How We Laugh
Does humor have hidden social and political power? How is it used?
The content that has me giggling the most lately is the videos of Jeremy Strong of Succession fame utilizing his ever-so-vast vocabulary to the point in which he sounds like an alien trying to convince us he’s human. I will provide you guys with one of my favorites:
Although difficult to grasp the minutiae of my merry prankster-ness I am, dramaturgically, an egregiously humored individual with a Kafka-esque satirical ideology rooted in the principles of idgaf.
In all unseriousness, it’s true, I am quite the jester, jokester, and prankster, merry or otherwise. When you get bat mitzvahed they make sure you can do two things: interrupt and make ‘em laugh! If you can’t do either, Hashem cuts off your hands.
One thing I’ve been noticing through my displays of humor is how and why I make the jokes that I do. While my usual priority is to make people laugh, the way I do it can vary so much from person to person.
With some people, I’ll often do a dead-pan “I don’t even know why you’re laughing this is actually so serious” kind of act. With others, I’ll laugh at my own jokes, bounce off theirs, and so on. What I’ve noticed, however, is the former is typically done with men.
I wonder if it's because I don’t want the men to feel like they’re in on the joke. Like this is me humoring myself and you could laugh if you want but I’m not going to laugh with you. It exerts this sort of off-putting power imbalance within the joke that is in some round-about way me getting back at my father for not listening to me. On the contrary, in some cases, I’ll put myself on equal footing with, or below people (who are usually women) when I laugh with them. The jokes become more vulnerable, and silly, and we treat each other like punchlines.
This is in no way universal. I just think it’s interesting because how we laugh can say a lot more about us than we think.
The Psychology Behind Humor
Now, in true Shannon Burk fashion, let’s get into some Freudian psychoanalysis. Freud’s theory on humor was similar to his theories about dreams in the sense that they reveal things about our subconscious. Freud was a proponent of the “relief theory” which states that laughter and jokes are the result of superfluous energy that we must release. While Freud’s theory may be interesting and I am a fan of his work, it has some issues that have deterred scholars from using it as it relies on ideas of mimicry and repressed emotion.
The superiority theory of comedy states that when we laugh it creates a feeling of superiority over the one being laughed at. I believe that in most cases, that’s why a lot of humor comes from a desire to feel superior, not inherent superiority. That is why you will often see the most insecure comics punching down, because, although they may be in a position in the societal hierarchy higher than that of their punchline, they feel they are so low they must target individuals they have concrete power over. On the contrary, those punching up feel superior in some regard to the groups they are, in a technical sense, beneath, because they are devaluing those above to the status of a mere joke.
The last theory is the incongruity theory which is the most popular amongst psychologists and philosophers today. It states that humor is derived from a subversion of expectations and a “jostling of the mind”. Immanuel Kant states “In everything that is to excite a lively convulsive laugh there must be something absurd (in which the understanding, therefore, can find no satisfaction)”.
I think all three theories have a lot of merit to them. In fact, I think they all can coexist. The incongruity and relief theory both provide adequate explanations for our urge to laugh when confronted with something uncomfortable. The superiority theory explains a lot of why laughing at can create a hierarchy. These theories give us a good foundation to explore how we laugh.
The Depth of Humor
I believe jokes are a lot like artifacts. Humor, like art, can be an interesting way of examining history. In addition to the surrealism found in paintings of the post-war period, the humor also became more surreal. Jokes became nonsensical and illogical like a Magritte or Dali painting. “The Fountain”, Duchamp’s practical joke on the art world, was a direct response to the horrors of the First World War and also a radical critique of elitism in the art scene.
This absurdist humor wasn’t just contained to the art world. The famous novelist, Franz Kafka, wrote a lot of surrealist and nonsensical literature during and after the First World War. His short story “The Hunger Artist” has a disturbing and unsettling subject matter but its ending is ironic and humorous. It makes us ask ourselves: Why are we amused? This is a tragedy, right?
Satire and dark humor as a medium is often seen in response to atrocities, injustice, or corruption. The joke is birthed out of anger and despair and in the end, makes us laugh. Another famous example of this is Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut. It is the epitome of this post-war surrealist humor. It follows Billy Pilgrim, a World War II soldier, as he travels through time (more nonsense). It can be off-putting and jarring and just when you’ve read something seemingly horrific the humor jolts you back with the phrase “so it goes”. Additionally, Jonathan Swift’s “Modest Proposal”(1729) was a hilarious yet bleak piece about how the Irish should sell their children as food to rich elites. A reaction to British policy and attitudes taken against the poor Irish-Catholic population, “A Modest Proposal” encapsulates a common way to grapple with tragedy: laugh.
Comedy has the unique quality of being a way to bring people together but also create distance as well. In Swift’s proposal, he creates a connection between the victims of the British and the elites, and by doing so, distances himself and those people from the groups he’s making fun of. The disdain for those groups creates a dichotomy: the laughers and the ones laughed at.
The Power of a Punchline
The laugher and the one laughed at seems, on the surface, a hierarchy. So why do I feel so powerful in situations where I am laughed at? I believe it's because I’m playing a character. I don’t actually not know who Quintin Tarantino is, but it’s funny to watch the guy buy it. It does two things for me: it reaffirms my belief that men would rather find a woman stupid than find her funny and it’s also really entertaining to watch him whip out Wikipedia and show me Pulp Fiction as I stare at him blankly, pushing down a smile. The joke isn’t a way to make him laugh, it's a joke for me and he can laugh if he wants. The joke’s real punchline isn’t me, it's him. That, in some way, feels like power.
Lying can be a very funny thing. It’s what I like to call deception humor. The TikTok trend of people telling their parents that their favorite celebrity died (see here) or switching names with your best friend when there’s a substitute teacher are a few examples. The joke relies on a facade to exist between the one making the joke and the joke's victim, or punchline.
When examining humor it's always important to look at the punchline. Who or what is it? What compels us to laugh? When you tell a joke, who are you making the punchline? Is it your boss? Your friend? Are you punching up, down, or sideways? In Swift’s “Modest Proposal”, he punches up at the wealthy elites. In the example about exchanged jabs between friends, we are punching sideways at each other. As for punching down, listen to a male podcast for some good examples.
The punchline is powerful because of the distance I mentioned earlier. You cannot create the distance without a punchline. This is why I find myself sympathizing with those who make an off-color Holocaust joke. Despite its insensitivity, it's understandable that, when confronted with such a gruesome atrocity, it's easier to grapple with it by turning it into a punchline. Like drinking before a family gathering, humor can be a mechanism to shield us from things we aren’t ready to handle emotionally.
When I put on my Quinn Fabrayian cadence and nod like I’m speaking to a child about his dinosaur collection (except instead of dinosaurs it’s vinyls) does it relate back to that superiority theory? If the joke relies on the man being misogynistic is that a way for me to absolve guilt for partaking in a joke that I would, under normal circumstances, find morally wrong? But it also is interesting when applying the theory of distance. The humor also works as a way of protecting myself, making me feel comfortable in a situation that would normally leave me anxious and scared. To make him the joke feels like I’ve got some power and I’m taking away some of his.
This made me interested in the radical nature of humor. A lot of the examples I mentioned regarding humor in a historical sense had a lot of radical ideas relating to elitism, colonialism, and imperialism. Did Jonathan Swift gain power in laughing at the British? Did Duchamp have power over the elites of the art scene? Do we gain power when we make fun of our exploiters?
This begs the biggest question of all: Is humor radical? If so, how effective is it really?
Humor and Radicalism
I found a thesis written in 2000 by Audrey L. Vanderford on the radicalism found in pranks. She writes that “Pranks operate on, in, and through power dynamics, inverting structures of status, authority, and convention”. An example that comes to mind is the GameStop short squeeze of January 2021, a prank done by amateur traders that ended up costing large hedge funds billions of dollars. The joke was funny and the hedge fund dissolved because of it. While the act could have been a fluke, I don’t believe radical acts exist in a vacuum. Every act, big or small, is worth something to the cause if it makes even a ripple in the currents of the status quo.
I also think it’s more important to examine what makes humor radical. Unfortunately, I don’t think that comedy and laughter can be considered inherently revolutionary. I think it’s hard work to make humor radical, but it’s a necessary cause all the same.
The distinction between what makes a joke radical brings us back to the laughing with and laughing at discussion. I think a radical joke laughs at a system and laughs with those harmed by that system. An oppressive joke is one that laughs at those harmed by the system. they uphold and laugh with their fellow oppressors. The former challenges and the latter preserves and strengthens.
This is why it can be important to reflect on what jokes we tell and what jokes we laugh at. What are we saying when we politely chortle at the man berating his girlfriend at the dinner table? What are we doing when we mock the billionaires and make a funny sign at the strike?
To Conclude
We must be silly. Do not deprive yourself of such a basic human need. But lest you forget the power your silliness holds! You could be so silly and so radical at the same time. In fact, some of the funniest jokes are funny because of their radicalism.
Also, it is important to recognize how you make people laugh, how you want to laugh, and what the way you laugh says about you. I did not read Freud’s 400-page book on this because I have homework to do and Bananagrams to play but I do know him well enough to say that he probably said your humor is a byproduct of your subconscious and maybe looking at your humor can give you insight on who you are. So go. Laugh. Reflect on said laughter. Learn it came from your dad. Laugh again.
Afterword
What a fun little piece to write. I hope you enjoyed yourself as well (and maybe let out a little radical chuckle). I want to thank you guys so much for the support as these pieces really mean a lot to me. I chugged a PSL, listened to Avril Lavigne’s “Complicated” on repeat, and read a shit ton of academic papers to write this baby and I can’t wait for the next one. I’m thinking I’ll do a September reccs to keep it light and fun and maybe do something on American Cowboys or God or elementary education’s failures or maybe sex in the city parody??? Who knows! Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe it really helps and I’ll talk to you later.
-Shannon<3
Sources:
Too Close for Comfort, or Too Far to Care? Finding Humor in Distant Tragedies and Close Mishaps
An instant Shannon Burk classic. There was also no doubt in my mind that you were going to let that Freud slip.
fabulous read! i ignored my entire soc class cause it was much better. also thinking we should get a framed print of the fountain for our bathroom.