He thought such interventionism unwise, though superior to war. He gave no hint of anticipating the trend of international co-operation that was to gather strength through the second half of the century. Mill neither accepted the political quiescence of Duveyrier nor suggested the need for drastic change. He believed that the problems of representation were similar in England and France, but more sharply defined and more clearly observed in the French context.
Neither Duveyrier nor Mill gave the least hint of an upheaval soon to come. Duveyrier argued specifically against the utility of another such event. It would be more than a dozen years before Mill conceded, not just for England Edition: current; Page: [ lxxxiii ] with its tradition of compromise and its history of successful opposition to monarchical absolutism, but for every nation, the rightness of working for improvement within the prevailing arrangements. He gave no hint of thinking that France would profit from a renewal of the experience.
The remarks were puzzling. Mill made no allusion to the serious depression of an immense fall in French production, large-scale unemployment, a substantial part of the swollen population in the capital on relief, great rural distress and unrest. Mill of course was by no means exceptional in apprehending no general crisis; others closer to the scene than he were hardly less unaware. He had never looked very far past the political scene in the capital. Thus he missed the profound movement that was taking place in the country.
He followed the press to some extent, a steady diet of scandal and complaint, an endless skirmishing between the government and the opposition. There is no evidence that he noted the near-unity of the varieties of opposition in the banquet campaign as a possible signal that a trial of strength was at hand. The explosion took him by surprise. Guizot was dismissed on 23 February; the King abdicated next day.
First, Lamartine might be propelled into war with Austria as the result of popular pressure to help the Milanese expel the Habsburg occupant from Lombardy. Without Carrel, or, I fear, any one comparable to him, the futurity of France and of Europe is most doubtful. After Lamartine had moved to assure Europe that France would not abet a war of Italian liberation, Mill was satisfied the government would act wisely.
As it happened, the drama of the Revolution was reaching its climax with the elections to a National Assembly. The broad tide of rural conservatism that came in was in protest against neglect of the interests of the countryside by an urban leadership. In his view, Lamartine, now out of office, had done no more than repeat the Girondist strategy of calling in provincial France to hold the line against the revolutionary political clubs of Paris. In fact, the Revolution was now bound on a course leading to destruction of the Republic. Mill followed events distantly.
He knew that Marrast was no longer at the National, had left the Government, and was Mayor of Paris he was also the real leader of the majority in the Executive Commission. Mill could have no knowledge of the extraordinary political manoeuvrings in Paris. Alarmed by the numbers of unemployed men in the city, the government announced its intention of closing the ateliers nationaux.
With that, a spontaneous working-class insurrection was mounted against it, on June. The pitched battles that took place made it the bloodiest fratricidal rising the capital had known. The government was legitimately defending itself, but the repression was severe and the social fears unleashed were exaggerated. Within days, this rough prophecy began to be borne out.
In the immediate aftermath of the June Days, Marrast led the attack on him: he was indicted in the prevailing reaction that had developed steadily following the conservative results of the general election for a Constituent Assembly on 23 April. Rather than stand trial in the unpromising climate of opinion, he slipped away and was permitted to take the Edition: current; Page: [ lxxxviii ] train to Ghent; he was arrested there briefly, and then at once crossed over to England. Mill, without the possibility of knowing in detail what had happened during the months since February, considered Blanc and the other former ministers to be exemplary tribunes.
But it was too late for them. In the election for the presidency of the Republic that December, Lamartine was swept aside, the radical candidates trailed distantly, and even Cavaignac was handily defeated by Louis Napoleon Bonaparte. The great mass of the electorate, peasants, voted against the republicans they blamed for disregarding their grievances and increasing their taxes; they voted for a legendary name, as did much of the urban population and a majority of the political notables.
The Lamartine government had done the best they could in the situation with which they had been confronted. His analysis was political; he showed no strong sense of the social dimensions of the upheaval. If there were errors, they were committed less by the government than by the political clubs. Mill knew little of the intrigues about the ateliers nationaux, which he defended, as he cleared Blanc of responsibility for their closing. Once again, his point was that the experiment had been made before adequate preparation could take place.
His answer was that, ready or not for the Republic, France had to attempt the experiment. He thought universal suffrage had, if anything, returned too conservative a majority. This, of course, Louis Napoleon had not been. But he perceived the great rural and urban problems dimly; his concern was with representative government. Continental socialism had thrust itself on his attention late in the day: he had been ambivalent about Fourier and hostile to Proudhon, he knew little of Cabet and Blanc until Carrel had been tempted by Bonapartism; Mill never was. Not least, Mill did not see that the tremendous power of the liberal press, durable and resilient, had almost come to an end.
He did not understand what it meant that the National had become the unofficial newspaper of the Provisional Government: that men like Marrast had become part of the new establishment. He was disturbed by the repression of the opposition journals, but did not fully grasp that universal suffrage had swept the petite and moyenne bourgeoisies aside. He did not see what it meant that Bonaparte had been elected President against the majority of the press, that the extraordinary force it had been ever since was finished.
The constitution of 4 November, , was the most democratic France had ever had, with universal manhood suffrage, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of petition. Even the droit au travail was alluded to in the preamble. But Cavaignac, for one, doubted that the country was republican, and the election of Louis Napoleon suggested he was Edition: current; Page: [ xci ] right. The Revolution of faded into the past. So tyranny once more settled on the country. The young French historians who boldly celebrated the Revolution as prologue to the apparent triumph of liberalism forty or so years later, or who explained the present as the outcome of the liberal impulse working its way through the centuries, he acclaimed as the best of the time.
The French scene was animated, Edition: current; Page: [ xcii ] creative, disputatious, sometimes explosive, but always instructive. It was his self-imposed task to try to make Englishmen see through the haze of their insularities and prejudices the essential lessons that France offered to all who shared in the common civilization. Some part of his special certainty about the relevance of France to English society flowed from his own peculiar acquaintance with the land and the people and their thought; some part was surely no more than the intelligent appraisal of intrinsic fact.
But time carried away both the observer and the observed. Despite his didactic purpose and immediate political and social concerns, Mill was too good a student of the past to permit disappointments and setbacks to break his commitment to France as the touchstone of Europe. He was far from being uncritical, he was by no means unprejudiced, he had his blind-spots.
But he never went back on his conviction that, whatever the aberration of the moment, France and its destiny were central to civilization. By , many hopes had foundered, and he felt it keenly that men had failed or been removed prematurely from the scene. He knew that the immense expectations of would never come again, that the social and political process was infinitely more complex and its desired outcome infinitely less assured in the foreseeable future than he and his young friends had imagined in the excitements of Paris that summer nearly twenty years before.
He remained watchful but publicly silent, his former impulse to interpret the news from France now quite gone. For Mill at the mid-century, great swings of hopefulness and despair concerning France and democracy lay ahead, but for the moment that was all. He never wrote a history in his adult years, but rather occupied himself with the philosophy of history and with the implications of that philosophy for social theory and practical politics. While he took great interest in British and classical history see especially Volumes VI and XI of the Collected Works , his principal concentration was on French history, particularly in its social and political manifestations.
Rich evidence of his fascination with French affairs is to be found throughout his works, especially in his newspaper writings and letters, as well as in the details of his life, from his boyhood visit to Pompignan and Montpellier in to his death in Avignon in French history had the immediacy of current politics, for he first read of the Revolution of in the midst of his apprenticeship in British radicalism, and dreamt of being a British Girondist.
During and after the struggle for the English Reform Act of , Mill followed and wrote about French politics, always keeping an eye on parallels with and lessons for Britain.
Historical News | The American Historical Review | Oxford Academic
The Revolution of again found an advocate in him, his growing interest in socialism being so stimulated by the experiments during the short-lived republic that he modified crucial passages in his Principles of Political Economy for its second edition of and more thoroughly for the third edition of One could cite much more evidence of various kinds, but the essays gathered in this volume give proof enough of both his interest and his understanding; reference to other volumes in the edition will further confirm the assertions just made. In provenance they are less diverse than those in other volumes of this edition, seven having appeared in the Westminster Review, two in the Monthly Repository, and three in the Edinburgh Review.
It is also worth noting that he promises on behalf of the Westminster to go more generally into the question of the French Revolution in a later number; he kept this promise to some extent in his review of Scott two years later, but one can infer his desire, finally abandoned only when Carlyle took up the task, to write a history of that revolution. He manages thus to combine the habitual Westminster line on history, politics, and literature with his own bias towards the French.
Given pride of first place in the Westminster, 5 its ample scope sixty-three pages of the Westminster shows that the editor was nothing loath to give the young Mill his head. The article, Mill says,. The number of books which I read for this purpose, making notes and extracts—even the number I had to buy for in those days there was no public or subscription library from which books of reference could be taken home , far exceeded the worth of the immediate object; but I had at that time a half formed intention of writing a History of the French Revolution; and though I never executed it, my collections afterwards were very useful to Carlyle for a similar purpose.
Some evidence of his reading has survived in a letter of 1 January, , to Charles Comte, whom he had met in Paris through J. Say some years earlier. Evidently pleased with the article himself, he had offprints made, sending some to Charles Comte in Paris; 9 these are textually identical with the original. He reported to Carlyle that the review was not worth his perusal and that it would have been better to wait until it could all appear at once.
Its brevity, however, does not imply insignificance, for he touches on major concerns, especially freedom of the press. In the event, Mill was a joint author of the article which we therefore print here as an appendix. Just how much he contributed is not certain, though his extant letters to White are helpful in this respect, showing Mill as an editor supple, if determined, in his relations with contributors.
On 21 October, , he wrote to White:. The whole should then be submitted for your approval, either in MS, or in type. If you consent to this do not trouble yourself to write only on purpose to say so as I shall consider silence as consent. The comment in a letter to Henry S. Chapman, asking that the article be set and proof sent as soon as possible, indicates a somewhat different judgment. Perhaps the few remarks which I have inserted near the beginning of the article, respecting M. Since Mill listed the article in his bibliography of published writings, one may assume that White accepted the version given him.
On internal evidence and that of these letters, one may speculate that the portions by Mill are those at In the circumstances, it is not surprising that the review of Carlyle shows some signs of haste, most evidently in the length of the quoted extracts. It is sure enough, of course, that Harriet Taylor had a part in making the selection for Dissertations and Discussions, though she did not live to see its publication, and perhaps she was more strongly offended by Carlyle than Mill was.
In any case, it seems a pity that Mill did not at least include parts of the review, as he did in other cases where the article in full appeared outdated or relatively insignificant. Mill continued for a few years to use Carlyle as an authority in other essays, sometimes openly and sometimes quietly. Carlyle would say. From the French of D. Preceded by a Biographical Sketch, abridged from the French of E. I dare not violate my instinct of suitableness, which we must the more strive to keep up the more we are exposed to swerve from it by our attempts to make the Review acceptable to the public.
Rather slight changes in the article as republished call attention to otherwise hidden peculiarities. Biographical Notices by MM. I should like very much. Even on Guizot there may be something still to be written. Nothing came of this notion for some time, though in Mill did much reading on Roman history, consulting the German authorities as well as Michelet and Arnold.
I hope to do Napier, and get him to insert it before he finds out what a fatal thing he is doing. But a philosophic vindication of the Papacy and the celibacy of the clergy, as essential preservatives against barbarism, was not then familiar to the English mind.
Historical Dictionary of French Theater
The second notion canvassed by Mill when he wrote to Napier about contributing an historical series to the Edinburgh was further comment on Guizot. He therefore was not specially anxious to rush his thoughts into print. When it was published in October it was well received, Francis Jeffrey commenting. Guizot, on the whole, I think excellent, and, indeed, a very remarkable paper. There are passages worthy of Macaulay, and throughout the traces of a vigorous and discursive intellect. He idolises his author a little too much though I am among his warmest admirers and I think under-estimates the knowledge and the relish of him which is now in this country.
I cordially agree with most of the doctrine, and the value that is put on it, though I am far from being satisfied with the account of the Feudal system, and the differences between it and clanship, and the patriarchal, or Indian or North American tribes and associations, with which the affinities are curious. Scottish school, including Gilbert Stuart and Millar.
You are of course quite right in not printing what you think would expose you to attack, when you do not yourself agree in it. At the same time. Neither do I think that the English, with all their national self-conceit, are now much inclined to resent having their faults pointed out—they will bear a good deal in that respect. I cannot complain of your having left out the passage controverting the warlike propensity of the French, though I should have been glad if it had been consistent with your judgment to have retained it.
I venture to say thus much because I think the Edin, has lately been sometimes very unjust to the French. Mill does not ignore history, but the history that matters is mainly that since , when France embarked on a constitutional course with, as it were, no native roots. The July monarchy was, of course, apparently continuing at the height of its success, with no portents of its downfall in less than two years.
Mill was able here to draw on his extensive knowledge of the development of the French constitution in theory and practice during the preceding decade and a half, as well as his acquaintance with Duveyrier and his writings, and draw conclusions about the immediate problems and eventual solutions. Though the socialist experiment was short-lived, its lessons, he believed, were of lasting value, as he indicates in the Autobiography when discussing the changes made in the Principles of Political Economy for the 2nd and 3rd editions.
The reason for these changes may not have been so evident to contemporary readers of the Principles, but Mill had responded earlier, if at first anonymously, to the Revolution, choosing for his vehicle the Westminster, which was more Edition: current; Page: [ cviii ] open to radical views than the Edinburgh. I remember well, in his excitement at the Revolution, his saying that the one thought that haunted him was—Oh, that Carrel were still alive!
This concern appears strongly in a letter to Hickson probably written in March of I attach importance to most of the notes, since when I am charging Brougham with misrepresentation of what Lamartine said, it will not do to bid the reader trust to my translations—and the passages from Tocqueville being cited as evidence to matters of fact, ought to be given in the original. You however must judge what is best for your review. You kindly offered me some separate copies—I should not desire more than 50, but in these I would like to have the notes preserved and it would not be necessary for that purpose to set them up in smaller type.
If the types are redistributed I would willingly pay the expense of recomposing. I cannot imagine how the printer could commit the stupid blunder of putting those notes with the text. The first extant reference to the article dates from 6 February, , when Mill reported to Hickson that it was finished, except for the revision, which was retarded by difficulties he was having with his eyesight.
Whom else should it go to?
- Lesbian Threesomes - Lost In The Barracks?
- Sea and Land and Sky (Modern Plays)!
- Spell Caster.
- Tagebuch auf der Reise nach Deutschland (German Edition).
I have had the proof of the pamphlet, all but the last few pages. There seems very little remaining in it that could be further softened without taking the sting out entirely—which would be a pity. I am rather against giving away any copies, at least for the present, in England—except to Louis Blanc to whom I suppose I should acknowledge authorship. Je crois que vous serez plus satisfait de la seconde. Mill responded:. He felt not only abstract revulsion but personal distress during the Second Empire, as his letters show, but no major essays dwell on his concern.
Furthermore, his extended comments in essays on history and historians after are exclusively devoted to the classical period, where his interest in philosophy was intertwined with historical considerations. But his extensive and intensive examinations of the themes developed in this volume, valuable in themselves, may also be seen behind his major political and social writings of the s and s. The articles, dating from to , that were republished in the third volume of Dissertations and Discussions also , were less thoroughly revised or, perhaps it is fairer to say, needed less revision.
There is, indeed, a gradual decrease in frequency of changes, substantive and formal, both as the years progress and as the gap between the time of first publication and of republication decreases. These generalizations, which derive from a study of all the revisions, are borne out by the essays in this volume, six of which appeared in Dissertations and Discussions, two in part and four in full, all in Volumes I and II.
The results of collation of the texts that Mill could have prepared will be seen in footnotes, which record the substantive variants in accordance with the system outlined on cxiv-cxvi below. A rough initial classification used also in the other volumes of this edition will help in describing the kind and frequency of his revisions: one can distinguish though there is overlapping among changes that reveal 1 alterations in opinion or fact, including omissions, amplifications, or corrections; 2 alterations resulting from the time between versions or from their different provenances; 3 alterations that qualify, emphasize, or give technical clarity; and 4 alterations that are purely verbal, or give semantic clarity, or result from shifts in word usage, and alterations in emphasis indicated by changes from italic to roman typeface.
Of these, the second is a trivial example of the fourth type, but the other two, involving excision of passages having to do with a radical view of the rights of property, illustrate type 1 because they involve important differences in intention and effect. It will be noted, of course, that they could be classed as type 2 because the passages, appropriate in a newspaper, might be thought not to serve the different ends of a periodical, especially after the passage of a year and a half. More illustrative, of course, are the changes in the six essays reprinted in Edition: current; Page: [ cxii ] whole or in part in Dissertations and Discussions.
In all there are substantive variants, of which 38 may be seen as type 1, 45 as type 2, as type 3, and as type 4. Of the total, only 37 reflect changes resulting from revision in the edition of Dissertations and Discussions, and almost all of these are type 4. Of the former, good instances will be found at j-j , k the motivation here a little mysterious , e-e , and g cf.
The type 2 changes reflecting the passage of time are illustrated by t cf. An interesting series of type 3 changes, close in effect to type 1, will be seen at n-n and following, where the proper ways of describing the effects of the Revolution of are explored. Such changes are related to those counted as type 4 that soften the elegiac tone at h , j-j , g , l-l , m-m , and e-e ; these have a cumulative effect indicating that individually minor Edition: current; Page: [ cxiii ] changes can have an importance going beyond type 3 to type 1.
In fact it contains 90 revisions 10 of them from , 50 of which 10 may be seen as type 1; once more it may be claimed that students of Mill, in this case especially those interested in the roots of his qualified socialism, should look carefully at these first and second thoughts. The accidental variants not reported in detail in this edition , mainly consisting of changes in punctuation and spelling, do not reveal sufficient evidence to justify major generalizations.
They of course show, to an indeterminable extent, the preferences of printers, editors, and publishing houses. The addition or removal of initial capital letters roughly in balance has not yielded any conclusions, nor are any of these changes suggestive of altered emphasis, as they are in other places, for example in some of the works in Volumes XVIII-XIX of the Collected Works. Details concerning revisions are given in the headnotes to each item and in the discussion above.
Method of indicating variants. The variants are of three kinds: addition of a word or words, substitution of a word or words, deletion of a word or words.
Addition of a word or words: see n-n. Here the plus sign indicates the editions of this particular text in which the addition appears. Information explaining the use of these abbreviations is given in each headnote, as required. Any added editorial comment is enclosed in square brackets and italicized. Substitution of a word or words: see j-j. In this volume there are few examples of passages altered more than once: see a-a. Here the different readings, in chronological order, are separated by a square bracket.
The circumstances are unusual, for the version of is from a letter from Mill to Carlyle. The other cases, all instances of a wording altered and then returned to its original reading, are signalled by the absence of an expected edition indicator. See, e. Deletion of a word or words: see h and j-j. The first of these is typical, representing the most convenient way of indicating deletions in a later edition.
That is, there is here, exceptionally, a later version of part of the copy-text, whereas normally the copy-text is the latest version. Dates of footnotes: see n. If no such indication appears, the note is in all versions. Punctuation and spelling. In general, changes between versions in punctuation and spelling are ignored. Those changes that occur as part of a substantive variant are included in that variant, and the superscript letters in the text are placed exactly with reference to punctuation.
Changes between italic and roman type are treated as substantive variants and are therefore shown, except in foreign phrases and titles of works. Other textual liberties. Some of the titles have been modified or supplied; the full titles in their various forms will be found in the headnotes. The dates added to the titles are those of first publication.
When footnotes to the titles gave bibliographic information, these have been deleted, and the information given in the headnotes. Having adapted our practices to composition by word-processor, we have not reproduced digraphs. At n-5n quotation marks have been added to what was clearly intended to be recognized as a quotation. Indications of ellipsis have been normalized to three dots plus, when necessary, terminal punctuation. The positioning of footnote indicators has been normalized so that they always appear after adjacent punctuation marks; in some cases references have been moved from the beginning to the end of quotations for consistency.
Also, in accordance with modern practice, all long quotations have been reduced in type size and the quotation marks removed. Double quotation marks replace single, and titles of works originally published separately are given in italics. When necessary his references have been corrected; a list of the corrections and alterations is given in the note below.
Sur l'histoire des femmes en France
The most extensive quotation is, as one would expect, from reviewed works; a large number of the shorter quotations some of which are indirect are undoubtedly taken from memory, with no explicit references being given, and the identification of some of these is inescapably inferential. It will be noted that Mill habitually translates from the French; this volume gives the best evidence of his very considerable skill. Since Appendix D serves as an index to persons, writings, and statutes, references to them do not appear in the general Index, which has been prepared by Dr.
Maureen Clarke and Dr. I am greatly indebted to the staffs of various libraries, including the British Library, the University of Toronto Library, the Victoria University Library, the University of London Library, the library of the Institute of Historical Research, the British Library of Political and Economic Science, the London Library, and a repeated but still special thanks for prompt and ever-courteous aid the library of Somerville College, Oxford.
Help of various kinds but always selfless came from these inadequately acknowledged scholars and friends: R. Alston, T. Barnes, Kathleen Coburn, M. Crump, J. Dewan, J. Pinkney, Aubrey Rosenberg, H. Schogt, C. Silber, and William Thomas. A generous grant in support of editing and publication from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada places us yet again in grateful debt. Her Huguenot heritage and historical profession make as appropriate as it is pleasant to announce again my enduring obligation to one member of the editorial committee, Ann P.
Westminster Review, V Apr. Mignet, 8vo.
“Au service de la France” dézingue les années de Gaulle
Not republished. It possesses, indeed, all the requisites for a popular history. It tells an interesting story; it tells it in an interesting manner; it is not too long to be readable; it addresses itself to the reigning sentiment in the nation for which it is written, and there is just philosophy enough in it to persuade common readers that they are deriving instruction, while there is not enough to task their attention or their patience.
There is a sort of middle point which it is difficult to hit exactly, between a philosophical history and a mere narrative. Mignet seems to have aimed at this point; he has at any rate attained it. The old mode of writing a history resembled the mode of writing a novel; with only this difference, that the facts were expected to be true. In both cases there was a story to be told, and he who told it best was the best novelist, or the best historian.
The poems which preceded the first histories, and which were probably intended, with some qualifications, to pass for histories, were written with the same ends in view as the prose histories which followed them. Greater license of amplification was, indeed, allowed to the poet, but in other respects the standard of excellence was the same: he who raised the most vivid conceptions, and the most intense emotions, was the greatest master of his art.
This mode of writing history attained its highest excellence in the hands of the Greek and Roman historians. Livy, perhaps, exemplifies it in its purest state. In what remains of his history we have a surprising instance of the perfection to which the art of narration may be carried, where no other part of the duties of a historian is attended to; and for that very reason. Each stands preeminent among his countrymen in the talent of narrative, each avoids generalization, and when he has any reflections to make, puts them into the mouth of one of the dramatis personae; retaining the character of the story-teller, even when he puts on that of the orator or the politician.
Between this style of historical composition, and the more modern one, which makes history subservient to philosophy, in which the narrative itself is but a Edition: current; Page: [ 4 ] secondary object, the illustration of the laws of human nature and human society being the first, there is an intermediate style, which endeavours to unite the characteristic properties of both the others. In this the primary object is still the gratification of that large class, who read only for amusement. With this purpose long inductions of facts or trains of reasoning being inconsistent, they are accordingly avoided, or banished to an appendix.
Dramatic interest is with these, as with the first class of historians, the main object; but such general reflections are interspersed, drawn from the surface of the subject, as may be comprehended without any effort of attention, by an ordinary understanding. The common reader is thus provided with such instruction, or supposed instruction, as his habits of mind render him capable of receiving, and is possessed with a high idea of the powers of the writer, who can communicate wisdom in so easy and entertaining a form. Of the popularity which may be acquired by this mode of writing history, the success of Hume is a striking example.
That his reputation for this quality is so widely diffused, is of itself a sufficient proof that it is undeserved. Had his reflections been really profound, we may venture to affirm that they would have been less popular. By a profound reflection, is meant a reflection, the truth of which is not obvious at first sight, and to a cursory reader, but which, in proportion as a man grows wiser, and takes a deeper insight into things, forces itself upon his assent.
When we say, that M. Mignet seems to have formed himself in this school, and that he is the highest specimen of it, among recent writers, which our recollection suggests to us, we have conveyed, we think, a tolerably accurate conception of his character as a historian. Little, therefore, remains to be done beyond the selection of such passages as seem best adapted to exhibit the degree in which he possesses the various attributes of his class: for we do not purpose to enter at present into the general question of the French revolution; it being our intention, at no distant period, to treat of that subject at greater length.
Mignet; and for this reason, among others, we are anxious that his work should be extensively circulated in this country. There is nothing more disgraceful to Englishmen than their utter ignorance, not only of the causes and effects, but of the very events, the story, of the French revolution. With the majority of them, even of those among them who read and think, the conception they have of that great event is all comprehended in a dim but horrible vision of mobs, and massacres, and revolutionary tribunals, and guillotines, and fishwomen, and heads carried on pikes, and noyades, and fusillades, and one Edition: current; Page: [ 5 ] Robespierre, a most sanguinary monster.
What the Tory prints choose to tell them of this most interesting period of modern history, so much they know, and nothing more: that is, enough to raise in their minds an intense yet indefinite horror of French reforms and reformers, and as far as possible of all reforms and reformers. Now, however, when they have ceased to tremble for themselves, and to start from their sleep at the terrific idea of a landing of French Jacobins or a rising of English ones to confiscate their property and cut their throats, they can, perhaps, bear to look at the subject without horror; and we exhort them to buy and read M.
Mignet, in his two volumes, had not space to do more than relate the story of the revolution. To an English reader, this omission will diminish in some degree the value of the book. A writer who opposes the current opinion, has need of all the proofs he can muster. Happily, the proofs are not scanty, and are, even in this country, accessible. He has mastered the grand difficulty in narration; he is interesting, without being voluminous; concise, without being vague and general Former writers on the French revolution had either lost themselves in a sea of details, dwelling on circumstance after circumstance with such painful minuteness that he who had patience to read to the end of the story had time before he arrived there to forget the beginning; or had contented themselves with a meagre abstract, describing the most remarkable scenes in terms so general as to have fitted a hundred other scenes almost as well.
In narrative, as in description, it is impossible to excite vivid conceptions, in other words it is impossible to be interesting, without entering somewhat into detail. A particular event cannot be characterized by a general description. But details are endless. Here then is the dilemma. All the details it is not possible to give, not only because nobody would read them, but because if read they would defeat their own purpose.
The multitude of the parts injures the ensemble. The difficulty is in the apt selection of details. It is in judging which of the individualizing features it is best to delineate, when there is not room for all: it is in fixing upon those features which are the most strikingly Edition: current; Page: [ 6 ] characteristic, or which, if delineated, will of themselves suggest the remainder, that the rarest quality, perhaps, of the skilful narrator displays itself. No less important in this post-bilingual discussion are cross- border diasporic groups which create new narratives exploring their own relationship between the official language, that of their communities of origin, and their own more personal registers of expression.
