The "âme virile" quote comes from Esquiros's Histoire des Montagnards... I certainly wouldn't exclude the possibility that he just made it up.
Ah the curse of Scurr strikes again, quote as fact anything you can no matter how dubious the source. Then, just ascribe it to Thompson 1937. She ascribes everything to Thompson 1937, when you do sometimes feel it might be nice if she mentioned the original source so one could judge the veracity.
Thank you for clearing that up, I was just curious as if he had said it - if it had been in a letter or something why everybody was still debating the whether he had a girlfriend point.
I have this theory that people don't actually read his books; they just buy them so they can look "intelligent."
I was googling images of Robespierre a while back and one of the first images links to a Zizek fan-cartoon (http://uberdionysus.livejournal.com/475270.html) which features Danton and Desmoulins' severed heads and the line "I'm not sure what Zizek is arguing but the dude is smart so I'm sticking with it." Another poster adds "I will love Zizek forever and ever. I don't care how crazy he gets or how little sense he makes."
Do I need to comment? That's the sort of comment that is acceptable when discussing avant-garde recording artistes. This chap even looks like Zizek. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aukzh-O6x3g) It's not so acceptable when you are permitting yourself to be talked into mass bloodshed and state control. One does wonder if "Zeezee" has read the speeches he introduces.
Though I have a sneaking suspicion she would have ruined that too. Bad fanfiction can ruin the best conceits,
I think you are right. To do decent fanfic, even decent crackfic you have to like your characters, or at least have a reasonable interest in them. She might have started out like that, but by the time she finally published her whole opus could be summed up in the words - The poor deluded fools.
and Robespierre/Camille is always a bit dubious, at best.
Randomly, and following on probably from my asumption by osmosis that Robespierre had "issues" with women, I'd always assumed that Robespierre/Saint-Just was well, if not historical at least apocryphal. I must just have watched too many FR movies.
Now I write dubious slash for kicks and have done for the last seven years and I maintain that Hillary would have had her arse kicked on any fanforum if she posted a gay character as badly thought through as her Camille. That whole being turned gay thing...just toxic.
I did find the idea of a teenage Camille suddenly realising he has a huge, huge, crush on his very straight and very oblivious best friend quite charming. (Robespierre would always be wet, or slightly out of breath, or staring out fourth floor windows with huge shining eyes declaiming something like "can you imagine, no original sin, we are all born free," in an awestruck voice.) But then it just struck me that it must have been fucking awful to discover you were gay in a country where it is still a capital crime, it must have been terrifying to suddenly get same-sex feelings in those circumstances, and I thought if I wasn't prepared to deal with that I should probably give over writing about it. (Hillary doesn't deal with this - or the subsequent decriminalisation of homosexuality by the revolutionaries and this seems like a bit of a glaring ommission if you are trying to write honestly about being a bisexual man in historical times. A blank gay-okay background is fine for historical PWP but if your trying to be semi-serious expect to be called on it.)
His problem is that he crafts Robespierre into a character in a romantic historical novel, instead of writing a biography of him.
See, now that just makes me think of Robespierre in a Camille wig, accessorised by thunderstorms.
no subject
Ah the curse of Scurr strikes again, quote as fact anything you can no matter how dubious the source. Then, just ascribe it to Thompson 1937. She ascribes everything to Thompson 1937, when you do sometimes feel it might be nice if she mentioned the original source so one could judge the veracity.
Thank you for clearing that up, I was just curious as if he had said it - if it had been in a letter or something why everybody was still debating the whether he had a girlfriend point.
I have this theory that people don't actually read his books; they just buy them so they can look "intelligent."
I was googling images of Robespierre a while back and one of the first images links to a Zizek fan-cartoon (http://uberdionysus.livejournal.com/475270.html) which features Danton and Desmoulins' severed heads and the line "I'm not sure what Zizek is arguing but the dude is smart so I'm sticking with it." Another poster adds "I will love Zizek forever and ever. I don't care how crazy he gets or how little sense he makes."
Do I need to comment? That's the sort of comment that is acceptable when discussing avant-garde recording artistes. This chap even looks like Zizek. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aukzh-O6x3g) It's not so acceptable when you are permitting yourself to be talked into mass bloodshed and state control. One does wonder if "Zeezee" has read the speeches he introduces.
Though I have a sneaking suspicion she would have ruined that too. Bad fanfiction can ruin the best conceits,
I think you are right. To do decent fanfic, even decent crackfic you have to like your characters, or at least have a reasonable interest in them. She might have started out like that, but by the time she finally published her whole opus could be summed up in the words - The poor deluded fools.
and Robespierre/Camille is always a bit dubious, at best.
Randomly, and following on probably from my asumption by osmosis that Robespierre had "issues" with women, I'd always assumed that Robespierre/Saint-Just was well, if not historical at least apocryphal. I must just have watched too many FR movies.
Now I write dubious slash for kicks and have done for the last seven years and I maintain that Hillary would have had her arse kicked on any fanforum if she posted a gay character as badly thought through as her Camille. That whole being turned gay thing...just toxic.
I did find the idea of a teenage Camille suddenly realising he has a huge, huge, crush on his very straight and very oblivious best friend quite charming. (Robespierre would always be wet, or slightly out of breath, or staring out fourth floor windows with huge shining eyes declaiming something like "can you imagine, no original sin, we are all born free," in an awestruck voice.) But then it just struck me that it must have been fucking awful to discover you were gay in a country where it is still a capital crime, it must have been terrifying to suddenly get same-sex feelings in those circumstances, and I thought if I wasn't prepared to deal with that I should probably give over writing about it. (Hillary doesn't deal with this - or the subsequent decriminalisation of homosexuality by the revolutionaries and this seems like a bit of a glaring ommission if you are trying to write honestly about being a bisexual man in historical times. A blank gay-okay background is fine for historical PWP but if your trying to be semi-serious expect to be called on it.)
His problem is that he crafts Robespierre into a character in a romantic historical novel, instead of writing a biography of him.
See, now that just makes me think of Robespierre in a Camille wig, accessorised by thunderstorms.