• Basic Writing questions is not a crit forum. All crits belong in Share Your Work

Domestic Animals Charged With Serious Crimes Subjected To The Legal System

Status
Not open for further replies.

zanzjan

killin' all teh werds
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
VPX
VPXI
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 5, 2010
Messages
9,728
Reaction score
3,208
Location
home home homityhomehome
Yes, I am talking about Terry Pratchett stuff. I[...] He probably works from a formula.

That's maybe the most awful and unfair thing I've ever heard anyone say about Terry Pratchett.

I still have no idea what your point is. Are you trying to figure out HOW to write gallows humor?
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
He probably works from a formula.

I very much doubt it. Unless you count "being able to see the absurd in everything and render into humorous yet thoughtful prose" as a formula.

I like my humour dark as the pits of hell, but like Da Ferret above me, saw nothing in he way that was written that was humorous.

They say humour is the hardest form of acting. I sincerely believe that's the same with writing

Maybe you could try writing scene in the style of Pratchett or Adams?
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
The Mysterious Benedict Society, by Trenton Lee Stewart.

If you asked me to analyze why I thought it was funny, I wouldn't be able to tell you. Is it because this scene is perfectly in character for both of them? Is it because Constance has been so stubborn this whole time and it's nice seeing her make a mistake? Is it because this takes place in a normal scene and the author only mentions it in passing?

Look. I'm a middle-grade writer, and we get told all the time how important voice is for our stories. So I get where you're coming from.

But voice can't make up for everything. Starting out with a pig on trial is going to make people think Animal Farm. Animal Farm is a Very Serious book. And a depressing one, too. So if people think you're trying to go for an Animal Farm-style story, they're not going to laugh. They're going to take it seriously.

In my opinion, you'd have to make it clear from the first sentence that this situation is worth laughing about: instead of murder, make the crime something silly. Have the punishment be ridiculous -- or have the "criminal" get away with it! The more obviously-ridiculous the trial is, the more likely you'll get laughs by contrasting the human characters' reactions.

Great example. I suspect that it might have had more of an impact if we knew more of the narrative.

Well, some sources disagree with you.
Lifetime comedians have in interviews shared, that, in addition to a sixth sense, humor can be deconstructed into its component parts.
For instance, a humorist wrote that, like in many other disciplines of artistic endeavor, there exists in some avenues of humor, The Law of Three.
Broken down into its simplest manifestation, it can be described as,

A priest, a Rabbi and an Atheist walk into a bar...

Less than three elements is not enough to work with and more than three different elements are too much.
Isaac Asimov wrote a whole book on the same principle.
Let me find an example. I'll get back to you.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,780
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Whether something is funny really depends on how it's written, I suppose. Douglas Adams managed to find humor in the birth (via the improbability drive), very short life in free fall, and death, of an innocent sperm whale.

With the trying farm animals as if they were humans thing, I'd probably find it more amusing if it were approached from the perspective of how absurd it is to do something like this, maybe even from the perspective of the people doing it. But it's all in the writing. I can get an occasional wry chuckle out of readers, but the thought of having to write an entire book where every scene is playing for laughs? I don't think it's where my talent lies.

And yes, I've heard of the "rule of threes" with humor. That two repetitions of a joke creates maximum amusement, then the returns start to drop off. But that doesn't really get at why a joke is funny in the first place.

Humor in the abuse and death of animals is a touchy subject in any case. Yes, cultures differ here, but in the US and western Europe, many, possibly mos, people regard animals as, if not quite equal to people, at lease deserving of humane treatment and protection. When animals appear in stories, they tend to elicit the same kind of protective instincts we feel towards children. This doesn't mean we don't have our everyday hypocrisies, like meat eating, here. But there's a difference between being "ok" with something happening out of sight and something in a story that's aiming for laughs.

So know who your audience is and consider it.
 
Last edited:

jjdebenedictis

is watching you via her avatar
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
7,063
Reaction score
1,642
In my opinion, humour is the act of getting audience to understand a strange situation based on intuitive (associative) understanding.

The punchline of a joke is the final clue that allows the audience to snap the puzzle pieces together and understand the situation, but to elicit laughter, the audience must also infer some truth beyond that supplied by the joke's clues.

Likewise, when a single line is funny, it's because we infer some truth beyond just what was said. It's often recognition of some truth about human nature. The inference is key.

Humour does not hinge on our logical problem-solving skills. It hinges on our associative problem-solving skills.

