A Marxist Criticism on “The Importance of Being Earnest”A Marxist Criticism on “The Importance of Being Earnest””Excuse me Geoffrey, could you get me some more water.
I’m terriblythirsty, and the weather out here isn’t doing any good for my complexion. “declares the man as he sighs in exhaustion. “Right away sir, anything else?” proclaims the servant. “No that will be all. ” says the man as he waves off the servant. So is this the scene of yesteryear’s society or one of today’s, well inactuality it can be either.
In today’s world the rich still rely on butlers andmaids. It seems to be a practice that will always exist in this world, but thequestion largely is not on their jobs, but if they are deemed of a differentclass, and sadly to say yes. In today’s world it seems that class is still ahuge part of the world order, and moreover it seems that there will always bethe rich and poor, the owner and the worker. This is even demonstrated by theliterature of our time and that of other era’s, such as the play “The Importanceof Being Earnest” by Oscar Wilde. In this play Wilde display’s the classstructure with a different and interesting twist. He makes a reflection on thesociety with his own sense of humor, but however it still leaves a very goodopportunity to make a Marxist critique about the way the class structureinfluences the play.
He leaves room for these critiques when he writes aboutthe servants, the nobles, and the middle class. His view on society and classis very evident on the way the servants are portrayed. “I don’t know that I am much interested in your family life, Lane'””No sir; it’s not a very interesting subject. I never think of itmyself. ‘”In this passage from the play it is very clear that Wilde likes to givehis characters some life, but however it seemed that he was giving the servantsa bit too much, but nevertheless it does establish very well the position ofthose servants. In the society Wilde is presenting it seems that the place ofthe servant was not only for manual labor, but also to provide conversation, andto compliment the employer’s personalities.
In the story the idea of class wasdemonstrated by the interaction between Lane and Algernon even though Lane waswitty he did know his place as a servant and throughout the play the servantswere an excellent reminder that class structure did exist. Wilde’s idea of awitty servant has even spawned off into today’s society with television sitcomssuch as “The Fresh Prince of Bel- Air” and “The Nanny”. In these shows theclass structure is inherent, but the gap between master and servant is smaller. That is one of the things that Wilde seemed to make apparent, one can haveservants, but the gap between doesn’t have to be that large.
There can be classstructure in the world, but the need for class discrimination doesn’t need to bethere, and another interesting critique can be made of the nobles of that time. In the Victorian period, and today’s nobles exist. These are people whoare of noble birth right and is only passed on from generation to generation. It is a well respected position, but the difference between the nobles oftoday’s day and the older ones is the power that they have. In today’s time thenobles have little power only respect, but in the Victorian period the power wasstarting to diminish but it still existed.
The characters in the play who wereof noble birth did indeed know how to use that power. Well when one makes a Marxist criticism it can’t be solely based on thestory’s view of the servants, but however one needs to also look at the way thenobility are viewed. In Oscar Wilde’s play he seems to make almost a mockery ofthe nobility. When one sees the way the nobles are portrayed one will thinkthis is a sarcasm on the nobles, but however if one examines it closer he/shemay realize this is closer to the truth than previous accounts of the nobles.
In the play Oscar Wilde does not hold back in fears he would offend anyone hewrote a play to entertain, but he also did an excellent job on reflecting howthe nobles are. Firstly he displays the character of Algernon, who .
