On the Text
Helen Maria Williams's Letters Written in France gave a very optimistic view of the beginnings of the French Revolution. The author seems to be in love with the ideas of equality and liberty. In the second letters she writes about the citizens working together "...the highest and lowest orders of citizens gloried in taking up the spade." (65) Everything is fresh and new. France is the young maiden ready to take on the world's problems while England is the older woman who has settled for her lot in life.
One passage stuck out to me. In letter five, the author tells us of a visit to a friend who shares her philosophical ideals. They talk about the importance of equality and the irrelevance of rank. The author then tells us that her friend wears a pendant make from a piece of the Bastille that is decorated with diamonds and other precious stones that is meant to celebrate her revolutionary ideals. This strikes me as the equivalent of putting a save the earth bumper sticker on a low mileage SUV. The rest of the text is very pro-revolution so her inclusion of this anecdote seems strange. Is she aware that the reality of the revolution can't live up to the people's high expectations? On the other hand, is this a sign that she doesn't see the potential problems ahead?
On the Reviews
In this period it became far easier to publish books due to advances in the industry which led to a greater availability and diversity of materials. Many critics and authors responded to this with claims that this could have a negative effect on literature and the public at large. In the criticisms of Helen Maria Williams's work we can see that the debates over the literary merits of 'popular' literature have been going on for a very long time. One reviewer wrote "whoever would write well must write to the few, and must even be able to reject whatever is likely to charm the multitude." (214) He is basically making the argument that in order for her future work to have merit she must write to a more select audience. Their is also a great deal of sexism in the reviews. Every reviewer made some remark about what they saw as the feminine quality of the writing. 
That passage in Williams's book stuck out to me as well. It is part of the issues I have with this work in that Williams seems to contradict what she writes, going back and forth on how she really views the events happening around her. I completely agree with your view on the reviews, thinking they were attacking her mainly for being a woman with feminine views. I'm glad I wasn't the only one who seeing that.
ReplyDeleteI definitely also saw a lot of contradictions in her accounts. Even your first paragraph about all the classes coming together and working seemed to me to contrast with her friends extravagance. I think she was aware that some ideals of the revolution were not exactly lived up to, especially when it came to the wealthy, and she utilized satire in order to point out the contradictions she was seeing. These kinds of things make me wonder why Williams dismisses herself as being able to comprehend the politics of the situation, and why some male critics seemed to belittle her writing by condemning the "feminine qualities" they saw in it.
ReplyDeleteThe passage about the pendant in letter five stood out to me as well. I found it almost a little too ironic and staged for Williams and her friend to be discussing the irrelevance of rank, but then she takes the time to not only notice, but write about the pendant. Scattered details like that and tone lead me to believe Williams is very intentional in her attempts to promote the Revolution. It's almost as if she's trying to reach a very large and wide audience. By mentioning the irrelevance of class, she's appealing to those in lower classes, but by addressing the pendant, she may be appealing to the higher classes. By demeaning her intelligence and comprehensions, she's appealing to another audience.
ReplyDelete