READING ASSIGNMENT: Swift, “A Modest Proposal” -- Read this and annotate “Modest
Proposal” using the reading questions below as your guide. (I won’t pick up the reading
questions; I will assess your annotation.)
John Dryden’s A Discourse Concerning the Original and Progress of Satire 1693
Excerpt from poet and playwright John Dryden's Discourse concerning the Original* and
Progress of Satire [1693]: he presents a partial, historical definition of satire.
"If we take satire in the general signification of the word, as it is used in all modern languages, for an
invective*, it is certain that it is almost as old as verse....After God had cursed Adam and Eve in
Paradise, the husband and wife excused themselves by laying the blame on one another, and gave a
beginning to those conjugal dialogues in prose which the poets have perfected in verse."
Dryden goes on to say that, contrary to common opinion, the word SATIRE does not derive
from satyr, "that mixed kind of animal, or as the ancients thought him, rural god, made up betwixt a
man and a goat, with a human head, hooked nose, pouting lips...pricked ears, and up-right horns, the
body shagged with hair, especially from the waist, and ending in a goat, with the legs and feet of that
creature." That is, satire does not derive from this a sexually lascivious creature and its behavior.
Rather, Dryden says, "it is grounded on sure authority, that satire was derived from satura, a
Roman word which signifies full and abundant, and full also of variety, in which nothing is
wanting to its due perfection. Satura, as I have formerly noted, is an adjective, and relates to the
word lanx...in English a charger or large platter, [which] was yearly filled with all sorts of
fruits, which were offered to the gods of their festival."
Of MENIPPEAN SATIRE, Dryden says this: "This sort of satire was not only composed of
several sorts of verse but was also mixed with prose....sprinkled with a kind of mirth and gaiety, yet
many things are there inserted which are drawn from the very entrails of philosophy; and many
things severely argued...mingled with pleasantness on purpose, that they may more easily go down
with the common sort of unlearned readers." [Dryden here is quoting an early Menippean satirist,
Varro.] Dryden goes on to say that in this type of satire, the "subjects were
various."
Dryden on HORATIAN and JUVENALIAN SATIRE: First, Dryden quotes a famous critic
who disparaged Horace for the humor of his satire. “‘A perpetual grin, like that of Horace, rather
angers than amends a man.’ I cannot [Dryden retorts] give him up the manner of Horace in low
satire so easily. Let the chastisement of Juvenal be never so necessary for his new kind of satire; let
him declaim* as wittily and sharply as he pleases; yet still the nicest [i.e. most refined] and most
delicate touches of satire consist in fine raillery [good-humoured banter]. This, [Horace], is your
particular talent, to which even Juvenal could not arrive....How easy is it to call rogue and villain,
and that wittily! But how hard to make a man appear a fool, a blockhead, or a knave,
without using any of those opprobrious terms! To spare the grossness of the names, and to
do the thing yet more severely, is to draw a full face, and to make the nose and cheeks stand
out, and yet not to employ any depth of shadowing. This is the mystery of that noble trade
[Horatian satire]....Neither is it true that this fineness of raillery* is offensive. A witty man is tickled
while he is hurt in this manner, and the fool feels it not. The occasion of an offense may
possibly be given, but he cannot take it. If it be granted that in effect this way does more
mischief, that a man is secretly wounded, and though he be not sensible himself, yet the
malicious world will find it out for him; yet there is still a vast difference betwixt the slovenly
butchering of a man, and the fineness of a stroke that separates the head from the body, and
leaves it standing in its place. A man may be capable...of a plain piece of work, a bare
hanging, but to make a malefactor* die sweetly [is an art].”
Definitions (lifted from the American Heritage Dictionary):
o·rig·i·nal (…-r¹j“…-n…l) 4. Archaic. The source from which something arises; an originator.
[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin orºgin³lis, from orºg½, orºgin-, source. See
ORIGIN.]
in·vec·tive (¹n-vµk“t¹v) n. 1. Denunciatory or abusive language; vituperation. 2. Denunciatory or
abusive expression or discourse. --in·vec·tive adj. Of, relating to, or characterized by
denunciatory or abusive language. [From Middle English invectif, denunciatory, from Old
French, from Late Latin invectºvus, reproachful, abusive, from Latin invectus, past participle of
invehº, to inveigh against. See INVEIGH.] --in·vec“tive·ly adv.--in·vec“tive·ness n.
de·claim (d¹-kl³m“) v. de·claimed, de·claim·ing, de·claims. --intr. 1. To deliver a formal
recitation, especially as an exercise in rhetoric or elocution. 2. To speak loudly and vehemently;
inveigh. --tr. To utter or recite with rhetorical effect. [Middle English declamen, from Latin
d¶cl³m³re : d¶-, intensive pref.; see DE- + cl³m³re, to cry out; see kel…-2 below.] --de·claim“er .
rail·ler·y (r³“l…-r¶) n., pl. rail·ler·ies. 1. Good-natured teasing or ridicule; banter. 2. An instance
of bantering or teasing. [French raillerie, from Old French railler, to tease. See RAIL3.]
mal·e·fac·tor (m²l“…-f²k”t…r) n. 1. One that has committed a crime; a criminal. 2. An evildoer.
[Middle English malefactour, from Latin malefactor, from malefacere, to do wrong : male, ill;
see mel-3 below + facere, to do; see dh¶- below.] --mal”e·fac“tion (-f²k“sh…n) n.
. . . [an] important Secret, in the designing of a perfect Satire; that it ought only to
treat of one Subject; to be confin'd to one particular Theme; or, at least, to one
principally. If other Vices occur in the management of the Chief, they shou'd only be
transiently lash'd, and not be insisted on, so as to make the Design double
1.
2. Under this Unity of Theme, or Subject, is comprehended another Rule for perfecting
the Design of true Satire. The Poet is bound, and that ex Officio, to give his Reader some
one Precept of Moral Virtue; and to caution him against some one particular Vice or
Folly: Other Virtues, subordinate to the first, may be recommended, under that Chief
Head; and other Vices or Follies may be scourg'd, besides that which he principally
intends. But he is chiefly to inculcate one Virtue, and insist on that. Thus Juvenal in
every Satire, excepting the first, tyes himself to one principal Instructive Point, or to the
shunning of Moral Evil. Even in the Sixth, which seems only an Arraignment of the
whole Sex of Womankind; there is a latent Admonition to avoid Ill Women, by shewing
how very few, who are Virtuous and Good, are to be found amongst them. But this, tho'
the Wittiest of all his Satires, has yet the least of Truth or Instruction in it. He has run
himself into his old declamatory way, and almost forgotten, that he was now setting up
for a Moral Poet.
The Scribelrus Club
The Age of Enlightenment, an intellectual movement in the 17th and 18th century
advocating rationality, produced a great revival of satire in Britain. This was fuelled by
the rise of partisan politics, with the formalisation of the Tory and Whig parties - and
also, in 1714, by the formation of the Scriblerus Club, which included Alexander Pope,
Jonathan Swift, John Gay, John Arbuthnot, Robert Harley, Thomas Parnell, and Henry St
John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke. This club included several of the notable satirists of
early 18th century Britain. They focused their attention on Martinus Scriblerus, "an
invented learned fool...whose work they attributed all that was tedious, narrow-minded,
and pedantic in contemporary scholarship". The club began as a project of sairizing the
abuses of learning wherever they might be found. In their hands astute and biting satire
of institutions and individuals became a popular weapon.
Reading Questions: initially,
* What does the speaker find "melancholy" in Ireland?
*Note the interesting distinction in the first line. Does the speaker finds it depressing
that such impoverished people exist? Or does he find it depressing to see such people?
Do you think the speaker's sympathies are with the suffering lower class? Or with the
poor rich class that has to look at them everyday?
1. “A Modest Proposal” is an ironic essay: the author deliberately writes what he does not mean. What is
the real thesis? Is there more than one?
2. A clear difference exists between Swift and the persona who makes this proposal. Characterize the
proposer.
3. Would it be possible to read this essay as a serious proposal?
4. Look closely at paragraphs 4, 6, and 7, and study how the appeals to logic are put in mathematical and
economic terms. Underline those words and phrases.
5. When does the reader begin to realize that the essay is ironic? Before or after the actual proposal is
made in paragraph 10?
6. Which groups of people are singled out as special targets for Swifts’ attack? Are the Irish presented
completely as victims, or are they also to blame?
7. Does the essay merely function as a satirical attack? Does Swift ever present any serious proposals for
improving conditions? If so, where?
8. What is the purpose of the last paragraph?