A hundred million movie-goers must be right... (1938)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

A father gave his little child, too young to go to school, a simple problem in arithmetic. "Darling, how much is five and five?" And Darling answered, "A million, billion thrillion!" Because the father knew the correct answer he felt pleasantly superior. If the child had answered 4, or 6 or 7 or a number close to the correct answer, he would have felt little amusement, but the ridiculously large figure made him feel that much more superior and happier. That is the only way we can account for his laughter because a million billion thrillion is not immensely funny in itself. I say not immensely funny in itself because in the word thrillion there is a slight variation of the strictly unfunny word trillion, a slight cause for laughter. True that most of us regard comedy as a thing in itself, or as a thing unlike any other thing, much as a person, an automobile or an animal are unlike each other, but with rare exceptions, and they are qualified, there is nothing known inherently funny or comical. The duck, the jackass, the kangaroo and the seal, standard laugh-getters of vaudeville and the comic strip, are not funny in themselves. They may be cute, pathetic, incongruous, in direct contrast with animals of so-called normal proportions but not inherently funny. Least comical of all things supposed to be comical in themselves are comedians. Looking at Charles Chaplin, Bob Burns, Joan Davis or the Ritz Brothers in repose we may smile but not because of their inherently funny personalities. We smile because they are proven, reputable funsters, and we are anticipating a comical exaggeration, turn or twist. In fact, when a comedian becomes conscious of everybody present hanging onto his every word and expecting him to say or do something comical he is not only inspired to give everything that happens around him a humorous twist, but he feels that he must be comical to live up to his reputation for being comical. Getting back to the subject of nothing being funny in itself, when I was working with Charlie Chaplin we would go for long walks to talk over the development of a story and whenever child or adult recognized him they would break into a broad smile and the children 117