A Rereading of Books III and IV in Gulliver’s Travels in the Light of the Conventions of Menippean Satire

Abstract

Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) has traditionally been viewed as a work of Horatian satire, employing humor and irony to criticize the social and political corruption of 18th-century England and Europe. However, scholars such as Northrop Frye and Mikhail Bakhtin have also argued for its alignment with Menippean satire, which criticizes abstract ideas through philosophical inquiry and satirical exaggeration. This study examines The Travels through the lens of Menippean satire, focusing specifically on Books III and IV. Unlike the first two books, which primarily target specific individuals and institutions, the latter sections move beyond contemporary political satire to engage in broader criticism of human nature and to interrogate epistemological and moral constructs. By drawing on Bakhtin’s framework of Menippean satire, this analysis situates The Travels within the Menippean tradition by revealing its deeper engagement with the overall human nature, and seeks to offer new insights into Swift’s criticism of reason, morality, and human pretensions.