= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
WalterL comments on Making Fun of Things is Easy - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (76)
I concur with you.
Also, you have an unlikely ally. I think it was C.S. Lewis that said that it was hard work to make a joke, but effortless to act as though a joke has been made. (google help me, yes, Screwtape Letters, number 11.) I generally try to let that guide me.
I think that genuinely funny jokes typically need some participation from the an aspect object of the joke. If you're mocking a policy by pointing out an incongruent consequence of that its certainly funny, but it wouldn't be possible if the root wasn't there to start with.
Say I'm an authority figure have a policy that everyone must wear two shoes. You draw a cartoon of someone with just one leg gamely wearing the other shoe on his hand. I think that this is a joke of the first flavor. It criticizes me, but it does so by pointing out my laughably bad policy.
By contrast I consider 'making fun of', to be humor that merely derides, that doesn't point out anything or rely on its substance at all. Its something humans do to Out-Tribe symbols, and I try not to let it signify beyond that.
Say I don't like a particular politican. I restate his latest speech in a sardonic mockery of his distinctive speaking style, then roll my eyes. I think this is "making fun of". It doesn't bring anything new to the conversation, I can do it about anyone and it, as you say, breeds contempt.
Hrr...the above wasn't as clear as I'd like it to be. How about this then? If a joke of the first (good) sort is made and I laugh I'm laughing at the joke. It indicates my approval of the cleverness of the witticism's author and the joy that I find in the paradoxical. If I laugh at a joke of the second sort I'm laughing not at the joke itself, but at its subject. My laughter indicates my derision towards the Hated/Scorned enemy.
So perhaps a good joke is about the essence of the criticized thing. And a bad joke is mere pattern-matching of the criticized thing; sometimes using a very poorly matching pattern.
(Or the bad joke may be about something irrelevant. Reminds me of two politicians in my country who were very powerful a few years ago. One of them seemed mentally unstable, and he frequently said the exact opposite of what he said before, just because it happened to fit in his newest conspiracy theory. His opponents made fun of him, often simply by quoting what he said last year and what he said now; and they also made fun of how his supporters also quickly changed their mind but sometimes didn't get the memo about the latest change of mind of their leader, so they contradicted each other, and then clumsily pretended the contradiction didn't happen. But also the other side made fun of their most important opponent... saying that he was short. And it seemed equally funny to them.)
So what you're saying is that he was willing to change his mind. ;)
At least that's how American politicians who do things like this try to spin it.
This one was an extreme case, even for a politician. Most likely really mentally ill, suffering from paranoia. His stories felt credible and sincere (I wouldn't be surprised if this is true in general for intelligent paranoid people), and he started very popular, but gradually more and more people noticed that his words don't match well with reality, and not even with his previous words. At the end mostly the old people remained loyal to him, so we say cynically that his political base died of old age. I guess that unlike many politicians, this one probably truly believed what he said.
I generally agree-- though I think that there are some cases in which even the first sort of joke is perhaps unwarranted. Jokes about spelling errors and other trivial mistakes seem to fall into a middle category where, while they are based on incongruities or errors, they are not based on substantive or meaningful ones.
Also, C.S. Lewis is far from an unlikely ally of mine. I consider his writing important and useful in many respects.
That explains so much stand-up comedy.
So what's wrong with that?
Personally, I find this sort of humour way too easy and therefore usually not funny. People not recognizing these two types takes away from the average quality of comedy. I reflexively see such people as stupid, but I understand this isn't entirely fair. Just laughing at the subject makes it possible to laugh at anything, and it starts to take away from other things, as lmm points out.
Easy?
I have in mind people like Jews in 1930s Europe, Russians under the Soviet rule, or, to take a contemporary example, Christian Copts in Egypt. Oppressed people who don't have an opportunity to change their lot through polite democratic process. Humor -- biting, nasty, derisive humor -- was and is very important for them. To fight back with, to keep their sanity, to feel as humans and not cattle. That humor's point is to "indicate derision towards the Hated/Scorned enemy".
I somewhat agree with this, but I had a much more casual interpretation in mind. The examples of jewish humour I've seen have all been quite witty, so they don't really count as "just laughing at the subject".
Just a data point: Your tone instinctively feels confrontational, and originally demotivated me from replying. Might be what turns off other people too. Is this intentional?
Somewhat. The point is not to demotivate or turn off other people, the point is to liven up the exchange, as well as provide some entertainment and motivation. I am not averse to poking people with sharp pointy objects :-D but I don't object to being poked myself.
Ok, good to know. Livening things up is good. It's funny how a simple acknowledgement can shift your view of a user agent sailing in bitspace.
You'd make a good surgeon. Just remember keep those objects sharp.
Yes, quite reasonable - but it can degenerate into the Book of Revelation.