Module to which the course contributes: Literature and Culture Program

Programs of study to which the module contributes: English & American Literature Level of the module: Honours      Category in Major Program: Disciplinary Elective

The expected and desired learning outcomes at the bachelor’s level include an advanced level of mastery of research skills applied to the written text that will allow students to achieve intellectual maturity as well as an initial experience of active professionalism within academia.

The syllabus is divided into topics that suggest various emphases and functions of literary humor:

1. Introduction to the course: Organization, requirements, syllabus.
2. Humor theory. The ethics of humor.
3. Comedy: Theories of comedy, comic modes, genres and techniques.
4. Satire: Forms and targets of satire.
5. Parody: Modern and postmodern uses of parody.
6. Irony: Rhetorical devices used to ironic ends.
7. Modern dystopias.

There is no set textbook for this course. All texts are available electronically on our course site under “Course Documents”, organized by weekly readings.

CG1. Identify the key features of the genres studied.

CG2. Demonstrate an understanding of the cultural background surrounding the works students read and examine.

CG3. Demonstrate an ability to convey their thoughts verbally and in writing concerning the literary periods studied in the course

CG4. Demonstrate an ability to engage in the collaborative learning process.

CG5. Demonstrate a capacity for critical and analytical thought in terms of interpreting various forms of literature, especially as they relate to the genre of satire.

CE1. Use specific philosophical terminology.

CE2. Introduce students to some of the most interesting and challenging questions – both theoretical and practical – in the philosophy of humour.

CE3. Gain experience of a wide variety of textual forms (novels, plays, short stories, essays) and understand how to incorporate these diverse forms into critical debates.

CE4. Be able to inter-relate theoretical debate with close textual analysis.

CE5. Be able to construct and defend a coherent intellectual argument.

CT1. To increase the understanding, appreciation, and enjoyment of literature.

CT2. Contextualize and develop a critical argument (in spoken and written form) in relation to debates raised in the course.

CT3. Provide multiple opportunities to improve skills of presentation, oratory and argument.

CT4. Write in accordance with the conventions of standard English usage and punctuation.

CT5. Become familiar with and employ a variety of resources for English study, including electronic and printed databases.

Copies of the class syllabus, course handouts and several short readings will be available to download. The course web site also includes links to satire/humor literary history, culture and author sites, research and style guides.

Indicative Secondary Reading

Apte, M. (1985). Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 

Colebrook, C. (2004) Irony. London: Routledge.

Critchley, S. (2002). On Humour. London and New York: Routledge.

Dentith, S. (2000). Parody. London: Routledge.

Griffin, D. (1995). Satire: A Critical Reintroduction. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Hutcheon, L. (1994). Irony’s Edge. The Theory and Politics of Irony. New York: Routledge, 1994. 

____ (2000). A Theory of Parody. The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. New York:

Routledge.

Morreall, J. (1983). Taking Laughter Seriously. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Rose, M. (1993). Parody: Ancient, Modern, and Post-Modern. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zupancic, A. (2008). The Odd One In: On Comedy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Ballart, P. (1994). Eironeia: La figuración irónica en el discurso literario moderno. Barcelona: Quaderns Crema.

Berger, P.L. (1997). Redeeming Laughter: The Comic Dimension of Human Experience. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. 

Billig, M. (2005). Laughter and Ridicule. Towards a Social Critique of Humour. London: MacMillan.

Boyd, B. (2004). “Laughter and Literature: A Play Theory of Humor”, Philosophy and Literature, 28 (1): 1-22.

Bremmer, J. & Roodenburg, H. (eds.) (1997). A Cultural History of Humour: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Colebrook, C. (2002). Irony in the Work of Philosophy. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Dane, J. A. (1988). Parody: Critical Concepts Versus Literary Practices. Aristophanes to Sterne. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. 

____ (1991). The Critical Mythology of Irony. Athens and London: The University of Georgia Press.

Davies, C. (2009). “Humor Theory and the Fear of Being Laughed at”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 22 (1-2): 49-62.

Gelven, M. (2000). Truth and Comedic Art. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

La Farge, B. (2004). “Comedy’s Intention”, Philosophy and Literature, 28 (1): 118-136. 

Lang, C.D.  (1988). Irony/Humour: Critical Paradigms. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Martin, R.A. (2007). The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press.

Minois, G. (2000). Histoire du rire et de la derision. Paris: Fayard.

Morreall, J. (ed.) (1987). The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Nelson, T.G.A. (1990). Comedy: The Theory of Comedy in Literature, Drama and Cinema. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perlmutter, D.D. (2002). “On Incongruities and Logical Inconsistencies in Humor: The Delicate Balance”, Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 15 (2): 155-168.

Electronic resources

http://www.hnu.edu/ishs/ResourceCenter.htm

http://www.hnu.edu/ishs/BiblioPage.htm  

http://www.humorstudies.org

 http://www.humorgrafico.org/  

Committed participation in class and self-motivated personal research is essential for this course. Students’ performance will be measured in a variety of ways, including some or all of the following: in-class presentations, web-based assignments, take-home essays (reaction / analytical research papers), tutorial discussions, and a final examination.  

In determining final grades, each course requirement carries the following weight:

•      Attendance and Informed Class Participation: 10%

•      Oral Presentation: 15%

•      Collaborative small group and seminar work: 20%

•      Weekly assignments: 10%

•      Essay: 20%

•      Final examination: 25% 

Teacher-made rubric for oral presentation, analytical essay, and tutorial discussion. Grading is based on a standard point system where each assignment is worth a set amount of points (depending on the assignment’s weight and value to the course), which contributes to an overall course total: MH = 95-100% (A+)

Sb. = 90-94%  (A)

Not.= 75-89%  (B)

Ap. =  60-74% (C)

Susp.= 0-59% (D) 

In order to pass this course, students must make a serious attempt at ALL assessment tasks.

Written feedback on assessed coursework. Verbal feedback on presentations and nonassessed coursework.