“Gulliver’s Travels,” by Jonathan Swift

FM's ratings:

1.      Premise 7

2.      Prose 8

3.      Plot 6

4.      Characters 5

5.      Overall 7

Comments (optional - but try to keep it under 3000 words!)

When I rate classic works from long ago, I try to keep in perspective how relatively undeveloped literature was at the time they were written.  And yet, it seems to me that many of those authors set the bar too low just because they could. I probably should have rated this a notch or two higher overall, but I kept sensing that Swift was capable of so much more.  Whereas Defoe went too far in detailing life stranded on an island in “Robinson Crusoe,” there was a lot of glossing over of the storyline here in favor of what passed for social commentary, as interesting as the social commentary is.  I remember having heard that Swift’s satire translates very well in many instances to modern situations, being just as applicable today as it was during his time.  There are several good examples of this, including the following:  “I desired that the senate of Rome might appear before me, in one large chamber, and an assembly of somewhat a later age in counterview, in another.  The first seemed to be an assembly of heroes and demigods; the other, a knot of pedlars, pick-pockets, highwaymen, and bullies.”  [Note the so-called “Oxford Comma” after the word “highwaymen” which in common usage, being the next to last item listed, is often omitted.]  What I hadn’t expected here was how akin to Science Fiction/Fantasy much of this work is.  Or that the prose would be so much more polished than Defoe’s.  The premise itself wasn’t so much “ahead of its time” as it was eccentrically whimsical, like “Alice in Wonderland” or “The Chronicles of Narnia.”  But I wouldn’t recommend it to a young reader – the more subtle aspects of the satire would be completely lost on them.  It is, however, one of those great works that I’m embarrassed to have waited so long to finally read!