Artefact 4 Evaluation

The immediate aim of the artefact was to make users resort to paraverbal and nonverbal signs in order to identify between a true and false scenario where the visual information was the same. The indirect aim was to observe how the impact of what the performers say depends on the impression these performers leave on their audience through the way they present their message.

When asked about the plausibility of the two scenarios, respondents found both could pass the test. The correlation between subtitles and actions on screen was sufficient, but when it came to guessing which of them is an actual sequence from within a film, the audience`s arguments for their choice started to fall back on paraverbal signs. They worded their arguments like this: `[that character] “sounded” embarrassed`, the way they spoke, it wasn`t aggressive but calm...`

Those relying solely on visual information and subtitles chose the wrong version. They focused on pattern recognition, i.e., similar scenarios played out in gangster films and consequently interpreted the following scenes to fit that scenario.

The artefacts so far looked at how different components that make up what Hodgart termed the aesthetic dimension of comedic performance contribute and influence the audience`s understanding. For the following artefacts I want to look at why parodies of Hitler seem to need less use of comic exaggeration than other historical characters and how does that affect the efficiency of the comedian`s criticism.   

Artefact 4

As I mentioned in an earlier post where I talked about the meaning of gestures, I wanted to do a second experiment that would encompass this side of a performance. Only, the way I did it this time, was to choose the same performance (a segment from a film) and, taking advantage of the language barrier, write an alternative set of subtitles that would fit the scenario. This way, hopefully, I could focus the respondents` attention on nonverbal and paraverbal cues. The scenarios were quite different; the original one was of two guys trying to blackmail and humiliate a barmaid in order to get free drinks; the alternative version re-cast them as thugs, coming for protection money.  

It should be interesting to note:

a) whether judging by the gestures and tone employed by the actors on screen, the audiences will find both scenarios plausible

b) if they will find it hard to tell which one is the original version

c) whether or not they will identify the importance of paraverbal means in their choosing the right version