| Author |
Message |
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8341
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Thursday, August 31, 2006 - 7:26 pm: | 
|
Dearest Jana -- Yes, I agree. Irony and satire are not mutually exclusive. I simply meant that I was not sure whether Hardy was trying to be one or the other or both. Since I haven't read the novel, I am at a decided disadvantage in discussing it (and if I were more sane, would probably not be attempting to discuss it at all). You know your stuff and I respectfully thank you for sharing that knowledge with us.
As to Eggers, I believe that excerpt I pasted here was written more as a response to his own book (which people were obviously calling ironic and which Eggers felt was not) than a complete discussion of the topic of irony in literature.
I believe Eggers was simply trying to point out that if Hardy, for instance, was run over by a book mobile that was stuffed to its metal roof with copies of Jude the Obscure on the day that he was due to appear in the local library to discuss his paper, Jude the Obscure: Ironic, Satiric, Both, or Neither?, this would not be considered ironic. Funny coincidence, maybe, but not ironic.
And yes, I know -- Hardy died in 1928, long before there were any book mobiles.
I also know that I am very wicked. 
Love,
M
|
Dale McLain
Senior Member
Username: sparklingseas
Post Number: 3146
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 11:30 am: |
|
 |
Morgan Lafay
Advanced Member
Username: morganlafay
Post Number: 2408
Registered: 08-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 1:12 pm: |
|
LOL! Dale, this is just tooo, too ironic.
The best explanation comes in a picture!
This should have been much nearer the beginning. Ironically, it wasn't. |
Jana Bouma
New member
Username: violamama
Post Number: 37
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 1:23 pm: |
|
Bwa-ha-ha!!!
Jana
|
Kathy Paupore
Senior Member
Username: kathy
Post Number: 3555
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 9:33 am: |
|
Isn't honest politician an oxymoron?
How about:
An ER doctor falls asleep at the wheel on the way home from a 12 hour shift and dies because he wasn't wearing his seat belt and was thrown from the vehicle.
Maybe it's ironic, but it's also true, so not funny.
Even worse, he was brought into the ER he just left.
I worked with him, and he used to tease me about being a stunt driver because I was accident prone, but I always wear my seatbelt and walked away from a rollover.
Irony?
 ~K
Kathy
Wild Flowers
|
Gary Blankenship
Senior Member
Username: garyb
Post Number: 9138
Registered: 07-2001
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 10:04 am: |
|
the ironic topper
he was treated by a staff he used to scream at for being incompetent...
Smiles.
Gary
A River Transformed
The Dawg House
July FireWeed more War/Peace
|
Kathy Paupore
Senior Member
Username: kathy
Post Number: 3556
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 12:04 pm: |
|
Gary, that would be ironic wouldn't it! Actually, he was a very patient and caring person, but maybe that is ironic also.
~K
Kathy
Wild Flowers
|
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8369
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 12:09 pm: |
|
Dear Kathy -- hopefully this might help:
irony -- humor based on opposites. a type of humor based on using words to suggest the opposite of their literal meaning. something humorous based on contradiction. something said or written that uses sardonic humor. incongruity between what actually happens and what might be expected to happen, especially when this disparity seems absurd or laughable.
Given all that, let's look at your example:
"An ER doctor falls asleep at the wheel on the way home from a 12 hour shift and dies because he wasn't wearing his seat belt and was thrown from the vehicle.
Even worse, he was brought into the ER he just left"
Anything said there that is opposite of what's meant? No, it's all statement of fact. But isn't it incongruous? No, again. If someone doesn't wear his seatbelt and gets in an accident, we expect he will die. There is no unexpected outcome in this situation and there is no opposite meaning. That he was brought into the same ER he just left is merely coincidence. There is no incongruence since he was taken to an ER which is what we expect to happen in this situation (ambulances usually take critically injured people to the nearest ER), nor is there any opposite meaning. Hence, there is no irony at all in this situation as you've presented it.
