Author: Hudson Lawrence

While I certainly don’t know much about 18th-century Irish Politics, the issues of poverty and the poor treatment of those less fortunate are still issues present in today’s society, and for that I think A Modest Proposal remains relevant and an important work for those wanting to go into public service and other fields that involve working towards a “public good”.

What stood out to me the most was just how straightforwards the writing seemed. Swift writes about the mass-murder and cannibalism of children as if it’s a completely reasonable idea, and not something completely shocking. While I did know about the subject matter going into it, I was surprised at how long Swift took to actually name his solution, something that I imagine was to get readers interested so they don’t immediately put the text down. It’s spoken very matter-of-factly, too, as if a large amount of thought was put into an idea that would never actually be implemented, including the speaker claiming to have tried human flesh himself, and laying out all the uses for this proposed system of baby-eating.

One aspect I personally find interesting is towards the end, Swift lists a number of actual solutions to economic imbalance, such as ending reliance on foreign goods, taxing absent landlords, ending factionalism, etc., while also telling readers not to mention them unless they are willing to attempt their implementation. I think that this is where the real satire of A Modest Proposal shines through, in that by discounting these actual answers in favor of the outlandish baby-eating scheme, he highlights them. If people aren’t willing to try something as simple as taxing landlords, why should a proposal like Swift’s make any difference?

The reason that this work was suppressed, I feel, is that it goes against the societal neglect levied against poorer Irish residents, and by calling it out, it may have made some upper-class readers feel attacked. While the content itself is shocking, the most important part of A Modest Proposal isn’t the ideas themself, but rather how it holds a mirror to the way poor people were treated. Reducing those without means to a resource to be consumed is the logical endpoint of ideas like indentured servitude, where those desperate to survive essentially sold themselves in the hopes that it would eventually lead to a way out of poverty. Swift points out how the wealthy elite see those struggling as a resource to be managed instead of as people, and indirectly makes it clear that processing those in need for food is not entirely different from how they are actually treated.

Overall, I actually found the text pretty enjoyable, despite the dark subject matter. I don’t usually read things from this era, and it was an interesting challenge dealing with the flowery language, the old lowercase S, and other such quirks of 1700s writing. I was able to pick up on the satire on my first read, too, which added to the work in my opinion. It still remains shocking, despite how long ago it was written, and I think it’s an important work considering the subject matter and how it’s still relevant to discussions over how to handle the rising wealth gap and increasing rate of homelessness in the US.

The name Judas has been used since the early days of Christianity as a stand-in for words like betrayer, traitor, turncoat, all tracing back to Judas’s fateful betrayal of Christ in exchange for thirty pieces of silver. While the Gospel of Judas doesn’t refute this event, it does offers up a more empathetic portrayal of its much-maligned namesake.

Despite Judas often being portrayed as scheming or underhanded, this gospel actually shows Judas to be a person that Jesus can speak privately with, trusting him with information that he otherwise keeps from his disciples. In fact, Judas is portrayed as the calmest and most rational out of all of them, being the only one able to understand and trust Jesus near the beginning of the text. As a whole, his character differs so greatly from the traditional portrayal that it’s difficult to conceptualize them as the same individual.

One of the most stark features of this text is how it goes against traditional christian teachings regarding the nature of the world and the spiritual powers at play. The Gospel states that it was not, in fact, God himself who created Adam and Eve, but rather by an angel named Saklas, who along with his fellow angels were responsible for the creation of mankind. The text also speaks a great deal about different generations of humans, and how some are unable to truly understand God. There is a large significance given to numbers in Jesus’s recounting, which could point to numerology, another practice not used often in Christian teachings.

In all, The Gospel of Judas offers an alternative, more esoteric view on humanity’s origins, as well as portraying Judas in a far more positive light than usual, both of which could be reasons for it’s controversy. It’s interesting to note the similarities between this and The Gospel of Mary Magdelyn, both featuring a disciple who is often misunderstood or depicted poorly, and both featuring them being privy to a private lesson by Jesus, which they can understand to a greater extent than the other disciples. I’m not sure if it’s a coincidence or not, but there are certainly connections to be made.

While the Gospel of Mary Magdelyn no doubt contains some amount of religious significance, recounting a (mostly lost) revelation given by Jesus following his resurrection, the most striking aspect of the Gospel itself is not the preaching itself but rather Mary’s role as a leader and the other apostles’ harsh reaction to her teaching.
Contrary to most bigoted perceptions of a woman’s societal role, especially those held when this work was first written, it is Mary, the sole woman, who remains calm while the male apostles are portrayed as frightened and confused following Jesus’s departure. She takes command of the situation, comforting the men, and recounts a teaching that she alone had received from Jesus. Upon hearing this, two of the men, Peter and Andrew, immediately dismiss her, casting her retelling into doubt. I find it interesting how even those portrayed as closely following Jesus’s teachings were portrayed in this text as distrustful, even jealous, accusing Mary of lying for recounting a teaching and dismissing her words as “strange”.
The text portrays Mary as a leader, someone who Jesus Himself showed favoritism towards, as well as someone who, even when faced with a challenging situation like the departure of Jesus, was able to organize the men and comfort them. This situation is unlike many seen in the bible. While some women were revered (another Mary, Jesus’s mother, comes to mind), a woman actually being portrayed as competent and leading men was rare, with the bible even stating that women should remain subservient to men (Ephesians 5:22).
The text serves as a rare legitimization of women in power during biblical times. While the text itself faded into obscurity, after its reemergence it was treated as noncanonical by most religious authorities. I think that part of the reason for this decision (apart from the recency of its emergence) is that it goes against the common conception of women in the bible, and Mary’s character in general. While in canonical texts, Jesus treated her well and loved her like all the other disciples, this was treated as an exception, and that respecting a woman was something groundbreaking to society at the time. This text shows Mary to be a powerful leader in her own right, able to preach and control a crowd, while the men are treated as ignorant and distrustful, contrary to the patriarchal religious authority in place both at the time of writing and still today.

Hey, all viewing! I’ve never gotten around to making a blog before, but it seemed like one of those neat little internet-y things that I wanted to try someday, so I’m glad that this class is giving me an excuse to do so. This blog, as implied by the title, is going to be going over the various readings and viewings for my FSEM, centered on Forbidden Texts. I’ve always had an interest in more controversial literature, especially those banned on account of their subject matter, so this class is right up my alley. The first two things I’ll be reading/writing about are the gospels of Judas and Mary Magdelyn (or is it Magdala?), which should be published shortly after I write this little blog intro.