Annotated Bibliography

1. BALDENSPERGER, F., `Les définitions de l'humour' (The definitions of humour), in: F. Baldensperger, Etudes de l'Histoire Littéraire (Studies of literary history), Paris, Librairie Hachette, 1907, pp. 176-222. A survey of various definitions of the concept of humour, from its origin in physiology (bodily fluid) to modern French, English and German connotations.

2. BEATTIE, J. , `On laughter and ludicrous composition', in J. Beattie, Essays, London, E. and C. Dilly; Edinburgh, W. Creech, 1778. An early critique of the Hobbesian interpretation of laughter as derision. The origin of laughter is the discovery of one or more incongruencies linked together into one or more combinations.

3. BERGE, B.D. (ed.), Introduction á l'étude scientifique du rire (Introduction to the scientific study of laughter), Paris, Flammarion, 1959. Selected papers on the scientific study of humour and laughter, several of which are listed in this bibliography.

4. BERGER, P.L. , The Precarious Vision, Garden City, NY, Doubleday, 1961. A theological and sociological essay on social reality and relativity in which the hidden connection between comedy and tragedy is discussed on pp. 209-218.

5. BERGSON, H., Le rire. Essai sur la signification du comique, 1905 (Laughter. An essay on the meaning of the comic), Paris, Librairie F. Alcan, 1935. Laughter is social by nature. It is a response to humour (or the comic) which is defined as a mechanization and rigidification of life. Laughter is a correction of this mechanization. It keeps people under the pressure of social control.

6. BERGSON, H., `A propos de la nature du comique' (Note on the nature of the comic), in: Revue du Mois, 10 November 1919. Reply to one of the critics of Bergson's theory (cf. 12) in which he explicates some of his ideas further.

7. BRUNS, M., Ueber den Humor, seine Wege und sein Ziel (On humour, its paths and its aim), Minden, Westfalen, 1921. Humour is a worldview and an attitude towards life. It is a relativizing expression of existential wisdom, and an inner freedom which can only be acquired after many hard and bitter experiences.

8. CARPENTER, R. , `Laughter, a Glory in Sanity', in: American Journal of Psychology, 33, 1922, pp. 419-422. Laughter signals the triumph of the mind which proves to be aware of the misleading nature of humour. When we laugh about the errors of others, we do so because we have avoided them.

9. CARRIT, E.F. , `A Theory of the Ludicrous', in: The Hubbert Journal, 21, 1922/23, pp. 552-564. Objects and events are only funny in relation to human values and norms. Laughter should not be identified with comedy which in fact expresses a sense of inadequacy and the failure to express emotions.

10. CAZAMIAN, L. `Pourquoi nous ne pouvons définir l'humour' (Why we cannot define humour), in: Revue Germanique, 1906, pp. 601-34. Humour cannot be defined in a single formula, but we can determine a few constant elements. In its content, humour always implies a sense of scepticism and relativism. In its form, humour often consists of a voluntary and conscious transposition of ideas and feelings from the normal and routine to the abnormal and unexpected.

Papers from the `Conference on Humour and Laughter', July 1976, Cardiff, Wales, organized by the British Psychological Association.

12. DELAGE, Y., `Sur la nature de comique', in: Revue du Mois, 20 April 1919, pp. 337-54. Critique of Bergson's theory of humour and laughter (cf. 5). The comic is characterized by two conditions: (1) there is an incongruency between cause and effect which is surprising, (2) the effect is unpleasant for the person subjected to it. In humour there is always a victim. Bergson responded to this essay (cf. 6).

13. DISERENS, C.M. , `Recent Theories of Laughter', in: Psychological Bulletin, 23, 1926, pp. 247-255. A comprehensive survey of the major traditional theories of laughter. Authors discussed include Baillie, Bergson, Bliss, Carpenter, Carrit, Delage and Eastman.

14. EASTMAN, M. , The Sense of Humor, New York, Scribner, 1921. Part one of this influential study discusses humour and laughter as means of communication originating in play. Humour is a `shock absorber' and relativizes the seriousness of daily life. Part two discusses various theories of humour and laughter.

15. EASTMAN, M. Enjoyment of Laughter, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1936. An oft-quoted study in which humour is narrowly related to playing. We laugh only when in a playful mood, and in humorous exploits even unpleasant things change into pleasantries.

16. EASTMAN, M. , `What We Laugh At—And Why', Reader's Digest, 42, April 1943, pp. 66-68. The joke has a universal technique: the audience is led to a specific goal, but by a sudden change is led astray and thereby tricked. Raised expectations vanish in limbo, accepted norms are placed upside down and reversed.

17. GOULD, G. , Democritus, or the Future of Laughter, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1929. Laughter emphasizes man's mortality and relativity. It makes all people equal, and is in this sense democratic. Laughter transcends the boundaries of superiority and inferiority, respectability and `irrespectability'. `The very function of laughter is to keep us earthly, to remind the dainty of the coarse.'

18. HAYWORTH, D. , `The Social Origin and Function of Laughter', Psychological Review, 35, 1928, pp. 367-384. Laughter signals to the other members of the group that they can relax. Its phylogenetic origin lies prior to the development of language as a means of communication. It communicates after a threat or danger, that the situation is safe again.

19. HEERING, H.J., Tragiek (Tragedy), The Hague, Boucher, 1961. An extensive discussion of humour's seeming opposite, tragedy. The `underground connection between humour and tragedy' is discussed on pp. 82ff.

20. HEYD, D. , `The Place of Laughter in Hobbes' Theory of Emotions', Journal of the History of Ideas, 43:2, 1982, pp. 285-296. Hobbes discussed humour and laughter in the context of a general theory of emotions, in particular of the sense of glory. What he said about laughter was not very original, as it had already been said by Plato, Aristotle and Descartes.

21. HOCHFELD, S., Der Witz (The joke), Potsdam/Leipzig, Verlag Von Bonness & Hochfeld, 1920. Most theories of humour focus on the irrelevant dimension of the comic. The joke is always dependent on the ambiguity of language, of words. It contains two meanings which have nothing in common, and are kept hidden until the punch line. The surprise of the joke lies in the second, hidden meaning.

22. HUTCHESON, F. , `Reflections upon Laughter', in: Reflections upon Laughter and Remarks upon the Fable of the Bees, 1750, New York, Garland Publishing, 1971. An early critique of the Hobbesian theory of laughter. It is not our sense of superiority which causes laughter. Its causes are manifold, but predominant is the juxtaposition of ideas which are contrary yet exhibit some resemblance: greatness-inferiority; dignity-courseness; sacred-profane; etc. Laughter elicits pleasure, banishes anxiety and sadness, relaxes tensions, reduces passions, corrects small vices, etc.

23. JANENTZKY, C., `Ueber Tragik, Komik und Humor' (On tragedy, comedy and humour), in: Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts, 1936-40, Halle, Freies deutsches Hochstift, 1940, pp. 3-51. Humour is the connection between comedy and tragedy. The comic is not an objective phenomenon but an act of human imagination and definition. It is not discrepancy which is crucial, but free playing, chance, brain waves, etc. People define things, events, human beings as being `comic' or `humorous'.

24. JEANSON, F., Signification humaine du rire (The human meaning of laughter), Paris, Editios du Seuil, 1950. Most theories about laughter are inadequate because they start with a cause-effect reasoning and end up in determinism. Laughter is a matter of consciousness, exhibiting an intentionality which is experienced, not cognitively reflected upon.

25. JENSEN, R. , `Quid Rides', Classical Journal, 16, 1920-21, pp. 207-219. Most theories of laughter neglect the impulsive jollity of humour. Laughter triggers the play instinct in adults which is still visibly present in children.

26. KNOX, I. , `Towards a Philosophy of Humour', Journal of Philosophy, 48, 1951, pp. 541-548. Humour is a form of liberation; the experience of delight about a chaos which has only a playful character. The lord of comedy is a lord of misrule. However, the misrule is not rebellion but play. Playful humour emphasizes and preserves existing values, but also criticizes them when they appear to be less valuable in practice.

27. KOESTLER, A. , `The Jester', in: The Act of Creation, Part One (1964), New York, Macmillan, 1967, pp. 27-97. Laughter is a luxury reflex without a clear biological function. It results from a comic unmasking of our expectations. There is a pattern in humour: an event or situation is looked at from two different, incongruent frames of reference, which are brought together (bi-sociation), from which a contrast emerges. Humour, art and science are intrinsically related in the act of creation.

28. KÖRNER, J. , `Der Witz' (The joke), Preussisches Jahrbuch, 239, 1935, pp. 128-149. The joke is a play on meanings, an ambiguous construction in which a sham meaning dominates and in which the true meaning is kept in the background. The discovery of the latter forces us to change our orientation. The joke conceals and reveals at once. Its essence is playing with words. Freud is criticized.

29. LINSCHOTEN, J., `Over de Humor' (On humor), Tijdschrift voor Philosophie, 13:4, 1951, pp. 603-66. A long, phenomenological essay on humour as a human capacity which presupposes versatility and intelligence. The essence of humour — which calls for smiles rather than laughter — is the discrepancy between idea and reality.

30. LIPPS, T., Komik und Humor (The comic and humour), Hamburg/Leipzig, Verglag L. Voss, 1898. A very influential study in which the comic is defined in terms of the contrast between the great and the small, the meaningful and the meaningless. It has a playful character and a surplus of psychical energy. The nature of humour is characterized by the transcendence of the comic-ridiculous (Komik).

31. MILNER, G.B. , `Why Laugh?', New Society, 25 December 1969, pp. 1008-1010. Laughter is caused by a reversal of values and patterns of behaviour, or by the juxtaposition of things which have nothing in common. Two reversals are discussed: spoonerism and chiasm.

32. MONTAGU, A. , `Why Man Laughs', Thing, April 1960, pp. 30-32. Only human beings laugh and speak. Laughter developed together with language and can be seen as a quasi-language. it is a social expression of happiness. In the course of evolution it lost its derisive quality. Natural selection favoured human beings who were able to express pleasure through laughter.

33. PLESSNER, H., Lachen und Weinen (Laughter and crying), Bern, Francke Verlag, 1961. Laughter and crying are forms of human expression on the borderline between the consciousmeaningful and the unconscious-physical. Both reveal the condition of man as being which has and also is a body.

34. CAMERON, W.B. , `The Sociology of Humour', in: Informal Sociology, New York, Random House, 1963, pp. 79-94. Humour is to be interpreted within social frames of reference: one situation is defined in terms of two different frames. Two broad categories can be distinguished: insider-humour (cf. jokes by Jews about Jews) and outsider-humour (cf. jokes by whites about blacks and vice versa). Jokes usually employ stereotypes, yet often break through moral conventions.

35. CHAPMAN, A.J., `Social Aspects of Humorous Laughter', in: 11, pp. 155-85. Discusses some experiments on humour appreciation, and on the problem of how to quantify humorous expressions. The author expresses his interest in the social dimensions of humour which he tries to measure quantitatively.

36. DAVIS, M.S. , `Sociology through Humour', Symbolic Interaction, 2:1, 1979-80, pp. 105-110. As an active and creative player in the social world, the human being tries to avoid incongruencies through humorous behaviour.

37. DUMAS, G. , Le sourire (The smile), Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1948. A rare study of smiling in which the social nature of the smile is emphasized (cf. chapter 4). A smile can only be understood within a social context. It is an expression of joy, has to be learned, and differs in its meaning from culture to culture.

38. DUPRÉEL, E., `Le problème sociologique du rire' (The sociological problem of laughter), Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Etranger, 106, 1928, pp. 213-60. An early sociological treatise in which laughter of inclusion is distinguished from laughter of exclusion. Humour affirms the solidarity of the group which may cause the exclusion of others. The inequality of the sexes with respect to humour is also discussed briefly.

39. EMERSON, J.P. , `Negotiating the Serious Import of Humor', Sociometry, 32, 1969, pp. 169-181. Joking is a useful channel for communication of taboo subjects. These subjects are, in a sense negotiated in an exchange.

40. ESCARPIT, R., L'Humour, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1960. Humour is viewed as playing with everyday, social, and taken-for-granted evidence. `Normal' behaviour is inverted but the social order is not seriously impaired. Humour has a critical (irony) as well as constructive (liberation from tensions) effect.

41. GROSS, E. , `Laughter and Symbolic Interaction', Symbolic Interaction, 2:1, 1980, pp. 111-112. A short note on laughter in terms of symbolic interactionism.

42. HERTZLER, J.O., Laughter — A Socio-scientific Analysis, New York, Exposition Press, 1970. Laughter is eminently social. It is a pre-verbal means of communication because through it we send messages with specific meanings. Laughter is in a way a language of gestures which can only be understood within a shared social-cultural context of values, norms and meanings. Like language, humour tends to institutionalize.

43. MARTINEAU, W.H., `A Model of the Social Functions of Humor', in: 66, pp. 101-25. Humour is part of every social system and can be analysed as one social process affecting the system. It functions as a `lubricant' and `abrasive' in social interaction. The paper gives a survey of the sociologically relevant literature and develops `a model of the social functions of humor'.

44. MEAD, G.H. , Mind, Self and Society, 1934, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1959. In this classic book on social interactions, identity and institutions, Mead discusses humour and laughter on p. 206f.

45. RICHTER, H.P., `Zur Soziologie des Humors' (On the sociology of humour), Soziale Welt, 6:2/3, 1965, pp. 105-10. The humorist is an actor whose attitude is essentially emotional and non-rational. His behaviour deviates from rational, social roles and their related values. A rationally constructed world is altered into an irrational reality. The observer understands the reversal of values, appreciates it as humour, and reacts to it with laughter.

46. STEBBINS, R.A. , `Comic Relief in Everyday Life. Dramaturgic Observations on a Function of Humour', Symbolic Interaction, 2:1, 1979, pp. 95-103. Particularly intellectually and/or socially creative individuals experience and create comic relief in everyday social life. They are able thus to solve problems in social interaction.

47. VICTOROFF, D., `Etude sociologique', in: 3, pp. 35-44. A sociological contribution to the scientific study of laughter, in which laughter is compared to language. Focuses on the group's influence on laughter. Humour is always group-specific.

48. VICTOROFF, D., `Sociologie du rire et psychoanalyse' (Sociology of laughter and psychoanalysis), Psyché, 72, 1952, pp. 665-74. Sociological and psychoanalytical interpretations do not exclude each other. The social nature of humour is highlighted by stereo-typed humour, i.e. stereotyped reactions to persons, institutions, values and symbols in society.

49. ZIJDERVELD, A.C., Humor und Gesellschaft (Humour and society), Graz Wien, Styria Verlag, 1976. A socio-historical and comparative study of the nature and the social functions of humour and laughter. The main themes have been elaborated in 207 and in this Trend Report.

50. ALLPORT, F.H., `Laughter', in: Social Psychology, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1924, pp. 252-8. Laughter is a response to a social stimulus whose nature is incongruent. A high expectation is reduced to nothingness, two opposed attitudes are switched, impulses are repressed and then released — laughter is the response to these incongruencies. It is a social process and someone who often laughts to himself is considered eccentric.

51. BERGH, H. van den, Konstanten in de Komedie (Constant elements in comedy), Amsterdam, Mousault, 1972. Seven recurrent psychological mechanisms which cause people to laugh are: slating, liberation, signal of life, applause, reflex, happy expectation and relaxation.

52. BERGLER, E. , Laughter and the Sense of Humor, New York, Intercontinental Medical Book Co., 1956. A Freudian study of humour in which it is argued that laughter is not directed towards others but to our own super-ego. The latter showers us with reproaches to which we respond with jokes and laughter. This is why we often ridicule heroes and great men and women of our time in our jokes.

53. BERLYNE, D.E. , `Laughter, Humor and Play', in: G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley, 1969, vol. III, pp. 795-852. Wide survey of the main theories of humour and laughter which are divided into two broad categories: (1) philosophical-literary, (2) modern psychological theories. The second half of the article discusses theories and experiments on playing.

54. BERLYNE, D.E., `Humor and its Kin', in: 66, pp. 43-60. Starting with existing theories and experiments of arousal, curiosity and investigative behaviour, the article tries to explain the pleasure experience of humour. It is related to and compared with play, art, music and curiosity in general. Humour is a `collative process': it is not tied to a closed stimulus, but refers to the past and anticipates the future.

55. BLISS, S ., `The Origin of Laughter', American Journal of Psychology, 26, 1915, pp. 236-246. Independently of Freud but at about the same time, the author argued that people are under a constant pressure to suppress their impulses, while they are at odds with social, ethical and religious codes of behaviour. Laughter results from a sudden liberation from these pressures. Humour appeals to our more primitive and natural wishes.

56. CARPENTER, W.R. , `Experiments of the Comic', American Journal of Psychology, 36, 1925, pp. 309-310. The comic emerges from the sudden rejection of an error or untruth by an effort of judgement. The larger the error we discover and the larger the strain on our mind, the stronger the comic effect will be. The author believes this hypothesis can and should be tested in experimental research.

57. CHAPMAN, A.J. and H.C. Foot (eds.), Humour and Laughter. Theory, Research and Applications, London, Wiley 1976. A collection of psychological papers on humour and laughter. The first part covers various theories and empirical studies, while the second consists of papers on the use and functioning of humour in society, e.g. the social functions of humour in Trinidad, humour and communication, humour and psychotherapy, etc.

58. CHOISY, M., `L'Angoisse du rire' (The fear of laughter), Psyché, 72, 1952, pp. 641-56. Laughter is a defence mechanism against fear of the forbidden. We defend ourselves by laughter against fear of the father, the mother, the authorities, sexuality, aggression, death, etc. These are the recurrent themes in jokes, and our laughter is a healthy reaction which relativizes the absoluteness of fear. Other reactions to fear include art, neurosis and alcoholism.

59. DOOLEY, L. , `The Relation of Humor to Masochism', Psychoanalytic Review, 28, 1941, pp. 37-46. A Freudian comparison of humour and masochism. They have in common the interaction between ego and super-ego. Ego regresses to the infantile stage and surrenders to the super-ego which treats ego as a child. Humour is also a defence mechanism. It denies the seriousness or painfulness of a situation.

60. DORIS, J. and E. FIERMAN , `Humor and Anxiety', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53:1, 1956, pp. 59-62. Experimental study of the relation between anxiety-score and reactions to humorous stimuli, conducted among 28 respondents with high anxiety-score (HA) and 28 respondents with low anxiety-score (LA). HA respondents prefer aggressive cartoons less than LA respondents, yet this correlation depends on the social context: the difference of preference occurred only when a respondent was interviewed by a person of the opposite sex. Interviewed by persons of their own sex, HA and LA showed the same preference scores.

61. DUMAS, G., `Le rire' (Laughter), in: Nouveau traité de psychologie, Paris, Alcan, 1933, vol. 3, pp. 240-73. Laughter can be approached from five different angles: (1) as an anatomic-physiological mechanism, (2) as an expression of pleasure, (3) as a reaction to the comic, (4) as a psycho-physical mechanism, (5) as a social phenomenon comparable to language. Laughter presupposes shared emotions, ideas and moral opinions, and it is communicative.

62. EASTMAN, M. , `Wit and Nonsense: Freud's Mistake', Yale Review, 26, September 1936, pp. 71-87. Critique of Freud's theory according to which humour consists of liberated impulses which are sexual and aggressive by nature. Humour, on the other hand, is often an expression of our wish to flee from reality. In humour we admit that we are cowards. There is, of course, also innocent humour (cf. nonsense humour). Crucial to much humour is the playful teasing of others.

63. FLUGEL, J.C. , `Humor and Laughter', in: G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley, 1954, vol. 2, pp. 709-734. Comprehensive survey of the main theories of humour and laughter. Both are related to playing, and to the absence of biological needs. The social group and the cultural tradition are important conditions. Humour is often associated with anxieties, aggression, sexuality, sense of superiority, intellect, etc. Taboos are broken, making room for tolerance of repressed feelings, thereby releasing a surplus of energy which is used in laughter.

64. FREUD, S., Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious, 1905, transl. by J. Strachey, London, Hogarth Press, 1960. Classic study in which it is argued that through jokes unconscious wishes are expressed in a socially acceptable manner. In this way the energy needed for repression is saved and discharged in laughter. The similarity between jokes and dreams is discussed in chapter 6. Three categories are distinguished: Witz, Komik, Humor.

65. FREUD, S. , `Humour', in: Collected Papers, vol. 5, transl. by J. Strachey, London, Hogarth Press, 1956. In humour, superego treats ego in a parental manner in order to help it to face reality and avoid the pain of the reality principle.

66. GOLDSTEIN, J.H. and P.E. McGHEE (eds.), The Psychology of Humour. Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues, New York/London, Academic Press, 1972. Twelve papers dealing with theoretical and empirical subjects concerning the psychology of humour. The emphasis is upon quantitive research and verifiable theories. The appendix is an annotated bibliography of English publications from 1900-71.

67. GOUSTARD, M., `Introduction à la bibliographie du rire et psychologie comparée', in: 3, pp. 83-118. Laughter is not merely a reaction to a humorous incident or object. It is our intention which renders an incident or object humorous.

68. GROTJAHN, M. , Beyond Laughter, New York, McGraw Hill, 1957. Influential, Freudian treatise in which the role of aggression in humour and laughter is heavily emphasized.

69. GUIMAN, J. and R.F. PRIEST , `When is Aggression Funny?', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12:1 1969, pp. 60-65. Whether aggression is viewed as funny or not depends on the social context: (1) aggressive acts by a person qualified as `good' are more readily appreciated as `humorous' than as hostile; (2) a victim who deserves aggressive treatment causes a humorous reaction sooner than someone who does not deserve inimical treatment.

70. HEIM, A. , `An Experiment on Humour', British Journal of Psychology, 27, 1936, pp. 148-161. Empirical study of possible regularities or tendencies in laughter. An attempt is made to classify humour by means of an experiment, and to indicate the major types of people correlating with this classification. It appears, as a result, that the experimental method is not very useful in the study of humour. Social elements may play an extraordinarily large role, but they were not taken into account in this study.

71. KLINE, L.W. , `The Psychology of Humor', American Journal of Psychology, 18, 1907, pp. 421-441. The regular, the uniform, the normal and taken-for-granted can never be the source of humour. The stimuli of laughter are, on the contrary, deviations from the regular and normal, and exaggerations of such deviations, Yet, the values of good and evil are not really affected, since humour is uninterested in worldly affairs. It has no practical interests but is an aim in itself. Located beyond good and evil, humour's essence is freedom.

72. KREITLER, H. and S. KREITLER , `Dependence of Laughter on Cognitive Strategies', Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 16, 1970, pp. 163-177. In most studies factors which stimulate laughter are not distinguished from the conditions which foster its working. The paper focuses upon the absurd as stimulus and cognitive strategies as a condition of laughter. Humour is not so much dependent on intelligence as on the total process of cognitive functioning, including habits of thought and learned abilities of problem solving.

73. KRIS, E., `Ego Development and the Comic', 1938, in: Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art, London 1953, chapter 8, pp. 204-16. The comic is not just a discharge of superfluous psychical energy (Freud), but also a regression to infantile experiences. In the comic, people throw off the shackles of logical thought and surrender to primary, infantile pleasures. Ego conquers anxiety and controls the surrounding world.

74. KRIS, E. , `Laughter as an Expressive Process', 1940, in: Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art, London 1953, chapter 9, pp. 217-239. The study of laughter gives insight into the ego's influence on expressive behaviour. Laughter is a social expression of aggression and regression, in which the control of the body by the ego is lifted. Laughter may slacken the functions of the ego.

75. LA-FAVE, L. , `Humour Judgments as a Function of Reference Groups and Identification Classes', in: 66, pp. 305-306. Humour and laughter are not synonymous, and many prominent theorists have written a theory of laughter rather than of humour. Jokes, experiments have shown, are appreciated by respondents when their reference group is treated favourably and their negative reference group unfavourably. Likewise, jokes are held `not funny', when they ridicule the reference group and treat the negative reference group favourably.

76. LEVINE J. , `Humour', in: International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 7, New York, Macmillan/Free Press, 1968. A survey of various theories of humour and laughter. Like the dream humour is a regression to infantile forms of thought and behaviour. The temporary suspension of logical and realistic thought has a rewarding effect. Humour liberates suppressed wishes.

77. McDOUGALL, W. , `Why Do We Laugh?', Scribners, 71, 1922, pp. 359-363. Laughter has physiological and psychological functions. It stimulates breathing and blood circulation, pushes the blood to the brain, etc. Laughter breaks through habits of thought and behaviour and enables relaxation. It prevents us from sympathizing emotionally with the pain and misfortunes of others.

78. MINDESS, H. , Laughter and Liberation, Los Angeles, Nash Publications, 1971. Humour results in physical liberation. It also liberates us from conventions, morality, reason, etc. It is `a frame of mind' and leads us to `an escape from self-imposed prison'. Its conditions include mental flexibility, spontaneity, unconventional playfulness, wit and humility.

79. PIDDINGTON, R. , The Psychology of Laughter, New York, Gamut Press, 1963. Comprehensive discussion of the psychology of laughter with a useful summary of the main classical and modern theories in the field.

80. SKINNER, B.F. , `Verbal Behavior', in: J.J. ENCKE et al. (eds.), The Comic in Theory and Practice, New York, Free Press, 1960, pp. 92-99. The telling of jokes and funny anecdotes is analysed as verbal behaviour.

81. TREADWELL, Y. , `Bibliography of Empirical Studies of Wit and Humor', Psychological Reports, 20, 1967, pp. 1079-1083. Elaborate bibliography of empirical, mainly psychological studies of humour which have appeared in 1897-1966.

82. WORTHEN, R. and W.E. O'CONNEL , `Social Interest and Humor', International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 15, 1969, pp. 179-188. An experiment among three groups of adult men in which the relationship between social interest (or humanistic identification) and humour appreciation is tested. High scores of individual independence and of other-centredness correlate positively with hostile or resigned jokes.

83. AUDEN, W.H. , `Notes on the Comic', Thought, 27, 1952, pp. 57-71. The comic is defined as `a contradiction in the relation of the individual or personal to the universal or impersonal which does not involve the spectator in suffering or pity'. Spoonerisms, puns, parodies, satires, etc. are discussed with references to literary works.

84. BRETON, A., Anthologie de l'humour noir (Anthology of black humour), Paris, Editions du Sagittaire, 1950. A compilation of black (or gallows) humour, taken from the writings of many, mainly French, authors. The volume includes a brief introduction by Breton.

85. ETIENNE, L., L'Art de contrepet (The art of punning), Paris, Pauvert, 1957. Analysis of the art of punning in the French language. Rabelais is usually seen as the first master of contrepèterie.

86. FORSTER, F., Studien zum Wesen von Komik, Tragik und Humor (Studies on the nature of the comic, tragedy and humour), Wein, Verlag Notring, 1968. Essays on the relationship between tragedy and comedy as intrinsically human phenomena. The focus is on the dramatic arts.

87. FRANÇOIS, D., `Le Contrepet', La Linguistique, 2:3, 1966, pp. 31-52. A linguistic and structural analysis of the pun in the French language.

88. HAZZLITT, W.C. , Studies in Jocular Literature, London, E. Stock, 1890. Humour and wit are culturally determined and can be studied in the various traditions of art and literature. The book discusses riddles, epigrams, fables, fairy tales, repartee, etc. Biographies of jesters and late-medieval jest books are rich historical sources which give us insight into the culture of those days.

89. JONGEJAN, E., De Humor-`Cultus' der Romantiek in Nederland (The humour-`cult' of romanticism in the Netherlands), Zutphen, W.J. Thieme, 1933. In Romantic literature between 1770 and 1840 a real cult of humour developed. Humorous and funny effects were used in a forced manner, in literature as well as in life styles. The mockery of sentimentality was an essential component of this cult.

90. KRONENBERGER, L. , The Thread of Laughter. Chapters on English Stage Comedy from Jonson to Maugham, New York, Knopf, 1952; New York, Hill & Wang, 1970. Comprehensive survey of British comedy over a period of three hundred years. Comedies focus on human weaknesses, and demonstrate what we are in contrast to what we pretend to be. They have a social character because they focus on social institutions and collective modes of behaviour. Johnson, Shadwell, Sheridan, Wilde, Shaw, Maugham and others are analysed in detail.

91. PROMIES, W., Der Bürger und der Narr, oder Das Risiko der Phantasie (The burgher and the fool, or the risk of imagination), München, C. Hanser Verlag, 1966. A study of the attitudes of the bourgeoisie vis-à-vis fools and folly on the stage in Germany. The book covers the early Enlightenment, the rise of Rationalism, late-Rationalism and Romanticism. The fool's imagination was attacked most — though unsuccessfully — by bourgeois Rationalism which itself is permeated by irrationalism.

92. ROBBINS, R.H. `The Warden's Wordplay: Toward a Redefinition of the Spoonerism', The Dalhousie Review, 46, 1966. pp. 457-465. Brief and lucid discussion of the unconscious wordplay that replaces words or syllables in a sentence. The spoonerism, as it is called, causes unexpected linguistic incongruencies.

93. SCHKLOVSKY, V.B., `Zur Theorie des Komischen' (On the theory of the comic), Neues Forum, 4, October 1967, pp. 755-58. Linguistic analysis of humour in which it is argued that jokes do not relate to any social or psychical reality, but consist of purely formal juxtapositions of linguistic structures. `The blood in anecdotes is not bloody'.

94. SILLARD, P.A. , `Some Irish Bulls', Catholic World, 135, September 1937, pp. 696-697. Brief analysis of unintended blunders in speech in which contrary meanings are tied together, causing odd sentence construction and weird semantic meanings.

95. THOMAS, K. , `The Place of Laughter in Tudor and Stuart England', Times Literary Supplement, 21 January 1977, pp. 77-81. Jokes indicate not only structural ambiguities in society, but also tensions and fears. Laughter is a source of social cohesion. In relatively small communities, ridicule is a means of preserving established values. Jest books, feasts of fools, and anti-religious and scatological humour under the Tudor and Stuart monarchies are discussed in the light of this interpretation.

96. CHRISTENSEN, J.B. , `Utani: Joking, Sexual License and Social Obligations among the Luguru', American Anthropologist, 65:6, 1963, pp. 1314-1327. Utani are the joking relationships of the Luguru in which jesting and sexual licence are not just allowed but even expected and compulsory. Radcliffe-Brown's theory of conjunction and disjunction (cf. 100) is discussed and applied to obligations among the Luguru.

97. DOUGLAS, M. , `Jokes', in: Implicit Meanings. Essays in Anthropology, London Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975, pp. 90-114. Joking should be located within social contexts. It exceeds the boundaries of social control and is in this respect subversive. Unlike the ritual which is the expression of consensus and hierarchic order, jokes disturb the status quo and its harmony. Yet, the joke also expresses consensus, has a cathartic function, and is in essence a group's critique of its own functioning.

98. DOUGLAS, M. , `Do Dogs Laugh? A Cross-Cultural Approach to Body Symbolism', in: Implicit Meanings. Essays in Anthropology, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975, pp. 83-89. Laughter is a physical form of communication and is a non-verbal expression of meanings. Laughter is the expression of a special situation and contributes to it.

99. FLORNOY, B., `Le rire chez les Indiens d'Amérique' (Laughter among the American Indians), in: 3, pp. 27-34. American Indians often laugh at the helplessness and errors of whites. Within their own societies there is always much laughter about children who imitate their parents or animals. Laughter is also elicited by stories about marital failures, strange customs in other Indian tribes, etc. Funny stories are told during feasts, and women tell each other funny stories about intimate details of their marital life.

100. RADCLIFFE-BROWN, A.R. `On Joking Relationships', 1940, in: Structure and Function in Primitive Society, New York, The Free Press, 1965, pp. 90-104. The classic essay on joking relationships in traditional African cultures. A joking relationship is defined as `a relation between two persons in which one is by custom permitted, and in some instances required, to tease or make fun of the other, who in turn is required to take no offence'.

101. STEWARD, J.H. , `The Ceremonial Buffoon of the American Indian', in: Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1931, vol. 14, pp. 187-207. Informative survey of institutionalized and ceremonialized joking in American Indian cultures. Ceremonial clowns violate sacred taboos and ridicule important ceremonies, traditional mores, matters of sexuality, strangers, etc.

102. ALSTON, J.P. and L.A. PLATT , `Religious Humor: a Longitudinal Content Analysis of Cartoons', Sociological Analysis, 30:4, 1969, pp. 217-222. Humour reflects socially accepted values and attitudes. It serves as a mechanism by which deviant or unacceptable behaviour is punished. The cartoonist tends to follow dominant values and attitudes because he is under the pressure of commercialism. Cartoons, therefore, reflect major changes of values and attitudes. The paper analyses changes in religious convictions.

103. BERGER, P.L. , A Rumor of Angels, Garden City, NJ, Doubleday Anchor, 1969. The essay discusses the rediscovery of the supernatural in modernity, and argues on pp. 86-90 that among other things, humour signifies a transcendental dimension of human existence: `The comic rejects the imprisonment of the human spirit in the world'.

104. FEHRLE, E., `Das Lachen im Glauben der Völker' (Laughter in the beliefs of nations), Zeitschrift für Volkskunde, 40, vol. 2, 1930, pp. 1-5. Laughter occupies an important place in the myths and legends of many nations. It expresses vitality and is based on the notion that it breaks the spell of death, as well as the spell of malediction. Laughter is often viewed as a defence mechanism against evil forces (cf. laughter at burial rites).

105. GOOD, E.M. , Irony in the Old Testament, Philadelphia, Westminster Press, 1950. Irony is characterized by two elements: (1) what is meant is contrary to what is said; (2) its purpose is positive and contains a conception of truth. Irony should be differentiated from sarcasm, satire and parody. The book discusses the role of irony in the Old Testament.

106. HAUSDORFF, D. , `Magazine Humor and Popular Morality, 1929-1934', Journalism Quarterly, 41:4, 1964, pp. 504-516. Humour in magazines is a useful indicator of the public's attitudes towards moral issues. Analysis of humour in eight magazines during the period 1929-34 indicates that the major issues were alcoholism, organized crime and organized religion.

107. KOLVE, V.A. , `Religious Laughter', in: The Play Called Corpus Christi, Stanford, Cal., Stanford University Press, 1966, pp. 124-144. What were the functions of laughter in the Middle Ages, and how did it relate to religion? What about medieval laughter at the sacred? The paper gives a historical analysis of the feasts of fools, of the innocents, etc., and of the Corpus Christi play.

108. LEGMAN, G. , Rationale of the Dirty Joke. An Analysis of Sexual Humor, New York, Grove Press, 1968; London, Cape, 1968. This analysis of erotic humour (dirty jokes) is based on Freud's theory of jokes (cf. 64, 65). The telling of obscene jokes is interpreted as a modified rape and the replacement of direct sexual relationships. Dirty jokes break taboos, and rationalize neurotically-charged situations.

109. LEGMAN, G. , `Toward a Motif-Index of Erotic Humor', Journal of American Folklore, 75, July 1962, pp. 227-248. As a preparation for the construction of a motif-index of erotic humour, the author presents a historical survey of erotic jokes as found in various literary genres.

110. BAUM, G., Humor und Satire in der bürgerlichen Aesthetik. Zur Kritik ihres apologetischen Charakters (Humour and satire in bourgeois aesthetics. Towards a critique of its apologetic nature), Berlin, Rütten und Loening, 1959. A marxist analysis of humour and satire as weapons in class conflict. Atonement is not in the nature of comedy and humour. The first chapter discusses the opposed conceptions of the comic in Hegel and Marx.

111. BERG, W.A.L.M. van den, Van de Lach tot de Traan. Het Cabaret: Sociologisch Bekeken (From laughter to tears. A sociological look at `cabaret'), unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Nijmegen, 1977. A sociological study of a European brand of comedy called cabaret, in which social and political satire is performed on stage, usually by one person who performs sketches and sings songs. Four types of `cabaret' have been identified by the author, who argues that these types reflect the psychological and political moods of various social groups in Dutch society.

112. COATES, J.F. , `Wit and Humor: a Neglected Aid in Crowd and Mob Control', Crime and Delinquency, 18, 1972, pp. 148-191. The use of humour may decrease tensions in crowds, unless these tensions have already reached boiling point.

113. FERDINANDY, M. de , `Carnival and Revolution', Atlas, February 1964, pp. 98-104. The Roman saturnalia and European carnival have much in common with political revolution. They are temporary periods of anarchy and licence in which destructive and repressed instincts emerge and take command. These periods are always followed by restoration.

114. HANSER, R. , `Wit as Weapon', Saturday Review, 35, 8 November 1952, pp. 13-15. Political jokes are the last possible forms of resistance under a totalitarian system. The German word for them is Flüsterwitze — whispering jokes. Many jokes circulating behind the Iron Curtain are adjusted versions of jokes against the Nazi regime. Old jokes frequently circulate for a long time in slightly adjusted versions.

115. KIKKERT, J.G. , `Humor in Estland' (Humour in Estonia), Internationale Spectator, 29:7, 1975, pp. 405-409. A discussion of anti-communist and anti-Russian jokes circulating in Estonia. They are directed against the Russian propaganda machine and the party apparatchiks. They function as an outler for the frustrations of political repression, and can be interpreted as forms of passive resistance.

116. LINDEMAN, H. , `Humor in Politics and Society', Impact of Science on Society, 19:3, 1969, pp. 269-278. Humour prevents us from taking things too seriously. It relativizes and creates tolerance. It is a democratic value to be cherished, defended and promoted.

117. OBRDLIK, A.J. , `Gallows Humor. A Sociological Phenomenon', American Journal of Sociology, 47, 1942, pp. 709-716. Analysis of the various forms of humour prior to and during the German invasion of Czechoslovakia, based on personal observation. When the oppression was at its height bravado humour was replaced by sardonic jokes which the author calls `gallows humour'. Its functions are discussed.

118. PRAAG H. van, Humor, het Geheime Wapen van de Demokratie (Humour, the secret weapon of democracy), Amsterdam, Arbeiderspers, 1967. Humour is an essential element of democracy. It relativizes, teaches us our weaknesses, and tells us to forgive the weaknesses of others. Humour testifies to our resilience in the face of superior power. Yet the pressure can not get too strong, or humour will fade away, as it does under very oppressive regimes.

119. PRIEST, R.F. , `Election Jokes: The Effects of Reference Group Membership', Psychological Reports, 18, 1966, pp. 600-602. Jokes about candidates and the effects of reference groups on their support are analysed and briefly reported.

120. PRIEST, R.F. and J. ABRAHAMS , `Candidate Preference and Hostile Humor in the 1968 Elections', Psychological Reports, 26, 1970, pp. 779-783. Analysis of the role of humour in elections.

121. BEATTY, J. , `Humor versus Taboo: the Sorrowful Story of the Cartoon', Saturday Review, 40, 23 November 1957, pp. 11-15. In American cartoons, controversial issues — such as sexuality, political and religious preference, and death — are taboo. Cartoons avoid these issues for commerical reasons. They are usually politically conservative and rather ill-informed, in sharp contrast to most British cartoons.

122. BERGER, A.A. , `Authority in the Comics', Trans-Action, December 1966, pp. 22-26. A comparative analysis of Italian and American cartoons suggests strong differences between the values of the two countries. In particular, the approach to and appreciation of authority is different: authority is more often deemed invalid in America and attitudes towards it are more hostile and rebellious than in Italy. `Comics accurately reflect values and are worthy of more serious attention'.

123. BLAIR, W. , Native American Humor, San Francisco, Chandler Publications, 1960. An historical analysis of typical American humour, expressing the country's institutions, laws, folk ways, manners, characters, convictions, etc. Such national humour can be observed in the US from roughly 1830. Regional differences are taken into account (down-east humour, old-south humour, etc).

124. BLAIR, W. , Horse Sense in American Humour from Benjamin Franklin to Ogden Nash, New York, Russell & Russell, 1942. A selection of humorous writings which express the typically American leaning towards common sense. In the introduction the author discusses the specific nature of American humour.

125. BLYTH, R.H. , Japanese Humor, vol. 24, Tokyo, Tourist Library, 1957. Japanese humour, like all national humour, is closely linked to the idiosyncracies of culture (cf. the smile as an expression of self-restraint). The book gives an historical survey, preceded by a comparative analysis of Japanese and European humour.

126. BOURKE, J. , Englischer Humor (British humour), Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965. Small but thoughtful discussion of British humour and wit. Essential is the sudden emergence of a tension which is as suddenly conquered again. Wit is intellectual, and sometimes offensive, while humour is rarely intellectual and usually reconciling. Different types and categories of British humour are discussed.

127. CAZAMIAN, L. , The Development of English Humor, Durham, Duke University press, 1952. The main focus is on humour in popular culture and literature during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

128. HAFERKORN, R., `Ueber das englische Understatement' (On the British understatement), in: Britannica, Festschrift für Hermann Flasdieck, Heidelberg, Carl Winter Universitätsverlag, 1960, pp. 129-41. Understatement is the tendency to say less than is actually intended. It is the expression of a worldview, a way of thinking and living, typical of the upper and upper middle classes in England. It radiates a sense of superiority and control.

129. HEARN, L. , `The Japanese Smile', in: Glimpses of Unfamiliar Japan, Boston/New York, Houghton-Mifflin, 1895, vol. 2, pp. 656-683. The Japanese smile is not an expression of jollity and pleasure but part of a cultivated etiquette. Even in situations of pain and sorrow, the smile seems to be obligatory. Loud laughter, sarcasm, irony and cruel jokes have no place in the Japanese code of behaviour. The smile signals the self-control which is fostered by Buddhist ethics.

130. KINNOSUKE, a. , `What Makes Japan Laugh?', Outlook, 146, 1927, pp. 49-51. Short discussion of the particular features of Japanese humour. The humour in southern Japan is reminiscent of the slapstick in American movies.

131. MERCIER, V. , The Irish Comic Tradition, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1926. Historical and literary study of Irish humour, with chapters on macabre and grotesque humour, wit and word play, and satire and parody.

132. ARNEZ, N.L. and C.B. ANTHONY , `Contemporary Negro Humour as Social Satire', Phylon, 29, 1968, pp. 339-346. Three stages of Negro humour as social satire are distinguished: (1) the humour is in-group and helps to promote social cohesiveness: (2) the humour turns public, and outsiders use the black minority as the focus of their caricatures (cf. the black and happy buffoon); (3) the members of the black minority have become self-conscious and poke fun at themselves publicly (cf. Dick Gregory, Flip Wilson, Godfrey Cambridge, etc.).

133. BARRON, M.L. `A Content Analysis of Intergroup Humor', American Sociologial Review, 15, February 1950, pp. 88-94. A content analysis of jokes about Jews (100), blacks (300) and Irish (274), taken from three different anthologies. The main stereotypes of each are listed and classified.

134. BOSKIN, J. , `Good-bye, Mr. Bones', The New York Times Magazine, 1 May 1966, pp. 31-92. A discussion of humour among American blacks in different periods. Two types are distinguished: external humour which fosters adjustment to the dominant white culture, and internal (in-group) humour which is anti-white and promotes black pride. Recent examples of blacks' humour reflect a new sense of self-confidence, and of black consciousness.

135. BURMA, J.H. , `Humor as Technique in Race Conflict', American Sociological Review, 1946, 11:6, pp. 710-715. Stereotyped humour about blacks in the US South functions to discredit the minority and to stress alleged white superiority. In reaction, blacks develop their own, anti-white humour. It is a technique used in times of conflict, aiming at the acquisition and maintenance of dominance.

136. DAVIES, C. , `Ethnic Jokes, Moral Values and Social Boundaries', British Journal of Sociology, 33:3, September 1982, pp. 383-403. When a society grows complex and abstract, and social and cultural boundaries become vague and uncertain, jokes about minorities seem to draw some clearly distinguishable lines again.

137. GOLDMAN, M., `The Sociology of Negro Humor', unpublished PhD dissertation, New School for Social Research, New York, 1960. Humour by and about blacks can only be understood sociologically by viewing it in the historical context of race relations in the US. Various functions of humour in the changing relations between the races in recent history are discussed. Humour is an instrument by which the tensions between the races can be measured.

138. GREENBERG, B.S. and S. KAHN , `Blacks in Playboy Cartoons', Journalism Quarterly, 47, 1970, pp. 557-560. Short paper on the image of blacks in the cartoons of Playboy magazine.

139. HITSCHMANN, E., `Zur Psychologie des jüdischen Witzes' (On the psychology of Jewish humour), Psychoanalytische Bewegung vol. 2, 1930, pp. 580-6. A critique of Reik's paper on Jewish jokes (cf. 143). Jewish self-derision is the result of the conflicts with which mainly young Jews have to live. They are squeezed between assimilation to the enlightened Western culture and loyalty to Jewish family traditions. By expressing their own imperfections in jokes, they are one step ahead of their opponents and critics. In the process, energy which they would have needed for repressing emotions is saved. Zionism is the arch-enemy of Jewish humour.

140. LANDMANN, S., Der jüdische Witz. Soziologie und Sammlung (The Jewish joke. Sociology and anthology), Freiburg, Switzerland, Walter Verlag, 1962. Socio-historical analysis and anthology of Jewish humour, in which the Jewish joke is viewed as a reaction to the pressures of the outside world, as well as a defence against the pressures from within embodied by the demands of tradition. When heroic battles and direct roads to victory appear impossible, people resort to jokes as a final weapon.

141. LOMAX, L.E. , `The American Negro's New Comedy Act', Harpers Magazine, 222, June 1961, pp. 46-46. Whites and blacks laugh increasingly about the same jokes. The blacks' humour becomes `interracial', and class differences assume a more prominent role. The more blacks are integrated into society, the more laughter works to destroy racism.

142. MIDDLETON, R. `Negro and White Reactions to Racial Humor', Sociometry, 22, 1959, pp. 175-183. Blacks react more positively to anti-white jokes than do whites, but whites and blacks appreciate anti-black jokes equally. In groups with low authority scores, blacks react even more favourable to anti-black jokes than do whites, but in groups with high authority scores no difference in reaction could be observed.

143. REIK, T., `Zur Psychoanalyse des jüdischen Witzes' (On the psychoanalysis of Jewish jokes), Imago, 15, 1929, pp. 63-88. Classic psychoanalytical essay on self-depreciation and self-critique in Jewish humour. It is compared to melancholy. Both centre around a lost person who was loved and is now internalized through identification. Jewish jokes are directed against the non-Jewish reality which is internalized through identification. They are a hidden indictment of the non-Jewish world.

144. RINDER, I.D. , `A Note on Humor as an Index of Minority Group Morale', Phylon, 26, 1965, pp. 117-121. The jokes of a minority are indicative of the self-images of its members and reflect their attitudes to the status they occupy in society as a whole. Two functions are dominant: (1) conflict with the outside world, and (2) control of deviation within the group.

145. RINDER, I.D. , `Minority Orientations', Phylon, 26, 1965. pp. 5-17. Within minorities, the identification of group members with their group (centripetal) conflicts with identification with society as a whole (centrifugal). Hate of one's own group develops gradually when an individual has broken his other ties, but has not yet been able to assimilate to society as a whole.

146. ROSENBERG, B. and G. SHAPIRO , `Marginality and Jewish Humor', Midstream, 4, 1958, pp. 70-80. In Jewish jokes, assimilation conflicts with the demands of Jewish tradition. Jewish humour testifies to the marginal and ambiguous position of Jews in modern society. The jokes offer an outlet for tensions and feelings of guilt arising from this marginality and ambiguity.

147. SMITH, N.V.O. and W.E. VINACKE , `Reactions to Humorous Stimuli of Different Generations of Japanese, Chinese and Caucasions in Hawaii', The Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 1951, pp. 69-96. An experimental study of immigrant Japanese, Chinese and whites in Hawaii and of their younger generations. The focus is on possible differences between the older and the younger members of these groups. Three experiments demonstrated that responses to humour differ greatly among these three ethnic groups, but not between the older and younger generations within each group. This suggests that differences of ethnic background have not yet been erased in the process of assimilation.

148. WOLFF, H.A. , C.E. SMITH and H.A. MURRAY , `The Psychology of Humor: A Study of Responses to Race Disparagement Jokes', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28, 1934, pp. 341-365. Humour has a formula: there is incongruency in the sudden presentation of a new and amusing contrast to an expectation. The paper reports an experiment with ethnic humour. The less an ethnic minority is appreciated, the more people will laugh at disparaging jokes about it.

149. ZENNER, W. , `Joking and Ethnic Stereotyping', Anthropological Quarterly, 43, 1970, pp. 93-113. An analysis of the dominant stereotypes in ethnic joking.

150. ARNDT, G.W. , `Community Reactions to a Horrifying Event', Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 23 May 1959, pp. 106-111. Severely shocked emotions can be mastered through humour and laughter. Children are often the main channel for cruel, sick and sardonic jokes. They can tell the jokes because they are not yet aware of the taboo nature of their content. To adults these jokes are repugnant, yet their liberating effect is welcomed.

151. BATESON, G. , `The Position of Humor in Human Communication', In: Cybernetics, Transactions of the Ninth Conference, held in New York, 20-1 March 1952, pp. 1-47. Humour is analysed in terms of communication theory. In telling a joke some facts are made explicit, while other information is held implicit and in the background. When the punch line is reached the latter is emphasized and brought forward, causing a paradox. The paradox is a prototypical paradigm of humour.

152. BAWDEN, H.H. , `The Comic as Illustrating the Summation-Irradiation Theory of Pleasure-Pain', Psychological Review, 17, 5 September 1910, pp. 336-346. Laughter is the expression of relief after the accumulation of stimuli which either raise an expectation or cause an incongruency. Laughter eases the return to social equilibrium and to control over the situation. It fosters a sense of social responsibility in the individual.

153. BERGE, B., `Propos sur le rire “relationnel” ' (Note on relational laughter), in: 3, pp. 119-22. In contrast to Hobbesian theory, the author emphasizes the relational nature of laughter. Laughter is not always derisive and at the expense of others. It is on the contrary, capable of fostering feelings of solidarity and of creating a sense of community. Laughter is essential to the socialization of the child.

154. BLAU, P. , The Dynamics of Bureaucracy, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1955. The social functions of humour in a bureaucratic organization are briefly discussed on pp. 109-112. Joking is often a feature of competitive situations where it fosters group solidarity and reduces tensions. Humour often supplements the stereotyping of clients by bureaucrats.

155. BOGARDUS, E.S. , `Play Attitudes', `Mirthful Attitudes', in: Fundamentals of Social Psychology, New York, Appleton, 1942, pp. 85-88, 88-95. Laughter is rarely aggressive but more often the expression of a `sunny disposition' and the result of social contacts. It can have a corrective and integrating effect on the members of a group.

156. BRADNEY, P. , `The Joking Relationship in Industry', Human Relations, 10, 1957, pp. 179-187. The anthropological notion of a `joking relationship' (cf. 100) is applied to the world of Western industry. Joking relationships tend to emerge among workers when there is a possibility of open conflict which they want to avoid. Conjunction is paired to disjunction in these relationships.

157. BURNS, T. , `Friends, Enemies and Polite Fiction', American Sociological Review, 18, 1953, pp. 654-662. Role conflicts are often solved by joking relationships. Jesting and irony occur in primary groups within larger, formal organizations, linking the formal and informal levels of role playing.

158. COSER, R.L. , `Some Social Functions of Laughter: A Study of Humor in a Hospital Setting', Human Relations, 2, 1959, pp. 171-182. Humour and laughter express the collective experiences of the members of a group. In the formal setting of a hospital, the author observed humour and laughter at work. They served to avert fear, to rebel against authority, and to liberate the individual from the stifling organization. Humour and laughter have socializing functions, and serve as outlets.

159. COSER, R.L. , `Laughter among Colleagues', Psychiatry, 23, 1960, pp. 81-95. Laughing together presupposes a common definition of a situation. The paper discusses jesting and laughing during staff meetings in a psychiatric institution. Social distances diminish, and the adjustment of the individual to the formal organization is facilitated. The rigidity of the social structure is loosened without damaging it. Humour also functions as a controlled outlet for aggression.

160. COSER, R.L. , `Laughter in the Ward', in: Life in the Ward, East Lansing, Michigan State University Press, 1962, pp. 84-89. Patients converse jocularly in reaction to the threatening aspects of `life in the ward'. Humour canalizes fears, anxieties and feelings of hostility. It creates consensus and a sense of solidarity. A dysfunction is, of course, that unsatisfactory situations remain unchanged.

161. DOLLARD, J. , Caste and Class in a Southern Town, New Haven, Conn., Yale University Press, 1937. In a society with a rigid, authoritarian social system, lower strata have to vent their frustrations and aggression in a circumspect manner. Joking is a device which is often used (p. 307). It brings relief but does not change the status quo.

162. EMERSON, J.P., `Social Functions of Humor in a Hospital Setting', unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1963. Social conflicts are caused by cultural and structural incongruencies and may lead to uncertainty and loss of self-control on the part of involved individuals. Humour introduces these conflicts informally and neutralizes them. It is a socially accepted form of protest.

163. FOX, R.C. , Experiment Perilous. Physicians and Patients Facing the Unknown, Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1959. In this study of life in a city hospital in New England, the joking and laughing of patients and doctors is also discussed (pp. 76-84, 170-79). They are devices to counter anxieties, uncertainties and frustrations — a cathartic function. Through humour new patients are introduced smoothly to the social milieu of the ward.

164. GOFFMAN, E. , Asylums, Garden City, NJ, Doubleday Anchor, 1961. A classic study of life in a `total institution'. The relevance of joking and humour in general for the maintenance of the inmates' self-identity (`identity joking') is discussed on p. 112.

165. GOODCHILDS, J.D. , `Effects of Being Witty on Position in the Social Structure of a Small Group', Sociometry, 22:3, 1959, pp. 261-272. An experimental study in which the influence of humorous behaviour on the position of the joking individual in the group is analysed. Clownish behaviour produces popularity but has little influence on the group; sarcastic humour does not produce popularity but has more effect on the behaviour of the group.

166. GOODCHILDS, J.D. , `On Being Witty: Causes, Correlates and Consequences', in: 66, pp. 173-193. The focus is on the humorous performer rather than the audience. The author is particularly interested in the influence of humorous behaviour on the interaction processes in small groups.

167. GOODCHILDS, J. D. and E.E. SMITH , `The Wit and his Group', Human Relations, 7, 1964, pp. 23-31. Two experimental studies of 72 and 108 adult males respectively provided information about (1) the personality and behaviour of the joker in a group and (2) the effects of humorous behaviour on the group. The joker has a positive self-image; his behaviour is relatively independent of the group's norms; groups with a successful joker evaluate the experience positively; and they are better equipped to solve their problems.

168. GOODRICH, A. , J. HENRY and D.W. GOODRICH , `Laughter in Psychiatric Staff Conferences: A Sociopsychiatric Analysis', American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 24, 1954, pp. 175-184. Analysis of 23 staff conferences in a psychiatric institution. Laughter promotes group solidarity, functions as an outlet for tensions, consolidates status positions, and diminishes anxieties. Cultural values concerning death and sexuality are corroborated by jokes.

169. HANDELMAN, D. and B. KAPFERER , `Forms of Joking Activity: A Comparative Approach', American Anthropologist, 74, 1972, pp. 484-517. A comparative analysis of joking behaviour in a sheltered workshop in Israel and in part of a lead and zinc mine in Zambia. Joking is governed by a set of rules called `joking frames'. Two major types are distinguished: `setting-specific' and `category-routinized' frames. The paper focuses on conditions which led to the establishment, maintenance and destruction of joking frames during interactions.

170. HES, J. and J. LEVINE , `Kibbutz Humour', Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 135, 1962, pp. 327-331. Humour is an expression of tension and a mechanism which fosters solidarity in the group. In the kibbutz, humour functioned as an outlet for daily tensions concerning authority, division of social responsibilities, attitudes of members of the kibbutz to art and culture, etc.

171. KAPLAN, H.B. and I.H. BOYD , `The Social Functions of Humor in an Open Psychiatric Ward', Psychiatric Quarterly, 39, 1965, pp. 502-515. The paper discusses three main functions: (1) humour fosters integration of the group, because it sanctions deviations, expresses common emotions, and promotes ties of friendship and mutual succor; (2) it promotes adjustment to the environment; (3) it embodies social approval, mutual acceptance and support.

