208

Amfiteater, letn. 12, št. 1, 2024
UDK 82.09-221:316.7
316.7:82.09-221
DOI 10.51937/Amfiteater-2024-1/196-210

Abstract
The paper takes as its starting point the relationship between “cancel culture” – and its
related political correctness – and comedy. It articulates this relationship in more detail and
places it in a sociopolitical context. Theories of comedy, the comic and humour highlight
two different interpretations or functions of these genres: On the one hand, it can be a
tool of social normativity, disciplining those parts of society that deviate from fictional
norms through humour directed against them. On the other hand, it can also oppose such
systems by revealing through comedy that “the emperor is indeed naked”. The history of
cancel culture has its roots in the historical social interactions of Black Americans, which
were comically oriented. An undertone of comedy also marked the initial emergence of the
term, which first appeared on Twitter in tweets by Black Americans in 2014. However, only
as it spread to other social groups and entered popular culture did it take on its current
meaning, with the aim of withdrawing public support from individuals, brands, etc., for
perceived inappropriate or controversial behaviour. The view that comedy, in whatever
form, is absolutely “sacred” and “untouchable” is merely a consequence of the bourgeois
conception of the autonomy of art, which denies it any political charge and attempts to
conceal the social power relations at work within comic procedures.
Keywords: humour theories, cancel culture, comedy, cultural critique, incongruity theory
Maša Radi Buh (1998) is a sociologist of culture and an independent researcher in the field
of contemporary performance practices. As a critic, she writes for Kritika, Neodvisni, Maska
and other publications. Together with Varja Hrvatin and Jakob Ribič she was a Jernej
Šugman Fund Fellow in 2022–23. She works as a dramaturg, e.g., Je že konec? (Is It Over?),
screamage, Agmisterij (Agmisterium), and is the editor-in-chief of the online platform for
arts criticism Neodvisni.
Nik Žnidaršič (2000) is a graduate of the dramaturgy and performing arts programme
at the Academy of Theatre, Radio, Film and Television (UL AGRFT) in Ljubljana, where he
received the Student Prešeren Award for his thesis. He is a dramaturg, e.g., Žene v testu
(Wives in Dough), Juriš (Assault), Razmetana soba (Messy Room), Agmisterij (Agmisterium).
He was a co-editor of the UL AGRFT blog and also writes theatre reflections (Neodvisni)
and plays.
masaradibuh@gmail.com, nikznidarsic5@gmail.com

Where Are the Boundaries?
Maša Radi Buh and Nik Žnidaršič

Summary
The article explores the intersection of comedy and cancel culture, focusing on the
survival of comedy in the face of the challenges of cancel culture. In the announcement
of Amfiteater’s International Scientific Symposium titled Survival of Comedy, the
term “survival” is linked to tragedy, suggesting a decline in other literary genres,
such as tragedy or epic, while comedy continues to flourish. The central question is
whether cancel culture will succeed in eradicating a sense of humour. By examining
the political dimension of humour, the article explores the social functions of
humour based on contemporary theories of humour, primarily superiority theory
and incongruity theory. Superiority theory posits that laughter involves a sense of
superiority over others, while incongruity theory explores perceived incongruities as
a source of humour. The latter provides a broader and more abstract framework that
allows for multiple interpretations of humour. Based on Noël Carroll’s conditions and
highlighting the role of discomfort in audience response, we argue that jokes that cause
discomfort due to a significant dissimilarity between the speaker’s and the audience’s
values may not be well received and, in turn, alienate one from the joke itself. The
example of humour aimed at marginalised groups is discussed, emphasising the
importance of intention, delivery and context in the reception of jokes. The concept
of cancel culture is introduced, tracing its historical origins and its development into
a contemporary phenomenon through social media platforms. Initially associated
with African-American culture in the 1980s, the term gained prominence in 2014,
largely through Twitter, but changed its nature from ironic and often playful to
more activist. Cancel culture, as defined by scholar Eve Ng, is the act of rejecting or
criticising individuals, brands or companies for perceived offences or inappropriate
behaviour. Practices associated with cancellation include withdrawing public support
and can lead to real-life consequences such as job loss. While cancellation is not
always permanent, it can have a lasting effect on an individual’s career. The article
then considers the relationship between comedy and cancel culture, framing cancel
culture as a progressive movement that challenges power structures. The critique
of cancel culture is positioned as a rejection or fear of acknowledging the social
or political power inherent in theatre. It is not about censoring humour but about
calling attention to humour that reinforces superiority or targets absent groups in

209

210

the audience. It is important to allow room for genuine mistakes while distinguishing
them from deliberately offensive behaviour. The article then refutes the notion that
cancel culture is exclusive to left-wing movements and provides a Slovenian example
where cancellation was associated with an artistic work rather than an individual’s
behaviour. The case of Ivan Cankar’s Lackeys and the actor Daša Doberšek, whose
performance was misused for political purposes, illustrates how cancel culture can be
exploited by the right for political ends. Looking at specific cases in Slovenian theatre,
the authors touch on the controversies surrounding Boris Kobal and the productions
of Mladinsko Theatre, Fear and Misery of the Third Reich and Lackeys. In the conclusion
of the article, we stress the importance of maintaining a balance between freedom of
expression and accountability in artistic creation. We argue that cancel culture, when
approached responsibly, can serve as a corrective to perceived power imbalances and
structural inequalities.