Isn't It Ironic? Well, Some Of It, YES

Time to discuss this stupid, now dated argument.

Irony is one of the most misused and misunderstood words in the English language, despite its fairly simple dictionary definition.  Dictionary.com defines it as “the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning.”  Easy, right?  Well anyone with a basic understanding of the English language knows that irony is usually saved for humor (not necessarily a jokey joke!) or exaggerative purposes, thus confusing a person when they are questioning whether to call something ironic or not.

And, of course, this includes Alanis Morrissette.

Thanks for setting the record straight, Brett!

Since the song was released in 1995, the general meme about Morrissette’s “Ironic” is that, well, nothing in it is ironic.  I might be 16 years late on this post, but since it is a claim I STILL hear, I figured it was time to set the record straight, stand on my pedestal, and claim that, though not EVERYTHING in the song is ironic, it does actually contain some ironic situations, with the potential for more.  Sorry, but it’s not simply black and white, even though I know people love it when things are. 

Let’s go through line by line (lyrics in italics, thoughts in bold) and analyze.

An old man turned ninety-eight
He won the lottery and died the next day

Without knowing background on said old man, it’s really hard to say.  Now, had the old man played the lottery every single day of his life while claiming “I CANNOT LIVE MY LIFE PROPERLY WITHOUT THE COMFORT OF LOTTERY WINNINGS.  UNTIL THEN I WILL BE A SHELL OF MY POTENTIAL.  AND ONCE I WIN THE JACKPOT, I SHALL BE THE GREATEST LIVING HUMAN THIS WORLD HAS SEEN,” and then died the day after he won the prize, then that would be ironic.  But since it’s a three minute song, we cannot go into the history of the old man’s finances, therefore Alanis probably shouldn’t have used this example. 

It's a black fly in your Chardonnay

Is this even a horrible thing?  I assume whatever disease the bug is potentially carrying would probably die in the alcohol.  Plus, the fly may have protein making it a nice accessory.  Regardless, it’s NOT ironic, maybe a tad unpleasant at worst?

It's a death row pardon two minutes too late

In my opinion, this is the first thing in the song that is ironic.  Assuming the criminal was on death row, he probably engaged in years of appeals to clear his name to no avail.  The fact that someone would give him a pardon, proving innocence two minutes after he was actually killed…hmmm, I’d consider this ironic.  Again, it involves assumption, but well, it’s a short song.    

And isn't it ironic... don't you think?   Well, so far one thing is clearly not ironic, one seems to be ironic, and the third has high potential for irony.  So while this is probably not what she was going for when creating the song, at least she’s not the complete idiot some make her out to be.    

It's like rain on your wedding day – Probably sucks, but not ironic
It's a free ride when you've already paid – If you’d be searching for the free ride for a while and then finally decided to pay only to find out the free ride just presented itself, it miiiiight be ironic.  But it’s a stretch, it could just be coincidence, but it depends on the situation. 
It's the good advice that you just didn't take – Definitely has the potential for irony.  Though I’d like to know what this good advice that she cannot take is.  The content of said advice probably would help decide whether or not it’s ironic. 
Who would've thought... it figures – I dunno what the fuck this even means.

Mr. Play It Safe was afraid to fly
He packed his suitcase and kissed his kids goodbye
He waited his whole damn life to take that flight
And as the plane crashed down he thought
"Well isn't this nice..."
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

OK, this verse can be completely ironic or not, pending on the tone of the “well, isn’t this nice...”  Here we have old Joe Play It Safe (is that Dutch?), who essentially waited his entire life to take a flight, simply because he was afraid of crashing.  It’s implied that he was so fearful of grim death that he avoided this safe, convenient way of traveling for his entire existence. 

Now, here comes the tricky part.  If Alanis is saying “Well, isn’t this nice” in a SARCASTIC tone, it’s not ironic.  It’s actually the expected outcome considering he always figured he’d crash if he flew.  If the “well, isn’t this nice” is NOT SARCASTIC, and he is actually enjoying the plane’s death spiral towards the Earth, then it’s a very ironic story.  

Anyone know the tone? 

Well life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
When you think everything's okay and everything's going right
And life has a funny way of helping you out when
You think everything's gone wrong and everything blows up
In your face

True, I suppose?  We can swirl irony into this little life theory of hers. 

A traffic jam when you're already late – Nah, this just sucks.  Leave earlier next time.  I live in Los Angeles, I always expect traffic. Not ironic. 
A no-smoking sign on your cigarette break – Not ironic unless said sign is next to a similar sign that states DESIGNATED SMOKING AREA.  More info, Alanis!
It's like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife – I’d say this is pretty f’n ironic considering I’ve never been around 10,000 spoons before. 
It's meeting the man of my dreams
And then meeting his beautiful wife  -- That’s just unfortunate.  Though I question how well she knew this “man of her dreams” if she didn’t even know he was married.  Perhaps Alanis is too much of a romantic, or maybe the “man of her dreams” is a douchbag that hid the fact that he was married for years, therefore questioning Alanis’s moral code when choosing mates if he’s still the man of her dreams.  Perhaps he ceased to be the dream man upon discovering his relationship status.   Never fear, Alanis, Dave Coulier is probably still single.  Either way, not ironic. 
And isn't it ironic...don't you think - Nope
A little too ironic...and, yeah, I really do think...  – In this case, I really don’t.

So, as you can see, yes, much of the song doesn’t involve irony, though a good portion of it actually holds the potential for irony if she’d only elaborate on the proposed situations.  Perhaps for the 20^th anniversary of Jagged Little Pill, Alanis will channel her inner Arlo Guthrie and pound out a 25 minute version of the song filled with detailed stories about her subject’s lives.  Until then, it remains a mystery.

But, regardless, there is SOME irony in the song, so can we quit saying NOTHING in it is ironic? 

(and I look forward to someone writing about how it’s ironic that I’m writing about irony, yet don’t understand what irony truly is.  I’m sure you’re out there, bring it on).   

Is it me....

... Or has DreamWorks animation managed to create the only non-cute panda in the history of pandas? 

E-Readers and Amazon

I don’t have a ton to add to the fact that Amazon is now selling more e-books than print books, but I am surprised by the rapid growth of the medium.  Obviously the ability to easily carry numerous books and magazines in a single tablet is attractive and convenient, but because I always considered the turning of the pages, the smell of the book, dog-earing, bookmarks, etc  to be part of the special experience of reading, I figured there would be a little more resistance to the turnover. 

Then again, I personally questioned whether or not I’d like using an e-reader and quickly adapted to actually reading books off my IPhone.  I still do buy print books from time to time, but I suppose I'm part of the revolution as well.

Will libraries soon be obsolete in favor of vast online databases? 

Does it...

annoy anyone else that Bristol Palin is still garnering media attention? 

Universal Healthcare is Good...that is until it becomes a political albatross!

Mitt Romney wants to earn the GOP nomination for the 2012 election.

Mitt Romney passed a universal healthcare bill while governer of Massachusetts.

Republicans don't like universal care and yearn to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Mitt Romney's Massachusetts healthcare plan looks a lot like the Affordable Care Act.

Mitt Romney has a big problem.

So, when in doubt, flip flop.   Yesterday, Mitt Romney addressed a Michigan crowd and explained, armed with a powerpoint, the differences between his Massachusetts act and the Affordable Care Act..  His major gripe was that healthcare should be solved as a state issue and not a federal one, even though the one he chose for his state (a successful plan by the way) mirrors the federal plan.  This, at face value, makes no sense to me other than the fact that Republicans generally like states' rights (because most feel we still live in the 1800's), thus he's trying to appease a base that questions him.  But even though I'm not convinced its best left as a states rights issue, Romney claims the ACA is a forced "one size fits all" approach to healthcare that is doomed to fail...except...the bill actually has a state waiver that allows states to pursue their own healthcare plan as long as it, essentially, meets the general requirements of the ACA. 

On a similar note, the Massachusetts law requires the individual mandate that many Republicans are claiming is unconstitutional.  Romney agrees that the mandate isn't valid because of its use on a federal level, but could be used on the state level if the state chooses to do so, even though most Republicans consider the mandate outright wrong because it forces people to buy something even if they'd prefer not to. 

The question is, how bad does this make him look to his base?  It seems as if he's fighting a losing argument with a paper thin defense.  After all, Republicans find his Massachusetts plan objectionable.  Knowing Romney often switches positions to appease his audience (he was once pro-choice until that became complete poison for a GOP presidential nominee), how soon will he denounce his own plan for the sake of victory? 

Just an observation.  It doesn't take a genius to know this is gonna be a hard one from him to weasel out of. 

Should 90 Year Old War Criminals Go To Jail?

Interesting story on the wire today about the trial/conviction of John Demjanjuk, a 91 year old, retired American autoworker that was accused of aiding the murder of 20,000+ Jews while working as a guard for the Sobibor death camp in Nazi occupied Poland during World War 2.  Apparently, Demjanjuk has been involved in over 30 years of legal proceedings, including being sentenced to death in Israel during the 80’s, only to have that conviction overturned due to possible mistaken identity.

First off, it’s kind of bizarre that this is occurring at all, as World War Two has become one of America’s greatest cultural and historical relics.  It’s been preserved and displayed in countless films and books that have frozen 1939-1945 in this timeless, even romanticized history lesson that helps explain a forgotten time period.  It feels like a closed book that we’ll open in a similar manner we would one on the medieval period.  So to think there are still court cases that deal with this closed period of history strikes me as kind of funny (not in the ha-ha way). 

Clearly much evidence was lost over the past sixty years, defendants and witnesses have died off, so it’s hard to build a case with iron clad evidence against Demjanjuk for crimes committed a lifetime ago, especially ones that may have been carried out under duress.  As a Jew (even as a non-practicing one), the Holocaust has always been a cloud over even my personal history as it’s something I’ve heard about even as a small child.  And while it’s certainly possible that Demjanjuk played a hand in the deaths, I wonder what the point of sentencing an ailing 91 year old man to prison for crimes he committed over half a century ago is (not to mention, there will probably be a yearlong appeals process).

But regardless of this particular case, it is interesting to note that society seems to assume that the only possible true form of punishment is a prison term, and I’m honestly not sure why, as there are multiple ways the system forces accused criminals to “pay for their crimes.”  In the unique case of Demjanjuk, there has been a clear life altering thirty years of legal proceedings, which no doubt led to assumed deserved public humiliation/shame, society ostracization, numerous dollars spent for lawyers (etc), and essentially a 30-year major pain in the ass.  I’m not quite sure what the benefit of adding jail time to this process would be other than to fulfill a strange understanding that a prison sentence is the ultimate goal when doling out punishment.  But why?  What is it about locking someone up that gives the public some kind of cathartic benefit?  It’s not as if a 91 year old (or any senior citizen) is a real threat to society.  Why is the idea of isolating someone from society in a closed, unpleasant area considered the ultimate justice?   To this point, what purpose does the continued effort to lock up a 91 year old really have when it seems that most of his adult life has already been under the microscope?  Would people really feel better if someone gave him a swift kick to the jewels at this point?

Really, what kind of justice is being served by this?  It seems more like a piece of dated political theater, like some true to life modern day play about aging World War 2 war criminals rather than an important stand against crime.  Not to mention, a waste of resources. 

But I know this is a touchy subject, curious to hear people’s thoughts.

Flying

The fact that humanity somehow was able to create a metal box that can fly across the country in five hours is astounding.  But even more curious is why many react to the idea of a flight with hostility usually reserved for the DMV or, I dunno, waterboarding.  Whether it be complaints about the airport, or the simple fear of flying, we have collectively equated one of our coolest and most impressive processes to a trip to the dentist. 

Let's start with the first step in the pre-flight process:  The airport.  From listening to some people complain, one may assume the airport is a modern torture chamber instead of what it really is:  a shopping mall that planes fly in and out of, and a hub of activity the includes citizens of the world.  In fact, I'm not sure if there are statistics about this, but I can only assume that international airports are the world's true cultural melting pots. To me, there's something beautiful about people from all over the globe using the airport as a brief resting stop before traveling thousands of miles to a new destination.  People watchers delight!  Obviously, most don't seem to agree.

Sure, security can be a pain, yeah there may be traffic on the way, but I know too many people who like to leave for the airport at the last possible second in an effort to spend as little amount of time there as possible.  I have friends who will gladly sit around their houses for a half an hour with nothing to do instead of getting to the airport a little early where they will, god forbid, have to sit comfortably, go to a restaurant, shop for a new pair of sunglasses, people watch, or if you happen to be at Las Vegas's McCarren, gamble.  Plus, the only thing stressful about the airport is the possibility of actually missing your flight.  Yet these same people gladly throw caution to the wind and invite this possibility, making the traffic filled ride to the airport and subsequent run through security into an unnecessary stressful situation. 

Then there's the irrational fear of actually flying.  There are dozens of activities we do on a daily basis that put us at more risk of injury or death than a simple flight does.  Sure, plans crash, but at such an infrequent rate that their "success" record is unparalleled.  The funny thing is even if I throw out statistics that suggest driving a car puts you at greater risk than a flight; its hardly news to those who fear flying.  They agree and then say, "yeah, but you know, whatever." So why are people terrified?  Is it a lack of control?  Is it because the knowledge that even a slight problem may cause, at most, death, and, at least, a terrifying experience?  Why does the fear of this rare possibility severely outweigh the statistics?

Anyway, food for thought.  Louis CK did have a great bit about this.  Click here for some laughs and rationality.