Should people be taught to understand jokes?

I am thinking about activities for a new education website, and I wondering whether one of the activities should include learning the meaning of jokes.

EdB suggests that humour is a fundamental to the way the mind works, and it seems to me that if a child does not understand a particularly good joke then the teacher should be just as concerned as if that child could not do multiplication. (I do not claim that EdB supports my contention).

I am seeking opinions on this matter from others.

Specifically, here is a line attributed to Groucho Marx (and others):

"Military justice is to justice what military music is to music."

- Is this funny?
- If you think it's funny, could you explain why it's funny?
- Have you learnt anything from others' explanations of why it's funny?
- Should understanding this joke be part of formal education?

Tags: humour

Views: 474

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 9, 2009 at 18:44
Thanks for the reply Kim.

I agree that not everyone should find poo poo jokes funny - but I think everyone should understand why poo poo jokes make people laugh.

Yes Groucho Marx delivered the lines well and lived in an age where there were many people in uniform so more people would relate to the joke. My point is that if children today were to learn the meaning of the joke this would be a good history lesson for them - much better say than learning about who kicked whose arse in WW2.

I agree that different races have different standards of humour - which is also very instructive.

Before I add this activity to my interactive website I need to devise a way of helping people understand jokes they don't yet understand - short of explaining them. Large, colourful arrows may be required.
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 11, 2009 at 1:10
Hello Dennis,

Thanks for the reply but I'm pretty sure that the Groucho line is in fact a joke.

Perhaps you and others could provide a list of qualities comparing military music to other forms of music.

I'm not trying to straight-jacket anyone here, rather provide a stage on which to demonstrate your creativity.
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 11, 2009 at 2:30
Hello Dennis,

Actually I think the line was first attributed to the former French Prime Minister, Georges Clemenceau. Perhaps only some national leaders take themselves too seriously.

Now your two lists are very long but did they make you laugh? I suspect not, in which case I must try harder.

So the new challenge is to list the characteristics which apply to military music but not particularly to other music, characteristics which might also be reasonably applied to military justice.

Some of the qualities you listed might comply but they seem to be written from the perspective of the person listening to the music rather than the people making the music.
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 14, 2009 at 10:53
Thanks for the response Kim,

Your points about un-subtle and loud remind me of the list I came up with myself.

How is the relationship between military music and music like that between military justice and justice?

- Lacking in subtlety
- Loud
- Bombastic
- Regimented
- Amateurish

When I announced this list to a group of friends a while back they were quite impressed but still they did not laugh.
Permalink Reply by Gerry Barnett on April 14, 2009 at 12:28
I think part of what is funny about this joke is that it is inviting the audience to take part in a bit of harmless (?) snobbery; saying that, in effect: Military justice isn't really justice at all. Or at least bad justice. (It reminds me of Groucho's other joke about 'military intelligence' being 'a contradiction in terms'...) He might be right; it does seem that military courts don't take the same measures to promote justice as civilian courts. And also, that military music is rubbish too, and perhaps expresses the lack of genuine humanity that he thinks 'real', or, non-military music expresses. Personally, I think it is a very genuine form of music, but I don't listen to it for pleasure.
On the whole this joke seems to be about laughing in the face of the big people with guns- inviting us to be childlike, whilst simultaneously inviting us into a group of enlightened people who 'know' about justice and 'know' about music. (Or like to think they do..) Also being invited into a group of people who might have recognised the form of the joke as being a proportional analogy found both in Aristotle's works and in the dry textbooks of school classrooms. Clever!

It would be good if teachers could explain some of this to children. Some of the reasons that a child won't 'get' a joke will be because they don't understand a word, or a cultural/historal reference, or that in this case, the form of the joke is also poking fun at formal text-book school lessons of days gone by. However, most kids can probably tell at least one joke, and if not that, can genuinely laugh at one. They should be taught/encouraged to use and understand humour in their script-writing, drama lessons, psychology, history, 'personal and social education' and English Lit., if they aren't already. I expect a lot of teachers already use humour in their lessons- even if only to diffuse tension and to keep the class attentive. Sometimes it can be of the damaging 'dark sarcasm' sung about in Pink Floyd's album 'The Wall'.
As someone else pointed out, jokes are only part of humour as a whole. I'm pretty good at the odd one-liner or quip, but I can't remember vast amounts of script, so I would be pretty rubbish at stand-up. Also, some people (large and small!) are better at physical humour than word-play; I think they are both equally worthy forms of humour.
Permalink Reply by Tony Alexander on April 16, 2009 at 1:03
What I found funny was how the points were ordered: usually when we say "A is to B, as C is to D", we are explaining how A relates to B by using a more understood/accepted relationship (namely, "C is to D").

When I heard military justice being compared to justice, I basically had vague idea what sort of relationship he was getting at: "A" is a crude, etc. form of "B".

Now, I had never given much thought to military music, let alone to it being a "crude" (or whatever) form of music.

Given that I didn't have to think hard about the relationship "A is to B", I found it funny that Groucho Marx thought military music's "crudeness" was obvious (more so than military justice's).

....
Permalink Reply by Franis on June 12, 2009 at 4:11
First off, I have to take credit for this idea. I came up with that point in the thread about Sir Ken Robinson. If the aim of schooling is actually training university professors, it's not preparing students to be good speakers unless schooling teaches stand-up comedy.

You're talking about why something is funny. This is a good question, "why are jokes funny?" The best way to teach this is to teach improvisational comedy techniques, IMHO.

Not necessarily will it work to narrate why something is funny. However, to spell out why it's oppositely NOT funny will end up being funny. Then the person will laugh because they will fill in the implied opposite. Opposites and extremes are cultural. It's funny to take a thing to it's extreme, in a sort of drama-queen style.
For instance you wrote:
How is the relationship between military music and music like that between military justice and justice? - Lacking in subtlety - Loud - Bombastic - Regimented - Amateurish When I announced this list to a group of friends a while back they were quite impressed but still they did not laugh.

If instead you would have said, it's funny because, obviously, military music is:
Subtle - Sensitive - Humble & Expertly Improvisational...
Ok, did you chuckle?
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on June 12, 2009 at 21:06
Thanks for the comment Franis,

You say that explaining (narrating) a joke isn't the best way to convey its meaning, and I believe you.

Your suggested solution takes us a step closer to what I was trying to achieve, but isn't quite there yet. What I want is a mechanism or a set of exercises that will help people understand jokes that they otherwise wouldn't - without any form of explanation.

Perhaps Dr de Bono's game of 'Concept Snap' would work - the idea being that you get two random cards each featuring a picture of something (like a bucket or spoon), and the players are required to come up with something that they could both be used for: eg. Carrying water.

Practising thinking "Why is A like B?" should help people understand the next joke when it comes along.
Permalink Reply by Sinclair McLay on June 13, 2009 at 14:12
What might be useful is a course on other people's sense of humour.
Come to think of it a History Of Humour could be well subscribed...
Permalink Reply by Sinclair McLay on June 13, 2009 at 14:22
A joke flew over a wall
Humour not common to all
Maybe class on others jokes
Different jokes for different folks
Permalink Reply by Sinclair McLay on June 13, 2009 at 15:43
On the subject of online education, once had an idea for an online university. Instead of having to go to Oxford or Harvard to listen to lectures on various subjects by the best in their field why not film the professors and lecturers and put the lectures on youtube. Enrollment would be free, students could follow at their own pace. Could be expanded to non-academic subjects - De Bono on thinking, Ramsay on food, Connolly on humour, Beckham on passsing the ball, Soros on markets etc etc

Feel free...


Youtube University
Come watch the best teachers play
Each best expert in thier field
Open level playing field
Permalink Reply by Sinclair McLay on June 13, 2009 at 16:19
What about teaching manners ? - not the arcane codes of social etiquette like how to hold a knife and fork, but useful stuff like how to order a drink in a bar, how to decline advances, how to deal with telesales people, when and if to interrupt, etc May need a new word to describe this vital, fluid, twin-banked river of respect - or maybe it already exists.

RSS

© 2013   Created by Administrator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!