Recent events in the world have shaken people to their
core, sparked mass protests, broken up families, and truly tested the allegiances
of many people throughout the world. These bleak times have hardly left any
room for humor to be present in the day to day lives of many people, and while
there are plenty of comedians out there trying to make people laugh, there are
only so many times one person can laugh at Alec Baldwin impersonating the
rather orange President of the United States. It seems as though the world is
moving ever so slowly towards the Platonic view of humor, one which is based on
malice and misfortune, which in turn, must be avoided (Plato, 10-13), as no one
is willing to laugh about the fact that families are being torn apart by a ban
on immigration for nationals of seven middle-eastern countries. In his dialogue
Plato states, through Socrates, that “to feel delight instead of pain when we
see or friends in misfortune – that is wrong” (Plato, 12) and it is clear, especially
now, that laughing at the misfortunes of others, even though they are not your
own is simply something that should not be occurring, given the severity of
those misfortunes.
This idea can be
furthered by examining the theory of humor that is given by the ever-cheerful
Thomas Hobbes. The author of Leviathan outlines
his theory of humor by saying that laughter comes from when someone compares
themselves to another, and realize that the other persons situation in life is
a lot worse than theirs (Hobbes, 19) which does not make humor seem that great.
It seems as though Hobbes would agree that humor is some sort of expression of
relief upon realizing that there are people in a worse situation than they
themselves are, almost a sort of coping mechanism for dealing with the sorrow
and the suffering rampant throughout the world. Luckily Hobbes does provide an alternative,
for finding humor in the suffering of others signifies inaction and acceptance.
Rather than simply comparing ourselves to those less fortunate than themselves
Hobbes states that “for of great minds, one of the proper works is, to help and
free others from scorn, and compare themselves only with the most able” (Hobbes,19).
The alternative proposed
by Hobbes is one which fits rather nicely with certain Jesuit ideals. In the
reading from former Superior General Kolvenbach, he cites a Father Ignacio
Ellacuria who said that Christian Universities must “be a voice for those who
do not possess the academic qualifications to promote and legitimate their
rights” (Kolvenbach, 30). Rather than laugh at these people as the Hobbesian
theory would say people would, the Jesuits would have people recognize these
differences, and assists those less fortunate than themselves, rather than
laugh at their situation. While laughter may be a coping mechanism, it is not
one which produces any sort of change. Upon hearing of the retaliation by Iran against
the ban on its citizens entering the United States, I will be honest I laughed,
because in all honesty, what American citizen was rushing to visit Iran in the
first place, it’s not exactly a prime vacation destination. What my laughter
was, however, was a Hobbesian coping mechanism, rather than realizing that
there were more than likely American citizens with family back in Iran, who
will now no longer be able to see them, or that these were the actions of
nations more than likely gearing themselves towards some sort of larger
conflict, I laughed it off. Rather than embrace the Jesuit ideal of being “men
and women for others” (Kolvenbach, 30) I was a man for myself, I did not rush
to protest the injustices being committed and understand that “that freedom is
never voluntarily given by the oppressor” (King, 2), but rather I used humor to
distance and shelter myself from the harsh reality that is slowly unfolding in
front of me.
It is clear that
throughout history the opinions and uses of humor as literary devices, and just
as parts of one’s everyday life has changed drastically. Dr. King knew that
humor had its place in the world, and knew how to employ it to benefit his own
movement. Others did not see humor as all that important, and some, like Plato,
saw it as such a danger to the state that they wanted it barred from appearing
in certain works. Regardless of the opinions and theories held by people and
scholars throughout time, it is clear that humor, in one form or another, is an
integral part of the human experience, and one that will not be vanishing any
time soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment