Intentions of Satirical Commentary in John Gay’s Beggars Opera and William Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure In John Gay’s “Beggars Opera” political satire is applied to comically “play” at the political and social issues concerning the 18th century. In the play, the characters of Mrs. And Mr. Peachum discover that their daughter Polly has married the “ Drinking, and Whoring” highway man, Macheath whom they believe will not be able to support their daughter (554).
The plot progresses with the Peachums attempting to kill Macheath for money, thus ensuing a storyline full of political and moral satire. In William Shakespeare’s “Measure for Measure” satirical comedy is applied to allude to both political and religious topics during the 1600s. The telling dramatic comedy unfolds as an absent leader creates chaos in electing a corrupt leader to temporally taking his place, thus illustrating how easily society can become corrupt from poor leadership.
While the play is set in Vienna, Shakespeare uses his comedy to allude to his ideals of justice and morality for England under the new leadership of King James I in 1604. Similarly, Both Shakespeare and Gay use comedy as entertainment, but also education in their satires by highlighting important points on justice and morality. However, unlike Shakespeare, John Gay’s intentions were not to appease a specific political leader, as his ballad opera focused on satirizing Italian opera and lampooning politicians during the 1700s.
John Gay used his satirical comedic opera to reflect upon the 18th century, society in which he lived in, openly mocking politicians and key elements in society, which he viewed as ludicrous. In all, John Gay successfully uses plot and the characters within his opera to portray his own commentary of society separate from the William Shakespeare “goal of appeasing his new king that limits his specific satire. In John
Gay’s “The Beggars Opera” the plot is used to highlight a satirical take on the morality and politics during the time period. In focusing on morality, John Gay alludes to the absurdity of love in society through mocking the understanding of marriage itself. In focusing on the character of Macheath and his relationship with women in the opera, the opera reveals how John Gay uses satirical comedy to illustrate how love is often confused with lust and envy.
Although, the characters of Polly and Lucy believe that they love Macheath, through the objectification of their own self-interest towards him they reveal one of the plays key truths that: “Love is so whimsical in both sexes that it is impossible to be lasting” (485). During John Gay’s era in which this opera was written, often women and men married for financial security, which is the ultimate contrast to Polly and Lucy’s reasoning, which adds to the further satire of Polly’s parents trying to kill Macheath for money.
In revealing the notion of false love, Gay provokes a further truth in his plot that the idea of the life in which we live is a lie. Specifically, Gay uses the plot to reflect on the question of the identity and hypocrisy of the characters themselves, through the use of his satirical commentary; In using thieves, prostitutes, highwaymen, prisoners and other “corrupt” individuals, John Gay alludes to the corrupt undertakings of eighteenth century London. Gay’s satire focuses much to his opinion of political figures as well as the legal system.
Famously, John Gay uses the character of Macheath to represent real 18th century political Whig leader Sir Prime Minister, Robert Walpole. In openly using his characters to mock current political leaders, Gay is able use-to-use political satire to show the faults in human nature, primarily politics. In the beginning of the play, Gay uses the beggar characters to open up the satirical notion of how he believes current leaders are not “gentlemen” but frauds stating, “the fine gentlemen imitate the gentlemen of the road, or the gentlemen of the road the fine gentlemen” (126).
The justifications the characters use throughout the opera also help reveal the further hypocritically in which England society lives in, as the characters create justifications for their tendencies of behavior and thus allude to a defense against criticism — for their criminal livelihood. The character of Peachum, throughout the play uses his own form of justification for his actions, as he is a professional “doublecrosser” in the opera, running a gang of thieves and turning those same thieves in for reward money.
By equating his profession with the “honest” practice of law — a profession that, in the supposed service of justice, protects and profits from criminals — he exposes the arbitrary ethical line that society draws in defining justice (450). In all, Peachum here dismisses the line between those on the right and wrong side of the law and asserts one of the play’s main themes, that self-interest and profitability dictate morality. Thus revealing the satirical truth of John Gay’s opera that all humans are hypocritical; the only real dividing line is success, alluding to in reality political leaders.
In contrast, William Shakespeare’s plot focuses primarily on the fallacies of human nature regarding religion and leadership. Historically, the plot did not focus of the mockery of the current political leader, King James but appeased towards him and even attempts to guide him in the notion of “Law above popularity”. This differs significantly from “The Beggars Opera” by John Gay, as Gay used his plot to progress satirical ideas of rebellion and the absurdity of politics itself.
While, William Shakespeare also includes satirical love in his play “Measure for Measure” to progress the plot, and while the characters methods for finding love are absurd, the play ultimately concludes with traditional marriage. The overall traditional plot structure of William Shakespeare’s comedy thus takes away from the impact of the satire taking place as he instills appeasement towards societal expectations with marriage as a plot solution.
John Gay however, concludes his opera through highlighting the falsies of humanity itself rather than solidifying the importance of societal status and expectations. The characters in which William Shakespeare uses in “Measure for Measure” also solidify a compact alliance towards his current leaders, as in most of his plays he is historically known for including positive reflections of leaders in his characters.
In “Measure for Measure” specifically William Shakespeare uses the absurd qualities of each of his characters, not to characterize King James but to show his past “bad” leaders, that society does not need. In doing so, Shakespeare limits his intentions of societal observation limiting him to only broad mockeries of past cultural woes that in all take away from the satirical intentions of his play. The characters actions within “Measure for Measure” also solidify the strong societal justifications that differ greatly from those in John Gays “Beggars Opera”.
As previously noted, William Shakespeare uses the motivations of marriage to “tie in” in his comedic plays for a conclusion that ultimately reflects the society he is in. Marriage while used primarily as comedic, is seen, as the only comprise to solidify the political struggles within the play thus symbolizing the impact society had on Shakespeare’s writing. Societal reflections within John Gay’s characters however, stem from a less positive attribute as his characters openly mock and disregard marriage as an absurd and faulty system.
Overall, in highlighting the importance of status rather than the absurdity in the plot and characters William Shakespeare alludes to a societal compromise that negatively differs from John Gay’s satirical “The Beggars Opera”. In being able to openly satirize society for personal and cultural benefit, John Gay embodies a take on comedic and political satire that is free of fear and compromise in story and characters. John Gay’s “The Beggar’s Opera” brings the hypocrisy of society to life through vast allusions that reflect the current 18th century society in which he is in, to promote change and also comedic relief.
