Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Land of the Irish
Excellent article; thanks for posting.

L'Anglaise et le Duc is one of the few movies I own; I highly recommend it. Here's an article from 2001 describing the controversy referred to above.

news telegraph

 telegraph.co.uk
 News home

Breaking news

Business news

Crossword Society

Factfiles

Law reports



Obituaries

Opinion

Picture galleries

Text alerts

Weather

Week at a glance

Your view

menu spacer
About us

Contact us

An 'Englishwoman' in Paris sparks a revolution among cinema audiences
By Julian Coman in Paris
(Filed: 16/09/2001)

A DAMNING film portrait of the French Revolution has scandalised audiences more used to tales of Jacobin heroism than images of drunk, stupid and sadistic peasants waving heads on spikes.

The film, released last week and entitled, inaccurately, L'Anglaise et le Duc (The Englishwoman and the Duke), is directed by one of France's best-loved film-makers, Eric Rohmer.

Based on the testimony of Grace Elliot, a young Scottish countess living in Paris during the Terror, it presents a trenchant view of the Revolution as nasty, bloody and anarchic. Until last week, Republican France had never seen anything like it.

As indignant Parisians watched sans-culottes (revolutionary zealots) commit a series of unspeakable atrocities on screen, and bridled at the royalist sympathies of Miss Elliot, film critics began to launch their own revolt.

Within the space of a week, Mr Rohmer's film has been variously described as "revisionist", "heretical", "neo-monarchist" and "counter-revolutionary".

Mr Rohmer has previously been the darling of the French cinema-going public, following successes such as Claire's Knee and The Green Ray. Yet his current unpopularity cannot have surprised him.

In highlighting the horrified reactions of an Anglo-Saxon monarchist as she watches the bloodthirsty Paris mob, Mr Rohmer has thumbed a nose at previous tub-thumping French blockbusters.

Films such as Jean Renoir's classic, La Marseillaise, have depicted the Revolution as a triumph of Jacobin courage over aristocratic arrogance. In French schools, the crimes of the Terror are glossed over as a necessary if unfortunate stage in the birth of the Republic.

Seen through the eyes of Miss Elliot and Mr Rohmer, however, the Jacobins are anything but a collection of virtuous freedom-fighters. Most revolutionaries are portrayed as vicious and sadistic; the majority are stupid, and nearly all are drunk.

Innocents are arrested and executed on a whim; homes are looted and the streets of Paris witness an unceasing parade of heads on spikes.

As Miss Elliot travels through central Paris, she is confronted by an alcohol-fuelled Jacobin who forces the bloody head of an aristocratic friend through the windows of her carriage. Later she weeps as she hears the mob howl with delight at the execution of the king.

In her diary, which forms the basis of the film's script, she remembers the day as "the most horribly sad that I have ever lived. The clouds themselves seemed to be in mourning".

She also charts the decline and fall of her one-time lover, the Duc D'Orleans, the cousin of the king, who voted for his death but then followed him to the scaffold.

Sophie Guichard, film critic for France Soir, said: "How can one not be shocked by this portrait of the typical revolutionary? How can one forget that this period also gave birth to the Declaration of the Rights of Man, from which we still benefit? The film lacks all balance."

Mr Rohmer is unapologetic. Claiming that L'Anglaise et le Duc "could have been an awful lot more violent", the director said: "I am showing mass murderers, the pits of society, people who killed for pleasure and under the influence of alcohol. I think Grace Elliot was mostly right about the Revolution - it was the end of a world, of a refined civilisation."

In Paris, cinema audiences are split between royalists and republicans. Sophie Boutin, a teacher, said: "This is a film made by an intellectual who is a Catholic and in all probability a monarchist. It's just a polemic against 1789."

But Jacques Ferney, a 24-year-old language student, disagreed. "It was about time someone looked at the Revolution from a different perspective," he said.

"As we grow up, there is so much pompous rubbish talked in school about how liberty, equality and fraternity arrived in 1789, but no one bothers to remember all the innocent people who were butchered. I think it's a good film."

External links
L' Anglaise et le Duc - tf1.fr [in French]

The Englishwoman and the Duke - Upcoming movies.com

Eric Rohmer - Foreign films.com


18 posted on 01/01/2005 8:08:07 AM PST by royalcello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: royalcello
Sophie Guichard, film critic for France Soir, said: "How can one not be shocked by this portrait of the typical revolutionary? How can one forget that this period also gave birth to the Declaration of the Rights of Man, from which we still benefit? The film lacks all balance."

From Operation Parracide: Sade, Robespierre & the French Revolution (E. von Kuehnelt-Leddihn):

ANYTHING POSITIVE?

Did the French Revolution leave anything positive to posterity? Only the metric system, which admittedly grew out of the democratic predilection for eternal measuring and counting. What about then the Declaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen? It was a purely anthropocentric document, a typically declamatory product of the first Enlightenment, which was conceived in 1789 and finally engrafted into the constitution of the Sadist-Republic in 1793. In the schoolbooks one reads about the period of the terror, "Le Terreur était terrible mais grande!" Even with all that a good number of moderates came under the blade too. Historically they had it coming because they hadn't considered what happened when one destroyed the old order. Charlotte Corday d'Armont, an enthusiastic Girondist, murdered the bloodthirsty Marat and was executed; Andre de Chenier, the great liberal lyric poet, died on the scaffold; the Marquis de Condorcet, chief ideologue of the "moderates," committed suicide in order to escape the chére mère. Madame Roland de la Planière, also a Girondist, exclaimed from where she was to be executed, "Oh liberty, what crimes are committed in your name. (Metternich on the other hand comments in the face of such flourishing "fraternity" that if he had a brother he would now just as soon call him a cousin.) Especially tragic was the fate of Chrétien de Malesherbes, a highly enlightened Liberal who remained true to the king. He defended Louis XVI and had to stand by and watch as his daughter, his son-in-law, and his grandchildren were decapitated before the guillotine brought an end to his own despair.

One shouldn't forget that much of what may appear positive to us today - liberality, intellectuality, humanitarianism - had all been already brought to us by the liberal, courtly absolutism, while the French Revolution which used all these words in reality did nothing more than brutally extinguish them. One is reminded of the reaction of Caffinhals, who replied to the uproar created by the defenders of Lavoisier, who cried, "You are condemning a great learned man to death," by saying, "The Revolution has no need of learned men." The good man was right; since the French Revolution only quantities, ciphers and numbers, have any value. The speech of the elite is hardly tolerated anymore.

From an intellectual point of view, the French Revolution was a conglomeration of un-thought out but fanatically believed inconsistencies, but it showed clearly, as so many other revolutions have, the true character of the great majority of the Genus Humanum.

In the French Revolution the scum of France succumbed to blood lust and opened the door to evil. In our day of electronic stultification, it's a sure bet that now, 200 hundred years later, this monstrosity will be the focus of orgiastic celebrations. The average man always clings despairingly to cliches. If one takes them away from him, he has to do his own research, his own thinking and deciding and has to begin anew. One can't really expect this sort of elitist behavior from such poor folks. Those whom the gods would destroy, they first rob of their reason.

31 posted on 01/02/2005 9:57:03 AM PST by Unreconstructed Selmerite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson