Reflections on Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France-- The Reversion of Order

According to our friend Burke, the French Revolution aggressively tore apart all that was orderly in the humane society of France. In post-revolution France there was no chivalry and no respect for what differentiated human society from bestial society. In other words "all these pleasing illusions" i.e. chivalry and the ostentatious grandeur of politeness in the ranks of the upper class "harmonized the different shades of life" i.e. this chivalry made up for the majority of the population in lower class who were destitute of all of the luxuries of chivalry (Burke 45).  But no worries, the animal-like conditions of the public were not a problem because the grandness of the royalty was enough to throw a blanket over the ugliness that was the living conditions of the lower class. He saw society in the terms only of the upper class, he gave credence to the gentlemanly status, which in itself is not a problem, the problem with his ideas are that they disregard those that are not of the gentlemanly status.

Burke was a royalist and had a viewpoint that is not seen as acceptable today. This idea that all humans, no matter their economic position, their skin color, their gender, are equal. This was also one of the main ideas of the enlightenment: equality (along with liberty and equality). Burke sees this idea of equality as intangible, as an idea from the "men of theory". In Burke's opinion society cannot be based on these intangible ideas, such as equality. The post-revolution France will fall apart sooner or later because there is a void in the cohesiveness. There is no structural support to society without rank, nobility, and "entailed inheritance" ( this idea that monarch power is derived from the previous, through inheritance and God's will: and intertwining of church and state). (Burke 39).  (There is no longer a love for royalty or a consideration for anyone but one's self. I almost can empathize with what he is saying here because if there is an extreme individualization there is no sense of human kindred-ness anymore, but Burke has exaggerated this idea of individualization. It is  impossible to completely extract compassion from human life, it is in our nature and even if you do not believe that is in human capacity to have at least some care for another human being than it is in human's best interest to be a social creature. Anyway this idea that Burke brings of an inconsideration for others is greatly out of proportion, especially considering his general lack of consideration for the lower class.

If his highly unrelatable ideas weren't very present by the end of this excerpt, in one of the first paragraphs he already let a hint in about his obsolete ideas. He refers to Marie Antoinette "as all that is delicate and feminine, semi-divine and yet vulnerable, Woman as seen in the chivalric tradition calling upon men for protection." (Burke 34). Right away all sorts of bells were going off in my head, "delicate!?", "for protection!?"but I had forgotten the time period. This idea is more cohesive with the whole population,even the lower class. The irony in this is that the "equality" of the enlightenment movement did not account for women. Th equality extended to a specific group of people, to the male working lower-middle class. In this sense, the enlightenment maintained this order between males and females that Burke approves of.  Men are there to protect women from physical work and the ugliness of the world; it is a male's chivalrous duty to protect the innocent eyes of the woman. That is what the grandeur that royalties put on in the Palace of Versaille and the likes with all of its shining and luxury to protect woman like Marie Antoinette, but Burke looks over all of the woman in the lower class who are immersed in the this ugliness all of the time. So not only are they overlooked by the ruling class and then they are still overlooked by the revolters. But that is not something that many people, including Burke, of that time were concerned with. It is a modern idea to have concern for gender equality. But it goes along with this idea that Burke's writing was difficult to relate to because his ideas are so obsolete.

Candide and Pope's Essay on Man -- Reactions to Social Changes

For every social change there is a reaction, either for, against, or somewhere in the middle. Responses to the humanist liberation of individuals and ideas, especially in the middle class, were positive. The image of the middle class as a collective unit was shattered by the introduction of inquiry and reason. It was an emulsification, not only of each person, but also of the presupposed knowledge.  Everything that had been taken for granted, as universal truths had been turned on its head. This was seen by some as an exciting new opportunity, a liberation from the chains of the old authority of monopolized knowledge. But not all responses had quite as positive an outlook. This changing of solidified truth was chaos. It was disturbing the order of the cosmos and the world and  the society. As the Pope says in his Essay on Man it was the questioning of the power  of God, of a power beyond human capacity.

The Essay on Man approaches a problem brought about by the Enlightenment: this idea that there is a need to inquire into pre-established notions and question the pre-established order of the world. The pope is outraged by the use of reason because it is a disrespect to God's plan. This enlightenment movement involves a distrust in God where human's find the need to question God's plan and try to uncover some sort of knowledge beyond what we as humans can handle. The Pope advises that we keep to our duties as humans, a status not equivalent to God, and don't meddle in the "perfection" of the God's will. It is unnecessary to inquire too much because whatever happens is what God wanted to happen. It is beyond us to understand why. It was almost a bit modern in a "what happens, happens" sort of way. In the right context it could've been seen as soothing or calming in that in life, sometimes it goes happily and sometimes it goes sour but we just have to know it is going to be okay in the grand scheme of things. But on the other hand, it can be seen as passive; we want something more, a control over our destiny, a knowledge that everything we do isn't futile and that we aren't just small pieces in a picture beyond our perspective. Voltaire falls in this latter category. He is not keen on this idea that everything that happen is just dandy.  

And , in this chain of reactions to social changes,Voltaire had a satirical response to the Pope and God's perfect plan. It was a bit of a straw-man argument in that he satirizes a  mis-characterization of the Pope's meaning. He satirizes the idea that all things that happen in the world are inherently good because they are God's will. He exaggerates this by all sorts of horrible things happen to Candide and the people he meets in his adventure but the seriousness of these events is never recognized by any of the character. Voltaire is poking at the idea that not all things are good and  the Pope cannot just wipe a broad stroke over everything and call all things good under God's will. Both of the main women characters, Cunegonde and the old woman suffer through rape, or sexual  assault, or abuse of one sort or another and no one is ever appalled or even really phased. These are clearly not good things and it is not alright to gloss over them with the passing words "it is all good and in God's plan". But this is where Voltaire was satirizes a mis-characterized argument. The pope is not saying every action and event is good, but of course, some actions are bad or unpleasant or even horrible, but in the grander picture, in God's picture, there is only perfection.

But Voltaire comes back to his main frustration with there is no drive for an individual if they do not have some sort of control over their own life. He ends with the cultivation of the garden. All of the characters end in a contented life. They have chosen their path and our literally cultivating their own life: their well-being and happiness. But their perspectives are narrow and they are contented only on the small scale of their garden home. Candide and friends are in control but only because they have shrunk their sphere of being. It is ironic in that Voltaire almost agrees with the Pope in that Candide and his friends settle down in a quiet, mildly fulfilling life where they do not push boundaries or perspectives.  The Pope in Essay on Man encourage humans to perform their humanly duties, stay in their realm of being, and do not reason or inquire because those actions are in the territory of God. And then Voltaire ends with the main characters staying in their human spheres without a real purpose or drive behind their actions. Candide and his friends have become the epitome of the human ideal according the Essay on Man; they do not challenge perspective and they do not wish for more than what they have.