A Modest Proposal Harkness Makeup by Ms. O'Connor

Question 1 - Sonja

2024-02-28 21:06:03 UTC

How does Swift being purposefully vague and general reasonable when talking about his "modest proposal" (for the first two-ish pages, until he makes a specific reference in the first paragraph of page 3) affect the audience, especially after they realise what exactly his modest proposal is?

Question 2

25swoerner — 2024-02-28 21:12:44 UTC

On page 5, Swift states that selling and eating children is the best way for the poor to survive because of British influence and their dominance over Ireland; how could this affect the way the British may view their own foreign policies?

Question 3

25swoerner — 2024-02-28 21:21:35 UTC

How does juxtaposing the very real prejudice against "papists" with the ludicrous idea of eating children in the same sentence (page 3, paragraph 5) force the British to reconsider their beliefs?

Question 1

25hmiller4 — 2024-02-29 02:11:27 UTC

Throughout the writing as Swift presents his argument leading up to top of page 3 paragraph one, to the end of the piece he never switches tone. He remains consistent in remaining formal and sophisticated when presenting such an outrageous idea of eating children. Why does he do this? and do you think it strengthens his use of satire and humour in the piece.

Question 2

25hmiller4 — 2024-02-29 02:18:06 UTC

As swift presents his argument about eating children, he uses strong diction towards the mothers such as "Men would become as fond of their wives during the time of their pregnancy as they are now of their mares in foal, their cows in calf.. nor offer to beat ot kick them." By using this language surrounding woman as well as terms such as beggars and by comparing their worth to the fatness and success of their babies, Swift creates strong diction that dehumanizes woman. WHy do you think he chooses to do this? Do you think by choosing to use this diction that it strengthens or weakens his argument?

Question 3

25hmiller4 — 2024-02-29 02:27:38 UTC

Jonathan swift was known as the father of satire at this time. Knowing this do you think readers at the time this was written in 1729 correctly took his writing as satire or rather took the writing offensively and seriously?

Question 1

86agoodin — 2024-03-07 04:27:10 UTC

Swift is clearly appealing to the British government in his essay, but seems to do so by mocking them. His format parodies that of a government proposal and his language mocks their views of the people. Even though it is all in a satirical sense, how does his mockery of the British help prove his point to the audience? Or does he risk offending them and causing his point to go unheard?

86agoodin — 2024-03-07 04:32:50 UTC

In the last paragraph, Swift attempts to prove his credibility by discussing how the issue does not affect him. Does this work for or against him? It is meant to make him seem more trustworthy due to him not having an ulterior motive, but him stating he is not impacted by the outcome may make him seem like an unreliable narrator.

86agoodin — 2024-03-07 04:35:47 UTC

Typically, writers attempt to humanize themselves and prove their credibility to the reader by showing themselves in a positive light, but Swift seems to do the opposite. He creates a cold and heartless persona that he maintains throughout the essay, referring to the Irish as useless and comparing the children to animals. How does his lack of humanity contribute to his satirical tone as well as help further his point?