As we continue our discussion in class about Jonathan Swift and his peers, Pope and Dryden, etc. It has occurred to me that we don't see much of their style of wit, that humorous and at times biting political satire, except in dark dusty corners and in editorial comics. Why has political satire faded into semi-obscurity, relegated to black and white lines and droll text on the bone grey pages of starving newspapers? Perhaps as a culture we have become too concerned with political correctness to enjoy a good satirical verse. Of course poetry itself is a neglected shadow of it's former robust self. So maybe the two are entwined? Satire and poetry strolling hand-in-hand down into the dark mire of obscurity, with it's mistress, reading, limping along behind them.
Certainly there are satirists in our age who perhaps can match wits with those of old. Most are content with commentary on politics from a safe distance however. Avoiding the ire of the politician shepherds and their flocks of adoring sheep. Perhaps this is because the sheep turn into ravening beasts when their favorites are brought under scrutiny. The were-sheep prowl the fields of political satire, ensuring that no wolves can vex the politician shepherd. So the satirical wolves must content themselves with letting fly their sharp arrows of wit from behind the walls of obscurity. Hoping that the were-sheep followers don't sniff them out, clamor over the wall and devour them in their ravening lust to protect the almighty shepherd and his crook of political correctness.
Perhaps we will see a return to the days when a Swift, a Pope, a Wollstonecraft and their progeny can once again provide our culture with a wider view of our failings, perhaps make us laugh at ourselves once in a while, and nod our heads in agreement that change can be accomplished. I hope to live to see that time, perhaps be part of it in a meaningful way, for true change comes from those who are willing to admit that we are not perfect, and see the truth behind the lines of a satirical verse.
I think your note on the lack of satire, in a world other than politics, seems to be at first true and an interesting concept to debate and ponder. However, I do think that satire still exists, both smiling and biting, but is not at the forefront of literature read by either the academic elite or the public. It seems rather that satire has pushed itself into the form of novels and perhaps into a very specific type of novel in the post Post-Modern Era. For example, Apathy and Other Small Victories and The Office are laugh out loud modern work-place satires whereas any of the Chuck Palahniuk novels (Fight Club's jab at Corporate America and Survivor's religious denunciation) are biting, harsh, and point to the vices of being a human in the late 20th and early 21st century. I do hope, as well, that satire can make it's reappearance in to the genre of poetry. I think in such a confusing world politically, social, religiously and technologically satire would lend itself as a guide to the comprehension of our purpose and codes of behavior in such a society.
ReplyDeleteLike Lauryn, I still find a good amount of satire in our culture, but it definitely doesn't take the form of the sharp and witty poetic satire of the eighteenth century. For me, the closest we come to that is in the political satire of shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.
ReplyDeleteIf I let my pessimistic side out, I'd argue that Americans (and I'm generalizing a lot here) don't want to engage with clever and witty political satire. They want to be told things in simple and divisive terms (I'm right; he's wrong) and don't want to have to spend the time and effort needed to become educated and truly informed, never mind devoting time to unraveling complex written satire. Along those lines, I heard an interesting critique of the Emmy's on NPR yesterday that chastised the judges for picking safe and appealing shows rather than the ones engaged in edgy comedy and satire (like "Louie" on FX).