The Art of the Prank » What Makes a Good Prank?

Pranks Psych 101

Moderator — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:47:33 +0000

Submitted by Steffani Martin and Peter Maloney:

April Fool! The Purpose of Pranks
by Benedict Carey
New York Times
April 1, 2008

Keep it above the belt, stop short of total humiliation and, if possible, mix in some irony, some drama, maybe even a bogus call from the person’s old flame or new boss. A good prank, of course, involves good stagecraft. But it also requires emotional intuition.

Psychologists have studied pranks for years, often in the context of harassment, bullying and all manner of malicious exclusion and prejudice.

Yet practical jokes are far more commonly an effort to bring a person into a group, anthropologists have found — an integral part of rituals around the world intended to temper success with humility. And recent research suggests that the experience of being duped can stir self-reflection in a way few other experiences can, functioning as a check on arrogance or obliviousness.

The 1960s activist and prankster Abbie Hoffman reportedly divided practical jokes into three categories. The bad ones involve vindictive skewering, or the sort of head-shaving, shivering-in-boxers fraternity hazing that the sociologist Erving Goffman described as “degradation ceremonies.” Neutral tricks are more akin to physical punch lines, like wrapping the toilet bowl in cellophane, depositing a massive pumpkin on top of the student union building, or pulling some electronic high jinks on a co-worker’s keyboard (though on deadline this falls quickly into the “bad” category).

What Hoffman called the good prank, which humorously satirizes human fears or failings, is found in a wide variety of initiation rites and coming-of-age rituals. The Daribi of New Guinea, for example, have children make a small box and bury it in the ground, telling them that after a while a treasure will appear inside but they must not peek, according to Edie Turner, a professor of anthropology at the University of Virginia.

Invariably the youngsters succumb to curiosity — only to find a sample of human feces.

The Ndembu of Zambia have an adult in a monstrous mask sneak and scare the wits out of boys camping outside the village as part of a coming-of-age ritual in which they are showing their bravery.

“These kind of tricks are very common,” Dr. Turner said, “and they are really a way to put a person down before raising them up. You’re being reminded of your failings even as you’re being honored.”

Jonathan Wynn, a cultural sociologist at Smith College, said pranks served to maintain social boundaries in groups as various as police departments and sororities. “And you gain status by being picked on in some ways,” he said. “It can be a kind of flattery, if you’re being brought in.”

In a paper published last year, three psychologists argued that the sensation of being duped — anger, self-blame, bitterness — was such a singular cocktail that it forced an uncomfortable kind of self-awareness. How much of a dupe am I? Where are my blind spots?

“As humans, we develop this notion of fairness as a part of our self-concept, and of course it’s extremely important in exchange relationships,” said Kathleen D. Vohs, a consumer psychologist at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. Dr. Vohs and her co-authors, Roy F. Baumeister of Florida State University and Jason Chin of the University of British Columbia, propose that the fear of being had is a trait that varies from near-obliviousness in some people to hypervigilance in others.

The researchers had 55 men and women play a computerized cooperation game and demonstrated that participants who felt they had been burned would go over the experience in their heads, playing out alternative versions of how they might have behaved.

“Being duped holds up this mirror to people,” Dr. Vohs said, “and may in fact show them where they are on the scale” — too trusting or too vigilant. Paranoia, too, has its costs, and it can sour relationships.

Running back the tape mentally, in this case meditating on how an embarrassing event might have turned out otherwise, is known to psychologists as counterfactual thinking. “The feeling of ‘I should have known better’ is the sort of counterfactual that serves to highlight your own shortcomings,” said Neal Roese, a psychologist at the University of Illinois. “A good deal of research has shown that these counterfactual insights can kick-start new behaviors, new self-exploration and, ultimately, self-improvement.”

Those observations may not leap to mind if you just showed up in go-go boots and an Elizabeth Taylor wig to a bogus 1970s cross-dressing party. Or if you fell for the e-mail message announcing you had won an award and should forward a draft of your acceptance speech to a supervisor.

But a good prank is, in the end, a simulation of a crisis and not the real thing. And it serves as a valuable reminder that not every precious box contains precisely the treasure you might expect.

The Writing is on the Wall

Moderator — Sat, 12 May 2007 00:16:24 +0000

From: katra.vox.com

On the other hand… what not to do:

A 13 year old boy was arrested and held without bail on suspicion of making a criminal threat after he allegedly wrote “Shooting Friday” as a prank on a bathroom wall at his school in Vista, California. Read the story here.

What not to do…

Joey Skaggs, Editor — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:22:10 +0000

Update to this story:
From AAP (Australia AP) via NEWS.com.au
April 16, 2007:

Judge Leo Hart today jailed Barnett for 15 months, with 12 months suspended for 15 months.

He said it was a “bizarre” case and that Barnett had the dual aim of getting recognition for his work and sending an anti-terrorism message.

“You’re an artist and believe yourself to be a good artist,” Judge Hart said.

“You believed that you had not been given the recognition that your work deserved and you sought to rectify this.”

Judge Hart said Barnett’s motives were not malicious but his behaviour was stupid and reckless.

He ordered Barnett to pay $6319 compensation to the police.

Original post:
From AAP via The Herald Sun
April 4, 2007:

A frustrated artist who wanted recognition for his work has pleaded guilty to creating a bomb hoax outside the National Gallery of Victoria.

Colin Douglas Barnett, 46, of suburban Cranbourne North, today pleaded guilty in the Victorian County Court to one count each of creating a bomb hoax and causing a public nuisance, and two counts of making a false report to police.

The court was told that on October 5, 2005, Barnett placed a clay vase-shaped sculpture, which he called a peace bomb, in Federation Square.

When he went back the next day, he saw it surrounded by chairs and tables, so he decided to move it to outside the National Gallery of Victoria.

Later that same day Mr Barnett made a call to Victoria Police to report a suspicious package.

The following morning on October 7, police were forced to close a section of busy St Kilda Road about 5am when the package was discovered by gallery security staff.

The bomb squad attended the scene and removed the package, which had “peace bomb” and “fragile: handle with care” written on it.

Barnett’s lawyer Sharon Kermath told the court that her client had been trying to get recognition and publicity as an artist.

“He was a frustrated artist who wanted to be recognised by the community,” Ms Kermath said.

“He wanted publicity to get into the art world,” she said.

“No major gallery was interested in his work.”

Ms Kermath said Barnett was remorseful for his actions and was “totally embarrassed” for what he did.

“The intention was to create a peace bomb because he was sick of hatred in the world,” she told the court.

“He wanted to donate the artwork (the peace bomb) to the National Gallery to represent peace.”

Prosecutor Damien Hannan told the court Barnett’s actions “caused havoc, significant disruption and alarm to the community”.

“What is clear is that the intention was to attract attention to himself,” Mr Hannan said.

“He knew it would create a disturbance.”

Mr Hannan said it was “ironic” that Barnett described his package as a peace bomb when he “caused terror” in the community.

He said a fine would be too lenient for Barnett.

“A clear message should be sent to the community that this won’t be tolerated,” Mr Hannan said.

Judge Leo Hart allowed Barnett to remain on bail pending a sentencing decision.

The Well Cooked Journalist: A Traditional Recipe

Joey Skaggs, Editor — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 04:55:54 +0000

“Is it not an art to deceive a trout with an artificial fly?” Walton

This delicious recipe for catching and cooking a journalist has been thoroughly tested. It features easy to find ingredients.

This is a very satisfying meal and although I have prepared it many times, one should not be concerned about repeating it too often. There are many ways to change the recipe and the results will always be pleasing.

There’s no need to worry about affecting the population of journalists. This is not an endangered species. It’s open season, no limit.

Although they can act like sharks or barracuda, they have also been compared to piranha. They are extremely territorial and defensive and will repeatedly attack either singularly or in large groups. You can usually find them behind hidden agendas, as they tend to conceal their politics and beliefs. However, they can be biased, opinionated, prejudiced, cynical, and even racist. At times, they take fact and contrive it so it bares little resemblance to reality.

But the media angler must not discriminate against them. Whoever bites and swallows the hook, is to be cooked. This includes pontificating corporate groupers as well as counter culture large mouth minnows. Even bottom feeders, like tabloid hacks and gossip mongers, are cookable.

As is true of rice or pasta, cooking times and taste vary based on the judgement, experience, competence, and sophistication of the chef.

ANGLING FOR THE JOURNALIST

Concoct a well thought-out story. TV news producers, writers and reporters are greatly under the influence of Hollywood. Hollywood is equally influenced by what appears in the news. Our culture is reflected in both of these forms of media. So it’s important to combine the necessary theatrical elements to attract them. In essence, give them what they want!

Dangling the line:

You may select from any of the following hooks, lures, and tasty baits. Mix and match for a formula that is sure to work.

Dependable hooks:

Choose the bait:

Reeling them in:

The media angler must be well prepared. Following is a list of critical ingredients and needed tools and utensils that must be in place to assure a successful meal.

Ingredients:

Tools and utensils:

Caution: This is a warning to all would-be media anglers. Care must be taken not to yank on the line before your catch has sufficiently bitten the hook. Nibbles frequently occur before swallowing the bait. Tease them until they gotta have it. One must always be patient. Once the hook is set, they usually jump in the boat. And believe it or not, many others simply follow suit. Often feeding frenzies occur and you might even catch more than you can handle.

But once caught they tend to be humorless and self righteous. They puff up and should be iced quickly. Or they will lie, slander, trivialize, and dismiss the angler so as to shift blame and not look ridiculous or stupid.

Although most look very attractive on the surface, they are unappetizing uncooked and will most likely leave a bad taste in one’s mouth if served raw. They actually resemble lawyers in this respect. But that’s another recipe.

Many claim serving them raw is preferred. Journalists are very easy prey for an intelligent, thinking person to eviscerate. They usually contain few guts, and the head and backbone are easily removed. I do, however, believe more pleasure is derived from, and a most pleasant feeling is obtained, by thoroughly cooking them before devouring them.

COOKING THE CATCH

Personal note to the chef:

Be sure you have no doubts about what you are doing and why. Cook for artistic satisfaction, not for profit. And never use ingredients that are illegal.

Recipe:

Take one arrogant, narcissistic, pretentious journalist. You may boil, broil, deep-fat fry, steam, bake, roast, grill or poach.

Precaution:

You can skin it or not. Just remember they usually have very thin skin which reddens quickly. Watch out for sharp teeth and a forked tongue. Do not use a pressure cooker. This could blow up in your face.

Combine the following:

Disclaimer:

Joey Skaggs is not responsible for any gastric disorder this dish may cause. It’s amazing what journalists will say once they’ve been cooked. They immediately start crying “foul play! I was had, and so were you, audience. This bad man targeted the wrong journalist. I’m actually the good guy. How sad for us all.” Or they get their colleagues to snap at you for them. Or they’ll make up their own stories and say they knew all along that it was a bated hook but went along just to see what would happen.

They will tell lies and try to make you look like the liar. They will associate you with crooks and con-men. They will tell you how this hurts because they will have to work harder to verify the facts as they can no longer trust any one. And they will wish you both legal and bodily harm.

End note:

One would think that one would grow tired of the sport because it no longer looks sporting. More like fishing out of barrel. But each catch is a new adventure and makes a great story. I personally have many trophy fish in my den. And, like all fishermen, I prefer exhibiting the big ones, but I’m proud of everyone that I’ve caught.

I’m just hoping that some day my tales will be more about the one that got away. That mythological, uncompromising, ethical, incorruptible journalist. An unbiased advocate that employs responsible journalistic practices. But for now, I’m going fishing.