The notion of society and politics as drama has drawn much attention in recent years. Yet despite the heritage begun by Aristophanes, few students of politics and the social order have taken comedy and comic inquiry seriously. This book revives the Aristophanic notion of democracy as comedy. Herein the reader will find why and how different aspects of American democracy--public opinion, interest groups, the presidency, and so on--are comic. It is the author's contention that the comic perspective offers insight and understanding on the actual operation of democracy. And they invite all those who wish to understand why American democracy is so comic to join them in their inquiry.

Should we take the idea of play seriously? Since the publication of Huizinga's "Homo Ludens" in 1938, a provocative literature has developed in philosophy and social science that does. Combs argues that we should understand play both as a generic concept with considerable power to explain human activity, and as a contemporary procept that demystifies some of the puzzling trends and innovations emerging in the quickly developing new social world of the 21st century.

Combs explores the thesis that play has a central role in our understanding of human activity and social and political organization in the new millennium. He argues that the human desire for play is strong and given the continuation of certain major historical innovations now shaping the world, it may well be that 21st-century people will increasingly exercise their desire for play and that the world will increasingly be organized around the principle and practice of play. It may now seem a truism that people prefer to have fun, but that has not always been the case. If, as Combs argues, the preference for fun is becoming central to human activity, we need to explore why that preference is becoming dominant and what kind of social organization and consequences such a change entails. A provocative look at social change in the 20th century that will be of interest to scholars, students, and researchers of sociology and anthropology.

The Political Pundits surveys in detail the small, elite group of persons who comment on and analyze politics in newspapers and newsmagazines, on radio and television, through lectures, books, and all other forms of political media. Dan Nimmo and James E. Combs discuss the key political role pundits play, their methods and strategies, and the potential danger they present to American political life. Our democracy is being transformed into a punditocracy, which replaces serious citizen debate with discussion guided by show business values. Punditry, Nimmo and Combs argue, produces symbolic rather than effective healing of political ills, political paternalism rather than political reflection, and, in the end, public disenchantment with politics. The authors conclude that pundits should not be taken too seriously, and approach their outpourings using a comic, or bardic, framework. In Part One, the discussion focuses on four generic types of pundits: Priests, Bards, Sages, and Oracles. Part Two identifies three pundit roles: as technicians, as members of the Chattering Class, and as media critics. Each chapter provides examples, cases, and profiles to demonstrate the dominance of punditry. The Political Pundits challenges the generally accepted view that learned and informed public discussion in politics provides an adequate forum for informing and involving citizens. Scholars and students of political science and communications will find the role of the pundits demystified--the curtain pulled back to reveal the wizards.

Collecting together some of the best thinking about the relationship between movies and politics, this book, originally published in 1993, encourages an awareness of the political dimension of film, both for film scholars and those entering the film industry. Eight essays are grouped into four parts addressing political ideology and movie narrative, political myth in the movies, political history and movie culture, and political communication and the movies. An introductory essay, as well as prefatory remarks to each of the four parts, brings additional insight and perspective and puts the essays into context.

Collecting together some of the best thinking about the relationship between movies and politics, this book, originally published in 1993, encourages an awareness of the political dimension of film, both for film scholars and those entering the film industry. Eight essays are grouped into four parts addressing political ideology and movie narrative, political myth in the movies, political history and movie culture, and political communication and the movies. An introductory essay, as well as prefatory remarks to each of the four parts, brings additional insight and perspective and puts the essays into context.

This book is an attempt to make sense out of Ronald Reagan by linking him to various grassroots dimensions of American popular mythology and mind. It attempts to utilize a variety of sources from American and popular culture studies, works on Reagan, and popular materials such as movies to offer an interpretation of reagan as an exemplar of the political relevance and power of popular culture.

"The Political PunditS" surveys in detail the small, elite group of persons who comment on and analyze politics in newspapers and newsmagazines, on radio and television, through lectures, books, and all other forms of political media. Dan Nimmo and James E. Combs discuss the key political role pundits play, their methods and strategies, and the potential danger they present to American political life. Our democracy is being transformed into a punditocracy, which replaces serious citizen debate with discussion guided by show business values. Punditry, Nimmo and Combs argue, produces symbolic rather than effective healing of political ills, political paternalism rather than political reflection, and, in the end, public disenchantment with politics.

The authors conclude that pundits should not be taken too seriously, and approach their outpourings using a comic, or bardic, framework. In Part One, the discussion focuses on four generic types of pundits: Priests, Bards, Sages, and Oracles. Part Two identifies three pundit roles: as technicians, as members of the Chattering Class, and as media critics. Each chapter provides examples, cases, and profiles to demonstrate the dominance of punditry. The Political Pundits challenges the generally accepted view that learned and informed public discussion in politics provides an adequate forum for informing and involving citizens. Scholars and students of political science and communications will find the role of the pundits demystified--the curtain pulled back to reveal the wizards.