A Modest Proposal Rhetorical Analysis

Both Swift and Kingston, authors of “A Modest Proposal” and “On Discovery” respectively, use irony to expose realities regarding a particular social construct. For instance, the narrator of “A Modest Proposal” proposes the slaughter and trade of beggar infants as a solution to Ireland’s overpopulation. Overlooking the flagrant moral injustice of murdering thousands of children, the narrator casually discusses how infant carcasses make for “dishes of excellent nutritive meat”, “admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots” (166 idk how to cite). Swift clearly uses verbal irony to reveal the upper class’ blatant disregard for the poor of Ireland, and thereby exposes the discrimination inherent in the Irish social hierarchy. Meanwhile, Kingston’s

As a satirical criticism of the Irish social hierarchy, “A Modest Proposal” extensively uses verbal irony to expose the oppression faced by the poor. Prioritizing his proposal over all else, the narrator dismisses all other proposals, like “introducing a vein of parsimony, prudence, and temperance” to the upper class, and “teaching landlords to have at least one degree of mercy towards their tenants” (169-170 idk how ot cite). With consideration to the author’s bitterly sarcastic tone, Swift clearly intends to vilify the upper class’ wasteful squandering and cruelty towards the poor by deeming these perfectly reasonable proposals as mere expedients. Swift thereby exposes this case of oppression as a result of the selfishness of those in power. On the other hand, Orwell’s memoir shows a very different side of oppression. Though he believes British “imperialism” against the Burmese “was an evil thing” and “was all for the Burmese”, Orwell nevertheless acknowledges that “the British Empire is dying”, and thus needs to expand in any way it can (145). When faced with the choice of shooting a rampaging elephant, he suddenly feels pressured to do so by “an immense crowd… all happy and excited”, even though he does not want to (148). Though the elephant ultimately calms down, Orwell fears the ridicule he may receive if he does not demonstrate

As a functionary of the “unbreakable tyranny” that the British empire holds over the Burmese, Orwell guiltily regards himself as a reluctant oppressor (145). Nevertheless, when pressured by the excited, starving Burmese to shoot an elephant, he realizes that “when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys” (148). In an ironic twist, Orwell now recognizes the Burmese people’s power over him, as they push him to demonstrate the authority expected from one aligned with their oppressors. Orwell’s experience with situational irony disillusions him to the reality that oppression operates in multiple directions. Similarly, Langston Hughes also encounters situational irony that brings him to a disillusioning realization. As a naive twelve-year-old in his narrative, Hughes takes his aunt literally when she tells him that a church revival will bring him to Jesus Christ. However, at the revival, Hughes never actually sees any sign of Jesus, and watches his friend impatiently “get up and be saved”, suggesting he, too, cannot see Jesus (97). Abandoning all hope of the advent, Hughes also pretends to see Jesus, and wonders why “God had not struck Westley”, his friend, “dead for taking” God’s “name in vain” (98). Here, Hughes encounters situational irony because he suffers in spite of his faithful disposition, while his lying friend receives praise