Are we rational? In Book IV of Gulliver’s Travels, Gulliver sure seems to think not, nor does the Houyhnhnm society in which the traveler finds himself living for years. In the most curious of circumstances, Gulliver finds himself in a place where he is thrust upon living amid a land where his fellow bipeds are little more than uncultured, filthy “brutes” called Yahoos and the ruling population is comprised of rational, reasonable horses referred to as Houyhnhnms.
What Jonathan Swift, the author of this masterpiece, is doing here is presenting to the reader a coin whose two sides really are heads and tails. He prefers not to confuse the picture by combining in one body two different ideas—he clearly draws a metaphorical line in the sand, dividing “rational” beings from ugly animals. Is Gulliver the conduit between these oppositions? No. Captain Don Pedro is. But he will be discussed later. Before getting into the grander scheme of Gulliver’s Travels, a discussion of some literary techniques and other related matters are to be first at hand.
Primarily, it is important to mention that the book is written in the first person, by the observer. This is stated because it conveys a sense of authenticity, in that we realize Gulliver himself has both testified to and is recalling his adventure in Houyhnhnmland. This helps relieve somewhat from the reader’s mind that this the work is little more than hearsay or the exaggeration of a fable. Perhaps making the work even more “believable” is the seeming lack of embellishment in the work. Rather, Gulliver seems to be reporting what he sees, writing down his accounts in a journalistic style. Swift was wise to employ this method in the work. It is less as though Gulliver is a storyteller and more an adventurer who wants to tell others what he is seeing. Needless to say though, the audience is still left wondering as to whether the events are actual or but a figment of Gulliver’s mind.
Another issue to report on are symbols and imagery in the book. There are several instances of both to note. Why did Swift choose to employ horses and simian-like creatures to represent the two very different aspects of human nature? Perhaps it is important to remark that horses, especially in the eighteenth century, held a certain respect in the world, both as a creature and as a friend to human industry. They are stately, regal beings who, in the early industrial era, were as integral to the economy as steam and mills. They are reliable animals who pulled wagons, pulled loads, and marched coaches down the finest roads and passages that traced the land. What more appropriate species but the horse could represent the “superior” Houyhnhnm?
Meanwhile, we are confronted with the Yahoos, detestable, unruly little beings who sound something close to a race of wild chimpanzees that are running amok. Genetically, simians are the closest species to humans and, in many ways, even resemble humans, especially when discussing physical comparisons. Something to be noticed when reading the work (keeping the 18th century British context in mind) is how there seem to be allusions to the Houyhnhnms and their rule over Houyhnhnmland to resemble something quite like a colonial government. It is as if the Yahoos (which are all colors but white, as were the native peoples of the colonial nations; note Gulliver IS white AND English) and the Houyhnhnms (which have a clearly distinct social order dictated by color, as noted on page 458) are coexisting in a society not much unlike any of the British colonies of the day. Certainly, one of the most socially controversial issues to this day is how some colonists supposed the native peoples of the occupied lands to be inferior in living condition, culture, and even in biology. In much the same way, the Houyhnhnms also look mightily down upon the unrefined, brutish Yahoos.
Another significant matter of symbolism to note is that Gulliver’s destinations are not reachable by land. They are accessed via boat. In the case of Book IV and the Houyhnhnms, this suggests that the “utopia” of Houyhnhnmland is unreachable but by those who dare to go further than the average person. That, to attain the level of rational, reasonable thinking that the Houyhnhnms are supposed to be projecting, one needs to literally be an adventureous, risk-taking soul who is willing to sacrifice potentially all to travel to a place that only one brave man ever could—or did—reach. Along this same vein of thinking, it is also important to note that Gulliver says “no European did ever visit these countries [including Houyhnhnmland] before me,” (482). Again, this a very important quote to evoke, because what is being suggested is that the people of Gulliver’s day have never been able to reach the so-called “rational, reasonable” nature of the Houyhnhnms.