172. LUNDBERG, C.C. , `Person-Focused Joking: Patterns and Function', Human Organization, 28:1, 1969, pp. 22-28. An analysis of 13 joking situations in a formal organization. The question discussed is: who starts the joking to whom, about whom, in front of whom, and with what effect? The focus is on the rank of the participants, the relative status of the groups involved, the positive or negative feelings generated, and the group and individual responses to the joking.

173. MACDOUGALL, C.D. , `Wit and Humor', `Comic Strips', Cartoons', in: Understanding Public Opinion, New York, Macmillan, 1952, pp. 426-434, 632-638, 638-646. Laughter-creating humour promotes a we-experience in an audience. Because of this, the audience is more amenable to serious topics. Each group has its own brand of humour which is rarely funny to outsiders. US political life has a few comedians who can be compared to traditional court jesters. At the court of public opinion these jesters exert considerable influence on political affairs.

174. MIDDLETON, R. and J. MOLAND , `Humor in Negro and White Sub-culture. A Study of Jokes among University Students', American Sociological Review, 24, 1959, pp. 61-69. A study of joking behaviour among students at two southern universities in the US. Differences in sex, race and frequency of joking are discussed. The most important function of joking is to strengthen feelings of solidarity and intimacy within the group. Too much emphasis has been placed on conflict and control functions in the literature on humour and laughter.

175. MILLER, F.C. , `Humor in a Chippewa Tribal Council', Ethnology, 6, 1967, pp. 263-271. A report of observations made during sessions of a Chippewa tribal council. Humour and laughter have no control functions but foster communication. They also create a sense of relaxation. Jokes can convey things which could not be expressed otherwise. They thus strengthen human relations.

176. PILCHER, W.W. , `Joking Behavior', in: The Portland Longshoremen, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, n.d. Another application of the notion of `joking relationships' (cf. 100) to Western society, this time to the behaviour of longshoremen in Portland (USA). Three categories are distinguished: (1) blasphemy; (2) cursing and abuse; (3) obscene language. These joking relations tie people together, keep aggression under control, strengthen group solidarity and indicate the boundaries of the group.

177. STEPHENSON, R.M. , `Conflict and Control Functions of Humor', American Journal of Sociology, 56, 1951, pp. 569-574. The two main functions of humour are (1) conflict (humour as a weapon) and (2) control (humour regulates behaviour). Jokes express the dominant values of society and reduce status differences.

178. SYKES, A.J.M. , `Joking Relationships in an Industrial Setting', American Anthropologist, 68, 1966, pp. 188-193. Applies the concept of joking relationships (cf. 100) to the informal, bantering behaviour of people in a Western printing office. Jocular relations were observed between young men and women who were potential partners. They avoided obscenities. However, uncontrolled and sometimes obscene joking behaviour occurred between individuals who were not potential partners, such as older married men and unmarried younger women.

179. WINECK, C. , `Space Jokes as Indication of Attitudes toward Space', Journal of Social Issues, 17:2, 1961, pp. 43-49. A content analysis of 944 jokes about modern space exploration, collected in 1957-59. The jokes indicate anxiety, uncertainty and ambivalence about the subject, and seem to function as a kind of underground channel of communication. The attitudes and opinions expressed in these jokes contrast with data from opinion polls.

180. ESCARPIT, R. , `Humorous Attitude and Scientific Inventivity', Impact of Science on Society, 19, 1969, pp. 253-258. The essence of humour is a shift in the angle of view on reality. The humorist focuses on the absurdity of reality but in order not to be held crazy, he must be sure of his sanity and should possess a healthy sense of superiority. Eccentricity is the hallmark of humour. The similarities with the scientific attitude are striking.

181. FEHR, H., Der Humor im Recht (Humour in the law), Bern, Haupt, 1946. An analysis of humorous incidents in, and humorous dimensions of, law and jurisprudence.

182. FELEKI, L. , `Keeping Laughably up with Science', Impact of Science on Society, 19:3, 1969, pp. 279-290. Humour can function as an elixir in a world dominated by the sciences and technology — a mechanized world with which humour is at odds. Scientifically and technologically trained people control their world and leave nothing to the unexpected. Emotions such as pride, hate and selfishness will slowly wither away, and satire with them. We can expect the emergence of a mechanized kind of humour which is closely linked to science and technology.

183. KNESSL, L., `Humor in der neuen Musik' (Humour in modern music), Neues Forum, 8, 1961, pp. 72-4. A short paper on humorous effects in music, particularly contemporary music.

184. KOHN, A. , `The Journal in which Scientists Laugh at Science', Impact of Science on Society, 19:3, 1969, pp. 259-268. Despite the image of scientists as cold-blooded, impersonal people, they usually have a good sense of humour. Without it, science could in all probability not exist. One journal is devoted to the coalition of humour and science: `The Journal of Irreproducible Results'. It ridicules verbosity, obscurantism, pomposity, etc. in scientific publications and research programmes.

185. MULL, H.V.A. , `A Study of Humor in Music', American Journal of Psychology, 62, 1949, pp. 560-566. A short paper on humorous effects in music.

186. PITLO, A., De Lach in het Recht (Laughter in the law), Haarlem, Tjeenk Willink, 1963. Laughter and the law are omnipresent in daily life, and have much in common. There is laughter at the law and lawyers, but there is also laughter in the law and in jurisprudence. The book gives an historical account of laughter and the law with many informative details.

187. BRILL, A.A., `Wit: its Technique and Tensions', in: Fundamental Conceptions of Psychoanalysis, London, George Allen, 1922 pp. 113-38. The techniques of jokes are similar to those of dreams, but unlike dreams jokes are social and require an audience. Various techniques such as double meanings, transference of meanings, automatism of thought, etc., are discussed and related to Freud's theory.

188. BRILL, A.A. , `The Mechanics of Wit and Humor in Normal and Psychopathic States', Psychiatric Quarterly, 14, 1940, pp. 731-749. Since Freud, few studies have dealt with the relations among humour, wit and psychopathology. Freud's distinction between humour and wit, and their relations to the unconscious, are reiterated.

189. BRODY, M.W. , `The Meaning of Laughter', Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 19, 1950, pp. 192-201. Particularly among patients undergoing psychoanalysis, laughter signals a defence. The origins of this laughter lie in the unconscious. It is the result of a liberation from psychic tensions — a liberation which is indirect, concealed and socially acceptable. Laughter conceals sadistic and masochistic emotions.

190. DAVISON, C. and H. KELMAN , `Pathological Laughing and Crying', Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 42:4. 1939, pp. 595-643. Pathological laughing and crying are involuntary attacks of emotional expression. They are caused by cerebral disturbances. Laughing and crying are closely related, and the one can change suddenly into the other.

191. GROTJAHN, M. , `Laughter in Psychoanalysis', in: Yearbook of Psychonalysis, S. Lorand ed., vol. 6, 1950, pp. 228-233. In therapeutic sessions patients often tell jokes or funny stories which are indicative of their unconscious impulses. Their meaning is often aggressive. The psychoanalyst can use these jokes and anecdotes as a means to inform patients of things they do not wish to hear.

192. KANT, O. , `Inappropriate Laughter and Silliness in Schizophrenia', Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 27, 1942, pp. 398-402. Starting from the hypothesis that every human expression has a meaning, the laughter of schizophrenics on inappropriate occasions should be viewed as the expression of certain experiences on the part of these patients. Loss of personal identity and the need to reduce tensions cause inappropriate laughter and silliness. Their meaning lies in the situation of the patients who realize its dangers and know that they can do nothing about it. The situation is truly bizarre and ridiculous to them. Eventually, however, this laughter can become autonomus and transcend these meanings.

193. KUBIE, L.J. , `The Destructive Potential of Humor in Psychotherapy', American Journal of Psychiatry, 127, 1971, pp. 861-866. Jokes by the therapist during a session may work destructively on the patient, since they can frighten him or her and interrupt their feelings and thoughts. The patient may believe he or she is being attacked and therefore withdraw in defence. Only experienced therapists should employ humour, but they should do so with circumspection and only during the later stages of therapy. In such cases, humour on the part of the patient may also be helpful. It can enable him or her to understand their problems better.

194. LEVINE, J. , `Humor and Mental Health', in: A. DEUTSCH and H. FISHMAN (eds.), Encyclopedia of Mental Health, vol. 3, 1963, pp. 786-799. A sense of humour indicates a stable character and is a sign of mental health. Humour can have a therapeutic value.

195. LEVINE, J. , `Response to Humor', Scientific American, 194, 1956, pp. 31-35. Humour is the temporary satisfaction of a hidden and forbidden wish and reduces fear and anxiety. Universal themes are sexuality and aggression. Experiment with the `mirth response test'.

196. SCHWEICH, M., `Réflexions sur le problème du rire en psychopathologie' (Reflections on the problem of laughter in psychopathology), in: 3, pp. 122-34. The explosive and improper laughter of schizophrenics is part of their way of experiencing reality. This laughter is not meaningless but expresses a split relationship to reality. In this sense it is a kind of a language.

197. CHARLES, L.H. , `The Clown's Function', Journal of American Folklore, 58, 1945, pp. 25-34. A survey of data on `ceremonial clowns' in 56 pre-modern, non-Western cultures, based on the cross-cultural survey of the Institute of Human Relations at Yale University. The clown makes conscious what has remained unconscious and hidden, namely the earthly, lascivious, profane and a-social elements of human existence.

