Perhap it is just TV playing to the lowest common demominator?
 

On Tuesday, 27 November 2012 02:45:36 UTC, archytas wrote:

> Not seen Chris or Charles Don.  Hicks, a few derivative references 
> apart, could have been a Brit.  Our cultures are probably less far 
> apart than such matters as the absence of footpaths in the States. 
> Our serious comedy is mostly political satire from Yes Minister to The 
> Thick of It.  What I was wondering was whether any one else feels more 
> general film and literature has gone Tragic and plots and characters 
> less and less comedic in the old Greek sense.  Our old sitcoms like 
> Dads' Army, Steptoe and Son and plenty of others had a great element 
> of 'daft people like me and you caught in a plight and muddling 
> through'.  Bilko and Top Cat had this too.  A fairly recent French 
> fil,m Mario et Jeanette had this. 
>
> On 27 Nov, 00:40, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 6:15 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > At other levels I think we should be ridiculing such matters as the 
> > > absence of disabled people in politically correct newsrooms and such. 
> > 
> > What about Chris Mathews? budda bump bump 
> > 
> > Charles Krauthammer, in contrast, is a paraplegic but ok from the neck 
> up. 
> > Most people don't even know about his disability because it's not 
> relavent. 
> > We like his commentary. 
> > 
> > dj 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Saturday, November 24, 2012 6:15:40 PM UTC-6, archytas wrote: 
> > 
> > > The Brits do more nob gags and used to pack theatres to see a guy play 
> > > the trombone with ass-gas- needless to say a Frenchman.  Audience 
> > > milking is central to some humour - this tends to put me off, but some 
> > > are so good at it I don't notice until afterwards.  US comedy films 
> > > are usually dross, but your stand-ups usually great.  My recent 
> > > favourite is 'The Pope's Toilet' from Uruguay.  The hero rides a bike 
> > > everywhere and his wife describes him as lacking pump for a bicycle 
> > > man.  Why do the French smell?  So even the blind can hate them.  Why 
> > > would you find an Irishman in the Alps?  Where else would you find a 
> > > downhill lake.  Irish jokes are Belgian, Polish and Swedish etc. 
> > 
> > > At other levels I think we should be ridiculing such matters as the 
> > > absence of disabled people in politically correct newsrooms and such. 
> > 
> > > On 24 Nov, 21:46, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > Over here, social workers have taken kids off foster parents because 
> > > > of their membership of UKIP - a party that shares the desire of 65% 
> of 
> > > > the population to leave the EU and restrict immigration.  You have 
> to 
> > > > laugh - or cry! 
> > 
> > > > On 24 Nov, 21:38, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > 
> > > > > Morecambe and Wise with Mum and Dad at Xmas perhaps.  Laurel and 
> > > > > Hardy.  Many other popular comedians are more likely to make me 
> weep. 
> > > > > I never liked Chaplin (actually thinking Hitler more of a comedian 
> > > > > than 'The Dictator') and we had Cannon and Ball here who hit a 
> nerve I 
> > > > > don't like.    I can laugh with some of the ostensibly more 
> vicious 
> > > > > types like Bill Hicks and Frankie Boyle.  Police and army culture 
> > > > > reveres tough, sadistic humour with self-depreciation thrown in. 
> > 
> > > > > I'm against speech crime but it's also clear not everything goes. 
>  I 
> > > > > don't agree with the Greek split - it's from Stanford EP - 
> suspecting 
> > > > > humour is closely linked with breakthrough thinking (though not 
> the 
> > > > > same) and unseating the biological trance of hierarchy (The Name 
> of 
> > > > > the Rose). 
> > 
> > > > > The SEP article concludes: 
> > 
> > > > > Along with the idealism of tragedy goes elitism. The people who 
> matter 
> > > > > in tragedy are kings, queens, and generals. In comedy there are 
> more 
> > > > > characters and more kinds of characters, women are more prominent, 
> and 
> > > > > many protagonists come from lower classes. Everybody counts for 
> one. 
> > > > > That shows in the language of comedy, which, unlike the elevated 
> > > > > language of tragedy, is common speech. The basic unit in tragedy 
> is 
> > > > > the individual, in comedy it is the family, group of friends, or 
> bunch 
> > > > > of co-workers. 
> > 
> > > > > While tragic heroes are emotionally engaged with their problems, 
> comic 
> > > > > protagonists show emotional disengagement. They think, rather than 
> > > > > feel, their way through difficulties. By presenting such 
> characters as 
> > > > > role models, comedy has implicitly valorized the benefits of humor 
> > > > > that are now being empirically verified, such as that it is 
> > > > > psychologically and physically healthy, it fosters mental 
> flexibility, 
> > > > > and it serves as a social lubricant. With a few exceptions like 
> > > > > Aquinas, philosophers have ignored these benefits. 
> > 
> > > > > If philosophers wanted to undo the traditional prejudices against 
> > > > > humor, they might consider the affinities between one contemporary 
> > > > > genre of comedy—standup comedy—and philosophy itself. There are at 
> > > > > least seven. First, standup comedy and philosophy are 
> conversational: 
> > > > > like the dialogue format that started with Plato, standup routines 
> are 
> > > > > interactive. Second, both reflect on familiar experiences, 
> especially 
> > > > > puzzling ones. We wake from a vivid dream, for example, not sure 
> what 
> > > > > has happened and what is happening. Third, like philosophers, 
> standup 
> > > > > comics often approach puzzling experiences with questions. “If I 
> > > > > thought that dream was real, how do I know that I'm not dreaming 
> right 
> > > > > now?” The most basic starting point in both philosophy and standup 
> > > > > comedy is “X—what's up with that?” Fourth, as they think about 
> > > > > familiar experiences, both philosophers and comics step back 
> > > > > emotionally from them. Henri Bergson (1911 [1900]) spoke of the 
> > > > > “momentary anaesthesia of the heart” in laughter. Emotional 
> > > > > disengagement long ago became a meaning of 
> “philosophical”—“rational, 
> > > > > sensibly composed, calm, as in a difficult situation.” Fifth, 
> > > > > philosophers and standup comics think critically. They ask whether 
> > > > > familiar ideas make sense, and they refuse to defer to authority 
> and 
> > > > > tradition. It was for his critical thinking that Socrates was 
> > > > > executed. So were cabaret comics in Germany who mocked the Third 
> > > > > Reich. Sixth, in thinking critically, philosophers and standup 
> comics 
> > > > > pay careful attention to language. Attacking sloppy and illogical 
> uses 
> > > > > of words is standard in both, and so is finding exactly the right 
> > > > > words to express an idea. Seventh, the pleasure of standup comedy 
> is 
> > > > > often like the pleasure of doing philosophy. In both we relish new 
> > > > > ways of looking at things and delight in surprising thoughts. 
> William 
> > > > > James (1979 [1911], 11) said that philosophy “sees the familiar as 
> if 
> > > > > it were strange, and the strange as if it were familiar.” The same 
> is 
> > > > > true of standup comedy. Simon Critchley has written that both ask 
> us 
> > > > > to “look at things as if you had just landed from another 
> > > > > planet” (2002, 1). 
> > 
> > > > > One recent philosopher attuned to the affinity between comedy and 
> > > > > philosophy was Bertrand Russell. “The point of philosophy,” he 
> said, 
> > > > > “is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth 
> stating, 
> > > > > and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe 
> > > > > it” (1918, 53). In the middle of an argument, he once observed, 
> “This 
> > > > > seems plainly absurd: but whoever wishes to become a philosopher 
> must 
> > > > > learn not to be frightened by absurdities” (2008 [1912], 17). 
> > 
> > > > > I laughed a lot more reading Lyotard's 'Libidinal Economy' - 
> rather as 
> > > > > I might chuckle along with a Tom Sharpe farce.  I'm not sure what 
> > > > > makes me laugh until it does.  The ideologies through which people 
> > > > > live lives often does, but this is without joy. 
> > 
> > > > > On 24 Nov, 19:40, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > 
> > > > > > I have seen it used recently as an ineffective cover for a badly 
> > > > > > positioned provocative argument. "I was only kidding, she 
> doesn't 
> > > > > > understand my humor..." not hard to see through and not 
> inspiring 
> > > > > > confidence.  The dance of the fool. 
> > 
> > > > > > Kind humor, irony, absurd, surprise are more my style than 
> sarcasm 
> > > or 
> > > > > > more aggressive humor that derides or shames. 
> > 
> > > > > > There is no denying the biochemical rush that comes with 
> laughing 
> > > > > > oneself to tears, and the joy that comes with sharing such a 
> moment. 
> > 
> > > > > > On Nov 24, 1:51 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > 
> > > > > > > While there is only speculation about how humor developed in 
> early 
> > > > > > > humans, we know that by the 6th century BCE the Greeks had 
> > > > > > > institutionalized it in the ritual known as comedy, and that 
> it 
> > > was 
> > > > > > > performed with a contrasting dramatic form known as tragedy. 
> Both 
> > > were 
> > > > > > > based on the violation of mental patterns and expectations, 
> and in 
> > > > > > > both the world is a tangle of conflicting systems where humans 
> > > live in 
> > > > > > > the shadow of failure, folly, and death. Like tragedy, comedy 
> > > > > > > represents life as full of tension, danger, and struggle, with 
> > > success 
> > > > > > > or failure often depending on chance factors. Where they 
> differ is 
> > > in 
> > > > > > > the responses of the lead characters to life's incongruities. 
> > > > > > > Identifying with these characters, audiences at comedies and 
> > > tragedies 
> > > > > > > have contrasting responses to events in the dramas. And 
> because 
> > > these 
> > > > > > > responses carry over to similar situations in life, comedy and 
> > > tragedy 
> > > > > > > embody contrasting responses to the incongruities in life. 
> > 
> > > > > > > Tragedy valorizes serious, emotional engagement with life's 
> > > problems, 
> > > > > > > even struggle to the death. Along with epic, it is part of the 
> > > Western 
> > > > > > > heroic tradition that extols ideals, the willingness to fight 
> for 
> > > > > > > them, and honor. The tragic ethos is linked to patriarchy and 
> > > > > > > militarism—many of its heroes are kings and conquerors—and it 
> > > > > > > valorizes what Conrad Hyers (1996) calls Warrior Virtues—blind 
> > > > > > > obedience, the willingness to kill or die on command, 
> > > unquestioning 
> > > > > > > loyalty, single-mindedness, resoluteness of purpose, and 
> pride. 
> > 
> > > > > > > Comedy, by contrast, embodies an anti-heroic, pragmatic 
> attitude 
> > > > > > > toward life's incongruities. From Aristophanes' Lysistrata to 
> > > Charlie 
> > > > > > > Chaplin's The Great Dictator to Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 
> 9/11, 
> > > > > > > comedy has mocked the irrationality of militarism and blind 
> > > respect 
> > > > > > > for authority. Its own methods of handling 
> > 
> > ... 
> > 
> > read more » 
>

-- 



Reply via email to