Voltaire’s Candide provides a form of comedy and commentary that is different
than the forms that we have discussed in class so far. Voltaire offers a biting satire of the world
he lives in; he uses the unique perspective of Candide, a young man who has led
a charmed life up until the story begins.
Voltaire constructs a fairy tale-like reflection of the real world to
tell the story of young Candide, and he works to build this world through
exaggeration. In the opening lines,
Voltaire writes, “His countenance is a true picture of his soul” (1). I may have a somewhat pessimistic view of the
world, but I do not believe that anyone’s face can truly reflect who they are
on the inside. This description is unrealistic, but serves the purpose of
showing the true purity of Candide before his life is changed forever. Through the character of Candide, Voltaire
offers an extensive critique of the way that staunch optimists view their
world. This is similar to Hau’ofa’s use
of Manu to help illustrate the corruption of the Tikongs. However, Voltaire’s commentary is much
bolder. He does not write with a
fictional world that separates his work from reality; he blends reality with
exaggeration and a bit of fiction. This
revised formula for humor works to very direct critical ends. There is no question on which groups Voltaire
is targeting because he clearly names them all.
For example, he directly comments on the practices of the people of
Portugal, stating, “After the earthquake had destroyed three-fourths of Lisbon,
the sages of that country could think of no means more effectual to prevent
utter ruin than to give the people a
beautiful auto-da-fé; for it had been
decided by the University of Coimbra, that the burning of a few people alive by
a slow fire, and with great ceremony, is an infallible secret to hinder the
earth from quaking” (13). This opening
to the chapter directly criticizes the practices of the Portuguese, and the
superstition that is attached to them.
Voltaire greatly valued reason and logic; public executions were often
neither reasonable nor logical, especially when they were being done for
mystical purposes. Voltaire makes the
absurdity of the ceremony clear using exaggeration and intense detail. He includes the detail about the practice
being approved through university research because it points out the
pseudo-science that must have been used to reach that approval. This is comical because it claims reason was
used to reach an unreasonable result. It
is an inversion of the values held by a reasonable reader, and the resulting
absurdity causes laughter.
John Kasaipwalova, like Voltaire,
uses humor and examples based in reality to criticize some form of injustice
that he sees in the world. His criticism
is not as broad as Voltaire’s because it only focuses on one instance of
injustice and one group of people. In
this way, it functions like a single story from Tales of the Tikongs. However, Kasaipwalova does not veil his
criticism in a fictional world; he directly addresses the Australian officers
that are oppressing the people of Papua New Guinea. Like Voltaire, Kasaipwalova’s descriptions
and dialogue are essential to both the comedy and the criticism. The law is a recurring idea in the short
story, driving the dialogue. For
example, when the Australian papa approaches the narrator, he says, “Listen
boy, who gave you permission to chew betel nut here? You are breaking the law,
the legal laws of this land” (Kasaipwalova 434). The term “legal laws” is comical because it
is a redundant phrase that does not provide any clarification of the specific
law that is being broken by chewing the betel nut. This instance shows how unreasonable the
Australians could be in their treatment of the people of Papua New Guinea.
Both Voltaire and Kasaipwalova use
humor to make a point about the injustices they see in their society. In this way, they are utilizing a similar
humor model to that of Hau’ofa in Tales
of the Tikongs; all three men take examples of what upsets them in the
world, combine it with exaggeration and sarcasm, and create witty stories
criticizing social ills. In all cases,
the men are criticizing people who do not respect other people in some
way. Hau’ofa and Kasaipwalova
particularly criticize colonizing powers (specifically the British and
Australian people), while Voltaire leaves no group without criticism. In a way, humor can be used as a method of
coping with the injustices that one sees but struggles to change on their
own. However, it can also serve as a
method of highlighting injustices for a larger audience because humor is able
to transcend racial/ethnic backgrounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment