Very little has been published on the subject of solitary laughter. Yet it appears quite possible

Laughter has achieved special significance within some of the more radical postmodern, and especially poststructuralist, discourses as an icon of liberated desire. Yet there is a sense in which laughter is anything but the expression of libidinal force, in which it can be seen to reflect a momentary subversion of desire. To understand this, poststructuralist linguistic theory itself can be employed (against itself), because in the linguistic philosophy of Jacques Derrida in particular there is a unique acknowledgment of the temporal dimension of communication and thought, and of the relationship of this to human desire. Such a model of communication provides insights into the way in which laughter is produced through the subversion of the human experience of temporality — and of desire, an effect of delayed satisfaction. The present article draws widely on the comic theoretical heritage, seeking to synthesize existing theories into a time-based model of how, and why, laughter is produced.

No abstract

The emergence of philosophical affect theory, sourced substantially in Continental philosophy, has intensified scholarly attention around affective potentials in laughter. However, the relationship between laughter’s affect and the comic remains a complicated one for researchers, with some maintaining that the two should be studied separately (Emmerson 2019, Parvulescu 2010). While there is a credible academic rationale for drawing precise distinctions, the present article takes an integrative approach to laughter and the comic. It analyzes, then synthesizes, points of convergence between key texts in affect philosophy and certain elements of incongruity-based humour theory. Specifically, the article seeks to demonstrate that some integration can bring insight and clarity to discussion of transformative potentials sometimes attributed to forms of comic laughter, especially within cultural studies and social science following the philosophy of Deleuze. This approach may also usefully complicate the concept of incongruity itself.

Purpose The purpose of this opinion piece is to present a case for the potential of positive autoethnography (PosAE) as a new autoethnographic approach. Design/methodology/approach This work resulted from on-going discussions between the authors as to the practicalities and benefits of associating the qualitative approach of autoethnography with the field of positive psychology. Findings PosAE is proposed to encourage writers to actively reflect on the importance for themselves, and their readers, of including positive narrative elements, prospective visions and exploratory trajectories in their work. Research limitations/implications This research builds on existing research that has included positive psychology in autoethnography. As positive psychology is grounded in empirical research, the authors are suggesting that PosAE is allied to pragmatic autoethnography. Practical implications PosAE offers to facilitate positive thought, affect and strategies that could improve well-being. For example, some people struggling with serious health issues, and those helping them, may find it useful for articulating conditions and envisioning, even experiencing, positive change. Social implications With so many lives impacted by mental health issues globally, and with rapidly changing societies struggling to provide stability and purpose, an autoethnography that provides tools such as PERMA (Positive emotions, Engagement, Positive Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishments/Achievements) to communicate the positive seems timely. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time the creation of an autoethnographic approach explicitly linked to positive psychology has been proposed.