How Does George Saunders Use Of A Satire

Writers throughout time have taken it upon themselves to pen the injustices around them and hone their artistic skills to document and expose acts of injustice, intending to spark change, debate, and reform. Roald Dahl and George Saunders, two renowned authors, tackle the same responsibility in their works, in the hopes of critiquing society and its distasteful, unsavory elements. The short stories “Lamb to the Slaughter”, written by Roald Dahl, and “My Chivalric Fiasco”, written by George Saunders, utilize satire and stylistic techniques to critique society and outline their perspectives on the world around them.
Roald Dahl’s “Lamb to the Slaughter” utilizes satire and humor to critique domesticity and the life of a housewife. His use of

detail and perspective allows us to view the eager, submissive, and anxious housewife, Mary Maloney, evident when she glanced at the clock again and again, waiting for her husband, “she merely wanted to satisfy herself that each minute that went by made it nearer to the time when he would come home” (Dahl 1). The exaggeration and descriptive imagery humorously depicts Mary Maloney as a submissive housewife, eager to please her husband in any way. The story satirizes domesticity by portraying an obsessive wife, Mary, who sits like a dog waiting to greet her husband at the door, fetching a drink for him like a toy, and gazing at him, not taking her eyes off him like he was a piece of meat (Dahl 1). The opening of the story, sets the scene of the household, depicts Mary’s obsessive need to please her husband, and contributes to the plot of the story and to her breaking point.
In addition, the elements establish the atmosphere in the Maloney household and the power dynamic between Mary and Patrick Maloney, displaying how her submissive behavior crushes her will to live, her purpose in life, and when it is taken away, she snaps.

When Patrick sits her down, to discuss some news, the end of their relationship (possibly an affair), she denies it, and continues to attend to her duties, not thinking about the reality, and then out of nowhere, she kills him with a leg of lamb. There’s humor in the fact that she takes the dinner she made, and utilizes the leg of lamb as a weapon to kill her husband, then there’s the aftershock and the panic mode sets in as she proceeds to cover up her crime, and the manner in which she disposes of the evidence. She kills him, and then extraordinarily, her mind became clear, she knew what to do, as it it was encoded in her genes, the wife of a detective (Dahl 2). Mary goes to Sam, secures an alibi, and then calls the police, playing the victim, falling into their arms, and crying uncontrollably, reinforcing gender roles and stereotypes, with the weak, sensitive, and emotional woman, the housewife, and the strong, brave, man, the protector. She brilliantly disposes of the murder weapon by manipulating the dumb, hungry men into eating the murder weapon, playing on their ego, pride, and protective

duty.
The humor and irony are evident when the cops’ mouths were full of meat and they are discussing the murder weapon, that a big bar must have been used to hurt Patrick, that the weapon should be easy to find, somewhere near their house, and under their noses (Dahl 4). Their discussion contains dramatic irony because the reader knows the truth of the murder weapon (which is being consumed) and the scene is comical. The lengths Mary went to cover up her involvement in her husband's murder displays the monotony and eternal hell she was destined to (as a housewife). The story incorporates the power dynamic between Patrick and Mary Maloney, her breaking point, her clever cover up, and humor to critique the hell of the domestic life of a housewife. Thus, Roald Dahl manages to pack all the humor, the subterfuge of the cover up, and the slyness to establish a point, that it took killing her husband for Mary to be free of her role as a housewife (and to visualize the oppression she faced implode with one swing of a leg of lamb).
George Saunders’ “My Chivalric Fiasco” incorporates the dystopian element to critique the falsehood of American capitalism, a corrupt, rigged economic system.

The dystopian world in the story serves as the antithesis to the ideal world, where expectations are thwarted and nothing goes your way. The misfortune of the characters appears in Martha being raped by her boss Don Murray, Ted witnessing the violation, and then Ted landing in trouble for opening his mouth and telling the truth rather than Don Murray for committing the act. These events speak volumes to the dark morale of the story, that despite where you come from, whatever you do, things get worse, summed up when Nate exclaims “Even if it is broke, leave it alone, you'll probably make it worse” (Saunders 2). The morale of the story can be applied to his downfall, but also to the impoverished underbelly of America in both this story and in reality. The poverty in the story, evident when Ted deliberates between telling the truth or keeping the money and steady job to help his family in ruin, as he was “the only one working person in our family. Mom being sick, Beth being shy, Dad having sadly cracked his spine recently when a car he was fixing fell on him” (Saunders 2). The misfortune and trouble at Ted’s home connects to a large theme, a critique of American capitalism, an economic system where the prioritization of profit creates inequality and a super class elite like Don Murray. Americans and people like Ted work

jobs that are tedious, demeaning, and pointless, going the extra mile to please their boss, with the intent to provide for his family and pay the bills. The gap in wealth widens and the promise that anyone can make it vanishes because the idea is ludicrous, an illusion, and a facade of reality, where Americans fall into a poverty trap.
The characters in the story resort to becoming a cog in the machine, mindless drones who follow whatever their boss, Don Murray, barks, to provide for their family, rather than thinking and acting freely. In addition, Saunders combines a chivalric language, Old English, with random noun capitalization and colloquial, vulgar, vocabulary. The language blend appears in moments when Ted weighs his morals, the truth or a steady job, or describes the aftermath of his actions like “’Twas true: Gossip & Slander did Fly like the Wind in our Town, and would, for sure, reach the Ear of poor dumbfuck Nate soon withal. And finding himself thus cruelly Informed, Nate would definitely freak. Oh, man. What a shit Day” (Saunders 4). The juxtaposition of language adds a humorous, comical element to a contemporary, dystopian, dark story. The story incorporates dark, black humor to tell the tale of not a structural oppression of American workers, or the dynamic between the little guy and the boss, but rather about the individual. “My Chivalric Fiasco” combines off-putting humor and satire as Ned swallows a chivalric pill meant to boost his knightliness, and then gradually slips into a chivalric, faux-Shakespearean tone evident when he narrates “Myself in proximity of the Wendy’s on Center Boulevard, by the closed-down Outback, coming down hard, aware that, soon, the effect of the Elixir having subsided, I would find myself standing before our iffy Television, struggling to explain, in my own lowly Language, that, tho’ Winter’s Snows would soon be upon us” (Saunders 4). The ridiculous aspect of the story, a protagonist taking a drug to speak like a knight is preposterous, and yet in this futuristic, dystopian tale, where whatever you do, things get worse, it makes sense. Thus, George Saunders’ “My Chivalric Fiasco” radiates the idea that life is not a fairytale through its dark, satirical, and off-putting humor.
Roald Dahl and George Saunders undertake a challenging task, to observe every nook and cranny of their surroundings and to write the truth, the grit and grime of society. The short stories “Lamb to the Slaughter”, written by Roald Dahl, and “My Chivalric Fiasco”, written by George Saunders, take reality and flip it inside out, presenting a different perspective on everyday life, and offering commentary on what they deem unsavory, and an injustice.