Conceptual blending
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 11:00, 25 August 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 11:00, 25 August 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | :''[[amusement]] - [[black comedy]] - [[burlesque]] - [[caricature]] - [[comedy]] - [[funny]] - [[entertainment]] - [[irony]] - [[joke]] - [[laughter]] - [[parody]] - [[ribaldry]] - [[ridicule]] - [[satire]] - [[send-up]] - [[spoof]]'' | ||
| - | |||
| - | '''Humour''' is the ability or [[quality]] of people, objects, or situations to evoke feelings of [[amusement]] in other people. The term encompasses a form of [[entertainment]] or human [[communication]] which evokes such feelings, or which makes people [[laugh]] or feel [[happiness|happy]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Central to this wiki is the notion of [[black humour]]. | ||
| - | ==Etymology== | ||
| - | The term derives from the [[humorism|humoral medicine]] of the [[ancient Greeks]], which stated that a mix of fluids known as humours ([[Greek language|Greek]]: [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%23115103 χυμός], ''chymos'', literally [[juice]] or [[sap]]; metaphorically, [[flavour]]) controlled human health and emotion. | ||
| - | ==A sense of humour== | ||
| - | A '''sense of humour''' is the ability to experience humour, although the extent to which an individual will find something humorous depends on a host of [[variable]]s, including [[geographical location]], [[culture]], [[Maturity (psychological)|maturity]], level of [[education]], [[intelligence]], and [[context]]. For example, young children may possibly favour [[slapstick]], such as [[Punch and Judy]] puppet shows or cartoons (e.g., [[Tom and Jerry]]). [[Satire]] may rely more on understanding the target of the humour, and thus tends to appeal to more mature audiences. | ||
| - | ==Understanding humour== | ||
| - | |||
| - | [[Arthur Schopenhauer]] lamented the misuse of the term "humour" (a [[German language|German]] [[loanword]] from [[English language|English]]) to mean any type of comedy. However, both "humour" and "comic" are often used when theorizing about the subject. The connotation of "humour" is more that of response, while "comic" refers more to stimulus. "Humour" also originally had a connotation of a combined ridiculousness and wit in one individual, the paradigm case being Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff. The French were slow to adopt the term "humour," and in French, "humeur" and "humour" are still two different words, the former still referring only to the archaic concept of [[Four Temperaments|humours]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Western humour theory begins with [[Plato]], who attributed to [[Socrates]] (as a semihistorical dialogue character) in the ''[[Philebus]]'' (p. 49b) the view that the essence of the ridiculous is an ignorance in the weak, who are thus unable to retaliate when ridiculed. Later, in Greek philosophy, [[Aristotle]], in the ''[[Poetics]]'' (1449a, pp. 34–35), suggested that an ugliness that does not disgust is fundamental to humour. | ||
| - | |||
| - | In ancient [[Sanskrit drama]], [[Bharata Muni]]'s ''[[Natya Shastra]]'' defined humour (''hāsyam'') as one of the eight ''[[nava rasas]]'', or principle ''[[Rasa (aesthetics)|rasas]]'' (emotional responses), which can be inspired in the audience by ''bhavas'', the imitations of emotions that the actors perform. Each ''rasa'' was associated with a specific ''bhavas'' portrayed on stage. In the case of humour, it was associated with mirth (''hasya''). | ||
| - | |||
| - | The terms "[[comedy]]" and "[[satire]]" became synonymous after Aristotle's ''Poetics'' was translated into [[Arabic language|Arabic]] in the [[Islamic Golden Age|medieval Islamic world]], where it was elaborated upon by [[Arabic literature|Arabic writers]] and [[Early Islamic philosophy|Islamic philosophers]] such as Abu Bischr, his pupil [[Al-Farabi]], [[Avicenna]], and [[Averroes]]. Due to cultural differences, they disassociated comedy from [[Greek drama]]tic representation, and instead identified it with [[Arabic poetry|Arabic poetic]] themes and forms, such as ''hija'' (satirical poetry). They viewed comedy as simply the "art of reprehension" and made no reference to light and cheerful events or troublous beginnings and happy endings associated with classical Greek comedy. After the [[Latin translations of the 12th century]], the term "comedy" thus gained a new semantic meaning in [[Medieval literature]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | The Incongruity Theory originated mostly with [[Kant]], who claimed that the comic is an expectation that comes to nothing. [[Henri Bergson]] attempted to perfect incongruity by reducing it to the "living" and "mechanical." | ||
| - | |||
| - | An incongruity like Bergson's, in things juxtaposed simultaneously, is still in vogue. This is often debated against theories of the shifts in perspectives in humour; hence, the debate in the series ''Humor Research'' between John Morreall and Robert Latta. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Morreall presented mostly simultaneous juxtapositions, with Latta countering that it requires a "cognitive shift" created by a discovery or solution to a puzzle or problem. Latta is criticized for having reduced jokes' essence to their own puzzling aspect. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Humour frequently contains an unexpected, often sudden, shift in perspective, which gets assimilated by the Incongruity Theory. This view has been defended by Latta (1998) and by [[Brian Boyd]] (2004). Boyd views the shift as from seriousness to play. Nearly anything can be the object of this perspective twist; it is, however, in the areas of human creativity (science and art being the varieties) that the shift results from "structure mapping" (termed "[[bisociation]]" by Koestler) to create novel meanings. Arthur Koestler argues that humour results when two different frames of reference are set up and a collision is engineered between them. | ||
| - | |||
| - | [[Tony Veal]], who is taking a more formalised computational approach than Koestler did, has written on the role of metaphor and metonymy in humour, using inspiration from Koestler as well as from [[Dedre Gentner]]'s theory of structure-mapping, [[George Lakoff]] and [[Mark Johnson (professor)|Mark Johnson]]'s theory of [[conceptual metaphor]], and [[Mark Turner (cognitive scientist)|Mark Turner]] and [[Gilles Fauconnier]]'s theory of [[conceptual blending]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Some claim that humour cannot or should not be explained. [[Author]] [[E.B. White]] once said,{{Fact|date=November 2008}} "Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but the thing dies in the process and the innards are discouraging to any but the pure scientific mind." | ||
| - | |||
| - | ===Evolution of humour=== | ||
| - | As with any form of art, the same goes for humour: acceptance depends on social demographics and varies from person to person. Throughout history, comedy has been used as a form of entertainment all over the world, whether in the courts of the Western kings or the villages of the Far East. Both a social etiquette and a certain intelligence can be displayed through forms of wit and sarcasm. Eighteenth-century [[Germany|German]] author [[Georg Lichtenberg]] said that "the more you know humour, the more you become demanding in fineness." | ||
| - | |||
| - | Alastair Clarke explains: "The theory is an evolutionary and cognitive explanation of how and why any individual finds anything funny. Effectively, it explains that humour occurs when the brain recognizes a pattern that surprises it, and that recognition of this sort is rewarded with the experience of the humorous response, an element of which is broadcast as laughter." The theory further identifies the importance of pattern recognition in human evolution: "An ability to recognize patterns instantly and unconsciously has proved a fundamental weapon in the cognitive arsenal of human beings. The humorous reward has encouraged the development of such faculties, leading to the unique perceptual and intellectual abilities of our species."[http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-06/ph-maf062708.php] | ||
| - | |||
| - | ==Humour formulae== | ||
| - | Humor can be verbal, visual, or physical. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Root components: | ||
| - | *appealing to [[feeling]]s or to [[emotion]]s. | ||
| - | *similar to [[reality]], but not real. | ||
| - | *some [[surprise]]/[[misdirection]], [[contradiction]], [[ambiguity]], or [[paradox]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Methods: | ||
| - | *[[hyperbole]] | ||
| - | *[[metaphor]] | ||
| - | *[[reductio ad absurdum]] or [[farce]] | ||
| - | *[[reframing]] | ||
| - | *[[comic timing|timing]] | ||
| - | |||
| - | [[Rowan Atkinson]] explains in his lecture in the documentary "''[[Funny Business (TV series)|Funny Business]]''" that an object or a person can become funny in three different ways. They are: | ||
| - | *By behaving in an unusual way | ||
| - | *By being in an unusual place | ||
| - | *By being the wrong size | ||
| - | |||
| - | Most [[sight gag]]s fit into one or more of these categories. | ||
| - | |||
| - | Humour is also sometimes described as an ingredient in spiritual life. Humour is also the act of being funny. Some synonyms of funny or humour are hilarious, knee-slapping, spiritual, wise-minded, outgoing, and amusing. Some Masters have added it to their teachings in various forms. A famous figure in spiritual humour is the [[laughing Buddha]]. | ||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| - | *[[Clown]]s | ||
| - | *[[Comedy]] and [[Comedian]]s | ||
| - | *[[:Category:Comedy and humor by nationality|Comedy and humour by nationality]] | ||
| - | *[[Comics]] | ||
| - | *[[Computational humor|Computational humour]] | ||
| - | *[[Gelotology]] | ||
| - | *[[Humor research]] | ||
| - | *[[Internet humor|Internet humour]] | ||
| - | *[[Joke]] | ||
| - | *[[Laughter]] | ||
| - | *[[List of publications in humor research|List of publications in humour research]] | ||
| - | *[[Mark Twain Prize for American Humor]] | ||
| - | *[[Satire]] | ||
| - | **[[Political satire]] | ||
| - | *[[Smile]] | ||
| - | *[[Theory of humor|Theory of humour]] | ||
| - | |||
| - | == Further reading == | ||
| - | *''[[Anthology of Black Humor]]'' (1940) - André Breton | ||
| - | *''[[Rationale of the Dirty Joke|Rationale of the Dirty Joke: An Analysis of Sexual Humor]]'' a 1968 book by Gershon Legman | ||
| - | *''[[Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious]]'' (1905) by Sigmund Freud | ||
| - | *''[[Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic]]'' (1901) by Henri Bergson | ||
| - | *[[Motif-Index of Folk-Literature]] | ||
| - | *[[List of publications in humor research]] | ||
| - | *''[[A History of Derision]]'' | ||
| - | *''[[Le Rire de résistance]]'' | ||
| - | {{GFDL}} | + | * [[Extension transference]] |
| + | * [[Mental space]] | ||
| + | * [[Cognitive psychology]] | ||
| + | * [[Cognitive rhetoric|Cognitive Rhetoric]] | ||
| + | *[[Cognitive sciences]] | ||
| + | * [[Talk:Conceptual blending/Resources|Resources on Conceptual Blending]] | ||
| + | * [[Embodied philosophy]] | ||
| + | * [[Conceptual metaphor]] | ||
| + | * [[Analogy]] | ||
| + | *[[Philosophy of mind]]{{GFDL}} | ||
Revision as of 11:00, 25 August 2011
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
See also
- Extension transference
- Mental space
- Cognitive psychology
- Cognitive Rhetoric
- Cognitive sciences
- Resources on Conceptual Blending
- Embodied philosophy
- Conceptual metaphor
- Analogy
- Philosophy of mind
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "Conceptual blending" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
