*Poet's Corner- William Wordsworth's Ode To The French Revolution

Click On Title To Link To William Wordsworth's Web Page.

Commentary

Here is William Wordsworth's famous ode to the beginning of the French revolution full of all the youthful enthusiasm such a world historic event can elicit. That he, like many another former 'friend' of revolutions over the ages, went over to the other side when things got too hot does not take away from his efforts here.


The French Revolution as it appeared to Enthusiasts


. Oh! pleasant exercise of hope and joy!
For mighty were the auxiliars which then stood
Upon our side, we who were strong in love!
Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,
But to be young was very heaven!—

Oh! times, In which the meagre, stale, forbidding ways
Of custom, law, and statute, took at once
The attraction of a country in romance!
When Reason seemed the most to assert her rights,

When most intent on making of herself
A prime Enchantress--to assist the work
Which then was going forward in her name!
Not favoured spots alone, but the whole earth,

The beauty wore of promise, that which sets
(As at some moment might not be unfelt
Among the bowers of paradise itself )
The budding rose above the rose full blown.

What temper at the prospect did not wake
To happiness unthought of? The inert
Were roused, and lively natures rapt away!
They who had fed their childhood upon dreams,

The playfellows of fancy, who had made
All powers of swiftness, subtilty, and strength
Their ministers,--who in lordly wise had stirred
Among the grandest objects of the sense,

And dealt with whatsoever they found there
As if they had within some lurking right
To wield it;--they, too, who, of gentle mood,
Had watched all gentle motions, and to these

Had fitted their own thoughts, schemers more wild,
And in the region of their peaceful selves;--
Now was it that both found, the meek and lofty
Did both find, helpers to their heart's desire,

And stuff at hand, plastic as they could wish;
Were called upon to exercise their skill,
Not in Utopia, subterranean fields,
Or some secreted island, Heaven knows where!

But in the very world, which is the world
Of all of us,--the place where in the end
We find our happiness, or not at all!

William Wordsworth

*In Honor Of The 229th Anniversary Of The French Revolution- The Pre-Revolutionary Period- William Doyle's View

Click On Title To Link To Wikipedia's Entry For The French Revolution. As Always With This Source It Is A Good Place To Start In Order To Look Elsewhere For More Specific, And Sometimes More Reliable, Information.

Book Review

The Origins Of The French Revolution, Second Edition, William Doyle, Oxford University Press, 1989

This year marks the commemoration of the 227th Anniversary of the great French Revolution. Democrats, socialists, communists and others rightly celebrate that event as a milestone in humankind’s history. Whether there are still lessons to be learned from the experience is an open question that political activists can fight over. None, however, can deny its grandeur. Well, no one except those closet and not so closet royalists and their epigones who screech in horror and grasp for their necks every time the 14th of July comes around. They have closed the door of history behind them. Won’t they be surprised then the next time there is a surge of progressive human activity?

********

All great revolutions, like the French revolution under review here, are capable, especially when they are long over, of being analyzed from many prospectives. Moreover, official and academic historian have no other reason to exist except to keep revising the effects that such revolutions have had on future historical developments. Left wing political activists, on the other hand, try to draw the lessons of those earlier plebeian struggles in order to better understand the tasks ahead. As part of that understanding it is necessary to look at previous revolutions not only from the position of how it effected the plebes but to look at from the position of those who do not see the action of the plebeian masses as decisive, at least for the French Revolution. If one wants to get a feel for the old way of looking at history from the top down then you can do no better than to look at the fairly recent example of Professor William Doyle’s “Origins Of The French Revolution”.

If one, like this reviewer, spends his or her time looking at the base of society (here the urban sans culottes, the landless peasants and displaced village artisans)to see how those forces were brought to political life, organized, made politically effective (if only for a time, as noted above, before they as individuals like society in general also run out of revolutionary steam) and how they put pressure on their leaderships and how those leaderships responded to those pressures then one downplays the other social forces that are in play in a revolutionary period. Great revolutions, however, create all kinds of turmoil in layers of society that previously were dormant or were in control, although shakily. In that regard, virtually a sure sign that a pre-revolutionary situation exists is when a portion of the old ruling elite (or their agents) begins to make revolutionary noises.

Professor Doyle has taken that important insight and made it one of his central arguments, that is , in the end the upwardly mobile, self-improving nobility (the meritocracy in today’s terms) in France rather than being frustrated with the old regime just wanted to tweak things here or there in order to make it more efficient. This is where his emphasis on looking at the effect of policies at the top of society leads him to a false conclusion. If revolutions merely occurred just because of the question of problems with circulation of elites then the plebeian masses of the cities (led by the sans culottes here) and those of the countryside (the peasants and village artisans) could not have been brought onto the political stage in their wake.

That said, Professor Doyle is not alone in favoring this argument. I noted in a review of Professor Simon Schama’s “Citizen" for last year’s commemoration a very similar, if more lengthy and wide ranging argument. So in the end here is the real reason to grab this book with both hands. Part I of this work contains an incredible essay by Professor Doyle on the state of historical writing on the revolution since 1939 (up to 1988, the time of the second edition). He goes through the ebb and flow of various theories too numerous to detail here. Let us put it this way. If you want to find out the sources for various views on the French Revolution, at least in the academy, then this is your prime source. For that, if not for the general argument of the book, kudos Professor Doyle.

******

Here is William Wordsworth's famous ode to the beginning of the French revolution full of all the youthful enthusiasm such a world historic event can elicit. That he, like many another former 'friend' of revolutions over the ages, went over to the other side when things got too hot does not take away from his efforts here.

The French Revolution as it appeared to Enthusiasts

. Oh! pleasant exercise of hope and joy!
For mighty were the auxiliars which then stood
Upon our side, we who were strong in love!
Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,
But to be young was very heaven!—

Oh! times, In which the meagre, stale, forbidding ways
Of custom, law, and statute, took at once
The attraction of a country in romance!
When Reason seemed the most to assert her rights,

When most intent on making of herself
A prime Enchantress--to assist the work
Which then was going forward in her name!
Not favoured spots alone, but the whole earth,

The beauty wore of promise, that which sets
(As at some moment might not be unfelt
Among the bowers of paradise itself )
The budding rose above the rose full blown.

What temper at the prospect did not wake
To happiness unthought of? The inert
Were roused, and lively natures rapt away!
They who had fed their childhood upon dreams,

The playfellows of fancy, who had made
All powers of swiftness, subtilty, and strength
Their ministers,--who in lordly wise had stirred
Among the grandest objects of the sense,

And dealt with whatsoever they found there
As if they had within some lurking right
To wield it;--they, too, who, of gentle mood,
Had watched all gentle motions, and to these

Had fitted their own thoughts, schemers more wild,
And in the region of their peaceful selves;--
Now was it that both found, the meek and lofty
Did both find, helpers to their heart's desire,

And stuff at hand, plastic as they could wish;
Were called upon to exercise their skill,
Not in Utopia, subterranean fields,
Or some secreted island, Heaven knows where!

But in the very world, which is the world
Of all of us,--the place where in the end
We find our happiness, or not at all!

William Wordsworth

IN THE TIME OF THE RISE AND DECLINE OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION - In Honor Of The 226th Anniversary

REMEMBER THE BASTILLE, BUT HONOR ROBESPIERRE AND SAINT-JUST.

BOOK REVIEW

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION-FROM ITS ORIGINS TO 1793, VOLUME 1; FROM 1793-1799, VOLUME 2, GEORGES LEFEBVRE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS,
NEW YORK, 1962, 1964

This year marks the 225th anniversary of the beginning of the Great French Revolution with storming of the Bastille on July 14th. An old Chinese Communist leader, the late Zhou En Lai, was once asked by a reporter to sum up the important lessons of the French Revolution. In reply he answered that it was too early to tell what those lessons might be. Whether that particular story is true or not it does contain one important truth. Militants today at the beginning of the 21st century can still profit from reading the history of that revolution.

Professor Lefebvre’s two volume account of that revolution is still a good place to start. Although scholarship on various aspects of the French Revolution has mushroomed since his books first appeared, especially around the time of the 200th anniversary of the revolution, most of that work has been very specialized. After over 40 years these volumes still set the standard for a general overview of the convulsions of French and European society before the rise of the Napoleonic period.

The French Revolution, like its predecessor the American Revolution, is covered with so much banal ceremony, flag- waving, unthinking sunshine patriotism and hubris it is hard to see the forest for the trees. The Bastille action while symbolically interesting is not where the real action took place nor was it politically the most significant event. For militants that comes much later with the rise of the revolutionary tribunals and the Committee of Public Safety under the leadership of the left Jacobins Robespierre and Saint Just. Their overthrow in 1794 by more moderate members of their own party, in what is known as the Thermidorian reaction, stopped the forward progression of the revolution although it did not return it back to the old feudal society. The forces unleashed by the revolution, especially among the land hungry peasantry, made that virtually impossible. In short, as has happened before in revolutionary history, the people and programs which supported the forward advancement of the revolution ran out of steam. The careerists, opportunists and those previously standing on the sidelines took control until they too ran out of steam. Not for the first or last time, the precarious balance of the different forces in society clashed and called out for a strongman. Napoleon was more than willing to be obliging when that time came.

The values of the Enlightenment- the believe that human beings can more or less rationally order the way they organize society in the interest of social justice and human dignity- are under extreme attack today. These Enlightenment values are reflected in the successes and failures of the French revolution. So what can militants of the 21st century gather from those tumultuous experiences as we try to extend the gains of that revolution and defend Enlightenment values against the ‘bully boys and girls’ of this world? The most obvious is that the very fact of the French revolution changed the whole nature of political discourse by the creation of a civil society. Today, that task may seem of little importance. However, at the time the vast majority of the population was treated by the old regime as a brute, silent herd. And was suppose to like it, to boot! Seem familiar.

The French Revolution also highlights the need to defend the revolution against both active internal counterrevolutionary elements of the old regime and foreign powers opposed to the new order, the new way of doing business in society. This necessity had also occurred previously in the English revolution where continental powers allied with segments of the old royal establishment tried to use Ireland and Scotland as bases to return the Stuarts to power. Later, in the Russian revolution that same phenomenon occurred with the White Guards and a seemingly world-wide array of hostile powers. In short, the old order will not give up without a fight. We should have that lesson etched in our brains.

Probably the greatest service that Professor Lefebvre provides in his volumes is to encourage an understanding of the relationship of revolutionary and counterrevolutionary forces. That is, the policies of the various post-1989 governments in reaction to the various forces in Europe, particularly but not exclusively the British, that most certainly were trying overthrow the revolution and either return to the previous status quo or make France a subordinate client state. In fact, this writer argues that one cannot understand French domestic governmental policy in this period without an understanding of that interconnectedness. The various revolutionary governmental forms, culminating with the Committee of Public Safety under Robespierre, were increasingly charged with defense of the revolution by putting France on a multi-front war footing. That meant both raising troops, one way or another, and assuring the support of the sans-culottes and small peasant landowners by appropriate measures. Whether, those governments did that well or poorly is up to the reader to decide. In any case, thanks, Professor Lefebvre.

*Poet's Corner- William Wordsworth's "Ode To The French Revolution"- In Honor Of Its 221st Anniversary

Click on the headline to link to a YouTube film clip about William Wordsworth.

Markin Comment:

Here is William Wordsworth's famous ode to the beginning of the French revolution full of all the youthful enthusiasm such a world historic event can elicit. That he, like many another former 'friend' of revolutions over the ages, went over to the other side when things got too hot does not take away from his efforts here.


The French Revolution as it appeared to Enthusiasts

. Oh! pleasant exercise of hope and joy!
For mighty were the auxiliars which then stood
Upon our side, we who were strong in love!
Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,
But to be young was very heaven!—

Oh! times, In which the meagre, stale, forbidding ways
Of custom, law, and statute, took at once
The attraction of a country in romance!
When Reason seemed the most to assert her rights,

When most intent on making of herself
A prime Enchantress--to assist the work
Which then was going forward in her name!
Not favoured spots alone, but the whole earth,

The beauty wore of promise, that which sets
(As at some moment might not be unfelt
Among the bowers of paradise itself )
The budding rose above the rose full blown.

What temper at the prospect did not wake
To happiness unthought of? The inert
Were roused, and lively natures rapt away!
They who had fed their childhood upon dreams,

The playfellows of fancy, who had made
All powers of swiftness, subtilty, and strength
Their ministers,--who in lordly wise had stirred
Among the grandest objects of the sense,

And dealt with whatsoever they found there
As if they had within some lurking right
To wield it;--they, too, who, of gentle mood,
Had watched all gentle motions, and to these

Had fitted their own thoughts, schemers more wild,
And in the region of their peaceful selves;--
Now was it that both found, the meek and lofty
Did both find, helpers to their heart's desire,

And stuff at hand, plastic as they could wish;
Were called upon to exercise their skill,
Not in Utopia, subterranean fields,
Or some secreted island, Heaven knows where!

But in the very world, which is the world
Of all of us,--the place where in the end
We find our happiness, or not at all!

William Wordsworth

*A Chronicle of The French Revolution From The Top- Schama's "Citizens"

Click On Title To Link To Wikipedia's Entry For The French Revolution. As Always With This Source It Is A Good Place To Start In Order To Look Elsewhere For More Specific, And Sometimes More Reliable, Information.

BOOK REVIEW

This year marks the commemoration of the 219th Anniversary of the great French Revolution. Democrats, socialists, communists and others rightly celebrate that event as a milestone in humankind’s history. Whether there are still lessons to be learned from the experience is an open question that political activists can fight over. None, however, can deny its grandeur. Well, no one except those closet and not so closet royalists and their epigones who screech in horror and grasp for their necks every time the 14th of July comes around. They have closed the door of history behind them. Won’t they be surprised then the next time there is a surge of progressive human activity?

Citizens- A Chronicle of the French Revolution, Simon Schama, Vintage Books, New York, 1989

All great revolutions, like the French revolution under review here, are capable, especially when they are long over, of being analyzed from many prospectives. Moreover, official and academic historian have no other reason to exist except to keep revising the effects that such revolutions have had on future historical developments. Left wing political activists, on the other hand, try to draw the lessons of those earlier plebeian struggles in order to better understand the tasks ahead. As part of that understanding it is necessary to look at previous revolutions not only from the position of how it effected the plebes but to look at from the position of those who do not see the action of the plebeian masses as decisive, at least for the French Revolution. If one wants to get a feel for the old way of looking at history from the top down then you can do no better than to look at the fairly recent example of Professor Simon Schama’s "Citizens".


As a student I was well versed in historical narratives that highlighted the role of great men (and it was mainly men that were highlighted in those days) and great governmental policies that formed the contours of human development (and here, again, development means Western European development). Professor Schama takes us back to those days in his narrative, although he also has some interesting things to say about cultural developments (creation of a reading public in the 18th century, increased focus on education under the influence of Rousseau and the philosophes, development of a public opinion with increased circulation of newspapers and post bills, changes in social mores such as the cult of sensibility, etc.) reflecting the hard fact that these days one cannot sell an historical argument (much less books) unless one sets the stage with such tidbits.

Louis XVI (and to a lesser extent his grandfather Louis XV) has had a very bad press over the last couple of generations, and rightly so, as historians, whether Marxist- influenced or not, have come to understand that one of the factors that speeds up the revolutionary process is the incompetence, inability or both, of the rulers and their coteries to rule in the old way. The great Russian revolutionary writer Leon Trotsky in an early chapter in his monumental three-volume History of the Russian Revolution noted the similarities in this regard between Charles I in 17th century England, Louis XVI in 18th century France and Czar Nicolas of Russian in the 20th century (and their wives) in this governmental incapacity (and colorlessness in their personal demeanor).

Professor Schama recognizes that any rehabilitation effort would take serious work so that he tends to dismiss Louis XVI as basically misunderstood and concentrates on his various, rapidly changing governments in order to argue, in the final analysis, that if this or that policy had been followed through a revolution could have been averted. This is hardly the first time such a proposition has been presented by a later, and in this case much later, historian who has the benefit of hindsight. However, unlike earlier historians Schama has the ability to observe that up until now although great revolutions have created an intense social swirl for a period they lose steam and the long term results of the upheaval appear as something that could have easily been negotiated by men of good will. Despite that piece of wisdom he nevertheless forgets that at times, particularly revolutionary times, even good will is as scarce as hen’s teeth. That mistake decisively impairs his argument.

If one, like this reviewer, spends his or her time looking at the base of society (here the urban sans culottes, the landless peasants and displaced village artisans)to see how those forces were brought to political life, organized, made politically effective (if only for a time, as noted above, before they as individuals like society in general also run out of revolutionary steam) and how they put pressure on their leaderships and how those leaderships responded to those pressures then one downplays the other social forces that are in play in a revolutionary period. Great revolutions, however, create all kinds of turmoil in layers of society that previously were dormant or were in control, although shakily. In that regard, virtually a sure sign that a pre-revolutionary situation exists is when a portion of the old ruling elite (or their agents) begins to make revolutionary noises.

Professor Schama has taken that important insight and made it one of his central arguments, that is , in the end the upwardly mobile, self-improving nobility (the meritocracy in today’s terms) in France rather than being frustrated with the old regime just wanted to tweak things here or there in order to make it more efficient. This is where his emphasis on looking at the effect of policies at the top of society leads him to a false conclusion. If revolutions merely occurred just because of the question of problems with circulation of elites then the plebeian masses of the cities (led by the sans culottes here) and those of the countryside(the peasants and village artisans) could not have been brought onto the political stage in their wake.

Nevertheless Professor Schama argues his view with skill and verve. There are also many other interesting arguments made by Professor Schama in this long book (although length here is no problem as the book is a fairly easy read due to his energetic style of writing), plenty of great photographs to give a nice visual presentation of the period and more than enough cultural tidbits to make this worthwhile to read. But, if you are a leftist political activist, the biggest reason to read this book is to know your political opponents, their arguments and those who would try to denigrate our plebeian history. Read on.

IN THE TIME OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE -In Honor Of The 222rd Anniversary Of The French Revolution

REMEMBER THE BASTILLE, BUT HONOR ROBESPIERRE AND SAINT JUST

BOOK REVIEW

PARIS IN THE TERROR, JUNE 1793-JULY 1794, STANLEY LOOMIS, J.B. LIPPINCOTT, NEW YORK, 1964

This year marks the 223rd anniversary of the beginning of the Great French Revolution with storming of the Bastille. An old Chinese Communist leader, Zhou Enlai, was asked by a reporter to sum up the important lessons of the French Revolution. In reply he answered that it was too early to tell what those lessons might be. Whether that particular story is true or not it does contain one important truth. Militants today at the beginning of the 21st century can still profit from reading the history of that revolution.

The French Revolution, like its predecessor the American Revolution, is covered with so much banal ceremony, flag- waving, unthinking sunshine patriotism and hubris it is hard to see the forest for the trees. The Bastille action while symbolically interesting is not where the real action took place nor was it politically the most significant event. For militants that comes much later with the rise of the revolutionary tribunals and the Committee of Public Safety under the leadership of the left Jacobins Robespierre and Saint Just. Although the revolution began in 1789 its decisive phases did not take place until the period under discussion in this review, that is from June 1793 with the expulsion of the (for that time moderate) Girondin deputies from the National Convention.

That event ushered in the rule of extreme Jacobins under Robespierre and Saint Just through the vehicle of the Committee of Public Safety. That regime, the Republic of Virtue, as it is known to militants since that time and known as the Great Terror to the author of the book under review and countless others, lasted until July 1794. It was in turn ousted by a more moderate Jacobin regime (known historically as the Themidorian Reaction, a subject of fascination and discussion by militants, especially the Bolsheviks, ever since).

Robespierre’s and Saint Just’s overthrow in 1794 stopped the forward progression of the revolution although it did not return it back to the old feudal society. The forces unleashed by the revolution, especially among the land hungry peasantry, made that virtually impossible. In short, as has happened before in revolutionary history, the people and programs which supported the forward advancement of the revolution ran out of steam. The careerists, opportunists and those previously standing on the sidelines took control until they too ran out of steam. Then, not for the first or last time, the precarious balance of the different forces in society clashed and called out for a strongman. Napoleon Bonaparte was more than willing to be obliging when that time came.

Mr. Loomis takes great pains to disassociate himself not just from the excesses of the period (the executions) but seemingly the whole notion of democratic revolution at that time. He essentially favors a constitutional monarchy, and let the revolution stop there. In short, a regime run by a Lafayette-type- but with brains. Great revolutions, however, do not go halfway, despite the best laid plans of humankind. That said, why would militants read this book which paints everyone to the left of the most moderate Girondists as some kind of monster or at least an accomplice? If militants only read pro-revolutionary tracts then they are missing an important part of their education- the fight against patented bourgeois mystification of events. The terror in Paris is a question that needs to be dealt with critically by us while we defend the members of the Committee of Public Safety in their efforts to defend France against internal hostile elements of the old regime and the counterrevolutionary Europe powers. And at the same time defend the Committee’s program of social democracy initiated in order to maintain their base among the sans-culottes.

That said, every place Mr. Loomis places a minus we do not necessarily place a plus. We need to do our own sifting out of revolutionaries from the pretenders. Mlle. Corday by all accounts was a royalist at heart before she murdered Marat. Marat was by all accounts a fanatic. You cannot, however, make a revolution without theses Marat types. A combat-type revolutionary party, if such a party existed in Paris at the time which this writer does not believe did exist, would rein a Marat in. Danton is still an equivocal character who wanted to stop the revolution at his threshold. A Danton-Robespierre political bloc could have carried the revolution over some tough spots. That was not to be. The fault lies in the personality of Robespierre. Moreover, the execution of the leading Hebertists was a serious mistake, as it weakened the Committee’s base of support among the sans-culottes.

Robespierre and Saint Just are portrayed here as little more than monsters. But without those two figures the contours of the revolution would have been different, if it had survived the Coalition military forces arrayed against it at all. The question of the military defense of the revolution and its requirements domestically takes short shrift in Mr. Loomis’s account. That is the book’s abiding error. Robespierre headed the key administrative component of that defense. Saint Just was instrumental in the military aspect of that defense. One can rightly ask, with the possible exception of Carnot, who else could have organized that defense? One should moreover note that a revolution brings to the fore all kinds of personalities, not all of them as well- adjusted as modern humankind (sic) - it however, can never be reduced solely to that factor. Thus, militants should look for other sources elsewhere in order to find ammunition in defense of Robespierre and Saint Just. Apparently, according to Mr. Loomis and others, they are in need of defending. Nevertheless, they are worthy of honor in any militant’s revolutionary pantheon. Enough said.

