What Could It Mean to Say That Today's Stand‐Up Audiences Are Too Sensitive?
Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 78 (4):501-512 (2020)
Abstract
Contemporary comedy audiences are accused by some comedians of being too morally sensitive to appreciate humor. To get closer to an idea of what this means, I will first briefly present the argument over audience sensitivity as found in the non-philosophical literature. Second, I then turn to the philosophical literature and begin from the idea that “funny” is a response-dependent property. I present a criticism of this response-dependence account of “funny” based in the claim that funniness is not de- termined by what normal audiences actually laugh at, but by what merits laughter. Third, I argue that excessive or deficient moral sensitivity distorts audience receptivity to humor. Fourth, I turn to candidates for ideally sensitive audiences. I conclude by returning to the particular cases of supposed oversensitivity or undersensitivity to jokes to see how we might judge them.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1111/jaac.12755
My notes
Similar books and articles
Baseball Stadiums and American Audiences.Kenneth H. Marcus - 2008 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 2008 (143):165-170.
Knowledge laundering: Testimony and sensitive invariantism.John MacFarlane - 2005 - Analysis 65 (2):132–138.
Testimony, recovery and plausible deniability: A response to Peet.Alex Davies - 2019 - Episteme 16 (1):18-38.
Imagine the Audience – On Audience Research in Rhetoric, Argumentation, and Christopher Tindale’s The Philosophy of Argumentation and Audience Reception.E. Kjeldsen Jens - unknown
Impression Management and Organizational Audiences: The Fiat Group Case.Saverio Bozzolan, Charles H. Cho & Giovanna Michelon - 2015 - Journal of Business Ethics 126 (1):143-165.
Where we stand today in the practice of evaluation: Some reflections.Eleanor Chelimsky - 1995 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 8 (3):8-19.
Introduction: Stand‐Up Comedy Today and Tomorrow.Sheila Lintott - 2020 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 78 (4):397-400.
Studying Rhetorical Audiences – a Call for Qualitative Reception Studies in Argumentation and Rhetoric.Jens Elmelund Kjeldsen - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (2):136-158.
Fantasy audiences versus fantasy audiences.Martin Barker - 2009 - In Warren Buckland (ed.), Film Theory and Contemporary Hollywood Movies. Routledge.
The Comedies of Machiavelli: The Woman From Andros; the Mandrake; Clizia.Niccolo Machiavelli & James B. Atkinson - 1985 - Hackett Publishing Company.
Constructing Audiences in Scientific Controversy.Jason A. Delborne - 2011 - Social Epistemology 25 (1):67-95.
Is Bill Cosby Still Funny? On Separating the Art from the Artist in Standup Comedy.Phillip Deen - 2019 - Studies in American Humor 5 (2):288-308.
Analytics
Added to PP
2020-11-10
Downloads
239 (#52,053)
6 months
124 (#5,802)
2020-11-10
Downloads
239 (#52,053)
6 months
124 (#5,802)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
References found in this work
Freedom and Resentment.Peter Strawson - 2003 - In Gary Watson (ed.), Free Will. Oxford University Press.
Dispositional Theories of Value.Michael Smith, David Lewis & Mark Johnston - 1989 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 63 (1):89-174.
The Moralistic Fallacy: On the ”Appropriateness' of Emotions.Daniel Jacobson - 2000 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (1):65-90.
The Moralistic Fallacy: On the 'Appropriateness' of Emotions.Justin D'Arms & Daniel Jacobson - 2000 - Philosophical and Phenomenological Research 61 (1):65-90.