CounterExample (2nd Draft)

Brown1 proposed that ‘x’ is satire if and only if ‘x’:

(a)    is aggressive criticism, understood by both the artist and the audience, expressed through any artistic medium

(b)   is the result of the artist’s use of devices, such as wit and irony, to cause laughter and surprise in the audience

(c)    is an art form

Suppose that the satirist does not intend to criticize society. Is it necessary that satire be aggressive? What What about good-natured humor in a community of shared cultural beliefs? Brown2 shall argue that these are cases of satire; hence Brown1’s argument is false.

For example, Dave Chappelle is a well known standup comedian in the United States of America. He began recording comedic skits comparing race relations in America. One of his skits, titled “White People Dancing” co-starring John Mayer and QuestLove (the drummer of the band The Roots), explores the effects of different instruments on different races. In this skit, Dave explores the stereotype that ‘white people can’t dance’ by using different artist and instruments to play different genres of music to different ethnic groups. Specifically, Dave visits places that stereotypically are culturally isolated. Dave visits places such as, a business office made up of white men and women, a barbershop that has a mix of Latino and African Americans. Dave, with the help of John Mayer and QuestLove demonstrates how Latino, African Americans and ‘white people’. When Mayer plays to the white people in the office, they dance and waving their hands in the air. Except when John Mayer plays in the barbershop, the barbers start to dance and freestyle rap. Dave also brings in an electric piano to create traditional salsa music causing the Latino barbers begin to salsa.  Dave disposes the stereotype that white people can’t dance by illustrating different ethnic groups dancing to specific genes of music and differences in dancing styles.    In this example, Dave exposes societal norms that lie in plain sight of his audience, although he does not intend to criticize the music industry. The irony lies is that people in America listen to a variety of different music, but may only be able to comfortably dance to a specific genre. Neal Brennan (the co-creator of “the Chappelle Show”, who is also white) and Dave Chappelle’s intention is neither to criticize nor to be aggressive, but to “model comedic social discourse where the unspoken is spoken– and the absurdities and hypocrisies that often inform polite conversations about race relations.” (Haggins, 207) Could this positive irony still be considered satire?

Dave Chappelle intended to use good natured humor to expose societal norms that are stereotypically hypocritical. His audience was the American population, in which its citizens share eccentric cultural beliefs.  His intention remains to be satire, even though one would not consider it aggressive or critical of American music. The former definition restricts ‘x’, specifically to intend aggressive criticism. Suppose an artist does not intend the persona and /or material to have a negative or aggressive connotation, his product is also considered ‘x’. The audience remains in agreement with the artist, recognizing his irony and wit, and enjoy his product with surprise and laughter.

 

 

Positive Irony: Satire counterexample

It was purposed that if ‘x’ is satire, if and only if: ‘x’ is aggressive criticism, understood by both the artist and the audience, expressed through any artistic medium. ‘X’ is the result of the artist’s use of devices, such as wit and irony, to cause laughter and surprise in the audience. The argument states that ‘x’ is also an art form. Suppose that the artist does not intend to criticize society. Is it necessary that satire be aggressive? What about good-natured humor in a community of shared cultural beliefs? I shall argue that it is not necessary that ‘x’ is aggressive criticism.

For example, Dave Chappelle is a well known stand up comedian in the United States of America. He began recording comedic skits comparing race relations in America. One of his skits, titled “White People Dancing” co-starring John Mayer and QuestLove (the drummer of the band The Roots, explores the effects of different instruments on different races. In this skit, Dave explores the stereotype that ‘white people cant dance’ by using different artist and instruments to play different genres of music to different ethnic groups. Dave utilizes TV tropes, such as Pop Culture Isolation and Culture Clash to expose music genres that are huge and significant in one subculture or ethnic group, but elsewhere nobody knows it exists or is indifferent to it altogether. This does not apply internationally, but within the same country or region. Radio is probably the main cause of this as radio is very isolated in terms of programming and format. Dave disposes the stereotype that white people can’t dance by showing that different ethnic groups generally listen to different music. In this example, Dave exposes societal norms that lie in plain sight of his audience. The irony lies is that people in America listen to a variety of different music, but may only be able to comfortably dance to a specific genre. Neal Brennan (the co-creator of “the Chappelle Show” who is white) and Dave Chappelle’s intention is not to criticize nor to be aggressive, but to “model comedic social discourse where the unspoken is spoken– and the absurdities and hypocrisies that often inform polite conversations about race relations.” (Haggins, 207) Could this positive irony still be considered satire?

The former definition restricts ‘x’, specifically to intend aggressive criticism. For the artist who does not intend the persona to have a negative or aggressive connotation, his product is also considered ‘x’. The audience remains in agreement with the artist, recognizing his irony and wit, and enjoy his product with surprise and laughter.

Help me get this write….

Satire derives from the Greek term satura, meaning a ‘medley’ or ‘mixed dish filled with various kinds of fruit’. In the Renaissance, as a result of false etymology, the word was confused with satyr, and so took on the connotation of lasciviousness and crude mockery. Satirical prose dates back to Common Era Rome, where Gaius Lucilius established the genus of poetical satire and Quintus Ennius first published using the term satura (“Satire.” The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008. Encyclopedia.com. 21 Oct. 2010 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>). In the 21st century, examples of American satirical prototypes are television shows such as, South Park, The Simpsons, Saturday Night Live, and the Colbert Report and new sources, such as, The Onion and The Giant Napkin. In this paper, I refer to the satirist as ‘artist’ and his or her constituency as ‘audience’. I will argue that if ‘x’ is satire, ‘x’ is an art form.  ‘X’ is aggressive criticism, understood by both the artist and the audience, expressed through any artistic medium. ‘X’ is the result of the artist’s use of devices, such as wit and irony, to cause laughter and surprise in the audience.
Satire, by Oxford definition, is a genus of literature and drama, characterized by the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues. Satirical prose takes a medley of forms from: Aristophanes of Ancient Greece, Juvenal of ancient Rome, Geoffrey Chaucer in Canterbury Tales, François Rabelais of Renaissance France, Jane Austen of 18th century England, Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens) of 19th century America, to Joseph Heller’s famous satirical novel, Catch-22.  Satire is used to describe collectively all such literary works, and the art of writing them. Here I focus on the more modern definition; the process of attacking by ridicule in any medium, not merely in literature. Although, the artist does not utilize a specific framework or identifiable form, the artist does utilize recognizable devices.
The most prominent devices of satire today are wit and irony. Wit, in English, originally meant ‘mind’ or ‘understanding’, later ‘cleverness’. In modern usage, wit is ‘intellectually amusing language that surprises and delights’ (Hodgart, p.111). The artist uses wit to exploit the contrast of two or all of the following: the definition of words, its accepted usage of words, and/or the lack of meaning of words. In other terms, wit is wordplay and resembles poetry. “Like poetry it rests on the ability to discover and reveal the power of language: e.g. similarities in sound (puns or rhymes), or unsuspected parallels in grammar and syntax” (Hodgart, p.111)
There are two classifications of wit: one given by the author based on the practical means (tendency) and the utilization of wit in speech (technique) (Freud, 13). Merriam-Webster defines tendency as the purposeful trend of something written or said and an act of deliberate, but indirect advocacy.  The artist’s tendency within the use of wit is described as either hostile or obscene. If the audience and/or the artist describe his or her tendency as hostile then the artist is expressing aggression or is speaking in defense of something. If the audience and/or the artist describe the tendency as obscene, then the artist’s product serves as a sexual exhibition, such as smutty jokes. Smutty jokes intentionally introduce sexual facts or relations through speech (Freud, 138-9). An artist uses wit to linguistically weave through his material; with this language the artist is able to create a persona separate from what the audience views of him (the visible person) and also a hybrid image of reality, making parallels between defective experience and unreachable ideals (Cope, p.178).  For instance, Dave Chappelle uses a technique of wit called ‘white voice’, within the context of casual story telling. This technique resembles the use of ‘black face’ era in minstrel shows of the late 19th century. In America today, African American comics use ‘white voice’ to manipulate the politics of differentiation. The sub-genre, among many others of wit, which best embraces both the classifications, tendency and technique of wit is Chappelle’s “white voice”. For Chappelle, this involves “taking all the rhythm out of my voice and speaking as monotone as possible” (Haggins, p.191-2). Chappelle’s tendency is not uncommon in post-modern African American stand up comedy; many of whom use “white voice” to create a persona and dual image of reality and, its technique, the use of the words, to distinguish and exploit (in other words satirize) contradictions in language across social, economic, political, and cultural mediums.
A second device the artist uses to make a distinction of satire from humor is irony. The Columbia Encyclopedia defines irony as “a figure of speech in which what is stated is not what is meant. The artist uses irony in a manner that assumes his or her reader or listener understands the concealed meaning of his or her statement. Perhaps the simplest form of irony is rhetorical irony, when, for effect, a speaker says the direct opposite of what s/he means. For example, in African American stand up comedy specifically Chappelle, uses what is referred to as ‘comic misdirection’. Comic misdirection is defined as a skill of an stand up comedian that allows him or her to lead his audience down a path to an incorrect or ironic end. Chappelle hones this skill when he “describes the advice he had given to students at his old high school in Washington, D.C. about ceasing to place blame on whites for all black social ills: ‘and you’ve got to learn [pause] to rap, or play basketball or something…You are trapped. Either do that or sell crack…That’s the only way I’ve seen it work. Get to work entertaining these white people. [Chappelle ends by doing a little dance]” (Haggins, p.202). Haggins points out the duality of his statement, “the unanticipated shift from what appears to be positivist rhetoric of self-determination to a blatant assertion of the untenable position for black kids in the ghetto”, which implies “the same old problems facing [African] American youth (poverty, unemployment, substandard education) have been complicated by the current sociopolitical climate” (Haggins, p.203). Irony is recognized, within satire, as critical: the ironic artist tends to exhibit an apparent positive attitude in order to echo a  negative evaluation (Garmendia, pp. 397-8). The artist uses the echo to surprise the audience into spontaneous laughter because of its unexpected twist. Irony resembles anti-humor, a trope commonly used by comics, which subverts the audience’s expectation of a punchline or humorous twist. The artist uses irony to replace the expected outcome with either frank ‘truth’ about the world or a scenario that could be possible given the circumstances. Criticism is the base of the use of irony and of satire. The use of comedic devices to communicate criticism is satire.
The artist uses ‘x’, not as a comedic device, but uses comedic devices to critique what s/he sees as “dangerous, religious, political, moral, or social standards” . The artist believes that “folly could be corrected by using art as a mirror to reflect society” ( Colleta, p.859-60). The efficacy of ‘x’ depends on the ability of the audience to recognize the irony that is the heart of its humor. The artist intends a deeper meaning and social signification beyond that of the humor. ‘X’ is not a concept that can can be met with requirements but an argument between the artist and the audience, except the only response the audience is able to give is emotive reactions to the monologue presented. The artist’s product, ‘x’, implies a double entendre, used to convey an indelicate meaning (Oxford English Dictionary). ‘X’ relies of the double meaning of word, or different interpretations of the same primary meaning (i.e. a pun). ‘X’ is an art form, the artist uses his creative linguistics as his or her utensil, and….

Completed ‘Satire’ Analysis

           Satire derives from the Greek term satura, meaning a ‘medley’ or ‘mixed dish filled with various kinds of fruit’. In the Renaissance, as a result of false etymology, the word was confused with satyr, and so took on the connotation of lasciviousness and crude mockery. In the 21st century, examples of American satirical prototypes are television shows such as, South Park, The Simpsons, Saturday Night Live, and the Colbert Report and new sources, such as, The Onion and The Giant Napkin. Satirical prose dates back to Common Era Rome, where Gaius Lucilius established the genus of poetical satire and Quintus Ennius first published using the term satura. Although, satire is relatively complex to the time in which it was published, the agenda and compatibility of humor and criticism remain effectual.
           Satire, by Oxford definition, is a genus of literature and drama, characterized by the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues. It can also be used collectively of all such literary works, and the art of writing them. Here I focus on the more modern definition; the process of attacking by ridicule in any medium, not merely in literature. Furthermore, satirical prose takes a medley of forms from: Aristophanes of Ancient Greece, Juvenal of ancient Rome, Geoffrey Chaucer in Canterbury Tales, François Rabelais of Renaissance France, Jane Austen of 18th century England, Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens) of 19th century America, to Joseph Heller’s famous satirical novel, Catch-22.  Satire does not possess a specific framework or identifiable form, but does utilize recognizable devices. Mary Claire Randolph describes, a “satirical spirit” which is “fluid and elusive as mercury” and “refuses to be bound by any rigid tenets”(Philological Quarterly, Vol. 21 (1942), pp. 368-384.). For the purpose of this paper, we must ignore inferences to sense of humor or laughter. Theories of humor and laughter would create more complexities. We will focus on satire as a concept, consisting of overlapping resemblances.
           Satire has its origins in the state of mind which is critical and aggressive, usually from irritation. Hobbes puts forth that human life is ‘nasty, brutish, and short’ and man is endlessly engaged in solving the problems set by nature. There are many ways to look at this life, and satire is one of them; to respond to the world with a mixture of laughter and anger (Hodgart, Matthew.Satire11-3World University Library, 1969). How is satire used as art? How does satire differ from other forms of comedy? Satire can turn from a state of mind to an art only when it combines aggressive criticism with aesthetic features which cause pleasure in the spectator. The spectator may identify himself with the satirist and share his anguish, but other sources of pleasure are patterns of sounds and meaning (i.e. wit). Satire demands the commitment to and involvement with the painful problems of the world, and simultaneously a high degree of detachment from the world. Satire is described as a ‘high form of play’ which gives us both the recognition of our responsibilities and the irresponsible joy of make-believe. Instead of an objective picture, the satirist provides an element of aggressive attack and a ridiculous vision of the world transformed: written for entertainment, but contains sharp and telling comments on the problems of the world. It distinguishes from other kinds of comedy by its approach to its subject, by its reflexive attitude toward the human condition which is reflected in its artistic conventions.
           The most prominent devices of satire today are wit and reduction (a genus of its own species). Wit, in English, originally meant ‘mind’ or ‘understanding’, later ‘cleverness’. In modern usage, wit is ‘intellectually amusing language that surprises and delights.’ Wit is the effect of perceiving an idea or event, simultaneously or in quick alternation, in two habitually incompatible frames of reference. The basic technique of reduction is the degradation or devaluation of the victim by reproducing his stature and dignity. Similar to philosophical reduction clarity and simplicity; the theme of satire is to reduce everything to simple terms. The appeal is always to common sense, plain reason, and simple logic (Hodgart, Matthew.Satire 108-28World University Library, 1969). In the Global-Digital Age, succinctness and simplicity is the key to communication. Communication is not comprehension, but it’s a start. Satire has the responsibility to convey the hypocrisies, etc. of the world at the same time revealing an amusing reflection. The trouble lies within the comprehension of the agenda of the satirist.
           In the United States today, satire walks a thin line with racism, sexism, classism, etc. Popularly political, today’s satire is frank, linguistically savvy, and sarcastic. Its agenda mirrors that of early Rome through Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World of the 20th century. The agenda is to expose foolishness in all its guises – – vanity, hypocrisy, pedantry, idolatry, bigotry sentimentality– and in some cases, to effect reform through such exposure. Through standard devices of satire, such as irony, the satirist creates a fictional character, a persona or even multiple personas, and a narrative form which will allow a double flow of meaning and avoids backlash. Irony means, literally, dissimulation and the systematic use of double meaning. It also assumes a ‘double audience’, one that is deceived by the surface meaning of the words, and another that catches the hidden sense and laughs with the deceiver at the expense of the deceived. The satirist must be careful with the use of irony: too much is self-defeating and too little leads to vulgar abuse and mockery. Irony is the normal device for exposing the comedy of human pretentions. Satire is “militant irony: the satirist uses irony to make the reader uncomfortable, to shake him out of his complacency and to make him an ally in the battle against the world’s stupidity” (Hodgart, Matthew. Satire 124-31 World University Library, 1969).
          
dave chapelle inside the actors studio
formal verse of satire
satire tv

On humour

Attempted conceptual analysis.

Satire concept analysis

Concept Map Taxonimizing SATIRE

9/30/2010

Exercise 3: It is not the case that moral facts exist

Man agrees about how things really are (defined as fact) and challenged by how things ought to be (value).  In principle, scientific fact is verified by empirical observation.  On the other hand, morals are consequential, cultural, and time sensitive. Assume John is a man, who is considering breaking up with his boyfriend because ‘Homosexuality is wrong’.  Based on insufficient evidence  and the suppression of doubts,  Concerned Women for America made the judgment that homosexuality is not only wrong, but ‘socially destructive’. In fact, man has been healthily fondling, well, ‘man’ while raising families and working successfully.

Facts are, again in principle, verified observation.  Moral judgment entails insufficient evidence and suppressing doubts. Hereafter, it is not the case that moral facts exist

My First Concept Map Taxomizing Friendship

Exercise 3: There are no moral facts.

Humans agree about how things really are (fact) and challenged by how things ought to be (value).  Specifically, scientific fact are hypothesizes that are verified by observation. As well as, scientific non facts can by dismissed by observation. This is to say, scientific fact is verified by empirical observation, therefore is transcendental, indisputable and empirical.

Humans are also quarreled by the way that one acts and the way one ought to act (moral).  When distinguishing morals, the actions are considered ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; no matter if one should take her duty or consequence into consideration. When this judgment is made, we appeal to some objective standard of morality. There is no universally accepted doctrine distinguishing morals, therefore  morals are not transcendental.

Morals are consequential, cultural, and time sensitive.  Morals lack the ability to be transcendental, as well as, indisputable and empirical at the same time. Therefore there are no moral facts.

I just want to start by sharing

My name is Omar Brown and I am a senior at McDaniel College in Westminster. These entries will cover my progress writing in Philosophy.

I have not yet decided what my theme throughout my writings will be. Recently, I have studied authors and activists such as, Cornel West, Malcolm X, James Baldwin, Lewis Carroll and bell hooks. Also, watched films directed by Spike Lee and Superfly.

I look forward to formulating a thesis that will help both you and I ameliorate