Gulliver Disillusioned: Is Multiculturalism Dead in the Twenty-First Century? On the 17th October 2010, Angela Merkel, chancellor of Germany, delivered a speech at a youth conference in Potsdam where she proclaimed that multiculturalism has “utterly failed” (Siebold, Reuters UK). This dire statement was pronounced in the midst of a German society torn by cultural tension between Germans and Muslim immigrants. In theory, a society that embraces multiculturalism is one in which two or more cultures coexist whilst harboring mutual respect for the other’s values and lifestyles and upholding a common national identity (Parekh 6). Multiculturalism implicitly assumes cultural equality, the notion that no culture is superior to another. The idea that cultural differences should be encouraged and protected is currently embraced by many Western political thinkers. The twenty-first century is an era of unprecedented globalization and cultural diffusion. However, the mingling of different cultures is often followed by disastrous consequences as seen in the turbulent political situation in Germany (Siebold, Reuters UK). Although Jonathan Swift wrote his travel satire Gulliver’s Travels in an age when multicultural societies had yet to emerge (indeed, cultural imperialism was the zeitgeist of the eighteenth century, an idea quite antithetical to multiculturalism), the cultural clash that Swift’s protagonist Lemuel Gulliver experiences with the foreign peoples he comes into contact with and observes between individuals within these societies portend the divisive aspects of human nature that preempt the possibility of a multiculturalist ideal. Gulliver is not a detached observer: his interactions with these societies eventually lead to his disillusionment about the goodness of humankind and destroy his own identity as an Englishman and a human being. Gulliver’s Travels echoes the barriers that exist to multiculturalism, proving itself very relevant to modern day readers
In Gulliver’s Travels, the eponymous hero undertakes a series of voyages by sea which bring him in contact with groups of strange and fantastical people. Not only does Gulliver observe many instances of culture clash, he and his hosts are often unable to appreciate each other’s way of life and adopt each other’s perspective on politics and cultural values. On his first voyage, Gulliver is captured by the natives of Lilliput, human creatures “not sixth inches high” who grant Gulliver the name “Great Man Mountain” (18, 33). Gulliver’s sheer size compared to that of the Lilliputians endows him with a unique perspective on the pettiness of Lilliputian preoccupations. (Sims 38). For instance, from Gulliver’s eagle’s view, the Lilliputians’ notion that the world comprises of only Lilliput and Blefuscu is absurd. When Gulliver extinguishes a palace fire by urinating on the building, the residents are not only ungrateful for Gulliver’s intervention; they interpret it as a crude act of treason. However, the Lilliputians are not the only people to suffer from cultural myopia. Gulliver’s own narrowness of vision is evident in his failure to consider how it would feel to be showered in a giant’s urine. Seeing and perceiving, or the lack thereof, are recurring issues throughout Gulliver’s Travels (Hunter 230). The only two possessions which Gulliver retains during his stay on Lilliput are his glasses and telescope, yet these items neither alleviate his selective blindness, nor grant him a broader perspective on his hosts.
In his essay on Gulliver’s Travels and cultural difference, Stuart Sims cites the perpetual antagonism between Lilliput and Blefuscu as a prime example of the inability of nations to coexist peacefully (Sims 38). The roots of this discord lay in a seemingly trivial disagreement between the so-called Big-Endians and Little-Endians over which end of an egg should be cracked before eating, an argument that resulted in the Big-Endians’ defection to Blefuscu. That such a tremendous upheaval is produced by a trivial matter like the proper method to crack an egg, especially considering that the Lilliputian Alcoran or holy book recommends “That all true Believers shall break their eggs at the convenient end,” seems laughable (52). Yet the battle between Lilliput and Blefuscu resonates with the modern reader because it throws into sharp relief the belligerent and proud human nature that pits groups of people against each other over inconsequential differences of opinion. The schism between the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims is an old battle that continues to this day. Like the Big-Endians and the Little-Endians, both religious groups read the same holy book whose core message is belief in God, yet disagreement over who delivered God’s message has catapulted members of the two groups into war. In a brilliant reversal of his experiences with the Lilliputians, Gulliver, on his second voyage, finds himself among giants in the land of Brobdignag. Gulliver – and we the readers to the extent that we identify with him – is made aware of his own pettiness (Monk 237). Gulliver reflects on the Lilliputians with more sympathy at this point, recognizing how monstrous and gruesome his appearance and habits must have appeared to his minute hosts. Swift suggests that the seemingly insurmountable divisions between cultures may be overcome if members of each culture are made to walk in the other’s shoes. However, it is notable that Gulliver is unable to refrain from passing judgment on the repulsive appearance of the Broddignag natives as viewed from his vantage point. He describes in graphic detail his hostess’ “monstrous breast” and nipple “varified with spots, pimples and freckles,” comparing her to “the fair skins of…English ladies, who appear so beautiful to [him], only because they are of [his] own size, and their defects not to be seen but through a magnifying glass.” (98) Like Gulliver’s spectacles and telescope, a magnifying glass allows one to see things in greater clarity and detail. Yet the irony lies in the fact that Gulliver’s new perspective, akin to vision through a magnifying glass, forces him to focus on the superficial details. Gulliver’s initial assessment of the people of Brobdignag echoes ominously of our human propensity to pass prejudicial judgment on members of other races and cultures based on superficial cues. Swift arrives at the essence of another obstacle to multiculturalism: people harbor preconceived judgments about other cultures that are often based on superficial knowledge, hence doing a great disservice to its individual members and thwarting the desire to gain a deeper understanding of the other culture. In Brobdignag, Gulliver is treated as a mere object of curiosity. He is forced by his first master to become a one-man circus act, a performer in a freak show which only magnifies the distance between him and the natives (Sims 41). The lightheartedness with which the Brobdignaggians treat Gulliver is exemplified by the king’s reaction to Gulliver’s account of English culture:
“He observed how contemptible a thing was human grandeur, which could be mimicked by such diminutive insects as I; and yet, said he, I dare engage, these creatures have their titles and distinctions of honor, they contrive little nests and burrows … they love, they fight, they dispute, they cheat, they betray. And thus he continued on, while my color came and went several times, with indignation to hear our noble country … contemptuously treated.” (115)
Although the king gains remarkable insight into the darker side of English politics and society, his patronizing tone suggests that there is nothing to be learned from a nation of “diminutive insects”. The king perceives Gulliver and his homeland as curiosities; he does not consider whether there is any merit to the practices and customs of another culture (Sims 42). On the other hand, Gulliver’s indignation is not entirely justified. Not only does he admit the truths in the king’s criticism, but he adopts a similarly cavalier attitude towards other peoples, such as the Lilliputians and later, the people of Laputa. Gulliver’s conversation with the king highlights the notion many people believe that their own culture is superior to others. Many western countries today enforce policies that reek of cultural superiority. The United States, for instance, is a very heterogeneous nation that adopts an assimilationist stance on immigrant communities. The Melting Pot metaphor used so often to describe the US points to the fact that minority communities are encouraged to detach from traditional beliefs and embrace the dominant American culture. On his third voyage, Gulliver comes into contact with the natives of the floating island of Laputa, a people so devoted to the pursuit of science and technology that it is incapable of governing itself. Gulliver is especially scathing in his verdict on the Laputan lifestyle. He states that he “saw nothing in this country that could invite [him] to a longer continuance, and began to think of returning home to England,” once again revealing sentiments of cultural superiority (215). Sims asserts that Laputa is a singular example of “cultural insularity”; the floating island literally detaches the Laputans from the communities that they govern (Sims 44). The degree to which Laputa is disconnected with the rest of the continent of Balnibarbi is manifest in the way its king crushes insurrections. The island is made to float over the rebellious town to deprive the inhabitants of sunlight, the latter may be pelted with rocks and as a last resort, the king can order the island to drop upon the town, “which makes a universal destruction of both houses and man” (188). The king’s choice to use violence against naysayers rather than peaceful negotiation is analogous to acts of terrorism that are perpetrated today against cultures with dissenting opinions. One particularly tragic group of creatures that Gulliver encounters during his travels to the island of Luggnagg is the Struldbruggs, immortal creatures doomed to an eternity of physical and mental incapacity and social ostracism. Gulliver adopts a typical western ideology that reveres longevity and the wisdom of the sages; nevertheless, biology triumphs (Groeneveld 106). The Struldbruggs age miserably, cannot retain their memories after eighty, lose the ability to communicate with mortals and become paupers living on public assistance. In her PhD thesis on the Struldbruggs, Groeneveld remarks that this minority is “marginalized legally, culturally, and emotionally; their very humanity is questioned” (110). Luggnagg society finds it difficult to deal with the very different and treat the immortals as less than human. Indeed, the Struldbruggs are seen as legally dead as soon as they reach eighty. This intolerance towards and marginalization of the Struldbruggs evokes the anti-immigrant sentiments in some contemporary western countries. In recent years, the United States has proposed increasingly stringent immigrations laws to deter the inflow of immigrants from third world countries, who find themselves in a disadvantaged position in their new environment. Like the Struldbruggs, they often experience a language barrier, need to subsist on public assistance and face discrimination by the larger society. On Gulliver’s last journey, the reader observes another instance of culture clash between the Houyhnhnms and the Yahoos, as well as the erosion of Gulliver’s self-identity. The Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms represent the extremes of human behavior: the former display the base and brutish elements of human nature and the latter embody what humanity aspires to be (Case 144). These two groups clearly live in conflict with each other; a multicultural ideal is unlikely to come to pass. However, what is more interesting is the manner in which Gulliver is treated by the Houyhnhnms. At the outset, the Houyhnhnms distinguish Gulliver from the Yahoos primarily by his clothing, to the extent that Gulliver fears their reaction to his naked body. Throughout Gulliver’s Travels, clothes function as “an outward manifestation of identity” (Groeneveld 261-2). For instance, among the Laputans, Gulliver wears geometrical, ill-fitting clothes to fit in with the rest of Laputan society. During his three year stay with the Houyhnhnms, the wearing away of Gulliver’s clothing and his having to make crude replacements using Yahoo skin parallel the deterioration of his identity. Most of Gulliver’s sojourn in the country of the Houyhnhnms is characterized by his ardent desire to integrate into that most admired society of creatures who “preserve decency and civility in the highest degrees” and hold “friendship and benevolence [as] the two principle virtues” (301). Gulliver is unable to achieve this goal because he is ultimately seen as a Yahoo in the eyes of the Houyhnhnms (albeit a rational, gentle Yahoo) and later, in his own eyes. Hence, his self-identity dissolves, replaced by his reluctant acceptance of the Houyhnhnms’ classification of him as a Yahoo and his impossible striving to be a part of Houyhnhnm society. In the end, Gulliver is so detached from his roots that he is unable to even recognize overt acts of kindness and goodness in his fellow humans such as that of Captain Pedro de Mendez, who helped Gulliver return to England (Case 142). The loss of Gulliver’s identity refers back to the notion of assimilationism which, in direct contrast to multiculturalism, advocates the abandoning of one’s native culture and the adoption of the mainstream culture as one’s own. The pressure to assimilate in many of today’s multicultural nations is a great cause of inter-group conflicts. Merkel’s statement on the failure of multiculturalism points to some xenophobic sentiments on the part of many Germans who feel that Turkish and Arab immigrants are not assimilating enough into German society. In an ironic twist on Gulliver’s situation among the Houyhnhnms, many Germans believe that their national identity is threatened and perverted by outside groups.
To what extent is multiculturalism a realistic goal for contemporary western societies and to what extent is it an ideal that can only be entertained by utopian thinkers? The bleak closing to Gulliver’s Travels conveys a rather pessimistic view of the ability of different groups of people living side by side to respect each other’s heritage and not feel the need to assimilate. Each of Gulliver’s voyages depict some obstacle to multiculturalism: the tendency to allow trivial differences of opinion to escalate into war, prejudice against members of out-groups, the inability to accept the very different, and the blurring of boundaries between multiculturalism and assimilationism. Nevertheless, unlike Swift, the reader has reason to feel optimistic in light of the small successes that countries such as Canada have experienced in promoting multiculturalism. Ethnic, racial and religious conflicts are inevitable, but given the amount of cultural diffusion and mingling that is taking place in the twenty-first century, we may one day see a world where multiculturalism is the norm and not the exception.
Works Cited
Case, Arthur E. “The Significance of Gulliver’s Travels.” A Casebook on Gulliver Among the Houyhnhnms. Ed. Milton P. Foster. NY: Vail-Ballou Press, 1961. 139-147. Print.
Groeneveld, C.. "Foreigners in their own country": The Struldbruggs and the changing language of aging in Swift's world. Diss. University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2007. Dissertations & Theses: Full Text, ProQuest. Web. 29 Nov 2010.
Hunter, J. Paul. “Gulliver’s Travels and the later writings.” The Cambridge Companion to Jonathan Swift. Ed. Christopher Fox. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 216-240. Print.
Monk, Samuel H. “The Pride of Lemuel Gulliver.” A Casebook on Gulliver Among the Houyhnhnms. Ed. Milton P. Foster. NY: Vail-Ballou Press, 1961. 227-245. Print.
Parekh, Bhikhu C. Rethinking Multiculturalism: cultural diversity and political theory. Harvard University Press, 2002. Web. 27 Nov 2010.
Siebold, Sabine. “Merkel says German multiculturalism has failed.” Reuters UK. N.p. 17 Oct 2010. Web. 27 Nov 2010.
Sim, Stuart. The eighteenth-century novel and contemporary social issues: an introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ Pr, 2008. 35-49. Print.
Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver’s Travels. Ed. Dutton Kearney. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2010. Print.