I’ve checked all the big-name dictionaries, cross-referenced the definitions, sifted through myriad permutations and fine distinctions. Here’s the upshot.
A joke (noun) is:
- something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, brief oral anecdote, or prank. First the doctor told me the good news; I was going to have a disease named after me. – Steve Martin
- a humorous or ridiculous element; something ludicrously inadequate, a sham, a farce, a laughingstock. Nancy Reagan’s ‘Just Say NO’ campaign was a joke.
- a trifling matter, not to be taken seriously (commonly used in negative constructions). Climate change is no joke.
To joke (verb) is:
- to speak or act in a playful or merry way. He’s always joking around.
- to say something in fun or teasing rather than in earnest; be facetious. “If it’s tourist season,” she joked, “why can’t we shoot them?”
It’s that last usage I need to address.
A few days ago, I was present when an instructor snapped at student using highly inappropriate language. In fact, about 25 people were present, most of them students themselves. The instructor had the floor and just about everyone’s complete and undivided attention for her little outburst. The immediate reaction was a collective gasp and a few muted exclamations of shock, followed by a tense, uneasy silence.
This incident happened in the context of theatre. More specifically, it happened in the context of Tech Week, a particularly exhausting and stressful part of the production process. Outbursts and other weirdness are de rigueur for Tech. It’s almost inevitable that at some point during the week the massive workload, anxiety, lack of sleep, and frustration will cause someone to act somewhat inappropriately or say something untoward.
I wasn’t happy about this particular expression of Tech-angst; directed at the stage manager (my student) and wholly undeserved. What rankles, though, is the public apology the instructor offered at the next rehearsal.
I would have been totally cool with any statement along the lines of, “Oops, I was frazzled, sorry I lost it. “ What we got was more along the lines of, “You might not realize the stage manager and I are old friends; if you understood our relationship, you’d have known I was joking.”
Guess the stage manager didn’t realize, either. He didn’t think she was joking, but he’s professional enough to be more concerned with getting the show up than arguing about it.
I feel like arguing.
This woman always laughs at her own jokes. She never even cracked a smile at this one. When a joke doesn’t go over – when nobody laughs – the jester doesn’t wait two days to say, “Sorry, that was supposed to be funny.” And faulting the audience for not getting the joke? How is that an apology?
She wasn’t joking. She made a mistake. Instead of copping to it and sincerely apologizing, she hid the truth behind a lie: “It was just a joke.”
I find this excuse particularly detestable these days, thanks to a certain odious, loud-mouthed, orange pimple on the face of humanity. It doesn’t sit right, does it? When Der Donald stirs up people’s basest prejudices and vilest urges, when he encourages foreign powers and domestic groups to criminal activity, when he slanders, objectifies, mocks, reviles, then uses “just joking” to deny what he did?
Doesn’t sit right with Jason P. Steed, either. He’s a lawyer who argues cases in the 5th Circuit. His 23 tweets on the social function of humor have gone viral, but in case you missed them, here they are, strung together for easy access.
1. I wrote my PhD dissertation on the social function of humor (in literature & film) and here’s the thing about “just joking.”
2. You’re never “just joking.” Nobody is ever “just joking.” Humor is a social act that performs a social function (always).
3. To say humor is social act is to say it is always in social context; we don’t joke alone. Humor is a way we relate/interact with others.
4. Which is to say, humor is a way we construct identity – who we are in relation to others. We use humor to form groups…
5. …and to find our individual place in or out of those groups. In short, joking/humor is one tool by which we assimilate or alienate.
6. In other words, we use humor to bring people into – or keep them out of – our social groups. This is what humor does. What it’s for.
7. Consequently, how we use humor is tied up with ethics – who do we embrace, who do we shun, and how/why?
8. And the assimilating/alienating function of humor works not only only people but also on ideas. This is important.
9. This is why, e.g., racist “jokes” are bad. Not just because they serve to alienate certain people, but also because…
10. … they serve to assimilate the idea of racism (the idea of alienating people based on their race). And so we come to Drumpf.
11. A racist joke sends a message to the in-group that racism is acceptable. (If you don’t find it acceptable, you’re in the out-group.)
12. The racist joke teller might say “just joking” – but this is a defense to the out-group. He doesn’t have to say this to the in-group.
13. This is why we’re never “just joking.” To the in-group, no defense of the joke is needed; the idea conveyed is accepted/acceptable.
14. So, when Drumpf jokes about assassination or armed revolt, he’s asking the in-group to assimilate/accept that idea. That’s what jokes do.
15. And when he says “just joking,” that’s a defense offered to the out-group who was never meant to assimilate the idea in the first place.
16. Indeed, circling back to the start, the joke itself is a way to define in-group and out-group, through assimilation & alienation.
17. If you’re willing to accept “just joking” as defense, you’re willing to enter in-group where idea conveyed by the joke is acceptable.
18. In other words, if “just joking” excuses racist jokes, then in-group has accepted idea of racism as part of being in-group.
19. Same goes for “jokes” about armed revolt or assassinating Hillary Clinton. They cannot be accepted as “just joking.”
20. Now, a big caveat: humor (like all language) is complicated and always a matter of interpretation. For example, we might have…
21. … racist humor that is, in fact, designed to alienate (rather than assimilate) the idea of racism. (Think satire or parody.)
22. But I think it’s pretty clear Drumpf was not engaging in some complex satirical form of humor. He was “just joking.” In the worst sense.
23. Bottom line: don’t accept “just joking” as excuse for what Drumpf said today. The in-group for that joke should be tiny. Like his hands.
– Jason P. Steed
See above: a joke (noun), 3rd usage. “Just kidding” is no joke.
I wasn’t there but we all have witnessed similar situations. “It was just a joke” Is that sort of like: “It was just locker room talk”? When someone says “It was just a joke” immediately after saying something offensive it reminds me of Hamlet’s mother and “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
For me it is “The Lady doth reveal too much, methinks.”
Yes, exactly! And HAMLET for an example — how apt to the theatrical venue in which this “joke” was played!
Ah no bother on the Kim joke front. In fairness, you didn’t really make a joke at her expense. Let’s be honest, none of us could afford to ;-)
The most hilarious aspect of her trip to Ireland (as an aside) is that they went to the cinema in Portlaoise. Now I suspect there are few Laois locals reading your blog (for shame!) but even they would have to admit that was pretty bizarre. Few midlands towns have much going for them, and frequently are the butt of jokes (just throwing in a butt reference for no real reason), but the only thing Portlaoise is famous for is a jail. There is a rich vein of humour to be mined from the prospect of Kim coming back to Ireland; in the sitcom in my head, her husband leaves her for a woman with an even bigger arse, and all her contracts dry up and she has to sign on the dole and live in a council house in Darndale (go on, Google it), and she ends up making a reality TV show with RTE called, oh I don’t know, ‘Living With The Car Crashians’ or something like that. Episode one sees her finding Dublin’s last pawn brokers where she gets 25 quid for a necklace worth 2 million dollars. She then takes the money to Moore Street to try and buy avocados (“getcher luvlee avercardoze.. toofera powind!’). Damn. I almost wish it were true…
This is brilliant. You’re def in the wrong career. Come to Hollywood and write sit-coms!
Of the two jokes, it’s a toss-up between and Enda and Kim which is the most useless to society. Both have made on arse of themselves. One metaphorically, one literally. Of course, some of the jokes born out of that robbery were fairly cruel. I wouldn’t fancy being held up at gunpoint, and no doubt anyone who has should have a degree of sympathy. But the levels of such were as low as the average intelligence of a Trump voter, the man who has made a living out of exploiting and demeaning many who now attend his rallies. Who knew baseball caps were for keeping your brains from falling out your ears? I thought they were for baseball players. Anyway, as my mate says, if you want to find sympathy it’s in the dictionary between ‘shit’ and ‘syphilis’. :-)
Anyway, do what others do; just head over anyway, and stay as long as you want. Hot chocolate’s on me!
Ah, true. A bit crass of me to jump on the Kim-joke band wagon, but my mind was still a-gog at Enda’s invite to Kim to come to Ireland, where he promised she’d be properly cared for. (? omg). My real purpose in adding a new comment, though, is to apprise your mate that I am totally stealing her line regarding sympathy’s location. Too right.
I long ago became super-conscious that I’d prefer my humor to be inclusive, rather than exclusive. I think I came by that philosophy after having been the target of so many “jokes”.
Oh, indeed. When you are the targeted kid – for whatever reason – or part of a group that is particularly, publicly ‘out’ at the moment (how well I remember the Polack jokes), it gives you a whole ‘nother level of sensitivity on the issue. My trigger these days is fat jokes. Humiliation humor at its worst, no holds barred. I hear voices raised against racist humor, sexist humor, but to be fat in this society has somehow become so ‘out’ it’s inexcusable, making ‘fat’ is fair game for abusive remarks … made just in fun, of course.
Another excellent post. And hitting the mark in every respect. From hanging around with a fire crew for a decade, I’ve certainly been immersed in some rather odd humour from time to time. I’ve dished it out and had to swallow it too. Steed’s tweets are brilliant. Point 6 sums it all up nicely. Joking (humour) performs such an important social function that I generally find myself defending it, even in its vilest forms (in the sense that someone will usually find it vile). For example, the recent Charlie Hebdo cartoons on the Italian earthquake really tested people’s mettle. Even dyed-in-the-wool liberals who lit candles for Paris felt several bridges had been crossed and razed to the ground. Despite its awfulness, you still could find vestiges of humour in it. Well, I could. So maybe that says more about me. Anyway, I digress. I wouldn’t be worried about Dump’s tiny hands. No doubt he has room service to push the big red button if required. It’s his tiny mean little mouth I’d be worried about. He manages to get an awful lot of crap out of that tiny orifice. God help you all if he’s elected, and yes, you are all welcome to Ireland if that happens. Just ask Enda for a passport. Tell him you’re a multinational. I think they do gold embossed ones…
(just kidding…)
Another astute comment. Humor is such a fascinating phenomenon; cognitive perception of audio or visual input that elicits an emotional/physical response. (My unscientific take on it.) Physical humor is arguably universal. Verbal humor is so deeply entrenched in culture and language, it’s generally untranslatable, demonstrating Steed’s point about in-groups and out-groups. IN if that’s your field (fire-fighter, doctor, actor, footballer), OUT if it isn’t. IN if that’s your jam (book club, health club, gun club), OUT if it’s not. Basically, IN if you speak the lingo, OUT if you don’t. You have to be IN to “get” the references, and group acceptance of references does, absolutely, normalize them. Add in personal taste, and suddenly what’s funny/what’s not becomes — ooh! there’s a red-headed woodpecker outside the window! (now THAT’S a digression) — becomes a bone of contention. Like you, I’m a staunch supporter of freedom-of-comedy. Toilet humor is not my thing, but if you like to laugh at poop jokes, by all means, go ahead. The same cartoon may be considered scathingly brilliant by some and in cruelly poor taste by others; not a problem. For me, the problem is how and where can we draw the line? I don’t believe in censorship and do believe sacred clowns — jesters, contrarians, satirists — essential to a healthy society. Yet, when it seems to me a comic’s sole shtick is to mock people for their race, ethnicity, gender, or disability, I condemn their jokes as unequivocally “not funny” and wish like hell I had a way to shut them up. As for the despicable Drumpf, he’s not joking. He’s rabble-rousing, exhorting his followers to acts of violence and intimidation (his latest, he’s sending his supporters to police “suspicious” polling places on Election Day), then dancing away from accountability by claiming his words were sarcastic. Goddess help the whole world if he’s elected. And yes, I would ask Enda for that passport, but as I’m not a glam celebrity who’s been robbed of her jewels in Paris, I doubt he’d consider my request. (Maybe I’m joking, maybe not — I’ll tell you after I see how you react.)