Reviewed by:

• Psychocritique de Rousseau par Laurence Viglieno
• Ekaterina R. Alexandrova (bio)

This volume collects eleven essays on Jean-Jacques Rousseau, published by Laurence Viglieno over a forty-year span from 1974 to 2014. Few other writers generate such sustained levels of critical interest as Rousseau—2019 alone saw the appearance of at least five book-length studies and several new translations devoted to the “citizen of Geneva.” Viglieno’s contribution is a noteworthy addition to Rousseauist criticism, since her thoughtful analysis both brings attention to many neglected texts and offers original interpretations of some of Rousseau’s major works. Though the volume is accessible to novices, it is of particular interest to literary scholars and specialists of the eighteenth century. Viglieno does a good job of teasing out some of the nuances in Rousseau’s texts through close readings and the application of Freudian psychoanalytic criticism. While she adapts methods of literary analysis developed by the French literary critic Charles Mauron in L’Inconscient dans l’œuvre et la vie de Racine (1957) and Des métaphores obsédantes au mythe personnel (1962), her approach is also enriched by Melanie Klein’s work on early childhood [End Page 300] experiences. The essays combine Freudian and Kleinian hypotheses on the functioning of the unconscious with literary analysis in order to identify and explore the obsessive images and metaphorical networks present in Rousseau’s texts, such as the recurrent fantasy of being buried alive (“Le Fantasme de l’enterré vif dans les Rêveries, ou le ‘complexe du cyclope’” [1979]). However, as Viglieno remarks, it would be presumptuous to base a global interpretation of Rousseau on the identification of recurrent themes in his corpus, or to establish what Mauron calls “le mythe personnel de l’écrivain” (251). In this respect, her study of the evolution of Rousseau’s “dramaturgie interne” is more nuanced and considerate of the uniqueness of his writing than the at-times totalizing Freudian readings of Rousseau by well-known critics such as Jean Starobinski or Pierre-Paul Clément (251).

The collection is divided into two parts. Part 1 groups together five essays on Rousseau’s play Narcissus, his autobiographical writing, and his correspondence. Part 2 comprises six essays, five of which are devoted to the Enlightenment bestseller La Nouvelle Héloïse (1761), and one to Rousseau’s early work, specifically theatre. The first essay, “Narcisse auteur dramatique ou ‘pour introduire le narcissisme de Rousseau’” (1977), is one of the best in the collection, and its position at the head of the volume is propitious since it scrutinizes Rousseau’s complex relationship to his writing, as well as suggests latent themes that emerge throughout the writer’s later work, themes that are picked up by subsequent essays in the volume. In exploring Valère or the Narcissus’s submission to his fiancée Angélique, “cette femme manifestement maternelle, plus sage, plus mûre que lui,” Viglieno notes the aspiration for a pre-Oedipal fusion with the mother, and the intense need for a protective, maternal love that is revealed by this pursuit. The critic goes further, however, and suggests that the play presents the germ of two “tentations” that Rousseau will alternatively fight against or indulge in his later, better-known works: the return to childhood, and the refusal of sexual difference (31). Rousseau’s interest in childhood is hardly surprising, considering his writing on education and his Bildungsroman-type heroes such as Émile and Saint-Preux, or even his admission in the Confessions that he never managed to grow up. However, the argument that Rousseau’s dream of an absence of sexual difference is accompanied by a violent refusal of his own latent femininity is a striking one in regard to an author whose attitude toward women has been the subject of persistent critical debate.

The fusion with the mother, and Rousseau’s relationship with the maternal body and his own physicality, is explored in another intriguing essay, “Le Fantasme de l’enterré vif.” Some of the more interesting essays in the collection likewise investigate the complicated relationship...

审核人：

• 卢梭·卢格斯·维格列诺心理批判
• 叶卡捷琳娜·亚历山德罗娃（生物）

本册收录了Laurence Viglieno在1974年至2014年的40年间出版的关于让·雅克·卢梭的11篇文章。很少有其他作家产生如此持续的批评兴趣，仅卢梭（Rousseau）到2019年就至少出现了五本书-篇幅研究和一些专门针对“日内瓦市民”的新译本。Viglieno的贡献是对卢梭主义批评的一个值得注意的补充，因为她的周到分析既吸引了许多被忽视的文本的关注，也为卢梭的一些主要著作提供了原创的诠释。尽管新手可以访问该书卷，但是18世纪的文学学者和专家特别感兴趣。Viglieno通过仔细阅读和运用弗洛伊德的精神分析批评，很好地解决了卢梭著作中的一些细微差别。虽然她采用了法国文学评论家查尔斯·莫隆（Charles Mauron）在2000年开发的文学分析方法L'Inconscient dans l'œuvreet la vie de Racine（1957）和Desmétaphoresobsédantesau mythe人员（1962），她的方法也因Melanie Klein在幼儿期的工作[End Page 300]而得到充实。文章将弗洛伊德和克莱因关于无意识功能的假设与文学分析相结合，以识别和探索卢梭文本中存在的强迫图像和隐喻网络，例如经常被埋葬的幻想（“ Le Fantasme de l'enterré”）。 vif dans lesRêveries，ou le'complexe ducyclope'” [1979]）。然而，正如维格利诺（Viglieno）所说，将卢梭的全球解释建立在对语料库中经常性主题的识别基础上，或者建立毛隆所说的“ lecrithein de l'écrivain”（251）是不正确的。在这方面，比起Jean Starobinski或Pierre-PaulClément等著名评论家对卢梭的弗洛伊德式读本的总阅读，她对卢梭的“ dramaturgie interne”的演变的研究更加细致入微，并考虑到了他的写作的独特性。 （251）。

集合分为两个部分。第1部分将有关卢梭的戏剧《水仙》，他的自传写作和他的书信的五篇文章归为一组。第2部分包含六篇论文，其中五篇专门论述启蒙运动畅销书《新小说》。（1761），以及卢梭的早期作品之一，特别是剧院。第一篇文章“卢梭的水仙剧情简介”（1977年）是该系列中最好的文章之一，由于它审视了卢梭与卢梭的复杂关系，因此在该卷的开头位置是有利的。写作，以及建议在作者以后的工作中出现的潜在主题，这些主题将在随后的论文集中找到。在探讨瓦雷尔或水仙对未婚夫安吉丽克的奉献时，“雪人女性化的表现物，贤哲，加上流露的情趣”，维格列诺注意到渴望与母亲进行恋母恋前融合，以及对保护性，孕产妇的强烈需求这种追求所揭示的爱。评论家走得更远，并暗示该剧本展现了卢梭将在他后来的更著名的作品中与之抗争或沉迷的两个“尝试”的萌芽：回归童年和拒绝性差异（31）。考虑到他在教育方面的著作以及他的像艾米尔（Émile）和圣普勒（Saint-Preux）这样的比尔登格斯罗曼式英雄，甚至是他被录取，卢梭对童年的兴趣也不足为奇。自称他从未长大的自白。然而，关于卢梭对无性别差异的梦想伴随着对自己潜伏的女性气质的暴力拒绝，这一论点对于作者而言一直是惊人的，因为作者对妇女的态度一直是持续不断的批判性辩论的主题。

在另一篇引人入胜的论文《 Le Fantasme de l'enterrévif》中探讨了与母亲的融合以及卢梭与母体的关系以及他自己的身体。馆藏中一些更有趣的文章同样研究了这种复杂的关系。