A Modest Pathos Proposal

A Modest Proposal starts off with some funny and possibly true claims of Ireland at the time. Not to say most of Swift’s claims are true, but they are attainable. His description of future generations of Irish kids is quite scary, “ as they grow up, either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country, to fight for the Pretender in Spain”(115). He uses this argument, along with a few others in his proposal for the solution of making a stronger nation. It is pathetic that Ireland would ever need some sort of revolution like this to become better, but then again, he gets the idea from the newfound America. When I read the proposal I thought it was totally ridiculous, but when he fathomed that America had already begun doing this, I took a step back. Did early Americans really? What? No way? So I read on, and his final pages were very serious in the parallels he makes with young America. He brings America into the equation quite subtly, “…for as to the males, my American acquaintance assured me from frequent experience…to fatten them would not answer the charge.” He uses this evidence to prove why we should only eat young children, because the meat of older kids is tough and lean. Besides the ridicule of his fellow Irishmen, the English are the main target in this piece. He is straightforward in his diagnosis of Ireland but the exploitation of England is quite satirical. Swift makes his point clear-cut, surpassing his moral issues and casting blame to anyone and everyone; not only the inability of the poor and helpless, but also the hypocrisy of the wealthy.

The one thing I had a hard time understanding today in class is the appeals; more specifically, the pathos. I remember in my English 190 class spending half the semester dealing with the three appeals, and even a class in high school worked on it. Anyways, the example used in class was of social welfare and that this is using pathos persuasion. I better understood the definition of pathos by defining the other two. By defining them, I could easily identify pathos by process of elimination. After I thought of a few examples or logos and ethos, I could better comprehend pathos. In a broad view, it attracts not only the emotions of an audience, but also the moral issues attached. After I conquered that concept, I could instantly think of several more instances of pathos. For example, cutting down a rainforest, expanding into Native American reservations and all environmental issues are all examples of pathos. Then it clicked, A modest Proposal is an outstanding example of pathos. On the contrary, it is everything pathos doesn't include. It is logically a great idea, but telling a 21st century adult that a country was slaughtering children to eat would make them nearly hurl. On that note, I have a pretty good idea of a pathos and logos argument.

Novels and Systems

In this week's first class lecture I noted a few connections between
the topics of systems and novel. The two attachments to systems are
that of incongruity and ambiguity. It is often thought that comedy is
produced by these two themes. More simply put, together, they create
the element of surprise, or novel. To further understand my ideas,
certain themes need to be defined. 'Wit's Weapons' notes that when
something is novel, it is often new or surprising. This idea helps
fulfill the quest for humor. Furthermore, concepts of novel are used
in systems. A system is a set of beliefs or ideas. An intended system
is different for every person. This is because we all have separate
beliefs, we were all raised differently, and most importantly, we all
think different things are funny.
An application to the original theory is that of a thriller novel or
movie. Although this theory is generally used to define a genre of
comedy, it can be concluded that the basic element of novel can be
described by other medias. In a bad scary movie, the audience is able
to predict the key action intended to surprise. This attempt at novel
fails, and thus the movie itself will most likely blunder. In a good
thriller, the director successfully surprises its audience. For
example, in the movie, "No Country for Old Men," the antagonist will
most likely attempt to surprise the protagonist. Excuse me if I forget
their names, but the idea still remains. The director is trying to
create the element of surprise. If he is successful in his vision, the
audience will most likely be stunned and surprised. A stunned and
surprised audience will yield better reviews, and thus a popular
movie. "No Country for Old Men" was successful in this conquest of
thrills and is generally considered a successful movie. Back to how
this relates to humor. The reader or viewer's prediction can be
further assessed in the early pages of 'Wit's Weapons'. It is said
that our prediction acts as the "expectation system" and the author's
depiction is the "real system." This system is intended to provoke the
laughs from an audience. If the expectation the reader has ends up
being true, then the author failed in his attempt at humor. The
transition between the two systems is where the humor lies.
The "real system" can be further broken down into incongruity and
ambiguity. I could further explore these differences, but essentially
they are both intended to create an element of surprise. For this
reason, I will streamline this narrative and focus on the half of
ambiguity.
One way an author can attract laughs is an attack on the systems. In
the excerpt from What's So Funny, humorists often reveal a specific
system to the reader. This system might spark the moral or obvious
systems of a reader. Then, the author suddenly shows the reader an
element from another system. This is where the ambiguity lies. The
authors' usage of this theory is what attracts laughter. It also
depends on many other variables: how well the reader knows the
systems, or if the system change is too ambiguous or not ambiguous
enough the reader will most likely become confused. Confusion is
usually not a recipe for laughter. It is important for the author to
find this area of ambiguity in order to entertain. There are many
other applications of how ambiguity can be used and even more
concerning incongruity that I intend to touch upon in my next
publication

Ketch Thunder

Ketch Thunder!

I wanted to continue my blog on Charlie Chaplin from last week. His character was too intriguing to fit into one blog. Last week I touched on the usage of notecards and music; most importantly, his mannerisms are what had me laughing. At the beginning of the movie he was on an assembly line and the line was moving at an easy pace, but upon increased speed, he would adjust his work speed. At first, he was calm and collected, but towards the end of the skit his feet were flying in all directions and he was making funny mistakes. It got to the point where he was getting in the way of his co-workers and eventually into the machine. The laughter ensued when he got eaten by that machine. He also took a break in the middle of shift to go to the bathroom and he was skipping on the way. His character was very childish, and in a grown up atmosphere, that was funny. It reminds me of the opening scene in Dumb and Dumber when Lloyd peeked out the limo’s window and had a strange conversation with the Australian women. After he got what he was there for he started mocking her even though he was oblivious. Charlie Chaplin has that oblivious attitude to him. He is in a world that he doesn’t belong in. This sort of behavior as a whole is funny to me.

In class we dissected the numerous slapstick humor readings and videos we had for homework. Although we spent majority of our time on the “Silence Dogood Letters,” I did not find them the least bit slapstick. The ideas of the papers were funny in themselves, but Franklin’s writings were more satirical than anything. Especially in the day in which he wrote those, I could not imagine the common man could read that and laugh. I consider myself fairly educated but those did not ring my bell for slapstick humor. Nonetheless, “John Parson’s Lizards” was the most appealing piece of writing to me. Initially, it was difficult to read, which created a major roadblock in my understanding of the material. But after I stepped back and began to read slower, I started to pick up on the simple aneurisms the author was using. Two things were very funny to me. On the surface, the retelling of a story to a friend is an age-old tradition. From the beginning of time, friends have been reminiscing about their previous night’s drinking endeavors or tall tales that accredit some sort of humor. This story is no different. Second, the imagery the author uses is astounding. The paragraph that describes the pastor handling the lizard in his clothes is beyond me. I had to stop and pause more often than not just to catch my breath. This story is simple dumb humor that I know as slapstick. Even though there was the minor obstacle of comprehension, I was able to break through it and laugh to a piece of writing for the first time. Another funny passage is when George asks him if he got caught and Parson’s responds, “Ketch Thunder! No Sir!” And that is how I well end today’s blog.

Week One Submission - From Aristotle to Chaplin to Carlin

Today I capped off the finale for my class openers. The line-up
includes stats, a history course, and English 260. It was no surprise
that my English 404 class had the most fun on opening day. Then again,
I would expect nothing less from a class labeled "Rhetoric and Humor."
I signed up for this class merely based on the course title. They say
to not judge a book by its cover, but in this case, it was a slam
dunk. This class looks like everything I wanted it to be. It looks:
fun, lively, and most of all, entertaining. Those usually aren't
adjectives we use to describe classes in college, but I could tell
this one was different. I hope my decision to stick with this class
pays off. Each assignment looks more fun and wittier than the next.
The culmination of the class is based on a stand-up comedy script for
god sakes. How could this not be fun?
Our second day of class had some excitement in it. I thought we would do a background check on the basics of humor, as any English class might use literary analysis as a foundation. Instead, our class touched on some interesting Aristotle techniques of ancient humor. Then, we got started on the serious business, George Carlin. I have always remembered my parents being big Carlin fans, thus I thought the humor might be a dryer or political. I could have never been more wrong. Jan took full advantage of this fine Jesuit University and approached the seven dirty words. I did some research on the seven dirty words and found out its origin. I was surprised to find out that it did have some political origin. The skit was in response to the 1978 Supreme Court case in which the justices affirmed the government’s power to regulate material on public airwaves. That reminded me of Howard Stern’s removal from the radio into the world of satellite radio.
Carlin’s skit taught me the extent to which comedians will go for a laugh. Although that skit is nationally famous, it went through plenty of turmoil before it got there. He was arrested in 1972 at Summerfest and charged with violating obscenity laws after performing this routine for the first time. Another thing about comedians is that they are persistent. He made this skit a hit after a few years of performing. He’s even being studied in college classrooms. I can now proudly tell my parents that I studied Aristotle and George Carlin in the same lecture.
The homework load for that day was fairly unclear. The one thing I was excited about was watching Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times. I was quick to pull it up on Google Video and the movie was just as I expected. The Three Stooges type comedy without words. The comedy was a generic approach to slapstick humor but I found the communication methods interesting. The lack of words and concentration on music caught my attention. The music set the mood for every scene and that was very ‘Fantasia’ like. Whenever Chaplin was in trouble or getting chased the music got a little darker, focusing on brass instruments. On the contrary, when slapstick humor was being committed, the music turned to the flute and clarinet type tones. I was keeping a keen ear for that change of tone. Another thing that caught my attention was the use of note cards. I remember one specific instance where the print came up maybe three times 30 seconds. The substitution of note cards instead of words baffled me. They also enjoyed mouthing words to give the audience some aspect of plot. I hope to touch on Chaplin in my next entry because as far as I can remember he is the first humor I have had been exposed to. He is the foundation for laughter in America and he deserves more attention.