Analysis Of The Great Cat Massacre By Robert Darnton

979 Words2 Pages

The Great Cat Massacre written by Robert Darnton in 1984 makes a point of the history of ordinary people’s mentalities as the concept and argues that the mentalities strongly influenced people’s behaviour and thinking in eighteenth century France, so this book can be classified into l’histoire des méntalites. For example, in “The Great Cat Massacre”, the title essay, Darnton picks up a French printer, Nicolas Contat’s memoirs as sources, deals with the event in the memoirs that some printers executed jokily cats one of which was loved by their master’s wife, and explicates people’s mentalities by interpreting historical background and meanings of this animal abuse, which the present people seem to regard as cruelty. For that, Darnton exploits …show more content…

He realises that what a behaviour, such as killing cats, signifies has been dependent on its historical background, and treats carefully the fissure between what killing cats signifies at the present and what that did in eighteenth century France, which can give historians a clue for interpreting the mentalités in the past. He stresses that the mentalities of people under the Old Regime was definitively different from those of present people and that it is indispensable for historians to regard people in the past as aliens. Therefore, his view about the importance of recognising the gap in the mentalities between in the past and in the present prompts him to criticise psychological interpretation of symbols in …show more content…

Roger Chartier, who is known as one of the most important critics of Darnton’s method, asserts that simple interpreting specific materials, such as Contat’s memoirs, could not form a unified mentalities of people under the Old Regime, for the society of France had diverse strata and a writing by people in a stratum might not be affected by other strata. He argues the limit of the symbols interpreted by Darnton as the tools to illustrate Frenchness . Dominick LaCapra, who is the other famous critic, states that as Darnton embodies the concept of symbolic meanings generated from opaqueness of the past and interprets them assertively, he loses sight of the possibilities of diversity of in one’s own culture and simplifies excessively the intricate interaction of proximity and distance within and between the past and the present . Sigurdur G. Magnusson pointed out that Darnton interpreted the texts and constructed the mentalities under the Old Regime as if the mentalities had manipulated individual behaviour, writings, and thinking without peculiar elements . Magnusson’s critic suggests the absence of actors’ personal deed in Darnton’s interpretation. These criticisms imply difficult problems to reconstruct mentalities in the past by interpreting symbols extracted from micro-study and bridge the difference

Open Document