Timothy Tackett's When The King Took

When it comes to revolutions the government plays an important role. A revolution can be explained as a rebellion against the government and injustices found in society. At a certain people will get tired of being oppressed. Oppression is one of the reasons that the French revolution took place. Society at that time viewed the king as father who was supposed to take care of them. In reality the king was only looking out for himself and not the best of his people. In his book When the King Took Flight Timothy Tackett focuses on the night the royal family tried to flee to Austria. When the king tried to left society felt that he was abandoning them and going against the revolution. Looking at this event it clearly shows how the king directly

played a part in the revolution. He also shows the idea of the individual and how that comes into play during the revolution. By exploring Tackett’s view of the revolution the reader could argue that Georges Lefebvre theory about Marxism can be applied to Tackett.
When the king and queen of France decided to flee the country with their family they would unknowably change the course of the revolution.

The great escape was short lived due to the ignorance of the royal family. “The yellow cabriolet, the large black berline with its yellow frame, and the three bodyguards in bright yellow coats” (Tackett Pg.63). If the royal family was going to escaped successfully they should of choose a better color. By choosing a color that was so bright they were bringing unwanted attention to themselves. When driving through the different towns the people became curious about the people in the bright yellow carriage (Tackett Pg.62). This carriage was not their only problem when it came to escaping, another problem was the royal family revealing their true identities to everyone. “The king began stepping out at the relay stops, relieving himself at the “necessary shed” (Tackett Pg.66). By being too confident in his power he exposes himself to everyone around him. Not a good thing when his supporters see him as their father. He was not only turning his back on his supports, but also the revolution. By turning his back on the revolution he was putting himself before his country. As the King of France it was Louis’s responsibility was to take care of his people, by not doing so he was setting in motion the revolution. When society feels oppressed by the government they will lash out to get the treatment they deserve. The king leaving just added

more unpredictability to the revolution. When the he and the royal family was finally caught, the question of what to do with them arises.
Throughout history there have been many revolutions, after the revolution is done the question becomes what to do with government? After the king was caught it was now up to society on how to deal with them. The king was supposed to be their father, but was willing to turn his back on them. If using this metaphor society was now the angry child looking for revenge against the neglectful parent. Once the republic is established it is now time to focuses on Louise’s future (Schue Lecture 10/26/16). The solution was to put the king on trial for his crimes against society. The trial split the republic at first because they could not figure out what time frame they should charge him under or what to charge him with (Schue Lecture 10/26/16). Whatever they choose to do would have a great impact on the future of France. This trial would not only go down in history, but change it. As seen in the other revolutions is successfully the revolutionist will want to punish their oppressor. By completely changing French society the revolutionist were now in control of their fate and the country. Tackett does a great job in showing the importance of the individual. While there were many groups in the revolution it came down to individuals who were committed to change to set the stage for the revolution.
Tackett’s whole book is a story about the king’s carriage ride and how that ride influenced the revolution.

With this approach he is able to show the importance that the individual plays in the revolution. “The very act of transforming society has aroused opposition among those whose vested interest and social positions had come under attack” (Tackett Pg.220). In this moment Tackett is showing how the individualis now being threatened. The way of life they once knew was no longer going to be the same. Even though the revolution is a group effort at the end of the day individual is directly affected. This also relates to Lefebvre; he applies the theory of Marxism to why he believes the French revolution happened. Lefebvre unlike Tackett does not focus on the individual rather on the social classes (Schue Lecture 10/10/16). Lefebvre says that “it showed traces of having originated at a time when land was the only form of wealth, and when the possessors of those who needed it to work and live” (Pg.1). This is clear example of a Marxist point of view he immediately starts talking about wealth. From Lefebvre point of view, the aristocrats revolting is what lead the other social classes to want to revolt (Pg. 3). How Lefebrve would approach Tackett’s point is that he would separate the social classes and explain their role in the

revolution.
By looking at When the King Took Flight by Timothy Tackett, he clearly demonstrates how the individual plays a part in the revolution. The king and his family unsuccessfully tried to flee from France. When they were caught they were forced to deal with the consequences of their actions. When the King Took Flight shows clearly the role the king played in the revolution. Tackett also focuses on the individual and how individualism comes into play during the revolution; even though the revolution is a group effort. While going deeper into Tackett’s book a reader could apply Georges Lefebrve theory about Marxism.