论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Mark Twain is regarded as the leading figure of American realistic literature in 19th century. He writes humorously and sharply with distinctive wits and profound insights. The short story Is He Living or is He Dead？ written in 1893 is a good example. Although short in length， the devices of irony and paradox are largely used. The essay will answer the key problem “Is he living or is he dead” by analyzing the plots and words from the perspective of irony in the novel.
【Key words】ironic language； ironic frame； Mark Twain
【作者簡介】陈灏君，昆明理工大学津桥学院。
It is universally acknowledged that Mark Twain is a milestone of American literature. Ernest Hemingway completely approves： “All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called， Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” （Churchwell， 2011） and William Faulkner’s words， “all of our grandfather”“the father of American literature” （Jelliffe， 1956： 88， 140） are more direct and concise. Even Twain himself was proud of it. In the 1890s in Europe， “he wrote in his notebook： ‘Are you an American？ No， I am not an American. I am the American. ’” （Churchwell， 2011） He deserves such a high opinion， because he is the “authentic American ---- a native writer thinking his own thoughts， using his own eyes， speaking his own dialect-everything European fallen away， the last shred of feudal culture gone， local and western yet continental. ” （Vanderbilt， 1989： 315）
Irony has greatly contributed to Twain’s success and then are regarded as his conspicuous styles. Among all his works， the short story “Is He Living or is He Dead？”， is undoubtedly far less famous than “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”， which is called “the Great American Novel”， however， the former， written in 8 years later than the other， displays a more mature humorist.
It is hard to apply an universally accepted definition of “irony”， says Fowler， “… definition of irony—though hundreds might be given， and very few of them would be accepted…. ” （Fowler， 2011） Cleanth explains it as the “obvious warping of a statement by the context： it exists only because of the particular context in which a linguistic component resides. ” （Brooks， 1998： 758） Gilles Deleuze and Jean Francios Lyotard go to one extreme and declare that irony corresponds to humour. （Zhao， 2006： 91） Anyway， the core of “irony” is definite that “the surface meaning and the underlying meaning of what is said are not the same”. （Fowler， 2011）
In the very beginning of the story， Twain arranges ironic plots， as well as ironic words. “At this retired spot （Mentone） one has all the advantages， privately…”—A short but powerful slogan， instantly grasping numerous eyes and hearts. Then， a coloured sketch of its natural beauty unfold， where there is “the flooding sunshine， the balmy air and the brilliant blue sea”. The sense of sight， smell and touch are all activated to set up Mentone. What’s more wonderful， there will never be “the marrying additions of human pow-wow and fuss and feathers and display” to interrupt such tranquility and privacy. In a word， “Mentone is quiet， simple， restful， unpretentious； the rich and the gaudy do not come there. ” Trustworthy guarantee is loudly broadcast. What a successful advertisement！ The ideal resort undoubtedly is firmly rooted in the brain！ Nonetheless， in next moment， the tone subtly adjust while saying “（a）s a rule… the rich do not come there. ” Then， an exception follows and the check fails to be cashed immediately， when “（n）ow and then a rich man comes. ” （Twain， 2009： 190） What to trust if promises always change？ Moreover， with such a picturesque start， it is expected to move along romantically and positively. However， the story abruptly deflects its way. Poverty， starvation， accompanied by frustration and despair and even ambition， conspiracy and death， they are the coordinates of the road， on which the four young artists “kill” themselves and surrender to fame and wealth. Now， they are all capable of leading a comfortably and luxurious life， but mentally and spiritually poor. Francois Millet is representative. “…he is alone in the world…he always looks sad and dreamy， and doesn’t talk with anybody. ” Smith， the tale-teller suffers the same so that he invites me， merely an acquaintance， “up to his parlour to help him smoke and drink hot Scotch. ” （Twain， 2009：191， 192） Both Millet and Smith， they stay at Mentone， the heaven on earth， however， their hearts wither and die， hardly feeling anything happy from the perfect resort. Sharp contrast！ Cruel irony！
Another outstanding application of irony is the accomplishment of the Carl’s great plan， whose content is only one sentence—“one of us must die. ” It is quite easy for the ordinary to perceive its absurdity， so naturally， as soon as hearing it， Millet， Smith and Frere believe that Carl is insane. But， he severely demonstrates the feasibility of the whim： “…by way of preamble I will ask you to note this fact in human history… I make bold to found a law upon it. ” “I base this opinion upon certain multitudinous and long-established facts in human history. ” Formal tone， written language and attractive future work effectively and gradually persuade others in the end. They devote to it with fervent hopes. The normal three accept and join in the crazy event ---- it is the first step. Next， through cunning and covert propaganda， an image of dying master Francois Millet perfectly penetrates into the mass and a panic buying breaks out. Surprisingly and crazily， Carl’s law， “…the merit of every great unknown great and neglected artist must and will be recognized and his pictures climb to high prices after his death， ” （Twain， 2009： 197） is engaged with the real situation like a pair of cog-wheels. The mad proves to be true. Who is mad on earth？
Mark Twain not only uses the device of irony in the structure， establishing an ironic frame of the story， but also applies it in detail， particularly， his designs and intentions are buried beneath those ordinary words. In this delicate work， the repetition of some words are noticeable. “Great” appears with almost the highest frequency among adjectives， as much as 12 times in total. In addition， there are its synonyms within too， such as， five “illustrious”， three “master” and the like. But， given different context， the connotations and tones of each “great” are not thoroughly uniform.
For example， when “great” is linked with somebody， it refers to a person with extremely good qualities， so it is usually an appreciative term. When Smith mentions the name of Millet to me for the first time， I exclaim：”What！ The great Francois Millet？” Here， it is a positive “great”， containing my admiration， though maybe blind. “Great？ He wasn’t any greater than we were， then. ” （Twain， 2009： 193）This is Smith’s answer and the question mark directly speaks out his disapproval and irony. Nevertheless， what he laughs at is not Millet， but the whole project， its four genius participants including Smith himself， its so-called fame and fortune and even the ill society that triggers all. In the end， hearing the secret and knowing the rich silk manufacturer is just the celebrity， I say “Great ----”. （Twain， 2009： 205） The dash reveals my doubt and hesitation of the gold content of the man-made “great”.
As a splendid ending， or the climax of the “great plan”， （Twain， 2009： 199） a “great funeral” is held. Apparently， it is great， for “what a stir it made all over the globe， and how the illustrious of two worlds came to attend it and testify their sorrow. ” See， what a large scale and how formal the language is！ But， a false start that Millet is not dead leads to this great joke. The whole world are April fools and pay the penalty. It is their blindness， vanity and dishonesty that afford a hotbed to they four. Furthermore， it is a significant moment for Millet and his friends. Although it is not a real funeral of Millet， it sings a dirge for they four， because in the great plan， they are “killed”， or rather， their artistic life terminate. Take Millet as an example. From then on， the artist Francois Millet is dead； the living body is Theophile Magnan， a “very rich silk manufacturer”， only remaining a title called “the Great Francois Millet”. （Twain， 2009： 190， 193） Tragically and ironically， it is not Millet’s individual misfortune， but the society’s. Everybody might be the lost Millet.
It is the time to answer Mark Twain’s question： Is he living or is he dead？ A premise must be fixed first. Millet， Smith， Frere and Boulanger， which is the object of the question， namely， who is “he”？ It seems Millet， because after casting lots， he is selected to pretend a dead master with a solemn funeral. As a result， the name Francois Millet is buried together with the wax figure in the coffin and a Theophile Magnan instead. Nevertheless， as I mentioned， the funeral is theirs. What it takes away is not only a name， but also their past， both good and bad： the art life， the friendship， the happiness， as well as the poverty and the obscurity. Thus， he is Millet； he is Smith； he is Frere； he is Boulanger. He is physically alive， but spiritually dead. The four artists died for ever.
References：
[1]Brooks，Cleanth.
【Key words】ironic language； ironic frame； Mark Twain
【作者簡介】陈灏君，昆明理工大学津桥学院。
It is universally acknowledged that Mark Twain is a milestone of American literature. Ernest Hemingway completely approves： “All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called， Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” （Churchwell， 2011） and William Faulkner’s words， “all of our grandfather”“the father of American literature” （Jelliffe， 1956： 88， 140） are more direct and concise. Even Twain himself was proud of it. In the 1890s in Europe， “he wrote in his notebook： ‘Are you an American？ No， I am not an American. I am the American. ’” （Churchwell， 2011） He deserves such a high opinion， because he is the “authentic American ---- a native writer thinking his own thoughts， using his own eyes， speaking his own dialect-everything European fallen away， the last shred of feudal culture gone， local and western yet continental. ” （Vanderbilt， 1989： 315）
Irony has greatly contributed to Twain’s success and then are regarded as his conspicuous styles. Among all his works， the short story “Is He Living or is He Dead？”， is undoubtedly far less famous than “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”， which is called “the Great American Novel”， however， the former， written in 8 years later than the other， displays a more mature humorist.
It is hard to apply an universally accepted definition of “irony”， says Fowler， “… definition of irony—though hundreds might be given， and very few of them would be accepted…. ” （Fowler， 2011） Cleanth explains it as the “obvious warping of a statement by the context： it exists only because of the particular context in which a linguistic component resides. ” （Brooks， 1998： 758） Gilles Deleuze and Jean Francios Lyotard go to one extreme and declare that irony corresponds to humour. （Zhao， 2006： 91） Anyway， the core of “irony” is definite that “the surface meaning and the underlying meaning of what is said are not the same”. （Fowler， 2011）
In the very beginning of the story， Twain arranges ironic plots， as well as ironic words. “At this retired spot （Mentone） one has all the advantages， privately…”—A short but powerful slogan， instantly grasping numerous eyes and hearts. Then， a coloured sketch of its natural beauty unfold， where there is “the flooding sunshine， the balmy air and the brilliant blue sea”. The sense of sight， smell and touch are all activated to set up Mentone. What’s more wonderful， there will never be “the marrying additions of human pow-wow and fuss and feathers and display” to interrupt such tranquility and privacy. In a word， “Mentone is quiet， simple， restful， unpretentious； the rich and the gaudy do not come there. ” Trustworthy guarantee is loudly broadcast. What a successful advertisement！ The ideal resort undoubtedly is firmly rooted in the brain！ Nonetheless， in next moment， the tone subtly adjust while saying “（a）s a rule… the rich do not come there. ” Then， an exception follows and the check fails to be cashed immediately， when “（n）ow and then a rich man comes. ” （Twain， 2009： 190） What to trust if promises always change？ Moreover， with such a picturesque start， it is expected to move along romantically and positively. However， the story abruptly deflects its way. Poverty， starvation， accompanied by frustration and despair and even ambition， conspiracy and death， they are the coordinates of the road， on which the four young artists “kill” themselves and surrender to fame and wealth. Now， they are all capable of leading a comfortably and luxurious life， but mentally and spiritually poor. Francois Millet is representative. “…he is alone in the world…he always looks sad and dreamy， and doesn’t talk with anybody. ” Smith， the tale-teller suffers the same so that he invites me， merely an acquaintance， “up to his parlour to help him smoke and drink hot Scotch. ” （Twain， 2009：191， 192） Both Millet and Smith， they stay at Mentone， the heaven on earth， however， their hearts wither and die， hardly feeling anything happy from the perfect resort. Sharp contrast！ Cruel irony！
Another outstanding application of irony is the accomplishment of the Carl’s great plan， whose content is only one sentence—“one of us must die. ” It is quite easy for the ordinary to perceive its absurdity， so naturally， as soon as hearing it， Millet， Smith and Frere believe that Carl is insane. But， he severely demonstrates the feasibility of the whim： “…by way of preamble I will ask you to note this fact in human history… I make bold to found a law upon it. ” “I base this opinion upon certain multitudinous and long-established facts in human history. ” Formal tone， written language and attractive future work effectively and gradually persuade others in the end. They devote to it with fervent hopes. The normal three accept and join in the crazy event ---- it is the first step. Next， through cunning and covert propaganda， an image of dying master Francois Millet perfectly penetrates into the mass and a panic buying breaks out. Surprisingly and crazily， Carl’s law， “…the merit of every great unknown great and neglected artist must and will be recognized and his pictures climb to high prices after his death， ” （Twain， 2009： 197） is engaged with the real situation like a pair of cog-wheels. The mad proves to be true. Who is mad on earth？
Mark Twain not only uses the device of irony in the structure， establishing an ironic frame of the story， but also applies it in detail， particularly， his designs and intentions are buried beneath those ordinary words. In this delicate work， the repetition of some words are noticeable. “Great” appears with almost the highest frequency among adjectives， as much as 12 times in total. In addition， there are its synonyms within too， such as， five “illustrious”， three “master” and the like. But， given different context， the connotations and tones of each “great” are not thoroughly uniform.
For example， when “great” is linked with somebody， it refers to a person with extremely good qualities， so it is usually an appreciative term. When Smith mentions the name of Millet to me for the first time， I exclaim：”What！ The great Francois Millet？” Here， it is a positive “great”， containing my admiration， though maybe blind. “Great？ He wasn’t any greater than we were， then. ” （Twain， 2009： 193）This is Smith’s answer and the question mark directly speaks out his disapproval and irony. Nevertheless， what he laughs at is not Millet， but the whole project， its four genius participants including Smith himself， its so-called fame and fortune and even the ill society that triggers all. In the end， hearing the secret and knowing the rich silk manufacturer is just the celebrity， I say “Great ----”. （Twain， 2009： 205） The dash reveals my doubt and hesitation of the gold content of the man-made “great”.
As a splendid ending， or the climax of the “great plan”， （Twain， 2009： 199） a “great funeral” is held. Apparently， it is great， for “what a stir it made all over the globe， and how the illustrious of two worlds came to attend it and testify their sorrow. ” See， what a large scale and how formal the language is！ But， a false start that Millet is not dead leads to this great joke. The whole world are April fools and pay the penalty. It is their blindness， vanity and dishonesty that afford a hotbed to they four. Furthermore， it is a significant moment for Millet and his friends. Although it is not a real funeral of Millet， it sings a dirge for they four， because in the great plan， they are “killed”， or rather， their artistic life terminate. Take Millet as an example. From then on， the artist Francois Millet is dead； the living body is Theophile Magnan， a “very rich silk manufacturer”， only remaining a title called “the Great Francois Millet”. （Twain， 2009： 190， 193） Tragically and ironically， it is not Millet’s individual misfortune， but the society’s. Everybody might be the lost Millet.
It is the time to answer Mark Twain’s question： Is he living or is he dead？ A premise must be fixed first. Millet， Smith， Frere and Boulanger， which is the object of the question， namely， who is “he”？ It seems Millet， because after casting lots， he is selected to pretend a dead master with a solemn funeral. As a result， the name Francois Millet is buried together with the wax figure in the coffin and a Theophile Magnan instead. Nevertheless， as I mentioned， the funeral is theirs. What it takes away is not only a name， but also their past， both good and bad： the art life， the friendship， the happiness， as well as the poverty and the obscurity. Thus， he is Millet； he is Smith； he is Frere； he is Boulanger. He is physically alive， but spiritually dead. The four artists died for ever.
References：
[1]Brooks，Cleanth.