Another function of direct speech which has not been demonstrated so far, is its ability to convey irony. This is especially important for the Book of J u d ith y which is highly ironic. Moore89 even goes so far as to
say," the storyteller had a mind and a perspective which are best described as essentially and profoundly ironic in character". Irony can be defined as follows^O.
"A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used; usually taking the form of sarcasm or
ridicule in which laudatory expressions are used to imply condemnation or contempt. A contradictory outcome of events as if in mockery of the promise and fitness of things."
This interpretation can be enlarged by combining it with other interpretations of irony.
In ancient Greece, any character who intended an irony and who executed it, was known as eiron. and any character who did not perceive an irony or was ridiculed by it, was known as alazon. If a single character acted as both eiron and alazon in the same irony (for example, if they were mocking themselves before an audience), then this was verbal irony. If separate characters acted as eiron and alazon, this was dramatic irony.
A further understanding of irony is to consider the ways in which it differs from its immediate counterparts. For example, how does irony differ from allegory or paradox? Muecke^l has proposed a definition by outlining three attributes which irony alone possesses:
89 Moore, Tudith , p.85
90 The. New ,Shoi.l£r..Qsford..Enslish Dietianary .onllistoiical Brinciples (Oxford: Oxford University, 1993)
i) It consists of two layers of meaning, but this attribute alone is not enough. If irony were just double-layered, then it would be
indistinguishable from metaphor or allegory.
ii) The two layers of meaning proposed by irony are not consistent with one another. This involves opposition between the two layers, by means of understatement or overstatement, or by saying exactly what is meant but in a sense unexpected by the listener. This eliminates both metaphor and allegory, but paradox and contrast can still be included as they both involve two possible, but conflicting, layers of meaning.
iii) Muecke's final attribute is that irony contains an element of innocence or u n a w a r e n e s s 9 2 . Those who do not possess certain
information, or are unable to perceive certain information, are 'innocent’ to the irony. This may be the predicament of a single character or several characters, and sometimes includes the reader or audience too.
It is only when all three of these criteria are met, that irony alone exists and not some other literary device.
Irony can also be divided into different types or forms93. if a character or author is purposefully ironic, then this is an intended irony. If an irony is perceived but is not intended, then this is unintended irony. Overt irony is when an irony is made explicit or stated that it is an irony, and a covert irony is when it is not. An irony can be finite where it is directed at a specific situation, or infinite where it is directed at the universal. It can be fixed where it generates two layers of meaning, or unfixed where it generates more than two layers. Booth terms an irony 92 Mueke, The Compass of Ironv. p.20 notes an exception, "There is one exception to this; in sarcasm or in very overt irony the ironist does not pretend to be
unaware of his real meaning and his victim is immediately aware of it." Verbal irony may also be an exception, but Muecke comments "self-irony (or verbal irony) implies a 'splitting of the ego' and hence an ability to see and to present oneself as an 'innocent'"(p.20).
93 See W.C. Booth, A Rhetoric of Ironv (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1974), pp.5-6
that is intended, covert, fixed, and finite as a stable irony, and any irony that is not, an unstable irony.
Edwin M. Good defines irony specifically from the perspective of the Hebrew bible. He comments^^;
"We may now summarize the argument, attempting to lay down guidelines for the identification of irony. We have seen that irony is criticism,
implicit or explicit, which perceives in things as they are an incongruity. The incongruity is by no means merely mean and contemptible, though it may be wilful. Nor is it only accidental, the work of fate, a matter of the way the ball bounces or the cookie crumbles. The incongruity may be that of ironic satire, between what is and what ought to be. It may be an
incongruity between what it actually so and what the object of ironic criticism thinks to be so, as in the irony of tragedy, or in the ironies we perceive in history.
But irony is distinguished from other perceptions of incongruity by two characteristics. One is the means of statement, which we may describe as understatement or a method of suggestion rather than of plain
statement. The other is a stance in truth from which the perception comes."
Good's understanding is similar to those outlined above, but he interprets irony as a criticism of the prevailing order. He suggests that the eiron is offering a truth which the alazon does not possess.
All these interpretations can be combined to offer a fuller
understanding of irony than any of these single definitions do by themselves. They can be combined further with A lon so-S ch ok el’s^S
earlier definition to distinguish irony from other literary ploys in the 94 E.M. Good, Ironv in the Old Testament 2nd ed. (Sheffield: Almond, 1981), pp.30-31
95 L.AIonso-SchôkeI,'Narrative Structures in the Book of Judith', Protocol Series of the Colloquies of the Centre for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture 11 (March 1974), p.8
direct speech of Judith, These definitions can be applied to Hebrew literature generally, and a good comprehension of how they function is necessary before Judith can be interpreted. The following examples have been taken from Hebrew literature, and the ironies in these passages highlight the contrast between eiron and alazon, examine the layers of conflicting meaning, and demonstrate some of the different types of irony which may be present.