I don't know about more of the comic surviving, but you're certainly right
otherwise, and about satire in particular. Think Aristophanes. Or the
comedies of the Restoration. There were a couple of dozen at least very
fine tragedies in the period, but except for an occasional performance of
All for Love, among the weakest of Dryden's tragedies, they've fallen off
the boards. Even the clearly political satire sometimes survives
most  readers' awareness of the issues involved. Hard not to chuckle about
the tirade in MacFlecknoe against pooor Shadwell, even if one has no idea
who he was. Not to mention the mock epic of Absalom and Achitophel. And we
still read and enjoy Chaucer. And Swift.

It's worth remembering that tragedies have as often as comedies been
politics by other means, hence subject to aging as their topicality falls
from consciousness. That doesn't seem to keep us from reading Shakespeare.

Mark


At 08:58 PM 6/4/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>I think Rebecca and Douglas's thoughts about the dating of satire are
>interesting. I've often heard another fallacy (of late on Ron's blog) that
>comedy (and satire has comic elements to be sure) dates faster than other
>modes. I can't help but think this is just totally wrong; in my experience,
>as a reader, this isn't true, but I've heard it said so many times (like
>I've heard that Iraq has WMD too), but in fact it dates no faster than
>anything else. In fact, most of the most popular and traditionally
>"canonical" works, I'd bet, are comedies or contain strong comic elements
>that "work" and one could, I think, easily make an argument that it
>survives LONGER than "tragedy" -- or at least MORE comic works and COMIC
>WRITERS seem to survive than other kinds of writers.
>
>But as to its lack of "translatability" across time, I think that idea's
>just bunk. (Sorry I can't muster anything but that by way of "argument" at
>the moment). g
>
>At 08:08 AM 6/2/2003 -0600, Douglas Barbour wrote:
>>Thanks Rebecca
>>
>>& yes, Gabe, menippean satire, for sure, which may be what something like
>>Preacher is: I find it hard to think of a reader who will not be offended
>>by some part of it, & I, personally, defy anyone not to laught at some part
>>too.
>>
>>As to Rebecca's question about the dating of satire, I think I only partly
>>agree. I mentioned Homage to Sextus Propertius in an earlier post, & it
>>seems to me that on one level, Pound is attacking contemporary British
>>imperialism, but a reader today would have no problem attaching the
>>Propertian twists & turns brought up to 1917 to today's imperium, the US.
>>
>>Which raises the question of how such work is read, no?
>>
>>doug
>>
>>Douglas Barbour
>>Department of English
>>University of Alberta
>>Edmonton Alberta Canada T6G 2E5
>>(h) [780] 436 3320      (b) [780] 492 0521
>>http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/dbhome.htm
>>
>>         We deserve overtime
>>for dealing daily with these mistreated burdens.
>>
>>                         Clark Coolidge