Heather Buzbee

Dr. Rollins
ENG 4300
12 December 2013
Seriously Silly: Jesus Shaves Just Like Everyone Else
Abstract:
Based on rhetorical and humor theories, this paper examines how David Sedaris uses incongruity
and superiority humor in his essay Jesus Shaves. Focusing on his own experiences and biases,
Sedaris uses humor to talk about religion and cultural practices and in doing so makes a subtle,
serious argument for people to accept one anothers religious and cultural beliefs.

Humor can be used by speakers to address issues that would be difficult to talk about in
normal situations. John C. Meyer makes a similar point in his essay, Humor as a Double Edged
Sword. Meyer states, Feelings may safely be communicated using humor that normally might
be blocked by lack of a socially acceptable outlet (318). As Meyer points out, humor can be
used to make certain conversations acceptable or at least possible. In the essay Jesus Shaves,
David Sedaris uses this particular rhetorical function of humor to his advantage. Sedaris uses
humor to set up a more relaxed environment by both entertaining and identifying with the
audience through the use of incongruity and superiority theories of humor. Through humor,
Sedaris focuses on his own ideas and biases to subtly persuade the audience to be more accepting
of other peoples cultural and religious beliefs.
In Jesus Shaves, Sedaris uses Henri Bergsons superiority theory of humor in a conflict
about the French Easter bell and the American Easter bunny to entertain the audience. In France,
instead of an Easter bunny, they have an Easter bell that brings chocolate to all the children.
Because France and America have two different ideas about who brings the chocolate at Easter,
this causes a conflict between the French teacher and Sedaris. When Sedaris says that an Easter
bunny brings chocolate, the teacher immediately thinks Sedaris used the wrong word. The

Buzbee 2

teacher sighed and shook her head. As far as she was concerned, I had just explained everything
that was wrong with my country (Sedaris 178). From this passage, it is evident that the teacher
believes her cultural practice of a bell instead of a bunny makes her and her country superior to
Sedaris and America. Of course, Sedaris believes the same thing about his country and the Easter
bunny. Both of them feel superior to each other, and their superiority is funny because of
Bergsons theory of humor. According to Bergson, people laugh at others who demonstrate a
mechanical inelasticity, in the sense that, the object or person being laughed at, does not adapt to
the situation like humans should and therefore act like a machine (6). In this conflict, Sedaris and
the French teacher are being inelastic by sticking to their own ideas instead of acknowledging
others. The audience recognizes this and feels superior to them. This conflict is funny because
the French teacher and Sedaris are being inelastic and basing their superiority on imaginary
holiday figures.
Through this conflict, Sedaris introduces a serious point with a silly subject. In the
conflict, he gives an example of two people who refuse to accept each others cultural beliefs,
even if it is just between an imaginary bell and bunny. This section subtly introduces his overall
persuasive aim that we should all accept each others beliefs. By setting up his essay this way,
Sedaris does not have to confront his audience, which could scare them away from listening to
his argument. In this instance, humor is working rhetorically because this light-hearted debate
relaxes the audience and helps Sedaris imperceptibly introduce an idea.
Sedariss entire rant about the Easter bell is funny because he is logically trying to argue
why a bunny is superior to a bell when both ideas are equally illogical and far-fetched. Not only
does Sedaris believe the Easter bunny is superior to the bell but he is so worked up about the
conflict of interests that he even makes an argument about why an Easter bunny is superior to an

Buzbee 3

Easter bell. At one point in his rant he states, And why fly one from Rome when theyve got
more bells than they know what to do with right here in Paris? Thats the most implausible
aspect of the whole story (179). This particular phrase is funny because the whole idea of an
Easter bell flying around Paris is implausible, not just that small part. The audience feels superior
to Sedaris because he is taking this argument so seriously. Bergson also claims that people laugh
at mechanical inelasticity when others stick to their own habits and opinions instead of adapting
to the situation (6). This theory is applicable for incongruity and superiority, and both
incongruity and superiority are applicable here. Instead of adapting to the situation and accepting
the beliefs of the French teacher, Sedaris continues to stick to his own ideas. This is inelastic
behavior. According to Bergson, during Sedariss rant, the audience laughs because Sedariss
inelasticity goes against accepted behavior and because they feel superior to Sedariss
inelasticity.
Instead of addressing the audience head on with a serious issue, Sedaris uses humor to
show the audience that they should not get worked up about what other people believe. In the
rant, Sedaris uses humor to focus on his own bias about the bell to exaggerate the situation and
make his opposition to other peoples beliefs seem ridiculous. This tactic makes the audience
laugh because they feel superior to him, and they feel superior because they know it is silly for
Sedaris to get so upset over an imaginary bell. By making the audience laugh, he makes a point
that getting so upset over whose idea is better can sound silly in the end. Sedaris uses humor to
make his own bias against the bell funny in order to set an example and lead up to his main point
at the end of the essay.
Using incongruity theory of humor Sedaris softens the touchy issue of religion.
According to Cicero, the orator can use humor to soften subjects that may be hard to talk about

Buzbee 4

or issues that the audience wouldnt easily swallow (186). One of the funniest parts in this piece
is the messed up English when the students are trying to explain Christianity in beginning
French. For example, one of the students explains He called his self Jesus and then he die one
day on two morsels of lumber or He die one day and then he go above my head to live
with your father (Sedaris 177). According to the basic incongruity theory of humor, these
statements are humorous because the phrases are unexpected and incongruous. These phrases are
incongruous because they go against what most native English speakers would expect to hear.
Something is incongruous when it still violates our normal mental patterns and our normal
expectations (Morreall 11). It is also incongruous because it fits logically under another context,
which is Elliott Orings theory of appropriate incongruity. Oring states appropriate incongruity
as the recognition of a connection even if that connection is logically or empirically
questionable (2). We know what they are trying to say, and that makes their phrases funny.
Here, with incongruity theories of humor, Sedaris is able to casually tie in Christianity to his
main point.
Humor also allows Sedaris to address a potentially offensive situation indirectly.
Although Sedaris focuses on seemingly silly subjects to make his argument, through humor he is
able to talk about a serious subject like Christianity indirectly. Many people can get offended
very easily when talking about religion. Sedaris does not linger on the subject of Christianity for
long. He soon switches from Christianity to food, which is an easier subject to talk about. He
also decides to compare the Easter bunny and the Easter bell rather than comparing religious
practices. However, it is clear that Sedaris wants to make a point about Christianity because he
comes back to the idea of explaining Christianity later in the essay. Sedaris says, I wondered
then if, without the language barrier, my classmates and I couldve done a better job making

Buzbee 5

sense of Christianity, an idea that sounds pretty far-fetched to begin with (179). Here, Sedaris
explicitly admits the idea that Christianity would be hard to believe even if they were explaining
it in English to someone who had never heard of it before. This sentence also seems important
because it is set off in its own paragraph as if to draw the readers attention to it. Again, he does
not linger on this thought. Through humor, he immediately goes on to poke fun at his French
skills and his French teacher. It is important to note that Sedaris talks about religion in this essay
because he immediately relates religious differences to his argument and Christianity is many
different readers religion, which makes his essay relevant to many readers.
Because of the humor, Sedaris was able to slide in a serious thought: Religions and
cultural practices sound weird to people who have never heard of the religion or cultural practice,
and it is hard to explain beliefs, like Christianity and Easter, to people outside a particular
religious or cultural group. If Sedaris had said this out of the context of this essay, some people
may be offended because this is a bold thing to say. However, in the essay, it fits, and it sounds
like a rational conclusion to wonder about. Through humor Sedaris is able to bring in a serious
idea without making it the main focus.
At the end of the essay, Sedaris uses superiority and incongruity theories of humor to
entertain the audience and make them feel superior to him in order to come to their own
conclusion about the piece. Sedaris ends with the fact that he still does not accept the bell. He
states, I accepted the idea that an omniscient God had cast me in his own image and that he
watched over me and guided me from one place to the next. The Virgin Birth, the Resurrection,
and the countless miracles my heart expanded to encompass all the wonders and possibilities of
the universe. A bell though thats fucked up (180). This statement is funny because it is
incongruous. If he accepts all of the wonders of the universe, he should also accept the bell. This

Buzbee 6

exception is unexpected, and it goes against his previous statement. His reaction to his teachers
beliefs also makes the audience laugh because he does not just accept the bell and let it go. This
is significant because it makes the audience question his judgment. This makes the audience
even feel superior to Sedaris because they feel like they were above the situation and came to the
realization on their own that he should just get over the bell.
By making fun of himself and his own biases, Sedaris uses humor as subtle enforcement
to show how people should not act. Meyer states, The enforcement function of humor allows
for stress on the violation of norms, which, although engendering mirth, requires correction
indicated by laughing at the person responsible for the humorous violation (321). In this essay,
laughter is used to correct deviations from the social norm. Sedaris acts against social norms by
not accepting the bell. By placing this act at the very end of the essay, the violation is
emphasized. The audience laughs because of this violation, and they know Sedaris should just
accept the bell. Because the essay is focused on Sedariss ideas and beliefs, the laughter is
correcting his behavior at the end of the essay.
Although Sedaris sets up the joke so that the audience is laughing at his actions, he uses
this laughter to correct everyone elses behavior as well. Sedaris acts how most everyone does
when confronted with beliefs that contradict their own. He maps out how we should act but then
falls back on how we really act. I think his ethos has to be taken into consideration here too
because if he were a self-righteous or cocky character then his ending would seem to fit his
personality and not really be applicable to other people. However, because Sedaris is a normal
everyday guy and acts like everyone else would, the audience can apply his idea to their
responses to other peoples religions and beliefs. This causes the audience to think, why dont we
accept other peoples religions and beliefs, and let it go? Sedariss use of humor causes the

Buzbee 7

audience to reflect not only on how Sedaris handled the situation but also how the audience
handles other peoples ideas and beliefs as well. However, because this approach was explicitly
correcting Sedariss behavior, the audience feels like it was their idea all along, which makes
them more apt to ultimately accept Sedariss argument in the end.
Sedaris uses humor throughout his essay to make subtle points that lead up to a strong but
subtle persuasive aim, and through the use of humor Sedaris addresses a potentially offensive
situation indirectly. If Sedaris had just said everyone should be more accepting of each others
beliefs because even Christianity can sound silly to some people sometimes, he would not have
gotten the same response from his audience. Humor creates a space for the speaker and the
audience to meet and discuss issues that would normally cause tension. In his essay, Sedaris
focuses on his own funny story to make people think about how they react to other peoples
beliefs. By making fun of his own bias, Sedaris persuades his audience to act the opposite of him
and be more accepting. Cicero once remarked, That each and every commonplace that I may
touch upon as a source for the humorous can, generally speaking, also serve as a source for
serious thought (190). Cicero believes that humor can serve as a source for serious thought, and
that is exactly what Sedaris proves in this essay. Although Sedariss essay is funny and
entertaining, it still makes a serious point. Serious thought can arise from humorous discourse as
Sedaris demonstrates in this essay.

Works Cited

Buzbee 8

Bergson, Henri. Excerpt from Laughter. The Comic in General the Comic Element in Forms
and Movement Expansive Force of the Comic. ENG 4300 Moodle. 11 Nov 2013.
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Invention: Excurses on Wit. Book 2. 180-205. ENG 4300 Moodle. 29
Aug 2013.
Meyer, John C. Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in
Communication. ENG 4300 Moodle. 11 Nov 2013.
Morreall, John. Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. ENG 4300 Moodle. 17
Sept 2013.
Oring, Elliott. Jokes and Their Relations. ENG 4300 Moodle. 24 Sept 2013.
Sedaris, David. Jesus Shaves. Me Talk Pretty One Day. New York: Little, Brown and
Company, 2001. 174-180. Print.

Copyright Heather Buzbee 2015