Hysterical Women and the French Enlightenment
Philosophical naturalism is the thesis that the physical world is all there is – no God, no angels, and no soul. Literary naturalism is the effort to portray human action in animalistic terms. The latter is likely an outgrowth of the former. From Interactive Oral presentations on Emile Zola’s novel, Thérèse Raquin, I have come to see how literary naturalism developed in nineteenth century France, and how this development shaped Zola’s work in two ways: his characterization of women and his psychology of human beings.
One group discussed nineteenth century French views on women. From them I learned that women were viewed as excessively hysterical, to be treated as lepers – approached from a distance and shipped off to the doctor. I have come to see how Zola’s work was influenced by this contemporary view of women. First, when Thérèse first encounters Laurent, she is thrown into a fit of lust, incapable of resisting. Second, when Mme Raquin learns of her son’s death, she tumbles into complete hysteria. She screams and cries like a wild animal, throwing everyone around her into understandable discomfort. In these ways, Zola’s work fits into the context of nineteenth century France and its attendant view of women and their instability. Moreover, seeing human action through the lens of naturalism provides a tidy explanation for hysterical women: they are animals, and animals lack self-control.
Just as certain views of women worked well for the literary naturalist, he could also avail himself of contemporary theories of human psychology. From another group, I learned that nineteenth century French psychology was based on the theory of temperaments, according to which one’s emotional state is determined by one’s physical state. I now understand that Zola’s work was deeply influenced by this theory. Thérèse, for instance, is sensitive because she is dominated by physical nerves. Moreover, Camille is dull because he is dominated by sickness. In both cases, the inward self is determined by the outward body. Interestingly, philosophical naturalism and the theory of temperaments are connected: the latter is an application of the former to human psychology. If there is no inner soul, then the only thing that can account for emotion is the body. I now understand that nineteenth century France is a product of the Enlightenment – independent human reason freed from religious concepts (i.e., the soul) – and that Zola’s work as a whole reflects this outlook.
One group discussed nineteenth century French views on women. From them I learned that women were viewed as excessively hysterical, to be treated as lepers – approached from a distance and shipped off to the doctor. I have come to see how Zola’s work was influenced by this contemporary view of women. First, when Thérèse first encounters Laurent, she is thrown into a fit of lust, incapable of resisting. Second, when Mme Raquin learns of her son’s death, she tumbles into complete hysteria. She screams and cries like a wild animal, throwing everyone around her into understandable discomfort. In these ways, Zola’s work fits into the context of nineteenth century France and its attendant view of women and their instability. Moreover, seeing human action through the lens of naturalism provides a tidy explanation for hysterical women: they are animals, and animals lack self-control.
Just as certain views of women worked well for the literary naturalist, he could also avail himself of contemporary theories of human psychology. From another group, I learned that nineteenth century French psychology was based on the theory of temperaments, according to which one’s emotional state is determined by one’s physical state. I now understand that Zola’s work was deeply influenced by this theory. Thérèse, for instance, is sensitive because she is dominated by physical nerves. Moreover, Camille is dull because he is dominated by sickness. In both cases, the inward self is determined by the outward body. Interestingly, philosophical naturalism and the theory of temperaments are connected: the latter is an application of the former to human psychology. If there is no inner soul, then the only thing that can account for emotion is the body. I now understand that nineteenth century France is a product of the Enlightenment – independent human reason freed from religious concepts (i.e., the soul) – and that Zola’s work as a whole reflects this outlook.
Comments
Post a Comment