Swift’s Gulliver’s Journeys and Orwell’s 1984
Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Journeys and George Orwell’s 1984, two of English literature’s crucial and prevalent political criticisms, have assisted to mold world viewpoint by offering new perspectives and mindsets, yet these two books differ in their means of communicating their satire of human nature. Whereas Gulliver’s Journeys touches mankind with a humorous note and ridiculous scenarios, in order to reveal the public’s hypocrisy and society’s reprehensible behavior, 1984, in contrast to Gulliver’s Journeys, provides depressing and dismal scenarios which forebode a heinous future and threaten human existence.
On his mission to reveal the inconsistencies and follies of mankind, Swift initially offers the readers an opportunity to make fun of themselves (disguised as a Lilliputians), yet later, the readers discover these funny representations underscored with scorching and extreme social and ethical satire. Observing the Lilliputians battle for power in the little wars that they fight, Gulliver laughs at what he thinks about a joke, however in reality he laughs at human beings and their minor disputes in addition to their fascinations. There is a good deal of fun in Lilliput, and with Gulliver we have the ability to assume a particular exceptional detachment and amusement at the ways of the pigmies” (Davis 86). Another circumstances of home entertainment for the onlooker and reader happens when the Emperor of Lilliput attempts to dominate the whole “world” (clearly not cognizant of a world much bigger than his Lilliputo-centric sphere), and to overtake the navy of his mortal opponent.
Still laughing and unsuspecting, Gulliver initially follows blindly during his stay, and completes all the tasks appointed to him, for he thinks in the goodness of the princes. Not up until Gulliver’s disillusionment with the iniquity of the princes and emperor, and hence with people, does he decline to follow orders. These preliminary feelings of blind trust appear comparable to the party members’ unquestionable commitment towards Big Brother in the novel 1984.
At the moment that the Emperor of Lilliput accuses Gulliver of treachery, Swift clarifies his satire, that the Lilliputians simply represent mini people. (Davis 87). Words, then, that the Emperor and his personnel had actually previously utilized, such as “degenerate nature of man, the great laws of nature, the torments of human life” break the mold of the Lilliputian world and use universally to the state of all humans (Davis 90). This short-lived humorous storytelling, provides a glance at the supreme misanthropic messages and subtleties, which underlie the book.
Because Swift’s work acts as what he hopes will become a corrective lens to the world, Gulliver’s eye glasses likewise serve as a sign of the ability to understand the real nature of people. In addition, these glasses depict “secrecy, personal privacy, ownership, identity” (Rogers 179). When he relinquishes all of his other personal ownerships, he does not give up his eyeglasses to the Lilliputians. Gulliver represents the “‘myopic hero’ whose lack of understanding is signified by the weak point and vulnerability of his vision. (Rogers 183). These glasses genuinely serve as correcting lenses and add to the “skills” of the lead character, as an observer. Basically, Gulliver metaphorically uses his glasses more frequently as the 4 books development. The recurrence of the word observe shows this increase. “The word observe and its derivatives happen some 140 times in the work: the frequency increases progressively from twenty-five in the very first trip, thirty-four in the second, thirty-eight in the third, to forty-five in the forth” (Rogers 184).
Swift passes on all of the ideas and actions in the book by filtering them through Gulliver’s affective senses and mind. In truth, Swift explains much of the episodes and” the narrative through sense impressions; passages are introduced with verbs suggesting Gulliver’s awareness of what is happening to himE ‘I discovered my Arms and LegsE/I likewise feltE/I heard a confused Noise/I felt,'” and so on (Rogers 185). What first appears as acceptable and well-taken criticism, later degenerates into severe, eremitic, and misanthropic subliminal messages.
While on a last voyage, Gulliver checks out the land of the Houyhnhnms. There, he finds horses that represent animal perfection incarnate. These exceptional creatures posses extraordinary moral and intellectual abilities, which dwarf human beings. Humans end up being Yahoos, wild animals doing not have all and any ability to possess any idea past those of their own corporeal requirements. Plainly, for the purposes of paradox, Swift inverts nature: Men end up being monsters, and beasts end up being men. Swift swapped the positions of reasoning and reason in between the people and the horses in order to “stun his reader’s omplacency as humans by inventing a world in which horses appeared where the logicians had actually put menE” (“Jonathan Swift” 518). This realization calls for introspection, on the part of the reader. In result, the beautiful immaculateness of the Houyhnhnms mesmerizes Gulliver, and like 1984’s brainwashing, represented by the dictum “He loved Huge Brother” Gulliver’s motto basically ends up being “I love the Houyhnhnms.” (Donoghue 161). These fascinations both appear at the ends of their respective books, after strenuous trials and discoveries of human nature and human frailties.
However, the 2 mindsets vary because Gulliver’s integrates anti-human propensities, while Winston Smith’s includes a more positive love and commitment for the common and human-like Big Sibling. Upon Gulliver’s first meeting with Yahoos, he refers to them utilizing pejorative terms such as “unpleasant, unsightly monster, disagreeable, distorted, filth, cursed, mischief, contempt, hostility, antipathy.” When Gulliver recounts his memories at the end of the unique, these adjectives and their synonyms incessantly precede the word Yahoo, which indicates his absolute loathing of these monsters.
Prior to having actually fulfilled the admirable Houyhnhnms, Gulliver reveals his disgust with the Yahoos. One can not assist the manner in which the Yahoos act, they remain in the wild, and they mirror human action, a conclusion on the part of the reader, as Jonathan Swift plainly planned. The monkey-like habits appalls happy Gulliver. Proud Gulliver doesn’t consider the disgusting animals to be comparable to himself, and continues looking for civilized animals. Gulliver gives quite a various portrait he had actually provided of the “noble” Houyhnhnms upon fulfilling them for the first time (McNeill Internet). “Yahoos are the natural end of the satirically developed human line.
Their extremely beastliness conforms to the bigger regressive inheritance of the Travels” (Seidel 80). Having successfully turned the tables of reason, Swift then reveals that the Yahoos represent the humans who have actually ended up being the subject of this ever increasing and progressively degrading satire. Upon very first conference the horses/Houyhnhnms, Gulliver explains them as “walking softlyEmanifestE mildEnever providing the least violence.” These terms associate a mindful and benign care, beyond animalistic and instinctual vigilance, to the Houyhnhnms and uses an excellent and incredible aura which surrounds these animals.
This first encounter sets the phase for later enchantment of the mind and soul of Lemuel Gulliver and what he thinks about spectacular paradigms of perfection. After finding out the Houyhnhnm language and adapting to their culture, a total change occurs within Gulliver; upon returning house to England, he ends up being a misanthrope. In order to safeguard his book, Gulliver’s statement refers to the Houyhnhnms as animals who “abound in all excellenciesE a logical creature.” Like animals which people can recognize by their smells, Gulliver corresponds human beings with monsters, using olfactory images, such as the “offensive smell” of the Yahoos.
Swift couples all of his recommendations to the Yahoos and humankind with derisive adjectives and later starts to describe members of his own household and society as Yahoo’s, culminating in the complete indictment of society. “Next-door neighbor Yahoo” means all individuals with “detestable qualities” and their “offending smell” metaphorically represents all of their abhorrent qualities. In Gulliver’s Journeys the Houyhnhnms are superior to guy because they have accomplished this harmonyEFrom our viewpoint, it is done by eliminating the reasons for discord: in Swifts see these are primarily man’s conceit and pride (Donoghue 171).
A when humorous parody has actually ended up being a blistering commentary on the nature of human beings and conveys the message that humankind includes filthy, greedy, pain in the neck, and irrational beings, whom conceit and self-importance dominate. While Swift scrutinizes the nature of human beings through an unreasonable, yet forceful analysis, George Orwell’s 1984, offers a viewpoint that includes a possible society that human beings could develop as an outcome of their frailties and drawbacks.
Initially, Orwell provides a more horrific and menacing representation of the future which right away starts when the author christens the lead character and describes his apartment or condo. Mainly, Orwell plans this book of severe caution to apply to the common individual on the street, and, as a result, he effectively gives Winston the common English last name, Smith, therefore producing a symbol for the generic “everyman.” Having generalized his function, Orwell then proceeds to describe the depressing appearance of Winston’s apartment or condo.
As Winston Smith comes home for lunch from his officeEwe are first of all familiar with the depressing seediness of things– the “gritty dust” in the street, the smell of “boiled cabbage and old rag mats” in the corridor, the elevator that hardly ever works since electricity must be saved (Schorer 300). In addition to the cold and bare environments and the unwelcoming atmosphere, the circumstances and conditions of a totalitarian state, wracked with consistent food and supply lacks, have callused Winston. His skin has actually been “roughened by coarse soap and blunt razor blades,” with the persistent annoyance of the “varicose ulcer. (Schorer 300). The degeneration of his physical condition foreshadows his later mental disintegration. In contrast to Gulliver’s experience in lands of abundance, where either Lilliputians or Houyhnhnms addressed his every need and to his cravings for food and beverage (a rather hedonistic presence), Winston experiences a “intense cold day in April.” Archetypally, April, a spring season, representing renewal, freshness, and fertility clashes, paradoxically, with, with the plain, winter-like conditions of the city spoiled with the “repellent wind. All of these words, “cold, vile, escape,” appear to provide an inescapable barren environment, particularly as Winston tries to run inside without any of the dirt holding on to him. Unfortunately, he fails, for an eddy of “gritty dust,” reminiscent of the outside world and a pointer of insecurity and the failure to stay in solitude, handles to follow him and coat his garments. Swift, like Orwell, uses sensations and sensual understandings to interact the mood. Just as Swift stimulates environment and setting through what Gulliver feels, hears, tastes, touches and observes, Orwell’s “gritty dust” nd “cold” day, and itching “varicose ulcer” communicate his discomfiture and seclusion. Foreshadowing Winston’s possible fate, the first paragraphs provide an action-packed, detailed and total setting, while in Gulliver’s Travels, Swift allows himself much time to develop attitudes and feelings. 1984 does not carefully move the reader, rather Orwell’s rhetorical method immediately includes the scary and shock appeal. Orwell’s function of outrightedly writing a scary story of a tyrannical country, with virtually no civil liberties, requires the reader to remember the story and styles, as troubling as they may be.
Swift likewise uses this shock appeal, for the function of memorablility, when he switches the locations of humans and monsters in nature, and the audience flinches in shame at the awareness of their follies and misbehavior. Suitable research into George Orwell’s life, sound acknowledgment, in addition to a word-association game offer possible descriptions of the odd term “memory hole.” Mostly, if these holes satisfied of disposal of garbage, then the authorities would not have called them “memory holes,” an apparent contradiction.
Beyond this spoken paradox lies the basis of choice, that the womb represents a place and location of destruction, mayhem, and turmoil, a main style in Orwell’s work. “Memory” sounds extremely similar to mammary, already pointing towards the womb as a location of damage. “Mem” of memory, in the Anglo-Indian dialect, of which Orwell was cognizant, while maturing in India, indicates “girl.” When joined with the reality that the “space” in “space 101” rhymes with womb, and that “101” indicates the beginning of all things and knowing, Space 101 functioning as a location of abuse heightens Orwell’s horrific message. It is a room listed below ground in the center of a white, windowless pyramid named the Ministry of Love– female meaning can rarely go further than that.” Orwell suggests that Space 101 is “an unconscious symbol for the uterus” (Kornbluth 309). Like Swift and his glasses, Orwell makes use of a typical object, a room in this case, in Winston’s life, to represent and convey the theme of inner and external turmoil of both now and the world to come. Artificiality of mind and spirit ends up being a large subject that Orwell deals with in 1984. It is not just food, gin, and cigarettes that are ersatz in the “utopia” Orwell unfolds before us.
The language of Oceania, too, is thoroughly fake; it is intentionally created to hide truth wherever possible, to misshape it (Harris 307). The gin and cigarettes that Orwell explains are hardly tasteful and of the coarsest quality so that calling them their generic item names needs exaggeration. Newspeak, the language of Oceania, in and of itself, is the epitome of phoniness. Naturally fundamental with paradoxes such as “War is Peace,” “Flexibility is Slavery” and “Lack of knowledge is Strength,” this mode of interaction incorporates one objective: to remove all capability for initial, imaginative, and for that reason possible heretical thought.
Newspeak in [sic] a system devoted to the elimination of totally free thought; as the range of vocabulary, and hence significance, is restricted, the ability to form and communicate ideas is significantly and proportionately decreased. Newspeak, when used solely, appears as a block of inanimate, monotonous reasoning (Using LanguageE, Web). Newspeak consists of words “actively inert, simplistic in structure, fatal in restriction.” This “staccato” sounding language bridles any type of feeling with its limited vocabulary, turning individuals into mere robots (Using LanguageE, Web).
The sounds that the characters and animals given off, in both novels, helped identify the attitudes of the readers and protagonists towards the other characters. Whereas Orwell uses the Newspeak language, one which integrates abbreviations and a system of speech that ends up being hardly identifiable to the everyday human being as a significance of the mindlessness of society, Swift compares the neighing of the Houyhnhnms to a tune, representative of rationality, although he does not at first comprehend the Houyhnhnm tongue.
Such oxymorons as Minitru (Ministry of Truth), Miniluv (Ministry of Love), Miniplenty (Ministry of Plenty), and Minipax (Ministry of Peace), names of the departments of Ingsoc, the federal government system of Oceania, prove the inconsistencies of the language with their own names. Minitru produced lies, while Miniluv performed abuse; Miniplenty consistently had to deal with rationing and scarcities, and Minipax was continuously fighting wars. These paradoxes convey the message that the world to come, ridden with doublethink and Newspeak, will fall victim to a hellish atmosphere without any acceptable mindful idea.
While Swift uses a satire of the world of what currently is, he inverts the planet so that the animals have the brains and the human beings end up being the meaningless Yahoos; Orwell offers a vision of what the world will become, when humankind loses all of its innovative intelligence. Both authors discuss society and the frailty of the human race, one through ridiculous humor, the other through tomb and major suggestion, and both through shock appeal. Sensuous images and language communicate their particular characterizations of the human condition. Both visions remain effective, often afraid, but constantly believed provoking.
Works Cited Davis, Herbert. The Satire of Jonathan Swift. Glenwood Press, Publishers: Westport, 1947. Donoghue, Denis. Jonathan Swift: A Crucial Introduction. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1969. Harris, Harold J. “Orwell’s Essay’s and ‘1984’.” Twentieth Century Literature 4 (1959 ): 154-161. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Dennis Poupard and James E. Individual, Jr. Detroit: Wind Research Study Business, 1985. 306-307. Kornbluth, C. M. “The Failure of the Science Fiction Novel As Social Criticism.” The Sci-fi Novel: Creativity and Social Criticism. 1969): 64-101. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Dennis Poupard and James E. Individual, Jr. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 1985. 307-309. “Jonathan Swift.” British Authors: 1660-1800. Ed. Martin C. Battestin. Detroit: Gale Research Study Business, 1985. 512-523 McNeil, John Dylan. “Our Fallen Tongue”: Jonathan Swift’s Indictment of Mankind in Part IV of Gulliver’s Journeys, “A Trip To the Nation of the Houyhnhnms” found @ http://www. ecn. bgu. edu/users/cujdm1/ swift. htm Rogers, Pat. “Gulliver’s Glasses.” The Art of Jonathan Swift. Ed. Clive T. Probyn.
London: Vision Press, 1978. 179-187. Schorer, Mark. “An Upset and Prophetic Novel.” The New York Times Book Review. 12 June (1949) 1,16. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Dennis Poupard and James E. Individual, Jr. Detroit: Wind Research Study Company, 1985. 300-301. Seidel, Michael. “Odd Dispositions: Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels.” Critical Essays on Jonathan Swift. Ed. Frank Palmeri. New York: G. K. Hall & & Co., 1993. 75-89. “The use of language in A Clockwork Orange and Nineteen Eighty-Four found @ http://kevorkian. suicide. org/dialect. html