Bewilderment and Illumination: Catch-22 and the Dark Humor of the 1960s

A Thesis Submitted to
The Faculty of the School of Communication
In Candidacy for the Degree of
Master of Arts in English

By
Kirsten Staaby
1 April 2009

Staaby ii
Liberty University
School of Communication
Master of Arts in English

Dr. Mark Schmidt

Dr. Mark Hamilton

Dr. Craig Hinkson

4/29/09
Date

4/29/09
Date

4/29/09
Date

Staaby iii
Table of Contents
Abstract _____________________________________________________________________iv
Introduction: Catch-22 as an Example of 1960s Dark Humor____________________________1
Chapter One: Toward a Definition of Dark Humor____________________________________4
Chapter Two: Dark Humor as a Reflection of the 1960s_______________________________23
Chapter Three: Bewilderment and Illumination: Catch-22 and the Dark Humor of the 1960s__44
Works Cited_________________________________________________________________70

Staaby iv

Abstract
It is often hard to deal with certain subjects in a way that would not be offensive or
painful. Dark humor is a popular and powerful way to deal with serious issues in a manner that is
both edifying and enjoyable. In his novel Catch-22, Joseph Heller deals with the atrocities of
war, and the subsequent effects it has on people and society as a whole. Hellers novel
incorporates the dark humor that became popular in the 1960s, and that was used by this
generation to deal with the tensions they faced in the political and cultural realms. There is much
that can be learned about America in the 1960s by studying the humor that so aptly reflected the
mindset of the culture of this time.

Staaby 1

Introduction: Catch-22 as an Example of 1960s Dark Humor

Staaby 2
Joseph Hellers Catch-22 is one of the most humorous novels of the 20th century. This
dark yet humorous novel presents a cynical view of the military and other institutions; a view
which many people seemed to share during the mid-20th century. While the novel is somewhat
narrowly focused on criticizing the American military and the bureaucracy that supports it, it is
still well received by a vast audience. The reason that such a cynical work could be so popular is
due to the humor Heller uses to convey his message. Catch-22 is effective because the reader
laughs at the absurdities of war and of the military in general. Even readers who may not feel so
strongly against the military and war are made to laugh and want to keep reading. There are three
main elements of the dark humor that Heller uses: absurdity, anxiety, and labyrinth imagery.
These elements make up the dark humor that is often found in the 1960s as they reflect the
culture in many ways, making this type of dark humor an effective tool for authors such as
Heller.
The use of humor to communicate a serious message is not unique to Catch-22, though
the novel proves to be an effective example of how such communication is accomplished. The
use of humor in this manner is often referred to as black humor, or dark humor. Dark humor
allows people to see a serious subject from a different perspective thus allowing readers more
freedom in how they deal with it. It is also less painful or uncomfortable when serious subjects
are dealt with in a humorous way. Dark humor deals with a wide range of emotions as it makes
people laugh while leading them to a greater understanding of a serious issue.
During the 1960s, many authors started using dark humor as a means of communicating
ideas that were actually very important to the culture. Since dark humor became so popular at
this time, it is important to study the culture in order to understand why certain elements are so
useful in dark humor literature. Historical criticism and authorial intent are of foremost

Staaby 3
importance in this study, in order better to understand the literature that was produced during this
time. Catch-22 will be used to provide an analytical study of the different aspects of dark humor
inasmuch as it provides multiple examples of the three main elements of 1960s dark humor.

Staaby 4

Chapter One: Toward a Definition of Dark Humor

Staaby 5
Humor is found in every culture in some form, whether it be literature, theater, or even
political propaganda. Dark humor or black humor (these terms are interchangeable) is a specific
type of humor which people can use as an outlet during times that are particularly stressful or
uncertain. Dark humor has been defined as writing that juxtaposes morbid or ghastly elements
with comical ones that underscore the senselessness or futility of life (black humour). Dark
humor novels deal with issues that are specific to a certain time, and seek to help people to cope
with those issues. Dark humor really gives two perspectives of an issue: one that shows the
serious side and one that shows a ridiculous and exaggerated version in order to make a point
about the serious side. Dark humor of the 1960s has its own unique qualities that specifically
reflect that culture. When studying the dark humor found in 1960s America, there are three main
elements that are found in most of the dark humor novels of this time: absurdities, anxiety, and
labyrinth imagery. These three elements make up the dark humor that became popular in the
1960s, which authors used to communicate important ideas during a time of great tension in the
United States.
While there are definitions for dark humor such as the one given above, it seems that
there is more to dark humor than simply that which underscores the senselessness or futility of
life. In his book Black Humor Fiction of the Sixties, Max F. Schulz points out that there has
never been a solid definition of dark humor. Perhaps this is because dark humor has much to do
with the culture in which it is used, and therefore it is sensitive to a certain period of time. Thus,
it is difficult to give dark humor a general definition. Schulz posits that Black Humor is a
phenomenon of the 1960s (5). He believes that there is a difference between the dark humor
found in novels of the 1960s compared to the dark comedies of Shakespeare, for example (5).

Staaby 6
The distinct elements of 1960s dark humor set it apart not only from regular humor, but also
from the dark humor of earlier times.
In order to try to form a good definition of dark humor, specifically 1960s dark humor, it
is important to first define humor in general. It is often hard to define what humor is, and how it
works. According to Israel Knox in his article Towards a Philosophy of Humor, it is hard to
determine any one definition that fully explains the concept of humor: so complex is the nature
of comedy and so varied are its manifestations that no theory is wholly adequate and no analysis
is exhaustive (541). Nevertheless, there are some elements of humor that philosophers generally
agree upon as being the reasons that people enjoy it. First, humor is enjoyable because it involves
intellectual play. In his text The Psychology of Humor, Rod A. Martin notes that humor
incorporates the pleasurable sensation of having ones thoughts oscillate back and forth between
two incompatible interpretations of a concept (7). The act of recognizing and assessing the
incongruities presented in a joke is mentally stimulating, and therefore enjoyable, which is
perhaps the primary reason for the enjoyment that is felt from humor.
Philosophers as far back as Aristotle have studied the idea of humor in order to define it
and explain its dynamics. For the purpose of this study, the terms humor and comedy will
be used synonymously. According to Aristotle in his work the Poetics, comedy 1 is the imitation
of characters of a lower type (4). Comedy was considered to be a way to mock those who were
viewed as less respectable than the average person. Aristotle notes that this genre had not always
been taken seriously, but eventually was used by highly regarded poets such as Homer (7).
Aristotle actually credits Homer with being the first to write a satirical poem, at least as far as
1

The traditional idea of the purpose of comedy is as follows: The comic artist's purpose is to hold a
mirror up to society to reflect its follies and vices, in the hope that they will, as a result, be mended
(comedy). Typically, comedies have a happy ending due to the characters recognition of his or her
follies and his or her attempts to be reconciled with society. In dark comedy, however, this is not the
case, as characters usually remain at odds with some aspect of society.

Staaby 7
written evidence can prove (7). Though comedy was used by even great poets such as Homer,
Aristotle still seemed to think it was inferior to the genre of tragedy because it was merely a form
of dramatising the ludicrous (7). Though comedy was not always thought to be as respectable
as tragedy, there are actually elements of comedy that make it more of a powerful tool than
tragedy is for communicating ideas.
The main purpose of comedy, according to Aristotle, is to mock characters that are
ridiculous in order to emphasize what is good and noble. By illustrating the ridiculous, comedy
helps the audience learn how things should be by showing how they should not be. Aristotle
states that comedy consists in some defect or ugliness which is not painful or destructive (9).
Thus, the audience should not feel pain or sadness as it might with a tragedy. By mocking
characters through the use of comedy, the audience is learning a lesson in a way that is
enjoyable. The defects or ugliness that Aristotle mentions are examples of incongruities in
characters that are inferior according to societal standards. When people recognize these
incongruities, feelings of humor arise. The audience makes connections between what is and
what should be, resulting in the mental stimulation that produces the enjoyable feelings of
humor.
The process of identifying incongruities is what often produces feelings of humor.
According to Otfried Hffe in his book Aristotle, jokes are effective because figuring out the
point is both enjoyable and instructive (40). In his book The Psychology of Humor, Rod A.
Martin concurs. He further explains the mental process that produces positive feelings from
humor:
To produce humor, an individual needs to mentally process information coming
from the environment or from memory, playing with ideas, words, or actions in a

Staaby 8
creative way, and thereby generating a witty verbal utterance or a comical
nonverbal action that is perceived by others to be funny. In the reception of
humor, we take in information (something someone says or does, or something
we read) through our eyes and ears, process the meaning of this information, and
appraise it as nonserious, playful, and humorous. (6)
The mental process of figuring out why something is humorous is the basis of the positive
feelings associated with humor. People enjoy figuring out meaning, and therefore jokes can be a
useful way of communicating ideas for the sake of edification. The idea of jokes being enjoyable
and instructive would certainly be useful to authors such as Joseph Heller who are trying to
engage an audience with a rather harsh message. If people did not find enjoyment in the dark
humor Heller uses, they would probably dismiss his novel as simply being ridiculous and overly
cynical. However, there is a sense of delight that comes with deciphering a deeper meaning in
the words of others, which is one of the main reasons that people enjoy jokes (Hffe 40).
Looking back at Aristotles idea of comedy, there seems to be much lacking in his
treatment of this topic. Though Aristotle lends a great deal of insight to the idea of tragedy, he
does not offer as much insight to comedy. In his article Aristotle on Comedy, Leon Golden
offers an interpretation of what he believes is Aristotles definition of comedy based on the
similarities between comedy and tragedy in the Poetics and the Rhetoric. Golden states that
Aristotle does give a definition of comedy, and that his definition of tragedy is actually based
upon it:
The first element of the definition of tragedy identifies tragedy as a form of
mimesis, and in the same section of the Poetics where this identification is made
(1447 a 13-16), comedy is also explicitly identified as a form of mimesis. (286)

Staaby 9
The fact that Aristotle indicates that both tragedy and comedy are forms of mimesis means the
two genres share similar qualities. These two genres are so similar that they are actually
dependent upon one another, in a sense. Aristotles definition of comedy is found in its
relationship to tragedy. Without one or the other genre, it may be hard to give a good definition
of either, and so Aristotle builds his theories of both genres upon their relationship to one
another.
Given this context, it is interesting that Aristotle discusses the element of catharsis in
tragedy but does not attribute it to comedy. Yet, Golden makes the observation that comedy
offers a cathartic experience to the audience, just as tragedy does. Catharsis, meaning
clarification, produces intellectual clarification to the audience through mimesis (288). Comedy,
as a form of mimesis, is intended to provide intellectual clarification as well. It provides
intellectual clarification by creating a copy of reality for people to observe and learn from.
Aristotle believes that the purpose of comedy is to point out things that are ridiculous, and to do
so in a way that does not cause the audience any real grief or pain. Golden points out the basic
elements of Aristotles definition of comedy:
(1) they must manifest some dimension of unjustified good fortune or of
inappropriate and incongruous behavior; and (2) such incidents (which can be
described as examples of error or ugliness) must be presented in such a way that
they do not generate any painful feelings on the part of the audience but are
clearly recognized as forms of the ridiculous. (288)
Though Aristotle does not believe that comedy should bring feelings of pain, he does seem to
think that errors of society need to be brought to light. Dark humor is a way to deal with very
serious or even tragic errors or events in a way that lessens painful feelings.

Staaby 10
While there is a clear distinction between tragedy and comedy, these two genres come
together in tragicomedy. Dark humor is closely related to tragicomedy, since it also possesses
certain characteristics that reflect both tragedy and comedy. Tragicomedy is characterized as
having a certain gravity of diction, the depiction of important public events, and the arousal of
compassionbut never carrying the action to tragedy's conclusion, and judiciously including
such comic elements as low-born characters, laughter, and jests (tragicomedy). Tragicomedy
is an interesting way of providing intellectual clarification because it incorporates tragic realities
but makes light of them so as to deal with them in a way that is not painful.
Comedy not only helps to deal with serious issues in a less painful manner, it also offers
multiple perspectives of a situation which makes it even more conducive to edification than
tragedy. In his book The Dark Comedy, J.L. Styan describes the intellectual benefit of integration
of comedy into a tragic play: Counterpointing the pathetic and the comic within the same
experience by demonstrating their object from more than one angle must have the effect of
sharpening the awareness of the onlooker (117). This combination illustrates tragicomedy and
how it provides an additional angle from which to view a situation. Tragedy elicits feelings of
sadness and despair, whereas comedy elicits feelings of mirth and hope. By combining these two
elements, the audience gains more insight as they are exposed to a wide range of emotions.
The 16th century humanist Desiderius Erasmus recognized the fact that comedy provides
an interesting perspective from which to view serious matters. In his work The Praise of Folly,
Erasmus personifies Folly, as she tells of her characteristics and why she is so popular. In his
introduction to the work, Erasmus discusses how several ancient writers used humor as an
edifying element in their works, and how it actually helped make the point in their serious

Staaby 11
studies. Erasmus feels that to leave humor for only nonserious matters would be truly
unfortunate:
Every other profession is entitled to a bit of leisurewhats so terrible if scholars
take a little time off for play, especially if their follery leads to something slightly
more serious? Some jokes can be managed in such a way that a reader who isnt
altogether thick of nose can profit by themmore, perhaps, than from the
pompous formal arguments of certain people we know. (5)
Erasmus believes that scholars should be able to present their arguments in a humorous manner.
In fact, he believes that readers learn more if humor is used to present an argument because just
as its the height of triviality to treat serious matters in a trivial way, so theres nothing more
delightful than finding that some trifles have been managed so that they turn out far from trivial
(5). Erasmus hopes that his readers will recognize the humor in his presentation of Folly, and
therefore learn a great deal because they are captivated by the delivery of this message. If
something is of great importance, it can be treated humorously so as not to bore the scholars
audience, and so that the audience has the pleasure of figuring out the deeper meaning in the
apparent trivialities.
Folly is certainly a negative characteristic, yet Erasmus lets his audience figure out his
true meaning from the incongruities he presents. In his article Erasmus Praise of Folly and the
Spirit of Carnival, Donald Gwynn Watson illustrates the similarities between plays of folly and
the Carnival holiday. Carnival is a holiday that originated in the Roman Catholic Church as a
celebration which precedes the Lenten season (carnival). Watson makes this connection to
show how both folly and carnival humor, which play upon the inversion of established order,
create a sense of freedom from the structure of everyday life (333). Humor is a similar inversion

Staaby 12
of established order, which provides an escape from the norm as it presents people and events in
a manner that is incongruous to reality. Erasmuss portrayal of Folly is of course an inversion of
what she actually is, yet this inversion helps the reader to see the true message.
The idea of an inversion of established order brings to mind the fool in Sir Thomas
Mores Utopia. Erasmus was a friend of More, to whom the introduction to The Praise of Folly
was actually written. More played upon Erasmuss ideas in his own work with the character of
the jester. The jester suggests that all old people should be sent to monasteries and convents in
order to relieve the town of the burden of supporting them. Many in the group to whom he was
speaking thought he was being serious and actually agreed with his ideas. A few realized that he
was joking, and saw the real message he was trying to convey. Some of the jesters audience
clearly did not recognize the absurdity in what he was proposing, and so they became bigger
fools than the fool himself. Dark humor can result in this sort of misunderstanding if the
audience does not recognize the humorous intent behind a statement or joke by recognizing the
inversion of truth.
The fact that humor can be used to communicate important ideas and that the fool can
truly be the wise one brings to question why jokes work the way they do. In his work Jokes and
their Relation to the Unconscious, Sigmund Freud discusses the nature of jokes and how they
work to produce humor. It has already been discovered that the act of figuring out a joke
produces positive feelings in people, as there is a sense of delight in discovering deeper meaning.
Besides this fact, there are many other aspects of joking and humor to be considered, since there
are many different kinds of jokes. Freud first distinguishes between jokes that have a purpose
and message and those that are merely for entertainment. Freud distinguishes them as
conceptual jokes and innocent jokes, respectively. Conceptual jokes have a definite purpose

Staaby 13
whereas innocent jokes are usually just plays on words and sound (91). Freud notes that this
distinction is not necessarily the rule in all cases, though it is accurate much of the time (91). It
is possible for an innocent joke to have a deeper meaning, though it may not be as apparent as
the meaning behind the conceptual joke. A joke is merely a way of communicating an idea: the
substance of a joke is independent of the joke and is the substance of the thought (92). The joke
is only funny because of the deeper thought behind it. The thought is there without the joke;
however, the thought is more effectively communicated through the joke. Understanding the
different types of jokes will help clarify how they work to convey deeper meaning.
The main distinction between the innocent joke and the conceptual joke is that the
purpose of the former is mainly to bring pleasure to the hearer while the purpose of the latter is
to make the hearer contemplate an idea. One way in which ideas are communicated through
joking is by first causing confusion, and later revealing the true meaning. Freud refers to the
scholar Theodore Lipps who says that jokes serve their purpose when one finds sense in
nonsense (qtd. in Freud 11). Freud describes this idea of bewilderment and illumination as
being an effective means of communicating with humor, as it is a way of giving meaning to that
which appears to be meaningless (12). People experience a sense of delight when they discover
meaning and find they are enlightened by something they did not expect to learn from at all.
The sense of discovering an unexpected truth from a joke describes the idea of
bewilderment and illumination that Freud mentions. The idea of bewilderment and illumination
draws upon the incongruities found in most jokes that reflect truth about a society or situation. In
his article Incongruity in humor: Root cause or epiphenomenon?, Tony Veale discusses
whether incongruities in jokes are what cause humor or if incongruities in jokes are the construct
of the listener after hearing a joke. Veale explains that there is often a need to go back and

Staaby 14
reevaluate the first part of a joke, in order to recognize the incongruity, and thereby recognize the
humor in it. In Catch-22, for example, flashbacks are necessary because the structure of the
novel often leaves the reader bewildered until Heller revisits a scene from a different perspective,
illuminating what really happened. This is usually a humorous point in the novel, as the new
perspective often explains an event that did not quite make sense earlier.
Bewilderment and illumination often come about due to the use of absurdities, which at
first appear to be nonsense, but actually reveal some sort of truth upon further consideration.
Dark humor often incorporates elements of the absurd, which is appropriate given the fact that
both tend to deal with serious issues in bizarre ways. The absurd is defined as that which calls
into question the rationality of human beings (comedy). Literature is an outlet through which
people can express social discontent in an interesting way, often using absurdities as a way to get
the readers attention and to emphasize a point. Catch-22 is among several novels of its time
period that use absurdity to call into question the sanity of political leaders and social
institutions. Heller uses absurdity in his depiction of incompetent military leaders, pointless goals
of the military, as well as in the complicated structure of the novel. The reader is bewildered by
the absurdities, but ultimately realizes that Heller has a purpose for using them.
Absurdity is not always recognized as an important aspect of humor, but in the 20th
century this style became a way for people to use ridicule to make a point. Typically plays are
associated with absurdity due to the rising popularity of the Theatre of the Absurd, though the
20th century saw many novels that followed a similar style. In his article Two Novelists of the
Absurd, Joseph J. Waldmeir notes that Joseph Heller and Ken Kesey were two American
novelists that made a conscious effort to transport the novel into the realm of the absurd (192).
Postmodern literature often breaks the rules of literature, and so a novel as absurd as Catch-22

Staaby 15
fits this time period. Not only did it make a point by being unique in its design, but the absurd
novel defined the mindset of a generation. Heller and Kesey, as well as other authors from their
time, pushed the limits of what was considered normal in order to produce some of the most
influential satirical literature of the 20th century.
Though humor and satire were respected tools in the literature of the 20th century, earlier
generations did not always regard them so highly. During the 18th century, humor was often seen
as negative and aggressive (Martin 22). Humor was at this time synonymous with ridicule
which was viewed as cruel and therefore rude (22). At one point during the 18th century, ridicule
became an effective method for debating, and was actually considered to be entertaining in some
contexts (22). Though there may still be some concern over the propriety of a joke in a given
setting, there seems to be much more of an accepting attitude towards joking in the 20th and 21st
centuries than in the past. Of course, even today not everything is permissible, even in a joking
context. Certain jokes that are perceived as racist or sexist, for example, would be unacceptable
today; however, it seems that there is less and less that is considered inappropriate, especially in
regard to mocking authority. Today, if people see a way to make a point through humor, they
take full advantage of it, even if it does offend some.
Humor often makes an audience much more receptive to controversial ideas than if they
are presented in a serious manner. According to Karen OQuin and Joel Aronoff in their article
Humor as a Technique of Social Influence, humor literature shows that using appropriate
humor increases the likeability of the communicator (349). By using humor, Heller appeals to
his audience and is able to criticize much more about society than he would be able to had his
novel been written in a serious tone. People enjoy jokes and enjoy the process of comprehension
that takes place when figuring out why something is funny. The sheer enjoyment of humor

Staaby 16
makes people much more open to the content matter being presented. If Heller were to have
written his novel in a serious tone in 1961, people would likely have been put off by such
negativity and harsh criticism of respected institutions. While cynicism is still present in the
novel, it is masked by a comic faade, making the message in the novel more approachable and
more enjoyable to the reader. Humor does not necessarily take away from the serious nature of
the message being presented; the message is still there, it is simply presented to the audience in a
more appealing manner.
Satire is an effective way to communicate feelings of discontent towards certain social
issues. Dark humor is often associated with satire as the subject of a satirical work can be rather
serious or grim, yet is being dealt with in a joking manner. An example of this is Jonathan
Swifts A Modest Proposal written in 1729. To suggest eating young children as means of
solving a societys economic crisis is grotesque if considered seriously. In fact, many of Swifts
contemporaries did not know how to interpret his essay, and considered it offensive. The fact
that even cannibalism can be the subject of a humorous work illustrates the freedom that humor
gives a writer. While Swifts proposal is absurd, it makes his point about the problem of
unemployment and the economical burden of those unemployed people who have children.
Because he used humor, Swift was able to address a serious issue and avoid punishment for
speaking out about social matters. Had he written about his disapproval of the countrys
leadership or its methods of handling such a crisis in a serious manner, he could very easily have
been imprisoned or punished in some other way. By making fun of the serious issues at hand, an
author is liberated as he or she finds that there is a much better reception of his or her ideas.
While dark humor is certainly a way for authors to speak out against government and
social issues, political leaders have taken advantage of its influence as well. Martin notes that

Staaby 17
humor became an acceptable means of communicating political ideas not just for the people, but
for the political leaders as well: During the twentieth century, the sense of humor also took on
sociopolitical connotations and was used for propaganda purposes (25). In his book Radio
Goes to War: The Cultural Politics of Propaganda during World War II, Gerd Horton discusses
the sense of unity brought about through humorous propaganda being broadcast over the radio:
Most important in the context of the war was the comedians ability to unite the
public behind Americas war effortThis cohesive role was one of radio
comedys main functions during World War II. People laughed with each other at
home and with the live audiences, and listeners knew there were millions of
people tuned in to the same program that they were hearing. (136)
Martin points out that Americans saw a sense of humor as a positive contrast to the serious
dictatorships that were in place overseas (25). It was considered to be an American virtue,
having to do with tolerance and democracy (25). There was even a change in the sense of
humor of politicians, who began to see humor as a positive attribute, rather than a sign of
weakness (25). If a presidential candidate tried using humor in the 19th century, he might have
been viewed as weak or incompetent. By the middle of the 20th century a sense of humor
became almost necessary for a presidential candidate to gain popularity.
Besides being an effective tool to deal with political situations, humor is also an effective
way of dealing with anxiety. The sense of underlying anxiety is another key element in the dark
humor of the 1960s. Martin states that humor helps unpleasant or stressful situations seem less
daunting by making light of them and turning them into something to be laughed at (19). In
this way, humor diminishes the threatening appearance of those events that seem to be
compromising ones well-being. Heller uses this technique by making war and the military seem

Staaby 18
so absurd that one cannot help but laugh at the characters and situations he presents against the
backdrop of a life-threatening scenario. Hellers themes were certainly relevant to the time in
which Catch-22 was written, and are also relevant to just about any generation (as war has sadly
been all too familiar to just about every time and culture). Catch-22 was no doubt helpful to the
younger generation living in 1961, whose members were dealing with the tensions of the Cold
War and whose parents would have experienced World War II first hand.
There are several types of humor that can be considered subcategories of dark humor,
each of which can be used to deal with specific types of situations. One of the most notable
forms of dark humor (and perhaps most relevant to this topic) is that of gallows humor, which
reflects the anxieties of the people using it. This type of humor became most notable during
Hitlers dictatorship and immediately after. According to Antonin J. Obrdlik in his article
Gallows Humor- a Sociological Phenomenon, gallows humor arises in connection with a
precarious or dangerous situation (709). Gallows humor is the product of those who are
resigned to the fact that they are or will be the victims of a particularly grim situation, and so the
only way really to cope is through humor. What makes a sense of humor specifically gallows
humor is that it actually jokes about the grim situation as though it were not very serious at all.
Dark humor (specifically 1960s dark humor) contains an element of gallows humor as it often
deals with situations that are truly grim or life-threatening, such as war.
While there is a lack of a sense of hope for those who use gallows humor, there is still a
sense of liberation and hope in dark humor. Martin notes that by poking fun at the ineptness
and stupidity of oppressors, gallows humor can be a subversive activity that allows one to gain a
sense of freedom from their power (49). Though a situation is hopeless, people are able to cope

Staaby 19
by allowing themselves to have this image that the oppressing force is inferior by making it
appear ridiculous. Obrdlik illustrates how this was effective during Hitlers dictatorship:
In one of his recent broadcasts from London, President Bene of Czechoslovakia
reassured the Czech people that things are going better because the rest of the
world is beginning to ridicule naziism and its leaders, an action which should be
taken as a good sign by the oppressed and as the beginning of the end by the
Nazis. (711)
The fact that the world was beginning to laugh at the Nazi regime ultimately takes power away
from the Nazis. There is nothing fearful about that which is not taken seriously. The humor is
found in how absurd the actions of the Nazis were, which other nations were recognizing and
taking action to stop. In looking back at how anyone could be so brainwashed as to do what the
Nazis did, people may use dark humor to make fun of those who took part in such atrocities. The
Nazi regime became something to be ridiculed, and therefore its power was taken away,
liberating, in a sense, those who were subjected to its oppression.
Dark humor relies upon a specific audience in order for it to truly be appreciated. Schulz,
for example, believes that dark humor in general is a product of the 1960s, and is therefore best
appreciated by that generation. Since dark humor tends to be rather topical, it is usually
necessary for one to have some sort of background information in order to get the joke.
According to J.L. Styan in his book The Dark Comedy, empathy is an important part of a
spectator or readers experience with a play or text (252). Styans main concern is the theatre,
and the importance of the audience being able to interact with and empathize with the characters
on the stage in a tragicomedy. The audience has vicarious experiences through theatre and
novels; however it helps if it is familiar with the situation and the anxieties of the intended

