The Ethnography of Communication in Tarantino's Django Unchained

Ethnography of Communication in Django Unchained

Django Unchained is an action-western film set in the antebellum Deep South in 1858. From an analysis of the transcript of a segment of the film, a clear exhibition of how cultural norms and social situational contexts influence the interlocution and interactions between the characters in the movie becomes apparent. The setting of the film is the American South of 1858, with the particular scene of analysis occurring in Texas. Dr. King Schultz, a bounty hunter who operates in the guise of a dentist, his former profession, seeks a slave named Django who can recognize a pair of his targets, the Brittle Brothers. Django, however, is owned by two slave traders called the Speck Brothers. The segment of analysis contains the interaction between Dr. Schultz, the Speck Brothers, and their slaves as Dr. Schultz attempts to make off with Django. The interlocution between Dr. Schultz and the Speck Brothers illustrates three theories presented by Bonvillain in Language, Culture, and Communication: The Meaning of Messages (Bonvillain 2013). The first theory to be examined, Communicative Interactions Between Socially Unequal Members, postulates that when unequals engage in conversation, the higher-status member more frequently asserts his right to speak over that of the lower member (Bonvillain 2013: 103). The idea of holding a higher-status and thereby holding power can be seen by interruptions in the data. The second theory, Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity, holds that members of stratified social classes express themselves using different styles (Bonvillain 2013: 219). This leads a member of one class, who lacks familiarity with the styles of another class, to become uneasy when presented with styles from a member of a different class (Bonvillain 2013: 219). More specifically, the members of a lower class exhibit this phenomenon when engaging in conversation with members of a higher class (Bonvillain 2013: 219). The last theory, Directive Use of Higher-Status Speakers, states that higher-status/empowered members of a conversation give more directives in interlocution to lower-status/less empowered members than lower members give to higher members (Bonvillain 2014: 109). An analysis of the language in the transcript of this film segment of Django Unchained illustrates cultural norms and situational context of this society by application of these three theories.

According to Bonvillain, interruption is related to perceived “social rights to speak” (Bonvillain 2013: 103). A generalization of the cultural dichotomy of the right to speak is that “in conversations between unequals, higher-status members assume more rights to turns and to longer turns than do those of lower status.” and “higher-status people tend to interrupt or complete their turns when interrupted, whereas lower-status individuals are apt to be successfully interrupted.” (Bonvillain 2013: 103). The idea of a social right to speak is easily relatable to situational power and perceived social status. Robinson and Reis found that those who interrupted were “...perceived as more assertive, more traditionally masculine and less feminine than those who did not interrupt.” (Robinson and Reis 1989: 152). Assertiveness is not a characteristic that the powerless would display to the powerful, but it certainly is a characteristic that the powerful would use in communication with the powerless. The data show not one instance of Dr. Schultz interrupting either of the Speck Brothers, but twice do the Speck Brothers interrupt him, illustrating the perception and changes in perception each character has as the scene progresses:

Dr. Schultz: Tell me, if you were to see any of these three gentlemen again, would you recognize them?-

Ace: Hey! (Everyone turns to Ace). Stop talking to him like that.

Dr. Schultz: My good man, I’m simply trying to ascertain-

Ace: Speak English goddammit.

In these instances, Ace successfully interrupts Dr. Schultz, implying that Ace believes he has a greater right to speak than does Dr. Schultz. This is presumably attributed to Ace seeing himself as holding power over Dr. Schultz, since both he and his brother are armed with shotguns and outnumber the bounty hunter protagonist. Furthermore, this occurs prior to the power shift of Dr. Schultz killing Ace and injuring Dicky, whereas no instance of interruption of Dr. Schultz’s right to speak occurs afterwards, supporting this theory that interruption and perceived right to speak over others are directly related to the situational context of who has the power. We first see an outnumbered and out-armed Dr. Schultz being interrupted, but after gaining the upper hand in his encounter with the Speck Brothers, Dr. Schultz is interrupted no more.

Directives are “utterances intended to result in an action by the hearer” which generally come in 6 different types (Bonvillain 2013: 109-110). Some directives, such as imperative directives, are generally called “commands”, whereas others, like hints and embedded imperatives, come across as “requests” (Bonvillain 2013: 110). There is a great power shift in this scene as Ace and Dicky Speck, shotgun-wielding men confronted by a stranger in the night, issue many directives to Dr. Schultz. After Dr. Schultz kills Ace and wounds Dicky, the power is shifted from the Speck Brothers to him, as shown by his giving directives after the shift. The Directive Use of Higher-Status Speakers theory implies that one interlocutor giving directives to another indicates a perceived possession of power by the speaker. A speaker without power or perceiving a lack of power is in no position to make demands to the party with power. The transcript data show the following directives:

1. Dicky: Speak English.
2. Ace: Hey! (Everyone turns to Ace). Stop talking to him like that.
3. Ace: Speak English goddammit.
4. Dr. Schultz: Puh! Don’t be ridiculous! Of course they’re for sale.
5. Ace: (Cocks shotgun) Last chance fancy-pants.
6. Dr. Schultz: No doubt. Now if you could keep your caterwauling down to a minimum, I’d like to finish my line of inquiry with young Django.
7. Dr. Schultz: One hundred, ten, twenty, … . Also, Mr. Speck, I’m afraid I will require a bill of sale. Do you have one?

Ace and Dicky, outnumbering and having more weapons than does Dr. Schultz, issue imperative directives to Dr. Schultz in (1), (2), and (3) and one hint in (5), whereas Dr. Schultz only responds once with a hint in (4). Between (5) and (6), the Speck Brothers are reduced to an injured Dicky after Dr. Schultz shoots both Dicky’s horse and Ace. This shifts the power completely to Dr. Schultz, who begins making directives. He gives an embedded imperative directive to Dicky in (6) and a question directive in (7), while Dicky can only curse him to “go to Hell, dentist!”. The Directive Use of Higher-Status Speakers theory shows, given the corresponding changes in power and the party issuing directives, that Ace and Dicky understood that they had the upper hand and were more secure prior to Dr. Schultz turning the tables. After Dr. Schultz gains control of the situation though, he begins issuing directives to the injured Speck brother, implying by the theory that he recognizes his command and grasp of the situation.

Different classes of speakers of the English language exercise various styles of language use and different vocabularies (Bonvillain 2013: 219). The Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity states that members different social classes communicate using different styles, leading a member of one class, who is unfamiliar with the styles of another, to become distressed when encountering styles from a different class (Bonvillain 2013: 219). For example, a person with a limited lexicon will most likely have a limited ability to participate in conversations with people who have greater vocabularies and most likely greater command of language, which in and of itself habitually creates a divide between the interlocutors. In this particular scene of Django Unchained, Ace and Dicky Speck, slave traders, exhibit the discomfort suggested by the Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity theory when encountering the style differences presented by Dr. Schultz. There are two blatantly obvious applications of this theory in the transcription data:

Dr. Schultz: Dentist. Now are you the Speck Brothers and did you purchase those men at The Greenville Slave Auction?

Dicky: So what?

Dr. Schultz: So, I wish to parley with you.

Dicky: Speak English.

Dr. Schultz: My good man, I’m simply trying to ascertain-

Ace: Speak English goddammit.

Dr. Schultz’s command of language and use of styles unfamiliar to Ace and Dicky suggest by the Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity theory that he belongs to a different social class from them. His English is fluent and flawless, but his choice of words like “ascertain” and “parley” in (1) and (2), which are not in the lexicon of Ace and Dicky, engenders discomfort in them, causing them to demand he speak “English”, the form of English familiar to them. With this particular analysis of data to support this theory, it is evident that Dr. Schultz’s choice of words and use of “elaborated codes”, codes that express “‘universalistic’ meanings by use of nouns, adjectives, and verbs having explicit referents”, unfamiliar to the Speck Brothers instills uneasiness and discomfort in them, implying by the theory that he and they are of different social classes and recognize said difference (Bonvillain 2013: 218-219). More specifically, since they lacked “familiarity and competence” in his styles, the Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity theory indicates that Dr. Schultz was of the higher-class and the Speck Brothers were of the lower working-class (Bonvillain 2013: 219). Bernstein noted that the “...speech mode facilitates the verbal elaboration of subjective intent, sensitivity to the implications of separateness and difference, and points to the possibilities inherent in a complex conceptual hierarchy…”, meaning that Dr. Schultz’s speech style inherently elucidates a sharp difference between himself and the Speck Brothers (Bernstein 1960: 271).

The analysis of this segment illustrates the ideas of perceived social class and situational power by infringing upon the rights to speak of others, the relation of directives and the perception of holding power, and that unfamiliarity with styles from others can emphasize or make apparent a difference in social class. The discomfort felt by Ace and Dicky in the conversation illustrates by the Class Based Codes/Construct Familiarity theory that Dr. Schultz’s eloquent language and conversational style emphasized the social difference between themselves and the doctor. Bernstein propounds this, adding that the constructs of members of high-status inherently distance the speaker from the listeners if they are of low status, emphasizing the social divide between classes through something as commonplace as speech. Additionally, the Communicative Interactions Between Socially Unequal Members theory expounds the idea that differences in perceived social class and situational power can be seen in exertion of the right to speak over another’s right to do the same. Ace and Dicky saw themselves as having more power in the situational context initially presented in the scene, resulting in Ace exerting his right to speak over Dr. Schultz’s, as explained by the theory as a result of the data. Lastly, the use of directives by Dr. Schultz and the Speck Brothers accompanies the power shift of Dr. Schultz gaining the upper hand in the confrontation, supporting the Directive Use of Higher-Status Speakers theory and reinforcing the idea that directives come more frequently from the speaker who perceives power in situational contexts. As Tarantino shows in the film, the powerless are usually in no condition to make demands to those in command of a situation. An ethnography of communication of this scene in Django Unchained has created cultural insight by applying theories to language and interaction data in the script. The characters of Dr. Schultz and the Speck Brothers demonstrate not only a clear cultural divide in the antebellum South, but also the behavioral and language associations that come with the perception of power. Tarantino captures not only a social divide in the South of 1860, but also continuing characteristics that people exhibit based on perception of situational contexts that will undoubtedly last well into the future.