American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies (ASECS)

The Family Romance of the French Revolution. by Lynn Hunt

Review by: Jeremy D. Popkin
Eighteenth-Century Studies, Vol. 26, No. 2 (Winter, 1992-1993), pp. 355-359
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Sponsor: American Society for Eighteenth-
Century Studies (ASECS).
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2739332 .
Accessed: 31/08/2014 03:59

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Johns Hopkins University Press and American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies (ASECS) are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Eighteenth-Century Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 REVIEWS 355

it"(p. 178). Browndefineshis approachas "postdialectical," meaningby

it thatincontrastto Hegel(whose"auflieben" Brownreadsaspurenegation)
he valuesevery new phaseof consciousness"asmuchfor whatit saves or
restoresas for what it produces"(p. 377). Thus Preromanticismwill be
"savedand restored"in Romanticism.
Sucha notionof "development" has severaldistinctiveconsequencesfor
Brown'spresentation.In spite of occasionalgesturestowardsrelativism,
the book is guided by a firm hierarchyof values, for it measuresthe
literatureof the Enlightenmentand Preromanticismagainstan external
standardratherthanvaluesintrinsicto it. Paradigmsandurnsmaybe tested
in Preromanticism butthey are perfectedin Romanticism;Goldsmithhas
been neglectedbecauseotherssoon filled "theparadigmsfar more richly
thanhe haddone"(p. 180). Brown'sbeliefin a hierarchyof aestheticvalue,
so evidentlyin conflictwithhis pluralism,even allowsfor usingliterature
to organizehistory:"literaryworkswhosevalueis notin doubtauthenticate
and often enrichthe analyticallanguages(psychological,philosophical,
economic,or whatever)thatcan successfullybe appliedto them"(p. 224;
my emphasis)."Literaryinventionsifts the infinitedataof humanexperi-
ence to forge an image [. . .] wherein history is reflected, focused, and
mastered" (p. 378). Inthissense,Browncanevenassignhistoricalintention
and necessityto transindividual style (e.g., pp. 72, 77, 102, and 196).
One may regardsuch deviationsfrom the Zeitgeistof contemporary
scholarshipas assetsratherthanliabilities.I notethemherenotin a critical
spirit, merelyto pointout theirproblematicalrelationto otheraspectsof
the treatment-which,in turn, makesPreromanticismvery mucha book
of ourage. Shortof ascribingto it a definitivenessthatits authordisclaims,
I can recommendthe volumeto all thosewho careaboutPreromanticism,
Romanticism,and the readingof literature.

JOHN NEUBAUER
University of Amsterdam

LYNN HUNT. TheFamily Romance of the French Revolution. Berke-

ley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992. Pp. xvi,
213. $20.

Few scholarshave the knackof raisingso manylarge issues in so few

pages as Lynn Hunt. Her previousbook, Politics, Cultureand Class in
the French Revolution(1984), broke with the conventionalanalysis of
revolutionarypolitics as essentiallya reflectionof social conflicts and
analyzedit insteadas a culturalsystemto be understoodthroughananalysis
of its symbolsand rituals.In her new book, TheFamilyRomanceof the

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
356 EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY
STUDIES

FrenchRevolution,Hunttakesher analysisof the Revolution'ssymbolic

dimensionin a psychologicaldirection,addressingalong the way major
debatesin feministstudies,criticaltheory,andhistoricalinterpretation, all
in just over two hundredpages. Refusingeitherto adhereto any variety
of "politicalcorrectness"or to avoidissues thatare likely to raisepartisan
hackles, Huntcontinuesto argue, as she did in her previousbook, that,
despiteall the violencethataccompaniedit, the FrenchRevolutionwas a
creativeeffort"to imaginea polity unhingedfrom patriarchalauthority"
(p. xiv).
Theorganizingconceptof Hunt'sbookis the notionof familyromance,
a Freudianterm that she redefinesfor her purposesas "thecollective,
unconsciousimageof familialorderthatunderlie(s)revolutionary politics"
(p. xiii). Her contentionis that changesin unconsciousattitudestoward
relationswithinthe family conditionedsuch consciouspoliticaldecisions
of the Revolutionas the executionof the kingandqueenandthe exclusion
of womenfrom activepoliticalroles. HuntfindsFreud'smythicalrecon-
structionof the originsof politicalauthorityas emergingfromthe killing
of the fatherby a band of brothersa powerful tool for analyzingthe
revolutionarymovement,which culminatedin the executionof the royal
father-figureandthe proclamationof a new orderbasedon fraternity.She
expandson Freudandon Rene Girard,whose analysisof the dynamicsof
sacrificialviolenceshe also drawson, by stressingnotonly the importance
of thenewbondscreatedamongthebrotherhood of rebels,buttheimplica-
tionsof thistransformation fortheplaceof womenin thepolity.Employing
a varietyof sources,includingnovels,paintings,engravings,revolutionary
debatesandlegislation,she pursuesher themein a series of loosely con-
nectedessays dealingwith late-eighteenth-century images of fathersand
families, the revolutionaryreshapingof family law, the executionsof
the king and of Marie-Antoinette,the totallyindividualisticworld of the
Marquisde Sade'sPhilosophiedans le boudoir,andthe haltingreturnof
the fatherand the family afterthe Terror.
More directlythanPolitics, Culture,and Class, TheFamilyRomance
of theFrenchRevolutiondealswiththedisturbingaspectsof theRevolution:
politicalexecutions,hostilityto women, Sade'spornographicextremism.
Unlikemost voyages into the revolutionarycollectiveunconscious,how-
ever, Hunt'sis not meant to discreditthe movementas fundamentally
irrational,but to affirmonce again the importanceof its contributionto
moderndemocraticculture.WhatHuntcalls"thefamilyromanceof frater-
nity,"the fantasyof a familyof equalsheld togetherby affectiveties, not
by arbitraryauthority,was, she concludes,essentialto thepoliticalproject
of a liberaland egalitariansociety.
There is nothingcontrivedaboutthe notionthat the revolutionaries'
views aboutfamilystructureandtheirideas for remakingsocietyat large

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 REVIEWS 357

were closely related. Both the revolutionarylegislatorsthemselvesand

theircontemporarycritics, suchas the arch-reactionary Louisde Bonald,
for whom the family was a microcosmof society, saw the connection
between the introductionof divorce and egalitarianinheritanceand the
individualistic,egalitarianthrust of revolutionaryconstitution-making.
The noveltyof Hunt'sanalysisis in suggestingthatchangesin the family
precededand, to some extent, determinedthe directionof the political
revolution.The spreadin pre-revolutionary artandliteratureof the image
of the "good"father, willing to renouncehis arbitraryauthorityand to
treathis childrenwithbenevolence,Huntwrites, "producesthe fate of the
king..." because"theideal of the good fatherand the father'ssubsequent
effacementfatallyunderminedthe absolutistfoundationsof the monarchi-
cal regime"(p. 34). This was not, to be sure, a consciousprocess:pre-
revolutionaryliteratureand art offeredfew images of sons killing their
fathers. Hence Hunt'sresortto psychologicalanalysisto argue that this
was theunconsciousmessagebehindtheproliferationof storiesandimages
in which the father'srole was minimized.
Historiansarewaryof suchrelianceon evidencethat,by its verynature,
cannotbe directlyproducedor that must be extractedfrom ambiguous
sources.Huntis carefulto avoidexcessiveclaimsin heruse of psychologi-
cal argumentation, andtheanalogiessheproposesaregenerallypersuasive.
In the natureof things,however,muchof the evidenceshe cites is subject
to conflictinginterpretations.
Whereshefindsthe saliencyof father-figures
decliningin pre-revolutionary literatureand father-imageryvirtuallyab-
sentduringtheRevolution,FrenchscholarJean-Claude Bonnet,in anessay
whoseconclusionsroughlyparallelhers,nonethelessfindsthefather-theme
"omnipresent" in eighteenth-century literatureand sees the revolutionary
cult of "greatmen"and the establishmentof the Pantheonas the creation
of new paternalreferences.1NeitherHuntnorBonnetdefinespreciselythe
corpusof textsto whichthey refer, andit is not clearhow one is to choose
between them. It is certainlytrue that the hapless Louis XVI suffered
throughouthis reignfromhis inabilityto fill the patriarchalrole convinc-
ingly, however,andHuntmighthavebolsteredhercaseby moreextensive
analysisof the pamphletliteraturethatretailedthe king'sstruggleto con-
summatehis marriageandhis inabilityto vindicatehis wife'shonorin the
DiamondNecklace affair.
Freud'sTotemand Taboo,on whichHuntdrawsheavily,treatswomen
as secondaryfigures, controlledfirst by the despoticfather,then by the
insurrectionarysons. A majortheme of Hunt'sbook is to show thatthe

' Jean-ClaudeBonnet, "De la famille 'ala patrie," in Jean Delumeau and Daniel
Roche, eds., Histoiredespejreset de la paternite(Paris: Larousse, 1990), pp. 235-
58.

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
358 EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY
STUDIES

revoltagainstthefathermadeit possibleforthefirsttimeto thinkof women

as politicallyactivebeings, andthatthe radicalrevolutionaries' emphatic
rejectionof this possibilitywas directlylinkedto the crisis causedby the
killingof theking.Likeseveralotherrecentscholars,Huntsees thevicious
campaignof denigrationagainstthe queen, who, unlike the king, was
publiclyaccusedof every conceivableprivatevice as well as of political
actsagainsttheRevolution,as "theemblem... .forthefeareddisintegration
of genderboundariesthataccompaniedthe Revolution"(p. 114).2 Huntis
neverthelesscriticalof the tendencyamongsome feministscholars,such
as JoanLandes,to paintrevolutionaryliberalismas inherentlyhostile to
women.In Hunt'swords,the Revolutionwas the firsteventthat"madethe
exclusionof womenintoan issue"(p. 203), andFranceafter1789 saw the
emergence of the first public calls for women'spolitical rights. Even
the domesticideologythatconsignedwomento theprivatespherewas, she
argues, a recognitionthat women had some positive role in social life.
It is, however, hardto reconcilethis conclusionwith Hunt'sown vivid
descriptionof the campaignagainstMarie-Antoinette. Thedifficultymight
havebeenreducedif Hunthadremindedreadersthatthequeen'sexecution,
part of a series of spectacularpolitical trials that claimed the lives of
numerousprominentmale revolutionaries -notably Barnave,the Giron-
dins, andseveralrevolutionarygenerals-was eminentlyover-determined
andthatthequeenhad, in fact, donemoreto tryto sabotagetheRevolution
thanalmostany of the othervictims of the guillotine.
Hunt'schapteron Sadeillustratessomeof thedifficultiesof usingliterary
evidencein a fashionthatwill convincehistorians.She considersLa Phi-
losophiedansle boudoir"oneof the mostrevealingtextsaboutthe revolu-
tionary political unconscious . . ." because it carries the fantasy of a society
madeup of equalindividualstotallyfreedfromfamilybondsto its ultimate
extreme(p. 125). Huntneverthelessadmitsthatthe bulk of Sade'sbook
was almostcertainlycomposedbeforethe Revolution,andit seemsclosely
linkedto the licentiousandpornographicliteraturethatflourishedfor de-
cades before 1789. When he publishedhis text in 1795, Sade addeda
"revolutionary" insertclaimingthatthe implicationsof equalityincluded
atheism,theft,incest,homosexuality,andthe rightof anymanto have sex
with all women. (Huntdoes not note thatsuchaccusationswere frequent
in the thermidorian anti-Jacobincampaignragingby thatdate.) The inter-
pretationof this compositetext as a windowon the unconsciousaspectsof
the Revolutionobviouslyposes some problems.
TheFamilyRomanceof theFrenchRevolutionis thusone of thosebooks
thatinspiresone to wantto arguewith the authorsaboutmanyof its key

2
For a fuller treatmentof the campaign against Marie-Antoinette, see Chantal
Thomas, La reine scelerate (Paris, 1989).

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 REVIEWS 359

points. There is somethinghere to challengeeveryone. Both historians

such as KeithBakerand FrancoisFuret, who see the Revolution'seffort
to throwoff royalauthorityas doomedfromthe outsetto reproduceit, and
feministscholarsfor whomthe revolutionaries' mainachievementwas the
exclusionof women from the public sphere, will take issue with Hunt's
convictionthatthe Revolutionwas, in spiteof everything,fundamentally
a movementtowardgreaterfreedom. Skepticsaboutpsychohistorywill
findthatHuntmakestoo muchuse of Freud,while Freudianpuristswill
objectthatshe ignoreshis psychologyof the individualand redefineshis
termsto suitherown purposes.Thosewho knowthe authorwill havelittle
doubtthat she meanther book to be provocative,and that she would be
mostdisappointedif the reactionto it was one of tepidacceptance.No one
who engageswiththisprovocativetextwill be ableto escapereconsidering
the fundamentalissues of the FrenchRevolution,however, and some of
Hunt'sassertionsare likely to stick in the mindsof even those who most
firmlyresisther methodsandher conclusions.Whichis to say thatLynn
Hunthas succeededagain in makingus rethinkwhat we thinkwe know
aboutthe FrenchRevolution.

JEREMY D. POPKIN
University of Kentucky

MADELYN GUTWIRTH, AVRIEL GOLDBERGER, and KARYNA

SZMURLO,eds. Germaine de StaeYl:Crossing the Borders. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991. Pp. v-xii; 248.
$45.

The three editors of Germainede Stael: Crossingthe Bordersdeserve

unambiguous praiseforhavingbroughttogetherseventeenscholarly,origi-
nal, and/orprovocativeessays by as manydistinguishedauthors:Simone
Balaye,FrankPaulBowman,JoanDeJean,MichelDelon, BeatriceFink,
MargaretR. Higonnet,CharlotteHogsett, Doris Y. Kadish, Gita May,
Nancy K. Miller, KurtMueller-Vollmer,IsabelleNaginski, Ellen Peel,
EnglishShowalter,Jr., Eve Sourian,SusanTenenbaum,andMarie-Claire
Vallois. Thechief editor,MadelynGutwirth,also contributesthe shortbut
concentratedPreface, reflectingher thoroughknowledgeof the field and
her excellentunderstanding of the socioculturalandpoliticalforces of the
time;KarynaSzmurlo,in her introduction,commentssuccinctlyon some
of the essays, using a variety of "modernist"critical approaches, reflecting
thoseof thecriticsbeingdiscussed;andAvrielGoldbergercontributesone

This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:59:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions