Books of the Day
More of the Truth About France
Farewell, France I By Oscar Paul. (Gollancz. 6s.) THERE is good strong broth in the cauldron of French politics which M. Bois, former editor of the Petit Parisien, sets before us. But there is also far too much steam. Unfortunately, it is no part of a translator's duty to blow it away, but the book needed condensing—and an index. We should then have been spared such passages as this :
On the staff of the Petit Parisien there was one man, its editor, who personified the struggle against Germany, the battle against Hitlerism and staunch alliance with England. But he was alone, or almost alone. How was he to be struck down? Attempts were made, but they were not to succeed. It would take the collapse of Bordeaux to get the better of him.
As editor of a big daily, M. Bois was in an excellent position to feel, if not to judge with complete knowledge of the facts, what was going on around him. He is extremely intuitive, subjective and personal—an emotional historian. He is a sincere friend of this country—even to the point of composing blank verse to it. Like many others, M. Bois believes that : " Since 1918, France allowed herself to descend a slope of moral decadence. . . . The French political system . . . was corrupted." The sense of patriotism, he continues, was lost and there was an indecent dis- play of relief after Munich, excusable only on the ground of unpreparedness. In a chapter headed "The two Georges Bonnets," the author displays keen insight into this political schizophrenic's make-up. Foxy, frustrated, blear-eyed, he never seemed sure of himself. " Several times he has apparently been well on the road towards a great career. Each time a mere nothing has sent him spinning down the ladder." There is also an interesting talk between the author and this furtive man—" the victim of his character." (One might add, perhaps, " and of his appearance.") M. Bois regards him as the embodiment of the weakness which led to the war. The chapter on M. Daladier is less revealing on the psychological side as regards its principal subject, but later on we are shown how his riding accident, just a year ago, led relentlessly to his eventual lack of grip and failure. He was riding alone when it happened, M. Bois points out, but the censor allowed no reference to the circumstances. The author's account of the unsuccessful attempt to " balance " M. Herriot by Marshal Detain—defeated by MM. Bonnet, Laval and Pietri, is interesting at a moment when the Marshal has again been in touch with the Speaker of the Chamber.
M. Reynaud's career and difficulties are closely analysed. Candidates for office teemed in a squabbling mass in which political calculations outweighed patriotism. His declaration of policy, M. Bois reveals, was drawn up by Colonel de Gaulle, who had been summoned to Paris at the time when Reynaud had hopes of taking over the Ministry of War. One minister described it as " good Reynaud stuff."
Madame de Portes (née Rebuffet) has a chapter to herself as one of " Reynaud's Evil Geniuses." The other—they were inti- mates—was Paul Baudouin, and he seems in the end to have dominated Reynaud through her, wearing him down until he could bear no more and, having lost his courage, abandoned the fight. But not before he had had hard brushes with M. Daladier about General Gamelin, carried his point, called in Marshal Petain and General Weygand, become Minister of War and made some effective appeals to the Parliament and country. M. Leger's dismissal is, in the author's opinion, one of the first mile-posts on the downward path. Contrived by M. Baudouin and Madame de Fortes, it was " the first breach in the Franco-British alliance." Mr. Churchill " discreetly inquired what it meant." After that Madame de Portes came more into the open. The talk of " regeneration through defeat " began. M. Laval reappeared on the scene, M. Daladier was " squeezed out " and General Weygand began to weaken. All this portion of the book is of great interest and well documented. For some statements M. Bois must bear his own responsibility. He says, for instance, that Madame de Portes prevented General de Gaulle from being made Minister of War—much as she had caused the dismissal of the gifted and prudent M. Palewski, Chef de Cabinet to M. Reynaud, some time before.
Mr. Churchill's flying visit to Tours, during which Madame de Portes lurked in a courtyard from which an officer expelled her " for the dignity of France," is dramatically and, I believe, accurately described. At that time I was, like M. Bois, in Tours, and later in Bordeaux, though he stayed a day or two longer than the rest of us. On am account his final chapters are of great value because other accounts of the tragic days of capitulation have been either imaginative or written by Frenchmen who went
much
on to Vichy and would not tell the whole truth. The Foreign Office of course, has the full story in its archives. When released, it will be fuller than that of M. Bois, but not, I imagine, different in essentials.
Criticisms of France which M. Bois may properly make because he knows and loves his country come less well from a Central European doctrinaire refugee, despite a thorough acquaintance with those sections of French political life where his doctrines find acceptance. Herr Paul would not care to be mentioned in the same breath as the &firmer, yet his wholesale condemnation of almost every aspect of French life is very reminiscent of the special supplement of that sheet i—ued last October for the benefit of German troops stationed in Paris. Both breathe an inherited or acquired Teuton superiority to present-day Latin civilisation. And both are- superficial. Herr Paul should not have boasted (p. 75) that he had " no access to bourgeois society." Universal access is needed before sweeping verdicts are pronounced. One wonders, too, how much French he knows. "7e ne marche pas " does not mean " I won't go"; an "hotel" is not a nobleman's house (Herr Paul does not like noblemen) but a " detached " town house. Herr Paul's accounts of the great events of last year are practically all hearsay. But where French Socialists are concerned, he is an authority.
BERNARD FOLEY.
Previous page
