A Modest Proposal Rhetorical Analysis

In his most famous pamphlet “A Modest Proposal,” Jonathan Swift used humor, sarcasm, and symbolism to address the poverty issue in Ireland and provided some outrageous suggestions to overcome it. Moreover, he criticized the treacherous English people and their politics in Irish society through this satire. Swift proposed that needy Irish families should fatten and sell their children as food to the rich people in society. As a result, the population in Ireland will be reduced, and the income of poor will increase considerably.

Swift made the opening of the satire by describing the sympathetic scene of the streets of Dublin where poor women, surrounded by many children, are begging although they could do jobs to support their families

in all aspects. And after becoming adults, the children of such family turn into criminals or sell themselves due to the unemployment problem. As Swift said (1729), “It is a melancholy object to those, who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads, and cabin doors, crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for alms. These mothers instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in strolling, to beg sustenance for their helpless infants, who, as they grow up either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes.” At this stage, Swift got the attention of the audience, and the audience expected from Swift to show more concerns about the poverty issue and give some feasible solutions. But instead of following the regular practice, he provided the subtle suggestion of eating the children, leaving the audience engaged into his essay and curious about his next move for making such claim.
Swift wanted to make the audience feel resentful as a reaction to his brutal proposal since that would make his proposal more ironic. He used the melancholy scene to evoke emotion into the audience’s heart so that they feel miserable about the indigent consequence of those poor Irish children. Before expressing his proposal, Swift was regarded as taking sides of the poor Irish by the audience, but instead, he placed the poor Irish’s circumstance from a purpose and a casual perspective.
According to Swift (1729), “I think it is agreed by all parties, that this prodigious number of children, in the arms, or on the backs, or at the heels of their mothers, and frequently of their fathers, is in the present deplorable state of the kingdom a very great additional grievance; and therefore whoever could find out a fair, cheap and easy method of making these children sound and useful members of the common-wealth would deserve so well of the public, as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the nation.” Here, the audience would consider Swift as a concerned citizen who was worried about his country and the people.

It appeared to him that this enormous number of poor children could never be the hope of the country. Instead, they were an additional grievance. In this part, the author maintained a serious tone which led the audience to assume Swift as a hero who was giving his best to develop the society’s situation. So, the audience hopes that he would introduce an effective way to help the Irish out of such misery. But then Swift said (1729), “I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection. I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old, a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled, and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or ragout.” This was quite unexpected to the audience that Swift would give such a shocking proposal of eating and selling the children to the rich people. He was not joking at all. He remained in a serious mood to prove his “modest proposal” quite reasonable. To support the proposal, he quoted statistic figures, and he was also completely aware that a conscious mind in the society will surely oppose his idea and the audience would regard eating children as morally shameful. The audience can hardly accept to eat

the children. Swift continued (1729), “I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.” He wanted the greedy landlords to consume the poor children instead of the low-income families because the Irish were considered as the meal of cruel landlords who devoured them like beasts. Swift used the word “devour” to show how brutally the landlords were destroying the poor people financially by increasing tax and high rent. Immediately, the audience could recognize the greedy nature of these landlords through such irony.
To detail his proposal, Swift calculated the number of poor Irish children and the amount of profit these children can contribute in their family and the country. Out of 1.5 million Irish at that time, there were 200,000 women who could bear children, and 30000 among them could financially maintain their children. The rest 170000 are “breeders,” and probably 50000 of them will lose their children. So that leaves 120000 children born in poor families in every year in Ireland which is not a small number at all. So how these children will be treated? They can’t do farming or build houses at a tender age. Until age six, they are even unable to live by theft. So as a part of his solution, he said, a newborn infant can survive on breast milk and two shillings during its first year which could be easily earned again by begging. Then, these infants should be sold in the market, reducing infanticides and abortions. Therefore, Swift encouraged the woman to start doing such practice to avoid the expenses that take to raise a child rather than avoiding the shame of raising a criminal. Furthermore, from the practice of his proposal, national economy, poor tenants, marriage, love for children, standard and exportation of meats all will be benefited more or less. Thus, the audience may agree that undoubtedly Swift’s proposal is "a fair, cheap and easy method of making these children sound and useful members of the common-wealth."
The only counterargument that the audience can establish is by questioning Swift’s claim of considering poor children as future criminals. Swift proposed to sell and eat the children to save the needy families from spending excess money. And he claimed that such deed was not a shame since those children wouldn’t have the opportunity to become criminals after they grow up. According to him, it is better to sell the children early than raising them to become criminals so that the family would not have to feel sorry about their children’s such consequence in future. But this is a ridiculous claim undoubtedly. It is a typical stereotype that children of poor families tend to be criminals in their later life due to lack of sufficient care, guidance, and love. But exceptions exist, and a single story is never enough to judge a person’s real background. No matter how terrible the circumstance is, many great mothers raise their children successfully with much love and care. These mothers will never give up on their children just because of money. Because hardly there is any mother who would expect their children to be criminals. Otherwise, the word “mother” would lose its real value a long time ago.
In conclusion, Swift was successful to persuade the audience by exposing the cruelty of English landlords at that time. He also successfully convinced the audience to be aware of the social problems in Ireland and what he wanted to do about it as a concerned citizen. He concludes that he has nothing personal about this matter as his children are all grown up, and his wife has passed her childbearing stage of life. He proposed such solution to ensure the betterment of the country although his stereotype of considering poor children as criminals is not a correct claim.