The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons 3031328353, 9783031328350

Citation preview

The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons

Vinod Balakrishnan · Vishaka Venkat

The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons

Vinod Balakrishnan • Vishaka Venkat

The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons

Vinod Balakrishnan Humanities and Social Sciences National Institute of Technology Trichy, India

Vishaka Venkat Linguistics and Literary Studies Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth Kochi, Kerala, India

ISBN 978-3-031-32835-0    ISBN 978-3-031-32836-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

ॐ अज्ञानतिमिरान्धस्य ज्ञानाञ्जनशलाकया । चक्षुरुन्मीलितं येन तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥ om ajñāna-timirāndhasya jñānāñjana-śalākayā chakṣur unmīlitaṁ yena tasmai śrī-gurave namaḥ By whom my eye, when blinded by darkness of ignorance, with the collyrium stick of Knowledge was opened, to that Glorious Guru, salutations. (qtd. in Nome 205)

To My Guru

Acknowledgements

This book started out as a simple question: Why do political cartoons promise to tickle the funny bone but, sometimes, end up getting under the skin? The attempts to find a convincing answer took us to Bengaluru for a conference on Creativity and Cognition in Art and Design. Our next stop was Singapore for a conference on Applied Psychology. This time we examined the political cartoon as a conceptual metaphor. The conversation about violence and anger like the hidden claws of political cartoons took us to different parts of the country. We spoke to the very masters who are plying this difficult art that, ironically, thrives in a climate of varying sensitivities. Conversations with Indian Cartoonists happened. Then someone reminded us about the controversy around Shanker’s Ambedkar cartoon. It seemed to us that every political cartoon has two fuses: The long and the short. The long one is lighted first. It produces the intended humor. But soon the short one also goes off causing a deafening reaction. Stones crash through glass windows, buses are burnt in blind fury. It is baffling that the very cartoon that at one time is perceived as humorous, at other times, feeds fury and violence. And so we traveled till we were able to arrive at a reasonable theory about the humor of political cartoons. This book is a record of our seeking. ix

x Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the following men and women who have hosted us, supported with grants, encouraged with positive comments and provided valuable insights: Aneesha Sharma (NID Ahmedabad), Jamuna Rajeshwar (NIMHANS Bengaluru), Man-tak Mike Leung and Lee-Ming Tan (Hong Kong Shue You University), Professor John A. Lent, Ajit Ninan, E P Unny, Gokul Gopalakrishnan, Kehsav Venkatraghavan, Manjul, Ravi Shankar Etteth, Sandeep Adhwaryu, Satish Acharya, Surendra and Yesudasan. The librarians at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, the National Institute of Technology Tiruchirappalli, Chinmaya Vishwa Vidyapeetha, Ernakulam. The research scholars who participated in our seminars: Muthukumar, Shintu Dennis, Swathi Kurian, Parvathy, and Anupama. For their editorial support we are grateful to Lakshmi R, Lalitha Sivram, Pushpalatha Mohan and Cathy Scott at Palgrave. Our families have shared our agonies and shouldered the responsibilities of home and of childcare: Bhuvaneswari, Adarsh, Krishnan, Jaya, Venkateshwaran, Rajeshwari, Ashutosh, Ramachandran, Hema, Poornima, Harish and Anjaney.

Contents

1 U  nderstanding Humour  1 1.1 Application of “Humour”   5 1.2 Ontogeny of Humour Theories   8 1.2.1 Superiority Theory   8 1.2.2 Relief Theory  11 1.2.3 Incongruity Theory  12 1.3 Linguistic Theories of Humour: A Preview  14 1.4 Performance of Humour  17 1.5 Transmutation of Humour: An Overview  19 1.6 Methodology  23 1.7 Overview of the Chapters  24 Works Cited  26 2 Performance  of Humour in Political Cartoons 35 2.1 Language and Violence  38 2.2 Cartoon Controversies: Global and National  40 2.3 The Nature of Humour in Political Cartoons  44 2.4 Anatomy of the Cartoons  46 2.5 Critique of the Thorat Committee  48 2.6 Concerns of Cartooning  51 Works Cited  56 xi

xii Contents

3 A  Communicative Framework of Humour 59 3.1 A Need for the Model  60 3.2 Communication Cycle of Humour  63 3.3 Model of Linguistic Communication  70 3.3.1 Constitutive Factors of Verbal Communication  71 3.4 Model of Visual Communication  77 3.5 Multimodal Integration of the Model  81 3.6 Viability of the Model  83 3.7 Implementation of the Model  84 Works Cited  90 4 Metaphor:  The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 93 4.1 Humour and Metaphor  94 4.2 Theories of Metaphor  97 4.3 Conceptual Metaphor Theory  99 4.3.1 Target 104 4.3.2 Source 105 4.3.3 The Need for Matrix 106 4.3.4 Matrix 107 4.3.5 Interaction of Three Domains—Source, Target and Matrix 107 4.4 Analysis of the Cartoon 109 4.5 The Integrated Model 113 Works Cited 117 5 Application  of the Model119 5.1 Language, Caste and Gender Discrimination 120 5.2 Corrupt Bureaucracy 137 5.3 Nehruvian Regime 148 5.4 Indira Gandhi Regime 151 5.5 Regionalism 156 Works Cited 163

 Contents 

xiii

6 Language,  Context and Operation of Humour165 Works Cited 169 Appendix: Persecution of Cartoonists171 G  lossary175 W  orks Cited183 I ndex207

Abbreviations

BJP CMT ESL GTVH IDM INC IRM NCERT NCF RTI SSTH

Bharatiya Janata Party Conceptual Metaphor Theory English as a Second Language General Theory of Verbal Humour Isotopy Disjunction Model Indian National Congress Incongruity-Resolution Model National Council of Educational Research and Training National Curriculum Framework Right to Information Script based Semantic Theory of Humour

xv

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 The thin line between humour and anger 45 Fig. 3.1 Constitutive factors of verbal communication. Source: Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language, edited by Thomas Sebeok, MIT P, 1960, pp. 353 71 Fig. 3.2 Functions of verbal communication. Source: Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language, edited by Thomas Sebeok, MIT P, 1960, pp. 357 73 Fig. 3.3 Linguistic framework of humour 73 Fig. 3.4 Conjoined model 82 Fig. 4.1 Interaction, application and reception of conceptual metaphors 108 Fig. 4.2 Conceptual mapping of Ambedkar cartoon 110 Fig. 4.3 The integrated model 114 Fig. 5.1 Conceptual mapping of Anti-Hindi agitation cartoons 127 Fig. 5.2 Transition in the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoons 128 Fig. 5.3 Conceptual mapping of Amul cartoons 134 Fig. 5.4 Conceptual mapping of Laxman’s cartoons on corrupt bureaucracy140 Fig. 5.5 Conceptual mapping of black and coloured politicians 142 Fig. 5.6 Conceptual mappings of Indira Regime I 155 Fig. 5.7 Conceptual mappings of Indira Regime II 156

xvii

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 4.1 Table 4.2

Two sides of humour Coordinates of communicative framework of humour Correlation of Barthes and Jakobson Correlation of target, source and matrix Correlation of Barthes, Jakobson, Lakoff and Johnson

46 76 82 109 115

xix

1 Understanding Humour

In 2014, The New York Times apologised for a cartoon on Indian Mars Mission as the readers complained the image of mocking the Indians. The cartoon portrayed an Indian farmer along with his cow knocking the doors of the Elite Space Club and the two members being flabbergasted to hear the knock. The cartoon’s intent was to applaud India for its successful budget mission to Mars. Heng Kim Song, the cartoonist, said he drew this image to “highlight how space exploration is no longer the exclusive domain of rich, Western countries” (BBC). On one hand, readers were hurt with the stereotypical caricature of India, which carries the colonial vision of India, being a land of snake charmers, agrarian community and backward in development. On the other, from the cartoonist’s perspective this was the easiest way to convey the essence of India and at the same time satirically take a dig at the Elite Space Club, which considers itself to be an exclusive and a different domain. In this instance, we saw how the humorous intent of the cartoonist was transmuted into a hurtful sentiment. When and where did the humorous communication go wrong?

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_1

1

2 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The main aim of this book is to examine and theorise the language of humour in political cartoons, which is multimodal in nature and carries a possibility to transmute. The book specifically examines Indian political cartoons in the light of the NCERT controversy. In India, even the ancient narratives from Puranas and Itihasas throw light on the transmutative nature of humour. The legend of the Moon’s Curse by Lord Ganesha (Seigel 33) and Draupadi’s laughter from Indian Puranas and Itihasas are cases in point. On the night of Ganesh Chathurthi, Lord Ganesha, hoarding the sweets offered by his devotee, rides his mouse and stumbles upon a stone. The image of Ganesha enduring “comic incongruity” (33), of an elephant head on a pot-bellied human body and who is carried by a mouse, elicits the Moon’s laughter. Ganesha, humiliated by lunar laughter, curses him saying, “those who look at your face hereafter shall be falsely accused” (Gupte 25). The laughter of Draupadi from the Indian Ithihasa, Mahabharata also illustrates the dire consequences of ill-timed humour. In Sabha Parvam, Draupadi laughs uproariously at Duryodhana who visits the palace of the Pandavas at Indraprastha (Menon 368). The astounding construction of the palace by Mayasura makes the wet and the dry surfaces indistinguishable. Duryodhana gets fooled once as he cautiously steps on the dry floor which shimmers like water. Next, assuming the floor to be dry, Duryodhana steps confidently on the wet floor and falls. Witnessing the fall, Draupadi laughs out loud and makes a sarcastic remark “a blind man’s son is blind” (Bandlamudi 176). This sardonic comment coupled with her laughter hurts Duryodhana, who vows revenge, eventually leading to her disrobement. In both the instances, the impending laughter, followed by the fall, consequentially leading to a curse or revenge, essentially captures the “cognitive frame” (Yus 83) of humour as evident in political cartoons which satirise the “fall” of the politicians and the institutions, leading to their censorship and the arrests of political cartoonists. These illustrations underline the transmutative tendency in the language of humour. In May 2012, the Houses of Indian Parliament were stormed (“India Parliament”; “NCERT Asked”) by different political parties demanding the ban of Keshav Shankar Pillai’s cartoon on Dr B.R. Ambedkar, which was included in the National Council of Educational Research and

1  Understanding Humour 

3

Training (NCERT) Political Science textbook for the 11th grade. The textbook was first published in 2006 with a new interactive curriculum framework through the inclusion of visual texts to inculcate critical thinking among students. Following the report of National Curriculum Framework 2005 to introduce “critical pedagogy” (6) which would help the students to be “critical observers of their own conditions and experience” (22), the NCERT textbooks were revised. The revised textbooks included cartoons and other visual resources which posed critical questions to the students. Shankar’s cartoon, drawn in 1949 and reiterated in the Class XI Political Science textbook in 2006, portraying Ambedkar (Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee between 1947–1950) as riding and whipping the snail (embodied as the Constitution) and Jawaharlal Nehru (the first prime minister of Independent India) standing behind Ambedkar shown as ambiguously whipping with his head turned down, became contentious in 2012 on the grounds of hurting caste sentiments. What was originally intended to be a humorous cartoon and expected to be received with deserved hilarity, after 60 years (in 2012), became the eye of a political storm as the politicians and the Dalit community expressed anger at the purported irreverence towards Ambedkar. NCERT advisors, Yogendra Yadav and Suhas Palshikar, resigned from their posts (“2 NCERT”) after the cartoon created furore in the parliament. Following the Ambedkar cartoon, the anti-Hindi agitation cartoon of R.K. Laxman also became controversial (Kolappan 2012). It was alleged that the cartoon insulted the sentiments of citizens of Tamil Nadu. Though one can always ascribe the cause and reaction of the political storm as a motivated political reaction and a fabricated friction, the phenomenon of a humorous text transmuting in a different socio-political milieu raises the question whether it is in the inherent nature of humour to be equivocal and instigate negative reaction. Following the controversy, a panel was set up under Professor Sukhadeo Thorat to evaluate the cartoons included in all the social science and political science textbooks. Out of 490 cartoons running through 968 pages included in six textbooks, the Thorat Committee report recommended deletion of 22 cartoons and modification of 18 mini cartoons and attached their critical observations to each one of them. The

4 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

cartoons, drawn by prominent national cartoonists including Shankar, Laxman, P.K.S Kutty among others were recommended to be deleted. The committee report again triggered fervid discussions and debates. Academicians like Zoya Hasan along with Professor M.S.S. Pandian, among others, expressed their dissent in accepting the recommendations of the committee (Chopra). The recommendations of the committee further prompt one to seek answer to the following questions: What are the limitations of humour in the way it is embodied in language and cognised by the reader? What went wrong with the communication cycle of humour? When and where did the transmutation of humour happen? What are the elements that catalyse the transgression? Some of the recent instances of cartoon controversies, post the Danish cartoon crisis in 2005, are as follows: The persecution of Ramón Nsé Esono Ebalé (Equitorial Guinea 2017), Musa Kart (Turkey 2016), Zunar (Malaysia 2016), the Charlie Hebdo attack (France 2015), the arrests of Atena Farghadani (Iran 2014), Leslie Chew (Singapore 2013) and Aseem Trivedi (India 2012). These instances emphasise that the moment humour’s wonder ceases, there is an impending violence ready to strike. One can read humour’s character as the curiosity of Shahrayar, the Persian king, of the Thousand and One Nights of the Arabian Nights, who is curious to know how Shahrazad’s tale would unravel (Haddawy 1990). The narrator clings precariously to the curiosity of the king knowing that, at the point, when his curiosity is exhausted, interest would transform into violent death. Thus, the profession of a political cartoonist, illustrating the cartoons with shades of sharp humour hidden between the strokes, corresponds to walking a tightrope. This metaphor of funambulism essentially captures the predicament of the cartoonist as every line he/she draws determines their fate that’s caught between affect and (dis)ease. But how is one to capture this transition theoretically? Rather than seeing the incidents as an act of censorship or political incorrectness, the study observes them to be quintessentially a “humor scandal” (Kuipers “The Politics of Humour” 63). By “humor scandal” the study emphasises that the political cartoon controversies suggest a failure of humour performing its function. Assuming the NCERT cartoon controversy as a prototypical case of humour transmutation, the study investigates how the principle of incongruity (what ought to happen and what happens in

1  Understanding Humour 

5

reality) determines the performance of humour when it is read out of context. The act of transmutation is captured theoretically by examining the recommended cartoons to be deleted by the Thorat Committee using a theoretical model. The first component of the model is constructed by assimilating the models of communication (linguistic and visual) by Roman Jakobson and Roland Barthes. The second component of the model incorporates metaphor as the medium to map the possibilities of humour’s transmutation. Adopting George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory (CMT), the second part develops the rhetoric scheme of humour. Here the term rhetoric in specific analyses how humour influences the audience. The scheme includes a three-phase structure. It adds to the domains of the source and the target proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (256), the matrix (proposed by the authors) which correspond, respectively, to the analyses of the cognitive, conceptual and representational components of the cartoon. The integrated model is applied to plot the possibilities for transmutation of humour.

1.1 Application of “Humour” The term humour is defined as follows: (a) As a noun, the quality of being amusing or comic. (b) A mood or state of mind. (c) Each of the four chief fluids of the body (blood, phlegm, yellow bile (choler) and black bile (melancholy) that determine a person’s physical and mental qualities. (d) As a verb, comply with the wishes of (someone) in order to keep them content, however unreasonable such wishes might be. (“Humour”) The above definition identifies four dimensions of humour: as a quality, a mood, a bodily fluid and as an ability to please someone. Humour, first, was defined as a form of fluid (Old North French/Mid-fourteenth century/Latin) and denoted the condition of being moist or wet (“Humor”,

6 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

etymonline). In medieval physiology, humour constituted the human body and disposition of an individual. In the frame of bodily fluid, humour was of four types—blood, phlegm, choler and melancholic/bile—representing four characteristics: sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric and melancholic. Humour as a medical compound finds its references in the works of Hippocrates’ Disease I, Affections, Diseases IV, (“Hippocrates” 362). The “humoral theory” was given a new dimension by Claudius Galen when he associated temperament to each kind of fluid: sanguine (causing optimism and cheerfulness), phlegmatic (indicating dullness and impassivity), choleric (affecting anger and irritability) and melancholic (manifesting as gloominess and depression) (Roeckelein 235). Humour as a temperament is further expanded in Ben Jonson’s theory of “comedy of humors”. Humour as a medical term, therefore, primarily indicates the bodily fluid. Eventually it acquired the meaning—of that of mood/sense or a temporary state of mind—in the seventeenth century. The qualitative frame of humour evolved as in the phrase “a sense of humour”, which defined it as an ability to perceive funny things. The term “humour” was introduced as a critical and theoretical denomination during the twentieth century (Larkin-Galiñanes 4). “Humour” manifested as a critical term when it was differentiated from wit, the comic and other forms. The Earl of Shaftesbury was one of the earliest theoreticians to define humour in, “Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humour” (1711) as a medium to hide “strong truths from tender eyes” (52). William Hazlitt further defines humour by distinguishing it from wit in the essay “On Wit and Humour” (1818): Humour is describing the ludicrous as it is in itself; wit is exposing it, by comparing or contrasting it with something else. Humour is, as it were, the growth of nature and accident; wit is the product of art and fancy. (13)

George Meredith in “An Essay on Comedy” (1877) discusses about humour as he says: If you laugh all round him, tumble him, roll him about, deal him a smack, and drop a tear on him, own his likeness to you and yours to your neighbour, spare him as little as you shun, pity him as much as you expose, it is a spirit of Humour that is moving you. (Ives 137)

1  Understanding Humour 

7

Meredith, here, observes humour as a method, prompting the audience to take pity on the target (subject) while he/she gets ridiculed for their flaws. Sigmund Freud’s definition of humour in Wit and Its Relation to the Unconscious (1905) also comes closer to the above definition where humour is identified with the “economy in the expenditure of feeling” (Carey xxvii). H.W. Fowler in Modern English Usage (1926) differentiates between humour, wit, satire, sarcasm, invective, irony, cynicism and sardonic based on motive, province, method and audience. Fowler, recognising the parallel definitions of Meredith and Freud, similarly perceives humour as one, requiring a sympathetic audience, which aims at discovery of human nature through observation. J.M. Baldwin in Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology (1901–1905) also defines humour as “a complex feeling (or corresponding quality) composed of an element of the comic and an element of sympathy” (qtd. in. Roeckelein 13). Humour, here, once again refers to the disposition of mind which evokes sympathy. James Drever in the A Dictionary of Psychology (1952) further demonstrates humour as a “Character of a complex situation exciting joyful, and in the main quiet, laughter, either directly, through sympathy, or (indirectly) through empathy” (qtd.in. Roecklein 2002, 14). Noël Carroll in Humour: A Very Short Introduction (2014) also identifies how the component of sympathy tends to humour. Christian F. Hempelmann in “Key Terms in the Field of Humor” also draws a map with the words associated with humour. Comparing wit with humour he says “wit came to cover the more aggressive, cerebral aspects, while humor covers the benevolent, crude aspects” (2017). In course of time wit became a fashionable sense. The semantic field set up by Wolfgang Schmidt-Hidding in 1963 differentiates “from aggressive ridicule/mock to non-aggressive humour… the other degree of cerebrality from cerebral wit to crude fun”. Jon E. Roeckelein in The Psychology of Humor: A Reference Guide and Annotated Bibliography (2002) differentiates humour from wit, as he says: “Humor [signifies] a disposition to see the ludicrous, comical, ridiculous, or absurd… often suggesting a generalness or a greater kindliness or sympathy with human failings than does wit” (25). From the above discussion on the sense of the term “humour”, one can conclude that the nature of humour represents the disposition of mind

8 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

that provides “an adaptive method of regulating emotions” (Mathews iv) and it, primarily, appeals to the senses which also evoke sympathy. The psychological and cognitive definitions expound how the workings of humour are closely associated with that of the mind and the mood. This study—which investigates how humour affects the emotional quotient of an individual—therefore, examines the qualitative nature of humour. This understanding of humour is also interesting for the current study, as all aforementioned definitions associate humour with sympathy. But the condition of transmutation, that the study deals with in detail, sees how the component of sympathy is misplaced, rendering humour to be hostile and indifferent, which ultimately leads to animosity.

1.2 Ontogeny of Humour Theories Let us scrutinise the development of humour theory as it progresses through the history of English literature. The timeline of humour theory will give one an insight into how the academic sphere has dealt with humour’s tendency to transmute. The timeline further is divided into diachronic and synchronic. The diachronic study of humour is compartmentalised mainly into three categories: superiority, relief/release and incongruity theories. Synchronically, it sees how these theories have been revised in the recent studies.

1.2.1 Superiority Theory In the classical age, the philosophers focused more on laughter rather than the concept of comedy or humour. During this age, laughter was synonymous with comedy and humour. Thus, often the terms are used interchangeably. Moreover, as theatrics was flourishing, initially, the focus of the philosophers was on the term “comedy”. Nevertheless, comedy and humour were considered to be the same. The Greek Philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, condemned the use of humour, believing it to be malignant and vicious. When one examines what good does the humour do to humanity and how does it function in guarding the morality, one observes

1  Understanding Humour 

9

that the philosophers conceived a utilitarian perspective and focused on the “object of laughter”—“who/what was being laughed at” (Larkin-­ Galiñanes 4).Thus, humour was a mere giver of pleasure and was declared to be a foible as it exploited the weakness or the inadequacies of people. Plato’s observations on humour as “laugh at the folly of our friends…and so we envy and laugh at the same instant” (97) in the Philebus and “laugh at buffoonery which you would be ashamed to utter” (197) in the Republic reinforce laughter’s penchant for human folly which compelled him to banish humour or the comedians from his ideal state. Aristotle’s definition of comedy in Poetics as “an imitation of characters of a lower type… It consists in some defects or ugliness which is not painful or destructive” (4) explains the nature of humour as that which laughs at the absurdity of mankind that does not cause any pain. This feeling of “suspicion, wariness” and “distrustfulness” (Larkin-Galiñanes 5) towards laughter marginalised the theatrical representation of comedy to the low characters belonging to the lower classes who performed despicable and irrational acts. These philosophical speculations on humour as a vicious expression led to the formulation of superiority theory, which is best defined by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan: “sudden glory…maketh those grimaces called laughter” (24). The attitude towards the superiority theory was puritanical even in the Middle Ages as Christianity banned laughter, considering it unholy. The writings and sermons of Clement of Alexandria (3rd cy A.D.), Basil of Caesarea (fourth century AD), John Chrysostom and Jerome (fourth/fifth century AD) (Larkin-Galiñanes 6) are historical instances of laughter being viewed as an “acknowledged sin” (qtd. in Gilhus 67) carrying the potential to move towards slander. With Renaissance and the revival of the aesthetic sense, comedy as a theatrical genre proliferated. Nevertheless, the perception of comedy, that which results from superior feeling remained intact through René Descartes’ The Passions of the Soul (1649) as he says, “there is always some small subject of hatred, or at least wonder” (85) in laughter. During the English Renaissance in the Jacobean Age, Ben Jonson propagated the “comedy of humors” through his plays: Every Man in his Humour (1598) and Every Man Out of his Humour (1599). The comedy of humors, theoretically, posited comedy as an excess of one of the fluids/ temperaments of an individual, which makes humans prone to folly. For

10 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

example, the character of Morose in Epicœne, or The Silent Woman (1609), with an excess of melancholy, remains melancholic, thus, humorous, throughout the play. Shakespearean comedy, on the other hand, presented a potpourri of high and low comedy as he was influenced by the plays of Plautus, Terrence, Aristophanes and Menander. Ranging from the intermittent comic reliefs to 17 comedy plays, Shakespeare explored humour in its physical, physiological, sociological and psychological forms. From witty dialogues, ironical and farcical plots to comical clowns and fools, trickery, disguise and confusion (Derrin 684), Shakespeare approached comedy in varied ways. After the Elizabethan age, the Puritan interregnum saw a complete shutdown of the theatres. By the beginning of Restoration age, comedy thrived conspicuously to such an extent that the dramatists—William Congreve, William Wycherley, John Vanburgh and John Dryden—were reprimanded by Jeremy Collier in A Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage (1698) for their banal and profane comic presentations to the English audience. Comedy flourished in its full vulgarity and obscenity on English stages. The use of wit, specifically, repartee or verbal fencing was noticeable. In the aforementioned discussion, one can see how initially laughter, humour and comedy were seen as one sprouting from a feeling of superiority. Thus, humour was considered crude and harsh. Ridiculing and satire went hand in hand with the development of superiority theory. The superiority theory, thus, expanded its theoretical frame between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. Synchronically, in the post-modern age, superiority theory of humour has been reoriented as disparagement theory which defines humour “as remarks that (are intended to) elicit amusement through the denigration, derogation or belittlement of a given target (Ferguson and Ford 283). The earliest study of the Disparagement Theory is attributed to H.A. Wolff, C.E. Smith and H.A. Murray’s “The Psychology of Humor: A Study of Responses to Race-Disparagement Jokes” (1934). The roots of disparagement theory were further developed in “A Disposition Theory of Humour and Mirth” (1976) by Dolf Zillmann and Joanne R. Cantor as they point that “the intensity of the response to humorous presentations critically depends upon the respondent’s affective disposition toward the protagonists involved” (93). The disposition theory was followed by

1  Understanding Humour 

11

“The Misattribution Theory of Tendentious Humour” (1980) by Zillmann and Jennings Bryant. Encompassing the superiority theory, disparagement and disposition theory gives new insights into the role of social identities in the reception of humour (Ferguson and Ford 296). This theory finds its relevance in the studies of ethnic humour, racial jokes, role of stereotypes and biases and hostile environments. Superiority theory, therefore, focused on the sociological aspects and affective components of humour.

1.2.2 Relief Theory The modern age, which was scientific in its temperament, analysed humour more technically. The nineteenth and twentieth centuries were fecund ages for the flowering of humour theories. Though the rudiments of relief theory are found in the writings of the ancient philosophers and theoreticians of the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, Herbert Spencer’s The Physiology of Laughter (1860) is a seminal text which analyses humour physically and physiologically. Spencer describes laughter in terms of the release of nervous energy as “nervous excitation always tends to beget muscular motion; and when it rises to a certain intensity, always does beget it” (195). The theory was further developed through the works of Freud and Daniel E. Berlyne. When Freud exploited the underpinnings of the unconscious on humour in Jokes and Its Relation to the Unconscious (1905), Berlyne, a British-Canadian psychologist, in his two works: Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity (1960) and Humor and Its Kin (1972) expounded the concept of arousal and humour. Relief theory is further explained politically and socially in Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the carnivalesque in Rabelais and His World (1965). The concept of carnivalesque, derived from the Feast of Fools, finds its first mention in Bakhtin’s Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (1963) as it analysed the subverted hierarchy allowing the lower classes to vent their frustrations and voice their complaints against the dominant or the ruling class. The relief theory of humour expanded through the works of M.K. Rothbart and Rod A. Martin’s The Psychology of Humour: An

12 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Integrative Approach, which has become a handbook for the theory. Rothbart’s “Psychological Approaches to the Study of Humour” (1977) analyses the arousal theory and the cognitive processing of humour. Martin gives a detailed account of the cognitive psychology, social psychology, psychobiology, developmental psychology, personality psychology and physiology of humour as he discusses the relation of humour with mental health and psycho-therapy. In “Individual Differences in Uses of Humour and their Relation to Psychological Well-being: Development of Humour Styles Questionnaire” (2003) Martin posits four types of humour dimensions as found in personality of individuals: (a) Affirmative humor (engage in witty conversations, making others comfortable and gathering relationships) (b) Self-enhancing humor (having a humorous perspective at life and remaining calm) (c) Aggressive humor (humor used for manipulating which is rude and disparaging and (d) Self-defeating humor (engaging people at the expense of one’s own by hiding their negative feelings and emotions) (53–54). The relief theory in the contemporary studies has branched into neuro-­ scientific investigations. This outlook of humour, furthermore, is explored in Robert R. Provine’s Laughter: A Scientific Investigation (2000) and Curious Behaviour: Yawning, Laughing, Hiccupping and Beyond (2012) and V.S. Ramachandran’s “The neurology and evolution of humor, laughter, and smiling: the false alarm theory” (1998).

1.2.3 Incongruity Theory Incongruity theory also developed simultaneously along with relief theory. There are flashes of the theory of incongruity in the writings of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Demetrius’ De Elocutine, Cicero’s De Oratore and Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria (Larkin-Galiñanes 12). The theory of incongruity was established with Frances Hutcheson’s Reflections Upon Laughter (1725), which was written to counter the assumptions of Hobbes. Hutcheson finds contrasting expressions at the heart of laughter when he says, “we also find ourselves moved to laughter by an overstraining wit, by bringing resemblances from subjects of a different kind from the subjects to which they are compared” (19). The concept of

1  Understanding Humour 

13

incongruity, primarily, deals with the colliding expectations (the collision between what ought to happen and what happens in reality). The theory further developed through the writings of Corbyn Morris (An Essay on Wit 1744), Samuel Taylor Coleridge (A Lecture on Wit and Humour 1818) and James Sully (Ridicule and Truth 1877) (Larkin-Galiñanes13). Between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, philosophers like Sydney Smith, Arthur Schopenhauer explored the causes of incongruity and deduced the element of surprise/suddenness to be imperative for the theory. Immanuel Kant’s famous statement in The Critique of Judgement about laughter as “an affection arising from the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing” (133), treats “suddenness” as a causal factor for incongruity. Schopenhauer’s The World as Will and Representation (1883) identifies incongruity as a cause of laughter when he says, “laughter arises from nothing other than the sudden perception of an incongruity between a concept and the real objects that are” (84). By the twentieth century, incongruity theory had adapted scientifically. Matthew M. Hurley, Daniel C. Dennett and Reginald B. Adams Jr in Inside Jokes: Using Humour to Reverse Engineer the Mind (2011) define humour as a “debugging process” (121), which helps in identifying the mistakes that don’t fit the mental space and correcting them. This debugging is similar to Jerry M. Suls’ incongruity-resolution model (1972). The incongruity-resolution theory of humour draws its foundation from Koestler’s “Bisociation”. The process of bisociation aims at combining two contrasting planes of thought on a single event. The bisociation theory was succeeded by the incongruity theory, as it developed into a two-­ stage process which needed an incongruous situation followed by a resolution. This theory is further supported by the false-alarm theory of humour by Ramachandran (1998) as he explains the phenomena of laughter and tickling resulting from the “deflation of the expectation” (351). Thus, as one analyses the theory of humour, there is a visible shift in the focus of humour research from the object/subject of humour to the logic of humour. The superiority theory of humour examined the object of laughter: who was being laughed at and how the relation between the subject and the object of laughter get affected. Relief theory, on the other, primarily focused the reaction of laughter and the internal operations

14 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

responsible for laughter. From the internal operations, incongruity theory moved towards the cognitive functions of humour as it examined the logic of laughter. The scrutiny of humour theories leads one to conclude that the major theories essentially explore the causes for the process and production of humour. Focusing the subject and object of humour, the theories analyse the causality and source of humour. This study, which aims at developing a model for mapping the transmuting nature of humour as seen in political cartoons, primarily evaluates the consequences of humour. The above theories, as they mainly focus the source of humour, inadequately provide a perspective on the consequence of humour. Differing from the major theories, the linguistic theories of humour give an insight into the operations of the language of humour. Studies of Victor Raskin (1985, 1998) and Salvattore Attardo (1994, 2001) have been seminal in the development and propagation of linguistic theories. As this study develops a multimodal model on the transitions in the language of humour, the cognitive-linguistic theories of humour will serve as the foundation for the construction of the model.

1.3 Linguistic Theories of Humour: A Preview Though unacknowledged, Koestler’s bisociation theory is crucial in the canon as it is one of the earliest theories to uncannily examine the cognitive function of humour as he discovered the “importance and universal role that projections between different regions of experience play in human thinking and communication” (Kirkman 29). Koestler’s theory has been further supported and elaborated after more than two decades in the works of Michael Mulkay, Peter L. Berger, Robert L. Latta’s cognitive shift theory and Roy E. Russell (Kirkman 30). What Koestler mentions as the “frames of reference” or matrices are similar to the idea of isotopies put forth by A.J. Greimas in Sémantique Structurale (1966), based on which Attardo developed the Isotopy-­ Disjunction Model (IDM), where he defines isotopy as “semantic interpretations of the text” (Attardo Linguistic Theories 63). Improvising Griemas’ division of the isotopes into narration/presentation and

1  Understanding Humour 

15

dialogues, V. Morin developed three functions: “normalisation (f1), interlocking (f2) and disjunction (f3)” (82). These three functions determine the linear structure of a joke as it proceeds from f1, f2 and f3. Normalisation introduces the characters, the characters identify the problem to be resolved, which is the function of interlocking. Finally, in the stage of disjunction, the problem is resolved. The function of disjunction is unique to the narrative structure of humour as it aids in the process of disambiguation. Disambiguation/disjunction, similar to the process of resolution or “justification”, is the final stage of understanding, as one makes a selection between the lexemes. The isotopy disjunction model, thus, gave three phases and two components in the analysis of the language of humour whether it is verbal or referential. Take for example, the famous dialogue in Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest (1895): Jack: “On the contrary, Aunt Augusta, I’ve now realised for the first time in my life the vital importance of being Earnest” (70). Here the term “Earnest” is a pun for the importance of being honest as well as for the importance of being the man named Ernest. The connecting term “Earnest” slowly transfers the meaning from—“the mundane isotopy” (Attardo Linguistic Theories 63)—being honest to the man named as Ernest “isotopy”. This tension between the isotopies by the connecting term creates an opposition. “Earnest” as a pun becomes humorous when the two “senses”/isotopies co-exist in a term or in a phrase. The process of disambiguation begins as the transference between the isotopies (senses) are activated. The incongruity in the pun moves to the state of resolution, as one becomes co-operative and decides to progress further, discarding the thought of the speech being abnormal or “ill-formed” (Attardo Linguistic Theories 129). Through the “backtracking” process the existence of connector/disjunctor—as the former preceding the latter or the co-existence of both—decides the cognitive process of the humour mode. Along with the theory of puns, Attardo and Victor Raskin proposed two seminal linguistic theories of humour: Script-Based Semantic Theory of Humour (SSTH) and General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH). SSTH was proposed by Raskin in Semantic Mechanisms of Humour (1985) based on the template of generative grammar. Similar to the isotopies, the basic necessity of SSTH is the existence of two opposing scripts,

16 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

where the script is “an organised chunk of information about something…a cognitive structure internalised by the speaker which provides the speaker with information on how things are done, organised” (Attardo Linguistic Theories 198). The competence of humour (197) becomes a major concern of SSTH as it perceives funniness of a text, as tantamount to evaluating the perlocutionary effect of a sentence. The semantic theory, thus, requires a set of vocabulary (scripts) available to the speaker and the combinatorial rules (Attardo Linguistic Theories 202). The prerequisites for SSTH to identify a text as funny, are (a) the text is partially or completely compatible with two different scripts (b) and the two scripts are opposite (Raskin Semantic Mechanisms 99). SSTH, therefore, emphasises the co-existence of two opposing scripts. Studies have further expanded SSTH to short stories (Chłopicki 1987), humorous metaphors (Morrissey 1989), ESL (Vega 1989), riddles (Risden 2001), Human-Computer Interaction (Mulder and Nijholt 2002) and Computation humour (Labutov and Lipson 2012). While SSTH is considered a competent theory in linguistic humour studies—as it helps in garnering evidences—the application field of the theory was limited to jokes and excluded the non-semantic phenomena. Besides, SSTH fails to theorise the performance of humour. Describing the rules for producing or identifying a humorous text, SSTH mainly puts forth the ideal conditions for a humorous reception. The theory was inadequate to recognise failed humour as it could not distinguish between a good joke and a bad joke (Attardo Linguistic Theories 214). Keeping in mind the shortcomings of SSTH, Raskin and Attardo revised SSTH to General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH) based on linguistic theory focusing the pragmatics and narration of humour. GTVH demands six knowledge resources (KR) to produce humour. They are: Script Opposition (SO), Logical Mechanism (LM), the Target (TA), the Narrative Strategy (NS), Language (LA) and Situation (SI) (231). The SO which has been fundamental to SSTH has been carried forward to GTVH and the logical mechanism examines the relationship between the scripts. While the language looks at the “exact wording” (223) and the final position of the punchline which renders funniness to the joke, the narrative strategy evaluates the narrative structure (dialogue, riddle, etc.) of the joke. The target decides the “butt” of the joke which could

1  Understanding Humour 

17

be individuals or groups and the situation investigates the content of joketelling. The proposition of parameters can decide the quality of a joke, thus, countering the deficiency of SSTH. The parameter of narrative strategy will also aid one in measuring different types of texts other than jokes. GTVH, therefore, proposes a dynamic approach as compared to the SSTH. Besides GTVH, the relevance theory developed by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson and other theories examine the pragmatics of humour. As one analyses the linguistic theories, hitherto, one observes that while the linguistic theory expanded its field to neurological, cognitive and pragmatic approaches and analysed the factors which are responsible for the generation of humour, the theories speak scantly about the factors that lead to a failed sense of humour, which in the present study is termed as transmutation. Thus, the literature survey of the theories of humour shows how the emphasis has been more on prescriptive strategies. There is an inadequate “critical hermeneutic” framework of humour as “the existing literature …does not offer a substantive account of the functions of audience, argument, or targets, and does not synthesize the strategies into a comprehensive account” (Phillips-Anderson 49). Observing this gap, the current study through the new model, integrating the theories of Barthes, Jakobson, Lakoff and Johnson, explains: (a) Field of transmutation and performance of humour; (b) the thin line between the humorous and the non-humorous; (c) how humour fails to impress its audience and (d) how the meaning of the humorous message changes.

1.4 Performance of Humour As the field of study has been determined, the next step is to identify a text through which a theoretical model can be built and applied. Studies in the performance of humour have been widely applied to films, drama, advertisement, sitcoms, stand-up comedies, memes, trolls and digital humour (Palmer 1994; Toncar 2001; Chovanec and Ermida 2012; Dynel 2013; Milner 2013; Taecharungroj and Nueangjamnong 2015; Duerringer 2016; Ross and Rivers 2017; Wilde 2018; Wiggins 2019; Dynel and Poppi 2020). The survey also suggests

18 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

that the recent research in the performance of humour mainly is multimodal in nature, which examines how the communication of humour happens through multiple modes (Francesconi 2011; Balirano 2013; Marone 2016; Chen and Jiang 2018; Tabacaru 2019; Buján 2019; Dynel 2020). The cutting-edge research in the performance of digital humour through internet memes and trolls show how the expressive platforms are shifting from the print medium to online mode (Sanfilippo et al. 2017; Drakett et al. 2018; Gambarato and Komesu 2018; Denisova 2019; Kearney 2019). In The Discursive Power of Memes in Digital Culture: Ideology, Semiotics, and Intertextuality (2019) Bradley Wiggins analyses internet memes as indicator of “ideology practice” as they influence the digital culture. The work seemingly weaves ideology, semiotics and intertextuality as he analyses memes. The work also uses Stuart Hall’s dominant, negotiated and oppositional decoding to understand the reception of memes. The emerging research on impoliteness theory and humour (Karatepe 2015; Toddington 2015; Uçar and Yildiz 2015; Badin 2016; Dynel 2016; Cronin 2018; Sinkeviciute 2019; Merritt et al. 2020) specifically captures how the language of aggression twins with the language of humour. The ongoing project Fungression: Humour and Impoliteness on Social Media (2018–2022), undertaken by the Marta Dynel (Principal Investigator), Fabio Indìo Massimo Poppi, Valeria Sinkeviciute and Thomas Messerli (Collaborators) interestingly analyses how online humour may find its origin in aggression. The literature survey suggests how the recent works analysing the performance of humour focus on ideology, semiotics, multimodality and aggression as a medium of expressing humour. The review also proves that the major focus of the works has been on the aspects of visual humour. In the research studies on visual humour, the field of political cartoons remain less attended (Lee 2003; Hempelmann and Samson 2008; Alosque 2010; Mwetulundila and Kangira 2015; Genova 2018; Reist 2018; Forceville 2019; Bury 2019). Moreover, the increasing arrests and lynching of the political cartoonists suggest it to be a potential field to study the transmutation of humour. A detailed discussion on the increasing cases of offence of humour in the field of political cartoons will follow in the second chapter. Interestingly,

1  Understanding Humour 

19

the field of political cartoons is also in a transitional period, as digital humour, through trolls and memes, takes the space and cartooning spaces are gradually disappearing. Analysing the scope for the study, political cartoons are chosen as the text for the application of the model. The language of humour is sine qua non in political cartoons (Tsakona 1172) and being multimodal in nature, the cognition of humour is non-linear (Tsakona 1172). This is a challenge to the present study as the model attempts to theorise the non-linear performance of humour. Humour in political cartoons, are mainly political in nature. Studies in the field of political humour, predominantly, analyse the presidential speeches, election campaigns and the parliamentary proceedings (Zlobin 1996; Morreall 2005; Meisel 2009; Tsakona and Popa 2011; Condor et al. 2013; Sørensen 2016). In comparison to that, studies regarding the theoretical application of humour in political cartoons have been limited (Vokey 2000; El Refaie 2009a; Tsakona and Popa 2011; Kuipers 2011; Davis 2017). The survey however points at abundant literature in the field of multimodality and political cartoons (Tsakona 2009a; Schilperoord and Maes 2009; Bounegru and Forceville 2011; Prendergast 2019; Negro 2017; Akpati 2019; El-Falaky 2019; Virág 2020). In view of the recent cartoon controversies and humour scandals associated with it, the literature survey presented, though not exhaustive, presents an analysis of the discourse rather than putting forth a theoretical stance to evaluate situations. Observing this the present study specifically contributes a theoretical model that explains the performance and transmutation of humour in political cartoons.

1.5 Transmutation of Humour: An Overview Transmutation is defined as: “(1) The action of changing or the state of being changed into another form. (2) Physics: The changing of one element into another by radioactive decay, nuclear bombardment, or similar processes. (3) Biology: The conversion or transformation of one species into another. (4) The supposed alchemical process of changing base metals into gold” (Stevenson 1890). By the term “transmutation”, the study here particularly focuses on the “action of changing”, the transition that

20 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the language of humour undergoes when it is in a continuous communication cycle. The term transmutation does not intend to say that humour disappears from the communication cycle, rather it points at the failed sense of humour. The term transmutation also provides the possibilities to understand humour as it transcends its border and garners unprecedented reactions. The term transmutation also has been acknowledged in the works of Kierkegaard (2004, 32, 39), Lydia Amir (2019, 67, 86, 151) and Marty Branagan (2007, 479). When they analysed how humour transmutes suffering into joy, the current study analyses how humour turns joy into hurt sentiment or positive emotion into a negative emotion. When Nancy Bell in We Are Not Amused: Failed Humor in Interaction (2015) accounts for the factors responsible for failure of humour, she does not analyse the tendency of humour to transmute. Humour is understood to fail when it peters out into silence. Transmutation, on the other hand, analyses the negative reactions that humour receives instead of silence. The same also has been accounted by Anna Stowra in “The Thin Invisible Line—Between Funny and Distasteful Multimodal Advertising Discourse” (2019). Transmutation is handy to explain how humour changes into the language of anger that even results in violent reaction when a cartoon offends the sentiment of the readers. While Jakobson’s “transmutation” examines the intersemiotic translation (127)—the interaction and connection of lingual signs through non-­ lingual signs—in this study “transmutation” presents the possibility for a change in the language of humour as the signs in political cartoons interact with the socio-cultural contexts and spatio-temporal location. One of the earliest treatises to recognise humour’s potential to transmute is Bharatamuni’s Nāṭya Śāstra (NŚ) (Circa AD 500), a classical treatise on the theory of emotions, which offers a path-breaking treatise on the theory about the embodiment of humour (hāsya). Hāsya is one among the nine rasas, which are considered crucial for histrionics. Defining the types of hāsya, Bharata uncannily states the possibility for humour to transgress. He proposes six variants of hāsya, they are: smita (gentle smile), hasita (slight laughter), vihasitha (open laughter), upahasitha (laughter of ridicule), apahasitha (obscene laughter) and attahasitha (boisterous laughter) (Unni 561). Bharata’s range of humour varies from gentle smile to boisterous laughter.

1  Understanding Humour 

21

Long before Michael Billig, Bharathamuni had seen through “unlaughter” (Billig 175) as Bharatha considers the laughter of ridicule, with the element of hidden contention, where humour is a weapon to counter criticism. Vihasita, Upahasita, Apahasita and Atihasita—running parallel to the Western forms of wit, satire, sarcasm and screwball—have shades of tendentiousness hidden in them. The types of humour, thus, can be broadly divided into the higher and the lower forms. When the higher forms represented sophistication and contentment, the lower forms of laughter represented ridicule, embarrassment, revenge and other denigrating states of mind. NŚ further divides types of hasya into uttama (superior), madhyama (mediocre) and adhama (vulgar or base) (Unni 561). This division explicates the moralising standard of humour which considered the meek and gentle smile as superior, open laughter and ridiculing as mediocre and boisterous and obscene laughter as vulgar or base. Stating the causes of hāsya, Bharata convinces one to see humour as a violation of modesty (dhārṣt ̣ya) (Unni 572) which constitutes the transitory emotion of raudra (anger) and posits that the consequents and causes of hāsya are similar to that of anger, thus, presenting the possibility for transmutation. NŚ becomes an important reference for the transmutation of humour, as the text in many ways resembles Aristotle’s Poetics. The similarity between the texts (Ley 2000; Das 2015) suggests that when the Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle considered humour to be associated with maliciousness and contempt, simultaneously the Indic traditions too approached humour cautiously. Thus, the superiority theorists treaded along the same line of thought as they connected humour with immorality and saw the possibility for humour to transmute. In Western discourse the superiority theorist, Thomas Hobbes explicitly hints at the malicious pleasure that one derives through the mockery of others. Alexander Bain’s Emotions and the Will (1859) also recognises the element of aggressiveness in humour as he says “‘genial humour’ has an element of degradation” (qtd.in. Billig 96). Philosophers like the Earl of Shaftesbury and Henri Bergson looked at the social effects of humour, considering it as a corrective weapon. Following the Freudian principles, there is always a psychology of suspicion hidden in humour as repressed feelings are vented through displacement and condensation. Humour, therefore, performs a subversive turn to spew aggression. Freud suggests

22 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the transmuting nature as he defines tendentious joke as target-oriented and one which “means…colluding participants illicitly enjoying the breaking of a rule while being protected from criticism by the ambiguity on which the joke is trading” (Wright 296). Political humour, “tendentious” in nature, manifests as the fatal stroke of a cartoonist which aims to displace political authority. W.H. Martineau in “A Model of the Social Functions of Humor” (1972) discusses the transgressive nature through the “lubricant” and “abrasive” types of social situations (Martineau 1972). While humour as a lubricant fosters social relation, the abrasive operation of humour brings in disintegration. Recognising the double-edged function of humour, Martineau perceives how humour renders power to the humourist/rhetor to either consolidate or decompose a social group. Though superiority theory and other theories discuss the rancorous shades of humour, the theory of incongruity comes closer to chart out the possibility for transmutation as the theory explains “laughter as a reaction to a variety of situations, humorous and otherwise” (Straus 4). The theory perceives incongruous as the source of humour, as the subjective understanding of the events clashes with the actual or the normal order of the events. Thus, the theory provides a space for the decoding of the humorous message to be “subject-dependent” (Straus 7). The “subject-­ dependent” space allows to accommodate how people have varied understandings of the same set of normal events, so what seems funny and incongruous to one may not be for others. The kernel of incongruity theory’s exposition lies in analysing how the production of humour lies in the conceptual violations. With this in mind, the model in the present study particularly examines how conceptual violation happens in the language of humour in political cartoons. The point of comparing the integrated model in the present study with that of incongruity-resolution model also helps in forwarding categorical nominations to scrutinise the conceptual violations in the humorous message. As the unexpected turn in the decoding of the humorous message responsible for transmutation is uncannily captured by the incongruity theory, the same serves as an important foundation for the theoretical model.

1  Understanding Humour 

23

1.6 Methodology There are two methods followed in the study. One is the constructivist paradigm, as it analyses the effect of humour when people “construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences” (Bada 67). The roots of the constructivist paradigm lie in the interpretative framework. This approach becomes the basic method of discovery in this study as it attributes the causes of humour’s transmutation to the varying contextual influence and cultural motivation that is constructed through what people learn through their experience. The construction of meaning and operation of humour’s language has been developed through two components: the communicative framework and the framework of rhetoric. The construction of the humorous message is analysed using the communicative framework, while the information processing is analysed using the framework of rhetoric. The term “communicative framework” is used in the sense as referred by Jakobson which aims at understanding the communicative functions of the language of humour (Tribus 2017; Kohler 2018). The communicative framework analyses the “the primary goal and intention of anyone involved in the act of communication on a given occasion, which is generally intended to be recognised by the other participants” (Chandler and Munday 2020). Barthes defines rhetoric as “the set of connotators” that form an ideology (49). The connotation is the condensed language and metaphors are the signifiers through which connotation happens. Within this structure, the framework of rhetoric uses metaphor as a tool to analyse how humorous messages are decoded and impact the audience. The model is developed by adopting and modifying the theoretical cues of Jakobson, Barthes, Lakoff and Johnson. Where Jakobson focused on the verbal behaviour, Barthes evaluated the visual behaviour. Thus, the two theorists aid in analysing the “multimodal” (Forceville 2016) nature of humour in political cartoons. Lakoff and Johnson’s CMT, on the other hand, is utilised to measure how the verbal and visual medium perform through metaphors and determine the performance of humour. The theorists are significant to the study as their theories focus on meaning construction. Jakobson deals with constructivism in “Closing

24 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Statement”, where he delineates the process of message construction as it is passed and received leading to information processing. Barthes, on the other hand, studied how the sign system constructs meaning through the visual in “Rhetoric of the Image”, which is considered partially similar to social constructivism (Robinson 2011). Lakoff and Johnson in Metaphors We Live By further propose the constructivist paradigm as they analyse how the embodiment of experience plays a significant role in shaping conceptual metaphors. Conceptual metaphor seals the gap between the cognitive and constructivist paradigm by bringing “mutual constitution of agents and social structures (on one hand), and the interaction of somatic and social meaning (on the other)” (Flanik 423). As the select theorists observe the processing of information and the system of sign and meaning construction, they are seen to commonly follow the constructivist paradigm. Jakobson (structuralist), Barthes (structuralist/post-structuralist), Lakoff and Johnson (Cognitive-Semanticist) significantly study the persuasive power of the rhetorical tropes. They are noteworthy in the current study as their research challenged the language of objectivism and argued how the rhetorical tropes play a significant role in carving realities. All the theorists critically analyse the discourse and theorise the process of meaning construction. Thus, the common ground of constructivist approach brings the theorists together, which provides an enhanced perspective on how experiences play a major role in the performance of humour in political cartoons, thus, rendering a theoretical frame for analysing the transmutation of humour. The built model is then applied to 22 of the cartoons which were recommended for deletion by the Thorat Committee. From the application of the model the study derives major factors that are responsible for the transmutation of humour.

1.7 Overview of the Chapters So far, one could see the scope for study in the transmutation of humour and how it aims at developing a model using the cartoons which were scrutinised by the Thorat Committee, following the NCERT cartoon controversy.

1  Understanding Humour 

25

In the second chapter, “The Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons”, the study problematises the dynamics of political humour. Beginning with the hypothesis that language is inherently violent and diabolic in nature, it discusses the double-edged nature of language. The chapter opens with a section on language and violence and gradually moves towards the equivocal nature of political humour as seen in cartoons. The chapter further discusses the nature of political humour and how it functions as a safety valve for democracy. Through this discussion the study places the relevance of humour research in political cartoons, which lies between political critique and public entertainment. The section primarily seeks a discussion on cartoon controversies such as the Danish cartoon crisis, the Charlie Hebdo case and the NCERT controversy which prompted the study. The chapter also includes a discussion on the persecution of the cartoonist and summarises the major points of concern from the ten interviews that was conducted with prominent political cartoonists of India for a book project. The section ends with a discussion on Navasky’s Art of Controversy, which in a way attempts to decode the rhetoric of political cartoons. Analysing the pros and cons of the theoretical analysis of Navasky, the study moves towards the model and states how the model is more accommodative and strategic in its functioning. In the third chapter, “A Communicative Framework of Humour”, the study explores the communicative framework of humour through Jakobson and Barthes. Jakobson’s “Closing Statements: Linguistics and Poetics” and Barthes’ “Rhetoric of the Image” are the primary texts used for the theoretical foregrounding. While Jakobson’s model discusses the communicative frame of language, Barthes discusses the rhetoric of the visual. The model is further compared with the Incongruity-Resolution Model of Jerry M. Suls, which is a two-step model for the cognition of humour. The model will be multimodal in its approach as it considers both the verbal language and image in interaction. The cycles of affect and disease are further analysed through the stages of interaction and reaction with humour. The model is explained through the terms of Impression, Perception, Coded Iconic Message, Non-Coded Iconic Message, the Linguistic Message and the Visual Code. The model is applied through the Ambedkar cartoon which triggered the NCERT

26 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

controversy. While the model sets the communicative frame and network of humour, the next step in the model is to include metaphor as a tool to measure the rhetoric of visual humour. In the fourth chapter, “Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour”, the second stage of the model is emphasised through metaphor as a measuring tool for evaluating the transgression of humour. With a brief note on the theories of metaphor the study narrows down to the CMT of Lakoff and Johnson in Metaphors We Live By. The section proceeds further with a discussion on the relationship between humour and metaphor. It answers the question: Why are metaphors significant to the language of humour? What runs parallel in both of them? And how do they operate? Along with the domains of source and target, the CMT is further modified with the proposal by the authors for a new category called matrix, which considers the representational aesthetics of metaphor. The three domains along with the conceptual maps are explained through the Ambedkar cartoon. At the end of the chapter the integrated model is presented in full and with the corresponding coordinates. In the final chapter, “Application of the Model”, the study applies the integrated model to the cartoons which were recommended for deletion by the Thorat Committee. The common features between the cartoons are analysed along with the conceptual maps. The model measures the possible interpretations which corroborate humour’s potential for the transgression. With these interpretations, the model finally consolidates the common factors responsible for the transmutation. The concluding section “Language, Context and Operation of Humour” discusses the pros and cons of the model and accounts for the challenges faced in building the model. It further elaborates the future possibilities of working with the model.

Works Cited Secondary Sources Akpati, C.F. “A Multimodal Discourse Study of some Online Campaign Cartoons of Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential Election”. IAFOR Journal of Arts and Humanities, vol. 6, no. 2, 2019, pp. 69–80.

1  Understanding Humour 

27

Alosque, Isabel Negro. “A Cognitive Approach to Humour in Political Cartoons”. Dimensions of Humour. Explorations in Linguistics, Literature, Cultural Studies and Translation, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, PUV, 2010. Amir, Lydia. Philosophy, Humor, and the Human Condition: Taking Ridicule Seriously. Springer, 2019. Attardo, Salvatore. Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Mouton de Gruyter, 2001. Attardo, Salvatore. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Mouton de Gruyter, 1994. Badin, Kim. Humorous Impoliteness in The Big Bang Theory and Sherlock: Conveying Humour with Offensive Language. 2016. Université Jean Moulin (Lyon), Dissertation. https://scd-­resnum.univ-­lyon3.fr/out/memoires/ langues/2016_badin_k.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Balirano, Giuseppe. “The Strange Case of The Big Bang Theory and its Extra-­ ordinary Italian Audiovisual Translation: A Multimodal Corpus-Based Analysis”. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, vol. 21, no. 4, 2013, pp. 563–576. Bounegru, Liliana and Charles Forceville. “Metaphors in Editorial Cartoons Representing the Global Financial Crisis”. Visual Communication, vol. 10, no. 2, 2011, pp. 209–229. Branagan, Marty. “The Last Laugh: Humour in Community Activism.” Community Development Journal, vol. 42, no. 4, 2007, pp. 470–481. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/44259076. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020. Buján, Marta. “The Function of Face Gestures and Head Movements in Spontaneous Humorous Communication”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 7, no. 2, 2019, pp. 1–29. Bury, Beata. “Understanding the Online Humour in the Example of American Political Cartoons”. Explorations in Humor Studies: Humor Research Project, edited by Martin Kuczok, et al. Cambridge Scholars Publishers, 2019, pp. 176–190. Chandler, Daniel and Rod Munday. A Dictionary of Media and Communication. Oxford UP, 2020. Chen, Qiaoyun and Guiying Jiang. “Why are You Amused: Unveiling Multimodal Humor from the Prototype Theoretical Perspective”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 6, no. 1, 2018, pp. 62–84. Chłopicki, Władysław. An Application of the Script Theory of Semantics to the Analysis of Selected Polish Humorous Short Stories. 1987. Purdue U, MA Dissertation. Chovanec, Jan and Isabel Ermida. Language and Humour in the Media. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012.

28 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Condor, Susan, et al. “Political Rhetoric”. The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, edited by Leonie Huddy et al., Oxford U P, 2013. Cronin, Marianne Eve. ‘Feck Off!’ Exploring the Relationship between Impoliteness, Laughter and Humour in the British-Irish sitcoms Father Ted, Black Books and The IT Crowd. 2018. U of Birmingham. Dissertation. https://etheses.bham. ac.uk/id/eprint/8713/1/Cronin18PhD.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Das, Shruti. “Ancient Indian Dramaturgy: A Historical Overview of Bharata’s Natyashastra”. RSIRJLE, vol. 3, no. 3, 2015, pp. 133–140. Davis, Jessica Milner. Satire and Politics: The Interplay of Heritage and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Denisova, Anastasia. Internet Memes and Society: Social, Cultural, and Political Contexts. Routledge, 2019. Drakett, Jessica et al. “Old Jokes, New Media—Online Sexism and Constructions of Gender in Internet Memes”. Feminism and Psychology, vol. 28, no. 1, 2018, pp. 109–127. Duerringer, Christopher M. “Who Would Jesus Bomb? The Republican Jesus Meme and the Fracturing of Ideology”. Social Media + Society, vol. 2, no. 1, 2016. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2056305116637095#artic leCitationDownloadContainer. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Dynel, Marta and Fabio Indìo Massimo Poppi. “Caveat Emptor: Boycott through Digital Humour on the Wave of the 2019 Hong Kong Protests”. Information and Society, 2020, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.108 0/1369118X.2020.1757134. Accessed 02. Sept. 2020. Dynel, Marta. “Conceptualizing Conversational Humour as (Im)politeness: The Case of Film Talk”. Journal of Politeness Research Language Behaviour Culture, vol. 12, no. 1, 2016 ———. “Conceptualizing Conversational Humour as (Im)politeness: The Case of Film Talk”. Journal of Politeness Research Language Behaviour Culture, vol. 12, no. 1. “Humorous Phenomena in Dramatic Discourse.” The European Journal of Humor Research, vol. 1, no. 1, 2013, pp. 22–60, https://europeanjournalofhumour.org/index.php/ejhr/article/view/Marta%20Dynel/ Marta%20Dynel. ———. “Conceptualizing Conversational Humour as (Im)politeness: The Case of Film Talk”. Journal of Politeness Research Language Behaviour Culture, vol. 12, no. 1. “Vigilante Disparaging Humour at r/IncelTears: Humour as Critique of Incel Ideology”. Language and Communication, vol. 74, 2020. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271530920300410. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020.

1  Understanding Humour 

29

Dynel, Marta, et al. “Fungression: Humour and Impoliteness on Social Media”. Project (2018–2022). Research Gate, https://researchgate.net/project/ FUNGRESSION-­Humour-­andimpoliteness-­on-­social-­media. El-Falaky, Samir. “Caricaturing Two Revolutions: Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Egyptian Political Cartoons. Proceedings of SOCIOINT 2019—6th International Conference on Education, Social Sciences and Humanities, 24–26 June 2019, Istanbul, https://ocerints.org/ socioint19_e-­publication/abstracts/papers/688.pdf. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020. Forceville, Charles. “Cognitive Linguistics and Multimodal Humour”, Bildwissenschaft: Zwischen Reflektion und Anwendung, edited by Klaus Sachs-Hombach, Von Halem. “Pictorial and Multimodal Metaphor”. Handbuch Sprache im multimodalen Kontext, edited by Nina Maria Klug and Hartmut Stöckl, Mounton de Gruyter, 2016. ———. “Cognitive Linguistics and Multimodal Humour”, Bildwissenschaft: Zwischen Reflektion und Anwendung, edited by Klaus Sachs-Hombach, Von Halem. “Metaphors Portraying Right-Wing Politician Geert Wilders in Dutch Political Cartoons”. Populist Discourse: Critical Approaches to Contemporary Politics, edited by Encarnacion Hidalgo-Tenorio et al., Routledge, 2019, pp. 292–307. Francesconi, Sabrina. “Multimodally Expressed Humour Shaping Scottishness in Tourist Postcards”. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 9, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–17. Gambarato, Renira Rampazzo and Fabiana Komesu. “What Are You Laughing At? Former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff’s Internet Memes across Spreadable Media Contexts”. Journal of Creative Communications, vol. 13, no. 2, 2018, pp. 85–103. Genova, Dafina Ivanova. “Grasping Political Cartoons? Not an Easy Matter”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 6, no. 1, 2018, pp. 85–99. Haddawy, Husain, translator. The Arabian Nights. W.W. Norton and Company, 1990. Hempelmann, Christian and Andrea Samson. “Cartoons: Drawn Jokes?”. The Primer of Humor Research, edited by Vikctor Raskin, De Gruyter, 2008. Karatepe, Çağla. Humour and Impoliteness Interaction in Improvised Tv Discourse. 2015. Middle East Technical University, MA Dissertation, etd.lib.metu.edu. tr/upload/12618865/index.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Kearney, Richard. “Meme Frameworks: A Semiotic Perspective on Internet Memes”. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy, vol. 4, no. 2, 2019, pp. 82–89.

30 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Kierkegaard, Soren. The Humour of Kierkegaard: An Anthology, edited by Thomas C. Oden. Princeton UP, 2004. Kohler, Klaus J. Communicative Functions and Linguistic Forms in Speech Interaction: Volume 156. Cambridge UP, 2018. Kolappan, B. “NCERT Textbook Cartoon Stokes Anger in Tamil Nadu”. The Hindu, 9 June 2012. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ncert-­ textbook-­cartoon-­stokes-­anger-­in-­tamil-­nadu/article3506029.ece. Accessed 11 Sept. 2019. Kuipers, Giselinde. Good Humor, Bad Taste: A Sociology of the Joke. De Gruyter. “The Politics of Humour in the Public Sphere: Cartoons, Power and Modernity in the First Transnational Humour Scandal”. European Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, 2011, pp. 63–80. Labutov, Igor and Hod Lipson. “Humor as Circuits in Semantic Networks”. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Jeju, 8–14 July 2012, pp. 150–155. https://aclweb.org/anthology/P12-­2030.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept. 2019. Lee, Cynthia Bailey. A Semiotic Analysis of Political Cartoons. 2003. U of California. Dissertation. https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~goguen/courses/271sp03/ spapers/cartoons/Cartoons.htm. Accessed 05 Sept. 2020. Ley, Graham. “Aristotle’s Poetics, Bharatamuni’s Natyasastra, and Zeami’s Treatises: Theory as Discourse”. Asian Theatre Journal, vol. 17, no. 2, 2000, pp. 191–214. Marone, Vittorio. “Looping Out Loud: A Multimodal Analysis of Humour on Vine”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 4, no. 4, 2016, pp. 50–66. Martineau, W. H. “A Model of the Social Functions of Humor”. The Psychology of Humor, edited by J. H. Goldstein and Paul. E. McGhee, Academic P, 1972, pp. 101–125. Meisel, J. S. “Humour and Insult in the House of Commons: The Case of Palmerstone and Disraeli”. Parliamentary History, vol. 28, no. 2, 2009, pp. 228–245. Merritt, Sally K. et al. “Creating Clever Internet Memes Perpetuates Offensiveness”. Western Journal of Communication. 2020. Milner, Ryan. “Pop Polyvocality: Internet Memes, Public Participation, and the Occupy Wall Street Movement”. International Journal of Communication, vol. 7, 2013, pp. 2357–2390. Morreall, John. “Humour and the Conduct of Politics”. Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour, edited by Sharon Lockyer and Michael Pickering, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 63–78.

1  Understanding Humour 

31

Morrissey, Maureen M. “Script Theory for the Analysis of Humorous Metaphors”. WHIMSY VII. Proceedings of the 1988 WHIM Conference, Purdue, 1–4 April 1988. Edited by Shaun F. D. Hughes and Victor Raskin, Purdue, 1989, pp. 124–125. Mulder, M. P and Nijholt, Antinus. Humour Research: State of Art. CTIT Technical Report Series, vol. 2, 2002, pp. 2–24. Centre for Telematics and Information Technology, ub.utwente.nl/webdocs/ctit/1/0000009e.pdf Mwetulundila, Rauna and Jairos Kangira. “An Analysis of Rhetoric and Humour in Dudley’s Political Cartoons Published in the Namibian Newspaper in 2012”. International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies, vol. 2, no. 6, June 2015, pp. 63–75. Negro, Isabel. “The Role of Visual Metaphor in Visual Genres”. EPIC Series in Language and Linguistics, vol. 2, 2017, pp. 119–126. Palmer, Jerry. Taking Humour Seriously. Routledge, 1994. Prendergast, Muireann. “Political Cartoons as Carnivalesque: A Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Argentina’s Humor Registrado Magazine”. Social Semiotics, vol. 29, no. 1, 2019, pp. 45–67. Ramachandran, V.S. “The Neurology and Evolution of Humor, Laughter, and Smiling: The False Alarm Theory”. Medical Hypotheses, vol. 51, no. 4, Oct. 1998, pp. 351–354. Raskin, Victor. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985. ———. “The Sense of Humor and the Truth”. The Sense of Humor: Explorations of a Personality Characteristic, edited by Willibald Ruch, Mouton De Gruyter, 1998. Reist, Wilissa M. A Thing of Humour? Exploring Gender and Hostile Humour in Alberta Political Cartoons. 2018. U of Alberta. Dissertation. https://era. library.ualberta.ca/items/b4844b19-­a5a8-­4380-­b719-­f6120121c73c 2018. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020 Risden, Edward L. “Script-Based Semantic Theory of Humor and the Old English Riddles.” Enarratio, no. 8, 2001, pp. 61–70. Robinson, Andrew. “Roland Barthes’s Mythologies: A Critical Theory of Myths”. Ceasefire, 30 Sept. 2011. https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-­theory-­ barthes-­2/. Accessed 10 Sept. 2019. Roecklein, Jon E. The Psychology of Humor: A Reference Guide and Annotated Bibliography. Greenwood Press, 2002. Ross, Andrews and Damian J. Rivers. “Internet Memes as Polyvocal Political Participation”. The Presidency and Social Media: Discourse, Disruption, and

32 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Digital Democracy in the 2016 Presidential Election, edited by Dan Schill and John Allen Hendricks, Routledge, 2017, pp. 285–308. Rothbart, Mary K. “Psychological Approaches to the Study of Humour”. It’s a Funny Thing, Humour, edited by Antony J. Chapman and Hugh C. Foot, Pergamon P, 1977, pp. 87–94. Sanfilippo, Madelyn, et al. “Multidimensionality of Online Trolling Behaviors”. The Information Society: An International Journal, vol. 34, no. 1, 2017, pp. 27–39. Schilperoord, Joost and Alfons A. Maes. “Visual Metaphoric Conceptualization in Political Cartoons”. Multimodal Metaphor, edited by Charles Forceville and Eduardo Urios Aparisi. Mounton De Gruyter, 2009, pp. 221–238. Sinkeviciute, Valeria. Conversational Humour and (Im)politeness: A Pragmatic Analysis of Social Interaction. John Benjamins, 2019. Sørensen, Majken Jul. Humour in Political Activism: Creative Nonviolent Resistance. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Stevenson, Angus. “Transmutation”. Oxford Dictionary of English, edited by Angus Stevenson, Third Edition, Oxford UP, 2010, p. 1890. Stowra, Anna. “The Thin Invisible Line-Between Funny and Distasteful Multimodal Advertising Discourse”. Explorations in Humor Studies: Humor Research Project, edited by Martin Kuczok et al. Cambridge Scholars Publishers, 2019, pp. 129–152. Suls, Jerry M. “A Two-Stage Model for the Appreciation of Jokes and Cartoons: An Information-Processing Analysis”. The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues, edited by Jeffrey H. Goldstein and Paul McGhee, Academic P, 1972, pp. 81–100. Tabacaru, Sabina. A Multimodal Study of Sarcasm in Interactional Humor. De Gruyter, 2019. Taecharungroj, Viriya and Pitchanut Nueangjamnong. “Humour 2.0: Styles and Types of Humour and Virality of Memes on Facebook”. Journal of Creative Communications, vol. 10, no. 3, 2015, pp. 288–302. Toddington, Rachel S. Impoliteness as a Vehicle for Humour in Dramatic Discourse. 2015. U of Central Lancashire. Dissertation. https://clok.uclan. ac.uk/12121/1/Toddington%20Rachel%20Final%20eThesis%20 %28Master%20Copy%29.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Toncar, Mark F. “The Use of Humour in Television Advertising: Revisiting the US UK Comparison”. The International Journal of Advertising, vol. 20, no. 4, 2001, pp. 521–539.

1  Understanding Humour 

33

Tribus, Angela C., “The Communicative Functions of Language: An Exploration of Roman Jakobson’s Theory in TESOL”. 2017. SIT Graduate Institute. MA Dissertation. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/ipp_collection/723/?utm_ source=digitalcollections.sit.edu%2. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020. Tsakona, Villy, and Diana Elena Popa, editors. Studies in Political Humor: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment. John Benjamins, 2011. Uçar, Aygül and Ipek Yildiz. “Humour and Impoliteness in Turkish: A Corpus-­ Based Analysis of the Television Show Komedi Dükkânı ‘Comedy Shop’”. Exploring (Im)politeness in Specialized and General Corpora: Converging Methodologies and Analytic Procedures, edited by Şükriye Ruhi and Yeşim Aksan, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, pp. 40–81. Vega, Gladys. Humor Competence: The Fifth Component. 1989. Purdue U, MA Dissertation. Virág, Ágnes. “Multimodal Conceptual Patterns of Hungary in Political Cartoons”. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, vol. 7, no. 1, 2020, pp. 222–253. Vokey, Scott. “Inspiration for Insurrection or Harmless Humour? Class and Politics in the Editorial Cartoons of Three Toronto Newspapers during the Early 1930s”. Labour / Le Travail, no. 45, 2000, pp. 141–170. Wiggins, Bradley E. The Discursive Power of Memes in Digital Culture: Ideology, Semiotics, and Intertextuality. Routledge, 2019 Wilde, Alison. Film, Comedy and Disability: Understanding Humour and Genre in Cinematic Constructions of Impairment and Disability. Routledge, 2018. Zlobin, Nikolai. “Humor as Political Protest”, Demokratizatsiya, no. 4, 1996, pp. 223–231.

2 Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons

Stephen King in his novel Bag of Bones recognises the diabolical nature of humour which he believes “is almost always anger with its make up on” (72). Humour, specifically political humour, which is a kind of personified anger becomes a weapon and an effective medium as it is handy in cartoons to criticise political authority. Humour in politics can be divided into two: “humour used by politicians and humour created by non-­ politicians about politicians” (Morreall 74). In this study, political humour is primarily used in the latter sense, referring to the humour made by the cartoonists on the political establishment. Political humour becomes politically and socially relevant with its power to criticise. Donning this social responsibility, a political cartoonist wields the power to impartially attack the socio-political institutions and educate the masses. Political humour is a sharp double-edged sword as it “questions the effectiveness of political decisions and practices, but also serves as a means of resistance to, or even rebellion against, political oppression and social injustice” (Tsakona and Popa 1). The functionality of political humour, thus, helps one to question the government as well as enable them to act against the system.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_2

35

36 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The use of humour in politics has been an age-old tradition. It has sustained itself as a persuasive discourse from the Greco-Roman age. During the ancient times the tradition of court jesters appointed by the kings kept alive the performance of political humour. The jokes of Tenali Raman, in the court of King Krishnadevaraya of Vijayanagara Empire, and Birbal, who served King Akbar of the Mughal Empire, depict how political humour has scrutinised the health of the democratic system by reprimanding the kings through witty jokes and humorous events. Other court jesters in history such as William Sommers in the court of Henry VIII of England, Perkeo of Heidelberg in the Court of Charles III Philip, Nicolas Ferrial or Triboulet serving Louis XII and Francis I of France have been illustrious examples who followed the vocation of the political humourist. The concept of the vidūṣaka, similar to the Shakespearean fool, found in Indian plays, also signifies the interactive space that political humour generated. Vidūṣaka, a critical arbitrator or an interposer in a play, with his verbal “deficiencies”, serves as a social type who is not taken seriously and this in turn gives him the licence to talk without the fear of any censure (Bhat 1959). Thus, the vidūṣaka like the political humourist marked his comments with sarcasm and attacked the audience as well as the social institutions. The tradition of court jesters and vidūṣaka were originally oral in tradition. With the onset of print culture, this oral tradition was gradually replaced by the tribe of political cartoonists. Charles E. Schutz in Political Humour: From Aristophanes to Sam Ervin (1977) presents the history of political humour in Western culture. Beginning with Aristophanes “the comic genius of political criticism” (Schutz 10), Schutz narrates the tradition of political humour practised till Sam Ervin, the twentieth-century American politician. Recognising “political invectiveness/comic aggression” (48) as the common ground for political humour, Schutz posits that the language of political humour is inherently belligerent in nature. Political invective emerges as a significant component when the affiliations with political parties and ideologies play a critical role in deciding the reception and impact of political humour. A supporter of the Indian National Congress Party (INC) would despise a cartoon that denounces them, but the opposition like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) would

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

37

appreciate the same cartoon. The cartoon created by Surendra (https:// www.freepressjournal.in/latest-­news/kejriwal-­slammed-­for-­insulting-­ hanuman-­on-­twitter) depicts how political invective operates in the reception of political cartoon. In the cartoon, there is a flying man, who is personified as Lord Hanuman with the mace and a tail. He is creating a distraction at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) by instigating a fire, alluding to the destruction of Lanka in the Ramayana, where with his lighted tail Lord Hanuman sets the city on fire. It was a diversion created for his mission to find Sita. Similarly, the cartoon alluding to the JNU situation shows how the BJP has been diverting the attention of the public from important issues like the market slump, the Pathankot massacre and other critical issues. The Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), shared the cartoon because it was a scorching attack on the ineffectual rule of the BJP, which had formed the central government. But when the cartoon was tweeted, the members of the BJP and the Hindu associations took umbrage at mockery of the religious symbol and besmirching of the image of Lord Hanuman. Though Kejriwal was politically motivated to share the cartoon, the reaction of the readers backfired on him, accusing him of insulting religious sentiments. Honore Daumier’s “Gargantua” published in 1831 portrayed a giant (taking inspiration from François Rabelais’ The Life of Gargantua and of Pantagruel) symbolising the royal king as a money gobbler. The publisher and the cartoonist were continuously persecuted. The cartoonist even was jailed for six months. The scathing cartoons of David Low and Herblock in the 1900s have created a stir in the society numerous times. The cartoons depicting the war period and political turbulence also faced a few controversies. The satirical cartoon strip “How to stop the cockroaches from making us into cockroaches?” which appeared in a children’s weekly in Iran became controversial in 2006. The strip shows a conversation between a Persian-speaking child and a cockroach as they discuss nine ways of treating the cockroach. Though the conversation appears trivial, soon it sparked controversy as the people believed it alluded to their current political situation and it insulted Iranian Azerbaijanis. The cartoon by Canadian artist Barry Blitt’s “The Politics of Fear” in The New Yorker

38 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

(2008) featuring Barak Obama in a “Muslim garb” and his wife Michelle in a “military gear” (Armitage 2021) offended people as it alluded to Islamic violence and terrorism. Thus, one observes a thin line that separates the humorous from the abusive in a political context. The art of political humour, a carrier of invective, is like “walking a tightrope”; balancing opposing views in a pleasant way, rendering itself bipolar; making people interact as well as react. Furthermore, to define the boundary between political correctness and incorrectness of humour is a challenging task, as there has been no consensus on the nature of humour (Morreall 65). The following sections outline the major elements involved in determining the nature of political humour, which would in turn aid in identifying the components imperative for theorising the functioning of humour in political cartoons.

2.1 Language and Violence This section introduces the main hypothesis of the study that the nature of language is such that it has an inherent tendency towards violence, which itself provides a platform for transgression. Language is like a double-­edged sword and the ambivalence is more in the language of humour. The Chinese symbol or the pictogram for satire is “laughter and knives” (“Laughing with Knives”), further corroborates the diabolic nature of humour. Justifying the two-facedness of language, Butler comments on how language “can sustain the body as well as threaten its own existence promoting violence” (5–7). Violence is implicit in language, which simultaneously conveys affection and compassion as well as anger and hatred. Tempered intonation, hate speech, bullying, curses and abusive words are examples of the volatile nature of language through which one initiates communication, mends broken ties or starts arguments. Language possesses alienating power too as it performs “symbolic violence” (Magnani 123) through the process of “otherisation”. Paul Ricoeur in his essay, “Violence and Language”, associates violence with the “problem of meaning” rather than the “problem of structure” (39). When the language fails to integrate, it turns violent. Jacques

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

39

Derrida’s concept of aporia also states the paradoxes inherent to language. The concept of aporia, in deconstruction, shows how language both enables and constrains itself, representing the “logical contradiction” (Lucy 1). Once language reaches its limit, it has the tendency to transcend or go beyond, which in this study is labelled the transmutation of humour. Politics is a natural terrain where violence and language are intertwined as the acts of tyranny, revolution and intrigue portray the “turgid play between meaning and violence” (Ricoeur 35). The function of humorous discourse in political cartoons is, often, inadvertently caught up in the play between meaning and violence. How does one see the play of paradox, between meaning and violence in political cartoons? When one considers the political cartoon as “a weapon that can make readers laugh out loud in agreement or clench their teeth with frustration and anger in opposition” (“Laughing with Knives”), one sees the language of cartoon being perilously balanced between meaning and violence. The potential for violence in humorous language makes governments formulate policies and clauses into the Constitution in order to restrict the freedom of expression. Each regime grants freedom of expression with reasonable restrictions, to keep the “Caliban paradigm” (Otto 100) at bay; because, though governments grant freedom of expression, the same privilege is used to criticise them. It is at this point one should discern the relationship between humour and censorship. The moment political institutions, the parties and the ruling governments feel threatened, the language of humour is condemned as offensive. The question of morality and political correctness determine whether humour has to be censored or not (“What is the Point of Offensive Humour?”). David Misch renowned screenwriter, author and director also discusses about the same concerns in the talk “Comedy and Morality: Satire, Censorship and Dirty Words” (2015). Villy Tsakona and Diana Elena Popa in Studies in Political Humour: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment (2011) analyses how the nature of political humour is inherently ambiguous in nature. Sharon Lockyer and Michael Pickering in Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour (2005) analyses how censorship, taboo and free speech make the ethics of humour a complicate nexus. Studies on humour and censorship (Kessel and

40 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Merziger 2012; Londino 2012; Luqiu 2017; Holm 2017; Kay 2018; Berger 2019; Calvey 2019) exhibit the difficulty in determining the boundaries of political correctness and offensiveness in the language of humour. Therefore, to determine when and how the language of humour transmutes in political cartoons is a complex task. From the above discussion one can conclude that there is an element of violence inherently associated with language. This element gets further amplified in the language of humour in political cartoons which by putting the government under the scanner can offend as well as amuse the readers. The consequences of admonishing the government and social institutions are further discussed through the global and national cartoon controversies.

2.2 Cartoon Controversies: Global and National In September 2005, the Danish Newspaper Jyllands-Posten in Aarhus, published cartoons; a few of them on the prophet Muhammad, criticising Islam which became controversial. One of the cartoons even depicted Muhammad wearing a turban shaped like a ticking bomb. The publication was considered blasphemous as it offended the Islamic religion. When the petitions from Imams and Danish Muslim Organisations had no effect on the Danish government, tempers escalated. Soon the event turned into a “crisis” with “diplomatic interventions by foreign governments, an embassy being burned, the staging of demonstrations and boycotts, and the posting of a one-million-dollar bounty for killing one of the cartoonists” (Sinderman et al. 4). It was even considered by the Danish government as the “worst international crisis since second world war” (Sinderman et al. 4). The cartoon sparked off debate on censorship and freedom of expression. Finally, the protests and demonstrations began settling following the apology from the newspaper in 2006 for hurting the Islamic sentiment. The intensity of the crisis continued whenever and wherever these cartoons were reprinted. The Danish cartoon controversy critically posed questions such as:

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

41

If freedom of expression does have limits, just how can these limits be defined? Is the giving of offence one of the possible limits to freedom of expression? How can we identify the boundaries of what might legitimately be considered offensive? Is there any kind of right to take offence? (Sturges 1)

Another cartoon controversy which shook the world was the Charlie Hebdo shooting in 2015. In January 2015, the Kouachi brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, entered the office of Charlie Hebdo Magazine in Paris, and fired at the staff. Around 12 members were killed in the office. Soon there were protests all round the world which fought the threat against freedom of expression. The slogan, Je suis Charlie (I am Charlie), created by Joachim Roncin, became viral in the social media. The French satirical magazine has been infamous for its blunt attacks on religions through cartoons. In 2011 it featured a cartoon on Muhammed, following which the office was fire bombed. In 2012 the magazine again featured a series of cartoons on Muhammed, which sparked off controversy. The tension between the groups and the magazine reached boiling point during the shooting. Analysing the cartoon controversies, Giselinde Kuipers in “The Politics of Humour in the Public Sphere: Cartoons, Power and Modernity in the first transnational humour scandal” (2011) identifies the affair as a “transnational humour scandal” (63) rather than a case of controversial free speech. The cartoons’ humorous discourse is considered the main cause for the controversy as the cartoons were introduced in the newspaper as gestures of “mockery, ridicule and derision” (64). The controversy escalated as humour followed a culture-specific regime. Charlie Hebdo and Denmark cartoon controversies show how the Western culture, on one hand, has persisted with criticising and mocking religion, the East, especially the Islamic countries, on the other, have remained traditional in their approach and resisted such blasphemous representations. The account of Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss Muslim scholar, stating the difference between the cultural acceptance of such representations in the International Herald Tribune, discusses how the humour in political cartoons is governed by the cultural “humour regimes”, the unwritten laws which specify what one can joke about.

42 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

That humour plays a critical role in making cartoons controversial has also been suggested by Jane Weston Vauclair in “Local Laughter, Global Polemics Understanding Charlie Hebdo” (2015). The tension surrounding the cartoon affair foregrounds the clash between the local and the global; between the “ethics of conviction” and the “ethics of responsibility” (6) and the local political culture of humour which is eventually undermined by the global concerns. After the Charlie Hebdo Massacre, the editorial in The New York Times, defended the magazine saying how Stéphane Charbonnier, the editorial director, “scoffed at any suggestion that the magazine should tone down its trademark satire to appease anyone”… [and how] “Charlie Hebdo has been an equal-opportunity offender: Muslims, Jews and Christians — not to mention politicians of all stripes — have been targets of buffoonish, vulgar caricatures and cartoons that push every hot button with glee” (“The Charlie Hebdo Massacre”). This proclaims satire and the humorous discourse as the lifeline of the magazine. Four years after, (in June 2019), the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon by the Portuguese cartoonist António Moreira Antunes on Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister and Donald Trump, the American president, caused public furore and The New York Times announced that it would no longer be officially publishing cartoons. In June 2019, the Canadian cartoonist Michael de Adder was let go by the agency right after the publication of his cartoon on border crisis, which depicted Trump, with a golf club in his hand, asking the two dead migrants, Oscar Alberto Martinez and his daughter Angie Valeria, whether they would mind if he played through. The above incidents coupled with the arrests of political cartoonists like Dogan Güzel from Istanbul and many other cartoonists across the globe, the assassination of Nahed Hattar in 2016, the shooting of Godfrey Mwampembwa also known as Gado in Kenya, and the detention of the students in Turkey by Erdogan for using cartoons which made fun of him, demonstrate how globally we are heading towards an era that proposes the impending death of humour and political cartoons. In the article “The Death of the Political Cartoon” (July 2019), Patrick Gathara in Al Jazeera discusses how political cartooning, “A pillar of journalism is being destroyed by oppressive governments, online mobs and

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

43

profit-oriented media moguls” (2019). The political cartoonists/humourists have become the “canaries in the coal mine” (Benson). The usage comes from the practice among miners who took the canary bird down into the mine shafts where the death of the bird indicated the level of toxic gases in the mines. Similarly, the vocation of political cartoonists has become a litmus test to check the health of democracy and the level of freedom of expression in a country. Coinciding with the rise of cartoon controversies across the globe has been India’s own share of public debates and issues on the use of humour in cartoons. The NCERT cartoon controversy turned the Indian academic world towards the rhetoric of humour and political cartoons. Besides, in April 2012, the West Bengal Chief Minister ordered the arrest of Professor Ambikesh Mahapatra, from Jadavpur University, Kolkata, for allegedly circulating scurrilous cartoons through email. He was arrested as “punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service” (“Section 66A”). This act triggered debates, kindling the issue of freedom of expression, human rights and censorship. Similarly, Aseem Trivedi was also arrested and charged with sedition by the clause of Section 66 A of the IT act, in 2012, for insulting the national symbols. For an anti-corruption campaign, Aseem Trivedi had drawn cartoons which represented the Indian parliament and the national emblem, thereby, committing an act of sacrilege: he had shown the four lions as blood thirsty wolves; the Indian parliament as a closet and the rape of Mother India by the corrupt politicians. The cartoons were accused of wanting sensitivity; bereft of “a sense of humour” (Narayan). In 2015, Lokmat, a Marathi newspaper was attacked for publishing a cartoon on ISIS. The cartoon was on the funding of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which had shown the organisation drawing money from a piggy bank. The copies of the newspapers were burnt, and the office was attacked. In 2017, cartoonist G. Bala from Tamil Nadu, was arrested for depicting the collector, the CM and the police commissioner without clothes. The cartoon showed the inefficiency of the State government in protecting a farmer’s family who committed suicide as they were harassed by the loan sharks. Though section 66 A of the IT act was repealed by the Supreme court in 2015, the cartoonist was arrested with offences related to defamation

44 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

under Section 501 of the Indian Penal Code and obscenity under Section 67 of the IT Act. The recent cartoon row in June 2019 which further sparked debates was of the Kerala Lalithakala Akademy, an autonomous cultural organisation, being asked to reconsider its cartoon award to K.K. Subhash who had drawn a cartoon on Bishop Franco Mullakkal, accused of rape charges. The cartoon depicted nuns fleeing at the sight of the Bishop as hens from a rooster and his staff had a pink lingerie pegged on. The cartoon was accused of hurting religious sentiments. The organisation stood adamant in its decision as it respected the judgement of an expert jury. The above incidents indicate a growing intolerance towards humour in political cartoons. John Chrysostom, describes this flip of affect in humour as, “foul discourse to actions still more foul. Often from words and laughter proceed railing and insult; and from railing, and insult, blows and wounds; and from blows and wounds, slaughter and murder” (374). The instances where humour moves from laughter to slaughter portray how the nature of humour in political cartoons is fragile.

2.3 The Nature of Humour in Political Cartoons Humour in political cartoons act as an effective medium to articulate the opinion of the cartoonist; but an argument ensues with an exaggeration of facts and thus, cannot be accepted directly. This gives room for divergent interpretations of the cartoons whose increasing tendency towards ambivalence creates “disputes about the meaning of humour [which] can never be settled” (Kuipers “The Politics of Humour” 70). Another factor which makes humour culpable in cartoons is its relation to power. Humour as a corrective weapon defines the social hierarchy as “people generally joke ‘downward’ rather than ‘upward’” (Kuipers Good Humor 122). Humour in political cartoons acts subversively as the people in authority are attacked and the channel, thus, is “upward”, which makes political humour aggressive and rebellious. The “upward” performance of

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

45

Fig. 2.1  The thin line between humour and anger

political humour, therefore, is circumscribed by gelotophobia—the fear of being laughed at—which makes people insecure. The cartoon controversies discussed prove how the art and expression of humour in political cartoon borders between free speech and censorship. Political humour survives within three coordinates: tolerance, democracy and freedom of speech (see Fig. 2.1). In a climate of intolerance, autocracy and censorship humour inevitably triggers anger, thereby, threatening its very existence in political cartoons. The coordinates signify the contesting relationship between humour, power and possible embarrassment which can either “explode in a bright, sensational light or simply fizzle out with only the slightest wisp of smoke” (Pickering and Lockyer 9). Tolerance and intolerance share a see-saw relationship in political humour as it balances itself between too much contentiousness (anger) and too much politeness (boredom) in the scale of emotions (Lockyer and Pickering 13). When humour crosses the limit and generates anger, the same humorous statement becomes virulently contagious. The cartoon controversies imply that humour by itself is two-faced. The vocation of cartooning is a carrier of paradoxes, as it demands the cartoonist to develop a divided personality, by acting as an “artist, journalist and humourist” (Khanduri 122). Each cartoon shows the struggle

46 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Table 2.1  Two sides of humour

A

B

EVOKE COMIC LIBERAL OVERT COHESION SUBTLENESS PLEASANT

PROVOKE CAUSTIC LIBELOUS COVERT TENSION SHARPNESS UNPLEASANT

in the artist to be truthful and discharge the responsibility of the journalist, who must deconstruct the facts, even as he/she strives to be an artist and humourist. Freedom of expression furthers the paradox, as on the one hand it grants the licence to express in an uninhibited way and, on the other, it strikes with a blind freedom to hurt others. The following table shows the binocular relation of humour and violence in a political context (Table 2.1). While column A presents the visible plane of political humour, column B portrays the secondary, plane linking it to indignation and anger. The table presents the paradoxical language of humour. The two columns imply that the functionality of humour is exclusive as well as inclusive. While column A depicts the cohesive and binding power of humour in social relations, the second column indicates its power to discriminate and exclude individuals in the public sphere. The paradox, therefore, points to the nature of humour to transmute.

2.4 Anatomy of the Cartoons In the foregoing discussion, one saw how humour has a volatile tendency to transmute when presented in a political context. To analyse how humour transmutes in political cartoons, the study analyses, in this section, the major elements which determine the impact of political cartoons. Martin Medhurst and Michael Desousa in “Political Cartoons as a Rhetorical Form: A Taxonomy of Graphic Discourse” (1981), identify the factors which are decisive in determining the persuasive power of the graphic tradition. The first step in creating a cartoon is the decision on

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

47

the news or issue on which the cartoon is drawn. They have classified the themes into four: (a) political commonplaces; (b) literary and cultural allusions; (c) personal character traits and (d) situational themes (200). These themes act as the repository from which the cartoonist draws his creations. A political cartoon needs a political issue for it to come into existence and the communication of the issue happens through its interaction with an allusion. The familiarity with the literary and cultural allusions becomes a prerequisite to decode the cartoons. The situational themes make the cartoon ephemeral and passive as it leaves the historical context. Cartoons are “enthymematic” (204), where all the facts and conclusions are not expressed directly; some are left to the imagination and interpretation of the readers. Thus, similar to the rhetoric of oral tradition, the rhetoric of the graphic tradition also depends on how the cartoonist (a) utilises the system of knowledge, beliefs, socio-cultural symbols and literary allusions (b) measures the attitude of the audience by presenting the necessary elements which would ignite the thought-process in the audience. Therefore, one can conclude that the rhetoricity of the political cartoon depends on humour and metaphors that sustain the enthymematic form of the cartoons. Humour primarily plays out in cartooning through the “principle of contrast” (205). It shows the contrast between “new ideas and time tested principles”, “competing ideologies”, etc. (205). The principle of contrast basically attests to the nature of humour to attract people by juxtaposing the incongruous ideas. The contrast becomes a necessity in the presentation of a cartoon due to the restraint in space as well as the low attention span that a cartoon attracts. Readers hardly spend more than ten seconds to read a cartoon and the cartoonist must impact his audience within this span of time. Thus, the principle of contrast becomes significant as it aids the cartoonists in being brief and clear. The contrast can be between the visual representations/imagery or a contrast between the caption and the image or it can also be a contrast between the assumptions of the public belief and attitude. The other two principles enhancing the graphic disposition are commentary and contradiction. While commentary as a disposition reinforces “cultural or political truism” (207), contradiction on

48 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the other hand does not offer a choice to the reader to form an opinion as it forces them to align with condemnation. The six elements which constitute the rhetoric of an image are: (a) use of line and form; (b) relative size of the objects; (c) exaggeration of features; (d) placement; (e) relation of text; (f ) visual imagery and (g) the rhythmic montage (Medhurst and Desousa 212). These features help one to understand the nuances of a political cartoon. While the anatomy of cartoons decides their rhetorical framework, the guidelines of the Thorat Committee which scrutinised the performance of cartoons, give the framework of standardisation for the rhetoric of cartoons from the perspective of the power relations and of authority. The report is critical for the present study as it evaluates the Indian political cartoons which were recommended to be deleted or modified by the report. The next section evaluates the performance of cartoons and its legislation through the Thorat Committee report.

2.5 Critique of the Thorat Committee The NCERT textbooks were launched in 2006 as part of new venture of the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) which aimed to foster critical and creative thinking among students. As part of this new curriculum framework, political cartoons were introduced in the textbooks. This new enterprise meant to take students out of the standard textual curriculum, made them resourceful and encouraged them to question the happenings. Cartoons in political science textbook were argued to be “integral to the textbook” rather than being a mere visual distraction as they served to “entertain or engage the readers, invite them to return to the text with a new range of questions or help them achieve critical distance vis-a-vis received wisdom, including that of the textbook itself ” (22). Characters Unni and Munni, created by Irfan, are in conversation throughout the chapters to kindle the critical thoughts among students. Columns like “Read a Cartoon” with a note under them and “Check Your Progress” were introduced in the textbooks to make them more interactive. The new edition of textbooks, thus, involved visual language, providing it greater reach and demanded active participation from the students. The

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

49

cartoons, however, opened the gate for debates and controversies as they were considered “a manipulation of symbols” (Koestler 70). In 2012, the presence of the Ambedkar Cartoon by Shankar in the textbook turned controversial. Following the uproar, the government was forced to appoint a committee under S.K. Thorat on 14 May 2012 to scrutinise the cartoons. The committee comprised six members: Professor Thorat was the chairman of the committee; Professor A.S. Narang (School of Social Sciences, IGNOU), Patricia Mukhim (Editor of The Shillong Times and a social worker), Professor M.S.S. Pandian (Professor of History, JNU) from Chennai, Abha Malik (Social Science Teacher, Sanskriti School) and Professor Saroj Yada (Head, DESS, NCERT). There were also 13 subject experts from Political Science who gave their learned opinion in accordance with the NCERT guidelines. The report was submitted on 27 June 2012. The main aims of the committee were to: (a) identify educationally inappropriate content and (b) provide alternatives for the content to be replaced. The committee inspected six textbooks including the social science and political science textbooks from IX to XII: (a) Class IX—Democratic Politics I; (b) Class X—Democratic Politics II; (c) Class XI—Indian Constitution at Work; (d) Political Theory; (e) Class XII—Politics in India Since Independence and (f ) Contemporary World Politics. The committee reviewed cartoons from textbooks and recommended the withdrawal or modification of around 22 cartoons. The cartoons were examined with the following guidelines: i. Convergence: While reviewing the textbooks the committee examined whether the written text or contents were in consonance with the illustrations. ii. Targeting of individuals or groups of individuals: The lessons were reviewed to see whether the content, both verbal and non-verbal, targets individuals or group of individuals or are intended to clarify the concepts and content. Whether there were distortions in explanation and interpretation. Whether the illustrations or pictures were “event specific or person specific”. iii. Sense of proportion in presentation: Balance in content, illustrations, visuals, cartoons and other visuals.

50 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

iv. Analytical and synthesis mode: Whether the content of the lessons focuses only on analysis or on synthesis also. v. Level of satire: What is the level of satire? Is it appropriate for students of that age? Is the satire subtle or abrasive? vi. Positive and negative examples: Is there a balance between positive and negative examples—case studies, cartoons, visuals, collage etc.? vii. Quality of illustration: Whether the images were eye-catching and stimulate the imagination. viii. Sensitivity: (a) How sensitive are the cartoons and illustrations towards communities, castes, ethnicity, religions, women, language and other groups and 22 minorities? In a country as diverse as India the above considerations cannot be disregarded. (b) Individual specific and issue specific visuals (“A Report” 21) The terms of references of the Thorat panel show how the committee impersonates the Constitution for adjudication and acts as a national agent to scrutinise the cartoons. Though the committee appreciates the use of cartoon and recognises its pedagogical value, they turn cautious towards their use which offers a “room for different understanding of the text and interpretation of visuals…by different segments of society” (24). The committee is specific on the “need for a careful balance with humour and the content” (23) or else it could lead to “unintended consequences”, which are “sensitive to certain groups of people in culturally diversified society” (23). This stipulation exhibits a moral policing agency. The committee used pedagogy as a reason to recommend the omission of cartoons from the syllabus. Their main criterion to scrutinise the cartoons was how far the cartoons were “educationally inappropriate”. Interestingly the committee included a panel of 13 experts on political science, professors and teachers of social as well as political science, but it excluded the cartoonist, the artistic mind which traffics in the language of cartoons. The committee recommended deletion of cartoons on sensitive topics like reservation, the elections and religion on the grounds of vagueness and insensitivity. Cartoons which depicted the bureaucracy in a negative light were also excluded. The cartoons recommended for deletion show how the committee remained intolerant towards any statement reproachful of the bureaucracy and policies of the government. The recommendations of the committee explicitly state that the cartoons with crude

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

51

statements, vagueness, opinions against political institutions and bearing negative messages were suggested for removal. After the committee submitted the report, there were further objections from NCERT which was chagrined with the recommendations. M.S.S. Pandian’s letter defends NCERT’s initiative to introduce cartoons where the teacher-in-the-class does not validate any opinion; instead, they ask the student to form an opinion. He argues against the recommendations of the report thus: Against this backdrop of the pedagogical intent and method of these textbooks - which are indeed imaginative exercises in critical pedagogy - I read all the textbooks with care, and from my own location as a teacher, as a parent, and as someone who has a steadfast commitment to certain kind of transformative politics. After the rewarding exercise of reading them, I do not find - let me confess, contrary to my expectation -- anything educationally inappropriate in them; and they should be used as they are. (“A Report” 41)

The animus generated against the recommendations of the Thorat report is proof that their suggestions were widely seen to be insensitive towards the essence of humour in cartooning.

2.6 Concerns of Cartooning To further understand the insensitivity towards the humour in cartooning, the authors conducted a field work involving ten interviews of the Indian political cartoonists working with Indian English newspapers. Out of ten, five of the cartoonists are veterans in the field: C.J. Yesudasan (Shankar’s Weekly, The Week), E.P. Unny (Indian Express), Ajit Ninan (Times of India), Keshav Venkataraghavan (The Hindu) and Ravi Shankar Etteth (Indian Express, India Today). The other five include the contemporary and trending cartoonists of India: Surendra (The Hindu), Manjul, Satish Acharya, Sandeep Adhwaryu (Times of India) and Gokul (Asian Age, New Indian Express). Through the interviews collected as Conversations with Indian Cartoonists: Politickle Lines (Balakrishnan and Venkat 2019) the authors profile the past and present traditions of cartooning. The

52 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

careers of the political cartoonists speak to one about the challenges and risks they face in their profession. The major themes that the interviews have covered include: use of humour and its transmutation in cartooning, invisible lines of ethics, their responsibilities, taboo topics, the cartoonists’ relation with the editors, goals of cartooning, process of creating cartoons and the role of the digital media in promoting cartooning. The interviews, on the whole, enabled us to feel the pulse of the cartoonists, their dilemmas and how their works are perceived by the public. The art of political cartooning began as a colonial art form in India. The major template the art followed has been foreign in nature. Before colonialism, the use of political humour had been primarily oral in its tradition. It was with the onset of print culture that the art of political cartooning replaced the tradition of court jesters and the vidūṣakas. Ritu Gairola Khanduri in Caricaturing Culture in India: Cartoons and History in the Modern World (2014) gives a chronological history of political cartooning in India, beginning with the 1870s, running through the colonial, national and the global times. The tradition of cartooning was introduced in India through Punch, with regional avatars as Hindi Punch, Hindu Punch and Oudh Punch (Khanduri 39). According to Keshav, the Swadeshamitran (1882) founded by G. Subramania Iyer and which featured Abanindranath Tagore carried the traces of the earliest attempts of Indian cartooning. Along with the publication of Punch, vernacular magazines like the Chitravalis of Baijnath Kedia from Calcutta, Sukhdeva Roy from Allahabad and Shiva Narayan Mishra from Kanpur (Khanduri 8, 66) contributed to the development of the colonial phase of cartooning. With independence in 1947, the art form gained momentum through the contributions of Keshav Shankar Pillai. Popularly known as Shankar, his weekly, Shankar’s Weekly, became the platform for cartoonists and soon was known as the Indian Punch. The weekly gave opportunity to the prominent cartoonists like O.V. Vijayan, Kutty, Rajinder Puri, Yesudasan, Unny and Ajit Ninan and paved the way for the second generation of cartoonists like Vijayan, Rajinder Puri, Mario Miranda and many others. Along with Shankar, Laxman soon emerged as a leading cartoonist. Both Shankar and Laxman were greatly influenced by the strokes of David Low. It was the latter’s inspiration which influenced the principles

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

53

of modern cartooning in India. Though cartooning as an art form has transformed in post-independent India, the major traditions have been that of the English and the American. In the modern times, cartoons of Patrick Oliphant, Jeff MacNelly, Oliver Sack, Michael Ramirez and many others have been significant in developing the modern tradition of Indian cartooning. An inconvenient truth about Indian cartooning is that, unlike Japan which has developed its own tradition of cartooning, the Manga culture, India, diverse in its culture has failed to develop its own tradition of cartooning that is distinct from that of the West. While in most respects India has followed the West in cartooning, it has not adopted the West’s liberal and candid cartooning approach, where drawing the emperor without clothes is the norm; the tradition of Indian cartooning has been more restrained. All the cartoonists unanimously agree that India’s approach to cartooning is subtler compared to the West. The researcher’s interviews with the leading Indian cartoonists reveal that there are unwritten norms which safeguard them from controversies. The hidden norms prevent the cartoonists from using religious or national symbols flippantly or making fun of political institutions. The incidents where the cartoonists have courted controversies prove that the Indian audience are sensitive towards religious and national symbols as well as their political icons. Another major challenge faced by the cartoonists has been the thin attention span of the readers. With readers entering a digital age of surveillance capitalism, the attention span has gone down. One of the major reasons Ravi Shankar temporarily retired from cartooning is his dejection with the audience. Keshav also talks about how the reduced perspective of the audience poses a challenge to the cartoonist who is left with fewer symbols and yet has to work hard to avoid repetition. The narrowed perspective of the readers forces the cartoonist to use stereotypes and clichés which carry the risk of being redundant or corrosive. The cartoonists together agree on how the resource of visual metaphors have decreased; even the use of Panchatantra (animal fables) has become redundant. The liberal approach in the past which allowed the cartoonists to portray the politicians as animals is a sensitive issue today. Moreover, the unwritten norms have even restricted the artistic freedom of the cartoonists.

54 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

As for the diversity of India, one must see it as exacerbating the challenges to the cartoonist. The artist must search for symbols which communicate with the audience universally as well as topically. The failure of the cartoons also occurs when readers fail to register the culture-specific metaphors. However, on the other side, the same diversity also serves as a resource where the cartoonist can combine different cultural metaphors. While some of the cartoonists support the plurality of Indian culture, which saves the cartoonists from monotony, the same diversity also increases the risk from reader-sensitivity. The cartoonists recognise the use of humour in cartooning; however, the preference for humour type changes according to the style of the cartoonist. While Keshav prefers satire as the medium for the cartooning, which he best describes as a thorn under the rose, cartoonists like Ravi Shankar, Ajit Ninan and Sandeep Adhwaryu prefer sarcasm and hard humour. Considering humour as the life jacket which saves the artist from drowning, it becomes the medium through which the cartoonist safely disguises his sharp criticisms. Yesudasan explains the success of humour in cartoons as a state when even the targeted subject enjoys the levity. The cartoonists also agree that the use of humour is subjective in the creation of the cartoon and they cannot always predict the reception by the audience. The instances shared by the cartoonists show how some sharp humorous events fly under the radar while the innocent humour grows on to become controversial. Other than directing the movement of the eye from the left, the cartoonists agree on how they cannot sense and predict the movement of the language of humour. Another challenge that the cartoonist faces is with the rise of social media, where virality is a clear and present danger to the reception of humour. With the arrival of social media, the reach is of a geometric magnitude. More the cartoon gets shared, more is the possibility of multiple reception, where virality determines the impact of humour. The major challenge the cartoonists face is the disappearing spaces for the cartoons. The New York Times’ decision to not publish cartoons further shows the alarming situation towards which the vocation of cartooning is hurtling. Cartoonists believe that, eventually, infotainment and graphic journalism will take over editorial

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

55

cartooning. However, so long as democracy exists, the profession of political cartooning will continue to point out the flaws of the system. The foregoing discussion points to the fact that cartoonists like to use humour as essential to the art form of cartooning. But they are themselves unsure of the movement of humour in political cartoons. It is here the present study intervenes to build a model in order to explain the movement of the language of humour and theorise the performance of humour in political cartoons, which demonstrates a tendency to transmute and render the cartoons controversial. Victor S. Navasky in The Art of Controversy: Political Cartoons and their Enduring Power (2013) systematically studies the art of controversy. He proposes a three-part theory for the cartoons that turn controversial: content theory, image theory and the stimulus theory. Navasky first discusses David Levine’s cartoon “Screwing the World” (xii) which shocked the audience, as it depicted Henry Kissinger caught in the act of copulating with the earth, which is depicted as a lady. The cartoon received negative reviews for depicting stereotypical image of the sexual act, where the male is on top while the woman is a passive sufferer. The representation further insinuated the act of rape suggesting how Kissinger is “ravaging the world” (xiii). David defended himself saying how as a “caricaturist he dealt in stereotypes—which poses a problem when one is rendering”… “I’m just showing what normal people do” (xiii). What appears normal to the cartoonist became controversial as it got published in the newspaper. With this incident Navasky begins his journey of explaining why cartoons turn controversial. With respect to content theory, he explores how the content of the cartoon upsets the audience, while the image theory evaluates how the form of the image hurts the sentiment of the audience and in the stimulus theory, he adopts the neuroscientific approach which explains how the brain reacts when the content and the form act as stimuli. Drawing examples from the controversial cartoons of Ed Sorel, David Low on Adolf Hitler and Barry Blitt on the Obamas, Navasky states how cartoons containing “sex, sexism, sexual orientation, race, racism, religion, and religious Fundamentalism” (6) turn provocative. The visual grabs more attention than the text because of its “totemic power: the power of representation” and its power to transcend any specific material incarnation”

56 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

(20). The neuroscientific theories of V.S. Ramachandran and Semir Zeki are explored further to see how the cartoon acts as a stimulus which triggers the emotions. The work is significant to the current discussion as it is one of the few studies which have focused on the art of controversy with respect to political cartoons. While the work mainly focuses on the “why”, the purpose or the reasons which makes the cartoon controversial, the present study focuses on “how”, by evaluating the method and by developing a model to see the transmutation of humour in political cartoons. While Navasky recognises humour as an important content of political cartoons, he provides a less-than academic and theoretical approach to analyse humour. It is here, the present study gains significance as it attempts to provide a theoretical framework. The theoretical model is further explained in the upcoming chapters which discuss two major functions of the language of humour, which are the communicative and the rhetoric.

Works Cited Secondary Sources Balakrishnan, Vinod and Vishaka Venkat. Conversations with Indian Cartoonists: Politickle Lines. Cambridge Scholars, 2019. Berger, Arthur Asa. “Politics of Laughter”. The Social Faces Humour: Practices and Issues, edited by George E.C. Paton, Chris Powell and Stephen Wagg, Routledge, 2019. Bhat, G.K. Vidūṣaka. The New Order Book, 1959. Calvey, David. “A Sociological Case of Stand-Up Comedy: Censorship, Offensiveness and Opportunism”. The Lost Ethnographies: Methodological Insights from Projects that Never Were, edited by R.J. Smith and S. Delamont, Emerald Publishing, 2019. Limited, pp. 65–78. Gathara, Patrick. “The Death of the Political Cartoon”. Al Jazeera, 03 July 2019, https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/death-­political-­cartoon-­19070 2083907178.html. Accessed 05 Sept. 2019. Holm, Nicholas. Humour as Politics: The Political Aesthetics of Contemporary Comedy. Springer, 2017

2  Performance of Humour in Political Cartoons 

57

Kay, Kavyta. “Riffing India Comedy, Identity, and Censorship”. New Indian Nuttahs: Comedy and Cultural Critique in Millennial India. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Kessel, Martina and Patrick Merziger. The Politics of Humour: Laughter, Inclusion and Exclusion in the Twentieth Century. University of Toronto P, 2012. Khanduri, Ritu Gairola. Caricaturing Culture in India: Cartoons and History in the Modern World. Cambridge UP, 2014. Kuipers, Giselinde. Good Humor, Bad Taste: A Sociology of the Joke. De Gruyter. “The Politics of Humour in the Public Sphere: Cartoons, Power and Modernity in the First Transnational Humour Scandal”. European Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, 2011, pp. 63–80. Lockyer, Sharon and Michael Pickering. Introduction. Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 1–24. Londino, Cathleen. “Verbal Sex: Hollywood Censorship and the Birth of the Screwball Comedy”. International Journal of the Image, vol. 2, no. 1, 2012, pp. 25–35. Luqiu, Luwei Rose. “The Cost of humour: Political Satire on Social Media and Censorship in China”. Global Media and Communication, vol 13, no. 2, 2017, pp. 123–138. Medhurst, Martin J. and Michael A. Desousa. “The Political Cartoons as a Rhetorical Form: A Taxonomy of Graphic Discourse”. Communication Monographs, vol. 48, no. 3, 1981, pp. 197–236. Navasky, Victor S. The Art of Controversy: Political Cartoons and their Enduring Power. Knopf, 2013. Schutz, Charles E. Political Humour: From Aristophanes to Sam Ervin. Associated UP, 1977. Tsakona, Villy, and Diana Elena Popa, editors. Studies in Political Humor: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment. John Benjamins, 2011. Vauclair, Jane. “Local Laughter, Global Polemics: Understanding Charlie Hebdo”. European Comic Art, no. 8, 2015, pp. 6–14.

3 A Communicative Framework of Humour

Art forms viewed as idiosyncratic creations are often tainted by prejudices and personal ideologies; they are manipulative by nature. Political cartoons which present a humorous take on the political and social events are emotive in nature and, thus, are capable of triggering the emotion of humour. However, they are equally unpredictable when they lend themselves to misreading. This chapter makes a study of the models of linguistic and visual communication by Roman Jakobson and Roland Barthes, respectively, in order to build a communicative framework for the language of humour. Describing rhetorical humour in a political discourse Michael Andrew Phillips-Anderson states that, it “is a linguistic act on the part of a speaker that carries with it the intended effect of producing a state of amusement or mirth in the auditor for the purpose of bringing about a change in attitude or belief ” (2). The definition locates humour as a “linguistic act” involving a speaker who initiates the process with an intention to generate mirth and affect the “attitude or belief ” of the audience. This definition posits three essential elements towards theorising the language of humour: (a) a speaker, (b) an audience to engage with and (c) the intentionality of humour to bring change. The communication model © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_3

59

60 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

proposed by Jakobson in “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics” provides the same elements in the form of communicative functions of sender, receiver and the factors that influence the decoding of the message. However, Jakobson primarily examines verbal language. As the cartoons are also a visual medium, the linguistic model of Jakobson is transposed to the visual medium through Barthes. Whether the visual and verbal rhetoric are transposable has been the subject of debate between the “transpositionists and the anti transpositionists” in France (Roque 38) in the 1970s. Until the 1960s, the rhetoric of language was considered to be exclusively verbal. With Barthes’ exposition of the “Rhetoric of the Image”, there is an impetus to transpose—the rhetoric of the verbal to that of the visual. Barthes notes: “Rhetorics inevitably vary by their substance (here articulated sound, there image, gesture or whatever) but not necessarily by their form; it is even probable that there exists a single rhetorical form, common for instance to dream, literature and image” (Barthes 49). By transposing the verbal to the visual, this study adopts the visual framework propagated by Barthes through his seminal essay “The Rhetoric of the Image”. In this model, rather than interchanging the verbal for visual, it forwards a combination of both as the humour in political cartoons is multimodal, a mixture of the captions and humorous caricaturing. While the theory of multimodality examines the interaction of the image and the text, the present study theoretically delves deep to understand the language of humour cognitively and semiotically through the frameworks of Jakobson and Barthes.

3.1 A Need for the Model Humour springing from the amusement at the cost of others’ complexes, incongruity and the release of the pent-up feelings manifests the arbitrary nature of humour which ensues on account of multiple causes. Cognitive studies of humour attempt to interpret and understand humour by recognising the neural correlates through the received signs and signals. The affective study of humour, on the other hand, investigates the degrees of appreciation of humour based on the emotional quotient of individuals.

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

61

The Mirth Response Test conducted by Fredrick C. Redlich, Jacob Levine and Theodore P. Sohler in 1951 with over 25,000 cartoons taken from The New Yorker, the Saturday Evening Post, Collier’s and many other magazines was one of the first tests to evaluate the cognition of humour and its relationship with the personality of an individual. The test corroborated Freud’s theory and validated the three assumptions that: (a) when humour is pleasurable there is some amount of release of repressed feelings which are not accompanied by anxiety; (b) when humour is responded with indifference it may be because the needs are egosyntonic or the needs are deeply repressed or the ego control is involved and (c) when humour is accompanied by anxiety or any other negative feeling it is mainly because the humour has generated a potential threat (720). The test also recognised how mirth is accompanied by both euphoric and dysphoric responses. This test, therefore, uncannily recognises the possibility for the transmutation of humour as it also accounts for the displeasure and the dystrophic responses which humour generates. Vinod Goel and Raymond J Dolan in “Social Regulation of Affective Experience of Humor” (2007) studies the affective side of humour through 16 participants as they scanned the cartoons. The study found a negative correlation between funniness and social appropriateness. Andrea Samson et al. in “Cognitive humor processing: Different logical mechanisms in nonverbal cartoons—an fMRI study” (2008) gives a logical mechanism of how incongruity resolution is processed in the left side of the brain through a study on 30 cartoons analysed by 17 healthy patients. In “Exposure to Political Disparagement Humor and Its Impact on Trust in Politicians: How Long Does It Last?” (2017) by Mendiburo-Seguel et al. the conclusion of the data study, which comes very close to the observation in the present study, shows how “repetition of a message can augment the swing of such message” (“Exposure to Political Disparagement”). The two-part investigation with 94 participants for the first study and 146 for the second study arrived at the conclusion that “repetition can produce tedium or reactance, and therefore decreased message acceptance by, for example, acting as a negative affective cue” (“Exposure to Political Disparagement”). Studies which analysed political cartoons through a qualitative-textual approach (Marín-Arrese 2008; Popa 2015; Al-Momani

62 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

et al. 2017; Kwon and Roh 2018; Marín-Arrese 2019) focused on decoding of humour as it interacts through cognitive elements. Freddie J Jennings, Josh C Bramlett and Benjamin R Warner in “Comedic Cognition: The Impact of Elaboration on Political Comedy Effects” (2019) cognitively analyse how people process political comedy. They argue for an effective processing which will depend on the individual’s affinity towards political humour and social nature of the media ecosystem. The literature survey above shows how the studies on the language of humour and political cartoons have either focused on the cognitive or affective logic of humour. Cognitive and affective studies have mainly focused on rational and emotional quotients responsible for humour, separately. Affective neuroscience differs from the methods of cognitive neuroscience by studying the emotional quotient of the brain by analysing the amygdalae, thalamus, hypothalamus and the limbic system of the right hemisphere. Cognitive neuroscience, on the other hand, studies the mental process of cognition with an emphasis on the cerebral cortex. Cognitive studies analyse the involvement of mind in the reception and appreciation of humour. Surprise, deviation as well as deception were primarily considered the elements for cognising humour from the age of Aristotle, Cicero, Quintilian to Immanuel Kant, Blaise Pascal and G.W.F. Hegel (Forabosco 135). The neuroscientific approach of B. Wild et al. (2003), Coulson and Williams (2005), Bartolo et al. (2006) and Marinkovic et al. (2011) (Blake 45) have insisted on the involvement of both the right as well as the left hemispheres in humour cognition. Later, studies about the damage of right hemisphere have proved that humour appreciation is more associated with the right frontal lobes (Wapner et al. 1981; Shammi and Stuss 1999; Pell 2006). When cognitive studies were preoccupied with the right hemisphere for humour appreciation, the affective study of humour, on its part, expanded the field through the psychological approach focusing on the personality traits, happiness index, emotional coping and humour therapy (Kuiper et al. 1992; Ford et al. 2014; Graefer 2016). Both the cognitive and the affective frames analysed the rational stimulus and the emotional quotient autonomously. Whereas, there have

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

63

been only a few attempts to integrate the two sides (Adolphs et al. 1998; Goel and Dolan 2007). While each approach has neglected the other, a model to theorise the communicative function of humour must attempt an integration of both the cognitive and the affective states, thereby, blending the rational and the emotional needs of the speaker as well as the audience. The model in this chapter attempts to theorise the success of humour (spontaneous emotional identification) and its failure to amuse (prolonged thinking, reasoning seeking rationality) resulting in hurt and anger by bridging the gap between the cognitive and the affective. The model specifically emphasises the cultural perceptions and correlation which play an important role in building the reason and the emotion. When the affective focuses on the content of humour, the cognitive evaluates its structure. Here, the first part of the model builds on close examination of the content of humour. The second part of the model, explicated through metaphor, underlines the structure of humour. The scope of the model, therefore, is broader as it examines both the content and the structure of humour. Schutz’s “psycho-logic” of political humour essentially captures the dual nature of the present model when he says: humour “in its higher reaches, … is a highly rational form of thought, building upon psychological drives and emotional needs of men in society to fulfil social purposes” (65). Recognising the complexity of political humour, Schultz calls for a blended approach catering to the emotion and the reason, which becomes the foundation of the model. The model, therefore, attempts to provide a dynamic approach by combining the logical structure and the sentimental content of humour.

3.2 Communication Cycle of Humour Gregory Bateson in “The Position of Humour in Human Communication” (1969), briefly sketches the communication cycle of humour in jokes. He considers a successful communication of humour as a circuit in which paradoxical or incongruous thoughts are completely conveyed. According to Bateson, humour consists of two layers of meaning, first is the “informational content” on the surface and the second, which is implicit in the

64 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

background (162). The two layers, in turn, contribute to the ambiguity in the language of humour. John C. Meyer in “Humor as a Double-­ Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication” categorises four functions of humour: (a) identification, (b) clarification, (c) enforcement and (d) differentiation (310). The first two functions work towards cohesion, while the latter set of functions are crucial in discriminating individuals. Through the function of identification, the cartoonist builds a rapport with his audience as he conveys difficult criticisms more bluntly as well as gently. The function of clarification aids the cartoonist in informing his/her audience about the social norms and the deflections that have happened. Through the function of enforcement, the cartoonist attempts to correct the corrupt and the flawed bureaucracy. Finally, the function of differentiation allows the cartoonist to make contrasting and contradicting remarks which form the crux of the ironical and paradoxical statements in political cartoons. Thus, the communication of humour, through political cartoons, is a “double-edged sword” which would either result in unification or division. This double-edged nature is the carrier of ambiguity which is inherent to the language of humour. The model which purports to analyse the communicative nature of humour must take cognisance of this aspect. One of the earliest interactive models of humour was proposed by Howard Giles, Richard Y. Bourhis, Nicholas J. Gadfield, Graham J. Davies and Ann P. Davies in “Cognitive Aspects of Humour in Social Interaction: A Model and Some Linguistic Data” in Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications (1996). Rothbart’s arousal-safety model is further elaborated by Giles et al. to understand the cognitive and decoding operations of humour. The model is built to delineate the social interaction based on intentional communication. The model adopts linearity in its sequence, which begins with the encoding process. The process of encoding humour in a message would be: to achieve group affinity, to offend, to distract or for compliance. The humorous message comprises three kinds of content: linguistic (speech pattern), Semantic-thematic (topic of humour) and cognitive content (setting, time-span and punchline). The process of decoding will result in arousal, resolution of the incongruity and relief which may either result in positive or negative response. The model further proves that the

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

65

unsuccessful communication of humour may result from lack of incongruity in the punch line or the failure in resolving the incongruity. The response to the failure of humour will depend on the relationship between the encoder and the decoder. The model proposed by Giles et al. presents a broader perspective that also considers the failure of humour. However, the model restricts the failure of humour to the lack of perception or reception of incongruity. Moreover, the model primarily explains the social interaction of humour happening through verbal jokes and punchlines. Another recent and significant model which looks at the communication of humour is Jerry M. Suls’ incongruity resolution model (IRM). Suls proposes a two-stage model for humour appreciation based on the information-processing analysis. Information processing, central to cognitive psychology, delineates the different mental stages or operations involved in receiving and processing a message. The model analyses humour as found in verbal jokes and captioned cartoons. Defining humour as the one lying between the incongruous and the congruous, Suls recognises two stages in the model: (a) confronting the incongruous (b) then, the reader arrives at a cognitive rule and the punch line reconciles with the incongruous (82). The operation of incongruity-resolution is examined through the following joke: The Perfect Son A: I have the perfect son. B: Does he smoke? A: No, he doesn’t. B: Does he drink whiskey? A: No, he doesn’t. B: Does he ever come home late? A: No, he doesn’t. B: I guess you really do have the perfect son. How old is he? A: He will be six months old next Wednesday. (“The Perfect Son”)

Humour in this joke is created with a slide from the congruous to the incongruous. The general conception of “the perfect son” here is that of

66 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the virtuous son who has high moral stature and is not under the influence of drinking, smoking and hanging out. But, at the end, the son turns out to be a six-month-old baby. The expectation of a righteous man in the generation of punks and freaks collides with the reality of an infant. According to Suls one can get hold of the joke not just by knowing the incongruous but must make a sense of it. Humour in the above joke lies in the process of resolving the incongruity. In this case, the incongruity with respect to a virtuous son is resolved with the real fact that that son turns out to be an infant. Suls’ model involves several stages of information processing. It begins with reading the joke, which is followed by storing the data about setting and context. This, in turn, helps the reader to form a narrative schema. The schema provides a framework for the assumptions of the reader to predict the text. If the anticipated result turns out to be real, the process ends there. In the above joke, when the father declares his son to be perfect, the reader forms assumptions and asks whether he drinks. When the answer is no, the reader proceeds to the next question. Thus, with the same schema the reader expands the text. Again, as the journey continues a new schema is constructed to interpret the text. At this point, when the predictions do not coincide with the outcome, an incongruous text is created leading to the element of surprise. If the father had answered that his son was a 23-year-old boy or perhaps even a boy between 16 and 18 years, the result would have been as the speaker had predicted and there would be no surprise. The puzzlement is dissolved at this stage and the statement remains non-humorous. Thus, when stage one ends with “abrupt disconfirmation of his prediction” (87), the second stage explains why the element of surprise becomes pleasurable. So, through the process of problem solving by using cognitive rules to compare, the process continues till one “gets” the joke. Suls also states that the model is accommodative of “motivational, emotional or situational factors” (89) which would increase the humour appreciation. Like the Giles et al. model, the model of Suls also gives a detailed schematic representation of the movement of humour. Both the models are based on the cognitive rules with which information is processed. But Suls himself points to the limitations of the model when he says: it cannot be applied to “physical forms of slapstick, exaggerated gestures and

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

67

facial expressions, cartoons without captions, and political caricatures” (Suls 82–83). He specifically restricts the application of his model to narrative humour. The point of contestation begins with Suls’ model as he states, “the recipient cannot maintain a set of multiple interpretations” (85). The present study constructs the model based on the theory that humour as it transgresses, its emotive boundary opens spaces for multiple interpretations. Suls gives four conditions for a situation to be humorous: 1 . Incongruity of the joke ending 2. Complexity of Stage-2 problem-solving 3. Time taken to solve the incongruity problem 4. Salience of the joke’s content (92) The contestation comes especially with the condition of complexity. According to Suls, only jokes with moderate complexity will be humorous. With the least complexity, it would turn out to be trivial; hence it would not be pleasurable. Here, the model fails to accommodate simple jokes, for example, of that of the clown: though it may appear trivial, it creates laughter. Suls’ model fails to explain the success of the simple mechanics of laughter. Moreover, what defines the level of complexity in a joke is not adequately discussed by Suls. Take for example the following joke: Two men walk into a bar and the first one says, “I would like some H2O.” Then the second man says, “That sounds good I will have H2O too.” Then the second man died. (Dickerson and Welsh)

As one reads, one may not find the joke at the first take. But as one reads it carefully, one can get hold of the humour, as the second person ordered for H2O too, which would be heard by the bartender as H2O2. Now, a person who understands chemistry will easily comprehend the joke. So, what makes a joke complex? One can argue that the complexity of the joke would depend on the person’s background, education, familiarity with the subject. What is a complex joke to one may be simple to the other. Thus, one cannot generalise that a joke with moderate complexity

68 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

alone will be humorous. Therefore, rather than complexity, one can argue that it is the ambiguity of the statement that renders funniness. Suls’ model, thus, is inadequate to handle the ambiguous nature of humour. Furthermore, Suls’ model also does not clearly state how the narrative schema is formed. How the reader forms assumptions also remain unclear as he states: “Some appropriate narrative schema concerning a jury or the course of a trial is selected. Some forthcoming information concerning a jury or a trial is expected” (90). The model also fails to explain the state of “unlaughter”. What if the surprise element leads to an antithetical situation? Instead of the failure of humour, the model ends with no-laughter option. The no-laughter option does not define the condition where humour transmutes from its limit. The statement that “humor increases with ease of information processing, which means that appreciation should peak just before the joke becomes trivial to its recipient” (Suls 92), suggests that there is a peak level in the appreciation of humour. What would happen if humour passes its peak? Here the model is insufficient to account for the multiple responses which humour can generate. Leo Kant and Elisabeth Norman in “You Must Be Joking! Benign Violations, Power Asymmetry, and Humor in a Broader Social Context” (2019) analyse the violated expectations through the concept of social distance, cultural differences and power asymmetries. They also discuss about possible consequences beyond humour as it turns abusive and aggressive. Gretel Liz De la Pena Sarracen, Paolo Rosso and Anastasia Giachanou in “PRHLT-UPV at SemEval-2020 Task 8: Study of Multimodal Techniques for Memes Analysis” analyse around 7000 memes by using BERT and VGG Architectures to build a model to classify them into various categories of offensive, humorous, sarcastic and motivational. These new models also explore the multimodal models of humour. But they have not adequately addressed how the humorous function fails and turns controversial. Keeping in mind the concerns and the inadequacies, the model in this study analyses the dynamics of humour when it becomes ambiguous yielding to multiple interpretations. Other models that deserve a mention are Paul Simpson’s “Triadic Structure of Satire as a Discursive Practice” in On the Discourse of Satire: Towards a stylistic model of satirical

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

69

humour (2003) which analyses satire through the domains of satirist, satire (addressee) and satirised (target) (86). Here again the model draws the basics from Jakobson. Francisco Yus’ “An inference-centred analysis of jokes: The intersecting circles model of humorous communication” (2013) makes an intersecting circles model with three coordinates— make-sense frame, cultural frame and utterance interpretation (11). The model seemingly takes inspiration from Jakobson’s codes and Barthes’ coded iconic and non-coded iconic messages. Seana Coulson’s “Frame-­ shifting and frame semantics: Joke comprehension on the space structuring model” (2015) takes inspiration from conceptual blending theory, which in turn is a successor of conceptual metaphor theory (CMT). All the models above mentioned have information-processing schema as a basic feature which the present model also employs. The information processing model was, critically, first posed by Jakobson. The model in this chapter, taking cues from the above models, traces it back to Jakobson, Barthes, Lakoff and Johnson, and builds afresh with a dynamic approach making it equally applicable to a visual text. The communicative model of humour is further divided into two: linguistic and visual. Multimodal theory which combines the language and the image is essential as the cartoons selected for this study generate humour through the combination of verbo-visual medium. The need for a multimodal theory of humour in cartoons has been researched before (Forceville 2005; Tsakona 2009b; EL Refaie 2009a; Abdel-Raheem 2018). However, the study has been more data centric and has focused on the application of multimodal theory rather putting forth an illustrative model on the working of humour. Moreover, the studies analyse how the one-to-one interaction between verbal text and the image affects humour. Whereas, the current study, to give a holistic approach, taking into consideration the verbal and the visual text recognises the multimodal approach. However, the goal of the study is to theorise and identify the factors that lead to transmutation. The factors involved in verbal communication and the factors that determine the rhetoricity of an image, prescribed by Barthes and Jakobson provide the basic framework to analyse the performance of humour. With this in mind, the present study specifically uses Jakobson and Barthes for constructing a model.

70 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

3.3 Model of Linguistic Communication Roman Osipovich Jakobson (1896–1982) was a Russian-born American linguist who founded the Prague Linguistic Circle (1926) and Moscow Linguistic Circle (1915) and laid the foundation of structural linguistics. Described as a “Polyhistor” (van Schooneveld 1), Jakobson is a significant theorist, known for his contribution in the theory of poetics, linguistics and semiotics and expanding its approach to anthropology, neurology and communication theory (Kučera 871). Influenced by the poems of Majakovskij and Velimir Xlebniko (Russian futurist poets), Jakobson looked into the structures and forms of the verses and soon became a leading figure in Russian formalism, which led to the formation of the Moscow Linguistic Circle. By 1920, he had shifted to Czechoslovakia, where he formed the Prague Linguistic Circle and laid the foundation for structural poetics. Subsequently, during his years in Prague, he also formalised theories on phonology. During his transit period in Scandinavia he worked on the theory of language concerning aphasia and specifically focused on language acquisition by children. After he shifted to America, he founded the New York Linguistic Circle and taught at Columbia, Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His stay in America between the 1940s and 1982, has been noteworthy for the remarkable works like Child Language, Aphasia and Phonological Universals (1941); Fundamentals of Language (1956); “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics” (1958); On Linguistic Aspects of Translation (1959); Phonological Studies (1962); Word and Language (1971); Main Trends in the Science of Language (1973); Questions de poetique (1973); Six Lectures of Sound and Meaning (1978); The Sound Shape of Language (1979); Brain and Language (1980); The Framework of Language (1980) and Language in Literature (1980). Through these works on poetics, Jakobson argues that “poetics” is not exclusive to literature rather to any form of discourse involving the method of using language. This pervasiveness of poetics later influenced critics like Barthes who applied the theory to semiotics and other related fields. In 1958 Jakobson presented a paper, “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”, in a symposium at Bloomington, which described the functions of language. Defining poetics as the one dealing with the “problems

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

71

of verbal structure” and which attempts to solve the question “what makes a verbal message a work of art” (Jakobson 350), he generalises that poetics is important to linguistics (the science of language) as well as semiotics (the theory of signs). Jakobson delineates six factors of verbal communication and analyses the poetic function in relation to it. He also discusses the two modes of arrangement, that of, selection and combination, based on similarity/dissimilarity and contiguity (Jakobson 358) and formulates the theories of metaphor and metonymy. This paper is important in rendering the skeleton of the communicative model of humour. By drawing the factors necessary for verbal communication, the model extends it to the communication of humour. Summarising the argument of Jakobson as “our experience of the formative elements of existence—perception, consciousness and communication —is inseparable from our encounters with language” (1), Richard Bradford comments that the position of Jakobson as a critic becomes indispensable in communication studies, as he considers language to be inseparable from perception, consciousness and communication. This, in turn, points towards the affective nature of language and serves as the operating platform of the present model.

3.3.1 Constitutive Factors of Verbal Communication The main focus of Jakobson is the verbal as he considers linguistics as the “global science of verbal structure” (350). He analyses the process of the speech act thus (Fig. 3.1):

Context Message Addresser -------------------------------------------------------------------Addressee Contact Code Fig. 3.1  Constitutive factors of verbal communication. Source: Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language, edited by Thomas Sebeok, MIT P, 1960, pp. 353

72 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The addresser is the one who initiates the communication and encodes the message. The addressee receives and decodes the message at the other end. The decoding of the message will depend on the Context (socio-­ cultural milieu), the Contact (channel of communication) and the Code (common ground for communication). The communication is deemed successful when the encoder and the decoder have a common code and a psychological connection. Along with the process of the speech act, Jakobson also integrates six functions of language. These functions mainly look at the linguistic operation. They are as follows: emotive, conative, referential, poetic/aesthetic, phatic and metalinguistic functions (357). The emotive function is the addresser’s response to the situation. It is the expressive function of the addresser which shows his/her attitude towards the message. Jakobson considers interjections as the best medium for the emotive function. The emotive function decides the mood of the communication and the intention of the addresser. The conative function has its orientation toward the addressee. It is the addressee’s response to the situation. Grammatically, they represent the vocative and the imperative expressions. The referential function is the context and mainly looks at what the message refers to and is equivalent to the denoted message. The phatic function defines the contact and the set of formulas which are employed to prolong the communication. Further, Jakobson differentiates between two levels of languages: the object language (speaking about the objects) and the metalanguage (which speaks about the language). The metalinguistic function is the medium through which the message is communicated. The inquiries the addresser and the addressee make to ensure whether they share the same code, represent the metalinguistic function. The poetic or the aesthetic function mainly showcases the message and evaluates the form of message (Fig. 3.2). The scheme of functions which constitute the factors of communication are given below: Based on the above model the researcher proposes a communicative model of humour as seen in political cartoons (Fig. 3.3). The model begins with the communication cycle initiated by the cartoonist or the humourist who is the addresser and the encoder of the message. The cartoon resulting from a political event or social happening comes out as an expression. The humour content in the cartoon is the

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

73

Referential Poetic/Aesthetic Emotive ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Conative Phatic Metalinguistic Fig. 3.2  Functions of verbal communication. Source: Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language, edited by Thomas Sebeok, MIT P, 1960, pp. 357

Fig. 3.3  Linguistic framework of humour

message. As the cartoon gets published in the newspaper, it is received by the reader or the audience. The newspaper in which the cartoon gets published is the contact or the physical channel. The publication mode of the text makes a difference to the range and the impact of communication. The category of text publication represents the medium in which the cartoons get published. Political cartoons which are graphic by nature communicate through the visual language. The codes in this communication cycle are the visual metaphors, symbols and signs the cartoonist uses to

74 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

communicate with the reader. While Jakobson’s model does not claim to evaluate the success or the consequence of the communication, the model goes a step further to analyse the success and the failure of humour. The researcher has modified Jakobson’s model by including the interaction and reaction phases. The model primarily represents the movement of the language of humour. Unlike the models by Giles et al. and Suls which follow a linear sequence, the model presented in this chapter shows a cyclical communication, thereby, accounting for dynamic waves of interaction and reaction. The phase of interaction is when the audience completely identifies with the humour presented by the cartoonist. This phase indicates the success of humour and how the audience establish an accommodative relationship with the cartoonist. It also represents the positive affect cycle: affect being “the evolved cognitive and physiological response to the detection of personal significance” (Lupia and Menning 335). Here, it represents the positive evaluation and identification that the reader is able to generate through the cartoon. This stage indicates the success of the common code between the cartoonist and the reader. The phase of reaction happens when the audience unpredictably cross the assumption of the cartoonist and give a new interpretation to the cartoon. Rather than misinterpretation this is a phase of “neo-interpretation” as the audience progress a step further than the predicted calculation of the cartoonist and interpret the cartoon differently than what was originally intended. The reactive phase also indicates the failure of humour to amuse the audience, and how, in turn, it has hurt the sentiment of the audience. The wave reaction shows the dis-ease it has caused among the readers. On the other hand, one can also consider the reactive phase as a disease, as it breeds ill feelings which becomes contagious as it is passed on virally. This stage indicates how the cartoon becomes controversial and shows the cartoonist in a negative light. The cycle of cognition can either begin with the phase of interaction and then lead to reaction or vice-versa. Shankar’s Ambedkar cartoon, when it was published in 1949, was welcomed smilingly by the readers as it mocked the pace at which Constitution Drafting Committee was moving. The same cartoon when it was published in the textbook in 2006 became controversial and generated a huge dissent.

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

75

Here, the communication of humour in the cartoon first follows the phase of interaction followed by reaction. The Aseem Trivedi cartoons generated a cycle of reaction and then led to interaction. Trivedi’s cartoons were published in 2012 as part of the anti-corruption campaign. It became controversial when the cartoonist was alleged to have insulted the national symbols and so was charged with sedition. The communication cycle of Aseem Trivedi’s cartoons first generated an outright reaction and later led to an interactive phase after the charges of sedition were dropped in 2012. The infinite cycle of interaction and reaction shows the infinite combinations in which the consequences of humour can happen. Either it may first strike a chord with the audience or hurt their sentiments. How does one arrive at the phase of interaction and reaction? The cognition cycle of interaction and reaction is based on the impression and the perception of the readers. Impression and perception form the mental content which influences the readers in comprehending a cartoon. The way the cartoonist influences the reader also depends on the impact of the impression and the perception. In this model, impression represents the aspect of feeling, which is the collection of memories and the experience the reader accumulates. Perception includes the thinking or the rational thought in which the reader indulges, constituting the contemporary influences, trends and ideas. Thus, impressions are more static in nature as they accumulate to form a solid memory. Perceptions, on the other hand, are temporary in nature as they change with the new developments in the social surroundings. When John Locke defined perception as the one formed “only when the mind receives the impression” (81), he inadvertently stated that impressions were the foundation upon which perceptions were built. The idea of perception also comes closer to Hume’s definition of perception as what “we are immediately and directly aware of ” (Lacewing). The difference Hume brings between impressions and ideas are functional in this model also. According to Hume, impressions are associated with the feeling which include the sensation of the mind and the reflection of the experience. Ideas, on other hand, are faint imitations of the impressions and are “less forcible and lively” (Bailey and O’Brien 35).

76 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

What Hume differentiates as impressions and ideas are proposed in the model as impressions and perceptions. Impressions are the deep frames formed in the mind through memories. Perception is how images are built based on the input the mind contemporarily receives from the surroundings. Perceptions, thus, change with the circumstances. Impressions and perceptions also loosely correlate with the diachronic and the synchronic mode of study. The diachronic study evaluates over a period of time, while the synchronic looks at the field with a simultaneity of occurrence of the cases. Thus, impressions come from a cumulative study while perceptions are formed from the concurrent study. Through the inclusion of impression and perception in the model, the researcher attempts to bring forth the affective and the cognitive stages. Impressions are part of the affective study as they are emotional and spontaneous in nature. Perceptions, on the other hand, represent the cognitive operation, where the mind rationally processes the thought. Thus, with the coordinates of cartoonist, cartoon, reader, impression, perception, newspaper/textbook and the visual, the model derives the communicative framework of humour as seen in political cartoons (Table 3.1). The above table stipulates the corresponding coordinates. The cartoonist is the addresser in the communication cycle who brings forth an emotive expression towards the current political and social events. The cartoon becomes the reading with an implicit message when humour is its major language. The reader receives the message and he/she is the addressee to whom the cartoonist bears the responsibility of making them aware. The way the reader interprets and refers to the cartoon will depend on his/her impressions and perceptions. It will vary from person to person, as Table 3.1  Coordinates of communicative framework of humour Addresser

Cartoonist/humourist

Emotive

Addressee Message Context Contact

Reader/audience Cartoon Impression and perception Mode of publication: Newspaper/ textbook Visual

Conative Poetic/aesthetic Referential Phatic

Code

Metalinguistic

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

77

experiences, memories and the comprehension of an event are personal. In the current case study, the newspaper and the school textbooks become the physical contact through which the audience communicate with the cartoonist. Visual language is the code that the cartoonist seeks as a common ground to communicate with the audience. As Jakobson’s model is linguistic in nature the prime focus has been the verbal aspects and oral conversations. It does not factor the dynamicity of the visual language. Therefore, to expand the scope of the model, the researcher further explicates the visual code through Barthes’ “Rhetoric of the Image”.

3.4 Model of Visual Communication A methodology to decode the visual language of the cartoon is imperative to the current study. Koestler commenting on the political cartoon states: The political cartoon, at its best, is a translation into visual imagery of a witty topical comment; at its worst, a manipulation of symbols. The symbols trigger off memories and expectations; the narrative content of the cartoon is taken in by visual scanning, with possibly a delayed-action effect due to the time needed for ‘seeing the joke’. (70)

Primarily, political cartoons are the visualisation of humorous comments and secondarily they are “manipulation of symbols” which are capable of provoking sentiments. The “delayed-action effect” suggests the dynamic nature of the symbols which can generate multiple interpretations. The study of the controversial cartoons stands as a case in point, where the embodiment of humour (the “visual imagery of a witty topical comment”) and the level of rhetoricity of the image (the “manipulation of symbols”) must be closely evaluated. The first part of model delineates a framework for the embodiment of the language of humour; the study can now turn towards the rhetoricity of the image. Following in the footsteps of Jakobson, Roland Barthes (1915–1980) emerged as a semiotician who was an influential structuralist critic as well as a dominant post-structuralist. He began his philosophical writings on

78 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the fields of writing and the system of signs in Writing Degree Zero (1953). Similar to Jakobson, Barthes too has been a man of varied interests and explored the stream of cultural studies through Mythologies (1957), Critical Essays (1964) and The Eiffel Tower and Other Mythologies (1964). Mythologies, describing the significance of myth and the system of signification, presents a collection of essays where Barthes comments on wrestling, wine, fashion, images and advertisements. Image Music Text is another seminal collection of essays which shows the traces of structuralism as well as post-structuralism in his work. The first half including “Rhetoric of the Image”, “Third Message”, focuses on the structural analysis of an image. “The Death of the Author”, found in the second part of the anthology, marks the beginning of post-structuralism, where Barthes breaks the notion of authority of the author in the communication network happening after the production of a work of art. S/Z (1970) and The Pleasure of the Text show the shift in Barthes’ focus towards the text. Barthes is one of the earliest theorists who provided a framework for evaluating multimodal texts (Martinec 2000; Fraiberg 2010; Serafini 2011); he furthered the study of sign system and established the study of visual semiotics. In “Rhetoric of the Image” Barthes differentiates three kinds of messages which would decide the impact of an image. Barthes makes the study of a photographic image (a Panzani advertisement poster), to analyse “how…meaning get[s] into the image? Where…it end[s]?” (32) and “how…analogical representation (the ‘copy’) produce[s] true systems of signs” (32). Advertisements, unlike other images influence the audience in the span of a few furtive glances. The ephemeral nature of ads urged Barthes to study the effect of the visual sign system in building ideologies. Analysing the advertisement, a still image, Barthes gives a critical framework to evaluate the messages encoded in an image which are connotative (hidden) and denotative (literal/superficial). The messages become powerful as the visual representations are the “simulacra” that construct a reality of their own to conceal the truth. Differentiating between the messages found in an image, Barthes recognises the following three messages: linguistic, non-coded iconic (denoted) and coded iconic (connoted).

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

79

(a) Linguistic message—Any image contains a linguistic message in the form of caption, dialogue or speech balloon. The linguistic message is the one which is received immediately by the reader. The code here is the language with which the reader is familiar. In the current study, English language is the linguistic code. Similar to Jakobson’s code, here the linguistic code establishes the common communicative ground between the speaker and the receiver. The message is twofold as it can be either connotational or denotational. The word “Panzani” in the advertisement not just conveys the name of the firm but also refers to Italian culture. The function of the image is further divided into anchorage and relay. Image being “polysemous”, containing a “chain of floating signs”, the anchorage helps the reader to identify the “elements of the scene and the scene itself ” (39). Through the anchorage the cartoonist directs the reader towards a message, presumed by the artist, by making them accept certain signs and reject others through a method of “subtle dispatching” (Barthes 40). It becomes a medium of control, restricting the freedom of interpretation. Relay on the other hand is found in cartoons and comic strips. Here, the written text maintains a complementary relationship with the image and becomes polysemous, which requires a higher level processing. It leads the action of thought in an image. Both the functions, of anchorage and of relay, can co-exist in an image. But when the communication is direct, the function of anchorage is dominant allowing the image to communicate the complex idea. When the relay takes charge, the information processing becomes more complex. (b) Coded iconic message (symbolic/cultural/connoted)—The coded iconic message is the sign that “stands in a relation of redundancy with the connoted sign of the linguistic image” (Barthes 34). The image of pasta or spaghetti with the half-opened packet of vegetables, further communicates the idea of an Italian cuisine. The image ­visually expands the connotation of the linguistic image “Panzani”. Here, in the advertisement through the French language the company attempts to bring the “Italianicity”. The connoted message analyses the arbitrary nature of the image as it is interpreted by the

80 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

receivers according to their whim. Barthes defines the dynamicity of an image as the one “constituted by an architecture of signs drawn from a variety of lexicons” (47). This also proves how the reception that an image receives is unpredictable as a single image grants umpteen interpretations. The connoted message decides the rhetoricity which is cultural in nature (35). (c) Non-coded iconic message (denoted)—It is the “perceptual message” (36) where the literal and superficial meaning of the image is conveyed. It is literal and a “message without a code” (36), which helps in contextualising the covert messages by “naturalizing the symbolic message” (45). Here, the relationship between the signifier and the signified is “quasi-tautological” (36). They are the first signs of an image which “require only a knowledge which is in some sort implanted as part of the habits of a very widespread culture” (34). With the analysis of the three kinds of messages, Barthes concludes that the rhetoric of an image is dictated by the interpretation of cultural and symbolic message. The rhetoric of an image turns unpredictable as “the number of readings of the same lexical unit or lexia (of the same image) varies according to individuals” (46). The variations in the readings “depends on the different kinds of knowledge- practical, national, cultural [and] aesthetic” (46). Defining lexicon as “a portion of the symbolic plane (of language) which corresponds to a body of practices and techniques” (46) a single image generates various lexicons depending on the individual’s body of practices. Thus, the second part of the model explicates how the rhetoric of the visual is crucial to interpreting an image, which depends on cultural signification. According to Barthes, the language of the image is the totality of utterances emitted as well as the totality of utterances received (47). The same is applicable to the language of humour in political cartoons. The rhetoric of humour in cartoons depends on three kinds of messages. The captions and dialogues that a cartoon carries constitute the linguistic message. Since the cartoons chosen for this study are multimodal which perform through captions and visual metaphors, they constitute the coded iconic and non-coded messages which communicate the implicit and the explicit messages. In the Barthesian sense each sign is interpreted

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

81

according to one’s culture. The signification of a humorous statement, therefore, depending upon a person’s socio-cultural background may end in laughter or anger. It is at the level of coded iconic message that the transition of humour happens as the messages coded in the humorous statement may not be deciphered the way the cartoonist assumes and it erupts into negative reaction.

3.5 Multimodal Integration of the Model The categories of impression and perception play a pivotal role in accommodating Barthes and Jakobson. What Jakobson terms as the code is further explicated by Barthes’ linguistic message. The code, then, in the model is inclusive of the visual and the linguistic. Here, the linguistic message encompasses the caption of the cartoon. Political cartoons which are multimodal in nature are constituted by the linguistic and the visual codes. The linguistic message in the current study, inclusive of a major collection of Indian political cartoons in English, presents the English language as the common code. In some of the cartoons, Hindi has also been used. Thus, English and Hindi constitute the code of the select cartoons. The coded iconic messages and non-coded iconic messages further are accommodated through the stages of impression and perception. Impressions, defined as the accumulated memory and experience which constitute the culture, are synonymous with the coded-iconic message. They play a key role in interpreting the message historically, socially and culturally. Perceptions on the other hand are similar to the non-coded iconic message. The message is drawn mainly from the objects which are “having-been-there” (Barthes 44). As non-coded iconic message envisages the “spatial immediacy and the temporal anteriority” (44), the category of perceptions corresponds to it. Perceptions define how the immediate surroundings and the circumstances influence the interpretation (Table 3.2). The above table correlates the points of intersection between Barthes, Jakobson and the communicative model. What Jakobson proposes as code is further expanded as the visual and the linguistic message in the current model. The analyses of the visual and the linguistic messages

82 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Table 3.2  Correlation of Barthes and Jakobson Communicative model Visual/linguistic Impression Perception

Roland Barthes Linguistic message Coded iconic message Non-coded iconic message

Roman Jakobson

Function of language

Code Context

Metalinguistic Referential

Context

Referential

Fig. 3.4  Conjoined model

constitute the metalinguistic function. Impressions, which represent culture, are the primary context through which the reader relates to the image. Perception, which comprises the current settings and influences, is the non-coded iconic message as it communicates with the reader instantly. This is the secondary context through which the reader refers to the image (Fig. 3.4). The conjoined model is as follows:

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

83

3.6 Viability of the Model The model supplements the theoretical field of humour comprehension as it presents a non-linear diametric relationship of humour with reactions which are, largely, unpredictable. Jakobson’s process of communication and Barthes’ rhetoricity/impact of visual communication are linear in nature as they deal with only one aspect of the communication cycle. Both the models are inadequate to explain the success and failure of communication. The multidimensional model focuses on artful communication of emotion as well as showcases the transition between the emotional and the rational quotient as it turns between the cycles of cognition and affect of humour. A pragmatic angle of investigation is significant to the model. Pragmatics, seen as “a field addressing communicative processes (or language as deployed by its users) and its relation to language form, coupled with the cognitive and socio-cultural study of language use” (Dynel 2), make it an essential part of theorising through the model as humour, particularly, in cartoons which are subject to regional and local regimes. One who is familiar with the political developments of a country and its culture alone is capable of capturing the sense of the cartoon. The pragmatic angle is further expanded through the categories of impression and perception. Unlike the examined models which do not fully explain how the reiteration of the joke or visual humour generates laughter, the model is built to explicate how the reiteration of the same cartoon can create a difference of response. The examined models which are based on information processing present a joke situation which saturates with its resolution. What happens when one receives a resolved joke? How does humour perform when iterated? The model explains this phenomenon of reiteration as the interference caused by impression and perception. Cartoons, which are spared a few seconds of gaze, thrive on stereotypes and familiar metaphors. This, in turn, aids the readers in quick cognition. The reiteration or the use of clichés, and stereotypes, thus, constitutes the basic communicative language of the cartoons. Through the influence of impression and perception, the model also theorises how the role of stereotypes in humour impacts the reiteration of the cartoons.

84 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The model specifically focuses the ambiguous nature of humour. The coded iconic message, impressions and perceptions mainly interpret the polysemous language of visual humour. Compared to a linear model of information processing, here, the model gives a cyclical structure which generates waves of interaction and reaction. The model turns accommodative as it conjoins the cognitive and the affective through impressions and perceptions. The model also makes a substantial contribution to the field of political cartoons that trigger visual humour when compared to the previous models which primarily focus on verbal jokes and humour.

3.7 Implementation of the Model Before we analyse the Ambedkar cartoon, let us have a look at an international cartoon which had turned controversial. Barry Blitt’s cartoon for the cover of The New Yorker in 2008 titled “The Politics of Fear” garnered negative reviews as it had shown Barack Obama in a Muslim garb and his wife Michelle in a military attire. This image was published right before the presidential elections. As the cartoon was published the audience was divided on its reception. On one hand there was negative reception as they thought the image was stereotypical which exploited the popular perception of Obama and his Arabic middle name. On the other hand, editor of The New Yorker, David Remnick, supported the cartoonist for his humorous take, as he says “The fact is, it’s not a satire about Obama – it’s a satire about the distortions and misconceptions and prejudices about Obama” (Culture Trip). Let us further analyse the image in terms of impressions and perceptions. The take of the cartoonist, Barry Blitt, is ambiguous as it is not clear whether he is making fun of the popular perception or merely utilising the stereotypical representation. The cartoon was published during the presidential elections. As election is the context it is not clear whether the cartoonist is targeting Obama or sympathising with him. There are no linguistic messages in the cartoon other than the title of The New Yorker as the cartoon appeared in the cover page. The cartoon which appears on the cover page of the magazine warrants the reader that the cartoon is satirical and sarcastic by nature. The characters of Michelle and Obama

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

85

are the non-coded iconic message as it points that the cartoon is about candidates for the presidential election. As the ambiguity continues the coded iconic message transmutes the humour. In the background one can see that the flag of the U.S.A. is burning and there is a portrait which seems to be of an Islamic man with beard and white turban. The portrait imbibes the stereotypical image of an Islamic priest. It is from this state the waves of reaction emerge. Here the clash between impression and perception creates the tension. The series of violence and attacks by the terrorists, who have majorly been Muslims, has already created a negative impression. Amidst this, the common perception of the Arabic Middle Name of Obama (Hussein) fuelled these impressions and there was a buzz among the public whether Obama is Christian or Muslim. The connections between politicians and terrorist attacks were randomly made and there were only a few discussions where the public expressed their concerns regarding national securities. As the medium of publication is magazine the impact stays longer until the new edition arrives. The communication model with coordinates of impression and perception helps one to delineate and understand how the function of humour transforms with the course of time. Now let us analyse the communication of humour in the Ambedkar cartoon, which sparked the cartoon row in India. The cartoon by Keshav Shankar Pillai was published on 28 August 1949 in Shankar’s Weekly. The cartoonscape portrays Dr B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution of India, riding a snail and Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India, poised to strike surrounded by an anonymous crowd that is enjoying the spectacle. Women draped in sarees, with their ghungats, stand along with their children while the men wearing turbans and dhotis represent the common folk, especially the agrarian populace of India. The smiling faces of the crowd symbolise the spectacle of nation-building, post-independence. With wide grins on their faces, the crowd is shown laughing at the national leaders, Ambedkar and Nehru, who have, literally, become a laughingstock. First, the cartoon is humorous as it shows the incongruity of statesmen with an exalted ambition of building the Constitution in time. However, in reality, it is a nerve-wracking snail’s progress in the drafting of the Constitution. The stoic expressions of Nehru and Ambedkar show their

86 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

perseverance to build a better India. The incongruity in the cartoon also lies in the representation because instead of riding a stallion or a horse, Ambedkar is riding a snail, symbolising the snail’s pace of the Constitution drafting process. The crowd is laughing at the pageant and the fragile position of the Indian state. Shankar, as a cartoonist, takes a dig at the pace at which the nation-building process is happening. The cartoon comes out as an expression of the anxiety and curiosity of the people who have been patiently waiting for the nation to come into being. Two sets of readers can be attributed to the cartoon. The first set is the intended audience of the cartoonist who belong to the 1950s and who were able to associate with the spirit of humour as presented in the cartoon. The second set includes the readers of 2012 and the students for whom the NCERT textbooks were prescribed. The word “Constitution” emblazoned on the snail is the linguistic message, which conveys to its readers that the issue that the cartoonist is raising is about the Constitution, thus the gigantic snail narrows the perception of the readers to Constitution. The term “Constitution” acts as an anchorage because it limits the freedom of interpretation. If the term “Constitution” was absent, the snail pace would then be attributed to any event or even to the leadership of both Nehru and Ambedkar. Perhaps it is this anchorage of the cartoon that curtailed the curiosity and kept the reaction of the audience in check in the 1950s. With the direct signification and reference to the context, the readers of the 1950s are able to interact with the cartoon. The caricatures of Nehru and Ambedkar are the non-coded iconic message which directly communicates with the reader that the purpose of the cartoonist is to depict the Constitution Drafting Committee. In Don’t spare me Shankar, the title below the cartoon reads: “Ambedkar was chairman of the Constitution drafting committee” (“Don’t Spare” 22), which reinforces that the major foci of the cartoon were the Constitution and Ambedkar. The image of Ambedkar riding the snail (the Constitution) also directly indicates that the constituent assembly and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee is the main topic of the cartoon. The indications are also clear that the cartoonist particularly aims at mocking the pace of drafting. At the primary level of signification, the act of whipping by Nehru indicates the responsibility of the first prime minister of Independent India, to

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

87

guide the committee and make it reach its end successfully. It shows how Nehru is involved in a race to finish the project. With both Ambedkar and Nehru holding the whip, the cartoon further conveys how the leaders are in a race to complete the drafting of the Constitution. But the cartoon transmutes at the level of the coded iconic message. Shankar was perceived as casteist in his portrayal of the upstanding Nehru with a whip behind Ambedkar who is seen flogging the snail. This interpretation hurt the sentiments of the Dalits and the cartoon in its iterated state became the eye of a political storm. As Dr B.R. Ambedkar was the messiah of the Dalits, the idea of Nehru whipping Ambedkar was blasphemous. The subject of humour had shifted from the snail (the Constitution) to Ambedkar himself. The simplification and exaggeration of his portrait along with the laughing faces that bear witness to the public insult to Ambedkar was an unexpected reading; it is at this level of the coded iconic message that the waves of reaction begin. With more than 60 years having lapsed the context, culture and symbolic significations have, expectedly, undergone change, thus, creating the climate for transmutation. The constituent assembly met first on 9 December 1946. India, with its newly attained independence on 15 August 1947, appointed Dr Ambedkar as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee which was formed on 29 August 1947. The constituent assembly accepted the Draft Constitution on 26 November 1949 and on 26 January 1950, finally, the Constitution officially came into effect. Thus, the snail’s pace of the drafting process picturises the three years the assembly took to shape the Constitution. The enormous size of the snail indicates the large size of the Constitution of India, which is the longest written Constitution in the world, having borrowed from the Constitutions of the U.K., the U.S.A., Ireland, Australia, France, Canada and the erstwhile Soviet Union. When the cartoon was drawn on 28 August 1949, exactly two years after Ambedkar’s appointment as the chairman of the Constitution on 29 August 1947, Shankar, as a cartoonist, was historically commenting on the slow pace of drafting of the Constitution. The cartoonist cleverly embeds humour into the cartoon through incongruity. The title of Shankar’s collection of cartoons, Don’t spare me Shankar, in fact, proves how Nehru as a leader encouraged Shankar’s “politicking”. Furthermore,

88 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the interactive phase of the cartoon is established through the statements of Sudhir Dar and Prakash Ambedkar, Dr Ambedkar’s grandson, who attests that there were no objections towards the cartoon at the time of its publication (Zaman 2012). The reception of the cartoon, however, changes in 2012—63 years after its publication, the cartoon has been alleged to hurt caste sentiments. The cartoon was included in the NCERT Political Science textbook for class XI in 2006 titled, “Indian Constitution at work” in the chapter namely, “Indian Constitution: Why and How”. The note under the cartoon in the textbook says: “Cartoonist’s impression of the ‘snail’s pace’ with which the Constitution was made; the making of the Constitution took almost three years. Is the cartoonist commenting on this fact? Why do you think, did the Constituent Assembly took so long to make the Constitution?” (“Indian Constitution”, 18). The note primarily asks the students to analyse the reasons for the delay in drafting the Constitution. The ambiguities of the cartoon increase as it is introduced in the textbook, which have sites of political contestation. At whom is the crowd laughing? Is the crowd laughing at Nehru or Ambedkar? Is the crowd laughing at the act of flogging or the pace of drafting? Is it laughing at the system or the caste prejudice? Rather than making fun of the Chairman, the note asks the students to discuss the challenges that are involved while framing the Constitution which forms the very foundation of a country’s sovereignty. However, 63 years later, the subject of the cartoon perceived by the audience has shifted from the Constitution to Ambedkar. After the reiteration of the cartoon in the textbook in 2006, on 11 May 2012, Thirumavalavan, a Member of Parliament (MP) from Tamil Nadu raised the alarm that the cartoon hurt the caste sentiments and insulted Ambedkar. It was further pointed out that the cartoon propagated caste discrimination as Nehru who belonged to the upper caste was towering over Ambedkar who came from the Dalit community. In the wake of such a reading, the community urged the government to remove the cartoon from the textbook. The gap of 63 years furthers the transmutation of humour. The contextual difference between the temporal frame of the 1950s and 2012 creates a difference in the influence of impression and perception of the cartoon. India in the 1950s was faced with the challenge of nation building, which

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

89

had recently achieved independence from the colonial government after 200 years of enslavement. The perception of the cartoon in the 1950s directly strikes a chord with the audience who have been witnessing new developments and challenges in the formation of India as an independent nation. The laughter of the crowd reassures how the citizens of the 1950s are laughing at the vanity of the national leaders and the incongruous results they have accomplished. The reactive phase of the cartoon begins with the influence of impressions. India of 2012 had new challenges to face like inequality, discrimination, economic crisis and so on. As the ruling governments changed, the concerns of the country also changed. As the citizens collectively moved from the phase of nation-building, along with the nature of divisive politics, the people were reminded of the impressions: the history of discrimination and the torture they faced as Dalits. The changed positions of Nehru and Ambedkar in the national history further promotes the thought of discrimination. Over the course of time, the admiration and stature of Ambedkar increased in comparison to Nehru’s. Ambedkar has been admired by millions as a living God who fought for the cause of the Dalits. The rise of Dalit consciousness exacerbates the transmutation of the cartoon’s humour. The positions of the whip: the straight whip ready to strike and the curled whip showing Ambedkar whipping the snail, symbolise the master-­slave relation. Nehru, the upper caste leader is poised to strike and Ambedkar, who is apparently about to be whipped portrays the Dalit community, the working class. The slowness of the snail is transferred to Ambedkar who is caricatured with a huge head and heavy body. The difference in their attires also furthers the discrimination. While Nehru, an educated upper caste leader of the nation is shown wearing a kurta-­ pyjama and a waistcoat, representing the heritage of India, Ambedkar, on the other hand, is shown wearing a three-piece suit, implying the “mimicking phase” of the “upstart” who struggles to belong to the elite circle with his attire. Though the representations of both Nehru and Ambedkar are stereotypical and make a faithful portrayal of the leaders, the readers are easily led to recognise them and see the frame as the tussle between tradition and modernity. The mode of publication of the cartoon is also an influential factor in the transmutation of humour. When the cartoon appears in a newspaper

90 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

there is a common code, a connection and a continuous communication between the reader and the cartoonist. The static column where the cartoon appears ensures a continuing bond with the reader. This chord is severed when the cartoon appears in a textbook after several years. The cartoon reappears in a new frame with a new set of readers. This strange communicative frame inevitably opens new interpretative spaces. Where newspapers and magazines address a general public, textbooks cater to a narrow set of audience. In this case, children between 14 and 17. A newspaper is relevant only for a day. Within a day one set of news is displaced and replaced by more sensational news. The cartoon which occupies a panel of few inches on the editorial page hardly captures the attention of the readers for more than 10 seconds. In comparison, the impact that a textbook creates is much bigger. After a revision, when the textbook is prescribed, it is read for 5–10 years where information is preserved and passed on, thereby the textbook has greater longevity. The cartoon above makes a detailed explication of the communicative framework of humour. The image is analysed through the categories of linguistic message, non-coded iconic message, coded iconic message, impressions, perception, interaction, reaction and mode of publication. Though the model recognises visual language as the primary code through which the communication happens between the cartoonist and the reader, the element or the factor/s by which the visual text is evaluated remains uncertain. Thus, in the second part of the model, the authors focus on metaphor as a means to measure the rhetoric of humour in the visual text.

Works Cited Secondary Sources Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed. “Multimodal Humour: Integrating Blending Model, Relevance Theory, and Incongruity Theory”. Multimodal Communication, vol. 7, no. 1, 2018. Adolphs, R., et al. “The Human Amygdala in Social Judgment”. Nature, no. 393, 1998, pp. 470–474.

3  A Communicative Framework of Humour 

91

Al-Momani, Kawakib, Muhammad A. Badarneh, and Fathi Migdadi. “A Semiotic Analysis of Political Cartoons in Jordan in Light of the Arab Spring”. HUMOR, vol. 30, no. 1, 2017, pp. 63–95. Bartolo, Angela, et al. “Humor Comprehension and Appreciation: An FMRI Study”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 18, no. 11, 2006, pp. 1789–1798. Bateson, Gregory. “The Position of Humour in Human Communication”. Motivation in Humor, edited by Jacob Levine. Routledge, 1969, pp. 159–166. Coulson, Seana. “Frame Shifting and Frame Semantics: Joke Comprehension on the Space Structuring Model”. Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research, edited by G. Brone et al, De Gruyter, 2015. Coulson, Seana and Robert F. Williams. “Hemispheric Asymmetries and Joke Comprehension”. Neuropsychologia, no. 43, 2005, pp. 128–141. Forceville, Charles. “Cognitive Linguistics and Multimodal Humour”, Bildwissenschaft: Zwischen Reflektion und Anwendung, edited by Klaus Sachs-­ Hombach, Von Halem, 2005, pp. 64–284 Ford, Thomas E., et al. “Affective Style, Humor Styles and Happiness”. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, vol. 10, no. 3, 2014, pp. 451–463. Fraiberg, S. “Composition 2.0: Toward a Multilingual and Multimodal Framework”. College Composition and Communication, no. 62, 2010, pp. 100–126. Goel, Vinod and Raymond J. Dolan. “Social Regulation of Affective Experience of Humor”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 19, no. 9, Sept. 2007, pp. 1574–1580. Graefer, Anne. “The Work of Humour in Affective Capitalism: A Case Study of Celebrity Gossip Blogs”. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organisation, vol. 16, no. 4, 2016, pp. 143–162. Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Dance, K. A. “Sense of Humour and Enhanced Quality of Life”. Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 13, no. 12, 1992, pp. 1273–1283. Kwon, Iksoo and Jung Hwi Roh. “Multimodality and Cognitive mechanisms: A Cognitive Semantics Analysis of Political Cartoons ”. Linguistic Research, vol. 35, no. 1, 2018, pp. 117–143. Marín-Arrese, Juana I. “Cognition and Culture in Political Cartoons”. Intercultural Pragmatics, vol. 5, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1–18. ———. “Cognition and Culture in Political Cartoons”. Intercultural Pragmatics, vol. 5, no. 1. “Political Cartoon Discourse: Creativity, Critique and Persuasion”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 22, 2019, pp. 117–134.

92 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Marinkovic, Ksenija, et al. “Right Hemisphere has the Last Laugh: Neural Dynamics of Joke Appreciation”. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, vol. 11, no. 1, 2011, pp. 113–130. Martinec, R. “Rhythm in Multimodal Texts”. Leonardo, vol. 33, no. 4, 2000, pp. 289–297. Mendiburo-Seguel, Andrés et al. “Exposure to Political Disparagement Humor and its Impact on Trust in Politicians: How Long Does it Last?” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 8, 2017, https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC574 3926/. Accessed 09 Sept. 2020. Pell, Marc. “Judging Emotion and Attitudes from Prosody Following Brain Damage”. Progress in Brain Research, no. 156, 2006, pp. 303–317. Popa, Diana E. “Televised Political Satire: New Theoretical Introspections”. Developments in Linguistic Theory, edited by Marta Dynel. John Benjamins. “Multimodal Metaphors in Political Environment”. Multimodality and Cognitive linguistics, edited by María Jesús Pinar Sanz, John Benjamins, 2015. Samson, Andrea et al. “Cognitive Humor Processing: Different Logical Mechanisms in Nonverbal Cartoons—An fMRI Study”. Social Neuroscience, vol. 3, no. 2, 2008, pp. 125–140. Serafini, Frank. “Expanding Perspectives for Comprehending Visual Images in Multimodal Texts”. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 54, no. 5, 2011, pp. 342–350. Shammi, P., and Stuss, D. T. “Humour Appreciation: A Role of the Right Frontal Lobe”. Brain, vol. 122, no. 4, 1999, pp. 657–666. Simpson, Paul. On the Discourse of Satire: Towards a Stylistic Model of Satirical Humor. John Benjamins, 2003. Wapner, W., Hamby, S., and Gardner, H. “The Role of the Right Hemisphere in the Apprehension of Complex Linguistic Materials”. Brain and Language, vol. 14, no. 1, 1981, pp. 15–33. Wild, B., et al. “Neural Correlates of Laughter and Humour”. Brain, vol. 126, no. 10, 2003, pp. 2121–2138. Yus, Francisco. “An Inference-Centered Analysis of Jokes: The Intersecting Circles Model of Humorous Communication”. Irony and Humor: From Pragmatics to Discourse, edited by L.R. Gurillo and B. Alvarado, John Benjamins, 2013, pp. 59–82. Zaman, Rana Siddiqui. “Can’t Our Politicians Laugh at Themselves?” The Hindu, 27 May 2012, https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-­page/cant-­our-­ politicians-­laugh-­at-­themselves/article3459923.ece. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019.

4 Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour

A study in political cartoons, inevitably, involves the deciphering of visual metaphors which constitute the semiotic layers of an image. Metaphors play a crucial role in the visual humour of political cartoons and they are a key tool to explore the ‘hermeneutics of the visual” (Heywood and Sandywell 1999). Jakobson in “Closing Statement” says: “the two basic modes of arrangement used in verbal behaviour [are] selection and combination” (358), which represent the two axes of operations for constructing and conveying the message. The Selection domain, representing the vertical axis, is based on “similarity, substitution, equivalence or contrast” (358). The Combination domain that lies on the horizontal axis, is based on “contiguity, juxtaposition” (358). Thus, Selection represents metaphor and Combination indicates metonymy. Where the Selection axis depends on choosing equivalent options, the Combination axis relies on syntactic connections. The metaphor is an integral part of political cartoons, which operate through the Selection domain, where the message is embedded in the framework of similarity, substitution, equivalence or contrast. When one contemplates a model, the inclusion of metaphor as a medium of the image’s rhetoric is imperative, as it is the “pervasive force © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_4

93

94 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

[which] organises language” (Jakobson 358). A study of metaphors in the political discourse, would help one to understand how it affects “political reasoning” (Bougher 2012) and thereby, offers insights about the logic of metaphorical patterning followed by the cartoonists. A study of metaphors will also enhance our knowledge about the process of the formation of political memory and will show how metaphors are crucial for constructing icons. This study examines the codes that constitute political cartoons by proposing a three-phase process of perceiving and cognizing conceptual metaphors in political cartoons. They are the domains of the source and the target which have been proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (256). To this, the authors propose the third dimension of the matrix. The three domains correspond to the cognitive, conceptual and representational components of the cartoon. The third domain of the matrix adopts culture as “webs of significance” (Geertz 5). Matrix is the pattern or frame of reference that keeps changing, allowing for different combinations and choices for metaphor conceptualisation through cultural motivation. By, extending the idea of conceptual metaphor for the purpose of theorising the use of humour in political cartoons, the study proposes to measure the suggestiveness of the language of humour.

4.1 Humour and Metaphor Why do we need metaphor as a tool to measure the rhetoric of humour? Political humour, which involves “communicative resource spotting, highlighting and attacking incongruities originating in political discourse and action” (Tsakona and Popa 6), thrives on the twin qualities of persuasiveness and effectiveness. Metaphor, as a rhetorical trope, contributes to the effectiveness of language by substituting one object or idea in terms of another. A study of metaphor in political humour (Gabin 1987; Mio 1997; Tsakona 2009b; Chovanec and Ermida 2012) emphasises how it is used “in political contexts… for ideological purposes [as] it activates unconscious emotional associations” (Charteris-Black 28). Thus, the rhetoric of humour in political cartoons—aims to sensitise people about, say, the flaws of democracy and effectively communicates the same through metaphor.

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

95

The conceptual duality between humour and metaphor is first recognised by Aristotle as the element of unexpectedness renders pleasure. Koestler is one of the earliest of the social critics to recognise the connection between humour and metaphor; he conjoins comic simile, hidden analogy and the poetic image in the same row in the triptych. He clubs caricature, schematisation and stylisation together, which further hints at the significance of metaphor in scheming and stylising political cartoons. Studies on the relationship of humour and metaphor (Mio and Graesser 1991; Grady 1999; Veale et al. 2006; Kirkmann 2009; Dynel 2009; Goatly 2012; Ritchie 2013; Carston and Wearing 2015) examine the commonality between the language of humour and the structure of metaphor and how they are interconnected and complement each other in the process of persuading. In the closeness between metaphor and humour, one notices that both duality and tension are common, where the “dual-structure of metaphor [combines] with a dual contrastive structure of humour” (Muller 111). The bisociation of ideas, where incompatible ideas are brought together to produce tension, leads to laughter. The incongruity theory that speaks about clashing expectations, again pinpoints at tension. The tension and the incongruity in humour comes closer to the diaphoric aspect of metaphor as it conveys “new meanings by emphasising dissimilarities” (Dynel 32). When it comes to metaphor, the tension between tenor and vehicle generates the creative space. The two-space model of Lakoff and Johnson, where two metaphorical concepts are cross-mapped through the source domain and the target domain, also denote the duality and tension that the metaphor endures. Thus, duality and tension are common to the language of humour and metaphor. Another commonality between language of humour and metaphor is that they are dependent on the factors of surprise and novelty (Dynel 31). The language of paradox also informs both humour and metaphor (Mio and Graesser 1991). However, paradox operates differently in humour and metaphor. As Pollio says “split reference yields humor if the joined items (or the act of joining them) emphasize the boundary or line separating them; split reference yields metaphor if the boundary between the joined items (or the act of joining them) is obliterated and the two items fuse to form a single entity” (248). When the two different concepts are

96 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

yoked together with the blurring of the boundary, it becomes a metaphor, but when the two different concepts make the boundary visible, it is humour. Kyratzis also mentions that a metaphor turns humorous when the boundaries of two concepts are “de-blended” and the dissimilarities are recognised (15). Interestingly, metaphor may also turn humorous through the fusion of boundaries (17). The conceptual blending theory recognises how the blended space enhances the working of humour and metaphor together. The paradoxical language is best seen at work through puns. Oscar Wilde’s Importance of Being Earnest appropriately suggests the simultaneous operation of metaphor and humour. Here, the title suggests the humorous events in the life of the character named Ernest. The women desire the “Earnest” which is also a metaphor for Victorian decorum and conventionality. The tension builds up in the play between the literal and the figurative when the women are deceived with two men dissembling with the name Ernest. In the above title, we see how the humorous pun and metaphor of “Earnestness” (which suggests being honest as well as the man named Earnest) are interconnected, and metaphor becomes an effective tool to pursue humour. Metaphor, thus, can be seen as an enabler of humour and a medium through which the language of humour can travel. The conclusion of Muller “searching for metaphors in co-text of humour related expression demonstrates that evaluation of humour and reasoning about its functions is strongly influenced by metaphors” (126), also makes a case in point that when the functioning of humour is studied the study of metaphor is also inevitable. Humour and metaphor follow the same methodology of information processing. When humour follows the Incongruity-Resolution Model, the processing terms of tension and ground implies the metaphorical frame. In the Incongruity-Resolution Model, first the incongruity is recognised and later it is resolved which leads to laughter. Similarly, the incompatibility between tenor and vehicle leads to the tension in the metaphor and the tension is resolved as soon as a common ground is found between the two (Mio and Graesser 1991). The cognitive process of both humour and metaphor, therefore, remains the same. Among the theories of metaphor, Conceptual metaphor comes closer to information processing of humour. When humour serves itself through opposing

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

97

scripts, the conceptual metaphors proceed through source and target. The use of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) will, therefore, enhance the study by delineating the conceptual mappings underwork in a humorous script. In the following section, through a discussion of the theories of metaphor, the relevance of CMT in humour research is established.

4.2 Theories of Metaphor The word “metaphor” is derived from meta (go beyond/cross over) and pherin/phora (to carry or bear) (Bourke 54). Etymologically, then, the metaphor has the ability to go beyond the ordinary and bear meanings which would bring in enhanced vision and imagination. In the fifteenth century, the word through the French term “metaphore/metafore” gained the meaning of being a medium of transference. Aristotle’s definition of metaphor in Poetics as “[that which] consists in giving the thing a name that belongs to something else” (qtd. in Bühler 391), points to the nature of metaphor as a literary device which functions as a medium for analogy. In course of time, the trope or the figures of speech expanded, and metaphor was recognised as one among them. In the Middle Ages, there was a shift from the stylistic and aesthetic point of view to the ethical and theological perspective. Following the age of renaissance, the use of metaphors in the works of John Donne saw a combination of reason and emotion. Peter Ramus, the French logician and rhetorician influenced the philosophers, as he reformed the logic of the rhetoric. Francis Bacon’s induction method also paved the way for the scientific development of the knowledge system. Following the influences of Bacon, Giambattista Vico revolutionised the concept of metaphor, who saw it as the basis of connecting different “perceptual and conceptual domains, creating new layers of meaning” (Danise 75). Defining truth as “a movable host of metaphors” (qtd. in Clark 65), Nietzsche equated reality with metaphors. In the twentieth century, the discourse on metaphor became critical. Refuting the Aristotelian idea of metaphor as a “mark of genius” and “eye of resemblances” (48) I.A. Richards in The Philosophy of Rhetoric (1936) proposed an interaction between the tenor (underlying idea/ principal subject) and the vehicle (medium through which the subject is

98 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

communicated). Richards divided the metaphor into sense (scientific) metaphor and emotive (poetic) metaphor. In a sense metaphor, “the shift of the word is occasioned and justified by a similarity between the object it is usually applied to and the new object” (Richards 220). Emotive metaphor “occurs through some similarity between the feelings the new situation and the normal situation arouse” (221). Richard’s division of metaphor showed how dynamic his approach has been as he considered the function of metaphor to be both affective and cognitive. Max Black elaborated the ideas of Richards in the essay “Metaphor” (1954) where he defined metaphor as an interaction between the focus (metaphorical usage) and the frames (rest of the sentence in which focus is placed). One of the earliest cognitive analyses of metaphor was done by Jakobson in “Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances” (1956). He differentiated metaphor and metonymy based on the domains of Selection and Combination, which correspond to similarity and contiguity, respectively. This theory serves as a critical link between literary criticism, structuralism and cognitive linguistics. Weller Embler further expanded the concept of metaphor in “Metaphor and Social Belief ” (1951), “Metaphor in Everyday Speech” (1959) and Metaphor and Meaning (1966) as he considered metaphor as a universal language playing a significant role in shaping social norms, beliefs and behaviour. In Metaphor and Reality (1962), Philip Ellis Wheelwright explicated the concept of ‘diaphor’, which saw metaphor as a juxtaposition and investigated the impact the social surroundings had on metaphor. Paul Ricoeur in The Rule of Metaphor: Creation in the Meaning of Language (1975) moved towards the hermeneutic point of view as he discussed the metaphoric reference through Nelson Goodman’s Language of Art. The critical discussions on metaphor grew further as it branched into the field of cognitive linguistics. The purpose of metaphor, thus, gradually shifted from the communicative to the cognitive operations. The conduit metaphor of Michael Reddy in “The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language About Language” (1979) and Koestler’s bisociation theory are considered the forerunners of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Taking inspiration from Reddy’s conduit

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

99

metaphor and Koestler’s bisociation, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s The Metaphors We Live By (1980) argue for metaphors to be social, personal, intuitive and directive in nature. Conceptual metaphors give a holistic approach as they define the conceptual system itself to be metaphorical in nature. The conceptual metaphors have been further expanded into multimodal metaphors in the works of Charles Forceville, where he says that the target and the source “are each represented exclusively or predominantly in different modes” (24). But in this particular study, though the model analyses verbal and the visual medium, rather than dealing with exclusive source and the target, the metaphorical analysis looks at the same target represented through different sources. Thus, for a systematic conceptual mapping to understand the impact of metaphors, CMT is preferred. The same argument also has been recognised by Tiffany Lin as she says: “scant studies on political cartoons have deemed the conceptual mode as an important aspect to analyze and thus have not investigated how the conceptual mode interacts with visual and verbal modes through various representations of multimodal metaphors with regard to specific political cartoon topics” (137–138). The creative metaphors also provide the plasticity to draw multiple interpretations and explore the ambiguous nature of humour (Dynel 2009). However, they provide a less of a theoretical stance based on which the possibilities for conceptual mapping can be drawn. CMT, therefore, gives a holistic and cognitive approach in analysing how metaphors navigate the language of humour.

4.3 Conceptual Metaphor Theory Metaphor, which was exclusively considered a poetic device, obtained a fresh perspective through George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT). Rather than perceiving metaphor as a literary device, Lakoff and Johnson conceived metaphor as a thinking pattern which makes intrusions into the quotidian. George Lakoff (1941–) is an American cognitive linguist and retired as a professor from the University of California, Berkeley. Currently, he is the Director of the Center for the Neural Mind & Society, Berkeley. He

100 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

began his academic career by working on the generative mechanics and has now established himself in the field of cognitive linguistics. As a critic, Lakoff is best known for reintroducing metaphors in the field of cognitive linguistics. He rose to fame with his work, Metaphors We Live By in 1980. The theory of conceptual metaphors was further expanded through its application in the socio-political life. In Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind (1987), he analyses metaphor as a cognitive structure and how they are culture specific. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor (1989) primarily evaluates how poems elaborate the cognitive metaphors and give a perception of the world. Explaining politics through cognitive science in Moral politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don’t (1996), Lakoff brings forth two models. He recognises the conservatives as “strict father model” and the liberals as “nurturant parent model”. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (2001) expands the idea further. In Philosophy in The Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought (1999), Lakoff and Johnson discuss how embodied experience and the body play a major role in conceiving and receiving metaphor. The idea of cognition and politics has been the present area of research. Lakoff’s works, Thinking Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision (2006), Whose Freedom?: The Battle over America’s Most Important Idea (2006), The Political Mind : Why You Can’t Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain (2008) and The Little Blue Book: The Essential Guide to Thinking and Talking Democratic (2012) discuss how cognitive frames work in political discourse. Lakoff has been significant in promoting the cognitive approach to metaphor. Mark Johnson (1949–) is an American philosopher and he is a professor at the University of Oregon. Specialising in cognitive neuroscience and philosophy of the mind, he co-authored two books with Lakoff. The wide application of CMT proves how the theory has become imperative to understand the working of metaphor and its influence on linguistic, biological and socio-political events. How do metaphors differ from conceptual metaphors? While the conventional metaphor is “a figurative expression…in which a word or phrase is shifted from its normal uses to a context where it evokes new

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

101

meanings” (“Metaphor” 760), the conceptual metaphor involves cognitive operations (Landau et al. 2014), that enable comprehension. From considering metaphor as a trope for comparison and substitution as in “my love is a red red rose” (Burns 318), conceptual metaphors are cognitive tools for understanding abstract concepts as in: “silence is gold”, “youth is a dark horse” and “ideas are food” (Lakoff and Johnson 47). Metaphors, from a classical point of view are more linguistic and are primarily used by the creators to serve the extraordinary. They serve as the best medium to express intense emotions. Conceptual metaphors, on the other hand, constitute the quotidian and have a more inclusive function. They are practical and rational by nature. Where the conventional metaphors indicate the creativity, conceptual metaphors, provide a clue to the thinking pattern and the operation of the logical mind. The former provides a narrow approach by restricting itself to literature and other artistic fields, while the latter promises a comprehensive and integrated approach. Conceptual metaphors are omnipresent and are crucial in the mental formation as they aid in understanding the abstract. Lakoff and Johnson considered metaphors as a reflection of experience and intuition of the mind. Conceptual metaphors, therefore, play a critical role in comprehending abstract thoughts as they are drawn from the embodied experience. CMT becomes significant in the present study as it provides a framework for the formation of meaning and for mapping of metaphor. The theory enables a comprehensive approach to “universality and culture-specificness of metaphor” (Kovecses xii). CMT was developed with an argument that “The concepts that govern our thought are not just matters of the intellect. They also govern our everyday functioning…everyday realities” (Lakoff and Johnson 4). By drawing examples from the everyday usage, Lakoff and Johnson show how the conceptual system is metaphorical. Take for example the phrase “TIME IS MONEY” (8). The following usages show how time, an abstract concept is understood through the concrete and tangible concept of money:

102 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

You’re wasting my time. I’ve invested a lot of time in her. (9)

Time is a “valuable commodity” and thus, its usage comes closer to that of money which is more tangible. Similarly, in the phrase “ARGUMENT IS WAR” (65), one tries to understand the abstract concept of argument through the concrete example of war, as one tries to “counter attack”, “defend” in the process of arguing. This process of drawing similarity happens voluntarily, proving how metaphors are fundamental to the act by which one lives and thinks. Conceptual metaphors thus, become the metalanguage which gives “thinking frames to discern hidden patterns” (Venkat and Balakrishnan 328). Lakoff and Johnson propose different kinds of conceptual metaphors. The structural metaphors see how “one concept is metaphorically structured in terms of another” (15). The examples of TIME IS MONEY, ARGUMENT IS WAR and LIFE IS A JOURNEY show how the abstract concepts of “time”, “argument” and “life” are metaphorically structured and paralleled with the concrete concepts of “money”, “war” and “journey”. In case of orientational metaphor, one concept is spatially oriented and organised with another concept. Metaphors which confront the tension between “up-down, in-out, front-back, on-off, deep-shallow, central-­ peripheral” (15) are orientational metaphors. For example: HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN I’m feeling up…My spirits sank. (16)

These orientational metaphors further suggest how the fundamental concepts are spatially organised, where “up” is related with health and prosperity, while “down” is associated with depression and illness. The next set, that of ontological metaphors, mainly looks at the objects through experiences, which gives various “ways of viewing events, activities, emotions, ideas, etc., as entities and substances” (26). The ontological metaphors give us the basis to refer and quantify the experience. The container metaphors, on the other hand, show how the visual field is bounded with space. They include the lands and the rocks. In the “tub of water” (31), tub becomes the container object, while the water is the container

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

103

substance. The different kinds of metaphors explained hitherto present the pervasive aspect of metaphor. The structural, orientational, ontological and container metaphors help one in the process of cognition. As to what facilitates the cognition, Lakoff and Johnson discuss the two domains of source and target. While conventional metaphors are explained through the domains of “tenor-vehicle” and “focus-frame”, conceptual metaphors are explained as a cognitive process that happens through the interaction of the “source” and the “target”. Target, here, is the primary or the main subject which is abstract in nature. Source is the secondary subject or the vehicle through which the primary subject is identified. Thus, the “source enables the target” (Kovecses 186). In the example, LOVE IS A JOURNEY (45), the abstract concept of love is understood by conceptual mapping of the abstract domain of love with the concrete domain of journey. Journey, that the physical body endures, is more concrete in nature. The source-target interaction, through conceptual mapping which gives rise to metaphorical entailments, is systematic, coherent and partial. It is partial because only a few features are taken to build the resemblance between two entities. In the example, THEORIES ARE BUILDING (53), one talks about the “foundation” of the theory, how it was constructed and structured by the theorists. But one hardly talks about the rooms, windows and corridors the theories may have. Thus, metaphorical mapping happens partially. The systematic correlation happens between the two domains through the interaction of the emotion and sensory-­ motor experience. The source-target communication in CMT has been further developed into “generic” and “blended” spaces through Conceptual Blending Theory by Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner (43). Though CMT has been a major theoretical application in cognitive linguistics, one of the major criticisms it faces is that conceptual metaphors were primarily applied to linguistic data. Thus, the major focus of the theory has been linguistic communication. The criticism against CMT have been levelled on the grounds: “(1) the issue of methodology (2) the issue of the direction of analysis; (3) the issue of schematicity; (4) the issue of embodiment; and (5) the issue of the relationship between metaphor and culture” (Kovecses 168). Regarding the issue of methodology, CMT is primarily criticised for focusing on the individual level

104 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

which mainly looks at how “specific speakers use specific metaphorical linguistic expressions in specific communicative situations in relation to particular target concepts” (Kovecses 169). Though CMT considers culture as a major source for the embodiment, it lacks a specific approach in dealing with the cultural metaphors. This leads to the second criticism that the top-down systematic approach adopted by CMT “cannot account for the unique and irregular semantic behavior of many metaphorical expressions” (Kovecses 170). When the theory fails to account for the irregularities influenced by culture-specific, local and regional factors, this brings the third criticism that CMT cares less to explain how culture and context shape the metaphorical mapping. The theory, therefore, falls short of explaining culture as a significant factor in affecting the medium, audience, speaker, setting and the topic. Looking at the above criticisms, one understands that CMT, as such, which has been specifically evaluating the linguistic data lacks in its dynamicity as one applies it to the visual field. Political cartoons charged with the political culture and situations, deploy metaphors that are more contextual in nature than embodied. Moreover, the visual metaphors are non-linear as compared to the linearity followed by the linguistic metaphors. Other than the standard movement of the eye from left to right, the sequence and the schematicity leading to metaphor cognition remain irregular. The linguistic metaphor is more restrictive in nature as it has a hierarchical sequence. Barthes’ statement: “[The] image straightaway provides a series of discontinuous signs. First (the order is unimportant as these signs are not linear)” (34), proves that the signs in an image are scattered and non-linear. This poses a challenge while deciphering the codes of the visual language. Keeping in mind the above criticisms against CMT, the authors propose a new domain, that of matrix, along with the source and the target, that attempts to include the culture-specificity, contextual motivation and dynamicity of the image.

