[lit-ideas] How Far Can Humour Travel?

  • From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 09:05:19 EDT

 
 
In a message dated 9/9/2004 12:47:30 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Point  taken, but I think this is an urban and modern perspective.   Your
French peasant four hundred or so years back--see, for example, "The  Return
of Martin Guerre," book or movie--used Charivari to police signs  of
otherness within the village and was immediately suspicious of  travelers,
vagrants, ex-soldiers, protestants, people with ideas about how  return on
land might be maximized.  What's funny to him is putting a  frog in the bed
of someone who is not providing the village with children,  and the idea of
one among the villagers could travel to  Paris.


-----
 
Interesting.
 
But I assume the distance this 'idea' (or _humour_) between the village and  
Paris was not a great one, and thus, 'humour travelled'.
 
I was wondering how far humour _can_ travel. In a global village, it is  
assumed that it _will_ travel.
 
I looked up in the OED for collocations with 'humour' and 'travel' -- to no  
avail. But it seems to me that in this sort of intransitive use of 'travel'  
(unless it's understood as ellipsisitcal for 'travel places') it's _humour_ we  
first question:
 
          humour travels
          that kind of humour  travels.
          that kind of humour  does not travel.
 
That is, it seems to me that, first and foremost, is the idea of humour  
achieving its purpose in Point A and in Point B that seem to concern people  
most. 
We don't usually speak of a sense of justice that travels, or that shame  
travels, for example.
 
Cheers,
 
JL

 


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  • » [lit-ideas] How Far Can Humour Travel?