Incongruity and Incongruity Plus Theory

Very Short Summary

The Incongruity Theory states that laughter is the result of observing two things united that don’t fit together, that are incongruous.

The Incongruity Plus Theory postulates further that simply observing incongruousness isn’t enough. In order to elicit laughter said incongruousness needs to be resolved.

Let me clarify this with a joke example:

- What do you call an alligator in a vest?
- An investigator.

According to the Incongruity Theory the first part, the image of an alligator in a vest should have made you laugh already because an alligator wearing a vest is incongruous.

But most people would laugh at the punchline of the joke “An investigator.” Because it offers a resolution to the incongruousness of the setup.

One problem is that in humor theory incongruousness has become an umbrella term. For example Paul McGhee uses it interchangeably with absurdity, ridiculousness, and the ludicrous. He even offers in his work “Humor: Its Origin and Development” a second definition of incongruousness:

“something unexpected, out of context, inappropriate, unreasonable, illogical, exaggerated, and so forth”

Now John Morreal writes in his book “Comic Relief” the following:

“The core meaning of “incongruity” in standard incongruity theories is that some thing or event we perceive or think about violates our normal mental patterns and normal expectations.” Comic Relief by John (New Directions in Aesthetics) Wiley, Kindle-Version, page 11

And also:

“The core concept in incongruity theories is based on the fact that human experience works with learned patterns. What we have experienced prepares us to deal with what we will experience. When we reach out to touch snow, we expect it to be cold. If a chipmunk is running toward us, we expect it to avoid us, not leap up and bite our jugular vein.” Comic Relief by John (New Directions in Aesthetics) Wiley, Kindle-Version, page 10-11

So something that violates our normal mental patterns and normal expectations can be considered incongruous because we could define “violates our normal mental patterns and normal expectations” simply as a “surprise”. And in my opinion something that surprises us is, even if it’s just for a second, incongruous - not in harmony with it’s surroundings and thus unexpected.

Proponents

James Beattie, Immanuel Kant, Søren Kierkegaard, Arthur Schopenhauer

The Case for the Incongruity and Incongruity Plus Theory

The Incongruity Plus Theory is the dominant humor theory right now and most joke writing strategies are based on it because it gives us one of the most important ingredients a joke needs: Surprise.

Aristotle already wrote in his “Rhetoric” that to get a laugh is to set up an expectation and then violate it.

Cicero wrote in “On the Orator”:

“The most common kind of joke is that in which we expect one thing and another is said; here our own disappointed expectation makes us laugh.” On the Orator by Cicero, trans. E. W. Sutton and H. Rackham. Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942), Book II, ch. 63.

And finally Kant:

“Laughter is an affection arising from the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing.” Critique of Judgment by Immanuel Kant, in The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor, ed. John Morreall (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1987), 47

This is also the reason why the two parts of a joke are normally called the Setup aka the preparation necessary to fool someone, and the Punchline. Punchline because a punch better comes unexpected or the person on the receiving end will evade or defend him- or herself. Some comedians even call it Setup and Surprise but it is the same thing.

The problem we comedy writers now face is, that not just any surprise works. Otherwise “2 + 2 = 5” would have us in stitches because it is surprising. Wrong, but surprising.

Even if we resolve the incongruity a surprise gives us, it doesn’t necessarily mean that people are going to laugh. If someone explains a magic trick and thus resolves the incongruity the magic trick provides by violating our expectations on how the world works, you won’t necessarily laugh.

In order to elicit laughter, incongruity has to resolve in a certain “logical” way. The ending of a joke has to be compatible with the beginning of a joke. And by compatible I mean that after having perceived the joke the start and the end of it still have to make sense. The linguistic professor Victor Raskin will tell us about that in the next chapter.

The Case against the Incongruity and Incongruity Plus Theory

Is it necessary to observe incongruity in order to laugh? Yes. In the sense that it needs to violate our normal mental patterns. Or at least there must be something new in the information we are presented because everything new is per se incongruous until we get to know it.

Is it sufficient to observe incongruity in order to laugh? No. No, because incongruity and resolved incongruity doesn’t necessarily lead to laughter. Read the following:

“2 plus 2 equals 5. Sorry, no it’s four.”

In the span of two short phrases we have observed incongruity and it’s resolution but I would bet real hard cash that there was no laughter on your part.

Rating: Four out of Five Stars

Really good. Helps a lot. Except they don’t explain how to get to an incongruity or how we need to resolve it.

The Takeaway

Always ask yourself: Is there a surprise? Does anything give the surprise away?