Madeleine de Scudery had a notably different opinion about the soul and minds of animals than Descartes. Scudery believed that animals, especially her chameleons, as noted in Anne E. Duggan’s journal article “Madeleine de Scudery’s Animal Sublime, or Of Chameleons,” ascertainably had the ability to think just as humans do. The chameleons of interest in Scudery’s writing were her pets which came from Alexandria. Based on Descartes’s work, animals are mechanical; they cannot reason and only exist to be controlled or utilized by humans. Animals and non-humans, in Descartes opinion, cannot have experiences since they are not thinking things with the brain and body connection given by God. Animals do not feel or have a conscious. Scudery disputes this fervently in her tale of her beloved chameleons and their love and friendship. There were many superstitious beliefs about the chameleon, its body parts, and how they served a purpose in the sixteenth-century medical community. This, along with the emergence of Descartes’ work and ideas of how animals are actually mechanical beings, spurred a great deal of fascination with the chameleon.
Scudery set out to share her observations with the world and exemplify the role of the chameleon to an exalted status rather than a science experiment or medical marvel. According to Duggan, Scudery’s work began to do just that; she writes, “Through a process of sublimation that, for instance, transforms excrement into musk, or an eyeball into a pearl, Scudery metaphorically elevates the status of her chameleons.” (Duggan, 2016, p. 31) The elevation of the chameleon above non-human or mechanical status is the primary goal, it seems, to Scudery in her argument against the Cartesian ideals of the time. Although she had two chameleons at the start, one male and one female, one of her Salon attendees mortally wounded the female, who later died. She notes their tender friendship and how devastated the male chameleon appeared at the loss of his companion. Descartes would dispute all of these “feelings” as assumptions on behalf of Scudery as he believes there is no way in which animals are capable of thought and presumably emotion.
Interestingly, Madeleine de Scudery had met and had correspondence with Catherine Descartes, the niece of Rene Descartes. Catherine was an avid supporter of her uncle’s philosophy. In Duggan’s article, she relays Scudery’s observations of the chameleon, and its ability to reason, even noting its ability to create friendships. Scudery, in correspondence with Catherine Descartes, writes, “… it is the friendship that they have for me that inclines me in their favor. For one cannot love anything by choice without some sort of reason.” (Duggan, 2016, p. 33) Here we see Scudery’s rebuttal again to those who believe that non-humans do not possess the ability to reason. Descartes writes about animals’ lack of intelligence in comparison to humans or thinking things. Descartes philosophy downplays the abilities and emotions that Scudery seems to observe in her companions. She makes clear that even referring to them as reptiles should be avoided. They possess the ability to respond to their name and her voice, according to Scudery.
References
Duggan, A. E. (2016). Madeleine de Scudéry’s Animal Sublime, or Of Chameleons // Lo sublime animal de Madeleine de Scudéry, o De los camaleones. Ecozon@: European Journal of Literature, Culture and Environment, 7(1), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.37536/ecozona.2016.7.1.977