Monday, September 28, 2009

Arthur Schopenhauer and Soren Kierkegaard Generally Agree

Arthur Schopenhauer and Soren Kierkegaard generally agree with Kant on the Incongruity Theory of laughter. Comedy, to both philosophers, must arise from contradiction. But Schopenhauer explains in greater detail the meaning behind many of the terms concerning laughter. Wit is intentional and usually utilizes words. Likewise, the joke is the "intentionally ludicrous." Folly, then, is generally unintentional, and is found most often in action, rather than words. Pedantry is a form of folly which is, in Schopenhauer's explanation, "guided by reason in everything." Therefore, a pedant would perform actions based wholly on conceptual reasoning, not then, upon concrete experience. He goes on to explain that "irony is a joke concealed behind seriousness," and humor, opposing irony, "is seriousness concealed behind a joke." In shorter words, both philosophers believe that one cannot understand humor until he can first understand seriousness, for it is in the contradiction between the two that laughter may arise. Kierkegaard then explains, further than Schopenhauer, that "the comical is present wherever there is contradiction, and wherever one is justified in ignoring the pain, because it is non-essential."
I grouped these two philosophers together because I believe they are making the same argument, and one example may perhaps suffice for all the points above mentioned. Most definitely a pedant, the classic 1950s television show, I Love Lucy, grapples with the notions of comedy versus seriousness. While Lucy continuously attempts to be serious in success, she acts as if she understands a situation as a professional should. But without the proper training, she very often finds herself in quite humorous predicaments. The situations become humorous to the audience, because we understand the seriousness that Lucy so artfully destroys. In the following clip, Lucy tries to prove to her husband that she can go out and bring home the bacon; she wants to prove that she can take on the (1950s) "man's role." The professional atmosphere should be quite serious, but, as you may well observe, Lucy turns it into folly.

Watch Lucy in the Candy Episode

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Immanuel Kant's Incongruity Theory

Setting aside the Superiority Theory of laughter, we then proceed to Kant's introduction to the Incongruity Theory. Kant sees humor as a healthy animation of the mind and body reacting to sensations "that have no design at their basis." Like winning the jackpot, laughter often springs from the discovery of something unexpected upon no logical reasoning. Wit performs this function, in Kant's words, "so that we can thus reach the body through the soul and use the latter as the physician of the former." Laughter exercises the mind and body.
To further exercise your mind's comparative notions of logic and ill-logic, and to perhaps exercise your body by means of laughter, I now present a brief animation of the song "Everything You Know Is Wrong," by Weird Al Yankovic.

Watch "Everything You Know Is Wrong!"

Monday, September 21, 2009

Thomas Hobbes on the Superiority Theory

Thomas Hobbes, nearly two millenia after Plato and Aristotle's lives, carries on the discussion of the Superiority Theory concerning laughter. Agreeing with the established terms, Hobbes merely strengthens its authority. He explains that men laugh at the recognition of their own abilities. In his own words, "laughter without offense, must be at absurdities and infirmities abstracted from persons, and when all the company may laugh together: for laughing to one's self puts all the rest into jealousy and examination of themselves." (Hobbes, from Human Nature, as provided in Philosophy of Laughter, above cited) While I can understand the situation that Hobbes describes, for I can picture the Lindsy Lohan flick Mean Girls as an example of the harsh laughter of judgment, I must also add that true laughter must derive from countless other sources. Laughter, Hobbes himself coins as "always joy," so must this Superiority Theory be true of all people, or just the inwardly "distorted" and the self-conscious? As I read his words, I wonder if Hobbes ever spent his highly academic life with children. Children laugh, and I do not think they even understand others' infirmities. They also produce laughter; laughter which I believe to be of the purest form. I have a two-year old nephew who constantly causes me to laugh, quite often to the point of tears, and usually this laughter is caused by the things he does so well. His cleverness surprises me when, rather than acknowledging his mother threatening to leave the picnic and go home if he doesn't eat his sandwich, he turns to me and compliments me on my hair. Now, Thomas Hobbes, explain to me how this laughter could be "nothing else but sudden glory arising from some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others."

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Aristotle on Laughter

Aristotle generally agrees with Plato's views, but he adds to the notion of Superiority Theory. In the case of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, he explains the human personality as related to humor. On one end of the spectrum, we have the buffoon, in today's case, I would relate this to the television sitcom; its laugh tracks indicate when the audience should be laughing, dumbing down the humor to the point where the listener does not even have to pay attention to what is said. On the other end of the spectrum, we have what Aristotle calls "the boorish," those who do not take laughter lightly. I would compare this, again to television, with the example of political analyst talk shows; so invested are they in their political cause, that they rarely leave room for light-hearted humor. In the middle is the sophisticated; Aristotle's "well-bred and educated" mean. This jokester knows the proper moments and subject-matter to cause laughter in his audience. This I would compare to Tonight Show host Conan O'Brian. While his wit provides wonderful humor, he remains aware of his new position in prime-time television. He censors much of his comments, as opposed to his position on Late Night, where his audience would be generally less significant and perhaps expecting a moreso crude humor.

Friday, September 18, 2009

Plato, on laughter:

Plato introduces us to the Superiority Theory of laughter. John Morreall, editor of The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor, describes the Superiority Theory by suggesting that "laughter is always directed at somebody as a kind of scorn." In following, Plato's Philebus places Socrates in a dialogue with Protarchus, explaining the simultaneity of pleasure and pain in laughter: pleasure, in the laughter itself, and pain, in the ridicule of others. A simple example of this would be finding humor in a friend's clumsiness: he hits the softball, pride swelling in his chest as he gauges the distance of the flight. He decides to kick it in to high gear rounding first--but in doing so, trips over the bag into a flailing leap and rolls to a stop between first and second base. The opposing team tags him out. We laugh at this (or, at least, I certainly did when I witnessed this spectacle), because of the ridiculous attempt of success in a skill not highly practiced by the subject.

rachelslaughter

When writing out my newly acquired web address for this fresh, new realm of communication that I am about to enter, I notice the odd phrase which the English language's duality suddenly presents. Rachel's laughter, as pertaining to the UW Oshkosh undergraduate class, Rhetoric of Laughter, transforms itself, in the form of a web address (without the apostrophe), into Rachel slaughter. On that note...
What is rhetoric? A good question, to begin, for it seems as though there could be an endless list of possible definitions. Aristotle defines rhetoric as "the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion." Beyond that, he explains how a rhetorician must intimately know and understand human nature and how it works. Rhetoric guides human tendency, not simply by what is expressed , but by how it is expressed. This is style. He professes that, "appropriate style will adapt itself to the emotions of the hearers, the character of the speaker, and the nature of the subject." Style, rightfully coined as "the art of language," by classical tradition, refers to prose, poetry, use of simile, metaphor, epithet, etc. By using such techniques, the author may well invoke his audience to simultaneously arrive at common judgment.
Rhetoric of Laughter, then, would refer to the persuasive means by which laughter results. Returning to the above mentioned slaughter comment, I decided to keep my original web address, not only for the irony protruding from its dual meaning, but also to explain a bit of truth on my approach to this subject: it has always been my understanding that once a joke needs explaining, it has lost its former wit. Will intense study of this subject "slaughter" the slight sense of humor I may have retained from my carefree childhood? We shall see; though it was not the strongest element of my personality, anyway.