Here's a PDF that was created for the Machine,Ñ¢.
http://www.sharebigfile.com/file/68444/mach-001-pdf.html
I'm gonna send it to syn for hosting, too.
Prof Cram, I'd like to get you (and everyone else's) opinion on this.
Umm, some help for the dumbass-impaired, me. How do I download that file. Do I need a login?
Type in the numerical code and wait 30 seconds/
Hmmm...
That fileshare site appears to be crap.
Please to be providing reliable filesharing site.
hehe, the scroll button is my friend. I should have stayed in bed.
Quote from: LMNO on January 25, 2007, 01:57:34 PM
Hmmm...
That fileshare site appears to be crap.
Please to be providing reliable filesharing site.
www.megaupload.com
Awesome.
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HVWZ6PV4
Thanks.
wow i didn't know that one existed (or did you just make it?)
anyway, downloaded and will be printed and distributed soon!
It was made a while back, I'm not sure why it never got distributed.
Reading through it, I think it's also guilty of a bit of "internal" chatter - talking about stuff that I wouldn't have understood if I'd not either spent time here or read the PD.
I really ought to try and figure out how to write "Jailbreaking for Dummies".
Step 1: Get it through your fucking head that rejecting everyone else's opinions does not constitute "thinking for yourself". You're actually doing more to *limit* yourself than to *free* yourself, because now you're confining yourself to opinions you haven't heard anyone else express yet. And what will you do when you *do* find someone who shares your opinion - change it yet again?
DJ R is beginning to roll...
Roll on, baby!
*visualizes an avalanche of plastic rubber duckies rolling down the mountain*
All in all, I'd say this is a really good pamphlet. A few of my comments about the BIP apply here - mainly the question of Audience and the need for some graphics to break up the text. The graphics are a tough issue though, because this pamphlet is already really dense. As is, I think a lot of the text is too small, and it would have to shrink further to make room for stuff. The font changes and the full page graphic on page 6 actually do a nice job of making the whole thing easier to read. So maybe it doesn't need graphics.
The goal of this pamphlet, to conceptualize The Machine, is a noble cause. I'm 100% behind you in hoping that people will snap out of it if we can only get them to realize that they're in it. Or that they ARE it. This is also something that can be done in a fairly small amount of space, so this pamphlet is brimming with potential.
This pamphlet is a lot more obviously directed at random people on the street. As such, some of the Discordian or obscure topics should be fleshed out or elaborated on.
A lot of the essays are clearly copy & pastes of board posts. I think that's okay because it gives the pamphlet a sort of conversational tone... if it were more formal, it might make some of points (particularly p5) too dense to grasp. Still, I think some of the posts should be edited so that they address the public instead of other board members.
Page 2
Pope Mangrove's text is quite good. In paragraph 2, the word Must is unclear - I think it should either be "should" or "is".
Paragraph 3 can use some overall cleanup: (relating to presentation, not content)
The line "When have governments NOT done the things that you isolated as being too specific?" is confusing - not sure what he's referring to there.
The second sentence runs on and should be broken into two or more sentences.
The word Maybe (in the last sentence) should be "may be".
The Little's Ubermensch's essay refers to the Aneristic principle and the Principia - could use a better explanation to make it accessible to the public.
Page 3
Vexaph0d's rant is real cool. I love the opening line where he expresses his fear that even arbitrary weird shit will one day be a part of the Machine, even if it isn't intended to sell Product. Yikes!
Paragraph 3 has the audience problem - the public doesn't know what the Aneristic vs Eristic shtick is.
The "crazy talk" paragraph is full of potential but I can't help feeling that it fizzles somewhat at the end. The talk about the Machine waking up is a really intriguing thought (which will be built upon later in the pamphlet), but Vex doesn't follow through... the paragraph ends by basically saying "if it happens, we're fucked but I don't know why." Luckily there's an immediate follow up which expands on his point.
