Fresh Air: Laughs Book

One of the main reasons I'm glad I speak German is that I can understand Gerhard Polt. His humor does not translate well in other languages; his observations on German conservatism can be misinterpreted. Even his Bavarian dialect doesn't connect in some parts of the German-speaking world. One my greatest regrets is that I don't speak any other languages because I know I'm missing so many great laughs. I remember a few years back when my favorite television comedy, Fawlty Towers, was going to premiere in Germany'dubbed, of course'and being horrified by how poorly it translated. My friend looked at me and shook his head as he shamed me, "What's so funny about this?" It took me some time to elevate my standing in his eyes. My obsessive love for comedy led to me this philosophical nugget.

The English translation of Henri Bergson's Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic was published in 1911. Despite its age, many of his observations about humor still hold up. A fundamental concept to understand why people laugh is rigidity, or as I would call it: expectation. He uses the example of finding humor when we see someone walking who trips, staggers awkwardly and perhaps falls (if they don't get hurt, although some might find humor in that). When we expect a certain outcome, we can find humor in the unexpected. This is the essence of great slapstick in many silent movies. The opposite is also true. We see humor in events when our expectations do not happen. This type of comedy is universal.

Laughter does not exist in a vacuum; to create and appreciate comedy, to link it to both the intellect and emotion, is uniquely human. When we see humor in animals, it is because we infer some human trait or activity in them. We do the same with inanimate objects. We must be able to compare or identify it with something we already understand, a frame of reference, be it experience, context, language or culture, is required. For example, when Bergson writes "[a]bsentmindedness is always comical," it conjures images of Lord Emsworth from P.G. Wodehouse's Blandings Castle stories. We all have met someone like him. Moreover, cultural context and a frame of reference are needed to produce laughter. Or, as Bergson writes, "Comedy depicts characters we have already come across and shall meet again." Laughter bonds. Its "business [is] to repress any separatist tendency." To take this argument to its extreme, laughter creates community; the more we laugh together, the more we find common feelings among ourselves.

These insights impress even more today because Bergson would not have known about Charlie Chaplin; what few Lumière-inspired films he may have seen were mostly technological novelties. He knew nothing about P.G. Wodehouse or stand-up comics or cartoons. He certainly couldn't have envisioned feature films with color and sound or television sitcoms. His views of "the comic" were based on personal experience and observations, reading, and from viewing plays, indeed many of his examples of humor are based on old French plays, especially by Molière:"You are only bound to treat people according to form," says Dr. Diaforius in the Malade imaginaire. Again, says Dr. Bahis, in L'Amour medicine: "It is better to die through following the rules than to recover through violating them."Bergson's humor seems to consist of a chuckle or a wry smile. I wonder if he ever experienced a gasping-for-air, snot-bubble-producing, tear-inducing kind of laugh. What would he have thought about a classic Marx Brothers scene or Groucho's quick quips? Or a classic Bugs Bunny cartoon? Would he have reveled in a classic routine by Bob and Ray? Would he have have been offended by the stereotyped Inspector Clouseau? I'm guessing he might have had some difficulties with Mel Brooks movies, but he might have loved some scenes from The History of the World, Part One.

But one part of comedy for which he would likely have been unprepared is how important it has become help cope with social and political issues. In the U.S., George Carlin arguably gave birth to the genre with bits like Seven Dirty Words, which led to the Supreme Court, and the Ten Commandments. This has led to comedians like Jon Stewart, John Oliver, and Samantha Bee becoming the most honest journalists and social commentators in the U.S. today. Similar trends are taking place all over the world, two of my favorites being the characters Erwin Pelzig and Jonathan Pie. I would have loved to read Bergson's thoughts on this.