Alanis
Morissette and
Misconceptions of the English Language
David J. Downs
November 2002
Okay. I know that some of you are undoubtedly tired of hearing
about this topic. I mean, it's probable you've already heard
rants and raves about Alanis Morissette's mistaken interpretation
of the word "irony" and its usage. If not, welcome
aboard. Many other publications and essays have addressed
the fact that her song "Ironic" contains a listing of
situations that, while sad or perhaps even tragic, are not ironic
in the true sense of the word.
However, another important fact rears its ugly head as you study
these essays, rants, and even most dictionary definitions.
Part of the problem, it seems, is a semantic one: plenty of people
apparently have no idea as to what "irony" actually is,
including professors of English and lexicographers. Perhaps
we can shed some light on the subject for them.
Some writers claim that the Morissette song does
describe ironic situations. Supposed experts—college
English professors, for example—throw around terms like "verbal
irony," "situational irony," "dramatic irony,"
and even "Socratic irony" to defend the lyrics of the
song. Such authors undoubtedly rely on interpretations of
the word proffered by lexicographers, textbooks, or their own professors.
Western civilization is rife with closed-minded sheep purporting
to be "experts" these days, adhering to the status quo
under pretence of superiority, who wouldn't know an actual insight
if it bit them.
Perhaps these authors do not know what irony actually is
because they have simply never experienced it or are unable to grasp
the concept. It is true that a certain level of abstract cognitive
function and intellect is required to "get it."
I'm sure you've met plenty of college professor types with 120 IQs
who posture themselves as intellectuals without the benefit of knowing
what true intelligence feels like; Lord knows I have. Or maybe
the stereotype is mostly true: Americans have no sense for the ironic.
I read one definition claiming irony was best defined as "a
type of humor based on using words to suggest the opposite of their
literal meaning." One example of such humor can be found
in the Morissette song; as a plane plummets toward the earth, one
passenger thinks to himself, "Well, isn't this nice?"
Of course, it was not nice. It was horrible
and terrifying and tragic. I'd suggest, however, that this
sort of statement is more precisely and correctly identified as
"sarcasm," rather than "irony."
Some of those same English professors may tell me that I am incorrect,
or that sarcasm is indeed a form of "verbal irony."
I tend to be of the opinion, however, that one should choose a single
term—the best word—to describe a concept, thereby refusing
to add to the confusion of our already chaotic world by referring
to a known concept with words that have other—better—meanings
in other contexts. In other words, the word "irony"
should be reserved for use in describing ironic situations, not
sarcastic ones, and vice-versa.
One web site I recently visited purports to offer lesson plans relating
music to other content areas. As an educator, I would prefer
that such plans contain material that was useful and accurate.
One plan suggested a lesson might refer to Swift's "A Modest
Proposal" as an example of irony. While Swift's piece
certainly contains elements of irony, sarcasm, and other critical
wit, it is most accurately described as "satire."
Why? Swift's objective in writing "A Modest Proposal"
was not to demonstrate an ironic situation, but to ridicule a specific
political situation through the absurd. Satire hopes to serve
as a catalyst for change; irony does not. Again, when one
word fits perfectly, we should refrain from convoluting the issue
further through vocabulary.
Another lesson on the same site is just flat-out incorrect in its
definition of irony. Said lesson plan describes irony as "the
contrasts between reality and people's perceptions" and "between
the way people view themselves and how they are seen by others."
Life is subjective; it's true. It's also true that our own
self-concept is rarely based on how we are seen by others.
Neither of these, however, have anything to do with irony.
As an aside, the fact that such misinformation made it to publication
on the site taints every other lesson plan presented there.
How could I ever trust that any of them are factually correct?
The best definitions of irony that I've found are similar, yet
still miss the mark. Essentially, most good definitions note
the key aspect to irony: incongruity between what might normally
be expected and what actually occurred or what actually is.
Without such incongruity, the situation is not ironic. What
all of these definitions still miss, however, is the most subtle—and
therefore most difficult—aspect of irony.
That subtle difference is the humor aspect, of course. Even
though ironic situations are often tragic, those with a highly-developed
wit recognize that they are also funny, because the incongruity
of an ironic situation must be in some sense absurd or even laughable.
Fred was walking home from the store.
As he crossed Broad Avenue, he was hit by a speeding truck full
of cabbage. He died instantly.
A person being run down and killed by a truck is tragic, not funny.
Contrast the above with this example:
Moonbeam was walking back to the commune
from the organic market. She had purchased a relatively
small batch of sprouts and carrots for her evening meal.
She winced as she passed the hotdog stand, her stomach turning
as she opined the fate of the poor animals who had so suffered
for such a deadly and disturbing product. She lamented the
masses who would die from the terminal illnesses caused by their
consumption of the carcinogenic agents and saturated fats found
in animals. Meat—so deadly and so cruel.
As she crossed Broad Avenue, she gave herself a warm inner-hug
for being so enlightened in her vegan lifestyle. She was
still smiling when the speeding vegetable truck ran the red light.
She died instantly.
Still tragic? Of course, but also hilarious and dripping
with irony. Why is one an example of irony and one not?
First, we must subject them to the incongruity test. When
we cross the street, do we normally expect to be killed by a truck?
Certainly not. Millions of people cross millions of streets
all over the world every day, and rarely is anyone mowed down by
a vegetable truck. So, both situations meet the test of what
is expected versus what actually occurs.
Fred dies. Moonbeam dies. Both are hit on the same street
by the same truck, but Moonbeam's death is ironic because she has
made certain life choices about diet that Fred did not.
"Huh?"
Moonbeam chose to avoid meat and eat only vegetables based on the
belief that this choice will prolong her life. She compliments
herself in her "enlightened" perspective, and pities those
who have doomed themselves to early deaths by not following her
example. This absolute certainty—that meat can only
harm her, while vegetables will keep her safe and healthy—is
contrasted sharply by the absurdity of her being killed by a truck
filled with her own personal "savior." Had the truck
been filled with oil or curtain rods, we are back to tragic again.
This demonstrates the problems with even the relatively good definitions
of "irony." Without the aspect of absurdity—that
sharp contrast which can be so laughable—the potentially ironic
simply reverts to tragedy.
Most of the examples in "Ironic" don't even stand on
the initial incongruity test. Morissette sings of flies in
wine, rain on wedding days, and traffic that impedes your progress
when things are already behind schedule. Sure, dying the day
after you won the lottery would certainly suck, but dying at the
age of ninety-eight is not especially unexpected. On the contrary,
I would maintain that every morning a 98-year-old wakes up alive
is more unexpected than the other. A situation is not ironic
simply because it's a "bummer"; true irony is much more
specific, much more dramatic, and—to those with a sardonic
wit such as mine—much more amusing.
The most straightforward account I've discovered as to why this
song is not ironic is online.
Scott provides a brief, yet accurate description as to why the song
lyrics do not describe ironic situations. Scott is a bit lenient,
in my opinion, when he suggests that the song's plane crash vignette
is an accurate depiction of irony. A person fearing airplanes
who dies when his first flight crashes is not irony, in the true
sense of the word. Remember, to be truly ironic, the situation
must be profoundly absurd or even laughable. A man who fears
flight and then dies when a plane crashes into his car would be
an example of irony.
The amazingly humorous thing about the song, of course, is that
it is itself a form of irony. Writing a song about irony—one
which attempts to demonstrate irony—that, instead, provides
not one true example of irony is most ironic. And damned funny,
if you ask me. Some have argued that this was intentional,
that Morissette had this in mind all along as she wrote the song.
While I will admit that she seems more intelligent than the average
bear, Alanis has never struck me as an intellectual of any depth.
I believe such a profound statement far beyond her capabilities.
Unless otherwise indicated, all content © 1997–2002
David J. Downs. All rights reserved.
|
