Humor

On Wednesday night, September 30th, I went to see Clybourne Park at the SCC Fine Arts Auditorium. I attended the show as an assignment for my Fundamentals of Acting class, THE- 128, so I chose to take this portfolio assignment from a theatrical standpoint. Having never experienced this particular theatre before, I will admit I was a bit distracted by the unfamiliarity of it all. I felt as though I were attending a performance in an older and smaller version of my high school’s auditorium. The color choice, a very late 80’s and early 90’s palette, just felt a little jarring and outdated. A simple black interior design would have complemented both the campus and the stage nicely. Anyway, moving past the interior design, I had a seat in the back-most row, since I am far sighted, and my experience unfolded with the rest of the evening.

The show was an overall wonderful experience for me, and I believe that as a theatrical work this play is a spectacle to behold. Between its brilliant depiction of two separate moments in history, visual elements to accurately represent the historical context, excellent character portrayal, and a shared theme of communication causing a difference in attitudes and interactions, Clybourne park is a stunning show that holds its own amongst the theatrical pieces of modern entertainment.

As is to be expected, here is a quick summary of the play as I experienced it: To begin, we have the first of two timelines the show includes. Taking place not long after the Korean War, 1959, this timeline stars Russ and his wife, Beverly. Russ and Beverly had a son, who after serving his time in the Korean War, committed suicide. The two are in a terrible state of turmoil, silently suffering over the death of their son, all while being pressured by their neighbors, Karl and Jim, to reconsider selling their home to an african american family. Then, in Act II, we are taken to the very same house, long since abandoned, in 2009. On yet another Saturday afternoon, a group of young adults in Chicago Illinois gather within the house to discuss purchasing it, when things go haywire and an enormous discussion of race interrupts the whole affair.

Before getting into the acting, the scenery and costume design was handled quite well in this performance, as is to be expected in any high caliber theatre production. The scenery utilizes one set for both acts, that set being the same living room of the same Chicago home. In Act I, the house is scattered about with boxes, suggesting that someone is going to either move out or has just moved in. The context clues of the speech make it clear that it is the former rather quickly, but this kind of cue from the scenery is important when it comes to plays. It gives the audience more time to wonder why they would be moving, rather than trying to get their bearings on what exactly is happening.

The home is not exactly made to look vintage, and it does not make it obvious what era you are in based solely on wallpaper and furniture (though the couches could suggest that you are dealing with a mid 20th century home if you cross analyze it enough.) What does make it apparent, however, is the costumes. The dress of Russ and Beverly indicates a 50’s kind of wardrobe, with Bev wearing a dress strictly for being around the house. The other characters to enter the home also wear prudent and sophisticated outfits, something which you just do not expect to see in high abundance these days without some sort of special occasion. The color choice also does a good job of indicating this, between the pale greens and the dull browns in everyone’s outfits.

The greens definitely remind me of an atomic era “nuclear family”. The same can be said in Act II, for both the set and the costumes. The set changes only the walls and the floors, showing that the wallpaper has peeled and debris lays strewn about the floor. It is obvious the house is abandoned, but we cannot tell for how long as an audience. Again, what helps nail down the time without any other context clues is the dress. The characters wear very modern fashion, from a hoodie and jeans with a beanie to a slim fitting striped sweater and jeans on a female, it is clear we have escaped the misogynistic wardrobe restraints of the 50’s. Kind of shocking that women wearing pants is actually a context clue for two different eras only 50 years apart, right?

Now, as I said before, the acting for this play is very, very well done at certain points. The actors made it a good point to maintain vocal clarity and intelligible volume, which I think I can speak to, since I was in the back. So, as far as vocal characterization goes, I was impressed. Russ’ opening bit about foreign countries. He did a very convincing job at playing the embarrassing dad character (for lack of a better term), between his cheesy Mongolian accent and his furious rage towards his neighbors– heck, even the sobbing at the end had me convinced. Not to ignore the female actors, though, because they were absolutely stunning as well! Beverly’s actress may have suffered from a little bit of underacting physically, like the scene with the chafing dish and Albert.

Beverly was trying to give him something, and in desperation she continued to insist on giving him the chafing dish that she had originally offered Francine. Albert, however, was offended by the implication that they needed anything as a handout, and grew more frustrated with Bev as she kept badgering him to take something. In order to better portray this urgency, Beverly could have picked up some of these offerings, like the chafing dish, and become more forceful with her offerings. Instead, she sort of let her hands drop to her sides and used her voice to emote. This being the only real complaint I had about their acting, I should take this moment to applaud Francine’s character and acting.

Not only did the actor nail down the mannerisms of a 50’s servant, but she did a wonderful job playing a convincing relationship with her boyfriend Albert. The interaction between the two felt very genuine, and their argument carried the uncomfortable intensity you would see in a real couple’s public argument. Both characters this actress played did a wonderful job harnessing the character and making it believable. However, as well as the actors played their parts and emoted with their lines, it could not fix the faults of the script. Maybe I am just bad at picking up on context clues, but in Act II I had a terribly difficult time understanding who these characters were, what they were doing, and why they were doing it.

Speaking of Act II, I would like to jump over to the subject of focus. There was a little malfunction in the wardrobe when Steve got up to argue with his wife, and in moving so quickly his beanie flew off his head. While he spoke the ensuing lines and fiddled with getting the hat back on his head, I saw his mouth start to break into a smile– even though his lines were supposed to be frustrated or angry. I saw the same thing happen in Act I, during one of Russ’ passionate monologues. When he told Jim and Steve to “politely go f— yourselves”, the rest of his line felt very distracted and his eyes began to dart, and I am assuming this was because the theatre was breaking into laughter when it should have been frozen in uncomfortable tension.

So focus and concentration may have been an issue, but what stands out the most about this play is the humor. Now, I know I was really harsh on the audience for finding humor in the morbid parts of Act I. Act II, however, does comedy like it was born to. Many of the bits rely on a great sense of comedic timing, between awkward pauses and very quick retorts. As far as timing goes, the best bit I can think of is when several characters explain turn by turn, one after the other, why Steve’s prison joke is offensive– without much room to gestate, another horrible coincidence is revealed to personally offend the characters.

Another part of comedy that they did wonderfully was tonality. Steve’s best jokes, in my opinion, relied on an exasperated and frantic tone. Meanwhile, Kevin and Dan both used a sense of cluelessness (facetious and genuine) to get their jokes across. Kevin, for example, set up Steve’s joke by playing an unexpecting, almost innocent anticipation for what would end up being a racist jab, getting an ironic laugh. Dan, of course, gets the laughs because he is genuinely oblivious to the entire situation– barging in and interrupting the heated argument throughout the entire act.

All in all, I very much enjoyed Clybourne Park. I am easily hooked in by political commentaries, and I especially get a kick out of unexpected parallels people draw between historical prejudice and modern prejudice. The show has a great amount of variety between drama and comedy, and I find that impressive. Usually my immersion with a show is ruined when these two elements mix– but this play does is wonderfully. Perhaps it was the gentle introduction of comedy in Act I, overshadowed by the drama. It could even be the way they spread it out between two acts, but I came out of that show with a mixed sense of frustration for modern prejudice, and I even came out amused with the humor in the show at the same time.

Works Cited

1. Clybourne Park. By Bruce Norris. St Charles Community College, St Charles. 30 Sept. 2015. Performance.

Internet memes are everywhere within the modern internet, and are becoming more and more popular in today’s society. For anyone unfamiliar with social media or even to internet culture as a whole, internet memes can be confusing and more difficult to understand. Despite the booming popularity of internet, most people, even those familiar with memes, are not aware of the actual origin of the word “meme”, or assume that it is only associated with the modern internet phenomenon.

In actuality, the meme has academic origins. The term “meme” is rooted in evolutionary biology, and was coined by Richard Dawkins in his famous 1976 book, The Selfish Gene. According to Dawkins, a meme is “a unit of cultural transmission or imitation”: his examples include the concept of God, nursery rhymes and jokes, catchphrases and fashion trends (Aslan). When we hear the word “meme” today, we generally think about what we call an internet meme.

An Internet meme is a concept or idea that spreads ‘virally’ from one person to another via the Internet (Beal). An internet meme today is most easily identified as a sort of image or video with a witty caption above it. However, there is so much more to memes rather than being a simple, funny image. There is a whole history behind the now popular meme, and memes have changed a lot over a p of a few decades. In addition, memes themselves have different uses, including the promotion of humor, sense of connection as a society, and even political expression.

The internet first became widespread in the 1990s, and this would be the time where the first, viral internet meme was created. This meme was called “Dancing Baby”, and it is simply an animation of a baby dancing. The Dancing Baby meme first spread and became popular through email, and then its popularity skyrocketed when featured on the hit television show, “Ally McBeal”. The Dancing Baby meme was one of the first examples of how the internet can transcend and become a part of the mainstream.

If we look back at the early 2000’s to see the beginnings of memes as mainstream, we would see bulky white text with a black border over a picture. Additionally, most memes in this time period were actually YouTube videos. If we look at memes today, you would see organized, black font text over a white background which appears above the picture or video it is captioning. The reason memes have changed so much in convections is because of the change of the primary platform they are created in.

Back in the early 2000’s, YouTube and 4chan were the primary sources of memes on the internet. Nowadays, with this creation of this app, Twitter is the main source of the memes you find today. Other sources along with Twitter include Reddit, Tumblr, Facebook, and other social media platforms. With new software used to create and share memes, the format of the meme changed with it. The typical format for an internet meme may have also changed simply to look more aesthetically pleasing and organized for others to see.

In correlation to the changing format of memes, the use of the internet meme is forever changing with time and what is happening in society. Most obviously, memes are generally and more currently used for humor and for commentary on popular and/or internet culture. When you look deeper, however, memes have more specific uses as well.

Memes can also serve as a sense of relatability and a connection in society. Sometimes, advertisers will use relatable memes to connect to an audience, particularly an adolescent one. A great example of this phenomenon would be the recent “It’s a Trap” anti-smoking ad from Truth. The anti-smoking ad is literally filled with memes that went viral over the course of the 2000s. The use of memes shows that this advertiser is particularly targeting an adolescent and young adult audience, especially with the time period of when those memes went viral.

Viral content on social media like memes are becoming frequent content in political communication as well. It might be surprising, but memes have combined pop culture with politics, allowing for the average person to know more about political issues than before using memes. According to Bebić, the humor of memes, their relatability, inspiration, and shortness can inspire research on political issues (46). Hence, the positive use of memes politically would be to create awareness to the issues. However, there are cons to using memes as a political medium. First, most political memes are more mocking towards the social or political issue at hand. Political memes throughout the internet are also usually biased. Additionally, the humor associated with memes may cause the public to not take the political issues at hand seriously.

A great example of this trend would be the 2016 US election. Political memes were everywhere you looked on social media at this time. The 2016 election memes began by comparing Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Usually, the memes suggested that Bernie was better than Hillary. This is further proof of the issue of bias in political memes. Bernie vs. Hillary memes transformed into Trump vs. Hillary memes in the later stages of the election. Memes of the two candidates could be brutal towards either candidate. Overall, the 2016 election was the first US election to be so associated with political memes throughout social media. This is primarily because the growth of internet memes boomed in the later 2000’s, especially in these past few years.

In conclusion, in terms of the internet, memes are becoming a more and more popular genre. Memes have developed into an influential type of infographic for today’s society, and it will continue to change over time as the circumstances around them change. Hence, memes will also continue to go viral and then cycle out. Memes may seem like humorous nonsense for people who only scroll through social media all day. However, it could be argued that internet memes have brought together a cultural concept, across the web and to society as a whole, to further promote the onset of viral ideas on social media, and provide a type of commentary to changes to the world we live in.

In today’s world, the newest devices, trends, and celebrities have a big impact on young adults, especially on which products they should buy. Amazon took advantage of this and targeted young adults by using the biggest celebrities and music to advertise Alexa, a technological device that allows people to do tasks hands free. In the “Alex Loses Her Voice” commercial, Alexa loses her voice and Amazon brings in celebrities such as Rebel Wilson, Gordon Ramsey, Cardi B, and more to try and replace the job of Alexa. These celebrities fail trying to take part in Alexa’s job by responding miserably to these tasks in a way that makes the audience laugh. The commercial is a primary example of Ethos and Pathos by bringing in trendy celebrities and watching them fail at the task in an amusing way to target the young adults watching the commercial to buy an Alexa.

In the commercial, ‘Alexa loses her voice’, Amazon introduces the Alexa to increase device sales. The commercial is aimed at both teenagers and adults by purposefully involving several famous artists as an eye catcher. The ad shows a woman, in her 30s, who brushes her teeth and asks Alexa about the weather. However, Alexa had lost her voice and is not able to respond. This causes the introduction of Rebel Wilson, Cardi B, and Anthony Hopkins, which impacted the commercial because of their humorous personalities as they try to substitute for the Alexa. These famous people have a reputation in the field of theater, famous cooking shows, and rap.

This introduces kairos by taking advantage of the time by using relevant celebrities at the time the commercial was made. This is because these celebrities are all relevant and known when the commercial came out and Amazon knows that through these celebrities it will grab the attention of its young viewers. While the commercial is manipulating the audience to buy the product, the ad also has some setbacks. The commercial does not fully explain the logic behind it. However, the commercial with the steps back follows and presumes that its purpose of convincing the audience to buy the Alexa. Throughout the commercials of Amazon, Alexa is a device that can follow any command that is given and help others by using several techniques that Amazon creates for the viewer’s point of view.

Although logos is not the strongest appeal in the commercial, throughout the commercial the audience sees the actors using the Alexa by just speaking to it, showing the audience how the Alexa works and how it is essential for an easier everyday life. Amazon approaches the logos appeal in the commercial by making its audience see how the Alexa can be used hands-free to do tasks such as playing music, stating basic facts, and even saying how the weather is. Through this the audience can see how the Alexa helps simplify and organize tasks for everyday life. The commercial uses celebrities to try to replace Alexa, but when they fail miserably, Amazon is trying to convey to its audience that an Alexa is a one of a kind device that cannot be replaced.

This leads to the chain of reasoning that buying an Alexa is essential for the everyday life of anyone. In addition, throughout the announcement, logos was applied for each question that was asked to Alexa where it would seem logical for anyone who sees the video. For example, one of the questions that were asked were: ‘How far is Mars?’, the logic behind that question is not rocket science and can be easily explained, which can be compared to how easy it is to ask Alexa. This question was answered by Cardi B, a famous rapper. She said: ‘How far is Mars, how am I supposed to know that I’ve never been there? There is not even oxygen there”. Cardi B’s response was very logical and humorous at the same time by amusing the audience while still incorporating the reasoning behind her response. Amazon uses logos appeals that also reflect pathos appeals that help convince the audience to buy the product by stating facts as well as adding humor.

