Tag Archives: irony

Some observations on a paragraph from Addison

01 Tuesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Literature

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Here is a paragraph from Richard Addison

Thus I live in the World, rather as a Spectator of Mankind, than as one of the Species; by which means I have made my self a Speculative Statesman, Soldier, Merchant, and Artizan, without ever medling with any Practical Part in Life. I am very well versed in the Theory of an Husband, or a Father, and can discern the Errors in the Oeconomy, Business, and Diversion of others, better than those who are engaged in them; as Standers-by discover Blots, which are apt to escape those who are in the Game. I never espoused any Party with Violence, and am resolved to observe an exact Neutrality between the Whigs and Tories , unless I shall be forcd to declare myself by the Hostilities of either side. In short, I have acted in all the parts of my Life as a Looker-on, which is the Character I intend to preserve in this Paper.

There are so many wonderful things about this quotation Addison in the first number of The Spectator March 1711

Consider

Thus I live in the World,

rather as a Spectator of Mankind,

than as one of the Species;

The “rather” sets an anticipated contrast. Contemporary style is for the immediate comparison. We would “rather than”, but here Addison breaks the contrast into two balanced clauses with an anticipation of the contrast. Notice also that the “s” of “species” recounts the “s” of “spectator”. The contrast begins with spectator and ends with species. The rhythm, sense, and sound all work together.

He gets the added benefit of “spectator” being the name of the paper for which Addison was writing.

Notice how he continues with the alliteration on the “s”

by which means

I have made my self

a Speculative Statesman,

Soldier,

This is a matter of taste and I cannot think of any certain rule, because he stops after self, speculative (which harkens back to spectator), statesman, and soldier. There is a ambiguity in the sense, because what is a spectator soldier – a speculative statesman is anyone of the bores on social media shouting an opinion without any real authority.

Notice what he does here with the sounds:

Merchant,

and Artizan,

without ever medling with any Practical Part in Life.

The m of merchant and meddling, artisan and any, which creates a patterned echo.

The “and” before artisan draws the list to a close.

The final life then breaks up the proceeding patterns of sound

With the Practical Part in Life.”

The concept is silly in their is no spectator merchant or soldier or artisan – unless he never acts.

We now come to the professional pundit:

I am very well versed in the Theory of an Husband, or a Father, and can discern the Errors in the Oeconomy, Business, and Diversion of others,

He does nothing but knows what is wrong with everything. This is the status of the internet: because he does not merely observe, but he also knows why everyone who is leading an actual life is doing the wrong thing.

The charm of Addison’s point of view is that it is ironic and detached without being unkind. In fact in this lovely prose, he is teasing only himself.

Thus there is a patterned irony: he is posing as a gadfly who is weirdly without the ability to see his own deficiency as he promises to critique others.

But the entire the standing is a pose which the real author is mocking.

This playful position itself comes in an essay where he is promising to tell the truth about his status as an author. The essay begins with the promise

I HAVE observed, that a Reader seldom peruses a Book with Pleasure ’till he knows whether the Writer of it be a black or a fair Man, of a mild or cholerick Disposition, Married or a Batchelor, with other Particulars of the like nature, that conduce very much to the right Understanding of an Author. To gratify this Curiosity, which is so natural to a Reader, I design this Paper, and my next, as Prefatory Discourses to my following Writings, and shall give some Account in them of the several persons that are engaged in this Work. As the chief trouble of Compiling, Digesting, and Correcting will fall to my Share, I must do myself the Justice to open the Work with my own History.

How Narratives Work, Part 4

03 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by in Acts, Preaching, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

Now that one has understood the plot line (and with biblical narratives, the sensitivity to the various levels of plots: the individual stories are part of larger narratives), and has undertaken to understand the look and feel of the story from the inside; there is a need to learn why the story is being told: what is the story about?

There are a few ways to begin to understand the story. Consider what the characters do and say? Does the narrator give explicit comment (and is the narrator “reliable”)? There is a “good guy” and a “bad guy” in the story. If the “good guy” wins or loses, why is that? Look for irony: are the character’s expectations upset? Why did the narrator tell me this story? To entertain me? To change me?

When we read the Biblical narratives, there is always a “strangeness” to the story: we must be changed.

In the narrative of Acts 4 here are some observations:

In verses 13, Peter and John are arrested for preaching: but the arrest was not successful in stopping the power of the proclamation:

But many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to about five thousand.Acts 4:4 (ESV)

The power lay in the Word, not in Peter and John. Later in Acts 5:38-39, Gamaliel puts his finger on the issue:

38 So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; 39 but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!” So they took his advice,Acts 5:38–39 (ESV)

(Continued in the next post).

March Against Irony

26 Saturday Mar 2016

Posted by in Culture, Psychology, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

There are so many things which are said and implied in this single ironic sentence:

Brussels (AFP) – The organisers of a “March Against Fear” planned for Sunday to mark the Brussels terror attacks said they had cancelled the event after the authorities asked them to do so because of security fears.

You can read the rest here

The Irony of Protest

18 Friday Dec 2015

Posted by in Culture, Ecclesiastes, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

CNN reports: Guy Fawkes mask inspires Occupy protests around the world

It is illustrated with this picture:

111104110514-anonymous-protester-occupy-london-horizontal-large-gallery

The irony comes as soon as one starts to think: Who is making these inexpensive plastic masks?

guy masks

Ecclesiastes 4:1–3 (ESV)

4 Again I saw all the oppressions that are done under the sun. And behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they had no one to comfort them! On the side of their oppressors there was power, and there was no one to comfort them. 2 And I thought the dead who are already dead more fortunate than the living who are still alive. 3 But better than both is he who has not yet been and has not seen the evil deeds that are done under the sun.

Hawthorne’s Twice Ironic Self-Disclosure

28 Friday Nov 2014

Posted by in Literature

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Hawthorne begins The Scarlet Letter with a discussion of what an author should disclose of himself to his reader. The irony of this is that Hawthorne is writing fiction and thus only pretends to self-disclosure.

Hawthorne wants us to read this text as reality with a wink: the text is engagement between writer and reader to undertake the task together. “I will disclose a secret of my thought which can only find by reading according to these rules.” Now the reader can breach this agreement and read all sorts of things going on, but such a reader will never hear from Hawthorne. Such readers are like those who would study the chemical composition of a human being and never find a friend.

Thus Hawthorne plays a double game: his fictitious reality leads one to his secreted reality which can only be had by agreeing to the ruse:

Some authors, indeed, do far more than this, and indulge themselves in such confidential depths of revelation as could fittingly be addressed only and exclusively to the one heart and mind of perfect sympathy; as if the printed book, thrown at large on the wide world, were certain to find out the divided segment of the writer’s own nature, and complete his circle of existence by bringing him into communion with it. It is scarcely decorous, however, to speak all, even where we speak impersonally. But, as thoughts are frozen and utterance benumbed, unless the speaker stand in some true relation with his audience, it may be pardonable to imagine that a friend, a kind and apprehensive, though not the closest friend, is listening to our talk; and then, a native reserve being thawed by this genial consciousness, we may prate of the circumstances that lie around us, and even of ourself, but still keep the inmost Me behind its veil. To this extent, and within these limits, an author, methinks, may be autobiographical, without violating either the reader’s rights or his own.

This Clamorous Volume

03 Wednesday Jul 2013

Posted by in Literature, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Bullies and tyrants cannot stand before irony. The simple words at the end of this quite, drive the stake of irony deep into the heart of the villain’s pride. Do not spoil the effect by racing to end. Rather, read slowly, out loud if possible and wait for the punch:

In a pamphlet lately published by Mr. Joseph Heming (which he hath titled ‘Judas Excommunicated; or, A Vindication of the Communion of Saints,’ &c.), there is so much dirt and venom vomited by him, upon my name and repute, that by his casting, you may easily guess the foulness of his stomach:—and get out of his way, reader; for he cares not where he lets fly, if the disgorging fit do but once come upon him, which comes not seldom. He made this promise in an epistle which he intended to prefix unto this clamorous volume; but spared it, upon courtesy to me, as he pretendeth:

“I am resolved now, God willing, if he retract not what he hath spoken, and that speedily, to give his reputation such a wound, that all godly men who love the truth, and speak the truth in sincerity, abominating lies, and such as speak them in hypocrisy; yea, those very ungodly ones, whose cause he pleads, shall loath it, as men do a rotten stinking carcass by the way-sides; neither shall all the friends he hath, or can possibly make, be ever able to salve it up.”

A very charitable and saintlike resolution, I can assure you: ….

This quotation comes the preface to

A BATTLE WITH A WASP’S NEST
or
A REPLY
to an angry and railing pamphlet, written by mr. joseph heming, called ‘judas excommunicated’

OR

‘A VINDICATION OF THE cOMMUNION OF SAINTS,’ &c.

wherein his arguments are answered, his abuses whipt and stript: the question, ‘whether judas received the sacrament,’ debated, and the affirmative proved

BY PETER LIGHTFOOT
London
1649
(Titles used to be much more entertaining.)

Of Communion With the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Digression 1c.iv (Shame)

05 Friday Oct 2012

Posted by in Augustine, Biblical Counseling, Hebrews, John Owen, Luke, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shame and sexual sin: It seems that sexual sin seems to bear such a weight of shame, because sexual sin is sin transgressing marriage. Since our marriage of Christ to his bride is the means by which shame is lifted, shame lies most heavily upon the corruption of marriage.

In Luke 7, we read of Jesus eating with a Pharisee. This story deals with the horrifying weight of shame in sexual sin and thus discloses the unfading and unending grace and love of God in Jesus Christ who carries our sin and shame far away:

36 One of the Pharisees asked him to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table. 37 And behold, a woman of the city, who was a sinner, when she learned that he was reclining at table in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster flask of ointment, 38 and standing behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears and wiped them with the hair of her head and kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment. 39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, for she is a sinner.” Luke 7:36–39 (ESV)

Now in thinking of this scene we are likely to misunderstand the picture of the woman.  While I don’t have any particularized knowledge on the subject, certain things seem certain. First, her personal status in the culture would be brutally oppressive. This is a prostitute in the 4th or 5th world (not 3rd).  Second, she would be wracked with shame constantly. In a society which offered limited physical movement over the course of one’s life (peasants don’t have the ability or wealth to move about), this woman would have been known to all. Even the Pharisee and moralist knew her. Thus, her home town would have constantly held has a matter of public shame.

Third, she is likely quite young. Prostitutes being marginalized by their culture and victimized in their position will find themselves at the very least physically vulnerable. The potential for disease would be striking. It would have been striking for a such a woman to have a realistic change to grow old.

So let us picture a teenage girl, terrified, broken, ashamed charging into the room and falling before Jesus – all the while knowing the hateful and hurtful glares of those around.

Augustine notes irony in the moment. The Pharisee wonders that Jesus did not know this woman was a sinner. Yet, Augustine notes that this woman Jesus was God:

Christ was supposed to be but a man both by him who invited Him, and by them who sat as guests at the table with Him. But that woman who was a sinner had seen something more than this in the Lord. For why did she all those things, but that her sins might be forgiven her? She knew then that He was able to forgive sins; and they knew that no man was able to forgive them. And we must believe that they all, they who were at the table, that is, and that woman who approached to the Feet of the Lord, all knew that no man could forgive sins. Forasmuch then as they all knew this; she who believed that He could forgive sins, understood Him to be more than man. So when He had said to the woman, “Thy sins are forgiven thee;” they immediately said, “Who is this that forgiveth sins also?” Who is this, whom the woman who was a sinner already knew? Thou who sittest at the table as if in sound health, knowest not thy Physician; because it may be through a stronger fever thou hast even lost thy reason. …

This woman who believed that she could be forgiven by Christ, believed Christ not to be man only, but God also. “Who,” say they, “is this that forgiveth sins also?” And the Lord did not tell them as they said, “Who is this?” “It is the Son of God, the Word of God;” He did not tell them this, but suffering them to abide for a while still in their former opinion, He really solved the question which had excited them. For He who saw them at the table, heard their thoughts, and turning to the woman, He said, “Thy faith hath made thee whole.” Let these who say, “Who is this that forgiveth sins also?” who think me to be but a man, think me but a man. For thee “thy faith hath made thee whole.”

Augustine of Hippo, “Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament”, trans. R. G. MacMullen In , in A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series, Volume VI: Saint Augustin: Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the Gospels, ed. Philip Schaff (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1888), 418.

Think of this: The woman who bore such weight of sin and shame – before God and man – caught a glimpse of Christ, of God Incarnate and falls before him.  What does she bring? Sin. Shame. Faith. She does not care what the world thinks, if Christ thinks she is clean.

Consider further: Jesus knows that in forgiving her sin that he will need to carry her shame. The shame of sin must be carried. The curse and shame of sin must be discharged. This poor girl comes in her weakness and offers nothing but her weakness, she comes to him in faith and weeps that he will carry her sin and shame. And Jesus, in compassion and love, says, I will carry this shame, leave it here with me. I will carry this sin, place it upon my back. I will discharge the curse. You need feel no shame – it is gone, I have carried it far away.

The Pharisee sees only the sinful woman – because he cannot see the Son of God before him. The Pharisee sees only according to the flesh – but the one who sees according to faith sees deeper:

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:16–21 (ESV)

One final note comes from Hebrews 2. The writer tells us that Jesus does not help angels. No, Jesus not save angels. Instead, he saves prostitutes bowed down with shame and sin (their own sin and most painfully, the sin of others). Jesus entered into combat and destroyed the Devil who seeks to destroy human beings by means of sin and shame: And in so doing, he makes plain the place of rest and hope:

14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. 16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. Hebrews 2:14–18 (ESV)

Training in Temper.4 (The Temple Tax.3)

28 Thursday Jun 2012

Posted by in A.B. Bruce, Discipleship, Matthew, Philippians

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

To see this same lesson elsewhere (the humility of Jesus used as a ground for the humility of those who follow Jesus), consider the argument of Paul to the church met by a certain dissention.  Some members of the Philippian church had fallen into a quarrel.  The source or persistence of the quarrel are unknown. Yet, we do know how Paul taught so as to stem their quarrel.

In the second chapter, Paul begins a direct assault upon their squabbling. In the case of this congregation, he does not make a sharp rebuke. Rather, he demonstrates to them the incongruity between their conduct and their profession. He does this by holding the irony and the incongruity of their Lord’s humiliation:

1 So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, 2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. 3 Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,

 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.

 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,

10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. Philippians 2:1–13 (ESV)

In this instance, a gentle rebuke by noting their own pride when contrasted with the Lord’s humility and desire to glorify the Father – even when it came a great personal cost – broke bones that a sharp response would have missed.

This teaches us a lesson on who to best correct those whom we disciple. While a sharp blow may be necessary in some circumstance, it is not the only means – nor even the best means.  Self-righteousness may be more quickly humbled by a sight of the cross than by direct assault.  In discipleship, means must always be calculated to ends. Always consider both the nature of the sin and the nature of the person (1 Thess. 5:14).

Training in Temper.4 (The Temple Tax.1):

27 Wednesday Jun 2012

Posted by in A.B. Bruce, Discipleship, Matthew

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

24 When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax went up to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the tax?” 25 He said, “Yes.” And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?” 26 And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. 27 However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.” Matthew 17:24–27 (ESV)

To understand the story, the context may help: In chapter 16, Peter confesses Jesus to be the Christ. Jesus foretells his death and resurrection, and instructs his disciples to take up the cross and follow Jesus.  Chapter 17 begins with the Mount of Transfiguration: for a moment, God grants to three disciples a glimpse of the true glory of Jesus. Jesus heals a demon possessed boy, again foretells his death and resurrection.  Directly following the story of the temple tax, Matthew records the dispute among the disciples about greatness, which leads to the discussions of relationships, humility, sin and forgiveness found in Matthew 18. There in midst of the revelation of the greatness of Jesus, his true mission, and the pride of disciples we find this strange story.

Bruce writes:

This story is a nut with a dry, hard shell, but a very sweet kernel. Superficial readers may see in it nothing more than a curious anecdote of a singular fish with a piece of money in its mouth turning up opportunely to pay a tax, related by Matthew, alone of the evangelists, not because of its intrinsic importance, but simply because, being an ex-tax gatherer, he took kindly to the tale.

Yet, as Bruce explains, the story expresses a great truth about Jesus and profound lesson for those who would follow Jesus.  To first understand the story, Bruce points us to the irony: Jesus, as a Jew and a man, was required by the Law of Moses to pay the tax. Yet the Jesus revealed on the Mount and as confessed by Jesus is the one for whom the Temple stands.  As one begins to consider this irony, Bruce notes that the irony exists not only in this story, but in the whole of the life of Jesus:

The law of Moses ordained that every man above twenty years should pay the sum of half a shekel as an atonement for his soul, and to meet the expenses connected with the service of the tabernacle rendered to God for the common benefit of all Israelites; and Jesus, as a Jew, was just as much under obligation to comply with this particular law as with any other. Nor was there any peculiar indignity, either in kind or degree, involved in obeying that law. Doubtless it was a great indignity and humiliation to the Son of God to be paying taxes for the maintenance of His own Father’s house! All that He said to Peter, pointing out the incongruity of such a state of things, was sober truth. But the incongruity does not meet us here alone; it runs through the whole of our Lord’s earthly experience. His life, in all respects, departed from the analogy of kings’ sons. Though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience; though He were a Son, yet came He not to be ministered unto, but to minister; though He were a Son, yet became He subject to the law, not merely the moral but the ceremonial, and was circumcised, and took part in the temple worship, and frequented the sacred feasts, and offered sacrifices, though these were all only shadows of good things, whereof He Himself was the substance. Surely, in a life containing so many indignities and incongruities,–which was, in fact, one grand indignity from beginning to end,–it was a small matter to be obliged to pay annually, for the benefit of the temple, the paltry sum of fifteenpence! He who with marvelous patience went through all the rest, could not possibly mean to stumble and scruple at so trifling a matter. (Emphasis added.)

The Double Irony of Solomon’s Labor:

21 Saturday Apr 2012

Posted by in Ecclesiastes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Ecclesiastes 2:4-11 lays out Solomon’s great work and the results.

First, this is a parody of the Genesis account: Solomon is exercising dominion over the post-Fall world. But his best efforts are futile attempts to approximate the original creation. He must try to force the creation to look like the world which once was. But in so doing, he will only create oppression and injustice (Eccl. 3:16).

Second, this is a parody of the King’s propaganda.  Kings routinely wrote short accounts of their greatness and the good of their reign. Ecclesiastes reverses the expectations of the genre. Rather than speaking of the greatness of his reign, he speaks of the greatness and then evaluates it all as a “vanity and a striving after wind” (Eccl. 2:11).