¹ J., J. Rousseau, ‘A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality’, in The Social Contract and Discourses, trans. G. D. H. Cole (London: Everyman, 1913 (1935)), 213. ‘Distinctions’ in the last sentence is Cole's translation of ‘préférences’. Whatever the origin of the inequality of recognition accorded the Second Discourse and the Social Contract, the fact is that the Everyman edition has now gone out of print, while Penguin now has The Social Contract without its subversive accompaniment. Maurice Cranston's new translation (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984) will fill the gap.Google Scholar

² Op. cit. 214.

³ E., Durkheim, Montesquieu and Rousseau, Forerunners of Sociology (Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press, 1960), 81.Google Scholar

⁴ Rousseau, op. cit. 233.

⁵ G., della Volpe, Rousseau and Marx (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1978).Google Scholar

⁶ M., Einaudi, The Early Rousseau (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1967), 118.Google Scholar

⁷ J., Plamenatz, Man and Society (London: Longmans, 1963), Vol. 1, 377 (footnote).Google Scholar

⁸ Rousseau, op. cit. 197 (footnote).

⁹ R., D. Masters, Rousseau (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968), 139-140.Google Scholar

¹⁰ R., Grimsley, The Philosophy of Rousseau (London: Oxford University Press, 1973), 37.Google Scholar

¹¹ K., F. Roche, Rousseau, Stoic and Romantic (London: Methuen, 1974), 35.Google Scholar

¹² Rousseau, op. cit. 234.

¹³ Op. cit. 232.

¹⁴ J., Charvet, The Social Problem in the Philosophy of Rousseau (Cambridge University Press, 1974), 26.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Op. cit. 30.

¹⁶ C. Cherry, ‘How Differences Make a Difference’, in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research XLI (1980-81), 64-92, 78.

¹⁷ Op. cit. 81.

¹⁸ Rousseau, op. cit. 197.

¹⁹ Op. cit. 212.

²⁰ E., Rapaport, ‘On the Future of Love: Rousseau and the Radical Feminists’, in Women and Philosophy, C. Gould and M. Wartofsky (eds) (New York: Capricorn, 1976).Google Scholar

²¹ Rousseau, op. cit. 201.

²² Ibid.

²³ Ibid.

²⁴ Ibid.

²⁵ Philip Robinson has pointed out to me that Rousseau's language in this whole paragraph had to his French readers the direct sexual sense that the context should anyway have led readers of the ambiguous English translation to grasp. ‘Objects’ quite simply meant female ‘love objects’ or ‘objects of sexual desire’ while ‘transient commerce’ ‘among young people of opposite sexes’ should not be thought of as occasional barter but as sexual intercourse, euphemistically but clearly signified. Rousseau, in other words, is straightforwardly placing sexual love at the ‘origin’ and this is where ‘singing and dancing’ get their impulse. See Philip Robinson, ‘Rousseau's Second Discours: Preciosity, Politics and Translation’, French Studies Bulletin (1984).

²⁶ Rousseau, , Emile, trans. Foxley (London: Everyman, 1911 (1974)), 175.Google Scholar

²⁷ E., Goffman, ‘Role Distance’, in Encounters (Aylesbury: Penguin, 1972), 94.Google Scholar

²⁸ I would invite comparative reflection on the following paragraph in Marx's Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, for it expresses the flowering of Romantic Humanism and is forced to acknowledge a tragic consequence: Assume man to be man and his relationship to the world to be a human one: then you can exchange love only for love, trust for trust, etc. If you want to enjoy art, you must be an artistically-cultivated person; if you want to exercise influence over other people, you must be a person with a stimulating and encouraging effect on other people. Every one of your relations to man and to nature must be a specific expression, corresponding to the object of your will, of your real individual life. If you love without evoking love in return—that is, if your loving as loving does not produce reciprocal love; if through a living expression of yourself as a loving person you do not make yourself a loved person, then your love is impotent—a misfortune (Moscow, 1961, p. 14). This, not surprisingly, is the last paragraph of the section on Money, and marks an awareness, never allowed to develop, of problems of ‘non-economic’ ‘poverty’.

²⁹ Rousseau, Discourse, 218.

³⁰ Ibid.

³¹ Op. cit. 237.

³² Emile, 191.

³³ Cherry, op. cit. 81.

³⁴ Op. cit. 86.

³⁵ Given what Rousseau says in his Letter to M. d'Alembert on the Theatre the erotic connection, even for those still sceptical of the intention of the Discourse, is hard to resist. Rousseau proposed to d'Alembert a Civic Ball in which young unmarried men and women can ‘show themselves off with the charms and faults which they might possess, to the people whose interest it is to know them well before being obliged to love them’ (Politics and the Arts, trans. Allen Bloom (Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1960), 128). Rousseau is forgetful enough of his anxieties about such events to propose a Queen of the Ball.

³⁶ R., Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974), 243. Hobbes and Mandeville had earlier stressed self-esteem's power over self-interest, a dimension of bourgeois philosophy too often ignored by vulgar critics. I criticize Nozick's claim in Ruling Illusions (Brighton: Harvester Press, 1977), 48-53.Google Scholar

³⁷ Discourse, 210.

³⁸ Emile, 10.

⁴⁰ Op. cit. 332-333.

⁴⁰ Op. cit. 331.

⁴¹ Op. cit. 328.

⁴² G. Lloyd, ‘Rousseau on Reason, Nature and Women’, Metaphilosophy (July/October 1983) 308-326. This article focuses on the significance of Rousseau's sexual philosophy for his conception of reason and feeling.

⁴³ Rousseau, op. cit. 442-443.

⁴⁴ Chris Cherry, John Charvet, Genevieve Lloyd, Anthony Manser and Benjamin Gibbs made helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.