George Sand mythographe (review)

In this authoritative study of George Sand as a creator of myths for the morally disorientated post-revolutionary France, Naginski explodes the perception of Sand as an imitator of contemporary thinkers, forcing the reader to recognize a writer critically engaged with the major social and ideological issues of her age. Naginski identifies 1836–1846 as Sand’s mythographic decade: a more intellectual, philosophical and engaged phase of her writing, during which she constructed new myths to inspire and regenerate French society. The study is organized into three parts. Part 1 analyses the use of the Prometheus myth in the two versions of Lélia, allowing Naginski to consider the development of Sand’s ideas between 1833 and 1839, as she moves from introspection to a concern for humanity as a whole, from despair to optimism and hope. It is argued that Sand feminizes and radicalizes the Greek myth, transforming it into an original ‘légende de son siècle’ (p. 82). Part 2 explores Sand’s engagement with the question of humanity’s origins, as she creates her own, unorthodox, ‘mythe des origines’ (p. 89). Naginski shows that this project has a dual motive: to rediscover the past as inspiration for the utopian future, but also to rehabilitate and ennoble three suppressed social classes: women (Le Poème de Myrza), the people ( Jeanne) and the proletariat (Le Compagnon du Tour de France). By elaborating a genealogy for these subjugated groups, it is maintained, Sand gives them a voice and a tradition that has been lost to them. It is also convincingly argued that this is not simply an expression of Sand’s desires, but an anticipation of ‘une réalité en train de s’accomplir mais encore invisible’ (p. 177), in a redefinition of Sand’s idealism as ‘réalisme prophétique’ (p. 176). The final part considers the way in which heretic thought — less dogmatic and more egalitarian than orthodox Christianity — inspires Sand to create new religious myths. By analysing the alterations made to the conclusion of Spiridion, and the significance of Wanda in La Comtesse de Rudolstadt, Naginski draws attention to aspects of these novels thus far largely overlooked, and also stresses the centrality of heresy as a ‘doctrine d’émancipation’ (p. 212) for Sand. What is most original about this work is that it is a serious consideration of ‘la pensée Sandienne’ (p. 9). Although it might have been interesting to see an analysis of the reasons behind Sand’s own eschewal of theory and self-deprecating attitude, Naginski opens up an important discussion on the lack of critical interest in Sand’s ‘vie intellectuelle’ (p. 101) and does much to rectify many misconceptions of Sand’s 1840s novels. Based on scrupulous knowledge and sensitive readings of the Sandian corpus and sustained reflection on the intellectual context, this study is an essential reading for Sand specialists and all those concerned with the nineteenth-century novel, offering a fundamental rethinking of this period of Sand’s work, a valuable contribution to our understanding of the power of myths in literature and a reassessment of Sand’s place within nineteenth-century intellectual and philosophical discourse.