We All Think We’re Brobdingnagians
until We Get to Brobdingnag
Human perception is deceptive. Despite numerous proofs that small is usually treacherous and potentially harmful while big is often gentle and harmless, people are still more inclined to believe that small is cute and endearing while big is bad and dangerous based on their physical attributes. A simple illustration that can be observed in everyday life pertaining to size is with dogs. While little dogs may be adorable, they are usually the ones that are snappy and mean but cowardly while the big, seemingly ferocious dogs are reliable and loyal. The problem with human nature is that people often make quick judgments according to outward appearances while placing too much emphasis on the wrong things only to find themselves shocked by reality when it finally hits. The saying to “take a step back and look at the big picture” has become more common now as people become increasingly aware of the absurdity of this human tendency. In Eighteenth Century England, this habit of making sweeping judgments while concentrating too much on trivial issues was a prevalence that few people even noticed or knew how to deal with if they could indeed identify it. Jonathan Swift, however, saw right through this problem and addressed it most succinctly in his writings. In Gulliver’s Travels, Swift presents a remarkable demonstration of how people often miss the big picture, by continually harping on the tiny, nitpicky details of life, through the protagonist’s curious encounters with little Lilliputians and giant Brobdingnagians, and in so doing, teaches his readers an important lesson on self-knowledge.
When analyzing these texts, it is very important to note that neither A Voyage to Lilliput, the first voyage, nor A Voyage to Brobdingnag, the second voyage, could make up a complete story by itself without the other. Unlike the third and fourth voyages that can be read as isolated incidents which are more independent of each other, the first and second voyages cannot be separated in order to get the full message that Swift is trying to point across. Unfortunately, especially in this present society, Lilliput has received much more recognition than Brobdingnag; probably mainly because of the attention that the media has given to Lilliput. It would seem that most people who have little knowledge of Swift or his works equate Gulliver’s Travels with Lilliput.
This situation is indeed tragic, for in the words of J. A. Downie, “the most potent and deliberate Swiftian satire on topical politics is made not in A Voyage to Lilliput, but in the unduly neglected A Voyage to Brobdingnag” (115). Although the British government takes quite a beating in the allegories in the first voyage, the true faults of the British Empire hit much harder when Gulliver attempts in vain to come to England’s defense while at Brobdingnag. As a matter of fact, the other three of the “four aspects of man,” as Samuel H. Monk calls it, namely, the physical, intellectual, and moral (48), are also more harshly satirized in Gulliver’s visit to Brobdingnag in comparison to his experience in Lilliput. Joe Horrell highlights this pattern as a deliberate tactic that Swift uses in which he only allows the “ironic implications” of one book to be illuminated in the subsequent book (484). Although A Voyage to Lilliput sets forth some obvious allegorical criticism, A Voyage to Brobdingnag completes the satire that began in the first voyage. It is not until Gulliver gets to Brobdingnag and begins to make the connections between his two encounters with first the Lilliputians and then the Brobdingnagians that the true message of the texts is revealed.
Interestingly enough, as much as the reader may enjoy how the objects of satire get pummeled to the ground in these texts, the joke is almost as much on the reader as well; especially the negligent or ignorant reader who focuses on the wrong thing and misses the big picture. By uniquely weaving his message to the readers into the text so that it is played out not in Gulliver’s reactions to his circumstances but in the way the reader reacts to Gulliver’s reactions, Swift skillfully reveals his purpose of the text by first causing the reader to fall into the trap that he sets up for the reader, that is, to become the very subject of his criticism. Most readers come away from the reading of the first voyage filled with disgust for the Lilliputians only to blush in embarrassment when reality slaps them in the face in the second voyage that they, like Gulliver, are themselves not much different from the Lilliputians. If, however, a reader reads only the first book without the second, he or she will go away with the puffed up notion that he or she is above the Lilliputian pettiness and not make the necessary connections at all. Such a case is not simply a set-back but detrimental because instead of learning a good lesson, the reader is left with a thwarted, lofty mindset of him or herself. Swift’s follow-up of Gulliver’s Lilliputian experience while he is in Brobdingnag therefore takes on a whole new richer and deeper meaning of Gulliver’s Travels which would be lost were either one of these voyages to be read without the other.
The first and most obvious aspect that is brought into consideration from the moment Gulliver arrives on Lilliput is the physical aspect. Gulliver is big; the Lilliputians are small. The obvious difference in size is unmistakable. Nevertheless, while Gulliver makes simple observations about these curious little humanlike creatures crawling all over his body and holding him captive, he merely takes it in without much contemplation. Like a sponge, he soaks in his experience and responds to the Lilliputians in a most unusual way. Horrell points out that although Gulliver is sorely tempted to hurt the Lilliputians and breakaway from their bonds by force while he lies captive on the beach, he holds himself back not because of any feeling or bond of kindred spirit, but because he did not want to be showered by prickly arrows again (485). What is intriguing is that while he takes an instant dislike for them, he also seeks to please them. Even though Gulliver has a much bigger advantage over the Lilliputians, he remains rather passive and even asks for permission to be released when he could very well break away by his own strength.
This is farther brought to attention in Downie’s article in which he mentions that Gulliver is able to stare the Emperor of Lilliput directly in the eye and is not the least bit intimated by him (110). Nevertheless, Gulliver obligingly bends to the Lilliputians’ every wimp and fancy like an obedient little puppy rather than assert any sort of authority despite his full capability to do so. Larry S. Champion makes the claim in his article that Gulliver’s sense of superiority because of his size caused him to never quite fit in with the Lilliputians (531). However, this sense of superiority is not really played out through his actions. In fact, it can be observed that over time, Gulliver becomes so familiar in his relations with the Lilliputians that he eventually loses his perspective and begins to picture himself to be on the same scale as them. Here, Dennis Todd’s argument is able to combine these two views coherently. Todd states that Gulliver is neither dim-witted nor crazy; rather, in order to cope with being a misfit, he unconsciously “reconstructs a sense of himself that he finds pleasing” (263). Therefore, to gain an identity among the Lilliputians and even among the Brobdingnagians later on, he is willing to play along with the role that he has been given; all the while feeling that he is still superior. As a result, he not only reaps the benefits of the Lilliputians’ favor (at least until he offends them), but also comes across as a gentle, benevolent, and likeable person.
In addition, Steven Millhauser presents an excellent point that could farther explain Gulliver’s treatment of the Lilliputians, that is, that miniatures pique human curiosity (128), and no matter how treacherous they may seem, they do not pose as an ominous threat the way the gigantics do (130). After all, as Allan Bloom asks, “what sermon has the force of the absurd claim that Lilliput is ‘the terror of the universe’?” (651) Especially for a scientific Eighteenth Century Englishman like Gulliver who carried his seeing glass with him around for magnification, these Lilliputians, contemptuous as they may be, did not have much effect on Gulliver in terms of their morals or intellect, but definitely fed his fascination. There is even the possibility that Gulliver tolerated their ill-treatment of him and their defiant, indignant ways with a sense of amusement. Millhauser goes on to say that miniatures allow for a feeling of possession in such a way that gigantics never could (130-31). Although Gulliver is the alien on the island of Lilliput, it would be easy, and indeed, quite natural for him to have a sense of ownership over the Lilliputians simply because of their littleness and therefore cause him to treat them with a sort of fondness (most likely much to their resentment).
With these perspectives of Gulliver and the Lilliputians, one is inclined to believe that although the Lilliputians were jealous, petty little fellows with strange, absurd laws, Gulliver was not fazed by their haughty attitudes and instead returned their treatment of him with kindness and respect. However, this pretty picture of Gulliver takes a drastic turn through the events at Brobdingnag. As it was with his arrival at Lilliput, Gulliver’s first encounter with human life at Brobdingnag emphasizes the gaping difference in size. This time, he is the one who is miniature while the Brobdingnagians are gigantic. At Brobdingnag, Gulliver finds himself on the other end of the spectrum. No longer is he big, kind Gulliver who willingly does whatever is asked of him, but tiny little Gulliver who darts around in fear to escape danger and performs against his will as a source of income for his master. He begins to recall his experiences at Lilliput and is now able to identify with how they must have felt in comparison to him. He also becomes acutely aware of the physical flaws of the Brobdingnagians’ bodies and contrasts it with the smooth, flawless skin of the Lilliputians. All his five senses become exceedingly sensitive, and he is able to reason that the Brobdingnagians are to Gulliver what Gulliver was to the Lilliputians (Bloom 651). Gulliver is now the possession; He is left in the care of a little girl and is carried around in a box. Gulliver is now the petty, self-seeking creature; his ideas and philosophies are pointless and trivial to the Brobdingnagians. Gulliver is now the defiant, inferior person who wishes to prove himself bigger than his physical size; He makes constant references back to England and how things are done there in attempt to amplify himself. With the obvious demonstration of size constantly in play throughout the first two books, Swift goes on to incorporate the other aspects of man into the stories. Instead of separating the four aspects into individual issues that Gulliver deals with, Swift uses the physical aspect to represent the moral and intellectual aspects (Bloom 650). Consequently, from these moral and intellectual aspects stems the political aspect.
With regards to size, morality, and intellect, the point that Swift wants to make clear is that big is equivalent to superiority while small is equivalent to inferiority. However, in order for big to be good superiors, virtue must coexist with big, for if big is abused, much damage can be done. At the same time, for small to avoid inferiority, small must think big in order to live out big. Since virtue must coexist with big, small must have virtue in order to overcome that inferiority complex. Nevertheless, small often fails and is instead stuck in the small mindset which leads to perpetual inferiority and the constant trying to earn respect. As a result, pettiness, indignance, and defiance are more often than not demonstrated in small. The external, outward appearance which seems perfect in the little people but utterly repulsive with the big people only serves to show that such things do not matter. It does the Lilliputians no good to look good from the outside but be bitter on the inside, while it does the Brobdingnagians no harm that Gulliver can see all their external flaws, for it is their virtue that counts.
Just as big is superior and small is inferior, big also represents a large, open mind, while small represents a closed up, narrow mind. In his article, John B. Radner writes that the decline of Lilliput is caused by the fact that the “Lilliputians did not understand their own degenerate nature” (54). Such is the state of the small-minded Lilliputians which prevents them from aiming for virtue. In contrast, the King of Brobdingnag is the virtuous man that he is because of his open-mindedness. He is aware of how fallible he is. Radner states how the King “has clear apprehension and exact judgment.” He is aware of his moral weakness and commands Gulliver never to speak again of total dominion through the usage of gun powder because he “distrusts his ability to restrain a lust for power” (59). Simply put, the King is big enough to admit his faults and does not attempt to mask it. It is also important to note that although the Brobdingnagian King may demonstrate virtue, not all Brobdingnagians are virtuous. They are also fallible, and unfortunately, like regular humans, they succumb to their moral failures. The fact that they are Brobdingnagians does not in any way release them from being subject to their own free will.
Finally, with regards to the political aspect, A Voyage to Lilliput gives an allegorical criticism of England, but it is A Voyage to Brobdingnag that truly points out the flaws of the British government. Just as readers find themselves dumbfounded when they read of the nonsensical political issues in Lilliput, the King of Brobdingnag expresses similar incredulity when he hears about England’s political tactics. To the King of Brobdingnag, the issues that Gulliver tells the King about is as absurd as declaring war over which end of the eggshell should be cracked is to the reader. The most popular incident that horrifies the King is that of gunpowder and dominance. Although the King is not immune to the desire of enlarging his influence, he is thoroughly abhorred at the idea of government acting by force on people. Edwin B. Benjamin states in his article that when Gulliver made such a suggestion to the King of Brobdingnag, it was to stoop as low as when the Admiral of Lilliput declared, “all true reasons of state” (qtd in Benjamin: 572). To the King of Brobdingnag, misuse of governmental power is unheard of. “[W]hat binds the king or magistrate to his people, ruler to ruled, is not the exercise of force or manipulation, but love and reason and the ethical concepts represented by fame, honor or reputation” (573). Gulliver learns from the King of Brobdingnag the valuable lesson that only through highly virtuous morals can a government be successfully run.
Through the course of his conversations with the King, Gulliver becomes increasingly aware that he is not the “Brobdingnagian” he thought he was, but a Lilliputian that he is not proud to be. Gulliver’s self-reflection and growing self-knowledge displays his own intellectual capacities that were absent in the first voyage. His response to this realization, however, is not what Swift promotes. Gulliver is filled with self-loathing and cannot even bear to look at himself in the mirror. The pride that he so carefully developed, nurtured, and nursed in his first voyage has now been dashed. Nonetheless, Gulliver is still in denial. Bloom points out that upon his return to England, Gulliver declares that “it was not necessary for him to visit Lilliput in order for him to see Englishmen as Lilliputians; it was only necessary for him to have been to Brobdingnag” (650). It is, however, obvious to the reader that this is far from the truth, for A Voyage to Brobdingnag without the previous experiences at Lilliput would have been a meaningless nightmare for Gulliver. He would not have been able to draw the parallels between his experiences at Brobdingnag and neither would he even have been aware of the characteristics of Lilliputians had he never met them before he met the Brobdingnagians. Like the Lilliputians, Gulliver would not have understood his own degenerate nature.
As far as the reader is concerned, it is important that the revealed depravity of man be seriously taken into consideration and be reflected upon. An outward reaction like Gulliver’s towards other people should not be exemplified, for indeed, after the third and fourth voyage, Gulliver completely loses what it means to be human. Such is not Swift’s intention. His intention is to make his readers become aware that human beings have the tendency of being Lilliputians and it is difficult if not impossible to recognize the Lilliputians in oneself without encountering both Lilliputians and Brobdingnagians. However, as much as humans are more prone to being Lilliputians, there is always the choice that can be made to be Brobdingnagians who choose virtue over vice and who choose to focus on the big picture rather than on the things that do not matter.
Works Cited
Benjamin, Edwin B. “The King of Brobdingnag and Secrets of State.” Journal of the History of Ideas 18.4 (1957):572-579. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Bloom, Allan. “An Outline of Gulliver’s Travels” The Writings of Jonathan Swift. Ed. Robert A. Greenberg. NY:W. W Norton & Company. 1973. 648-661. Print.
Champion, Larry S. “Gulliver's Voyages: The Framing Events as a Guide to Interpretation.” Texas Studies in Literature and Language 10.4 (1969):529-536. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Downie, J. A. “Political Characterization in ‘Gulliver’s Travels’.” The Yearbook of English Studies 7(1977):108-120. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Horrell, Joe. “What Gulliver Knew.” The Sewanee Review 51.4 (1943):476-504. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Millhauser, Steven. “The Fascination of the Miniature.” Grand Street 2.4 (1983):128-135. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Monk, Samuel H. “The Pride of Lemuel Gulliver.” The Sewanee Review 63.1 (1955):48-71. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Radner, John B. “THE FALL AND DECLINE: Gulliver’s Travels and the Failure of Utopia.” Utopian Studies 3.2 (1992):50-74. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.
Todd, Dennis. “The Hairy Maid at the Harpsichord: Some Speculations on the Meaning of Gulliver’s Travels.” Texas Studies in Literature and Language 34.2 (1992):239-283. JSTOR. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.