Artigo Revisado por pares

Locating Gulliver. Unstable Loyalism in James Gillray’s 'The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver'

2013; Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Volume: 14; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

ISSN

1780-678X

Autores

James Baker,

Tópico(s)

Historical Art and Culture Studies

Resumo

This paper examines James Gillray’s 1804 satirical print The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver. Drawing on Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) the print offers a seemingly uncomplicated loyalist rejection of the Napoleonic threat. However, as this paper demonstrates, by reading and rereading the intertextual narratives between The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver and Gulliver’s Travels a far more complex interpretation of the print emerges, one whose nuances put pressure on both any contention that the print sought to communicate at a popular level or merely using instinctive loyalist readings of the print. This pressure is simultaneously applied to traditional understandings of Gillray as a broadly loyalist satirist. Indeed the Gillray that emerges from this study more closely resembles an artist who rejected his paymasters by erecting hyper-loyalist visions so absurd they were intended to be understood – by the cautious, learned and critical reader – as subverting and undermining their purpose. His work then was irretrievably unstable and ambiguous, simultaneously mocking republican France and hyperloyalist visions of loyalist France. Whether late-Georgian consumers saw either or indeed both of these messages, depended in what preconceptions they brought to satiric masterpieces such as The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver. Le present article analyse une gravure satirique de James Gilray, The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver. (1804). Inspiree des Voyages de Gulliver de Jonathan Swift (1726), cette image offre a premiere vue une critique loyaliste de la menace napoleonienne. Toutefois, une lecture plus fouillee des rapports entre la gravure de Gillray et le livre de Swift fait ressortir une interpretation plus complexe. De cette maniere le present article tente de nuancer quelques idees largement partagees, a savoir que la gravure cherchait a communiquer son message a un public plus large et qu’elle s’appuyait sur des lectures loyalistes primaires. De la meme facon, l’article a l’ambition de revenir sur l’interpretation traditionnelle de Gillray comme un satiriste dont les sympathies loyalistes ne sont plus a demontrer. Le Gillray qui se degage de la presente analyse est davantage un artiste fort critique de ces commanditaires, dont les positions loyalistes sont presentees d’une facon tellement absurde que le lecteur plus eduque, plus distant, plus critique ne pouvait y voir qu’une subversion de l’ambition explicite de l’image. En fait, l’oeuvre de Gillray etait particulierement difficile a situer et d’une grande ambivalence, l’artiste se moquait a la fois de la France republicaine et des idees hyper-loyalistes de la France monarchique. La question de savoir si le public de l’epoque y voyait soit un des messages en equestion, soit les deux messages en meme temps, etait largement fonction des idees preconcues et des cadres de reference avec lesquelles on abordait des chefs-d’oeuvre satiriques comme The King of Brobdingnag and Gulliver.

Referência(s)