would have made

Question

Part of a par: He died there seventy years later of throat cancer. The uneventfulness of his life would have made the strictest of New Critics happy.

This par is at the beginning of an essay, which means I can give no more context than this; with the use of WOULD HAVE MADE, which is frequently seen in counter-factual conditionals, does the above two sentences give the hint/meaning that the strictest of New Critics WERE and ARE unhappy?

Enoon · Accepted Answer

"Par" took me a minute. Please type things out so I can read them more easily.

No. If the New Critics had been aware of his life, they would have been pleased at how uneventful it was. I have no idea what that means, but that's what it says.

CalifJim · Answer

Johnson13does the above two sentences give the hint/meaning that the strictest of New Critics WERE and ARE unhappy?

We can infer that the New Critics were not happy (presumably because they didn't know how uneventful his life had been).

CJ

Enoon · Answer

CalifJim Johnson13does the above two sentences give the hint/meaning that the strictest of New Critics WERE and ARE unhappy?We can infer that the New Critics were not happy (presumably because they didn't know how uneventful his life had been).CJ

I can't get there. How did you arrive at that? I picture the New Critics as a school of criticism to do with perhaps a certain genre in art who for some reason approve of uneventful lives. Their present mood is unknown, but if you selected their strictest members and told them of his life, they would be pleased with the information.

CalifJim · Answer

enoonI can't get there. How did you arrive at that?

I'm not sure where "there" is, but I'm guessing that I got there the same way you did. Your explanation is not different from mine except in some slight details. You seem to be focusing on the present, whereas the sentence is in the past. "would have made (them happy)" is the formula for the counterfactual past. Therefore, we infer "did not make (them happy)". So they were not happy, just as I said earlier. More accurately, they were not made happy. (Note that this does not mean "they were (made) unhappy". If they didn't know of the uneventfulness, they could not have had any reaction at all, whether of happiness or of unhappiness.)

He died there seventy years later of throat cancer. The uneventfulness of his life would have made the strictest of New Critics happy.

CJ

Enoon · Answer

CalifJimI'm not sure where "there" is ....

"There" is your point of view. Thanks. I can't think that the New Critics, whoever they were, were chronically unhappy, so for the first time in my life I will agree to disagree if you will. I'll take silence as a "yes".

CalifJim · Answer

enoonwere chronically unhappy

Out of curiosity, what words or phrases did I use that made you think I held the view that the critics were chronically unhappy? My view was that they were not (made) happy and not (made) unhappy. How could they have been either one or the other if they hadn't yet found out about the very thing that "would have made" them happy?

I have no problem with a lack of agreement here, but I'm curious to know why you think our views are so different. As I said, your explanation seemed very similar to mine.

CJ

Enoon · Answer

CalifJim enoonwere chronically unhappyOut of curiosity, what words or phrases did I use that made you think I held the view that the critics were chronically unhappy? My view was that they were not (made) happy and not (made) unhappy. How could they have been either one or the other if they hadn't yet found out about the very thing that "would have made" them happy? I have no problem with a lack of agreement here, but I'm curious to know why you think our views are so different. As I said, your explanation seemed very similar to mine.CJ

The OP wanted to know whether the passage in question meant that the Critics were unhappy. Your first post said, "We can infer that the New Critics were not happy." I contend that on the contrary we have no information about their emotional state, and further that "to make someone happy" in this context merely means to cause a feeling of satisfaction. To think, as you seem to, that being informed of his life would have changed their emotional state to happiness would require that the Critics be unhappy before hearing of it, since you seem to think that in despite of the news their state remained unchanged. In the absence of any evidence about their condition, it is reasonable to suppose that you thought that unhappiness was an identifying trait of a New Critic, whatever that is, the way a Puritan can be relied on to be grim.

That turned out to be much, much harder than I thought it was going to be. The thoughts seemed better organized when they were only in my head.

would have made

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions