Once you have hit the world and the world, you will live together in a fairly good understanding. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Jonathan Swift When Gulliver's Travels was first published in 1726, Swift instantly became the most famous misanthrope in history. Thackeray was not alone in his indignation when he denounced the affair as “beyond all sense of manliness and shame; dirty in words, dirty in thought, furious, enraged, obscene” (quoted in Hogan, 1979: 648). Since then, few literary works have been so dissected, discussed and contested. This is a magnum opus from one of the greatest satirists in the English language, but it certainly doesn't offer easy answers. It is written like the typical travel book of the era, but instead of offering a relaxing escape from the real world, it brings us face to face with reality in all its complexity. Of the four books that make up the work, by far the most controversial was the last: "A Journey to the Houyhnhnms". In it, the narrator, Gulliver, is dropped off by mutineers on an island inhabited by two species. Yahoos are dirty, savage and barbaric, with no ability to reason. These miserable creatures physically resemble humans but immediately fill Gulliver with disgust. The Houyhnhnms, on the other hand, are a race of talking horses governed entirely by reason. They live a natural and simple life and use Yahoos for menial jobs. They are so honest that they cannot conceive of the concept of dishonesty. They consider Gulliver a precocious Yahoo and, after a few years, banish him from the island. Gulliver is heartbroken, having developed a love for these serene creatures and their way of life. He spent the rest of his life in England, trying to speak to horses and his fellow human beings "only with hatred, disgust and contempt." Until the 20th century, criticism of book four tended to equate Gulliver with Swift. Gulliver would rather jump from the ship that “saved” him than re-enter human society. He can't bear to look at his own reflection because of the resemblance it bears to the Yahoos. He considers himself unworthy even to kiss the hoof of his master Houyhnhnm. This deeply offended an England that viewed man as the pinnacle of creation and the paradigm of reason. Swift seemed to condemn humanity to a pointless and horrible existence, with no prospect of self-improvement or progress. Modern criticism, however, can be divided into two broad schools of thought regarding the extent to which Swift wished to present Houyhnhnm society as ideal. . James L. Clifford distinguishes between a “soft” approach and a “hard” approach (Lock, 1999). The approach one takes has an impact on one's entire notion of the book: on narrative technique, on genre and, above all, on the target of Swift's satire. The gentle approach, currently the more popular of the two, defends Swift. from his 18th century detractors by refuting the idea of ​​Swift as a hater. Expositors believe that there is a clear distinction between Gulliver and Swift and that Swift is satirizing his narrator rather than speaking through him. Houyhnhnms are ironic devices that are not intended to be considered ideal. Likewise, the reader should not look down on Yahoos as Gulliver does, because Yahoos too are abstractions. Gulliver's behavior at the end is so absurd and stupid that all the "insight" he has gained cannot be taken seriously. He considers the kind captainMendez is just another Yahoo, which makes it clearly unreliable, critics say. Moreover, the Houyhnhm company is, by modern standards, far from ideal. Houyhnhnms love all members of their race equally, but feel no romantic or sexual love. As extremely rational creatures, they consider it folly to mourn the death of a particular family member or friend. They reject everything that is unfamiliar to them. They exploit the Yahoos and procreate according to strict eugenic principles in order to create an inferior servant class. Their language is limited and their culture primitive. They seem distant, cold and bleak. George Orwell was particularly opposed to the Houyhnhnms, calling them walking corpses. He sees their society as the epitome of totalitarianism, where the attitude is "we already know everything, so why should dissenting opinions be tolerated?" » (Orwell, 1971: 353). This certainly couldn't be Swift's idea of ​​an ideal society, says the gentle school. The Houyhnhnms must be symbols of the rational element of man, and the Yahoos symbols of the appetitive and sensual qualities of man. Swift hated the deistic rationalism, popular in the 18th century, which relied on reason as the sole guide to belief and action. Thus Gulliver is satirized for his inability to find a balance between his humanity and his intellect. Crane summarizes the imputed morality: “Human nature is bad enough, but it is not totally hopeless; reason is a good thing, but a life of pure reason is not a desirable end for man.” This critical approach tends to consider Gulliver's Travels as a novel. Gulliver is a psychologically complex character and Swift uses him as a dramatic tool. This article seeks to reject the easy compromises of this approach in favor of the traditional “hard” school of thought. Gulliver's Travel's is a satire, and Gulliver, as a satirical device, does not have a personality of his own. Although it is dangerous to completely equate narrator and author, Gulliver and Swift share the same fundamental view of human nature. The difference, as R. Crane puts it, is simply "between a person who has just discovered a deeply disturbing truth about man and is considerably upset and one who has known this truth all his life and can therefore write calmly and humorously about the discovery of his hero. ". There is no indication anywhere that Swift himself did not believe the words he puts into the mouth of his hero. Readers have no other source than Gulliver, nor conflicting points of view between which decide. The ending of the book is not comic, but poignant. Gulliver, once so self-confident and proud of his species, suffered a tragic disillusionment which cleverly constitutes the climax of the entire work L. The idea that Gulliver's Travels actually despairs of the human condition is consistent with what is known about the author's statement that "primarily [he] hate[s] and loathe[s] this animal called man." (quoted in Columbia, 1993) is certainly quite unequivocal. Swift was an orthodox Christian and a conservative. His puritanical views led him to view man as "fallen", as intrinsically sinful and evil. he prelapsarian existence Unlike them, Adam and Eve were not content to live in blissful ignorance and caused man's misery by following their appetites rather than following their reason. Likewise, Gulliver's curiosity and thirst for adventure are the cause of all his troubles and his cruelty towards those he leaves behind. He was certainly not aA democrat, he hated lords and politicians but felt no better about the lower classes. To assert that Swift could not have sanctioned the exploitation of the Yahoos or the lower caste Houyhnhnms is to assume that Swift had modern values ​​such as liberty and equality. These values ​​resemble meliorism, which advocated the possibility of progress and improvement in society and which Swift rejected even in his time. We also know from another work, the Battle of the Books and the Journey to Glubdubbdrib in volume three, that Swift had great respect for the classic man. Although the ancient Greeks and Romans were still human, they were as noble, intact, and sane as man could be. The Houyhnhnm company is reminiscent of the Classique company in its simplicity. This fits particularly well with Plato's description of his ideal state in the Republic. In the Republic, everyone knows their place and their duties in society. Inferiors do not strive to be equal to their superiors, and superiors do not mistreat their inferiors. Children are educated only in mythology and physical fitness. The leaders have no private property or family, having given their children to the “community” at birth. Plato believed that only a few people possessed the ability to reason correctly, but that this ability was the most valuable. He was also suspicious of the written medium, which he considered imperfect and misleading. It seems that Swift specifically had Plato in mind when creating the Houyhnhnms. Plato did not believe that his ideal society would ever come into existence, and Swift probably believed it even less. But unlike the gentle school, which says a life of reason is unattainable and undesirable, Swift believed it was simply unattainable. Whether Swift presents Houyhnhnm society as perfect for humans is an almost superfluous question, because it will never arise. Rather, it is a foil to human society, a means of showing that we are not as rational as we think we are. Swift, in a letter to Pope, says that Gulliver's Travels aims to “prove the falsity of this definition of animal rationality; and to show that it should only be rationis capax” (quoted in Hogan, 1979: 648). By this he means that man has the capacity for some reason, but instead of using it to elevate himself, he uses it to increase his depravity. The uniquely human phenomenon of war, for example, so ridiculous when explained by Gulliver, requires some intelligence on the part of humans, but not much. Gulliver's sleeping quarters are literally halfway between the Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms, and this becomes a metaphor for the paradoxical state of man. Swift includes sympathetic characters like Captain Mendez in the book to drive home the point that he is referring to all humans, including the reader who may imagine themselves exempt. Perhaps this is why readers are so eager to soften the message of Gulliver's Travels because they want to turn the harsh gaze of its satire away from themselves. This is certainly the reason why the work has become a popular children's tale. The idea that we are all Yahoos for life worries people as much today as it did almost three centuries ago. Then there are the numerous references to excrement, which becomes the symbol of man's filth. When the Yahoos first see Gulliver, they defecate on his head, whereas Swift's ideal being, the horse, has particularly harmless feces and lives cleanly. This ties in with the contrast between the Yahoo regime and the Houyhnhnm regime. Gulliver can't live on the monotonous diet,.