I may be dense but I’ve reread the article several times trying to understand exactly how this jab was supposed to work against its target. Was it the mere physical juxtaposition and contrast of tone and appearance? I feel like some clever wordplay must have been involved (such as the lines of Swift’s epitaph running into Marsh’s and changing their meaning) … otherwise it doesn’t seem terribly clever? But Swift was terribly clever in general, so I must be missing something.
Swift intentionally placed his stark and brief epitaph directly beside the gaudy and verbose monument of Marsh. This physical and rhetorical contrast eternally exposed the pompous vanity of his rival.
Agreed - I was waiting for a more insightful explanation. I'm not a scholar, but I associate Swift with hyperbole and this seems way too subtle, if not bland.
Given how exact Swift was in terms of where and how the epitaph was placed, there definitely seems to be some meaning there that's been lost. There's got to be more to it.
Were this fiction, I would expect a denouement where images of the two memorial stones, black and white, when placed side by side (as Swift intended), reveal a subtle joke.
I may be dense but I’ve reread the article several times trying to understand exactly how this jab was supposed to work against its target. Was it the mere physical juxtaposition and contrast of tone and appearance? I feel like some clever wordplay must have been involved (such as the lines of Swift’s epitaph running into Marsh’s and changing their meaning) … otherwise it doesn’t seem terribly clever? But Swift was terribly clever in general, so I must be missing something.
Swift intentionally placed his stark and brief epitaph directly beside the gaudy and verbose monument of Marsh. This physical and rhetorical contrast eternally exposed the pompous vanity of his rival.
Eternally until they moved one of them
Agreed - I was waiting for a more insightful explanation. I'm not a scholar, but I associate Swift with hyperbole and this seems way too subtle, if not bland.
Given how exact Swift was in terms of where and how the epitaph was placed, there definitely seems to be some meaning there that's been lost. There's got to be more to it.
Were this fiction, I would expect a denouement where images of the two memorial stones, black and white, when placed side by side (as Swift intended), reveal a subtle joke.
I find myself wondering if this essay is meant as a gentle satire. Bemused not savage, not Swiftian.
I am reminded of Lord Peter Wimsey.
Swift wrote his famous epitaph to eternally mock his bitter rival.
Thanks, Gemini.
> Ozymandian pathos
...for the win.