Millions of consumers proceeded to their nearest commercial centers this week in hopes of acquiring the latest, and therefore most desirable, personal device. … “Its higher price indicates to me that it is superior, and that not everyone will be able to afford it, which only makes me want to possess it more,” said Tim Sturges, ….
Anytime anyone tries to tell me that human action can be reduced to a single activity my bullshit meter starts to screaming.
You may be on to something regarding cynicism. I am not cynical and while I can laugh easily I'm not adept at telling jokes. I think that's a small price to pay not to live your life under the constant cloud of disgust and hatred for your own species.
Just sheer jealousy? Is that the best you could come up with?‘Lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt’My integrity, or that which I aspire to, is such that I’ve never gone intoextreme debt. And on the few times I have used my overdraft (no more than £200), I recovered promptly.
I didn't meant to imply that all people with prudent spending habits are jealous of the wealth status seekers, simply that it was a third possible cause. I believe my own amusement at the behavior of the aforementioned individuals is due to a combination of the first two listed causes (perceived duplicity and perceived shallowness). These could probably both be categorized as laughing at behavior that we believe to be different from our own.
If you, too, occasionally find yourself laughing at wealth status seekers, what do you find your own reasons to be?
Great point, Robin. Your post got me thinking about the cynical basis of comedy, and also about how comedic pieces can be seen as enacting a sort of mock QA process, in which a set of social practices are tested to see which are "good" and which "bad," i.e. socially acceptable or not. That is, the characters are shown to engage in certain practices, often in exaggerated form, and in unusual situations - "edge use cases" - in order to demonstrate which will "break" and which won't. When they break, the audience laughs - and learns not to engage in this practice, either at all, or in certain situations. (I work in tech - thus my thinking of the QA analogy.)
Perhaps openly seeking a wealthy status (regardless of one’s actual wealth) is also mocked because it indicates the seeker believes his/her own value is increased by the mere ownership of a new/expensive item. I think people would like to believe that they only truly consider the physical and mental characteristics of a person, so these status seekers might come off as completely shallow.
Unfortunately, far from mocking it (yes it does happen in comedy, and that's on topic) people go along with it... they don't seem to equate themselves with the targets of comedy... or just don't care.
I would imagine that those with reduced financial means (or a lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt) might mock wealth status seekers (obvious or not) due to sheer jealousy.
Just sheer jealousy? Is that the best you could come up with? 'Lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt'My integrity, or that which I aspire to, is such that I've never gone into
extreme debt. And on the few times I have used my overdraft (no more than £200), I recovered promptly.
The excerpt above seems to describe a very specific type of status seeking - the obvious attempt at projecting an image of wealth.
I think this particular type of status seeking is often criticized due to the duplicity which is frequently associated with it. Take as an example the guy who makes $10-$20/hr and is sinking deeper and deeper into debt to provide the illusion of wealth through his purchases of a new bmw, luxury home furnishings, 0% down McMansion, 3g ipod, netbook, etc.
Perhaps openly seeking a wealthy status (regardless of one's actual wealth) is also mocked because it indicates the seeker believes his/her own value is increased by the mere ownership of a new/expensive item. I think people would like to believe that they only truly consider the physical and mental characteristics of a person, so these status seekers might come off as completely shallow.
Alternately, I would imagine that those with reduced financial means (or a lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt) might mock wealth status seekers (obvious or not) due to sheer jealousy.
As for cynicism in comedy in general, we tend to have very high opinions of ourselves and aren't always very tolerant of groups or individuals who we see as different. Comedians do a great job of focusing on and exaggerating our differences and provide us an outlet for dealing with these feelings through laughter rather than violence.
Has anyone read "Impro"? Johnstone basically invented modern improv. He explicitly teaches status. Here's a sample
His definition of comedian; from the link:
A comedian is someone paid to lower his own or other people's status.
But you can lower (or raise) anything, not just people. We might call a funny person, a "comedian", if they're good at lowering (and raising) the status of things in general.
Designing a popular tech gadget conveys status. Just buying one at the store is not a difficult or exclusive activity (even 10 year olds can afford fancy smart phones) so it doesn't carry much status.
It can make you look tech savvy and there are technology branding issues which are status related. The real status symbols in life are more exclusive than a simple $200 purchase.
The Onion article also poked fun at how we get excited about minor gadgetry improvements.
"[J]ust how much of human behavior do most people think is driven by status seeking? 10%? 90%?"
How big a motivational factor must *status seeking* be to count as "driving" one's behavior? One's status in society is important, and must virtually always be at least a background consideration. But it will often have only minor force, especially when one is confident of being unobserved.
But, of course, one is always observing himself. The singleton "society"--oneself--is the most important society to which he belongs. Losing status with oneself is, for many people, harder to bear than losing status with other people.
Some people also have religious concerns, and more strongly fear losing status with God than with their fellows.
But, to repeat, one's social status is always a legitimate concern, though perhaps a minor one.
“tainted with a desire for status”What’s wrong with desire for status?
