To what extent does expectation control our ability to laugh at a joke? In So I Called the Batman¸ Louis CK notably creates comedy and generates laughter through the use of the incongruity theory. This is based on the fact that laughter is created when something violates our normal patterns and expectations. In order to achieve this, he uses the techniques of absurd lines, escalation and misdirection, gestures, the rule of three, and acting out.
To begin with, absurdity is humor with the absence of reason. The use of ambiguous and ridiculous statements creates confusion and laughter for the audience as it goes against their anticipations. To illustrate, at the start of the show when expressing his discontent at bats, he states in a rather uptight voice with a ludicrous thought that it’s not like “bats make all the French toast in the world” (0:25-0:28). By juxtaposing two unrelated words, “bats” and “French toast” confusion
…show more content…
For example, in the beginning, he sets up the joke by stating that he feels perfectly safe in New York City. He elaborates his claim by stating three reasons why (1:14-1:24). The first item he lists is “murders” which we subconsciously associate with criminals. This assumption is reinforced when he states the next item as “child molesters”. Immediately, a pattern of criminals is created in our brains. However, when we find out that the next word is “Jews” the pattern is broken creating surprise and shock, and for some maybe even offense, thus resulting in the punchline of the joke. In the same manner when Louis CK sees the bat and describes his reaction, he also uses the rule of three. First he “crawls into a closet”, then he “closes the door”, and then “he calls 911” (3:22-3:28). Again the pattern is broken as you would not expect a person to call 911 just because of a bat in their
Psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists study humor because it is a fundamental culture value, but they still can’t determine why certain things make some people laugh and others not. There are “humor quotient” tests that are designed to measure an individual’s sense of humor, but these tests are questionable. These tests aren’t accurate because almost all humor depends on cultural background knowledge and language skills. Not every person in the whole world, or even in one country share the same background knowledge and skills, therefore they cannot have the same type of humor. “The fact remains that individuals vary in their appreciation of humor” (Rappoport 9). Since humor varies from individual to individual, humor lies in the individual. How successful or funny a joke is depends on how the person receives the joke, humor cannot be measured by a statistical
Notably, he lists off the following texts: Don Quixote, Dante’s Divine Comedy, Tristan Shandy, Huck Finn, Lucky Jim, Catcher in the Rye, and lastly Infinite Jest. He does iterate on the first two texts, and describes them as being very exhibitory of the comic impulse. Don Quixote exhibited the feeling of disappointment, and Dante’s Divine Comedy arose from the author’s feelings after being exiled from Florence. If not you as some individual, certainly many others found theses texts to be sufficiently humorous. One could attribute this to the fact that their respective author’s channeled their feelings that were rooted in tragedy, just as Almond
Throughout Cosby’s speech there is a comedy element hidden in a tragedy element. When Cosby discusses the blame on Caucasians in African American communities, he jokes, “... ...
“Everyone has a sense of humor. If you don't laugh at jokes, you probably laugh at opinions.” Once said an American poet, essayist, and existentialist philosopher Criss Jami, Killosophy. I also believe that humor and laugh play a big role in our lives. However, there are two types of people’s personality; people who understand humor and more open minded, and those who just cannot get it, and that, in my opinion, just makes their live harder. The article, “That’s Not Funny” by Caitlin Flanagan, is talking about college students that are not allowed to joke because of comedians restrictiveness in what they are talking
Many critics have attempted definitions of Black Humor, none of them entirely successfully. The most significant recurring features of these definitions are that Black Humor works with: absurdity, ironic detachment4; opposing moral views held in equipoise, humanity's lack of a sense of purpose in the unpredictable nuclear age, the realization of the complexity of moral and aesthetic experience which affects the individual's ability to choose a course of action5; and a playing with the reader's ideas of reality6.
I feel like if I was able to tell people what the jest of the jokes were while watching people would appreciate the play a bit more than if they didn’t know anything about it. Overall though this is a great Broadway adaption from nothing pretty much, and Will Ferrell really solidifies his role as one of the world’s funniest actors and comedians at the same time. Looking back, America was a good place and we were pretty safe after 9/11, it was great looking back on those eight years of his presidency, and we can only hope the next president can deliver something special
The twelfth and thirteenth episodes of South Park’s tenth season, “Go God Go” and “Go God Go XII”, work as pieces of comedy because they effectively uses humorous triangular formats. Both episodes satirize extremist behavior involving religion and atheism. The episodes usually show situations that involve the audience watching a humorous exchange between two parties. On occasion, the audience watches one character being made fun of, but overall the jokes involve the audience observing an exchange between two parties. The creator’s also use the characters to demonstrate their own beliefs and criticisms.
