Situation comedy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Slapstick describes a specific type of comedy that through the laughter lovely situation arises.

Situation comedy in the movie Arsenic and Old Lace (Original title: Arsenic and Old Lace ) by Francesco Capra from the year 1941st

Etymology of situation and comedy

Situation (from Latin-French "[factual] situation , position, [status]") originally refers to geographical locations. The term is suitable for capturing person and object constellations in spatio-temporally limited scenarios. The (cinematic) narrative research uses it u. a. to make events describable on the basis of situational changes or genre-specific constellations of certain characters and objects. So-called standard situations . Furthermore, narrative research assumes that human experiences are cognitively processed through situations.

Komik (from Greek komós ) originally referred to the pageant in the ancient poets' contest, the Attic agon . In German, the adjective comical is assigned to people or things that make you laugh or seem strange . Something unspecific , which is often understood as contrary to the tragic . For analysis purposes, it is useful to distinguish comedy from related phenomena such as humor and laughter . Comedy is often understood as something staged (i.e. a staged situation), humor in contrast to this as a character trait or attitude through which comedy is perceived. In contrast, laughter is the reaction or affect that comedy ideally evokes. 

Comic theory

Forms of comedy

Henri Bergson traces the situation comedy in his 1900 book Le Rire (Laughter) back to the contrast between the living and the mechanical .

Situation comedy can be defined as different from other forms of comedy: Theodor Lipps clearly separates it from character comedy . According to Lipps, the origins of the comedy either lie in the people or in fateful situations. Christiane Voss distinguishes comical situations from tragic and sublime . Selma Alic regards situation comedy as a super-category to other types of comedy such as form, movement or word comedy . Perhaps the best-known description of situation comedy comes from Henri Bergson's Le Rire (1900). Here, too, it is defined in contrast to character, word and body comedy. Situationskomik produced either by mechanical repetitions ( Repetition ), reversed roles ( inversion ), or confusion ( interference of the series ):

“A situation is always funny when it belongs to two completely independent series of events at the same time and thus has a double meaning.” - Henri Bergson: Le Rire , 1900

Incongruence theory

Many theories of comics start with the observation of contrasts. Beginning with Arthur Schopenhauer's considerations on incongruence , the comic was repeatedly described in terms of the contradicting, opposing, paradoxical or contrasting elements. We are talking about unstable opposition relationships, breaches of conventions or exchanges that are either dissolved ( relief ) or not. In any case, bipolarity seems to be a key trait of comedy. Bipolarity between the sublime and the nothing (in Theodor Lipps) or the living and the mechanical (in Henri Bergson). Contrast pairs can appear unexpectedly either side by side or one after the other. This unexpected moment ( punch line ) seems to be a second defining characteristic. According to the incongruence theory, funny situations are characterized by unexpectedly nonsensical contrasts . The difficulty with this normative definition lies in the immense range of situations that trigger laughter. Since comedy often makes taboo breaks and deviations from the norm its subject, the abnormal itself would have to be standardized.

Perception theory

Tilting figure as a symbol of a situation change, as is characteristic of situation comedy.

See also: Figure-ground perception

The unexpectedly crazy proportions of comic situations are often compared with optical paradoxes such as tilting figures or Möbius strips . Situation perceptions shift from one state to another, opposing one. So the comic situation has two wrong sides that flow together like a Möbius strip . Such optical illusions show a phenomenon that perceptual psychology describes using the pair of terms ' figure and ground ':

“The basic figure-structure originally describes the phenomenon that when looking, more attention is always paid to a part of a figure than to another. That part of the content that is on a higher level of awareness is called the figure, the correspondingly different one is the reason. ”- Susanne Schäfer: Komik in Kultur und Context , 1996

If the figure-ground ratio changes , this leads to a shift in context. The same thing appears in a new perceived context. An initially probable context for a disturbing moment is suddenly replaced by an improbable one, so that “a new level of meaning is introduced overwriting that requires a reinterpretation of what was previously [represented]”.

Comedy as bisociation

Arthur Koestler , in his book The Act of Creation (1964), proposes that comedy and creative thinking are closely related. Both use the conceptual re-linking of schemes.

See also: bisociation

In his book The Act of Creation (1964) Arthur Koestler proposes that comedy and creative thinking are closely linked. He coined the term bisociation :

"It is the clash of the two mutually incompatible codes, or associative contexts, which explodes the tension. […] The pattern underlying […] is the perceiving of a situation or the idea, L, in two self-consistent but habitually incompatible frames of reference, M1 and M2. [...] While this unusual situation lasts, L is not merely linked to one associative context, but bisociated with two. "- Arthur Koestler: The Act of Creation , 1964

In this sense, comedy lives from a situation L, which is classified in two normally incompatible associative frames of reference (M1, M2). Punch results from unexpected leaps in thought from one frame of reference to the next - a creative act, as mental schemes are newly linked. The unexpected change of context is decisive, whereby the different interpretations of the situation can oscillate back and forth.

Comedy as a game with schemes

See also: scheme (psychology)

Instead of using tilting figures ( Wolfgang Iser ), figure-basic structures (Susanne Schäfer), context changes (Dieter Heinrich / Arianne Mhamood) or frames of reference (Arthur Koestler), funny situations can also be explained using the scheme term:

“The schema concept refers to cognitive structures of organized prior knowledge, abstracted from experience with specific instances; schema guide the processing of new information and the retrieval of stored information. ”- Susan Fiske and Patricia Linville: What does the schema concept buy us? , 1980

Information about events, situations and objects are integrated into a network of associations through schemes . This sometimes explains why situation comedy is culture-dependent: We can only understand the comedy when both bisociated schemata are recognized in a situation. If we are not familiar with the schemes (e.g. if we do not know cultural allusions), we do not understand the joke either. This theory also explains why characters often appear blind to us in strange situations : Since they only perceive the world schematically, heuristic misjudgments occur . Situations are misunderstood and fallacies arise . The situation seems ridiculous because cultural norms are disregarded ( limitation ), or because something new arises through the confrontation with existing norms ( transgression ). This is also where the aesthetic quality of the situation comedy lies: worldviews are questioned and presented as something falsifiable - prone to errors and always having to be rethought. This means that strange situations appear chaotic , but at the same time encourage creative rethinking and form a basis for innovation .

The combination of incongruence theory with findings from perceptual psychology ( gestalt and schema theory) results in the following definition of situation comedy: A situation L (narrative figure and object relationship) that is bisociated with two culturally incompatible schemata (S1 and S2) is a strange situation where S1 and / or S2 contains a disturbance torque . The comical punch line results from the unexpected tilting from one situation interpretation to another. If we understand situation comedy as a game with schemes, this explains why gags are culture-specific, work with norm breaks and why it is impossible to set up a normative comedy formula.

The play Der Nackte Wahnsinn (Original title: Noises Off ) by Michael Frayn from 1982 is characterized by running gags and playing with ever-varying intratextual schemes .

Schemas in a strange situation can be either intra- or intertextual .

  • Intratextual schemata are established through the narration . It is referred to over and over again, so that here comedy situations can arise from repetitive situations that always show the same sequence of symmetrically corresponding events under ever new circumstances. The decisive factor in such running gags is not just the repetition, but the constant new variation of the familiar schematic sequence.
  • Intertextual schemes are used in parodies . There are schemes that are not established through the narration , but rather the z. B. Assume genre knowledge. The result is a game with genre clichés or narrative and structural patterns are reinterpreted.