The discussion below Vexaph0d's section (between LHX and 000) is thought provoking. I had a thought regarding this manner of discussion... (though not specifically related to this pamphlet) In other documents, this type of dialogue could be used to illustrate to the reader how to "think outside the box". Like for example, one person argues for liberal things, and the other argues for conservative things. If both arguments are essentially straw men, a sharp reader might realize that it's not a matter of choosing the best side. The real point we'd be making is that people should draw their own damn conclusions instead of just jumping behind the safest label. (end tangent)
Page 4-5
Both of these essays are very well written and make some excellent points. The top half of p4 is a really great crystallization of the BIP project, and it's a perfect setup for the point made at the bottom of the page: we're trapped in the machine, but if you keep your head up, you can avoid some of its snares.
p5: I have five boners for Douglas Hofstadter. I think he was a good choice to cite and the quote is very relevant.
At the bottom of the page, 000 references Discordian Chaos / OM, which will be lost on the public. There's probably a short phrase which could be plugged in to get the point across. perhaps "absurdity"? "pranks on the public"? Eh, I'm not sure.
Page 6-7
I love this spread. This is exactly the kind of humor that the pamphlet needed. I think the memo is an acceptable place to put in all those lunatic fringe references like Fnord and Subgenius. Anyone that's followed the pamphlet so far may be intrigued by these silly words... they allude to the larger conceptual framework which gave birth to this pamphlet.
The article "is the machine a conspiracy?" is the perfect follow up to the Illuminati memo.
The graphic at the bottom of 7 needs to be sharper - I can't read it.
Page 8
I LAWL'd at this page. Really well put together. I love that you get a little certificate for being enlightened by the pamphlet, but then the certificate says its worthless.
so that's my $0.02
Good thinking, all around.
Actually, I forgot that somone put in that last page. If you try to print the thing out & compile it, you'll have an odd number of pages. When I distribute the thing, I usually leave that out. I think I can use the "dense text" suggestion to add 2 more pages, and then we'll be in business.
i have text in the Machine pamphlet?
think my polystyrene nose is cutting circulation to my brain or something....lol...
Yup.
QuoteThe Machine,Ñ¢ loves to polarize situations in their favour (us/them...good/evil etc) but
immediately reverts to obfuscation & smoke screens the moment someone notices.
People are a fundamental component of the Machine,Ñ¢. The degree to which they are
a component is variable, but essentially being alive and part of a society inducts one
into Machineship,Ñ¢.
Governments are collections of people, regardless of whatever means they were
assembled (democracy, military dictatorship etc etc). so as long as people are
involved, then there must be a potential for Machinist,Ñ¢ features to arise.
When have governments NOT done the things that you isolated as being too specific?
I think an underlying problem is that within the Machine,Ñ¢ are the desires for power
& control for their own sake and the attending problem of holding on to that power
for as long as possible. The points I listed maybe specific manifestations but their
motivation are, I believe, very much part of the greater apparatus that we think is 'the
Machine,Ñ¢'.
-Pope T. Mangrove xvii
well fack me ol' boots.
it's twoo! it's twoo!
ok...groovy.
:-)
> I have five boners for Douglas Hofstadter.
FINALLY!!!
someone on this forum who read the damn book!
IT WAS ABOUT FUCKING TIME
I read it too.
Just saying.
what?
oh.
oh, because when posting about it on the old BIP forum, i had kinda like the feeling i was talking about something nobody heard of before.
good! very good!
i think it's one of the better mindfucks i ever read, though i must say i'm having a hard time enjoying it just as much the second time i'm reading it.
i've read some of it.
Quote from: Vexaph0d
Soon, even weird shit that shouldn't make any sense at all will only reinforce the Machine (TM), even if it isn't intended to sell Product.
I've been chewing on this quote all day and it occurred to me that there's an awful lot of absurdity that's creeping into the mainstream. YTMND, for example. Or viral internet things ("All your base..."). Or the Chuck Norris phenomenon. Or so many crazy tv commercials.
maybe
Ten years from now a man will walk down the street in a gorilla suit, rubbing his crotch or something, and it'll blend in with the background, fading into the whirring machine hum. People will write it off 'cause rather than being shocked by random incomprehensible shit, they're numb to it.
So what rebellion comes after that? How do you shock people that are bored of being shocked?
1) I'm not sure I would consider the examples you give to be "absurdity"
2) You don't have to wait ten years, IMO. But I think it has more to do with a proclivity to be detached from your surroundings than being numb to absurdity. It's similar to someone seeing someone broken down on the highway and not having the thought of stopping to offer help ever entering the mind.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on January 25, 2007, 09:04:54 PM
Quote from: Vexaph0d
Soon, even weird shit that shouldn't make any sense at all will only reinforce the Machine (TM), even if it isn't intended to sell Product.
I've been chewing on this quote all day and it occurred to me that there's an awful lot of absurdity that's creeping into the mainstream. YTMND, for example. Or viral internet things ("All your base..."). Or the Chuck Norris phenomenon. Or so many crazy tv commercials.
maybe
Ten years from now a man will walk down the street in a gorilla suit, rubbing his crotch or something, and it'll blend in with the background, fading into the whirring machine hum. People will write it off 'cause rather than being shocked by random incomprehensible shit, they're numb to it.
So what rebellion comes after that? How do you shock people that are bored of being shocked?
With as xtian and theocratic as the US is becoming, there will continue to be many things that shock people. Hell, they can't even deal with two men kissing.
...or a woman's nipple slippage.
we have abolished our topless laws in this city a few years back
so women have the same rights as men to go topless
sadly no one has taken advantage
:cry:
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on January 26, 2007, 01:54:44 AM
we have abolished our topless laws in this city a few years back
so women have the same rights as men to go topless
sadly no one has taken advantage
:cry:
You just wait till the Xtians get up in Canada. :lulz:
ohhhhh we got em
the thing is i live in a pretty french town
and it used to be mostly French Roman Catholics, which were pretty laid back (other then those sadistic, crazy, teacher nuns :cry:)
unfortunately in last about 10 years other freaky Christians like the Jehovah's, Borne Agains, Conservative Babtists, and other Fundamentalists have more of a presence
and the Roman Catholics are dwindling, churches are merging, ect.
Kind of unfortunate really
I used to like the days when i knew my local priest, could talk to him on the bus, and he WASN'T judgemental
but such is progress, or degress, or what have you
I don't miss the crazy french canadian teacher nuns though
my baby sisters is just 4 years yonger then me and they were more or less all gone by the time she reached mid-grade school
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on January 25, 2007, 09:04:54 PMI've been chewing on this quote all day and it occurred to me that there's an awful lot of absurdity that's creeping into the mainstream. YTMND, for example. Or viral internet things ("All your base..."). Or the Chuck Norris phenomenon. Or so many crazy tv commercials.
maybe
Ten years from now a man will walk down the street in a gorilla suit, rubbing his crotch or something, and it'll blend in with the background, fading into the whirring machine hum. People will write it off 'cause rather than being shocked by random incomprehensible shit, they're numb to it.
So what rebellion comes after that? How do you shock people that are bored of being shocked?
i think this implies that simply shocking people is not the way to go. it's not the shock that does the mindfuck that causes the thinking that opens the door.
like mooing in a public transport (sorry kaouusu, but i sorta agree with PVS on that -- though that doesn't mean it isn't fun!)
to RWHN: doesn't the fact that you don't think those examples are really absurd, sort of prove the Prof's argument? also, even though All Your Base is oldest hat as anything, if you don't think it's completely absurd to carry a mistranslated japanese text so far, then i think we're talking about a different definition of absurdism ;-)
speaking about absurdism. i could give a lot of examples of more subtle, not-quite-but-seemingly-non-sequitur absurdism that appears in Dutch and Belgian humouristic cartoons (to name a few, Kamagurka, Gummbah, Spekkie Big, Het Stomme Beertje ..).
they often take the shape of "intensely bad jokes", kind of like the link of unfinished jokes i passed in another (or this?) thread to LMNO.
I have organized "the International Day of the Bad Joke" event/party a few times at my students-association (edition 1, 2 1/2 and of course 33 1/3 .. because Bad Jokes aren't supposed to be funny). the main running feature of the event was "the interruption microphone". when somebody had a Bad Joke to share with the audience, they would get on the stage, the music would be stopped, and in utter silence the joke would be told, followed by utter silence (if there was any laughter instead of some painful groaning, obviously it was NOT a Bad Joke and the person would be honed away by the audience "NO PUNS!!!").
An example of a typical Bad Joke (which survives translation rather well):
At his office, an accountant opens the safe. He finds a naked woman inside. Says the accountant "WHERE IS THE MONEY??!"
as preparation for this event i took the task upon myself to let no possibility for a Bad Joke go untold. after practising this a few weeks before the event, I never got rid of the habit afterwards. I enjoy the groaning of utter despair way too much in a sadistic kind of way to not bother people with. (ok I admit, they usually turn out to be incredibly bad far-fetched puns)
Triple Zero is now my new short-term personal savior.
Quote from: LMNO on January 26, 2007, 12:57:24 PM
short-term personal savior.
I've stolen that and filed it beside my "Annual Bible"
Just so you know, I stole it from TGRR.
Hah copythefted2
Who took it from the Book of the Subgenius.
Who took it from Middle Eastern cults.
Who took it from the Roman Empire
It's just turtles, turtles, turtles, all the way down.
didnt one of the disciples say that to jesus?
I wish.
Quote from: LHX on January 26, 2007, 01:37:05 PM
didnt one of the disciples say that to jesus?
troof it was archibald the undresser
He showed up in one of the gospels that the pope, in his infinite wisdom, decided should be cut from the theatrical release.
Quote from: triple zero on January 26, 2007, 11:46:26 AM
to RWHN: doesn't the fact that you don't think those examples are really absurd, sort of prove the Prof's argument? also, even though All Your Base is oldest hat as anything, if you don't think it's completely absurd to carry a mistranslated japanese text so far, then i think we're talking about a different definition of absurdism ;-)
Yeah, I suppose my definition of absurdism is probably different. I think I agree with the spirit of what the Prof was saying, I just didn't really think the particular examples she gave were all that absurd. But I still think the issue of detachment is stronger than any numbness to absurdism, but that's just me.
Quoteas preparation for this event i took the task upon myself to let no possibility for a Bad Joke go untold. after practising this a few weeks before the event, I never got rid of the habit afterwards. I enjoy the groaning of utter despair way too much in a sadistic kind of way to not bother people with. (ok I admit, they usually turn out to be incredibly bad far-fetched puns)
There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns. It is a cosmic rule. All opportunities for puns must be seized upon.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 26, 2007, 02:10:36 PM
There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns. It is a cosmic rule. All opportunities for puns must be seized upon.
I got a visual of Roman Emperor bukkake.
Quote from: DJRubberducky on January 26, 2007, 03:23:09 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 26, 2007, 02:10:36 PM
There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns.  It is a cosmic rule.  All opportunities for puns must be seized upon. 
I got a visual of Roman Emperor bukkake.
Ahh, so you've seen Caligula then right? :-D
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 26, 2007, 03:47:28 PM
Quote from: DJRubberducky on January 26, 2007, 03:23:09 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 26, 2007, 02:10:36 PM
There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns. It is a cosmic rule. All opportunities for puns must be seized upon.
I got a visual of Roman Emperor bukkake.
Ahh, so you've seen Caligula then right? :-D
No, actually, I've not. It was just the mental connection of "seize" and "Caesar".
(Feel free to be shocked and dismayed that I've not seen the movie. I get that a lot. I've not yet seen the entirety of Spaceballs, and it was only within the last 18 months that I'd ever seen Blazing Saddles. And I still haven't fully seen Star Wars episodes 5 and 6.)
I'm not shocked. I don't know many people in my circle in real life that have seen it. You should rent it sometime though. Malcolm MacDowell plays an excellent sexually and mentally derranged Roman Emperor.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 26, 2007, 04:15:35 PM
I'm not shocked. I don't know many people in my circle in real life that have seen it. You should rent it sometime though. Malcolm MacDowell plays an excellent sexually and mentally derranged Roman Emperor.
Not to mention Helen Mirren, who's still my dictionary definition of the word 'fuck'
What I thought was interesting is the desensitization I experienced. by the end of the movie, it was all "Oh, look. More breasts. Yawn."
Kinda like Showgirls.
But did Showgirls have the Wall of Death? I think not! :-D
Quote from: triple zero on January 26, 2007, 11:46:26 AM
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on January 25, 2007, 09:04:54 PMI've been chewing on this quote all day and it occurred to me that there's an awful lot of absurdity that's creeping into the mainstream. YTMND, for example. Or viral internet things ("All your base..."). Or the Chuck Norris phenomenon. Or so many crazy tv commercials.
maybe
Ten years from now a man will walk down the street in a gorilla suit, rubbing his crotch or something, and it'll blend in with the background, fading into the whirring machine hum. People will write it off 'cause rather than being shocked by random incomprehensible shit, they're numb to it.
So what rebellion comes after that? How do you shock people that are bored of being shocked?
i think this implies that simply shocking people is not the way to go. it's not the shock that does the mindfuck that causes the thinking that opens the door.
like mooing in a public transport (sorry kaouusu, but i sorta agree with PVS on that -- though that doesn't mean it isn't fun!)
to RWHN: doesn't the fact that you don't think those examples are really absurd, sort of prove the Prof's argument? also, even though All Your Base is oldest hat as anything, if you don't think it's completely absurd to carry a mistranslated japanese text so far, then i think we're talking about a different definition of absurdism ;-)
speaking about absurdism. i could give a lot of examples of more subtle, not-quite-but-seemingly-non-sequitur absurdism that appears in Dutch and Belgian humouristic cartoons (to name a few, Kamagurka, Gummbah, Spekkie Big, Het Stomme Beertje ..).
they often take the shape of "intensely bad jokes", kind of like the link of unfinished jokes i passed in another (or this?) thread to LMNO.
I have organized "the International Day of the Bad Joke" event/party a few times at my students-association (edition 1, 2 1/2 and of course 33 1/3 .. because Bad Jokes aren't supposed to be funny). the main running feature of the event was "the interruption microphone". when somebody had a Bad Joke to share with the audience, they would get on the stage, the music would be stopped, and in utter silence the joke would be told, followed by utter silence (if there was any laughter instead of some painful groaning, obviously it was NOT a Bad Joke and the person would be honed away by the audience "NO PUNS!!!").
An example of a typical Bad Joke (which survives translation rather well):
At his office, an accountant opens the safe. He finds a naked woman inside. Says the accountant "WHERE IS THE MONEY??!"
as preparation for this event i took the task upon myself to let no possibility for a Bad Joke go untold. after practising this a few weeks before the event, I never got rid of the habit afterwards. I enjoy the groaning of utter despair way too much in a sadistic kind of way to not bother people with. (ok I admit, they usually turn out to be incredibly bad far-fetched puns)
Well, that's just it, though, isn't it?
The joke itself, bad, punny, etc., doesn't have to be brilliant. It has to represent a cultural base that's easily recognizable by the audience it's told to and its message needs to be salient and make a point not already made (or at least somewhat original to the thinking brain, so that it sticks).
That's what absurdity can do if it's effective. The effective absurd transcends shock, transcends funny.
The "mooing" example, for example, wasn't meant to bring people out of anything other than the usual-somnolent state they employ while being literally herded by their infrastructure and socio-cultural space from one point to another. You bring them out of this comotosal state by a simple onomatopoeia: moo.
It's brilliant, actually. Because it's easily tangible and immediately effective.
Especially if they then take it to the next level and stampede. :D
LMNO:
> Triple Zero is now my new short-term personal savior.
how short-term?
and are you saved yet?
is there anything i can do to strengthen my position for the next short term?
RWHN:
> There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns.
but the badness of my puns is only outshone (?) by their far-fetchedness!
Jenne:
> Well, that's just it, though, isn't it?
i am aware that that post seems to be contradicting itself. but let me summarize it shortly in the two points that it tries to make:
1) simply shocking people, just as simple absurdism is not the way to go for the kind of making-schmucks-think-for-themselves type mindfuck that discordians are after. just that is not enough for making people genuinely go "huh?" in which very short moment they have to actually form their own opinion about something and think for themselves.
you need something extra, something that (metaphorically speaking) is on one end attached to their current paradigm, but peels loose from it and heads elsewhere like a curved piece of rail for their train of thought (whoa, metaphores!) and at the end of it finding themselves in no-mans-land.
2) i personally enjoy absurdisms and bad far-fetched puns. but they're not particularly enlightening for the people i tell them to (except for the accidental random horrible troof that slips by). they are related to discordianism in the way that my taste for bad puns is probably what got me interested in the first place, but i don't think it's a keystone anymore in the discordianism of the 21st century. or, rather, it kind of goes without saying.
maybe absurdism and bad puns were more novel and new in the 60s when the PD was written?
3) sorry for the bad english and the fact that it was not, in fact, a short summary. i misled you.
4) edit: i totally forgot about lollercaust. maybe i take it all back.
Confucius say "flash of wisdom just as likely to come from bad joke as barstool to the head"
Saying the right thing, to the right person, in just the right way, at the precise time it takes for them to 'get it', is something that defies deliberate intention.
If the intention is there regardless, however, then you both end up laughing at the cosmic joke together. It's like cerebral simultaneous orgasm. I kinda dig it. And it also doesn't make me feel queasy sharing it with a man.
Quote from: triple zero on January 26, 2007, 08:27:50 PM
LMNO:
> Triple Zero is now my new short-term personal savior.
how short-term?
and are you saved yet?
is there anything i can do to strengthen my position for the next short term?
RWHN:
> There is no such thing as bad far-fetched puns.
but the badness of my puns is only outshone (?) by their far-fetchedness!
Jenne:
> Well, that's just it, though, isn't it?
i am aware that that post seems to be contradicting itself. but let me summarize it shortly in the two points that it tries to make:
1) simply shocking people, just as simple absurdism is not the way to go for the kind of making-schmucks-think-for-themselves type mindfuck that discordians are after. just that is not enough for making people genuinely go "huh?" in which very short moment they have to actually form their own opinion about something and think for themselves.
you need something extra, something that (metaphorically speaking) is on one end attached to their current paradigm, but peels loose from it and heads elsewhere like a curved piece of rail for their train of thought (whoa, metaphores!) and at the end of it finding themselves in no-mans-land.
2) i personally enjoy absurdisms and bad far-fetched puns. but they're not particularly enlightening for the people i tell them to (except for the accidental random horrible troof that slips by). they are related to discordianism in the way that my taste for bad puns is probably what got me interested in the first place, but i don't think it's a keystone anymore in the discordianism of the 21st century. or, rather, it kind of goes without saying.
maybe absurdism and bad puns were more novel and new in the 60s when the PD was written?
3) sorry for the bad english and the fact that it was not, in fact, a short summary. i misled you.
4) edit: i totally forgot about lollercaust. maybe i take it all back.
1) I don't think you need to reinvent any wheels, however. All that was being suggested was a lighter touch. A spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down, so to speak. And don't forget, for all those guys are now "old hat," the original authors of the PD have longevity. There's a reason for that.
2) I don't think humor is declasse. To assume so is to throw out your funny bone with the bathwater. Not cool. You also assume your readership doesn't have a funnybone. They do, and they like to use it. No need to be scholarly and professorlike, ranting and preacherlike 100% of the time. Coaxing, cajoling and going for the hoots and hollers can be just as effective. Luring the flies with honey rather than vinegar, I guess.
What I'm trying to say is that throwing what material there COULD be out there and not expecting great and huge things from it could actually have more of a surprise and good things come out of it than you'd expect. That's the best kind of material, in a lot of ways. If it's reachable, if it's not unattached to the original goal, then why the hell not?
Is laughing at yourself a waste of time?
not really sure if that's what i wanted to say, but i agree 100% with what you just said there.
though i still think it would be very valuable to make sure there is also an extra, discordian-oriented, layer underneath the humor. so that people don't go "haha very funny" and then dismiss it, but perhaps question themselves "why was that funny" or some other lingering thought.
though humour an sich, is already quite good for this itself, like sillycybin said in the cosmic giggle thread, the very moment of "getting it", is like this tiny drop of enlightenment.
Quote from: triple zero on January 27, 2007, 11:13:43 AM
though humour an sich, is already quite good for this itself, like sillycybin said in the cosmic giggle thread, the very moment of "getting it", is like this tiny drop of enlightenment.
All humor is is a method of reacting to our realization of a break in a pattern. Pretty much anything funny is out of the ordinary in some way. Presenting people with a lot of humor is a great way of getting people acclimated to the unusual, so they'd be more willing to look at actual philosophy.
(I hope nobody already said that. If so, :oops: in advance.)
maybe useful addition here, the "definition of humour" according to John Cleese, which i picked up from one of his books ages ago (so i may have remembered it wrong):
Quote from: John Cleesetwo --at first sight unrelated-- frames of reference that are brought into connection in an unexpected manner
Dammit, I needed that definition over THERE *points to humor in BIP fread*... :D
Quote from: triple zero on January 29, 2007, 10:31:34 AM
maybe useful addition here, the "definition of humour" according to John Cleese, which i picked up from one of his books ages ago (so i may have remembered it wrong):
Quote from: John Cleesetwo --at first sight unrelated-- frames of reference that are brought into connection in an unexpected manner
Baby seal walks into a club.
easy, it's a double one in fact.
- on one level:
two frames of reference = two meanings of the word "club"
unexpected manner = usage in a "walks into a .."-joke, which arguably isn't really unexpected once you think of it, but it's short enough to be unexpected before you have a chance to think about it. timing is also part of humour.
- on another level:
two frames of reference = 1) the typical expectation of structure of a "X walks into a bar/club"-joke versus 2) the actual structure of the joke
unexpected manner = the joke does not follow the typical structure of this joke but instead ends prematurely as the punchline is in the usage of the word "club", not in what actually happens in the club.
(explaining the joke from this template can probably also be done in a few other ways, perhaps)
Quote from: triple zero on January 30, 2007, 10:00:54 PM
easy, it's a double one in fact.
- on one level:
two frames of reference = two meanings of the word "club"
unexpected manner = usage in a "walks into a .."-joke, which arguably isn't really unexpected once you think of it, but it's short enough to be unexpected before you have a chance to think about it. timing is also part of humour.
- on another level:
two frames of reference = 1) the typical expectation of structure of a "X walks into a bar/club"-joke versus 2) the actual structure of the joke
unexpected manner = the joke does not follow the typical structure of this joke but instead ends prematurely as the punchline is in the usage of the word "club", not in what actually happens in the club.
(explaining the joke from this template can probably also be done in a few other ways, perhaps)
I would put this whole thing down. Explaining a joke is sooo unfunny that it's funny to me.
effort takes humor out of everything
unless you are watching the thing making the effort
then its funny as hell
like this thread is prolly a riot to anybody reading it
people are suspicious of people who try to be funny
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 30, 2007, 10:04:34 PMI would put this whole thing down. Explaining a joke is sooo unfunny that it's funny to me.
hell yeah! :lol:
usually when i make a joke/pun so BAD that people's brains somehow refuse to even attempt to get it or recognize it's a joke.
i EXPLAIN it to them, just to PAIN them some more.
down to the gritty details.
"not funny huh??! I'LL SHOW YOU NOT FUNNY"
Quote from: triple zero on January 30, 2007, 10:34:38 PM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 30, 2007, 10:04:34 PMI would put this whole thing down. Explaining a joke is sooo unfunny that it's funny to me.
hell yeah! :lol:
usually when i make a joke/pun so BAD that people's brains somehow refuse to even attempt to get it or recognize it's a joke.
i EXPLAIN it to them, just to PAIN them some more.
down to the gritty details.
"not funny huh??! I'LL SHOW YOU NOT FUNNY"
hahaaaaaaa
you sick bastard
make em squirm huh?
Quote from: LHX on January 30, 2007, 10:20:57 PM
effort takes humor out of everything
unless you are watching the thing making the effort
then its funny as hell
like this thread is prolly a riot to anybody reading it
people are suspicious of people who try to be funny
You're right. But I do think it's possible to
try to be funny and
succeed. (see: stand up comics, television) The riot you're talking about is when someone tries to be funnier than they actually are (see: stand up comics, television).
Quote from: LHX on January 30, 2007, 10:20:57 PM
effort takes humor out of everything
unless you are watching the thing making the effort
then its funny as hell
like this thread is prolly a riot to anybody reading it
people are suspicious of people who try to be funny
Thats what I was saying in the other thread.
Just spit the knowledge and the funny will come out on it's own.
Quote from: triple zero on January 30, 2007, 10:34:38 PM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 30, 2007, 10:04:34 PMI would put this whole thing down. Explaining a joke is sooo unfunny that it's funny to me.
hell yeah! :lol:
usually when i make a joke/pun so BAD that people's brains somehow refuse to even attempt to get it or recognize it's a joke.
i EXPLAIN it to them, just to PAIN them some more.
down to the gritty details.
"not funny huh??! I'LL SHOW YOU NOT FUNNY"
You weren't trying to be funny were you? It just came out.
Unless i'm wrong. Then you are the joke writer.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 31, 2007, 12:57:22 AMYou weren't trying to be funny were you? It just came out.
Unless i'm wrong. Then you are the joke writer.
well on the one hand i was of course demonstrating the "definition" i put up earlier (as i felt RWHN's post was a challenge to that, but i might have been wrong)
on the other hand it's kind of morbid fun to dissect jokes while they're still alive and wriggling, of course i know the analysis completely destroys the funny. if you take an intricate piece of fireworks apart bit by bit it also won't go off anymore, but -- and not only for seeing how it works -- it's kinda fun to do it.
two frames of reference, funny/not funny, brought in to a connection in an unexpected manner? :)
hey but isn't that what we're doing all the time here, the universe/machines/ourselves has played a horrible cosmic joke on us, and we can either die laughing or we can pick it apart until it's not funny anymore? ;-)
Quote from: triple zero on January 31, 2007, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 31, 2007, 12:57:22 AMYou weren't trying to be funny were you? It just came out.
Unless i'm wrong. Then you are the joke writer.
well on the one hand i was of course demonstrating the "definition" i put up earlier (as i felt RWHN's post was a challenge to that, but i might have been wrong)
on the other hand it's kind of morbid fun to dissect jokes while they're still alive and wriggling, of course i know the analysis completely destroys the funny. if you take an intricate piece of fireworks apart bit by bit it also won't go off anymore, but -- and not only for seeing how it works -- it's kinda fun to do it.
two frames of reference, funny/not funny, brought in to a connection in an unexpected manner? :)
hey but isn't that what we're doing all the time here, the universe/machines/ourselves has played a horrible cosmic joke on us, and we can either die laughing or we can pick it apart until it's not funny anymore? ;-)
No, I wasn't challenging, I was providing an example. Also, anytime I can use that joke I will. One of my faves it is. And also I like your approach with the bad jokes that people don't get. I do that sometimes as well, though, often times I will just follow up with another bad joke until people start running away from me.
RWHN,
Knows how to clear a room.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 31, 2007, 01:58:03 PMAlso, anytime I can use that joke I will.  One of my faves it is. 
ah, i also have one of those (don't know if it translates well, but i'll try)
two idiots standing in front of the traffic light.
one says: "it's green"
the other says: "a frog"
Quote from: triple zero on January 30, 2007, 10:34:38 PM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on January 30, 2007, 10:04:34 PMI would put this whole thing down. Explaining a joke is sooo unfunny that it's funny to me.
hell yeah!  :lol:
usually when i make a joke/pun so BAD that people's brains somehow refuse to even attempt to get it or recognize it's a joke.
i EXPLAIN it to them, just to PAIN them some more.
down to the gritty details.
"not funny huh??! I'LL SHOW YOU NOT FUNNY" Here's some pictures of Carrot Top!!
LAIL Mechanics, the lot of you.
Dirty bastards.
If I make you laugh by sticking out my tongue, is that glossolaila?
Quote from: DJRubberducky on January 31, 2007, 08:46:52 PM
If I make you laugh by sticking out my tongue, is that glossolaila?
that's deep.
ever thought of joining SSOOKN?
Mmm...I don't do well in groups. That's why I hang out here. :D
Quote from: DJRubberducky on January 31, 2007, 09:18:18 PM
Mmm...I don't do well in groups.  That's why I hang out here. :D
it's free, no meetings, almost zero level commitment and teh scrid brings you snacks.
Quote from: LMNO on January 25, 2007, 01:32:32 PM
Here's a PDF that was created for the Machine,Ñ¢.
http://www.sharebigfile.com/file/68444/mach-001-pdf.html
I'm gonna send it to syn for hosting, too.
Prof Cram, I'd like to get you (and everyone else's) opinion on this.
[re-jack]
Ok, the entire PDF needs to be done over, as far as layout is concerned. I can alter the text to add another page, but I need someone who's good with PDF layout toactually put it together. Who's up for it?
Synaptyx and TOA are both skilled with pdf image and layout.
OK, I'll PM them.