generally french revolution etc, occasionally art or simply memes, both vital forms of food for the soul. history nerd with internet access. painting student :)). amadey, she/they
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Text
can’t have seasonal affective disorder if i say that winter isn’t real it was just invented by Big Vivaldi to sell all four of his seasons
37K notes
·
View notes
Text
Finally answering this:
Thank you, @saintjustitude for asking me to rant—I adore doing just that :]
(First of all, thank you to everyone for waiting. I know I took a lot of time to write this, but I had only around an hour free every day, and I usually spent it searching for sources. My knowledge is limited; the play isn't available. I rely on memoirs, interviews, and reviews.
My inbox is always open, and if anyone has any Wojtek questions, I'd be absolutely delighted to answer them. And I mean it. It can be anything.
Every quote was translated by me. All my sources are listed.
Unfortunately a part of it wasn't saved, and I don't have access to some info anymore but this post will probably serve as the beginning of a longer thread.)
And now: “Sprawa Dantona” (1975).
1. How did it all come to be? Why was ‘The Danton Case’ and not any other play?
When I say ‘Danton’ directed by Wajda, most probably think of the 1983 version, a political metaphor: Comsal representing the Polish government, Dantonist representing Solidarity. Was it like that originally? Was Wajda just calling for a fight with the government, transforming Przybyszewska's work to fit his own narrative?
In short: No! (At least if we're referring to the 1975 version, the film is completely another story; I'll gladly make another post about it.).
Zygmunt Hübner (I have mentioned him already in this post) chose Wajda to direct the play even though the latter was a relatively young director; something was telling Hübner that giving the play to him would be absolutely necessary. Pszoniak later referred to that event as Wajda being cast in it as much as he himself was.
The play was simply a way to introduce the artistic team Hübner created. There was none of some “noble patriotism’ or 'anti communism'. (None of what Wajda described as the purpose of the later film.)
Why was that play in particular chosen? That is unknown.
“The idea [of exhibiting that play] came from the fact that Hübner was looking for a play (…) that would present his artistic team as a whole, which he assembled with great imagination and intuition.”
At first, Pszoniak laughed into Hübner's face when offered the role. He thought it fine, intruiging, but the character of Robespierre was so foreign to him that he couldn't give anything from his own person or his own experiences to his Maximilien.
He asked for the role of Danton; that role seemed to fit him way better with "his [Danton's] sensuality, his dynamic physiognomy, and his balls."
Wajda and Hübner were quite insistent and more or less forced Pszoniak into the role.
“Hübner and Wajda were so stubborn that they did not take my objection into account. Nothing there [in the role] suited me; there was no starting point for the role. I had no right to play it. But they convinced me for so long that the whole situation with ‘The Danton Case’ became a dead end.”
The transformation from simply a good play to something entirely political in Wajda's eyes was very slow but steady. On that a little later.
2. Pszoniak wasn't ready to play Robespierre? How did he prepare for the role then?
It's very important to note that it was not bad will that made Pszoniak initially refuse the role, but the theater typecast he was put into and which he almost got used to. All of his power and stage presence were connected to his own physicality, to this sort of mobility and expression that he had to (presumably at Wajda's request) abandon while playing Robespierre.
Wojtekspierre getting his hair cut from a man with surprisingly modern glasses
Whether he was in a tragedy or comedy, it was the unique liveliness that made him so different. Suddenly he was offered the role of Robespierre, a man he only knew from unfavorable history books, portrayed a certain way by Przybyszewska, and he's made to stand before the expanse of that character's personality in a try to make him someone physical.
While it might seem quite shocking, when preparing for the role, Pszoniak didn't even read any Robespierre biography. Why? According to him:
“I didn’t think at all about a historical figure, and besides, you can’t play any historical figure. I put aside the books on the French Revolution. I read them much later, when, years later, in Paris. (…) I didn't want to portray a historical figure, so I didn't judge or evaluate him. I simply tried to get closer to him, to understand him as a person. Przybyszewska herself made it easier for me. The text of the play clearly indicated that she was fascinated by him. (...) Przybyszewska constructed this character in an unusual, enigmatic way. I clung to this fascination, it was a reason for treating Robespierre with empathy. This is a necessary condition for creating a character, without empathy you will never be able to get closer to the man you are to become on stage. Wandering through the labyrinth of his emotions, motives for action, opinions he expresses, I became so strongly attached to him, he took over me so much, that as a result I became Robespierre-Pszoniak.”
Pszoniak admitted he didn't want to play a politician [but, of course, as we all know, he was later forced to in ‘Danton’ (1983)].
The preparations took time and patience (especially from his wife - Barbara). Pszoniak tends to describe it as a painful process. Robespierre's physical expression was compared to being bound tightly by his own flesh, almost imprisoned by it, but freed by his mind. Pszoniak realized that all of the power in portraying Robespierre could only be gained from a deeper reflection. How to show a mind on stage?
That Pszoniak didn't know, and so he made the decision to show Robespierre's determination and faith instead of simply a calculated brain. To show a path, an objective. That's why the last scene was so hard to play (conversation between Robespierre and Saint-Just after Danton's death); he even asked Wajda for a white cloth as a makeshift shroud. To Pszoniak, that scene meant the symbolic death of his character. Robespierre (described by Pszoniak as a “very intelligent man") feels that inevitable peril awaits in the near future. The actor often described a feeling of mourning something or someone after the performance.
The challenge of creating the role, in the words of Wojciech Pszoniak:
“I started to control all my reflexes morning till night; from waking up to falling asleep, I was destroying myself. In everyday life, even the smallest activity, I slowed down; I was reducing and cleaning up [every one of] my habits. Torment, the absolute torment of controlling yourself, of managing yourself. Zero spontaneity, the phone rings, my first reaction—run to answer it—I stop myself calmly, in control of every slowed-down gesture. I imitated Zygmunt Hübner's focused gait; I noticed how he placed his feet. And I started walking like that myself. That's how I set a different, more controlled way of moving. After that, I turned to gestures, head movements, the way of getting up, and gesticulation. I felt that I was different. Acquaintances and friends both asked where this change came from. I suppressed the dynamic, extraverted myself.”
And
“I was pushing the boundaries of supervision [over myself], checking how I would behave after drinking a larger amount of vodka. One day I went out with Basia [wife] and friends (...) After a few bottles, at four in the morning, they were amused, cheered up, asking if I was sick because I was behaving like a machine. After three weeks of suffering, I reached ground zero. This happened during the rehearsals. A conversation about Robespierre and Danton. I joined the discussion, exclaiming, 'I disagree!’ - and suddenly I saw that my hand was no longer my hand, that it was not the hand of that Pszoniak that I am, but that it was already a hand—the beginning of someone else.”
3. What of Danton?
Here the problem with the play began. The man cast as Danton, Bronisław Pawlik, was just... terrible.
He was a good actor in general, definitely, but in short (explanation for the anglophones), it was like casting Danny DeVito as Danton.
He was short of stature, weak of voice, much older than Pszoniak, and simply unfit for the role.
He didn't have a stage presence; his voice was silenced by the other people on stage, and Pszoniak kept acting as if there was some great, dangerous opponent when there wasn't—the audience seemed to notice it.
It all added to a kind of feeling of resentment after preparing so long for the role of Robespierre.
Danton (Bronisław Pawlik), Camille (Olgierd Łukaszewicz) and Westermann (Franciszek Pieczka) celebrating
Pawlik was more concerned with the position of the props or the costume instead of conversing and shaping their roles. To Pszoniak it was the role of a lifetime, to Pawlik it wasn't.
“The audience was sitting on the stage because the entire theater had been transformed into the Revolutionary Tribunal. Here, a powerful voice and a [kind of] broad gesture were needed... Pawlik's charm disappeared in the feverish crowd. What consequences did this have for the play? Enormous, Danton was deprived of the strength [for both the audience and actors] to believe that he posed a deadly serious threat to the revolution. And this lack bothered me terribly...”
4. How did it become political then?
As I have previously mentioned, it was a slow, steady process. Even Wajda himself didn't think much of the play; it was the audience that began the change.
As the first example, Pszoniak recalls a scene when Eleonore comes in with tea but not sugar—in the audience at first only a few laughing, but gradually along with the many performances it turned into the whole audience cackling. The play was exhibited just when a time of increasing problems with sugar supplies began in Poland (food stamps for sugar were introduced).
Pszoniak admitted that the cast would often laugh along with the audience. It seemed almost absurd—a tragic play blending with the real world.
When it comes to Pszoniak himself in that time, the more he played the role, the more it felt like “punching the air.” Instead of having a genuine conflict, he had no support, no reference point in Pawlik as Danton or the audience. For the role to have meaning, to be something, it all had to be a matter of life and death. His co-actor was slipping into comedic grotesque while playing the second main role.
"The success of the play was huge, but the audience was eager to read the play [only] in the context of political allusions. (…) The audience felt that something was happening [on and off stage], (…) the tension grew."
The audience's reaction seemed to be a direct answer to the Danton shown on stage. Instead of a political opponent, there stood a sad, tired victim of the committee who seems completely and utterly innocent, all his words said with a kind of saddened charm (doesn't that remind you of a certain film Wajda made later?).
5. What of the other actors?
Here is where I have the least information. If anyone has any more sources of information, actor memoirs, etc., feel free to reblog this post with additional info or simply contact me about it so I could make Part 2. :]
The cast.
I have to tell you something shocking... Wajda is capable of giving actual, normal characterization to secondary characters (gasp, thunderstrike, wolf howling).
Or perhaps that was just the actor/Zygmunt Hübner (I guess we'll never know).
The most information I could gather was about Saint-Just (played by the excellent Władysław Kowalski).
Based off the limited amount of reviews I could gather, he was a positive character in general. Described as “a man gifted with exceptional warmth and [someone] unconditionally devoted to his cause” or “full of raw passion."
AND HE GIVES MAXIME FLOWERS IN THIS VERSION AS WELL, EXCEPT IN THIS ONE ROBESPIERRE (KIND OF) SMILES!
I couldn't find much on Eleonore, Louise, or Lucille, though I've searched and searched for a few days. All I could find is that the actresses were excellent—that is, unfortunately, no source of any relevant information. Frankly speaking, since Wajda, in kind words, doesn't excel at writing women, I don't have much faith in their characterization on the director's part.
Camille played Łukaszewicz is usually called a “complicated youth"—that is, of course, an opinion—or “spontaneous in reflexes"—that's a bit better of a description. As you can see, I am limited by the fact the play isn't available, and I must depend on biased or subjective sources.
Worried Camille Desmoulins (Olgierd Łukaszewicz) - I do think this Camille looks quite nice.
6. And did the critics like it? Was it well directed?
In short, it was a very, very liked play by both the critics and the audience. It ran for 5 years; it ended around 1980, when many of the actors simply left Poland.
About critics and reviews written by them: What surprised me immensely is the fact that most available reviews (written before the release of the film ‘Danton’) of the play weren't anti-Robespierre. The play is often described as something of a moral discussion, something for the viewer to assess, a work that doesn't suggest one solution to understand the conflict, or revolution (in other words, a great play).
A thing I've noticed is that along with time, the descriptions of the main characters seem to change. Danton—in earliest reviews described as “absolutely repulsive," then later as a tragic man, someone who adores life. Robespierre—in earliest reviews described as an absolute “marble statue," an idealist, someone pure, then in later reviews as just a fanatic.
7. What about Wajda? Did he change the text much? What about the scenography?
I was surprised to learn that Wajda absolutely could make a good, Przybyszewska-accurate play.
From all I could find, there is not much I can accuse Wajda of when it comes to ‘The Danton Case’ stage adaptations. It was made very well. What most likely contributed to the later change in people's mentality when met with the play is the fact that the audience was sort of a part of the performance. How? Like this:
“It [the play] takes place on a stage placed in front of the audience; on the actual stage and in the rest of the audience sit in rows of chairs rising upwards. Everything encompassed by the scenography is one theater. This played out brilliantly in the second parts, in the beautifully composed group scenes, where the audience not only looks at the stage but is drawn into it as an extra audience at the hearings of the revolutionary tribunal.”
And
“Wajda made "The Danton Case" as if against himself—against his previous self: he gave up on visual effects, music, and symbolism. He built a spectacle—a spectacle indeed!—raw and beautiful. (…) During the (…) presentation of "The Danton Case," seats for viewers were also installed on the stage, which was fortunately spacious, the audience surrounds the actors, the actors are among the audience, on the balcony, in the passages.”
If Danton or Robespierre were so close to the audience, I think it really did influence the people's opinion of it later on. Pawlik was terrified, jumping like a fish out of water from one audience member to the other, and there was Pszoniak, white and still under his shroud just a few meters away. That did certainly change the performance's reception.
8. Where can I watch this?!
As I have mentioned here: the play isn't available online, but most certainly is somewhere in the archives (confirmed by Pszoniak), when it was supposed to have a TV debut the martial law was introduced, and a few years later everyone seemed to have forgotten about it.
