There is a laugher that is orderly, and a laughter based on
absurdity. A journalist writes an
article, that breaks no laws. An article
that the authorities acknowledge did no harm.
Yet, deprives the journalist of a job and opportunities. The authorities represent order, which
justifies their desire to forget the person who the article was based on. The authorities agree that nothing serious was
done as the article used a pseudonym, and collected negligible fees. Yet, the journalist becomes an unwelcome
entity in society. An absurd
situation. What happened to the
journalist and what is humorous about the situation?
Questions to Consider while Reading the Book
•What is the raison d’etre of the book? For what purpose did the author write the book? Why do people read this book?