I think you get more humorous when you get more serious.
However, this obvious contradiction seems to have something very substantial.
People like Louis de Funes, Heinz Erhardt, Hape Kerkeling, Jim Carrey, Robin William, Woody Allen and many more, are said to have actually been quite serious people.
Developing humor is a matter of mindfulness.One must be able to perceive one’s environment in a way that others often do not, and then push this perception to the extreme, that in this exaggerated way it is also revealed to those who do not normally recognize it.
The stories of Mario Barth live almost exclusively from it.
In this way, the situation is created that one becomes apparent to someone who does not even notice a funny event or peculiarity, without having told him what a stumbling place one thinks he is.He can then laugh about it and everyone is thrilled.
That’s the only thing, it’s not a nice humour.
Afterwards, the person can go on with this joke and tell it to others and thus make sure that he, too, stands there as a fine observer.Which is not the case, but which again, if the third party laughed, does not matter.
And because that is the case, humour and wit can make a decisive contribution to the formation of a population group.Not in every respect, but there are certainly content that can be transported in this way.
For example, if I want to promote more recognition of same- or other-sex couples, it may be helpful to convey this content via jokes about heteros.In which I humorously show how boring heteros are, in relation to gays and lesbians.
Of course, this is also the other way around, if I want to tell jokes in the circle of the Kl-Klux-Klan and stay alive.
Intelligence is also often perceived as funny.Heinz Erhardt once gave the “poem” to the best: “You can drink water, you can leave it.”
Here is played with the ambiguity of the movement.Once you can leave it in the sense of “be” and once you can leave it in the sense of “leave water”. The deliberate omission of a sentence part, which is quite common in language, creates humour here.
Then there’s the “emotional humour.”Here the listener is deliberately lured on a wrong track, which is then concluded with a sentence part, which often leads to a deep laugh in the sense of “Ho Ho Ho Ho Ho Hoooo”. Example: “I have nothing against you, at least nothing that helps.”
Here, the listener is first lured on the wrong track, in which he is made to believe that this is a sympathetic situation, which is then reversed.
Intelligent humor is always also surprising, with U-turns within the narrated.
Then there is the “flat humour,” which is aimed at discriminating against a fringe group.And there should even be people who find it funny.
In the disco:
He: “Well, my sweetness.Why are you standing alone here?” She: “Wanted farts.”
The unexpected turn of the situation has a certain comedy, but the level is just making a belly landing, which, after abusing a bottle of tequila, doesn’t necessarily have to be bad.You can see that it always depends on where you tell a joke to whom and in what state.
The disco joke is rather unsuitable for the boss at the Christmas party, but if he is already at the 3rd whisky you can tell him:
Stock market visitors: “Where are the toilets here?”
Broker: “There’s no, everyone’s snore here.”
Because he knows about money and at the Christmas party he can just be 5’e.
Also important, so that humor is properly understood, or jokes also arrive, is an engaging personality.
Those who have charm, can entertain people without getting bored, who can tell, so that it remains exciting, who can play with gestures, who can use them consciously supportive or contrary, will also be sure of his listeners.
So prerequisites for humor are:
- spiritual ‘tFastness’
- unexpected “tQuerthinking”
- a ‘tcharming personality’
And of course there are people who bring the above-listed attributes and are still not funny, that may be mainly because they don’t want to be.
Then there are people who don’t want to be funny, but bring an involuntary comedy.To a certain extent, madness can be very funny when you think of the Buttler of “Diner for One”.
The bottom line is that you can’t give anyone an ideal path: “Watch out here, so and that’s how you get funny.” That will not work.But one can be clear about the individual mechanisms that a joke goes through to its success and practice that will most likely help.
The bottom line is that everyone has to develop their own personal style, just as musicians develop their style and thus come to a certain recognizability.
Who will give his lecture with “Hello first…” and then speaks rather slowly, almost without emotion, can only be called R眉diger Hoffmann.
If someone said, “And I already had that….Dominions… please tear themselves up a little together we must be here…… so pleaseeeeee”, then that can only be Piet Bell. A certain recognizability is not unimportant either.
“SOOooooo….There I am”…..
And who is that?