As long as there is thought, there will always be thought against something. And as long as thought has been chronicled in writing, there has been satire. Satire is a form of criticism that deviates from the norm in its execution; rather than outlining and proving points in something like an essay form, satire seeks to persuade through sheer wit. It’s mockery must generally be subtle to succeed, and of course if a criticism is to be subtle then it must be disguised beneath something; hence most satire is concealed within some sort of a narrative. To assure the reader grasps such an immense investment of cleverness, there are certain parameters that must be met for successful satire. These can be generally summed up in that satire sets up an expectation in the reader’s mind, and then somehow under or over fulfils it.

The earliest significant use of satire is Chaucer’s classic frame tale, “Canterbury Tales.” His target there was many-pronged, but consisted essentially of large groups of people. To mock them, he simply recorded their true nature right beside the ideal they should have, or pretended to, uphold. This marked the most basic trademark of satire; to contrast reality with the illusion you intend to critique. Chaucer, however, was light-hearted and forgiving in his criticism, and as such his piece cannot be considered true satire, but mere literature with a satirical bend.

However, he laid down a groundwork for satirical writing that would later come to fruit far more outrageously, in the 18th century. There can be no mistaking the intentions of Alexander Pope’s “The Rape of the Lock”; it exists only to reveal the opulence and excess of the upper class. It’s aims are made so very clear in the manner in which it is set up. The poem is written in epic form, and it’s subjects are treated with a grand and elevated tone. The reader is primed for matters of an epic proportion; what they receive is more than a little underwhelming: coffee and card games, which degenerate into a petty squabble. The gap between what was expected and what was delivered points the reader to the true nature of the poem, and when this knowledge is combined with the myriad hints and veiled comments throughout it, a new kind of criticism is forged. True satire, powerful and sharp.

Only a few years later, a similar feat was accomplished by Jonathan Swift, in his story “Gulliver’s Travels.” Rather than ridicule a group of people, Swift aims his darts at British society in general. Like Pope before him, the key to Swift’s satire lies in comparison; however, his approach is more in line with that of Chaucer. He sets up alternate societies with bizarre and seemingly irreconcilable differences. Yet when these differences are examined closely, the brilliance of Swift’s satire is revealed. All that the reader would consider abnormal in those other societies is in fact, metaphorically, something their own society has come to accept from itself! For example, the politicians in Lilliputia have to put on an elaborate show to stay in power. Most outlandish, until one realizes the parallels between their circus act and what was and is required to survive in British politics. In this way, Swift succeeds in manipulating the reader into convincing himself of Swift’s own points.

Using satire to criticize is risky business; the author risks having all their work go right over the audience’s head. However, when executed as cleverly as has been seen in the works of Chaucer, Pope, and Swift, the rewards more than outweigh the risk involved. Satire is a powerful tool, and with a target as flawed and full of potential as the human spirit, it will surely be used for a long time to come.