1. Figurative Language
Sometimes we ask ourselves about why there is figurative language and the importance of it in literary works. What is the role of figurative language and what is the purpose of an author uses it in his or her works. Whether it will give another sense of meaning in the work or not, we will know later. Those are common questions which always come in our brain. That is why figurative language is also a part of some literary elements that appropriate to be discussed.
According to Abrams, figurative language is a conspicuous departure from what users of a language apprehend as the standard meaning of words, or else the standard order of words, in order to achieve some special meaning or effect. Figures are sometimes described as primarily poetic, but they are integral to the functioning of language and indispensable to all modes of discourse (Abrams, 1999: 96).
Abrams explains in his book, A Glossary of Literary Terms, that the existence of figurative language is to achieve some special meaning or effect. That is meant that if it is compared with the sentence which is not figurative language, it will be flat sentence. It has a meaning but did not make an effect to a reader. Sometimes, there are a lot of figurative languages in poetry. But there is some author who uses figurative language in his or her prose. In other words we can conclude that figurative language is more widely used in the writing of literature.
Such as Mark Twain’s work ‘Cannibalism in the Cars’, there are various kinds of figurative language. Mark is known as one of author that has a great skill to arrange the words become more interesting to read. One of the reasons why using figurative language becomes important is to make the readers have an impression while reading.
In this case, we will analyze some of those figurative languages with focused to Paradox, Irony, and Satire. In the next explanation about those, we would know the differences among those each others and knowing the function.
2. Paradox
There are many literary books that explain about the definition of paradox. According to Peter and Fowler in their book of ‘The Rutledge Dictionary of Literary Terms’, paradox is an apparently self-contradictory statement, though one which is essentially true (Peter Child & Roger Fowler, 1973: 166). It means that in paradox statement, there must be two things or more in which those are contradictory meaning each others. Abrams adds the description of paradox as a statement which seems on its face to be logically contradictory or absurd, yet turns out to be interpretable in a way that makes good sense (Abrams, 1999: 201). According to him, its contradictory lies in logic but it is interpretable as a good sense.
Sometime, there are some people who still have the difficulties in analyzing the paradox. Something that they doubt is to determine the part of contradictory. Whether it is contradicted as logically mind or it is contradicted in real condition of the story? That is thing which should be explained clearly.
Let we see the examples in the story of Cannibalism in the Cars, at least there are some statements which is contain the element of paradox. Those are;
Paragraph 7 line 14;
“Cheerfulness gave place to grave concern.”
If we see, there are two words that logically contradictory meaning. The word ‘Cheerfulness’ is usually associated to happiness, party, or something that could make us laugh. But in that sentence, it is compared with word ‘grave’ in which has related meaning as a sorrow, pain, sadness, etc. Trough that sentence, Twain want to describe the condition which is truly happen is fear and anxiety in which they are imprisoned in the snow storm.
From those explanation we know that the contradictory meaning in paradox could be analyzed from two sides; first, it is seen from the real meaning of two words that really contradictory logically without connect it to the story. Second, we see from the truth of a story. Though paradox shows the contradictory two things, but one of them is conditionally true.
To make our understanding up, let’s we see sample of paradox. In paragraph 8 line 10, “It was a weird picture, that small company of frantic man fighting the banking snow...”
The words ‘frantic man’ and ‘fighting’ are logically contradictory. ‘Frantic men’ is a group of men who scare of something. And ‘Fighting’ is an act of struggling something by quarrel or attack somebody. From both of definition, we realize that logically it is impossible that frantic men fight. Usually, a man who scares will not be able to fight. He or she will cry, shuddered, or hide. And from the real meaning, we see that a small company is not afraid to fight the banking snow which is fall down on and on.
The other example is paragraph 13 line 18, “A night of restless slumber, filled with the dreams of feasting-waking distressed with the gnawing of hunger.”
From this sentence, there are at least three phrases that show the contradictory. It is preceded by phrase, ‘Restless slumber’ and ‘Dream of feasting’ which is clearly contradicted. As usual, logically restless slumber is a condition where a person could not sleep comfortably and calmly. And it is so impossible if in that condition a person could dream about feasting or party. And also ‘feasting’ also contradict with ‘gnawing of hunger’ in which feasting is a condition with joyfulness, and full of foods. But in the story explain that they are (a group of man) hunger. As a fact that truly condition is they are hunger.
And this is still same in paradox, paragraph 43 line 3, “With all his gentleness of manner and his soft voice, I shuddered whenever he turns his hungry eye upon me...”
There is phrase ‘soft voice’ and word ‘shuddered’ which is also have the contradictory each others. Those contradict in meaning logically. Usually, ‘soft voice’ will make the listener feel relax. But character ‘I’ shuddered listen his voice.
Then, in paragraph 46 or last paragraph there is a piece of statement that classified to paradox. “...I had only been listening to the harmless vagaries of madman instead of the genuine experiences of a bloodthirsty cannibal.” More and more, clearly we could see two words that really contradict each other and so absurd. In which logically ‘madman’ is always being ridiculous and terrifying. But in the other side it is called ‘harmless’. The words that so opposite and have a contrast meaning.
Abrams explained that paradox was a prominent concern of many New Critics, who extended the term from its limited application to a type of figurative language so as to make it encompass all surprising deviations from, or qualifications of, common perceptions or commonplace opinions (Abrams, 1999: 202). It means that the overview of paradox could be categorized by three aspects. First is a qualification. It will make paradox statement from the deviation of qualification of word. Second is common perception. It is the way to analyze that paradox words through common perception. Every people has different analysis about something, but logically most of them always have same perception if examine the things that universal. And third is commonplace opinion. Almost same with common perception, commonplace opinion is also used to give an analysis of paradox statement universally logically same. Other example is ‘I burn and freeze’. All of us agree that nothing burning caused freeze.
3. Irony
Irony is one of figurative language that shows something different from what actually happened. Generally, it could call same with paradox that show the contradictory of something. Irony is a mode of discourse for conveying meanings different from, and usually opposite to, the professed or ostensible ones. There are several kinds of irony, though they fall into two main categories: situational and verbal (Peter Child & Roger Fowler, 1973: 123). Abrams added that verbal irony is a statement in which the meaning that a speaker implies differs sharply from the meaning that is ostensibly expressed (Abrams, 1999: 134).
From those definitions about irony I myself argue that irony shows the contradictory of situational and it is said with verbal contradictory also. But it is not like paradox, the contradiction is not indicated by two or more words as a sign of contradictory. Contradictory in irony covers whole of story. It means that we have to read overall the story so that we know the real meaning that is truly uttered. Peter said that all irony, however, depends for its effectiveness on the belief in and exploitation of the difference and distance between words or events and their contexts.
Let’s we see the example of irony in some part of Cannibalism in the Cars narration. In paragraph 39 line 7, “That I know was the cheeriest hour of my eventful life.” In this part, the stranger narrator said a word ‘cheeriest’ but actually the situation is inversely proportional to the spoken. The real situation at that time is distress, dreadful, and hunger. It is so far from the meaning of ‘cheeriest’. That is the irony.
And in the next paragraph 42 line 2, “Ah it was like a novel sir – it was like a romance.” In this part, the fact is the overall condition of the story is full of tense and terrifying. The meaning is so different with what have said ‘like a novel, like a romance.’ It is because the word ‘romance’, usually connected with happiness, peacefulness, and so on.
And for the last irony in paragraph 43 line 7, “...my heart fairly stood still!” Actually ‘I’, he has been boring to listen the stranger’s story. He feels not comfort with the stranger narrator but he keeps the silent over time. So, may be this is what Peter meant that irony is divided into two; situational and verbal. It is involved to situational irony in which it is known by the narrative of the story, not from the dialogue. The figure does not tell you directly but by a narrative. Thus, it could be called situational because the contradiction of situation is revealed by narrative.
Typically, this is the form situational irony takes in plays, where narrators, concealed or otherwise, are more difficult to employ; hence the term dramatic irony. Here the eiron is replaced by members of the audience who have been apprised of a character’s real situation before he knows it himself, and who can therefore anticipate and enjoy the frustration of the ideal by the actual (Peter Child & Roger Fowler, 1973: 123).
Abrams adds, the ironic statement usually involves the explicit expression of one attitude or evaluation, but with indications in the overall speech-situation that the speaker intends a very different, and often opposite, attitude or evaluation (Abrams, 1999: 135). Irony could be classified as contextual expression. As I said that to understand what the speaker said in irony, we should read whole the story and we may know the context of it.
Different with paradox, we could analyze it from explicit expression. It means that there are signs of paradox in the statement. Paradox used to use two words or more to indicate the sense of paradox. So, though we did not know the whole story, we would know that is paradox by just reading one statement. It is also called textual side. And those are the differences between paradox and irony.
4. Satire
Besides paradox and irony, there is other figurative language in this story. That is satire. Refer to Concise Oxford English Dictionary, satire is the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices. In figurative language, satire always uses to ridicule something contextually. It means that satire contents of ridiculous to outside story. Usually, it has connected with historical allusion of the story.
Satire can be described as the literary art of diminishing or derogating a subject by making it ridiculous and evoking toward it attitudes of amusement, contempt, scorn, or indignation. It differs from the comic in that comedy evokes laughter mainly as an end in itself, while satire derides; that is, it uses laughter as a weapon, and against a butt that exists outside the work itself (Abrams, 1999: 275).
In the explanation, satire always is same by humor. But actually there is the differentiation between satire and humor. What distinguishes satire from comedy is its lack of tolerance for folly or human imperfection. Its attempt to juxtapose the actual with the ideal lifts it above mere invective (Peter Child & Roger Fowler, 1973: 211). So, intend of satire is the author attacks some object, using as his means wit or humor that is either fantastic or absurd.
Let’s we analyze the example of satire in this story. In paragraph 23 line 1, “MR. A. L. BASCOM of Ohio: I move that the nomination now close and the House proceed to an election by ballot.” That underlined word shows the insinuation to the Congress. May be the author want to mock the selection’s style made by the congress which is not always conducive at that time? It may be, but we never know clearly. Therefore, it is necessary to know the historical allusion to reveal this satire. Allusion is a passing reference, without explicit identification, to a literary or historical person, place, or event, or to another literary work or passage (Abrams, 1999: 9).
Normally, if we become a reader and try to understand intend of satire is to mock something. Then if there is an analysis of satire, there is always allusion that supports it. Allusion used as a reason why the author mocks something in his or her works. Undoubtedly there is a reason why the author does it. Abrams asserted in his book, since allusions are not explicitly identified, they imply a fund of knowledge that is shared by an author and the audience for whom the author writes. Most literary allusions are intended to be recognized by the generally educated readers of the author's time, but some are aimed at a special coterie (Abrams, 1999: 10).
Those are about allusion, and next is paragraph 24 line 3, “...I must beg to move that they be dropped at once, and that we elect a chairman of the meeting and proper officers to assist him, and that we can go on with the business before us understandingly.” Once again, this is may be a satire to the congress which is acts without procedure.
For the last, paragraph 31 lines 2, “...I move to amend it by substituting for the name of Mr. Herman that of Mr. Lucius Harris of St. Louis, who is well and honorably known to us.” According to me, this part is a satire on the characteristic of Americans who really looked at someone on the basis of castle and degree. It is a stereotype of American.
Some modern authors, including Joyce, Pound, and Eliot, include allusions that are very specialized, or else drawn from the author's private reading and experience, in the awareness that few if any readers will recognize them prior to the detective work of scholarly annotators. The current term inter-textual includes literary echoes and allusions as one of the many ways in which any text is interlinked with other texts (Abrams, 1999: 10).
The reason of why I analyze the satire in paragraph 31 is because I remember the history of the American solve the problems of racial equality of black and white. Racialism becomes very difficult to resolve, this is what makes me speculate that most of mindset American in judging a person is based on the degree and honor. This could be categorized as historical allusion. That’s why, satire always associated with allusion, although it is historical, biblical, or mythical.
To gain the function of satire, yet again, writers may use a variety of devices: caricature, exaggeration, parallelism or parody, to achieve similar ends (Peter Child & Roger Fowler, 1973: 211).
Overall, the existence of figurative language is to establish the meaning of words to give some effects and more striking to reader. Figurative language is also one way to realize the author’s thoughts through works he or she had written.
References:
Abrams, M.H. 1999. A Glossary of Literary Terms. United Sates of America: Earl McPeek
Child, Peter & Roger Fowler. 1973. A Routledge Dictionary of Literary Terms. United States of America: Routledge
Payne, Michael & Jessica R. Barbera. 1996. A Dictionary of Cultural and Critical Theory. United States of America: Wiley-Blackwell
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar