1 Onyekaba

Adaobi Onyekaba Professor Dreisbach English Composition 101 24 February 2012

Outsiders View on Life In David Sedaris Chicken in the Henhouse, Sedaris makes his main point of bringing emphasis toward the issue of how prejudice against gays affects him as a homosexual male. This essay gives insight on the authors experiences in a hotel while on tour. In trying to make coffee for himself, coincidentally the author runs into a ten-year old boy having difficulty carrying several cups to his room. At this point, Sedaris decides to help the child, but in doing so, his insecurities get the best of him. Due to the current Catholic scandal and societal homophobia, the author feels he must be careful in not appearing as a pedophile. And his use of humor assists in getting his point across to readers. In the text, Sedaris uses exaggeration to make a point appear more important than need be, yet draws attention to it, uses repetition to echo a certain idea and how it adversely influences his life, and makes use of irony to demonstrate the discrepancy between what is said and what is implied throughout his text. Sedaris makes use of exaggeration in persuading his readers of how prejudiced actions against gays, in general, impact his life. Within his essay, exaggeration is defined as a basic technique of humor. We make a situation better than life so we can see it better (Lunsford, Rusckiewicz, and Walters 401) Sedaris use of the term is effective because he uses an avant-garde method in drawing attention to his main topic. In that sense, by emphasizing an idea, it forces readers to pay attention to his argument. Earlier in the essay, Sedaris complains of the below average service (or ill treatment) he has received throughout his trip. The below average services ranges from the airline losing his luggage; to Sedaris receiving a less than appealing basement hotel room. This reveals that all the

2 Onyekaba authors bad luck, associated with news on the Catholic Church scandal, he feels society and homophobia is to blame for his series of unfortunate events. He asserts, Why haste the view on a homosexual? He only looks at schoolboys rectums. And a suitcase? Please! We all know what they do with those? They may not have come out and said it, but they were sure thinking it. I could tell (Sedaris 214). The author exaggerates this minor situation not only because of his frustration over the poor quality of service he has dealt with, but also, with the issue of the scandal. With this example, placed at the beginning of the essay, Sedaris confirms his credibility to the readers in his attempt to be funny. The author is aware that the loss of his luggage and receiving an inadequate room are clearly not major issues; however, by making a big deal of his own insignificant situation, his implication of the media making a big deal of an already over publicized scandal is also shared with the audience. The correlation that the radio callers make between pedophiles and gays further angers him because the diverging topics should not be associated with each other. By including such examples of exaggeration, Sedaris uses humor in getting his message across to his readers which specifies the prejudice against gays is unnecessary and should not be treated lightly. Sedaris employs the commonly used strategy of repetition in addressing the audience on how the perception against gays as pedophiles is disturbing his life. Repetition as a device of the authors work aids in echoing the importance of the message he wants to get across to his readers. In the beginning, readers are introduced to Audrey, a radio caller who gives her belief on the topic of homosexuality. Sedaris provides a highly accurate description of people similar to her while saying, Little by little, theyd begin interchanging the words homosexual and pedophile, speaking as if they are one and the

3 Onyekaba same (Sedaris 213). Sedaris hopes to make the point of how people like Audrey usually falsely accuse or confuse gays of being pedophiles, and as a result of such thoughts, gays are looked down upon, and in turn, people like her make him to question all his actions. He states The voice of reason whispered in my ear. Dont do it, buster you are playing with fire. I withdrew my hands, then stopped, thinking. Wait a minute. Thats not the reason. Its Audrey, the crackpot from the radio (Sedaris 216). In debating whether to assist out the young boy in carrying the coffee cups; Sedaris is forced to ponder on whether his action can be viewed as pedophilia. For other people like the old man who was neither a priest nor a homosexual, he hadnt felt the need to watch himself, worrying that every word or gesture might be misinterpreted, (Sedaris 223). To outside parties, such an action is commonly considered as an issue of little or no importance. Due to the influence of people like Audrey in our society, Sedaris feels that he is left with no alternative except to question the validity he creates in everything he attempts to do. The authors use of repetition adds humor to the essay because it further brings out his main point. While the author completely focuses on the concerns of prejudiced individuals, such as Audrey, who view him as a homosexual, he fails to notice that she is actually controlling his life. This, then forces him to adapt his actions to whatever those like her say or do. In place of leading an enjoyable life, Sedaris is too busy reacting to peoples preconceived notions about gays. By including examples of Audrey, Sedaris brings forward the negative influences gay prejudice has had on his life. This technique appears humorous because the active use of repetition of an idea may seem annoying, but when used appropriately, it catches the readers attention by showing the significance of the repeated idea within the entire work.

4 Onyekaba Even more effective than his use of repetition, Sedaris employs irony to show readers how prejudice against gays affects his life. Irony, which originates from the incongruity theory of humor describes the cause of laughter as the bringing together of images which have contrary additional ideas, as well as some resemblance in the principal idea (Brody 465). An event or situation is considered ironic when actions that occur do not happen in a sensible way. The discrepancy between what is supposed to happen and what actually happens is where the humor lies in the text. Readers are reintroduced to Audrey, a caller on a radio station, who replaces the word chicken for fox in the phrase fox in the henhouse (Sedaris 213). Her misuse of a common phrase adds to her unreliability as a critic and reveals that she knows little about gays yet she insults them by labeling them pedophiles. This situation is ironic because the reader would expect Audrey to be well versed in giving her opinion on a controversial topic, but interestingly enough, she is not. This example allows the readers to question Audreys credibility and the credibility of others like her that make a connection between homosexuals and pedophilia. Again, Sedaris uses irony to illustrate the discrepancy that occurred when he was worried about how people viewed him. The author questions many of his actions in his quest to help Michael, the ten year old boy, but at the end, all his worrying is deemed useless when Sedaris writes, Wait a minuteand she stepped forward and pressed a dollar into my hand. You people run a very nice hotel, she told me. I just wish we could stay longer (Sedaris 224). Prior to this moment, the author is nervous about being viewed as a pedophile but in his attempt to appear normal to Michael and his mother; they are oblivious of his attempt to maintain normalcy as a non-homosexual. Thus, Michael and his mother just see him as a hotel worker. This situational irony effectively reveals Sedaris point to

5 Onyekaba his readers that he is so apprehensive of how people view him that he excessively over thinks his actions. By including instances such as these, Sedaris fruitfully shows readers how ones perception of themselves is affected by the influence of others. The irony of these examples lies in the comparisons of how Audrey and Sedaris view themselves and how other people view them. Editors: Lunsford, Rusckiewicz, and Walters effectively bring about the statement that Humor also works because a funny remark usually contains, at its core, an element of truth (Lunsford, Rusckiewicz, and Walters 398). This statement explains the effectiveness of using humor to propel an argument because humor reveals truth in a comical way. Using humor to propel an argument teaches the audience while entertaining them as well. The remarkable combination of these two ideas in an essay is what makes Sedaris argument on the prejudice against gays an effective and bold one.

6 Onyekaba Work Cited Sedaris, David. Chicken in the Henhouse. Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2004. 211- 224. Humor in Arguments. Everythings an Argument. Eds. Lunsford, Andrea A, John J. Rusckiewicz, and Keith Walters. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2007. 393 410.