Sharon Lockyer

Dear Shit-Shovellers: Humour, Censure and the Discourse of Complaint

In this article we analyse letters of complaint about instances of comic discourse where the humour is regarded as overstepping the mark and causing offence. We are particularly interested in how this sense of offence is registered and how complainants articulate the offence for which they seek some form of redress. In pursuing this interest, we seek to bring together two distinctive modes of analysis: linguistic discourse analysis and symbolic cultural analysis. This is methodologically appropriate to the discourse involved because of the ways in which epistolary complaints use forms of linguistic framing for offsetting potential objections to what they want to say, and because of the highly figurative language which is employed in voicing the substantive complaint and the censure of the humour that is entailed in this. Our focus overall is on the underlying ambivalence involved in negotiations between ethical and comic discourse.

Dynamics of social class contempt in contemporary British television comedy

British television comedy has often ridiculed the complexities and characteristics of social class structures and identities. In recent years, poor white socially marginalised groups, now popularly referred to as “chavs”, have become a prevalent comedy target. One of the most popular and controversial television “comedy chavs” is Little Britains fictional teenage single mother, Vicky Pollard. This article examines the representation of Vicky Pollard in light of contemporary widespread abuse of the white working class. Highlighting the polysemic and ambivalent nature of Vicky Pollards representation, the article argues that whilst Little Britains characterisation of Vicky Pollard largely contributes to contemporary widespread demonisation of the working class, there are moments within Little Britain when a more sympathetic tone towards the poor working class may be read, and where chav identities are used to ridicule the pretensions, superficiality, and falsity of middle-class identities. The article concludes that television comedy has been, and continues to be, a significant vehicle through which serious concerns, anxieties, and questions about social class and class identities are discursively constructed and contested.

Heard the One About … Applying Mixed Methods in Humour Research?

A wealth of literature exists that calls for an end to the dichotomous relationship between quantitative and qualitative research and closer integration of research methodologies. Many social and behavioural sciences have reaped the benefits of mixing methods. However, few methodological papers examine the specific benefits a mixed‐method approach can have for humour researchers. This paper illustrates that humour studies are an appropriate vehicle through which to advance the debate on mixed methods. The paper discusses practical, theoretical and methodological benefits of using mixed methods, demonstrates how a mixed‐method approach was innovatively used during a research project into the ethics of humour, and highlights how combining methods provided a more comprehensive understanding of the ethics of humour than would be gleaned from a reliance on one or two methods.

Dynamics of partisan journalism: journalist-source relations in the context of a local newspaper's anti-paedophile housing agenda

This article explores the influence of partisanship on the framing of a local news agenda. Using a case study approach, it explores how one local newspaper in the East Midlands of England, the Nottingham-based Evening Post, reacted with hostility to leaked Home Office plans housing high-profile paedophiles in its locality (albeit inside the grounds of the local jail). Within weeks, though, the papers news frame had shifted from hostility toward the Home Office to a more sympathetic news frame reporting how local professionals would manage risks posed by paedophiles in Nottingham. In order to make sense of the local dynamic underpinning this changing news frame, the paper uses interview data to explore interactions between local journalists and key protagonists to understand the predictable and unpredictable factors that shaped the terms of their reporting. The article concludes by discussing the significance of partisan dynamics on the framing of a highly charged local and national paedophile-related issue.

The sickest television show ever: Paedogeddon and the British press

This paper explores the controversy caused by Paedogeddon, a one-off special of the Channel 4 series Brass Eye broadcast on July 26, 2001. Although the program sought to satirize inconsistencies in the way the British media treats and sensationalizes child sex offenders and their crimes (Clark, 2001), it offended many viewers and caused considerable controversy. More than 900 complaints were made to the Independent Television Commission, almost 250 complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Commission, and 2,000 complaints to Channel 4, “officially” making Paedogeddon the most complained-about television program in British television history at that time. This paper examines the nature of the objections to Paedogeddon as played out on the pages of the British national press and contributes to debates about morally acceptable television. Three themes are identified in the press objections to the mock-documentary: aesthetic arguments; moral and ethical implications; and consequences of ministerial intervention. The nature of these press objections served to prevent an engagement with Paedogeddons critique of the media. Further, the analysis illustrates how media discourses and scripts can fix and limit debates surrounding controversial television programming.

A TWO-PRONGED ATTACK?

This paper critically assesses the journalistic practices adopted by the British magazine Private Eye. Drawing on interview data with key Private Eye personnel, this article examines the Eyes favoured journalistic technique of combining satirical humour and investigative journalism, and assesses the strengths and limitations of combining these different journalistic practices in British post-war journalism and British democracy. It also examines the magazines contextual features which facilitate this combination of journalistic techniques. It is argued that this mix of satirical humour and investigative journalism is possible because of the distinctive manner in which Private Eye is organised editorially and politically. The paper concludes with a discussion of the future of combining satirical humour and investigative journalism as a journalistic technique.

The Ambiguities of Comic Impersonation

Impersonation is an ambiguous term. It can be viewed positively, as for instance when we say of a certain act that it is a good impersonation or when we regard a certain comedian as an effective impersonator. It can also be viewed negatively, so drawing on other meanings of the word. This happens when we use it in its associations with imposture, duplicity, fabrication and fraudulent practice. The word impersonator is then more or less equivalent to the old-fashioned, but still effective description of someone as a mountebank or quack. The description makes us think of falseness, trickery and manipulation. By implication it carries the accusation of cheating or being a cheat. The accused stands indicted of having usurped someone else’s role or identity for an underhand purpose. The negative connotations attached to the term do not usually apply to the profession of acting or comedy, for then impersonation generally has a positive sense, with the label of impersonator as comic entertainer being regarded as wholly legitimate, but it would certainly carry at least some of these connotations if we regard a particular comic impersonator as trading on a demeaning or derogatory stereotype, whether of gender, ethnicity or some other social category. The term would then be one of ethical criticism, involving a negative evaluation of the impersonation.

From comedy targets to comedy-makers: disability and comedy in live performance

The stand-up comedy landscape has been transformed in recent years with an increased number of disabled comedians performing. Using semi-structured interviews with disabled comedians, this article provides a thematic analysis of the material and ideological motives, intentions and lived experiences of disabled comedians. Two themes are discussed: comedy management and control; and affirming disability through comedy. These themes are characterised by complexity and contradictions. The article concludes that, although not a straightforward process, stand-up comedy enacted by disabled comedians is potentially a powerful tool through which hegemonic norms around disability can be challenged and renegotiated.

Analysing stand-up comedy

Comedy is a diverse, vibrant and multifaceted phenomenon. Its ubiquity is demonstrated through the different forms and styles it adopts and the variety of functions it fulfils. Scholars across a range of disciplines, from sociology and psychology to biology and English, have provided significant insights into this complex and pervasive form of expression that permeates everyday life and mediated discourses. Although a number of different disciplines take comedy as their subject matter, the opportunities afforded to the inter-disciplinary study of comedy are rarely, if ever, capitalized on. Comedy scholars seldom consult other scholars from outside their own specific fields. This became self-evident when the three of us informally discussed the lack of literature on ‘how’ to analyse stand-up comedy at the Comedy, Society and Popular Narrative conference at Liverpool John Moores University in November 2009. Each of us explained how we might go about analysing stand-up comedy from our own approaches – Sharon Lockyer from a sociocultural perspective, Brett Mills from a humour theory approach and Louise Peacock from a theatre and performance standpoint. It was through such discussions that the benefits of inter-disciplinary approaches to studying comedy were revealed. These

Editorial 'Acting Up: Gender and Television Comedy'

When two of us sent out the call for papers for a comedy symposium (also called ‘Acting Up: Gender and Television Comedy’) at Northumbria University in 2012 we were surprised and pleased to receive submissions that addressed both masculinity and femininity. When the call for papers went out for this special issue in 2013 a similar response ensued: over forty proposals came in, almost equally divided along gender lines, regarding male and female comedians, series, showrunners and writers/producers. Although academic work on gender today encompasses the examination of white, hegemonic heteromasculinity, the political work of feminist comedians, programme makers and academics continues to pack a powerful political punch. As Jo Brand notes in the interview with Sharon Lockyer in this current issue, there is recognition that women’s voices are missing from some aspects of television comedy and public statements have been made about raising the number of women on screen; however there has been little attempt to change the style of formats such as panel shows (Thorpe 2014). This collection of essays also registers the recent interest in feminism as the focus of comedy. Aspects of that revival are evident, in the United Kingdom, in the resurgence of popular stand-up which directly references feminist issues; most notably Bridget Christie’s triumph at the Edinburgh Festival in 2013 with ‘ AB ic For Her’. Christie was the third woman to win what is now the Foster’s Edinburgh Comedy Award in its 34-year history; Jenny Eclair won in 1995 and Laura Solon in 2005, so it is hardly full steam ahead. Stand-up has historically been a maledominated field (see Lockyer 2011), while television comedy – sitcom in particular – is often cited as a more feminine arena, if only as a domestic medium. Yet in British sitcom the central focus has often been a male figure or, more often, a dysfunctional couple, with the female partner taking the role of secondary character or sidekick who feeds the protagonist’s comedy by remaining stolidly rational (Gray 1994, 83). More remarkably, in comedy and television studies, it is only in the last decade that work has begun to emerge which examines masculinity in some detail. Andy Medhurst’s A National Joke (2007) was in the vanguard, although masculinity was not overtly part of that volume’s remit. The visible rise of female stars in American television comedy also raises questions about feminism and representation. The work of writers and performers such as Tina Fey, Amy Poehler and Lena Dunham has directly addressed debates