Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Rīga : Zvaigzne, 1990.
Description
Based on the 1758 edition, this translation strives for fidelity and retains Montesquieu's paragraphing. George R. Healy's Introduction discusses The Persian Letters as a kind of overture to the Enlightenment, a work of remarkable diversity designed more to explore a problem of great urgency for eighteenth century thought than to resolve it: that of discovering universals, or at least the pragmatic constants, amid the diversity of human culture and society, and of confronting the proposition that there are no values in human relationships except those imposed by force or agreed upon in self-interested conventions.
User reviews
LibraryThing member MeditationesMartini
In some ways, you've read one epistolatory 18th-century novel satirizing Europeans through the eyes of the Oriental Other, you've read 'em all--and I must be getting kind of close to literally having read them all. But if I could only recommend one, the Persian Letters would surely be it. Usbek and
The politics can get tedious when they turn to disquisition, and the satire can be a bit heavy, as it is with these things, and sometimes the crackpot theories on e.g. climate or the extinction of the human race are elaborated on at too much length. But we have to recognize that this is an eruption in its way of the same exuberance we love in these Enlightenmen, and take the bad with the cool allegories about the Troglodytes, perfection out of purgation, and the idea that Adam might have been the last survivor of a dying world; or the Christian fetishing of virginity as parallel to the Muslim fetishing of the female body (such a telling difference from Mary Wortley Montagu's fecund Turks, these constructed Persians feeling the loss of virginity as life's central shame and hard knock); the deft way Montesquieu has Usbek encompass two powerful but problematic positions on affairs of the heart:
"Nothing had made a greater contribution to mutual attachment than the possibility of divorce. A husband and wife were inclined to put up with domestic troubles patiently, because they knew that it was in their power to bring them to an end, and often they had this power at their disposal all their lives without using it, for the unique reason that they were free to do so."
v.
"I find something very sincere, and very great as well, in the words of a king who, on the point of falling into enemy hands, saw his courtiers weeping around him and said "from your tears, I realize that I am still your king."
Perhaps not contradictory, but two true things, in 18th-century France, imaginary Iran, or here and now.
Show More
Rica hit Paris, learn, listen, wonder, evaluate, scoff, ask questions, while the time away in this Shangri-La, until word comes that the home front has been neglected too long, the seraglio is in disorder, the wives are poisoned and the eunuchs stabbed. It's a neat way of undermining the wise and evenhanded Usbek and squeezing some more play out of the form--much as he admires certain of the European institutions and seems to pass judgment on others from an eminently reasonable place, at home his only task was to embrace the velvet glove or the iron fist, and it is vacillating that sinks him.The politics can get tedious when they turn to disquisition, and the satire can be a bit heavy, as it is with these things, and sometimes the crackpot theories on e.g. climate or the extinction of the human race are elaborated on at too much length. But we have to recognize that this is an eruption in its way of the same exuberance we love in these Enlightenmen, and take the bad with the cool allegories about the Troglodytes, perfection out of purgation, and the idea that Adam might have been the last survivor of a dying world; or the Christian fetishing of virginity as parallel to the Muslim fetishing of the female body (such a telling difference from Mary Wortley Montagu's fecund Turks, these constructed Persians feeling the loss of virginity as life's central shame and hard knock); the deft way Montesquieu has Usbek encompass two powerful but problematic positions on affairs of the heart:
"Nothing had made a greater contribution to mutual attachment than the possibility of divorce. A husband and wife were inclined to put up with domestic troubles patiently, because they knew that it was in their power to bring them to an end, and often they had this power at their disposal all their lives without using it, for the unique reason that they were free to do so."
v.
"I find something very sincere, and very great as well, in the words of a king who, on the point of falling into enemy hands, saw his courtiers weeping around him and said "from your tears, I realize that I am still your king."
Perhaps not contradictory, but two true things, in 18th-century France, imaginary Iran, or here and now.
Show Less
LibraryThing member paradoxosalpha
Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu was an intellectual giant of early 18th-century France. His Persian Letters were composed under the conceit of correspondence written by Persian travelers in Europe. In an early series of these letters, he presents the fable of the Troglodytes. In
"...that the individual's self-interest is always to be found in the common interest; that wanting to cut oneself off from it is the same as wanting to ruin oneself; that virtue is not such as to cost us anything, and should not be considered as wearisome exercise; and that justice to others is charity for ourselves."
Letter 13 extols the virtues of the new order of society that followed from these revised ideals, and Letter 14 discusses the beginnings of that polity’s decline, as they chose to subject themselves to a monarch. The Betts edition appends an additional letter on the Troglodytes written by Montesquieu, but not published by him in the Letters.
The entire Troglodyte series deserves to be studied in connection with the utopias of Plato and Rabelais alike.
Show More
Letter 11, this remote Arabian people is introduced as "so wicked and ferocious that there were no principles of equity or justice among them." The consequent Ayn Rand-style faux-libertarian dystopia (alarmingly similar in many details to our mass society today) leads to a substantial decline in population. The subject of Letter 12 involves the regeneration of society by the efforts of two men and their households, who broke with Troglodyte custom in realizing"...that the individual's self-interest is always to be found in the common interest; that wanting to cut oneself off from it is the same as wanting to ruin oneself; that virtue is not such as to cost us anything, and should not be considered as wearisome exercise; and that justice to others is charity for ourselves."
Letter 13 extols the virtues of the new order of society that followed from these revised ideals, and Letter 14 discusses the beginnings of that polity’s decline, as they chose to subject themselves to a monarch. The Betts edition appends an additional letter on the Troglodytes written by Montesquieu, but not published by him in the Letters.
The entire Troglodyte series deserves to be studied in connection with the utopias of Plato and Rabelais alike.
Show Less
LibraryThing member AlanWPowers
A remarkable book. Its topics read as if written in 2010: Persian/ "Iranian" Islam trying to convert Armenian Christians and Zoroastrians because of the new Shah's edict. Hence, all the Armenians fled, emptying with a stroke of the pen "all the skilled workmen, and all the businessmen of
Then there are the gender issues, letters written by favorite wives in the seraglio to their husband in Paris; or, the chief eunuch's letters on the difficulty of guarding the seraglio, especially Roxanne. Then there's the historical, comparatist reflections, say on slavery in Rome versus slaves guarding the seraglio. Roman slaves were very productive, and could grow very rich: from tours of Roman tombs and Neapolitan tombs from teh Roman era, I know this to be true; their wealth sometimes grew because Senators, for example, were debarred from money-making except as land-owners and patrons.
One of the fictitious letter-writers compares Roman slaves in their industry and eventual wealth--enough to buy their and their families' freeedom--to the lazy luxuriousness of Persian slaves whose only "job" is to guard the seraglio.
This is a stunner, to read a work from 60 years before the Declaration of Independence that addresses many issues that populate our evening news, as well as some issues (Roman slavery) that would be discussed if we TV watchers were smarter.
The reflections on religion are astute and timeless. For instance,
"It is observable, that the members of the minority religions commonly make themselves more useful to their country, than those of the established religion; because, being excluded from all honours, they can only render themselves considerable by their opulence; they are led to acquire it by their industry, and to embrace the most toilsome employments in the society." What better argument for varieties of religions, and against majority rligions, whether Islam in Iran or Evangelicalism int he US?
Show More
Persia."Then there are the gender issues, letters written by favorite wives in the seraglio to their husband in Paris; or, the chief eunuch's letters on the difficulty of guarding the seraglio, especially Roxanne. Then there's the historical, comparatist reflections, say on slavery in Rome versus slaves guarding the seraglio. Roman slaves were very productive, and could grow very rich: from tours of Roman tombs and Neapolitan tombs from teh Roman era, I know this to be true; their wealth sometimes grew because Senators, for example, were debarred from money-making except as land-owners and patrons.
One of the fictitious letter-writers compares Roman slaves in their industry and eventual wealth--enough to buy their and their families' freeedom--to the lazy luxuriousness of Persian slaves whose only "job" is to guard the seraglio.
This is a stunner, to read a work from 60 years before the Declaration of Independence that addresses many issues that populate our evening news, as well as some issues (Roman slavery) that would be discussed if we TV watchers were smarter.
The reflections on religion are astute and timeless. For instance,
"It is observable, that the members of the minority religions commonly make themselves more useful to their country, than those of the established religion; because, being excluded from all honours, they can only render themselves considerable by their opulence; they are led to acquire it by their industry, and to embrace the most toilsome employments in the society." What better argument for varieties of religions, and against majority rligions, whether Islam in Iran or Evangelicalism int he US?
Show Less
LibraryThing member AlanWPowers
A remarkable book. Its topics read as if written in 2010: Persian/ "Iranian" Islam trying to convert Armenian Christians and Zoroastrians because of the new Shah's edict. Hence, all the Armenians fled, emptying with a stroke of the pen "all the skilled workmen, and all the businessmen of
Then there are the gender issues, letters written by favorite wives in the seraglio to their husband in Paris; or, the chief eunuch's letters on the difficulty of guarding the seraglio, especially Roxanne. Then there's the historical, comparatist reflections, say on slavery in Rome versus slaves guarding the seraglio. Roman slaves were very productive, and could grow very rich: from tours of Roman tombs and Neapolitan tombs from teh Roman era, I know this to be true; their wealth sometimes grew because Senators, for example, were debarred from money-making except as land-owners and patrons.
