Category: Comedy

This essay will argue how the combination of both comedy and horror genres have been successfully merged. It will also demonstrate how merging these genres has helped make the movie franchise Scream (1996) by Wes Craven a success. Success, for the purpose of this essay, will be measured by how comedy is used within the films narrative effectively, the popularity of the movie within society (resulting in sequels), award nominations and financially in box office takings.

As Vander Kaay and Fernandez-Vander Kaay (2016) explain horror and comedy are an unlikely partnership, at opposing ends of the ideological spectrum. Comedy wants you to experience pleasure, to enjoy yourself, yet horror wants the audience to endure, survive and encounter something distasteful and unpleasant, you become a different person once the experience is over. Yet the sub-genre is successful because horror and comedy evoke similar reactions from an audience. Humour stems from unexpected surprise (it is funny because it was not expected) and awkwardness (when something is uncomfortably funny) but these two aspects comprise of what scares people in films. Surprise transforms into shock, the instants that startle you because they are so unexpected and awkwardness which becomes dread in a horror context. “Thought their goals might be different, comedy and horror are working with the same to principles” (Vander Kaay and Fernandez-Vander Kaay 2016, p. 56).

Indeed, Prohászková (2012, p. 134) states that “horror is a varied genre that is hard to be defined by one single definition. And therefore, the most accurate is the one that defines horror through each of its categories and its sub-genres”. In the late 1970’s and 1980’s the slasher sub-genre was popularised with well-defined attributes and tropes. “A maniac with a knife slaughtering a group of young, good-looking teenagers in a myriad of gruesome ways” with the movies being “notoriously devoid of grown-ups” (Rockoff 2002, p. 5-11). Add in the enigmatically disguised killer(s); rural location and a long dark night to create a creepy, grave-yard like atmosphere, mixed with the fear of the unknown and it equates to the perfect recipe for a slasher movie. These movies are best characterised by films like Halloween (1978), Friday the 13th (1980) and Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984). The sub-genre was revived in 1996 with Scream (Menard, A. D., et. al. 2019) involving human antagonists portrayed as masked killers who are troubled evil souls, contrasted by the noble ‘pure of heart’ protagonist teenagers who are being murdered because of sexual promiscuity, drug use, social deviance or as a repercussion of someone else’s actions.

However, when outwardly incompatible genres are mixed, like comedy and horror, movie producers need to be cautious to deliver coherent and fulfilling work (Miller and Bowdoin Van Ripe 2016). Yet, Scream produces much more than just ‘coherent, fulfilling work’. It breaks the horror mould by adding comedy to the mix of the slasher sub-genre whilst challenging the stereotypes attached to it. One way the film does this is by ridiculing the genre tropes (Maslin 1996) and challenging them, with constant intertextual references to other popular slasher movies and references to ‘the rules’. These rules are based on John Fiske’s theory (2016) that genre creates a pattern: that viewers are conditioned to recognise elements of specific genres and associate these elements with them. For example, whilst watching Halloween at the party Randy (who works in a video store and is a horror film enthusiast) tells his peers about the rules (these are the elements expected within basic slasher horror films. If anyone breaks the rules they die). “1. You can never have sex. Big no, no. Big no. Sex equals death, okay”. Sidney has sex with Billy yet survives for the sequels (all 4 of them). “2. Never drink or do drugs. The sin factor. It’s an extension of number one”. Randy drinks beer at the party and survives. And 3. Never, ever, ever, under any circumstances, say “I’ll be right back” ‘cos you won’t be back”. Stu says this before he goes to the garage to get some beer and comes back. Even when Sidney receives a phone call from the killer ‘Ghostface’ asking her if she likes scary movies she replies, “What’s the point? They’re all the same. Some stupid killer stalking some big-breasted girl who can’t act who is always running up the stairs when she should be running out the front door. It’s insulting”, challenging the identifiable traits of the genre and mocking them. The irony is that the teenagers in Scream are re-enacting a typical slasher genre movie. This is emphasised by the constant intertextual references to slasher films and the mirroring of the characters slasher trope actions in Scream. The movie Halloween plays on the television at the party which emulates Sidney and Billy’s interaction in the bedroom.

Additionally, the hybrid sub-genre also utilises the expression of comedy and horror to question the underlying cultural tensions (Miller and Bowdoin Van Riper 2016) “of power, danger, desire and anger” that girls faced in the 90’s. Scream challenged customary interpretations of femininity by promoting positive female friendships (between Sidney and Tatum) and altering the concept of women being viewed as ‘weak’ and needing ‘saved’ by the typical white male hero. Scream demonstrated that the protagonist could be a female with bodily strength that matched their male antagonists and along with other film and television shows such as Clueless (1995) and Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997), encouraged a wave of female empowerment (Rowe Karlyn 2003, p. 177-199).

Furthermore, the horror and comedy genre combination in Scream paves the way for an emotional roller coaster of unease and discontent because comedy is used to lull the audience into a false sense of security and safety (Gordon 2017), so they do not suspect when another killing is about to happen. At Stu’s party his girlfriend Tatum goes to the garage to get more beer from the fridge. A rake falls on the floor, which makes her jump and puts the audience immediately on edge, but this feeling is dispersed when the cat runs out through the cat flap in the electric garage door but when Tatum tries to return to the party the connecting door is jammed. She opens the electric garage door to get out, but the door starts to jam then close again. When she turns around to try the connecting door again ‘Ghostface’ is there, but Tatum assumes it is just one of the party guests playing a prank. She is very self-assured and sees this situation as posing no threat to her at all and manages to convince the audience of that too. She walks up to ‘Ghostface’ and says mockingly, “Oh, you want to play psycho killer?”. Ghostface gives a sinister nod and the audience know at this point that the comedy is shifting back into horror, yet Tatum is still oblivious to the fact that her life is in danger. “Can I be the helpless victim? Please don’t kill me, Mr. Ghostface, I want to be in the sequel” she chimes, before realising it is not a game.

Indeed, the camera angles used is this scene tell the audience of Tatum’s impending death. The fact that ‘Ghostface’ is looking down on her from the stairs shows a clear sign of dominance, height and weight advantage. Tatum is looking up at ‘Ghostface’ and is shown as the vulnerable, small caged prey ready to be toyed with. In this scene the comedy is spoken, the horror is within the mes-en-scene, but this is reversed when Tatum tries to escape out of the cat flap, visually it is comedic, yet her audible screams of horror imply otherwise.

Moreover, comedy is used within Scream successfully to throw suspects off track and draw the audience’s attention to subtle clues. Indeed, when Randy and Stu are in the video store Randy is calling out Billy as the killer. He is animated about this and attracting attention from other teenagers in the store, but Stu seems to find his theory amusing. When Randy turns around Billy is behind him and the atmosphere immediately changes from animated banter to tension. The camera angle changes to a close up shot of Randy’s face to emphasise to the audience just how tense and awkward he feels, the audience can relate and feel it too. Billy questions why Randy thinks he is the murderer and is not happy about being accused. Stu finds the whole scenario amusing and, coming from behind, puts his elbows on Randy’s shoulders, smirks and pings his ear. Comedy is used in this scene to enable the audience to question Stu’s reaction because it is not normal. Usually if you are caught bad mouthing someone you are sheepish and embarrassed but Stu revels in Randy’s discomfort and makes the audience question if Stu is possibly unhinged and if his comedy characteristics are masking his psychopathic tendencies.

Certainly, at the end of the movie Stu is hysterical and psychotic, bleeding to death but still trying to joke about the murders in a manic and frenzied way. When Sidney escapes from the killers she reverses the situation back onto Stu and calls him on the house phone in the same way he had called her as ‘Ghostface’ – Stu: “Did you really call the police?”. Sidney: “You bet your god damn sorry ass I did”. Stu (whinging voice): “Ohhhh. My mom and dad are gona be so mad at me”. Comedy has been used successfully to feed the narrative of his story as Stu is portrayed as the hyperactive teen: the irritating comedic one of the group, but he progressively gets more intense throughout the film. The horror/comedy elements are combined perfectly as he is one of the ‘Ghostface’ killers and comedy has been used as a means of disguising his true identity.

Indeed, the success of Scream at the box office and in popularity is renowned. Until 2018 Scream was the highest grossing slasher film making over $173 million worldwide (Hallenbeck 2009). In 1997 it was nominated nine times for various awards, scooping up seven of those nominations, one of which was ‘Best Movie Award’ (IMDb 2020). The popularity of the already established cast, combined with the comedy element, presented Scream as a new genre of slasher movie. It appealed to those who previously would turn away from horror movies thanks to the infusion of comedy within the movie and paved the way for four sequels, parody movies and an array of copy-cat films to be produced.

Overall, this essay gives a detailed explanation of how successful the combination of horror and comedy work together both within a film: driving the narrative and adding unexpected dark humour to a sub-genre that would not normally be associated with laughter and in addition, commercially with successful profit margins. Furthermore, the winning of awards acknowledges the popularity and acceptance of the hybrid mash up within this film allowing it to set the bar for other horror comedies (and their hybrid sub-genres) to come. The numerous comedy horror films made after Scream and the continuation of their creation today, in 2020, plus the demand for them and their persistent popularity, illustrate just how successful the combination of these two genres are and remain to be.

Everyone has various expression forms in their hearts, but the maximum common form is laughter. It facilitates us to relieve pressure and make us feel better about ourselves. Comedy movies play a very important role in helping us laugh. Today’s movies have numerous forms. Despite recent action tendencies and horror films, comedy films were always the first choice in the sense that it offers people the opportunity to see life’s humor.

In the comedy genre, there is a lot of different techniques to make someone laugh. Some of them are slapstick comedy and dark comedy, both of which make the audience laugh. The slapstick comedy is mostly used in movies like Mr. Bean, Laurel, and Hardy or the 3 Stooges. Slapstick is mostly referred to as physical humor, on the other side dark comedy is also known as Black humor. Black humor is used when the comedians joke about serious matters like religion, death, and more serious things. This type of comedy is suitable for people who are over the ages of 18/20, even though some may not get the point of Dark Humour, that is the proper age for people to start listening or watching it.

In the classical days, certain clothes in the genre Comedy became a big role. As it became the current dress of the past due seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, where every possible part of the frame was adorned. The voice changed to wonderful and brittle, witty in language, regularly prose changed into used, and rapid repartee changed into the norm. Actors imitated the Parisian aristocratic fashion of address with its wealthy background from Moliere. By this mean, that in the classical days’ everything was new to the people at that age, something different from the comedy and change of clothes seen to make the audience laugh.

Ever since the first recorded short film, in the Comedy genre of the Lumiere brothers (Larroseur Arose) (1895), the movie portrays an easy realistic joke wherein a gardener is tormented by a boy who steps on the hose that the gardener is using to water his plants, slicing off the water flow. When the gardener tilts the nozzle up to see why no water is coming out, the boy jumps off of the hose, inflicting the water to spray him. The gardener is greatly surprised, and his hat falls off, but he soon catches on. A chase ensues, each on and off-screen (the camera in no way actions from its authentic position) until the gardener catches the boy and administers a spanking. The entire movie lasts best forty-five seconds, but this simple little bit of slapstick can be the forerunner of all subsequent movie comedy.

In the comedy genre, a lot of costumes and makeup is used to make the actor funnier, actors will be dressed in all sort of costumes. Such as being in long clothes that they don’t fit in and then topping it off with some clownish makeup. Also, lighting has a big factor in the comedy genre because to achieve the comedic look you need to brighten up the image, so you need to use a lot of lights and also you need to brighten up the subject/actor, otherwise if using low key lighting and high contrast you will end up with a more dramatic feel to the picture.

In comedy, a lot of editing is used to make the movie funnier and a lot of different shots are taken from different angles. A good example is when there is an actor in the middle of the frame and a piece of cake goes into the frame unexpectedly. Also, the editor tries to use a lot of different sound effects to give the movie a more comedic feel. Some examples from comedy films are if there will be a fight, they will use funny punching sounds or sometimes they use sounds like farting noises to make the viewer laugh more.

