Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Newest Obsession
My newest mini-obsession is Nazi-occupation of France, both directly and Vichy France. I'll admit it all started by watching "The Sorrow and the Pity."
There's something about the idea of how the French coped with the occupation and the myriad stories about why they collapsed and what collaboration and resistance meant. There is also the idea that France has created a myth that the collaborators were few in number and that many people resisted. Evidence has mounted that the number who resisted was much lower than the myth. So there must have been logical reasons for what they did. Looking back now with hindsight and the simplicity of black and white (Nazis bad, everyone else good) the knew jerk reaction is, "Why did they collaborate with evil?" or "I would have resisted." Is that true? Or were things more muddled and therefore interesting?
One nuance that I've seen in the literature in when the right and the left lay blame for the defeat to the Nazis. The Right views the Third Republic has weak politically and militarily and advanced policies and politics that weakened France and made it soft in relation to Nazi attacks. In addition, maybe it wasn't so bad to get rid of this regime that had connections to Soviet Russia.
On the left, they see the right as implacably hostile to the Third Republic and almost view the military collapse to the Nazis as a stab in the back; that the right wanted to see the French government fall and that the right saw a connection to Nazi ideas.
This obsession may fade but for now, that's what I'm interested in.
There's something about the idea of how the French coped with the occupation and the myriad stories about why they collapsed and what collaboration and resistance meant. There is also the idea that France has created a myth that the collaborators were few in number and that many people resisted. Evidence has mounted that the number who resisted was much lower than the myth. So there must have been logical reasons for what they did. Looking back now with hindsight and the simplicity of black and white (Nazis bad, everyone else good) the knew jerk reaction is, "Why did they collaborate with evil?" or "I would have resisted." Is that true? Or were things more muddled and therefore interesting?
One nuance that I've seen in the literature in when the right and the left lay blame for the defeat to the Nazis. The Right views the Third Republic has weak politically and militarily and advanced policies and politics that weakened France and made it soft in relation to Nazi attacks. In addition, maybe it wasn't so bad to get rid of this regime that had connections to Soviet Russia.
On the left, they see the right as implacably hostile to the Third Republic and almost view the military collapse to the Nazis as a stab in the back; that the right wanted to see the French government fall and that the right saw a connection to Nazi ideas.
This obsession may fade but for now, that's what I'm interested in.
