themuzicman
May 22nd 2003, 10:04 AM
I've been thinking about humor, some, and I have a theory:
One of the general truths about good humor is that it must have an element of truth to it.
My theory is that humor's primary function is to help us as a society deal with minor problems without being overtly confrontational about it.
Here's what I mean:
After the shuttle disasters, jokes (as morbid as they might be) sprung up about them. They get told and retold, in spite of people's objections to decor and such. Why? I think it's because humor helps us to cope with a disaster such as that.
Another example is stereotype jokes: blondes, redheads, pollacks, "newfies" (for those in Canada), etc.
Part of the reason these are funny is that there rings an *element* of truth. Not a universal truth, maybe even a general truth, but some element that our culture is dealing with.
Think about it for a minute: Was there a joke told that you thought was funny, until you realized that it applied to you? I know for me, it was being a "hollander", and being cheap.
Why were there so many Clinton jokes? There was a problem that needed to be dealt with, and we tried in many ways, including humor, to deal with them. (Apparantly it didn't work, but...)
Same thing with denominations. Baptist dancing jokes are the best example. Why? At least certain elements of the Baptists denomiations have gone overboard in their ban on dancing. So, we tell jokes.
The problem I see coming (and that is already here), is that jokes that point at particular problems are coming under attack as "insensetive" or not "politically correct". Now, there is a certain element of truth, here, too, because jokes can go overboard in being patently offensive. But, have we swung the pendulum so far in the other direction, that we can no longer use this tool effectively?
Thoughts? Comments?
Michael
One of the general truths about good humor is that it must have an element of truth to it.
My theory is that humor's primary function is to help us as a society deal with minor problems without being overtly confrontational about it.
Here's what I mean:
After the shuttle disasters, jokes (as morbid as they might be) sprung up about them. They get told and retold, in spite of people's objections to decor and such. Why? I think it's because humor helps us to cope with a disaster such as that.
Another example is stereotype jokes: blondes, redheads, pollacks, "newfies" (for those in Canada), etc.
Part of the reason these are funny is that there rings an *element* of truth. Not a universal truth, maybe even a general truth, but some element that our culture is dealing with.
Think about it for a minute: Was there a joke told that you thought was funny, until you realized that it applied to you? I know for me, it was being a "hollander", and being cheap.
Why were there so many Clinton jokes? There was a problem that needed to be dealt with, and we tried in many ways, including humor, to deal with them. (Apparantly it didn't work, but...)
Same thing with denominations. Baptist dancing jokes are the best example. Why? At least certain elements of the Baptists denomiations have gone overboard in their ban on dancing. So, we tell jokes.
The problem I see coming (and that is already here), is that jokes that point at particular problems are coming under attack as "insensetive" or not "politically correct". Now, there is a certain element of truth, here, too, because jokes can go overboard in being patently offensive. But, have we swung the pendulum so far in the other direction, that we can no longer use this tool effectively?
Thoughts? Comments?
Michael