Humour and Eddie Izzard PDF

Page 2
Abstract
Throughout history, humour has been used as a
means of entertainment and communication. Through
different types of analysis, this paper seeks to conclude
on the communicative advantages of stand-up, and how
humour can be broken down into something concrete
and relatable. Applying these analytical tools to stand-
up comedian Eddie Izzard's show Dress to Kill, and
comparing his work to historical and cultural milestones
of stand-up comedy, a conclusion is sought towards
which methods can be applied in order to appear
humorous, and evoke laughter. Being a transvestite,
Eddie Izzard is an interesting example of how culture,
incongruity and linguistics can be used in various ways
within comedy and humour.

Summary
Danish Summary
Humor er igennem historien altid blevet brugt som et
middel til underholdning og kommunikation. Igennem
forskellige analysemodeller, sger dette projekt at
konkludere p de kommunikative fordele ved stand-up,
og hvordan humor kan brydes ned til noget konkret og
relaterbart. Ved at anvende disse analytiske redskaber til
stand-up komikeren Eddie Izzard's show Dress to Kill,
og ved at sammenligne hans arbejde med historiske og
kulturelle mileple i stand-up komedie, sges der en
konklusion p hvilke metoder der kan benyttes for at
fremst humoristisk, og for at fremprovokere latter. Selv
vrende transvestit, er Eddie Izzard et interessant
eksempel p hvordan kultur, uoverensstemmelse og
lingvistik kan bruges p forskellige mder inde for
komedie og humor.
Page 3

Russian Summary
,

.
,
-,
-
.

- "
",
- ,

,
. ,
,
,
- .

Table of Content
Introduction ................................................................... 5
Problem Formulation ................................................... 7
Dimensions ..................................................................... 8
Methodology .................................................................. 8
o Case Choice .......................................... 8
o Evolution of Project .............................. 9
o What we could have done differently ... 9
History of Humour ..................................................... 10
- Antiquity: the dawn of Western theatre ... 11
o Ancient Greece ................................... 11
o Ancient Rome ..................................... 12
o The Renaissance in Italy ..................... 13
- Development of British stage performance
and humour .................................................. 14
o The United Kingdom adopts stage
performance ........................................ 14
o Shakespearean Times .......................... 14
Page 4

- Eddie Izzard versus History ...................... 15
o Putting on a Show ............................... 17
o Debating or Entertaining? .................. 18
Linguistic Theories ..................................................... 19
- Discourse Analysis ...................................... 19
- Semantic Script Theory of Humour.......... 20
- General Theory of Verbal Humour .......... 22
- Communication in Humour ....................... 25
o Bona-Fide Communication ................ 25
o Non-Bona-Fide Communication ........ 26
Theories of Humour ................................................... 31
- The Superiority Theory .............................. 31
o History of the Superiority Theory ...... 31
o Social Contract Theory ....................... 32
o Thomas Hobbes .................................. 33
o The Superiority Theory Explained ..... 34
- The Incongruity Theory ............................. 35
o History of the Incongruity Theory ..... 35
o The Incongruity Theory Explained .... 37
o Incongruity Theory and Puns ............. 39
- The Relief Theory ........................................ 40
o History of the relief Theory ................ 40
o The Relief Theory Explained .............. 41
Applying Theories ....................................................... 43
- The Native Americans ................................. 43
o Introduction to Discourse Analysis .... 43
o Immediate Analysis ............................ 43
o Main Function of the Interaction ........ 46
o Macro-function of the Sketch ............. 47
o Body Language ................................... 47
o Relationship between the Participant
Roles ................................................... 47
o Features of Spontaneous Speech ........ 48
o Conclusion on Discourse Analysis ..... 49
- Transvestite in the Army ............................ 50
o Semantic Script Theory of Humour
Analysis ............................................... 50
o The Relief Theory Applied ................. 51
o Conclusion on the Sketch ................... 52
- Ich bin ein Berliner ..................................... 52
Page 5

o Introduction ........................................ 52
o GTVH Analysis .................................. 54
o Incongruity Analysis .......................... 57
o Superiority .......................................... 58
- Back-Tracking ............................................. 59
- Effects of a Live Audience .......................... 59
- Political Humour ......................................... 63
o Introduction to Political Humour ....... 63
o Eddie Izzard and Political Humour .... 64
Conclusion ................................................................... 68
Bibliography ............................................................... 70
Appendices .................................................................. 72

Introduction

Humour is something the majority of human beings
use every day in various situations to connect with
people. We all know of humour and stand-up and are all
affected by it to some degree. Originating in the 17th
century, the word humour is of relatively recent date.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it arose out
of psycho-physiological speculation on how the
different types of humour can affect a persons
temperament.

There are various reasons for laughter, yet not all of
them are directly connected to humour. Being tickled,
inhaling laughing gas or reacting to shock, is not
something most people would describe as humorous. So
what defines humour?
Page 6

Even though stand-up is a constant part of our lives,
we rarely reflect on how complex that kind of humour
can actually be. As humans developed through time, so
did what we think is funny. Therefore the topic of our
project has a wide range of possibilities for
investigation, such as how stand-up has developed.
Does it even influence us as human beings at the present
time? Another interesting part of stand-up is how the
language is used. It can be put under linguistic analysis
which can provide us with an understanding of how
stand-up is able to provoke emotions in us.

Humour plays a considerable role in closing
communication gaps between people by offering an
alternative way of interacting with each other. It helps to
remove the initial resistance between people and
establishes a rapport between the participants of the
conversation. Building rapport with someone will
ensure a trusting relationship in which a conversation
can flow effortlessly. Humour can therefore help extract
information, which might not otherwise be offered.
Humour has many functions: It can be an ice-breaker
when meeting new people, a way to entertain ourselves
or others, it can be comforting, social, cultural or
political. In stand-up comedy, the main purpose of the
humorous text of the speaker (performer) is to make the
hearer (audience) laugh. For the performer to be
successful in achieving his/her goal, it must be ensured
that the audience is able to appreciate the humour.

All kinds of humour are means of communication and
people use these for different purposes. Some use it
solemnly for the sake of entertainment, while others use
it in communication as a means of delivering a message,
be it political or social, that might otherwise offend the
receiver. However, the only way this works is if the
humour is presented and received successfully. In stand-
Page 7

up, the performer usually tries to cover all of these
aspects.

As previously mentioned, there are many kinds of
humour, and most of them can be traced back as far as
basic communication, so in order to make the topic
more relatable, we are focusing on stand-up. In the 90s,
one of the most influential stand-up comedians was
Eddie Izzard. He managed to successfully deliver his
jokes to a large variety of people within different
cultures. Our goal for this project is to seek a conclusion
to what Izzard does to produce humoristic
performances, and affect the audience in the way he
wants.

Problem Formulation

How can the structure of stand-up comedy be
defined, and how did it develop into the form of
humour it is today?

How have humoristic devices and methods been
developed through history, leading to modern day
stand-up?
What linguistic methods/tools does Eddie Izzard
take into use when performing stand-up comedy,
and how?
When applying different theories to a sketch,
what do they have to offer respectively?
What conclusion can be drawn when applying
theories of humour to stand-up comedy?
Does Eddie Izzard use cultural diversity in his
performance? If yes, how and why?
Page 8

What has the feministic and gay liberation
movements meant to Eddie Izzard as a stand-up
comedian?

Dimensions

Our project covers the dimension History and
Culture, together with Text and Sign. Our project is
built up on the linguistics of the stand-up comedy show
Dress to Kill by the comedian Eddie Izzard. To
accomplish this we have used historic and cultural
academic literature of the theories concerning humour
and stand-up. Furthermore we have chosen to use Text
and Sign as the other dimension, because the theories of
linguistics make it possible to analyse stand-up.

Methodology

Case Choice
Text & Sign and History & Culture were chosen as
our dimensions. To cover Text & Sign, the majority of
the theories chosen for the analyses are linguistic
theories. We aimed to use as much knowledge as
possible, acquired from the Text & Sign lectures given
by Anne Fabricius, who specializes in the areas of
speech acts and language functions. The knowledge
gained about linguistics will be demonstrated by using
the Semantic Script Theory of Humour, the General
Theory of Verbal Humour, and a discourse analysis on
selected sketches from Eddie Izzards stand-up show
Dress to Kill. Furthermore, the four general theories of
humour will be taken into consideration. The three main
theories: the Incongruity Theory, the Superiority Theory
and the Relief Theory will be applied to various
Page 9

sketches. The forth theory, called the Play Theory, does
not offer an explanation to why laughter occurs but
rather the functions of humour, and will therefore not be
included in the analysis.

Evolution of the Project
Starting out, the group discussed to focus the project
on peoples reactions to comedy and humour. This was
quickly discarded though, as it would be too difficult to
gather sufficient knowledge on this topic. Instead, the
main perspective of the project was settled on: what
makes something humorous, and which methods can be
used to achieve this. Early on, Eddie Izzard was chosen
as the main focus, whose sketches we chose to apply the
theories of humour to.
The group had difficulties deciding which approach
to take, in order to involve the dimension of History &
Culture. The discussions were mainly focused on what
direction the history part should take: whether we
wanted to focus on the most important events in the
history, a biography of Eddie Izzard, the history of
humour or simply the history of British humour.
Through various group meetings, and conversations
with our supervisors and the opponent group, we
decided to narrow our main focus down to the history of
stand-up humour. Furthermore, the group chose to
create a historical overview of some of the theories we
chose for the analyses.
In order to include the cultural perspective, it was
agreed that the project was going to include an insight to
the usage of politics in humour, and how Eddie Izzard
delivers political messages in his shows. The Superiority
Theory is also going to offer an insight to how cultural
differences can be used when creating humour.

What we could have done differently
The writing process should have been started earlier,
since towards the end of the project, the group faced
Page 10

many unforeseen problems, which would otherwise
have been resolved earlier.
In order to start the actual writing process sooner, it
might have been a good idea to have deadlines for each
of the group members at an earlier stage. These should
have included deadlines for research, reading and
writing. By doing so, the group would have avoided
wasting time, not only at the group meetings but also
when doing research in the spare time.
Additionally, the group should have also made clear
guidelines to how the group meetings should have been
conducted. Because this wasnt done, meetings would
often end in constructive discussions, but no real
progress or decisions would be made. Another
consequence was that we didnt reach a decision on the
final formulation of the research questions until the
second project seminar, leaving us with only four weeks
to finish the paper.
The final thing we could have done differently would
have been to arrange more meetings with our
supervisor. The supervisor could then have provided us
with even more constructive and objective inputs. The
working process would probably have been more
productive if more perspectives were discussed from the
beginning of the project.

History of Humour

We may not realize it, but entertainment of today
owes a lot to the past. Humour has existed for as long as
human conscience has, and the tradition of stage
performance dates back from Antiquity. By using the
power of stage and expression, Eddie Izzard of the
1990s mocks notorious World War leaders whilst
thousands of years before that, the Ancient Greeks
mercilessly made fun of the political figures of their day
and age, both to the cheers of a packed theatre.
Page 11

The following section is an overview of humour from
a historical and cultural perspective. It attempts to trace
back humanity's relationship with humour. It also aims
to undercover the birth and development of stand-up
comedy, by presenting it as an evolution of stage
performance in the Western world. The section also
includes subsections that compare and contrast Izzard's
performance to how it was done in the old days.

Antiquity: the dawn of Western
theatre
Ancient Greece
Stage performance in the Western world originated
from the cult of Dionysus, the hellenized Thracian god
of fertility and wine. The residents of Ancient Greece
were engaged in rituals involving songs, dance and
drinking as means of escapism and removing social
constraints. In the 500s B.C.E., a large festival, called
the Dionysia, was made in Athens in honour of this god.
Its central events were theatrical performances on stage
of drama, tragedies, and from 487 B.C.E.: comedies
1
.

The origin of the word comedy
2
is adopted by Latin
from the Greek words meaning 'revel' and 'singer'. As a
dramatic genre, it represents a play with a happy ending,
as in Dante Alighieri's Divine Comedy. Unfortunately,
most original comedy plays have not been preserved
today. Our best knowledge comes from the few
surviving plays of Aristophanes and Menander, the
pioneering playwrights of the movements of Old
Comedy and New, respectively. We also learn of the
setting and execution of the plays, from illustrations on
traditional ceramic vases, or in the writings of later
authors, such as Herodotus and Aristotle.

1
Krusteva, Olga: Theatre through the Centuries, p. 9-46
2
"Comedy." Oxford Dictionaries.
Page 12

The latter credits Thespis as the first person to wear a
mask and impersonate a character
3
. When playing a
character, for example a Greek deity, he would step out
of 'his normal self' and enter a stage of enthusiasm, the
word originally meaning possession
4
.
Thespis was the pioneer of performance as we know it,
as he made an association between a person and
storytelling; and later in the 5th century B.C.E.,
Aeschylus introduced a second character on stage, thus
making dialogue possible.

Looking back in history, it seems that comedy plays
rose to fame at uneasy times for Ancient Greece. As
opposed to tragedy, which reached heights in time with
the peak of society itself, comedy was most popular
during the decline of the Greek Government. People
needed an outlet for their frustrations; thus, during the

3
"Thespis ." Encyclopedia Britannica.
4
"Possession." Oxford Dictionaries .
Dionysia contests, spectators would watch three tragedy
plays in a row in the morning and one comedy with a
happy ending afterwards, as to take their minds off the
serious issues addressed at first. To this day, comic
relief is one of the most important functions of humour.

Ancient Rome
The hellenization of Ancient Rome occurred in 3rd
century B.C.E. given the admiration for the conquests of
Alexander the Great. Local Roman playwrights
translated Greek plays and adapted them to meet the
Roman senses, and annually there would be festivals in
honour of the god Saturn, very reminiscent of the
Dionysia
5
.

The incarnated Roman theatre would leave an
everlasting effect on entertainment to come. The
pantomime, meaning 'to imitate', was a well loved type

5
Page 13

of performance which today is a subject of study of
using facial expressions to convey emotions and
humour. The two major Roman playwrights, the
straightforward and explicit Plautus, and the more subtle
and crafty Terence, would inspire Shakespeare centuries
later.

The Renaissance in Italy
One of the most common notions that all historians
would agree with, is that Italy is the centre of the
Renaissance in Europe from the 14th through the 16th
century. It's a blossoming period for the arts, and a
boom in architecture saw the design of covered, indoor
theatre buildings. This new type of performance made it
even more exciting to go and see a play; important
features were introduced, such as the linear perspective
on stage, which gives more depth to the decor and
background, and an early notion of 'the fourth wall' that
separates performer and audience.

Street performance was also popular, and the growing
acclaim of the movement comedia dell'arte, also known
as the comedy of masks, helped make theatre a spectacle
that everyone could afford to enjoy. As the name
suggests (art), these were stylish performances by
trained professionals who practice every day and travel
in troupes from town to town. The performers hid their
faces behind masks and fake moustaches, and were not
capable of mimicking, so instead they provoked laughter
by making overdramatic gestures or falling over.
Therefore slapstick humour was a prominent feature in
comedia dell'arte
6
.

The distinctive feature of the comedy of masks,
however, is the element of improvisation. Italian library
archives hold over a hundred performance scripts of
sketches, which are merely small pieces of paper with a

6
Page 14

few basic instructions written on them. This means that
performers had the opportunity to interpret the situation
however they wanted to, and it was very much up to
them to create their routines. They learned through trial
and error, which sketches do best with the audience, and
how to add new features to give a funnier performance
from day to day. They even changed the characters to
match the places they were performing at.

Development of British stage
performance and humour

The United Kingdom adopts stage performance
Some typical British forms of entertainment have
roots in commedia dell'arte. Theatre manager John Rich
is credited to have introduced the Italian character of
Harlequin to Britain. The genre harlequinade is mainly
a style of visual entertainment with prominent use of
gestures, dancing, and slapstick, as the five main
characters get in trouble with each other.

The traditional puppet show Punch and Judy also
borrows the titular character, Mr. Punch, from Italian
entertainment. The show is another example of slapstick
humour, as the violent Mr. Punch is often upset at the
other characters and beats them up with a huge stick.
The fights are numbed down and made distant from the
real world thanks to the unrealistic, exaggerated facial
expressions carved on the puppets' faces and their
funny, squawking voices.

Shakespearean times
The reign of Queen Elizabeth was a Golden Age in all
spheres. It is a time in which William Shakespeare has
expanded the vocabulary of the English language by
inventing dozens of new expressions and reviving
archaic words. This lead to a revolutionizing storytelling
Page 15

and his works help us today to trace the blossoming of
the British culture, humour and stage performance.

Shakespeare's comedies are more cheerful than the
rest of his catalogue. For example, Much Ado About
Nothing contains a wide variety of humour and comic
devices such as puns and deadpan/dry humour, and has
a happy ending. They satirize the troubles of everyday
life of a social class, and explore themes such as family
drama, young lovers versus disapproving elders,
romance, breaking up and getting back together again.
This genre is known as comedy of manners.

Witty wordplay is omnipresent in Shakespearean
plays; however, his earlier works incorporate more farce
and slapstick and have multiple, quite extravagant plots
overlapping with each other and with a dramatic
culmination of events. The Comedy of Errors for
example, relies on slapstick humour the most, as it deals
with ridiculous situations such as twin-swapping leading
to mistaken identities, and other physical humour.
Eddie Izzard versus History

As humanity progresses with the passage of time, so
does society's taste for contemporary entertainment that
reflects its state, culture and current affairs.

Eddie Izzard's performance is a humorous
rollercoaster that covers everything from Western
history to public school. It allows analyses from
multiple perspectives, and taken in many directions.

Izzard makes sure to present notorious war leaders in
a negative, satirical way, for example insulting Hitler
multiple times throughout the show and talking about
him with disdain in his tone of voice. Aristophanes, too,
was definitely anti-war, as his play Lysistrata suggests.
Page 16

In that comedic play, he criticizes all military conflicts
and accuses them of being an unnecessary waste of
human life. The plot depicts the titular heroine
Lysistrata explaining to her fellow women how they can
put an end to the Peloponnesian War, by refusing sex to
their husbands in exchange for peace. In modern times,
Lysistrata is also considered to be an excellent example
of feministic text, as it depicts the struggles of women
and the sexual relationships in a strictly patriarchal
society. On this note, Shakespeare's A Midsummer
Night's Dream, which is set in Athens, later attempts to
analyse gender roles and the futility of a woman's choice
in marriage. And finally, Izzard addresses the problems
with a male-dominated society in his sketch about
make-up in the army (appx. 2), among other sketches.
His treatment of the subject, and his own sexuality and
freedom of expression, evokes feministic undertones.

Menander (ca. 341 B.C.E. - 290 B.C.E.) was the best
known representative of New Comedy - the literary
movement that would later inspire the style of Italian
Renaissance theatre, Shakespeare, today's sitcoms,
Eddie Izzard and others. Whilst Aristophanes was more
interested in great myths of the past or public figures,
Menander's plays were more familial and societal, and
presented a vivid palette of the humorous woes and
struggles of a social class.

In the spirit of New Comedy, Eddie takes the liberty
to discuss trivial things of his life, such as his
experiences as a transvestite, teenage stories and other
personal topics. He also pokes at stereotypical notions
about the place he happens to perform in, which is San
Francisco, in the case of Dress to Kill. The remarks
being that the city is always full of snakes, and that there
are not enough taxi cabs. He makes fun of stereotypical
notions that certainly do not apply to the whole nation,
as well bringing forth the common prejudice of
Page 17

Americans being ignorant of their own history, or the
average Italian riding on a scooter and saying ciao.

A very distinct feature of Izzard's performance
however, is his spontaneity. Historically, he owes this to
the street performers in Antiquity, and later the comedy
of masks in Italy, where actors didn't follow a detailed
script like in a regular play, and it was up to them to
improvise and create the sketch.
7
This may well be the
earliest direct roots of stand-up comedy. These actors
would travel from town to town, just like Izzard does,
and depending on where they were going and who they
were performing in front of, they would fit their
sketches to be relevant at this time and place. Depending
on the reaction they got, the actors would learn what
they could do better and what the different audiences
like. When Izzard at some instances delivers a joke that
falls flat, as the audience does not understand or

7
appreciate it, he would mimic taking out a notebook and
scribble 'Never do this ever again!' to regain the
audience's trust.

Putting on a show
Eddie Izzard's technique is to impersonate and
imitate, thus making up for things that are not there. He
relies on the audience's imagination to perform his
sketches, as he is a one-person-show in a minimalistic
setting (a simple blue backdrop on stage); yet with his
expressive style of performing, he is able to give the
impression of re-enacting an elaborate play with
multiple actors, detailed backdrops and costumes. The
audience is familiar with how theatre works, and goes
along with it, as they can visualize what Eddie is trying
to achieve with only gestures, expressions and role-play.

Page 18

Debating or Entertaining?
Since its conception, the stage has been a powerful
platform to communicate any message, be it an artistic
play or a political debate. Taking the stage is a symbol
of being given freedom of expression, as the sender has
the advantage of both speech and actions to make a
stand in front of a receptive audience.

Aristophanes, for one, was a controversial figure in
Athens, who set up political theatre in his plays, most
notably The Wasps and The Knights. The circumstances
of the Dyonosia contest allowed him to address serious
topics through humour and performance. He mocked
Greek politicians, celebrities and even mythological
characters. In fact, he also addressed the audience
directly during an intermission in the middle of the play,
known as parabasis
8
. He would express his views freely

8
"Parabasis." Britannica Online.
and subject people to a lengthy political banter.
9

In Aristophanes times, when plays were performed
outdoors in plain air, the tone of voice was probably
much louder than today. The delivery of the lines was
perhaps more declamatory, and the acting more
dramatic and passionate, so that the many spectators all
the way to the furthest row of the huge amphitheatre
could make out exactly what was happening on the
stage. Getting a serious message across to the audience
seems to be more efficient in a louder, harsher tone of
voice.

Eddie Izzard in particular does not intend to subject
the audience to his views in such an 'in-your-face' way.
Some of his predecessors, as well as contemporaries
may do, but Izzard himself casually and tactfully
handles every topic he touches upon in his shows. He is
talking politics, yet he doesn't intend to break out into a

9
Page 19

lengthy political banter. He is a living compendium of
history, a tutor in foreign languages, and he is simply
enjoying the fact that he is being an entertainer.

Linguistic Theories

Discourse Analysis
With a discourse analysis it is possible to focus on
any feature of linguistic actions. In this project, this will
be done by studying sentence structure, pronunciation,
the choice of words, body language, etc. The goal with
the discourse analysis is to employ linguistic theory and
methodology to reveal how Eddie Izzard utilizes
sociolinguistics. A text (an oral sentence) usually has a
message and, sometimes, a deeper meaning to it. The
aim is to find these deeper meanings by looking at, for
instance, the vocabulary of a sketch. Another element to
look at is the semantic relationship between words
10
.

For a better analysis, a text can be split into smaller
parts. Doing so will allow the analyst to build up a text
from the foundation. By looking at every small piece,
more knowledge about every bit will arise through a
closer examination. It is then more straightforward to
achieve a greater understanding of the text.

The expression "discourse" is defined in a lot of
different ways; it covers both the use of language
spoken beyond the text (what a text says implicative),
but also covers the actual language use.

Because of this, there are a lot of different directions
in which you can take a discourse analysis, and there are
generally a lot of different occurring linguistic genres.

10
This section is inspired by a Text & Sign lecture: Fabricius, Anne:
"Language and Power." Text and Sign
Page 20

These genres take place according to the type of
conversation: mails, dialogues, interviews, coaching or
commercials, and so on.

Semantic Script Theory of Humour
The Semantic Script Theory of Humour was
developed by Victor Raskin in 1985 and described in his
book Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. As the name
suggests, the goal and approach of the theory is creating
a mere semantic explanation to why something is funny.
The field of semantics that is implied here is the
linguistic semantics. These can be defined as the study
of meaning that is used to understand human expression
through language
11
.
It is therefore important to note that the theory only
deals with verbal humour. Verbal humour can always be
expressed in a text, since the words can be written

11
S.Varalakshmi: "Grammar, Syntax, Semantics and Discourse."
down. It is true that situations which only communicate
non-verbal humour can be considered funny, but it is
impossible to make a linguistic analysis of these.

The approach to the analysis of whether a text can be
acknowledged as humorous is expressed in the Main
Hypothesis. The Main Hypothesis presents two
requirements that need to be met for a text to be
considered humorous:
A text can be characterized as a single-joke-carrying
text if both of the conditions in are satisfied:
(i) The text is compatible, fully or in part, with
two different scripts
(ii) The two scripts, with which the text is
compatible, are opposite
The two scripts with which some text is compatible
are said to overlap fully or in part on this text.
12

12
Raskin, Victor: Semantic Mechanisms of Humor, p. 99
Page 21

To have a better understanding of the Main
Hypothesis, a definition of a script is appropriate.
Raskin defines it as: [...] a large chunk of semantic
information surrounding the word or evoked by it.
13

The script is an internal schema of all the information
connected to the word stored in the native speakers
brain. For example, the word book instantly evokes a
series of information in the mind: the subject, purpose,
place to be found, associations, etc.
The text of the joke is supposed to be ambiguous in
order for it to be humorous. Even though the text is
ambiguous, the hearer only registers one interpretation
of the text until a punch line is delivered.

As stated in the Main Hypothesis, it is important that
the sentences are compatible with two different scripts
which must overlap. However, one must note that the
two opposed scripts are not always enough for a text to

13
Raskin, Victor: Semantic Mechanisms of Humor, p.81
be considered humorous, but the overlap must also be
done unexpectedly. The punch line is the name for the
overlap of two scripts: a line that changes the hearers
interpretation of the text into a new interpretation, thus
creating humour.

The Main Hypothesis states that [...] the two scripts
with which the text is compatible are opposite.
14

However possible, it is not necessary that the scripts are
opposing in the standard way, where the scripts are
literal oppositions of each other (e.g. Good vs. Bad).
Sometimes the opposition is not as obvious unless
rephrased.

When performing a script analysis, the purpose is
[...] to provide a semantic interpretation of the text of
the joke [...]
15
and seeing if the text adheres to the
Main Hypothesis. The full analysis described in

14
15
Raskin, Victor: Semantic Mechanisms of Humor, p.118
Page 22

Semantic Mechanisms of Humor offers some
components which are unnecessary for finding the
answers to the research questions, and therefore the
analysis of a sketch will be a simplified version of the
script analysis, focusing on the most important aspects
of the theory.

General Theory of Verbal Humour
The following chapter is based on the book edited by
Victor Raskin: The Primer of Humor Research.
The General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH) was
proposed by Salvatore Attardo and Victor Raskin in
1991, as a response to the Semantic Script Theory of
Humour (SSTH) by Raskin, which was, admittedly,
only effective for analysing shorter humorous texts.
Therefore, it was reviewed and extended and became
one of the six knowledge resources in the General
Theory of Verbal Humour:

1. SO: the Script Opposition of the SSTH.
2. Logical Mechanism (LM): corresponds to the
resolution phase of the incongruity/resolution
models, essentially it is the mechanism whereby
the incongruity of the SO is playfully and/or
partially explained away.
3. Situation (SI): refers to the props of the joke,
the textual materials evoked by the script of the
joke that are not funny (so, in a joke about a dog
in a pub, the background knowledge about pubs,
such that they serve beer, etc. is as part of the SI)
4. Target (TA): what is known as the butt of the
joke.
5. Narrative Strategy (NS): the genre of the joke,
such as riddle, 1-2-3 structure, question and
answer, etc.
Page 23

6. Language (LA): the actual lexical, syntactical,
phonological, etc. choices at the linguistic level
that instantiate all the other choices.
16

It was later determined that, although being an
extension of the SSTH, the GTVH still lacked the
components to properly analyse longer humorous texts.
However, with its increase in knowledge resources, it
had broadened the scope of the analysis to comprise all
linguistic levels.

To better understand what each knowledge resource
offers in the analysis of a humorous text, an elaboration
is in place:

The Script Opposition is, according to Raskin,
smaller jokes, mostly puns, consisting of two assertions:

16
Raskin, Victor, ed.: The Primer of Humor Research
the first, that a joke is made of two scripts overlapping
over the joke and secondly, that the scripts are opposed.
This element allows one to specify the actors of a joke
and suggests the area of conflict, which will lead to the
comical conclusion.

The Logical Mechanism serves to clarify on the
mentioned area of conflict and the resolution within the
joke, in other words, it explains the gist. In that sense,
it has the same purpose as the Incongruity Theory,
except for being, analytically, on a more superfluous
level.

The Situation is, as mentioned above, the background
elements indirectly related to the joke. It serves to
identify the setting and will, in many cases, be vital for
the joke to come through to its audience. One could
consider this the knowledge resource that allows the
Page 24

listener to prepare empirical knowledge, as to prepare
for the joke.

The Target is simply the victim of the joke. In
accordance with the Superiority Theory, this knowledge
resource classifies the degraded, the being to whom we
feel superior. If the listener identifies with the target, it
is possible that the humorous release, which is said to be
implemented in the feeling of being superior
17
, will
fade.

The Narrative Strategy functions as an indicator, as to
which type of joke one is to be subjected to. Knowing
the genre of a joke, one will have some presumptions as
to how the joke is structured grammatically and what
outcome to expect. This is, however, also apparent to
the one telling the joke. In some cases, a Narrative
Strategy can serve to deceive the listener into expecting

17
Morreall, John: Taking Laughter Seriously.
a certain ending, expectations which will not be met,
resulting in a release of laughter.

Lastly, the Language serves to indicate the
sociolinguistics. On a basic level of analysis, this can
help identify: social factors, gender variation, class and
dialect. In combination with other knowledge resources,
looking at Language can change the expectations to
certain humorous texts; e.g. the a man walks into a bar
joke can have a significantly different appearance if the
man happens to speak in a certain dialect, e.g. A Texan
dialect. Apart from having an idea of the geographical
setting, the dialect might also suggest a certain turn of
event or outcome, which, again, will allow for the
audience to be misled.

In summary, the General Theory of Verbal Humour
offers tools to analyse the structural and linguistic
features of a humorous text, and can, in combination
Page 25

with theories of humour, give a broad analysis of a joke.
Do note, that in order to analyse a verbal joke, it must
first be transcribed.

Communication in Humour

Bona-fide Communication
The following chapter is based on the writings by
Victor Raskin in his book Semantic Mechanisms of
Humor.
When engaged in an everyday conversation, where
the communication is genuine, people are engaged in
bona-fide communication. In bona-fide communication,
the speaker is committed to the relevance and sincerity
of his message. In turn, the hearer is aware of, and
recognises, this fact, and therefore perceives the
message to be one that is true and relevant.

Paul Grice introduced the cooperative principle in
1975, which explained the way verbal communication
should be conducted in order to be successful. Grice
introduced the four maxims:

1. Maxim of Quantity: Make your contribution
neither less nor more informative than is
required
2. Maxim of Quality: Try to make your
contribution one that is true
3. Maxim of Relation: Be relevant
4. Maxim of Manner: Be perspicuous
(i) Avoid obscurity of expression
(ii) Avoid ambiguity
(iii) Be brief
Page 26

(iv) Be orderly
18

If the hearer in a bona-fide conversation is having a
tough time perceiving the message as being true and
relevant, s/he will always, at first, give the speaker the
benefit of the doubt. The hearer will do so by searching
for an interpretation, which again will make him/her
able to perceive the message as being true and relevant.
If the hearer succeeds in doing so, a felicitous speech act
occurs. This is how allusions and implicatures are made
and successfully perceived in bona-fide communication:
the hearer receives information which is implying
something not said, so in order to understand the
message conveyed, the hearer alludes and implicates
meanings.

18
Fabricius, Anne: " Speech Acts and Language Functions " Text and Sign

Non-Bona-Fide Communication
If a conversation, at any point, does not follow the
maxims, non-bona-fide communication occurs. Since
humour is a part of this communication form, when
entering a joke-telling mode, the non-bona-fide
communication takes place. It occurs in four different
situations. These can be combined in six different ways.
Two in (1), two in (2) and two combining (1) and (2):

1. (i) The speaker makes the joke
unintentionally
(ii) The speaker makes the joke intentionally
2. (i) The hearer does not expect the joke
(ii) The hearer expects a joke
19

The following is an examination of what happens in
different combinations:

19
Page 27

In (1.i) the speaker is creating an ambiguity
unintentionally. S/he is engaged in bona-fide
communication, which means that, to the best of the
speakers knowledge, s/he is committed to a serious,
sincere, information-conveying conversation. The
intention of the speaker is to deliver an unambiguous
statement, but because an unintentional ambiguity is
produced, this is no longer possible for him/her to do so,
because the ambiguity now puts the hearer in a
humorous mood.

In the case of (1.ii) the speaker is intentionally
entering the non-bona-fide communication, and is
deliberately creating a script overlap (an overlap of one
interpretation of the text to another one). When in non-
bona-fide communication, the aim of the speaker is no
longer to convey a truthful conversation but rather to
make the hearer laugh.

In (2.i) the hearer does not expect a joke, and
therefore believes s/he is engaged in a bona-fide
conversation. This will make the hearer try to interpret
the message as one that is true and relevant. If this turns
out to be impossible, the hearer will then look for an
alternative way to interpret it. Since, in most societies,
joke-telling is a more acceptable and frequent way of
non-bona-fide communication than lying, it is more
comfortable for the hearer to assume that the speaker is
joking (Are you kidding?) than to assume that s/he is
being lied to. This will make the hearer enter the joke-
telling mode.

In the case of (2.ii) the hearer is expecting a joke, and
will try to understand the message as such. Therefore
s/he will not try to interpret the message as bona-fide
communication.

Page 28

In (1.i 2.i) there is still a possibility of maintaining
bona-fide communication, if it is possible to interpret
the message of the speaker in a non-humorous way.
Furthermore, it is also possible if both the speaker and
the hearer fail to notice the ambiguity. If the ambiguity
goes unnoticed, the joke does not even occur, as the
unintended ambiguity remains unperceived and
suppressed. Furthermore, if the hearer is under the
impression that the speaker is following Grices four
maxims, then s/he will perceive the text as true and
relevant, so bona-fide communication will continue to
occur.

In (1.i 2.ii) the speaker is engaged in, what he thinks
is, a bona-fide conversation but this is not the case.
Here, the hearer perceives the utterance made by the
speaker as being humorous, and thus, the speakers
attempt to convey a true and relevant message, fails.
The hearer may interpret this message in a humorous
way for a number of reasons s/he might be attuned to a
humorous mood by the speaker, deliberately or
inadvertently, or might already be in this mood due to a
previous conversation with a third part. The message of
the speaker may also be one that makes a non-serious
interpretation more likely.

In the case of (1.ii 2.i) the speaker makes a joke,
which the hearer does not expect. Pranks, leg-pulling
and conundrums are all part of this category.

In the last possible combination (1.ii 2.ii) both the
speaker and the hearer are attuned to humour, and to
each other. They are both actively engaged in a non-
bona-fide, joke-telling form of communication.

In everyday conversations, most people adhere to
Grices four maxims. When considering joke-telling
form of communication, it should be noted that the four
Page 29

maxims contradict the whole idea of joke-telling. In
fact, comedy breaks the original maxims. Therefore, in
the book Semantic Mechanisms of Humor, Raskin
includes revised maxims that can be applied to joke-
telling mode of communication:

1. Maxim of Quantity: Give exactly as much
information as is necessary for the joke
2. Maxim of Quality: Say only what is
compatible with the world of the joke
3. Maxim of Relation: Say only what is relevant
to the joke
4. Maxim of Manner: Tell the joke efficiently
20

In the new revised Maxims of Humour, the hearer
does not expect the speaker to deliver a message that is
true and relevant, but rather that the speaker will try to
make him/her laugh, by using joke-telling. Therefore,

20
the hearer will actively search for the joke ingredients
in the speakers message.

Comedy not only breaks the maxims, occasionally,
it will also exploit them. An example of maxim
exploitation can be seen in the usage of implications in
humour. When implicating, a speaker adds an
underlying meaning to the message conveyed. This, as
will be mentioned later, is especially common in the
understanding of puns.

Most humour breaks the maxims invented by Paul
Grice. They do so in order to steer clear of normal bona-
fide communication, so the listener will recognise that a
joke is being told. But as shown, new maxims for
humour have been introduced, as depicted in Semantic
Mechanisms of Humor by Victor Raskin, and these
should be followed in order to create laughter in a
sufficient way.
Page 30

Just as bona-fide communication fails if Paul Grices
maxims are not abided by, so will humour if the non-
bona-fide cooperative maxims are not. Joke-telling
might also fail, even if the speaker does everything right
according to the maxims, and provides all the necessary
ingredients. The hearer might simply not get the joke.
In order to avoid the situation where the hearer does
not get the joke, the philosopher Sigmund Freud has
outlined positive and negative factors that accompany
the reception of humour. The positive factors are:

1. The most favorable condition for the
production of comic pleasure is a generally
cheerful mood in which one is inclined to
laugh...
2. A similarly favorable effect is produced by an
expectation of the comic, by being attuned to
comic pleasure
3. ...The generating of comic pleasure can be
encouraged by any other pleasurable
accompanying circumstance...
21

Freuds second positive factor has been explored by
many other researchers, who concluded that special
devices can be used by the speaker to enhance the
reception of humour. Such devices are often used by
professional comedians to put the receivers in the right
mood of expectation. Often comedians start their jokes
with words like Let me tell you a funny story, This is
a joke, or Something funny happened to me today
etc. By doing so, comedians immediately put the
hearers mind into receiving and interpreting the
information, with regards to non-bona-fide
communication.

21
Page 31

Freud also presents the negative factors that might
influence the reception of humour:

4. Unfavorable conditions for the comic arise
from the kind of mental activity with which a
particular person is occupied at the moment
5. The opportunity for the release of comic
pleasure disappears, too, if the attention is
focused precisely on the comparison from
which the comic may emerge
6. The comic is greatly interfered with if the
situation from which it ought to develop gives
rise at the same time to a release of strong
affect
22

In his shows, Eddie Izzard fulfils all three positive
factors for humour reception. The fact that his jokes are
delivered in a stand-up show already ensures that the

22
hearer is prepared for a humorous environment, and
prepares to interpret all the text as humorous.

Theories of Humour
The Superiority Theory

History of the Superiority Theory
Though still being developed and refined through
modern time, Superiority Theory can at least be traced
back to the fifth century B.C.E., where philosophers
Plato and Aristotle were highly influential. Giving life
to the very first speculations of humour, they both
formed theories concerning the feeling of superiority
when finding something funny.

In Platos work Philebus, he describes how humour
is a [...] mixture of pleasure and pain that lies in the
Page 32

malice of amusement.
23
He argues that, in comedy, we
feel gladness rather than gloom, when experiencing
someone elses misfortune. He continues that ignorance
and misfortune is a laughable matter, when seen through
the eyes of more blessed individuals. Plato also reflects
on superiority in his work Republic, where he argues
that humour should not be applied to stories of the gods,
which were presented to children, because it would
make them feel higher, more superior, and they would
therefore lose respect.

Aristotles development of Platos theories on
superiority, argued that the means of the ridicule should
not be to cause harm:

Those who carry humour to excess are thought
to be vulgar buffoons, striving after humour at
all costs, and aiming rather at raising a laugh

23
Plato: Philebus
than at saying what is becoming and at avoiding
pain to the object of their fun Nicomachean
Ethics (IV, 8)
24
. And later on, in the same
chapter, Aristotle concludes: But those who
joke in a tasteful way are called ready-witted...

25

Social Contract Theory
Many centuries later, Thomas Hobbes (April 5th,
1588 - December 4th, 1679) picked up where Plato and
Aristotle had left, developing what turned out to be the
first clear formulation of the Superiority Theory. The
issue of governmental authority was discussed amongst
several grand thinkers between the seventeenth and the
nineteenth century, which led to the creation of the
Social Contract, and inspired Hobbes to his written
work Leviathan. Originating during the Age of

24
Aristotle: "Nicomachean Ethics."
25
Smuts, Aaron: "Humor." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Page 33

Enlightenment, the Social Contract is a model which
questions the legitimacy of having a state, political
party, or government, over the individual. The Social
Contract argues that individuals must give up a part of
their freedom, and subject to the higher authority, or
majority, of society. This is to insure safety and
protection of the individual, thus maintaining a
controlled community.

In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes formulated society
with no governmental ruling as "state of nature", where
the actions of individuals are controlled only by their
own conscience. With the Social Contract, several
philosophers and theorists have sought to demonstrate
why an, otherwise independent, individual would
succumb to the rules of a government in order to
achieve the benefits of a controlled society.
26

26
Friend, Celeste: "Social Contract Theory." Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy.
Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes was a British philosopher, best
known for his work with political philosophy. In 1651,
Hobbes wrote the political/philosophical work
Leviathan, which has been the foundation of Western
political philosophy, in the perspective of the Social
Contract Theory. Being a very liberal thinker, Hobbes
believed firmly in "the free man" and that all men are
equal. Leviathan, as well as the Social Contract Theory,
concerns the structure of society and legitimate
government. Hobbes wrote Leviathan during the
English Civil War, and argues that complete order in a
society can only be obtained by the use of social
contract, which includes having an absolute sovereign or
superior. Hobbes asserted that men voluntarily agree to
give up their freedom, in favour of the authority of a
government. With the arguments of the powers obtained
by superiority in Leviathan, Hobbes was the first known
Page 34

theorist to formulate a clear description of the
Superiority Theory.
27

The Superiority Theory Explained
The earliest thinkers of the Superiority Theory (Plato
and Aristotle) all describe the negative effects that
humour actually cause in our lives. This particular
theory of humour builds on the idea of how destructive
the most basic human tendencies can be in our culture.
Even though Plato and Aristotle are some of the first to
bring this idea into light, it wasnt publically known
until Thomas Hobbes really made the theory stand out
28
.

Hobbes structured the idea of the Superiority Theory,
suggesting that laughter appears when you have a sense
of superiority over a person or an object - what he calls
sudden glory. To explain this, the term butt of the joke

27
Friend, Celeste: "Social Contract Theory." Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy.
28
Attardo, Salvatore: Linguistic Theories of Humor.
can be used to identify the main idea behind the
Superiority Theory. When someone makes a fool of
themselves, appearing less fortunate or intelligent,
someone superior can collect satisfaction from it
29
,
which is one of the reasons why we laugh at others,
using self-denigration. Furthermore, Hobbes says that
all humour is demeaning, and even the most subtle joke
is just a development of this. The pleasure that we get
from making fun of these people, comes from our
feeling that we are superior to them in some way
30
.

I may therefore conclude, that the passion
of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from
some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves,
by comparison with the infirmity of others, or with our
own formerly.
31

29
30
Monro, D. H.: Theories of Humor.
31
Lippitt, John.: "Humour and Superiority." Academia.edu.
Page 35

On the other hand, Bergson viewed the theory slightly
different, yet still emphasizing the negative side of
humour. Bergson claims that we all dislike being made
fun of, because of the position it puts us in. He
developed the theory of social corrective, used by the
society to identify and contain those who do not keep up
with the development of the group. Bergson thus
developed the theory, adding to the original. When
applying Bergsons ideas to the same example as before,
the superior takes use of the social corrective, wanting
the less fortunate individual to conform to society.
32

Although the Superiority Theory offers an interesting
view on humour, it does not work as a single analysis
model for analysing humour as a whole. The Superiority
Theory cannot be used as a tool for studying the
involved individuals, and how they interact with each
other. Without the interactions, areas such as wordplays

32
or puns cannot be explained, which is why two more
theories of humour have been developed.
The Incongruity Theory

History of Incongruity Theory
Not unlike the Superiority Theory, the development
of the Incongruity Theory traces back to the great
Greeks. In Aristotles written work Rhetoric from 350
B.C.E., he reflects on the effect an unexpected ending to
a sentence or a joke can have:

The effect is produced even by jokes
depending upon changes of the letters of a
word; this too is a surprise. You find this in
verse as well as in prose. The word which comes
is not what the hearer imagined...
33

33
Aristotle: Rhetoric
Page 36

Aristotle describes the creation of such a sentence as
having a twist, or surprise, making a drastic change in
the perception of the sentence:

Jokes made by altering the letters of a word
consist in meaning, not just what you say, but
something that gives a twist to the word used.
34

This type of inconsistency is still used today by most
stand-up comedians, using a set-up and a punch line.
Thus, there is built up an expectation from the set-up,
which then surprises the audience by having an altering
twist to the story.

Several centuries later, the French philosopher Blaise
Pascal did some further developing of the theory.
During the seventeenth century, Pascal proposed that:

34
Aristotle: Rhetoric
"Nothing produces laughter more than a
surprising disproportion between that which one
expects and that which one sees.
35

However, although there had been plenty of
interpretations on the theory, it wasnt until 1779 that it
was properly named. James Beattie was the first
philosopher to use the word incongruous in relation to
humour. He proposed that:

The cause of humorous laughter is two or
more inconsistent, unsuitable, or incongruous
parts or circumstances, considered as united in
one complex object or assemblage, as acquiring
a sort of mutual relation from the peculiar
manner in which the mind takes notice of them
(320).
36

35
"Humor - Superiority Theory." Science Encyclopedia.
36
"Philosophy of Humor ." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Page 37

Later on, during the eighteenth century, as a reaction
to Thomas Hobbes Superiority Theory, the theory was
further developed. As mentioned, the Superiority Theory
explains the occurrence of laughter as being directly
linked to the motives of the person who laughs. Instead,
the Incongruity Theory tries to identify the conflicting
things in our society that evoke laughter.

By taking this new step towards another way of
explaining laughter, it laid the foundations for a new and
more modern way of understanding and studying
humour. At the same time, it also took an important step
towards ridding laughter from these suspicions: that
humour was only used to make fun of someone or
something.
37

37
Raskin, Victor. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor
The Incongruity Theory Explained
The Incongruity Theory focuses on the element of
surprise, and is often identified with frustrated
expectations. The theory states that humour is created
out of a conflict between what is expected and what
actually occurs in a joke. Whether something
unexpected happens in our everyday lives, or it has been
artificially created, a sudden twist from our initial
expectations can sometimes provoke laughter. This
accounts for the strongest feature of most humour: an
ambiguity, or double meaning, which deliberately
misleads the audience, followed by a punch line. That is
the reason why too frequent repetition can rob a joke of
its humour, since the initial expectation is no longer
different from the end result of the joke.

The Incongruity Theory argues that mixing two ideas,
which are considered to be completely different, is
essential to humour. The cleverness of a joke will
Page 38

therefore depend on two things: how different the
subjects of the joke are, and the level on which these
subjects are connected in the punch line.
According to the Incongruity Theory, humour also
breaks Paul Grices maxims in the use of language. As
mentioned, in the bona-fide communication part, the
maxims state that we should aim to communicate
clearly. By not doing so, a form of humour arises. This
is one of the reasons why the non-bona-fide maxims
were introduced.

Interestingly enough, not having your expectations
fulfilled, can also evoke anger. Therefore, there can be a
very fine line between incongruity, which is intended to
be humorous, and the superiority principle, which can
easily be misinterpreted into being mean. This
especially occurs in practical jokes, as they depend on
people being of the same mind-set, and in the right
mood. After all, the victim of a practical joke would not
be able to see it coming, but the person setting up the
victim should have been. Maybe the situation will evoke
laughter, but, as mentioned, it might evoke anger, if the
action of the prankster can be interpreted as being mean.
If so, the situation might be seen as being not so funny,
as it is difficult for people to see themselves in ways
they do not expect or want to, and thereby be laughed at.
On the other hand, people will gladly laugh at others
(superiority), but especially when it is intentionally done
by the use of self-deprecation. That might be why many
of the most successful comedians tend to come from
subcultures within our society, because some of the best
comedy arises when people are willing to make fun of
themselves, or the subculture they represent. This can be
called comedy of personal insight, because the
comedian can make jokes based on information that
people might not have, whilst making fun of him or
herself.
Page 39

Because these comedians are from slightly different
subcultures, their audiences do not feel like they,
themselves, are being made fun of. The comedians,
however, are not so different from the main social
norms, that they cannot be seen as one of us. This
creates a safe-zone for the audience, seeing as they do
not feel targeted by the joke, but will still be able to
understand why it is comical.

Incongruity Theory and Puns
The easiest way to use incongruity in a joke is to do a
pun, which is a form of wordplay. It makes puzzles from
written or spoken language, by exploiting words, which
has two or more meanings, thereby giving the same
word different meanings and implications to the
receiver.
In a pun, the understanding of a joke is purely verbal.
In a normal joke, there is often a connection between the
main theme and/or character, and the punch line, but in
a pun there is often no connections made, and no actual
punch line. The only thing needed, in a pun, is for the
hearer to be of the same humorous mood as the speaker
delivering the joke, so s/he understands the underlying
meaning of the pun.

The incongruity in puns occurs when the text
linguistically takes advantage of words with more than
one meaning or similar sounding words. Therefore a
specific pun is often closely tied to a language, or a
culture consisting of people with the same form of
humour. A word in any one language, which has a
double meaning, making a pun funny, will probably not
have the same effect, or even meaning, if translated into
another language this is also true for most jokes. It is
difficult to explain to a person, not speaking the same
language, why something is funny, which is why
humour is such a cultural phenomenon.

Page 40

The sketch Transvestite in the Army from Dress to
Kill, demonstrates how a pun is created. Here, Eddie
Izzard mimes the part of a squirrel, which possesses a
lot of human qualities, e.g. thinking, talking, worrying,
etc. The example will show how a word can become
ambiguous by adding a second meaning to it. At one
point the squirrel goes: Fucking nuts! Fed up with them
always... I long for a grapefruit. (appx. 2.16) When the
squirrel utters this statement, it can actually be
understood in two different ways. The first being, that
the squirrel goes fucking nuts, as in the squirrel has
become mad or mentally ill. In this case the word nuts
refers to the word crazy. Then Eddie Izzard pauses for
just a second, until he adds, as the squirrel: Fed up with
them always. This implies that it is not the case that the
squirrel has become mentally ill, but rather that it is
tired of eating nuts all the time. Then another small
break, and then Eddie Izzard, again as the squirrel, goes
I long for a grapefruit, to make the pun clear for those
who might not have gotten the play on words the first
time.
The Relief Theory

History of the Relief Theory
Opposed to the Superiority Theory and the
Incongruity Theory, the Relief Theory is mainly based
on psychological studies. It traces back to the 19
th

century, where Herbert Spencer developed a thesis,
laying the groundwork of the Relief Theory, in his work
The Physiology of Laughter.
In the book he describes a concept that is greatly
inspired by a previous theory, called the hydraulic
theory. This theory was highly popular at the time,
being influenced by the steam engine. According to
Spencer, the body uses laughter, as a means of muscular
motion to get rid of nervous energy that has been build
Page 41

up in our bodies, in the same way as the valve on a
steam engine. Spencer claims that the muscular and
respiratory functions that occur from laughter are a
natural mechanism, which is designed to relieve the
body of nervous energy hence the Relief Theory.
38

Years later, Sigmund Freud picked up where Spencer
had left, with his written work Jokes and Their Relation
to the Unconscious from 1905. In the book, he redefines
the Relief Theory, keeping the basics of Spencers
theory, yet advancing the idea of relief via laughter.

Freud divides the theory into three types of laughter,
which, individually, are supposed to release different
types of build up energy, much like Spencers theory,
yet much more refined.
39

38
Martin, Rod A.: The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach, p. 58
39
Smuts, Aaron. "Humor." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Relief Theory Explained
As explained, the Relief Theory is based on a very
basic idea that we release tension when we laugh, the
most notable writers of this idea being Spencer and
Freud. Spencer believes that everybody builds up energy
through nervous feelings and/or stress, which is then
released through humour. It is the management of the
everyday stress that gives us this extra energy, and this
[...] must expend itself in some way or another.
40

Spencer implies that [...] nervous excitation always
tends to beget muscular motion.
41
Laughter, being the
result of muscular motion, becomes a way of releasing
many forms of nervous energy. He came to this idea
because of his prior work on the hydraulic theory.
Thus, looking at the Relief Theory, we are given a
concrete reason to why we laugh.
42

40
41
42
Page 42

Freud, who is known as the father of psychoanalysis,
wrote a much more elaborate version of the same theory
as Spencer - just with a new process. This process is
splitting up the source of laughter into three different
groups: joking, the comic, and the humorous, that
involves building up of some psychic energy and then
releasing it. In joking, all the energy that was going to
be used to repress sexual and hostile emotions is stored,
and can possibly be released by laughing. In the comic,
all of the leftover energy that one has after using ones
cognitive energy for solving an intellectual problem can
be released. The humorous is basically the emotional
energy that is saved up through the misunderstanding of
a situation, which turns into something that should not
have been taken so seriously. The build-up of energy
from the serious emotional situation can then be
released.
43

43
Society makes us tie down some certain impulses,
like the sexual and hateful impulses, by giving us laws
and rules to follow, which is what Freud calls the
censor.
44
This means that everything that is laughed at,
by you or anybody else, is something that one has
repressed, which then has a side effect of laughter.
Freud thought of humour as a way of out-smarting the
censor
45
. The best way to get around the censor,
according to Freud, is either to deceive or disarm it. The
way you would deceive it, would best be done by using
tools of humour, for example a pun. This allows Freud
to account for indecent and harmful humour, just like
what the Superiority Theory focuses on. The Relief
Theory also includes that, if a person had all this stress
about something, and it is suddenly removed, s/he might
find some humour in it.
46

44
45
46
Page 43

Applying Theories
The Native Americans
Introduction to Discourse Analysis
The sketch chosen is about a group of newcomers,
who comes to America, and eventually realize that
Native Americans already live there. This sketch
provides a lot of humorous ways to portray the conflict
between the different cultures of the Native Americans
and the newcomers. Additionally, it has an ironic and
satiric view on historical happenings that actually took
place. When looking at a text analytically, it is
necessary to identify and characterize discourses. It is
important to note that not all of the discourse elements
are relevant to the research, so the analysis will focus on
the aspects deemed relevant.

The goal with the discourse analysis, is to examine
the way in which a deeper implication and meaning is
established, through the way Izzard performs his
sketches. How the words used are carried out, what the
deeper meanings with these are, and how Izzard uses
linguistics. As mentioned, it is important to look at the
different small pieces that, in the end, will contribute to
achieving a bigger picture. The first elements of the
analysis will be a general analysis, followed by the more
specific elements.

Immediate Analysis
When Eddie Izzard is first performing as the
Newcomers, he uses his body language to support the
words used. When he speaks about the place that God
has brought them to, in order to raise a family and
practice religion where nobody has ever been before, he
is holding out both arms in great pride, clutches his fists,
Page 44

and holds his arms out in excitement to back up the
enthusiasm of the character portrayed (appx. 1.03).

Then the Newcomer is suddenly leaning and looking
to his right, as if talking to someone beside him (appx.
1.04). His eyebrows are lifted, as if to back up his mime
of asking a question directed at the native beside him.
He then leans back, walks with same enthusiasm as
before the disruption, and continues to say that nobody
is around. This makes the audience laugh, because the
excuse me was an obvious contradiction to the fact
that nobody is here. The audience have, by now,
figured out that there must be standing a native right
beside the Newcomer. This is also supported by the next
comment made by the Newcomer, asking: Who the
fuck are these guys? (appx. 1.05).

The newcomer then points with a thumb over his
shoulder, gazing in front of him with a questioning look,
like he is speaking to one of his fellow Americans. Then
he turns back to the Native American, gesturing a
headdress by putting his hands up in the air, waving his
hands while pointing out, that they certainly do not need
any food (appx. 1.06).

Eddie portrays the Newcomers as egocentric and
better knowing, and the Native Americans as very polite
and with great hospitality. He is backing this up with the
detail that his newcomer character turns back to his
fellow newcomers with a smirk, as if the offer made was
laughable, with the comment: Just put some clothes
on! (appx. 1.06).

Eddie Izzard then returns to being himself, which is
made clear by the way his face relaxes, and stops the
mime. He points his finger at the audience, to get their
attention, and then goes Meanwhile, that winter..."
(appx. 1.07).
Page 45

Eddie now returns to being the character of the
Newcomer by re-entering his state of mime, running
across the stage, changing his voice into the one we
know from before: Excuse me, do you have any food?
(appx. 1.07). The character is now smiling, and Eddie
makes it clear that the Newcomers were unable to take
care of themselves, unlike the Native Americans. He
uses his body language to switch around the roles of the
characters, so that the Native Americans are now
superior. He does this by making the Newcomer humble
and having him trying to charm the Native American
character. He does this with flattering comments about
the exact same things as he had made fun of moments
ago. He then uses the same hand gesture of the
headpiece as before, but this time he is saying I love all
this. Lovely idea. (appx. 1.08) The character laughs
nervously, to show his desperation, and apologizes for
the initial rudeness (appx. 1.09).

The Newcomer is now tilting his body back and forth,
as if he is nervous and impatient, with an unconvincing
smile. Then, the character changes into being more
superior and confident, standing up tall and laying his
hands on his lap. This signals a completely different
attitude, and with this, he questions the fact that the
natives do not have any system of ownership (appx.
1.10). Having received what they wanted, the
Newcomers can, again, do as they please.

Eddie Izzard implies that the newcomers are all about
power and profit, even if it causes suffering for others.
This is backed up by the Newcomers further
commenting on how more of them will be arriving, and
how this should not be a problem for them. The
Newcomer takes the food naively handed to him by the
Native American (appx. 1.11).

Page 46

The audience knows from the historical event that
when more of the Newcomers arrive it will be a problem
it actually results in something catastrophic for the
natives. The Newcomers will not keep their promises: as
we know, they tricked the natives by giving them false
hopes and promises, which were never kept. In
conclusion, this is an ironic situation.

Eddie Izzard, now performing as himself, makes
some final remarks on the sketch, using more irony.
Eddie turns, making a neutral expression with his face,
diverse from when he is acting like the characters in the
sketch. He looks directly at the audience, which is never
done when playing a character.

Eddie, now speaking as himself:

So the American government lied to the
Native Americans for many, many years, and
then President Clinton lied about a relationship
and everyone was surprised. (appx. 1.12)
Eddie pauses to let the irony sink in, letting the
silence speak for itself until he, with his eyebrows lifted,
says: A little naive, I feel (appx. 1.12 and 1.13)

Eddie Izzard puts the whole matter with the Native
Americans versus the Newcomers into a bigger
perspective. By pointing out what people get shocked
about nowadays, he lets the audience get the point - and
maybe even feel a little dumb. By comparing the
peoples reactions to these two very different matters,
Eddie Izzard makes his point of view clear.

Main Function of the Interaction
Eddie Izzard is performing an informal/desultory
interaction. The show is built up as a dialogue between
Izzard and the audience. Even though Izzard is the only
speaker, the audience's response makes the show work
Page 47

as a dialogue, since the spoken language, the words said
and the performance, depend on the reaction of the
audience.

Macro-function of the Sketch
The topics change freely, as they usually do in
desultory conversations. The spoken language is highly
informal, with a great deal of non-prestigious forms,
such as slang, swearing, different dialects, etc.

Body Language
Breaking the dialogue into smaller parts provided a
better chance to describe some important factors in the
dialogue. Body language and spoken language are two
very different things, but both can be used to create
humour. Independently, they can make people laugh,
but in combination with each other, they expand the
opportunities of making different punch lines. Even
though the body language can back up the spoken word
to make the point of a sketch even more humoristic, the
two ways of performing can also work against each
other, making a double meaning. When Eddie Izzard
performs the Newcomer in the chosen sketch as being a
friendly and generous type, the body language can show
the opposite. Furthermore, body language and spoken
language can fit well together, resulting in nothing
making sense without both parts present, e.g. when
Izzard, as the Newcomer, refers to the Native
Americans headpiece with hand gestures (appx. 1.05).

Relationship between the Participant Roles
Even though participant roles are defined by the
situation, the stand-up show generally works as a
teacher/student situation. The audience seems to be
Izzards students, patiently listening to his "knowledge"
(In this case, jokes about Izzards observations in life,
and his points of view).

Page 48

Eddie Izzard is using humour as a tool to make the
audience listen. In this way, people are more likely to let
him convince, or teach, them to think and feel the same
way as he does. By steering his humour into something
everyone knows about, or have experience with, people
are more likely to adopt and accept this knowledge,
even though they do not really have a chance to respond
to what Izzard says. Although the audience does not
speak during the show, they still have a say: Eddie
Izzard brings up topics, but it is still the audience who
react to these. They do this mostly by laughing, and
when they do that, Izzard knows that he is on the right
track, and he knows in which direction to continue.
Conversely, the audience can react with no laughter at
all, which notifies Izzard that he might have crossed a
line, or that the audience may not have understood the
specific joke. Sometimes the audience might even have
an aversion to what Izzard says on stage, and they will
start making a nervous laughter, sounds of revulsion,
offended murmurs, or just some sarcastic howls. Then,
Izzard knows that he is to avoid further uproar.
Sometimes when the audience reacts differently than
Izzard expects, he will bring out an imaginary notepad
and pen from his pocket, and writes down, while saying:
"Never do that joke again, ever!"
47
Doing this, Izzard is
able to turn the situation into something yet again
laughable.

Izzard is the obvious sender, and the audience the
receiver, but sometimes the roles are switched around.
This happens rarely though, as people's boundaries seem
to be wide when going to a stand-up show, and Izzard is
undoubtedly the dominant participant.

Features of Spontaneous Speech
An interesting thing about stand-up comedy is its
unique way of using spontaneous speech, which has not

47
From Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard, 1999.
Page 49

been pre-recorded. This means that a stand-up comedian
works without a safety net, as there is nothing that
protects the performer(s) from making errors. Also, the
comedian has to be aware of the fact that s/he might
offend the audience during some performances, but not
in others, since the mood of the audience, on the day,
might be different. However, it is possible for the
comedian to look through the script and performance
beforehand, trying to make sure to avoid a situation
where an audience might be offended. It is possible for
the entertainer to rehearse over and over again, until a
sophisticated and fulfilling performance is reached.

The linguistics of stand-up comedy consists of much
more informal language than broadcast television, even
though stand-up comedians have scripts, and rehearse
their performances. The linguistics will still have to
seem unstructured and natural (spontaneous speech).
This can be accomplished by using a lot of colloquial
words, such as kinda, didnt, aint, etc. Eddie
Izzard does this as well: What's all this, please? No, we
dont want any of your food, thank you very much!
(appx. 1.06)

Conclusion on Discourse Analysis
Eddie Izzard uses his stand-up show to illustrate his
point of view on different topics important to him. Eddie
Izzard is trying to guide the audience towards sharing
his views. By offering a perception of events and affairs
that people can relate to, he, and comedians in general,
make viewers feel connected to him by the respect he
gains through laughter. This respect for the performer
makes it possible to eradicate the prejudice people might
have for e.g. transvestism. This makes it achievable,
through stand-up, to have an influence on e.g. politics
and culture.

Page 50

Transvestite in the Army

Semantic Script Theory of Humour Analysis
The following is an analysis using the Semantic Script
Theory of Humour applied to an extract from the sketch
taken from the show Dress to Kill.

For better understanding of the extract, the summary
of the sketch is: Eddie Izzard is talking about
transvestites not being allowed to be recruited in the
army, because of the dont ask, dont tell policy. He
then continues by telling the following joke:

(1) They're missing a huge opportunity, because
one of the main elements of attack is the element
of surprise.
So what could be more surprising... than the 1
st

battalion Transvestite Brigade? (appx. 2.22 and
2.23)

Since this joke is only an extract (for full joke, see
appx. 2), there are words before the extract that evoke
the native speakers standard script of the first sentence
of the joke (appx. 2.22). These words are Army and
Forces. The words in the previous sentences already
evoke the script of something conservative, serious,
traditional, heterosexual, identical etc. (appx. 2.18 to
2.21)
The first sentence evokes a standard script of a tactic
that is commonly used in combat; an attack where the
enemy is attacked without any warning, thus not giving
any time for preparation. The hearers common sense
proposes that the script is Unexpected Attack.

Page 51

When reading the next sentence (the hearer still has
the script of unexpected attack in mind), the word
Transvestite puts the hearer in doubt: the word suggests
something untraditional, not conservative, homosexual,
unique - completely opposite of the association with the
words Army or Forces. Because the standard script is
closely associated with those words, the opposition of
the word Transvestite creates an overlap to the second
interpretation of the text a literal understanding of the
words Element of Surprise: the enemy is surprised to see
a transvestite brigade.

There are two interpretations of the text (two scripts),
so the text matches the first condition of the Main
Hypothesis. Furthermore, the two scripts are opposite
the second condition is also met.

A text can be considered humorous when the two
conditions are met, which the text has achieved. The
conclusion of the script analysis on the extract is that it
can be considered a joke.

The Relief Theory Applied
Below, the Relief Theory is applied to the Eddie
Izzards sketch Transvestite in the Army from the stand-
up show Dress to Kill. However, the main focus is on
the squirrel bit (appx. 2.08 to 2.16). The analysis is
focusing on how the audience, as well as Eddie Izzard,
release their built up energy through laughter. As
mentioned earlier, according to Freud, the Relief Theory
is the build-up of psychic energy, because of the censor
that makes us repress sexual and crude impulses. The
censor can be defined as the rules that our society makes
us follow, which keeps us from doing the things that
arent acceptable.
It is apparent that Eddie is going around the censor
throughout the stand-up show, first of all because of the
clothing that he is wearing. Now, when Eddie says I
Page 52

used to keep all my make-up in the squirrel hole up in
the tree (appx. 2.08), it implies that the he needed to
hide it. As result of the norms of society, Izzard as a kid
could not put on make-up; same goes for the squirrel it
needs to keep these things secret. In a way one might
make the connection that the squirrel and Eddie is the
same person, and that this is how Eddie gets to release
his repressed emotions - which is where the build-up of
energy comes from until it is released. The crowd finds
this funny because of the energy that they have built up
throughout the day, and get to laugh it out because
Eddie makes it possible for them to dodge the censor, so
to speak. Eddie makes this possible by using puns and
word play, a prime example being when he says: [...]
occasionally they go fucking nuts. (appx. 2.16)

Conclusion on the Sketch
In his performance of this sketch, Eddie Izzard
misleads and tricks the audience, and by doing so, he
shapes their expectations. He then leads the thread of
conversation off topic, causing these expectations to be
unfulfilled. As the example above and the Incongruity
Theory tell us, it is these unfulfilled, or frustrated,
expectations that cause laughter, which is exactly what
happens: the audience laughs.

