No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
There are few scholars who have not despaired of settling the controversies that relate to Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Well known during his lifetime, these disputes have become legends which obscure the real ambiguities of his existence and achievement. In this respect, Rousseau belongs to the family of Montaigne and Gide, whose lengthy confessions have rarely been judged in an unbiased manner. It is, to be sure, the very purpose of such avowals to preclude indifference, and, in the case of Rousseau, there is little sense in trying to evade the haunting and problematical implications of his autobiography. The man and artist must first be approached not only for the sake of their respective importance, but also because the Discourses, the Social Contract, and the Emile are transpositions and solutions of their inner conflicts. At present, there is agreement on at least this one point, and many philosophers and critics have sought to find the principle which would reveal the true motives of a man who swore to tell the truth. However, few of their commentaries on the Confessions and the Rêveries du promeneur solitaire envisage the fundamental question of the autobiographical genre itself, namely: How does the great autobiographer succeed in making credible and convincing the story of his life, and what are the stylistic means by which he imposes this vision on others?
1 Mme de Warens (Paris, 1914), pp. 26, 27.
2 J. J. Rousseau, Les rêveries du promeneur solitaire, ed. Marcel Raymond (Geneva, 1948), pp. 56, 57. Concerning the relationship between Rousseau and Mme de Warens, see François Mugnier, Madame de Warens el J. J. Rousseau (Paris, 1891); Hélène Pittard, “J. J. Rousseau et Mme de Warens,” Revue des deux Mondes (1 Oct. 1924); A. Schinz, Etat présent des travaux sur J.-J. Rousseau (Paris and New York, 1941).
3 Jean-Jacques—En marge des confessions (Paris, 1948), i, 10.
4 Rousseau, Les confessions, ed. Georges van Bever, 3 vols. (Paris, 1946), i, 9 (my translation). Hereafter parenthetical references in the text to volume and page or page alone will be to this edition.
5 The problem of time in the Confessions has been studied by Poulet and Georges Gusdorf. The former's book, Etudes sur le temps humain (Paris, 1950), has an excellent chapter on Rousseau's experience of time, while the latter's treatise, Mémoire el personne, 2 vols. (Paris, 1950), contains an interesting paragraph on Rousseau's memory. These two critics, however, hardly concern themselves with the time of the artist, that is, illusory or artificial duration.
6 Œuvres complètes, ed. V. D. Musset-Pathay, xiii (1823–26), 50, 51.
7 Mme de Warens, p. 111.
8 Rousseau, Œuvres, xiii, 50.
9 Rêveries du promeneur solitaire, 5e promenade, p. 84.
10 Cf. “les sentimens ne se décrivent bien que par leurs effets.”
11 Rêveries du promeneur solitaire, 8e promenade, p. 131.
12 Ibid., 10e promenade, p. 162.
13 Ibid., p. 163.
14 Ibid., p. 164 (my trans.). These, perhaps, are the last words written by Rousseau.