In "Laughter"
by Henri Bergson, he points out that comic, which is the element or quality of
comedy, does not exist naturally. Instead, the comic phenomenon feeds off the
sea of emotions in mankind. I think that this is an interesting and unique view
because I have always assumed that I laugh because I am seeing or hearing
something amusing instead of consciously finding the amusement present.
The comic exists because
of the shadow of feelings and thoughts that human put on an object. Take away
the active thinking or relating to the aforementioned object, there is probably
nothing on the object that would induce laughter. It is the same as saying that
something humorous to adults might not be the same way for children because
they lack in the appropriate knowledge, or something funny to you might not be
the same to the person next to you because he is not equipped with the similar
experiences. Therefore, comedy is very individual, subjective and personal.
So what is the point of
recognizing that comic is specific and private? Well think of pranks in general.
Many misunderstandings can sprout from the mere over-seriousness of the person
conducting the prank or the person whom the prank is being played on. Say a Mr.
A thought that it would be fun to apply a layer of super-glue on his work colleague,
Mr. B’s chair so that when Mr. B comes in and sit on his chair, he would be
stuck to the chair for the next few hours until he figures a way to let himself
loose. Unfortunately, Mr. B just so happen to lost his job that day and is in
no mood for jokes. When he finds himself stuck to his chair, his would most
likely be furious instead of amused. To make matters worse, he is wearing his
favorite pair of pants and he is asked to leave the office within the next
hour. Would that still be funny? Mr. A assumed that his prank would be funny
because he is imagining the prank from a third person’s perspective. What if
the tables were turned and he finds himself being the victim instead? Is he not
effectively putting his own thoughts and emotions on his pranks before he finds
it funny?
I agree that comic is not exist naturally. I also agree that it is very private and individual. There is no one thing that will make every person in the whole world laugh.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading Bergson's argument because of the thought that we only laugh at animals or objects because we place human emotions upon them. The part of me that loves animals and all my pets says that they have their own emotions and thoughts (and I'm sure they do) but of course they are inhuman thoughts and emotions. Nobody can ever know exactly what their dog or cat is thinking. I might laugh at my cat for being so smug with himself, but of course I don't know if that's really how he feels. His expression that I consider "smug" might just be his sleepy face.
ReplyDeleteThis post points to the important role perspective plays in the comic. In your example, Ai Lin, the pranked person is outside the circle (the small society who is in on the joke) so he might become furious, as you say. Still, I want to explore this idea in class tomorrow to help us understand how laughter functions in the world.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree! Something funny that is not appropriately expressed might become an insult to another party. We have to always consider the other's personalities and characters, and how far they can take our jokes before pranking them. To have a successful comical effect, I think it involves many aspects: settings, people, story behind it, etc.
ReplyDelete