compare it to the version of the story I told in class. How does reading the original version of the story add to your impressions of Rousseau? Do you find yourself more sympathetic to him or less sympathetic to him? Does the version of the story I told you in class seem close enough to the original, or do you think that students definitely should read the original version and draw their own conclusions?
The original version does show Rousseau's remorse much more, which does make me feel a little more sympathetic. I think, however, that is to be expected because rarely does anyone paint a picture of themselves as a criminal without any regret. He was still clearly in the wrong, but reading it in his own words he obviously tried to convince the reader of his regret. I think it's interesting to hear both sides of the story, but simply hearing your version is good enough too.
ReplyDeleteI think overall both the stories are pretty close to the same. In class you told us how he stole the ribbon and than accused the young women that she stole it and after she tried defending herself for something she didn't do, Rousseau's still didn't admit to stealing the ribbon. You told how he didn't really care that she would loose her job and didn't care that she would have a hard time finding a new job. The only thing you missed out on is how Rousseau felt. In his story he tells the readers how what he did practically haunts him. Knowing his side of the story makes me feel a little bit sympathetic towards him since he did feel bad but than another part of me doesn't because in his book he expresses how much he knew it was going to hurt the girl and still never did anything about it. I think the story you told us in class is close enough to the original but I still think students should read the original version.
ReplyDeleteHolly Vancura
I think I cheat a bit as I tell the story. I should probably note that Rousseau is discovered in possession of the ribbon and *then* blames it on the girl. Not sure if that makes him more sympathetic or less.
DeleteThe main difference between the story told in class and the story described in the book regards how Rousseau lied. In class, it was never told that Rousseau was caught with the ribbon. In the story, he actually was. Also, in class, it was told that Rousseau said he saw the servant take the ribbon. In the actual story, Rousseau said that the servant girl gave him the ribbon. That was the main difference.
ReplyDelete- Cody Martens
Right, Cody. And here's what's interesting (to me at least) in the process. I probably told the story right when I first game the lecture 27 years ago. I didn't bother to read the primary sources again, and so, little by little, I changed the story--getting farther away from the original than I ever intended!
DeleteFrom what I read from the online lecture notes, you told the story in a much more broad way. Instead of telling of the specific event that led Rousseau to his conclusions on human nature, you told his opinions on it. His version of the events make it seem as though he is criticizing Marion in order to justify blaming her for the theft.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, he even says he is to blame and he says he always felt the wickedness of his deed, stealing the ribbon of Mademoiselle Pontal. He isn't easy to sympathize with after reading his story. Because he says that he was caught with the ribbon before blaming her, and that he knew she would face serious consequences but didn't care.
Vi Michel
From the story told in class to the original the only difference is on how Rousseau lied to the Madame. In class you told us that he was not caught with the ribbon but in the original he was. And I still don't feel sympathetic at all because he is a thief and a lair on how he got the ribbon.
ReplyDeleteMason Sundvold
I think that both versions of the story are very similar, except for in the real story he was found with the ribbon he didn't get away with it. I do not feel sorry for him because he did take the ribbon and he is the one that should be in trouble for it not the maid. So I do not feel sorry for Rousseau.
ReplyDelete-Colton Schaefer
I definitely think students should have to hear both versions to get a full picture of how Rousseau's thoughts on what he did. Reading thing made me feel more sympathetic for him because it shows that does feel guilty in a way about what he did. In the version you said in class, it seems that Rousseau had a completely clean conscience when he blamed the servant for stealing the ribbon. It is important to understand Rousseau's thoughts to truly understand why he believes that we should change society, not man.
ReplyDeleteTabitha DeVoss
I don't feel much sympathy towards Rousseau. He may have felt guilty for taking the ribbon but it does not excuse the fact that he did take it and put the blame on someone else. Both stories are similar though in class he wasn't caught with the ribbon like he was in the original story. I think it would be beneficial to students to read the original story. It helps to understand it a little more and then they can draw some of their own conclusions on what happened.
ReplyDelete-Melayna Waisanen
Rousseau was Enlightenment Philosophical thinker who had a idea of dualism because the matter and spirit were live forever. So he attacked the ruling as a socialogical feudal and to emphasize the democracy. And he thought the human equal. thus he reacted sensitive to stealing the ribbon. that part is one of the important thing to understand about Rousseau.
ReplyDelete