4328322
Katie Freund
SOC250
Everyday Interactions
1 November 2012
Independent Research Project: Miss Universe Australia Question Fail
Miss Universe pageants maintain remarkably high standards for their competitors within their codes of conduct which allow for a large domain of disappointment. One trip, stumble or wrong answer can cost a contestant her chance at winning the crown and title of being the most beautiful woman in the world. The women in these pageants are intensely critiqued on their mannerisms, appearance, impression, talents, and ability to answer questions. Their success is based on their ability to impress the judges and conform to their expectations of the Miss Universe idealistic in being an intelligent, well-mannered and beautiful woman. Thus, when the contestants fail to perform in such a way, they are heavily scrutinized and demeaned. The vast array of expectations between and among the contestants and judges provides an intriguing sociological interpretation of the micro interactions that occur within these pageants.
In this report I am going to analyze a video clip and how it relates to themes of micro-sociology and everyday interactions. The piece of data that I have chosen to analyze is of a Miss Universe Australia contestant, Jesinta, during the question answering round. I am going to analyze Jesinta’s interaction with her setting, audience, and interviewer through micro-sociological themes. Specifically, I will interpret how Jesinta breaks the rules of conduct within the Miss Universe Australia competition and how she does not live up to the expectations of herself and the audience. I will also briefly conduct a discourse analysis on the types and ways that language is used during these interactions.
Video 1. The video clip of Jesinta during the question response round in the 2009 Miss Universe Australia pageant (Ten 2010).
As seen in Video 1, the setting of this contest takes place in a formal venue where there is a single focus among a stage and an audience. Everyone present is there to watch or be a part of the Miss Universe Australia pageant. The three main actors in this clip are the contestant, Jesinta, the interviewee, Peter, and the audience. Between and among each of these actors there are micro interactions occurring.
As first identified by Goffman (1971), there is a front and a backstage for every interaction. The backstage is defined as an informal setting where actors prepare for their performance on the frontstage where they act a role in front of an audience. The backstage of this clip involves all of the preparation Jesinta has put in to getting ready for the competition including her make-up, fittings, and rehearsals. With every backstage there is a corresponding frontstage. The frontstage of Jesinta’s performance is her appearances in front of the judges and during the Miss Universe Australia competition. This is when Jesinta is on her best behavior and acting according to the way that she wants people to perceive her. She is putting on a performance for both the judges and audience and acting in such a way that she believes Miss Universe Australia would act. This social front can be divided in to three parts: setting, appearance, and manners.
The setting of the pageant is that of asymmetrical demeanor, meaning that there is a hierarchy among the people present or a difference of treatment between them (Goffman 1967). Within the hierarchy, Jesinta is at the bottom of the pyramid. She is seeking approval by the judges while being critiqued on everything she does. The rules of conduct within the contest hold expectations and obligations from both the actor(s) and the audience. These rules are upheld by the judges and what it symbolizes to hold the title of Miss Universe Australia. These rules represent a guideline for her actions based on the views of Miss Universe by society and cultures throughout the lifespan of the competition. In the Miss Universe Australia pageant, the audience and judges maintain certain expectations and ideals of what they believe Miss Universe Australia is or how she should behave. Accordingly, this is how they expect Jesinta to behave. This is also represented in the way that Jesinta has an obligation to perform in a way that adequately represents the winner of the Miss Universe competition. A successful self performance by Jesinta according to her obligations and the expectations of the judges is the key to fulfilling her role and winning the competition.
Jesinta gives off an impression of wealth, elegance, glamour, happiness, and perfection. She does this through her personal front by managing her appearance and mannerisms (Goffman 1971). Because of this initial self impression given off of, Jesinta has a high status and exchange rate.
Figure 1. Jesinta’s appearance during the Miss Universe Australia pageant in 2009 (Google Images 2012).
As seen in Figure 1, Jesinta is wearing an elegant and very expensive looking gown showing off her slim figure. Her hair and make-up are done to perfection along with her coordinated jewelry to complete her appearance of the ideal femininity. Her appearance acts as a stimuli to inform the audience of her social status (Goffman 1971). Within the video clip, Jesinta is continuously smiling and maintaining impeccable manners to display the attributes of Miss Universe Australia. She is polite in that she respects Peter while he is talking and then thanks him for giving her a question to answer, which is not necessary.
Jesinta breaks the rules of conduct of the pageant when she stutters and loses her wording while trying to answer the question proposed by Peter. As noted by Goffman (1967), “when a rule of conduct is broken we find that the two individuals run the risk of becoming discredited: one with an obligation, who should have governed himself by the rule; and the other with an expectation, who should have been treated in a particular way because of this governance. Both actor and recipient are threatened.” Specifically, Jesinta does not live up to the expectations of the judges who expect her to be able to answer this question without hesitating or losing her wording. Similarly, she does not fulfill her obligations as a Miss Universe Australia contestant. Jesinta acknowledges that she has broken the rules of conduct when she awkwardly laughs and apologizes. This inability to conform to the rules of conduct damages her ‘face’ and deprives her of the role she is attempting to achieve. She is visibly upset after her face-damaging act, as one’s emotions are associated to one’s ‘face’ and status. Jesinta attempts to maintain her 'face' by apologizing to the audience and judges for her word fumble.
The audience responds to Jesinta’s apology and loss of words by clapping for her. Although clapping is not an interaction through spoken words, it is a form of communication (Whelan 2012b). However, within this form of interaction the content is not clear. This clapping can be interpreted in two ways: as a positive or negative act. The clapping could signify the audience’s encouragement to continue answering the question while recognizing Jesinta’s mishap in her performance. Alternatively, the clapping may be an acknowledgement that she has failed to comply with their expectations and that her question answering round is over and she will most likely not go any further in the competition. Because clapping is commonly a sign or recognition of a job well done, the clapping in this scenario is most likely an encouragement and face-saving act. In this way, the audience is not opposing Jesinta but is instead providing means of compassion and facework (Whelan 2012a). However, they are not creating an alliance with her because they know that she has committed a beauty pageant faux pas. This is what Goffman terms 'cooling the mark out' (Goffman 1952). The 'mark' is the failure to comply with the expectations of the Miss Universe Australia pageant. When someone is involuntarily deprived of their role or status, there is a cooling period, or transition and acceptance of a lesser role or demotion. By the positive facework done on Jesinta, she is given a second opportunity to redeem her face and enforce her status as competitor for the title of Miss Universe Australia.
The pragmatics of Jesinta’s use of the phrase “I’m sorry” is contextual and representative of her understanding that she did not oblige by the rules of conduct for the pageant. By definition, the meaning of 'sorry' is to feel distress or sympathy for someone of misfortune or to acknowledging a wrongdoing by expressing remorse (Pettigrove & Collins 2011). If this is the context in which Jesinta was using the phrase, it would imply that she has sympathy for the audience and judges. This would suggest that she feels bad for the audience’s misfortune of hearing her scramble for words and that she is apologizing for not living up to their expectations of her performance. The meaning of this apology is very specific to this interaction. In other contexts, “I’m sorry” can be a way of expressing sympathy or compassion for the death of a friend or family member or accidentally nudging someone while walking down the street. An apology can have a vast array of meanings. It is not for the stumbling of words that Jesinta is apologizing for, but instead it is the meaning behind the stumble. It shows her inability to fulfill her performance as Miss Universe Australia. As quoted by Goffman (1971), “a person may involuntarily be deprived of a role under circumstances which reflect unfavorably on his capacity for it. The lost role may be one that he had already required or one that he had openly committed himself to preparing for. In either case the loss is more than a matter of ceasing to act in a given capacity; it is ultimate proof of an incapacity.” In the context of Jesinta's apology, it is a recognition that she has let herself, the judges, and the audience down and may be appealing for their sympathy or compassion.
Jesinta’s overall performance was successful in that she was able to complete the question while providing an acceptable answer. However, her performance would have been scrutinized by the judges and not considered very fulfilling as Miss Universe Australia. Her original high status was not re-established although it was not entirely diminished either. The facework done on Jesinta by the audience allowed her to save 'face' and keep her composure to complete her answer.
From a broader perspective, Jesinta's question round 'fail' was posted on youtube.com and evidently went viral and public for anyone to see. This may affect the reputation of the Miss Universe Australia competition in that they do not have control over who views the video and how they interpret it or comment on it.
References
Goffman, E (1952), 'On Cooling the Mark Out: Some Aspects of Adaptation to Failure', accessed 28 October 2012, http://www.tau.ac.il/~algazi/mat/Goffman--Cooling.htm
Goffman, E (1967), ‘The Nature of Deference and Demeanor’, Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviors, Doubleday, Garden City, NY, pp. 47-95.
Goffman, E (1971), ‘Performances’, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth, Penguin, pp. 28-82.
Google Images (2012), accessed 29 October, from http://leisure.ezinemark.com/jesinta-campbell-crowned-miss-universe-australia-2010-77364e0b3a68.html
Pettigrove, G, & Collins, J (2011), ‘Apologizing for Who I Am’, Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 137-148.
Ten (2010), ‘Miss Universe Question Fail.’, Youtube.com, accessed 20 October 2012, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AAViRKF2mA
Whelan, A (2012a), 'SOC250 2012 Subject Outline', Everyday Interactions, University of Wollongong, Faculty of Arts, accessed 20 October 2012, pp. 1-10.
Whelan, A (2012b), 'Week 8 Lecture Slides', SOC250 Everyday Interactions, University of Wollongong, accessed 28 October 2012, http://soc250-everyday-interaction.blogspot.com.au/
