Why are things funny?
the funny is a dynamic, indefinite thing and treating it as such is why bergson writes this
I don’t understand why emotion gets in the way of laughing
It seems like what he’s describing applies to a relatively narrow field of comedy
I.e. the places where empathy would prevent you from laughing.
“Its appeal is to intelligence, pure and simple”
The laughable element is mechanical inelasticity
In drama, vice is fully integrated into the characters, in comedy, it retains a definite presence
“To realise this more fully, it need only be noted that a comic character is generally comic in proportion to his ignorance of himself.”
https://www.britannica.com/art/dramatic-irony ?
“It is unnecessary to carry this analysis any further”
Laughter is a tool society has created to ensure people do not become too reliant on routines (inelasticity) and do not drift away from the society they are in (as inelasticity is a sign of eccentricity)
Laughter, then, does not belong to the province of esthetics alone, since unconsciously (and even immorally in many particular instances) it pursues a utilitarian aim of general improvement.
The attitudes, gestures and movements of the human body are laughable in exact proportion as that body reminds us of a mere machine.
Something appears more laughable when the causes of a comical effect appear more natural
When people act in a repetitive way, the begin to resemble an automaton (robot) and this incongruity is what provokes laughter
Imitation is funny because it highlights humans as mechanical
Again, laughter serves as a tool to avoid people falling into excessively rigid patterns of behavior
_Such a proposition as the following : “My usual dress forms part of my body” is absurd in the eyes of reason. Yet imagination looks upon it as true. “A red nose is a painted nose,” “A negro is a white man in disguise,” are also absurd to the reason which rationalises; but they are gospel truths to pure imagination. _
Doesn’t this directly contradict his idea that laughter is borne purely out of reason?
Ceremonies in social life are funny to us when detached from their social meaning because, once again, their repetitive/mechanical nature is funny (as stated prior)
A mechanical element introduced into nature and an automatic regulation of society, such, then, are the two types of laughable effects at which we have arrived .
The result of the combination will evidently
be a human regulation of affairs usurping the
place of the laws of nature
“Experience is in the wrong” is my argument of choice henceforth
Any incident is comic that calls our attention to the
physical in a person, when it is the moral side
that is concerned.
Though I’m not sure if this will be stated in the text it appears that, according to Bergson, comedy arises due to the conflict between the capacities of the mind and the limitations of the body
It is not necessary to fully equate a person with a function or object to create a comic effect even just starting is enough
Depersonification of people for their roles is another way to achieve comedy, once again, due to the contrast between the view of that person as an “object” and our perception