Humour in the Swedish Court : Managing Emotions, Status and Power
Bergman Blix, Stina LU
and Wettergren, Åsa
(2018)
p.179-209
- Abstract
- This chapter analyses humour from an emotion sociological perspective, linking humour to power, status, and group solidarity. It draws from about 300 observed trials and interviews with 43 judges and 41 prosecutors from four Swedish districts courts. Humour is sometimes skilfully used as a strategy to ease tension, relieve boredom or to reprimand. It is initiated/allowed by the judge, but high-status lawyers or prosecutors may take the initiative. Judges may use humour to uphold an effective and smooth procedure, attenuating their own power. It is generally unacceptable to laugh at the expense of lay (low power) people present in court. Inter-professional humour takes place in intermissions during the hearings, while trials running over... (More)
- This chapter analyses humour from an emotion sociological perspective, linking humour to power, status, and group solidarity. It draws from about 300 observed trials and interviews with 43 judges and 41 prosecutors from four Swedish districts courts. Humour is sometimes skilfully used as a strategy to ease tension, relieve boredom or to reprimand. It is initiated/allowed by the judge, but high-status lawyers or prosecutors may take the initiative. Judges may use humour to uphold an effective and smooth procedure, attenuating their own power. It is generally unacceptable to laugh at the expense of lay (low power) people present in court. Inter-professional humour takes place in intermissions during the hearings, while trials running over several days may include the defendants in the semi-backstage inter-professional joking. Most in-court humorous incidents are unintended, where laughter is suppressed or released depending on the judge. Humour has different functions and expressions front stage (in court) and backstage (office, lunch room). Observation of both arenas reveal its shame-management function in inter-professional relations. While judges’ backstage area flourishes with jokes about embarrassing procedural mistakes, prosecutors’ backstage humour more often deals with the foulness and tragedy of criminals and crimes. (Less)
- Abstract (Swedish)
- This chapter analyses humour from an emotion sociological perspective, linking humour to power, status, and group solidarity. It draws from about 300 observed trials and interviews with 43 judges and 41 prosecutors from four Swedish districts courts. Humour is sometimes skilfully used as a strategy to ease tension, relieve boredom or to reprimand. It is initiated/allowed by the judge, but high-status lawyers or prosecutors may take the initiative. Judges may use humour to uphold an effective and smooth procedure, attenuating their own power. It is generally unacceptable to laugh at the expense of lay (low power) people present in court. Inter-professional humour takes place in intermissions during the hearings, while trials running over... (More)
- This chapter analyses humour from an emotion sociological perspective, linking humour to power, status, and group solidarity. It draws from about 300 observed trials and interviews with 43 judges and 41 prosecutors from four Swedish districts courts. Humour is sometimes skilfully used as a strategy to ease tension, relieve boredom or to reprimand. It is initiated/allowed by the judge, but high-status lawyers or prosecutors may take the initiative. Judges may use humour to uphold an effective and smooth procedure, attenuating their own power. It is generally unacceptable to laugh at the expense of lay (low power) people present in court. Inter-professional humour takes place in intermissions during the hearings, while trials running over several days may include the defendants in the semi-backstage inter-professional joking. Most in-court humorous incidents are unintended, where laughter is suppressed or released depending on the judge. Humour has different functions and expressions front stage (in court) and backstage (office, lunch room). Observation of both arenas reveal its shame-management function in inter-professional relations. While judges’ backstage area flourishes with jokes about embarrassing procedural mistakes, prosecutors’ backstage humour more often deals with the foulness and tragedy of criminals and crimes. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/a39c39f1-45bc-48ea-a25a-0b17601d623b
- author
- Bergman Blix, Stina
LU
and Wettergren, Åsa
- publishing date
- 2018
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- humour, court, status, power, prosecutors, judges, humour, court, status, power, prosecutors, judges
- host publication
- Judges, Judging and Humour
- editor
- Anleu, Jessica Milner Davis; Sharyn Roach
- pages
- 31 pages
- publisher
- Palgrave Macmillan
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85063796583
- ISBN
- 9783319767383
- 9783319767376
- DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-319-76738-3_6
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- a39c39f1-45bc-48ea-a25a-0b17601d623b
- date added to LUP
- 2026-01-27 12:49:36
- date last changed
- 2026-01-29 13:09:13
@inbook{a39c39f1-45bc-48ea-a25a-0b17601d623b,
abstract = {{This chapter analyses humour from an emotion sociological perspective, linking humour to power, status, and group solidarity. It draws from about 300 observed trials and interviews with 43 judges and 41 prosecutors from four Swedish districts courts. Humour is sometimes skilfully used as a strategy to ease tension, relieve boredom or to reprimand. It is initiated/allowed by the judge, but high-status lawyers or prosecutors may take the initiative. Judges may use humour to uphold an effective and smooth procedure, attenuating their own power. It is generally unacceptable to laugh at the expense of lay (low power) people present in court. Inter-professional humour takes place in intermissions during the hearings, while trials running over several days may include the defendants in the semi-backstage inter-professional joking. Most in-court humorous incidents are unintended, where laughter is suppressed or released depending on the judge. Humour has different functions and expressions front stage (in court) and backstage (office, lunch room). Observation of both arenas reveal its shame-management function in inter-professional relations. While judges’ backstage area flourishes with jokes about embarrassing procedural mistakes, prosecutors’ backstage humour more often deals with the foulness and tragedy of criminals and crimes.}},
author = {{Bergman Blix, Stina and Wettergren, Åsa}},
booktitle = {{Judges, Judging and Humour}},
editor = {{Anleu, Jessica Milner Davis; Sharyn Roach}},
isbn = {{9783319767383}},
keywords = {{humour; court; status; power; prosecutors; judges; humour, court, status, power, prosecutors, judges}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{179--209}},
publisher = {{Palgrave Macmillan}},
title = {{Humour in the Swedish Court : Managing Emotions, Status and Power}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76738-3_6}},
doi = {{10.1007/978-3-319-76738-3_6}},
year = {{2018}},
}