Response to grace's blog 11/29

I think you made some good points examining the humor behind this video and the possible reasons Millenials find this humor so appealing as opposed to other generations. I personally did not laugh that much at this video. I found it more cringe-worthy than humorous, but I can see the comedic appeal, like when something is so stupid it just makes you laugh.

I think making light of situations like these make it easier for our generation to grasp the harder things that we go through in life, such as school continually getting more competitive and increasing in difficulty as well as the increased pressure put on our generation to create positive change in the world.

I also think that the stupid decisions he makes to drink the different colored drinks relate him back to a child which is incongruous since he obviously is an adult as we can tell from his voice, which adds to the overall comedic effect since it disrupts our normal mental expectations for this set of behaviors. Overall, I think the appeal of this video is the lack of sincerity in the situation that allows a sense of relief among the audience, and especially millennials who tend to shoulder a lot of weight when it comes to current world dilemmas.

Response to walker's blog 11/17

I think this clip definitely mainly uses the superiority theory. I also want to add to Walker's interpretation of how the comedian uses the superiority theory and say that I think the members of the audience who laughed at his jokes also found themselves superior to the situations he was describing. I think a lot of the comedy that comes from his jokes as they relate to the audience is the fact that they relate over common beliefs regarding gun laws, abortion, or maybe even parenting styles. People in the audience who really found these jokes funny could have laughed because they agree with his stance, or they could have laughed because they find it absurd and they believe that he is making fun of the stance they disagree with, similar to late-night political comedy shows.

I also agree that the incongruity theory is a good theory to back up the humor in this clip. Not only are the punch lines of his jokes a little more obscene or out of the norm that maybe what we would normally expect, but also the topics that he chooses to make his jokes about are usually considered taboo to joke about. This makes these jokes a violation of our normal mental patterns since our brains to not usually associate comedy with these normally serious matters. This makes his comedy all the more effective since it adds a bit of unexpected humor and a lack of predictability to his shows. People who regularly watch him may expect the type of humor that he usually employs, but even then, his punchlines seem to always bring something new to the table.

Response to rebecca's blog 11/12

Oh. My. Gosh. I love this show so much. It is one of my all-time favorites. This scene is the funniest, and it is a perfect indicator of Jake's character as a whole. I agree that this best fits the incongruity theory due to the contrast between the levity of the singing and the sincerity of the case of trying to find who her brother's murderer is.

An interesting point to think about is how this video could be described by the benign-violation. I think most of us could agree that either we found this video funny or could see what makes this video funny. However, in my opinion, Jake made an obvious violation of social norms by laughing in this serious situation, but this violation was not benign since it was an incredibly serious situation that had to do with putting someone in jail for potentially the rest of his life, due to murder.

Overall, this video is a good one to discuss the different theories and how they work because of the fact that not all the theories can fully explain what makes this video funny when it is undoubtedly funny. I think it is a good start for conversations to follow regarding how different social norms can be attributed to different comedy theories.

Response to mallory's blog 11/4

I found this video pretty funny. I think the fact that the actor had an accent definitely increased the humor of the clip, as you mentioned. I definitely agree that incongruity theory can primarily be used to explain the comedy behind this video. I also think that the use of the camera angles, facial expressions, and the way that Limmy talks to the audience as if he is with them in person really adds to the effect of the clip.

Incongruity theory can be used to describe the humor behind this video from many different angles. First of all, it is a bit unexpected how he takes such a common topic and applies it to this video as if it is super secretive, and nobody knows about this huge secret. Furthermore, it is unexpected to see how the cast reacts after the filmer says "cut," when they all run up and want a taste of the water for themselves.

Incongruity theory can also be used to describe the humor behind the video through a violation of our normal mental patterns. Usually, people do not think of this argument as so obvious; it is simply a matter of personal preference. Having to take in this argument as something so obvious, so secretive, and the exaggeration behind it which implies that you are stupid if you do not know this obvious fact, makes it seem as if drinking out of a water bottle is stupid, and it is so obvious that you should not do it since there is a much better solution, at least according to Limmy. However, so many people drink water bottles daily. AND they pay money for them! This makes the argument a bit of a violation of our mental patterns since it is not as obvious as Limmy would make it seem, so it causes the audience to rethink whether buying water bottles is stupid or not.

