No death Penalty, No Easter BunnyDeath penalty is not something people are used to hear or talk about, even though it is not far from our history as mankind. USA is the only country in the western world there still practices Death Penalty even though it has been forbidden in all the countries around them. A prisoner judged to death proximal waits in prison for 20-30 years for his penalty. In 2016 there were 2.902 prisoners convicted to Death Penalty according to the American Death Penalty Information Center.No Death Penalty No Easter Bunny is written by Colin Cohen in 2003. The topic of the essay is clear as the title. Cohen comes with different statements for Death Penalty in a humoristic tone which are so outrageous that it is funny. The interesting thing about Cohen is he uses irony, humor and sarcasm to make his point clear and it works. It seems like the narrative is for Death Penalty but throughout sarcasm and humor, he shows that he is actually against Death penalty and even provokes the people who support the Death penalty.
The vibe throughout the whole essay has a sarcastic tone and that is something that allows the narrator to be critical against the death penalty and with those who votes for it, without making someone angry. Colin Cohen uses his humor by saying that without Death penalty there would be no Easter Bunny hiding eggs for the children. “The truth is that the death penalty lies at the foundation of Christian religion: and without such a policy, we would not only be without Christianity, but we would also be without Easter bunnies.” Cohen claims here in a humoristic way that because of the Jews death penalty against Jesus Christ and his risen from the dead, there will no more be Easter bunnies. This is a humoristic and sarcastic way to prove his point against the death penalty. He makes fun of people who argue for the death penalty by using the Incongruity theory which makes people laugh because this does not match reality and it is exaggerated. In the same time, he also uses The Relief Theory because he is talking about death which is a taboo which people do not normally talk about. Therefore, laughter also deals with shame by releasing nervous energy. And laughing at our taboos creates a distance, which makes us feel that we are in control.
The death penalty is a topic that often evokes strong emotions and is not frequently discussed in everyday conversations. However, it is an issue that has a significant historical background. While many countries around the world have abolished the death penalty, the United States remains one of the few Western nations that still practices it. In fact, in 2016 alone, there were 2,902 prisoners convicted to the death penalty in the United States, according to the American Death Penalty Information Center.
Colin Cohen’s essay, "No Death Penalty, No Easter Bunny," written in 2003, takes a humorous and sarcastic approach to the topic. Cohen uses irony, humor, and sarcasm to convey his opposition to the death penalty and even provoke those who support it. By adopting a sarcastic tone throughout the essay, Cohen is able to criticize the death penalty and those who advocate for it without angering anyone.
One example of Cohen’s use of humor is when he claims that without the death penalty, there would be no Easter Bunny hiding eggs for children. He humorously suggests that the death penalty lies at the foundation of the Christian religion, and without it, there would be no Christianity or Easter bunnies. This statement is clearly exaggerated and intended to be humorous, but it serves to underscore Cohen’s point against the death penalty.
In his essay, Cohen employs the Incongruity theory of humor, which relies on creating a mismatch between what is expected and what actually occurs. By presenting outrageous and absurd statements, Cohen elicits laughter from his readers. Additionally, he also utilizes the Relief Theory of humor by addressing the taboo subject of death. Laughter, in this context, serves to release nervous energy and create a sense of control over the topic.
Overall, Cohen’s essay provides a unique and thought-provoking perspective on the death penalty. By using humor and sarcasm, he effectively challenges the arguments in favor of the death penalty while maintaining a lighthearted tone. His essay encourages readers to critically examine their beliefs and attitudes towards the death penalty, all while providing a humorous and engaging reading experience.