Recent reading
Nov. 29th, 2020 03:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
luzulaWelcome, new people from the friending meme! Uh, I guess you get some historical geekery now...don't say I didn't warn you. : )
Rights of Man by Thomas Paine (1792)
I listened to the Librivox audiobook. This is a bit later than the period I'm mostly being geeky about, but references to it have just turned up in so many different places that I wanted to hear what it said. For context, if you don't know, it was written as a response to another English book attacking the French revolution, but it's also a lot about the American revolution. It must've been very refreshing to hear such a direct attack on monarchy and the aristocracy! I can well understand that it was so widely read.
Although it does make me a little...sad, maybe? when he writes that if we only had a republic and a constitution, nobody would ever complain about taxes anymore, because they had the means of influencing them, and also there would be no reason to make war. Yes, I am sure nobody in the US or France ever complains about taxes today. *irony* It's a bit like reading suffragists who thought that if only women had the vote, all social problems would be solved. Or Emma Goldman being excited about the Russian revolution, but then disillusioned when she saw how it turned out. I guess everything is always more complicated and our work is never done.
I think the can of worms that Paine avoids fully opening is property. I mean, many of the arguments that he makes against the political power of inherited monarchy/aristocracy (that it was originally established by conquest; that even if one king is wise, his son could be an idiot, etc) would also apply to inherited wealth...and the point about conquest would apply to, um, basically all of the US which he so admires! He quotes approvingly a French revolution principle that the right to property is sacred, and OTOH, then talks approvingly about the properties of the Catholic church in France being taken away. And didn't the French nobility lose their estates? But maybe that was after 1792. I note with some bogglement that he argues against colonialism because it costs more to the occupying country than what they gain from it. *skeptical*
But when he is suggesting a system of taxation, he says that Although an enquiry into the origin of [the aristocracy's] estates be unnecessary, the continuation of them in their present state is another subject. And then he proposes a sharply progressive tax on estates that would discourage primogeniture, and with time would lead to the estate being divided among more and more people. Can't find the quote now, but I think he did not want any tax on commercial profit though? But he does want to set up a proto-welfare state, with pensions for everyone and free schooling for the poor, and is against regressive taxes.
I think it's kind of fascinating how Paine blithely writes a book of 96K words (almost ten hours when read out loud) to expound his principles, in a country in which a lot of people still can't read, instead of something short and pithy. And nevertheless it was a huge success, and a lot of people did read it, or had it read to them.garonne, you had read the claim that it was written in order to be read out loud, hadn't you? That's actually one reason I chose to listen to it as read by amateurs. By modern terms, I suppose the sentence structure is still a bit complicated, but then, the convergence of written and spoken language is apparently one of the great linguistic changes in English over the last hundred years (at least I heard a linguist say so).
...Britain never did get a constitution, did it?
Rights of Man by Thomas Paine (1792)
I listened to the Librivox audiobook. This is a bit later than the period I'm mostly being geeky about, but references to it have just turned up in so many different places that I wanted to hear what it said. For context, if you don't know, it was written as a response to another English book attacking the French revolution, but it's also a lot about the American revolution. It must've been very refreshing to hear such a direct attack on monarchy and the aristocracy! I can well understand that it was so widely read.
Although it does make me a little...sad, maybe? when he writes that if we only had a republic and a constitution, nobody would ever complain about taxes anymore, because they had the means of influencing them, and also there would be no reason to make war. Yes, I am sure nobody in the US or France ever complains about taxes today. *irony* It's a bit like reading suffragists who thought that if only women had the vote, all social problems would be solved. Or Emma Goldman being excited about the Russian revolution, but then disillusioned when she saw how it turned out. I guess everything is always more complicated and our work is never done.
I think the can of worms that Paine avoids fully opening is property. I mean, many of the arguments that he makes against the political power of inherited monarchy/aristocracy (that it was originally established by conquest; that even if one king is wise, his son could be an idiot, etc) would also apply to inherited wealth...and the point about conquest would apply to, um, basically all of the US which he so admires! He quotes approvingly a French revolution principle that the right to property is sacred, and OTOH, then talks approvingly about the properties of the Catholic church in France being taken away. And didn't the French nobility lose their estates? But maybe that was after 1792. I note with some bogglement that he argues against colonialism because it costs more to the occupying country than what they gain from it. *skeptical*
But when he is suggesting a system of taxation, he says that Although an enquiry into the origin of [the aristocracy's] estates be unnecessary, the continuation of them in their present state is another subject. And then he proposes a sharply progressive tax on estates that would discourage primogeniture, and with time would lead to the estate being divided among more and more people. Can't find the quote now, but I think he did not want any tax on commercial profit though? But he does want to set up a proto-welfare state, with pensions for everyone and free schooling for the poor, and is against regressive taxes.
I think it's kind of fascinating how Paine blithely writes a book of 96K words (almost ten hours when read out loud) to expound his principles, in a country in which a lot of people still can't read, instead of something short and pithy. And nevertheless it was a huge success, and a lot of people did read it, or had it read to them.
garonne, you had read the claim that it was written in order to be read out loud, hadn't you? That's actually one reason I chose to listen to it as read by amateurs. By modern terms, I suppose the sentence structure is still a bit complicated, but then, the convergence of written and spoken language is apparently one of the great linguistic changes in English over the last hundred years (at least I heard a linguist say so). ...Britain never did get a constitution, did it?
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 06:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 06:28 pm (UTC)That's very true about how sad the political optimism of the past can be (what's that bit in Les Misérables, I think it's one of Enjolras's revolutionary speeches,—'citizens, the nineteenth century is great, but the twentieth century will be happy'? I had to stop for a few moments reading that passage). Complicated and never done, indeed.
But very interesting to see Paine suggesting ideas that were later adopted, although not for some time afterwards, and were more or less successful, like free universal education and state pensions. It's always good to be reminded of how ideas seen as normal now first developed, and how long a history they can have before becoming what they are now!
...Britain never did get a constitution, did it?
Not a proper one, no—what we call 'the British constitution' is basically just a pile of accreted precedent going all the way back to Magna Carta. The foundation for a functional political system!
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 06:54 pm (UTC)ETA: Er, just to be clear, we are sadly still a monarchy, just one where the king is not supposed to have any political power (but still costs unnecessary amounts of money).
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 06:56 pm (UTC)We proudly have an unwritten constitution! (she said, tongue in cheek)
If you're interested in some British political theory, I recommend Walter Bagehot's "The English Constitution" (1867): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_English_Constitution
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 07:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 08:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-29 08:49 pm (UTC)Yeah, one of the depressing things about reading about the 18th and 19th centuries is that (1) so many things haven't changed and (2) of the big changes that have happened, some of them turned out to be pretty superficial. Even the aspects of 19th century life that seem to have disappeared, like child labour, are still there but just displaced to another part of the world.
By modern terms, I suppose the sentence structure is still a bit complicated
In the book where I read that Paine wrote to be read aloud, the author showed an extract from RoM and compared it to an extract from another book from the time (If I remember correctly it was Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, which would of course be the obvious choice to compare it to) and indeed, Burke's sentence structure was way, way more complicated :D And the author's point was that Paine and Burke were writing for two totally different audiences.
I guess Burke's book is the one about the French revolution you mentioned? I didn't realise Paine was writing in direct response to that.
Paine blithely writes a book of 96K words... instead of something short and pithy
Haha :D
Actually I also read that books were often broke up by the purchaser and the individual parts circulated separately, and that in particular this often happened with RoM. So maybe people were mostly consuming it in shorter chunks. (I would hope that didn't happen with novels, because that would be pretty frustrating for the reader :D ) I guess it was easy to break books up back then, because the cheap ones were sold without the cover, and also with the way books were sewn as multiple sections and then those sewn together, you could just cut the sections apart. I feel like I'm not explaining that very well, but I guess you know what I mean!
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 12:32 pm (UTC)"We wanted freedom, but all we got was democracy..."
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 05:05 pm (UTC)It's always good to be reminded of how ideas seen as normal now first developed, and how long a history they can have before becoming what they are now!
Yes. Also it's interesting to see how various ideas that I may think naturally hang together sometimes appear in the past in other configurations than today.
Actually Sweden's constitution was completely out of step with political reality until the 1970's, when it was revised to reflect the fact that the king didn't actually have any power anymore. Heh. We do have the world's oldest legislation on the freedom of the press, though!
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 05:08 pm (UTC)Thanks for the rec!
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 05:28 pm (UTC)Oh, very interesting. Went to archive.org and checked, and while the language isn't complicated everywhere, I did find one sentence of Burke's that took up a whole, fairly densely printed page! And yes, Paine's book was written as a response to Burke's. It seems they were actually friends before that, and that Burke did support the American struggle to get representation, and was against the slave trade? Seems they parted ways over monarchy though...
That's also very interesting about books being broken up and passed around--I can imagine the swap sessions ('have you read this part yet? want to swap?'). Yes, I do know about the sections which books are sewn in since I intend to learn some basic bookbinding. : D Although I did not know that cheap books were sold without covers.
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 05:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 08:00 pm (UTC)It is very good! The musical is more accessible than the book—and the music is great—but of course it leaves a lot of stuff out, including most of the political subtleties. I recommend both.
Haha, seems like a good idea to clarify that you are definitely a constitutional monarchy...
We do have the world's oldest legislation on the freedom of the press, though!
Huh, nice! How old?
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 08:34 pm (UTC)Huh, nice! How old?
1766!
(no subject)
Date: 2020-11-30 10:44 pm (UTC)Bookbinding knowledge for the win!
Perhaps you're conflating Rights of Man with Common Sense. The latter is truly a pamphlet -- 22000 words -- published anonymously as the American Revolution was moving from conceptual to bloody.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/147