In the article ‘Just Kidding’ – But at Whose Expense written by Richard Berstein, the concept of “who can say what about whom, and under what circumstances” is questioned. From the start of the article, Berstein clearly distinguishes the different effects comedy presented in stand-up comedy or live performances versus that presented through television. Comedy theatre shows are known to express various perceptions, including socially sensitive topics, through “art”, whereas television “have always been arenas for mockery.”

To further explain this idea, Berstein gives an example of a CBS commentator named Andy Rooney and a stand-up comedian Eddie Murphy. Rooney had been severely criticized by the public for his offensive statement about the minority groups, which originally was done to bring out laughter. With the same comedic purpose, a black comedian Eddie Murphy’s impersonation about minority groups became popular, and still, people like to make jokes about his videotapes. According to Berstein, network television is considered “the tamest of all the media.” Even though people do the same exact things with same exact purposes, the outcomes drastically change due to what form of media they choose to use.

 

Towards the end of his article, Berstein claims that “onstage, a comedian can always invoke the phrase ‘just kidding'” unlike in the field of politics. Again, he draws a line between expression through “the tamest of all the media”: television, and expression through live performances. I do understand Berstein’s point of view, but I do not agree completely. It is true that people on television are often humiliated and censured; however, it is not always “arenas for mockery.” On the stage, a comedian can interact with the audience, which means that even though he or she says something offensive, one can always wrap up with the phrase “just kidding” and watch the audience’s reaction. On the television too, a comedian can escape the awkward situation by saying “just kidding”– but the only difference is that he or she cannot see the facial expressions of the audience, and that television has a much wider viewers, which then equals to a more delineated superiority theory. Moreover, art can be expressed through the medium of television– it is just that we, the public, see the same things differently with different perspective and values.

 

They Say I Say

1. Thomas Hobbes argues about superiority theory, by stating that “men laugh at mischances and indecencies” and that “men laugh at the infirmities of others.” Laughter results from the idea when one compares his or herself to others and feels that he or she is in a better position.

2. Immanuel Kant proposes relief theory  by bringing in the concept of health conditions; sensations and emotions are key factors that control our body, as Kant claims that “vibration of our organs [helps] restore their equilibrium and has beneficial influence on our health.”

3. Arthur Schopenhauer emphasizes the incongruity theory by asserting that “incongruity between a concept and real objects” is what causes the laughter– he also points out the significance of paradox which mainly starts one to laugh.

4. Herbert Spencer both argues about superiority and incongruity theory, explaining them through physiology. He starts the writing by a question stating “Why do we smile when a child puts on a man’s hat?” We laugh at that child because not only we see a visual mismatch, but also we feel more superior to that child.

Thomas Hobbes connects laughter to superiority theory. Many people think that laughter equals to positivity and joy, but according to Hobbes’ stance, it does not. We laugh at other people’s lack of physical or mental conditions. We mock at other people’s “mischances and indecencies.” We make fun of other people because we think, or more accurately, wish to feel that we are in a more superior position.