Dylan Kerrigan
  • Home
  • About
  • Academic Writings
    • Consultancy Summaries
  • Books
  • Opeds/Blogs
  • Other Writings
  • Teaching
    • Graduate Supervision
  • Therapeutic Cultures
  • In the Press
  • Presentations
  • Videos
  • Research
    • Data Visualisations
    • Past
    • Current
    • Future
  • Blog

Comedy and the absurd

24/6/2013

0 Comments

 
What is comedy and how does it function as cultural critique?
Picture
Many people speak truth to power. These include politicians, journalists, academics, activists, whistle-blowers and many others. No one, however, seems to do it with the same bite and revelation as the joker or comedian. Or, put a little differently humour, parody, and the absurd have a long history of being a space from which to criticise privilege without serious repercussions. 

This has been so since medieval times. Characters such as jokers, jesters and fools entertained the courts and rooms of those of high status with regular performances that questioned authority without threatening it. 

And so it is in the 21st century. Whether we are talking about locals like Errol Fabian, Nikki Crosby, Tommy Joseph or a long line of calypsonians who played on absurdity to call out the powerful. Or international TV shows like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart or Have I Got News on the BBC. Good humour often relies on and provides revelation and clarity. 

In offices and institutions research confirms healthy humour improves relationships between staff. We might add humour in schools too, but evidence (and experience) suggests humour in schools, especially when bottom-up and not top-down from the teachers themselves, often results in punishment. 

This suggests humour has limits. That in certain spaces that run on rules of hierarchy like schools, law courts, and conversations with police officers, humour as acceptable critique is not recognised. Also, without the requisite cultural knowledge—say, of a country or a workplace—humour can be used incorrectly. And bad humour makes problems and situations worse. 

There are three main ways that academics understand humour. These can be seen through linguist Victor Raskin’s model. He wrote about psychoanalytical, social-behavioural, and cognitive-perceptual theories of humour. The first is related to Freud and his opinions on repression. For Freud humour was a way to release tension from our inhibitions—sexual and emotional. In this sense humour is a safety valve, a way to defuse personal conflicts and wider public anxieties (around say corruption or safety).

The social-behavioural literature understands humour as a way to make fun of others in order to feel personally superior. This is humour as disparagement—a sort of laughter in love with the other person’s misfortune. This is the cultural logic of most slapstick comedy.

The cognitive-perceptual theory sees humour as related to absurdity. It surfaces when the unexpected happens; something that creates cognitive dissonance. This unexpected quality is a rewriting of the norm—the foreign friend who mispronounces zaboca, or a person jumping up on Carnival morning who does a 180-degree wine and spin only to be lip-to-lip with a police horse. These situations are funny because they are accidental and unforeseen.

These theories suggest three ways humour works to make us laugh: as a safety valve, a feeling of superiority, and the unexpected. Aside from laughter, humour often produces social integration. In workspaces, studies into organisational culture show that humour builds relationships, creates camaraderie, and helps people cope with the daily stresses of their office life. Humour can also erode status difference between superiors and subordinates and allow workers to vent their frustrations and anxieties about power.

A good way to understand these insights about healthy humour is to provide a public example of a comedic and absurd episode such as the recent firetruck revelations. Firstly the situation is one of absurdity (the basis of the cognitive-perceptual theory) because the cost of recovery and the mishandling by Cabinet of the requested monies all speak to a reality that appears warped. This absurdity or cognitive dissonance has a wider social function in that it unites the public beyond party politics.

In a social-behavioural context the public humour and disbelief generated by this absurdity is disparaging, not polite. We ridicule those in charge because we feel intellectually and morally superior. Their actions lead many of us to think if it were us making these decisions we would not be so silly. 

From Freud’s point of view, the blatant mismanagement of public funds allows many of us a chance to vent our conflicted feelings about the incompetence of those who govern us. Not just the party in power, but the ridiculousness of two-party ethnic politics itself. Seen through this lens of humour, the firetruck episode also flips the script. 

Instead of jokers, jesters and fools questioning authority, it is those in authority providing entertainment for the court of public opinion. And their “mistakes” question their own authority.

http://guardian.co.tt/columnist/2013-06-24/comedy-and-absurd
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Categories

    All
    Academia
    Amerindian
    Bias
    Capitalism
    Carnival
    Census
    Change
    Charlotteville
    Christmas
    Cipriani
    Citizenship
    Class
    Clico
    Colonialism
    Comedy
    Community
    Conspiracy
    Corruption
    Crime
    Critical Thinking
    Cultural Logic
    Cultural Logic
    Cultural Myth
    Culture
    Degradation
    Development
    Differences
    Disabilities
    Discourse
    Discrimination
    Diversity
    Division
    Drugs
    Economic
    Economics
    Economy
    Education
    Emancipation
    Emigration
    Employment
    Environment
    Equality
    Ethnicity
    Ethnocentrism
    Ethnology
    Family
    Gang
    Gender
    Governance
    Government
    Grenada
    Hcu
    History
    Homophobia
    Identity
    Imperialism
    Inequality
    Institutions
    Intellectualism
    Justice
    Language
    Legislation
    Marriage
    Mas
    Militarism
    Military
    Morality
    Multiculturalism
    National Security
    Nepotism
    Opportunity
    Patriarchy
    Policy
    Politics
    Poverty
    Power
    Precolonial
    Prejudice
    Prisons
    Privatisation
    Privilege
    Progress
    Propaganda
    Prostitution
    Race
    Reflexivity
    Relationships
    Religion
    Rights
    Science
    Security
    Segregation
    Sexism
    Sexuality
    Sex Work
    Slavery
    (small-goal) Football
    Social Media
    Soe
    Solidarity
    Speed
    State
    Status
    Success
    Taboo
    Teaching
    Technology
    Tobago
    Tourism
    Trade
    Transparency
    University
    Violence
    War
    White Collar
    White-collar

    Archives

    December 2022
    October 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    August 2020
    June 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    February 2019
    November 2017
    October 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012

    RSS Feed