Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:51:03.979Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stendhal and the Lesson of Napoleon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Dennis Porter
Dennis Porter*
Affiliation:
University of California Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Given Stendhal's known liberal opinions, his admiration for Napoleon has always appeared paradoxical. Through a detailed examination of the two works most fully representing Stendhal's thoughts on Napoleon, an attempt is made to resolve the paradox. To do full justice to the complexity of the author's attitudes, what he found to blame is first contrasted with what he praised. The admiration for the man of destiny contrasts with the dislike of the statesman, extraordinary qualities of character are set against weaknesses. Beyond the description of the man, Stendhal discerns general historical laws operating in Napoleon's career. The course of events from rise to prominence through imperial power and progressive decline embodies a lesson for mankind. Despotism promotes a state of national demoralization and, therefore, prepares its own defeat. Such a judgment derives from the historiography of Enlightenment liberalism. The contrast between Stendhal's attitude toward Danton and Napoleon confirms that this is the tradition to which Stendhal belongs. As a utilitarian Stendhal nevertheless concludes that Napoleon's impact on European history was not wholly negative, since it led to a greater sum of happiness. As a liberal he affirms that lasting happiness within a state is only possible with constitutional government.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 85 , Issue 3 , May 1970 , pp. 456 - 462
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Note 1 in page 456 References are to the V. Del Litto edition, Napoléon (Lausanne: Editions Rencontre, 1961). This edition contains both the Vie de Napoléon and the Mémoires sur Napoléon. To facilitate rapid identification I have indicated from which work I am quoting by means of F or M before the page reference.

This carefully qualified expression of Stendhal's love for Napoleon makes it difficult to agree with Del Litto's sugges that it ever seriously occurred to Stendhal to transform even the Vie into a “pamphlet bonapartiste,” since that would imply partisan approval of a political system and of a party, many of whose political instincts were deeply contrary to Stendhal's own. See Del Litto, La Vie intellectuelle de Stendhal: Genèse et évolution de ses idées (Paris, 1959), p. 582.

Note 2 in page 456 L'Œuvre de Stendhal: Histoire de ses livres et de sa pensée (Paris, 1951 and 1966), pp. 65–178, and Napoléon, pp. 563–582.

Note 3 in page 456 “Pour si surprenante qu'elle puisse paraître au premier abord, cette méthode mystique de l'appel au cœur n'est pas une boutade sous la plume de Stendhal. Il insistait encore en quelque autre endroit sur ce fait que son cœur lui disait ce qu'il fallait prendre et ce qu'il fallait mépriser dans les livres qu'il consultait pour son travail.” L'Œuvre de Stendhal, p.177.

Note 4 in page 456 L'Œuvre de Stendhal, p. 173.

Note 5 in page 456 P. 178.

Note 6 in page 457 There are important differences of emphasis in terms of events narrated but the view of Napoleon projected by both works is similar: “Ses idées sur le grand homme n'avaient pas changé” (Martineau, p. 172).

Note 7 in page 457 F. Rude's thoroughly documented recent work, Stendhal et la pensée sociale de son temps (Paris, 1967), makes very clear how well informed Stendhal was in the field of social and economic as well as political thought.

Note 8 in page 457 Thus Stendhal quotes Napoleon approvingly: “Il faut être grand dans le crime comme dans la vertu” (v, p. 120).

Note 9 in page 458 It is part of Stendhal's purpose in La Vie to reply to a number of specific charges concerning what we have come to call war crimes, especially those committed in Egypt. He does so by explaining that they are much exaggerated, though circumstances and the brutalized condition of a people who had lived so long under despotism may occasionally have forced Napoleon's hand.

Note 10 in page 458 A deeper, more sensitive side of Napoleon's nature is revealed in his friendship for a young artist, which is described toward the end of the Mémoires. The episode is designed to illustrate Napoleon's capacity for affection and, by contrast, his habitual solitary aloofness. Involved, of course, is the romantic motif of the solitariness and suffering of genius.

Note 11 in page 459 “Paris voulait se charger de digérer pour la France” (v, p. 136). See also the following discussion of the Napoleonic state.

Note 12 in page 459 Napoleon's behavior abroad is seen as no less reprehensible, since he made no attempt to establish constitutional government in the countries he conquered, Austria and Prussia, for example.

Note 13 in page 460 This view of Napoleon's career is confirmed by a note written by Stendhal in a copy of Mémoires d'un Touriste and quoted by Martineau: “Napoléon sauva la révolution en 1796 et en 1799 au 18 brumaire. Bientôt il chercha à anéantir la révolution et il eût mieux valu pour le bonheur de la France qu'il fût tué en 1805 après la paix” (p. 172).

Note 14 in page 461 He makes a similar statement with reference to the army of 1809: “Cependant l'armée, déjà corrompue par le despotisme, ne fit pas aussi bien qu'à Austerlitz” (V, p. 99).

Note 15 in page 461 “Il y avait un tyran, mais il y avait peu d'arbitraire” (V,p. 69).

Note 16 in page 461 For Stendhal the very idea of energy is associated with republican government—“le Parti de l'énergie” (M, p. 322).

Note 17 in page 461 Stendhal claims that the disastrous effects of Napoleonic rule, in fact, set in much earlier: “En quatorze ans d'administration, il avait avili les cœurs et remplacé l'enthousiasme un peu dupe des républiques par l'égoïsme des monarchies” (V, p. 182).

Note 18 in page 461 It is characteristic and further defines Stendhal's own political allegiances that he should refer to “le profound et vertueux Sieyès” (V, p. 56). Constant, too, is singled out for praise, “l'homme par qui l'on pense juste en France” (V, p.211).

Note 19 in page 461 Stendhal refers to the moment variously as “le plus grand des annales de la France” (V, p. 153) and “le plus beau de l'histoire moderne” (M, p. 291).

Note 20 in page 462 “On peut dire que la République fut blessée au cœur par la mort de Danton. Son agonie dura six ans, jusqu'au 18 brumaire (9 novembre, 1799)” (M, pp.320–321).

Note 21 in page 462 He has, for instance, no objection on doctrinal grounds to the possibility that Louis xviii might as constitutional monarch have fulfilled the role of “fils de la Révolution” that Napoleon cast off: “Bonaparte ayant, en quelque sorte, par sa tyrannie, abdiqué la qualité de fils de la Révolution, Louis trouvait une heureuse occasion de s'en revêtir” (V, p. 209). The overriding question is, does such a regime make for a greater sum of human happiness? Such, too, is the gist of his comments on Spain, when he concludes that it would have been to that country's advantage to have accepted Joseph as its constitutional monarch: “. . en acceptant Joseph pour roi . . . ils avançaient de trois siècles le bonheur de leur pays” (F, p. 115).