Theories On Humor
Different Theories on Humor
By: Lucy Waszak
There are three main theories that try to explain comedy. These include the incongruity theory, superiority theory, and relief theory. The Incongruity theory tries to explain that we laugh because of the uneasiness between two concepts that do not go together or make sense. The account I found most persuasive on the Incongruity theory is Emmanuel Kant's account of it. He explained that something absurd and outlandish needs to happen to make us laugh. Kant describes, "Laughter is an affection arising from a strained expectation being suddenly reduced to nothing"(Lippitt 1). It is not exactly known what Kant meant by the expectation being reduced to nothing, but there is an interpretation of his claim that would make sense. It says that at the start of a joke we have a certain expectation of where it is going to go. When the joke is finished we realize that we were on the wrong path the whole time, and this is the reason we laugh because it was so unexpected. This was so convincing to me because when they gave the example from the show, Cheers. I thought the joke was going a certain way until I realized how wrong I was. This misunderstanding is what made me laugh to myself and truly realize how accurate that was and has been in everyday life. One example of comedy that goes along with the idea that we laugh at jokes because it ends in a different path than expected is a joke from The Office. It is halloween and all the workers got dressed in costumes. One character, Creed, comes in a suit covered in blood and is interviewed. He says, "It's Halloween, that is really, really good timing". One would expect that he is wearing a costume for halloween when he sits down and starts talking, but by the end you realize that he is not dressed for halloween and just happens to be covered in blood. This makes us laugh because no one would ever expect for that to happen since it looks like he is in a halloween costume. The expectation that he is in a halloween costume is reduced to nothing by the end of Creed's statement. This supports the incongruity theory because what Creed has just said is so absurd and does not make sense that we laugh in response to this absurdity.
I believe that the theories all support each other in getting close to the essence and discovering what exactly makes us laugh. Each theory makes a good point in explaining comedy, but I don't think any of them can explain the essence of comedy on their own. For example, the incongruity theory helps explain the reason for why we actually laugh at the end of certain jokes, but it does not apply to all types of comedy. Superiority and relief theories help explain other types of comedy that the incongruity theory can't explain. Not all examples of incongruity, superiority, and relief are funny because it depends on the context and the opinions of the person hearing the joke. If someone has a strong opinion on a topic raised in a joke and does not find it funny they will not laugh at it, but it still may be laughable to someone with a different attitude towards the topic. Also if someone hears a joke from a context they do not know much about, like a certain T.V show, they likely will not find the joke funny since it does not make sense, and they do not know the background of the joke. Context and attitudes are extremely important in wether someone finds a joke funny or not. The incongruity theory makes many good points in explaining why certain jokes make us laugh, but it can not support all types of humor and jokes.
That's a really important line. I think you could argue that the expectation aspects shows the way that relief theory impacts incongruity theory. Unless there is some emotional quality to the change, unless it surprises or otherwise makes us feel something, then there won't be laughter. We laugh off the incongruity between our original emotional state and the later one.
ReplyDelete