Four Months Later....

I need to read more.

I found some of what I need in an old book by Michael Sells that I got in my philosophy of religion class as an undergrad.

What the hell does philosophy of religion have to with Batcat?

Far more than you'd think.

I've gone back and forth over writing this thesis as an analysis of narrative structures of comedy or the kind of spiritual aspect that I see in absurdist humor.

I keep coming back to the spiritual. I think more concrete theories of comedy have to come into play, as well. But this is what I've realized in that four months: ideally, a Batcat cartoon should function in much the same was a Zen Koan does. Something that uses an established format to intentionally confound rational thought so as to create an unmodulated immediacy between the viewer and the emotional response.

Sells draws the analogy between trying discursively describe the ineffable nature of God and trying to explain the humor of a joke. Any comedian knows that if you have to explain it, it isn't funny. That because laughter is such an irrational, instinctual response, even without absurdity layered on top of it. The Batcat style of humor, or what I am still calling freestanding humor, ideally, would take that one step further. Explanation should not only be detrimental to freestanding humor, but in fact, barely achievable.

My advisor, Tina O'Hailey, recommended a book to me that I have bought but not yet read, which she told me at one point contains a passage regarding a theory of comedy that essentially states that comedy is created by creating and then thwarting or subverting an expectation. Freestanding humor should thwart that expectation itself, either by not turning at all, or by incorporating elements into the punchline that bear no relation to the initial volley of the discourse. I prefer the former, as I envision freestanding humor as a single moment that contains set-up, turn, and punchline simultaneously.