Readers of Rousseau who are concerned with his thoughts on education invariably turn to his work explicitly on education: Emile. This philosophical novel follows the education of a boy from birth to young adulthood, supplemented with a brief look at the corresponding education of his young wife, Sophie. These educations at first blush appear to be grossly sexist and inapplicable in our contemporary climate, and even if readers take the time to consider them further, they often conclude that these educations do not even succeed in the way Rousseau intends them. The inadequacy of it on his own terms is particularly concerning, and offers a hopeful avenue for further inquiry. I argue that Rousseau presents an alternative education that corrects for the shortcomings of the one he presents in Emile, in his preceding novel, Julie, or the New Heloise. This work is often studied for its content on love and family, while the education of Julie and her proposed education for her children is generally ignored. By ignoring Rousseau's first presentation of individual education, scholarship has been biased towards Emile as Rousseau's definitive statement on the subject, for better or worse. I examine Julie to flesh out Rousseau's educational vision, both in terms of his theoretical principles on the proper education for men and women, as well as the implications for those who are concerned with the same human problems Rousseau sees in modern bourgeois society and who are interested in his potential solutions. This dissertation helps to "rehabilitate" Rousseau in educational circles today, while also acknowledging and grappling with his prescient observations about our nature and conditions that we are reluctant to acknowledge with the same clarity today.
Read