198. FLETCHER, C. , `Fool or Funny: the Role of the Comedian', in: Beneath the Surface. An Account of Three Styles of Sociological Research, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974, pp. 147-161. Humour demands a close tie to the audience, lest the entertaining comedian change into a laughable fool or clown whose humour and wit represent a superficial, commercial act.

199. KLAPP, O. , `The Fool as a Social Type', American Journal of Sociology, 55, 1950, pp. 157-162. The fool has a social role with social functions. He represents values which the group rejects, and serves as an outlet for aggressive feelings. The fool is a symbol of this aggression. His behaviour is part of a control mechanism and fortifies the very norms which are violated by it. The fool serves as a negative example.

200. KÖNNEKER, B., Wesen und Wandlung der Narrenidee im Zeitalter des Humanismus (Essence and change of the idea of folly in the humanistic era), Wiesbaden, F. Steiner Verlag, 1966. A thorough analysis of the ideas of folly and fools in Brant, Murner and Erasmus. These are discussed in the context of the Renaissance and early rationalism in the 16th century.

201. POLLIO, H.F. and J.W. EDGERLY , `Comedians and Comic Style', in: 57, pp. 215-242. The comedian or clown occupies an important place in social life. Being funny is a universal cultural phenomenon (cf. ceremonial clowns in non-Western, pre-modern cultures). The social functions of comedians are discussed in many theories, and it is obvious that an important part of laughter is nothing but the product of social interaction.

202. SWAIN, B. , Fools and Folly during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, New York, Columbia University Press, 1932. A comprehensive historical study of medieval and early modern folly, and ecclesiastical rejections of it. The feast of fools and fools' societies in France are discussed in detail.

203. WEIDKUHN, P., `Fastnacht, Revolte, Revolution' (Carnival, rebellion and revolution), Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte, 21, 1969, pp. 289-306. Carnival is intrinsically related to rebellion and revolution. They all realize a reversal of values and create a temporary anarchy. The May 1968 rebellion in Paris had carnival features.

204. WELSFORD, E. The Fool. His Social and Literary History, 1935, Gloucester, Mass., Peter Smith, 1966. A detailed study of the history of the fool as social role and literary figure. Very well documented chapters on the court fool in France and England, and on the stage clown and comedian.

205. WERTHEIM, W.F. , East-West Parallels, Chicago, Quadrangle Books, 1965. A volume of essays in comparative sociology. One paper, `Society as a Composite of Conflicting Value Systems' (pp. 23-39), discusses humour and jesters as counterpoint phenomena.

206. WILLEFORD, W. , The Fool and his Scepter, Chicago Northwestern University Press, 1969. A psychoanalytically-oriented study of fools and folly. It is in three parts: `The Fool and his Show'; `The Pattern of Folly'; and `The Fool and the Kingdom';

207. ZIJDERVELD, A.C. , Reality in a Looking-Glass. Rationality through an Analysis of Traditional Folly, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982. A socio-historical study of the nature and functions of fools and folly in traditional, pre-modern cultures. There are chapters on popular fools and court fools in medieval and early-modern Europe, on ceremonial fools in non-Western cultures and on the strained relationship between folly and modernity.

208. BATES, L. , `Development of Interpersonal Smiling Responses in the Pre-School Years', Journal of Genetic Psychology, 74, 1949, pp. 273-291. While growing up the child begins to laugh increasingly about things which people enjoy and define socially as funny.

209. BIRD, G. , `An Objective Humor Test for Children', Psychological Bulletin, 22, 1925, pp. 137-138. A brief report on an experiment which demonstrates that children have a special sense of humour which correlates with their IQ.

210. CAVANAGH, J.R. , `The Comics War', Journal of Crime, Law, Criminology, 40, 1949, pp. 28-35. Does the reading of comic books influence children negatively? Anti-social behaviour results from amassed aggression which cannot be expressed thus causing fear and anxiety. Comics may function as lightning conductors, since the child projects itself into the story and thereby works off its aggression. However, aggressive and bizarre stories can have a negative influence on ill-adjusted youth.

211. ENDERS, A.C. , `A Study of the Laughter of the Pre-School Child in the Merrill-Palmer Nursery School', Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, 8, 1928, pp. 341-356. Observation of children (two-four years), in groups and individually, who reacted to funny objects and photographs. Intelligence does not appear to influence the frequency of laughter, but age is crucial. The main causes of laughter are the movements and sounds of objects.

212. FOOT, H.C. and A.J. CHAPMAN, `The Social Responsiveness of Young Children in Humorous Situations', in: 57, pp. 187-212. There has been little research into the influence of the social situation on the responses of children to humorous stimuli. The focus is usually on the stimuli. Research carried out by the authors indicates that the social situation can alter the responsiveness of children to humour.

213. HELMERS, H., Sprache und Humor des Kindes (Language and humour of the child), Stuttgart, Klett, 1971. Humour develops in children when they begin to speak. Language offers the child a stable order of norms and rules which is inverted and turned upside down in the comic. The child's laughter indicates his affirmation of these rules and norms. Humour is thus a playing with language through which the child experiments with the rules and norms of that language. Without safety, or the sense of a spiritual order, humour could not emerge at all. (Cf. the `seriousness' of puberty.)

214. KENDERDINE, M. , `Laughter in the Pre-School Child', Child Development, 2, 1931, pp. 228-230. A brief report of an empirical study of laughter among pre-school children, conducted in February-June 1931. The children laughed most about their own movements and about socially unacceptable situations. The presence of other children was crucial for laughter, and children with a high IQ laughed more frequently than those with a low IQ.

215. KIMMINS, C.W. , `The Sense of Humour in Children', Strand Magazine, 63, 1922, pp. 52-56. An analysis of about 1,000 funny stories and jokes told by children aged seven-eighteen years. Central themes were superiority, the misfortunes of others, the stupidity of others, etc. Puns and surprising jokes were the favourites. However the appreciation of humour changed according to age. The sense of superiority, first towards younger children, and then towards adults, starts at roughly the age of eight years.

216. KIMMINS, C.W. , `Visual Humour: Sights that Children Laugh At', Strand Magazine, 63, 1922, pp. 294-299. An analysis of the young child's appreciation of everyday humour, based on about 1,000 funny incidents related by children. Until the age of seven years, children laugh mainly at visible events in which something surprising occurs — particular accidents and the misfortunes of others.

217. LAING, A. , `The Sense of Humour in Childhood and Adolescence', British Journal of Educational Psychology, 9, 1939, pp. 201ff. Brief report on an empirical study of differences in sense of humour, conducted among 200 children aged seven-ten years, 283 aged eleven-thirteen years, and 226 aged fourteen-eighteen years. The development of a sense of humour runs parallel to the intellectual and emotional development of the child. The youngest group laughed mainly at deviations from the normal and conventional, the middle group mostly at discomforts of others, and the oldest group displayed marked individual differences in sense of humour.

218. PLAQUET, J., `Essai sur le rire chez l'enfant' (Essay on the laughter of children), in: 3, pp. 141-4. The laughter of children is mainly an expression of happiness, and is closely related to playing. Like language, laughter offers a means of expression.

219. HIGHET, G. , The Anatomy of Satire, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1962. A theoretical and historical analysis of satire in which three types are distinguished: (1) monologue; (2) parody; (3) story. Many examples from literary history (from Ancient Greece to contemporary America) are offered.

220. JOHNSON, E. , A Treatise on Satire, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1945. Critique is the essence of satire. It attacks conventions, habits and usages which are widely accepted without thinking. This is satire's unmasking function. It lays bare the follies of our world-taken-for-granted.

221. KOLAJA, J. , `American Magazine Cartoons and Social Control', Journalism Quarterly, 30, 1953, pp. 71-74. Content analysis of 600 cartoons from Ladies' Home Journal, Saturday Evening Post and Collier's. Humour often functions as social control by ridiculing deviant behaviour. Its conflict function lies mainly in ridiculing opponents, and again this strengthens the group's morale. However, the cartoons investigated avoided controversial issues and thus lacked these two functions. They were characterized instead by an atmosphere of `the American middle-class weekend'.

222. KRIS, E. , `The Psychology of Caricature', Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art, London, Allen and Unwin, 1953, chapter 6, pp. 173-188. Caricatures, including cartoons, are graphical jokes. They are the result of a conflict between the direct gratification of instinctive needs and the repression of those needs by the super-ego. Caricatures have an aggressive nature, but try to unmask people in a socially acceptable manner. They are in part also the result of regression to a primitive stage ruled by effigy magic.

223. KRIS, E. , `The Principles of Caricature', Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art, London, Allen and Unwin, 1953, chapter 7, pp. 189-203. Portrait caricatures originated not earlier than the late 16th century. Political caricatures emerged in England only in the 18th century. This late genesis was caused by a change in the social position of artists who were no longer craftsmen, but creators of art as a projecton of inner life. However, the origin of the caricature goes beyond cultural history and should be sought in effigy magic. It still is a form of controlled magic.

224. LUCIE-SMITH, E. (ed.), The Penguin Book of Satirical Verse, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, Penguin Books, 1967. An anthology of English satirical literature. `The satirist', it says in the Introduction, `speaks about power, and men of power', Urban life is often the target of the satirist.

225. WINICK, C. , `Teen-agers, Satire and Mad', in: M. Truzzi (ed.), Sociology and Everyday Life, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1968, pp. 170-185. A discussion of American teenagers' perception of their world in the late 1950s. The information is based on a content analysis of issues of Mad magazine and on interviews with regular readers. The magazine is described as `today [1962] the only satire magazine published in this country [USA] which has any considerable circulation'.