法国最后一位国王的信件:海伦·玛丽亚·威廉姆斯与贝特朗·德·莫维尔关于路易十六信件翻译的争论

IF 0.1 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
Paula Yurss Lasanta
{"title":"法国最后一位国王的信件:海伦·玛丽亚·威廉姆斯与贝特朗·德·莫维尔关于路易十六信件翻译的争论","authors":"Paula Yurss Lasanta","doi":"10.54103/2037-2426/18429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines The Political and Confidential Correspondence of Lewis the Sixteenth (1803), by Helen Maria Williams, in which she translates the letters by Louis XVI while she adds her own political commentaries. This translation received negative reviews and one of its harshest critics was royalist emigré Bertrand de Moleville. The first part of this article explores the controversy that surrounded Correspondence and reveals that the letters were forged. The following part analyzes Williams’s political arguments that legitimize the deposition of Louis XVI as the king of France. The last part explores Bertrand’s Refutation, published in 1804. The article concludes that, regardless of the authenticity of the letters, Correspondence is a work that deserves reconsideration as it sheds light into Williams’s participation in the political debates of her time. Besides, the article shows that the misogynistic arguments employed by Bertrand contributed to the invisibilization of Williams’s work.","PeriodicalId":41992,"journal":{"name":"Enthymema-International Journal of Literary Criticism Literary Theory and Philosophy of Literature","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Last King of France’s Letters: The Controversy between Helen Maria Williams and Bertrand de Moleville about the Translation of Louis XVI’s Correspondence\",\"authors\":\"Paula Yurss Lasanta\",\"doi\":\"10.54103/2037-2426/18429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines The Political and Confidential Correspondence of Lewis the Sixteenth (1803), by Helen Maria Williams, in which she translates the letters by Louis XVI while she adds her own political commentaries. This translation received negative reviews and one of its harshest critics was royalist emigré Bertrand de Moleville. The first part of this article explores the controversy that surrounded Correspondence and reveals that the letters were forged. The following part analyzes Williams’s political arguments that legitimize the deposition of Louis XVI as the king of France. The last part explores Bertrand’s Refutation, published in 1804. The article concludes that, regardless of the authenticity of the letters, Correspondence is a work that deserves reconsideration as it sheds light into Williams’s participation in the political debates of her time. Besides, the article shows that the misogynistic arguments employed by Bertrand contributed to the invisibilization of Williams’s work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Enthymema-International Journal of Literary Criticism Literary Theory and Philosophy of Literature\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Enthymema-International Journal of Literary Criticism Literary Theory and Philosophy of Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54103/2037-2426/18429\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enthymema-International Journal of Literary Criticism Literary Theory and Philosophy of Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54103/2037-2426/18429","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了海伦·玛丽亚·威廉姆斯的《刘易斯十六世的政治和机密信件》(1803年),她在信中翻译了路易十六的信件,并添加了自己的政治评论。这个译本受到了负面评价,其中最严厉的批评者之一是保皇派移民Bertrand de Moleville。本文的第一部分探讨了围绕信件的争议,并揭示了信件是伪造的。以下部分分析了威廉姆斯的政治论点,这些论点使路易十六成为法国国王的证词合法化。最后一部分探讨了1804年出版的伯特兰的反驳。文章的结论是,无论信件的真实性如何,《信件》都是一部值得重新思考的作品,因为它揭示了威廉姆斯参与她那个时代的政治辩论。此外,文章还表明,伯特兰所采用的厌女主义论点导致了威廉姆斯作品的隐形。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Last King of France’s Letters: The Controversy between Helen Maria Williams and Bertrand de Moleville about the Translation of Louis XVI’s Correspondence
This article examines The Political and Confidential Correspondence of Lewis the Sixteenth (1803), by Helen Maria Williams, in which she translates the letters by Louis XVI while she adds her own political commentaries. This translation received negative reviews and one of its harshest critics was royalist emigré Bertrand de Moleville. The first part of this article explores the controversy that surrounded Correspondence and reveals that the letters were forged. The following part analyzes Williams’s political arguments that legitimize the deposition of Louis XVI as the king of France. The last part explores Bertrand’s Refutation, published in 1804. The article concludes that, regardless of the authenticity of the letters, Correspondence is a work that deserves reconsideration as it sheds light into Williams’s participation in the political debates of her time. Besides, the article shows that the misogynistic arguments employed by Bertrand contributed to the invisibilization of Williams’s work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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