My teenage American girlfriend

 
The most unexpected letter I ever received in my life landed in my letterbox during the winter of 1983. The first thing that caught my attention was the American stamp on the envelope. Uh?

Inside was a letter in French from a young American girl. Uh?

She was a student in French and asked me how the French did celebrate on the third or fourth of January (that weren't her precise wording of course).

 

Now this happened nearly thirty years ago and I don't precisely remember the details but I eventually found out - and maybe did she explain it in her letter- that her teacher (for some reason I imagine she had a female teacher) asked the students to pick up names randomly (probably in a phone book) and send letters to the French people whose names and adresses they would have found. And I was at the receiving end...

Needless to say I answered the girl, don't remember her name, about the Galettes des rois (that's how I remember it was during the winter) and congratulated her etc.

And I couldn't help thinking that was a brave move by the teacher (and an extremely positive and pedagogical one at that) that I considered at that time, and still do now, so symbolic of what is usually considered the American mindset at its best.

I explain: Here are the notions of  taking risk, being open minded, taking initiative, going outside of one's own little world and, aptly, making contact with people speaking the language the teenagers were learning.

I mean, what where the chances, that all letters would arrive by curious and interested French people who would take the pain to answer? Did all the students receive an answer? Not counting the addresses that weren't valid any more etc. So I imagined the teacher asked the students to write two letters just in case, 'cos it would have been so devastating for one or two of them not to get any letter back from France.

Now, I admit I was impressed by the pedagogical skills of the teacher and I sort of remember I asked the girl to congratulate her for her bright idea, just a bit worried that she may not receive my letter, stuff happens...

And then what happened will you ask? Well, I kept the letter of the girl for some months? Some years? Until I eventually lost trace of it, maybe during the time I spent in London between 1984 and 1985, but at the end of the day I was unable to possibly write her another letter.

That could have been the end of the story but not quite so.

Since I never forgot this episode, in the first months I had a computer (2003) I sent an email to the American association of teachers of French with the vague hope they could locate the teacher (by then, 2003, I think I still had a confused idea the letter was from the East Cost). To no avail alas, I never had any mail back, be it just to inform me they had received my query. Fair to say, twenty years had already elapsed betwen the day I received the winter letter and the day I wrote to the association. I could try again but it's been nearly thirty years now...

Thirty years... sigh... By now Isabelle must be 45, have married and mothered two or three puppies...

Now, Isabelle, is that you calling after me?

Is this supposed to be funny?

Anglo-Saxons songs are covered the world over in about every existing languages, Italian and Japanese films at the heights of their glorious period were distributed all over Europe and America, novels from all countries are translated in many languages from Arabic to Norwegian and from German to Korean and one may consider these exchanges are a positive effect of globalization (although there's nothing new here save the size of the audience market)

This is all fine and dandy but yet, there is a segment of the entertainment industry which has definitively stayed within national borders and it's the stand up comedians' performances.

Not that humor is absolutely confined to each and every national culture, although it certainly is a major factor when it comes to political references or strictly historical facts or characters. 

I've chosen Lenny Bruce because that's the first name I could think of, not being familiar with the American entertainment scene, but certainly hundreds of other comedians could as well have been picked up. Needless to say, I don't understand one single word of what he says and it probably is totally meaningless to a non-American listener.

But there's no doubt that there exist many, many comedians whose performances could be translated and re-enacted by European or Chinese comedians and it would be funny all the same.

Of course there are such stand up comedians in every country and culture in the world whose wit, quirks, repartees, imagination and observation skills could benefit to millions of people in the world, simply it seems this market is totally ignored by the entertainment business and I don't know why.

Above is a video of a French female stand-up comedian's act (she's also an actress, a theater director etc.) which I suppose could perfectly be translated into German or Polish and it would be as efficient in these languages as it is in French.

By the way, how funny is that comedian???

Cervantes and The Tea Party

 

So the Reps and the Dems have finally secured an agreement regarding the debt ceiling before the dead line was reached, like it was evident they would. As a foreigner I lack the basic knowledge of American politics to understand if there's a winner since it looks like that was a confrontation between the two main parties instead of a common effort to salvage the national economy.

Some say the Republicans - under the influence of the Tea Party - have humiliated prez Obama, but what do I know? Yet I read not all Americans are pleased with the show and the outcome that has resulted.

David for example seems to be just half satisfied: 

Thank you Tea Party for your terrorist attack on the world economy, the USA and my retirement.

Now Steve is also rather critical of the Tea Party and specifically of Michelle Bachman:

Michelle Bachman blaming Obama is like an arsonist blaming a fired department for a fire. 

