ernst jünger in cyberspace

mailing list archive - EJ, DIE SCHERE #72: Note 2/3


»Dabei wird Hobbes' LEVIATHAN anschaulich.«
GULLIVER'S TRAVELS an illustration of "LEVIATHAN"?

[continued]



3. The roots of Swift's pessimism

So we have in Hobbes man as a wild beast ever attacking and persecuting his
fellow man, unless reined in by the authority of the state? And even then
with no higher aspirations than »the foresight of their own preservation,
and of a more contented life thereby«, i.e. nothing but the pursit of
materialist happiness and no striving for higher ideals? So we have in Swift
man as a detestable, vicious and non-rational animal using all tricks of
civilization trying to hide this fact?

Looking at the two books in this way it may indeed seem that the 17th
century treatise becomes »anschaulich« in the 18th century novel. However,
it is a superficial way of looking. Only when regarded very generally, too
generally to yield much elucidation, the two pessimisms can be taken as so
similar that the pessimism of the story may be declared to be an
illustration of the pessimism that is inherent in the theory.

In our postmodernist times this is not illegitimate. We have learnt recently
that any text may mean anything that it evokes in the mind of its reader. It
seems to me that EJ took this postmodernist view. I cannot maintain,
however, that it is fruitless because it involves a challenge to have a
fresh look at the texts. Setting out on an old-fashioned premodernist
enquiry into the historical circumstances of the two books leads to
radically opposite positions that I would refuse to interpret as model and
illustration What I learnt made me come to the conclusion that EJ's
observation on Hobbes and Swift is misleading. It is so because it blurs
essential differences and characteristics of the two books and their
authors.

Hobbes was no cleric. On the contrary, he has sometimes been suspected of
being the first atheist in 17th century England. Swift was a career
churchman and finally rose to become Dean of St. Patrick's in Dublin.
Swift's satire was powered by a long tradition of pulpit oratory. According
to the doctrine of the Church, Swift's employer, man is in a fallen
condition and thus in need of redemption. Though it flows from the Lord
redemption is dispensed by the Church. The more drastically the sinful state
of man is painted by the Lord's servants the more desirable must redemption
and the more beneficial must the Church appear to the flock of believers;
the more awe-inspiring appears the mercy of the Lord who grants redemption
to man, that miserable wretch, for no reason but His inscrutable whim. So
throughout the history of Christendom the predecessors of Swift have
thundered from the pulpits their denigrations of man.

Swift follows this age-old practice, bolstered by many passages from Holy
Scripture and the canonical writings of the Church. As a novelist, he
translates it into the secular idiom of his tale. Moreover, he adds a
peculiar personal touch. There is in his nature a bilious resentment against
man in general, maybe originating in certain traumatic childhood
experiences. He expresses it in an »excremental vision« of man. Swift can
neither forget nor forgive the sorry fact that man is born »inter urinas et
faeces« [St. Augustine]. This unsavoury topic is an obsession with him. Also
in GULLIVER'S TRAVELS he brings it up several times [needless to say, the
editions for young people omit those passages]. Particularly the various
uses to which the Yahoos put their excrements seem to be as characteristic
of themselves as they seem both frightful and fascinating to protagonist and
author. To be sure, Swift cherished his friends and estimated many an
individual human being, as his letters bear witness. But as to the human
race he had a pessimist's gloomy image. EJ felt that poignantly.

[To be continued]

--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Günter Rebing
Hügel 20
D-53359 Rheinbach
Tel./Fax 02226-3980
Mobil 0177-5961331
E-Mail: g.rebing@eplus-online.de
und
Rebing@t-online.de




Markup © John King, July 2001.