Mary Wollstonecraft

I found this author harder to understand than Burke and Williams. After I got used to her style of writing, I was able to see how she clearly attempts to tear apart Burke's argument piece by piece. In her writing, I found a parallel use of key phrases. Burke wrote, "By this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror on those children of their country, who are prompt rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their poisonous weeds, and wild incarnations, they may regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate their father's life," (pg. 55-56). Wollstonecraft then writes in her work, "The ivy is beautiful, but, when it insidiously destroys the trunk from which it receives support, who would not grub it?" (pg. 58). At first glance, this analogy seems to come out of nowhere; however, when I read it, it reminded me of Burke's reference of the "poisonous weeds," (pg. 56). Wollstonecraft carefully uses Burke's expression against him in her argument.

Also, Wollstonecraft speaks of "artificial flowers" (pg. 61) She writes, "In modern poetry the understanding and memory often fabricate the pretended effusions of the heart, and romance destroys all simplicity; which, in works of taste, is but a synonymous word for truth. This romantic spirit has extended to our prose, and scattered artificial flowers over the most barren hearth; or a mixtures of verse and prose producing the strangest congruities," (pg. 61). I believe she directly attacks Burke and accuses his writings to be too flowery. I believe that Wollstonecraft thinks he is hiding the true ugliness of what he is saying behind elaborate and beautiful phrases. It is as if she uses his own analogy against him, which I felt was ingenious.

I also liked her reference to "rust of antiquity" and "blind love," (pg. 58). Wollstonecraft wrote, "If there is any thing like argument, or first principles, in your wild declamation, behold the result:- that we are to reverence the rust of antiquity, and term the unnatural customs, which ignorance and mistaken self-interest have consolidated, the sage fruit of experience: nay, that if we do discover some errors, our feelings should lead us to excuse, with blind love, or unprincipled filial affection, the venerable vestiges of ancient days," (pg. 58). When I read this, I interpreted the "rust of antiquity" to be a negative side effect of tradition. I believe she is trying to point out that as things age, they become less useful. These old ideas dull. Perhaps this is what Wollstonecraft meant by this expression. When she then refers to the idea of looking past the errors with a "blind love" I couldn't help but agree. I think Wollstonecraft wanted to make the point that to just go along with whatever we are told is absurd. When Burke wrote, "By this wise prejudice we are taught to..." (pg. 55). He is saying that the people should just accept the tradition and go along with their lives and stop questioning the past. He wants people to blindly go about their lives. Wollstonecraft sharply questions this with her expression of the "blind love."

Overall, I felt like both Burke and Wollstonecraft were excellent writers. Both knew exactly how to appeal to his audience. Wollstonecraft wants to appeal to those who find the Revolution exciting and want to break free from oppresion. Burke tries to appeal to the aristocracy who does not want things to change. He finds the revolution scary, and he does not wish to see things be redistributed. Overall, I enjoyed both perspectives. They were so different it helped me understand the other passage better by reading the opposing view.