What is the
relationship between humor and contradiction? What is the
relationship between laughter and power?
Woody Allen's “The
Whore of Mensa” and Mark Twain's “Jim Blaine and His
Grandfather's Old Ram” are both explorations of humor based in
incongruity and contradiction, as the characters in the story refuse
to meet our expectations. Allen takes a funny contradiction: an
intellectual brothel, and runs with it. Twain's story defies our
expectations (and those of the narrator's) because the Grandfather
never actually tells the story of the Old Ram, despite our
expectation that he will eventually do so.
Zora Neale Hurston's
“The Gilded Six-Bits” begins to
answer the question of not only why something is humorous in the
abstract—but also why we might laugh. Hobbes and Plato both find
the root of humor in relationships of power: the strong laughing at
the weak. In “The Gilded Six-Bits,” Joe has the final laugh
against Slemmons when he reveals the falsity of Slemmons'
wealth-claim (Plato sees identifies false claims of wealth as comic),
and also has the last laugh because he keeps his wife, Missie May,
despite Slemmons' attempt to claim her as his own. When Joe breaks
into unexpected laugher at discovering Slemmons and Missie May in bed
together, it's a recognition of his broken expectation, and the
laugher comes from the power imbalance. Allen's “Death Knocks”
plays with contradiction and power, too, with the absurd image of
“Death” falling through a window and playing cards, and the
balance of power upset as Nat, doomed to die, refuses to obey fate.
Plato's Republic
sought to describe the features of a utopia. While discussing this
book in my Philosophy class, Dr. Bagley suggested that Socrates
enjoys (perhaps even finds humorous) presenting the features of his
perfect polis that he
knows will never be accepted by the broader population (such as rule
by a philosopher-king and the communizing of all property). Socrates
believes that the selfish aspects of human nature will need to be
completely overcome in order to establish a just city. Perhaps this
is why Plato's opposition to humor seems so contradictory to our
every day experience. In a perfect world, maybe there would be no
laughter. But the world is far from perfect; in Christian terms, it's
fallen. Kant categorizes laughter as an animal function, beneath the
intellectual capacities of his definition of humanity (this may be
partly based on Kant's flawed—by modern medicinal standards—theory
of how humor affects the internal organs). I would argue that
laughter is an authentically human response to the world in which we
live.
The
Christian worldview of Jesuit education began with the rebellious
death of Jesus on the cross, an image which Edith Stein once referred
to as “the sign of contradiction.” This begins to explicate
Kierkegaard's remark that “Christianity is the most humorous view
of life in world-history.” Humanity's struggle against spiritual
sin and worldly oppression is finally won not by the expected soldier
Messiah, but by the weakest of humans. The Romans laugh because they
believe they have won, but the Christians laugh because they trust
that they have ultimately won.
King's “Letter
from a Birmingham City Jail” is not meant to be a humorous document. But perhaps that
is because King recognized that it was still within the realm of
human possibility to overcome oppression. Sometimes, as Joe teaches
us when he knows he can never reverse Slemmons' momentary triumph,
all we have left to fight the contradiction and weakness of human
existence is to have the last laugh.
No comments:
Post a Comment