killing the punchline
The journey from my house to the gym is usually very boring. So to entertain myself, I decided to listen to podcasts during my commute, and yesterday was the first day I implemented this awesome plan. I subscribed to this podcast called "philosophy bites" and decided to check out this podcast called "humour and morality". And to be honest I was quite looking forward because I'm quite enjoy inappropriate jokes and so I prepared myself for a galore of toilet humour and dirty gags.
I had a horrible time. Mind you, there were plenty of inappropriate jokes, ranging from racist jokes, dirty jokes to toilet humour. But it was something about a stuffy guy explaining why these jokes were funny that killed all the mirth I was supposed to be having. It was probably the least funniest thing I had heard in a long time.
I'm sure people are familiar with times when a person in the group says "I dont get it" after a joke had been told. Usually the person who tells the joke is often forced to explain why the joke is funny, and from my own experience, if the joke is not very intellectual, everyone who laughed now feels kind of stupid and awkward. But if the joke is more intellectual, the person who didnt get the joke then starts laughing and slapping her or his companions on the back saying "haha that is just so great, so funny! Because of XYZ reasons haha".
At this point any hopes of further mirth will be completely dashed. But one is left to wonder-- why does explaining the punchline often kill the punchline? Or, in academese, why is humour is resistant to causal explanation?
I had a horrible time. Mind you, there were plenty of inappropriate jokes, ranging from racist jokes, dirty jokes to toilet humour. But it was something about a stuffy guy explaining why these jokes were funny that killed all the mirth I was supposed to be having. It was probably the least funniest thing I had heard in a long time.
I'm sure people are familiar with times when a person in the group says "I dont get it" after a joke had been told. Usually the person who tells the joke is often forced to explain why the joke is funny, and from my own experience, if the joke is not very intellectual, everyone who laughed now feels kind of stupid and awkward. But if the joke is more intellectual, the person who didnt get the joke then starts laughing and slapping her or his companions on the back saying "haha that is just so great, so funny! Because of XYZ reasons haha".
At this point any hopes of further mirth will be completely dashed. But one is left to wonder-- why does explaining the punchline often kill the punchline? Or, in academese, why is humour is resistant to causal explanation?