Xll lllustrations
26 “ Great Disbanding of the Anticonstitutional Army"
(1792)
27. From Sade's Philosophie da由 le boudoir (1795)
28. From Sade's Philosoμie da叫 le boudoir (1795)
29. Festival of the Supreme Being, June 1794
30. Pierre-Narcisse Gu岳rin， The Relurn 01 Mar，叫加111.1
(1799)
3 1. J acques-Louis David , The Intervention 01 the Sabine
Women (1799)
;:;11:11111it--fa;11
"7
13 0
13 1 Preface
155
166
168 Since the title of this book may be obscure to some readers , 1 wiU
begin with a few words of explanation about what 1 mean by family
romance. The term is Freud's , though it is now used , especially by
literary criti臼， in ways that are only loosely related to Freud's origi.
nal formulation. I By “ family romance" Freud meant the neurotic's
fantasy of “ getting free from the paren臼 of whom he now has a low
opinion and of replacing them by others , who , as a rule , are of
higher social standing."2 When the child feels slighted by his par-
ents , he (he , in particular, since Freud thought this tendency was
much weaker in girls) retaliates hy imagining that these are not in
fact his parents and that his real parents are important landowners ,
aristo叮ats， or even kings and queens. In Freud's formulation , the
family romance was located in the individual psyche and was a way
for individuals , especially boys , to fantasize about their place in the
social order. Thus the individual psyche was linked to the social
order through familial imagery and through intrafamilial conflict
Ra ther t h_an using this term in the strict Freudian sense as apply-
ing to the individual psyche , 1 use it to refer to the political-that 間，
the collective-unconscio肘， and 1 give the term a positive connota-
tion. Byfi缸nily ro闖闖 1 mean the collective , unconscious images of
the familial order that unde.rlie revolutionary politics. 1 will be argu
ing that the French had a kind of collective political unconscious that
was structured by na訂 atives of family relations. 3 1 do not claim that
1. See , for example, the useful disCllssion in Christine van Boheemen , The Novel
as Fa-叫ry Roma鬧。 Lang!呵仇 G叫吭 and Authority from Fielding to .fi句 ce (Ithaca, N.Y. ,
1987). The idea of family romance also informs , among others , ]anet L. Beizer.
Fami旬 Plots: Baizac 's Narrative Generations (New Haven, 1986)
2. From “ Family Romanc，肘，" in vol. 9 of Th e S.帥血，rd Edition 01 rhe Camp岫
Psychological Works OJ Sigmund Fre叫:， trans. James Strachey (London , 1959), pp. 238-
239. 1 am indebted to Ruth Leys for 曲的 reference and for severa1 other helpful
suggestlons
3. The term political U'悶。悶悶咽 became current in litera可 studies after Fredric
]ameson elaborated it in The PoliJ. ical Unco間cùru.s: Narr，叫'"'山 aS“ially S'Y'呻olic Acl

XIV Prefi血e
thìs is a universal phenomenon; other peoples at other times might
well experience politics in other terms. But most Europeans in the
eighteenth century thought of their rulers as fathers and of their
nations as fam泌的 writ large. This familial grid operated on both the
conscious and the unconscious level of experience
The French in a sense did wish to get free from the political
parents of whom they had developed a low opinion , but they did
not imagine replacing thein with others who were of a higher so-
cial standing. They imagined replacing them-the king and the
1 gu~en-with 空 different kind of f~T哇~~v， one in which the parents
! were -è"ffaced and the children , especial1 y the brothers , acted autono
mously. Needless to say, however, the French revolutionaries did not
stand at the tribune and lay out their psychosexual fantasies about
the political order. As a consequence , many readers may question
the veηterms po的ical unco閉目。叫 and fainily romance; what evi
dence could possibly prove 也eir existence? My case for using these
terms is simply that they年~e_l~ ~s make ,.s.e nse of PV吟'nce_that would
other、vise remain confounding an廿 mysterious. 1 hope to present
enough of this evidence to convince my readers that such an ap-
proach is fruitfuL because it brings p叫ausb:_Q.v~rl~l?ked ev油nce
into clearer iO C1,.lS and b竺空u，se it r<\i~es.j且旦回1叩山u~Sti出&通車且L
the meanings of modern politics. The ideology of absolutism ex-
plicitly tied royal govemment to the patriarchal family, and the use
of the termfrat.訂nity during the French Revolution implied a break
with 曲的 prior mode l. It makes sense , then , to ask what 出is break in
the family model of politics meant
By introducing the termfamily r翩翩叫 1 do not mean to suggest
that the French revolutionaries were acting out of some kind of
ljlili--idi--
pathological fantasy rooted in warped individual psychologies. The
revolution的海mily;í'扭扭e"， (and 也ey were plural) were not
n且血。臨揖aaicms...to..disappointment-as in Freud's formulation-
but c:~eative effÇ>rt.穹的 reimagine the political world , to imagine a
polity unhinged from patriarchal authority. 1 use the term fa由均
romance(s) in order to suggest that much of this imaginative effort
went on below the surface , as it were , of conscious political dis-
怔由 aca， N 玄'. 1.981~. My. analysis is not_ much informed by Jam由o~， though 1 do
endorse his daim that “ t~e structure of the psyche is histori-cal , and has a fíjstorγ
(p. 62). It might be said that 1 am 甘 ying to uncover some of that h叫0坪，
P們耳face XV
course. 1 try to get at its constitution and changes through a variety
of documents , ranging from speeches about the killing ofthe king to
paintings and engravings of ordinaηfamilies
1 do not offer 由is analysis of family romances as a replacement
for traditional political history, as if feelings about paternal author-
肌 for instanc已 somehow predetermined the nature of overt politi-
cal conflicts. 1 do not mean to reduce politics to fanta扭曲， eithe z:
individual or collective. Yetn.olitics.. dn" deoen~η~ imag:~natiQn and
hence to some extent OP fa且2勻~， and family experience is the 回urce
of much of that fantasy. Family issues divided political groups on a
consclOUS 缸ld on an unconscious level. It is significant , for example ,
that di証erences over family policy divided a broadly defined politi
calleft, wh油 propo叫 sweeping changes in family laws , from a
broadly defined right, which res帥d those changes. In many and
sometimes surprising ways , family romances , both conscìous and
unconscious , helped且rgani_?e the poli正il;al e，迎 eriençe of the Revolu-
tion; revoluùonaries and counterrevolutionaries alike had to con-
front the issues of paternal 主旦thoJjt咒 female participauon , and
fraternal solidarity. They had to tell stories about how the republic
ca白 to be and what it meant , and those stories a1ways had an
element of family conftict and resolution. Some of the elemen已 of
the stories were perennial-the relaùons of fathers to sons , hus-
bands to wives , parents to children , men to women-but their par-
ticular configurations were contingent on the social and political
patterns P.Toduce-Ø by the revolutionary process
Over the years of preparation of this book, 1 have benefited from
the help and encouragèment of countless individuals and institu-
tions. My work on this p呵ect 且rst got off the ground during the
academic year 1988-89 thanks to a National Endowment for the
Humanities fellowship at the School of Social Science of the 1n-
stitute for Advanced Study in Princeton. The School of Arts and
Sciences at the University ofPennsylvania made it possible for me 扭
扭ke a year's leave 血 1均 988-89 by sl叩 P 抖leme凹 趾tm
n
the 1nstitute for Advanced Study imd has also generously supported
my research 血 s ince 1987 出 t hrou莒h 由e Joe and Emil句 y Lowe Founda-
tl口n Term Proft 跆es品sorshi中
P 泊 i n the Huma叩m山tle
臼s. This research fund
provided me with the invaluable help of two research assistants ,
Teffrey Horn and Victoria Thompson. The Society for the Human-
ities at Cornell University provided me with a semester's leave and
 ,
XVl PreJa祖

an intellectual home during the spring of 1990. To all these institu- 1

tions and my coll凹gues at them , 1 am very grateful
1 had the good fortune (at least it usually seemed like good
tortune) of working on this book during the bicentennial celebra- The Family Model of Politics
tions of the French Revolution. As a consequence 1 had the oppor-
tUnIty to give various parts at conferences and lectures around the
world. Many of the central themes of my argument were first elabo-
rated ln the Gauss seminars that I gave atpnnCetonUXliverszty m the
fall of 1988 and in the Hagey lectures at Waterloo University in the It was a cold and foggy morning in winter when the king of France
臼
fall ofl均989. It 站
i simpo
由ss且ibl扭etωor吋ec∞
ogn吐ize adequat扭el勾.y alloft出
he helpful met his death. At 10:22 A.M. on 21 January 1793 , the executioner
sug
咿伊
g叫
e s dropped the guillotine's blade on the neck of Louis Capet , the
mgs in Rouen , Paris , Tokyo , Edinburgh , Milan , and many other former Louis XVI (see 且gure 1). The recently installed guillotine
places. Special recognition is due to the participan臼 in my seminar had been designed as the great equalizer; with 此， every death would
on sexual1Wand repubHCanism at the FoIger Institute in d1e spring be the same , virtually automatic , presumably painless. The deputies
of1991They graciously sat through weeks ofdiscusslon on matters hoped that by killing Louis in this way, they would prove “ that great
fi--!lIlli--::JI most dear to me , read large portions of the manuscript of the book , truth which the prejudices of so many centuries had stifled; today we
and freely gave of their own ideas on the subject. The two readers have just convinced ourselves that a king is only a man and that no
for the U niversity of California Press , Sa叫1 Maza and Dena Good- man is above the laws."
man , offered many valuable suggestions; and Sheila Levine , as In these few words , the newspaper writer captured the meaning
usual , shepherded me and the book 出rough all the necessary s也ges of the event in the most accessible terms: the French killed the king
一寸」‘

toward publication. Margaret J acob has shared all my woπies and in order to 啞?也必鄧5丘f主~S that the king was only a man like other
dTlit--dlτ453

hopes for this book and has read i臼 vanous versions with immense men , 出tha泣t 血
t hC:，I_!!主且cofk
旭III耳gshi中pwhi止ch had been so powe盯rf
，ulduring
臼
good cheer and good sense s叩o manyc 臼 entu叮ne 臼s could be ef証 faced
Since 1 have been studying the forms of French revolutionarv Europe! Peoples of the world! Look carefully at the thrones and you
pol血臼 for two decades now, 1 suppose 出at it is about time 由伽 剖t 1
a wills甜ee that they are noth 划ing but dust!"l As ifto ensure the return of
r閃ec∞
ogniz扭ed the importance of 吐t h
也efami勾 l甘ymc印
onstituting the po
叫li由
tl臼 I this particular throne to dust , the severed head and body of the king
司 1439

iI:Or吋
de位r. So
凹n削m
耽 白s 也
e t he
… were immediately deposited in a deep grave in the Madeleine Ceme-
叫司司司草司哥哥札吭高通

iliM
峙yownm
帥…t扭m
e盯肺忱昀…叫
吋 r間盯e臼悶削叫
叫…
s泣叫叫叫
巾
ti
叫州
i泊叫C臼seme
n 且 E望E詐
吋
ed
的阱
圳川
h
丘 omt恥
hee叫
x叩F恥 如wm
呵g tery and covered with quicklime. All remaining traces of the king's
!u戶且心血弘戶且此拉拉.lli..ehojd， M于 mother was involved in many 1 physical presence were 是ffaced
political and public-interest organizations , sat for ten years on the 1].~， newspaper arti ç_le's tones of hope and tenses of conditional-
cìty council of S t. PauI , Mìnneso恤.， and now is a county commis- it} rbelié)a great iÍ.且J:SÎetr: 'France has given a great example to the
sioner. My father 且rst tolerated and then actively e月 oyed 出e eXClte- pe句話。f 伽 world and a great lesson to kings，伽 writer proclaims ,
mem.I learned ?n mmense amount about the way local poluics but will the one and the other profit from it? The day is forever
worked by watchmg my mother and have always been encouraged memorable , but will it survive for posterity? "Never let insult CQme
司l
m my Intellectual endeavors to understand themby my fathmI only near you. Historians! Be worthy of the tiine; write the truth , nothing
hope that they WIlI see in these pages a tnbute to the1r mnuence but the truth 可 The writer writes to reject all semblance of guil t. The
(though 1 do not mean to imply that the family and gender relations
of the French Revolution remind me of home!) 1. "Parìs. ]ournée du 21 ， "Journal 申， h咖me.s libres de to甜 t.， 伊戶， no 缸， 22]anu
缸7 叮叮 Unless otherwìse noted, all translations from 出e French are my Qwn
2. Ibid
 電7

2 TheFami會 Model of Polit岫

τheFa'叫[y Mo缸10fPo恤臼 3

。f the entire social order, even though the political position of Louis
XVI had been undermined in some respec臼 before '793 , perhaps
even before 1789. The status of Louis Capet was very much in
questìon at the time of his execution. Had the executioner killed a
king or a man long since deprived ofhis sacred status? Whatever the
answer, whether the king was symbolically dead in '793 , 1789 , or
before , hi~ actual death in 1'7"'}丸s;trew_<!tt~~i9n t，丘克旦旦旦且..Y_oid
marked by the empty pedestal facing Louis during his execution
The pedestal had supported a statue of his grandfather, Louis Xv.
The government which ordered the execution of the former king
was a republic whose legitimacy rested 00 popular sovereignty. Es-
tablishiog a republic on paper took a stroke of the pen; winning the
allegiance of the population and establishing an enduring sense of
生 gitim缸V 問 quired much more. What would make people obey the
law in the new 50口al order?~The king had been the head of a social
body held together by [!)ÕP 梢。f_Ç[eferenc里 peasan臼 defeπed to
their landlords , journeymen to the叮 masters ， great magnates to
their king, wives to their hU5bands , and children to their parents
Z EngmvTJlt;7;LTZZZ:zylznht:tfz;于附晶晶間， Au叫thor叫江向于 in the state 叫
w見叫s 位
e XD
叫li滔
citl
咐Iy modeled 叩
0 n aut由
hQ且缸4且址迎l阻 e J

fà可可 λm
叫ya
叫1 世
d ecl
伽la盯r叫
a
mmwhm

叫配問間站du山dh 吋 h 閉口由此

清mm
mM山
阱，的m扭

Lmm
ohhAMFeateeag

別問 LMJLhvnm

2tggyRmhmb-FmmeM
Hu
mmr

叫 R刊坤hm 阻"咱可出恥時間臼

，別吋
自由

d 時 hzw.

huL叮吋 H 叩此吐時 tm 此 b
SO

V
目 rtUT3r

間
r'ev
吋 er
間'en
缸ce of chil站
bh dr間en for 出 t hei叮
r pa
盯ren臼 z站s linked tωo the legitimat扭
恥RMYU ﹒的HMdnwmpn

bMvrfy
e

缸 dntmeueOWA1a

問∞刊
oeooc.vtxovbt
ueJHKTY

h 吐 ucrhovt
tdweueamms

lnsHme
ito itnf 1
引閉目民kmmdh 叮 Ydm可叩

on;
nf
ndf3--bp
llcta'
扭曲 RU 臼殉叫 bN 位叫祖 pd

aaknarhtziEon
問臼 ifm

obedience of subjects to their sovereign."4 Once the king had been

hcaztbnnn
MWFHtevat-Mm-m

仙一間m
抽血

刮目已呵叫 mrse缸缸 phd間 m

M甜甜凹的

ttddnded--auk
d
怕T

eliminated , what was to be the model that ensured the citizens'

p 站叩而自

記
。bedience?
UUUEngtcm

一U

hm 間加叩恥
叫耽間組 m吋

N 0 one understood better than the English critic of the Revolu~

df
Tm祖 y 叫 e 盯 em刊

三
」山山叮ihdk 吋
刮目

明mm扒問句mmm 雌

tion , Edmund Burke , the connection between filial devotion and the
叫叫圳叫叫吋山川M

yf5CU
叫 anoE

willingne品 of a subject to obey. He feared that the whole community

問
咒
ntnmTehe
dh加

would l;J e destroyed by the subversion of “ those principles of domes~

把知自

aboehaμ
闊

閱 (u
L∞

、己心

tic trust and fidelity which form the discipline of social life."5 1n
UE
恆的

前L

reviewing the early events of the Fren~h Revolution and in particu-

P
v台叮加軒

ahh

JIVE-tel

咀閏mpm

lar the demeaning of the royal family during the October Days of
的Mbω

ndwk

-rnFd
叩吋 wd
um 即回

山 WT 回
比

吋出
m可叮叮

1789, Burke bemoaned the passing of what he called the age of

祖 oh
3g
沈 UR

chivalrya叫 its replacement by the age of “sopl:!jsters♂econoIDls唔，

e出

只且且 calculators":
刮
心 rM

問
d

叫
n

4:. Mar~el Garaud and Romuald Szramkìewicz , La Révolution fran腳se et la familk

(Paris , 1978) , p. 135
5. Letter to a Member of the Nati棚al Assembly, quoted in Steven Blakemore , B前.ke
TJFEELEZZ:zzzt:;;2;?缸izrrh;2DavidRJ叫甜， TheKi呵3 and lhe Fall of Language: -The 1嗯?問品 R間。 lu帥彷由 Linguis缸 Event (Hanover, N.H. ,
198~)， ~. 42. Blakemore offers an excellent discussioñ of Burke's understanding of
patna-τ.chy.
 z
宅穹

'
哼
i

TheFam均 ModelofPo卸的 5
4 The Family Model 0/ Politics

In the new age , all the pleasing illusions , which made power gentle , struction of absolutis_ffi ~~~d on the d包住I!Çtiçm of .parri~rchy; ~
,

and obedience liberal , which harmonized the di fIerent shades of life , 而at 伽 French called “la ':puíssance paternelle"? How tar 抖。uld
and which , by a bl叩 d assimilation , incorporated into politi臼 the the mOderauon of paternal authorIty gopwould the restncuon
sentiments which beautify and soften private society, are to be dis- of 叫ernal 叫10rity make everyone in the politi叫 family 叩祉，
brciherW仙 bro 伽枷
In 0伽 wo拙，
solved by this new conquering empire of light 阻d reason. All the
decent drapery of life is to be rudely torn ofI,
what
s to be 間
t
Ill;:t刮 ed pa泣t甘 f;at血 叩 岫

dom
叫lí阻sm wa 茁
Without that “ decent drapery," wÌthout "the sentiments which beau- by the triarchal 臼 her廿? If pater na r e­

v叭吋、，l缸aced by a model of 仕 fra瓜te盯口 叫

rrm1 t句
此 Y弘， what were 間 血 lmp 抖
e 刮H
lica 且
on肘 s of 出
t 叫t
ha
tify and soften private society," Burke predicted , the revolutionaries
:Lewm帥l? How, for instance ，叫做 ideaofthe political
of the 凹dusion
would have to ru! e by the force of terror “ ln the groves of their
be malatamedm the absence oldJustlkatIons of
academy, at the end of every vista, you see not由 hing but the ga 叫llows正" ofwomen to
, the model of the famlly be thrown
Myanalysis 站s in the 跆 flollowing pa 茍ge
白SI阻s much influenced by Bu 盯rke's “ natural' famlly order?would
based on ISOlated , mdependent ,
fundamental insight ÎntωDtheint世erwe臼avi血 ngof.且[.lY<!
沮te.晶品.ea堪!!王且且ent臼sand out altrwetherm favor of a model l
、 J早
.Qu且 bli~ p q_litics , even though 1 have a very different view of 'the ，
self-po自由 sing cont間mgmdivldualsPThe attack on absoiutism
Revolution from his. Burke saw that political obedience rested on broughtmts turbulentwake anecessaryreevaluationofT 竺?叩7
something more than rational calculation “ To make us love our , of the individual self dId not
t;ountry, our country ought to be lovely."7 Political obedience always AIthoughd1ese questtons might seem to be obVIous , they
rests on a set of assumptions about the proper working of the so口al 叮esent themselves very clearly or even all uonce to the leaders of
;order, and obedience-in modern terms , consent-is never auto :i叫rench Re叫ltion. To a great ex叫 thesePOIlucal qu 帥 ons have also
theorFCon-
'(lmatìc, even when 扯i tmo dropped out ofmuch modern , contract-based
l伸卡O叫肘 It wa 缸s certa 缸m 叫ly not au 叫t阻
岫omatic in the new 呻ubl垃tCι， 血 as 阻 叮act theory pretends that questIons about the fUIdly and the rela
i性紗卡伊叫llec
O 口tor.閃'S and mi凶II山
lit祖
arηγ r閃ec
口凹
r 山tt扭
u er凹sd也tS缸
∞。仰
C v叮
e re
“ dev問eη day, tions between men and women belong i 可 apn 咽 psnh~ 做學 ~e

from th 立且 ublic arena, All of the great politícal theorists from the
The revolutionaries were ripping the veil of deference off society.
with the question in part叫­
Unlike Burke , however, they did not see this as the end of all seventeenth centurfonward struggled ,
伽 m tried to devise
decency; they wanted to make their government “ lovely" too. From lar. of women's place in the new order, and aU of
1789 onward , supporters of the Revolution were engaged in the 叫 utions 伽 t would ensure 伽 continued subord叫 tmotwomef
patrlarchy yet most ot
great adventure of the modern Western social contract; they were to thmr husbands after the breakdown of
elaboratmg what Carole
tηing to replace deference and paternal authority with a new basis these theorists showedIIttle interest in
Pateman calls the “S 凹lalωltract" b 酬間 n men and women that
for political consen t. Many of them had read the great theorists
great excepuon
of this adventure: Machiavelli , Hobbes , Locke, Montesqui凹， and loglcally accompanied the SOCIal contract-8The one
theonst-indeed hIS
Rousseau. But the theoris阻， with the exception ofRousseau , offere吐 ls Freud Although hardy known as a polidCAl
works-Freud
litt1 e in the way of advice about the affective relations that might foraysm th1s drect10rl are among hIs most mal1gned
contract that would
cement a new contract tried to Imagine a story about the ongmal soc1al
as
1n the absence of any dear model for the private sentiments that 呻lain t吋en晶晶 of"the law of male sex.呵h叭he right ofmen
might make a new order lovable , the revolutionaries fumbled their men to dominate women. 9
way through 再_thicket of interrelated prob!ems , If absolutism had
rested on the ,' ~odel of p'ãtri立i'cliãl auuÍ辰1哼;' then would the de-
8. Carole Pateman , The S.自叩IG ttracl (Stanford
訪
, 1988). Alth~: gh .~a~em~n's
)U
follow her on all pomuI have wnttta ttus bo ok to
!tji-- 6. Edmund Burke , R~月fections on the Revolution iη France (New York, 1973) , pp. 89-
analySIS
show howd
ES veryImportantzI
益 culutwas
donot
tomfom aRmarchalvemonofhternl叮
9PaterzM吼叫 e ，伽 term "law of male sex呵 ht" from Adrienne Rich. See
甜，
91
7, Ibid" P, 9' p. ,

叫 「 刊叫 •

一""=====--，，._，. "，，_"~-~"--'~'--
 6 TheFami旬 Model 01 Pol，臨叮
The Family Model 01 Pol，岫 7
、

In Totem and 1ì.α boo (1913) , in particular, Freud offered his own su-re of compeutlon w油in the band of bro恥!s，的 one could be
version of the origins of the social contract , or what might be called allowed to gam “ the father's supreme power," but the desire to
the original family romance. He located those origins in a kind of mlmzc the father could be accommodated in new systems of rank
prehistoric fall from life in the primal horde , the first amorphous and status “The ongmal democratlc equalltynof each member of
gathering of humans. In "the first great act of sacri且ce，" as he called the tnbe was relinquIStled, and mdwzduals who dISUnguzshed them-
it , the sons banded together to kill the father and eat him. 1o They sel ves above tI別關 were venerated. 13 Thus the social con間ta?
killed the father because he had kept all the females for himself and env且aged by Freud was not only based on a concoml叫tfxuaA
driven away the growing sons. By eating him , they accomplished co刮目也 in which women were subject to m叫 poweri lt al叫T
their identi且cation with the father. Th e deed once accomplished , 一lied complementarybonds between men SOCIal organlzatlon suυ
the brothers felt a sense of guilt , so they undid their deed by creating lmaM an unddymg, h 呻愕恥帆 hl址l句Y ch盯呵g伊ed， male bo叩n耐
副1呵
d r
two taboos: a taboo against killing the totem animal that was sub- no pl旭ace in the new politic臼a剖1 and social order ex' 缸cep
抖ta晶s markers of
stituted for the father; and the incest taboo , which denied the liber. n
social relations between rne凹
ated women to the brothers. These taboos gave rise to religion and Freud-ownlnablIUty to worktumselfoutofa patriarchal model of
social organization (kinship) respectively, and they e叮ectively re-
pressed for the future the two main wishes ofthe Oedipus complex: lz:zrz弘r2:;;az:a::J;;11::江ZZe:1:芷江
the desire to kill the father and to sleep with the mother the murdered father, Freud Inserts aeI cannot suggest at what poznt
By instituting the taboos , moreover, the brothers solved the ma- ln this process of development a placels to be found for the grtat
jor problem facing them after the killing of the father: their feelings mother-oddesses , who may perhaps in general have preceded the
of competition with each other for the women. “ Sexual desires do fa出er-zOds"咐
叮F恥re凹ud's 泊
M vi
not unite men ," claimed Freud ,“ but divide them." 11 If the brothers t阻es昀
t臼5 th1; C叩ou
叫ldima莒俘m
即e were ben附enÐ臼a伽 rsand
were to live together in peace , they had to- deny themselves the 間間r 閃 軒峙臨血斟一且~se C()
e 叩 nfl帥 ln a 阻
t ellin
呵啥
n gp
戶as叫
s且age
呵吭叭，
he凹叫
as田s扭
閻
er叫
肘t扭
.ed
d

women previously controlled by the fathe r. Freud suggests that the “

brothers' so口 al organization had a homosexual tinge that was worth 凶s with quit扭e 叩
u s pec口1a叫1 insì昀st扭enc臼e 出
t ha前t the 伊
g'od of each of them 臼
is
preserving. By creating the incest taboo , the brothers “ rescued the for
口間II
z
7talli--1) depends on hi站s relation to hi凶s father in the flesh and osc口illates anα
organization which had made them strong-aI?- d which may have
been based upon the homosexual feelings and acts , originating
perhaps during the period of their expulsion from the horde." 12 ;扣
泣拾;=古:吉f紅:2立試;丘且
!r 拉::;O;豆泣比
f口口:立;:2
拉古位!叮:立:?愷
J品:立:;止止已泣;irZ話:rz
Through their new social organîzatio口， the brothers were able to and of social organlzation generallv.
reconcile themselves with the dead father, whom they also loved and In the essay;1n thIs book， 1ιo not intend)to apply Frεud 0月
admired , maintain their 長elings for each other, and at the same Freudianism to the French Rerolution , as it....Freud's theories ot
time enforce a heterosexual system of marriage to ensure the sur- human deveIODInent could be SImply superimposed as a gndon the
vival of the group raw data of the revolutIonary 凹perience. Indeed , many of the
An inevitable “ longing" for the father led to a recreation of him in central Freudian concepts such 品 penis envy, castra t10n tears , or
the 中rm of gods and 叩cialorgani且tion itsel f. Because of the pres- even the Oedpal complex wlll appearmfrequently or not at aum
these pages. 1 find Freud's analysis in To的n and Taboo suggesuve
10. TotemandTaboo:So間 PoinlS of Agr帥棚t betweeη /heM闊的IL鉤。 of Savages and
Neurotics , in vo l.
13 ofThe S的 ndardEdìJ.ioη ofthe Com抖的 Ps;'加logical 禍rksofSìp關吋
府'eud， tran~.James Strachey (Lo ndon , 1958), p. 15-1 13. Ii,J id_ , pp. 148-49
11. Ibid. , p. 144 14. Ibid. , p. 149
12. Ibid 15 , Ib峙， p. '47
 ];':'"
J情

TheFami句 !Y[odel 0/ Politics 9

8 The Family Model OJ Politics

because it sees a set of relationships as being critical to the founding

of socíal and political authority: relationships between fathers and
sons , between men , and between men and women. In addition ,
Freud's own need to "何lte a my出 of h uman origins demonstrates
the cen trality of na叮 atives about the family to the constitution of all
forms of authority, even though Freud's account cannot fruitfu Ily be
read as an analysis of an actual even.t in prehistory or as a rigid
model for social and political relationships. 1 wiI1 be arguing that the
experience of the French Revolution can be interpreted to put
pressure on the Freudian account , even though that aCCQunt pro-
vides an important point of departure.
The-ve汙冊.，ntipn of the name Freud by a historian is for some a
red ftae of danger. Among histonans , p;)ycnυ削dlYUC mterpr'長胡I帥，
'has been largt i)'" confined to the analysis of individual biographies
or, more rarely, to the analysis of group psychology in times of crisis
The connection between individual psyches and social and historical
development is an interesting su均 ect of research , but it does not
directly concern me here. 1 do not , forexample , offer an analysis of a
figure such as Robespier~ein 1ìt~_udian terms. 1 am interested rather 2Engravmg of the execuuon ofLOUIS XVI From Rmoiutm間 de Pa悶，
in the ways 出at people(cÇ>llec肘elNmagine-that 院 think uncon- no l85 , 19-26January1793Photo-author
sciously about-the operation ÕÌ 品悶了， and the ways in which this
imagination shapes and is in turn shaped by political and so口al ity or scientific grounding of psychoanalysis. Yet they do not vitiate
processes. Central to this collective imagination are the relations t斗 lmpo口ance of 伽 qu帥ons raised by Freud or of 伽 g 伊en肘e叫
between parents and children and between men and women meHtmiOn叫
To put it in specific historical terms , once the French had killed :' noedi阻enc甘nva站5 n_ot ~圳u咐
r付
t('ρ、 m 羽卅州t，t
可 亡斗_缸
a ndhet甘n閏edt岫opr叩
OVl泊
Øe an explanation
the king, who had been represented as the fatherofhis people , what f臼OrhowltJJorkJhso dO呵， he sugges關 several themes that will
did they imagine themselves to be doing? What figure did they appear again and againm this book the kilumg of the father, the
imagine to take his place? What was the structure of the new political nature of fraterni句， the 刮目gnation of guilt , the fate of the ι“ι吐li油 b盯­
unconscious that replaced the old one? Answers to these questions at扭ed women凡" the choi止ce ofnew tωot扭ems tωo replace the dead father,
require an analysis of the political imagination that is at once histor- and the enforcement of the incest taboo. 17
ically specific and capable of illuminating generally the basic meta- The French killed the father in an act 出 at com臼 aS c伽e 白
phors of modern political and sociallife anything does in modern history to a ritual sacrÌ自ce (see figure 2)
Freud's apparent ÌnsÍstence that the ritual sacri且ce of the father
was an actual deed-“ in the beginning was the Deed";16 his fond- tndJnahIZ品fZ句:;;2品?ZZ出:芳:filztrzitl站立
ness for analogies between the thought processes of “savages" and
neurotics; and his incredibly intricate , if not fanciful analyses of
話:fiZALJt::J;:zw;zizezztt:也;tZTJZ咐:232:
particular individuals are a lI grounds for w叮叮 about the verifiabil- :rrJI叫:;:話說:如ZtmrzlEEA;:tJEIZtzr;;2
閃al heart of the mat世;:; ~~~~e-~ore primal than republican Rome or Lycurgan
16. The concluding sentence of Tot駒n and Taboo , ibid. , p. 161 Sparta."
 10 TheFam均 Model of Politics
Zhe 叫ical new恥per that published 恥 engrav呵S 呻rodu叫 m
ngures 1 an C1 2 put It JllSt that way:
we owe to the earth , SInce we have m a manner of speakmg conse
crated slavery by our example , weowe a great lesson In the personof
the 66th KIng, more cnXIIIXIal than all hmpredecessors taken together
The blood ofLouis Capet , shed by the bl~de of the Iaw ~-n-;-l-T;~~~~~
:7933 冉且也且.of心述且正崎旦旦旦耳。 L伽附間ZILl叫斗
dtvlmtyofthe Anczexlts whlch one cannot make auSPICIOus and favor-
able except by oEeTIng tOItm sacnace the liEb ofa great culprit
It is worth noting that in this passage the editor did not describe
the “ great culprit" as a father figure. By '793 the revolutionaries
wanted to rqect any such role hr Louis Capet, the former LOUIS
XVI-Nevertheless , the father 1SImpIIed because the paper went on
to refer to the brothers who had KIlled turn , and u descnbed a scene
m whzch the nctzm was metaphorically devoured A crowd ofpeople
mn up tothe scaEold after the execuuon to dlp theIr pikes and
handKerchlefhm the blood ofthe former KIng One Ealot SPTInkled
blood on the crowd and shouted，“Brothe吭 they tell usthat the
blood ofLOUIS Capet WIll fall again on our heads;well, SO be 此， let it
fail ..RepuMEans, the blood of a bmg bnngs happiness 叮 8
TRS IS one of 伽se r盯 O 叫的ns whe白n 附圳lOn叮 di站阻昀 s缸
s∞
coours
prOVl阻 αe
臼S 1臼 own revealing glimps扭 e mt凶o the p:;趕t.Y_chosexua
叫1 founn 詢恥-
t∞i昀lOn
凹
ons of 做t he 戶
p 01山
1此即tIc臼al
吋 order. Yet even in this 臼咒 the evid高ce is
su句ect to more than ?ne Enterp間tation. In a m句 or rereadi時 of
Freud-analysis, the llmry critic Rent Glrard has OEe叫 aLf­
ferent psychoanalytical perspecuve onjust such a scene He arEues
岫 ritual sacri自ce Is not fur曲me抽lly about parri耐ea吋斗間
but rad1er Is a way of concealing and dlspllsing drcornInurntyzs
?mofzts own Violence.TEe ntuaIImonofVIOlence-the slh
gung out of a scapegoat-sewes to remmtute diEerences-Imits ,
and boundaries and thereby d時 places v划encefrom themMorof
the community. He insists , "The purpose of the sacrifice is to restore
narmony to the community, to reinforce the social fabri c." Bound-
anes are especlally important because any “ sacrificial crisis." accord-
ing to Gira吋 threatens sexual dfremtmon Themghhgoutof
;這tt:武器:;25若是EZSjliffi青年GSEZ位liE
Durk扭闊的πSomotog(CaEZEbrIdge， 1988)， pp25-43
:
The Family Model 01 PoW 臼 11
the scapegoat , who might be anyone and not just the father, is for
Girard the true origin of all myths , rituals , kinship systems , indeed ,
svmbolic thought itself. 19
The Girardian reading provides a di旺erent angle on the passage
from the revolutionary newspaper about the execution of the king.
In a Girardian account , the emphasis would not be on the king注
position as father ofhis people. The brothers do not kill him b~cause
they want to share his power but rather because the French fear
their own capacity for violence and need a ritual act in order to
reinstitute community boundaries. In other words , the king has to
die to erase the guilt that 出 e French themselves feel befi盯.e the act has
been committed. As the editor of the Révolutio叫 de Paris wrote: “ We
Qwe to the earth , since we have in a manner of speaking consecrated
slavery by our example , we owe a great lesson in the person of the
66th king."
In order to displace i臼 own violence , which follows from the
disintegration of Old Regime cultural and political codes , the revo-
lutionary community hasωfocus 血 guilt on a ~l_l r門拉且峰阻J_he
scapegoat , who is , as Girard pu臼 it， a kind qE:''in onstrous do哇!至九
“The surrogate victim constitutes both a link and a barrier between
the community and the sacred."20 The king has to be transformed
into a kind of sacred monster, whose expuIsion will return the
community to itself. His monstrousness is defined by his outrageous
culpability; he is, the newspaper c1aims,“more criminal than all his
predecessors taken together." He has to be in order to be a suit-
able victim. As a consequence , his blood (another sacred a l1 usion)
“cleanses us of a stigma of 1300 years." Only the sacrifice of a great
culp討 t would be sufficient to the task of community redefinition and
redemption
Several themes from Girard's reinterpretation of Freud will ap-
pear in the essays that follow: the moment of sacrifi口al crisis , the
need for the community to define i臨If throu足!> l):u'-titÐi.峙。ι叮C--"~
tI且每是nd the threat of the loss of boundaries , especially sexual
boundaries. It is not enough , however, to replace Freud with Girard
1n the French Revolution , the king was victimized for several rea-
sons; he may have been a great culprit and hence a monstrous
19. Ren丘 G且 rard， Violence and 的e Sacred, trans. Patrick Gregory (Baltimore , 1977) ,
pp. 8, 188, 235. K~一一---一一-
20. Ibid. , p. 271
 電

'2 TheFam均 Model 01 PO卸叫 TheFa叫你 Model 01 Polit叫 '3

!!double ofthe communURbut he was also the father 50, in a sense-I
E正在!，t t.o拉Y0L both .ífreud恥 and Girardian) ways. The French
\ Revolution is a drama about conflict between father and sons a-ηd
about the threat of violence to the community.
Girard denies the validity of the Oedipal triangle between fa-
ther, mother, and son and replaces lt WIth a moreEenerallzed ml-
metic model of desire which emphasizes the identification between
During the radical yea間 ， 1792-94 ,fraternity was used more often
in a narrow and fearful sense; fraternity de且 ned a kind of "us" and
“ them" of revolutionary politics , especially on the popular level
One Parisian sectional assembly proclaimed in February 1793 ,“ For
a free people , there should be no neutral being. There are only
brothers or enemies." The'_ slogan “ fraternity or death" seemed to
capture this sentiment in dramatiç fashion. A reaction against 5uch a
,

men; nevertheless , he too accords some importance to the role of belligerent notion of :fraternity accompanied Robespierre's fall from
women. 21 Women are often blamed for violence in order to exoner- power. In the fìrst months after his execution , most representations
ate men; women are associated with delirium in order to reaSSure of fraternity associated it with symbols of sweetness , purity, inno
male dignity and authority and in particular to eliminate the blur- cence , and union.
ring of sexual boundaries that accompanies the sacrificial crisis.22 In Domestication of fraternity did not prove to be enough , however
the end , however, Girard , like Freud, refuses all independence of Progre臼ively after the fall of Robespierre ,“ fraternity" dropped out
acuon towomen , En both psychoanalyuc scenanos they are simply ofrevolutionary slogans to be replaced by liberty and equali 叮 stand
the ohjecu of deSIre, whether dIrectly (In the case of Freud)ormdi ing alone. Official engravers no longer included fraternity in their
rectly through male mimesis (in the case of Girard). It is one of mv repertoire of themes , and royalist engravers represented it in de “
aims here to redress that balance , 的 m 站 t 伽t ，、w哼吋叫
凹x口
o 叩
me risory contexts. An engraving of 1797 , for example , shows a sans
剖出加reat臼s be叫s扭e 由 t he
叮y could 缸
a ct and no
叫tJus缸t because they were culotte trampling on the constitution. The word fraternity is written
convenient hgments of the male imagination. on his dagger. Fraternity and fraternization were now cynically
The French revolutionaries 吐id talk self-consciously about "fra limited to the relations with the “ sister republics ," the satellites and
termty八he least understood of the values in the 間 r evo叫h叫
i dependents of the conquering French nation. U nder the Consulate ,
of 叫e
叮r句 eq
中 叫
ula
祕 li你
t叮
弘'， an
Y 吋 dfl
丘叫ate盯rnit prefec臼 were expressly forbidden to use the word. 23 This brief
was an idea assoc口iated wit吐h politica叫J solidarities and the drawing of history suggests that the word had a poli甘 cal charge that was indis-
political and 切 s O口a
叫1 boundarie 剖s Wlt出hin the 凹
c omffium抗ty.芋'. The notion of solubly linked with radical revolution.
E丘raternity gradually evolved during the revolutionarγdecade， as a Getting at the affective charge implicit in the notion of fraternity
recent study by Marcel Dav1d has shown In the early years of the Ìs more diffìcult, Revolutionaries rarely explained their emotional
Re叫 Utl凹， fraternity had a large and 凹的dent meaning be臼use motives for, or reactions to , their language , gestures , or rituals. As a
almost everyone could be imagined 訕 asp戶art叩P 戶at肋
ing in the 一ec∞
叩缸
O mmu-,-- consequence , my analysis wi1l usually have to proceed by indirection
m此t芋 For 凹 examPIke'at the Festwal of Fekmuon of l4July l790 , and inference. There are , however, all sorts of clues about the
Lafayetteswore on behalMaIl 伽五跆 f吋
ed
d叫ed na叩tI叩 l昀
l凹叩
on
n向u吋 pres psychosexual meaning of fraternity in revolutionary symbolics , for
叩
e nt "tι'tωorema
剖ln 叩un
叫it臼ed 切
t o all 吭
tth1e Frenchby the lndlssoluble bondsof instance , in the ordering of festivals and the choice of icons and
fraternity." emblems; and , on occasion , in revolutionary discourse itself-for
example , in the debates on women's clubs or in the newspaper
21GEard rqecuthe hmzly model , whether zt pnvlleges fathers orbrothers, and accounts of the killing of the king. The psychosymbolics of the
!nastsmstead 。nthecentralztyofrwalrytodeSIre Ashepu臼此，“rivalry does not ari扭

占的fLtbrzzzZFZZJZLEiZSJUA話:伊拉[;泣，立ZT
ZtJIlt:22;:?;iit;叮叮tt:叮叮L叫::1:;2芯trtt 23. My account of the conscious meaning of fraternity is taken from Marcel
Dav泊 ， Frl帥mité et Ré'叩叫ion française , 1789-I799 (Paris , 1987); the quotations are
UGSEreslsmcest and patrzczde , amdzt1s the hypocnucai adults who undertake to from pp. 58, 145, 205, 244. David provides an indispensable guide to the usag凹 of
enligh阻n him in this matter." Ib泊， pp. '45 , '75 the term before and especially during the Revolution. He argu自 that me slogan "Ia
22 , Ibid.. pp, 139-41 fraternité ou la mort" w自 not meant to be as menaαng as it sounds

中 一一一一 「 •
 亨-
14 The Family Jvlodel of PolitiCj
revoIutionaηpolitical imagination are. also apparem , however, in
Jess conventional sources for historical analysis: in novels , in paint-
ings , and e恥cially i呵。l阻al pornog呻hy. All of 恥m are exam-
ples of genres in which family romances can be dramatically en-
acted
In what follows , 1 offer a necessarily selective but 1 hope not
arbitrary reading of a wide range of sources , from la心的ut thp
familv to porn何也P， Q~Ç novels. My subjects w仙nclude such d附rse
tOpI臼 as the rÎse of portraiture in 1791 , the regularization of inheri-
tance for illegitimate children in 1793 , and the VQ耳le of novels
about orphans after '795 , as well as 恥 more obvious topÎ臼 such as
the 凶
ki仙
ill
the Revolut臼ion has of late attracted cons釗iderable attenti昀on ， esoe-
臼ally as it is expres叫 m graphIchmz muchless hasbeendoneas
yet with revolutionary oaintin耳 and literiiture. 24 The revolutionarv
d門de has been considered unwo抽yofattenuon bymost Eterar;
fn岫 and art historians because it produced little in 伽 wayofgr，臼t
lI terature or paìnting , apart from works by Jacques-Louis David
U ntil very recently, scholars continued to assume that the Revolu-
tion had had little positive impact on “ high" art beyond the "van
daluation' , of natIonal treasures that occurred durmg the radlcal
pedod of late 1793and early 179425LIterary hIStones of the Rev』
olution , for instance , still begin with considerations of political
叩eeches and newspapers , just as they did in 的e nzmteeAh cen-
叫作品 ItIS obvmls ttmno oneS?hoiar 臼n hope to offer a survey of
all the relevant cultural 于nd political expressions of the period in the
search for thelr underlymg patterns of familial imagerFI certainly
,24. See , for example , the es阻ys in French Ca闊的lre and the Freηr;h Revo血帥"
諾諾il甜苦tEE野i錯綜蹄丘吉
jd結jzzi說:3;研叫:217jfEi355克服
句:;旱的:zrzztf;:zzrtJZ;11:rztzzzz::芷江品
!fjl點噹措iiiif品出tilt
TheFa刷 ly Model 01 PO帥的 15
do not daim to account for every engraving , painting , or novel in my
analysis , but 1 do hope to offer an account of the links bet附en
family images and power that will prompt others to examine their
own sources in new ligh臼.
Anyone who works on the revolutionary period knows how diffi-
cult it is to use art-historical and literary materials , Sources such as
paintings , engravings. and novels are by their nature particularly
rich in repr臼entations of fathers , mothers , and children , but they
are not transparent representations of the imagery of power. Paint-
ers rarely painted with straightforward political purposes , even dur
in g- the French Revolution , and novelists rarely wrote with the self-
conscious aim of supporting a particular politi個1 order. Moreover,
we know little about the specific intentions of artis阻 or novelists of
出e period
The difficulties are also technical. We do not know the press runs
of most novels published at the time , and the exhibition catalogues
of the revolutionarγperiod are often limited to simple and uninfor-
mative designations of paintings such as “ family scene" or “ head of
an individual." The example of engravings is particularly instruc
tI呵. Prints required less time for production and as a consequence
could be expected to follow the latest political developments more
rapidly than the less obviously politicized media. 27 Revolutionary
prints were not produced from a set of systematic or self-conscious
themes , bowever; they were produced in response to a variety of
demands ranging from the immediate propaganda aims of the gov-
ernment to the consumer market for subscription engravings that
captured revolutionary history even as it unfolded. 28 There are over
3 o ，ooopnn臼 from the French Revolution collected in various librar-
ies and mUSeums in the world. Most of them are not dated or signed ,
so drawing conclusions about their meaning is even more risky than
ìn the case of works by well-known painters
These problems compound the di品culty of working in a psycho-
analytic perspective. 1 will be moving constantly between the familial
27. On the lack of revolutiona門 themes in French painting of the period. see
James LeitJ:t, Art as pr唔唔間血 in France , I750刊 799: A Study in the Hist，吋 Qf Id，山
(Toronto , 1965)' Leith estimates that only 5 percent ofFrench paintings exhibited in
the 0伍cial salons treated revolutionary themes , They were vastly outnumbered by
landscapes , portr卸的， and genre paintings. See especially pp. 135 , 145, A more
nuanced vièw can be found in Olander, "p，個， 'm閃開 tlre ，"
28. See French Caricature and the French Re valution
 FZ

16 The Family .!vlodel of Polit叫

and the political, on the grounds that they are interconnected; and 1 2
Wl山Ilbe 晶
slhi崩
“
ft凶
tlu
呵 z
grounds that they tell a 耐 of interrelated stories about the foundin!!
of a new political and social order. Like the “newh岫nCl咐'in a且 The Ri se and Fa!l of the Good Father
缸nd lit扭
a er阻aryc
叮
cntlc
口1昀
l盯
sn
I口x帆
O伽ra叫ormw 叫It由
ho叫the叮r kin吋也s of ∞nt扭emporaneOl叫
d "-c) 士 1

ume凹
tl可 trymg to account flo r 恤“
n叫on. Yet in 恥 end， my aim is d恥rent from 由eirs. Rather
tl work of art or literature , 1 want to g-et
at 戶e common h岫rical and imaginative processes 山t animate
pamtmg, engraving, and IIterature-as well as poIItical events dur-
ing the French Revolutìon. 1 自 nd that comm。再 ground in the de-
velopment of family romances that both unified and threatened to
unravel the revolutionary experience as a whole
In a speech given to the Constituent Assembly in August '790, a
little-known deputy drew the connection between tyranny in the
family and tyranny in the polity
After having made man free and happy in public life , it remains for us
to assure his liberty and his happiness in private life. You know that
under the Old Regime the tyranny of parents was often as terrible as
the despotism of ministe凹; often the p口 sons of 5tate became family
prisons. lt is 5uitable therefore to draw up, after the declaration of
rights of man and citizen, a declaration, 50 to speak, of the righ臼 of
5pou5e5, of fathers, of sons, of parents, and 50 on. 1

The Revolution opened the way to a reconsideration not only of

state authority but also of authority within the family. The righ臼 of
every family member and all family relationships were now to be
r叩lated in the interest of控旦旦nd 把控告5S. It is obviOl叫rom
this passage that the p05ition of the king was still very much un-
decided one year after the beginning of the Revolution. The despo-
tism of ministers , rather than the tyranny of kings , was the focus of
the deputy's concern. Within 在 year， however, both the king and his
queen would become the focus of a violent , often scurrilous cam-
paign to denigrate their authority.
The story of the king's fan from his lofty position was intimately
tied up with the fortunes of the ideal of the good fathe r. If the king
was father of his people , then changes in the image of fathers would
have an inescapable impact on the king's represen阻tion of himself
回 the public. ç且豆豆$ffi of excessive or tyrannical paternal authority
began lon告主￡起起」且主g.. The Enlightenment conviction that man-
kin吐 was movìng out of its political and intellectual adolescence led
to increasing demands for participation in public affairs. It might be

1. Deputy Gossin speaking on 5 August 1790, during the discussion of judicial

reorgamzatl間 ， Archi阻'þaγlementaires，vol. 17 (Paris , 1884) , P.617
弘一引!、也可

*'1
個m
心計觀攝制付醫潛移
哥也且可玄。生。可。-EE
 特

30 31

法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史 在一個陰冷多霧的冬日早晨，法國國王一命嗚呼，時值 能從中取得什麼好處呢?這一天，固然將永難忘懷，可是它 第

章
一七九三年一月廿一日上午十時廿二分。執行死刑的會l子手 也能傳之久遠，永為後世紀念嗎? I 別再受人輕侮了，眾史

車庭模式論政站
解落斷頭臺的利鋒，直下路易﹒卡佩 (Louis Capet) 的頸 家們 1 萬勿辜負大好時光，寫出真相來，只有真相值得記

項，這位路易不是別人，他正是前法王路易十六。不久前才 載，不要徒費筆墨! J 2 於是這位作者便致力於寫作，以驅

設竣的斷頭臺，操作近乎全自動，死時亦應不甚疼痛，其著 除所有罪疚的感覺。當日，曾有三萬名民眾湧進革命廣場

眼點在於人人平等，不論是誰，都同樣死法。代表們希望藉 ( Place de la Révolution )共睹法王之死，現場並駐有八萬名武

著這個方法處死路易， I 數百年來被偏私、歧視所壓制侵害 裝守衛以確保刑場的安全。 3 如果說當時確有任何罪疚感，

的偉大真理， J 終獲檢驗證實， I 今天，我們終於相信，國 那麼，這份心情自當為眾人所共有。

王也不過是個凡人，無人能超越法律之上。」 法玉被判處死刑，是法國大革命中最重要的政治事件，

報上這篇文章的執筆者，僅用區區數言，便道盡法王之 其象徵的重大意義固為世人所公認，然而革命人士本身對這

死的筒中三味:法民試主，為的是讓自己相信國王也不過是 個行動所代表的意義卻持有歧異，甚至相衝突的看法。舉個

個凡人，而幾世紀以來法力無邊的王權麗法，一朝亦司破 例子來說，國民公會( the Convention )代表振振有詞，動不

除。「卡佩不再!歐洲人民們 l 世界各民各族們 l 注意看 動便引用英國處死查理一世( Charles 1) 的前例做為佐證，

啊!那王座上面，除了塵土之外什麼都沒有! J 1 又彷彿要 但卻無法對這項史實所代表的意義提出前後一貫的論點。而

確保法國這個王座從此確歸塵土，他們還特意將法主已經身 且，大家都知道王權終究在英國復辟，當初裁定試君的裁判

首異處的屍骨，立刻掩埋在瑪德萊娜公墓( Madeleine 官們也都遭處極刑。在這種情況下，這實在不是一個特別鼓

Cemetery) 的一處深穴，其上並覆以生石灰。至於其餘一切 舞人心的前例。

足以表徵法玉的外在痕跡，也一併減除淨盡。 不論是革命黨還是保主黨，雙方都認為君王是整體社會

然而，文中那滿帶希望的口吻，假設性的語氣，卻暴露 秩序的指標 雖然早在七九三年之前，路易+六的王權

出潛藏深處的焦慮。法國已經為世上眾民立下一個榜樣，給 已經在某些方面削弱不少一一因此路易﹒卡佩就死之時，其

各國君主發出一個教訓，文章的作者如此宣稱，可是，眾人

2 Ibid.
1 "Par眩， Journée du 21 ," Journal des hommes libres de to甜 !es p.可:1'， no.82, 22 J且uacy 3 關於這場審判和行刑過程的研究請參閱 David P. )O吋曲， The King's TriaL- T!品e
1973 除非特別加註，否則所有的法文翻譯均來自筆者﹒ 4卉"l!nch Revol.峙。n VS. Lo叫 XVI(Bed"旬， 1979)

月1fh
……
 三名

32 33

法圓大革命時期的車庭羅曼史
身分地位到底為何，仍值得商榷。創子手的斷頭刀下，死的 典範呢? 黨

究竟是一名君王，抑或是一名早被剝除神聖名位的普通人? 英國的柏克 (Edmund Burke) 對法國大革命頗有意見， 章

車庭模式論政治
但是不論答案為何，也不管就象徵意義而言，法國主權到底 他看出孝順一事與子民服從意顯之間的關聯，見解之深刻精

死於何時?一七九三、八九年，還是更旱。然而法王在一七 閥，可謂無人能出其右。 t 社會生活的紀律，源自家庭生活

九三年的肉身之死，卻將眾人的注意力指向一個忽然出缺的 的信任與忠誠。扒自克擔心'這個基本準則一旦遭到顛
神聖空白:這份空白，在另外一個凸顯的空白之下，格外引 覆，整個社群也將毀於一旦。他檢視法國大革命初期所發生

人注目一一也就是在路易斷魂之際，正對著的那座已然空空 的事件，尤其是一七八九年十月啦抑王室的種種軸，不
如也的雕像台。座台之上，原本矗立著其祖父路易十五的雕 禁發出傷逝的話嘆。在他眼裡，一個富有騎士精神的大時代

像。 告終了，取而代之者，是一個充斥著「詭辯人、經濟人、計

下令處死前法王的政府，是一個叫主權在民( popular 算人」的時代:

-'
sovereignty )為合法性基礎而建立自嗯*1日時體。在紙上建立
共和圈，只消大筆一揮，不費吹灰之力;但是若要真正獲得 在這個新時代的裡面，過去那一切令人感到舒適溫馨

民心效忠，並建立一個長遠的合法政權，卻沒有這麼單純。 的氛幻都將要消失了，那使得在上者行使權力、溫雅寬

如何才能使民眾服膺新社會秩序下的律法?舊有的社會秩 大，在下者服膺順從、磊落隨心，使得人間上下人等和

序，原係以國王為首，藉眾人對權柄的敬崇遵從，結為一 諧融洽，並 j符私人生活社交之中的各種美感柔和情憬，

體:農民順從他們的領主，工人順從他們的雇主，大官顯貴 溶入政治生活層面的這一切怡悅氛圍，都將在新帝國光

順從國王，妻子聽命丈夫，兒女順從父母。一國之權柄，完 明與理性的洶洶來勢征服下驅消散盡。原本輕籠著人間

全符合一家之權柄的模式。一六三九年曾頒詔曰 I 兒女對 的那一層高雅椎喂，俱將被粗魯地一把撕開了。

父母懷有之天然敬意，與臣民對君王於法理該付出之服從，

殊為相關。」毛如今君王既去，又該用什麼做為公民服從的

5 Letter 叫 M<m品er o[the National Assembι 引自 Steven Blakemore, Burke and the
.Ij Marcel Gara吋阻 d Romuald Szramkiew問 La Révolution frl刷戶前 et la fomille Fall o[Languagc: The F，削chRe帥 lution as Linguistic Ev，帥 t(Hanov凹， N.H. ， 1988),
(Pa間， 1978) , p. 135 p. 42. Blakemore 對於柏克有關父權的理解，提出了傑出的看法。

34
法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史 沒有了這一層「高雅帳慎 J .沒有了「那令人產生美麗柔和
的諸般情僚 J .沒有了這一切居間的粉飾緩銜，柏克預言，
革命分子只有訴諸恐怖勢力統治一途。「不管他們是那一
說，任一派，放眼望去，看不見其他任何出路，路盡處只有
斷頭臺在。 J 6
柏克看破私人情僚與公眾政治之間的交織相纏，本書以
下的分析，即深受這項根本性洞見的影響(雖然本人對法國
大革命持有非常不同的看法。)柏克認認、為政治上的服從性
(圳仰州叫
lii
層基礎: 1 要民愛國，國必須先有其司愛之處。 J \政治上
的服從，往往奠基於一組有關社會秩序適當運作的假定，而
服從一事一一若用現代的譜法，應該是共識一一從來不會自
動發生，即使外表上看起來千真高確，確乎是自動幸生的模
樣，即使在所謂的傳統社會裡面，事實上也不可能呵成立
的共和國度亦然，更不可能令人民自動聽命行事，這是稅務
和兵役人員每天都有的經驗。
革命黨一手掀去舊社會上下有序服從恭順的面罩。不過
他們和柏克的想法不同，並不認為人間一切的高尚就此斷
絕;他們也想讓他們的政府「司愛 J (lovely) 。從一七八九
6 Edmund Burke , ReJlea.ωm
9 1.
7 Ibid.. p. 91
35
年那一年起，建強便開始進行現代西方社會契約的冒險大 第
業;他的算以一種新的基礎，取代舊有以順從和父權為基 章
車庭模式論政治
礎所建立的政治共識( political consent) 0) 他們當中，有許多
人都讀過有關這項冒險工作的眾家學說理論:如馬基維利
( MachiaveIl i )、霍布斯 (Hobbes) 、洛克 (Locke) 、孟德斯鳩
( Montesquieu) 和盧梭( Rousseau )等人的作品。至於如何
以情感關係鞏固這份新契約的重大課題，除盧梭之外，眾位
大家的理論卻著墨不多，鮮有任何高見可供參考。
新的秩序，無法再向人際感情的架構借力，以令人感受
其可愛之處，於是革命者只好一路胡亂摸索，穿過糾結重重
的問題而來令目果說，專制政權的建立係奠基於父權制的家
族統治，那麼專制政權之亡，是否必須先iU除父權統治才能
實現j 也就是法圓人所說的「推翻父權 J (川…
paternelle )。父權從此不再獨大，是否表示政治大家庭中的
每一成員，兄弟之間、兄弟與姐妹之間、見女與父母之間，
從此平起平坐，人人平等?換句話說，過去自父親大權獨攬
的家庭空間，如今該換演那一種「家庭羅曼史 J ?如果父權
( paternalism )將改由手足情、兄弟愛( fratern時)取代，這
個新模式又意昧著什麼?比方說，既然已經不能再為過去
「合乎自然」的家庭秩序提出正當理由，此後將如何繼續維
持把女人排除在外的政治現象。是不是應該把家庭模式徹底
on the Re'llolu帥n in France (New Yor k. 1973) , pp. 89-
拋棄，改以完全建立在隔離、獨立、自主、契約性的個體上
的新模式《打倒了專制王權，隨之而來的洶湧澎濟之中，令
，，~
 37
36

法國大革命時期的車庭羅曼史 人不得不憬然省思，重新考量起「個別人」該有的形貌j 在〈圖騰與繁忌) ( To tem and Ta boo, 1913) 一書中，佛 第

洛伊德更搬出他自己的一套社會契約起源理論，或稱為最早 章
這些問題看起來雖然很明顯，當初卻不會在眾革命人士

車庭模式論政治
的一齣家庭羅曼史。在史前第一批無組織的要在居人群裡面，
的腦海中清楚浮現，至少，他們一時沒有想到這麼多。事實
上，當代各種主張民約論的政治學說，多數也略此不談。民 在一種帶有宛如史前人類墮落的意味之下，他找到這些事物

約論學者更多半視而不見，假裝這些有關家庭及男女關係的 的起源。在他所謂的人類史上「第一場大獻祭 J ( the fìrst

great acC of sacrifice )中，兒子們合謀殺害了父親，還把他吃

命題與公共生活分離，屬於私人生活層次。十七世紀以來 z
各大政治學者都與這個問題苦門，車乎是主人手事行秩序中該 到肚子裡去。 IO 獄父，是因為父親一人獨享眾女，還把長大

有的地位，更令他們頭痛不已。前掘出的解決之道，也一 的兒子趕走:食父，是如此方可完成與父親的認同。大事既

律是在父權至上的舊制解體之後，一仍男尊女卑，絕對保證
妻子繼續服從隸屬於丈夫的管轄"至於巴特曼(
Pateman )所說的「兩性契約 J
約之後，邏輯上理當隨之而來的課題，然而多數大理論家卻
成，眾子開始感到罪疚，便又創出兩項禁忌，以抵除自己的
大逆行徑。一是以圖騰動物替代父親，禁止獵殺圖騰物，一
Carole
是禁止亂倫，於是兄弟們也不得親近方被解放的女子。從這
(sexual cont阻ct) ，本是社會契
兩項禁忌之中，日後分別衍生了宗教與社會組織(親族關

仍惜墨如金，無意討論， 8 只有佛洛伊德是一大例外。佛氏 係) ;同時從此也有效地扼止了戀母情結( Oedipus complex )

雖不以政治學者名世一一說起來，他對政治理論所做的嘗試 的兩大慾望:一為試父，一篇寢母。

最為人所詬病一一但他卻會發揮想像力，杜撰出一個故事描 禁忌、之立，更進一步為眾兄弟解決了獄父之後所面臨的

述初民的原始社會契約，用以解釋為什麼男性做為男人，有 另一重大難題 也就是他們之間為爭奪眾女而起的爭競之

心。佛洛伊德有言: I 慾者，分也，性慾一事，不令男人聯
權力支配女人，這也就是「男性性別權法則 J ( the law of
合，令他們對立。 J II 如果兄弟諸人想要和平共處，就得放
male s且-right) 的源、由。 9
棄前此被父親大人一手包攬的眾女。佛洛伊德主張，兄弟檔

8 Carole Paceman, The SI帥al Contract (Stanfo吐， 1988) 。雖然巴特曼的分析十

分重要，筆者並不完全贊成其分析。我撰寫本書，以揭示要將兄弟愛強 10 Totem 叫 Taboo: Some Points of.勾間開t between 如 Menj祉 b阻 ofSavages
臨'd M.帥。楠，且 vol. 13 of The Sta吋'ard Edition o[ 晶宮 Cornp{ete ß芋'hofogical
化成君權是何其困難。
9 巴特曼由 Adrienne Rich 處得到「男性性別權法貝iJ J 的看法。請參閱品說， l防站句(SiK'甜甜 Freud， tr凹 5.Ja囚 es Strachey (Lo吋0阻， 1958)， p. 151
II Ibid., p. 14位
p.2.
38 39

法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史
的社會組織裡面有幾分同性相戀的氣息值得保存，若為女色 面，還是沒有地位。她們存在的唯一作用，只是用來標示眾 第

男性之間的社會關係。
毀棄殊為可惜。如今建立7禁止近親相交的忌諱，男子「維 章

車庭模式論政治
繫挽回了令他們變為強大的社會組織一一這份組織，可能基 佛氏陷在以父權模式解析心理性政治結構( psychopolitical

於一種同性互戀的情標與行為而生，溯其源頭，或始於當初 organizatlon )的死胡同裡，從〈圖騰與禁忌〉書中某處輕輕

眾子遭父放逐離群之際。 J 12 於是藉著新成立社會組織的幾 帶過的幾行，可以窺見他其實無法完全自圓其說。論到初民

項手段，眾子與亡父和好(對父親，其實他們也有敬愛， ) 如何開始為被獄之父進行造神運動之際，佛洛伊德略加數

手足之間的感情也獲得維繫'在此同時，並厲行異性婚姻制 筆， í 在這段過程之中，眾多代表母親的偉大女性神祇，到

度，確保了族群的綿延。 底是在何時何地取得一席之位，我無法解釋。也許， 般而

對於故去的父親，無司避免會滋生一股「思慕之情 J ' 言，母神( mother-godd聞自)的出現，是早在父神之前就已

結果是以神的形象重造父親，並在社會組織中灌注他的父權 有了吧。 J 14 佛洛伊德如此父權至上，以致他無法想像其他

精神。兄弟檔中，競爭壓力極大，自然不容許任何一人取得 可能。在他眼裡，唯 的爭競，只有父子之間的爭競;女

「父親的無上權勢 J ( the father's suprem:e power) ，但是卻司以 人，只不過是男性衝突競逐的物品。佛氏男有一段話，將他

經由新設置的階級地位體系，滿足傲仿父權精神的渴求。部 這種只見男人的心態完全表露無遺， í 然而，個人心理分析

落中原本人人同等的「原型民主式平等 J ( the original 的結果一再告訴我們，他們塑造的每一位神祇，都師法其父

democratic equality )就此作廢，一些具有特殊表現，能夠在 的形象，他們個人與神的關係'也都視其與肉身父親的關係

眾人之中揚名立萬的成員開始受到崇敬。 13 佛洛伊德設想的 而定、而搖擺、而改換。歸根究低，神之為物，只不過是一

社會契約，不但建立在一份界定兩性關係'亦即「女從男」 個被高舉了的父親。 J 15 律法與社會組織的道理，大致亦

的附約之上，同時也意昧著要靠男子之間的約定加以補足。 獄。

如此的社會組織，昇華了男性問私底下原有的一股密切相交 本書並不打算以佛洛伊德的觀點詮釋法國大革命，好像

相結的激流。而女人呢，在這個新興的政治、社會秩序裡 只要把佛氏理論往有關大革命經驗的原始資料上面輕鬆地一
一試試

-bb
-ll
-23 -P-4
-P
--
18
戶

“ I缸a:， p. 149.
11

,9
1 4A
吟 I缸a:， p. 14'忍
40
法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史
罩，就司以條目清晰，立現規矩方圓。事實上，佛氏的某些
中心觀點理論，如陽物豔羨( penis envy) 、閹割恐懼
( cas甘甜 on fears )等心理特質，甚至連伊底帕斯的戀母情
結，都不會或甚至完全不在本書的章節中出現。筆者在此，
只是認為佛氏於《圖騰與禁忌〉中所提出的分析頗具啟發
性，對於社會政治權威之立，點出了一系列深具決定性意義
的人際關係:父子、男男、男女。此外，佛洛伊德甚至深覺
有必要親自動手，下筆寫出了一則為人類溯源的神話。此舉
也顯示有關人類家庭的傳講陳述，是各式權威建立的中心關
鍵一一雖然我們不司以將佛洛伊德的講法，認真地視為遠古
的史實來解讀，也不司僵化地用以代表實質的社會政治關
係。筆者認為，佛氏之說，誠然為法國大革命提出了重要的
研究方向，而對大革命實地經驗情狀的解讀詮釋，卻適是以
為其說的效性產生壓力。
作為一名歷史學者，單單提及佛洛伊德之名，就足以令
某些人產生戒心。在史學界裡，心理分析這一套理論，通常
都只應用於為個別人士作傅，最多(這一類的例子更少)也
只是用來探索危機狀況下的群眾心理。至於個人的精神狀態
與社會歷史的發展有何關連，雖然是一門饒有興昧的研究題
日，卻與本書探討的課題沒有直接相關。舉例而言，筆者並
不打算運用佛洛伊德派的術語，查考某位人士，如羅伯斯比
爾( Robespierre )其人的心理狀態。本人的興趣卻在以下幾
項﹒入黨直是如何一一不自覺地，無意識地一一對權力運作進
41
行集體想像，而這份想像，又如何塑造政治與社會的過程，
第
至終，又如何被其反塑造的經過。集體的創作想像之中，最 章
車庭模式論政治
重事的一壤，即在親子、男女兩項人倫關係上。
(!j歷史實例而言，原本作為子民歌的法玉，如今卻被
法民砍了頭。這些砍了君父腦袋的子民，以為自己在幹什
麼?他們又把誰想像成新的父親，取代他的位置?汰舊換
新，這份新來的「政治無意識」心理又是何等模樣、結構，λ
若要解答以上諸問題，勢必對那于其E售價1主@想像進行d
析，一能了解其歷史的特定意義，二能就現代政治社會生活
的各項基本隱喻，作全面普遍的閻明。
佛洛伊德一味堅持，試父以為祭這種儀式性的犧牲
( ritual sacrifice) ，是史前真實發生過的真人真事-一所謂
「太初有其事」也( in the beginning w.站 the Deed ) 0 16 他→向
喜歡把「野人 J (savages) 與精神患者的思想過程放在一起
類比;他對某些特定個人的心理分析，復雜糾結(且不論是
否天馬行空)到令人不可思議的地步。凡此種種，都令人對
心理分析之學的可驗證性，或其科學基礎心生納悶。不過，
佛洛伊德提出來的幾項問題，他所描繪的總體隱喻性結構，
均有些重要唔，並不可因此抹殺。略問學坦克雄
主1lfF從絕非自諱。佛氏為其中發動運作的模式提出血釋，建
議了廠辦盾，將在本書中一再出現殺父的舉動、兄弟
16 The concluding sentence of To tem and Tab，叫 ibid.， p. 16 1.
 42 43

法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史 愛、謗罪歸疚的做法、婦女被「解放 J (liberated) 後的命 彩 j 但是父親形象卻依然溢於言外。因為接下去該報就提到 第

運、選擇新圖騰以取代亡父的形象、以及嚴禁亂倫通姦的規 殺死路易的革命兄弟，並描繪行刑之後，群眾爭先恐後奔向 章

車庭模式論政措
定等等。 17 刑台的景象。他們伸出矛槍、手帕，每個人都想沾染一點前

法國人試其君父之舉，司謂現代史上最接近儀式性的犧 王的鮮血。這個場面十足充滿了隱喻﹒宛如眾人狼吞虎嘿，

牲。刊出某兩幅版畫的激進派報紙，就是如此表示: 必欲將之分食。一名狂熱分子還將路易的血灑向群眾，一面

高聲叫道﹒「兄弟們，他們說，路易﹒卡佩的血，會再找回

我們虧欠天地一個祭禮，說起來，既然我們已經重新 我們的頭上;好啊，來就來，管它的，就讓它來吧 ..共和

告別了為奴狀態，便應該在六十六系國主身上歸還所欠 人士們，國玉的血，將為大家帶來幸福快樂。 J 18

之債。此人罪大惡極，比他前任所有人加在一起的罪孽 這是一個少見的情況，革命論述( discourse )本身竟然

還要深重。一七九三年一月廿一目，藉著律法的利刃， 能夠提供那隱藏在政治秩序後面，有關根本精神面貌

流出了路易﹒卡佩的鮮血，終於游除淨盡那屈辱了我們 ( psychosexual )的訊息。但是，歷史的見證雖在，各方的解

一千三百年的烙印......自由一如眾神之神性，只有在獻 讀卻不一句拉德 (René Gi叫)大規模重讀佛海峙的解 f

上大罪魁的性命以為祭後，人間才能獲其吉祐眷顧。 析，對同樣場景，提出全然不同的心理分析觀點 J拉認為儀
式性犧牲的意義，基本上不在獄親與亂倫，卻是出於社群對
值得注意的是，在這段文字裡面，報紙編輯並不會將「大罪 自己冒潰的滔天暴行感到驚恐，因此而出之以掩飾的手段。
魁」描述為主塑里參P 革命以還，及至一七九三年之際，革 將暴力的行使儀式化 挑出一名代罪羔羊一具有重新劃

命黨已經極力自舊王路易十六身上學除任何這一類的色 界設限的作用，遂將罪行的所在，由于士群內部向外轉移。站
堅稱「犧牲的目的，在恢復社群和諧，強化社會紋理。 j

17 關於這幕「原始場景 J 的重要性，可參閱 Ronald Paulson , Representatio甜 01

Ra咖ion (1789-182司 (New Haven, 1983) 。尤其在頁 26' í 在此我們發現

巴黎最中心且最重要的自我再現-刻板類型與獨一無二閣的緊張關係 18 "Morr de Lou的 XVI， dernier roi de F阻nce，" Révolutio甜甜 Pa叫 nO. 185. 19-26
象徵與再現的拉扯，我們可說這是退化，是回歸到主要原始場景，是 January 1793 我比拔了涂爾幹和佛洛伊德式有關試玉的分析。請參閱“Th，
《杜攝勒老爹}與其他人所說的核心，這一幕比共和羅馬或 Lycurgan 斯巴 Sacred and the French Revolution ," In ]effrey Alexander, ed. , Durkheimian
達的場景更原初。 SocioÚJgy (Cam bridg', 1988), pp. 25-43

一一…一 …
 毛5
44

法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史
種祭有巴望物，把他驅除之後，社群才能還真本相。而其魔 第
限之設，尤為重要，因為「犧牲危機 J ( sacrificial crisis )危
性，則是本於其深重的罪孽而來，該報稱他「罪大惡極，比 章
及「性別區化 J (叩阻l 晶阻間
叫
m叫
nlt叫

車庭模式論政治
他前任所有人力日在引起的罪孽還要深重。」其人之罪，務必
羊之舉一羔鮮羊可哺能是扭任何似人，不一定只是父親卡在吉拉
深重，否則就不是合用的祭物。國他的死，他的血(又一有
德眼裡，則是一切神話 (myth) 、儀式、親族體系，甚至象
關聖祭的暗喻) I 株除淨盡那屈辱了我們一千三百年的烙
徵思維( symbolic thought )的起源。 19
吉拉德式的解讀，為革命派報紙那篇有關法王就別的文 印。」只有獻上人中之罪魁，才能滿足于士群重新定位與救贖

字提供了一個不同的角度。照他的說法(事情的重點，不在 的任務。

古拉德對佛洛伊德重做解讀，本書將引述其中幾項論
法主做為法國人民君父的地位。兄弟試父，非為分享父的權
勢，而是因為法民擔心消受不了自己的滔天暴行，因此才需 題(發生犧牲危機的那一刻、社群經由替罪者的選擇以完成

要以一種儀式性的做法，為社群設立一個界限 4 換言之，法 自我疋位的需要，以及界限分野之失，尤其是兩性之別若不

王是非死不可，如此才能為法民抹除他們內心深處，在行為 明，所司能造成的威電快過吉拉德並不能完全取代佛洛伊
發生之前，即已感到的罪疚。一如〈巴黎革命報〉 德。在法國大革命中，法王之死，有好幾層原因，他可能的

確是一名大罪魁，因此有資格為社群擔任雙重惡魔的角色，
( Révolutions de Paris) 的編者所言﹒「我們虧欠天地個祭
糧，說起來，既然我們已經重新告別了為奴狀態，便應該在 然而，他也是眾人之 51) 因此，就某種意義而言，筆者希望
兩面兼顧(佛洛伊德與吉拉德兩家之論。)法國大革命這個
六+六系國王身上歸還所欠之償。」
舞台上，不但有父子衝突的劇情，也演出暴力對社群造成的
為了移轉在舊政權文化政治符碼解體之後，自己帶來的
威脅。
種種暴行，革命社會必須找一個替死鬼頂罪。這名替死鬼正
吉拉德不贊成所謂父、母、子之間的伊底帕斯三角情結
如吉拉德所稱，近於某種「雙重惡魔 J ( monstrous double)
關係，改提另外一種雖類似，卻比較概括性的欲望模式
「是社群與要者之間的連結與障礙。 J 20 法王必須轉型成某
( model of desire) ，強調男人之間的認同。不過，他多少也為

女人的重要性保留一點地位。 21 女人，通常都被按上禍水之
19 René Girard, Vio!e nce and the Sa佇'ed， tra由 Patrick Gregory (Baltimore , 1977) ,
pp. 8, 188.255
21 吉拉德反對獨惠父兄的家庭模式，堅持主張使用返回到對慾藍的抗爭。
20 Ib id.. p. 27 1.
 47
46

中，(見弟愛往往與政治上的團結一致( political solid叫 ties )

法國大革命時期的家庭羅曼史
名，是導致暴力發生的原因，好讓男人洗脫嫌疑。女人，也 第

往往被視為情緒不穩，容易興奮錯亂，以保證男子的尊嚴與 有關，並有為社區內部界定政治與社會性界限的作用〉然後 章

軍庭模式論政治
權威。更重要的作用，在於浪除男女界限混淆的危險，因為 在革命十年的歲月之間，如馬鑫﹒大街( Marcel David) 最

犧牲危機時刻，特別會有關生之別不保的後遺症。 22 但是說 近的研究顯示，兄弟愛的觀念逐漸演變。革命早期，兄弟愛

來說去，吉拉德也跟佛洛伊德一樣，就是不肯賜與女性半點 的意涵廣、信心足，因為革命人人有份，大家都可以被設想

的行動白主權。不管是那一種心理分析式的情節，女人終歸 為社群中的一分子、參與者。比如在一七九0年七月十四日

是欲望的目標物。不管是直接(佛氏)抑或間接(吉氏) , 聯邦紀念日( f，自tival of Federation )上，拉法耶特( Lafàyette )

她們都只是男性的擬態( mimesis )。本書的宗旨之一，即在 就代表在場全體國民自衛軍誓言 「兄弟之愛永固不朽，誓

矯正這種不平衡的視點，並主張女性之所以被視作威脅，就 以此與全法人民永誌聯合。」

是因為她們也有行動、有作為，而不單單只是用來方便男性 句了激進派當家的年代，亦即一七九二至九四年問:兄
自我想像的虛構物事。 弟愛的使用在意義上變得狹窄許多，甚至有恐佈的意味 j 變

法國大革命的人士確也會自覺地談及哥倆好的「兄弟愛」 成一種在革命政治上(尤其在民眾層次)區分「我們」與

( fraterni可，譯註:中文一向稱為「博愛 J '原是不涉性別歧 「他們」的用語。一七九三年二月巴黎某區民眾大會宣稱自

視的住譯。但為準確表達此字的字性與本書主張的男性感 「對於自由之民而言，沒有所謂中閉路線。不是兄弟，就是

情，在此特捨中性泛指的「博愛 J '而以「凡弟愛」代之。) 敵人。 J I 沒有兄弟愛，就是死來見 J 的口號，也戲劇性地

「兄弟愛」這個觀念，原是革命三大口號「自由、平等、兄 捕捉住這股誓不兩立的情緒。隨著羅伯斯比爾的失勢，這種

弟愛」中最不被人了解的一個。在革命人士自覺性的言說 來勢洶洶的兄弟愛觀念遭到反動。在他死後的一個月裡，兄

弟愛就開始改與溫馨、純淨、無邪、合一的象徵產生聯想。

劍拔弩張的兄弟愛就此馴服，然而卻還不滿足。漸漸
如他所言 r 並不是因為對客體(即母親)偶然產生兩種慾墓才產生抗
爭，相反地，主體對客體產生慾望，是抗爭心理本身使然。」因此， 地，在羅伯斯比爾下台之後，兄弟愛竟然從此「銷聲匿

「亂倫的慾望與科父的慾望不屬於孩童所有，而是滋生於成人的心中，在 跡 J '自革命口號中退卻，如令只剩下自由與平等並秀。官
這樣的模式裡 兒子總是最後才知道自己所想藍的是亂倫與試父，儲
方的出版品上，不再包含兄弟愛的主題，保王黨的出版品
蓄的成人才要為這樣的想法負責。 J Ib id., pp. 145-175 。

22 Ibi呵， pp. 139-141 上，則以嘲弄的畫面處理兄弟愛。比方說，一七九七年刻製

4日 是9

法 的一幅新聞圖片裡，就顯示一名無套褲漢( sansculo間)腳 畫，尤其是政治性色情圖Þf，更明顯地充斥著革命性政治想 第

大
國 踏憲法，身上所佩短劍，卻皇島有「兄弟愛」的字樣。所謂兄 像的心理象徵物( psychosymbolics )。這一類作品，都是可以 章

命
革
弟愛與哥倆好 (fraternization '亦指佔領軍與佔領國人民交 充分藉著戲劇手法，展現家庭羅曼史的表現裝置型。

時自家庭攝 好，猶指與當地女性發生關係， )如今只餘嘲諷口吻，專用

以描述法國與其「姐妹國 J (sister republics )的關係。所謂

在以下的章節裡苗，筆者將為一系列材料提出解讀，從

有關家庭的立法，到色情類的小說，類別不一，來源廣泛。
是請致諭式案
姐妹國就是屈服在法國佔領軍下的諸附庸從圈。執政當國期 其中取材雖不免有所取捨，希望尚不致有武斷之嫌。本書討
史
曼
間，更明文禁止地方首長使用兄弟愛這個字。 23 兄弟愛短短 論的主題甚廣，包括 七九一年間肖像畫( portraiture )開
一生，顯示此字含有一層與激進派革命脫不 7 關係的政治作 始時興，一七九三年起私生子財產繼承權始成定例， 七九

用。 五年後孤兒為主角的小說風行一時，以及其他直接相關的題

兄弟愛概念中暗藏的感情作用就比較不容易看出來了。 日，如王、后二人之死等等。雖說近來學界對法國大革命時

革命分子很少為自己言行舉止背後的情感動機，或因此造成 期圖像的研究( iconography )頗為注曰:然而對於革命性文

的反應提出任何解釋。筆者在此便只能以間接及推論的方式 學、繪畫的本身，關注卻依然甚少 司能正因為係以圖像

進行探索。然而兄弟愛在革命象徵裡所含有的性心理 表現之故吧。且許多文學批評家與藝術史學者都認為革命十

( psychosexual )意義，有闋的線索郤俯拾即是。比方在節慶 年無足觀也，他們以為，在傑克路易﹒大衛( Jacques-Louis

的時序、與聖像( icons) 、章徽 (emblems) 的選用裡面，以 Oavid) 的作品之外，可以稱得上傑作的文學或繪畫成就幾

及必要之時，甚至在革命言說本身中一一比方有關婦女團體 乎是零。一直到最近，學者還依然認定大革命時期的「成

的辯論，或報上對處死國王一事的記載 都訂以找到蛛絲 績 J' 除了只會在一七九三年未至一七九四年初大肆「破壞 J

馬跡。一些不屬於傳統歷史學的研究材料中，如小說、繪 ( v叩dalization )國家瑰寶之外，對「高等」藝術根本不會產

23 筆者對「兄弟愛 J 詞的定義採借自 Marcel David Fraternité et Révo/ution 24 例如 French Ca ricature and the French Revoluti冊" 1789-1799，臼talogue for an
frança肘~， 1789-1199 (Paris 1987) ，本文引用的文字出自頁詞、 1師、 205 exhibition coorganized by the Universicy of California, L05 Angel間. and the
及 244 。關於法國大革命前與革命期間對該名詞的使用，馬塞﹒大衛提 Bibliothèque nation a1e de France 札0' Angeles , 1988). m自於革命期間的藝術的
供了絕對的指引。他表示 "!a fj叫ernité ou la mort"的口號的原始意義並不 討論，請參閱Emmet Kenned}九 A CU/j叫ra/ Hùtory o[ the French Revolution
像聽起來的那樣具威脅性。 (New Haven , 1989)
5。 51

法國大革命時期的車庭羅曼史

第一章
生任何正面的衝擊。 25 比方說，研究法國大革命文學史的學 當時眾藝術家與小說家們創作時的真正心情或是特定的意向

者們， Jli令天還一沿十九世紀的研究方法，只從政治演說及 呢?

車庭模式論政治
報紙著手尋找材料。 26 當然，任何一位學者都不可能盡閱所 其中的難處，也牽涉到技術層面。當時多數小說的印刷

有相闋的文化與政治表現材料，以考查它們所內舍的家庭形 版次( press runs ) ，都沒有數據可考，大革命時期的展覽目

象的基本模式，筆者的研究，同樣也無法包括當時的每一幅 錄，亦皆語焉不詳，對於作品的介紹，往往言簡而意不敗，

刻版、每一張畫作、每一部小說。唯所願者，只希望能為家 通常均僅以「居家場景 J (family scene )、或「頭部人像」

庭形象與權力之間，提出一個解讀，拋磚引玉，促使其他人 (head of 叩 individual )就交代了事。各種材料之中，版畫最

也能從新的角度出發，重新檢查他們手中的資料。 有意思，因為版畫印本的製作費時較少，因此也較能跟隨捕

凡是研究大革命時期的人，都了解運用藝術史料及文學 捉最新的政治動態，比起其他政治性質顯然較低的媒介，速

史料的困難。一般如繪畫、版畫、小說等作品，雖然本來就 度快了許多。 27 革命時期的版畫印本，並非遵循一組系列性

常向父母子女等家庭人物取材，但卻缺乏權力形象的明顯表 或自覺性的主題，通常是被動地因應各種不同需要而作，從

逞。畫家作畫，很少有直接的政治目的，甚至在法國大革命 具有立即時效的政府宣傳，直到追蹤革命動態的消費訂閱市

期間也不例外。小說家寫作，也鮮有為支持某一特定政治秩 場，目的不一。 28 全世界各圖書館及博物館內，一共收集有

序而作的自覺性目標。尤有甚者，今日的我們，又如何知道 三萬餘張法國大革命時期的版畫印本，其中多數未註明日

期，或沒有畫家簽名。因此，從這些日期不明、畫者不詳的

畫作推斷尋找結論，顯然比研究那些知名大家的名作更為冒
25 Serge Bianch且，“Le 'Vmdal臼me révolurionnaire' Oll ta n剖55叩 ce d'un mythe," in
La Légende de la Révolution, act自 du colloque international de Clermont-Ferr叩 d，

juin 1986 (Oermont-Ferrand, 1988) , pp. 189-199. W il1iam Dl祖d" 針對以革

命為主題的畫作做了傑出的研究。他對於革命藝術遭竄毀一事提出評 E 在此段期間內缺乏以革命為主題的法國畫作，關於此問題可參閱James
論 「相當頻繁地， 1790 年代那十年常僅被視為舊王朝時代下藝術和政 Leith, Art 街 h咿咿nda in Francc, 1750-1799: A Stu.咿 m 伽 H;，叫 ofld岫
策的延續或者被視為揭開拿破崙時代及往後世代的一個簡單，但卻不 (TQronto, 1965) 0 Leith 估計，在宮方沙龍所展示的畫作中，僅有 5峙的法
易被實現的序幕。」“Pour transmettre à la posteri的 French Painting 間社出e 國畫展現革命的主題，其餘的畫作則多屑地景、肖像畫及風俗董四請特
Revolution, 1774-1795" (Ph.D. di髓， New York Univers旬" 1983) , p. 11 別參閱頁 l 鈞、 145 0 想了解更細密的觀點則可參閱 Olander， <<Pour
26 例如 'B曲trÎce Didier, La Li的油站re de L笨 拙。 lution foznsçaise (Paris , 1988). 。當ηM吻，，，，，"。

書中所傲的概要介紹。 28 See Fren拙 ea，翩翩reand the 品問ιh&叫帥on.

 52

法國大革命時期的車庭羅曼史
險。

以上這些問題，愈增精神分析研究角度的難度。筆者將

不時在家庭與政治之間遊走，因為兩者相互聯結;同時也在 士 、戶丈_"':'

不同的題材之間來回轉換，因為這些材料敘述的故事彼此相

闕，都是講述一個新政治、新社會秩序的建立。一如目下藝

術與文學批評界的「新史家」般，筆者也將文學、繪畫，或

其他藝術形式，並一爐而共治，與當代他種史料並列排比。

但是論及本書的終極目標，卻與新派史家有異。本人的目

的，不在解讀藝術或文學作品本身，卻在了解背後那股共同 第二章

來源，那股在法國大革命期間，發動了藝術作品，也發動了

政治事件的歷史性與想像性的各項作用過程。在家庭羅曼史 好父親的興與衰
的演變裡，筆者找到了藝術與政治的共同基礎，而家庭羅曼
The Rise and Fall of rhe Good Farher
史的發展變化，對於革命經驗的整合，則具有正負兩面作

用，既有統合效果，也有將其拆散的威脅。

'