Comedy in History

by Cliopatria

It is a truism that you can't study humor without deadening it. It's wrong. David Moser discusses the rise and fall of a Chinese form of stand-up," crosstalk": think Abbot and Costello's"Who's on First" with a strong dose of vaudeville and the political sensibilities, sometimes, of underground Soviet-era literature. [via Simon World]

And David Nishimura has links to a cross between a piñata, firecracker and chocolate (artillery shell-shaped) Easter Bunny.... I can't even describe it. Plus the story of the scientific principle applied to the decompression rate of chocolate covered marshmallows during WWII.

A pre-final exam season cautionary tale: my wife, who is reading (listening to, actually) the Bill Clinton memoir reports that he was a law school instructor for a time, during which time he also was campaigning for Congress (that's someone's definition of hell, I'm sure, but it gets better). He did fine juggling things, mostly, except for the time that he took some final exam papers on the campaign trail and lost five of them. The students got full credit, but no grade, and things seemed settled. Except that, many years later, he met one of those students again -- Susan Weber-Wright -- when she presided over the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. Don't lose papers!

Finally, a really funny question: do you read the AHR? (That's the American Historical Review published by the American Historial Association, for those of you who haven't paid your dues lately) I know, it's not really funny, but I wonder sometimes how many people really read our flagship publication and how many just scan the authors and contributors lists for known names? My style: I do the latter, except about every fourth or fifth issue, in which I read most of it and skim everything, devouring the entire book review section as a snapshot of our historiographical present. It's great for teaching World History, actually, to be able to say"there are people doing research on Roman malaria..."

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Jonathan Dresner - 11/24/2004

I belong to the organization because I think it's worthwhile, professionally. I don't belong because of the journal, but AHR is one of the only (and certainly the premiere) general and comprehensive history journal.

As an Asianist, it's mostly a waste of time (though I'll have more comment on the really interesting pre-WWII Japan-Islamic collusion article when I finish it). But I also teach world history, historiography, advise senior theses (and students interested in grad-school) outside of my field. I sit on hiring committees and curriculum committees, and I feel like I need to have some idea what the 'state of the art' is in the field generally.

Plus, to be honest, I enjoy it. Good history (and the Early Modern Sleep article was one of the best in recent memory) is fun to read, and journal articles are a really good length to encounter new material and ideas.

Julie A Hofmann - 11/24/2004

Er ... um ... I read chunks when I have the time. I tend to read reviews in my field and by/about people I know. I read the articles that are useful for me (rarely in my specific field, but often about things I teach) or that just look really cool -- like the one last year (? or before?) about Early Modern sleep deprivation. As for when I actually read them, well, let's just say that they tend to be a lower priority unless I'm procrastinating. Not that I would do such a thing. Ever.

Charles V. Mutschler - 11/24/2004

Which begs the question. Why belong to an organization which produces journals you don't read fully? I tend to scan the AHR and JAH when they arrive at the university library, but I find a lot more material I will actually use in my scholarship in other journals. Which is one reason I belong to groups like the Mining History Association, a couple of railroad history organizations, and two archival organizations, and not the AHA. and OAH. I would rather spend my money on gasoline and note cards than collecting journals I won't read.

CVM

Oscar Chamberlain - 11/24/2004

Apparently stacks of journals are the floor are heading toward history's dustbin. Check out this article on young adults and newspaper readership. The Washington Post did a survey and found out that many young people did not want a paper delivered--even if it was free-- because the old ones would clutter up the place.

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,65813,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3

Jonathan Dresner - 11/24/2004

I don't even have a stack. My living and work space is littered with journals I looked at, saw something which deserved a closer look, and put someplace convenient....

Ralph E. Luker - 11/24/2004

Funny you should ask about reading the AHR! I had a whole post composed about the professional journals I subscribe to, stack beside my rocker, and have to carry down to the basement for storeage about this time every year, when the stack reaches about three feet high. Do not even ask what percentage of that three feet I have read. Do not tell my wife I said this.