I don't think Robin is making a normative judgment about status-seeking. He's just referring to the fact that most people feel uncomfortable about their own status-seeking and attempt to hide it from themselves and others.
The usage of 'taint' is not entirely inappropriate because, look at this way: In the pursuit of free thought (as in Science) or free art (I couldn't phrase this one better because I'm not quite sure how art works), 'status' is a constraint, a boundary condition that must be met if you will. For instance, if I seek status, I might pursue solar cell research instead of trying to explain better the phenomenon of charge transport in disordered solids, because the former brings me much more status than the latter. Although the latter is a much more significant contribution to science and will likely result in greater benefit to mankind in the long run, albeit in a latent roundabout way.
Is comedy cynical, or is cynicism inherently funny?
To answer your question, I don't quite understand the sense in which the word 'cynical' is being used by Dr. Hanson here. And I'm not sure what is inherently funny about cynicism. I am in agreement with Dr. Hanson that status lowering is a significant component of much common comedy, including slapstick, toilet, and sexual humour. However, I don't think that covers all cases. Another significant source of much comedy is hyperbole overlaid on quirks. For instance Jerome K Jerome starts his legendary novel 'three men in a boat' with his looking up some medical dictionary and concluding that he had just about every illness in the book and then feeling slightly offended that he missed one. Similarly, in 'three men on the bummel' he narrates about the german desire for perfection, and how he wouldn't be entirely surprised if a good German citizen went to the police and complained that the waterfall was not orderly enough, and asked that the fall be tamed. These are just two examples. I haven't thought enough to figure out all possible sources of comedy. I expect there are more.
I'd say that in practice we fairly clearly do. Probably because we have to figure out the situation, including what sort of signals and actions are in our interest, before signaling makes much sense.
The Onion example isn't status seeking; it's signaling group membership. Lots of groups display membership badges, but they're not lampooned as much as those whose credo is that they're above petty tribalism.
We signal more in desperate times. Childhood is pretty secure -- your parents are always there. It's adolescence and young adulthood when you're the most socially desperate. And sure enough, that's when people wear clothing with logos, obsess over what hairstyle will best signal group membership, etc. And all those American flags came out just after 9/11; they've since disappeared.
One reason that comedy doesn't age as well as other genres is that these subtle jabs at status-seeking require us to know what fads and affectations the group was chasing at the time. Not the stuff they teach in history class, so a lot of it makes no sense to us now. Being overly topical is not the best way to stay relevant.
Anytime anyone tries to tell me that human action can be reduced to a single activity my bullshit meter starts to screaming.
You may be on to something regarding cynicism. I am not cynical and while I can laugh easily I'm not adept at telling jokes. I think that's a small price to pay not to live your life under the constant cloud of disgust and hatred for your own species.
Comedy is no longer humour, it now tickles your ambivalence.
This really is a lotofun!
Just sheer jealousy? Is that the best you could come up with?‘Lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt’My integrity, or that which I aspire to, is such that I’ve never gone intoextreme debt. And on the few times I have used my overdraft (no more than £200), I recovered promptly.
I didn't meant to imply that all people with prudent spending habits are jealous of the wealth status seekers, simply that it was a third possible cause. I believe my own amusement at the behavior of the aforementioned individuals is due to a combination of the first two listed causes (perceived duplicity and perceived shallowness). These could probably both be categorized as laughing at behavior that we believe to be different from our own.
If you, too, occasionally find yourself laughing at wealth status seekers, what do you find your own reasons to be?
Great point, Robin. Your post got me thinking about the cynical basis of comedy, and also about how comedic pieces can be seen as enacting a sort of mock QA process, in which a set of social practices are tested to see which are "good" and which "bad," i.e. socially acceptable or not. That is, the characters are shown to engage in certain practices, often in exaggerated form, and in unusual situations - "edge use cases" - in order to demonstrate which will "break" and which won't. When they break, the audience laughs - and learns not to engage in this practice, either at all, or in certain situations. (I work in tech - thus my thinking of the QA analogy.)
I've written about this at http://litnow.litnow.com/?p.... I'd love to know your thoughts on my analysis.
One needs a sense of humour to cope with this madness
Perhaps openly seeking a wealthy status (regardless of one’s actual wealth) is also mocked because it indicates the seeker believes his/her own value is increased by the mere ownership of a new/expensive item. I think people would like to believe that they only truly consider the physical and mental characteristics of a person, so these status seekers might come off as completely shallow.
Unfortunately, far from mocking it (yes it does happen in comedy, and that's on topic) people go along with it... they don't seem to equate themselves with the targets of comedy... or just don't care.
I would imagine that those with reduced financial means (or a lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt) might mock wealth status seekers (obvious or not) due to sheer jealousy.
Just sheer jealousy? Is that the best you could come up with? 'Lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt'My integrity, or that which I aspire to, is such that I've never gone into
extreme debt. And on the few times I have used my overdraft (no more than £200), I recovered promptly.
The excerpt above seems to describe a very specific type of status seeking - the obvious attempt at projecting an image of wealth.
