For this post, I've decided to do something different. Instead of TFLN, I have discovered the site "When Parents Text." It's another website of texting humor, just without the drunkenness.
First of all, beneath the title, the subheading reads "small keypad, old hands." Personally, I find the concept of parents texting is inherently funny, especially when I see my friends' parents who put on reading glasses to text because the lettering on the keypad of their phones are so tiny. But here is my favorite entry:
Dad: where u sleepin ovr?
Me: I’m not sure yet.
Dad: lettuce kno wen u kno fer sure.
On top of my uncontrollable laughter when it comes to parents using instant message abbreviations, the fact that 'let us' became 'lettuce' and actually sounds the same when you read it out loud is hysterical. Just to clarify, when I'm laughing at parents texting, I really don't think it is the same as the 'sucker laughter' since they have to make an effort and sometimes struggles to keep up with the changing times. To me, the humor comes from a more basic source, which is simple incongruity. In a single text conversation, there are numerous incongruities, each contributing to the overall humor. Often times, it is the current generation of youths who are harshly criticized for our use of instant message abbreviations. That and the invention of spell check have helped produce a generation of people who do not know how to spell or even write with proper grammer, or so many think. Yet in this text conversation, there is a complete reversal of rules. The dad is using instant-message-speak (improperly because the goal of those abbreviations is to shorten the text but 'fer' has the same amount of letters as 'for') while the offspring is the one who texts with impeccable spelling and even punctuation. This probably added a streak of triumph to my laughter, which reminds of the American inclination to stick up for the underdog. Now we've showed them! Though to give the dad his just due, even though he was very economical about his words, eliminating unnecessary and silent letters, he punctuates his texts properly, another amusing incongruity.
Lastly, the lettuce is just so funny.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Sunday, December 5, 2010
quick!
Tonight, my friend Rebecca left me a voice mail because she was wondering if I wanted to go the gym with her. Surprisingly, my first reaction was not "no, I went this morning" but why doesn't she just text me? Yet calling someone and texting someone are two wholly different things. Similarly, humor in TFLN is different from a standup routine. Yet I've discovered that there is an element of speech in some of the text of TFLNs.
(734): she peed. on the sidewalk. it is 2 pm. Help.
(619): Lauren she was gnawing on a dresser. Gnawing. On. A. Dresser.
In these texts, the use of the period does not just serve the usual function of signifying the end of a sentence. Instead, they dictate to the reader how they intend for the joke to be read. Each period dictates a pause.
The emphasis subtly created by the periods do not take away from the humor of the texts. In fact, it even adds to the comedy. The emphasis created by these periods exaggerates the effect of the verb. This is especially easy to see in the latter quote which has the sentence without the periodic periods and with the multiple periods. When "gnawing" is a one word sentence, it underscores the absurdity and animal-like action and evokes a more detailed image. It works in a different way for the former text. Now that I think about it, this could just be me. However, as I read the text with periods, for me, the humor from each fragment stacks up as if each "sentence" adds a block to the tower of situational humor. And the "help" was just the cherry on top. This also works for the second text. Gnawing in itself is a vivid verb for an exaggerated action for a person. However, when you add on "dresser," on top of it, the shock humor increases substantially and contributes to the humor. Thus, the elements of speech built in by the periods makes the texts funnier than if they were just words without any punctuation.
Nevertheless, even though the joke in its entirety is lengthened by the pauses the periods dictate, the humor is still in short little nuggets. These examples, just like every other texts in the website, nonetheless adhere to Jessie Bier's idea that "our usual jokes are quick and pointed." Though the medium of the humor certainly has something to do with the length, Jessie Bier wrote The Rise and Fall of American Humor in 1968, a remote world with no texting. So what led to Bier's claim that "it is our speed that typifies us?" Impatience is undoubtly a national characteristic of young America. Perhaps it's because our nation is emphasizes results- after all, we are the nation of fast food chains and drive thru lanes. We don't focus on the delicate process of making food and sitting down to savor every bite with a fork and a knife. We become full, faster, if we grab the paper back and eat out of the wax-paper wrapper.
(734): she peed. on the sidewalk. it is 2 pm. Help.
(619): Lauren she was gnawing on a dresser. Gnawing. On. A. Dresser.
In these texts, the use of the period does not just serve the usual function of signifying the end of a sentence. Instead, they dictate to the reader how they intend for the joke to be read. Each period dictates a pause.
The emphasis subtly created by the periods do not take away from the humor of the texts. In fact, it even adds to the comedy. The emphasis created by these periods exaggerates the effect of the verb. This is especially easy to see in the latter quote which has the sentence without the periodic periods and with the multiple periods. When "gnawing" is a one word sentence, it underscores the absurdity and animal-like action and evokes a more detailed image. It works in a different way for the former text. Now that I think about it, this could just be me. However, as I read the text with periods, for me, the humor from each fragment stacks up as if each "sentence" adds a block to the tower of situational humor. And the "help" was just the cherry on top. This also works for the second text. Gnawing in itself is a vivid verb for an exaggerated action for a person. However, when you add on "dresser," on top of it, the shock humor increases substantially and contributes to the humor. Thus, the elements of speech built in by the periods makes the texts funnier than if they were just words without any punctuation.
Nevertheless, even though the joke in its entirety is lengthened by the pauses the periods dictate, the humor is still in short little nuggets. These examples, just like every other texts in the website, nonetheless adhere to Jessie Bier's idea that "our usual jokes are quick and pointed." Though the medium of the humor certainly has something to do with the length, Jessie Bier wrote The Rise and Fall of American Humor in 1968, a remote world with no texting. So what led to Bier's claim that "it is our speed that typifies us?" Impatience is undoubtly a national characteristic of young America. Perhaps it's because our nation is emphasizes results- after all, we are the nation of fast food chains and drive thru lanes. We don't focus on the delicate process of making food and sitting down to savor every bite with a fork and a knife. We become full, faster, if we grab the paper back and eat out of the wax-paper wrapper.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
having faith in people or just being naive
As I am nearing the end of my string of posts about humor in Texts from Last Night, so I thought it would be appropriate to reflect on general trends that have revealed themselves to me after reading pages and pages of texts. One of most commonplace type of jokes are the "sucker jokes" (which sometimes also include good news/bad news jokes and even anti-romantic jokes that make the naive person the sucker). Even in my posts, many jokes can be traced back to this format that provokes us to laugh because we are not in an unfortunate situation or because it makes us feel especially clever.
Classic example from our never ending source TFLN: (708): He fell asleep and they duct taped him to the floor. He's pissed.
For this text, 2295 people thought it was a "good night," while only 255 people thought it was a "bad night," according to the "good night"/ "bad night" buttons. This means that only about 1 in 10 people sympathized with the guy that was duck taped. Meanwhile, an overwhelming majority aligned themselves with the tricksters and thought the prank hilarious. Comments included "Classic prank. Funny every time," "I'd do that if my friend passed out on the floor..." and "A real winner would have taped him to the ceiling..."
Does this mean that Americans are just sadistic people? Possibly. But that would be oversimplifying the reaction to these jokes. So, let's break it down.
In the middle of writing this post, I actually browsed my classmates' blogs, desperate for inspiration. I found Julia's post (I think its hers) about Tom and Jerry, a favorite of mine from childhood. Why did I find that funny? I mean, if you go beyond the instinctive laughter that inevitably escapes your lips no matter what age you are, the cartoon is just Tom and Jerry hurting each other. Those injuries are not funny. We don't see people getting beat up and instinctively laugh as we would while watching Jerry run backwards into a piece of Jello to launch himself forward and throw a candle stick at Tom, thereby setting him on fire. Therefore, it's not the violence nor Tom's unfortunately burned tail that makes us laugh.
In that one skit, besides the result, there's only the means of which Jerry injures Tom left. I think that is where the funny lies. This is to say that it is the cleverness or even the creativity in the method in which this violence was incurred that evokes laughter. And really, that is the difference between a prank and a deliberate act of injury. A prank causes pain (sometimes) in a creative, not-as-direct way. Thus, when we laugh, we are enjoying the creativity and cleverness of the plot more than the end result.
Going back to the joke we started with, we don't laugh because the person is pissed or is stuck. However, it is funny that the person was probably ducked taped to the ground like a silver mummy.
Consequently, classifying these sucker jokes may be an oversimplification of the joke's form.
...Or maybe I just don't want to believe that people have a sadistic side to them.
Classic example from our never ending source TFLN: (708): He fell asleep and they duct taped him to the floor. He's pissed.
For this text, 2295 people thought it was a "good night," while only 255 people thought it was a "bad night," according to the "good night"/ "bad night" buttons. This means that only about 1 in 10 people sympathized with the guy that was duck taped. Meanwhile, an overwhelming majority aligned themselves with the tricksters and thought the prank hilarious. Comments included "Classic prank. Funny every time," "I'd do that if my friend passed out on the floor..." and "A real winner would have taped him to the ceiling..."
Does this mean that Americans are just sadistic people? Possibly. But that would be oversimplifying the reaction to these jokes. So, let's break it down.
In the middle of writing this post, I actually browsed my classmates' blogs, desperate for inspiration. I found Julia's post (I think its hers) about Tom and Jerry, a favorite of mine from childhood. Why did I find that funny? I mean, if you go beyond the instinctive laughter that inevitably escapes your lips no matter what age you are, the cartoon is just Tom and Jerry hurting each other. Those injuries are not funny. We don't see people getting beat up and instinctively laugh as we would while watching Jerry run backwards into a piece of Jello to launch himself forward and throw a candle stick at Tom, thereby setting him on fire. Therefore, it's not the violence nor Tom's unfortunately burned tail that makes us laugh.
In that one skit, besides the result, there's only the means of which Jerry injures Tom left. I think that is where the funny lies. This is to say that it is the cleverness or even the creativity in the method in which this violence was incurred that evokes laughter. And really, that is the difference between a prank and a deliberate act of injury. A prank causes pain (sometimes) in a creative, not-as-direct way. Thus, when we laugh, we are enjoying the creativity and cleverness of the plot more than the end result.
Going back to the joke we started with, we don't laugh because the person is pissed or is stuck. However, it is funny that the person was probably ducked taped to the ground like a silver mummy.
Consequently, classifying these sucker jokes may be an oversimplification of the joke's form.
...Or maybe I just don't want to believe that people have a sadistic side to them.
Friday, November 26, 2010
hehe...oh...
As is with many other books I've read for Introduction to Political Philosophy, Democracy in America blew my mind, offering a different perspective on the relationship between state and religion. It had always been deeply ingrained in my mind that church and state should be very separated. Yet, in Democracy in America, Tocqueville portrays religion as a facilitator of democracy. Now that I have let down my previous notions, it kind of make sense. That's the thing about religion- it influences believers and society in so many different ways- some overt, and some discrete. To look at religion from another perspective, what do religion-related TFLNs tell us about the role of religion in America?
(215): i got kicked out of Barns and Nobles cuz i put all the bibles in the fiction section
This text probably comes off as disrespectful to people who do follow the bible. Do only non-believers find this funny? Yet if people still laughed, they will have proven Tocqueville, who claimed that in America there is a moral "tyranny of the majority" so that there were only believers and people who pretend to believe. Does laughing at this joke mean that we have surpassed that? In some ways, it does. There are multitudes of beliefs in America and moreover, freedom of expression (or is that just an illusion, according to Tocqueville). Some people might find it disrespectful and wrong. Some people might find religion to be off limits for jokes. Some might just find it funny. At the same time, in our contemporary society, there is still the concept of political correctness, which imposes a social etiquette and unspoken rules about what is socially acceptable and what is not. But even these standards are stretched because uploaded on the TFLN website, this is suppose to be a source of humor. This goes back to the concept that humor provides a medium almost immune from criticism (in most cases) about being politically correct. Consequently, in this comfort zone of humor, people can laugh at potentially disrespectful material just because they think it's funny. On the other hand, we have unknowingly validated Tocqueville. If we felt that we need the comfort zone to escape political correctness, then there is a "moral tyranny of majority" that wields influence over our judgments about how to act.
Having already established this comfort zone, I found this joke to be similar to be a remote cousin of the sucker joke because it reminded me of Scully Bradley's idea that American humor is anti-romantic in that it taking down illusions. (This could just be because I'm not a believer. Forgive me, if I have offended you). By putting all the Bibles in the fiction section, the person is essentially saying to believers that everything in the Bible was made up. Even though illusion is not the right word to describe the situation, the action still follows the style of puncturing a vision, or just a firmly held belief.
(513): You tried to wear your Jesus costume into Family Christian stores and say it was a book signing.
Similar in its hint of disrespectfulness, this joke also pokes fun at religion. After all, religion is all about the spiritual experience and way of life which has to come from within. Yet, if this person just puts on a Jesus costume, which is this superficial and probably exaggerated, he undermines (admittedly in a humorous way) everything religion stands for. In essence, the person in the costume is mocking the Family Christian store and all the people in it.
P.S. While writing another post, I re-read The Rise and Fall of American Humor. While discussing topics of American humor, Biers mentioned conformism and also that "the pieties of religion suffere steady attack." While these could be unrelated as there undoubtly are a variety of religions in American, atheists are still in the minority. I wonder America's affection for mocking conformism and appreciation for uniqueness that also contributes to the humor of these race jokes. Because in both of the jokes, the pranksters are mocking religion in a setting where religion, if not promoted, is respected.
(215): i got kicked out of Barns and Nobles cuz i put all the bibles in the fiction section
This text probably comes off as disrespectful to people who do follow the bible. Do only non-believers find this funny? Yet if people still laughed, they will have proven Tocqueville, who claimed that in America there is a moral "tyranny of the majority" so that there were only believers and people who pretend to believe. Does laughing at this joke mean that we have surpassed that? In some ways, it does. There are multitudes of beliefs in America and moreover, freedom of expression (or is that just an illusion, according to Tocqueville). Some people might find it disrespectful and wrong. Some people might find religion to be off limits for jokes. Some might just find it funny. At the same time, in our contemporary society, there is still the concept of political correctness, which imposes a social etiquette and unspoken rules about what is socially acceptable and what is not. But even these standards are stretched because uploaded on the TFLN website, this is suppose to be a source of humor. This goes back to the concept that humor provides a medium almost immune from criticism (in most cases) about being politically correct. Consequently, in this comfort zone of humor, people can laugh at potentially disrespectful material just because they think it's funny. On the other hand, we have unknowingly validated Tocqueville. If we felt that we need the comfort zone to escape political correctness, then there is a "moral tyranny of majority" that wields influence over our judgments about how to act.
Having already established this comfort zone, I found this joke to be similar to be a remote cousin of the sucker joke because it reminded me of Scully Bradley's idea that American humor is anti-romantic in that it taking down illusions. (This could just be because I'm not a believer. Forgive me, if I have offended you). By putting all the Bibles in the fiction section, the person is essentially saying to believers that everything in the Bible was made up. Even though illusion is not the right word to describe the situation, the action still follows the style of puncturing a vision, or just a firmly held belief.
(513): You tried to wear your Jesus costume into Family Christian stores and say it was a book signing.
Similar in its hint of disrespectfulness, this joke also pokes fun at religion. After all, religion is all about the spiritual experience and way of life which has to come from within. Yet, if this person just puts on a Jesus costume, which is this superficial and probably exaggerated, he undermines (admittedly in a humorous way) everything religion stands for. In essence, the person in the costume is mocking the Family Christian store and all the people in it.
P.S. While writing another post, I re-read The Rise and Fall of American Humor. While discussing topics of American humor, Biers mentioned conformism and also that "the pieties of religion suffere steady attack." While these could be unrelated as there undoubtly are a variety of religions in American, atheists are still in the minority. I wonder America's affection for mocking conformism and appreciation for uniqueness that also contributes to the humor of these race jokes. Because in both of the jokes, the pranksters are mocking religion in a setting where religion, if not promoted, is respected.
Monday, November 22, 2010
YUM
Besides being home with my family, the best thing about Thanksgiving is food (though really, I'm obsessed with food all year around). Thus, it would only make sense to kick off Thanksgiving break properly with food themed jokes.
While these jokes employ many classic humor techniques, their value lies in what they reveal about the role of fast food in America. Internationally speaking, America has been associated with fast food chains such as McDonald's and KFC as much as it has been associated with Disney and Hollywood movies.
However, Americans don't just eat fast food. A closer look will reveal that fast food is no longer a type of food but a culture. Here are a few texts that present different attitudes towards fast food.
(541): my math teacher staples burger king applications to failed tests
This is a subtle example of the "sucker joke," where the joke teller employs the superiority theory and laugh at those receiving the failed grade and the teacher's implied belittlement that he/she can achieve little beyond a job flipping burgers. The condescending tone of this joke comes not only from the superiority theory but more importantly, from a new trend where people look down on fast food and people who work in fast food, classifying them as low-class jobs in the service industry.
(210): Just made hot dog dorito pasta. It happened.
Individually, these are all iconic American foods. However, piling them together makes for a bizarre combination, which is the foundation of shock humor. But beyond the shock, the joke also subtly reinforces the idea of "the-more-the-better." In reality, both hot dog and pasta are already entrees on in themselves. Yet the person chose to put all these popular junk foods together. This inclination for more is beyond mere hunger, but reflects an inherent greed prevalent in American culture. We like whole sale markets such as Costco and Sam's club because we can buy everything in bigger quantities. In McDonald's, small, medium and large are not sufficient. We need Super Size. Though the greed here is manifested in food, it extends to everything the realm of consumerism covers.
(757): At McDonald's last night the guy gave you the wrong kind of McFlurry, so you screamed at him, "YOU MCFUCKED UP."
Similar to the "the titanic is 'syncing'" joke from an earlier post, this text is also a kind of play on words. Upon hearing "McFucked up," we understand that the person means to say that the worker at McDonald's messed up big time. The fact that the prefix "Mc" has become so iconic and so well known that it can be applied to other words and carry over the meaning of "super size" signifies that fast food chains as institutions have influenced America more than the just the food we eat, but our culture.
Although these jokes are all centered around junk foods in America, they present different views on them, which once again reminds me how even though we can pin down something as "American," it will represent a different side of America to different people. For example, the first joke looks down upon people who work in fast food restaurants because they are not well educated. Yet there are people who feel contempt towards President Obama for his Ivy League education. Similarly, in the second joke, some people may find it to be the most disgusting part of our culture while others may find it epic, admiring the audacity of such a platter.
While these jokes employ many classic humor techniques, their value lies in what they reveal about the role of fast food in America. Internationally speaking, America has been associated with fast food chains such as McDonald's and KFC as much as it has been associated with Disney and Hollywood movies.
However, Americans don't just eat fast food. A closer look will reveal that fast food is no longer a type of food but a culture. Here are a few texts that present different attitudes towards fast food.
(541): my math teacher staples burger king applications to failed tests
This is a subtle example of the "sucker joke," where the joke teller employs the superiority theory and laugh at those receiving the failed grade and the teacher's implied belittlement that he/she can achieve little beyond a job flipping burgers. The condescending tone of this joke comes not only from the superiority theory but more importantly, from a new trend where people look down on fast food and people who work in fast food, classifying them as low-class jobs in the service industry.
(210): Just made hot dog dorito pasta. It happened.
Individually, these are all iconic American foods. However, piling them together makes for a bizarre combination, which is the foundation of shock humor. But beyond the shock, the joke also subtly reinforces the idea of "the-more-the-better." In reality, both hot dog and pasta are already entrees on in themselves. Yet the person chose to put all these popular junk foods together. This inclination for more is beyond mere hunger, but reflects an inherent greed prevalent in American culture. We like whole sale markets such as Costco and Sam's club because we can buy everything in bigger quantities. In McDonald's, small, medium and large are not sufficient. We need Super Size. Though the greed here is manifested in food, it extends to everything the realm of consumerism covers.
(757): At McDonald's last night the guy gave you the wrong kind of McFlurry, so you screamed at him, "YOU MCFUCKED UP."
Similar to the "the titanic is 'syncing'" joke from an earlier post, this text is also a kind of play on words. Upon hearing "McFucked up," we understand that the person means to say that the worker at McDonald's messed up big time. The fact that the prefix "Mc" has become so iconic and so well known that it can be applied to other words and carry over the meaning of "super size" signifies that fast food chains as institutions have influenced America more than the just the food we eat, but our culture.
Although these jokes are all centered around junk foods in America, they present different views on them, which once again reminds me how even though we can pin down something as "American," it will represent a different side of America to different people. For example, the first joke looks down upon people who work in fast food restaurants because they are not well educated. Yet there are people who feel contempt towards President Obama for his Ivy League education. Similarly, in the second joke, some people may find it to be the most disgusting part of our culture while others may find it epic, admiring the audacity of such a platter.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
haha WTF
When Mikhail Bakhtin claimed that carnivalesque humor is specific to the middle ages and inherently different from modern satire, he was both right and wrong. To see how modern humor actually parallels folk carnival humor in a variety of ways, you'll have to read my English paper. However, he is right in that humor is often a product of a specific time and culture.
Though it is hard to pin down the exact age range of people who submit and read TFLN, the content makes it clear that it is geared towards contemporary American youth, some of whom are still in school. Though the content or subject of the joke can be age specific sometimes, as the website explains, "[their] goal was to create a site that was revealing in nature while concealing the identity of everyone involved. " As a result, the text itself displays other characteristics of humor so that the its style offers insight to a broader trend in our culture today.
(609): Made a joint out of my Yale rejection letter. Life is grand.
While the humor can come from the sarcasm of the statement "life is grand" at the end of the joke, in this case it is also possible that the person is sincere...and high. The humor of this text mostly come from the stark contrast between a joint and Yale (or maybe if we're being brutally realistic, they aren't necessarily contradictory?). Most of the humor resides on the stunning incongruity of these two things. We call it shock humor. Like frosting on a cake, another element that contributes to the humor of this text is the detail. It wasn't not just any upsetting letter, but a rejection letter. It wasn't any rejection letter, but one from Yale. These details also give hints about how the person was probably a serious, and academically successful student, bringing more contrast to the joint, which brings another side of him to light. Thus, the details enhance the contrast. On a similar note, using the word "grand" as opposed to just "good" also contributes to the humor.
Here is another example of how detail contributes to the comical effects of a joke, "(412): You are writing your college essay comparing yourself to Lady Gaga, Vladimir Putin, and Dale Earnhardt Jr. and you are worried about the conclusion sounding cheesy?"
First of all, the outrageous contrast and impossible links (personally, I can't figure out any connection between Lady Gaga and Putin besides the fact that they live on the same planet and are on the news a lot) lead us back to humor from the sheer ridiculousness of the text. Moreover, the specific names enhance the joke because of all the connotations that come with them.
This joke not only represents how detail and incongruities work in humor, but also reflects how humor changes with our culture. Nowadays, with 10 windows opened on our screen, the song flowing through our earphones and the iPhone spazzing with new textsconveys a message about our lifestyles, we need flashy and gripping things like big names to grab us. And really, our attention span only lasts as long as it takes to read that name. In our fast paced lives, we no longer settle down to appreciate the subtly and the buried sarcasm in a joke. We only enjoy spurts of shock humor that tear our eyes away for whatever we were doing. Thus, technology and pop culture not only shapes our lifestyles, but also contribute to the evolution of our culture change alongside us.
Though it is hard to pin down the exact age range of people who submit and read TFLN, the content makes it clear that it is geared towards contemporary American youth, some of whom are still in school. Though the content or subject of the joke can be age specific sometimes, as the website explains, "[their] goal was to create a site that was revealing in nature while concealing the identity of everyone involved. " As a result, the text itself displays other characteristics of humor so that the its style offers insight to a broader trend in our culture today.
(609): Made a joint out of my Yale rejection letter. Life is grand.
While the humor can come from the sarcasm of the statement "life is grand" at the end of the joke, in this case it is also possible that the person is sincere...and high. The humor of this text mostly come from the stark contrast between a joint and Yale (or maybe if we're being brutally realistic, they aren't necessarily contradictory?). Most of the humor resides on the stunning incongruity of these two things. We call it shock humor. Like frosting on a cake, another element that contributes to the humor of this text is the detail. It wasn't not just any upsetting letter, but a rejection letter. It wasn't any rejection letter, but one from Yale. These details also give hints about how the person was probably a serious, and academically successful student, bringing more contrast to the joint, which brings another side of him to light. Thus, the details enhance the contrast. On a similar note, using the word "grand" as opposed to just "good" also contributes to the humor.
Here is another example of how detail contributes to the comical effects of a joke, "(412): You are writing your college essay comparing yourself to Lady Gaga, Vladimir Putin, and Dale Earnhardt Jr. and you are worried about the conclusion sounding cheesy?"
First of all, the outrageous contrast and impossible links (personally, I can't figure out any connection between Lady Gaga and Putin besides the fact that they live on the same planet and are on the news a lot) lead us back to humor from the sheer ridiculousness of the text. Moreover, the specific names enhance the joke because of all the connotations that come with them.
This joke not only represents how detail and incongruities work in humor, but also reflects how humor changes with our culture. Nowadays, with 10 windows opened on our screen, the song flowing through our earphones and the iPhone spazzing with new textsconveys a message about our lifestyles, we need flashy and gripping things like big names to grab us. And really, our attention span only lasts as long as it takes to read that name. In our fast paced lives, we no longer settle down to appreciate the subtly and the buried sarcasm in a joke. We only enjoy spurts of shock humor that tear our eyes away for whatever we were doing. Thus, technology and pop culture not only shapes our lifestyles, but also contribute to the evolution of our culture change alongside us.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Love Story
Back when pigtails was my default hairdo, I would not only pout and whine my through those steamed carrots and multiplication tables but also always ask my mom if I was adopted (I am not), just in case she was my evil step mother and I didn't even know it. This suspicion was almost as deeply engrained in my mind as the notion that I'm going to be a princess. With the Cinderella picture book always opened in my lap, "I see the lights, see the party, the ball gowns/ See you make your way through the crowd/And say, "Hello"/Little did I know..." Okay, I won't get carried away with Taylor Swift here, but there is a point to be made: princess fantasies knows no age limits and neither does idealism. However, shaped by our reality and molded by time, our idealism has endured but also changed with our human experiences to obtain their places in our lives today.
Although contemporary romantics may have traded in white ponies for sleek Mercedes, romanticism and a few age-old acts of chivalry still remains. For example, the gentlemanly act of giving up one's jacket is still respected today, (303): Awww. A guy on the train just took his coat off so his girlfriend could throw up into it. Who says chivalry is dead?
It's not. In fact, it has transformed alongside our culture and way of life (443): I'm a gentlemen, chivalry is what i do, i'll open the door, pull out your chair, buy your drinks, i'll even go down first, but when it comes to mario kart, i draw the line. I'm sorry but i just can't let you beat me at mario kart.
More importantly, romanticism is only one of many manifestations of a broader idealism. Americans have a special relationship with this idealism in that we embrace it as much as doubt it. This contradiction not only continuously provides material for humor, but has also given rise to a classic form of humor: good news/ bad news jokes.
(620): He just helps fat girls get exercise. One walk of shame at a time.
This follows the good news/bad news formula because a walk of shame humiliating (and usually accompanied by a headache) while exercise is beneficial. Though this is by no means a just representation of contemporary romantic relationships, it does evokes the reality of many college campuses as way of undermining the Disney notion that every girl will be saved by a knight in shining armor. Yet we can't help but laugh. This confirms Jessie Bier's claim in The Rise and Fall of American Humor that Americans tolerate and even embrace “so much cruelty in our humor" that has become a defining characteristic. At the same time, this also goes back to the not-so-secret pleasure we derive from laughing at "suckers." It's like we enjoy being inside the bubble of fantasy. But if we're not inside, there's nothing that we love more than bursting it. However, not all of the jokes in this genre follow the form as closely, "(636): The doctor said 'youre the 2nd youngest person that ive seen with this condition. Thats probably not the silver medal you were looking for today.'" This one features a slight variation since it also incorporates sarcasm, which adds a whole new dimension to the joke. In this case, the bad news is not the punch line as it is in the walk of shame one above. Within the second line itself, there is another juxtaposition between the good and the bad that makes the statement more stinging and more poignant. But why does the last line, in which bad news so overt beneath the sarcasm still evoke a chuckle? Are we marveling at how we can make something so horrible sound so nice? In a way, the attempt to look on the bright side of things is just us laughing at our own idealism. The inherent incongruity in this is that while it is a laughter, it represents a way of coping.
The fact that Cinderella (the Disney version) has become as much of a classic as Othello and that good news/ bad news jokes still appear in different forms today means that we still believe. It doesn't mean that we are naive and unaware of the reality of the world we live in. Sometimes, we just want to suspend our disbelief. We're not ostriches burying our heads in the sand pretending that we live in a happy-go-lucky world. The truth is that we need this idealism as much as we need the brutality of realism to keep us in check. Because if we let go of this idealism, this fantasy to look up to, what have we got to keep us going?
No wonder Taylor Swift's Love Story gets so played so many times.
Although contemporary romantics may have traded in white ponies for sleek Mercedes, romanticism and a few age-old acts of chivalry still remains. For example, the gentlemanly act of giving up one's jacket is still respected today, (303): Awww. A guy on the train just took his coat off so his girlfriend could throw up into it. Who says chivalry is dead?
It's not. In fact, it has transformed alongside our culture and way of life (443): I'm a gentlemen, chivalry is what i do, i'll open the door, pull out your chair, buy your drinks, i'll even go down first, but when it comes to mario kart, i draw the line. I'm sorry but i just can't let you beat me at mario kart.
More importantly, romanticism is only one of many manifestations of a broader idealism. Americans have a special relationship with this idealism in that we embrace it as much as doubt it. This contradiction not only continuously provides material for humor, but has also given rise to a classic form of humor: good news/ bad news jokes.
(620): He just helps fat girls get exercise. One walk of shame at a time.
This follows the good news/bad news formula because a walk of shame humiliating (and usually accompanied by a headache) while exercise is beneficial. Though this is by no means a just representation of contemporary romantic relationships, it does evokes the reality of many college campuses as way of undermining the Disney notion that every girl will be saved by a knight in shining armor. Yet we can't help but laugh. This confirms Jessie Bier's claim in The Rise and Fall of American Humor that Americans tolerate and even embrace “so much cruelty in our humor" that has become a defining characteristic. At the same time, this also goes back to the not-so-secret pleasure we derive from laughing at "suckers." It's like we enjoy being inside the bubble of fantasy. But if we're not inside, there's nothing that we love more than bursting it. However, not all of the jokes in this genre follow the form as closely, "(636): The doctor said 'youre the 2nd youngest person that ive seen with this condition. Thats probably not the silver medal you were looking for today.'" This one features a slight variation since it also incorporates sarcasm, which adds a whole new dimension to the joke. In this case, the bad news is not the punch line as it is in the walk of shame one above. Within the second line itself, there is another juxtaposition between the good and the bad that makes the statement more stinging and more poignant. But why does the last line, in which bad news so overt beneath the sarcasm still evoke a chuckle? Are we marveling at how we can make something so horrible sound so nice? In a way, the attempt to look on the bright side of things is just us laughing at our own idealism. The inherent incongruity in this is that while it is a laughter, it represents a way of coping.
The fact that Cinderella (the Disney version) has become as much of a classic as Othello and that good news/ bad news jokes still appear in different forms today means that we still believe. It doesn't mean that we are naive and unaware of the reality of the world we live in. Sometimes, we just want to suspend our disbelief. We're not ostriches burying our heads in the sand pretending that we live in a happy-go-lucky world. The truth is that we need this idealism as much as we need the brutality of realism to keep us in check. Because if we let go of this idealism, this fantasy to look up to, what have we got to keep us going?
No wonder Taylor Swift's Love Story gets so played so many times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)