Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Towards a Unified Theory of The Three Stooges' Humor

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
darkstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 05:33 PM
Original message
Towards a Unified Theory of The Three Stooges' Humor

The popular reduction of humor theories into three groups -- Incongruity, Relief, and Superiority theories -- is an over simplification. Several scholars have identified over 100 types of humor theories, and Patricia Keith-Spiegel's classification of humor theories into 8 major types (biological, superiority, incongruity, surprise, ambivalence, release, configuration, and psychoanalytic theories) has been fairly influential. Jim Lyttle suggests that, based on the question they are primarily addressing humor, theories can be classified into 3 different groups. He argues that, depending on their focus, humor theories can be grouped under these categories: functional, stimuli, and response theories. (1) Functional theories of humor ask what purpose humor has in human life. (2) Stimuli theories ask what makes a particular thing funny. (3) Response theorists ask why we find things funny. A better way to phrase this concern is to say that response theorists ask what is particular about feelings of humor.

Thomas Hobbes developed the most well known version of the Superiority theory. Giving emphatic expression to the idea, Hobbes says "that the passion of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others, or with our own formerly" (Human Nature, ch. 8). Motivated by the literary conceit of the laugh of triumph, Hobbes's expression the superiority theory looks like more of a theory of laughter than a theory of humor. Baudelaire offers an interesting variation on Hobbes' superiority theory, mixing it with mortal inferiority. He argues that that "laughter is satanic" -- an expression of dominance over animals and a frustrated complaint against our being merely mortal.

Critically reversing the superiority theory, Robert Solomon offers an "inferiority theory" of humor. He thinks that self-recognition in the silly antics and self-deprecating behavior of the Three Stooges is characteristic of a source of humor based in inferiority or modesty....


Learn much, much more here about theories of humor here, including the role of post-ironic satirical strategies in the re-interpretations of Roadrunner's and Coyote's "proxemic dance in anthropocentric space":

http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/humor.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Oeditpus Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Personally, I rather adhere to the Bergsonian idea
of laughter as a social sanction against inflexible behaviour, but... excuse me a moment.



And now...







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Rather? Quite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sigh... no... no... no....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-19-08 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Not a poke in the eye?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Pies are far more expansive in their application.
Granted the poke in the eye (along with the slap, the bonk on the head, the nosetweak, etc.) has its particular geist, these are all fundamentally self-referential and internalized memes.

The pie toss, on the other hand, extends the internal dialogue of regeneration through (comic) violence into the broad social sphere--a stunning commentary upon deeply-rooted cultural/sexual repression within a superficially puritanical culture. Additionally... You still there? Hello? :boring:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. A hand, Hand...
Edited on Thu Mar-20-08 10:15 AM by Winebrat
:applause:

I will be cachinating all day over your effulgent if not slightly periphrastic elucidation.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. I know why women don't like the Stooges.
They're not funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. You got that right!
I never ever EVER liked the Three Stooges even when I was a little kid. I couldn't figure out why they even had them on teevee. Not funny and stupid beyond belief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Yeah....
Shh, don't tell Zornhau, he might divorce me... :rofl: But I'm in that camp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-20-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. The definitive unified theory of 3 stooges "humor"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC