This is funny

Should All Writing Be Funny?

And if not, why not?

Hello, I’m about to explain why writing should always be funny. When writing is funny, it makes the reader smile, and they feel happy. When they are happy, they are not sad, and therefore do good things for society, their friends, and their family.

Pretty bland, isn’t it?

Surprised you’re still reading.

Are you?

I think all writing should be funny, humorous, comic, and amusing. History is on my side.

Take Slaughterhouse 5. Kurt Vonnegut’s wartime masterpiece about his experiences during the bombing of Dresden is deadly serious. And deeply funny.

Likewise, Catch-22, is another book that mixes the dreadfulness of war with jokes. True, the humour might not be The Flintstones, but it’s funny all the same. Same as Catcher in the Rye. A dismal story but amusing.

Then there’s A Confederacy of Dunces, without doubt the funniest book I’ve read — and a masterpiece in comic writing.

More a straight comedy than Catcher in the Rye for sure. More a farce. But it’s still incredibly serious and poignant as we watch Ignatius J. Reilly struggle on through life.

And as we do, we see the world through the eyes of a madman, a man who is unhinged and on the margins of society. Until we realize he’s not. He’s pretty normal, like me and you.

You might be wondering whether comedy is just a cheap trick to get people’s attention. I don’t think so. It takes a great writer to combine tragedy and comedy.

I haven’t read all the major works of literature — far from it. But at a guess all the greats incorporate humor into their work. From Dickens to Tolstoy. Flaubert to Balzac. Joyce to Shakespeare. Zola to Thoreau.

All their books are funny, and we get to laugh, as well as cry, feel anger, hatred, loathing, and all the other emotions that go with reading a good book.

Which is why a lot of books are not great. Even if they are written well with perfect grammar, a great plot and interesting characters, if there’s no humour, I’m struggling to connect. Unable to join the dots between the plot, the characters, the setting, and the meaning. Where’s the humanity in it? Humans are funny beings. It’s what makes us tick, and may even — although I can’t prove it — differentiate us from animals.

I’m reading a book like this right now. It’s a cop thriller I found in a café. I got hooked. It's absorbing and pacy. But it’s as dry as a turd baked out in the sun for 24 hours.

The characters don’t possess a cent’s worth of humor, and plod through the book as though their mouths have been sealed shut and are unable to smile or laugh. Or even cry.

In one part, the hero’s partner is brutally murdered, but he shrugs it off as though someone has thrown a snowball at him. I mean, give us something to raise the mood. Let us know the hero gives a shit, and is willing to fight on. How about a joke? Instead of: I picked up his badge and walked towards the car. It was still raining.

I should have closed the book there and then, but it was too gripping as the author was a good writer.

So here’s the thing, can a good writer ever become a great writer if they aren’t going to experiment with that one emotion we all possess? Humour.

And can authors who only write straight comedy ever be great writers?

Did I just say that…

Douglas Adams’ famous book was originally a radio series aired in 1978 on the BBC. It was intended as pure comedy, but that’s clearly not the case if you’ve read it.

One could argue it’s pure comic fantasy, and nothing more. But it’s difficult not to wonder what he was saying.

What is he saying? And what does 42 mean? And what really is at the end of the universe.

I’ll let you decide.

Thanks for reading this funny (I think) piece. For more utter nonsense, check out: