Digressing for a moment to the first theory readings of this semester, there is Aristotle and his book, Nicomachean Ethics. In chapter eight of it, he offers, “People who carry humor to excess are considered vulgar buffoons. They try to be funny at all costs, and their aim is more to raise a laugh than to speak with propriety and to avoid giving pain to the butt of their jokes” (15). This is a fair observation, given the fact that anyone who tries to make others laugh regardless of the expense would most rightly be called a buffoon. Additionally, it is true that they are the one who will make a joke regardless of whom it hurts, or the damage it causes. In the end, that brand of humor is not funny, for it only attacks the subject, and when the audience realizes this, the shame of it all far outweighs the comedic effect.
Returning to the present, the question arises: What does the above piece of Aristotle’s wisdom say about the stand-up of Ralphie May? First reactions would want to categorize May as the buffoon, for he is a white man spouting equivocally racist criticism of African American culture. His mocking seems like nothing more than a comedian seeking cheap laughs. However, a second (more thought-out) reaction would see that May is not the Aristotelian buffoon many would presuppose.
The last part of Aristotle’s definition makes clear that the buffoon fails to “avoid giving pain to the butt of their jokes” (15). May obviously is cognizant of his joke’s aim, and he shows this is an interesting way. Before setting into the meat of his material, he makes a purposeful jab at himself, commenting on his failure to pass up free candy. This quick joke about his weight shows May’s recognition that everyone, not just those he is about to make fun of, have faults. To make fun of himself before making fun of another demonstrates his desire to avoid inflicting real damage on the butt of the joke. It is a deliberate move which works to lessen the potential hostile impact the rest of the piece’s focus may have.
Still, it is important to keep in mind that though May’s joke about his own shortcomings suggest his following words are not meant as serious racism, that does not mean everyone sees them that way. Certainly, the stereotypes he presents, and the behavior he mocks, can be a real part of someone, and they may not appreciate his less-than-flattering portrayal. The only remedy I can think of for a situation like this is to recognize that people oftentimes take themselves too seriously. That is why when comics like May come along, we need to remember that they are challenging us to see our own ridiculousness. Perhaps then, it is best to follow his example, and utilize that golden ability to laugh at yourself.
Morreall, John. The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1987.
Your interpretation seems very neo-Aristotelian and might involve some 20th or 21st century projections upon his work that are not there. Humor for him seems to function more as a social critique--Letting one know that they are falling short without the harshness of direct criticism. I wonder if Aristotle would really advocate the act of laughing at oneself. Nichomachean Ethics is all about virtues and vices. In addition, note he also advocates a superiority theory. I don't think the the golden mean of humor would be laughing at oneself because if one found what one did humorous, one might miss the reason that one is being humorized. Namely one might miss how one is inferior to the joker or if making fun of oneself, making one might seem to take the lack of virtue too lightly for Aristotle. His works are pretty serious in tone and nature. I don't think he wants us to make light of our faults by laughing at them.
ReplyDelete