Baudelaire had a penchant for “intoxication” and comedy. And what better day to discuss Baudelaire’s notion of the comic than on St. Patrick’s Day! To be sure, Baudelaire thinks that the absolute comic, at its best, is like “intoxication.” Perhaps the “Satanic Serenity” that Walter Benjamin takes note of has a source in this; after all, Benjamin wrote about “Satanic Serenity” in his notes for his essay “Hashish in Marseille.” As Baudelaire understands it, the state that one enters in the Absolute comic includes a sense of being “double.” The irony of it all is that this duality reminds one that one is “innocent” and, literally, destroyed. And on St. Patrick’s day people usually talk about getting “wasted,” “destroyed,” and “hammered.” All of these phrases suggest some kind of violence and, as Baudelaire suggests, some kind of innocence.
As we learned in the last blog entry, Satanic laughter is associated with a sense of superiority. Baudelaire sees the insane (“the mad”) as the best illustration of an extreme sense of superiority. The laughter of the insane, based on the psychotic insistence on the superiority of the laugher, brings out the essence of the “significant comic” (the comique significatif). Mad laughter is, for Baudelaire, Satanic. It has a total disregard for the world. It laughs at the world. But it is deluded. It has no innocence about it whatsoever. It takes on a destructive daemonic aspect.
The significant comic doesn’t seem to embody what Benjamin would call “Satanic Serenity” since it is solely destructive. The significant comic is not simply comic because she is “wasted”; no, s/he is comic because s/he wastes people with her daemonic humor and laugh.
(Mind you, for Baudelaire, children, “budding Satans,” are included in this category.)
The Absolute comic is different from, yet related to, the “significant comic.” It is the kind of comedy that would attract Walter Benjamin who appreciated, like Baudelaire, gestural comedy (mime) and the kind of comedy that included what Baudeliare called the “law of ignorance.”
Baudelaire first introduces the Absolute comic when he discusses “laughter at the grotesque.” To be sure, “the laughter caused by the grotesque has about it something profound, primitive, axiomatic, which is much closer to the innocent life and to absolute joy than is the laughter caused by the comic in man’s behavior”(157).
For Baudelaire, this is the superior form of comedy because it brings man “closer to the innocent life and to absolute joy.”
Baudelaire notes that the “absolute comic” has “one criterion”: “that is laughter – immediate laughter.” However, there is one condition for comedy to be absolute, besides immediate laughter and that relates to the disclosure of what is most pathetic in humankind: “the comic can only be absolute in relation to fallen humanity”(158).
In other words, the absolute comic must signify through falleness. It must be – so to speak – wasted.
And it is only the best artists, Baudelaire tells us, who apprehend it. For these minds “are sufficiently open to receive absolute ideas”(158). Baudelaire, after saying this, writes of an author who is the master of German horror and the grotesque; namely, the late 18th century German writer ETA Hoffman (158): “He always made a proper distinction between the ordinary comic and the type which he called the “innocent comic.”
What Hoffman calls “the innocent comic” is a blending of the innocent and the grotesque. Moreover, it isn’t so “innocent” in the sense that it includes a distinct form of “violence.” It doesn’t escape violence.
Baudelare notes that we also see such violence and innocence in the work of French mimes like Pierrot. Regarding the mime and the clown, Baudelaire notes that Pierrot mixed the innocent and the grotesque by way of facepaint and gesture: “Upon his floured face he had stuck, crudely and without transition or gradation, two enormous patches of pure red. A feigned prolongation of the lips, by means of two bands of carmine, brought it about that when he laughed his mouth seemed to run from ear to ear”(160).
And although he appeared childish and innocent, he certainly was not: “As for his moral nature, it was basically the same as that of the Pierrot whom we all know – heedlessness and indifference, and consequently the gratification of every kind of greedy and rapacious whim”(161).
In other words, while he appears innocent, he is “devilish.”
The act of this rude yet innocent clown leads us to “a dizzy intoxication.” When one watches them “intoxication swims in the air; it is intoxication that fills the lung and renews the blood in the arteries”(163). The “absolute comic” has “taken charge of each one of them.” And by each one, Baudelaire suggests that the comic and the audience are possessed. Everyone is intoxicated.
The mime becomes possessed and seems to leave the realm of men: “Every gesture, every cry, every look seems to be saying: ‘The fairy has willed it, and our fate hurls us on – it doesn’t worry me! Come, let’s get started! Let’s get down to business!’ And then they do…which starts at this point – that is to say, on the frontier of the marvelous”(162). In other words, the mime takes us into another realm by way of his gestures – a realm that, while laughable, brings us closer to childhood.
This can only mean that in his grotesque and childish disregard of limits, the mime’s gestures, his madness, while destructive counters the solely destuctive madness of the regular comic. The mime is not simply mad – he is, actually; he certainly flaunts a superiority and indifference to the civilized world of adults. But this madness, because it is childish, is also innocent. The mime is a drunk of sorts and he spreads the feeling of intoxication through his rude and innocent gestures.
Baudelaire notes that nothing can surpass the absolute comic that we find in the mime: “But how could the pen rival the pantomime? The pantomime is the quitessence of comedy; it is the pure comic element, purged and concentrated”(162).
Nonetheless, Baudelaire ends his essay on laughter and devotes the most space to discussing this mad innocence by way of a close reading of ETA Hoffman’s story “Dacus Carota, The King of the Carrots.”
This story is exemplary because it shows us how a little girl, a “budding Satan,” loses her sense of comic superiority by way of the grotesque. Her astonishment, her shock, brings us in touch with the “Absolute Comic.”
Baudeliare tells us that “the unfortunate young girl, obsessed with dreams of grandeur, is fascinated by a display of military might.” When the girl is shown the soldiers sleeping at night, by her “magician” father, she experiences shock and vertigo. Her exposure to the grotesque display of soldiers sleeping at night, when her father opens the “flap” of the tent, leads to what Baudelaire calls a “comic emanation, explosion, as it were, a chemical separation.”
What “emanates” from the comic explosion?
In the comic explosion we become aware of our childish part, which is unaware of itself.
This is the “law of ignorance.” Indeed, for Baudelaire, “the most distinctive mark of the absolute comic is that it remains unaware of itself.”
This translates into a double consciousness for the viewer or reader. It indicates “the permanent dualism in the human being – that is, the power of being oneself and someone else at the same time”(165).
This experience, since it includes ignorance is double. As we saw above with the little girl who is astonished when she sees the grotesque soldiers but doesn’t know why she is astonshed: she is double. She doesn’t know herself, but we do. Its an uncanny sense of self that the reader or viewer takes on. Baudelaire says it is superior – and, as we have seen superiority is the core of the satanic-slash-comic. It is the essence of laughter.
Perhaps this sense of duality is the cause of what Walter Benjamin’s calls a “Satanic smile.” Benjamin argues that it is based on a “Satanic Serenity” and not on destructive element of the Satanic. But this misses one essential point made by Baudeliare: the serenity one has, which enables one to be oneself and someone else at the same time, is based on some kind of explosion. It is based on some kind of destructive violence which, as Baudelaire, notes is inevitable when it comes to comedy.
This resonates with what we saw in Benjamin’s reading of Dostoevsky’s The Idiot. There, he notes that a return to childhood, will not come without an “implosion.”
The violence that the mime and Hoffman apply leads to childhood. This is the paradox. With Benjamin this takes on a fascinating element because Benjamin sees himself as the butt of the joke. He sees himself as a man and as a child: as himself and someone else. But, and here is the point: he is both a man and a child. He is double.
But there is one missing ingredient: the real basis for the Absolute Comic’s performance – as for the significant comic – is failure. The secret of comedy is that it is based on what Baudelaire called Spleen – that is, rage and anger at one’s meaningless suffering in the world. Superiority – whether of the significant or the Absolute comic variety – is ultimately a delusion. But a necessary one as it casts out the hope that even though one is pathetic, one is innocent. This can either bring about a Satanic Serenity or, perhaps, depression and melancholy.
Benjamin brought this double sense of himself in the Goethe aphorism and in the Shuvalkin parable. The absolute comic – and its sense of duality – is evident insofar as “the law of ignorance” pervades both: Benjamin was asked to sign but he had not idea that his name was already signed; and Shuvalkin thought he had the signatures of Potemkin but found that he was ignorant. Shuvalkin, like Benjamin in the “Vestibule” dream, didn’t realize that the king had singed his name on each paper. In both, the prank, though Satanic, is an emanation and explosion within which Benjamin sees himself as other: in which he sees himself as a schlemiel.. He sees himself as double: as man and child.
Perhaps we can say that every day was St. Patrick’s day for Benjamin insofar as every day he looked in the mirror he realized he was “wasted.” Perhaps this gave him “Satanic Serenity.” On the other hand, perhaps this made him a Sad Clown? (As we shall see, in upcoming blog entries, this was one of Baudelaire’s double self-images. Perhaps it was Benjamin’s too?)
(Here is one of the first animated films ever made. This film, made in 1892, was named after the clown Pierrot that Baudelaire sees as exemplary of the Absolute Comic. Its entitled Pauvre Pierrot. Can you spot Benjamin in this animated film (wink, wink)?)