In the end, this kind of critical discussion of models of linguistic hybridity will hopefully expand the limits of current discursive paradigms, allowing for additonal cultural alternatives to appear in the interstices of official discourses on both sides—no, all sides—of the border. Despite subsequent social mobility that one may identify in subsequent generations, it remains impossible for me to ignore the important role that questions of social class must play in this discussion of ethnic or linguistic identity.
For collections of working-class oral histories, see Hendrickson and Doty So what exactly do I remember? For how many others of my same background and generation are even interested in understanding them? That hot day in late summer, shuttling between childhood homes, parochial and public schools, parental workplaces, neighbourhoods, streets and city centres, set free a flood of memories and narratives for both of us that set me thinking about the mechanisms of memory, of why we remember and in what circumstances: to stay alive, or to keep a conversation and a relationship going, or a lan- guage flowing between two people?
And in such a conversation, might one actually cre- ate something of greater value, perhaps even a particular plan for the survival of what one might still be able to call a cultural identity, however small or endangered? Recent studies of Riel, moreover, evoke other provocative questions: Frances W. Like the many French-Canadians who ventured below N. I have come to appreciate in my readings of French-Canadian ethnic history the attention often paid to autobiographical detail and personal scholarship; Gerard Brault, for exam- ple, devotes an entire chapter of his study on French-Canadians in New England to his own family history.
The family photograph I include here, as a historical document, might serve to disengage the transmission of memory from the act of reproduction and the institution of father-son inheritance, and allows for a multiple and hopefully more feminized view of Francophone New England. Tremblay and Beaugrand, married and had children in a French Catholic parish, and later moved with them to Pawtucket, RI. In his eighties, near the end of the Second World War, he walked along Route 6 from his home in Rhode Island back to his adopted hometown of Fall River to try to see the friends and places he had left behind.
When he found no one left he TOPIA 16 knew, he is said to have walked home, and that soon after, he died, heartbroken. In the photo, these sisters in black create a stark, yet all-too-common image of devotion and sacrifice, gathered once again in honor of a both lost and omnipresent father perhaps the only way that they could be reassembled, photographed and represented here. An additional note on cultural hybridity as lived experience: to this day, Lowell remains one of the most ethnically-diverse environments in New England. The Shipping News dir.
Brokeback Mountain dir. Ang Lee As these new connections are rearticulated for others, each may be the starting point of an even more complex set of microethnicities. References Amaron, Rev. Calvin E. Ottawa: Carleton University Press. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books. Jeanne la fileuse. Brault, Gerard J. Carrier, Roch. Chartier, Armand-B. Chartier, Armand. Paris: Gallimard. Derrida, Jacques.
La carte postale. Paris: Flammarion. Doty, C. Orono, ME: Univ. Encyclopedia of Music in Canada. Terre sauvage. Voir, 24 May. Passeurs culturels: Une literature en mutation. Cartographies schizoanalytiques. Hendrickson, Dyke. Quiet Presence. Portland, ME: Guy Gannett. Kaye, Frances W.
The Town and the City. New York: Grosset and Dunlap. Visions of Gerard. New York: Ferrar Straus Giroux. New York: Penguin. Satori in Paris. New York: Grove Press. Kymlicka, Will. New Forms of Citizenship. This article links the lands used to endow Reading with those of late Saxon queens and of female communities themselves linked to queens.
It explores lay control of such communities and the circumstances in which such control came to be defined as unacceptable, and thus in which monastic reform advanced. The foundation of Reading abbey, as a male Cluniac house, used former queens' lands and freed the lands of older religious communities. Volume 85 , Issue If you do not receive an email within 10 minutes, your email address may not be registered, and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account.
If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username. Pauline Stafford University of Liverpool Search for more papers by this author. Tools Request permission Export citation Add to favorites Track citation. Share Give access Share full text access. Share full text access. Please review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article. Get access to the full version of this article. View access options below. You previously purchased this article through ReadCube.
Related Lépouse saxonne (Les Historiques) (French Edition)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved