Pass
Sara Tezel
Senior 12-2
Mrs. Wacker
27 October 2006
Please Pass the Children
Jonathan Swift’s essay “A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country” (The Art of Writing. Ed. Cosmo Ferrara. New York: Random House School Division, 1981. 155-170) employs savage irony to present its purpose. Written in 1729 to expose the tragic conditions of the lower classes, the proposal attempts to manipulate readers with its sense of ridicule and scorn. A plea for human reason and decency, the satire expresses his moral indignation of the attitudes of the upper class for the poor and subtly suggest their responsibilities to society and the nation.
In order to gain his readers’ attention, Swift begins the essay by communicating with the well-off at their, self-proclaimed, superior level. Supplying those born with a silver spoon in their mouth with an abundance of facts and authority figures, Swift tells the reader of his proposal to rid the crowded streets of Ireland of “beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an aims” (155), a problem with which the citizens of high class are both familiar and frustrated. He suggests that the young beggar children be eaten.
Swift cleverly writes to the upper class emphasizing the drast difference the privileged themselves have established between the have and the have nots. Supporting his proposal, he identifies numerous advantages that not only benefit the wealthy audience for whom he is writing, but also Ireland as a whole. He starts elaborating on his proposition subtly and begins by lightly suggesting the slaughter of beggar children will benefit all in Ireland.
The first positive of Swift’s plan to use beggar children as nourishment is the number of Catholics would greatly decrease. This appealed to the upper class because, being Protestants, the fact that “the number of Popish infants is at least three to one in [Ireland]” (158) would be appalling. Another advantage in his plan is that poorer tenants will having something valuable of their own. After the sale of their children, women will have money for rent, food, and clothing. Giving the poor the ability to buy would also help the shop owners who can only benefit from another customer.
While Swift seems dainty and innocent in his early attempts to persuade his readers to listen to his genius idea, he soon turns wicked and sharp. Dehumanizing the lower class to cause the privileged to disassociate themselves as much as possible is a wonderful technique Swift employs. He refers to the women as “breeders” (156) numerous times, describes a child as a mere “carcass” (158), and talks about cooking the children just “as we do [when] roasting pigs” (159). By emphasizing the gap between these two groups of people, Swift is actually trying to show the wealthy how they have treated the commoners as animals and how outdated their attitude is.
After graphically presenting his proposal and defending it, Swift subtly includes his actual solutions to improve the problem of poverty in Ireland. These ideas are simple deductions including: using only products produced in Ireland, selling their products to other countries, and teaching “landlords to have at least one degree of mercy toward their tenants” (163).
Brilliant in his technique, Swift words could grab a reader’s attention in 1729 as much as they do in common time. One may argue that Swift did too well of a job when using his verbal irony. While most of the people who read Swift’s article were of the upper crust, many were not properly educated. A person has to be careful not to be too passionate about the wrong part of their article because passion sticks. Swift uses too much enfaces on how “a child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends” (158) and not enough on the real, plausible solutions. People remember the first and last things they hear or read; the information that is read in the middle of an article is lost. Seeing this as the case people will only remember that this man, Jonathan Swift, suggested eating beggar children was good for their country and not that loving one’s country is key to its success. Because he opened his article with his bogus theory, he should have ended the commentary with the true solutions.
Jonathan Swift, a master of verbal irony, uses his talent with words to expose the injustice done to the working, or maybe more appropriately called begging, class. He uses vulgar “humor” to draw his readers in and attempts to leave them with his true intentions. Swift may fail at leaving his reader with the intended message, but his words are something the reader is sure not to soon forget.
Senior 12-2
Mrs. Wacker
27 October 2006
Please Pass the Children
Jonathan Swift’s essay “A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country” (The Art of Writing. Ed. Cosmo Ferrara. New York: Random House School Division, 1981. 155-170) employs savage irony to present its purpose. Written in 1729 to expose the tragic conditions of the lower classes, the proposal attempts to manipulate readers with its sense of ridicule and scorn. A plea for human reason and decency, the satire expresses his moral indignation of the attitudes of the upper class for the poor and subtly suggest their responsibilities to society and the nation.
In order to gain his readers’ attention, Swift begins the essay by communicating with the well-off at their, self-proclaimed, superior level. Supplying those born with a silver spoon in their mouth with an abundance of facts and authority figures, Swift tells the reader of his proposal to rid the crowded streets of Ireland of “beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an aims” (155), a problem with which the citizens of high class are both familiar and frustrated. He suggests that the young beggar children be eaten.
Swift cleverly writes to the upper class emphasizing the drast difference the privileged themselves have established between the have and the have nots. Supporting his proposal, he identifies numerous advantages that not only benefit the wealthy audience for whom he is writing, but also Ireland as a whole. He starts elaborating on his proposition subtly and begins by lightly suggesting the slaughter of beggar children will benefit all in Ireland.
The first positive of Swift’s plan to use beggar children as nourishment is the number of Catholics would greatly decrease. This appealed to the upper class because, being Protestants, the fact that “the number of Popish infants is at least three to one in [Ireland]” (158) would be appalling. Another advantage in his plan is that poorer tenants will having something valuable of their own. After the sale of their children, women will have money for rent, food, and clothing. Giving the poor the ability to buy would also help the shop owners who can only benefit from another customer.
While Swift seems dainty and innocent in his early attempts to persuade his readers to listen to his genius idea, he soon turns wicked and sharp. Dehumanizing the lower class to cause the privileged to disassociate themselves as much as possible is a wonderful technique Swift employs. He refers to the women as “breeders” (156) numerous times, describes a child as a mere “carcass” (158), and talks about cooking the children just “as we do [when] roasting pigs” (159). By emphasizing the gap between these two groups of people, Swift is actually trying to show the wealthy how they have treated the commoners as animals and how outdated their attitude is.
After graphically presenting his proposal and defending it, Swift subtly includes his actual solutions to improve the problem of poverty in Ireland. These ideas are simple deductions including: using only products produced in Ireland, selling their products to other countries, and teaching “landlords to have at least one degree of mercy toward their tenants” (163).
Brilliant in his technique, Swift words could grab a reader’s attention in 1729 as much as they do in common time. One may argue that Swift did too well of a job when using his verbal irony. While most of the people who read Swift’s article were of the upper crust, many were not properly educated. A person has to be careful not to be too passionate about the wrong part of their article because passion sticks. Swift uses too much enfaces on how “a child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends” (158) and not enough on the real, plausible solutions. People remember the first and last things they hear or read; the information that is read in the middle of an article is lost. Seeing this as the case people will only remember that this man, Jonathan Swift, suggested eating beggar children was good for their country and not that loving one’s country is key to its success. Because he opened his article with his bogus theory, he should have ended the commentary with the true solutions.
Jonathan Swift, a master of verbal irony, uses his talent with words to expose the injustice done to the working, or maybe more appropriately called begging, class. He uses vulgar “humor” to draw his readers in and attempts to leave them with his true intentions. Swift may fail at leaving his reader with the intended message, but his words are something the reader is sure not to soon forget.
posted by Stezie @ 12:54 AM
0 thoughts
