Judul: humor as a strategy to reveal corruption in Indonesia.

Korupsi di Indonesia merupakan suatu fenomena yang sudah mengakar dan menjadi budaya bangsa.
tindak korupsi sudah dianggap sebagai sesuatu yang wajar dan berterima. Fenomena korupsi yang tak
kunjung usai has been a main target of humor. Lewat humor korupsi dibedah dan ditelanjangi. Humor
menjadi alat penerjemah untuk membungkus ide korupsi agar dapat lebih dapat ditampilkan dan tidak
menyinggung. Melalui humor korupsi diexplore dan dianalisis hingga menemukan sebuah bentuk tentang
filsafat budaya bangsa, sejarah dan kepercayaan agama yang menjadi legitimasi kenapa korupsi tumbuh
subur di Indonesia. Pada akhirnya ditemukan bahwa adat budaya sungkan dan ewuh pekewuh menjadi
landasan awal suburnya korupsi dari sisi budaya. Filsafat untuk harus memberi sebagai rasa terimakasih
juga menjadi bibit utama suburnya korupsi di ndonesia. Dan kepercayaan kepada mistis dan hal gaib
membuat masyarakat Indonesia percaya penuh kepada pemuka agama atau dukun yang secara tidak
langsung juga menyuburkan korups karena biasanya mereka akan meminta imbalan berupa balas budi
atau harta benda duniawi.

Orang Indonesia suka cara instan

Penggalian situs Batu Tulis, Bogor untuk mencari harta karun oleh Menag Sayyid Agil Husein Al
Munnawar jadi berita yang paling menghebohkan.
Wartawanpun berduyun-duyun menanyakan soal fenomena mistik yang dipercayai Menag Al Munnawar
kepada Gus Dur.
Saat kunjungannya ke Serang, Banten (21/8 2002) Gus Dur ditanya,apakah dia percaya adanya harta
karun di Situs Batu Tulis?
Dengan ringan Gus Dur menjawab "Kalau saya percaya sudah dari dulu-dulu, saya gali duluan."
Mendengar jawaban itu kontan wartawan yang mewawancarainya terpingkal-pingkal.

Orang Indonesia itu mau cepat kaya tapi gam au susah gam au kerja keras. Jad mereka suka semua
yang instan. Budaya ini juga lah yang menyebabkan korupsi subur di indonesa

Pola piker indo yg buat dia korupsi

Semua orang indo itu korupsi

Korupsi-koruptor. Kalau anda menganggap koruptor adalah orang yg korupsi itu salah. Tidak
semua orang yang korupsi itu koruptor, karena koruptor itu hanya orang yang ketangkap
korupsi. Selama belum tertangkap mungkin mereka masih pejabat, bukan koruptor. Jadi yang
harus anda ingat knapa banyak koruptor, katena memang level koruptor lenih tinggi dari
pejabat. Dan untuk mnjadi koruptor memang harus jad pejabat.
Saya datang ke makam, karena saya tahu. Mereka yang mati itu sudah tidak punya
kepentingan lagi.” Katanya

Semua orang Indonesia itu sebenarnya punya kecenderungan korupsi hanya saja tidak
ketahuan. Beberapa yang tertangkap aja yang kemudian ketahuan bahwa ada yg korupsi.
Fenomena ini sepert gunung es koruptor yang tertangkap hanya sebagian kecil dar mayoritas
korptor sebenarnya yang ada di akar gunung. Hal ini karena masy Indonesia menganggap
tndakan korupsii sebagai hal yang lumrah bahwa mengambil bayaran atas pekerjaan yang
dlakukan bukanlah korupsi melainkan hanya bayaran atas jasa dan kinerja yg ia lakukan. Kren
aitu kenapa korupsi selalu dkaitka dengan pejabat karena meski sdh mendapat gaji dar negara
mereka biasanya masih akan mengambl bagan dana dar sutu proyek untuk kantong mereka
pribadi karena merasa uang itu ada karena jasa mereka dan oleh karenanya mereka layak untuk
mendapat bayaran dan itu tentunya ga dianggap sebagai korupsi. Ironisnya di semua kalangan
masyarakat konsep ini juga dilakukan sehingga korupsi tu jadi kayak gunung es. Semua orang
berpeluang menjadi koruptor

Orang Indonesia Melihat status

Nah karena berita korupsi kita awali dengan korupsi. Seorang hakim tindak pdana korupsi
tertangkap lagi. Ini ketua pengadlan negeri kapahyang penghulu ditangkap di rumah dinas.
Inilah hebatnya kta. Memang kadang-kadang dlema di negara kita itu gini, kita tu menilai orang
kalau hanya ngomong tidak pernah melakukan itudianggap ah loe biasanya Cuma ngomomng.
Makanya ini hakim ngurus korupsi kalau dia gak korupsi kurangb afdhol
Suatu har ada orang mati yang baca kamsar. Wah bacnya ga karu2an . salah semua harokatnya.
Mbaj itu orang gak karu2an bacanya. Ta tapi dia yang punya SK (sk modin)
DPR dulu TK, sekarang playgroup,” kata Gus Dur, ketika menjawab pertanyaan wartawan
tentang kejadian di DPR saat sidang itu.

Orang Indonesia itu cenderung melihat orang dari covernya bukan dari isi/kemampuannya.
Sehuingga kalau ada orang yang paham ttg suatu hal tapi da ga ada title maka ga dpercaya.
Makanya yg jad pejabat atau pimpinan itu basanya orng2 ga bener dan akhrnya justru orang2
ini melakukan korupsi.

Korupsi itu budaya bangsa

Bangsa ini tidak akan bangkrut karena ribuan pengemis tapi bangsa ini akan bangkrut karena 10
koruptor oleh karena itu mari kita pertahankan koruptor hanya 9 saja.
Bahwa bumi ar dan kekayaan alam yg terkandung di dalamnyadikuasain o negate san
dpergunakan sebesar2 nya u kemakmuran rakyat. Walaupun kenyataanya bnyk dikuasa asing
knp krn pola pkir kra sendri krn kita sdh anggap bhw itu tdak asing lg
Ceritanya para presiden dan pemimpin negara berdialog dengan Tuhan. Presiden AS Ronald
Reagen: Tuhan, kapan negara kami makmur?, Tuhan jawab, "20 Tahun lagi". Presiden AS
menangis.

Presiden Prancis Sarkozy: Tuhan, kapan negara Prancis makmur? Tuhan menjawab: "25
Tahun lagi." Mendengar jawaban Tuhan, Presiden Prancis menangis.

PM Inggris Tony Blair: "Tuhan, kapan negara Inggris bisa makmur?" Tuhan menjawab: "20
Tahun lagi." PM Tony Blair ikut juga menangis.
Presiden Gus Dur: "Tuhan, kapan negara Indonesia bisa makmur?" Tuhan tidak jawab, gantian
Tuhan yang menangis.

Gus Dur coba cari suasana di pesawat RI-01. Kali ini dia mengundang Presiden AS dan Prancis
terbang bersama buat keliling dunia. Seperti biasa, setiap presiden selalu ingin memamerkan
apa yang menjadi kebanggaan negerinya.

Tidak lama terbang, Presiden Amerika, Clinton mengeluarkan tangannya dan sesaat kemudian
dia berkata: "Wah kita sedang berada di atas New York!"

Presiden Indonesia (Gus Dur): "Lho kok bisa tau sih?"

"Itu, patung Liberty kepegang!", jawab Clinton dengan bangganya.

Tidak mau kalah, Presiden Prancis Jacques Chirac, ikut menjulurkan tangannya keluar. "Tahu
nggak? Kita sedang berada di atas kota Paris!", katanya dengan sombongnya.

Presiden Indonesia: "Wah, kok bisa tau juga?"

"Itu... menara Eiffel kepegang!", sahut presiden Prancis tersebut.

Giliran Gus Dur yang menjulurkan tangannya keluar pesawat. "Wah... kita sedang berada di
atas Tanah Abang!" teriak Gus Dur.

"Lho kok bisa tau sih?" tanya Clinton dan Chirac heran.

"Ini, jam tangan saya ilang," jawab Gus Dur kalem.

Utusan : “Pak Pejabat, sehubung dengan selesainya proyek ini, kami menyiapkan hadiah untuk
bapak. Tapi hadiahnya ada mobil yang diparkir di halaman gedung ini.”

Pejabat : “Hadiah? Hadiah apa? Tidak! Saya menolaknya.”

Utusan : “Mohon diterima, Pak. Kalau tidak atasan saya nanti marah karena menganggap ia tidak
bisa membina hubungan baik.”
Pejabat : “Tidak, saya tetap tidak mau. Nanti saya dianggap korupsi. Saya ini anti korupsi.”

Sang utusan tak kehabisan akal. Ia pun menawarkan opsi lain kepada si pejabat.

Utusan : “Kalau begitu, bagaimana jika bapak membeli hadiahnya saja?”

Pejabat : “Memang, hadiah apa yang diberikan?”

Utusan : “Satu koper besar emas batangan. Bapak bisa membelinya hanya dengan Rp. 100.000”

i pejabat pun mengeluarkan uang seratus ribu sebanyak lima lembar dari dompetnya.

Utusan : “Wah, pak, uangnya terlalu banyak. Sisa 400 ribu”

Pejabat : “Ambil saja kembaliannya dan berikan saya 4 koper emas batangan lainnya.”

`Utusan : “???”

Apa bedanya korupsi zaman Orde Lama, Orde Baru dan korupsi zaman sekarang?

Jawabannya, zaman Orde Lama korupsi sembunyi-sembunyi, dilakukan di bawah meja.

Zaman Orde Baru, sudah mulai berani, korupsi dilakukan di atas meja.

Nah zaman sekarang, bahkan meja-mejanya ikut dikorupsi!

Korupsi itu sejatinya sudah menjadi budaya bangsa karena itu pemberantasan korupsi dirasa
sebaga suatu hal yang mustahil ya karena sdh dianggap biasa sdh dianggap budaya
Menyalahkan pola piker masyarakat indo yang tertaalu sempit byang aneh yang pick sehingga
justru ini yg buat korups ada. Makanya korupdi ga bsa diberantas yak arena pola piker
masyarakatnya gam au maju gam au berubah

Mennyakan bukan pada ahlnya

Korupsi terjadi dimana2

Klo ketahuan korupsi ngeyel

Indonesia is a multicultural country consists of hundreds of distinct native ethnic, racist, and religion.
Historically, the Nation was built because of the unitary spirit of its components, which was firmly united
and integrated to make up the victory of the Nation. The plurality
Keberagaman ini sejatinya menjadi kekuatan bangsa has historically been (a) an important societal
source of power and force of establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies; For all of these
reasons, religion, together with secular authorities of political,
6
moral, and ideological power, has been a main target of humor. Humor is indeed uncomfortable with
totalizing systems, ideas, and feelings; or better, humor is nourished by these systems, in that it needs to
criticize them. The history of satire on religion has followed the cultural history of the interplay between
powerful religions, individual religious doubting, and social anti-religious sentiment. It has also paralleled
the history of the conflict between protection of the sacred from profanation and defense of the
individuals’ right to express their ideas, including those for or against religion.

