Category: Satire

Satire: Unleashing the Force of Mockery and Irony

Introduction

Satire is a way of carrying out a specific task used by writers to uncover and condemn the inanity and wrongdoing of an individual or a society by applying comedy, mockery, overstatement, or sarcasm. A person, country, or, surprisingly, the whole world could be aimed in the form of satire by a writer.

The Role of Mockery in Satire

Traditionally, satire is a humorous section of writing that forms the enjoyment of an individual or a society to reveal its ignorance and imperfection. Satire’s job is to mock or attack those wrongdoings in society, which the writer contemplates as a warning to sophistication. The purpose of satire is not to create laughter towards people or ideas; it aims to inform society and to change their judgment regarding the succeeding dishonesty or surroundings. The most effective form of satire is the usage of mockery, making fun of and showing contemptuous language directed at a specific person or thing.

Mockery is applied in most elements of satire because it tends to create further enjoyment for the audience. Throughout a piece of satire, mockery is generally used to mock or make fun of something. While people read or watch a piece of satire, it is more enjoyable to view when someone is being made fun of. For example, The Simpsons 3 a.m. parody Donald Trump; mockery is constructed in this piece by making fun of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. In this video, you can see how mockery is being used because watching this will make you laugh. Mockery is intending to mock or make fun of someone, which this video does very well.

Not only is mockery used in films or videos, but it is additionally applied in cartoons. In this cartoon, there is a sign that says, “Caution children playing.” This sign declaims the opposing view of what the children are actually doing. It conveys how the kids are on their phones or electronic devices, not playing or interacting with one another. This relates to today’s society because kids nowadays are always on their phones. Kids would rather be on their phones than hanging out with friends. This is an example of mockery because it is making fun of today’s generation and how kids cannot stay off of their phones.

Mockery is also used in the novel Huckleberry Finn; the characters do not mock or make fun of this topic. Religion is being made fun of and mocked in this novel, even though the characters do not mention anything about it. The author implies that religion is being made fun of. In the first chapter of this novel, it states, “Now she had got a start, and she went on and told me all about the good place. She said all abody would have to do there was to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever.

So, I didn’t think much of it. But I never said so. I asked her if she reckoned Tom Sawyer would go there, and she said not by a considerable sight. I was glad about that because I wanted him and me to be together.” – The Huckleberry Finn, page 3. Twain shows how he does not like the proposal of heaven and communicates how the common person would think it was boring. This also shows how judgemental people can behave.

Authors often use irony as a satirical device. Irony is a literary device in which there is an incongruence in discordance between what one says or does and what one means or what is generally understood. Swift uses vast amounts of irony throughout his writing called A Modest Proposal. When Swift is talking about his proposal

Conclusion

In the Modest Proposal, mockery is used to mock a person. For example, “For first, as I have already observed, it would greatly lessen the number of papists, with whom we are yearly overrun, being the principal breeders of the nation as well as our dangerous enemies…” The author, Swift, is writing in the voice of an extreme, bigoted English Protestant in order to mock such a person. He reveals the stereotype that the Irish make a lot of babies by calling them “principal breeders.”

Satire’s Influence on Politics, Media, and Society

Introduction

Satire is regarded as an effective way to understand society and reveal its values. Satire can have a good effect when it comes to politics, but there can be some bad as well. Satire establishes it can be necessary for an excellent society to hold those in power publicly accountable. It is a vital picture of our freedom to conflict, know who our best satirists are, and listen to what they have to say carefully. Stephen Colbert brings his signature satire and Comedy to The Late Show with Stephen Colbert is the #1 late-night show.

Body

Political Accountability Through Satire

Colbert talks with a diverse guest about what is new and relevant in the world of politics. The incongruity theory suggests that humor arises when things that do not usually go together replace logic and familiarity. Whether or not we agree with Colbert’s politics, his influence is a cue of the critical function of satire in public discourse.

