Why do we laugh? What does comedy reveal about human nature, society, and the mind’s strange elasticity?
In this classic 1900 essay, philosopher Henri Bergson anatomises the comic impulse with surgical clarity and lyrical wit. For Bergson, laughter is no mere reflex. It is a social gesture, a corrective, a way for life itself to defend its supple intelligence against rigidity and habit. From pratfalls to irony, from the mechanical in the living to the absurd in the everyday, his argument ranges effortlessly between metaphysics and vaudeville.
With a new introduction by Simon Critchley, Laughter emerges as both a foundational text in aesthetics and a startlingly modern theory of humour—anticipating Freud, Chaplin, and memes alike.
An appended essay by Wyndham Lewis offers a bracing counterpoint: a modernist’s rejoinder to Bergson’s genial philosophy. Together they trace the fault-lines between laughter and cruelty, vitality and violence, thought and form.
A century on, Bergson’s question still bites: what makes us laugh—and why does it matter?
Popular and accessible works of French philosopher and writer Henri Louis Bergson include Creative Evolution (1907) and The Creative Mind (1934) and largely concern the importance of intuition as a means of attaining knowledge and the élan vital present in all living things; he won the Nobel Prize of 1927 for literature.
Although international fame and influence of this late 19th century-early 20th century man reached heights like cult during his lifetime, after the Second World War, his influence decreased notably. Whereas such thinkers as Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Jean Paul Sartre, and Lévinas explicitly acknowledged his influence on their thought, Bergsonism of Gilles Deleuze in 1966 marked the reawakening of interest. Deleuze recognized his concept of multiplicity as his most enduring contribution to thinking. This concept attempts to unify heterogeneity and continuity, contradictory features, in a consistent way. This revolutionary multiplicity despite its difficulty opens the way to a re-conception of community, or so many today think.