One of the fictitious letter-writers compares Roman slaves in their industry and eventual wealth--enough to buy their and their families' freeedom--to the lazy luxuriousness of Persian slaves whose only "job" is to guard the seraglio.
This is a stunner, to read a work from 60 years before the Declaration of Independence that addresses many issues that populate our evening news, as well as some issues (Roman slavery) that would be discussed if we TV watchers were smarter.
The reflections on religion are astute and timeless. For instance,
"It is observable, that the members of the minority religions commonly make themselves more useful to their country, than those of the established religion; because, being excluded from all honours, they can only render themselves considerable by their opulence; they are led to acquire it by their industry, and to embrace the most toilsome employments in the society." What better argument for varieties of religions, and against majority rligions, whether Islam in Iran or Evangelicalism in the US?
Show More
Persia."Then there are the gender issues, letters written by favorite wives in the seraglio to their husband in Paris; or, the chief eunuch's letters on the difficulty of guarding the seraglio, especially Roxanne. Then there's the historical, comparatist reflections, say on slavery in Rome versus slaves guarding the seraglio. Roman slaves were very productive, and could grow very rich: from tours of Roman tombs and Neapolitan tombs from teh Roman era, I know this to be true; their wealth sometimes grew because Senators, for example, were debarred from money-making except as land-owners and patrons.
One of the fictitious letter-writers compares Roman slaves in their industry and eventual wealth--enough to buy their and their families' freeedom--to the lazy luxuriousness of Persian slaves whose only "job" is to guard the seraglio.
This is a stunner, to read a work from 60 years before the Declaration of Independence that addresses many issues that populate our evening news, as well as some issues (Roman slavery) that would be discussed if we TV watchers were smarter.
The reflections on religion are astute and timeless. For instance,
"It is observable, that the members of the minority religions commonly make themselves more useful to their country, than those of the established religion; because, being excluded from all honours, they can only render themselves considerable by their opulence; they are led to acquire it by their industry, and to embrace the most toilsome employments in the society." What better argument for varieties of religions, and against majority rligions, whether Islam in Iran or Evangelicalism in the US?
Show Less
LibraryThing member stillatim
The nice thing about reading early 'novels' is that they so often have nothing in common with a typical contemporary novel. That's definitely the case for PL, of which only the first dozen and the last half dozen pages are are connected in any kind of narrative. Not only that, the narrative is
The meat of the book consists in letters written to and from various 'Persians,' seeing France and some other parts of Europe for the first time. Like all good satire, it takes the normal (well, normal for 18th century French novel readers), views it from another perspective, and finds it to be both hilarious and horrifying. If you've read other 18th century moralists, you'll know what to expect: freedom, intelligence, stoicism, nature good; tyranny, love of money, theology bad.
But I oversimplify, because easily the best thing about the book is how free-floating it is. I found it virtually impossible to tell when Montesquieu wanted his authors to agree with the letter writers and when to disagree. Which had the awful, depressing effect of making me think about things. For that I knock off two stars, because thinking about things is way too hard work for me.
Show More
immensely dull, unless you're the sort of person who gets off on descriptions of Harem life. Such people are, I'm sure, less common now than they were in the 18th century. A general warning: if you're prone to crying with rage any time a European shows curiosity in Oriental (sic) culture, you'll have to be very, very careful with this book. Some of it smacks of crazy ethnocentrism. On the other hand, the book is much more critical of French society than it is of 'Persian' society. The meat of the book consists in letters written to and from various 'Persians,' seeing France and some other parts of Europe for the first time. Like all good satire, it takes the normal (well, normal for 18th century French novel readers), views it from another perspective, and finds it to be both hilarious and horrifying. If you've read other 18th century moralists, you'll know what to expect: freedom, intelligence, stoicism, nature good; tyranny, love of money, theology bad.
But I oversimplify, because easily the best thing about the book is how free-floating it is. I found it virtually impossible to tell when Montesquieu wanted his authors to agree with the letter writers and when to disagree. Which had the awful, depressing effect of making me think about things. For that I knock off two stars, because thinking about things is way too hard work for me.
Show Less
Subjects
Language
Original language
French
Original publication date
1721
Pages
266
ISBN
5405003301 / 9785405003306
Local notes
Pagātnes domātāju darbi