[HN Gopher] Things I learnt doing stand-up comedy
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Things I learnt doing stand-up comedy
        
       Author : NesquikMike
       Score  : 160 points
       Date   : 2022-08-11 11:43 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (michaelgv.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (michaelgv.uk)
        
       | linsomniac wrote:
       | Dick Van Dyke show: "Ask me what the most important thing is
       | about comedy." "What's the most import..." "Timing."
        
       | nsxwolf wrote:
       | I've been interested in trying out standup in Meta Horizon Worlds
       | - there's a bunch of comedy clubs you can visit. So far it hasn't
       | really panned out as nobody is really seriously trying when I
       | happen to visit. People go on stage and don't really do standup,
       | and nobody pays attention.
        
         | ed wrote:
         | Zoom open mics are a thing, if you're looking to practice
         | https://jokezoom.com/online-comedy-open-mics
        
       | JackFr wrote:
       | I went to college with a guy who ended up being a successful
       | stand-up (multiple Netflix specials - level). He wasn't terribly
       | funny in college - his brother was much, much funnier. Also
       | watching his first bits on TV - first late night basic cable,
       | then Letterman and Leno and then eventually his specials, he was
       | not good at first and he was not a natural.
       | 
       | My big takeaway from that was that comedy, like many, many things
       | is a skill that can be improved on with hard work. Undoubtedly
       | there is some element of innate talent, but it is far less than I
       | would have imagined before.
        
         | bradlys wrote:
         | Comedy is also like other things - you may be good at it but it
         | doesn't mean you want to turn it into a career.
         | 
         | I've been asked at times if I had ever considered standup or
         | doing some kind of comedy or joining in on things - but I am
         | funny because I want to entertain people I like, not strangers.
         | When I tell stories or bits to strangers to get a laugh - I
         | don't really get the same sense of pleasure out of it as I do
         | with a group of friends.
         | 
         | I've considered being more intentional and getting very good at
         | comedy but in some ways - I like the uncoordinated trial and
         | error.
        
         | JoeAltmaier wrote:
         | Not a Higgins brother, was it? I went to school with Mike.
        
           | JackFr wrote:
           | Jim Gaffigan.
        
             | awb wrote:
             | I believe that. Watching his specials is like watching
             | someone who's trying really hard to be funny and
             | occasionally brute forces a laugh. He doesn't come across
             | as a naturally funny person like some other comics do.
        
         | ralfd wrote:
         | > his brother was much, much funnier
         | 
         | The ultimate victory in intra-sibling competition: Grinding
         | comedy until you have a Netflix stand-up special and your
         | naturally funny wise-cracking brother doesn't.
        
       | nborwankar wrote:
       | Did a similar 6 week class in standup many many years ago.
       | 
       | Two major things I learned were
       | 
       | a) you have to get the audience hooked in the first 20-30 secs or
       | it gets much harder. Best example Emo Philips opening with "You
       | know it's really hard when you have to kill a family member
       | because they are the devil. <Pause for laughter>. Other that it's
       | been a great day". Now that's a hook :-)
       | 
       | b) the concept of "laughs per minute" - ie there is a certain
       | rate at which the laughs become self sustaining. It's 3-4 laughs
       | per minute. If you can keep that up for 2 mins the audience is in
       | a state of laughter that keeps getting more and more intense. If
       | you do less than 2 laughs a minute the energy drops between each
       | laugh and you have to work really hard to bring it back to level.
       | Key is to maintain a rate that results in a high ambient level of
       | hilarity bordering with at least a couple of people cackling
       | loudly and losing it.
       | 
       | Nevertheless when you do a successful set you feel like Superman
       | when you walk off the stage.
        
       | kevinventullo wrote:
       | In the section "Don't Underestimate the Ruthless Competitiveness
       | of Your Peers", I had a totally different takeaway. I think it's
       | entirely possible that a set which kills _among comedians_ may
       | fall flat to a general audience.
        
         | NesquikMike wrote:
         | Author here, you're right that this can happen.
        
       | pessimizer wrote:
       | I take a view that is pretty close to my HN username. Comedy is
       | about pointing out weakness, and laughing is a reflex that you
       | have when you recognize prey. PC comedy is about self-
       | deprecation, where you pretend to be prey yourself in order to
       | stimulate the audiences hunting instinct, rather than telling
       | stories about prey or picking members of the audience to make
       | look like prey.
       | 
       | The humor is in the hyperbole about how weak the prey is. The
       | setup of a joke sets people up as a familiar level of prey, and
       | the punchline is about someone (or everyone) in the joke being
       | far weaker than you could have predicted. The punchline in this
       | joke is about Jimmy Carr being stupid in a way that you wouldn't
       | imagine someone could actually be.
        
         | teddyh wrote:
         | Some of the more ancient philosophers might agree with you, but
         | most don't.
         | 
         | https://existentialcomics.com/comic/355
        
         | noSyncCloud wrote:
         | This seems rather reductive, honestly. What about anti-humor?
         | That's still comedy. What about math jokes?
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | I don't know what anti-humor is, but I'm a big fan of Neil
           | Hamburger. The joke is that he's a terrible comedian who also
           | has a bad temper and a bad personal life.
        
         | altruios wrote:
         | This does not resonate with me. I think this is more indicative
         | of your internal psychology than any psychology of humor.
         | 
         | It sounds to me like you think in terms of prey and predator as
         | a default metaphor: which informs me of how I should handle you
         | as an agent - carefully.
         | 
         | If you reduce everything to animalistic tendencies - you start
         | reacting that way: then people start treating you that way
         | based on your actions... self fulfilling prophecy.
         | 
         | You might want to update you mental model of comedy - or
         | provide a significantly more cogent argument for your view, as
         | it was far from convincing - and frankly worrisome.
         | 
         | All in all it sounds like you are telling us how you respond to
         | people you perceive as prey... which is... concerning that you
         | view ANY human as prey...
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | Every comment in this subthread is fucking weird. Stop making
           | up a life for me in your head.
        
         | skrebbel wrote:
         | Who's the prey in a good pun?
        
           | rrauenza wrote:
           | Not sure who the prey is, but everyone is the victim. :)
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | Sorry, I laughed. I'm astounded by how much the British
             | like puns as opposed to Americans. I've heard British
             | audiences audibly gasp at the high quality of a pun, like
             | it took their breaths away.
             | 
             | Reductively I'd say the prey is the audience in that case,
             | for not being smart enough to see it coming. The best puns
             | are heavily telegraphed yet somehow totally unpredictable.
             | They're clever mirrorings of things everyone is already
             | familiar with, but still didn't see coming.
        
           | gattilorenz wrote:
           | So... Prey tell?
           | 
           | Bad puns aside, there's many theories in the scientific
           | literature (from cognitive psychology, linguistics and AI)
           | that describe the mechanisms of puns (and many other types of
           | jokes, really), and they mostly talk about deviations from a
           | script/subverting expectations and norms (Hanks' theory of
           | norms)/accessing a non-default interpretation that is
           | different from the default one (Giora's optimal innovation
           | hypothesis).
           | 
           | For the interested reader, i suggest starting with Raskin htt
           | ps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110198492...
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | I don't think that unexpected things are necessarily funny.
             | Unexpected stupidity or weakness is funny. Unexpected
             | cancer isn't funny. To make it funny, you have to make
             | someone stupid.
        
         | ineptech wrote:
         | This doesn't sound even a little right to me. That punchline is
         | based on inversion of expectations, not self-deprecation.
         | Certainly there seems to be some connection between laughter
         | and an interrupted defense mechanism, but your version of it
         | ("laughing is a reflex that you have when you recognize prey")
         | doesn't make much sense. Why would we need a mechanism to avoid
         | biting prey?
         | 
         | It would be much more plausibly viewed as a mechanism to avoid
         | fighting rivals. As in: monkey A steals monkey B's banana, and
         | monkey B bares his teeth to attack, but then, recognizing that
         | monkey A is bigger and will kill him, monkey B evolves the
         | behavior of laughing instead, as a way to dissipate the
         | aggression and avoid a fight he will lose. Later, lower-status
         | monkeys use humor as a way to gain status, because since
         | laughter is equivalent to not-fighting, you can win or avoid a
         | fight with a higher-status monkey by making him laugh.
         | 
         | That sounds a lot more believable, and it kinda-sorta comports
         | with observation (e.g. it maps very neatly to medieval jesters
         | getting away with making jokes about the King, or schoolyard
         | bullying victims 'winning' if they can get the crowd laughing
         | at the bully). But it's still a just-so story about
         | evolutionary behavior, and by definition suspect as those are
         | famously easy to gin up.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | > That punchline is based on inversion of expectations, not
           | self-deprecation.
           | 
           | The expectation is that Jimmy Carr is of normal intelligence
           | and awareness. The joke that he is making is that he is not.
           | 
           | I don't buy the monkey story because laughing isn't generally
           | defensive. If somebody attacks you and you laugh, they will
           | attack you harder. To defend yourself with laughter, you
           | point at a third-party and laugh, so maybe they'll think the
           | third party is weaker than you.
        
             | bluefirebrand wrote:
             | > The expectation is that Jimmy Carr is of normal
             | intelligence and awareness. The joke that he is making is
             | that he is not.
             | 
             | I'm pretty sure the joke is that you aren't going to get
             | much done in "a moment" of Cancer Research.
             | 
             | Not that he's too stupid to do the research. He could be
             | the world's foremost expert on Cancer Research and the joke
             | is still funny.
        
         | jackblemming wrote:
         | You're welcome to your interpretation. You're right because
         | it's your perspective and reality, but you should know, most
         | people don't think this way and it may have negative long term
         | effects on your life and health.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | That's condescending.
        
             | bozhark wrote:
             | and true
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | It's true that people on the internet can't have light
               | conversations about the nature of comedy without larping
               | as psychologists, diagnosing people over the internet as
               | severely damaged for having an opinion that they disagree
               | with. We should really be able to have grown-up
               | conversations without attempting to disqualify each
               | other.
        
             | hollasch wrote:
             | That's a very good observation.
        
             | jackblemming wrote:
             | Do you have any suggestions on how to write it in a less
             | condescending tone?
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | That is one type of humor, and it does get great laughs when
         | done well. However it also backfire getting you run out of
         | town.
         | 
         | Notice that most of the examples of humor in this discussion
         | are not that type.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | I'd argue that they all are. The target of every joke is
           | someone painted as comically inept or weak. The only ways to
           | subvert that is to aim it at yourself (which endears you to
           | people), to aim it at the audience (which makes the audience
           | feel that you are superior to them), or to aim it at the
           | world in general (which makes you and the audience comrades
           | against a stupid world.)
        
       | theluketaylor wrote:
       | That's a specific type of expectation confounding that comes from
       | a dangling modifier. English is particularly good at creating
       | these types of sentences and it leads to some of my very
       | favourite jokes.
       | 
       | If the lady had said "Can you spare a few minutes to discuss
       | supporting cancer research" there isn't any ambiguity in the
       | sentence and then no joke.
       | 
       | Community used these to great effect. For example:
       | 
       | Britta: Yep, I'm getting serious. I got a backpack, got a new
       | notebook. Oh, I got one of those see-through yellow pens so I can
       | do that thing where you colour in the words.
       | 
       | Shirley: Highlight?
       | 
       | Britta: Probably the backpack.
        
         | rahimnathwani wrote:
         | My favourite joke from Community:
         | 
         | I thought you got your degree online from Colombia?
         | 
         | Yes, but they want a _real_ degree from _America_
        
           | rospaya wrote:
           | This one might be the most appropriate since it's a joke
           | about jokes - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMT7MAnJna8
        
           | tomjakubowski wrote:
           | Columbia, not Colombia. That's the joke
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | InCityDreams wrote:
         | >"Can you spare a few minutes to discuss supporting cancer
         | research"
         | 
         | Sure, I've left my two young kids and a puppy in a locked and
         | closed car and it's a very, very, very hot day and I have 3
         | important things to do...can you?
         | 
         | /FB cap doff, of course.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lgessler wrote:
         | Hm, is this really a dangling modifier? Something's a dangling
         | modifier when its modificand is unexpressed or ambiguous, but
         | "for cancer research" has a clear modificand, the noun phrase
         | headed by "minutes".
         | 
         | Rather, I think this is just some ambiguity about what the "few
         | minutes" are for.
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | I'm fascinated by stand-up comedy. I took a course a couple of
       | years ago (online thanks to the pandemic) and it was so, so much
       | harder than I expected it to be! By the end of the course I was
       | nowhere near having a "tight five" that I was ready to perform in
       | public.
       | 
       | I've continued to pay attention to it since, and it really is
       | amazing how much skill and preparation it takes to put together
       | anything that even comes close to being a decent performance.
       | 
       | Great stand-up comedians have inevitably spent hours of time
       | refining every sentence that comes out of their mouths, despite
       | their delivery sounding entirely natural and unrehearsed.
        
         | bambax wrote:
         | Just yesterday night I went to a comedy club in Paris that does
         | standup comedy in English. It was an "improv special" where
         | each comic has to improvise jokes based on random prompts
         | displayed on a screen with a projector.
         | 
         | T.J. Miller, of Silicon Valley fame, does it successfully in
         | this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxD6S-nEL_I
         | 
         | But yesterday, most comics bombed badly; out of 8, just one was
         | actually good, and one passable; the others were terrible. But
         | it's an incredibly difficult exercise, so much so that one has
         | to wonder why you would put yourself through this.
         | 
         | It's certainly true that comedy is about writing and rehearsal
         | and being analytical and having a fun look at the world; but
         | it's also about quick wit, especially if one wants to interact
         | with the audience.
        
           | toyg wrote:
           | /bitch-mode on
           | 
           | They do this in Paris precisely _because_ they bomb - if they
           | were any good, they 'd be making money in an actual English-
           | speaking country...
           | 
           | /bitch-mode off
        
         | mikebridgman wrote:
         | Where did you take the online course?
        
           | simonw wrote:
           | It was with Stanford continuing education.
        
         | bink wrote:
         | I used to go see Carlin perform every August in Vegas. He was
         | almost always working on new stuff and carrying a clipboard
         | around with various jokes. It was really interesting to then
         | watch his specials and see how the material developed.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | Melting_Harps wrote:
           | > I used to go see Carlin perform every August in Vegas. He
           | was almost always working on new stuff and carrying a
           | clipboard around with various jokes. It was really
           | interesting to then watch his specials and see how the
           | material developed.
           | 
           | Was this in his early days, or his darker rant days?
           | 
           | Even in his darker period he was still a crafty orator, using
           | rhyming, cadence and tonality so well.
           | 
           | He discusses this in many interviews over the years and many
           | which were shown in is documentary. What's even crazier to
           | think is that he was kind of a recluse and an introverted
           | person, which is insane considering how much of a wildman he
           | was for most of his career.
        
             | bink wrote:
             | It was over the course of 10 years or so and I got to see
             | the slow decline, sadly. His final years had really very
             | few jokes (at least in Vegas).
        
         | solarmist wrote:
         | Interesting. This sounds exactly like what's been happening
         | with me trying to get down talking about my startup.
        
           | simonw wrote:
           | I tweeted a thing the other day about how there are
           | surprising parallels between stand-up comedy and coming up
           | with good questions for interviewing job candidates. In both
           | cases there's a lot to be said for thinking VERY hard about
           | the exact wording you are using, and the way in which the
           | material is delivered.
           | https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1556277081691959296
        
             | germinalphrase wrote:
             | I've taught at the high school level for about ten years.
             | The mental process is familiar. I may teach the same lesson
             | several times in a day, but there are constant alterations
             | to pacing/phrasing depending on specific students in the
             | room/time of day/personal assessment of how earlier
             | phrasing landed/etc
        
               | JabavuAdams wrote:
               | Teaching is a kind of performance. I love that part. I
               | need to get better at the marking/admin.
        
       | gotmedium wrote:
       | If you like standup comedy you should watch the french standup
       | comedy series from Netflix! Amazing cast and great throughout
       | 
       | https://www.netflix.com/fr/Title/81233911
        
       | janandonly wrote:
       | "Monday, Tuesday, Banana". The first two components, which create
       | an expectation, are the set-up; and, the third that confounds the
       | expectation is the payoff, or the punchline.
       | 
       | To take an example from Jimmy Carr.                   A lady with
       | a clipboard stopped me in the street the other day.         She
       | said, "Can you spare a few minutes for Cancer Research?"
       | I said, "All right, but we're not going to get much done."
        
         | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
         | It's called the "rule of three". 2 examples to define a trend
         | line, and the 3rd one to subvert expectations.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(writing)#Comedy
        
         | altdataseller wrote:
         | I'm dumb.. what's the punchline in that joke?
        
           | Joeboy wrote:
           | "Can you spare a few minutes for Cancer Research?" is a thing
           | people say when they're trying to get you to donate to cancer
           | research charities. Jimmy interprets it instead as meaning
           | she wants him to spend a few minutes doing actual cancer
           | research himself (which would be unlikely to be very
           | productive).
        
           | SuperCuber wrote:
           | The lady meant to spare a few minutes to talk about cancer
           | research, the punchline is misinterpreting that as a
           | suggestion to do actual cancer research
        
         | orionion wrote:
         | > A lady with a clipboard stopped me in the street the other
         | day. She said, "Can you spare a few minutes for Cancer
         | Research?" I said, "All right, breast is fine - but I draw th
         | line at colorectal on the first date."
        
         | neonate wrote:
         | Your comment is nothing but a quote from the article. Why?
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | Much respect for sharing a video!
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6miCy-nmXIY
       | 
       | I /really/ like that opener: "My favourite London bus is the 24".
        
         | NesquikMike wrote:
         | Haha thanks for linking!
        
           | curiousgal wrote:
           | It gave me a good chuckle. Bravo!
        
           | lisper wrote:
           | Made me laugh! :-)
        
           | ozim wrote:
           | Decent set :)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | stomczyk09 wrote:
       | I love point 7 of "let the audience laugh". I can totally see
       | this being a pain point of not having a pause before your next
       | joke. Pausing and silence is so powerful and is also exhibited in
       | sales calls, and can drive suspense to the next joke or even a
       | joke you're in the middle of
        
       | presidentender wrote:
       | I've been doing standup for just shy of 5 years. I started with a
       | similar class, attended a lot of open mics, hosted several of my
       | own mics, and produced shows. With covid I left SF and came back
       | to Montana, which might seem like it would be bad for a comedy
       | career, but in many ways it's easier to make headway here. The
       | Punchline and Cobb's have so many eager comics that they can pick
       | and choose and it's difficult to stand out. Here I'm a biggish
       | fish in a teeny pond; I can rent a theater and fill it and make
       | hundreds of dollars instead of the $25 I could hope for from
       | shows in the city.
       | 
       | Of course sometimes you're still looking at empty rooms and empty
       | tip jars or no ticket sales, but most of the time, I get to tell
       | more jokes to a larger number of people and get more money at
       | each show working in flyover country.
        
       | rcurry wrote:
       | True story: A few days back my wife and I were doing Wordle. I
       | could tell the answer was "RUSTY", her pet name for me. So I told
       | her the answer was sitting right next to her and she says "No,
       | STUPID is six letters."
        
       | wonder_er wrote:
       | This was a great read! I had a planned sabbaticle from work,
       | scheduled to start in April, 2020, and I planned on
       | studying/practicing standup at a local comedy place in Denver.
       | Covid blew a hole in that, obviously, and I've not done it.
       | 
       | This all reminds me of a paper I've read, and think about
       | regularly. The author, or others, might be interested. I've
       | posted notes and a link to the paper here:
       | 
       | https://josh.works/driven-by-compression-progress-novelty-hu...
       | 
       | The argument is something like "when our expectations are
       | subverted, and new visible order snaps into view, we feel
       | satisfied and interested". Curiosity and expectation seems to
       | play a large role in humor and standup.
       | 
       | Thanks for this article, Michael! I've subscribed via RSS! I am
       | thankful to have found your website.
        
         | NesquikMike wrote:
         | Thanks! :D
         | 
         | Really like the quote and your website. I've had a good play
         | around with your "find a random blogger from Hacker News"
         | project.
        
         | corytheboyd wrote:
         | Was it Rise Comedy? I did the standup 101 class, it was a good
         | time! I had fun with my showcase but definitely decided it
         | wasn't for me. Totally recommend doing it, performing on an
         | open mic for the first time(s) is such a wild experience that
         | you won't get anywhere else :)
        
       | throwaway675309 wrote:
       | Good read though the linked performance fell rather flat - it
       | seem to be almost preternaturally obsessed with London bus
       | routes, you would have to have an excellent set of diamond
       | pickaxes to mine any worthwhile material from that particular
       | domain and most of it barely warranted a chuckle from myself.
       | 
       | The self congratulatory estimating himself as one of the worst
       | performers but coming out as one of the top three was a little
       | hamfisted, and if that was honestly the case... I cannot even
       | imagine what the other comedians used for material... a list of
       | ones favorite mosaic bathroom tile patterns perhaps?
       | 
       | Comedy feels like writing, if you need to take a course it's
       | probably just not for you.
        
         | labster wrote:
         | Agreed, bus lines aren't nearly as funny as subway lines:
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mornington_Crescent_(game)
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | If you don't think that was an impressive _first-time_
         | performance from a comic you are massively under-estimating how
         | difficult this is.
        
       | ncr100 wrote:
       | Somewhere I learned that comedy is about surprise.
        
         | jrm4 wrote:
         | I read somewhere that literally all humor stems from
         | "incompatible frames of reference" and I thought that was
         | interesting.
        
           | sonofhans wrote:
           | Frank Herbert said, "Laughter is a human reaction to non-
           | lethal surprise."
        
             | SeanLuke wrote:
             | And he should know! The Dune series was so, so funny.
        
               | butterknife wrote:
               | Muad'Dib we call instructor of boys.
        
         | moviewise wrote:
         | Because being surprised is funny.
         | 
         | This is the best way to get a laugh:
         | 
         | "You show the fat lady approaching; then you show the banana
         | peel; then you show the fat lady and the banana peel together;
         | then she steps over the banana peel and disappears down a
         | manhole."
         | 
         | --Charlie Chaplin
         | 
         | Laughter is the reaction to being surprised in a safe
         | environment.
         | 
         | From:
         | 
         | https://moviewise.substack.com/p/the-funniest-movie-scene
        
       | strict9 wrote:
       | What is it about threes?
       | 
       | - The rule of thirds for visual imagery [1]
       | 
       | - Three-act structure for storytelling and plays [2]
       | 
       | - Three-part setup for stand up comedy [this article]
       | 
       | Rules for content often fall into a rule of threes, and I'd love
       | to know why.
       | 
       | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thirds
       | 
       | 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-act_structure
        
         | NesquikMike wrote:
         | Mathematically the minimum number of elements necessary for a
         | pattern is three.
        
           | JadeNB wrote:
           | > Mathematically the minimum number of elements necessary for
           | a pattern is three.
           | 
           | An assertion about mathematics requires a definition, and I
           | don't believe this one for the usual definition of 'pattern'.
           | For example, if I wanted to exhibit a linear pattern, two
           | data points would be sufficient.
           | 
           | (But we're not talking about mathematical constructs anyway,
           | so it's not clear what the relevance of mathematics is.)
        
             | guhidalg wrote:
             | 2 points establishes local linearity, not global linearity.
             | f(x) = x^2 looks linear if you take any 2 arbitrary xs, add
             | a third and you can no longer draw one line that intersects
             | all 3 points.
        
               | JadeNB wrote:
               | > 2 points establishes local linearity, not global
               | linearity. f(x) = x^2 looks linear if you take any 2
               | arbitrary xs, add a third and you can no longer draw one
               | line that intersects all 3 points.
               | 
               | Yes, certainly. And 3 points can show you a pattern that
               | looks quadratic but isn't, and so on. More to the point,
               | 3 points can _rule out_ a claim of linearity, but they
               | also cannot _demonstrate_ a claim of linearity (e.g., you
               | can usually find 3 collinear points on the graph of a
               | cubic). My point was not to make a mathematical claim
               | myself, but rather to argue that the claim  "the minimum
               | number of elements necessary for a pattern is three" is
               | so vague to, I think, be nearly meaningless--and, in
               | particular, unfalsifiable; in my mind, it doesn't deserve
               | the adverb "mathematically".
        
               | guhidalg wrote:
               | In that I agree. Maybe a better word is "normally" as in
               | "normally don't assume a pattern until you see 3 of them"
        
               | whoooooo123 wrote:
               | Only on HN could a comment thread devolve from "light
               | observation on the nature of comedy" to "arguing about
               | the nature of linearity in mathematical equations" in 6
               | comments.
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | The three-act structure and the three-part setup are the same
         | thing. You establish the premise, build-up the concept, then
         | provide a payoff. "It's as easy as 1, 2, 3".
         | 
         | What's the simplest way to represent most stories? You draw a
         | line. It goes from point A to point B, start to finish, where
         | the characters begin and where they end. There's a whole lot of
         | "middle" there too. What a coincidence, act two tends to be the
         | longer one! Again, "1, 2, 3".
         | 
         | How about the simplest way to count to (say) start a race? "Go"
         | is unpredictable; "Ready, Go" is barely better; "Ready, Set,
         | Go" gives you a clear cadence. 1, 2, 3. Beginning, middle, end.
         | 
         | As for images: humans are symmetrical with two eyes, we
         | naturally divide the picture into two sides so you wouldn't be
         | impressed by a "rule of halves". A rule of thirds is no more
         | than a grid, one where there are clear sides and a middle to
         | the image. A rule of fifths would also work, as would a five-
         | act structure (which is a thing).
         | 
         | Three is the smallest number to which you can reduce a lot of
         | concepts by establishing a pattern.
        
         | JadeNB wrote:
         | > Rules for content often fall into a rule of threes, and I'd
         | love to know why.
         | 
         | I would like explicitly to appreciate your choice to give 3
         | examples.
        
         | runevault wrote:
         | People inherently pattern match everything, looking for how it
         | fits their worldview. Three points either lets you see the
         | pattern and see everything fits it, or gives you enough setup
         | to create payoff.
         | 
         | If you only do single setup plus payoff the audience may
         | instead try to make the two fit together. If you give them two
         | points of reference, it allows them to prebuild an assumed
         | pattern with less work from the story/music/whatever for you to
         | either play within or subvert.
         | 
         | An example of using just two to build patterns in the audience
         | (but doesn't give a chance to subvert expectations per se) is
         | cutting between shots in movies. The audience inherently tries
         | to deduce the meaning of going from one image to a second.
         | David Mamet has a great book, 'On Directing Film', that is not
         | very long and talks about the shot transition version of this
         | in great detail. You can use the ideas there and expand it to
         | three to get into the ideas I've talked about above.
        
         | paulpauper wrote:
         | It does not need to be three. It can be: set-up and then the
         | punchline
        
           | whoooooo123 wrote:
           | Or less.
           | 
           | Jimmy Carr says that the shortest joke he's ever written is
           | two words: dwarf shortage.
        
         | Taylor_OD wrote:
         | Well for comedy its patterns. You hear something once and its
         | just a thing, the second time you hear it you remember the
         | first time and you might chuckle, the third time your brain
         | recognizes it as a pattern and building off the first two times
         | you heard it and its, "funny".
         | 
         | I'm over simplifying but that is really the basis of a lot of
         | comedy. Stand up less so. Most improv runs on the rule of
         | threes though. It's an easy way to make something not funny at
         | least a little funny.
         | 
         | Try it in a meeting or presentation sometime. Start with some
         | goofy line or joke. Mention it again in the middle. Close with
         | it. You'll probably get laughs. Even if its not that funny and
         | got crickets the first time.
        
         | InCityDreams wrote:
         | 80/20 in sports, and a few other things.
        
       | mike10921 wrote:
       | Back in the day, I used to frequent Comedy Cellar and I was there
       | multiple times when Chris Rock was trying out his material in
       | order to decide which jokes he would later use with his larger
       | audiences.
        
         | morley wrote:
         | IIRC when Rock tries out material, he deliberately speaks in a
         | dull monotone. He's such a great performer that if he uses his
         | normal standup instincts, he can get laughs off of weak
         | material.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-11 23:01 UTC)