What is Parody?
A History in Laughter
A history of parody takes us back to the classical and medieval worlds. Scholars claim that the first recorded sites of parody. In terms of classics, the Deipnosophistae by Greco-Egyptian author Athenaeus is a set of historical tales set at a banquet in Rome and is often regarded as an early version of parody. Authors Peg Weiser and Brand Zeglin argue this is due to the text “using epic vocabulary, and treating a light, satirical, or mock-heroic subject” (1).
As for the middle ages, mock-heroism and parody crop up in medieval Europe with Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales and The House of Fame serving as examples. Epics and Romance poems were popular and therefore subjects of parody for writers like Chaucer, and in his dissertation Zil Korkut argues that this “humorous imitation inevitably exposes the artificial conventions of these genres, drawing the reader’s attention at the same time to the exaggerated idealism that often accompanies them” (25). An example of mocker heroism appears in Chaucer’s “The Nun’s Priest’s Tale” where chivalric characters like the knight and the damsel are replaced by a rooster and hen, spinning the story into a mock-heroic beast fable. These are only a few examples of parody throughout history, but depict the long tradition of the genre that speaks back to popular texts and genres of the time. With this historical context in mind, we can proceed forward viewing parody as a more legitimate genre as we discuss its definition.
Many scholars offer definitions of parody focusing on elements such as its linguistic function or its reflexivity, but Peg Weiser and Brand Zeglin offer a clear, concise definition that incorporates the ideas of older scholars in an approachable way. They define parody as “the comic refunctioning of preformed linguistic or artistic material,’ where the comic element involves the creation incongruity between the original and the parody traceable to the way the parodist “foregrounds” the original in the parodied work: by highlighting it, complicating it, or confusing it” (2-3). In their definition, parodies represent their original text or genre in the foreground, imitating aesthetics and possibly even themes, but introduce a comic element to the text that leaves it unable to be classified as an adaptation of a text or genre and in some way highlights, complicates, or confuses.
This definition is helpful when entering a discussion on Film Noir parodies and what might be expected of them. From Weiser and Zeglin’s definition, we know that these parodies will “foreground” Film Noir, but introduce a comic element that will leave it unable to be classified as simply a comedic Noir film. They will also introduce a comic element that will highlight, complicate, or confuse our perceptions of the original, negotiating new perceptions of Film Noir that call attention to it’s innate artifice as a set of constructed choices. Additionally, elements of parodic tone are elaborated on further by Weiser and Zeglin and serve to differentiate parody from satire and pastiche.
​
Parody vs Satire vs Pastiche
​
In parody, the comic element of the text might criticize or express appreciation for the original--and oftentimes does both. As the pair explains, “parody can be 'ambivalent' toward its target and can involve—in its creative re-presenting of the original—a mixture of criticism and sympathy for the parodied text” (3-4). As the pair explains, parody is often both “laughing at and with” (Weiser & Zeglin 4) the original text. This critical and appreciative tone differentiates parody from satire and pastiche. Satire mostly focuses on criticizing its subject, pointing out flaws and hypocrisies often through a biting sense of humor. It laughs at, but normally not with. Pastiche rather is simply a replication of a text or genre and usually doesn’t have a set tone or angle with which it approaches texts.
