Gender, Enlightenment, and revolution in two eighteenth-century biographies (Madame du Coudray, Chevalier d'Eon)

Recent biographies by Gary Kates and Nina Rattner Gelbart of two eighteenth -century figures, a transgendered officer and diplomat--the Chevalier d'Eon --and a state-sponsored midwife named Mme du Coudray, offer unexpected insi ghts into the themes of gender, Enlightenment, and revolution when consider ed in tandem. Jeffrey S. Ravel notes that in the context of the last decade 's emphasis on the role of gendered thought and behavior in the onset of re volution, it is striking that these two life stories do not necessarily con form to our historiographical expectations. Although both du Coudray and d' Eon adopted unconventional positions in relation to Old Regime standards, t heir life stories were thoroughly fashioned by the possibilities and limita tions of existence in an absolutist polity. Lisa Forman Cody, however, argu es that the lives of d'Eon and du Coudray also display characteristics that foreshadow a more modern sense of self. Du Coudray's mission, Cody suggest s, hints at future republican projects that harness maternity to the cause of national regeneration, while d'Eon's legal troubles in England generate modern conceptions of bodies and selves as separate and self-possessed. Kat es, in his contribution to the forum, discusses how his encounter with d'Eo n across two centuries changed his own ideas about gender. His research, an d meetings with contemporary transgendered individuals, led him to rethink his gender assumptions and question the feminism he had inherited from the 1970s. Gelbart, in turn, found herself locked in a struggle with her subjec t to unveil the private feelings and emotions that du Coudray had so carefu lly hidden in the written record. In her essay, she openly reflects on the biographical process in the tale of the king's midwife. Finally, Elizabeth Colwill takes note of the historiographical and methodological issues that the biographical genre raises for historians. Both Kates and Gelbart, she s uggests, were attracted to "the hidden motivations of their 'secretive subj ects'", leaving some reviewers uneasy with the 'accuracy' of their work. Co lwill, however, argues that 'fact vs fiction' may be a false construction, because the art of interpretation is not at odds with careful archival reco nstruction.