literature

Not Just a Social Construct

Deviation Actions

aichiyume's avatar
By
Published:
562 Views

Literature Text

“Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime.”-Aristotle

To say that the French Revolution was some manner of inevitability seems short-sighted especially considering that we have the current luxury to look back at the history books and seeing the mistakes made and the successes won.  Every major civilization in the world had a similar system of monarchy and aristocracy but why France? Why the 18th century? Why did it so quickly turn to bloodshed? It was this powder keg, this tour de force of social tension and severely weakened government were some the factors that lead up to revolution.  
In The Memoirs of Madame Roland, Madame Roland, the wife of a member of France’s parliament explains both the governmental concerns before and during the revolution and gives up a glimpse into the complex social world in France before and during the revolutionary times. Madame Roland described the situation as “On the throne today; tomorrow in irons” (Roland 27).  She went on to discuss the weak condition in the parliament that showed the cracks in the monarchy that led to such great social tension. “Pache at the War Ministry was committing error after error through weakness and devotion to the Jacobins” (Roland 28) and “Garat should never have set his sights beyond the Ministry of Justice. His poor health and natural dislike of hard work were not too noticeable in that low-key department, but when he moved to the Ministry of the Interior his weaknesses were all too apparent.” (Roland 28).
The Jacobins, Parat, Pache: all were major players in the French parliament that are showing such weakness even before the outbreak of revolution. She goes on to call the members of the council puppets, fools, weak and “fussy little bureaucrats” (Roland 50). She continues to make scathing remarks about the state of the Ministry, “The degradation of the Convention, it daily act of cowardice and impotence upset me so much that I found the recent excesses almost preferable” (Roland 30-31). Madame Roland explains in her memoir that her husband had recently left the Ministry of the Interior and became quickly unpopular due to his actions; “Roland had just struck a judicious blow against his adversaries by publishing, on his retirement, more detailed accounts of his tenure of office than any minister before him had ever produced.” (Roland 29) this action left him vulnerable and in a position for attack; an attack that came in the form of the arrest of both Mr. and Mrs. Roland. Mr. Roland was able to escape but Madame Roland stayed in France and was promptly arrested. Madame Roland was sent to prison, released, arrested again and later executed on November 8, 1793 for “conspiring against the unity and the indivisibility of the Republic and attempting to introduce civil war.” (Roland 259).
Madame Roland also gives us insight into the complex social hierarchy of France due to her status and her husband’s position within the Ministry of the Interior. She expressed a disliking of “excessive emotionalism” (Roland 42) and she is able to speak off-handedly about the September massacre stating that “my blood boils when I hear the Parisians praised for not wanting another 2 September massacre.” (Roland 31). She was well-read and intelligent and able to write very well. This provides a light view into the upper class; most of the members of the aristocracy were well-educated while members of the lower classes simply did not have the time or money to have their children educated so extensively or at all, having the time to sit and read a book was a luxury most families did not have, or even the ability to learn to read. She even says that “boredom is a malady of empty souls and resourceless minds.” (Roland 50).  She also states though that she “had no real social circle; twice a week I was invited to dinner ministers , deputies and others with whom my husband needed to be on good terms.” (Roland 61).
She mentions that there had been a recent increase in food prices. It was this stark separation in classes that led to such great strain, the rich simply became richer and the poor grew poorer. Heavy taxation from the rich affected the poor the most, the one group that could not afford such high taxes. These taxes were not just on food but on land ownership and of course, rent. During this time only the wealthy were land owners and controlled most of the land in France and would lease out this land in a very feudal-style manner, thus securing their place in the upper class of society. Feudalism as stated by Rousseau is “an absurd system if ever there was one, contrary both to the principles of natural rights and to all good polity.” (Rousseau 46).
Viewing the revolution from that perspective it would seem that social tensions would continue to rise until a boiling point was reached. Jean Rousseau states in his work The Social Contract that “man is born free and everywhere he is in chains. One believes himself the other’ master, and yet is more a slave than they.”. This strongly stratified system left the lower classes feeling under control most of a tyrant than a king and the king had become nothing more than a figurehead and puppet to the aristocracy.
Rousseau gives readers an entire section on how a government could easily avoid uprising from the people. He states that periodic assemblies in which “have no other subject than to maintain the social treaty” (Rousseau 119) and they must “always to open with two motions which it should be impossible ever to omit, and which ought to be voted on separately.” (Rousseau 119).  He even states so eloquently that “Now it would be absurd if all the Citizens united could not do what each one of them separately can do.” (Rousseau 120).
At the time revolution began there seemed to be a breakdown at both levels; the government faced extreme weakness from internal and external pressure and the upper class’s construct made social mobility impossible. The hierarchy of the French aristocracy became a social issue and not an issue of money as suggested in Stendhal’s The Pink and the Green. Mina finds herself unable to fit into either social category due to the way she received her fortune not due to its sum. It is similar to the WASPS of today where there are individuals and families of equal or even greater wealth but due to the lack of social status, these individuals are excluded.
The government’s weaknesses lead to further collapse with greater influence by the Jacobins. Members of the parliament had become figure heads and were under severe pressure due to private interest and party obligations, a not too unfamiliar situation faced by modern senate and congress members “It will always be a subject of regret that the French nobility was destroy and uprooted instead of being subjected to the control of the laws. The error deprived the nation of a portion of its substance, and dealt liberty a wound that will never heal. (Tocqueville 140.)
Even Madame Roland spoke of the recent increase in food prices. It was this stark separation in classes that led to such great strain, the rich simply became richer and the poor grew poorer. Heavy taxation from the rich affected the poor the most, the one group that could not afford such high taxes. These taxes were not just on food but on land ownership and of course, rent. During this time only the wealthy were land owners and controlled most of the land in France and would lease out this land in a very feudal-style manner, thus securing their place in the upper class of society. Feudalism as stated by Rousseau is “an absurd system if ever there was one, contrary both to the principles of natural rights and to all good polity.” (Rousseau 46).

These are the perfect conditions for revolution, a crumbling government and a social stage that forced despair onto the working class and an upper class renowned for its excess and grandeur. The French aristocracy has been noted for centuries for its opulence; the palace of Versailles may well be the final nail in the coffin, sealing the fate of the French upper class. The magnificent palace of the king, King Louis XVI had become a symbol of oppression and class stratification “In October 1789 a mob forced the royal family to leave Versailles for Paris” (Dyer 1) though this was not the first casualty of the Reign of Terror, which began with the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789 “. “Louis XVI was condemned to death for treason, and was executed on January 21, 1793” (Dyer 1).
The best observations of the causes that lead up to revolution in France come from Alexis De Tocqueville in his work The Old Regime and the French Revolution. He stated that “inequalities enough existed already between the various classes of Frenchmen.” (Tocqueville 127) citing that the cause of the tension was both societal and governmental “the great crime of the old kings was the division of the people into classes” (Tocqueville 135).  He pointed clearly at the government as well saying that “the destruction of political liberty and class divisions were the causes of all the disease of which the old regime died.” (Tocqueville 124) and calling this disease “the most deadly” (Tocqueville 124). Tocqueville goes on to describe King Louis XVI saying that “there was one who did desire to see the people united, and tried with all his heart to unite them, and that one---wonderful mystery of God’s judgments! ---was Louis XVI!” (Tocqueville 135). King Louis who had been vilified by history and by the patriots of the revolution is actually said by Tocqueville to be the one who wished the most to unite France.
Tocqueville also made other remarks about the revolution that provide a different perspective that is not necessarily from the revolutionary’s or the upper class’s point of view. He remarks that “what seemed to be love for liberty turns out to be mere hatred of a despot.” (Tocqueville 204), the war had no longer become an issue of fighting for liberty but a fight against the aristocracy.  He goes on to state that “The French Revolution had no country; one of its leading effects appeared to be to efface national boundaries from the map. It united and divided men, in spite of law, traditions, characters, language; converted enemies into fellow countrymen, and brothers into foes; or, rather, to speak more precisely, it created far above particular nationalities, an intellectual country that was common to all, and in which every human creature could obtain rights of citizenship.” (Tocqueville 24).
Rousseau tells us that “the perfection of the social order consists in the union of force and law; but for this to be so, law must guide force.” (Rousseau 163). During the times of the revolution force overtook law and the upper class suffered under its own ordinances, ones passed to protect itself such as the law prohibiting nighttime arrests as hinted by Madame Roland “A ‘law’ was now little more than a word which was being used to deprive people of their most widely recognized rights. Force was now the master.”(Roland 39). In the days of the Reign of Terror, nobles and common men and women were accused and sent to be executed without any true cause. If one merely speculated that a neighbor or friend was a member of any perceived enemy the individual in question could be executed.  
What made the revolution even more interesting was that the people most greatly affected, the upper class, were the ones most in favor of it in theory. Madame Roland herself favored greatly the concepts of the revolution, such as a reinvigorated nationalism but harshly opposed the reasons why the lower classes were so impassioned “I was in the state of mind that makes one eloquent. Boiling with indignation, void of al fear, passionate for my country whose ruin I could see before my eyes, conscious that all I loved in the world stood in mortal peril.” (Roland 33). Tocqueville himself observed also that “nations born to freedom hate the intrinsic evil of dependence” (Tocqueville 204) and questioned “why do they need order to remain free?” (Tocqueville 205).  Madame Roland refutes that “’The majority of the people in Paris are simply asking to be told what to do.’” (Roland 33). This lack of direction and violent means of solving the issues of the lower class stirred up harsh criticism from the aristocracy that in theory supported their cause of freedom, equality and liberty.
The lessons learned from the revolution are that in times of great social and executive crisis there will always be a reaction. Tocqueville states that “The French Revolution was both their scourge and their tutor.” (Tocqueville 23). Whether the reaction is as explosive as the French Revolution cannot be determined until the time comes. The ideals of the revolution became nothing more than “engendered fanaticism and propagandism” (Tocqueville 183).  
The French Revolution could happen anywhere but it was simply a perfect storm, a tour de force of a government, weakened and struggling due to crippling internal and external pressures and a social system heavily stratified that prevented any form of social mobility and left the common people in a state of despair. Perhaps Madame Roland said it best herself “That is the common lot of the virtuous in time of revolution. When the people first rise up against oppression, wise men who have shown them the way and helped them to recover their right come to power. But they do not stay there long. More ambitious characters soon emerge, flatter and delude the people and turn them against their true defenders.” (Roland 27).



Works Cited
Dyer, Kim. "Versailles." Castles.org "Castles of the World" Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <www.castles.org/castles/Europe…>.
Roland, and Evelyn Shuckburgh. The Memoirs of Madame Roland: A Heroine of the French Revolution. Mount Kisco, NY: Moyer Bell, 1990. Print.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, and Victor Gourevitch. The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 1997. Print.
Stendhal. The Pink & the Green ; Followed By, Mina De Vanghel. New York: New Directions, 1988. Print.
Tocqueville, Alexis De, and John Bonner. The Old Regime and the French Revolution. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2010. Print.
Wilde, Robert. "History of the Guillotine 4 - The Terror." European History – The History of Europe. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <europeanhistory.about.com/cs/f…>.
A little paper on the French Revolution and justice. You know, since it's been a while. <3 
© 2014 - 2024 aichiyume
Comments6
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
MachineKing18's avatar
The 1700's hundreds was the 18th Century. Use the 18th century or the 1700's for that century.