Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The ‘ancients versus moderns’ controversy, a prominent intellectual debate of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, pitted those who admired the intellectual achievements of classical antiquity against those who believed that modern science and reason had surpassed the ancients. This dispute extended beyond academia, influencing literature and philosophy. Jonathan Swift, a keen observer of his time, masterfully addresses this controversy in *Gulliver’s Travels* (1726), not by taking a definitive side, but by satirizing the follies and limitations of both factions. Through Gulliver’s voyages to fantastical lands, Swift exposes the vanity, intellectual arrogance, and moral failings inherent in both the reverence for the past and the uncritical embrace of the new.
The ‘Ancients versus Moderns’ Debate: A Brief Overview
The debate originated in France, sparked by Boileau’s defense of classical literary models. The ‘ancients’ championed the virtues of classical Greek and Roman literature, philosophy, and political thought, believing they offered timeless wisdom and moral guidance. They valued order, reason, and tradition. The ‘moderns’, on the other hand, emphasized the progress of knowledge through scientific inquiry and rationalism, arguing that modern thinkers had surpassed the ancients in understanding the world. This often manifested as a dismissal of classical authority and a celebration of innovation.
Laputa, Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glubbdubdrib, and Japan: Satirizing the ‘Moderns’
Swift’s most direct satire of the ‘moderns’ is found in the voyages to Laputa, Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glubbdubdrib, and Japan. Laputa, the floating island inhabited by abstract thinkers, represents the dangers of impractical, detached intellectualism. The Laputians are obsessed with mathematics, astronomy, and music, but utterly incapable of applying their knowledge to practical concerns. Their preoccupation with abstract thought leads to societal decay and a disconnect from reality.
Balnibarbi, the land below Laputa, is a parody of the Royal Society and the scientific projects of the time. The Academy of Projectors is filled with absurd and useless inventions, highlighting Swift’s skepticism towards purely theoretical science divorced from practical application. For example, attempts to extract sunlight from cucumbers or to soften marble for pillows demonstrate the folly of misguided innovation. This voyage critiques the modern tendency to prioritize novelty over utility.
Luggnagg and Glubbdubdrib further expose the flaws of the ‘modern’ pursuit of knowledge. The Struldbrugs, immortals who do not enjoy eternal youth, are miserable and senile, demonstrating the limitations of extending life without addressing the problems of aging and mortality. The ability to summon ghosts in Glubbdubdrib, while seemingly impressive, reveals the futility of seeking knowledge about the past without moral or practical benefit.
Brobdingnag and Lilliput: Critiquing the ‘Ancients’ and Human Vanity
While primarily a satire of European politics and human nature, the voyages to Brobdingnag and Lilliput also contain elements that critique the ‘ancients’. Brobdingnag, the land of giants, allows Swift to satirize the perceived virtues of the ‘ancients’ – their emphasis on grandeur and tradition – by presenting them as physically imposing but morally flawed. The King of Brobdingnag, while initially impressed by Gulliver’s accounts of European history, ultimately dismisses it as petty and barbaric. This suggests that the ‘ancient’ ideals of heroism and nobility are often based on illusion and self-deception.
Lilliput, the land of tiny people, satirizes human pettiness and the absurdity of political and religious disputes. The Lilliputians’ obsession with trivial matters – the proper way to break an egg – reflects the narrow-mindedness and factionalism that Swift saw in both ‘ancient’ and ‘modern’ societies. The elaborate rituals and ceremonies of the Lilliputians can be seen as a parody of the formalistic traditions valued by the ‘ancients’.
Swift’s Position: A Balanced Critique
Swift does not unequivocally endorse either side of the ‘ancients versus moderns’ debate. Instead, he uses *Gulliver’s Travels* to offer a broader critique of human reason, pride, and the limitations of knowledge. He suggests that both the uncritical reverence for the past and the unbridled enthusiasm for the new can lead to folly and moral corruption. His satire is directed at the inherent flaws in human nature, rather than at any particular intellectual school of thought. The Houyhnhnms, rational horses, represent an ideal of reason and virtue, but their complete lack of emotion and empathy also highlights the dangers of suppressing human passions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Swift’s *Gulliver’s Travels* provides a complex and nuanced engagement with the ‘ancients versus moderns’ controversy. Rather than taking sides, Swift employs satire to expose the weaknesses and pretensions of both factions. He demonstrates that neither tradition nor innovation, in and of themselves, guarantee wisdom or moral progress. Ultimately, Swift’s work serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of intellectual arrogance and the importance of humility in the pursuit of knowledge, remaining remarkably relevant even today.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.