Wollstonecraft kontra Rousseau

Abstract

The pioneer feminist philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797) has been the subject of much ättention recently as it is now 200 years since she died. At long last her Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) has been translated into Swedish, and a Swedish biography disclosing her dramatical life to a larger audience has been published. The author hopes this will open np for a more serious discussion of ber ideas based on the study of her writings. This study tries to make a contribution to that discussion. To a large extent, the energy present in the Vindication draws from her reaction to the teachings of Jean Jacques Rousseau. As much as she admired him as a writer of novels, she despised his views on women, especially as they were expressed in Emile, ou De Véducation (1762). She devoted a large part of her book to finding faults with him and sometimes you get the impression that there was no end to them. In this study, however, an attempt is made to acknowledge Rousseau both as an ideal and an enemy to Mary Wollstonecraft, even if most of the text deals with her critique of him and his ideas. She disagrees with his views on history and theology, ethics and education, as well as with his opinion of women. Their differences converge in an ambivalent approach to the notions of reason and sensibility. This study also explores the many ways in which Mary Wollstonecraft tried to come to terms with her ambivalence towards Rousseau. She makes excuses on his behalf, she points out the logical errors in his reasoning as though she could persuade him in his grave, and she desperately tries to understand how he could be so much mistaken, when he seemed so sensitive and intelligent on other topics. In the end she pities him; she thinks he gave up on love too easily. Emile will stay isolated and lonely even together with his Sophie, Rousseau's conception of the ideal woman. Rousseau's ideal man can never be loved and understood by a woman.