As I see it, it's both, comedy and tragedy, and at the same time neither of them. I know it sounds like a cheap cop out, but still -- from the perspective of "intelligent creature" it's a horrific tragedy, from the perspective of a detached observer it's a hysteric comedy, but from the perspective of the whole it does not matter because all perspectives are just interpretations that depend on particular point of view. The way I put it certainly implies also a point of view of the whole, but that's just insufficiency of language as the whole has no particular perspective as such. One may say it's indifference or impartiality, but that only muddles the issue even more. The best way to describe it would be that it's like holding the paradox floating in the air without actually trying to solve or understand it -- just seeing it for what it is. I'm firmly convinced that the underlying issues here are fear of death and identification with body-mind. Thus the average person prefers the "exoteric delusions", a mystic twists herself into a pretzel to keep at least a semblance of her form going on indefinitely, and "modern atheist" is simply at loss as he sees that neither exoteric nor esoteric approach correlates with reality but still associates his "I" with a particular and unique (trans-)human form, hence he sees the existence as absurd, cruel, etc. I'd also like to clarify one aspect -- when I said that "there's no particular meaning or motivation behind...child's play", I don't mean it in a fatalistic "let-the-flow-do-what-it-will" way. More in the sense that there's no particular premeditated purpose, similarly as when one eats when the hunger kicks in. With all that being said, and not to overcomplicate things, what "simply follows" is peace and satisfaction.