Talk:Gulliver's Travels

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the General Project Discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Tasks you can do: Novels WikiProject Announcements and open tasks (watch • edit • discuss) → Please help with tagging articles! This WikiProject now includes "Novels", "Novellas", "Novelettes" and "Short Stories" of narrative form! Critique (Featured Article): None current - "7 achieved / 2 removed" Review: Erast Fandorin Improve: Nineteen Eighty-Five • Vathek • Enderby Outside • The Runes of the Earth • The Giver • Crown of Shadows • More... Create: Black Cocktail • Blackthorn Winter • London, 1850 • The Fatal Eggs • More... Novel without Infobox (auto list): many novel articles do not have an infobox - and need one (auto generated list) - may need expansion of article too A new policy proposal has been started and this is to be seen at Wikipedia:Speedy deletion criterion for unsourced articles, please take a look at these and comment. This is a vital subject and all editors should consider the implications. These are NOT active yet, but could have wide reaching consequences. Please contribute your views. Our Collaboration Department is continuing with one more title Waverley (novel) for the current month. Get collaborating on the article and also look at nominating other titles to be considered. Pages that only exist as redirects: Men at Arms changes

Contents 1 tiny changes 2 POV 3 Just my opinion 4 British? 5 Royal Society 6 Editorializing 7 Merge? 8 Brobdingnag on Votes for Deletion 9 Why deletion? 10 Rewritten in toto 11 Book 1 12 Orwell's expression 13 Suggestion/Gulliveriana 14 Allusions 15 Cavehill claim 16 Length 17 Maps 18 Relative sizes 19 Flappers 20 Vandalism

[edit] tiny changes

I find it impossible to believe that the writers of Futurama and Anthony Burgess had Gulliver in mind, so those references had to be taken out. Head meaning 'Gulliver' wouldn't add anything and the 'playing god' theme comes up in South Park and Simpsons. Also- the fourth part doesn't definitely show a society that's "better" than England, and Gulliver is ridiculed for becoming obsessed with a set of values that revolve around enslavement of humans and eating oats. Maybe someone could revise the analysis.

[edit] POV

"It is interesting that this fourth voyage seems to have been the one that has most engaged literary critics over the years." whether it is interesting or not is opinion...

[edit] Just my opinion

I pulled the sections from the book that still make me howl out loud laughing, and which strike me as being close to quite universal truth. Feel free to cut it back

I also can't write about Swift without being sarcastic myself, although I do most certainly agree with him about almost everything the man ever wrote.

This book is the beginnings of modern culture, probably uniquely so, with its free written satire and blunt critique of every concept of human "justice"... very few books of the time, with the exception of More's Utopia, would hold up to a reading today as well as this.

I don't think it can possibly be overestimated as an influence on the English language and culture.

But that's just my opinion.

[edit] British?

I put "British" to describe Swift, but this doesn't do justice to his Englishness; yet merely to say "English" omits his strong connection with Ireland. Can anyone find a brief yet informative expression? (The aristocrats were joining together as one group of more than just the English ones at that point, though it was well short of complete as the Camerons among others were yet to show.) PML.

"Anglo-Irish" would be a better term to use for him, after all he was born in Ireland and spent most of his life here. -Dubhthach

[edit] Royal Society

It is widely supposed that Laputa was a strict satire of the Royal Society, which Isaac Newton also despised

Is there a typo in that sentence somewhere ?

Newton was President of the Royal Society so it seems unlikely that he would despise it. --Imran 20:50 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Editorializing

The article says:

They also rely on showing each other visible objects rather than speech in words wherever possible, considering it "purer". It is not recorded whether any of them ever spelled out "Welcome to Macintosh", but it seems likely. Again, Swift's satire stands to this day.

That's funny, but it seems to me that it's editorializing. -- Dominus 19:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

I don't like the current situation, where there's separate articles for each section of the book and also much detail about each section in this article. Somebody should either move the details to the sub-articles or fold the sub-articles into this one. (But which? That's the question...) --Paul A 06:48, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree. There should be a page dedicated to the discussion of Endianness. That would create a great discussion!! --DannyM 17:07, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Brobdingnag on Votes for Deletion

There is a proposal on Votes for deletion currently to delete Brobdingnag and redirect it to the main article. In my view, this section of Gulliver's travels is of such importance that it warrants its own page. I have cast my vote on the Vfd page and I would encourage people with an interest in Gulliver's Travels to have their say. Capitalistroadster 00:17, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Why deletion?

Why did the last edit delete some information about adaptations? If they cannot justify this I may revert?

By the way, what is the procedure for removing the "cleanup" categorisation? PatGallacher 11:43, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)

• The deletion appeared to be simply vandalism; I have fixed it. As for removing the cleanup tag, I think it requires someone rewriting the rather verbose article and cleaning up the tone. I'll try it if I get some free time, but anyone else is more than welcome to do so as well. --b. Touch 14:01, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm wondering how/why the page needs "cleaned up"? As GT is, in my opinion, one of the ifinest books ever written in English I'd be happy to have a go but I'd be interested to know what's wanted : a complete new article, a root canal of the existing one or just a buff and shine?

I'll have a go, whatever, but I don't want to raise any hackles as I'm new to this wiki thing.

[edit] Rewritten in toto

I rewrote the entire article. It still needs extensive polishing, spellchecking and better attribution of sources (I need to get to a library to consult the collected correspondence for instance) but I reckon it's better than what was there. The article I rewrote contained some useful information but also felt like a Lit Crit piece rather than an encyclopedia article and I distinctly doubted its NPOV.

I'd welcome all improvements with open arms (or the wiki equivalent) AxS 21:02, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Book 1

I removed a comment saying that only the first part is well known, what evidence is there for this. I think a case could be made for this being the most popular, although we cannot mention that in this article, but I would not say that it is any better knwon than anything else in the book. Also it seems odd making comments about the undeniable popularity of this work then saying that the first book is very well known and the rest is not, it seems bizarre that people would stop reading such a popular book after the first section. Rje 15:06, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Comment on the first book was mine -- the first voyage is extensively bowdlerised as a work for children and many people read this in their childhood and never bother with it again. Vide Samuel Johnson's comment on GT : "Once you have thought of the big people and the little people the rest is simple" (or words to that effect). Most people think of solely the first voyage or maybe the first two but the third and fourth will only be known by people who've read the book proper.

Having said all that I accept that the comment may have been inappropriate to the article. AxS 12:02, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have checked this myself occasionally and children's editions invariably consist of the first 2 books, except that very recently somebody has produced a version for children, I assume made "child-friendly" but based on all 4 books. PatGallacher 16:19, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)

[edit] Orwell's expression

Would a normally careful writer like Orwell really have used the sloppy phrase "six most indispensable books"? PatGallacher 18:37, 2005 July 16 (UTC)

Yes, he would -- the context was something like "If one were to make a list of six books that were to be saved (...) Gulliver's Travels would certainly be on the list". It's quoted on the back of a recent "Classics" edition of GT. The phrase "six most indispensible books" is quoted in the introduction to the Oxford World Classics edition. I don't have it to hand (but I'll check over the weekend) to give the absolute source but I believe it was a radio interview, so he may not have crafted his words as carefully as he otherwise might. AxS 11:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Got it. It's from "Shooting an Elephant" (1950) AxS 10:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

"If I had to make a list of six books which were to be preserved when all others were destroyed, I would certainly put GULLIVER’S TRAVELS among them." - POLITICS VS. LITERATURE: AN EXAMINATION OF GULLIVER’S TRAVELS (1946), http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79e/part43.html

[edit] Suggestion/Gulliveriana

It might be worth adding a section on Gulliveriana (I'm not sure this is a real word), those works produced after Swift's that provide further adventures of Gulliver, or differing versions of the originals. As Gulliver was immensely popular (especially the first two books) many people wrote books and poems about the character(or other characters and locations from the book). These things are alluded to here on the talk page, but merely as adaptations and bowlderizations. Granted, such things certainly existed, but not all (or perhaps even most) of them were bowlderizations. A section discussing these productions (including the bowlderizations) might be valuable, and moreover, would attest to the cultural significance of Swift's work.--MS

I support this idea. Myself, I will be able to add two entries on obscure Gulliver-inspired novels that I read. Trapolator 18:50, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

How about a related section in or around the publication history? Such things as the "Lilliputian Odes" (vaguely obscene poetic parodies produced in 1727) or Gay's poems about the book could go there? I'm sure there must be other stuff produced in the 275+ years between publication and today. I'll see about finding a bibliography if you think it's relevant. AxS 11:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Allusions

I was hoping to find many of Swift's allusions to British politics. For instance, I understand that the episode where Gulliver urinates on the Queen's palace, thus putting out a fire, and is surprised that the Queen is ungrateful, indeed hostile; is an allusion to an episode where he wrote a pamphlet in defence of (I think) Queen Anne who hated it and became his enemy as a result. 220.238.81.162 04:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Generally, any modern edition would do that for you. If you're a UK reader, I recommend the Oxford World Classics edition, it has a heap-o-footnotes and is reasonably priced. (As a sidenote, Anne was not a friend of Swift and it's reckoned that the urinating on the palace epiode is a mix of "putting out a fire by irregular means" (relating to Bolingbroke's secret peace negotiations with France) which were later declared illegal, as was Gulliver's urination, and Anne's prudishness about Swift's satiric writings). AxS 10:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cavehill claim

Quote : "The idea for Gulliver came from the profile of the sleeping giant profile of the Cavehill in Belfast."

Did it? Says who? Certainly there's no mention of it in any of Swift's correcpondence and, given that the "Giant" part of Gulliver's Travels is only 1 part in four, this strikes me as an unattributable attestation made by Belfast locals (Swift lived and worked in Dublin for the last 33 years of his life). I've qualified the sentence heavily but find me any proof that Swift was inspired by the Cavehill and I'll be happy to have it reverted back. AxS 12:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Swift lived awhile in Belfast; from the Jonathan Swift article: "Then, apparently despairing of gaining a better position through Temple's patronage, Swift left Moor Park to be ordained a priest in the Church of Ireland and was appointed to a prebend in Kilroot, near Belfast in 1694". Swift would have been more than familiar with Cavehill, as is anyone who has lived in Belfast. The outcrop at the top is called "Napoleon's Nose", as it looks like a giant profile of Napoleon; it seems that people have been aware that it looks like a sleeping giant for some time. Also, it is mentioned on the BBC's website here (bottom of page). I know none of this is concrete proof, but I hardly think it is beyond the bounds of possibility that a man who wrote a story featuring a giant man was inspired by a landscape he was familiar with that looked like a giant reclining man. My grandparents who grew up in Belfast tell me they remember hearing the story about Cavehill when they were young, so if it is an invention, it is not a recent one. Like I say, not "proof", but food for thought. Martin 01:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Length

Why is this article so much shorter than it used to be? Any rejections to restoring it to it's original size? Sinatra Fonzarelli 00:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

This article would probably benefit from inclueding the original maps, but the only scan I can find on Wiki right now is commons:Image:Moll_-_Map_of_Lilliput.png, maybe not the greatest... AnonMoos 16:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Relative sizes

I have a problem with the scales and/or dimensions given in the main article. First, it states that the Lilliputians were 20 cm high. If the average height of a man is assumed to be 180 cm, that's a ratio of about 9:1. Next, the Brobdingnagians are described as being 12 m high. That's about 6.7 times higher than the average human. The article goes on to state that the scales were 12:1 and 1:12. Something's wrong. It's been a few decades since I read the book, and my memory is certainly fallible, but I think the ratios in the article (1:12 and 12:1) are correct and the given heights (20 cm and 2 m) are incorrect. Can someone check? Thanks. Steven marzolian

If I remember Michael Foot's introduction correctly, Swift states that the Lilliputians were indeed a twelfth of the size of normal humans, a size which he normally sticks to, but he breaks this in a few places e.g. when he has the Lilliputian cavalry drilling on Gulliver's handkerchief. PatGallacher 21:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flappers

I'm at a loss to see how mention of these useful people can have escaped this article. The word itself is used by those who study politics, politicos, and political ways; as in so many things, Swift made concrete and memorable a social pattern seen up and down the ages. I shall quote the text at length:

I observed, here and there, many in the habit of servants, with a blown bladder, fastened like a flail to the end of a stick, which they carried in their hands. In each bladder was a small quantity of dried peas, or little pebbles, as I was afterwards informed. With these bladders, they now and then flapped the mouths and ears of those who stood near them, of which practice I could not then conceive the meaning. It seems the minds of these people are so taken up with intense speculations, that they neither can speak, nor attend to the discourses of others, without being roused by some external taction upon the organs of speech and hearing; for which reason, those persons who are able to afford it always keep a flapper (the original is CLIMENOLE) in their family, as one of their domestics; nor ever walk abroad, or make visits, without him. And the business of this officer is, when two, three, or more persons are in company, gently to strike with his bladder the mouth of him who is to speak, and the right ear of him or them to whom the speaker addresses himself....

Flappers are seen in and out of goverment offices; exactly as in Laputa, people often demonstrate status by refusing to hear or speak until permitted to do so by their flappers. No educated person should be unaware of this reference; I'll add it to the article when I can find the place for it -- and a decent citation of the analysis. John Reid 05:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Visiting this page on 11/19 I discovered vandalism in a few passages. I am not sure what the intended meaning of the phrases would have been, so I have not made any changes, but I bring it to your attention.