- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Postirony is overcoming the boundaries of the genre, which allows you to define a statement as ironic. That is, the speaker creates a situation of multiple interpretation, when it is not clear whether the person is serious or ironic, and it is in this uncertainty that an additional meaning and a new aspect of humor arise.
As an example, there are two famous videos:
1) Sergey Kuryokhin's speech with the Lenin-grib hypothesis.�
2) Andy Kaufman's speech
In the first case, for a long time it was not clear whether Kuryokhina really thinks that Lenin is a mushroom, here we must also understand the situation of 1991, when the media field was filled with all sorts of disclosure of Soviet secrets and secrets and other x-files. In the second, Kaufman creates a situation where it is not clear whether he is playing a comedian-losers or he really needs help.
Meta-irony in this regard works with a slightly different technique when it refers us to an already existing ironic text, creating a second level, so to speak, irony over irony or, as Roland Barthes said, “the abduction of language”. As an example, you can give an example when comedians make fun of other comedians using some cliches or stereotypes.
Here is an example of the complexity of the perception of meta-irony in Russian humor on the example of Yegora Kuksa
Postirony is a parody of irony, meta-irony is irony over irony. For example, to say “I'm proud of my B in math” is a post-irony, and “I'm proud of the school that gives us all B's in math” is a meta-irony.
In one of his recent webcasts, a leading Russian expert on post-and meta – irony, Andrey (khan) Zamay, gave, in my opinion, a very good example of both phenomena. Post-irony is to steal a demo recording of Oksimiron and sing your own verse on it, then post it online, pass it off as the original (in order to mislead a not too sophisticated audience or at least make a little more intelligent comrades raise one eyebrow). The meta-irony is to go straight to Oxymiron, a sworn enemy, an ideologically alien character, and, gritting your teeth, record a joint composition with him to achieve your creative goals. Let's look at a real example. The glory of the CPSU goes to the STS. It would be wrong to say that “Slava sold out”, at least because on the show Slava continues to bend his line; he does not betray his ideas (or those that he usually broadcasts), he still remains the “ideological opponent” of the other two judges, and the format, which is why the participants are suspicious of him. And he also wants to make money, which he doesn't hide. This is sincerity. Is there any irony here? Yes. An audience that is not used to thinking in terms of meta-modernism, the one that sees Fame within the framework of traditional ideas about rappers, “burns up”, “see a rapper on TV, put dislike”, and Fame plays on these feelings. He also earns money, which conservative rappers can't afford, who are very much fused with their image and with some concepts that are clearly outdated and it's not clear who invented them. Glory is also in the mask, and without it. Slava fulfills her tasks, both creative and vital, and at the same time (inadvertently or “on purpose”) saves television, makes it more modern, more youthful. Even Kirkorov is forced to throw away his robes, which only attract grandmothers, and try to suck on the Anti-Hype (Kirkorov in this case is hardly sincere). As for the post-irony, it could manifest itself in this example as follows:: The glory of the CPSU would simply be pasted into some blue light with the help of modern technical means (watch the clip “Pasha Technician – I drop trends”; a typical post-irony (and even a parody!)). Everyone would have laughed (at the collision of two layers, or the “venality” of Fame would have been ridiculed; the editing author might have had a different motive) and that would have been the end of it. The meta-irony is much deeper, in my opinion. If post-irony is still irony, giggles-giggles that sometimes point to the truth (for example, according to the scheme “if we laugh at it, then it's not true; then the truth is the opposite”), then meta — irony is a “new sincerity”, a constant fluctuation between banter and truth without falling into any of these extremes.
In postirony, there is still clearly some tricksterism, that is, you can catch the truth and fiction, but in the context of the narrative of meta-irony, this is practically impossible.
Meta-irony in the modern world of youth is presented as a kind of evolutionary postirony. That is, if the humor in the post-irony was that there is just some object, text and they laugh at it. For example, a drill is depicted and it says “poop”, for modern youth this is funny. Meta-irony is both a simple post-irony, but much more “stupid”, and a mockery of what humor was like before.
In general, the terms are clearly explained, but but but the construction of the interpretation is strange: “Irony is when you directly joke about something…” Irony is not WHEN, BUT WHAT. “Irony is a direct joke about something…”
Meta-irony is another round of postmodernism , and it is a parody of development . If a post-irony is, for example, some serious text at the end of which it says ” but this is not accurate “, then a meta-irony is a frivolous text and an obvious mockery