A child has the capacity to make the most critical and objective observation on society and human behavior . How is this possible? A child has not yet matured and lacks adequate education and experience. However, this is precisely why a child would make a perfect social scientist; his naivety can constitute an excellent means of objective criticism and most often of satire. A child's inquisitive nature and thirst for knowledge would result in dispassionate questioning of social structures, without the brainwashing of those same institutions, and their vulnerability would expose all the societal dangers present. This childish scientist would see the truth as it is. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay This same premise can be applied to literary works. A naive character or narrator can be used as a childlike scientist, who reveals social truths to the audience through his naivety. As Maurois noted, writing about Candide, by Voltaire, "It was a novel of apprenticeship, that is to say of the formation of an adolescent's ideas through brutal contact with the universe" ( 101). Jonathan Swift also takes this approach in his work Gulliver's Travels, where Gulliver, the main character, provides a naive point of reference. The satires Gulliver's Travels, by Jonathan Swift, and Candide, by Voltaire, both use naivety to convey satirical attacks. on society. In both works, the litotes [euphemisms] are made up of extremely absurd situations, which further highlights the ridiculous nature of a situation. The characters in each novel are made vulnerable by their overconfident nature. They are taken advantage of and these characters are exploited by corrupt people in society. Attacks are also being launched against authority figures around the world. This is seen in the characters' reactions to authority. Finally, both works are travel stories, which expose the main characters from numerous perspectives. This allows authors to satirize many aspects of society. These two satirical works make a multitude of absurd situations, thus highlighting the absurdity in question. This is a particularly effective technique because a character or narrator finds themselves involved in a ridiculous situation. The reader, with an aesthetic distance, is then able to recognize the stupidity of the incident. After careful consideration, a satirical conclusion can be drawn. For example, Voltaire's narrator lightheartedly describes a brutal battle scene: Nothing could have been more splendid, more brilliant, more intelligent or more orderly than the two armies. . . . then rifle fire drove away from our brave new world approximately nine or ten thousand scoundrels who infested its surface. The bayonet was also the sufficient cause of the death of several thousand men. (22-23) The diction of this passage is ironic. By calling a battle “splendid” (22) and “brilliant” (22), the narrator demonstrates how common the idea of ​​war has become and how little human life is valued. Furthermore, the phrase “Our brave new world” (22-23) identifies optimism as being at the center of this satirical attack (Maurois 100). The narrator thus nonchalantly addresses serious subjects. Maurois cited Voltaire and Swift as using this method when he states: "and from the dean [Swift] he [Voltaire] had learned to tell an absurd story in the most natural way" (104). In this way, crazy scenarios arestand out in the context of "serious" discourse, and when approached on a satirical level, the narrator's careless consideration of terrible events suggests a desensitization of society. Quintana, in his essay “Situation as a Satiical Method,” describes Swifts’ satire as “situational satire.” In this method, a situation is created and objectively observed in order to produce satirical attacks (344-346). This method is the same as described earlier. The public, once removed from the dramatic situation, realizes the absurdity of it and the satirical nature of this situation. While speaking with the king of Brobdingnag, Gulliver describes many absurd features of human life in Europe that, to him, seem noble. He particularly treats gunpowder with litotes (book I, ch. 6-7). The noble manner in which Gulliver presents his culture ironically accentuates the ignoble qualities of Europe. Another example can be taken from Gulliver's stay in Lilliput. Attending Lilliput's "political" ceremonies, Gulliver seriously considers the ridiculous system of obtaining political favor and power. Politicians perform “rope dances” in order to gain political rank. (Book I, ch. 3). Here, Gulliver's gullibility is used as a political attack on the superficiality of politics. In both works, characters or narrators make euphemisms or treat absurd subjects with complete sincerity, creating a situation from which satirical observations can be drawn. Another way in which naivety is used in these two tales is to satirize the tendency of corrupt people to take advantage of trusting individuals too much. Both Gulliver and Candide fit the description of an overconfident and naive character. Van Doren recounts this situation as demonstrated in Gulliver's Travels: Grateful for the kindness he had shown, Gulliver aided the Lilliputs in this war by capturing the Blefuscudian fleet and bringing it as a gift to his royal host. But the Lilliputians were no more grateful than the English had been to the Oxford ministry for ending the war with France. . . . The most embittered of the petty ministers became Gulliver's enemy. (187) Here, Gulliver places his trust too easily in the hands of strangers. This naive gesture leaves the Lilliputians with the possibility of betraying him. Swift is able to satirically attack human behavior through this “situational irony” (Quintana 344-346). In this particular situation, Swift demonstrates how dangerous overconfidence can be. Gulliver thinks he has made friends among the Lilliputians. However, at the end of the visit he is almost executed (Bk. I). On a satirical level, Swift asserts that the corrupting human being is mortal when he is trusted too much. The dangers of being too confident are also addressed in Candide. In chapter 19, Candide is taken advantage of by an accomplice captain. Candide, who has just acquired great wealth from the El Dorado, is overcharged for passage on a ship. Then he entrusts his goods to the captain, who flees with Candide's riches (ch. 19). Voltaire here rejects an “optimistic” (Maurois 100) approach to philosophy. The audience realizes that Candide has been defrauded by confiding in a “trustworthy” citizen of the “best of all possible worlds” (Maurois 100). Once again, naivety is used to create satire. In this case, an individual's overconfident nature is wrongly exploited and results in loss of property or even a near-death experience. Another aspect of society that is attacked in these two novels is authority.numbers. In each case, Gulliver's or Candide's reactions to authority are used as satirical devices. In Candide's case, positive progress occurs after a period of naive subordination. In Gulliver's case, the hierarchical structures of society keep him in constant submission. Candide initially blindly accepts his teacher's very optimistic philosophy. It takes time for Candide to begin to question this authority. Voltaire argues that authority figures should be questioned and that their doctrine should not be taken literally. Voltaire's negative tone towards Candide's naive following of Pangloss's optimism is seen from an aesthetic distance in the context of devastation after devastation occurring. Pangloss's philosophy clearly does not hold water. This leads Candide to an evaluation of this authority. Pasco describes this intellectual growth that occurs after questioning: when Candide says at the beginning of chapter 13 that if Pangloss had lived, Candide would have dared to oppose the master's continued insistence that all is well in the best of all possible worlds , we know something happened. This is the first in a series of indications that Candide has begun a process of development that will make him considerably less naive. (94) Candide is able to become less naive and therefore less subordinate. Unfortunately, the same is not true for Gulliver. He has been conditioned by a hierarchical society to internalize his role as submissive. This internalization is apparent during his first encounter with the Lilliputians, Gulliver states: "I responded in a few words, but in the most submissive manner" (36). The audience must consider the drastic size difference between Gulliver and the Lilliputians. It is absurd for Gulliver to bow to these microscopic islanders. Once this is assessed, Swift's satirical attack on hierarchical structures becomes clear; certain institutions foster a socially stratified culture, of which Gulliver is a product. Again, her submissive nature emerges in her contact with the Houyhnhms. Lawler mentions Gulliver's position with the Houyhnhms when he notes "the final realization that even as servant and disciple there can be no place for him [Gulliver] in the land of the Houyhnhms" (323). In this country, Gulliver readily assumes his role as submissive, due to his experience of hierarchical authority. In both novels, different satirical points are made about authority, but they are both made through the same means of a naive character's reaction to authority. Finally, both works can be seen as travel stories, which expose the naive characters to various perspectives. This allows authors to satirize various aspects of human nature and universalize the satire. Clark further describes Gulliver's role: Indeed, he [Gulliver] was quick to understand the inhabitants of the lands upon which he chanced. In this respect he was a typical traveler. (2) In the "Introduction to Gulliver's Travels" this feeling is also expressed. The author states that “Swift adopts an ancient satirical device: the imaginary journey” (905). Gulliver travels to distant, unknown lands and is presented with new perspectives that satirize lands very familiar to the reader. The world seen through her naive eyes can be interpreted as a satire of Swift. Van Doren comments on the effect of these different perspectives, using Brobdingnag as an example: But after the giant he [Gulliver] could not return so easily to the old scale. . . his own people seemed contemptible for their pettiness. (189) And again taking, 1930.