Comments on: Observational Humor — Case Study #23

By: sol morrison

sol morrison — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 02:47:57 +0000

I just hadn’t seen these replies till today. Sounds like
Sound Advice — except the phrase, “Aspire to Greatness.”
I dislike Superlatives ; many ( most ?) are what I call “Empty Adjectives” or “Cotton-Candy Communication.” Looks great, large yummy, pink candy. But, when ya’ bite into it : Sticky , sugar-sweet stuff — and a Whole Lotta’ HOT AIR.
Whilst we’re Lemon-Harranguing : Everything has “Quality” –
so a “Quality Education” can be Good or Bad — or many degrees between. ( Like the Ol’ “Texture” trick — and “Which WEIGHS more,
One Pound of Lead or One Pound of Feathers?” )

And, finally (thank goodness ) : “Perfection” — “Best”
“Greatest” — “Most” — these are Subjective Evaluations –
Not Objective Terms. In fact, if ya’ do something of an
Artistic Nature — and EVERYONE Agrees that it is “PERFECT ” — and there is Nothing Anyone ( even you ) can do to IMPROVE on that
Perfection , There is NO Where to go –and Nothing Anyone can do to improve or make That Particular ART- Work Better ( in ANY way ) — Then you gotta’ QUIT — Change art forms — Genres –
styles — equipment, etc. “Art is reaching toward Perfection — Not
ever attaining it. ” — Sol Morrison

By: Michael Cortes

Michael Cortes — Sun, 18 May 2008 09:36:56 +0000

I disagree wit you, Sol. Those who aspire to greatness, study those who are great. Even better, they study what those who are great do.

But, you must be ready for what information is presented to you. A dog trainer always starts with the “sit” command, a human always learns to crawl first, and with computers you always start with “Where is the power button?” Everything after that, you must work your way up to it.

Stick with John. He is funny. He is knowledgeable. His case studies work. It will click with you one day and be well worth it. You may new to this, or you may have years of experience under your belt. But we can always use a little stretching of our own boundaries. Don’t you think?

By: John Kinde

John Kinde — Sat, 17 May 2008 18:11:19 +0000

The observational case studies are never meant to be universally funny. You’re right, “you had to be there.” I give the set up to give the reader a feel for what it might have been like to be there, but that’s impossible to totally do. I omitted the asides, explaining what makes the joke tick, in this case study. It probably would have been helpful to include them. One thing to note, every line I include in the case studies worked with the live audience. When I deliver an observational line that doesn’t work (on the average, one line in 10), I leave it out of the case study. (unless I can draw a good teaching lesson for why if fell flat.) The humor, from the readers viewpoint, is not top-of-the-line because of the contrived and telegraphed set up. It’s intended to be a laboratory case study and not an entertainment piece.

By: sol morrison

sol morrison — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:49:40 +0000

These are SO “Sight-Specific” and So “Site-Specific” and SO
“Sound-Specific” — and Place- . Chronology- , etc.- Specific — that I feel “Ya’ hadda’ be there ” to Really “Get” your Lessons and your Thinkage. ( And the more you hafta’ explain your reasoning — The Set-Ups , the harder it becomes to track-through to any real, GENERAL Lesson. ) — Sol Morrison

By: Barbara Rochester

Barbara Rochester — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:27:36 +0000

Thanks for the wonderful stuff on this website.
I have pointed my preacher-to-be grandson to it.
Yesterday in Toastmasters our Table Topic was “Dreams.” The Table Topics Master closed the session with, “I used to dream in Spanish, but now I dream in English (pause) wit subtitles.”
Then I gave my second Manual speech on Family Reunions with an opening of “Google tells me that it has 1,920,000 entries on the topic of family reunions. I didn’t read them all.” We had a great meeting. I’m learning from you. Again, thank you!