This document is a syllabus for a class on dark humor taught by Ingrid Fernandez. The class will examine humor that aims to be offensive through images, jokes, and comedy that are obscene, violent, and in poor taste. Students will analyze how this type of humor works as a form of argument by pushing social boundaries related to topics like death, race, religion, violence, and sexuality. Major assignments include a rhetorical analysis of a example of dark humor, analyzing multiple philosophies of humor, and a research-based argument examining how dark humor functions in a particular work and challenges social norms. The class will explore the work of comedians, philosophers of humor, and examples from films, television, literature and more

1. Dark Humor: A Rhetoric of Social Taboos Instructor: Ingrid Fernandez
PWR 1 GIF, Section 01/Winter 2013 Office Hours: Mon. 12-3 PM, Tues. 2-4 PM
T/Th., 11:00 a.m.-12:50 p.m. Location: 460-316
Room: 160-332 ingridf@stanford.edu
DISCLAIMER: This class deals with material that might be extremely offensive to some individuals. We will
be looking at images and jokes that are often obscene and violent and not in the best of taste. Examining the logic
behind material that is disturbing, marginal and offensive is precisely the purpose of the class. We will have
materials on death, racial and ethnic stereotypes, religion, violence, sexual situations, bodily fluids, and illness,
among others. If you think the subject matter might make you uncomfortable, I strongly suggest you take another
class.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Warning: Lewd and rude. Not recommended for the prude. This class deals with material that aims to be
extremely offensive to some individuals. If this might make you uncomfortable, do not take this class. We will
be looking at images and jokes that are often unapologetically obscene, littered with profanity, violent, and not in
the best of taste. The purpose of this class lies precisely in examining the logic behind material that is shocking,
marginal and vulgar, and then determining how such material works as a form of argument. Dark humor
relishes the disorderly, bitter, perverse, sadistic and sick in its refusal to compromise with the status quo
and actively seeks to ruffle many feathers in its intended audience.
It is no surprise this brand of comedy often deals with the most delicate subject matter--violence and
bodily damage, illness, aging and death, race and ethnicity, and gender and sexuality—often combining
the sacred with the utmost form of the profane. In attempting to determine the contested role of dark
humor in society, we will look at the work of stand-up comedians, satirists like Stephen Colbert, Jon
Stewart, and the Monty Python sketch group, underground online comics like Cyanide and Happiness
and The Freckled Finger as well as philosophies of humor postulated by figures such as Plato, Hobbes,
Schopenhauer, Freud, Bergson, Breton, and Morreall. The ultimate goal is for students to find
compelling material, analyze these texts and images, and develop their own ideas about the limits and
possibilities of the rhetoric of dark humor.
TEXTS
Required:
• Morreall, John, ed. The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor. New York: State University of New York
Press, 1987.
• Gaiman, Neil. The Sandman Vol. 1: Preludes & Nocturnes. New York: DC Comics, 1991.
• Gaiman, Neil. The Sandman Vol. 2: The Doll’s House. New York: DC Comics, 1990.
• Weekly Readings posted on Coursework
Optional:
• Bataille, Georges. Eroticism: Death and Sensuality. Trans. Mary Dalwood. San Francisco: City Lights,
1986.
• Breton, André. Anthology of Black Humor. Trans. Mark Polizzotti. San Francisco: City Lights, 1997.
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 1

2. • Lunsford, Andrea. Easy Writer: A Pocket Reference, 4th
Ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010.
CLASS OBJECTIVES
You already know how to write and do not need basic sentence structure and grammar lessons from me. This
course is designed to refine your writing skills and most importantly, to allow you to successfully develop
argumentative strategies and defend a point of view on any subject matter you might encounter in both your
academic studies and life in general. Being a good rhetorician, one might say, is truly priceless—unless you have
a MasterCard, that is (just joking).
CLASS FORMAT
Normally, each class will contain a brief lecture (15-45 minutes) followed by a 10-minute break. The second part
of each session is dedicated to class discussion, group projects, writing activities, etc. Discussion includes
opinion questions, close reading, socio-historical analysis, debate, and group and individual projects and writing
assignments. You will be asked to bring materials from your larger project or based on personal interests and
share them with the class as part of your contribution to the discussion.
ATTENDANCE/TARDINESS
Attendance is mandatory and will impact your final grade. If you anticipate missing a session, please let me know
in advance to coordinate make-up possibilities.
As a form of courtesy to other members of the session, please arrive on time and ready to embark upon class
activities. Be sure to have read all material to be covered in class. Chronic absences or tardiness will affect your
final grade. Three or more absences will result in one lower letter grade for your final class grade.
INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS
I would like to meet with each student at least three times this quarter, mainly to provide feedback on your
assignments. A sign-up process will be available through Coursework. The meetings will be informal and act as
a way for you to discuss your interests, projects, progress in the course and other concerns you might have.
GUIDELINES
Here are some basic preemptory conditions:
• A high level of courtesy shall be extended to all members of the session.
• All students must contribute at least once per session. I want to hear from all of you, not just one or two
students.
• If you have an issue at any point during the quarter, please inform me immediately and we will set some
time to discuss it. Remember, I am not a mind reader.
• No comment is incorrect. Taking a stand/point of view depends of the strength of your rhetorical
argumentation. As long as you utilize the text (first and foremost) as well as historical, social,
biographical, etc., material to support a concept, you can take the argument in many directions and come
up with a myriad of creative analyses.
• No question is “stupid” or “silly.” Our meetings are meant to clarify concepts discussed in class and open
the way for individual interpretation of the material covered. If you have a question, there’s a high
probability other people in the class will have the same doubts and can benefit from discussing possible
answers. I do not have the answers to all questions—it’s simply part of the limits of being human.
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 2

3. However, I will try to provide as much guidance as possible and if in doubt, will get back to you after
conducting some further research.
• We are here to learn from each other. In previous classes, I have been exposed to some of the most
interesting and groundbreaking concepts by discussing the material with students. Don’t be afraid to be
creative or bring ideas from various disciplines into class. These can often result in new ways of looking
at literature, philosophy and life in general and add great value to any class discussion as well as your
personal research projects.
GRADE BREAKDOWN
Rhetorical Analysis (20%)
Texts in Conversation (20%)
Research Based Argument (30%)
Response Papers and Group Projects (10%)
Class Participation and Attendance (20%)
MAJOR ASSIGNMENTS
Rhetorical Analysis/RA (3-5 pages)—For this assignment, you will select a short text, a joke, a cartoon or a
visual comedy sketch/film and identify the subject matter being contested, the performative role of the speaker or
medium, its intended audience and the ways in which it pushes social boundaries, specifically those dealing with
taste and social etiquette.
Texts in Conversation/TiC (6-8 pages)—A substantial part of academia deals with learning the thoughts of
prominent historical figures. However, we should always look at these texts with a critical eye, making
judgments as to what we can utilize and what we might find irrelevant for our own projects. This assignment is a
venture into the philosophy of humor supermarket. Read at least three different perspectives on humor. The goal
is for you to identify the strengths and weaknesses of these arguments, find what is useful to you and what can be
discarded, and develop an informed view that will aid, support and expand your in-depth analysis in the last
assignment.
Research-based Argument/RBA (10-12 pages)—This final assignment draws on your Rhetorical Analysis and
research in the history and social role of humor acquired through Texts in Conversation. Here, you will identify
the presence of dark humor in a particular work (literature, TV, film, cartoons, etc.) and discuss its function as a
form of rhetoric by analyzing such components as the role and purpose of the speaker, the intended audience, the
mode in which the text engages with contentious subject matter, and the overarching goal behind the specific
form of articulation of the text. You will also determine the level of success the text achieves in making a point
discernable to its audience, challenging the status quo, and pushing the boundaries of taste and etiquette.
SELF-EVALUATION
The RA, TiC and RBA will be submitted with a self-evaluation sheet providing your own comments on the
progress you feel to be making in your work as well as areas that might need improvement. This is a key part of
acknowledging your strengths and weaknesses as well as discovering your potential as a writer and rhetorician.
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 3

4. RESPONSE PAPERS
From time to time, I will ask you to write a 1-2 page response paper explaining your reaction to class discussion, a
visual screening, class material, your own outside research, etc. You will then share this with the class. This is
just to give your classmates and I an idea of your interests and points of view.
GROUP WORK AND PEER REVIEW
As part of the class, you will be working in groups and have fellow students revise your work prior to submission.
The goal is not only to share your writing with others, but to receive constructive criticism and analysis, which
will make your final product better. This is a learning experience not a critical judgment upon your person. The
idea is to have fun with it and take as much as you can out of the experience.
LATE SUBMISSION
Assignments not submitted on time will reflect a full letter grade drop for each day after the deadline. In case of
emergency situations, I might grant a late submission, giving that you run it by me first.
SCHEDULE
Jan. 8th
— Introduction to class; Not Everyone’s Cup of Tea: Defining Dark Humor; social taboos
Jan. 10th
—Dealing with the Absurd World: Origin and History of Dark Humor; virtues of humor; “Archenemy
of Sentimentality;” Screening: Jon Stewart’s piece on the “good old days.”
Readings:
• Morreall, “The Positive Ethics of Laughter”
• Breton, “Introduction,” Anthology of Dark Humor
• Gorey, “The Beastly Baby”
Jan. 15th
—Handout: What is Rhetoric?: Writing about Dark Humor; preparation for RA
Readings:
• Freud, “The Uncanny”
• Bakhtin, “Introduction,” Rabelais and His World
• Python, Selections from Complete and Utter Theory of the Grotesque
• Bataille, Eroticism, “Transgression” (Chapter 5)
• Gaiman, The Sandman Vol 1, “24 Hours” and “Sound and Fury”
Screening: Bashing Mexico: Stephen Colbert vs. Lou Dobbs, Chris Rock’s Black vs. Niggers, Legion (2010)
theatrical trailer (possibly Chris Morris)
Outside-class Assignment: Definitions Assignment, Group Research for Listening for Dark Humor (due Jan.
17th
)
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 4

