Comments on: Comedy 2.0 http://www.jillgolick.com/2010/01/comedy-20/ Life at the intersection of television and digital Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:40:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Rich Baldwin http://www.jillgolick.com/2010/01/comedy-20/#comment-16251 Rich Baldwin Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:06:54 +0000 http://www.jillgolick.com/2010/01/comedy-20/#comment-16251 It's a good piece, but it does make the assumption that current trends will continue in the same direction - that we'll want more violent humour, for instance, in the future. We're just as likely to experience a cultural rejection, and shift in a more conservative direction in the future. In some places this shift is already taking place, so in the future we may end up seeing some really large gaps in what is considered humourous to different groups, just in North America alone. What is funny in the future will be things that are conflictual, outside the cultural context of the moment, but only within a certain distance outside societal norms of the times. Benny Hill, for instance, is funny not only because of the slapstick, but because it's not socially acceptable for dirty old men to chase young women. If society didn't bat an eye at that sort of activity, Benny Hill would lose a lot of its humour. Alternately if society decided that old men chasing young women was a truly sick and twisted activity then Benny Hill would be generally considered far less funny in that it is at present (assuming of course that society didn't decide that the best comedy should be sick and twisted). Comedy is a social game where the most succesful jokes both play just within the present rules while suggesting changes to those same rules. There is totally a research paper in this . . . I may have to write it. It’s a good piece, but it does make the assumption that current trends will continue in the same direction - that we’ll want more violent humour, for instance, in the future. We’re just as likely to experience a cultural rejection, and shift in a more conservative direction in the future. In some places this shift is already taking place, so in the future we may end up seeing some really large gaps in what is considered humourous to different groups, just in North America alone.

What is funny in the future will be things that are conflictual, outside the cultural context of the moment, but only within a certain distance outside societal norms of the times. Benny Hill, for instance, is funny not only because of the slapstick, but because it’s not socially acceptable for dirty old men to chase young women. If society didn’t bat an eye at that sort of activity, Benny Hill would lose a lot of its humour. Alternately if society decided that old men chasing young women was a truly sick and twisted activity then Benny Hill would be generally considered far less funny in that it is at present (assuming of course that society didn’t decide that the best comedy should be sick and twisted). Comedy is a social game where the most succesful jokes both play just within the present rules while suggesting changes to those same rules.

There is totally a research paper in this . . . I may have to write it.

]]> By: I Got Whatchya Need (sketch) « Chris Martin Comedy http://www.jillgolick.com/2010/01/comedy-20/#comment-16197 I Got Whatchya Need (sketch) « Chris Martin Comedy Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:21:47 +0000 http://www.jillgolick.com/2010/01/comedy-20/#comment-16197 [...] Comedy 2.0 (jillgolick.com) [...] […] Comedy 2.0 (jillgolick.com) […]

]]>