Contingent dynamics of political humour

Abstract

This article introduces the themes of the special issue. It offers a provisional working conception of “political humour.” It then notes some of the tendencies and challenges for scholarship on political humour, namely, that political humour interacts contingently and conditionally with intentions, contexts, and audiences. The individual articles of the special issue are briefly summarized, and some concluding lessons drawn.

“Laughter and Sex Prolong Life”: Current Trends in the Humour Practices of Russian-Speakers in Estonia

“…Such awareness of political correctness might also partly account for the popularity of jokes on everyday life topics as, unlike political, ethnic or religious humour, jokes about everyday life are less likely to violate the unseen boundaries of politically correct communication. Another possible explanation is that the use of political humour activates when triggered by public controversy (Basu and Zekavat 2021; for a case study, see Elsayed 2021), such as the ambiguous pre-election posters discussed by Jānis Juzefovičs and Triin Vihalemm (2020); although even in this case much of the humour recontextualised the posters from the domain of the ethno-political to that of everyday life. The few jokes in our sample that reflect the minority status of Russian-speakers in Estonia focus on the language aspect, which is one of the most tangible symbols of integration (or the lack of it).…”

Alleen Pace Nilsen and Don L.F. Nilsen. 2019. The Language of Humor. Cambridge: CUP

“…This approach aims to enhance information dissemination, promote distinction, and evoke sympathetic political engagement with a specific ideological or distributive agenda, as opposed to the agenda of rivals. Political humor does not use political subjects primarily as means for amusement but rather is substantial political action conducted through amusing means (Basu & Zekavat 2021). Scholars stress the conservative ways in which political humor relies upon and redoubles existing shared expectations at the expense of errant targets, they also affirm the radical ways in which it can sponsor cognitive shifts and thereby liberate human energies (see Billig 2005, Lockyer & Pickering 2005.…”