Nuance is the Key to Sarcasm

Anyone with a lick of a sense of humor understands the benefits that  “The Surprising Benefits of Sarcasm” proffers. In fact, as I was reading the introductory remarks, in which the author puts forth straw man arguments about the potentially detrimental side effects of sarcasm, I found myself repeating one word whenever a new study was introduced: nuance. The benefits of sarcasm get past the surface level of the conversation and force participants to think critically at the moment to understand what the sarcastic comment articulates through context clues. Moreover, it is the nuance of the form that unveils its power and benefits. 

In recognizing this fact, and being a part of the first generation to grow up on the internet, it became evidently apparent how off-base some of the studies being presented were. For instance, the study observing the recognition of sarcasm in text and in vocal portrayal began with hypotheses that are not based on any understanding of human behavior and communication. The scientists predicted that the people reading sarcastic comments would accurately tell which is which 78% of the time. While the listeners of sarcasm, they predicted, would accurately judge the comments 73%. This contrasts all understanding of human behavior and development. Humans have developed from verbal communication. We as a species are adept at discerning facial features, tone, inflection, and other context clues are reference points to coincide with the content of statements to give a full understanding of a statement. The human mind is not developed to understand nuance in a digital, written format, where the context we rely on is stripped from the statement. 

The developers of the creativity study understood this to an extent. Their findings from the rise of creativity from sarcastic conversations make sense because the contributors of such an interaction are thrown into a game-like situation. The game is one-upmanship and each time the ball is tossed back to an individual, they are forced to think on their feet to create a comeback to continue the conversation. The verbal acrobatics performed in a conversation between two people that understand the context of the situation sparks creativity because it is sink-or-swim. Furthermore, in finding that the spark of creativity is not apparent when the recipient does not recognize the sarcasm. The nuance hypothesis is reinforced. Just as in its digital form. A sarcastic comment not taken as such–when the intent is misunderstood–does not spark creativity because it is not a mutual game of acrobatics and the stimulation of continuance is lost.