Reflective Essay
How can we creatively think of comedy as a mode within (and beyond) genre, form, and media? Well, one thing that I for one have learned in this studio is that comedy is versatile and dynamic, having the ability to transcend genres and infiltrate other forms and media. I suppose my hope for our major media artefact, Rogue, is that others find it funny–as, despite not having a role in the editing process, I think the others in the group did some fantastic work with the editing. I think it highlights how comedy, as a genre, can be hybridised with others to form more nuanced genres, ‘creating hybrid forms which combine comedy with other dramatic or generic elements’ (Mundy and White 2012:132). In this instance, the dramatic element is borrowed from the action-having spy movie such as Spy (2015) starring Jason Statham and Melissa McCarthy among others. The comedy, meanwhile, comes through a few elements. Incongruity, ‘the clash between such odd elements and normality (Audissino 2023:6), serves as one form. Since our character is from the past, what is normal for us isn’t normal for her which clash in order to create incongruity. Another is parody, which Joe Toplyn suggests ‘is considered to be a funny imitation of an artistic work that typically wasn’t intended to be funny’ (2014:239). Again, the spy film is typically very serious. Jason Statham’s filmography elucidates this. We also made parodies of 21st-century human tropes including our reliance on technology. Overall, I think our artefact addresses the key concerns of the studio; the comedy is a stand-alone product of our artefact that is enhanced by hybridisation and other elements of comedy.
If I were to continue or add onto our artefact, I would focus on amplifying the theories of humour within it. While our artefact did include incongruity, I feel like the incongruous aspect of the film could be enhanced by introducing more theories of humour. Relief, for example, involves some sort of tension to be released (Audissino 2023), which I think, while subtly present, could’ve been emphasised to add some more moments of drama. Benign violation, the idea that comedy can be produced by harmless subversions of norms (Audissino 2023), could have been more present in order to create more of a Mr. Bean archetype. I wouldn’t change the campy/b-film vibe we have in the final film, as I feel like these films have an inherent comedic nature.
In terms of the collaborative nature of this studio, I feel oddly neutral about it. Of course, I preferred working alone, not only because there is more control involved, but also because I can work on my time and look ahead to schedule a time that works for me to dedicate to working on a media artefact. In the first three weeks of this studio, I often utilised my mostly empty Fridays to filming, editing, and uploading my media artefacts. I would attend class Mondays and Wednesdays to gather ideas and write something that I thought would fulfill the requirements of the task. I would then null it over to consolidate my idea, which I would then dedicate Friday to film. Some weeks I had less time than others and so even if I wanted to, I simply couldn’t make a grander or technically advanced artefact. Despite this, I think even my underthought artefacts fit the requirements of the given week. Moving into group work was actually easier than I’d thought. I actually didn’t mind working with mostly different people each week. Working alongside others allowed for a diverse range of perspectives and ideas, but I feel that overall, we were mostly on the same page and if not went with the flow. I also feel like these weeks were the best in terms of media production; the groups weren’t too big nor small, and neither were the artefacts themselves. Moving into the group for the major media artefact was also rather easy. I liked the idea of the “fish out of water” character and believe we achieved it in a creative way within and beyond the comedy genre. The brainstorming and ideas phase was particularly fun as it involved simply bouncing off others’ ideas, interests, and wants. I do feel however that some roles were breached slightly leaving some group members to do more work than others, which I think could’ve been less apparent with better communication and actually remaining true to the designated roles. It simply felt like there were too many cooks in the kitchen at times which ultimately hindered the group’s ability to actually get things done without getting jaded. The hardest part really, was scheduling. Especially in the latter half of the semester, I for one, had far less time to actually engage fully with certain things, both due to having other assignments as well as a life to attend to; hence my struggle to make it to a few shoots. Overall, while I certainly preferred working alone, the group work was nowhere near awful, so I feel a bit on the fence in terms of this studio’s collaborative nature.
Conclusively, the studio has broadened my understanding of comedy, revealing its versatility as a mode and form. Our artefact, Rogue, showcases how comedic elements like incongruity and parody can enhance and transform traditional genres like spy films, and, while collaboration presented challenges, it also enriched the creative process, leading to a more nuanced final product. If we had continued working on the film, I’d focus on refining the theories of humour within our artefact that could amplify its impact.
References
Mundy, J. & White, G. (2012), “Comedy and Genre Boundaries.” in Laughing Matters: Understanding Film, Television and Radio Comedy, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 130–148.
Audissino, E. (2023), “From Dionysia to Hollywood: An Introduction to Comedy’s Long (and Bumpy) Road” in Audissino, E. & Wennekes, E. (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Music in Comedy Cinema, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 3–23.
Toplyn, J. (2014), “Parody Sketches” in Comedy Writing for Late-Night TV, New York: Twenty Lane Media, pp. 239–261.