Abstract
This paper challenges the common interpretation of Rousseau's "Julie, or the New Heloise" as a feminist work, arguing instead that the novel actually reinforces patriarchal values. While the epistolary novel creates emotional connections with its female characters, it ultimately celebrates women's sacrifices within the patriarchal system rather than critiquing it. The analysis focuses on the protagonist Julie's character development, particularly examining her roles as a daughter and mother, where her supposedly virtuous decisions consistently align with patriarchal expectations. The paper contests Lynn Hunt's argument in "Inventing Human Rights" that such epistolary novels contributed to human rights development through empathy. Instead, it argues that while "Julie" may have evoked empathy, this empathy was superficial and did not lead readers to question the patriarchal structures causing the character's suffering. Rather, the novel presents Julie's sacrifices as noble necessities, thereby reinforcing rather than challenging existing gender hierarchies. This reexamination of "Julie" suggests that emotional resonance with characters' suffering does not automatically translate into criticism of the social structures causing that suffering.
Keywords: Human Rights, Maternal Sacrifice, Empathy, Social Contract
Copyright © 2024 Scholar of Tomorrow. All SoT articles are distributed under the attribution non-commercial, with no derivative license. This means that anyone is free to share, copy, and distribute an unaltered article for non-commercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited.