Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Les voyages de Gulliver

 | 
François Boulaire
, 
Daniel Carey

The Reception of Gulliver’s Travels in Britain and Ireland, France, and Germany

Melanie Maria Just

Texte intégral

This celebrated Satirical Romance has extended the name and the reputation of its author to nations who might never have heard of the favourite of Lord Oxford, the champion of the Church of England, or even the protector of the liberties of Ireland.
Sir Walter Scott, Introduction to Gulliver’s Travels
Whether the excellence of Gulliver’s Travels is in the conception or the execution, is of little consequence; the power is somewhere, and it is a power that has moved the world.
William Hazlitt, Lectures on the English Poets

The Reception of Gulliver’s Travels in Britain and Ireland

  • 1 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels ”, Munich, W. Fink, (...)

1Ever since it was first published in October 1726, Gulliver’s Travels has been received with judgements of either utter disgust or warm admiration. A more balanced position, one that would bridge the gap between these two extremes, does not seem to exist.1 The Travels is one of those books which does not leave its readers indifferent; and this may in part explain why it is still spoken of today as one of the great achievements of world literature. In this review of reaction to the book across Europe, predominantly in the 18th and 19th centuries, several themes emerge: the overriding reception of the text in moral terms, the role and proper understanding of satire as it relates to Swift, the problematic status of Part IV, the representation of human nature, the predominance of genetic criticism and the debated facts of Swift’s biography.

  • 2 For extracts from their letters, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage, London (...)
  • 3 Letter from Pope to Swift of 16 November 1726, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Cri (...)

2The immediate response to the publication of Gulliver’s Travels by Swift’s friends was one of enthusiasm, admiration, and praise.2 Their letters to the Dean of November 1726 bear witness to the fact that Gulliver’s Travels was widely read in London by people of all classes and sexes; it was, in fact, the most talked-of literary sensation of the day. As fellow members of the Scriblerus Club, Swift’s friends Alexander Pope, John Gay and John Arbuthnot, shared his sense of satire. Their enthusiasm for Gulliver’s Travels, therefore, comes as no surprise. However, all three stress that the book met generally with a favorable reception, at least, as Pope points out, with “persons of consequence”.3 Indeed, many “in such a witty age” found even Part IV “a highly amusing and perfectly legitimate joke”,

  • 4 Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism of Gulliver’s ‘Voyage to the Houyhnhnms’, 1726-1914 ”, in Stanford (...)

they signed themselves Yahoo, tried to speak Houyhnhnm, accepted the phrase “to say the thing that is not” as a convenient euphemism … and … humorously adopted the words Yahoo and Houyhnhnm as exact synonyms for man and horse.4

3Nevertheless, it becomes clear in these letters that there were also critics who would not, or could not, understand what the satire was really about. Gay confirms that

the Politicians to a man agree … that the Satire on general societies of men is too severe.

4One person in particular seems especially opposed to it.

Your Lord [Bolingbroke] is the person who least approves it, blaming it as a design of evil consequence to depreciate human nature.

5This kind of criticism was to have its followers in the critical history of Gulliver’s Travels. In addition, church-goers were offended because they considered Swift’s design

  • 5 Letter from Gay to Swift of 17 November 1726, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Crit (...)

impious, and … an insult on Providence, by depreciating the works of the Creator.5

6Contemporary criticism of Gulliver’s Travels was often dependent on whether the critic was favorably disposed towards its author once his identity became known, or whether personal animosities existed. One early detractor was Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, who, as a Whig, was opposed to Swift on political grounds. She assumed Swift, Arbuthnot and Pope to be responsible for the work, and congratulated them, spitefully, on their achievement:

  • 6 Letter from Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to her sister, Lady Mar, of November 1726, quoted from Kathl (...)

Great Eloquence have they employ’d to prove themselves Beasts … and to say truth, they talk of a stable with so much warmth and Affection I can’t help suspecting some very powerfull Motive at the bottom of it.6

  • 7 Jonathan Smedley, Gulliveriana: or a Fourth Volume of Miscellanies (1728), quoted from Kathleen Wi (...)

7Another enemy of Swift’s for political and religious reasons was Jonathan Smedley, Dean of Clogher. He confirmed, in 1728, what Swift’s friends had said in their letters, namely that everyone was reading Gulliver’s Travels. But in contrast to Pope, Arbuthnot and Gay, Smedley pretended not to understand how people who claimed to be comparatively intelligent could waste their time reading a book that was written “without Humour or Allegory”. He attacked Swift in his position as a fellow-clergyman; as a preacher, he said, Swift was obliged to teach “Religion and Virtue” but instead taught “the very Reverse of them.”7

  • 8 Samuel Richardson, Clarissa (1748), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Herit (...)

8It comes as no surprise that Samuel Richardson, the great upholder of moral virtue, was appalled by what he read in Gulliver’s Travels, particularly in Part IV. Since the view which he expressed in his personal letters seems identical with what the characters in his epistolary novels say, one can assume that Richardson’s view is expressed when Lovelace in Clarissa calls Part IV the “abominable Yahoo Story”.8 Richardson himself admits a feeling of disgust at

  • 9 Letter from Richardson to Lady Bradshaigh of 23 February 1752, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.) (...)

all those of [Swift’s] writings, in which he endeavours to debase the human, and to raise above it the brutal nature.9

9Henry Fielding’s response was different. In an obituary, Fielding commends Swift for having

  • 10 Henry Fielding, “Obituary of Swift” of 5 November 1745, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift (...)

employed his Wit to the noblest Purposes, in ridiculing … several Errors and Immoralities which sprung up from time to time in his Age.10

  • 11 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels ”…, p. 8.

