When the sad news of Prince's death surfaced, satirical magazine The Onion was quick to respond. Their article, entitled "Nation Too Sad To Fuck Even Though It's What Prince Would Have Wanted," made me laugh, but I was also surprised at the Onion's bravery for posting a satirical article on Prince the day the nation learned of his passing. Out of curiosity, I scrolled through the Facebook comments and, sure enough, some people considered it "too soon" and insensitive of the Onion. But for the most part, people took the joke quite well; some added quips of their own, some expressed their own farewells to Prince, and some even thanked the Onion for taking the edge off his death.
Moral of the story? Dark humor has the power to heal those in crisis. (It also has the power to offend but, let's be honest, what doesn't anymore?)
On the surface, humor seems simple: somehow says or does something that tickles your fancy, and you laugh. But explaining the psychology behind humor is actually a very tricky task and there are numerous theories to account for humor's complexities. Unfortunately, studying these theories is one of the quickest ways to send your sense of humor into a coma, so I'll keep this brief. Two theories most applicable to our topic are Benign Violation Theory and Relief Theory. Benign Violation Theory basically states that we find something funny when it violates an expected norm of some kind without threatening us. Therefore, making a joke about a dead celebrity may be funny and acceptable as long as it doesn't seem to be hurting anyone, but joking about a suicidal person could easily be seen as dangerous and not funny. Relief Theory, pioneered by Freud, looks at laughter as something akin to an orgasm: tension builds up and we must release it some way. In the context of dark humor, this means we accumulate tension concerning taboo topics such as sex and violence and then cathartically release that tension by laughing about it.
Neither of these theories are fail proof because comedy is just so dang complex and subjective, but they provide some good food for thought as to how humor can serve as a coping mechanism. Studies have proven what we all know instinctively: laughter makes us feel better even in the midst of tragedy. Physiologically, humor lessens the emotional pain and physically laughter eases the effects of stress.
So what about those who say, "too soon?" Well, according to Benign Violation Theory, these people perceive the joke as threatening rather than benign. This is where it gets really tricky for those creating the jokes. It's a given that most people won't find a joke very funny when it involves a threat to murder them. That clearly isn't benign. But people can view jokes as threatening their beliefs and values, and they therefore perceive it as dangerous while other people may not. On the other side of the spectrum, if the joke doesn't violate any expectation, they might just not find it funny at all. It's a balancing act and even experts like the Onion can't please everybody. Whether a joke will be funny or offensive boils down to people's personal belief systems. It doesn't mean you're a bad person if you laugh or a wet blanket if you don't. It's just how we each perceive the world.
Laughing at a tragic situation is a bit like slapping a band-aid on a child's owie. It doesn't change whatever bad even occurred, but it does make you feel better and gives you a commercial break from the tears. So, thank you to the Onion and everyone else trying to keep the world sane right now through these argumentative times. The world is ridiculous anyway. Might as well laugh along with it.
