Though to Justify It Rather Than Critique It. See, for Examp
Notes Introduction 1. Even nonfeminist readers have concurred with this assessment— though to justify it rather than critique it. See, for example, Joel Schwartz, The Sexual Politics of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), and Allan Bloom’s introduc- tion to Emile (New York: Basic Books, 1979). 2. Paul de Man, “Rhetoric of Blindness: Jacques Derrida’s Reading of Rousseau,” in Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983), 102–41. 3. Kaja Silverman, Male Subjectivity at the Margins (New York and London: Routledge, 1992), 1. 4. Cited in Maurice Cranston, The Solitary Self: Jean- Jacques Rousseau in Exile and Adversity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 33–34. 5. See Rousseau, Letter to d’Alembert, and Writings for the Theater , ed. and trans. Allan Bloom, Charles Butterworth, and Christopher Kelly (2004), vol. 10 of The Collected Writings of Jean- Jacques Rousseau , 12 vols., ed. Roger D. Masters and Christopher Kelly (Hanover, NH, and London: University Press of New England, 1990–2007) [hereafter Letter ], 325–26; Oeuvres complètes de Jean- Jacques Rousseau , 5 vols. (Paris: Gallimard Pléiade, 1959–95) [hereafter OC ], 5:92–93. 6. Rousseau, The Confessions and Correspondence, Including the Letters to Malesherbes , trans. Christopher Kelly (1996), vol. 5 of Collected Writings [hereafter Confessions ], 369 ( OC , 1:439). Translation modified. 7. I am certainly not the first to read gender in Rousseau as per- formative. Several recent feminist readers also make this claim. See Elizabeth Rose Wingrove, Rousseau’s Republican Romance (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 6–12.
[Show full text]