[coldtea]

>I never understood that joke. Is it supposed to be an anti-joke? That's the only way it makes any sense as a joke.

It's just a joke based on going against the listener's common expectations -- like almost all jokes.

They expect a specific intent for crossing the road -- and having something to do with the fact that the being doing the crossing is a chicken, but instead they get the obvious and most immediate and base reason for anybody crossing a road.

[sdegutis]

Right, that's what makes it an anti-joke. Anti jokes can be funny. Just, it's weird that it's one of the first jokes we're introduced to growing up, because it's not a typical or even basic kind of joke.

[logfromblammo]

It's the introductory example of an anti-joke in the culture's humor-teaching curriculum.

A lot of the jokes that we tell kids are actually teaching them the basics of what is considered funny in our culture. Much of it demonstrates how to establish a pattern or preconception, then break or subvert it for the desired comedic effect.

For instance, you can't tell "banana-banana-orange" or "interrupting cow" as your first knock-knock joke, because you first have to establish the pattern of a "proper" knock-knock joke.

After the chicken crosses the road, you tell some shaggy dog stories, then you hit them with the never-ending setup, where the joke is in how long you can get them to listen to your pointless rambling while waiting for a punchline that never comes.