Occupational Therapy News OTnews November 2019 | Page 39

FORENSIC SERVICES FEATURE
I split comedy club and language into three
words, with the aim of supporting the group to
clarify and explore different forms of expression
– humour, banter and comedy: humour was
personal taste and comedy style; banter was
off stage with friends, colleagues or family; and
comedy was professional, scripted and with an
awareness of your persona.
Banter could generate laughter in the
group. It could, however, also be misleading
because one of the aims of the group was
obviously to learn about how we can interact
in a more positive and sophisticated way
through better understanding of people and
the environment.
Within the culture of a prison, there is often
a cruel use of language described as banter. As
a facilitator, refocusing and educating the men
In a perfect setting, the environment would create a place where
they would take chances and make mistakes. Although the room
we had to use was not perfect, the occupational therapy team
discussed options and decided to use a room that had more
natural light, and looked out onto our service’s garden, which has
been designed by the men. The room also had access to the
internet, allowing us to share clips we found humour in.
I believe this room supported the need to be comfortable and
although it could not fix all the inner group dynamics, it seemed to
allow people to relax.
As a facilitator, I am naturally more unstructured and informal
in running mainly leisure based groups, but this allowed me to
be much more nonchalant. I hope this supported the men to be
engaged, to worry less about right and wrong, and to be brave
enough to tell a joke or speak about what they find funny.
Humour, banter and comedy
Throughout the programme we watched and discussed various
comedians, sitcoms and sketches. However, what became
difficult was allowing the men the freedom to express themselves
while they were still developing skills to recognise when humour is
appropriate.
about more sophisticated comedy, and about
how and where it can be positively used in
interactions was difficult.
One of the men, for example, had thought
saying ‘You’re f***ing ugly, you are’ to a peer
was comedy, and this was positively reinforced
by the group laughing.
After exploring how this could make an
individual feel with limited success, due to
some of the difficulties the men in the group
can have in understanding and responding to
the emotions of others, the group did begin to
discuss comedy and banter in a more complex
way in terms of when, where and why banter works and different
relationship contexts.
With friends in your home, pub or café, they recognised that you
can get away with a level of inappropriate banter that, if used in a
job interview or in church would be frowned upon or received badly.
Paving the way for further discussion
The above discussion further paved the way for a task focused on
a comedian’s different presentations and why they work for that
comedian.
The group studied clips of comedians, analysing their facial
expressions, head movements, gestures, body movements,
posturing, voice inflection and tone variations. Later, we discussed
why they wear certain clothing and what they needed the audience
to perceive their stage persona as.
Ken Dodd, Eddie Murphy and others were chosen to discuss.
With Ken Dodd, the men noticed he was attempting to be the
court jester with wild hair, props and a silly smile. In contrast,
Eddie Murphy was noted to walk up and down the stage like a
boxer, shouting his punchline like a prize fighter searching for the
‘Haymaker KO’ punch, and wearing a flashy costume, putting
himself in the showman bracket.
OTnews November 2019 39