![\"\"](\"https:\/\/scrutinies.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/10\/Between-Heaven-and-Mirth.jpg\" "\\"between")
<\/p>\n
I\u2019d guess I\u2019m not in the target audience for Fr. Martin\u2019s book. \u00a0Not because I\u2019m not a Christian, but because I didn\u2019t think religion has to be somber all the time in the first place. \u00a0A fair amount of the book is spent refuting this ides through exegesis of specific passages, general theological philosophizing, and recounting jokes. \u00a0If you\u2019ve already accepted Martin\u2019s major premise, you may share my wish that he\u2019d spent more time talking about how<\/em> humor could be integrated into Christian life, instead of defending the idea of including it at all.<\/p>\n Most of all, I would have liked to see Fr. Martin talk more about how to distinguish between good humor from bad. \u00a0Some of his examples are easy ones (humor at the expense of others, self-deprecating humor that actually degrades you, etc), but he didn\u2019t talk as much about humor at the expense of institution or ideology. \u00a0More than once, he cites examples of how joy and joking can be subversive. \u00a0This is one of the charges traditionally leveled by the anti-humor crowd \u2014 humor is destabilizing, and even institutions rooted in truth are not immune to this disruptive force.<\/p>\n Given that he acknowledges the danger, I would have liked him to talk more about how to recognize the institutions that deserve disruption and when (and how) to shield fragile truths from mockery.<\/p>\n Humor-as-subversion is one of the most used weapons in the atheist arsenal, but I\u2019ve got my doubt about its utility. \u00a0A lot of humor depends on shared vocabulary \u2014 you have to the right expectation to be able to be surprised and delighted by a humorous reversal, but outside the community it reads as mockery. \u00a0Some jokes should stay private; it doesn\u2019t mean they\u2019re bad<\/em> jokes or that they don\u2019t point to something clever and true, just that we can\u2019t be fluent in all private languages of \u00a0slang and experience.<\/p>\n Some time ago, Stephen Sondheim put his finger on one of the hallmarks of bad humor: camp-as-excuse. \u00a0He said he was frustrated by people who aimed to make so-bad-it\u2019s-good parodies, where any shallowness was explained away thus \u201cOh, we\u2019re really just satirizing bad art.\u201d \u00a0It\u2019s easy to find dumb things and point and laugh, but it doesn\u2019t take much creativity or offer that much to your audience.<\/p>\n The greatest virtue of humor is that it can come at truth obliquely. \u00a0A well told joke is jarring and makes you think differently. \u00a0At the very small scale, puns surprise you with homonyms or secondary meanings (\u201cWhen is a door not a door? \u00a0When it\u2019s a jar!\u201d<\/em>). \u00a0At the other end of the spectrum is the Lord of Misrule<\/a> (also known as the Abbot of Unreason)\u00a0who presides over the topsy-turvy season of Carnival or the Twelve Days of Christsmas and offers some counterpoint to the normal order of things.<\/p>\n In the context of Christianity, I assume the best kind of humor is any that draws attention to the strain of \u201cbeing made for another world\u201d as C.S. Lewis would put it. \u00a0Humor rejoices in the setting up and resolving a tension, and Christianity is rooted in an awareness of a discrepancy between what we are and what we ought to be. \u00a0Perhaps, for Fr. Martin and others, the proper kind of disruptive humor is the kind that draws attention to this oddity, but doesn\u2019t undermine confidence in its resolution, so dadaist, non-sequitur humor that mocks you for expecting a punchline might be verboten.<\/p>\n Over on my side of the fence, I like humor for its ability to discomfit us. \u00a0Our reason is imperfect and our biases are legion, so we don\u2019t deserve\u00a0complacency. \u00a0Humor generically is still a destabilizing force, though, so if I were coming up with safeguards, I might suggest to only joke about the things you love. \u00a0Looking carefully through the ideas you value to find doubled meanings can be instructive, and you need to have a pretty good understanding of a concept to make more than surface jokes.<\/p>\n Plus, it\u2019s fun<\/em>.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/4.bp.blogspot.com\/_wSoONVcq6tg\/SqPFwZGhPII\/AAAAAAAAAzw\/dgF1ORxZ9KQ\/s320\/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg\" "\\"nelson")
<\/p>\n