From another response thread on the blog:
Do they [the Houhynhnms] represent a virtuous society that humans should emulate, or is he satirizing them for being unemotional and naive? Gulliver praises the Houyhnhnms and wishes "they were in a capacity or disposition to send a sufficient number of their inhabitants for civilizing Europe" (392-3). Yet we also get a sense that they are somewhat naive, for the Houyhnhnms have no word for falseness and refer to it as "the thing which is not" (360). Also, Houyhnhnm family structure makes an impression on Gulliver, for they show "no fondness for their colts or foals" (377). Is their lack of emotion something that Swift presents as a contributing factor to a just society, or is he lampooning their naive outlook and lack of emotion?
Discuss!
Deadline: Wednesday (3/16), start of class.
19 comments:
In class, we discussed why Gulliver is so fond of the Houyhnhnms, and some people attributed it to survival instincts and the desire to fit in. But even if we can rationalize Gulliver's opinions about the Houyhnhnms, Swift provides several reasons for second guessing Gulliver's wish that the they "were in a capacity or disposition to send a sufficient number of their inhabitants for civilizing Europe" (392-3). An over reliance on reason may appear to be merely one of the Houyhnhnms idiosyncrasies, but later in the story, it has more problematic implications.
In Chapter 9, Gulliver describes a Houyhnhnm council meeting in which they debated whether to exterminate the Yahoos. Both sides of the issue offer arguments that are based on how inconvenient or useful the Yahoos are to the Houyhnhnms. Gulliver's master argues against extermination, but not out of compassion or for moral reasons, but because the Houyhnhnms have not sufficiently bred their donkey population to replace the Yahoos. Furthermore, he suggests sterilizing the Yahoos--a practice he learns about from Gulliver--in order to "put an end to the whole species without destroying life" (380). Houyhnhnm society may not be plagued by some of the criticisms Gulliver directs at English society, but it is also not a utopia.
Although the Houyhnhnms are rational, they generally use it to reaffirm their society's values. Gulliver mentions that their topics of discussion usually concern "friendship and benevolence, or order and economy...upon unerring rules of reason...and often upon the various excellencies of poetry" (383). Disagreement is discouraged in favor of affirming received values. Because each Houyhnhnm is overly concerned with "pleasing his companions," (383) expression and dissent are limited. This is not the kind of society that Kant would describe as enlightened, for it promotes conformity of thought. Swift shows that reason does not guarantee intellectual freedom and, although necessary, is not sufficient for a virtuous society.
To add to Dema's point:
- The sterilization of the Yahoos is also genocidal, the same vice that Gulliver criticises his fellow Europeans for at in Chapter 12. He says that these are "a few scruples with relation to the distributive justice of princes" (393) when one of the European powers discovers, meets with and subsequently murders and enslaves. Gulliver isn't being entirely consistent when he condemns the imperialistic behaviour of the Europeans (including an ironic jab at the British, "this description... by no means affect the British nation", p.393). He even considers what it might be like to for those people when he thinks that they "do not appear to have any desire of being conquered, and enslaved, murdered..." (393). The same argument can be applied to the Yahoos - they would not have any desire of being sterilized into extinction, so they should not be a proper object of such a practice.
- If you scan the footnotes you will find there are frequent references to Plato's Republic and Thomas More's Utopia. Both of these texts try to theorise what a perfect society might be like - for example, the indifference of the adults to the young is from Plato, the indifference to death is from Utopia and the Stoics (381) and the type of poetry that they compose is from Plato and Sparta (380). Perhaps Swift is doing something along the lines of what Haywood may have been doing with Fantomina - performing a thought experiment regarding what a society that actually followed Plato or More's ideas would actually be like. It is enough to dupe Gulliver, but the representation seems to suggest that this would be more inhuman than ideal. After all, it produces in Gulliver a profound misanthropy, a disgust for himself and for others of his own species. It separates him from his own nature and is therefore unnatural.
-While I agree with Shaun that the Houyhnhnms at first might seem to be a comparison to a Utopia, especially with all of the references to More's work and Plato, but in the end I agree with Dema that their society is not a Utopia.
That being said, I feel the Houyhnhnms society isn't something we should necessarily overanalyze. I read it as being merely a contrast to highlight various parts of European society in Swift's time. Their idea to sterilize the yahoos seems cruel, but then you realize that humans do the same thing to horses in modern day society. From this, we're supposed to draw comparisons. It's similar to the practice of the Orient: that is, the idea that western authors created a fictional world based on the East, and then used it as a yardstick to measure the West against. Many misrepresentations arose because of the idea of the Orient, and if we continue to overanalyze Houyhnhnms society, while we may not get stereotypes or misrepresentations, we may still get an idea that is vastly different from what Swift might've intended.