Thus, I too think it's incredibly wrong-headed to think Terry Pratchett writes according to a formula. Logic isn't what makes us laugh because the part of our brain that handles logic is physically incapable of feeling emotion. That's handled by the part of our brain that handles associative problem-solving.
 
Last edited:

JHFC

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Messages
680
Reaction score
78
Location
South
That's interesting, because in Islam, animals are considered not to have free will. Only humans and jinns have free will. Animals follow their instincts (so the dog biting the child who teased it did so because its instincts to protect itself kicked in). Angels are programmed to always obey Allah, so are always good.

(please excuse the comparative religions derail... I find this very interesting. As is the historical context for animal trials.)

Catechist here, and I've never heard of animals having free will in Christianity. At least my branch of Christianity.

Angels have will but not free will.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
Unless you count "being able to see the absurd in everything and render into humorous yet thoughtful prose" as a formula.

The above statement is my point. Terry Pratchett has this sense. Not an unfair generic formula.

I like my humour dark as the pits of hell, but like Da Ferret above me, saw nothing in he way that was written that was humorous.

They say humour is the hardest form of acting. I sincerely believe that's the same with writing

Maybe you could try writing scene in the style of Pratchett or Adams?


Zanzjan, Mr. Flibble put into words what I failed to communicate. It doesn't have to be conscious. Just a sense that you feel has worked in the past and so you keep returning to it.
 
Last edited:

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
In that case your only option may be to clone Pterry and patch his mind into yours :tongue His humour is in the way he looks at the world, slightly askew from the norm so it highlights the absurdity in banalities.

ETA:

/slight derail

He takes a lot from real life absurdities that many people take for granted. Treacle Mines for instance. They're a real thing, albeit a long standing joke, which I only realised yesterday when we drove past the Treacle Mine pub....he took the joke and made it real. The flat world on elephants and turtles? Yep that belief existed. I think the problem with your original post is it's posted straight, not askew, if you see what I mean. Highlight the absurd, minimise the reality of the gore and suffering. Even with gallows humour, people rarely look at a pile of entrails and burst out laughing, they find the absurdity of a situation and focus on that to hide what is unsettling.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
That's maybe the most awful and unfair thing I've ever heard anyone say about Terry Pratchett.

I still have no idea what your point is. Are you trying to figure out HOW to write gallows humor?


I am trying to learn a whole menu of ways to create humor in my serious fiction, obeying the rule that it grows organically out of the narrative.

That way I can vary my constructions.

The people that I grew up with treasured gallows humor. I have been a fan of it from youth.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
In that case your only option may be to clone Pterry and patch his mind into yours :tongue His humour is in the way he looks at the world, slightly askew from the norm so it highlights the absurdity in banalities.

ETA:

/slight derail

He takes a lot from real life absurdities that many people take for granted. Treacle Mines for instance. They're a real thing, albeit a long standing joke, which I only realised yesterday when we drove past the Treacle Mine pub....he took the joke and made it real. The flat world on elephants and turtles? Yep that belief existed. I think the problem with your original post is it's posted straight, not askew, if you see what I mean. Highlight the absurd, minimise the reality of the gore and suffering. Even with gallows humour, people rarely look at a pile of entrails and burst out laughing, they find the absurdity of a situation and focus on that to hide what is unsettling.


Great observations Mr. Flibble!
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,140
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
I am trying to learn a whole menu of ways to create humor in my serious fiction, obeying the rule that it grows organically out of the narrative.

That way I can vary my constructions.

The people that I grew up with treasured gallows humor. I have been a fan of it from youth.

Terry Pratchett relies on what he calls the better writer in the back of his head. He doesn't try to create or use formulae. He observes the oddities around him and shows them through his characters and his world.
 

Sage

Currently titleless
Staff member
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
64,562
Reaction score
22,368
Age
43
Location
Cheering you all on!
I am trying to learn a whole menu of ways to create humor in my serious fiction, obeying the rule that it grows organically out of the narrative.

If it grows organically out of the narrative, how can you prepare for it in a thread? ;)

The best way for you to learn how humor works is to read something (well, many things) that is funny and analyze what made it funny to you. Of course, what you find funny might not be the same thing that I find funny, but chances are good that someone out there will find it funny too. If they don't, maybe humor's not your thing, but you'd probably figure that out fast by reading lots of humor and finding that your sense of humor doesn't seem to match other people's.

You can't figure out how to be funny by asking people to post detached examples from their novels.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
Terry Pratchett relies on what he calls the better writer in the back of his head. He doesn't try to create or use formulae. He observes the oddities around him and shows them through his characters and his world.



