[identity profile] celine-carol.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] revolution_fr
Hola, long time lurker, first time posting...

I've recently been pretty obsessed with the French Revolution (particularly Robespierre), and I've been reading quite a bit on him and his contemporaries, and I've noticed that a lot of people have jumped to diagnose several other revolutionaries and analyze every possible psychological inclination they may have had.  (I've read a lot of theories on what made Marat blister up, and there seems to be something of a consensus that Mirabeau probably had every venereal disease known to mankind, and sexual preferences that would have been considered rather deviant at the time have been attributed to Camille...)

But I've searched the internet rather thoroughly, and I have yet to find any explanation for Robespierre's behavior that really amounts to anything other than "He was a jerk" or "He was weird" or "He was just fanatical".
But a lot of his traits:  Jerky walk, fist clinching, facial twitching/grimacing, head/shoulder rocking, light filtering problems, issues with voice modulation, nervous breakdowns, gastrointestinal issues, social awkwardness, trembling hands, issues with unexpected social calls, not liking to be touched, absentmindedness, odd food preferences, not liking to look people in the face, refusal to change clothing/habits, and his tendency toward obsession ---
Seem to point toward something that could be diagnosed.

I was just curious if anyone else thought that his behavior could have been symptomatic of a disorder (or syndrome)?

Date: 2010-01-04 02:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maelicia.livejournal.com
I'm still in the process of studying all of this, so excuse the summarized form of this explanation:

Psychology/Psychoanalysis and History are a big fashion couple of the 20th century. There's actually been a lot of psychoanalysis attempts of Robespierre, in many languages (I spotted one dating from the first decades of the 20th century, in German, pondering Robespierre's (homo)sexuality). Closer to us, in French, there is Jacques André who tried to psychoanalyse the revolutionary process (La Révolution Fratricide - Essai De Psychanalyse Du Lien Social, 1993), and there is Jean Artarit who published a huge psychoanalytical "biography" of Robespierre (in 2003 -- it was reedited last year). As far as I understood, both are influenced by Lacan, who revived Freudian theories. So to answer, according to André and Artarit, Robespierre wasn't just "a jerk/weird/fanatical", he had a "particular psychological profile, etc."

However, as Jacques André himself did end up saying: you can't psychoanalyse a historical figure. You can't make a psychoanalysis without the person in front of yourself revealing his own psyché. This is not how it works.

The main problem with all of these attempts (and it shows in Artarit a lot) is that they will take the most anecdotes they can, coming from various sources, without evaluating the worth of the sources, and stick them all together to build a "psychological portrait". Only, when it comes to Robespierre, you have to understand that we will never know who was the real Robespierre. Our knowledge of Robespierre's personality is blurred both by his "black legend" (his negative legend built by the Thermidorians) and by his idealization by his would-be revolutionary/republican heirs in the 19th century.

So to speak, all these traits you mention may come from Thermidorian accounts, memoirs of the contemporaries or unreliable "witnesses" (written long, long after the events), or were often just made up during the 19th century either by the pseudo-historians themselves or by novelists/playwrights. To conclude, I don't think these traits help at all in understanding Robespierre's role in history, or in understanding the Terror/the French Revolution: at the very least, it can be useful for novelists or filmmakers, as the many films and books produced in our period sufficiently prove. Finally, I don't think we're going anywhere or learning anything in diagnosing post-mortem (and long, long post-mortem, might I say) a disorder or a syndrome for Robespierre: psychological history is only an updating of the good old 19th century "history of the great figures" (i.e. certain individuals caused this event or that massacre because of their particular traits/because they were crazy/amazing/etc.) and it's also very much fitting to our present period in which we try to reduce the social to the maximum so to give the main priority to the total triumph of the individual.

