Alex
A Modest Proposal
Posted on: 04/19/2010 16:09
In Junior High I had to read
|
|
| For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public
|
| By Jonathan Swift (1729) |
After reading certain responses to GIA, as well as responses to Sarah Silverman's video on the Vatican, I am begining to think others have not read it.
Satire is often used to bring to light social injustice.
Yes social injustice, murder, rape, and slavery are not funny. However satire is often a good way at pointing out social ills, and dangerous ideas. Just look at John Stewarts take on Glenn Beck.
Search
Recently Active...
Comments
Alex
Posted on: 04/19/2010 16:12
It is a melancholy object to those who walk through this great town or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads, and cabin doors, crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags and importuning every passenger for an alms. These mothers, instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in strolling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants: who as they grow up either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes.
I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection.
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.
I do therefore humbly offer it to public consideration that of the hundred and twenty thousand children already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one-fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle or swine; and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore one male will be sufficient to serve four females. That the remaining hundred thousand may, at a year old, be offered in the sale to the persons of quality and fortune through the kingdom; always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends; and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.
I have reckoned upon a medium that a child just born will weigh 12 pounds, and in a solar year, if tolerably nursed, increaseth to 28 pounds.
I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.
jesouhaite777
Posted on: 04/19/2010 16:41
Dude do you ever talk about happy stuff ?
seeler
Posted on: 04/19/2010 16:42
I do remember reading a Modest Proposal when in school (or college). I hadn't thought of it for quite some time though.
GordW
Posted on: 04/19/2010 17:21
I love Swift's essay.
GIA/DL doesn't come close. Besides I think he/she might mean it!
Alex
Posted on: 04/19/2010 17:53
Swift is better writer for sure. However, GIA brought to our attention how the current system results in great evil. Like the thousands who died today due to malnutrition.
Plus it was so absurd, it had to be satire.
SG
Posted on: 04/19/2010 17:57
Alex,
I think that for parody or satire to have weight or meaning it has to be known to be satire or parody. If SNL does a skit, it is known to be satire and parody. If 20/20 does it is not so clear. If it is 20/20 and seems real, then it is perceived real and the satire and parody is lost.
Jonathon Swift, under his psuedonyms, was known for essays, political stuff and lo and behold satire. So, Jonathon Swift taking about eating their children or selling them to the rich folks made fun of British authority and people knew that.
GIA is quite different, in that there is no claim to satire or parody. There is also no craft and no continuity.
There are times it is 20/20 and times it is SNL and times it Swift and then Cronkite. So, what is it?
It is argued like it is a genuinely held belief. Now, one might think GIA is trying to beat the lengths Swift went to to support the argument or even beat Swift at sustained irony and though one might want to think so, GIA is no Swift.
It is a piss poor knock off at best.
If Swift had not written an essay that people could use for kindling and he had logged on and typed and people had said, "You cannot be serious about eating the children?" or "I am scared my mum or dad is gonna sell me" would Swift have kept it up? We cannot know.
GIA stays true to form and never claims satire or parody. Always the thorn. Is it because the prick is to jostle you or is it to draw blood? Who knows. After years of the same garbage the routine is old and tired. So, by now I no longer say "who knows", I instead say "who cares"
What I do know is that if people had eaten there children based on Swift only being capable of bad satire that instead sounded like a genuine belief, it would not be looked upon so highly. I also love the Onion and the Landover Baptist Church website. It is only good because it is rather obviously satire and parody and well done or it would look to close to Westboro Baptist Church.
GIA's failure to convey whether something is satire/parody or just drivel is not our responsibility. It is GIA's IMO
If GIA chooses not to own up to poor satire and poor parody, then the chips fall where they may. The same as if the very well done Landover Baptist insisted they were actually this type of Baptist and they had their site taken down for insisting it was all true.
My wondermail to admin was "GIA needed to name it" whatever it was.
Alex
Posted on: 04/19/2010 18:54
Alex,
GIA is quite different, in that there is no claim to satire or parody. There is also no craft and no continuity.
I always thought most of what he wrote was a parody or satire. Especially his legalistic questions/posts which I thought were making fun of of the Sadducees. Who else asked such detailed legalistic questions, that had nothing to do with real life.
I sensed in his legalistic post a lot of anger towards religion, so you are correct in saying that there was no continuity, and it did make it hard to distinguish what was what.
For that reason too I believed he was from Ottawa and was a retired angry civil servant.