Scan barcode
kecb12's review against another edition
4.0
This book was a bit of up and down for me. I was so fascinated by Rousseau and felt a kinship with his wanderings and musings and writings that the book was something I wanted to keep reading. Sometimes, however, the writing was a little dry and heavy on facts without as much narrative, so that made the book a slog at times. All that being said, this was a super interesting book that introduced me to a man whose writings I hope to become more familiar with in the future.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
5.0
Leo Damrosch is indeed sympathetic toward Rousseau. Of course, unless he or she has an ax to grind, that goes without saying for a biographer; after all, the dead have no money to pay for their portraits to be painted in words.
Damrosch portrays Monsieur Rousseau sympathetically, but, nonetheless, warts and all.
Many of those warts stem from his childhood. A mother who died shortly after his birth, with a father on the outs with his in-laws and sliding downward socially and financially, were the starters for his Geneva early development. Further traumas resulted in a lifelong fetish for punishment, along with a strong revulsion to human sexuality. (Other than with his Parisian mistress of his mid-30s and onward, by the time he was 40, Rousseau was almost virginal.)
At the same time, being poor, from a disrupted family with Rousseau eventually fobbed off by his father, he did not have much of a chance for formal intellectual development. Nor did he shine in any early apprenticeship. (Beyond Rousseau's well-known aversion to outwardly imposed discipline, Damrosch suspects he might have had dyslexia.)
But, from this, he was eventually (like a Swiss-French Abraham Lincoln) able to fulfill his drive toward greatness in learning and practical philosophical thinking.
Damrosch goes on to portray how he stood his ground against Diderot, Voltaire and others, often at great personal sacrifice and picking up more warts and flaws along the way.
The author of "The Social Contract" greatly influenced our Founding Fathers. This volume makes clear why he should be a known influence for more Americans today.
Some national reviewers suspect that this sympathy gets too much in the way of a neutral portrait. One example some people might cite is Damrosch's wondering whether Rousseau actually committed five childen by his Paris mistress to a foundling home, noting that Rousseau himeself, while mentioning five children once, only goes into any detail -- brief as it is -- about one, the first. (And perhaps his hang-ups about sexuality may lend some credence to this.)
No matter; Damrosch still points out the contractions between this and Rousseau later establishing himself as a child-rearing expert.
Nor does Damrosch overlook Rousseau's other failings, such as not giving his juvenile benefactor, Mme de Warens, a promised full share of his inheritance. Some of these failings do come out in his Confessions, his greatest work.
Augustine may have invented the genre of biography with his own Confessiona; however, Rousseau invented the modern genre, with its psychologizing and self-analysis in a way that an Augustine could never even have understood.
Perhaps that is part of why Rousseau has been handled with tongs -- or with hammers -- by many of the more conservative elements of American intelligentsia. (Note the claim that he is the intellectual forefather of Freud, Marx and Nietzsche.)
First, that's not entirely true; second, to the degree it is true, he's not their only forebearer; and third, what if he is? (Besides, he's really better seen as the forefather of French existentialism, above all, Camus.)
Rousseau deserves to be read and understood on his own, and Damrosch lets us do that.
Damrosch portrays Monsieur Rousseau sympathetically, but, nonetheless, warts and all.
Many of those warts stem from his childhood. A mother who died shortly after his birth, with a father on the outs with his in-laws and sliding downward socially and financially, were the starters for his Geneva early development. Further traumas resulted in a lifelong fetish for punishment, along with a strong revulsion to human sexuality. (Other than with his Parisian mistress of his mid-30s and onward, by the time he was 40, Rousseau was almost virginal.)
At the same time, being poor, from a disrupted family with Rousseau eventually fobbed off by his father, he did not have much of a chance for formal intellectual development. Nor did he shine in any early apprenticeship. (Beyond Rousseau's well-known aversion to outwardly imposed discipline, Damrosch suspects he might have had dyslexia.)
But, from this, he was eventually (like a Swiss-French Abraham Lincoln) able to fulfill his drive toward greatness in learning and practical philosophical thinking.
Damrosch goes on to portray how he stood his ground against Diderot, Voltaire and others, often at great personal sacrifice and picking up more warts and flaws along the way.
The author of "The Social Contract" greatly influenced our Founding Fathers. This volume makes clear why he should be a known influence for more Americans today.
Some national reviewers suspect that this sympathy gets too much in the way of a neutral portrait. One example some people might cite is Damrosch's wondering whether Rousseau actually committed five childen by his Paris mistress to a foundling home, noting that Rousseau himeself, while mentioning five children once, only goes into any detail -- brief as it is -- about one, the first. (And perhaps his hang-ups about sexuality may lend some credence to this.)
No matter; Damrosch still points out the contractions between this and Rousseau later establishing himself as a child-rearing expert.
Nor does Damrosch overlook Rousseau's other failings, such as not giving his juvenile benefactor, Mme de Warens, a promised full share of his inheritance. Some of these failings do come out in his Confessions, his greatest work.
Augustine may have invented the genre of biography with his own Confessiona; however, Rousseau invented the modern genre, with its psychologizing and self-analysis in a way that an Augustine could never even have understood.
Perhaps that is part of why Rousseau has been handled with tongs -- or with hammers -- by many of the more conservative elements of American intelligentsia. (Note the claim that he is the intellectual forefather of Freud, Marx and Nietzsche.)
First, that's not entirely true; second, to the degree it is true, he's not their only forebearer; and third, what if he is? (Besides, he's really better seen as the forefather of French existentialism, above all, Camus.)
Rousseau deserves to be read and understood on his own, and Damrosch lets us do that.
nellybly's review against another edition
5.0
I usually stick to biographies on Supreme Court justices or presidents so this was a nice change. I love reading Rousseau's work and it was nice to get to know the man a bit more. Even if he happened to not be very likable or inspiring.
More...