Barnes, R. (2007) States Music has a big role in these types of movies like when a piece of music is being played to show a character’s status or to show the setting of the place.

The production crew of a comedy film usually consists of a boom mic operator camera person, director, producer and sound mixer and also the utility person. The boom mic operator is responsible to capture the sound from the actors and the sound mixer is responsible to mix and edit. The sounds to achieve the maximum best from the actors then the utility person helps around with running cables and making minor repairs to equipment if needed. The most important of them all is the director and the camera person because they work together to achieve the best possible picture for the movie, and the feel for the movie. The director and producer give the camera a person ways on how to compose the framing and also what they want in the frame.

According to (Gilles Deleuze, Dialogues II) (51-2)

”It is humor which makes language stammer, which imposes on it a minor usage on which constitutes a complete bilingual system within the same language’’.

References:

Journals:

1. Barnes, R. (2007). The sound of Coen comedy: music, dialogue and sound effects in Raising Arizona. The Soundtrack, Volume 1(Volume 1), p.15 P.
2. Sanders, T. (2006). The Comedy of Manners. [online] p.1. Available at: https://resource.acu.edu.au/trsanders/units/comedy/comedyofmanners.html [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].

Books:

1. Bishop, R. (2013). Comedy and Cultural Critique in American Film. 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, p.8.
2. Brown, B. (1992). Motion Picture and Video Lighting. 2nd ed. Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis, p.36.
3. Holman, T. (1997). Sound For Film And Television. 3rd ed. Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis, p.56.

Websites:

1. Cash, J. (2019). Types of Comedy for Drama Class | The Drama Teacher. [online] The Drama Teacher. Available at: https://thedramateacher.com/types-of-comedy-for-drama-class/ [Accessed 14 Dec. 2019].
2. McGrail, L. (n.d.). 5 Essential Elements of Successful Mise en Scène in Film | Lights Film School. [online] Lights Film School. Available at: https://www.lightsfilmschool.com/blog/mise-en-scene-in-film-afk [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].
3. WARD, C. (2014). 8 Comedy Techniques Edgar Wright Does Right – The Beat: A Blog by PremiumBeat. [online] The Beat: A Blog by PremiumBeat. Available at: https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/8-comedy-techniques-edgar-wright-does-right/ [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].

Black comedy or dark humour is the kind of comedy that presents serious things in a rather light manner. The lieutenant of Inishmore by Martin Mcdonagh and The ‘Shape of Things’ by Neil Labute focus on the use of black comedy to evoke laughter and aim to manipulate the audience during the serious subject matters, which can be considered a mirror of society.

Throughout The lieutenant of Inishmore, Mcdonagh examines the idea of bloody and barbaric scenes with comedy to manipulate the audience into considering the mindset of a psychopath as well as the different topics of murder, death and torture. The ongoing cruel terrorist attacks in Northern Ireland led the playwright, Martin McDonagh, to mock the political actions through his work. Amidst the comedy and carnage, McDonagh delivers cutting commentary on the endless cycle of violence that ‘troubles’ our world. During the play, the audience experiences the shock of what they are witnessing and question serious issues such as loss and guilt. This notion was also highlighted through the two characters, Donny and Davey as they would often repeat jokes in serious situations. This is seen, During Scene 8, when Davey has failed to wake up Donny in time, and they are still asleep when Padraic arrives. He wakes them up and demands to know where the cat is. They indicate the decoy, claiming it has a disease that makes it smell like shoe polish and ‘get all orangey’. Padraic isn’t fooled and angrily shoots the cat, blowing it to pieces. Consequently, during the argument is where the audience members may feel the confrontation as there was an increase in volume and the pacing of the dialogue was faster, however, the incorporation of sarcasm and the use of dark, disturbing and sarcastic language used somehow manages to be ruthlessly comedic and often allows the audience to forget about the gasping/shocking moments. Thus, Mcdonough explores the idea of bloody and barbaric scenes as well as sarcasm with comedy to manipulate the audience.

Labute condemns the use of black comedy to evoke laughter and also aims to manipulate the audience during serious situations in the play.

The play is set in a small university town in the American Midwest and focuses on the lives of four young students who become emotionally and romantically involved with each other. The play provides the audience with an insight into the devastating consequences such issues can have upon a relationship between the two main protagonists, Evelyn and Adam.

The audience view the two main protagonists Adam and Evelyn as they are cuddling in bed, close together as they hold each other firmly, staring off. There is a tripod nearby, and a camera which has started recording. Although this would generally make the audience feel uncomfortable as it is not considered a norm in society, to film a sex tape and openly discuss it. However The staging and language, gives the audience a comic effect.

Although ‘The Lieutenant of Inishmore’ and the ‘Shape of things’ are different from each other, both plays incorporate the use of black comedy and aim to provoke laughter in certain situations.

Labute, like Mcdonough, also uses common societal issues which allow readers to understand the context of the play, using different themes to convey their message. Similarly, both playwrights incorporate black comedy for a comic effect, allowing readers to laugh and supposedly forget about the bizarre and barbaric moments. Both plays had underlying themes at times, Thus, the audience at times remaining quiet and a sense of shock whilst watching different situations occur, However Mcdonough and Labute incorporate catharsis throughout the play, with the intentions to confront the audience and describe the emotional release from the outside as a result leading individuals to laugh.

To conclude, throughout Mcdonagh’s play ‘Lieutenant of Inishmore’ and Labute, ‘Shape of Things’, explore and examine the important use of black comedy for comic effect as both playwrights aim to manipulate the audience during the serious subject matters, which can be considered a mirror of society.

Comedy and its implications for society have been discussed throughout history by philosophers the world over due to the universal nature of comedy and humour. The topic of comedy was even discussed by ancient philosophers Plato, Aristotle, and Epictetus all the way to the modern day. The theories as to why we find particular things funny and other things not, vary. Some of the more famous theories are the ‘Superiority Theory’, the ‘Relief Theory’, and ‘Incongruity Theory’. Depending on which one we believe to be correct would help to answer whether or not comedy has a positive or negative effect on society and our psyche. The early philosophers generally agreed that comedy had a negative effect on us but later philosophers revised the theories around comedy and the general consensus became that comedy can have a positive effect on us.

Plato believes that comedy is damaging to us and details how that he believes that people (especially rulers) should not allow themselves to be susceptible to uncontrollable bouts of laughter as he says that “a fit of laughter which has been indulged to excess almost always produces a violent reaction” . He also comments that he finds the fact that the gods are detailed to laugh, up high on Olympus, disturbing as they are meant to be divine and therefore better than us and resultingly should not be in hysterics. This is one of the few instances that Aristotle agrees with Plato and writes that some forms of mockery were forbidden and mockery is a type of jest and therefore some jests should be forbidden. These philosophers believe that comedy and things we find funny come from the fact that we think ourselves superior to particular things or people. This is the ‘Superiority Theory’ which essentially is the theory that we laugh at what we believe we are superior to, whether that be other people or past versions of ourselves. We find humour in mocking and from this humour we make ourselves feel greater which, of course, we would describe as a negative trait to have; it seems that therefore laughter is simply us expressing our feelings of superiority which we naturally do not want to admit. This would, for example, perhaps explain as to why we find the character ‘Mr. Bean’ funny; because he is portrayed as a simpleton whose lack of intelligence often leads to his own humiliation. We find humour in the fact that we are intellectually superior to him and therefore reinforces the plausibility of this theory. This also accounts for why we find seemingly more offensive jokes funny such sexist or racist ones. There are however, flaws to this particular theory; we can argue that there are a multitude of things that we feel superior to such as animals, yet you do not actively laugh at them. Similarly, if you were to come across a beggar in the streets, you may be better off than he is but you do not laugh at his misfortune. We also must pay attention to some of the other things that we may laugh at, such as a magician who possesses superior skill or wit to us. We also regularly laugh at ourselves at particular moments, which of course would be somewhat paradoxical if the theory were true as we cannot find ourselves inferior to ourselves.

Another theory as to why we find things humorous is the ‘Relief Theory’; this theory equates our need for laughter to the release of pressure in a steam boiler. Laughter acts as a pressure- relief system for our bodies as it directs excess emotions towards something else instead. Freud believed this theory to hold true as he wrote that the most repressed emotions are that of sexual desire and aggression which is why many jokes have within them the theme of sex and/ or hostility. In engaging with comedy about sex we vent our libido; in laughing at a joke that targets a group of people that allows for us to vent repressed hostility that we would usually censor in most other social scenarios. The Relief Theory is sometimes used to explain as to why particular instances are humorous; because something unexpected occurs that does not follow the usual order of events. When witnessing anything in normal life you expect causal events to occur in the same pattern: A-B-C. However, when something unexpected happens you use the excess mental energy that you had planned to use in the form of laughter. This could explain as to why for example we find someone falling over funny, as we had expected just to see them continue the sequence and the mental energy that we had intended to use to continue to process the pattern, instead produces laughter. This also could potentially explain as to why in nervous situations it is somewhat common for people to start uncontrollably laughing in situations that one is not supposed to like a funeral or before doing something potentially dangerous. This theory therefore seems to show that comedy is in fact good for us, not just from a moral standpoint, but it also as a way of relieving ourselves of pent up negative emotions. This indicates that the reason for laughter is not because of some superiority complex that leads to us believing ourselves to be above others, but rather as a healthy manner of dealing with internal emotions that could otherwise be negative. There currently exists multiple laughing clinics as many believe that laughter releases useful hormones and leads to better mental and sometimes even physical health; this somewhat corresponds with the Relief Theory. Freud also suggests that potentially we also laugh at inappropriate times because it assists in dealing with the realisation that our own lives are beyond our control. However, there are also further arguments that are against the Relief Theory, such as in the realms of comedy, we regularly expect the unexpected; the classic ‘knock-knock’ joke for example, people know to expect something that does not follow the normal causal process, yet we still find these jokes funny. When watching a stand-up comedian, you know that the stories and anecdotes that they tell lead to something humorous and yet we still laugh. One could also argue that the energy that you use to process causal events is low and therefore the theory that we instead channel this energy into bouts of laughter seems to not make sense as the energy required to laugh is much higher.

Another potential theory is the ‘Incongruity Theory’, which is simply the theory that what we find to be comedic is simply the witnessing of something incongruous, which is something that is essentially unexpected and manages to subvert from your mental patterns. When a joke’s ending is incongruitous with its beginning then we regularly find this amusing; therefore, the humour of a joke stems from the incongruity violating our normal view of the world by breaking normal causal events. This theory is initially proposed by Aristotle and was supported by German philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Kant, and Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer claims that the incongruity that causes laughter is located between our sense perceptions of the world and our ‘abstract rational knowledge’ of the world that we perceive. Schopenhauer explains that we perceive unique individual things with many properties but when we group them under abstract concepts then we focus on just one or a few properties of individual things. An easy example of this could be how we group different breeds of a particular species under one word like ‘dog’ or ‘cat’. He further claims that humour is found in the incongruity between a concept and a perception that are supposed to be focused on the same thing, and he believes that this theory can work with any joke. Furthermore, Schopenhauer mentions that malicious laughter comes from how incongruous the previous conceptions that the subject had compared to how reality is now presenting itself. He also comments on the fact that humour is somewhat pleasurable and this comes from our animal nature of using perception to gain knowledge over using our thought. This theory seems to mean that comedy is therefore neither objectively good nor bad but rather a realisation of an incongruity between our perception of the subject and our abstract rational knowledge of the subject; essentially the humour of a joke can be explained by the absurdity of the scenario. The unexpectedness as it were. Comedy then could be argued to be a force for good in this context as it provides a sort of further analysis of the world which we as humans strive for.

