In ancient Eastern society, written novels eventually achieved a prominent place in the culture, following a long tradition of oral accounts and short works such as poetry. Furthermore, with the government's strict content policy, many authors and poets feared punishment and therefore avoided political or religious criticism in their work. However, satire provided a way to possibly disguise critical intentions while still entertaining audiences of the time. Monkey, a translation of Journey to the West by Arthur Waley, is a great example of the emergence of satire in the form of fictional narrative and offers great insight into the lifestyle and traditions during the Ming Dynasty. Another highly regarded oriental piece is the Ramayana. Considered a Scripture, the Ramayana is considered one of the greatest works for its religious teachings and insight into the Hindu culture and lifestyle of the time period, of which it is somewhat ambiguous, as oral accounts preceded written ones. Alberson describes the influence of the Ramayana thus: "For those who know India, written history offers very little... But its literature, shaped and shaped over the centuries, gives us a much more intimate understanding of the guiding spirit of the its peoples" (Alberson 323). Often, literature can be much more revealing of a culture than nonfiction historical accounts because of its carefully constructed themes and characters. The Monkey and the Ramayana both offer entertainment, teachings, and insights into the cultural period through different uses of satire, conflict, and character development. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Monkey, written by Wu Cheng-en and translated for Western culture by Arthur Waley, is a fictional account of a diverse group of individuals' wild and funny journey towards enlightenment and functions as a satire to criticize both the political and religious structures. As a satire, Wu Cheng-en's work is capable of both criticizing and entertaining. The need for satire is in this case a possible pursuit and, more generally, as Fairclough rightly summarizes, “Men don't like their weaknesses exposed” (Fairclough 183). By using animals as main characters, such as the Monkey, Sandy, Pigsy and the Dragon, a barrier is created between deeper themes, real criticism and harmless entertainment. In a way, it lengthens the distance between each hardness, acting as a sort of buffer. Shep describes the character's satire as "in making the rebel an animal, the Chinaman can laugh at his antics without guilt, while unconsciously admiring his defiance of the powers that be" (Shep 1). Monkey himself is a very likable protagonist, he is brave, loyal and particularly funny, serving as a source of comic relief. In short, the satirical comedy, in Monkey, helps to ease the tension as well as entertain the audience. Fairclough describes comedy in a special way: “Comedy is an imitation of life” (Fairclough 183). Real life isn't all drama or all action; it's comical much of the time, whether acknowledged or not. This is why fictional narratives, like Monkey, become so expressive of their time period. Pigsy also serves as a great source of comic relief as well as a sort of critical barrier as an animal. De Bary describes him thus: "Wu Cheng-en's supreme comic creation is Pigsy, who symbolizes crass sensual life in the absence of religious commitment and mythical ambition. He is doubly comic, because as a reluctant pilgrim he has no calling for the world. " monastic life and why despite all itsmonstrous size and strength, he harbors no ambition beyond a hearty meal and a good sleep with a woman in his arms" (De Bary 171). Pigsy symbolizes gluttony and laziness, just as the Monkey represents courage and loyalty, and thanks to its comedic nature readers have the opportunity to both have fun and learn a lesson from Pigsy: don't be a glutton! In addition to the comic satire, Monkey also tackles some very real issues in politics. Through the characterization of the Jade Emperor, the ruler of Heaven, readers gain insight into the nature of the class structure and government of the time period, the Ming Dynasty. When the Monkey enters Heaven, he is assigned menial jobs and somewhat humiliating, such as a stable worker position, thus reflecting the injustice of status advancement Landsberger succinctly describes the structure of Heaven as “a bloated bureaucracy, packed with countless officials with titles. pompous, with a finger in every possible earthly pursuit” (Landsberger 1). Criticism of religion also occurs, as when Monkey chastises Buddhist prisoners, telling them they should have tried to save themselves; they should act. Bantly opines on the often comical nature of this criticism with the statement: “The bewildering range of cultural traditions, especially those of China's three major religious traditions… is so diverse and daringly intertwined… Therefore any interpretation faces danger to exaggerate the importance of these cultural and religious elements, only to discover that the author offered them in jest” (Bantly 1). Monkey is a satire, so it is assumed that the reader will be entertained as well as educated Religious satire also offers an accurate portrayal of the religion of the time. Bradeen and Johnson explain that “This depiction accurately represents the lived religious experience of everyday Chinese and provides a healthy antidote to the common perception of Chinese religious traditions as distinct, sometimes competing, often contradictory teachings. ” (Bradeen and Johnson 40). This insight is particularly accurate as it examines how satire works to reveal the cultural standards and traditions of the period. Monkey, in addition to entertaining its audience, teaches important values ​​through the interactions of its characters. Some examples include the Great King's monster's words to the sister of the perch: "A team of horses cannot reach a word that came out of the mouth" (Wu 266). In line with these words, you should be careful that what you say is permanent, a fitting lesson for the Monkey as his words get him into trouble as often as they get him out of trouble. This teaching is generally simple and direct, and therefore capable of reaching a wide readership. Another example, particularly revealing of Confucian values, goes like this: “If a man was your teacher for a day, you should treat him as your father for the rest of his life” (Wu 173). This example illustrates Confucian teachings on the importance of education and respect, illustrated by Tripitaka in obedience and listening to his protectors. Once again, the message is simple and reaches almost all readers. The values ​​expressed in Monkey reflect well the values ​​found in the three religions of the Ming Dynasty culture, Taoism, Buddhism and Confucianism. The Ramayana also acts as a reflection of the culture and values ​​of its people through important teachings and portrayals of traditions. Since the Ramayana is considered a scripture, it differs from the Monkey culturally, but is still very culturally reflective. In some cases it is also used asjustification of events; for example, Pollock explains, "the cult of Rama blossomed only when the Hindu kings found in the story of the contention of the Ramayana... a parallel for their struggle against Turkish political power... the cult of Rama grew during the 12th century in direct response to the equation of Rama and the Hindu kings as protectors of the purity of the Hindu polity against foreigners" (Pollock 261). Because of its scriptural context, the narrative's popularity is often attributed to its parallels with the Hindu way of life. Furthermore, Sakalani analyzes his cultural reflection in the following way: “It is not enough to simply say that the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are two great epics. They are also a story, although not of a particular time or period. They are the eternal history of India. Other historians have changed over time, but this story has not. These two epics embody what India considers its ideals” (Sakalani 51). Some of the ideals addressed by the Ramayana are duty, honor, loyalty, and kindness. Duty is an important Hindu value, as it reflects an individual's commitment and faith. Rama is a great example of many valuable traits, duty in particular. His impressive duty to the country is illustrated in several instances, such as when he is voluntarily exiled. Bose describes his decision and its meaning: “He values ​​a promise… above his own life, his brother and even Sita herself. As always in poetry, solidarity with representatives of patriarchy and adherence to its contractual code are valued above loyalty to generational and gender subordinates” (Bose 35). Duty to country and law is always weighed against lesser obligations, and honor depends on this adherence to duty. Bose further emphasizes the importance of Rama's decision: "Certainly the most complex and revealing debate on the question of the potential conflict between personal loyalty and adherence to abstract principles of truth and dharma is embodied in the series of emotionally elaborate conversations involving Rama, the his brother Laksfimanfia, his mother Kausalya and his wife Sita as to whether Rama should obey his father's order to be banished and, if so, who should accompany him into exile" (Bose 43). This experience of Rama choosing duty to the law over one's rights shows his awareness of the value of duty, or his impressive display of “dharma.” Another example involves Indrajit, Ravana's son, who leaves his family to work with Rama. Considered treason and betrayal to his family, his actions would not normally be considered an example of good. However, Indrajit is considered righteous by Valmiki because he chose duty towards his country; he knew that his homeland would suffer greatly due to the wrong choices of his father and uncles. For the value and "dharma" of loyalty, Sita is a primary symbol. As a testament to the time period, women are subservient to the patriarchy and their role is based almost exclusively on this loyalty. Bose describes the situation in detail: “First, a woman's husband is her god, equal to no one else. A woman need not worship anyone except him. The first duty of a woman is to renounce her own self-interest and concern herself only with that which is conducive to the well-being of her husband. This is the only self-denial required of a woman. A woman who is completely devoted to her husband in thought, word and deed does not need the blessing of anyone else, because even God himself is forced to realize his desires" (Bose 44). Bose briefly recounts the enormous pressure placed on women to give themselves completely to their patriarchs and the blessings they will receive from.