I truely thought you were going for satyre in this piece. If not, I don't see the humor. I agree with this. And self-deprecating humor in writing is very funny. When a MC tells about something they did that didn't turn out well and made them look foolish, it's very easy to relate because we've all tripped while chewing gum.
But it is the majority that defines the cultural characteristics... nothing is ever typed, classed, categorised or defined by it's minority aspects. The reason it is called 'British humour' is because the majority of Britons share a consensus on what constitutes 'funny'. That happens to be sarcasm, irony and satire. For Americans, it tends to be people falling over and toilet humour.
You have posh and working class people living in the same area? Sounds idyllic. A sense of humour can be any number of things, refined or not. I happen to like the dry and sarcastic kind. If someone doesn't 'get me', it's their loss perhaps. To add, if I have something serious to say to someone, well of course I will be serious. There's a time and place for humour etc etc.
I don't really try to convey humor as much -- certain funny lines in dialog are inspired by things my friends and I say to each other, or my thoughts on some subject.
I write because I am. I only write what I know. I could not make things up especially when it comes to using people at my advantage in my writing. I like humour in stories and the only humour I will write about is the humour I know and like. Humour is best when it is shared and NOT at the expense of others.
Would a person that hates losing really have a group of friends that weren't annoyed by her? Someone who HAS to win ALL of the time would irritate most people, just a little bit, and as a result, they may have a few snide remarks to make about her behind her back. It would seem that she would have to find a group of friends who are not even one ounce competitive to be that accepting. Even amongst an entourage. The Lady Winnity nickname did make me smile. I thought that it was meant to be sarcastic however.
Not if they were very close friends. Remember she makes/provides all the tea parties afterwards. It is a vey closed group of friends and because they know each other very well they will let her have ways. It is kind funny but humour between friends is what I was trying to convey.
I disagree. I find that the closer I am to someone the more casual -- and sometimes bordering on impolite when it comes to humour -- I can be.
Maybe expanding upon the ways that she goes about trying to make sure she wins at all cost could be humorous.
That is interesting. I would consider it the opposite ,the bigger a circle of friends is, the closer the joviality. Humour is what brings people together. Nothing else does it better then humour. StandUp comedy shows are very popular because us humans like to unwind with humour. We might be all different characters and from all sorts of walks of life but one thing we al lhave in commone is a sense ofhumour that is light and jovial. The closer you are to someone the lighter are the jokes . Hence my little example that shows that humour betweeb a large group of friends is quite subtle but nonetheless fun to watch.
This is just an example of how you would express humour. Iwould very much appreciative if you could take part: How would you express something FUNNY using ONE or TWO characters?
There's no recipies for humor. It just doesn't work that way. If you have a funny-bone you'll likely write funny stuff almost by accident, if you don't, you wont. It's like asking for a recipe for passionate poetry, when what you need is to feel passion for it while writing. If you're in doubt, it's a good sign that it isn't working for you.
The problem/issue with humour, it is something you see read or hear, Explaining it simply does not get through. It must said/told rather then explained. Everyone has a streak of humour inside them hence laughter. I am never indoubt it is simply putting cross in away that will get through to people that is the idea.
DISAGREE. The closer you are to someone the more you know about what they will and won't tolerate. The more you can push their tolerance and get away with it. The more you can be FORGIVEN for pushing past their tolerance limit. I can be downright rude to people I know very well, and they take it in the spirit it is meant, with a nod and a wink. I can even include my boss in this - I take the mick out of him no end, but luckily he shares the same sense of humour as me and laughs it off. He gives back as much as he takes anyway. But people do not always have the same sense of humour - yours and mine obviously differ greatly. While I find sarcasm and micky taking really quite side splittingly hilarious, you would probably find my sense of humour offensive. Because I don't know you and therefore don't exactly what would offend, I would be more likely to keep my humour light and 'jovial' as you put it. So I find that the opposite is true - the closer you are the more offensive you can be, whereas the less well you know someone the lighter the humour.
I think for the vast majority of people (especially males) this is not true, the closer you are the more offensive and mocking your humour is. For example, I'll regularly call my best friend a c*** as a joke (and it's found amusing) whereas I would never (obviously) joke about with one of my teachers like that. It's all part of 'banter', where a common understanding allows you to actually be quite horrible to each other and it's still found funny. This can be represented in writing very effectively because it mirrors the real world so strongly. The trick is to make sure you set up a situation between your characters where it makes sense and works.
