Gary Larson’s complete collection of published cartoons was reproduced in a 2003 two volume set modeled after early modern printed illuminated scriptures. It echoed other commemorations of the history of printed materials, such as the 2016 republication of Martin Luther’s 1534 illuminated German Bible. While diverse in scope, religious themes persistently featured throughout Larson’s cartoons poking fun at the absurdities of theodicy, sectarianism, polemics, and ecclesiastical authority. The proposed essay will provide a comprehensive evaluation of Larson’s sense of humour in the mode of the history of the book advocated by Jonathan Z. Smith in his 2009 essay “Religion and the Bible.” What emerges is a sophisticated account of Larson’s engagement with religious ideas and iconography in a historical context of printed publication practices. The editorial context demonstrates Larson’s awareness of the audiences he both entertained and offended. In sum, the collection can be understood as a precursor to the contemporary debate about the persistent and new visibilities of religion as well as the way humour can diffuse controversial topics in our increasingly divided societies.

Children’s Literature particularly in the 21st Century, has had a strong focus on humour. Classic authors such as Dahl have been joined by more recent additions to the sector including Jeff Kinney, David Walliams, and Liz Pichon who all employ humour as the main driver for their stories, with slapstick, gore and terrible things happening to grown-ups at their heart. Deary’s Horrible Histories series, which has delivered to hoards of young people an approach which exposes them to the lived historical experience through hilarity, fart jokes, gore, word play, and a focus on the ridiculous (Scanlon 2011) has translated into television series and feature length films. And religion, in the few texts published with faith as a theme in the 21st Century, has been treated with humour by a number of well known, and lesser known, authors. Almond, Cottrell Boyce, Mian, Gleitzmann – all have tackled the lived religious experience through comedy in its various forms. Where they differ from many adult books which tackle religious scenarios and tropes is in the respectful and gentle way in which religion is treated – not making fun of faith, but using comedy to probe the lived experience of the protagonists in ways in which children will be engaged and interested. Few use religion as a focus for humorous derision: most use it to form the windows, mirrors and sliding glass doors (Bishop, 1990) which allow children access to the lived experience of others. In a publishing landscape where religion in children’s books is treated tentatively or ignored altogether (Miskec, 2011, Prothero 2007, Wood 1999) a bit of a laugh can go a long way towards developing the understanding, curiosity about others’ lives at which children’s literature excels.

In recent years, the relationship between religion and visual satiric expressions has been a topic of public discourse, sparked initially when Danish and Norwegian newspapers in 2005 published cartoons depicting the Islamic prophet Muhammad. The publications led to heated debate and demonstrations. The 2015 attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo brought the topic back into the public eye. In 2019 New York Times stopped publishing cartoons when a drawing of the Israeli prime minister as a guide dog wearing a Star of David collar and leading a blind US President Donald Trump, led to protests. The controversy over boundaries for joking about religion is part of a larger debate about satire, freedom of expression and the rights of vulnerable religious minorities. In this article I will focus on newspaper cartoonists. I have interviewed seven cartoonists in Norway about religious satire. I want to know how the public controversies have influenced their work. What kind of drawings will they not make, and are they reflecting on majority vs minority issues when they make religious satire? Does their own religious background have anything to say? We tend to like humour that target people below ourselves in the social status hierarchy (cf. superiority theory). A survey conducted among the general population shows that 52 percent states that the publishing of newspaper caricatures about religion in most cases will be the right thing to do. But a significant minority have second thoughts on the topic. Attitudes towards religious satire are related to what people think about religious minorities. Both fear and feeling of solidarity can lead to more restrictive attitudes towards caricatures. The relevance of superiority in societies that focus on human rights for vulnerable groups can thus be questioned.

Religion, performative comedy and offence have a long relationship in British culture, from Alf Garnett, Life of Brian and Dave Allen through to Eddie Izzard, Ricky Gervais and Tim Minchin. In this chapter, I will primarily examine the art of stand-up comedy, within a wider context of performed comedy, to trace two changes that occur from the 1960s to the present day; a shift from mocking to ridiculing, and the changing landscape of dynamism between ‘insider’ to ‘outsider’ voices. I will highlight changes in social attitudes to religion and comedy, in addition to exploring the development of comedy as a vehicle to both attack and defend religion after the rise of the New Atheism in the mid-2000s. This will include commentary upon the shift from attacking religious practices to attacking religious beliefs, and the shift from gentle mockery to outright ridicule. In so doing, I will look at the philosophical act of reductio ad absurdum as a tool in the offender’s arsenal, examining transgressions of senses of decorum, entitlement and taste on the one hand, and formations of senses of identity, community and superiority on the other. I will conclude with a reflection on religious responses to offence, and ask how this can be analysed within a Lived Religion approach.

Contemporary ‘television’ seriality has encountered many changes, but in the last decade what has been labelled as prestige or the third golden age of television structurally changed this kind of (pop) cultural products, from storytelling to means of production, distribution, reception. Among others, one aspect of particular interest is the growing relevance of (non) religious themes in such narratives, especially in innovative and unconventional forms. Genre narratives, on the other hand, have often remained tied to more traditional understandings and forms of representation of religions. The paper will propose an analysis of some examples of contemporary seriality in the comedy genre that present narratives built around explicit (non) religious themes. Two principal trends seem to emerge. A group of series that present narratives centred on surreal experiences or representations revolving around some kind of relationship with God or some form of divinity or narratives explicitly about (a) God. Shows like God friended me, The good place, Miracle workers, Black Jesus are examples of this group. However, a second trend seems of particular interest in the context of this call. Shows like Ramy, Broad city, After life represent the everyday life of (non) religious persons narrated through the language of humour and comedy specifically about (non) religion. What is relevant about these series, in this sense, is, on the one hand, the focus on material (non) religious experience of the main characters and the performative aspects of their (non) religious identity and, on the other hand, the kind of comedy the they enact revolving around the crossroad between everyday life and everyday religion. Building on a critical approach to the representation of (non)religion in media and popular culture and specifically on material and lived religion, the paper will focus mainly on this second group of shows highlighting some interesting trends emerging at the intersection between comedy and (non)religiosity in contemporary seriality.

In this chapter I will be exploring the work of the stand-up comedian Stewart Lee from a theological perspective. Using the methodology of Vanhoozer, Anderson and Sleasman (2007) for analysing popular culture I will discuss the theological implications of Lee’s work, particularly in the context of satire, blasphemy and offence. Questions will include whether Lee’s work is offensive, or whether the context of his comedy should be taken into account and ameliorates charges of blasphemy. Is all humour permissible as long as it is funny, as Schweizer (2020) argues? I will also explore laughter and comedy from a theological perspective and whether this is a more appropriate and helpful lens with which to explore his work than that of offense. Is there a deeper theological meaning to his work particularly in his critique of society and exploration of the human condition? This will lead to a discussion on the deeper purpose of comedy and its function within society, as well as the tradition of the holy fool. I will end with a positive critique of Lee’s work, and how his truth telling challenges both church and society into more authentic and just relationships in community and public life.

Humor cannot be separated from social reality. In the incongruity theory, it is stated that humor functions as a social control, and mocking stereotyping and prejudice. The community’s sensitivity to the incongruity in society’s religious life can trigger expressions in the form of humor and comedy. On the one hand, the expression of dissatisfaction with the socio-religious reality in the form of comedy that can be agitated from religious blasphemy. This can be seen in the period 2018-2020, where there were many accusations of blasphemy in the appearance of stand-up comedy. On the other hand, this anxiety can be a means of preaching (dakwah). Preaching by this issue is very popular with the people because it is close to the their social reality. This study aims to see how the same anxiety and discomfort can be conveyed with different expressions in different contexts which can lead to various responses. The perspective used is a pragmatic-discourse analysis. This can be seen from the discourse that is presented in humor which is conveyed through two contexts, the context of the joke and the context in the jokes. The object of this research is a comedy treat that contains people’s discomfort about religious life, religious fanaticism, and religious teachings. The discourse will be classified into humor which are laughing at religious teachings or laughing at the behavior of religious people. In this research, it is hoped that the parameters of offense for religious communities in Indonesia can be compiled. This is also to place a discourse in a suitable context to minimize offense. This parameter is important in order to maintain the continuity of religious harmony in Indonesia.

This chapter aims to exam the outsiders’ views of Brazilian Pentecostalism by analysing the ‘Jesus in the guava tree’ episode, which was narrated by Damares Alves, the current Minister of Women, Family and Human Rights in Brazil who is also a Pentecostal priestess. The event was publicised through a video in which Alves talks about how she saw, as a ten-year-old kid, Jesus Christ while she was attempting suicide on the top of a guava tree. After the video reached a broader public, Damares was the target of jokes, memes, and mockery on Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, and even in regular media vehicles. The characteristics of the jokes and memes follow what Christie Davies (1998; 2011) called ‘stupidity jokes’ in which a social group is treated as stupid; Alves was treated as someone who does not know the role and meaning of Jesus in a many memes. However, a few memes also pathologised her experience by accusing it of madness and even the use of hallucinatory drugs, following a common trait of Modern society of mocking of ‘laughing at the lunacy’ (Cross 2013). This episode illustrates the common views of outsiders’ on Brazilian Pentecostalism – a religious movement that has grown fast in the country in the last decades, but Catholicism still is the major religion in Brazil. Outsiders often consider Pentecostals as obsessed with money and with a strong will to believe in anything that their leadership says (Campos 1999: 356; Mariano 2012). Moreover, the ‘Jesus in the guava tree’ event has much to say about how the internet became an area of struggles between political and religious views through humour and memes (Börzsei 2013; Campbell et al. 2016; Kulkarni 2017; Chattoo 2018), what is the contemporary image that outsiders’ have regarding Pentecostals in Brazil, and what are the differences between outsiders and insiders views of humour.

The death or the illness of a community member, friend or relative is always a critical moment for the Wana people of Morowali, Central Sulawesi. It breaks the delicate balance inside the community, and it casts a shadow of insignificancy on life. To avoid being overwhelmed by the emotional wave caused by an unexpected loss and to retrieve the balance, Wana people follow a series of small and big rituals that guide them and control their emotion and manage to transform a negative event into a positive occasion of celebration and reaffirmation of life. This is also expressed through the smiles and the laughs that are possible to see and hear during these rituals. It is not by chance that a Wana told me “mereka bermain” (they are playing), to explain to me the explosion of controlled violence that characterize their funerals. Indeed, the kayori (Wana funeral) and the momago (Wana main shamanic ritual) are two playful occasions in which every member plays a role and emotion are guided by the tradition. These two rituals bring together dozens or even hundreds of people from all over the area, giving the opportunity to spend some time with friends and relatives that live far away, or to find a new partner. Moreover, Wana people, a culture that refuses to use violence and avoid strong negative emotion, use jokes to control the behaviour of the members of the community, not only during these rituals but in every situation of life. This essay, supported and enriched by photos taken during my fieldwork, will explore the power of smiling, laughing and joking, and the amazing ability of the Wana to accept the inevitability of pain, rooted in the myth, while using it to reinforce the sense of community, celebrate life and achieve the primordial unity.

This chapter will argue that jokes, humour, and laughter can play a central role in religious experience and can be harnessed as a tool for highlighting meaning. This view runs contrary to the oft accepted position that the path to profound and religious truths should be a serious and solemn one. Through a consideration of Osho (an enigmatic, yet controversial figure) and the Rajneesh Movement, I will demonstrate how laughter can be at the heart of a religious tradition. For Osho, “life is a cosmic joke” (Rajneesh 1998: 77) and so the only appropriate response is to laugh. Heavily influenced by Zen Buddhism, Osho sought the laughter of his followers (through joke-telling, kōans, and meditation) as he believed that the disruption it causes allows reserved and constrained bodies to break free, to stop thinking rationally and to experience an awakening. Thus, laughter is positioned as a religious act, an essential tool for unveiling wisdom and understanding the incongruities of life. Despite the overt presence of laughter in the Rajneesh Movement, Osho’s use of humour and joke-telling has been overlooked by previous scholars in favour of the more ‘serious’ dimensions of Osho (one exception to this is Gilhus 1997). Yet as a self-declared “laughing guru”, Osho frequently laughed during his lectures and was renowned for telling jokes, humorous anecdotes, and generally being playful with his followers. This chapter will recognise that Osho’s image as a laughing, humorous, joking, playful guru was challenging for some of his followers. Indeed, Osho’s use of humour and joke-telling allowed him to push the boundaries of acceptability and taste, in order to highlight inadequacies in this world and to transmit religious understanding through an alternative means.