audience_rousseau

=Audience=



The works of Jean-Jacques Rousseau were meant to reach a wide audience. When writing, Rousseau tried to address the oppressed, the average man, the individual, society, his peers, and those he felt were his opponents. He had a diverse group of people that he wrote for and tried to truly relay his ideas and philosophies. In “The French Revolution: Ideas and Ideologies,” Maurice Cranston wrote, “He was the plebian among philosophers, Jean-Jacques the martyr and the champion of the poor; but he also provided arguments which served the purposes of the Terror” (Cranston 12). The French Revolution and the notions that were being produced at is origins really influenced Rousseau; therefore, many of his works were directed towards this audience. He is continually referenced as the “plebian,” “martyr,” “champion of the poor” because he needed to speak to the people. He wanted the everyday, average people to know that they had the ability to change their lives. The commoner was not as common as he thought, and could fully advance the life in France, and, in doing so, better life for all around. He wrote for “philosophers” in order to show his capacity and the capacity of the people. His resemblance to the people allowed for a better understanding of the masses. By writing for other philosophers, Rousseau improved his own credibility through the persuasion of others. Mark Cranston elucidated, “Rousseau replace Montesquieu…Where Montesquieu had understood freedom as being unconstrained and unimpeded in doing what one chooses to do so long as it is lawful, Rousseau defined freedom as ruling oneself” (Cranston 12). Hence, by writing in opposition to others’ philosophies, Rousseau gained favor and the ability to speak explicitly with his audience. His differing views distinguished him from others.

Moreover, one of his most significant beliefs was that of society and the individual. Jennifer Einspahr displays this idea fully; in the her essay “ The Beginning that Never Was: Mediation and Freedom in Rousseau’s Political Thought,” she wrote, “the noble savage is pure, innocent, vigorous, happy, and free; Parisians are vile, corrupt, weak, miserable, and enslaved… In the Second Discourse, Rousseau proposes to revisit the state of nature to truly ascertain the difference between what is “natural” in human beings and what is constructed, or the result of human history” (Einspahr 438). His ideas create a connection between the individual and society, one that displays a parasite-type of relationship on the part of society. Through his detailed description on this relationship, the enargeia that depicted the concept helped to pull in a greater audience. Rousseau’s expansion of words to portray several feelings and notions like “the noble savage’s innocence” and the “Parisians’ corruption,” allow for any audience to understand and appreciate his work. His work //Confessions// further supported his arguments because he was able to use testimony to grow closer to his audience and show a resemblance to them. Through this type of writing, Rousseau created situated ethos with the masses enjoying and devouring his work. His audience could “ascertain,” “revisit,” and “propose” in the manners of Rousseau. Whether it was philosophy or description, he knew how to easily and clearly reach his intended audience.

Works Cited Cranston, Maurice. “French Revolution: Ideas and Ideologies.” //History Today// 39.5 May 1989: 10-14. //EBSCOhost//. Web. 18 October 2012.

Einspahr, Jennifer, “The Beginning that Never Was: Mediation and Freedom in Rousseau’s Political Thought.” //Review of Politics// 72.3 (2010): 437-61. //EBSCOhost//. Web. 18 October 2012.

-Pua Trice



Rousseau Home Page