|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
From Politics to ComedyA Comparative Analysis of Affiliative Audience Responses
Pam Wells
University of York, United Kingdom
Peter Bull
University of York, United Kingdom
This study aims to identify key similarities and differences between the affiliative behaviors of audiences to political speakers and stand-up comedians. Four televised stand-up comedy routines were analyzed in terms of three dimensions: invitationality (whether the audience response is invited), rhetoricality (the use of rhetorical devices associated with audience applause), and synchrony (audience responses judged to commence either just before or immediately after the intended completion point of the speaker's utterance). Three different forms of asynchrony ("mismatches") were also identified, where the audience response was isolated, delayed, or interruptive. Stand-up comedians were found to invite similar proportions of affiliative audience responses to politicians, with comparable degrees of synchrony. However, they were less similar with regard to the rhetorical devices employed and the types of mismatch that occurred. Future investigations will focus on those aspects that are more specific to the genre of stand-up comedy.
Key Words: stand-up comedy • political speeches • laughter • rhetoric • speaker— audience interaction • public performance
References
- Atkinson, J.M. (1984a). Our masters' voices. London: Methuen.
- Atkinson, J.M. (1984b). Public speaking and audience responses: Some techniques for inviting applause. In J. M. Atkinson & J. C. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 370-409). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Atkinson, J.M. (1985). Refusing invited applause: Preliminary observations from a case study of charismatic oratory. In T. van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 161-181). London: Academic Press.
- Bull, P. (2000). Do audiences only applaud "claptrap " in political speeches? An analysis of invited and uninvited applause. Social Psychology Review, 2, 32-41.
- Bull, P. (2002). Communication under the microscope: The theory and practice of microanalysis. Hove, UK: Routledge.
- Bull, P. (2003). The microanalysis of political communication: Claptrap and ambiguity (Routledge international series in social psychology). London: Psychology Press.
- Bull, P. (2006). Invited and uninvited applause in political speeches. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 563-578.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Bull, P., & Noordhuizen, M. (2000). The mistiming of applause in political speeches. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 275-294.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Bull, P., & Wells, P. (2001, July). Quality of applause and the art of oratory. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Social Psychology Section of the British Psychological Society, University of Surrey, Surrey, UK.
- Bull, P., & Wells, P. (2002). By invitation only? An analysis of invited and uninvited applause. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 230-244.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Clayman, S.E. (1992). Caveat orator: Audience disaffiliation in the 1988 presidential debates. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 78, 33-60.[Web of Science]
- Clayman, S.E. (1993). Booing: The anatomy of a disaffiliative response. American Sociological Review, 58, 110-130.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Goffman, E. (1979). Footing. Semiotica, 25, 1-25.
- Greatbatch, D., & Clark, T. (2005). Management speak: Why we listen to what management gurus tell us. London: Routledge.
- Heritage, J., & Greatbatch, D. (1986). Generating applause: A study of rhetoric and response at party political conferences. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 110-157.[CrossRef]
- Limon, J.K. (2001). Spritzing, skirting: Standup talk strategies. In S. I. Salamensky (Ed.), Talk, talk, talk: The cultural life of everyday conversation (pp. 105-118). New York: Routledge.
- Llewellyn, N. (2005). Audience participation in political discourse: A study of public meetings. Sociology, 39, 697-716.[Abstract]
- McIlvenny, P. (1996a). Heckling in Hyde Park: Verbal audience participation in popular public discourse. Language in Society, 25, 27-60.[Web of Science]
- McIlvenny, P. (1996b). Popular public discourse at Speakers' Corner: Negotiating cultural identities in interaction. Discourse and Society, 7, 7-37.[CrossRef]
- Psathas, G. (1995). Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Rutter, J. (1997). Stand-up as interaction: Performance and audience in comedy venues. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
- Rutter, J. (2000). The stand-up introduction sequence: Comparing comedy comperes. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 463-483.[CrossRef]
- Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation ( G. Jefferson, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
- Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Schegloff, E.A. (1993). Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 99-128.[CrossRef]
- Stiff, J.B., & Morgan, P.A. (2002). Persuasive communication. New York: Guilford.
- Tsang, W.K., & Wong, M. (2004). Constructing a shared "Hong Kong identity " in comic discourses. Discourse and Society, 15, 767-785.[CrossRef]
- van Dijk, T.A. (1997). Discourse as structure and process. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (Vol. 1). London: Sage.
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 26, No. 4,
321-342 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X07306978
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
|
|
