Saturday, June 24, 2006

Study in Humour

While I was searching on the internet, I found this page: http://www.erenkrantz.com/ArtsCore/. It's not in my nature to be mean or discouraging, in fact quite the opposite, but I can't help thinking that none of the pictures are very funny. As a study in humour, can anyone come up with any suggestions as to why?

I was watching Eddie Izzard the other day, he IS quite funny, and I think that part of the reason is that he expects to get a laugh - he delivers his lines in such a way that he's like "c'mon, laugh!" and people do. I was also listening to "I'm sorry I haven't a clue" on radio 4 'listen again', and how come the words 'Mornington Crescent' can be funny, as can the line 'Tina, come get some haaam', but other things aren't? What's that all about?

If you want more examples of the type of thing I'm talking about, try http://www.tes.co.uk/Caption_competition/. It's amazing the variety of answers there, some of which are funny, and some of which aren't. While I think about it, why not try entering, let's see if one of us can win it.

D.

1 comment:

David Pickersgill said...

Maybe crude humour is to do with embarrassment? Or the fact that it's a bit 'naughty'?

I guess that things can be funny if they are:

- Unexpected or unusual or surprising (like 'stonehenge' in Spinal Tap, or Monty Python)

- Part of some small puzzle, that has to be worked out. I think that's why double entendre works - there's a 'ha' factor as you 'get' it.

- Linked to this, you're also more inclined to laugh if you feel part of a group because of the joke; I think that's where observational humour comes from, like Peter Kay. All he really does is talk about things that really happen, but the fact that everyone knows what he's talking about makes them laugh because they all feel part of one group, together. That's also part of the reason why humour is so culture-specific, I guess; things that were funny 100 years ago just aren't today.

D