Now if he was not taken to an ER at all, there would be incongruence (an outcome that is different than what we expect) and perhaps it could be said that his situation (a critically injured person not taken to an ER) would be ironic. Or if he was taken to a veterinary clinic instead where they work on animals, not humans, that might be considered both humorous and incongruous and hence, ironic.
Does that help at all? And I apologize for using this poor doctor's death as an example. I am not making fun of his situation or death. I'm just using his example to try to make the concept of irony clearer.
Love,
M
|
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8370
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 2:15 pm: |
|
I believe Mr. B has given us a statement that is nearly ironic:
"he was treated by a staff he used to scream at for being incompetent"
Yes, I suppose that an ER doc being treated by a staff that he screamed at for being incompetent could be considered incongruent and, therefore, ironic (although some might argue that if he was taken into an ER where he worked, it probably would not be all that unexpected that docs on his staff would be treating him). But I would add that this irony would only be made evident if the ER doc lived (unexpected outcome). If he died at the hands of his incompetent staff, that would be pretty much what we'd expect, prove the doctor was right in his opinions of their incompetence, and not be very ironic.
As to this:
"Actually, he was a very patient and caring person, but maybe that is ironic also."
No, tragically the deaths of caring, patient people are not ironic. Unfortunately, these lovely people die just like the rest of us. It is not irony, but it's certainly very, very sad. My condolences on the loss of this man.
Love,
M
|
Gary Blankenship
Senior Member
Username: garyb
Post Number: 9144
Registered: 07-2001
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 6:53 pm: |
|
Isn't it ironic that irony is so difficult to define?
Smiles.
Gary
A River Transformed
The Dawg House
July FireWeed more War/Peace
|
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8372
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 8:07 pm: |
|
It would only be ironic if you could prove irony should be easy to define. If you couldn't prove it should be easy to define, then the fact that irony is difficult to define is simply a pain in the ass, not ironic. *LMAO*
Now quit it. I need to get back to these Challenge entries. And before you ask, no, that's not ironic either.
Laughter is the Best Medicine (not ironic, just true), Love,
M
|
Fred Longworth
Intermediate Member
Username: sandiegopoet
Post Number: 309
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 8:25 pm: |
|
Laughter is the worst medicine. |
Kathy Paupore
Senior Member
Username: kathy
Post Number: 3557
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 9:30 am: |
|
M, the irony lies in the fact that an ER doctor treats X amount of patients a year that don't wear seatbelts and are injured or die as a result of accidents, therefore you would expect an ER doctor to be wearing a seatbelt and he wasn't.
As I stated the episode, no it wasn't ironic or funny, but if you think about it, yes it is ironic.
Is there such a thing as subtle irony?
OH, Websters dictionary has as a synonym for ironic: sarcastic.
And the Roget's on irony: ambiguity, contrariety, duality, humor, sarcasm.
Irony is completely understandable.
~K
Kathy
Wild Flowers
|
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8377
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 11:43 am: |
|
(I found this most informative. I point everyone to the bolded section at the end about the usage controversy, in particular, though please don't skip the other material as it is essential in understanding the usage controversy.)
From Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
Etymology
The Greek etymology of the word irony, (eironeia), means feigned ignorance (a technique often used by the Greek philosopher Socrates, see further), from (eiron), the one who makes a question pretending to be naïve (a rhetorical question), and (eirein) is also a verb radical of the Greek “to speak.” The verb (eirein) itself is probably from the Proto-Indo-European root *wer- 'say.
Socratic irony
Socratic irony is feigning ignorance in order to expose the weakness of another’s position.
The Greek word eironeia applied particularly to understatement in the nature of dissimulation. Such irony occurred especially and notably in the assumed ignorance which Socrates adopted as a method of dialectic, the “Socratic irony.” Socratic irony involves a profession of ignorance that disguises a skeptical, non-committed attitude towards some dogma or universal opinion that lacks a basis in reason or in logic. Socrates’ “innocent” inquiries expose step by step the vanity or illogicality of the proposition by unsettling the assumptions of his dialogue partner by questioning or simply not sharing his basic assumptions. The irony entertains those onlookers who know that Socrates is wiser than he permits himself to appear and who may perceive slightly in advance the direction the “naïve” questioning will take. Fowler describes it:
The two parties in his audience were, first, the dogmatist, moved by pity and contempt to enlighten this ignorance, and, secondly, those who knew their Socrates and set themselves to watch the familiar game in which learning should be turned inside out by simplicity.
Many have interpreted Socrates as not feigning ignorance so much as expressing a form of philosophical skepticism.
Television journalist Louis Theroux demonstrated expert use of Socratic irony to his audience, by interviewing a number of diverse individuals with an air of relaxed naivety and appreciative curiosity. This has led to his subjects becoming less guarded and more open in answering questions than they would have been in a more adversarial dialogue, while more often than not also granting Theroux subtle control of the interview.
In his character of Ali G, Sacha Baron Cohen uses Socratic irony to satirical effect. For instance, in one sketch he interviews a professor from the National Poison Information Centre about recreational drug use. Ali’s pretended stupidity in the form of asking questions such as “Does Class A drugs absolutely guarantee that they is better quality?” elicits a response that makes drugs look like any other consumer article.
The 19th century Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard admired Socratic irony and used a variation of Socratic irony in many of his works. Kierkegaard wrote on Socratic irony in his master’s thesis, titled On the Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates. In the thesis, Kierkegaard praises Plato’s and Aristophanes’ use of Socratic irony, and argues that Aristophanes’ portrayal of Socrates in The Clouds most accurately captured the spirit of Socratic irony.
Roman irony
In Roman times, irony was used in public speaking and rhetoric, in which the words used were opposite their meaning or intent.
Shakespeare imitated Roman irony in his play Julius Caesar in Mark Antony’s speech: "Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears! I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." (III, ii, 78-79), continually emphasising that Brutus and the conspirators "are honorable men." The subsequent monologue uses extensive irony to glorify Caesar; Antony selects words that seem to support the assassins, while his purpose and his effect is to incite the crowd against them.
Verbal irony
Verbal irony is traditionally defined as the use of words to convey something other than, and especially the opposite of the literal meaning of the words. One classic example is a speaker saying, “What lovely weather we are having!” as she looks out at a rainstorm intending to express her dissatisfaction with the weather. However, there are examples of verbal irony that do not rely on saying the opposite of what one means, and there are cases where all the traditional criteria of irony exist and the utterance is not ironic.
Verbal irony is distinguished from related phenomena such as situational irony and dramatic irony in that it is produced intentionally by speakers. For instance, if a speaker exclaims, “I’m not upset!” but reveals an upset emotional state through his voice while truly trying to claim he is not upset, it would not be verbal irony just by virtue of its verbal manifestation (it would, however, be situational irony). But if the same speaker said the same words and intended to communicate that he was upset by claiming that he was not, the utterance would be verbal irony. This distinction gets at an important aspect of verbal irony: speakers communicate implied propositions that are intentionally contradictory to the propositions contained in the words themselves.
A fair amount of confusion has surrounded the issue regarding the relationship between verbal irony and sarcasm, and psychology researchers have addressed the issue directly (e.g, Lee & Katz, 1998). For example, ridicule is an important aspect of sarcasm, but not verbal irony in general. By this account, sarcasm is a particular kind of personal criticism leveled against a person or group of persons that incorporates verbal irony. For example, a person reports to her friend that rather than going to a medical doctor to treat her ovarian cancer, she has decided to see a spirtual healer instead. In response her friend says sarcastically, "Great idea! I hear they do fine work!" (Note that this could easily be spoken literally by a person who believes in spiritual healing as a legitimate treatment for cancer). The friend could have also replied with any number of ironic expressions that should not be labeled as sarcasm exactly, but still have many shared elements with sarcasm (see examples below).
Research shows that most instances of verbal irony are considered to be sarcastic, suggesting that the term sarcasm is more widely used than its technical definition suggests it should be (Bryant & Fox Tree, 2002; Gibbs, 2000). Some psycholinguistic theorists suggest that sarcasm (Great idea! I hear they do fine work), hyperbole (That's best idea I have heard in years), understatement (Sure, it's only cancer), rhetorical questions (Does your soul have cancer?), and jocularity (Get them to fix your bad back while you're at it) should all be considered kinds of verbal irony (Gibbs, 2000). The differences between these tropes can be quite subtle, and relate to typical emotional reactions of listeners, and the rhetorical goals of the speakers. Regardless of the various ways folk taxomonies categorize figurative language types, people in conversation are attempting to decode speaker intentions and discourse goals, and are not generally identifying, by name, the kinds of tropes used.
Use of irony
The word “irony” is frequently used figuratively, especially in such phrases as “the irony of fate,” of an issue or result that seems to contradict normal expectations derived from the previous state or condition.
Situational irony
Players and events coming together in improbable situations creating a tension between expected and real results. This differs from verbal and dramatic irony because this occurs only to the audience.
Examples:
A shipboard scene of reconciliation and hope for an estranged couple ends with the camera pulling back to reveal a life preserver stenciled “RMS Titanic.”
The fire station burned down last night.
Irony of fate (cosmic irony)
The expression “irony of fate” stems from the notion that the gods (or the Fates) are amusing themselves by toying with the minds of mortals, with deliberate ironic intent. Closely connected with cosmic irony, it arises from sharp contrasts between reality and human ideals, or between human intentions and actual results. Minor examples are daily life situations such as the rain that sets in immediately after one finishes watering one’s garden, following many days of putting off watering in anticipation of rain. Sharper examples can include situations in which the consequences are more dramatic.
For example:
The artist Monet's loss of vision, but not hearing.
Ludwig van Beethoven’s loss of hearing, but not vision.
The 1956 loss by fire of the top of Harvard’s Memorial Hall tower, while being restored by workmen to make sure it would last for generations.
American astronaut Gus Grissom's death inside Apollo 1 may have been partly because of a spacecraft redesign that he had recommended after the Mercury-Redstone 4 mission. After a Mercury hatch opened prematurely, nearly causing his death, Grissom had recommended the Apollo hatch be made more difficult to open. The new hatch proved too difficult to open.
Seymour Cray, supercomputer architect, dying of head and neck injuries suffered in a traffic collision. His vehicle — a Jeep Cherokee — was designed using a Cray supercomputer.
Chemist and mechanical engineer Thomas Midgley invented both tetraethyl lead and the chlorofluorocarbon Freon-12 as intended boons to the world. However, both compounds were environmental disasters: the first resulting in widespread lead poisoning, and the second class of compounds in widespread harm to the ozone layer. The contrast between Midgley's intended and actual results remained sharp to the end: at the age of 55, Midgley contracted polio and invented a complicated system of pulleys and ropes to move him in his bed. Although he was an accomplished engineer, this system also badly departed from its ideal task, strangling its inventor to death.
At the turn of the century, Charles Justice was a prison inmate at the Ohio State Penitentiary in Columbus. While performing cleaning detail duties in the death chamber, he devised an idea to improve the efficiency of the restraints on the electric chair. Justice designed metal clamps to replace the leather straps, thus allowing for the inmate to be secured more tautly and minimize the problem of burnt flesh. These revisions were incorporated into the chair and Justice was subsequently paroled from prison. Ironically, he was convicted in a robbery/murder and returned to prison 13 years later under a death sentence. On November 9, 1911, he died in the same electric chair that he had helped to improve. A further irony, of course, is his last name 'Justice'.
