Irony in Hunters in the Snow and How I Met My Husband Essays

Irony in Hunters in the Snow and How I Met My Husband Essays Irony in Hunters in the Snow and How I Met My Husband Paper Irony in Hunters in the Snow and How I Met My Husband Paper Irony in Tobias Wolffs Hunters in the Snow and Diane Munros How I Met My Husband Irony in Tobias Wolff’s â€Å"Hunters in the Snow† and Alice Munro’s â€Å"How I Met My Husband† Irony expresses and often underlines the contrast between two opposite concepts creating an indirect, more sophisticated method of communication. Irony is as efficient in a literary work, as the reader can perceive it. Therefore, often times the reader must carefully analyze the material, reading it repeatedly if necessary, in order to fully understand the author’s message and intent. Tobias Wolff and Alice Munro employ irony in their short stories in attempt to surprise the readers, giving them an opportunity for discovery. In Wolff’s â€Å"Hunters in the Snow†, irony acts as a tragicomedy agent, but its role is mainly to reveal the true nature of the protagonists’ characters. On the other hand Munro’s use of irony gives her story, â€Å"How I Met My Husband†, a nice and funny finale, suggesting coming of age through epiphany and also the transition from phantasy to reality. Hence, irony is used differently in the two stories, such that in Wolff’s story it is a repetitive theme that keeps the reader engaged, while in Munro’s story irony provides the punch-line ending. In the short story, Hunters in The Snow, written by Tobias Wolff, the reader is presented with many elements of irony. The main characters of the story are three friends with personal issues that have a life-changing day in their lives. The three friends meet on a weekend to go deer hunting. It is the middle of the winter and the weather and environment they are in, which is upstate Washington state, is described as quite cold and inhospitable, which creates a slight discomfort in the reader. The author mentions that â€Å"two years in a row they’d been up and down this land† (87) in the same area they were heading. So one would think the three must know this area inside and out. At the end of the story though, they prove us otherwise: â€Å"They had taken a different turn a long way back† (99). They get lost and do not even notice it, probably causing Kenny’s death. The connection between the fact that they know the area and that they lose their way anyway is not very apparent, yet I consider it one of the biggest situational ironies of the story, partly because it is the most tragic one. The main character seems to be Tub, an overweight man with an eating disorder, since he was presented first and also in most detail. Even though Tub is being overly cautious with his rifle by taking the bolt out before he enters the truck, which is not a common practice among hunters, he later shoots Kenny in a blink of an eye. The author mentions that Tub â€Å"shot from the waist† (91), which means that this was an instinctive reflex in self-defense. The other two characters are Kenny, the prankster of the group and Frank, the intellectual of the group, who seems like the leader of the group in the beginning of the story. Both Kenny and Tub look up to Frank and show him what seems to be undeserved respect. As we find out later on he is clearly unworthy of the respect initially given to him. The irony of the situation is that Frank becomes quickly a subordinate of Tubs will. After Tub stands up to Frank and confronts him physically about the constant bullying, Frank instantly loses face and starts trying to please Tub in any way possible, completely ignoring the wounded Kenny. From being the leader of the group he becomes this puppy, doing everything he can to gain Tub’s approval, as his initial friendship to Kenny seems to have evaporated or never have truly existed. This situation is similar to an everyday occurrence in society of a person cheating on their spouse then eventually marrying the person they cheat with, yet it does not occur to that person they cheated with, that history might repeat itself. Tub accepts Frank’s apparent sensibility towards him instantly, without questioning his integrity and without realizing that he is most likely to become the next Kenny. In the beginning of the story Kenny puts Tubs life in danger by driving fast, halfway on the curb towards Tub. So one could say Kenny was playing with Tubs life. He then laughs uncontrollably at Tub â€Å"slapping his knees and drumming his feet on the floorboards† (86). And somehow this turns back against him, when he is the one shot by Tub later on in the story. When they stop to rest by the creek Kenny actually talks about choosing to be burned on the stake if â€Å"you ask me how I want to die today† (88), referring to the unpleasant cold weather they were having. This is yet another proof of Kennys ignorance towards the importance of life, and death for that matter. He is also presented as the best hunter in the group: â€Å"this will be the first season since I was fifteen I haven’t got my deer† (90), so it is ironic that Kenny is the one that probably dies at the end, but somehow it is expected. He seems like a strong character in the beginning, by driving the truck, getting permission to hunt from the owner of the land and he is assigned to kill the dog. Yet, ironically, he becomes the weakest character in the story at the end. Alice Munros How I Met My Husband is an autobiographical short story that presents a decisive moment in the author’s life. The main character is Edie, a â€Å"hired girl† that works in the house of the wealthy Peebles family. Even though the author is omniscient she still attempts to hide some elements of the truth I wouldnt have looked in her drawers Thats a lie. I would have looked but I would have felt worse (128). The story is told in the first person, yet from the fifteen-year-old Edies point of view. In spite of the fact that she does not have to reveal anything that she does not want the reader to know, ironically, her guilt determines her to admit to it in a humorous way. This is an example of situational irony, where we do not expect to see a corrective remark addressing the authors true feelings and yet it happens. The irony occurs outside of the story though, making the presence of the author noticeable. The character of Alice Kelling seems to be the antagonist of the story, as we read the scene where the ladies find out that Edie knows about Chris Watters leaving. However, this is a quite common way for an author to shift the sympathy of the reader, by building a main character, making him or her familiar and then creating a highly controversial scene or situation, where no matter what the reader roots for the main character. Alice Kelling is actually a victim just like Edie, even though most readers will consider Alice Kelling the antagonist. After reflection it becomes clear to the reader that despite his friendly behavior the antagonist is actually Chris Watters. The clearest sign that he was doing something wrong would be his own epiphany: â€Å"Oh, no† (136). In this case the irony occurs within the reader, a very interesting effect achieved by the author. Another ironic twist of the story occurs, as the reader realizes, that Edie married the mailman. She had waited by the mailbox for Chris Watters letter for months, and every time she saw the mailman she would smile. This of course confused the mailman, making him believe that he is the reason she was waiting at the mailbox every time. It is ironic and almost sad how the author lets the husband continue to believe that she â€Å"went after him by sitting by the mailbox every day† (140). Ironically, she does not even say the mailman’s first name, as opposed to Chris Watters who is the only adult character addressed by the first name throughout the story, a clear sign of affection. And mostly ironic would be how the author describes the beginning of her relationship with her husband in no less than one paragraph. It almost suggests that the story could have been titled How I Fell in Love, But Then Married My Husband, which would take a whole lot of fun out of the ending. A sign of her admitting to giving up on love is the passage where she talks about the two kinds of women: the ones that wait and the â€Å"busy† ones, that do not wait, referring to women who are looking for love and women that decide to just settle down. She then states that â€Å"even though there might be things the second kind of women have to pass up and never know about, it still is better† (140) , which shows she has no regrets about her decision. These two stories display irony in various ways. Tobias Wolff uses more graspable irony in â€Å"Hunters in The Snowâ€Å", which is very evident to the reader, while Alice Munro choses a more subtle way of being ironic in â€Å"How I Met My Husband†, but apparently both techniques are very effective in their own way. Also, another difference would be the amount of irony present in the two stories. Although not as effective as Munro’s usage of it Wolff’s story is abundant in irony which creates a constant entertainment for the reader. Munro chooses to make much less use of it, yet she still manages to create the surprise ending. When comparing the two stories one might consider Wolff’s story more interesting and maybe even more engaging, which could be considered slightly commercial. Munro’s story on the other hand requires more patience to read through, however, it might also offer more reason for contemplation. References: Wolff, Tobias. â€Å"Hunters in the Snow. † Perrine’s Literature Structure, Sound Sense. Eds. Thomas R. Arp and Greg Johnson. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. 86-99. Munro, Alice. â€Å"How I Met My Husband. † Perrine’s Literature Structure, Sound Sense. Eds. Thomas R. Arp and Greg Johnson. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. 125-140.

Brief History of the State of the Union Address

Brief History of the State of the Union Address The State of the Union address is a speech delivered annually by the President the United States to a joint session of the United States Congress. The State of the Union Address is not, however, delivered during the first year of a new president’s first term in office. In the address, the president typically reports on the general condition of the nation in the areas of domestic and foreign policy issues and outlines his or her legislative platform and national priorities. Delivery of the State of the Union address fulfills Article II, Sec. 3, of the U.S. Constitution requiring that â€Å"The President shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.†Ã‚   As a policy of the doctrine of separation of powers, the Speaker of the House must invite the president to present the State of the Union Address in person. In lieu of an invitation, the address can be delivered to Congress in written form. Since January 8, 1790, when George Washington personally delivered the first annual message to Congress, presidents have from time to time, been doing just that in what has become known as the State of the Union Address. The speech was shared with the public only through newspapers until 1923 when President Calvin Coolidges annual message was broadcast on radio. Franklin D. Roosevelt first used the phrase State of the Union in 1935, and in 1947, Roosevelts successor Harry S. Truman became the first president to deliver a televised address. Extreme Security Required As the largest annual political event in Washington, D.C., the State of the Union Address requires extraordinary security measures, as the president, vice president, Cabinet members, Congress, Supreme Court, military leaders and diplomatic corps are all together at the same time. Declared a â€Å"National Special Security Event,† thousands of federal security personnel- including a number of military troops- are brought in to guard the area. The Great State of the Union Controversy of 2019 The question of when, where, and how the 2019 State of the Union Address would be delivered became a hot political mess on January 16, when during the longest federal government shutdown in history, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California) asked President Trump to either delay his 2019 address or deliver it to Congress in writing. In doing so, Speaker Pelosi cited security concerns caused by the shutdown. â€Å"Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29,† wrote Pelosi in a letter to the White House. However, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen stated that the Secret Service- then working without pay due to the shutdown- was fully prepared and willing to provide security during the address. â€Å"The Department of Homeland Security and the US Secret Service are fully prepared to support and secure the State of the Union,† she wrote in a tweet. The White House suggested that Pelosi’s action was actually a form of political retaliation for President Trump’s reluctance to negotiate with the House on the its refusal to authorize $5.7 billion in funding requested by Trump  for construction of the controversial Mexican border wall- the dispute that had triggered the government shutdown.   On January 17, President Trump responded telling Pelosi via a letter that her congressional delegation’s planned secret seven-day, secret â€Å"excursion† to Brussels, Egypt and Afghanistan â€Å"has been postponed† until the shutdown ended, unless she chose to travel using commercial aviation. Since the non-publicized trip included Afghanistan- an active war zone- travel had been arranged aboard a U.S. Air Force plane. Trump had earlier canceled his own upcoming trip to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, due to the shutdown. On January 23, President Trump turned down Speaker Pelosi’s request to delay his State of the Union Address. In a letter to Pelosi, Trump asserted his intention to deliver the address on Tuesday, January 29 in the House chamber as originally scheduled. â€Å"I will be honoring your invitation, and fulfilling my Constitutional duty, to deliver important information to the people and Congress of the United States of America regarding the State of our Union,† Trump wrote. â€Å"I look forward to seeing you on the evening on January 29th in the Chamber of the House of Representatives,† he continued, adding, â€Å"It would be so very sad for our Country if the State of the Union were not delivered on time, on schedule, and very importantly, on location!† Speaker Pelosi has the option of blocking Trump by refusing to call a vote on the resolution required to formally invite the president to before a joint session of Congress in the House chamber. Lawmakers have not yet considered such a resolution, an action typically taken for granted.   Speaker Pelosi quickly returned this historic struggle of separation of powers back to where it started on January 16 by informing President Trump that she would not allow him to deliver his speech in the House chamber as long as the government shutdown continued. President Trump responded by indicating that he would announce plans for an alternative State of the Union address at a later date. A White House spokesperson suggested options including a speech from the Oval Office of the White House or at a Trump rally away from Washington. In a late night tweet on January 23, President Trump conceded to Speaker Pelosi, stating that he would delay his State of the Union Address until after the government shutdown had ended. â€Å"As the Shutdown was going on, Nancy Pelosi asked me to give the State of the Union Address. I agreed. She then changed her mind because of the Shutdown, suggesting a later date. This is her prerogative- I will do the Address when the Shutdown is over,† Trump tweeted, adding, â€Å"I look forward to giving a great State of the Union Address in the near future!† The President continued that he would not seek an alternative location for the annual speech â€Å"because there is no venue that can compete with the history, tradition and importance of the House Chamber.† In a tweet of her own, Speaker Pelosi said she was hopeful that President Trump’s concession meant that he would back a bill already before the House that would temporarily fund the federal agencies affected by the shutdown. On Friday January 25, President Trump reached an agreement with Democrats on a short-term spending bill that did not include any funding for the border wall but allowed the government to temporarily reopen until February 15. During the delay, negotiations over border wall funding were to continue, with President Trump stressing that unless funding for the wall was included in the final budget bill, he would either allow the government shutdown to resume or declare a national emergency allowing him to reallocate existing fund for the purpose. On Monday, January 28, with the shutdown at least temporarily ended, Speaker Pelosi invited President Trump to give his State of the Union address on February 5 in the House Chamber. â€Å"When I wrote to you on January 23rd, I stated that we should work together to find a mutually agreeable date when government has reopened to schedule this years State of the Union address,† Pelosi stated in a letter provided by her office. â€Å"Therefore, I invite you to deliver your State of the Union address before a Joint Session of Congress on February 5, 2019 in the House Chamber.† President Trump accepted Pelosi’s invitation a few hours later. The Address At Last President Trump finally delivered his second State of the Union address on February 5th in the House Chamber. In his 90-minute speech, the president sounded a tone of bipartisan unity, calling on Congress to â€Å"reject the politics of revenge, resistance and retribution - and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise and the common good.† Without mentioning the record 35-day government shutdown that had delayed the address, he told lawmakers he was â€Å"ready to work with you to achieve historic breakthroughs for all Americans† and by working to â€Å"govern not as two parties but as one nation.† In addressing funding for his controversial border security wall that had caused the shutdown, the president came short of declaring a national emergency, but did insist he would â€Å"get it built.† Trump also stressed his administration’s economic success, noting that â€Å"no one has benefited more from our thriving economy than women, who have filled 58 percent of the new jobs created in the last year.† The president added, All Americans can be proud that we have more women in the workforce than ever before - and exactly one century after Congress passed the constitutional amendment giving women the right to vote, we also have more women serving in Congress than ever before.† The statement brought a standing ovation and chants of â€Å"USA!† from female lawmakers, many of whom had been elected based on their platforms opposing the Trump administration. On foreign policy, Trump touted his efforts to denuclearize North Korea, claiming that â€Å"if I had not been elected president of the United States we would right now, in my opinion, be in a major war with North Korea.† He also revealed that he would meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un for a second summit on February 27 and 28 in Vietnam.   Washington Hit the Essentials Rather than outlining his administrations agenda for the nation, as has become the modern practice, Washington used that first State of the Union Address to focus on the very concept of the union of states that had so recently been created. Indeed, establishing and maintaining the union was the primary goal of Washingtons first administration. While the Constitution specifies no time, date, place, or frequency of the address, presidents have typically delivered the State of the Union Address in late January, soon after Congress has re-convened. Since Washingtons first address to Congress, the date, frequency, method of delivery and content have varied greatly from president to president. Jefferson Puts it in Writing Finding the whole process of a speech to a joint session of Congress a little too kingly, Thomas Jefferson chose to carry out his constitutional duty in 1801 by sending details of his national priorities in separate, written notes to the House and Senate. Finding the written report a great idea, Jeffersons successors in the White House followed suit and it would be 112 years before a president again spoke the State of the Union Address. Wilson Set the Modern Tradition In a controversial move at the time, President Woodrow Wilson revived the practice of spoken delivery of the State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress in 1913. Content of the State of the Union Address In modern times, the State of the Union Address serves as both a conversation between the president and Congress and, thanks to television, an opportunity for the president to promote his partys political agenda for the future. From time to time, the address has actually contained historically important information. In 1823, James Monroe explained what became known as the Monroe Doctrine, calling on powerful European nations to end their practice of western colonization.Abraham Lincoln told the nation he wanted to end slavery in 1862.In 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke of the four freedoms.Just four months after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush shared his plans for a war on terror in 2002. Whatever its content, presidents traditionally hope their State of the Union Addresses will heal past political wounds, promote bipartisan unity in Congress and win support for his legislative agenda from both parties and the American people. From time to time... that actually happens.