Wayne C. Booth,A Rhetoric of IronySummary of the TextChapter 1: The Ways of Stable IronyTo begin, Booth describes the ways in which different readers can read irony differently.How do we know what an authors intentions are when he/she uses irony? Booth answers that there is such a thing as stable irony and gives us a set of reading tasks - these guide us to reconstruct the correct meaning of the ironyFour marks of stable irony:1. ironic statements are intended not accidental or ironies of event2. covert intended to be reconstructed, not overt (eg It is ironic that)3. the reader is not invited to reconstruct further ironies4. irony is finite in application the field of discourse is narrowly described, and not about life in general (6)What makes irony different from all communication? Human statements are surrounded by nuances that are assumed to be understood by speaker and listener (8) but elaborate inferences are required in literature. Context is everything!Four steps to reconstruction:1. Reader must reject the literal meaning recognize a dissonance between what he reads and what he knows2. Reader must try out alternative interpretations eg that guy must be crazy3. Reader makes a decision about the authors knowledge or beliefs4. Reader chooses a new meaning based on his beliefs about the authorThis process is communal: The whole thing cannot work at all unless both parties to the exchange have confidence that they are moving together in identified patterns (13). Booth even claims that real intimacy is impossible without irony (is he being ironic?) (15).How do we know what comprises the correct interpretation?Booth applies the Russell test to irony and concludes that we have to use our common sense the irony we see can be argued for soundly (16).Irony differs from other figures of speech because they do not require the 4 steps of interpretation.Metaphor in metaphor, we have to reconstruct meaning but we are not forced to make a decision about the authors intent. What we reject is the form of the sentence eg all the world is not actually a stage (23) there are no incompatibilities to reconcileAllegory and Fable there are traps in irony and invitations in allegory A nave reader who overlooks irony will totally misunderstand what is going on. A nave reader who reads an allegory without taking conscious thought, refusing all invitations to reconstruct general meanings out of the literal surface, will in effect obtain an experience something like what the allegory intends (25)Puns puns can be used either ironically or straight (Booth 26) many puns do not contribute anything to the meaning of the sentence eg I yam what I yam puns which ask us to reconstruct meaning are more like ironyStable Irony and Satire important to Booth irony must always have victims, but the building of amiable communities is often far more important than the exclusion of nave victims (28) the reader feels included because the author doesnt have to spell out what he/she is saying irony is directed to affirmative matters creates a community of believers even as it excludes (28) irony is used in some satire, not in all; some irony is satiric, much is not (29)Booth sees the act of reading and understanding irony as an intimate act:Total strangers, we had just performed an intricate intellectual dance together, and we knew that we were somehow akin (31). For Booth, irony brings reader and author together into a community of those who understand.Chapter 2: Reconstructions and JudgmentsReading irony is in some ways like translating, like decoding, like deciphering, and like peering behind a mask (33).Ironic reconstruction depends on unstated assumptions that readers and ironists share there needs to be a common place for these two to meet. The concept of common locations leads to the image of two platforms at work in reconstruction the reader is asked to move from one platform (on which the speaker pretends to stand (35) to another. But how do we know that the reader needs to move in Booths terms, that the first platform is shaky? (35)An ironic statement implies a set of beliefs, and we reject the statement because we reject the entire set of beliefs the reader cannot believe that the author is that kind of person. Booth prefers to use the image of moving between two buildings, one more elevated than the other: The movement is always toward an obscured point that is intended as wiser, wittier, more compassionate, subtler, truer, more moral, or at least less obviously vulnerable to further irony (36). The two dwellings are seen for what they are and the reader accepts the invitation to leave one and choose another.Advantages of Reconstruction (and Booths metaphor of two dwellings) it reminds us of complexities there is always an implied claim to superiority dramatizes the distance between two points there are many rejected propositions and many victims explains that words require reconstruction something implicit in their place that gives them away reconstruction must be performed rather than saidRequired Judgments we must make judgments about the overt proposition and the stance of the author; we must also judge whether the reconstructed building works and whether the ironist is justified in forcing us to go to the new dwelling all readers are invited to agree with whatever message they have discerned (41) irony works to conceal its art it risks disaster more aggressively than any other device (41) the more ironies we discover in a work, the cleverer we think the author and ourselves for detecting all of these ironies (this can lead to irony-hunting (42)Some Pleasures and Pitfalls of IronySuccessful reading of irony depends on reserves of tact and experience and even wisdom that are likely at any moment to prove lacking in any of us, and yet irony offers special temptations to our weaknesses, especially our pride (44)Chapter 3: It is Ironic?How can we avoid making the mistake that Booth makes with his deer-hunting student? (Booth relates a story about reading irony into a story where none was intended by the author).Clues to ironyStraightforward warning in the authors own voice in titles eg Diary of a Worrier (53) in epigraphs other direct clues, eg author denies being the narrator (Booths eg is Nabakov) (55)* Booth notes that it is foolish to take these warnings at face value they are only clues and can also be ironic!Known error proclaimed the speaker betrays ignorance that is incredible (57) popular expressions presented incorrectly historical facts are transposed or proclaimed conventional judgment author must judge the knowledge of the readerConflicts of facts within the work either the author has been careless or is being ironic classic presentation: plausible but false voice, then contradictions are introduced, then the correct voice is heard correcting the initial voice (64)Clashes of style like Mueckes travesty and burlesqueConflicts of Belief we notice a conflict between the beliefs expressed and those we suspect the author to hold (73) every reader will have the greatest difficulty detecting irony that mocks his own beliefs (81)Part II: Learning Where to StopEach ironic statement can be interpreted in many ways how do we when to stop interpreting?Chapter 4: Essays, Satire and ParodyContext is the key, and for Booth there are two kinds. First, there is the literary context what we reconstruct as we read. Second, there is the historical context in which the piece was written and printed and read.the first context is what we finally arrive at, in our total act of successful reading: it does not exist for us until the passage clicks into place as a kind of completed whole. The second exists before, during, and after this reading, available to be referred to as an aid in our reconstruction and also available as a possible distraction from a sound reading. (97)The engagement between the author and reader depends on a world they never made, and also on 3 kinds of agreement: common experience of the English language common cultural experience their common experience of literary genresThe writer must be aware of the group of people who will read the irony and not get it. Sometimes, as in the case of the Modest Proposal, all readers are supposed to get it after all being duped for awhile (109).Readers must recognize that intention is important to the reading of irony:Whatever the ups and downs of critical controversy, historical knowledge, including knowledge of genres, is thus often implied when reconstructing stable ironies: a reconstructing of implied authors and implied readers relies on inferences about intentions, and these often depend on our knowing facts from outside the poem. (133)Chapter 5: Ironic PortraitsIn longer works, the reconstruction of messages or content seems to be for the sake of revising and completing a picture of the speaker or of an action in which he is involved (137).In an ironic portrait, we dont stop at reconstituted segments that replace the whole message; we stop with some kind of human character, situation or story that we have been led to see as superior (141). Sometimes what is ironic is the contrast between what the speaker believes about himself and what we infer about him (147) this inference depends on how our knowledge and experience relate to the implied authors intentions (147).Fiction and DramaIt is important only to recognize the absolute split between works designed to be reconstructible on firm norms shared by authors and readers, and those other ironic works that provide no platform for reconstruction. In one kind, all or most of the ironies are resolved into relatively secure moral or philosophical perceptions or truths; in the other, all truths are dissolved in an ironic mist. (151)Many short stories written since the 19th century have taken the form of extended monologues readers must reconstruct the distances between the presented view of things and the authors evaluation (151).We have to decide whether or not we trust the narrator. Booth gives the Flannery OConnor story as an example. In this story, we can see the inconsistencies in the characters perceptions, but it is not so easy to see the realities. The story is the place we look for clues to reconstruct the world that contradicts with the characters world.Custom-Built WorldsMany modern writers have created clashes of character and secret value that are immeasurably more difficult to reconstruct (Booth 169) This kind of story is especially vulnerable to the two pitfalls of ironygoing too far and not going far enoughStable irony always depends on the sharing of norms with an implied but covert author and yet many modern authors, themselves not at all confused about at least some values, underlying their ironies, have encouraged the notion that sharing values doesnt matter (171).Chapter 6: The Ironists VoiceWe have to rely on our picture of the author (either implied or from experience) in order to reconstruct with confidence the meaning behind the irony. Readers begin to take interest in the ironic voice (176), in the tasks it assigns and the qualities it provides.Irony is essentially subtractive for Booth (177), and when irony goes too far, when it becomes a total irony that must discount itself (178), it becomes nothing. In modern times, authors become better known for their use of irony than their uses of the metaphoric. In this chapter, Booth presents the voices of Fielding and EM Forster to illustrate how the ironists voice presents pervasive stable irony. Authors perform a kind of training on their readers to show them when to read the irony, and when to read the statements as they are so that everything that is written does not become suspect.We know when to stop by paying attention to the work for it tells us to stop when continuing will destroy the other riches the work offers (190).Chapter 7: Is there a standard of taste in irony?The ironist asks us to assume that his form of irony is worthy of our attention. We have to make judgments about irony and for Booth there are four levels on which we evaluate irony.There are more questions than just is there irony here? and is the irony honest? (197): judging parts according to function qualities as critical constraints success at particular works comparison of kindsBooth notes that there are many things that can get in the way of our making judgments about irony he calls them Five Crippling Handicaps (222): ignorance inability to pay attention prejudice lack of practice emotional inadequacyPart III: InstabilitiesChapter 8: Reconstructing the Unreconstructable: Local InstabilitiesBooth describes some categories of irony using three variables:1. the degree of openness or disguise irony can be covert or totally overt, ie It is ironic that2. the degree of stability in the reconstruction can the reader be confident that his/her work is done when he has understood the irony?3. the scope of the truth revealed ranging from the local to the universalStable-Covert-LocalHere the meaning of irony is hidden but firm as a rock when discovered by the reader (235).Stable-OvertThese statements assert an irony that the speaker has observed and wants to share:Booth describes this irony in a diagram that creates this statement:Isnt it ironic that things are.When we thought they were, or wished they were, like thisThey are REALLY LIKE THIS (238)Unstable IronyThere is irony that resists that firm interpretation leaving the possibility, and in infinite ironies, that since the universe (or at least the universe of discourse) is inherently absurd, all statements are subject to ironic undermining (241).Booth asserts that wherever there are intentions, however obscure or unconventional, there are invitations to interpret (245). In unstable-overt-local ironies, we know that something is being undermined but we dont know where to stop in our interpretations. In unstable-covert-local irony, there is no firm place to stand but the author still insists on a meaning.Chapter 9: Infinite InstabilitiesInfinite ironies assert that the universe is absurd and that nothing will stand up under ironic examination (253). Booths example of Robert Graves poem notes that the surface meaning is the meaning of the poem (Booths italics) yet underlying the poem is a truth that Graves is trying to reach. But many modern authors reject using such an overt declaration of irony and Booth turns to Beckett for an example. While Becketts work is often portrayed as empty of meaning, Booth notes that critics and readers have a strong emotional response to it.Booth finishes by writing a final note on evaluation: There can be no guidebook to tell us how much irony a work should contain; the artist himself will show us how much of it a work should contain and still succeed with us (276). Though in one sense it remains true that each reader must decide for himself the level of irony he will tolerate, once again we must say that there are just not that many levels to go around; we join authors and other readers even in our most private choices (276).Works CitedBooth, Wayne.A rhetoric of irony. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.

Fonte;

http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~raha/Booth-site/pages/irony-sum.htm