A study of laughter in science lessons

Laughter is a fundamental human phenomenon. Yet there is little educational research on the potential functions of laughter on the enacted (lived) curriculum. In this study, we identify the functions of laughter in a beginning science teacher’s classroom throughout her first year of teaching. Our study shows that laughter is more than a gratuitous phenomenon. It is the result of a collective interactive achievement of the classroom participants that offsets the seriousness of science as a discipline. Laughter, whereas it challenges the seriousness of science, also includes the dialectical inversion of the challenge: it simultaneously reinforces the idea of science as serious business.

Setting limits to laughter : university teaching and the boundaries of humour

This paper forms one part of a broadly-based study into the use of humour within tertiary teaching. One theme to emerge from semi-structured, in-depth interviews with university academics concerns the setting of boundaries to the appropriate use of humour within lectures and tutorials. Following the ‘benign violations’ theory of humour—wherein, to be funny, a situation/statement must be some kind of a social violation, that violation must be regarded as relatively benign, and the two ideas must be held simultaneously—this paper suggests that the willingness of academics to use particular types of humour in their teaching revolves around the complexities of determining the margins of the benign. These margins are shaped in part by pedagogic limitations, but also by professional delimitations. In terms of limitations, the boundaries of humour are set by the academic environment of the university, by the characteristics of different cohorts of students, and by what those students are prepare to laugh at. In terms of delimitations—where humour choice is moderated, not by the possibility of immediate laughter, but rather by the consequences of that choice—academic seniority and security play a large role in determining what kinds of humour will be used, and where boundaries are to be set. The central conclusion here is that formal maxims of humour use—‘Never tease students’, ‘Don’t joke about potentially sensitive issues’—fail to account for the complexity of teaching relationships, for the differences between student cohorts, and for the talents and standing of particular teachers.

Lecturing and the limits of laughter

The literature on humour in teaching frequently defaults to a series of maxims about how it can be used most appropriately: ‘Never tease students', ‘Don't joke about sensitive issues', ‘Never use laughter for disciplinary purposes'. This paper outlines recent research into the boundaries of humour-use within teacher education, which itself forms one part of a large scale, broadly-based study into the use of humour within tertiary teaching. This particular part of the research involves semi-structured, in-depth interviews with university academics. Following the ‘benign violations' theory of humour - wherein, to be funny, a situation/statement must be some kind of a social violation, that violation must be regarded as relatively benign, and the two ideas must be held simultaneously - this paper suggests that the willingness of academics to use particular types of humour in their teaching revolves around the complexities of determining the margins of ‘the benign'. These margins are shaped in part by pedagogic limitations, but also by professional delimitations. In terms of limitations, the boundaries of humour are set by the academic environment of the university, by the characteristics of different cohorts of students, and by what those students are prepare to laugh at. In terms of delimitations, most academics are prepared to tease their student, and many are prepared to use laughter as a form of discipline, however their own humour orientation, academic seniority, and employment security play a large role in determining what kinds of humour will be used, and where boundaries will be set. The central conclusion here is that formal maxims of humour provide little more than vague strategic guidelines, largely failing to account for the complexity of teaching relationships, for the differences between student cohorts, and for the talents and standing of particular teachers.

Undressing the actor : the erotic relationship with the audience

The intimacy and eroticism of the actor’s relationship with the audience is captured in the ecstatic revelation of the actor “being in the moment.” Drawing on the theories of Freud and Sartre and twenty years of performance praxis, this paper explores the exchange of erotic discourse between stage and spectator that not only heightens the experience of the liveness of theatre, but creates a symbiosis that is silently negotiated, agreed upon and sensuously performed during the suspended timeframe of the theatrical event. The actor draws the audience into the erotic transaction through various dramatic devices: the seduction of the soliloquy, the somatic and verbal discourses, the sensuality of light and costuming. The audience responds with its own paralingual and verbal foreplay: the playfulness of laughter, the slapping of hands and, most significantly, the gaze. While the gaze is often perceived as a form of voyeurism, this paper argues that the gaze of consensual agreement between audience and actor can work to unmask inhibitions enabling the actor to create the truth of the moment in complete abandon.

A determinism and desire: Some neurological processes in perceiving the design object

The environment moderates behaviour using a subtle language of ‘affordances’ and ‘behaviour-settings’. Affordances are environmental offerings. They are objects that demand action; a cliff demands a leap and binoculars demand a peek. Behaviour-settings are ‘places;’ spaces encoded with expectations and meanings. Behaviour-settings work the opposite way to affordances; they demand inhibition; an introspective demeanour in a church or when under surveillance. Most affordances and behaviour-settings are designed, and as such, designers are effectively predicting brain reactions. • Affordances are nested within, and moderated by behaviour-settings. Both trigger automatic neural responses (excitation and inhibition). These, for the best part cancel each other out. This balancing enables object recognition and allows choice about what action should be taken (if any). But when excitation exceeds inhibition, instinctive action will automatically commence. In positive circumstances this may mean laughter or a smile. In negative circumstances, fleeing, screaming or other panic responses are likely. People with poor frontal function, due to immaturity (childhood or developmental disorders) or due to hypofrontality (schizophrenia, brain damage or dementia) have a reduced capacity to balance excitatory and inhibitory impulses. For these people, environmental behavioural demands increase with the decline of frontal brain function. • The world around us is not only encoded with symbols and sensory information. Opportunities and restrictions work on a much more primal level. Person/space interactions constantly take place at a molecular scale. Every space we enter has its own special dynamic, where individualism vies for supremacy between the opposing forces of affordance-related excitation and the inhibition intrinsic to behaviour-settings. And in this context, even a small change–the installation of a CCTV camera can turn a circus to a prison. • This paper draws on cutting-edge neurological theory to understand the psychological determinates of the everyday experience of the designed environment.

Common psychotic symptoms can be explained by the theory of ecological perception

The symptoms of psychiatric illness are diverse, as are the causes of the illnesses that cause them. Yet, regardless of the heterogeneity of cause and presentation, a great deal of symptoms can be explained by the failure of a single perceptual function – the reprocessing of ecological perception. It is a central tenet of the ecological theory of perception that we perceive opportunities to act. It has also been found that perception automatically causes actions and thoughts to occur unless this primary action pathway is inhibited. Inhibition allows perceptions to be reprocessed into more appropriate alternative actions and thoughts. Reprocessing of this kind takes place over the entire frontal lobe and it renders action optional. Choice about what action to take (if any) is the basis for the feeling of autonomy and ultimately for the sense-of-self. When thoughts and actions occur automatically (without choice) they appear to originate outside of the self, thereby providing prima facie evidence for some of the bizarre delusions that define schizophrenia such as delusional misidentification, delusions of control and Cotard’s delusion. Automatic actions and thoughts are triggered by residual stimulation whenever reprocessing is insufficient to balance automatic excitatory cues (for whatever reason). These may not be noticed if they are neutral and therefore unimportant whereas actions and thoughts with a positive bias are desirable. Responses to negative stimulus, on the other hand, are always unwelcome, because the actions that are triggered will carry the negative bias. Automatic thoughts may include spontaneous positive feelings of love and joy, but automatic negative thoughts and visualisations are experienced as hallucinations. Not only do these feel like they emerge from elsewhere but they carry a negative bias (they are most commonly critical, rude and are irrationally paranoid). Automatic positive actions may include laughter and smiling and these are welcome. Automatic behaviours that carry a negative bias, however, are unwelcome and like hallucinations, occur without a sense of choice. These include crying, stereotypies, perseveration, ataxia, utilization and imitation behaviours and catatonia.

The Black Label: trade mark dilution, culture jamming, and the no logo movement

This article considers the ongoing debate over the appropriation of well-known and famous trade marks by the No Logo Movement for the purposes of political and social critique. It focuses upon one sensational piece of litigation in South Africa, Laugh It Off Promotions v. South African Breweries International (Finance) B.V. t/a Sabmark International. In this case, a group called Laugh It Off Promotions subjected the trade marks of the manufacturers of Carling Beer were subjected to parody, social satire, and culture jamming. The beer slogan “Black Label” was turned into a T-Shirt entitled “Black Labour/ White Guilt”. In the ensuing litigation, the High Court of South Africa and the Supreme Court of Appeal were of the opinion that the appropriation of the mark was a case of hate speech. However, the Constitutional Court of South Africa disagreed, finding that the parodies of a well-known, famous trade mark did not constitute trade mark dilution. Moseneke J observed that there was a lack of evidence of economic or material harm; and Sachs J held that there is a need to provide latitude for parody, laughter, and freedom of expression. The decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa provides some important insights into the nature of trade mark dilution, the role of parody and satire, and the relevance of constitutional protections of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Arguably, the ruling will be of help in the reformation of trade mark dilution law in other jurisdictions – such as the United States. The decision in Laugh It Off Promotions v. South African Breweries International demonstrates that trade mark law should not be immune from careful constitutional scrutiny.

Zarathustra’s Cave

In 'Zarathustra’s Cave' the iconic apartment set from 90’s sitcom 'Seinfeld' is presented devoid of actors or action of any kind. Instead the ‘apartment’ sits empty, accompanied by the ambient noise of the screen-space and the distant sound of city traffic. At irregular intervals this relative silence is punctuated by the laughter of an off-screen audience. Unprompted by any on-screen action, this spontaneous audience response ranges from raucous fits of cheering and applause to singular guffaws and giggles. The work is the product of a deep engagement with its subject matter, the result of countless hours of re-watching and editing to isolate the aural and visual spaces presented on the screen. In its resolute emptiness, the installation addresses the notion of narrative expectation. It creates a ‘nothing-space’, where a viewer can experientially oscillate between a sense of presence and absence, tension and pathos, or even between humour and existential crisis. The work was first exhibited in ‘NEW14’, at the Australian Centre for Contemporary Art in Melbourne.