Abigail isn't much more amused when she writes: 

We can thank the Republicans for a lot of this. First, putting the Nation in an economic mess during and after the Bush Administration and lately with their Tea Party compatriots for a public spectacle leading up to the rise in the debt ceiling.

But there are divergent opinions as well...

Me I don't know but it reminds me of the Spanish saying that Cervantes quoted in his Novelas Ejemplares which he published exactly 400 years ago.

"Il en est qui se crèveront les deux yeux pour que leur ennemi s'en crève un"

  

 (Unfortunately I haven't been able to retrieve the quote and yet I read it and wrote it down at the time)

Hu-Ho...

C'était l'affaire de sa carrière. The whole world had to be informed that Cyrus Vance jr was incorruptible and that America is the land where justice is equally distributed with no distinction between the poor and the rich, white and colored immigrant people etc. So he didn't hesitate to treat the rich white man like he was guilty before any investigation, he had him paraded with the infamous perp walk and his first appearance in a court of justice was filmed by TV cameras so that billions of people around the world be convinced what an utterly abject and despicable person Dominique Strauss-Kahn was.

But after some weeks, he had to admit there were some hitches in the case and consequently he gave the world an image of the U.S that again may not be so flattering. American self inflicted wound?

There is this article this morning in the NYT about a resurgence of dormant anti-Americanism in France due to the way Strauss-Kahn's name has been sullied in an unspeakable manner. I for one don't think there's any resurgence of the kind Steven Erlanger mentions. Rather, I'd be more inclined to believe that old clichés and stereotypes have been reinforced once again. But are the French responsible for this sorry state of affair?

Now, to be fair, I have to say that, had this incident happened in France, it would have taken months -if not years- before the French judiciary system would very reluctantly have admitted a minor mistake may possibly have been committed. 

Just last week a man was declared innocent after he spent 9 years in jail because a 13 year old girl falsely accused him of rape.

All French people know of the horrendous Outreau miscarriage of justice which took place some years ago. Like seems to have been the case with Cyrus Vance jr, the French judge swallowed the story made by the female accuser hook, line and sinker.

Stories like these are countless in France and the French are totally disgusted with their judiciary system and its judges, make no mistake about it.

Contrary to how things unfurl in France where judges never ever admit they made any mistake, one must give credit to C. Vance jr that he basically let understood he made some errors in his handling of the case. He certainly would have spared himself the embarrassment had he been less eager to make a publicity stunt for the sake of his career...

But too late. Le mal est fait and his reckless conduct has given another bad rap to the image of the U.S the world over.

Ubuesque!

Speaking of international law...  

"The White House responded Wednesday to a congressional outcry over U.S. military action in Libya, saying that President Obama has the authority to continue the campaign even without authorization from U.S. lawmakers.

In a detailed, 30-page report sent to Congress, the administration argued that the U.S. has a limited, support role in the NATO-led bombing campaign in Libya. Because U.S. forces are not engaged in sustained fighting and there are no troops on the ground there, the White House says the president is within his U.S. constitutional rights to direct the mission on his own." (here)

Obviously not all Americans are satisfied with the rationale of this position...

Of course I have no opinion on the matter yet I cannot fail to notice, once again, how flexible and adaptable law is at the hands of the power holders. Talk of a reliable tool when it comes to international relations!

I dare not imagine what any American (or French for that matter) Administration would sound like if the Chinese or the Iranians were to issue such a convoluted statement after they'd bombed Tawain or Bahrain for three months in a row.

As a matter of fact I previously thought that this Libyan war had something Shakespearian about it but Alfred Jarry's character comes also to mind. Black is white and head is tail but such is the law since Ubu Roi has so decided!


(Picture: Ubu imperator by Max Ersnt)

A new world order

 

When Edith Shain was kissed by a sailor on August the 14th 1945 in Times Square, America was celebrating the victory of freedom and democracy upon tyranny and the subjugation of people. 

As we understand it, democracy means free elections, the rule of law and a judiciary system that makes sure everyone is entitled to a fair and balanced trial, in criminal cases in particular.

Hence the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials where war criminals were tried and condemned according to the fundamental principles of democracy, each of them assisted by a lawyer for example.

Sixty years or so later when the American led coalition invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, the  aim of the war was to get hold of OBL until President Bush declared: ‘I truly am not that concerned about him’.

Ok, so the goal of this invasion shifted from catching a man into "helping" a country to adopt democratic values and to respect the tenets of democracy which means free elections, rule of the law and fair and balanced judiciary system.

A couple of weeks ago an American commando raided a town in Pakistan, got hold of OBL and deliberately killed him and dumped his corpse in the ocean.

I don't discuss the morality of the raid, the cold blood killing of OBL or the violation of Pakistan territorial integrity. I don't quibble either about how things should have or shouldn't have been done, I just have no opinion.

Fact is the whole thing was an indisputable breach of international law and democratic principles, the very same ones the U.S has been adamantly calling all countries around the world to abide to.

Now, the US is in Afghanistan to help this country to rebuilt  itself according to the democratic values America has been championing for decades the world over while in the same time the US breaches international law by intervening in Pakistan and killing without due trial the spiritual leader of the people it fights in a country it occupies to teach its inhabitants to learn and to respect the democratic values it violates next door. 

Is it me or is there something that simply doesn't fit here?

The French woman who taught American musicians

Second to the works by George Gerschwin, the second movement of his string quartet by Samuel Barber is arguably the most famous piece of all American classical music.
 

This simple fact by itself is rather unexpected since chamber music and string quartets in particular aren't noticeably popular among people without musical education or training. And yet, this work by S. Barber has acquired an extraordinary status in the U.S.A and beyond where it has become some sort of official music for remembrance and commemorations.

This is an opportunity to remember that string quartets as a genre has been widely practised by American musicians from Charles Ives, the first one to achieve fame, to Kenneth Fuchs, including Elliott Carter or John Cage and Philip Glass, the most prolific of them all being Milton Adolphus who wrote no less than 35 string quartets!

Samuel Barber's adagio may be one of the most famous pieces of American classical music yet Barber's a much less known figure than Leonard Bernstein who probably is the icon of American music.

Although Bernstein didn't write any string quartet, like some 600 American musicians he was a student of Nadia Boulanger, a French composer and teacher who was a key figure of Western music in the XXth, training conductors like Igor Markevich or Daniel Baremboïm and musicians like Burt Bacharach and George Antheil! Here is an extensive list of the musicians, most of them Americans, Nadia Boulanger taught to.

Isn’t it worth noticing that while America owes nothing to Europe re Jazz which is the epitome of the American musical uniqueness, a large part of her classical education was made in France by this revered French woman who Aaron Copland describes in these terms:

This intellectual Amazon is not only professor at the Conservatoire, is not only familiar with all music from Bach to Stravinsky, but is prepared for anything worse in the way of dissonance. But make no mistake... A more charming womanly woman never lived.

How did America get involved?

Just a couple of weeks ago, few Americans (or Canadians for that matter) could imagine their nation would again be in a warlike situation in another Arab country. 

And yet they should have known better...

Like everywhere else, there is an American embassy in Paris whose job it is to represent the USA in France as it is to report to Washington what's going on in this European country. And since both Craig R. Stapleton and Charles Rivkin are qualified professionals, the American administration knows far more about the French political scene and its actors than most of the French themselves. Notwithstanding the American secret services...

So when it comes to the current president of the French Republic they perfectly know how unpredictable, unreliable and irresponsible the man is.

Yet it seems they didn't see it coming: Sarkozy has succeeded in dragging the US of A in Libya which wasn't particularly on the radar screen of America afaik.

How did that happen? 

According to the media (whose reliability is 100% documented) B.H.L persuaded the French President to intervene in Libya so that the rebels who emerged from the upheaval east of Libya wouldn't be massacred by Gaddafi's army. This is when Sarkozy knew he had an opportunity to make a political coup!

Now, whatever how they're called, there are Chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff in each and every country and it is impossible that the French and the British ones (and the generals) didn't warn Sarkozy and Cameron that the French and British aviations couldn't conduct alone the mission they were assigned.

These top brasses knew the American assistance was indispensable and once again it is impossible that the French -and the Brits particularly- didn't exchange with their American counterparts before the strikes were launched. 

Of course Sarkozy was aware of this state of affair but, true to himself, he put the American administration in a quandary not totally unrelated to blackmail: You have no choice but to help us ("Either you're with us or you're against us" anyone?).

Did Sarkozy think of ousting Gaddafi in the first place under the pretence of protecting civilians? For what I now, this line has been used by the State department in order to justify an American participation to the Libyan operations.

Reluctant as it seems it was from the beginning, it looks like the US saw in the Franco-British initiative an opportunity to settle old scores with Gaddafi (La Belle, Lockerbie) which may be the reason why it eventually jumped in the bandwagon.

When asked about an involvement in Libya Obama answered: Days, not weeks! So when the time came for America to withdraw from this thorny affair there was no other option but to handle to NATO the leadership of this intervention. Sarkozy who wanted to be seen as the spearhead of this little war of his own first opposed the move to NATO but finally had to back down and retreat.

