Bibliographic details and abstracts are available to all. Downloads of full-text dissertations are restricted to University of Portsmouth members who must login. MPhils may be accessed by all.

Abstract

The purpose of this project is to examine how the damning rhetoric of both Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, published in 1790, and Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, published in 1791, criticises the displays of masculinity within political commentaries and thus allows the author to assert their superiority.

Despite the backdrop of the controversial events in France, the authors' main priority is the direct addressing, and usually attacking, of their political opponent. This assaulting of their adversary comes across as an attempt to disvalue their character, and their foundations too, thus rendering them inferior to that of the author. However, while the opponent's character is discredited, by contrast the author's foundations are celebrated. By comparing the insubordinate and destitute arguments of the other, to the victorious and enlightened point of author, the writers of this period founder their identity in the sabotaging of another.

In this dissertation, I will be exploring the extent to which Burke and Paine use the themes of principles, rhetorical voice and masculinity to supply an explosive critique of their opponent. I argue that this act of deformation enables my two writers to assert superiority in their own foundations.

Using Michael Kimmel's 'Masculinity as homophobia' (2001) to inform my reading of hypermasculinity and homosociality, I declare that the subjective critiques of party principles and rhetorical voice within a male dominated environment, allow for both writers to attack the display of a fervent masculinity.

Course: English Literature - BA (Hons) - C0995

Date Deposited: 2020-02-10

URI/permalink: https://library.port.ac.uk/dissert/dis13531.html