I have vague memories of reading a kid's version of Gulliver's Travels - and an even vaguer memory of a comic book. I don't remember anything political or controversial - just the concept of travelling to unknown lands and finding very different worlds.
Swift targets not only government, royalty & aristocracy but also lampoons anyone who sets themself up as important.
pg 112 - "...how vain an Attempt it is for a Man to endeavour doing himself Honour among those who are out of all Degree of Equality or Comparison with him. And yet I have seen the Moral of my own behaviour very frequent in England since my return; where a contemptible little Varlet, without the least Title to Birth, Person, Wit, or common Sense, shall presume to look with Importance, and put himself upon a foot with the greatest Persons of the Kingdom."
Interesting to see how his use of various words and phrases differs from today's usage. Some of the words are commonly used in many english novels i.e. "nice" meaning delicate or skillful. But others are different from how we would say something today such as "artificially" for skillfully (pg 114), "seasonable Supply" meaning "opportune replacement (pg 114), Also different spellings (croud for crowd, consort for concert, pumpion for pumpkin, jobbs for jobs, chuse for choose, fole for foal
In Lilliput, Swift seems to want to depress any and all pretensions. In Brobdingnag he seems to focus in more on England and the monarchy. I'm not sure how much to make of examples showing a seeming difference social or moral niceties in Lilliput vs. in Brobdingnag. On pg 114 Gulliver won't sit on a chair made of the Queen's [shed] hair (out of respect) but in Lilliput he urinated on the Queen's quarters to put out a fire.
pg 116 Swift notes that reason is not proportional to size - is this a comment on human vs animal or more about various stations in life?
"That, Reason did to extend itself with the Bulk of the Body: On the contrary, we observed in our Country, that the tallest, Persons were usually least provided with it."
Gulliver speaks in favour of 3 kingdoms (and not union of England and Scotland in 1707 and [ironically on Swift's part] about extraordinary care taken in education of the aristocracy and the role of House of Peers.
One of the end notes speaks about Swift's view of English House of Lords being the final court of appeal for Ireland (rather than Irish House of Lords). In a letter Swift writes "...the Question is whether People ought to be Slaves or no" pg 311 Given what seemed to be Swift's opinion about the Irish Catholics, this seems a hypocritical question.
There is a long dialogue between Gulliver and the Brobdingnangian king about England: the hereditary nobility (pg 117) "Ornament and Bulwark of the Kingdom," comments about high clergy (Bishops), lawyers etc.
Irony mark
The irony mark or irony point (؟) (French: point d’ironie) is a punctuation mark proposed by the French poet Alcanter de Brahm (alias Marcel Bernhardt) at the end of the 19th century used to indicate that a sentence should be understood at a second level (irony, sarcasm, etc.). It is illustrated by a small, elevated, backward-facing question mark.[3]
It was in turn taken by Hervé Bazin in his book Plumons l’Oiseau ("Let's pluck the bird," 1966), where the author however used another (ψ-like) shape.[6] In doing this, the author proposed five other innovative punctuation marks: the "doubt point" (
), "certitude point" (
), "acclamation point" (
), "authority point" (
), and "love point" (
).[7]
), "certitude point" (
), "acclamation point" (
), "authority point" (
), and "love point" (
).[7]Swift uses a lot of irony. Irony is defined as a situation where:
"the surface meaning and the underlying meaning of what is said are not the same." Also, Eric Partridge, in Usage and Abusage, writes that "Irony consists in stating the contrary of what is meant."
The use of irony may require the concept of a double audience. Fowler's A Dictionary of Modern English Usage says:
Irony is a form of utterance that postulates a double audience, consisting of one party that hearing shall hear & shall not understand, & another party that, when more is meant than meets the ear, is aware both of that more & of the outsiders' incomprehension.
Some examples of use of IRONY in Swift pg 116, 117, 118
pg 120 - supports freedom of thought - should be defended
pg 120 irony - "clearly proved that Ignorance , Idleness, and Vice are the proper Ingredients for qualifying a Legislator. That Laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied by those whose interest and Abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them."
pg 122 - "But great Allowances should be given to a King who lives wholly secluded from the rest of the World, and must therefore be altogether unacquainted with the Manners and Customs that most prevail in other Nations: The want of which Knowledge will ever produce many Prejudices, and a certain Narrowness of Thinking; from which we and the politer Countries of Europe are wholly exempted."
The Brobdingnagian King is horrified at the thought of weapons of war and destruction (gunpowder and firearms) and rejects Gulliver's offer to put these weapons in his hands to conquer all around him. Gulliver comments (pg124) "A strange Effect of narrow Principles and short Views!"
They have an interesting rule or law, (in the interests of the current Plain Language movement):
"No Law of that Country must exceed in Words the Number of Letters in their Alphabet."
Gulliver mentions "Politicks as Science " which seems to allude to Machiavelli and his findings.
In his voyage to Houyhnhnms Land, Gulliver comments about a Captain (pg 207), " a little too positive in his Opinions, which was the Cause of his Destruction, as it hath been of several others."
Here Gulliver seems more cynical and disenchanted with European society. He is horrified at the Yahoos' bestiality. At the same time he is quite enamoured of the Houyhnhnms ' reason and their just, orderly life - though there is social stratification there. pg 212 "I plainly observed that their Language expressed the Passions very well..."
Their reason is described in the end notes as (pg 345) "cognitive rather than ratiocinative."
For the Houyhnhnms, lying is difficult (pg 223) "Doubting or not believing are so little known in this country that the Inhabitants cannot tell how to behave themselves under such Circumstances."
"The Use of Speech was to make us understand one another, and to receive Information of Facts."
The Houyhnhnms are contrasted with the animalistic Yahoos, with the comment that (pg 225) "reason will in Time always prevail against Brutal Strength."
They also speak about (pg 229) things indifferent (pg 347) which reminds me of a term used by either the Epicureans or the Stoics for unimportant things - I'll have to go back Lucretius or Marcus Aurelius and find the reference.
Swift has a long description of stupid reasons for going to war, which we could pull out anytime in the current century.
He also gets into quite a diatribe against the Law and lawyers, proving black is white according how they are paid. He also has a very apt comment on the length of legal proceedings, on pg 232.
He discusses reason and brutality; Nature and reason, the stoics; Reason as common law - and notes that reason is prevented by self-love and by the passions.
The castigations continue: on pg 239, against aristocracy, inbreeding, cuckholdry, hybrid vigour.
Swift ironically lists the various uses of reason by Mankind, and the corruptions on pg 241.
"[...] he looked upon us as a Sort of Animal to whose Share, by what Accident he could not conjecture, some small Pittance of Reason had fallen, whereof we made no other Use than by its Assistance to aggravate our natural Corruptions, and to acquire new ones which Nature had not given us. That we disarmed our selves of the few Abilities she had bestowed; had been very successful in multiplying our original Wants, and seemed to spend our whole Lives in vain Endeavours to supply them by our own Inventions."
On pg 242 he turns his lens on civil war "for if you throw among five Yahoos as much food as would be sufficient for 50, they will, instead of eating peaceably, fall together by the Ears, each single one impatient to have it all to it self." "then would ensue such a Battle [...] with terrible Wounds made by their Claws on both sides." He then goes on to talk about the Yahoos coveting and fighting over coloured stones.
It was an interesting book. I wish I remembered more about what I got out of it as a child, whether the irony came through. It's a bit dated as a political instrument now since this type of commentary does not typically have to be hidden and disguised (in truly democratic countries).
No comments:
Post a Comment