"My mother set the picnic table with insect-repelling candles, and just as she started to eat she caught me chewing a hunk of beef the size of a coin purse. Gorging always set her off, but on this occasion it bothered her more than usual. "I hope you choke to death," she said. I was twelve years old, and paused thinking, Did I hear her correctly? "That's right, piggy, suffocate" "
- When You Are Engulfed in Flames by David Sedaris
I love the vignette that Sedaris creates in this passage and especially how he plays around in the cultural arena. There is no way in heck anyone’s mom would ever say that in adherence to cultural norms/roles and Sedaris' mom shockingly deviates from them by telling the 12 year old Sedaris to "choke to death", which creates humor. In this blog post I am going to try to achieve the same effect by writing about people who have unreasonable and rude reactions to things, playing around in the cultural arena and using a deadpan tone in the low style much in the same way Sedaris does to achieve humor.
I was sitting in a lecture hall in Tydings taking my microeconomics exam and Clark, one of my best friends, was sitting in the desk next to me. I had a cold at the time so every few minutes or so I'd cough a bit, nothing too distracting or disconcerting. Well about half way through the exam I had a small fit of coughing, and there was something about this one and not the others that just set Clark off.
"I hope you cough out a lung," he said.
I had to do a double take because I could believe he said that.
"That's right, wheezy, cough it out."
That reminded me of one time when I was visiting my grandpa in the extended stay ward of Sibley Hospital. Next to his room was an elderly woman whose daughter brought her granddaughter to see every few days. One day I overheard the granddaughter, who couldn't be older than eight, talking to the elderly woman.
"Why can't you just die already? Mommy told me it would happen soon but it’s already been a month since then and every time we come out here I have to miss watching Hannah Montana"
Good God, I thought to myself, What the heck has this world come to?
I know what its come to. In my art class on last Monday, my art teacher assigned us our final. We have to do forty-five compositions all of either frogs, manhole covers, dandelions, apples, or ants. She said she was going to give us fifty but decided to give us a break and only assign forty-five, and to repay her we had to do them all by the Monday after Thanksgiving. She asked the class how we felt about the assignment after she explained it.
"Mrs. Jacobs, hold on a second while I go ram my head into a wall," said a student responded.
He stood up and proceeded to ram his head into the wall.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Irony
"And the irony is that they wrote better without access to my quotes."
-Steve Carlton
One thing in writing that I've never been able to grasp is the concept of irony even though I see it in use every single day. Holcomb and Killingworth say that irony is the "most complex and difficult" of tropes to accomplish (94). They themselves don't have a perfect way of defining it, saying that it is a trope that involves "inversions and reversals" and that it "turns standard meaning and expectations upside down" (94). I felt inspired by this quote to practice writing ironic statements by writing a ton of them for this blog post in the format of Steve's quote, which uses irony to create humor.
And the irony is that while Glenn Beck says that Obama is a fascist, he's actually more of a socialist.
And the irony is that I chose to write examples of irony, something I'm horrible at writing, even though this damn thing is due in 14 minutes.
And the irony is that the one time I didn't check that the toilet seat was down before I sat down on it, I fell in because it was left up.
And the irony is that seat belts actually lead to more car crashes because of the false sense of security they provide that gives drivers more incentive to drive dangerously.
And the irony is that before the Revolutionary War, colonists actually paid fewer taxes than British Citizens.
And the irony is that I'm fucking sick of irony 150 words in after I was excited to do this exercise because it would give me the chance to write something funny.
And the irony is that one church that formed during the Protestant Reformation banning sex wiped themselves out.
And the irony is that the American Flag that is hanging on my house's front door was made in Taiwan.
And the irony is that I told myself I wouldn't wait to do homework until the last minute for fear of the dreaded writers block.
And the irony is that Luke was Leia's brother.... wait didn't they hook up in A New Hope? ...what the shit?
And the irony is that Ricky Martin turned out to be gay (Not that there is anything wrong with that).
And the irony is that even though nearly every single elementary history lesson I've ever had claims the Civil War was not fought over slavery even though it was. The state right to do what? Oh that’s right hold slaves.
And the irony is that dogs actually can look up (optimism for the win!).
And the irony is that in Up for fucking once the dog didn't die (I'm still reeling from Where the Red Fern Grows).
And the irony is that I wasted so much time learning Tai Kwon Do to pick up hot Asian chicks and it didn't pan out at all because apparently football players and that asshole guy who picks up the guitar at the party and plays "Wonderwall" get all the girls.
And the irony is that I actually love The Gilmore Girls.
And the irony is that my dad's Ford F-150 has a Vineyard Vines bumper sticker on it.
-Steve Carlton
One thing in writing that I've never been able to grasp is the concept of irony even though I see it in use every single day. Holcomb and Killingworth say that irony is the "most complex and difficult" of tropes to accomplish (94). They themselves don't have a perfect way of defining it, saying that it is a trope that involves "inversions and reversals" and that it "turns standard meaning and expectations upside down" (94). I felt inspired by this quote to practice writing ironic statements by writing a ton of them for this blog post in the format of Steve's quote, which uses irony to create humor.
And the irony is that while Glenn Beck says that Obama is a fascist, he's actually more of a socialist.
And the irony is that I chose to write examples of irony, something I'm horrible at writing, even though this damn thing is due in 14 minutes.
And the irony is that the one time I didn't check that the toilet seat was down before I sat down on it, I fell in because it was left up.
And the irony is that seat belts actually lead to more car crashes because of the false sense of security they provide that gives drivers more incentive to drive dangerously.
And the irony is that before the Revolutionary War, colonists actually paid fewer taxes than British Citizens.
And the irony is that I'm fucking sick of irony 150 words in after I was excited to do this exercise because it would give me the chance to write something funny.
And the irony is that one church that formed during the Protestant Reformation banning sex wiped themselves out.
And the irony is that the American Flag that is hanging on my house's front door was made in Taiwan.
And the irony is that I told myself I wouldn't wait to do homework until the last minute for fear of the dreaded writers block.
And the irony is that Luke was Leia's brother.... wait didn't they hook up in A New Hope? ...what the shit?
And the irony is that Ricky Martin turned out to be gay (Not that there is anything wrong with that).
And the irony is that even though nearly every single elementary history lesson I've ever had claims the Civil War was not fought over slavery even though it was. The state right to do what? Oh that’s right hold slaves.
And the irony is that dogs actually can look up (optimism for the win!).
And the irony is that in Up for fucking once the dog didn't die (I'm still reeling from Where the Red Fern Grows).
And the irony is that I wasted so much time learning Tai Kwon Do to pick up hot Asian chicks and it didn't pan out at all because apparently football players and that asshole guy who picks up the guitar at the party and plays "Wonderwall" get all the girls.
And the irony is that I actually love The Gilmore Girls.
And the irony is that my dad's Ford F-150 has a Vineyard Vines bumper sticker on it.
"He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies; and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction."
-Shylock, Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare
This is one of the most brilliant monologues ever written by William Shakespeare and there is much to analyze in it. The monologue is told from the perspective of Shylock, a Jewish moneylender who has been betrayed by Antonio, a Christian who he lent money to. In the cultural arena, Shakespeare adheres to the conventions that normally are used in order to add emphasis and force to a speech. Shylock frequently uses isocolon and parallism in lists (i.e. "mocked at my gains, scorned my nation" in keeping with established conventions in making a speech. Shylock also uses lists of rhetorical questions, another convention of speeches, in combination with isocolon, anaphora, and climax (i.e. if you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?) in order to add even more force to what he is saying.
Shakespeare frequently combines many figures together, usually in the same phrase, in order to add force to what Shylock is saying. I think the most powerful example of this is in this series of lines: " If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge". The most obvious figure here is parallelism and anaphora, which serves to show how Shylock believes that both Christians and Jews should receive the same treatment. Another one that is clear is the usage of antimetabole ("If a Jew wrong a Christian...If a Christian wrong a Jew"), which further adds towards this equality Shylock wishes to see. The isolation of the word "revenge" by itself in its own sentence adds emphasis to how Shylock believes he is justified in taking revenge against the Christians, and when Shakespeare has Shylock break the parallelism by saying "Why, revenge" the second time, he draws emphasis (in a deviation) to how Shylock thinks he is justified in taking revenge on Antonio.
I think it’s interesting to look at this monologue and discuss whether it functions in the high, middle, or low style. One could argue it is in the high style because of how many figures there are crammed into it, but on the other hand it adheres to most of the characteristics of the low style, especially in how Shylock relies mostly relatively "concrete and specific nouns" and "action verbs" with "easily processed sentence structures" (Holcomb and Killingsworth 74).
On one footing, this monologue is Shylock addressing Salarino in the context of the play, but on another it is Shylock addressing social inequalities based on religion. I have only begun to analyze what is probably one of the greatest monologues in the history of theater.
-Shylock, Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare
This is one of the most brilliant monologues ever written by William Shakespeare and there is much to analyze in it. The monologue is told from the perspective of Shylock, a Jewish moneylender who has been betrayed by Antonio, a Christian who he lent money to. In the cultural arena, Shakespeare adheres to the conventions that normally are used in order to add emphasis and force to a speech. Shylock frequently uses isocolon and parallism in lists (i.e. "mocked at my gains, scorned my nation" in keeping with established conventions in making a speech. Shylock also uses lists of rhetorical questions, another convention of speeches, in combination with isocolon, anaphora, and climax (i.e. if you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?) in order to add even more force to what he is saying.
Shakespeare frequently combines many figures together, usually in the same phrase, in order to add force to what Shylock is saying. I think the most powerful example of this is in this series of lines: " If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge". The most obvious figure here is parallelism and anaphora, which serves to show how Shylock believes that both Christians and Jews should receive the same treatment. Another one that is clear is the usage of antimetabole ("If a Jew wrong a Christian...If a Christian wrong a Jew"), which further adds towards this equality Shylock wishes to see. The isolation of the word "revenge" by itself in its own sentence adds emphasis to how Shylock believes he is justified in taking revenge against the Christians, and when Shakespeare has Shylock break the parallelism by saying "Why, revenge" the second time, he draws emphasis (in a deviation) to how Shylock thinks he is justified in taking revenge on Antonio.
I think it’s interesting to look at this monologue and discuss whether it functions in the high, middle, or low style. One could argue it is in the high style because of how many figures there are crammed into it, but on the other hand it adheres to most of the characteristics of the low style, especially in how Shylock relies mostly relatively "concrete and specific nouns" and "action verbs" with "easily processed sentence structures" (Holcomb and Killingsworth 74).
On one footing, this monologue is Shylock addressing Salarino in the context of the play, but on another it is Shylock addressing social inequalities based on religion. I have only begun to analyze what is probably one of the greatest monologues in the history of theater.
Jonathan Safran Foer
" I have always thought of myself as very potent and generative. I have many girls, believe me, and they all have a different name for me. One dubs me Baby, not because I am a baby, but because she attends to me. Another dubs me All Night. Do you want to know why? I have a girl who calls me Currency, because I disseminate so much currency around her."
-Everything is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer
This is an excerpt from the first chapter of Jonathan Safran Foer's novel Everything is Illuminated where Alex, the narrator, introduces himself. We find out later on in the book that Alex is a native Ukrainian that speaks a very minimal amount of English, but Foer implies this brilliantly through Alex's butchering of the English language throughout his narration before he explicitly states it. One way he does this is by having Alex speak for the most part in the low style, operating largely in the textual arena, almost exclusively using simple sentence structures and complex ones that are not hard to understand, and nearly every single sentence follows the subject before predicate sentence structure without any deviation and minimal usage of subordination. It is in the cultural arena that we generalize this simplistic usage of syntax as belonging to someone that is learning English as a second language. Another way Foer does this is through Alex's improper usage of words such as "disseminate", "potent", "generative”, “dubs" and "currency" that have the right dictionary definition that he wants but are not the best choice of word that he could use. Alex, instead of saying spending money, says that he "disseminates" currency, which means the same thing, but sounds weird and ill-fitting when read by a native English speaker who is used to saying "spending money" instead of "disseminating currency"(another example of Foer playing around in the cultural arena and reader's expectations to create interesting deviations to create humor).
There are multiple reasons why Foer has Alex speak in a bastardized form of the English language. One obvious one is to create humor, mostly by deviating from traditional ways of speaking like when he says he is "potent and generative" instead of saying he is attractive to women (social/cultural arena). Another is to establish Alex's humorous and womanizing character; from the way Alex talks, you can just picture this slick talking stylish and young Eastern European man that barely speaks any English, and Foer does this all without a single use of imagery to describe Alex. Foer creates a very strong vignette of Alex without ever using imagery, which is very impressive; he provides the necessary descriptions for us to create our own image of Alex, which is stronger than if he were to do it for us. Foer also establishes Alex's footing to the reader as being one where Alex is having a conversation with us telling his life story by having Alex speak in the low style, which lends itself towards conversational writing.
-Everything is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer
This is an excerpt from the first chapter of Jonathan Safran Foer's novel Everything is Illuminated where Alex, the narrator, introduces himself. We find out later on in the book that Alex is a native Ukrainian that speaks a very minimal amount of English, but Foer implies this brilliantly through Alex's butchering of the English language throughout his narration before he explicitly states it. One way he does this is by having Alex speak for the most part in the low style, operating largely in the textual arena, almost exclusively using simple sentence structures and complex ones that are not hard to understand, and nearly every single sentence follows the subject before predicate sentence structure without any deviation and minimal usage of subordination. It is in the cultural arena that we generalize this simplistic usage of syntax as belonging to someone that is learning English as a second language. Another way Foer does this is through Alex's improper usage of words such as "disseminate", "potent", "generative”, “dubs" and "currency" that have the right dictionary definition that he wants but are not the best choice of word that he could use. Alex, instead of saying spending money, says that he "disseminates" currency, which means the same thing, but sounds weird and ill-fitting when read by a native English speaker who is used to saying "spending money" instead of "disseminating currency"(another example of Foer playing around in the cultural arena and reader's expectations to create interesting deviations to create humor).
There are multiple reasons why Foer has Alex speak in a bastardized form of the English language. One obvious one is to create humor, mostly by deviating from traditional ways of speaking like when he says he is "potent and generative" instead of saying he is attractive to women (social/cultural arena). Another is to establish Alex's humorous and womanizing character; from the way Alex talks, you can just picture this slick talking stylish and young Eastern European man that barely speaks any English, and Foer does this all without a single use of imagery to describe Alex. Foer creates a very strong vignette of Alex without ever using imagery, which is very impressive; he provides the necessary descriptions for us to create our own image of Alex, which is stronger than if he were to do it for us. Foer also establishes Alex's footing to the reader as being one where Alex is having a conversation with us telling his life story by having Alex speak in the low style, which lends itself towards conversational writing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)