Summary

The presence of a common cultural identity allowed for the growth of nationalism, the unification of a country and the establishment of a public voice. As demonstrated by the unification of the German Confederation (1871), there is an undeniable strength that a common culture maintains. The strength of a common culture within a nation allows the role of the public within a nation to be established and thus expedites the social and governmental progression of the nation. The strength of a common culture comes from the fact that it creates a sense of trust within a nation, that the citizens of a nation seek the same goals. As a result of this trusting environment, the public is more willing to have an active voice, such as the British did after the Crimean War. The example of how Great Britain responded to public complaints after the Crimean War demonstrates how the presence of a common culture is conducive to national progression and betterment. 

767-780

The Crimean War (1854-1856) revealed both the decline of the Ottoman Empire as well as the reality of the hardship of war. While there was no decisive military victory for the French and British or the Russians, the ultimate end of the Crimean War in a treaty seriously dampened the pride of the Russians and thus maintained the balance of power. What is equally significant to the maintenance of the balance of power that the Crimean War achieved is the publicity that the reality of the Crimean War gained through the photograph of Roger Fenton. While the public could previously hear stories of the hardships of war, the photography of British Fenton revealed the poor conditions that the British army suffered during the Crimean War and inspired a public response. Fenton’s photography brought the reality of the hardships of war home to Britain and inspired not only a public demand for change of the conditions of army but also the artistic movement of realism. The basic foundation of realism is the artistic depiction of their reality without the interference of artistic “interpretations” of this reality. The realist movement was revolutionary not only because of its new artistic implications but also because it demonstrated a new form to communicate the realities of either the army (such as Fenton’s Captain Dames of the Royal Artillery) or the menial tasks of common workers (such as Courbet’s The Stone Breakers). The Crimean War was historically and artistically influential for it allowed the maintenance of the balance of European power as well as being the source of the foundation of realism.

762-767

The divisions of European land in the 19th century left patchwork nations were comprised of either divided states (such as the German Confederation) or disjointed cultures (such as the Habsburg Empire of Austria-Hungary). While the nations were divided in both of these cases, the difference between cultural and geographical division is significant and produces considerably different outcomes. Geographical division, such as in the case of the German Confederation (which was broken into 38 individual states), inspired the creation of a united German identity, and, consequently, a united German nation. To contrast, the cultural division of the Habsburg Empire proved to be its weakness. The empire was attempting to bridge the opposing cultures of Austria and Hungary, a unification which was threatened by Hungarian Kossuth in 1848 and would have successfully broken the ties between Austria-Hungary had it not been for Russian intervention in 1849 which ended the Hungarian revolt. Instead of acknowledging the blatant cultural division between Austria and Hungary, the Habsburg Empire struggled to just barely hold itself together, creating the allusion of a united Austria-Hungary through shared legal institutions in order to avoid the reality that the cultural divide was too powerful to maintain a unified empire. 

Summary

In order to avoid revolution, a government essentially has two options. Great Britain and Prussia demonstrated these two options in the later half of the 19^th century, when the governmental systems of both countries were facing opposition from their respective liberal parties. A government must act as Great Britain did (with the Reform Bill of 1867) and compromise with the discontented party, or it can act as Prussia did (with the influence of Bismarck) and unite the country with a common cause, such as nationalism, in order to almost distract the opposing party. Clearly, between these two options (that of compromise and that of “distracting” the opposing party), the former will result in an overall more contented country and will consequently have longer-lasting peace. The act of compromise demonstrates the humbleness of a government and it’s willingness to adhere to the complaints of the people in order to better the state of the country as a whole. To contrast, the use of nationalism to momentarily unite a country only stalls the threat of revolution and allows a ruler (such as Bismarck) to focus on exterior gains (such as Germany) instead of interior problems. Creating a sense of nationalism within a country does not achieve anything aside from temporarily uniting that country; the problems that existed before the presence of that nationalism will still exist after that sense of nationalism fades away. Consequently, if a government truly wants to avoid revolution (and not just stall the threat of a revolution), it only really has one option: to put aside its ego and mold itself to fit the needs of its people.

762-767: Power of Nationalism

The German Confederation could not have been united without Bismarck’s understanding of the power of nationalism. Driven by his desire for power, Bismarck tactfully maintained his ultra-conservative values without bothering the Prussian liberals. While Bismarck did not necessarily go out of his way to compromise his values in order to please Prussian liberals, he managed to avoid revolution by appealing to the uniting factor of liberal and conservative Prussians: their nationality. Ultimately, Bismarck wanted Prussian control over the German Confederation, which, when Bismarck rose to power, was under the combined powers of Austria and Prussia. By engaging in the Seven Weeks War (1866), Bismarck was able to weaken Austria militarily and also establish a sense of Prussian pride. Austria ceded its lands to Prussia and thus allowed Bismarck to create the Northern German Confederation. Following this victory, Bismarck needed to unite Southern German states and again used nationalism as a uniting factor. Bismarck created a conflict between France and Germany in order to unite Southern Germans against France and in support of Prussia. Bismarck understood that when a nation is put in a vulnerable position, the nation is strengthened and unites in order to defeat the threat. Through military victories, Bismarck created a sense of Prussian nationalism, and this maintenance of public support allowed him to expand his power without the threat of revolution from Prussian liberals. 

754-762

            While much of continental Europe suffered from revolutions in 1848, Great Britain again managed to escape the grasp of revolution and, since Great Britain was not entangled in revolutionary chaos, continued its social and political progress. The government continued to be responsive to the complaints of the public, as demonstrated by the 1867 Reform Bill. Many workers had felt as if their limited and indirect representation in state was unjustified and, instead of further repressing and controlling these workers, Parliament granted these workers the representation that they desired. While the passing of the 1867 Reform Bill (which was ironically driven by Conservative Benjamin Disraeli) was undoubtedly an accomplishment for liberalism, it also called to question the role of women within the British society and whether women should be included in the social changes that Britain was undergoing. While this question was publicized by John Stuart Mill, who defended women’s rights to freedom in his literature, it was overlooked or somewhat pushed to the side. While Great Britain had been so quick to mold to cease the complaints of the workers, women did not gain basic liberties until World War 1, which reveals a contradiction within liberalism and calls to question the true value of women with British society.

Response to: http://j91h.blogspot.com/2009/01/response-to-response-to.html

In Justine’s response to my post she disagreed with my description of Romanticism as “simple”, and I have to say that I agree with her argument. The word “simple” does not do the accomplishments and transformation of the Romantic period justice. However, in comparison with the intellectual accomplishments of the Enlightenment, which were based in trying to discover a logical reason or explanation to reality, the entire concept of Romanticism, to follow one’s emotions and impulses, seems to be, well, rather simple. The Enlightenment was not necessarily inaccessible, but just takes more effort in interpreting. When studying the Enlightenment, I felt as if I had to pick-and-choose between philosophe’s, and while I was by no means searching for an explanation for the meaning of life or anything of that sort, it is much easier for me to access and relate to the reality depicted in a Romantic work than that described by the philosophe’s. 

732-742

Willingness to compromise is the essential component in preventing revolution. If a government hopes to escape revolution it needs to be humble enough to reshape and change with the will of the people. While the Congress of Vienna (1814) had presented an idealistic proposition to ensure peace and prevent revolution, it did not stress the importance of embracing governmental and systematic change in order to avoid revolution. The success that systematic change has in avoiding revolution is best demonstrated by the British reform in 1832. The period after the Napoleonic Wars brought great hardship to Great Britain, and, as a result, social unrest, particularly within the middle class. As pressure from lower classes increased, British political leaders realized that the only way to avoid revolution would be to have an open ear to the complaints of the British people and try to mold itself, moderately, to resolve the problems through the Reform Bill of 1832. This Bill reduced (but did not eliminate) the influence and presence of the British elite in Parliament and opened Parliament to some members of the middle class. The result of this alteration in Parliament were changes that heeded to the needs of the middle class (such as the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846) and thus made a greater majority of the British public content. While discontentment with the gains of the 1832 reform remained and was demonstrated through the rise in Chartism during the 1840s, ultimately, the willingness of the British government to adhere to the complaints of the people at all was critical in preventing revolution. The actions of the British government in 1832 demonstrated the need to change according to the complaints of the people in order to prevent revolution. 

Response to "Token Self-Indulgent Post"

Much like Laura, I too have a “soft spot” for Romanticism. Her post, which contrasts the Enlightenment and Romanticism, inspired me to consider why Romanticism is such an attractive period. I think that much of the attraction to the Romantic period comes from its simplicity. While “simplistic” is not the correct word to describe the works created during this period, the foundation of Romanticism, to depend on human emotion, experience and nature, is not incredibly complex. Unlike the Enlightenment, Romanticism relied on themes that are personal and consequently tangible to a greater audience. To contrast, the Enlightenment, in an effort to assess reality and give logical reasoning to existence, birthed obscure concepts to which an audience could not necessarily relate or agree. The Romantic period provided an “explanation” of reality that was much more simple and understandable than the many interpretations of reality created during the Enlightenment, trying more to express reality than analyze it. During the Romantic period, reality was interpreted as nothing more than one’s experience and existence provided by nature. It is the simplistic nature of Romantic period, to draw on and interpret real experience and as no more than reality, which allows people to maintain a “soft spot” for Romanticism.

709-717

It is no surprise that the French Revolution evoked fear within other European countries. Thus, the Restoration period, which was driven by the desire of Metternich and Tsar Alexander 1 to establish and maintain peace within Europe, was a natural response to the chaotic French Revolution. However, instead of establishing a peaceful system in which the majority of people were content (within their respective countries), the Restoration was entirely dependent on the power of the government to maintain peace and made little attempt to alter governmental systems to better fit the wants of the people. The problem with this is that it overlooked the fact that a revolution is driven by the dissatisfaction of the people with the governmental system. Thus, the Restoration period, while driven by good (and idealized) intentions, was not necessarily open to change and people's dissatisfactions were merely bottled up, and, due to this lack of change, the Restoration was doomed.