An Analysis on the Use of Satire

Satire is the use of ridicule or humor in an artistic work with the purpose of exposing or denouncing vice or folly. Although it is usually subtle in nature, it is used to bring light to contemporary societal problems and provoke change within a culture. Many artists have tackled serious issues using this form of comedy to appeal to their audience. Satire has been used for centuries as a means of assessing the faults of society.

This literary device could be traced back to the old Greek playwrights, such as Aeschylus, of the fifth century B.C. In his plays he would have men dressed as satyrs, thus the modern word satire, make fun of the actors. The use of comedy as a means of criticism continued to develop and grow stronger as the centuries progressed.

Satire, however, is more than humor, it is an expression of the human way of thinking. It mirrors the feelings a society has of the environment around them. Although it does not exemplify everyone, it does usually appeal to a large section of the populus. Its use goes back to the many ancient tribes who used "satire" in curses or rituals. Poets could kill with words just as warriors could with swords, and was thus a force to be feared. In Elizabethan England, satiric verse were prohibited and burned if discovered.

Until vernacular literature such as Dante's Inferno, satire was not often employed. Even after satire began to grow in popularity, it was not used to criticize contemporary social figures. Its influence, and the concept of tackling more serious issues, did not begin to grow profoundly until the sixteenth century, although the true explosion occurred in the seventeenth and eighteenth century, during the Enlightenment.

One of the most famous of those among this period was Jonathon Swift, an English satirist who wrote Gulliver's Travels, a satire on human nature, and A Modest Proposal, in which he found that the greatest solution to the poverty and famine of the Irish was to use the children of Ireland as a source of food and wealth. The title, A Modest Proposal, adds greatly to the overall impact and irony of the essay, the topic proposed being anything but modest.

There was no malicious intent in his work, however. Swift's sole purpose was to reveal a problem with society and expose it through the use of humor. As stated in The Purpose and Method of Satire. " the best satire does not seek to do harm or damage by its ridicule...but rather it seeks to create a shock of recognition and to make vice repulsive so that the vice will be expunged from the person or society intended to benefit by the attack...whenever possible, this shock of recognition is to be conveyed through laughter or wit..." (Harris). Thus, satire is not a means of attack, nor is it intended to carry out unnecessary verbal abuse. Its purpose is to provoke change using jest, not slander.

However, in order for a satiric work to facilitate change, that which is being ridiculed must be understood. "When the reader is aggressed, he must be moved to change or correct himself by embarrassment for or shock at recognition of his guilt: his crimes must be presented in such a way that they appear truly odious to him..." (Harris). Satire would not work effectively if the vice being mocked did not appear clearly iniquitous. Thus, the reader could easily detect the immorality depicted and alter his ways if necessary.

To create such a critique of society that opens the eyes of the reader, the work must not only be intellectual, but entertaining as well. Thus, humor and wit are often employed to capture the reader's focus and keep him sitting, looking at the pages. Devices such as irony, comedy, and exaggeration are used not only to make the work more attractive, but to enhance the effect of the satiric theme prevalent within it.

Such satire is seen everyday, whether in literature, magazines, comics, television, or movies, it is quite common in the media. There are many mediums through which it may be expressed. Cartoons such as The Simpsons, Family Guy, and King of the Hill use it often. Television shows like Saturday Night Live and The Daily Show constantly satirize everyday events occurring in our society. It is seen in comic strips and journals like The Onion. Everywhere one looks, there is satire.

One of the greatest and most popular satiric works of the twentieth century is Animal Farm, by George Orwell. Orwell tells the story of a group of animals living on Manor Farm, who, after hearing of a dream that Old Major, a popular old boar, has prior to his death, the animals decide to overthrow their human oppressors, seize control of Manor Farm, rename it Animal Farm, and form their new government under a system called Animalism. Prior to his death, Old Major teaches the animals a song called "Beasts of England," where his dream of a world without humans is thus described. Mr. Jones, the once human owner of Animal Farm attempts to regain control, but is once again defeated.

