The Punster's Pocket-book. Westmacott Charles Molloy

      In awkward gestures awkward mirth be shown,

      Yet, spite of gesture, man still laughs alone."

      Now to the exercise of this high and distinguished prerogative of our nature, what is a more certain stimulant than a pun? If it be good, you laugh at the pun; if bad, at the punster; and in either case, he is almost certain to laugh himself. Moreover, the punster is one of all others, "quem jocus risusque circumvolat;" not only witty himself, but the cause of wit in others; for it is rarely, indeed, in the social circle, that one pun is not the signal for a series of others. The cards are generally played after the first is led, till the suit is fairly out.

      But laughter is not only one of the principal faculties which distinguish man from inferior animals; it likewise contributes greatly to the promotion and preservation of health. "Laugh and grow fat," is a very old and a very wise adage.

      And observe, the fat which thus increaseth the ribs is wholesome, good, firm fat, bearing no resemblance whatever to the adipose envelope of the bloated and corpulent. Those who are clothed with laughter-begotten fat are, moreover, in general, of humour frank and free, cordial, cheerful, and enterprising; as dissimilar to the indolent, arthritic, or the selfish gourmand, as to the cadaverous, saturnine, acetous beings who stalk about like so many skeletons, galvanised into temporary motion, and presenting a memento mori to all they meet. And if such be the genial, the beneficial, effects of laughter, can we laud too highly the practice of punning, that most apt and prompt instrument of promoting it?

      In another point of view, too, this art doth not a little contribute to the advancement and improvement of moral feeling. How often have the asperities incident to conversation been instantly softened down by the means of a well-timed pun? How many a rising storm of colloquial debate and controversial wrath has been dispelled by the same salutary agency, when wisdom would have failed to convince, or mediation to conciliate? The able punster has perhaps more frequent opportunities than any other character, of securing the blessing pronounced upon the peace-maker.

      The pious Dr. Watts, in his Introduction to Logic, has commented on the moral as well as literary evils arising from the number of equivocal and the comparative paucity of univocal words. Now the knowledge of a disease being half its cure, who is so likely to be exempt from the evils arising from the above-mentioned sources as the punster? Every fresh touch of his art may be considered as a discovery of some more of these dangerous equivocals, and indeed his whole life may be regarded as a philanthropic voyage in quest of them, combining the double advantage of exciting mirth by their timely production, and affording a salutary warning to the hearer against the employment of such Proteus terms in grave and serious discussion. Thus again we see the paragrammatist enabled to contribute in a high degree to the social enjoyment, literary improvement, and moral amelioration of his fellow creatures.

      If wit consists principally, as the first of modern philosophers has affirmed, in the unexpected association of ideas apparently far removed in their nature from each other, punning must, in its very essence, claim to rank in the highest class of wit. And how must the frequent exercise of searching for such associations, and bringing them however recondite to light, sharpen the intellect of the individual engaged in it! We have already adverted to the general practice of this art among the members of our universities; we may likewise observe that the learned body of the law, a body distinguished perhaps beyond any other for their superior shrewdness, and extent of general information, are universally partial to it. The barrister who pleads, and the judge who directs, are alike ambitious to display their excellence in this highly prized art; and justice herself, though for the sake of her character she must needs be blind, is rarely found deaf to the sallies of the punster.

      Ohe! jam satis est. Sufficient, we are persuaded, has been said to satisfy all persons of the value and excellence of punning, except indeed the obstinately incredulous; and such, as a just punishment, we would excommunicate for ever from the enjoyment of puns, and the society of punsters. Can we pronounce a severer doom?

      But as the best of things are the most liable to abuses, so has the cause of punning suffered much from the want of judgment evinced by many of its votaries. Anxious, as far as possible, to contribute to maintaining this noble art in the possession of its well-merited reputation, we venture a few words of caution to some of its professors on the errors too frequently committed by them.

      Imprimis, a pun, like an epigram, is worth little indeed if the point can be anticipated. Hence proper names, though they have in some few instances been successfully worked upon, are in general bad materials for the punster. The attempt to pun upon Black, White, Green, Brown, Scott, England, and id genus omne, if productive of any laughter, is of that only which is excited by the imbecility and empty pretensions of him who makes it. In justice to our contemporary John Bull, we must observe that on this very dangerous ground, he is almost the only person who has had the singular felicity of uniformly appearing with success.

      For the same reason that we object to proper names, we need scarcely observe that all trite puns are detestable. There are a number of words, such as heart, love, soul, last, grave, and a host of others, that have been fairly worn thread-bare in the service. Let him whose wit is not competent to discover some other sources than these hackneyed ones, be a listener, but by no means a speaker in a circle of punsters. Decies repetita placebit, however just it may be as the criterion of merit in a poem, will never do for a pun, one of whose chief excellencies is novelty, – nay, which often, however rich at the moment of its utterance, will not successfully admit of repetition, even to those who have never before heard it, at another time and under different circumstances.

      A pun can rarely be considered very good, which involves a difference of orthography. It appears like a descent from its true dignity to the level of a common conundrum.

      Lastly, let every punster bear in mind, that punning is only the sauce of conversation, and that he who thinks to entertain by introducing it continually into his discourse, resembles a man who should present me with a dish of Cayenne pepper alone by way of a meal. It may likewise be observed, that what is usually called an inveterate, is never a good punster. The constant desire of display, by accustoming himself to be contented with mediocrity, or something below it, almost disqualifies him from uttering any thing above it. We may say with justice, "a pun spoken in good season, how good is it!" Time, and place, and persons too, must be regarded. The punster, while he enlivens conversation, is one of the greatest acquisitions to a company; when he only interrupts it, he is one of its greatest nuisances. Much more could we add concerning both the theory and practice of this art, but we would not willingly become tedious. Gentle reader, whosoever thou art, receive in good part what we have here written; imbue thyself with such a love of punning, and such a sense of its dignity, that thy efforts may exalt and not degrade it: so shalt thou merit the good wish which, with a sincere heart, we now bestow upon thee: Mayest thou become one of the warmest admirers of punning, and shine as one of the first of punsters!

      THE ORIGIN OF PUNNING: FROM PLATO'S SYMPOSIACKS