Category: Irony

This extract is from ‘Beasts are Rational’ which is part of Plutarch’s collection of essays known as on Moralia. The compilation consists of literary works and touches on political, religious, and ethical issues. The publication date is thought to be around 100 AD.

In this text, Plutarch casts an ironic view on human life and behavior, as well as that, the protagonist is a pig named Gryllus. The source of Plutarch’s parody is The Odyssey in which the crew of Odysseus have been turned into pigs by the goddess Circe. Odysseus overcomes Circe and forces her to change his men back to their original form. In this version, the pig Gryllus argues his point with Odysseus on the disadvantages of being human. It is a satirical perspective on current intellectual culture regarding language and sophistic learning.

In the opening lines, Odysseus is questioning whether virtue in beasts exists. Gryllus responds that the souls of animals are more naturally disposed to virtue. Unlike men who are predisposed to falsehood and mislead. Ironically, Odysseus is fondly called ‘willy one’ by Athena because he characteristically deceives. Therefore, Gryllus implies that through man’s ability to speak, he will lack virtue, as he has a penchant for physical pleasures and will continuously lie to achieve his ends. Yet it is through Gryllus’ art of speech that he enforces how virtuous the animal kingdom is in comparison to man. His language articulates their unpretentious nature through words such as ‘guileless’, ‘artless’, and ‘stout heart’, a human metaphor and ironically valor for their courage.

According to Gryllus, an animal’s bravery is equally manifested in both genders, “and the female is in no way inferior to the male”. Nevertheless, the following lines describe the female in derogative terms, ‘sow’, and ‘vixen’, and yet the horse is called a ‘fine-spirited mare’. The examples he uses are associated with Hesiod’s view of women in Works and Days. Nonetheless, his observations about the fairness of the sexes link to the Stoic opinion that women were ethically equal to their counterparts. Gryllus also points to the fact that humans pride themselves on being superior to wild animals in bravery, integrity, and reason yet animal epithets are applied to heroes to describe their skills.

Plutarch’s philosophical interest is cleverly manipulated through Gryllus’s humorous dialogue, and his empathy for animals is perceptible, though he suggests that their reasoning capabilities are weaker than that of humans, hinting they are able “to live lives that are more naturally virtuous than are those of humans”. There is an ambiguity within the text which is highlighted by that the fact Gryllus’s mental faculties are noticeably human. This is in conjunction with George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm. The main protagonist is a pig named Napoleon, who parallels Gryllus’ dislike of humans and the consensus on the farm is “Four legs good, two legs bad”. Though given the power of speech, this does not always equate to reason as both these pigs are biased in their views. This characteristic of contempt is singular to human qualities. 

The short story, ‘The Jewelry’, by Guy De Maupassant examines the theme of life being full of irony and never knowing what you are really dealing with. One may perceive something and think it is amazing until they see the reality of the situation and then truly understand what they were dealing with and how the person or thing they thought were something turned to be something completely different. The short story is filled with many ironic situations. Irony is the difference between what the reader expects to happen and what actually happens in the story. The three types of irony are situational, verbal, and dramatic. Situational irony s when something happens in the story that is not supposed to happen. Verbal irony is when something is said but should be interpreted literally. It has a different meaning than what is said. Dramatic irony is when the reader knows something is going to happen but the characters do not know.

The plot of the story was filled with irony and helped the reader develop characteristics of the characters that were not mentioned. In the beginning of the story, the author lets the reader how any man would like her. She is beautiful, respectful, charming, and “the young girl seemed to be the very ideal of that pure good woman to whom every young man dreams of entrusting his future”. When the author says ‘seemed to be’, it reveals that is not really who she is and is hiding something. When someone says ‘seemed to be’ it doesn’t mean that she is what they are saying she is. It means that she is putting up a persona to show the people the noble side of her when in reality she is something completely different. She is hiding something from everyone and it is not until the end of the story in which it is revealed what she really is hiding.

The next irony is that they ‘seemed to live in luxury’ which they did because of Lantin’s wife income. It mentions in the story that “she ruled his home with an economy so adroit that they really seemed to live in luxury”. M. Lantin never questioned where she was getting all the money from since he only made “3,500 francs a year” and there was no way he could have paid for all the “false jewelry” that she had. He was happy and content with his life. He has all he ever wanted, a beautiful wife and a happy life. His pride and happiness made him oblivious to what was actually happening with his wife. His wife had a lover who was paying for her jewelry which turned out to be real, food, and wine. If he were to pay more attention to her and notice what she was doing and where she was coming from, he would have noticed that something was off and that she had a potential lover, but instead he let his happiness and pride take over which led to him being cheated on.

When thinking about how she had the time to meet up with her other lovers it becomes obvious from the beginning of the story. M. Lantin said that she had a “love of the theater, and [a] passion for false jewelry”. He did not like going to the theater and would tell her to go with her lady-friends but she would refuse until one day she finally listened to him and went without him. This gave her the opportunity to interact with other men without him being there or seeing her. If he would have gone with her to the theatre, she wouldn’t have the opportunity to talk to other men and meet her new lover who was buying her all the jewelry she had. It is mentioned that “it would be impossible to conceive of any attentions, tenderness’s, playful caresses which she did not lavish upon her husband…”, meaning that she did not give her husband attention either and instead gave it to someone else. She loved her husband but at the same time loves someone else too.

Lastly, one of the biggest ironies of the story was the fact that the jewelry was real. The husband used to be upset with her and wouldn’t want her to wear the “fake” jewelry and wanted her to be “adorned with one’s natural beauty and grace”. It turned out all the jewelry she was wearing is real and it wasn’t her husband that gave it to her. After he sold all the jewelry after his wife died, he did not care at all about his wife’s affair and only cared about how rich he was now. He wanted to tell everyone about it, even the people he didn’t know. He never liked going to the theater but he went by himself for the first time and it was the first time that he had gone “without feeling bored by the performance” and shortly after that he got married. It’s ironic because when his wife went by herself, she found a lover and when he went by himself, he also found a lover and got married after six months. His second wife was virtuous and upstanding and made his life miserable, but his former wife was not virtuous and made him very happy.

All in all, the irony in this short story allows the reader to fully understand the characteristics and without it the story would be missing lots of key details about the characters. It shows that life is not always about seeing the good in people you love. In order to completely understand someone, you need to also examine their flaws and realize they are not perfect, because no one is perfect. If you let your happiness and pride to make you insensible to ones flaws, you may end up like M. Lantin and not know what your wife is doing when she is not with you.

Irony occurs when a reader sees that the author is showing that there is a gap between what is thought to be true and what actually is true. Irony is not always immediately apparent to the reader. If ironies are too obvious or heavy, the reader is likely to feel that he or she is being treated as a child. There are a few kinds of irony in literary techniques.

First and foremost, situational irony occurs when the audience, or one of the characters, knows something that the other characters do not know. It also occurs when incongruity appears between expectations of something to happen, and what actually happens instead. There is something entirely different happens from what audience may be expecting, or the final outcome is opposite to what the audience is expecting. For an example, based on the novel ‘The Lottery’ by Shirley Jackson, the title itself shows the situational irony of the story. In our mind, the lottery is something fortunate and advantageous, but the person whose name is drawn is not considered lucky and is violently stoned to death by their neighbors and family. Next, the story starts by describing the morning ‘clear and sunny’. The people of the town are happy and going on as if it is every other day. The author uses situational irony by giving a horrific event a ‘sunny’ setting. The function of situational irony is to lay emphasis on important scenes and make strange and unusual images vivid.

Dramatic irony is when the audience knows something the characters don’t — so the characters might get an unexpected outcome, but for the audience it’s not unexpected at all. Dramatic irony is often used for laughs. When we have information, the characters don’t have, we want to shout a warning through the screen or book. For an example, in the story ‘The Lottery’ by Shirley Jackson, once a family is chosen, the second round begins. In this round, each family member, no matter how old or young, must draw a slip of paper. It is Tess Hutchinson who draws the slip with the black circle. While Mrs. Hutchinson protests the unfairness of the situation, each of the villagers picks up a stone — “And someone gave little Davy Hutchinson a few pebbles” – and closes in on her. The story ends with Mrs. Hutchinson being stoned to death while protesting, “It isn’t fair, it isn’t right”. The story concludes with six of the most famous closing words in short story history, “And then they were upon her”.

Finally, because many ironies are subtle, it is not surprising that many readers (particularly new readers) are blind to them. It is undeniable that irony teaches us that not everything is what it seems. We could expect one thing to happen, but something completely opposite may take place.

Resource

‘Literary Terms’. Literary Terms. 1 June 2015. Web. 3 Nov. 2016.