Response to elizabeth's blog 10/27

I have mixed feelings about this clip overall. When I first started watching this video, it actually kind of scared me because the guy cleaning the house is pretty aggressive. He just went around yelling and screaming at people, which I did not find funny because I am generally pretty sensitive to people yelling. I can see the comedic appeal to the video, and it definitely can be explored through the different theories, but it also kind of freaked me out. 

I think the lack of comedic appeal for me could be described through the benign-violation theory. When people are yelling, raising their voices, or screaming at others, it is considered a violation. However, we the yelling is not resolved or it does not feel safe, the violation is not benign, and therefore, it will not be considered funny. I usually get freaked out by people yelling, so this did not feel benign to me.

I could also see the way that gender roles and stereotypes played into the comedic elements of the video. The way that the main character was portrayed as a woman, but with opposite qualities of a stereotypical woman such as a lower voice definitely added to the comedic effect. 

I appreciated the exploration that Elizabeth gave into the incongruity theory as well. I thought it was really accurate, and if the yelling was not so intense for me, I think the incongruities throughout the video would have been humorous. I am interested to see how other people interpreted the video in this way and who found it comedically appealing. 

Response to mckenna's blog 10/21

I actually did not find this video funny until close to the very end. I noticed what you said about the actors and actresses trying to keep it together when they wanted to laugh but had to keep a serious face. I thought this was really funny, especially since it is super relatable for almost everybody. Everyone has to have been in a serious situation before where something funny happened, and they wanted to laugh, but they could not because of the atmosphere around them. In this instance, the fact that they were performing is what made it inappropriate for them to laugh in this serious situation, which made it all the funnier.

Additionally, I think the clip was a lot funnier since the laugh track was included in the background. I think without the laugh track, I would have felt super uncomfortable watching the video, and I would not have known when I was supposed to laugh or when something was supposed to be funny or not since the funny part of the clip was the sincerity of it in the comedic situation. The laugh track helped to break the awkward silences and make the awkward instances comedic rather than uncomfortable for the audience.

Overall, I think the incongruity theory is a great theory to describe this clip, as Mckenna mentioned. It does a great job explaining why the situation is funny. Incongruity theory posits that this clip is funny due to a violation of our normal mental patterns. This is due to the fact that the audience expected this situation to not be funny, and furthermore, the audience continually expected another sentence to come out of Debbie's mouth instead of the one that always did. Also, the things she said and the way she kept bringing the group down was pretty unexpected at first.

Response to lauren's blog 10/14

I agree with a lot of what you said analyzing this video. I definitely think the high-pitched, unrealistic voices made the video funny, and it would have just been annoying or kind of creepy if there were real voices with real people. I think it was a bit of an exaggeration picking at gender roles and gender norms, and I am honestly not quite sure how I feel about it. I did not think it was all that hilarious. I thought it definitely had some funny parts, but overall, I thought it was a little boring to be honest.

I agree with the different theories you brought up in your analysis of it. I think the incongruity theory also has a big part to play in this clip because the ending and the conversation as a whole is a little unexpected and out of the ordinary. I am not quite sure what I was expecting from the video, but it was definitely not an argument between Barbie and her boyfriend with an ending of her holding up a chalkboard saying "you're right."

I think the fact that it was picking at Barbie who is supposed to be the "perfect human"... a literal doll... is kind of ironic and adds to the funniness of the video especially as random things like the toilet note and the walk to the fridge are mentioned. I think the comedy of the clip is increased by the perception of Barbie and the fact that it is also a movie and not real life makes it funny when she compares their relationship to Romeo and Juliet.

Overall, it was an interesting clip, and I see how comedy theory can be applied to it, but it does not necessarily fit my taste in comedy.

Response to anna kathleen's blog 10/8

I really enjoyed this blog post video. I agree with Anna Kathleen when she says that it is different than other ones we have watched for class in other blog posts. I found it really funny because it reminded me of my family dynamics and the crazy things my dad sometimes does out of misunderstandings. In that case, it was less of a case of the superiority theory and more of the opposite since I could remember a time when it happened in my life.

I think the fact that the video was more relatable than other videos we have watched in class made it even funnier for me because I could actually imagine this happening in my life. It seems more realistic than something from Key and Peele or The Office for instance.

I really liked the distinction Anna Kathleen made between something being funny and something being comedy. I think it is super accurate since when something is funny in daily life, the intention is not for it to be comedic, but when retelling that story, the comedic elements are exaggerated to make it have a more comedic purpose.

I think this clip is also hilarious due to some incongruities within the story. The fact that she numbered the list specifically to help him out and make sure he could go through the express line, and it wound up having the complete opposite effect is very ironic. The incongruity between the intended outcome and the actual outcome make this hilarious (especially since it didn't happen to me... which is where superiority theory comes in).

Response to alex's blog 9/30

These two video clips were hilarious. Afterward, I was definitely intrigued by why I found myself laughing so hard. I completely understand your arguments and find them compelling, but, especially for the first clip, I think you missed a large part of incongruity theory that could explain what made these readings so funny.

Obviously, the graphics and the voice in the back made it a lot funny since it was a lot more dramatic, and someone laughing in the background makes the audience laugh more since laughter is contagious. I think the main part of the argument you missed though was not giving the incongruity theory enough of a chance to explain the first video.

The incongruity theory seems to have a straight forward definition, but there are a lot of instances where the incongruity theory can be expanded upon a lot more than you may realize. For instance, in the first video, I think part of the reason the clip was so funny was the huge gap between grammar education and sexual development. All of these people were talking about either sex, being pregnant, or both. The mere idea of this in itself is hilarious. If you stop to think about how old you have to be to become pregnant or even be aware of the notion of sex, the idea that these people writing these posts cannot even spell this mature idea is hilarious.

This is also incredibly incongruous because normally, in each of our mental sets, or at least in mine, one would think that a person would be able to spell pregnant before they were actually worried about pregnancy!

For the second video, I think you had some great explanations, so I do not have much to expand upon with that one. I thought it was mainly funny considering the idea that these random and seemingly obvious things could be overlooked and need to be corrected in the first place, which I think you mentioned.

Thanks for sharing!

Response to jack's blog 9/23

This was a great choice for a funny clip. It definitely made me laugh. I like your interpretations of the different comedic elements, but I also wanted to look into some different theories and how they could explain the comedy behind this clip. Specifically, the benign-violation theory could really apply to this clip and explaining the comedic elements behind it.

When looking at why this clip was funny, I immediately started thinking about how it was a violation since the substitute teacher was messing up (or violating) the correct pronunciation of the students' names. It was hilarious, however, because it was completely benign. I love this explanation because it explains perfectly why these violations were funny because they were so obviously harmless to the students.

The arguments between the student and the substitute were also hilarious because you would not normally expect students to argue with teachers because it is generally considered disrespectful. I would classify this as an example of the incongruity since this is unexpected and not in the norm; it could also fit under the benign-violation theory.

Furthermore, I really like the incongruity theory's explanation because the pronunciation of these names was completely unexpected because most of us had never heard these names pronounced this way before.

All in all, I really like this video clip because I think it is a clear example of how multiple theories can be applied to one situation and how they can overlap. I really think all four theories we have discussed can be somehow applied to this theory. Thanks for sharing!

Response to john's blog 9/15

I really liked your interpretation of the video; I thought it was super accurate how you talked about the different tones used and how they affected the interpretation of the events and what was being said. However, I really hated the video. I found myself really uncomfortable and cringing the whole time, and there was no conclusion at the end, so my feelings were never resolved! I was not sure whether the video you chose was supposed to be funny or if you were just trying to show how tone could relate to how different sentences are perceived. If the video was not supposed to be funny, then how does this relate to comedy? I think it could potentially relate because depending on the tone of a joke, the joke could be perceived as sarcastic, offensive, or funny. All of these are completely different feelings to evoke in an audience which is crazy to think that tone could change so much.

Furthermore, this video made me think of the benign-violation theory. The judge said some very harsh criticisms to the contestant which could be seen as the "violation," and if at the end of the video, the contestant won or the judge confirmed that his dish was good it would have been funnier because the criticisms would be "benign," but I could not tell if the criticism were benign or criticisms in the end which just left me confused and not laughing.

In conclusion, I think this video and your interpretation of it left me with more questions than answers. Not in a bad way, it just really got me thinking, which I guess is a good thing! Thanks for sharing, and everyone comment what you think if you have comments relating to some of my questions and confusions.

Lead Blog 8/5

Hey everyone welcome to my blog! This one is sure to make you laugh, and in this blog, we are going to work on finding out exactly why that is. For our first adventure, we are going to look at a scene from the famous TV show The Office.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO8N3L_aERg

Overall, everyone must admit you laughed at least once during that scene and definitely not for just one reason. All the different characters contribute to the comedic elements in multiple different ways. Let's look at the three theories and see how they each play into this fast-paced scene!

First, when looking at the incongruity theory, Dwight definitely served as the highlight of the comedic outlet. Dwight is a normally tame, rule follower which is obvious even in this scene as a whole, but there are definitely parts where he strays from his norm which backfires tremendously and in all the best ways. To start off, Dwight starts an actual fire! Furthermore, he does so by smoking a cigarette which is very bad and against his usual character. He then furthers this incongruity by saying that smoking is going to save lives, while the traditional saying says that smoking kills. In summarizing and looking at the scene as a whole, the funniest aspect is how bad it all ended. As a result of him trying to teach everyone through experience, he only made things worse and caused immense damage to the office. The incongruity between what he wanted to happen and what actually happened is hilarious to watch as his coworkers react in crazy ways to his fake fire.

Leading off of this, for the relief theory, the coworkers exemplify this theory the most. I will start by saying that all of the following examples could also fit under the incongruity theory given the context of the scene, but they also fit under relief, so I wanted to provide some examples of this theory as well. For starters, the relief in this scene is used in a way to cut the seriousness of there being a fire in the office. Angela is scrambling to get out of the office and the first thing she goes to save is not herself or her coworkers but her cat?? Kevin goes into the break room which would normally seem like a place someone would go to try and find an exit, but instead, he chooses to frantically break into the snack machine in order to get free food. These examples employ relief theory because in these moments when the coworkers feel as if they are in a life or death situation, all restraint is removed, and they do things that would not normally be societally accepted like breaking open a vending machine or throwing a cat into the ceiling.

Lastly, the superiority theory is used in the scene as a whole. The mere fact that the whole time I am sure you were saying in your head: "Wow this is so stupid. This would never happen to me. They are such idiots," shows how the superiority theory comes into play which makes the scene all the more hilarious. Also, when Andy says, "the fire's shooting at us," when Dwight lights some firecrackers which is just hilariously false also demonstrates some superiority theory when the audience begins to think oh I would never mistake firecrackers as someone shooting at me; wow that is so stupid.

Overall, this scene of The Office is a great example to use when examining comedy because it employs all the different types of comedy which is also probably why it reaches so many people and is so funny! Thanks for tuning into my blog; I cannot wait to see what you all have to say!

Lippitt blog 9/2

I found Schopenhauer's formulation the most persuasive. I related to the examples used, and I found the description of the incongruity theory easy to understand. It helped me get a better grasp of the theory and what it all entails. Another example of comedy that illustrates the incongruity theory the way Schopenhauer's formulation is in the show How I Met Your Mother. In a scene, the show exaggerates the lack of suit selection Ted has by contrasting it with another main character's suit selection. The other character, Barney, has hundreds of suits, a lot of which are the same color with slightly different detailing, but Ted can never find a nice suit when Barney tells him to suit up.

The different theories of comedy do describe different types of comedy. Some types of comedy overlap using more than one theory, but overall, the theories are not the same, and they do not evoke the same emotions as the others. I do not think one gets closer to the essence. I think they all serve different purposes. Not all examples of the different theories are funny because they may not be relatable to the audience or they may not be delivered with the right tone. It also depends on the effectiveness of the joke and how it is perceived by the type of audience it is presented to. For example, in order for an incongruence joke to be funny, the audience must perceive the two things being compared in the joke as abnormal or opposite.

Best recent piece of comedy 8/30

The best piece of comedy I've seen recently is from one of my favorite television shows: How I Met Your Mother. This TV show is similar to other sitcoms like The Office, Friends, Parks and Rec, and other similar shows. How I Met Your Mother has five main characters each with different personal problems. It follows them as they go through their daily lives in a funny take all leading up to when the narrator reveals to his kids, who he is narrating the story to, how he met their mother. While watching it, I found myself laughing often, but I never stopped to ask myself why that was. After reading about the different theories of humor, I definitely better understand how the comedy in the show works. Throughout the show, I believe that all three theories of comedy are used at different times. The audience laughs at Barney, one of the main characters, because he is always messing up and finding himself in awkward situations in which case the audience is laughing at Barney as they look down upon his shortcomings. This is an example of the superiority theory of comedy. Furthermore, the relief theory is often used when confronting issues such as sleeping around, excessive drinking, and family problems in order to bring people comedic relief when the tension and discomfort that comes with such topics are released. I also feel incongruity theory is used at points, but I have not yet fully grasped how this theory looks in works beyond the definition.