The Maxims by François de La Rochefoucauld

First published:Maximes, 1665-1678 (English translation, 1706)

Type of work: Philosophy

The Work:

François de La Rochefoucauld describes his Maxims as a “portrait of the human heart.” He writes in the preface to the first edition that these reflections on human conduct will probably offend many persons because the aphorisms are full of truths that are unacceptable to human pride. He suggests that the reader suppose him- or herself to be the sole exception to the truth revealed and should avoid the tendency to have his or her opinion influenced by amour-propre, or self-love, as that would prejudice his or her mind against the maxims.

The reference to self-love, the basic concern for the self by which the value of any action, person, or thing is presumed to be judged, is characteristic of La Rochefoucauld. Critics generally describe this great French writer as a cynic and take as evidence his maxims, in which he attributes to self-love the central role in human conduct. Yet a mere cynic is one who hopes for a better world than the present one; a cynic constantly compares what could be and what ought to be with what is, responding to the disparity with bitterness. Consequently, everything that cynics say is the truth as they see it; as they see it, it is worthy only of a sneer. La Rochefoucauld, on the other hand, takes self-love to be an undeniable fact of human existence and does not hope for anything better. Consequently, his view of the world is that of a person amused to see the difference between what people conceive themselves to be and what they are; his or her delight is in a witty revelation of the facts of life. Throughout The Maxims, as in the refreshing self-portrait with which the collection begins, La Rochefoucauld reveals an intelligent sense of humor that takes the sneer out of what he says.

“My normal expression is somewhat bitter and haughty,” he writes in his initial self-portrait, and “makes most people think me supercilious, though I am not the least so really.” He goes on to describe himself as “inclined to melancholy” but not from temperament alone: “It is due to . . . many other causes.” He calls himself an intellectual who delights in the conversation of cultured persons, in reading, in virtue, and in friendship. His passions are moderate and under control. He is neither ambitious nor afraid of death. He has given up “light amours” and wonders why so many people waste their time paying “pretty compliments.” The portrait concludes with the assurance that were he ever to love, he would love with the strong passion that is a sign of noble character; however, he doubts that his knowledge of the value of strong passion will ever “quit my head to find a dwelling in my heart.”

The first maxim is important as a summary statement of La Rochefoucauld’s central conviction.

So-called virtue is often merely a compound of varied activities and interests, which good fortune or our own assiduity enables us to display to advantage; so it is not always courage that makes the hero, nor modesty the chaste woman.

With the second maxim, the author names the concern that is essential to the human heart: “Amour-propre is the arch-flatterer.”

In many of the maxims, La Rochefoucauld expresses his conviction that virtue is the accidental result of an exercise of the passions; acts undertaken passionately to satisfy the demands of a pervasive self-concern are interpreted in other ways, as signs of nobility of character. In maxim 7, for example, he declares that “Illustrious deeds, of dazzling brilliance, are represented by politicians as the outcome of great aims, whereas they are usually the result of caprice or passion.” Similarly, “The clemency of princes is often nothing more than a political artifice designed to secure the goodwill of their subjects” (maxim 15). “Such clemency, though hailed as a virtue, is the product sometimes of vanity, sometimes of indolence, not infrequently of timidity, and generally of all three combined” (maxim 16).

One way of summarizing La Rochefoucauld’s philosophy is to point out that, to him, virtue is usually passion misunderstood. People do something because their own irresistible self-love drives them to it; the world observes the power of the act and mistakes it for the grandeur of courageous virtue. Not all of the maxims develop this theme, however. Many of the comments are both wry and true, and the effect is heightened all the more by their pithiness. Examples of this include “The desire to appear clever often prevents our being so” (maxim 199), “We all have enough strength to bear the misfortunes of others” (maxim 19), “Flattery would do us no harm if we did not flatter ourselves” (maxim 152), and “There is no fool so troublesome as a fool with brains” (maxim 451).

Some of the maxims have a positive note, an appeal to the honesty by which people may lessen the damage caused by their self-love. La Rochefoucauld implies that there is hope for those who find it possible to recognize the worth of others and to do so sincerely, for those who know their own limitations and acknowledge them, and for those who admit that their show of virtue is often an empty show. The author respects such honesty, and it is apparent that The Maxims are confessional as well as didactic.

La Rochefoucauld found through his own experience certain truths that writers of all ages have expressed in various ways and that gain power through repetition. In several maxims, he develops the idea that it is doing people an injury to be so much concerned with their welfare as to burden them with the necessity of being grateful. He recognizes that people tend to be free with advice to others but not eager to accept it for themselves. People admit such shortcomings as a poor memory to hide something like the lack of intelligence.

La Rochefoucauld’s psychology is that of the sophisticated courtier. He was too much aware of his own disguises ever to have acquired the knowledge that would have led to a more objective and more scientific psychology. His psychology, like his philosophy, while not that of the person in the street, is certainly that of the person at court—clever enough to see behind the masks of those who travel in high society but not tolerant enough of possibilities to be willing to admit that those whom he calls honest people are more common than he supposes. When his psychology has the strong ring of truth, it is more by accident than discernment; and when it is false, he seems embittered to distortion—hence the charge of cynicism.

Nevertheless, some of his maxims do define something of the human character: “To disclaim admiration is to desire it in double measure” (maxim 149), “We easily forget our faults when they are known only to ourselves” (maxim 196), “Excessive eagerness to discharge an obligation is a form of ingratitude” (maxim 226), and “If we were faultless ourselves, we should take less pleasure in commenting on the faults of others” (maxim 31).

Behind the revealing wit of La Rochefoucauld there is the murmur of an injured man. No one can discern the falsity of others better than a timid man who believes himself betrayed, longs for recognition and gratitude, and feels he does not receive enough of either. La Rochefoucauld reveals himself when he reveals the desperate amour-propre that moves all human beings.

Bibliography

Culpin, D. J. La Rochefoucauld: Maximes. London: Grant & Cutler, 1995. Concise introductory overview and interpretation of The Maxims, including information about the context of the work and La Rochefoucauld’s ideas about virtue and human nature.

Hodgson, Richard G. Falsehood Disguised: Unmasking the Truth in La Rochefoucauld. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press, 1995. Examines La Rochefoucauld’s ideas about truth and falsehood within the context of his views on self-love, the passions, vice, and virtue. Explains how his ideas emerged from seventeenth century Baroque culture and other moralists, and assesses his impact on later philosophers.

Hope, Quentin M. “Humor in the Maximes of La Rochefoucauld.” Dalhousie French Studies 58 (Spring, 2002): 3-9. Examines La Rochefoucauld’s literary interest in “humor,” namely teasing, laughter, and making fun. Hope claims that many of the maxims should be understood as jokes.

Lewis, Philip E. La Rochefoucauld: The Art of Abstraction. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1977. Describes the problematic nature of La Rochefoucauld’s abstract reflections on the conflict between self-love and love for others. Discusses the psychological and ethical dimensions of The Maxims.

Moore, Will G. La Rochefoucauld: His Mind and Art. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1969. A clear introduction to the many levels of meaning in La Rochefoucauld’s pithy and marvelously ambiguous moral maxims. Discusses the political, social, and religious implications of The Maxims.

Mourgues, Odette de. Two French Moralists: La Rochefoucauld and La Bruyère. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978. A thoughtful comparison of La Rochefoucauld and Jean de La Bruyère, two eminent French moralists. Explores La Rochefoucauld’s reflections on subjectivity, and contains an excellent bibliography of major critical studies on these two thinkers.

Thweatt, Vivien. La Rochefoucauld and the Seventeenth-Century Concept of the Self. Geneva: Droz, 1980. Discusses the influence of St. Augustine and neo-Stoicism on La Rochefoucauld. Examines his reflections on people’s efforts to maintain their individuality in a society that favors and rewards conformity.

Zeller, Mary Francine. New Aspects of Style in “The Maxims” of La Rochefoucauld. 1954. New ed. New York: AMS Press, 1969. Explains clearly why La Rochefoucauld’s The Maxims permits a wide variety of interpretations. Discusses the refined rhythms and complex structures in many maxims.