Sarkozy eventually was outplayed by the Americans because children shouldn't be left alone playing with matches.

Now the times for the mission creep concept has arrived and I have serious doubts Sarkozy ever foresaw there will be one. This is Sarkozy at his best: 1: shoot, 2: aim, 3: think...

Tinky Winky and the tyrants

In my early fifties I was an avid follower of the British Teletubbies program and Tinky Winky in particular was my hero then. Some kind of role model for me so to say.

So, out of curiosity I finally went to read what Wiki had to say about this series and this is when I knew I needed a massive dose of emotional rescue!

Tinky Winky, my hero, was suspected to be a sleeping agent of the homosexual conspiracy!

Jerry Falwell was on the watch and knew there was more than meets the eye behind the cute purple-colored-triangle-antenna-wearing character.

I had previously heard about this Jerry Falwell and I knew he played in the same league as Pat Robertson.

Some people really have to be embarrassed with sexuality and their own body to detect subliminal messages at every corner of the street. These religious zealots are birds of a feather, be they Christians in America, Muslims in Iran, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia and orthodox Jews wherever they are.

For dozens of centuries, all these self appointed priests ruled the world and behaved as tyrants and criminals towards people who simply were different like that Teletubbies character is supposed to be. So if you meet one of them, run Tinky Winky, run!

Les méchants s'entendent plus facilement pour la guerre qu'en temps de paix pour la concorde.

Tacite

[Histoires, Livre I, chap. 54 (5)]

Cultural prejudice

You may remember the scene in A Fish called Wanda when Jamie Lee Curtis becomes totally wild when John Cleese starts speaking (fake) Italian.

It's an interesting thing to observe how some foreign languages carry with them their fare share of cultural prejudice, be they positive or not.

French and Italian for example are often perceived as being sexy to American ears which may not be the case with German or Spanish.

German sexyness? Hmmm... sounds unlikely doesn't it? Yet, German calls for other cultural values which certainly have certain sociological and historical grounds.

Languages as tools which raison d'être is to communicate are basically neutral in terms of associated values and cultural hints. Just like the many writing systems, Chinese ideograms, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Latin alphabet, Arabic or Nordic ones are neutral and don't carry with them any cultural underlying meanings. They're just written signs on stones, sand or paper like sounds are just... well sounds.

It's the peoples and their cultures which give the languages they speak such and such flavor which don't pertain to their languages in the first place.

It all has to do with the history and culture of the peoples whose languages we may find attractive, or not. History here is the key word which explains the nature of the perceptions attached to foreign languages. And to be more precise, the history our own culture shares with other ones.

One may object that the mere nature of some sounds makes them unpleasant to our ears but then again, it's a matter of cultural context and possibly personal tastes.

I don't feel particularly comfortable with Deutsch or Chinese sounds euphonically speaking but I nonetheless may associate these sounds to certain cultural standards.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to the clichés we associate foreigners with. French and Italian may sound sexy to certain American ears or romantic to Asians, they nonetheless carry with them other images which probably are not particularly sexy.

Now, who knows if a Japanese Jamie Lee Curtis doesn't wiggle on her bed when a Cambodian speaks (fake) Vietnamese to her?

They can't be that dumb

Like everyone else since the 9/11 attacks I've heard this story of the 72 virgins awaiting Islamist terrorists in the paradise their religion has in store for them.  

So I wanted to know whether that was true or a totally fictitious reading of the Qur'an by western media.

After a few seconds I landed on WikiIslam which, I suppose, is as reliable as Wikipedia. A few more seconds and I found here what I was looking after.

Indeed it seems there's a passage in the Qur'an which alludes to the possibility of a reward for Muslims sacrificing their lives for the cause of Allah. The rest is all made of interpretations by Muslim commentators who also believe there are God given eternal truths.

WikiIslam isn't extolling about this issue; it simply does the job Wikipedia does: The articles are neutral and documented.

Here is another article by an American with a typical American sense of humor that I'm very fond of. He makes very good points and isn't at all specifically critical of Islam per se. Actually, for what I understand the guy is an atheist.

"nonfundamentalist Muslims don't take the cosmological parts of the Koran any more literally than nonfundamentalist Christians take the biblical story of Genesis"

"But don't be too quick to judge. Christianity, after all, invented the idea of paradise in the first place."

Now the point I wanted to make is that I find it hard to believe that Muslim suicide-bombers engage in terrorism just because of this tall story of 72 virgins they'll get as reward.

To so believe amounts to deliberately ignore the deep political and historical reasons why fundamentalist Islamists engage into the Jihad.

