| Dan Abrams' "Theory of Comedy": As some of you may know, I started my serious comedy-nerdom in college. Without as much natural talent as others, I took an academic approach. I even started working on a "Comedy Textbook" (in 1992). Some of my colleagues in our sketch comedy troupe helped me track down and interview a bunch of heroes of humor (including Jon Stewart, Dana Gould, Phil Hartman, David Spade, Alan King, Bob Saget and many others - I still have the audio tapes!). I wrote about 50 pages for my Creative Non-Fiction class but ran out of insight. Over the past two decades (almost) I've continued to compile notes and insight on the craft of comedy. And I'm ready to finally publicly reveal my "Theory of Comedy"... "Comedy is connections." - Proof: You can't laugh if you don't get the reference. - Physiologically, I theorize that a joke is literally a "mental shortcut" that connects disparate synapses. If somebody is slow to make the connection then they can still derive some satisfaction from finally "getting it" but it won't make them laugh as if they got it quickly. - CAVEAT: There is still a lot of comedy that I may even personally appreciate but can't yet understand its "mechanics". Some performers are just inexplicably funny independent of their material. I certainly concede that I don't yet have it all figured out. (And yes, I'm ego-maniacal enough to include the word "yet" in that sentence.) - Five Practical Consequences (that most already know or intuit): #1: "Call Backs" (aka references to previously established ideas) are consistently effective. "Set-up" a new idea early in a stand-up routine or script and then "pay it off" later for good closure of that connection. Set-up a bunch of references throughout and then sew them all together at the end for an even greater audience climax. #2: If your audience is open to connections (e.g. fans or simply a warmed-up audience that has already been primed to make connections/laugh) then they are more likely to enjoy you. Conversely, if they don't want to like you (if they're pissed off from a bad comic/script or if they're simply comedically exhausted from making too many connections/ODing on comedy) then they can effectively choose not to make the connections your jokes intend. So if they're "arms folded" be sure to start out with smaller connections that are likely to work and build credibility for the bigger stretches/connections later on. #3: Connections already made (old jokes) aren't as funny. But if the mechanics of that joke are sound then it may be applicable to a different set of references or at a minimum to a different audience. Try dissecting your favorite jokes/routines and see if you can swap-out references while preserving the funny. #4: If the audience is actively looking for the connection (maybe because you telegraphed the punchline or maybe because you simply wagered a lot of emphasis) then they can "get ahead of you" and make the connection prematurely which hurts the joke. This is also why dissecting comedy is so UNFUNNY. It's like the difference between an Aikido sensei telling you how he will throw you and the act of actually throwing you. #5: Comedy isn't really "surprise" or "revealing truth" as other academics have posited. Knowing that Dick Van Dyke or Andy Dick is going to trip at the top of a show doesn't prevent laughter, just the opposite. The audience is waiting to make the connection as a flipside to a "call back" - the nomenclature I devised for this kind of joke formula is "prophesy". So when you "set up references" they can be hidden to be used in a "call back" or explicitly done as in a "prophesy" formula deliberately alerty to the future connection but distancing it sufficiently to create a shortcut. WELL, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I have a bunch more written about this but I wanted the basics established/published today. If you have your own ideas about comedy (or references/links to other stuff you find to be more valid) please let me know. I eventually plan to finish and publish my "Comedy Textbook" (but it could take me another decade). Thanks and good karma to you. Warm Regards, Dan |
CAVEAT! I'm an amateur philosopher and idea-generator. I am NOT an investment professional. Don't take any of my advice before consulting with an attorney and also a duly licensed authority on finance. Seriously, this my personal blog of random ideas only for entertainment purposes. Don't be an idiot.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Dan Abrams' "Theory of Comedy"...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi Dan. Amanda Holm here. I shared your post with my husband George, who is currently deployed as an Army Reservist in Iraq, and as you can imagine is pretty hard-up for entertainment. Plus, he's a student of comedy as well. The following conversation ensued:
[13:02] stankowg: Interesting theory he's got there.
[13:02] MandaH123: Yeah, it seems reasonably broadly applicable.
[13:03] stankowg: But it doesn't adequately explain the funniest joke in the world.
[13:04] stankowg: (Two guys out hunting, one shoots the other, calls 911, says "I think I killed my friend," operator says "First, let's make sure he's dead." BANG "Okay, now what?")
[13:04] MandaH123: Ah, I thought you meant the Monty Python sketch initially.
[13:04] stankowg: No, the actual, scientifically proven funniest joke in the world.
[13:04] MandaH123: Righto.
[13:05] stankowg: Where's the connection there? If anything, it's a lack of connection, I'd argue -- the two disparate meanings of "make sure."
[13:06] MandaH123: Hm. This brings up a potential format problem here -- i.e. the difference between "comedy" and "telling jokes."
[13:06] stankowg: Good point.
[13:07] MandaH123: But I'd also venture the writer of the joke made the connection between the disparate meanings of "make sure," connecting the follow-up line to the clearly inappropriate one.
[13:08] stankowg: Seems like kind of a stretch.
[13:08] stankowg: Comedy is about connections, except when it's about breaking them?
[13:08] MandaH123: No, the joke connects a different meaning to the original phrase.
[13:08] stankowg: i.e. Creating the expected connection in the setup, then breaking it with the punchline?
[13:09] MandaH123: Yeah, I do think (and I think Dan dances around but doesn't take on) the unexpectedness of the connection is important to the joke's impact.
[13:10] stankowg: Understandable.
[13:12] MandaH123: I should post this as a comment to his blog.
[13:12] MandaH123: This conversation, I mean.
[13:13] stankowg: If you'd like.
[13:14] MandaH123: Then I shall. With the caveat that, when he publishes his textbook, we expect a share of the royalties.
Dan, interesting start. I like the idea that connections form the basis of an overall analysis of comedy. I want to read more. Have you explored connections that aren't made to a common point of reference but rather to an individual's life experience? I think these subjective connections give storytelling (and perhaps comedy) its true power. On another note, it seems to me that there is an obvious link between connections and irony. If you're working on a book, this specific topic might be worth examining as well.
Amanda's conversation reminded me of an observation I had recently, while watching an episode of Frasier on a plane. Every single joke, I realized, was about the misinterpretation of the literal for the figurative.
For instance, Laura Linney is leaning back on a couch as Frasier passionately kisses her, and she sits bolt upright and says "I'm uncomfortable," and while we and Frasier immediately assume she means with the kiss, it is revealed a beat later that she is sitting on a bottle of wine. A series of this type of joke ensues.
Killing the friend is another example of this, misinterpretation of a figure of speech, for the literal.
I think the best humor might transcend word play, bringing it to a point where absurd ideas toy with your sense of reality - monty python case in point. But anyway, that is, like humor, a matter of taste.
Note that the last aspect of another language or culture that you can ever really understand is its humor. Here, it's obviously not about words (which can be translated, to some extent) but about taboos and ideas.
Freud has a lot to say about this/humor, you might want to look into that too. Unless you're afraid of your own neuroses.
Ciao ciao, Claudia C.
Post a Comment