• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

The type of combative self-deprecation that Kimmel and Lange display in this conversation, in which one man accuses the other of “upstaging” him, also indicates that self-deprecation is used to display magnanimity. In That’s Not What I Meant, Tannen writes, “It’s an ironic twist by which you want to be magnanimous but want credit for it too—and taking credit for being magnanimous reframes the other person’s behavior as depriving you” (89). Self-deprecating humor operates in a similar way. One is not merely telling an embarrassing personal anecdote or using himself as the target of a joke, but, on the “metamessage” level, which looks beyond the surface of a statement to determine “what we’re doing when we speak” (Understand 32), he is telling his partner (and in the case of talk shows, the audience as well) that he is being generous, sacrificing his own pride in order to compliment the other man. This is evident in Kimmel and Lange’s conversation. Both men combine compliments of the other man with denunciations of themselves, suggesting that such a combination is a generous and giving gesture. [The writer ably concludes her analysis with a compressed restatement about competition:] The real competition is not about which man was funnier at the wedding, but over which man can better compliment the other’s performance.

In Conan O’Brien’s conversation with actor Kiefer Sutherland, O’Brien repeatedly pokes fun at his own weakness in order to emphasize Sutherland’s toughness, a trait for which the actor is known. It may appear that O’Brien is putting himself down, but at the same time he displays one-upmanship. When O’Brien is being self-deprecating, downplaying his own skills in relation to Sutherland’s, Sutherland becomes the recipient of O’Brien’s generosity. O’Brien, thus, comes out of the conversation in a hierarchical position to Sutherland, for he was the one giving, and not receiving, the praise and generosity.

[The writer now extends her category of self-deprecation to include another form, teasing:] Teasing and self-deprecation may appear to go hand-in-hand. In teasing, man A makes fun of man B, and in self-deprecation, man B makes fun of man B. Either way, man B is made fun of. However, the target of the humor is not always as important as the source. If man A teases man B, man A has the upper hand. But if man B teases himself, it is man B who gains dominance in the conversation. On the topic of the wedding that Jimmy Kimmel and Artie Lange attended, Lange says, “Um, but I was glad you were at my table, man, cause it was all good looking people. You uglied it up a bit.” Kimmel responds, “I know, yeah. That’s uh…yeah we make quite an imposing pair.” The men go on, both making fun of what they describe as mutual ugliness. Later in the conversation, Lange begins to tease Kimmel about the host’s girlfriend, saying that the couple was engaging in frequent displays of public affection at the wedding. In this situation, Kimmel does not transform Lange’s teasing into self-deprecation, but instead tries to remove the teasing altogether.

Lange: And so I’m thinking I’m not gonna be the only single loser there and then you and Sarah—I look over and it’s like you were shooting Nine and a Half Weeks or something.

Kimmel: Oh, no it wasn’t.

Lange: You oughta, you oughta see these two.

Kimmel: That’s not true.

Lange: “So Jim there’s a broad over there we could dance with” he’s like (kissing face).

Kimmel: Stop it. That wasn’t me—

Lange: I’m telling you, she—

Kimmel: That’s really embarrassing cause that wasn’t me. Maybe you’re confusing me with Corolla, people do that from time to time.

In this excerpt, Lange shatters the mutual self-deprecation that the two had been enjoying earlier, teasing Kimmel about something that Kimmel is clearly not comfortable being teased nor teasing himself about. As a result, Lange has dominance in this conversation. Kimmel struggles to recapture a sense of control, telling Lange that he is the one who should be embarrassed, at which point he bring