| Webmaster |
France, Versailles, etc.
Our great philatelist Fred Hansson writes: "I am just back from Sweden. A few years ago you sent me a large Swedish stamp that featured a lion, angels and other vivid orientations. Well, I saw the original in Dronttningholms Slott. It's on the ceiling of that palace dating to Sweden's imperial age. The infant is the future ruler with Mars helping him to be strong, Faith and Virtue showing the way and the Swedish lion as the symbol of state. This huge painting is in one of the reception rooms of Queen Hedvig Eleonora, letting visitors know where her young son place is in this world.
Drottningholms Slott: Just 15km (nine miles) west of central Stockholm, Drottningholms Slott (Drottningholm Palace), Flottsforvaltining (tel: (08) 402 6280; website: www.royalcourt.se), is one of the most magnificent legacies of Sweden’s imperial age, justly compared to Louis XIV’s Versailles. Begun by the great Swedish Baroque architects, Nicodemus Tessin the Elder and Younger, in 1662, for the dowager queen, Hedvig Eleonora, Drottningholm is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is surrounded by equally splendid gardens containing the delightful Rococo Chinese Pavilion"
RH: I visited Drottingholms Slott a few years ago, but for me it is an expression of the tragedy of history. Originally I was a professor of French culture, but for me even la grande nation" had a fatal flaw: fashion, "le dernier cri". Versailles and Louis XIV's "L'état, c'est moi" produced Versailles, while the people lived in misery. Unfortunately, the ideal of absolute monarchy and grand palaces imitating Versailles spread throughout Europe. It was the latest fashion. The most ostentatious imitations of Versailles are Germany's Sans Souci (with its silly French name) and the palaces of St. Petersburg, but even lesser heads of state built them. There is one in Latvia's Riga. Despising it as a symbol of the old order, the Communists used it for storage, but it is now being restored. The Hegelian reaction to monarchy was revolution, beginning with the American Revolution. The 1763 resolution in the House of Commons condemning the increase in the power of George III showed the way the winds of democracy were blowing. The American Revolution was the implementation of that resolution. Jefferson was confused. On the one had, he was infatuated with the fashionable France of absolute ancien régime, but he began talking about spilling the blood of patriots after the outbreak of the horrible French Revolution, for which Louis XIV was responsible.
Sweden itself was caught up in this infernal cycle. Voltaire wrote a critical history of the reign of Charles XII, whose megalomania led to disaster, although some Swedish nationalists still revere him. A period of constitutional reform and limited monarchy led to a counter revolution in 1772. After the turmoil of the French Revolution, Jean Baptiste Bernadotte, one of Napoleon's marshals, was chosen by parliament as monarch, and from him comes the present symbolic Swedish monarchy. Sweden emerged from the Napoleonic wars greatly impoverished.
One would think that after all this, the infatuation with things French would disappear, but it was not so. The "Napoleonic legend" was a potent force throughout the nineteenth century, even in the US. Most people cannot remember the France of my youth. Paris was the center of world fashion, and from it emerged a series of silly ladies' fashions. Everywhere women wanted to have the latest Parisian fashion. One harmless example of this was that the wife or Theodore Roosevelt redecorated the White House in the French art nouveau style-
The mania of the French for fashions led to a series of -isms, most of them silly. One group of artists said nature was made up of cubes, hence cubism, while another stressed dots, hence the pointillisme. Picasso, who was a fairly good artist in his youth, got caught up in this and began producing his grotesque paintings, which it is sacrilege to criticize. Other Spanish artists and writers followed these crazes, which became fashionable in Spain. Worse still, instead of reforming the monarchy, the Republicans tried to create a French-style of republic, which led to chaos and the Civil War.
That world has gone. Despite hankerings for the glories of Louis XIV and Napoleon,
France is now just another country, and the world is no longer infatuated with
French fashions. Germany is trying to be just another normal country, which
should be the aspiration of all countries. The world of Drottningsholmrs Slott
has gone forever, and Sweden is just another normal country.. I wish Fred would
give us his impressions of it. We welcome him back. In line with our learning
history project, it would be interesting to see what Swedish history textbooks
have about past glories. Sic transit gloria mundi.
Christopher Jones answers my criticism of Versailles and the palaces built in
imitation of it: ªInteresting how this "normal" little country
managed to infuriate the Bush administration over the Iraq war and now the deployment
of NATO forces in Iraq. France is not just another country. It has played and
continues to play a very important and necessary role in the world: as the political
motor for the EU and a necessary but positive critic of the US. Considering
the current lamentable state of fashions, arts and films, which thanks to US
imperialism, have swiftly disintegrated into a semi-Morlock state, a little
French influence would do us all some good. If you think pierced navels, dirty
jeans, tattoos and t-shirts are "normal" US fashions, count me out.
I will stick with Chanel and Dior. If you've forgotten, have a good look at
the pictures of -- say for example, Audrey Hepburn. Remember her? Those were
the days when the US had some interest in fashion too. In the end, Americans
are jealous of the French because they cultivated beauty for itself. Is Paris,
just an "ordinary" city like Milwaukee? Are France's treasures in
art, architecture worthless? Is its natural magnificence comparable to the burnt
hills of the San Fernando valley? More and more, I feel that the French have
a good sense for life itself and the proof is that Germans are adopting their
ways (they were always fascinated by them.) I sincerely hope that the French
do NOT become a "normal" country and start eating GM junk food. As
for its political leaders, could the US have produced a political leader with
the imagination of General de Gaulle? Nope. BTW, I would probably put him as
the most amazing and successful superstatesman of the 20th century -- light
years in advance of all US presidents, British PMs and the rest of those who
"manage" the state instead of building from nothing. Note: Versailles
was splendid isolation but what is Washington DC? How many lament the "Out
of touch syndrome" of those who live inside the Beltway?"
RH: Christopher misrepresents my `position. In political terms France is just
another country, and it must get rid of its folies de grandeur, from which de
Gaulle suffered. My comments had nothing to do with current American dislike
of France. I understand those Frenchmen who think that the US suffers from folies
de grandeur. As for pop culture and slobs, I have long been vocal in my denunciation
of them. I deem the downtown of all modern large cities a fall from grace after
the beauty of older cities like Paris or Oxford, but a city should be judged
by the quality of the habitats of ordinary people, and there even the San Fernando
Valley is preferable to sous les toits de Paris. Life in Palo Alto /Stanford
is far better than life in Parts, where I spent many years.
Randy Black answers Christopher Jones' eulogy of de Gaulle as a superstatesman:
"I can understand Mr. Jones’ adoration of Charles de Gaulle. He was
an amazing man. But the most successful super statesman of the 20th century
might be an overstatement. Let’s look at what he did as a French statesman.
Following WWII, he entered politics. After achieving no success in transforming
the French political scene in 1947, he quit. Following the French failures in
Indochina and the constitutional crisis in Algeria, he was made premier and
given emergency powers in 1958. Thus, he rewrote the French constitution and
was elected President with 78% of the vote in 1958. Thus, as one of the founding
members of the EEC, he was able to deny British entry into the EEC. (The mark
of a great statesman?)
During this period he was forced to suppress riots by French national groups
in Algeria when he argued that Algeria should be abandoned. He granted Algeria
independence in 1962. Later in 1962, he again rewrote the French constitution
so that he might be directly elected by the people. When the National Assembly
censured him, de Gaulle dissolved the body and held new elections. His prime
minister resigned in protest of de Gaulle’s position on Algeria. De Gaulle
was, nevertheless, reelected. By 1965 de Gaulle was again elected premier, but
only after a run off. Under his leadership and that administration, France suffered
a severe economic recession. He continued to deny Britain entry into the EEC,
he condemned the US over Vietnam (after the French were forced to surrender),
condemned Israel over the Six Day War and withdrew France from NATO. Is this
the mark of a great statesman?
On an official visit to Canada in 1967 to help the country celebrate 100 yeas
of nationhood, de Gaulle insulted the entire Anglophone world when, in Montreal,
before 100,000 Quebecers, he said, “Vive le Quebec Libre!” This
blunder was a monumental one, and clearly interference in to another country’s
private affairs. The Prime Minister of Canada cancelled the rest of de Gaulle’s
visit and ordered him to leave Canada. Another example of a great, successful
statesman?
By 1968, France suffered nationwide demonstrations and labor strikes. De Gaulle
was forced to accept many reforms demanded by the proletariat. But he again
dissolved parliament and held new elections instead. He was reelected in 1968
after offered the specter of a Communist revolution within France. Sound familiar?
De Gaulle was finally forced to quit in 1969 after trying once again to transform
the Senate into nothing more than an advisory body. Is this the mark of, as
Mr. Jones claims, the most amazing and successful statesman of the 20th century?
I will leave it to our fellow WAISers to decide. Personally, I believe that
de Gaulle was a great, inspirational leader in exile during WWII. He managed
France from the devastation of WWII into a modern age via his charisma, style
and manner. That’s about it, though. Along the way, he managed to divorce
France from NATO, Canada, the British, Israel. Whom have I forgotten?"
| Webmaster |