The Importance of Being ‘Satire’
From witty to savage, what distinguishes satire is the ability
of the satirist to invite societal change. Satire is a wasp sting; laughter
with knives, but more importantly it is a mirror to one’s own virtues and
vices. Satire as we know it sits across a dichotomous spectrum from Horatian to
Juvenalian and all the shades in between. The former is recognisably mild, presenting
amusement and entertainment to indulge its audience while the latter is fierce,
often bitter and invective. Truth be told, satire does not have to make us
laugh in order to effectively and successfully serve its purpose, because the
moral agenda of satire is to present the follies of human society in order to
“mend” the world, not necessarily to provoke laughter. Two brilliant satirists,
Oscar Wilde and Jonathan Swift, play important roles in presenting satire
across its spectrum with Wilde’s play The
Importance of Being Earnest and Swift’s essay A Modest Proposal respectively. While Wilde sets the audience
laughing, Swift’s satirical proposal unleashes a wave of repugnance, but both
texts are arguably equally successful in exposing society’s flaws.
Oscar Wilde’s last, but reputedly best play, The Importance of Being Earnest is very
comical yet thought provoking. It is centred on two men and their constant
efforts to avoid certain social obligations deemed necessary at the height of
the Victorian era. The unseen truth is that with the constant pressure to
uphold certain values regarding his own sexuality, this play may well be seen
as Wilde’s brave effort to satirize the society that condemned him for his
double standards. Witty and clever, Wilde satirises the Victorian standards
using exaggeration, reversal and farcical comments which sets the audience
laughing. One such hilarious instance is the interrogation of Jack Worthing, by
the arrogant aristocrat who is at the centre of hilarity, Lady Bracknell. “To
lose one parent, Mr Worthing may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both
looks like carelessness”. Wilde ridicules the upper class’ superficial views on
marriage, and as bizarre as it sounds to us, the code of conduct that governed
who you were supposed to love and how you were expected to love them. Also, as
we delve into the twist of the play, we discover the true nature of characters
such as Gwendolen’s ideals. Gwendolen’s trivial upper class nature and her vision
of a perfect partner are prominent as she obsesses over marrying a man with the
name ‘Earnest’. While such quirkiness evokes a chuckle, Wilde is surreptitiously
criticising this materialistic approach to love and marriage so valued by
Victorian society.
The deceitful nature of Victorian society is also subject to
Wilde’s criticism. According to his friend Algernon, ‘one of the most advanced
Bunburyists’, Jack is the master of deceit and disguise. ‘Earnest’ Worthing
represents the unattainability of Victorian values. He is viewed as a man of
responsibility and honour, while in reality he prefers to pretend he has a
brother ‘Earnest’, in order to side step his social obligations. Jack’s
character is also used to create the pun in the namesake: The Importance of Being ‘Earnest’. As the play unfolds it becomes
clear that he is far from ‘earnest’. All in all, Wilde’s Importance of Being Earnest serves up trivial comedy on our plates,
while the fierce satirising is cleverly concealed behind his blithe wit and effective
play of words.
On a more vicious and contemporary note, Jonathan Swift’s essay,
A Modest Proposal does not include
any aspects of humour [at least not at face-value], but uses countless other
satirical tools to deliver its true message. A Modest Proposal introduces a solution to Irish poverty problems
by proposing a systematic selling of and cannibalistic consumption of children
of the poor to the wealthy. Swift not only proposes a cannibalistic approach to
the poverty problem, but he ensures his readers are informed of how to prepare
delicacies from the young children. The essay is an obvious manifestation of
Swift’s ridicule of the nature of Irish-English economic and political
policies. Swift gives us nothing, and worse, no one to laugh at. He does,
however, brilliantly play a satirist’s role by inviting change to the class
structure within the English-Irish relationships and more importantly to the
poverty issue in Ireland.
The proposal begins with a compassionate tone. Swift describes
how the beggars on the streets are ‘forced’ into their poverty which
contradicts the view of the upper class who believed the poverty was to be blamed
upon the poor themselves. Reversal used here is the key to Swift’s accusations
later in the essay. He claims that the landlords’ use of the Irish lower classes
for servant-hood is discriminating to a degree that one could justify the
owning of children of the poor by landlords, “I grant this food will be
somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have
already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.”
Savage, but satire at its finest, Swift makes his clear-cut point, with vicious
attacks towards his targets. No giggles. Swift accuses the society and its
flawed nature for the poverty.
Towards
the end, based on the assumption that his audience will accept the
cannibalistic approach to the problem as morally reprehensible, Swift uses the
irony of the situation to reduce human beings to entities. In terms of
satirising, he metaphorically compares young children to old furniture or
clothes thereby commenting on the treatment of the poor by the upper classes. If
we explore the essay in detail, Swift’s compassion towards the poor can be seen
in the text rather than the very immodest literal meaning of it.
Despite the fact that the title is still under
criticism, the reader recognizes the pun and therefore the intention of this satire.
The serious have chosen to neglect the satirical intentions of Jonathan Swift, but
one should understand that although Swift does not present his readers with the
opportunity to laugh-out-loud at their flaws, this ‘modest’ proposal also
successfully mocks the irrational policies of the Irish-English classes.
Satire is vital to set change in motion. While it may not always be funny, it provides an insight
into society. Satirists achieve this by the clever play of words using numerous
satirical techniques. While Wilde sets the audience cackling with laughter when
mocking the Victorian standards and beliefs, Jonathan Swift satirises the English approach and involvement in Irish
affairs with a very ‘modest’ proposal to consume young children. A judgmental
line cannot be drawn to define which form of satire is more effective - witty
or harsh. Perhaps it is wiser to conclude that both satirical texts use
different methods to expose foolishness
in all its guises, with the desire to effect reform in society.
Works Cited
J. Cummings, Michael. "A Modest Proposal: a Study
Guide." Free Study Guides for Shakespeare and Other Authors. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/ModProposal.html>.
Swift, Jonathan. "A Modest Proposal - Jonathan
Swift." The Art Bin Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html>.
Swift, Jonathan. "A Modest Proposal Critical
Essay by Jonathan Swift Volume 101." Study Guides, Lesson Plans,
Homework Help, Answers & More - eNotes.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr.
2013.
<http://www.enotes.com/modest-proposal-essays/modest-proposal-jonathan-swift>.
"The Importance of Being Earnest - Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d.
Web. 26 Apr. 2013.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Importance_of_Being_Earnest>.
Wilde, Oscar, and Richard Allen Cave. The
importance of being earnest and other plays. London: Penguin Books, 2000.
Print.
