Robespierre: El primer revolucionario

by David P. Jordan

As it changed forever the political landscape of the modern world, the French Revolution was driven by a new type of personality: the confirmed, self-aware revolutionary. Maximilien Robespierre originated the role and embodied its ideological essence and extremes; the self that he projected to the people was equated with the ideals for which he strove. In creating this intellectual biography of so enigmatic a figure, David Jordan has stressed the words of the man about himself. With great imagination and insight, Jordan places Robespierre's self-conceptualization within the context of events and explains how Robespierre "The Incorruptible"—a man seen by contemporaries as virtuous—could not only equate justice with vengeance and demand it of the people, but also stand as its symbol before the world.

Genres: History, French Revolution, Biography, France, 18th Century, Nonfiction

322 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 1985

About the author

David P. Jordan received his Ph.D. from Yale University, USA. He is the Distinguished Professor of French History, Emeritus, at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Reviews

[Elliott · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is far safer to admire and to praise Mussolini than it is to list one virtue of Robespierre it seems. Far too often Robespierre is simply filed away with "The Mob," or cruel tyrants, though he was hardly anything of the sort. Indeed were the subject's name hidden and his beliefs merely stated Robespierre is a desirable politician. He was consistent, argued brilliantly, anti-war, and believed in direct democracy, equality beneath the law regardless of rank, a free and open government responsible and accountable to its citizenry, strict government regulation and maintenance for essential services: public health, foodstuffs,and education. What Robespierre desired was a republic guided by citizens taking active control of their government and in turn realizing their full potential. What Robespierre earned for these beliefs was a virtual coup that placed him beneath a guillotine and condemnation since his death. David Jordan, besides giving a rare and certainly well deserved positive biography on the man, tracks down much of the negative view of Robespierre back to a few texts composed subsequent Robespierre's execution to justify the Thermidorian's seizure of power.
All in all a tremendously rewarding read, though a bit dry reading at times and a bit more technical to be sure (Jordan skims over much of the more well known parts of the French Revolution to explore his subject instead) it nonetheless is an excellent replacement for much of what has been written and recycled on Robespierre.

[Jeanne · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the biography that Robespierre would want you to read. It presents his motivations and ideals at their finest. Jordan is full of praise for his favorite French revolutionary and says that with Robespierre you either love him or hate him -- he inspires extreme feelings. But there are a number of problems with Jordan's approach. The context is sketchy. In order to allow Robespierre to speak for himself as much as possible, there is not enough space given over to describing the events of the revolution. I'm sure you were supposed to be familiar with all that going in, but it would be helpful to have a refresher.

Some of Jordan's comments about Robespierre sound a little like a defensive parent -- yes he called for executions but Marat and Danton used more bloodthirsty language, for example. Johnny might be starting fights at school, but look at the other kids! He describes in great detail how the Terror spiraled out of control and how the Montagnards could not have stopped it once they had created it as a means of keeping power and eliminating their enemies. As Danton pointed out, the Terror could not be stopped and government returned to the Convention under the constitution of 1793 until the war was ended. The endless cycle of Terror was not only eroding support for the Jacobins, it was also wearing them out. By the time Robespierre was executed, he was exhausted physically and mentally with no new ideas on how to move forward.

Jordan also doesn't discuss enough the Law of 22 Prarial that implemented the Terror. You can talk about Robespierre's high minded ideals and vision of a united republic, but it would be interesting to see the logic that led from executing all of his enemies to that united republic. Did he really not realize that the Terror would become an unending death machine? Jordan points out that the Cult of the Supreme Being was the revolutionary ideology that Robespierre believed could supplant the church and unify the French people behind one government and one constitution and one set of ideals. He was influenced by Rousseau and believed that man was perfectable given the right circumstances. But his definition of counter revolution was broad and he was not just killing aristocrats. Jordan argues that Robespierre did, after the failure of the Cult of the Supreme Being, look around and realize that man is not perfectible and that you can't kill people into liking you, but it would have been interesting to read more about that.

Ultimately that is my problem with the book. The high minded Robespierre is given a lot of room to proclaim expansively. The problematic Robespierre who strips people of their rights in order to kill them more efficiently is not explored. You can argue that in a revolution it is safer to kill the old monarchs and their supporters than to exile them because a dead monarch can't rally supporters, but there must have been alternatives to killing everyone who disagrees with you.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was torn as to how to rate this book. First, there were incredible insights into this man I had never read anywhere else before, and I have read quite a bit about this. Second, the book is hard to read. There are just some passages that make it a slow and arduous process to get through the book. However, in the end, I believe it is worth the read to uncover the mind of this person, unlike anywhere else you will find it.

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

I admire for the most part Jordan's aim, which is to be as unbiased as possible and let Robespierre speak for himself. But Robespierre 'speaks for himself' mostly through his speeches, and his speeches were mostly Enlightenment style hymns to virtue, which are BORING.

Also, an author needs to interpret and weave his own story, so the reader has something in which to sink his teeth. Jordan's self imposed distance from his subject doesn't allow him to this, which is another drawback.

[Mok78 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Too many sentences I simply could not comprehend.

For example, Jordan describes Robespierre:

“His personality was efficiently organized, his character integrated, so the self he presents and reveals has a power that comes from organic unity and concentration of means”.

[Philippe V d’Espagne · Rating 5 out of 5]

a very entertaining and fascinating biography full of details and takes very carefully the information handed as to not make false impressions of the contents