Introduction And Definitions:

Seemingly following Aristotle's lead many people have thought of comedy as the lesser and ludicrous side of serious drama, that is tragedy, which causes audiences to weep and be purged of pity and fear. Many playwrights who view the world from a comedic perspective however think of their work as significantly dealing with essentially the same issues as "serious drama" but with a different perspective, a different vision of the human experience. Some philosophers and theologians also think of comedy, and the audience's responsive laughter, as meeting human needs as deeply as the purgation by tears. Indeed it is currently being argued that the Biblical point of view, while not lacking seriousness and tears, is comedic rather than tragic (Frye and Buechner). It is from this perspective that I chose to approach and explore some of the relationships between Moliere's dramatic comedy and a theology of mutuality.

An Extended Definition Of Dramatic Comedy:

Dramatic comedy is experienced in the communal setting of the theatre where personal reactions and responses are constantly reinforced, modified or checked by that communal awareness of the setting. The collective response of spontaneous laughter and the inherent approval of applause become significant ways in which the audience affirms and apprehends the play's observations and resolutions regarding the human condition and its "virtual future" (Langer).

While tragedy is seen as individualistic in its implications, dramatic comedy consistently has been understood as a microcosm with broader societal implications (Kronenberger). What happens to the central and secondary characters provides the crucible in which implications for both the individual and society are tested.

[page 162] The most usual shape the action of dramatic comedy takes is that of the chiasm. Society is seen to be in some state of imbalance that threatens its very continuance. The action of the dramatic comedy traces the movement of society, by way of the characters embroiled in that action, toward imminent disaster, collapse, or failure, only to be rescued by some fortunate twist of the plot. This rescue brings about a rebalancing of society by way of a reaffirmation of the traditional societal norms, or a societal shift that may bring about a new more appropriate power base for society (Frye, Langer, Fry, Sypher, Buechner, Rood).

Dramatic comedy has traditionally seen itself as a corrective to the society in which it has found itself. Comic playwrights have at times pilloried the person who dared to transgress the societal norms of the age, and have also held up to ridicule those societies that transgressed the humanity of the individual. In either case the major dramatic comic playwrights have sought to "correct the vices" of their age by their comedies (Moliere, Kronenberger).

Anything in human actions and responses that is perceived as non-human is fodder for immediate and corrective laughter. Anything mechanical or mechanistic in movement, thought, or reaction in a human is perceived by an audience as laughable and in need of correction. (Bergson) The movement of dramatic comedy traditionally has been from misunderstandings, antagonism, mechanistic non-human responses and lack of mutuality toward understanding, acceptance, and becoming more fully human in response and mutuality.

The positive "virtual future" (Langer) that is suggested by the playwright is for the specific individuals involved in the comic action. It is also inclusive of the society at large implied by the play. The society at the end of the comedy is normally more inclusive in that it is open to everyone who accepts the miraculous twist that brought it about and to everyone who does not violate its inclusive norms of mutuality.

While not wanting to fall into the formalistic trap that suggests that dramatic comedy is only defined by its form or structure I have addressed its spirit as well. The spirit of dramatic comedy celebrates our capacity to survive, to at least, endure (Corrigan). This spirit provides [page 163] happy endings as the natural, inevitable, eschatological result of the comic vision. "Comedy is not just a happy as opposed to an unhappy ending, but a way of surveying life so that happy endings must prevail." (Kronenberger)

The "Ladder of Comedy" moves from the low comedy of obscenity to the high comedy of ideas that attacks the sacred cows of a given society. It includes physical comedy, slapstick, plotting devices, witty dialogue and comedy that grows out of character.(1) Its breadth is wide and the humorous responses of audiences to any specific rung on the ladder will vary significantly. Some dramatic comedies are mildly humorous and kindly in disposition, others are vicious in attack and vitriolic in intention. Each dramatic comedy however will find its own level and intensity of humor to deliver its content and present its comedic vision.

Purposefully or not every dramatic comedy has ramifications that are religious or theological. Even purposefully negative attacks on religious beliefs or established religion have obvious religious ramifications. The implications of dramatic comedy to an eschatological vision of humanity suggest a profound faith, or hope in the future.

The comic vision of the future expects, relies on, or at least tolerates the miracle that is necessary to bring about a "happy ending". That which causes the lack of mutuality, the isolation or imbalance in society is seen as the "problem" or sin, if you will, that needs to be attacked, ridiculed, or rendered impotent by laughter. Through the vision that demands survival and happy endings a miraculous plot twist happens which is "beyond human knowledge and control" (Langer) and insures a positive "virtual future" (Langer) for everyone who accepts the miracle, and is willing to live within the bounds of the resurrected community that is founded on love and mutuality.

My Working Definition Of Dramatic Comedy:

The implications of the above suggested to me the following working definition of dramatic comedy on which I have based the rest of my observations:

[page 164] Dramatic comedy is serious in its intentions, communal in its experience, societal in its scope, chiasmic in its structure, corrective in its goal, relational and inclusive in its implications, celebrative and hope-filled in its spirit, humorous in its delivery, and religious/theological in its ramifications.

To deal with the potential breadth of this topic requires significantly more time and space than allotted in this paper. It beckons me on to a more thorough investigation of the various strands of this multifaceted relationship in the future. In this present paper, however, the more immediate goal was accomplished through; an analysis of several significant historic theories of comedy, analysis and criticism of the dramatic comedies of Moliere, and development and application of a relational theology of mutuality as suggested by John Macmurray, Martin Buber and John Macquarrie. In this process the theological issues of sin, grace, finitude, mutuality and future community were identified as central issues of the dramatic comedy tradition of Moliere as reflected in representative scripts from his oeuvre, and the representative theories of dramatic comedy which suggest themselves as applicable to his work.

The Main Body of The Paper:

L. J. Potts, in "The Subject Matter of Comedy," contends the main concern of the comedy writer is to "discriminate between what is normal and abnormal in human behavior."(2) What is normal does not generally concern the comedy writer except as a yardstick by which s/he measures the abnormalities s/he wishes to criticize. Sex is the one area, he maintains, in which everyone can be said to be eccentric, or abnormal. He elaborates his idea in the following statement:

The mere fact that no other human relationship is so natural as this one; that the survival of the race depends on it; and that it is the commonest disturbing [page 165] influence to which human nature and social life are subject - this ensures that it should be the most persistent theme of comedy.(3)

In the majority of his plays Moliere used the convention of the classical young lovers of Plautus, Seneca and Menander as the norm against which he showed the object of his criticism to be abnormal, and therefore deserving of his criticism. By using this short-cut he identified the stock naive, stupid, or taken-in young lovers as the good element in the world of his plays. Any force that interfered with or opposed their natural progression toward successful mating is immediately characterized as evil, or undesirable, and worthy of his derision. It is "folly to oppose this compulsion to mate, and what opposes properly falls under a derisive light,"(4) according to Lehmann. Moliere then, by keeping his eye on the classical young lovers as the norm, and their prosperous mating and implied procreation as their normal behavior, characterized those forces which opposed them as abnormal, faulty, or maladjusted, and therefore worthy of his derisive laughter.

Moliere further revealed his own ideals concerning love and lovers by his use of non-classical lovers whose relationships were built upon mutual respect, understanding, and altruistic concern for the well being of the other party. These relationships were more mature and open, and did not require those involved to be of similar age, as was true of the classical young lovers. There was no young man to oppose the older man for the hand of the girl in these depictions of more ideal relationships. They were built upon loving mutual relationships rather than similarity in age, vitality, and potential procreative ability.

However, when youth and age did engage in a contest for the hand of a young girl, Moliere, by relying upon the convention of classical young lovers, led the audience to believe that youth should win and age be thwarted in his attempts to win the young girl's hand. The aged (40's) contestant was seen as the disruptive influence who was comic in his attempts to win the girl and therefore worthy of ridicule.

[page 166] One form of love contest Moliere used to establish the norm, against which he set his object for criticism, was a direct contest between a father and son for the love of a young girl. Francis M. Cornford has argued convincingly, in The Origin of Attic Comedy, that the beginnings of this contest between age and youth as a comic device are found in the traditional patterns of religious ritual. This ritual was based on a Seasonal Pantomime (a Ritual Combat between the Old Year and the New, Summer and Winter, or Life and Death), followed by a Sacred Marriage to ensure the return of fertility to the race and a regeneration of nature.(5) Whether Moliere's comedy followed this ritualistic theory of comedy because it was so deeply ingrained in the very fabric of the comedic tradition he knew, or because the sexual nature of humankind is a significant common denominator in human inter-relationships and therefore very subject to deviation, conflict, joy, and freedom is perhaps a moot point. It is most probably a combination of these theories that made Moliere focus so consistently on love and lovers, their problems and the movement to a final happy union built on mutuality as the norm against which he showed those who caused their problems to be abnormal and therefore worthy of his criticism.

Moliere's comedies are most generally enlightened by Cornford's theory of the fertility ritual pitting the young and old king in a combat. In this form the

good spirit and his antagonist are felt to be, after all, only two successive representations of the same principle. . . . The spirit of the new year and of its fertility is merely the spirit of the old year come back again. The old year is a force of evil and obstruction, only because he is old and has yielded to the decay of winter.(6)

While not attempting to force Moliere to adhere precisely to Cornford's formula, we can see some potential explanations for an often repeated form used by Moliere. In L'ecole Des Maris, L'ecole Des Femmes, and L'avare the old man in each case must be defeated, not only because he is evil and the source of obstruction to the youth's wedded happiness, but because in his age he has "yielded to the decay of winter."(7) These "old" men were Moliere's [page 167] approximate age in the first two plays and only a few years his senior in the third. All three characters were performed by Moliere in their original productions.(8) In the old man the promise of new life through procreation is seen figuratively or factually as less potent than in the youth. He is seen as another aspect of the cycle of life in which the Old must eventually and continually be replaced by the Young so that life and the race can continue. Fertility is insured in the present, and is a promise for the future.