French Revolution and Romanism.
A few things struck me about these readings most notably the reference to aristocracy and then also how the Burke describes his view on social contracts, something that I am interested in as I have read Locke, Hobbs, Montesquieu, Rousseau and Tocqueville various interpretations of social contract theory.
Upon my reading about the French revolution the one thing that kept sticking out to me was the continued reminding of the former tyrannical government. Helen Maria Williams describes “the eldest prince, Mon. de Chartes… his attentive politeness formed a striking contest in my mind, to the manners of those fashionable gentlemen in a certain great metropolis, who considers apathy and negligence as the test of good-breeding” (40). Clearly an attack on the current first estate of the French aristocracy in how they would typically were everything this prince was not. Williams would also discuss how the aristocracy should not be in the position of power based solely on heredity and that they should not receive any more rights than that of her fellow man. This is a clear statement that the theories of John Locke, David Hume, Jean Jacque Rousseau, and Montesquieu on social contract and that humans have an undeniable equality about them requires that there be one class of citizens. The French Revolution came on the heels of the Declaration of Independence which for the modern context famously wrote that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were all natural rights; however, the document is a list of grievances against King George III of England. The document helped cement the ideal in the minds of the citizenry that just because they were not born to nobility that they still could push back much like the nobles did in England in 1215, which lead to the Magna Carta. This document in 1215 lead to the equalization of power between the nobility and the King, It was this document that lead to the need for the any king to satisfy his nobility as the document essentially allowed for the open revolt against a king. However at this time there was not real movement among the commoners to become equal citizens until the advent of social contract theory. This would help spurn several revolutions, most notably the French and American revolutions.
However the authors of the time authors felt that the French revolution stood for something nobler. With the creation of the deity Liberty and famous picture of Lady Liberty leading the masses while holding the French Tri-Color flag against the tyranny of the current regime of aristocrats held a higher ideal of Romanticism. By creating a new government there is a “new partnership” as Edmund Burke writes on “The contract of Society.” Here Burke describes likens a new government to “a partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection” (56). The partnership is not just a simple social contract like what a Locke or a Hobbs’ inspired theorist would think. But an ever evolving set or partnerships and principles that would define any human relationship and for this reason is why the romantics of the era take such a deep interest in the French revolution.
Robert,
ReplyDeleteOK job for your first post, presenting several observations about the writings of Williams in the context of the social and political events of that day (and before). I like the way you share and connect your comments to your previous readings. I would like to see more of a focus on the text, though, and more analysis of a narrower topic. As a general rule in these posts, say more about less. You make numerous generalizations about the events and philosophical ideas of the time, but rarely quote and discuss a particular statement. You might look at some of your classmates' blogs to learn from how they approach these writings. I think you have some good insights, but you can present and support them better with greater focus and textual evidence.