Baudelaire’s political ideas stem from the hypocrisy of the ruling classes in France, which formed the anti-Republican sentiment that he felt created inequality and corruption in the government. Baudelaire believed in the power of aristocracy as the primary form of legitimate government. In this manner, Baudelaire found respect for the cleric (gatherer of knowledge), the soldier (the defender), and the poet (the creator) as the dominant political view of organized society. Furthermore, he viewed the people of the “professional classes” as slaves. For instance, the elite power of the poet is projected in the poem “Benediction” as a commentary on social and class status in Baudelaire’s aristocratic political view:
Skyward, to where he sees a Throne blaze splendid,
The pious Poet lifts his arms on high,
And the vast lightnings of his soul extended
Blot out the crowds and tumults from his eye
(Baudelaire 11).
In this monarchical view of the poet’s “throne” that is seen in the sky, Baudelaire is presenting his view of the true divinity of humanity through the eyes of a creator. This is an important part of the aristocratic and anti-republican view of the French government, which made Baudelaire an enemy of the state. Baudelaire did not believe in democracy or republican values because he felt that humanity was too corrupted and hypocritical to manage such as an advanced form of government. These are important aspects of Baudelaire’s political views that define the undermining
DBQ Practice The French Revolution was caused by many problems within France. During the 18th century, France participated in wars such as the American Revolution and the 7 years war. With France participating in those 2 wars, they became bankrupt. France had to somehow make money so they decided to start heavily taxing the 3rd estate and made them work harder for their own food and wealth.
The initial impulse of the French revolution was destructive. For those who lived through all, or even part, of these vast upheavals, the shock was overwhelming. Maximilien Robespierre was a proud disciple of the enlightenment and declared that no political writer had foreseen this revolution. Robespierre (1758-1794) was one of the leaders of the Committee of Public Safety, the effective governing body of France during the most radical phase of the revolution. The leaders of this revolution attempted, perhaps more than any other revolutionary leaders before or since, to totally transform human society in every way. (Supreme Being) Although Robespierre began with patriotic intent he still was the face of the Reign of Terror and was viewed as being a radical person.
The French Revolution has been studied since its end in an attempt to determine and understand the causes of it and its duration. Different schools of history attempt to provide different explanations, such as Marxist schools examining whether the French Revolution amounted to a class struggle or the ‘maximalist’ school in which the cultural transformation of French society is examined, including attitudes about monarchy, privilege and religion. This essay will contend that fundamental divisions of attitudes towards privilege began the revolution, with disagreements about religion and the Catholic Church making the revolution longer in duration. Monarchy is linked to privilege as the King was part of the privileged Second Estate. Thus, the revolution as a
The French Revolution was a time of period where social and political was a disruption in France that lasted from 1789 until 1799. This time of period affected Social Structure of France prior to the French Revolution. The factors that caused this revolution was due to having a bad government system, weak superiority, and inequality of the classes of people in France during the war. In this research, I will define and explain how Social Structure contributed to the French Revolution Resentment of royal authoritarianism. The three estates that social structure consists of are first estate which are the clergies, second estate known as the Nobleman, and third estate which are the Bourgeoisie, peasants, and workers. The Revolution did not omit sharp distinctions among the social groups, neither did it alter the distribution of wealth. This caused them to divide into these three groups called as estates.
Before the French Revolution began, people were openly expressing their dissatisfaction with French society through written means. The discontent comes from many areas, but a large focus comes from the nobility. Voltaire, Candide, or Optimism, Isabelle de Charrière, The Nobleman (1763), and Nicolas Toussaint le Moyne des Essarts, The Noailles Affair (1786), gives a clear representation of how the nobility is viewed in the second half of the eighteenth century. Writers represented most of French nobility as mainly being only concerned about their family heritage and luxurious privileges, which greatly corresponds with reality as can be seen in William Doyle’s The Oxford History of the French Revolution.
During the 16th and 17th centuries it is clear and evident that the centralization of power, or the absolutism in and hierarchy, does in fact induce stability in society, however, it is also evident via the given readings that absolutism also had its flaws which were later proved to be its downfall. It essentially all boils down a single concept of the people versus government. This is evident in the history of the French prior and leading up to the Révolution. In addition to, the monarchy of the English under King James VI and I’s rule. As complicated as the nature of government is, when power or authority is concentrated excessively into a single point, the society will crack by that very same point if a healthy relationship between citizen and ruler is not established. One cannot expect to bully and undermine one’s citizens without considering the possibility that one day they will rise up against him or her and “religious” masks can only be worn for so long before people recognize the hypocrisies present within them. Both of these truths are evident as seen in the given texts. Specifically, with The Great Cat Massacre, On The Social Order and Absolute Monarchy, by Jean Domat, and Trew Law of Free Monarchies, King James VI & I.
