Volume 24, Issue 3

This study presents two aspects of the novel in question, its humor and its structure. It shows that both have been misunderstood and misinterpreted, and begins by reminding us that the author herself was long misunderstood because of early critical misreadings and presuppositions. It then continues to demonstrate that the two aspects studied are in fact interrelated; the so-called flawed structure, actually a framing structure, is in fact a firm form that is carefully underpinned by the instances of humor. It proceeds by presenting and dispelling the basic myths about the author and the novel, then presents the structure and the reasons for misconceptions of it before proceeding to map the humor using Attardo's system of humor rhythm mapping. Chlopicki's character frames also contribute to a demonstration of parallel characterization which contradicts another, minor myth, that of the unsuitability of the hero for the heroine. The study as a whole attacks the ideas of humorlessness in Brontë fiction, the inferiority of Anne's work and the feebleness of the structure of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.

This study assessed romantic partners' perceptions of their own and each others' humor usage during a conflict discussion. Forty-eight married and dating couples were recorded discussing conflict topics that both partners cited as sources of disagreement in their relationships. Both partners then viewed the videotaped interaction and reported on the humor used by each of them in the interaction. Humor was identified by at least one participant in all couples, with a total of 412 instances of verbal humor identified by participants across 336 minutes of recoded interaction. Partners identified the same instances as humor attempts about 34% of the time. A mix of actor and partner variables predicted participants' relationship satisfaction and their perceptions of conflict escalation and progress. The implications of these findings for advancing the understanding of humor in conflict, as well as the utility of this methodology for further study of humor in dyads, are discussed.

This paper is a case study of contemporary Arab political jokes in the light of Bakhtinian theory of carnival and the carnivalesque. According to this analysis, these political jokes represent a variety of texts whose topics revert around “glorifying”, mocking, parodying, scatologizing, and ultimately betraying the ruler. These types of political jokes reflect a textual representation of the life cycle of the oppressive ruler, which begins with comic “crowning” and glorification and ends in “decrowning” and comic death. Within this cycle, political jokes represent a kind of hidden dialogue between the oppressed and their marginalized discourse, and the regime and its dominant autocratic discourse. These jokes are disturbing to the regime, leading perhaps to punishment, but they do not necessarily either undermine or actually support the regime. Like carnival, the telling of these jokes in a repressive context merely builds a second world outside the oppressive world of the regime and offers an alternative framework to the regime's policies.

The Lebanese people are lovers of the social and the humorous, and the soul of their humor is manifest in their social gatherings, tales, civil and religious celebrations, songs, jokes, literature, theatre, cartoons, and spontaneous wit. In the present article, humor, Arabic (fukaha), in the collectivist Lebanese culture is discussed with particular focus on comparisons with Western humor scholarship. The discussion is illustrative rather than exhaustive and is informed by Western contemporary humor theories regarding conceptualization of humor and its varied forms and functions. In addition to providing Arabic humor terminology and English equivalents, culture-universals (mass media, rhetors humor, jokes, wit and accidental humor) and culture-bound (zajal and Zalghouta) humor in the Lebanese context are described. Finally, the psychological and social functions of Lebanese humor are identified, as are gaps in research and the need for a science-driven agenda for cross-cultural humor scholarship involving Arab Middle Eastern and EuroAmerican humor scholars.

The Gospels never mention Jesus laughing. Therefore, the inference some make is that if it does not specifically say that he did, then he must not have. Other scholars have argued that it is easy to see humor in the writings about Christ if you look for it (e.g., Buckner, The joy of Jesus, The Canterbury Press, 1993; Trueblood, The humor of Christ, Harper & Row Publishers, 1964; Wirt, Jesus man of joy, Harvest House Publishers, 1999). The goal of the present study is to examine how Christians describe the humorous (or not) behavior of Jesus Christ using the Humorous Behavior Q-Sort Deck (Craik, Lampert, and Nelson, Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 9: 273–302, 1996). This is a new application of an established methodological approach which should aid our thinking on the subject of humor and Christ. Thirty subjects sorted the 100 statements while reflecting on Jesus. The results are discussed within the humorous style framework of Craik and Ware (Humor and personality in everyday life, Mouton de Gruyter. 1998) and the larger research context.