Author: Mireya Stevenson

What a book. Bear with me, as for a “Modest Proposal”, it feels quite vulgar.

In the book A Modest Proposal, the author opens with an idea that he has: to make use of poor children. He describes, for five pages, how poor babies are not only a burden on the state but a burden on their families as well. At first, he hints at his idea, stating how their life would contribute to the feeding and clothing of others. Finally, stating on page 10 how he believes these poor children should be turned into livestock. The author proposes that out of a hundred twenty thousand, twenty thousand would be made into basic livestock, and the other hundred thousand would be well-fed for the wealthier class. Let it be known, the author is referring to babies under the age of two. The author additionally adds two more proposals if it came to it — the first, to turn the skin of live babies into apparel, second, to sell the carcass of the well-fed girls, as they are worth a good amount. Then he lists the advantages of this idea, and further states how anyone who wishes to make an argument against him would need a better solution for the poor.

The Advantages:

1. Rids the kingdom of the poor and useless
2. Will give the poor something of value
3. Makes the kingdom wealthier
4. Free’s poor mothers of the burden of raising their children
5. Allows good cooks to not only experiment but make more money
6. Will make married women and men happier to not have to raise their children
7. Will raise meat exports of the kingdoms.

There are additionally 2 statements that took me aback, a suggestion that the rich have already eaten the poor parents, and references to an American companion that would seem to also be a cannibal. Both were almost vague statements that I wouldn’t want to presume I’m interpreting correctly.

Now my personal view on the book: from the start, I knew where the book was going; however, at no point did I expect what the author would say. Plumping up babies, skinning them alive, selling carcasses. Unfortunately, this reminds me of real-life instances or conspiracies that I will refrain from stating on the internet, which contribute to my theory for this “banned book”.

Would those of higher class, who may or may not participate in such activities, want this book hidden from the public to stay hidden themselves…? If it was a “proposal”, which I personally took to be a dystopian-satirical proposal, why have it banned instead of used to inform people of dangerous mindsets? Say the author was being serious in his statements, why not use it to steer people away from such ideas because of common sense?

Don’t get me wrong, I am not ignorant of the fact that this is my personal (and extremely conspiracy-minded) view of this book. Maybe those who wanted it pulled simply did not want this to become a popular idea! Just my thoughts!

I find the Gospel of Mary fascinating. 

This book basically tells the story of an instance when Jesus had given a message to his disciples, and of course, in his cryptic nature, it left the disciples confused and distressed. So Mary of Magdala comforts them and tells them not to worry; the disciple Peter asks Mary to teach what Jesus had taught her and they had not heard. My assumption is she does so for the next 4 pages. However, after she teaches them as she was asked, the disciples doubted Mary and challenged her, asking what would make her that much more favorable than them as a woman. Thankfully, Levi shuts down Peter’s challenging and instructs them to instead hear the word and go out to preach themselves.

This book has found multiple areas that piqued my interest. Although in biblical cannon, I’m personally not familiar with this instant, the fact the disciples were in disarray over a preaching and that someone had to step in to understand the teaching for all of them. Then the way the disciples instantly challenged her based on her being a woman. The author even notes that this story could lead one to doubt the legitimacy of the disciples as good preachers if they could be so dismissive of teachings simply because it came from a woman. 

Additionally, this book is missing eight whole pages. I comprehend the fact that it was found way back when, but the fact that three of the eight are part of her preaching is something that concerns me. My personal theory about this book is that maybe “someone” wanted to cover up and smother the stature of Mary of Magdala, so after it was written, they destroyed or hid the pages to never be seen. We will never know the importance of those missing eight pages and what effect they could’ve had on Christianity as it grew.

From what I understand, this book tells a Christian story from Judas’ perspective. Additionally, for some reason I cannot wrap my head around, Jesus speaks cryptically for most of this book.

It starts with Jesus at dinner with his disciples for the eucharist. After a humbling of the disciples, Jesus pulls Judas to speak privately. But in this private conversation, Jesus tells Judas he will tell him everything, then walks off; I assume entirely from the group to speak with a completely different group. Which frustrated me at first, but he does tell Judas everything over a period of unknown time in the book. We skip to a different day where the disciples tell Jesus about a vision of a temple, and Jesus basically says people will do what people will do, and if that be the wish of the Lord, then so be it.

After the temple conversation, Judas begins to show genuine curiosity about humanity, how it was created; there’s a conversation of cosmos, chaos, and the underworld, and the destiny of Adam and humanity, all of which made little sense to me… 

Judas asks about a house almost described as the top of Mount Olympus, just a location not made for the typical person, that Jesus tells him to not concern himself with because Judas could never get in. At the end of their conversation, Judas tells him to follow his star, although Jesus informed him that his star was cursed. 

As for where I stand regarding this book, although half of the book makes no sense to me, it is very interesting to see Judas as a person who concerned himself with humanity and what Jesus has to say versus the idea that he simply betrayed Jesus. What I find even more fascinating is the fact that this is unrecognized as well as on the “Banned Books” list. What harm did it do to see a perspective of Judas as something other than a traitor? The book even speaks on how Judas is destined to betray Jesus, so why ban it?

I theorize that because it shows Judas as a person who was destined to a fate, there is a fear that readers will see Judas not just as a villain.