Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Adelaide, Dept. of Classics, 1987. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 266-273).

Os diálogos de Platão ainda são exemplos de como a filosofia, mais que um método de investigação ou busca por conhecimento, deve ser compreendida tal qual um modo de vida. O filosofar, nestes textos, ajuda-nos a entender como, no mundo clássico, as esferas estão conectadas, ao mostrar de que maneira a política, a metafísica e a epistemologia são interdependentes. Assim, porque tem como ponto de partida a metafísica, que é tela para a pintura da cidade ideal, em que ao filósofo cabe a chefia, todos os outros regimes que não sejam a monarquia ou a aristocracia filosóficas são compreendidos como formas degeneradas de governo. Dentre os regimes analisados pelo filósofo, destaca-se a democracia: o modo político, por excelência, grego, é descrito como o degrau anterior à tirania, ou seja, como a ante-sala para o bárbaro governo. Em outro âmbito, a saber, no da comédia, encontramos Aristófanes; dentre outras coisas, o grande crítico do demagogo Cléon e dos desvios da democracia de seu tempo. Se Platão é dependente de uma metafísica para combater a democracia, o comediógrafo, ao contrário, não tem como fundamento algo semelhante, mas lança mão de suas peças para educar os espectadores que são os responsáveis pela decisão tomada, democraticamente, acerca do vencedor dos festivais que encerravam, dentre outras disputas, aquela concernente aos autores cômicos. Deste modo, a intenção do trabalho é procurar entender como a filosofia platônica e a comédia aristofânica, apesar da crítica comum que desenvolvem às instituições democráticas gregas, apresentam soluções para o problema, alicerçadas em fundamentos radicalmente diferentes: a metafísica, no caso de Platão e o vislumbre da reestruturação do regime democrático, possibilitado com a reeducação da pólis, em Aristófanes. Para a articulação dessas concepções, necessário foi levar em consideração as diferenças próprias aos gêneros dos discursos e ao papel que comediógrafo e filósofo desempenhavam junto à pólis. / Les dialogues de Platon exemplifient que la philosophie, plus qune méthode dinvestigation ou une recherche de la connaissence, doit être comprise comme un moyen de vie. Le philosopher dans ces textes, nous aide à compreendre comme, dans le monde classique, les sphères sont liés quand on montre la manière selon laquelle la politique, la métaphysique et lépistémologie sont interdépendentes. Ainsi, parce que le philosophe a comme point de départ la metaphysique, qui est la toile de la peinture de la cité idéale dont le philosophe est le chef, tous les autres régimes que non la monarchie ou laristocratie philosophiques sont vues comme formes dépravées de gouvernemment. Entre les régimes analisés par le penseur, la démocratie est remarquable: le type politique, par excellence, grec, est décrit comme le marche anterieur à la tiranie, cest-à-dire- lante-salon du gouvernemment barbare. Dans lespace de la comédie, nous rencontrons Aristophane, le critique du demagogue Cléon et des problèmes de la démocratie de son temps. Si Platon est dépendent dune métaphysique pour combattre la démocratie, le comédiographe, au contraire, na pas comme fondement quelque chose pareille, mais il se sert de ses pièces pour éduquer les spectateurs qui sont les responsables pour la décision pensée, démocratiquement, par rapport au vainqueur des festivals dans lequels il y avait les disputes des auteurs comiques. Alors, le but du travail présent est dessayer compreendre comme la philosophie platonique et la comédie aristophanique, en dépit de la critique commune sur les institutions démocratiques grecques, présentent des résolutions au probléme démocratique fondées sur bases radicalement différentes: la métaphysique, au cas de Platon, et la possibilité de réformer le régime démocratique grâce à la rééducation de la pólis, en Aristophane. Pour conduire ces conceptualisations, il a fallu faire attention aux différences entre les genres des discurs et au rôle du comédiographe et du philosophe dans la pólis.

Bibliography: leaves 266-273 / 273 leaves ; 30 cm. / Title page, contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University Library. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Adelaide, Dept. of Classics, 1987

Ridicule is a means of affecting change. Issuing an interpretation of a subject's relation to an ideological formation or social norm as an argument to change behavior, language-use, belief, or the like, ridicule can be used both to affirm and to contest prevailing hierarchies. As a discursive function, this dissertation theorizes, ridicule can be either monological or dialogical. Monological ridicule often takes the form of a demand or directive and usually commands its subject to comply with some ideological formation or social norm. Used in this way, it is a norming tool. In contrast, dialogical ridicule generally invites or encourages negotiation or mediation. As such, it is often used to contest or challenge prevailing hierarchies, with the ultimate aim of creating conditions that can allow for transformation. In six chapters, this dissertation offers a theory of ridicule, traces conceptions of it through western history, examines both monological and dialogical applications of it, and, lastly, explores its use on the Internet, where it has flourished. If the aim of rhetoric is to please, to instruct, or to entertain, then ridicule may be the master rhetorical trope as it can achieve all three simultaneously.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oregon, 2008. / Typescript. Includes vita and abstract. "The authors ... include Madame Sarah Kemble Knight, William Byrd II, John Marrant, John Robert Shaw, Benjamin Franklin and David Crockett, as well as comparator texts, such as the legends of Mike Fink and the memoir of Stephan Burroughs"--P. 1. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 187-196). Also available online in Scholars' Bank; and in ProQuest, free to University of Oregon users.

Thesis (doctoral)--Université de Paris IV, 1978. / Includes indexes. Includes bibliographical references (p. 717-742).

The intent of this thesis is to investigate the prominence of audience ridicule in the French theatre from the medieval sottie to Ionescan Absurdism of the mid-twentieth century. Throughout the history of French drama, playwrights have exploited this tactic with either the purpose of invoking an emotional or intellectual response or inciting a social or political call to action. This exploration takes particular interest in shaming theatrical audiences during periods of political unrest, analyzing the ways in which playwrights employed language, studies of characters, and plot-related content to highlight the prevalent and pervasive ills of society and of humanity. The majority of the literature from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries criticizes the aristocracy, the clergy, and the crown. As we approach revolutionary France, the theatre all but abandons intrigue in favor of the tears that flowed that from the ocean of English Sentimentalism. Melodrama and the well-made play adorned the early-nineteenth century, while the later part of the century brought French theatre Jarry’s pataphysics and his affinity for audience shaming that set the stage for the impending onslaught of twentieth-century ridicule. The avant-garde movement flourished at the beginning of the century with the Dadas and the Surrealists responding to humanity’s response to the War to End All Wars. When Ionesco arrived at the forefront of the French theatre mid-century, he employed the most effective audience ridicule tactics invented by his predecessors and created his Absurdist theatre. Ionesco writes: “take a circle, caress it, and it will turn vicious” (38). From the fifteenth century to the twentieth century, the cycle of audience ridicule was indeed vicious in a theatre that sought to effect positive change in a rapidly changing society.

The serious investigation of humor's function in society is an emerging area of research in critical humor studies, a "negative" subsect of the extensive and "positive" research that assumes humor's goodness. Using Michael Billig's theory of ridicule as a framework, this study explored how humor operated to discipline characters who broke social norms or allowed characters to rebel against those norms. Layering this with gender performative theory, the study also investigated how different male and female characters used ridicule and were subject to it themselves. After examining ridicule in The Big Bang Theory, 2 Broke Girls, and The Odd Couple using a critical rhetorical analysis, the findings revealed that disciplinary ridicule was used more overtly throughout all three programs, while potentially rebellious ridicule emerged in only a few scenes. In addition, men were overwhelmingly the subjects of disciplinary ridicule, although women found themselves as subjects throughout all three programs as well. The discursive ridiculing of non-normative bodies constructed and maintained social norms about gender and sexuality, thereby uninviting these bodies from participating in society.

Nous nous proposons de suivre l’histoire du portrait littéraire et la place de Molière en tant que portraitiste dans deux de ses piè ces les plus célèbres, Le Tartuffe et Le Misanthrope. Molière déplace l’intérêt de l’action dans ses comédies vers les portraits des personnages. S’appuyant sur les principes des Anciens : « castigat ridendo mores », Molière rév èle à travers les portraits, les vices, surtout l’hypocrisie, et l’importance du masque dans la société du XVIIe siècle. La grande varié ;té des portraits sera illustrée de nombreux exemples. Nous nous intéressons aux diverses fonctions des portraits. Ils dévoilent l’intérêt pour le réalisme psychologique et témoignent d’une mode de divertissement mondain. En mettant l’accent sur les défauts et le ridicule des personnages, avec les portraits, les pièces se chargent d’une dimension satirique.

Au Québec, le genre cinématographique le plus populaire est sans contredit la comédie. Ces films sont ceux qui remportent le plus de succès au Box-Office national et sont souvent appréciés autant par la critique que par le public. D’une posture « proféministe », ce mémoire vise à démontrer comment les représentations de la masculinité, ou plutôt des masculinités, représentent l’objet du rire dans six comédies québécoises : Les Boys (Saia 1997), Québec-Montréal (Trogi 2002), Horloge biologique (Trogi 2005), Les 3 p’tits cochons (Huard 2007), De père en flic (Gaudreault 2009) et De père en flic 2 (Gaudreault 2017). Dans ces films, les homme sont souvent représentés comme étant centrés sur eux-mêmes, libidineux, compétitifs, immatures, stupides ou encore « féminisés ». Ces « failles » masculines permettent aux personnages masculins d’être comiques malgré des comportements parfois problématiques. Dans ces comédies, on tend à catégoriser les individus selon leur sexe, ce qui semble affecter le potentiel comique des personnages. D’une part les hommes sont faillibles mais tout de même amusants et donc divertissants. D’autre part, les femmes sont quant à elles stables et sont les représentantes de normes sociales plus acceptées, ce qui les rend ennuyantes et non-comiques en comparaison. Le comique semble être principalement l’affaire des hommes dans ces films, ce qui fait en sorte qu’hommes et femmes n’ont pas le même temps d’écran, faisant de celles-ci l’Autre aux yeux des protagonistes masculins. Cette attention plus importante accordée aux hommes leur permet d’être ciblés par le ridicule, un phénomène de nature disciplinaire. Les hommes sont comiques grâce à ce ridicule qui les cible en particulier. Ce ridicule témoigne aussi d’une « gender police », suggérant une surveillance entre les personnages masculins qui veulent s’assurer que les autres hommes agissent dans le cadre de normes masculines traditionnelles. Ceux qui peinent à se comporter adéquatement, comme de « vrais hommes », sont ciblés par le ridicule qui les incite à performer afin de pouvoir s’identifier à des configurations normatives de la masculinité. C’est pourquoi, bien souvent, les personnages parviennent à atteindre une masculinité « non-ridicule ». Nous estimons qu’il s’agit là d’un « décentrement » suivi d’un « recentrement » de leur masculinité. Leur comportement problématique s’en voit banalisé et vient servir le comique. De la sorte, ces comédies québécoises réitèrent des représentations traditionnelles des genres sans pour autant les contester, ce qui est ultimement à l’avantage des hommes. / In Quebec, the most popular and successful film genre is without a doubt comedy. These movies are the most successful at the national Box Office and are usually appreciated by both critics and audiences alike. From a “profeminist” perspective, this thesis aims to demonstrate how representations of masculinity, or masculinities, become a means to provoke laughter in six Quebec comedies: Les Boys (Saia 1997), Québec-Montréal (Trogi 2002), Horloge biologique (Trogi 2005), Les 3’ptits cochons (Huard 2007), De père en flic (Gaudreault 2009) and De père en flic 2 (Gaudreault 2017). In these movies, men are portrayed as being self-centered, horny, competitive, immature, dumb or even “unmanly”. These masculine “flaws” are precisely what make these male characters funny, despite how problematic their behavior can become. These comedies also tend to categorize individuals based on their biological sex, which seems to be linked to their capacity to provoke laughter. On the one hand, men are flawed but still funny and thus entertaining, while women, on the other hand, represent stability and more accepted social norms, which makes them boring and less funny in comparison. The “comical” appears to be exclusive to men in these comedies. In that regard, genders get an uneven time of screen, often making women the “Others” to the male protagonists. This greater attention on men allows them to be targeted by ridicule, an inherently disciplinary state of being. Despite being constantly ridiculed for their actions, male characters are still funny, thanks to a ridicule that affects them more than it does for women. This ridicule also seems to act as a “gender police”, suggesting a male-male gaze. Men gaze upon one another to make sure male characters act in accordance with traditional masculine norms. Therefore, they try to avoid being ridiculed under the gaze of other men. The ones who can’t act accordingly see themselves becoming the target of ridicule, which becomes a means for men to reach normative configurations of masculinity. What seems paradoxical is how men are usually able to reach a “non-ridicule” masculinity. We consider this to be part of a “decentralization” followed by “recentralization” of their masculinity. Their questionable behavior, typical of traditional and normative masculinities, is thus trivialized and serves comical purposes. By doing so, these six Quebec comedies reassert traditional representations of genders without questioning them, which mostly benefits men.