Dramas - Women in Comedy Essay

The Changing Role of Women in Comedy.

How has comedy between 1950 to 2000 been used by female performing artists to foreground the subjugation and objectification of adult females in society? What impact has this had on the modern-day female comic of today?

Introduction & A ; Overview

Chapter One: A Sense of the Times

• fiftiess
• sixtiess
• 1970s-1980s

Chapter Two: Women’s ‘Sense’ of Humour

Chapter Three: Issues in Stand-up Comedy

• Bing a Woman
• Traditional Gender Expectations
• Aggressiveness
• Sex and Femininity
• Issues of Power and Control
• Manners of Stand-up Comedy
• Self-Deprecation in Women’s Humour
• Self-deprecation in the work of Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers
• The domestic goddess

Decision: The 1990s and Beyond: The Future of Women in Stand-up Comedy

Reference List

Introduction

Comedy is a signifier of look which stretches and sometimes breaks boundaries. It crosses all sorts of boundaries, including those of gender. It can be hazardous because it frequently ridicules societal and moral conventions in a manner that challenges and threatens accepted norms, endangering the position quo. This is peculiarly true of women’s comedy.

This paper will analyze the manner that comedy has been used by female performing artists during the period from 1950 to 2000, concentrating on the subjects of subjugation and objectification of adult females in society. It will besides analyse the ways in which the experiences of these five decennaries have affected modern-day female cartoon strips.

Chapter One gives a general overview of each decennary, to explicate the political and societal climes of that clip as a model for analyzing the alterations in women’s functions. Included will be illustrations of different adult females cartoon strips whose experiences best represent selected facets of that clip frame.

This will be followed by an analysis of what people mean when they talk of a ‘sense of humour’ – what, precisely,isa sense of temper? Do adult females hold a different sense of temper than work forces? Most of the literature about adult females cartoon strips touches on this inquiry on some degree ; some of the literature goes into a great trade of deepness. This is often done to react to the averment that has been made, repeatedly over the old ages, that adult females ‘don’t have a sense of humour’ . This statement has been made most often by work forces. However, this same averment has at times been leveled ( frequently in an accusative mode ) by adult females toward other adult females.

Chapter One: A Sense of the Times

A. The Decade of the fiftiess

The decennary of the 1950s was a clip of great alteration. Britain was come ining a period of increased richness and freedom, and many of the old societal and cultural constructions began to be challenged, peculiarly by the immature. In Hollywood, every bit good as throughout the United States and North America, post-war sentiment lingered on and mingled with the confusion that accompanies times of great alteration.

In some topographic points, such as Britain, this convulsion was exemplified by a inclination to draw off from formal faith. In the United States, this period was an epoch of economic growing assorted with a sense of preservation. At the same clip, there seemed to be a professed belief in the old values ; nevertheless, this belief was tinged with uncertainty. Harmonizing to one bookman, the professed belief was ‘mixed with a sense of malaise that possibly the old values no longer held all the answers’ ( Sova, 1998, 106 ) .

Harmonizing to critics Linda Martin and Kerry Segrave, the portraiture of adult females during the 1950s was by and large considered to be negative. Women histrions and performing artists were largely typecast as ‘dumb, ugly man-chasers or some image thereof’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 203 ) .

Some noteworthy performing artists of comedy of this period include Judy Holliday, Lucille Ball, Phyllis Diller, and Joan Rivers. Blond comedian Judy Holliday, who had been looking in movies every bit early as the 1940s, continued to so make in the fiftiess. She even managed to go a movie comedy star in the 1950s, a effort that even Lucille Ball did non pull off. Sova asserts that Holliday ‘went for the laughs in an guiltless manner’ , something which worked good for her in the 1950s, but which did non work for Ball either so or subsequently ( Sova, 1998, 120–121 ) .

Holliday and Ball were similar in that they both played both consecutive play, and so switched over subsequently on to a comedic format. Ball, nevertheless, was non a epic presence on the Ag screen, and she failed to pull the sort of involvement that Holliday did. Hence, she ne’er reached stardom on a cinematic degree. Still, Ball is possibly a more familiar name, even to this twenty-four hours. She went on to revolutionise telecasting with her comedy spouse and hubby Desi Arnaz. In so making, it may be said that Lucille Ball set the criterion for what was so a reasonably new genre, the situational comedy.

Phyllis Diller is another comic who became known during this period, and has remained known to this twenty-four hours. ‘Diller transcended “comediennes” of the twenty-four hours, if non femaleness itself, by denoting her reaching in the mid-1950s in the most bizarre mode conceivable, ’ asserts a coeval of hers. He goes on to depict her entryway onto the phase: ‘She landed onstage like a flightless black-footed albatross bird – exerting her coffin nail holder, piercing the nightclub air with her frenzied squawk, all beak and beadlike poulet eyes, and dressed in a intentionally brassy getup’ ( Nachman, 2003, 216 ) .

Susan Horowitz points out that Diller came out of the 1950s, ‘a period which stressed and overdone sex–role differences’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 50 ) . In add-on, it is important to observe that at the clip Diller entered the profession of comedy – in the mid 1950s – female cartoon strips were practically non-existent. Commenting on her calling as a whole, Horowitz asserts that ‘both Diller’s capable affair – sex entreaty and domestic competency – and the mode in which she handles it – self-deprecation – are Diller’s comedic return on the stereotyped 1950’s woman’ ( Horowitz, 1987, 62 ) .

This decennary besides ushered in Joan Rivers, who is described by a co-worker as geting upon the scene ‘with forked lingua and sharpened talons. . . [ she ] spot and clawed her manner to comic success and has clung to it for beloved life’ ( Nachman, 2003, 592 ) . Rivers’ comedic attack has been described as ‘a jar of contrasts’ : her rapid-fire mode of speaking, combined with her broad fluctuation of subjects, kept her audience members on their toes.

Her comedic manner is frequently attributed to background: she drifted between societal categories, ne’er experiencing genuinely comfy in any one class. Horowitz has described her as ‘both an insider and an foreigner, classy and declasse – the private school pupil – whose household can non pay the measures ; the affluent famous person – whose act mocks the elite ; the elegant lady – who talks about flatuss and pooping’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 93 ) .

Yet non even the most hideous comedy act could vie with telecasting. The growing of this television’s popularity had a strong impact on every facet of society. Television had really rapidly go more popular than wireless, replacing it as the preferable signifier of amusement in the place. In add-on, more and more people began to hold telecasting sets in their places.
The proliferation of telecasting brought with it a alteration in manner. Martin and Segrave explain that ‘where wireless relied on adult females mangling the linguistic communication, telecasting, in maintaining with its ocular nature, relied more on physical sight jokes to convey “dumbness”’ . Therefore, this period hallmarked the combination of the dumb, blonde, buxom stereotype. At least on telecasting, as opposed to radio, adult females were able to joint clearly ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 204 ) .

B. The sixtiess

The motion off from the conservative 1950ss began and continued throughout the disruptive 60s in America. Revolutionary ways of believing spread quickly, and existent alteration transformed the cultural cloth of American life. During this decennary, ingestion continued in Britain, but had become less affiliated with useful demands, and more to make with position and comfort.
For adult females cartoon strips, nevertheless, the first half of the 1960s was one of the least productive in their history. Although in Hollywood the movie industry was opening up more for adult females, the field of amusing stand-up seemed to be at a standstill. Martin and Segrave do indicate out that there was at least one positive image in American wit to welcome the new decennary. This one exclusion was Elaine May.

Elaine May was an illustration, and she represented what adult females could carry through when given a just and equal chance. May, harmonizing to Martin and Segrave, ‘provided a sample of what was to follow as more and more female cartoon strips cast off the old images and stereotypes and broadened and extended their topographic point in the field of humor’ ( 1986, 206 ) .
What was notable about May’s public presentation is that she did non seek to look ugly, the manner so many adult females cartoon strips of this period seemed to make. In add-on, she did non trust on self-deprecation the manner other female cartoon strips did. She and Nichols shared an equal partnership – another rare thing at this clip. Normally the adult female would play a foil to showcase the other, male, portion of the couple.

Among the cartoon strips who started to go know during this clip, one was Carol Burnett. Harmonizing to Martin and Segrave, Burnett ‘represented a performing artist who straddled the line between independency and submissiveness’ ( 1986, 308 ) . This was no easy undertaking, given the hostile clime the universe of comedy offered adult females. Horowitz points out that Burnett’s manner at this clip was marked by self-deprecation: ‘Burnett’s self-deprecating wit was typical of comediennes of the late fiftiess and early 1960s, and it served to soften audience opposition to the impression of an assertively amusing woman’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 69 ) .

Dave Tebert, the adult male who ran the endowment section at NBC in the early 1960s, asserted that adult females were given the same chances as work forces, but that ‘they were non aggressive plenty or forceful plenty to cover with the rummies and badgerers frequently found in the audience’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 18 ) .In add-on,Bob Shanks, the endowment coordinator for thePaarshow, made an effort to happen female cartoon strips. Over a three-year period, nevertheless, he interviewed 500 adult females ; merely 20 of them were considered good plenty to go through. He commented that ‘the humor was missing’ or that the adult females lacked ‘quickness of response’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 19 ) .

Comedy was public presentation originating from accomplishment and humor, and public presentation was a male function. Funny misss would non be asked out on dates’ assert Martin and Segrave ( 1986, 19 ) . Bing popular in school, holding a day of the month to the prom, being seen as attractive and compliant – these qualities were valued in immature adult females and misss. Bing cagey and witty – cardinal qualities for a amusing, were non valued. There, most adult females of the clip felt that given a pick, comedy should be submerged.

When work forces make clever gags at women’s disbursal, they may be considered great, insightful cartoon strips, assert Martin and Segrave. On the other manus, adult females who do the same at the disbursal of work forces may be labeled such derogatory footings as ‘ball-busters or man-haters’ . In fact, ‘women are non even safe jabing merriment at other adult females. They are considered anti-female or catty’ mentioning Joan Rivers as an illustration of this ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 20 ) .

C. 1970s–1980s

The 1970s was a clip of gradual alteration. Harmonizing to some, ‘the decennary of the 1970s was one of slow but steady growing in the figure of adult females come ining or reentering aspects of the movie industry that had been closed to them for decades’ ( Sova, 1998, 153 ) .

Laugh-Inhadhit the airwaves at the terminal of the sixtiess, and one time it was steadfastly entrenched, it showcased a assortment of adult females cartoon strips. In fact, it was the first clip that so many comics had so much exposure since the yearss of music hall.Laugh-inhelped a figure of cartoon strips to acquire exposure and start callings. Among these were Goldie Hawn, Ruth Buzzi, JoAnne Worley, Lily Tomlin.

Lily Tomlin brought some alone accomplishments to the industry through her intelligence and creativeness. She did this through the creative activity of new amusing characters. In add-on, she was able to execute several well-received phase concerts. Her movie calling has been less successful ; this may be partially due to the hapless choice of functions she has been given.

The beginning of the Women’s Movement in America in the late sixtiess and early 1970s of class had an consequence on adult females in comedy throughout the United States and Britain. Comedians who began to look during this clip include Bette Midler, Sandra Bernhard, Madeleine Kahn, and Marilyn Sokol.Laugh-Incontinued to expose adult females cartoon strips. In add-on, shows like Shows likeSaturday Night LiveandSCTVhelped get down the callings of such comics as Gilda Radner and Andrea Martin.

The 1980s did non see much betterment. ‘Comediennes with anything to state were being labeled “hostile” or “too masculine” ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 312 ) .

The most phenomenal rise, nevertheless, was the unprecedented figure of adult females who had begun to look in comedy nines as stand-up cartoon strips. These new adult females cartoon strips dealt with women’s issues, such as manner, menses, weight, hygiene, being individual, sex and relationships. These subjects were frequently portion of the self-deprecating wit that continued to tag women’s wit through the balance of the century.

During this clip, it should be noted that really few minority adult females appeared in this profession. The great exclusion was Moms Mabley, who managed to get the better of exceeding obstructions in deriving credence in the universe of chiefly white male entertainers.

Chapter 2

Women’s ‘Sense’ of Humour

In their 1986 volumeWomans in Comedy,Linda Martin and Kerry Segrave assert that female cartoon strips are a rare trade good. The account for this, they assert, lies in the normally held belief that ‘women are merely non amusing… they don’t laugh at gags, nor do they make them’ .

To back up their averment, Martin and Segrave describe a magazine article written in 1951. A author named Robert Allen wrote an article about adult females and wit forMaclean’s.Allen bemoaned the fact that adult females ne’er seemed to cognize when to express joy at a gag, or they frequently failed to express joy at all. He claimed he had experimented at place, and that he used different sorts and different manners of wit, but that his ‘subjects’ ne’er seemed to acquire the gags. To be just, he said he tested people outside his ain place, including a ‘variety’ of other females. Still, he got the same consequences with that group.

After all this, he stated that the lone decision he could pull was that adult females have no sense of wit ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 16-17 ) .

It is interesting to observe that it ne’er occurred to Allen that he might be the 1 who was non ‘getting it’ . It besides interesting to observe that Allen’s article was considered of import plenty to finally do it intoReader’s Digestas a condensed piece – but this did non go on until 13 old ages subsequently. Sing the fact that mostReader’s Digestcondensed articles appear within months of the original publication, a lag clip of 13 old ages is instead singular. As Martin and Segrave suggest, ‘this illustrated possibly the eternity of the thought and the demand to show it once more in a different decennary, to a new audience merely at a period when the image of the female comedian was get downing to be liberated’ ( 1986, 17 ) .

The humourist James Thurber, composing contemporaneously with Allen, wrote a piece in which he addressed an anon. Miss G.H. , who had sent him some unasked comedy stuff. He responded to her stuff by proposing that she ‘become a bacteriologist, or a Red-Cross nurse, or a Wave, like all the other girls’ .

The most vituperative unfavorable judgment at the clip, nevertheless, came from a adult female. Sarel Eimerl wrote in a November 1962 issue ofMademoisellethat ‘a adult female who truly makes one laugh is about as easy to happen as a pauper taking his Sunday brunch in the Edwardian Room’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 17 ) .

It appears that in the 1950s and beyond, adult females were thought – largely by work forces, but besides some adult females – to be missing a sense of wit. That belief has non been wholly eradicated to this twenty-four hours. In her essay ‘Gender and Humour’ , Lizbeth Goodman analyzes the following gag from Banks and Swift’s 1987 book on comedy:
Question: How many women’s rightists does it take to sleep together in a light bulb?
Answer: That’s non amusing.

Goodman goes on to explicate that although the thought of the gag is simple, that there is a great trade more traveling on. This gag is, in fact, ‘an illustration of an accessible and non-valorized signifier of societal review, which functions as a mirror of the values of the dominant culture’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 287 ) .

It is besides interesting to observe that this gag is familiar to us. It has been repeated any figure of times in recent old ages, each clip with some item changed. Often the alteration is in the pick of mark. Different minority groups may be featured as the mark, depending on the context of the relation. Therefore, the Teller of the gag is implicitly saying that adult females, excessively, are a ‘minority’ . Harmonizing to Goodman, ‘that adult females are singled out as a “minority” group, despite the bulk of adult females in society, is declarative of the male prejudice of society and its values’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 288 ) . Horowitz points out that, like other groups that have suffered favoritism, adult females are classified as a minority group by affirmatory action plans ; nevertheless, ‘unlike cultural minorities, adult females are a numerical majority’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 8 ) .

Goodman besides points out that the fact that adult females are so often targeted in gags in western civilization is important in itself: ‘that adult females are so frequently the butt of gags in western civilization says a great trade about that culture’ . It reveals, for illustration, that the jokesters are normally work forces. It besides reveals that the hearers are profoundly immersed in the patriarchal civilization. In fact, Goodman takes this a measure farther. She points out that the hearers are steeped in the patriarchal civilization ‘to the extent that certain types of responses are “gendered” : for case, loud laughter as opposed to hush hand-over-the-mouth giggles’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 288 ) .

Another manner to analyse this gag, Goodman suggests, is to take into consideration the fact that the value of the gag does non lie entirely within the gag itself. Rather, its value depends on other factors. One of these factors is the context of the relation ; the other is the reading of the listener. She cites Adrienne Rich’s 1979 reinterpretation of the gag, explicating that making so ‘requires an consciousness of the context of the joke’s production and an ability to decontextualize the gag mentally’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 288 ) .

By making this, the gag can be interpreted in such a manner that it is non an abuse to adult females, or an abuse to feminism. Alternatively, it becomes a review of the simplistic impressions that are normally held about adult females in society – and particularly about adult females who are women’s rightists.

This ultimately brings us to the rhetorical inquiry about adult females and temper:makeadult females have a sense of temper? Linda Naranjo-Huebl replies this in the affirmative. She besides includes an account of how this wit is different. ‘One of the common findings of all the gender and wit surveies is that there does in fact exist something that can be identified as adult females ‘s humor’ , she asserts. She so explains that it is a ‘distinct’ signifier of wit, ‘characteristic of and originating from adult females ‘s experience that serves distinguishable communicative maps associated with that experience’ ( Naranjo-Huebl, 2005, web ) .

Linda Naranjo-Huebl asserts that ‘the stereotype of the humorless female has pig-headedly persisted, reinforced by surveies reasoning that adult females use wit less frequently than men’ . She puts forth three theories to explicate why this stereotype has persisted for so long.

The first account has to make with women’s usage of linguistic communication. Womans are by and large brought up to be polite, and the linguistic communication of temper is frequently impolite. In add-on, humor tends to be aggressive, and adult females have traditionally been discouraged from showing any kind of unfastened aggression.

The 2nd account for the continuance of this stereotype is that ‘much of adult females ‘s wit has been either censored or misinterpreted’ ( Naranjo-Hueblo, web ) . That is to state, adult females do hold a sense of temper, but it has mostly gone unrecognised – a state of affairs which is still being rectified today.

Not merely have illustrations of women’s temper been censored and misinterpreted, but besides the methodological analysis of the surveies has often been flawed. The methods used, chiefly those created by work forces, tend to prefer male signifiers of wit. The consequences so falsely ‘prove’ that adult females lack a sense of temper.

Naranjo-Hueblo explains one such survey, in which 250 undergraduate concern pupils from a major university were asked to reply inquiries sing a conjectural state of affairs. The state of affairs consisted of the pupils feigning that they were with a co-worker ; the co-worker is transporting a briefcase which all of a sudden becomes unfastened, ensuing in documents winging all over the topographic point.
The pupils are so asked how they would react: would they disregard the episode and maintain on walking? Would they help the co-worker by halting to assist pick up the documents? Or would they badger the co-worker or in some other manner express temper? Each pupil was allowed to take merely one response.

As one might anticipate, the bulk of work forces chose to react with temper, while the bulk of adult females chose to assist. This Godheads of the survey assumed that one couldn’t be helpful and humourous at the same clip. Furthermore, it led them to reason that adult females did non hold every bit great a sense of temper as work forces. Naranjo-Hueblo points out the picks do non include the possibility that adult females may be humourous about the state of affairs as they are helping their co-worker. Furthermore, ‘another job with the survey is that it posits “ wit ” as a one-line epigram in a slapstick state of affairs, which is non adult females ‘s preferable signifier of wit ( Naranjo-Huebl, web ) .

The 3rd ground adult females have been found to miss a sense of temper is that temper has mostly been defined by work forces. Womans find humour in different beginnings,
frequently preferring word gags and wordplaies every bit good as narratives, whereas work forces prefer much more gibelike signifiers of temper. ‘It has ever been more acceptable for masculine manners to act upon feminine 1s, instead than frailty versa. . . The powerless return on the furnishings of the powerful’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 9 ) .

Chapter Three: Issues in Stand-up Comedy

• Bing a adult female
• Traditional gender outlooks
• Aggressiveness
• Sex and Femininity
• Power and Control Issues
• Manners of Stand-up Comedy
• Self-Deprecation in Women’s Humour
• Self-deprecation in the work of Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers
• The domestic goddess

A. Bing a Woman

As stated earlier, comedy is a signifier of look which stretches and sometimes breaks boundaries. This is really true in the instance of stand-up comedy. Stand-up comedy ridicules the norms of society. It challenges convention, and it inquiries moral positions.

in peculiar has a tradition of roasting moral, societal, and political conventions. The stand-up comic is often considered as bing on the peripheries of mainstream society.
For any stand-up comic, male or female, a figure of factors come into drama when they are in forepart of an audience. What race are they? What is their cultural background? What is their sexual orientation, or what does it look to be? Are they disabled, and is that uncomfortable for the audience member? When you add gender into the mix, it becomes that much more unpredictable. The reaction the audience gives to a female stand-up is much different to the 1 they would give to her male opposite number. The audience seems to anticipate a adult male to be amusing. When confronted with a female stand-up, they suspend judgement until she can turn out that she is amusing.

B. Traditional Gender Expectations

Traditional gender outlooks are besides a really of import issue for adult females cartoon strips. Conventional definitions of ‘lady-like’ behaviour are an obstruction. Conventional definitions of what it means to be ‘feminine’ or to move ‘lady-like’ are incongruent with the often-inappropriate behaviour of adult females in comedy. This is peculiarly true of such signifiers of comedy as stand-up modus operandis. In stand-up comedy, adult females cartoon strips can non be inactive and demure on phase, for this behaviour will non arouse laughter. Alternatively, they must be aggressive, sometimes loud, and often un-ladylike. They must wholly interrupt with recognized societal conventions.

Bucking these conventions is hard for a figure of grounds, non the least of which is economic net income. Gender outlooks are reinforced, particularly by mainstream corporate media, because they are tied into money. The objectification of adult females ‘is a cardinal factor in the sale of trade goods, another pillar of the competitory system’ ( Sakeris, 2001, 227 ) . Women cartoon strips by definition interruption barriers and defy convention. By so making, they present a figure of different challenges to mainstream society, and particularly to that part of mainstream society which will finally endure financially.

In add-on, notes Sakeris, ‘the ghettoization of women’s work and the proviso of necessary, but unpaid, labour in the place – all supported by our procedures of gender socialisation – are cardinal to a capitalist economic system as well’ ( Sakeris, 2001, 227 ) .

C. Aggressiveness

Another facet that must be considered is the aggressiveness involved in stand-up comedy. Stand-up comedy can be viewed as an aggressive act. In the effort to arouse laughter, it can be said that the comedian is seeking to exercise control over her audience. Therefore, it can be seen as a power battle. Because of the power associated with the successful usage of wit, wit induction has become associated with other traditionally masculine features, such as aggression, laterality, and assertiveness. For a female to develop into a buffoon or jokester, so, she must go against the behavioural form usually reserved for adult females ( Naranjo-Huebl, 2005, web ) .

This is in direct resistance to the passivity that society traditionally expects of adult females. To acquire up on phase and act sharply is something that goes against traditional norms and is hence fishy. Bing female agencies moving demurely, being subservient while staying unnoticeable. When a female gets up on phase and performs as a comedian, she is aggressive, actively prosecuting the participants, and demanding for attending.

Women ‘s temper is often interpreted as a challenge. This is of course due to the aggressive nature of stand-up comedy, particularly in an audience, which will most likely be comprised chiefly of work forces. Excessively much aggression can be estranging in the best of state of affairss. When excessively much aggression is exhibited by a female, the menace is compounded. It can look to males that this female intruder is seeking to prehend what they think of as their district – ‘male’ district. This can be black for an act, finally for a calling.

As several research workers have pointed out, comedy is an aggressive activity, and it requires performing artists to be difficult – and adult females are non supposed to be difficult. ‘Being pervasively nice is non contributing to comedy which requires sarcasm and ridicule. Womans who do interrupt through into comedy are branded with all kinds of unpleasant labels, such as strident, butch, or frustrated’ ( Martin and Segrave, 20 ) .

D. Sexuality and Femininity

Another issue, and one which is vitally of import, is that of gender. Even if she is non speaking about sex in her act, this is an issue. The inquiry of a woman’s gender and her sense of muliebrity are undeniably cardinal issues to the professional adult female comedian. What is the connexion between amusing entreaty, sex entreaty, and our impressions of what is feminine?

Mother, virgin, cocotte: these are the societal functions imposed on adult females.

The features of ( alleged ) feminine gender derive from them: the valorization of reproduction and nursing ; fidelity ; modesty, ignorance of and even deficiency of involvement in sexual pleasance ; a inactive credence of men’s ‘activity’ ; seductiveness, in order to elicit the consumers’ desire while offering herself as its material support without acquiring pleasance herself’( Irigary, 1985, 63-4 ) .

Some would travel every bit far as to see analogues between the act of standup comedy and the act of sex. For illustration, Horowitz asserts that ‘sexuality can be loving, common exposure – as can comedy ( Horowitz, 1997, 12 ) . Horowitz and others have suggested that there is an familiarity in the relationship between the amusing and her audience that is non unlike the familiarity between lovers.

There are changing degrees of candor in different stand-up modus operandis. This may be seen as mirroring the sexual candor of the male stand-up comic. However, it is accepted less easy. As Horowitz points out, ‘female cartoon strips are expected to travel far – but non excessively far’ ( Horowitz, 1997, 17 ) .

E. Power and Control Issues

Humour is frequently used as a agency of commanding societal state of affairss. In a extremely volatile set of fortunes, temper can frequently defuse the menace by assisting to ease the tenseness. By utilizing humour this manner, unsafe detonations of pique can be averted without coercing confrontations. Yet since the terminal consequence is the same – the state of affairs is brought to a arrest by peaceable agencies – this besides means that temper exerts a sort of power. The kineticss of power are complex and can be hard to negociate.

These kineticss are farther complicated when it comes to the instance of self-deprecatory temper. The comedian mayseemto be releasing control by taking her ain insufficiencies and defects and seting them out at that place on public show. Yet she is non releasing control: she is still standing at that place, the focal point and focal point of attending ; besides, she is still keeping the microphone/phallic symbol. As Horowitz points out, ‘it’s difficult to maintain adult females in their topographic point as inactive sex/domestic objects when they’ve merely been actively utilizing their life experience and sentiments to acquire laughs’ ( Horowitz, 1997, x ) .

Therefore, what appears to be a resignation of ego and power is really anything but.

These are hard and complex issues to see in this still mostly chartless district. Although there are more adult females stand-ups today than of all time before, they have really few function theoretical accounts to larn the ropes from. As a consequence, they mostly go it entirely, sometimes taking hazards because they truly do non cognize what will go on if they try something. Opportunities are it has been done before, but since so small has been documented until late, she will hold to seek it out for herself.

F. Modes of Stand-up Comedy

One method of accommodating to the demands of acting is to try to follow the male theoretical account in footings of physical visual aspect. By playing down her ain attraction, or by minimising her gender, the female amusing can pull attending off from gender difference. Of class, this can ne’er be obliterated wholly. But at least by non flashing, she may be able to pacify her audience slightly.

However, the maneuver of utilizing gender-neutrality to chant down her visual aspect is non a tested and true manner of pacifying an audience. The ‘norm’ in stand-up comedy modus operandis has traditionally been, and remains, male. By minimising their muliebrity, it is possible that adult females cartoon strips are making themselves a ill service in the long tally.

