论文部分内容阅读
John Esperian, Christian Clark
College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
Few would deny the nobility of an animal which has played a significant role, historically, in the lives of humankind: the fabled unicorn, the Trojan Horse, and Pegasus, together with the Houyhnhnms of Jonathan Swift are testaments to the nobility of horses. In a modern context, Seabiscuit, Black Beauty, Silver, steed of the iconic Lone Ranger, and Tir na nog, from Irish folk tale history, have maintained the tradition of nobility. High comedic elements such as TV’s Mr. Ed, Aspercel, from The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (1968), Ollie, of Laurel and Hardy fame, reincarnated as a horse, and Tir na nog, hiding in an elevator to avoid being apprehended by the law, help to complete the comedic portrait of equine nobility.
Keywords: Jonathan Swift, Gulliver, Mr. Ed, Aspercel, Seabiscuit, Laurel and Hardy, satire, surrealism
Nobility & Horses in Modern Literature, TV/Film, & Pop Culture
Swift, Gulliver, & Houyhnhnms
“A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse” (Shakespeare, 2011).
“No man could more verify the truth of these two maxims: That nature is very easily satisfied; and That necessity is the mother of invention” (Swift, 2003, p. 186).
“And of course Henry the Horse dances the Waltz” (Lennon & McCartney, 1967).
Five horses come to mind when thinking of nobility and horses: the Houyhnhnms of Gulliver’s Travels(2003), Seabiscuit (book and film of same name), Hidalgo (film of same name), Aspercel, from a little known gem, The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (film),1 and Tir na nog (“land of eternal youth” in Irish) from a notable Irish film, Into the West (1993). Further, the full range of appreciation of horses can be found cover to cover in the magazine EQUUS.
Few have escaped Jonathan Swift’s satirical blade, and his humor is as relentless as his criticism. Consider Gulliver’s return to London and his preference to sleep in the family stables, or his whinnying inflections of his speech or his trot-style manner of walking, emulating the style of the horses he has come to understand as examples of pure reason. Four instances in the fourth book highlight the virtuous perceptions of the perfectly reasoning Houyhnhnms:
COMEDIC REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NOBLE HORSE
(1) The mistress who is late to a meeting because her husband “happened that very morning to shnuwnh” or “to retire to his first mother. Her excuse for not coming sooner was, that her husband dying late in the morning, she was a good while consulting her servants about a convenient place where his body should be laid; and I observed she behaved herself at our house as cheerfully as the rest. She died about three months after”. (Swift, 2003, p. 185)
(2) Gulliver’s description of war and his host’s command to stop: “I assured him that I had seen them blow up a hundred enemies at once in a siege, and as many in a ship; and beheld the dead bodies drop down in pieces from the clouds, to the great diversion of all the spectators. [?] I was going on to more particulars, when my master commanded me to silence”. Gulliver’s master says to him, “I cannot but think you have said the thing which is not” (Houyhnhnm term for lying). (Swift, 2002, p. 453)
(3) The penchant for “shining stones” that Yahoos (humankind sans reason) covet: “My master said he could never discover the reason of this unnatural appetite, or how these stones could be of any use to a Yahoo; but now he believed it might proceed from the same principle of avarice, which I had ascribed to mankind”. (Swift, 2002, p. 461)
(4) A deep discussion on “natural philosophy” and the difference between humans and Houyhnhnms with regard to reason, doubt, certainty, and argument or debate. In this instance, Swift’s (2002) satire seems to suggest or call for a kind of pragmatism as regards reason and humanity:
I remember it was with extreme difficulty that I could bring my master to understand the meaning of the word“opinion”, or how a point could be disputable; because reason taught us to affirm or deny only where we are certain; and beyond our knowledge we cannot do either. So that controversies, wrangling, disputes, and positiveness in false or dubious propositions are evils unknown among the Houyhnhnms. In the like manner when I used to explain to him our several systems of natural philosophy, he would laugh that a creature pretending to reason should value itself upon the knowledge of other people’s conjectures, and in things, where that knowledge, if it were certain, could be of no use. Wherein he agreed entirely with the sentiments of Socrates, as Plato delivers them, which I mention as the highest honor I can do that prince of philosophers. (p. 465)
Ironically, the horse and Gulliver seem to have Socrates wrong or backward. Swift parodies their reason some, and in their assuredness, they espouse an almost arrogance or righteousness, as opposed to traditional Socratic ignorance, which sees wisdom and individuality as such insofar as they recognize as much universality or shared truth in one another (see Plato’s Apology (2004a) and Phaedo (2004b), especially the former, in which Socrates compares himself to “a sort of gadfly, given to the state by god; and the state is a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size and needs to be stirred into life” (Plato, 2004a, p. 1099); and the latter, in which he recalls of “the soul […] her own proper jewels, temperance, and justice, and courage, and nobility, and truth” (Plato, 2004b, p. 1108).). This is a slippery slope, however, as ever with the complexity of Swift and this text, and orientation easily shifts with regard to satire. This paradox of Socrates, his knowledge or wisdom of his ignorance or not knowing, somewhat reflects the passion of humanity, which is celebrated here some, in human communication and open-mindedness, argument and “opinion”, doubt, and speculative philosophy, one might argue perhaps, in the application and balance of reason in the human experience or condition. Depending on context, emphasis, and interpretation, as humans (and readers), we might see at any moment the pros and cons of one state of mind or being (Houyhnhnm, boundless reason, altruism) as opposed to an opposite or other one(Yahoo, boundless passion, egoism). In this philosophical context, opposites or contraries such as sadness and happiness make for interchangeable masks of comedy and tragedy, or in a word, tragicomedy.
From 18th Century Classicism to 20th Century Family Film Comedy
From 18th century classicism, the shift to 20th century 50s- and 60s-era family film comedy is less imposing. The plot of the film The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (1968) is about a father who convinces a drug company, “Aspercel”, for which he works, to sponsor a show horse they name Aspercel for his daughter to ride and win with as a publicity stunt. The plot, however, has nothing to do with what the story is really about.
The conflict of the story arises when the father, Fred, discovers that his daughter has come to hate competitions and is only competing because her father’s job is at stake. He makes this discovery shortly after“Aspy”,2 his daughter’s nickname for the horse, frees himself from his stall, shows at the window, and after being spited by Fred for having lost a competition, runs off, then takes him unwillingly on a wild ride through the countryside in which Aspy jumps a number of high fences.3 He decides his daughter Helen’s happiness is more important and says she never has to compete again. This exemplifies redemption through a comic episode with a horse.4
The real story, one comes to understand, is about how a horse can dramatically change one’s life. In the scene wherein Helen overhears her father and his employer, the latter speaks in heated terms of what’s riding on that horse and if that horse is strong enough to carry the load. As Helen’s displeasure shows, despite her trying to hide it, Aspy manipulates Fred into putting his daughter’s needs first, a skill he had not cultivated prior to the arrival of “Aspercel”. Further, the trainer and co-star who comes to ride the horse to ultimate success says she has done it not for the grace of saving his job or notoriety and such, but rather, “for the horse”, and at the end of the film, over a group snapshot with Aspy, we hear, “… like a big, happy family”. By 21st century standards, this tableau may appear corny perhaps, but nevertheless serves as a portrait of a noble horse (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Tableau of “a big, happy family” in The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (Note Aspy’s toothy grin).
Nobility continues with the iconic Seabiscuit (2003), a book by Laura Hillenbrand and a film for anyone who is interested in what life was like during the Depression-era late 1930s in America, has empathy with the underdog, and appreciates a moving story about how those two interests intersect. Seabiscuit is a small horse with an indifferent and somewhat lazy side—sleeping and eating his favorite pastimes early in life. The compelling story is about how three men, Charles Howard, the horse’s owner and wealthy auto baron; Tom Smith, a skilled trainer whose most notable characteristic is silence; and Red Pollard, a jockey who seems to be able to communicate almost spiritually with his mounts and who is blind in one eye (a secret he keeps to himself), come together to fashion the almost unbelievable success of Seabiscuit, considered by most race-horse people a horse destined to be an also ran.
Perhaps the singular nobility of Seabiscuit may be found in what he represents to a down and out American public—an identification with the underdog who could win against larger and more famous horses with a more notable pedigree, suggesting perhaps light may be found at the end of the tunnel for everyone during such dark times:
The Titanic was a symbol of man’s hubris and mortality meeting with the indomitable force of fate and nature, while Seabiscuit is Frank Capra’s Everyman with a saddle on him. Perhaps Seabiscuit was the symbol for America of the downtrodden masses, whose determination and pluck bested the fat cats. (Simanton, 2011)
Held yearly for centuries, the Ocean of Fire, a 3,000 miles survival race across the Arabian desert, was the ultimate challenge to the efforts of man and steed working in concert. In 1890, a wealthy sheik invited an American, Frank T. Hopkins, and his horse to enter the race. Hopkins was a cowboy and dispatch rider for the U.S. Cavalry and had once been acknowledged as the greatest rider the West had ever known. Hopkins and his mustang, Hidalgo, were pitted against the world’s greatest Arabian horses and Bedouin riders.
The 2004 film Hidalgo demonstrates a good measure of nobility. Other horses are tamed by men and carry their riders through the desert, but Hidalgo seems to share an understanding with Hopkins. He can sense what Hopkins needs from him and reacts to a situation comparable to how Hopkins himself would act. Hopkins has flashbacks of bad times and only once recalls a better time, sitting on a beautiful hilltop with Hidalgo. In this instance, the horse may be seen as a replacement of family member. The moment that truly shows a difference between Hidalgo and other horses and their relationships to their owners is at the conclusion of the film. Together, they win the race; however, the army has a corral of mustangs which they have been ordered to shoot. Hopkins uses his earnings from the race to purchase all of the horses and sets them free. Hopkins loves his horse so much that he releases him as well, and as Hidalgo is about to go, he stops and looks back, perhaps for being unaccustomed to freedom, but most likely, because of a look of appreciation, which can be seen as a remarkable act of nobility (Ebert, 2004).
The symbolic and supernatural central character of the film Into the West is a horse, Tir na nog. Briefly, the story line revolves around two relatively poor and motherless young Irish boys who are gifted a magical horse by their grandfather. The horse is stolen by a wealthy individual who wants Tir na nog as a racing horse. The kids steal the horse back, and the chase begins over the Irish countryside with the young boys outwitting the combined efforts of the law and wealth.
The climax of the story and its resolution are singularly moving as viewers learn that the horse represents the deceased mother’s spirit, who has appeared to help draw the drinking, sullen father out of the city and back into the countryside. The father burns down the caravan or gypsy cart that had belonged to his wife and him, which releases her spirit to the heavens. But that is not the end. As one of the boys, Ossie, is about to drown trying to stay on Tir na nog—his grandfather has told him the tale of what happened to Ossian when he got down from his horse, that he aged 1,000 years and turned to dust—we see the horse plunge into the ocean waves, drown, and then transform into the boys’ mother’s hair and a hand that saves the boy from drowning, suggesting, rightly, that Tir na nog is an incarnation of the mother. We hear the boy say about the horse to his father, in the film’s conclusion, “It’s her, Mummy, isn’t it?”.
From Swift to Mr. Ed: Horse Sense
Horse Imagery from Antiquity to Postmodernism
Before tracing this tradition to the TV show Mr. Ed, recall how the horse or equine imagery ties into worship, appreciation, recognition, ritual and sacrifice, its notability from antiquity. Take the prayer or “Hymn to the Horse” in the Rig Veda (collected orally circa 1000, written circa 600 B.C.E.) (“Hymn to the Horse”, 2004, p. 1332), as “cosmic referent” and comparison to the holy cow, god(s), as emblematic of worldly or universal experience, for example, the “Swift Runner”, “the young man”, “the love of young girls”, and “troops” (“… your highest form eager for nourishment in the place of the cow”, and Bedford editors note, “the winged horse can represent intellect and consciousness”; “Varuna… rose out of the primordial waters as the cosmic horse” and more): “The racehorse has come to the slaughter, pondering with his heart turned to the gods. The goat, his kin, is led in front; behind come the poets, the singers. The Swift Runner has come to the highest dwelling-place, to his father and mother” (“Hymn to the Horse”, 2004, pp. 1344-1345). This not only coincides nicely with Gulliver and Mr. Ed, but also with the passage on retiring to one’s first mother (above) or primordial source, again putting into question and action the play of identity, potential, or purpose. Here, for example, the last goes first, “the scapegoat”, sacrifice, or companion and worshipped coalesce in this singular vision or worldview.5
In considering this mix of horse sense and horse play, the mid or wavering road between high and low culture—also, between common, street sense and erudite, scholarly or academic knowledge—in Gulliver’s Travels or classic literature and modern comedy, the (ig)noble horse acts as archetype, representative tool, or metaphor (for good and/or bad) in myth, literature, and culture. The Trojan horse, subterfuge of the trickster folk hero, the tricky, somewhat elusive figure Odysseus (Ulysses), another character exemplary of modern ingenuity and human genius, however suspicious or dangerous nonetheless (see Kafka’s “Silence of the Sirens” (1971)), continues the tradition in Joyce’s Ulysses (1934) in this sense, its central character(s) as conduit, interior monologue being(s) (polylogic blooming), Bloom(s). In this context, one might ask, is a horse a horse of course of course (see theme song lyrics to TV show Mr. Ed)? Note the irony or contrariety of lyrics to the theme song or jingle, its lighthearted melody that makes one forget sense or logic in a way and just repeat and sing along: “ask the horse” for “The answer that you’ll endorse”; “He’s always on a steady course”. At the end of the novel, Gulliver references the Trojan horse and his claim for writing “for the noblest end, to inform and instruct mankind” (Swift, 2003, p. 196), another ironic moment reminiscent of the discussion on “natural philosophy”(above), (self-)assuredness, and lack of doubt.
