Customer Reviews

Humor Theory: Formula of Laughter

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I give this book five stars and applaud the originality of author's thought. This is a very special book for a very special reader.

It is easy to see why some readers would be left disappointed over this book. Both the content and the presentation are complex and multi-dimensional. The author provides an all-encompassing view of humor, derives a mathematical equation describing the effect of humor on people, and dissects a broad range of jokes and anekdotes. To appreciate the book, one needs to be accustomed to a rigorous critical thinking - a trait is not shared by the majority of readers interested in the subject of humor.

What makes this book great is the recipe of humor, a methodology that one can adapt for real-life situations to advance their social status in dating, career growth, public speaking, or family life. The reader that is open to the complexity of presented analysis will find this book fascinating and eye-opening. What's more, the derived "formula of laughter" is a tasty intellectual tidbit, which captures human behavior in an amazingly accurate way.

This book could be a foundation for a practical guide "learn to be funny," but to reach the hearts of broader audience, but it would have to be written in a simpler language and would have to include more examples that readers could relate to.

Increased confidence, reduced stress, and family connection are direct derivatives of the inclusion of real theory of humor in the daily life. This is the theme of Igor Krichtafovitch's book; he artfully illustrates with humor theory and practical tools for implemtation. "Humor Theory" should be a nearby reference for all those who want to succeed.

The book describes the specifics of creating jokes, such as where to place the punch line. It advises the joke-teller to create a riddle that the audience has to solve. Yet the audience needs to solve it quickly. That way, the listeners will experience joy. The joke needs to be concise, so that it keeps the interest of the audience.

Here is a summary of the formula:

Concision + riddle + easy to understand punch line = laughter

I highly recommend this book to anyone who aspires to develop a great sense of humor.

This book is not what I expected it to be. Its explanation of why humor is socially powerful and what it is used for in society lacks depth and comprehensiveness. Any intelligent kid or average adult who merely sees how humor is used in political cartoons, Saturday Night Live, and daily life can easily come up with the same explanations, and probably write those explanations out in English way better than this guy. Plus, the fact that this guy has a very different background (the natural sciences) than the topic of humor he writes on makes me doubt his knowledge on the subject right away. Better to read a book written by someone with a strong background in history, the arts, or social sciences any day, since someone like that could dig up research and go into more detail on each of the claims about humor Igor makes in this poorly written book. Plus, it seems to be so simplistic that its basically for people who have almost no idea how to be funny, or anything or anyone IS funny.

It's a barely-intelligible and very piecemeal history of humor philosophy that is concluded by a revelation about humor that you already knew, represented by a formula that you didn't need.

I was looking for a book that would present an organized and convincing categorization of the social functions of humor, the sorts of humor, and some practical ideas on how to use humor to accomplish social goals. This book has none of these. Instead, it gives a summary of philosophical thoughts on humor, an ill-supported coarse-grained categorization of humor (there is a major category reserved for "military humor"???), and a handful of mathematical formulas that are supposed to predict the humor in jokes. The author fails to observe that self-contained short jokes written on paper (including his examples) are generally not funny at all in comparison with off-the-cuff humor in a social context or the routines of a comedian. Where is the formula that explains that?

I don't believe the guy who wrote this book has any sense of humor at all and if I ever have to get that in depth in the study of humor...someone please just kill me.

Why can't I put no stars?