irony
and. Greek speech whose meaning or meaning is opposite to the literal meaning of the words; mocking praise, approval, expressing censure; mockery Ironically, mockingly, mockingly; praise, which is worse than scolding.
irony
irony, g. (Greek eironeia) (book). A rhetorical figure in which words are used in a sense opposite to the literal one, for the purpose of ridicule (lit.), for example. words of the fox to the donkey: “Where are you, smart one, wandering from, head?” Krylov.
Subtle ridicule, covered with a serious form of expression or an outwardly positive assessment. There was a wicked irony in his praise. Say something. with irony. Irony of fate (book) - a mockery of fate, a strange, incomprehensible accident.
irony
And, well. Subtle, hidden mockery. I. fate, (translated: strange accident). * By scarlet irony - as if in mockery.
adj. ironic, -aya, -oe.
irony
and. Subtle ridicule, covered with a serious form of expression or an outwardly positive assessment.
and. A stylistic device of contrast between the visible and hidden meaning of a statement, creating the effect of ridicule (in literary criticism).
irony
IRONY (from the Greek eironeia - pretense)
denial or ridicule, feignedly clothed in the form of agreement or approval.
Stylistic figure: expression of ridicule or deceit through allegory, when a word or statement takes on a meaning in the context of speech that is opposite to or negating its literal meaning.
A type of comic when the funny is hidden under the guise of the serious (as opposed to humor) and conceals a sense of superiority or skepticism.
Irony
(from Greek eironеia, literally ≈ pretence),
in stylistics ≈ an allegory expressing ridicule or slyness, when a word or statement acquires in the context of speech a meaning that is opposite to the literal meaning or denies it, casting doubt on it.
Servant of influential masters, With what noble courage Do you thunder with free speech
All those who have their mouths covered.
(F.I. Tyutchev “You were not born a Pole...”)
I. is reproach and contradiction under the guise of approval and consent; a phenomenon is deliberately attributed a property that does not exist in it, but which should have been expected. “Sometimes, pretending, they talk about what should be, as if it exists in reality: this is the irony” (Bergson A., Sobr. soch., vol. 5, St. Petersburg, 1914, p. 166); I. ≈ “...a crafty pretense, when a person pretends to be a simpleton, is not those who know that what he knows” (Potebnya A. A., From notes on the theory of literature, Khar., 1905, p. 381). Usually I. are classified as tropes, less often as stylistic figures. A hint of pretense, the “key” to I. is usually contained not in the expression itself, but in the context or intonation, and sometimes only in the situation of the utterance. I. is one of the most important stylistic means of humor, satire, and grotesque. When ironic ridicule becomes angry, caustic mockery, it is called sarcasm.
In aesthetics, it is a type of comic, an ideological-emotional assessment, the elementary model or prototype of which is the structural-expressive principle of speech, stylistic art. An ironic attitude presupposes superiority or condescension, skepticism or ridicule, deliberately hidden, but defining the style of an artistic or journalistic work (“ Praise of Stupidity” by Erasmus of Rotterdam) or the organization of imagery (character, plot, the entire work, for example in “The Magic Mountain” by T. Mann). The “secrecy” of ridicule and the mask of “seriousness” distinguish humor from humor and especially from satire.
The meaning of art as an aesthetic category has changed significantly in different eras. Antiquity is characterized, for example, by “Socratic irony,” which expressed the philosophical principle of doubt and at the same time a way of discovering truth. Socrates pretended to be like-minded with his opponent, assented to him and imperceptibly brought his view to the point of absurdity, revealing the limitations of truths seemingly obvious to common sense. In ancient theater, one also encounters the so-called tragic I. (“I. Fate”), theoretically understood in modern times: the hero is confident in himself and does not know (unlike the viewer) that it is his actions that are preparing his own death (classic example ≈ “Oedipus the King” by Sophocles, and later “Wallenstein” by F. Schiller). Such an “I. fate" is often called "objective I.", and in relation to reality itself - "I. history" (Hegel).
Art received a detailed theoretical justification and varied artistic implementation in romanticism (theory by F. Schlegel and K.V.F. Solger; artistic practice by L. Tieck, E.T.A. Hoffmann in Germany, J. Byron in England , A. Musset in France). Romantic history emphasizes the relativity of all aspects of life that are restrictive in meaning and significance—everyday inertia, class narrowness, and the idiocy of self-contained crafts and professions are portrayed as something voluntary, taken upon by people for the sake of a joke. Romantic I. is undergoing an evolution: at first it is the I. of freedom - life does not know any insurmountable obstacles for its free forces, making fun of everyone who tries to give it permanent forms; then the sarcasm of necessity - the forces of inertia and oppression overcome the free forces of life, the poet flies high, but he is pulled back, caustically and rudely mocking him (Byron, Hoffmann and especially G. Heine). Romantic I. exposed the discord between the dream (ideal) and real life, the relativity and changeability of earthly values, sometimes questioning their objectivity and subordinating art to the goals of aesthetic play. G. Hegel’s opinion on “negative I.” romanticism, although exaggerated, is not without foundation. I. is more negative and subjective in nature and purpose in the concept of the Danish thinker S. Kierkegaard, who expanded it to a life principle - as universal remedy internal liberation of the subject from necessity and bondage in which he is held by a sequential chain life situations. Essentially “negative” and even “nihilistic”, losing the boundary between truth and error, good and evil, freedom and necessity, I. becomes in the decadent mentality of the “end of the century” (19th), including among some symbolists, about which A. A. Blok wrote bitterly. Among a number of artists and aestheticians of the 20th century involved in modernism (the surrealists, Ortega y Gaset), “nihilistic” art includes the principle of total parody and self-parody of art.
A peculiar concept of “epic I.” as one of the basic principles of modern realism was developed by T. Mann, who, starting from the universality of romantic I., emphasized that I. is necessary for epic art as a view from the heights of freedom, peace and objectivity, not overshadowed by any moralizing. A kind of “ironic dialectic” was reflected in the theatrical method of “alienation” by B. Brecht.
═In the judgments of the classics of Marxism, along with the high assessment of “Socratic I.” contains elements of epic history (Engels in a letter to M. Kautskaya dated November 26, 1885 - see K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd ed., vol. 36, p. 333≈34) and dialectically reveals the concept "AND. history" (see Letter from F. Engels to V.I. Zasulich dated April 23, 1885 ≈ ibid., p. 26
I. is diverse in Russian literature and criticism: “avenger” and “comforter” in A. I. Herzen; “mocking criticism” of the revolutionary democrats V. G. Belinsky, N. A. Nekrasov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin; merging with the elements of humor in N.V. Gogol; turning into sarcasm in F. M. Dostoevsky; parody by Kozma Prutkov; romantic by A. A. Blok. Soviet literature (V.V. Mayakovsky, M.M. Zoshchenko, E.L. Schwartz, M.A. Bulgakov, Yu.K. Olesha, I. Ilf and E. Petrov) adopted and developed the art characteristic of Russian realistic literature. 19th century literature She realizes the ironic attitude in a very diverse way: through parody (A. G. Arkhangelsky) and parodic tale (Zoshchenko), grotesque (V. Belov), ironic speech (I. G. Erenburg), contrast of words and situation (A. T. Tvardovsky ).
Lit.: Losev A.F., Shestakov V.P., History of aesthetic categories, [M.], 1965; Borev Yu. B., Comic..., M., 1970; Kierkegaard S., Über den Begriff der Ironie, Düsseldorf ≈ Köln, 1961; Strohschneider-Kohrs J., Die romantische Ironie in Theorie und Gestaltung, Tübingen, 1960; Muecke D. C., The compass of irony, L., (bib. p. 260≈69).
N. P. Rozin.
Irony
Irony obvious meaning. Irony should create the feeling that the subject under discussion is not what it seems.
Irony- the use of words in a negative sense, directly opposite to the literal one. Example: “Well, you are brave!”, “Smart, smart...”. Here positive statements have negative connotations.
Hence his autonomy, mental health, balance, irony, detachment - in short, wisdom.
Bizarre interweaving of fiction and reality, depth of psychological analysis, paradoxical judgments, soft irony make Akutagawa's works true masterpieces.
Weakened by a diet of rainwater, daffodil petals, beetles, peanuts fed to the squirrels, and stale bread thrown to the tits, the conceptual artist hiding in the hole could not give a worthy rebuff to the enraged Pete, who was never imbued with the seriousness of his artistic mission , performed by the conceptualist, broke three of his ribs, which, according to irony fate and, by all accounts, was the highest conceptual touch of the entire gardening and artistic project and contributed to the fact that this project became known to the general public through subsequent legal proceedings.
At the end of the meeting, the great master with hostility and irony made a remark to Bezukhoy about his ardor and that it was not only the love of virtue, but also the passion for struggle that guided him in the dispute.
On the next Sunday, which is evil irony It was Valentine's Day - the holiday of lovers, Artem bought champagne, an expensive bonbonniere and a gorgeous bouquet.
Then, from collection to collection, we see how more and more carefully, with more love, with increasing skill and with subtle irony Bioy Casares prescribes the background against which the action unfolds, the characters - both main and secondary - become more vivid, specific signs - national and temporal - become brighter and more prominent.
It can be generated either by parts of speech transformed in relation to the original ones in the text, with a modified set of valences, which will be illustrated below, or by secondary meanings of the word, overtones, connotations and occasional meanings involved in interpretation, as, for example, in the case of the occurrence of the opposite meaning at irony, so frequent in Platonov.
And since there is not a single good undertaking and not a single good person in which, if you look at them from a certain point of view and through a magnifying glass, there would not be funny sides, then irony Veilya spared no one.
Christophe's youthful enthusiasm awakened the usual irony, although he tried to hide it, and nothing came of their meeting.
Vadim Passek, Vitberg, Polezhaev, from an emphatically impartial story about the Slavophiles to touchingly tender commemorations of friends, from majestic portraits of Garibaldi, Owen, Mazzini to subtle irony in the characteristics of such figures of the 1848 revolution as Ledru-Rollin and others.
Kharms can be most productively conducted in the forms of its repeated parodic inversion through irony.
In Alikhan's words, Galazov caught a slight irony, mistook her for mistrust and got angry: “Don’t believe me?”
Heinrich could not help but notice that last words Hauptmann said bitterly irony.
With subtle and deadly irony the article exposed Glazunov as detached, decomposed, infected with the prejudices of the bourgeois element, and Glazunov himself should have been horrified when he saw an impartial reflection of his moral character.
Irony - what is it? Probably all Russians watch films by Eldar Ryazanov on the eve of the New Year. And “The Irony of Fate” is one of many people’s favorites. But few people thought about the meaning of the film's title. Today we will tell you what irony is and whether it can only be found in fate.
Irony - what is it? Translated from Greek language this word means pretense. That is, a person, in mocking expressions, ascribes to an object or subject qualities that it does not possess.
Irony usually manifests itself in words of praise. Who among us has not heard such words spoken by a loved one?
Let's look at it with an example. The child broke a vase, and he didn’t do it on purpose at all; a ball hit it. And the mother understands that scolding the child is pointless. The vase stood on the cabinet, and no one could have imagined that the child would reach it. In this situation, there is simply nothing to say other than the ironic “well done.”
If we give a broad definition of irony, then it can be characterized as a witty remark made to the point. Moreover, the second factor plays an important role. All people can come up with funny answers in hindsight, but a spoon is good for dinner.
To make their speech come alive, people often resort to various stylistic devices and use different figures of speech. Therefore, irony is divided into several subtypes.
The first of them is hidden or explicit. When a person does not want to show the true object of ridicule, he veils it. This is often common among comedians when they touch on the government apparatus in their skits. That is, it is not entirely clear who exactly they are mocking.
Obvious irony is directed at a specific person or object. Most often, this method of ridicule is practiced among friends.
The second type of irony is kind or caustic. In the first version, ridicule does not carry any negative meaning. A person simply notices a funny coincidence of circumstances and does not want to offend his opponent.
On the contrary, to support him, he tries to give the situation a humorous tone. But caustic statements cannot be considered light irony. Although this form is considered quite acceptable, it is still rude and offensive.
