In the 17th century French society of Molière, servants were seen as status symbols and as subordinates. Arnolphe has also taken the precaution of choosing stupid servants, believing that his superior intellect will allow him control. When Arnolphe tries to scold them for letting Horace into the house, they mock him and, later, they violently shove their master when he imitates Horace. The playwright again inverts the dichotomy of master and servant to satirize Arnolphe’s lack of true authority.
Through the opening conversation with Chrysalde, Molière introduces us to Arnolphe. Arnolphe has a great fear of cuckoldry, yet takes great glee in his friend’s downfalls. He unsympathetically mocks them, taking comfort by saying “They’ll never get the chance to mock at me / I’ve been too clever for ‘em.” Molière plays with his cockiness, bringing together Arnolphe and the unwitting Horace. Arnolphe learns of Horace’s affair with Agnes: a situation that he does not find quite so amusing when he is the victim. The irony is that the supposedly infallible Arnolphe has to witness his own humiliation and hear Horace ridiculing “that fool La Souche”, “Misguided, besotted, lecherous, half-mad, An upright corpse!” He sees his greatest fear come to life in front of him and his perceived infallibility crumbles. Rather than portraying this gravely, Molière works within the genre of farce, causing Arnolphe to release his emotion through uncontrolled outbursts “Oh!” “Merciful god!” Arnolphe tries to maintain his composure and keep Horace unaware by attributing his outbursts to various conditions. This creates a hilarious scene where we see Arnolphe suddenly become the taunted rather than the taunter.
Molière has Arnolphe stumble through continued comic misfortunes in order to satirize his perception of infallibility. He positions Arnolphe so that he becomes a party to the plans of his enemies. However, despite his best efforts, his inside knowledge, and the apparent naivete of Agnes and Horace, he cannot stop them being together. Every apparent victory for Arnolphe is quickly overturned by the youthful determination of the lovers, or by simple chance. In the final scene it appears Arnolphe has triumphed, getting Horace engaged to an unknown girl. However, ironically, he has only sealed his defeat, as the girl is revealed to be Agnes. The infallible Arnolphe ends up overwhelmed by young love and pure chance: Molière implies his supposed intelligence and cunning mean nothing because everyone is fallible, contrary to Arnolphe’s self perception.
Molière ties up all the threads of the plot through a string of coincidences, as is typical of farces. In the final scene, all the characters finally meet and everything is exposed. The plot resolves so that everyone ends up with what is best for them. In Arnolphe’s case, ironically, this is to remain unmarried. Molière highlights this comic irony when Chrysalde congratulates him for not getting married.
Three Sisters by Chekhov is a very different play, written at the turn of the 20th century in Russia, in the realist style of drama. The realist style is a contrast to the 17th century French farce of Molière: it is rambling and relatively uneventful, and has a large cast of characters. Chekhov satirizes several men, compared to Molière’s focus on satirizing his protagonist Arnolphe. Chekhov’s satire works less overtly than that of Molière. Chekhov builds satire into the play mostly through his slow moving dialogue and plot: without exaggerated acting, or comic coincidences.
In Three Sisters, Chekhov uses Vershinin and Toozenbach as representatives of educated, intelligent, respectable men. Their favourite hobby is their philosophising and they take quite some pride and seriousness in it. However, their philosophisings are often closer to being rambling flights of fancy than brilliant revelations. Chekhov uses Soliony to undermine the seriousness. “Cluck, cluck, cluck! There’s nothing our good Baron loves as much as a nice bit of philosophizing.” The silliness of the clucking points out similar silliness in the philosophizing, and Toozenbach’s following humourless reaction only serves to heighten the satire. Chekhov’s use of Soliony here is similar to the satire of Molière: comic ridicule, albeit using a realist manner.
One of Toozenbach’s favourite ideas is that work is the solution to all of society’s problems. He says, “this longing for work… How well I can understand it!”, despite never having worked in his life. After his speech about the wonders of work, Chekhov brings us closer to reality through Chebutykin: “I’m not going to work.” Toozenbach’s childish-sounding retort is “You don’t count.” Years later in Act 2, Toozenbach finally resigns from the military, saying he is going to work. An act later he still has no job, saying “I really do intend to … start working there quite soon.” His apathy in fulfilling his ‘dream’ serves to satirize the conviction of his ideas and their perceived nobleness and is also used by Chekhov to portray the inertia of the Russian bourgeoisie.
Koolyghin is a quite different character, a provincial man who Chekhov satirizes through the juxtaposing of his perceptions and his reality. We see what he cannot, producing a dramatic irony. He is described by Irena as “the kindest of men, but not the cleverest.” He is happy with life, and oblivious to any problems, such as his wife Masha’s affair with Vershinin. He says, throughout the book: ”I'm happy, happy, happy!” “I’ve been lucky all my life.” However, Chekhov portrays him as being stuck in a provincial rut. He is happy with his marriage to Masha, and believes that she is happy too: “Masha loves me”, “I feel as if we were only married yesterday.” This contrasts is in contrast with bored Masha: “He seemed terribly learned then, very clever and important. Now it’s quite different, unfortunately.” She begins an affair with Vershinin, but Koolyghin remains unaware, often wondering “Where’s Masha?” He works as a schoolteacher, and often uses Latin phrases: “In Vino Veritas”, “Mens sana in corpore sano”, flattering his perception of himself as intelligent and educated, when we see him as a simple countryman. Chekhov’s dramatic irony in his treatment of Koolyghin is completely different from the comic satire of Molière. The ironic juxtaposition occurs gradually over the several years of the play, as we learn bits and pieces through the rambling dialogue. This is compared to the immediate comic juxtaposition of Molière, facilitated by the fast moving play and use of comic coincidence.
Molière satirizes his central character Arnolphe in an overt, exaggerated way, in fitting with the play’s farcical nature. Through Molière’s ridicule of Arnolphe’s obsession with absolute control over Agnes, we are presented with the idea that love and marriage should be spontaneous, rather than calculated. Chekhov targets several of his characters, sometimes satirizing quite obviously (Soliony’s clucking), but often more subtly by contrasting perception and reality throughout the slow, sprawling structure of the play. Through Chekhov’s satire, he introduces the idea that self perceptions can prohibit the kind of self understanding that leads to personal growth and improvement in life.
1500 words
Bibliography
Chekhov, Anton Three Sisters, Penguin Books; London, 1954
Molière The School For Wives, Samuel French; London, 1954
