Everyone knows that humor is important. It permeates our
entertainment. Is a huge part of social conversation.
Builds friendships and romantic relationships. Affects culture.
And so on. However, despite it being everywhere, it is seemingly
rare that anyone thinks much about why. What it means to laugh
and why we like to so much. And how this simple involuntary
cackle of the voice can influence so much of the world.
20th century American writer, EB White said that analyzing humor is like dissecting a
frog, “Few people are interested and the frog dyes of it.” However, of course, people
still dissect frogs, because some people ARE interested. And unlike the dissection of a
frog, arguably, the outcome of looking into the nature of humor reveals something beautiful.
Of course, there are many different types of comedy.
Standup comedy, comedy films, theatre, music, literature,
commonplace conversational humor, and so one. Furthermore, there
are many subgenres within each category of comedy. However,
what’s interesting is what seemingly strings them all together.
The ingredients of a comedic occurrence and the gravitational
pull that we all feel towards it. There are several theories on the nature of
humor and what makes a funny thing funny. However, one of,
if not the primary and most popularly accepted theory is known
as the Incongruity Theory. Simply put, the Incongruity Theory
suggests that something is funny when one realizes a difference
between what is expected and what actually happens. A discrepancy
between a person’s concept of a thing and their perceptual
experience of the thing, when both are suppose to go together,
but don’t. This theory was proposed, accepted, and discussed
by renowned philosophers like James Beattie, Immanuel
Kant, Arthur Schopenhauer and Søren Kierkegaard. In reference
to this principle, Kierkegaard said, “Man is the
only animal that laughs and weeps: for he is the only animal that
is struck with the difference between what things are, and what
they ought to be.” Coinciding with the Incongruity Theory, 21st
century behavioral scientist, Peter McGraw, crafted a theory known as The Benign Violation
Theory. In which, it is suggested that humor is found when a violation or disruption of
one’s expectations or sense of normality occurs, but specifically, only when the violation
is felt as benign. In other words, the violation does not cause any real harm to the person
perceiving it. This of course means that one’s sense of humor is relative to their perception
of how the world is or ought to be as well as their perception of what is harmful or
offensive within it. Regardless of the relativity of one’s sense
of humor, generally everyone’s returns to the same
principle of experiencing something unexpected, irrational,
or incongruent,
which begs the question; why is it that when something goes
wrong; when something is close to being painful; or when
something dupes the rational mind do we experience it as funny
and pleasurable? It is in the nature of the human being to
take him or her self fairly seriously. A human is both consciously
and rationally aware of itself, and so what option
is there other than to be conscious and rational about its
self and its existence? However, the experience of something
humorous confronts us with the realization that our
logic and sensibility is, at least in the instance, inadequate or
incongruent with reality. That we didn’t and couldn’t know
what was going to happen on the other side of the joke or comedic
occurance. 20th century existentialist philosopher Albert
Camus writes, “Man stands face to face with the irrational.
He feels within him his longing for happiness and for reason.
The absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need
and the unreasonable silence of the world.” And
so, how does a rational being confront the idea that its existence
might not be rational, but rather absurd? Perhaps the answer
is simply to laugh.
We all share in the same susceptibility of being wrong and
coming face to face with the apparently unknowable, indifferent
conditions of the universe. The ultimate comedian is life
itself, as it apathetically mocks our attempts to put our foot
on it. No matter our attempts to attribute meaning to existence;
no matter anyone’s truth, it is fair to argue that the only
truth anyone can ever be sure of is that they can’t be sure of
their own truth. And perhaps it is obligatory here to say that
this might not even be true. Regardless, the point is, there is
an inherent longing for certainty in human life. A longing that
manifests itself in all kinds of ridiculous ways. Ways that can
be harmful, misleading, or despairing. Humor helps us counter
balance this, as if the mind came equipped with a sort of self-
medicating feature required to survive this conscious experience
of existence. Humor helps us remember to lighten up a little
when we fall too deeply into ourselves as individuals and
as collectives. It helps us realize things aren’t always as
they seem nor as serious. It reminds us of how little we know
about what might happen next and that we shouldn’t think
too pompously of one’s self or live with too cold or too rigid of
beliefs that claim ultimate power or certainty in the absurdity
of life. It shows us that we are all pretty goofy and foolish,
but that that’s ok and that we should share in the laughter,
rather than fight over the despair.
Interestingly, many philosophers of the past, including
some of the aforementioned, negatively critiqued humor’s role in
the human condition. Immanuel Kant argued that the joy of
laughter is purely physical rather than intellectual. He posed
the questioned that if to be human is to be rational and seek
rational understanding, how could it be positive to realize and
experience the irrational? However, if in fact we do exist in an
absurd relationship with the universe, is it not of value that
we can and do transmute the absurdity into playfulness,
enjoyableness, and happiness? Is that not the most rational
thing left to do? The role of the comedian is no different than
the artist or the philosopher. The painter or the writer.
The filmmaker or the musician. To turn the mundane into the exciting.
The bleak into the enjoyable. The unspeakable into the discernable.
And to help us better consider and adapt our perspectives
of the world with sincerity and honesty only possible to
the medium. Perhaps not all comedy and humor can be seen
as positive, but fundamentally, in every well-intended
comedic moment there exists an attempt to transmute the conscious
experience of the absurd and chaotic into something pleasurable,
earnest, playful, clever, or interesting. And in every experience
of laughter we are reminded of how foolish we are, but how
joyful we can
be nonetheless.