• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

As you read the essay (which we have excerpted slightly), notice how the writer

locates significant patterns in her primary material (her transcripts of conversations on late night talk shows) and asks “So what?”;

uses restatement to infer implications;

uncovers assumptions;

formulates and reformulates binaries; and

uses both data and lens to repeatedly qualify and complicate her claims.

We have included annotations in square brackets to suggest how the writer uses various analytical methods for writing about reading.

“I think my cooking, uh, sucks”: Self-Deprecation

on Late Night Television

by Anna Whiston

Low confidence is not exactly typical in Hollywood. Celebrities are known just as much for their egos as they are for the movies that they headline and the scandals that they induce. And yet, late night talk shows, such as The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Late Night with Conan O’Brien, The Late Show with David Letterman, and Jimmy Kimmel Live, include endless examples of self-deprecation on the parts of both the male hosts and the male celebrity guests. Self-deprecation is, on the surface, a way of belittling oneself. However, examination of the conversations that take place on these television programs helps show that this strand of apparent humility is actually a much more nuanced conversational technique. Conversations on late night talk shows reveal that self-deprecation does not necessarily pit one man as inferior to another.

In You Just Don’t Understand, linguist Deborah Tannen explores conversation as a process affected largely by the gender of the speaker. For men, according to Tannen, “…life is a contest in which they are constantly tested and must perform, in order to avoid the risk of failure” (178). This sense of competition often manifests itself in “one-upsmanship,” a strategy in which men attempt to outdo each other in order to achieve a hierarchical position within a conversation (Tannen 26). However, there are certain situations in which hierarchy is not necessarily desirable. The interactions between men on late night talk shows serve as one example of this situation.

In another one of her works on conversation, That’s Not What I Meant, Tannen discusses framing, the idea that “everything about the way we say something contributes to establishing the footing that frames our relationships to each other “(75). The guests on talk shows are entering a frame, or conversational alignment, that is inherently asymmetrical. Though both guest and host are technically celebrities, the guest is presented as the centerpiece of the program, the man who answers the questions, while the host is simply the asker. This frame is not always one that is appealing for the guest, who may want to create a persona that is not that of an elite star, but of a likable and approachable everyman. In order to cultivate this persona, the guest can use conversation to downplay his star status and success in order to establish a more symmetrical alignment to the host, thereby changing the frame of the conversation. As we will see, however, this reframing is complicated, since it essentially shifts the asymmetry to a different ground. An example of this technique can be found in actor Paul Rudd’s interview with NBC late night talk show host Conan O’Brien:

Rudd: I’m great, how are you?

O’Brien: I’m very good. You know things are going very well for you. You’ve been in so many successful movies. You have this new film Role Models. People love this movie, very funny, big hit for you, you’ve gotta be excited. I mean you you’re a big, big star. Rudd: It…I don’t know about that, but it’s very exciting. Oh God, I’m still out of breath! I swear to God.

By negating O’Brien’s compliment, Rudd downplays his fame and thus reframes the conversation. By saying, “Oh God, I’m still out of breath,” Rudd draws attention away from his stardom to some goofy dancing that O’Brien and Rudd did at the beginning of the interview. When O’Brien again tries to draw attention to Rudd’s star