|
Article Excerpt
Abstract. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore how five middle school students examined humor and characterization used in adolescent literature according to Louise Rosenblatt's (1995) reader response transactional theory. The study was conducted with a focus group of five 6th-grade students, three girls and two boys, from a public middle school language arts classroom in the Southwest region of the United States. The guiding question for the study was: In what ways do selected middle school students talk about the connections between humor and characterization in response to adolescent literature? Methods for data collection included semistructured interviews and transcripts of audiotaped and videotaped literature circle discussions. The students read the adolescent literature both efferently and aesthetically (Rosenblatt, 1995) as they attended to humor, thus setting conditions for engaging the humor. To begin, if the situation in the text was the result of superiority humor, where the focus group members could predict the targeted character would be hurt, disappointed, or promote a negative change in the character's development, then they would not engage in the humor. Additionally, if the humor was closely related to the students' world of understanding, then the humor was embraced only after careful deliberation. Finally, if the characters presented themselves as resilient and unaffected by the humor, then the students were willing to laugh at the characters.
**********
Cross-legged, legs tucked under them, students find a comfortable position as they settle in to hear more of Jack's Black Book (1997), an adventurous and humorous story written by Jack Gantos. With each passing event in the story, laughter erupts as students predict upcoming dilemmas, pranks, and consequences. Students are eager to discuss the absurdity of Jack's actions and also comment on Gantos' effective use of language.
Humor plays an important role in the classroom depicted in the aforementioned vignette. Sadly, not all classroom teachers spend time attending to humor in literature and examining it for its literary value. E.B. White (1977) contends "the world likes humor, but it treats it patronizingly.... It feels that if a thing is funny it can be presumed to be something less than great, because if it were truly great it would be wholly serious" (p. 244).
As a researcher and teacher, I have observed how humor affords students an opportunity to make intertextual and experiential connections. I have watched as their discussions of humor have helped them understand new and varied perspectives of texts. I have recorded the excitement in their voices as they use humor to become more familiar with language and wordplay, leading them to deeper understandings of literary experiences. Lastly, I have listened to students express the enjoyment they experience by attending to humor in their reading. In this article, I share how selected middle school students talk about the connections between characterization and humor in response to adolescent literature.
Theoretical Framework
Is it the humorous glimpses at serious matters, the command of language, or parodies that draw adolescents to humorous literature? What, if anything, does this genre offer for young readers? Nilsen and Nilsen (1982) suggest humor in adolescent literature goes beyond "simple amusement." In fact, "Humorous literature forces teenagers to be active instead of passive readers. As they mentally stretch, they are training themselves to become experts in the subtle manipulation of an amazing set of symbols" (p. 64).
It is from this vantage point of supporting active readers using humorous literature as a vehicle that I present the theoretical framework in two main components: 1) the role of humor in literature and 2) reader response theories supporting the concept of learning through talk.
The Role of Humor in Literature
While laughter might be readily defined, humor remains more elusive and ambiguous, often context specific and individualized. Currently, more than 100 theories relating to humor exist dating back to Plato and Aristotle (Ziv, 1988, p. viii). Not only do theories of humor vary, but so do definitions of humor and humor-related terms. For the purpose of this article, humor is defined as "that quality in a happening, an action, a situation, or an expression of ideas which appeals to a sense of ludicrous or absurdly incongruous" (Webster's Third New International Dictionary, 1971, p. 1102).
Developmentally, as students experience multiple meanings of words and have opportunities to play with language, the humor they identify with resembles the wordplay of adults. Once preadolescents and adolescents begin experiencing the ambiguity of wordplay, they tend to prefer anecdotes, wit, and other forms of more sophisticated humor, as opposed to memorized jokes (Hill, 1988; McGhee, 1978).
Recent Research Studies Involving Humor
Kleinberg and Cockett (1996) conducted a study with a small group of adolescents regarding their perceptions of humor during a summer reading program at a public library. The researchers gave brief "book talks" about selected books; the adolescents read books individually, and shared their thoughts with the remainder of the group. Kleinberg and Cockett concluded that it is difficult to separate the role of subjectivity in humor from the social aspect of learning. The study also claimed to help participants search for deeper meanings when reading and to view humor from varied perspectives.
In 1987, a study conducted by Gentile and McMillan identified what children and adolescents depict as humorous. According to their findings, adolescents respond to various types of humor (see Table 1).
Louis (1973) investigated the responses of 216 sixth-grade students to action humor and the humorous words of characters. The students were randomly selected from 18 different classrooms in both inner-city, suburban, and rural school settings. Five hypotheses were tested regarding humor preferences and emotions toward the literature. Inner-city students responded more favorably to the action humor, whereas the students from rural settings preferred the humor created by words.
Reader Response Theories
While reader response theories vary, for the purpose of this article they are defined as "sharing a concern with how...
|