Forms of situation comedy

Linguistic joke, slapstick , irony , parody, running gag , etc. Variants of situation comedy can be differentiated in the most varied of ways. Henri Bergson already differentiated comedy in forms, postures, movements, characters and situations . For a systematic approach, it is necessary to find suitable comparison parameters that can be used to differentiate situations: Comedy can be examined on different levels of representation, e.g. B. on a visual level ( sight gags ) or on a linguistic level ( puns ). Situation comedy could also be differentiated on the basis of the temporal expansion ( setup and pay-off of a scheme change), the contrast quality of the cover (the difference between S1 and S2), the repetition (oscillation between S1 and S2) or the interpretation of the situation (which figures take S1 and / or S2 true).

Situation comedy about information dramaturgy

See also: focussing

Gérarde Genette establishes three relationships between recipient and character knowledge : The zero focus or "overview" (readers / viewers know more than the character; L / Z> F), the internal focalization ("sympathy"; L / Z = F) and external focusing ("outside view"; L / Z <F). It is crucial that Genette understands the knowledge of a character to understand the situation, and that this can change dynamically ( alteration ).

Zero focus Internal focussing External focussing
"Overview" "With view" "Outside view"
Narrator > character  Narrator = character  Narrator < character 
The narrator knows more than one figure or says more than one figure knows. The narrator says nothing more than a character knows. The narrator says less than a character knows.

Five forms of situation comedy

Philipp Neuweiler suggests five different forms of situation comedy  :

designation Focalization description
The surprise F1 = Z Figure and viewer only recognize S1 and are equally surprised by S2.
Blind into disaster F1 <Z Viewers recognize S1 and S2. The figure only S1, so that it runs 'blind' into disaster.
The clever solution F1> Z In contrast to the viewer, the figure recognizes S2 and leads the situation to a creative solution.
The mutual misunderstanding F1 <Z

F2 <Z

Several figures interpret the situation differently: F1 only perceives S1 and F2 only perceives S2. Spectators recognize S1 and S2.
The rollplay F1 = Z

F2 <Z

Some characters and the audience recognize the ambiguity of a situation (S1 and S2), while others only perceive S1.

F1 = first figure / group of figures

F2 = second figure / group of figures

S1 = first situation interpretation

S2 = Second situation interpretation

Z = viewer / recipient

Two central questions of this typology are: What interpretations or schemes (S1 and S2) are there in a situation? And which of them are perceived by the audience or the individual characters?

The surprise

Situation comedy in the sense of a surprise arises when the audience and the character are equally surprised by a situational change in perception. One figure perceives the situation as a disturbance or the behavior of another figure as abnormal and reacts in surprise.

Example : In arsenic and lace bonnet , the good-hearted aunts Martha and Abby Brewster (S1) surprisingly turn out to be serial killers (S2).

Blind into disaster

Figures run blind into disaster if they misjudge a situation (in contrast to the more knowledgeable spectators) (F1 <Z). The audience has additional contextual knowledge about the narration or about their genre awareness. "The comic potential lies [...] between what appears to be (also is inherent in the text) [S1] and what the reader knows that it really is [S2]." So the characters sometimes literally grope in the dark .

Example : a wine bottle with toxic arsenic is first established in arsenic and lace cap (S2). The figure of Dr. Einstein doesn't know anything about it and wants to take a sip of it to refresh himself (S1).

The clever solution

"Joke is the ability to find similarities between different things or (in a narrower sense) to bring seemingly very distant, irreconcilable [...] things into a new, unexpected, surprising, vivid relation that first brings tension, then pleasing solutions." : On the Origin and Forms of Development of the Joke , 1889

Witz (from Old High German wizzan ) originally meant " understanding ". When figures solve a situation in a clever way , they act like a trickster . You get to situational reinterpretations that are not immediately obvious to the audience (F1> Z).

Example : Policeman O'Hara finds the tied theater critic Mortimer Brewster in arsenic and lace . Instead of freeing him directly (S1) he uses the situation for himself to present Mortimer with his self-written play (S2).

The mutual misunderstanding

Perhaps the most distinctive form of situation comedy is based on mutual misunderstanding . Two or more characters interpret situations differently and talk past each other, so to speak, which is what makes a mistaken comedy . For Henri Bergson, this can only be achieved by establishing two independent rows that clash. The viewers get an insight into the respective situational understanding of the characters and become double confidants . The constant tipping back and forth or “balancing between two opposing interpretations” creates the special attraction of this comical situation. It is an unstable state, because at every moment the confusion threatens to dissolve, which in turn creates tension.

Example : The newly wed Elaine wants to go on her honeymoon with her husband Mortimer Brewster in Arsenic and Lace Top (S1). Mortimer, on the other hand, wants to cover up the body in the window chest in front of Elaine (S2) and throws it out of his apartment. Elaine misunderstands Mortimer's protective reaction as ignorance, Mortimer in turn misunderstood Elaine's behavior as intrusive.

The rollplay

In role play , one or more characters have more knowledge about a situation than other characters (F1 = Z, F2 <Z). You can use this to your advantage by 'playing' something to the other characters. At the same time, the 'play in play' creates a self-reflective moment in the narrative, which is particularly characteristic of the Elizabethan theater .

Example : In arsenic and lace bonnet , the two aunts Martha and Abby Brewster learn that the homeless Gibbs spends his old age without relatives. While Gibbs thinks he is being invited for a drink by the two women (S1), they want to release him from his loneliness (S2). The aunts (and the spectators) are aware of both interpretations of the situation (S1 and S2). Abby and Martha play a scene with Gibbs with the aim of poisoning him.

Relationship between situation comedy and character comedy

The Harlequin (itl. Arlecchino ) in the Commedia dell'arte as a prototype of a comic figure.

Strange characters look typical . For Henri Bergson, the typical is a trait that no longer develops and thus appears mechanical.

“Anyone who automatically follows his path without worrying about contact with the others seems funny.” - Henri Bergson: La Rire, 1900

So maybe two funny basic types  can be distinguished: The blind / absent-minded / idiot , as victims of their own schematic thinking. And the figure of the trickster who deliberately breaks with schemes . Already in Attic comedy a distinction is made between the characters alazṓn (at whom one laughs) and eirôn (with whom one laughs).

Mutual misunderstandings can only arise through schematically restricted situational perceptions (with the idiot figure) and only tricksters can reinterpret situations and thus use them creatively for themselves ( The Clever Solution ). The character comedy offers a different, but not a contradicting reading of the situation comedy . Both forms of comedy can be viewed equally. While the situation comedy to focus on the collective places (figure as situational constant) that takes character comedy that figure as a variable in the view. If typical figures represent a certain schematic thinking and acting, they thus form the basis for the confrontation of incompatible situation interpretations and thus for situation comedy .

See also

literature

  • Mikhail Bakhtin : Literature and Carnival. On romance theory and laughter culture. Frankfurt am Main 1990.
  • Charles Baudelaire : On the nature of laughter. In: Ders .: Complete Works / Letters. Edited by Friedhelm Kemp u. Claude Pichois in collaboration with Wolfgang Drost. Volume 1. Munich 1977, pp. 284-305.
  • Peter L. Berger: Redemptive laughter: the comic in human experience. de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1998, ISBN 3-11-015561-3 .
  • Henri Bergson : The Laughter. Darmstadt 1988.
  • August Wilhelm Bohtz : About the comic and the comedy. Goettingen 1844.
  • Simon Critchley : In On Humor (2002), Critchley argues that humor can change a situation and therefore perform a critical function.
  • Sigmund Freud : The joke and its relation to the unconscious. London 1940.
  • Sigmund Freud: The humor. In: Ders .: study edition. Edited by Alexander Mitscherlich, Angela Richards u. James Strachey. Volume IV. Frankfurt am Main 1970, pp. 275-282.
  • Robert Gernhardt : What is there to laugh about? Zurich, 1988.
  • Wilhelm Genazino: The stretched look. Munich, 2004.
  • Ewald Hecker: The physiology and psychology of laughter and the comic. Berlin 1873.
  • Wolfgang Hirsch: The essence of the comic. Amsterdam / Stuttgart 1959.
  • Eike-Christian Hirsch: The joke conductor. Hamburg 1985.
  • András Horn : The comic in the mirror of literature. Attempt a systematic introduction. Wuerzburg 1988.
  • Franz Jahn: About the essence of the comic. 1906.
  • Carsten Jakobi, Christine Waldschmidt (Hrsg.): Joke and Reality. Comedy as a form of aesthetic appropriation of the world. Bielefeld 2015.
  • Friedrich Georg Jünger : About the comic. 3. Edition. Frankfurt am Main 1948 (1st edition: also 1948)
  • Emil Kraepelin : On the psychology of the comic. Scientific publishing house, Schutterwald / Baden 2001.
  • Dieter Lamping : Is comedy harmless? A theory of literary comedy and comic literature. In: literature for readers. No. 2, 1994, pp. 53-65.
  • Theodor Lipps : comedy and humor. A psychological-aesthetic examination. (= Contributions to aesthetics. VI). Hamburg / Leipzig 1898.
  • Odo Marquard : Exile of Joy. In: Wolfgang Preisendanz, Rainer Warning (Ed.): The comic. Munich 1976, pp. 133-151.
  • Jean Paul : Preschool of Aesthetics. Hamburg 1990.
  • Manfred Pfister: Bibliography on genre poetics (3). Theory of the comic, comedy and tragicomedy (1943–1972). In: Journal of French Language and Literature. 83, 1973, pp. 240-254.
  • Luigi Pirandello : The humor. Mindelheim 1986 a. a.
  • Helmuth Plessner : laughing and crying. An investigation into the limits of human behavior. Munich 1950.
  • Wolfgang Preisendanz, Rainer Warning (Ed.): The comic. Munich 1976.
  • Joachim Ritter : About laughter. In: Leaves for German Philosophy. 14, 1940/41, pp. 1-21.
  • Otto Speyer: About the comic and its use in poetry. Berlin 1888.
  • Karl Ueberhorst: The comical. An investigation. Volume I: The Really Funny. Leipzig 1896. Volume II: The Falsely Comical. Leipzig 1900.
  • Friedrich Theodor Vischer: About the sublime and the comic, a contribution to the philosophy of the beautiful. Stuttgart 1837. (Also in: Ders .: On the sublime and the comic and other texts on aesthetics. Frankfurt am Main 1967, pp. 37–215.)

Web links

Wiktionary: situation comedy  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. Duden | Situation comedy | Spelling, meaning, definition. Retrieved November 29, 2017 .
  2. a b Werner Digel, Gerhard Kwiatkowski: Situation . In: Werner Digel, Gerhard Kwiatkowski (Ed.): Meyers Großes Taschenlexikon: in 24 vol. Mannheim . tape 24 . Mannheim / Vienna / Zurich 1987, p. 236, 772 .
  3. Anette Auberle, Anette Klosa: Situation . In: Anette Auberle, Anette Klosa (ed.): Duden dictionary of origin. Etymology of the German language . 3. Edition. Dudenverlag, Mannheim / Leipzig / Vienna / Zurich 2001, p. 772 .
  4. a b c d Christiane Voss: The comic of the situation - the situation of the comic . In: Andreas Ziemann, (Ed.): Open order? Philosophy and Sociology of the Situation. Knowledge, communication and society. Writings on the sociology of knowledge . Wiesbaden 2013, p. 229-242 .
  5. ^ Branigan Edward: Narrative Comprehension and Film . London 1992, p. 4th ff .
  6. ^ Albrecht Lehmann: Speeches about experience. Cultural studies consciousness analysis of storytelling . Dietrich Reimer Verlag GmbH, Berlin 2007, p. 9 .
  7. ^ Susanne Schäfer: Comedy in Culture and Context . Munich 1996, p. 15 .
  8. a b c d e Ariane Mhamood: Comedy as an alternative. Parodistic narration between travesty and counterfacture in the 'Virginal' and 'Rosengarten' versions as well as in 'Biterolf and Dietleib' . In: Literature - Imagination - Reality. English, German and Romance studies . tape 47 . Scientific publishing house Trier, Trier 2012, p. 21, 23 f., 25 .
  9. a b Helmut Bachmaier: Afterword . In: Helmut Bachmaier (Ed.): Texts on the theory of comedy . Reclam, Stuttgart 2005, p. 121-134 .
  10. a b c Theodor Lipps: Comedy and Humor . Starnberg 1898, p. 129, 130 f . ( public-library.uk [PDF]).
  11. Selma Alic: Comedy Narrative. Narrative structures and comedy in Hollywood comedy . Marburg 2014, p. 99 .
  12. a b c d e f g Henri Bergson: The laugh . Eugen Dederichs Verlag, Jena 1921, p. 47, 61 ff., 66, 69, 90 .
  13. a b c d Wolfgang Iser: The comic, a tilting phenomenon . In: Wolfgang Preisendanz, Rainer Warninger (Ed.): The comic . Wilhelm Fink Verlag Munich, Munich 1976, p. 398-402 .
  14. a b c d e f g Susanne Schäfer: Comedy in culture and context . Munich 1996, p. 28, 56, 62, 69, 78 f., 70 ff .
  15. Sandra Fluhrer: Constellations of the comic. Observations of humans with Franz Kafka, Karl Valentin and Samuel Beckett . In: Munich studies on literary studies . Wilhelm Fink Verlag Munich, Munich 2016, p. 19 .
  16. a b c d Arthur Koestler: The Act of Creation . London 1964, p. 32, 35 f., 37 .
  17. a b c Dieter Heinrich: Free comedy . In: Wolfgang Reisendanz, Rainer Warninger (Hrsg.): The comic . Wilhelm Fink Verlag Munich, Munich 1976, p. 385-389 .
  18. ^ A b c Heinz Otto Luthe: Comedy as a passage . Wilhelm Fink Verlag Munich, Munich 1992, p. 60 ff., 119 ff .
  19. ^ A b Andrew Horton: Introduction . In: Andrew Horton (ed.): Comedy / Cinema / Theory . University of California Press, Berkeley / Los Angeles / Oxford 1991, p. 1 - 24 .
  20. ^ Susan Fiske, Patricia Linville: What does the schema concept buy us? In: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6 . 1980, p. 543-557 .
  21. ^ Winfried Schulz: communication process . In: Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, Winfried Schulz, Jürgen Wilke (Hrsg.): Fischer Lexikon Publizistik Massenkommunikation . Frankfurt am Main 2009, p. 169-200 .
  22. a b Wolfgang Matzat: The hopeless comedy: code of honor and situation comedy in Calderón's "comedia de capa y espada" . In: Romantic research . tape 98 . Munich 1986, p. 58-80 .
  23. a b c d e f g h Philipp Neuweiler: Forms of situation comedy in Frank Capra's "Arsenic and Old Lace" . Mainz 2017 ( philipp-neuweiler.de [PDF]).
  24. ^ A b Noël Carroll: Notes on the Sight Gag . In: Andrew Horton (ed.): Comedy / Cinema / Theory . University of California Press, Berkeley / Los Angeles / Oxford 1991, p. 25 - 42 .
  25. Gérard Genette: The story . 3. Edition. Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1994, p. 120 ff .
  26. Kuno Fischer: About the origin and the forms of development of the joke . 1889, p. 97 .
  27. a b Gottfried Müller: Theory of comedy. About the effect in theater and in film . Würzburg 1964, p. 59, 75 .
  28. ^ Lothar Miklos: Film and television analysis . 2nd Edition. Constance 2008.