Stephen Colbert’s comic voices have influenced the outlines of modern American media and politics in astonishing ways. Comedy programs like The Daily Show and Comedy Central, appearances on CNN’s Crossfire, Fox News’s The O’Reilly Factor, and even at college commencement ceremonies, their dialogs have permeated local and national arenas. Stephen Colbert’s speech at the 2006 White House Correspondent’s Dinner was viewed over 2.7 million times within its first two days on YouTube and was the number one downloaded item on iTunes.The Daily Show with Jon Stewart has a critical positive impact on political participation among the American people, and Comedy plays a big part in politics.

Unmasking Societal Issues and Hypocrisies

Stephen Colbert uses parodic polyglossia in much the same way, but with some slight differences, on his nightly television show, The Colbert Report. On a popular segment of the show called The Word, he split the television screen into two and compared his vocal comic persona on the left side of the screen against written statements on the right. Colbert reports: ‘You know folks, when I look back to the months leading up to our invasion of Iraq, one thing is clear…it seemed inevitable, thanks in no small part to the news media’s crack reporting’ (the words ‘On Crack’ then appear to the right of Colbert; Colbert, 2007a). Colbert uses Comedy to bring humor to a serious matter; people use laughter as a disguise. Colbert appropriates the form of CNN-style newsmaking (e.g., the use of scrolling sentences across the bottom of the screen), comparing two voices (in this case, the oral against the written) to chastise the mainstream media for its complicity in the government’s deliberations leading up to the Iraq war.

His likeability and charm have always characterized Colbert’s satire, but he has undoubtedly still been capable of really sharp moments–especially when he blasted then-President George W. Bush at the 2006 White House Correspondents Association Dinner. He was feet away from the President, and Colbert delivered a cutting speech insulting the President’s policies. He wanted Bush to pay no attention to his drooping approval rating, and reality has a well-known liberal bias. Whether we agree with Colbert’s politics, his influence is a reminder of the critical function of satire in public discourse. Colbert makes a mockery of something that needed to be mocked and helps shed light on a genuine enemy of free democracy. It helps to bring the political issues to light but uses humor to do it peacefully.

Colbert performs other characters to create multivoiced insights about American media and politics. Colbert plays several different characters in a segment where he visits Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. Over the campus loudspeaker, Colbert broadcasts, ‘Students, this is your founder, John F. Kennedy; please report to the auditorium immediately’ (Colbert, 2006a). With a voice-over, Colbert then narrates to his television audience, ‘Time for Politics 101 with Professor Doctor Stephen T. Colbert.’ Colbert saw standing in front of the Kennedy school’s entire student body, wearing a red bowtie and tweed jacket.

Satire’s Influence on Political Participation

Russell Peterson describes the use of late-night TV show hosts’ satire when talking about politics and what people are genuinely laughing about the issues. ‘Losing Our Religion’ by Russell L. Peterson shows his view on how he feels about the political system itself losing its religion as that people do not care anymore about what they say or morals. Peterson believed that Christianity had done two things: it has developed the most explicit doctrine of good versus evil, and it has developed the most explicit and articulated doctrine of logos. Peterson states that he strives to live as if God exists when asking him about his religion. Peterson explains how, though democracy is a good idea, it does not work because that is why we find these comedians so funny; they are speaking the truth.

Peterson believes that more people listen to comedians because they say the same thing news anchors do but in a more humorous way. Peterson believes that people know that they should be more interested and involved in current events and not what people are wearing but their views on religion and politics. People shy away from talking about politics in general and religion. Politics and religion are something that people hate to talk about because they know no matter how worked up one gets, there is not much to be done about it in this democratic nation in which we live. They forced us to choose between two bad candidates, and whichever one is not the worst will win.

Politics, as well as religion, have changed so much over the years. People are starting to pay more attention to what is new in Hollywood rather than who is controlling our nation. People are no longer watching the news because it is not entertaining. Why watch something boring when we can watch something humorous and learn the same information regardless? No matter the source, the information is going to be twisted, and Americans know that. Peterson points out that the late-night hosts do not just pick fun at the political candidates and the decisions they make, but they make fun of democracy itself and declare that it is all just a sham. In a country where we are proud to call ourselves run by the people, it is hard to believe that people are not running the country at all.

Conclusion

Satire is known as an effective way to understand our society, and it reveals the values of society. We can focus on the real issues at hand but in a more fun way. Colbert’s influence is a reminder of the critical function of satire in public discourse. People are willing to laugh, and that is power. Satire can vary in its quality, but the best satire has a definite point to make. It is not merely destructive but constructive. Peterson believes that more people listen to comedians because they say the same thing news anchors do, but more humorously, he and Colbert have the same style and agree with their style.

The term humor refers to a quality of action, speech, or writing that excites amusement. Humor takes up specific topics and actions and focuses on certain social issues. Incongruity is an astonishing relationship between two things thought to be disparate, a difference between what one expects and what one gets, and a lack of consistency and harmony. Incongruity fits here well; it allows for the possibility that by placing two disparate ideas in conversation, new aspects of both come to light, and humor can be used to provoke thought.

Work Cited

1. A Citizen’s Guide to Democracy Inaction: Jon Stewart and …. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10417940 802428212
2. Boler, M. (2006). The Daily Show, Crossfire, and the will to truth. Scan, pp. 3, 1–8.
3. Cohen, N. (2006, May 22). That after-dinner speech remains a favorite dish. Washington Post. Retrieved March 20, 2007, from
   https://glazer-dasinger.weebly.com/political-beliefs-and-behaviors/russell-peterson-from-strange-bedfellows
4. ‘Stephen Colbert’ The Importance of Satire – Christ …. https://christandpopculture.com/stephen-colbert-importance-satire/
   The Late Show, Stephen Colbert – CBS All Access. https://www.cbs.com/shows/the-late-show-with-stephen-colbert/

Satire in “The Great Gatsby”: Exploration of the American Dream

Introduction

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald was written about a satirical story that embraces American ideals. The narrator, Nick Carraway, describes Gatsby’s satirical life, his incredible parties, and the amount of money he has. When reading the book, there is a lot deeper meaning than the luxuries some people have. Fitzgerald wrote The Great Gatsby to portray the ideal American dream and a real look at the fancy lifestyles everyone wishes they had in America.

The Illusion of Freedom and Social Mobility

Fitzgerald expresses the American ideal with a satirical story between Daisy and Gatsby. Looking more deeply at Fitzgerald’s writing, when Daisy goes to Gatsby’s house for the first time, she is shocked about Gatsby’s shirts, “He took out a pile of shirts and began throwing them, one by one, before us, shirts of sheer linen and thick silk and fine flannel… Suddenly, with a strained sound, Daisy bent her head into the shirts and began to cry stormily. ‘They’re such beautiful shirts,’ she sobbed, her voice muffled in the thick folds. “It makes me sad because I’ve never seen such beautiful shirts before” (Fitzgerald 92). The point of Fitzgerald adding this is because Gatsby was not proper, and he’s making a point that it’s okay not to follow some guidelines. When Daisy starts to cry in front of Gatsby, she’s crying because of how Gatsby had so many-colored shirts he was throwing, not because she has not seen him in 5 years. That proves that being wealthy is a need for Daisy to be in a relationship.

Fitzgerald also expresses satire about the American dream ideal when Gatsby throws huge parties and everyone, even people who were not invited, finds a way to go to the parties. When Nick Carraway goes to Gatsby’s house the first time, he states, “I believe that on the first night I went to Gatsby’s house, I was one of the few guests who had actually been invited. People were not invited—they went there. Sometimes they came and went without having met Gatsby at all, came for the party with a simplicity of heart that was its own ticket of admission” (Fitzgerald 41).

Clearly, the people who were not invited were acting carelessly at the party, and they would not tell people directly, but they were moving from house to house like a moth to only get the gossip and the champagne. Fitzgerald also adds, “his blue gardens men and girls came and went like moths among the whisperings and the champagne and the stars…and stocked with gins and liquors and with cordials so long forgotten that most of his female guests were too young to know one from another” (Fitzgerald 43). Fitzgerald added that because Gatsby’s female guests are quite young to know the difference between what drinks were being served. This shows how the American dream ideal that the younger you are, the better because girls started to go to parties and meet men without knowing what everything meant.

The last of the American ideal is how Fitzgerald mentioned Gatsby’s personal life in the book. Gatsby went from being poor to out of nowhere getting an inheritance from a friend and becoming ridiculously wealthy. Gatsby is a figure of the American dream because people wanted that life so badly. In society, people believed the American dream was “big money, big house, and parties.” However, reading the book, the American dream was not real, and it would die eventually. The moment when the story is set at Gatsby’s funeral, and Tom says, “..Mr. Nobody from Nowhere..” (Fitzgerald 123). Well, Tom is saying even though Gatsby was wealthy and famous, people only cared for his parties; Gatsby was not seen as “popular” in others’ eyes.

Conclusion

Even Though Fitzgerald showed a satirical story between Daisy and Gatsby, he also showed other strangers the luxurious life of the people they know. Fitzgerald wrote the book to show what it was like back then, people’s luxurious lives, and their dark sides. The American dream was not the perfect life after all. The Great Gatsby showed the American Dream as someone starting low on the economic or status level or working really hard towards becoming wealthy and having fame. In the 1920s, people wanted to be rich, popular, and happy, but Gatsby thought money would fix his happiness, but money doesn’t buy happiness.

References

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. Scribner, 1925.

Satire, Sarcasm, and Social Commentary in ‘Roseanne’: Past and Present

Introduction

The Roseanne show and fictional Conner’s family has always been able to represent the issues of America and the world using satire and humor. By using the dynamics of the family to bring these issues to the forefront, Roseanne, both in the older seasons as well as in this new season, writes to the people. She does so with her dynamic wit and sarcastic persona. This show was and still is one of the few sitcoms to successfully portray the struggles of the working class. Roseanne and the other writers create memorable and issue-driven episodes. The struggles of today’s families are as relevant and funny today as they were when the original show aired, and Roseanne is still the best at using satire, sarcasm, and humor to bring those struggles as well as the issues facing Americans to the forefront and allow all of us to laugh with her.

Body

The Evolution of Satirical Strategies

Now that Roseanne is back on the air, the writing of the show, although still about a blue-collar family in the Midwest has taken a different turn. The primary writer is Roseanne Barr, and the tone of the show hinges a lot on her political views and the issues that confront Americans today. The first episode aired on March 27, 2018, after a twenty-year hiatus, and on it, Roseanne and her sister have not spoken for two years because Jackie voted for Jill Stein and Roseanne is an ardent Trump supporter.

Roseanne, still wanting to target working-class white people, is using her partisan politics to reach them. The new version of the show is tackling the issues of today by including the opioid crisis, the cost of health insurance, high unemployment, and transgender/gay rights. Although Roseanne is an outspoken supporter of President Trump and a conservative, she has maintained the progressivism of the show in the way that her writing addresses common issues and problems that her fictional family is facing. Daughter Becky wants to become a surrogate mother, and although Roseanne is initially against it, she is reminded by her sister Jackie that “You always believed a woman had a right to decide what happens to her body,” and Roseanne relents. (Paskins)

In the second episode of this new season, Darlene, who is now a single mother with two children and a son, Mark, wants to wear girls’ clothes to school. Darlene is okay with this, as she states that he is not gay or transgender; he just likes to dress this way. Dan and Roseanne are also okay with this and go to their grandson’s school to defend him. (“Dress to Impress”) The tackling of the issue of cross-dressing shows how Roseanne, through the scripting of the episode, is tackling relevant issues in today’s world. Having a character like Mark in the new version of the show is important to maintaining the integrity of what ‘Roseanne’ is all about.

