The Surface of the Question — Les Misérables

Of what is revolt composed? Of nothing and of everything. Of an electricity disengaged little by little, of a flame suddenly darting forth, of a wandering force, of a passing breath. This breath encounters heads which speak, brains which dream, souls which suffer, passions which burn, wretchedness which howls, and bears them away. Whither? At random. Athwart the state, the laws, athwart prosperity and the insolence of others. Irritated convictions, embittered enthusiasms, youthful courage which has been exalted, the taste for change, every vanity which thinks that destiny has bankrupted it, and at the very bottom the rabble, that mud which catches fire: such are the elements of revolt. That which is grandest and that which is basest belong to it. Whoever cherishes in his soul a secret revolt against any deed of the state, of life or of fate, is ripe for riot, and as soon as it appears he begins to quiver and to feel himself borne away. Revolt is a waterspout in the social atmosphere which forms suddenly in certain conditions of temperature. It eddies, mounts, descends, thunders, tears, uproots, bearing with it great natures and small, the tree trunk and the stalk of straw. Woe to him whom it bears away as well as to him whom it strikes. It breaks the one against the other. It communicates to those whom it seizes an extraordinary power. It fills the firstcomer with the force of events. It converts everything into projectiles. It makes a cannon-ball of a rough stone, and a general of a porter.

If we are to believe certain oracles of crafty political views, a little revolt is desirable from the point of view of power. Revolt strengthens those governments which it does not overthrow. It puts the army to the test, consecrates the bourgeoisie, draws out the muscles of the police. It is an exercise in gymnastics. It is almost hygiene. Power is in better health after a revolt, as a man is after a good rubbing down. There is for everything a theory which proclaims itself good sense: mediation offered between the false and the true, rather haughty extenuation which, because it is mingled with blame and excuse, thinks itself wisdom and is often only pedantry. A whole political school called the golden mean has been the outcome of this. As between cold water and hot water, it is the lukewarm water party. This school, all on the surface, dissects effects without going back to first causes, and chides from its height the agitation of the public square.

If we listen to this school, the riots which complicated the affair of 1830 deprived that great event of a portion of its purity. The Revolution of July had been a fine popular gale, abruptly followed by blue sky. They made the cloudy sky reappear. They closed the shops, depressed the funds, threw the Exchange into consternation, precipitated failures. It has been calculated that the first day of a riot costs twenty millions, the second forty, the third sixty. A three days' uprising, if only the financial result be taken, is equivalent to a lost battle. No doubt uprisings have their beauty. The war of the pavements is no less grandiose than the war of thickets. But is all this worth the bloodshed? Add the future darkness, honest liberals in despair, foreign absolutism happy in these wounds, the massacres which have too often dishonoured the victory of order grown ferocious over liberty gone mad. To sum up all, uprisings have been disastrous. Thus speaks that approximation to wisdom with which the bourgeoisie, that approximation to the people, so willingly contents itself. For our parts, we reject this word uprisings as too large, and consequently as too convenient. We make a distinction between one popular movement and another. We do not inquire whether an uprising costs as much as a battle. Why a battle, in the first place? Even at the same price, we should prefer the 14th of July. We reject these figures, which appear to be reasons and which are only words. An uprising being given, we examine it by itself. In all that is said by the doctrinarian objection, there is no question of anything but effect. We seek the cause. We will be explicit.