In the following passage from Chapter 3, Steinbeck narrates Cyrus Trask's thought process, attempting to deduce his reasons for marrying Alice. Cyrus's views on family and women are typical for a man of his time period, and Steinbeck uses verbal irony to highlight their ridiculousness:
Alice Trask had a number of admirable qualities . . . . She was not very pretty, so there was no need to watch her. . . . Whether she liked children or not no one ever knew. She was not asked, and she never said anything unless she was asked. From Cyrus' point of view this was possibly the greatest of her virtues.
Steinbeck states that Alice has "admirable qualities," only to list several things readers would not likely think of as "admirable": she is not pretty; she may or may not like children; she does not speak unless spoken to. It seems odd and contradictory to list these as Alice's "greatest virtues," particularly given that none of the qualities listed have anything to do with morality. Those listed are only virtues insofar as they make it easier to reinforce patriarchal norms—but, in truth, that is exactly what Cyrus Trask wants from her.
Alice is a bit of an odd figure in Adam's life, functioning as a pseudo-mother but maintaining emotional distance from both of the young boys. Eventually, after seeing Alice smile to herself, Adam is struck with the impulse to give her little gifts in secret. However, in a touch of dramatic irony at the end of Chapter 3, Alice assumes that Charles is giving her the little gifts instead of Adam:
"You have to know him," [Alice] repeated. "For a long time he has given me little presents, pretty things you wouldn't think he'd even notice. But he doesn't give them right out. He hides them where he knows I'll find them. And you can look at him for hours and he won't ever give the slightest sign he did it. You have to know him."
Alice does not know, but the reader does know, that it is Adam who has been giving her presents this entire time—not Charles, as Alice assumes. This bit of dramatic irony reflects on both Alice and Adam's loneliness: for Adam, the gestures of kindness he makes go unrecognized. In Alice's case, she experiences moments of connection through these gifts, but misattributes the source, ironically shutting down the person actually trying to connect with her.
In the following passage from Chapter 5, the narrator uses situational irony to describe an important—and hypocritical—development in Liza Hamilton's religious mores:
When Liza was about seventy her elimination slowed up and her doctor told her to take a tablespoon of port wine for medicine. She forced down the first spoonful, making a crooked face, but it was not so bad. And from that moment she never drew a completely sober breath.
Liza Hamilton, known for her strict Presbyterian morals, begins to drink regularly after being exposed to alcohol for the first time. Ironically, she participates in an act that for much of her life she would have regarded as morally reprehensible.
This passage highlights important concepts that tie into Steinbeck's critique of Christianity and moral absolutism. Principally, the irony in this excerpt reveals the hypocrisy of religious people who claim moral superiority. When given an excuse to deviate from her morals, Liza does so almost immediately, becoming what essentially amounts to a functioning alcoholic. Liza harshly judges those who break the Christian moral code, yet gives herself a great deal of leniency when it is her turn to deviate. Her sense of morality is not absolute, but rather capable of being modified to suit personal needs.
In Chapter 6, Steinbeck describes Charles's life during Adam's absence. Without his brother or father for company, Charles turns to sex workers for human companionship, though he barely views these women as human. Using situational irony, Steinbeck elucidates the nature of these relationships:
There is great safety for a shy man with a whore. Having been paid for, and in advance, she has become a commodity, and a shy man can be gay with her and even brutal to her.
There is irony in the statement that shy men feel "great safety" with sex workers, particularly when it is this "great safety" that makes them comfortable enough to be "brutal." Such men may feel safe from judgement, but the sex workers certainly are not safe from the men.
As a shy man, Charles may be anxious about romantically or sexually propositioning a woman; thus, to satiate his needs, he must pay for companionship. The transactional nature of these relationships negates the sex workers' humanity, in Charles's eyes. They become nothing but "commodities," bought and paid for. And when a person "owns" something they view as property, they often see fit to treat that property how they choose, with no regard for the property itself. Sadly, Charles's loneliness and shyness result in a problematic and harmful attitude towards women.
In the following excerpt from Chapter 8, the narrator speculates on sexuality and humanity in an attempt to reveal aspects of Cathy's character to readers. In this discussion, the narrator uses verbal irony as a device for critique:
What freedom men and women could have, were they not constantly tricked and trapped and enslaved and tortured by their sexuality! The only drawback in that freedom is that without it one would not be a human. One would be a monster.
In the above passage, the narrator implies that it would be a form of freedom not to be beholden to sexuality. In reality, the narrator implies, it is not sexuality but the social systems that construct and enforce shame which are to blame for the "trickery" and "torture."
This passage also draws on and critiques Christian rhetoric on sexuality: the words "tricked and trapped and enslaved and tortured" in reference to sex might reasonably make an appearance in any sermon meant to inspire moral panic. Through irony, Steinbeck questions the notion that so-called "sexual immorality" is a problem worth worrying about, going so far as to assert that it would be inhuman for someone not to "struggle" with the complexity of sexuality. This viewpoint seems to celebrate rather than condemn the imperfection of humanity, rather than reinforcing the Christian belief that people must be "saved" from the ugliness of human nature.
In the following passage from Chapter 8, the narrator discusses Mr. Ames's murder, as well as his employee's response. As is stylistically typical for Steinbeck, the passage employs verbal irony and contradiction, implying different conclusions about the employees than those that are directly stated:
Since the owner's house was burned and the owner ostensibly burned with it, the employees of the tannery, out of respect, did not go to work. They hung around the burned house, offering to help in any way they could, feeling official and generally getting in the way.
The narrator states that the workers do not go to work after the Ameses' house burns down "out of respect," but this is verbal irony—they are more likely lazy, given that they "get in the way" despite offering to help. The image is one of idleness, not industry.
Through the use of irony in this passage, Steinbeck subtly comments on human nature, displaying the workers' sudden dissolution into a state of entropy after their employer dies. These men have little loyalty to their boss, simply displaying "respect" as a tactic to release them from work. This passage showcases the increasingly alienated relationship between worker and employer that developed over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries.