Does Gendered Humor exist?
Well, I don't know. If one were to ask me I would certainly agree that there is a social construct which would like us to conform to certain paradigms that relate to humor. But reading the article about how different parts of the brain were illuminated by different types of humor I found my credulity was somewhat strained. I don't know if I believe these results were a product of intrinsic genetic gender dispositions. Certainly I think that different parts of the brain may correlate to different types of humor, and I think people are conditioned, perhaps, according to gender, to consider certain things funny, from a gendered perspective, and other things not.
Shows like Sex and the city thrive on this notion that different genders nessecitate different types of humor. From a consumerist standpoint this is benificial to the entertainment industry who can now justify the production of even more goods which can be marketed, primarily to one of the groups, but also the other. Having Female only humor also ensures that anything will have a certain amount of viewership, no matter how poor the quality, because it has a gender correlated and this correlation alone is enough to entice people to watch it. TV stations like Oxygen and Lifetime do most of their buisness this way. And yet watching liftimeone would think the only things women were interested in were domestic abuse and sexual harrassment.
In short, I am reluctant to admit to any real, existing gendered humor. THough I do admit certain things are marketed as such.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Random Post
To be sure I was never wholly certain what to post here. I always found it much easier just to get to the point and be done with it than to actually type something, long , drawn out and meaningful. Knowing the origin of the blog as a sort of public diary (which, insofar as I understand what a diary is supposed to be, is a self defeating exercise) I have decided to use this as a forum to complain about the myriad of mundane problems and inconveniences that I find myself faced with. Hell, If it worked for seinfeld, then why not for me?
This morning I woke up, turned off my alarm, took a shower, and realized I didn't have class. I also realized that instead of setting my alarm for eight am as usual I had set it for six. I'm still not entirely sure how that happend. So I went back to sleep and ended up sleeping into the afternoon. Which is, of course, also irritating.
Earlier this week I had the extreme displeasure of loosing my dayplanner, which means I had to ask many of my professors when stuff they had told me was due, was due. This also proved irritating and rather embaressing. I do not like having to admit to being a complete and utter moron, indeed, I frequently delude myself into thinking that this is not the case. However, given the fact that I lost a book in my own bedroom apparently, I'm forced to admit there can be no other diagnosis.
I won't go on further because I have nothing else to say.
I did read these gems over the week, which I found funny:
"The Two lovers had never met. They were like to hummingbirds who had also never met."
"The duck floated over the water, exactly like a bowling ball wouldn't."
This morning I woke up, turned off my alarm, took a shower, and realized I didn't have class. I also realized that instead of setting my alarm for eight am as usual I had set it for six. I'm still not entirely sure how that happend. So I went back to sleep and ended up sleeping into the afternoon. Which is, of course, also irritating.
Earlier this week I had the extreme displeasure of loosing my dayplanner, which means I had to ask many of my professors when stuff they had told me was due, was due. This also proved irritating and rather embaressing. I do not like having to admit to being a complete and utter moron, indeed, I frequently delude myself into thinking that this is not the case. However, given the fact that I lost a book in my own bedroom apparently, I'm forced to admit there can be no other diagnosis.
I won't go on further because I have nothing else to say.
I did read these gems over the week, which I found funny:
"The Two lovers had never met. They were like to hummingbirds who had also never met."
"The duck floated over the water, exactly like a bowling ball wouldn't."
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Topic
My intial concept was to do something which explores the roots of and popularity of animated humor
Funny cartoons were once the schtick of political satirists in newspapers and of children's cartoons. Then,
for a time, cartoons began to stop reflecting, even simplistically and in a way that children could comprehend,
the political discourse of the time. IN the late 20th and 21st centuries we have seen an upsurge in animated humor.
The popularity of shows like Fat Albert and The simpsons gave rise to a generation of 'adult' cartoon humor shows, these include
southpark, Futurama, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, King of The Hill, etc. Some of these are politically and/or frequently
socially conscous, all, however, gear their humor towards adult an dmature audiences.
Thesis:I would endeavor to also, perhaps, assert that cartoons were useful for political commentary because people were disarmed by it and
because it allowed, even more than regular comedic media, for the use of and exploration of themes which might otherwise be viewed as inappropriate or too serious.
Cartoons are innately surreal, and therefore what they say and do is not viewed, perhaps, with as much Gravity as what a real person says.
Funny cartoons were once the schtick of political satirists in newspapers and of children's cartoons. Then,
for a time, cartoons began to stop reflecting, even simplistically and in a way that children could comprehend,
the political discourse of the time. IN the late 20th and 21st centuries we have seen an upsurge in animated humor.
The popularity of shows like Fat Albert and The simpsons gave rise to a generation of 'adult' cartoon humor shows, these include
southpark, Futurama, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, King of The Hill, etc. Some of these are politically and/or frequently
socially conscous, all, however, gear their humor towards adult an dmature audiences.
Thesis:I would endeavor to also, perhaps, assert that cartoons were useful for political commentary because people were disarmed by it and
because it allowed, even more than regular comedic media, for the use of and exploration of themes which might otherwise be viewed as inappropriate or too serious.
Cartoons are innately surreal, and therefore what they say and do is not viewed, perhaps, with as much Gravity as what a real person says.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Danger Profoundness Ahead
Ok I'll admit the tittle of this post is really really ambitious all things considered.
However, I have been giving some reather serious thought to what exactly it means to see and create "characters" in comedy and standup. In Oliver Double's Article, he draws parralels between acting and standup because they both share elements of emulation and immitation and, to some extend, actual adoptating of personas, to evoke a response in the audience. The article on the whole as quite intersting, though I was most intruiged by the section on Persona.
This appealed to me because, while general chracterization is obvious, persona's are not. As he mentions, character comedians do have obvious stage personas, but often times people adapt exagerated stage personas which are not so immediately reckognizable. I actually kind of wish he had gone more into this subject. It seems significant to me, the way comedians 'play themselves' on stage. I think this affectation presents a vital difference in various types of comedy. It has been my observation that among comedians who use their personality as the source of humor (Dane Cook, Dimitri martin being two rather different examples of the same thign) this sort of exageration is the source of their humor. No on is as idiotically manic as Dane Cook, nore do they froth at the mouth and salivate and spit and hop around as much when talking about burger king, and yet he is not portraying someone else in his comedy, he is portraying himself. Lewis Black, full of venom and vitriol, is another great example of this. His stage persona is loud and angry, and while he may in real life be clever and have a biting wit, I doubt verymuch he communicates solely in shouted diatribes. Perhaps this sort of self emulation, in addition to providing a more "funny" version of the self, serves a a sort of catharsis for the comedian as well. Just a Thought.
Mitch Hedberg, as I've mentioned about a hundred times, is my favorite comedian. I have not put a clip of him here though. I have also included a sketch by flight of the conchords, two of my favorite comedians who almost certainly are "characterized" versions of themselves. The act basically centers around them being the 4th most popular "folk parody band from New Zealand." They intersperse humerous songs with funny, if self effacing, banter. They have a show on HBO now. What is groundbreaking, in my mind, is the way they seemlessly combin the musical and comedy aspects of their act and how developed their musical sense is for, comedians anyway. Indeed their music has become more popular than the act itself.
Find two 2-3 minute clips below:
Enjoy1
However, I have been giving some reather serious thought to what exactly it means to see and create "characters" in comedy and standup. In Oliver Double's Article, he draws parralels between acting and standup because they both share elements of emulation and immitation and, to some extend, actual adoptating of personas, to evoke a response in the audience. The article on the whole as quite intersting, though I was most intruiged by the section on Persona.
This appealed to me because, while general chracterization is obvious, persona's are not. As he mentions, character comedians do have obvious stage personas, but often times people adapt exagerated stage personas which are not so immediately reckognizable. I actually kind of wish he had gone more into this subject. It seems significant to me, the way comedians 'play themselves' on stage. I think this affectation presents a vital difference in various types of comedy. It has been my observation that among comedians who use their personality as the source of humor (Dane Cook, Dimitri martin being two rather different examples of the same thign) this sort of exageration is the source of their humor. No on is as idiotically manic as Dane Cook, nore do they froth at the mouth and salivate and spit and hop around as much when talking about burger king, and yet he is not portraying someone else in his comedy, he is portraying himself. Lewis Black, full of venom and vitriol, is another great example of this. His stage persona is loud and angry, and while he may in real life be clever and have a biting wit, I doubt verymuch he communicates solely in shouted diatribes. Perhaps this sort of self emulation, in addition to providing a more "funny" version of the self, serves a a sort of catharsis for the comedian as well. Just a Thought.
Mitch Hedberg, as I've mentioned about a hundred times, is my favorite comedian. I have not put a clip of him here though. I have also included a sketch by flight of the conchords, two of my favorite comedians who almost certainly are "characterized" versions of themselves. The act basically centers around them being the 4th most popular "folk parody band from New Zealand." They intersperse humerous songs with funny, if self effacing, banter. They have a show on HBO now. What is groundbreaking, in my mind, is the way they seemlessly combin the musical and comedy aspects of their act and how developed their musical sense is for, comedians anyway. Indeed their music has become more popular than the act itself.
Find two 2-3 minute clips below:
Enjoy1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)