Two young pigs, Napoleon and Snowball, at first work together to help ensure the prosperity of the farm, doing things like teaching the animals to read or organizing them to make sure everything is done properly. However, their ideas increasingly conflict with one another. Eventually, Napoleon uses the dogs to chase Snowball off the farm, seize control, and declare that pigs will from now on make all the decisions.

As time wears own, Napoleon uses various means to make himself even more powerful. He creates false rumors and rewrites history in order to make Snowball a villain and scapegoat for all things that go wrong. Napoleon also declares that those who oppose him shall be instantly executed for treason. The years pass and the theories of Animalism become faded. The pigs, meanwhile, become increasingly human-like. In a grim ending, Napoleon changes the name of Animal Farm back to Manor Farm, and allies himself with the humans against the working class.

Orwell uses this novel, as well as the well-known 1984, to satirize the Russian Revolution, the rise of Stalin, and the overall defects in the theory of communism. Stephen Greenblatt writes in his Three Modern Satirists: Waugh, Orwell, and Huxley that "the horror of both Animal Farm and the later 1984 is precisely the cold, orderly, predictable process by which decency, happiness, and hope are systematically and ruthlessly destroyed" (Greenblatt). The reader starts the novel with a sense of humor and comedy. However, as this childlike fable progresses, the horror becomes more and more apparent, and one begins to ponder the power of greed and vice.

As the book begins, Old Major inspires the upcoming revolution by providing the animals with a vision of a classless society. The "Beasts of England" echoes his dream and gives the animals a powerful revolutionary ballad with which they are inspired and are provided with a literary poem that exemplifies their common sentiment. "Soon or late the day is coming, Tyrant Man shall be o'erthrown, And the fruitful fields of England, Shall be trod by beasts alone" (Orwell 32). Old Major can thus be seen as the embodiment of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, writers of The Communist Manifesto. Old Major, like Marx, has a vision of a better society, of a world where the animals are no longer oppressed. He, of course, again like Marx, could not foresee the future bloodshed and warring for power that such a dream would cause. Old Major thus becomes the visionary philosopher in the fable.

Everything in this novel is an allegory for one thing or another, and Old Major is not the only character to represent a specific type of person. Stephen Greenblatt writes that "...societal types are presented in the various kind of farm animals - pigs for exploiters, horses for laborers, dogs for police, sheep for blind followers, etc" (Greenblatt). Orwell does not only criticize the idea of communism, but criticizes those within a society that follow it. The sheep and horses represent the hopeless and ignorant proletariate and the pigs represent the dictators.

Snowball, like Old Major and Napoleon, resembles closely a leader involved in Russia's history and once again depicts the allegory of the communist revolution. Leon Trotsky was a Marxist theorist who had a power struggle with Joseph Stalin in the 1920's, and was subsequently expelled from the Communist Party and exiled from the Soviet Union. Snowball, likewise, had a power struggle with Napoleon and was exiled from Animal Farm. Following the exile, Napoleon begins to use Snowball as a scapegoat for the misfortunes that occur under his reign.

The actual revolt of the animals is a reference to the Revolution of 1917 in Russia, and the philosophy they adopt, Animalism, is an obvious reference to Communism. The Seven Commandments of Animalism they devise seem great and wise at first, with such ideas as "Whatever walks upon two legs is an enemy," "No animal shall sleep in a bed," and of course, most important, number seven, "All animals are equal" (Orwell 43). The Seven Commandments are eventually reduced to a single maxim, "Four legs good, two legs bad" (Orwell 50), with the intended purpose that animals should stay away from all things human.

However, this great philosophy begins deteriorating from its intended purpose when put into actual practice, just like in the real world. After Napoleon's victory over Snowball, "the remainder of Animal Farm is a chronicle of the consolidation of Napoleons power through politics, propaganda, and terror" (Greenblatt). Napoleon, the embodiment of Stalin, does anything and everything to satisfy his lust for power. He threatens all those who oppose him with instant death by his lackeys, the dogs, the animal version of the KGB. He spreads propaganda against Snowball, the animal essence of the capitalist and democratic philosophy. It was Snowball who wanted the animals to vote on major decisions, such as the building of a windmill for energy. Napoleon, however, states that he makes all the decisions and that he is to be blindly followed. Thus, the ignorant laboring class believes Napoleon when he tells them that all is for the best.

