Emile Zola and Jean Racine both came from troubled families; Racine’s 17th Century Bourgeoise existence was as an orphan from the age of four, and Zola’s father died when he was seven in the latter part of the 1800s. Consequently both Phédre and Jacques Damour, although from different eras, can be used as profound examinations of their views and reactions to the familial structure: As one commentator, Christopher Wagner, observes: “French families seem to have been very close knit units. This was especially true of the Zola family.”(1) They were men that had grown up without the traditional family unit, and as such had the ability to lend objective social comment to what they themselves had subjectively experienced. Thus the theme of family in these two texts can be regarded firstly as an insight into the minds of the authors but also as a reflection of society in general, insofar as the drama, however extreme is a representation of the pressures experienced by families throughout the ages. Claude Abraham, a professor of French, explains that: “…these suffering humans play out one of the bloody acts of a long family drama.”(2) It is cl

In his preface to Phédre, Racine explains that: “Les faiblesses de l’amour y passent pour de varies faiblesses…”(3) This rationalisation of Phédre’s actions brings to light the very essence of familial tribulations. As individuals we are guided by our emotions, yet in a family it is clear that these need to be expressed in respect to the group as a whole. Consequently although our mistakes can be blamed on love, this does not exclude us from responsibility. In her explanation to Hippolyte: “Je m’abhorre encore plus que tu ne me détestes…Venge-toi, punis-moi d’un odieux amour: Digne fils du héros qui t’a donné le jour, Délivre l’univers d’un monstre qui t’irrite.”(4), we understand that Phédre is helplessly guided by passion, but at the same time is not blind to the disruption that it causes around her. It is this zeal, the feeling of ‘living for the moment’, that we all experience, coupled with the awareness that our actions have long term effects, that Racine exemplifies in Phédre’s inner turmoil. Abraham goes on to say: “Phédre is not guilty of incest because of a law or innocent because of another; she is guilty because she considers herself so.”(5) In the end we are the only judges of our actions, for we must live with the consequences, and by demonstrating this Racine lays bare the bewilderment that we all suffer daily. “In perhaps no other character of Racine’s is the consciousness of guilt so strong” (6) An observation by Cairncross , this demonstrates the underlying evidence of Racine’s Jansenism. The author is strongly attributing the guilt to Phédre; for although her actions are dictated by her emotions, she is still morally aware of their consequences.

11. http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/jracine.htm

6. Page 38 Racine- Phaedra Cairncross

Some topics in this essay:
Jacques Damour, Phédre Racine, Les Rougon-Macquart, Racine Zola, Christopher Wagner, Berru”8 Jacques, Claude Abraham, Throughout Zola’s, Larousse Edition, Damour Zola, jacques damour, phédre racine, larousse edition, racine larousse edition, phédre racine larousse, racine larousse, jacques damour zola, jean racine, damour zola, claude abraham, la vérité, family unit, racine claude abraham, loved ones, jean racine claude,