The Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals - Charles Darwin (an ebook reader TXT) 📗

[16] Dr. Piderit has come to the same conclusion, ibid. s. 99.

Whether we look at laughter as the full development of a smile, or, as is more probable, at a gentle smile as the last trace of a habit, firmly fixed during many generations, of laughing whenever we are joyful, we can follow in our infants the gradual passage of the one into the other.

It is well known to those who have the charge of young infants, that it is difficult to feel sure when certain movements about their mouths are really expressive; that is, when they really smile.

Hence I carefully watched my own infants. One of them at the age of forty-five days, and being at the time in a happy frame of mind, smiled; that is, the corners of the mouth were retracted, and simultaneously the eyes became decidedly bright.

I observed the same thing on the following day; but on the third day the child was not quite well and there was no trace of a smile, and this renders it probable that the previous smiles were real.

Eight days subsequently and during the next succeeding week, it was remarkable how his eyes brightened whenever he smiled, and his nose became at the same time transversely wrinkled.

This was now accompanied by a little bleating noise, which perhaps represented a laugh. At the age of 113 days these little noises, which were always made during expiration, assumed a slightly different character, and were more broken or interrupted, as in sobbing; and this was certainly incipient laughter.

The change in tone seemed to me at the time to be connected with the greater lateral extension of the mouth as the smiles became broader.

In a second infant the first real smile was observed at about the same age, viz. forty-five days; and in a third, at a somewhat earlier age.

The second infant, when sixty-five days old, smiled much more broadly and plainly than did the one first mentioned at the same age; and even at this early age uttered noises very like laughter.

In this gradual acquirement, by infants, of the habit of laughing, we have a case in some degree analogous to that of weeping.

As practice is requisite with the ordinary movements of the body, such as walking, so it seems to be with laughing and weeping.

The art of screaming, on the other hand, from being of service to infants, has become finely developed from the earliest days.

High spirits, cheerfulness.—A man in high spirits, though he may not actually smile, commonly exhibits some tendency to the retraction of the corners of his mouth.

From the excitement of pleasure, the circulation becomes more rapid; the eyes are bright, and the colour of the face rises.

The brain, being stimulated by the increased flow of blood, reacts on the mental powers; lively ideas pass still more rapidly through the mind, and the affections are warmed. I heard a child, a little under four years old, when asked what was meant by being in good spirits, answer, “It is laughing, talking, and kissing.”

It would be difficult to give a truer and more practical definition.

A man in this state holds his body erect, his head upright, and his eyes open. There is no drooping of the features, and no contraction of the eyebrows. On the contrary, the frontal muscle, as Moreau observes,[17] tends to contract slightly; and this smooths the brow, removes every trace of a frown, arches the eyebrows a little, and raises the eyelids.

Hence the Latin phrase, exporrigere frontem—

to unwrinkle the brow—means, to be cheerful or merry.

The whole expression of a man in good spirits is exactly the opposite of that of one suffering from sorrow.

According to Sir C. Bell, “In all the exhilarating emotions the eyebrows, eyelids, the nostrils, and the angles of the mouth are raised. In the depressing passions it is the reverse.”

Under the influence of the latter the brow is heavy, the eyelids, cheeks, mouth, and whole head droop; the eyes are dull; the countenance pallid, and the respiration slow.

In joy the face expands, in grief it lengthens.

Whether the principle of antithesis has here come into play in producing these opposite expressions, in aid of the direct causes which have been specified and which are sufficiently plain, I will not pretend to say.

[17] `La Physionomie,’ par G. Lavater, edit.

of 1820, vol. iv. p. 224. See, also, Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy of Expression,’ p. 172, for the quotation given below.

With all the races of man the expression of good spirit appears to be the same, and is easily recognized. My informants, from various parts of the Old and New Worlds, answer in the affirmative to my queries on this head, and they give some particulars with respect to Hindoos, Malays, and New Zealanders. The brightness of the eyes of the Australians has struck four observers, and the same fact has been noticed with Hindoos, New Zealanders, and the Dyaks of Borneo.

Savages sometimes express their satisfaction not only by smiling, but by gestures derived from the pleasure of eating.

Thus Mr. Wedgwood[18] quotes Petherick that the negroes on the Upper Nile began a general rubbing of their bellies when he displayed his beads; and Leichhardt says that the Australians smacked and clacked their mouths at the sight of his horses and bullocks, and more especially of his kangaroo dogs.

The Greenlanders, “when they affirm anything with pleasure, suck down air with a certain sound;”[19] and this may be an imitation of the act of swallowing savoury food.

[18] A `Dictionary of English Etymology,’ 2nd edit.

1872, Introduction, p. xliv.

Laughter is suppressed by the firm contraction of the orbicular muscles of the mouth, which prevents the great zygomatic and other muscles from drawing the lips backwards and upwards.

The lower lip is also sometimes held by the teeth, and this gives a roguish expression to the face, as was observed with the blind and deaf Laura Bridgman.[20] The great zygomatic muscle is sometimes variable in its course, and I have seen a young woman in whom the depressores anguli oris were brought into strong action in suppressing a smile; but this by no means gave to her countenance a melancholy expression, owing to the brightness of her eyes.

Laughter is frequently employed in a forced manner to conceal or mask some other state of mind, even anger. We often see persons laughing in order to conceal their shame or shyness. When a person purses up his mouth, as if to prevent the possibility of a smile, though there is nothing to excite one, or nothing to prevent its free indulgence, an affected, solemn, or pedantic expression is given; but of such hybrid expressions nothing more need here be said. In the case of derision, a real or pretended smile or laugh is often blended with the expression proper to contempt, and this may pass into angry contempt or scorn.

In such cases the meaning of the laugh or smile is to show the offending person that he excites only amusement.

Love, tender feelings, &c.—Although the emotion of love, for instance that of a mother for her infant, is one of the strongest of which the mind is capable, it can hardly be said to have any proper or peculiar means of expression; and this is intelligible, as it has not habitually led to any special line of action.

No doubt, as affection is a pleasurable sensation, it generally causes a gentle smile and some brightening of the eyes.

A strong desire to touch the beloved person is commonly felt; and love is expressed by this means more plainly than by any other.[21]

Hence we long to clasp in our arms those whom we tenderly love.

We probably owe this desire to inherited habit, in association with the nursing and tending of our children, and with the mutual caresses of lovers.

[19] Crantz, quoted by Tylor, `Primitive Culture,’ 1871, Vol. i. P. 169.

[20] F. Lieber, `Smithsonian Contributions,’ 1851, vol. ii. p. 7.

With the lower animals we see the same principle of pleasure derived from contact in association with love.

Dogs and cats manifestly take pleasure in rubbing against their masters and mistresses, and in being rubbed or patted by them.

Many kinds of monkeys, as I am assured by the keepers in the Zoological Gardens, delight in fondling and being fondled by each other, and by persons to whom they are attached.

Mr. Bartlett has described to me the behaviour of two chimpanzees, rather older animals than those generally imported into this country, when they were first brought together.

They sat opposite, touching each other with their much protruded lips; and the one put his hand on the shoulder of the other.

They then mutually folded each other in their arms.

Afterwards they stood up, each with one arm on the shoulder of the other, lifted up their heads, opened their mouths, and yelled with delight.

[21] Mr. Bain remarks (`Mental and Moral Science,’ 1868, p.

239), “Tenderness is a pleasurable emotion, variously stimulated, whose effort is to draw human beings into mutual embrace.”

We Europeans are so accustomed to kissing as a mark of affection, that it might be thought to be innate in mankind; but this is not the case.

Steele was mistaken when he said “Nature was its author, and it began with the first courtship.” Jemmy Button, the Fuegian, told me that this practice was unknown in his land. It is equally unknown with the New Zealanders, Tahitians, Papuans, Australians, Somals of Africa, and the Esquimaux.” But it is so far innate or natural that it apparently depends on pleasure from close contact with a beloved person; and it is replaced in various parts of the world, by the rubbing of noses, as with the New Zealanders and Laplanders, by the rubbing or patting of the arms, breasts, or stomachs, or by one man striking his own face with the hands or feet of another. Perhaps the practice of blowing, as a mark of affection, on various parts of the body may depend on the same principle.[23]

The feelings which are called tender are difficult to analyse; they seem to be compounded of affection, joy, and especially of sympathy.

These feelings are in themselves of a pleasurable nature, excepting when pity is too deep, or horror is aroused, as in hearing of a tortured man or animal.

They are remarkable under our present point of view from so readily exciting the secretion of tears. Many a father and son have wept on meeting after a long separation, especially if the meeting has been unexpected.

No doubt extreme joy by itself tends to act on the lacrymal glands; but on such occasions as the foregoing vague thoughts of the grief which would have been felt had the father and son never met, will probably have passed through their minds; and grief naturally leads to the secretion of tears.

Thus on the return of Ulysses:—“Telemachus Rose, and clung weeping round his father’s breast.

There the pent grief rained o’er them, yearning thus.

Thus piteously they wailed in sore unrest, And on their weepings had gone down the day, But that at last Telemachus found words to say.”

Worsley’s Translation of the Odyssey, Book xvi. st. 27.

So again when Penelope at last recognized her husband:—

“Then from her eyelids the quick tears did start And she ran to him from her place, and threw Her arms about his neck, and a warm dew Of kisses poured upon him, and thus spake:”

Book xxiii. st. 27.

[22] Sir J. Lubbock, `Prehistoric Times,’ 2nd edit.

1869, p.