Enlightened Pleasures: Eighteenth-Century France and the New Epicureanism (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Enlightened Pleasures: Eighteenth-Century France and the New Epicureanism Pierre Saint-Amand (bio) Thomas M. Kavanagh. Enlightened Pleasures: Eighteenth-Century France and the New Epicureanism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010. x+254pp. US $45. ISBN 978-0-300-14094-1. Thomas Kavanagh has written extensively on eighteenth-century France, on its libertine literature and esthetics, and on its culture of gambling. His latest book provides him with another intriguing, elusive object of inquiry, creating an original oeuvre that provides a different narrative of the Age of Voltaire, away from the pessimistic version of Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, or the idealistic version of Ernst Cassirer. Kavanagh returns to what he would call the original “French story” of the French Enlightenment, his preferred preoccupation: pleasure. He does so by probing the classical heritage of this notion in the eighteenth century. It is what he calls the Enlightenment’s new Epicureanism that Kavanagh meticulously examines in this rich, concise book, not the libertinage perceived more commonly as sexual licence but the recasting of it as an exceptional synthesis of Epicureanism and Stoicism. This book is divided into eight chapters covering a variety of known and under-studied texts (Jourdan, Mirabeau), the visual arts, and the erotic theatre, a welcome addition. Chapter 1 offers a new reading of a turbulent, little-known memoir-novel, Le Guerrier philosophe by Jean-Baptiste Jourdan. This hard-to-follow novel (a detriment to this chapter that opens the book) narrates a story that establishes, Kavanagh argues, the primacy of the experience of love, of “the evanescence of pleasure” (16). The characters are repeatedly confronted with the renunciation of Stoic principles, with reason. [End Page 398] Chapter 2 is devoted to La Morlière’s oriental tale Angola. The tale relates a story about “coupling,” understood as “a practice of pleasures sought and found within a conviviality” (34). Kavanagh unveils the various tools with which the novel inspires pleasure, especially the mirroring apparatus that reverberates all the way to the reader. Comparing Rousseau’s Julie and Angola in that light, the author stresses the differences of ideology between the two novels. Fantasies and pleasure are substituted by Rousseau with the imagination and sentiment. In his next chapter, Kavanagh studies a perfect novel for his thesis, Thérèse philosophe. Nowhere in libertine literature is the Epicurean philosophy better articulated. The character of the Abbé who becomes Thérèse’s mentor is of the essence. His Spinozan speech with its distinctive precepts determines the course of the erotic education of the heroine. Kavanagh examines the various parts of Boyer d’Argens’s loose narration and follows Thérèse’s trajectory from fear to full consciousness of pleasure, realized as “exchange with another” (65). Pleasure is then transformed as volupté. Considering the role of pleasure in the visual arts, Kavanagh devotes an entire chapter to the eighteenth century’s primary suspect, François Boucher. But it is by way of Abbé Du Bos that Boucher’s innovation about the depiction of pleasure is studied. Kavanagh shows how Du Bos, radically putting the viewer’s pleasure first, creates the conditions for the success and marketability of Boucher’s productions. It is also from Du Bos’s Critical Reflections, according to the author, that Boucher will derive a technique of representation of pleasure that is immediate and intense. Reviewing a number of the artist’s paintings, Kavanagh replaces Boucher expertly within the sensationist aesthetics that makes him a more complex painter of rococo, rescued from Diderot’s harsh judgement. He becomes instead the great manipulator of colour and form, the magician of plaisir pur. In that new landscape, chapter 5 considers the inescapable case of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Kavanagh recognizes the challenge in the face of Rousseau’s “shaming of pleasure” and its substitution by liberty (103). What will be the positioning of the author of the Confessions vis-à-vis this emerging “legitimacy of pleasure” (103) in the century? To resolve this dilemma, he reconsiders Rousseau’s philosophy through the concept of “eudemony” (well-being), where the alliance of pleasure and happiness appears more credible. The challenge of this chapter was to wrestle with Rousseau’s...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».