top of page

Interview with Théo Aiolfi: The Political Performance Analysis Protocol

Writer's picture: Théo AiolfiThéo Aiolfi

In this interview, Théo Aiolfi discusses his Journal of Language and Politics article, When performance studies meet discourse theory: The political performance analysis protocol as an interdisciplinary methodological tool. He shares the origin and inspirations of this methodological tool and the path it opens for the study of politics as performance.


Photo of crowd at performance

Photo by Luis Quintero on Pexels



Author profile photo
It is always very tempting to keep one’s analysis focused on the level of text, which remains an essential and primary medium to convey meaning but overlooking the embodied and performative components of discourse only provides an incomplete snapshot of politics.



Why did you decide to write this piece?

This article initially emerged from a methodological impasse during my doctoral research. My entire PhD was premised on the aspiration to bridge political science and performance studies, and their relevance to understand the success of far-right politicians. Even though I was guided by two supervisors, Shirin Rai and Silvija Jestrovic, who were at the cutting edge of the dialogue between the two disciplines, I quickly found out that there were very few methodological tools to conduct interdisciplinary research. Scholars in political science had used all kinds of methods for discourse analysis, but most of these tools suffered from what I call in the article a “logocentric bias”: they focus on text first and foremost but rarely engage with the performative component of discourse seriously. Likewise, scholars in theatre and performance studies had developed all kinds of tools to analyse artistic performances, but these methods could not be applied ‘as is’ to social performances, in particular political ones. Starting with the foundation provided by Shirin Rai’s political performance framework, I combined multiple influences, primarily Jeffrey Alexander’s thought-provoking typology of constitutive elements in social performances and Patrice Pavis’s influential questionnaire to analyse theatrical performances, to create my own tool which went through various occurrences and names until it reached its current form.


Simultaneously to my methodological endeavours about politics and performance, I grew acquainted with Discourse Theory through my empirical interest in populism. The postfoundational perspective on discourse which Laclau and Mouffe coined in their groundbreaking work immediately felt like a natural fit for the kind of research I was conducting on the role of performance and performativity in populism. The more I learned about discourse analysis in this tradition, the more parallels I found between performance studies and Discourse Theory: in particular, their focus on instability of meaning making and the role of materiality in discourse production struck me as particularly stimulating. As such, I adapted a more general piece about discourse analysis and performance into a dialogue about performance analysis in Discourse Theory. I did try to include other forms of discourse analysis, most notably Critical Discourse Analysis and multimodal analysis, but the article makes a specific contribution to this scholarship.


What are the key takeaways?

The key takeaway from this article is that scholars in Discourse Theory, and more widely social scientists conducting discourse analysis, should treat performance and performativity like more than a superficial or disingenuous afterthought . It is always very tempting to keep one’s analysis focused on the level of text, which remains an essential and primary medium to convey meaning but overlooking the embodied and performative components of discourse only provides an incomplete snapshot of politics. While the Political Performance Analysis Protocol (PPAP) does not claim to be the ideal methodological tool, or even a replacement for other more established forms of discourse analysis, it provides an original and thought-provoking option in the methodological toolbox of discourse analysts of all stripes. I used this tool in my research into the presidential campaigns of Donald Trump and Marine Le Pen, with the former being a particularly salient (and obvious) example of a politician relying on over-the-top outrageousness and hyper-theatrical performances. But in this article, I use another example, that of Greta Thunberg’s iconic “How dare you?” speech to showcase the versatility of the PPAP. Even in the case of a political performance whose theatricality was comparatively subdued, the tool provides insights into aspects of discourse that other forms of analysis would miss. All in all, the PPAP’s purpose is to provide concrete guidance for scholars curious to engage rigorously with the performative component of discourse. And if my own methodological struggles and insights can be useful to others, the article will have fulfilled its ambitions.


Where do you plan to go next in your research?

Since I started my current position as junior professor at the University of Burgundy, my research interests have increasingly shifted towards the topic of identity, whether it is the formation of collective subjectivities, like ‘the people’, or its individual resonance. With the close publication of this article on performance analysis, of our theoretical intervention on “The Transgressive Aesthetics of Populism” with my colleague Thomás Zicman de Barros and of my book on The Populist Style, I have reached the end of a cycle of research that began at the start of my PhD. It is thus an exciting period for me to expand my outlook beyond my specialty on populism, and the concept of identity provides a stimulating avenue to explore further. Regardless of my empirical focus however, I seek to sustain that interdisciplinary lens of politics and performance as there is an incredible amount of untapped potential which social scientists – myself included – should aim to channel into our research.

12 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comentarios


bottom of page