Humour

I think humour is often a creative and intelligent way of looking at a situation from a unique perspective.

Consider Ogden Nash on dogs:

" Dogs display reluctance and wrath
If you try to give them a bath.
They bury bones in hideaways
And half the time they trot sideaways."

Cute and funny, to me, anyway!

This world is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel.
Horace Walpole

Tragedy plus time equals comedy. For those with a keen sense of humor, the requirement of time is lowered and the limit of tragedy is raised.

Some people can already find elements of humor in 9/11. There are definitely comedians that have pulled material out of that tragedy. Some people never will never be able to laugh about anything related to that topic. But there will undoubtedly be more people able to laugh about elements of 9/11 twenty years from now that there were on 9/12/01.

I'm not saying people dying is unimportant or that it is funny. But once a person is able to sort through the emotions, and appreciate them within a defined perspective, they can then allow their sense of humor to work its magic of relieving the stress of those emotions.

I agree pinchehoto, but is the humour mostly due to daring to risk offence, in deliberate understatement or non-sequitur related to something that would normally be treated with less irreverence...which comes back to the original point Satyr made?

Absurd is, trying to send a message to a complete stranger on a blogsite and having the 'No more than 300 characters' message pop up repeatedly and erasing as much as possible without obscuring the original message and then becoming frustrated and typing in the word 'Testing' and that goes through!

Now thats...absurd, if you ask me.

Satyr wrote:


I did, you should have received it.

"A 300 word response huh? Must have been something."


Puter malfunction alert! There is no way I typed 300 words, I'm not that chatty...[size=7] most of the time. [/size]

this quote from Alan Alda, as his personna in a Woody Allen movie, was intended as a blatant farce on the subject of comedy, to merely reveal the shallowness of the average opinion.

tragedy becomes 'available' to comedy, after the passage of time, but has nothing to do with comedy per se.

[adopt not, those things whose meaning alludes you]

One can look at tragedy as an 'ingredient' to comedy,...scuse me while I adjust my spice rack.

Breaking comedy down to it's basic component, the joke or gag,each gag must have an element of reality, an element of surprise, and an element of distortion, such as , such as exaggeration, understatement, or irony.

"The funniest thing in the world is the truth." ~Twain

Having a unique view point seems to help spot the elements booman2 listed.

Tragedy can be the whole point of the joke. The shock of a serious situation being taken lightly especially between people who understand how offensive the joke should be - can be the joke itself. ie I'm laughing because I'm surprised and shocked that you could find that situation amusing.

The human animal, similar to all creatures functions on the basis of familiarity and repetition (habit) breeding 'comfort' - the less change that takes place in daily interactions, demanding adapting to a 'new' situation, the better.
Humour seemingly flies in the face of this stance, as it is most often created by an unexpected shift from that which is expected, and the 'laugh' response generated comes from relief at the realization that this fresh challenge to life's equilibrium is not serious, and threatening, but a joke! - humour.

[who can avoid laughing, upon realizing they have just done something truly 'foolish'?]

I think I see what you're saying BGW.

So in the tragic "dark" humour situation...the humour lies in the fact that I suddenly realise the comedian is not really without empathetic feeling regarding the tragedy, he's just pretending to be?

The fact that I realise this more quickly than someone else would leave me less offended at his "poor taste"?

edit> used the wrong "you're"

I used to have this german shepard dog as a kid. Bronze was his name. Bronze loved to rough-house and pretend "fight."

So I'd get down on all 4's and make some kind of bizarre sound like a zombie werewolf or something.

Whenever I did this, seeing me on all 4s and making that first zombie growl, Bronze would get this huge damn smile on his face, and launch a fake "attack" on me, and the "fight" would be on.

Bronze loved this game so much. He could do it for hours. His smile was so big. When he'd get a particulary good "bite" in on me or tear my shirt a little, I swear to gawd he'd almost laugh.

He knew this was all in fun. He knew I wasn't actually this animal fighting him.

He seemed to understand the irony of the stick I'd have in my mouth--and keep away from him--he's supposed to be the damn dog, not me. Did he understand irony?

Some will argue Bronze thought of me as simply another dog. Could be. Even if that is so, he still seemed to be humorous with this other "dog."

I'd get down and pretend like I was going to eat his food. He'd go nuts, smile and "attack" me. He seemed to know it was ironic.

Sometimes it seemed like he would play a practical joke. I'd take off my socks, he'd sometimes grab one in his mouth. He'd "sneak" away and see if I was going to come and attack him and fight him for it. He hoped I would, so he could have a "fight." He knew it was wrong. Damn dog was smiling as he did it. He was joking with me.

Did Bronze understand humor? Was he being humorous?

Can some animals understand humor? Can we prove that they do not? Chimpanzees come really close too it appears, even closer than my dog example above...

Can we truly say humans are the only animals that understand or can "do" humor?

Good question em.

I'm on your side there, but to play the opposition for a moment...

...could your dog understand the concept of play-acting (perhaps as a training tool for offspring)...more than any awareness of the comedy of the situation?

Is it just a case of anthropomorphism?

Good point Eorl.

Actually I am not sure either way on it.

Oh I know some will come in here later and "prove" very logically that the dog doesn't understand "humor."

But I am not convinced it can be proven either way.

I need to talk to a dog and actually communicate with its brain to know for sure. Sometimes we humans assume we know more about animals that we actually do, I think. Sure we can train the dog's mouth to water. Probably could do that with humans too. Doesn't mean they can't understand humor...(I'm oversimplifying sort of on purpose..)

Yeah I agree em. I'm sure we underestimate them enormously. I'm quite the human brain under analysis could not play Rachmaninov's Concerti either. (I know mine can't....yet )

I'm a cat person myself....them critters ain't half tricky!

The dog in my avatar picture will take a single, small kibble into the living room, roll on her back, and mimic an epic struggle, as though she were barely able to hold her own against the evil kibble--all the while, she will look to see if you are in on the fun.

A game she particularly enjoys is "Is that my biscuit." This entails reaching for her biscuit as though to take it from her. She then puts her head down and snarls (what my Sweetiepie calls the "evil weasel" face) as though she would take your hand off. She will pause now and again an look up with a big smile, as though to say, "Great fun, innit?"

One morning, i let the dogs outside, and gave each a biscuit as they came in. I then stepped outside and had a cigarette. When i came back in, i found Miss Cleo in the living room, with biscuit untouched, and wearing a big smile--waiting patiently to play "Is that my biscuit." I know adult human beings who cannot defer their pleasure that long, nevermind children.

There is a two part human delusion of superiority to animals which i see in operation. The first is very natural--a species seeks to dominate its food source niche; we don't run off the birds because they don't threaten our food supply. We will kill other predators, and "vermin" such as rodents who also threaten our food supply. Otherwise, the other plants and animals don't rise above the horizon of our interest.

The second source is that most pernicious of western influence--the Judeo-Christian tradition. We are confidently assured that we have been given dominion over all of the beasts. We are exalted above them because we possess a "soul." Not to realize the force of this basic tenet leaves one unable to understand the rabid reaction to Darwin's theory of descent, which obtains to this day. The fanatical believer not only considers her-/himself superior to the beasts, but to the infidel as well.

My notion is that this is foolishness. We are no more qualified to judge of the interior life of a dog, than they are to judge the quality of our prose. In humans, we consider the ability to defer present pleasure for an anticipated improved pleasure as a sign of wisdom and maturity. Was that not exactly what Miss Cleo did in patiently waiting until i had finished a leisurely smoke? Did she also not display an intelligent understanding of my habits which told her that i would be along shortly, and that her patience would be rewarded? I find this "specie-ism" not only to be unfounded, but to potentially deny us the greater pleasure which can arise from the mute understandings between humans and their companion animals.

These are paltry examples--Miss Cleo is by nature fun-loving, and has a highly developed sense of humor. The most part of my human acquaintance would be improved by acquiring a sense of humor such as hers.