A glint of good news came to the now-impoverished family when the merchant heard that a ship containing his merchandise had just arrived in port. The merchant was overjoyed and went to claim his wealth, only to find that there had been a legal ordeal and he had, indeed, lost it all. Here, the author tries to illustrate the French government’s inadequacy in meeting the needs of the people. In the 1850s, great minds, including the Swiss/French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, were writing that the authority to rule came from the people themselves. Furthermore, philosophers argued that the government’s duty was not to serve their own decadence but rather to serve the people. The French government, being an absolute monarchy, was ruled by only the word of Louis XV, and the royal Bourbon family had a history of ruling to meet their own selfish desires. The French monarchy did not uphold the intrinsic promise and duty of any government to protect, feed, and serve its people. De Beaumont symbolizes this by failing to deliver the goods to the impoverished former merchant. In other words, just like the merchant’s undelivered goods, the
The 17th century French aristocrat Michel de Montaigne lived in a tumultuous world. With the spark of Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses, the fire spread rapidly to France. The nation divided against itself. The rebellious protestant Huguenots and the traditional staunch Catholics both viewed the other group as idolatrous heretics in time when that crime could justify execution. Consequently, Catholic monarchs throughout Europe felt the impending threat to their reigns, too, because if they supposedly ruled through divine right, what would change concerning the support of their subjects? After the peace-making Edict of Nantes, rehashing the religious conflicts of the century was forbidden, but seeing his country—and even his own family—torn apart, how could one refrain from comment? So in his writings, Montaigne has to write around his actual subjects. This isn’t to say, however, that he conveyed none of his ideas directly. Montaigne criticizes the cultural belief in a correct way of life, opposing the idea with a more relativistic viewpoint, though the way in which he presents it, as mere musings in personal correspondence, fails to effectively convince his readers.
The author explained how the French Revolution starts and also how choice made by the royal government affect the old regime which moved the country into different conflicts. For example, in chapter 1 “The
During the period of The French Revolution, Maximilien Robespierre, French lawyer and politician, was probably one of the most influential and well – known figures. I selected him because I found his personality interesting, and wanted to know more about him. To this day, among historians, Robespierre is a very controversial figure. Some support his actions during the Reign of Terror, while others do not. Furthermore, in his early days as a politician, he was known as ‘The Incorruptible’ due his strict moral values and ideas, yet, during the Reign of Terror, he was responsible for the executions of thousands. I found the contrast between his two ideologies really shocking, and wanted to know more about historians’ perspective of him, so I decided to research and do this project on Robespierre.
When I first heard the name Charles Baudelaire a few weeks ago, I just thought of him as another historical author that we had to learn about in an English class. Little did I know, how his work would affect me in the next weeks. Baudelaire coined the term modernity which was a period of ongoing change and transition to urban and industrial life. As a person who believes technology is destroying communication skills, it was interesting to see how Baudelaire faced the same troubles through urbanization instead of technology. A piece of Baudelaire’s piece that stood out to me was The Eyes of the Poor in his famous work called Paris Spleen. Baudelaire used the word ‘spleen’ in his work to show a sense of disgust with everything.
The violence in France will not stop until equality is reached. The revolutionaries picture a time when all the people of France live equal. This reasoning is the core factor of why they are fighting against the system. When we learned the motive for Madame Defarge’s reasoning for hating the Marquis and anyone associated with him, she replies that everyone against the revolution should “...tell the Wind and Fire where to stop; not me!” (326). We learn here that she has not intent to stop until she gets even with the Evrémonde family. Madame Defarge’s idea of equality is the death of Charles Darnay and everyone associated with him. When Madame Defarge and Defarge were discussing the end of the revolution Defarge asked the question, “but one must stop somewhere. After all, the question is still where?” (324). Defarge questions Madame Defarge’s intent to stop somewhere but Madame Defarge replies with “At extermination” (324). This strengthens the fact that Madame Defarge believes the revolution will be complete with the death
During the eighteenth century there was one central political cause for the French Revolution. King Louis XVI was a weak ruler who endured a lavish lifestyle. He disregarded the people’s needs, leaving much of the French population in discontent. Prior to the revolution the form of government was Absolute monarchy led by Louis XVI. The problem with absolute monarchy was that people were denied basic rights, and a say in government because the divine right theory was abused. The King ruled by the divine right of theory which
Liberté, égalité, fraternité was the cry of freedom that countless people used to propel them through, and to the end of the French Revolution. This long period of social, political and economic change in France lasted 10 years, starting in 1798 and ended with Napoleon Bonaparte. The French Revolution greatly affected all of Europe at the time and continues to represent the embodiment of revolution to this day. This constant struggle between the heavily taxed, burdened, and unrepresented third estate and those higher created an environment of monumental change for everyone. In the years leading up to the French Revolution, new beliefs and ideas were reaching every corner of Europe creating the thought that men should live free of oppression. However, in France the leader Louis XVI lead like a tyrant leaving the people impoverish and angry. Through the analysation of numerous circumstance present during the Ancien Régime, such as an inferior fiscal leadership, massive debt, and the forthcoming of new ideas during the Enlightened period, it can be concluded that the means for this revolution were justified as it is in our essence to revolt for a change.
In the 18th century, European society put an emphasis on social standing; each social class was expected to act differently, thus affecting the way one would get treated and the amount of opportunities available to them. In Flaubert’s Madame Bovary, food imagery and the way each character acts towards food reveals the distinctions between the various social classes and, more importantly, the mediocrity of the French bourgeoisie. However, Flaubert chooses not to focus on all of the social classes, but solely on the characteristics and mannerisms surrounding the middle and the high classes. Revolving the novel around middle-classed characters who represent the middle class, Flaubert criticizes the bourgeoisie through their desire to escape