Wiston Papers

I Was Being Sarcastic, Not That You Would Know.

Our daughter sent us an article about sarcasm.  The focus was how and when we learn to recognize and use it.  There were several examples.

I suspect that she was telling me something, but didn't state it overtly.  My wife, of course, had no such reservation.  

The idea of sarcasm and how early we learn both to use it and to detect it is fascinating.

I am aware that autistic children do not perceive sarcasm because of their inability to process cues of social intercourse.  For most of us, however, we learn these cues.  But how and why did sarcasm develop?

An obvious theory would be related to the social intercourse I alluded to in the previous paragraph.  If one is reared in a society where certain norms are expected of its inhabitants--and members generally abide by such rules of conduct--then how does one disagree without violating the code?

Certainly one could exhibit disagreement is several overt ways such as physical confrontation.  However, committing murder or corporal injury certainly would be frowned upon and most likely result in ostracism and banishment from the fellowship of the community.  

But disagreements are inevitable among humans beings so some mechanism must either exist or be developed to permit the exchange of different opinions yet maintain a requisite civility.

There is a wide range among cultures in the degree to which members can express independent thought or action.  In Asian societies that place a high value on conformity, I would think that specific verbal mechanisms exist to permit a display of individualism yet not upset societal equilibrium.

I have told this story before.  As a former university professor working with graduate students I had many conversations about the students’ final research projects.  Asians, at first blush, appeared to be especially docile and reticent to argue for a position contrary to my own.   They would come to my office, make a request, then seemingly agree with every statement I made as to why their idea would not be wise.

Nevertheless, I frequently realized afterward that--although I believed I had persuaded them--these Asian students often left my office having achieved much of what they sought.  I was baffled as to why.  Polite persistence certainly was one answer.  Sarcasm was never employed, but the students were adept at a level of verbal fencing that was persuasive.   Civility was maintained and no social faux pas committed.

However, in more intense debates among themselves do Asians and other deferential societies employ a high level of sarcasm?   If so, is it because it’s a vehicle for conveying potentially disagreeable ideas without expressly challenging the other?  If so, is sarcasm reserved for those forums where a single individual wants to have the widest possible dissemination of an alternative view yet not overtly challenging the status of the other?

In my recent readings of 19^th Century British novelists, I have seen authors portray characters as adept at verbal confrontation through sarcasm that does not explicitly express hostility or is opening demeaning.  

Some societies--in the West for example--individualism is valued and even encouraged.   Does this affect how its members employ language?  Is sarcasm more prevalent in the U.S. rather than Japan or China?

Sarcasm, in my opinion, seems a way of expressing a particularly mean or disagreeable attitude.   In the article our daughter sent, I’m not sure that I would label all of the remarks as sarcasm.  Other terms—that escape me at the moment—seem more accurate descriptions.  But maybe I'm not as adept at recognizing cues as I should be.

Nevertheless, we certainly learn to perceive, understand and use sarcasm at an early age.  So it certainly has a function in our association with other people.  At least for some of us some of the time.

Steve Coon

April 30, 2012