Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
perspectives, effect
effect . The overriding impression that
one is left with is that sweatpants are more than merely indicative of shame and
demoralization; viewed through Lagerfeld's gimlet eye, they are one and the same
thing.
By drawing our attention to superficial similarities and deep dissimilarities
between what is expected and what is real, devices like chiasmus can pack a powerful
ironic punch. Yet, though chiasmus offers a convenient vehicle for packing ironic
insights into a structurally pleasing form, such devices can often be too easy to use,
allowing one to fake the presence of cutting insight with little more than cut-and-
paste . Consider the following exchange from the 1999 comedy Mystery Men , which
concerns the misadventures of a group of wannabe superheroes with underwhelming
powers. Mr. Furious has anger management issues, while the Sphinx's only power
is an ability to torture syntax until it yields an apparent profundity.
The Sphinx : He who questions training, only trains himself in asking questions. […] Ah yes,
work well on your new costumes my friends, for when you care for what is outside, what is
inside cares for you. […] Patience, my son. To summon your power for the conflict to come,
you must first have power over that which conflicts you.
Mr. Furious : Okay, am I the only one who finds these sayings just a little bit formulaic? “ If
you want to push something down, you have to pull it up. If you want to go left, you have to
go right. ”It's…
The Sphinx : Your temper is very quick, my friend. But until you learn to master your rage
Mr. Furious : …your rage will become your master? That's what you were going to say.
Right? Right?
The Sphinx : Not necessarily.
That wonderful last line says it all: the Sphinx has hit on a successful formula
for mere generation , to turn casual utterances into guru-like prognostications. His
utterances appear deep, yet they are little more than superficial repetitions with
crossover. One can imbue them with real meaning, of course, but it is clear that
meaning takes a back seat to surface form in the Sphinx's need to appear wise and
all-knowing. We laugh at the Sphinx because his formulaic use of rhetorical devices
has made him necessarily predictable. This is the essence of a deterministic formula:
it always produces the same outputs for the same inputs, making a weak demurral
such as “ Not necessarily ” all the more risible.
Yet all rhetorical devices are formulas of a sort. It is their repeated utility in
different contexts that makes them worthy of study by those who want to give their
arguments a form that most effectively reflects their meaning. As an orator, the Sphinx
is a one-trick pony; he is predictable not because chiasmus is always predictable,
but because he is always predictable in his choice of chiasmus. As a device for
inverting an opponent's argument, chiasmus has few equals, yet we tire quickly of
any device that is used too often and with too little variety. Were the Sphinx to up his
game, and use a wider variety of rhetorical forms to better convey an impression of
mental agility, we might pay more attention to what he has to say. For the syntactic
manipulation of surface forms is actually a reasonable strategy for exploring theworld
of ideas. Words are often our only handle on subtle feelings and half-formed ideas,
cause and cause
Search WWH ::




Custom Search