What is comedy?
- Thread starter Car
- Start date
a reply
This is a obviously a huge question, and I don't profess to have an answer that will suit everyone, but my personal view is that comedy is identification. Every hysterical thing no matter how absurd it might be must have an element that an audience can identify with, a truthful moment that people can relate to in their own personality/life.
I think Comedy is created when the performers create a situation (through a character,location, or reality) that is a hyperbolized (or analogus-yes I don't know how to spell) account of a familiar situation.
I do think the Harold is capable of this type of comedy, of often works because it does that.
This is a obviously a huge question, and I don't profess to have an answer that will suit everyone, but my personal view is that comedy is identification. Every hysterical thing no matter how absurd it might be must have an element that an audience can identify with, a truthful moment that people can relate to in their own personality/life.
I think Comedy is created when the performers create a situation (through a character,location, or reality) that is a hyperbolized (or analogus-yes I don't know how to spell) account of a familiar situation.
I do think the Harold is capable of this type of comedy, of often works because it does that.
Last edited:
i think the harold can completely evoke a spectrum of responses on both emotional and intellectual levels. as an audience member/student, i think that i can safely say that some of the best moments i've seen at the ucb were moments that were completely unexpected. the genius things - the most truthful thoughts that come spilling out, almost accidentally - do shine through and complete the picture of harold as art. at least that's how i perceive it. it may not be the full width and breadth that berrebbi's looking for, but, shit, it's something significant and of the moment, regardless.
comedy is when you strike a nerve.
dunford
comedy is when you strike a nerve.
dunford
Boing! Comedy!
I'll try to weigh in here...
Comedy is honesty and truth. From the fart joke to biting wit to satire to parody, it all comes out of reality.
It was explained to me in college as this:
Reality is as one level.
Drama is at a slightly higher level. So it's more intense, more emotional, more immediate.
Comedy is at a much higher level. So the intensity becomes absurd, the emotionality (is that a word?) is heightened, and the immediacy is exaggerated.
Basically, comedy is exaggerated reality. The fart joke is funny because not of the actual act, but of the embarassed aftermath (just look at Jim Carey for an example). The biting wit is funny because it goes to the ironic truth of the matter (To paraphrase Oscar Wilde and a customs official - "What have you got to declare?" "Only my intelligence!" (If anyone has the right quote, tell me, but you get the idea.)) Satire is a subtle way of showing the absurdity of a situation or attitude (Monty Python's Parrot Sketch) and Parody is a blatant way of showing the absurdity of a situation or attitude (Any song parody).
But all has to come from truth. The makers of the 1960s show "The Avengers" were amazed because it was supposed to have been a parody on James Bond, but as they were trying to make fun of a heroic attitude, no one got the joke. The truth is that people LIKE heroes and heroic actions. There's no truth to parody. There's no joke. There's a great discussion of this in Ayn Rand's "The Romantic Manifesto". A great book to read for all writers and improvisers.
-Erik:up:
I'll try to weigh in here...
Comedy is honesty and truth. From the fart joke to biting wit to satire to parody, it all comes out of reality.
It was explained to me in college as this:
Reality is as one level.
Drama is at a slightly higher level. So it's more intense, more emotional, more immediate.
Comedy is at a much higher level. So the intensity becomes absurd, the emotionality (is that a word?) is heightened, and the immediacy is exaggerated.
Basically, comedy is exaggerated reality. The fart joke is funny because not of the actual act, but of the embarassed aftermath (just look at Jim Carey for an example). The biting wit is funny because it goes to the ironic truth of the matter (To paraphrase Oscar Wilde and a customs official - "What have you got to declare?" "Only my intelligence!" (If anyone has the right quote, tell me, but you get the idea.)) Satire is a subtle way of showing the absurdity of a situation or attitude (Monty Python's Parrot Sketch) and Parody is a blatant way of showing the absurdity of a situation or attitude (Any song parody).
But all has to come from truth. The makers of the 1960s show "The Avengers" were amazed because it was supposed to have been a parody on James Bond, but as they were trying to make fun of a heroic attitude, no one got the joke. The truth is that people LIKE heroes and heroic actions. There's no truth to parody. There's no joke. There's a great discussion of this in Ayn Rand's "The Romantic Manifesto". A great book to read for all writers and improvisers.
-Erik:up:
Comedy is:
Albert Brooks
Bill Hicks
Richard Pryor
Steve Martin
Bill Murray
John Cleese
Firesign Theatre
Nichols & May
"The Graduate"
Monty Python
SCTV
"Groundhog Day"
Comedy is not:
pre-teen girls burned by Napalm running down an open road
being reduced to a shadowy outline on a concrete wall by nuclear weapons
prolonged exposure to toxic waste reducing your previously strong bones into something resembling almost-ready Jell-O
Ben Affleck
Brooke Shields
an earache
being dumped
these lists are neither complete nor definitive and may be interchangeable....
Albert Brooks
Bill Hicks
Richard Pryor
Steve Martin
Bill Murray
John Cleese
Firesign Theatre
Nichols & May
"The Graduate"
Monty Python
SCTV
"Groundhog Day"
Comedy is not:
pre-teen girls burned by Napalm running down an open road
being reduced to a shadowy outline on a concrete wall by nuclear weapons
prolonged exposure to toxic waste reducing your previously strong bones into something resembling almost-ready Jell-O
Ben Affleck
Brooke Shields
an earache
being dumped
these lists are neither complete nor definitive and may be interchangeable....
Last edited:
i think charlie chaplin said . . .
i am the worst at quoting people - and i know this is waaaaaaaaay off but i beleive charlie chaplin said something like this, and I mis-quote:
"Life is a tragedy from up close and a comedy from a long shot" - or from a distance - or something like that.
Anyone who knows the actual quote can feel free to correct me.
i am the worst at quoting people - and i know this is waaaaaaaaay off but i beleive charlie chaplin said something like this, and I mis-quote:
"Life is a tragedy from up close and a comedy from a long shot" - or from a distance - or something like that.
Anyone who knows the actual quote can feel free to correct me.
A lil' different take...
In theatrical criticism, one might define the two as these:
<i>Comedy</i>
The protagonist of the main conflict that permeates a script <i><b>wins</b></i> in the end, at the climax.
<i>Tragedy</i>
The protagonist of the main conflict that permeates the script <i><b>loses</b></i> in the end, at the climax.
This says nothing of funny. And possibly it doesn't work well in describing improv- or sketch-based comedy. It serves as one perspective on the word "comedy," or rather, one perspective on what we call "comedy."
"What is" questions much like Machine's don't reach final answers ... if one makes the question in E-Prime (English without be-verbs), other possibly intended meanings come up:
"What do we mean by 'comedy'?"
"What do we call 'comedy'?"
"What do we generally find comedic?"
Aristotle (lover of fine "is" questions) might have asked Machine's question in his native tongue, but what seemed to underlie Artistotle's thought (based on his writings) lived a belief that qualities existed inherently "in" things. He did not seem to regard that humans, more correctly, <i>experience</i> qualities, and that each human has a different experience of reality.
So? So, each person has a different experience of comedy, what makes something "comedic," etc., and finding a common strain for every person's <i>use of the word</i> "comedy" proves more accurate.
Maybe a collection of people's meanings when they refer to something as "comedy" suffices for an answer to the question "What is comedy?," as opposed to a search (albeit simply implied) for "the" definition of comedy.
Been
In theatrical criticism, one might define the two as these:
<i>Comedy</i>
The protagonist of the main conflict that permeates a script <i><b>wins</b></i> in the end, at the climax.
<i>Tragedy</i>
The protagonist of the main conflict that permeates the script <i><b>loses</b></i> in the end, at the climax.
This says nothing of funny. And possibly it doesn't work well in describing improv- or sketch-based comedy. It serves as one perspective on the word "comedy," or rather, one perspective on what we call "comedy."
"What is" questions much like Machine's don't reach final answers ... if one makes the question in E-Prime (English without be-verbs), other possibly intended meanings come up:
"What do we mean by 'comedy'?"
"What do we call 'comedy'?"
"What do we generally find comedic?"
Aristotle (lover of fine "is" questions) might have asked Machine's question in his native tongue, but what seemed to underlie Artistotle's thought (based on his writings) lived a belief that qualities existed inherently "in" things. He did not seem to regard that humans, more correctly, <i>experience</i> qualities, and that each human has a different experience of reality.
So? So, each person has a different experience of comedy, what makes something "comedic," etc., and finding a common strain for every person's <i>use of the word</i> "comedy" proves more accurate.
Maybe a collection of people's meanings when they refer to something as "comedy" suffices for an answer to the question "What is comedy?," as opposed to a search (albeit simply implied) for "the" definition of comedy.
Been
I think a lot of "what is funny" boils down to recognition. (of course, the same can held true of tragedy a la Aristotle - without recognition, no catharsis, etc. etc.)
This is, in my opinion, why we can develop the "you had to be there" kind of joke. In context of a show, we create new "memes" (units of knowledge) with the audience which only make sense in context of the show. Anyone out of the room will be hard pressed to recognize the humor because they don't share the knowledge.
Ergo, recognition (be it of language or of situation) is absolutely essential to something being perceived as funny.
Egads, how's that for an absolute statement?
So... uh... Aristotle?
R. Kevin Doyle
Loose Screws
Honolulu, HI
:exp:
This is, in my opinion, why we can develop the "you had to be there" kind of joke. In context of a show, we create new "memes" (units of knowledge) with the audience which only make sense in context of the show. Anyone out of the room will be hard pressed to recognize the humor because they don't share the knowledge.
Ergo, recognition (be it of language or of situation) is absolutely essential to something being perceived as funny.
Egads, how's that for an absolute statement?
So... uh... Aristotle?
R. Kevin Doyle
Loose Screws
Honolulu, HI
:exp:
first of all comedy (like the word 'love') can refer to several things
i assume, by the asking, that we are talking about 'haha' comedy? - as in what makes someone laugh
what elements of the world can take someone from a stationary position and cause them to respond with laughter?
so that is what i am going to talk about
comedy in practice has a strong element of individual taste (of course)
in theory - at this point, i've observed comedy as the result of activating the participants mind
when they are experiencing something that they did not originate or choose to experience right now
they seem to laugh
like tickling
you respond to tickling when you getting sensations from your body that you did not expect
its a surprise for your brain on a physical level
further...
without physically interacting with someone, comedy takes a bunch of forms
so far i have seen that 'response' comes largely from a distance between expectation and actual experience
and that distance can be large or tiny and still cause a response
usually this is described as 'you think one thing is going to happen, and then something different happens'
that seems to be one part of it
in this case because the two are separated enough, they evoke a response
it also works in the other direction where simply rewarding the expectation is comedy
this expectation can come from your own life experience or is developed throughout the show itself
in this case what you are witnessing is close enough to your expectations for that situation that you respond
(like when you see someone deal with their mother the way you deal with yours)
okay - im going to stop there
this is what i was thinking
im sure there is more to say
i assume, by the asking, that we are talking about 'haha' comedy? - as in what makes someone laugh
what elements of the world can take someone from a stationary position and cause them to respond with laughter?
so that is what i am going to talk about
comedy in practice has a strong element of individual taste (of course)
in theory - at this point, i've observed comedy as the result of activating the participants mind
when they are experiencing something that they did not originate or choose to experience right now
they seem to laugh
like tickling
you respond to tickling when you getting sensations from your body that you did not expect
its a surprise for your brain on a physical level
further...
without physically interacting with someone, comedy takes a bunch of forms
so far i have seen that 'response' comes largely from a distance between expectation and actual experience
and that distance can be large or tiny and still cause a response
usually this is described as 'you think one thing is going to happen, and then something different happens'
that seems to be one part of it
in this case because the two are separated enough, they evoke a response
it also works in the other direction where simply rewarding the expectation is comedy
this expectation can come from your own life experience or is developed throughout the show itself
in this case what you are witnessing is close enough to your expectations for that situation that you respond
(like when you see someone deal with their mother the way you deal with yours)
okay - im going to stop there
this is what i was thinking
im sure there is more to say
Last edited:
Re: i think charlie chaplin said . . .
This might not be the quote you were looking for, but it immediately came to mind after reading yours.
"Life is a Comedy to those who think, a Tragedy to those who feel."
It feels pretty accurate. :exp:
Originally posted by Rachel
"Life is a tragedy from up close and a comedy from a long shot" - or from a distance - or something like that.
Anyone who knows the actual quote can feel free to correct me.
[/B]
"Life is a tragedy from up close and a comedy from a long shot" - or from a distance - or something like that.
Anyone who knows the actual quote can feel free to correct me.
[/B]
"Life is a Comedy to those who think, a Tragedy to those who feel."
It feels pretty accurate. :exp:
Sean Penn
...said this in relation to his character in HurlyBurly (and I'm paraphrasing very loosely)
That if someone throws up on you it isn't funny, but when you're telling the story to friends much later, it's not only funny, but the more puke the better, and the more horrified you are by it in the story, the funnier.
A character has a goal. The more difficulty he has in obtaining it, and the more energy he puts into obtaining it, and the less amused he is by this difficulty, the funnier it is.
something to that effect. I wish I had a quote, but I don't
...said this in relation to his character in HurlyBurly (and I'm paraphrasing very loosely)
That if someone throws up on you it isn't funny, but when you're telling the story to friends much later, it's not only funny, but the more puke the better, and the more horrified you are by it in the story, the funnier.
A character has a goal. The more difficulty he has in obtaining it, and the more energy he puts into obtaining it, and the less amused he is by this difficulty, the funnier it is.
something to that effect. I wish I had a quote, but I don't