5 ms·
To quote a better man than me: >The assumption that puns are per se contemptible, betrayed by the habit of describing every pun not as a pun, but as a bad pun
by nostromo95 9y ago
To quote a better man than me:
>The assumption that puns are per se contemptible, betrayed by the habit of describing every pun not as a pun, but as a bad pun or a feeble pun, is a sign at once of sheepish docility and desire to seem superior. Puns are good, bad, and indifferent, and only those who lack the wit to make them are unaware of the fact. [0]
[0] Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage, 2nd Edition
- jcoffland 9y agoThose who possess the wit but refrain, are the most admirable.
- nostromo95 9y agoHa, who said that? Stating your opinion as aphorism doesn't make it true. The application of wit seems to me to only be a positive. Humor brings joy. Adding wit to a conversation makes it strictly better.
- adrianratnapala 9y agoLike good hammers, good wit can be used for evil. After it is how we mock people. Voltaire, in spite of his other good attributes, was a villain in this regard. He could tell lies about opponents, but he would do it wittily so that the opponents couldn't set the record straight without it seeming that they can't take a joke.
- gbgtgsenki 9y agoFowler stated his opinion in his book and you used that as an aphorism. Do you accept that as truth just because you know who said that, but don't even consider something that a pseudonymous user wrote? I have to say that you are a dumb sheep, even though I agree with you in the pun/humor matter.
- nostromo95 9y agoFirst off, Fowler's lines aren't an aphorism. If they are, then all quotes are aphorisms. Was it an appeal to authority? Sure. Fowler was a genius. I'll more readily accept his authority than some pseudonymous user's. Secondly, I did consider our grandparent's comment (see the second half of my reply). Should consideration be measured in word count or something? Should I have written him a paper? I called him out on the comment because I see such pithy writing as fundamentally intellectually dishonest. Writing your (unsupported) conclusion with the trappings of a well-known adage misrepresents your (possibly personal) opinion as something already widely believed, staving off further argument.
- jcoffland 9y ago> Adding wit to a conversation makes it strictly better. Clearly there are many exceptions to the above assertion. The most common being when the main purpose of the wit is not to entertain but to showcase the punner's cleverness.
- nostromo95 9y ago>The most common being when the main purpose of the wit is not to entertain but to showcase the punner's cleverness. Not to get bogged down by minutiae, but I'd argue that wit and ostentation are two separate things, and that it's certainly possible to practice one without the other. But sure, I'll concede that some puns are made pretentiously.
- samstave 9y agoYou seem bitter and boring, and I would not want to have conversations with someone who is so strict and boring and so set on their own supposed superiority that they shun the pun, to wit.
- stephengillie 9y agoA witty saying proves nothing -Voltaire
- lovemenot 9y agoSeems Fowler may be missing the point. Many derisive comments are in fact statements of relative approbation. As in: "that pun was not just bad (good), it was awful (great)" For every foul pun, there is another still Fowler.
- nostromo95 9y agoYeah, I agree in part. But many do call all puns bad (bad). The emergence of bad (good) probably followed this. I also think that the bad-awful spectrum is missing a category: the sublime/artful pun. See Shakespeare: >Now is the winter of our discontent / Made glorious summer by this Son of York >Ask for me tomorrow, and you shall find me a grave man.