Abstract
This chapter presents a rhetorical analysis of British political satire using the Aristotelian modes of persuasion vis-à-vis ethos, pathos, and logos. These refer to the credibility, emotion, and logic of how political satirists seek to construct and communicate a message to their audiences. This chapter argues that different types of rhetorical style exist across the case studies (namely, The Thick of It and Private Eye) given their distinct audiences and their expectations. Ultimately, by employing this theoretical approach, the chapter concludes that British political satire is an active participant in the political process rather than an objective observer that can fashion political opinions and affect the quality of political discourse in British politics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Atkins, J., A. Finlayson, J. Martin, and N. Turbull. 2014. Rhetoric in British politics and society. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Basu, L. 2014. British satire in The Thick of It. Popular Communications 12 (2): 89–102.
Bruns, G. 1979. Allegory and satire: A rhetorical mediation. New Literary History 11 (1): 121–132.
Campbell, A. 2013. Interview with the author, 26 May.
Crines, A. 2013. An analysis of George Galloway’s oratorical and rhetorical impact. Politics 33 (2): 81–90.
———. 2014a. The rhetoric of neoliberalism in the politics of crisis. Global Discourse 5 (1): 116–129.
———. 2014b. Rhetoric and satire – Spitting image and political comedy. In Rhetoric in British politics and society. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Finlayson, A. 2012. Rhetoric and the political theory of ideologies. Political Studies 60 (4): 751–767.
Flinders, M. 2012. Defending politics: Why democracy matters in the twenty-first century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hayton, R., and A. Crines. 2015. Conservative orators from Baldwin to Cameron. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Lee, H., and N. Kwak. 2014. The affect effect of political satire: Sarcastic humour, negative emotions, and political participation. Mass Communication and Society 17 (3): 307–328.
Lockyer, S. 2006. A two-pronged attack? Exploring Private Eye’s satirical humour and investigative reporting. Journalism Studies 7 (5): 765–781.
Lunsford, A. 1978. Aristotelian rhetoric: Let’s get back to the classics. Journal of Basic Writing 2 (1): 2–12.
———. 1979. 22 June, No. 457.
———. 1981. 11 September, No. 515.
———. 1983. 21 October, No. 564.
Quintilian. 2001. An orators education book II. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawnsley, A. 2012. Armando Iannucci vs Andrew Rawnsley. The Guardian, 2 September.
Toye, R. 2013. Rhetoric – A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Roe-Crines, A.S. (2020). The Rhetorical Portrayal of Public Servants in British Political Satire. In: Sullivan, H., Dickinson, H., Henderson, H. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_53-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_53-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Political Science and International StudiesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences