"Jonathan Swift" is the title given to an introduction for a version of that author's work Gulliver's Travels. It was rejected by the publisher, who said Vonnegut had sentimentalized Swift without a detailed knowledge of his life and character. Acting as his "own vanity publisher", Vonnegut included in Palm Sunday in March 1981.[1]
Summary[]

Portrait of Jonathan Swift, 1710, by Charles Jervas
It was while in Dublin as dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral—although he had hoped for bishopric in England—that Swift wrote Gulliver's Travels. He attained this position, and was treasured by his community, despite being "such a ferocious satirist". He began the book at the age of fifty-four—Vonnegut's age when he wrote this introduction—when he was already known as bitingly funny. This work, however, Vonnegut contends are in fact a series of sermons regarding a crisis in Christianity that still continues. Ever greater understanding of the natural world has made it increasingly difficult to see ourselves "as God's little lambs". Human reason could now affect the world as only armies and disasters had done before and Swift found it urgent to examine these newly powerful beings. According to Gulliver, we are disgusting, but Swift makes Gulliver insane over the course of his journey such that he is not the reliable narrator of the beginning.
In high school, Vonnegut had a teacher who said a person would have to be "at least a little insane" to so obsess over how disgusting humans are to Swift's degree. However, he would now reply to that teacher that this obsession is so overdone as to become ridiculous. Swift means to show that readiness to feel disgust for humans, including ourselves, does not protect society as we are taught, but is an enemy of our reason and common sense. Although Swift himself didn't expand much on this idea, it is disgust that makes possible genocide, warfare, torture, and suicide. Gulliver's Travels attempts to immunize the reader with an overdose of disgust. This edition by the Book-of-the-Month Club, based on the Oxford University Press edition edited by Paul Turner, lacks his introduction and copious notes. Those interested in relating the book to Swift's life and era, or the scientific impossibility of tiny Lilliputians or giants of Brobdingnag, would do well to read that version. However, Swift, like all authors, wished his work to be loved on its own. Thus does Vonnegut apologize for this "Yahoolike intrusion", as well as for perhaps making this work—no doubt a result of "much rage and joy and irrationality"—sound too sane.[2]