"Insensibility, of all kinds, and on all occasions, most moves my imperial displeasure"
About this Quote
In this quote, Frances Burney reveals a strong hostility to insensibility, which she recommends provokes her "royal annoyance" more than any other characteristic. To understand this, we must consider the context of insensibility in Burney's time. She lived in the 18th century, a duration that valued sensibility-- an intense understanding and responsiveness to emotional or aesthetic experiences. It was an age when emotional responsiveness was considered a marker of ethical and social refinement.
Burney, understood for her eager observations of society, likely relates insensibility with a lack of compassion and aesthetic appreciation. Her use of the word "imperial" to explain her annoyance adds a reliable tone, stressing the intensity and non-negotiable nature of her aversion. This choice of phrasing also suggests that to her, insensibility is not a minor fault however a significant flaw, practically a breach of social agreement and a failure of character.
Insensibility may indicate a person's inability to get in touch with others on a psychological level, therefore recommending callousness or cold. In literature, specifically books of manners from Burney's period, characters who show insensibility often work as foils to the more virtuous, delicate protagonists. These people are portrayed as lacking depth, incapable of valuing art, nature, or the subtleties of human interaction.
Moreover, Burney's statement may reflect her own creative approach. As a novelist and playwright, sensitivity not only to others' emotions but also to the subtleties of society was important to her craft. Insensibility, therefore, might be seen as an affront to her devotion to art and understanding of humanity.
By disdaining insensibility, Burney highlights its viewed risks versus the societal material-- a caution against disinterest in empathy and charm, prompting a more extensive engagement with the world and people around us. Her words serve as both an individual conviction and a social pointer of the hazards of emotional and ethical detachment.