The first and strongest technique that Amazon applies is pathos. That is, this commercial is a way of attracting a sense of humor through the use of entertaining celebrities. For example, when Gordon Ramsay was asked to give a recipe for a grilled cheese sandwich his response was very capricious and had a strong impact on the audience. The humor towards Gordon Ramsay’s response was very specific and captured the sense of happiness of the spectators. In addition, Gordon’s personality also helps to persuade the hilarious role in the commercial. Another example is when a man asked Cardi B to play country music and Cardi B plays her music instead. She then starts dancing and singing her own song which creates an amusing and entertaining part of the ad for its audience. Therefore, this commercial addressed the audience using mainly pathos, to attract emotions such as humor by using the celebrities to appeal to the audience.

In addition, the commercial also emphasizes the use of ethos. The use of ethos is what makes the commercial reliable and credible. In general, Amazon has been a company known for creating many popular products, like Alexa, due to this over time the company has had a great impact on technology. However, commercial credibility is shown by putting famous comedians that the public admires or already knows. Celebrities have a big impact for viewers because it makes the ad look reliable due to the fact that they are well known to people around the world through television and movies. In the commercial, four famous figures were used to grasp the audience’s attention and persuade them into buying a product.

Cardi B and Rebel Wilson are two famous celebrities who are also well known for empowering others. Anthony Hopkins and Gordon Ramsay are two men who have a monumental impact on the commercial because of the respect they obtain by many. However, the commercial also values ​​the use of ethos by showing the public about asking for help when necessary. Along the commercial people asked the simplest questions and were explicitly answered each time. In particular, towards the end of the ad, a woman asks Alexa to call Brandon, however, Anthony Hopkins responds with ‘I’m afraid Brandon is a little tied, but let me know if there is something I can help you with Jessica”. The credibility of the commercials is shown through telling the audience that Alexa can be asked anything and will respond in the most understandable and easiest way possible.

In conclusion, the commercial ‘Alexa loses her voice’ has impacted many viewers and led to them buying the product. The commercial has formed several ways to show the Alexa product, therefore, it leaves the audience with no choice but to buy the item. Through the use of humor, reasoning, and credibility the commercial was organized in a certain way so that the public could have an appeal to. Throughout the commercial, the images and techniques that were used in the Amazon’s ‘Alexa Loses Her Voice” commercial has a great way to sell the technology Alexa device through the use of humor and celebrities that help persuade the young viewers.

Workplaces have been generally seen as serious places where people pursue their career and earn money for their daily lives. Being paid salary to produce profit for their organizations, employees are supposed to take their jobs very seriously and can not underestimate their responsibilities. Therefore, it is reasonable that employees are not allowed to make jokes or have fun in the workplace. However, this serious working environment seems to cause many problems for companies, such as employee turnover, absenteeism, etc. Therefore, a series of different arguments about this issue have been presented.

This essay will argue that humor, a very efficient managerial tool to solve those problems, should be encouraged in the workplace. In this essay, there points related to humor in the workplace will be discussed. Firstly, the definition of humor will be introduced. Secondly, this essay will explore the benefits of using humor in the office and give some suggestions about avoiding using inappropriate humor. Thirdly, the reason why people can not make jokes will be explained, and the possibility of injecting humor in the workplace will be evaluated.

First of all, before exploring other aspects about humor in the workplace, it is necessary to understand clearly what humor is. Different people might give different definitions of humor. Fry (Shearer, 1998) explains that humor is composed of situational jokes. It is an ongoing interpersonal process. In addition, Malone (1980), in reporting Chapman’s study, states, “humor is a process initiated by a humorous stimulus, such as a joke or cartoon, and terminating with some response indicative of experienced pleasure, such as laughter”.

According to Shearer (1998), the most significant point about humor is that it can make people take their life less seriously. Secondly, a survey shows a stressful working environment costs the North American economy 100 billion dollars each year. Since a serious working environment wastes companies a lot of money, humor should be injected into workplaces (Shearer, 1998). Not only employees but also organizations can gain many benefits from using humor in the workplace. The most significant advantage of using humor in the workplace is to make employees healthy.

Some people argue that humor just can make people laugh. After laughing, people can gain nothing. However, Shermen (Roth, 2002) states that “… numerous benefits of humor to the human body and found it to be a positive coping tool for stress, illness and pain”. It has been proved that using humor can release employees’ stress and anxiety. According to Shearer (1998), a scientific study shows that laughter can enable our body to produce positive chemical and physiological changes. Braverman (1993) explains that humor is similar to jogging, which can make people healthy.

The difference is that humor is “internal jogging”. When people are laughing, their heart rate and blood circulation are increased and more oxygen is absorbed. Moreover, when people stop laughing, one kind of chemistry called endorphins, which can lead to physical relaxation, will be released in the brain. It is has been argued that humor can be an obstacle of the communication between colleagues. Chapman (Malone, 1980) states, “humor has often been characterized as base and degenerate, fit only for the ignorant and foolish”.

Moreover, using humor in the workplace often leads to sexual harassment, racial discrimination, etc. However, humor can be an efficient way to build relationship with other colleagues. According to Baughman (2001), he mentions that Borge, the great humorist pianist states, “A smile is the shortest distance between two people”. Nowadays, as teamwork is becoming more and more essential in any organization, employees have to communicate with other people frequently. Using humor in the conversation can have a positive impact in building understanding between different people.

Moreover, humor can make other people feel they are important, for example, when a manager uses humor to make his subordinators laugh, they will feel valued and respected (Shearer, 1998). Lastly, Buxman (2001) notes, “Sharing a laugh helps co-workers establish a bond and develop rapport”. According to Crain (1995), a director of a major university gave one hundred fund-raising presentations to the audiences. He only used humor in his fifty speeches; on the other hand, he did not use humor in other fifty speeches.

The result was that the presentations in which he used humor raised more money than the presentations in which he did not use humor. Sometimes, humor might result into miscommunication between employees. However, if they can avoid using inappropriate humor in their offices, humor can be a very useful tool to improve camaraderie in the workplace. Shearer (1998) states “laughing with other people is healthy and liberating, but laughing at another person is unhealthy”. When people laugh together, they share a humorous situation. Both the humorist and the recipient will feel happy.

However, when people laugh at another person, only the humorist will be happy, the recipient will not be happy. According to Belker (1997), “laugh at” humor is funny, but it is based on other people’s expense. This kind of humor usually offends other people, sometimes even makes an enemy. Therefore, Tulin (1998) explains that the key to distinguish whether this humor is appropriate or inappropriate depends on the effect of our jokes on the recipient and others in the workplace. Consequently, people should think very carefully before they make jokes.

They should keep asking themselves whether their joke might offend anyone of my colleagues or make anybody unhappy. It is claimed that if humor is injected in the workplace, the profit of organizations will be decreased. For this reason, humor can increase the frequency of employee errors, etc (Ford, 2003). On the other hand, According to Braverman (1993), humor can improve employee’s productivity. For example, the Southwest Airlines has been making a profit every year since humor was injected into the workplace.

Buxman (2001) notes that when people have to do their boring jobs again and again, their productivity will be destroyed. Humor can enable people to concentrate on their jobs for a long time by making the work become more interesting. Moreover, Ford (2000) notes that humor, which is related to organization’s productivity, can bring a lot of positive impacts to organizations, such as, attraction of new employees, reduction of employee turnover and absenteeism rate and growth of the customer’s satisfaction. In addition, humor also can be a very powerful motivator.

The increased morale can make employees become more productive (Baughman, 2001). William Hodge (cited in Braverman, 1993), a management consultant, has done a survey on 329 company executives, which shows that 97 percent strongly believe humor is worthwhile. Another research conducted by Burke (cited in Braverman, 1993) tells us that 84 percent of human resource managers think a sense of humor can make employees do their job better. Lastly, in order to evaluate the possibility of injecting humor in the workplace, it is necessary to analyze the reasons why employees can not express their humorous side while they are working.