Status Anxiety By Alain De Botton Analysis

Humor is very prevalent in today’s society. However, Is it vital? In his 2004 book, Status Anxiety, Alain de Botton argues that the chief aim of humorists is not merely to entertain but to discuss topics that might otherwise be “dangerous or impossible to state directly.”

To begin, it is important to understand what humor is and how it differs from satire. Humor is anything that makes us laugh, while satire is a genre of literature which uses humor as a tool to convey an argument (Singh, 68). The chief aim of some humorists truly is to entertain. Pranksters we watch on the internet are humorists. They play tricks and gimmicks on unsuspecting people to make us, the audience laugh. They are not trying to prove anything or discuss anything controversial. It would have been more accurate for de Botton to argue that authors of satire are the ones who allow controversial topics to be discussed.

It is true that for them to discuss their opinions on these topics directly would be dangerous because the variety of their audience members. They use humor to lessen the consequences in case anyone misunderstands or feels offended. However, this does not always work. There always comes a point where someone feels offended and a clear discussion has to be held on what was being portrayed in the satire. Then the author then has to chose to either revoke what he/she said or to directly state his or her opinion.

While satire can be strong and effective, I do not believe it plays a more vital role in our society than any form other form of argument. The reason so many satires are able to get away with discussing controversial topics without consequences is because they are designed so that only a particular audience can understand them. When discussed clearly and with the entire society, its consequences are equally if not more dangerous than a non-humorous