1887
image of Brutal spoons and cheesy gloves
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In its long presence on television and the internet, the genre of the cooking show has changed and diversified significantly. The initial principally instructional character has given way to more entertaining sub-genres, including parodic ones, that is, ‘spoof cooking shows’ on the internet. The presentation of self ( ) takes on many forms in everyday life, but the possibilities of publicly managing one’s own impression have enormously increased on the largest stage in the world, the internet (cf. ). The blurring of the Goffmanian concepts ‘front-’ and ‘backstage’ are important here in the presentation of self as ‘fake’ or ‘real’ person on the web. This article looks at the diversification of the genre of the cooking show in its transition to the internet, first by investigating strategies of formality or informality ( ), then by exploring a particular spoof show, , as an example of how genre conventions are manifested by undermining.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00073.muh
2021-03-16
2021-05-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Androutsopoulos, Jannis
    2015 “Negotiating authenticities in mediatized times.” Discourse, Context & Media8: 74–77. 10.1016/j.dcm.2015.06.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2015.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
    1984Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (ed. and trans. byCaryl Emerson). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 10.5749/j.ctt22727z1
    https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctt22727z1 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bradbury, Malcolm
    1989 “An age of parody: Style in the modern arts.” InNo, Not Bloomsbury: Collected Writings on British Fiction since 1945, ed. byMalcolm Bradbury, 46–57. London: Arena.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cambridge English Dictionary Online
    Cambridge English Dictionary Online. n.d.https://dictionary.cambridge.org
  5. Collins, Kathleen
    2009Watching What We Eat: The Evolution of Television Cooking Shows. New York: Continuum. 10.5040/9781501336133
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501336133 [Google Scholar]
  6. Duan, Bingqing
    2019 “Genre diversification of American cooking shows.” Unpublished MA thesis, University of Bayreuth.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Goffman, Erving
    1959The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Heritage, Stuart
    2020 “‘Spoons are so brutal!’ Paris Hilton’s cooking show is a rare work of comic genius.” The Guardian, 20January. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jan/20/spoons-are-so-brutal-paris-hiltons-cooking-show-is-a-rare-work-of-comic-genius (accessed20 March 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Hoëm, Ingjerd
    2001 “Theater.” InKey Terms in Language and Culture, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, 244–247. Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hutcheon, Linda
    2000A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms (2nd edn.). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Irvine, Judith
    1979 “Formality and informality in communicative events.” American Anthropologist81(4): 773–790. 10.1525/aa.1979.81.4.02a00020
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1979.81.4.02a00020 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2001 “Formality and informality in communicative events.” InLinguistic Anthropology: A Reader, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, 189–207. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Johnson, Thomas
    2019 “You Suck at Cooking won’t make you hungry, but it will make you laugh.” The Washington Post, 18March. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/03/18/you-suck-cooking-wont-make-you-hungry-it-will-make-you-laugh (accessed15 September 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Ketchum, Cheri
    2005 “The essence of cooking shows: How the Food Network constructs consumer fantasies.” Journal of Communication Inquiry29(3): 217–234. 10.1177/0196859905275972
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859905275972 [Google Scholar]
  15. Labov, William, and Joshua Waletzky
    1967 “Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience.” InEssays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, ed. byJune Helm, 12–44. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lacey, Nick
    2000Narrative and Genre: Key Concepts in Media Studies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lai-Yeung, Theresa Wai, and Simon Wing Wah So
    2010 “TV as a multimedia synchronous communication for cooking and eating activities: Analysis of TV cooking shows in Hong Kong.” InISM 2010: The IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia, 302–307. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. 10.1109/ISM.2010.52
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ISM.2010.52 [Google Scholar]
  18. Marwick, Alice, and danah boyd
    2011 “To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on Twitter.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies17(2): 139–158. 10.1177/1354856510394539
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856510394539 [Google Scholar]
  19. Matwick, Keri, and Kelsi Matwick
    2019 “Bloopers and backstage talk on TV cooking shows.” Text & Talk40(1): 49–74. 10.1515/text‑2019‑2052
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2019-2052 [Google Scholar]
  20. Meng, Bingchun
    2011 “From Steamed Bun to Grass Mud Horse: E Gao as alternative political discourse on the Chinese internet.” Global Media and Communication7(1): 33–51. 10.1177/1742766510397938
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766510397938 [Google Scholar]
  21. Mittell, Jason
    2004Genre and Television: From Cop Shows to Cartoons in American Culture. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203642139
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203642139 [Google Scholar]
  22. Mühleisen, Susanne
    2020 “Formality and informality in cooking shows: Paula Deen and the development of a genre.” InTalking about Food: The Social and the Global in Eating Communities, ed. bySofia Rüdiger, and Susanne Mühleisen, 189–207. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.47.10muh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.47.10muh [Google Scholar]
  23. Naccarato, Peter, and Kathleen Lebesco
    2012Culinary Capital. London: Berg. 10.5040/9781350042131
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350042131 [Google Scholar]
  24. Rea, Christopher
    2013 “Spoofing (e’gao) culture on the Chinese internet.” InHumour in Chinese Life and Culture: Resistance and Control in Modern Times, ed. byJessica Milner Davis, and Jocelyn Chey, 149–172. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 10.5790/hongkong/9789888139231.003.0007
    https://doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789888139231.003.0007 [Google Scholar]
  25. Shifman, Limor
    2013 “Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication18: 362–377. 10.1111/jcc4.12013
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12013 [Google Scholar]
  26. Shulman, David
    2017The Presentation of Self in Contemporary Social Life. Los Angeles: Sage. 10.4135/9781506340913
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506340913 [Google Scholar]
  27. Swales, John. M.
    1990Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Setting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00073.muh
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00073.muh
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error