When a Joke is not a Joke

The New Yorker pulled off it's own sophisticated Swift Boat operation this week. It published an issue cover of a cartoon of Barack and Michelle Obama as political extremists and anti-American. The editors argue that it is only satire and they are making fun of how these rumors develop - maybe they think their elite, erudite readers will figure it out themselves. But there is not commentary on the cartoon inside the issue... it is just dropped on the cover of this week's edition and we are all expected to figure it out and not make any misinformed assumptions.

Have you ever had a friend that teased you frequently? Did you ever wonder if the teasing had anything to do with some ambivalent hostility that person has towards you? Use that example for the magazine's latest cover. The New Yorker is Obama's ambivalent friend -

In an essay titled "Humor" published by the head of the Antropology department at Brown University, Dr. William Beeman analyzes humor - his comments can inform us on the real nature of the New Yorker's so-called satirical cartoon:

Freud theorized that jokes have only two purposes: aggression and exposure. The first purpose (which includes satire and defense) is fulfilled through the hostile joke, and the second through the dirty joke.

(for link to Beeman essay click here)

To interpret academic speak, what Beeman is saying is that Sigmund Freud proposed there are only two reasons for jokes, 1) hostility, insult, verbal assault and 2) to expose the person who is the subject of the joke - tell a secret, or tell people something the subject is ashamed of or will embarrass him/her.

The question in the TNY remains - to whom is the hostility directed? Obama, his wife? Bin Laden? our Congressional fear mongers? Since there is no accompanying explanation - the magazine left itself wide open for indulging in dirty business.

Normally I would post the image - but I feel if I do that, I will perpetuate the rumor/stereotype/mis-information.