Sometimes I carry a joke to far, I see something clever that someone did, that I had laughed and laughed about, but then I try to do the same or even more, usually people don’t think I’m being funny anymore. I was wondering if that is wrong.
No that’s right always carry a joke far too far, beyond milking it to death, after all the ultimate punchline is when you tell someone you went too far, in a humorous way.
There’s a joke that comedians like to use to prove a point about humour, it is a joke that always changes and always is used to excess and to such a disregard of taste that the more you disregard humour, taste, good sense the more it becomes humour. I know it’s name, do you? They made a film about it.
I’m gonna go with my instinct here and just say no. No there is not.
I don’t know its name. I had a clever idea today. I noticed that ilikenametha was back, and I remembered Captain Crunk’s mockery of his threads, I thought I could do the same, and intristically imply that I was only copying his idea, then I thought I could further that making this thread also in the same fashion, which intristically implys that I’m going to far with my copying his mockery. But, what you said brings up a similar question. Is it going to far to explain one’s jokes in minute detail?
Oh you already know the answer to that.
I honestly don’t know the answer. I was just guessing when I said no.
I hope I’m not being asinine, but maybe we should continue this conversation. Why is it that you don’t know if it it’s true?
Because I’m high as a kite.
This joke almost always has these elements—alternative versions may change this form.
Setup: A family act going in to see a talent agent; either the whole family or just one family member (usually the father). The agent asks what they do. If the whole family is present, the act is performed for the agent; otherwise it is described. Act: It is described in as much detail as the teller prefers. While most tellings follow one of a few basic forms, the description of the act is meant to be an ad lib. Traditionally, the description is tasteless, and ribald. The goal is to significantly transgress social norms. Taboo acts such as incest, rape, coprophilia, coprophagy, bestiality, and murder are common themes. Punch line: The shocked (or intrigued) agent asks what the act is called, and the proud answer (sometimes delivered with a flourish) is: "The Aristocrats!" The intention of the punch line is in the reading of the joke as a satirical comment on the decadence of the aristocracy.
The joke can result in creating a change in appreciation the scripts we allow ourselves to follow, circumstance by circumstance. It forces a uneasy cause… the Malamati method isn’t too different from the Cynic in this regard (truth is, there isn’t much difference between the two philosophies, the latter is likely a direct continuation absorbed into Islam).
Comedic timing in how you continue in pushing it out can lead to great outbursts of laughter here… don’t just drone, skip a few beats in the droning, effect how your tone is coming out- grow big or small.
There’s been a lot of asininity going on lately (cough), so I thought I would reopen this topic.
Sometimes I carry a joke to far, I see something clever that someone did, that I had laughed and laughed about, but then I try to do the same or even more, usually people don’t think I’m being funny anymore. I was wondering if that is wrong.
Too much for whom in what context?
I mean, for me it can be too much sometimes. There can be a manic, unpleasant edge…when I am the source, when they are, when we both/all are.
ButI don’t think there can be a rule about what is too much.
There is that saying: “You are being a perfect ass.” Now if you are so , can you be too perfect of an ass? Can you carry your perfection too far?
I recently made a joke, but no one was laughing, I think I may have even made someone snap.
It was more of a crack.