Comedy can also be argued to actually provide some practical use to us, such as using it to study people’s psyche, but in particular, study the psyche of people from the past. Depending on the theory which you believe is correct about the nature of comedy, you can use these to analyse jokes that were once popular in different cultures and resultingly you can determine the mindset that these historical cultures had alongside other their other writings. We as people of the modern era may look at ancient jokes and regard them as simply not being funny, however the people of the time thought that they were and that poses other questions as to whether taste in comedy has somehow evolved or that some jokes are just so old that they have lost their incongruity. Old, particularly ancient, jokes seem unfunny to us but it could be explained by the fact that incongruities rely upon our view of how the world ought to be and this has clearly changed over the years, rendering these once funny jokes into unfunny ones. This shows how comedy is good for us in that it can be used to study the change in human psyche across time and culture. Comedy and a sense of humour is seemingly ingrained in all humans to varying degrees and while some may argue that this could be an example of some sort of divine creator, many would counter this by arguing that this is not epistemically justified and requires too much of a dogmatic leap of faith.

Noël Carroll comments on how comedy is but one of many forms of amusement that humans use to entertain themselves and generally believes in the Incongruity Theory

The Human Comedy by William Saroyan follows the journey of a fourteen year old boy into manhood. The book is set during the WWII era in Ithaca, California. Homer Macauley, the narrator, has to take upon adult responsibilities and provide for his whole family after his older brother leaves for war and his father passes away. While working as a telegraph boy, Homer delivers news mainly of death and through this he learns about pain being a part of growing up. In the book, The Human Comedy, Saroyan’s effective writing on war, love, death and family shapes the entire book which depicts an image so touching that it sticks throughout the novel. When the news about the older brother arrive at the end, it conveys how emotions play a powerful role in the becoming of a man. Homer is tested on his evolution from a naive child into an experienced young man.

Pain is a part of growing up. It’s unavoidable and definitely not the best feeling. However, there’s a lesson. Either it ́s patience or empathy, pain has its positive effects. In The Human Comedy, the major pain Homer dealt with was death. As a telegraph messenger boy, his job brought him into the lives of a variety of characters, exposing him to a sensitive topic at a young age. He delivered the news of the deceased to loved ones, therefore death was always on his mind. “Death is not an easy thing for anyone to understand, least of all a child, but every life shall one day end” (Saroyan ). Homer was able to learn from a young age that death causes great grief, but it’s important to accept what occurs naturally. Death will make people with the right attitude stronger. At the end of the story when the news of the death of his brother Marcus arrived, the world was testing him on what he learned. Instead of crying, Homer and his mother invite the guest who told them the tragic news into their home with enthusiasm. “Sometimes we have to help open the door, instead of focusing on things that can’t be changed” (Saroyan ). The ending taught a lesson that there’s no running from pain but simply viewing the positive lesson.

Loneliness was one of the central themes in The Human Comedy. It pointed out that loneliness is an inevitable component of the human life. Every individual is alone at some point and the effort for companionship is simply pointless. Homer spent numerous amount of time giving news of death which can make people feel lonely. At the end the news of his brother’s death emphasized the central theme because he stems loneliness into independence.

Homer’s father had passed away a couple of years before and was mentioned in the book a few times. Although he’s dead, there were occasions when he visited his wife, Ms. Macauley, as a “ghost”. During one of the visits he had told her that their son was going to join him. The ending was literally foreshadowed. Furthermore, Homer had always known that bad news would be coming to his family. He had let out clues that indicated this. When the news did arrive, although it was tragic, there was little surprise.

Homer as a young individual was “the man of the house” due to his father’s death and brother’s departure. However, he was extremely responsible with his role, and was exposed to sensible topic at a young age. The ending of The Human Comedy emphasizes his coming of age from a naive child into an experienced man. The text keeps consistency of all the central ideas throughout the end of the book, depicting pain, loneliness, and struggle during the era of WWII.

Have you ever been blindsided by others? Or manipulated into going against your own personal beliefs? Well, Good morning to the English Teachers Association. Now Shakespeare has been named one of the best poets, playwrights and actor of his time by multiple people like John Dryden: “He was the man who of all modern, are perhaps ancient poets, had the largest and most comprehensive soul. But Shakespeare’s magic could not be copied be; within that circle none durst walk but he”. As you can properly tell Shakespeare was ahead of his time with his language, rang of plays, influence of literacy culture and exciting plots.

Language is one of the key components for Shakespeare being studied because of how he does not use simple words and forces them into the characters mouths. Instead, he uses words that are striking that stay with us during and after the play. Shakespeare also uses poetic techniques like Puns and metaphors. Range of plays is also found within the mix because of not every play that Shakespeare wrote was a major hit or successful, but he wrote a large body of plays. The two themes that outclassed the others include comedy and tragedy.

Influence on literary culture is a key reason for Shakespeare being studied is how other writers use him in their own books or novels. Shakespeare is like the window into many writers after him.

Lastly, the forth-key element to Shakespeare being studied exciting Shakespeare’s is infrequently boring, he brings a wide range of characters with extraordinary traits to go with them: witches, ghosts, fairies, laughter, fighting, horror, romance, and bloodshed, are the best characters and themes that he used. His work is relevant because of how significantly relatable his stories and characters are, just because they are old does not mean that they are unreliable. Shakespeare’s characters are still popular in the modern day society for example Romeo, Juliet, Macbeth, Julius Ceaser and many more. These characters are so popular because of the given traits: roles and characterisation detailed upon them by Shakespeare, certain aspects of the characters help us feel connected to them or relatable. Characters play a very important role is stories is because the drive the story as a whole, different characters create different settings, emotions, conflicts and tension within the story. Shakespeare’s characters remain popular in today’s modern day because of how the characters are portrayed which therefore makes them relatable to its audience.

In ‘Endgame’, Samuel Beckett explores the dark absurdity of the human condition through the undynamic, loveless relationships between each of the four characters, primarily Clov and Hamm. Tension is maintained throughout the play through the constant suggestion that Clov will abandon Hamm, however the fact that this never happens highlights the repetitive nature of their apocalyptic world, and their painful unwillingness to face its bleakness alone. Beckett drew inspiration from the Greek philosophers Democritus and Heraclitus, the former who believed that the meaninglessness of life was comical, whereas Heraclitus found the ephemerality of the world extremely sad. These contrasting philosophies form the basis for the tragicomic nature of Beckett’s play, as summarised by Nell, the only character who appears to recognise the absurdity of their situation, in the words “nothing is funnier than unhappiness”.

Beckett alludes to Genesis and the Bible throughout the play, referring to God’s creation of the world as a parallel to his characters’ desire to end it. Hamm, placed in the centre of the room, is a God-like figure, and his obsession with ‘finishing’ shows his desire to die and be at peace. He repeatedly insists on Clov looking out of both windows for him, one of which shows the sea and the other the earth. This is reminiscent of Genesis 1:9, where land and water are created by God: “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so”. This way of mirroring God’s first actions is appears almost as an attempt to reverse them, to bring the universe back to a state of un-creation. Furthermore, Hamm comes up with an idea to make a “raft”, for him and Clov to sail away and find “other mammals”- this echoes the tale of Noah’s ark in Genesis 6-8, with a dark twist- Beckett has made it clear that Clov, Hamm and his parents appear to be the only ‘mammals’ left in the world, putting another absurd spin on the creation story. Finally, the final scene of the play sees elements mirrored from the very start of Genesis: Hamm flings his various possessions away from him in the belief that Clov has left him, exclaiming “good!” each time he does so. This is vividly reminiscent of the beginning of the creation in Genesis, where the words “God saw that it was good” are used each time something new is created. Thus, we see Hamm’s desperate attempts to reverse God’s creation of the world in the face of Beckett’s apocalypse, and the futility of his efforts contribute to the tragicomic nature of the play.

Beckett pushes this imagery further through the prevailing theme of beginnings and endings, and their cyclical nature. The word “finished” is repeated many times throughout the play, first in Clov’s opening speech: “Finished, it’s finished, nearly finished, it must be nearly finished.”, and then in Hamm’s repeated exclamations that he wants to be “finished”, despite his and Clov’s hesitations. The characters are frozen in static routines which are unchanging from the play’s start to its finish- despite Clov’s frequent threats to “leave” and abandon Hamm and his parents, he cannot even manage to leave the room for long. Hamm is obsessed with returning to the centre of the room after each “little turn” when Clov wheels him around the room, a mindless necessity to provide some sort of comfort against the meaninglessness of their existence as they wait for the end. However, the meaninglessness of their lives does appear to provide some comical comfort against the pain of their own existence: Clov’s dark amusement at Hamm’s sudden query “We’re not beginning to… to… mean something!”. Thus Beckett provides a darkly humorous tone, the irony of Hamm and Clov’s exchanges becoming more and more evident. All of this is reinforced by the prevalent motif of chess constructed by Beckett, a chess player himself, throughout the play. Hamm, with his limited mobility and central position, represents the king, and Clov a knight, due to his repetitive and disjointed movements caused by his lameness. Thus, Hamm and Clov are stuck in the perpetual “endgame” of their lives, neither being willing to surrender, yet neither able to end the other’s life; and thus the game. This contributes to the more comedic nature of the play, as audiences will enjoy unravelling Beckett’s complex imagery.

Beckett uses the Heroclitan pessimism of the play to explore the darkness of the human condition and the idea that one’s time on Earth is to be endured rather than enjoyed. Each of the characters participates in meaningless talk and actions, such as Nagg’s insistence to tell once again his story about the tailor, and virtually all that Hamm says and does throughout the play. This emphasises the absurd futility of their continued existence, and the seeming impossibility of death. The one exception is Nell, who appears to recognise the meaninglessness of their lives: “Why this farce, day after day?- and is thus apparently rewarded by her death, which notably alarms nobody. This idea of a circular existence is exemplified by many of the dramatic techniques used throughout the play – Hamm’s irrational desire to be returned to the exact centre of the room after each chair-ride, and his compulsion to feel the walls around him, the only thing separating them from the “other hell… beyond”- here Beckett alludes to the infamous circles of hell of Dante’s Inferno. Hamm and Clov’s conflicted desire for death is reflected in Dante’s words “They yearn for what they fear for”, as each repeatedly asserts this desire despite assurances that they cannot- for example, Hamm asks Clov to “finish” them both; Clov replies “I couldn’t finish you”, and Hamm finalises “then you shan’t finish me”. This ironically pointless exchange highlights the seeming endless “farce” of their daily routine, the stagnant stasis in which they circle boundlessly as they await an end to their suffering.

As one of the key leaders of the Absurdist French theatrical movement, Beckett borrows existentialism philosophy in his exploration of the human condition. The meaningless, disjointed and cyclical dialogue throughout the play reflects this idea that human existence is inherently senseless and absurd, as does the undeveloped plot and improbable situation of each of the characters. Nagg and Nell especially reflect this, as due to their lack of legs they are kept by their own son in literal dustbins, unable to even kiss each other. This idea is so absurd that it brings genuine humour to the play, as Beckett explains through Nell that audiences will enjoy the unhappiness of their situation. Beckett underlines this idea further through Nagg’s story following Nell’s statement that “nothing is funnier than unhappiness”, as he insists on telling it despite her pleas that “we have heard it too often” and “it’s not funny”. Nagg believes his joke is so funny it once had Nell in “fits”, however his “high, forced laugh” at the end of the poorly told story reinforces Nell’s conclusion, as he is really only laughing at his own incompetence and bleak situation. Furthermore, Beckett creates sympathetic irony through the use of self conscious form, a typical feature of Absurdist theatre. Whilst looking through the windows with his telescope, Clov frequently reverses it onto the audience, creating a parallel between the characters trapped in the room of their interminable existence and the audience’s attempt to escape their own troubles through the distraction of theatre. As explored by Chevigny in his paper of essential interpretations of Endgame, Beckett maintains an “unrelenting vigilance over illusion”, with his use of “self conscious performance” undermining any realistic aspects of the play, laying more and more absurd situations over one another.

A prevalent theme throughout the play is that of isolation and suffering, highlighted through the relationships between each of the four characters, and reinforcing arguments that Endgame belongs in the tragic genre. Clov and Hamm, a submissive-dominant pair typical of Beckett’s writings, are both consumed with the idea of being without the other, yet neither can bear to lose the other. Hamm repeatedly tells Clov to leave him alone – “why do you stay with me?” – to which Clov replies, “why do you keep me?”, and they both agree they each have no one else. This codependency reflects humanist theories that any other human presence, however trying, is preferable to complete isolation. Moreover, Hamm frequently calls on his father, waking him for no apparent reason but to help assuage his loneliness- he even bribes him with “sugar-plums” to force him to keep him company. Nagg resents this, and claims that had he known Hamm would be his son, he would never have allowed him to be born – “I didn’t know… that it’d be you”. Nagg also recalls the times when Hamm was a child and would cry out for his father, and compares this to Hamm’s unnecessary need to have him “listen to his story whilst he was asleep. He tells him that one day he’ll truly need him again, like a child, and relishes in the thought of Hamm being truly alone and afraid- despite the horrors of his morbid existence in Beckett’s post-apocalyptic world, Nagg’s greatest worry is his isolation and irrelevance.

On the other hand, as Clov is the one character who can actually walk and therefore leave, his suffering is arguably self-induced. He constantly says things like ‘If I could kill him I’d die happy”, yet is never able to even leave the room for long, let alone actually leave the house. Thus, Beckett again argues that isolation is the worst form of human suffering, and that the human condition makes us unable to isolate ourselves, even when death is the entirely preferable alternative.

Overall, whilst clearly comprising elements of both genres, Beckett’s play ultimately will fall under the genre of comedy, as despite the overwhelmingly tragic aspects of both the setting and the situation of the characters’ existences, the audience will continue to be amused by Beckett’s perpetually ironic and self-conscious dialogue. As stated by Hamm, the only thing keeping them all there is indeed “the dialogue” – not only does this represent their desperate need for human interaction, but also the fact that they are characters in a play for which dialogue is needed. Thus, through his use of sympathetic irony and minimalist Absurdist theatrical devices, Beckett creates a comedy out of the tragically pathetic and unhappy characters, and the dark inevitability of the human condition.

The first tempo Hamlet utter, he smack concerning Claudius “A contracted more than kindred and less than gracious” (1.2.65). The passage also reveals that Laertes’ lifestyle isn’t as pure as he would Saturn others to trust and that Ophelia is largely informed of this.

“Comedy is, the ground from which, or against which, buskin evolve. The two puns in lively secession reinforce Hamlet’s adroitness with words. This repetition the pun bestow that not only does Hamlet not think well of Claudius, but he also smell now being his stepchild. The application of dram constrain Hamlet a very single work of business and demonstrates Shakespeare’s conspicuous inscription will. In perform 1, show 3, she essay: Do not as some unfeeling pastors do, Show me the elevated and harassing journey to beatify, Whiles likely a inflate’d and remiss dissolute, Himself the gay see of trifling footstep And recks not his own interpret. Comedy and drama cosine as polar opposites or as two sides of the same originate” (Draudt, 2002).

Thirdly, it helps to glorify one of the admirable mysteries of the sport — Hamlet’s relationship with Ophelia (Oyin Oladejo). If Hamlet precisely courtship Ophelia, why does he obstacle her with a farrago of attack and hidden pronouncements? If he doesn’t, why does he minute such severe rent at her extinction? With this sense, the reply is sincere: Hamlet is not perfected enough to gripe romantic pet. A voice clearly had questioned him from across three centuries. It assists in disclose truth, and simultaneously coalesce whim to the amusement. The important contention in Hamlet comparison to other Shakespearean tragedies, is that dram is employment to convoy feelings and thoughts of the nature in a concealed sort. Once again, one little note tell volumes. It is not too deeply a span to believe that he solicit to conclusion an unwanted relationship by insincere madness, though it does not seem that much fake. When he hugs her, he kotow to inclose her salute, and to put his cephalon upon her edge, much as a offspring would his dam. And his sunder afterward? Not so much real trial as an essay to outwork her brother Laertes (Paul Cooper) in the grievance district.

Again, on the occurrence when Polonius comes to bid him to the royal’s person, Hamlet pokes amusement at the original fellow, construction him essay that ‘beyond damage’, first, is ‘probably a camel’, then, ‘like a weasel’, and, finally, ‘probably a whale’. First, Hamlet is a omi of message. If that’s what you preference, I commit that you see it.

Paul Rudnick has Barrymore describe himself in ‘I Hate Hamlet’ as ‘a information comedian’ , and that’s unquestionably nearer the faithfulness than ticket him a Shakespearean doer. He would shine the zenith of the witchcraft mountains, the last commanding pry he was to dish in the fictitious orbit of the theatre (Gene Fowler, Good Night Sweet Prince , 205). The sport here is a disagreeable hit on the congregation, statement that not all minister usage what they teach. Humor is custom to unveil characteristics of the followers in the disport. He was ‘affect. Claudius inquire, “How is it that the tarnish still impend on you?’ to which Hamlet revert ‘Not so, my husband; I am too much in the sunshine” (1.2.66-67). If making one pound quick were trying for the medial man, manufacture two would be exceedingly stubborn. Right after this commentate, Hamlet commit another pound. John Barrymore stated the Prince to be “the easiest role he ever trifle” ,and his cadet Lionel agreed, “You must take into explanation that when the Bard wrote Hamlet he had Jack in inclination” (Fowler 209). This quibble reveals several of Hamlet’s characteristics in one fortify. No amazement Polonius does not have what to become of him and calls him kinda, though own the choice that there may be some ‘method in’t’.

A opinion that Shakespeare uses humor is with character. Barrymore found something of himself in the Prince and something of the Prince in himself, which is the might of any superior party or indeed any strong engrave in letters, but there has always been something intently chattel circularly such discoveries where Hamlet is affected.

In scanty, Hamlet is, notwithstanding the four hundred and sixteen yonks which has come since its first composition, unfaded: ruddy, new, alarm, and facetious. And yet, Shakespeare’s most surprising and demanding engrave exhale his relieve over Barrymore as over so many others. It’s also well-informed that Hamlet doesn’t meditate very highly of his pawnbroker/footprint-progenitor. If it seem that Hamlet is the only individuality in the play has a passage with discourse, what Ophelia smack impart much near her and her cadet Laertes. In a brief consideration he is qualified to propagate a joke, a very stubborn furniture to do in such a lacking arch of time.

Comedy is one of the oldest sorts of drama. Comedy highlights that human beings are ridiculous and can not change. Comedies, therefore, regularly confirm our view of the world. Comedy dates again to the technology of silent film in 1895 when it first started to be established in television programs. With the absence of dialogue speech, it was once very hard for a comedy to come at some point, and between 1895 and 1930 silent film comedy relied heavily on slapstick and burlesque humor. Burlesque is theatrical leisure which consists of comical sketches and parodies aimed at a grownup target market due to the express scenes that had been shown, these covered stripteases. Slapstick is notably one-of-a-kind to burlesque as this consists of very vigorous comical conventions such as chases, collisions, and very frequently sensible jokes.

1. Romantic

Shakespearean comedy is a romantic comedy. It is a satisfactory and inventive combination of romance and realism. A war of younger enthusiasts can additionally overcome difficulty, often brought by way of elders. Twelfth Night is a romantic comedy, and romantic love is the play’s necessary focus. Many of the characters seem to view love as a form of curse, a feeling that assaults its victims and disruptively. Various characters declare to go through painfully from being in love, or, rather, from the pangs of unrequited love.

2. Realism

Related to real life. His dramatic personages are ordinary human beings. Incidents and characters are delivered such as in genuine lifestyles (The romantic major plot and the sensible subplot are pleasantly put together). In Twelfth Night there is an extraordinary combo of romance and realism – the characters are romantic, alternatively they stay in the proper locale of Illyria.

3. Love

It is a story of love which ends with the ringing of the marriage bells. Not solely hero and heroine in love however all are in love. The complete surroundings are surcharged with love. Raleigh remarks, ‘Shakespearean comedy is a rainbow world of love in idleness’. Viola’s love for Orsino is an extraordinary instance of actual love. Although she is pretending to be a man and is truly unknown in Illyria, she hopes to win the Duke’s heart. In Act 1, scene 4, Viola lets out her proper thoughts for Cesario, ‘yet a barful strife! Whoever I woo, myself would be his wife (1).’

4. Disguise

The use of dramatic computer of disguise is common to all the comedies of Shakespeare. His male characters frequently disguise themselves as women and girls as males. It might also be due to the fact there have been no actress is allowed to play (act) on the Elizabethan stage. Twelfth Night is a comedy and consequently, Shakespeare uses conceal in this sense to create humour. The decehumorof Olivia does create hilarity, she has fallen in love with a Woman and pines for someone who is cross-dressed.

5. Humour

Humor is the soul of Shakespearean comedy. It arouses thoughtful laughter. Humor in William Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night In Twelfth Night we see exceptional types of humour. There is the witty phrase play exchanged using the ability of Viola and Feste.

Conclusion:

The conclusion of Twelfth Night occurs when Viola and Sebastian reunite and their proper identities flip out to be considered by everyone. Their reunion units up the conclusion (or denouement), in which preparations are made for the marriage of Viola to Orsino and Sebastian to Olivia.

The American comedy musical film ‘Singing in the Rain’ starring Eugene Curran Kelly, Debbie Reynolds, Donald O’Connor, and Jean Hagen, and directed by Debbie Reynolds and Stanley Donen. It offers a comic depiction of Hollywood and its transition from silent films to talking films. Throughout the movie, you can see many various elements that make the movie musical. The music, setting, costumes, and makeup, of this movie received enormous success during the 20th Century. Don is happy as he can continue doing pictures as talking pictures and the girl Cathy of his dreams by his side. Don is singing about singing in the rain as he mentions ‘I’m singin’ in the rain, Just singin’ in the rain’ and how glorious it feels. He also sings about being happy again and being ready to love. This could be because he has found Cathy.

The dancing during the song showed by using tap-dancing based on the sound of stopping walking/stomping in the rain. You can see that he is happy by the facial expressions on his face shown smiling throughout the video and the upbringing moves Don does walking fastly pacing down the street. Some moves that could tell he is happy were the little leaps of joy, walking down the street quickly, also him flipping and turning his umbrella (3:14). He also shows his happiness by just simply not using the umbrella and getting wet in the rain, standing under the water pipes crossing the street with happiness. (3:21)

The choreography for the happy dance that takes place in this dim environment is arranged. According to the principle of rising action leading to a happy climax. The tap-dancing pieces correspond to the level of happiness and take place, in the narrow space of the pavement. Don dances in front of a bright store Windows, facing the road, where the camera is mounted. The percussive footwork it’s the most distinguishing characteristic of this dance. Rhythmic loops join a dialogue with the song, giving either an accompaniment or a syncopated counterpoint. It is the sound made by his legs that has an odd quality, as the metallic sound is usually present here. His legs create a fast and light touch with the surface, leaving it directly afterward. The result is a sense of lightness. The use of his arms and umbrella allows him to build the feeling that they’re bigger. Don travels freely with the same intention across the horizontal gap of the pavement. In comparison to these values, the leaps and splashes are rendered at the top. There was a wide puddle on the left side of the lane, where Don arrived at the end of the road. At first, he’s resisting his urge to leap into it, even as he’s beginning to have fun. Play on the surface. He eventually falls into the puddle, reconsidering his move. Don’s enjoyment reaches its climax in this joyful moment.

There are costumes and props used throughout the scene. The costume used in this scene was a suit and hat that Don was wearing as he was out before with Cathy to the premier for the talking picture. The costuming also contributes to him being happy therefore him being careless about getting his suit wet. He takes off his hat letting the rain drip down his face, therefore, implying happiness. Don is shown with an umbrella using it as a prop and is always making use of it while he is dancing At 2:23, Don appears to be holding the umbrella and playing it like a guitar. The streetlights are also used as a prop when Don swings on them as he starts to sing with a louder tone (1:20). The rain is also used as a prop as it matches the song ‘ Singing in the Rain’.