Journeyman Philosopher

I was watching TV late the other night and managed to catch an interview with Alfred Hitchcock that was filmed long before I was born.

I must say I was completely blown away with it. Not only did he have a wonderful sense of humour, which I believe had a heavy influence on the humour of today to take a farfetched guess,  but he was amazingly insightful and sophisticated.

What was amazingly interesting to me in the interview, however, was Hitchcock’s theory on scare tactics. Or to say it more clearly what he felt people needed in order to enjoy a good scare. It’s a really simple idea but an insightful one.

Viewers need release. He explained this through an example involving a rollercoaster. People enjoy rollercoasters because although there are crazy ups and downs twists and turns it eventually ends. And in this there is release. In his own experience he directed a suspenseful film, I haven’t been able to find the name, in which a child carried a bomb throughout town unknownst to himself that eventually exploded and killed him. Hitchhock remembered being adamantly criticized for this choice. He felt it was due to putting the audience ‘through the ringers’ and thereafter giving no positive release. 

He also made a very interesting distinction between humour and suffering. he referenced the old school short of a man in a top hat walking down the street and falling down a drain pipe. This although amusing he felt, was only so if you didn’t look past the action. If you were to look down the pipe and see the bleeding man for example, the scene would lose its sense of humour. 

Why do we find this concept funny Im wondering? I, myself, Thai box and whenever I’ve accidently really hurt someone I’ve laughed my ass off, although I’ve felt horrible. What does this say about our humour and humanity? 

I honestly have no idea. I don’t believe our sense of humour is either short sited or malicious which would seem to be hinted at by the Hitchcock example. In a sense instead, I believe we laugh in order to get over the suffering we’ve experienced.

The idea of laughing off your pain I believe is liberating in a sense, when we make a joke of a bad experience (sincerely intended) I’d think it would be a manner of healing.

I remember a while ago I made a joke to a friend whom got very angry at me for it. I remarked to him after ‘Joking is healing’ and I remember him looking at me in dismay. The fact in this situation is he wasn’t ready to heal yet and was still hurting from the event. Of course I apologised after, but I do think this is an interesting situation.

The man who falls in the pothole won’t laugh at himself as he’s bleeding and suffering at the time it happened most likely. But perhaps later in life he’ll look back and say “God that was stupid!” and laugh.

In such a manner he puts his negative experience behind him and moves on, wouldn’t this be considered healthier than being readily apprehensive?

The individuals that look on and laugh at it though, what are they thinking? When I have laughed at others pain it has not been malicious. I’ve almost always looked at it like ‘Wow, that’s a crazy story to remember’. However this has always been in a situation when the person who was hurt wasn’t freaking out. Perhaps because I was given the release by the person ‘not dying’ or himself taking a ‘light hearted approach’ to the situation I found humour in it. I don’t think I’d react the same way if they started brandishing hatred towards me. But even when I say this I realize I have laughed at people that were ridiculously angry as well.

Hmmm… I just honestly don’t know what it is others perceive, or even what the perceive of me laughing! What makes it ok to laugh? What is funny? And how much pain can we comfortably laugh at?

Generally I laugh at situations. Things that may be considered ridiculous from within my framework of knowledge (such as the simple cause and effect of someone falling down a hole when walking and not paying attention). I think generally I would assume its safe to laugh if the laughter in itself won’t have a negative repercussion on that individual, or if they deserve the negative repercussion that would come from it. Hmmmm…. or at least it seems like that must be my philosophy to it, LOL.

Sidenote: An interesting tidbit is that supposedly in a movie released around a year before Hiroshima Hitchcock actually had a bomb using plutonium in it. And upon the completion of the film, he was watched by the FBI for a period of 6 months. For a general idea of Alfred Hitchhock you can find him here.