Types of Irony and Frameworks for Discussion
Types of Irony and Frameworks for Discussion
Since irony is quite a complex area of study, it is helpful to divide it into different sections of study. Jack C. Gray, in his article, “Irony: A Practical Definition,” creates a quite clear structure of the different types of irony, which we will use as a framework for our discussion of the subject.
Gray divides the subject into two over-arching, broad categories: “Verbal Irony” and “Nonverbal Irony.”
Verbal irony, divides into “Conscious Irony” and “Unconscious Irony.” Conscious Irony then divides into “Understatement,” “Sarcasm,” “Socratic Irony,” “Comic Irony,” and “Narrative Commentary.” “Unconscious Irony,” according to Gray, is generally confined to drama.
Nonverbal irony is the kind of event-oriented irony that most people jump to when thinking of irony. Gray divides this into “irony of situation,” “irony of structure,” and “irony of fate.” (Gray)
The list, of course, doesn’t cover every type of irony in existence, and it certainly doesn’t provide absolute clarity in terms of identifying irony, but it is helpful in that it provides an immediately accessible framework in which irony can be categorized. It is also a useful list in that it attempts to seal in the gap created by those who wish to think of irony as something specific and the theorists we discussed two sections ago who prefer to think of irony as something which is much more broad. Let’s examine each of Gray’s subdivisions in more detail.
Understatement
Understatement is a very common rhetorical device found in literature, particularly fiction. It involves, typically, a situation where the author intentionally underplays a situation’s importance to create a form of suspense in the reader. A good example would be the end of Ralph Clarence’s poem, “Soliloquy.” The last few stanzas of the poem reas:
Visiting after expulsion,
and a long absence.
Gazing at the high school girls,
their shadows whispering
words which danced,
entranced, and died away.
A pretty one said I was a legend,
but I can't remember a thing
but red paint and a shattered rib cage.
I had a dream once,
to decapitate myself with a shotgun
in the bathroom, and let the blood
spray round the room, running into the
tiles and making pretty patterns.
Engrave and dig the tile earth, and
when the sea finally died away,
"Society needs a wake-up call."
I was a silly child. (Clarence.)
Starting with the lines, “but I can’t remember a thing/but red paint and a shattered rib cage,” the poem seems to suggest deep trauma associated with the adolescence of the narrator. Then, the author describes a gruesome scene of public suicide. However, the poem ends with the line, “I was a silly child,” thus adopting a nonchalant tone and delegitimizing the sense of trauma associated with the narrator.
Understatement is not the clearest form of irony. In fact, considering it ironic is perhaps to join with theorists such as Cleanth Brooks who define most figurative language as ironic. However, because it so common, and because it seems to operate in a "covert" manner, unlike other types of figurative language, it warrants discussion in the “realm of irony.”
Gray then goes to sarcasm.
Sarcasm is a concept which is unavoidable when discussing irony. It is,
basically, saying something and meaning something different. However,
its overt nature, usually lacking complexity, somewhat alienates
it from irony. Sarcasm has been used so extensively that it has
practically become non-ironic due to the fact that when people hear it
or read it, they immediately make the mental jump to the intended
meaning of the statement. For example, imagine this conversation
between an employer and an employee:
EMPLOYER: Why are you late? This is the third time this week.
EMPLOYEE: Well, my car broke down.
EMPLOYER: How did you get here then?
EMPLOYEE: Well, um... it started running again.
EMPLOYER: Yeah, I'm going to believe that.
The final phrase, "I'm going to believe that," literally means
something different than what the employer intends. However, almost
every reader will read that situation and immediately see, "I don't
fucking buy that-you are lying to me." Therefore, it somewhat removes
itself from ironic discussion due to its immediacy and simplicity.
“Socratic Irony” refers to the type of feigned ignorance associated with Socrates. Socrates, as depicted by Plato, has become a symbol of wisdom. However, in the dialogues written by Plato, Socrates would often act as if he “knew nothing” for the sake of exposing his opponent’s arrogance and ignorance.
“Unconscious Irony,” also termed, “Dramatic Irony,” refers to irony which is generally found in drama. This type of irony involves a character who unconsciously makes an ironic statement—it is part of the playwright’s intention that we take the statement ironically, but the character is unconscious of the irony. A classic example is the famous line, “At least things can’t get any worse,” following which, everything gets worse. However, this line has become clichéd to the point of losing the covert nature which makes it ironic. Jack C. Gray refers to lines from Hamlet in his article:
When Hamlet (I, iv) speaks of a "vicious mole of nature" in men which "Shall in the general censure take corruption / From that particular fault," he is scarcely aware how well he is describing himself (Gray)”
Gray divides “nonverbal irony” (which I generalized in earlier sections simply as “situational irony” or "cosmic irony") into three categories. “Irony of situation” refers to real-life situations, “irony of structure” refers to ironic situations as depicted by an author in fiction, and “irony of fate” refers to something greater, “Fate” itself or God, acting as an author and creating an ironic situation.
Nonverbal irony distances the concept of irony from a rhetorical device somewhat, but it puts the rhetorical device into the hands of something more abstract. Irony should be thought of as something that it is intentionally designed to serve a purpose. If a situation is being ironic, then something greater than that situation is creating an ironic situation which we can learn from. In the example from the “Abuses” section in which a person bad-mouths someone only to see them later creates the higher plane that insists that we cannot get away with merely voicing our problems with a person to anyone but that person.
Wayne C. Booth, in his book, A Rhetoric of Irony, lists four qualities to what he labels "stable irony" which are quite helpful in thinking about irony. To summarize:
ONE: Irony is intentional. It is not simply a careless mistake (unless made by a character in a play, and in that case the author has carefully constructed such carelessness) or a misunderstanding on the part of the author, although, as a writer, I sometimes look at my past work and laugh a bit (and no doubt, I will in the future at some of my writing now) at how perfectly I seem to have constructed irony due to my own misunderstandings at the time I had written it.
TWO: Irony is "covert." The basic defintition refers to "saying one thing while meaning something else." If the irony is instantly recognizeable, it seems to function as something different than irony.
THREE: However, the ironic statement has a kind of "stability--" it is a statement wherein several readers can read it the same way, due to indications given within the text. This would exclude a lot of absurd statements which aren't meant to be taken literally but don't seem to have an alternate meaning to jump to.
FOUR: Related to this stability, "stable irony" is finite, and limited in scope. (Booth 5-6).
Booth's framework for "stable irony" is a good one to keep in mind while looking for irony.
You might be thinking, "well, I'm starting to understand a bit better, but how do I identify it in texts?"
Luckily for you (is that irony on my part? I'll let you decide ;) ), there is a section on just that.
Next: Indications of Irony
Previous: Abuses and Misunderstandings of Irony
Table of Contents
