All Comedy is Irony

Drama is understanding reality; comedy is fucking with it

Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

TL;DR: All comedy requires both reality and ridiculousness. Concepts that are similar yet conflicting create irony that makes up humor. Laughing at jokes is probably a by-product of ironic animal fighting.

What is humor? Is it entirely subjective? Or are their universals to all jokes? Isn’t comedy just tragedy plus time? Or was that a joke?

Comedy is misunderstood; everyone has at least some sense of humor, but most haven’t examined what makes something funny. So I’ve written a (humorless) piece outlining my thoughts on comedy.

Theories of Humor

Philosophers have spent quite a bit of time trying to understand humor. And they have each provided their own answers to what it is.

Plato associated laughter with an expression of scorn and superiority. Kant and Schopenhauer considered humor to be a violation of expectations. Freud argued in classic Freudian fashion that it was more of a hydraulic release of nervous energy.¹ These views represent the Superiority, Incongruity, and Relief theory, respectively.

The three theories of laughter listed above are certainly true in some cases, but what unites them is their recognition of irony.

When I say irony, I mean a broad definition of irony. This is defined formally as the “characterization of a situation which discloses that what on the surface appears to be the case contrasts consequentially with what is actually the case.” Basically, humor requires similarity and contrast, or the real and the ridiculous, as I will call them.²

There are two dimensions to every joke: the real and the ridiculous. The real is what ties the concepts of a joke together. The ridiculous meanwhile is their contrast, which subverts the real, and creates irony. The chronology doesn’t matter, but both need to be present for humor.

Each of the above three theories recognizes this irony element but in different ways.

The superiority theory contrasts the “normal” with the “other.” Sometimes we laugh at people because they’re different from the rest of us. And recognizing a target’s deviation from regularity delivers a strong sense of shame by showcasing the target’s ridiculousness. Being so fat, ugly, and poor relative to the average is what makes yo momma so funny. But not all jokes are insults and not all insults are jokes.

Incongruity theory, or violated expectations, is more direct irony. Our expectations and the punchlines are the real and the ridiculous respectively. Yet jokes don’t always have to violate our expectations (like running gags or structured jokes like Louis CK’s “of course . . . but maybe”). We might see the punchline coming, but still laugh at the ridiculousness.

Also, “violating expectations” is too broad. Our predictions fail us all the time, but not all those instances were funny. The times we got hurt probably were though.

And under the Relief theory, Freud argued that “energy released in laughing at a joke is the energy normally used to repress hostile and sexual feelings.” Laugher is the expression of our dark unconscious.

This may help explain some provocative humor.³ But it certainly doesn’t explain all jokes. And not everyone who laughs at provocative jokes has some disturbed, pent-up emotions. They may just recognize the ridiculousness dimension of the joke.

Irony is the Foundation of Humor

Remember the Simpson? The working patriarch acts childlike and with reckless irresponsibility. The affectionate mother figure would hilariously lose her temper and release her inner beast. The mischievous boy would often take his antics too far. The younger sister plays the voice of reason among absurd adults. And the baby shot a guy. They’re all an ironic play on real archetypes.

All the funny characters on the show are like this. The Mayor is useless and inept to an extreme. The clown reveals his dark side after the cameras turn off. The bartender has far more problems than his patrons. The doctors and lawyers violate every professional standard. The businessman isn’t just greedy, but greed incarnate. They’re all either over-the-top caricatures or possess qualities that are unexpected from what would be typical. Either way, it’s all irony.

Relationships can be ironic. Think of Homer’s nonsensical hatred towards Ned Flanders, despite Ned’s absence of concern and unending kindness. And Mr. Burn’s failure to ever remember Homer’s name, despite their many, many interactions over the course of the series (“Simpson, eh?”).

Irony is what makes comedic double acts so funny: the straight man and the funny man. One is the real, the other the ridiculous. Irony is created through their natural dialogue and situations.

Drama, meanwhile, only requires reality. Ridiculousness may play a role in some more existentialist stories, but only as a theme within a larger drama. In humor, it is the ridiculousness that’s the star of the two. If the joke gets “too real” it might lose its humor altogether.

Irony can be used in drama to develop situational irony. However, irony is a necessary component of humor.

