Confessions by Rousseau Rousseau\'s Confessions

¶ … Confessions by Rousseau

Rousseau's Confessions is, as the title hints, an autobiographical account of the author's personal experiences and of his development as an individual. Even from the beginning, Rousseau introduces himself as an extraordinary character with a republican, free spirit, and these characteristics will be subsequently proved in the narrative. The title of the work is intended as a misleading allusion. Thus, Rousseau confesses indeed his deeds both good and bad, his impetuous and passionate thoughts and acts and his love affairs with all the incriminatory details. However, the whole is not told in repentance but on the contrary, with the rare delight and satisfaction than an artist takes in the aesthetic qualities of his own life. While the modern reader is struck and won over by the passionate character and by the intelligence of the narrator, to his contemporaries Rousseau was a controversial and even heretic figure. Even when he does not address directly the question of religion in his writings, it is evident that Rousseau was refractory to organized religion or to any other form of absolute control that enslaved the free spirit.

Rousseau introduces himself thus even from the first lines of the book as "a man in all integrity of nature"(Rousseau, 10), emphasizing the natural qualities of man, rather than the abstract and spiritual ones. Following closely the trajectory of his life, the author speaks about his extremely early initiation into reading and his almost prodigal comprehensiveness and maturity of thought as a child. This is significant also, because, as Rousseau says, together with an advanced understanding for his age, he also acquired an intimate acquaintance with passions even before actually experiencing them: "I soon acquired by this dangerous custom [reading] not only an extreme facility in comprehending but, for my age, a too intimate acquaintance with the passions."(Rousseau, 25) Rousseau thus emphasizes that his comprehension and his mind were nurtured by the passion and not only by abstract thought and philosophy. Thus, it is obvious that Rousseau evolved as a man haunted by the passions of his soul, who took pleasure in everything, in the mere fact of being alive and free, in love and even in the satisfaction of the physical needs of eating or sleeping for instance. Overall, Rousseau might seem an epicurean in a certain perspective but it is to be noted that he was not only enthusiastic about physical pleasure but also about the passions of the soul. His passionate response to life distances him from the dogmatic rituals of religion.

This fact is evident in Rousseau's love affairs, all of which are recounted faithfully in his book. His quarrel with religion becomes even more obvious when he confesses that he was inspired by lust and passion when he first became acquainted with the devout Madame de Warrens: "a religion preached by such missionaries must lead to paradise!"(Rousseau, 35) it should not be concluded that Rousseau was in any way an atheist, as he himself declares that he was not entirely devoid of religion. His quarrel was not with the Supreme Being as such, but with the over-dogmatic Catholicism that inspired him with a sense of awe because of its idolatry and its blind submission to the dogmas: "I had that particular aversion our city entertains for Catholicism, which is represented there as the most monstrous idolatry, and whose clergy are painted in the blackest colors."(Rousseau, 49) Rousseau feels entrapped by the strict code of Catholicism. The witty comparison that he makes between the bells that called him to mass and those that called him to breakfast, i.e. To partake of the pleasures of life, is very telling: "If the bells of the viaticum alarmed me, the chiming for mass or vespers called me to a breakfast, a collation, to the pleasure of regaling on fresh butter, fruits, or milk."(Rousseau, 52) the author feels more comfortable with his own religion, Protestantism, than with Catholicism precisely because as a Protestant he is allowed to know and to investigate that in which he believes, and not to merely submit to it: "Protestants, in general, are better instructed in the principles of their religion than Catholics; the reason is obvious, the doctrine of the former requires discussion, of the latter a blind submission."(Rousseau, 66) Rousseau's tensed relationship with religion appears even more evident when he wants to be converted to Catholicism, thus being directly confronted with what he found to be a humiliating and artificial doctrine: "I even suspected him of having been guilty of a perfidy with which he accused our ministers, and that he fabricated passages sometimes in order to evade an objection that incommoded him."(Rousseau, 75) Thus, the curate that is supposed to "preach" him the truth actually fabricates his ideas and forces his conclusion on him, instead of inspiring him with any sense of sincere piety. The fact that Rousseau could not let himself be duped by prejudice and falseness emphasizes that he was enticed to think freely, for himself and not to accept the limitations that come with a fixed and artificial doctrine. For the author thus, truth lies in the human soul. It can be said that Rousseau was thus closer to the teachings of the New Testament, which preached love as the main doctrine rather than those of the Old Testament where God is pictured like a fearful and jealous father. He was thus a believer in the human soul and in freedom. His reaction once he 'escapes' conversion edifying: "I had passed two months in absolute confinement; this was new to me; I was now emancipated, and the sentiment I felt most forcibly, was joy at my recovered liberty. After a slavery which had appeared tedious, I was again master of my time and actions, in a great city, abundant in resources..."(Rousseau, 78) He could accept confinement because he is a believer in freedom and the natural possibilities of man, above the unnatural and strict religions.