Sarcasm and the Muting Effect

One of the many components of David Sedaris’ personality and writing style that make him so entertaining is his intense sarcasm.  Those who have a specially tuned ear to sarcasm find Sedaris’ use of it particularly witty and sometimes shocking.  This unique form of humor is pleasing to each and every reader and unfailingly draws a chuckle or two out of me in each essay.  However, the most recent anecdotes I have read in Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim have brought a slight literary inconvenience to my attention. 

                I've noticed that when in the midst of an incredibly uncomfortable and out-of-the-ordinary situation, Sedaris tends to use his sarcasm to treat a situation as if such an insane occasion were a typical part of his mercilessly strange life.  At some points, this technique comes in handy in his attempt make the reader laugh, while in many other parts this has a muting effect.  The essay titled “Blood Work” describes a time when Sedaris was hired as an apartment cleaner by a man who mistook him as an employee for an erotic home-cleaning service.  The events that occurred because of this mistake are so humiliating to read that I almost sprained a muscle in my face due to cringing so fiercely.  However, the embarrassment is not clearly expressed by the author and is instead glazed over by an off-putting attitude that treats the situation as only moderately embarrassing, at most.  Some might argue that this technique is genius, and that Sedaris is leaving it up to the reader to carry the entire weight of the embarrassment as they feel necessary.  This is a perfectly valid argument, and I will not attempt to push it aside completely.  I, on the other hand, would highly appreciate more of an insight on how Sedaris himself felt in such a strange and uncomfortable situation.  In other essays, Sedaris pushes the described emotions and reactions in the direction of his family rather than himself.  Since he doesn't have the skill to see directly into the minds of his family and friends and copy his findings down in his book, the reader is left assuming that Sedaris’ portrayal of their reactions and emotions are relatively accurate.  I find myself simply wishing that Sedaris would talk about his own inner feelings and responses to events more often; it is a memoir, after all. 

                Despite the continuous laughter that Sedaris’ stories evoke from me, his use of sarcasm to tame his emotions in their raw, original state leave a few of the author's own first-hand reactions to be desired.

(Question answered: What parts distract from the work's overall effectiveness? Why?)