One maneuver that has worked in the past, of class, is the incorporation of self-deprecating temper into the act. As mentioned earlier, self-deprecating temper – the ‘putdown’ – has been efficaciously used by many female cartoon strips in the past. But seting herself down, the female performing artist may look to be submissive alternatively of disputing, endangering, or even hostile. If she is perceived as any of these things, she will lose all hope of set uping resonance with her audience. In add-on, if she has begun to set up resonance, this will efficaciously call off out the recognition she had already built up.

Another positive consequence of self-deprecatory temper is that it may be really effectual in hammering bonds between adult females. They will necessarily detect that they have at leastsomecommon land. Once this common land is established, they may get down to portion experiences, which will assist them to set up connexions. Performers want to bond with their audience, and this is one manner for adult females cartoon strips to make so.

Although some believe that self-deprecation is really a negative procedure which suggests self-hate, others disagree: ‘There is nil incorrect with self-disparaging jokes. In wit, everything is a mark. Even the grossest disabled gag can be amusing. What is upseting is when self-disparagement of females becomes a norm, and the stereotype of dumb and ugly becomes so permeant that it is believed to be true’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 23 ) .

Paula Poundstone is premier illustration of a amusing utilizing self-deprecation to hammer bonds and set up connexions with her audience. In add-on, she has an international entreaty that adds a particular entreaty to her act. She, like Roseanne, is unapologetic and blunt. When she mentions any of the extremely publicized errors she has made over the old ages, she does non make so with a sense of shame or self-loathing. For many adult females, although they may non place with her attitude, they may look up to it, and admire her for being courageous plenty to exhibit it.

G. Self-deprecation in Women’s Humor

i. Self-Deprecation: Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers

Conventional definitions of what it means to be ‘feminine’ or to move ‘lady-like’ are incongruent with the often-inappropriate behaviour of adult females in comedy. This is peculiarly true of such signifiers of comedy as stand-up modus operandis. In stand-up comedy, adult females cartoon strips can non be inactive and demure on phase, for this behaviour will non arouse laughter. Alternatively, they must be aggressive, sometimes loud, and often un-ladylike.

They must wholly interrupt with recognized societal conventions.

Women’s comedy often takes the signifier of self-deprecation. By utilizing self-deprecating temper, female cartoon strips are non endangering the audience ; they are endangering themselves. Self-putdowns are non hostile or estranging to an audience. There have been many adult females cartoon strips who have used self-deprecation as portion of their act because it was the lone manner for them to derive credence. This paper will demo that that is bit by bit altering.

Phyllis Diller is a premier illustration of a adult female utilizing squelchs as portion of her staple modus operandi. Her usage of costumes, which is portion of her hallmark, is besides important. Susan Horowitz describes Diller’s outfits as ‘grotesque, uncomplimentary and funny’ . Diller seems to travel out of her manner to look physically flawed. She speaks in a rapid-fire mode that she is besides known for. Her laughter, harmonizing to Horowitz, is besides unladylike – it is, instead, ‘a strident guffaw’ ( Horowitz, 57 ) .

Joan Rivers is another illustration of a adult female utilizing self-deprecation. She often makes merriment of her ain organic structure. However, she is different from Diller in her visual aspect. Alternatively of brassy costumes and make-up, Rivers is ever stylishly dressed and impeccably groomed. This makes her comedy attack different from Diller’s. Although Rivers is besides often uses physical self-putdowns, they are non seeable to the audience. Rivers, excessively, speaks rapidly, frequently infixing her hallmark chorus – ‘can we talk’ – into her address.

two. The ‘Domestic Goddess’ – Roseann Barr

The construct of the “ domestic goddess ” conjures up images of a 1950s type homemaker that might hold at one clip been a male phantasy. As Naranjo-Huebl points out, ‘women write about things that involvement adult females, and in our civilization, adult females ‘s experience has included the domestic kingdom. Women ‘s wit, from the earliest certification of it to the present, has a strong accent on the family and the interpersonal relationships of the family’ . The adult females of today may be different in many ways from their forebears. However, although their domain has widened a great trade, they still find that household life is a great beginning of what is of import to them, including wit.

A perfect illustration of the ‘domestic goddess’ today is Roseanne Barr. In her early stand-up public presentations, Roseanne drew on what she knew from her functions as a adult female. This includes the functions of married woman, female parent, nurturer, and sex-symbol – for starting motors.

Roseanne Barr would be an illustration of a female amusing using ‘domestic humour’ . In fact, she refers to herself as a ‘domestic goddess’ . Her stuff is frequently based on manner in which she has failed to mensurate up to socially recognized norms in women’s traditional functions, such as married woman, female parent, sex symbol.

However, although there is aggression and ill will in Roseanne’s wit, and it may be considered self-deprecating, the choler is non directed at herself. Alternatively, it is targeted at society, or at her household, or at the manus that life has dealt her.

Roseanne’s manner is direct, frequently to the point of being ‘in your face’ , which is frequently considered scratchy by some. She makes no apologies. This endears her to some, alienates her from others.
Using self-deprecatory tempers frequently puts the audience at easiness. It may function as a face-saving scheme for the benefit of the audience. Female cartoon strips may utilize this to soften the blow when they take pokes at work forces. Self-deprecatory temper may be besides be used to set up a common land between adult females. In pulling on their shared experiences, the amusing and the adult females in the audience connect, ensuing in a type of familiarity.

Womans today are switching off from derogative self-putdowns and self-deprecation. Cultural alterations have bit by bit enabled modern-day adult females to make utilize humor in ways that their predecessors were unable to.

Lizbeth Goodman compares the Roseanne ‘domestic goddess’ character to the British women’s rightist comedy act Spare Tyre. Spare Tyre is a group formed in 1979 B three adult females who portion some issues that are common to most adult females. These issues revolved around self-image, weight, eating wonts and attitudes towards nutrient. ‘Spare Tyre’s work encourages adult females to encompass their ain organic structure forms and sizes, and to happen comfort in their differences instead than seeking to achieve the impossible “magic weight” or other step of conformance to the feminine stereotype’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 291 ) .

Spare Tyre’s work encourages adult females to replace deep-rooted attitudes with newer, positive thoughts about organic structure form and size. They focus on observing the differences among adult females instead than reenforcing the destructive activities like dieting infinitely to make a certain charming figure on the graduated table. They refuse to conform, and promote others to make the same – and to experience good about it.

Decision: The 1990s and Beyond
Some critics have noted that at that place seemed to be a little displacement from self-deprecation to self-respect towards the terminal of the 1990s, but that his arguable. As we have seen, self-deprecation does non needfully bespeak or reflect a hapless self-image or a sense of self-hatred. It has evidently worked for female stand-up cartoon strips on a figure of degrees with good grades of success. It is besides built-in in hammering bonds between adult females. Women will necessarily detect that they have at leastsomecommon land. Once this common land is established, they may get down to portion experiences, which will assist them to set up connexions. Performers want to bond with their audience, and this is one manner for adult females cartoon strips to make so.

Although some believe that self-deprecation is really a negative procedure which suggests self-hate, others disagree: ‘There is nil incorrect with self-disparaging jokes. In wit, everything is a mark. Even the grossest disabled gag can be amusing. What is upseting is when self-disparagement of females becomes a norm, and the stereotype of dumb and ugly becomes so permeant that it is believed to be true’ ( Martin and Segrave, 1986, 23 ) .

Another point to see is that self-deprecation appears to be submissive, but that sense of submissiveness is really and semblance. The comedian mayseemto be releasing control by taking her ain insufficiencies and defects and seting them out at that place on public show. Yet she is non releasing control. She is the 1 who remains in control. She is still standing at that place, the focal point and focal point of attending ; besides, she is still keeping the microphone/phallic symbol. Therefore, self-deprecation demand non be interpreted as submissiveness or as surrender – what appears to be a resignation of ego and power is reallyanythingbut..

An advantage to utilizing self-deprecatory temper is that is really effectual in seting the audience at easiness. It may function as a face-saving scheme for the benefit of the audience. In add-on, female cartoon strips may utilize this to soften the blow when they take pokes at work forces. The focal point is ever to maintain the audience engaged, and to ne’er estrange them and hazard losing their involvement. Establishing a good resonance with the audience is vitally of import. ‘Comedies, in general have this informal gay character. The audience laughs and laughter is active engagement: what barrier may be between executing infinite and witness infinite is therefore breached. Nothing genuinely endangering or amazing occurs in a societal comedy’ ( Tuan, 1990, 161–2 ) .

It is of import to recognize that the public presentation is merely one side of the moral force: it is besides of import that the adult females in the audience must be free to express joy every bit good. Laughter can pull groups of people together, even when they are aliens. As Goodman points out, ‘laughter is itself a signifier of cultural representation, or self-expression. Laughter may, for adult females, besides be a agency of overthrowing cultural norms by “breaking the silence”’ ( Goodman, 1992, 296 ) . Feminist wit, on the other manus, posits a female witness. This is true of literature every bit good as performance’ ( Merrill, 1988, 279 ) .

These are hard and complex issues to see in this still mostly chartless district. Although there are more adult females stand-ups today than of all time before, they have really few function theoretical accounts to larn the ropes from. As a consequence, they mostly go it entirely, sometimes taking hazards because they truly do non cognize what will go on if they try something. Opportunities are it has been done before, but since so small has been documented until late, she will hold to seek it out for herself.

Will female stand-up cartoon strips of all time become a portion of the mainstream? That remains to be seen. ‘”Going mainstream” frequently means compromising on content – peculiarly feminist content – in order to make larger audiences. But many comics are happy to do this via media, or do non see it as a via media at all’ ( Goodman, 1992a, 291 ) .

Clearly, alteration has been happening. The development of women’s temper of assorted sorts has changed the medium of comedy itself’ .

‘Essentially, the adult females in comedy are being transformed from objects to subjects’ suggests one critic ( Carlson, 1991, 163 ) . This transmutation has had a profound impact on the genre itself.

Womans in Comedy Today

Lizbeth Goodman explains the separate universes in which female cartoon strips traditionally have had to populate: adult females cartoon strips can state things during a stand-up comedy modus operandi that they would likely non acquire a warm response in the place. The comedy nine or theater provides a safe locale for this manner of look, whereas the universe outside that locale – place, or a nine-to-five occupation – is wholly different scenes. In those scenes, adult females cartoon strips must take on less baleful character.

That, nevertheless, has bit by bit begun to alter. As Goodman points out, ‘the separation of phase and life functions has been shifted in recent old ages, mostly through the attempts of feminist adult females in the aftermath of the modern women’s motion. Humour has been a powerful tool in this cultural shift’ ( Goodman, 1992, 289 ) .

Conventional definitions of what it means to be ‘feminine’ or to move ‘lady-like’ are incongruent with the often-inappropriate behaviour of adult females in comedy. This is peculiarly true of such signifiers of comedy as stand-up modus operandis. In stand-up comedy, adult females cartoon strips can non be inactive and demure on phase, for this behaviour will non arouse laughter. Alternatively, they must be aggressive, sometimes loud, and often un-ladylike.

They must wholly interrupt with recognized societal conventions.

