Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!oliveb!bunker!wtm
From: 11PDAVIS@GALLUA.BITNET (Pete Davis)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Humor and the truth
Message-ID: <14777@handicap.news>
Date: 12 Apr 91 14:45:19 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.isc-br.com
Reply-To: 11PDAVIS@GALLUA.BITNET (Pete Davis)
Lines: 75
Approved: wtm@hcap.fidonet.org
Fidonet: Silent Talk Conference

Index Number: 14777

OK. I really should be copping some badly needed REM time, but I
gotta respond to this. I maintain a firm "No Comment" on the
emotional issues in this string, but I want to try to clear up a
factual misunderstanding.

        Flame shields up, Mr Sulu.

        Stephen White responds to James Womack:

SW>      JW> Humor is a cultural experience.
SW>
SW>     Humour is culturally independant. Culture merely provides a
SW>     "database" of known things to ensure understanding of the joke.

Humor is not culturally independent, because (with some exceptions,
like slapstick) humor is intimately based on language, and language
and culture are inseparable.

What does or doesn't make a joke funny is *how* it more a question
of *how* it done, rather than *what* is done. The artistry in humor
consists of being able to set up a plausible situation, with a
plausible and unremarkable outcome, then providing an unanticiated
but still plausible outcome. (Gawd, that sounds pompous).

The art comes from manipulating the rules of language/culture,
which must be shared by the joker and the jokee. That's why
6-year-old English speakers love knock-knock jokes, but puns fly
right over their heads. They haven't developed enough awareness of
the rules of the language. For example:

        "Do me a flavor and help me finger this out."

(I wish my ASL/Deaf-culture were good enough to give an equivalent
example in sign. Anyone else want to try?)

A six-yr-old will think, "That's stupid; it doesn't make any
sense." But an adult will understand the wordplay involved, the
intent of the pun, and might still think "That's stupid." Humor is
relative, not absolute.

To someone who knows ASL, but doesn't know enough about English to
be able to play with it, that isn't funny either. It's
English-funny, but it's not ASL-funny.

The crititical part of a lot of humor is the *wordplay*. Being able
to really play with words (which is a lot like playing with
reality) means being able to understand the literal meaning of
what's signed/said, and the way the rules were twisted to get from
the Set Up to the Punchline. "Funniness" is in the way language is
used to misrepresent reality.

Culture also influences humor. Henny Youngman could say, "Take my
wife.  Please" or Rodney Dangerfield can say, "I don't get no
respect." and English-speaking Americans, who grew up in the
post-WWII, television culture will "get it", a Russian or a
Namibian or an ASL-signer won't, because those two lines are
cultural institutions. Their funniness is in shared cultural
experience.

Anyhow, I just wanted to clear up a confusion of facts. I really
*REALLY* don't want to get involved in arguements over beliefs or
feelings.  (Oh, I knew I shoulld have kept my hands in my lap, and
my big mouth shut.) Make any kind of claims you want about
communication brand names; just don't say anything insulting about
humor. It's an artform I love; in ASL AND English.

Besides, it seems that Stephen and James probably agree on a lot of
points here. Hopefully this thread won't develop into FLAME WARS Pt
99. May the farce be with you both. (Couldn't resist)

                                        Have fun!
					Pete Davis
					11PDAVIS@GALLUA.BITNET