Staaby 20
audience (256). For this reason background information is useful to the reader of a novel such as
Catch-22. In some way, the characters and events taking place need to be familiar. Therefore,
gallows humor, though perhaps much more meaningful to a person who is part of the intended
audience, can still be interesting to an outsider.
Another interesting type of humor that falls under the category of gallows humor is
Jewish humor. It makes sense that Jewish humor is closely associated with gallows humor,
given the history of the Jewish people. The anxieties that the Jewish people faced during World
War II are certainly appropriate material for the gallows humor that became a part of Jewish
humor tradition. Though there is the element of gallows humor, Jewish humor tended to be more
self-deprecating than most other forms of humor. In his article The Myth of Jewish Humor,
Dan Ben-Amos discusses the self-critical form of humor that began with Freud. He notes that
in Jewish jokes, Freud suggested, the narrator is also the butt of his story (112). Jokes that are
self-deprecating are somewhat dark in that they usually point out the negative aspects of a person
or community. Ben-Amos quotes Martin Grotjahn, saying aggression turned against the self
seems to be an essential feature of the truly Jewish joke. It is as if the Jew tells his enemies: You
do not need to attack us. We can do that ourselvesand even better (qtd. in Ben-Amos 114).
The idea that people can make fun of themselves gives them a sense of superiority or at least of
safety against their perceived enemies.
Given Hellers own experience in World War II, it seems as though he is mocking
himself, as he mocks the institutions of which he was a part. This reflects the self-ridiculing
nature of Jewish humor. Heller does not represent his Jewish heritage with Catch-22, but rather
he ridicules his American heritage as if to let the world know that he is aware of what his
nations bureaucracies and twisted values look like from the outside. By ridiculing American

Staaby 21
institutions, Heller may in fact be trying to save them from humiliation. On the other hand, he
may have given up on saving the face of America, and really is just trying to make fun of the
things about his country that he finds ridiculous.
The final element of dark humor of the 1960s is labyrinth imagery. This idea actually
began with European authors such as Jorge Luis Borges and Alain Robbe-Grillet. Surrealist
novelists such as Borges and Robbe-Grillet sought a new way to express ideas in a postmodern
society. The labyrinth became a standard image in the works of the authors, as they tried to
convey the nebulousness of postmodern values and sense of truth. According to Allene M.
Parker in the article Drawing Borges: A Two-Part Invention on the Labyrinths of Jorge Luis
Borges and M.C. Esher, the labyrinth is defined as an intricate enclosure or structure
containing a series of winding passages hard to follow without losing ones way (12). Parker
goes on to note that the labyrinth only has one opening that serves as both the entrance and the
exit (12). In this way, the labyrinth is a construct in which a person explores different paths, but
returns to where he or she began.
Freuds definition of jokes represents the labyrinth image to a certain degree. People are
presented with the joke, and then must explore different meanings before going back to the
original comment or phrase. The humor comes from exploring ideas, and then coming back to
where one began in order to apply what was found. The labyrinth is also a good representation of
dark humor, as it is often associated with somewhat dark imagery in stories. Dark humor novels
of the 1960s use labyrinth imagery in several ways. The most obvious way in which labyrinth
themes are apparent in works such as Catch-22 for example, is in their structure. Many dark
humor novels of the 1960s are written in a way that explores different perspectives or are written

Staaby 22
in a way that can be difficult to follow. In this way the labyrinth imagery is not only present in
the humor of a novel, but also in its structure or themes.
Dark humor is more complex than humor in general, as it ventures away from that which
is simply comical and into the realm of the tragic. Since both comedy and tragedy are meant to
be edifying through intellectual clarification, or catharsis, tragicomedy is even more so as it gives
two different perspectives. Dark humor models tragicomedy as it depicts ludicrous characters
and ideas as well as those that are noble, or at least good, but less than ideal. In dark humor this
is conveyed through absurdities, which contrasts the ludicrous and the ideal.
Freud explains how bewilderment and illumination play an important role in joke telling,
creating a sense of confusion that makes the enlightenment to follow even more amusing. This of
course is dependent upon an audience that can relate to or is at least familiar with the subject of
the joke. Ultimately dark humor provides multiple perspectives on an idea and uses
bewilderment and illumination to reflect society that in turn reveals a great deal of truth. Through
the use of absurdities, people laugh at what should not be, and recognize what should. People can
cope with anxiety by turning serious issues into something non-threatening and comical. Dark
humor also allows for the exploration of ideas in a labyrinthine manner, which provides several
perspectives to an idea. Dark humor is a way to communicate important ideas in a manner that is
both amusing and edifying. Novelists of the 1960s realized this and took advantage of a style that
not only captured the essence of their culture, but also spoke to it.

Staaby 23

Chapter Two: Dark Humor as a Reflection of the 1960s

Staaby 24
While some novels are not recognized until years after publication, Catch-22 was
immediately popular when it was first published in 1961. In the preface to the 1994 edition of
Catch-22 Joseph Heller recalls the reviews printed the day after the publication of his first novel.
At least twenty-one noteworthy individuals offered praise for this unusual new book, with one
critic stating that it was the best novel to come out of anywhere in years (Nelson Algren qtd
in Heller 1). One of the reasons that Hellers work was immediately popular was that it gave
voice to the sentiments of that generation. For reasons cited in the first chapter, the satirical
nature of the dark humor found in the novel also aided in its reception. Dark humor became an
increasingly popular device in the 1960s, not only in literature but also in television and radio.
The dark humor of the 1960s, incorporates the three characteristics of dark humor: absurdities
(bewilderment and illumination), anxiety, and labyrinth imagery. With the rapidly growing
economy and the possibility of World War III in the near future, the 1960s countercultural
generation needed a way to express the anxiety and frustrations they faced, which Joseph Heller
encapsulates in Catch-22.
In further developing a definition of dark humor, it is important to look closely at the
society for which it was written. Schulz makes the distinction that dark humor developed not
only in the 1960s, but in 1960s America. The reason he believes this is not only because the dark
humor novelists he cites are mainly American, but also because the American novel . . . is more
receptive to the inconclusive exploration of ontological and epistemological questions of being,
growth, and knowledge (14). In other words, the American audience was able to accept works
that did not necessarily come to any conclusion about anything. It was acceptable simply to
explore the questions of life and knowledge and not give any answers. As the counterculture of

Staaby 25
the 1960s began to grow, it became increasingly acceptable simply to question traditional
truth. The important thing was that people were beginning to question.
The countercultural revolution can perhaps be said to have its roots in the relatively
comfortable lifestyle enjoyed by many middle-class Americans. After World War II, the
improved economic situation provided Americans with many luxuries they did not have before.
Despite the improving economic conditions, there was a growing sense of discontent among
some people, particularly the youth of America. These teens and young adults began to feel that
materialism had become a problem, and they wanted to disconnect themselves from the
corruption they believed it caused within society. According to David Farber and Beth Bailey in
The Columbia Guide to America in the 1960s, these youths wanted to break free from
mainstream America and even tried to set up their own political and cultural systems (59).
The views of these youths stemmed from the beat generation of the 1950s. People like Allen
Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, and William Burroughs rejected societys structures and sought
enlightenment by going against social norms. The beats influenced the culture around them
through their controversial lifestyles and the literature that told their stories. The hippie
generation that followed was largely a product of the countercultural revolution that began with
the beat generation.
The beat generation began in New York City, and would later move across the country to
San Francisco. In his book The Unraveling of America: A History of Liberalism in the 1960s,
Allen J. Matusow notes that the beats had their roots in the black hipsters of the 1930s (280).
These were black men in northern cities, many of whom migrated from the south after World
War I. They used drugs, were sexually promiscuous, and were bitter toward the white man
(which can be viewed as mainstream society) (280). Jazz music was extremely influential to

Staaby 26
this group, as it reflected the hipster sense of uninhibited spontaneity. A white man named
Herbert Huncke became involved in the hipster movement while living in Chicago. He took the
drug use and promiscuity to the extreme, using these as an escape from reality. He first coined
the term beat in describing his weariness from life (281). Huncke reflected the attitudes of
those who would follow after him, as they too would become weary of the mainstream, seeking
enlightenment and kicks in a world they felt was consumed by materialism.
In 1945, Huncke was introduced to many of the people with whom the beat generation is
commonly associated. William Burroughs, Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, and John Clellon
Holmes were the writers and intellectuals who became engaged in the hipster movement with
Huncke as they shared some of the same ideals and desires to live in resistance to mainstream
culture (281). These people would be the pioneers of a culture that wanted to discover more to
life than what society offered them. They questioned the norm and pushed the limits however
they could as they became the counterculture that began influencing the youth of America.
Literature was seen as an influential tool for the counterculture. It became an outlet of
expression capable of shaping the minds of generations to come. Many of the beat writers of the
1950s began to change not only the minds of their readers, but also to change the face of
literature itself. Confessional poetry became a popular mode of expression, as well as stream of
consciousness writing found in novels such as On the Road by Jack Kerouac. Confessional
poetry tends to be autobiographical, and is most often associated with writers such as Robert
Lowell, Allen Ginsberg, Anne Sexton, and Sylvia Plath. Though confessional poetry is very
much focused on the individual writer, the poetry reflects the time and culture in which he or she
lives. In his article Impersonal Personalism: The Making of a Confessional Poetic, Steven K.
Hoffman explores the characteristics of confessional poetry, stating that it incorporates both

Staaby 27
nineteenth and twentieth century elements that simultaneously make this type of literature both
personal and universal:
Contemporary confessional poetry is a phenomenon that synthesizes the
inclination to personalism and consciousness building of the nineteenth century
with the elaborate masking techniques and objectifications of the twentieth, a
phenomenon which, under the veneer of self-absorption unprecedented even
among the Romantics, makes notable inroads into myth and archetype, as well as
social, political, and cultural historiography (688)
Confessional poetry and stream of consciousness writing had a way of turning the author into
this sort of myth or legend, while at the same time relying on mostly factual information to tell a
story. Much can be learned about the beat culture by reading On the Road or the poetry of Allen
Ginsberg. These works, among others, tell the story of a generation that started the
countercultural revolution.
The confessional writers believed that society corrupted people, and so by focusing on
the individual, they were separating themselves from the rest of the world and creating their own
subculture. The hippie generation that followed took the ideas of these confessional writers and
beat poets and brought them to a new level. Hippies were very much in favor of breaking away
from mainstream society in order to live in community with others who believed in the same
values. They wanted to focus on their individuality and to escape the restrictions placed on them
by the Establishment. According to Matusow, Hippies mocked liberal politicians, scorned
efforts to repair the social order, and repudiated bourgeois society. In so doing, they became
cultural radicals opposed to established authority (277). Hippies were not liberals, but rather
they were radicals who felt that social reform was a lost cause. The only way to live life the way

Staaby 28
it was meant to be lived was to break free from mainstream society and discover ones own sense
of truth and being.
In many ways the hippie culture of the 1960s was reflected in the dark humor of the time.
One of the qualities of 1960s dark humor that can be found in this culture is the idea of
bewilderment and illumination. The hippie culture believed it was important to try to reach a
greater sense of consciousness, which they tried to achieve through the use of hallucinogenic
drugs. In this way, the drugs produce the absurdities that the hippies see, creating a bewildering
situation. Afterwards, there is a sense of illumination, as though a greater consciousness has been
achieved. The accounts of drug use usually end with people feeling that they have been
enlightened. Allen Ginsberg was first introduced to certain hallucinogenic drugs while at
Timothy Learys house in 1960 (Matusow 289). Timothy Leary was a former psychiatrist who
had given up on conventional practices in order to experiment with drugs such as LSD as a
means by which to help people free their minds (288-289). Ginsbergs experience at Timothy
Learys house resulted in his discovery that he was God, and that it was time to commence
with a psychedelic revolution (289).
The use of hallucinogenic drugs reflects the idea of bewilderment and illumination that
was present in the dark humor novels of the 1960s. A good example of bewilderment and
illumination in the 1960s culture is found in Ken Kesey and his famous acid test. Kesey got
together with the Grateful Dead to put on shows in which the music was so noisy and frenzied
that it alone defied reason (292). On top of that, free LSD was distributed among the concert
goers, leading to an experience that was bewildering to say the least. Kesey believed he was
bringing an enlightening experience to these people by exposing them to the chaos of a cosmic
consciousness through psychedelic music and drugs (292). There are numerous accounts of

Staaby 29
people using LSD in the 1960s (as it took a while for it to become illegal). Whether legal or not,
many people, such as former psychiatrist Timothy Leary or Ken Kesey, felt that the drug was a
powerful tool in helping people transcend their circumstances in order to achieve a greater sense
of being (292).
Another way in which the culture was reflected in the type of dark humor that was
emerging was the sense of anxiety that was present. There was especially a sense of anxiety
brought on by the possibility of war during this time. The 1960s generation was caught between
two major wars. Their parents would have experienced World War II (some of the younger
generation may have memory of it too, depending upon when they were born) and they were
feeling the tension of the possibility of World War III between the U. S. and Soviet Russia (that
war never came, but the Vietnam War came in the mid 1960s). The 1960s culture reflected this
tension because of how it seemed constantly surrounded by war, or at least the threat of war in
the future. When Lyndon Johnson took the presidential office after John F. Kennedys
assassination, tensions continued to grow as he began sending more of Americas troops to
Vietnam. Dark humor surrounding the war and the military in general arose during this time, in
literature as well as television programs. The comedy used in these works reflects the anxiety of
the times, and how humor served as an outlet during seemingly hopeless situations.
Labyrinth imagery is the third aspect of the dark humor of the 1960s, which is a recurring
theme within the literature and music of the times. While it may not be an intentional theme for
all authors, certainly some of the literature of the 1960s incorporates labyrinth themes. Jorge
Luis Borges, though a European writer of the 1960s, is one author in particular that emphasizes
labyrinth themes intentionally. In one of his works, The Library of Babel, Borges describes the
universe as a library that has infinite volumes which each contain information that directs the

Staaby 30
reader to another volume. There is a never-ending series of information that ultimately answers
no questions, but rather keeps referring the reader elsewhere until he ends up where he began.
Borges work seems to indicate there is no truth or definite point to life, as he shows his
characters faced with endless possibilities of truth that all lead to the discovery of yet another
path that can be taken. Ultimately, the labyrinth leads back to the beginning of the journey,
perhaps underscoring a sense of futility in trying to discover absolute truth.
The surrealist style of Borgess works would also fit with the absurd qualities of some of
the other literature being published in the 1960s. Heller certainly uses absurdities, and also uses
elements of a labyrinth motif in the structure of Catch-22. It is written in a chaotic form that
often goes back to scenes that have already taken place in order to shed a new light on them. The
labyrinth in this case represents the idea that there is not one absolute way of looking at a
situation or concept of truth, which fits the 1960s philosophy of questioning traditional thinking
and having the freedom to explore different paths.
Literature was not the only medium for communicating the need to free ones mind and
discover individual truth. The music of the 1960s was also extremely influential to the
counterculture in this regard. Psychedelic rock groups like the Grateful Dead created a sort of
surreal type of music through its chaotic or bewildering style. Of course, part of the surreal
experience with the Grateful Dead was due to the amount of drug use associated with their
shows. According to David Fraser and Vaughan Black in their article Legally Dead: The
Grateful Dead and American Legal Culture, the Grateful Dead and drugs have become, for
many, virtually synonymous (22). The chaotic style of acid rock (as this type of music came
to be known) was in itself a way of pushing limits and making new discoveries in musical style,
and the drugs were a way for fans to be more receptive to this new sound.

Staaby 31
Another driving force in the music industry during the 1960s was folk rock. At the
forefront of this genre was Bob Dylan. Dylans music was influential because it was personal
and reflective, and expressed the anxieties of the culture. His song Blowin in the Wind
questions the absurdities of war, while many of his other songs explore his personal life and
struggles (Matusow 295). Dylans music reflected both the concerns of his culture as well as the
confessional style of writing that was so popular at this time.
Bob Dylan was not only influential to the culture but also to fellow musicians who were
shaping the culture. One of the bands that were greatly influenced by the personal lyrics and
truthfulness of Dylans music was the Beatles. In turn, the Beatles were an extremely influential
force in pop culture during the 1960s. Their music not only influenced the culture, but it also
reflected it. Some of the songs that they wrote during the late 60s seemed totally nonsensical.
Songs like I am the Walrus and Come Together were, according to John Lennon, nothing
more than unrelated, random ideas put together to music (Turner 188). The lyrics to the song I
am the Walrus are a series of unconnected thoughts and allusions. It is loosely based on a
childrens rhyme, and Lennon wrote it as a response to hearing that a school teacher was having
his English class analyze Beatles lyrics (Turner 187). He wanted to prove that some of his songs
had no meaning and were not meant to be analyzed in a classroom. The idea of creating
something which has no definite meaning fits in with the hippie idea that anything goes and that
people need to free their minds and discover their own truth. Come Together was actually first
written as a campaign song for Timothy Leary when he decided to run for the office of Governor
of California in 1969. His campaign slogan was Come together, join the party which Leary
said referred to a celebration of life more than a political party (Turner 188). The Beatles spoke

Staaby 32
to and influenced the hippie era, not just through their lyrics, but through everything they stood
for as well.
One way in which the Beatles continued to be influential was by incorporating Eastern
beliefs into their music. After studying in India under the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the Beatles
believed they came back enlightened. Their study of Transcendental Meditation led them to
want to focus on more personal matters in their music. John Lennon was particularly interested
in the act of self-exploration and confessional lyrics in the songs he was writing with Paul
McCartney in 1965 (Spitz 586). The Beatles album Rubber Soul was the product of this
confessional song-writing, and it joined the ranks of albums of the psychedelic rock genre, which
spoke to a generation that used this music as a way to escape from the strictures of society.
All of the confusion and nonsensical nature that seemed to permeate the music industry
carried over into some of the literature of the time as well. For this reason, the 1960s generation
accepted Hellers novel with open arms. The hippie generation saw Hellers novel as an example
of free speech and expression for a worthy cause. According to Stephen Potts in his book Catch22: Antiheroic Antinovel, the activist readers of the 1960s . . . found their confirmation in the
pointed social satires of Heller, Vonnegut, and Kesey (8). Literature that questioned social
norms and pushed the limits of convention helped to motivate those who were bent on making a
statement and taking a stand for the purpose of effecting change. Potts contrasts this with the
novels of authors such as J.D. Salinger and Jack Kerouac, which were geared toward the more
quietly rebellious college students who recognized a desire for change, but were not the ones
burning draft cards and marching through the streets with picket signs (7). Novels by authors
such as Heller, Vonnegut, and Kesey were for the people who were actively trying to change

Staaby 33
things, not just sitting around imagining the ideal. These novels were for doers, not just
dreamers.
Many readers immediately assume that Catch-22 is an antiwar novel, though Heller
claims that this is not the books main purpose. Heller satirizes many aspects of society, but
nonetheless, in the eyes of the youth of the time Heller and his novel were most identified with
the antiwar issue (Potts 8). The fact that Heller was actually a bombardier in the U.S. Army Air
Corps explains his vivid imagery of Yossarians missions and his overt parody of the military in
general. Heller is obviously concerned about the military, but also focuses on other social
dilemmas he feels need to be addressed.
Timing is an important aspect in considering the reception of a work like Catch-22.
Heller could not have planned a better time to publish his novel as political circumstances led to
the Vietnam War, which led many to embrace Hellers cynical treatment of war and other
institutions of the nation (Potts 7). Catch-22 provided criticism for certain social aspects of
American society during a time when social activists were against anything associated with the
Establishment (7). As a college professor, Heller would have been aware of the protest and
debate that went on at many campuses. While Catch-22 is set during WWII, many people were
applying Hellers ideas to their time, and to the war in Vietnam.
Though Hellers novel clearly has a message that transcends time, he very much draws
upon personal experience to write Catch-22. Perhaps Hellers most significant experience that
would have inspired his novel was his military service. As the author of an antiwar novel,
firsthand experience is certainly useful for Heller as he sets the scene for his story. At the age of
19, Heller enrolled in cadet school for the Army Air Corps. He flew sixty-six missions as a
bombardier in WWII before being honorably discharged from the service. Heller seems to be

Staaby 34
voicing the general opinion of those who oppose war and see it as absurd through his almost
nonsensical parody of the military.
While Catch-22 clearly satirizes the military, Heller claims that his novel does not speak
against the importance of a sense of duty to ones country. It almost seems unfitting for Heller to
make such a statement, but during an interview at the United States Air Force Academy he made
it clear that he believed the United States needed to get involved in World War II:
I believe World War II was a clear-cut issue between this country and Fascism,
represented by Germany and Japan. This country was not in the war until the
attack on Pearl Harbor, and after that attack, I believe . . . all respectful opposition
to this countrys participation in the war disappeared, and there was no
controversy about it. (Meredith 50)
Heller may satirize the bureaucracy of the military, but he never specifically protests Americas
involvement in WWII. Having fought in this war, Heller seems to maintain a level of patriotism
even though he does not necessarily agree with certain aspects of the military itself.
Though Heller was involved in WWII, he claims that his personal experiences are not
conveyed in the main character Yossarian, who is a bombardier as well. During an interview at
the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Heller points out that his novel is not
necessarily anti-war or anti-military. The main focus, he says is individuals in conflict with each
other, about individuals underneath the authority of leaders who were either neglecting or were
indifferent to their responsibility, or who were maybe not up to that responsibility (Heller qtd in
Meredith 50). Though military and war imagery make up the setting for the novel, Heller only
uses this as one way by which to address the issues of the corruption of bureaucracies in society
and its effects on the people being governed by them. Heller admits that his novel is irreverent

Staaby 35
and disrespectful in order to be honest and to shed some light on issues that were important to
society in those days (50).
Because of novels such as Catch-22, and also because of the ability to broadcast the
Vietnam War on television, awareness was being raised as to what war is really like. Besides
television news broadcasts of war activity, Hollywood eventually turned in the direction of war
related movies and television series. Hollywood interpretations of war seemed to side with the
satirical climate that was so popular. Catch-22 was filmed as a movie in 1970, and later in that
decade M*A*S*H became an increasingly popular television series. People were beginning to
realize the full extent of war and were often outraged by it. Many people took an active stance
against the war as they felt more harm than good was resulting from United States involvement
in Vietnam. These activists were aided by the visual presentation that was all around them,
including the parodies that used dark humor to accentuate the atrocities of war.
M*A*S*H is a good example of how television was used to convey the anxieties of war
for the 1960s generation. It was one of Americas most popular television shows from 1972 until
1983. Though it aired after the 1960s, it reflected the sentiments of that era. The show ran for
eleven consecutive seasons, and the finale was watched by some 106 million viewers (Arango).
M*A*S*H was originally a novel by Richard Hooker, published in 1968. It was then turned into
a film in 1970, later followed by the television series in 1972. Like Catch-22, M*A*S*H is
actually not about the Vietnam War, though many people may have thought so. M*A*S*H is
about the Korean War, yet the use of dark humor transcends the specifics, and was applied to the
feelings that many people had about the war in Vietnam. Catch-22 enjoyed a similar popularity
as over ten-million copies have been sold since 1961. Catch-22 can perhaps be viewed as an

Staaby 36
influence on Hookers novel and the subsequent movie and television series that influenced a
generation.
Dark comedy began to appear on other types of television shows as well. The values of
the 1960s generation began to be voiced in sitcoms that were aired toward the late 60s and early
70s. All in the Family, which aired from 1971-1979, was a sitcom that can be credited as being
one of the first shows to use comedy as a way of making fun of mainstream culture. The main
character Archie Bunker was a closed-minded old man who denounced some minority or liberal
cause in each episode (Gilbert 141). Archie repeatedly lost his battles to keep traditional values
alive, as his hippie daughter and son-in-law (along with his unwittingly liberal wife) proved that
his old fashioned way of thinking did not work anymore (141).
Television quickly became one of the foremost mediums for using humor to
communicate radical ideas. Another television show that used comedy to reinforce the ideas of
the counterculture was The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour. This show promoted liberal ideas
by making fun of more conservative values. In her book Producing for TV and Video: A Realworld Approach, Cathrine Kellison notes that Rowan and Martins Laugh-in, That Was the
Week That Was, and The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour all succeeded in reflecting the chaotic
era of the 1960s with satire and irreverent wit (31). These television programs used humor in
order to connect with the counterculture and reflect the irreverence that this generation felt
towards political and cultural issues of the 1960s.
Of course not everyone appreciated the irreverence of the television shows and literature
of the times. While many people appreciated and used Catch-22 as a tool for confirming their
own radical ideas, not everyone was as enthusiastic about Hellers novel. Many critics
questioned the unconventional style and cynical tone of the work, saying that it was pointless and

Staaby 37
much too dark. The fragmented chronology and absurd characters left many readers feeling that
the novel had no point at all. According to Potts, one major complaint about the structure of the
novel was the sudden change of tone and chronology of events toward the end. It was as if a
nonsensical story was suddenly trying to be serious. According to an anonymous writer under
the pen name Roger H. Smith, Catch-22 was immoral, artless, and worthless (Potts 10).
The fact that Catch-22 had such extreme opposite reviews attests to its powerful
influence in society. People either loved it or they hated it. The social issues that Heller touches
on in his book will undoubtedly hit a nerve in most people, either positively or negatively.
Issues such as capitalism, the military, and even religion are prominent themes in the novel that
everyone has at least some opinion on, since they affect everyone in some way. Hellers use of
humor and absurdity do not downplay the importance of these themes. On the contrary, the style
that Heller uses serves as a sort of wake up call for anyone who may have felt apathetic about
any of the issues before having read the novel.
One of the main issues prevalent throughout Catch-22 is the reference to the militaryindustrial complex that became an important part of American culture. Dwight D. Eisenhower
is famous for using this phrase in his farewell address in 1961. He warned the nation not to get
carried away by the military-industrial complex, as he believed it could undermine American
Democracy (military-industrial complex). He believed it would be detrimental for the nation
to promote the violence and instability of war in order to make a profit by manufacturing
weapons of mass destruction as well as other war materials. The United States had already
embarked upon an arms race with the advent of the Cold War, which certainly raised the tensions
felt by a country that had just finished one war, and was looking at the possibility of another in
the near future. People were divided about this issue, as with any issue that concerns the whole

Staaby 38
country. Many felt that it was important not only to counter the legitimate threat posed by
communist expansionism but for America to prove that it was just as strong and advanced as its
enemies (particularly the USSR), and so they supported efforts to compete with them in science,
technology, and education (Matusow 9). In this case, the military-industrial complex manifested
itself through the development of spacecraft and war related materials, in order to protect
Americas strong image.
The original readers of Catch-22 in the 1960s were aware of many of these issues and
would most likely have had some opinion on them. For many years, the United States held more
or less an isolationist policy in foreign affairs, though this changed drastically after the attack on
Pearl Harbor in 1941. Some people were uncomfortable with the United States continuing its
strong military, particularly in bases scattered across the globe after WWII. The United States
was using its political and economic strength to provide security and economic growth around
the world (and eventually became viewed as a sort of global policeman trying to solve the
worlds problems). In the 1960s, the United States began to get involved in Vietnam. The
Vietnam conflict caused a great deal of confusion in the minds of Americans as many were
unsure of the validity of the moral, political, and economic goals that were driving the U.S
government.
The Vietnam War was perhaps one of the most controversial issues of the 1960s, though
towards the end of that decade most people were ready to see the war end as aquickly as
possible. Paul Potter, president of Students for a Democratic Society, 2 declared that the Vietnam
War revealed that America was run by faceless and terrible bureaucracies. . . that consistently
put material values before human values. (Farber 40). This is strikingly similar to what Heller
2

The Students for a Democratic Society was a group of college age students who supported the
development of a New Left that would focus on resolving what they thought were the problems caused
by institutions or the Establishment (Savage 262).

Staaby 39
seems to be saying in Catch-22. This description sums up the idea of the Establishment that
the counterculture was trying to resist. The Establishment was a term used to define the set of
social structures and governing powers that ran the country. It was this authority that the hippies
resisted, because they felt the Establishment was corrupt and did not truly care about the people
it was governing (40).
Catch-22 was not the only novel that expressed concerns about the Establishment or
bureaucracies of America during the 1960s. It is easy to see why Catch-22 was so popular when
considering some of the other novels that were written (and well received) shortly after the
publication of Catch-22. These novels are further confirmation of what was considered important
to this generation. Novels such as One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, The Bell Jar, and The
Crying of Lot 49 are examples of novels that conveyed the mindset of the counterculture of the
1960s. One common thread that they all share is the way they dealt with the issue of the
Establishment or Institutions of society. The literal image of the institution is found in the
mental institutions that provide the setting for all of One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest and part
of The Bell Jar. The Crying of Lot 49 shows the main character in a constant struggle with a
conspiracy that controls a large part of society. All of these novels reflect the concerns of society
in the 1960s, and use the same kind of dark humor that Heller uses in Catch-22.
The image of the Institution is very apparent in Ken Keseys One Flew Over the
Cuckoos Nest. The story is told by Chief Bromden, a patient in a mental institution, centering
around one character who upsets the order and structure of the machine that the patients are
forced to be a part of. The imagery of being medicated and being in a fog reflect Keseys acid
tests, and the way that he tried to find a greater consciousness through the confusion and chaos of
LSD. McMurphy, the character whose story Chief Bromden tells, is a catalyst of confusion

Staaby 40
himself. By upsetting the smooth operation of the mental institution he helps to free the
patients, in a sense. He shows them that there is more to life than what the Big Nurse tells
them. Kesey, like McMurphy, is a voice of the culture, trying to show people that they need to
think for themselves and learn that there is more to life than what society tells them. Everyone
needs to find their own sense of truth, and not let society govern everything they do.
Kesey continually points out the importance of humor through his character McMurphy.
At one point in the novel McMurphy says man, when you lose your laugh you lose your
footing (68). McMurphy uses humor to try to create a sense of liberation from the stiff rules and
regulations of the hospital. By introducing confusion or bewilderment into the hospital,
McMurphy ultimately brings illumination to the others characters, especially Chief Bromden,
who realizes that he needs to stand up for himself and escape the confines of an institution that
does not really have his best interest in mind.
Chief Bromden often has episodes that reflect the labyrinth imagery of 1960s dark
humor. At one point in the novel, Chief Bromden does not take the medication that is typically
administered before the patients go to bed. As a result, he has hallucinations of the innerworkings of the machine that is the mental institution. Kesey uses imagery of endless
machines stretching clear out of sight and huge brass tubes [that] disappear upward in the
dark (83). There are men walking in continuous motion along winding catwalks, making sure
that the machine is functioning properly. The images of twisting tubes and endless machinery
reflect a labyrinthine setting in which Chief Bromden feels trapped and helpless to stop the
machine. Bewilderment and anxiety are clearly present in this scene as well, showing how
Kesey incorporates all of the elements of dark humor in his novel.

Staaby 41
The Bell Jar is a good example of the confessional style of writing that was popular in the
1960s. Sylvia Plaths novel is a work of fiction that draws heavily upon her own life
experiences. Plath includes elements of bewilderment and illumination and anxiety through the
main character Esther Greenwood, who is a representation of the author in many ways. There
was a lot of stress and tension in society due to a rapidly changing culture and the constant fear
of nuclear war. Plath records her own stresses and tensions as a young woman who is trying to
find her place in a bewildering new world.
Plaths novel reflects the anxiety of the 1960s culture. It also deals with the treatment
methods that were being used to help those who suffered from mental illness. Plath recalls her
electro-shock therapy, a practice which has since been banned. Despite the gravity of the issues
presented in The Bell Jar, Plath uses an element of humor to deal with them. In one scene, Esther
is trying to find a place to hang herself. Plath presents this in such a way that the reader cannot
help but laugh as Esther fumbles around with the cord from her mothers bathrobe,
unsuccessfully searching for a place that will accommodate her needs: After a discouraging
time of walking about with the silk cord dangling from my neck like a yellow cats tail and
finding no place to fasten it, I sat on the edge of my mothers bed and tried pulling the cord
tight (159). There is a sense of anxiety and hopelessness in the character of Esther, yet Plath
employs humor in telling her story. Esther nonchalantly discusses her failed suicide attempt in an
amusing way, showing how bewilderment and anxiety skewed her sense of reality.
The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon is another instance of the type of literature that
was being produced in the 1960s. This novel is an especially good example of the bewilderment
and illumination as well as labyrinth themes that are often found in the dark humor during this
time. This novel follows the story of Oedipa Maas, who is given the responsibility of executing

Staaby 42
her ex-boyfriends will, which leads to a somewhat nebulous detective story. Oedipas search is
confusing as it is unclear exactly what inspires her to put so much effort into searching for
meaning in something that may not have any real meaning to begin with. As Oedipa finds clues
she continues a somewhat labyrinthine search that does not seem to lead to any definitive end.
The Crying of Lot 49 amply incorporates the themes of bewilderment and illumination
and the labyrinth. Bewilderment is easy to come by in this novel, as the reader needs to try to
follow a character who is not even sure where she is going or why. Oedipa believes her exboyfriend has set up a sort of scavenger hunt in his will, as she follows what she believes to be
clues leading to information about a world-wide conspiracy. Ultimately Oedipa learns about
herself, and not the secret network that she is searching out. The illumination comes in realizing
that she was searching for the wrong thing, and the labyrinthine imagery is found in the search
itself. Pynchon questions the existence of truth outside of the self through his novel, which he
writes in a humorous and entertaining way.
One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, The Bell Jar, and The Crying of Lot 49 embody the
elements that reflect the culture of 1960s America and the humor that was employed by authors
and comedians at this time. In Black Humor Fiction of the Sixties, Schulz mentions a common
trait that many dark humor novels possess: The main character never experiences social
reconciliation (8). This is true for the three novels just mentioned, as well as for Catch-22.
Since Schulz believes that dark humor (or black humor) is a product of the 1960s, it would make
sense that these novels would not end with the characters becoming a part of society. The 1960s
were a time of change and resisting the mainstream culture, and the dark humor novels stayed
true to this way of thinking.

Staaby 43
Catch-22 falls in line with the 1960s novels that challenged authority and mainstream
society. Heller admits that the book is anti-traditional establishment and that his use of the
military is mainly to show an establishment or institution in that light (Meredith 57). His main
character, Yossarian, is more of an anti-hero than a hero, and certainly does not become
reconciled with the institutions in his life. As a product of the 1950s-1960s generation, Catch-22
incorporates dark humor in order to communicate an important message. This dark humor is a
product of the 1960s, and reflects distinct qualities about this generation and culture. Absurdities,
anxiety, and labyrinth imagery are key elements in the dark humor novels of this time, all of
which are reflected in Hellers Catch-22.

Staaby 44

Chapter Three: Bewilderment and Illumination: Catch-22 and the

Staaby 45
Catch-22 is one of many novels published in the 1960s which followed a distinct 1960s
American dark humor style. Published in 1961, Catch-22 continues to be one of the most popular
novels to come out of this time period. Hellers work encapsulates the elements that make up
dark humorparticularly 1960s American dark humor. Writing at the same time as authors such
as Ken Kesey, Thomas Pynchon, and Sylvia Plath, Heller is one of many whose works express
the mood and the voice of the day (though none seem to present as comprehensive a commentary
on the culture as Heller does in Catch-22). In a time of such great change and tension in both
cultural and political aspects, the 1960s was a time in which people faced a great deal of anxiety
and uncertainty. Humor was used in several mediums such as radio and television, but neither of
those methods of communication could stand the test of time a well as the novels that were
written in this manner. Joseph Hellers Catch-22 reflects the concerns of the 1960s generation
through his use of absurdities to communicate bewilderment and illumination, gallows humor to
communicate anxiety, and labyrinth imagery to show the changing times and the uncertainty of a
culture that was beginning to question traditional ideals and values.
Catch-22 has become one of the defining works of literature of the 20th century. In his
article Catch-22 as Avatar of the Social Surrealist Novel, Jesse Ritter comments on the absurd
qualities of Catch-22 that reflect the literature and culture of the 20th century: Much of modern
literature is devoted to portraying the Absurd, or the failure of rationalist expectations. Hellers
relentless use of radical juxtaposition in Catch-22 intensifies our sense of the Absurd to the point
of hallucination (82). Heller abandons rationalist expectations in order to convey the mindset
of the modern culture (82). The absurdities that Heller includes in his novel are ultimately there
for a reason. While the reader may feel confused from time to time, Heller brings the ridiculous

Staaby 46
antics and absurdities to light in order to produce the effect of bewilderment and illumination
that is a key element in 1960s dark humor.
It seems unlikely that absurdity could deepen ones understanding of serious issues, but
this is exactly what Heller does in his parody of an Air Force pilot in World War II trying
desperately to avoid the dangers of a war run by idiotic bureaucrats. The humorous antics and
ridiculous characters are present in the novel for more than just laughs; they are elements used by
Heller to convince his audience of absurdities in society. In his work Jokes and their Relation to
the Unconscious, Sigmund Freud refers to the scholar Theodore Lipps who says that jokes serve
their purpose when one finds sense in nonsense (qtd. in Freud11). The absurd antics of
Hellers characters along with the disordered structure of the novel may at first seem like mere
nonsense; however, Catch-22 has proven to be one of the most influential social satires of the
twentieth century. Through the use of dark humor and absurdity, Heller clearly demonstrates his
ideas regarding certain institutions which guide modern society.
Dark humor has been an increasingly popular mode of writing since the early to mid
twentieth century. Authors such as Vonnegut, Kesey, and Pynchon fall under this category, as
the unifying threads of social criticism and absurdity group them together. The use of dark
humor often brings with it a surge of both positive and negative reviews. It is hard to ignore the
absurd, especially when it takes a definite stab at some aspect of society. For those who
appreciate Catch-22, it is usually because Hellers style evokes such a strong response. The
complicated structure of the novel as well as Hellers use of dark humor affords him a great deal
of freedom in the content matter he deals with, as he carefully tangles a web of social criticism
around one authoritative catch that influences the characters and events of Catch-22.