‘Comedy is both an aggressive and rational response to human nature and experience’ , asserts Merrill ( Merrill, 1988, 278 ) . The acknowledgment of women’s right to be both aggressive and rational is a comparatively new in the history of stand-up. What is besides new is that feminist temper now allows itself to turn to itself consciously to adult females, and to set up bonds with the multiplicity of experiences and values adult females may incarnate.

Wit addressed to adult females is a comparatively new phenomenon, and it is an of import measure. It will ease the development of ‘a civilization that allows adult females to self-critically inquiry the stereotypes that have governed our lives. A strong, rebellious wit empowers adult females to analyze how we have been objectified and fetishized and to what extent we have been led to perpetuate this objectification’ ( Merrill, 1988, 279 ) .

It is clear that there is a long manner to travel before adult females stand-ups become portion of the mainstream. If by traveling mainstream, they can make larger audiences, some may make up one’s mind that whatever it takes, it will be deserving it to them. Others insist that ‘going mainstream’ has ever meant, and continues to intend, selling out on some degree. It means compromising on content, and that content is normally feminist in nature.

Clearly, alteration has been happening. The development of women’s temper of assorted sorts has changed the medium of comedy itself’ .

As stated early on, comedy is a signifier of look which stretches and sometimes breaks boundaries. It crosses all sorts of boundaries, including those of gender. It can be hazardous because it frequently ridicules societal and moral conventions in a manner that challenges and threatens accepted norms. This is peculiarly true of women’s comedy. It challenges convention, and it inquiries moral positions in peculiar. It has a tradition of roasting moral, societal, and political conventions. The stand-up comic has been often considered as bing on the peripheries of mainstream society, and she remains at that place today.

If one were to take an existent count of the figure of adult females stand-up cartoon strips there are today, that figure in itself would non be impressive. However, the influence this little figure of adult females has is turning. More and more adult females are recognizing that comedy offers them an mercantile establishment for many emotions. It is the ideal vehicle for self-expression and a path to self-knowledge. Comedy exists in many formats beyond the stand-up modus operandi. Television, film, theater – all the locales have been impacted by the altering functions of – and attitudes toward – the adult female in comedy.

‘With increasing assurance, adult females now composing comedy are happening that this radical potency can supply a manner around the traditional restrictions of the genre. At the same clip, the adult females are continuing the jubilation merely comedy can promise’ ( Carlson, 1991, 161 ) .

Womans composing about adult females for adult females: this is a new strain of amusing adult females who are regenerating non merely women’s comedy, but thoughts approximately comedy as a humanizing and cosmopolitan experience that is non merely for work forces, but for everyone.

Reference List

Austin, Gayle. 1990. ‘Feminist Theories: Paying attending to women’ . Pp. 136–142 in.
Goodman, Lizbeth, ed. ,The Routledge Reader in Gender and Performance.London: Routledge.

Carlson, Susan. 1991.Womans and Comedy: Rewriting the British Theatrical Tradition.Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

Counsell, Colin and Wolf, Laurie, erectile dysfunction. 2001.Performance Analysis and Introductory Coursebook.London: Routledge.

Gardiner, Caroline. 1987. ‘What Share of the Cake? The employment of adult females in the English theatre’ . Pp. 97–102 in Goodman, Lizbeth, ed. ,The Routledge Reader in Gender and Performance.London: Routledge.

Gledhill, Christine. ‘Pleasurable Negotiations’ . Pp. 193–209 in Bonner, Frances et al. , ed. ,Imagining Womans: Cultural Representations and Gender.Oxford: Polity Press.

Goodman, Lizbeth. 1992a. ‘Gender and Humour: Positions, Positions, Gender and Humour’ . Pp. 286–300 in Bonner, Frances et al. , ed. ,Imagining Womans: Cultural Representations and Gender.Oxford: Polity Press.

Goodman, Lizbeth. 1992b. ‘Comic Corruptions: Comedy as Strategy in Feminist Theatre’ . Pp. 301–320 in Bonner, Frances et al. , ed. ,Imagining Womans: Cultural Representations and Gender.Oxford: Polity Press.

Horowitz, Susan. 1997.Queens of Comedy: Lucille Ball, Phyllis Diller, Carol Burnett, Joan Rivers and the New Generation of Funny Women.Amsterdam, The
Nederlands: Gordon and Breach Publishers.

Limon, John. 2000.Stand-up Comedy in Theory, or, Abjection in America.London: Duke University Press.

Long, Jennie. 1994. ‘What Share of the Cake Now? The employment of adult females in the English theatre’ . Pp. 103–112 in Goodman, Lizbeth, ed. ,The Routledge Reader in Gender and Performance.London: Routledge.

Martin, Linda and Segrave, Kerry. 1986.Womans in Comedy.Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press.

Merrill, Lisa. 1988. ‘Feminist wit: rebellious and self-affirming’ . Pp. 271–280 in Barreca, Regina, ed. ,Last Laughs: Positions on Women and Comedy.New York: Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, Inc.

Nachman, Gerald. 2003.Seriously Funny: The Rebel Comedians of the 1950s aqnd 1960s.New York: Pantheon Books.

Naranjo-Huebl, Linda. ‘From Peek-a-boo to Sarcasm: Women ‘s Humor as a Means of Both Connection and Resistance’ .
URL: hypertext transfer protocol: //home.swbell.net/gr8folks/humorresistance.html
Accessed August 5, 2005.

Sakeris, John. 2001.‘Howard’s First Kiss: Sissies and Gender Police in the “New” Old Hollywood’ . Pp. 217–231 in Pomerance, Murray, ed. ,Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls: Gender in Film at the End of the Twentieth Century.Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.