In his essay, Bergson points out that comedy is essentially human. It cannot be associated with inhumane objects or creatures and is rooted in society and human connection. When we laugh at inhuman things, such as animals, it is because, more often than not, they possess human qualities that we find amusing. This video of a goat screaming as a human would that went viral a few years back is a prime example of this. This point made by Bergson made me think of the (phenomenal) animated series Bojack Horseman (Raphael Bob-Waksberg, USA, 2014). Following the life of a 90s Sitcom actor,
Bojack Horseman, years after the show went off of the air, the majority of the show’s characters are animals with human features. Bojack is a talking horse who walks on two feet and wears a blue sweater, jeans and a sports coat. His agent, Princess Caroyln, is a cat (who always lands on her feet), and his friend is a labrador named Mr Peanut Butter, who is married to a human named Diane.
Part of the show’s hilarity is the intersection between humans and animals; like that, many of the characters in the show are famous actors or directors but in animal form. An example that emulates this is the transformation of Quentin Tarantino into Quentin Tarantulino. In the show, he is still the same eccentric, brilliant director “known for reviving dead careers” but in tarantula form.
Alongside this, the comedy’s success is because the show’s plotline is rooted in human society, and they go through ‘human issues’. The show comments on drug addiction, divorce, narcissism, and capitalism, but it makes it more lighthearted and funny because the characters are animals. It does this brilliantly in Episode 2 of Season 5; The Dog Days are over. Here the CEO of an online brand, “girl croosh”, learns that some bugs are unionizing. She hires exterminators/negotiators to solve the problem, and the audience sees the building being fumigated. The comedy here comes from the act of fumigating these workers, and the fact that these insects are in a corporate setting where unionizing is needed allows for the joke to land. Justifying Bergson’s point for the need for human society or common ground, for comedy to work.
Episode 2, Season 5 “The Dog Days are Over” Bojack Horseman, (2014) Raphael Bob-Waksberg. 2014. Netflix.
Henri Bergson, “Chapter 1,” Laughter, trans. Brereton & Rothwell (London: MacMillan, 1911), 1-66.
I love Bojack! I agree animal characters make it more lighthearted in dealing with human issues—I think this is also related to Bergson’s connections to ceremonies and fashion (p. 45). Making the characters animals isolates recognizable societal patterns from their regular human context, allowing us to more easily interrogate newfound laughable ridiculousness in them.
This is so interesting because it totally looks at the animals as vessels for human beings in Bojack in a different way — I had always thought it was just to be silly and for concept, but it’s so true that the stories in Bojack hit differently when they’re being told by people that don’t look exactly like us, and I think that’s one of the greatest things about animation. In shows like Big Mouth, the struggles are relatable but we’re not forced to look at ourselves through a mirror, making it more digestable.
BoJack Horseman is one of my favorite shows of all time! I really like this connection that you made between Bergson’s point on comedy being strictly rooted in society and human connection and BoJack, because what makes the show so good is that it is inherently human. It strikes a balance between crude animation with non-human characters that all have intense human characterization throughout the show and its satirical commentary on human society.
One thing that is interesting about this show is how it can go from a funny comedic scene to a scene full of emotion and deep analytics into the human psyche; specifically with addiction and depression. Do you think that BoJack strikes a good balance between comedy and emotion? What would Bergson say about a show that is a blend between comedy (that requires a non-emotional response) and drama that invokes a deep sense of empathy/pity for the characters in us.
I completely agree that the shows success owes a lot to the ability to express very human issues through the seamless combination of human and animal characters. Allow animals to appear as human establishes a very clear reality in the show that is different from that of the audience. Therefore, the audience can dive into the content of the show without getting distracted by the presence of the animal characters. Furthermore, the audience can absorb and discuss storylines with heavy topics like addiction, mental health, and sexuality because they are presented outside of the context of our own reality despite their relevance.