Christianity and the Triumph of Humor: From Dante to David Javerbaum by Bernard Schweizer (review)

At the outset of his book, Christianity and the Triumph of Humor, Bernard Schweizer expertly frames his topic by juxtaposing two seemingly contradictory views: that humor runs counter to religion and that humor and religion are in fact symbiotic. Wary of absolutes, Schweizer uses these opposed positions as a point of departure in his exploration of how the two positions are inextricably tied to each other. To his credit, he presents a highly nuanced thesis, arguing that it is a mistake and counterproductive to suggest that humor either supports or detracts from religious ideals. Instead, he makes the case that comedy is better understood if viewed as a complex, rhetorical tool for both those who propagate religious beliefs and those who challenge them. Through this lens, the book presents numerous examples that demonstrate the crucial role humor has played in the cultural, aesthetic, and religious evolution of Christianity.

Schweizer splits his book into two complementary parts. He dedicates two chapters in part 1 to exploring the ideological components of humor, which he then draws on in his account of the cultural and historical manifestations of religious comedy. Nevertheless, part 1 is not merely a formality; the two chapters are noteworthy not only for setting the parameters for his later analysis but also for their own significant contributions. In chapter 1, Schweizer challenges the commonly held assumption that humor is inherently coded as liberal leaning rather than conservative. In this analysis, what stands out is how deftly the chapter moves from a theoretical exploration of ideology to a quantitative analysis of humor appreciation and then to a synthesis of the two that produces a rewarding model with which to analyze different comedic modes. The value of this model is that it allows for multiple readings of a single funny text or performance, which undermines overly simplistic calls for censorship of caustic comedy or, for that matter, any definitive declaration about how someone supposedly must interpret a piece of humor.

Chapter 2 focuses on the morality of humor within the Christian tradition. Utilizing his model from chapter 1, Schweizer continues to push back against the interpretations of humor as either good or bad. Of particular importance is his discussion of offensive humor. Schweizer cleverly circumvents criticisms of offensive comedy by arguing that the value-neutral categories of liminality and entrenchment are preferable to the overly moralistic ones of good or bad. An understanding of humor in terms of shifting boundaries (liminality) or reinforcing them (entrenchment) enables a productive conversation about humor without "the straitjacket of a moral dualism" (42). Jointly, these two chapters set the stage for the historical analysis that follows.

Part 2 looks more closely at humor within the Christian tradition over time. Chapter 3 begins by investigating humor in the Middle Ages. Schweizer chooses his examples wisely so that he can carefully show a progression of thought. In line with his argument that humor is not inherently liberal minded, in documenting this progression he demonstrates what he identifies as the erosion of taboo and absolute authority. In his examination of the writing of David Javerbaum, for example, Schweizer jettisons a superficial reading of the writer's work as simply blasphemous in favor of one that demonstrates how the aesthetics of humor allows radical humorists to layer laughter and thoughtfulness.

Chapter 4 shifts periods, offering a more contemporary look at pop culture. Relying on examples like South Park, Schweizer pulls salient observations about culture and religion from each of his illustrations and moves beyond the false binary of so-called good versus so-called bad comedy. Instead, he argues it is crucial to appreciate humor for opening up spaces for sophisticated discussion on religious issues.

Schweizer's book is valuable in its ideological exploration, theoretical model creation, and refutation of a narrow, liberal understanding of humor as well as in its application of these ideas in his discussion of both historical and contemporary cases. By...