Annotation Bibliographies:

Overview:Who does not enjoy a good moment of laughter? Comedy is a worldwide entertainment practice employed by people with the talent and creativity to create, improvise and engage the audience in funny jokes. I am interested in studying the various techniques some of my favorite Puerto Rican comedians use to capture their audiences: Chente Ydrach, Luis Raul, and Lejuan James. I will compare their strategies, their intended audiences, their language, and also their mannerisms. Why is it that these comedians are so popular? Are they popular in Puerto Rico in specific or in Latin America in general? How can their intended audience affect their performances, especially their use of language? Are all my favorite comedians using the same techniques, or are they different? What is each comedians’ intended purpose?

First source:

Weaver, Simon. "The Rhetoric Of Disparagement Humor: An Analysis Of Anti-Semitic Joking Online." Humor: International Journal Of Humor Research 28.2 (2015): 327-347. Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.

Simon Weaver is a Research Associate in the Department of Health Sciences at the University of Leicester, UK. In his article he seeks to outline and synthesize the various approaches to the rhetorical analysis of humor and show how they can be used to analyze racist and sexist humor. The article is intended for well-educated UK and USA citizens concerned about the effects that

racist jokes towards black and Asian people have on society. The article closely attends to the broad forms in which racist humor can be expressed. Weaver examines the ways in which racist humor has communicative impact, is persuasive, and can affect impressions of truth in serious ways. This source is primarily focused on the consequences of disparagement humor; I can see that the author wants to alert the people of the negative impact racist humor can have on the society, and that he is more against it than supportive of it. He proposes that it is primarily the techniques of humor that generate laughter rather than the subject matter (ibid). Weaver gives explicit examples of jokes followed by an analysis of the humor, racism, and technique used. For example: “‘why do Jews have such big noses? Because air is free!’ We can see that the joke contains the techniques definition (13), stereotype (43) and ridicule (36). The shape of the Jewish synagogue is defined through the joke. This definition is then accounted for because of a very common Jewish stereotype, that Jews are miserly. Stereotype works to reduce the existence of any people to crude simplifications. It is this reduction through stereotype that leads to the construction of ridicule or to the derision of the butt of the joke.” This source uses countless of other sources to back up his claims and by doing so, adds to his credibility. This source is similar to other sources in that it discusses the theme about rhetorical humor, but it different in how it is mainly focused on the consequences of using racist humor. This source is excellent for my research paper: it gives dozens of examples, evidence, theory, and sources to back up his claims on racist humor.

Second source:

Brown, Ashley. Satire. Ohio: Charles E Merrill, 1968. Print.

This source is intended for people who are interested in learning the history of satire and for writers and poets who are interested in writing a satire themselves. The purpose of the introduction on satire in this book is to give a brief history context on satire before getting to read famous and historical essay satires that have been written throughout history. This is a very important source for my research paper because it will basically explain and define what a satire is, the purpose of it, and the history of how it has come to be the way it is nowadays. While I analyze the different humor trends in Puerto Rico, the introduction to this book could help distinguish the main differences between different satires and the techniques used to approach the audience. I will be able to distinguish if the Puerto Rican comedians use any satire at all in their humor as comedians. The source mentions how a satirist can approach its audience with an invective stance or a whimsical one, and also on how a satirist can choose to “distance” himself from the critique or approach himself to it to get different responses. This information will work out perfectly with my research paper because I can use this to give my intended audience a gist of the techniques and effects that come with a satire. This source is similar to the other sources in that it gives some techniques on humor and its history, but it is different in that it is mainly focused on the history and the development of satire.

Third source:

Bitzer, Lloyd F. "The Rhetorical Situation." Philosophy and Rhetoric 1, 1 (1968): 1-14. Print.

Lloyd Bitzer is an American rhetorician. He began his rhetoric studies at Edgewood College and in 1962, received his doctorate from the University of Iowa. In The Rhetorical Situation, Bitzer attempts to revive the notion of rhetorical situation, and to establish it as a controlling and fundamental concern of rhetorical theory. He argues that all rhetoric is shaped by a situation (context included) just as it is shaped by its audience. Bitzer argues that rhetoric is essentially-related-to-situation by proving with specific examples of past discourses that all discourses are pragmatic and come into existence because of some specific condition or situation which invites utterance. Bitzer says: “To say that rhetoric is situational means: 1) rhetorical discourse comes into existence as a response to a question, or a solution in response to a problem; 2) a speech is a given rhetorical significance by the situation, just as a unit of discourse is given significance as answer or as solution by the question or problem 3) the situation controls the rhetorical response in the same sense that the question controls the answer and the problem controls the solution.” Bitzer, after explaining what a rhetorical situation is, gives general characteristics and features of rhetorical situations, such as that they exhibit structure, invite a “fitting” response, and more. This source is similar to the other sources in that it will give me yet another tool to analyze the comedians’ humor, but it is very different to other sources in that it is mainly focused on the situation of the rhetoric of the humor. I could use this source to analyze the rhetorical situation of some of the comedians. For example, Chente Ydrach and Lejuan James shoot humorous videos in certain places and events where the jokes are actually inspired by the situation in which they are in, and because of that they are even funnier.

Fourth Source:

Zamir, Tzachi. "Why Does Comedy Give Pleasure?." British Journal Of Aesthetics 54.2 (2014): 175-190. Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.

Tzachi is a researcher at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His main research is focused on philosophical dimensions of dramatic acting. He writes primarily to cinematographers of any type of movie to educate them in the art of comedy and humor. In this paper he proposes a teleological definition of comedy, integrates different accounts of laughter into a relatively unified explanation, clarifies the connection between laughter and comedy, defends a flexible ontology of comic response that enables the coexistence of genuinely competing paradigms of the mind, and suggests how comic pleasure forms an indispensable addition to a theory of comedy. Good information provided in this source includes lines such as the definition of “comedy as an aesthetic offering expected to generate a cheerful mood by means of presenting, usually in a dramatic form, a fictional narrative characterized by ‘a movement towards harmony, reconciliation and happiness.” He gives explicit differences between satire and comedy; gives theory behind what comedy is and what has to come with it; and gives specific terms to certain kinds of humor in comedy. The three features he mentions laughter combines are correlational, attitudinal, and explanatory. His stance on the topic is primarily an objective one and also one of awe toward the theory; I view him as very passionate about the topic. I would consider that this is one of the most important sources I can utilize for my research paper. The information in this article is similar to the other sources in that he has information in humor and comedy, however,

the information in this article is different to all others in its special analysis of humor in comedy itself. The information Tzachi provides is extremely relevant to my analysis on the comedians’ humor, their techniques, the philosophy and science behind what they do and how they do it.

Fifth Source:

Morreall, John, "Philosophy of Humor", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/humor/>.

John Merreall is a funny speaker who does research on the medical, psychological, and social benefits of humor. He also shows his audiences practical ways to add humor to their work and their lives. He is a Doctor of Philosophy and Professor of Religious Studies at the College of William and Mary, and is also the founder of the International Society for Humor Studies and was elected President for 2004-2005. His general audience is the common citizen who lacks knowledge on humor and wants to learn a little about it so that they can also incorporate it into their daily lives. The situation the author seems to be responding to is the philosophy about humor and all its arguments and principles. In addition, he talks about the science and reasons why use humor and why in some cases it is good and in other it is bad. “Simply put, our laughter expresses feelings of superiority over other people or over a former state of ourselves,” he says about the Superiority Theory of humor. He also suggests some additional theories such as the Relief Theory and the Incongruity Theory: “While the Superiority Theory says that the cause of laughter is feelings of superiority, and the Relief Theory says that it is the release of nervous energy, the Incongruity Theory says that it is the perception of something incongruous—something that violates our mental patterns and expectations. This approach was taken by James Beattie, Immanuel Kant, Arthur Schopenhauer, Søren Kierkegaard, and many later philosophers and psychologists. It is now the dominant theory of humor in philosophy and psychology.” This source is also very helpful to my analysis on the history and purpose of comedy when talking about the different humor each comedian I analyze uses. It also provides very credible information because he provides the names of the philosophers that came up with the theories. This source is similar to most of the other sources in that it talks about a little bit of the science and history about humor, but is very different in its approach to humor by taking a philosophical/logical approach. The overall quality of this source is excellent to my analysis on the humor of the different comedians. This source will help me explain the logical reason as to why the different Puerto Rican comedians approach humor the way they do.

Sixth Source:

DeCamp, Elise. "Humoring The Audience: Performance Strategies And Persuasion In Midwestern American Stand-Up Comedy." Humor: International Journal Of Humor Research 28.3 (2015): 449-467. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

This paper explores how performance strategies in stand-up comedy are employed to foster audience receptivity to a comedian’s social commentaries. Elise DeCamp (Department of Anthropology, Western Michigan University) mentions how much of a stand-up comedy performance’s success in fostering audience receptivity to any commentaries launched on social issues depends on the initial moments of contact between a comedian and the audience. The author encompasses the breadth of the comedy process, from the initial hook to the individual experience of audience members. This source especially explores the strategies by which comedians gain audience favor throughout even their more politically and racially charged material. To analyze the effectiveness of different humor techniques, the author interviews a total of thirty audience individuals and twelve comedians. The audience interview was composed of questions that asked on their general opinion about the show, impressions on style/relatability, how accurately/fairly they felt race was presented, and their perception of racial difference. He interviewed the comedians in a different manner, and then tabulated their responses in a frequency chart that tallied the most common answers from audience members and comedians to preferred/successful performance strategies. “In this analysis, I considered the reasons given as to why each strategy or presentation style was more or less favored by the comedians along with how well the performers’ perceptions of successful (laughter-inducing) approaches aligned with audience members’ explanations of what engaged them.” “The primary, favored techniques and styles that I documented through these interviews include: (1) honesty/truth of experience; (2) self-deprecation and personal vulnerability; (3) acknowledgment of the audience (in terms of regional location, different demographics, and shifting mood/thoughts); (4) control of the room/crowd (through competence and acknowledgment); and (5) creatively subtle, non-hostile social commentary.” This source is similar to many of the other sources I am using in that it talks more about comedy and humor, but is different in that all these conclusions are based of off his research and his interviews with real people after having gone to the comedy and seen it. This source is extremely good for my research paper because it goes through the process of analyzing part by part the techniques and approaches different comedians use to captivate their audiences. This will be excellent in my paper to analyze the approach and techniques Puerto Rican comedians have and to distinguish in what ways are their techniques similar or different to the ones mentioned in the source.