Olympe De Gouges And Edmund Burke example essay topic

Sources Essay #1 Abbe de Sieyes, Olympe de Gouges, and Edmund Burke were all concerned about the future of France. Each of the authors, though, had three different, and distinct perspectives regarding the Revolution. Abbe de Sieyes conveyed the vitality of the third estate; Olympe de Gouges took a stand for the parity of women; and Edmund Burke advocated the incorporation of conservatism instead of a revolution. Sieyes and Gouges were for the revolution, while Burke was against it. Sieyes represents the success of the revolution, whereas Burke embodies failure.

Gouges falls in-between the line of success and failure. All of the authors signify three major perspectives of the people of France. Abbe de Sieyes' What is the Third Estate, focuses on the Revolution and the uncertainties that go along with it. Sieyes' main argument is that the people, not the king, should control the government. He believes that the indigent of the French nation are the only people that have the right to restructure the French Constitution. In this document, Sieyes explores what the clerics have endeavored, and what the more fortunate group suggests in place of it; he declares what must be done; and he stresses the changes that are necessary for the third estate to have equitable power (Sieyes 98).

He reiterates the third estate's basis for power in the following context, "It is certain then, that only non privileged members are capable of being electors and deputies to the national assembly" (Sieyes 102). Sieyes clearly illustrates that the third estate is the only estate that is concerned about the true outcome of the French people, and that is reason enough for the third estate to have a deciding hand in the constitution of France. Unfortunately, the first and second estates disagreed with this concept and demanded that the voting remain equally weighted. Thus, the third estate conducted its own meetings and formed a new National Assembly (Kishlansky 651). Since the king was not too ecstatic with this "National Assembly", he shut down their meeting location. What the king did not know was that through his ignorant action, he pushed the members of the National Assembly toward an unfathomable sequence of events - the French Revolution.

Sieyes' document represents the success of the Revolution. The common people were able to take matters into their own hands and demonstrate that they truly were the ones who held power in France. Olympe de Gouges took a somewhat different approach in demanding equality. She explored the basic rights of man and then furthered her perspective by writing about equal rights for women. Instead of writing this declaration to the king, she wrote it to the queen. She first rhetorically questions why women are being deprived of their basic rights.

Further on in the document, she observes that women "stick together" and do not have petty or bizarre standards to live up to. Indirectly, she is able to demonstrate that women are of a higher intelligence - "into the crassest ignorance, he wants to command as a despot a sex which is in full possession of its intellectual faculties; he pretends to enjoy the Revolution and to claim his rights to equality in order to say nothing more about it" (Gouges 105). In addition, she comments that women are a more reasonable, more courageous gender, and of course, the most beautiful. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen is compared to The Declaration of the Rights of Woman.

In Gouges revised document, she added the word 'woman' next to the word 'man. ' In Article IV, Gouges explained, "the only limits on the exercise of natural rights of woman are perpetual male tyranny" (106). In comparison to Article IV regarding the rights of man and the citizen, only the man is mentioned as free and with natural rights. By Gouges revision to Article IV, she not only claims the "natural rights" of women, but also their freedom from men.

She concludes her document with a zealous reflection - for women to break free from men's grasp and declare their independence. Men were the huge winners from the Revolution, and workers, women, and slaves were most obviously the losers (Pojmann 10/02/03). Regardless of the strong impact women had during the revolution, such as the march to Versailles, they did not gain much from their efforts. For example, women were able to get divorce legalized after much persuasion; however, they were not victorious in their crusade for an education or constitutional rights (Kishlansky 658).

Gouges' essay was bittersweet. Although she was persecuted for her political beliefs and was not able to attain immediate privileges for women during the revolution, she designed a great platform for the future of feminist rights. Then there is Edmund Burke - a man who has a unique outlook on the revolution. Burke stands behind the traditional, conservative French ways. His document clearly displays an aversion to change. He blames the need for reform on the ungratefulness of the people.

He scolds his fellow men by articulating that by "following those false lights, France has brought undisguised calamities at a higher price than any nation has purchased the most unequivocal blessings" (109). Clearly, he believes France is worse off now from this revolution than it was before. Burke brings up the issue of increasing corruption, greed, crime, poverty, and need for power. He reasons that it is more beneficial to France to revise what it has for a constitution than to tear it up all together and start from scratch. "Liberty... must emerge out of the gradual development of the old order, and not its destruction" (Kishlansky 718). Even though Burke was a huge supporter of conservatism, he still could not stop the revolution or the drastic changes it would bring about.

His essay was thought provoking, yet somewhat a symbol of failure of the French Revolution. He explained the so-called disadvantages of a revolution, yet it still occurred. Nevertheless, he shed positive attention upon an emerging political class - conservatism. Victor Hugo made a statement about the revolution in Les Miserables that epitomizes the central concept of the uprising and even the ideas behind the aforementioned authors' essays: "Anger may be foolish and absurd, and one may be wrongly irritated, but a man never feels outraged unless in some aspect he is fundamentally right" (89). This notion unmistakably exemplifies the drive behind the people of France and their dire need for reform. Sieyes, Gouges, and Burke are all great examples of successful and unsuccessful philosophies during the revolution.

Work Cited Hugo, Victor. Les Miserables. New American Library: New York, New York. 1987. P. 89.