Gulliver’s Travels can be enjoyed for its fantastic entertainment by child and adult alike, as evinced by its many productions and reproductions on TV and in film, many of which, unfortunately, like the most recent, which we heard was so bad that it was not worth seeing (nor naming here), may have Swift turning in his grave. At the same time, however, Swift’s text is also highly and deeply philosophical.
One of the core concerns is of human potential or capability, in terms of identity or being (in thought and action), a main theme of the modern world, delivered with a kind of philosophy of laughter and a wicked wit, in visions of the (in)human, animal, even alien (self). Much like language, as thematized in ethnographic episodes, for example, words spelled phonetically in alphabetic script and translated roughly into English (such as to retire to one’s mother (to die) or to exhort (to judge or to condemn)), humanity has within it an awesome ability for equal measure of greatness, grace, dignity, civility, as well as indignity, depravity, injustice, incivility, disgrace, inhumanity and so on (see such Swiftian lists). The manifestation of such potential in language then, as emblematic of humanity, comes from both logic, reason, or rationality as well as from randomness or arbitrarity and relativity, as suggested by some modern scholars of semiotics or linguistics, such as Saussure or Barthes. This kind of thinking or infinite wonder creates a miraculous irrationality of the phenomenon of existence, language (question of origin), meaning, perception, consciousness, being or identity, ever more relevant themes in modern literature and culture both high and low. As a part of and apart from the cosmos, this instinct at once conjures or tries to express experience while confronted by the enigma itself. In this vision of (in)humanity, Swift creates a perfectly rational, speaking (but not literate, curiously), and equanimous equine. At the same time, such an image or idea is uproariously absurd. Humanity is a composite of the brutish Yahoo and the civil Houyhnhnm, contrary to the too often narrow or uni-dimensional interpretation of these species or elements of the text, as evinced by still other episodes or travels in the novel.
Swift is a precursor and visionary of the modern taste, now the norm, ironically (as its roots lie in revolt or non-conformity), of (pop) surrealism (even Dadaism), as seen on TV and in film, especially advertising and, ironically again, progressively more controversial yet popular cartoon sitcoms such as the animated series Family Guy (1999), which features an uber-intelligent talking dog (a writer of sorts), or American Dad (2005), which features a crass, sarcastic but endearing extraterrestrial or alien who wants to remain in exile, a displaced, disguised foreigner, and a witty, spritely, puckish or equally condescending yet likeable German-accented fish named Klaus.6 Such works as Gulliver’s Travels and on TV, film, and other incarnations or manifestations of humanity betoken the proverbial horse-feathers, horse-sense, horse-play, horse’s mouth, or in short, all the(non)sense of thinking anything’s possible as regards potential or capability (of identity, being, consciousness).
One might trace this kind of surrealist satire and imagery in other modernist works such as Gogol’s “The Nose” (2011), wherein a state official has his social standing and sanity usurped when one day his nose somehow leaves his face and appears across town, impersonating him or challenging his identity, as it were, in developing its own persona. Compare this with Ed’s nose-head (sense of smell and direction or nose-how), or Dostoevsky’s master-slave reversal and tragi-comic play in Notes from Underground (2003), which perhaps exhibits a kind of surrealist existential humanism. Jokes in Mr. Ed are witty, timeless in ways no less sophisticated in this sense than these master satirist writers, often touching on ulterior meaning in an almost other-worldly funny way: Ed’s head is “one big nose”, he says when explaining his sense of direction from smell; Wilbur’s boss says, “He never kisses another man’s wife”, when prompted by his wife to kiss her after Wilbur kisses his (“Wilbur Post, Honorary Horse”). Sense of this strangeness continues still more strongly in the (post)modern work of writers such as Kafka and Beckett (note extended notes on which in Popular Culture Association 2009 paper presentation,“The Absurd in Early Television and Film and (Post)Modern Literature” by Christian Clark.).
Satire & Surrealism in Literature, TV/Film, & Pop Culture
The strange doubling effect or weird amalgam of animal and human, natural and super-or preternatural, high and low, appears in another classic double in comedy and film, Laurel and Hardy, in one of their earliest films together, Flying Deuces, the title typifying the comedy duo in terms of contrariety and the double (thin and fat team), who at the end await execution for desertion, and Stan asks Ollie if he still wants to come back as a horse(we forget Ollie’s response, if any; he may have shrugged it off). Shortly after, they escape in a plane, not surprisingly crash, and when Ollie is reincarnated as a horse, he is displeased, and Stan is happy to be reunited(see online video link in References) (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Stan and Ollie reunite at the end of Flying Deuces (1939).
Similarly, two scenes from separate episodes of the TV show Mr. Ed form a nutshell of this Swiftian satiric principle: (1) In “Wilbur Post, Honorary Horse” (see online video links in References), Wilbur disagrees with his employer and goes on informal strike, while Ed gives him the idea to write a book about horses (note parallel to Gulliver’s lexicographic-ethnographic writing) which will be a best seller, surely, according to Ed, since he knows everything about horses. Ed here plays a trickster, at once helpful but hindering, and no ordinary horse. He manages to distract Wilbur, who has started work again, to try to finish the book and convinces him to pretend to be a horse, so the book can be “authentic”; initially Wilbur is reluctant, but seems convinced to try again once Ed says he needs to think horse, not think human, that just because he is a human—which, after all, he is, Wilbur so assuredly attests—is a “poor excuse” for not trying “to rise above our birth”, as Ed puts it. Wilbur’s wife says,“You won’t be satisfied until you become a horse” (his employer, “You’re not a man; you’re a horse”), and later Wilbur dreams of becoming one, in which Ed asks him if he is prepared to give up humanhood for horsehood, whereupon Wilbur neighs, nods, and stamps his hoof, and Ed says, “You will now become a member of the horses of the world”.
(2) In “Don’t Laugh at Horses” (see online video links in References), Ed upholds “horsely dignity” by informally striking against Wilbur’s costume (a two-person horse suit), the irony of which episode, touching on the philosophy of humor or duality of tragicomedy, is that laughter resolves the conflict (contrary to the title and Ed’s initial position), when Ed sees kids laugh at Wilbur’s act, which is perhaps to say we must be able to laugh at ourselves and see in this a kind of composite (ig)nobility of farce and gravity, low and high culture. This doubling or melding, polar unification in the master-slave reversal, contrary complementaries, and (anti)thesis of sadness-happiness echoes in this context one of Blake’s great epigrams, from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell(1790), “Excess of sorrow laughs. Excess of joy weeps”.
As punishment, Wilbur brings Ed to a trainer, a dullard who says Ed “must be one of them trick horses”, when Ed impresses him with his reason and human understanding such that the trainer declares to Wilbur, “He’s so smart you should be carrying him!”.
Ed’s trickster qualities entail an arrogance yet generosity, easily susceptible to or manipulated by flattery, though he is quick to praise or point out right and wrong. He often plays off the human-animal composite, reversal, or conflation; he says to the camera at the end of the first episode of the TV series, “The First Meeting”:“People—talk, talk, talk.…”. Compare the Houyhnhnms’ speech (but illiteracy): “not the least idea of books or literature” (Swift, 2002, p. 445), as they “have no letters” (Swift, 2002, p. 468); virtual silence or under-emphasis about the dead and being “buried in the obscurest places” (Swift, 2002, p. 469); and “hnhloayn, which signifies an exhortation” or almost tacit understanding and ironic tautology, because “no person can disobey reason without giving up his claim to be a rational creature” (Swift, 2002, p. 473), an almost telepathic or futuristic sense here, especially in relation to the core concern for potential or capability and identity, which however, shows that humans are not entirely or solely rational.7 When Wilbur says about Ed’s talking or intelligence, that “the thing is fantastic; I just don’t understand it”, Ed says, “Don’t try to; it’s bigger than both of us”, and later, moreover, that“It’s ridiculous”. As regards the amalgam effect, composite, doubling, reversal of animal-human, (in)human, or(super)natural, these scenes intimate Swift’s classic yet contemporary surreal satire.
Conclusions
To conclude, we share this fitting metaphor, akin to the concepts essayed here, from Ghalib’s ghazal “Don’t Skimp With Me Today” (2003):
The horse of life is galloping; we’ll never know the stopping place.
Our hands are not touching the reins, nor our feet the stirrups.
I keep a certain distance from the reality of things.
It’s the same distance between me and utter confusion. (lines 3-6, p. 971)
References
Amateau, R. (Director). (1961, Jan. 5). The first meeting. Mr. Ed. IMDb. Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/video/hulu/vi3434780697/
Banecker, A. (2011, April 23). Remembering the marshmallows: The importance of comic absurdity, humorous non sequiturs, and necessary silliness in the short works of Woody Allen. Popular Culture Association (PCA) Annual National Conference (paper presentation, San Antonio, T.X.).
Blake, W. (1790). The marriage of heaven and hell (Copy B). In M. Eaves, R. N. Essick, & J. Viscomi (Eds.), The William Blake archive. Retrieved from http://www.blakearchive.org/
Dostoevsky, F. (2003). In Tr. R. E. Matlaw, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 5). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Ebert, R. (2004, March 5). Hidalgo. Rogerebert.com. Retrieved from http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/
Ghalib. (2003). Don’t skimp with me today. In Tr. R. Bly, S. Dutta, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford(Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 5). Paul Davis et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Gogol, N. (2011, Sept. 1). The nose. Project gutenberg. Retrieved from http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0602381.txt
Hymn to the horse. (2004). In P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Johnston, J. (Director). (2004). Hidalgo (DVD). United States: Touchstone.
Joyce, J. (1934). Ulysses. New York, N.Y.: Random House.
Kafka, F. (1971). The complete stories. New York, N.Y.: Schocken Books Inc..
Lennon, J. & McCartney, P. (1967, June 1). Being for the benefit of Mr. Kite. G. Martin. (Producer). Sgt. Pepper’s lonely hearts club band (CD). Germany: Parlophone.
Lubin, A. (Director). (1963, Oct. 6). Wilbur post, honorary horse. Mr. Ed. Youtube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhKwphgmVc; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBv-KW_BHg
McFarlane, S. (Executive producer). (1999). Family guy [Television series]. Los Angeles, C.A.: Fox.
McFarlane, S., Barker, M., & Weitzman, M. (Executive producers). (2005). American dad [Television series]. Los Angeles, C.A.: Fox.
Newell, M. (Director). (1993). Into the west (DVD). United States: Miramax Films.
Plato. (2004a). Apology. In Tr. B. Jowett, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Plato. (2004b). Phaedo. In Tr. B. Jowett, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Shakespeare, W. (2011, March 1). Richard the third. V. iv. 10. Bartleby.com. Retrieved from http://www.bartleby.com/70/3354.html
Simanton, K. (2011, March 10). Review of film Seabiscuit. Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/reviews/0329575
Stewart, I. (Director). (1963, Nov. 3). Don’t laugh at horses. Mr. Ed. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReEmIiJSXYY; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJdpmL99gRs
Sutherland. A. E. (Director). (1939). Flying deuces (RKO radio pictures). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZPvuoG_su0
Swift, J. (2002). Gulliver’s travels. In S. Lawall (Ed.), The norton anthology of world literature (2nd ed.) (Vol. D). New York: Norton.
Swift, J. (2003). Gulliver’s travels. In P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 4). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Tokar, N. (Director). (1968). The horse in the gray flannel suit (DVD). United States: Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Inc..
John Esperian, professor, Department of English, College of Southern Nevada. Christian Clark, professor, Department of English, College of Southern Nevada. 1 Found while searching for the film The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1956), this gem has a funky bebop soundtrack.
2 Both a minor trainer, first, after noting the silly name Aspercel, and then the major trainer for Aspy, call him fondly, “Meatball”. After Fred and his employer overhear the minor trainer criticize the name Aspercel, Fred says to his boss, “I only keep him around because the horse laughs at his jokes”. Meatball likes to drink beer, too, and in their first and last scenes together, Fred and he share one.
3 Fittingly farcical, while the two are chased by police officers in a squad car (the call having gone out for a “horse in a gray flannel suit”), one officer compliments, “Nice jump!”.
4 When a girlfriend at the time fell from a horse that took off on her, as the saying goes, the stable became the unstable.
5 Consider other ancient texts and such imagery as, for example, the four horsemen of the apocalypse in Revelation.
6 Note here reference to conference panel and presentation of paper, “Comic Absurdity, Humorous Non Sequitors, and Necessary Silliness in the Short Works of Woody Allen” by Andrew Banecker, who notes how sophistication or distinction of higher or richer humor such as Allen’s (or Swift’s) involves a depth or intricacy of reference to premises or ideas and proves more satisfying or provocative than lower or less thoughtful comedies or shows as referenced here and evinced in tangents, non sequitors, or random, unrelated series of images or thoughts.
7 Much as we have claimed here, Bedford editors note, “At the heart of Gulliver’s Travels lies the question, What does it mean to be a human being? […] and exactly where Swift would place humanity on the scale between Houyhnhnm and Yahoo is not at all clear” (Swift, 2003, p. 147).
College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
Few would deny the nobility of an animal which has played a significant role, historically, in the lives of humankind: the fabled unicorn, the Trojan Horse, and Pegasus, together with the Houyhnhnms of Jonathan Swift are testaments to the nobility of horses. In a modern context, Seabiscuit, Black Beauty, Silver, steed of the iconic Lone Ranger, and Tir na nog, from Irish folk tale history, have maintained the tradition of nobility. High comedic elements such as TV’s Mr. Ed, Aspercel, from The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (1968), Ollie, of Laurel and Hardy fame, reincarnated as a horse, and Tir na nog, hiding in an elevator to avoid being apprehended by the law, help to complete the comedic portrait of equine nobility.
Keywords: Jonathan Swift, Gulliver, Mr. Ed, Aspercel, Seabiscuit, Laurel and Hardy, satire, surrealism
Nobility & Horses in Modern Literature, TV/Film, & Pop Culture
Swift, Gulliver, & Houyhnhnms
“A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse” (Shakespeare, 2011).
“No man could more verify the truth of these two maxims: That nature is very easily satisfied; and That necessity is the mother of invention” (Swift, 2003, p. 186).
“And of course Henry the Horse dances the Waltz” (Lennon & McCartney, 1967).
Five horses come to mind when thinking of nobility and horses: the Houyhnhnms of Gulliver’s Travels(2003), Seabiscuit (book and film of same name), Hidalgo (film of same name), Aspercel, from a little known gem, The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (film),1 and Tir na nog (“land of eternal youth” in Irish) from a notable Irish film, Into the West (1993). Further, the full range of appreciation of horses can be found cover to cover in the magazine EQUUS.
Few have escaped Jonathan Swift’s satirical blade, and his humor is as relentless as his criticism. Consider Gulliver’s return to London and his preference to sleep in the family stables, or his whinnying inflections of his speech or his trot-style manner of walking, emulating the style of the horses he has come to understand as examples of pure reason. Four instances in the fourth book highlight the virtuous perceptions of the perfectly reasoning Houyhnhnms:
COMEDIC REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NOBLE HORSE
(1) The mistress who is late to a meeting because her husband “happened that very morning to shnuwnh” or “to retire to his first mother. Her excuse for not coming sooner was, that her husband dying late in the morning, she was a good while consulting her servants about a convenient place where his body should be laid; and I observed she behaved herself at our house as cheerfully as the rest. She died about three months after”. (Swift, 2003, p. 185)
(2) Gulliver’s description of war and his host’s command to stop: “I assured him that I had seen them blow up a hundred enemies at once in a siege, and as many in a ship; and beheld the dead bodies drop down in pieces from the clouds, to the great diversion of all the spectators. [?] I was going on to more particulars, when my master commanded me to silence”. Gulliver’s master says to him, “I cannot but think you have said the thing which is not” (Houyhnhnm term for lying). (Swift, 2002, p. 453)
(3) The penchant for “shining stones” that Yahoos (humankind sans reason) covet: “My master said he could never discover the reason of this unnatural appetite, or how these stones could be of any use to a Yahoo; but now he believed it might proceed from the same principle of avarice, which I had ascribed to mankind”. (Swift, 2002, p. 461)
(4) A deep discussion on “natural philosophy” and the difference between humans and Houyhnhnms with regard to reason, doubt, certainty, and argument or debate. In this instance, Swift’s (2002) satire seems to suggest or call for a kind of pragmatism as regards reason and humanity:
I remember it was with extreme difficulty that I could bring my master to understand the meaning of the word“opinion”, or how a point could be disputable; because reason taught us to affirm or deny only where we are certain; and beyond our knowledge we cannot do either. So that controversies, wrangling, disputes, and positiveness in false or dubious propositions are evils unknown among the Houyhnhnms. In the like manner when I used to explain to him our several systems of natural philosophy, he would laugh that a creature pretending to reason should value itself upon the knowledge of other people’s conjectures, and in things, where that knowledge, if it were certain, could be of no use. Wherein he agreed entirely with the sentiments of Socrates, as Plato delivers them, which I mention as the highest honor I can do that prince of philosophers. (p. 465)
Ironically, the horse and Gulliver seem to have Socrates wrong or backward. Swift parodies their reason some, and in their assuredness, they espouse an almost arrogance or righteousness, as opposed to traditional Socratic ignorance, which sees wisdom and individuality as such insofar as they recognize as much universality or shared truth in one another (see Plato’s Apology (2004a) and Phaedo (2004b), especially the former, in which Socrates compares himself to “a sort of gadfly, given to the state by god; and the state is a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size and needs to be stirred into life” (Plato, 2004a, p. 1099); and the latter, in which he recalls of “the soul […] her own proper jewels, temperance, and justice, and courage, and nobility, and truth” (Plato, 2004b, p. 1108).). This is a slippery slope, however, as ever with the complexity of Swift and this text, and orientation easily shifts with regard to satire. This paradox of Socrates, his knowledge or wisdom of his ignorance or not knowing, somewhat reflects the passion of humanity, which is celebrated here some, in human communication and open-mindedness, argument and “opinion”, doubt, and speculative philosophy, one might argue perhaps, in the application and balance of reason in the human experience or condition. Depending on context, emphasis, and interpretation, as humans (and readers), we might see at any moment the pros and cons of one state of mind or being (Houyhnhnm, boundless reason, altruism) as opposed to an opposite or other one(Yahoo, boundless passion, egoism). In this philosophical context, opposites or contraries such as sadness and happiness make for interchangeable masks of comedy and tragedy, or in a word, tragicomedy.
From 18th Century Classicism to 20th Century Family Film Comedy
From 18th century classicism, the shift to 20th century 50s- and 60s-era family film comedy is less imposing. The plot of the film The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (1968) is about a father who convinces a drug company, “Aspercel”, for which he works, to sponsor a show horse they name Aspercel for his daughter to ride and win with as a publicity stunt. The plot, however, has nothing to do with what the story is really about.
The conflict of the story arises when the father, Fred, discovers that his daughter has come to hate competitions and is only competing because her father’s job is at stake. He makes this discovery shortly after“Aspy”,2 his daughter’s nickname for the horse, frees himself from his stall, shows at the window, and after being spited by Fred for having lost a competition, runs off, then takes him unwillingly on a wild ride through the countryside in which Aspy jumps a number of high fences.3 He decides his daughter Helen’s happiness is more important and says she never has to compete again. This exemplifies redemption through a comic episode with a horse.4
The real story, one comes to understand, is about how a horse can dramatically change one’s life. In the scene wherein Helen overhears her father and his employer, the latter speaks in heated terms of what’s riding on that horse and if that horse is strong enough to carry the load. As Helen’s displeasure shows, despite her trying to hide it, Aspy manipulates Fred into putting his daughter’s needs first, a skill he had not cultivated prior to the arrival of “Aspercel”. Further, the trainer and co-star who comes to ride the horse to ultimate success says she has done it not for the grace of saving his job or notoriety and such, but rather, “for the horse”, and at the end of the film, over a group snapshot with Aspy, we hear, “… like a big, happy family”. By 21st century standards, this tableau may appear corny perhaps, but nevertheless serves as a portrait of a noble horse (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Tableau of “a big, happy family” in The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit (Note Aspy’s toothy grin).
Nobility continues with the iconic Seabiscuit (2003), a book by Laura Hillenbrand and a film for anyone who is interested in what life was like during the Depression-era late 1930s in America, has empathy with the underdog, and appreciates a moving story about how those two interests intersect. Seabiscuit is a small horse with an indifferent and somewhat lazy side—sleeping and eating his favorite pastimes early in life. The compelling story is about how three men, Charles Howard, the horse’s owner and wealthy auto baron; Tom Smith, a skilled trainer whose most notable characteristic is silence; and Red Pollard, a jockey who seems to be able to communicate almost spiritually with his mounts and who is blind in one eye (a secret he keeps to himself), come together to fashion the almost unbelievable success of Seabiscuit, considered by most race-horse people a horse destined to be an also ran.
Perhaps the singular nobility of Seabiscuit may be found in what he represents to a down and out American public—an identification with the underdog who could win against larger and more famous horses with a more notable pedigree, suggesting perhaps light may be found at the end of the tunnel for everyone during such dark times:
The Titanic was a symbol of man’s hubris and mortality meeting with the indomitable force of fate and nature, while Seabiscuit is Frank Capra’s Everyman with a saddle on him. Perhaps Seabiscuit was the symbol for America of the downtrodden masses, whose determination and pluck bested the fat cats. (Simanton, 2011)
Held yearly for centuries, the Ocean of Fire, a 3,000 miles survival race across the Arabian desert, was the ultimate challenge to the efforts of man and steed working in concert. In 1890, a wealthy sheik invited an American, Frank T. Hopkins, and his horse to enter the race. Hopkins was a cowboy and dispatch rider for the U.S. Cavalry and had once been acknowledged as the greatest rider the West had ever known. Hopkins and his mustang, Hidalgo, were pitted against the world’s greatest Arabian horses and Bedouin riders.
The 2004 film Hidalgo demonstrates a good measure of nobility. Other horses are tamed by men and carry their riders through the desert, but Hidalgo seems to share an understanding with Hopkins. He can sense what Hopkins needs from him and reacts to a situation comparable to how Hopkins himself would act. Hopkins has flashbacks of bad times and only once recalls a better time, sitting on a beautiful hilltop with Hidalgo. In this instance, the horse may be seen as a replacement of family member. The moment that truly shows a difference between Hidalgo and other horses and their relationships to their owners is at the conclusion of the film. Together, they win the race; however, the army has a corral of mustangs which they have been ordered to shoot. Hopkins uses his earnings from the race to purchase all of the horses and sets them free. Hopkins loves his horse so much that he releases him as well, and as Hidalgo is about to go, he stops and looks back, perhaps for being unaccustomed to freedom, but most likely, because of a look of appreciation, which can be seen as a remarkable act of nobility (Ebert, 2004).
The symbolic and supernatural central character of the film Into the West is a horse, Tir na nog. Briefly, the story line revolves around two relatively poor and motherless young Irish boys who are gifted a magical horse by their grandfather. The horse is stolen by a wealthy individual who wants Tir na nog as a racing horse. The kids steal the horse back, and the chase begins over the Irish countryside with the young boys outwitting the combined efforts of the law and wealth.
The climax of the story and its resolution are singularly moving as viewers learn that the horse represents the deceased mother’s spirit, who has appeared to help draw the drinking, sullen father out of the city and back into the countryside. The father burns down the caravan or gypsy cart that had belonged to his wife and him, which releases her spirit to the heavens. But that is not the end. As one of the boys, Ossie, is about to drown trying to stay on Tir na nog—his grandfather has told him the tale of what happened to Ossian when he got down from his horse, that he aged 1,000 years and turned to dust—we see the horse plunge into the ocean waves, drown, and then transform into the boys’ mother’s hair and a hand that saves the boy from drowning, suggesting, rightly, that Tir na nog is an incarnation of the mother. We hear the boy say about the horse to his father, in the film’s conclusion, “It’s her, Mummy, isn’t it?”.
From Swift to Mr. Ed: Horse Sense
Horse Imagery from Antiquity to Postmodernism
Before tracing this tradition to the TV show Mr. Ed, recall how the horse or equine imagery ties into worship, appreciation, recognition, ritual and sacrifice, its notability from antiquity. Take the prayer or “Hymn to the Horse” in the Rig Veda (collected orally circa 1000, written circa 600 B.C.E.) (“Hymn to the Horse”, 2004, p. 1332), as “cosmic referent” and comparison to the holy cow, god(s), as emblematic of worldly or universal experience, for example, the “Swift Runner”, “the young man”, “the love of young girls”, and “troops” (“… your highest form eager for nourishment in the place of the cow”, and Bedford editors note, “the winged horse can represent intellect and consciousness”; “Varuna… rose out of the primordial waters as the cosmic horse” and more): “The racehorse has come to the slaughter, pondering with his heart turned to the gods. The goat, his kin, is led in front; behind come the poets, the singers. The Swift Runner has come to the highest dwelling-place, to his father and mother” (“Hymn to the Horse”, 2004, pp. 1344-1345). This not only coincides nicely with Gulliver and Mr. Ed, but also with the passage on retiring to one’s first mother (above) or primordial source, again putting into question and action the play of identity, potential, or purpose. Here, for example, the last goes first, “the scapegoat”, sacrifice, or companion and worshipped coalesce in this singular vision or worldview.5
In considering this mix of horse sense and horse play, the mid or wavering road between high and low culture—also, between common, street sense and erudite, scholarly or academic knowledge—in Gulliver’s Travels or classic literature and modern comedy, the (ig)noble horse acts as archetype, representative tool, or metaphor (for good and/or bad) in myth, literature, and culture. The Trojan horse, subterfuge of the trickster folk hero, the tricky, somewhat elusive figure Odysseus (Ulysses), another character exemplary of modern ingenuity and human genius, however suspicious or dangerous nonetheless (see Kafka’s “Silence of the Sirens” (1971)), continues the tradition in Joyce’s Ulysses (1934) in this sense, its central character(s) as conduit, interior monologue being(s) (polylogic blooming), Bloom(s). In this context, one might ask, is a horse a horse of course of course (see theme song lyrics to TV show Mr. Ed)? Note the irony or contrariety of lyrics to the theme song or jingle, its lighthearted melody that makes one forget sense or logic in a way and just repeat and sing along: “ask the horse” for “The answer that you’ll endorse”; “He’s always on a steady course”. At the end of the novel, Gulliver references the Trojan horse and his claim for writing “for the noblest end, to inform and instruct mankind” (Swift, 2003, p. 196), another ironic moment reminiscent of the discussion on “natural philosophy”(above), (self-)assuredness, and lack of doubt.
Gulliver’s Travels can be enjoyed for its fantastic entertainment by child and adult alike, as evinced by its many productions and reproductions on TV and in film, many of which, unfortunately, like the most recent, which we heard was so bad that it was not worth seeing (nor naming here), may have Swift turning in his grave. At the same time, however, Swift’s text is also highly and deeply philosophical.
One of the core concerns is of human potential or capability, in terms of identity or being (in thought and action), a main theme of the modern world, delivered with a kind of philosophy of laughter and a wicked wit, in visions of the (in)human, animal, even alien (self). Much like language, as thematized in ethnographic episodes, for example, words spelled phonetically in alphabetic script and translated roughly into English (such as to retire to one’s mother (to die) or to exhort (to judge or to condemn)), humanity has within it an awesome ability for equal measure of greatness, grace, dignity, civility, as well as indignity, depravity, injustice, incivility, disgrace, inhumanity and so on (see such Swiftian lists). The manifestation of such potential in language then, as emblematic of humanity, comes from both logic, reason, or rationality as well as from randomness or arbitrarity and relativity, as suggested by some modern scholars of semiotics or linguistics, such as Saussure or Barthes. This kind of thinking or infinite wonder creates a miraculous irrationality of the phenomenon of existence, language (question of origin), meaning, perception, consciousness, being or identity, ever more relevant themes in modern literature and culture both high and low. As a part of and apart from the cosmos, this instinct at once conjures or tries to express experience while confronted by the enigma itself. In this vision of (in)humanity, Swift creates a perfectly rational, speaking (but not literate, curiously), and equanimous equine. At the same time, such an image or idea is uproariously absurd. Humanity is a composite of the brutish Yahoo and the civil Houyhnhnm, contrary to the too often narrow or uni-dimensional interpretation of these species or elements of the text, as evinced by still other episodes or travels in the novel.
Swift is a precursor and visionary of the modern taste, now the norm, ironically (as its roots lie in revolt or non-conformity), of (pop) surrealism (even Dadaism), as seen on TV and in film, especially advertising and, ironically again, progressively more controversial yet popular cartoon sitcoms such as the animated series Family Guy (1999), which features an uber-intelligent talking dog (a writer of sorts), or American Dad (2005), which features a crass, sarcastic but endearing extraterrestrial or alien who wants to remain in exile, a displaced, disguised foreigner, and a witty, spritely, puckish or equally condescending yet likeable German-accented fish named Klaus.6 Such works as Gulliver’s Travels and on TV, film, and other incarnations or manifestations of humanity betoken the proverbial horse-feathers, horse-sense, horse-play, horse’s mouth, or in short, all the(non)sense of thinking anything’s possible as regards potential or capability (of identity, being, consciousness).
One might trace this kind of surrealist satire and imagery in other modernist works such as Gogol’s “The Nose” (2011), wherein a state official has his social standing and sanity usurped when one day his nose somehow leaves his face and appears across town, impersonating him or challenging his identity, as it were, in developing its own persona. Compare this with Ed’s nose-head (sense of smell and direction or nose-how), or Dostoevsky’s master-slave reversal and tragi-comic play in Notes from Underground (2003), which perhaps exhibits a kind of surrealist existential humanism. Jokes in Mr. Ed are witty, timeless in ways no less sophisticated in this sense than these master satirist writers, often touching on ulterior meaning in an almost other-worldly funny way: Ed’s head is “one big nose”, he says when explaining his sense of direction from smell; Wilbur’s boss says, “He never kisses another man’s wife”, when prompted by his wife to kiss her after Wilbur kisses his (“Wilbur Post, Honorary Horse”). Sense of this strangeness continues still more strongly in the (post)modern work of writers such as Kafka and Beckett (note extended notes on which in Popular Culture Association 2009 paper presentation,“The Absurd in Early Television and Film and (Post)Modern Literature” by Christian Clark.).
Satire & Surrealism in Literature, TV/Film, & Pop Culture
The strange doubling effect or weird amalgam of animal and human, natural and super-or preternatural, high and low, appears in another classic double in comedy and film, Laurel and Hardy, in one of their earliest films together, Flying Deuces, the title typifying the comedy duo in terms of contrariety and the double (thin and fat team), who at the end await execution for desertion, and Stan asks Ollie if he still wants to come back as a horse(we forget Ollie’s response, if any; he may have shrugged it off). Shortly after, they escape in a plane, not surprisingly crash, and when Ollie is reincarnated as a horse, he is displeased, and Stan is happy to be reunited(see online video link in References) (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Stan and Ollie reunite at the end of Flying Deuces (1939).
Similarly, two scenes from separate episodes of the TV show Mr. Ed form a nutshell of this Swiftian satiric principle: (1) In “Wilbur Post, Honorary Horse” (see online video links in References), Wilbur disagrees with his employer and goes on informal strike, while Ed gives him the idea to write a book about horses (note parallel to Gulliver’s lexicographic-ethnographic writing) which will be a best seller, surely, according to Ed, since he knows everything about horses. Ed here plays a trickster, at once helpful but hindering, and no ordinary horse. He manages to distract Wilbur, who has started work again, to try to finish the book and convinces him to pretend to be a horse, so the book can be “authentic”; initially Wilbur is reluctant, but seems convinced to try again once Ed says he needs to think horse, not think human, that just because he is a human—which, after all, he is, Wilbur so assuredly attests—is a “poor excuse” for not trying “to rise above our birth”, as Ed puts it. Wilbur’s wife says,“You won’t be satisfied until you become a horse” (his employer, “You’re not a man; you’re a horse”), and later Wilbur dreams of becoming one, in which Ed asks him if he is prepared to give up humanhood for horsehood, whereupon Wilbur neighs, nods, and stamps his hoof, and Ed says, “You will now become a member of the horses of the world”.
(2) In “Don’t Laugh at Horses” (see online video links in References), Ed upholds “horsely dignity” by informally striking against Wilbur’s costume (a two-person horse suit), the irony of which episode, touching on the philosophy of humor or duality of tragicomedy, is that laughter resolves the conflict (contrary to the title and Ed’s initial position), when Ed sees kids laugh at Wilbur’s act, which is perhaps to say we must be able to laugh at ourselves and see in this a kind of composite (ig)nobility of farce and gravity, low and high culture. This doubling or melding, polar unification in the master-slave reversal, contrary complementaries, and (anti)thesis of sadness-happiness echoes in this context one of Blake’s great epigrams, from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell(1790), “Excess of sorrow laughs. Excess of joy weeps”.
As punishment, Wilbur brings Ed to a trainer, a dullard who says Ed “must be one of them trick horses”, when Ed impresses him with his reason and human understanding such that the trainer declares to Wilbur, “He’s so smart you should be carrying him!”.
Ed’s trickster qualities entail an arrogance yet generosity, easily susceptible to or manipulated by flattery, though he is quick to praise or point out right and wrong. He often plays off the human-animal composite, reversal, or conflation; he says to the camera at the end of the first episode of the TV series, “The First Meeting”:“People—talk, talk, talk.…”. Compare the Houyhnhnms’ speech (but illiteracy): “not the least idea of books or literature” (Swift, 2002, p. 445), as they “have no letters” (Swift, 2002, p. 468); virtual silence or under-emphasis about the dead and being “buried in the obscurest places” (Swift, 2002, p. 469); and “hnhloayn, which signifies an exhortation” or almost tacit understanding and ironic tautology, because “no person can disobey reason without giving up his claim to be a rational creature” (Swift, 2002, p. 473), an almost telepathic or futuristic sense here, especially in relation to the core concern for potential or capability and identity, which however, shows that humans are not entirely or solely rational.7 When Wilbur says about Ed’s talking or intelligence, that “the thing is fantastic; I just don’t understand it”, Ed says, “Don’t try to; it’s bigger than both of us”, and later, moreover, that“It’s ridiculous”. As regards the amalgam effect, composite, doubling, reversal of animal-human, (in)human, or(super)natural, these scenes intimate Swift’s classic yet contemporary surreal satire.
Conclusions
To conclude, we share this fitting metaphor, akin to the concepts essayed here, from Ghalib’s ghazal “Don’t Skimp With Me Today” (2003):
The horse of life is galloping; we’ll never know the stopping place.
Our hands are not touching the reins, nor our feet the stirrups.
I keep a certain distance from the reality of things.
It’s the same distance between me and utter confusion. (lines 3-6, p. 971)
References
Amateau, R. (Director). (1961, Jan. 5). The first meeting. Mr. Ed. IMDb. Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/video/hulu/vi3434780697/
Banecker, A. (2011, April 23). Remembering the marshmallows: The importance of comic absurdity, humorous non sequiturs, and necessary silliness in the short works of Woody Allen. Popular Culture Association (PCA) Annual National Conference (paper presentation, San Antonio, T.X.).
Blake, W. (1790). The marriage of heaven and hell (Copy B). In M. Eaves, R. N. Essick, & J. Viscomi (Eds.), The William Blake archive. Retrieved from http://www.blakearchive.org/
Dostoevsky, F. (2003). In Tr. R. E. Matlaw, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 5). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Ebert, R. (2004, March 5). Hidalgo. Rogerebert.com. Retrieved from http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/
Ghalib. (2003). Don’t skimp with me today. In Tr. R. Bly, S. Dutta, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford(Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 5). Paul Davis et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Gogol, N. (2011, Sept. 1). The nose. Project gutenberg. Retrieved from http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0602381.txt
Hymn to the horse. (2004). In P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Johnston, J. (Director). (2004). Hidalgo (DVD). United States: Touchstone.
Joyce, J. (1934). Ulysses. New York, N.Y.: Random House.
Kafka, F. (1971). The complete stories. New York, N.Y.: Schocken Books Inc..
Lennon, J. & McCartney, P. (1967, June 1). Being for the benefit of Mr. Kite. G. Martin. (Producer). Sgt. Pepper’s lonely hearts club band (CD). Germany: Parlophone.
Lubin, A. (Director). (1963, Oct. 6). Wilbur post, honorary horse. Mr. Ed. Youtube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhKwphgmVc; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBv-KW_BHg
McFarlane, S. (Executive producer). (1999). Family guy [Television series]. Los Angeles, C.A.: Fox.
McFarlane, S., Barker, M., & Weitzman, M. (Executive producers). (2005). American dad [Television series]. Los Angeles, C.A.: Fox.
Newell, M. (Director). (1993). Into the west (DVD). United States: Miramax Films.
Plato. (2004a). Apology. In Tr. B. Jowett, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Plato. (2004b). Phaedo. In Tr. B. Jowett, P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 1). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Shakespeare, W. (2011, March 1). Richard the third. V. iv. 10. Bartleby.com. Retrieved from http://www.bartleby.com/70/3354.html
Simanton, K. (2011, March 10). Review of film Seabiscuit. Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/reviews/0329575
Stewart, I. (Director). (1963, Nov. 3). Don’t laugh at horses. Mr. Ed. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReEmIiJSXYY; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJdpmL99gRs
Sutherland. A. E. (Director). (1939). Flying deuces (RKO radio pictures). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZPvuoG_su0
Swift, J. (2002). Gulliver’s travels. In S. Lawall (Ed.), The norton anthology of world literature (2nd ed.) (Vol. D). New York: Norton.
Swift, J. (2003). Gulliver’s travels. In P. Davis, G. Harrison, D. Johnson, P. Smith, & J. Crawford (Eds.), The bedford anthology of world literature (Book 4). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Tokar, N. (Director). (1968). The horse in the gray flannel suit (DVD). United States: Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Inc..
John Esperian, professor, Department of English, College of Southern Nevada. Christian Clark, professor, Department of English, College of Southern Nevada. 1 Found while searching for the film The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1956), this gem has a funky bebop soundtrack.
2 Both a minor trainer, first, after noting the silly name Aspercel, and then the major trainer for Aspy, call him fondly, “Meatball”. After Fred and his employer overhear the minor trainer criticize the name Aspercel, Fred says to his boss, “I only keep him around because the horse laughs at his jokes”. Meatball likes to drink beer, too, and in their first and last scenes together, Fred and he share one.
3 Fittingly farcical, while the two are chased by police officers in a squad car (the call having gone out for a “horse in a gray flannel suit”), one officer compliments, “Nice jump!”.
4 When a girlfriend at the time fell from a horse that took off on her, as the saying goes, the stable became the unstable.
5 Consider other ancient texts and such imagery as, for example, the four horsemen of the apocalypse in Revelation.
6 Note here reference to conference panel and presentation of paper, “Comic Absurdity, Humorous Non Sequitors, and Necessary Silliness in the Short Works of Woody Allen” by Andrew Banecker, who notes how sophistication or distinction of higher or richer humor such as Allen’s (or Swift’s) involves a depth or intricacy of reference to premises or ideas and proves more satisfying or provocative than lower or less thoughtful comedies or shows as referenced here and evinced in tangents, non sequitors, or random, unrelated series of images or thoughts.
7 Much as we have claimed here, Bedford editors note, “At the heart of Gulliver’s Travels lies the question, What does it mean to be a human being? […] and exactly where Swift would place humanity on the scale between Houyhnhnm and Yahoo is not at all clear” (Swift, 2003, p. 147).