From the time of Aristotle and Plato, philosophers have speculated about humour and laughter, proposing that ridere est humanum. But research has shown that chimpanzees and rats also laugh. Sociologist Norbert Elias believed that laughter evolved as an antidote to aggression, but humour can also be damaging. While studies in neuroscience, psychology, linguistics, literature, performance, history, sociology, religion, health and the emotions all now contribute to our understanding of the functions and consequences of humour, the question of whether humour unites or divides the human race is still open to debate. While humour can assist social cohesion in many ways, depending on cultural context (as some examples of peculiarly Australian uses of humour illustrate), and while its creators and practitioners command attention in daily life, it remains resistant to easy definition.Introducing humour studies H ow does someone come to be studying humour and laughter? Is it really a research field? Or is the idea that humour deserves serious attention merely a joke? These questions confront anyone embarking on this field, as they did the present author when, in 1965, | embarked on my doctoral thesis at University of NSW. My supervisor C. R. B. Quentin, the founder of the National Institute of Dramatic Art who also held the Chair of Drama, told me, "Oh Jessica, don't study tragedy [my intended subject], study comedy; you'll never be bored." He was very right and I am still fascinated by it. Back then, I chose to focus on the commonly despised variety of low comedy or farce -the kind that depends on physical and visual humour rather than on witty dialogue as found in high comedy 182 and the comedy of manners. There were very few academic historians of the theatre who thought this was important and the typical reaction was that it must be very easy to comprehend such a basic form of drama. However, from a practical and theatrical point of view, it is anything but simple. Quentin himself, a former director with the Old Vic Theatre Company, preferred directing comedy and considered it far more demanding than tragedy: it was difficult to make it succeed, challenging for the actors and even more resistant to analysis on the cold page. Beginning with a study of the history and theory of European farce across nine different cultures (working mostly in translation), I progressed to teaching comedy at Stanford University as a visiting scholar in the '7os. Here I was lucky enough to work with famous names in English and Theatre JOURNAL & PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Davis -Taking humour and laughter seriously
