Each author subsisted to two (2) different kinds of perspectives, which make up the second and third critical elements of the comparative analysis component of this paper.
Berger analyzed humor based on social and political perspectives. Usage of these perspectives was most useful in discussing the two typologies of humor he thoroughly discussed in the book: satire and folly. Satire as a type of humor drew upon important concept that makes up its core: "militant irony" (158-9). Folly, meanwhile, was best characterized through the concepts "absurd" and "reality in a looking glass" (176).
Satire gives humor a political aspect to it, as illustrated in the term "military irony," which Berger defined as "a term derived from war, it is an attitude of attack that is part of a campaign against someone or something." Interestingly, the author qualified that satire need not have the 'brutality' that comes with military irony; however, he also claimed that "satire that is overly gentle liquidates itself" (156-7).
As a political vehicle to be used for or against an individual, group, or ideology, satire draws power from its directness and brutality. This is the reason why satire is best applied in the political arena: no other types of humor persuades people more effectively than satire, since it contains all the necessary elements needed to communicate correctly and effectively, such as wit, persuasiveness (level of persuasion), and 'truth' in the form of an expose or newfound information.
Folly, meanwhile, takes its origins from the concept of absurdity -- a deviation from reality, which made Berger term this type of humor as similar to viewing 'reality in a looking glass.' While satire's strength comes from its high level of persuasion...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now