4.3.1 Target Target domain (Lakoff and Johnson 2003) in CMT is the “principal subject” similar to Richards’ tenor. Target is the stage of “ideation”, where the

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

105

cartoonist “selects” appropriate signs reflecting on the event. This is the primary stage of signification where the principal subject and the suitable “cognitive” cues are identified which are characteristic of the event. It is the phase of assimilating information about a political event by analysing the facts. The political history and events inform the creation of the metaphor. Utilising the ‘relevant information’ for communication, the cartoonist selects cognitive signs which come forth as conceptual metaphors. Target domain is the abstract concept or event which the cartoonist attempts to understand through the source domain. In the Ambedkar cartoon, the pace of the constituent assembly and the process of drafting of the Constitution, together, form the target.

4.3.2 Source The source domain (Lakoff and Johnson 2003), similar to Richard’s vehicle, illustrates the target. After the selection of cognitive signs, the cartoonist infuses the representations with his/her political orientation. This decides the “purpose” of the representation; if the cartoonist is in favour of the political development there would be strokes of acceptance; or if he/she is critical about the event, the sketches would be strident and satirical. The cartoonist selects the “concepts” which convey the experiences of the event. As the cartoonist’s personal opinion is suggested through the cartoons, it can either be ‘favourable’ (in support of the event chosen) or ‘subversive’ (contesting the happening). This, in turn, decides the positive or negative impact on the audience. Metaphors chosen by the cartoonist become the “ancillary subject” which aid in comprehending the principal subject. The source domain is the concrete concept which the cartoonist chooses to clarify the target. In the Ambedkar cartoon, the pace of the Constitution drafting committee which remains abstract and invisible to the citizens of India is tangibly shown through the snail. The linguistic message of “Constitution” etched on the snail also helps the reader to concretise the message.

106 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

4.3.3 The Need for Matrix The direct correlation of the target to the source communicates the message directly to the audience. The correlation communicates the slow drafting process of the committee. But why did the cartoon offend people? The visual metaphors of political iconography, unlike verbal metaphors, exist in a non-linguistic environment, demanding different heuristics. Unlike the linguistic metaphors, visual metaphors are non-­ linear, and demand dynamic ways of interpretation and reception of the visual signs. The visual platform provides a flexible domain where the reader can interpret the signs in myriad ways and in any order. Therefore, the category of the matrix is essential to visual metaphors as it focuses on the aesthetics and representational aspects. For Koestler, matrix is the frame of experience. He defines it as “any ability, habit, or skill, any pattern of ordered behaviour governed by a ‘code’ of fixed rules” (33). The one which governs the codes, or the fixed rules, is one’s culture or tradition. The term, matrix, therefore, denotes the cultural motivation. Moreover, Koestler also explains how the term also captures ambiguity in the language of humour, that paves way for several interpretations. In this study, matrix, is the pattern or frames of reference that keep changing, allowing different combinations and choices that are offered for metaphor conceptualisation through cultural motivation. Though Lakoff and Johnson identify the conceptual metaphor as a cognitive movement from the “source” to the “target” based on the embodiment, the process of “how” the mapping happens based on cultural motivation remains indeterminate. While Lakoff and Johnson see conceptual metaphors as an unconscious cognitive mapping between the source and the target domains, metaphors in political cartoons are consciously employed and are in tune with the politics and aesthetics of representation chosen by the cartoonist. Thus, while theorising political iconography, one must factor the role of context in visual communication. The context and cultural motivation have, further, been explored through the matrix.

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

107

4.3.4 Matrix The matrix examines the influence of “context” on the “aesthetics” of representation of metaphors. “Representation”, an amalgamation of both selection and purpose along with aesthetics, is a state of re-representation of the conscious experience (Winkielman and Schooler 2011). Here, the re-representation of prior knowledge and the existing schema are extended to accommodate the new circumstances. This stage is crucial to decide the intensity of reception, as the new perceptions enhance the representation in accordance with the present context, which in turn, determines the stages of interaction and reaction. The matrix, therefore, includes the categories of cultural motivation and contextual influence, which encourages the artist to select representations which helps in conveying the message smoothly. In the Ambedkar cartoon, the snail is not the only visual metaphor. As one closely examines the cartoon, the whips in the hands of Ambedkar and Nehru, the laughing crowd, the sartorial styles of Nehru and Ambedkar and the sitting positions of the characters are metaphors which significantly communicate with the audience. With the time-shift from 1949 to 1952, the way these metaphors interact also changes. This is where the significance of the matrix emerges.

4.3.5 Interaction of Three Domains—Source, Target and Matrix The triadic model in this study analyses the domains of the source, the target and the matrix through the interaction of the ancillary subject, the principal subject and the context, respectively. Lakoff and Johnson perceive conceptual metaphors as an interface happening between the source (the domain through which the subject is understood) and the target (the subject which has to be comprehended). The target domain being abstract, the source domain presents concrete examples to comprehend the abstract (Kovecses 16). For Lakoff and Johnson, metaphors are cognised through conceptual mapping, which is the systematic correspondence between the common features of the principal and the subsidiary subject.

108 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

But what motivates metaphorical correspondence? Lakoff and Johnson suggest the embodied cognition to be fundamental to comprehending the target. But as Philip Eubanks stated, “while we may conceptualize these groupings as gestalts, each instance of a conceptual metaphor is inflected-at minimum by politics, philosophy, social attitudes, and individual construals of the world” (420). Thus, the bodily experiences which Lakoff and Johnson consider as the origin of the metaphorical mapping, is essentially decided by the environment and the culture which condition the body. The matrix, therefore, is a significant co-ordinate. The conceptual metaphors in political cartoons interact through the ‘target’ by examining the “selection” of the “cognitive” cues; the “source” by looking at the “purpose” of “concepts”; and the “matrix” by analysing the ‘aesthetics’ of ‘representation’ (Fig. 4.1 and Table 4.1). The model above summarises the performance of conceptual metaphors in political iconography. In the “target” stage, the cartoonist “selects” the “cognitive” cues economically to communicate the political

(Selection) Target (Cognitive)

Conceptual Metaphor

(Purpose) Source (Conceptual)

(Representation) Matrix (Aesthetics)

Fig. 4.1  Interaction, application and reception of conceptual metaphors

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

109

Table 4.1  Correlation of target, source and matrix Target

Source

Matrix

Principal subject Cognitive Selection

Ancillary subject Conceptual Selection+Purpose

Context Representational Selection+Purpose+Aesthetics

events and attitudes. In the “source” stage, the cartoonist selects the “concept” and “purpose” of the concept in conveying the message. In the “matrix” stage, the cartoonist takes “representational” cues from the “context” and aesthetically presents the cartoon. The interaction of source-­ target-­matrix is discussed in detail through the analysis of the Ambedkar cartoon.

4.4 Analysis of the Cartoon The metaphorical correspondence is mapped by analysing the interaction of the source, the target and the matrix domains. The principal target of the cartoon is the Constitution. And the cartoonist primarily uses the snail to show the pace of the drafting process. The snail acts as the source. The transmutation of humour happens when the target changes from the drafting of the Constitution to Ambedkar and the source changes from the snail to the whip. The metaphor of “snail’s pace” mainly indicates the slow pace of the Constitution drafting as in the following phrases: (1) Snail Mail: How the postal services slowly deliver the mail (2) At a Snail’s Gallop: here again, similar to the snail pace, the slow movement is associated with the snail (“Snail”). Thus, as the focus shifts from the snail to Ambedkar, the slowness of the snail gets transposed to Ambedkar, which gives offence. The slowness of the snail questions and mocks the ability of a national leader (Fig. 4.2). The transmutation is metaphorically mapped as follows: If both Nehru and Ambedkar were shown riding a snail, the power positions would remain stable, thus, conveying less ambiguity. If Shankar had also shown the other committee members riding the snail, the

110 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Fig. 4.2  Conceptual mapping of Ambedkar cartoon

interpretation of the cartoon would have been different. But the necessity of the cartoonist to convey the message within the immediate apprehension of the cartoon, forces the cartoonist to employ stereotypes and symbols. Shankar depicts Ambedkar alone in the cartoon, as being the Chairman of the whole Committee, his representation wholly symbolises the committee itself. There is another cartoon in which Shankar utilises the same metaphor where, again, Nehru is shown in a dominant position of commanding the racers to move quickly. Unlike the Ambedkar cartoon, this cartoon which depicted many leaders belonging to different castes and communities riding the snails never turned controversial. All the leaders were riding snails and the spatial orientation here was equally distributed among the leaders. Instead of a snail, if Ambedkar had ridden a horse, the reception of the cartoon would also have been different. There is a cartoon where Ambedkar is shown riding the black stallion, (“Don’t Spare me Shankar 66”) which, in turn, portrays how vigorously the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, along with Nehru and Rajagopalachari, won the

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

111

Constitution Amendment Bill. But the cartoonist’s expression to capture the slowness of drafting of the Constitution is appropriately expressed through the snail rather than the horse; the horse represents victory, the snail represents the failure or the delay. The stereotypical nature of the snail helps the cartoonist to convey the message. However, as the context changes, the stereotypical representation transmutes within the interpretative frame. The influence of the matrix, in this case, the time-shift from 1949 to 2012, which primarily changed the way people perceived Nehru and Ambedkar, is the vital factor for the transmutation of humour. The rise of Dalit consciousness is the major element in the matrix which acted as a catalyst for the transmutation. The Dalits are a group of people who belong to the “Oppressed/Depressed Class”. Dr Ambedkar soon emerged as the idol of the community because “he was from the oppressed class. He had the worst experiences of injustice and cruelty. He strongly protested all injustice done to the Dalits…” (Prasad and Gaijan viii). The Dalit consciousness gradually developed into a political consciousness through the teachings of Ambedkar. The All India Scheduled Caste Federation was formed in 1942. With Ambedkar as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, he ensured that the backward communities were uplifted through the Constitutional provisions. With Ambedkar’s conversion to Buddhism in 1956, he took up the task of uplifting the community by asking them to convert. The Dalit Panther movement which emerged during 1970s, propagated the Dalit consciousness. Thus, it was with Ambedkar, the Dalit consciousness arose. The time shift from 1949 to 2012 completely changed the perception of the people, who had begun to venerate Ambedkar. The matrix, the aesthetic representation, is further explained through the spatio-temporal locations of Ambedkar and Nehru. The spatial orientations of both Nehru and Ambedkar furthers the discrimination as Nehru is standing, while Ambedkar awkwardly squats on the snail. Visually, Nehru is given more power as the posture of standing covers more space than sitting. Here STANDING IS UP and SITTING IS DOWN. The confrontation between the up (positive, healthy, happy, able) and down (negative, sick, sad, inefficient) furthers a sense of discrimination. As Nehru is standing on the ground, the metaphors of standing kick in with the associations:

112 

(1) (2) (3) (4)

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Stand (one’s) ground: to stand with perseverance Stand by: dictating one’s success Stand up to someone or something: to confront fearlessly Stand fast: remain determined (“Stand”).

They indicate the leadership of Nehru who is persistent and determined in facing challenges. On the contrary, Ambedkar, sitting on the snail, symbolises the following: (1) Sitting duck: sitting in a vulnerable position (2) Sit at the feet of someone: who remains devoted to the master (3) Sit tall in one’s saddle: remaining stoic in one’s position (“Sit”) shows how he remains subservient to Nehru, though he is educated, and holds a powerful position as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee. Nehru with his drooped head and emotionless face, also hints at the disappointment he has towards the performance of the Drafting Committee. The squatting also symbolises the physical exhaustion of Ambedkar during the drafting of the Constitution. The cartoon, further, generates transmutation of humour with the ambiguous position of whipping. The whip becomes yet another expression of oppression. The whip which reminds one of the colonial discrimination brings back the memories of the master-slave paradigm. In 1949, the whip had the suggestion: “WHIP INTO SHAPE”, where both, Nehru and Ambedkar were trying to take control of the nation through the Constitution. By 2012, the associations of the whip have changed to connote: “GET THE WHIP HAND” (“Whip”). The changed perception of the audience brings their focus to Nehru and they accuse the cartoonist of favouring Nehru, the upper caste, by giving him the whip. Clearly, people get offended when they see Ambedkar appearing to be whipped. Makarand Sathe (“Different Strokes” 2012) gives two other alternatives which the cartoonist could have used to avoid ambiguity in the cartoon. The first cartoon reverses the caste politics and the second preaches equality where the leaders share responsibility; they stand shoulder-­to-shoulder. According to Sathe:

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

113

The other two cartoons can make students become aware of and think about this limitation and also, about whether the cartoonist, by being more sensitive to the hegemony in society, could have said it in any other way…Together these three variants can make students aware of what the cartoonist wanted to say at a particular point in history as well as how his own location creates limitations. They illustrate how the interpretation of history is always contemporary and is a continuous process. It indicates how one should locate an issue in history and also interpret it through contemporary sensibility simultaneously, without chauvinism. (“Redrawing Shankar”)

One may posit that the cartoon becomes controversial when history and art intersect. The objectiveness of the historical event and the subjective artistic representation intersect to make the cartoon ambiguous. From the above discussion, one can conclude that metaphors play a dynamic role in the transmutation of humour. The matrix is formed by the context and that cultural influence plays a major role in deciding the dynamicity of the visual metaphors. The message the cartoon communicates, and the reactions it generates are better understood in an Indian context. The historical situation and the cultural motivation are decisive in deciding the impact of humour as well as the cartoon. The stereotypical representations of the snail and the whip, which generally represent the race and the chase of the leaders exhaust themselves with the passage of time. The exhausted stereotype, thus, opens itself to the cycle of reaction. With the intersection of contextual influence, cultural motivation and the dynamics of the visual representation (together which form the matrix), the possibilities for the transmutation of humour increases.

4.5 The Integrated Model The above model represents metaphor as a tool to measure the rhetoric of humour. The model discussed in the previous chapter represents the communicative framework of humour. While the communicative framework takes cues from the model of Jakobson and Barthes, the framework of rhetoric takes inspiration from the CMT of Lakoff and Johnson (Fig.  4.3). The integrated model, which combines the two functions, communicative and the rhetoric of humour, are as follows:

114 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Coded Iconic Message

Impression/Feeling

Text Publication

Interaction/ Affect

Interaction/ Affect

Cartoon/ Expression

Cartoonist/ Humorist Reaction/ Disease

Reader/ Audience Reaction/ Disease

VISUAL Linguistic

Perception/Thinking

Non-Coded Iconic Message

(Selection) Target (Cognitive)

Conceptual Metaphor

(Purpose) Source (Conceptual)

(Representation) Matrix (Aesthetics)

Fig. 4.3  The integrated model

The model is multimodal in nature which combines the verbal and the visual medium. It portrays the movement of the language of humour. On the addresser side, one can see the cartoonist framing the cartoon as his/ her expression. The cartoon, there, enters the cycle of communication.

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

115

The reader receives and interprets the cartoon based on his/her impression and perception. This, in turn, depends upon the way the reader interprets the linguistic, coded and non-coded iconic messages. While the coded and non-coded iconic message constitute the visual, the basis on which visual signs are interpreted, depends upon the source, target and matrix domains. The correlation between the domains determines the reception of humour in political cartoons. It can either lead to interaction or reaction. The proportion of interaction and reaction also depends on the mode of publication (Table 4.2). The above table shows the correlation of the coordinates between the communicative framework and the framework of rhetoric. While the basic frame of the addresser (cartoonist), addressee (reader) and the message (cartoon) has been retained, the innovation in the model happens at the level of the elements which intervene between the process of communication and reception. The linguistic message as well as the visual message constitute the code and are mainly metalinguistic in nature. This metalanguage is further analysed through conceptual metaphor. The domains of the source and the target of conceptual metaphors directly communicate the primary message of humour. Impression and perception decide the reception and intensity of the message. This depends on the way the reader deciphers the coded and non-coded iconic messages of the image. Impression represents the reflection of the accumulated memories and experiences. Perception, on the other hand, is the spontaneous topicality with which the reader can relate. This mainly constitutes the influence of the current events and surroundings.

Table 4.2  Correlation of Barthes, Jakobson, Lakoff and Johnson Rhetorical model of metaphor

Communicative model Roland Barthes

Roman Function of Jakobson language

Visual Impression

Code Context

Metalinguistic Source-target Referential Matrix

Context

Referential

Perception

Linguistic message Coded iconic message Non-coded iconic message

Matrix

116 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The deciphering of the coded iconic messages depends on the way the reader relates to his/her individual experience, while the non-coded iconic messages communicate directly with the reader as it is based on the collective experience of a group based on the current circumstances. These, in turn, represent the cultural motivation and the contextual influence, which are mainly referential in function. The way one relates with the coded and non-coded iconic messages depend on the matrix, which, basically, constitutes the cultural and contextual experience. The matrix is the larger context which encompasses the impression and the perception. The correlation of the visual through the source and the target, along with the impression and perception through matrix which constitutes the coded and non-coded iconic messages, together, decide the reception of humour which can either move towards interaction or reaction. While interaction represents the success of humour, the reaction cycle indicates the transmutation of humour. The model stays versatile in its approach as it does not argue for a strict one-to-one relation between the elements. Rather, the model allows for the combining of the factors in different proportions and intensities. Other than the linear sequence of the message travelling from the addresser to the addressee, the interaction between the elements of impression, perception, coded and non-coded iconic messages, the source-target-matrix domains remain dynamic. The intensity of their interaction will vary from individual to individual. The model represents a cyclical communication, which indicates that the more the duration that humour remains in the cycle of communication, the possibility for it to transmute increases as the context of humour changes. The model attempts to present a dynamic approach towards the study of the language of humour and multimodality, which accounts for the circumstance where humour transmutes and fails to amuse its audience. The model allows for multiple choices that the readers can make through the contextual influence and cultural motivation. This, in turn, shows how accommodative the model is which is inclusive of the “variability, negotiability and adaptability” (Verschueren and Brisard 42) that shapes the choices of the readers.

4  Metaphor: The Rhetorical Frame of Humour 

117

Given the coordinates which are decisive in determining the communication and rhetoric of humour, the integrated model is applied to the rest of the cartoons which were scrutinised by the Thorat Committee and were recommended to be deleted.

Works Cited Primary Sources Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. U of Chicago P, 2003.

Secondary Sources Bougher, L. D. “The Case for Metaphor in Political Reasoning and Cognition”. Political Psychology, vol. 33, no. 1, 2012, pp. 145–163. Carston, Robyn and Catherine Wearing. “Hyperbolic Language and its Relation to Metaphor and Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics, no. 79, 2015, pp. 79–92. Chovanec, Jan and Isabel Ermida. Language and Humour in the Media. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012. Dynel, Marta. “Creative Metaphor is a Birthday Cake: Metaphor as the Source of Humour”. Metaphorik.de, vol. 17, 2009, Research Gate, https://researchgate.net/publication/242081327_Creative_metaphor_is_a_birthday_cake_ Metaphor_as_the_source_of_humour/link/5487178c0cf2ef34478eb0c8/ download. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Gabin, R. J. “Humor as Metaphor, Humor as Rhetoric”. Centennial Review, vol. 31, no. 1, 1987, pp. 33–46. Goatly, Andrew. Meaning and Humour. Cambridge UP, 2012. Grady, Joseph E., et al. “Blending and Metaphor”. Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by G. Steen and Raymond Gibbs, John Benjamins, 1999. Heywood, Ian and Sandywell, Barry, editors. Interpreting Visual Culture: Explorations in the Hermeneutics of the Visual. Routledge, 1999. Kirkmann, Arvo. “On the Similarity and Distinguishability of Humour and Figurative Speech”. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 13, no. 1, 2009, pp. 14–40. Landau, M. E., et al. “Introduction”. The Power of Metaphor: Examining its Influence on Social Life. American Psychological Association, 2014, pp. 3–16.

118 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Mio, Jeffrey Scott and Arthur C. Graesser. “Humor, Language, and Metaphor”. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, vol. 6, no. 2, 1991, pp. 87–102. Mio, Jeffrey Scott. “Metaphor and Politics”. Metaphor and Symbol, vol. 12, no. 2, 1997, pp. 113–133. Ritchie, David. Metaphor. Cambridge UP, 2013. Veale, Tony, et al. “The Cognitive Mechanisms of Adversarial Humor”. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research vol. 19, no. 3, 2006, pp. 305–339. Winkielman, P. and J. W. Schooler. “Splitting Consciousness: Unconscious, Conscious, and Metaconscious Processes in Social Cognition”. European Review of Social Psychology, vol. 22, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–35.

5 Application of the Model

In the previous chapter, the model for locating the language of humour was framed. The integrated model combines two components: the communicative and the rhetoric. In this chapter, the viability of the model is further demonstrated by applying it to the cartoons which were recommended for deletion or modification by the Thorat Committee. In all, 22 cartoons were recommended for deletion. In the previous theoretical chapters, the model is applied to the Ambedkar cartoon by Shankar. In this chapter, the model is applied to the remaining 21. The scrutinised cartoons are grouped based on the following themes: (a) Language, Caste and Gender discrimination (b) Corrupt Bureaucracy (c) the Nehruvian Regime (d) the Indira Gandhi Regime and (e) Regionalism. After the Ambedkar cartoon, the next cartoon which grabbed the attention of the public was the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoon of Laxman. The cartoon was seen to hurt the Tamil sentiment and the pride of the “Dravidian movement”. Out of 22 cartoons, only two cartoons, the Ambedkar cartoon by Shankar and the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoon by Laxman, explicitly show the transmutation of humour: During the initial publication, the cartoon was received positively and in the course of time, there was a visible transition in the reception of the cartoon. The rest of

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_5

119

120 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

the cartoons have been only recommended for deletion or modification anticipating their potency to hurt the readers’ sentiments. Since the reaction phase is not discernibly present, in case of such cartoons, the model explains the possibilities for the transmutation of humour in the communication cycle. The cartoons are examined through the following coordinates drawn from the integrated model: (a) The relation between the cartoonist/humourist and the reader/audience (b) Linguistic Message (c) Coded and Non-Coded Iconic Message (d) Impression and Perception (e) Visual message evaluated through the source, the target and the matrix (In the previous section, since the language of humour and metaphor has been identified as synonymous, the terms source and target in the further sections points to the conceptual metaphors which make the language humorous) (f ) Mode of Publication and (g) the phases of interaction and reaction.

5.1 Language, Caste and Gender Discrimination This section evaluates the cartoons based on the Anti-Hindi agitation, Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation and the bill for 33% reservation for women. The cartoons indicate how the possibility for the transmutation is large when issues concern language, caste and gender discrimination. The two cartoons were drawn in the wake of the government declaring Hindi as the National Language of India. The first cartoon (“Non-­ Hindis”, Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT, 2006, p. 165) was drawn by Shankar which shows how the non-Hindi speaking community has been dominated by the Hindi speakers. The second cartoon portrays (“The Boy Can’t Read English Either”, Politics in India Since Independence, NCERT, 2007, p. 153) the protests from the non-Hindi speaking community. Shankar and Laxman as cartoonists mainly target the imposition of Hindi and the repercussions in parts of India. Both Shankar and Laxman have portrayed the challenges India faced as a Republic. However, both the cartoonists present two sides of the same issue. The first cartoon was published in 1949. The second cartoon by Laxman was drawn during 1965 at the peak of the Anti-Hindi protests spearheaded by the

5  Application of the Model 

121

students of Tamil Nadu against the Central government. Where Laxman bluntly attacks the non-Hindi protesters, Shankar takes a dig at the staunch Hindi supporters. Both the cartoonists address two sets of readers: the readers of the respective contexts of 1949 and 1965 as well as the 2012 audience. India, being a heterogeneous country with a multi-lingual culture, the decision of the Government to choose one language, Hindi, as the Official National language created mayhem and a crisis arose in governance. During the colonial era, English was the official language. As the independence movement gained momentum, there was also an urge among politicians to boycott English and adopt Hindi as the National language. Both Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru championed the move. The Indian National Congress party began a campaign for adopting Hindustani as the official language. As soon as the propaganda reached the Southern Region, people reacted against the domination of a Northern language, which undermined the southern culture and languages. When C. Rajagopalachari became Chief Minister of the Madras presidency after the 1937 elections, he was keen to introduce Hindi in schools. Against the strong push from the Centre to adopt Hindi, Periyar from Tamil Nadu unleashed protests across the state. The protests were launched as part of the Dravidian Self-Respect Movement by Periyar. Soon the protest flared into mass processions, where government offices were vandalised followed by the display of black flags and picketing of the schools which taught Hindi. The magazine cover of Kudi Arasu (Republic), run by Periyar, essentially captures the spirit of the movement. In the magazine, Kudi Arasu carried the title “Veezhga Hindi”, which demanded the “Fall of Hindi”. As the protest gained momentum, the Congress party soon became divided. While one side including Rajagopalachari wanted Hindi, leaders like Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and S. Sathyamurti were against the monopoly of Hindi. As the leaders supporting Hindi were unrelenting, the protest grew violent and the agitators like Periyar were imprisoned. The struggle which began in 1937, when Rajaji issued a notice to make Hindi compulsory in schools, finally ended when the order was withdrawn. However, between the 1940’s and the 1950’s, the agitations continued whenever there was an attempt to impose Hindi. Leaders like

122 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Periyar, Annadurai along with Dravidar Kazhagam (social movement Dravidian Conference) kept a close vigil. In 1965, again, the agitation peaked when the Tamil Nadu Students’ Anti-Hindi Agitation Council organised conferences to exhort students to join the movement. In one of the conferences, students came together demanding the indefinite suspension of the articles on official language in the Indian Constitution. Following the demand, the central government escalated the move to declare Hindi as the official language which further agitated the protesters. Annadurai declared that he would observe 26th January 1965 as a day of mourning; after receiving threats and warnings from the government on disrespecting the sacredness of the republic day, the protest date was advanced, and it finally led to the imprisonment of Annadurai. However, on 26th January, there was a state-wide protest by the students, following which a riot ensued and para-military forces were deployed to control the situation. The clash between the military and students led to huge loss of public property; many students committed suicide and self-immolated themselves. Finally, with diplomatic talks and negotiations led by Lal Bahadur Shastri, the second prime minister of India, the agitation was calmed. The context of the Anti-Hindi agitations discussed hitherto is the pretext for the two cartoons. This context acts as the matrix, which primarily guides the aesthetic representation of the cartoons. The first cartoon was published on September 18, 1949. On September 17, 1949, there was a discussion about the translation of the Constitution among the members of the constituent assembly. The proceedings began with K.M. Munshi putting forth the demand for releasing the Hindi draft of the Constitution on 26th January as he said: “once there is one translation published in Hindi, it will be very easy to have a common terminology throughout the country” (“Constituent Assembly Proceedings”). The argument was further supported by H.V. Kamath, Seth Govind Das, R. Sidhva and Ghanshyam Singh Gupta. The proceedings show how the members pushed for a Hindi draft of the Constitution. The caption under the cartoon by Shankar reads “During discussion on the national language in the Constituent Assembly, Nehru had to appeal to the Hindi speaking provinces to show greater tolerance towards the others” (“Don’t Spare Me Shankar” 24), indicating that the declaration of Hindi as an official language was the main point of discussion.

5  Application of the Model 

123

In the first cartoon, a man is crawling on all fours as he carries the burden of four people. The four people who are seated on the man’s back are the major supporters of Hindi—Purushottam Das Tandon, Seth Gobind Das, Mahabir Tyagi and K.M. Munshi. This cartoon leans towards the dark side as the incongruity of expressions creates humour. On the one hand, we see Nehru pleading, for restraint and empathy towards non-Hindi speaking communities. The supporters of Hindi who ride the man and hilariously laugh at the position of the non-Hindi communities is also represented. The Linguistic Message by Shankar, the poor man ridden by the four members as “Non-Hindis”, shows that the main subject is the plight of the Non-Hindi speakers. The helpless expression on Nehru’s face and the exhaustion writ on face of the poor man, further, clarify this plight. By labelling him, “Non-Hindis” (in the plural), Shankar shows how the man is a collective noun for all the non-Hindi speakers who have been dominated by the Hindi speakers. Shankar limits the use of verbal text in the cartoon. On the contrary, Laxman fills his cartoon with verbal texts. The “STUDENT AGITATION” written on the back of the student and the blackboard containing the “ASSURANCES: NO HINDI, ENGLISH TO CONTINUE, NO COMPULSION TO LEARN HINDI, NO HINDI! ENGLISH FOREVER! ETC ETC”, shows the topicality of the cartoon. The comment by a politician: “the boy can’t read English either”, further mocks the “pseudo-regionalism” of the students who encourage only Tamil and will not support Hindi and are equally ignorant about English. The cartoon shows the students protests and the politicians staring at them who have already complied with the demands of the students. The humour of the cartoon lies in the incongruity of the students unable to process the message and rebelling unnecessarily. In both the cartoons, the linguistic message acts as the anchorage which narrows the interpretation of the cartoons. The verbal text along with the caricatures of the politicians act as the non-coded iconic message. The dynamics of the visual further plays through the coded-iconic messages. The functionality of conceptual metaphors helps in deciphering the coded iconic message. Both the cartoons depict two sides of violence. While Shankar’s cartoon portrays the violence perpetuated by strong Hindi supporters, Laxman’s cartoon depicts the violence perpetuated by Anti-Hindi agitators. The stick in the hand, similar to the whip in

124 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Ambedkar’s, which symbolises violence, acts as a source, which, in turn, generates the master-slave suggestion. The man crawling in the first cartoon triggers the suggestion of an animal which is cruelly treated. Perhaps, the imagery comes closer to that of a donkey carrying a heavy burden. The man crawling with four riders is obviously exhausted and famished. We also have Nehru pleading with the riders to show some mercy. The image of the man bending and crawling on all fours, again, suggests enslavement and oppression. The image of the donkey also acts as a source in the first cartoon where the suggested physical strain connotes exploitation by its master. The metaphor of the donkey alludes to the idioms: 1. Do the donkey work: where one is forced to work, which results in physical exhaustion. In the above cartoon, the “donkey work” can also be attributed to the protests of the Anti-Hindi communities. They have indulged in a lot of physical resistance and riots, yet, they remain dominated by the Hindi speaking group. 2. As stubborn as a mule: being persistent. The prolonged agitations of the Anti-Hindi community from 1940’s to 1960’s show their persistence in achieving their demands (“Donkey”, “Mule”). While the agitators against the Hindi language are represented as a singular entity, the supporters of Hindi are plural in number. This again portrays the tussle between the majority and the minority as the Centre is depicted as majoritarian with respect to the State. The cartoons also depict the issue of federalism in India. Shankar’s cartoon, included in the chapter on “Federalism”, under the section “Demands for Autonomy”, in the Class XI textbook, Indian Constitution at Work, proves that the aim of introducing the cartoon is to make readers understand the challenges of federalism. The second cartoon included under the chapter, “Regional Aspirations” in the Class XII textbook, Politics in India Since Independence, also proves how the struggle between the Centre and the State becomes one of the significant governance issues of India. The NCERT textbook asks whether “such conflicts are good for the country?” (165, “Indian Constitution”). The cartoon invites students to explain the challenges to federalism which concerns the balance between the centre and the state. The ambiguity in the cartoon arises with the incongruity of expressions worn by the politicians. The way one reads these expressions depend

5  Application of the Model 

125

on the perception and the impression. With the contemporary knowledge of the happenings in 1949, the audience perceive the smiles worn by the Hindi supporters as suggesting the callousness of the politicians who have enjoyed tormenting the non-Hindis. Though Nehru is the PM of India, his act of pleading with his political colleagues, raises questions about his own stance on the issue. When impression kicks in, one examines critically the historical significance of the Nehruvian regime and to ask: Is Nehru powerless and not in a position to control his colleagues who have been harassing the non-Hindis? One can also interpret Nehru as a silent sympathiser with the politicians, which becomes clear from his inaction. Thus, the difference in the perception and the impression makes the humour ambiguous. Humour in the second cartoon lies in the incongruity of the agitating student being illiterate both in English as well as in Hindi. The Hindi-­ agitation is shown in a negative light. The element of surprise marked with exclamation both in “No Hindi!” and “boy can’t read English either!” adds to the humour. The linguistic message in the cartoon suggests dual topics. As one closely examines the cartoon, one can find two bold captions: “The BOY CAN’T READ ENGLISH EITHER!” and “STUDENT AGITATION”. The first caption shows the concern of the Centre and it attempts to reconcile with the state with the assurance on the blackboard declaring there is no Hindi and they can continue with English. The second caption on the back of the student who has been continuously throwing stones at the Centre, targets the violent protest of the state. The reception of humour will depend on the topicality of the cartoon, which can either be targeting the centre or the state. The stone and the depiction of the rebellious students act as the source. As the cartoon is more text dominated, the visual images play a lesser role in the cartoon. The image of an illiterate student becomes clearer from the dialogue that he can’t read English. The student is throwing stones at the Hindi supporters. On the one hand, the stone symbolises the protest and the attendant vandalism caused by the protesters. On the other, it also relates to the representation of the student as uncouth, implying that he belongs to a more primitive stone age. The pelted stones strewn near the board also convey how wild the protest has been as in: “as wild as hurling stones”. The stone in the cartoon, thus, depicts the resistance as well as the intensity of the protest.

126 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The transmutation of humour in this cartoon happens when one reads the hurt sentiments of the citizens of Tamil Nadu. Similar to the Ambedkar cartoon which dented the pride of the Dalit movement, the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoon hurts the pride of the Dravidian movement. Laxman was accused of defaming the Dravidian movement, along with its leaders Periyar and Annadurai. Jayalalitha, the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, demanded its removal from 12th NCERT textbook on the grounds: (1) The Dravidian movement should have been explained to students using photographs of that era as they would be the best tool for this purpose and instead carrying a cartoon saying the Tamil student was not required to study Hindi and that he was ignorant towards English has hurt the sentiments of Tamil people. (2) It (publication of the cartoon) not only amounts to demean the Anti-Hindi movement but also seems to insult Annadurai and (EV Ramasamy) Periyar who led the protests. The cartoon, originally published to explain the intensity and importance of the movement, has assumed contradictory proportions (in the textbook). It is regrettable that a cartoon hurting the Tamils` sentiments has been published (“Jaya joins Karuna”). Jayalalitha preferred the photograph to the cartoon, which captured the “true nature” and essence of the movement. The photograph, which was included in the textbook represents the historical event with perfect nominals conveying the right amount of information. The cartoon, on the other hand, captures the fact (Vendler 132–133) which is a loose container and opens itself to more interpretations and paraphrasing. The transmutation of humour happens when the cartoon takes the historical event of the Anti-Hindi agitation movement and represents it as a fact, giving the readers more space to interpret the cartoon and its humour subjectively. While the cartoon in 1965 depicted the popular perception of the protests turning violent, the impression of the Tamil community in 2012 about the glory of the Dravidian movement that saw the establishment of the regional parties: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhakagam, prevents the people from receiving the humorous cartoon. It is the intrusion of impression, the intervention of the historical past, which creates the transmutation. After

5  Application of the Model 

127

47 years, when one removes the cartoon from its historical context and looks at the success of the Dravidian movement, it can only be seen as hurting the Tamil pride and distorting their history. The cartoonist mainly pricks the extremism of the Self-Respect Movement. Both the cartoons portray the flippant attitude towards the minority. Though Laxman’s cartoon portrays how Bhakthavalsalam, the then CM of Tamil Nadu, and Rajagopalachari attempt to control the protest by acquiescing to the demands of the protesters, years later, the target of the cartoon moves away from the Centre’s attitude of mocking the state’s protest. From the perspective of the NCERT, in different chapters and textbooks, they have represented both the aspects of the agitation—of that of the Centre’s belligerence as well as State’s protest. However, only the cartoon portraying the student protest became controversial. The following conceptual metaphors are at work in the two cartoons which primarily aim at the Centre (Figs. 5.1 and 5.2):

Fig. 5.1  Conceptual mapping of Anti-Hindi agitation cartoons

128 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Fig. 5.2  Transition in the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoons

The above chart indicates that the subject of the earlier cartoon, mainly focuses on the Centre. In the interaction, it becomes clear that the cartoon mainly targets the Central government. While in the first cartoon, the cartoonist mocks the centre by representing the members as insensitive who wear a wry smile and torment the civilians. In the second cartoon also, Laxman shows the efforts of the Central government to mend the relation with the State. The central politicians are shown as the teachers attempting to instruct the state. As time passes and the powers of the states are established, the target of humour, changes from the Centre towards the State, thereby becoming the ground for the reactionary phase of humour. A probable reason for reactions to the cartoons is the presence of Colonial metaphors. The power tussle witnessed here between the Centre and the State is attributed to the colonial legacy whose significance lies in the manipulation of identity and representational politics. The colonial legacy reminds one of the times when people were divided, and discrimination was rampant. The Coloniser stepped in to restore order in a system that was deliberately destabilised. Albert Memmi’s Coloniser and the Colonised (1957) containing two sections: The Portrait of the Coloniser and The Portrait of the Colonised, illustrates the construction of two identities. The colonised is the ‘humbling’, ‘lazy’, ‘litany of faults and

5  Application of the Model 

129

inadequacies’, ‘muscular’ and a ‘hopeless weakling’ (Memmi 29). The Coloniser on the other hand is ‘exalting’, strong and ‘legitimate’. The representation of the Centre as riders and teachers and that of the State as donkey, monkey, savage and primitive reinforce this duality. The transmutation of humour becomes visible in the Anti-Hindi agitation cartoon of Laxman as it explicitly portrays the colonised, the state as an illiterate entity. During the 1950’s, independent India had a powerful Centre. However, power gradually shifted to the States, thus, shifting the locus of power. With a federal structure in place, the demands of the States also increased. In 1950’s, the Centre served the topicality of humour. With the passage of time and factors like accumulation of past history, intrusion of impression, the topicality of humour shifts to the State. This makes the cartoon a sensitive text as its humour appears to poke fun at regionalism. The cartoon of Shankar escapes the reaction phase as the 2012 audience see the topicality of the cartoon as that of depicting the dilemma of the State. The second set of cartoons was published by the Amul brand. Here the ad agency (Da Cunha Communications Inc) is the cartoonist and the initial readers of the cartoon are mainly the customers of Amul. By 2012, with its reiteration in the textbook, there is a new set of readers including the students and the contemporary audience. The cartoon was included in Class IX Democratic Politics I in the chapter “Working of Institutions”. The cartoons were taken to be just filling up the space and spreading negative message, because of which the committee recommended its deletion. Amul’s method of campaigning for Amul butter, being functional like an editorial cartoon that comments on the nation’s socio-economic, political consciousness has made the brand “not just India’s most favoured butter brand but also its most trusted social commentator” (Mitter). Perceiving humour as the apt medium to put forth a convincing argument, Amul—unlike rest of the mascots like Vlasic Stork, M&M’s, Chester the Cheetah of Cheetos, who have become popular through television commercials and animated videos—has remained unconventional by continuing to occupy space in the print medium. The Amul campaign with the iconic Amul girl has been running for more than 52 years. The tag-line—“The Taste of India”—makes the girl a perennial representative

130 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

of the taste of the young generation. The ‘utterly butterly delicious’ Amul, characterises topical humour to be utterly (outright) and butterly (sweet) in nature. As one analyses the Amul billboards, one comes across the fine tuning of the verbal and visual, where the product rides on a witty caption and a subtle argument in the label. The two cartoons were published in the context/matrix of the reservation policy in India. The Mandal Commission, or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Commission (SEBC), was set up by the Janata Government under the leadership of B.P. Mandal in 1979 to identify the socially and educationally backward class and evaluate the necessity for bringing reservation policy for their social, economic and educational development. In 1980, the Other Backward Classes (OBC’s) were identified and a reservation policy of 27% in Government jobs, Central as well as Public Sector, was planned to be implemented. The report of the committee led to huge debates and discussions. In 1990, when the Government finally took the decision to implement the policy, it led to student protests and some of them like Surinder Singh Chauhan, Rajiv Goswami among others belonging to the upper castes immolated themselves. A temporary stay was brought to the implementation based on Indira Sawhney’s petition of how the new policy violated the Constitutional right to equal opportunity. However, the final judgement of the Supreme court went in favour of the reservation policy and gave the Government the all-clear. The judgement led to violent reactions from the students belonging to the upper castes: Government buildings were picketed; public property was vandalised; schools and colleges remained closed for many days. The cartoon (“Outstanding Butter Classic”, Democratic Politics I. NCERT, 2006, p. 81) was published in 1990 and the other cartoon (“The Riot Taste”, Democratic Politics I. NCERT, 2006, p. 81) in 1991. This cartoon looks at the reservation policies for the OBC, while the second cartoon examines how Mandal commission raked up a lot of bitterness, as it was based on the caste system. Unlike the previous cartoons which are more visual, Amul hoardings produce their humour through the verbal puns. The target of the Amul ad is reservation, which is made clear through the first word of the line ‘reserved’. As the eye moves from the left to the right, the word ‘reserved’ essentially captures the essence of

5  Application of the Model 

131

the Amul ad. The humour of the ad comes from the incongruity between what we expect and what happens in reality. The linguistic message is the main carrier of humour. The cartoon carries the heading “Reserved for this Outstanding Butter Classic”. When one reads the word reserved, in that political context, the audience expect a serious visual representation. The tension is built further with the word ‘for this’. The first line of the joke builds up the opposing script and maintains the tension by building suspicion in the mind of the readers. The readers move ahead with the doubt: whom is it reserved for? Soon the incongruity is revealed when the reserved category is revealed to be “Outstanding Butter Classic”. As the reader resolves the incongruity of the joke, he/she is again served with a surprise. The O, B and C of the phrase is highlighted, which indirectly indicates the rumblings of the reservation policy for the OBC. Yet again, the colour for highlighting of the letters OBC triggers association with Amul’s butter. The colour association of OBC and Amul, proves that the OBC referred in the text mainly emphasises the quality of the butter, which coming from Amul is the outstanding butter classic. The image of the bread further anchors the idea of butter spread and how Amul serves a delicious breakfast with an outstanding butter classic. The butter spread acts as the non-coded iconic message, which communicates that the topic of the cartoon mainly is the outstanding butter. The coded iconic message through the emboldened and coloured letters of O, B and C, indicates that the message is about OBC. The colour red also acts as an implicit message. It emphasises the typesetting which is a trademark of the Amul brand. The red polka dots on the white dress and the matching ribbon run parallel with the white and red colour association of Amul. The brand name is in white against a red background. Nevertheless, as one analyses the previous cartoons of Amul, one observes that the red in the background becomes a suggestive barometer for the turmoil faced by the Indian government. The cartoons like “Compulsory Sterilisation” and “Bite to Information” utilise the red background to convey episodes of turmoil in Indian history. The “Compulsory Sterilisation” cartoon depicted the controversial compulsory sterilisation programme which was introduced by the Indira Gandhi government in 1976 and was popularised by her son, Sanjay

132 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Gandhi. However, the forced sterilisation garnered hatred from the citizens and eventually led to the fall of the government. The “Bite to Information” cartoon depicted the launching of the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) by the Indian parliament in 2005, which was opposed by politicians and led to widespread protests. Thus, the redness of the background not just accounts for the brand but also socio-political turmoil. Moreover, the colour red with a conventional association with humour brings into popular imagination the figures of the clown, the joker and the jester. The design of the Amul girl who wears a white dress with red polka dots indicates how the moppet functions like a fool or a jester who makes important comments upon the social issues and interacts directly with the audience. Looking at the above cues, one observes that in the first cartoon Amul makes a witty comment by punning on “Outstanding Butter Classic” as well as the government’s stance on reservation to the OBC’s. From the above discussion, one can conclude that the colour red along with the yellow colour of the O, B and C which correlates with the colour of butter act as the source of humour. The second cartoon follows up with the report of the Mandal Commission and the student riots that erupted. While the situation seems to be more intense than the previous cartoon, here the Amul ad chooses a subtle blue background. The caption of the billboard begins with a reassuring negation about Amul’s stance on the reservation policy. The linguistic message in the cartoon is “No reservation for this quota”. In the context/matrix of the reader being aware of the violent student protests which has even escalated to self-immolations, the script builds up the tension by giving a negative affirmation. The reader is kept guessing about the stance the Amul girl is taking in the situation. However, the incongruity of the sentence is further revealed through the image of the Amul girl holding a half-eaten slice of bread. This, in turn, intends that she is talking about herself and her brand which can be consumed and relished by all and no need to have ‘any reservation’ about it. The bread slices act as the non-coded iconic message indicating that the Amul brand is equally accessible to all. As the eyes move from top to bottom, the image of the raised hands further builds the tension and with the group of hands holding slices of bread, symbolise the working class. The image of the hands below

5  Application of the Model 

133

symbolises communism and in extension, the labour class. The image of the risen hands, as the coded-iconic message, either suggests the protesters who are against reservation or the OBC’s (the working class) who are being favoured through reservation. The cartoon, thus, simultaneously conveys the protest of the general category students as well as the fight of the OBC students for reservation. The colour combination of “No reservation for this quota” parallels with the “riot taste of India”. Both the labels are given in black, which run parallel with the gloominess following the riot. The black colour of the Amul label along with the Amul girl and the hands with the slices of bread act as the source of humour in the cartoon, as it clearly suggests that they are talking about propagating the taste of butter, without any reservations. In this context, the group of hands holding slices of bread with Amul butter spread represents the majority, thereby, underlining Amul’s popularity. The Thorat Committee recommended the cartoon to be deleted as: “Cartoon focussing on Amul and reservation look like just filling the space and also negative message about reservation” (25). In both the cartoons, the transmutation of humour lies in reading the message negatively. Positively, the cartoons read as the promotion of the Amul brand. This is the interaction phase of the cartoon. But within the matrix of reservation, the first cartoon suggests the issue covertly through “Outstanding Butter Classic” and the second cartoon also implies the violent protests through the “riot taste of India”. The implied message remains ambiguous and provides a context for speculation. Ambiguity, here, acts as the catalyst for the transmutation of humour and serves the ground for reaction (Fig. 5.3). The above diagram shows the transmutation of humour as the aim of the cartoon shifts from the Amul Brand to the reservation policy. When the advertisement was published in the 1990’s, Amul’s brand image was the sole purpose. The perception of the cartoon aids the reader in focussing on the Brand through “Outstanding Butter Classic” and Amul’s “Riot Taste of India. By 2012, when the billboards were re-produced in a textbook, the aim changes from the Amul brand to the topic of reservation which triggers bitter memories in the minds of the readers and thus, becomes hurtful and a propagator of a negative message.

134 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Fig. 5.3  Conceptual mapping of Amul cartoons

Similar to the rise of Dalit Consciousness, which gave a new interpretation to the Ambedkar cartoon, the intervention of impression, that of the history of the discrimination against the reserved categories, creates a new interpretation and the cartoon becomes controversial. The second cartoon furthers the transmutation as the caption, “No reservation for this quota”, keeps the target audience oblivious. On the one hand, from the perception of the present situation of unequal opportunities, the cartoon forces one to see the general category as the one without reservation. On the other, from the history of reservation, it also shows how the general category were against reservation and the working class had to fight for the reservation. This ambiguity acts as the ground for transmutation and makes humour sensitive.

5  Application of the Model 

135

The next cartoon by Surendra for The Hindu relates to the Bill for reservation for women in politics. The cartoon was included in the Class X Democratic Politics II in the chapter, “Gender, Religion and Caste”. The cartoon depicted a woman standing outside the parliament and men are obstructing the entry. It carried the caption: “Do you think that Indian Parliament is a divided House blocking the passage of the Women’s Reservation Bill? What does this cartoon claim?”. The Thorat Committee recommended the cartoon to be modified saying: “It is not clear” (25). The cartoon (“Don’t Worry We’ll Find a Way for You”, Democratic Politics II. NCERT, 2007, p. 45) sensitively portrays the issue of the Women’s Reservation Bill which was passed in the Rajya Sabha (The Upper House) in 2010, but was defeated in the Lok Sabha (The Lower House). The Bill proposed to reserve 33% of the seats for women in the Lok Sabha and all the state legislative assemblies, thereby, increasing the representation of women in politics. However, the bill was never supported by the members of the Lok Sabha. Compared to the previous cartoons, which reappear after a historical gap of 30–50 years, Surendra converses with the contemporary readers as the cartoon was published during the 2000’s. The linguistic message in the cartoon “don’t worry, we will find a way for you”, shows the incongruity. While all the male politicians have blocked the way to the parliament, the politicians who have secured their seats give a false hope to the woman standing outside. The placard in her hand and the parliament in the background act as the non-coded iconic message, which directly communicate with readers that the target of the cartoon is the Women’s Bill. The visual message is decoded through the source of spatial orientational metaphors in the cartoons. The main orientational metaphors at play in the cartoon are: (a) UP-DOWN (b) INSIDE-OUTSIDE. The metaphor of up shows prosperity and secured positions that the politicians are enjoying. The woman standing is “looked down upon” by the men. Here, ‘down’ represents the state of under-representation and the marginalisation of women. Similarly, the male politicians are inside the parliament, which indicates how they have a permanent roof to stay and a stable ground to grow. The metaphor of inside here represents safety, strength, solidity and development. Whereas, the metaphor of outside

136 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

signals weakness and instability. It shows how women lack a permanent roof and a platform for growth. The first floor and ground floor of the parliament further represent the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, respectively. The Rajya Sabha (the upper house) is represented by the male politicians who are on the first floor. As one analyses the historical sequence, one understands that, the bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha. The support offered by the male politicians on the upper floor also connotes this event. The Lok Sabha (the lower house) which is represented by the politicians on the ground floor, are seen blocking the gates of the parliament. Their act of blocking connotes the sad fate of the bill in the Lok Sabha. Here, the orientational metaphor of ABOVE-BELOW acts as the coded iconic message. The cartoon shows the incongruity between the government’s inclination to pass the Bill, while there are many politicians within that government who oppose the bill. The long history of discrimination against women becomes the matrix that is crucial to the way the cartoonist conceptualises the event. The cartoon reinforces the idea of gender discrimination in India, where women are expected to remain confined to the house, rather than work outside the domestic domain, especially, politics. From the perception, the time when the cartoon was published, the message, with a touch of irony suggests that there was no unanimity in promoting women’s development. This phase determines the interaction cycle of humour. With the rise in female power, the impression of gender discrimination renders the humour sensitive and reactive. Unlike the Amul cartoons which take an ambiguous stand on the issue of reservation based on caste, this cartoon by Surendra clearly depicts how the politicians are misogynistic and have opposed the bill that supports reservation for women. The Thorat Committee however recommends the cartoon to be modified rather than be deleted as the cartoon is based on a sensitive issue and portrays the male politicians in a negative light. The Thorat Committee’s report about the cartoon being unclear also shows how the caption given in the textbook does not help the students in critical thinking. The caption rather gives a biased note asking the students to think whether the cartoon shows a “divided parliament”? (Democratic Politics II 45) The “divided parliament” again insinuates the perception of weak governance

5  Application of the Model 

137

with parliament divided on a sensitive issue of representation to women in politics. Devoid of the caption, the cartoon directly suggests how the house is divided. The directness of the cartoon acts as the basis for the transmutation of humour. The transgression happens when the topic of the cartoon shifts from the issue of reservation for women to the apparent frailty of Indian governance structure.

5.2 Corrupt Bureaucracy The majority of the cartoons which have been recommended by the committee for deletion or modification fall under this category. It is in this section that one sees the moralising tendency of the committee which goes against the grain of political humour. The cartoons which represent the politicians in negative light are recommended for deletion. The first set of cartoons by Laxman shows the corruption in electoral politics. The cartoons were included in the Class XI textbook, Indian Constitution at Work in the chapters “Election and Representation”, “Executive” and “Judiciary”. Laxman as a cartoonist communicates with a universal set of readers, who have a similar experience, irrespective of the socio-political context. The adequacy and accuracy of Laxman’s cartoons are described best by Khanduri: “[His cartoons] repeat his complaint about the problems with democracy, the pitfalls of development and the social inequity that has remained, despite half a century of democracy. He is chronicling political change while at the same time returning our attention to the fact that not much has changed and why might that be” (qtd. in Hills). The cartoons represent the shenanigans of the Indian bureaucracy through the image of the Common Man as a mute witness. Laxman targets the flaws of the Indian Bureaucracy, while Common Man acts as the source. By providing episodes about a corrupt bureaucracy, Laxman cartoons a series of digs on the corrupt politicians in the electoral arena. In the first cartoon (“Forget that Old Habit”, Source: Laxman, R.K. “Forget that Old Habit”, Indian Constitution at Work. NCERT, 2006, p. 73), he makes fun of the politician who is in the habit of covering his face. He directly mocks those politicians who are involved in

138 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

scams and controversies. However, the incongruity is indicated through the caption which asks the politician to give up his habit of covering his face before the camera as he is the nominated candidate for the election. The corruption in the system is exposed where such fraudulent candidates are known to run for government. The second cartoon sequentially depicts the post-election scenario in which portfolios are assigned to ministers. The minister seems unhappy with the portfolio, apparently, because his capabilities and eagerness to serve the people have not been rewarded. The incongruity is revealed when the reader realises that the politician is upset with the perks that come with the portfolio and the leader consoles by reminding him that the portfolio, indeed, comes with a house, a car, servants, foreign trips and secretaries. The third cartoon (“I’ve been Honourably Acquitted” Source: Laxman, R.K. “I’ve been Honourably Acquitted”, Indian Constitution at Work. NCERT, 2006, p. 14) represents the vicious cycle of the politicians getting involved in scams and then getting acquitted by the court to be further elected. In the third cartoon, the politician is acquitted by the court. The incongruity becomes evident when the reader realises that the politician is making the promise to never again indulge in corruption. Laxman also pokes fun at the institutions like the courts which by acquitting a criminal politician provides him a chance to ruin governance again. In all the three cartoons, other than incongruity of the intention of the politicians, the humour is further heightened through the presence of the Common Man who remains a mute witness and wears a bewildered expression at the incongruities happening around him. He is the connector between the cartoonist and the common citizen who is a helpless witness to the incongruous happenings. The linguistic messages act as the main medium of humour as they uncover incongruity. The Common Man who witnesses the incongruous acts, becomes the source through whom the citizens are able to connect with the theme. He is the coded-iconic message, as the character encodes the helplessness of the Indian citizens who are mute spectators of the illegal deeds. The images showing the politician with his face covered, the next one unhappy with the portfolio and the third one in the court act as the non-coded iconic messages which directly expose the criminal proclivity of the politicians. The history/matrix of controversies and scams

5  Application of the Model 

139

involving politicians form the basis for the stereotypical representation of “dirty politics”. Unlike the previous cartoons where the difference between the impression and perception acts as a catalyst for the transmutation of humour, here the impression and perception remain the same. The history as well as the present condition show the repetitive cycle of crimes committed by the politicians. The old scams have been replaced by new ones. When the difference between impression and perception reduces, the impact of the stereotypical representation increases as it comes closer to a factual representation. The interaction phase of humour is the stage where the audience identifies with this representation and mocks the career of politicians. The cartoon turns to the reaction phase as it incriminates the politicians and the governmental institutions that rule the country. All the three cartoons were recommended by the committee for deletion. The first cartoon carries the caption: “A comment of the criminal-­ politician nexus?” and it was recommended for deletion as the cartoon “stereotypes all politicians as being criminals”. The second cartoon carries the caption: “Why do people want to be ministers?” This cartoon seems to suggest that it is only for perks and status! Then why is there competition for some portfolios? The third cartoon has a sarcastic comment: “At least this gentleman seems to be happy with the judiciary!”. These two cartoons were recommended for deletion as they “convey a negative message” (26). The suggestions of the committee prove that the transmutation of humour happens when the stereotypes point to a negative stance. With the rise in the incidences of scams and controversies: Jeep Scandal (1948) Bofors scam (1987), 2G scam (2008), Commonwealth Games Scam (2010), the idea of dirty politics is evident which a cartoonist utilises and renders as stereotypical representations. The cartoons mainly explore the following metaphors (Fig. 5.4): The target and the source remain the same, so is the matrix as there is no difference between the impression and perception. Through the common man as the source, the cartoonist conveys the idea of the corrupt bureaucracy. With an unbroken history of scams, the cartoonist utilises stereotypes, which transcends the time frame and generally apply to any context, past as well as present. The stereotypes can be reinterpreted even in the present context of scam and controversies.

140 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Fig. 5.4  Conceptual mapping of Laxman’s cartoons on corrupt bureaucracy

Common Man is the connecting medium for the reader as his presence on site lends credibility of witness. The Common Man of Laxman acts as the vidūṣaka in classical Sanskrit plays. Similar to the fool or the clowns in the Shakespearean plays, the vidūṣaka acts as a sidekick to the protagonist and is the only medium through which the audience associate themselves with the characters. He is more of a commentator who also introduces the scenes and situations. Similar to the vidūṣaka, the Common Man is disillusioned but is resigned to a Tiresian silence “because he has seen so much and in a way that is what allows him to survive” (Doctor). The Common Man comes closer to the vidūṣaka also for the reason that he becomes the ally of the cartoonist. The Common Man presents a rational outlook and the helplessness of the public who merely remain silent observers. Unlike the vidūṣaka, the Common Man remains a mute witness to the happenings because, as Laxman, said “He doesn’t want to speak, because he knows it won’t help” (Doctor). He is a silent observer in a dhoti and a coat, representing the middle-class community. He is the connector between the cartoonist, the event and the audience as he introduces the situation. He is the mouthpiece of the common men of India: “Through [The Common Man’s] witnessing, the reader also [witnesses] democracy in action, [knows] how the bureaucracy works, [understands] why democracy fails, what are the challenges for a developmental agenda for a new democracy” (qtd.in Hills). The Common Man, thus, becomes

5  Application of the Model 

141

a tool for generating humour through which the audience directly makes an association with the incident, while the cartoonist directly attacks the bureaucracy. This directness acts as the ground for the transmutation of humour. The next cartoon (“Why do you Bother”. Cartoon. Democratic Politics I. NCERT, 2006, p. 67), similar to Laxman’s cartoon, utilises stereotypical representation. The cartoon was included in the Class IX textbook, Democratic Politics I, in the chapter “Electoral Politics”. In this cartoon also, the cartoonist Irfan communicates with a contemporary and a universal set of readers. The linguistic message in the cartoon introduces the setting, that of the election booth. The caption shows the politician addressing the voter: “Why do you bother? You can go, I got your vote cast” (Democratic Politics I 67), which indicates how the politician intimidates the voter after indulging in the illegal act of booth capturing. The depictions of the polling booth along with the portrayal of a lady carrying a voter id and entering the booth act as the non-coded iconic message. The cartoon by Irfan uses the colour black to suggest it with unruly behaviour and corruption. Here, the colour black acts as the main source through which the cartoonist targets the corrupt politician. The same becomes a coded-iconic message as it encodes criminality. The politician as well as the goons are in black colour, which represents their abject thuggishness. The politician is shown, stereotypically, indulging in booth capturing. The police man who is witnessing this is also a partner in crime and has his share (pun intended) in running a corrupt government. However, the humour transmutes in the given matrix by portraying the politician as black and the voter as fair. The goons supporting the politician are even more dark. The suggestiveness of the colour black can be read in the following ways: 1. As black as (one) is painted: portraying someone as audacious and evil. 2. As black as a raven’s feather: The raven is considered a bad omen. Thus, the colour black signifies a malicious intent. 3. A black mark: indicates a stain or a stigma one has to face when one commits a mistake. 4. Black magic: magic and spirit derived from evil forces which is mainly used to take revenge or hurt a person. (“Black”)

142 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The voter is shown in white implying his innocence and helplessness as he stands a mute witness to the audacious act. The Thorat Committee recommended the cartoon for deletion “due to the possibility of negative messaging” (25). The transmutation of humour happens when the matrix of discrimination against black, the Apartheid system, discrimination against the Dalits, triggers the memories of racial violence. The perception of the cartoon makes the audience interact with the humour, while the impression and the history of racial violence associated with the colour black triggers the reaction phase as it implies that black is synonymous with criminality (Fig. 5.5). The next cartoon (“Right to Information”, Democratic Politics II. NCERT, 2007, p. 49) by Surendra was included in the Class X Political Science textbook, Democratic Politics II, in the chapter, “Popular Struggles and Movements”. The cartoon carries the thought-provoking caption: “The Right to Information Act is one of the recent legislations passed by Parliament. Who is shown as obstructing the implementation of the legislation?” (Democratic Politics II 49). The Thorat Committee recommended the removal of the cartoon as it insinuates that the bureaucracy obstructs the implementation of the legislation. This again throws light on the inefficiency of the politicians and the bureaucracy, thus, spreading a negative message. Surendra, as a cartoonist, is conversing with the Indian readers of the new millennium when an initiative to pass the right to information was adopted by the government. The audience is relatively contemporary, as RTI has been a recent policy launched by the Indian

Fig. 5.5  Conceptual mapping of black and coloured politicians

5  Application of the Model 

143

government. The cartoon portrays the incongruity in the implementation of the right to information act. In the first panel, prime minister Manmohan Singh is shown inaugurating the Right to Information as he spreads his hand in a grand gesture of inaugurating the act. The hand pump waiting to be operated represents the support ruling government upheld for the Act in Parliament. In the second panel, it shows how the common people struggle to operate the hand pump as no water comes out of the tap. The cartoon utilises the common scene in a village where the villagers gather around hand pumps to collect water. The waterspout stands for the information flow, which does not render any information and the vessel of knowledge (the pot) remains empty. The humour is generated in this incongruity which lies between the high expectations of the government in passing the RTI Act and its failure to be effective. The RTI was introduced, by replacing the Freedom of Information Act (2002), which empowered the citizens of India to demand any information regarding policies and judgements of the ruling government. The Act was imposed to improve transparency in governance. It was passed by the Indian parliament in 2005. The enactment of the RTI has been the result of agitation by many social activists including Aruna Roy, Nikhil Dey, Shankar Singh and Anshi (Anima 2018). The demand for the Right to Information began as a grass roots movement with the agitations of the Mazdoor Kisaan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) (Organisation for the empowerment of workers and peasants) in 1996 in Beawar, who protested against the non-payment of wages to the workers employed by the government. Soon the protest gained momentum with social activists and other organisations joining the struggle. During the agitation, many social activists who demanded information also lost their lives. Aruna Roy’s The RTI Story: Power to the People accounts for the death of nearly 60 social activists who attempted to utilise the act to seek information. The villagers dressed in dhotis, lungis and sarees implies the matrix of the struggle of the MKSS, which was instrumental in the passing of the law in 2005. However, there have been considerable failures in the implementation of the programme. The tap that does not give any information represents the refusal of the government to share while stalling the requests of the citizens. It also shows the non-cooperation of the officials in providing information. Shailesh Gandhi, the Information

144 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Commissioner at the Central Information Commission, predicted, then, that there would be around 90,000 pending complaints and requests by 2015 (Misra). He says, By 2015, an RTI applicant wanting to appeal would have to wait for six years before being addressed by the IC… According to the findings of a recent nationwide study conducted by Public Cause Research Foundation (PCRF), of 76,813 cases analysed, there was a delay in providing information in 59,631 cases. (Misra)

This inefficiency is visualised by the cartoonist through the dysfunctional tap. The tap here stands for: 1. Tap into: Access information, which is the appropriate metaphor for the Right to Information act. The dysfunctional tap shows how the citizens are not able to tap into the information despite the government passing the Act. 2. On tap: Something which is available immediately. This metaphorical expression also brings out the irony of the situation, when the citizen’s requests are not heeded. It also alludes to the expression “Justice delayed is justice denied”, which can be re-written in this situation as, “Information delayed is information denied”. 3. Tight tap: The tight tap doesn’t give information implying that the bureaucrats are tight lipped. (“Tap”). The transmutation of humour happens through the direct association of the tight tap to the uncooperative politician, who is represented as tight lipped. “Inauguration”, “Right to Information” and “Bureaucracy” are the three main linguistic messages, which convey that the target of the cartoon is the launch of the RTI policy by the government. The hand pump acts as a source which shows how the processing of the policy has been hampered by the politicians themselves. It also acts as the coded-­ iconic message. The village setting which acts as the non-coded iconic message shows the real beneficiaries who are looking forward to the successful launch of the policy. Through the cartoon, Surendra targets the inefficiency of the bureaucracy which keeps contradicting itself from

5  Application of the Model 

145

within. Here again, the difference between impression and perception does not play a significant role as the cartoon shows the corrupt politicians who refuse to be transparent and accountable towards the people who have elected them. However, the matrix of violence against the social activists who pressed for RTI further transmutes humour. The perception of humour by the audience as they witness objections from the politicians and their identification with the visual metaphor of the tight tap defines the interactive phase. When the impression, the history of the murder of the activists who supported and attempted to implement RTI intrudes humour, it becomes sensitive and reactive. Humour turns sensitive as it negatively portrays the bureaucrats who have obstructed the system. The cartoons (“You Already” Democratic Politics II. NCERT, 2007, p. 85 and “Guarding the Defected MLAs” Source: Manjul. “Guarding the Defected MLAs”, Democratic Politics II. NCERT, 2007, p. 85) were included in the Class X textbook, Democratic Politics II in the chapter, “Political Parties”. Like Laxman, the cartoonist Manjul communicates with readers on broader issues. He targets the processes of election. The linguistic messages, “You already have so much money. Why do you want to contest the elections?”, “50 Crore” and “He is guarding the defected MLAs” show how the cartoons depict the election process that involves asset disclosure and defection. The verbal texts along with the politicians wearing the Gandhi cap and the man guarding the suitcases act as non-coded iconic messages. The suitcase and the 50-crore sheet act as the source to indicate the corrupt practices of politicians during elections. They also act as the coded-iconic message which shows the wealth amassed by the politicians illegally. The first cartoon explicates the irony of disclosing the huge assets of the politicians, amassed through corruption, and in the second cartoon, the cartoonist shows the process of defection where the politicians change parties. The first cartoon offers the ironical view of how much the politicians spend on their election. In the second cartoon, suitcases symbolise the money that has been given to them to switch allegiance. Both the cartoons were recommended by the committee to be deleted because “It does not convey any message, besides it is too crude” (26).

146 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

In the first cartoon, the lady who is filing her nomination is declaring an asset of 50 crore. Two observations: 1. The candidate already has made enough money from her career as a politician, which indicates the degree of corruption. 2. The greediness of the politician who always wants to make more money. The second cartoon shows how the policeman is guarding the defected MLAs. The suitcases indicate the loads of money that change hands for floor-crossing. The cases of defection were high between 1967 and 1970 (Diwan 304). It began with the Haryana MLA, Gaya Lal, who changed his allegiance thrice. When Indira Gandhi came to power, there was a fall in the rate of defection, but they continued between 1973–1975, until the anti-defection law was passed in 1985. Recently, in 2017, two MPs of the Janata Dal and 18 MLAs from Tamil Nadu were disqualified for defection. In the 2019 general elections of India, right from Tom Vadakkan, Shatrughan Sinha to Savitri Bhai Phule and Kirti Azad there have been defections in the BJP as well as the INC. Three MPs and ten MLAs came to the BJP and three MPs and one MLA shifted to the INC. Thus, the two cartoons drawn by Manjul show how they capture a general context. The directness of the telling which implies the greed and insatiability of the politicians cause the transmutation of humour by denting the image of the politicians. Here again, the stereotypical representation of dirty politics plays a major role in humour’s transgression. The audience interact with the humour as they identify with the immediate contexts where politicians still face troubles for having undeclared assets and wealth. The humour turns reactive as the cartoon stereotypically represents politicians to be corrupt. The impression and perception remain the same because there has not been much of a difference in the way politicians are depicted as they are still believed to be corrupt. The cartoon (“This Chair”. Democratic Politics II. NCERT, 2007, p. 49) was drawn by Ajit Ninan for The Times of India. Ajit as a cartoonist converses with a universal set of readers who have witnessed the use and abuse of religion. The cartoon was included in the Class X Political Science Textbook, Democratic Politics II in the chapter, “Gender, Caste and Religion”. Under this section, the textbook discusses how “Communalism was and continues to be one of the major challenges to

5  Application of the Model 

147

democracy in our country” (48). In this context, the use of religious symbols on the chair becomes sensitive as it implies how religion has been used as a medium to win elections. The Thorat Committee recommended the deletion of the cartoon “keeping the sensitivity of the people towards religion” (25). The linguistic message under the cartoon says that the chair is for the CM-designate to prove his secular credentials. However, the next line “there will be plenty of rocking”, exposes the ironical truth about politicians using religion to rock the state. The portrait of Gandhiji, politicians and the carpenter form the non-coded iconic message which directly communicate the use of religion in the minister’s office. Gandhiji’s portrait furthers the incongruity of humour, as on the one hand, he promoted secularism but in reality, the politicians cunningly use religion for their selfish ends. The rocking chair is the source and the coded-iconic message of the cartoon through which the cartoonist targets religion as a political strategy for gaining the support of the people. The word “rock” here implies: 1. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world: In this context, it means how the politicians are rocking the cradle of religious sentiments to rule the country. 2. Rock the foundations: It shows how the politicians use religion and bring instability. The demolition of the Babri Masjid, the Godhra riots, the Anti-Sikh riots are some of the instances of religious violence which have given political mileage to the leaders. (“Rock”). The cartoon shows how religion plays an important role in politics. The chair symbolises power. It is made up of all the religious symbols: Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism and so on. The cartoon’s symbolism of the chair is ambiguously posed between dividing the nation on religious lines and unifying it. The transmutation happens on account of this ambiguity. The perception of the cartoon positively interacts with humour as politicians are portrayed to be secular and honest leaders. The incongruity is revealed by the linguistic message and the intrusion of impression about the history of religious violence the politicians have stirred for political mileage makes humour sensitive and reactive.

148 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

5.3 Nehruvian Regime This section includes cartoons which revolve around Nehru, when he became independent India’s first prime minister. Nehru as a leader had to face new challenges during the making of the Republic. The censoring of these cartoons indicates the Thorat Committee’s moral policing with regard to humour. The committee’s recommendation for deletion points to its role as an arbitrator of cartoons which are perceived to perform a reinterpretation of history. The first cartoon (“Kicking Upstairs”, Indian Constitution at Work. NCERT, 2006, p. 166) was included in Indian Constitution at Work in the chapter “Federalism”. The cartoon represents a tussle in federalism as it shows the way governors were appointed in the Nehruvian regime. The caption under the cartoon in the textbook asks: “Is this how governors should be ‘appointed’” (Indian Constitution 166), thereby, turning the class’s focus on Nehru’s method of appointing governors. The word “appointed” highlighted with quotation marks further signifies the importance of the process. Here, Shankar, as a cartoonist interacts with the audience who lived during the Nehruvian era. Governors of the State are appointed by the Central government; thus, every action of the governor implies an act of the Central government. The actions of the Governor become even more debatable when the ruling parties in the Central and in the State governments are different. Nehru, the architect of modern India, had a prominent role in building “co-operative federalism” (Rajashekhara 135). “Kicking Upstairs” is the linguistic message in the cartoon which is a comment on Nehru’s style of appointing Governors. Nehru in the cartoon acts as the non-coded iconic message which points to his regime as the target of the cartoon. The action of kicking and the people bending over and waiting to be kicked up act as the coded-iconic messages, which indirectly indicate the dominance of Nehru and, correspondingly, of the Centre over the State governments. The action of kicking is the main metaphorical source. Kicking here refers to: A kick in the butt: Nehru shows his domination by kicking up the governors and asserts the domination of the Centre over the State. (“Kick”)

5  Application of the Model 

149

Thus, the metaphor of kicking up, which orientationally shows the height corresponding to greater power, conveys a sense of domination of the Centre over the State. The perception of the cartoon in the immediate context of appointing governors shows the firm stance of Nehru who “held that the appointment of a person as Governor should only be on merit, from outside the state, and only in consultation with the concerned chief minister and emphasised that these should be developed as firm conventions” (Pankaj 17). Nehru even preferred people from outside politics for the post of Governor. This context helps the reader to positively interact with humour. However, the transmutation of humour happens when one analyses the history/matrix of Nehru’s leadership which shows how Nehru practiced a “paradoxical legacy that combines institutional balance in the political arena with erosion of state autonomy under a centralised economic edifice” (Rajashekara “Nehru and Indian Federalism” 135). This brings the reactionary phase. The analysis of impressions of the federal structure of India shows that during the Nehruvian regime, he formulated a “prefectorial federalism” by which the will and control of the Central government was dominant (Rajashekara “The Nature” 246). This context turns the impact of humour. The president’s rule imposed in Kerala in 1959 threw new light on the discussion of the role of governors. The Sarkaria Commission was established in 1983 to evaluate the Centre-State relations and it included a separate evaluation on the role of the governor. Finally, the powers and discretion of the Governor were delineated. Though the committee recommended the removal of the cartoon based on its “ambiguous message”, the cartoon wryly presents the domination of the Centre in the appointment of Governors. The role of the Centre and the State which works through colonial metaphors transgresses humour. The work of the colonial metaphor as seen in the section, “Language, Caste and Gender”, functions in this cartoon also. The second cartoon (Laxman, R.K. “Quit”, Politics in India Since Independence. NCERT, 2007, p.169) was included in Politics in India Since Independence in the chapter “Regional Aspirations”. The cartoon by Laxman targets the Liberation of Goa during the 1960’s. Laxman as a cartoonist converses with the readers of the 1960’s. India achieved its independence in 1947, however, the Portuguese refused to give up Goa.

150 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

A liberation movement ensued in Goa between 1940 and 1961. The first civil disobedience movement began in 1946 which was led by Dr Ram Manohar Lohia and Dr Juliao Menezes. By 1947, different Goan political factions came together to demand that the Portuguese “Quit India”. Between 1948 and 1953, the diplomatic talks between India and the Portuguese failed. The movement gained momentum by 1953 and the agitations led by organisations like the Goa Liberation Army and Azad Gomantak Dal grew violent. By 1954, India annexed Dadra and Nagar Haveli which were also under the Portuguese. Following the annexation, India launched a military operation in Goa in 1961, and finally, Goa gained independence. This matrix is significant in understanding the cartoon. Similar to Goa, Pondicherry which remained a French colony, even after India achieved independence, was later annexed by the Indian army. The linguistic message of “Quit Goa” clearly defines the target of the cartoon. The title of “India” on the main door shows that the major setting of the room represents the Indian nation. Nehru is the non-coded iconic message as he is represented as the leader of India who must hold diplomatic talks with the Portuguese. Nehru’s statement “I admit years back you were living happily right here when this was all a colonial jungle… But we’ve cleared it now and built a decent house! So you must QUIT!……” shows his intent to hold talks with the Portuguese. The monkeys and the house act as the main source of humour in the cartoon. In this cartoon, the colonial metaphor is reversed. When the colonial masters considered the colonised as the Savage and the uncouth who lead an unsophisticated life, the metaphor reverses the perception to show how the colonial masters, the Portuguese, have actually been uncivilised to take Goa as their colony. Nehru’s newly built house represents India’s freedom and it is a symbol of civilisation. The colonial scenario, after the attainment of independence, is a chaotic jungle. The monkeys and the house act as the coded-iconic message. The monkeys lazing about and scratching their heads show their barbaric status. With the impression of the harshness of colonial rule, the audience positively interact with the humour in the cartoon which makes fun of the erstwhile colonial rulers. By 2012, the context has changed, India has forged diplomatic relationships with the former colonial masters and the readers are located in time that is past the history of the colonial rule. The perception of the cartoon

5  Application of the Model 

151

in the immediate context makes the humour reactive and sensitive as the foreigners are shown as wild animals. Moreover, the cartoon was recommended for deletion on the grounds that no institution or politician should be portrayed as an animal. Here, the committee takes exception to the use of animal symbolism in humour which aids the cartoonists in conveying the message quickly. As one analyses the cartoons of Shankar, one observes that the animal symbolism was common among the cartoonists. The use of the Panchatantra, the animal fables was relatable to the audience once. With the course of time, the repertoire of visual symbols has narrowed. In the above two cartoons, the colonial metaphors play a significant role. In the first cartoon, the tussle between the Centre and the State is expressed through the colonial metaphor. In the second cartoon, the relationship between the coloniser and the colonised is reversed. In both the cartoons, as the context changes in the course of time, the impact of humour also changes.

5.4 Indira Gandhi Regime The cartoon (Laxman, R.K. “The Cup that Cheers”, Politics in India Since Independence. NCERT, 2007. p. 98) was included in the class XII textbook, India Since its Independence, in the chapter, “Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System”. The Indira Gandhi regime witnessed different phases. First, she formed her government with Morarji Desai as the deputy prime minister. Her government, then, came to power in 1967, when Congress won the elections. Soon she enforced her own decisions, chief among them was the nationalisation of banks. Following this decision, she was dismissed from the party by the party President, S. Nijalingappa. Indira formed her own faction, which was called Congress (R) and the other group including Morarji Desai was called Congress (O). With the slogan “Garibi Hatao” (Eradicate Poverty) triumphing over the opposition’s slogan of “Indira Hatao” (Remove Indira), Indira romped to power with a landslide victory in 1971. This phase witnessed the launch of socialist policies. Besides, India defeated Pakistan in the war of 1971 which led to the creation of Bangladesh.

152 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

The Bangladesh Liberation war was a significant milestone which boosted the image of Indira Gandhi. In 1971, following the petition of Raj Narain, who accused her of using government funds in the election and illegal electoral practice, the case was taken up in the court and Indira was found guilty in 1975. The court ordered Indira to give up her parliamentary seat and banned her from contesting elections for the following six years. Defying the order of the court, with the recommendation of the President, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, a State of Emergency was declared on 25 June 1975 to control the unrest and chaos created by the opposition parties. The compulsory sterilisation programme under her son Sanjay Gandhi was one of the most infamous policies during this time. In 1977, the state of emergency was withdrawn, and elections were called. Indira lost the election, but soon came back to power in 1980. Following the formation of the militant group under the leadership of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale who bunkered with his armed group inside the precincts of the Golden Temple, the sacred temple of the Sikhs, Indira ordered Operation Blue Star in 1984 to flush out the militants. A lot of damage was done to the sacred temple. On October 31, 1984, two of her Sikh bodyguards who were hurt by Operation Blue Star assassinated her. This matrix is important to understand the cartoons. The first cartoon indicates the restoration of the Congress party after it split and the Indira Gandhi faction triumphed. The main slogan that took Gandhi to power was “Garibi Hatao”. The linguistic message the “cup that cheers” indicates the slogan “garibi hatao”, which called for eradication of poverty. The beggar popping out with the plate indicates his poverty and is a reminder to Indira of her promises. The cup and the poor man act as the source through which Laxman targets the victory of Indira. The cup and the man also act as the coded-iconic message. The depiction of Indira is the non-coded iconic message which directly communicates that the subject of the cartoon is the Indira Gandhi regime. The man emerging from the trophy is a reminder of the false promises of the politician. The “Garibi Hatao” slogan was also recently used by Rahul Gandhi, Indira’s grandson, in the 2019 elections. The Twenty Point Programme was initially launched by Indira in 1975. The programme included:

5  Application of the Model 

153

attack on rural poverty, strategy for rainfed agriculture, better use of irrigation water, bigger harvests, enforcement of land reforms, special programmes for rural labour, clean drinking water, health for all, two-child norm, expansion of education, justice to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, equality for women, new opportunities for youth, housing for people, improvement of slums, new strategy for forestry, protection of the environment, concern for consumer, energy for villages, and a responsive administration. (Madan 328–329)

When the government changed, the policies were not executed and, later, were restructured in 1982 and 1986. Thus, the man with the empty plate also foresees the empty promises the politicians make. Laxman as a cartoonist talks with the audience of 1971 and in the light of victory to the Indira faction through “Garibi Hatao”, the cartoon underlines their election strategy. It is the encouragement of the voiceless which led to the cheering cup. This immediate context of Indira’s victory is the perception through which humour interacts. But the reactionary phase of humour happens as we look at the history of the Indira Gandhi regime (emergency, Sikh massacre, compulsory sterilisation) and the scarred impressions they have left to a reader of 2012 who reads the cartoon differently. The Thorat Committee saw fit to recommend the deletion of the cartoon for “being politically sensitive” (27). As the context changes and one becomes aware of the history of the regime, the way one reads and interprets the cartoons differ. Here, the difference between the impression and the perception plays a significant role in the impact of humour. The second cartoon (Kutty, P.K.S. “Congress Party”, Politics in India Since Independence. NCERT, 2007, p. 95) was included in the class XII textbook, Politics in India Since Independence, in the chapter, “Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System”. Here again P.K.S. Kutty, the cartoonist, is mainly interacting with the readers of the 1970’s. The cartoon above shows the differences between Indira and the Congress party. When Laxman portrayed the aftermath of the split of the Congress party and the victory of the Indira faction, Kutty portrays the split of the Congress into Congress (R) and Congress (O). The “Congress Party” written on the thatched roof, the “Syndicate” on the pig and the “cook book” on the book carried by Indira act as the linguistic messages which depicts the attitude of Indira with the syndicate. Indira acts as the

154 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

non-­coded iconic message as it directly communicates how the target is the Indira regime. The syndicate is shown as the pig for the sacrifice. The pig in the cartoon acts as the source and the coded-iconic message. The Congress party syndicate as the caged pig represents how Indira outsmarted them and, eventually, snuffed them out. The pig here represents: 1. To buy a pig in a poke: To buy or get into something without actually knowing about it. The Congress syndicate that Indira took over was similar to buying a pig in a poke. Initially, there were snide remarks of how Indira was functioning as a puppet of the syndicate. It was in the later phase that she asserted her authority. As the pig also stands for a slovenly, dirty and gluttonous person, it suggests how the syndicate was a mess when Indira took over. 2. Like a pig to the slaughter: Without being aware that one is being prepared for the sacrifice. In this context, the syndicate was totally unaware of how Indira would turn independent without the need to consult the syndicate. The chasm widened and, finally, led to a split. Suggestively, the syndicate is led to a slaughter of which it is not aware. (“Pig”) With the audience of the 1970’s, the perception of the cartoon interacts with humour as it allows the audience to identify with the leadership of Indira Gandhi. On the other hand, the cartoonist insinuates that the syndicate was dirty and messy and the book that Indira Gandhi carries, titled, “Cook Book”, puns on the expression “cook the book”. The direct association is that the book instructs Indira on how to cook the pig. The table near her arranged with plate and the cutlery suggests this. The “cooking the book” expression looks apt as one looks at the history of Indira Gandhi, where the impression of how Indira Gandhi was booked for malpractices in the election plays a significant role. That she falsified the financial records for the election campaign, suggests her manipulative side. Here, the impressions at work make humour reactive as they hurt the sentiment, history and the image of the Congress party. The other cartoons by Kutty also show the authoritarian power of Indira. In the cartoons, Indira is shown to be in control of governance. In the first cartoon, she is manufacturing the ministers as in a doll factory. In the second

5  Application of the Model 

155

cartoon, she must decide on apportioning power to the States that line up like beggars before her. Both the cartoons depict how Indira micromanaged her ministers and how the government was fully centralised. The expression of sacrificing the pig gains more significance in this context. The Thorat Committee recommended that the cartoon may be deleted as the subject is shown in an animal form. Animal symbolism which is a common tool utilised by the cartoonist becomes the ground for the transmutation of humour. Animal representation helps the cartoonist to convey the message quickly as the character and the nature of the animals become clearly associated with the person or the situation. However, the committee recommended the deletion of animal symbols. Even the cartoon by Huffaker was recommended for removal as the institutions were represented as animals. Animal symbolism, like the stereotypes, contain no difference between the impression and perception as their character remains the same. This stability gives the cartoonist an opportunity to use it as a medium to communicate with the audience quickly. The censoring of animal symbolism further shows that the government insists on moralising the use of humour. From the above two cartoons on the Indira regime by Laxman and Kutty, the following source and target have been utilised by the cartoonist. The diagram below shows the shift in the source as well as the target domains in course of time which leads to the transmutation of humour (Figs. 5.6 and 5.7).

Fig. 5.6  Conceptual mappings of Indira Regime I

156 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

Fig. 5.7  Conceptual mappings of Indira Regime II

The transmutation of humour happens as the context changes. Providing an opportunity to the contemporary reader to analyse the political history, the target of the cartoon changes from the success of the Indira Gandhi regime to the failures during her governance.

5.5 Regionalism Similar to humour’s sensitivity to religion, caste and gender, regionalism is one topic which demands that humour be subtle and cautious. The diversity of the country with 29 states, is a cause for mutual recriminations between regions. Two cartoons were recommended to be censored as they dealt with sensitive regional issues. The two cartoons are included in the Political Science textbook, Politics in India Since Independence, in the chapter “Regional Aspirations” as they represent the contentious side of Indian governance. The cartoonists Kutty and the Amul Brand target the troubled regions of Kashmir in the North and Assam in the North-East which have a history of separatism and secessionism. Kashmir in India, which was a princely state, has been partly occupied by Pakistan as well as China. The struggle between India, Pakistan and China continues. After achieving Independence in 1947, the princely states were given the choice to accede to India or to Pakistan or remain independent. Maharaja Hari Singh did

5  Application of the Model 

157

not take any decision. Meanwhile, rebels from the Northwest Frontier of Pakistan attacked the state, which prompted the king to seek India’s help. India provided assistance on condition of accession following a plebiscite. Indian troops were moved to quell the uprising. With the intervention of the UN, the line of control was drawn between India and Pakistan. The UN instructed Pakistan to first withdraw forces and then requested India to withdraw, after which plebiscite was to be conducted. But the demands were rejected by Pakistan who were asked to withdraw first; both the forces did not withdraw and the problem of accession of Kashmir continues. Following which, political instability and chaos have been frequent in Kashmir. In the cartoon, Kutty shows Indira crowning Sheikh Abdullah, who again became the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir after the Indira-­ Sheikh agreement in 1974. The cartoonist interacts with the readers of the 1970’s. The cartoon is devoid of a linguistic message. However, the caption under the cartoon directly tells that the topic of the cartoon is the Indira-Sheikh agreement. The images of Indira and Sheikh act as the non-coded iconic message. Abdullah formed the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference party and defied the rule of Maharaja Hari Singh. He led the Quit Kashmir agitation in 1946. When Maharaja Hari Singh asked for military aid from India, Sheikh Abdullah was declared as the head of the Emergency administration of Kashmir. He formed a patrolling force to guard the streets of Kashmir, which soon changed into a militia. After Maharaja Hari Singh’s abdication, his son came to power who arrested Sheikh Abdullah on the grounds of plotting against the state to create an independent Kashmir. Abdullah was arrested in 1953 and was put in prison for the next 11 years. After the charges were dropped, he undertook deliberations to solve the dispute between India and Pakistan. With Nehru’s death, the talks came to an end. After Indira came to power and won the Indo-Pakistan war in 1971, an agreement was signed between Indira and Sheikh Abdullah, which made him the CM. He dropped his demand for self-rule in Kashmir and was declared the CM, after which Jammu and Kashmir was given an autonomous status according to article 370 of the Indian Constitution. Sheikh Abdullah was widely criticised for giving up his demands for the plebiscite. The crown in the

158 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

cartoon acts as the source and the coded-iconic message. The crown represents power and authority. The wry smile worn by Abdullah shows his greed for power. The immediate context/ perception of him giving up his demands for self-rule of Kashmir proves the hidden motives behind the smile. In this context, the audience interact with the subtle humour in the cartoon. The cartoon becomes sensitive as Kashmir remains a conflict zone, which has been subjected to many terrorist and militant attacks. The transmutation of humour happens as the context changes. In that context, autonomous status for Jammu and Kashmir may seem an exclusive right for the state. But with the history/matrix of bloodshed and attacks, the same decision to forego the plebiscite has been felt heavily by the people of Kashmir. This context makes the cartoon sensitive. The impression of continuous bombings and terrorist attacks which has menaced the lives of the Kashmiris turns the cartoon sensitive and the humour reactive. Furthermore, in the latest development of the revocation of article 370 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, the sensitivity of the cartoon is bound to increase more. In the second cartoon (Amul. “Assarmed and Dangerous”, Politics in India Since Independence. NCERT, 2007, p. 166), Amul targets the tense situation in Assam. Amul takes a humorous view of the tensions in Assam during the 1970’s; the intended audience of the cartoon are also the readers of the 1970’s. Assam, one of the eight states in the North-East of India, like Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and Sikkim, is geographically difficult to access. Each state possesses a different culture. and their inhabitants vary from one other. Geographically and culturally, these North-Eastern states, have always felt alienated from the mainstream. In this cartoon, Assam retaliates against the illegal migrants from Bangladesh. Between 1975–1985, there were massive agitations by the All Assam Students Union (AASU) and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP). During the by-election in 1978, the parties realised there was an increase in the number of voters. The parties postponed the election till the foreign voters were excluded from the list. This later transformed into a popular movement and took a violent turn when thousands of immigrants were killed by the indigenous mobs in 1983,

5  Application of the Model 

159

which was called the Nellie Massacre. In the Khoirabari massacre in 1983 another 500 immigrants were killed by the agitators. The agitation came to an end when the Assam Accord was signed in 1985 under the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi and the parties came together to form the Assam Gana Parishad, which later ruled the state. The ethnic demands of the state led to violent movements and struggles. This matrix of ethnic violence is mandatory to comprehend the cartoon. The linguistic message in the cartoon says “Assarmed and Dangerous”. “Assarmed” puns on Assam, which is armed and dangerous. The militants standing with the guns behind the tea estates prove this. The militants with the guns act as the non-coded iconic message. The caption “Safer tea times” along with the green valley in the background connotes the tea-estates and the geography of Assam. They act as the coded-iconic message. “Assarmed” = Assam+ Armed is another coded-iconic message, which mainly acts as the source of wordplay in the cartoon. While Amul as a brand wishes good and safer tea times with Amul milk, on the other hand it shows how Assam is desperately in need of safer times. This incongruity generates humour. The Thorat Committee recommended the removal of the cartoon as it did not depict the reality stated by the newspapers. When the NCERT was purporting to give all the sides of the issue, the newspapers focused on the historic pact, while the cartoon showed the violence of the movement. The transmutation of humour happens in the cartoon where the difference between the impression and perception is less which makes humour reactive. With the immediate context/perception of the 1970’s, the readers would have interacted with the humour in the cartoon, but the continuing history/impression of ethnic violence in Assam makes the humour reactive. The cartoon still reverberates with contemporary significance. The recent cases of violence and riots in Assam—in July 2012, violence broke out between the Bodos and Bengali-speaking Muslims in Kokrajhar, there were further attacks in May 2014 upon Bengali Muslims; in December 2014, there was an attack by the militants in Assam—prove the continuing ethnic violence which makes the cartoon sensitive. As one looks at the history of violence in Assam, one finds that the context has remained the same, which makes it difficult for one to perceive the

160 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

humour. Similarly, the insurgency has also continued in Kashmir for ages. This context makes the cartoon sensitive. Thus, the transmutation of humour happens as the context remains the same and the increased violence makes the persuasion of the cartoon difficult. The analysis of the cartoons through the model emphasises that context plays an important role in understanding humour in political cartoons. Gradually as time changes, there is a corresponding change in the impact of humour. Thus, understanding of the context and the temporality is essential to comprehend the dynamics of humour. The category of matrix, which is akin to history, shows how context and culture is important in the interpretation of political humour. The cartoons also show how humour from incongruity is the major type found in political cartoons. In most of the cartoons, the incongruity between the expectations of the politicians/parties/audience and how the events unfold in reality forms the basis of humour in political cartoons. Humour further takes the shade of irony, parody and sarcasm in political cartoons. The coordinates used in the model further explicate the working of humour. The impact of humour varies as the readers change. The linguistic message in the political cartoon directly communicates the topicality of humour. The target domain is the non-coded iconic message, that conveys the subject of the cartoon. Source domain is the coded-iconic message that analyses the metaphorical vehicle. The perception and impression are crucial in deciding the impact of humour. Perception represents the immediate or the current context, while impressions indicate the accumulated past and the memories. The difference between perception and impression decides the impact of humour. Perception and impression together constitute the matrix, which is the general context (sum total of immediate and the secondary context). In most of the cartoons, perception primarily indicates the interaction phase of humour. Impressions on the other hand, which denote the history through their interventions render humour reactive. Impression and perception represent two kinds of contexts, the immediate and the historical which are crucial to the understanding of humour. More the difference between impression and perception, more are the chances of the cartoon turning reactive. The Ambedkar cartoon, the Anti-Hindi

5  Application of the Model 

161

agitation cartoons and many cartoons by Laxman, Shankar and Kutty prove that when the time gap increases, the tendency to read humour out of context also increases. When the difference between impression and perception is less, it results in the use of stereotypes. With lesser difference between impression and perception, the stereotypical representation is stronger and closer to a factual portrayal. The stereotypical representation, though a necessity for humour in political cartoons, has to be portrayed cautiously to reduce the sensitivity of humour. The model also shows how conceptual metaphors are intrinsic to the functioning of humour in political cartoons. The major reasons for the transmutation of humour derived from the model are: • Context is important to humour. The difference between the impression and the perception determines the impact of context on humour. The idea of the larger context is analysed through matrix. • Ambiguity plays a significant role in the transmutation. When humour in political cartoons is ambiguous, the space it offers for interpretation and reinterpretation increases. With the change in the context, the ambiguity of humour takes different shapes and forms, thus, underlining its transgressive nature. • Similar to ambiguity, directness also plays a major role. As the directness of humour increases, the chance of it becoming rude and reactive also increases. Therefore, one can conclude that the success of humour lies between the balancing of ambiguity and directness. • Humour becomes sensitive when it deals with the minority community who are offended in terms of language, caste, community, gender and region. Here, humour in political cartoons particularly exposes the power relations which unobtrusively impacts humour. • The mode of publication has not been analysed individually for all the cartoons as it demonstrates that when the mode of publication shifted from the newspaper to the textbook, humour transmuted. Newspapers are more accessible to the general public. Moreover, the cartoon column which appears daily in the newspaper assures that the public is in

162 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

a continuous conversation with the cartoonist. With familiarity of style, the intention of the cartoonist becomes clearer, thus, accomplishing a successful humorous communication. One understands how intentionality and familiarity are crucial for discerning the impact of humour. When the same cartoon appears in a textbook, firstly, the humour in the cartoon is placed out of context. Secondly, textbooks are intended for a narrow audience, mainly the students. Where the newspaper inhabits a public sphere, the textbook is more closed and demands a cautious approach. The duration of the cartoon’s impact also varies as the medium varies. With every breaking news, the cartoons get replaced by new ones, but in a textbook once the cartoons are selected, they stay for a minimum of five years. Thus, the mode of publication is also intrinsic to decide the impact of humour. The medium of publication determines the virality and contagiousness of humour. • The act of moralising can be harmful to the health of humour. The Committee has censored many of the cartoons that use humour to portray the bureaucracy in a negative light. While the main aim of humour in politics is to expose the flaws of democracy, the act of censoring humour for its interventionist character shows the growing intolerance towards the very essence of humour. The analysis of humour in Indian political cartoons turns attention on the typical Indian preference for humour that’s subtle and gentle. When the West practices a direct and no holds barred attitude to humour, Indian political cartoons are more moderated in structuring political humour. The preference for subtlety in humour is evident in the excessive moralising posture of the committee. Thus, the coordinates in the model aid in assessing the factors which are responsible for the transmutation. The model also helps in foreseeing the movement of the language of humour in political cartoons. It also helps in delineating the nature of humour in Indian political cartoons. The model, therefore, attempts to visualise the functioning and operational domains of humour in Indian political cartoons.

5  Application of the Model 

163

Works Cited Secondary Sources Anima, P. “Know your RTI Soldiers”. The Hindu Business Line, 27 Apr. 2018, https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/know/know-­your-­rti-­soldiers/ article23694105.ece. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019.

6 Language, Context and Operation of Humour

The study above shows how humour is perilously balanced between freedom of speech and censorship; “affect” and the “disease”. The cartoonist picks his pen to confront the sword. The pen/affect and sword/disease confrontation in political cartoons, foregrounds two functions of humour: One can either “laugh with” or “laugh at” the subject (Hall and Allin 2–3). The chasm between “laugh with” and “laugh at”, further clarifies the difference between “affect” and “disease”. Laughing with the subject is the association the audience makes with the subject confirming a positive impact. But when the audience “laughs at” the subject, there is, invariably, a cause for embarrassment, which is followed by hurt sentiment. The difference between laughing with and laughing at, is fundamentally, that between understanding and tolerance. To have a positive impact from the cartoon, one should be ready to understand, on the other end, how far the humour is infectious, would be decided by how much one is ready to tolerate the cartoonist’s jibe. Thus, the survival of the cartoonist depends on the thin line between “excessive contentiousness” and “excessive politeness” (Palmer “The Logic of the Absurd” 175). The juxtaposition of “affect” and “disease” is intended to emphasise humour’s two-facedness. The word “contagious” is an adjective of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7_6

165

166 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

“contagion” and it is defined as “(of a person) likely to transmit a disease by contact with other people or (figurative) of an emotion, and affect others” (“Contagious”) thus, implying humour’s disease-affect potential to impact opinion. Looking at the definitions hitherto, the word “contagious” suggests how humour is double-edged as it can mean how humour can bring emotional excitement or how mercurial it can become to corrupt minds. With this hypothesis, the study further illustrates the dialectic relation between humour and violence. Aligning with Robertson’s statement that “Humour is an affirmation of dignity, a declaration of man’s superiority to all that befalls him” (71), its function in political cartoons is as a weapon with which the common citizens counters the dominant political discourse. However, the discussion on the cartoon controversies, global and national, explicates how the study is relevant in the present situation where there has been an increasing intolerance towards humour across the globe. Humorous cartoons which have even resulted in the lynching of the cartoonists and mass murder by terrorists prove how the world is turning insensitive to humour, resulting in “intellectocide” (Bennoune). In this context, the study is significant which makes an attempt to examine humour and its problematic relationship with negative reactions in the political sphere. Unlike the West where political cartoons have been included in the textbooks (McCarthy 1977; Hou and Hou 1998; Werner 2004; Steinbrink and Bliss 2015), when India for the first time introduced political cartoons in the textbooks in 2006, it turned controversial in 2012 and the Members of Parliament demanded the withdrawal of the cartoons from textbooks. The Human Resource Development (HRD) Minister’s comment: “cartoons on the political class should not find a place in textbooks” (Ray 136) further indicates how the controversy spun out of control. The Thorat Committee’s scrutiny depicts how humour in political cartoons can either lead to interaction or reaction. The way one receives humour is primarily based on the impression and the perceptions of the reader. The model, taking cues from Roland Barthes, Roman Jakobson, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, further analyses how impression and perception render to the transmutation of humour. Perception and impression represent two kinds of contexts: the immediate context relevant to the creation of the cartoon and the personal

6  Language, Context and Operation of Humour 

167

historical context. The context-specific aspects which are intrinsic to the understanding of humour in political cartoons constitute the pragmatic angle of the model. The importance of context also suggests how the medium or the mode of publication is also significant in determining the consequence of humour. The impact of humour changes as the audience change with the mode of publication. The general public at the newspaper’s end, the students as the receivers of textbook education and the contemporary audience in the social media each, reads, receives and reacts differently according to the changes in the medium. The model also analyses how the power relations in the context play a significant role in deciding the boundary between political correctness and the Un-PC. The Ambedkar cartoon, Anti-Hindi agitation cartoon, the cartoons on the Indira regime and others show how in the immediate context the representation by the cartoonist seems ethical. With the passage of time, however, the impressions intervene and the source-target relationship of the metaphor in humour changes, the same cartoon turns politically incorrect. The common use of Animal symbolism between the 1950s and the 1990s and its censure in 2000s also shows how the ethical presentation of humour is contextual and more appropriately situated in nature. The major conclusion that one can derive from the model and readings of the cartoons is that humour as a text in political cartoon is created with a specific context in mind. With the course of time and the interplay of intertextual elements—the interaction of verbal and the visual medium (multimodality of humour) through the source-target-­ matrix in the mapping of conceptual metaphors along with the personal cultural context—transmutes humour in political cartoons. The same argument also has been pointed by Jörg Zinken in “Ideological imagination: intertextual and correlational metaphors in political discourse” (2003). The analysis of the cartoons through model exhibit that the majority of cartoons derive its humour from incongruity. The same connection is identified by Popa as she says, “cartoons, metaphors and incongruity play in such a unique form of political entertainment as a direct continuation of the satiric message” (“Televised Political Satire” 377). The incongruity between the expectations from politicians and the reality visited upon by the citizens form the basis of political humour. Shades of superiority

168 

V. Balakrishnan and V. Venkat

theory also shape the nature of political humour, as it plays out the power dynamics between the inferior and the superior and the feeling of embarrassment. The model also establishes that the success of humour in political cartoons lies between the balance of ambiguity and directness. Humour should not be too obscure to the citizens, neither should it be too blunt to directly attack the sentiments of the target. Speaking of the relation between ambiguity and directness, the use of stereotype is convoluted in political humour. The model concludes that the lesser the gap between the impression and perception, which is the personal history and the immediate context, the use of stereotype becomes equivalent to a factual representation. The gap, here, again signifies the importance of the context. Context, here, specifically looks at the cumulative history. For example, the negative representation of politicians through humour is taken to be offensive. But on the other hand, the representation comes nearer to the factual as the continued history of scams and the immediate context of scandals in which politicians are involved show that it is in the very vocation of the politician to indulge in corruption. Thus, stereotypes which constitute the anatomy of political cartoons, should communicate strategically for more receptiveness. Finally, the moralising behaviour of the committee which censored cartoons that depicted the bureaucracy in the negative light, again pinpoints the changed political atmosphere which is affecting the survival of humour. The age of animal symbolism, use of character sketches from Panchatantra and the depiction of the emperor in the buff is gone. The political atmosphere has grown to be more sensitive and intolerant towards humour. The arrests and killing of cartoonists in the recent years suggests an alarming situation. The model advocates discretion in the light of insensitivity of the political authority towards humour. The editorial cartoons have their own register which is governed by the regional and national politics, language and culture. While the contextual factor can be theoretically accounted for by the model, there is a bigger challenge in developing the model to accommodate the register which varies from region to region. Through the model, the study explores the probable interpretations that has a potential to turn humour reactive. Moreover, the model primarily traces the transmutation from humour to anger, the examination of reverse transmutation also furthers the scope of

6  Language, Context and Operation of Humour 

169

the study. The model can be further strengthened with quantitative analysis. One can also further conduct neuro-scientific research, FMRI scans to understand the implication of transmutation of humour on the human brain. We need scientific analyses to see how humour is affecting the audience, especially in this era of trolls and memes where humour turns viral and controversial at quick pace. The increasing cases of humour controversies (Appendix) illustrate the “growing shrillness” (Padmanabhan 2015) towards humour in political cartoon. Amidst the spectre of the cartoonists vanishing, the topic of transmutation of humour becomes a major concern in the humanities. From the academic standpoint, the study therefore holds much promise for future researchers.

Works Cited Secondary Sources Hou, Charles and Cynthia Hou. The Art of Decoding Political Cartoons. Moody’s Lookout Press, 1998. McCarthy, Michael P. “Political Cartoons in the History Classroom”. The History Teacher, vol. 11, no. 1, 1977, pp. 29–38. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/492723. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Padmanabhan, Chitra. “The Growing Shrillness of Politics is a Problem for the Cartoonist”. The Wire, 08 Dec. 2015, https://thewire.in/media/the-­growing-­ shrillness-­of-­politics-­is-­a-­problem-­for-­the-­cartoonist. Accessed 03 Sept. 2019. Steinbrink, John and Bliss, Donna. “Using Political Cartoons to Teach Thinking Skills”. The Social Studies, vol. 79, no. 5, 2015, pp. 217–220. Werner, Walt. “On Political Cartoons and Social Studies Textbooks: Visual Analogies, Intertextuality, and Cultural Memory”. Canadian Social Studies, vol. 38, no. 2, 2004, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1073912.pdf. Zinken, Jörg. “Ideological Imagination: Intertextual and Correlational Metaphors in Political Discourse.” Discourse and Society, vol. 14, no. 4, 2003, pp.  507–523. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/42888585. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020.



Appendix: Persecution of Cartoonists

Year Country France

1831

b

1917

b

Netherlands

1940 bLondon 1982 bLondon 1987 Palestine

1987

India

b

1994 Algeria

1995 Algeria 1996 Algeria 1998 Istanbul

Event Charles Philipon was charged with defamation for insulting King Louis Philippe. Louis Raemaekers, a Dutch cartoonist, popular for his anti-German cartoon, fled to England fearing persecution. David Low was placed on Hitler’s hitlist. Robert Edwards was arrested for anti-Semitic cartoons. Naji Salim, a Palestinian cartoonist, was shot dead for his sharp and edgy cartoons criticising the Arab governments. S. Balasubramanian, editor of Ananda Vikatan, was arrested for the caricature of legislators. Said Mekbel, an Algerian journalist, was also assassinated for his sharp views expressed in the Algerian newspaper. Brahim Guerroui was an Algerian cartoonist who was assassinated. Mohamed Dorbane, journalist with Le Soir d’Algérie, was killed in a bomb explosion. Dogan Güzel was arrested for defamation as his cartoons in the Özgür Gündem mocked the Turkish authorities. (continued)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7

171

172 

Appendix: Persecution of Cartoonists

(continued) Year Country

Event

1999 India

Irfan Hussain, a cartoonist of Outlook, was found murdered. Tony Namate was attacked for his open criticisms on the rule of Zimbabwe government. Denis Leroy was prosecuted for his cartoons on terrorist attacks. Danish cartoon crisis Ali Dilem was sentenced to jail for his provoking cartoons. Vilks was attacked for his controversial cartoons on Muhammad. Manel Fontdevila was fined for insulting the royal family. Prageeth Eknaligoda, a bold cartoonist, critical of the Sri Lankan government, disappeared. Ali Ferzat was beaten by Syrian military forces for scathing cartoons. Harish Yadav, popularly known as Mussveer, was arrested for an offensive cartoon on CM of Gujarat (Narendra Modi). Mahmoud Shokraye was arrested for defamatory cartoon. Aseem Trivedi was arrested for his cartoons which disrespected the national symbols. Ambedkar cartoon controversy. Leslie Chew was arrested and attacked for his controversial cartoons. Xavier Bonilla was tried for his cartoons on corruption and criticism of the Ecuadorian government. Atena Farghadani was arrested for cartoons against the regime. Charlie Hebdo attack. Hadi Heidari was arrested by the Iranian government. Jiang Yefei was sentenced for his cartoons insulting the authorities. Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks was attacked. Musa Kart was also arrested by the Turkish authorities. Zunar was arrested for attacking the government through cartoons. The cartoonist, Islam Gawish, was arrested during a police raid in Cairo. Ramón Nsé Esono Ebalé was arrested for his cartoons which criticised the government.

2000 Zimbabwe 2001 France 2005 Jutland 2006 Algeria 2007 Sweden 2007 Spain 2010 Sri Lanka 2011 Syria 2011

b

2012

b

India

Turkey

2012 India 2012 India 2013 Singapore 2014 Ecuador 2014 Iran 2015 France 2015 Iran 2015 China 2015 Copenhagen 2016 Turkey 2016 Malaysia 2016 Egypt 2017 Equatorial Guinea

(continued)

  Appendix: Persecution of Cartoonists 

173

(continued) Year Country

Event

2017 India

Bala arrested from Tamil Nadu for portraying the politicians naked. Chinese government cancelled the exhibition of Badiucao in Hong Kong. Michael de Adder lost his job for insulting the American president in his cartoons. The New York Times stops the edition of cartoons.

2018 Hongkong 2019 Canada 2019 USA

The list presented here is not an exhaustive list, as it presents some of the hand-­ picked cases which primarily shows the increasing intolerance towards the political cartoonists b Navasky, Victor S. The Art of Controversy: Political Cartoons and their Enduring Power. Knopf, 2013 a

Glossary

A blind man’s son is blind 

Draupadi addresses Duryodhana, who is the son of the blind King Dhritarashtra. When Duryodhana carelessly slips from the ground Draupadi sarcastically remarks him to be as blind as his father. Aam Admi Party (The Common Man’s Party)  It is an Indian political party, founded in 2012, as part of the movement against corruption in India. Arvind Kejriwal is the leader of the party. Abanindranath Tagore  A remarkable artist and writer, who is known as the founder of Indian Society of Oriental Art and the Bengal School of Art. He was also an active participant in the Swadeshi movement. Ajit Ninan  He is a renowned political cartoonist, known for his “Centrestage” series in India Today. He is currently drawing for “Nina’s World” in Times of India. Akbar  Akbar the Great was a Mughal emperor who ruled between 1556 and 1605. He consolidated and expanded the Mughal empire in India. He is also known for promoting the Indo-Persian culture. Akhilesh Yadav  He is an Indian politician and the president of the Samajwadi Party. All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (Assam Popular Struggle Association)  It is an Indian political party from the state of Assam. Anshi Singh  She was an important activist in supporting the implementation of the Right to Information Act.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7

175

176 Glossary Anti-Sikh riots 

Following the assassination of Indira Gandhi on 31 October 1984 by her two Sikh bodyguards, a riot ensued, and thousands of Sikhs were massacred. Arvind Kejriwal  He is an Indian politician and the current Chief Minister of Delhi. He is an important leader of Aam Aadmi Party. Article 35 A  The article provided special privileges to the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir. Article 370  This article gave autonomous status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Aruna Roy  She is an Indian activist known for her campaign for Right to Information. She was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 2000. Assam Gana Parishad (Assam People’s Association)  It is a political party of Assam, currently led by Prafulla Kumar Mahanta. The party was formed after the Assam Accord of 1985. Azad Gomantak Dal  Founded by Vishwanath Lawande, Narayan Hari Naik, Dattatraya Deshpande, Prabhakar Sinari, Azad Gomantal Dal is a revolutionary party found in Goa against fighting the colonial rule of the Portuguese. B.P.  Mandal  Bindheshwari Prasad Mandal was the chairman of the Second Backward Classes commission. His report recognised the “Other Backward Classes” and recommended reservation for the OBCs. B.R. Ambedkar  Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, popular known among the public as Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, has been the significant leader in promoting the Dalit consciousness and the Dalit Buddhist movement. He was an economist, politician and a social reformer. He is known as the architect of Indian Constitution. Baijnath Kedia  He started, Vyang Chitraval, an Indigenous version of Punch. Bangladesh Liberation War  In 1971 the East Pakistan revolted against the West Pakistan and demanded separate state. With the entry of Indian army, it turned into an Indo-Pakistan war in 1971. The West Pakistan surrendered, and the East Pakistan was converted and the state of Bangladesh was formed. Beawar  A city in the state of Rajasthan. Bharatiya Janata Party  One of the major political parties in India. It is currently the ruling central party of India. Birbal  He was the advisor of Mughal Emperor Akbar and is a famous character in Indian folk tales. C.J. Yesudasan  One of the popular cartoonists from Kerala. He has worked with Shankar in Shankar’s Weekly. He is known for his character Kittumavan, the earliest pocket cartoon in Malayalam.

 Glossary  C.N. Annadurai 

177

He was an Indian politician and the first Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. He was a member of Dravidar Kazhagam and formed the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, a political party in spearheading the self-respect movement in Tamil Nadu. Chitravalis  Earliest forms of paintings and caricatures circulated in India. Compulsory Sterilisation Programme  During the time of Emergency, in 1976, Sanjay Gandhi, son of Indira Gandhi, introduced the compulsory sterilisation programme in India. Men were forced to undergo vasectomy and women were compelled to control birth. Dassault Rafale deal  One of the controversies faced by BJP and NDA government. The controversy is regarding the Rafale fighter jets manufactured by the French company Dassault Aviation. The controversy sparked when the previous Rafale Deal made by UPA (United Progressive Alliance) government, which gave the manufacturing of the flights to government-owned HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited), was replaced and given to a private firm during the NDA rule. Demolition of Babri Masjid  In December 1992, the Babri Masjid was demolished by Hindu activists as their protests turned violent. The mosque was built in Ayodhya, which is believed to be the birthplace of Lord Rama, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Draupadi  One of the important characters in the epic, Mahabharata. She is the wife of Pandavas (Yudhishtir, Bheema, Arjun, Nakula and Sahadeva). Dravidar Kazhagam  It is the self-pride movement of Tamil Nadu, which was begun by E.V. Ramaswamy. Duryodhana  Another central character in Mahabharata. He is the son of Dhritarashtra and the arch nemesis of Pandavas. E.P. Unny  One of the trending political cartoonists of India. His pocket cartoon “Business as Usual” appears in the Indian Express. Emergency  It was declared between 1975 and 1977, during the Indira Gandhi regime. It was issued with the order of the President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. After Raj Narain lost election, he filed a case against Indira for election fraud in 1971. The High Court verdict held Indira guilty of the charges. She challenged the judgement in Supreme Court, but it also upheld the verdict of High Court. Indira was banned from contesting election and was asked to forsake her privileges. Following the unrest, an emergency was declared. Civil rights were curbed and any intolerance against the government was not spared. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed  He served as the President of India between 1974 and 1977.

178 Glossary G.  Subramania Iyer 

He was a freedom fighter and a social reformer. He is the founder of The Hindu. Ganesh Chathurthi  It is a festival which celebrates the birth of lord Ganesha. He is invited to homes as a guest by installing his clay idols. After a few days he is sent back by dissolving the idol in the sea. Ganesha  Lord Ganesha is the son of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati. He has an elephant head and a human body. He is considered to be the remover of obstacles. Ghungats  It is a kind of scarf with which married women cover their heads. It is usually done with the end of the Sarees worn by the ladies. Godhra riots  The riots happened in Gujarat in 2002. The Hindu pilgrims were returning from Ayodhya, in a train. Soon argument ensued between the travellers and train was set on fire. The event resulted in communal violence. Gokul Gopalakrishnan  He is a trending cartoonist and is known for his cartoon column in the Asian Age. His comic strip “Small Talk” appears in the New Indian Express. Golden Temple  It is a Gurudwar (place of worship for Sikhs) in Amritsar, Punjab, and is an important pilgrimage site for the Sikhs. Hanuman  Lord Hanuman is an important character in the epic Ramayana. He is an ardent devotee of Lod Rama and helps him in the battle against Ravana. Hardik Patel  He is an Indian politician and a member of INC. He is known for the patidar reservation agitation in 2015. Indian National Congress  It is one of the major parties in India. INC led the independence movement in India. Currently it is the opposition party. Indira Gandhi  She was the first female Prime Minister of India and daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru. Indraprastha  It was the capital of Pandavas in Mahabharata. Irfan Khan  He is a prominent cartoonist in India. He has worked with the Economic Times, Navbharat Times and Asian Age. Ithihasa  It means history and also implies a story which happened in the past. J.  Jayalalitha  She was an Indian politician and a member of All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. She had served as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. Jadavpur University  It is a popular public state university in Kolkata. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference party  It is a political party in Jammu and Kashmir, which was founded as All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference by Sheikh Abdullah in 1932 and later renamed in 1939.

 Glossary  Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill 

179

The act proposed to reorganise the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories: Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale  He was a militant leader and led revolutionary movements in Punjab. Jawaharlal Nehru  He was an Indian freedom fighter and a politician. He led the INC and became the first Prime Minister of Independent India. He is often referred as the architect of Modern India. Jawaharlal Nehru University  It is a public university located in New Delhi. K. Kamaraj  He was an Indian politician and the president of INC. He was the man behind making Lal Bahadur Shastri, and after his death, Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister of India. He has also been the Chief Minister of Madras state (Tamil Nadu). K.M. Munshi  He was a freedom fighter and an Indian politician. He was also a famous litterateur. He is the founder of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Keshav Venkataraghavan  Popularly known as Keshav is an artist and drew for “Cartoonscape” column in The Hindu. Krishnadevaraya  He was the emperor of Vijayanagara empire. Kudi Arasu  It was a Tamil magazine begun by Periyar E.V. Ramaswamy in 1925. Lok Sabha  It is the lower house of the Indian parliament. Lord Vishnu  He is one of the gods forming the trinity along with Lord Brahma and Lord Shiva. Lord Vishnu is entitled with the responsibility of sustenance and administering the world. M.  Bhakthavatsalam  He was an Indian politician and a freedom fighter from Madras. Mahabali  He is the King of asuras and was sent to the underworld by Vamana, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Mahabharata  One of the two great epics written by Sage Vyasa. It revolves around the tension between Kauravas and Pandavas. Maharaja Hari Singh  He was the last ruler of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Mahavir Tyagi  He was an Indian politician, a member of INC and a freedom fighter. Mamata Banerjee  She is an Indian politician and a member of All India Trinamool Congress. Manjul  He is a trending freelance cartoonist. His cartoons have appeared in Daily News Analysis.

180 Glossary Manmohan Singh 

He is an Indian politician and a member of the INC. He was the Prime Minister of India and is also an economist. Mario Miranda  He was a prominent Indian cartoonist from Goa who has worked Times of India and Economic Times. His works are famous for presenting illustrations on life of Mumbai. Mayawati  She is an Indian politician and the national president of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan  Founded by Aruna Roy in 1990, MKSS is an Indian social movement which demanded right to information. Morarji Desai  He was an Indian politician and played an active role in independence movement. He has also served as the fourth PM of India. Following differences with Indira Gandhi there was a split in the Congress and later he joined Janata Party. Narendra Modi  He is the current PM of India. He also served as the CM of Gujarat. National Curriculum Framework  It is the syllabi framework published by National Council of Educational Research and Training. Nationalisations of the banks  Till 1960s banks were privately owned and operated. With Indira’s decision, in 1969, 14 banks were nationalised. NCERT  National Council of Educational Research and Training is a government organisation which designs curriculum and textbooks for central board schools. Nikhil Dey  He is an Indian activist, who played an important role in forming MKSS and leading the right to information act. O.V. Vijayan  He was a prominent cartoonist who worked for the Statesman and The Hindu. He was considered to be a remarkable writer in Malayalam. His novel Khasakkinte Itihasam (The Legends of Khasak) (1969) brought a literary revolution in Malayalam literature. Operation Blue Star  It was an Indian military operation conducted in June 1984 under the command of Indira Gandhi to capture the militant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale who was hiding in the complex of the Golden Temple, Amritsar. P.K.S. Kutty  Puthukkody Kottuthody Sankaran Kutty Nair, popularly known as Kutty, was a renowned political cartoonist whose cartoons have appeared in the Hindustan Times and Indian Express. Panchatantra  It is a collection of animal fables written in Sanskrit by Vishnu Sharma around 200 B.C.

 Glossary  Pandavas 

181

They are the major characters in the Hindu epic Mahabharata. They are the five sons of King Pandu: Yudhishtir, Bheem, Arjun, Nakul and Sahadev. Periyar  E.V. Ramaswamy, popularly known as Periyar, is the leader of Dravidian movement, the self-respect movement in Tamil Nadu. He was a social reformer and fought against social discrimination. Purāṅa  It is a genre in Indian literature which includes old tales, legends and myths. There are 18 mahapurāṅas in Sanskrit literature along with 18 upapurāṅas. Purushottam Das Tandon  He was a freedom fighter and was known for his strong stance to promote Hindi as the official language of India. Quit Kashmir  It was a movement begun by Sheikh Abdullah against King Hari Singh who ruled Kashmir as a princely state. Rahul Gandhi  He is the son of Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi. Raj Narain  He was a freedom fighter and is mainly known for winning the electoral malpractice case against Indira Gandhi. Rajinder Puri  He was a veteran Indian cartoonist and his works have appeared in The Statesman and The Hindustan Times. Rajiv Gandhi  He was the PM of India and was assassinated in a bomb blast in 1991. Rajya Sabha  It is the council of States and the Upper House of Indian Parliament. Ramayana  It is one of the Hindu epics along with Mahabharata. It revolves around the story of lord Rama and his quest to retrieve Sita who is captured by the demon Ravana. Ravi Shankar Etteth  He is a prominent Indian cartoonist and is currently a renowned fiction writer. His cartoons have appeared in India Today. S. Nijalingappa  He was an Indian politician belonging to the INC. He has been the CM of Karnataka and was popular as a freedom fighter. Sandeep Adhwaryu  He is a trending cartoonist whose works appear in Times of India. His column is titled “Line of No Control”. Sarkaria Commission  Led by Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, the commission in 1983 analysed the sections held by the State and the Centre. Satish Acharya  He is a trending freelance cartoonist and his cartoons have appeared in Midday. Seth Gobind Das  He was an Indian freedom fighter and a renowned Hindi author. He supported Hindi as a national language of India. Sonia Gandhi  Wife of Rajiv Gandhi and a member of Indian National Congress. Surendra  He is a prominent Indian cartoonist working with The Hindu.

182 Glossary Swadeshamitran 

It was a Tamil language newspaper begun by G. Subramania Iyer and ran between 1882 and 1985. Unny and Munni  They are the characters who appear frequently in the NCERT textbooks and interact with the students. Vamana avatara  It is the fifth avatar of lord Vishnu. Lord Vishnu incarnates as a brahmin to defeat the ego of the demon King Mahabali. Vijayanagara  It is an empire which ruled the Deccan area in the fourteenth century.

Works Cited

Primary Sources “A Report of the Committee constituted for Reviewing the Textbooks of Social Sciences / Political Science, for Classes IX–XII constituted by NCERT”. NCERT, 14 May 2012. https://ncert.nic.in/announcements/notices/pdf_ files/NECERT_SKT_(final).pdf. Accessed 10 Sept. 2019. Barthes, Roland. “Rhetoric of the Image”. Image Music Text. Translated by Stephen Heath, Fontana Press, 1977, pp. 32–51. Democratic Politics I. Textbook. NCERT, 2006. Democratic Politics II. Textbook. NCERT, 2007. Indian Constitution at Work. Textbook. NCERT, 2006. Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language, edited by Thomas Sebeok, MIT P, 1960, pp. 350–377. Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. U of Chicago P, 2003. Politics in India Since Independence. Textbook. NCERT, 2007.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7

183

184 

Works Cited

Secondary Sources “2 NCERT textbook advisors resign following Ambedkar cartoon row”. Indian Express, 11 May 2012, https://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/2-­ ncert-­textbook-­advisors-­resign-­following-­ambedkar-­cartoon-­row/. Accessed 12 Sept. 2019. Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed. “Multimodal Humour: Integrating Blending Model, Relevance Theory, and Incongruity Theory”. Multimodal Communication, vol. 7, no. 1, 2018. Adolphs, R., et al. “The Human Amygdala in Social Judgment”. Nature, no. 393, 1998, pp. 470–474. Adom, Dickson, et al. “Constructivism Philosophical Paradigm: Implication for Research, Teaching and Learning”. Global Journal of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 4, no. 10, 2016, pp. 1–9. Akpati, C.F. “A Multimodal Discourse Study of some Online Campaign Cartoons of Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential Election”. IAFOR Journal of Arts and Humanities, vol. 6, no. 2, 2019, pp. 69–80. Al-Momani, Kawakib, Muhammad A. Badarneh, and Fathi Migdadi. “A Semiotic Analysis of Political Cartoons in Jordan in Light of the Arab Spring”. HUMOR, vol. 30, no. 1, 2017, pp. 63–95. Alosque, Isabel Negro. “A Cognitive Approach to Humour in Political Cartoons”. Dimensions of Humour. Explorations in Linguistics, Literature, Cultural Studies and Translation, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, PUV, 2010. Alsadi, Wejdan M. “I See What is Said: The Interaction between Multimodal Metaphors and Intertextuality in Cartoons”. Snapshots of Postgraduate Research at University College Cork. 2016, publish.ucc.ie/boolean/pdf/2015/00/04-­ Alsadi-­2015-­00-­en.pdf. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020. Amir, Lydia. Philosophy, Humor, and the Human Condition: Taking Ridicule Seriously. Springer, 2019. Anima, P. “Know your RTI Soldiers”. The Hindu Business Line, 27 Apr. 2018, https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/know/know-­your-­rti-­soldiers/ article23694105.ece. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Aristotle. Poetics. Translated by S.H. Butcher, Cosimo Classics, 2008. Ashley-Cooper, Anthony. “Sensus Communis; An Essay on Freedom of Wit and Humour”. Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, with a Collection of Letters. Basil: Printed for J.J. Tourneisen and J. L. Legrand, 1790. Google Books. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=5xhMAAAAcAAJ&printsec=fr ontcover&dq=characteristicks+of+Men,+Manners,+Opinions,+Times&hl=e

  Works Cited 

185

n&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjC5I7c3LzmAhWryTgGHVRUBoAQ6AEITjAF #v=onepage&q=characteristicks%20of%20Men%2C%20Manners% 2C%20Opinions%2C%20Times&f=false. Accessed 10 Sept. 2019. Attardo, Salvatore. Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Mouton de Gruyter, 2001. ———. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Mouton de Gruyter, 1994. Bada, Steve Olusegun. “Constructivism Learning Theory: A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning”. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, vol. 5, no. 6, 2015, pp. 66–70. Badin, Kim. Humorous Impoliteness in The Big Bang Theory and Sherlock: Conveying Humour with Offensive Language. 2016. Université Jean Moulin (Lyon), Dissertation. https://scd-­resnum.univ-­lyon3.fr/out/memoires/ langues/2016_badin_k.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Bailey, Alan and Dan O’Brien. “Hume’s ‘Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding”: A Reader’s Guide. Continuum, 2006. Balakrishnan, Vinod and Vishaka Venkat. Conversations with Indian Cartoonists: Politickle Lines. Cambridge Scholars, 2019. Balirano, Giuseppe. “The Strange Case of The Big Bang Theory and its Extra-­ ordinary Italian Audiovisual Translation: A Multimodal Corpus-Based Analysis”. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, vol. 21, no. 4, 2013, pp. 563–576. Bandlamudi, Lakshmi. Dialogics of Self, the Mahabharata and Culture: The History of Understanding and Understanding of History. Anthem P, 2011. Bartolo, Angela, et al. “Humor Comprehension and Appreciation: An FMRI Study”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 18, no. 11, 2006, pp. 1789–1798. Bateson, Gregory. “The Position of Humour in Human Communication”. Motivation in Humor, edited by Jacob Levine. Routledge, 1969, pp. 159–166. Bennoune, Karima. “Algeria Twenty Years On: Words Do Not Die”. Open Democracy, 24 June 2013, opendemocracy.net/en/5050/algeria-­twenty-­years-­ onwords-­do-­not-­die/. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Benson, Time, editor. Britain’s Best Political Cartoons. Random House, 2018. Berger, Arthur Asa. “Politics of Laughter”. The Social Faces Humour: Practices and Issues, edited by George E.C. Paton, Chris Powell and Stephen Wagg, Routledge, 2019. Bhat, G.K. Vidūṣaka. The New Order Book, 1959. Billig, Michael. Laughter and Ridicule: Towards a Social Critique of Humour. Sage, 2005.

186 

Works Cited

“Black”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/ black. Accessed 29 Sept. 2019. “Black Humour”. A Glossary of Literary Terms, edited by M.H. Abrams and Geoffrey Halt Harpham, Wadsworth, 2012. Blake, Margaret Lehman. The Right Hemisphere and Disorders of Cognition and Communication: Theory and Clinical Practice. Plural Publishing, 2018. Bougher, L. D. “The Case for Metaphor in Political Reasoning and Cognition”. Political Psychology, vol. 33, no. 1, 2012, pp. 145–163. Bounegru, Liliana and Charles Forceville. “Metaphors in Editorial Cartoons Representing the Global Financial Crisis”. Visual Communication, vol. 10, no. 2, 2011, pp. 209–229. Bourke, J. The Story of Pain: From Prayer to Painkillers. Oxford UP, 2014. Bradford, Richard. Roman Jakobson: Life, Language, Art. Routledge, 1994. Branagan, Marty. “The Last Laugh: Humour in Community Activism.” Community Development Journal, vol. 42, no. 4, 2007, pp. 470–481. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/44259076. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020. Bühler, Karl. Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language. Translated by Donald Fraser Goodwin, John Benjamins, 1990. Buján, Marta. “The Function of Face Gestures and Head Movements in Spontaneous Humorous Communication”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 7, no. 2, 2019, pp. 1–29. Burns, Robert. The Collected Poems of Robert Burns. Wordsworth Poetry Library, 1994. Bury, Beata. “Understanding the Online Humour in the Example of American Political Cartoons”. Explorations in Humor Studies: Humor Research Project, edited by Martin Kuczok, et al. Cambridge Scholars Publishers, 2019, pp. 176–190. Butler, Judith. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. Routledge, 1997. Calvey, David. “A Sociological Case of Stand-Up Comedy: Censorship, Offensiveness and Opportunism”. The Lost Ethnographies: Methodological Insights from Projects that Never Were, edited by R.J. Smith and S. Delamont, Emerald Publishing, 2019. Limited, pp. 65–78. Carey, John. Introduction. The Joke and its Relation to the Unconscious. Translated by Joyce Crick, Penguin, 2003. Carston, Robyn and Catherine Wearing. “Hyperbolic Language and its Relation to Metaphor and Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics, no. 79, 2015, pp. 79–92. Chandler, Daniel and Rod Munday. A Dictionary of Media and Communication. Oxford UP, 2020.

  Works Cited 

187

Charteris-Black, J. “Britain as a Container: Immigration Metaphors in the 2005 Election Campaign”. Discourse & Society, vol. 17, no. 5, 2006, pp. 563–581. Chaturvedi, Rakesh Mohan and Kumar Anshuman. “Chowkidar Beats Chor Hai: Modi Uses Insults to His Advantage”. The Economic Times, 24 May, 2019. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/69474044.cms? from=mdr&utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_ campaign=cppst. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019. Chen, Qiaoyun and Guiying Jiang. “Why are You Amused: Unveiling Multimodal Humor from the Prototype Theoretical Perspective”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 6, no. 1, 2018, pp. 62–84. Chishti, Seema. “Explained: ‘Freedom’ to Express Oneself, but within Limits”. The Indian Express. 16 Jan. 2015, https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ india-­o thers/explainedfreedom-­t o-­e xpress-­o neself-­b ut-­w ithin-­l imits/. Accessed 06 Sept. 2019. Chłopicki, Władysław. An Application of the Script Theory of Semantics to the Analysis of Selected Polish Humorous Short Stories. 1987. Purdue U, MA Dissertation. Chomsky, Noam. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT P, 1965. Chopra, Ritika. “Cartoon Row: NCERT Junks Thorat Panel’s Suggestions”. India Today, 15 July 2012. https://www.indiatoday.in/buzztop/buzztop-­ national/story/cartoon-­row-­ncert-­junks-­thorat-­panels-­suggestions-­109485-­2 012-­07-­15. Accessed 12 Sept. 2019. Chovanec, Jan and Isabel Ermida. Language and Humour in the Media. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2012. Clark, Maudemarie. Nietzsche on Truth and Philosophy. Cambridge UP, 1990. “Comedy and Morality: Satire, Censorship and Dirty Words”. United States Studies Centre, 2015, https://www.ussc.edu.au/events/comedy-­and-­ morality-­satire-­censorship-­and-­dirty-­words. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Condor, Susan, et al. “Political Rhetoric”. The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, edited by Leonie Huddy et al., Oxford U P, 2013. “Constituent Assembly of India Debates (Proceedings)—Volume IX. Sep 17, 1949”. Constituent Assembly Debates. https://www.constitutionofindia.net/ constitution_assembly_debates/volume/9/1949-­09-­17. Accessed 25 Sept. 2019. “Contagious”. Lexico, https://lexico.com/definition/contagious. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Coulson, Seana. “Frame Shifting and Frame Semantics: Joke Comprehension on the Space Structuring Model”. Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research, edited by G. Brone et al, De Gruyter, 2015.

188 

Works Cited

Coulson, Seana and Robert F. Williams. “Hemispheric Asymmetries and Joke Comprehension”. Neuropsychologia, no. 43, 2005, pp. 128–141. Cronin, Marianne Eve. ‘Feck Off!’ Exploring the Relationship between Impoliteness, Laughter and Humour in the British-Irish sitcoms Father Ted, Black Books and The IT Crowd. 2018. U of Birmingham. Dissertation. https://etheses.bham. ac.uk/id/eprint/8713/1/Cronin18PhD.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Danise, Marcel. Vico, Metaphor and the Origin of Language. Indiana UP, 1993. Das, Shruti. “Ancient Indian Dramaturgy: A Historical Overview of Bharata’s Natyashastra”. RSIRJLE, vol. 3, no. 3, 2015, pp. 133–140. Davis, Jessica Milner. Satire and Politics: The Interplay of Heritage and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Denisova, Anastasia. Internet Memes and Society: Social, Cultural, and Political Contexts. Routledge, 2019. Derrin, D. “Shakespearean Comedy”. Encyclopedia of Humor Studies, edited by Salvattore Attardo, Sage Publications, 2014, pp. 684–688. Descartes, René. The Passions of the Soul. Translated by Stephen H. Voss, Massachusetts: Hackett Publishing Company, 1989. Dickerson, Kelly and Jennifer Welsh. “In Honor of National Chemistry Week, Here Are 15 Jokes Only Chemists Will Get”. Business Insider, 20 Oct. 2013, https://www.businessinsider.in/science/in-­honor-­of-­national-­chemistry-­ week-­here-­are-­15-­jokes-­only-­chemists-­will-­get/articleshow/24448417.cms. Accessed 24 Sept. 2019. Diwan, Paras. “Aya Ram Gaya Ram: The Politics of Defection.” Journal of the Indian Law Institute, vol. 21, no. 3, 1979, pp. 291–312. JSTOR, https:// www.jstor.org/stable/43950639. Doctor, Vikram. “R.K. Laxman’s Black and White World Reflected Varied Hues of a Common Man’s Life”. Economic Times, 27 Jan. 2015, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/blogs/onmyplate/rk-­laxmans-­black-­and-­white-­world-­ reflected-­varied-­hues-­of-­a-­common-­mans-­life/. Accessed 29 Sept. 2019. “Donkey”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/ donkey. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019. Drakett, Jessica et al. “Old Jokes, New Media—Online Sexism and Constructions of Gender in Internet Memes”. Feminism and Psychology, vol. 28, no. 1, 2018, pp. 109–127. Duerringer, Christopher M. “Who Would Jesus Bomb? The Republican Jesus Meme and the Fracturing of Ideology”. Social Media + Society, vol. 2, no. 1, 2016. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2056305116637095#artic leCitationDownloadContainer. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020.

  Works Cited 

189

Dynel, Marta and Fabio Indìo Massimo Poppi. “Caveat Emptor: Boycott through Digital Humour on the Wave of the 2019 Hong Kong Protests”. Information and Society, 2020, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.108 0/1369118X.2020.1757134. Accessed 02. Sept. 2020. Dynel, Marta. “Conceptualizing Conversational Humour as (Im)politeness: The Case of Film Talk”. Journal of Politeness Research Language Behaviour Culture, vol. 12, no. 1, 2016 ———. “Creative Metaphor is a Birthday Cake: Metaphor as the Source of Humour”. Metaphorik.de, vol. 17, 2009, Research Gate, https://researchgate. net/publication/242081327_Creative_metaphor_is_a_birthday_cake_ Metaphor_as_the_source_of_humour/link/5487178c0cf2ef34478eb0c8/ download. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. ———. “Humorous Phenomena in Dramatic Discourse.” The European Journal of Humor Research, vol. 1, no. 1, 2013, pp. 22–60, https://europeanjournalofhumour.org/index.php/ejhr/article/view/Marta%20Dynel/Marta%20 Dynel. ———. “Vigilante Disparaging Humour at r/IncelTears: Humour as Critique of Incel Ideology”. Language and Communication, vol. 74, 2020. https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271530920300410. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020. ———, editor. The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains. John Benjamins, 2011. Dynel, Marta, et al. “Fungression: Humour and Impoliteness on Social Media”. Project (2018–2022). Research Gate, https://researchgate.net/project/ FUNGRESSION-­Humour-­andimpoliteness-­on-­social-­media. El-Falaky, Samir. “Caricaturing Two Revolutions: Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Egyptian Political Cartoons. Proceedings of SOCIOINT 2019—6th International Conference on Education, Social Sciences and Humanities, 24–26 June 2019, Istanbul, https://ocerints.org/socioint19_ e-­publication/abstracts/papers/688.pdf. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020. El Refaie, Elisabeth. “Metaphor in Political Cartoons: Exploring Audience Responses”. Multimodal Metaphor, edited by Charles J. Forceville and Eduardo Urios-Aparisi, Mouton de Gruyter, 2009a, pp. 173–196. ———. “What Makes Us Laugh? Verbo-Visual Humour in Newspaper Cartoons”. The World Told and the World Shown edited by Ventola E and Guijarro A.J.M. Palgrave Macmillan, 2009b, pp. 75–90. Eubanks, Philip. “The Story of Conceptual Metaphor: What Motivates Metaphoric Mappings?”. Poetics Today, vol. 20, no. 3, 1999, pp. 419–442.

190 

Works Cited

Fairclough, N. Language and Power. Routledge, 2013. Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books, 2002. Ferguson, Mark A. and Thomas E. Ford. “Disparagement Humor: A Theoretical and Empirical Review of Psychoanalytic, Superiority, and Social Identity Theories”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, vol. 21, no. 3, 2008, pp. 283–312. Forabosco, Giovannantonio. “Cognitive Aspects”. Encyclopedia of Humor Studies, edited by Salvatore Attardo, Sage, 2014, pp. 135–137. Forceville, Charles J., and Eduardo Urios-Aparisi. Multimodal Metaphor. De Gruyter Mouton, 2009. Forceville, Charles. “Cognitive Linguistics and Multimodal Humour”, Bildwissenschaft: Zwischen Reflektion und Anwendung, edited by Klaus Sachs-­ Hombach, Von Halem, 2005, pp. 64–284 ———. “Pictorial and Multimodal Metaphor”. Handbuch Sprache im multimodalen Kontext, edited by Nina Maria Klug and Hartmut Stöckl, Mounton de Gruyter, 2016. ———. “Metaphors Portraying Right-Wing Politician Geert Wilders in Dutch Political Cartoons”. Populist Discourse: Critical Approaches to Contemporary Politics, edited by Encarnacion Hidalgo-Tenorio et al., Routledge, 2019, pp. 292–307. Ford, Thomas E., et al. “Affective Style, Humor Styles and Happiness”. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, vol. 10, no. 3, 2014, pp. 451–463. Fowler, H.W. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, revised by Sir Ernest Gowers, Oxford UP, 1965, p. 253. Flanik, William. “‘Bringing FPA Back Home: Cognition, Constructivism, and Conceptual Metaphor”. Foreign Policy Analysis, vol. 7, no. 4, 2011, pp. 423–446. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24909837. Accessed 05 Sept. 2019. Fraiberg, S. “Composition 2.0: Toward a Multilingual and Multimodal Framework”. College Composition and Communication, no. 62, 2010, pp. 100–126. Francesconi, Sabrina. “Multimodally Expressed Humour Shaping Scottishness in Tourist Postcards”. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 9, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–17. Gabin, R. J. “Humor as Metaphor, Humor as Rhetoric”. Centennial Review, vol. 31, no. 1, 1987, pp. 33–46.

  Works Cited 

191

Gambarato, Renira Rampazzo and Fabiana Komesu. “What Are You Laughing At? Former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff’s Internet Memes across Spreadable Media Contexts”. Journal of Creative Communications, vol. 13, no. 2, 2018, pp. 85–103. Gathara, Patrick. “The Death of the Political Cartoon”. Al Jazeera, 03 July 2019, https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/death-­political-­ cartoon-­190702083907178.html. Accessed 05 Sept. 2019. Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. Basic Books, 1973. Genova, Dafina Ivanova. “Grasping Political Cartoons? Not an Easy Matter”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 6, no. 1, 2018, pp. 85–99. Giles, Howard et al. “Cognitive Aspects of Humour in Social Interaction: A Model and Some Linguistic Data”. Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research, and Applications, edited by Antony J. Chapman and Hugh C. Foot. Transaction Publishers, 2007, pp. 139–154. Gilhus, Ingvild Saelid. Laughing Gods, Weeping Virgins: Laughter in the History of Religion. Routledge, 1997. Goatly, Andrew. Meaning and Humour. Cambridge UP, 2012. Goel, Vinod and Raymond J. Dolan. “Social Regulation of Affective Experience of Humor”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 19, no. 9, Sept. 2007, pp. 1574–1580. Grady, Joseph E., et al. “Blending and Metaphor”. Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by G. Steen and Raymond Gibbs, John Benjamins, 1999. Graefer, Anne. “The Work of Humour in Affective Capitalism: A Case Study of Celebrity Gossip Blogs”. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organisation, vol. 16, no. 4, 2016, pp. 143–162. Gupte, B.A. Hindu Holidays and Ceremonials: With Dissertations on Origin of Folklore and Symbols. Asian Educational Services, 1994. Haddawy, Husain, translator. The Arabian Nights. W.W. Norton and Company, 1990. Hall, G. Stanley, and Arthur Alliń. “The Psychology of Tickling, Laughing, and the Comic.” The American Journal of Psychology, vol. 9, no. 1, 1897, pp. 1–41. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1411471. Accessed 11 Jan. 2020. Hazlitt, William. “On Wit and Humour”. Lectures on the English Poets. New York: Wiley and Putnam, 1845. Google Books, https://books.google. co.in/books?id=X5BRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=lectures+on +english+poet+wiley+and+putnam&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij3d2 G4bzmAhX1zTgGHfH6Bo8Q6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=lectures%20 on%20english%20poet%20wiley%20and%20putnam&f=false. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019.

192 

Works Cited

Hazra, Indrajit. “Jest like That: Girl with the Amul Tattoo”. The Hindustan Times, 01 July 2012, https://www.hindustantimes.com/business/jest-­like-­ that-­girl-­with-­the-­amul-­tattoo/story-­0lNH47ZLJ7eWE5xsrm2gGO.html. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019. Hempelmann, Christian and Andrea Samson. “Cartoons: Drawn Jokes?”. The Primer of Humor Research, edited by Vikctor Raskin, De Gruyter, 2008. Heywood, Ian and Sandywell, Barry, editors. Interpreting Visual Culture: Explorations in the Hermeneutics of the Visual. Routledge, 1999. Hills, Carol. “R.K. Laxman, Cartoonist Who Chronicled India’s First 60 Years of Independence, has Died”. PRI, 31 Dec. 2014, https://pri.org/ stories/2014-­1 2-­3 1/cartoon-­c haracter-­c hronicles-­i ndias-­f irst-­6 0-­years-­ independence. Accessed 29 Sept. 2019. “Hippocrates”. Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece, edited by Nigel Wilson, Routledge, 2006, p. 362. Hobbes, Thomas. The Essential Leviathan. A Modernized Edition, edited by Nancy A. Stanlick and Daniel P. Collette, Hackett Publishing Company, 2016. Holm, Nicholas. Humour as Politics: The Political Aesthetics of Contemporary Comedy. Springer, 2017 Hou, Charles and Cynthia Hou. The Art of Decoding Political Cartoons. Moody’s Lookout Press, 1998. “Humor”. Online Etymology Dictionary, https://www.etymonline.com/word/ humor. Accessed 01 Sept. 2019. “Humor”. Merriam-Webster’s Learners Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https:// www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/humor. Accessed 1 Nov. 2019. “Humour”. Lexico, Oxford, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/humour. Accessed 11 Sept. 2019. Hurley, Matthew M., Daniel C. Dennett and Reginald B. Adams, Jr. Inside Jokes: Using Humor to Reverse-Engineer the Mind. MIT Press, 2011. Hutcheson, Francis. Reflections Upon Laughter, and Remarks Upon the Fable of the Bees, Glasgow: Printed by R. Urie for D. Baxter, 1750. “India Parliament Row over Dalit Icon Ambedkar Cartoon”. BBC, 11 May 2012. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-­asia-­india-­18031128. Accessed 16 Nov. 2019. Indurkhya, Bipin. Metaphor and Cognition: An Interactionist Approach. Springer, 1992. Ives, Maura C. editor. George Meredith’s Essay on Comedy and Other New Quarterly Magazine Publications. Associated UP, 1998. Jakobson, Roman. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, Routledge, 2000, pp. 126–132.

  Works Cited 

193

“Jaya joins Karuna, Vaiko chorus for removing textbook cartoon”. Firstpost, 13 June 2012, https://www.firstpost.com/india/jaya-­joins-­karuna-­vaiko-­chorus-­ for-­removing-­textbook-­cartoon-­342083.html. Accessed 25 Sept. 2015. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment. Translated by John H. Bernard, Cosimo Classics, 2007. Karatepe, Çağla. Humour and Impoliteness Interaction in Improvised Tv Discourse. 2015. Middle East Technical University, MA Dissertation, etd.lib.metu.edu. tr/upload/12618865/index.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Kay, Kavyta. “Riffing India Comedy, Identity, and Censorship”. New Indian Nuttahs: Comedy and Cultural Critique in Millennial India. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Kearney, Richard. “Meme Frameworks: A Semiotic Perspective on Internet Memes”. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy, vol. 4, no. 2, 2019, pp. 82–89. Kessel, Martina and Patrick Merziger. The Politics of Humour: Laughter, Inclusion and Exclusion in the Twentieth Century. University of Toronto P, 2012. Khanduri, Ritu Gairola. Caricaturing Culture in India: Cartoons and History in the Modern World. Cambridge UP, 2014. “Kick”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/kick. Accessed 01 Aug. 2019. Kierkegaard, Soren. The Humour of Kierkegaard: An Anthology, edited by Thomas C. Oden. Princeton UP, 2004. King, Stephen. Bag of Bones. Hodder, 2001. Kirkmann, Arvo. “Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour”. Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore, 2006, pp. 27–58. https://folklore.ee/folklore/ vol33/kriku.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept. 2019. ———. “On the Similarity and Distinguishability of Humour and Figurative Speech”. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 13, no. 1, 2009, pp. 14–40. Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation. Hutchinson and Co., 1964. Kohler, Klaus J. Communicative Functions and Linguistic Forms in Speech Interaction: Volume 156. Cambridge UP, 2018. Kolappan, B. “NCERT Textbook Cartoon Stokes Anger in Tamil Nadu”. The Hindu, 9 June 2012. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ncert-­ textbook-­cartoon-­stokes-­anger-­in-­tamil-­nadu/article3506029.ece. Accessed 11 Sept. 2019. Kövecses, Zoltán. “Conceptual Metaphor Theory: Some Criticisms and Alternative Proposals”. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, no. 6, 2008, pp. 168–184.

194 

Works Cited

———. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford UP, 2010. Kučera, Henry. “Roman Jakobson.” Language, vol. 59, no. 4, 1983, pp. 871–883. Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Dance, K. A. “Sense of Humour and Enhanced Quality of Life”. Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 13, no. 12, 1992, pp. 1273–1283. Kuipers, Giselinde. Good Humor, Bad Taste: A Sociology of the Joke. De Gruyter, 2015. ———. “The Politics of Humour in the Public Sphere: Cartoons, Power and Modernity in the First Transnational Humour Scandal”. European Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, 2011, pp. 63–80. Kwon, Iksoo and Jung Hwi Roh. “Multimodality and Cognitive mechanisms: A Cognitive Semantics Analysis of Political Cartoons ”. Linguistic Research, vol. 35, no. 1, 2018, pp. 117–143. Kyratzis, Sakis. “Laughing Metaphorically: Metaphor and Humour in Discourse”. 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, University of La Rioja, Spain, 20–25 July 2003, https://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.be/iclc/ Papers/Kyratzis.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept. 2019. Labutov, Igor and Hod Lipson. “Humor as Circuits in Semantic Networks”. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Jeju, 8–14 July 2012, pp. 150–155. https://aclweb.org/anthology/P12-­2030.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept. 2019. Lacewing, Michael. “Hume on the Relation between Impressions and Ideas”. Routledge, pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1807/719f5bc92ca9727eb9caaf3582 9c1544c79c.pdf. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019. Landau, M. E., et al. “Introduction”. The Power of Metaphor: Examining its Influence on Social Life. American Psychological Association, 2014, pp. 3–16. Larkin-Galiñanes, Cristina. “An Overview of Humor Theory”. The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, edited by Salvatore Attardo, Routledge, 2017, pp. 4–16. “Laughing with Knives: Exploring Political Cartoons”. National Museum of Australia, 2002, https://www.nma.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/ 19141/laughing_with_knives_colour.pdf. Accessed 05 Sept. 2019. Lee, Cynthia Bailey. A Semiotic Analysis of Political Cartoons. 2003. U of California. Dissertation. https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~goguen/courses/271sp03/ spapers/cartoons/Cartoons.htm. Accessed 05 Sept. 2020. Ley, Graham. “Aristotle’s Poetics, Bharatamuni’s Natyasastra, and Zeami’s Treatises: Theory as Discourse”. Asian Theatre Journal, vol. 17, no. 2, 2000, pp. 191–214.

  Works Cited 

195

Lin, Tiffany and Wen-yu Chiang. “Multimodal Fusion in Analyzing Political Cartoons: Debates on U.S. Beef Imports Into Taiwan”. Metaphor and Symbol, vol. 30, no. 2, 2015, pp. 137–161. Lippmann, Walter. Public Opinion. Dover Publications, 2004. Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. London: Printed for Thomas Tegg, R. Griffin and Co. and J. Cumming, 1829. Lockyer, Sharon and Michael Pickering. Introduction. Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 1–24. Londino, Cathleen. “Verbal Sex: Hollywood Censorship and the Birth of the Screwball Comedy”. International Journal of the Image, vol. 2, no. 1, 2012, pp. 25–35. Lucy, Niall. A Derrida Dictionary. Wiley, 2004. Lupia, Arthur, and Jesse O. Menning. “Politics and the Equilibrium of Fear: Can Strategies and Emotions Interact?”. The Affect Effect: The Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior, edited by Ann Crigler, et al., U of Chicago P, 2007, pp. 337–356. Luqiu, Luwei Rose. “The Cost of humour: Political Satire on Social Media and Censorship in China”. Global Media and Communication, vol 13, no. 2, 2017, pp. 123–138. Madan, G.R. India of Tomorrow: Problems of Social Reconstruction after Fifty Years of Independence. Allied Publishers, 1998. Magnani, Lorenzo. Understanding Violence: The Intertwining of Morality, Religion and Violence. Springer, 2011. Marín-Arrese, Juana I. “Cognition and Culture in Political Cartoons”. Intercultural Pragmatics, vol. 5, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1–18. ———. “Political Cartoon Discourse: Creativity, Critique and Persuasion”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 22, 2019, pp. 117–134. Marinkovic, Ksenija, et al. “Right Hemisphere has the Last Laugh: Neural Dynamics of Joke Appreciation”. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, vol. 11, no. 1, 2011, pp. 113–130. Marone, Vittorio. “Looping Out Loud: A Multimodal Analysis of Humour on Vine”. European Journal of Humour Research, vol. 4, no. 4, 2016, pp. 50–66. Martin, Rod A. et al. “Individual Differences in Uses of Humor and their Relation to Psychological Well-Being: Development of the Humor Styles Questionnaire”. Journal of Research in Personality, vol. 37, no. 1, 2003, pp. 48–75. Martin, Rod A. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Elsevier A P, 2007.

196 

Works Cited

Martineau, W. H. “A Model of the Social Functions of Humor”. The Psychology of Humor, edited by J. H. Goldstein and Paul. E. McGhee, Academic P, 1972, pp. 101–125. Martinec, R. “Rhythm in Multimodal Texts”. Leonardo, vol. 33, no. 4, 2000, pp. 289–297. Mathews, Lindsay. Role of Humor in Emotion Regulation: Differential Effects of Adaptive and Maladaptive Forms of Humor. 2016. City University of New York, Ph.D. Dissertation. McCarthy, Michael P. “Political Cartoons in the History Classroom”. The History Teacher, vol. 11, no. 1, 1977, pp. 29–38. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/492723. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. McCombs, Maxwell E. and Donald L. Shaw. “The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media”. The Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, 1972, pp. 176–187. Medhurst, Martin J. and Michael A. Desousa. “The Political Cartoons as a Rhetorical Form: A Taxonomy of Graphic Discourse”. Communication Monographs, vol. 48, no. 3, 1981, pp. 197–236. Meisel, J. S. “Humour and Insult in the House of Commons: The Case of Palmerstone and Disraeli”. Parliamentary History, vol. 28, no. 2, 2009, pp. 228–245. Memmi, Albert. The Colonizer and the Colonized. Routledge, 2013. Mendiburo-Seguel, Andrés et al. “Exposure to Political Disparagement Humor and its Impact on Trust in Politicians: How Long Does it Last?” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 8, 2017, https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC5743926/. Accessed 09 Sept. 2020. Menon, Ramesh. Mahabharata: A Modern Rendering Volume I. iUniverse, 2006. Merritt, Sally K. et al. “Creating Clever Internet Memes Perpetuates Offensiveness”. Western Journal of Communication. 2020. “Metaphor”. The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, edited by Alex Preminger and T.V.F. Brogan, Princeton U P, 1993, pp. 760–766. Meyer, John C. “Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication”. Communication Theory, vol. 10, no. 3, 2000, pp. 310–331. Milner, Ryan. “Pop Polyvocality: Internet Memes, Public Participation, and the Occupy Wall Street Movement”. International Journal of Communication, vol. 7, 2013, pp. 2357–2390. Mio, Jeffrey Scott and Arthur C. Graesser. “Humor, Language, and Metaphor”. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, vol. 6, no. 2, 1991, pp. 87–102. Mio, Jeffrey Scott. “Metaphor and Politics”. Metaphor and Symbol, vol. 12, no. 2, 1997, pp. 113–133.

  Works Cited 

197

Misra, Udit. “The Slow Death of the RTI Act”. Forbes India, 10 Feb. 2011, https://api.forbesindia.com/article/resolution/the-­slow-­death-­of-­the-­r ti-­ act/22182/1. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Mitter, Sohini. “Utterly Butterly Amul Ad Turns 50 Years Old”. Indian Express, 13 June 2012, archive.indianexpress.com/news/utterly-­butterly-­amul-­ad-­ turns-­50-­years-­old/961309/. Accessed 25 Sept. 2019. Morreall, John. “Humour and the Conduct of Politics”. Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour, edited by Sharon Lockyer and Michael Pickering, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 63–78. ———. “Philosophy and Religion”. The Primer of Humor Research, edited by Victor Raskin, Mouton De Gruyter, 2008, pp. 211–242. Morrissey, Maureen M. “Script Theory for the Analysis of Humorous Metaphors”. WHIMSY VII. Proceedings of the 1988 WHIM Conference, Purdue, 1–4 April 1988. Edited by Shaun F. D. Hughes and Victor Raskin, Purdue, 1989, pp. 124–125. Mulanda, O. and Khasandi-Telewa, V. “In the Cartoonist’s Mind: Exploring Political Comic Strips in Kenyan Daily Newspapers”. The Journal of Pan African Studies, vol. 6, no. 9, 2014, pp. 30–43. Mulder, M. P and Nijholt, Antinus. Humour Research: State of Art. CTIT Technical Report Series, vol. 2, 2002, pp. 2–24. Centre for Telematics and Information Technology, ub.utwente.nl/webdocs/ctit/1/0000009e.pdf “Mule”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/mule. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019. Müller, Ralph. “A Metaphorical Perspective on Humour”. Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research, edited by Geert Brône, et al., De Gruyter, 2015, pp. 111–128. “Mungerilal’s dreams ‘come true’”. Business Line, 04 Feb. 2004, https://www. thehindubusinessline.com/2004/02/04/stories/2004020402480100.htm. Accessed 09 Sept. 2020. Mwetulundila, Rauna and Jairos Kangira. “An Analysis of Rhetoric and Humour in Dudley’s Political Cartoons Published in the Namibian Newspaper in 2012”. International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies, vol. 2, no. 6, June 2015, pp. 63–75. Nair, Rukmini Bhaya. “3 Reasons Why Modi’s ‘Raincoat’ Metaphor Is Brilliantly Bruising”. NDTV, 17 Feb. 2017, https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/with-­ raincoat-­and-­scam-­modi-­changes-­political-­syntax-­1660012. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019.

198 

Works Cited

Narayan, Shoba. “The Problem with Aseem Trivedi’s Cartoons”. Livemint, 20 Sept. 2012. https://www.livemint.com/Leisure/1xsAPR0ZQrgUhr13dGzDVK/ The-­problem-­with-­Aseem-­Trivedis-­cartoons.html. Accessed 05 Sept. 2019. National Curriculum Framework. 2005. NCERT, 2005, https://ncert.nic.in/ rightside/links/pdf/framework/english/nf2005.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov. 2019. Navasky, Victor S. The Art of Controversy: Political Cartoons and their Enduring Power. Knopf, 2013. “NCERT Asked to Remove Ambedkar Cartoon: Sibal”. Outlook, 11 May 2012, https://www.outlookindia.com/newswire/story/ncert-­a sked-­t o-­remove-­ ambedkar-­cartoon-­sibal/762250. Accessed 04 Sept. 2019. Negro, Isabel. “The Role of Visual Metaphor in Visual Genres”. EPIC Series in Language and Linguistics, vol. 2, 2017, pp. 119–126. Nome. Advaita Devatam God of Nonduality: Verses of Devotion and Knowledge from the Tradition of Advaita Vedanta. Society of Abidance in Truth, 2009. Oring, Elliott. Jokes and Their Relations. The U P of Kentucky, 1992. Ottati, Victor, et al. “The Metaphorical Framing Model: Political Communication and Public Opinion”. The Power of Metaphor: Examining its Influence on Social Life. American Psychological Association, 2014, pp. 179–202. Otto, Melanie. “The Caribbean”. The Routledge Companion to Postcolonial Studies, edited by John Mcleod, Routledge, 2007. Padmanabhan, Chitra. “The Growing Shrillness of Politics is a Problem for the Cartoonist”. The Wire, 08 Dec. 2015, https://thewire.in/media/the-­growing-­ shrillness-­of-­politics-­is-­a-­problem-­for-­the-­cartoonist. Accessed 03 Sept. 2019. Palmer, Jerry. “Parody and Decorum: Permission to Mock”. Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour, edited by Sharon Lockyer and Michael Pickering, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 79–97. ———. Taking Humour Seriously. Routledge, 1994. ———. The Logic of the Absurd. BFI, 1987. Pankaj, A. “Governor in Indian Federalism—II: Hiatus between Constitutional Intents and Practices”. Indian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 63, no. 1, 2017, pp. 13–40. Pedersen, Ove K. “Discourse Analysis”. Encyclopedia of Political Science, edited by Betrand Badie and Dirk Berg-Schlosser, Sage, 2011. p. 672. Pell, Marc. “Judging Emotion and Attitudes from Prosody Following Brain Damage”. Progress in Brain Research, no. 156, 2006, pp. 303–317. Phillips-Anderson, Michael Andrew. A Theory of Rhetorical Humor in American Political Discourse. 2007. U of Maryland, Ph.D. Dissertation. Pickering, Ken. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. I.E. Clark Publications, 1996.

  Works Cited 

199

“Pig”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/pig. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Pillai, Keshav Shankar. “Don’t Spare Me Shankar”. Children’s Book Trust, 2002. Plato. The Works of Plato: Analysis of Plato and the Republic. Translated by Benjamin Jowett, Cosimo Classics, 2010. ———. Three Dialogues: Protagoras, Philebus and Gorgias. Translated by Benjamin Jowett, Cosimo Classics, 2011. Pollio, Howard R. “Boundaries in Humor and Metaphor”. Metaphor: Implications and Applications, edited by Jeffrey Scott Mio and Albert N. Katz. Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 1996, pp. 231–253. Popa, Diana E. “Televised Political Satire: New Theoretical Introspections”. Developments in Linguistic Theory, edited by Marta Dynel. John Benjamins, 2013. ———. “Multimodal Metaphors in Political Environment”. Multimodality and Cognitive linguistics, edited by María Jesús Pinar Sanz, John Benjamins, 2015. Prasad, Amar Nath and M.B. Gaijan. Dalit Literature: A Critical Exploration. Sarup and Sons, 2007. Prendergast, Muireann. “Political Cartoons as Carnivalesque: A Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Argentina’s Humor Registrado Magazine”. Social Semiotics, vol. 29, no. 1, 2019, pp. 45–67. Rajashekara, H.M. “Nehru and Indian Federalism.” The Indian Journal of Political Science, vol. 55, no. 2, 1994, pp. 135–148. JSTOR, https://www. jstor.org/stable/41858802. ———. “The Nature of Indian Federalism: A Critique”. Asian Survey, vol. 37, no. 3, 1997, pp. 245–253. Ramachandran, V.S. “The Neurology and Evolution of Humor, Laughter, and Smiling: The False Alarm Theory”. Medical Hypotheses, vol. 51, no. 4, Oct. 1998, pp. 351–354. Raskin, Victor. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985. ———. “The Sense of Humor and the Truth”. The Sense of Humor: Explorations of a Personality Characteristic, edited by Willibald Ruch, Mouton De Gruyter, 1998. Redlich, Fredrick C., et al. “A Mirth Response Test: Preliminary Report on a Psychodiagnostic Technique Utilizing Dynamics of Humor”. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, vol. 21, no. 4, Oct. 1951, pp. 717–734. Reist, Wilissa M. A Thing of Humour? Exploring Gender and Hostile Humour in Alberta Political Cartoons. 2018. U of Alberta. Dissertation. https://era.

200 

Works Cited

library.ualberta.ca/items/b4844b19-­a5a8-­4380-­b719-­f6120121c73c 2018. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020 Richards, I.A. Practical Criticism: A Study of Literary Judgement, edited by John Constable. Routledge, 2001. ———. “The Philosophy of Rhetoric”. Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor, edited by Mark Johnson, U of Minnesota P, 1981, pp. 48–62. Ricoeur, Paul. “Violence and Language”. Political and Social Essays, translated by Joseph Bien, Ohio U P, 1974, pp. 32–41. Risden, Edward L. “Script-Based Semantic Theory of Humor and the Old English Riddles.” Enarratio, no. 8, 2001, pp. 61–70. Ritchie, David. Metaphor. Cambridge UP, 2013. Robertson, Connie. The Wordsworth Book of Humorous Quotations. Wordsworth Reference, 1998. Robinson, Andrew. “Roland Barthes’s Mythologies: A Critical Theory of Myths”. Ceasefire, 30 Sept. 2011. https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-­theory-­ barthes-­2/. Accessed 10 Sept. 2019. “Rock”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/rock. Accessed 30 Sept. 2019. Roecklein, Jon E. The Psychology of Humor: A Reference Guide and Annotated Bibliography. Greenwood Press, 2002. Roque, Georges. “Rhetoric, Argumentation and Persuasion in a Multimodal Perspective”. Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres, edited by Assimakis Tseronis and Charles Forceville, John Benjamins, 2017, pp. 26–50. Ross, Andrews and Damian J. Rivers. “Internet Memes as Polyvocal Political Participation”. The Presidency and Social Media: Discourse, Disruption, and Digital Democracy in the 2016 Presidential Election, edited by Dan Schill and John Allen Hendricks, Routledge, 2017, pp. 285–308. Rothbart, Mary K. “Psychological Approaches to the Study of Humour”. It’s a Funny Thing, Humour, edited by Antony J. Chapman and Hugh C. Foot, Pergamon P, 1977, pp. 87–94. Rycroft, C. A Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. Penguin, 1995. Saint Chrysostom. On the Priesthood; Ascetic Treatises; Select Homilies and Letters; Homilies on the Statutes, edited by Anthony Uyl. Devoted Publishing, 2017. Samson, Andrea et al. “Cognitive Humor Processing: Different Logical Mechanisms in Nonverbal Cartoons—An fMRI Study”. Social Neuroscience, vol. 3, no. 2, 2008, pp. 125–140.

  Works Cited 

201

Sanfilippo, Madelyn, et al. “Multidimensionality of Online Trolling Behaviors”. The Information Society: An International Journal, vol. 34, no. 1, 2017, pp. 27–39. Schilperoord, Joost and Alfons A. Maes. “Visual Metaphoric Conceptualization in Political Cartoons”. Multimodal Metaphor, edited by Charles Forceville and Eduardo Urios Aparisi. Mounton De Gruyter, 2009, pp. 221–238. Schneider, D. J. The Psychology of Stereotyping. Guilford Press, 2005. Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation: Volume I. Translated by Judith Norman et al., Cambridge U P, 2010. Schutz, Charles E. Political Humour: From Aristophanes to Sam Ervin. Associated UP, 1977. “Section 66A of the Information Technology Act”. The Centre for Internet and Society, https://cis-­india.org/internet-­governance/resources/section-­66A-­ information-­technology-­act. Accessed 09 Sept. 2019. Serafini, Frank. “Expanding Perspectives for Comprehending Visual Images in Multimodal Texts”. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 54, no. 5, 2011, pp. 342–350. Shammi, P., and Stuss, D. T. “Humour Appreciation: A Role of the Right Frontal Lobe”. Brain, vol. 122, no. 4, 1999, pp. 657–666. Shonoda, Mary-Anne. “Metaphor and Intertextuality: A Cognitive Approach to Intertextual Meaning-Making in Metafictional Fantasy Novels”. International Research in Children’s Literature, vol. 5, no. 1, 2012, pp. 81–96. Siegel, Lee. Laughing Matters: Comic Tradition in India. Motilal Banarsidass, 1989. Simpson, Paul. On the Discourse of Satire: Towards a Stylistic Model of Satirical Humor. John Benjamins, 2003. Sinkeviciute, Valeria. Conversational Humour and (Im)politeness: A Pragmatic Analysis of Social Interaction. John Benjamins, 2019. “Sit”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/sit. Accessed 25 Sept. 2019. “Snail”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/snail. Accessed 28 Sept. 2019. Sniderman, Paul M., et al. Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis. Princeton U P, 2014. Soare, Andrea. “From Classic Political Cartoons to Memes in Romanian Satirical News”. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov, vol. 12, no. 2, 2019. Sørensen, Majken Jul. Humour in Political Activism: Creative Nonviolent Resistance. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Spencer, Herbert. Illustrations of Universal Progress: A Series of Discussions. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1870.

202 

Works Cited

Sperber, Dan. “Verbal Irony: Pretense or Echoic Mention”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, vol. 113, no. 1, 1984, pp. 130–136. “Stand”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/ stand. Accessed 25 Sept. 2019. Steinbrink, John and Bliss, Donna. “Using Political Cartoons to Teach Thinking Skills”. The Social Studies, vol. 79, no. 5, 2015, pp. 217–220. “Stifling Dissent: The Criminalization of Peaceful Expression in India”. Human Rights Watch, 24 May 2016, https://hrw.org/report/2016/05/24/stifling-­ dissent/criminalization-­peaceful-­expression-­india. Accessed 08 Sept. 2019. Stowra, Anna. “The Thin Invisible Line-Between Funny and Distasteful Multimodal Advertising Discourse”. Explorations in Humor Studies: Humor Research Project, edited by Martin Kuczok et al. Cambridge Scholars Publishers, 2019, pp. 129–152. Straus, Ian Jaeger, “Incongruity Theory and the Explanatory Limits of Reason”. 2014. UVM Honors College. Dissertation. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/ hcoltheses/26. Accessed 08 Sept. 2020. Sturges, Paul. “Limits to Freedom of Expression? Considerations Arising from the Danish Cartoons Affair”. IFLA Journal, vol. 32, no. 3, 2006, pp. 181–188. Suls, Jerry M. “A Two-Stage Model for the Appreciation of Jokes and Cartoons: An Information-Processing Analysis”. The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues, edited by Jeffrey H. Goldstein and Paul McGhee, Academic P, 1972, pp. 81–100. Surendra. “Done Sir, All Attention is on JNU”. Cartoon. The Hindu, 16 Feb. 2016, https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/cartoon/article8241311.ece. Accessed 09 Sept. 2019. Tabacaru, Sabina. A Multimodal Study of Sarcasm in Interactional Humor. De Gruyter, 2019. Taecharungroj, Viriya and Pitchanut Nueangjamnong. “Humour 2.0: Styles and Types of Humour and Virality of Memes on Facebook”. Journal of Creative Communications, vol. 10, no. 3, 2015, pp. 288–302. Talmy, Givón. Context as Other Minds: The Pragmatics of Sociality, Cognition and Communication. John Benjamins, 2005. “Tap”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/tap. Accessed 29 Sept. 2019. “The Aqueous Humor”. Vision Eye Institute, 26 Aug. 2017, https://visioneyeinstitute.com.au/eyematters/aqueous-­humour/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2019. “The Charlie Hebdo Massacre in Paris”. The New York Times, 07 Jan. 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/opinion/the-­c harlie-­h ebdo-­ massacre-­in-­paris.html. Accessed 09 Sept. 2015.

  Works Cited 

203

“The Perfect Son”. Short Jokes. ITESLJ. iteslj.org/c/jokes-­short.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2019. “The Vitreous Humor”. Vision Eye Institute, 26 Aug. 2017. https://visioneyeinstitute.com.au/eyematters/the-­vitreous-­humour/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2017. Thomson, John B. Studies in the Theory of Ideology. U of California P, 1984. Toddington, Rachel S. Impoliteness as a Vehicle for Humour in Dramatic Discourse. 2015. U of Central Lancashire. Dissertation. https://clok.uclan. ac.uk/12121/1/Toddington%20Rachel%20Final%20eThesis%20 %28Master%20Copy%29.pdf. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Toncar, Mark F. “The Use of Humour in Television Advertising: Revisiting the US UK Comparison”. The International Journal of Advertising, vol. 20, no. 4, 2001, pp. 521–539. “Transmutation”. Oxford Dictionary of English, edited by Angus Stevenson, Third Edition, Oxford UP, 2010, p. 1890. Tribus, Angela C., “The Communicative Functions of Language: An Exploration of Roman Jakobson’s Theory in TESOL”. 2017. SIT Graduate Institute. MA Dissertation. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/ipp_collection/723/?utm_ source=digitalcollections.sit.edu%2. Accessed 06 Sept. 2020. Tsakona, Villy, and Diana Elena Popa, editors. Studies in Political Humor: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment. John Benjamins, 2011. Tsakona, Villy. “Humor and Image Politics in Parliamentary Discourse: A Greek Case Study”. Text and Talk, vol. 29, no. 2, 2009a, pp. 219–237. ———. “Language and Image Interaction in Cartoons: Towards a Multimodal Theory of Humor”. Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 14, no. 6, 2009b, pp. 1171–1188. Uçar, Aygül and Ipek Yildiz. “Humour and Impoliteness in Turkish: A Corpus-­ Based Analysis of the Television Show Komedi Dükkânı ‘Comedy Shop’”. Exploring (Im)politeness in Specialized and General Corpora: Converging Methodologies and Analytic Procedures, edited by Şükriye Ruhi and Yeşim Aksan, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, pp. 40–81. Unni, N.P. translator. Nāṭya Śāstra. NBBC Publishers, 2014. Van Schooneveld, C. H. “By Way of Introduction: Roman Jakobson’s Tenets and Their Potential”. Roman Jakobson: Echoes of his Scholarship, edited by Daniel Armstrong and C. H. Van Schooneveld, Peter de Ridder P, 1977, pp. 1–11. Vauclair, Jane. “Local Laughter, Global Polemics: Understanding Charlie Hebdo”. European Comic Art, no. 8, 2015, pp. 6–14. Veale, Tony, et al. “The Cognitive Mechanisms of Adversarial Humor”. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research vol. 19, no. 3, 2006, pp. 305–339.

204 

Works Cited

Vega, Gladys. Humor Competence: The Fifth Component. 1989. Purdue U, MA Dissertation. Vendler, Zeno. “Facts and Events.” Linguistics in Philosophy, Uof Cornell Press, 1974, pp. 22–146. Venkat, Vishaka and Vinod Balakrishnan. “How Conceptual Metaphors Make Political Iconography: A Focus Group Discussion on the Psychological Aspects”. Applied Psychology Readings: Selected Papers from Singapore Conference on Applied Psychology 2017, edited by Man-Tak Leung and Lee Ming Tan. Springer, 2018. Verschueren, Jef and Frank Bisard. “Adaptability”. Key Notions for Pragmatics, edited by Jef Verschueren and Jan-Ola Östman, John Benjamins, 2009, pp. 28–47. Virág, Ágnes. “Multimodal Conceptual Patterns of Hungary in Political Cartoons”. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, vol. 7, no. 1, 2020, pp. 222–253. Vokey, Scott. “Inspiration for Insurrection or Harmless Humour? Class and Politics in the Editorial Cartoons of Three Toronto Newspapers during the Early 1930s”. Labour / Le Travail, no. 45, 2000, pp. 141–170. Wapner, W., Hamby, S., and Gardner, H. “The Role of the Right Hemisphere in the Apprehension of Complex Linguistic Materials”. Brain and Language, vol. 14, no. 1, 1981, pp. 15–33. Weinberger, Marc G., and Charles S. Gulas. Humour in Advertising: A Comprehensive Analysis. M.E. Sharpe, 2006. Werner, Walt. “On Political Cartoons and Social Studies Textbooks: Visual Analogies, Intertextuality, and Cultural Memory”. Canadian Social Studies, vol. 38, no. 2, 2004, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1073912.pdf. “What is the Point of Offensive Humour?” The Conversation, 10 May 2017, https://theconversation.com/what-­is-­the-­point-­of-­offensive-­humour-­76889. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. “When Crime Pays”. Harpercollins. https://harpercollins.co.in/book/when-­ crime-­pays/. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019. “Whip”. Farlex Dictionary of Idioms, https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/ whip. Accessed 25 Sept. 2019. Wiggins, Bradley E. The Discursive Power of Memes in Digital Culture: Ideology, Semiotics, and Intertextuality. Routledge, 2019 Wild, B., et al. “Neural Correlates of Laughter and Humour”. Brain, vol. 126, no. 10, 2003, pp. 2121–2138. Wilde, Alison. Film, Comedy and Disability: Understanding Humour and Genre in Cinematic Constructions of Impairment and Disability. Routledge, 2018.

  Works Cited 

205

Wilde, Oscar. The Importance of Being Earnest. Heinemann, 1994. Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan. “Relevance Theory”. The Handbook of Pragmatics, edited by Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, Blackwell, 2006, pp. 607–632. Winkielman, P. and J. W. Schooler. “Splitting Consciousness: Unconscious, Conscious, and Metaconscious Processes in Social Cognition”. European Review of Social Psychology, vol. 22, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–35. Wright, Edmond. “The Joke, the “as if ” and the Statement”. The Analytic Freud: Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, edited by Michael P. Levine, Routledge, 2000, pp. 294–311. Yus, Francisco. “An Inference-Centered Analysis of Jokes: The Intersecting Circles Model of Humorous Communication”. Irony and Humor: From Pragmatics to Discourse, edited by L.R. Gurillo and B. Alvarado, John Benjamins, 2013, pp. 59–82. ———. Humour and Relevance. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2016. ———. “Multimodality in Memes: A Cyberpragmatic Approach”. Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, edited by Patricia Bou-Franch and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Zaman, Rana Siddiqui. “Can’t Our Politicians Laugh at Themselves?” The Hindu, 27 May 2012, https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-­page/cant-­ our-­politicians-­laugh-­at-­themselves/article3459923.ece. Accessed 23 Sept. 2019. Zillmann, Dolf and Joanne R. Cantor. “A Disposition Theory of Humour and Mirth”. Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications, edited by Antony J. Chapman and Hugh C. Foot, Transaction Publishers, 2007, pp. 93–116. Zinken, Jörg. “Ideological Imagination: Intertextual and Correlational Metaphors in Political Discourse.” Discourse and Society, vol. 14, no. 4, 2003, pp. 507–523. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/42888585. Accessed 07 Sept. 2020. Zlobin, Nikolai. “Humor as Political Protest”, Demokratizatsiya, no. 4, 1996, pp. 223–231.

Index

A

B

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), 37 Acharya, Satish, 51 Adhwaryu, Sandeep, 51, 54 Affect, 4, 8, 25, 44, 59, 69, 74, 83, 94, 165, 166 Ahmed, Fakhruddin Ali, 152 Ambedkar, B.R., 2, 3, 25, 26, 74, 84–89, 105, 107, 109–112, 119, 124, 126, 134, 160, 167 Ambiguity, 22, 64, 68, 85, 88, 106, 109, 112, 124, 133, 134, 147, 161, 168 Amul, 129–134, 136, 156, 158, 159 Animals, 53, 124, 151, 155, 167, 168 Annadurai, C.N., 122, 126 Anti-Hindi agitation, 3, 119, 120, 122, 126, 129, 160–161, 167 Assam Gana Parishad, 159 Attardo, Salvatore, 14–16

Bangladesh Liberation war, 152 Barthes, Roland, 5, 17, 23–25, 59, 60, 69, 70, 77–83, 104, 113, 115, 166 Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP), 36, 37, 146 Bhindranwale, Jarnail Singh, 152 Black, Max, 98 Blitt, Barry, 37, 55, 84 C

Charlie Hebdo, 4, 25, 41, 42 Chitravalis, 52 Coded iconic message, 25, 79, 81, 84, 85, 87, 116, 120, 123, 131, 133, 136, 138, 141, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 152, 154, 158–160

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 V. Balakrishnan, V. Venkat, The Language of Humour and Its Transmutation in Indian Political Cartoons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32836-7

207

208 Index

Colonial, 1, 52, 89, 112, 121, 128, 149–151 Common Man, 137–140 Communication of humour, 18, 63–65, 71, 75, 85 Compulsory sterilisation programme, 131, 152, 153 Conceptual mappings, 97, 99, 103, 107, 110, 127, 134, 140, 142, 155, 156 Conceptual metaphors, 24, 94, 96, 97, 99–103, 105–108, 115, 120, 123, 127, 161, 167 Constitution, 3, 24, 39, 50, 85–88, 105, 109, 112, 122 Corrupt bureaucracy, 119, 137–147 D

Denmark cartoon crisis, 41 Desai, Morarji, 151 Desousa, Michael, 46, 48 Disease, 25, 74, 165, 166 Draupadi, 2 Duryodhana, 2

G

Gandhi, Indira, 131, 146, 152, 154 Gandhi, Rahul, 152 Ganesh, 2 Gargantua, 37 Garibi Hatao, 151–153 Gopalakrishnan, Gokul, 51 H

Herblock, 37 The Hindu, 37, 51, 135 I

Impression, 25, 75, 76, 81–85, 88–90, 115, 116, 120, 125, 126, 129, 134, 136, 139, 142, 145–147, 149, 150, 153–155, 158–161, 166–168 Indian Express, 51 Indian National Congress (INC), 36, 121, 146 Indira Gandhi regime, 119, 151–156 Irfan, 48, 141 IT Act, 43, 44

E

Elections, 19, 50, 84, 85, 121, 137, 138, 141, 145–147, 151–154, 158 Embler, Weller, 98 Emergency, 152, 153, 157 Etteth, Ravi Shankar, 51 F

Fauconnier, Gilles, 103 Forceville, Charles, 18, 19, 23, 69, 99

J

Jakobson, Roman, 5, 17, 20, 23–25, 59, 60, 69–72, 74, 77–79, 81–83, 93, 94, 98, 113, 115, 166 Jammu and Kashmir, 157, 158 Jayalalitha, J., 126 Johnson, Mark, 5, 17, 23, 24, 26, 69, 94, 95, 99–108, 113, 115, 166

 Index  K

Kejriwal, Arvind, 37 Khanduri, Ritu Gairola, 45, 52, 137 Koestler, Arthur, 13, 14, 49, 77, 95, 98, 99, 106 Krishnadevaraya, King, 36 Kudi Arasu, 121 Kuipers, Giselinde, 4, 19, 41, 44 Kutty, P. K. S., 4, 52, 153–157, 161

209

141–143, 145, 149, 150, 152, 158–161 Medhurst, Martin, 46, 48 Miranda, Mario, 52 Multimodal, 2, 14, 18, 19, 23, 25, 60, 68, 69, 78, 80–82, 99, 114 Munshi, K.M., 122, 123 N

L

Lakoff, George, 5, 17, 23, 24, 26, 69, 94, 95, 99–108, 113, 115, 166 Language, caste and gender discrimination, 119–137 Laxman, R.K., 3, 4, 52, 119–121, 123, 126–129, 137, 138, 140, 141, 145, 149, 151–153, 155, 161 Liberation of Goa, 149 Linguistic message, 25, 79–81, 84, 86, 90, 105, 115, 120, 123, 125, 131, 132, 135, 138, 141, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 152, 153, 159, 160 Lok Sabha, 135, 136 Low, David, 37, 52, 55 M

Mahapatra, Ambikesh, 43 Mandal, B.P., 130 Manjul, 51, 145, 146 Matrix, 5, 26, 94, 104, 106–109, 111, 113, 115, 116, 120, 122, 130, 132, 133, 138, 139,

Narain, Raj, 152 National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), 2–4, 24, 25, 43, 48, 49, 51, 86, 88, 120, 124, 126, 127, 130, 135, 137, 138, 141, 145, 146, 148, 149, 151, 153, 158, 159 National Curriculum Framework (NCF), 3, 48 Nāṭya Śāstra, 20 Navasky, Victor, 25, 55, 56 Nehru, Jawaharlal, 3, 85–89, 107, 109–112, 121–125, 148–150, 157 Nehruvian regime, 119, 125, 148–151 New York Times, 1, 42, 54 Ninan, Ajit, 51, 52, 54, 146 Non-coded iconic message, 25, 69, 80–82, 85, 86, 90, 115, 116, 120, 123, 131, 132, 135, 138, 141, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 154, 157, 159, 160 O

Obama, Barrack, 38, 55, 84, 85

210 Index P

Panchatantra, 53, 151, 168 Perception, 9, 13, 25, 63, 65, 71, 75, 76, 81–86, 88–90, 100, 107, 111, 112, 115, 116, 125, 126, 133, 134, 136, 139, 142, 145–147, 149, 150, 153–155, 158–161, 166, 168 Periyar E.V.R., 121, 122, 126 Persecution of cartoonists, 25, 173 Pillai, Keshav Shankar, 2, 52, 85 Puri, Rajinder, 52 R

Rajagopalachari, C., 110, 121, 127 Rajya Sabha, 135, 136 Ramus, Peter, 97 Reaction, 3, 13, 20, 22, 25, 37, 74, 75, 81, 83–87, 90, 107, 113, 115, 116, 120, 128–130, 133, 139, 142, 166 Regionalism, 119, 129, 156–162 Reservation, 50, 120, 130–137 Rhetoric, 5, 12, 23, 25, 26, 43, 47, 48, 56, 60, 80, 90, 93, 94, 97, 113, 115, 117, 119 Richards, I.A., 97, 98, 104 Ricoeur, Paul, 38, 39, 98 Right to Information (RTI), 142–144 Roy, Aruna, 143

Source, 5, 14, 22, 26, 94, 95, 97, 99, 103–109, 115, 116, 120, 124, 125, 132, 133, 135, 137–139, 141, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 152, 154, 155, 158–160 Suls, Jerry M., 13, 25, 65–68, 74 Surendra, 37, 51, 135, 136, 142, 144 T

Tagore, Abanindranath, 52 Target, 5, 7, 10, 16, 17, 26, 42, 49, 69, 94, 95, 97, 99, 103–109, 115, 116, 120, 125, 127, 128, 130, 134, 135, 137, 139, 141, 144, 145, 147–150, 152, 154–156, 158, 160, 168 Theories of humour, 14–17 Thorat Committee, 3, 5, 24, 26, 48–51, 117, 119, 133, 135, 136, 142, 147, 148, 153, 155, 159, 166 Times of India, 51, 146 Transmutation, 4, 5, 8, 17–24, 26, 39, 52, 56, 61, 69, 87–89, 109, 111–113, 116, 119, 120, 126, 129, 133, 134, 137, 139, 141, 142, 144, 146, 147, 149, 155, 156, 158–162, 166, 168, 169 Trivedi, Aseem, 4, 43, 75 Turner, Mark, 103

S

Sarkaria Commission, 149 Schutz, Charles E., 36, 63 Singh, Manmohan, 143

U

Unni and Munni, 48 Unny, E.P., 51, 52

 Index 

107, 113–116, 120, 123, 125, 130, 131, 135, 145, 151, 167

V

Venkataraghavan, Keshav, 51 Verbal, 10, 15, 23, 25, 36, 49, 60, 65, 69, 71–77, 84, 93, 99, 106, 114, 123, 130, 145, 167 Vidūṣaka, 36, 52, 140 Vijayan, O.V., 52 Vijayanagara, 36 Visual, 3, 5, 18, 23–26, 47–50, 53, 55, 59, 60, 69, 73, 76–81, 83, 84, 90, 93, 99, 102, 104, 106,

211

W

Wheelwright, Philip Ellis, 98 Wilde, Oscar, 15, 17, 96 Y

Yesudasan, C.J., 51, 52, 54