Scan barcode
lauroberge's review against another edition
3.0
Suis-je la seule à trouver que Rousseau semble extrêmement prétentieux?
grllopez's review
3.0
My thoughts: http://greatbookstudy.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20Confessions
ayushinayak's review
4.0
Rousseau’s Confessions- A summary
As is valid about works of art, they are not just an exceptionally real articulation of the creator's perspectives and thoughts, additionally by extension, introduce a mirror for the world we live in. This is one motivation behind why it is hard to survey them. For, it calls not just a full focus towards the thoughts communicated and conclusions raised, additionally for a profound contemplation; a reflection on the significance of thoughts introduced, their significance on the working of society and their need in the wake of regular day to day existence.
Confessions, is about this and the sky is the limit from there. Notwithstanding being the principal real personal history of an individual's own life, Confessions presents to us the different focuses in the life of creator which decided the penning and reason of his other significant works including Emile, The Social Contract and Discourse on Inequality. As such, it shapes a foundation perusing towards understanding his different works.
In the expressions of Rousseau, the reason of composing this work was to display a legitimate record of his life, character and different endeavours (music organization, letter composing and article composing) and furthermore as an answer or legitimization against the regrets of his vile adversaries, who, as he would see it, impelled a plot against his notoriety. Among others, including his companions, the one name that was every now and again specified was that of Voltaire. Frustrated with the methods for high society and languishing colossally over their hates, Rousseau chose to carry on with a basic, rural life i.e. surrendering the material solaces and driving an existence with absolute minimum necessities. It is the thing that structures the foundation of his works, 'Talk on imbalance' and 'The Social Contract', where he underscores on the characteristic condition of an individual i.e. the physical opportunity and a freedom to do basically as they wish. It must be noted here, that Rousseau trusted himself to be a subject of mocking and despise of his companions for his choice to have a basic existence.
However, it was this remain of his, which made his record appear to be one-sided as in there was a predictable meandering of the wrongs that he had as far as anyone knows endured in the interest of his adversaries. Despite the fact that, Rousseau, in the earliest reference point express that-
“Since I have undertaken to reveal myself absolutely to the public, nothing about me must remain hidden or obscure. I must remain incessantly beneath his gaze, so that he may follow me in all the extravagances of my heart and into every least corner of my life. Indeed, he must never lose sight of me for a single instant, for if he finds the slightest gap in my story... he may wonder what I was doing at that moment... I am laying myself sufficiently open to human malice by telling my story, without rendering myself more vulnerable by any silence.” (Rousseau 49)
furthermore, is honourable as in he gives episodes of his own deeds/wrongdoings (counting burglary, his being completely sentimental and condition of enthusiasm evoked for some ladies throughout his life), yet at the same time, it some way or another appears a misrepresenting truth that the entire world (notwithstanding three or four close individuals) were included in a trick to demolish his name; this, being the motivation behind why I gave a mark less to the work. Here, I additionally acknowledge that since this is my first perusing of a Rousseau work and I haven't yet perused any of his different works or works by his peers, I may likewise be having an unjustifiable view on the matter.
One other thing that always annoyed and appeared to be sketchy was Rousseau's choice of leaving his youngsters (from wedlock with Theresa) with havens for the dread that they may be presented to second rate ways and thoughts as rehearsed by different individuals from Theresa's family. A man of such learning as Rousseau, making such move and leaving his own kids, show an absence of sympathy, which I accept is the extremely essential of a characteristic state (as proposed by Rousseau) of individuals. He himself went about as an inconsistency to his own perspectives/convictions. However, as indicated by him, it was for the reason that he thought his youngsters would improve training at refuges than at home, at the same time, it is still unfathomable that he would repudiate them and wouldn't backpedal even once to check whether they got the instruction he coveted for them. Furthermore, the incongruity, that he attempted the written work of "Emile-on Education" for the sole motivation behind clarifying the significance of instruction. I think about whether he ever examined, that surrendered youngsters could confront with such tension in their lives, that it might render the entire thought of reason for training insignificant to them.
Amid his life, he likewise saw and was tormented by the wide hole between the rich and poor class of the general public. That is, of the courses in which in some cases, the general population from poor class were misused by rich class. And furthermore of the routes in which rich or eminence drew in while chatting or managing individuals from lower strata of society. Here he likewise referred to the different occurrences, where he felt, that his companions from sovereignty acted disparagingly. This, being the motivation behind why he composed 'Talk on Inequality'.
Rousseau, amid his later years, was ousted by the legislatures of different spots he lived at. So that, his life turned into a steady changing of spots and sufferings he persevered through, each time he needed to move from a place. It is very crippling to note that the administrations/sovereignty of different states and nations were resolved to ousting a man, who was not hesitant to articulate his thoughts, or as Rousseau himself says, was a casualty of a scheme outlined against him by his foes. Attributable to my little learning regarding the matter, I can't be a judge of that.
In general, the voyage through Confessions was not just knowledge into the life of Rousseau additionally into the methods for the general public he lived in. It cleared out me with a sharp feeling of perplexity a still greater question-Has the general public enhanced overall, on the perspectives brought up in the work or is it an out and out act of futility?
Works cited
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Confessions. 1768. gutenberg, https://www.gutenberg.org/.
As is valid about works of art, they are not just an exceptionally real articulation of the creator's perspectives and thoughts, additionally by extension, introduce a mirror for the world we live in. This is one motivation behind why it is hard to survey them. For, it calls not just a full focus towards the thoughts communicated and conclusions raised, additionally for a profound contemplation; a reflection on the significance of thoughts introduced, their significance on the working of society and their need in the wake of regular day to day existence.
Confessions, is about this and the sky is the limit from there. Notwithstanding being the principal real personal history of an individual's own life, Confessions presents to us the different focuses in the life of creator which decided the penning and reason of his other significant works including Emile, The Social Contract and Discourse on Inequality. As such, it shapes a foundation perusing towards understanding his different works.
In the expressions of Rousseau, the reason of composing this work was to display a legitimate record of his life, character and different endeavours (music organization, letter composing and article composing) and furthermore as an answer or legitimization against the regrets of his vile adversaries, who, as he would see it, impelled a plot against his notoriety. Among others, including his companions, the one name that was every now and again specified was that of Voltaire. Frustrated with the methods for high society and languishing colossally over their hates, Rousseau chose to carry on with a basic, rural life i.e. surrendering the material solaces and driving an existence with absolute minimum necessities. It is the thing that structures the foundation of his works, 'Talk on imbalance' and 'The Social Contract', where he underscores on the characteristic condition of an individual i.e. the physical opportunity and a freedom to do basically as they wish. It must be noted here, that Rousseau trusted himself to be a subject of mocking and despise of his companions for his choice to have a basic existence.
However, it was this remain of his, which made his record appear to be one-sided as in there was a predictable meandering of the wrongs that he had as far as anyone knows endured in the interest of his adversaries. Despite the fact that, Rousseau, in the earliest reference point express that-
“Since I have undertaken to reveal myself absolutely to the public, nothing about me must remain hidden or obscure. I must remain incessantly beneath his gaze, so that he may follow me in all the extravagances of my heart and into every least corner of my life. Indeed, he must never lose sight of me for a single instant, for if he finds the slightest gap in my story... he may wonder what I was doing at that moment... I am laying myself sufficiently open to human malice by telling my story, without rendering myself more vulnerable by any silence.” (Rousseau 49)
furthermore, is honourable as in he gives episodes of his own deeds/wrongdoings (counting burglary, his being completely sentimental and condition of enthusiasm evoked for some ladies throughout his life), yet at the same time, it some way or another appears a misrepresenting truth that the entire world (notwithstanding three or four close individuals) were included in a trick to demolish his name; this, being the motivation behind why I gave a mark less to the work. Here, I additionally acknowledge that since this is my first perusing of a Rousseau work and I haven't yet perused any of his different works or works by his peers, I may likewise be having an unjustifiable view on the matter.
One other thing that always annoyed and appeared to be sketchy was Rousseau's choice of leaving his youngsters (from wedlock with Theresa) with havens for the dread that they may be presented to second rate ways and thoughts as rehearsed by different individuals from Theresa's family. A man of such learning as Rousseau, making such move and leaving his own kids, show an absence of sympathy, which I accept is the extremely essential of a characteristic state (as proposed by Rousseau) of individuals. He himself went about as an inconsistency to his own perspectives/convictions. However, as indicated by him, it was for the reason that he thought his youngsters would improve training at refuges than at home, at the same time, it is still unfathomable that he would repudiate them and wouldn't backpedal even once to check whether they got the instruction he coveted for them. Furthermore, the incongruity, that he attempted the written work of "Emile-on Education" for the sole motivation behind clarifying the significance of instruction. I think about whether he ever examined, that surrendered youngsters could confront with such tension in their lives, that it might render the entire thought of reason for training insignificant to them.
Amid his life, he likewise saw and was tormented by the wide hole between the rich and poor class of the general public. That is, of the courses in which in some cases, the general population from poor class were misused by rich class. And furthermore of the routes in which rich or eminence drew in while chatting or managing individuals from lower strata of society. Here he likewise referred to the different occurrences, where he felt, that his companions from sovereignty acted disparagingly. This, being the motivation behind why he composed 'Talk on Inequality'.
Rousseau, amid his later years, was ousted by the legislatures of different spots he lived at. So that, his life turned into a steady changing of spots and sufferings he persevered through, each time he needed to move from a place. It is very crippling to note that the administrations/sovereignty of different states and nations were resolved to ousting a man, who was not hesitant to articulate his thoughts, or as Rousseau himself says, was a casualty of a scheme outlined against him by his foes. Attributable to my little learning regarding the matter, I can't be a judge of that.
In general, the voyage through Confessions was not just knowledge into the life of Rousseau additionally into the methods for the general public he lived in. It cleared out me with a sharp feeling of perplexity a still greater question-Has the general public enhanced overall, on the perspectives brought up in the work or is it an out and out act of futility?
Works cited
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Confessions. 1768. gutenberg, https://www.gutenberg.org/.
grete_rachel_howland's review
2.0
There are many gems of thought throughout the text, but for the most part Rousseau is a whiny, pathetic, self-pitying sort of fellow.