Date: 2010-01-04 06:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maelicia.livejournal.com
*blink blink* One of the political and revolutionary leaders who took part and participated in shaping his era, and one of the most famous too, an autistic? I don't know much about autism, and even less on high-functioning autism, but that seems rather... off. I would say that, from the way some people seem to explain his main traits and 'pathology', that they'd rather categorize him as having an obsessive–compulsive personality style. But, as I explained above, the thing that bugs me a lot with all of this is that it's reducing a particular social context to the personal disorders of an individual. I personally believe the development of psychology and all the related (pop psychology, sex therapy, etc.) contributes to reduce social responsibility and that it's merely a tool to conformism and normativity. Example: nooo, it's not society that is unfair, it's YOU who have a problem and must fix it within yourself...! Rigid and inflexible principles as part of the defense of a cause to make the society a better and fairer place to live in isn't a pathology in my book!

Never thought of those sort of descriptions being used as smear campaigns (since when does twitching indicate a malicious spirit?)
Actually, it's more part of the whole portrait they created of him. I have no idea if that indicated something for them that we may not possess the key of understanding to -- or maybe, it means the same as for us: that they try to say he was unstable and crazy.

but come to think of it, the only modern portrayal I've seen (given I've not seen too terribly many) that seems to portray them more as signs of intensity rather than in a negative light was an old black and white movie.. The title was 'La terreur et la vertu' or something similar to that.
I've seen La Terreur et la Vertu (see my icon; I rather like that film), but I don't really remember twitching...

Date: 2010-01-04 04:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sibylla-oo.livejournal.com
Sorry, for "not liking to be touched": is the movie "Danton" your historical source? And for the other "symptomps"?

Date: 2010-01-04 07:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maelicia.livejournal.com
Did you consider that, if you do find the same trait in at least two sources, it may be because one of the two copied the other? It is a known thing for Thermidorian sources, for example: they all copy/pasted pretty much the same original portrait (dating from 13 thermidor) and put some additions. As for the biographies using these details, I wouldn't give much credibility, since they're also copy/pasting...

disliking looking others in the face (that last one was actually in several sources which I don't feel like back-checking my internet history to find)
If it's difficult to actually say how twitching can be part of a negative portrait, this one is easier, because often they followed it by an explanation: Robespierre disliked looking others in the face because he was hypocritical/double-face, etc., and, to put it simply, a bad person not to be trusted. I could actually look for the part in one of the many pamphlets that mention it, I know I stumbled across it recently. Also, this would seem like going with the portrait that some made of "Robespierre is like a cat" -- think all the attributes given to a cat, and you get more traits to the portrait of Robespierre.


and one of his teachers from LLG.
I'm curious, actually, to know which source this is.

Date: 2010-01-04 08:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sibylla-oo.livejournal.com
What a pity, I'd be very interested in the sources to judge their reliability myself.
For the moment, some of the "symptomps" seem to me as a part of the Thermidorian "not a people's man" image (i.e. Robespierre WAS NOT the only one among the jacobins who chose not to give up wearing the powdered wig, however, this detail was widely stressed to question the sincerity of his republicanism), while others shout at me "beware of florid 19th century writers like Carlyle and pseudo-Freudian homophobic 20th century filmmakers like Wajda" :-D BTW, "nervous breakdown" is Ruth Scurr's THEORY, not a proven fact. Many others attributed Robespierre's "absence for illness" to TBC and other diseases. As for the "issues with unexpected social calls" - what exactly are you referring to?
As for the bibliography in Spanish, there is actually quite a lot of stuff translated, including speeches and other primary sources not available in English.

Date: 2010-05-31 12:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maelipstick.livejournal.com
BTW, "nervous breakdown" is Ruth Scurr's THEORY, not a proven fact. Many others attributed Robespierre's "absence for illness" to TBC and other diseases.

Sorry for butting in with a trivial comment, but what is TBC?

Profile

revolution_fr: (Default)
Welcome to 1789...

February 2018

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 12 1314151617
18192021222324
25262728   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 31st, 2025 01:37 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios