Two voices
Parody is another form of humor that is frequently conflated with verbal irony. In Gary Saul Morson’s read of Mikhail Bakhtin, parody is distinguished from irony by the inclusion of a “double-voiced word,” or an “utterance that [is] designed to be interpreted as the expression of two speakers,” the primary speaker and the parodist (65).
This definition is similar to the common understanding of verbal irony in that the ironist also is expressing two utterances, one stated and one (potentially) intended; however, the distinction seems to lie in parody’s recognition of a physical and/or temporal separation between the original speaker and an imposter (they parodist must always follow the original), and we can note that the latter references the former.
Of course, this idea of “an imposter who references the original” opens up a can of worms, which I hope to parse out soon. Namely: What happens when a speaker parodies her/himself? What should we call it when a speaker establishes a generic persona that doesn’t reference any specific speaker/agent – can you truly parody a “type”? Or is the idea of “type” itself a parody? Can/should we posit that any speaker is ever bona fide, original or arché, thus relegating all else to copies (mimesis)? Look for more on this soon.
Copies
In any case, that is how parody differentiates itself from irony: by a reliance on mimesis – impersonation or copying an original person or text, at least in form (the language they use and ways they express themselves).
Disagreement
Moreover, it is a disagreement between the two speakers – some have translated parody as “against the song” – and it is the second speaker who expects to gain our support, who has the authority. Thus, like irony, parody is thought to involve a replacement (if not a negation) of a primary text by the secondary, especially when used for the purpose of satire.
However, others read parody, especially in its humorous forms as “beside the song,” in which case it doesn’t oppose the original in any meaningful way. I think of Weird Al Yankovic’s “Eat It” parody of Michael Jackson’s “Beat It”; the two texts were parallel in ways that were witty and thus humorous, but they were not in direct opposition. Both versions can exist side-by-side, without conflict; in fact, the one supports or supplements the other.
Signaling parody
Also like verbal irony, comics signal to the audience that statements are parodic through techniques such as exaggeration or understatement of foolish behaviors. For example they can overact or overreact, or they can strangely not react. These and other techniques produce incongruity between the original and the copy.
In a previous example, which I’m sure you’re tiring of quickly, when Bill Maher quotes “people” and then Bush in the first and third paragraphs, these are thus not parody, but mimesis; they are mimicries of the public and President Bush, respectively, but they contain no secondary expression – so we can’t use it. Thus, as an example of parody used for satirical purposes, I move to Lewis Black.
Lewis Black
Comedian, actor and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart correspondent Lewis Black has risen in popularity in recent years. Black received the “Best Male Stand-Up” award from the American Comedy Awards in 2001. In 2004, he was recognized by the Pollstar Awards and garnered his first Grammy nomination for his comedy tour, Rules of Enragement (washingtonpost.com). His book, Nothing’s Sacred, debuted on The New York Times Bestseller List in 2005. His HBO performance, Red, White and Screwed gained him a second Grammy nomination in 2006, and he won the award for Best Comedy Album in 2007 for The Carnegie Hall Performance. Since then, he won again in 2011 with Stark Raving Black, and was nominated again in 2013 for In God We Rust.
In an interview with Neal Conan on National Public Radio, Black describes himself as a ‘social’ (or perhaps ‘topical’) comic, not a political comic, because he draws material from whatever is in the news that excites him, from Superbowl half-time performances to the weather. However, he does discuss partisan politics and governmental policy, and this has not gone unnoticed.
In Red, White and Screwed, Black meanders through several topical and social bits, eventually coming to the following:
We have no energy policy, you know? None whatsoever. We still don’t have a good one, it’s ridiculous. And if you ask… We’re not going to have solar energy in my lifetime, you know? A few people have it, but it’s something we should all have, it’s ridiculous. I’ll take no flying cars, but solar energy? And if you ask your congressman why, he’ll say, [With his eyes crossed, a slightly slack-jawed expression and clutching at himself for emphasis] “‘Cause it’s hard. It’s really, really hard. Makes me wanna go poopy. You wanna know why we don’t have solar energy? Because the sun goes away each day, and it doesn’t tell us where it’s going.”
Black sets up his parodic statements as satirical. He states outright that solar energy is something we (American scientists) should have accomplished by now, and something the government should be pushing.
When he actually depicts a congressman, Black’s mannerisms (slightly swaying, face slack, hunching and grabbing himself), speech patterns (use of the term “poopy”) and rationality become that of a child, if not someone mentally challenged. In this parody, the generic politician is infantilized, portrayed as incapable of action and thereby made the object of ridicule. However, like ironic satire, even if one accepts that the speaker’s intention is ridicule, it may not be effective as I’ll argue tomorrow.
Questions? Comments? Thoughts? Additions?
References:
Black, Lewis. Lewis Black: Red, White and Screwed. New York: Home Box Office. Original air date: 10 June, 2006, 10pm EST. Rebroadcast 19 October, 2007, 9pm CST.
Morson, Gary Saul. “Parody, History, and Metaparody.” Rethinking Bakhtin: Extensions and Challenges. Eds. G.S. Morson and Caryl Emerson. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1989. 63-86.
Rose, Margaret A. Parody: Ancient, Modern, and Postmodern. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University, 1993.
Wilson, Nathan. Was That Supposed to be Funny? A Rhetorical Analysis of Politics, Problems and Contradictions in Contemporary Stand-Up Comedy. Dissertation in partial completion of the Ph.D. August, 2008.
