Jessica Milner Davis

Satire and its constraints: Case studies from Australia, Japan, and the People’s Republic of China

Abstract Satire’s critical bite exposes it more often than other forms of humor to various kinds of restraint or control. While most studies of satire focus on its formal censorship (by editorial, legal or political decision), others acknowledge the additional role of internalized constraints (such as personal humor tastes and cultural conventions) that influence satirists in their creative work (self-censorship). This paper argues that constraints on satire (and humor generally) are not limited to those summed up as censorship and self-censorship and that examining reactions that occur after the initial success of a published satire helps to identify a wider range applying to satire and humor in different cultures and times. Focusing on reception rather than creation, therefore, this paper looks at specific cases of successfully published satire that subsequently stirred expressions of public offence in contemporary Australia, Japan, and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). A distinction is drawn between reactions stemming from personal and cultural constraints and opposition shaped by economic and politico-legal forces and interactions between the two are also considered. Moderators of the backlash effect also include the medium of communication and some stylistic features of satire.

Justices on Stage: Comic Tradition in the European Theatre

The figure of the judge is one of the oldest stock characters found in European comedy. Many Graeco-Roman comedies rely on nonsensical legal processes to resolve their comic conflicts and the corrupt judge is a characteristic trope in Byzantine satire. The late Middle Ages saw the emergence of the comic legal scholar, whether over- or under-trained or perhaps simply flawed by human nature. In all these manifestations, the judge or magistrate exercising judicial functions, supposedly a figure of respect, becomes the butt of mockery and laughter. This chapter traces the line of descent of this comic judicial figure, starting with the medieval legal scholars of Bologna’s university, famous for their abstruse learning and hairsplitting disputations, and passing through the commedia dell’arte mask of Il Dottore (The Doctor of Laws) and Renaissance comedy to contemporary theatre, opera, film and television. Selected comic judicial figures are discussed to illustrate the range of comic interpretations. Although in real life the courtroom is more often marked by tedium and monotony than high drama, it is nevertheless an essentially theatrical arena containing contestants and an authoritative figure or figures presiding as adjudicator. The comic tradition associated with the judge draws its energy from the paradox of the all-too-human judge to whom this decisive power is attributed. Both this form of legal comedy and the more serious genre of “courtroom drama” turn on a resilient and enduring nexus between the stage and the law.

Thinking About Judges, Judging and Humour: The Intersection of Opposites

Judges and humour are rarely thought of together; however, humour and the judiciary intersect in a wide variety of ways, as the contributions to this book demonstrate. Judges individually and collectively may be the subject or target of humour; decisions may have to determine questions of humour and its effect(s); and judges may create and use humour themselves, often as a way of managing their work, especially in court, but also in the interface between the judicial role and personal life. Courts and their participants, both lay and professional, often feature in comedies and satires that present judicial or legal formalities and customs as entertainment. This chapter introduces the interdisciplinary scholarship on the concept of humour and its application in literary, fictional and workplace contexts, including the courts. The book as a whole examines humour relating to the judiciary, legal processes, cases and legal systems from a range of countries and over time in order to illuminate the many ways that humour and the judiciary intersect.

The Satirist, the Larrikin and the Politician: An Australian Perspective on Satire and Politics

This chapter introduces the book and discusses satire as a genre and the practice of the satirical mode. It outlines how the relationship between satire and politics in various political systems is explored in the subsequent chapters and summarises their findings to give an overview of the book. Arguing that Australasian (Australian and New Zealand) cultures of using humour provide useful insights into how political satire operates, the chapter describes what characterises the Australian use of humour and the origins and etymology of the term “larrikin”. In contrast to the serious-minded nature of the British John Bull image or the American Uncle Sam, Australians have come to use the irreverent image of the larrikin as a shorthand to depict their national identity. The authors trace how this image has evolved over time, especially as mediated through Australia’s cartooning history, and why cartoonists have played so important a role in national self-definition. A number of popular and long-lived cartoon characters have incorporated the larrikin over the years and, taken up by successful writers, playwrights and comedians, the larrikin has provided a useful image for politicians to adopt when appealing for the popular vote. As several cases show, cartoonists can turn the image back against the nation’s leaders when they expose themselves through hubris. The larrikin’s current status in Australia’s multi-cultural and diverse society is uncertain, although its connection with nationalist populism still remains.