Perksl17856.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright by Lisa Glebatis Perks 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Lisa Glebatis Perks certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: A Sketch Comedy of Errors: Chappelle’s Show, Stereotypes, and Viewers Committee: Barry Brummett, Supervisor Dana L. Cloud Joshua Gunn Matthew McGlone America Rodriguez A Sketch Comedy of Errors: Chappelle’s Show, Stereotypes, and Viewers by Lisa Glebatis Perks, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May, 2008 Acknowledgements Throughout the process of creating this dissertation, I drew heavily on the guidance, friendship, and love of many people. Although writing can be an isolating enterprise, it is best accomplished with a web of support. I have the 4 Ps to thank. First, I would like to thank the Pioneers from whom I’ve learned so much about academia and life. Jaime, Amy, and Kevin, I am honored to follow in your footsteps and look forward to joining the ranks of the Wizard’s Apprentices. Jennifer, you have been a great friend and fountain of knowledge. You always seem to know when cookies and conversation are needed. Second, I would like to thank the Pantheon. Every committee member has had a strong impact on my life and work. Dr. Rodriguez, I am grateful for your fresh perspective and encouragement. Dr. McGlone, you have expanded my education immensely and I thank you for guiding me through foreign scholarly lands. Josh, you are a wonderful mentor and community builder. Your love for the discipline is contagious. Dana, you have helped me so much as a scholar that I feel like an honorary advisee. The time and care you dedicate to others is inspirational. Barry, you spoiled me with your helpfulness. I greatly admire your dedication, patience, and creativity. Third, I must thank my stable full of Peers. Amanda, this has been a tag team effort and I have you to thank for remaining on track with my writing. I hope that we can iv still have camp in the years to come. Nicole, you are the most unique mix of professionalism and grace, with a big scoop of goofy. I greatly appreciate your humor and helpfulness. Soo-Hye, your honesty and positive outlook have been incredibly refreshing throughout the graduate school process. Finally, and most importantly, I need to thank my People. Mom and dad, your unflagging encouragement has meant the world to me. I am thankful to feel so loved by you and by my wonderful newer family, the Perks. Josh, you always keep me grounded and help me think about what really matters in life. Thank you for all the sacrifices you have made for me and for us. v A Sketch Comedy of Errors: Chappelle’s Show, Stereotypes, and Viewers Publication No._____________ Lisa Glebatis Perks, PhD The University of Texas at Austin, 2008 Supervisor: Barry Brummett Celebrities such as Halle Berry, Dave Chappelle, Kathy Griffin, and Don Imus have recently evoked public ire for making what some people have seen as tasteless jokes. Their notorious humorous communication shares two notable qualities: the discourse was mass mediated and the “jokes” were all premised on stereotypes. This two- part dissertation addresses the complicated subject of understanding the meanings viewers co-create with humorous mediated communication that is premised on racial stereotypes. I focus on Chappelle’s Show as my primary text of analysis, but the findings here have applicability to the wider genre of humorous mediated communication that is premised on stereotypes. In the first part of the dissertation I survey humor theory and humor criticism, noting weaknesses in the ways that communication scholars have previously studied humorous mediated texts. I then suggest that humor scholarship can be improved through two principal methods: 1. humor scholars of various academic disciplines need to use a vi unified set of terms that refer to the humor stimulus, humor motivation, and the possible effects of the humor, and 2. critics of humorous mediated texts need to approach them as a unique genre, with a critical lens that accounts for the polysemy inherent in many humorous texts. In the next part of the dissertation, I model a multi-methodological approach to mining the mélange of meanings in Chappelle’s Show. My in-depth case study of racial stereotype-based humor in Chappelle’s Show incorporates textual analysis of a dozen sketches, qualitative analysis of viewer opinions about the show, and a quantitative analysis of viewing behaviors as well as the relationship between viewing the show and prejudice. This multi-methodological approach helps better mine the polysemic meanings of the text because it explores the spectrum of the communication model from stimulus to receiver. I conclude that Chappelle’s Show can both encourage and reduce prejudice. While inconclusive conclusions are an anomaly in media criticism, I advocate the pursuit of such conclusions in humor criticism. Stereotype-based mediated comedic texts demand an exploration of their multiple meanings, not a definitive statement about how they should be interpreted or how they affect an audience. vii Table of Contents List of Tables ...........................................................................................................x INTRODUCTION 1 Chappelle’s Show and Comedy Controversies ...............................................2 Chappelle’s Show: Political Economy ............................................................6 Research Questions .........................................................................................9 Method Informed by Theory .........................................................................11 Chapter Preview ............................................................................................25 PART I: HUMOR THEORY AND CRITICISM 31 Chapter 2: The Roots of Humor Theory ................................................................31 Framework: Motivational Theories ..............................................................32 Theory Dialoguing: Speaking the Same Language ......................................36 Superiority Theory ........................................................................................52 Conclusions ...................................................................................................61 Chapter 3: A Survey of Humor Criticism ...............................................................65 Cloudy Theoretical Lenses: Incongruity and Superiority .............................68 Audience Conjectures and Hypothetical Interpretive Communities ............74 (Largely) Ambivalent Collective Findings ...................................................80 Conclusions ...................................................................................................85 PART II: UNDERSTANDING STEREOTYPE-BASED HUMOR 88 Chapter 4: Rhetorical Criticism of Chappelle’s Show ...........................................88 Decoding Race-Based Humor .......................................................................89 Analysis.........................................................................................................97 Conclusions .................................................................................................132 viii Chapter 5: Qualitative Analysis of Chappelle’s Show Viewer ............................137 Focus Groups .......................................................................................................137 Method ........................................................................................................140 Analysis.......................................................................................................146 Conclusions .................................................................................................179 Chapter 6: Statistical Measures of Viewer Characteristics and the Relationship Between Chappelle’s Show Viewing and Prejudice ...................................184 Effects of Exposure to Stereotypes and Stereotypical Humor ....................187 Study 1 ........................................................................................................193 Study 2 ........................................................................................................202 CONCLUSION 212 Chapter 7 ..............................................................................................................212 Theories and Methods for Understanding Humor ......................................214 Statistical Analysis of Chappelle’s Show ...................................................224 Implications: Methodological .....................................................................226 Implications: Stereotypical Humorous Mediated Communication .............229 WORKS CITED 234 VITA 247 ix List of Tables Three Dimensions of Humor Based on Martin’s Classifications ..........................32 Four Treatment Conditions in Study 1 .................................................................195 Study 1 Results of t Test Comparison of Mean Aggregate Attitude Measures (Q10 + Q11). ...............................................................................................198 Study 1 Mean of Aggregate Scores Q10 + Q11 Per Condition ...........................199 Study 1 Mean Scores for Q10 ..............................................................................200