Conform or Die

November 2018, "Humanities 301"

Conform or Die

Jessica McDermitt

Seventy years after the French Revolution, Charles Dickens published the first part of A Tale of Two Cities. The novel is a work of historical fiction that explores the French Revolution and the philosophy behind it, encapsulated in the revolutionary motto “liberty, equality, fraternity.” In sharp contrast to American ideology, which French thinkers attempted to draw from, French revolutionary ideology twisted the meanings of the words. To them, liberty, equality, and fraternity meant complete uniformity, achieved at any cost. A Tale of Two Cities explores this distortion, especially through a group of characters who take on the same name, “Jacques,” in order to identify themselves more fully with revolutionary ideology. Throughout the novel, these characters’ actions illuminate the French Revolution’s conflation of equality and fraternity with conformity, which eventually leads to the destruction of liberty.

Equality is the core of French revolutionary ideology. To French thinkers, equality means every citizen is identical, not only in opportunity and legal status, but also in ideology, opinion, and action. In Sister Revolutions, Susan Dunn writes, “the French worshipped homogeneity and unanimity” (55). Emmanuel Sieyes, a key French thinker, envisions French citizens as “like-minded, sharing the same opinions, ideals, and revolutionary goals” (Dunn 61). This viewpoint is fundamentally opposed to the American viewpoint, especially as propounded by James Madison in “Federalist 10.” He argues that individuals have inherent differences, which he calls “causes of faction,” deeply embedded into their humanity. To Madison, individual differences are a normal part of the human experience. But to the French, individual differences are a barrier to true equality.

By removing differences between individuals, the French idea of equality causes people to lose the features that give them a unique identity. In A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens demonstrates this idea through a group of revolutionary characters who take on the name “Jacques” at various times throughout the novel. The name, like the title “citizen,” functions as a shorthand for the characters to communicate that they are all equal and all on the same side. Toward the beginning of the book, Ernest Defarge takes on the name “Jacques” to communicate solidarity with the people he has been conversing with (Dickens 38). However, later in the book, as other characters take on the name, they lose all individual identity. Eventually, the characters have no distinguishing traits, leading the other characters to identify them only by numbers, such as “Jacques One,” “Jacques Two,” and “Jacques Three” (Dickens 186). In their attempt to communicate their total equality, the characters have effectively become iterations of the same person. Throughout the novel, characters who take on the name of Jacques have given up their individual identities in the name of equality with each other.

In French revolutionary ideology, total equality leads citizens to develop a sense of fraternity and work together for the good of society at large, expressed as the General Will. As Dunn explains, “Individuals may possess private wills that express their particular interests, but citizens must recognize and concur with the General Will that mirrors the good of all” (62). To be united, citizens must give up their individual pursuit of happiness in service of the greater good. Once again, this idea leads to a loss of personal identity. Rather than a society of individuals pursuing their own goals, French revolutionary ideology creates a “mass” of citizens that, banded together, has the power to do anything it wants to achieve its goals (Dunn). Historically, this brotherhood of the masses led to mob rule and frightening atrocities throughout the Revolution.

In A Tale of Two Cities, this conformist idea of fraternity plays out clearly. During the storming of the Bastille, revolutionaries lead masses of citizens through the streets; during this scene, leaders are identified only as Jacques One, Two, and Three. Calling the characters by this name deindividualizes them—any member of the mob they lead could take their place, and no one would know. In addition, the descriptions of the attack have few distinct characters and are composed mostly of blurs of movement and violence (Dickens 243-51). Again, this emphasizes the merging of individual identities into one murderous mass. A few pages later, Jacques Three is at the forefront of the mob’s attack on an old aristocrat (Dickens 252-56). The people, led by deindividualized equals, have taken over. Interestingly, the name Jacques is also used to identify those who are not a part of the brotherhood. In one scene, a spy named John Barsad attempts to build rapport with Defarge by addressing him as “Jacques.” Coldly, Defarge answers, “That is not my name. I am Ernest Defarge” (Dickens 205). By refusing to communicate with him as “Jacques,” which would imply that Barsad is included in the equality the name indicates, Defarge speaks to Barsad as someone outside the revolutionary brotherhood.

Clearly, the French concepts of equality and fraternity have devastating consequences for individuality when played out. In addition, as French ideology obliterates differences between individuals, they also erode individual liberty. To French revolutionaries, true freedom is the freedom to choose to conform to the greater good, which they call the General Will (Dunn 62). Since the General Will is based on everyone in society, group societal rights outweigh individual rights. In fact, individual liberty is a threat to the system of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Dunn writes, “Ultimately, the function of the Terror was not the protection of France from foreign threats but rather protection of the ‘oneness’ of the people from the freedom of the people” (95). French liberty is freedom to conform—no more. In contrast, in “Federalist 10,” James Madison argues that forcing conformity by removing individual differences among people stifles liberty at its source. Because of how fundamental differences are to human nature, Madison explains, one of the only ways to eliminate them is to destroy “the liberty which is essential to [their] existence” (Madison 43).

In A Tale of Two Cities, the suffocating equality among the characters who identify as Jacques clearly demonstrates that Madison’s conclusion is correct. Throughout the novel, the characters who most fully embody French conformity threaten the liberty of everyone around them. First, characters known only as Jacques feature prominently in Charles Darnay’s reincarceration and his trial, which endanger his life and liberty throughout the last third of the novel. Jacques Three reappears later, suspiciously observing Sidney Carton in a wine shop and eager to arrest him. Later, revolutionaries plan to arrest Lucie and accuse her of “plots,” a vague accusation that underscores the paranoia of revolutionary society (Dickens 426). All individual differences have been removed, creating a homogenous society; anyone who is a threat to this society, legitimate or not, must be eliminated. All actions must be aligned with revolutionary ideology, or else they represent “plots” against the security of the union. By taking on the same name, the characters planning all of these actions demonstrate that they have submerged themselves fully in their revolutionary identity (or lack thereof). By becoming entirely equal, they realize Madison’s fear—that removing the differences between people will cause extinction of liberty itself.

A Tale of Two Cities artfully demonstrates the way French revolutionary ideology twists the slogan “liberty, equality, fraternity” from a promise of improvement to a threat against life and liberty. To French revolutionaries, liberty means acquiescence. Equality means conformity. Fraternity means mob rule. Rather than individuality, freedom of opinion, and diverse worldviews, the revolutionary mantra connotes a frightening sameness, unity that destroys everything outside of itself. A Tale of Two Cities clearly demonstrates the loss of identity and liberty inherent in this distortion. Toward the end of the novel, Dickens explains the choice that thousands had to make during the Revolution: “Above a heap of dust and ashes in the court, ran the letters: National Property, Republic One and Indivisible. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death” (Dickens 324). The French Revolution’s ideology left a legacy of destruction in its wake—conform, or die.

Works Cited

Dickens, Charles. A Tale of Two Cities. Puffin Books, 2009.

Dunn, Susan. Sister Revolutions: French Lightning, American Light. Faber and Faber, 1999.

Madison, James. “Federalist 10.” The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, Bantam Books, 1982, pp. 42–49.