It was an indictment, and it was most popular among those who were indicted — that is, politicians, scientists, philosophers, and Englishmen in general. Swift was roasting people, and they were eager for the banquet. Swift himself admitted to wanting to "vex" the world with his satire, and it is certainly in his tone, more than anything else, that one most feels his intentions. Besides the coarse language and bawdy scenes, probably the most important element that Dr.
Behind the disguise of his narrative, he is satirizing the pettiness of human nature in general and attacking the Whigs in particular. By emphasizing the six-inch height of the Lilliputians, he graphically diminishes the stature of politicians and indeed the stature of all human nature. Why, one might ask, did Swift have such a consuming contempt for the Whigs?
This hatred began when Swift entered politics as the representative of the Irish church. Representing the Irish bishops, Swift tried to get Queen Anne and the Whigs to grant some financial aid to the Irish church. They refused, and Swift turned against them even though he had considered them his friends and had helped them while he worked for Sir William Temple.
Swift turned to the Tories for political allegiance and devoted his propaganda talents to their services. The method, for example, which Gulliver must use to swear his allegiance to the Lilliputian emperor parallels the absurd difficulty that the Whigs created concerning the credentials of the Tory ambassadors who signed the Treaty of Utrecht.
His book was popular because it was a compelling adventure tale and also a puzzle.
His readers were eager to identify the various characters and discuss their discoveries, and, as a result, many of them saw politics and politicians from a new perspective. He is concerned with family and with his job, yet he is confronted by the pigmies that politics and political theorizing make of people.
Gulliver is utterly incapable of the stupidity of the Lilliputian politicians, and, therefore, he and the Lilliputians are ever-present contrasts for us.
We are always aware of the difference between the imperfect but normal moral life of Gulliver, and the petty and stupid political life of emperors, prime ministers, and informers.
In the second book of the Travels, Swift reverses the size relationship that he used in Book I. In Lilliput, Gulliver was a giant; in Brobdingnag, Gulliver is a midget. Swift uses this difference to express a difference in morality.
Gulliver was an ordinary man compared to the amoral political midgets in Lilliput. Now, Gulliver remains an ordinary man, but the Brobdingnagians are moral men. They are not perfect, but they are consistently moral.
Only children and the deformed are intentionally evil. Gulliver is revealed to be a very proud man and one who accepts the madness and malice of European politics, parties, and society as natural. The Brobdingnagian king, however, is not fooled by Gulliver. The English, he says, are "odious vermin.
They are superhumans, bound to us by flesh and blood, just bigger morally than we are. Their virtues are not impossible for us to attain, but because it takes so much maturing to reach the stature of a moral giant, few humans achieve it.
Brobdingnag is a practical, moral utopia. Among the Brobdingnagians, there is goodwill and calm virtue. Their laws encourage charity.
Yet they are, underneath, just men who labor under every disadvantage to which man is heir. They are physically ugly when magnified, but they are morally beautiful. We cannot reject them simply because Gulliver describes them as physically gross.
In Books I and II, Swift directs his satire more toward individual targets than firing broadside at abstract concepts. In Book I, he is primarily concerned with Whig politics and politicians rather than with the abstract politician; in Book II, he elects to reprove immoral Englishmen rather than abstract immorality.
He attacks his old enemies, the Moderns, and their satellites, the Deists and rationalists. In opposition to their credos, Swift believed that people were capable of reasoning, but that they were far from being fully rational. For the record, it should probably be mentioned that Swift was not alone in denouncing this clique of people.
This love of reason that Swift criticizes derived from the rationalism of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.From Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels ” Abstract: The Enlightenment, from the late 17th century to the late 18th century, is a philosophical movement whose /5(1).
Gulliver’s Travels is regarded as Swift’s masterpiece. It is a novel in four parts recounting Gulliver’s four voyages to fictional exotic lands. His travels is first among diminutive people–the Lilliputians, then among enormous giants–people of Brobdingnag, then among idealists and dreamers and finally among horses.
As mentioned earlier, Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver Travel’s is a work of satire, and should be read as such. The obvious criticism of human conceit and vanity is the most overt message contained within Gulliver’s final voyage, but what needs to be mentioned is also the apparent lifelessness that comes along with the Houyhnhnms’ dedication to reason.
Swift, in fact, created the whole of Gulliver's Travels in order to give the public a new moral lens. Through this lens, Swift hoped to "vex" his readers by offering them new insights into the game of politics and into the social follies of humans. Jonathan Swift was one of the leading satirists in English literature.
In Gulliver's Travels, he satirizes many aspects of literature, politics, religion, and philosophy, even critiquing the . Gulliver’s Travels recounts the story of Lemuel Gulliver, a practical-minded Englishman trained as a surgeon who takes to the seas when his business fails.
In a deadpan first-person narrative that rarely shows any signs of self-reflection or deep emotional response, Gulliver narrates the.