Literature is a reflection of life; writers tell the story of our lives and try to understand and criticize it. Using their works as a mirror of society, they tend to criticize what they see as wrong for humanity. Satire as a transhistorical genre is one of the most commonly used methods of criticism exposing human error in various styles.
It is not easy to define satire in literature, and it is sometimes considered a blind spot, as is stated by Alastair Fowler: Satire is the most problematic mode to the taxonomist, since it appears never to have corresponded to any one kind. lt can take
1982:110). Similarly, Charles A. Knight mentions the difficulty of defining satire. He
38
ating other forms by way of parody or using such imitation as a way of fixing points of reference and
agree. Leonard Feinberg, in a similar line of thought, asserts that:
protean species of art that no two scholars use the same definition or the same outline of
at the satirists' various purposes in using satire may be more helpful.
can use two basic approaches; they either see people as blind and foolish, and the satirist tells the truth with a smile and wants to cure their ignorance which is their worst fault or the satirists see people as evil and despicable, and want to punish and destroy them (235). Irony is mostly used in satires and while employing the irony the satirist, as nd generally elevated manner about the low and trivial, or treat the great and grand and elevated in a base and trivial
- -heroic and
the burlesque are used in literature to create humorous criticism.
In literature, satire is a powerful form and it points out corruption and deficiencies in human behaviour and in society in general. Matz defines satire as such:
The foolishness of the world not the venom of erm from the aspect
these definitions, it could be inferred that ridiculousness, foolishness, and the distortion of familiarity are among the satire's key points. Furthermore, its ability to protect the
39
writers from culpability for criticism makes it popular among the writers because it is covertly stated; in other words, its messages are implied between the lines. Also, the messages given in satirical form are more effective and catchier than overtly declared ones. For Christopher Yu satire "means any rhetorical procedure involving caricature, mockery, or irony, that is to say any act of comic distortion that encodes an ulterior agenda" (3). Satire should not be seen as merely destructive; in fact, it is implicitly constructive and satirists sometimes show themselves as constructive critics. Satire is also among the most memorable and original forms of literature. Many great minds use it in the literary world such as Horace, , Swift, Pope, and Goethe. It avoids
-ended, essayistic, ambiguous in its relationship to history, uncertain in it is political effect, resistant to formal closure, more inclined to ask questions than to provide answers, and ambivalent about the pleasure it
set; it can be serious or trivial, moral or immoral, sacred, or blasphemous.
Gilbert Highet classifies satire under three groups in his book titled The Anatomy of Satire
own person or behind a mask. He states his view of a problem, cites examples, pillories opponents, and endeavors to impose his view upon the public (13). The second group is
work or form look ridiculous by pointing at its incongruous ideas or exaggerating its aesthetic devices, or he makes the ideas look foolish by putting them into an inappropriate form (13). The third group of satires contains neither monologues nor parodies, but narratives in which the satirist generally does not appear at all. Some of them are stories, others are dramatic fictions. Narrative, either as a story or as a drama,
40
seems to be the most difficult type of satire. When it is successful, it is likely to be a masterpiece (13). However, this classification, Highet admits, can be criticized because monologues are different from narratives, yet a parody can be in the form of a monologue or of a narrative. To be scrupulously exact, the pattern of satire can be defined as parody, non-parodic fiction (dramatic or narrative), and non-parodic monologue (with its variants). He also talks about a number of reliable tests and claims that if some or most of them apply to a text, it is likely to be a satire. First, a generic definition is given by the author: For example, Juvenal uses a powerful tirade to justify his choice, to describe his material, and to sketch his special methods of writing satire.
The second one is "pedigree": when Erasmus, for example, claims that his Praise of
Folly Pumpkinification Metamorphoses, he stresses
one line of its descent comes from the classical satirists. Thirdly, the choice of a theme and method used by the earlier satirists: In Boileau's first satire, there is a beggar's monologue which is related to becoming corrupt and this central theme is taken from Juvenal's satire. Fourth, an author can make it plain that he is writing a satire by quoting the actual words of a distinguished satirist; for example, Peacock starts some of his novels by quoting from Samuel Butler and likewise, Lord Byron begins English Bards and Scotch Reviewers
Besides, it should be noticed that only some sections of a work can be satire, as Hodgart remarks "no-full length novel is likely to be satirical throughout" (214). A writer does not need to use satirical devices such as parody, irony, and paradox throughout his work. At this point, it would be beneficial to mention the difference that Frye underlines between irony and satire: "The chief distinction between irony and satire is that satire is militant irony: its moral norms are relatively clear, and it assumes standards against which the grotesque and absurd are measured" (223). If writers use
41
satirical devices only in certain sections of their work, then those sections on their own can be satiric, but if these devices are found in every section of a work, then the work can be regarded as a complete satirical one.