Romeo and Juliet, a play written by William Shakespeare based in Medieval Verona during the Elizabethan Era was a play that outlined the tragic romance of two teenagers who risk everything to be together because of their family’s longstanding feud. Baz Luhrman adapted the play to create a modern version based on Venice Beach in Miami in 1996. Luhrman has used Shakespeare’s version of the play as a foundation when creating his more recent version to engage a modern audience in Shakespeare’s ideas. Many differences between the two versions of the play are shown in the love at first sight scene and in Mercutio’s death scene. These differences are shown with the use of dialogue in Luhmann’s film and different camera angles.

Luhrman’s love at first sight scene shows Romeo and Juliet in a very private space, close up to a fish tank where the pair makes eye contact and perhaps fall in love. This scene is almost like a cliché love at first sight where Romeo and Juliet lock eyes and then become inseparable throughout the rest of the movie; in life and death. However, Shakespeare’s version of the love at first sight scene was shown in more of a public setting. Romeo sees Juliet from a distance and asks a serving man for her name and from there on Romeo has the determination to speak with and soon marry the woman he has so called, fallen in love with at first sight. Tybalt hears Romeo’s voice and determines that he is a Montague. This causes a division between Romeo and Juliet as Romeo now needs to try to hide from or avoid Tybalt who wants Romeo slain. In Luhrman’s scene, Tybalt does not see Romeo until much later and his conversation with lord Capulet is much shorter than it is in Shakespeare’s scene. Luhrman does this to show how Romeo and Juliet will find a way to be together no matter how dangerous or how challenging and that is the main point of this scene. Shakespeare also does not show Juliet falling in love with Romeo until he grabs her hand and they speak. In Luhrman’s version of the scene, Romeo finds out Juliet is a Capulet because he sees her go to her mother, Lady Capulet, but doesn’t have a conversation with the nurse asking who Juliet is, like in Shakespeare’s version of the scene where Romeo asks the nurse “is she a Capulet?” Luhrman uses dramatic irony when Romeo looks up and sees Juliet as a Capulet and is stunned. It makes the entire scene more dramatic and shows the main challenge the couple will face to be together which is their family’s hatred. In both versions of the scene, Romeo and Juliet are devastated when they find out their “only love sprung from [their] only hate” but the entire play shows that they are destined to be together.

Mercutio’s death scene in Luhrman’s version of the play is almost the same as Shakespeare’s version of it. However, Luhrman includes much more suspense between Tybalt and Mercutio’s fight and Tybalt and Romeo’s fight. This shows the anger in each of the characters building up and their thoughts on what will happen next, which makes the whole scene a lot more dramatic. Shakespeare’s version of the scene goes more like a flowing conversation rather than a physical fight which is what Lurhman includes a lot of throughout the entire scene. Violence is one of the main things incorporated throughout most of Mercutio’s death scene in Luhmann’s version as it displays a great amount of physical hate between the two houses, showing anger and malevolence. Luhrman can incorporate this in his scene because Shakespeare does not show specific areas where the characters are fighting. Speaking while fighting is something Lurhman also does a lot of in this scene because when characters are vicious both verbally and physically, it portrays a greater level of fury between them. In both scenes, Romeo tries to make a truce with Tybalt, but Tybalt rejects and challenges Romeo to a fight. Romeo tries to walk away but Tybalt being “sleek” and “fiery”, manages to get to Romeo before he leaves which begins a brawl between the two houses that soon leads to Mercutio’s death.

Luhrman’s version of the film was overall preferable for a modernized audience than Shakespeare’s original script. Luhmann’s modification in setting, music, and dialogue gave the film an alluring and lively influence engaging a greater audience. Overall Baz Luhrman’s interpretation of the play was remarkably and beautifully styled to create a prime and contemporary film. 

In ‘Bully’ Martin Espada uses the first stanza to introduce the theme of his poem. “In the school auditorium/the Theodore Roosevelt statue/is nostalgic” (lines 1-3). The statue described emanates a nostalgia for the Spanish-American war, which was considered by many to be a morally reprehensible act of hate upon Hispanic people. The author of the poem, Martin Espada, was introduced early on to political activism by his father, Frank Espada, who was a leader in the Puerto Rican community and the civil rights movement. Martin Espada dedicated much of his life’s work to social injustice and Latino rights. He has received countless awards for his literary works being the first Latino recipient of some. Puerto Rico is frequently featured in his work as a theme, which is the case in his poem ‘Bully’. The poem uses a statue of Theodore Roosevelt to symbolize white society and the children of the school to symbolize the Hispanic community. The most effective and persuasive literary elements in this poem are the layers of situational irony which are intensified by the use of symbolism.

Situational irony describes events happening in a way that is opposite of what the reader would expect to happen. In the poem ‘Bully’ Espada describes the Hispanic people, portrayed by the school children, acting out against white society, symbolized by the Roosevelt statue. The way Espada describes the statue and school in such great detail suggest perhaps he attended the school or maybe taught there. Roosevelt is introduced as a brave soldier and politician in the first stanza by Espada: “each fist lonely for a saber, /or the reigns of anguished-eyed horses, /or a podium to clatter with speeches” (5-7). This signifies the Latino children’s longing to have the same tools that Roosevelt and his men used against their people during the Spanish-American war. Espada continues “glorying in the malaria of conquest” (8). The mention of the phrase ‘malaria of conquest’ refers to how Roosevelt used force to overtake the Spanish during the war. He was like a disease killing and conquering them. This first stanza has a serious tone reflecting upon the overall theme of the poem. It introduces the reader to the malicious bully Theodore Roosevelt just before an ironic turn of events.

A bully is defined as a person “who is habitually cruel, insulting, or threatening to others who are weaker, smaller, or in some way vulnerable” (Merriam-Webster.com). This word, used as the title, is given meaning through each stanza of the poem. Theodore Roosevelt was truly a bully during the Spanish-American war. There are contrasting beliefs on Roosevelt’s ethnocentricity and his reasoning for invading the Caribbean with that of the desegregation movement in Boston in the 1960s. This is emphasized as Espada writes, “but now the Roosevelt school/ is pronounced Hernandez/ Puerto Rico has invaded Roosevelt/ with its army of Spanish singing children” (9-12). This part of the second stanza is ironic because during the Spanish-American war Roosevelt attacked the smaller, weaker Spanish naval ships with his big strong US Navy vessels. Now, almost a century later, the same people Roosevelt attacked and bullied are returning the favor by taking over the school named in his honor. The word ‘invaded’ is played with using layers of irony that incriminate the representation of American nationalism. Espada uses racist metaphors similar to those of white supremacists, who use metaphors to convey their apprehensions to immigration in a similar ‘invasion’ of America by the same Latino people Roosevelt tried to conquer. Espada continues, “Brown children devouring/the stockpiles of the cafeteria” (14-15). This description really brings out the imagery in the poem and allows the reader to imagine the small brown children eating in the school cafeteria. Espada goes on to write about the “children painting Taino ancestors that leap across the murals” (16-17). Now, the reader can picture the children proudly painting their ancestors on the wall. A visualization is created of these painted characters leaping with joy in the murals, the joy of knowing that they now have their own victory taking over the school. It’s also important to know that the Taino tribe that is mentioned here were not only descendants of the Puerto Rican people but, also the first known indigenous people in America to be discovered by Christopher Columbus. This implies that the Puerto Rican people are descendants of the original people of America. So, what right does Roosevelt have to conquer them?

Espada elaborates on the theme of the poem in the third stanza criticizing the hate and ethnocentricity of Theodore Roosevelt. “Roosevelt is surrounded/ by all the faces/he ever shoved and eugenic spite” (18-20). There is irony here since now Roosevelt is surrounded and about to be conquered by the same people he attacked during the war. By using the word ‘eugenic’ Espada seems to speculate that Roosevelt had tendencies similar to those of the Nazis. He continues “and cursed as mongrels, skin of one race, /hair and cheekbones of another” (21-22). Roosevelt’s racist ideas were malicious and cruel as we look at this vulgar description of ‘mongrels’. Roosevelt saw these people of color as inferior. It’s ironic that Roosevelt had such negative ideas about immigrants considering that he himself was a descendent of Dutch immigrants. This is just a reminder of the needless and wasted energies of racism in general, especially in America. We are all immigrants besides the few Native Americans that originated here. Many people in America wonder if there will ever be an end to the systematic racism and hate that is still sweeping across the nation.

There’s a sort of victory for the children at the end of the poem who “plot to spray graffiti/in brilliant parrot colors across the Victorian mustache/and monocle” (24-26). The brilliant colors are symbolic to a hopeful colorful youth that accepts one another, and the spraying of graffiti to cover up the statue symbolically ends racism. The word Victorian may have been used to refer to the social class of Roosevelt. This part of stanza four is ironic because the people that Roosevelt considered a lower class have now officially taken over his school and the statue symbolically conquering racism against Latinos.

