Los Angeles Review of Books debate on “Genuine Pretending: On the Philosophy of the Zhuangzi” by David E. Cooper, Paul J. D’Ambrosio, Hans-Georg Moeller:
lareviewofbooks.org/article/decoding-the-zhuangzi-a-debate-on-hans-georg-moeller-and-paul-j-dambrosios-genuine-pretending/
Moeller and D’Ambrosio seem to claim that Cooper’s criticism that they are overzealous in the search for humour in Zhuangzi passages means that Cooper disregards humour, its power and its significance. I don’t think he implies that at all.
I don’t think that their response implies anything about Cooper. I think they continue to suggest, contra Cooper’s claim of overzealousness, that there is *something* humorous about the passages, and that this humor plays out in a variety of ways beyond the ‘ironic’ or ‘satirical’.
That could be William. I got this impression from this: “He does, however, find our insistence on the humorous nature of many passages “overzealous” … To disregard humor in the Zhuangzi is to miss its focus on incongruity. Humor is arguably the most powerful literary device in this text…”