4 ms·

The severity of the reaction doesn’t really matter as long as it’s illogical in relation to the last input

• coldtea 4y ago
  I wasn't pointing at the severity of the reaction (eiter in the clip, or in this thread). The severity of the reaction is the second joke in that clip, but I was referring to the main joke: that the passengers reaction comes when the stewardess reveals there's no more coffee, not at all the abdolutely horrible things said before. That part would be funny even if it was shown as regular outrage and some loud complaints. Because, even though a "straw that broke the camel's back" response is by definition about having an outburst at a smaller slight as opposed to one of the biggers ones that preceded it, when the final slight is extremely out of proportion compared to the previous ones, having that be "the final straw" becomes farcical. In other words, there's illogical and there's really really illogical - to the point of being comical.
  • juliusgeo 4y ago
    “when the final slight is extremely out of proportion compared to the previous ones, having that be "the final straw" becomes farcical.” I think we are arguing past each other because this is exactly what I’m saying—the phrase is intended to be used for these exact farcical situations. You seem to want there to be a ton of nuance in an aphorism, which you will simply rarely get. The phrase is used to communicate a sense of someone not reacting and then reacting all at once—your arguments about the exact differential between different events in the sequence leading up to the breakage of the back are irrelevant because that is not the point of the phrase.