So, erm… Who's raiding the archives with me? (By the way, fragments of the play exist online, but only 10-20 minute excerpts, so if I find the time, I'll try to track them down.).
Sources:
Books:
Aktor. Wojciech Pszoniak w rozmowie z Michałem Komarem, Wydawnictwo Literackie 2009;
Maciej Karpiński, Pszoniak, Wydawnictwa Artystyczne i Filmowe Warszawa 1976;
Małgorzata Terlecka-Reksnis, Pszoniak. Fragmenty, Wydawnictwo Poznańskie 2024
Photos used and play reviews (pardon the rhyme):
http://encyklopediateatru.pl
31 notes
·
View notes
Text
Jean Cocteau’s frescoes
In 1949, the poet Jean Cocteau met Francine Weisweiller who invited him a year later to spend a week’s holiday in her house in St Jean Cap Ferrat which overlooked the bay of Villefranche.
A few days after his arrival, Jean Cocteau would say: “I’m tired of idleness, I wither here…” He asked Francine whether he could draw the head of Apollo above the fireplace in the living room. Matisse had told him: “When you decorate a wall, you decorate the others”, so Cocteau kept on painting. Inch by inch, he covered all the walls of the house with frescoes inspired by the Greek mythology and the French Riviera.
All summer in 1950, Jean Cocteau worked on ladders without any preliminary model. After drawing in charcoal, the poet enhanced his drawings with coloured powders diluted in raw milk, otherwise known as frescoes in tempera. Cocteau would write: “I didn’t have to dress the walls; I had to paint on their skin […] Santo Sospir is a tattooed villa”.
Two years after completing the walls of the villa, Jean Cocteau tackled the ceilings. Finding them too white, he coloured them with pastels in very soft tones. He also composed mosaics for the entrance patio and a tapestry for the dining room. The art-covered walls even inspired a film, the 1952 La Villa Santo-Sospir, a filmed tour of the home given by Cocteau himself.
For many years, Jean Cocteau spend long periods in the villa and wrote about the place: “When I was working at Santo Sospir, I became myself a wall and these walls spoke for me”.
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
Okay, so:
Latin has this word, sic. Or, if we want to be more diacritically accurate, sīc. That shows that the i is long, so it’s pronounced like “seek” and not like “sick.”
You might recognize this word from Latin sayings like “sic semper tyrannis” or “sic transit gloria mundi.” You might recognize it as what you put in parentheses when you want to be pass-agg about someone’s mistakes when you’re quoting them: “Then he texted me, ‘I want to touch you’re (sic) butt.’”
It means, “thus,” which sounds pretty hoity-toity in this modren era, so maybe think of it as meaning “in this way,” or “just like that.” As in, “just like that, to all tyrants, forever,” an allegedly cool thing to say after shooting a President and leaping off a balcony and shattering your leg. “Everyone should do it this way.”
Anyway, Classical Latin somewhat lacked an affirmative particle, though you might see the word ita, a synonym of sic, used in that way. By Medieval Times, however, sic was holding down this role. Which is to say, it came to mean yes.
Ego: Num edisti totam pitam?
Tu, pudendus: Sic.
Me: Did you eat all the pizza?
You, shameful: That’s the way it is./Yes.
This was pretty well established by the time Latin evolved into its various bastard children, the Romance languages, and you can see this by the words for yes in these languages.
In Spanish, Italian, Asturian, Catalan, Corsican, Galician, Friulian, and others, you say si for yes. In Portugese, you say sim. In French, you say si to mean yes when you’re contradicting a negative assertion (”You don’t like donkey sausage like all of us, the inhabitants of France, eat all the time?” “Yes, I do!”). In Romanian, you say da, but that’s because they’re on some Slavic shit. P.S. there are possibly more Romance languages than you’re aware of.
But:
There was still influence in some areas by the conquered Gaulish tribes on the language of their conquerors. We don’t really have anything of Gaulish language left, but we can reverse engineer some things from their descendants. You see, the Celts that we think of now as the people of the British Isles were Gaulish, originally (in the sense that anyone’s originally from anywhere, I guess) from central and western Europe. So we can look at, for example, Old Irish, where they said tó to mean yes, or Welsh, where they say do to mean yes or indeed, and we can see that they derive from the Proto-Indo-European (the big mother language at whose teat very many languages both modern and ancient did suckle) word *tod, meaning “this” or “that.” (The asterisk indicates that this is a reconstructed word and we don’t know exactly what it would have been but we have a pretty damn good idea.)
So if you were fucking Ambiorix or whoever and Quintus Titurius Sabinus was like, “Yo, did you eat all the pizza?” you would do that Drake smile and point thing under your big beefy Gaulish mustache and say, “This.” Then you would have him surrounded and killed.
Apparently Latin(ish) speakers in the area thought this was a very dope way of expressing themselves. “Why should I say ‘in that way’ like those idiots in Italy and Spain when I could say ‘this’ like all these cool mustache boys in Gaul?” So they started copying the expression, but in their own language. (That’s called a calque, by the way. When you borrow an expression from another language but translate it into your own. If you care about that kind of shit.)
The Latin word for “this” is “hoc,” so a bunch of people started saying “hoc” to mean yes. In the southern parts of what was once Gaul, “hoc” makes the relatively minor adjustment to òc, while in the more northerly areas they think, “Hmm, just saying ‘this’ isn’t cool enough. What if we said ‘this that’ to mean ‘yes.’” (This is not exactly what happened but it is basically what happened, please just fucking roll with it, this shit is long enough already.)
So they combined hoc with ille, which means “that” (but also comes to just mean “he”: compare Spanish el, Italian il, French le, and so on) to make o-il, which becomes oïl. This difference between the north and south (i.e. saying oc or oil) comes to be so emblematic of the differences between the two languages/dialects that the languages from the north are called langues d’oil and the ones from the south are called langues d’oc. In fact, the latter language is now officially called “Occitan,” which is a made-up word (to a slightly greater degree than that to which all words are made-up words) that basically means “Oc-ish.” They speak Occitan in southern France and Catalonia and Monaco and some other places.
The oil languages include a pretty beefy number of languages and dialects with some pretty amazing names like Walloon, and also one with a much more basic name: French. Perhaps you’ve heard of it, n'est-ce pas?
Yeah, eventually Francophones drop the -l from oil and start saying it as oui. If you’ve ever wondered why French yes is different from other Romance yeses, well, now you know.
I guess what I’m getting at is that when you reblog a post you like and tag it with “this,” or affirm a thing a friend said by nodding and saying “Yeah, that”: you’re not new
44K notes
·
View notes
Text
Saint just could’ve stopped napoleon (with virtue)
But thermidorians, aka future members of the directory, stopped Saint just (with thermidor)
But napoleon, he got rid of the directory (with a coup)
I propose we change the name of rock, paper, scissors to: Saint Just, Directory, Napoleon. I will not take any questions.
47 notes
·
View notes
Text
becoming a communist as a coping mechanism is the plot of a classic polish novel
dude i need someone to talk to me about my fitzier post-rescue fic wip where fitzjames becomes a communist as a coping mechanism (its a crackfic...taken seriously)
16 notes
·
View notes
Text
im laughing so hard because no matter what song you listen to
spiderman dances to the beat
no matter what song ive been testing it and lauing my ass off for an hour
2M notes
·
View notes
Text
Reblog this to place a small flower in the hair of prev, and that you're very proud of them
38K notes
·
View notes
Text
Whaaaatt? Aw man I wish I could go back in time and see this!!!
TIL: In the 1981 original Broadway cast of Amadeus, Tim Curry played Mozart to Ian McKellen’s Salieri. Both were nominated for the best actor Tony—McKellen won.
4K notes
·
View notes
Text
HEY
THE COMMODIFICATION OF ART IS A BLIGHT
FILMMAKERS AND GAME DEVELOPERS SHOULDNT HAVE TO BOW TO THE WHIMS OF CORPORATE GREED
BUT GUESS WHAT? THEY CAN'T TAKE AWAY OUR MEANS OF PRODUCTION HERE
IF YOU HAVE A STORY IN YOUR HEAD WRITE IT
IF YOU HAVE A SONG YOU WANT TO HEAR SING IT REGARDLESS OF YOUR PERCEIVED TALENT
IF YOU HAVE ACCESS TO A COMPUTER AND ALWAYS WANTED TO MESS AROUND WITH MAKING SOME KIND OF VIDEO GAME DOWNLOAD REN.PY OR TWINE OR GODOT IF YOU CAN SUPPORT IT AND FUCK AROUND
DRAW WHATEVER YOU WANT ON THE BACK OF A NAPKIN
THEY CAN COMMODIFY CREATIONS BUT THEY CANNOT COMMODIFY YOUR BRAIN AND HANDS
FIND SOMETHING YOU CAN DO AND DO IT FOR YOURSELF
THE ACT OF CREATION IS BEAUTIFUL
69 notes
·
View notes
Text
11K notes
·
View notes
Text
A postcard from Zurich.
108 notes
·
View notes
Note
You're leaving out the vital part where Saint-Just was holding the basket and drinking the blood that dripped through the wicker. He got arm cramps from holding it for so long, you can see the famous engraving of him exercising his arms here
I am sorry, did I understand that correctly? Portable guillottine? Entire family slaughtered on the spot by portable guillotine?
But of course! If you walk around Paris and listen very carefully, you might still hear the ghostly echoes of its dreadful rolling wheels.
37 notes
·
View notes
Text
fancy a plate of Lobster Thermidor, anyone?
Who's hungry?
58 notes
·
View notes
Text
why is privacy so eroded. I get treated like a nutcase if I say no, I don't want strange companies taking pictures of my home and putting them online for maps or whatever. I don't want to be in the background of your tiktok, and I think it's weirder for you to assume I'm okay with it than it is for me to politely ask you to refilm it so my face isn't in the frame. I don't enjoy handing my employer a list of every online account I have and feeling under surveillance when I'm just shit posting or sharing pictures of my cats or garden harvest. I don't want to hear your private calls on speaker on the bus, esp when the person on the line doesn't know you're broadcasting their words to strangers. I don't want an algorithm guessing what will piss me off the most so I spend more time online, engaging with shit I don't want to see or hear out of outrage. I don't want any of this. it's total ass.
86K notes
·
View notes
Text
Saint-Just Resources
A culmination of the many articles and other resources I use in my own research as someone studying to be a historian on the revolution. Will be added to as I progress in my research; please let me know if any links don't work!
Historians on Saint-Just:
Biography from Association pour la sauvegarde de la Maison de Saint-Just*
Histoire de Saint-Just député à la Convention nationale (Hamel, 1860)
Lenôtre on SJ's 1791-early 1792 life in rural France
Juarès on SJ in the lead-up to 9 Thermidor (1908)*
Saint-Just (Cioti, 1991)
Saint-Just: Sohn, Denker und Protagonist der Revolution (Monar, 1993)
Saint-Just (Gignoux, 1947)
Saint-Just en mission la naissance d'un myth (J.P. Gross, 1967)
Saint-Just et les femmes (Quennedey, 2016)
Saint-Just: Apostle of the Terror by Geoffrey Bruun (my personal favorite English SJ bio)
The Man of Virtue: The Role of Antiquity in the Political Trajectory of L.A. Saint-Just (Linton, 2010)*
Saint-Just: The French Revolution's "Angel of Death" (Linton, 2015)*
Three Letters of Saint-Just (Bruun, 1934)
Saint-Just in modern Annales historiography (Vinot, Linton, Quennedey, etc., 2017)
Saint-Just : Une Constitution pour la République (on his role in the drafting of the 1793 Constitution) (Crucifix and Quennedey, 2018)
Saint-Just's Pre-Convention Life:
Monograph on the Château de Coucy (first believed to have been written in the 1780s as a school assignment, debunked by Vinot) - see this blog post by Anne Quennedey for more info.
Arlequin-Diogene (SJ's play) -> I did an English translation
Saint-Just Commits Tax-Fraud
L’esprit de la révolution et de la constitution de la France (1791)
Convention Speeches:
All Convention Speeches Summarized (Quennedey, 2020)*
First Speech: 13 November 1792 on the debate of putting the King to trial.*
19 vendémiaire an II (10 October 1793)
Ventôse Decrees Proposal Convention Speech (my complete English translation)*
9 Thermidor an II (28 July 1794) Speech/Draft
My full English translation
"Praise the Victories and Forget Ourselves" Excerpt
"Tarpeian Rock" Analogy from 9 Thermidor Speech draft
Miscellaneous:
Why I study SJ
My Thoughts on SJ's Thoughts on the Terror
SJ's Last Paris Apartment ( w/ monimarat)
SJ's various lodgings in Paris
Speech to Army of the Rhine excerpt
Alsace Mission Map
Saint-Just on Marat*
* indicates what I consider the most important of these sources in order to learn about Saint-Just truthfully.
209 notes
·
View notes