Everyday interactions have been an interest to study for conversation analysists. They examine both verbal and non-verbal conduct in everyday interactions, focusing on what is being said and how it is being said. This essay will examine an interview between Zac Efron and Rove McManus, drawing on sociological theories such as cultural scripts, Goffman’s dramaturgical theory, presentation of self, the documentary method of interpretation codes of conduct and symbolic interactionism. As the interviewer, Rove does not simply ask questions and listen to answers; he is an active listener and controls the direction of the conversation. He signals uptake, understanding, agreement and emotional involvement. Activities directed to the audience can aim at ensuring uptake or manipulating the interviewee’s response in some way. These back channel activities may take either visual or auditory form. Visual back-channel activities include nods, smiles, grimaces, furrowed brows and gestures like raised palms and shoulder shrugs; auditory back-channel indicators include both non-linguistic sounds like sighs, inhalations, laughs, and suction clicks and linguistic signals (Norrick 2010). This essay will focus on these signs of listenership to the exclusion of visual indicators.
Talk show hosts engage in particular interviewing practices as participants in a specific contextualized activity and as part of their individual construction of a public persona within this activity (Norrick 2010). The goal of this interview is human interest rather than politics (Norrick 2010). The roles are more fluid where the question-answer response tends to be a similar structure of everyday conversation. Interviewers interject a range of reactions directed primarily at the audience (either present in the studio or potential via the microphones and cameras). For example, at 1.40 of the video, when Zac walks in, there is an attractive photo of him in the background, to which Zac’s fans start screaming at. Rove also encourages Zac’s fans to start screaming by telling them to “start screaming now”, which could be seen as a sign of power and control as he is directing them what to do. The photo is used to elicit a certain response and encourage screaming and excitement. Rove is responsible to the audience for getting interesting, informative answers from Zac, and for ensuring that the audience can understand and appreciate the answers. Rove, as the interviewer, interjects background information to help the audience follow Zac’s response. For example, in the interaction below, Rove asks Zac whether he is familiar with the language differences in Australia, to which Zac admits that he is not and had told a reporter that he is “rooting” for her, which is humorous because we know that rooting is an Australian term for sex although it is an American term for cheering.
(At 3.33)
Rove: You should be careful while you’re here too (points at Zac) because when you’re...you may be polite and want to say the right thing to people but we have lingo differences and you’ve been here a couple of times and I’m not sure if [pause]. Are you across all of them at the moment?
Zac: No man. I’m still rusty. I was, um [pause] given an interview the other day and the lady was so nice. She was such a sweetheart and we were laughing a lot and I said at the end of the interview, you know ‘I’m really rooting for you
[Zac and Rove laugh]
Zac: and [pause] she went silent...I realised that was a bad mistake
In the above interaction, Rove tries to engage the audience by asking Zac interesting questions about whether he knows the language differences in Australia. Rove also points at Zac, which shows his power. Zac reveals more information than is intended, which shows that he is comfortable around Rove and in front of an audience. Zac’s statement about telling the journalist that he is rooting for her becomes humorous because we recognise that rooting has a different meaning in Australia than in America, which is where Zac lives. Therefore, the term ‘rooting’ is a cultural script. The key idea of the theory of cultural scripts is that widely shared and widely known ways of thinking can be identified in terms of the same universal grammar (Wierzbicka 2002). Thus, different cultures may use the same word but it may have a different meaning. We also recognise that he was embarrassed with what he had said to the journalist through the number of pauses and he avoids eye contact when telling the story.
The conversation becomes free-flowing and open, with other cast members asking Zac questions and interjecting Rove’s questions. Although Rove seems comfortable with Peter and Carrie asking questions, he tries to shift the interaction back between him and Zac, with Rove predominantly asking the questions. This is shown in the following interaction. It is evident that the use of humour is intentional. Humour is deployed when Zac discusses his older female fans. He uses the motion of his hands when he is discussing them grabbing him, showing the audience what is meant by ‘grabbing’. The statement is humorous as we would expect young female fans to be “grabbing” him, not mums or grandmas. Humour is deployed in the following interaction between Peter and Zac, when Zac is discussing his older fans and Peter asks Zac whether his mother gets nervous around him, suggesting that his mother would find him too attractive to be around him. Zac laughs, showing that he understood Peter’s question as a joke.
(At 2.20)
Zac: “Inevitably when there’s so many [mums] grabbing you too hard or won’t let go, it’s usually not a young fan, it’s a mum or grandma”
[laughs]
Carrie: “and what about”
Peter: “Does your own mum get a bit nervous around you?”
Zac: “ahh” (laughs)
Zac: “No”
Goffman’s dramaturgical theory states that life is similar to a drama in that we are always performing a role in front of an audience, although the roles can change. He divides his theory into two stages: the front stage and the back stage. Goffman (1971) refers to the front stage to refer to those activities which occurs in front of an audience and has some influence on the audience. In the interaction below (from 5.05-5.28), Zac admits that he was nervous backstage but knows that on the front stage, he can not appear too nervous. On the front stage, he appears to be calm and relaxed. As Hogan (2010) argues, Goffman’s dramaturgical approach is a metaphorical technique used to explain how an individual presents an “idealized” rather than authentic version of him/herself. Thus, Zac’s presents a relaxed image of himself, rather than his authentic self where he was nervous. As Hogan argues, in the front stage, we are trying to present an idealized version of the self according to a specific role. In the backstage, we do much of the real work necessary to keep up appearances, as shown by Zac’s admission that back stage he was nervous. Rove and the other cast members are team members. They are defining the situation, which we know as a television interview. Rove is the interviewer and Zac is the interviewee. Rove is expected to ask questions and Zac is expected to answer them. The other cast sit on the couch and are expected to listen and be quiet.
Myf: How does that translate for you when you get nervous. Like, we never see, like, you look like such a professional. You’re always very calm and cool but when you’re really nervous what happens to you?
Zac: I don’t know. It’s just adrenaline. I don’t know. Especially when you’re performing, you kinda use that energy but you have to turn that into a positive.
Peter: Are you nervous now Zac because you look pretty calm?
[all laugh]
Zac: Yeah one hundred percent. I don’t know how anyone does this without getting nervous. I’m backstage, like jumping up and down and getting pumped, then I just come and sit.
[Rove and Zac laugh]
Goffman’s theory of presentation of self refers to the way individuals present themselves in different situations through their different selves. Presentational rituals specify what should be done and how recipients should be treated in interactions (Goffman 1967). Demeanour refers to ceremonial behaviour conveyed by appearance and the nature of their movements. In the video. Rove is wearing a suit and dresses very professional although he is not to be taken too seriously. He is also wearing sneakers which shows his humour and casual nature, as he is not fully dressed in business attire. Zac, on the other hand, is wearing a t-shirt and jeans. He appears very causal and calm. The roles that they are performing influence the way that they present themselves. Rove, as the interviewer, should be dressed more formally and Zac, as the interviewee can dress more casually.
The documentary method of interpretation refers to using past experience to make meaning out of present events and to assume from past experience that only individuals of a particular kind are likely to be found in a given social setting. For example, we know that Zac is a celebrity based on the fact that he is an actor and is very popular among female fans and he appears in the media frequently. We know that Rove is the television host and that most of his guests are celebrities. We know this from past experience through watching his show. We also know that it is Rove’s show based on past experience and there are many indicators to suggest that it is his show: the sign saying “Rove”, his name on the cup, his role as the interviewer.
A code of conduct is a set of social norms that prescribes, proscribes and describes how people should behave (Jimerson & Oware 2006). Zac and Rove follow the codes of greetings. Rove and Zac stood facing each other, each grasped the each other’s right hand for a short while, and then let go, then patted each other on the back. If this action is to be accomplished, the two men must be close enough to one another for their hands to come into contact, and they must be oriented to one another appropriately. The two hand shakers must engage in a joint manoeuvre to create a spatial and orientational frame within which the action of handshaking can take place (Kendon as cited in Raffer-Engel 1980). Zac and Rove step up to one another and shake hands, then Rove steps away from the place they were standing in for the handshake, and re-orient themselves in relation to one another. For example, they greet each other formally by shaking each other’s hand and then they pat each other on the back. This demonstrates the gendered codes of communication. If it was a female greeting Zac, then he would kiss her on the cheek but with two men, they make sure that they keep their distance, ensuring that they follow the code of conduct and the type of behaviour that is appropriate for the situation.
Goffman (1967) states that rules of conduct affect the individual in two ways: firstly, as obligations (the individual behaves as they morally should behave) and secondly as expectations (how others should act around him or her). Garfinkel’s breaching experiments revealed that the relationship between normative rules and socially organised events appears to be a cognitive one in which rules are constitutive of what the events are (Heritage 1984). In the video, Zac knows how to behave in front of an audience. He knows the structure of the interview and has his hands in his lap. Rove also knows how to behave as an interviewer. He is obligated to behave in a professional but humorous way and expects Zac to be relaxed around him. Rove performs the most powerful role in the interaction. As the interviewer, Rove asks the questions and can control the direction of the conversation.
