Arizona republican., 1903-03-30

!. -s4l.I--s-s..s..si r-s..FI.E.4.E!.
Concerning Wit and Hunor.

Concerning Wit and Hunor.
If one could acquire thorough
knowledge of literature. the ART of
literature, without having having the
faculty of observation one would be as
tonished to learn by report divine
how few professional writer's know how
to distinguish between one kind of
writing and another. The difference
between description and narration, that
between a thought and q feeling, be-
tween poetry and verse, and SO forth
all this is commonly imperfectly under
stood, even by most of those who work
fairly we'll by intuition. The ignorance
of this sort that is most general is that
of the distinction between wit and
humor. Now, it will be found that, as
rule, shoemaker knows calfskin
from sole leather and a blacksmith can
tell you wherein forging clevis diff
fers from shoeing a horse. He will tell
you that it is his business to know such
things, so he knows them. Equally
and manifestly it is writer's business
to know the difference between one
kind of writing and any ether kind. but
to writer's generally that advantage
seems to be denied: they deny it to
themselves.
I was once asked by a rather famous
author why we laugh at wit. 1 replied:
I'VE don't-at least those of US who
understand it do not" Wit may make
us smile, or make us vince, but laugh
ter-that is the cheaper price that we
pay foS an inferior entertainment.
namely humor. There are persons who
think they are expected to laugh. Hav-
ing been taught that anything funny
is witty. these benighted persons natur-
ally think that anything witty IS
funny.
Who but a clown would laugh at the
maxims of Rochefoucauld, which are
as witty as anything written? Take, for
example, this familiar epigram: There
is something in The misfortunes of our
friends which we find not entirely dis
pleasine''-I translate from memory.
It is an Indictment of the whole hu
man race; not altogether true AMI,
therefore. not altogether dull. with just
enough of audacity to startle and just
! enough of paradox to charm, profound
" wise, as bleak as steel-a piece Of
, ideal wit, as admirable as well-cut
grave or the precision of stroke OF the
public headsman, and about as funny.
Take Rabelais' saying that an empty
stomach has no ears. How pitilessiy
it displays the primitive beast alurk in
us all and moved to activity by our
I elemental disorders. such as the daily
stress of hunger, Who could laugh at
the horrible disclosure, yet who for
bear to smile approval of the dizziness
with which the animal is unveiled?
| In a matter of this kind it is easier
to illustrate than to define. Humor
! (Which is not inconsistent with pathos,
| so nearly allied are laughter and tearsl
is Charles Dickens, Wit is Alexander
/ Pope. Humor is DogbeTry, wit is Mer-
QUITO. HUmor is ArteInus Ward. John
/ Phoenix. Josh Billings, Bill Nye, Mark
! Twain-their name is legion; for wit
we must brave the rerils of the deep:
| 1t is made in France" and hardly
: bears transportation. All Americans
are humorous; if any are born witty,
Heaven help them to emisrate You
| shall not meet an American and talk
| with him two minutes but he will say
| something humorous; in ten days he
viii say nothing witty; and if he did
your own. O most witty of all possible
readers, would be the only ear tina;
would give it recognition. Humor is
tolerant. tender; its ridicule caresses;
Wit staos. beSs pardon-and turns the
weapon in the wound. Humor is 9
sweet wine. wit Il dry: we know which
is preferred by the connoisseur.
They may be mixed, forming an ac-
ceptable blend. Even Dickens could or
rare occasions do this. as when he say:
of some solemn ass that his ears have
reached . rumor. Lovely.-AmbrosS
Biercc IN San Francisco Examiner.