Wilde & Shaw: Two Satirical Responses to Social Class - Essay Example

Wilde & Shaw: Two Satirical Responses to Social Within the construct of Westernized culture, social hierarchies have been established on the basis of class. The more money one makes, the higher their status is in this hierarchy. This cycle continues even in present day. Who is at fault for why things are this way Can it be changed Oscar Wilde and George Bernard Shaw, two satirical authors, pondered these very questions through their works Lord Arthur Savile's Crime and Pygmalion respectively. Each of these stories would reveal very unique perspectives on social class. By analyzing the similarities and differences present in Wilde's and Shaw's mindsets, one can gain a better appreciation on how immensely complex elitism is in general, both in what causes it and how it can be eradicated. Similarities 1) Snootiness Both Lord Arthur Savile's Crime and Pygmalion purport the idea those on the higher end of the class hierarchy tend to be snootier towards their lower-class counterparts. In Lord Arthur Savile's Crime one of the most prevalent examples of upper-class snootiness occurs with Lady Windermere's attitude towards her cheiromantist, Mr. Podgers. At the beginning of the story, the reader sees that Lady Windermere thinks her cheiromantist "is not mysterious, or esoteric, or romantic-looking" (Wilde, 1). She also cuts down his appearance saying that he was a "little, stout man, with a funny, bald head, and great gold-rimmed spectacles" (Wilde, 1). Towards the end of the story, after Lady Windermere reveals he was actually a fraud, she cuts down his love-making ability. Never once did she place blame on herself for getting involved with such a person. Pygmalion shows many examples of snooty behavior starting in the very first act with Clara's behavior. She gets an attitude at her brother not being able to hail a cab, which already gives the reader the impression she's very spoiled. She also tries to convince her mother not to give Eliza money for the flowers, despite how poor and desperate the flower girl looked. Clara's apathy for the social class beneath her shows that the middle-class also contributes to elitism, a theme which is explored deeper throughout the play. As Pygmalion continues the audience becomes introduced to an even snootier character, Henry Higgins. During his role as Notetaker in Act I, he displays this trait by harassing Eliza. He even threatens to get the police involved if she continued to sell flowers not because she was a real nuisance to anyone but simply because "a woman who utters such depressing and disgusting sounds has no right to be anywhere-no right to live" (Shaw, 1). In subsequent Acts after he arrogantly offers to refine Eliza, he constantly treats her like trash despite actually liking her romantically. He justifies his actions by saying, "I treat a duchess as if she was a flower girl" (Shaw, 5). So in his condescending mind, Higgins feels he's treating Eliza in a proper manner because he treats even more 'noble' women the same way. 2) Tokenization of human beings Another common theme that can be observed throughout each of these literary works is the thought that, to the upper-class mind, certain persons are expendable. Their only purpose is to fulfill whatever need the upper-class person has; once that need has been fulfilled they are no longer valuable. Lady Windermere sums it up by saying, "lions are only good for one season; as soon as their manes are cut, they are the dullest creatures going" (Wilde, 18) . In this case her 'lion' was Mr. Podgers, whom she no longer cares about after learning of his death. The fact that he was still a human being that lost his life meant nothing because to her he was just a mere token that is now no longer available. Lord Arthur Savile is another character in Wilde's vision who views certain persons as expendable. However, unlike Lady Windermere it wasn't necessarily an issue of class with him. It was more a matter of whom he determined to be the most expendable at the time, whether it was because of old age, (which was the case of Lady Clementia, his first potential victim), opportunity, (seen in his choice of his next potential victim, the Dean of Chinchester) and finally class and social perception, (evident in his murdering Mr. Podgers, who not only was on a class lower than him but was also viewed as shady by the community). In Pygmalion tokenization can be observed through Higgins's attitude towards Eliza, whom he views as a "live doll" (Shaw, 4). For him Eliza is nothing more than a source of entertainment, whose only purpose was to show how great a linguist he was. In fact, he is so arrogant in his personality that in his thinking Eliza should actually be honored someone of his stature displayed such an interest in her. However, Eliza never has such an attitude. Even in the midst of possessing a very slight sexual attraction to Higgins, (which Shaw talked about in an epilogue written a few years after the play), she still maintains her dignity by never succumbing to his selfish whims. For that reason she becomes forever expendable to him. 3) The role of the middle-class The final similarity evident in Wilde's Lord Arthur Savile's Crime and Shaw's Pygmalion lies in the authors' perception of the role of the middle class in elitism. To Wilde, the middle-class takes advantage of their status simply by allowing themselves to be tokens of the upper-class. During this process the middle-class can become as shady, immoral and exploitative as their upper-class counterparts. Mr. Podgers is a prime example. While obviously not as evil- minded as Lord Arthur Savile, he is a character that was far from innocent. He becomes a willing token to the upper-class by misrepresenting his fortune telling abilities. He doesn't seem to care about the havoc he has caused by doing this because for him it's all about a paycheck. Pygmalion's shady middle-class character is Mr. Doolittle, Eliza's father. He even admits he is immoral after being confronted on his immediate willingness to sell off his own daughter. He blames it on his social status. However, towards the end of the play as he acquires more money he realizes he cannot truly escape the middle-class dilemma, even with a little more funds. Mr. Doolittle's 'plight' shows the reader that economic security on any level cannot guarantee morality. The middle-class and the upper-class can be just as sinful as the poor, whom tend to be constantly criticized as being more improper than everyone else simply because of their social status. Differences The major difference between these two pieces lies in the individual perspectives from which they were written. Wilde possesses a very grim, pessimistic view on elitism. While his brilliant short story very clearly shows how wrong such an attitude is, it seems unable to acknowledge that those guilty of perpetuating it will receive some form of justice in fate. Lord Arthur Savile murdered a man and receives what appears to be a happy life. He gets a chance to marry the woman that he felt he had to kill for, along with being blessed with children. Never once does he even appear guilty. Granted, Mr. Podgers certainly wasn't a faultless character, but he didn't deserve death either, especially since,(like other middle-class persons), he was simply playing the game of survival. He is the "Hamlet that has to jest like Prince Hal" (Wilde, 10). Yet, fate still favored Lord Arthur Savile, simply because he had more money and power in society. All in all perhaps the main moral evident in Wilde's work is that elitism is and always will be something a society will just have to deal with; the middle and upper-class are truly hopeless in being able to rise up from such a mindset. In contrast, Shaw's Pygmalion paints a much more optimistic outlook on the hope of ending judgment based purely on social class. First off, the characters Ms. Eynsford Hill, Freddy, Mr. Pickering and at some moments even Ms. Higgins show that not all middle or upper-class persons are innately selfish, arrogant and evil against classes lower than them. No such characters exist in Wilde's story, where everyone has a sinister motive. Secondly, Eliza Doolittle's personality shows that one does not have to be a token to the class that is above them. Never once does she falter in defending herself against Higgins, which she does all throughout the play. She does not change him, but ultimately receives a more important gift, that of human dignity. So for Shaw the best way to fight elitist attitudes is to not define oneself by them. Always stand tall and be proud regardless of social status. Those who aren't completely brainwashed by their class might be influenced, while the others won't. In the long run it doesn't matter because at least the individual has been true to themselves, exhibiting a form of power even some of the richest persons could never obtain. Conclusion: In conclusion, thorough analysis of Lord Arthur's Savile's Crime and Pygmalion helps to reveal some of the modern-day attitudes towards social class. Which viewpoint is the best to adhere to Well, obviously Shaw's perspective is very appealing towards those who are more hopeful that things can change, yet for some it still somewhat unrealistic. At least with Wilde's approach, one would realize that elitism is here and it's not going to go away. Life is sometimes unfair to folks, which is perhaps a notion that should just be accepted rather than constantly fought for our own security and hope for a just and fair existence. Regardless of which view one decides to adopt for themselves, perhaps the ultimate lesson to be learned from both literary commentaries is the most simple of them all; at least acknowledging the problem and understanding how everyone contributes to it. Works Cited Shaw, Bernard George. Pygmalion. New York: Brentano, 1916; Bartleby.com, 1999. February 2006 . Wilde, Oscar. Lord Arthur Savile's Crime. Court And Society Review 1877: 1-19. Bibliomania.com. February 2006 Read More