Is It Acceptable To Joke About Tragic Things?

There's a ton of dark jokes out there today in things like Family Guy and Pulp Fiction. We've all heard them and, probably, laughed at them. After all - they're just fictional characters, right? It's okay to joke about them.

But then there are the types of jokes that are a bit more polarizing. These are the jokes that rip on real life tragic events in history or horrible things that are going on right now - topics like The Holocaust, 9/11, suicide, and pedophilia. Now we've all heard the saying that "comedy is tragedy plus time." Understandable but even if a lot of time has passed (as is the case with the Holocaust), are there some events or topics that are simply too terrible to joke about?

I'm personally of the opinion that as long as it's done in a tasteful, comedic matter or, barring that, amongst close friends, anything is fair game in the world of comedy but I'm eager to hear what you guys have to say.

Slight bump after the unlocking of this thread. Thank you mod!

If you don't mind, I'm gonna quote George Carlin:

I don't think any subject should be off limits for a joke, but context is very important.

Dark humor is not about making light of people's suffering, but about creating a safe space where you can laugh at how shitty the world can be.

edited 28th Jan '14 11:14:01 PM by DrStarky

I consider being able to laugh at something prerequisite to putting it behind you.

Granted, there is such a thing as "too soon".

To quote Aristotle:

Humor is the only test of gravity, and gravity of humor; for a subject which will not bear raillery is suspicious, and a jest which will not bear serious examination is false wit.

I believe humor to be the best way to examine tragedy, especially the tragedy of injustice. Often, injustice is perpetuated because nobody's willing to discuss the often silly premise upon which it is based. Humor does that, and does it well. I believe that is what old Carlin was getting at in the quote listed above.

I also don't believe anyone or anything should be considered above mockery. If it can't be mocked, it is too sensitive to be important.

While I agree with this, I have to point out that quite often the comedian in question isn't making fun of the reason why the injustice was occurring. Too often the point of the rape joke was the victim as opposed to the victim-blaming culture when regarding rape. It's "hey look, this woman is getting raped because she dresses slutty/walking out at night/etc" rather than "hey look, this rapist is blaming the victim!"

Also, there is such as thing as "too soon". I doubt anyone here would agree that making a joke out of a dead person being dead or how mournful the family members are when the funeral is taking place is appropriate.

edited 28th Jan '14 11:50:09 PM by IraTheSquire

Speaking of which, a lot of Eastern European humor (as exemplified here) is based on crass ethnic stereotypes, usually un-Acceptable Targets like the mentally ill, and, on occasion, the Holocaust. Up North, for that matter, tradition seems to be to deflate even the most gruesome of tragedies with a dry, deadpan Understatement. So, overall, I'm left with the impression that the hurdle is not so much about being able to laugh at specific tragic things or touchy subjects, but that eventually, the very idea of a subject being "touchy" gets dropped altogether. It's like the black humor characteristic for soldiers and doctors, only applied universally - when "too soon" becomes "yet again" , it just doesn't have the same punch to it anymore.

And yes, apparently it also applies to funerals.

Graham Chapman was a comedian and thus jokes in his funeral about his death will be seen as a tribute and thus is an exception rather than the norm.

Would you expect it to go down well if you go out, right now, pick a random funeral and make jokes at the expense of the deceased and their family? Or would you be seen as picketing a funeral like the WBC?

It does depend on who is making the jokes. A family member or friend making jokes about the deceased is not going to elicit the same reaction as a total stranger making the same jokes.

Not to mention who the deceased is. As mentioned: jokes in a comedian's funeral can be seen a tribute.

Also, which bit of the funeral. Joking in the church? Depends very much on the joke. You can go nuts at the wake, though (heck, it's bad form not to needle the deceased a little through humour — it's the last chance you'll get for all that friendly one-upmanship and tale-telling about them in such a concentrated way).

The only consideration at the wake is who you're telling the tale/ joke to. And, how much they've drunk.

edited 29th Jan '14 3:37:48 AM by Euodiachloris

Well, funerals are often followed by a reception or a wake, in which people often tell jokes about the deceased. I've been to a funeral where, for instance, the departed specified in his will that no-one was to wear black and he was to be carried from the church to the theme from the BBC's Grandstand sports show, his favourite program in life.

The thing is, a joke should be respectful; airing all the family's dirty laundry isn't on, but cracking a few about that hilarious time the departed and you got pissed in Berlin during your national service...

edited 29th Jan '14 3:45:11 AM by Achaemenid

Yeah, there's a difference between a joke about the deceased's death and an amusing anecdote about them while they were alive.

It's still possible to joke about the way the deceased died, but it depends on how the deceased lived.

Honestly, delivery and phrasing is usually what makes or breaks a joke anyway, regardless of the topic. Mitch Hedberg (or whatever that stoner's name was) wouldn't be half as funny if he didn't have that deadpan delivery where he sounds like his absurd proposals are completely serious.

So, overall, it's not so much the subject that matters, but the audience and general context. To that effect, as most of the world's humor wasn't developed for network-safe sitcom jokes or increasingly scrutinized stand-up routines, what's acceptable can hardly be applied universally - if anything, plenty of jokes were downright meant to be offensive... and even those backfire quite a lot. Ironically, it seems it's exactly tragedy that breeds so much comedy, likely as a coping mechanism. And, on a larger scale, since a lot of countries have basically Seen It All when it comes to tragic events, it makes sense their cultural standards of appropriate subject matter would be less than strict.

edited 29th Jan '14 8:18:44 AM by indiana404

I agree, context is everything.

The epitome of the tasteless comedian, imo, is Joan Rivers. She loves to stir the pot. But she doesn't have much in the way of wit; the schtick is that she's foul mouthed and old. So there is this famous clip of Rivers getting heckled after making a 9/11 reference. Not a joke, mind you. It was an unfunny reference. The heckler had a son who died in the attacks. Joan Rivers might not be much a comic, but she knows a thing or two about spin. She immediately turns on the heckler, swears at him, throws him out, screams at the rafters, paints herself as a heroine using humor to alleviate tragedy.

Some people think that being an insensitive prick is, be definition, really funny shit.

Way I see if, it depends on the content of the joke itself. Jokes about tragedies can be funny, if the joke itself is actually funny and witty. It's something that requires quite a bit more wit and effort to make funny than a non-tragedy, but it can be done.

@Khudzlin: I'd say that the person you're telling the joke to is the most important factor. Joking about 9/11 to your average person is fine, but not to a family member of one of the victims.

Yeah but how do you know who had people die in the 9/11 attacks? If you're telling a joke to a bunch of friends or at a comedy club, you have no idea who's going to be offended. So should you stop the jokes based on a few potential offendees? Or do you keep it going even if it really offends someone personally?

After all - Chris Rock made a Columbine joke and Gervais made a 9/11 joke and they were both warmly received yet they had no idea who might be offended in the audience.

edited 29th Jan '14 11:11:21 AM by FantasyLiver

Although it's impossible to avoid offending everyone in anything you do, I think that's a poor excuse to not think about the implications of humor about serious topics.

It's easy to forget that, in a time where you can make a comment on anything immediately as it happens, people like George Carlin worked for a very long time on their material.

There isn't any quick, easy formula for dark humor.

It really does depend on whether you actually have a joke. Just mentioning something controversial or painful isn't a joke in itself. Ricky Gervais, Jimmy Carr, Jim Jeffries, Tim Minchin, and George Carlin - among others - are really good at this, IMO.

I don't think comedians should justify their jokes or defend them. It should be obvious from context that they don't really mean the shocking opinions they include in their jokes - more often than not, they're making themselves the butt of the joke by adopting a position and character that the audience can laugh at. That sort of thing can make difficult things easier to handle, but the audience has to be in on the joke.

Celebrity is the only qualifier I worry about. I'm more liable to give a joke a pass if it's some random schmoe.

A thirst for fame blurs the lines between being offensively funny and just being offensive to get headlines. Then it becomes attention-whoring. I think most people can tell the difference:

• Gilbert Gottfried. He had a sweet Aflac deal, but he just had to net a few more Twitter followers. Now he's embarrassing himself on reality shows.
• Seth Mcfarlane. Oh ho ho, Peter Griffin smothered some kids to death under his fat ass. And now an extended scene of him puking in grief and horror.
• Lisa Lampenelli. Compared herself to Don Rickles. Deserves to be eaten by wolverines.
• Bill Maher. Never passes up a chance to mock the dead.
• Tracy Morgon. The modern day Stepin Fetchit.

edited 29th Jan '14 1:21:26 PM by johnnyfog

To be fair to Bill Maher, I don't think he's said anything about a recently deceased person that he wouldn't have said if that person was still alive.

I'm not sure if that makes a difference, though - I mean, it does to me because I don't get the taboo about speaking ill of the dead, but I think even if you'd say it's wrong to joke about someone who just died you'd at least be a bit less shocked if the person doing the joke was already joking about that dead person before they died.