Vexation and Diversion: Three Problems in Gullivers Travels - Book Report/Review Example

Literature is, undoubtedly, a social commentary whereby most, if not all, works therein withstand societal interpretation whether in the constructs of society presented or in their selective positioning of protagonists and characters vis--vis society. It is within the parameters of the stated that Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels and Henry Fielding's Joseph Andrews, are best appreciated and most accurately understood. Both works, as shall be argued, undertake a brutal deconstruction of human society with the explicated purpose of illustrating the extent to which the perversion of norms and nature have culminated in the isolation of man from his own social setting and, in the case of Gulliver, from his own human persona and self. Critics have unanimously acknowledged Joseph Andrews and Gulliver's Travels to be social satires, whose primary intention was the exposure of English social foibles, eccentricities and hypocrisies. Frank (1994), a literary scholar, notes that the society, as presented in Joseph Andrews, is inarguably reflective of the author's contemporaneous English society and social relations, with the canonical authorial tone employed throughout intended to expose and highlight the stated society's comical hypocrisy and pervasive superficiality, hidden beneath a very thin veneer of sophistication, tradition, custom and religiosity. While the above stated interpretation may sound unduly harsh, especially in consideration of the quasi-comical storyline, Cruise (1987) and Baker (1968) concede to it, with the latter drawing attention to the theme of false versus genuine virtue as supporting evidence. In line with the stated interpretation, the society presented within Joseph Andrews emerges as a fundamentally flawed one; a society inherently devoted to the maintenance of the superficiality of the seeming' versus the authenticity of the being.' Nowhere is the stated more evident than in Fielding's portrayal of parson Adams. Parson Adam's character exposes the fact that one of the main themes of Joseph Andrews is the search for true virtue. The novel has numerous other parsons besides Abraham Adams, all of whom are successful, inspire the respect of the community and are generally held in high esteem because they are popularly regarded as virtuous men. In direct comparison, Abraham Adams' outer appearance, with his shoddy clothes and his comical demeanor, is the very opposite of respectable. Within the context of a society which judges men on the basis of seeming/appearance, rather than being, Adams is thus cast aside and disregarded as a comical and inconsequential character. The society within which Adams exists effectively rejects him on the basis of his outer appearance while he, himself, eschews the norms of that society and does not make the effort to integrate. As such, not only is Adams marginalized by that society but he actively participates in his own marginalization. To his extent, he is distinguished from his society, not just by his appearance but by his apparent disinterest in integration. Adams is not only distinguished from his society by the factors outlined in the above but, according to Frank (1994) by his poverty. Within the parameters of a society which refuses to acknowledge the existence of poverty and when confronted with it, perceives of the poor in terms of negative stereotypes pertaining to their laziness and unwillingness to apply themselves to an honest living, Parson Adams emerges as an unwelcome anomaly. His poverty is not only a distinguishing characteristic with an undeniable outer manifestation but, as projected by Fielding, is a socially intolerable phenomenon which has predetermined his marginalization (Frank, 1994). From within the bounds of the above interpretation, Parson Adams functions as more than an anomaly or an outsider who just refuses to go away; he functions to expose the hypocrisy of the society presented within the pages of this novel and from a wider perspective, which pervades throughout England. It is society, as portrayed by Fielding, which functions solely on the basis of appearance and which, accordingly, is rendered incapable of judging the false from the genuine or differentiating between being virtuous and seeming virtuous. Therefore, even as the other religious figures in the novel are respected for their outer manifestations of virtue and religiosity, despite all evidence to the contrary, Parson Adams' true virtue, expressed in his resistance of material temptation, his loyalty, his repeated acts of true Christian charity and his sufferance of the ridicule of others, go unrecognized and unappreciated. As such and from within the framework of a comical satire, Fielding launches an unrelenting critique of English society, demonstrating how the hypocrisy which pervades throughout the social construct has determined the alienation of one who possesses true virtue while ensuring the embrace and respect of those who do not. As one turns to Gulliver's Travels one finds that it is an equally unforgiving critique of English society, despite its supposed fictional setting. As Corder (1961) observes, numerous critics, not to mention readers, have resisted interpretation of Gulliver's Travels as a satirical representation of English society and norms, preferring instead to interpret the work as an expose of human nature. While the former is undoubtedly valid, Corder (1961) maintains that the societies presented therein are England, in all its manifestations, and not a string of fictional lands, despite "the illusion of travel" (Corder, 1961, p. 98). Evidencing the agued, Corder (1961) points to the remarkable similarities which exist between the Houyhnhnms' social construct and the values of rationality which pervade therein and that which exist within the confines of English breeding farms, or the Lilliputians and English politics, government and social hierarchy (Corder, 1961). Gulliver, from within the context of this interpretive perspective, is traveling within English and across English social values and norms. In other words, and despite superficial appearances to the contrary, Gulliver's Travels is as much a critique of England and the English social construct as is Joseph Andrews. Within the parameters of Gulliver's Travel, English society is not only devoted to pretentious hypocrisy and confined within the stifling boundaries of nonsensical social norms, ideals, value judgments and a stringent hierarchical order but its inherently flawed nature lends to the articulation of an ideal which, far from being a Utopia, is exposed s nothing less than a dystopia. As Brady (1979) observes, the majority of readers may have find difficulty in comprehending the correlation between English society and, for example, the land of the Lilliputians but that does not negate the remarkable correspondence between the two. The six inch Lilliputians, with their air of pompous superiority, their devotion to frivolity and their ridiculous intrepidity can hardly be distinguished from many of those who have attained positions of social or political authority, whether by accident of birth or circumstance and certainly cannot be argued as distinct in their behaviorisms from the majority of mankind. In fact, as Brady (1978) continues, were one to engage with the text, one would conclude that the Lilliputians are not mythical or fictitious people but are Man and, according to Swift, Englishman as produced by the English social construct. By virtue of physical differentiation, Gulliver initially sees the Lilliputians as they truly are - small, petty people, trapped in their nonsensical norms and locked within the confines of their social order. Within the context of this understanding, Gulliver is n outsider; it is not his size which renders him such, as Rondino (1991) but his insight into the true nature of this people and his inability to correlate between his attitudes, opinions, beliefs and behaviorisms and theirs. When he looses that critical insight, and objectivity is replaced by subjectivity borne out of a growing, and grudging admiration, his outsider status remains, nevertheless, as is because of size differentials. He becomes a rejectee, instead of rejecter (Rondino, 1991). In other words, whether by virtue of insight or size, Gulliver cannot integrate and, thus, continues his travels. In analysis the rationale behind the continuation of the travels, Corder (1961) argues that Gulliver's continued wandering from one place to another, from one societal alternative to the next, is representative of an inner desire to find himself and to find a home, as in a place where he belongs. The variant societies which he travels to, and lives in, do not fulfill that yearning for home because he ultimately belongs in none of them, whether because of his understanding of the reality of that society or because its rejection of him consequent to physical differentials (Corder, 1961). Within the context of this interpretation, Gulliver's travels are indicative of an inner yearning for acceptance and for a sense of communal belonging. That sense of communal belonging, the desire to integrate and become a part of a larger whole, escapes Gulliver, even when he arrives at a classically English ideal of a utopia, the land of he Houyhnhnms. To all intents and purposes, this is a land government by rationality, justice, equality and benevolence. To an outsider, like Gulliver, it is the quintessential utopia and his admiration and fascination with the functioning of this land and the behaviorism of the Houyhnhnms even lends to his perception of them as physically, not just morally and spiritually, beautiful (Nichols, 1981). However, the referenced admiration is that of an outsider and primarily motivated by the desire to attain that sense of community and belonging which pervades among the Houyhnhnms and, is not, as Nichols (1991) emphasizes the product of an objective evolution of the stated society. Within the context of the stated and primarily due to the fact hat he wants to belong, Gulliver is rendered incapable of recognizing the dystopian nature of this community, even when it ultimately rejects him due to physical differentiation. As may be deduced from the above analysis, Gulliver is the quintessential outsider; a man fundamentally incapable of, not simply finding a home and feeling that sense of communal belonging which he strives for, but of finding himself. It is, thus, that the novel concludes with his quasi-insane alienation from his own self and his own skin. His perennial feelings of alienation from society and those with whom he comes into contact with, compounded with their own rejection of him, have culminated in an alienation from the self (Fox, 1986). This is perfectly illustrated when, in Book IV, he sees a reflection of himself in the water and faints with horror at his own image and again, when after his long absence, he faints with disgust at his wife's embrace. Gulliver, as Swift seems to argue, has become insane but his insanity is the consequence of the fundamentally flawed nature of the social construct that is 18th century England. Gulliver's inability to identify with that society and those within it ultimately lead to irrevocable self-alienation. As may be determined from the foregoing analysis, both works comprise unrelenting criticisms of English society. While they may be couched in satirical, somewhat comical terms, the referenced criticisms aim towards, not the dissection of English society but, its deconstruction. Within the context of such societies, men incapable of hypocrisy, such as Gulliver or Parson Adams, can never attain belonging and are doomed to live the life of perennial outsiders. Bibliography Baker, S. (1968). Fielding and the irony of form.' Eighteenth Century Studies. 2(2), 138-154. Brady, F. (1978). Vexation and diversion: Three problems in Gulliver's Travels.' Modern Philology. 75(4), 346-367. Corder, J. (1961). Gulliver in England.' College English. 23(2), 98-103. Cruise, J. (1987). Fielding, authority, and the new commercialism in Joseph Andrews,' ELH. 54(2), 253-276. Fielding, H. (1742, 1982) The History of the Adventures of Joseph Andrews and of His Friend Mr. Abraham Adams. London: Penguin Classics. Fox, C. (1986). The myth of narcissus in Swift's travels.' Eighteenth Century Studies. 20(1), 17-33. Frank, J. (1994). The comic novel and the poor: Fielding's preface to Joseph Andrews.' Eighteenth Century Studies. 27(2), 217-234. Nichols, M.P (1981). Rationality and community: Swift's criticism of the Houyhnhnms.' The Journal of Politics. 43(4), 1153-1169. Rondino, R.H. (1991). Splendide mendax: Authors, characters, and readers in Gulliver's Travels.' PMLA. 106(5), 1054-1070. Swift, J. (1726, 1987). Gulliver's Travels. London: Penguin Classics. Read More