Faye Ran "Modern Tragicomedy and the Fool" The ubiquitous presence of the fool in tragicomedy exemplifies our

modern penchant for dialectical subversiveness and multifaceted indeterminacy. in 20th and 21st cen Perhaps the prevalence of the fool maybe accounted for through its definition of person who is both inferior, one who represents failure and consequences of failure, of the individual who does not internalise or function to given social values and standards. The archetypal configuration consists of 5 aspects 1 an idiosyncratic appearance and behaviour: the fool will manifest some anatomical deformation or anti-natural appearance, often in combination with aberrant psychological or cognitive functioning. secondly, a maladaption: non-comforming. The fool will contradict, oppose or distort normative systems and ideologies. His/her conduct will evince the exact reverse of behviour commensurate with social expectation and custom. his/her function as a target and source of humour and laughter: the fool is considered a comic character in so far as he/she inevitably elicits laughter and mirth, or derision and ridicule. The fool him/herself may engage in mimicry, mockery, humorous banter, impersonation. Fourth, his/her marginality: the fool whether by custom, nature or function, is traditionally a social misfit or pariah. fifthly, duality: folly and non-folly and order and disorder are always simultaneously implied in the person and behaviour of the fool. When we judge a fool to be inappropriate, we are acknowledging normative standards and effectively criticising subversive or deviant behaviour. People will respond with laughter, yet harbour feelings of repulsion, pity or fear. In addition to his anomalous personality, the duality of the fool is also evinced by his/her marginal position, his/her simultaneous power and powerlessness and the ambivalent reactions he or she evoke. Although the fool may function in may ways for instance as a satirist, jester or clown, he or she will undoubtedly serve as a catalyst for comic catharsis. Fools can be expected to reverse relationships between those dominant and those subservient. The court fool of the Renaissance, gained recognition for acknowledged defeats were socially acceptable and entertainment. While deprived of ordinary rights and responsibilities, the fool was plafced in "the paradoxical position of virtual outlawry combined with utter dependece on the support of the social group to which he belongs.' Consider the paradoxical nature of foolery and foolishness. Those assigned the status of the fool are no longer restricted or inhabited by custom, propriety or convention. The fool is free from moral structures and ethical proscriptions.