able 1.Structure of overt irony in Shaw’s descriptionof Churchill’s prewar rhetoricAlazons: Churchill and British PublicExpected Event Script:IntentionMeans or BehaviorOutcomeTo fightPugnacious rhetoric WarSituation Described:IntentionMeans or BehaviorOutcomeTo fightPugnacious rhetoric War is avertedlunacy. As a result, an observer can perceive “latent irony” (Muecke, 1969,p. 82) in almost any situation. The observer just has to have some sophis-tication, particular motivation and ironic sensibility.These three elements—sophistication, motivation and sensibility—arestandard fare among current theories of irony, but I am placing particularemphasisontheirrolesinironicperception.LindaHutcheon(1994)hasthe-orized that irony “happens” (p. 58) for a person when an experience “rubstogether” (p. 19) different perspectives with which the person is familiar.Shaw (1949) seemed to agree. He described his own unique perceptionsas cognitive thunderbolts: “Every subject struck my mind at an angle thatproduced reflections new to my audience” (p. 57). I am proposing a wayof thinking about the point of view that facilitates such thunderbolts.First, perception of irony requires some sophistication about the sit-uation (Frye, 1957/1990; Muecke, 1969; Rorty, 1989; Hutcheon, 1994). Theironist cannot perceive twists to event scripts if she does not know the situ-ation. The more she knows, the subtler her irony can be.Common Senseis anoutstanding example of sophistication as a foundation for irony. One of themost striking elements of Shaw’s essay is the level of detail about Europeanhistory and international diplomacy which he provided as context for hisironic insights.Second, the ironist is motivated. She wants to juxtapose differentperspectives. Irony can serve many diverse functions from includingparticular people to excluding them; from exploring new perspectives toobscuring one’s own position; from ingratiating oneself to attacking others;from adding humor to deepening seriousness; from diffusing conflict tointensifying it (Hutcheon, 19942). But even the most benign use of ironic hu-mortodefuseconflictinvolvesadifferentiationbetween“us,”whocanstepback and see the humor, from at least a hypothetical “them,” who cannot.