This was a fascinating read. I didn't realize that Mendelssohn had an advocate so close to Fritz.
Re: the great "not so catholic philosopher..." quote, I just saw that the second sentence is slightly different at Trier! (Was looking for possible Mendelssohn mentions there.) Preuss gives Il y a dans tout ceci trop peu de religion pour que la raison ne soit pas du côté de la demande., even saying that it's slightly different from Nicolai. The meaning is almost the same, but with "little enough religion" vs. "enough philosophy", the emphasis is different. Preuss says he copied it from the original, owned by an unnamed individual during his time. Huh.
But yeah, the precariousness of living as a Jew comes through very clearly, and the prevalence of "that's just the law / how it's done" even among people who are themselves very much pro-enlightenment. Your addendum on the other hand emphasizes why I feel like this was such a missed chance, because it's not like Fritz' principles wouldn't have allowed him to take the necessary steps.
Aside from that, this also gives quite a vivid picture of D'Argens, which I appreciate.
petition had to have been lost through an unusual accident
Like the flute was at fault for the wrong notes? I mean I get that Fritz didn't want his friends involved in his politics, but, well. *side-eyes* (On the other hand, I have wondered before just how much got lost on his way to or from Fritz with his style of government.)
Nevertheless, this part -
When the Marquis visited the King that evening, he started to chide him as soon as he had stepped into the room.
- made me smile. Probably a tale that became a bit bigger in the telling, but still, it's a great scene.
It is, and D'Argens comes across vividly and very well in it. For another very likable take on the Marquis, see Casanova's memoirs (he met him after D'Argens had returned to France), as quoted here.
But yeah, the precariousness of living as a Jew comes through very clearly, and the prevalence of "that's just the law / how it's done" even among people who are themselves very much pro-enlightenment. Your addendum on the other hand emphasizes why I feel like this was such a missed chance, because it's not like Fritz' principles wouldn't have allowed him to take the necessary steps.
Heinrich Heine: And this is why I'm anti-Prussian, and my despot of choice to fanboy is Napoleon. Vive l'Empereur!
cahn and mildred_of_midgard, the Code Napoleon, which became the foundation of German state laws during the time Napoleon was more or less boss of continental Europe, did abolish these restrictions for Jews, and young Harry Heine from Düsseldorf was directly affected by this. By the time he was an adult who needed a job, otoh, Napoleon was gone and several of those restrictions were back (though thankfully not the Schutzjuden-ones). Heine had a life long soft spot for Napoleon, larger than any freedom-loving poet should have. And his instense dislike of all things Prussian leads to some hilarious verses in Deutschland: Ein Wintermärchen, among other works.
Back to the Marquis D'Argens: in addition to being friends with Mendelsohn and Raphael, he also employed a Jewish secretary for a while, Aaron Salomon Gumpertz.
Casanova: The Marquis, who got famous more through his steady friendship with the late Frederick II. than through his works, which aren't read by anyone these days [...]
Aw. But that reminds me, has anyone read the Lettres Juives? I know Fritz did, and I'm kind of curious.
D'Argens: Listen to me, never make the mistake and write your memoirs.
Ha. Love that Casanova then spends a whole paragraph explaining why he's doing just that and that he hopes he'll burn them before his death.
Lettres Juives: I haven't read them yet, but I see Nicolai's advertised translation is completely online, so I might if I can find the time. From the descriptions I've read, the basic premise is one popular at the time, a letter novel written from the pov of a fictional outsider - D'Argens in addition to the Lettres Juives also wrote the Lettres Chinoises - commenting on the manners of the writers' own country, or continent. Madame de Graffigny used the same premise for her Lettres Peruviens, where the letter writing outsider is a Peruvian (an Indian one, not a Spanish one), and she's bound to have read D'Argens bestseller. And amazingly, the concept survives into the 20th century - if you've ever read Herbert Rosendorfer's "Briefe in die chinesische Vergangenheit", they're a case in point. Lettres Juives has a Jew as the letter writer, commenting on first France, then other European countries.
Mind you, depressingly for D'Argens, Casanova isn't wrong (and it's telling that this became true even within D'Argens' own life time). The only member of the Sanssouci table round who didn't need Fritz either to become famous or stay famous, and whom people today can still discuss without as much as mentioning Fritz, remains Voltaire.
As more then one historian and biographer has observed, this tells you something. Mind you, it's not that Fritz didn't try to get the best and the brightest of his time when he was young, in 1740. It's that later on, he stopped being approachable for new cultural developments, and where he did read newer first class writers and invited them to Prussia, like Diderot and D'Alembert, they either didn't stay (D'Alembert) or didn't come in the first place (Diderot). And of course, by ignoring the entirety of German literature exploding around him in the second half of his life, he ensured not befriending any of its representatives, either.
The only member of the Sanssouci table round who didn't need Fritz either to become famous or stay famous, and whom people today can still discuss without as much as mentioning Fritz, remains Voltaire.
Huh. Maybe? But my first reaction was that that doesn't really seem like Fritz's style. Namely not doing something, and then pretending like he'd done it all along when badgered. Fritz isn't that conflict-avoidant: if he's refusing to do something on principle, he'll usually either die on that hill, or after enough wearing down, go, "Fine, I'll do it, are you happy now?" Maybe you'll find counterexamples (you and Selena did turn up examples of Fritz writing vaingloriously about himself in the third person circa 1745!), but I would need more evidence to believe this was in character.
Tacitly refusing a petition? Yes, I'm told this is what he did with Mendelssohn's' Academy membership, and it seems to have been standard royal practice, in that Stollberg-Rilinger tells me MT did the same thing with petitions she didn't want to grant.
Scapegoating? Absolutely, but usually on matters where Fritz felt strongly about something getting done the right way and couldn't admit to having been at fault for it going wrong (like blaming the flute because he very much cared about the quality of the music, and choosing to die on that hill for a week, then finally giving in).
Trying to get away with something in hopes no one notices and then lying through his teeth when caught? This strikes me as how he interacted with people who had power over him, i.e. FW, not with people he had power over.
I welcome counterevidence!
On the other hand, I have wondered before just how much got lost on his way to or from Fritz with his style of government.
I feel like that must have been pretty inevitable. I mean, are there bureaucracies in which that doesn't happen? And I don't feel a micromanaging monarch would eliminate that problem.
- made me smile. Probably a tale that became a bit bigger in the telling, but still, it's a great scene.
I was thinking more that he did indeed lose it, i.e. that he made a mistake/forgot, and didn't want to own up to that, not that he was strongly opposed and lied about it. But looking back at my comment, the politics line doesn't entirely fit with that interpretation, so I clearly didn't think it through. :P But yeah, I agree that if he felt strongly about not wanting to do it, he wouldn't have bothered to lie.
Ah, yeah, if that's what you meant, then "It got lost? I can't have lost it, someone else must have lost it!" would have been totally in character. Though it could just as easily have actually been someone else who lost it, we just don't know.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Re: the great "not so catholic philosopher..." quote, I just saw that the second sentence is slightly different at Trier! (Was looking for possible Mendelssohn mentions there.) Preuss gives Il y a dans tout ceci trop peu de religion pour que la raison ne soit pas du côté de la demande., even saying that it's slightly different from Nicolai. The meaning is almost the same, but with "little enough religion" vs. "enough philosophy", the emphasis is different. Preuss says he copied it from the original, owned by an unnamed individual during his time. Huh.
But yeah, the precariousness of living as a Jew comes through very clearly, and the prevalence of "that's just the law / how it's done" even among people who are themselves very much pro-enlightenment. Your addendum on the other hand emphasizes why I feel like this was such a missed chance, because it's not like Fritz' principles wouldn't have allowed him to take the necessary steps.
Aside from that, this also gives quite a vivid picture of D'Argens, which I appreciate.
petition had to have been lost through an unusual accident
Like the flute was at fault for the wrong notes? I mean I get that Fritz didn't want his friends involved in his politics, but, well. *side-eyes* (On the other hand, I have wondered before just how much got lost on his way to or from Fritz with his style of government.)
Nevertheless, this part -
When the Marquis visited the King that evening, he started to chide him as soon as he had stepped into the room.
- made me smile. Probably a tale that became a bit bigger in the telling, but still, it's a great scene.
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
But yeah, the precariousness of living as a Jew comes through very clearly, and the prevalence of "that's just the law / how it's done" even among people who are themselves very much pro-enlightenment. Your addendum on the other hand emphasizes why I feel like this was such a missed chance, because it's not like Fritz' principles wouldn't have allowed him to take the necessary steps.
Heinrich Heine: And this is why I'm anti-Prussian, and my despot of choice to fanboy is Napoleon. Vive l'Empereur!
Back to the Marquis D'Argens: in addition to being friends with Mendelsohn and Raphael, he also employed a Jewish secretary for a while, Aaron Salomon Gumpertz.
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Aw. But that reminds me, has anyone read the Lettres Juives? I know Fritz did, and I'm kind of curious.
D'Argens: Listen to me, never make the mistake and write your memoirs.
Ha. Love that Casanova then spends a whole paragraph explaining why he's doing just that and that he hopes he'll burn them before his death.
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Mind you, depressingly for D'Argens, Casanova isn't wrong (and it's telling that this became true even within D'Argens' own life time). The only member of the Sanssouci table round who didn't need Fritz either to become famous or stay famous, and whom people today can still discuss without as much as mentioning Fritz, remains Voltaire.
As more then one historian and biographer has observed, this tells you something. Mind you, it's not that Fritz didn't try to get the best and the brightest of his time when he was young, in 1740. It's that later on, he stopped being approachable for new cultural developments, and where he did read newer first class writers and invited them to Prussia, like Diderot and D'Alembert, they either didn't stay (D'Alembert) or didn't come in the first place (Diderot). And of course, by ignoring the entirety of German literature exploding around him in the second half of his life, he ensured not befriending any of its representatives, either.
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
And Euler, but your point stands.
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Huh. Maybe? But my first reaction was that that doesn't really seem like Fritz's style. Namely not doing something, and then pretending like he'd done it all along when badgered. Fritz isn't that conflict-avoidant: if he's refusing to do something on principle, he'll usually either die on that hill, or after enough wearing down, go, "Fine, I'll do it, are you happy now?" Maybe you'll find counterexamples (you and Selena did turn up examples of Fritz writing vaingloriously about himself in the third person circa 1745!), but I would need more evidence to believe this was in character.
Tacitly refusing a petition? Yes, I'm told this is what he did with Mendelssohn's' Academy membership, and it seems to have been standard royal practice, in that Stollberg-Rilinger tells me MT did the same thing with petitions she didn't want to grant.
Scapegoating? Absolutely, but usually on matters where Fritz felt strongly about something getting done the right way and couldn't admit to having been at fault for it going wrong (like blaming the flute because he very much cared about the quality of the music, and choosing to die on that hill for a week, then finally giving in).
Trying to get away with something in hopes no one notices and then lying through his teeth when caught? This strikes me as how he interacted with people who had power over him, i.e. FW, not with people he had power over.
I welcome counterevidence!
On the other hand, I have wondered before just how much got lost on his way to or from Fritz with his style of government.
I feel like that must have been pretty inevitable. I mean, are there bureaucracies in which that doesn't happen? And I don't feel a micromanaging monarch would eliminate that problem.
- made me smile. Probably a tale that became a bit bigger in the telling, but still, it's a great scene.
Yeah. :)1
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
Re: Moses Mendelsohn (aka Nicolai, Volume I, b)
- made me smile. Probably a tale that became a bit bigger in the telling, but still, it's a great scene.
Yes!