#sj had at one point written “people who love each other should marry” and then seemed to later have thrown in “men and women” but who know | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

frevandrest · 8 months

Note

Is there a timeline for Saint-Just’s divorce opinions? I remember him early on writing that it was immoral and then he said a marriage could be separated if the couple didn’t have children in 7? years.

There are only two "phases" that we know of (against then in favour); or, rather, only one source/point when he voiced he was against divorce. This is in his 1791 book "L'esprit de la révolution". In it, SJ says that divorce ruins the social contact, but doesn't elaborate much. I mean, there is an entire chapter about it, but it's a few paragraphs long (half of which are ramblings about Rome and God/religion). I honestly must admit that I don't understand why he argues against. He says that it's against nature. That book aged badly like a week (?) after it was published, because it praised the Constitutional monarchy and then soon after Louis decided to take a trip to Varennes.

So soon after, in "De la Nature", we have SJ arguing pro divorce, and he remained very in favour of it for the rest of his life. Now, we don't know when "De la Nature" was written, but it had to be after "L'esprit" but before September 1792 (when divorce was legalized), because he talks about how divorce should be allowed (implying that it's not yet legal at the time of writing). He said some really based things in "De la Nature" about the rights of women (of which divorce is important aspect) but I need to go through that book to be able to talk about details. As I understand, he talks about how the existence of divorce would ensure independence (I guess as in, autonomy). (I think this independence when it comes to women is a theme he mentions more than once in his writings, though in different contexts). Then in "Les Fragments d'institutions républicaines" (written sometimes in late 1793-early 1794), he talks positively about divorce once again. Although here it is more in practical terms (since it was already legal), so he was writing about the regulations surrounding divorce and the rights of children after divorce.

"he said a marriage could be separated if the couple didn’t have children in 7? years."

Yes, but he does not give this as a condition under which a divorce can happen - he advocated for free divorce without a reason. This note says that a couple that has no children after 7 years is divorced by law and must separate. Like a mandatory divorce in this situation? Which may sound strange, given that he wrote a few paragraphs earlier that "man and a woman who love each other are married" so... what if those childless people love each other, Antoine? (Spoiler: he never explains). So this is really wtf and contradictory and some historians tried to explain it as SJ seeing having children as marriage's only purpose (so if no children = divorce), and idk, maybe? But I don't really see it. SJ generally writes so much about the right of women to decide on their spouse, AND he openly says that a man and a woman who love each other are married and they don't have to tell anyone (they can keep it a secret), unless she gets pregnant, when they must declare it. So he definitely argued for the existence of marriage without children. Which makes this comment about mandatory divorce after 7 years very confusing.

But! Let's not forget that this was 18c century and boy did they love to include things that were happening around them as if those are universal laws (to the point where you can glean people's personal biographies through srs political writing). In this case, we know that Thèrése Gellé left her husband on the 7th anniversary of their marriage (25 July 1793), and they did not have children.

No idea if SJ had any link to Thèrése at the time, but this was a marriage that affected him a lot in 1786 and SJ Never Forgets. And we know he knew of Thèrése's escape to Paris after she left her husband so he definitely knew of this incident (since he was believed to had kidnapped her and/or responsible that she left). So I am positive that this note in the Institutions was inspired by the event, for whatever reason.

#ask #anonymous #frev #saint-just

36 notes · View notes

dangermousie · 1 year

Text

Of course Ming Ye’s plan to save Sang Jiu involves gruesomely dying in her stead. If aesthetically suffering was an Olympic sport, the man would be going for a gold medal.

I have my issues with this portion of the story (not the way it’s written, it’s done well, but with my liking or lack thereof for this couple, about which more below) but this is the important point! Yes, the tears are important blah blah but this is a lesson about how to swap someone’s demonic stuff without, you know, driving nails into them like they are evil Jesus.

By now, I am quite done with these two boneheads, but I confess that made even my cold black shriveled heart hurt.

(I guess they had a starter marriage :P)

Ummmm, honey! She just massacred 10K people! I am sure they had old and kids among them. Like...by now I want to smack both of them with a shovel, tbh.

Awwww. Even with my annoyance at these two, this once again made me :(

Sang Jiu being her charming self. Let the man die in peace (or, since you yourself are about to keel over), let him survive in peace.

OK, OK, Mousie, stop being irritated and concentrate on how pretty LYX looks here.

And then she’s all “psych! I can’t be undevilized or even survive because my normal body is dead.” You couldn’t have let him know BEFORE he got repeatedly flambeed for you?

It’s OK, hot dimbulb, there are many many fangirls who will gladly accept your...ahem...divine essence. All night long.

What the hell! Now that she’s dying, she still wants to do her best so he’d not have any peace. No dissipating before a final twist of the knife. WTF! By now, any shred of sympathy I had for her (and to a large degree MY) has disappeared utterly. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s bad writing - just as MY is terrible at communicating and prone to dramatic gestures over common sense functioning, Sang Jiu is incredibly self-absorbed and immature from beginning to end. She was someone who thought it was a great idea to marry a guy who did not know her at all because he was hot. She also thought it was a great idea to force him into sex right after they got divorced. She didn’t wait to find out whether the method she came up with would result in divine punishment or whether it was still worth it to use the crystal chalice despite where it came from or or or or or really anything. It’s just before she went powerful and evil, Ming Ye and the viewer could ignore the red flags (which got redder and redder; I mean much as fictional dubcon in 14 was hot, it WAS 100% dubcon/sexual assault; no nice sweet good selfless well-adjusted person does that) but once she got power into her hands and trauma really shoved her further, it became really clear. It’s kind of like Tantai Jin. If he has no status and no power, does it matter in terms of its effect on the world if he would love revenge or is cold or has trauma or w/e? No, of course not because whether he’s a well-adjusted sweetheart or dysfunctional psycho, he has no power to carry out anything, whether it’s to open a puppy shelter or to carry out a wholesale slaughter. But once he gets power, his traumas and quirks become everyone else’s concern and one must deal with them somehow because he makes it everyone’s business. Same here.

What. The. Fuck. That is not romantic, this is UGH. Honestly, I am glad MY and SJ found each other because they should not inflict themselves on other partners. It’s kind of amazing that I started out liking them and by now I am all “thanks divine lightning, hurry it up with your barbeque.”

He ultimately does not but by then I stopped caring. I am so so so happy we are back to our headcases Tantai Jin and Susu.

The thing is - my ranting does not mean I did not enjoy this portion of the story (unlike in the novel where I skimmed it since I dngaf about it at all.) The acting is great, the visuals are nuts, and the characters, including MY and SJ are completely internally consistent and their actions make total sense for what and who they are - their arcs are logical. I strongly dislike both of them by the end, but that does not mean it was not a well-done story.

#cdrama #luo yunxi #bai lu #till the end of the moon

50 notes · View notes