Humour in literature

[MANICHAEAN]

There is an argument that the place that humour takes in literature can be compared with the place of crisis in society i.e. that humour discovers the long lasting disorders that people would feel uncomfortable in facing. Writers indicate insufficiencies through humour. Thus, their criticism is ambiguous.

Carlyle refers to the meaning of humour being integral in the empathy and in the compassion of all kinds of existence, wheras Thackeray goes further in saying that humour is joking with love. Perhaps the latter is nearer the truth. Humour is a feature of the heart. There are people who do not know how to love. Perhaps, those are the ones who have no sense of humour.

The main presumption for good humour is the absence of cynicism, malice, or pretense & Aristotle even advocates humour as an expression of health i.e. "Be joyful so that you can be serious".

[L.M. The Third]

Very good and interesting post. Thanks! I can't wait to hear more.

[dafydd manton]

As an oft-published writer of humour, I am of the opinion that analysing it is one of the saddest things in the human psyche. The role of the writer is to milk maximum yuks out of his audience, and the role of the audience is to roll about on the Axminster. Fini.