Sarcasm seems to be finding me in many places recently, but since my life right now is Americorps NCCC it's my most recent medium for exposure. I would be inclined to believe that perhaps I am just too sensitive to the sharp come backs, the stinging remarks, the laughter disguising angry remarks, but my deep respect for love and the community inform me otherwise. I often interpret sarcasm as teasing in disguise, or anger without confrontation. One friend described sarcasm as "cheap humour at an others expense. Humour for people who don't know how to be funny."
Even in groups where all participate in equally bashing, each equally pointing out every mistake of the others, there seems to be a serious lack of respect for the possibilities of a loving dialogue. Recently team members of mine said they would prefer people laugh and make fun of them when they trip and fall then ask if they are alright.
I know that this is true for many people but I am still appalled when I hear it. When living in Northern Ireland I learned that people like Oprah would never fly in Northern Ireland because their genuineness would be in question. I have heard similar and said similar things of people like Bono. Why is it so hard to accept a genuine loving response? Perhaps because far to often it is used to coerce a gift, favour or fame. Or is it the lack of community depth and relationships which rest on more than the mutual use of the sidewalk?
Recognizing that Northern Ireland and similar places have been shaped by an incredibly deep wound, are we to believe that our community has been equally shaped by a different but equally harming wound? If we are to believe that this wound exists, does our use of sarcasm to mask the wound truly help in the work toward reconciliation. Does the short term relief through sarcasm hurt our long term recovery? Now Northern Ireland is known to have some of the darkest humour, much like ambulance and ER workers, the connections between the two are not hard to make. However the use of humour to collectively gain relief from a serious and difficult time is a wise use of time coupled with other works.
I am digressing. What I am looking at is the replacement of sarcasm with caring dialogue that focuses on the loving/positive aspects of the relationships. Of course without ignoring the hurt. This view of a wounded community is here put into perspective because of my constant search for the good. I know, I KNOW that this search is not my singular quest, but a quest shared by more people than can be counted. I believe that far fewer people actually experience the use of love for coercion than those touched by its effects. Often like in blighted neighborhoods where even if you have had no personal experience with the police you are hardened to their position by the experiences shared in the community. It is that mistrust that breeds the further occurrence of police/community conflict. The work of the police to gain the trust of the community seems that much harder because of the built mistrust. The same definitely goes for those who use sarcasm to hide and release anger without coming to terms with its effects on the self and the other.
Perhaps I have gone to far without truly defining sarcasm and deciding whether there can be constructive and useful sarcasm. I use sarcasm to take jabs at our political figures as has been done for centuries though I personally like to call this wit. Consulting my favorite source for word debates Merriam Webster should help,
Sarcasm: 1:a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain 2:a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual.
Wit: suggests the power to evoke laughter by remarks showing verbal felicity or ingenuity and swift perception especially of the incongruous.
While perhaps with these definitions the differences are unclear the truth still remains that Sarcasm which is used to jab or tease others, however playfully, causes wounds that may be imperceptible to the participants but ripples through the community. I don't know if this is making sense any more but if nothing else sarcasm like teasing and bullying are while sometimes great momentary reliefs of anger they are not constructive ways to actually build a cohesive and strong community.
If we truly believe that love does conquer all, would that mean starting with the conquering of sarcasm that cuts love open like a festering wound in our daily language?
4 comments:
Christopher Weir wrote
at 4:40am on July 3rd, 2007
I just have to pick upon the comments about Northern Ireland. It's not that we question the genuiness of Oprah or Bono. It's just that the Irish/British/Northern Irish have a strong sense of reality and have no time for such exuberance of emotion. For example, there is cynicism about Bono as he strides ther world attempting to avchieve effective debt relief when, in reality, he has made no difference whatsoever. Yes, he has raised millions for charity but the self-righteous attitude with which he thinks he can solve the third world crisis is repulsive. It's not sarcasm, it's called honesty. As for Oprah, she does great work but the public adoration which she instigates herself is rather unnecessary.
thank you for commenting on my blog, I was begining to think noone read it anymore. I feel like what you call exuberance of emotion is to me a person reaching out emotionally to people. I totally agree that bono himself may not have done a lot for debt relief but he has raised awareness for people who would unfortunatly may never have known about these issues. I don't think that people who don't show that kind of emotion have a greater or lesser sense of the world I just think that the sarcasim that cuts into people is unneccessary at any level. I didn't intend to make a connection between sarcasm and looking at reality. Thank you for helping to clarify this. I hope you weren't offended by my NI connect I was just thinking of that comment that was told to me while I was there.
Hi Cass,
This is a good post and it got me thinking about this very tricky subject. I also find it quite shallow and unnecessary, but tolerable in small measures. I guess it serves the purpose of allowing people to be shallow and fickle - instead of honest and straightforward - where/when the feel circumstances call for it,(no excuse really) because everyone else around them is that way (which would point to a general group insecurity) or where people just don't feel secure enough as individuals to be open with others or to stand in their own shoes , so they use sarcasm as a defence mechanism - almost like launching "pre-emptive strikes" to keep others at arms length and sometimes its just "to be in"/be popular/remain accepted within their peer groups or broader society which (misguidedly) might consider sarcasm to be a high form of wit.
Although sarcasm might be quite "clever" or sharp in terms of always having a quick sarcastic response ready, it in no way reflects any deep level of intellectualism, wisdom, creativity, independence of thought or more importantly - compassion or empathy - and that's where sarcasm's real deficiency lies.
From my experience we might find different levels of sarcasm in different places - for example there's definitely more sarcasm in London than in Belfast, (I cannot honestly say that I have not come across sarcasm in Northern Ireland, but generally I found people to be more outspoken and genuine - as you pointed out.), but it could also depend on the social or work groups that we move in. Younger people might indulge in it more than older people. It might also increase and reduce in popularity. (tricky subject indeed! ;-)
When we have a strong sense of self we would of course not be too negatively affected by constant exposure to the heavy use of sarcasm, but we might also simply just opt to move on and to not expose ourselves to so much constant and draining negativity.
Personally I do think that its unfortunate to find such a high level of sarcasm within a social development organisation/project like the one you work for and you are rightly raising some questions about it.
Jacques
Post a Comment