The majority of comedy is centered on identity. Comedy, like many other aspects of different cultures contains barriers that are broken only by an understanding of the context of the comedy. In order words, it is unlikely that an African would fully understand a joke by an American comedian if the joke draws from a primarily American historical or social context. Hence, what one can identify with affects what kind of jokes one can relate to. Identity is predicated on the ability to relate because identities are formed through personal interpretations of the environment one finds himself or herself in. These personal interpretations can be highly influenced by a manipulation of the context or amount of representation. Using Bigsby and Ruckus
Many politically based talk shows focus on controversial topics. Their shows aim to cause discussion over many politically controversial topics. The shows cause people from both sides of politics to argue over topics that usually both sides strongly believe in their opinion. The shows begin to turn into a screaming fest, where one side, of the argument, tries to talk over the other side, while the other does the same thing. It shows that without humor or something else being there to lighten the mood a small debate can turn into a fully heated argument. This shows the power of context and diction. Through the use of a humorful tone, when used in the right time and place, people are able to calmly talk about topics that without it would be a full on argument. Through a comedian’s humorful word choice, he is able to make his points usually without completely enraging his audience. Those who don’t use humor or something else to lighten the mood, end up creating an argument that just grows and grows until both sides are screaming at and denying everything the other side says. However, eventually something is said that lightens the mood. This is usually something somewhat comical that both sides can relate to. Whatever it was that was said becomes the thing that both sides can agrees on, and as a result makes the argument
Laughter is an interesting topic. Mainly because of the lack of thought that goes with it as to why we laugh. In an article titled Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic by Henri Bergson, the theory behind why things are funny is explored. He mentions many different things in his article pertaining to the comic, however, there are a few that stand out more than others. He talks directly about the fact that things are only funny if they relate to humans. Then he touches on the idea that accidents are funnier than planned events. Finally, he speaks on laughter being directly related to social setting. The 1992 film Noises Off is a perfect demonstration of everything that Bergson writes about. Henri Bergson’s essay on laughter is perfectly supported by the film Noises Off.
Upon reflecting on what form of comedy makes me laugh, I continually came back to absurdist humor found in television and movies. Two instances of this humor would be Santa Clarita Diet and Sharknado. the first comedy makes use of two major forms of comedy, absurdist humor, and satire. The second movie Sharknado is predominantly absurdism throughout the entire movie. Each of the references are quite different but share many of the same themes at throughout their plots.
What are without the feelings of sadness, lonesomeness, empathy and urge? In Louis CK’ “Does Not Like Cell Phones” video, he claims that technology messes with peoples’ feelings in many negative ways. With technology, kids don't build any empathy for others, causing them to say harmful things to each other without feeling bad about it. In Pete Holmes, ‘Google (Not Knowing) video, he claims that technology is ruining peoples lives because they think know everything. There is no time for mystery or wonder to occur when you have a question, causing you to not feel satisfied when you figure out the answer.
There have been many theories over the years as to why we laugh. Freud suggested that during laughter, you discharge pent-up psychic energies. In a theory by V.S. Ramachandran, we laugh to alert others in the social group that an anomaly, whatever it is we are laughing at, is inconsequential. For example, if someone falls and is not hurt, we laugh to signal to others that the person is all right. The theories vary greatly, but there are so many attributes to the phenomenon o...
The problem with designating Beckett's work as Absurdist is, precisely, that this interpretation reduces his work. When a critic describes a work as "Absurd," she does not simply mean that the work is "outrageous" or "nonsensical" or merely silly. Coined by American critic Martin Esslin, the term "theater of the Absurd" can be defined as a kind of drama that presents a view of the absurdity of the human condition by the abandoning of usual or rational devices and by the use of nonrealistic form..Conceived in perplexity and spiritual anguish, the theater of the absurd portrays not a series of connected incidents telling a story but a pattern of images presenting people as bewildered beings in an incomprehensible universe. Holman 2. In the introduction to The Theatre of the Absurd, Martin Esslin provides a comprehensive explanation of "Absurdist" theater.
The theme of absurdity can also be judged by the structure of the play. There is no change in the plot and actions performed by the two characters, no change in the setting. Rather the only thing which the audiences can have a sense of is that the two characters waiting and waiting, there is no such beginning, middle and end, as in other plays. The structure goes on like this in the first act: