Affiliation:
1. Humanities and Philosophy University of Central Oklahoma Edmond Oklahoma
Abstract
ABSTRACT
One of the standard defenses of Daniel Tosh, Andrew Dice Clay, Bernard Manning, and other stand-up comedians who have been accused of crossing moral lines is that the responses they elicit belong to an aesthetic rather than a moral domain to which standard methods of ethical evaluation are therefore inapplicable. I argue, first, that fictionality does not confer immunity to ethical criticism and, second, that the stance adopted by the stand-up artist is not fully analogous to a fictive one in any event. Whatever the case with respect to the adoption of an alternative persona, the stand-up artist refers in his or her pronouncements to the actual world in a way that a fiction does not. That also suggests susceptibility to ethical criticism, just for different reasons.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Music,Philosophy,Visual Arts and Performing Arts
Reference24 articles.
1. The Sad Clown: The Deep Emotions Behind Stand-Up Comedy;Christensen,2018
2. Abuse on the Premises: the ‘Bernard Manning’ Case Means Employers Cannot Turn a Blind Eye to Harassment,” Independent;Clarke,1996
3. Only Kidding: The Connection between Amusement and Our Attitudes;Dadlez;Southwest Philosophy Review,2006
4. Truly Funny: Irony and Satire as Moral Criticism;Dadlez;Journal of Aesthetic Education,2011
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Amoralism and jokes;The European Journal of Humour Research;2024-06-26