A satirical work aims to attack a vice or folly, and wit and ridicule are employed to achieve it. Humour has an essential role in holding up a serious issue to ridicule.
However, note that the primary aim of satire is not just to entertain the reader, as Griffin remarks: "Satire does not forsake the "real world" entirely. Its victims come from that world, and it is this fact (together with a darker or sharper tone) that separates satire from pure comedy" (1). In addition, as Rosen articulates: "Satire cannot be pure entertainment because it contains too many indications that it is also serious or satire cannot be seriously moralistic, as it purports to be, because its investment in comedy precludes any kind of systematic teaching" (3). Also, the use of humour, which can be regarded as an inseparable part of satire, helps divide the satire into two basic categories; these are traditional and modern satire. In the traditional satire, humour is employed to offer solutions for the satirized issues of the society. However; in the modern satire, the tone of humour is dark and correction of the vices in society is not the satirists' purpose. For modern satirists, the world is too decayed to be corrected. As Neimneh articulates: "Modern satire was not always serious or corrective of folly or vice, and it often laughed at the absurdity of the postwar Western world (64). Pratchett's satire can be regarded as an example of modern satire written in the 20th century because he both directs his criticism of our world's serious problematic issues such as political corruption, gender rights, income injustice, and makes his readers laugh while using satire. Put another way, his satire's tone is not dark, but he deals with the serious issues in modern society.
42
Another difference between the modern and traditional satire is that, the former is usually found in poetry but the latter is more common in novel form. As Griffin
commonly found not as an independent fo
Also, for Kernan, each age of satire inclines to attack certain targets and for him the target of modern satire is pr
material improvement, on scientific achievements, and on wildly optimistic assumptions
Kernan because the subject of modern satire cannot be narrowed down to a single
vary from one book to another. Pratchett, for example, satirizes corrupt politicians, gender rights, and social injustice. Each of these subjects can be found in any satirical work.
Apart from the use of humour, another difference between modern and traditional satire is that the former "tends to be less personal and more social, i.e. it deals more with attitudes, outlook, temper, and institutions than with individuals" (Neimneh, 2012:64). Correspondingly, Pratchett directs his criticism at institutions. For example, the Unseen University in the Discworld Series can be regarded as Pratchett's criticism on educational institutions. Further, in modern satire, satire's corrective function has lost its importance; there is no norm against which an immoral, wrong, or sinful attitude could be judged. Therefore, just unveiling the vice or folly in a society can be enough
exposure of vice. The judgment of that vice is up to the readers. To sum up, a brief
43
survey on the use of satire throughout literary history, its development, and
differs from the traditional satire.
Both ancient Greeks and Romans left their imprints on satire. In the hands of man
Greek and Roman literary works, bearing a range of generic labels, contain hints of Ancient Greeks produced many examples of satirical work. Aristophanes' plays are a fantastic example of this;
however, the word "satire" and its definition had not yet been coined when he produced his plays.
"satura quidem tota nostra est"
The list of Roman verse satirists can be very long, but Lucilius, Horace, Persius, and Juvenal are the most recognized names. Similarly, Keane, based on Quintilian's declaration, states that "His (Quintilian's) pronouncement limits satire to the handful of verse authors who, as a result, came to comprise the ancient canon in the eyes of most scholars. This exclusive group consists of four writers Lucilius, Horace, Persius, and Juvenal" (31).
Hooley reports that Lucilius is (168/7 102 BCE) the widely acknowledged
satirists -Horace, Persius, and Juvenal- refer to Lucilius as the authorizing inaugurator of their craft. Also, Horace consciously designed the satire as an invented literary kind;
in this way, he gave Rome the tools for thinking about satire as well as the occasion to talk about it by staging his great rivalry with Lucilius. Literary celebrity Persius followed Horace. His lyrics (23 and 13 BCE) and epistles (20 and 18 13 BCE) won immediate favor and were the objects of subsequent literary imitation. Hooley also
44
explains that Persius used satire in the style of Lucilius and Horace. Further, Persius, Seneca, and Petronius were three active satirists: The latter two composed satirical tracts mixing prose and various verse forms in the manner of Varro (116 27 BCE).
erted, symphonic, and hugely comprehensive, taking in all of Rome itself, in fact, in the centerpiece satire of the first book (20).
Traditionally, based on its tone, satire is divided into two: Horatian and
Juvenalian satire. On the one hand, Horatian sat In
Horace's satires, both major and minor personages are time and again heightened in order to be brought down all the heavier. This heightening is achieved by way of literary allusions or sometimes other imagery" (Plaza, 2006:57). Horatian satires are examples of indirect methods. In the indirect method, satirists use implications in order to express their view: "By positioning himself as a satirist in the footsteps of his aristocratic Republican predecessor Lucilius (d. 102 BCE), Horace was drawing attention to the difficulty of writing full-blooded satire in a changed political climate"
(Gowers, 2005:48). In ancient times, writers wanted to own a rich and strong patron in politics and society. A patron both supported his writer and protected him; however, having a secure patron also caused "a difficulty" for writers because they were not completely free to write whatever they wished and direct their satires; the patron's approval and taste shaped their works and criticism. That is why many satirists preferred to use the indirect method. On the other hand, Juvenalian satire is biting and bitter:
before shooting it down with derision is used extensively. This corresponds to his
45
method the satirist attacks angrily. Gowers describes Juvenal as the satirist of
partnership with epic, he sets out to look bigger, denser, ruder, slyer, angrier, fleshier, more sophisticated and bilious, to the power of ten, than all the other satirists before him
Satire written in the Ancient period, usually by Horace and Juvenal, is termed as classical satire. Its content consisted of vices and immorality observed by the satirists in their society. Beside the subject matter, its technique was also unique. Criticism in classical satire must be focused on named individuals, and criticized events or situations must be clearly described in detail. Speakers of these criticisms must not be directly targeted, so the criticized people must not be the same with the audience. The word 'audience" was used on purpose because the classical satires were written in verse form and read on the stage to the audience.
Focusing on satire in the Ancient period helps reveal the characteristics of satire from its beginning and understand its emergence as a literary genre. Further, Horatian and Juvenalian satire are the touchstone of satire even today, and in many literary studies these terms are frequently referred. Defining these terms also forms a basis to comprehend the following centuries' satirical works, which were written under the influence of satire in the ancient period.
In the Middle Age, satire continued to flourish in Europe. Satire in the middle age was impersonal and it aimed to bring the behavior which was being criticized into the forefront so that people might compare their behaviour with the criticized one and felt guilty. From this point of view, it might be claimed that one of the fundamental purposes of the medieval satire is to correct vices instead of just portraying them.
Similarly, Mann in his book entitled Chaucer and Medieval Estate Satire highlights the
46
corrective features of estate literature and points out that estate literature, beside o create, and contribute to, stereotypes; the way in which an individual author writes about monks or women can well influence the way in which his
medieval literature not only depends on but also exploits the traditional image of the framework of social stereotypes.
In many works, medieval literature is titled as estate literature so at this point it The Norton Anthology of English Literature, Medieval society is described as consisting of three estates:
The nobility, composed of a small hereditary aristocracy, whose mission on earth was to rule over and defend the body politic; the church whose duty was to look after the spiritual welfare of that body; and everyone else, the large mass of commoners who were supposed to do the work that provided for its physical needs (238).
In the late-medieval genre of estate satire the three estates, clergy, nobles, and
referred to as estate satire. Correspondingly, Helen Philips expounds that although the range of professions varies from text to text, most estate satire began with clerics like popes, cardinals, bishops, priests, monks and sometimes other educated professionals like lawyers, doctors and moved on those who rule and govern like kings, barons, knights and then those who work like merchants and peasants (23).
Medieval society is different from classical society; because it is mostly concerned with their agrarian, feudal and commercial problems, and its values mostly
47
depend on Catholicism. Medieval satirists used the classical satire tradition but they adapted it for their own concerns. Their concern was to use satire in order to correct the vices in their society. Medieval satirists turned the classical satire themes, namely immorality and vices in society, into a broad criticism covering the vices of society's different estates. There was a deep-seated resentment between the upper and lower estates of society till the late-medieval period but as a result of the Black Death and
anybody to directly turn his criticism to any estate of the society.
