I wish to thank one of my dear readers, tkmorin for presenting me with The Rose of Kindness Award. There are little rules to follow, such as nominating 13 bloggers. This I will do in another post. The number 13 is a lucky number for tk. So thank you tk. That was very kind of you.
I am very thankful to tkmorin. Her posts on Canada are a constant source of knowledge. She knows the details, the day-to-day, and her presentation, a little at a time, is truly successful. I read the contents of every single one of her blogs, even if it takes me a little time. In fact, I read all of your blogs.
I also received a nomination from iamforchange, but failed to understand his post fully. I therefore apologize and thank him sincerely. In fact, I wish to thank all of you and must go over each post to see whether or not I have done my duty. To the best of my knowledge, I haven’t in the case of the Best Moment and You Are Loved nominations.
I realize that nominations are to be inserted in one’s sidebar, but I have serious deficiencies. For instance, I do not know how to insert “elements” in her sidebar.
In fact, Micheline now writes in palish grey rather than very dark grey letters. She does not know how this happened.
Vincent van Gogh
Vincent van Gogh (30 March 1853 – 29 July 1890) was a Dutch Master who lived, briefly, at the end of the nineteenth century.
Although future critics may think differently, Édouard Manet‘s (23 January 1832 – 30 April 1883) Déjeuner sur l’herbe, The Luncheon on the Grass, (c. 1863) may well have changed the course of the history of European art, mainly French. It is a representational, à la Gustave Courbet (10 June 1819 – 31 December 1877), rather than an abstract painting. However, it ushered in a revolution.
Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe could not be shown at the Salon (founded in 1725), the official art exhibition of the Académie des Beaux-Arts. It was rejected by Academicians Jean-Léon Gérôme (11 May 1824 – 10 January 1904) and Adolphe-William Bougereau (30 November 1825 – 19 August 1905). Manet therefore showed it at the Salon des refusés. Ironically, history was very kind to rejected artists, les refusés.
You may remember thatGertrude Steinand her brotherLeon Steinbought Matisse’s Woman with a Hat, showed at the 1905 Salon d’automne, a newSalon, established in 1903. Matisse was described as a Fauviste, a wild beast, but he didn’t coin the term. This was “du nouveau,” (something new), to quote French poet Charles Baudelaire. Matisse used unusually bold colours. The Cone sisters were also in Paris at the time. These wealthy American socialites could afford artworks.
Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe: an element of Magical Realism
Novelty made Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe a painting Academicists would reject. It featured a nude woman sitting with two fully dressed men and sharing a luncheon. Nudes had long entered the Fine Arts, but not in such a manner. The nude figure does not seem to fit the painting. But it could fit the imagination of the gentlemen sitting next to her as well as Manet’s imagination. It could also be a reference or a reminiscence: art within art. There is in Manet an element of magical realism, a characteristic of Latin American literature. According to Professor Matthew Strecher, magical realism is “what happens when a highly detailed, realistic setting is invaded by something too strange to believe.”[i]
Manet’s Bar at the Folies-Bergère is also enigmatic. Just where is the man? Furthermore, I wonder whether or not the mirror reflects the woman. Manet was accused of not knowing perspective, which does not make much sense.(See A Bar at the Folies-Bergères, Wikipedia.) But the newness of the painting may be the depiction of the young woman who seems a foreigner. Her eyes display a kind of bewilderment. The painting could be a depiction of Marxistalienation. The painting was shown at the Paris Salon, in 1882, at a later date than Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe (1862-1863).
One of my former teachers writes that “[i]n each case Manet takes a ‘standard’ Reality, not only as to content, but also as toform.”[ii] Professor Gowans also states that Manet was teaching other painters and that his work is therefore “didactic.” As for the public, they were not a factor.
Also enigmatic is Manet’sOlympia, shown at the 1865Paris Salon. But it will not be discussed today.
______________________________
[i]Matthew C. Strecher, “Magical Realism and the Search for Identity in the Fiction of Murakami Haruki,” Journal of Japanese Studies, Volume 25, Number 2 (Summer 1999), pp. 263-298, at 267.
[ii] Alan Gowans, The Restless Art, A History of Painter and Painting 1760-1960 (Philadelphia and New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1966), p. 190.
Micheline Walker
June 17, 2013
WordPressOlympia, 1863
Photo credit: Wikipedia
(Please click on the picture to enlarge it.)
I have written a post where Bluebeard is compared to an “animal.” So I feel compelled to come to the rescue of man’s best friends: cats and dogs. If treated kindly, they grow into affectionate members of the household. In fact, your house becomes their house. You’re just a happy tenant!
So I thought I would send you images of animals, Pablo Picasso‘s animals.
As you have noticed,Bluebeardis reminiscent of many folktales and other works of literature, not all of which belong to what we now call children’s literature. Yesterday, we looked at Charles Perrault’s Bluebeard. Perrault’s first audiences were persons who gatheredin French seventeenth-centurysalons, a more refined and sophisticated environment than court: the Louvreand, later in the century, Versailles. Children may have been Perrault’s very last audience.
I also mentioned that in French seventeenth-century literature, one could not combine comedy and tragedy. Like comedies, fairy tales end well, but there may be a “happy ending” to a comedy that does not seem a real comedy. Such is the case with some ofMolière‘s comedies. The best examples are Le Misanthrope, TartuffeandDom Juan. Molière nearly broke the rules as didPerraultin his fairy tales. We know that Bluebeard’s young wife will be saved, but by the time her brothers arrive, we are out of breath. Would that a message-carrying dog had been sent to fetch the brothers!
However, Charles Perrault, a modernein the famousQuerelle des Anciens et des Modernes,has chosen riveting suspense. Here, rulesare being challenged by a member of theAcadémie françaiseitself. Other than the stained key, there is very little enchantment in Bluebeard, in which respect it resembles Puss in Boots. The young wife and Anne are clever girls, but where is the young wife’sfairy godmother?Well, she does not have one. Is this a fairy tale? One wonders.
a Fairy tale “bursting out,” but saved
As for motifs and instances ofintertextuality, seldom have they been as abundant than in Bluebeard. In fact, motifs and intertextualité seem to override genre. Although, “all’s well that ends well,” this is a fairy tale I would call “éclatée” or bursting out. Perrault is taking the new genre to its very limit. Moreover, there is something biblical about this fairy tale: the stain cannot be removed, except miraculously. That stain seems of remembrance of la tache [stain] originelle, the original sin. Moreover, the brothers arrive at the verylast-minute. So not only the young bride, but the genre itself, i.e. fairy tales, are saved. Thisis an“in extremis,” intervention.
Bluebeard
As for Bluebeard, he is not the mean second wife who turns her husband’s beautiful daughter by a first marriage into a chimney sweeper. Bluebeard is more than an ”animal,” he is a monster. He’s Goethe’s Faust: Mephistopheles.
Conclusion
Having written the above, I can say no more than I did yesterday: “All’s well that ends well.”
Both images are by Danish illustratorKay Nielsen(12 March 1886 – 21 June 1957)
title: “Elegy II”artist:Helen O’HaraTribute to Kay Nielsen
For Students
For those of you who are students of folklore, I have provided Alishman’s extremely useful cross-referencing, complete with links to the tales he mentions. Motifs overlap in this surprisingly rich “fairy tale,” so I have listed them.
Particularly helpful is Alishman’s page devoted to the Grimm Brothers. It is entitled:Grimm’s Fairy Tales. The brothers Grimm have a classification system of their own: KHM.
To access D. L. Alishman’s page, click on How the Devil Married Three Sisters ATU 311and other folktales of Aarne-Thompson-Uther type 311translated and/or edited by D. L. Alishman
Illustration in The Fairy Tales of Charles Perrault,by HarryClarke (1889-1931), illustrator. London: Harrap (1922) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Charles Perrault‘s (1628-1703) Bluebeard, La Barbe bleue (seeGallica.BnF), is an exceptionally rich source of motifs.InAarne-Thompson-Uther, Bluebeard is classified as ATU 312, ATU 312A:The giant-killer and his dog – Bluebeard. The U in ATU stands forHans-Jörg Uther.[i]Charles Perrault‘s Barbe bleue, Bluebeard,features a killer, butthere is no reference to a dog. However, Bluebeard is rooted in a popular and largely oral tradition. In the more traditional tales, a dog or a bird is sent to warn our heroine’sfamily, her brothers especially.[ii]This element has been removed by Perrault. However, ProfessorD. L. Alishman specifies that folktales classified as ATU 312 and ATU 312A are stories “about women whose brothers rescue them from their ruthless husbands or abductors.” Such is the case with Bluebeard. So, to begin with, the motif of Bluebeard is AT 312 and 312A .
Bluebeard is feared by most women. He owns many properties, in town and in the countryside, “gold and silver dishes, beautifully upholstered furniture and golden carriages: de la vaisselle d’or et d’argent, des meubles en broderie, et des carrosses tout dorés.” (Gilbert Rouger)[iii]However, his blue beard makes him so ugly and terrifying that women run away when they see him. Moreover, despite his blue beard, this colourful but brutal character has married several times, but every wife has disappeared. The moment Perrault reveals this fact, we enter the realms of mystery and suspense. What has happened to the former wives? There will be a moment of revelation.
Bluebeard’s neighbour, a Lady, has two beautiful daughters and is looking for suitable husbands. When they first see Bluebeard, the daughters find him repulsive. However, Bluebeard organizes a feast and invites the young women and a few of their friends (first image). As they go from pleasure to pleasure, the younger daughter begins to see Bluebeard as a less frightening man and marries him.
Bluebeard marries and goes on a trip: forbidden room
Once he has married the younger daughter, Bluebeard tells her he must go away on a trip, but to invite friends (second image). He then starts distributing keys and warns his wife not to enter a certain room yet gives her the key to this room. The telltale key and the forbidden room are motifs dating to the story of Adam and Eve. Eve is tempted by the serpent and bites into the forbidden apple. When collecting folktales, the Brothers Grimm were told the story of Marienkind, Mary’s Child, in which a girl enters a forbidden thirteenth room, sees the Trinity and is then burdened with a telltale gold finger. Marienkind will not confess that she did enter the forbidden room until she is condemned to burn at the stake. As the flamesstart engulfing her, she finally tells the truth and is saved. The motifs of that tale, the forbidden room and the telltale stain, link it to Bluebeard.
Disobedience: the stained key
Likethe archetypal Eve, women are considered curious and, despite their fears,they want to unlock forbidden rooms, closets and cabinets. Again, “folk versions of the tale do not fault the heroine for her curiosity?”[iv] Bluebeard’s young wife trembles, but she unlocks the hidden cabinet (third image). Here we think of the deceptive closet that leads to other rooms. That is another motif. Next, when the young wife sees the bloodstained floor and the bodies of dead women, she drops the key and it gets stained by the blood on the floor of the room. This element seems a variation on the “tache [stain] originelle,” or the original sin. Therefore, our main motif could well be that of the indelible stain. Babies are born “entachés,” stained with the original sin. The young wife cannot clean the key. It is, therefore, an enchanted key.
Bluebeard returns
Bluebeard returns that very evening and is received with open arms. His bride hopes to delay the moment when he will ask for the keys to be returned, one of which is the stained key. The young bride therefore entertains her husband as doesScheherazade,the Persian Queen of theOne Thousand and One Nights who has studied sufficiently to know that fiction, entertainment in the form of storytelling, might save her from death, which it does.
However, the next morning, our poor young wife is asked to return all the keys her rich and ruthless husband has entrusted to her. He sees the stained key and tells her she will join the wives who have died due to their indiscretion. She, of course, falls to her knees begging for forgiveness. Bluebeard was testing her and she has failed the test. She is yet another Eve who has yielded to temptation.
Tests are a common element in fairy talesas are the three requirements that will turn a toad to turn into a prince. But this a one-test, or trap, narrative that resembles the Pandora’s Box narrative. Pandora is given a jar named pithos which she is instructed not to open, but curiosity, the villain, is as irresistible as the serpent. She opens the jar and releases all the bad things in the world. Evil is born and women are to blame. They are the scapegoats.
Fortunately, Bluebeard’s young wife inhabits fairyland. Her sister Anne has not yet returned home. So the young bride has a stand-in, so to speak, and uses a common a ruse. She asks to be allowed to pray for one half of a quarter-hour and goes upstairs to alert her sister. This recourse is reminiscent of Shakespeare’sDesdemona‘s (Othello) request. This is yet another motif or, possibly, an instance of intertextuality, texts that mirror one another. Usually, folktales have motifs, not Shakespearean theater. Our terrified heroine asks her sister Anne to go to a tower and to watch because their brothers have promised to visit and Bluebeard has returned earlier than expected. Anne is instructed to alert them from her tower.
Anne, ma sœur Anne, ne vois-tu rien venir ?
Bluebeard grows increasingly impatient, but the younger wife keeps asking her sister Anne whether or not she can see the brothers. This is a summit of suspense: Anne, ma sœur Anne, ne vois-tu rien venir ? Anne, my sister Anne, can’t you see anything coming? Anne answers twice. Je ne vois rien que le Soleil qui poudroie, et l’herbe qui verdoie. All I see are flurries of the Sun and grass turning green. The third time, however, Anne reports that she sees men on horseback riding in their direction. As you know, the number three is a common element of fairy tales.
At his wits end, Bluebeard starts screaming so loudly that the house shakes (fourth image). He goes upstairs and grabs his young wife by the hair, holding a knife. Once again, she asks to pray, but he will not let her pray. At this point, the reader or listener fears that all is lost, except that we are in fairyland. There has to be a saviour, and there is.
Kairos: the opportune moment
At the opportune moment, kairos, the brothers make a racket at the door. The door is forced open and Bluebeard sees one brother, a dragoon, and the second, a musketeer. Bluebeard runs away from them, but the brothers catch him when he reaches the porch and drive a sword through his body (fifth image).
The younger sister inherits her husband’s possessions. She provides her sister with the dowry that will enable her to marry a kind man she has known for a long time. She buys her brothers appointments as captains and, for her part, she marries a gentleman.
The Morals
There are two moralités. One is the moral ofcautionary tales. It is anexemplum. The tale tells about the dangers of curiosity:
La curiosité malgré tous ses /attraits,Coûte souvent bien de regretsOn en voit /tous les jours exemples paraître.Curiosity, despite all its /appeal //Often costs many regrets // One sees /everyday examples appear. (literal translation)
However, Perrault uses a second moral that is not altogether a moral, but reassurance. He writes that those who have common sense know that this story happened a long time ago. There are no longer such terrible husbands, nor husbands who asks for the impossible. Even when they are displeased or jealous, etc.
In other words, he tells readers that he has written a fairy tale.
Comments
Criticism of Bluebeard
There has been criticism of Bluebeard. For instance, help is so slow in coming that this fairy tale, nearly fails the “happy ending” rule fairy tales. However, Perrault’s suspense is acceptable in storytelling. It adds piquancy to the tale. In seventeenth-century France, one could not mix comedy and tragedy. Tragedy inspires pity and fear. Featuring a dog or a bird carrying a message would have lessened the degree of suspense, not to mention pity and fear. In more traditional tellings of Bluebeard, the heroine “insists on donning bridal clothes, and they prolong the possibility of rescue by recounting each and every item of clothing.”[v]
As mentioned above, curiosity is not a factor in more traditional tellings of Bluebeard.
Bruno Bettelheim[vi]situates Bluebeard in the animal-groom cycle (Aarne-Thompson), except that our heroine marries the animal before a curse is lifted that transforms him into a kind and beautiful person, which is usually the case in fairy tales. In Beauty and the Beast, Beauty learns to love Beast as Beast is, which lifts the curse. She marries a beautiful man, the appropriate ending in a fairy tale.
Classification
Bluebeard is an ATU 312 or ATU 312A type, but it is related to the Brother’s Grimm’s Fitcher’s Bird(number or KHM 46, Grimm),Aarne-Thompson-Uther type 311, and theRobber Bridegroom(KHN 40, Grimm),Aarne-Thompson-Uthertype 955.Marienkind(KHM 3) is ATU 710. So it seems that Professor Alishman’s above-mentioned list could include Marienkind, Fitcher’s Bird and the Robber Bridegroom, depending on his criteria for selection. Margaret Atwood is the author of The Robber Bride (1993) and Angela Carter, the author of The Bloody Chamber(1979). It would appear this story therefore combines many ATU types. Moreover, this tale and its variants have been told many times.
The indelible stain seems a particularly important motif. I have mentioned the Bible. Curiosity leads to the original sin, called stain in French: la tache. But it also reminds us of the spot on Lady Macbeth’s hand. It will not wash away: ”Out, damn’d spot! out, I say!”(Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 1, line 35). Lady Macbeth has killed and the stainon her hand is as permanent as the original sin. She must atone. In this regard, Bluebeardis reminiscent ofWilliam Shakespeare‘s Macbeth. But we are reading a fairy tale. The genre itself demands a happy ending as do comic texts. However, what we call motifs could be instances ofintertextuality, which might be the case with a comparison between the indelible stain, a motif, and the original sin, not a motif but, perhaps, intertextualité.
The indelible stain motif also appears in Le Roman de Perceforest, a medieval narrative usually associated with SleepingBeauty. Blanchette’s fairy godmother has asked her not to touch Lyonnel. But she does, briefly and accidentally. The finger that has touched Lyonnel turns black.
In the Brother’s Grimm’sMarienkind,Marienkind opens the thirteenth door, or forbidden door. It seems the number thirteen has long been an unlucky number, but the more important element, the motif, is that of the telltale stain.
Conclusion
Let it be short: ”All’s well that ends well.” Tout est bien qui finit bien.
______________________________
[i] The AT-number system was updated and expanded in 2004, the yearHans-Jörg Uther published his Types of International Folktales: A Classification and Bibliography.[ii] Maria Tatar in Jack Zipes, editor, The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2000).[iii]Gilbert Rouger, editor. Les Contes de Perrault (Paris: Editions Garnier, 1967).[iv]Loc. cit.The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales.[v]Loc. cit. The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales.[vi] The Uses of Enchantment (New York: Vintage Books Edition, 1989 [1975, 1976]), p. 182.Franz Schubert (31 January 1797 – 19 November 1828; aged 31)Piano Sonata in B Flat Major, D. 960Alfred Brendel, KBE(born 5 January 1931,Wiesenberg)
Executions of the Third of May, by Francisco Goya, 1814
El Sueño de la razón produce monstruos, by Francisco Goya
Self-entitlement
Allow me a few more comments on “entitlement” or “self-entitlement,” a state of mind that currently numbs reason among members oftheNational Rifle Association. As I have written before, the spirit ofthe Second Amendmentis to protect theAmerican people, which it no longer does despite the presence of a “well regulated [sic] militia.” Consequently, by virtue of the Second Amendment itself, one cannot allow the bearing of firearms by civilians as it now endangers “the security of a free state.” Matters have turned around.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”(The Second Amendment)
Citizens all over the world are entitled to safety. In other words, they have “rights.” However, entitlement, when carried too far, may and does stand in the way of reason. In fact, at a certain point, self-entitlement constitutes a mental disorder. Let me quote Wikipedia again:
“In clinical psychology and psychiatry, an unrealistic,exaggerated, or rigidly held sense of entitlement may be considered a symptom ofnarcissistic personality disorder, seen in those who ‘because of early frustrations…arrogate to themselves the right to demand lifelong reimbursement from fate.’” (Entitlement)
The initial purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure “the security of a free state,” the “free state” lacking a “well regulated militia.” If members of the National Rifle Association cannot see that theUnited States now possesses “a well regulated militia,” i.e. the necessary law-enforcement agencies, and that the bearing of arms currently threatens “the security of a free state,” they and their supporters have lost the ability to use “reason” and imperil “the security of a free state.” Thousands of Americans die from gun violence every year, including children, thereby making it obvious that people who bear arms threaten the safety of a “free state.” If Americans did not bear arms, no American could shoot another American and potential killers could not purchase the powerful firearms that enable them to shoot innocent schoolchildren.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, thatall men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certainunalienable Rights, that among these areLife, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…”
There may be flaws in theUnited States Declaration of Independence, but it would be my conviction that “Life, Liberty and the pursuit ofHappiness,” are “unalienable Rights.” Consequently, members of the National Rifle Association are at odds with the United States Declaration of Independence. Because of guns, lives are lost. If I were a parent living in the United States, I would fear letting my children attend school. Moreover, those parents who have lost children to a gunman, the parents of Newtown, grieve profoundly and will probably do so until they reach the end of their own journey on earth.
In short, given that they live in defiance of the Social contract, members of the National Rifle Association cannot be considered fully fledged citizens, no more than the rich people who deposit their money in offshore accounts. Such people also threaten the concept of nationhood. In fact, it could well be that Americans who once owned slaves and now refuse to pay their fair share of taxes feel they are entitled to a measure of compensation for a “right” they have lost. Yet, slavery is not consistent with the declaration of independence which holds as “truths” that “Life, Liberty [my bold letters] and the pursuit of Happiness” are “unalienable Rights.” Slavery was an aberration.
A Quotation from the Boston Globe
May I quote the first paragraph of an article by Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby entitled:‘All men are created equal’ is not hypocrisy but visionand published on 4 July 2010 (please click on the title to read the entire article).
‘HOW IS it,’’ the great English man of letters Samuel Johnson [my link] taunted Americans 235 years ago, “that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?’’ His fellow Englishman Thomas Day [my link] remarked in 1776 with equal scorn: “If there be an object truly ridiculous in nature it is an American patriot signing resolutions of independency with the one hand and with the other brandishing a whip over his affrighted slaves.’’
The Spirit and the Letter of the Second Amendment
We oweMontesquieu(18 January 1689 – 10 February 1755), a political thinker, as were Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-JacquesRousseau, the useful distinction between the spirit and the letter of the law. Within bounds, the letter of the law does not always reflect faithfully the spirit of the law. Yet, the letter of the law cannot contradict the spirit of the law in its totality. That would be a mockery of justice.
In my opinion, worded in full, the Second Amendment should state that “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, [in the absence of a well regulated militia] the [current] right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That would be its spirit. Statements need not always be worded in full because parts are inferred (seeinference)and, therefore, understood.
There is currently in the United States a well-regulated militia.
Conclusion
I will conclude by writing that certain goals remain, such goals as “the security of a free state.” However, the means can change. Before the invention of airplanes, a New Yorker’s goal may have been to go to Paris, but his means of getting there was to board atrans-Atlanticor Ocean liner.
Similarly, a former means of ensuring the safety of citizens, the use of firearms by civilians, has changed. Given that the United States now has “a well regulated militia” and because the former right to bear arms currently threatens the “security of a free state,” bearing arms should be controlled to the fullest extent. At the moment, the goal, i.e. the “security of a free state,” or its safety, has rendered null and void the former “right” to “bear arms,” firearms threatening the “security of a free state.” The means, bearing arms, must therefore be changed, and, as I wrote above, it must be changed by virtue of the Second Amendment itself: “the security of a free state.”
The term “Battle of the Atlantic” was coined by Sir Winston Churchill in February 1941 who described it as the “longest, largest, and most complex” in naval battle in history. It lasted six years. (See Battle of the Atlantic, Wikipedia)
The Normandy Landings
To narrow the field, we will remember D-Day, or Operation Overlord, the Normandy landings which took place 69 years ago on 6 June 1944. The Normandy landings may well be the largest military operation in history and it was an operation that could not fail.
Adolf Hitler (20 April 1889 – 30 April 1945) had invaded Europe, thereby acquiring Lebensraum(living space). He was eliminating Jews and Romani as well as persons he deemed racially inferior and mentally deficient. He was also sending to death camps persons he considered sexual deviants. The master race was the Aryan race. However, the Aryan master race theory was not Hitler’s idea. That’s another story.[i]
Growth of Nazism
It has often been claimed that the growth of Nazism could have been avoided had the Germans not been severely penalized under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles signed at the end of World War I (28 June1919). Article 231, the “war guilt clause,” imposed onerous and humiliating reparations on the German people. That mistake was not repeated at the conclusion of World War II. The United States put into place the Marshall Plan, or European Recovery Program, ERP. It could be that the United States wanted to prevent the spread of communism (see Marshall Plan, Wikipedia). Be that as it may, Europe was rebuilt.
Opposition within Germany
There was opposition to the Führer within Germany, both before and during World War II. By the late 1930s, there were in fact many opponents of the régime, but it was too late. If discovered, they were killed. By then, they were Hitler’s hostages and Hitler was a dictator. (See Führerprinzip, Wikipedia). During the war years, die Weiße Rose, the White Rose, was a German resistance movement and there were, moreover, attempts to assassinate Hitler. (See Assassination Attempts on Adolf Hitler, Wikipedia.)
Particularly notorious is the disastrous 20 July plot (1944). A bomb was left by Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg (15 November 1907 – 21 July 1944) in a room where Hitler was to hold a meeting. The bomb was moved slightly and, although it detonated, Hitler was not injured. Stauffenberg was executed on 21 July, a day after the failed bombing. However, according to Wikipedia (20 July plot), 4,980 were executed as a result of this failed assassination.
Among members of the White Rose resistance who were caught, most were executed at Stadelheim Prison, Munich, in 1943, but Hans Conrad Leipelt was beheaded on 29 January 1945.
Sympathizers outside Germany
Moreover, there were sympathizers outside Germany. Unity Mitford (8 August 1914 – 28 May 1948) was among the people who fell for Nazism. Her story is mysterious. She apparently shot herself in the head and was returned to her family by Hitler who had paid the hospital bills. She may also have given birth to Hitler’s child. That, we may never know. But we know that there were Nazi sympathizers in Britain.
Naivety: The Right Honourable Neville Chamberlain FRC
There may have been naivety in the case of Neville Chamberlain (18 March 1869 – 9 November 1940), the First Minister of the United Kingdom. It may have been difficult for him to believe that Hitler was a monster. According to Wikipedia, Chamberlain “is best known for his appeasement foreign policy.” He signed the Munich Agreement in 1938, “conceding the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany.” However, when Hitler invaded Poland, on 3 September 1939, Britain, with Chamberlain as First Minister of the United Kingdom, declared war on Germany. Chamberlain “led Britain through the first eight months of the Second World War.” (See Neville Chamberlain, Wikipedia.)
The Vichy Government
As well, there were collaborateurs in France. Philippe Pétain (24 April 1856 – 23 July 1951), a hero of World War I and a marshall of France, made peace with Germany and became Chief of State in the Vichy government. He was 84 at the time. After the war, Pétain was condemned to death but spared the ignominy of an execution by Charles de Gaulle (22 November 1890 – 9 November 1970) who was President of the Provisional Government of the French Republic from 1944 until 1946. De Gaulle had been a protégé of Pétain.
Operation Overlord
We will now go directly to Operation Overlord (see Battle of the Atlantic, Wikipedia), an attempt to liberate Europe which, as I noted above, could not fail. Operation Overlord was led mostly by Eisenhower (US) and Montgomery (UK) and required deception on the part of the Allied forces. The Nazis never suspected the Allied forces would enter Europe through Normandy. Calais was the area they were protecting. Let me use numbers to describe Operation Overlord. This military operation necessitated:
a 12,000-plane airborne assault (strategic bombing) which preceded an
“[o]n 6 June 1944, after almost a year of special assault and combined operations training, the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division (Maj-Gen R.O.D. Keller) and the 2nd Canadian Armoured Brigade (Brig R.A. Wyman) were part of the Allied forces which attacked the Normandy coast of France in Operation Overlord. Landing on “Juno” Beach, between Vaux and St Aubin-sur-Mer, the Canadians penetrated about 9 km inland by the end of D-Day. Beating back enemy counterattacks during the next several days, the Canadians continued to thrust inland against growing opposition, aided by highly effective tactical air support. Supported by British formations on either flank, a lodgement area was gained and additional formations reinforced the assault forces. In the Canadian sector the 2nd Canadian Infantry Division (Major-General C. FOULKES) and 4th Canadian Armoured Division (Major-General G. Kitching) arrived to form the Second Canadian Corps under Lieutenant-General G.G. SIMONDS. With these and additional forces, the First Canadian Army (Lieutenant-General H.D.G. CRERAR) took over command of the eastern part of the Allied front.”
I lived in Normandy and visited all the beaches and cemeteries: little white crosses, almost as far as the eye could see. There were far too many deaths and there was destruction. We lived near Coutances. The stained glass windows of its Gothic cathedral had melted. Saint-Lô was almost totally destroyed and so was Caen.
One of my uncles survived D-Day. He cannot understand how and why he survived. On his return to Canada, he married and settled into one of the houses built for veterans by the Canadian government. Sixty-nine years after D-Day, my uncle still lives in his veteran’s house. They were little houses, but lovely.
This morning, I found more than twenty-five thousand ads in my WordPress “comments.” This is not a problem I can solve alone. At the moment, I receive approximately twenty-five thousand ads every day.
I featured Suzor-Coté a few days ago. So I am using his sketch of “The Death of Montcalm.” Montcalm was defeated by James Wolfe at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. James Wolfe also died. He was 32 and Montcalm, 47.
The Conquest
Yesterday, I had a conversation with an educated French Canadian. It was an eye-opener. This gentleman is convinced that the arrival in Quebec of immigrants with multicultural backgrounds will ultimately lead to the disappearance of the French milieu in Quebec. Moreover, he is certain that Nouvelle-France was conquered, which negates the choice the French made in 1763, the year the Treaty of Paris was signed.
He emphasized that Britain had long wanted to add Nouvelle-France to its colonies, forgetting, for instance, that when Pierre-Esprit Radisson and his brother-in-law, Médard des Groseillers, known as “Radishes and Gooseberries,” discovered the Hudson Bay and returned to Canada with a flotilla of a hundred canoes filled with pelts, they were treated as coureurs de bois rather than explorers. Unlike coureurs de bois, voyageurs were hired and had a license to travel and fetch fur west of what is now Quebec.
Because the fur he had brought to Montreal was confiscated, Radisson went to England and obtained the support of Prince Rupert of the Rhine, KG, PC, FRS (17 December 1619 – 29 November 1682). Prince Rupert financed an expedition to the current Hudson Bay. In 1668-1669, the Nonsuch sailed across the Atlantic. Radisson was right. Large boats could travel to the inner part of Canada, from the North. This way fur traders would not need canoes as much as they had to previously. Yet, let it be known that canoes manned by nimble voyageurscontinued to do the better job of gathering precious pelts.
The fact remains, however, that when the Hudson’s Bay Company was founded, in 1670, Britain acquired Rupert’s Land. It was a vast chunk of North America which the French had an opportunity of acquiring, except that Louis XIV was building a castle at Versailles, which French peasants would have to pay for.
Rupert’s Land
At the conclusion of the Seven Years’ War, France’s financial circumstances were strained. In October 1776, Louis XVI appointed Swiss-born Jacques Necker director-general of the finances, but despite a degree of success, Necker could not prevent the French Revolution. In other words, in 1673, not only had France lost battles, but it was poor. Nouvelle-France being a financial burden, France chose to keep sugar rich Martinique and Guadeloupe.
Of course, Britain wanted to appropriate Nouvelle-France, i.e. Canada and Acadie, but France itself could not fight back. It seems that, in the end, the more prosperous nation won. At one point, France owned nearly two-thirds of North-America. It lost New France in 1763 and, in 1803, it sold Louisiana. Napoleon (15 August 1769 – 5 May 1821) needed money.
Battles do play an important role in history but, occasionally, there is a “bottom line.” New France fell to Britain, but in this particular demise, only a richer France could have kept New France. The puzzling element in the Treaty of Paris is Britain’s willingness not to take away from its new French-speaking subjects their farms, their seigneuries and their religion. Moreover, at the time of the French Revolution, Britain made it possible for émigrés priests to move to Quebec where they would not be idle and that many became educators.
I will conclude by expressing doubts as to the possibility of teaching their true history to those Québécois who have chosen to think that New France was conquered, that there were no ‘patriots’ killed in Toronto (see Upper Canada Rebellion), and that Canada is not an officially bilingual country promoting the use of French.
I would also like to stress that if French-speaking Quebecers want to keep their language, they should make it their personal duty to do so. Speaking French as well as possible begins at home. As for the Quebec Government, it would be my opinion that, with respect to the survival and growth of French, it ought to make it its main mission to encourage Québécois to speak and write their language more correctly. It would give itself a positive and attainable goal. Québécois should feel motivated to perfect their French.
At any rate, there was no “conquest” of New France. France had lost battles, but the truth remains that it chose to part with New France because it was not bringing in a profit.
I wish to apologize for not reading your posts as quickly as I used to. The reason is one you will understand. It seems all kinds of businesses have found a way of turning my comments into commercial advertisements. They write long texts.
Let me use numbers to describe this new form of terrorism perpetrated on innocent bloggers. Last week, I erased 165,000 comments and changed the settings on my computer so no comment could enter. It didn’t help. Yesterday, I deleted about 30,000 ads, but there are several thousand ads waiting to be deleted.
This is ridiculous. These ads clog up my computer and slow it down. In fact, I can no longer access all of my WordPress applications.
I have been spending entire days deleting ads. Even the bulk action function is slow. I apologize for using settings that isolate me, but until these individuals stop clogging my computer, I have to try to protect myself. This problem started a few weeks ago, perhaps a month.