I wonder why Gulliver would want the Houyhnhnms to basically come and teach a how-to seminar on culture and society in Europe, when their values have only caused him to hate himself and other humans to the point where he refers to them all as Yahoos. I agree that Swift is satirizing the Houyhnhnms’ lack of emotion. Gulliver’s master doesn’t even soften his harsh criticism of Gulliver although he knows Gulliver has reason, and Gulliver obediently listens and believes, thinking his master “who daily convinced me of a thousand faults in myself, whereof I had not the least perception before” (371) shows him the truth. Even after the master agrees not to compare Gulliver to the odious Yahoos, he still refers to Gulliver as a servant and calls the two “brethren” (372), but Gulliver says not a word in protest. And when telling Gulliver to leave, the master says he would be content to have Gulliver stay because he had changed some of his habits “to imitate the Houyhnhnms” (384). The Houyhnhnms pick apart Gulliver’s lifestyle, clothing and intelligence and objectify him as much as possible. They agree to not refer to Gulliver as a Yahoo, and then convince him to see himself as one. So basically, I agree with Dema that the Houyhnhnms reinforce their own society’s values, refusing to rethink or question them. Instead it is easier for them to place Gulliver in their pre-molded notion of a Yahoo, rather then understanding him as a separate, rational being or species.
The Houyhnhnms civilization is purely rational; they lead a life governed by sense and moderation. There are traces of Plato’s Republic in the Houyhnhnms’ rejection of entertainment and displays of luxury, their appeal to reason rather than any religious writings as the criterion for proper action, and their communal approach to family planning. As in Plato’s ideal community, the Houyhnhnms have no need to lie or to have any word for lying. Essentially it seems like a utopia, but they lack vigor or challenge and their extreme rationality should not be considered human ideals at all. One example of their inhumanity is exhibited during their annual meeting one of them apologizes for being late to the meeting because her husband had died shortly before and she had to make the proper funeral arrangements. She then proceeds to eat her lunch like all other Houyhnhnms and is not affected at all by her loss, rationalizing that dead is dead and no emotional response is needed.
The Houhynhnms are both admired and satirized. Their honesty and generosity is to be admired by the reader and is admired by Gulliver. Their lack of affection for their colts and their continuously referring to Gulliver as a Yahoo despite the differences between men and yahoo's is meant, I think, to satirized the Houhynhnms. The country is full of interesting things and a complicated language and Gulliver does discuss the idea of sending some to Europe to civilize the place, but if they were sent to Europe no one would listen or be able to understand them, so while I think that some parts of the culture are praised others are made into a satire. The overall impression that Gulliver leaves us with is Satire mixed with respect. The satire is evident in their reaction to clothes and their inability to even comprehend a lie, or in their language “the thing which is not”. Throughout the chapter the Houhynhnms are unable to comprehend much but that which they do comprehend they are masters of. Because they are masters of that which they comprehend the Houhynhnms are to be admired and respected. Because of their lack of understanding many things they are to be made fun of.
I agree with my classmates that Houyhnhnms are rational creatures. I also agree that they exhibit a lack of emotion especially regarding the subject of death as Vivian previously mentioned on the blog. Unlike in Gulliver’s society, the Houyhnhnms hold a unique view about death. They accept it as a part of life and refuse to see it as depressing and mournful. Death is not dwelled upon either.
In Gulliver’s point of view, they exist in a Utopian society. He admires the simplicity and tranquility of it. The Houyhnhnms uphold the value of integrity. For example, in their language, a word equivalent to “lie” is nonexistent. Although this peaceful lifestyle suits Houyhnhnms, it is not fit for a human being like Gulliver who is capable of functioning in a higher level and imperfect society with more complex reasoning.
The Houhynhnms, most of my classmates argue are basically a utopian society. One thing that most of my peers fail to take notice of is the fact that they are unwilling to trust in any information of which they do not. They don't believe that there could be another body of land out in the sea; they doubt Gulliver when he says that a boat can float on water. Their biggest flaw in their inability to believe something new or even make an attempt at it. While the Houhynhnms believe to be above yahoos, yet they exhibit the characteristic of arrogance. They are not able to look beyond species, even when the master had Gulliver with him; it was not as an equal but instead as a piece of entertainment.
Besides focusing on Gulliver who does he even think he is. While in the land of the Houhynhnms, he was able to pick up some traits from them. One bad habit that he picked up was the idea that he is superior to all other creatures, especially to the yahoos. Hey guess what Gulliver, in case you have not noticed you’re a yahoo too, those animals you hate so much. The Houhynhnms may hate the yahoos, but you know what they do support each other. Gulliver should stop believing that he is better than everyone else, he is a yahoo. Embrace it Gulliver, help out your fellow countrymen. Besides I have one question why did he use the skin of the yahoos for clothes, that disgusting that means that he put on human skin on top of his own. Did anyone notice that? No animal that I know of uses the skin of their same species for protection from heat and cold.
To a gullible Gulliver, the land of the Houhynhnms is a utopia. As an outsider, I disagree. Gulliver is taken aback with the idea that they cannot lie, their relationships with each other, their affection, etc. I also think that as an entire species, ganged up on Gulliver and made him to believe things that drastically affected his view of Europe and the Houhynhnms.
They refer to him as a Yahoo even though there are stark differences in Gulliver and the Yahoos. He does not seem to protest much, and even starts to see the negativities of human life through what is apparently wrong with the Yahoos. Gulliver is put onto the low end of the totem pole in their society and treated as lesser than them.
When put into a situation like this, eventually the person who is continuously put down and treated as less will begin to accept it and think it is true. Gulliver has this high opinion of the Houhynhnms, but is it because he really and truely believes that they are in every way better than the human race or is it because he is nervous about fitting in and wants to believe and accept everything it is that they have to say?
The Houhynhms society is idyllic in the eyes of Gulliver. He is so taken by the fact that they seem so utterly entranced by him that he is willing to be degraded and kept around as nothing more than a form of amusement for the Houhynhms. Gulliver believes them to be a perfect society due to their relationships with each other, however he was drastically changed as a person by accepting their ideals. He never had a very high opinion of other humans, but after living among the horses when he returns to soceity he cannot even tolerate the apperance of his wife and children. His time among the Houhynhms seemed to Gulliver as something that changed him for the better, but as a reader it is clear that they had a negative impact on him as a person.
A lot of great points here, about various dimensions of Gulliver's reaction to the Houhynhnms. It seems pretty clear that the land of the Houhynhnms is far from the ideal society Gulliver imagines it to be, and that Gulliver's growing adulation has more to do with his own limitations than with the Houhynhnm's virtues.
So where is Swift going with this false utopia? Clearly he's not "just" telling a made-up travel story: he's also reflecting back to his readers in exaggerated, satirical terms some features of their world. He's got a point to make through Gulliver's unreliable and delusional depiction of the Houhynhnms. What is it?
I don't think we're necessarily supposed to see the horses as "naive" or criticize their "lack of emotion", but I do think that we are not supposed to believe a lot of what Gulliver says. I actually think they have the opposite of a naive outlook -- they know exactly what they're doing. For instance, they claim to not have a word for lying, but they certainly know what lying is (because they don't believe Gulliver when he tells them about war, etc. if they didn't know what lying was, they simply would believe everything he says) *but* they do want Gulliver to think they don't know what lying is. I think they represent the new rich that we talked about in class on Monday that Swift criticizes, being anti-Whig. Gulliver thinks the horses are completely rational and moral beings, but there are instances where the reader can tell they aren't really. They treat Gulliver as lesser than them, even after he can speak their language and has tried endlessly to prove himself to them and the horses eventually exile him. I think this is heavily influenced by Swift's support of the Irish. To me, the horses are satirizing the English as well, who look down on the Irish, as Yahoos.
To first attempt to answer KW's question, I believe that Swift composed this story in hopes to highlight indirectly the nature of the world he lives in. All of the things that are major within the story involving Gulliver are things that show the way that humans beings can react to one another and other creatures. As Hume did, I can see this is Swift drawing on some fiction but also trying to relate it back to the truth through his perception of societal issues and behaviors. Most importantly, the story has to be good enough to attract the attention of readers. Making it otherwise would remove the buyers from it.
Back to the initial question at hand: I agree with the majority of the class. I believe Gary made an important point. The Houhynhnms do not believe a lot of things, and even doubts Gulliver. I would like to jump out there and say that Swift is recreating another view of humans before they had been corrupted by different things in life. They only believe things as far as they can see them. Therefore the way that they were acting through this story makes sense. They represented a isolated species unlike that of Gulliver who has been affected by different cultural aspects. They are still or have not been affected by the same things that he has. SO, in that case, their people are a bit rational. They lack experience with key emotion. They base it off of their sense.
During class on Monday, we discussed that Gulliver strongly identifies himself with the Houyhnhnms. However, I think that Gary brings up an interesting point that I didn't really focus on when arguing that the Houyhnhmns represents this Utopia society. Hence, I think that since these horses are rational, by keeping such a peaceful and smooth like society governed by truth and reason, there isn't even a word for "lie" in their language. Therefore, throughout all of Gullivers four voyages he is able to relate to the Houyhnhnms in a much more respectable manner than the Yahoo's. Although, Gulliver is a very intelligent character this notion of him being naive or this gullible Gulliver comes from just the lack of emotion as Swift conveys throughout his voyages and his actions. Gulliver never showed expressed any of his feelings. I felt like Gullivers entire character was really revealed in the last chapter (12) when he states:
"My Reconcilement to the Yahoo-kind in general might not be so difficult, if they would be content with those Vices and Follies only which Nature hath entitled them to. I am not in the least provoked at the Sight of a Lawyer, a Pick-pocket, a Colonel, a fool, a lord, a gamester, a politician, a whoremonger, a physician, an evidence, a suborner, an attorney, a traitor, or the like: this is all according to the due course of things: but, when I behold a Lump of Deformity, and diseases both in body and mind, smitten with pride, it immediately breaks all the measures of my patience; neither shall I ever be able to comprehend how such an animal and such a vice could tally together" (p.394).
This just shows that Gulliver struggled to adapt to his own human-like culture. In his course of things he is revealing what he perceives humanity to be now and is blaming himself for being apart of this hyprocrisy he was once apart of unknowingly throughout his travels.
I agree with Margaret that the Houyhnhnms are both admired and satirized. Swift recognizes their way of a just society as something to be simulated by our own society. Their ability to equalize everyone is a great thing and something we try to strive for but can never accomplish. Swift also pokes fun at them because of their lack of emotion. Life seems a little meaningless without emotion or feeling. Joy of life is the thing that helps us continue to strive to be better.
I think it's possible to view the Houyhnhnm's society as an attempt at a utopia, but the horses themselves being unemotional. The idea of not having a word for lying does not make the horses naive. Although they can still avoid speaking the truth, I feel that saying they are naive doesn't really relate. Naive to me is a type of ignorance. The horses are obviously not ignorant to untruths because they can still describe lies, they just don't have a word for it. And being able to avoid the truth without lying seems to show intelligence and cunning by the horses.
This world is only somewhat of a utopia for this reason. The horses are truthful, however they are not straight forward.
Also, their idea of sterilizing the yahoos is quite the opposite of a utopia. Granted, the horses want to get rid of the "scum" from their society, this sterilizing ideology isn't Utopian.
I think what Swift is showing is that the public can be enamored with differences and occasionally that can blind one's search for the truth.
Obviously, the Houyhnhnms are clearly viewed as "the other." This sense of difference makes them exotic and almost charming in their stubbornness and over-rationalized thinking.
With that said, one can also look at Swift's description of the Houyhnhnms as satirizing humans. The naivete shown by the Houyhnhnms is that of a person who has not experienced much in life and is unwilling to step outside of a comfort zone, which is basically what the protagonist in a traveler's tale like Gulliver's Travels is all about.
So I think the Houyhnhnms are as much a critique of humans as they are at showing how humans are enamored with "the other."
I feel that Gulliver's delusional depiction of the Houyhnhmns reflects how blindly some people follow certain ideologies. Gulliver is overwhelmed by the Houyhnhmns' logic and values, but it's clear to the reader that their society has its flaws. His quick transition to complete devotion to the Houyhnhmns, and utter disregard for humanity seems ridiculous, and I think Swift is commenting on people who were swayed with certain Enlightenment thought without truly considering their personal beliefs.
These thoughts of mine kind of stemmed from the comment JeTara made, although I’m not sure they are in line with what she meant. So I feel that Swift uses the Houyhnhnms to criticize the Enlightenment views on humanity. We are like the horse people in that we view our reason with some degree of pride and arrogance. Although the Houyhnhnms do not have a general sense of “badness” in their culture, the Master is still able to comprehend the ideas of war and crime that Gulliver explains to him. Perhaps if the culture of the Houyhnhnms had been less conservative, they may have had ideas of crime and war before Gulliver’s arrival. In parallel to this ignorance of the darker natures of life, people of the Enlightenment focused on the good of man-kind. They were all about progress and reason – the light. In this optimism, there is a tendency to ignore the dirtier side of humanity like crime and war. With our reason, we can try to explain why we, as “enlightened” beings, still perform such acts of barbarism. Modernity can be seen as a play between the light and the dark of the human condition and perhaps Swift is advocating that we use the light to illuminate the dark.
Post a Comment