Apparently, a lot of people are upset about Amy Schumer’s video of Beyoncé’s “Formation”:
They claim it is disrespectful, that Queen Bey is, or should be, exempt from parody. But what makes this a parody? Parody is defined as exaggeration for the purpose of humor. There is no exaggeration in this video. Nor is there any humor. Just because Schumer is a comedian does not mean everything she does is comedy. The audio track is the real song, not some Weird Al rewrite. And the video, which Schumer labels a “tribute,” is just a bunch of women on a film set dancing to a song during their downtime.
Mostly white women.
Is that the video’s real “crime,” that it most prominently features Amy Schumer and Goldie Hawn, two white women, two blonde white women dancing to the song? Does this render the video cultural appropriation, unlike the thousands, literally thousands, of other YouTube “dance cover” videos featuring black fans dancing?
Has cultural appropriation expanded from condemning white artists for “stealing” and profiting from black musical styles to condemning white fans for consuming and enjoying black music?
Granted, the issue is a bit more pointed with the song “Formation,” which directly addresses the sad, and too often deadly, state of racial inequality in the United States, but for me, the video’s true crime is that it is boring. It would never pass muster on Lip Sync Battle.
Wait, is that an example of gender appropriation?