tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post5884717311085407905..comments2023-11-03T06:02:02.128-07:00Comments on By Ken Levine: Reducing comedy to an equationBy Ken Levinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17305293821975250420noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-10573558050967305052015-06-01T08:44:01.987-07:002015-06-01T08:44:01.987-07:00From the "reducing comedy to an equation,&quo...From the "reducing comedy to an equation," I thought this was going to be along the lines of breaking down recent pop music to formula, as producers of late have done <i>ad nauseum.</i> The result is pre-packaged pablum that makes the worst "American Bandstand" acts of 1959 sound good by comparison. (Which reminds me: When I lived in Philadelphia in the mid-'80s and Philly lost out to Cleveland as the home of the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame, perplexed locals did not understand why. I provided them the answer in one word: Fabian.)VP81955https://www.blogger.com/profile/11792390726196611188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-28181651698259701292015-05-31T23:54:16.514-07:002015-05-31T23:54:16.514-07:00Too many big words. I skipped this one.Too many big words. I skipped this one.Jaycenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-10661739410451415772015-05-31T13:49:18.120-07:002015-05-31T13:49:18.120-07:00It's probably addressed in one of those books,...It's probably addressed in one of those books, but surprise (an abrupt Buster Keaton sight gag) and lack of surprise (Laurel and Hardy blithely cruising towards a specific disaster) can both make me laugh out loud. Likewise reaction and lack of reaction.DBensonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-62866450482272187452015-05-31T10:23:58.555-07:002015-05-31T10:23:58.555-07:00In England, that may be an explanation of "hu...In England, that may be an explanation of "humour", but not humor. The only funny thing is the way the Brits spell it.Candanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-7174573285025797722015-05-31T10:23:16.999-07:002015-05-31T10:23:16.999-07:00@Johnny Walker
Since you've read O'Shanno...@Johnny Walker<br /><br />Since you've read O'Shannon's book, wouldn't it be fair to read Clarke's book and make the comparison. Instead, you are comparing your interpretation of O'Shannon's entire book to Ken's synopsis of a book. Of course, it is going to seem simplistic in comparison.<br /><br />I have read neither, but now I'm going to read both. Thanks to both of you for the recommendations.Eric Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10639837826294361383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-80479884920239123982015-05-31T08:14:16.856-07:002015-05-31T08:14:16.856-07:00A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer in...A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer in the pants. Comedy gold. Dodgerdawgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-5755078861312412142015-05-31T07:13:08.176-07:002015-05-31T07:13:08.176-07:00"Always tell the audience what you're goi..."Always tell the audience what you're going to do. Then do the thing. Then tell the audience the thing has been done." <br />Jerry Lewis' secret to comedy, according to an anecdote I heard on a Simpsons commentary track.Oat Willienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-35332604880888763912015-05-31T06:38:19.379-07:002015-05-31T06:38:19.379-07:00I think the book by Dan O'Shannon (producer of...I think the book by Dan O'Shannon (producer of Cheers, Frasier and Modern Family), <a href="http://www.amazon.com/What-Are-You-Laughing-Comprehensive/dp/1441162933/" rel="nofollow">"What Are You Laughing At?"</a>, deserves some mention here! For a start, it quickly and easily debunks simplistic explanations like this (for some of the same reasons Ken did -- it doesn't explain Gallagher for one thing).<br /><br />So while there is probably some truth in this explanation as to why we find resolving incongruity pleasurable, it doesn't solve the whole equation of what makes us laugh. Dan's book zooms right out and takes into account ALL the variables. I found it very compelling.<br /><br />Ken himself has the book on the <a href="http://kenlevine.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/my-recommended-reading-list.html" rel="nofollow">reading list of his USC comedy writing class</a>, so if you're interested in an anthropological angle on the mysteries of laughter, I think he'd agree that it's a great place to start.Johnny Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13302545167970532080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-71942499038851611802015-05-31T06:24:21.120-07:002015-05-31T06:24:21.120-07:00I thought the equation was Comedy = Tragedy + Time...I thought the equation was Comedy = Tragedy + Time. Ralph C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12488657064245017543noreply@blogger.com