2015
DOI: 10.1111/jacc.12301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stand‐Up Nation: Humor and American Identity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
(6 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…13 The choice of the study material was governed by both scholarly and practical issues. In the first place, stand-up comedy has thus far been analyzed from a variety of angles (e.g., Prussing-Hollowell 2008;Gillota 2015) amongst which a linguistic analysis (Schwarz 2010), not to mention semantic analysis (e.g., Seizer 2011), is by far underrepresented. This paper thus seeks to fill this void in scholarly endeavors, focusing on stand-up routines in which a specific relationship between the comedian and the audience has an impact on what is considered impolite or rude (Locher & Watts 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…13 The choice of the study material was governed by both scholarly and practical issues. In the first place, stand-up comedy has thus far been analyzed from a variety of angles (e.g., Prussing-Hollowell 2008;Gillota 2015) amongst which a linguistic analysis (Schwarz 2010), not to mention semantic analysis (e.g., Seizer 2011), is by far underrepresented. This paper thus seeks to fill this void in scholarly endeavors, focusing on stand-up routines in which a specific relationship between the comedian and the audience has an impact on what is considered impolite or rude (Locher & Watts 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scholars compare his work to the likes of Jim Norton, Neil Hamburger, or Anthony Jeselnik. David Gillota, for example, argues that while many comedians use their comedy as a vehicle for driving social commentary, “Other figures, like Jim Norton, Daniel Tosh, or Carlos Mencia, rely more on shock value than on social commentary to drive their humor” (105). While Gillota's point is generally true of many shock comics, Tosh's use of shocking material and his social commentary cannot be teased out so neatly.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%