Impact of Jokes on People and Their Perception

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Joke classification
Factors that determine the nature of the joke
Symbolic interaction of jokes
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

This paper is a sociological insight to the universality of jokes. It gives some jokes and looks at why they are considered funny by some people and not others. It borrows from Harold Kelly’s Attribution Theory in psychology and tries to explain jokes specific to a certain geographical region of which can only be understood by members of that culture. It also looks at ethnicity and the nature of jokes related to race is explored.

Lastly, we shall look at the sociological aspect with specific reference to symbolic interactionism theory of George Herbert Mead and that of implausibility of jokes by Harvey Sacks.

Joke classification

Below are some one-liners which may be considered universal due to the commonality of the content to people of different cultures while the more specific ones are explained in further detail:

“Jack Kevorkian for White House Physician. This is an example of a joke that may not be funny to other people outside the USA because few people outside the USA know who Jack Kervokian is.
I tried sniffing Coke once, but the ice cubes got stuck in my nose. This joke can only be understood by those who know the colloquial name for cocaine.
A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory. A witty spin on the nature of guilt.
A diplomat is someone who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you will look forward to the trip.
Assassins do it from behind. This is a sexual joke that may be offensive to some people because of its nature. It may be inappropriate to use with people who we are not well acquainted with or at dinner tables.
Auntie Em, Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog. Dorothy. It can be used with people who are familiar with the story of the Wizard of Oz. Otherwise, the audience may not get it.
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away and you have their shoes.
Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. Vending machines everywhere often chew up our change and sometimes refuse to give the item selected. Everyone who has ever experienced this resonates with this joke.
A day without sunshine is like, night. Obviously! This is one of those “duh” jokes that isn’t hilarious but will elicit a smile out of the audience.
Don’t piss me off! I’m running out of places to hide the bodies. This may be inappropriate to an audience that has experienced a death in the lives through murder and may still be grieving. It can be lighthearted just to express a level of exasperation.
I didn’t say it was your fault. I said I was going to blame you.
If you choke a smurf, what color does it turn? Again, one must be familiar with the show The Smurfs.
I am not a vegetarian because I love animals. I am a vegetarian because I hate plants.
On the other hand, you have different fingers” (“What are funny jokes” n.p).

Another aspect of jokes is those that are based on stereotypes or race. To the person who is being made fun of in the joke, the following joke may be quite offensive.

There was an Englishman, a Cuban, a Japanese man and a Pakistani on a train. The Cuban throws a cigar out of the window, saying they are “ten-a-penny” in his country. The Japanese man throws a Nikon camera out, saying they are ten-a-penny in his country. Then the Englishman throws the Pakistani out the window (BBC par.4).

Some psychologists argue that this joke makes light of human life, therefore, has no iota of humor in it in fact the British MP, Ann Winterton who told the joke was sacked from the British shadow cabinet because of the distasteful nature of the joke regardless of the innocent motives which she had in telling it.

The following example was extracted from the Swap Meet Dave Website:

After working his farm every day, an old farmer rarely had time to enjoy the large pond in the back that he had fixed up years earlier with picnic tables, horseshoe courts, and benches. So one evening he decided to go down and see how things were holding up. Much to his surprise, he heard voices shouting and laughing with glee. As he came closer, he saw it was a group of young women skinny-dipping in his pond.

He made the women aware of his presence and they all went to the deep end. One of the women shouted to him, “We’re not coming out until you leave.” The old farmer replied, “I didn’t come down here to watch you ladies swim or make you get out of the pond naked. I only came down to feed the alligator (Swap Meet Dave par.14).

The moral of the above joke is that old age and wisdom will always trounce over youth and adeptness. It makes lighthearted comments about age differences and asserts the adage, old is gold.

Factors that determine the nature of the joke

According to Kelly’s attribution theory, two factors determine certain behavior. The dispositional factors or internal factors which are the personal characteristics like the personality traits and attitudes of the individual. These determine what he called the distinctiveness of the behavior and the consistency of the behavior. These two concepts mean the uniqueness of the behavior and how one responds to different stimuli and how frequently someone responds to the same stimuli in the same way respectively.

In relation to jokes, these two concepts explain why people may crack up to this joke one time and after listening to it again, find it completely boring. It may also be because of their mood or their sense of humor. If someone is in a foul mood, a few things will cheer him/ her up.

The second factor is the situational or the external factors. These include the surroundings or current situation in which the joke is being told. For example, if someone is among a group of friends and someone tells a joke, there is an increased pressure for everyone to laugh or risk becoming part of the joke. This is because the person will be viewed as “slow” or as expressed in this joke: “there is a library but there are no books in it”.

Symbolic interaction of jokes

In the sociological perspective, George Herbert Mead’s theory of symbolic interactionism also explains this phenomenon. Under his concept of the Looking Glass Self, the person is seen as a social actor on the theatre playing the different roles.

Also according to Mulkay, structural arrangement of jokes is a contributing factor to how a joke is accepted or understood. He argues that in a joke there are certain variables called implausibilties which are not overtly clear. This means the sequential delivery of the joke (Mulkay 12). He looks at the structural context of a joke presented by Sacks which explains a “dirty” joke involving a mother-in-law, her sons and her daughters-in-law at their honeymoon getaway. The mother-in-law suggests that the couples stay overnight before going on their honeymoon. She hears sounds coming from the rooms of the first and second daughters-in-law but hears no sounds from the third room. In the morning she asks her first and second daughters-in-law why they were wailing and gets the following responses.

“I yelled because it hurt!”

“I yelled because it tickled.”

She then asks the third why she didn’t make any sounds. She responds by saying that her mother-in-law had cautioned her against speaking with her mouthful. What is even more surprising and yet funny is that it was told by a 12-year-old girl! (Mulkay 13).

Mulkay quotes the works of Emerson and Walle in explaining sexual jokes and their significance in social life. He says that sexual jokes are used in the humorous mode instead of the serious mode in order to tackle this sensitive subject. The differences in age also account for humor in the contents of the sexual joke. For example, adolescent sexual jokes will be more centered on the sexual information because of inexperience but the adult jokes will be more centered on the punch line. This accounts for the snickering of adolescents at the slightest allusion to sexual humor while adult jokes tend to have underlying undertones of which the meanings are deep and not easily deciphered (Mulkay 54).

Gender also plays a role in which jokes someone thinks are funny. According to Legman, the main aim of men telling jokes is to achieve sexual congress. These jokes may be offensive to the women but they seem to work on girls who are being hit on just because of the audacity of it. Sexual jokes are not universal as they sometimes portray women in a bad light losing their appeal (Mulkay 54).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper postulates the different reasons that jokes are received in different ways such that some are more humorous than others. The theories of Mead of the looking glass self are explored in relation to dramaturgy and how we respond to jokes that we do not understand.

In addition, the theory of Sacks is introduced in relation to implausibility of jokes and how they are different from serious discourse i.e serious conversation.

The role of gender in the humor of jokes especially those of a sexual nature is also identified.

Various examples of jokes are also given showing how they may universal or specific to the ethnic group or race it relates. This includes stereotypical jokes and those related to race. Is it right to laugh at such jokes or to make such that jokes at all?

Lastly, this paper will summarize the whole argument with a clincher joke.

“A conclusion is a place where you got tired of thinking” (“What are some funny jokes” n.p).

Works Cited

Askville web pages. What Are some really funny jokes you can tell people you don’t know very well?,2008. Web.

BBC web pages. Why do people find racist jokes funny?, 2002. Web.

Mulkay, Michael. On Humor: Its Nature and Place in Modern Society,n.d.Web.

Swap Meet Dave web pages. Senior Citizen Merriment and Fun. n.d. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!