This thought emerged after a discussion with a friend. To convey an emotion it is in some cases more powerful to act out the emotion opposite to the situation, letting the audience sense the juxtaposition. That was a bit tricky to put into a sentence so here is an example, we follow our character a small boy who’s family suddenly experiences severe hardship. He recounts changes and events he notices in his family as a result of the hardship, i.e. his dad stops XXXX with a sort of happy ignorance, rather than direct sadness. This happiness and innocence is juxtaposed the dire tone of the situation, the boys limited understanding of the seriousness of the situation is also juxtaposed with the audiences deeper understanding of the events unfolding. The audience then experiences a different kind of sadness instead of a kind of pity for the child, there is a certain level of emotional tension left hanging as the audience is aware that at some point the boy must confront the events with himself in the future.

This example works in part because of the assumed innocent ignorance of the child, I wonder how it would apply to other situations. My gut feeling is that it would take the form of denial which in turn I think could produce another kind of sadness, but perhaps not as emotionally potent to a child’s loss of innocence.