Staaby 47
When asked about the use of dark humor in Catch-22 during an interview with Dale Gold
of Washington Post Book World, Joseph Heller responded, I dont like the term dark humor. I
like to think of it as sour sarcasm or ugly satire. I dont like comedy for the sake of comedy
(56). Heller clearly believes that humor is best used as a way to deal with issues that are of great
importance. He does not want to simply make people laugh with his novel; he wants to make
people think.
The idea of finding truth in humor is an integral part of Catch-22. Freud discusses the
theory that says the comic effect of jokes comes from bewilderment and illumination (16).
Bewilderment is a major comedic tool in Catch-22 which reflects the popular attitude toward war
of the generation for which Heller was writing. The actual Catch-22 itself is an example of
bewilderment and illumination that illustrates the absurdities of war. When Yossarian asks Doc
Daneeka to ground him from flying any more missions, he finds he is caught in the tangled
logic of the infamous catch:
There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern
for ones own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the
process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to
do was ask; and as soon as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would
have to fly more missions . . . Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute
simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle. (46)
The circular reasoning behind the catch reflects the circularity of Hellers fragmented story,
which is structured in a much more deliberate way than it is often given credit for.
As the 1960s were a time of a countercultural revolution, it is fitting that Hellers novel
should itself be somewhat countercultural in its form. It does not conform to typical literary

Staaby 48
conventions as the reader is brought from one scene to another in the middle of chapters and as
the chapters themselves are given in almost a backwards chronological order. This use of
discontinuity in Hellers novel is in itself an example of bewilderment and illumination as the
structure of the novel helps to communicate his ideas more effectively than if it were presented
in a more orderly fashion. In his article Spindrift and the Sea: Structural Patterns and Unifying
Elements in Catch 22 Clinton S. Burhans, Jr. refers to the structure of Catch-22 as an
ingenious fusion of time planes into the simultaneity of existential time and how Heller has
done something in each chapter to link it to the preceding chapter (240). Hellers chronology
ties in the technique of bewilderment and illumination as the reader is presented with
foreshadowing flashbacks that reveal humorous explanations to events that have already
occurred in the novel (240).
The flashbacks in Catch-22 add a dramatic effect to the novel which intensifies events or
situations as the reader gains more knowledge as he or she goes along. An example of the
foreshadowing flashback is found when Yossarian appears at formation naked and refuses to
wear his uniform after a particularly disastrous mission. The reader finds out that his uniform is
in the laundry because it was covered in blood when the tail gunner, Snowden, was killed during
this mission. It is not until the end of the novel that the reader is told the details of Snowdens
tragic death, which in turn explains much of Yossarians own fear and desperate attempts to get
out of flying more missions throughout the novel. In this case, discontinuity appears in a slightly
different way as the humor of Yossarians actions is brought about by the bewilderment instead
of the illumination, since his naked protest is not quite so funny when one finally realizes the
devastating reason behind it.

Staaby 49
Heller uses discontinuity in a number of ways in his novel. According to Gary W. Davis
in his article Catch-22 and the Language of Discontinuity, Heller sees . . . linguistic and
intellectual discontinuities reflected in our social systems and institutions as well (71), which
he in turn portrays in his novel. The most obvious example of this is found in Milo
Minderbinder. Milo is a direct criticism of capitalism as he finds a way to make an enormous
profit during war time, as he buys and sells goods from around the world and uses the planes
and men of the U.S. military to aid him in his endeavors. The idea of discontinuity comes into
play as Heller is clearly trying to make a statement about the absurdity of the military-industrial
complex that Eisenhower warned about in 1959. According to Heller, making a profit through
war is a gross discontinuity.
Heller demonstrates how Milos actions become truly absurd when he is willing to put
the men of his squadron in danger in order to make a profit. Milo Minderbinder tries to
convince everyone that his business endeavors will benefit them as well, though his actions
seem far from having everyones best interest in mind:
The life jackets failed to inflate because Milo had removed the twin carbondioxide cylinders from the inflating chambers to make the strawberry and
crushed-pineapple ice-cream sodas he served in the officers mess hall and had
replaced them with mimeographed notes that read: Whats good for M&M
Enterprises is good for the country. (307)
Heller actually echoes the beliefs of the hippie generation that questioned the rampant
materialism in the world (Farber and Bailey). Heller seems to believe that capitalism puts
profit and power before people, an idea that resurfaces through several other of his characters.

Staaby 50
Throughout Catch-22 Heller addresses the idea that institutions often put ideals before
individuals. In his article The Sanity of Catch-22, Robert Protherough points out how Heller
criticizes bureaucracy, particularly the bureaucracy of the military. General Peckem is the most
obvious character that Heller uses to mock a bureaucracy. For example, the general makes lists
of personnel to request as though he were simply making a grocery list, and as he gives his men
conflicting orders simply to keep them running around in circles looking busy (204). The idea
of keeping up appearances and doing things just for the sake of doing something (such as when
Colonel Scheisskopf is encouraged to send out memos that the parade that was never going to
take place would be canceled for the upcoming week) reduces people to nothing more than
pawns in a pointless game.
People are once again made to seem like nothing more than objects or names on a list
when Doc Daneeka is reported dead after a plane crash. In the absurd bureaucracy in Catch-22
it is impossible to deny that Doc Daneeka was on the flight since his name was on the official
flight list. Even as Doc Daneeka stood before his commanding officers to explain that he had
not been on the flight, and was in fact alive, it was to no avail: Colonel Cathcart refused to see
him, and Colonel Korn sent word through major Danby that he would have Doc Daneeka
cremated on the spot if he ever showed up at Group Headquarters (343). Reality does not
matter when maintaining the established systems that govern society are placed before a
concern for the people.
The absurdities of the institutions of war are further demonstrated in Catch-22 through
the insensitive attitudes that many of the characters have toward death and war in general.
Colonel Cathcart is one such character whose main concern in the war is to form nice bombing
patterns for the aerial photographs and to hopefully get his name in the Saturday Evening Post.

Staaby 51
One way in which he hopes to possibly make news is through what he believes to be his
elegantly written death notices that go to the families of those who are killed in battle. One
such letter is sent home to Doc Daneekas wife when he tries unsuccessfully to convince the
commanding officers that he is still alive: Dear Mrs., Mr., Miss, or Mr. and Mrs. Daneeka,
Words cannot express the deep personal grief I experienced when your husband, son, father or
brother was killed, wounded or reported missing in action (344). Bewilderment fuels the
humor in the situation as Mrs. Daneeka receives letters from Doc Daneeka pleading for help,
while simultaneously receiving letters from the War Department telling herin stunning
prosethat as far as they are concerned, Doc Daneeka is dead.
The situation with Doc Daneeka is one of many throughout the novel which shows
something to be the opposite of how it should be. Returning to Freud, a joke is a judgment
which produces a comic contrast (10). Heller uses this technique in the way that various
characters of Catch-22 respond to death. Yossarian seems to be the only one who truly fears for
his life, though for this he is told by Major Sanderson, the hospital psychiatrist, that he has a
bad persecution complex (299). In his article War and the Comic Muse: The Good Soldier
Schweik and Catch-22, J.P. Stern notes that Yossarian never ceases to be outraged by the
astounding fact that men . . . should be seriously adding to the means of their destruction by
willingly complying with the demands of the military (208). Heller shows his readers that
Yossarian is really the voice of reason, though the rest of the characters accuse him of being the
crazy one.
The antihero characteristics of Yossarian correspond with the antinovel characteristics of
Catch-22. In order to reach his audience more effectively, Heller needed to break certain rules in
the traditional school of literature. Stern makes the comment in his article that the central theme

Staaby 52
(of Catch-22) is the preservation . . . of the integrity of a private individual against, but also in
full contact with, the all-but-overwhelming pressures of a world at war, and further, that Catch22s humor is never disconnected from [its] realism (203). Hellers commentary on social
issues is meant to be taken seriously, and his use of dark humor helps to communicate his
message in a way that shows his audience what he wants to say rather than just saying it. After
laughing through some of the events in Catch-22, it is sobering for the reader to step back and
make sense of the nonsense.
The absurdities of Catch-22 demonstrate not only feelings of bewilderment and
illumination, but also those of extreme anxiety. Heller captures the anxieties of the time in which
Catch-22 was written through several of his characters and their absurd situations. He uses
gallows humor as a way in which to deal with ideas that would be difficult to face otherwise. The
seriousness of war and the dehumanization that takes place in the military are two main issues
that Heller addresses with the use of gallows humor, which enables him to deal with these grim
subjects in a way that does not cause the reader too much discomfort.
A great deal of the anxiety found in Catch-22 is a result of the dehumanization of the
men in the military. Schulz believes that Heller uses this idea not only to comment on the
military, but also to comment on a culture that is more interested in numbers and averages than
actual people (97). Schulz sums up the lack of individuality the mid-twentieth century culture
seemed to be facing:
In a society beset by a dissociation between dated ideals and immediate reality,
between the myth of individuality and the submission to anonymity, between the
desire to be an instrumental member of a group and the pressure to fit within
every statistical mean, there unavoidably engenders tension and anxiety [sic]. (97)

Staaby 53
The twentieth century saw the rise of technology and a greater emphasis on efficiency; often
neglecting the needs of individuals. The importance of the individual seemed to be fading in
many respects, as a more utilitarian attitude developed because of these advances. One of the
ways that this is most obvious is in the military. The military represents the kind of bureaucracies
that focus on efficiency and productivity as opposed to individuality. Heller uses this institution
to depict a general social anxiety in which the individual was becoming less and less important.
Anxiety is exhibited by many characters throughout Catch-22, but by none so much as
Colonel Cathcart. Heller describes Cathcart as a blustering, intrepid bully who brooded
inconsolably over the terrible ineradicable impressions he knew he kept making on people of
prominence who were scarcely aware that he was even alive (Heller 188). He was paranoid for
no reason at all, believing that people were paying much closer attention to him than they
actually were. According to Schulz, Cathcart experiences this anxiety because his ambition to
embody his societys ideals is continually frustrated by his failure to understand its rules (92).
Cathcart goes along with a system he does not fully understand, whether he realizes it or not. His
lack of understanding causes stress, since he is not sure what is expected of him and never knows
if he is doing the right thing to impress his superiors.
The sort of anxiety that Colonel Cathcart experiences was commonly found in American
dark humor novels of the 1960s. Schulz believes this is because the world . . . has accelerated its
drift toward fragmentation of experience, isolation of the individual, irrelevancy of the future,
and sense of personal inadequacy (93). By the mid-twentieth century, society was beginning to
focus on the importance of the average instead of the individual, and to focus on being
efficient instead of being personal (94-95). This is depicted in the letters that Cathcart sends
home to the family members of deceased soldiers. The all-purpose attitude behind these letters

Staaby 54
shows that individuality is not important (at least to the military in this case). In this way, people
struggle to maintain a sense of self-worth, much like Cathcart who felt he was always doing
something wrong.
Another example of a character who felt anxiety due to a loss of individuality is Doc
Daneeka. Not only is the incident in which Doc Daneeka is declared dead absurd, but it also
portrays a loss of individuality. The military is not concerned with Doc Daneeka as a person. He
was simply a name on a flight list for a plane that crashed; therefore he must be dead, even
though he did not actually go on that flight. Doc Daneeka begins to feel the effects of the
dehumanization because of the military bureaucracy. Schulz notes that a loss of individuality
occurs when ones sense of self becomes unfixed (96). Doc Daneekas sense of self becomes
unfixed as he begins to doubt his sanity and even whether or not he is alive. He is dehumanized
to the point that he is described in animal-like terms, and begins to disappear as far as the
military is concerned: Alarm changed to resignation, and more and more Doc Daneeka acquired
the look of an ailing rodent. The sacks under his eyes turned hollow and black, and he padded
through the shadows fruitlessly like a ubiquitous spook (343). Not only does Doc Daneeka lose
his individuality, he loses his sense of humanity to the bizarre reasoning of the bureaucracy
running his life (or former life as they would have it).
A loss of individuality also occurs when Yossarian speaks with the psychiatrist, Major
Sanderson. Sanderson does not really care at all about Yossarians problems, preferring to tell
Yossarian of his own problems instead. At one point, Major Sanderson calls Yossarian
Fortiori, even though this is not his name. Yossarian tries to tell the Major he is mistaken, but
the Major does not believe him: Your name is Fortiori, Major Sanderson contradicted him
belligerently . . . Oh, come on, Major! Yossarian exploded. I ought to know who I am. . . .

Staaby 55
And Ive got an official Army record here to prove it Major Sanderson retorted (298). The
name Fortiori is significant itself as it represents the term a fortiori used in logic. It means an
argument to the effect that because one ascertained fact exists, therefore another, which is
included in it, or analogous to it, and which is less improbable, unusual, or surprising, must also
exist (Stark 154). In other words, because Yossarian was in Fortioris bed, he must be Fortiori.
It does not matter who Yossarian says he is; his identity has been decided by the Army through
their skewed reasoning, and they do not care who he really is.
The soldier in white represents the anxieties of war as he is the image of a faceless,
nameless member of a group that is treated as though he is not even a person. The soldier in
white is a figure all wrapped in gauze who cannot speak, and has no defining characteristics
except for his unfortunate appearance. He resembles an empty shell with nothing more than a
hole for his mouth and a system of tubes and jars feeding his hidden body. The description of the
soldier in white lacks a sense of humanity. Schulz points out how anxiety due to loss of
individuality (or a sense of self) is present in the image of the soldier in white who is believed
by the other patients of the hospital not even to exist beneath his all-enveloping bandages (95).
The patients are actually rather disturbed by the quiet, unimposing new patient on the ward,
simply because they cannot figure out who he is, or if he is really even there.
The soldier in white is made to seem like more of an object than a person, reflecting the
anxiety caused by institutions such as the military and a loss of individuality in favor of being a
useful part of a group. Heller describes the nurses working tirelessly to polish the pipes and jars
that pass liquid in and out of the soldier in white, and to whisk his bandages so that they were
clean and bright (168). There is no real purpose to what they are doing. They are not helping the
man beneath the bandages, but rather focusing on his appearance. Nurse Cramer even begins to

