January 20, 1995

Formal Verse Satire

A satiric mode developed by the Roman poets Lucilius, Horace, Persius, and Juvenal. The formal verse satire is generally considered the only species, or sub-genre, of the genus satire to possess any kind of identifiable or consistent form.

The Roman formal verse satire consists of an outer frame or “shell” made up of the satirist, and adversarius (interlocutor), a lightly-sketched setting, and a thesis of debate; within this shell we find a binary inner “core” — the satire itself. In the first part of the satire the poet examines specific follies and/or vices and exposes, ridicules, and decries them in a number of ways. In the second part the satirist recommends their antithetical virtues.

Thus, the formal verse satire breaks into two divisions: thesis and anti-thesis, destruction and construction, black and white. The two parts, however, markedly disproportionate. Invariably the negative portion of the satire outweighs the positive. It is the basic principle of the satire that in order to insure the reader’s favorable reception of his positive recommendations, the satirist must first inundate him with a deluge of sin, foolishness, and moral outrage for the greater part of the poem — until he can no longer stand the stink of this foul side of human nature and is frantic to embrace the first virtues that he lays eyes on.

Within this general mode of formal verse satire we find one set form: the apologia pro satura sua, the satirist’s apology or defense of satire. In this pattern an interlocutor attempts to dissuade the satirist from his precarious pursuits; he warns the poet to embrace prudence, or better, to transfer his talents to a safer, more rewarding genre (epic and panegyric are commonly suggested alternatives). But the virtuous satirist refuses to change his ways — when his sense of morality is outraged he must vent his spleen through satire. The traditional closing has the poet making some polite (ironic?) concession to the interlocutor, such as agreeing to write only of the dead or those outside the political sphere.

Miniature dramatic elements, short sermons, lively vignettes, damning character sketches or “portraits,” indicating allusions and moral foibles — the formal verse satirist uses these devices in order to drive his point home, in much the same manner as a dramatist uses events to build to a climax and dénouement.

While Alexander Pope’s formal satires almost always follow the Horatian mode — rebuffing and chiding through humor and ridicule delivered in an urbane, conversational tone — we should note the Juvenalian heat that sizzles once or twice in “Arbuthnot” and virtually explodes in the “Epilogue to the Satires.”

In Discourse Concerning Satire, John Dryden suggests three criteria for satire: unity of design which should communicate to the “reader some one precept of moral virtue, and to caution him against some on particular vice of folly”; many materials from the Latin satura, meaning “a dish plentifully stored with a variety of fruits and grains”; and the majesty of the heroic or epic finely mixed with the venom of ridicule.