Enlightenment Satire by Werner von Koppenfels

※ The following is taken intact from Werner von Koppenfels' "'Nothing is ridiculous but what is deformed': Laughter as a Test of Truth in Enlightenment Satire" as anthologized in A History of English Laughter, without any of my personal critique. This blog post is therefore subject to immediate removal upon notice. ※

4. The bitter laugh: The mock-heroic mode as a grimace of moral disgust.

Satire as a genre--we have only to think of its founding father Aristophanes--is not afraid of using the filthy and obscene in order to humiliate man's pride, to literally cast dirt on his aspiration to be a rational animal. Now neoclassical taste, though by no means prudish, put a ban on any detailed or drastic representation of man's more animal aspects like the sexual or the excremental functions. Readers of Gulliver's Travels, however, will remember that the disgusting aspects of man's animal nature play a conspicuous part in the satiric narrative, especially in Book IV, which presents a shockingly unflattering picture of mankind.

Pope dedicated his second mock-epic The Dunciad to his friend Swift, and something of Swift's taboo-breaking 'excremental vision' seems to have found its way into the elegant heroic couplets of Pope's masterpiece, which caused a public outcry when it first came out in 1728. In tone and subject matter it could not be more different from the [sic.] Rape of the Lock. Following the lead of Dryden's Mac Flecknoe, Pope outdoes his model, and uses Virgil's Aeneid as a heroic foil to stage the coronation of a king of dunces and the coming into power of a mindless mass culture of dulness in Britain.

MLA7:
Werner, von Koppenfels. "'Nothing Is Ridiculous But What Is Deformed': Laughter as a Test of Truth in Enlightenment Satire" A History of English Laughter: Laughter from "Beowulf" to Bekett and Beyond. Ed. Manfred Pfister. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2002. 57-67. Print. (The entire excerpt is taken from Page 64.)

"On the Nature of Laughter" ("De l'essence du rire"; 1855) by Charles Baudelaire (3/3: The Distinction in Between: Joy/Laughter, the Comic/the Grotesque, the Absolute Comic/the Significant Comic)

(Picture taken from "Charles Baudelaire." WIKIPEDEA.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Baudelaire. July 24, 2018.)

In Part V of "De l'essence du rire,"* Baudelaire deals with the distinction between joy and laughter. According to Baudelaire, joy is "single," while laughter is "double." Namely, joy is one solid entity all by itself, while laughter is only an expression provoked by a feeling of conflicts, or, a "double" (two-fold) feeling.

The distinction between the comic and the grotesque is also specified here: the comic is an imitation; the grotesque is a creation. The grotesque, therefore, seems to be on a higher artistic level for it is a response toward denial of common sense and it is an expression provoked by superiority of humans to nature, not of one person to another, as it is (the primitive form of sense of superiority) in the case of the comic.

Baudelaire refers to the comic as the ordinary comic, the customary comic, the comic associated with laughter caused by behavior or something commonplace--i. e., "the significative comic" (le comique significatif). The significative comic is an easy-to-analyze comic because it is composed of double or contradictory elements (this does remind us of the incongruity theory).

On the other hand, Baudelaire refers to the grotesque as something closer to innocent life, closer to absolute joy, and closer to nature--i. e., "the absolute comic" (le comique absolue). The absolute comic is not anything of a double or contradictory nature, but a single, solid entity, which is to be understood through intuition alone, instead of finding elements in contradictory categories.

V.**

1.         il faut d’abord bien distinguer la joie d’avec le rire. La joie existe par elle-même, mais elle a des manifestations diverses. (it is necessary to draw a distinction between joy and laughter. Joy exists by itself, but it has many different ways to show.) 

2.         Le rire n’est qu’une expression, un symptôme, un diagnostic. Symptôme de quoi ? Voilà la question. La joie est une. Le rire est l’expression d’un sentiment double, ou contradictoire (Laughter is only an expression, a symptom, a diagnostic. Symptom of what? That is the question. Joy is one single thing; laughter is the expression of a double or contradictory feeling.)

3.         je veux parler du rire causé par le grotesque. Les créations fabuleuses, les êtres dont la raison, la légitimation ne peut pas être tirée du code du sens commun, excitent souvent en nous une hilarité folle, excessive, et qui se traduit en des déchirements et des pâmoisons interminables. (I'd like to talk about laughter caused by the grotesque. Fabulous creations, beings whose reason of existence cannot be justified by common sense, often excite in us a crazy, excessive hilarity which manifests itself in endless schisms and swoons.)

4.         Le comique est, au point de vue artistique, une imitation ; le grotesque, une création. Le comique est une imitation mêlée d’une certaine faculté créatrice, c’est-à-dire d’une idéalité artistique. Or, l’orgueil humain, qui prend toujours le dessus, et qui est la cause naturelle du rire dans le cas du comique, devient aussi cause naturelle du rire dans le cas du grotesque, qui est une création mêlée d’une certaine faculté imitatrice d’éléments préexistants dans la nature. Je veux dire que dans ce cas-là le rire est l’expression de l’idée de supériorité, non plus de l’homme sur l’homme, mais de l’homme sur la nature. (The comic is, from the artistic point of view, an imitation; the grotesque, a creation. The comic is an imitation combined with a certain creative faculty, namely, with an artistic ideality. Now, human pride, which always prevails, is the natural cause of laughter in the case of the comic [sense of superiority in human nature makes certain things laughable]; it also becomes the natural cause of laughter in the case of the grotesque. The grotesque is a creation combined with a certain imitative faculty that involves elements preexisting in nature. I'd like to say that, in this case, laughter is the expression of an idea of superiority, yet no longer superiority of one person to another, but of humans to nature.)

5.         le rire causé par le grotesque a en soi quelque chose de profond, d’axiomatique et de primitif qui se rapproche beaucoup plus de la vie innocente et de la joie absolue que le rire causé par le comique de mœurs. (the laughter caused by the grotesque has in itself something profound, self-evident, and primitive, something much closer to innocent life and absolute joy than the laughter caused by the customary/ordinary comic.) 

6.         le grotesque domine le comique d’une hauteur proportionnelle. (the grotesque prevails over the comic on a much larger scale.)

7.         J’appellerai désormais le grotesque comique absolu, comme antithèse au comique ordinaire, que j’appellerai comique significatif. Le comique significatif est un langage plus clair, plus facile à comprendre pour le vulgaire, et surtout plus facile à analyser, son élément étant visiblement double : l’art et l’idée morale ; mais le comique absolu, se rapprochant beaucoup plus de la nature, se présente sous une espèce une, et qui veut être saisie par intuition. Il n’y a qu’une vérification du grotesque, c’est le rire, et le rire subit.; (I shall refers to the grotesque as the absolute comic, as opposed to the ordinary comic, referred to as the significative comic. The significative comic is a clearer language, easier for the vulgar to understand, and above all easier to analyse, with obviously double elements--of art and of morality. But the absolute comic, much closer to nature, shows itself as one single entity and demands comprehension by intuition. There is only one way to verify the grotesque--it is laughter, the sudden laughter.)

8.         Le comique ne peut être absolu que relativement à l’humanité déchue (The absolute comic is possible only when humanity fails./ The comic, only in relation to fallen humanity, can be absolute.)

*MLA7: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. "De L'essence Du Rire." Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques. Wikisource, N. p, n.d. Web. 14 July 2018. <https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire>.

MLA8: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. “De L'essence Du Rire.” Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques, Wikisource, fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire.

** The following translations are mine.

"On the Nature of Laughter" ("De l'essence du rire"; 1855) by CharlesBaudelaire (2/3: The Birth of Laughter and Christianity)

 (photo source: http://citation-celebre.leparisien.fr/citations/38361)

In Part Four of "De l'essence du rire," Baudelaire again maintains that laughter comes from the mind that instills ridiculousness into a certain object and hence nothing is by its very nature laughable unless made a target to be laughed at. Accordingly, on a cultural level, all religious idols can be targets of laughs and ridicules for Christians. Of course, it is not that non-Christian beliefs and gods are laughable; it is the monotheist mindset of Christians that despises non-Christian communities by making fun of their beliefs and gods.

IV.

1.         Quant aux figures grotesques que nous a laissées l’antiquité, les masques, les figurines de bronze, les Hercules tout en muscles, les petits Priapes à la langue recourbée en l’air, aux oreilles pointues, tout en cervelet et en phallus, — quant à ces phallus prodigieux sur lesquels les blanches filles de Romulus montent innocemment à cheval, ces monstrueux appareils de la génération armée de sonnettes et d’ailes, je crois que toutes ces choses sont pleines de sérieux. Vénus, Pan, Hercule, n’étaient pas des personnages risibles. On en a ri après la venue de Jésus, Platon et Sénèque aidant. Je crois que l’antiquité était pleine de respect pour les tambours-majors et les faiseurs de tours de force en tout genre, et que tous les fétiches extravagants que je citais ne sont que des signes d’adoration, ou tout au plus des symboles de force, et nullement des émanations de l’esprit intentionnellement comiques. Les idoles indiennes et chinoises ignorent qu’elles sont ridicules ; c’est en nous, chrétiens, qu’est le comique.* (As for the grotesque figures handed down to us from antiquity: the masks, the bronze figurines, the all-muscular Hercules, the little figures of Priapus (whose tongue thrusts in the air, whose ears are pointed, and whose glans and penis stand out of proportion), the prodigious penes the fair daughters of Romulus (the founder and the first emperor of Rome) innocently ride upon (which are monstrous reproductive organs bedecked with bells and equipped and wings)--I believe that all these abound in profound seriousness. Venus, Pan, Hercules had never been laughable personages; they were laughed at only after the advent of Jesus, with the help of Plato and Seneca. I believe that ancient people were full of respect for drum majors and performers of all kinds of feats of strength. And, all the aforementioned extravagant artifacts were statues for worship, or, in addition, symbols of strength, but not intended for some comic relief the mind.  The Indian and Chinese goods do not know they are ridiculous; it is in us Christians that their ridiculousness exists.)**

*MLA7: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. "De L'essence Du Rire." Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques. Wikisource, N. p, n.d. Web. 14 July 2018. <https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire>.

MLA8: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. “De L'essence Du Rire.” Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques, Wikisource, fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire.

** The translation is mine.

"On the Nature of Laughter" ("De l'essence du rire"; 1855) by Charles Baudelaire (1/3: Laughter Is Evil by Nature)

(Picture taken from "BAUDELAIRE : DE L’ESSENCE DU RIRE (annoté): Curiosités Esthétiques (French Edition) Kindle Edition." amazon. (https://www.amazon.com/BAUDELAIRE-LESSENCE-annot%C3%A9-Curiosit%C3%A9s-Esth%C3%A9tiques-ebook/dp/B019DEBKLG. February 13, 2018.)

In his "De l'essence du rire,"* Baudelaire seems to make sense of three things: 1. laughter is evil by nature; 2. the birth of laughter and Christianity; 3. a distinction should be drawn between joy and laughter, the comic and the grotesque, the absolute comic ("le comique absolu") and the significative comic ("le comique significatif").**

II

1.         Aux yeux de Celui qui sait tout et qui peut tout, le comique n’est pas (In the eyes of the Almighty, the comic does not exist).

2.         le comique disparaît au point de vue de la science et de la puissance absolues (From the viewpoint of the absolute power and the absolute knowledge, the comic disappears).

3.         le rire est généralement l’apanage des fous, et qu’il implique toujours plus ou moins d’ignorance et de faiblesse (Laughter is in general a privilege of the crazy, and it implies more or less ignorance or weakness).

4.         Il est certain, si l’on veut se mettre au point de vue de l’esprit orthodoxe, que le rire humain est intimement lié à l’accident d’une chute ancienne, d’une dégradation physique et morale. Le rire et la douleur s’expriment par les organes où résident le commandement et la science du bien ou du mal : les yeux et la bouche (It is certain that, when one speaks from a stance of orthodoxy, human laughter is closely linked to the accident of the Ancient Fall, a degradation both physical and moral. Laughter and pain are expressed by organs in which commands and knowledge of Good and Evil reside: the eyes and the mouth).

5.         le comique est un élément damnable et d’origine diabolique (the comic is a damnable element and it is of a diabolic origin).

