Cocks on Dunghills – Wollstonecraft and Gouges on the Women’s Revolution

Q2 Arts and Humanities
SATS Pub Date : 2022-09-26 DOI:10.1515/sats-2022-0015
S. Bergès, Alan M. S. J. Coffee
{"title":"Cocks on Dunghills – Wollstonecraft and Gouges on the Women’s Revolution","authors":"S. Bergès, Alan M. S. J. Coffee","doi":"10.1515/sats-2022-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While many historians and philosophers have sought to understand the ‘failure’ of the French Revolution to thrive and to avoid senseless violence, very few have referred to the works of two women philosophers who diagnosed the problems as they were happening. This essay looks at how Mary Wollstonecraft and Olympe de Gouges theorised the new tyranny that grew out of the French Revolution, that of ‘petty tyrants’ who found themselves like ‘cocks on a dunghill’ able to wield a new power over those less fortunate than themselves. Both offer diagnoses and prognoses that revolve around education. Wollstonecraft argues that a revolution that is not backed by a previous education of the people is bound to result in chaos and violence. Such education, however, must be slow, and it necessitates the reform of the institutions that most shape the public’s character. A revolution, perforce, is fast, and it often takes several years, or even generations before the spirit of the reforms finds itself implemented into new institutions. Olympe de Gouges shares Wollstonecraft’s worry and she observes that the men who were once dominated quickly become tyrants themselves unless their moral character is already virtuous. But the state of being dominated leaves little room for virtue; hence, newly minted citizens need to be educated in order not to replicate the reign of tyranny onto other. Gouges suggests that the answer to the difficulty she and Wollstonecraft highlighted was to educate the people where they could be found: on the streets, or, where they could easily and willingly be gathered: in theatres. By helping organise revolutionary festivals, highlighting the ways in which citizens could be virtuous, and writing plays to awaken their virtue, and proposing a reform of the theatre, so that the production of such plays would be possible, Gouges offered a plan for the civic education of French citizens in the immediate aftermaths of the Revolution. Unfortunately, the chaos she and Wollstonecraft had sought to remedy, led by the cocks or petty tyrants, ensured that they were unable to see through their plans, with Wollstonecraft having to leave Paris and Gouges being sent to the guillotine.","PeriodicalId":38824,"journal":{"name":"SATS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SATS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2022-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract While many historians and philosophers have sought to understand the ‘failure’ of the French Revolution to thrive and to avoid senseless violence, very few have referred to the works of two women philosophers who diagnosed the problems as they were happening. This essay looks at how Mary Wollstonecraft and Olympe de Gouges theorised the new tyranny that grew out of the French Revolution, that of ‘petty tyrants’ who found themselves like ‘cocks on a dunghill’ able to wield a new power over those less fortunate than themselves. Both offer diagnoses and prognoses that revolve around education. Wollstonecraft argues that a revolution that is not backed by a previous education of the people is bound to result in chaos and violence. Such education, however, must be slow, and it necessitates the reform of the institutions that most shape the public’s character. A revolution, perforce, is fast, and it often takes several years, or even generations before the spirit of the reforms finds itself implemented into new institutions. Olympe de Gouges shares Wollstonecraft’s worry and she observes that the men who were once dominated quickly become tyrants themselves unless their moral character is already virtuous. But the state of being dominated leaves little room for virtue; hence, newly minted citizens need to be educated in order not to replicate the reign of tyranny onto other. Gouges suggests that the answer to the difficulty she and Wollstonecraft highlighted was to educate the people where they could be found: on the streets, or, where they could easily and willingly be gathered: in theatres. By helping organise revolutionary festivals, highlighting the ways in which citizens could be virtuous, and writing plays to awaken their virtue, and proposing a reform of the theatre, so that the production of such plays would be possible, Gouges offered a plan for the civic education of French citizens in the immediate aftermaths of the Revolution. Unfortunately, the chaos she and Wollstonecraft had sought to remedy, led by the cocks or petty tyrants, ensured that they were unable to see through their plans, with Wollstonecraft having to leave Paris and Gouges being sent to the guillotine.
《粪堆上的公鸡——沃斯通克拉夫特和古吉斯论妇女革命》
虽然许多历史学家和哲学家都试图理解法国大革命未能蓬勃发展并避免无谓暴力的原因,但很少有人提到两位女哲学家的作品,她们在问题发生时就诊断出了问题。这篇文章着眼于玛丽·沃斯通克拉夫特和奥林普·德古热是如何将法国大革命产生的新暴政理论化的,这些“小暴君”发现自己就像“粪堆上的鸡奸”一样,能够对那些不如自己幸运的人施加新的权力。两者都提供围绕教育的诊断和预测。沃斯通克拉夫特认为,一场没有事先教育人民的革命必然会导致混乱和暴力。然而,这种教育必须是缓慢的,它需要改革那些最能塑造公众性格的机构。一场革命必然是快速的,往往需要几年,甚至几代人的时间才能将改革的精神落实到新的制度中。奥林普·德古热和沃斯通克拉夫特一样担心,她观察到,那些曾经被统治的人,除非他们的道德品质本来就很高尚,否则他们自己很快就会变成暴君。但是,被支配的状态给美德留下了很小的空间;因此,新公民需要接受教育,以免将暴政的统治复制到其他人身上。Gouges认为,解决她和Wollstonecraft所强调的困难的方法是教育人们在哪里可以找到他们:在街上,或者在他们容易和愿意聚集的地方:在剧院。通过帮助组织革命节日,强调公民的美德,写戏剧来唤醒他们的美德,并提出剧院的改革,使这些戏剧的制作成为可能,古热为法国公民在大革命后的公民教育提供了一个计划。不幸的是,她和沃斯通克拉夫特试图纠正的混乱局面,在那些混蛋或小暴君的领导下,确保了他们无法看到他们的计划,沃斯通克拉夫特不得不离开巴黎,而古格则被送上了断头台。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SATS
SATS Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信