The classical satire “A modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift has had major controversy since its creation in 1729. The piece is set to make people see the economic and political happenings of Ireland during that time period. While this is the surface, it also deals with many more issues such as religion, class and racial boundaries. It does this by putting out the idea of not only cannibalism, but also dehumanization and selective reproduction, essentially Eugenics. The modest proposal, in simple terms is the use of children as a commodity to help not only the poor, but the rest of the community. The commodification is the use of every part of the child, leaving nothing to waste. Now we can see how in doing this we could come to question the
…show more content…
They had many attempts of trying to silence him they even offered a reward to anyone who would turn in the true satirist behind the story. Jonathan Swift had published it under a pseudonym just as he did for many of his other works and even those who knew that he wrote it did not turn him in. All of this came as no surprise because he was criticizing English rule in Ireland. One individual that responded to Swift’s satire was his friend “Lord Bathurst” he wrote a letter that used similar tactics to “A Modest Proposal” in his letter Lord Bathurst “jokingly agreed with Swift 's proposal, deciding that it would be beneficial for his own family of nine children” (Amy Lindquist, Shiselle Lopez, Kathryn Kummer). This article did not seem to display whether or not they agreed with Swift, they seem to have taken a neutral stance on the matter and stating nothing more than the facts of Swifts life and how someone else reacted (Lord Bathurst) to the satirical …show more content…
Truth Forest, went on to ask if they have ever read the book, and if it was terrible. In asking the question the way ‘Truth Forest’ did made me think maybe they took the satire seriously. Why ask if it was terrible? It made me question their understanding of the piece. As did one other blogger “It is an incredible example of stretching a ridiculous concept to it’s absolute limits while maintain such a deadpan stance that many actually felt he was serious at the time (and judging by Truth Forest’s post, some still do)” (Posted by Xamonas Chegwe). Many of the responses seem to coincide with the truth of the satire that it meant as just that, a satire. In this particular forum there was very little disagreement, while some felt that the piece boarder “hysteria” others felt the “latter half” of the piece “lacks the controlled and devastating savagery of the first half” (Posted by The Unnamable). Which implied to me and some other bloggers that they didn’t quite understand that in the second half he proposes a more realistic solution and at the same time takes a more direct approach to display the issues in Ireland. None of these bloggers seemed to be ignorant of the satires purpose, they seemed to comprehend for the most part what/who was being targeted in the story. None of them mentioned that they
They had many attempts of trying to silence him they even offered a reward to anyone who would turn in the true satirist behind the story. Jonathan Swift had published it under a pseudonym just as he did for many of his other works and even those who knew that he wrote it did not turn him in. All of this came as no surprise because he was criticizing English rule in Ireland. One individual that responded to Swift’s satire was his friend “Lord Bathurst” he wrote a letter that used similar tactics to “A Modest Proposal” in his letter Lord Bathurst “jokingly agreed with Swift 's proposal, deciding that it would be beneficial for his own family of nine children” (Amy Lindquist, Shiselle Lopez, Kathryn Kummer). This article did not seem to display whether or not they agreed with Swift, they seem to have taken a neutral stance on the matter and stating nothing more than the facts of Swifts life and how someone else reacted (Lord Bathurst) to the satirical …show more content…
Truth Forest, went on to ask if they have ever read the book, and if it was terrible. In asking the question the way ‘Truth Forest’ did made me think maybe they took the satire seriously. Why ask if it was terrible? It made me question their understanding of the piece. As did one other blogger “It is an incredible example of stretching a ridiculous concept to it’s absolute limits while maintain such a deadpan stance that many actually felt he was serious at the time (and judging by Truth Forest’s post, some still do)” (Posted by Xamonas Chegwe). Many of the responses seem to coincide with the truth of the satire that it meant as just that, a satire. In this particular forum there was very little disagreement, while some felt that the piece boarder “hysteria” others felt the “latter half” of the piece “lacks the controlled and devastating savagery of the first half” (Posted by The Unnamable). Which implied to me and some other bloggers that they didn’t quite understand that in the second half he proposes a more realistic solution and at the same time takes a more direct approach to display the issues in Ireland. None of these bloggers seemed to be ignorant of the satires purpose, they seemed to comprehend for the most part what/who was being targeted in the story. None of them mentioned that they