III

1.         Le rire vient de l’idée de sa propre supériorité. Idée satanique s’il en fut jamais (Laughter comes from the idea of one's own sense of superiority. A satanic idea if there was any) !

2.         le rire est une des expressions les plus fréquentes et les plus nombreuses de la folie (laughter is the most frequent and numerous expression of madness).

3.         si l’on veut creuser cette situation, on trouvera au fond de la pensée du rieur un certain orgueil inconscient (if one is willing to go deep into this situation, one will find in the depths of the thought of laughter a certain unconscious pride).

IV

1.         Le rire est satanique, il est donc profondément humain. Il est dans l’homme la conséquence de l’idée de sa propre supériorité ; et, en effet, comme le rire est essentiellement humain, il est essentiellement contradictoire, c’est-à-dire qu’il est à la fois signe d’une grandeur infinie et d’une misère infinie, misère infinie relativement à l’Être absolu dont il possède la conception, grandeur infinie relativement aux animaux. C’est du choc perpétuel de ces deux infinis que se dégage le rire. Le comique, la puissance du rire est dans le rieur et nullement dans l’objet du rire. Ce n’est point l’homme qui tombe qui rit de sa propre chute, à moins qu’il ne soit un philosophe, un homme qui ait acquis, par habitude, la force de se dédoubler rapidement et d’assister comme spectateur désintéressé aux phénomènes de son moi. Mais le cas est rare (Laughter is satanic. It is then profoundly human. It is the consequence in the person with an idea of a sense of superiority about himself. And, indeed, as laughter is essentially human, it is essentially contradictory. This is to say that it is at once a sign of infinite greatness and a sign of infinite misery, with the infinite misery in regard to the absolute Being and the infinite greatness in regard to animals. It is from this perpetual crash of these two infinities that laughter emerges. The comic, the power of laughter, is in the person who laughs and in no way in the object he laughs at. The one who falls never laughs at his own fall unless he is a philosopher, a man who has habitually acquired the strength to remain detached from phenomena concerning his ego and to reamain as a disinterested looker-on. But this is a rare case).

2.         le rire est signe d’infériorité relativement aux sages (laughter, in regard to sages, is a sign of inferiority).


*MLA7: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. "De L'essence Du Rire." Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques. Wikisource, N. p, n.d. Web. 14 July 2018. <https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire>.

MLA8: Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. “De L'essence Du Rire.” Charles Baudelaire: Curiosités Esthétiques, Wikisource, fr.wikisource.org/wiki/De_l%E2%80%99essence_du_rire.

** The following translations are mine.

Sir Philip Sidney on Delight and Laughter (1595)

Picture taken from "Philip Sidney." Wikipedia. (portal); captured and cropped (direct source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Sir_Philip_Sidney_from_NPG.jpg. January 29, 2018.).

Like Plato, Sidney has a negative take on laughter, which in his understanding comes from sneering at others' deformity, misery, or inferiority in any form (see Plato on Comedy & Laughter (I) ). While drawing the distinction between delight and laughter, Sidney again reminds us of one of his predecessors, Demetrius, the author of De Elocutione, which distinguishes "the humorous" (to provoke laughter) and "the charming" (to give pleasure), with the former being typical of buffoons and the latter being proper of wits (see De Elocutione: Grace & Charm of Humor).

According to Sidney, laughter comes from derision, not delight. Laughter is an expression of scorn; delight is an experience of joy. When we laugh at others, we laugh at their misery; when we laugh at ourselves, we try to deal with our own. Laughter, in other words, pains people. This viewpoint may be somewhat extreme and such a distinction may be least convincing, but we are given the opportunity to peep into some of the earliest efforts that lay down the foundation for humor studies. Here are two paragraphs taken from "The Defence of Poesie" or "An Apology of Poetry" (1595):

But our comedians [may well refer to comedy playwrights] think there is no delight without laughter; which is very wrong, for though laughter may come with delight, yet cometh it not of [from] delight, as though delight should be the cause of laughter; but well may one thing breed both together: nay, rather in themselves they have, as it were, a kind of contrariety; for delight we scarcely do, but in things that have a conveniency to ourselves, or to the general nature; laughter almost ever cometh of [from] things most disproportioned to ourselves and nature.  Delight hath a joy in it, either permanent or present. Laughter hath only a scornful tickling. For example, we are ravished with delight to see a fair woman, and yet are far from being moved to laughter. We laugh at deformed creatures, wherein certainly we cannot delight. We delight in good chances, we laugh at mischances; we delight to hear the happiness of our friends or country, at which he were worthy to be laughed at that would laugh; we shall contrarily laugh sometimes to find a matter quite mistaken and go down the hill against the bias,* in the mouth of some such men, as for the respect of them one shall be heartily sorry, yet he cannot choose but laugh; and so is rather pained than delighted with laughter. Yet deny I not but that they may go well together; for as in Alexander's picture** well set out, we delight without laughter, and in twenty mad antics we laugh without delight, so in Hercules, painted with his great beard and furious countenance, in a woman's attire, spinning at Omphale's *** commandment, it breedeth both delight and laughter. For the representing of so strange a power in love procureth delight, and the scornfulness of the action stirreth laughter.

But I speak to this purpose, that all the end of the comical part be not upon such scornful matters as stirreth laughter only, but, mixed with it, that delightful teaching which is the end of poesy. And the great fault even in that point of laughter, and forbidden plainly by Aristotle, is that they stir laughter in sinful things, which are rather execrable than ridiculous: or in miserable, which are rather to be pitied than scorned (Sidney 358).

* Contrary to its expected course. The balls used in lawn bowling have a bias, a peculiarity in weight or shape that causes them to swerve (Sidney 358n9).

** Plutarch, in his Life of Alexander 4, discusses Apelles' (4th c. B.C.E.) famous painting of Alexander [Robinson's note] (Sidney 358n1).

*** Queen of Lydia, whom the legendary hero served fro 3 years as a slave in order to be purified of a murder; during that time he fell in love with her (Sidney 358n2).

-- Sidney, Philip. "An Apology for Poetry." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Eds. Vincent B. Leitch, et al. New York: W.W. Norton & Co, 2001. Print. 326-362. Print.

Nicholas Udall: Ralph Roister Doister (c. 1553)

Picture taken from "Famous Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual People Born in the 1500s." Ranker: Vote on Everything. (https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-gay-lesbian-and-bisexual-people-born-in-the-1500_s/famous-gay-and-lesbian. January 27, 2018.)

※ The following is taken intact from Figueroa-Dorrego & Larkin-Galiñanes's book, A Source Book of Literary and Philosophical Writings about Humour and Laughter (Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009. 200), without any of my personal critique. This blog post is therefore subject to immediate removal upon notice. ※

Moving now to England, comedy as a dramatic genre starts with Nicholas Udall's Ralph Roister Doister (c. 1553),  under the influence of Roman comedy, and with a prologue that states the author's intention to provide "mirth with modestie" and avoid any kind of abuse and scurrility:

Knowing nothing more commendable for a man's recreation

Than Mirth which is used in an honest fashion:

For Mirth prolongeth lyfe, and causeth health.

Mirth recreates our spirites and voydeth pensivenesse,

Mirth increaseth amities, not hindering our wealth,

[...] ("Prologue," ll. 6-10. Udall 1984: 101)*

This is certainly a hymn to mirth, understood as good-natured, convivial merriment expressed by laughter, following the most favourable views of humour from classical times to the Renaissance. Instead of linking humour with scorn, Udall associates it with health and friendship, and presents it as having an important role in human recreation, and as a good remedy against depression. The play is actually full of roistering and farcical actions performed by stock characters borrowed from Plautus and Terence, whose plays were well known by any educated person at the time, since they were part of their instruction. Burlesque, misunderstanding, and the clash of opposing parties that finally get reconciled are basic elements of this play that will later be developed by Shakespeare, for instance, in most of his romantic comedies.

* Udall, Nicholas. "Roister Doister." Four Tudor Comedies. Ed. William Tydeman. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984. 99-205. Print.

-- Figueroa-Dorrego, Jorge and Cristina Larkin-Galiñanes. A Source Book of Literary and Philosophical Writings about Humour and Laughter: The Seventy-Five Essential Texts from Antiquity to Modern Times. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009. 198-200. ISBN-13: 978-0-7734-4730-1; ISBN-10: 0-7734-4730-X.