I thought that the Parvulescu reading about laughter in the world of Daisies really speaks to the ideas of laughter as a community that we’ve been talking a lot about in class, specifically the community of watching comedy in an audience, and the idea of laugh tracks that we spoke about two classes ago and how it changes the way the comedy is consumed. Parvulescu writes that “laughter dislocated itself from its initial object … and laughter reproduces itself; laughter asks for more laughter” (Parvulescu, 158). I like this idea that some laughter gives others “permission to laugh,” in that seeing someone else laugh makes it okay for you to laugh too.
The idea that being in an audience that’s laughing will encourage laughter outright from you, unlike when you’re watching tv alone in bed and you do the thing with the slight exhale through the nose. Recently I saw M3gan in the theaters and everyone was cackling out loud. Not only did this essentially make the viewing experience, but it also allowed us to find the movie funnier than maybe it was supposed to be, as a horror movie (but one that is undoubtably camp).
This lends itself to the classic scene in television and movies where everything is going wrong or hard and one character, the most serious character usually, starts laughing at the situation, and the rest of the characters start laughing hesitantly and
then burst into full laughter. This scene from Brooklyn 99 sort of shows this concept — Captain Holt, the most serious character in the show starts laughing hysterically, and you can see Peralta skeptical, and Boyle next to him beginning to laugh. While not the best example, it’s clear that laughter encourages laughter, and Holt is giving Peralta and the rest of the squad permission to laugh through his own letting loose.
“Peralta Pranks Holt” YouTube, uploaded by Brooklyn Nine-Nine, 26 Sep. 2019,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtJRJVdUFx4
Anca Parvulescu; “So We Will Go Bad”: Cheekiness, Laughter, Film. Camera Obscura 1 September 2006; 21 (2 (62)): 144–167. doi: https://doi-org.ezproxy.st-andrews.ac.uk/10.1215/02705346-2006-005
I think your Captain Holt example is really interesting and a good example of how one person’s laughter can encourage other people’s laughter, especially as this is a prank that only Captain Holt finds funny, yet Charles still laughs. This makes me wonder whether laughter is reserved only for situations or things that we find funny – can we genuinely get caught up in others’ laughter without actually finding the situation funny ourselves?
I think this is a great example of the infectiousness of laughter, especially in how it complicates the dynamics behind its spread. Holt’s role as captain and therefore reigning authority influences their impulse to joke and laugh, especially the more reserved Amy. Rather than always being transgressive or fostering community bonding in an egalitarian sense, laughter seemingly can also reaffirm existing societal rules or hierarchies.
In my opinion, the example of captain holt here is perfect! Because of his character traits and authority within the series, it can mirror when a group of people are laughing. Similarly, it reminded me of situations where people fall or get hurt and how it also made me think about situations where people get hurt, and them laughing about it is what allows everyone else around them to.
I have always been interested in the idea of infectious laughter because in the moment it seems like we actually find it funny but sometimes if we were to see a scene/hear that joke when we were alone, we may not actually find it funny. I like the Captain Holt example because the prank itself is very minimal but the humor comes from the exaggerated laughter of Captain Holt, which influences Charles to start laughing. If he didn’t start the chain of laugher, Charles may not have laugh at all.
I also agree with your Captain Holt example and I feel that that character archetype has become more recognizable in workplace comedies especially. When laughter comes from the more serious member of a cast of characters, there is a certain shock value to their outburst. The audience is as caught off-guard as the other characters. Other prime examples of this include Stanley from The Office or Ron Swanson (who has a particularly uncharacteristic laugh) from Parks and Rec.