A Modest Proposal

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pag_Hingowa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One of the greatest works of satire in the English language.

I recall teaching it to a class of freshman comp students in college. It was interesting to see who understood that it was satire and who took it as a “serious” proposal. The “serious” ones were at first incredulous that it wasn’t an earnest proposal, and then a few of them marveled at the skill of Dr. Swift. Some never understood at all and were horrified. 😃
 
I_Thirst said:
One of the greatest works of satire in the English language.

I recall teaching it to a class of freshman comp students in college. It was interesting to see who understood that it was satire and who took it as a “serious” proposal. The “serious” ones were at first incredulous that it wasn’t an earnest proposal, and then a few of them marveled at the skill of Dr. Swift. Some never understood at all and were horrified. 😃
Click to expand...
Well said. Dr Jonathan Swift was best known for his masterpiece, Gullivers Travels and was a man of great and prolific works.
Read more about him on the following link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Swift
 
Dee_S said:
Well said. Dr Jonathan Swift was best known for his masterpiece, Gullivers Travels and was a man of great and prolific works.
Read more about him on the following link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Swift
Click to expand...
Not to derail from the morals thread, but a woman made a presentation to the city of Toronto’s mayor recently using the same title. That prompted someone to post:
Thank you dear Mary!

My only concern is that those councillors - including Tweedledum and Tweedledumber - who have never heard of Margaret Atwood will likely never have heard of Jonathan Swift either, and will likely also be incapable of recognizing satire when they hear it.

“Hmmmm, satire? Just a sec, let me Google that. Let’s see; pan pipes? Nope. Horns? Nope. Goat’s feet? Nope. Definitely can’t be satire. She must be serious!”
Click to expand...
 
I_Thirst said:
One of the greatest works of satire in the English language.

I recall teaching it to a class of freshman comp students in college. It was interesting to see who understood that it was satire and who took it as a “serious” proposal. The “serious” ones were at first incredulous that it wasn’t an earnest proposal, and then a few of them marveled at the skill of Dr. Swift. Some never understood at all and were horrified. 😃
Click to expand...
A question to ask the ones who understood: “at what point in the text did you ‘get it’?”

It is indeed a superb piece of writing:
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, …

rossum
 
I’m having (more than) second thoughts, having read this work and found out who he is.

It is amusing, in a ‘dark’ way, BUT, satire/satyr or not, I consider it a ‘vile masterpiece of anti-catholic sentiment’ - so potentially harmful, that it should be reserved to scholars only.

He is quite obviously taking on the Catholics of Ireland, who did not practice birth control, and have long been the butt of poverty jokes among the Protestants, until the present.

Only a diseased and undisciplined mind could have produced such a bigoted work!

I quote here from an article by Cardinal Meyer on Chastity and Modesty (dealing with the printed word) that applies not only to those matters, but in general too:

"Whether we are conscious of it or not, we are influenced by the books, magazines, and papers which we read, and all of these leave their imprint on us as individuals. Back in the eighteenth century, Samuel Johnson expressed the same idea when he said:"Books have always a secret influence on the understanding: we cannot at pleasure obliterate ideas; he that reads books of science, though without any fixed idea or desire of improvement, will grow more knowing: he that entertains himself with religious treatises will imperceptibly advance in goodness; the ideas which are offered to the mind, will at last find a lucky moment when it is disposed to receive them."

It’s worth reading more about this highly intellectual and humanitarian Cardinal who was Archbishop of Chicago until his death in 1965 and who gave speeches alongside Martin Luther King.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Gregory_Meyer

It would be great if ‘pro lifers’ would join and contribute to this discussion. Stock up their armory and defences, to fight their good fight.
 
The following quote from this work says it all:
**“Infant’s flesh will be in season throughout the year, but more plentiful in March, and a little before and after; for we are told by a grave author, an eminent French physician, that fish being a prolifick dyet, there are more children born in Roman Catholick countries about nine months after Lent, the markets will be more glutted than usual, because the number of Popish infants, is at least three to one in this kingdom, and therefore it will have one other collateral advantage, by lessening the number of Papists among us.” **

As does this:
Jonathan Swifts Religious Beliefs
Swift was a clergyman, a member of the Church of Ireland, the Irish branch of the Anglican Church; and as such he was a militant defender of his church (and his own career prospects) in the face of the threats to its continued existence posed by Roman Catholicism at home in Ireland (which was overwhelmingly Catholic) and in England, where Swift and his peers saw the Catholics (and, at the other religious and political extreme, the Dissenters) as threatening not only the Anglican Church but the English Constitution.
victorianweb.org/previctorian/swift/religion1.html
 
Dee S, it appears that you do not understand satire and how it is used. The thought that it should be “reserved for scholars only” is bizarre. To claim that A Modest Proposal is a work of “anti-Catholic sentiment” is outrageous and completely misses the mark on how satire operates in literature.

It is common in satire that those who are satirized (in thought, in manners, etc) do not understand that they are being satirized. 😉
 
My dark, twisted sense of humor loved this in high school. I “got it” as soon as I read the actual proposition. Fantastic read and, in my opinion, shows how ridiculous abortion is anyway.
 
Dee_S said:
I’m having (more than) second thoughts, having read this work and found out who he is.

It is amusing, in a ‘dark’ way, BUT, satire/satyr or not, I consider it a ‘vile masterpiece of anti-catholic sentiment’ - so potentially harmful, that it should be reserved to scholars only.

He is quite obviously taking on the Catholics of Ireland, who did not practice birth control, and have long been the butt of poverty jokes among the Protestants, until the present.

Only a diseased and undisciplined mind could have produced such a bigoted work!

I quote here from an article by Cardinal Meyer on Chastity and Modesty (dealing with the printed word) that applies not only to those matters, but in general too:

"Whether we are conscious of it or not, we are influenced by the books, magazines, and papers which we read, and all of these leave their imprint on us as individuals. Back in the eighteenth century, Samuel Johnson expressed the same idea when he said:"Books have always a secret influence on the understanding: we cannot at pleasure obliterate ideas; he that reads books of science, though without any fixed idea or desire of improvement, will grow more knowing: he that entertains himself with religious treatises will imperceptibly advance in goodness; the ideas which are offered to the mind, will at last find a lucky moment when it is disposed to receive them."

It’s worth reading more about this highly intellectual and humanitarian Cardinal who was Archbishop of Chicago until his death in 1965 and who gave speeches alongside Martin Luther King.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Gregory_Meyer

It would be great if ‘pro lifers’ would join and contribute to this discussion. Stock up their armory and defences, to fight their good fight.
Click to expand...
You are aware that virtually no Christian church sanctioned the use of articifial contraception until the early 20th century, right? Even if Swift didn’t mean to be satirical, how could he have been bigotted towards Irish Catholics if his perceived “judgment” was that they did not use moderation when it came to procreation, not that they did not use birth control?
 
Dee_S said:
The following quote from this work says it all:
**“Infant’s flesh will be in season throughout the year, but more plentiful in March, and a little before and after; for we are told by a grave author, an eminent French physician, that fish being a prolifick dyet, there are more children born in Roman Catholick countries about nine months after Lent, the markets will be more glutted than usual, because the number of Popish infants, is at least three to one in this kingdom, and therefore it will have one other collateral advantage, by lessening the number of Papists among us.” **

As does this:
Jonathan Swifts Religious Beliefs
Swift was a clergyman, a member of the Church of Ireland, the Irish branch of the Anglican Church; and as such he was a militant defender of his church (and his own career prospects) in the face of the threats to its continued existence posed by Roman Catholicism at home in Ireland (which was overwhelmingly Catholic) and in England, where Swift and his peers saw the Catholics (and, at the other religious and political extreme, the Dissenters) as threatening not only the Anglican Church but the English Constitution.
victorianweb.org/previctorian/swift/religion1.html
Click to expand...
Perhaps read my posts, they are clear enough.

It can’t be doubted that Johanthan Swift was anti-catholic and employed his talent for satire as a mockery in this particular case.
.
As for their being no contraceptive pill in those days, true enough. But there have been other ways of preventing conception and removing it (abortion) practiced throughout the history of the world, not just from the 20th century onwards.
 
Corpus_Cristi said:
You are aware that virtually no Christian church sanctioned the use of articifial contraception until the early 20th century, right? Even if Swift didn’t mean to be satirical, how could he have been bigotted towards Irish Catholics if his perceived “judgment” was that they did not use moderation when it came to procreation, not that they did not use birth control?
Click to expand...
Correct, I am ‘aware’ of this. But, tell me, how did Jonathan Swift arrive at this ‘judgment’ that they (catholics) did not use moderation when it came to procreation?To make it more clear, what form did the non-catholic’s use of moderation take, and why was the difference noticeable enough to draw his attention and motivate this satire?
 
Dee_S said:
Correct, I am ‘aware’ of this. But, tell me, how did Jonathan Swift arrive at this ‘judgment’ that they (catholics) did not use moderation when it came to procreation?To make it more clear, what form did the non-catholic’s use of moderation take, and why was the difference noticeable enough to draw his attention and motivate this satire?
Click to expand...
Unless I’ve missed the point of his Modest Proposal for the last 40 years, my understanding was that he wrote this in response to the people who were complaining about the increase in the number of Irish, in particular the Catholic ones.
 
Phemie said:
Unless I’ve missed the point of his Modest Proposal for the last 40 years, my understanding was that he wrote this in response to the people who were complaining about the increase in the number of Irish, in particular the Catholic ones.
Click to expand...
I agree - also, when we analyzed it, we saw indications that he was also making a statement about treatment of those in poverty.
 
Dee_S said:
Correct, I am ‘aware’ of this. But, tell me, how did Jonathan Swift arrive at this ‘judgment’ that they (catholics) did not use moderation when it came to procreation?To make it more clear, what form did the non-catholic’s use of moderation take, and why was the difference noticeable enough to draw his attention and motivate this satire?
Click to expand...
sigh At the root of satire is irony. Look at the mathematical figures he uses. Look at the reasoning. It’s all technically designed to convince the reader of something objective. It’s been said that science will tell me that putting strychnine in my grandmother’s tea will kill her, but science can’t tell me why it’s wrong. Despite the technical speech that Swift uses, he knew and his readers knew then and now that what he was proposing was, while modest (ie. within the means of reasoning, hence all the numerical and technical talk that is throughout the piece), was absolutely wrong and that instead of killing Irish children, the general public should be have been helping them. As for the things you’re saying about Jonathan Swift, I can’t take them seriously. You should present more reliable sources than what someone randomly posted on the internet. It’s easy to find anyone who agrees with a skewed point of view on the information super highway.
 
Corpus_Cristi said:
sigh At the root of satire is irony. Look at the mathematical figures he uses. Look at the reasoning. It’s all technically designed to convince the reader of something objective. It’s been said that science will tell me that putting strychnine in my grandmother’s tea will kill her, but science can’t tell me why it’s wrong. Despite the technical speech that Swift uses, he knew and his readers knew then and now that what he was proposing was, while modest (ie. within the means of reasoning, hence all the numerical and technical talk that is throughout the piece), was absolutely wrong and that instead of killing Irish children, the general public should be have been helping them. As for the things you’re saying about Jonathan Swift, I can’t take them seriously. You should present more reliable sources than what someone randomly posted on the internet. It’s easy to find anyone who agrees with a skewed point of view on the information super highway.
Click to expand...
Just to cheer you up, sigh, you and I are not the only people who have or will differ on the character and modus of Jonathan Swift. This is an extract from an article by one of his contemporaries, Daniel Corkery (14 February 1878 – 31 December 1964),an Irish politician, writer and teacher. (who states in his work Ourselves and Dean Swift, that Swift was ‘rabidly anti-catholic’), sorry can’t supply the link, but if you have the resources and can, please let me have it.

“Ourselves and Dean Swift
D Corkery - Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, 1934 - JSTOR
Swift’s character is a quagmire for writers. They are not agreed on any one of his faculties. Thackeray speaks. of ’ his savage heart; but for Churton Collins his heart was as tender as a woman’s. Mr. Gwynn says one must be either for him or against; he himself is for, which argues that…”

The link I supplied in my earlier post is:
victorianweb.org/previctorian/swift/religionov.html
Written and compiled by David Cody, Associate Professor of English, Hartwick College.

For your interest, and others who may like, they have other pre-Victorian authors to look up info on:
victorianweb.org/previctorian/misc/authors.html

I also came across this google book, by now Sir Walter Scott, The Memoirs of Jonathan Swift:
.scholar.google.co.za/scholar?cluster=2328177878718783472&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

My opinion is that to fully appreciate and benefit from a work, one must have a fair knowledge of the person who wrote it and their particular view and circumstances. A superficial acceptance, for the joy of it, is ok too!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top