Review: The secret of Seinfeld’s Humor: The significance of the Insignificant The Secret of Seinfeld’s Humor: The significance of the Insignificant, an article written by Jorge Gracia briefly outlines what the author believes to be the origin of the humour with which the popular television show Seinfeld achieved such broad based success. A show that embraced the ordinary of everyday life, while atypically avoiding the mainstay of violence and sex of most of today’s popular visual media and culture. Gracia (19??) begins his article by posing the question “how, can a show that deals with ordinary, everyday occurrences have such wide appeal”? This is a very general question that could be analysed in any number of ways. The author however, …show more content…
I also suspect that some of this information may have been contradictory to the authors main arguments. To his credit however, Gracia does, however offer to distinguish between the sad and the funny. We laugh, claims the author because we see in it “the significance of the insignificant, while we cry because through it we grasp the insignificance of the significant”. Not a new concept states Gracia, given that we are so often faced with both emotions on a regular basis. This simple statement is the core of Gracia’s argument. By stating this, he is necessarily saying that laughter derives from a new perspective on ourselves. One that illuminates, idiosyncrasies, customs and peculiarities which are given minimal attention during day to day activities, but which have great significance. Comedy draws on these factors to identify the ordinary as extraordinary. Thus Seinfeld lives up to its moniker ‘a show about nothing’. The show necessarily underscores that the commonplace is indeed pertinent, this is reinforced by the audience being aware of the significance of what is happening while the shows characters remain in the dark. Conversley the author argues that sadness in respect to laughter is the opposite. That is, it originates from the significant, and it is a degree of insignificance encapsulated within these ‘tragedies’ that elecits sadness.
From neuroscientists to comedians themselves, O’Hara litters the article with reliable experts to ensure the points made in the article are diverse and rooted in credibility. Without these resources, saying that “[c]omedy is more than just a pleasant way to pass an evening”(2) would be disregarded as a matter of opinion. By supplying each point with an array of examples, O’Hara manages to show the reader that many beside herself share her points. After planting a statement, O’Hara makes sure that she backs up her claims with plenty of evidence. When examining how comedy changes people’s views of certain minority groups, O’Hara lays out two different examples of real situations where this is put into affect. She touches on the homosexual community, disabled community, and even on a man who shared his experience from being a policeman “to expose nonsensical policies”(5). By both using multiple resources and sharing numerous examples, O’Hara successfully convinced the reader that comedy does indeed hold a very significant place in our
Laughter can be an instinctive expression of lively amusement although we don’t usually realise the offence of the joke we are laughing at. Tamara discusses modern satire and its position in humanity.
“Rather than placing comedy as a creator of puppet-like illusion (making the living seem mechanical), this approach reconsiders comedy as a revealer of truth (as it deconstructs lies). It is certainly not uncommon to hear “it’s funny because it’s true” when witnessing a standup comedian’s act”. For example, when at the beginning of the movie the two guys confuse the Dude with the millionaire Lebowski and break into his home and then realize that the Dude is not a millionaire because of his bowling ball.The Dude replies by saying” obesely you’re not a golfer” but it was a bowling ball.When one of the guys said that the dude was a loser he replies by saying “but at least I was housebroken”. “One might be able to argue that some of the greatest comic moments are those which are able to make comedy out of this difficult reality (e.g. Borat, This is Spinal Tap, certain types of stand up, etc.); however, as a general comic principle, we can agree that emotional involvement creates an obstacle to our ability to laugh”. When we involve our emotions into something that might be funny to other and not our self might be because we have gone through the experience or someone close to us has. For example, the kidnapping of Bunny can seem like a joke, but somebody that has lived through one and survived it can bring up emotions that remind them of that
This piece analyzes the sitcom in comparison to stand-up comedy. In the chapter “What’s So Funny About America?” sitcoms are broken down into elements that contrast those of stand-up. Marc describes the two forms of comedy as very different. He states that sitcoms depend on “familiarity, identification, and redemption of popular beliefs” while stand-up normally relies on “the shocking violation of normative taboos.”
Comedy, especially satirical comedy, plays an interesting and unique role in our popular culture, as it not only pokes fun at ridiculous and, often, hypocritical aspects within our society, but also helps open up conversations on matters that are often too sensitive and/or controversial to talk about in “normal,” non-comedic settings. In my opinion, there is no better example of this satirical comedic approach within our popular culture than the highly successful mockumentary sitcom, “The Office.” Within this show, the rather satirical approach to sensitive topics, such as race, gender, and sexuality (just to name a few), are consistently and creatively explored, especially within the episode, “Body Language.” However, while many may argue that the jokes made in comedic shows shouldn’t be taken seriously, as they are done so for comedic purposes, I argue that we must still critically analyze the jokes made, especially when referring to sensitive social identities, since these jokes still have immense cultural power capable of not only reinforcing certain stereotypes, but also normalizing them, which can prove to be detrimental to the social progress that we have made as a country thus far.
In this sketch some of the dialogue consisted of statements such as “First of all they’re lazy, good for nothin’ tricksters, crack smokin’ swindlers, big butt havin,’ with their wide noses breathin’ all the white man’s air. They eat up all the chicken, they think they’re the best dancers, and they stink” which glorifies Chappell’s exaggerated use of satire, but basically mocks many of the racist stereotypes associated with black people. As with many things of this nature, everyone didn’t receive this humor in the way intended, ultimately bringing light to the delicacy surrounding satire when it applies to race. Although another intriguing spectrum of this use of satire is apparent when looking at how this skit alongside this overall show in question factored heavily into prolonged consequences. This show treaded a thin line that the dynamic of race based comedy treads with the ability it has in creating awareness with the risk of actually being a way in which to reinforce as well. This as Dave Chappell so boldly and accurately put it in his Oprah Winfrey interview was an action of being “socially irresponsible”, which inevitably troubled the young comedian, resulting in his decision to walk away from the show. The reality remains that where it was intended for these skits to be of a completely satirical stance, they inevitably became for some viewers an opportunity to indulge in racist
Elaboration of a previous idea. P. 41: “In Cohen’s terms, humor serves the vital psychological and social function of confirming or cultivating intimacy, and establishing or reinforcing community.”
Humor plays a very important role in coping with stressful and adverse life circumstances. Gross and Munoz (1995) stated that humor can be viewed as an important emotional regulation mechanism contributing to one’s mental health. According to Fredrickson (2001), the positive emotion of mirth accompanying humor alleviates the negative feelings of anxiety, anger and depression. It enables an individual to think in a broader and flexible manner and engage in creative problem solving.
What one person finds funny another might disturbing. Comedy is art is a forum to express someone’s self. Many comedian’s use their anger and frustration to express their opinion on current events, politics and religion. Many Americans would rather listen to a comedian talk about what’s wrong in America then listening to the local news. Some comedian should refrain from exercising their right to freedom of speech if others are offended.
Before receiving a license or a school permit, a person has to take a Drivers Education class. A few months before I turned fifteen I decided that I would get ahead of the game and take the class. As an avid learner I had nothing but excitement for the class. The first day I showed up in good spirits expecting to take a class that I would enjoy. Little did I know that my instructor would loathe my work ethic and abhor my drive to overachieve.
Cognitive demands involved with humor processing can decrease negative emotions. In other words (specifically, WedbMD journalist Kathleen Doheny’s words), good jokes cure bad moods. These statements are obviously composed in different syntax and were created to pertain to separate audiences. However, both are able to develop the same overarching reader interpretations.
Correspondingly, Edwin Morgan uses aspects of life to show how laughter is a protection and a need in life. Morgan uses the simile “laughter ringing them round like a guard”. This shows that laughter and joy will protect you from the sad and depressing thoughts in your mind. That happiness will act as a barrier from all the bad in the world and for even a split second
This instant between Philip and Louis helps to show that humor and laughter can help one of many situations become better for human beings. As human beings we have two major emotions which are positive and negative. A positive emotion can be expressed by happiness, laughter, and joy. A negative emotion can show sadness, anger, irritation, and stress and a few more. Incorporating humor in your everyday life can help your attitude,
Philosophers over the years have attempted to generate their own theories of what makes a person laugh. Bergson and Davis’s theories have given people an indication of what that could be. Together these philosopher’s theories enlighten us to why people might laugh. Bergson and Davis’s theories limit us in explaining to the fullest extent of the workings of comedy. Bergson’s theory has three elements that he believes constitute why we laugh and claims, “…the mechanical encrusted upon the living,” promotes laughter (Bergson 10). While Davis’s theory is concerned with the foundation of laughter with incongruities and ambiguities. As well the audience, who finds something funny, instead of the object that is funny.
In the journal article Humour as Emotion Regulation: The Differential Consequences of Negative Versus Positive Humour, authors Andrea Samson and James Gross (2012) conduct two studies that focus on using different forms of humor in order to regulate emotions. Multiple theories on humor were explained throughout the introduction such as humor being used as a distraction technique or humor being used to alleviate negative emotions. The authors clearly explained there was currently no general consensus between the theories (Samson & Gross, 2012).