I don't think the 17 terrorists who committed the 9/11 attacks did so for the sole purpose of getting 72 hotties in their afterlife. And the same applies for the Iraqis or Afghans who blow themselves up when fighting what they rightly consider invaders and occupiers of their country.

No, these guys aren't that dumb although you can't exclude the possibility that one simpleton is. But even Zaccharia Moussaoui wasn't that stupid. He was brainwashed but for what we know he wasn't enrolled by al-Qaeda with the promise of getting 72 big breasted babes after he dies.

So if it appears that there's some truth in this 72 virgin story, I suspect there has been some manipulation of these readings of a tiny part of the Qur'an in order to downplay the real motivations of Islamist terrorists.

Slaves

 

Don't be mistaken: Class struggle is still a daily reality in the industrial world. The haves want to have more at the expense of the have-nots.

This process is currently taking place both in France and in the U.S of America.

In France, like everywhere else, when progress occurs in the social situation of the masses, it is not due to a sudden and benevolent act of generosity from the ruling elite, e.g. the owners of the capital of course, but it is the outcome of a violent confrontation where the strongest wins.

Nevertheless, after the capitalists have been compelled to yield a tiny bit of their immensely huge wealth they have no other goal than to gain back what they deem an illegitimate -though legal- deprivation of what is "naturally" theirs. 

This thirst for reappropriation has been a permanent fixture in French history since the Revolution up to now.

The latest example can be observed with the full steam attack of the right-wing to scuttle and abrogate all the social measures that were implemented by the Socialists since F. Mitterrand was elected president in 1981. 

Namely the retirement age which he lowered from 65 to 60 has now been raised up back to 62. Also, the 35-hour workweek has largely been emptied of its contents and now another third-rate rightist politician questions the life-long employment guarantee for civil servants.

The point of the post is to highlight how hundreds of thousands of people who actually profit by these social measures complain that said measures bring France down to her knees and must be repelled. One  may wonder what the motivations of these voters are who want to be deprived of their welfare. Is it their own fate? Is it the future of the Nation?

The ultimate answer is that they've been brainwashed by the permanent and unrelenting propaganda campaign led by rightist politicians into believing that any social progress is detrimental to their personal well-being and that they must elect the sensible politicians (understand the rightist ones) who will protect them from the nasty and irresponsible policies of the Socialists.

In other words, the master tells his slaves what is good and what is bad for them. Coincidentally, the concept of what's good and bad is different for slaves and masters.

For what I know, the same is to be observed in the U.S where a major social advance such as the universal health care system which would benefit several dozens million American citizens is fiercely under attack by the Republicans. So much so that they've succeeded in making about half of the American people believe that the health care bill would be un-American, unconstitutional, dangerous, socialist, contrary to the interest of those most in need of this "universal" system etc. ad nauseam.

Once again, the wealthy tell the poor what is good and what is bad for them. And many of the poor believe what the master says...

It is impossible to convince a slave that he is being exploited by his master.

(It also raises the questions of universal suffrage and democracy but this is another story)

Never satisfied!

During the last American Administration, Republicans wouldn't stop lamenting how the rest of the world was against the US. They used to see anti-Americanism about everywhere. Numerous polls conducted the world around by the Pew Institute for example, showed that a large majority of the world population had a bad image of America.

To tell the truth, it looked like this image had lowered to an historically abysmal level. Globally speaking, the US had something like 25% positive opinions in the world.

Now, Obama has raised that number to about 75% positive opinions within less than a year. Talk of a success in terms of communication and image making.

And guess what? The Republicans aren't satisfied yet!

They lamented when their country was criticized and now they whine because it is praised, but not for the good reasons in their eyes.

Some people are born unsatisfied really!

American heat

There's something that doesn't fail to surprise me when reading the American newspapers or the numerous blogs that American citizens devote to the domestic politics: the ferocity each side seems to have in store for the opposite camp.

Wow! Looks like there's no lost love between the Dems and the Republicans. One may think it's quite normal that on this particular field when points of view diverge there's some heat to be expected but really, to this point of antagonism...

Of course, as a Frenchman what do I know about American politics? But if I try to compare with the traditional opposition between right and left in Europe, only far leftists would be so vindictive against far rightist, and conversely.

But these two extremes amount to about 10% of the voters in France whereas Democrats and Republicans make about, say, 90% of the voters in the US.

Is this virulence a good and faithful image of the American national mentality when it comes to debating and exchanging ideas? Or more simply is the pattern of thoughts so different that no comparison can be made between the way Europeans and Americans deal with their respective domestic concerns?