IN THE TIME OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

REMEMBER THE BASTILLE, BUT HONOR ROBESPIERRE AND SAINT JUST

BOOK REVIEW

PARIS IN THE TERROR, JUNE 1793-JULY 1794, STANLEY LOOMIS, J.B. LIPPINCOTT, NEW YORK, 1964

This year marks the 217th anniversary of the beginning of the Great French Revolution with storming of the Bastille. An old Chinese Communist leader, Zhou Enlai, was asked by a reporter to sum up the important lessons of the French Revolution. In reply he answered that it was too early to tell what those lessons might be. Whether that particular story is true or not it does contain one important truth. Militants today at the beginning of the 21st century can still profit from reading the history of that revolution.

The French Revolution, like its predecessor the American Revolution, is covered with so much banal ceremony, flag- waving, unthinking sunshine patriotism and hubris it is hard to see the forest for the trees. The Bastille action while symbolically interesting is not where the real action took place nor was it politically the most significant event. For militants that comes much later with the rise of the revolutionary tribunals and the Committee of Public Safety under the leadership of the left Jacobins Robespierre and Saint Just. Although the revolution began in 1789 its decisive phases did not take place until the period under discussion in this review, that is from June 1793 with the expulsion of the (for that time moderate) Girondin deputies from the National Convention.

That event ushered in the rule of extreme Jacobins under Robespierre and Saint Just through the vehicle of the Committee of Public Safety. That regime, the Republic of Virtue, as it is known to militants since that time and known as the Great Terror to the author of the book under review and countless others, lasted until July 1794. It was in turn ousted by a more moderate Jacobin regime (known historically as the Themidorian Reaction, a subject of fascination and discussion by militants, especially the Bolsheviks, ever since).

Robespierre’s and Saint Just’s overthrow in 1794 stopped the forward progression of the revolution although it did not return it back to the old feudal society. The forces unleashed by the revolution, especially among the land hungry peasantry, made that virtually impossible. In short, as has happened before in revolutionary history, the people and programs which supported the forward advancement of the revolution ran out of steam. The careerists, opportunists and those previously standing on the sidelines took control until they too ran out of steam. Then, not for the first or last time, the precarious balance of the different forces in society clashed and called out for a strongman. Napoleon Bonaparte was more than willing to be obliging when that time came.

Mr. Loomis takes great pains to disassociate himself not just from the excesses of the period (the executions) but seemingly the whole notion of democratic revolution at that time. He essentially favors a constitutional monarchy, and let the revolution stop there. In short, a regime run by a Lafayette-type- but with brains. Great revolutions, however, do not go halfway, despite the best laid plans of humankind. That said, why would militants read this book which paints everyone to the left of the most moderate Girondists as some kind of monster or at least an accomplice? If militants only read pro-revolutionary tracts then they are missing an important part of their education- the fight against patented bourgeois mystification of events. The terror in Paris is a question that needs to be dealt with critically by us while we defend the members of the Committee of Public Safety in their efforts to defend France against internal hostile elements of the old regime and the counterrevolutionary Europe powers. And at the same time defend the Committee’s program of social democracy initiated in order to maintain their base among the sans-culottes.

That said, every place Mr. Loomis places a minus we do not necessarily place a plus. We need to do our own sifting out of revolutionaries from the pretenders. Mlle. Corday by all accounts was a royalist at heart before she murdered Marat. Marat was by all accounts a fanatic. You cannot, however, make a revolution without theses Marat types. A combat-type revolutionary party, if such a party existed in Paris at the time which this writer does not believe did exist, would rein a Marat in. Danton is still an equivocal character who wanted to stop the revolution at his threshold. A Danton-Robespierre political bloc could have carried the revolution over some tough spots. That was not to be. The fault lies in the personality of Robespierre. Moreover, the execution of the leading Hebertists was a serious mistake, as it weakened the Committee’s base of support among the sans-culottes.

Robespierre and Saint Just are portrayed here as little more than monsters. But without those two figures the contours of the revolution would have been different, if it had survived the Coalition military forces arrayed against it at all. The question of the military defense of the revolution and its requirements domestically takes short shrift in Mr. Loomis’s account. That is the book’s abiding error. Robespierre headed the key administrative component of that defense. Saint Just was instrumental in the military aspect of that defense. One can rightly ask, with the possible exception of Carnot, who else could have organized that defense? One should moreover note that a revolution brings to the fore all kinds of personalities, not all of them as well- adjusted as modern humankind (sic) - it however, can never be reduced solely to that factor. Thus, militants should look for other sources elsewhere in order to find ammunition in defense of Robespierre and Saint Just. Apparently, according to Mr. Loomis and others, they are in need of defending. Nevertheless, they are worthy of honor in any militant’s revolutionary pantheon. Enough said.

*ROBESPIERRE AND THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION

Click on the title to link to a "Wikipedia" article on French revolutionary Maximilien Robespierre.

IN THE TIME OF THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION

DVD REVIEW

REMEMEBER THE BASTILLE, BUT HONOR ROBESPIERRE AND SAINT JUST.

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, HISTORY CHANNEL PRODUCTION, 2004

This year marks the 218th anniversary of the beginning of the Great French Revolution with storming of the Bastille on July 14th 1789. An old Chinese Communist leader, the late Zhou Enlai, was once asked by a reporter to sum up the important lessons of the French Revolution. In reply he answered that it was too early to tell what those lessons might be. Whether that particular story is true or not it does contain one important truth. Militants today at the beginning of the 21st century can still profit from an understanding of the history of the French Revolution.

There are many books that outline the history of that revolution. I have reviewed some of them in this space. Probably the most succinct overview, although it was written over one half century ago, is Professor Georges Lefebvre’s study. For those who want a quick visual overview of the main events and political disputes the History Channel production under review has a lot to recommend it. The production covers all the main pre-revolutionary problems confronting France at the time, including its terrible debt problems caused in the main by its support of the American Revolution to the political, social and, yes, sexual inadequacies of Louis XVI. As has been noted by many commentators on revolution, including myself, one of the prerequisites for revolution is that the old regime can no longer govern in the same way. The personage of Louis XVI seemingly fits that proposition to a tee.

The production goes on to highlight the key events. Obviously, and most visibly, the storming of the Bastille that opened up the cracks in the old monarchial regime. It details the struggle to create a constitutional monarchy through the various legislative assemblies that sought to carry out the reforms necessary to bring France into the modern age short of declaring a republic. And also the attempts, including by Louis himself, by forces of the old regime to return the old monarchy or stop the revolution in its tracks. When those efforts failed and the revolution began in earnest the production details the internal struggle by the revolutionaries, most notably the great fight between the Girondins and Jacobins for power, and the formation of the republic. After the defeat of the Girondins this led to the further fights to ‘purify’ the revolution among the Jacobin forces and the reign of the Robespierre-led Committee of Public Safety that consolidated the gains of the revolution through the ‘Reign of Terror’. Finally, the downfall and execution of Robespierre in 1794 represented the reaction that most revolutions exhibit when the political possibilities for further leftward revolutionary moves are no longer tenable.

There are many great scenes portrayed here as well. The murder of Marat by Corday. The Festival of the Supreme Being. The oratory of Danton and many more scenes that give one a pretty good general feel for the dynamics of the revolution. Included are ‘talking head’ comments by noted historians of the revolution giving their take on the meaning of various events. This is a plus. The major negative is in the axis of presentation. Almost fatalistically the emergence of Robespierre is intertwined throughout all of the earlier events giving the impression that he was inevitably bound to take power. And, also inevitably, due to the excesses of the ‘Reign of Terror’, to lose it. This may be good documentary presentation form but it is bad history. Revolutions, particularly great revolutions, are few and far between. They are messy affairs at the time and reamin the same seen through the historical lens. Nevertheless if the social tensions in society could always, or should always, be resolved in a nice non- violent parliamentary way there would be no revolutions. Damn, where would that leave us as the inheritors of the sans-culottes tradition?