As the years pass, the old philosophies of the revolution must change. For example, the "Beasts of England," which was meant to inspire uprising, becomes a dangerous liability. The lyrics are changed to "Animal Farm, Animal Farm, never through me shalt thou come to harm!" (Orwell 97).The old song is no longer necessary since the revolution has long since passed, and Napoleon obviously does not want to inspire such sentiments again.

Napoleon is no longer called Napoleon, for that would be improper, but is referred to as "Comrade Napoleon." Although this signifies that he is something other than equal to the other animals, the animals do not notice and feel that it is befitting to call their leader Comrade. In order to repair this violation of the Seventh Commandment, the law is changed to "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" (Orwell 133). This clearly shows how the minds of the ignorant are so malleable that they conform to change, even if its exactly what they opposed a short while ago.

Slowly, as the story progresses, the pigs become less animal-like and more humanoid, the very thing which the foundation of Animalism sought to stay away from. It is in Chapter X that the pivotal moment occurs. "It was a pig walking on hind legs" (Orwell 131). It is Squealer, Napoleon's right hand man that the animals see. Napoleon himself comes out after a long line of pigs walking upright as well. "He carried a whip in his trotter" (Orwell 132). It is at this point that we can clearly see that the oppressed have become the oppressors, not just in action, but in appearance as well.

The laboring, ignorant animals, however, instead of panicking and revolting, quickly change their old maxim from "Four legs good, two legs bad" to "Four legs good, two legs better" (Orwell 132). In the final meeting between the pigs and humans, Napoleon states "'If you have your lower animals to contend with...we have our lower classes'" (Orwell 136). It is here that the novel reaches its conclusion and the folly of communism is meant to hit hardest.

Orwell uses this fable to show how, although in its perfection the idea of Communism is feasible, it could not be applied to our world under realistic conditions. For "there have been, are, and always will be pigs in every society, Orwell states, and they will always grab power" (Greenblatt). He puts forward the idea that greed and lust for power will always lead people with authority to take advantage of the weaker minds in society. Thus, communist perfection cannot be achieved.

The fact that Orwell made the tale into a fable, what he called a "fairy story" allows the message to come across, through comedy and satire, from a third person perspective, as if looking into another world. "...Orwell uses the apparently frivolous form of the animal tale to convey with immense power his profoundly bitter message" (Greenblatt). The reader is meant to ask, "How could such ignorance possibly exist?" Stephen Greenblatt writes that "Animal Farm does indeed contain much gaiety and humor, but even in the most comic moments there is a disturbing element of cruelty and fear." Despite the fact that the tale is a comedic chronicle of the adventures of a group of animals, there is a repugnant sentiment associated with the progression of the story, as evil and cruelty take hold more and more.

There is a moment in the novel where Napoleon realizes that Boxer, the old laboring horse, is no longer useful, and is thus sold by Napoleon to be made into glue. This passage is haunting in the disregard that a leader would have for his people. What's even crueler to think about is "that everyone in the society, wittingly or unwittingly, contributes to the pigs' tyranny" (Greenblatt). By not rising up, as the animals did initially, they encourage Napoleon to stay in power. Orwell is saying that it is our duty as people not to lie below the heels of such wicked oppression as it crushes us to death.

Russell Baker writes in the preface of the book that Animal Farmis "...a political tract, a satire on human folly, a loud hee-haw at all who yearn for Utopia, an allegorical lesson, and a pretty good fable in the Aesop tradition. It is also a passionate sermon against the dangers of political innocence" (Orwell vi). The satire is indeed popular for a reason. It not only does exactly what a good satire should, take a folly within our society and bring it to the readers attention by criticizing it through the use of humor, it is a gripping and enjoyable tale as well, with important, and sometimes, cleverly concealed allegories to the Russian Revolution.

While Animal Farmis one of the most popular satires of the twentieth century, a well known predecessor, and what Animal Farm has often been compared to, is Voltaire's Candide.Candide is the story of a young boy, aptly named Candide, or Optimism, who grows up in a Baron's castle in Germany under the education of the philosopher Pangloss, who teaches "metaphysico-theologo-cosmolonigology" and believes that this world is "the best of all possible worlds."

Candide falls in love with the baron's daughter, Cunegondé, and subsequently gets expelled from the castle. From this point on, Candide suffers through a series of tragic and misfortunate events, all the while entertaining Pangloss' optimistic and naïve philosophy. Throughout his adventures, Candide encounters a slew of characters such as: Martin, the cynical scholar; Cacambo, Candide's valet; an old misfortunate woman; Jaques, the Anabaptist who helps Candide; and a Grand Inquisitor. The satire presented in this work by Voltaire is done mainly through the use of these characters and others.

Candide "anatomizes the world's potential for disaster and examines the corresponding human capacity for optimism" (Bell). As Candide travels around the world and witnesses, as well as experiences, various misfortunes, he continues to maintain his optimistic attitude and continues to believe that "all is for the best" (Arouet 116). Voltaire draws much of the tragedy in his story from events occurring around the world at the time, such as the earthquake in Lima.

These ideas, these tragedies, and most of the book in fact, is meant as a blow to Wilhelm Gottfried Liebniz, a philosopher of the eighteenth century. Pangloss, whose philosophy is the basis of the satire, is the literary, fictional form of Liebniz. "Master Pangloss taught the metphysico-theologo-cosmolonigology. He could prove admirably that there is no effect without a cause, and in this best of all possible worlds the baron's castle was the most magnificent of all castles..." (Arouet 12). This philosophy is similar to Liebniz's, who believed that our universe is the best possible one God could have made. Even the name of Pangloss' philosophy, metphysico-theologo-cosmolonigology, is purposely made to sound so ridiculous that one should cast it aside as rubbish.

Voltiare constantly uses tragedy to ask, how could one be so optimistic in the face of all this? "'This earthquake is nothing new,' replied Pangloss; 'the city of Lima in America experienced the same last year...'" (Arouet 26). This is a clear attack at Liebniz's optimistic philosophy, and such things repeat themselves constantly throughout the book. When the good natured Anabaptist drowns, Pangloss' reply is "...the coast of Lisbon had been made on purpose for the Anabaptist to be drowned there" (Arouet 25). The purpose of Pangloss is to show the extreme view when thinking along philosophical terms and to show the folly of such a view. "Pangloss embodies the optimistic notion that ultimate reality can be known by reason..." (Beck). This optimistic notion that Voltaire criticizes is the central theme throughout the book, however, it's not the only thing he satirizes.

The foil to Pangloss, the extreme on the opposite end, is shown through the philosophy of Martin, who Candide meets halfway through the tale. "...Martin embodies the pessimistic notion that ultimate reality defies rational accounting and can be known only through a manichaeistic mythology" (Beck). Whereas Pangloss's philosophy is extremely optimistic, Martin's is morbidly pessimistic. His philosophical view is summed up when he says that "...man was born to live either in the convulsions of misery, or in the lethargy of boredom" (Arouet 127). There is a point in the story where Candide witnesses a ship captain, who had previously robbed him, drown and die. He tells Martin that this proves Pangloss right, since the skipper got exactly what he deserved, and that it is indeed the "best of all possible worlds." "...'Very true,' said Martin 'but why should the passengers perish too?'" (Arouet 82). This clearly sums up the difference in philosophy between Pangloss and Martin, optimism and pessimism.

The idea of misfortune, Voltaire states, does not apply to the individual, but to just about everyone in society, so how could this be the best of all possible worlds? "...ask each passenger to tell his story, and if there is one of them all who has not cursed his existence many times, and said to himself over and over again that he was the most miserable of men, I give you permission to throw me head-first into the sea" (Arouet 50). Voltaire is showing that extreme optimism focuses solely on the ups, while masking the downs, and thus the truth, of life. This idea can best be exemplified by the old woman in the story. Born, the pope's daughter, beautiful and wealthy, she eventually wound up ugly, with one buttock, working as a servant. "In her role as the character who has already undergone life's vicissitude's, the old woman functions to capture, at a glance, the passage from beauty to ugliness, wound to cure, sin to grace, evil to good, the beginning to the end of the tale" (Marsh). Voltaire thus points out the harsh realities of life. One cannot ignore tragedy just because one does not want it to occur.

While the old woman exemplifies the uselessness of optimism and the reality of misfortune, she serves another important purpose. She is one of the figures throughout the satire used to show the hypocrisy of religion. "You know that I am the daughter of Pope Urban X and of the Princess of Palestrina" (Arouet 41). Obviously, the Pope should not have children as he is required to be celibate. She is not the only character that represents the impropriety of religious figures of the time. There was the Grand Inquisitor, who threatened Don Issacher with an auto-da-fe, not because of religious reasons, but because Don Issacher "owned" Cunegondé, and the Grand Inquisitor wanted her for himself. There was also the Abbot. "...the Abbé of Perigord was another cheat, who had imposed on the honest simplicity of Candide..." (Arouet 95). Voltaire shows the true immorality of religion of his time, for isn't a priest who steals jewels no better than one who sells indulgences?

Upon arriving penniless in Holland, Candide asks a religious orator for help, but instead gets nothing but abuse from him and his wife. However, Voltaire does not condemn the average religious believer, such as Jacques, the Anabaptist, who is a kind and compassionate, helpful man. He condemns the zealots and the hypocrites, as well as those who fall prey to their traps. Voltaire does not criticize ideas relating to the concept of religion as a belief.

Another object of Voltaire's satire is the idea of emphasizing on genealogy or heritage. Candide is an illegitimate child because his mother refused to marry his father when he could produce no more than seventy-one quarterings, or degrees of nobility. Later in the book, the Baron refuses to allow Candide to marry his sister, Cunegondé, despite the fact that Candide saved both their lives and Cunegondé has turned ugly due to the toils and tragedies of her life. He says, "You! you have the impudence to marry my sister, who bears seventy-two quarterings" (Arouet 60). Clearly, he is emphasizing her degree of nobility and Voltaire is bringing attention to this ridiculous concept.

While Voltaire satirizes these ideas throughout the horrible proceedings that Candide and the other characters suffer through, he makes one final point at the end of the book. After his toil, and the battle he encounters between optimism and pessimism, Candide realizes the uselessness of philosophical speculation. Instead of continuing to debate with Pangloss, he answers instead that, "...we must cultivate our garden" (Arouet 30). The garden represents the tranquility of the isolated life as well as the productivity when one does not partake in useless discussion. Thus, Voltaire drives home his final point, his final blow to Liebniz; that no matter what he says, whether its ridiculous or not, it is in fact, absolutely useless, as nothing productive arises from it.

Throughout the novel, Voltaire uses subtle language to express his satire, never mentioning those he satirizes, or any satiric ideas directly. This is because "Voltaire cannot afford to be dangerously obvious - to expose himself to the countermeasures of censorship" (Bottiglia). While his satire is indirect, his methods leave a strong message. "Of capital importance is satire through parody, or burlesque: of fictional conventions, as of metaphysical and other dogmas..." (Bottiglia). As one reads the novel, humor can be easily found from all the tragedy. With the ending comes a strong sense of peace and an understanding of what is truly important in life.

One of the strongest works of satire, predating even Voltaire's Candide, is In Praise of Folly, by Desiderius Erasmus. Written when the Reformation was beginning to take hold of the people of Europe, it was one of the many written works that brought the corruption of the clergy to the attention of the people. Such works led to religions based on faith, not the word of the Pope.

Folly, the narrator of the work, after identifying herself, begins to exclaim her role in the world. She states that she is the origin of foolishness, yet does not receive enough gratitude. Without her, people would not marry and women would not continue to give birth, for isn't marriage and childbirth simply a folly of life? Folly continues to berate various people in the beginning of the book, using a lighthearted and comedic tone. "...a woman will be a woman, i.e., a fool, whatever guise she takes up" (Erasmus 15). Erasmus not only makes fun of woman, but criticizes their use of make-up as foolish. "She points to the follies of the lawyer, sophist, and astrologer, in turn, and has her hard hit at each" (Seebohm). Folly shows the error of everyone in society, and proves that everyone has their fallacies, even philosophers and writers like Erasmus himself.

Folly then turns to the wise men, calling them foolish. "...if they could but keep themselves untainted from the contagiousness of wisdom..." (Erasmus 11). While the wise are foolish, the foolish are, in fact, wise. For, according to folly, with wisdom comes ugliness, while the foolish remain pure and beautiful. Ignorance is indeed bliss. Erasmus states through his work, that no man is exempt from error. "The Praise of Folly advocates a humanism that conceives man not as a rational animal, but as a passionate one, and like itself, capable of serious folly..." (Cooksey). Every rational being is capable of error, and those working under the name of God are no exception.

After naming various groups of fools, such as merchants, poets, and rhetoricians, "Folly turns to the morals of popes and clergy, their secular pursuits, and the wars which they engage in themselves..." (Seebohm). It is here that the satire takes a less humorous tone and becomes much more critical. Erasmus "declared his opinion in the Praise of Folly, that the priests and clergy alone did not make up that Church which is the spouse of Christ" (Seebohm). This is the basic tenet of the ideas of the Reformation. The religious structure of Christianity is not about blindly following the word of the Pope, or other members of the clergy, it is about personal belief, and following the word of Scripture.

Erasmus wanted to show how, throughout time, the Christian ideal became more and more tainted with greed and ambition of men in power. "His predominant idea is to draw contrast between the simple holiness of primitive Christianity and the corrupt fabric of his own time; and he points out the contrast by humorous little delineations of contemporary theologians and monks, and humorous little hits at their pedantry, ignorance, and vices" (Hannay). Theologians, Folly states, create ridulous rules and philosophical allegories to suit themselves, ideas that only other theologians would understand. Monks, like theologians, create their own rules as well, however, they do not stick with these rules. Monks are too often corrupted with the vices of drink and women, yet they can still lecture people on the mistakes others have made. Folly highly criticizes leaders who use their religious authority to tyrannize.

She criticizes a number of abuses throughout the satire, including the sale of indulgences and pardons. Indulgences were one of the most criticized practices of the era. Could one truly buy his way into heaven? "And though the Praise of Folly, being a satire upon existing abuse, does not tell us fully what he wishes to see in their place; yet there is other abundant evidence , that he not only sought to wean men's minds from the works of the schoolmen, that he also sought to lead them to the Bible." Thus was the purpose of the Reformation, and this satire exemplifies it well. Erasmus sought to criticize the Church in order to bring their folly to the attention of the people and lead them to Scripture.

Erasmus' harshest criticism is that of the Pope.

Now as to the popes of Rome, who pretend themselves Christ's vicars, if they would but imitate his

exemplary life, in the being employed in an unintermitted course of preaching; in the being attended

with poverty, nakedness, hunger, and a contempt of this world; if they did but consider the import of

the word pope, which signifies a father; or if they did but practice their surname of most holy, what

order or degrees of men would be in a worse condition? (Erasmus 82).

Folly points out that if popes and bishops were required to live their lives in purity as the apostles had, they would quickly give up their religious power. However, popes can keep away from criticism with the use of excommunications and their own interpretations of Scripture, as the Pope is "infallible."

In the end, Erasmus states that "The ultimate folly is that of God, for how, Folly asks, can the humiliation and sacrifice of Christ, the act of Divine grace, be understood except as an act of sublime and benevolent folly" (Cooksey). Folly states in the end how foolish the Christian is, for he is like a foolish sheep, completely dependant on Jesus. In his religious piousness and zealotry, he is more worried about the afterlife then the pursuits of the present.

Erasmus' work, though controversial, was very important. He used his intellectual sarcasm and his classical knowledge to satirize the moral and religious issues of his time. Folly ends her dialogue with the quote "Farewell! Live long, drink deep, be jolly, Ye most illustrious votaries of folly!" (Erasmus 107). Its tone, going from light-hearted comedy to serious discussion and criticism makes the audience ponder their own lives and their own follies.

One cannot argue the influence that Erasmus' work, as well as other satiric works, have had in society. Though it cannot be said with certainty that these literary works have been the pivotal force to bring about change in society, it cannot be said that they have not had a major influence. "For satire is not just a matter of attacking the target; it's also a matter of attacking or at least challenging those who believe in the target, who do not see, that is, the moral imperfections at the basis of a particular social or political stance" (Johnston). Satire is not meant to just criticize one thing, it is meant to bring that criticism to the eyes of the audience, for they are the ones who initiate change.

A satire is most effective if it has used humor in a constructive way, to educate its audience to the vices and follies of those around them. Orwell emphasized the folly of communism, Voltaire showed the uselessness of philosophical speculation, and Erasmus illustrated the vice of the clergy. They all had a purpose and method in their satire that was accomplished through the effective use of irony and sarcasm. A satire is not a true satire if it has nothing pertinent to say about an element of society.

Satire is used "not just to remind us of our common often ridiculous humanity, but rather to expose those moral excesses, those corrigible sorts of behaviour which transgress what the writer sees as the limits of acceptable moral behaviour" (Johnston). Although it was once used effectively to bring about change and infamy to those who deserve it, modern day satire is not as effective as it used to be. Contemporary criticism of popular figures, whether political or religious, is now nothing more than a means of proving one's celebrity status.

The majority of such satire comes no longer from books, but from humorous television shows and movies. People feel proud when Jon Stewart or Saturday Night Live make fun of them. They no longer see their folly as something that needs to be changed, but as something that will bring them more fame and money.

That is not to say that effective satire is dead, but just that it is not reaching its intended audience or having the same effect that it used to. The majority of the American population does not read regularly, and so they must be reached, as already stated, through the mediums of television, music, and movies. Most recently, a satire came out in theaters titled Thank You For Smoking. It satirizes the tobacco industry, pointing out its vices and hypocrisy, in a humorous entertaining way. Although it is proof that satire has not completely faded, despite great reviews, the movie is playing in very few theaters.

Thus, although its effectiveness has been lost as the centuries progressed, it still remains a powerful tool used to bring the error of society to the people. Though it does not directly influence an event, it influences the people who can, the masses. Could change truly be brought about without a following? Satire provides that following and brings the people together under one idea or one purpose. When the people have organized to bring change to a society, it is hard to stop them. The Reformation, the American Revolution, World War II have all started due to a mass organization of people, and in each of these events, one could find satire as one of the methods used to influence the people and assess the faults of society throughout the centuries.
Works Cited

Arouet, Francois Marie. Candide. New York: Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003.

Beck, Ervin. "Voltaire's CANDIDE." The Explicator. 1999.

Bell, Ian A. "Candide: Overview." Reference Guide to World Literature. 2nd ed. 1995.

Bottiglia, William F. "'Style.'" Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century:Voltaire's. 1964.

Erasmus, Desiderius. The Praise of Folly. New York: Barnes and Noble Publishing, 2004.

Greenblatt, Stephen J. "George Orwell." Three Modern Satirists: Waugh, Orwell,and Huxley. 1965.

Hannay, James. "The Satirists of the Reformation." The Cornhill Magazine. Vol. XVI, No. 95 ed. 1867.

Harris, Robert. "The Purpose and Method of Satire." VirtualSalt. 24 Oct. 2004. 2 Mar. 2006.

Marsh, Leonard. "Voltaire's 'Candide.'" The Explicator. 2004.

Orwell, George. Animal Farm. New York: Signet Classic, 1996.

Seebohm, Frederic. "Erasmus as a Satirist." The North British Review. Vol XXXII, No. LXIII ed. 1860.