“Journal of My Life” by J.L. Menetra, Essay Example

Journal of Jacques -Louis Menetra of My Life is an autobiographical confession , and it is quite remarkable. At first glance, seems like a pretty simple thing: the story of a man’s life, told by himself. But in the days of Menetra was not common for people, especially people of their own relatively lower station to maintain a confessional way. In fact, the text is very lonely in the period in which he lived and wrote, namely 18 to 19 early centuries (Menetra 2-3). Journal of Menetra of my life is actually a simply wonderful document, a memoir rich with accounts of all the peccadilloes and picaresque adventures.

Menetra has encounters with criminals and the authorities, gets into fights, and embarks on sexual adventure . Also covers France, is set to practice the profession of his father glaziers, marries and starts a family, and later engaged in politics . It is a story that is a very nice man. Menetra lived from 1738 until Napoleon’s reign in the 19th century. The context in which he wrote was a truly momentous period for France, covering as it did the time of Louis XV, as seen Napoleon. And yet, Menetra wrote primarily for himself, their struggles, their dreams, their various adventures . Through the eyes of Menetra, a large part of the construction of masculinity in the society of his time is evident. From his involvement in the abbeys of youth after his family life, Menetra participates in a world of gender identification, definition and recreating himself in a dynamic work with the customs of his time.

The document itself is an autobiographical account. Menetra talks about the people she has met along his life, drinking and traveling companions thief who kidnapped him and held him hostage for several days two women (27-43 ). We learn from abusive and violent temper of his father, of his own skepticism of organized religion, Lyons man who wanted to marry the niece of the man. We learned all this and more besides: a rich tapestry of the life of a man. There is a clear text , and it’s introduction and afterword by Daniel Roche. In the introduction, Roche explains the background, putting in its historical context. Menetra witnessed great changes in his long life, including the French Revolution. Its very original voice offers the prospect of a common man, instead of a Marat or Robespierre ( or Napoleon), and in this wise is the most invaluable.

From the beginning, Menetra is just lovely. “My father married and settled at the same time and married a virtuous girl who bore him four children three girls and a boy myself because all your little jokes will write about” ( Menetra 18). As a child, young Menetra was a real bastard. Many of his statements make it clear that was like a kid poultry, he learned at an early age to prevent abusive, violent father and seek the company of others. From his youth he learned to be skeptical of organized religion, seeing how unscrupulous priests took advantage of the credulity and superstition of a large number of people (18 to 20). In the time it would take her First Communion, he says: “I can say that I could not believe that the Son of God allowed men feed like” (22) .

In his youth, ran Menetra abbeys youth , youth gangs in a particular town or neighborhood in a big city (Ruff 161). Its ostensible purpose was to provide some functions, especially the maintenance of the local moral and monitoring of local marriages. They took a great interest in marriages, because they themselves were not married. As such, it focused heavily on the supply of marriageable girls, and they went to no small lengths to control this. Objected to certain parties, and they are felt through their discontent public embarrassment, often through the use of symbolic acts , like blocking the way before the wedding procession of the couple in the church (161). In other cases, their opposition was more insistent noise made ??by performing cacophonous music, pots and pans were beating and abusing cats to produce screaming (161-162).

And in other cases , following Menetra simply engage in violence. ” One day we had a bad fight with the farmers, some of whose skulls got hit on ” we ( 29) says. Using symbolic acts, noisy protests and fighting all the stops, youth claimed some ownership of themselves and their environment. Of course, this was indelibly linked to the evolution of masculinity according to cultural scripts, embedded narratives of patriarchy. Far from an absolute, rigid system, patriarchal customs that determined the nature of masculinity in time Menetra were very clear liquid, as they should be. Thus, although Menetra and his minions can say, in a sense they have been trapped by elements of patriarchy that left little choice but to engage in violent fights occasionally, it is undoubtedly true that if one follows his own account of things Menetra was nothing if not versatile and dynamic in their performance of gender roles when it suited him so (Shepard 76-80).

One particularly disturbing but revealing incident actually sheds much light on this point. Menetra tells how one day, while riding in a small forest with a partner: “I saw a shepherd and shepherd young girl in action” (37). It scared the boy making a noise , and then ” I amused myself with medium girl willingly the rest by force ” (38 ) . Menetra has only admitted his ” middle willingly ” however, who raped a girl. While this type of sexual violence also served as a demonstration of male power and privilege on the bodies of women – especially pastors girls, who were lower class and particularly vulnerable , since working alone in remote areas – which was not the only code by which Menetra measured behavior. He relates that he felt bad , and so ” I retraced my steps and stopped a second time and as I was a good Christian and had heard that a sin was paid forgiven medium gave the girl three coins of two suns and continued in my path “( 38).

A deeply disturbing story , but a revelation for that. What Menetra is effectively saying that the reader is that despite violating shepherd girls can be a sin , is one that can be partially atoned for at least the payment of money. Even the act of payment indicates the act of a penitent thief who returns a value of goods you have taken. So Menetra casual act of sexual violence, and the arrogant way he tries to clear some of their guilt by paying the girl, serves as a microcosm of some of the most fundamental rules of social system he lived .

The performance of masculinity in the days of Menetra also required violence among men for the sake of “honor”. In addition to personal honor, the perceived honor of a woman could be at stake, as well as a contest between men. Menetra relates an anecdote in which he kissed a girl serving at a tavern for a bet. He ” politely asked which granted him permission, ” an indication of the courtesies that could shape the relations between the sexes ( 47-48 ) . However, Menetra tells us , was addressed immediately , to his great surprise, ” a small man with a sword ” (48 ) . What happened next should not be a surprise to anyone who has seen guys fight. ” He gave me a rude shove I did likewise drew his sword disarmed him ” (48 ) . This led to a more general fight, in which – if believed – Menetra wounded three men with swords, and did so without assistance ( 48). The bill smells like bragging, but it also has some ring of truth, thus the credibility of at least the initial confrontation and how Menetra recounts his subsequent misfortunes. He ran from police , was captured, and had to leave the city ( 48).

But what the episode shows is that violence was a recurring part of the life of a man. France in the 18th century was a violent place, perhaps much more violent than contemporary Western societies . In social situations, especially those related to women about who might take some interest in the property, the men had to be prepared to engage in violence for the purposes of competition. Not doing so would be an affront to their masculinity. In some cases, this meant challenging a man who seemed to be growing interest and adoption of a young woman , as was the case with aspiring fighter who stood in the face of Menetra in the bar. As anyone who has witnessed a scene, or close enough in a contemporary setting can attest drinks, the idea does not always declared that the jealous rival who starts the fight has any interest in the property really young . Their motivations can not be naked. Whether or not the vandalism kind of ‘value’ is rewarded , of course , depends on many things , not least whether or not able to make good on their promises and flattery bellicose .

Menetra in time married and had children, but do not give up womanizing for quite some time (204 ) does. He relates that finally slowed his womanizing ways, but his wife , meanwhile , ” was constantly in search and invested on their own and I and my children cheated out of us ” ( 204). Here we see the double fundamental moral Menetra world : his selfish behavior is ” minor indiscretions ” while his is inexcusable for him. Hypocrisy seems more range when you consider how much of a womanizer Menetra was before this, not to mention the fact that he was still doing well in their marriage. The Menetra power as head of household was no absolute way because, after all, his wife went to the back and on your own – you cheated and their children. Therefore, his patriarchal role was challenged and to some extent subverted by his wife as he and other men often were confronted (Harvey 4-5).

The home is supposed to be the domain of man, the place could have their needs met because, after all, worked as hard as he did to support his family (Harvey 5). However, it was anything but a quiet and uncontested space. Since men and women are people with their own temperaments and individual experiences , conflict and renegotiation of the boundaries persisted. In the days of Menetra , one of the most significant events with respect to the roles of the sexes was the emergence of a secular ideology that eclipsed previous ideological foundations of patriarchy based on law, religion and education ( 6-7). On the one hand, women internalized subordination and men internalized Menetra sole . On the other hand , women as wife Menetra undermined him (if you believe) and sometimes flatly overruled .

Such a case was the marriage of his daughter ( Menetra 209) . A pastry -maker, Menetra tells us , he moved to the area and ” cajole my wife knew that loaned money provided to marry my daughter , it was like selling your slave” ( 209) . There are at least two important things to note here . First, a key part of manhood and masculinity was participating in marriage as an owner or investor. How does a man win a wife? Profit is the correct term here . If she was younger and therefore not married, won by (usually ) securing the favor of his father , or in this case to ensure the favor of his mother and to subvert the will of the Father in the matter. The asymmetry is apparent when one considers the situation of the woman in this case : that actually moved like a capital good .

The second thing to note is that Menetra did not like this man at all. “His hypocritical Tartuffe air his ways and his wicked face on which I was not wrong from accepting ” us (209 ) tells . He did not care that the man, who did not agree , but … somehow , his wife got her way , and her daughter was duly married pasta making. The whole thing came to grief , especially the daughter , of course , when accounting improprieties of the bakery – maker met him and his new wife . After they have been reduced to penury , Menetra was able to get his daughter ( 210) . And this may be the most telling vignette of all, because it shows the extent to which women were second-class citizens , and men to their owners, in the days of Menetra . Therefore, to be a man in 18th-century France , its construction, which was to be a member of a caste with power over women as a subordinate caste. This power took the form of a ratio of property, in which men assume control over women that involved a very real kind of property. The violence was linked to this system in the form of an embedded code that required men to turn to him to defend his “honor” and therefore the social position against other men , sometimes with the direct purpose of winning favor of women.

For a historian , Menetra autobiographical confession is absolutely invaluable. This paper demonstrates how a relatively “normal” man and thought in the 18th century France lived. Given the extent to which the stories are often written about , and often to the main movers and shakers in a given society , Menetra text is priceless to the views offered in daily life a person who , despite winning political office for a while, came from humble circumstances and rubbed shoulders ( among other things) the “ordinary” men and women themselves . What Menetra offers the historian is the key to history and to the common man in his time , rather than the works of kings and popes , priests and princes. Moreover, the limitations of the work should also be considered. First, Menetra is writing about his own life , not necessarily the larger historical events. This does not mean that he can not say much about the historian some of these events , example of this terror, but it does mean that you have to offer is limited in this respect . Accounts of his various exploits Menetra may also be prone to a certain amount of embellishment, although the amount is, of course , impossible to say. This is without prejudice again Menetra diary is valuable for what it represents : a testimony of colorful life of a remarkable man.