don't talk let's TALK : company : against irony

Against Irony
On February 4 2008, TALK acquired the piece of art 'Against Irony', made by Vincent van Gerven Oei and Jonas Staal. The object consists of four stone slabs engraved with a text in Dutch. The text is an analysis of the use of irony in an artistic context. The importance of this piece of art for TALK lies in the fact that irony is an instrument that can potentially disturb relationships. TALK is an organization that focuses on the art of relationships, or, to be more precise, sustainable relationships. Irony and relationships are, as shown below, a dangerous combination. I would like to illustrate the above with an example from my own personal experience. The situation is as follows. As a full-time manager with a financial background who was working for a small consultancy firm I did not do any billable work. This led to a remark from the managing director: "I dare say Wim; you are not earning the company a great deal of money." While saying this he laughed at me as if he was making a joke. On analyzing the situation between an observer (me) and the spectator (the managing director), we can say that in fact there are two messages here. On the one hand there is the dry message from the spectator telling me that I am not earning the company any money in the sense that I do not send invoices to customers. This is an actual fact. It makes me less valuable for the company. In that sense the spectator is right: I only cost money. On the other hand the message was delivered as a joke and, as Western custom would have us believe, it should not be taken seriously. In other words, what you get is a potentially serious remark in a not so serious packaging. This in itself is like a contradiction in terms, which could be completely harmless if only the observer is not too serious about the whole situation. This means that he is inclined to go for the funny element and he laughs amicably with the manager. The question is how the managing director in feels in this situation. Claiming that it was intended as a serious remark contradicts his joking attitude. At the same time however he could have wanted to make a serious point. If the observer leans towards the more serious interpretation, i.e. the actual message, the situation gets even more complicated. The observer needs clarity and being a good observer, would probably ask for this clarity. The result will be that the spectator, by using irony, is trapped. By using two different emotions in conjunction, he is now forced to choose. One option is to deny the serious undertone of the message. In this case the spectator will say that it was just a joke, not to be taken seriously. Alternatively, the other option allows for a semi-relaxed introduction of a serious matter. In this case, the serious approach of the observer could lead to a serious response; the managing director could say: "Well Wim, all joking aside, there is in fact something I would like to discuss with you." Using irony turns this situation into a lottery. Depending on the reaction of the observer the spectator could have the opportunity to make his point, but he can not be certain that he will. From a relationship point of view, there is irony within irony here. While being ironic, no matter how much this is denied, there is in fact a second level of irony created by the familiarity of the scene. On the surface the familiarity seems to increase the intimacy in the relationship, but in fact it does not because there is a contradiction with the serious message. It implies a double meaning, familiarity and distance. The message is not understood because of the laughter and the familiarity is not achieved because of the contradiction with the serious message. Using irony and denying it at the same time is a serious insult in relationships. In business relationships where managers, who have hierarchical power over their subordinates, use this mechanism to communicate their messages, collegiality and professionalism get mixed up and relationships are seriously damaged.

Against Irony

On February 4 2008, TALK acquired the piece of art 'Against Irony', made by Vincent van Gerven Oei and Jonas Staal. The object consists of four stone slabs engraved with a text in Dutch. The text is an analysis of the use of irony in an artistic context.
The importance of this piece of art for TALK lies in the fact that irony is an instrument that can potentially disturb relationships. TALK is an organization that focuses on the art of relationships, or, to be more precise, sustainable relationships. Irony and relationships are, as shown below, a dangerous combination.

I would like to illustrate the above with an example from my own personal experience. The situation is as follows. As a full-time manager with a financial background who was working for a small consultancy firm I did not do any billable work. This led to a remark from the managing director: "I dare say Wim; you are not earning the company a great deal of money." While saying this he laughed at me as if he was making a joke.

On analyzing the situation between an observer (me) and the spectator (the managing director), we can say that in fact there are two messages here. On the one hand there is the dry message from the spectator telling me that I am not earning the company any money in the sense that I do not send invoices to customers. This is an actual fact. It makes me less valuable for the company. In that sense the spectator is right: I only cost money. On the other hand the message was delivered as a joke and, as Western custom would have us believe, it should not be taken seriously. In other words, what you get is a potentially serious remark in a not so serious packaging.

This in itself is like a contradiction in terms, which could be completely harmless if only the observer is not too serious about the whole situation. This means that he is inclined to go for the funny element and he laughs amicably with the manager. The question is how the managing director in feels in this situation. Claiming that it was intended as a serious remark contradicts his joking attitude. At the same time however he could have wanted to make a serious point.

If the observer leans towards the more serious interpretation, i.e. the actual message, the situation gets even more complicated. The observer needs clarity and being a good observer, would probably ask for this clarity. The result will be that the spectator, by using irony, is trapped. By using two different emotions in conjunction, he is now forced to choose. One option is to deny the serious undertone of the message. In this case the spectator will say that it was just a joke, not to be taken seriously. Alternatively, the other option allows for a semi-relaxed introduction of a serious matter. In this case, the serious approach of the observer could lead to a serious response; the managing director could say: "Well Wim, all joking aside, there is in fact something I would like to discuss with you." Using irony turns this situation into a lottery. Depending on the reaction of the observer the spectator could have the opportunity to make his point, but he can not be certain that he will.

From a relationship point of view, there is irony within irony here. While being ironic, no matter how much this is denied, there is in fact a second level of irony created by the familiarity of the scene. On the surface the familiarity seems to increase the intimacy in the relationship, but in fact it does not because there is a contradiction with the serious message. It implies a double meaning, familiarity and distance. The message is not understood because of the laughter and the familiarity is not achieved because of the contradiction with the serious message. Using irony and denying it at the same time is a serious insult in relationships.

In business relationships where managers, who have hierarchical power over their subordinates, use this mechanism to communicate their messages, collegiality and professionalism get mixed up and relationships are seriously damaged.