![]() When a character says exactly what they mean, that can be uninteresting both for the actor delivering the lines and for the audience watching them. Verbal irony can be a powerful tool in writing dialogue. What Does Verbal Irony Mean? Verbal irony meaning explained That doesn’t mean you have to agree with what you write – particularly in fiction – but you do have to acknowledge that some people might interpret it that way. The most important thing to remember is that the words you write will have an impact on the reader. There isn’t necessarily a “right” or “wrong” perspective on the difference between stable irony and unstable irony. Others say we can only interpret an author’s voice based on the things they write. Many literary scholars suggest that we can’t interpret an author’s voice based solely off the things they write. An author’s voice is what we interpret as the author’s true feelings on their work.Īll of this is subjective – and tucked under the umbrella of literary criticism.Unstable irony is a type of verbal irony in which readers are unable to infer the author’s voice.Stable irony is a type of verbal irony in which readers are able to infer the author’s voice.The difference between stable irony and unstable irony is an important part of deducing an author’s voice. Destroying valuable rail infrastructure is incredibly foolish and not regarded well by the State of Federal agencies.Conceptual Verbal Irony Examples Stable vs. Rail transit is a key part of that and with the Federal infrastructure finds and the State Rail Plan, we have already paid close to $1B in taxes here in Santa Cruz which we would lose to another California City if we turn away from rail. For us to address equity and our climate crisis, we need to get as many people as possible using public transit, and grow public transit so that people can easily get onto a bus or train every 15 minutes to get where they need to go. They have NO CLUE what life is like for the average resident of Watsonville, not to mention those who have no choice but to use public transit. They claim Watsonville needs more busses and doesn’t need clean dependable light rail, but these funders of Greenway’s Measure D have never ridden a bus from Watsonville to Santa Cruz in their life. The Greenway people often call out ‘fund the busses’ but they drive $100K Teslas. Roseman is included as he did quite well with the sales of his New Leaf Markets and hob knobs with the other anti-public transit clan. I find Roseman’s argument about who would ride rail completely inaccurate and ironic since the wealthiest land developers and business owners are the ones funding Greenway’s anti-equity, anti-environment, anti-public transit, Measure D. That is what I would call progressive! And your yes vote on Measure D helps to make that happen. ![]() to avoid having to navigate on auto-congested city streets. Let’s railbank the corridor and quickly build out a trail that will provide a safe way for cyclists, pedestrians, wheelchair users, etc. ![]() Instead of being fiscally reckless by potentially investing over a billion dollars in a train that only those with higher incomes will use, let’s pour resources into expanding and modernizing our Metro bus system, building a bus-on-shoulder system on Highway 1, and reducing fares to encourage ridership. ![]() They want to prevent our community from using this resource to provide a safe and effective bike/pedestrian/wheelchair-safe trail for millions of dollars less cost than one that avoids taking up unused damaged tracks that could otherwise be sold as scrap metal that could, in turn, be used to pay for transit improvements. Growth happened anyway, and now, ironically, many of the same “progressives” are saying that we should preserve unused tracks between Davenport and Watsonville in hopes that one day it will become financially feasible to build out a commuter rail that will do little to reduce the daily horror show commute on Highway 1. It made sense, and would have made a real difference! Well, they stopped that train from being built out, one that would have been financially feasible, and likely crowded with commuters and tourists. Back in the late ’70s, when our collective community was concerned about rapid population growth, some “progressive” leaders fought back efforts to revive the “Suntan Special,” a train that would have transported people to work over the hill during the week and allowed thousands of tourists to avoid flooding Highway 17 and our local streets with polluting auto traffic on the weekends, all in the name of preventing such growth.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |