What did the Yahoos look like? “Their heads and breasts were covered in thick hair, some frizzled and others lank; they had beards like goats…” (Swift 237). Shave and clothe them and they look like Europeans. What, then, is the essence of man? How ironic it is that a human being could be so animal-like, not taking care of themselves and acting irrationally, while the horse-like Houyhnhnms were so superior.
Before he understood the relationship of the Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms, Gulliver was “amazed to see such actions and behavior in brute beasts; and concluded with myself that if the inhabitants of this country were endued with a proportionable degree of reason, they must be the wisest people on earth” (Swift 238). The irony, of course, is that the supposed “brute beasts” were superior to mankind. They had the ability to reason and be rational and not let greed get in the way of their decisions.
This is also proven when Gulliver, at first, wanted only to go home and be with his friends and family. In the end, all Gulliver wanted to do is to stay with the Houyhnhnms and learn more about them. When he was finally forced to go home, he was disgusted to see how the ‘Yahoos’ at home lived. He saw the potential of what the human lifestyle could be and wanted nothing to do with society. Ironically, his only friends at home were the horses.
In Twayne’s Masterworks Studies Gulliver’s Travels The Politics of Satire Ronald Knowles analyzes the use of satire that Jonathan Swift used in the novel. His major focus is on how Swift employed the Houyhnhnms as a satirical device to show the downfall of man and how the human race could be improved. The Houyhnhnms had “no words for power, government, war, law, punishment, and a thousand other things” (Knowles 127). The Houyhnhnms do not understand, or even know, these words. This demonstrates that it is possible to run a country without these institutions, if the people are reasonable, rational, creatures. People can learn how to come to agreements through open and honest discussion, and lead peaceful, orderly lives.
Knowles points out Swift’s conclusion that “reason alone is sufficient to govern a Rational Creature” (Knowles 127) having the ability to reason with one another without greed, without the want of power and money getting in the way, is a characteristic that the ‘Yahoos’ do not have. If they were able to gain this ability they would need only reason to govern their land, without the need of artificial means, such as laws and government. This also shows how in the Houyhnhnm Country all are equal and have a say in what goes on. The Houyhnhnms are able to use what they are given in nature as tools to help them survive instead of destroying themselves. “Nature and Reason were sufficient guides for a reasonable animal, “ says Swift (Knowles 127).
Although Gulliver points out that the Houyhnhnms “Wants and Passions are fewer than among us” (Knowles 127), Knowles questions just how “utopian” Houyhnhnm society really was. He compares Houyhnhnm philosophy to stoicism—the suppression of passion and the elevation of reason. But, Knowles points out, “since they don’t have any emotions to resist (apart from one that they nurture—hatred of the Yahoos),” Houyhnhnm stoicism was cheaply earned (Knowles 128). The human race, in contrast, has many desires and passions. Men want to have everything, and share nothing. They wish power and money, and cannot appreciate what they have, or what they are given. They want instant gratification and then want even more.
Knowles compares Houyhnhnm Land to Sir Thomas More’s Utopia: promoting “friendship and benevolence… they have an unceremonious respect for each other, and even strangers…” (Knowles 128). These are qualities Yahoos—and Englishmen—cannot grasp. They will do anything and everything to destroy others if they believe it will benefit themselves. They are unable to live with trust and equality. But Knowles points out that while the Houyhnhnms “response to Gulliver’s recount of England” reinforces Swift’s satire, Houyhnhnms utopian ideal itself is questionable. Their inability to understand other points of view, their naiveté, ignorance, and even their lack of passion, make the Houyhnhnms themselves “an additional object of satire” (Knowles 131)
Like Knowles, I believe that the Houyhnhnms were the dominant satirical device in this section of Gulliver’s Travels. They are the ones who were humanlike creatures in an animal’s body. They had the characteristics of the “perfect” human, while the human-appearing Yahoos were mere brutes. The Houyhnhnms were the reasonable and rational creatures that the Yahoos could possibly become. But because of their greed, and desire for power and money and the inability to trust each other the Yahoos—Swift’s stand-in for Englishmen—remained beasts of burden and the lowest grade of manual laborer. Government and laws and other rules were needed to regulate society when people were unable to regulate themselves.
I also agree with Knowles’ questioning of how “utopian” Houyhnhnm Land really was. Men cannot be Houyhnhnms—men have passion. Passion and emotion are just as necessary to human nature as reason. Of course we can agree with Swift that man needs to control his emotions and exercise his rationality, but are the Houyhnhnms really an appropriate role model? Knowles points out that the Houyhnhnms stoicism was “something of a travesty” and “simplistic” (Knowles 128). They have neither virtue nor vice; they have no passions to surrender.
I am unsure of whether I agree or disagree with Knowles’ treatment of Houyhnhnm utopia. Knowles is not content with comparing Gulliver’s Travels with More, but also tries to tie this section of the novel to Plato, Plutarch, Deism, and “the Christian doctrine of the unregenerate—those incapable of spiritual rebirth and renewal” (Knowles 128). I confess that his analysis becomes too complex for me to render agreement or disagreement. But I feel that he and I do agree that, beyond the satire, Houyhnhnm society was an unrealistic goal for Englishmen to pursue. And, although the Houyhnhnms live in a place that was far less corrupt than Gulliver’s, their world was certainly not free of corruption or its own form of racism and eugenics.
I also agree with Knowles’ analysis that the Houyhnhnms were not the only factor of satire in the novel. I believe that other things also played a role. Gulliver, having seen that the Yahoos in many ways resemble himself, also plays a role as satire. It allows Gulliver to point out all the flaws of his fellow ‘Yahoos’ in Europe, without seeing that the flaws are really his as well. Knowles cites Steward Lacasece, who noted that “the Yahoos illustrate six or seven deadly sins—covetousness, lust, anger, gluttony, envy, sloth—while Gulliver embodies the seventh, pride, by the end of the work” (Knowles 131).
Certainly, though Knowles spends only a relatively small part of his treatise directly analyzing this section of the novel, he does an excellent job. He explores the various degrees and devices of satire employed by Swift. In some of his concluding pages Knowles focuses on some of the ironies of Houyhnhnm superiority. The Houyhnhnms have great difficulty in deciding whether or not to banish Gulliver. What is his status in their rigid social structure? They are not capable of seeing beyond their own two-dimensional country. Perhaps the most telling incident, a “symbol of Houyhnhnm limitation,” is when Gulliver spots a tiny island in the distance through his small telescope, but the sorrel Houyhnhnm who has befriended him sees only a “cloud”. He “had no Conception of a Country beside his own” (Knowles 140). Knowles’ conclusion, of course, is that Houyhnhnm “myopia” was, in some ways, even worse than mankind’s.
Work Cited
Knowles, Ronald. Twayne’s Masterworks Studies: Gulliver’s Travels The Politics
of Satire. Twayne Publishers. New York, 1996.
Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver’s Travels – Part IV (A Voyage to the Country of the
Houyhnhnms) The Norton anthology of World Masterpieces: The Western Tradition. 7th ed. Vol. 2: Literature of Western Culture Since the
Renaissance. Eds. Sarah Lawall and Maynared Mack. New York: W.W.
Norton & Co., 1999. 236-281.