Can anyone provide examples from their work?

There have to be many ways to do this, isn't that so?
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,140
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
Can anyone provide examples from their work?

There have to be many ways to do this, isn't that so?

Many ways to do what? Look at the world. Certainly, each person has a myriad of perspectives possible.

See and talk about oddities? That's mostly a matter of what is emphasized from what is seen. One can also show multiple perspectives on the same thing that simply do not fit together.

If you're having trouble with this, I recommend digging up books of humor essays, columns and/or cartoons for various different periods in the 19th and 20th centuries.

There is one principle which is worth noting: that so many humorous things can also be seen as horrible. Indeed, one of the things one discovers reading 20th century humor is how disturbing many elements of it are from a more recent perspective. A lot of it relied on racism, sexism, homophobia, and the hilarity of drunk driving.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
If it grows organically out of the narrative, how can you prepare for it in a thread? ;)

The best way for you to learn how humor works is to read something (well, many things) that is funny and analyze what made it funny to you. Of course, what you find funny might not be the same thing that I find funny, but chances are good that someone out there will find it funny too. If they don't, maybe humor's not your thing, but you'd probably figure that out fast by reading lots of humor and finding that your sense of humor doesn't seem to match other people's.

You can't figure out how to be funny by asking people to post detached examples from their novels.

I am analyzing now.

I am able, now, as opposed to years before apply or see the component parts of a joke.

And, what I don't understand I will ask the author what effect she was going for, or did she do something specific, in her estimation?

Sometimes a writer can tell you but at other times they can't.

Yes, I can and do apply external techniques in my writing to gain effects that reziac highlighted many posts above.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
Many ways to do what? Look at the world. Certainly, each person has a myriad of perspectives possible.

See and talk about oddities? That's mostly a matter of what is emphasized from what is seen. One can also show multiple perspectives on the same thing that simply do not fit together.

If you're having trouble with this, I recommend digging up books of humor essays, columns and/or cartoons for various different periods in the 19th and 20th centuries.

There is one principle which is worth noting: that so many humorous things can also be seen as horrible. Indeed, one of the things one discovers reading 20th century humor is how disturbing many elements of it are from a more recent perspective. A lot of it relied on racism, sexism, homophobia, and the hilarity of drunk driving.


...and the hilarity of drunk driving!

I like the alliteration.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
...and the hilarity of drunk driving!

I like the alliteration.



I realize that the idea of stifling spontaneity makes most authors uncomfortable.
But, I was always a fan of black humor and studied ways to see it in its individual parts.

Bearing in mind the subjectivity of humor, I do believe that I can recognize certain components of a piece of humor.

Eg., The best jokes always contain at their core a segment of truth.
 

Samsonet

Just visiting
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
1,391
Reaction score
184
Location
See my avatar? The next galaxy over.
I realize that the idea of stifling spontaneity makes most authors uncomfortable.
But, I was always a fan of black humor and studied ways to see it in its individual parts.

Bearing in mind the subjectivity of humor, I do believe that I can recognize certain components of a piece of humor.

Eg., The best jokes always contain at their core a segment of truth.

Or at least something that people think is true. Or something that subverts what people think is true.

Why are blond jokes so short?

So brunettes can remember them.

It's a reference to another joke, so while it's not true itself, it subverts what the hearers might have been thinking.
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,140
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
I realize that the idea of stifling spontaneity makes most authors uncomfortable.
But, I was always a fan of black humor and studied ways to see it in its individual parts.

Bearing in mind the subjectivity of humor, I do believe that I can recognize certain components of a piece of humor.

Eg., The best jokes always contain at their core a segment of truth.

Lack of spontaneity isn't the problem. Indeed, many stand-up comics spend ages refining 10 minutes of material.

The problem is that recognizing the components of something doesn't produce its composition.

All art has composition, the hidden aspect that puts things together so that what comes out is more than what goes in.

In painting when the objects being painted don't seem to be in the same space, that's failure of composition.

In music when the instruments don't play off of each other, so that they do not produce a harmony beyond the reach of any one of them, that's failure of composition.

In poetry, when the words are chosen to fit into spaces rather than show more than they are saying, that's failure of composition.

In fiction, when characters monologue at each other or take actions forced by the needs of plot, that's failure of composition.

In humor, when the pieces of a joke do not come together into a glimpse into an absurd reality, that's failure of composition.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
Lack of spontaneity isn't the problem. Indeed, many stand-up comics spend ages refining 10 minutes of material.

The problem is that recognizing the components of something doesn't produce its composition.

All art has composition, the hidden aspect that puts things together so that what comes out is more than what goes in.

In painting when the objects being painted don't seem to be in the same space, that's failure of composition.

In music when the instruments don't play off of each other, so that they do not produce a harmony beyond the reach of any one of them, that's failure of composition.

In poetry, when the words are chosen to fit into spaces rather than show more than they are saying, that's failure of composition.

In fiction, when characters monologue at each other or take actions forced by the needs of plot, that's failure of composition.

In humor, when the pieces of a joke do not come together into a glimpse into an absurd reality, that's failure of composition.



Yes, I believe that is true.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
358
Reaction score
16
Location
New York City
Whether something is funny really depends on how it's written, I suppose. Douglas Adams managed to find humor in the birth (via the improbability drive), very short life in free fall, and death, of an innocent sperm whale.

With the trying farm animals as if they were humans thing, I'd probably find it more amusing if it were approached from the perspective of how absurd it is to do something like this, maybe even from the perspective of the people doing it. But it's all in the writing. I can get an occasional wry chuckle out of readers, but the thought of having to write an entire book where every scene is playing for laughs? I don't think it's where my talent lies.

And yes, I've heard of the "rule of threes" with humor. That two repetitions of a joke creates maximum amusement, then the returns start to drop off. But that doesn't really get at why a joke is funny in the first place.

Humor in the abuse and death of animals is a touchy subject in any case. Yes, cultures differ here, but in the US and western Europe, many, possibly mos, people regard animals as, if not quite equal to people, at lease deserving of humane treatment and protection. When animals appear in stories, they tend to elicit the same kind of protective instincts we feel towards children. This doesn't mean we don't have our everyday hypocrisies, like meat eating, here. But there's a difference between being "ok" with something happening out of sight and something in a story that's aiming for laughs.

So know who your audience is and consider it.



Referencing the bolded words above, the explorer Gordon McCreagh was able to accomplish this in his dynamic South American exploration narrative from the 1920's called, White Waters and Black.

I called a zoo one day looking to get some clarification on some Peruvian species that I was researching, and was put in contact with the director of the Herpetologist's Dept. He quickly asked me if I had ever read the book that he had in his hands at the moment, called, White Waters and Black?

He was so enthusiastic as to the quality of the writing that he made me promise to go search for it and purchase it.

I trusted his knowledge and did just as he asked, and my life has been much enriched from reading this book.

Please, please, take a look at it! It is one of the most brilliantly executed exploration narratives that I have ever read.

The first 50 pages are available for free on google books.
 
Last edited:

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
OK

So assuming you have read up on the theory of humour etc

What exactly is it you want here?

For examples of humour, you'd be best served in the humour sub form/SYW. But you've posted here in BWQ
So. what are you after?


What do you want us to say? Because I am confuddled on what you actually want from this post
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,865
Reaction score
4,640
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
Lack of spontaneity isn't the problem. Indeed, many stand-up comics spend ages refining 10 minutes of material.

The problem is that recognizing the components of something doesn't produce its composition.

All art has composition, the hidden aspect that puts things together so that what comes out is more than what goes in.

In painting when the objects being painted don't seem to be in the same space, that's failure of composition.

In music when the instruments don't play off of each other, so that they do not produce a harmony beyond the reach of any one of them, that's failure of composition.

In poetry, when the words are chosen to fit into spaces rather than show more than they are saying, that's failure of composition.

In fiction, when characters monologue at each other or take actions forced by the needs of plot, that's failure of composition.

In humor, when the pieces of a joke do not come together into a glimpse into an absurd reality, that's failure of composition.
In humor, when you have to go through such pains to explain WHY your joke is funny? It's not.
 

Haggis

Evil, undead Chihuahua
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
56,217
Reaction score
18,303
Location
A dark, evil place.
You want to see what a funny animal story is like? Here's a funny animal story.

Why is it funny? Because a court has ordered an animal to cease and desist a behavior that defines him. The court might as well tell a bird not to fly, or a fish not to swim, or a worm not to wiggle, or a slug not to...whatever it is that slugs do. And even if the dog would have been willing to go along with the court order we'd never know since it's doubtful he can read Croatian.

Few things are less funny than discussing what makes something funny. If you want to learn funny, go buy some funny books and read them. Sure, listen to comedians too. That can't hurt. It's not the same as writing funny, but it's related.

What makes you laugh? Write about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.