The poem brings light to an issue of immense significance during the era of Theodore Roosevelt and in modern times. Immigration is still a substantial and important issue today, and racism is still thriving against both black and brown people in America, The irony and symbolism that Estrada uses in his poem make the reader look at himself and America in a different light. Many Latino people struggle to survive coming to America hoping for a better life. They are often separated from their families and some even locked in small rooms and cages, barely given the essentials for survival. In the poem these people fought against Theodore Roosevelt and now, they fight against a new bully.

Works Cited

1. Espada, Martin. ‘Bully’ Literature for Composition: An Introduction to Literature. 10th Ed. Sylvan Barnett, William Burto, William E. Cain and Pearson, 2014, pp.207-208.
2. Bully. (n.d.) In Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bully

In his novel ‘Shibumi’, author Rodney William Whitaker writes, “Irony is fate’s most common figure of speech”. Irony is present in almost every situation imaginable—from the small talk made while waiting in line to the foundation of some of the most well-known, acclaimed pieces of literature in history. Simply put, irony is a contrast between expectation and reality— when what is expected to happen does not. Author Shirley Jackson utilizes this concept multiple times in ‘The Possibility of Evil’, a story in which she narrates the daily life of Miss Strangeworth, a seemingly pleasant and well-liked citizen of a small town. Despite her apparently cheery demeanor, this not-so-pleasant soul makes a habit of writing harsh—but anonymous—poison-pen letters to fellow neighbors in hopes of diminishing any possibility of wickedness that may be infecting her precious town. One day, though, her habits are discovered and a recipient of one of her unkind letters decides to take revenge in the form of the destruction of her most treasured possession—her roses. Jackson does an excellent job of using irony in Miss Strangeworth’s story of sorrow to reveal the traits of her characters, propel the plot, and establish a basis for the actions taken by the characters in her story.

One instance of irony presented in the story can be identified when Jackson details Miss Strangeworth’s behaviors and feelings concerning her roses. Miss Strangeworth, despite having a plethora of roses at her disposal in her front yard, rarely ever picks them (26). On the rare occasion she does remove them from their bed, their use is solely in her house and her house alone (26). She even went out of her way to “[send] over a great big basket of gladioli” to the church—instead of her own roses—when flowers were being collected (26). The irony in Miss Strangeworth’s management of her roses aids in both propelling the plot and providing a basis for the actions of the character(s) later on in the story. In this example, Miss Strangeworth’s roses are later destroyed by an anonymous neighbor in an act of revenge rooted in bitterness concerning the inconsiderate letters she had written (38). Because she took such great pride in her roses—so much that she would never dare think of uprooting them for someone else—the anonymous character was presented with the perfect opportunity to give Miss Srangeworth a taste of her own medicine. They were able to ruin Miss Strangeworth’s pride and joy in return for the harsh words and feelings she had thrust upon them.

Additionally, the polite manner in which Miss Strangeworth addresses her neighbors in contrast with the blatant, discourteous words she uses when writing her letters is a clear example of situational irony used in the story with the purpose of revealing Miss Strangeworth’s character. In one of her various conversations with her neighbors, Miss Strangeworth kindly reassures Helen Crane, a new mother, of her baby’s regular development (29). In response to Mrs. Crane’s remark regarding her concern for her baby’s lack of movement, Miss Strangeworth comments, “Nonsense. All babies are different. Some of them develop much more quickly than others…”, and later continues to respectfully tease Mrs. Crane about her worries (29). Despite the polite dialogue Miss Strangeworth engages in on a regular basis, her personality is truly revealed when she anonymously addresses her infamous messages to those members of her community who she suspects may be up to ‘evil’. To Helen Crane in particular, she writes, “Didn’t you ever see an idiot child before? Some people just shouldn’t have children, should they?” (31). The blunt language used in this and other letters Miss Strangeworth writes is outrageously harsh in comparison to the cordial, sympathetic speech she exhibits on the streets of her town. This purpose of this instance of irony is most clearly to reveal Miss Strangeworth’s character as someone who may seem pleasant and heartfelt on the outside, but for who—on the inside—a different story is told. From this example, Miss Strangeworth can be described as harsh, inconsiderate, and brutal with her words despite being one of the most well-respected citizens of her town.

Finally, the scene in which Miss Strangeworth overlooks her dropped letter is a prominent form of dramatic irony presented in the story, and it helps to drive the plot. In the process of placing her poison-pen letters in the mailbox at the post office, one letter catches on the edge of the slot and falls to the ground (36). Miss Strangeworth does not notice it, but “the Harris boy”—as he is referred to—does. After a fruitless attempt to call Miss Strangeworth back to the post office, he decides to personally deliver the forgotten letter for her (37). The fact that Miss Strangeworth is not aware of the situation introduces suspense into the story and foreshadows the action(s) soon to follow—the consequences for Miss Strangeworth’s insensitive notes. As mentioned previously, Miss Strangeworth’s roses are anonymously destroyed the following morning, and the reader can conclude that they were destroyed by the recipient of the abandoned letter.

Irony can be identified in almost any situation, and is evidently useful in written works such as ‘The Possibility of Evil’ as a basis for a majority of the events that take place in the story. Through Miss Strangeworth’s unfortunate turn of events, we can clearly determine instances where a contrast between what we believe to be true and what is actually true is helpful in driving the plot and the actions of the characters, as well as in revealing the true, defining character traits of each figure in the story. As Whitaker’s quote suggests, irony penetrates many of the occurrences experienced daily—whether they be fictitious or found in reality—and fate can be found to manipulate the outcome of various situations using this ever-prevalent figure of speech in everyday life.

Pahom was a hardworking man. But nonetheless, he was a poor peasant. He and his wife seemed content living a stress-free lifestyle, and not having much. “We may never grow rich, but we will always have enough to eat”, his wife would say. Although Pahom agreed, he thought in the back of his mind that his life would be perfect and he would have nothing to fear if he only had more land.

Pahom learned of a neighbor selling land, and managed to sell animals, scrape and borrow enough money to purchase 40 acres. For a while he was satisfied, he turned over and had success with his crops, but greed and evil eventually will get the best of him again.

Upon hearing from a passerby that a neighboring village was selling fertile land. Desire overcame him. He did not want to suffer to the hands of thieves that stole from him, and felt that if only others would leave the village there would be more room for him and a bigger estate. This feeling of wanting more made him feel cramped and uncomfortable in his life. So, he moved to the new location, acquired plenty of land, and became successful and wealthy.

And again, history would repeat itself, as soon as he settled down and became content, Pahom was not satisfied and wanted more than what he had. One day a dealer came to get feed for his horse, and told of the land of the Bashkirs, where he could get thirteen thousand acres of land for 1,000 rubles. Greed got the best of him, and he travel 300 miles by foot bearing tea, wine and gifts for the Bashkirs. Pahom made it to the mound in time, but due to him wanting the most and the best, he died from exhaustion. “Six feet from head to foot was all he needed”.

There are many elements of irony shown throughout the story. The three types of irony, verbal, situational, and dramatic are demonstrated. Dramatic irony is when the reader knows information that a character in a play, movie, or novel does not know. Tolstoy demonstrated dramatic irony by allowing his audience to know that the devil was listening as Pahom was boasting about not being afraid of anything including the devil. This was a key piece of information because the devil was symbolizing the greed for always wanting bigger and better. “It is perfectly true”, thought he. “Busy as we are from childhood tilling Mother Earth, we peasants have no time to let any nonsense settle in our heads. Our only trouble is that we haven’t land enough. If I had plenty of land, I shouldn’t fear the Devil himself!”. This is excerpt from the story is an example when Pahom does not have any idea that the devil is listening however the audience finds out the devil is listening a few paragraphs below: “But the Devil had been sitting behind the oven, and had heard all that was said. He was pleased that the peasant’s wife had led her husband into boasting, and that he had said that if he had plenty of land, he would not fear the Devil himself”. Now, we know throughout the rest of the story that the devil is listening to anything Pahom says and that he does not have any idea.

Situational irony occurred at the end of the story. The actual result was totally different than what the reader would expect it to be. At the end of the story the reader was expecting Pahom to have been successful in his quest for more land, all the walking and sweating, his body was weak, he made it to the mound and the Bashkirs Chief cheered for him that he made it, he fell to the ground and they lifted him to find blood running from his mouth. Pahom had died.

The author also showed verbal irony by using the title of the story as part of the play on words. In the title there is a question itself, ‘How much land does a man need?’. However, after reading the story one could believe Tolstoy is being sarcastic in this title. The entire story is about how Pahom kept wanting more land and he didn’t actually need any of it. He ended up dying because he was never happy with what he had and always thought he needed more. So, the answer to the title is, “Six feet from his head to his heels was all he needed”.

Lastly, the ending of the story demonstrated a parable because it illustrated a lesson to be learned. Be happy with what you have, and you will have everything.

Works Cited

1. Kat. ‘Definitions and Examples of Irony in Literature’. The Flocabulary Blog, 18 Apr. 2016, http://blog.flocabulary.com/definitions-and-examples-of-irony-in-literature/
2. Leo Tolstoy. ‘How Much Land Does a Man Need?’.

He talks a lot about his lack of actual freedom in the opening monologue of ‘The Story of an Hour’. The thought of the husband now not believing his wife comes to the fore in this story in phrases of situational irony. From Webster’s New World College Dictionary, we get this definition: “Freedom is stated to be the absence of need, or of restraint, in the presence of either free will or compulsion”. Mrs. Mallard felt liberated after she had heard that her husband had died. Throughout the book, Kate Chopin’s story, ‘The Story of an Hour’, helps exhibit how genuine freedom can only be performed when one surrenders one’s fetters.

Mrs. Mallard was residing a relaxed and getting alongside nicely with her husband, but she had heart disease. She was once informed that her husband was killed at work, and so she locked herself in her room to be alone. Sister and brother-in-law stepped in to lend their support, but she advised them she desired to be alone, so they left her to cry on her brother’s shoulder. Looking out the window, she realized she had damaged free of all of the commitments that had before sure her. Over and over again “Outrageously entertaining! Come, go, it’s all free!” (being restrained to a single room with no one to talk to distract her) discovered Mrs. Mallard experiencing both intellectual and emotional independence. Coming out of the bed, her husband seemed in the doorway, and she fell down in a faint.

A hypothetical case of situational irony is shown by the truth that Mrs. Mallard was happy when she idea her husband was once dead due to the fact she had been liberated from confinements. When her husband returned, she was free, even although she was no longer confined. It is also ironic that many people have heard that the phrase “the reality will set you free”. Then her husband came home, and she heard that he used to be nevertheless alive, so it should be stated that she was freed or she was worse off. Those who believed she loved her husband’s freedom when he back domestic would suppose she acquired what was coming to her in the form of his death. When the physicians came in, they instructed her she had died of a coronary heart attack and when they did, she obtained the coup de grace of death. This is ironic because, as she was blissful to see him safely returned to her and didn’t die as she had assumed she had completed looking for him.

Thus, the situational irony observed in ‘The Story of an Hour’ by Kate Chopin demonstrates the theme that actual freedom is determined only by way of surrender. She feared that her husband used to be useless at first, but when she eventually realized that being single would make her truly happy, she observed that he used to be home. So, she no longer regarded herself to be liberated, and this saddened her. As a result, she died of a heart attack. While it would sadden her greatly, this proved to be beneficial for Mrs. Mallard and set her free, for which she would have been thankful.

Introduction:

William Shakespeare’s play ‘Julius Caesar’ is replete with instances of irony, a literary device that adds depth and complexity to the narrative. Irony, often used to convey hidden meanings and unexpected twists, serves as a powerful tool in shaping the audience’s understanding of the characters and the events unfolding in the play. This critical essay explores the significance of irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ and how it contributes to the themes, character development, and overall impact of the play.

Body:

Dramatic Irony:

One of the most prominent forms of irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ is dramatic irony. This occurs when the audience possesses information that the characters do not, creating a sense of tension and anticipation. For example, the audience knows about the conspiracy against Caesar’s life, while Caesar himself remains oblivious to it. This dramatic irony heightens the suspense and foreshadows the impending tragedy.

Verbal Irony:

Verbal irony, characterized by a discrepancy between what is said and what is meant, is prevalent throughout the play. Several instances of sarcastic remarks, double entendres, and ironic statements add depth to the dialogue and reveal the true intentions of the characters. For instance, when Brutus claims to be an honorable man while justifying Caesar’s assassination, the audience recognizes the irony in his words, as his actions contradict his supposed nobility.

Situational Irony:

Situational irony arises when events unfold contrary to expectations or have an outcome different from what is anticipated. In ‘Julius Caesar,’ the assassination of Caesar, intended to restore liberty and prevent tyranny, ironically leads to further political unrest and chaos. The conspirators, who sought to preserve Rome’s democratic ideals, unintentionally pave the way for the rise of a new autocratic ruler in the form of Octavius Caesar.

Irony of Fate:

The irony of fate is a recurring motif in ‘Julius Caesar.’ The characters’ efforts to control their destinies are often thwarted by unforeseen circumstances and ironic twists. For instance, Brutus, driven by his desire to uphold the Roman Republic, becomes entangled in a tragic sequence of events that ultimately leads to his downfall. This irony of fate underscores the play’s exploration of the limits of human agency and the capricious nature of destiny.