According to Blumer (1969 as cited in Roberts 2006), symbolic interactionism refers to the particular and distinctive features of interaction which take place between human beings. Symbolic interactionism involves interpretation or ascertaining the meaning of the actions or remarks of the other person (Blumer 1969 as cited in Roberts 2006). Symbolic interactionism can be divided into meaning, language and act. Through meaning, we learn that it is an informal interview and Rove appears to be professional although his humorous nature shows. Observation refers to those objects which help to define the situation such cameras, microphones (which can not be seen although we know that they are there) and the set. We know that it is a television interview because of the meanings that are attached to the objects. Act refers to how the actors are performing. Zac, Rove, Carrie and Peter are very relaxed and calm. They help to define the situation and the way that they should act in a television interview.
In non-verbal communication, the expression of power and status is directly related to social distancing. The person with power has the right to determine the level of intimacy that he or she will permit in interacting with others. When Zac was invited to sit down, he sat in the chair at the other side of the table, opposite to where Rove was sitting. The arrangement of chairs expresses power and status (St. Clair in Raffer-Engel 1980). Rove’s chair was behind the table, showing his power and authority. It also allows for eye contact. The use of swivel stools increases the flexibility for communication by allowing Zac to turn in several directions to address the other cast (St. Clair as cited in Raffer-Engel 1980). This shows the flexibility of the interview as the interaction is not jest between Rove and Zac but Zac also interacts with the other cast.
Therefore, this essay examined an interview between Zac Efron and Rove McManus, drawing on sociological theories such as Goffman’s dramaturgy, presentation of self, symbolic interactionism and the documentary method of interpretation. Rove engaged in particular interviewing practices as participants in a specific contextualized activity and as part of their individual construction of a public persona within this activity.
References
Goffman, E 1959, The presentation of self in everyday life, Penguin, New York.
Goffman, E 1967 ‘The Nature of Deference and Demeanor’ in Interaction
Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour, Pantheon Books, New York, pp.47-96.
Goffman, E1971, ‘Performances’, in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life,
Penguin, Harmondsworth, pp.28-82.
Heritage, J 1984, ‘The morality of cognition’ in Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology, Polity Press, Cambridge, pp75-102.
Hogan, B 2010, ‘The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media: Distinguishing Performances and Exhibitions Online’, Bulletin of Science Technology & Society, vol.30, no.6, pp377-384, accessed 20 August 2012, http://bst.sagepub.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/content/30/6/377.full.pdf+html
Jimerson J & Oware, M 2006, ‘Telling the Code of the Street: An Ethnomethodological
Ethnography’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol. 35, no. 1, pp24-46, accessed 25 October 2012, http://jce.sagepub.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/content/35/1/24.full.pdf+html
Kendon, A 1980 ‘Features of the structural analysis of human communicational behaviour’ in W Raffler-Engel (ed.), Aspects of nonverbal communication, Swets and Zeitlinger, Lisse, pp.29-43.
Norrick, N 2009, ‘Listening practices in television celebrity interviews’, Journal of Pragmatics, vol.42, no.1, pp525-542, accessed 18 October 2012, http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0378216609001775
Roberts, B 2006, ‘Symbolic Interactionism 2 – Developments’ in Micro Social
Theory, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp46-61.
Schegloff, E 2000, ‘Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation’, Language in Society, vol.29, no.1, pp1-60, accessed 22 October 2012, http://journals.cambridge.org.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=28332&jid=LSY&volumeId=29&issueId=01&aid=28331&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOCSession
St. Clair, R 1980 ‘Social distance: expressions of power, solidarity and status’, in W Raffler-Engel (ed.), Aspects of nonverbal communication, Swets and Zeitlinger, Lisse, pp81-102.
Wierzbicka, A 2002, ‘Australian cultural scripts-bloody revisited’, Journal of Pragmatics, vol.34, no.1, pp1167-1206, accessed 25 October 2012, http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0378216601000236
Zac Efron interview on Rove live-full interview-best quality HQ-Promoting 17 Again, accessed 18/10/2012, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm1VtS8f-PE&feature=related
No comments:
Post a Comment