The Terror of French Women

The Terror of French Women:

A Commentary on Female Revolutionaries

            The French Revolution was terrifying in its entirety. Many factors influenced this historical, slaughter filled, chaotic nightmare experienced in Paris during the later part of the eighteenth century. As one could imagine, this horrific event caused a significant amount of influence on the writers of the romantic era, who mostly resided in the territories of Great Britain. However, one of the most shocking aspects of the Reign of Terror was the abundance of control the Parisian women held over the revolt.

            During and prior to the French Revolution, women were viewed by the public in a more traditional sense; they were the weaker sex that should be submissive to their male counterparts. This description is seen in the presentation over “Women and the Law; Addressing Inequality, Imprisonment, and Madness” where it is discussed that women held no authority over anything in the eyes of public courts. This however, was not the prominent issue in Paris. No one had any sort of authority outside of the upper class and all poor were seen as nothing but poor. Not to mention the poor had absolutely nothing- no bread, no money, no job opportunities, literally nothing. So just to quickly recap, that would leave the women of Paris and surrounding areas in the class viewed at rock bottom, and viewed within that class as the rock bottom of human beings. They were basically seen as the inanimate trash of a population viewed as below humans. Just adding insult to injury, women were viewed publically as emotionally unstable and insane. As seen in Wolstencraft’s Maria, women often were placed in mental institutions for practically no reason, so there is no surprise that the women of the French Revolution were often seen as insane. Perhaps another insight into the frustrations of French women and the public view is seen in The Castle of Otranto. This story discusses the subservient role of women and their power-hungry male counterparts. It is quoted in the bog post “Women and Power” that “Walpole seems to be making a political statement and commenting on those in power following their misguided whims as opposed to what is right. Manfred and Frederic both act on their passions without regard for those involved” which in this case, is lower class women being submissive to their lower class husbands and ultimately submissive to the upper class and royals- including royal women who have control over the country. This shows a paralleled corruption of power through the characters in Otranto and the gender and class issues of eighteenth century France. So if the government is corrupt, the women are oppressed, and majority of the population is unhappy, why would it matter if women were a strong aspect of a revolution where everyone was revolting? Many possible answers to this question are similar to those found when the public looked down on the creature in Frankenstein. Like the creature, the women are just as human as men, yet any sort of equal involvement is seen in a disgusted manner. As discussed in “A Human Monstrosity” on the blog, each individual woman is seen in a more respected way by those around her; she sees the starvation and oppression of her family and does something about it. However, seeing a street mob of ladies in dresses over throwing the Bastille was definitely frowned upon in society because of their gender and the judgmental nature of man. Another reason the public looks at the women involved in this movement is because of the movement itself. In “Religion in Christabel” on the blog a point becomes apparent about how the French Revolution was meant to be this amazing movement of passion and bringing power back to the people, yet instead it became a gruesome and morbid blood bath. The actions that occurred were so shocking and grotesque that the public could not understand how most of it was instigated and promoted by the gentler sex. Despite the opinion of the public view, the women were triggered by many aspects of their oppression and surroundings to do such terrible acts.

            Women are scientifically more emotional creatures and maybe this played a major role in why the behaved the way they did during their revolution. When the royal family acted in a way of absolute rule and grandeur while the people of the lower classes sat starving in the streets and robbed by taxes, the women’s maternal instincts set in and acted out. The upper class is much like the rulers discussed on the blog in “Percy Coleridge?” where they used their power to create a frivolous life that was ultimately destroyed. The devastation of the frivolity is similar to the downfall of the upper class in the revolution. The female revolutionaries were often seen as crazed deviants living on the fringe of society as seen when speaking of the creature in Frankenstein in “Separation of Self” on the blog. However, the women act in a way similar to the insanity discussed in “Obsessions and Crazy People” where the only crazy people are completely swallowed by an all involving emotion. The emotion is driven by a cycle of pitiful lives that they are forced into with no escape except death. Much like in the blog post “Innocence Versus Experience” where the chimney sweep is forced into a horrible life with little hope, the poor women of the lower class feel the same way. They were born into their position, inheriting nothing and leaving with nothing. Perhaps this is why they have little inhibitions while revolting- they quite literally have nothing to lose. Even the loss of life was not a threat to these females because they commonly suffered premature deaths due to starvation, illness, and like “Born of the Dead” on the blog discusses- childbirth. Frankenstein killed because he had nothing and no one; similarly the women had nothing and watched their loved ones die regularly. The women believed their revolt was justified by bringing the people what was rightfully theirs much like the prophecy spoken of in “Rightful Inheritance and the Supernatural” on the blog. The French revolutionaries believed that the violence suffered by the upper class was deserved. But there is something to be said on the matter. Both in “Frankenstein” on the blog and in the novel, the point about Frankenstein being unaccepted is brought to light. Were the female revolutionaries frowned upon because they were doing something wrong or because they were not relatable and breaking social norms?

            But why was this so terrifying that it still stands as a major massacre in history? Similar to Isabella in The Castle of Otranto as discussed in “Small Instances of Atypical Female Behavior” the women of the revolution were attempting to control their own fate, but why is this so horrifying? Men kill masses on their rise to power, why can women not do the same? The idea of the gentler of the sexes doing something so horrible is an unexpected blow. Just like Lamia is discussed in the blog post “Difference in Descriptions” appearance is everything. The lamia is deceitful in appearance and actions much like the thought of being behind one of the largest massacres in history during the Reign of Terror. However, it is discussed in “Known and Unknown Monsters” that the two different lamias differ because one has expressed a target of motive and the other has not. The women of the French Revolution definitely had a motive, but it was not clear to the world. In “The Negative View of Women in Clare’s Don Juan” on the blog, women are said to be the one stirring the mischief pot and says they are more sinful than men as a whole, which is reflected when they kill a list of upperclassmen just for being upper class. In this post and in “Problem with a Poison Tree” there is a question of sin. The later discusses Lucifer as a snake and the apple in the Garden of Eden. The two go hand in hand, what makes violent women so terrifying to the public is the biblical connection of Eve’s partnership with the devil to eat the forbidden fruit and deceive Adam into taking a bite as well ultimately resulting in the banishment from the perfect garden. The world was afraid that the horrific acts destroying a country were not godly and yet another partnership with the devil to destroy man. Yes, that is a very dramatic conclusion, but it was a prominent view in a very traditional period of time.

            Ultimately, what came from the fighting female role in the French Revolution were basically women fighting against oppression and for power and freedom for themselves and their class, however this is not what was achieved. Their class witnessed an overthrow of abusive power and broke their bonds but women went right back into very traditional roles afterward. In the end, their reasons for fighting were emotional and to save those around them, but the whole-hearted fight of passion for others advanced others but not necessarily themselves. The women of the French Revolution are still seen just for being violent and cold-hearted instead of passionate idealists fighting out of love for others.

Works Cited

Black, Joseph. The Age of Romanticism. Peterborough, Ontario [u.a.: Broadview, 2006. Print.

"French Revolution." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 05 Aug. 2013. Web. 06 May 2013.

"Liberty Equality, Fraternity: Exploring the French Revolution." Chapter 5 Page 1. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2013.