The prohibition jest which stands preeminent in the United States,
and has afforded French and English humorists a field which they have
promptly and ably filled, draws its vitality from the inexhaustible
springs of human nature. Readers and play-goers profess themselves
tired of it; moralists deprecate its undermining qualities; but the
conflict between a normal desire and an interdict is too unadjustable,
too rich in circumstance, and too far-reaching in results, to be
accepted in sober silence. The complications incidental to prohibition,
the battle of wits, the turns of the game, the adventures--often sorry
enough--of the players, all present the essential elements of comedy.
Mrs. Gerould has likened the situation to an obstacle race. It is that,
and it is something more. In earlier, easier days, robbery was made
justifiably droll. The master thief was equally at home in northern
Europe and in the far East. England smiled at Robin Hood. France
evolved that amazing epithet, “chevalier d’industrie.” But arrayed
against robbery were a moral law and a commandment. Arrayed against
wine are a legal ordinance and the modern cult of efficiency. It will
be long before these become so sacrosanct as to disallow a laugh.
The worst that has been said of legitimate American humour is that it
responds to every beck and call. Even Mr. Ewan S. Agnew, whose business
it is to divert the British public, considers that the American
public is too easily diverted. We laugh, either from light-hearted
insensitiveness, or from the superabundant vitality, the half-conscious
sense of power, which bubbles up forever in the callous gaiety of
the world. Certainly Emerson is the only known American who despised
jocularity, and who said early and often that he did not wish to be
amused. The most striking passage in the letters of Mr. Walter Page
is the one which describes his distaste for the “jocular” Washington
luncheons at which he was a guest in the summer of 1916. He had come
fresh from the rending anxiety, the heroic stress and strain of
London; and the cloudless atmosphere of our capital wounded his spirit.
England jested too. “Punch” had never been so brilliant as in the
torturing years of war. But England had earned the right to jest. There
was a tonic quality in her laughter. Page feared from the bottom of
his soul lest the great peaceful nation, safe, rich and debonair, had
suffered her “mental neutrality” to blot out from her vision the agony
of Europe, and the outstanding facts which were responsible for the
disaster.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account