During the Middle Age, Geoffrey Chaucer and William Langland were the most -medieval English writers, Geoffrey Chaucer and William Langland, were both superb
rists of the period.
Neither of these men wrote an entire work that we might call satire, largely because
Canterbury Tales; Mann states that the form of the prologue is a reason for looking in estates literature, rather than any other literary genre, for its source (7). Also, satire was seen in certain tales and in their prologues in The Canterbury Tales and the first five Piers Plowman. Namely, satires in many medieval literary works are episodic and they are within certain medieval genres such as fables, romances, sermons, and songs. Therefore, many of the medieval works that include satire were known under different labels, even if the writers called them satire, their works did not conform to the classical satire.
Instead, they seem more like sermons as they contain many religious subjects.
As the most outstanding literary figure of the fourteenth century, Chaucer
48
satire has been used, it has been as supplementary evidence in a historically-oriented
examination of fourteenth- ted masterpiece The
Canterbury Tales is regarded as the most preeminent work that includes medieval estate satire. Chaucer wrote The Canterbury Tales in vernacular English rather than in Latin or French because one of his aims was to make his work accessible to the upper estate and the whole society. Clerics wrote satire in Latin only for other clerics as very few people in the society could understand Latin except for the clergymen. In this sense, satire in Latin could be seen as internal satire for the clergy estate, but Chaucer changed this tradition and wanted to reach every part of English society. With this consciousness, Chaucer compared the upper and lower classes and used his observations in The Canterbury Tales. The "General Prologue" in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales especially gives much information about the characters in his satirical work. Mann states that the form of the prologue is a reason for looking in estates literature, rather than any other literary genre, for its source (7).
Chaucer's narrators are pilgrims, and they all represent a broad spectrum of ranks and occupations. The style, tone, and genre in his tales are different from each other as the narrators come from different estates of society. For example, while the Knight tells a courtly romance about two noble gentlemen and lady, Miller mentions the relationship between the old carpenter's young wife and a student. It should be noted that in The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer does not only focus on the corruption of the upper class, instead he wants to expose examples of corruption in all estates of the society. Also, Chaucer was interested in portraying the society completely, that is the reason why he used thirty pilgrims; there is hardly any collection of tales that includes thirty narrators.
These thirty narrators have different professions and Chaucer either shows the qualities
49 prai
works and his loyalty to the Church make all these three characters great representatives of their estate. However, Chaucer also mentions three more characters from these three
Good-in their portrayal, Chaucer stresses their vices, sGood-ins, and the corruption Good-in their moral, social and religious life. With the comparison of positive and negative representatives of the same estates, Chaucer uses satire to show his readers the difference between how these people should be and how they actually are.
partly for this reason more telling. In The Canterbury Tales
to w
to retain both without allowing the positive and negative values to cancel each other
in which the different social groups are listed and their abuses are condemned.
According to him what such works showed was that vice and virtue were not simply
estate or occupation. What might be permissible or even recommended for one order, including hunting for the nobles or marriage for the laity, might constitute a sin for another, for instance, those who had entered religious orders. Rigby also points at
50
specific satires for each estate: "Satirists attack churchmen for being lustful and proud, nobles for failing to defend widows and orphans, labourers for being lazy and greedy and wives for being disobedient, vain and talkative (8). To sum up, during the Middle Ages, in England the main aim of the satirists was to reveal the corruption in the society which spread every estate from top to bottom and offer correctives and remedies. The common and implied message in the estate satire is that a major change in the society might be provided by motivating people to look inward for their own vices and correct them. Chaucer, the most recognized medieval English satirist, created a microcosm of his society by selecting characters from each estate. Further, he used irony and humour to direct his satire, especially at his gullible narrators who were easily deceived by people's appearance and words.
Renaissance writers had a great interest in classical views and genres so their satirical works were written under the influence of their interest. However, it was not easy to adapt the classical genres and styles to Europe's new culture. A new way of seeing and thinking developed firstly in Italy, then in all other European countries.
Renaissance writers tried to blend the classical genres and the new world order in their works. In The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism Prescott explains a difficulty about this issue:
A certain unease in Renaissance commentary on satire and humour can also be explained by the need when following the ancients to adapt classical genres and styles to a culture with dukes and kings, not senators and emperors, to new media and new means of censorship, and to a religion that urges people to love their enemies not to humiliate them into suicide as, it was said, the ancient satirist Archilochus had done when he invented the iambic (284).