[ Followups | Post Followup | History 101 Discussion Forum | Help ]

Love and Obedience

Posted by Alysia Hoover on February 26, 2001 at 22:22:13:

MAIN POINT: Obedience and love have different meanings throughout history. My Father’s Life, Poster, Charlton, Schwartz, and Le Roy Ladurie offer different interpretations of these meanings and how they affect culture and the family.

HISTORICAL CHANGE: The most important aspect of change in the topic of obedience and love is clearly shown through the contrast of Pierre as a father and Edmond as a father (My Father’s Life). Pierre believed that through obedience came love and Edmond believed that through love came obedience. These differing opinions stemmed from changing times and the role of fatherhood changing. Pierre used obedience as a vehicle to love because he truly believed that his decisions were in the best interest of his son, Edmond. He prided himself on raising his son as any man in a French rural society would. An example of this was when he had Edmond return from Paris. He believed that he knew what was best for him and did not want him to become part of the bourgeois. Pierre held an enormous amount of love for his son, just as Edmond held an enormous amount of love for him. Edmond, an almost polar opposite of his father, raised his children in such a manner that because they loved him, they obeyed him. He encouraged them to go to Paris and better themselves because he loved them. The love Pierre and Edmond had for their children, as well as the love their children had for them changed drastically in only one generation.

REPRESENTATION BY OBSERVER: Poster develops the notion that families changed between the generations of Pierre and Edmond and it was these changes that led to the differing opinions of love and obedience. My Father’s Life exemplifies Poster’s views when Pierre says to Edmond, “Edme, evil are the son and daughter who do not honor their father! Blessed are the son and daughter who obey at the expense of their own heart” (p 91). Poster felt that Pierre wanted the Restif family to remain in the peasant life-style and the bourgeois life was not for them. Poster expressed the changes of love and obedience found in the generations of Pierre and Edmond through an observer’s approach.

REALITY OF THE OBSERVED: Poster had a somewhat biased view of the Retif family. This bias stemmed from his evidence because My Father’s Life was biased in and of itself. Examples of bias in My Father’s Life can include how much of an honorable and good man Pierre was portrayed to be, when in actuality he beat his wife and was only seem as so greatly honorable in the eyes of his son, Edmond. Another bias present is the way Edmond portrayed his mother. He only emphasized her positive attributes and did not include her negative ones, or simply the fact that she was acting as any mother would. These biases in the original text led to a bias in Poster’s interpretation of My Father’s Life.

HISTORIANS’ DIFFERING INTERPRETATIONS: Historians have a very different interpretation of My Father’s Life than the reader may often find in the actual text. Le Roy Ladurie wrote, when speaking of Edmond’s punishments, how Pierre Rétif was an honorable father. “Such paternal punishments did not obliterate affection between father and son however; in Nitry the verb “to fear” was generally taken to be synonymous with “to love”: “it is common parlance in the district when speaking of God or of one’s parents”.”(Le Roy Ladurie, p 217). Edmond was obedient towards his father and loved him for making him such an honorable man. R. Schwartz extended this obedience by examining how differently Edmond would have grown had his father not loved him so much.

In the years that followed, Edme, we are told, never tired of retelling the story to his own children. And whenever he told it, tears cam to his eyes as he blessed his father for his strictness: “Without that lesson, he would often say, I would probably have become a free spirit like so many others; but my father put a stop to the danger at the source; he had to be forceful because the attraction was already very strong!”14 Thus it was that disobedience and the dangers associated with unbridled sexual desires were suppressed at first sighting by the stern and vigilant paternal hand. When obedience was strengthened, innocence was preserved
(Schwartz, p 7)!

It is clear that Pierre and Edmond both loved their children, but they had different ways of showing this love.

CONNECTIONS: Connections to My Father’s Life are found in the Charlton article about changes in the family. Charlton discusses his views of change as well as Rousseau’s. These changes led to differences in love and obedience and how they are portrayed in the family.

WORKS CITED:

Rétif de la Bretonne, My Father’s Life, Alan Sutton, 1986.

Mark Poster, The Eighteenth Century, 25 (1984): 217-240.

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, The Mind and Method of the Historian, The University of Chicago Press, 1981.

Robert M. Schwartz, The Peasant as Hero: Rousseau, Restif de la Bretonne, and the Representation of Rustic Virtues, Publications du Centre Georges Chevrier, 2000.

D.G. Charlton, New images of The Natural in France, Cambridge University Press, 1982-1983.

Followups

Post a Followup

Name:
Email:

Subject:

Comments:
: MAIN POINT: Obedience and love have different meanings throughout history. My Father’s Life, Poster, Charlton, Schwartz, and Le Roy Ladurie offer different interpretations of these meanings and how they affect culture and the family. : HISTORICAL CHANGE: The most important aspect of change in the topic of obedience and love is clearly shown through the contrast of Pierre as a father and Edmond as a father (My Father’s Life). Pierre believed that through obedience came love and Edmond believed that through love came obedience. These differing opinions stemmed from changing times and the role of fatherhood changing. Pierre used obedience as a vehicle to love because he truly believed that his decisions were in the best interest of his son, Edmond. He prided himself on raising his son as any man in a French rural society would. An example of this was when he had Edmond return from Paris. He believed that he knew what was best for him and did not want him to become part of the bourgeois. Pierre held an enormous amount of love for his son, just as Edmond held an enormous amount of love for him. Edmond, an almost polar opposite of his father, raised his children in such a manner that because they loved him, they obeyed him. He encouraged them to go to Paris and better themselves because he loved them. The love Pierre and Edmond had for their children, as well as the love their children had for them changed drastically in only one generation. : REPRESENTATION BY OBSERVER: Poster develops the notion that families changed between the generations of Pierre and Edmond and it was these changes that led to the differing opinions of love and obedience. My Father’s Life exemplifies Poster’s views when Pierre says to Edmond, “Edme, evil are the son and daughter who do not honor their father! Blessed are the son and daughter who obey at the expense of their own heart” (p 91). Poster felt that Pierre wanted the Restif family to remain in the peasant life-style and the bourgeois life was not for them. Poster expressed the changes of love and obedience found in the generations of Pierre and Edmond through an observer’s approach. : REALITY OF THE OBSERVED: Poster had a somewhat biased view of the Retif family. This bias stemmed from his evidence because My Father’s Life was biased in and of itself. Examples of bias in My Father’s Life can include how much of an honorable and good man Pierre was portrayed to be, when in actuality he beat his wife and was only seem as so greatly honorable in the eyes of his son, Edmond. Another bias present is the way Edmond portrayed his mother. He only emphasized her positive attributes and did not include her negative ones, or simply the fact that she was acting as any mother would. These biases in the original text led to a bias in Poster’s interpretation of My Father’s Life. : HISTORIANS’ DIFFERING INTERPRETATIONS: Historians have a very different interpretation of My Father’s Life than the reader may often find in the actual text. Le Roy Ladurie wrote, when speaking of Edmond’s punishments, how Pierre Rétif was an honorable father. “Such paternal punishments did not obliterate affection between father and son however; in Nitry the verb “to fear” was generally taken to be synonymous with “to love”: “it is common parlance in the district when speaking of God or of one’s parents”.”(Le Roy Ladurie, p 217). Edmond was obedient towards his father and loved him for making him such an honorable man. R. Schwartz extended this obedience by examining how differently Edmond would have grown had his father not loved him so much. : In the years that followed, Edme, we are told, never tired of retelling the story to his own children. And whenever he told it, tears cam to his eyes as he blessed his father for his strictness: “Without that lesson, he would often say, I would probably have become a free spirit like so many others; but my father put a stop to the danger at the source; he had to be forceful because the attraction was already very strong!”14 Thus it was that disobedience and the dangers associated with unbridled sexual desires were suppressed at first sighting by the stern and vigilant paternal hand. When obedience was strengthened, innocence was preserved : (Schwartz, p 7)! : It is clear that Pierre and Edmond both loved their children, but they had different ways of showing this love. : CONNECTIONS: Connections to My Father’s Life are found in the Charlton article about changes in the family. Charlton discusses his views of change as well as Rousseau’s. These changes led to differences in love and obedience and how they are portrayed in the family. : : WORKS CITED: : Rétif de la Bretonne, My Father’s Life, Alan Sutton, 1986. : Mark Poster, The Eighteenth Century, 25 (1984): 217-240. : Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, The Mind and Method of the Historian, The University of Chicago Press, 1981. : Robert M. Schwartz, The Peasant as Hero: Rousseau, Restif de la Bretonne, and the Representation of Rustic Virtues, Publications du Centre Georges Chevrier, 2000. : D.G. Charlton, New images of The Natural in France, Cambridge University Press, 1982-1983.

Optional Link URL:
Title of Link:
Optional Image URL: