I thought Seinfeld was very funny. Still do.

It was actually quite Shakespearean in both concept and characterization. In Shakespeare's comedies, from Twelfth Night to The Tempest, you generally find similar characters: You have a hero and heroine like Miranda and Ferdinand in The Tempest, who bumble their way through romantic misadventure. You have a clever clown or jester, like Gonzalo, who is on a level with the protagonists but is constantly foiled by his own schemes. And you have a natural clown, like Caliban, whose foolishness elevates him in a way above the other players. I would submit that Elaine, Jerry, George and Kramer in sequence serve these purposes in Seinfeld episodes.

Secondly, Shakespeare was fond of the plot device of misperception. Events, people, things are constantly mistaken among the players, while the audience is privy to the true nature of the situation. The humor lies in the failure of the characters to perceive it, and to continue to function in this mode of self-delusion.

Add to these elements the concurrent development of two or three plot arcs, and you have either A Midsummer Night's Dream or The Fear-of-Clowns Episode.

I disagree that Richards deserves this disaster because he is a lame actor. He is a terrific physical comedian with a unique and effective sense of timing. He may indeed be out of his element in standup. But the crucial thing of interest here is the public display of a man letting his demons get the best of him while on a stage, his real or feigned attempt to exorcise these demons, and the paricipation of the audience at the Laugh Factory, and all of us really, in his rise, fall, and potential redemption.

Which wouldn't make a bad Shakespeare play in itself, by the by.