Women of the French Revolution

Dear Linda Kelly: Your book is delicious in the ear. I read this book aloud until my voice was tired. If I had read this book at nineteen, I think I would have gone around for days secretly pretending to be Madame de Stael or Madame de la Tour du Pin. (Which of course invites the question: what stops me now? You've given me all the trimmings to sew myself the invisible mental costumes.) I'm no scholar, but I'm interested in the people who make history and the history that makes people. I didn't know very much about the French Revolution before I read your book. Had you written it with an axe to grind, a scholarly point to prove, I might not have learned how much I have left to know about the time and place. (And isn't that the delight in reading history? Not knowing everything - but opening unexplored rooms?) I'm so glad you wrote this book. I'm glad you took the trouble to explain what the fourth estate really was and to report the political events as they occurred. Reading those passages was like reading the best of our contemporary blogs on jurisprudence and congressional debate. And I'm glad you focused on the women's lives and actions. I was, when I picked the book up, apprehensive of a gender statement. Thank you for giving me Women of the French Revolution, not Womanhood of the French Revolution. If you wrote this book for the intelligent reader who wants to know who the women players were and what drove them, and to what ends they were driven, then you succeeded. Reading, I found flesh and blood women, complex and real. And, happily, I don't feel superior to them, as much biography leaves its reader feeling about its subject. I now know who these women were, and what they did and said. I grasp their actions and their educations. They, not you, compel me, as they should. Well done. Your vocabulary is crisp and economical, and whenever possible, you let the women speak to us in their own quotes. This is seductive history. This is history that can open the eyes of a reader who finds history dull. This is history that makes me want to read more, to keep these women and this time in the room with me a little longer. Thank you, Linda Kelly.

Women in France sacrificed much but gained little from the French Revolution. Kelly discusses this in a chronological way that is intended for those interested in a broad study of the role of women during the French Revolution. Kelly is the co-editor of two anthologies, Feats and Proposals, and has written for number of papers, including the Times Literary Supplement and the Washington Post. Her other most recent work is the book Juniper Hall. Kelly integrates general information about the French Revolution with more detailed stories of important women of the period. The work centers on the experiences of Olympe de Gouges, Th¨¥roigne de M¨¥ricourt, Madame Roland, Madame de Sta§×l, and others. Using primary sources, Kelly recounts the experiences of women from the early days of the revolution to their deaths or the beginning of France¡¯s military dictatorship. Though women had no official role in politics, they influenced policy through mob tactics, salons, and by persuading their powerful husbands and lovers. Kelly tells the colorful and diverse stories of influential women of the French Revolution in order to support her thesis. Many of the women gave their lives for their beliefs and others lost everything they once held dear. Though these women sacrificed much in the name of the republic, there was little lasting change for women. Kelly writes, ¡°[o]nly the laws of inheritance, by which, in 1791, women were legally entitled to an equal share with men, remained unchanged, the only tangible legacy of the Revolution.¡± This work is more detailed than a general overview of the French Revolution, but it is certainly not a treatise. Though the work is not intended for scholarly reading alone, Kelly uses many French terms that are left unexplained and utilizes a vocabulary that can only be understood by those possessing an extensive education or a large dictionary. The book is interesting an informative, but somewhat difficult to read. It is too broad and short to serve to impart the scholarly knowledge her vocabulary shows was her intention. The chronological order and the general events of the Revolution help the reader to understand the order of events, which shows that the author wrote for the layperson. This is in direct contrast to the intention shown in her vocabulary.