Responding to "Absurdism"
Hello everyone! Welcome back. :)
This week on Captivating Comedy Comments I will be responding to a lead blog post by Alex. Alex wrote about a concept he refers to as "absurdism" using two video examples.
This one...
This week on Captivating Comedy Comments I will be responding to a lead blog post by Alex. Alex wrote about a concept he refers to as "absurdism" using two video examples.
This one...
I can certainly see how absurd would be the word you would use to describe the videos. Honestly, I was a little speechless after watching them. And, I most definitely laughed.
So, John makes the point that these videos don't fit into the comedy theories that we have discussed up to this point.
To review, we have talked about incongruity theory, superiority theory, relief theory, and benign violation theory. John makes a very strong argument for the point that these videos of "absurdism" don't fit well into any of these theories. Sure, we can maybe twist them a little to make them possible, but do they really fit? John says no and I AGREE.
But, if none of the theories match this "absurdism", where do they fit into comedy?
Well, I would argue that maybe they don't. I know, I know! It's crazy, right? I mean, I laughed at the videos, so how could I possibly think that the videos aren't comedy? Just hear me out.
I would argue that this "absurdism" is where we begin to see the distinction between something that is "funny" and something that can be classified as "comedy".
Okay, so something is "funny" if it makes us laugh, right? I would say that is a pretty fair and safe definition to go with, albeit a simple one.
What makes something comedy, then? Is everything that is comedy everything that is funny? I don't think it is. I think there are jokes that are hilarious but that I wouldn't classify as comedy. I think that there are everyday moments in life that are funny, but don't qualify as comedy.
And, sadly, I don't really have the perfect definition of comedy. I would love to give it to you word for word. I would love to tell you that if it doesn't fit into these exact theories then it's not comedy. But, I don't really think that that is true.
Nonetheless, I do know that there must be some distinctions and I think that Alex's video examples are where I would draw the line.
Until next time,
Always Laugh Lots!!!
- Anna Kathleen Spitler <3
P.S. Don't forget to check back later this week. There might be a lead blog post coming soon....
So the genre of the absurd, in other words, is one in which laughter is possible but not expected--we laugh because we perhaps have no other possible reaction. In a sense, laughter here is a last resort--it stands in for our lack of any other way to react to it. Perhaps the incongruity is not what we expect, but the fact that we have no reaction--we are at a loss. Which is unusual, and possibly funny, but not necessarily comedy. This would be one of those genres outside the normal order of comedy.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there are moments in life that are funny but don't count as comedy. I never realized this until you said this in your post! I also agree that the videos don't fit into any of the theories and we could twist them to "fit" into one of the theories but it still doesn't cover everything from the videos.
ReplyDeleteI agree that maybe they aren't classified as comedy, but do these theories not seek to explain why things are perceived as just funny? For example, benign violation seems to more be a theory of laughter than a theory of comedy. It seeks to explain why certain jokes or actions cause people to laugh, not why a stand-up comedian is entertaining.
ReplyDelete