I would like to have more critical documentation for "The Fall of the House of Usher" as a satirical parody.
The problem is that "The Fall of the House of Usher" is not a satirical parody. That is why you cannot find critical documentation on it. The story exemplifies gothic horror and introspective. It is a commentary on the society of the time. Poe observes the decay in the upper classes, and represents it literally though the decay of the Ushers. The story's dark mood is not parody, it is metaphor. Satire and parody are descriptions of life in an overly comedic fashion, designed to make the reader laugh but also think about what is being described. You will find plenty of documentation on "The House of Usher" as exemplary gothic literature, so why don’t you begin there?
Certainly, there are often different interpretations of literature. If Edgar Allan Poe's "The Fall of the House of Usher" is a reflection of the upper class who married among themselves, then, indeed, his story may be interpreted as a satire. That the bloodlines have become so thin and there can be no relatives found for the Ushers to marry suggests that theirs is an incestual relationship, a relationship which parodies the relationships of those who married within their small socially elite circle.
From my professor: If it is satirical then how can it not be parody? The most pertinent questions you have to ask yourself are: if Poe is satirizing then what is being satirized and how in the story? And once such instances have been identified, how does one categorically decide that they don't have a parodic component or charge (depending upon the reader's knowledge of the gothic, or of parody)?
I see it as satirical because of the overwrought images. I can see that there is not much critisizm but it does not mean that it is not there. I appreciate your perspective. I will try make every effort to support my evidence in my paper. Thank you for your comments