10In 1752, John Boyle, fifth Earl of Orrery, had his Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr Jonathan Swift published, a work which was to have an important influence on the reception of Swift and his works, not only in England but also on the Continent. Orrery pretended to be a friend of Swift’s in the Dean’s later years; however, he seems to have abused Swift’s friendship in order to make the Dean’s alleged personal disappointments responsible for the misanthropy of Gulliver’s Travels.11 Accepting Orrery’s explanation of this misanthropy would mean identifying Swift with Gulliver. It means projecting Gulliver’s misanthropy of Part IV onto Swift, and saying that Swift speaks through Gulliver. However, this is a serious mistake and an impediment towards understanding the satire. Gulliver is an Everyman-figure and must not be identified with Swift. Swift himself had expressed his own view of misanthropy, which differs essentially from that of Gulliver, in a letter to Pope of 29 September 1725:

  • 12 The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift, D.D., David Woolley (ed.), 4 vols, Frankfurt, Berlin, Bern, (...)

I have ever hated all Nations professions and Communityes and all my love is towards individualls for instance I hate the tribe of Lawyers, but I love Councellor such a one … but principally I hate and detest that animal called man, although I hartily love John, Peter, Thomas and so forth. This is the system upon which I have governed my self many years (but do not tell) and so I shall go on till I have done with them[.] I have got Materials Towards a Treatis proving the falsity of that Definition animal rationale, and to show it should be only rationis capax. Upon this great foundation of Misanthropy (though not Timons manner) the whole building of my Travells is erected.12

  • 13 John Boyle, fifth Earl of Orrery, Remarks on the Life and Writing of Dr Jonathan Swift, quoted fro (...)
  • 14 Orrery, Remarks…, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 122.
  • 15 Ibid., p. 123.

11In general, Orrery finds the satire in Gulliver’s Travels “too severe” because it presents “human nature itself … in the worst light”.13 In his criticism, Orrery misunderstands the nature of good satire. He can only hope that “pointing out the errors, and applying salutary means to avoid them” was Swift’s original intention, an intention which the Dean fell short in executing because the discoveries Gulliver makes are not extended so as to “afford improvement”.14 A good satirist, however, would not necessarily state the satiric norm explicitly. Rather, he might be satisfied with describing the satiric scene and thus leaving the reader to deduce the norm inherent in his description. Finally, the norm might be utterly obscured. Whereas Books I and II, Orrery admits, contain some “just strokes of satyr”,15 Book IV is to be dismissed altogether. He denies any possible utility in a biting satire that employs drastic pictures in order to awaken people’s awareness of their own vices:

  • 16 Ibid., p. 125.

True humour ought to be kept up with decency, and dignity, or it loses every tincture of entertainment. Descriptions that shock our delicacy cannot have the least good effect upon our minds.16

  • 17 Orrery, Remarks…, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 126.
  • 18 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gullivers Travels”…, p. 9.

12The image of the Yahoos appears so unacceptable to Orrery that he feels the need to vindicate human nature, praising the Creator for His great achievements in endowing human beings with reason which raises them above beasts.17 This view was not untypical at the time, and it influenced much of the criticism of Gulliver’s Travels after Swift’s death. Gulliver’s Travels was denied any kind of moral value because it did not complement people’s ideal of mankind as the crowning glory of creation.18

13An attack as serious and unjust as Orrery’s called for a defence by Swift’s followers. After the publication of Patrick Delany’s Observations Upon Lord Orrery’s Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr Jonathan Swift, Deane Swift, the son of Swift’s cousin, took it upon himself to defend Gulliver’s Travels in his Essay upon the Life, Writings and Character of Dr Jonathan Swift. He praised the book as

  • 19 Deane Swift, Essay upon the Life, Writings and Character of Dr Jonathan Swift (1755), quoted from (...)

a direct, plain and bitter satire against the innumerable follies and corruptions in law, politicks, learning, morals and religion.19

  • 20 Deane Swift, Essay…, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 144.

14In Part IV, he says, Swift exposed all those vices and corruptions which also enrage God when he sees them in his own creatures.20 To all those who reject Part IV for religious reasons, Deane Swift responds that it does nothing but apply Saint Peter’s statement on the corruptions of the human soul, as expressed in 2 Peter 2, to a practical situation. According to Deane Swift, in this passage St Peter maintained that

  • 21 Ibid., p. 145.

that creature man, that glorious creature man, is deservedly more contemptible than a brute beast, when he flies in the face of his CREATOR by enlisting under the banner of the enemy; and perverts that reason, which was designed to have been the glory of his nature, even the directing spirit of his life and demeanour, to the vilest, the most execrable, the most hellish purposes.21

  • 22 Ibid.

15Deane Swift admits that the images of Part IV are shocking to any reader, but, he goes on, the more shocking they are, the more likely it is that they will bring home their message, namely, “to enforce the obligation of religion and virtue upon the souls of men”,22 a view which most of his contemporaries did not share.

  • 23 Thomas Sheridan, The Life of the Reverend Jonathan Swift (1784), see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swif (...)

16Like Deane Swift, Thomas Sheridan, the younger, the son of Swift’s friend, tried to defend Gulliver’s Travels against attacks such as those from Orrery. Sheridan’s entire defence is based on the assumption that the Yahoos are not human. Their shape, he admits, betrays some resemblance to that of human beings, but only in order for the reader to listen to the moral message.23 This moral message, according to Sheridan, has to be looked for in the character of the Houyhnhnms rather than in that of the Yahoos:

  • 24 Thomas Sheridan, The Life…, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. (...)

[men should] emulate the noble and generous Houyhnhnm, by cultivating the rational faculty to the utmost; which will lead them to a life of virtue and happiness.24

17His defence, however, is based on a misunderstanding:

  • 25 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation of Jonathan Swift 1781-1882, Philadelphia, n.p., 1941, p. 41.

There are certainly absurdities in Sheridan’s defense of Gulliver. He has mistakenly tried to refute the palpable humanness of Swift’s Yahoos.25

18By saying that the Yahoos cannot debase human nature because they are not human, he seems to imply that “if they were human, they would debase it”, and he would then agree with Orrery. Despite his questionable view of the Yahoos, Sheridan saw something in Gulliver’s Travels which other critics had not noticed until then:

  • 26 Ibid.

He did succeed in pointing out what other critics refused to see – the fact that, with all his misanthropy, Swift distinguishes carefully between virtue and vice and fulminates only at the latter.26

19This is a line of defence which William Godwin was to take up later in the century:

  • 27 William Godwin, The Enquirer: Reflections on Education, Manners, and Literature (1797), quoted fro (...)

It has been doubted whether, under the name of Houyhnhnms and Yahoos, Swift has done any thing more than exhibit two different descriptions of men, in their highest improvement and lowest degradation; and it has been affirmed that no book breathes more strongly a generous indignation against vice, and an ardent love of every thing that is excellent and honourable to the human heart.27

20One example of those critics who were blind to this aspect of Gulliver’s Travels was Edward Young. He called the book a blasphemy against human nature:

  • 28 Edward Young, Conjectures on Original Composition (1759), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swi (...)

O Gulliver! dost thou not shudder at thy brother Lucian’s vultures hovering o’er thee? Shudder on! they cannot shock thee more, than decency has been shock’d by thee. How have thy Houyhnhnms thrown thy judgment from its feet; and laid thy imagination in the mire? In what ordure hast thou dipt thy pencil? What a monster hast thou made of the Human face divine?28

  • 29 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 9.

21Young was not the only one to deny a writer the right to misanthropy.29 An age which saw man as created in the image of God necessarily condemned misanthropy as immoral and irreligious. This opinion is expressed nowhere more forcibly than in James Harris’s Philological Inquiries, where he implicitly suggests that Gulliver’s Travels should be put on the list of forbidden books:

  • 30 James Harris, Philological Inquiries, in Three Parts (1781), Part III, quoted from Kathleen Willia (...)

MISANTHROPY is so dangerous a thing, and goes so far in sapping the very foundations of MORALITY and RELIGION, that I esteem the last part of Swift’s Gulliver (that I mean relative to the Hoyhnms [sic] and Yahoos) to be a worse Book to peruse, than those which we forbid, as the most flagitious and obscene.30

  • 31 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation…, p. 41.

22In the Romantic and Victorian periods, there was a general tendency to be entertained by Parts I and II, to find Part III boring, and to be appalled, and yet “fascinated by [the] very repulsiveness” of Part IV.31 For Sir Walter Scott, Parts I and II are “less shocking to the understanding” than the other two because people are, from their infancy onwards, used to fairy tales with their giants and dwarfs. In general, Scott regards Gulliver’s Travels as more useful than other utopian fiction because it makes its morality palpable by humor and satire. But, he goes on,

  • 32 Sir Walter Scott, Life of Swift (1814), quoted from Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 292.

even a moral purpose will not justify the nakedness with which Swift has sketched this horrible outline of mankind degraded to a bestial state.32

  • 33 Ibid.
  • 34 Sir Walter Scott, Introduction to Gulliver’s Travels, quoted from Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p (...)
  • 35 Sir Walter Scott, Life of Swift, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 29 (...)
  • 36 Ibid.

23Though less vituperative in his attacks than many of his fellow critics, Scott fails to conceal the disgust he feels at Part IV. He calls it “a diatribe against human nature”,33 the portrayal of mankind being “too degrading for contemplation.”34 Like Orrery before him, Scott tries to explain Part IV by referring to Swift’s life. He blames Swift’s disappointed hopes, his dissatisfaction with life in Ireland, his personal health, as well as Stella’s, for his loathing of the human species.35 However, Scott does not lapse into the mistake of identifying Gulliver’s misanthropy with that of Swift. Swift, he says, shows a “general misanthropy which never prevented a single deed of individual benevolence”,36 a true statement if one calls to mind Swift’s letter to Pope of 29 September 1725.

  • 37 William Hazlitt, Lectures on the English Poets (1818), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, (...)
  • 38 Ibid., p. 329.
  • 39 Ibid.

24One noteworthy exception to those critics who commented unfavorably on Gulliver’s Travels in the Romantic period is William Hazlitt. He praises it as a work that has “a power that has moved the world.” Swift’s aim, he says, was “to strip empty pride and grandeur of the imposing air which external circumstances throw around them.”37 Hazlitt denies any misanthropy on the part of Swift because he had acted with the most laudable of purposes “to show men what they are, and to teach them what they ought to be.”38 His final judgment is, “the moral lesson is as fine as the intellectual exhibition is amusing.”39

25Critics in the Victorian age were interested primarily in the personality of Swift. Thus, they focused on the disappointments in the Dean’s life and on his declining health as explanations for the drastic imagery employed in Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels. They did not develop any new features in their criticism, but basically repeated what people like Orrery or Scott had said before them. However, one new development was the fact that the Victorians distinguished between the narrative and its teachings:

  • 40 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation…, p. 108.

Without exception they enjoyed the story of Lemuel Gulliver’s voyages into strange realms; but almost as universally they hooted the moral of that story.40

  • 41 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 10.
  • 42 Ibid.

26As a result of this distinction, the Victorians took their “revenge” on Swift for the displeasure he had caused them: they converted Gulliver’s Travels into a book for children,41 toning down the offensive images by transferring the story into the realm of fantastic fairy tales. This, of course, did not help towards a better understanding of Swift’s satire.42

27A case in point is Thackeray, a writer who indulged in fanatical hysteria:

  • 43 William M. Thackeray, Lectures on the English Humourists of the 18th Century (1851), quoted from M (...)

It is Yahoo language: a monster gibbering shrieks and gnashing imprecations against mankind – tearing down all shreds of modesty, past all sense of manliness and shame; filthy in word, filthy in thought, furious, raging obscene …43

  • 44 William M. Thackeray, Lectures…, quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism…”, p. 221.
  • 45 See, for example, an anonymous review in The Critic of July 15, 1854: “Thackeray is a thorough des (...)
  • 46 Robert Mahony, Jonathan Swift, The Irish Identity, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 19 (...)
  • 47 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 11.

28Thackeray calls the moral of Gulliver’s Travels “horrible, shameful, unmanly, blasphemous”, and he advises all those who have not yet read it to avoid Part IV.44 Reviews of Thackeray’s Lectures were not all favorable,45 “which betrays some erosion of the long habitual British asperity towards Swift the man.” Thackeray was reproached with his “exaggerated emphasis on misanthropy”, and Swift was portrayed as a man of “charity and kindliness.” A comparison was drawn between Swift’s treatment of vice and that of Hogarth, “who had never been regarded as misanthropic or insane.”46 Many critics in the second half of the 19th century saw in the Yahoos representatives of a corrupt human nature that was innate rather than acquired, an image to which they generally objected.47

29A more remarkable change in the reception of Gulliver’s Travels became noticeable in the wake of the First World War. Shocked by the horrors of war, people lost their belief in man as the crowning glory of creation formed in the image of God. They suddenly recognized how similar human beings were to the Yahoos:

  • 48 George Saintsbury, The Peace of the Augustans (1946), quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism (...)

The Yahoo man pure and simple, man as he is, has always not far from him; something of the Yahoo, it may almost be said, he has always actually latent in him.48

  • 49 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gullivers Travels”…, p. 13.
  • 50 Ibid.

30This criticism marks the initial stage of a rehabilitation of Swift, a process which was to continue slowly over the course of the 20th century. However, before this rehabilitation could make itself fully felt, psychoanalytic criticism, which was at its height in the 1920s and 1930s, sought to portray the Dean as a psychopath who indulged in neurotic fantasies of coprophilia, exhibitionism, and voyeurism. It was fortunate that the recovery of Swift was then too far advanced for this kind of criticism to have any lasting influence or success.49 The arguments adduced during this rehabilitation process were by no means new ones. They had first appeared in Deane Swift’s defence against the attacks directed at Swift by Orrery: Gulliver’s Travels is not an attack on humanity in general, but a satire on its follies and vices.50

The Reception of Gulliver’s Travels in France

  • 51 Quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France, Paris, É. Champion, 1924, p. 57.
  • 52 Voltaire, Letter to M. Thieriot of February 1727, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The (...)
  • 53 Voltaire, Letter XXII (1734), Mélanges, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed), Swift, The Critical He (...)
  • 54 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 59.
  • 55 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 58.

31Voltaire was one of the few people in eighteenth-century France to have had access to the English original. Discussing Gulliver’s Travels in a letter to M. Thieriot of February 1727, he calls Swift the English Rabelais; indeed, he regarded him as superior to Rabelais, dubbing him the Rabelais “sans fatras”.51 What impressed him most in Gulliver’s Travels were the “strokes of imagination” and the lightness of style, “even if it were not in addition a satire on human kind.”52 Although Voltaire read the original, as yet unexpurgated version of Gulliver’s Travels, he did not accuse Swift of presenting too pessimistic a view of mankind. Nevertheless, he had some doubts about the success Swift’s works would enjoy in France. The French, he says, “will never have a very good understanding of the books of the ingenious Dr Swift” because the satire puts high demands on people’s knowledge of English culture, history, and politics, a knowledge not sufficiently available in France.53 One of Swift’s friends, the exiled Bishop Atterbury, shared these doubts on the grounds that the French had a different sense of humor from the English, and would therefore have difficulties understanding the significance of Gulliver’s Travels.54 A different view was held by Lady Bolingbroke, widow of the Marquis de Villette and second wife of the exiled Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke. She was one of the most ardent admirers of Swift in France, and was convinced that her compatriots would profit from the translation which had been announced but was not yet published.55

32The first French translation of Gulliver’s Travels was published anonymously at The Hague as early as January 1727,

  • 56 Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels into Remote Eighteenth-Century Germany”, in The Novel in Angl (...)

a translation … which may be described as “literal” according to the standards of the early 18th century, but which hardly qualifies as “faithful” today since it … caters to the delicateness of French bon goût.56

  • 57 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 58.

33This translation never enjoyed popularity in France, simply because the title Voyages du Capitaine Samuel [sic] Gulliver en divers pays éloignez suggests that a certain Gulliver was the author, and people did not draw the connection between this figure and the author of Le Conte du Tonneau (A Tale of a Tub), a work which had made Swift popular in France.57

34However, the French were not slow in producing another translation of their own, announced in literary journals as early as April 1727. The advertisement drew attention to Swift’s authorship:

  • 58 Mercure of March 1727, quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 60.

C’est … la Traduction d’un Livre Anglois tout nouveau, qui a eû un succès prodigieux à Londres, et dont l’Auteur est l’illustre M. Swift, qui a déjà donné au Public plusieurs Ouvrages très estimez, et surtout le Conte du Tonneau, Livre assez connu en France.58

35The translation was undertaken by the abbé Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines. If one speaks about the reception of Gulliver’s Travels in eighteenth-century France, one has to bear in mind that one speaks about the reception of this particular translation, and not about the reception of Swift’s Gulliver. This distinction is critical, since the translation differs in substantial respects from the original.

36From his statements in the “Préface du Traducteur”, it is clear that Desfontaines is far from Voltaire’s ideal of a good translator, described as follows:

  • 59 Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 71.

un traducteur doit être capable d’oublier son propre génie et se revêtir de celui de son auteur.59

37Desfontaines never succeeded in capturing the genius of Swift; while he praised the work’s playful and witty satire, he did not conceal his aversion to what he regarded as many bad parts:

  • 60 Abbé Desfontaines, “Préface du Traducteur”, in Voyages de Gulliver (1727), quoted from Sybil Gould (...)

des allégories impénétrables, des allusions insipides, des détails puérils, des réflexions triviales, des pensées basses, des redites ennuïeuses, des poliçonneries grossieres, des plaisanteries fades …60

  • 61 Ibid.

38All these elements would, Desfontaines goes on, be indecent if rendered word for word in French, and would offend against the good taste of the French public.61 Consequently, he felt compelled to adapt the original to the French taste, toning down whatever he regarded as offensive; and he was convinced that he would do well to do precisely this:

  • 62 Ibid.

Je me suis figuré … que j’étois capable de suppléer à ces défauts et de réparer ces pertes, par le secours de mon imagination, et par de certains tours que je donnerois aux choses même qui me déplaisoient.62

  • 63 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 62.

39In the end, Desfontaines even flattered himself that he had produced a version of Gulliver’s Travels which possessed certain merits the original lacked.63

  • 64 Ibid., p. 63.
  • 65 Ibid, p. 64.
  • 66 Ibid., p. 65.
  • 67 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 67.

40If one compares the original with the translation, one notices two different types of changes – omissions and additions. Not having a lively sense of humor himself, Desfontaines left out those passages in which Gulliver displays the cheerful side of his character, as, for example, in the description of the old farmer with his spectacles in Brobdingnag.64 He also dispensed with elements he regarded as base and trivial for a hero, such as Gulliver’s eating habits in Lilliput and Brobdingnag.65 Other omissions are the result of Desfontaines’s not wanting to offend against French bon goût. A Frenchman at that time, he says, would have been disgusted at the mention of terrible diseases or clothes being infested by lice. Also, the description of the Yahoos had to be toned down for all those who objected to seeing human nature made ridiculous.66 By contrast, Desfontaines tried to convey his own moral message by adding several passages, as is the case with the “Traité de Morale” in Part II.67

  • 68 Ibid., p. 78.
  • 69 See Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 84.

41Desfontaines’s adaptation of Gulliver’s Travels was an instant success. The first edition sold out immediately, and a second had to be prepared. A review in the Mercure de France of May 1727 praised the translation as an extraordinary achievement, remarkable for its clarity of style.68 It called the whole a moral treatise which observed the Horatian principle of utile et dulce; Part IV in particular was seen as instructive because it exposed the faults of mankind.69 Similarly, the Journal des Savants of July 1727 was full of praise:

  • 70 Journal des Savants, July 1727, quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, pp. 79-80.

Ses réflexions philosophiques, ses préceptes de morale, ses maximes de politique, ses idées sublimes sur l’honneur, sur la purité [sic], et sur tous les devoirs de la vie civile, les éloges qu’il fait de la vertu, l’horreur qu’il donne du vice en général … toutes ces choses sont amenées par des préambules divertissans et soutenues par des imaginations amusantes.70

  • 71 François Augustin Paradis de Moncrif, Œuvres Mêlées (1743), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), S (...)
  • 72 See Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 108.
  • 73 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 82.

42Apart from two exceptions, people praised the translation and agreed that it was a remarkable achievement, and that Desfontaines’s Gulliver was a book from which everyone could profit. The two exceptions were Paradis de Moncrif and Madame Du Deffand. Paradis de Moncrif did not think highly of Gulliver’s Travels because, to his mind, it simply reversed acknowledged roles (“under the name of Houynhnhnis [sic] horses have human reason, and men the instinct of horses”71), and, he went on, it did not need a great deal of genius to enlarge and reduce things as Swift had done in Lilliput and Brobdingnag.72 Madame Du Deffand, on the other hand, detested the moral passages, and found talking to horses the most boring and awful thing she could imagine, as she explained in a letter to Horace Walpole in July 1780.73

43All in all, extensive statements about Gulliver’s Travels after the 1730s were rare because the work was considered too well-known to make such comment necessary. One indication of how successful Gulliver’s Travels was in France is the large number of imitations, such as L’Isle de la Raison ou les Petits Hommes (1727) by Marivaux, a comedy in three acts, or L’Isle de la Folie (1727), a comedy in one act.

  • 74 Ibid., p. 90.
  • 75 Ibid., p. 92.

44Gulliver’s Travels also gave new impulses to the genre of the voyages imaginaires. One notable example is Voltaire’s Micromégas; another less notable one is Desfontaines’s Voyage. Desfontaines seems to have been so flattered by the success of his translation that he could not resist the temptation of writing what appears to be a sequel to Gulliver’s Travels. However, he makes it clear in the Preface that the name of the hero constitutes the only similarity to it; he chose the name of Gulliver because readers were already familiar with it.74 Desfontaines seemed confident of his success, and of his ability to excel Swift. The work was too obviously a piece of plagiarism to be of much interest to readers.75 But his voyage imaginaire was not the only one that failed to be successful; there were simply too many productions of this kind in the second half of the 18th century. Even those imitations of Gulliver’s Travels that were comparatively successful at the time were soon forgotten. In the end, it was only the original that survived.

The Reception of Gulliver’s Travels in Germany

  • 76 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, p. 3.
  • 77 Ibid., p. 9.
  • 78 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany in the 18th Century: A Preliminary Sketch”, in “N (...)
  • 79 Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

45Towards the middle of the 18th century, there was an increasing demand for English literature in Germany, as the Germans followed the French in their growing interest in everything English. However, only few readers at that time were able to read and understand English. Works written in English, therefore, reached Germany mainly in translations, editions that were themselves often translated from French versions.76 If one bears in mind the liberties Desfontaines had taken with Gulliver’s Travels, one must regard it as fortunate that the first two German translations were based not on Desfontaines’s adaptation, but on the first French translation, which was published anonymously at The Hague in January 1727, and which can be considered a comparatively faithful one.77 The two German translations were published in Hamburg and Leipzig respectively; but only the Leipzig translator admits that he had translated from the French because the work’s reception in France had been so favorable.78 In contradistinction to France, in Germany Swift had not been popular until the publication of Gulliver’s Travels. It was the success of this publication that made the Dean interesting to a wide reading public. The translators of the first two German versions praised Gulliver’s Travels as “an ingenious invention presenting truth and solid maxims under the cover of striking and amusing images.” The book, they said, “aimed generally at the folly of men and the depravity of their customs.”79

  • 80 Johann Christoph Gottsched, Versuch einer critischen Dichtkunst; see Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “S (...)

46The problem many German readers had with Gulliver’s Travels was that it did not seem to fit into any conventional categories of genre. There were, however, several attempts at classifying it. In 1751, Johann Christoph Gottsched (1700-66), one of the leading neo-classical critics, called the first two parts political fables, a term not applicable to Part IV, in which, to Gottsched’s mind, Swift had sinned against the poetic laws of probability.80 This kind of criticism was as yet unaffected by comments from influential English writers, but matters were to change in the following year.

  • 81 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, p. 20.
  • 82 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

47In 1752, Orrery’s Remarks on the Life and Writing of Dr Jonathan Swift was published in England, and in the same year translated into German. From then on, German readers showed an interest in Swift’s life, and criticism of his works became mainly biographical.81 Discussions of Gulliver’s Travels concentrated more and more on Part IV; it was seen as an expression of what was taken to be Swift’s misanthropy. In a review of the Remarks in the Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen of March 1753, Albrecht von Haller (1708-77), a Swiss physician and poet, accepted Orrery’s criticism of Part IV, finding Swift’s images “gross and indecent”. He accused Swift in particular of bearing ill-will towards his fellow human beings, which is in contradiction to Haller’s own principle of loving mankind despite its faults and vices.82

  • 83 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.
  • 84 Ibid.

48In Germany at that time, the conception of satire was gradually changing. While to a critic like Gottsched, the term satire was still restricted to formal verse satire with the satirist as a moral philosopher, others extended the term to include everything written in a satiric spirit. What characterized this satiric spirit was a condemnation of general evil and a providing of a satiric norm, the observation of which would be of benefit to society.83 Consequently, critics looked for a satiric norm in Gulliver’s Travels, and it was in this that they found the text wanting. Haller regarded it as neither good nor useful; the Houyhnhnms, he maintained, do not represent an ideal for human beings to follow since they have no occasion to employ their reason.84

  • 85 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, pp. 11-12.
  • 86 Ibid., p. 15.
  • 87 Ibid., p. 11.

49However, the critical reaction was not all unfavorable. Swift had his defenders, among them Johann Heinrich Waser, a theologian from Switzerland. Between 1756 and 1766, his translations of several of Swift’s works were published in the eight-volume collection Satyrische und ernsthafte Schriften von Dr Jonathan Swift, of which Gulliver’s Travels comprises the fifth volume.85 Waser was the first to translate Swift’s works directly from the English. He was an exception among eighteenth-century translators in that he did not feel obliged to tone down the original. One reliable indication of how faithful a translator was to the original is the use of scatological imagery. Waser, in contrast to Desfontaines for example, “never allowed accuracy to be sacrificed to prudery.”86 The reason for this may be that he saw in Swift a kindred spirit, who, like himself, fought against any kind of injustice.87 In the Preface to his version of Gulliver’s Travels, Waser defended Swift against the accusations directed at him by readers such as Orrery and Young. Their mistake was that they

  • 88 Ibid., p. 16.

had failed to distinguish between Swift’s end(s) and his means. The Houyhnhnms, for example, were not intended to degrade human nature; rather, they were the Dean’s means to an end, a means of correcting abuse.88

  • 89 Ibid., p. 20.

50Waser was one of the few who understood the nature of Swift’s satire for what it really was, an attack not on mankind in general, but on human vices and corruptions. His translation was a complete rendering of the original, with neither omissions nor additions. It suffered, however, from the impact of Orrery’s Remarks.89 Orrery’s book had already spread its venom too far over the German-speaking world for a translation like Waser’s to be successful.

51Johann Gottfried Herder was another German writer who noticed some affinities between himself and Swift. His attitude towards the Dean, however, was not one of unequivocal admiration. Although he defended Swift against Orrery’s accusations, he

  • 90 Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean with the Whip’: Herder and Swift”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonatha (...)

observed a tension between Swift’s deeply humane way of thinking and his cynical, bitter attitude towards his fellow men.90

  • 91 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.
  • 92 Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.
  • 93 See Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.
  • 94 See Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.

52Herder’s criticism of Swift, like that of many others at the time, concentrated on the Dean’s life. But unlike others, he did not call him a misanthrope, but rather a philanthropist who was so distressed by the vices and corruptions of mankind that he sometimes went too far in his satire.91 Herder tried to approach Gulliver’s Travels from a psychological point of view. He thought that Swift was undergoing a process of “exhumanization”, involving continued isolation in a self-imposed exile, and that Gulliver’s Travels was “an advanced stage of that mental process.”92 Herder regarded the Yahoos as representatives of mankind in all its depravity and corruption, whereas the Houyhnhnms represent the ideal of reasonable beings, a state to which human beings should aspire.93 Herder lamented the fact that Swift was for the most part misunderstood in Germany, a fact which he attributed to the Germans’ unfamiliarity with English culture and history. But one thing he knew for certain was that in Germany the Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms would also last.94

  • 95 See Edgar Mertner, “Christoph Martin Wieland’s Criticism of Swift”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonat (...)
  • 96 See Edgar Mertner, “Christoph Martin Wieland’s Criticism…”.
  • 97 Ibid.
  • 98 See Harald Kämmerer, “The Reception of Swift in Eighteenth-Century Germany and Johann Karl Wezel’s (...)

53A more unfavorable view of Gulliver’s Travels was taken by Christoph Martin Wieland. In his Beiträge zur geheimen Geschichte der Menschheit, he accused Swift of having allowed his misanthropic attitude to misguide his reason, which, if employed to its proper use, would have made the Dean one of the greatest among the men of genius. Particularly in Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels, Wieland goes on, Swift had given an example of his intention to injure mankind maliciously.95 For Wieland, the Yahoos are “a hideous mixture of ape and devil”, created for the sole purpose of presenting a pessimistic perspective on mankind. The reason for Swift’s “unnatural passion” he traced to the Dean’s disappointment with his fellow men. According to Wieland, Swift wanted to take revenge on the human race for all it had made him suffer.96 Wieland himself had a different approach to the follies of mankind; he ridiculed them, but he remained optimistic and never lost his faith in the inherently good qualities of the human race.97 This view makes Wieland a typical representative of Enlightenment premises. The accusations levelled at Swift at that time were all the more severe because in those passages of Gulliver’s Travels that reveal Gulliver’s misanthropy Swift had disregarded such premises.98 The accusations which originated in the criticism of Gulliver’s Travels had a decisive influence on the reception of all of Swift’s works in Germany.

Conclusion

54If one looks at the reception of Gulliver’s Travels in Britain, Ireland and Germany, one notices certain parallels, but divergent comments emerged in France. This difference is largely the result of Desfontaines’s translation. In France, the reception of Gulliver’s Travels, at least as far as the 18th century goes, was that of Desfontaines’s adaptation. His toning down of the original was successful in that it was received with widespread approval. Criticism of Gulliver’s Travels was generally favorable and full of praise for its moral message.

55In Britain, Ireland and Germany, criticism tended to be less enthusiastic; indeed, the attacks levelled at Gulliver’s Travels were sometimes unjustifiably fierce. Of course, the book had its defenders, but the majority were put off by Swift’s supposed misanthropy. In all of these countries, Orrery’s Remarks exerted a damaging influence on the reception of Gulliver’s Travels, as it did on Swift’s works in general. But however savage some of the attacks were, they did not succeed in effacing Gulliver’s Travels from the list of the world’s most famous books. There will always be those who consider the images too coarse, or the satire on human vices too mordant, but there will also always be those who are enraptured by Swift’s acute awareness not only of the flaws, but also of the virtues, of his fellow human beings. Whatever their response may be, many readers nowadays would agree with what George Orwell said about Gulliver’s Travels in 1950:

  • 99 George Orwell, Shooting an Elephant (1950), quoted from Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels, Paul T (...)

If I were 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.99

Notes

1 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels ”, Munich, W. Fink, 1984, p. 8.

2 For extracts from their letters, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970, pp. 61-64.

3 Letter from Pope to Swift of 16 November 1726, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 62.

4 Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism of Gulliver’s ‘Voyage to the Houyhnhnms’, 1726-1914 ”, in Stanford Studies in Language and Literature, Hardin Craig (ed.), Stanford: School of Letters, Stanford University, 1941, p. 211.

5 Letter from Gay to Swift of 17 November 1726, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, pp. 62-63.

6 Letter from Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to her sister, Lady Mar, of November 1726, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 65.

7 Jonathan Smedley, Gulliveriana: or a Fourth Volume of Miscellanies (1728), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, pp. 90-91.

8 Samuel Richardson, Clarissa (1748), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 104.

9 Letter from Richardson to Lady Bradshaigh of 23 February 1752, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 105.

10 Henry Fielding, “Obituary of Swift” of 5 November 1745, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 109.

11 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels ”…, p. 8.

12 The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift, D.D., David Woolley (ed.), 4 vols, Frankfurt, Berlin, Bern, P. Lang, 1999-…, vol. II, pp. 606-7.

13 John Boyle, fifth Earl of Orrery, Remarks on the Life and Writing of Dr Jonathan Swift, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 121. For a new edition, see João Fróes (ed.), Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr Jonathan Swift, Newark and London, Associated University Presses, 2000.

14 Orrery, Remarks…, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 122.

15 Ibid., p. 123.

16 Ibid., p. 125.

17 Orrery, Remarks…, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 126.

18 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gullivers Travels”…, p. 9.

19 Deane Swift, Essay upon the Life, Writings and Character of Dr Jonathan Swift (1755), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 139.

20 Deane Swift, Essay…, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 144.

21 Ibid., p. 145.

22 Ibid.

23 Thomas Sheridan, The Life of the Reverend Jonathan Swift (1784), see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 235.

24 Thomas Sheridan, The Life…, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 237.

25 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation of Jonathan Swift 1781-1882, Philadelphia, n.p., 1941, p. 41.

26 Ibid.

27 William Godwin, The Enquirer: Reflections on Education, Manners, and Literature (1797), quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism…”, p. 219.

28 Edward Young, Conjectures on Original Composition (1759), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 179.

29 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 9.

30 James Harris, Philological Inquiries, in Three Parts (1781), Part III, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 208.

31 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation…, p. 41.

32 Sir Walter Scott, Life of Swift (1814), quoted from Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 292.

33 Ibid.

34 Sir Walter Scott, Introduction to Gulliver’s Travels, quoted from Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 312.

35 Sir Walter Scott, Life of Swift, see Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 292.

36 Ibid.

37 William Hazlitt, Lectures on the English Poets (1818), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 328.

38 Ibid., p. 329.

39 Ibid.

40 Donald M. Berwick, The Reputation…, p. 108.

41 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 10.

42 Ibid.

43 William M. Thackeray, Lectures on the English Humourists of the 18th Century (1851), quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism…”, p. 221.

44 William M. Thackeray, Lectures…, quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism…”, p. 221.

45 See, for example, an anonymous review in The Critic of July 15, 1854: “Thackeray is a thorough despot in his dealings with Swift … He whirls and wheels over poor Swift with the intensity of a falcon, ever and anon coming down with a grand swoop upon his enemy. His talons are so strong, his beak so pointed, that, with the Dean writhing beneath his feet, he reminds one of the vulture tearing at the liver of Prometheus.”

46 Robert Mahony, Jonathan Swift, The Irish Identity, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1995, p. 103.

47 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels”…, p. 11.

48 George Saintsbury, The Peace of the Augustans (1946), quoted from Merrel D. Clubb, “The Criticism of Gulliver’s ‘Voyage to the Houyhnhnms’”, p. 232.

49 See Hermann J. Real and Heinz J. Vienken, Jonathan Swift, Gullivers Travels”…, p. 13.

50 Ibid.

51 Quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France, Paris, É. Champion, 1924, p. 57.

52 Voltaire, Letter to M. Thieriot of February 1727, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 73.

53 Voltaire, Letter XXII (1734), Mélanges, quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 74.

54 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 59.

55 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 58.

56 Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels into Remote Eighteenth-Century Germany”, in The Novel in Anglo-German Context, Kathleen Williams (ed.), Amsterdam and Atlanta, Rodopi, 2000, p. 9.

57 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 58.

58 Mercure of March 1727, quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 60.

59 Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 71.

60 Abbé Desfontaines, “Préface du Traducteur”, in Voyages de Gulliver (1727), quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 62.

61 Ibid.

62 Ibid.

63 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 62.

64 Ibid., p. 63.

65 Ibid, p. 64.

66 Ibid., p. 65.

67 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 67.

68 Ibid., p. 78.

69 See Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 84.

70 Journal des Savants, July 1727, quoted from Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, pp. 79-80.

71 François Augustin Paradis de Moncrif, Œuvres Mêlées (1743), quoted from Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 107.

72 See Kathleen Williams (ed.), Swift, The Critical Heritage…, p. 108.

73 See Sybil Goulding, Swift en France…, p. 82.

74 Ibid., p. 90.

75 Ibid., p. 92.

76 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, p. 3.

77 Ibid., p. 9.

78 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany in the 18th Century: A Preliminary Sketch”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonathan Swift in German Letters from the 18th Century to the Present Day, Hermann J. Real (ed.), with the assistance of Melanie Just, Neil Key, and Helga Scholz, forthcoming.

79 Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

80 Johann Christoph Gottsched, Versuch einer critischen Dichtkunst; see Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

81 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, p. 20.

82 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

83 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

84 Ibid.

85 See Hermann J. Real, “Gulliver’s Travels…”, pp. 11-12.

86 Ibid., p. 15.

87 Ibid., p. 11.

88 Ibid., p. 16.

89 Ibid., p. 20.

90 Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean with the Whip’: Herder and Swift”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonathan Swift in German Letters from the 18th Century to the Present Day, Hermann J. Real (ed.), with the assistance of Melanie Just, Neil Key, and Helga Scholz, forthcoming.

91 See Marie-Louise Spieckermann, “Swift in Germany…”.

92 Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.

93 See Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.

94 See Arno Löffler, “‘The Irish Dean…”.

95 See Edgar Mertner, “Christoph Martin Wieland’s Criticism of Swift”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonathan Swift in German Letters from the 18th Century to the Present Day, Hermann J. Real (ed.), with the assistance of Melanie Just, Neil Key, and Helga Scholz, forthcoming.

96 See Edgar Mertner, “Christoph Martin Wieland’s Criticism…”.

97 Ibid.

98 See Harald Kämmerer, “The Reception of Swift in Eighteenth-Century Germany and Johann Karl Wezel’s Satire Belphegor”, in “Never Ill Receiv’d”: Jonathan Swift in German Letters from the 18th Century to the Present Day, Hermann J. Real (ed.), with the assistance of Melanie Just, Neil Key, and Helga Scholz, forthcoming.

99 George Orwell, Shooting an Elephant (1950), quoted from Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels, Paul Turner (ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1998, p. ix.

Auteur

Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster

© Presses universitaires de Caen, 2002

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540