Elise Rivas

The Importance of Being Earnest Timed Write

Mrs. O’Connell

Prompt: Write a well-crafted essay that agrees with, disagrees with, or qualifies the following statement: Wilde’s play, The Importance of Being Earnest is a satirical look at a variety of social ills that Wilde would like to see changed.

Saturday Night Live, a show on NBC dedicated entirely to skits mocking pop-culture, never shies away from provoking an audience. Nor does the show hide behind fears of flaunting an opinion. During the 2008 Presidential Election, one would have to be quite oblivious to not see the show’s blatant endorsement for Barack Obama. Each show begins with a political skit. But beyond SNL’s opinionated nature lies a desire to poke fun at the meaningless, trivial features of society. Most of the skits have no depth, like “Debbie Downer” and “Opera Man.” Oscar Wilde, particularly in his play The Importance of Being Earnest, like SNL, is funny for the sake of being funny. There is no implicit message. Wilde merely desires to provoke the audience by broaching laughable features of society. One would be thinking too intensely if one believes Wilde was proposing a societal change.

A main focal point of satire in Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest is towards the overbearing romanticism of relationships and in life. For example, Cecily, a young, googly-eyed girl, writes letters to herself from her imaginary suitor, Ernest. While explaining to her fiancée, Algernon, she mentions, “Why, we have been engaged for the last three months,” for she has romanticized their relationship for months even though it officially began only minutes prior. In a more broad sense, Wilde shows how romanticism pervades lives with Gwendolyn and Cecily’s diaries. These books, which are usually meant for a catharsis, in the case of the girls, are secretly written for future publication and thus fame. Wilde, by satirizing romanticism, by no means is trying to “outlaw” it. Why would Wilde propose a change to stop diaries or fantasizing? That Wilde jokes about negligible matters refutes the statement that he is attempting to ignite a change, for there are more serious issues.

Extending beyond minute topics, Oscar Wilde tackles the topic of marriage. In the Victorian Era, the time at which the book was written, marriage was meant to be a dry, flat, business deal between families. Wilde’s satirical viewpoint is evidenced by quotes like, “I am not in favour of long engagements. They give people the opportunity to find out one’s character before marriage, which is never advisable.” Oscar Wilde’s portrayal of marriage as a union devoid of passion is to joke about unions for what they have become. If Wilde was to propose that marriage be arranged only by the future spouses and that marriage only be amorous, it would detract from the hilarity of the play. The way in which Wilde satirizes marriage is in no way political, if it were, it would be a “buzz kill” and inconsistent with the tone of the play.

Furthermore, Wilde take on education, particularly that of the upper-class. Lady Bracknell, a prim woman, although highly “educated” seems to have forgotten her manners with crass questions and interrogations, during which she asks about income and age. The lack of social-education enhances the non-serious tone of the book, rather than enhances a secondary message about the quality and the different types of education. To further show that the sole purpose is to create a laugh, Wilde writes that “Education tampers with ignorance. Ignorance is like a gentle fruit.” Oscar Wilde surely is not proposing that people remain ignorant, thus proving his play does not rise above a one-dimensional comedy.

Sometimes it is difficult for many people to accept that something can be just a parody, something that’s sole purpose is to have an audience’s eyes well up with tears of laughter. Saturday Night Live’s parodies do not propose any change about Opera, Motivational Speakers, or Laser Cats. Just like the writers of SNL, Oscar Wilde only means to poke fun at absurd qualities of pop-culture, not to expose “social ills he would like to see changed.”