How Does Insult Give Pleasure:The Anti-structure Comedy in the Game Field

doi:10.12054/lydk.bisu.72

Abstract

Abstract:

This research takes the restaurant named Dick’s Last Resort in Boston, the US. as a case study and discusses the source of attractions of the restaurant known for rude services. The research applies qualitative methods, based on the data collected from field work and from social network reviews, using the software Maxqda as an analysis tool. As a result, this research finds out that this restaurant builds up a field atmosphere of game and conducts the interactive comedy performance in this field and realizes an anti-structure game process. This process includes the interaction between servers and customers, and also the interaction between customers. Furthermore, this research explores the key phrases within this game process, including: (1) informing; (2) demonstration; (3) guiding; and (4) interaction. It also finds out the application of body language and oral language during different phases. Based on this, this research analyses the results of the game conducted in the restaurant and points out the main influencing factors, including: (1) the degree of participation of audiences (the characters and acceptance of audiences); (2) the existence of moral border and personal border; (3) the sensitivity of the performers detecting the borders of the audiences; (4) the influence of cultural background of the audiences; and (5) the fulfillment of the basic functions of the restaurant. In the end, this article tries to answer the final question regarding to the attraction of this unique restaurant, namely: how does good-humored teasing give pleasure? The answer to this question is reflected in the following theoretical logic: (1) the construction and informing of the border of a “game filed”; (2) the authenticity contained in rudeness; (3) the intelligence contained in humor. In general, regarding this unique service style which contradicts the traditional and regular service style in restaurant management, this research discovers a possible explanation of the phenomena, illustrates its implementation approach in practice, pointes out its main successes and existing/potential problems, intending to provide references for theoretical exploration and restaurant practice.

Key words: pleasure, rude service, restaurant attraction, game field, anti-structure comedy

摘要：

位于美国的“烂人最后的港湾”餐厅,因其著名的粗鲁型服务吸引着大量游客体验受虐式就餐。一定程度上,餐厅从供餐设施异化为了可体验的景观。本文通过实证研究发现,该餐厅通过建构一个游戏氛围场、一个反结构的游戏过程,实现了互动性的喜剧表演,使体验者获得了阈限之内的黑色愉悦,该过程由主客间以及顾客内部的互动所主导,包括一系列构成要素及各阶段中特定工具的使用。本文亦分析了该游戏的结果及影响因素,回答了关涉其吸引力本质的问题,即受虐为何产生了愉悦,最后指出在特定场域中,反结构化的喜剧甚至受虐行为具有激发黑色愉悦的功能。

关键词: 黑色愉悦, 粗鲁服务, 餐厅吸引力, 游戏场, 反结构喜剧

CLC Number:

Yanjun XIE, Jiaojiao SUN. How Does Insult Give Pleasure:The Anti-structure Comedy in the Game Field[J]. Tourism and Hospitality Prospects, 2018, 2(5): 19-36.

谢彦君, 孙佼佼. 黑色愉悦的受虐来源：游戏场中的反结构喜剧[J]. 旅游导刊, 2018, 2(5): 19-36.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1 Official website of the restaurant

Fig.2 The entrance of the restaurant

Fig.3 The Time-Space Model of the game field in the restaurant

Fig.4 Customers’ hats and curious passersby

Tab. 1 Examples of jokes on the tall hats

年龄阶段	小孩子	旁边家长	青少年	年轻男性	年轻女性	中老年人
帽子上的戏谑语	我亲邻居家的狗来练习接吻。	孩子免费。	失败的青春期过渡。	我不是男同性恋,我男朋友是。	Les Be Honest。（谐音女同性恋）	我哪有秃顶?

Fig.5 A waiter pointing at the customer

Fig.6 The influencing factor model in the comedy restaurant

References 35

[1]	Babcock-Abrahams B.“A tolerated margin of mess”: The trickster and his tales reconsidered[J]. Journal of the Folklore Institute, 1975, 11(3): 147~186.
[2]	Barbara T.The clown’s way[M]// Tedlock D, Tedlock B. Teachings From the American Earth: Indian Religion and Philosophy. New York: Liveright, 1992: 105~118.
[3]	Bernard H R, Ryan G W.Analyzing Qualitative Data: Systematic Approaches[M]. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2010: 4.
[4]	Brightman R.Traditions of subversion and the subversion of tradition: Cultural criticism in Maidu clown performances[J]. American Anthropologist, 1999, 101(2): 272~287.
[5]	Burnes B.Kurt lewin and the planned approach to change: A re-appraisal[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2004, 41(6): 977~1002.
[6]	Carter J.Stand-up Comedy: The Book[M]. New York: Dell, 1989: 150~151.
[7]	Course M.The clown within: Becoming white and Mapuche ritual clowns[J]. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 2013, 55(4): 771~799.
[8]	Crumrine N R.?apakoba, the Mayo Easter ceremonial impersonator: Explanations of ritual clowning[J]. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1969, 8(1): 1~22.
[9]	Franzosi R, Doyle S, McClelland L E, et al. Quantitative narrative analysis software options compared: PC-ACE and CAQDAS (ATLAS.ti, MAXqda, and NVivo)[J]. Quality & Quantity, 2013, 47(6): 3219~3247.
[10]	Friedman S, Kuipers G.The divisive power of humour: Comedy, taste and symbolic boundaries[J]. Cultural Sociology, 2013, 7(2): 179~195.
[11]	Greenwood D.Of sad men and dark comedies: Mood and gender effects on entertainment media preferences[J]. Mass Communication and Society, 2010, 13(3): 232~249.
[12]	Harbidge L.Audienceship and (non) laughter in the stand-up comedy of Steve Martin[J]. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 2011, 8(2): 128~144.
[13]	Hieb L A.Meaning and mismeaning: Toward an understanding of the ritual clown[M]// Alfonso O. New Perspectives on the Pueblos. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1972: 163~195.
[14]	Kapferer B.Entertaining demons: Comedy, interaction and meaning in a Sinhalese healing ritual[J]. Social Analysis: The International Journal of Social and Cultural Practice, 1979(1): 108~152.
[15]	Keisalo M P.A semiotics of comedy: Moving figures and shifting grounds of Chapayeka ritual clown performance[J]. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 2016, 6(2): 101~121.
[16]	Kuckartz U.Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software[M]. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2014: 3.
[17]	Kuipers G.Humor styles and symbolic boundaries[J]. Journal of Literary Theory, 2009, 3(2): 219~239.
[18]	Lewin K.Psychological ecology[M]// Cartwright D. Field Theory in Social Science. London: Social Science Paperbacks, 1943: 72.
[19]	Limon J.Stand-up Comedy in Theory, or, Abjection in America[M]. Durham: Duke University Press, 2000: 12.
[20]	Lockyer S.Performance, expectation, interaction, and intimacy: On the opportunities and limitations of arena stand-up comedy for comedians and audiences[J]. The Journal of Popular Culture, 2015, 48(3): 586~603.
[21]	Lockyer S & Myers L. ‘It’ s about expecting the unexpected’:Live stand-up comedy from the audiences’ perspective[J]. Participations,2011,8(2):165~188.
[22]	MacCary W T. Patterns of myth, ritual, and comedy in Plautus’ Casina[J]. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 1974, 15(5): 881~889.
[23]	Makarius L.Ritual clowns and symbolical behaviour[J]. Diogenes, 1970, 18(69): 44~73.
[24]	McBurney B. Desert Island Discs[Z]. BBC Radio 4, 2012.
[25]	McConachie B. An evolutionary perspective on play, performance, and ritual[J]. The Drama Review, 2011, 55(4): 33~50.
[26]	Ritchie C.Performing Live Comedy[M]. London: Methuen, 2012: 164~166.
[27]	Seligman A B, Weller R P, Puett M J, et al.Ritual and Its Consequences: An Essay on the Limits of Sincerity[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008: 11~73.
[28]	Stebbins R A.The Laugh-Makers: Stand-up Comedy as Art, Business, and Life-Style[M]. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1990: 53.
[29]	Sutton-Smith B.The Ambiguity of Play[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009: 29.
[30]	Wallace J.Tragedy and laughter[J]. Comparative Drama, 2013, 47(2): 201~224.
[31]	Zillmann D, Joanne C R.A disposition theory of humor and mirth[M]// Chapman A J, Foot H C. Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Wiley, 1976: 93~115.
[32]	李彬. 酒店管理研究中的“理论与情境”融合模式思考[J]. 旅游导刊, 2017, 1(3): 100~106.
[33]	潘莉, 金康伟. 目的地品牌个性感知过程研究: 一个理论分析框架[J]. 旅游导刊, 2018, 2(1): 22~36.
[34]	谢彦君. 旅游体验研究: 一种现象学的视角[M]. 天津: 南开大学出版社, 2005: 54~56.
[35]	朱英毅. 简析礼貌原则在餐厅服务英语中的应用[J]. 柳州职业技术学院学报, 2010, 10(4): 71~74.