A Rabbi, a Priest, and a Nun Walk Into a Bar. . Or, the Search for Comedic Architecture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A RABBI, A PRIEST, AND A NUN WALK INTO A BAR. OR, THE SEARCH FOR COMEDIC ARCHITECTURE An Undergraduate Thesis in Architecture By Ryan MoUoy Submitted to the College of Architecture At Texas Tech University In partial fulfilhnent of the degree of: Bachelor of Architecture Programming Instructor: Dr. Michael Jones, Ph.D. Design Critic: Joanna Mross Accepted Dean dojlege of Architecture Special Section: {1.51 ^^^f''^- nn .f jrf <* *^'' X y X .^^- Searching for ideas was like Ilookin g for burried treasure. I learned how to build ^ ' great architecture. peculiar perspectives Note to reader: this crucial page of the plot development was unfortunately draw n with disappearing ink. Table of Contents Introduction Architecture as a Comedic Act What is Humor? A Few Theories Regarding Why We Laugh Defining the Root of Humor The Architect and the Farceur Model Farceurs Tricks of the Trade Formula for Comedy The Satire The New Religion: Television A New Pantheon of Gods Gospels of Televisions Greats Hymnals for a New Religion Roles of the Church: Worship, Learning, Fellowship The Mother Road Route 66 and the New Religion Americana Functional Building Requirements The Primary Function Tables, and Charts, and Graphs, Oh My! Introduction David Farrell Krell writes in his hook Archeticture, "Without multiplicity, mix, swap, surrender, ecstasy, and humor—no arheticture. Instead, an architecture shaped in the traditional mold, one that exchanges the entire universe of life for a few facades of power."^ Krell speaks of humor as being an essential element of architecture. It is true; humor is, and has been, historically an element often found, though commonly overlooked, in architecture. This notion of humor being an essential element in architecture has moved the author to search for an architecture of humor, an architecture that does not concede to anything but the conventions of comedy. This is not a reaction to current stylistic trends in architecture. It is, however, an experiment to test the boundaries architecture has as a medium of expression. If we are able to communicate worldly ideas, cosmic forces, and timeless thinking through architecture we should be able to create comedy. It seeks to ask if an architecture can be created whose structure, form, and function can be inherently comedic. The project proposes a pilgrimage church for those who watch television religiously. It serves as a satire; the underlying foundation upon which one builds comedic architecture. Through the notion of celebrating television with something as sacred as 'church' we begin the pursuit of comic architecture. ^ David Farrell Krell, Archeticture: Ecstacies of Space, Time, and the Human Body (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997), 34. Architecture as a Comedic Act Architecture is a medium of expression just as is art, prose, poetry, the five-panel comic strip, film, and theater. These are merely the mediums through which we communicate various ideas. If the content of film can exist for the purpose of making us laugh, can architecture do the same? The sole purpose of the half-hour sit-com is an expression of comedy; can architecture be similar to sit-com in which its sole function is comedy? What is Humor? Humor is everywhere, it works its way into every aspect of our daily lives. Humor is found in the newspaper, on the television, in literature, magazines, radio shows, bathroom graffiti, architecture, art, and in our daily conversations with others. There is no escaping humor, and no subject matter is sacred to the attack of comedy. Humor has penetrated our most treasured beliefs and private aspects of our lives, whether it is sex, religion, politics, death, education, and ethnicity. If there is something one can name it has most likely been ridiculed, joked about, or used for someone's comic attack.^ Humor has no boundaries. For unknown reasons we laugh at the comic revelations about the inadequacies and absurdities of ourselves. We even laugh at our own expense. Humor gives us delight. Events in our lives that are humorous make us feel good. In fact, that very aspect, delight, is the most important aspect of humor.^ To create an exact definition of humor is impossible. Humor remains enigmatic. We can define some common things that make us laugh and we are able to recognize the varying modes of comedy, but there still remains a great deal of controversy as to why we consider something as funny. Perhaps we can only define what humor is by the feelings we receive from it. Humor gives us pleasure, in a sense humor tickles our minds. 2Arhtur Asa Berger, A// Anatomy of Humor (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1993), 1. 3lbid, 2. A Few Theories Regarding Why We Laugh. The ambiguity of the definition of humor has attracted some of the greatest minds. The theories of Emanuel Kant, Thomas Hobbes, Sigmund Freud, and others has helped formulate and influence the work of humorists. It is important to recognize theories of why we laugh if we are to be able to understand what humor is. For Aristotle, humor, is based on imitation of men worse than the average. This notion that comedy is predicated on people who are "ridiculous" suggests the superiority theory. Hobbes took Aristotle's notion further, saying that: "The passion of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves by comparison w ith the infirmity of others, or our own formerly."^ The superiority theory relies upon the 'thank God I am not him' attitude: the glory and degradation of others. It is an affirmation \\ hich gives us self esteem. Using Hobbes' theory we discover that degradation of others is not the only thing that creates laughter, we also laugh at our own follies. This enjoyment, however, can only be possible if we laugh at an event in our past which helps to increase self-esteem. If laughter is "sudden self-glory" it explains why we can laugh at apparently nothing; external stimuli has little to do with laughter. Laughing is only created by self-glory, the laughter of sheer joy. Hobbes' account for laughter cannot occur at all times. It is in his use of the word 'sudden' that reveals to us that humorous situations are not created by a constant feel of superiority. Timing then becomes an issue to the modes of comedy; sudden glory falls upon sudden conception.^ Hobbes believes we laugh at ugly incongruities, absurdities, and cross purposes of life, matters intellectual as well as moral, and our own follies, provided these events give us "sudden glory." External stimuli relating towards laughter is held only to these few things. Hobbes' theory thus falls short of providing us a thorough explanation as to why we laugh, though this can only be held accountable because he is primarily a philosopher of power. Hobbes theory does relates ^Arhtur AsaBerger, An Anatomx of Humor (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1993), 2. 5lbid, 2. humor to power, and this may be its strongest point. In this sense, humor can be a subtle and powerful means of social control by dominant elements. It can also be a force of resistance. Perhaps the most important theory of humor generally accepted by scholars and is the incongruity theory, which argues that humor involves some kind of a difference between w hat one expects and what one gets. Kant, the father of incongruity theories, says laughter is: "an affection arising from the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing."^ Kant's simple formula for humor assumes that the mind is wound up to head in one direction when instead it is wrenched off its path and turned in a different direction. Humor thus becomes a tricking of the mind. The term "incongruity" itself has many interpretations: inconsistent, not harmonious lacking propriety, irrational, and not conforming, a number of possibilities are hidden in the term. Some incongruity theorists will include the superiority theory as a special type of incongruity. Our ability to recognize something as being incongruous occurs almost immediately. We recognize those things that we have learned are incongruous as well as those that are instinctively incongruous in our subconscious. This might explain why slapstick, farce, irony, and the absurd are easily recognizable modes of comedy. The most intriguing and controversial theories of humor stem from Freud. At the core of Freud's theory is a single assertion: jokes are not distinguished from other verbal phenomena by their linguistic structure, but by their relation to the unconscious. In his book. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, Freud writes: "Here at last we can understand what it is that jokes achieve in the service of their purpose. They make possible the satisfaction of an instinct (whether lustful or hostile) in the face of an obstacle that stands in its way."^ The nature of humor lies in our unconscious desire to satisfy an instinct. Freud tells us that we mask our aggressions (including sexual aggression) through humor. Humor, therefore, is a release from inhibition. 6D. H. Monro, Argument of Laughter (Carlton: Melbourne University Press, 1953), 147. "^Sigmund Freud, Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconcious^ New 1\ Translated From the German and Edited by James Strachey (New York: Norton, 1963), 101. However it is not just the unconscious that helps formulate humor. Freud devotes a great deal of time discussing the forms and techniques that jokes employ. It is important for us to recognize word-play, condensation, and displacement as important structural properties of jokes. The theories of humor often overlap or expand upon each other. No one theory is correct, in fact each theory has helped define those things that we do find humorous.