Title: Gulliver’s Travels

Author: Jonathan Swift  

Genre: Classics

Publisher: Dover Thrift Editions

Format: Paperback

Pages: 226

Rating: 3/5 stars

Synopsis:

Regarded as the preeminent prose satirist in the English language, Jonathan Swift (1667–1745) intended this masterpiece, as he once wrote Alexander Pope, to “vex the world rather than divert it.” Savagely ironic, it portrays man as foolish at best, and at worst, not much more than an ape.

The direct and unadorned narrative describes four remarkable journies of ship’s surgeon Lemuel Gulliver, among them, one to the land of Lilliput, where six-inch-high inhabitants bicker over trivialities; and another to Brobdingnag, a land where giants reduce man to insignificance.

Written with disarming simplicity and careful attention to detail, this classic is diverse in its appeal: for children, it remains an enchanting fantasy. For adults, it is a witty parody of political life in Swift’s time and a scathing send-up of manners and morals in 18th-century England.

Review:

Well, I finally read this book, which has been on my TBR list for what feels like forever. And I was a little disappointed. The characters adventures were just boring to me. It took the author a long time to describe every setting and scenario, which normally would be a good thing; but I found the descriptions to just drag on forever, and I started to lose interest in the story. However, one thing that I did find interesting was the author’s views on human nature. He critiques the European states at the time by showing established societies, not deserted islands. This could show that he believed that the Europeans could learn a thing or two from other established societies, instead of insisting on dominating them.

It also shows the author’s negative view of human nature: in one adventure, it is described that one group of people rebelled because they didn’t like cutting their eggs on the small side. Which is ridiculous, but this goes to show that the author viewed humans as a ridiculous being.

Overall, disappointing, but with some interesting historical insights, which made me give it 3 stars! Happy reading!