#theodore besterman

[drethelin]

[frederick-the-great]

And so it has never been understood how Voltaire came to transfer to mme Denis, little by little, the greater part of his fortune. The explanation now becomes clear, and could hardly have been simpler: he loved her.

Theodore Besterman, Prefatory notes in The love letters of Voltaire to his niece. 

Besterman was the one who discovered Voltaire’s love letters which changed how scholars viewed the relationship with Madame Denis, his niece, and which also explains Voltaire’s domestic situation - and financial - during the last 20 years of his life.

[frederick-the-great]

This controversy has now become unreal, for whether Joan was or was not what she thought she was, Voltaire's irreverence cannot touch her. All that we are interested in is the intrinsic merit of the poem. And here I do not hesitate to assert that the literary methods of the Pucelle distinctly surpass those of the Henriade

Theodore Besterman, Voltaire.

[frederick-the-great]

Learn, learn that all systems offend my reason

Voltaire, quoted in Theodore Besterman’s biography.

Besterman adds:

To use modern terms, Voltaire was a man of science rather than a philosopher. Thus we can see how perfectly irrelevant are the criticisms directed to him because he did not compose formal works of academic philosophy. What is the sense of criticising him for not doing that which he explicitly condemned?

[frederick-the-great]

The more academic kind of philosopher thinks Voltaire's opinions are unworthy of careful examination because they are not formulated in the language of schools. There is indeed little formally systematic about Voltaire's presentation of his views. His detractors have said so a thousand times with many a smirk, as though this fact had something obscene about it. In reality, if Voltaire did not compose a system of philosophy it was not because he was incapable of undertaking such a construction...it was rather because he thought it very foolish to do so. 'Systems', said he, 'offend my reason." There is also a technical difficulty: Voltaire was utterly incapable of writing a sentence the meaning of which is not pellucid at a first reading. Academic philosophers and theologians naturally take a poor view of such unprofessional conduct.

Theodore Besterman, Voltaire.

[frederick-the-great]

Adventures in History - part 4

Oh Besterman you were doing so well, this biography is so good, but did you really have to portray Frederick as a porphyric tyrant, and all-around insincere, artificial man? One only has to read Frederick’s own writings and look at his his behavior during the Seven Years War to know that even under the most extreme circunstances (even in his moments of despair) he managed to emerge as a balanced individual, filled with common sense. Why must biographers of Voltaire treat Frederick as though he was the Evil King who ruined Voltaire - innocent, sweet Voltaire Who Does No Wrong?

Likewise, why must Frederick’s biographers treat Voltaire as though he was an opportunistic trickster who was only interested in cultivating a relationship with Frederick for his power and influence?

Isn’t it infinitely more reasonable to believe that these two men who wrote in Besterman’s own words a thousand letters to each other, who knew each other for over 40 years, had a much more subtle, complex and interesting relationship and that they tricked and damaged each other in the same measure they helped and supported each other? 

Why must we put down a fascinating personality to underline the fascination of the other equally interesting person?

[frederick-the-great]

Adventures in History - Part 3

Theodore Besterman’s biography of Voltaire keeps on giving. On the one hand, Besterman’s breadth of knowledge is remarkable. He is closely familiar with basically everything Voltaire ever wrote (And someone who knows even a little bit about Voltaire knows that this is no small feat) and he has a good, above average knowledge of every subject Voltaire dedicated himself to: from literature, to science to History, he can talk about Racine and Charles XII. The background studying that this man had to do to get to Voltaire is quite extraordinary and seldom seen in academia nowadays.

On the other hand he is, maybe unwittingly, hilarious. On discussing Madame du Deffand who wrote a rather unflattering description of Madame du Châtelet he says: “as for her underwear, I must plead an ignorance no doubt equal to that of Madame du Deffand”

On the following page there’s this footnote:

“In La vie Privée de Voltaire et Madame du Châtelet (Paris, 1820). The original manuscripts, after being for many years buried in the Phillipps collections, are now in the possession of a dealer called Kraus, in New York, who has not allowed me to check them - so rare an attitude that it deserves to be recorded”

[frederick-the-great]

The most extroardinary, the most maddening of all, to Voltaire, was that Shakespeare is a genius. Those are his very words. He could never get over it, but to suppose that this was due to insensibility, stupidity or envy (to choose only a few of the epithets used by commentators whom, for my part, I will merely stigmatise as ignorant).

Voltaire, Theodore Besterman.