I think Robespierre is remarkably sane I agree. Despairing, at the end - and at points in between - yes, insane, no. In fact, one might well say that an excess of lucidity was the cause of that despair.
I chopped this, because I have a whole rant on Robespierre's sanity. I realise declaring someone sane is still psychoanalysing them to some degree and therefore this is a little hypocritical but still. There are three main arguments for Robespierre being mad, and in my honest opinion, they're all total crap.
1)Robespierre was nuts because he had a dreadful childhood.
If you are going to play the awful childhood card, the aristos will always win hands down. His father might have been a shmuck but he didn't try and shoot him, or lock him up naked in his own faeces, or teach him to lie, lie and lie again.
I don't completely agree with the theory of personality disorders, although when I was trained on them the lecturer did add - "these traits are not wholy negative, combined with a high level of education anti-social personalities often do well in business and politics because they can be ruthless and function believing the rules don't apply to them." This is obviously a simplifcation, but it does seem to fit the aristocratic world view. Robespierre was never fucked up enough to believe he was above the rules.
Robespierre's mum died and he was sad. Yes. Indeed. That is a sane response. If she'd have died and he had been cheerful, then one would have worried. He grew up in adversity, but he had some really strong protective factors working for him, he was intelligent, he did well at school and he was a healthy(ish) eldest male child. (Some early social scientist in the 30s found extended families will move hell and high water to keep the eldest male child alive and sane when a family unit implodes because that child is seen as the key to the families future.)
Aaand Robespierre had a dog. Alright, we don't know if Robespierre grew up with a dog, but having a dog is a pretty strong protective factor for kids growing up in adversity - I think that's Fongay et al 1994 and I always quote it because I think it's awesome. Prescribe dogs not Ritalin!
2) Robespierre was obviously very messed up because he tried so desperately to recreate the family he never had with the Duplays.
Uh no. Most people will spin a mutually supportive social network around them, and if it's not a defacto family, it often functions like one. It only becomes troubling if the person in question constantly sabotages this support network or accepts abuse in order to keep a support network. Unless one accepts PoGS as truth Robespierre fit into neither category.
Also, don't you really have to have quite a strong sense of self worth not to be swayed by having to prove yourself to the world through your status. Robespierre didn't seem to care about money, or about the fact he lived with a carpenter, he did what made him happy, what met his needs without any of the neurotic show most people who govern feel the need to put on and that to me is a mark of deep and profound sanity.
I sometimes think the reason Robespierre offends so much as a leader is because he was, in his life so normal and so ordinary. Perhaps that's why even quite right-wing people can live with Danton, who was prepared to act like a ruler even in a democracy, but loathe and fear Robespierre.
Freron also seemed to think there was something odd going on with the Duplays and he's horribly patronising to them, but then Freron didn't really think Maurice Duplay should be allowed to vote, much less live with members of the government.
Robespierre was insane because he was a paranoid blood-thirsty monster.
Paranoia is the delusion that people are out to harm you. People really were out to harm Robespierre. You get to your sad point, that by the end of year two beginning of year three, Robespierre could really have done with that dash of psychopath. He couldn't kid himself either politically or morally, lucidity left him with no defences against the despair.
We had a general election this year on Robespierre's birthday. I can't say much for the result, but we had an election with universal suffrage and it seemed kind of a good way to commemorate Robespierre.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: Saturday, 10 July 2010 00:11 (UTC)I agree. Despairing, at the end - and at points in between - yes, insane, no. In fact, one might well say that an excess of lucidity was the cause of that despair.
I chopped this, because I have a whole rant on Robespierre's sanity. I realise declaring someone sane is still psychoanalysing them to some degree and therefore this is a little hypocritical but still. There are three main arguments for Robespierre being mad, and in my honest opinion, they're all total crap.
1)Robespierre was nuts because he had a dreadful childhood.
If you are going to play the awful childhood card, the aristos will always win hands down. His father might have been a shmuck but he didn't try and shoot him, or lock him up naked in his own faeces, or teach him to lie, lie and lie again.
I don't completely agree with the theory of personality disorders, although when I was trained on them the lecturer did add - "these traits are not wholy negative, combined with a high level of education anti-social personalities often do well in business and politics because they can be ruthless and function believing the rules don't apply to them." This is obviously a simplifcation, but it does seem to fit the aristocratic world view. Robespierre was never fucked up enough to believe he was above the rules.
Robespierre's mum died and he was sad. Yes. Indeed. That is a sane response. If she'd have died and he had been cheerful, then one would have worried. He grew up in adversity, but he had some really strong protective factors working for him, he was intelligent, he did well at school and he was a healthy(ish) eldest male child. (Some early social scientist in the 30s found extended families will move hell and high water to keep the eldest male child alive and sane when a family unit implodes because that child is seen as the key to the families future.)
Aaand Robespierre had a dog. Alright, we don't know if Robespierre grew up with a dog, but having a dog is a pretty strong protective factor for kids growing up in adversity - I think that's Fongay et al 1994 and I always quote it because I think it's awesome. Prescribe dogs not Ritalin!
2) Robespierre was obviously very messed up because he tried so desperately to recreate the family he never had with the Duplays.
Uh no. Most people will spin a mutually supportive social network around them, and if it's not a defacto family, it often functions like one. It only becomes troubling if the person in question constantly sabotages this support network or accepts abuse in order to keep a support network. Unless one accepts PoGS as truth Robespierre fit into neither category.
Also, don't you really have to have quite a strong sense of self worth not to be swayed by having to prove yourself to the world through your status. Robespierre didn't seem to care about money, or about the fact he lived with a carpenter, he did what made him happy, what met his needs without any of the neurotic show most people who govern feel the need to put on and that to me is a mark of deep and profound sanity.
I sometimes think the reason Robespierre offends so much as a leader is because he was, in his life so normal and so ordinary. Perhaps that's why even quite right-wing people can live with Danton, who was prepared to act like a ruler even in a democracy, but loathe and fear Robespierre.
Freron also seemed to think there was something odd going on with the Duplays and he's horribly patronising to them, but then Freron didn't really think Maurice Duplay should be allowed to vote, much less live with members of the government.
Robespierre was insane because he was a paranoid blood-thirsty monster.
Paranoia is the delusion that people are out to harm you. People really were out to harm Robespierre. You get to your sad point, that by the end of year two beginning of year three, Robespierre could really have done with that dash of psychopath. He couldn't kid himself either politically or morally, lucidity left him with no defences against the despair.
We had a general election this year on Robespierre's birthday. I can't say much for the result, but we had an election with universal suffrage and it seemed kind of a good way to commemorate Robespierre.