bergson. laughter

8/8/2019 Bergson. Laughter

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bergson-laughter 1/61

LAUGHTER: AN ESSAY ON THE MEANING OF THE COMICHenri Bergson

Bergson's thinking typifies a peculiarly Gallic tendency torationalize the apparently ephemeral and subjective (inthis case, humor), discussing it in exquisitely rarefied

language in order to assert that which defies commonsense (a funny hat is not funny, laughter expresses noemotion, no one laughs alone) but partakes nonethelessof a logical inevitability. Laughter , first published in 1911,clearly draws upon the early years of Europeanmodernism, yet also prefigures the movement in someways. In recognizing the comic as it embodies itself in a"rigid," absentminded person, locked into repetitious,socially awkward behavior, Bergson--even as he looksbackward, primarily to Molière--seems to be spawning thesophisticated visual and physical comedy of Chaplin,Keaton, and Lloyd.

While Laughter won't quite explain why the Frenchlove Jerry Lewis, or keep you in stitches, it's abracing read that will make you think twice about laughing the next time someone stumbles into alamppost.— Robert Burns Neveldine



L A U G H T E R · H e n r i B e rg s o n p . 2a L A U G H T E R · H e n r i B e r g s o n p . 2b

LAUGHTER

AN ESSAY ONTHE MEANING OF THE COMIC

BY HENRI BERGSONMEMBER OF THE INSTITUTE PROFESSOR AT THE

COLLEGE DE FRANCE

AUTHORISED TRANSLATIONBY CLOUDESLEY BRERETON L. ES L. (PARIS), M.A.

(CANTAB) AND FRED ROTHWELL B.A. (LONDON)

TRANSLATORS' PREFACE

This work, by Professor Bergson, has been revised in detail by theauthor himself, and the present translation is the only authorisedone. For this ungrudging labour of revision, for the thoroughness with which it has been carried out, and for personal sympathy inmany a difficulty of word and phrase, we desire to offer ourgrateful acknowledgment to Professor Bergson. It may be pointedout that the essay on Laughter originally appeared in a series of three articles in one of the leading magazines in France, the Revuede Paris. This will account for the relatively simple form of the work and the comparative absence of technical terms. It will alsoexplain why the author has confined himself to exposing andillustrating his novel theory of the comic without entering into adetailed discussion of other explanations already in the field. He

none the less indicates, when discussing sundry examples, why theprincipal theories, to which they have given rise, appear to himinadequate. To quote only a few, one may mention those based oncontrast, exaggeration, and degradation.

The book has been highly successful in France, where it is in itsseventh edition. It has been translated into Russian, Polish, and

Swedish. German and Hungarian translations are underpreparation. Its success is due partly to the novelty of theexplanation offered of the comic, and partly also to the fact that theauthor incidentally discusses questions of still greater interest andimportance. Thus, one of the best known and most frequently quoted passages of the book is that portion of the last chapter in which the author outlines a general theory of art.

C. B. F. R.



L A U G H T E R · H e n r i B e rg s o n p . 3a L A U G H T E R · H e n r i B e r g s o n p . 3b

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I

THE COMIC IN GENERAL--THE COMIC ELEMENT IN FORMS AND MOVEMENTS-- EXPANSIVE FORCE OF THE COMIC

CHAPTER II

THE COMIC ELEMENT IN SITUATIONS AND THE COMICELEMENT IN WORDS

CHAPTER III

THE COMIC IN CHARACTER

CHAPTER I

THE COMIC IN GENERAL--THE COMIC ELEMENT IN FORMS AND MOVEMENTS-- EXPANSIVE FORCE OF THE COMIC.

What does laughter mean? What is the basal element in thelaughable? What common ground can we find between thegrimace of a merry- andrew, a play upon words, an equivocalsituation in a burlesque and a scene of high comedy? Whatmethod of distillation will yield us invariably the same essencefrom which so many different products borrow either theirobtrusive odour or their delicate perfume? The greatest of thinkers, from Aristotle downwards, have tackled this littleproblem, which has a knack of baffling every effort, of slippingaway and escaping only to bob up again, a pert challenge flung at

philosophic speculation. Our excuse for attacking the problem inour turn must lie in the fact that we shall not aim at imprisoningthe comic spirit within a definition. We regard it, above all, as aliving thing. However trivial it may be, we shall treat it with therespect due to life. We shall confine ourselves to watching it grow and expand. Passing by imperceptible gradations from one form toanother, it will be seen to achieve the strangest metamorphoses.

We shall disdain nothing we have seen. Maybe we may gain fromthis prolonged contact, for the matter of that, something moreflexible than an abstract definition,--a practical, intimateacquaintance, such as springs from a long companionship. Andmaybe we may also find that, unintentionally, we have made anacquaintance that is useful. For the comic spirit has a logic of itsown, even in its wildest eccentricities. It has a method in itsmadness. It dreams, I admit, but it conjures up, in its dreams, visions that are at once accepted and understood by the whole of a

bergson. laughter

Documents