On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 21:21:41 +0000,
savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
That's the difference. You see it as funny and I don't. So to me it's
not comedy. It's a misguided failed attempt at comedy.
ItÆs fascinating how personal identity, cultural connections, and
individual experiences can shape our reactions to humor or satire.
Here are some possible psychological reasons why Bruce might find
Freberg's parody not only not funny but offensive:
1. **Cultural Identity and Representation**: As someone with a
connection to Black heritage, Bruce might feel a deep cultural pride
in 1950s R&B, a genre rooted in Black musical innovation. A parody
like Freberg's could be perceived as trivializing or mocking a
significant cultural achievement, which might feel disrespectful.
2. **Emotional Attachment**: Loving 1950s R&B likely means Bruce has a
strong emotional connection to the music. When something he cherishes
is parodied, it might feel like an attack on something personal, even
if the intent was humor.
3. **Historical Context**: The 1950s were a time of racial segregation
and significant struggles for Black artists to gain recognition. A
parody of an R&B hit from that era might unintentionally evoke
memories of those challenges, making the humor feel tone-deaf or
dismissive.
4. **Satire and Dehumanization**: Research suggests that satire can
sometimes dehumanize its targets, reducing them to caricatures and
amplifying negative perceptions. If Freberg's parody comes across as
mocking rather than celebrating, it could feel like it diminishes the
artistry and significance of "Sh-Boom."
So why might Roger from UK, who also has a connection to Black
heritage and enjoys R&B every bit as much as Bruce, in contrast find
the Freberg record amusing?
There could be several reasons for this difference:
1. **Sense of Humor**: Humor is deeply personal. Roger may have a
broader appreciation for satire or parody in general, or simply find
FrebergÆs style clever and entertaining.
2. **Cultural Context**: Growing up in the UK, he may have a different relationship with 1950s American R&B and its societal implications.
While he loves the music, he might not see the parody as diminishing
its cultural value because he views it through a different lens.
3. **Critical Distance**: As an authority on the genre, Roger might
analyze Freberg's parody with a historian's perspective, appreciating
it as part of the broader narrative of 1950s entertainment, rather
than taking it personally.
4. **Personal Disposition**: It could simply come down to personality.
Some people have thicker skin when it comes to satire or are less
likely to feel offended by mockery, even of something they love.
The interplay of identity, culture, and personality is endlessly
complex. It's intriguing how both Bruce and Roger have deep
connections to the genre but interpret Freberg's parody so
differently.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)