Scan barcode
naiapard's review
Questions
0. What would the modern reader like to know about this book?
-. Perhaps, why would they want to read it?
0. Maybe because is a renown name?
I wondered that at the same time as I was asking myself why did I start this book after all? I have vague memories about studying the romantic trend ages ago, before the pandemy, and how my teachers would point to Rousseau as a fore father of the movement.
Why would you read Rousseau? Why would you read his diary-like Confessions? Because this is not a diary in the proper sense. This is Rousseau at old age recollecting passages from his life.
What I most regret regarding the details of my life which have escaped my memory, is that I never kept a diary of my travels. p.173
His narratorial voice is past the point of discretion. The discurs is run by the subjective point that tends to be almost intrusive. It gets to you. It pokes at your shields. Rousseau`s way of convincing the reader about something is by not even trying to “convince” him/her. He starts from the premise that he has entire suzerainty over the text. Something that is indisputable for him.
You, as a reader should fell grateful that you got the chance to read him. It is a patronizing attitude that seemed to be really in vogue in the eighteen centuries. For some reason, the white men of the time really loved to play the game of the arrogant/coy boy:
Since I had shaken off the yoke of my tyrants, I led a tolerably even and peaceful life; deprived of the charm of two strong attachements, I was also free from the weight of their chains (His “reastrained” attitude towards the broke off friendship with Diderot and Grimm.)
I cannot say that this was a read of pleasure. The beginning was flowing quite well, but then I got stuck in the plethora of names and details of status. Those went over my head. He is not that good on the part of narration as someone like Goethe, foe example. It was almost painful, from a point, to keep rowing in the sea of self importance.
He build this prototype of this “Rosseau” that abided by his moral principles. The whole purpose of the Confessions seemed to be the propagation of his idealized agenda. He tries to teach something through it (it is unclear to me, what exactly, but I bet there was/are eyes better endowed to spot it.)
It is sometimes said that the sword wears out the scabbard. That is my history. My passions have me live, and my passions have killed me. p.234
I won`t rate the book. I do not know the criteria after which I should star it.
Instagram
my Blog
0. What would the modern reader like to know about this book?
-. Perhaps, why would they want to read it?
0. Maybe because is a renown name?
I wondered that at the same time as I was asking myself why did I start this book after all? I have vague memories about studying the romantic trend ages ago, before the pandemy, and how my teachers would point to Rousseau as a fore father of the movement.
Why would you read Rousseau? Why would you read his diary-like Confessions? Because this is not a diary in the proper sense. This is Rousseau at old age recollecting passages from his life.
His narratorial voice is past the point of discretion. The discurs is run by the subjective point that tends to be almost intrusive. It gets to you. It pokes at your shields. Rousseau`s way of convincing the reader about something is by not even trying to “convince” him/her. He starts from the premise that he has entire suzerainty over the text. Something that is indisputable for him.
You, as a reader should fell grateful that you got the chance to read him. It is a patronizing attitude that seemed to be really in vogue in the eighteen centuries. For some reason, the white men of the time really loved to play the game of the arrogant/coy boy:
I cannot say that this was a read of pleasure. The beginning was flowing quite well, but then I got stuck in the plethora of names and details of status. Those went over my head. He is not that good on the part of narration as someone like Goethe, foe example. It was almost painful, from a point, to keep rowing in the sea of self importance.
He build this prototype of this “Rosseau” that abided by his moral principles. The whole purpose of the Confessions seemed to be the propagation of his idealized agenda. He tries to teach something through it (it is unclear to me, what exactly, but I bet there was/are eyes better endowed to spot it.)
I won`t rate the book. I do not know the criteria after which I should star it.
my Blog
More...