The Subtle Transformation

Another new cast member of the show is DJ’s daughter, Mary Conner. In the “White In the Men Can’t Kiss” episode of the seventh season of the original series, DJ would not kiss the black classmate that he was starring opposite in the class play because of the color of her skin. For a sitcom, Roseanne managed to expertly touch upon racial bias and showcase the uncomfortable conversations Roseanne and Dan had when confronting their own bias. (White Men Can’t Kiss”) As the new season progresses, we discover that Mary Conner is DJ’s daughter with his wife, that same black girl now grown and serving as a soldier overseas. The idea of mixed marriage was not as acceptable in the original series, whereas now Roseanne tackles it with honesty and openness.

The writers, Matt Williams and Roseanne Barr based the show, characters, and storylines on their own real-life experiences. Williams, when asked where his ideas came from, said, “You Write what you know.” (Bennett) Williams is the son of blue-collar parents who created the characters as a consolidation of his own family members. Goranson, when interviewed by TODAY, stated that the biggest impact of the show was “this archetypal family that had storylines around money issues and personal issues and love and … that was such a mirroring for families in the United States and around the world.

I think it really helped people communicate better … and also not feel isolated.” (Bennett) Williams said the intent of his writing was ‘to represent the people I grew up with — without condescending — and basically celebrate this working-class family with a husband and wife who loved each other.’ (Bennett) The writing of the original series did just that – it kept it real. Williams stated about his writing and ideas for the show: “They were real people to me, and I wanted to write about their experiences. (Bennett)

The Roseanne show was based in the fictional factory town of Lanford, Illinois, and is about the nuclear Conner family rotating around the heartbeat of the family. Other vital members of this family are husband and dad Dan, played by John Goodman; sister Jackie, played by Laurie Metcalf; daughters Becky and Darlene, played by Lecy Goranson (replaced by Sarah Chalke partway through the sixth season); and Sarah Gilbert respectively, and son DJ played by Michael Fishman. The early show often tackled issues not usually discussed on TV, like birth control, PMS,
teenage sex, money, unemployment, and feminism. It brought forth the struggles of the working class using satire and humor. In its first run, Roseanne was political, but more indirectly than overtly. The show dealt less with debates happening on the national stage and more with the ones happening at kitchen tables, with the frayed purse strings of two working-class parents, and the even more frazzled sanity that came with raising three kids during the 1990s evolving cultural values. (D’Addario) In the new version, kitchen-table debates have been replaced with the cultural confusion of today’s issues.

Conclusion

Satire and sarcasm are used every day to get one’s views across. The Roseanne show, both past and present, does just that. Roseanne is an expert at using not only sarcasm and satire but also humor to express her point of view through the writing of her TV show. The Roseanne show debuted on October 18, 1988 and ran until May 20, 1997. In its early days, the show was created to portray an average working-class family. It was one of the few on the air that mimicked the traditions of shows like The Honeymooners and one of the last to succeed before TV comedy was taken over by upper-class white folks who never seemed to worry about money. (VanDerWerff)

The show was tough, honest, and often provoking. It could pivot from very funny to very heartbreaking on a dime. While we laughed and cried at the original show, will we do the same for the new version? The new Roseanne debuted on March 27, 2018 and while it still portrays a middle-class family, the script has drifted from the trials and tribulations of that family to a discussion about President Donald Trump, current events, and culture. The arguments now are less about how Roseanne examined feminism and class and more about her political views and stance on today’s debatable issues. The old Roseanne blends well with the new Roseanne. She still writes to provoke conversations.

References

1. Bennett, L. (2018, March 23). ‘Roseanne’ at 30: What the cast has said about the groundbreaking show. TODAY. https://www.today.com/popculture/roseanne-30-what-cast-has-said-about-groundbreaking-show-t125790
2. D’Addario, D. (2018, March 27). ‘Roseanne’ Review: TV’s Most Timely Revival is a Goofy Delight. Time. https://time.com/5211630/roseanne-review-timely-revival/
3. Paskins, L. (2018, March 27). Roseanne returns to its central political conflict – Trump. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/mar/27/roseanne-returns-to-its-central-political-conflict-trump