CHAPTER 7

                                               MARGARET FULLER’S PRAGMATIC FOURIERISM

 

               Throughout the 1840s, Fuller travelled in Fourierist circles.  Her close friends in the movement included William H. Channing, Marcus and Rebecca Spring of the North American Phalanx, and Sarah Shaw, whose husband Francis industriously translated French socialist literature to further the cause.[1]  In more than twenty months on the Tribune staff, she developed a close friendship with her employer Greeley; her articles filled the space formerly occupied by Brisbane's column.  Later, as the Tribune's European correspondent, she would meet Hugh Doherty and Garth Wilkinson in London; she later associated with Victor Considerant, Clarisse Vigoreux, and Doherty in Paris.[2]  Socialism played a prominent role in her Tribune dispatches; by the end of 1847, she argued that America's future rested in "voluntary association" (qtd., L. Reynolds 65).  By May 1848, she was declaring herself "as great an Associationist as W. Channing himself, that is to say as firm a believer that the next form society will take . . . will be voluntary association in small communities."[3]  In the same letter, Fuller even contemplated writing a book on Associationism; it is conceivable that portions were incorporated into her lost history of the Italian Revolution.  Like Marx and Engels, she had little use for orthodox Fourierists, but she celebrated the socialist's grand vision:

 

                              I see the future dawning; it is in important aspects Fourier's future.  But I like no Fourierites; they are terribly wearisome here in Europe; the tide of things does not wash through them as violently as with us, and they have time to run in the tread-mill of system.  Still, they serve this great future which I shall not live to see.  I must be born again.  (Fuller to W. H. Channing, 7 May 1847, LMF 4:271)

               In previous chapters, I argued that Brownson's and Emerson's grapplings with Fourier had been unduly neglected, and that the extent of Fourier's influence on the elder James had not been uncovered until Habegger's recent work.  But a similar charge cannot be levelled against contemporary studies of Fuller: Bell Gale Chevigny, Christina Zwarg, and Reynolds, among others, have all emphasized Fourier's influence.  Chevigny, a self-described Marxist-feminist (xix), is understandably interested in Fourier's influence as a "pioneering radical feminist"; she further speculates that Fuller, as a result of her experiences in Europe, "wanted and increasingly needed to accept" a system of values similar to Fourierism (383).  It is well known that Fuller's reading of Fourier in fall of 1844 had a profound influence on the final form of Woman in the Nineteenth Century (Urbanski 57).  As we shall see presently, Zwarg's "Footnoting the Sublime" has established an even earlier date for Fourier's influence on Fuller.  In a separate study of Fuller's writings for Greeley's Tribune, Zwarg praises them as an engagé cultural criticism that is nevertheless sensitive to aesthetic perspectives.  She argues that Fuller's journalism was "dedicated to the 'transitional' state of the culture"; that its seeming incoherence was the result of Fuller's ambitious attempt to report on the "multiple fronts" of cultural change, a project inspired in part by Fourier's totalizing worldview.[4]  Two forthcoming studies will shed more light on Fuller's involvement with Fourier: Zwarg's Feminist Conversations (Cornell UP, 1995), and, doubtless, the second volume of Charles Capper's excellent biography.[5]

               Given all this scholarly attention, it is ironic that Fuller had much less to say about Fourier than had Brownson, Emerson, or James.  Then again, the evolution of her attitude towards Fourierist socialism followed a radically different trajectory.  Like Emerson—indeed, before Emerson—she had expressed her disdain for Brisbane's communitarian pipe dreams.  As Guarneri observes, however, Fuller eventually came to have more faith in Fourierism than some Fourierists.  While Brisbane dismissed the revolutions of 1848 as superficially political, she insisted upon their socialist identity (Guarneri 489n19).  It is particularly interesting that Fuller's early interest in Fourier's visionary metaphysics led to her eventual advocacy of a socialist praxis influenced by Fourierism.

 

               As with Emerson, Fuller's first mention of Fourierism was accompanied by her supercilious dismissal.  In an 1840 letter, probably to William H. Channing, Fuller painted a picture of her ideal community, far more pleasant and natural than the one proposed by "your Mr Brisbane":

 

                              A few friends should wander along a little stream like this, seeking the homesteads.  Some should be farmers, some woodmen, others bakers, millers &c By land they should carry to one another the commoditie[s] on the river they should meet solely for society.  At sunset many of course would be out in their boats, but they would love the hour too much ever to disturb one another. . . .  When we wished to have merely playful chat, or talk on politics or social reform, we would gather in the mill, and arrange those affairs while grinding the corn.  What a happy place for children to grow up in!  Would it not suit little —————— to go to school to the cardinal flowers in her boat, beneath the great oak-tree?  I think she would learn more than in a phalanx of juvenile florists. . . .  Can we not people the banks of some such affectionate little stream?  I distrust ambitious plans, such as Phalansterian organizations!  (LMF 2:179-180)

Fuller went on to wish George Ripley and like-minded social reformers success in their attempts to "throw off a part, at least, of these terrible weights of the social contract."  But these good wishes were embedded in a quintessentially Emersonian confession: "I do not feel the same interest in these plans . . . ."[6]  Channing himself was still a "confirmed Socialist" at the time he co-edited the Memoirs; therefore, he would have been inclined to enlist her memory in his camp to the fullest extent possible.  In discussing her visits to Brook Farm, Channing allowed that Fuller had had a "catholic sympathy" for the movement and a general faith in the advent of "Harmony."  But he conceded that she had found Fourier's "organization by 'Groups and Series'" too mechanical: "[A]t this period, Margaret was in spirit and in thought preeminently a Transcendentalist" (MemoMF 79-80).  Just as Emerson had once wryly advocated "Concord Socialism" for individualists, Fuller mused in her journals about "an association, if not of efforts, yet of destinies," and declared, "It is a constellation, not a phalanx, to which I belong" (MemoMF 73).

               Apparently it took years for Fuller to develop her appreciation for Fourier; she agreed with Emerson that Greeley and Brisbane were "dim New Yorkers" (17? Mar. 1842, LMF 3:52).  And after the December 1843 Fourier convention, Fuller complained to her "Aunt" Mary Rotch about the public's anti-intellectualism:

 

                              The Boston people are eager as usual after this and that, music and Fourier conventions,—lectures excite less interest now; there are such hordes of dullards in that field; it is almost as bad as the church.  (21 Jan. 1844, LMF 3:170)

Even so, as Hudspeth notes, Fuller was curious enough to read Fourier for herself.  She almost certainly met Brisbane, who had remained in Boston after the convention, for on January 28, she would write to Brownson to ask for Brisbane's copy of an unspecified volume of Fourier.[7]

               The earliest evidence for Fuller's reading in and reevaluation of Fourier appeared soon afterwards.  The venue for her appropriation of Fourier's metaphysics of the "aromal" was most unlikely—the "Wisconsin" chapter of Summer on the Lakes, in 1843, published in May 1844.  As Zwarg argues in "Footnoting the Sublime," Fuller's Western trip had heightened her consciousness of the American Indian's plight, and Fourier provided a convenient theoretical framework.  Fuller may have lifted Fourier's argument from the Théorie de l'unité universelle that the savage has a more restricted life than the civilizee, yet in many respects a more enjoyable one.[8]  Her thinking through of Fourier's historicization of racial subordination, Zwarg suggests, may have led her to his similar critique of gender subordination. 

               Whatever her train of thought, her linkage of Association with woman's freedom led to "a productive disagreement with Emerson on the question of agency and social change."  But, given the relevance and moral urgency of the concerns she raised elsewhere in Summer on the Lakes, a debate over the merits of Justinus Kerner's Die Seherin von Prevorst, the biography of a young clairvoyant, does not seem like the most likely forum for a discussion of Fourier.  But Andrew Jackson Davis would later make the same connection, praising the young seeress as the most important teacher in German history—greater than Luther and Calvin—just as Fourier was far and away the greatest teacher produced by the French (Davis 584, 585).

               As we have already seen in Chapter 5, Fuller argued for the willingness to risk belief in clairvoyance through the allegorical character "Free Hope," who in turns cites a wise man's advice: "I have lived too long, and seen too much to be incredulous."[9]  In fact, "Free Hope" invokes Fourier to explain clairvoyance's scientific basis, explaining that the mind of the poetic dreamer "stretches of itself into what the French sage calls the 'aromal state'" (SL 146).  Compare the following passage from Fourier's disquisition, immediately after his outline of "sensual relations between the planets" on "the many other pleasures [jouissances] of the dead, whom we must call ultra-mondain beings, people more alive than we are," and their occasional relations with mere terrestrials (OC 3:333):

 

                              Vision.  One finds an ultra-human faculty among some of the magnetized and somnambulists, who see without the aid of their eyes . . . .  It is . . . a faculty borrowed from those in the other life, where the exercise of the five senses is different than it is here; they are still the same five senses, but with a perfection immensely superior to those of human faculties.  One could prove, while on the subject of the aromal movement, that the food of the ultra-mondains and that of the great planetary bodies is at least twenty times more varied and more refined than that of our gastronomes.  (OC 3:337, my trans.)

And so on—bizarre as Fourier's elaboration is, versions of its underlying cosmogony were circulating in Napoleonic France, available through Mesmer, Restif de la Bretonne, or Swedenborg.[10]  In any case, the only other passage on magnetism indexed in Silberling's Dictionnaire de sociologie phalanstérienne is found in the Nouveau Monde industriel, which Fuller did not read until several months later.  Thus, as Zwarg conjectures, she almost certainly read OC 3, possibly the very volume of Fourier that Fuller had borrowed from Brisbane via Brownson.  Consider how striking Fuller's response was: after rejecting Brisbane's "ambitious plans" for communitarian socialism, she tentatively endorsed Fourier's infinitely more ambitious plan for interstellar communitarianism.

               This Fourierist arcana interested Fuller enough that she referred to it again, albeit more obliquely, in the opening paragraphs of Woman in the Nineteenth Century, in her call for man "to be a student of, and servant to, the universe-spirit; and king of his planet, that as an angelic minister, he may bring it into conscious harmony with the law of that spirit."[11]  This flighty rhetoric is also Fourierist doctrine, possibly gleaned from conversations with Brisbane (cf. SDM 239, 244), from the Théorie de l'unité universelle, or even from her reading of the Nouveau Monde industriel, which argued that "planetary worlds" were "the most immense creatures" (OC 6:372).  But there is a crucial distinction to be made between Fuller's appropriation of Fourierist metaphysical jargon and the interest evinced by others in the Transcendentalist circle towards that metaphysics.  For her, such arcana were neither a subject for derision (as they were for Hawthorne, Brownson, and the Emerson of the 1844 Essays) nor obsession (for Emerson in his Swedenborgian moods and James).  She was simply interested in visionary Fourierism.[12]  Her only criticisms of Fourier in Woman in the Nineteenth Century were holistic: the Frenchman was "a stranger to the highest experiences" and had put too much faith in institutional reform (a judgment she would later revise).  But she found Fourier a useful corrective to Goethe's overemphasis on self-culture, and she saluted both men as romantic synthesizers, kindred spirits (W19C 314-315).

               Of course, Fuller also had more down-to-earth reasons for appreciating Fourier, in particular, his critique of civilization from a feminist perspective.  Since Fourier's amorous corporations often remind one not so much of sexual freedom, but of an adolescent boy's fantasy of sexual freedom, "feminist" may not be the first word that springs to one's mind.  Faiza Blashak, for example, has called Le Nouveau Monde amoreux a "phallocentric utopi[a]" which "aim[s] at the subjugation of the feminine."[13]  A just observation, and yet a problematic one, for it had been Fourier himself who had coined the word "féminisme"![14]

               True, the word did not migrate to English for another half-century, and it is unlikely that Fuller encountered it in Paris.  But Fourier's signal contribution to feminist theory is generally acknowledged.  As early as Quatre mouvements, he had argued that the rights each society accorded to women were the most reliable barometer of that society's level of advancement.[15]  Furthermore, he had insisted that the extension of these rights was the most effective agent of social progress.  Just as Marx believed that the liberation of the proletariat would bring about a transitional phase that would lead to the communist utopia, Fourier argued that women's liberation would signal the dawn of Guarantism, the transitional state between Civilization and Harmony:

 

                              As a general thesis: Social progress and transformations of Period occur as a result of the progress of women towards liberty, and declines in the social Order occur as a result of a decrease in the liberty of women.

                                             Other events influence these political vicissitudes, but no other cause produces social progress or decline so rapidly.  As I have already said, the adoption of closed seraglios would quickly transform us into Barbarians, and the opening of the seraglios would suffice to bring the Barbarians into Civilization.  To summarize: the extension of women's privileges is the general principle of all social progress.  (OC 1:132-133)

Indeed, this principle is restated in the preface to Woman in the Nineteenth Century: "I believe that the development of [man] cannot be effected without that of [woman]" (W19C 245).  This sentiment had been anticipated by the Brook Farmer Marianne Dwight, who after some comments on Fourier, advised her friend Anna Parsons to "[t]ake a spiritual view of the matter":

 

                              Raise woman to be the equal of man, and what intellectual developments may we not expect?  How the whole aspect of society will be changed!  And this is the great work, is it not, that Association in its present early stage has to do?  (Dwight to Anna Parsons, qtd., Sams 122)

In order to bring this equality about, Fuller borrowed Fourier's formula for the workplace: one-third of all positions in "masculine pursuits" should be allocated to women who desire them, just as one-third of all "feminine" duties were reserved for men (W19C 346)

               Woman's equality would also require a retooling of the marital institution, Fourier argued.  His "amorous corporations" called for two fundamental reforms: first, the recognition of women's "amorous majority" at age 18, "emancipating them . . . from the humiliation of being put up for sale, and being obliged to do without men until some unknown comes to buy them and marry them" (OC 1:133).  He argued that the current marital system, in which the economic interest of other parties played a far greater role in picking a mate than the woman's own desires, forced young girls to disguise their conduct with a "varnish of chastity," inevitably resulting in "universal Cuckoldry" (OC 1:137, 135).  Such passages may well have been Fuller's inspiration for a recurring argument in Woman: prostitutes are not depraved, but the products of a depraved society.

 

               Fuller's evolution from the Fourier-inflenced feminism of Woman to the socialism of the Tribune dispatches seems natural enough: a movement from one critique of domination to another.  But why was she first interested in Fourier's visionary doctrine of the aromal?  One possible answer is suggested by Ednah Dow Littlehale Cheney's description of the effect that Fuller's Conversations had had on her:

 

                              I found myself in a new world of thought; a flood of light irradiated all that I had seen in nature, observed in life, or read in books.  Whatever she spoke of revealed a hidden meaning, and everything seemed to be put into true relation.  Perhaps I could best express it by saying that I was no longer the limitation of myself, but I felt that the whole wealth of the universe was opened to me.  (qtd., Capper 305-306)

Within this typically Romantic rhetoric one detects the oceanic feeling once again, the description of the subject's loss of ego boundaries and expansion into the universe.  If the irrationalism of the Conversations had opened new vistas for Cheney, then the irrationalism of Fourier's aromal may have offered similar experiences to Fuller.

               This is not to say that Fuller was convinced that the "aromal state" explained the phenomena of clairvoyance and mesmerism.  Her interest in mesmerism during this period is well-known: she even received regular mesmeric treatments in the spring of 1845 (Stoehr 216-217).  Yet her interest in these pseudosciences might better be seen as mere flirtations with irrationality.  As "Free Hope" responded to the Emersonian "Self-Poise,"

 

                              To me it seems that it is madder never to abandon oneself, than often to be infatuated; better to be wounded, a captive, and a slave, than always to walk in armor.  As to magnetism, that is only a matter of fancy.  You sometimes need just such a field in which to wander vagrant . . . .  (SL 148)

Perhaps Fuller was not espousing the Fourierist arcana or vouching for the authenticity of Die Seherin von Prevorst; rather, she simply found them interesting fields to wander in.

               Fuller's male counterparts were more uptight in their responses to visionary Fourierism: Brownson had to damn it, Emerson had to dissect it relentlessly, and poor James adopted it as one of his creeds.  The romantic synthesizer Fuller simply saw Fourier as a kindred spirit; she was not obsessed by the details.  Hyper-intellectual that she was, Fuller nevertheless realized that an intellectual response to visionary Fourierism was inappropriate—a point that was largely lost on her male friends.

               Furthermore, keeping in mind that Chasseguet-Smirgel (after Freud) diagnoses paranoia as a male disease, it is interesting to compare Fuller's attitude towards sexual liberation with that of her male counterparts.  Her erotic life was largely compressed into the last five years of her life: her affair with James Nathan, her pursuit of the young Associationist Thomas Hicks[16], and of course her relationship with Ossoli, only legally formalized after the birth of Angelo (Deiss 292-293).  But Emerson struggled to repress the obvious truth about her life, as in this well-known journal entry made while he was co-editing Fuller's memoirs:

 

                                                                                          Marriage

                              W.H.C[hanning] fancied that M had not married: that a legal tie was contrary to her view of a noble life.  I, on the contrary, believed that she would speculate on this subject as all reformers do; but when it came to be a practical question to herself, she would feel that this was a tie which ought to have every solemnest sanction; that against the theorist was a vast public opinion, too vast to brave; an opinion of all nations & of all ages. (JMN 11:463)

               Emerson's repression, similar to his repression of Caroline Sturgis's carnal desires, may have been motivated by a greater concern than propriety.  As we saw, members of the Transcendentalist circle felt the attraction of free love, even Emerson.  Yet the men had a vested interest in holding on to the patriarchal structure, unlike Fuller, who insisted upon the necessity of institutional change.  Possibly these men worked out a psychic compromise.  In their heads, they enjoyed the erotic fantasy of free love, as well as universal socialism, eros in the larger sense.  For this purpose, the repressed Transcendentalists could have picked no better masters than Swedenborg and Fourier, the masters of intellectualizing sexual experience.  (Depending on the nature of Fourier's "sapphianism," it is even possible that both men died virgins.)  But in the world outside the psyche, the men in the Transcendentalist circle struggled to hold on to their patriarchal privileges.  For example, James's 1852 renunciation of free love was accompanied by a reactionary anti-feminism which held, in Habegger's characterization, that "woman is subservient, secondary, and inferior to man," and marriage was based on a doctrine of force, "antediluvian brutality" (F 333, 334).  From this reactionary point of view, then, Fuller's personal life had to be misrepresented.  For her was substituted the lifeless Zenobia, the abstract theoretician, the crystal removed from life.

 

Next chapter

Return to Table of Contents

 



    [1]Here are representative snippets from Fuller's correspondence: "I hear much of Frank [Francis G. Shaw] in Fourierite Association"  (Fuller to Sarah Shaw, 25 Feb. 1845, LMF 4:51).  "My dear Marcus . . . .  I have become an enthusiastic Socialist; elsewhere is no comfort, no solution for the problems of the times" (Fuller to Marcus and Rebecca Buffum Spring, 12 Dec. 1849, LMF 5:295).

    [2]Fuller to Evert A. Duyckinck, 30 Oct. 1846, LMF 4:235; L. Reynolds 60.

    [3]Fuller to Mary Rotch, 29 May 1848, LMF 5:71.

    [4]"Reading Before Marx" 232-234.  Zwarg may overreach when she proceeds to draw comparisons between Fourier's cultural criticism and that of the two historians of the Risorgimento, Fuller and Antonio Gramsci.  Fourier believed his social science marked the end of ideology, a less supple formulation than the Gramscian "return to ideology."

    [5]I regret not having the opportunity to consult the recently-published final volume of Robert N. Hudspeth's Letters of Margaret Fuller.

    [6]LMF 2:180.  Fuller's familiarity with such an amusing detail as the "phalanx of juvenile florists" suggests that Brisbane had already begun his propaganda campaign.  Social Destiny of Man had been published on 15 September 1840, while Hudspeth has tentatively dated Fuller's letter a mere six weeks later (Bestor, "Albert Brisbane" 150).  Fuller's parallel dismissal of Brisbane and Ripley, in conjunction with the latter's October 1840 Dial review of Brisbane's book, further suggests that the Fourierist influence upon Ripley's initials plans for the "Transcendentalist" Brook Farm may be greater than previously acknowledged.

    [7]Guarneri 232; LMF 3:174; Brisbane to Brownson, [1844?], Brownson Papers.

    [8]Zwarg, "Footnoting"; see OC 3:163-177, the second volume of TUU, misidentified in "Footnoting" as the third volume.

    [9]SL 147; rather than cannibalize Zwarg's essay, I would refer the reader to "Footnoting" 629-634.

    [10]On Mesmer's possible influence on Fourier, see Zwarg, "Footnoting" 632; on the Restif-Fourier connection, see Poster 132-138; Viatte 263-268.

    [11]W19C 247.  Jeffrey Steele correctly identifies the reference; his gloss, however, is skewed by a typical materialist misreading: "Fuller adds a psychological concept to [Harmony] by using the term to refer to an ideal state in which the different facets of a person's being are in balance" (EssMF 452n5).

    [12]Granted, in light of Emerson's 11 April 1844 letter to Fuller—see Chapter 5—the provisional advocacy of "Free Hope" may well have been based on an earlier letter from Fuller, but the creation of the allegorical character insulated her from direct public endorsement of the aromal.

    [13]In the abstract of Blashak's dissertation (unfortunately unavailable via interlibrary loan).

    [14]Goldstein 92n10, Altman 291n1.  Today's numerous anti-feminists might be tempted to emulate Dühring and Daniel Bell.  Just as these two exploited Fourier's status as ur-socialist in an attempt to portray socialism as irrational, others might similarly dismiss feminism as having been "invented" by a crackpot, passing silently over earlier feet-on-the-ground feminists (e.g., Wollstonecraft).  And since Fourier was also the first to use "science sociale" in its modern sense (see Shapiro), should the social sciences also be abolished?

               Also, Blashak's characterization calls to mind an interesting parallel.  French feminists of the 1970s were made uncomfortable by their white fathers Derrida and Lacan, their theoretical presence a reminder that the patriarchy had not been escaped (Jardine).  For similar reasons, some feminists might find the recognition of Fourier's proto-feminism strategically undesirable.  Blashak's abstract valorizes "Cixous' vision of a lesbian utopia" as "a strategic alternative to the phallocentric conditions that still operate today"; so far, no problem.  But the valorization is at the expense of Fourier's utopia, one in which the "unconscious lesbian" would become conscious of her desires (qtd., Beecher 238).  To be fair, Fourier the self-described "Sapphianist or a protector of lesbians" (qtd., Manuel and Manuel 675) can also be seen a vicarious (albeit presumably passive) exploiter of lesbians.

    [15]Fourier detested the fourth historical era, the "patriarchal," even more than the cruel "Civilization" of his day.  He was grateful that its remnants were found in only a few isolated corners of the globe and among the "Jewish sect" (OC 3:52).

    [16]On Hicks, see Chevigny 423-424, LMF 4:307, and LMF 5:66—an ardent letter replete with Fourierist rhetoric.