The Dude Abides, Darkly

The Big Lebowski (1998) is a classic example of the Coen brothers' characteristically dark sense of humor, depicting grim events in an almost flippant manner. “The Dude” (Jeff Bridges) shares a legal name with Jeffrey Lebowski (David Huddleston), thereby creating the perfect context for a comedy-of-errors. Lebowski sets itself apart from other simple situational comedies through the gravity and intensity of the situations contained therein. Simon Critchley does not specifically discuss dark humor in his book On Humour, but his three theories of humor are nonetheless pertinent to an in-depth examination of Lebowski. First, a quick summary of the three theories:

1. We laugh at others, out of feelings of superiority
2. Laughter is a release of nervous energy, or a response to an awkward situation
3. Humor arises from the difference between our expectations and what actually occurs

Lebowski includes all three theories in varying degrees. Audiences laugh at the characters themselves, as The Dude & Friends are messy, unemployed bowling-enthusiasts – a perfect recipe for creating feelings of superiority, it would seem. There is also a great deal of nervous laughter, especially with regard to Maude Lebowski (Julianne Moore) and her artwork. The same could be said for the scene with the ferret and the bathtub, depending on how uncomfortable small rodents on leashes make you. 

It is the third theory, though, which addresses the majority of Lebowski's humor. Critchley speaks mostly of jokes, where punch-lines depart significantly from their anticipated direction. He elaborates, saying that a “true joke, a comedian's joke, suddenly and explosively lets us see the familiar defamiliarized, the ordinary made extra- ordinary and the real rendered surreal” (10). In Lebowski, most of the situations themselves (with some obvious exceptions, of course) are more or less familiar to the viewer. We've seen kidnapping stories before; we've seen complex tales of mistaken identities (both good and less-good); we've likely even seen bowling fanatics before, though none with quite the panache of Jesus Quintana (John Turturro). It is the way that the Coen Brothers toy with our horizon of expectations that makes this movie a comedy.

I find it fascinating that this film, like most of the Brothers' dark comedies, could have easily tipped over into the realm of drama with just a few different stylistic or character-based alterations. Dark comedy is a hard genre to define, and it is an even harder genre to write within. Yet the Coens have still managed to master it. Consider the bare-bones plot: After a case of mistaken identity, which led to theft and assault in the home of an innocent man, that man becomes involved in a kidnapping scheme. When plans go awry, the alleged kidnappers send a severed body part to the abducted woman's husband as a threat. The summary could continue further, but I think you get the point. It sounds like a drama, yes? It even sounds like a bit of a horror thriller, with bloody toes being sent via USPS. Yet the disjunction between the grave situations and the various characters' outlandish (or not outlandish enough?) responses to their circumstances creates a comedic effect.

Critchley does touch on dark humor briefly, even referencing a Coen Brothers creation: “if there is a coldness at the core of the comic,” resulting from the distance from everyday life which comedy allows, “then this can also be disturbing... Consider the Coen Brothers' 1996 film, Fargo, where multiple murder is treated with a troubling numbness” (88). To be fair, Fargo leans more toward drama than Lebowski, but Critchley's comment is still applicable. The Dude is so casual in his treatment of the physical threat on both himself and the supposedly kidnapped woman, preferring to dwell on his ruined rug. He drinks White Russians and bemoans the loss of a decorative item. So yes, the plot is grim, but the characters are comedic. The same could be said for Fargo.

Does this “gallows humor” have a clear place in Critchley's compiled theories? Does it fit in one, or does it seem to combine all three? Or perhaps it marks a need for a fourth theory? For me, the humor of Lebowski is in large part due to the tension between the viewer's expectation and the film's “reality,” if you could call it that. We expect a reasonable, rational human being (though The Dude seemed to trade in reason and rationality for his unconventional title) to treat a violent situation with a bit more caution, but we delight in The Dude's buffoonery. It is a pleasant contradiction to our expectations. Is this true of all dark humor, though? Or just that of the Coen Brothers?