The Science of Storytelling

In Will Storrs excellent book “The Science of Storytelling” he says that humans are inherently interested in change. He even goes so far as describing our brain as a change detection machine. Think about a head for a moment: Eyes, ears, tongue, nose are all excellent at detecting change. Even our hair can tell us about changes in the wind.

But our senses get dulled if we are exposed to the same stimuli over a longer period of time: If there is no change our brain stops paying attention and we start to blend out birds chirping and the continuous smell of bread baking in the oven.

When there is not much going on our brainwaves are relaxed but as soon as something changes - the bread in the oven starts to burn, there is a sudden loud noise - a scan would tell us that our brain is firing from all cylinders.

We perk up, tense up, are completely aware of our surroundings until we deem the situation safe again.

Why? Because our natural impulse is to survive. Mostly by not dying and procreating. And we do that by trying to predict the future. The person who can correctly tell what is going to happen doesn’t have to fear it or can even use it to his advantage.

Predicting the future simply means that our brains are hard-wired to look for cause and effect. We see something happening and immediately make assumptions what is going to happen next based on the first thing. Or try to assign a cause to something that has already happened.

And this is why we as humans are so fascinated by change. Our survival depends on it. Because if there is a change and we didn’t predict it, we don’t know the source of the change or how it will play out, it could spell disaster (or opportunity).

And our brain isn’t just a change detection machine it also is a cause and effect machine: We form assumptions almost immediately and without conscious effort.
Imagine a dead body and next to it a bloody knife. Most of us naturally jump to the conclusion that the bloody knife has something to do with how this person died. Murder, we cry.

But if we don’t have more to go on, an as likely explanation would be that the dead person was a butcher and he suffered a heart attack while working.

Working… as a serial killer!

Did you laugh? Maybe you did, maybe you didn’t. But making assumptions about how the world is and how stuff is connected is at the heart of good joke writing.

And we as comedy writers need to know about our brains craving for cause and effect. For always trying to come up with an explanation of how things are connected together. How they make sense. And we need to ruthlessly exploit it for the greater good of making people laugh.

SUMMARY TIME

You thought you were safe, right? You thought I forgot all about the SUMMARY TIME. Surprise! I didn’t. And this will be a tough one. Without looking I want you to write down EVERYTHING you remember about the different theories. And because I’m a nice guy, here is a list of all the names:

And because I love you, here is the format I used for the Humor Theories:

Very Short Summary

What the title says. The shortest summary I could manage while still remaining useful.

Proponents

To quote one of the biggest hits when I was young:

“Who, who, who, who, who?”

Baha Men with “Who let the dogs out?”

The Case for the Theory

Again. What the title says. Reasons and thoughts that support this theory.

The Case against the Theory

Is it necessary in order to laugh? Where I try to explore if what the theory states is necessary in order to create humor.

Is it sufficient in order to laugh? Where I try to explore if what the theory states is sufficient in order to create humor.

Rating: Five out of Five Stars

The more stars, the more important I believe the theory to be when it comes to writing jokes.

The Takeaway

What does it bring to the table when it comes to actually writing some comedy.