5. Jan. 17th
—Listening for Dark Humor: The Songs of Nick Cave and Shane MacGowan
Readings:
• Lyrics for Cave and MacGowan songs (handout)
• Yeats, “For Anne Gregory”
Outside-class Assignment: Samples of Dirty/X-rated Jokes (due Jan. 22nd
)
Jan. 22nd
—Flaunting Transgression: The Art of the Tendentious Joke; Screening: George Carlin ‘s “Seven
Words,” Gilbert Gottfried’s rendition of “The Aristocrats.”
Readings:
• Dirty and Politically Incorrect Joke Samples on Coursework
Outside-class Assignment: Samples of Shit/Bodily Fluids Jokes/Images (due Jan. 24th
)
Jan. 24th
—From the Cradle of Shit: Taboos on Bodily Fluids
Readings:
• Kristeva, Selections from Powers of Horror
• Laporte, Selections from History of Shit
• Bataille, Selections from Eroticism (Chapter 4)
• Simons, “Manliness and the Visual Semiotics of Bodily Fluids in Early Modern Culture” (skim over
the text)
Due: RA Draft
Jan. 29th
—LIBRARY SESSION
Jan. 31st
—Death, Aging and Illness; Screening: Excerpts from Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986), Lehmann’s
Heathers (1988), George Carlin’s It’s Bad for Ya
Readings:
• Kafka, “The Metamorphosis”
• Miglietti, “About Death”
• Webb and Webb, “Dead or Alive”
• Gaiman, The Sandman Vol. 1, “The Sound of Her Wings.”
•
Feb. 5th
—Racial and Ethnic Stereotypes; Screening: Stephen Colbert’s piece on “blackwashing”
Readings:
• Boskin, “The Complicity of Humor”
• Jenkins, “America’s Comedy of Detachment”
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 5

6. Due: RA Final
Feb. 7th
—Religion (Monty Python Project); Screening: Life of Brian
Readings:
• Gorey, “The Pious Child” (optional)
Outside-class Assignment: Watch Python Friday Night, Saturday Morning 1979 television interview on Life of
Brian and prepare for in-class debate (due Feb. 12th
)
Feb. 12th
—Religion (continued); Debate: Priests vs. Pythons; Screening: Original debate clip, Jon Stewart’s piece
on organized religion
Readings:
• Two Python articles on Coursework (ICONS and Telegraph)
Feb. 19th
—Philosophy of Humor (Basic Writings); introduction to research; handout: Argumentation
Readings:
• Morreall, The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor
o Superiority Theory—Plato, Aristotle, Cicero and Hobbes
o Incongruity Theory—Kant, Schopenhauer, Hazlitt
o Relief Theory—Santayana, Spencer
o Criticism of Humor Theories—Morreall, “A New Theory of Laughter,” “Funny Ha-Ha,
Funny Strange, and Other Reactions to Incongruity”
Due: TiC Draft
Feb. 21st
—Freud and Bergson
Readings:
• Freud, “On Humor,” Selections from Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious
• Bergson, Selections from Laughter
Feb. 26th
—Violence: American Psycho Project; Screening: American Psycho
Readings:
• American Psycho Articles on coursework
• Gaiman, Sandman Vol. 2, Part 5
Outside-class Assignment: Group Project (due Feb. 28th
)
Due: TiC Final
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 6

7. Feb. 28th
—Interpreting American Psycho
• Group Presentations
Outside-class Assignment: Bring an example in which the author/writer/comedian crossed the line (due March
5th
)
March 5th
—Is Dark Humor Ethical?
Readings:
• De Souza, “When Is It Wrong to Laugh?”
Due: RBA Draft
March 7th
—Humor and Ethics (Continued)
• Morreall, “The Negative Ethics of Humor”
Outside-class Assignment: Prepare for student presentations on RBA projects (March 12th
and March 14th
)
March 12th
— Practical Application: Individual Student Presentations on RBA Project
March 14th
—Continuation of Individual Student Presentations on RBA Project
Due: RBA Final
Dark Humor Syllabus/Fernandez 7