I think this particular type of status seeking is often criticized due to the duplicity which is frequently associated with it. Take as an example the guy who makes $10-$20/hr and is sinking deeper and deeper into debt to provide the illusion of wealth through his purchases of a new bmw, luxury home furnishings, 0% down McMansion, 3g ipod, netbook, etc.
Perhaps openly seeking a wealthy status (regardless of one's actual wealth) is also mocked because it indicates the seeker believes his/her own value is increased by the mere ownership of a new/expensive item. I think people would like to believe that they only truly consider the physical and mental characteristics of a person, so these status seekers might come off as completely shallow.
Alternately, I would imagine that those with reduced financial means (or a lack of desire to go into extreme credit card debt) might mock wealth status seekers (obvious or not) due to sheer jealousy.
As for cynicism in comedy in general, we tend to have very high opinions of ourselves and aren't always very tolerant of groups or individuals who we see as different. Comedians do a great job of focusing on and exaggerating our differences and provide us an outlet for dealing with these feelings through laughter rather than violence.
Okay, help me out here, what's cynical about this? http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Has anyone read "Impro"? Johnstone basically invented modern improv. He explicitly teaches status. Here's a sample
His definition of comedian; from the link:
A comedian is someone paid to lower his own or other people's status.
But you can lower (or raise) anything, not just people. We might call a funny person, a "comedian", if they're good at lowering (and raising) the status of things in general.
Designing a popular tech gadget conveys status. Just buying one at the store is not a difficult or exclusive activity (even 10 year olds can afford fancy smart phones) so it doesn't carry much status.
It can make you look tech savvy and there are technology branding issues which are status related. The real status symbols in life are more exclusive than a simple $200 purchase.
The Onion article also poked fun at how we get excited about minor gadgetry improvements.
"[J]ust how much of human behavior do most people think is driven by status seeking? 10%? 90%?"
How big a motivational factor must *status seeking* be to count as "driving" one's behavior? One's status in society is important, and must virtually always be at least a background consideration. But it will often have only minor force, especially when one is confident of being unobserved.
But, of course, one is always observing himself. The singleton "society"--oneself--is the most important society to which he belongs. Losing status with oneself is, for many people, harder to bear than losing status with other people.
Some people also have religious concerns, and more strongly fear losing status with God than with their fellows.
But, to repeat, one's social status is always a legitimate concern, though perhaps a minor one.
“tainted with a desire for status”What’s wrong with desire for status?
I don't think Robin is making a normative judgment about status-seeking. He's just referring to the fact that most people feel uncomfortable about their own status-seeking and attempt to hide it from themselves and others.
@J:
“tainted with a desire for status”
What’s wrong with desire for status?
The usage of 'taint' is not entirely inappropriate because, look at this way: In the pursuit of free thought (as in Science) or free art (I couldn't phrase this one better because I'm not quite sure how art works), 'status' is a constraint, a boundary condition that must be met if you will. For instance, if I seek status, I might pursue solar cell research instead of trying to explain better the phenomenon of charge transport in disordered solids, because the former brings me much more status than the latter. Although the latter is a much more significant contribution to science and will likely result in greater benefit to mankind in the long run, albeit in a latent roundabout way.
Is comedy cynical, or is cynicism inherently funny?
To answer your question, I don't quite understand the sense in which the word 'cynical' is being used by Dr. Hanson here. And I'm not sure what is inherently funny about cynicism. I am in agreement with Dr. Hanson that status lowering is a significant component of much common comedy, including slapstick, toilet, and sexual humour. However, I don't think that covers all cases. Another significant source of much comedy is hyperbole overlaid on quirks. For instance Jerome K Jerome starts his legendary novel 'three men in a boat' with his looking up some medical dictionary and concluding that he had just about every illness in the book and then feeling slightly offended that he missed one. Similarly, in 'three men on the bummel' he narrates about the german desire for perfection, and how he wouldn't be entirely surprised if a good German citizen went to the police and complained that the waterfall was not orderly enough, and asked that the fall be tamed. These are just two examples. I haven't thought enough to figure out all possible sources of comedy. I expect there are more.
I'd say that in practice we fairly clearly do. Probably because we have to figure out the situation, including what sort of signals and actions are in our interest, before signaling makes much sense.
The Onion example isn't status seeking; it's signaling group membership. Lots of groups display membership badges, but they're not lampooned as much as those whose credo is that they're above petty tribalism.
We signal more in desperate times. Childhood is pretty secure -- your parents are always there. It's adolescence and young adulthood when you're the most socially desperate. And sure enough, that's when people wear clothing with logos, obsess over what hairstyle will best signal group membership, etc. And all those American flags came out just after 9/11; they've since disappeared.
One reason that comedy doesn't age as well as other genres is that these subtle jabs at status-seeking require us to know what fads and affectations the group was chasing at the time. Not the stuff they teach in history class, so a lot of it makes no sense to us now. Being overly topical is not the best way to stay relevant.