Ich bin ein Berliner

Introduction
In this sketch Eddie Izzard takes the famous speech of
American president John F. Kennedy (J.F.K.), given in
front of The Berlin Wall on the 26
th
of June in 1963, and
makes his most famous line from that speech into a
joke, by switching the spotlight to a flaw in the
presidents German grammar.

Page 53

In his speech, J.F.K. spoke about the great issues
between the communist world and the free world, which
never needed a wall to prevent people from leaving their
countries. He considered the Berlin Wall a symbol of all
the failures of the communist world. The wall kept
families separated, and people, who were supposed to be
free, trapped.

Kennedy says that the post-war generation of
Germans has earned its right to be free, but as long as
this wall stands and one in four Germans are denied
their freedom, this freedom cannot be assured.

J.F.K. then goes on to talk about how the people of
West Berlin live on a defended island, but behind enemy
lines. He expresses his, and the American peoples,
sympathy for West Berlins people, who have been
living under siege for 18 years, and praises them for
how they have kept vitality, fighting spirit and hope.
The President puts West Berlin up as a symbol for West
Germanys commitment to democracy, freedom and
progress.

As Kennedy approaches the end of his speech, he tells
the crowd that people can only look forward to the day
when the city is once again united, and when that day
comes, the people of West Berlin can proudly say that
they were on the front line in the fight for freedom. As
he puts it: All free men, wherever they live, are citizens
of Berlin. And therefore I take pride in (saying) the
words; Ich bin ein Berliner.

In this speech, President Kennedy is arguing for
peace, also on an individual level, in the midst of the
Cold War. He is also encouraging the people of West
Berlin and the West German government, who are
standing up to the Soviet Union. All in all, this speech
had an impact on both American and German history,
Page 54

but this is not Eddie Izzards point of focus. As
mentioned earlier, he removes the spotlight from the
intentional focus of the speech to J.F.K.s bad German.

GTVH Analysis
In this chapter, the General Theory of Verbal Humour
(GTVH) will be applied to the sketch. The analysis will
be done in a chronological order according to the six
Knowledge Resources
48
. Seeing as more than one
analytical tool will be used to analyse Ich bin ein
Berliner, some parts of the GTVH-analysis will draw
less focus, since they will be thoroughly analysed at a
later time.

The sketch is a longer monologue, in which Izzard
tells the story of how President Kennedy held a speech,
standing on the Berlin Wall, talking to the citizens of
Berlin. During the speech, President Kennedy makes the

48
Raskin, Victor, ed.: The Primer of Humor Research
mistake of adding the article ein to Berliner,
changing the meaning from Berliner, a citizen of Berlin,
to a type of pastry called a Berliner. The sketchs
focus lies on this misunderstanding, and the Berliners
further misunderstanding of this.

Before continuing, one must note that identifying the
Script Oppositions comes down to choosing what is
included in the joke. For this analysis, everything noted
in the appendix will be considered the joke (3.01 to 3.10
in the appendix). The first of the scripts of the Script
Oppositions in Ich bin ein Berliner, is the
misconception of the word Berliner. The intended
message was Ich bin Berliner (I am a Berliner), but
the conceived message, the second script, was that he
was the Berliner pastry (appx. 3.03). Additionally, the
Berliners further misunderstanding of Kennedys speech
as being intended (considering it to be part of an
American attitude) could be considered an alternative
Page 55

second script. These are the opposing scripts and thus
the main focus of the joke.

The fact that President Kennedy allegedly said he was
a doughnut in front a lot of people, is funny in itself, but
what is also funny, is Izzards playful interpretation of
the situation. Looking at the situation with a serious
mind-set, one would expect the people of Berlin to
understand the intended message, but instead, Izzard
takes the less obvious approach and plays out a
Berliners reaction (appx. 3.10). The Logical
Mechanism is that it becomes apparent that, not only has
Kennedy made a slight grammatical error, the Berliners
have, as well, interpreted that mistake as being
intentional. This leaves us with two factions who are
both misunderstanding the situation, which results in
neither of them realizing what is actually going on.

Identifying the Target becomes interesting, since two
parts end up as subjects to minor tease: Kennedy,
misusing the German language, and the Berliners,
navely expecting the mistake to be intended
considering the way the role of the Berliners is played
out (appx. 3.10), this could also be interpreted as an
insult towards Americans.

The joke is told as a summary of a historical event,
and as such, the Narrative Strategy does not convey as
many expectations as, for example, a knock-knock joke.
This leaves the field of expectations bare, and allows
Izzard to take the joke in any direction he desires.
However, Izzard still manages to raise certain
expectations through the first part of his joke:

Trouble is, Ich bin ein Berliner means I am
a doughnut, and... This is true, and this is what
Page 56

he said -- he said: I am a doughnut! (appx.
3.03)

This is his immediate punch line, but what the
audience is unaware of, is that this is not all there is to
the joke. Punch lines usually indicate that the joke is
over, and, in a sense, this does conclude the first part of
the joke; Kennedy has successfully become the Target.
However, after having played around with Kennedys
misunderstanding, Izzard introduces a new point of
view: that of the Berliners. After making it apparent that
the Berliners liked Kennedys proclamation, Izzard
continues by playing the role of a questioning Berliner
(appx. 3.09), asking what he (Kennedy) means. Izzard
answers the question on behalf of another Berliner:

It's a slang! He's American! He's a doughnut! A
fucking doughnut. [...](appx. 3.10)

Naturally, a German would understand Kennedys
intentional message, but here, the German over-analyses
the message as something intangible perhaps as an
American jargon of some sort. With this, Izzard uses a
Narrative Strategy that allows him to surprise the
audience by extending the joke beyond their
expectations (incongruity).

To deliver the joke, Izzard speaks on President
Kennedys behalf, and speaking in a fervent manner, he
says the I am a doughnut-sentence. Socially, the
President intends to establish a bond with the people of
Berlin, which becomes funny, as he, in Izzards sketch,
fails to express this intention. Ironically, the German,
answering the speculations of the meaning of Kennedys
expression, actually makes an equally funny
grammatical mistake: when explaining, he says: Its a
slang (appx. 3.10). Slang is uncountable, so the
word-usage conveys unfamiliarity with the English
Page 57

language. Izzard probably does this to better distinguish
the German from Kennedy; but as a result, both
Kennedy and the Berliner fail to correctly express
themselves. Whether this is intended on Izzards part is
unknown. He further suggests cultural alienation with
the language choice of the German. The German, being
unable to clearly express his understanding of I am a
doughnut, repeats himself while gesticulating to the
best of his ability. In the end, the sketch is perceived as
talking at cross-purposes, as a result of the Language
use.

Incongruity Analysis
In a stand-up show, it is expected that everything will
be in the form of jokes. So when Eddie Izzard brings up
J.F.K., it is not surprising to the audience that he will be
made fun of. This, however, does not mean that their
expectations will be met, for there is a very small
chance that an audience will figure out what the exact
outcome of a joke will be. Therefore, the Incongruity
Theory can be applied to most jokes, because the
receiver will always experience unfulfilled expectations
on some level Ich bin ein Berliner is no exception.

As described earlier, Eddie Izzard can be very
political. So, when he brings up the matter of the Cold
War and Kennedys speech, his audience will most
likely expect that he will present a political view on the
subject in a humorous way. This time, though, instead of
being political, he ends up making fun of Kennedy,
actually saying he is various kinds of German foods
(appx. 3.08). This creates laughter, as the audience had
no chance of knowing the direction the joke would take.

The sentence Ich bin ein Berliner is also a good
example of how bona-fide and non-bona fide
communication overlaps. Kennedy was doing a very
important political speech in a time of crises. The truth
Page 58

and relevance of the text he was trying to convey cannot
be disputed, but when he makes such an obvious
grammatical mistake, it will defeat him in this purpose.
Whether the crowd in Berlin actually perceives the
comical aspect of this grammatical error, at the time, is
more uncertain.

Regardless of this, when Eddie Izzard points it out to
his audience, what is generally accepted as a bona-fide
text suddenly becomes non-bona-fide, incongruous and
humorous (appx. 3.03).

Superiority
The joke made by Eddie Izzard is also funny if
analysed from a cultural standpoint using the
Superiority Theory. At the beginning, it is Kennedys
bad German which is at the centre of attention, but
Eddie then turns this around, also making fun of the
German peoples bad understanding of English (appx.
3.10). This, according to the Superiority Theory, is
especially funny to the audience, which is mainly
American, because of the cultural aspect. Almost every
culture will have jokes about other cultures, be it
nationalities, or different cities, or even the people living
next door, as long as a group of people can unite and
laugh at others.

The sketch Ich bin ein Berliner gives a good insight
into the way Eddie Izzard performs. Being a
professional stand-up comedian, it is expected that he
uses different methods to charm his audience, but with
the analyses it has been possible to actually define at
least some of those techniques.

Page 59

Back-Tracking

When Eddie Izzard makes a joke with focus on a
certain sentence, sound, or gesture, he can pull the
audiences attention back to that joke by repeating the
specific thing that triggered the jokes climax, and can
thus recreate the effect of the previous joke. This is
especially effective in connection with a new joke,
resulting in a sense of correlation between the jokes.
Lastly, the surprise of connecting the joke can further
strengthen the humorous gain. This is called back-
tracking, and is essentially repetition of the same
sentences, sounds or words at different times during a
performance.
Back-tracking is something Eddie Izzard uses a lot,
and it creates a huge impact on the punch lines, and
thus, amplifies the humour of a joke. During the Ich
bin ein Berliner sketch, Eddie Izzard explains how the
people of Berlin go amok. When doing so, Eddie Izzard
refers back to a previous sketch, in which he speaks
about how messages are perceived. In the previous joke,
he explains that the effect does not come from what is
being said, but the way it is communicated (appx. 3.04).

Effects of a Live Audience

Another element of stand-up comedy is sympathetic
circularity, in which a comedian will attempt to get the
audience to feel an agreement towards the subject
discussed. This is done by using questions directed at
the audience, such as: Am I wrong here? or Aint
that true? to make the viewers feel included in the
show, and reflect upon the topic. In this way, a stand-up
show is actually built up as a dialogue, even though
there is only one speaker.
Page 60

Eddie Izzard includes his audience throughout Dress
to Kill. An example of this can be seen in the Ich bin
ein Berliner sketch. Here, the audience laughs at a
statement, and Izzard says, to confirm his statement to
the laughing audience: This is true! You know...
Cause, Ich bin Berliner is I am a Berliner.

When performing a live stand-up show the comedian
will often use colloquialisms and ad-libbing. Even
though these tools can be well prepared and practiced,
any live performer needs the ability to evaluate the
mood of the audience. This is important as s/he can then
adjust the language and material being used accordingly,
to adapt to the audiences reactions during that specific
show, as they may vary. On stage, a stand-up comedian
can make adjustments to the raw material by adding
new sentences, or removing some parts of the show, that
might not fit into the environment in which s/he
performs. This may also lead to the change of timing in
both the set-up and the punch-line. By changing the
original script and making small adjustments all the way
through, an act performed by a stand-up comedian is
never completely the same, particularly with the use of
improvisation.

The most essential factor to make a successful
performance, as a stand-up comedian, is the interaction
with the audience. It is vital that the audience feels like
it is playing a role in the show. This way, the audience is
encouraged to have a positive and open-minded point of
view on the whole situation. If the audience does not
acknowledge its participating role, the comedian has to
be ready to adjust, so an awkward atmosphere can be
avoided.

Eddie Izzard ad-libs a lot when performing his shows.
Ad-libbing is when a performance (or parts of one) is
carried out with little or no rehearsal, thus using
Page 61

improvisation and spontaneity. Because of this, Eddie
Izzard is highly dependent on the reactions from his
audience.
In the beginning of the show Dress to Kill, Eddie
Izzard reacts to noises made by the audience as a
response to a joke. Izzard interprets this into the
audience having brought snakes along for the show.
This results in laughter from the audience, which could
not have happened, had Eddie Izzard not responded to
the audiences hissing.

Both the Incongruity Theory and the Narrative
Strategy of the General Theory of Verbal Humour agree
that Eddie Izzard uses a certain set of expectations to
deceive his audience. This is not done by leading the
audience in the wrong direction; it is quite apparent, that
the joke is going to be on Kennedy, but, the fact that the
focus is going to be about food is, supposedly, quite a
surprise to everyone in the audience. The Narrative
Strategy further suggests that, seeing as the joke is
finished, the audience does not expect a continuation to
take place.

The first part of the sketch focuses mainly on
Kennedy as the Target of the joke. Then, as a result of
changing the Target to the Berliner, Eddie Izzard
changes his method as well (Incongruity to Superiority).
In this case, Izzard uses first Kennedy and incongruity
as a pair, shifts to using superiority and the Berliner -
which leads to reaching humorous climaxes.

