Arrested Development and Philosophy_ They've Made a Huge Mistake - Kristopher G. Phillips [49]
To say that speech is “performative” is to say that in certain instances, with the right people and the right context, to utter something is the same as to do something. J. L. Austin (1911–1960) was the first philosopher to extensively explore the performative dimension of speech.3 Austin’s most well-known and oft-cited example is a marriage ceremony: When you say “I do” in a marriage ceremony you do not report on the marriage but in fact get married, even if you do it based on a dare.
It’s not just marriages that happen with the simple uttering of a few words in the right context with a speaker of the right authority. Suppose that I approach a yacht docked in Orange County, California, smash a bottle of champagne on its helm, and pronounce, “I christen this ship the C-Word.” In uttering the phrase, “I christen this ship the C-Word,” I do not report or describe the world; rather, I perform the act of christening in the very uttering of the words (as long as I have the authority to christen ships). The same goes for apologizing (“I apologize for hurting you”), promising (“I promise to meet you at the Queen Mary”), betting (“I bet ten thousand dollars on Lucille 2”), swearing (“I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”), and on and on.
These speech acts are explicit performatives in that the verb identifies the action that is accomplished (or, at least, attempted) in the uttering of the phrase. In saying “I apologize,” I apologize. In saying “I promise,” I promise. But the explicitness of explicit performatives isn’t necessary for any given illocutionary act4 (a performative speech act) to come off without a hitch. I can apologize by saying, “I’m sorry,” or, “I didn’t mean to hurt you,” or, “I’ve made a huge mistake,” and so on. I can promise by saying, “I’ll be at the Queen Mary at three o’clock come hell or high water.” I can bid by screaming, “10,000!” at a charity bachelorette auction. These utterances aren’t explicit performatives, but they are performatives, nonetheless.5 Actions such as promising, apologizing, marrying (whether “for real” or on a dare), daring, betting, bidding, naming, and the like can be done in speech. So can actions such as stating, asserting, claiming, arguing, protesting, affirming, and so on.
In Austin’s theory of the performative nature of utterances, we find an analysis of language that acknowledges the simple fact that we do things with words. Such a theory implicitly recognizes that no utterance conveys meaning outside of a context; the role of the speaker, the audience, the culture, and the historical moment function as key players in understanding what a particular utterance means.
Austin noted that there are more subtle ways of doing something with words than constructing explicit performatives. I give you Lucille Bluth.
“I’ve Been a Horrible Mother.”
Lucille Bluth is the matriarch of the Bluth family and (as it turns out) the master and commander of the Bluth Company. She is also one of the most quick-witted, venom-tongued characters to grace TV motherdom (perhaps ever). She quickly justifies an insult directed at a young Lindsay Bluth (“Dinner’s ready! We’re having Lindsay-chops!”) as a way of preparing her for school bullying. Once when Michael suggests that Gob should be fired from the Bluth company, she assumes Michael to mean that Gob should be “gotten rid of” in the sense of “should no longer exist” (Michael: “I need you to get rid of Gob.