Of course, as we speak about the “reasonable, rational nature” of the Houyhnhnms, we all probably begin asking ourselves, “Is Houyhnhnmland the reflection of a truly utopian society?” On the surface, all seems orderly, neat, tidy, virtuous, and perfect, but really, we realize that the Houyhnhnms are lacking in some of the most important of human elements. After all, the Houyhnhnms express little, if any, emotion. Most notably, they procreate for function only; there are no “love children” in Houyhnhnmland. As described on Page 466, the Houyhnhnms aim to “produce one of each sex” and, should a young Houyhnhnm die, another youngster will be produced. The underclass of Houyhnhnms, which are largely occupied as servants, are allowed three of each sex. Of course, though, as these generally unfeeling beings go, parents “have no fondness for their colts or foals, but the care they take in educating them proceedeth entirely from dictates of reason,” (466). Clearly, Gulliver’s Travels is as much social commentary as it is satire, but there are a couple instances where one begins to realize just how socially edgy this work must have been in its day. Beyond the scathing remarks about how the Yahoos
As Gulliver goes about accounting the many exchanges between himself and Master, we see the record of this particularly bold statement: [M]aster thought it monstrous in us to give the females a different kind of education from the males, except in some articles of domestic management; whereby, as he truly observed, one half of the natives were good for nothing but bringing children into the world; and to trust the care of their children to such useless animals, he said was yet a greater instance of brutality. (466). On the surface, this could be deemed as a nearly vulgar statement by most any feminist. While master seems to detest that females’ only major role is to produce babies and raise children, we then realize that their seems to be disgust in the “useless animals” called the female gender as a whole. However, when reading the words again, maybe the quote can be seen as a backhanded advocacy for equal rights. After all, the above long quote by and large reflects the gritty reality of a woman’s place in the eighteenth century. Women were not politicians or bankers or even voters (at least this was the case in any male-dominated society of the era most have ever heard of); they truly had little opportunity to be anything other than mothers, maids, and nannies. Interestingly, Gulliver states that in Houyhnhnmland, “[t]emperance, industry, exercise, and cleanliness are the lessons equally enjoined to the young ones of both sexes,” (466). Now, if we read between the lines, we see in there the notion of a equal education. If this is so, and was practiced in a land of “rational,” “reasonable,” “admirable” beings, than is it possible to say that we, in this generally equal society, have reached something of the level of reasonableness that Gulliver so reveres? Maybe gender equality is a supremely rational notion? Perhaps the feminists would agree.
There is an interesting point to make about Gulliver’s influence upon the Houyhnhnms after his years in their midst. While the Houyhnhnms maintain a hardline stance against the acceptance of Yahoos throughout Book IV (though Master had a soft spot for Gulliver), it is significant to note that both Gulliver and the Houyhnhnms each seem to express marked emotion upon Gulliver’s departure from the island. Gulliver cried. The Houyhnhnms sing a farewell song and keep their eyes fixated upon the departing Yahoo who left an impression upon the Houyhnhnm society. It is surprising that the Houyhnhnms seem to actually feel a bit of loss (or, perhaps glee, in the case of those Houyhnhnms who took offense at Gulliver’s presence), but it is almost more amazing that Gulliver finds himself actually crying as he leaves the island. He may be mourning his withdrawal from the island of beings he so idolizes or he simply fears the arduous, even painful reassimilation into his native land brimming with and governed by filthy beings he now sees as Yahoos. At any rate, Gulliver, for all his efforts to ascend in mind and rationale to the level of the Houyhnhnms (who express little more than indifference upon the passing of a fellow Houyhnhnm), actually cracks, expressing unrepressible human emotions.
It is curious when, upon being on Don Pedro’s ship, Gulliver feigns being sick so as to keep to himself in the ship’s cabin. It is particularly striking that Gulliver, who so reveres a creature who are said to have no word for lies or untruths, himself projects a falsehood on the ship. Is this a hypocritical slip or a mistake? No? It likely does not stem from any sort of malice. Rather, it seems to only goes to highlight humans’ inherent imperfection. Even Gulliver, who aspires to reach the supreme level of moral righteousness that the Houyhnhnms supposedly exercise, cannot truly reach that for which he striving. This does little slip of conduct does not seem to be arbitrarily placed by Swift. Rather, it looks like it is intended to contrast against the shining, honest, good role model introduced in Chapter XI named Captain Don Pedro.
Indeed, it is Don Pedro who shines in Gulliver’s Travels as a true role model. If Yahoos represent the ugliest side of human nature and Houyhnhnms sensible but detached existence, then Don Pedro is the exemplary combination of the two; physically a Yahoo, rationally a Houyhnhnm, and in every respect the embodiment of a compassionate, benevolent soul which can only come in a human package. It is no small point to make that Gulliver “really [begins] to tolerate” Don Pedro aboard the ship (478). After all, Gulliver can barely go on to withstand the sight or odors of his very own family and countrypeople. It is clear that Gulliver acknowledges that Don Pedro is, as he would likely agree, an outstanding Yahoo. However, it never seems that Gulliver recognizes Don Pedro as the figure who should be the traveling Englishman’s true role model. It seems that this fact really only is beheld in the eye of the reader. After all, it is clear to most of us that Don Pedro clearly stands out as the embodiment as among the best that humankind has to offer. However, it truly seems that Don Pedro is seen by Gulliver only as a novelty of sorts, much like the Houyhnhnms see Gulliver. It really is sad for Gulliver that the meeting with Don Pedro seems to do little to fully reconnect Gulliver to the human world. Certainly, Gulliver manages to coexist with “Yahoos” on a confined ship for a challenging period of time. However, Gulliver does not really ever snap out of his disgust for “Yahoos,” and this is superbly illustrated upon returning to his family (a move made per Don Pedro’s sound advice).
The only living things in England to which Gulliver feels any real connection are the horses he keeps. Perhaps it is commendable, should one say, that Gulliver strains to physically reside with his family, but it is utterly repulsive that he has lost so many emotional ties with his family and has fostered such a hatred of Yahoos that he views his having fathered children [young Yahoos in his mind] as an act of “shame, confusion, and horror,” (479). In the end, we realize that Gulliver has wound up returning to his home essentially delusional, emotionally disturbed, and completely unable to recollect what it means to live in a human society. This has nothing to say as to whether Gulliver really traveled to the lands of which he speaks. That is really irrelevant. What matters is deciding what constellation of Gulliver’s experience has done for his mind, heart, and soul.
Perhaps what is important is not what Gulliver sees during his adventures, but what he did not see. We realize that, in the end, humans really are rational, reasonable beings. In the scheme of life, are we really as rotten as the Yahoos? Who could say we are ever as cold and indifferent as the Houyhnhnms? Certainly, there are some people who are as stoic as the Houyhnhnms and as lewd as the Yahoos. Yet, for the bulk of humankind, it seems many of us are both level-headed and rational as well as good-natured and benevolent, just like Don Pedro. However, Gulliver does not realize that. He is searching for something more in this world and, perhaps through his societal disillusionment, forgets that people are basically good, prudent, warm souls that, sometimes, make errors. It does not help Gulliver’s perspective on mankind that the last people he saw before his time with the Houyhnhnms are those who toss him off the ship and abandon him. What good can it do when the very creatures who appear to be the most rational, sensible beings on the planet loathe Gulliver’s kind and instill in his mind to do the same?
Luckily, we the readers, do not lose our touch with humanity. We see that, for whatever strong suits the Houyhnhnms may have in seemingly clear heads, logical reasoning, and prudence, they well lack otherwise in tolerance, emotion, and heart. Who would ever want to live in a society where children are seen as little more than a functional continuance of the next generation, the passing of a family member is treated with relative indifference, and castration is seen as the means of population control? Where is the joy? Where is the love? Where is the faith? It is not there. It is absent. As we learn, Houyhnhnmland really is no utopia. It is the nightmarish vision of what society would become if, suddenly, human nature lost perhaps its most important asset: the heart.
Work Cited:
Swift, Jonathan. “Gulliver’s Travels Book IV.” The Norton Anthology of World Literature. 2nd. Ed. Sarah Lawall. New York: W.W. Norton, 2002. 437-483.