Irony as a Tool for Critique:

Shakespeare employs irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ as a means of critiquing human nature, politics, and the pursuit of power. The irony in the characters’ words and actions exposes their flaws, contradictions, and moral ambiguities. For example, Antony’s funeral oration, delivered with apparent praise for Brutus and the conspirators, is a masterful display of dramatic irony, as his true intentions are to incite the Roman citizens against them. This irony highlights the manipulative nature of political rhetoric and questions the authenticity of public figures.

Irony and Tragic Catharsis:

The pervasive use of irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ contributes to the play’s tragic impact and catharsis. Irony creates a sense of dramatic tension and heightens the audience’s emotional engagement with the characters and their fates. The juxtaposition of lofty ideals and tragic consequences evokes a profound sense of irony, leaving the audience to contemplate the complexities of human nature and the destructive consequences of unchecked ambition and political intrigue.

Conclusion:

The masterful incorporation of irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ enriches the play’s themes, characters, and overall impact. Dramatic irony, verbal irony, situational irony, and the irony of fate all play crucial roles in shaping the audience’s understanding of the characters’ motivations and the consequences of their actions. Furthermore, irony serves as a potent tool for critiquing human nature and politics, exposing the flaws and contradictions inherent in the pursuit of power. By employing irony, Shakespeare invites the audience to contemplate the intricate web of fate, morality, and the consequences of choices. The pervasive presence of irony in ‘Julius Caesar’ ensures that the play continues to resonate with audiences, provoking introspection and engaging with timeless themes of power, loyalty, and betrayal.

Introduction:

William Shakespeare’s tragedy ‘Othello’ is renowned for its masterful use of irony, which adds depth and complexity to the narrative. Irony, a literary device that involves a contrast between what is expected and what actually happens, plays a crucial role in shaping the audience’s perception of the characters and their motivations. This critical essay explores the significance of irony in ‘Othello’ and how it contributes to the themes, character development, and overall impact of the play.

Body:

Dramatic Irony:

Dramatic irony is prevalent throughout ‘Othello’ and creates a sense of tension and anticipation for the audience. In the opening scene, the audience becomes aware of Iago’s duplicitous nature and his malicious plans to manipulate Othello. While the other characters remain unaware of Iago’s true intentions, the audience is privy to his schemes, heightening the dramatic irony and building suspense as the play unfolds.

Verbal Irony:

Verbal irony is skillfully employed in ‘Othello’ to convey hidden meanings and to reveal the true thoughts and feelings of the characters. Iago, in particular, is a master of verbal irony, using his words to manipulate those around him. For instance, when Iago repeatedly professes his loyalty to Othello, the audience understands the irony of his words, as his true intention is to bring about Othello’s downfall. This creates a stark contrast between what is said and what is meant, adding depth to the characters’ interactions.

Situational Irony:

Situational irony arises when events in the play take an unexpected turn, contrary to what the characters and the audience anticipate. One example of situational irony in ‘Othello’ is the reversal of power dynamics between Iago and Othello. Initially, Othello is portrayed as a powerful and respected figure, while Iago is perceived as subservient. However, as the plot unfolds, Iago’s manipulations lead to Othello’s tragic downfall, highlighting the ironic reversal of fortune.

Irony of Appearance vs. Reality:

A significant theme in ‘Othello’ is the contrast between appearance and reality, which is enhanced through the use of irony. Characters often have misleading appearances that conceal their true intentions and motivations. For instance, Desdemona’s supposed infidelity is a result of the ironic discrepancy between her virtuous character and the false appearance created by Iago’s manipulations. This irony underscores the theme of deception and the destructive consequences of misjudging others based on appearances.

Irony as a Commentary on Human Nature:

The pervasive use of irony in ‘Othello’ serves as a critique of human nature and the flaws inherent in human relationships. The play explores themes of jealousy, trust, and manipulation, all of which are heightened by the presence of irony. Irony exposes the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the characters, shedding light on the destructive consequences of unchecked emotions and the manipulation of trust.

Conclusion:

The masterful use of irony in ‘Othello’ elevates the play’s themes, character development, and dramatic impact. Dramatic irony, verbal irony, situational irony, and the irony of appearance vs. reality all contribute to the complexity and depth of the play. By employing irony, Shakespeare invites the audience to examine the complexities of human nature, the consequences of deceit, and the power dynamics at play within relationships. ‘Othello’ serves as a timeless exploration of jealousy, manipulation, and the tragic consequences that arise when irony intersects with human emotions and flawed judgment.