As mentioned in the body language analysis, a sudden
change in language-use can imply a change in persona
a new character entering the stage. In Ich bin ein
Berliner, Eddie Izzard purposefully speaks with flaws
in the language, while mimicking a German. The
function of doing so is, of course, to indicate that he is
not acting as Kennedy anymore, as he speaks perfectly
Page 62

fluent English. But in doing so, Eddie Izzard is also
insinuating that an average German does not speak
English well enough to know that Its a slang (appx.
3.10) sounds wrong. It would probably be sufficient to
simply change dialect, but when Izzard chooses to make
a faulty sentence, it actively shows his choice of
method: Superiority. In the same quote, uttered by the
Germans, there is another, perhaps more important,
example of the Superiority Theory. Here, Eddie Izzard
implies that the Germans are not only bad at English,
but also that they have no sense of American culture.
The fact that they think Im a doughnut is American
slang, pictures them as being stupid, which in turn
makes Eddies American audience feel superior to them.

The GTVH, Superiority Theory and Incongruity
Theory contribute differently when analysing, since the
General Theory of Verbal Humour, as the name
indicates, explains humour on a more superfluous level.
The Superiority and Incongruity Theories, on the other
hand, both explain specific elements which, in this case,
are both main elements. As such, the applied theories
equally contribute to a bigger viewpoint on the sketch as
a whole.

It is still important to note that it is possible for
aspects of a joke to be unintended, e.g. in "Ich bin ein
Berliner", the fact that the same grammatical mistake
(appx. 3.01 and 3.10), made by both Kennedy and the
Berliner, is not emphasized by Eddie Izzard, leads us to
think that he is perhaps not aware of it. This does not
justify that Izzard did not think of it at all, but it
suggests that spontaneous humorous situations can
occur.

Page 63

Political Humour

Introduction to political humour
Political humour is a subcategory of humour, which is
becoming more and more widespread. The typical
message of a political joke is that things in our society,
e.g. political leaders, laws, ideas or even culture, are not
functioning the way they should be.
Political humour is used as a way of communicating
these views and beliefs, which might otherwise remain
uncovered or considered to be taboo. Using humour is a
good way of communicating such a message, because it
has a way of making the receiver let his or her guards
down. The audience is therefore more receptive to these
topics, which would otherwise be considered too
delicate.

There are two different classes of political humour:
The first class, often referred to as degrading jokes, is
used as a tool for damaging, degrading or defaming a
person, or for damaging a group, an idea or the society
as a whole. The second class of political humour is
referred to as exposure jokes. This class is aimed at
political regimes as a whole, and will include references
to events, which are not otherwise widely published.
The classes are not far apart though, as exposure will
also occur in degrading jokes. In fact, the purpose of
exposure is usually to degrade something or someone.

As mentioned, politics as a theme has become
frequent in different types of humour, also including
stand-up comedy. The typical political joke will contain
oppositions of two scripts: the script of how things are
proposed to be, opposed to the script of how things
actually are. This opposition is what creates the humour.
Usually the first script will be the one of how political
leaders are good, laws are there to protect and so on.
The second script then conveys the idea of things not
Page 64

being as script one depicts them to be, by describing the
same leaders, laws and views as something bad or
evil.

Eddie Izzard and Political Humour
An increasing number of stand-up comedians use
their line of work as a mean to communicate their own
political views on society. Eddie Izzard also does this -
and to a high extent. As can be seen in almost all of his
performances, he is very passionate about human rights
and sexual liberation, and he covers these topics in most
of his shows, Dress to Kill being no exception.

In Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard talks about
transvestism. When he begins his show, he runs onto
stage in high heels and a dress. He says nothing, but this
is so far from what people normally see in a stand-up
show, that it provoked laughter, simply because people
did not expect to see him in womens clothing.
He then begins his performance by talking about how
he has practiced wearing heels without falling, because
of the embarrassment it causes, when a guy wears heels
and falls over: [...] if a bloke falls over wearing heels,
then you have to kill yourself. (appx. 2.03) This tells
his audience that he is not self-conscious about being a
transvestite. He is dressed as a woman with make-up,
high heels and a dress. He even runs and jumps in this
outfit. Then he jokes about men, like himself, wearing
high heels. This sends a strong visual signal to the
audience, as well as conveying self-irony and a strong
character. His reason for doing so is that it will amplify
the effect of his words.
This is also done in a way that supports the idea of the
Incongruity Theory. Nobody expects him to enter the
stage running and jumping in heels, and he surprises the
audience by saying, that if a man falls over in heels,
then he has to commit suicide. Both result in laughter.

Page 65

Eddie Izzard then goes on to talk about how
transvestites are not able to join the US Army, despite of
the armys Dont ask, dont tell policy. This policy
was the official United States policy on homosexuals
serving in the military from 1993 until 2011. The policy
prohibited people from speaking of their homosexual or
bisexual orientation or relationships, while serving in
the US Army. If they did so anyway, they would be
discharged, unless it was done to avoid or terminate
military service.
49
The policy also prevented open
homosexuals from serving their country, as their
presence "[...] would create an unacceptable risk to the
high standards of morale, good order and discipline,
and unit cohesion that are the essence of military
capability."
50
Or in the words of Eddie Izzard: Its the
wrong shade of lipstick for the army (appx. 2.21). This
basically means that homosexuals, who actually want to

49
"Don't Ask Don't Tell." Gayborhood
50
"Don't Ask Don't Tell." Gayborhood
serve their country, cannot do so without assuming an
identity which is not their own.
However, the fact that a transvestite has gained the
respect to convey these messages in a humorous
fashion, and actually have people paying attention to
what he has to say, is a step in the right direction. Had it
not been for the gay/sexual liberation, and the feminist
movements earlier in the 20
th
century, this might not
have been the case.

The feminist movement, or at least the second wave
of the feminist movement, was concerned with gender
inequality in laws and culture, and it also focused on
womens sexuality. At around the same time, the gay
liberation movement was forming. It was, of course,
focusing on sexual liberty. Both of these movements are
supporters of the other sexual movement the LGBT
(Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender movements).
Today, all of these movements fight for the same cause;
Page 66

to rid society of oppression, and obtain social and sexual
equality.
51

52

Arguably, people like Eddie Izzard are helping their
cause by bringing up these topics. Besides being a
transvestite and, as he puts it, part of an alternative
sexuality, Eddie Izzard is also a feminist. He says so
himself in a YouTube clip
53
of a Q&A session he did
after a live performance in 2008.
In this clip, Eddie Izzard talks about when human
beings reached the point in evolution, where mental
strength was equally important to psychical strength. At
this point in time, men and women should have had the
same rights, but it has taken society an enormous period
of time to figure that out.

51
"Civil Rights and the LGBT Movement." American Thinker.
52
Krolkke, Charlotte, and Anne Scott Srensen. Gender Communication
Theories and Analyses
53
Annaandian: "Eddie Izzard on Feminism." Youtube
There is no doubt that women have a more equal
position in the modern society, than before these
movements were formed. Women now have the rights
to vote, own property and have equal jobs, but society
has still not reached social equality. Even though it is
almost 50 years ago since President John F. Kennedy
signed the Equal Pay Act into law, women in America
are still significantly underpaid, compared to their male
colleagues, according to a recent survey.
54

In the same Q&A session Eddie Izzard talks about,
how he has discovered that a big part of the male
character is still associated with strength and power, and
the female character with softness and weakness. This is
illogical, since there are both strong and weak character
men and women. Izzard feels that it is weak men that
control these beliefs.

54
"Difference Between Men and Women Salaries in the US." Ncwanche.
Page 67

He gives an example of a woman giving a street
stand-up performance. As he was watching, a group of
men started to embarrass this woman. They even got
more people to join them in this act. Izzard thinks that
these men only harassed her because it was a woman
and because they were of weak character.
His view on this matter is arguably truthful, as weak-
minded people have a tendency to use humour as a
means of degrading others. As Eddie Izzard puts it, it is
the weakness of weak men that has been holding the
world for ransom.

It is easy to see that Eddie Izzard is very political.
And the topics of his shows, such as homosexuals and
bisexuals, and people of alternative sexualities, not
being able to join army, and the fact that we still face
gender based discrimination, are very important to our
society.
One can also argue the fact, that it is a transvestite
who is bringing these topics up, makes the messages
even more convincing. And the fact that he is a stand-up
artist only amplifies his voice, just by the sheer numbers
of ears it reaches.
By using stand-up as a platform, he reaches people
who would otherwise not have thought about these
problem areas. These people will be more receptive, as
they are letting their guards down because the matters
are communicated through humour.
Eddie Izzard has become an opinion-leader, and one
can conclude that he educates his audiences in his
beliefs. A lot of people will probably not share these
beliefs, but they will be forced to think and react, and it
can therefore be inferred that his shows will help people
gain a more open-minded view on sexualities, which is
probably his main goal.
By bringing up all of these problem areas, Izzard
becomes the voice of many. He is no longer just a
Page 68

transvestite or a feminist, but he becomes a part and a
modern voice of all the liberation movements - be it
feministic, homosexual or any part of LGBT. Now
Eddie Izzard is helping their cause, just as their cause
has helped him and others of the alternative
sexualities. Had it not been for all these liberation
movements, a male feminist, who likes to dress up in
womens clothing, would probably not have become the
most popular comedian of the 1990s, and the passive
activist he is today.

Conclusion

Through thorough analyses of humour and stand-
up, we discovered that this subject is filled with
complexity. It is possible for comedians to use a lot of
different means in stand-up, which has been proven by
examining different theories and linguistic methods, and
applying them to humour in the form of Eddie Izzards
stand-up show: Dress to Kill.

By investigating the origins of stand-up comedy, it
has been possible to conclude on how this form of
humour has become what it is today. As shown, its roots
date back to the entertainment forms of ancient Greece.
The use of props, including the slapstick, masks,
costumes, etc., has been an efficient way to get a
humorous point across, ever since the beginning of stage
performance. Since then, stand-up comedy has become
a means of conveying personal views, on politics and
society as a whole.

Applying the different linguistic theories, it has been
possible to conclude on how Eddie Izzard actively uses
certain techniques to affect his audience. These include
his choice in language, mimes created by the use of
body language, and the topics he covers. While doing
Page 69

so, he covers the three main theories of humour. All
three theories contribute with an approach that tackles
humorous situations in different ways, and covers all
aspects and circumstances occurring in a stand-up show.
We can thereby conclude that these need to be covered,
in order to create humour and laughter.
The Superiority Theory views laughter as something
created for and by the person making the joke, in order
for him or her to feel better about him or herself. The
Incongruity Theory, on the other hand, views laughter as
a reaction to a surprising result of a joke, which differs
from the initial expectation. Lastly, the Relief Theory
also sees laughter as a reaction, but in this case, the
reaction comes from tensions stored within ourselves
being released.

We have concluded that when Eddie Izzard performs
his stand-up shows, he will express his opinions on
different cultural discussions. He takes both sides into
consideration when making fun of cultural differences,
by ridiculing either side. His reason for doing so is to be
able to point out flaws in, not only our society, but in all
societies, without anyone feeling targeted. He expresses
his views to make people think about the consequences
of our actions, for the sake of ourselves and others.

Last, but not least, we have looked into Eddie Izzard
as a transvestite, and how he has been able to become
the popular comedian he is today. In conclusion to this,
it is again worth noting, that the social and sexual
liberation movements of the 20
th
century have had a
major influence on the acceptance of the alternative
sexualities, which Eddie Izzard is a part of. Had it not
been for those movements, he would not have been able
to gain the respect allowing him to influence his
audiences, and make them reflect on matters of great
importance to him.

Page 70

Bibliography
annaandian. "Eddie Izzard on Feminism." Youtube . 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aeonnrXTN0 (accessed
December 2012).
Aristotle. "Nicomachean Ethics."
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html (accessed
December 2012).
. "Rhetoric." http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.3.iii.html
(accessed December 2012).
Attardo, Salvatore. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Edited by Victor
Raskin and Mahadev Apte. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1994.
Billig, Michael. Laughter and Ridicule: Towards a Social Critique of
Humour. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2005.
"Civil Rights and the LGBT Movement." American Thinker.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/civil_rights_and_the_lgbt_
movement.html (accessed December 2012).
"Comedy." Oxford Dictionaries.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/comedy?q=comedy
"Difference Between Men and Women Salaries in the US." Ncwanche.
2010. http://www.ncwanche.org/difference-between-men-and-
women-salaries-in-the-us (accessed December 2012).
"Don't Ask Don't Tell." Gayborhood.
http://www.gayborhoodapp.com/blog/dont-ask-dont-tell-
explained.html (accessed December 2012).
Eddie Izzard: Dress To Kill Script - Dialogue Transcript.
http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/e/eddie-izzard-dress-to-
kill-script.html (accessed December 2012).
Fabricius, Anne. "Language and Power." Text and Sign.
http://www.akira.ruc.dk/~camelia/Teaching/TextAndSign/anne4.pdf
. Speech Acts and Language Functions.
http://www.akira.ruc.dk/~camelia/Teaching/TextAndSign/anne2.pdf
Fairclough, Normann. "Analysing Discourse." In Textual Analysis for
Social Research , by Anne Fabricius, 127-150. New York: Routledge,
2003.
Friend, Celeste. "Social Contract Theory." Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/ (accessed December
2012).
Hobbs, Thomas. The Leviathan.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-
contents.html (accessed December 2012).
"Humor - Superiority Theory." Science Encyclopedia.
http://science.jrank.org/pages/9715/Humor-Superiority-Theory.html
Page 71

Karakashev, Vladimir. Speech and Stage. 2nd Edition. Plovdiv: Hristo G.
Danov, 1989.
Krolkke, Charlotte, and Anne Scott Srensen. Gender Communication
Theories and Analyses. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2006.
Krusteva, Olga. Theatre through the Centuries. 1st Edition. Sofia:
Otechestvo, 1980.
Lippitt, John. "Humour and Superiority." Academia.edu.
http://www.academia.edu/1302857/Humour_and_superiority
Martin, Rod A. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach .
London: Elsevier Academic Press, 2007.
Monro, D. H. Theories of Humor.
https://www.msu.edu/~jdowell/monro.html (accessed December
2012).
Morreall, John. Taking Laughter Seriously. New York: State University
of New York Press, 1983.
"Parabasis." Britannica Online.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/442360/parabasis
"Philosophy of Humor ." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/humor/#IncThe (accessed December
2012).
Plato. Philebus. http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/philebus.html (accessed
December 2012).
. "The Republic ." http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html
"Possession." Oxford Dictionaries .
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/possession?q=posses
sion (accessed December 2012).
Quintero, Ruben, ed. A Companion to Satire: Ancient and Modern.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2007.
Raskin, Victor. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor . D. Reidel, 1985.
Raskin, Victor, ed. The Primer of Humor Research . Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter, 2008.
Ross, Alison. The Language of Humour. London: Routledge, 1998.
S.Varalakshmi. "Grammar, Syntax, Semantics and Discourse."
International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research.
2012. http://www.ipedr.com/vol33/033-ICLMC2012-L10049.pdf
(accessed December 1, 2012).
Smuts, Aaron. "Humor." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
http://www.iep.utm.edu/humor/ (accessed December 2012).
Spencer, Herbert. "The Physiology of Laughter ."
http://www.lian.com/HIRANO/academia/laughter.htm (accessed
December 2012).
"The incongruity theory and its effect on humor." Helium.
http://www.helium.com/items/331326-the-incongruity-theory-and-
its-effect-on-humor (accessed December 2012).
Page 72

"Thespis ." Encyclopedia Britannica.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/591852/Thespis

Appendices

Appendix 1
The Native Americans
55

(Performance by Eddie Izzard)

[1.01]But in America, it was
different. The founding fathers
landed in 16(mumbles). They set off
from Plymouth and landed in Plymouth!
How lucky is that?
[1.02]"This is Plymouth? We've just
come from Plymouth! We've gone round

55
Extract from Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard, 1999. Transcript from:
http://www.auntiemomo.com/cakeordeath/d2ktranscription.html#strategicshee
p
in a circle. Lads, back on the
boats."
[1.03]They finally got there and
said:
"Ah, this is where our God has
brought us to! We can practice our
religion here, we can raise a family.
There's nobody here! (Looks over
shoulder)
[1.04]Excuse me (Looks forward
again)
[1.05]There's nobody here! Yes, a
land empty of human existence Who
the fuck are these guys? (Mimes a
headdress) [1.06]What's all this,
please? No, we don't want any of your
food, thank you very much! Just put
some clothes on!"
[1.07]Meanwhile, that winter
"Excuse me, do you have any food?
[1.08]I love all this, love the idea!
Page 73

(Mimes the headdress)(Chuckles)
[1.09]Yes, I'm sorry, we were a bit
brusque when we first arrived, we
didn't realize you owned the entire
country! [1.10]But you have no system
of ownership? Mmm, interesting! Maybe
that can come in useful later Food!
Thank you very much, very nice...
[1.11]Yes, there are more of us
coming, but we'll keep our promises."
[1.12]So the American government lied
to the Native Americans for many,
many years, and then President
Clinton lied about a relationship,
and everyone was surprised!
[1.13]A little nave, I feel!
Appendix 2
Transvestite in the Army
56

(Performance by Eddie Izzard, San
Francisco, California: 1999)

[2.01]In heels as well Yes, I am a
professional transvestite, so I can
run about in heels and not fall over.
[2.02]You know, if a woman falls over
wearing heels, erh... Thats
embarrassing... [2.03]But if a bloke
falls over wearing heels, then you
have to kill yourself, you know Its
the end of your life Its quite
difficult.
[2.04](He then talks about things in
and around San Francisco, where the
show is performed)

56
Extract from Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard, 1999. Transcript as heard on the
DVD.
Page 74

[2.05]I was gonna be in the army when
I was a kid. Yes And I say that,
people go: Oh, arh, ooh No, I was. I
was gonna be in the army, when I was
a kid... Because if youre a
transvestite, youre actually a male
tomboy.
[2.06]Thats where the sexuality is.
Yeah, its not drag queen. No, gay
men have got that covered, and erh...
this is male tomboy, and people do
get them mixed up, they put
transvestite there No! no!, no!,
no! Little bit of a crowbar
separation, thank you.
[2.07]And gay men I think would
agree, and erh... Its male lesbian,
thats really where it is, ok? Its
true. Because most transvestites
fancy girls... Fancy women! So thats
where it is.
[2.08]So running, jumping, climbing
trees, putting on make-up when youre
up there. Thats where it is. And I
used to keep all my make-up in a
squirrel hole up the tree. [2.09]And
erh, the squirrel keeps make-up on
one side and nuts on the other side.
And sometimes I get up that tree,
that squirrel will be covered in
make-up.
[2.10](Eddie Izzard is now doing a
mime of the squirrel putting on make-
up while humming a tune. The squirrel
then notices that it is being watched
and quickly puts away the make-up,
picks up a nut and starts chewing.
Page 75

The squirrel then looks at its
spectator.)
[2.11]What?!.. Fuck off!
(Now as himself)
... He seems to say.
[2.12]And they always eat...
Squirrels always eat nuts with two
hands. Always two hands.
[2.13](Eddie is now doing an
impression of a squirrel eating with
two hands, then suddenly looking up
and looks around standing totally
still with only the eyes moving. If
you have ever watched a squirrel
eating, you will know what this looks
like.)
[2.14]And occasionally they look up
and go: Uh, oh, eh.
As if theyre going:
[2.15]Did I leave the gas on? ...
No! Im... No! Im a fucking
squirrel
And occasionally they go:
[2.16]Fucking nuts Fed up with them
always I long for a grape fruit.
Yeah, so thats very much like the
army, and erhm
[2.17](Eddie then talks a bit about
the American gun policy, before
returning to himself being a
transvestite for a third time.)
[2.18]So, I didnt join the army, as
you might have noticed And erh,
Page 76

yeah. Cause theres not much make-up
in the army, is there? No? [2.19]They
only have that night-time look, and
thats a bit slapdash, isnt it? And
they look a mess. And so you can't
join, even though the American armed
forces have a distinct policy of
"don't ask, don't tell" towards the
alternative sexualities. [2.20]If
you're a bloke wearing a lot of
makeup, you know I don't think they
need to ask, really!
[2.21]And so you can't join, they go,
"No, no, you can't. It's the wrong
shade of lipstick for the Army, I'm
afraid..." [2.22]And they're missing
a huge opportunity here, cause we
all know one of the main elements of
attack is the element of surprise
[2.23]And so, what could be more
surprising than the 1st Battalion
Transvestite Brigade? Airborne wing!
The airborne wing parachuting into
dangerous areas with fantastic
makeup! And a fantastic gun! And the
opposing forces going:
[2.24]Fucking ell, look at these
guys! Look at that! Theyve got guns.
They've got guns! Jesus, they've got
guns! Ah, bugger. I was so surprised!
Were you surprised? I was surprised.

Appendix 3
Ich bin ein Berliner
57

In James Masons voice:

57
Extract from Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard, 1999. Transcript as heard on the
DVD.
Page 77

[3.01]People of Berlin! I have come
to tell you something about the
American states I have come to say
to you that every free citizen of the
world is a citizen of Berlin, and I
wish to say to you: Ich bin ein
Berliner.
In his normal voice:
[3.02]And the crowd went fucking
wild [3.03]Trouble is Ich bin ein
Berliner means I am a doughnut and
erh... (Audience laughing) This is
true! and this is what he said, he
said: I am a doughnut.
[3.04]And as I say: (Eddie is
referring to a previous joke) 70% how
you look, 20% how you sound...
(Waiting to speak while the audience
laughs) ...only 10% is what you say.
[3.05]He said I am a doughnut and
they went wild!
You know, because Ich bin Berliner
is I am a Berliner, but Ich bin
ein Berliner thats the name of a
doughnut they have there.
[3.06]And its like going to
Frankfurt: I am a Frankfurter
(mimes people of Frankfurt looking at
each other laughing).
Imitating people from Frankfurt:
Yea, weve heard that one Jackie
[3.07]Imitating person from Hamburg:
I am a Hamburger, too.
In his normal voice:
[3.08] Lucky he didnt do a tour of
Germany:
Page 78

I am a Hamburger, a Frankfurter and
a doughnut.
[3.09]But the people of Berlin must
have gone:
Person 1: What? What did he say? He
said he was a doughnut? Person 2: I
thought he said he was a doughnut
too.
Person 1: So what does that mean?
[3.10]Person 2: Its a slang. Hes
American. Hes a doughnut. A fucking
doughnut

Appendix 4
Kind of French
58


(Eddie is talking about the
consequences of WWII. He is then
commenting on the casualties the
different countries suffered.)

[4.01]And about 20 million Nazi
Germans died, but they did start it,
they did start that one. And, yeah,
so it was that, and France hated them
all cause Southern France was
collaborating with the Germans,
embarrassing!

58
Extract from Dress to Kill, Eddie Izzard, 1999. Transcript from:
http://www.auntiemomo.com/cakeordeath/d2ktranscription.html#encore

Page 79

[4.02]So since then, they've been
kind of spiky and kind of, French...

[4.03]I'm very positive on the
French, my family way back was
French, so I go with it, but they are
kind of, well, fucking French at
times...

[4.04]"All of Europe, you must do
this!"
"Well we're not gonna! We're gonna
have a sandwich."

Appendix 5
Humour DVD-Material
Dress to Kill: San Francisco, CA:
1999
1. Native American (0:27:25)
2. Transvestite in the Army (0:08:10)
3. Ich bin ein Berliner (1:06:16)
4. Kind of French (0:23:14)
YouTube-Clips
1. Eddie Izzard on Feminism (Q&A)

Appendix 6
Project Technique Course
Throughout the semester, we have had some project
technique classes which were held to help us with our
project work as it came along.
Conveniently, the first class gave us the basic tools
for preparing a project: choosing the right dimensions to
support our project and problem definition.
Furthermore, it assisted us to learn how to reflect
critically about our material and what is expected of our
project work in the end.
Page 80

This led our group to do a history-part discussion,
some concrete deadlines for the project, together with
delegation of work. With these tools we found out that
our project was very broad, and we had to find out
whether we would we be doing only British humour or
humour in general. We started to find milestones of
humour and figured out which of these milestones were
important for a smooth path towards global stand-up and
Eddie Izzard. The members of the group believe this to
be the best solution, as long as the milestones of humour
chosen are the highlights in history.
The second class taught us something about group
meeting efficiency; one of the tools we learned about,
was how to make use of a logbook. We in our group
have found this very obliging, as it has helped us to e.g.
eliminate consequences of absence at group meetings.
We also learned the importance of structure: how to be
an active listener, letting each other make tell their ideas
about the matter were working on, together with
assuring that we all come to an agreement and then
write these agreements down. With this, it became
easier to structure the skeleton of a synopsis - and
thereby our project paper. From these results, we all
started to take greater responsibility, helping each other
out with questions and decisions to get more out of our
group. We had more group dynamics and this made our
meetings more efficient. Consequently, we were soon
after able to estimate some expected outcomes, and
make some deadlines for every member of the group.
This led to some very valuable conclusions on our
individual work, where we were able to sum up our
results and answers. Also, we discussed what we learned
from these deadlines, and, as a result, it was easy to
figure out what we would continue working on. The
project was beginning to take shape.
The third class taught us about plagiarism, how to
avoid it and how to cite properly.
Page 81

We found out that it is truly important, that we make
footnotes to show where we have found eventual written
material used. It is furthermore essential, that we make
clear to each other which assessments weve come to
regarding material-use. By using already existing
material without properly citing it, it will be seen as
plagiarism. So a group might, however unintentional,
plagiarise, if not being properly aware of this.
It is after the last seminar clearer than ever, that the
group needs to help each other checking through the
material, making sure that everything fits together and
ensure a fluent and consistent language throughout the
paper. It is also important that a group is on the same
page has the same idea of the goal. It is crucial to
avoid nitpicking, especially in a bigger group. Lastly, it
is important that everyone sees a clear structure and
agrees to accomplish the same goals.
Conclusion
During these three seminars, the group has learned
that our material, and especially our conclusion, must
always be written with care. We have been taught tools
to improve our logbooks, our group dynamics and our
writing skills, which will surely be of great use to us all.
We have learned to give each other space, and the
opportunity to speak without constant interruptions from
each other. To make a group work, everyone will have
to be focused, helping each other reach the final,
identical goal. After this project, everyone will
individually take these numerous working tools to use
on future projects.

Humour and Eddie Izzard PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Humour and Eddie Izzard PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Page 2

Вам также может понравиться