Staaby 56
cry as she is moved very deeply by the soldier in white (169). Nurse Cramer is really moved
by the idea of patriotism and what the military is supposed to stand for, not by the unfortunate
condition of the nameless man beneath the bandages.
A good example of the lack of humanity given to the soldier in white comes when there
is a discussion about his purpose. While the nurses change his jars once again, the soldiers
wonder why the nurses just dont hook the two jars up to each other and eliminate the
middleman? (170). As far as the soldiers can tell, the soldier in white is nothing more than
something through which the fluids in the jars beside him can pass. Not only does this reflect a
loss of humanity and individuality, it also illustrates the absurdity of bureaucracies that focus on
the efficiency of their institutions, rather than the individuals that comprise them. The fact that
the soldier in white keeps reappearing in the novel suggests that this is a point that Heller does
not want his readers to forget.
The idea of taking away someones humanity is typical of gallows humor used by those
who need to cope with such situations. Dunbar reflects the anxieties of war and the use of
gallows humor since his attempts at saving his own life are more humorous than effective.
Dunbar is afraid of death and is obsessed with self-preservation (much like Yossarian). Of
course, it is not strange that a person would want to protect his or her life; however, Dunbar
becomes anxious and neurotic due to his situations. Dunbar often feigns illness in order to stay in
the hospital and avoid being sent into combat. One of the ways he tries to make his life longer
while he is in the hospital is by cultivating boredom (Heller 9). Dunbar would lie in his
hospital bed increasing his lifespan by staring at the ceiling and doing nothing (9). Though
Dunbar knows that death is inevitable, he comically tries his best to escape it. Heller uses

Staaby 57
gallows humor to underscore Dunbars sense of anxiety as a member of an institution that treats
him as though his life is disposable, and not worth protecting any more than anyone elses.
The idea of a life being disposable and therefore meaningless is exactly what the 1960s
counterculture stood against. Of course, in an institution such as the military, utilitarianism
comes into play out of necessity. There is no way to be involved in a war and to show concern
for each person who is fighting it. People are therefore reduced to numbers, and averages.
Schulz talks about the problem of reducing man to averages and means and uses Pynchons
novel V as an example. He describes the mid-twentieth century as the product of a generation of
statisticians graphs. It has evolved into a computer society (94). Pynchon comments on this
issue of dehumanization in his novel: all aspects of life are being geared to a mythical average
without flesh and bone, an average that consists of no living object, no actual person (94).
Schulz believes that the result of this is that people substitute logic for the organizing ratio of
average and mean, which results in a loss of focus on individuals (94).
Jesse Ritter discusses the social surrealist genre that he sees as a product of the dark
humor fiction of the 1960s, and points out how one of its main focuses is to protest
dehumanization. Ritter refers to Pynchons The Crying of Lot 49 as an example of social
surrealist literature that speaks to the importance of the individual:
As the social surrealist genre develops, its increasingly bitter humor and
hallucinatory presentation of reality in no way diminish the objective presentation
of social reality. Referring to Thomas Pynchons multiple absurdities in his
description of used cars as the battered, castoff egos of their former owners in The
Crying of Lot 49, Don Hausdorf insisted that This may be Black Comedy in its

Staaby 58
grotesque manipulation of details but it also embodies social protest against
dehumanization. (76)
Ritter believes that the way dark humor presents reality may seem absurd and irrelevant, but as
Hausdorf points out, these absurdities reflect the fact that dehumanization is itself an absurdity.
Catch-22 clearly protests dehumanization, and uses multiple absurdities for this cause, to say
the least.
A humorous occurrence of this type of dehumanization is found in Colonel Cathcarts
view of the enlisted men. Cathcart is ultimately only interested in getting his picture in the
Saturday Evening Post for being the exceptional leader he seems to think he is. When talking to
the chaplain one day about how having prayer before missions might help increase his chances
for his few minutes of fame, it does not occur to the colonel that the enlisted men flying the
missions should attend as well. In fact it does not occur to colonel that the enlisted men pray to
the same God he does, and he tries to think of a way to avoid having to include them in the
prayer meetings when he finds out that they actually do: Id like to keep them out, confided the
colonel . . . It isnt that I think the enlisted men are dirty, common and inferior. Its just that we
dont have enough room (194). Clearly Colonel Cathcart does find the enlisted men to be dirty,
common and inferior, as he seems to think they are less human than himself; he does not even
want them to pray to the same God as he does.
Chaplain Tappman reflects the anxiety not only of dehumanization, but also of
uncertainty due to the changing ideals of society. The idea of finding ones own sense of truth
was a popular movement in the 1960s counterculture. The chaplain reflects a sort of anxiety due
to a loss of faith and being uncertain how he can help the soldiers. The chaplain begins
questioning his purpose and his faith in God, uncertain about the purpose of life: It was already

Staaby 59
some time since the chaplain had first begun wondering what everything was all about. Was
there a God? How could he be sure? (Heller 267). It is strange for a chaplain to be the one
questioning such things, but this only helps to emphasize the concerns of the 1960s culture. By
showing someone who has dedicated his life to religion now questioning it, Heller reflects the
counterculture who questioned traditional values. There is a sense of anxiety that comes with a
loss of faith, as that which was considered to be true is no longer reliable. A sense of purpose or
meaning is lost when there is nothing upon which to base ones very existence.
The anxiety of trying to find a sense of purpose in society is found in the character Major
Major. Heller aptly describes Major Major as an anxious man who suffers from perpetual
mediocrity: Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some have
mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three (83). Major Major
represents the anxiety of a culture that wanted more than to simply fit the standard of what
society told them they should be. Major Major has no strong convictions either way, and so
simply goes along with being average.
Major Majors conformity goes as far as his enrollment in the Army. He enrolled simply
because he was told to enroll. He became a Major simply because a computer mistook his name
for his rank. Major Majors life seems to be a series of events that lead to his increasing
conformity to societys expectations. The problem for Major Major is that even though he does
what is expected of him, nobody likes him: He was polite to his elder, who disliked him.
Whatever his elders told him to do he did . . . Major Majors elders disliked him because he was
such a flagrant nonconformist (85). Of course, Major Major is anything but a nonconformist,
which suggests that trying to conform to societys expectations is pointless. In this way, Heller
seems to be supporting the counterculture in their nonconformist beliefs as he makes the one true

Staaby 60
conformist in his novel one of the most miserable characters. The 1960s were a time when
people were being encouraged to explore their own truth and to live life apart from the
materialism and corruption of society, but Major Major could not figure out how to do this.
Anxiety due to materialism was another issue for the people in the 1960s counterculture,
who wanted to separate themselves from mainstream society in order to avoid corruption. Milo
represents the anxieties that 1960s America had about the military-industrial complex. While
Milo makes a profit, and even improves some of the conditions for the men on base, he
ultimately loses sight of the well-being of the people, and focuses on what is good for business.
In her article Militarism and Grass-Roots Involvement in the Military-Industrial Complex,
Nancy Edelman Phillips notes that many people become caught up in the military-industrial
complex because they need to feel that the military stands for something more useful than one
had originally thought (628). By viewing the military as more than simply a fighting machine,
it may be easier for some people to cope with their own involvement. Milo reflects this in Catch22 as he believes he is providing a great service to the soldiers, and scarcely seems to realize he
is involved in a serious war.
Though Milo may believe that his business ventures are for the good of everyone, he
ultimately crosses the line and begins to tread on dangerous ground, just as Eisenhower warned
America about in his farewell address. At one point in the novel, Milo sends planes to bomb his
own military base because this proved to help him economically. Once again people are depicted
as nothing more than replaceable things as Milo promises to reimburse the government for its
losses during his financial venture:
This time Milo has gone too far. Bombing his own men and planes was more than
even the most phlegmatic observer could stomach, and it looked like the end for

Staaby 61
him . . . Milo was all washed up until he opened his books to the public and
disclosed the tremendous profit he made. He could reimburse the government for
all the people and property he had destroyed and still have enough money left
over to continue buying Egyptian cotton. (Heller 259)
Heller uses Milo as an example of the dangers of the military-industrial complex, and how it can
easily be a dehumanizing factor as it can turn people into nothing more than expendable goods
for the purpose of generating a profit.
Yossarian, like Milo, directly reflects aspects of the anxieties of the 1960s American
culture, though he does so in a more logical way. Yossarians rational fear of death portrays the
legitimate fear of a generation that was surrounded by the uncertainty of the possibility of war.
Yossarian is surrounded by death, just as the 1960s culture was surrounded by the threat of war.
Unlike Milo, Yossarian does not try to rationalize war to try to make it a positive enterprise. He
sees it for what it is, and tries to logically argue his way out of missions so that he does not have
to endanger himself. Of course, logic is always overridden by Catch-22, which would be enough
to drive anyone insane.
The idea of mental illness is present in Catch-22, as this is a common element that
reflected anxiety in 1960s dark humor. There is a sense of irony in this case as Yossarian, who is
perhaps the most sane character in the novel, feigns mental illness in his attempts to be sent
home. The image of the mental hospital found in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest and The Bell
Jar is present in Catch-22 in the form of the military in general and the hospital in particular.
The characters in the hospital along with Yossarian are portrayed by Heller as being far more
mentally unstable than Yossarian, making the hospital seem more like a mental institution.

Staaby 62
Anxiety due to the Institution or Establishment of society is present in the character
Appleby. Yossarian tells Appleby that he has flies in his eyes, which must be why he cannot see
things the way they really are. When Yossarian informs Appleby of the flies in his eyes, Appleby
goes into a panic, questioning his own sanity (Heller 46). Instead of depending upon his own
logic and reasoning, he depends on the reassurance of others to confirm that his vision is not
obscured by flies. Applebys anxiety comes from the fact that he does not know what to think
unless someone tells him what to think. This represents one of the problems that the 1960s
counterculture saw in society, as they strove to spread a message of freeing the mind and
thinking for oneself. Appleby is a victim of the institution that controls his life, and is therefore
unable to see things as they really are, or to even think for himself.
There is a continual sense of tension between the soldiers and their authorities in Catch22. Similar to the mindset of the 1960s counterculture, the soldiers were subjected to the
strictures of an institution that did not care about them as individuals. According to James L.
McDonald in his article I See Everything Twice!: The Structure of Joseph Hellers Catch-22,
Heller sets two worlds in opposition to each other: the world of those in power, and the world of
their victims (105). This parallel that Heller constructs denotes the importance of the structure
of the novel. The soldiers remain victimized by their insensitive superiors, which results in their
subsequent anxiety. The parallel of the world of the oblivious bureaucrats and the world of the
anxious soldiers reflects the tensions in 1960s society and helps in developing Hellers
purposeful, though seemingly chaotic structure.
In order to understand the use of the labyrinth theme in Catch-22 it is important to
further define this idea. A labyrinth is defined as a system of intricate passageways and blind
alleys (labyrinth). In many cases labyrinths were underground structures, which added to the

Staaby 63
blindness one might feel when trying to navigate them. Hellers novel uses labyrinth imagery
in both its structure and content. The structure represents the twisting and turning of a labyrinth,
as Heller frequently shifts his focus from one character to another, and from one event to
another. It can be difficult to keep track of all that is happening in the novel, leaving the reader
feeling perplexed. Another way in which Catch-22 incorporates labyrinth imagery is in the
serious subject matter. Labyrinths are often associated with dark imagery, and so the gravity of
war and some of the events that take place reflect this.
Though Catch-22 was relatively popular when it was first published, many people had
a difficult time understanding the novel because of its complex structure. Many of these people
did not appreciate Catch-22 because they were not familiar with the new form of the novel that
was arising during the 1960s. They lack knowledge of the contours of twentieth-century fiction
. . . a different type of structure and order from that to which the novel-oriented reader may be
accustomed (77). The new novel 3 no longer followed the rules of traditional novels. Even the
form of the new novel was important in reflecting the culture, and so there was an element of
confusion that readers needed to adjust to.
The structure of Hellers novel is the main element that reflects the labyrinth theme that
became popular in 1960s American dark humor. In his article Catch-22: Dj vu and the
Labyrinth of Memory, James M. Mellard notes that Heller has taken the new novel of RobbeGrillet and extended it to fit his purposes (109). Mellard goes on to say that Heller uses the
labyrinth element of the new novel in order to convey a delusive experience, hallucinatory
quality and disjunctive expression of reality in Catch-22 (109). Delusions are not uncommon in

The new novel is defined as an avant-garde novel of the mid-20th century that marked a radical
departure from the conventions of the traditional novel in that it ignores such elements as plot,
dialogue, linear narrative, and human interest (new novel).

Staaby 64
Catch-22, and the style in which the novel is written reflects the idea of hallucinations or
delusions that many of the characters suffer.
The idea of seeing everything twice is a recurring theme in the structure of the novel, as
Heller brings the reader back to events that have already taken place, in some cases more than
twice. McDonald notes that the structure of the novel seems chaotic, but is actually carefully
developed to reflect the restlessness and rebelliousness of the times (102). McDonald points
out that Heller is a conscious artist who carefully manipulates the diverse and seemingly
divisive elements of the novel to achieve structural unity (103). Writing a novel such as Catch22 would have been no easy feat as it requires a great deal of effort in order to keep the
characters and situations straight. Heller actually kept a chart in order to try to keep everything in
order, though even he admits that he probably missed some inconsistencies (Meredith 51).
The episode in the hospital in which Yossarian mimics the soldier who saw everything
twice represents the confusion of the structure of Catch-22 which reflects the labyrinth themes of
1960s dark humor novels. Hellers use of dj vu can be rather confusing, especially during
ones first reading of his novel. The reader needs to pay close attention in order to realize the
significance of seeing an event from multiple perspectives. Yossarian, of course, only actually
sees everything once and is pretending to see everything twice in order to stay in the hospital.
The confusion caused by this illness results in chaos in the hospital ward, as everyone wants to
assign this symptom to a disease in their areas of specialization. In this way, Heller is
commenting on the idea of finding ones own sense of truth or meaning in a situation, which was
a popular way of thinking in the 1960s. Just as the doctors in this scene explore many different
possibilities of what this illness could be, readers (who actually do get to see everything twice)

Staaby 65
are charged with the task of exploring the meaning in the fragmented events that are presented to
them.
The labyrinth theme in Catch-22 is most evident in Hellers use of dj vu. In his
interview with the United States Air Force Academy, Heller discusses the importance of Dj vu
in his novel: There were several reasons for using dj vu . . . it is the suggestion that things that
are happening have happened before and will happen again, unless somebodyan individual or
societymakes some effort to break that chain of events (Meredith 51). Heller uses a
labyrinthine structure to show the idea of recurring events, which will only keep happening
unless someone puts a stop to it. This reflects many peoples feelings about war, especially in
the 1960s when it seemed like the Cold War was everywhere.
The dj vu in Catch-22 reflects labyrinth imagery in its repetitive structure and the idea
that a labyrinth brings a person back to where he or she began. Chaplain Tappman deals directly
with the idea of dj vu as he searches for meaning in his life throughout the novel. The chaplain
struggles with questions of his own faith, and finds that his exploration of truth ultimately brings
him back to where he started. In one instance, the chaplain begins to question a feeling of dj
vu in having previously met Yossarian. He feels this experience is either an insight of divine
origin or a hallucination (Heller 268). He cannot decide whether his insight is of great
importance or merely a sign that he is losing his mind. This uncertainty fits the labyrinth
imagery that Heller uses in order to bring to question the idea of the uncertainty of truth that was
present in 1960s America.
Dj vu also serves as a way for Heller to move his story along and to show that there is
significance in many of the scenes that he only dwells on for brief moments. Mellard notes that
the use of dj vu may at first seem pointless, but it actually adds a great deal of insight to the

Staaby 66
novel: dj vu is actually neither simply repetitive or redundant but is rather complexly
incremental and progressive, for the examples of dj vu of character, thematic motifs, and
events that Heller offers one move inevitably toward completion and resolution (111). Although
Heller uses a labyrinthine method of revealing elements of his novel, he does so in a way that
brings a sense of completion. In a way this is fitting with the theme of the labyrinth, since
labyrinths come full circle and end where they begin. Heller similarly presents snapshots of
information throughout the novel, in order to bring these situations together in the end so that the
reader may have a better understanding of what he meant in the beginning.
In many instances, labyrinth imagery is found in the miscommunication of some of the
characters. Often the conversations can be compared to the blind alleys found in labyrinths,
because neither character speaking knows what point the other is trying to make, and neither
character really cares. Heller discusses the issue of miscommunication among his characters:
The meaning in the book is that the people of different characters or different
sensibilities do not talk to each other, do not understand each other . . . other parts
of Catch-22 I wrote consciously and deliberately with what might be called the
perversion of language or the manipulation of language in different ways in which
phrases can be interpreted by people who want to use them in that way.
(Meredith 51)
Heller uses a very postmodern element in creating the opportunity for multiple meanings in his
text. Much like the labyrinth theme, there are multiple routes that can be taken in interpreting
Hellers meaning. The miscommunication between his characters represents this freedom of
interpretation that fits the 1960s generation that was reading Catch-22.

Staaby 67
Miscommunication is an issue during Yossarians first conversation with the chaplain.
There is a great deal of repetition and circularity in their conversation, which does not appear to
have any point: Youre a chaplain, he exclaimed ecstatically. I didnt know you were a
chaplain. Why, yes, the chaplain answered. Didnt you know I was a chaplain? Why, no. I
didnt know you were a chaplain (13). This sort of confusing and pointless conversation occurs
often between the characters in the novel. The characters do not seem to pay attention to one
another, and their conversations turn out to have no purpose. While the conversations may have
no purpose, Heller has a purpose in including them in his novel. The idea of miscommunication
strengthens the idea of freedom of interpretation, but it also points out the absurdity that results
when people no longer know how to communicate.
Miscommunication (or lack of communication) brings to mind the idea of blind
alleys in labyrinth imagery. The characters often do not pay attention to what is going on or
what someone is telling them, and therefore they go along blindly, often ignoring important
events. An example of this is found in the character Aarfy, who is one of the pilots Yossarian
must fly with, is oblivious to the urgency of the war around him. When his own plane is in
trouble, he casually sits back in his seat and lights a pipe. As Yossarian frantically tries to give
him instructions to fly them out of trouble, Aarfy replies with a calm I cant hear you (147).
Even when Yossarian is wounded and bleeding in the back of the plane, Aarfy cannot understand
(or hear, as is his complaint), what is going on, even though it is happening right in front of
him. In this way, Heller seems to suggest that there are people who turn a blind eye because they
do not want to deal with what is going on around them.
The labyrinth imagery continues with darker scenes such as the flashbacks to
Snowdens death. Like a labyrinth, these scenes are interwoven into the text, as though one has

Staaby 68
turned a corner in a maze and runs into something unexpected. These darker moments of Catch22 serve to remind the reader of the seriousness of war, and the value of human life that seems to
be overlooked by so many of the characters. Mellard notes that through Snowden, Yossarian
comes to an awareness not only of the fact of death but also of the possibility of life (119).
Through the traumatic experience of witnessing his fellow soldier die, Yossarian gains a deep
appreciation for life, and resentment towards those who make him risk his own. Heller uses
labyrinth imagery as he continually revisits the grim scene of Snowdens death. He infuses his
novel with this serious event in order to remind the reader that behind the absurdity and humor
there is a serious message to be considered.
Hellers use of dark humor in Catch-22 underscores the mindset of the generation for
whom he was writing, yet his novel continues to be enjoyed by audiences today because of the
humorous way that he deals with such a pivotal time in American culture. Heller incorporates the
style of 1960s dark humor that was popular among writers of that time, which in itself is an
interesting way to learn about that culture. Through his absurdities, gallows humor, and
labyrinth imagery, Heller creates a fictional world that illustrates the sentiments of the culture in
which he lived, and that would be appreciated for generations to come.
Literature has always been an outlet for social commentary, and the 1960s was
certainly a time when authors took advantage of this. The 1960s were a particularly interesting
time for literature, as the traditional novel gave way to the new novel which ignored traditional
literary styles. Heller, among other authors, took advantage of this new form of writing that so
perfectly fit the counterculture of the day. By studying the dark humor literature of the 1960s,
much can be learned about the current behaviors, values, and concerns of that time. Also, it is
helpful to have an understanding of the history of humor in order to see how dark humor works.

Staaby 69
Since dark humor was such a popular element of the literature of the 1960s, it is interesting to
look at the culture to see how and why this humor was being used. The dark humor literature of
the 1960s reveals much about a very interesting time in American social and political history,
and was quite distinct from dark humor in different contexts. The distinct qualities of the dark
humor of the 1960s (bewilderment and illumination, gallows humor, and labyrinth imagery) are
an interesting way to view the mindset of a time of great change and uncertainty; a time that
certainly questioned the status quo, and which had a far-reaching influence in history.

Staaby 70
Works Cited
Arango, Tim. Broadcast TV Faces Struggle to Stay Viable. The New York Times. 29 February
2009. <http://www.nytimes.com> Path: Business; Media & Advertising.
Aristotle. Poetics. New York: Dover, 1997.
Ben-Amos, Dan. The Myth of Jewish Humor. Western Folklore. 32.2 (1973): 112-131.
black humour. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 31 Jan.
2009 <http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9015485>.
Burhans, Clinton S., Jr. Spindrift and the Sea: Structural Patterns and Unifying Elements in
Catch 22. Twentieth Century Literature 19.4 (1973): 239-50.
"carnival." Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 15 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9020411>.
catharsis. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 20 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9020799>.
comedy. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 22 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-51100>.
Davis, Gary W. Catch-22 and the Language of Discontinuity. NOVEL: A Forum on Fiction
12.1 (1978): 66-77.
delusion. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 22 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9029866>.
Erasmus, Desiderious. The Praise of Folly and Other Writings. Ed. Robert M. Adams. New
York: Norton, 1989. 3-87.
Farber, David, and Beth Bailey. The Columbia Guide to America in the 1960s. New York:
Columbia U.P., 2001.

Staaby 71
Fraser, David, and Vaughan Black. Legally Dead: The Grateful Dead and American Legal
Culture. Perspectives on the Grateful Dead. Ed. Robert G. Weiner. Westport:
Greenwood Press, 1999. 19-40.
Freud, Sigmund. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. London: The Hogarth Press,
1960.
Gilbert, James B. Popular Culture. American Quarterly. 35.5 (1983): 141-54.
Gold, Dale. Portrait of a Man Reading. Conversations with Joseph Heller. Ed. Adam J. Sorkin.
Jackson: U.P. of Mississippi, 56-60.
Golden, Leon. Aristotle on Comedy. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 42.3 (1984):
283-90.
Heller, Joseph. Catch-22. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2004.
Hffe, Otfried. Aristotle. Trans. Christine Salazar. Albany: SUNY Press, 2003.
Hoffman, Steven K. Impersonal Personalism: The Making of a Confessional Poetic. ELH 45.4
(1978): 687-709.
Horton, Gerd. Radio Goes to War: The Cultural Politics of Propaganda during World War II.
Berkeley: U of California Press, 2002.
humour. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 31 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9106291>.
Kellison, Cathrine. Producing for TV and Video: A Real-world Approach. Boston: Elsevier,
2006.
Kesey, Ken. One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest. New York: Penguin, 1962.
Knox, Israel. Towards a Philosophy of Humor. The Journal of Philosophy. 48.18 (1951): 54148.

Staaby 72
labyrinth. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 31 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9046731>.
Martin, Rod A. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrated Approach. Ontario: Elsevier, 2007.
Matusow, Allen J. The Unraveling of America: A History of Liberalism in the 1960s. New York:
Harper and Row, 1984.
McDonald, James L. I See Everything Twice!: The Structure of Joseph Hellers Catch-22. A
Catch-22 Casebook. Eds. Frederick Kiley and Walter McDonald. New York: Thomas Y.
Crowell, 1973. 102-8.
Mellard, James M. Catch-22: Dj vu and the Labyrinth of Memory. A Catch-22 Casebook.
Eds. Frederick Kiley and Walter McDonald. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1973. 10921.
Meredith, James H. The Literature of World War II: A Student Casebook to Issues, Sources and
Historical Documents. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1999.
military-industrial complex. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online.
31 Jan. 2009 <http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9389526>.
More, Sir Thomas. Utopia. New York: Dover, 1997.
new novel. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 31 Jan. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9007852>.
Obrdlik, Antonin J. Gallows Humor- a Sociological Phenomenon. The American Journal of
Sociology. 47.5 (1942): 709-16.
OQuin, Karen, and Joel Aronoff. Humor as a Technique of Social Influence. Social
Psychology Quarterly. 44.4 (1981): 349-57.

Staaby 73
Parker, Allene M. Drawing Borges: A Two-Part Invention on the Labyrinths of Jorge Luis
Borges and M.C. Esher. Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature. 55.2
(2001): 11-23.
Phillips, Nancy Edelman. Militarism and Grass-Roots Involvement in the Military-Industrial
Complex. The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 17.4 (1973): 625-655.
Plath, Sylvia. The Bell Jar. New York: Harper and Row, 1971.
Potts, Stephen W. Catch-22: Antiheroic Antinovel. Boston: Twayne, 1989.
Protherough, Robert. The Sanity of Catch-22. A Catch-22 Casebook. Eds. Frederick Kiley and
Walter McDonald. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 201-212.
Pynchon, Thomas. The Crying of Lot 49. New York: Harper Perennial, 1965.
Ritter, Jesse. Catch-22 as Avatar of the Social Surrealist Novel. A Catch-22 Casebook. Eds.
Frederick Kiley and Walter McDonald. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1973. 73-85.
Savage, Sean J. JFK, LBJ, and the Democratic Party. Albany: SUNY Press, 2004.
Schulz, Max F. Black Humor Fiction of the Sixties. Athens: Ohio UP, 1973.
Simon, Richard Keller. The Labyrinth of the Comic: Theory and Practice from Fielding to
Freud. Tallahassee: Tallahassee U.P. of Florida, 1985.
Spitz, Bob. The Beatles: The Biography. New York: Back Bay Books, 2006.
Stark, Howard J. The Anatomy of Catch-22. A Catch-22 Casebook. Eds. Frederick Kiley and
Walter McDonald. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1973. 145-58.
Stern, J.P. War and the Comic Muse: The Good Soldier Schweik and Catch-22. Comparative
Literature. 20.3 (1968): 193-216.
Styan, J.L. The Dark Comedy: The Development of Modern Comic Tragedy. New York:
Cambridge U.P., 1968.

Staaby 74
tragicomedy. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopdia Britannica Online. 7 Feb. 2009
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9073149>.
Turner, Steve. A Hard Days Write: The Stories Behind Every Beatles Song. New York:
HarperCollins, 2005.
Veale, Tony. Incongruity in humor: Root cause or epiphenomenon? International Journal of
Humor Research. 17.4 (2004): 419-28.
Waldmeir, Joseph J. Two Novelists of the Absurd. Wisconsin Studies in Contemporary
Literature. 5.3 (1964): 192-204.
Watson, Donald Gwynn. Erasmus Praise of Folly and the Spirit of Carnival. Renaissance
Quarterly. 32.3 (1979): 333-53.