X-Envelope-to: words-l@uga.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"words-l@uga"
X-VMS-Cc: CROSEN
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:28:00 EST
From:         CROSEN%BGSUOPIE.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Subject:      E.B. on Humour and Wit

Greetings,

From the E.B., s.v. Humour and Wit:

In all its many splendoured varieties, humour can be simply defined as a type
of stimulation that tends to elicit the laughter reflex.  Spontaneous
laughter is a motor reflex produced by the coordinated contraction of 15
facial muscles in a stereotyped pattern and accompanied by altered
breathing.  Electrical stimulation of the main lifting muscle of the upper
lip, the zygomatic major, with currents of varying intensity produces facial
expressions ranging from the faint smile through the broad grin to the
contortions of explosive laughter.

The laughter and smile of civilized man is, of course, often of a
conventional kind, in which voluntary intent substitutes for, or interferes
with spontaneous reflex activity; this article is concerned, however, only
with the latter.  Once laughter is realized tobe a humble reflex, several
paradoxes must be faced.  Motor reflexes, such as the contraction of the
pupil of the eye in dazzling light, are simple responses to simple stimuli
whose value to survival is obvious.  But the involuntary contraction of 15
facial muscles, associated with certain irrepressible noises, strikes one as an
activity without any utilitarian value, quite unrelated to the struggle
for survival [Marty comments: This twit has obviously never had to survive
a faculty meeting].  Laughter is a reflex but unique in that it has no
apparent biological purpose.  One might call it a luxury reflex.  Its only
function seems to be to provide relief from tension [Jeeezus Christ!  Isn't
that enough??].

The second related paradox is a striking discrepancy between the nature of
the stimulus and that of the response in humorous transactions.  When a
blow beneath the kneecap causes an automatic upward kick, both
"stimulus" and "response" function on the same primitive physiological
level, without requiring the intervention of the higher mental functions.
But that such a complex mental activity as reading a comic story should
cause a specific reflex of the facial muscles is a phenomenon that has
puzzled philosophers since Plato (maybe they should have asked a couple
of primatologists about this, eh?].  There is no clear-cut, predictable
response that would tell a lecturer whether he has succeeded in convincing
his listeners; but when he is telling a joke, laughter serves as an
experimental test.  Humour is the only form of communication in which a
stimulus on a high level of complexity produces a stereotyped predictable
response on the physiological reflex level [am I the only one who thinks
this is nonsense?  What about cathartic tears at moments of great drama,
or erections when reading or viewing pornographic literature or films?]
Thus the response can be used as an indicator for the presence of the
elusive quality that is called humour--as the click of the Geiger counter
is used to indicate the presence of radioactivity.  Such a procedure is not
possible in any other form of art; and since the step from the sublime to
the ridiculous is reversible, the study of humour provides the psychologist
with clues for the study of creativity in general.

The remainder of the article deals with the following topics (for those
of you who haven't seen enough):

The logic of laughter
Laughter and emotion
Verbal humour
Situational humour
Styles and techniques in humour
Relations to art and science
The humanization of humour
Non-western styles
Humour in the contemporary world

There is, of course, a bibliography at the end of the article.

Marty Rosen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU