Corbeill builds on these associations by beginning Chapter 4 with a look at debauched behavior at feasts by effeminate male banqueters, and proceeds to consider effeminate behavior in general. Rhetorical jibes on these topics were focused as much on defining what was the proper appearance and behavior for an aristocrat as on identifying deviance. Most interesting in this chapter is how Corbeill charts variations in Caesar's opinion of and tolerance for political humor as his own political fortunes wax and wane. Throughout this book, Corbeill sees humor as a tool by which politicians defined otherness. Mockery and derision are methods used to exclude others and to place them outside the boundaries of social norms.
Laughter can be a powerful rhetorical weapon.
As Corbeill points out, if you can make someone the object of laughter, you have humiliated him. Vicious verbal attacks were a standard component of Roman political oratory, and humor was especially appealing in scoring points against an opponent because what you said about him did not necessarily have to be true to be effective, it merely had to be funny. I found no major flaws in the book. One always has some quibbles with the interpretation of specific passages, but I would rather not distract from the main thesis of this original book by cluttering up the review with such trivia. First of all, the subject matter is mostly limited to jokes found within formal speeches.