Historical irony (cosmic irony through time)
When history is seen through modern eyes, it sometimes happens that there is an especially sharp contrast between the way historical figures see their world and the probable future of their world, and what actually transpired. When the World War which began the 20th century was called The War to End All Wars, this later became an example of historical irony. Historical irony is therefore a subset of cosmic irony, but one in which the element of time is bound up. Examples:
When the telephone was invented, some people were especially quick to see the possibilties. One man even said: "I can easily see that every town will want one."
Contrasting statements were made at the dawn of computers, which were initially thought to be devices never capable of use outside a government or academic setting.
Historical irony is often encapsulated into statement:
"They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Nearly the last words of American Civil War General John Sedgwick[1]
In response to Mrs. Connally's comment, "Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn't love you." John F. Kennedy uttered his last words, "That's very obvious." [2]
Fiction
A typical use of irony of fate occurs in the climax of Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
Frollo, the villain, stands upon a gargoyle. He raises his sword to strike Esmeralda, and says, “And He shall smite the wicked and plunge them into the firey pit!” At that moment, the gargoyle breaks off, sending Frollo falling to his death into the courtyard, filled with molten lead that Quasimodo had spilled to stop the oncoming guards. The irony is that Frollo’s line is used in reference to Esmeralda, but instead it winds up applying to Frollo himself as he plunges into the fiery pit of molten lead.
Spoilers end here.
Situations resembling poetic justice, but lacking the aspect of justice, may also be ascribed to the irony of fate.
Tragic irony (dramatic irony)
In tragedy, what is called "tragic irony" becomes a device for heightening the intensity of a dramatic situation. Tragic irony particularly characterized the drama of ancient Greece, owing to the familiarity of the spectators with the legends on which so many of the plays were based. In this form of irony, the words and actions of the characters belie the real situation, which the spectators fully realize. It may take several forms: the character speaking may realize the irony of his words while the rest of the actors may not; or he or she may be unconscious while the other actors share the knowledge with the spectators; or the spectators may alone realize the irony. Sophocles’ Oedipus the King provides a classic example of tragic irony at its fullest and finest.
Irony may come to expression in inappropriate behavior. A witness to a scene involving threats of violence, for example, may perceive continued politeness on the part of the victim as increasingly ironic as it becomes increasingly inappropriate. Sometimes the “second” audience is the private self of the ironist.
When not recognized, irony can lead to misunderstanding. Even if an ironic statement is recognized as such, it often expresses less clearly what the speaker or writer wants to say than would a direct statement.
Another famous case of tragic irony occurs in the William Shakespeare play, Romeo and Juliet when Romeo finds Juliet in a drugged death-like sleep, he assumes her to be dead and kills himself. Upon awakening to find her dead lover beside her, Juliet kills herself with his knife.
Comic irony
Layers of comic irony pervade Jane Austen’s novels. The first sentence of Pride and Prejudice famously opens with a nearly mathematical postulate. “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.” The scene that follows immediately betrays the proposal. “No, a rich young man moving into the neighborhood did not come to seek a wife.” In fact, it soon becomes clear that Austen means the opposite: women (or their mothers) must always be in need of, and desperately on the lookout for, a husband. The irony deepens as the story promotes his romance and ends in a double wedding.
Comic irony from television sketch-comedy has the distinction over literary comic irony in that it often incorporates elements of absurdity. For instance, an ironic situation might involve getting hit by a rib-delivery truck after trying to poison someone with bad rib-sauce in order to steal his or her gems. Reference: Season 4 Cycle 1—SCTV Network / 90 Show 2, Polynesiantown.
Metafiction
Main article: Metafiction
Metafiction is a kind of fiction which self-consciously addresses the devices of fiction. It usually involves irony and is self-reflective. Metafiction (or “romantic irony” in the sense of roman the prose fiction) refers to the effect when a story is interrupted to remind the audience or reader that it is really only a story. Examples include Henry Fielding’s interruptions of the storyline to comment on what has happened, or J.M. Barrie’s similar interjections in his book, Peter Pan. Daniel Handler’s A Series of Unfortunate Events could also be considered a form of romantic irony, in which the action is frequently halted for a warning that the events to follow could be potentially distressing. The concept is also explored in a philosophical context in Sophie’s World, by Jostein Gaarder. A similar example occurs in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy novel where the narrator reveals in advance “in the interest of reducing stress” that nobody will get hurt by a pair of incoming nuclear warheads, but that he will leave some suspense by stating that he would not reveal whose upper arm would get bruised in the process.
Irony as infinite, absolute negativity
While many reputable critics limit irony to something resembling Aristotle's definition, an influential set of texts insists that it be understood, not as a limited tool, but as a disruptive force with the power to undo texts and readers alike. This tradition includes not only Søren Kierkegaard, but 19th-century German critic and novelist Friedrich Schlegel ("On Incomprehensibility"), Charles Baudelaire, Stendhal, and the 20th-century deconstructionist Paul de Man ("The Concept of Irony"). Briefly, it insists that irony is, in Kierkegaard's words, "infinite, absolute negativity". Where much of philosophy attempts to reconcile opposites into a larger positive project, Kierkegaard and others insist that irony — whether expressed in complex games of authorship or simple litotes — must, in Kierkegaard's words, "swallow its own stomach". Irony entails endless reflection and violent reversals, and insures incomprehensibility at the moment it compels speech. Not surprisingly, irony is the favorite textual property of deconstructionists.
There is more at stake here than a simple quibble over a dictionary definition. Holocaust writer Tadeusz Borowski's brief and fiendishly complex short story "The Death of Schillinger" shows how irony infects not just Holocaust literature, but the acts and lives of victims, perpetrators, and bystanders alike. Cohen's comedy provokes horrified laughter because it ruthlessly exposes cultural norms about race, sex, religion and national origin, often all in the same sketch. Both take on the atrocities of the 20th and 21st centuries without providing a stable perspective from which to judge or a positive program that right-thinking people might pursue. Instead, Borowski and Cohen render any possible position absurd. Any definition of irony quickly becomes mired in philosophy's bitterest debates.
Usage controversy
The material above deals with the primary dictionary meaning of the word irony. There is no controversy that the usage above is a correct usage; the controversy is over whether it is the only correct usage. Authority, in the form of dictionaries and usage guides, can be cited on both sides.
Descriptivists generally discount such self-proclaimed language authorities in favor of studying how individuals currently use the word.
It is currently quite common to hear the word ironic used as a synonym for incongruous in situations where there is no “double audience,” and no contradiction between the ostensible and true meaning of the words. Two examples of such usage:
Ironically, Sir Arthur Sullivan is remembered for the comic operas he found embarrassing, rather than the serious works he hoped would be his legacy.
Adolph Coors III was the former heir to the Coors beer empire. Ironically, Coors was allergic to beer.
The American Heritage Dictionary’s usage panel found it unacceptable to use the word ironic to describe mere unfortunate coincidences or surprising disappointments that “suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly.” This definition still allows the above usage but excludes examples like “It's a traffic jam when you're already late” as made popular by Alanis Morissette’s “Ironic”.
However, the American Heritage Dictionary recognizes a secondary meaning for irony: “incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs.” In other words, ironic in this sense is synonymous with incongruous. The word incongruity is not in the active vocabulary for most speakers of the English language, irony being much more widespread among those wanting to be precise in their language.
Other historical prescriptivists have even stricter definitions for the word irony. Henry Watson Fowler, in The King’s English, says “any definition of irony—though hundreds might be given, and very few of them would be accepted—must include this, that the surface meaning and the underlying meaning of what is said are not the same.” Fowler would thus consider the Sullivan example above as incorrect usage.
Recent developments
Alanis Morissette’s popular 1995 song “Ironic” breathed new life into the ongoing controversy over the definition of irony. The song attracted a great deal of attention from prescriptivists[citation needed] for its (arguably) flagrant misuse of the word ironic. Morissette’s alleged misuses of the word include the following:
It’s a traffic jam / when you’re already late
He won the lottery / and died the next day
Among those who assert that the song uses an invalid definition of irony, many find it ironic that Morissette would write a song titled “Ironic” with no actual irony in it. In 2004, Morissette herself acknowledged that the song doesn’t live up to the definition, which is what makes it ironic.
This sort of meta-irony was almost certainly the goal of the writers of Saturday Night Live in their “Tales of Irony” sketch, in which guest host Jason Alexander presided over a Masterpiece Theatre–like presentation of short films which, to his increasing dismay, lacked ironic content. Irony played the role of the punchline in many Bill Brasky skits of Saturday Night Live, famously the interchange “He hated Mexicans!” / “And he was half Mexican!” / “And he hated irony!”
Dave Eggers’ novel, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius contains a lengthy discourse criticizing (what the author regards as) the misuse of the word irony.
A PhD Comics strip takes up the issue of the disconnect between the popular view of the definition of ironic and the view supported by many academics.
It may be that popular usage patterns are shifting the predominant meaning of irony toward references to ironies of fate. Whether this has been caused, exemplified or popularized by the American Heritage Dictionary (or by Alanis Morissette) is unclear.
Cultural variation
Irony requires a cultural backdrop, and as with any culture-specific idiom, irony often cannot be perfectly transplanted. An expression with a secondary meaning clear to an east-coast American may be obscure to a Canadian, Briton, Australian, Indian or even a west-coast American, though they ostensibly all speak the same language. Attempting a literal translation of an ironic idiom to another language often renders the concept incoherent. Further, the use of spoken irony also often relies on non-literal cues such as tone of voice or posture. Every culture incorporates its own form of linguistic metaphor, idiom and subtlety, and translation requires extra care.
|
"A-Bear"
Senior Member
Username: dane
Post Number: 1850
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 4:16 pm: |
|
I'll be damned! (no truer words, yes?)
"I see," said the blind man, "it's as clear as mud to me." *smile*
D |
"A-Bear"
Senior Member
Username: dane
Post Number: 1851
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 12:14 am: |
|
M -all jokes aside, I indicated earlier (in this thread) I was one who saw irony in everything. I don’t have a personal vendetta with the word but I do feel surrounded by it at times, albeit, it hasn’t killed me yet. Case in point: today, I loss another employee because he refused the “temporary” new hours I assigned him and that I needed him to work. His reason? “Family comes first. I’m not working extra hours. I quit.” At which point, he tossed his keys on my desk, and proceeded to clean out his locker. I did not engage him in a verbal exchange to try convincing him that he was making a mistake. Family first? Yes, I’ll buy into that -it’s a noble and wonderful idea. But I couldn’t help thinking about the irony in what he was saying and doing. I mean, how in the hell was he going to feed and support his family (who comes first and foremost) by giving up his only income? Job abandonment doesn’t qualify you for unemployment. Ironic? Maybe, maybe not. But like I said, I see irony in everything and everyone. Perhaps I’m wrong in the definitions you so painstakingly posted, however, if you state something that results in its opposite intent, well, in my mind, that’s irony of the highest order. Somewhat like a book I read about Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), entitled, “I Hate You, Please Don’t Leave Me.” Now, how ironic is that? It even came with its own psychiatric stamp of disapproval.
D |
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8387
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 10:00 am: |
|
Dear bear -- I think that your example, like Kathy's, falls under the category of how modern people are attempting to expand the ironies of fate model. As the explanation I posted said, "It is currently quite common to hear the word ironic used as a synonym for incongruous in situations where there is no “double audience,” and no contradiction between the ostensible and true meaning of the words." I believe a man who leaves his job for the benefit of his family, while his job loss will, in fact, hurt his family, is a perfect example of incongruity, even if it does not fit perfectly to the model of irony as classically described. In other words, people use the word ironic when they mean incongruous. While some categories of irony have some features of incongruity, these synonyms, like a lot of synonyms, are not completely interchangeable.
Perhaps if this keeps happening in modern language, the so-called experts will have to expand the definition of irony formally to include examples like yours. This is how language is changed. People start using it in ways other than accepted traditionally and then the definition formally changes. I highly suspect this will happen with irony. It just hasn't happened yet for those traditionalists who hold to a strict definition of irony. But even the dictionaries now are listing incongruous as a synonym for irony. However, I wouldn't argue this point with a language professor. You would likely lose as The American Heritage Dictionary’s usage panel found it unacceptable to use the word ironic to describe mere unfortunate coincidences or surprising disappointments. You see, there is no winning with this one. *LOL*
As for the BPD personality, I'm afraid most would consider people with this disorder highly ironic, though they don't mean to be. As the title of the book clearly shows, they often say the exact opposite of what they mean. This could be considered irony. Sad that it is also a psychiatric disorder and sad that they, unlike most emotionally stable folks, can't control their ironic statements. However, I don't think statements made by emotionally disordered people could be real irony, since I'm not sure they really intend true irony. I think they are just terribly and sadly confused when they say these things.
As for what you are seeing everywhere, I think you might better describe it as incongruity rather than irony. Hey, that's good. You are seeing something, which is often not quite true of me these days. *LOL*
Love,
M
|
Kathy Paupore
Senior Member
Username: kathy
Post Number: 3564
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 12:20 pm: |
|
It's not what you say it's how you say it. It's difficult for some to see irony in the written word but if you add voice, inflection, posture, you get effect. If you change the telling of the story/incident you can make it ironic.
Irony is difficult to define because we each bring our own perceptions and understanding into our interpretations.
Back to the ER doctor: say you see this-
He's caring for a patient in the ER who's just been in a car accident, tells him/her if you'd been wearing your seatbelt your injuries would not have been this severe.
At the scene of his accident the paramedics are working over his injured, lifeless body, the seatbelt hangs idly in its holder.
Irony of fate.
Maybe there shouldn't be an absolute defination for irony, or hard and fast rules...
"Irony cannot often be perfectly transplanted."
What I see as ironic, someone else probably won't.
~K
Kathy
Wild Flowers
|
~M~
Board Administrator
Username: mjm
Post Number: 8390
Registered: 11-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 2:07 pm: |
|
Dearest Kathy -- As I said to bear, there is much controversy going on as it concerns this topic of irony. Some you spoke to would agree that your example could be considered an irony of fate.
Unfortunately, a lot of the stuffy academicians (and anal-retentive people who insist on strict adherence to the rules) would not. As the above information stated: "Other historical prescriptivists have even stricter definitions for the word irony. Henry Watson Fowler, in The King’s English, says “any definition of irony — though hundreds might be given, and very few of them would be accepted — must include this, that the surface meaning and the underlying meaning of what is said are not the same.” Fowler would thus consider the Sullivan example above as incorrect usage." I believe he would consider your example invalid as well.
Personally, I'm not all that concerned (even though I am anal-retentive at times, it doesn't extend to this topic) that people adhere to a strict definition of irony. If people wish to expand irony to include incongruence, I support that. It would certainly lead to a lot less arguments when discussing this topic.
However, as writers, I thought it was interesting and might be important, that we know the traditional views of irony and how restrictive some people are in their interpretation of it just in case we want to try writing something ironic. I hoped the information would keep people from stepping in the same trap as Alanis Morissette who wrote a song titled "Ironic" that didn't have any irony in it. That's rather embarrassing don't you think? She had to back-pedal and say that the title was ironic, even if the content wasn't.
I think I'll stick to incongruous just to be safe. *grin*
Love,
M
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page
