The lost art of the heckle

Written By: - Date published: 8:33 am, October 10th, 2023 - 12 comments
Categories: Deep stuff, election 2023, Media, Politics, uncategorized - Tags:

What has happened to the fine art of intelligent heckling? During this election campaign we have witnessed the interruption of political meetings by activists driven by conspiracy theories or out right bigotry who have scored their 15 seconds of TV coverage by screaming abuse or unintelligible rants at the speakers.

We have also witnessed groups inspired by hellfire and damnation sermons and fired up by prayers to their leaders aggressively blocking entry to meetings and shrieking abuse at the attendees.

We have had reports of speakers being shouted down because they dared use commonly understood Maori words in the course of their speech.

Media have reported this as heckling when, in reality, it is deliberate disruption by desperate attention seekers.

Heckling is an art form, as Guardian writer, Michael White says: “at its best it is a conspiracy between the heckler and the heckled born out of mutual antagonism but mitigated by combative wit, a gamble, too, as neither player can be sure that they will come off best in what is usually a testosterone charged exchange.”

These two examples are classics of the combative art of an intelligent heckling exchange:

Harold Wilson revelled in the story of a Labour MP speaking at a meeting in Yorkshire who was heckled with “What’s Labour going to do about prostitution?” The speaker replied “Drive it underground” and was promptly trumped with the rejoinder, “Typical Labour – pandering to the miners again.”

We all recall the heckling exchange between David Lange and Jerry Falwell at the 1983 Oxford Union De-bate when Falwell challenged Lange over New Zealand’s nuclear free policy and was met with the riposte “I’m going to give it to you if you hold your breath just for a moment….. I can smell the uranium on it.” The audience erupted in laughter’s Falwell was reduced to impotence and Lange could continue to put the case for a Nuclear Free Pacific.

Such exchanges, it would appear, cannot happen now as heckling needs a proper hall and a proper public meeting attended by an informed audience that is aware of issues and arguments and who regard the meeting as an important event where trivialisation of issues is regarded as an insult.

What has happened to the attitude of audiences now can be attributed to the influence of social media and the demands of the 24 hour news cycle which, combined, encourage brief exchanges of opinion often with-out the writer having neither the time nor the inclination to review the information put in front of them. One has only to scroll through the comments made on social media pages to realise that political “debate” has become an amplification of the trivial re-enforced with mindless abuse rather than reasoned political thought and engagement which then plays into the ranting interruption that passes for heckling at political meetings.

What has changed? Are we, the voting public, angrier and more disaffected? If the behaviour during this election is any judge then most certainly yes.

If one regards heckling as an art form – “the conspiracy between the heckler and the heckled” one needs to recognise that heckling and its exchanges often make the meeting and help to develop the arguments the speaker is putting forward. Both Lange and Wilson knew this and would often pose a rhetorical question which would draw in the heckler who would then be despatched with a witty response which kept the meeting on track.

We need to resurrect the lost art of intelligent heckling and restore the humour that breaks the tension and undermines the anger and abusive commentary that we have experienced this election campaign. One looks forward to the heckled exchange where the heckler declares: “ Vote for you? I’d sooner vote for the Devil!” to be met with the response “ And if your friend is not standing this election?” Though this election it may be a wait in vain.

Alan Papprill

12 comments on “The lost art of the heckle ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Dennis Frank 1
    10 October 2023 at 9:31 am

    The deep Green view uses ecosystem relations as the driving psychodynamic process in groups. These emanate from the number 3 in the neopythagorean theory I developed.

    Person/group triad is the basic framing to use in consequence of this. Heckler/heckled is a 2-person interaction, both impacting the group in oscillatory dialogue. Those 2 speakers made a triad with the audience. Triads energise group process (metabolism in nature) so the audience gets fired up…

    You're quite right about heckling injections of vitality, fun-inducing, provocative dynamism into the political process. They build, if the politician is adept, reputation.

  2. Obtrectator 2
    10 October 2023 at 10:05 am

    Oh dear oh dear …. how many more times will it be necessary to point out that the "uranium breath" riposte was made NOT directly to Jerry Falwell, but to someone seeking to put a question on his side of the debate?

    • Dennis Frank 2.1
      10 October 2023 at 10:28 am

      Ah, history. Work of the devil! Think it was George Bernard Shaw, erudite Irish rebel, who pointed out that "fiction is ably represented by the historians".

  3. Corey 3
    10 October 2023 at 10:18 am

    Too many activists and influencers and thought "leaders" on the left and right have no understanding of what a debate or contest of ideas is, they have been trained by social media to instantly spew out their opinions and block any opposing view to give anyone else a chance to speak.

    Not to mention most activists and influencers these days on the left and right genuinely and histrionically view everyone on the other side as a dangerous threat to society who cannot be allowed to spread their message.

    The constant demonization, dog fighting and hyperbole in political discourse fulled by algorithm based echo chambers on both sides has created a society that genuinely views different ideas as scary, dangerous and a threat.

    You can't have heckling under these circumstances because that would require allowing someone you disagree with to actually speak atleast a little bit, and we're being trained to think those we disagree with are evil, and who'd let evil speak?

    And you're right, some of the most hilarious political lines have been from hecklers who wait for the speaker to say something before delivering a pithy line.

  4. tsmithfield 4
    10 October 2023 at 10:34 am

    Oh for the days of Lange and Muldoon. Whatever you think of their politics, they were great in public meetings.

    I remember Muldoon in one public meeting being heckled by someone in the audience. He asked them what their job was. The reply was "teacher". Muldoon then asked him if he would let his students behave like that. Got a good laugh from the crowd that basically shut the heckler up.

    I didn't particularly like the politics of either. But, had to admire their skills in public debates.

  5. Anker 5
    10 October 2023 at 1:52 pm
    • I have to mention the shameful de platforming that has gone on around SUFW and gender critical women.
    • Remember Albert Park, where the likes of left wing activist Shaneel Lal and the Green Party turned up with their whistles and drums etc so that the Let Women Speak rally were drowned out? And then of course not content to silence these women with noise, the unruly, threatening violent mob hit, punched, kicked and spat at women and poured liquid over them.

    prior to this SUFW had their meetings cancelled at public libraries and had to go to the High Court who declared they were not a hate group and that their meeting should go ahead. This election, activists tried to prevent a candidates meeting organised by SUFW from going ahead.

    so 15 seconds of unintelligible rants and then being removed is a bit underwhelming compared with what gender critical women have put up. It seems to me it is the extremists on the left that seek to stifle debate by cancelling and de platforming and smearing their opponents. I would be happy to hear any examples of the right doing this.

    oh and also the Labour woman who got slapped. I utterly condemn it

  6. SPC 6
    10 October 2023 at 3:18 pm

    Having heard from salt and now from pepper, I'm inclined to question whether there is any season in which I would want to vote for either of you.

    Perhaps the audience should consider eating fresh food, that does not require either of them … and that is how one reduces the cost of government.

  7. Mike the Lefty 7
    10 October 2023 at 5:25 pm

    I cast my mind back to the 70s, it was probably the 1975 campaign.

    Muldoon was being typical Muldoon, being personally offensive to his Labour opponents in a town hall somewhere in the country.

    A guy wearing an old fashioned hat jumped up and started verbally sparring with Muldoon. The latter's reaction was to loudly proclaim the man a communist and urge the crowd to "deal with him". The man was jumped on by National thugs, punched and dragged out.

    My writing this is to demonstrate that at least back in those days you knew who your enemy was and could face them, nowadays your enemy is faceless but emboldened by technological anonymity, which makes them a lot more dangerous.

    Who needs intelligent heckling when unintelligent trolling is so much easier?

  8. roblogic 8
    10 October 2023 at 6:51 pm

    Lost art? I think Guy Williams still has the knack for it laugh

    Weird election tangent: I heard a rumour that Chris Luxon doesn’t believe that Dinosaurs were real… so I went and asked him! The NZ Today podcast returns tomorrow! guywilliams.co.nz for more details! pic.twitter.com/WmdDediiel— Guy Williams (@guywilliamsguy) October 10, 2023

    This has been a fun (but also rather concerning) line of questioning of some of Luxon’s malformed fringe beliefs.

    Guy Williams got a tip that Luxon nixed an Air NZ ad that featured dinosaurs because he doesn’t believe in them. He then DODGED THE QUESTION WHEN GUY ASKED. THE MAN DOESNT BELIEVE IN DINOSAURS. I’m sorry but that’s a bridge too far.— Justine (@kvetchings) October 10, 2023

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 8.1
      10 October 2023 at 7:17 pm

      Yea..but how long ago did Luxon think Dinosaurs existed? Millions of years? Or..Thousands …..

      • Mike the Lefty 8.1.1
        11 October 2023 at 2:04 pm

        Political joke:

        Why does National support museums?

        A: They feel at home amongst a bunch of old fossils.