Size as a Manifestation of Moral Rightness, Societal Indoctrination in Gulliver's Travels

In Gulliver's adventures to Lilliput and Brobdingnag he encounters wholly different sized people, but manages to become prisoner to both. The Lilliputians are diminutive, but manage to use cooperation and tools to tie him down and later chain him up; the Brobdingnagians only need their monstrous size to detain the now tiny Gulliver. Each race finds some utility in Gulliver's "unique" size, and it becomes interesting to see how each race treats Gulliver, given the power struggle inherent in their size differences. The relationship between Gulliver and each race, cast in comparison to his society back home, reveal the relative morality of each race - which we can ultimately see as satire and social commentary on the state of England at the time Swift wrote the novel.

As a captive of the Lilliputians, Gulliver must be careful to earn their trust in order to gain some freedoms in their society. However once he does so, they use him to attack the two factions that threaten their lifestyle. What's more is that Gulliver is forced to sign articles binding him to their servitude. These are laid out in formal language, ensuring a satirical read as each articles reinforces the difference in size between the Lilliputians and Gulliver and if he wanted to, he could easily ignore or refuse any. The relationship established between the Lilliputians and our traveling protagonist is first established as a physical difference, then highlighted as a societal one. Gulliver agrees to help the Lilliputians attack the harbor of Blefuscu in a nonviolent way; however he refuses to crush their society and reduce their people to servitude. It seems that the minuscule, rope-jumping, egg-cracking people of Lilliput are, despite the sometimes hilarious caricature of this size, are a viscously amoral race.

When Gulliver then travels to Brobdingnag and encounters a race of giants, a wholly different tone of morality takes hold of the novel. Once again, this relationship is born from a difference in size. Physically, Gulliver is to the Brobdingnagians as the Lilliputians were to Gulliver - a clever reflection of part 1 on the behalf of Swift. However, the ethical relationship between them is not exactly the inverse. Gulliver's toy-like dimensions make him a curiosity to the people of Brobdingnag, he becomes a sort of side-show attraction (akin to when he brought back miniature farm animals back to England between these two voyages). When Gulliver enters in discussion with the Emperor of Brobdingnag he offers up the modern invention of gunpowder to please him. This outrages the emperor and he questions why the invention would need a place in society. This confuses Gulliver, as he has been accustomed to its "utility" his whole life. Swift casts the Brobdinnagians as a simple people, but decidedly more ethical then the Lilliputians - at least not nearly as barbaric.

What really stands out to me is the idea of indoctrination set forth by Swift in these adventures. It seems that no matter how much time Gulliver spends with a race of foreign people, they can never meet eye-to-eye (physically, politically, or otherwise). Swift gives numerous examples of how this indoctrination almost literally blinds the people to think and act a certain way, and ignore all other possible alternatives. Reading this book is very much an exercise in opening ones eyes to more possibilities and scrutinizing the traditions of society.

Differences in Shoe Heels

Jonathan Swift’s political history as a pamphleteer with the Tories and Whigs during the early eighteenth century led him to write satire mocking government, religious beliefs, and anyone who didn’t share his same views on various topics. The reader is privy to Swift’s criticism of English government and society from the beginning of the story when Gulliver visits Lilliput. Gulliver is faced with the minute people, called Lilliputians, who he describes as little people with little ambition. Swift contrasts the noble actions of Gulliver with those of the unjust emperor by describing Gulliver as sparing the lives of the Lilliputians when the emperor’s palace catches on fire. He does not walk to the ocean for water, killing Lilliputians on the way, but instead pees on the palace to stifle the fire. The emperor does not view Gulliver’s acts as brave even though he saved the palace from burning to the ground and saves the lives of those inside.

Swift is also able to criticize the religious beliefs of both the Lilliputians and England as a whole in the first story by describing the election of ministers in Lilliput by physical standards, such as their ability to walk a tightrope or stick jumping. If they are able to consistently perform these physical tasks then their rank of minister is safe. After making a mockery of the religious qualifications of the ministry, he satirizes the ongoing religious war in England by referencing the war involving the people of Liliput and their neighbor, Blefuscu. His allusion between the “High Heels” and “Low Heels” to the political parties of the Whigs and Tories suggests to the reader that he views both wars as trivial and meaningless. The High Heels are compared to the conservative Tories and the Low Heels to the progressive Whigs. The names Swift uses, “High Heels and Low Heels” suggest the only difference in the two ideologies is the height of their heels. All of these underlying references are present in his first voyage and are a product of Swift’s personal unrest with the political parties of England during that time. He is illustrating the petty differences between the two parties, showing the Lilliputians as bickering over the size of their shoe heels, and going to war with their closest neighbors because of a disagreement over how to eat an egg. The different underlying cultural, political and religious references are frequent throughout Gulliver’s Travels, starting with his first visit to Lilliput.