Yet the same reason why humor is funny is also what makes examining humor so unfunny. For drama, analyzing and understanding the components of a thrilling scene or situation is a showcase of one’s aesthetic appreciation and intellect. Explaining a joke meanwhile is a sign of not being “in” on the joke.

A joke is funny because of its dimension of ridiculousness. Explaining that ridiculousness makes sense of it, places it in reality, and therefore destroys the joke altogether. Although the person examining the joke may become the object of ridiculousness (see Family Guy). The ridiculous dimension is like eye floaters; you have the sensation of their presence but they disappear when they become the target of focus.

Humor can also be meta-ironic, where the joke itself possesses the ridiculousness element (see Norm Macdonald’s roast of Bob Saget). A joke can be funny in the context of being an unfunny joke, through what’s known as “anti-humor” (see puns); the reality is the joke form and the ridiculousness is the lack of humor.

Post-irony falls under irony too. Post-irony is when the listener isn’t sure if the joker was being serious. Here, the ridiculous dimension itself has dimensions of reality and ridiculousness.

You can try this out and when you hear a stand-up special or watch your favorite sitcom; spot the dimensions of the joke and see how the ridiculous is tied to reality. It might make the jokes less funny, but at least you’ll get a sense of what makes you laugh.

Laughter as an Adaptation

Laughter seemed to evolve independently among different animals as part of play. Play, like mock-fighting, is metabolically costly, so it must be useful. These uses might include preparation for predator attacks, adapting to novel situations, and communication of hierarchy.

Play among animals itself is a form of irony: It’s all of the actions of fighting to the death, with none of the intention or danger. Laughing is just the confirmation of the fight’s irony. “Me wrestling you to the ground is make-believe, so let’s not kill each other and have fun, haha.”

If someone is striking you with all of the motions of a fight, you want them to do something that makes you comfortable that you aren’t in any danger. Laughter is annoyingly loud and involuntary, serving as a reliable and trustworthy signal of play, and preventing the interpretation of real fighting. So evolution went with it.

The SEP on humor makes the case for laughter as an evolved play signal:

The hypothesis that laughter evolved as a play signal is appealing in several ways. Unlike the Superiority and Incongruity Theories, it explains the link between humor and the facial expression, body language, and sound of laughter. It also explains why laughter is overwhelmingly a social experience, as those theories do not. . . . Tracing laughter to a play signal in early humans also accords with the fact that young children today laugh during the same activities—chasing, wrestling, and tickling—in which chimps and gorillas show their play face and laugh-like vocalizations. The idea that laughter and humor evolved from mock-aggression, furthermore, helps explain why so much humor today, especially in males, is playfully aggressive.

Humor itself, outside of rough-and-tumble activities, is an important part of play for boys. “Shitting on” each other (hurling insults and comebacks) is similar to play fighting among animals. It showcases one’s verbal and social intelligence and even establishes group hierarchy.

Laughing at ironic languages, like jokes and insults, are probably just a by-product of laughing at ironic fights.

Or it can be argued that laughter has an independent value related to the development of language. It’s more trustworthy than a smile since it’s involuntary, so it could have played a role in developing trust between speakers.

But regardless of laughter’s origins, there are definitely parallels between human and animal humor. To laugh is to recognize the reality and ridiculousness of a situation or thought.

Why Does it Matter?

Comedians have been dominating social media and the podcasting space, playing a far greater role in public life than ever before. Comedy was once a pursuit for aspiring actors who lacked superhuman beauty. And like non-jocks in high school, they took the funny angle for success, hoping to earn their way onto a sitcom.

However, with comedians like Joe Rogan, Dave Chappelle, and the disciples of Jon Stewart providing us with their views on the world through humor, I thought it useful to understand what comedy is.

And it’s not just comedians. Success with people requires at least some sense of humor. Jokes that fall flat are painful to hear. But if you can literally force a laugh out of someone, you can also force out their respect and admiration. It’s useful to understand this power going forward, as language, rather than visuals or physical sensations, continues to play a more active role in our daily lives.

1. These examples come from “The Elephant in the Brain” by Kevin Simler & Robin Hanson; 5/5 read.

2. I include coincidence in my definition of irony. So long as there is a difference tied by a similarity, that would qualify under what I call irony. Think “priest and a rabbi” jokes. The punch line is an over-the-top caricature.

3. And meta-provocative, like “what do you call a black pilot?” punchline: “A pilot, you racist.”