Indonesia is a multicultural country consists of hundreds of distinct native ethnic, racist, and religion.
Historically, the Nation was built because of the unitary spirit of its components, which was firmly united
and integrated to make up the victory of the Nation. The plurality become advantageous when it reaches
harmony as reflected in the National motto “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika”. However, plurality also issues social
conflict easily. Ever since its independence, the scent of disintegration has already occurred. However, in
the last decade, social conflicts with a variety of backgrounds are intensely happened, especially which is
based on religious tensions. The conflict arises from differences in the interests of various actors both
individuals and groups. It is emerged as a fractional between the groups in the society or a single group
who wants to have a radically changes based on their own spiritual perspective. Using social media yang
kaya akan bahan2 tsb, penulis berusaha melhat bagaimana konsep ini dibungkus dengan humor agar
lebih dapat ditampilkan dan tdak menyinggung. that rich of satire materials on how religious principle are
portrayed in real life.

In this paper we explore the degree to which news coverage drives the content of late night political
humor
Humor is a sociological phenomenon with which we are all familiar. It is universal among human
societies, although what incites laughter varies. When we talk about religion, however, it is often as a
humorless entity. Religion is treated as serious business and is, therefore, something that is beyond the
reach of humor and laughter. Indeed, because humor is often associated with frivolity in Western
scholarship we have not given it the same attention and prestige as other topics deemed more relevant
or deserving. Yet even though it is treated as unimportant, humor offers us a wide variety of cross-
cultural data that allows access to different cultures’ socio-religious imaginations. For this reason, having
a viable sociological theory of religious humor would be an important development for the sociologist of
religion, while a strong sociological understanding of religion would be beneficial for the sociologist of
humor.
then we start to see how this legitimating force reveals the comic: not by escaping our socially
constructed worlds, but by going deeper into them. Any sense of the comic revealed by humor is a
reflection of the socially legitimated order of things upon which a joke or humorous situation is based.
It places the sociology of religious humor within the central questions of the sociology of religion, which
ask how religious meaning is made, transmitted, and institutionalized from our experiences

JIKA lewat komed lbh banyak dtonton shg pesanya lbh tersampakan
“Saya rasa humor itu merupakan kebutuhan setiap orang. Orang bisa menolak
perbedaan agama, budaya, bahasa atau apapun, tetapi tidak ada yang bisa
menolak humor. Sehingga segala sesuatu yang disampaikan dengan humor,
meskipun nyelekit, mereka bisa terima. Karena ada yang bisa membuat
mereka tersenyum senang, tapi ada juga yang memang pahit dan tetap bisa
ditelan karena humor. Humor adalah kekuatan yang tajam untuk mengkritisi
tanpa membuat orang jadi marah banget,”
Compliment responses are especially challenging because of the need to balance accepting the
compliment with saving face for not sounding arrogant. The use of humor in responding to a compliment
can serve as a mitigating factor to respond to a compliment gracefully but with amusement to balance out
the loss of face. The present study seeks to analyze humorous CRs in Spanish and English in order to
establish cross-cultural comparisons. The results suggest some distinct cultural tendencies. American
English speakers prefer self-denigrating humor whereas Peninsular Spanish use teasing and ironic
upgrades

Lewat karya-karya yang diterbitkan di tahun 2000an…Through the works of postcolonal novels (joke2)
that portrayed how religious aroma really lived, the art of humor became a strategy in revealing the idea
of spiritualism in indonsia. As religion ityu sgt senstif sehingga pembcaraannya hrs dengan humor
supaya tdk menimbulkan konflik.
Laughing in the Face of Climate Change? Satire as a Device for Engaging Audiences in Public Debate.

THE ART OF HUMOR IN DICKENS’ OLIVER TWIST: TRANSLATION STRATEGY IN REVEALING THE
CORRUPTION IN INDUSTRIAL ERA.

Corruption in Indonesia has been a matter of intense concern and fight against it are trivial. corruption
dan segala hal dilakukan u memberantas korupsi. (), (), (). Ironically corruption in indonesia has become
cultural and the majority who are involved in committing every type/form of corruption don’t even know
that their action is considered corruption. the intimacies of corruption with the normalized complicity of
ordinary people happened because the essential of its action ada dlm karakter budaya bangsa. Beberapa
sikap sungkan, ewuh pekewuh membuat korupsi bertumbuh subur di Indonesia.

It has paralyzed democracy and has a deleterious effect on social and economic spheres.

THE ART OF HUMOR IN CORRUPTION

Corruption is common phenomena in Indonesia. Corruption has been widespread and deeply
rooted in the vast archipelago country. The nature of corruption is an age old phenomenon and
can still be seen everywhere now a days (udah ada sejak dulu dan mendarah daging sehingga jadi
budaya bangsa.). Using humor adalah alat yang bisa portrayed how corruption really lived.
Through humor showed how social and cultural at that time created corruption behavior in the
society. Humor menjadi alat penerjemah budaya yang luar biasa untuk memahami filosofi
kebangsaan dan budaya Indonesia.

entrenched, inveterate, deeply rooted, ingrained, deep-rooted : mendarah daging

Corruption was a huge problem in England when industrial London in the 1830s, when Dickens was
writing. Oliver Twist was one of his best novel that portrayed how corruption really lived. Through this
novel, he showed how social and cultural at that time created corruption behavior in the society.
Nowadays in the 4.0 era, Indonesia faces the similar issues and pressures that create greater changes in
the society that deconstruct corruption behavior issues in such a way that it becomes absurd, hilarious,
and therefore layak menjadi kajian. Corruption merupakan fenomena yg terjadi dimana saja dan kapan
saja. Bahkan tidak ada satu negarapun yg terbebas dari korupsi. Akan tetapi konteks korupsi sebagai
budaya dan legitimasi social tidak berlaku di semua tempat. Indonesia terkenal karena korupsinya dan
pada masanya inggris juga mengalami kondisi ini ketika indutri1.0 mulai berdampak pada masyarakat
eropa. Beberapa peeubahan besar yang terjadi dikarenakan teknologi membuat konteks korupsi ini
muncul. Dengan demikian tidaklah terlalu jauh jika konteks korupsi di inggris di era industry 1.0
diperbandingkan dengan konteks Indonesia di era 4.0.

Berbicara tentang korupsi maka pemunculannya atau the actualization biasanya digambarkan lewat
humor yang bernada satire. Karena it plays powerful position to point out the deficiencies in certain
human behaviors and the social issues in such a way that they become absurd, hilarious, and therefore
it is entertaining and reaches a wide audience. The art of humor created by Dickens is an interesting
strategy to deliver the message of corruption. The caricaturization of the characters and utterance that
consist of social and cultural context mampu menerjemahkan konteks korupsi dengan baik. Humor
digunakan untuk mendelegasikan fenomena korupsi tanpa menimbulkan chaos dan konflik. Beberapa
konteks sindiran yang ada pada dickens juga ditemukan dalam konteks Indonesia.

Through our analysis of …. this article has identified two important factor yang membuat korupsi
menjadi konteks budaya da social di masyarakat ketika great changes happen.
The findings vividly show that the major causes of corruption in Nigeria are poverty, attitudinal
problem/tribalism and greediness. But attitudinal problem of both the politicians and the society at large
could be taken as the major one. The sad aspect is, in Nigeria, corruption has become cultural. The
majority are involved in committing every type/form of corruption. However, electoral corruption is the
dominant one. It has paralyzed democracy and has a deleterious effect on social and economic spheres.

The art of humor is a powerful art form to represent satire. Humor to depict satire plays powerful
position in specific periods, where the growing number of issues and pressures arise. It uses to point out
the deficiencies in certain human behaviors and the social issues in such a way that they become absurd,
hilarious, and therefore it is entertaining and reaches a wide audience. The use of humor in dickens to
represent kondisi social revolusi industry sejatinya sama dg kondisi Indonesia di masa industry 4.0.
Ketidaksiapan masyarakat thd teknologi yang mengubah kehidupan mereka menimbulkan
permasalahan dalam banyak hal; terutama social politik dan ekonomi. Tekanan keuangan dan
kekuasaan membuat manusia yg berkuasa seperti raja dan manusia biasa seperti budak. Ketimpangan
ini kemudian diutarakan lewat satire dengan menggunakan alat humor shg tidak menimbulkan konflik
dan mampu melindungi pembicara/pencetus lelucon. Beberapa humor dickens dalam sisi pemerintahan,
politik dan agama sangat erat berkaitan dengan Indonesia yang juga menggunakan humor dalam
konteks agama social politik dan pemerintahan. Meski berbeda negara, budaya, dan masa. Konteks
permasalahan keduanya hampir mirip. Inggris yang terkoyak karena revolusi industry menimbulkan
masa cerah dg penemuan berbagai teknologi tetapi juga meninggalkan sisi kelam manusia yang
berjuang dan tidak mampu bertahan dan akhirnya hanya menjadi sapi perah/budak. Pemerintahan yg
semakin korup dan kekuasaan yg disalahartikan. Kondisi Indonesia yg baru terbebas dari masa orde baru
dan menapaki era demokrasi yg diinginkan tiba-tiba terjerambab pada dunia modern industry 4.0 yang
bergerak sangat cepat dimana manusia harus berjuang, bertahan, lalu gagal dan hanya menjadi
pengangguran. Pemerintahan menggunakan kekuasaan untuk bertahan dan agama sebagai alat untuk
menghalalkan segala cara sama sperti inggris pada masanya yg menyatukan peran geraja dan
pemerintah dalam satu kotak yg sama.

Humour is a multi-disciplinary dan karenanya mampu menjadi alat yg mengupas banyak hal dari
berbagai segi. Lewat humor (People have been working on humour karena ) kita dapat melihat makna
dibalik candaan dg konteks serius yang sejatinya mencerminkan kondisi social budaya dalam suatu
masyarakat.

Disini kita bisa melihat bahwa permasalahan social ekonomi dan budaya ini sejatinya selalu muncul atau
ada di setiap jaman. Ketika ada temuan baru yg bombastis, changes yg besar dan masy ga mampu u
menerima maka konteks ini akan selalu muncul tidak perduli dimana , kapan dan di negara mana. Ini
adalah sebuah femonema yg selalu terjadi dan dapat terjadi di mana saja kapan saja.

Through our analysis of the U stage play, interviews with its playwright/ director, and its local reception,
this article has identified two important benefits associated with the use of a satirical mode in climate
change communication.

==

buangan

=Research on the structure of humorous discourse began in classical philosophy and still
represents an essential research area for contemporary linguists. Plato and Aristotle began to deal
with the essence of humor about 2000 years ago and laid the foundations for today's modern
theories of humor as represented by influential linguists such as Goldstein and McGhee (1972),
Chapman and Foot (1977), Raskin (1985), and Apte (1985). In linguistics, specifically, research
shows that humour has been studied from the perspectives of syntax, pragmatics, and semantics;
such studies include Oaks (1994), Norrick (1993), Hetzron (1991), Dolitsky (1992), Giora
(2001), and Mulder & Nijholt (2002). Linguistics is also a very thriving area through which
humour has been studied by various scholars like Raskin (1994), Lew (1997), Krikmann (2006),
Knight (2008), Dynel (2009), Attardo et al. (2013), among others. In my study, I will deal in
detail with the incongruity theory, the hostility theory, and the release theory, because they
represent the central theories on which all modern theories are based. The study relied upon
social theories of humor namely the functionalist approach and the conflict approach. Social
theories of humor, including superiority, incongruity, and relief theories, surfaced in the
narrations of humorist, which are influenced by the changing sociopolitical context of the
country. Thus, the way corruption wrapped in humour is influenced by the changing of
sociopolitical context of Indonesia. In the framework of the General Theory of Verbal Humor
(GTHV), Attardo (1994: 47) highlights the aggression theories (for which every humorous
experience arises as an expression of a superiority feeling of a human being towards another
human being), the release theories (for which humor is the effect resulting from a release of
accumulated energy) and the incongruity theories (according to which humor is based on the
discovery of a reality or a thought that turns out to be inconsistent with what was expected). To
provide an adequate description of humor as a functional linguistic phenomenon, several models
have been advanced by a number of sociologists and sociolinguists. Martineau's (1972) proposed
model of verbal humour, which is functional in nature, proves to be highly serviceable for
examining jokes in terms of a sociolinguistic point of view. This model assumes that the
functions of the social mechanism called humor can best be analyzed in three structural settings:
(1) those within a specific group; (2) those in an intergroup situation aiming at one of the two
groups; and (3) those in an intergroup situation focusing on the interaction and relationship
between the two groups. To Martineau, four major variables form the basis of social interaction
during the humorous act. These are: the actor (the agent who delivers the joke), the audience (the
people who receive the joke), the butt of a joke (who is usually ridiculed by the joker) and finally
the judgment of a joke (which is the evaluative element of the whole model, either esteems or
disparages a particular group of people). Within the schools of thought that have dealt with
humor, General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH) provided a strong impetus for the emergence
of much research on joking is the which is a structural in nature (Attardo and Raskin 1991). This
posits a picture in which language and social context interact effectively. Raskin (1985), and
Attardo and Raskin (1991) provide an insightful account of the different ways in which a
Speaker can generate a joke. Building on the Semantic Script Theory of Humor (SSTH) first
proposed by Raskin (1985), Attardo and Raskin (1991) developed their theory of humor
(GTVH). The GTVH presupposes that a joke, consists mainly of six Knowledge Resources
(KR). These are LA, SI, NS, TA, SO, LM. Each one of them is as indispensable for the joke as
the audience to the joke itself. Thus, according to the GTVH, each joke can be viewed as a
sextuple, specifying the instantiation of each KR as a parameter. The GTVH presents itself,
according to Ruch et al. (1993), as a mechanism capable of generating an infinite number of
jokes by combining the various values that each parameter can receive. Although the general
importance of dealing with joking as a sociolinguistic phenomenon is well-recognized, many
details about the relationship existing between joking and the social context in which it is used
on the one hand, and joking and the sociological implications derived from this phenomenon on
the other, still require more clarification and the subject is currently attracting considerable
research.

The analysis deals with numerous questions, among which are most significantly the
following:
Only by knowing the social, cultural and linguistic framework, it is possible to understand
humorists’ narratives on themselves, their work and humor at large in a society existing within a specific
framework and reacting to it. how the social role of humor changes and shifts within the humorists’
narratives, depending on the characteristics of different historical periods. The continuities or
discontinuities of various narratives are placed within the sociopolitical context of Turkish society
throughout the last 35 years. Another important contribution of this study to literature is applying
agesold interdisciplinary humor theories, going back to Plato and Kant to the context of Turkish humor.
The humor theories are used, whenever appropriate, to interpret and read between the contents and
specific details of the collected narratives. They reflect the interdisciplinary nature of the field of humor
research.

What meanings are attributed to their observed manifestation? 4. What effects do they provoke in
different circumstances? 5. To what uses can they be put? 6. What are the links between these varied
features and the concerns of the social sciences?

How do humorists describe the social role of humor in Turkey in their narrations? Ø How do the
humorists’ narratives reflect on the impact of sociopolitical context on their humor production and
humor’s social role in Turkey?
 The statements gathered and analyzed within the research unquestionably reflected the
respondents’ subjective views on the nature and characteristics of the society they produce humor in
and how it affects the role of humor, i.e. whether it functions as a change agent, or a pain killer

mediums, including humor magazines, television, newspapers, and youtube channel during the
presidential election from 2018-2019. The data are utilized to derive clues and insights on what they
perceive to be the social function and role of humor in their societies.
This research used descriptive qualitative method. Data was gathered using interest surveys,
documentation, and library research. This thesis explores not only Dickens works itself but it also
compares the humour in the Indonesian newspapers. The data taken from mass media including
magazines, television, newspapers, and youtube channel. It comprises of different corruption issues
during the presidential election from 2018 to 2019. mediums analysis focus on data and documentary.
This thesis explores not only Dickens works itself but it also compares the humour in the Indonesian
newspapers. I have elected to use Kompas and Jawa Post as a reference of Indonesian newspapers due
to their popularity and the completeness of the news. the country’s best. Data was gathered using
interest surveys, documentation, and library research. It comprises of different mediums, including
humor magazines, television, newspapers, and youtube channel during the presidential election from
2018-2019. The data are utilized to derive clues and insights on what they perceive to be the social
function and role of humor in their societies.
In order to provide authentic material, performances by comedians Jerry Seinfeld and Steven Wright
were transcribed and served as main data for the analytical part of this study.

TEORI
The four predominant themes that came out of this research corresponded to one or more humor
theories that reflected on the social role of humor. One of those theories is incongruity theory, which
understands humor to function subversively. Many theorists, including Locke, Kant, and Schopenhauer
wrote on incongruity theory of humor. According to Kant’s work, humor derives from a culturally
defined sense of reality that pre-exists it and which it seeks to twist and turn upside down. By revealing
the incongruities in the everyday structures of power and their “naturalness”, the comic can turn the
familiar unfamiliar and create opportunities for critique. In this manner, humorists are thought to act as
the comic doubles of critical philosophers, challenging the established norms of culture through “wit”,
rather than argumentation. While incongruity theory will be analyzed in more detail under the chapter
on “Theoretical Framework”, this theory constituted an appropriate tool to decipher the second theme
emerging out of the research, namely “expression of feelings and thoughts in a witty manner”. It is
fascinating to realize how
The study found that the humorists focused on four major themes when interviewed on the
social role of humor in Turkey. These themes are 1) humor as opposition, rebellion and freedom of
expression; 2) humor as a witty defense mechanism; 3) humor as therapy, hope and survival, and finally
4) humor as self-reflection, communication & community formation.

Review of Literature
subjek apa = non orang balikkan lg sama qualitaticve yg ta pilih.
setting : Indonesia apa. as a place atau ind dlm newspaper , ind dlm gambaran yioutube itu di
lomit5 . thn berepa ? kmp kok thn it8u.
data koleksi : lgs ambol tr
data analysis masukkan tema2 dlmm data coding
The analysis not only explores Dickens works itself but it also compares the humour in the
Indonesian newspapers. I have elected to use Kompas and Jawa Post as a reference of Indonesian
newspapers due to their popularity and biggest reader. Data was gathered using interest surveys,
documentation, and library research. It comprises of different types of humour related with the
corruption issues. The data was taken during the presidential election from Soeharto to Joko
Widodo era. The data taken from to derive clues and insights about the role of humor in
capturing the corruption issues in Indonesian context.

DICKENS COMEDY DULU…HUMOR AS REFERENTIAL

BARU KOORUPSI DAN KNP KORUPSI
KORUPSI DLM LENSA DICKENS
MASS MEDIA
RESEARCH QUEST
DESIGN : QUALITATIVE
REFRENCE REFEREITAL
SIGNIFY SIGNIFIER
 CARRICATUR
SEMANTICS

It is so because he started off his literary career for newspapers. Therefore, it is quite a bit
similar with the way of corruption depicted in Indonesian newspapers.

This study uses Dickens humor to demonstrate social and cultural attitude created from
corruption behavior and how media exposed this to public. Dickens style of writing is perhaps
most characterized by the use of satire, poetic line, and humour.

1. To what extent does humor in revealing corruption use as a means of power? and how it
can be used to persuade and influence the readers?
2. how Dickens’ humor used as a lens to reveal a corrupt society in Indonesia.
3. how humorous corruption stories portrait the cultural codes of conduct and corrupt
practices in Indonesia?
4. How do comical corruption impact on the sociopolitical context of Indonesia?
5. what the creators of humor perceive to be the main motives behind laughter
6. how the content of humor was impacted by the social changes during the period of the
research?
7. How do the humorists’ reporters (narratives) reflect on the impact of sociopolitical
context on their humor production and humor’s social role in Indonesia?
triangle which refers to the three parts connection among a referent, a reference, and a symbol. It
is because the language of a media consists of words, sentences, tones, and expressions that
represent many facets and meanings.
, and finally added by sociological theory by Zygmunt Bauman.
to he;p me getting clear picture of emzntic triangle I refer to dickens satire, humor and
poetic l;ne
ling I will rely mainly dari dickens. In linguistics perspective my main literary will rely
on poetic line, satire and … dari sosiologi …..Humorists’ narratives on the social role of humor
in Indonesia coincide with the two main approaches to humor from the literature; namely the
functionalist approach and the conflict approach. Social theories of humor, including superiority,
incongruity and relief theories, surfaced in the narrations of humorists, which are influenced by
the changing sociopolitical context of the country.

As most academic studies on humor have been written from the perspective of psychology or
philosophy, this study is unique because it engages the field of sociology to delve into the perspectives
of this specific professional group. This work aims to provide fresh insights into Turkish society by
applying a discourse analysis on the narratives of humorists in a historical perspective
For the sake of clarity, the definition of “humor” used in this study is borrowed from Eric Weitz:
“a social transaction between two people, such as a performer or writer and audience, where one party
intends to make the other party amused and invoke laughter.” Adding on to the definition of Weitz, in
this study, humor will be understood and used as “a means of interpreting social phenomena through a
critical, witty and satirical approach.”

==
CHAUCHER
Chaucer describes the characters with thoroughness and in incredible detail. He “was the first
author who discovered character, and drew it individually.” (Bloom, 2008, p. 316)
His characters and their descriptions are even applicable in our society these days and Chaucer
forces the reader to think about the society in all historical periods
Chaucer practises humour repeatedly in The Canterbury Tales not only to entertain but also to
call attention to the social problems of his days. Through the irony and satire Chaucer attacks two
institutions of medieval society, the church and the marriage
The Roman Catholic Church is according to Chaucer permeated with hypocrisy and is only
concerned with earning money and the members of the church constantly break their own rules.
Chaucer is upset with the church’s hypocrisy and he wants to see it changed. The reader can find a lot of
remarks and criticisms almost in every tale and prologue
The readers learn from his work about people from all medieval classes, they learn about the
way of dressing, about their behaviour, customs, interests, possessions, abnormalities and passions.
Chaucer also enables the reader discover the medieval form of living and eating habits. Furthermore
Chaucer is presenting the description with an amusing technique by using satire and irony. There are
issues in the late medieval society that Chaucer disagrees with, criticizes them and wants to educate
people to be aware of them. The main Chaucer’s critical appraisal is towards the hypocrisy of the
church. He describes the institution as corrupted and greedy that does not care about the poor people
and cares only about its requirements.

The Roman Catholic Church is according to Chaucer permeated with hypocrisy and is only
concerned with earning money and the members of the church constantly break their own rules.
Chaucer is upset with the church’s hypocrisy and he wants to see it changed. The reader can find a lot of
remarks and criticisms almost in every tale and prologue
Chaucer is using satire to make fun of church’s hypocrisy on purpose. He is educating the
readers to be aware of the church and its corrupted and authentic members. He is pointing out that the
religious people are usually well educated and good spokesmen that is why the reader should be aware
of them
The Canterbury Tales is an estate satire which effectively criticize the main social classes of the
time described. Chaucer expresses an opinion that person does not necessarily belong to a social class
by birth but rather by their effort and work. Many of Chaucer’s characters even do not fit in any of the
three classes or estates –
he uses satire and irony not only to entertain but also to teach and educate people.
Chaucer uses an estates satire to analyse the society and its problems.
Chaucer often put people together and he also creates a lot of juxtapositions, ironic contrasts
between two details or two characters as for example between the Parson and the Friar and the Monk,
Chaucer is using irony because he mentions the hotel Bell as the high class hotel but it is in a
matter of fact a disorderly house.
comic person with a red beard and head because of which was compared to a fox. Chaucer
expresses his bad character by the appearance because the Miller has a mole with red hair on the nose
They are very corrupted persons and Chaucer uses them to satirize and criticize the corruption
and hypocrisy inside the church.
Chaucer attacks not only a patriarchy but hierarchy in the medieval society as well.

=
 Finally, the conclusion discusses changes that may have happened to laughter in the nineteenth
century and what it means to find ourselves laughing at Dickens’s texts today
Dickens’s project; that he is a comic writer whose aim is not simply to make people laugh, but to
experience laughter in all its complexity and to think about its connection to subjectivity and thought; to
experience laughter as something involving change and difference, and to think about the effects and
implications of such change. Dickens’s texts know that laughter is capable of controlling and ordering
the world, as much as it is capable of disordering and challenging it.
Edmund Wilson = Dickens’s humour, like so much comedy, has always been praised and
appreciated, but very rarely discussed in any depth.
that comedy provides a ‘scapegoat’ for frustrations, functioning as a licensed transgression that allows
society to continue unharmed, laughter as ‘a holiday or relief’ is demonstrably false and that laughter
implies ‘a very solid agreement with a certain value system.’ Far from being a release, he claims that
Dickens controls our response to his humour, using laughter to manipulate the audience towards his
worldview.

In summary, given the scope of Dickens studies, there is a remarkable drought of work on Dickens and
comedy in all its forms, which this thesis attempts to play its part in redressing.

laughter has a power over who we are, and over the things that we respond to with laughter. In the
nineteenth century Carlyle writes ‘how much lies in Laughter: the cipherkey, wherewith we decipher the
whole man.’44 Goethe wrote similarly that ‘there is nothing in which people more betray their character
than in what they find to laugh at.’45 It is in many ways the reverse that is argued here; that laughter
does not reveal what a person already is but that laugher produces characters and subject-position

Stephen Potter writes that whilst Humour is a specific thing referring to what we call Comedy

Whilst Comedy is a specific form, laughter appears to be formless; every laugh, it seems, is different

comedy has been that of why we laugh, or of what we laugh at. As a result, discussions have focussed on
laughter as an ‘effect’ of a ‘cause’

In On Humour he summarises, ‘if humour tells you something about who you are, then it might be a
reminder that you are not the person you would like to be

it is the belief here that this theory of comedy, which has come out of reading Dickens and could not
have existed without his work just as Lacan comes out of reading Freud, can also have an eventual
relationship with Dickens’s texts.

Dickens added a joke about this later, as a footnote to the 1847 Cheap Edition of the novel, which read,
‘a remarkable instance of the prophetic force of Mr Jingle’s imagination; this dialogue occurring in the
year 1827, and the Revolution in 1830.’ The editor of the old Penguin edition, Robert Patten, interprets
the moment as Dickens correcting himself for not realizing this anachronism, but either way Dickens has
made a joke out of the fact that the future is in the present, realising consciously or unconsciously that
he had made the future construct the present, and that seeing this was something that causes
laughter.3 Further, the writing of the novel itself transforms its fictional 1827 into the events that led up
to what later happens, so that ‘The Posthumous Papers’ of the Pickwick Club, the novel’s full title, show
that all writing is posthumous in that it retroactively transforms and fixes the past after its ‘death.’ 4 The
past becomes the past of the present that represents and determines it, making it what Lacan calls ‘the
present synthesis of the past

Dickens saw writing as having the potential to produce order and reality. From the earliest age, he
betrays a remarkable interest in letters, not just in the sense of a passion for literature, though that is no
doubt part of it; but in a stranger and more unusual way, he demonstrates a fascination with the
complex powers of individual words and characters. In this interest we can see that the emphasis is not
on nonsense but on accidental or ungoverned sense, that writing does not destroy but produces. In a
fragment from David Copperfield, which Forster tells us is closely autobiographical, Dickens describes
the experience of learning shorthand as a teenager

The shorthand that Dickens knew is that of Thomas and Joseph Gurney, whose book Dickens purchased
and taught himself from in the late 1820s. Here, as in a modern shorthand system, letters or
combinations of letters, represented by various stokes of the pen, stand in for words determined by the
system. In the Gurney system, for example, the symbol ‘p’ symbolises ‘people’.7 Dickens describes these
as the ‘arbitrary characters’ of shorthand, and he calls them ‘horrors’. These are characters ‘who
insisted, for instance, that a thing like the beginning of a cobweb meant expectation, and that a pen-
and-ink skyrocket stood for disadvantageous’. The letter’s ‘despotic’ ‘insistence’ on a particular meaning
makes it horrific and ‘almost heartbreaking,’ because of its demand to be read in a particular way. The
young Copperfield, surely standing in for a young Dickens at this point, feels that the meaning which
demands to be read, although singular, is hidden; the alphabet is ‘an Egyptian temple in itself,’
suggesting that it is a rebus or puzzle

Language has the ability to signify something altogether different from what it says. The relevance of
this to Dickens can be seen from the quotation on shorthand above, which shows Dickens’s sense of a
language which attempts to signify a single meaning, but in fact signifies something altogether different,
with its supposed meaning absent and hidden.

This type of nineteenth century comedy, if we can locate it here, would differ from many discussions of
Victorian nonsense literature, since the argument here is that it is not so much that language cannot
help turning to nonsense (though this may be true in some ways) but that language cannot help
producing sense. 14 As such, Dickens’s nonsense shows that this is all sense is; something which comes
into being though language and therefore not something that was there to govern the process from the
start; as was argued above, it is a product of moments of Aufhebung or of event

The law dishes out identities haphazardly, and it recalls the blackly humorous tragedy of Mr Bumble
naming the orphans alphabetically in Oliver Twist (OT, 10)

. There is a comedy in the idea that since we attach so much value to our names, they should be given
out so carelessly.
argues that Dickens’s writing is characterized by ‘patterns of repetition that give casual coherence to
sprawling narratives without compromising one’s sense of their sprawl.

The idea of naming brings to mind the theorist of comedy Henri Bergson, who proposed that we can
recognize the well-known distinction between tragedy as the genre of individuality and comedy as the
genre of universality

For Bergson, whilst tragedy allows you to believe in your unique individuality, comedy tells you that all
you are is a type, a product of social discourse.

Punch can be linked to caricature.

Dickens shares something with his contemporary here in that he sees a comedy in caricature, associated
with the grotesque, as not ‘imitating’ something which already exists (as if it were realism) but instead
as ‘creating’ something just as ‘nature’ does; something which appears to be ‘natural’ and pre-existing.

Dickens and caricature is a familiar topic, since his work has been associated with caricature from the
time of his writing onwards.

As such Dickens’s name is lent to the start of a new tradition of writing which connects images and
words, associating him with caricature from the early stages of the genre’s popularity in the nineteenth
century

On the other hand caricature in Dickens contains the doubleness found in jokes about nationality: it
both produces something which it refers to and shows that production for what it is.

The contrast of registers here is significant, as Bakhtin would note, and shows something of what has
happened to carnival in the nineteenth century. Here the carnival is interruption and the event at the
same time. The characters laugh, not because they ‘avoid deformity or misfortune,’ as is the case in
‘superiority theory’ but precisely because they have not avoided misfortune, and yet have survived. The
comic figure is thus invulnerable to tragic defeat.

For Dickens the fact that Punch is ‘so superior to all the accidents of life, though encountering them at
every turn’ holds the key to the comedy. Dickens writes; ‘I suspect this to be the secret (though many
persons may not present it to themselves) of the general enjoyment which *is found+ in this class of
entertainment

JIKA lewat komed lbh banyak dtonton shg pesanya lbh tersampakan
“Saya rasa humor itu merupakan kebutuhan setiap orang. Orang bisa menolak
perbedaan agama, budaya, bahasa atau apapun, tetapi tidak ada yang bisa
menolak humor. Sehingga segala sesuatu yang disampaikan dengan humor,
meskipun nyelekit, mereka bisa terima. Karena ada yang bisa membuat
mereka tersenyum senang, tapi ada juga yang memang pahit dan tetap bisa
ditelan karena humor. Humor adalah kekuatan yang tajam untuk mengkritisi
tanpa membuat orang jadi marah banget,”