Russian and foreign writers often used mocking statements in their works. Therefore, many examples of irony can be found in classical literature. I. A. Krylov mastered it perfectly.
In his fables, each character has his own unique image and character, and often makes fun of his interlocutor. Here is an example from everyone famous work“Dragonfly and Ant”: “Did you keep singing? This business". This is exactly how the little hard worker teases his lovely parasite, trying to convey to her that songs will not feed her.
Another example can be taken from the work of A. S. Pushkin:
“Here, however, was the color of the capital,
And know, and fashion samples,
Faces you meet everywhere
Necessary fools."
What is this - Pushkin's irony? This is a caustic mockery disguised in poetry, which exposes the high society with just one quatrain.
If you want to understand what irony is, then you need to find out the words that are close to it in meaning. Synonyms for our term will be: ridicule, mockery and sarcasm. They all explain the concept of the term well. True, synonyms for irony work remarkably well only in a team. But separately, they explain the essence worse. After all, irony is not ridicule or mockery, it is a kind of lesson that a person makes to his opponent.
Thanks to appropriate comments, a person can correct his character or try to be more restrained so as not to get into comical situations.
But sarcasm is more like a synonym for irony. After all, both perform the same task, only their means are different. Sarcasm is simply a sarcastic remark, while irony is deliberate exaggeration.
People who use these forms of ridicule not only against others, but also against themselves, are practically not vulnerable. After all, how can you be offended by a person who laughs not only at you, but also at himself?
There are usually two types of people who are mocked: those who have achieved nothing and those who have achieved a lot. Why is this happening? Few people like to talk about people who fall under the definition of average.
But those who have achieved success in life are usually subject to criticism, sarcasm and, of course, irony. After all, the path that a person has taken to success is often too thorny. And if this person is famous, then the whole country often watches his ascent to Olympus on TV.
It is no wonder that during the period of his failures, which certainly happen, a person becomes an object of ridicule. People in our country love to gossip and slander so much.
But people who always fail at something are also often the subject of ridicule. No matter what they take on, everything always falls out of their hands, and they themselves know how to slip out of the blue. Such failures look comical in the eyes of others.
Today it is fashionable to tease friends with caustic remarks. But not everyone succeeds. The line between irony and offensive remarks is very thin. Therefore, if you are not confident in your abilities, then do not choose loved ones as an object of ridicule.
But some people manage to be ironic professionally. They do it easily and naturally. What is this skill or talent? Most likely, the person has an ironic worldview. How can we understand this?
Such a person does not take problems and failures to heart and loves to laugh at both his own and others’ mistakes.
The definition of irony is much broader than just instructive ridicule. People who are naturally gifted increased attention, manage to notice funny situations that an ordinary person would not pay attention to. This is how an ironic worldview is formed. But if you don’t have it, don’t worry, with due attention and diligence it can still be developed.
In order for a person to be considered a cheerful person and not an ulcer, he must dose out his grins and teachings. As they say, don't throw pearls before swine. If you are absolutely sure that your interlocutor will not appreciate or understand irony, then why waste your creative potential on him?
It is better to use irony in doses, and in the company of well-known friends. After all, it’s one thing when you laugh at a friend who fell into a puddle, and a completely different thing when a complete stranger finds himself in this awkward situation.
In general, it is best to use irony as a way to sum up your thoughts or to defuse an overly tense situation. In the first case, you will show yourself as an intelligent and charismatic person, and in the second, as a kind of funny guy who can be the life of the party.
As a rule, a person thinks about the question “ Irony, what is it?” when he needs to realize the difference between allegory and sarcasm. To do this, you must first remember the ancient Greeks, who founded numerous philosophical movements, and also talked a lot about relationships in human society. Of course, these ancient Greek thinkers did not ignore the issue of irony, giving it a simple definition.
Irony is the use of words or sayings with the opposite meaning; the purpose of this manipulation is ridicule.
Many politicians and philosophers of the past used irony as one of the key elements of their speeches. It is noteworthy that irony is a great way to present information if you want the listener to remember it for a long time. Indeed, memory has interesting feature– interesting and unusual information is often remembered more easily and for a long time.
Today irony is a subtle mockery that can be used in a form hidden from the listener.
You can learn especially a lot about irony if you study the literature of the late 19th century. During these times, examples of irony in literature poured out as if from a cornucopia. Such techniques were used by writers for the same thing as ancient politicians - to attract attention and remember information. Both in the past and today, the media uses irony techniques, and there are many programs in which this method of transmitting information is almost the only one.
If you are wondering " What is irony?", then it’s best for you to familiarize yourself with this concept using live examples:
“You are the minds, and we are the alas” (Folk Art)
“You are a golden man, Yuri Venediktovich. You think about the people all the time. You need to rest” (Nasha Russia)
“Did you keep singing? That’s the point” (Krylov).
Examples of irony can be cited not only in quotes, for example, the following situation can be described as evil irony:
Person No. 1 led a healthy lifestyle all his life, ate right, neither drank nor smoked. Person No. 2 was his complete opposite: he smoked, drank, and led a riotous lifestyle. Person #1, in the prime of his life, is diagnosed with lung cancer. And person No. 2 lives to a ripe old age.
By skillfully using irony techniques, you can achieve great success in communicating with other people. Experts say that people who regularly use irony in communication, as a rule, have extraordinary intelligence.
The irony is ridicule, containing an assessment of what is ridiculed; one of the forms of denial. A distinctive feature of irony is a double meaning, where the truth is not what is directly expressed, but the opposite of what is implied; the greater the contradiction between them, the stronger the irony. Both the essence of an object and its individual aspects can be ridiculed; in these two cases, the nature of irony - the volume of negation expressed in it - is not the same: in the first it has a destructive meaning, in the second it has a corrective, improving meaning. Irony appears in the early 5th century BC. in the ancient Greek comedy, where among the characters is the “ironist” - a pretender in the street, deliberately emphasizing his modesty and insignificance. In the Hellenistic era, irony is framed as a rhetorical figure that strengthens a statement by deliberately re-emphasizing it. In the same function, irony passes to the Roman rhetoricians and becomes one of the variants of allegory, which was later used by the humanists of the Renaissance (Lady Foolishness in Erasmus of Rotterdam), the authors of the Enlightenment (J. Swift, Voltaire, D. Diderot). Having survived to this day as a stylistic device, irony is conveyed through the speech of the author or characters, giving the image a comic coloring, which means, unlike humor, not condescending approval of the subject of conversation, but rejection of it. The transformation of irony into a philosophical category is associated with the name of Socrates. Although Socrates himself did not use such a concept, it has come to define his critical style since Plato. Socratic irony consists in the denial of both real, objective truth and the subjective idea of the latter; According to this kind of irony, the only truth is self-sufficient negation, as evidenced, in particular, by the philosopher’s famous saying: “I only know that I know nothing.” Socrates' principle of irony, which asserts the contestability and dialecticism of the absolute, was partially supported by Aristotle.
Among the writers of modern times (M. Cervantes, F. Quevedo or L. Stern), irony serves as the starting position of the narrative, which precedes the philosophical and aesthetic meaning that the literature of romanticism gives it, which turned to the antithesis “man - world". In German romantic aesthetics, a special type of romantic irony took shape, which captures the constant movement of thought, the infinity of the spiritual principle, which contains the ideal as an eternal thought that has no finite designation. Romantic irony contrasts the objective world with a flexible, moving ideal - poetic fiction, i.e. ignorance by the artist, the creator of the work, of real phenomena and connections: the embodied perfect can always be ignored by the more perfect fictional. Thus, romantic irony becomes the fundamental artistic principle that distinguishes the work of the romantics. As synonyms for the term “romantic irony,” F. Schlegel, who introduced it (“Critical Fragments”), used the words “arbitrariness” and “transcendental buffoonery,” meaning free play creative imagination around each and every life problem and contradiction. This form of subjective denial was a reaction to the ideology of mercantile rationalism, which discredited human individuality. This essence of romantic irony was transformed by the German romantics of the second generation, for whom the dependence of the spiritual principle on reality was already outlined: in their works, irony refers not only to the external world, but also to the internal, subjective one opposed to it. The romantic approach to life itself turns out to be ironic - romantic irony naturally leads to self-denial. At this time of crisis of romantic consciousness, Schlegel spoke of irony only as a manner of thinking, and not as the starting position of creativity. In new historical conditions, in the teachings of K.V.F. Zolger (“Erwin”, 1815), irony represents the recognition of the descent of the ideal, its refraction in reality, the interconnection and mutual influence of these two opposing principles. In this direction, the concept of irony develops in Hegel’s philosophy, revealing the dialecticism of the sublime and the base, the unity of the universal ideal with the particular material. Hegel criticizes romantic irony, seeing in it an expression of fear of the laws of real life and an incorrect creative principle that excludes the verisimilitude of the work. Hegel finds irony in the fact of the dialectic of all development, and above all historical. In the realism of the 19th century, as in the literature of the pre-Romantic period in general, irony did not have the status of a norm of aesthetic consciousness, because at these stages the subjective worldview was much weaker than in romanticism. Here, irony often merged with satire - which was not at all expected by romantic irony; it turned into sarcasm, becoming a means of exposing and exposing the social structure or certain aspects of life. S. Kierkegaard criticized romantic irony for the “game” that constitutes it, but at the same time, like Socrates, he followed the German romantics when he declared the subject, the individual spirit, to be the bearer of irony, thereby polemicizing with Hegel’s objectification of irony (“On the Concept of Irony” with constant reference to Socrates"). His interpretation of irony as the relationship of the individual to the world was continued by the existentialists (O.F. Bolnov, K. Jaspers), who denied any truth other than existential, except subjective knowledge about life.
In the art of the 20th century, irony takes on new forms, one of which is the author’s detachment from the story told through the introduction of the figure of the narrator (early short stories and “Doctor Faustus”, 1947, T. Mann; G. Böll “Group Portrait with a Lady”, 1971). Irony carries within itself the “alienation effect” in B. Brecht’s theater - the method of presenting familiar phenomena as if from the outside, as a result of which the viewer gets the opportunity to re-evaluate them and make an unconventional, more true judgment about them.
The word irony comes from Greek eironeia, which means pretense, mockery.
IRONY IRONY (Greek - pretense). A mocking expression consisting of attributing to a person or object qualities directly opposite to those that it possesses; mockery in the form of praise.Dictionary foreign words, included in the Russian language. - Chudinov A.N., 1910.
IRONY [gr. eironeia] - 1) subtle mockery expressed in a hidden form; 2) using a word or an entire expression in the opposite sense for the purpose of ridicule.
Dictionary of foreign words. - Komlev N.G., 2006.
IRONY Greek. eironeia, from eironeuma, a mocking word, or question. Ridicule, using respectful and praiseworthy words to express oneself.
Explanation of 25,000 foreign words that came into use in the Russian language, with the meaning of their roots. - Mikhelson A.D., 1865.
IRONY is malice, subtle mockery, expressed in words whose real meaning is the opposite of their literal meaning. Most often it is guessed only by the tone in which a phrase or speech is pronounced.
A complete dictionary of foreign words that have come into use in the Russian language. - Popov M., 1907.
IRONY is a subtle and at the same time somewhat caustic mockery, resorting for its expression to such comparisons that have the opposite meaning. Thus, calling a coward a brave man or a villain an angel means irony.
Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. - Pavlenkov F., 1907.
Irony ( gr. eironeia) 1) subtle, hidden mockery; 2) a stylistic device of contrast between the visible and hidden meaning of a statement, creating the effect of ridicule; most often - a deliberate discrepancy between the positive meaning and the negative connotation, eg: blessed in the golden circle of nobles ii, listened to by kings(Pushkin).
New dictionary of foreign words. - by EdwART, 2009.
Irony of irony, w. [Greek eironeia] (book). A rhetorical figure in which words are used in a sense opposite to the literal one, for the purpose of ridicule (lit.), for example. words of the fox to the donkey: “Where are you, smart one, wandering from, head?” Krylov. || Subtle ridicule, covered with a serious form of expression or an outwardly positive assessment. There was a wicked irony in his praise. Say something. with irony. І Irony of fate (book) - a mockery of fate, an incomprehensible accident.
Large dictionary of foreign words. - Publishing house "IDDK", 2007.
Irony and pl. No, and. (fr. ironie Greek eirōneia feigned self-deprecation).
1.
Subtle mockery expressed in a hidden form. Evil and. AND. fate (trans.: strange accident).
||
Wed. sarcasm. humor.
2.
lit. A stylistic device of contrast between the visible and hidden meaning of a statement, creating the effect of ridicule.
Explanatory dictionary of foreign words by L. P. Krysin. - M: Russian language, 1998.
Philosophical encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editor: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983.
IRONY (from Greek eironeia - pretense, pretense)
h originally a manner of speaking in which the speaker feigns ignorance despite his knowledge, or says something contrary to what he actually thinks or believes (but this must be understood by an intelligent listener). Socrates' irony consisted in the fact that the wise man appeared foolish in front of the ignorant, who seem to themselves to be knowledgeable and wise, so that they could finally learn from their conclusions (through the mouths of others) about their ignorance and stupidity and direct their efforts towards true wisdom. Romantic irony lies in the disposition of the spirit, “when it turns a blind eye to everything, endlessly rises above everything limited, as well as above its own art, virtue or genius” (Fr. Schlegel); irony could be an expression of actual superiority or an attempt to compensate for internal weakness and uncertainty. Existential irony, according to Kierkegaard, is an absolute disregard for aesthetic phenomena in the transition to ethical norms that form the prerequisite for religious self-determination, a disregard whose roots lie in a highly developed Christ. world of feelings (Kier kegaard, ьdber den Begriff der Ironie, 1841).
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. 2010.
IRONY (Greek εἰρωνεία, lit. - pretense) is a category of philosophy and aesthetics that denotes a statement or image of art that has a hidden meaning, the opposite of what is directly expressed or expressed. Unlike satire, edge does not hide its criticism. relationship to the object, I. is a type of hidden ridicule. In it, negation occurs in an emphatically affirmative manner. form. I. consists in the fact that someone agrees, proves, asserts the right to existence of a phenomenon, but in this statement the denial is expressed. relation to the object. Having a meaning opposite to that which is directly expressed, I. presupposes creativity. the activity of the thinking that perceives it, which was noted by Feuerbach in the book. "Lectures on the essence of religion." Lenin writes out this idea of Feuerbach with approval: “...A witty manner of writing consists, among other things, in the fact that it also presupposes intelligence in the reader, that it does not express everything that it leaves to the reader to say to himself about relationships, conditions and restrictions under which this position alone has meaning and can be conceivable" (Works, vol. 38, p. 71). For the first time the term "I." appears in Greek. literature in the 5th century. BC h. In the comedies of Aristophanes I. is used in the negative. sense, denoting “deception”, “mockery”, “cunning”, etc. In “Wasps” (174) Klenoslav acts “cleverly” (eironicos), selling a donkey, in “Clouds” (448) Strepsiades calls an ironist (eiron) a liar. I. receives a deeper meaning from Plato. According to Plato, I. means not just deception, but something that, while outwardly resembling deception, is in fact deep knowledge. In Plato's dialogues, Socrates widely uses language as a means of polemics and proof of truth. Using I., Socrates belittles his knowledge, pretends that he has no idea about the subject of the dispute, assents to his opponent, and then, by asking “naive” questions, brings the interlocutor to the consciousness of his error. Plato characterizes Socratic I. as the self-humiliation of a person who knows that he is not worthy of humiliation. Plato's irony is a mockery that hides deep intellectual and moral values under the guise of self-humiliation. content. Further development The concept of I. is contained in Aristotle, who considers I. as pretense, meaning the direct opposite of boasting. According to Aristotle, pretense in the direction of more is boasting, in the direction of less - I., in the middle between them is truth. Aristotle says that the ironist is the opposite of the braggart in the sense that he ascribes to himself less than what is actually available, that he does not express his knowledge, but hides it. He values ethics highly. meaning of I., considering it one of the most ch. virtues, “greatness of soul,” evidence of the selflessness and nobility of man. personality. The post-Aristotelian understanding of I. loses its depth. I. is defined either as indecision and secrecy (Theophrastus, “Characters”), or as boasting and arrogance (Ariston, “On the Weakening of Arrogance”), or as allegorical. technique of oratory (Quintilian, “Rhetorical Instructions”, IX, 2). In the suit, I. appears in transitional historical periods. periods. Lucian's irony, being a form of decomposition, self-criticism of the ancient. mythology, reflected the fall of antiquity. ideals. The art of the Middle Ages is richly satirical. motives, but they are instructive. character and completely devoid of I. Middle Ages. aesthetics generally criticized I., considering it empty, sophistic. a claim that destroys faith in dogmas and authorities. Thus, Clement of Alexandria believed that its purpose was “to arouse surprise, to bring the listener to open his mouth and become numb... The truth is never taught through it” (“Stromata”, I, 8). During the Renaissance, along with the growth of free-thinking, fertile soil appeared for the flourishing of the arts. practices and aesthetics. theories of I. The suit of this time in burlesque and buffoon form parodies the ancient. and Middle Ages ideals (the poem "Orlandino" by Florengo, "The Aeneid" by Scarron, etc.). In the treatises of this time ("On Speech" by G. Pontano, "The Courtier" by B. Castiglione) I. is considered exclusively as a rhetorician. device, as a figure of speech, helping to avoid “personalities” and expose s.-l. ridicule in the form of a hidden hint. This tradition, which considers speech as a unique method of speech, persisted until the 18th century. Vico in “New Science” defines I. as a trope formed by a lie, “which, by the power of reflection, puts on the mask of truth” (“Foundations of a New Science...”, L., 1940, p. 149). I. receives special significance in German aesthetics. romantics, who attached universal significance to philosophy, considering it not only as a method of art, but also as a principle of thinking, philosophy and existence. The concept of "romantic I." was developed in theory. works of F. Schlegel, directly influenced by Fichte's philosophy. Just as in Fichte’s system of “scientific teaching,” the development of consciousness consists in the endless sublation and positing of “I” and “not I,” romantic. I. lies in the spirit’s denial of its own, self-imposed boundaries. According to the principle of romantic. I., no art. form cannot be an adequate expression of the author's imagination; it does not fully express itself, always remaining more meaningful than any of its creations. I. means creative. fantasy is not lost in the material, definition is not constrained. forms, but floats freely above its own. creatures. I. - where the superiority of what is expressed over the expression itself is expressed. Being free in relation to her material, I. synthesizes opposites, realizing the unity of the serious and funny, tragic and comic, poetry and prose, genius and criticism; “In irony, everything should be a joke, and everything should be serious, everything should be simple-mindedly frank and everything should be deeply feigned” (see F. Schlegel, in the collection “Literary Theory of German Romanticism”, Leningrad, 1934, p. 176) . According to Schlegel, I. removes the limitations of the department. professions, eras and nationalities, makes a person universal, tuning him “now in a philosophical way, now in a philological, critical or poetic, historical or rhetorical, ancient or modern...” (ibid., p. 175). However, this synthesis, carried out on the subjective basis of Fichte's “I,” is illusory, entirely dependent on the arbitrariness of subjective consciousness. Characterizing the romantic. I., Hegel called it “the concentration of the “I” in itself, for which all bonds have disintegrated and which can live only in a blissful state of self-enjoyment” (Works, vol. 12, M., 1938, p. 70). Romantic theory I. is completed in the aesthetics of Zolger, which, emphasizing the dialectical. the moment contained in this category identified it with the moment of the “negation of the negation” (“Vorlesung über Ästhetik”, Lpz., 1829, S. 241–49). Romantic I., embodied in art. practice of L. Tick ("The World Inside Out", "Puss in Boots"), means abs. the author's arbitrariness in relation to the created images: the plot becomes the subject of a play of the author's imagination, the serious tone of the narration is violated by alogisms, the illusion is scenic. action is destroyed by the appearance of the author, the reality of the action is disrupted by the displacement of the plans of the real and unreal, etc. I. is of particular importance in the poetry of Heine, who developed that romantic feature. I., when not only the depicted object is ridiculed, but also the author himself, his position in relation to this object. Heine's irony was a way of getting rid of excessive lyricism and pompous sentimentality, a form of decomposition of the "romantic." illusions of the author and the approval of his criticism. positions in relation to reality. “In Heine, the dreams of the burgher were deliberately elevated, in order to then just as deliberately overthrow them into reality” (F. Engels, see K. Marx and F. Engels on art, vol. 2, 1957, p. 154). Subsequently, the theory of romanticism. I. developed into neo-romanticism. the aesthetics of the symbolists, where it was understood as a technique that exposes the insignificance of a phenomenon, revealing its inconsistency with the ideal (see A. Blok, Balaganchik, Irony, in the book: Soch., 1946, pp. 303–08 and 423–24). With sharp criticism of the romantic. I. Hegel spoke, who pointed out its subjectivism and relativism (see Works, vol. 12, pp. 68–71). Speaking about the “irony of history”, “the cunning of the world’s mind,” he tried to reveal the objective nature of history contained in the development of history. In "Phenomenology of Spirit", showing the dialectic of the development of knowledge from everyday ideas to scientific ones. concepts, Hegel showed an ironic dialectics of moral development. and scientific consciousness. In the bourgeoisie idealistic aesthetic theories of the 2nd half. 19th century I. loses his morals. and philosopher the meaning given to it in the classic. aesthetics. Irrationalistic I.'s interpretation is already contained in Kierkegaard in his doctoral dissertation. “On the Concept of Irony” (S. Kierkegaard, Der Begriff der Ironie, 1841, ed. 1929). Nietzsche openly criticizes antiquity. I., assessing it as a “deceitful cunning” (see Collected works, vol. 1, M., 1912, p. 24). Modern I., according to Nietzsche, expresses pessimism. an attitude towards reality that supposedly borders on cynicism (see ibid., vol. 2, M., 1909, p. 156). Freud reduces I. to technicality. the technique of “depiction using the opposite,” which allows “to easily bypass the difficulties of direct expressions, such as curses...” (“Wit and its attitude to the unconscious,” M., 1925, p. 234). The category I. is of great importance in Marxist-Leninist aesthetics. The classics of Marxism gave this category a wide range of societies. meaning, using it in application to philosophy and the arts. creativity and world history. The young Marx highly appreciated Socratic I., pointing out the need to “understand it ... as a “dialectical trap”, through which the ordinary common sense turns out to be forced to come out of all his ossification and reach... to the truth immanent to himself...". In this sense, I., according to Marx, is a necessary form of theoretical thinking, philosophy. "... And Heraclitus,.. . and even Thales, who teaches that everything consists of water, while every Greek knew that he could not live on water alone... - in a word, every philosopher who defends immanence against the empirical personality resorts to irony" ( Marx K. and Engels F., From Early Works, 1956, p. 199). Emphasizing the critical point contained in I., Engels connected this category with the objective and revolutionary nature of the process of historical development. “What do the crumbs of our wit mean?” compared to the gigantic humor that makes its way in historical development!" (Marx K. and Engels F., Works, vol. 29, 1946, p. 88). "The irony of history" acting "in our favor" is, according to Engels, a form of destruction of people’s illusions about themselves and characterizes the real, objective meaning of history. movements. “People who boasted that they had made a revolution were always convinced the next day that they did not know what they were doing - that the revolution they made was not at all like the one they wanted to make. This is what Hegel called the irony of history, that irony that not many historical figures have avoided" (ibid., vol. 27, 1935, pp. 462–63). Modern bourgeois aesthetics considers art as a characteristic feature of modern times. lawsuit Yes, Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gaset in op. "Dehumanization of art" proves that modern. the claim is doomed to I. and cannot exist otherwise than without I. Only thanks to I., this suicidal mockery of art over itself, “art continues to be art, its self-negation miraculously brings it preservation and triumph” (“The Dehumanization of Art”, N. O., 1956, p. 44) . In ironic and skeptic. in relation to reality sees the character of modern times. lawsuit and it. existentialist Alleman ("Irony and Poetry" - Ironie und Dichtung, 1956). On the contrary, modern progressive aesthetics gives a humanistic interpretation of truth and connects it with the problem of truth. “Objectivity,” writes T. Mann, characterizing the modern so-called epic art, “is irony, and the spirit of epic art is the spirit of irony” (Collected works, vol. 10, M., 1961, p. 277). Sov. aesthetics considers art as the most important means of aesthetic education, as a way of rejecting romanticism. bombast, exaltation and a way of asserting realism. I. is the most important category reflecting creatures. phenomena in the development of modern times. realistic. lawsuit In the works of V. Mayakovsky, S. Prokofiev, B. Brecht, T. Mann, G. Green and others, I. is such a way of reflecting reality, in which the denial of outdated illusions, ideals and views is combined with the retention of the positive, with the affirmation the author's realistic position in relation to reality. Lit.: Galle A., Irony, "New Journal of Foreign Literature, Art and Science", 1898, vol. 3, No. 7, p. 64–70; Berkovsky N., Aesthetic positions of German romanticism. [Intro. Art. to the collection], in the collection: Literary theory of German romanticism, Leningrad, 1934; his, German romanticism. [Intro. Art. to the collection], in the collection: German romantic story, M–L., 1935; Maksimov D.. About irony and humor in Mayakovsky. (To pose the question), "Scientific Bulletin of Leningrad State University", 1947, No. 18; Schas1er M., Das Reich der Ironie in kulturgeschichtlicher und ästhetischer Beziehung, V., 1879; Brüggeman Fr., Die Ironie in Ticks William Lovell und seinen Vorläufern..., Lpz., ; his, Die Ironie als entwicklungsgeschichtliches Moment, Jena, 1909; Pulver M., Romantische Ironie und romanticische Komödie, , 1912; Ernst Fr., Die romantische Ironia, Z., 1915; Thomson J. A. K., Irony. An historical introduction, L., 1926; Heller J., Solgers Philosophie der ironischen Dialektik..., V., 1928; Lussky A. E., Tieck's romantic irony with special emphasis upon the influence of Cervantes, Sterne and Goethe, Chapel Hill, 1932; Reiff P., Die Ästhetik der deutschen Frühromantik, Urbana, Illinois, 1946, S. 230–38: Alleman B ., Ironie und Dichtung, Pfullingen, . Bibliogr., S. 221–30. V. Shestakov. Moscow.Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F.V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970.
IRONY IRONY (Greek ειρωνεία) is a philosophical and aesthetic category that marks the moment of dialectical identification (Self-revelation) of meaning through something opposite to it, something different. As a rhetorical figure, irony is related to satire, and through it to the comic, humor and laughter. The concept of irony develops from the semantic complex contained in the Greek. είρων (ironist, i.e., pretender), meaning a person who says something other than what he thinks, which is often combined with the motive of self-deprecation, self-abasement: Aristotle defines irony as the perversion of the truth (i.e., the “middle”) in the direction of belittlement and contrasts irony with boasting (EN II 7, 1108 d 20 sqq.). According to the definition of the pseudo-Aristotelian “Rhetoric to Alexander,” irony means “to say something while pretending not to say it, that is, to call things by opposite names” (chapter 21). Being aimed at identifying the contradiction between the guise and the being, between words, deeds and essence, irony presupposes, therefore, a certain life position comparable to the position of the Greek. Cynic and Russian holy fool. This is “Socratic irony”, as Plato understood it: Socrates’ self-abasement, his “ignorance” (he knows that he knows nothing), turns into its opposite, allowing one to discover someone else’s “ignorance” as an ironic moment and approach higher, true knowledge. Already Socratic irony in its Platonic-Aristotelian understanding combines irony as a philosophical and ethical attitude, which later gave irony as an aesthetic position, as a rhetorical figure (device) and as a moment of human existence itself. The long-standing rhetorical tradition (from the 4th century BC to the beginning of the 19th century) codifies irony as a technique to the detriment of its vital practical universal significance and dialectical function. New approaches to irony emerge in the 17th and 18th centuries. (in particular, in Vico and Shaftesbury), in the era of Baroque and Classicism, in connection with the intensive understanding of the principles of creativity, creative gift (ingenium), etc. German romantics (F. Schlegel, A. Müller, etc.) anticipate real irony historical formation. Already in F. Schlegel, irony appears as a principle of universal transition within the whole: “Irony is a clear consciousness of eternal mobility, infinitely complete chaos,” “a mood that gives an overview of the whole and rises above everything conventional.” In irony, “negativity” takes precedence over positivity, freedom over necessity. The essence of romantic irony lies in the absolutization of movement, negation, in the final nihilistic tendency, which turns any whole as a living organism into chaos and non-existence - as if at the last moment of the dialectical collapse of this whole. This led to strong criticism of romantic irony from Hegel. However, romanticism also contained a subtle understanding of the mediating role of “negation” in the formation of any living, including artistic whole: already in F. Schlegel, then in Solger, irony mediates the opposing creative forces of the artist and gives rise to a work of art as a perfect balance of extremes, when the idea is destroyed in real being, and reality disappears in the idea. Irony is “the focus of art..., which consists in the sublation of an idea by the idea itself,” it is “the essence of art, its internal meaning”(Zolger. Lectures on aesthetics. - In the book: Aka. Erwin. M., 1978, p. 421). Hegel characterized irony in Zolger as the principle of “negation of negation”, close to the dialectical method of Hegel himself as “the driving pulse of speculative reasoning” (On “Posthumous writings and correspondence of Zolger.” - In the book; Hegel G.V.F. Aesthetics, vol. 4. M., 1978, pp. 452-500; Aka. “Philosophy of Law”, § 140). S. Kierkegaard, in his dissertation “On the Concept of Irony...” (Ombegrabet ironi med tatigt hensyn til Socrates, 1841), was the first to give a historical analysis of irony - both Socratic and romantic. However, Kierkegaard himself leaned towards a kind of ironic existentialism, arguing that “irony is health when it frees the soul from the shackles of everything relative, and it is illness if it is able to endure the absolute only in the guise of nothingness” (Über den Begriff der Ironie, 1976, S. 83-84). In general, “irony as a negative principle is not the truth, but the path” (ibid., S. 231). At the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. Concepts arise in literature that reflect the complexity of the relationship between the artistic personality and the world, for example. in T. Mann: a subject, endowed with the fullness of experience and seeking the truth, feels a tragic connection and split with the world, feels that he belongs to a world of values, which at the same time is deeply questioned and is in a state of crisis. Marx and Engels repeatedly turned to the concept of irony. IN preparatory materials to the dissertation “The difference between the natural philosophy of Democritus and the natural philosophy of Epicurus” (1841), Marx considered irony (Socratic) as a necessary position inherent in philosophy “in its relation to ordinary consciousness”: “every philosopher who defends immanence against the empirical personality resorts to irony”; Socratic irony “must be understood... as a dialectical trap, through which ordinary common sense is forced to emerge from all its ossification and reach... the truth immanent to itself” (Marx K., Engels F. Soch., vol. 40, p. 112). Engels wrote about the “irony of history,” which consists in the contradiction between a plan and its implementation, between the real role of historical figures and their claims, and more broadly, in the contradiction between objective laws historical development and the aspirations of people, between the historical trend and its final outcome. So, analyzing the experience bourgeois revolutions, he noted: “People who boasted of having made a revolution were always convinced the next day that they did not know what they were doing - that the revolution they made was not at all similar to the one they wanted to make. This is what Hegel called the irony of history, that irony that few historical figures have escaped” (ibid., vol. 36, p. 263; see also vol. 19, p. 497; vol. 31, p. 198). Lit.: Losev A.F. Antique and romantic irony. - In the book: Aesthetics and art. M., 1966, p. 54-84; Gulyga A.V. Reading Kant. - In the book: Aesthetics and life, v. 4. M., 1975, p. 27-50; Thomson J. A. K., Irony, an historical introduction. Cambr. (Mass.), 1927; Knox N. The word irony and its context, 1500-1755. Durham, 1961; Strohschneider Kohrs t. Die Romantische Ironie in Theorie und Gestaltung. Tub., 1977; Prang H. Die Romantische Ironie. Darmstadt, 1980; Behler E. Klassische Ironie, romanticische Ironie, tragische Ironie. Darmstadt, 1981; läpp U. Theorie der Ironie. Fr. /M., 1983. Al. V. Mikhailov
New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001.
Goldilocks
Translated from Greek, the word “irony” (eironeia) means “pretense.”
Irony is a subtle mockery that is tried to be covered up with a serious expression or approval. With the help of irony, a person expresses a thought that creates a mocking effect.
Irony is words whose meaning is opposite to what is said. That is, the literal phrase has the opposite meaning.
Irony is a phrase or word that expresses mockery or deceit. A kind of "trick".
For example:
*The current president of Ukraine has a head - the house of councils.*
*Our Prime Minister is the creator of a new unknown language and the author of a unique dictionary.*
*Nowadays parents give their children such beautiful names: Foka, Foka, Frol, Thekla...One can only envy their fantasies. As well as for children who will go to school in a few years.*
*Poor wives of the new Russians! They have so many worries: either make an appointment at the salon, or call the pool cleaner to change the water, or go to boutiques, their legs get tired. And this servant: order food for the cook, give it to the nanny, send the driver for bird’s milk. By the end of the day, like a squeezed lemon.*
Sayan Mountains
Irony is a subtle, veiled mockery, usually exposing something negative (from the Greek eironeia - pretense). Sometimes it is kind, but, as a rule, not very often :).
An example of irony in fiction:
F. I. Tyutchev.
Lyudmila Kozina
If words are used in a negative sense, the opposite of their literal meaning, it is irony. For example: “Well, you are brave!” If translated from Greek, then irony is pretense, i.e. depicting a negative phenomenon in a positive way. In this case, you need to emphasize the feigned tone. If irony is expressed in writing, then the words are placed in quotation marks.
Katrina77
Irony, in my understanding, is a cocktail of humor and a gentle “poking one’s nose” at some problem.
This is a very good way to let people know, without most likely offending them)), that they need to pay attention to something!
Irony often helps me in life...especially if my opponents perceive it adequately...
Moreljuba
By such a concept as “irony” we mean a kind of mockery with notes of negativity at something or someone. It is true that a person can also be ironic at himself, which is by no means given to everyone. Usually, words of irony are pronounced seriously, but with a certain smirk in the intonation.
The USSR
Slightly disguised (just enough for the smart to guess and the stupid to not understand the trick) mockery, teasing - that’s what irony is. It is often used in relation to oneself - in this case we are talking about self-irony.
Albertik
The easiest thing to say is that irony is a mockery of a person, which is expressed as if as a joke.
Irony can best be caught in a person’s intonation, but there is no need to be offended by irony, most often people point out your small shortcomings that you do not notice.
Nikolai sosiura
Irony is an expression that is used figuratively to ridicule the interlocutor.
The words of the one who is ironic are used with a negative meaning, directly opposite to the literal one.
Irony is manifested not only in the text, but also in intonation.
Trew1111
Asking the question: What is irony?, I remembered a story from my life. When my friends laughed at me and even mocked me a little, but I couldn’t understand it. That is, it turns out that irony is such a light mockery that is done with a serious look.
Mant1cora
Irony in my understanding is a veiled (with the help of humor) indication to a person of his wrong action or inaction. It turns out especially interesting when a person takes irony at face value.
Tatiana "@"
Irony (from the Greek eironeia, literally - pretense), 1) in style - an allegory expressing ridicule or slyness, when a word or statement acquires in the context of speech a meaning that is opposite to the literal meaning or denies it, casting doubt on it.
IRONIA (from the Greek eironeia - pretense),
1) denial or ridicule, feignedly clothed in the form of agreement or approval.
2) Stylistic figure: an expression of ridicule or deceit through allegory, when a word or statement takes on a meaning in the context of speech that is opposite to the literal meaning or denies it.
3) The type of comic, when the funny is hidden under the guise of the serious (as opposed to humor) and conceals a sense of superiority or skepticism.
.jpg)
