‘Truly this is the sweetest of theologies’, William said, with perfect humility, and I thought he was using that insidious figure of speech that rhetors call irony, which must always be prefaced by the pronunciato, representing its signal and its justification - something that William never did. For which reason the abbot, more inclined to the use of figures of speech, took William literally …Umberto Eco The Name of the Rose
Having run afoul of irony in both directions lately (having my own ironic post on Lent taken literally, then taking literally an ironic comment by Chris), I’ve come to the conclusion that HTML needs its own version of the pronunciato.
Here’s my proposal: Text meant to be taken ironically would be surrounded by <
Alas, the problem with this is that the tag would itself immediately become a candiate for use in an ironic way. It’s yer old use/mention problem. I believe Frege faced this problem, as does the Pharisee in the stoning scene of The Life of Brian:
Official: Stop, will you?! Stop that! Stop it! Now, look! No one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle! Do you understand?! Even, and I want to make this absolutely clear, even if they do say ‘Jehovah’.
Crowd: Ooooh! [Crowd stones Official.]
I’ll defer to Brian (Weatherson) on the fine points of detail here.
I tend to rely on an ellipsis at the end of sentences I want to be taken ironically. Annoying, but slightly less so than a bloody smiley…
Now I’m confused Richard. Do you mean ellipsis isn’t less annoying than a smiley? And what about when you actually want to signify …
Never mind.
Emoticons and html-tags are a completely mistaken approach to irony.
A statement’s possibility of being misconstrued seems to me to be the essence of irony. By some silent agreement the speaker and the listener, the writer and the reader, construe a third person in the conversation, a hypothetical figure, the dupe, who does in fact take the ironical statement literally, and the joke is really on this virtual nr.3.
Nobody likes to actually assume that third party role, but the risk that it happens must exist for irony to be possible. Once you attach explicit irony signs, you get rid of the concept altogether.
We used irony so much at my boarding school it became impossible to determine if any given statement was ironic or not. Even as teenagers, we felt that went a bit far.
Someone said that the smiley signifies “Please don’t hit me.” I stuck Edwin Starr’s “War” on the jukebox in a country bar last night, and felt a bit self-conscious.
Motoko — that is a wonderful explanation of irony. Is it your own doing?
I remember a few years back, talking to a parent of young children who explained that the children were going to a Waldorf school in order to avoid exposure to irony. This seemed at the time, and still seems, like one of the most wrong-headed parenting strategies I have ever heard tell of. I can’t imagine it would work, but even so. Trying consciously to raise a naif, a square?
jq:
you can use the div tag, and then put title=”Irony” on it. not sure if it works in all browsers, and some other tag might be better, but there yo have it.
no problem.
Motoko — that is a wonderful explanation of irony. Is it your own doing?
Well, partly; I was thinking about a conversation I had some time ago with a friend. We talked about the policeman who based his research on telemarketing fraud on an article from The Onion, and we decided that he was really the ideal reader, the person you’re imagining when you read The Onion - the one who believes it’s true. I think you find this concept of a “dupe” in psychoanalysis too.
Motoko, you said it perfectly. If irony is overtly signalled, it’s not irony.
The written word offers more challenges in this respect to both writer and reader than the spoken word and visual communication but… you can’t sacrifice the effect for the sake of assistance to the irony-impaired.
(In fairness to John’s intentions, I don’t think missing the irony in one statement once in a while qualifies as irony-impairment… Plus, even if you get it only later, you’re still getting it, at least! )
Jeremy: I think same-irony schools should be a good idea. Separation is the best way to ensure freedom of irony.
A. I think that I’m in love with the idea of “suitably ironic colors.”
B. I’m reminded of a bit of dialogue from the Lollapalooza episode of the Simpsons:
TEENAGER 1: Oh, it’s that cannonball guy. He’s real cool.TEENAGER 2: Dude, are you being sarcastic?
TEENAGER 1: I don’t even know anymore.
I was going to make the point about irony being undermined if it is too explicitly signaled… but then I thought John was being ironic and lost my nerve.
I love that Simpsons scene Ted quotes. It’s always the first thing I think of when someone mentions irony now.
I seem to recall from grad school that some people take the irony/sarcasm distinction very seriously, and they seemed to have decent reasons. It might be worth reviving that distinction in the blogworld at some point.
On distinctions, I think the one Kieran is looking for is force/content not use/mention. This deserves a longer comment, but unless someone else writes it it will have to wait until the close of business here.
By the way, I’m pretty sure the Chris John refers to in his post is not Chris but someone else called ‘Chris’.
praktike,
Sadly, MT comments seem to strip out title attributes. I was experimenting with a self referencig anchor. But primary posters could probably do it.
Praktike—Oh, like that’ll work.
Well, it looks like typing
a href=”http://irony”
in the angle brackets will get you something, but perhaps some people still won’t get it. (If you click it, it’ll take you to a gaming company.)
Seriously—oh my god, I can’t start a post on this thread like that. I’m sorry.
Professionally, irony seems to me to work by violating a Gricean maxim of conversation (and IIRC Grice explicitly cites irony). You say something that the hearer knows is not to be taken seriously, thus implying the opposite, or perhaps implying mockery of those who would be dumb enough to believe it/take it seriously, or something like that.
Of course reception of the irony depends on knowing what the speaker will and will not mean seriously—meaning that in an ironic enough context, communication is absolutely impossible!
Well, as Tom the Dancing Bug says, “Sarcasm is the downfall of civilization! Oo! Run! It’s sarcasm!” (The first panel of that strip contains a definition of the irony/sarcasm, distinction, I guess. Duh.)
This proposal, as with emoticons, is maybe partly motivated by the limitations of written vs. oral communication: on the web, no one knows you’re sounding quizzical.
Brian (or “Brian”) is right, though, as it happens, I did know the “Chris” who is not Chris many years ago.
talking to a parent of young children who explained that the children were going to a Waldorf school in order to avoid exposure to irony.
Jeremy, surely you were the victim of perfect irony.
oh, and further, you could hack MT to do this pretty easily.
sorry to be all “literal.”
Ogged — that is a tempting thought, but I talked with them at length and they were quite earnest about it.
But irony has long been dead! Today you need counterintuitivity tags. That’s where the currency is.
… and no one has mentioned Alanis Morrissette yet.
damn, morvern morrissetted the thread.
Actually I’m one of those people who takes the distinction between irony and sarcasm seriously, very seriously indeed. It just pisses me off, especially this one time at capoeira when this goddamn.. well, friend, said that irony meant saying something you don’t mean. And really I couldn’t talk her out of it, no matter the references I made to Greek Drama, she’s a communications major so I can of course understand her not understanding the concept. I just had to post about this here, sorry if I was sort of incoherent but I’m really still sort of pissed off about it. This was two years ago.
“Of course, the reception of irony depends on knowing what the speaker will and will not mean seriously- meaning that in an ironic enough context communication is absolutely impossible!”
Didn’t Kafka once write something about that?
Seriously now, with respect to the use/mention and force/content distinctions, I don’t know that they are specific enough to pin down the particular matter. And I don’t think that the notion of “seriousness” is quite apropos. Doesn’t irony have to do with the interplay between belief and disbelief and the expression thereof? And in this respect, irony would pertain to the level of discourse itself rather than reality and to the surplus of discourse over reality. That would be why literary fiction almost inevitably tends toward irony. (Though, in the case of the peripety of classical tragedy, it is the seeming force of reality itself that traps and crushes one in one’s belief.) The charge against irony would be the charge of disbelief, of an utter lack of belief. Against the pomo/pop culture hipster crowd this has the ring of truth delivered with blunt force trauma. But there is no necessity in the case, for it could just as well be a matter of discrimination between beliefs. And in the face of conventionalistic authoritarians who want to impose their narrow take upon “reality” and what such conventionalism is wont to bring about, the despair of sheer disbelief is not without its merit.
Realistically, Quiggin and DDavies don’t need irony tags.
Can anyone translate what John C. Halasz wrote?
Or was it ironic?
Crikey, I feel like a dupe.
Right on, matako. The use of such a device would, like the exclamation mark used to signal “humour” by the witless, be a dead giveaway.
Emoticons. Scum of the blogiverse.
You can use <span title=”Irony”>…</span> if you want to (this probably only works in modern, i.e. post-about-1999, browsers). Personally I think this is an absolutely jolly splendid idea and you should all start using it, though I note that it doesn’t work in MT’s comments….
Bernard Shaw once suggested the introduction of a new irony-conveying typeface on the model of italics but sloping left, to be called “ironics”.
I don’t know if he was being serious or not.
“Can anyone translate what John C. Halasz wrote?”
Nah. Too much in there.
No irony in nihilism, no irony without belief
“Irony is the last refuge of the moralist,…”
Can anyone finish the above for me?
“the despair of sheer disbelief is not without its merit.”
Cetainly a willful typo in there somewhere.
Motoko — that is a wonderful explanation of irony. Is it your own doing?
It’s straight out of Fowler, 1926.
http://www.panix.com/~hncl/HectorsJournal/archives/000176.html
Sorry, I thought I was being clear enough. I was contesting the idea that irony was not “serious”, as in the Gricean maxims. Nor is “seriousness” necessarily a useful or even identifiable criterion in language. I think seriousness would probably depend on the consequentiality of what is transacted. Like “literal meaning”, “seriousness” as a linguistic criterion is a notion that depends on what it is not, as if the shifting of levels and modal relations in language could be eliminated to get down to its basic form.
Nor is that matter of irony necessarily an either/or proposition.
And there were no typos that time.
“And there were no typos that time.”
“the despair of sheer disbelief is not without its merit.”
Certainly a willful typo in there somewhere.”
This was just a stupid allusion to “Sickness Unto Death”, meant to be ironic
“Nor is that matter of irony necessarily an either/or proposition.”
But perhaps you caught it afterall :)
I liked the piece
John C. Halasz, that is so much clearer now. Seriously.
Bob: Irony is the last refuge of the moralist
I thought that was sarcasm, not irony?
“Bob: Irony is the last refuge of the moralist
I thought that was sarcasm, not irony?”
It is a quote from Kierkeggaard, or half a quote.
The second half goes something like:
“moralist, for he has no way of expressing…”
I tried googling, and looking in the indices of my books, but I can’t remember and can’t find the passage.
The first half, as stated is my favorite K quote, and one of my favorite all-time quotes. Take a long time to explain
Bob: I think I just confused it with the thousand variations of “sarcasm is the last refuge of the…” (weak-minded, incompetent, pedant, moralist, etc.). I know I’ve heard that a lot, but never with “irony” in place of sarcasm…
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review