Comedy, far from being merely a source of laughter, is a complex artistic and cultural phenomenon.
- It intertwines humor, social critique, and narrative structure, engaging audiences both emotionally and intellectually.
Souad Khalil | Libya
Comedy is often perceived merely as a source of laughter, yet its nature is far more complex and nuanced. Throughout history, from ancient Greek theater to modern dramatic forms, comedy has served not only to amuse but also to provoke reflection, reveal social contradictions, and explore human behavior.
The term “comedy” itself has evolved over time. In medieval usage, as noted by scholars, it signified harmony, reconciliation, and resolution rather than mere wit or boisterous amusement. Even in contemporary contexts, comedy encompasses both laughter and a narrative drive toward resolution and unity, highlighting the interplay between humor and deeper human insights.
This article examines the multifaceted dimensions of comedy, exploring its historical development, its theoretical foundations, and its enduring role in literature and theater as a vehicle for both entertainment and cultural reflection.
Comedy—also known as ‘Comedia’ in its second technical term—derives from the Greek word ‘komos’, meaning noisy merriment, associated with the Dionysian festival procession. Comedy, as one of the two main genres in dramatic art, encompasses various forms of humor across ages, spirits, and personality traits, such as farce, amusement, jig, burlesque, and others. However, the precise dividing line between comedy and other dramatic forms cannot be definitively established, as technical elements often overlap among different genres.
A purely comedic play, meaning one without musical or lyrical interludes, consists of verbal and action-based material crafted in a special theatrical style. Its purpose, during performance, is to generate a general atmosphere of cheer that elicits the audience’s delight, smiles, or laughter. Consequently, it provides a cathartic effect, releasing sorrow, anxiety, despair, or frustration. In comedic plots, one does not encounter catastrophic or tragic scenes that distress the viewer. Characters, with their frustrations and contradictions in behavior, speech, actions, and appearance, primarily engage the audience’s playful side rather than the serious, profound one. Ultimately, all events conclude happily.
Dr. Johnson defined comedy as a theatrical representation of human life intended to evoke joy in the spectator. Aristotle, on the other hand, devoted no specific treatise to comedy, though he made brief references to it in Chapters Four and Five of his Poetics. Just as tragedy, in his view, originated spontaneously through leaders of dithyrambic choruses, comedy emerged under the guidance of leaders of phallic choruses—a point clarified by Dr. Ibrahim Hamadeh in his ‘Dictionary of Dramatic Terms’.
In ‘The Theory of Comedy’, by T.H. Nelson (translated by Mary Edward Nasif), numerous examples are analyzed and evaluated regarding comedy and laughter, both supporting and challenging these concepts. What, then, is the meaning of comedy? Many often understand comedy simply as something that provokes laughter, but this is inaccurate. In the middle Ages, as Neville Coghill noted, the term ‘comedy’ implied reconciliation and accord, rather than wit, quickness, or noisy mirth. Most comedies of that period began with an obstacle to happiness, ultimately resolving all difficulties. This conception persisted during the Renaissance, reminiscent of John Harington’s description of an innocent lady narrowly escaping execution for adultery, which he considered amusing—not for its humor, but for her ability to avoid disaster.
In this context, Philip Sidney and Ben Jonson warned against limiting comedy merely to laughter, even as they valued and appreciated humor and amusing others. The author distinguishes two evolving concepts of comedy: the first, widespread over time, associates comedy with laughter; the second, prevalent in the Middle Ages, emphasizes movement toward reconciliation, accord, and happiness. These two concepts often conflict, as laughter is typically linked to conflict, hatred, and vengeance, disrupting harmony rather than reinforcing it.
The psychoanalyst Charles Morgan observed contradictory notions in comedy: the drive toward reconciliation responds to human longing (e.g., the desire to restore a lost mother), while laughter arising from ridicule expresses a desire to triumph over a repressive authority figure. Yet, this is not meant as a reaction to psychoanalytic theory in general. Often, tension exists between elements of satire, challenge, and irreverence in any comedy, and the narrative trajectory toward harmony
This book contains 269 pages of studies, testimonies, comparisons, and analyzed examples. I have selected some summarized pages on comedy and its traditional and modern concepts.
One of the first observations about laughter is its problematic nature. Freud, who emphasized the importance of laughter for humans, noted the prevalence and superiority of aggressive and satirical jokes over non-satirical ones. When we laugh, it is usually directed at a person or a particular situation. As Neil observed in Beckett’s play ‘Endgame’, laughter often arises from fear or unhappiness. People seem to enjoy laughing at the misfortunes of others or at their deformities, especially physical impairments.
The English philosopher Bernard Mandeville, in the eighteenth century, described the human reaction to others’ misfortunes:
“In the face of disasters, we either laugh at others or pity them, depending on our feelings toward them—whether scorn or compassion. If a man falls and suffers a minor injury without affecting us, we usually laugh. This triggers alternating feelings of pity and scorn, as we apologize for our laughter, laugh again, and repeat the cycle.”
Thus, in the same situation, conflicting emotions blend: one may feel both compassion and ridicule. Many plays and films provide examples where satire and empathy coexist. After discussing some theories of laughter and its relation to controversial topics, two essential questions arise:
- Why do we need theories of laughter and comedy?
- Do laughter and comedy conform to theories, or are they diverse and resistant to strict theorization?
Shakespearean critic L.C. Knights argues that the comprehensiveness and solidity of literary production determine the value and quality of comedy. The methodology of comedy requires detailed explanation and analysis. Therefore, theories of comedy primarily aim for entertainment and amusement. As Redfern notes, the only generalization when discussing comedy is that laughter is one of three phenomena that capture human attention, the others being sneezing and sexual arousal.
A second issue arises from discussing laughter seriously, which often leads to analyses inconsistent with the playful nature of laughter. It is difficult to explain all instances of laughter and comedy through a single theory. Some recurring forms appear in commercial theatre, which Knights considers good comedy. For example, he analyzes the interaction between ‘commedia dell’arte’ (improvised comedy) and ‘commedia erudita’ (literary comedy) in Renaissance Italy, noting also the influence of music and silent cinema on Beckett and Queneau. These examples demonstrate the close relationship between theory and practice.
In Chapter Two, M.H. Abrams observes that the term “comedy” is applied primarily to plays, despite comical elements in poetry and prose. Since drama is the primary context for comedy, it is central to the history of written humorous literature, beginning in fifth-century BCE Athens. These dramatic comedies, written by Aristophanes, competed with other playwrights, and their works quickly faded from prominence. Aristophanes’ plays were characterized by structural plotlines, lively contemporary language, and remarkable humorous, ribald, and politically satirical scenes.
Thus, the term “comedy” or “farce” has been associated since ancient times with satire and laughter. Modern comedy, as explained in the book, primarily relies on written texts, rather than improvisation. Improvised comedy (commedia dell’arte), which flourished in Italy during the 16th and 17th centuries, is a prominent form of comedy, focusing mainly on contemporary comedic forms. Hence, the terms modern comedy and ancient comedy correspond, as do ‘commedia dell’arte’ and literary comedy (commedia erudita). Literary comedy traces its roots to Plautus and Terence, while ‘commedia dell’arte’ often borrowed dramatic plots from literary comedy.
Returning to the beginning, comedy involves two contrasting elements: laughter (often involving satire and discord) and the narrative movement toward a harmonious, joyful conclusion. Defining “comedy” precisely remains difficult. Umberto Eco explains that anyone attempting to define comedy from antiquity through Freud or Bergson concluded it is a broad term encompassing diverse, sometimes contradictory phenomena, including amusement, comedy, grotesque, parody, satire, wit, and more.
Laughter and the movement toward cohesion and consistency are central to comedy. These elements may conflict, with some works emphasizing one over the other. Eco suggests that any work containing these two fundamental comedic elements deserves study and reflection. Certain forms, such as behavioral farce and satire, fall under the broader concept of comedy.
Satire resembles comedy in its aim to amuse the audience. However, satire addresses topics or lessons that critique its audience. For instance, some works satirized apostate Hebrews with vivid imagery and sophisticated style, combining humor with moral and social commentary. Some theorists view comedy as an integral part of satire, functioning to educate and reform.
When observing a comedic work, one challenge is distinguishing which humorous elements are to be taken seriously and which are for laughter. The author draws on numerous examples and plays, summarizing content from the first and second chapters. The book contains fourteen chapters; the final chapter focuses on laughter and harmony, highlighting the tension in comedy between laughter (which can be destructive) and the narrative drive toward reconciliation, harmony, and acceptance of the surrounding world.
Bergson argues that laughter arising from ridicule and scorn affects social coexistence, contributing to adaptation and integration into society. Despite its harshness, the comedic character being mocked has lost flexibility and adaptability. Positive aspects of laughter are recognized, even with its cruelty.
In conclusion, comedy, while provoking laughter and satire, ultimately evokes amusement or sympathy, illustrating its dual nature.
Comedy, far from being merely a source of laughter, is a complex artistic and cultural phenomenon. It intertwines humor, social critique, and narrative structure, engaging audiences both emotionally and intellectually. Whether through satire, farce, or literary comedy, it illuminates human contradictions, fosters reflection, and offers a path toward reconciliation and harmony.
As discussed, laughter in comedy can both entertain and challenge, provoking responses ranging from amusement to empathy, from critique to insight. The enduring value of comedy lies not only in its capacity to amuse but also in its ability to reveal deeper truths about human nature and society. Thus, the study of comedy enriches our understanding of literature, theater, and the intricate interplay between humor, narrative, and human experience.
References:
The Theory of Comedy in Literature and Theatre, T.H.A. Nelson
Dictionary of Dramatic Terms, Dr. Ibrahim Hamadeh
Read: Bakhtin: Ideology and Language
______________
Souad Khalil, hailing from Libya, is a writer, poet, and translator. She has been writing on culture, literature and other general topics.
