Laughter as a Gavel

Kompas/Handining

.

As we all know by now, Setya Novanto (Setnov), the House of Representatives (DPR) Speaker who was renamed a suspect in the e-ID corruption case, had an accident. The car he was riding crashed into an electricity pole. The front fender and grille was damaged. One of the tires was wrecked. Setnov\'s head was bruised and bleeding. "The temple of Bapak [mister] was swollen as big as a bakpao (steamed bun)," his lawyer Fredrich Yunadi said. Setnov was rushed to the hospital.

Of course, accidents are unfortunate incidents. Surely he caused a few tears, or at least attracted some empathy. Do we not often shout in reflex, "Watch out!" when we see someone on the other side of the road who might be in danger?

Our body seems hurt, even though it is someone else who is hurt. There is a kind of mysterious connection between ourselves and that person. That connection can be a meeting point of true humanitarian value, a kind of genuine care for our fellow man.

This was also the case when Setnov met with an accident. We, especially netizens, reacted in reflex. Only, the expression that came out was not a cry of sorrow, let alone pain.

Instead of sympathy, what emerged were expressions of ridicule. Combining the many expressions in their various forms (verbal, visual, audiovisual), the overall reflex was laughter. Whatever, we have been merry for several days. Our body seems to have been infused with good news.

Physical reflex

Of course, this is not normal. How can it be that we laugh when another person has had an accident? But what is not normal: us or Setnov’s accident?

Our body is an entity that cannot be deceived. It will give meaning to stimulus (reality) according to the character of the stimulus. Through the tongue, which is controlled by thought, we respond to the stimulus in various ways, whether positive or negative. It is from the tongue, then, that we hear lies.

However, to laugh is the tongue acting as a muscle. Even though brain activity is there, laughter generally constitutes a physical reflex. Therefore, laughing is the most sincere human expression. At least, when we laugh, we are separated from our many thoughts and thereby separated from our many burdens. That is called honesty.

Then, what causes laughter?

Heraty (1983) said that laughter is generally triggered by humor that appears as a result of conflicting associations, or bisociation. The two or more clashing associations make us unable to think, and we are only able to respond with laughter. Pay attention to the following illustration.

An ojek (motorcycle taxi) driver transports an ustad (religious teacher) to an interview at a private TV station. He drives fast, as the ustad has a tight schedule. A policeman stops him at an intersection and cautions him that the way he has been driving endangers other people and himself. Feeling brave in the ustad’s company, the ojek driver answers, "Not to worry, mister Policeman, we will not be in danger. God is with us." The policeman gets angry and replies, "I’m ticketing you because you’re driving a motorcycle with three people on board!"

How does our brain respond?

Before we say anything, our body will surely respond first by laughing. That is because through the policeman’s reply, the joker crashes the common association of God in our daily lives.

The expression "God is with us" is a metaphor that can be interpreted as "God protects us". This clashes with the association of "God is here physically, getting a free ride with the ojek driver driving the ustad", and that the motorcycle is actually carrying three people.

In the case of Setnov’s accident, what associations clashed in the various expressions (verbal, visual, audio) that have been circulated?

According to observations, one of the variations of humor is based on the electricity pole that remained upright, even though it was hit by a large vehicle and caused a bruise as big as a bakpao to rise on Setnov’s forehead.

From here, the association grows and starts clashing. "The electricity pole becomes a suspect; the electricity pole causes a citywide blackout; the electricity pole in action; the holy electricity pole," and so on.

All associations indicate that Setnov’s accident was not normal. Therefore, the physical bodies of those who are normal (us) respond reflexively at the abnormal situation through laughter. Take note that all laughter is triggered by humor that can be cynical, ironic, and even sarcastic.

Arbitrary verdict

Well now, let’s take a good think.

What happened to Setnov actually did happen; it wasn’t engineered. But the public still laughed. Then, Setnov’s car crash could possibly be the saddest humanitarian tragedy at the yearend, and possibly in the narrative of the history of corruption cases in Indonesia.

A physical accident involving a corruption suspect has become a punchline. Of course, it is a contradiction in human relations. However, at the same time, it shows that basic human instinct has cut our ties with the (suspected) corruptor. There is no need to be sad for him. No mercy for him. No more care for him!

The most terrible consequence must be accepted by Setnov himself.

Under Peircean semiotics (philosophical study of signs), he has, since the beginning, been at the level of a legisign (sign of a general idea, norm or law), that he is indeed deserving of the suspect status as declared upon him by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

According to the taxonomy of semiotic signs, “suspect status” is actually a qualisign, or a sign that denotes that the bearer only has the potential of being a corruptor. The status still gives room for nullifying the sign of “guilty”.

In the next phase, if he stands trial as a defendant, this status can be raised to the sinsign level (specific but not definitive). In the final phase, it is the judge\'s gavel that will decide whether it is a legisign or not.

Setnov has, once again, with his behavior, cut through the first two semiotic levels. This has forced the “informal judges” to deliver a verdict on him.

These “informal judges” is none other than the public. As “informal judges”, the public certainly has many arbitrary gavels that they can bring down whenever they like. Laughter is one of these gavels.

ACEP IWAN SAIDI

Lecturer at the Arts and Design Postgraduate School, Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB)