[lit-ideas] Re: Laugh Tracks
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:07:32 -0500
RP:
On a more serious note, if people 'literally' can't be trusted (the
deceitful buggers) to recognize humor without the prompting of a laugh
track, why should they ever laugh at movies, plays, or books?
Excellent question, Professor Paul. Why indeed should they laugh? Ms
Andy's assertion that people laugh only in response to laughter is not borne
out by the recent research (soon to be published by Phoenix University
Press) by my colleague, graduate assistant George-Ludovico Hoffnung and I
which proves, definitively, we believe, that while, indeed no one ever
laughs without provocation, that said provocation can vary greatly. So the
question becomes then what prompts laughter? And how can we control it?
Laughter itself does indeed prompt laughter as Ms Andy claims. Laughter
seems to be an infectious behavior. Almost a disease, But there are very
many other causes of laughter besides laughter. One is the misfortune of
others. Seeing, hearing or reading about the misfortunes of others can
bring on fits of guffaws. My colleague and I have yet to determine whether
this kind of laughter is a sympathetic physiological response to the
victim's plight -- an inverse way of crying perhaps-- or is just pure evil
glee. Other provocations include surprise, quirky-smirky-ironyisms, and
George Bush. But that doesn't answer Robert Paul's question: "why should
they ever laugh at movies, plays, or books?" Well, they shouldn't ever
unless they find them funny.
Mike Geary
Memphis
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
