Newsletter

The place of the military

VE Day ceremony at Place Rihour, Lille, 8 May 2019. © Juliette Pavy/APJ/Hans Lucas

In August 2019, General Vianney Pillet was appointed Nord area defence and security officer and military governor of Lille. As well as his operational responsibilities, supported by the departmental military representatives of Hauts-de-France, he coordinates activities concerned with remembrance and raising the profile of the armed forces, as part of promoting links between the armed forces, the nation and young people, in particular the key national commemorations.

The place of witnesses

Jean Monin, a survivor of Montluc and the camp of Mauthausen, tells schoolchildren his story during a visit to the former Montluc Prison, 16 December 2014. © Mémorial de Montluc

Commemorative ceremonies give pride of place to the witnesses of the events being remembered. Today, their testimonies are not just a “scenographic resource”; they are essential to the act of commemoration, from the prior work on remembrance, to its ritualisation on the day of the ceremony.

Remembering those executed at Bondues

The fort of Bondues. © Tanguy Prouvost/Musée de la Résistance de Bondues

Hélène Priego is director of Bondues Resistance Museum, which opened in 1997. The museum has enriched the town’s stone heritage devoted to the memory of those who were executed at Bondues during the Second World War. Because that history is a key element of local identity, it is a source of distinctive commemorative practices, in Bondues and the surrounding area.

Major National Remembrance Sites and cemeteries: places of innovation

Illuminations at Belfort cemetery, 10 November 2018. © Samuel Carnoval

Among the rich stone heritage in France and elsewhere which contains national history and memory are sites that are continually changing. The Major National Remembrance Sites (Hauts Lieux de la Mémoire Nationale, or HLMNs) and national cemeteries are at the heart of a development policy which is turning them into innovative commemorative sites.

The Centenary in Metz

School pupils and re-enactors take part in the First World War Armistice centenary ceremony, on 11 November 2018, in Metz. © Philippe Gisselbrecht/Ville de Metz

During the First World War centenary, Christine Aguasca was municipal councillor for remembrance, defence and inter-religious relations for the Mayor of Metz. To mark this special commemorative cycle, this city in Moselle held a series of events that shed light on its own experience of the conflict and its remembrance dynamism.

Commemorating the Franco-Prussian War: the challenge of preserving remains

Musée de la Guerre de 1870 et de l’Annexion, Gravelotte. © Département de la Moselle

While France has seen special commemorative cycles to mark the anniversaries of the two world wars, in 2020 it is preparing to revive the memory of a conflict that remains little-known, not to say forgotten, by most people, even though it has never ceased to be commemorated. Felt to be a psychological necessity in the wake of the war, over time its commemoration has come to be a historical necessity.

War memorials

Remembering the dead of the Great War: an endless procession of widows and orphans passes before the cenotaph, 17 July 1919. © Excelsior-L’Équipe/Roger-Viollet

As soon as the First World War was over, war memorials sprang up across the communes of France, and became a focal point for individual and family remembrance of the war. A century on, these “remembrance sites” are still a mainstay of commemorations and bear witness to the common lineage of the different generations of service personnel.

The Chateau of Joux sends its regards

Universal National Service (SNU) – the education programme geared to national remembrance

Universal National Service (SNU) – the education programme geared to national remembrance

 

The Service National Universel (Universal National Service, or SNU) is for all young people aged 15-17 years. Its purpose is to strengthen the national cohesion of young people around republican values and promote civic engagement among the younger generation.

 

Download the booklet presenting the Service National Universel (SNU)

 

SNU consists of three stages, the first two of which are compulsory: a two-week cohesion trip; a community service assignment lasting a minimum of 12 consecutive days or 84 hours, performed outside school time in the year following the cohesion trip; an optional placement lasting a minimum of three months.
 
Phased in gradually since June 2019, the idea is for Universal National Service to become widespread. For the time being, its implementation relies on volunteers, and anyone can enrol to become a fully participating citizen.

 

inscription SNU

https://www.snu.gouv.fr/inscription-au-snu-12

 

Stage 1: The national remembrance content of the cohesion trip

 

Details of the aim and national content of the cohesion trip are provided on the SNU website.

As part of the cohesion trip, the Ministry of the Armed Forces offers a Defence Remembrance Day, comprising a 60-minute remembrance module devised and run by the DPMA, in partnership with the National Office for Veterans and Victims of War (ONAC-VG), to raise young people’s awareness about remembrance issues and heritage.
This module aims to get across why national remembrance is so important, what it enables, and why and how it should be preserved.
 

  • It begins with the screening of a film, structured around three main themes, which serves as a basis for discussion, giving young people the chance to express their views, gain a better grasp of remembrance issues and question commemorative practices. 
  • Next comes a learning activity, in which young people play a lead role, giving them an insight into the organisation and main stages of a ceremony. 
  • Lastly, a presentation about the period of community service undertaken in Stage 2 of the SNU provides an opportunity for young people to put the values that unite us into practice.

 

Stage 2: Community service assignments

 

The SNU website provides details of the aim and content of the community service assignments.

Community service assignments in the field of remembrance may take the form of a wide variety of initiatives, on remembrance sites, in ceremonies, with memorial associations and veterans’ groups. They are a practical way of bringing national memory to life and passing it on to the younger generation.
 
The varied choice of community service assignments available means that everyone should be able to find one to suit their preferences and skills. Download the 2019 list

 

Stage 3: Remembrance placements (minimum three months)

 

These optional three-month placements are for young people aged 16-25.

For the placements on offer in the sphere of remembrance, the DPMA gets involved, welcomes the young people and actions the ONAC-VG and its partners – veterans’ associations, the Museums and Memorials of Contemporary Conflicts (MMCC) network and the trinômes académiques (joint defence and education committees) – in order to offer a remembrance programme in keeping with the SNU’s goals.

Teaching the history of war, teaching war in the past, teaching war in the present

1940: Answering the Call

Contents

    Summary

    DATE: 18 June 1940

    PLACE: London

    OBJECT: General de Gaulle’s call to arms

    OUTCOME: Founding act of the Resistance

    The call to arms of 18 June is today considered the founding act of the Resistance, but the movement was slow to find its way in the early days and in 1940 consisted purely of individual initiatives. That said, 1940 was definitely when the first pockets of resistance were formed and the symbol of the leader of Free France was born.

    The beginnings of the Resistance are often over-simplified. Having left for London on 17 June, General de Gaulle supposedly founded the Resistance the following day, with his appeal on BBC radio. A movement of mobilisation then got under way across France. Although based on fact (the departure to London, the emergence of groups of people in France who wanted to do their bit), this view of things is simplistic and inaccurate. Firstly, because, regardless of the importance of General de Gaulle’s call to arms, the Resistance – with a capital ‘R’ – did not simply come into being on 18 June 1940. Secondly, because De Gaulle’s initiative did not immediately give him any real stature or status vis-à-vis the British government, the French people or the initial pockets of resistance, which emerged independently of the action taken in London. Thirdly, because what – 80 years on – is known as the Resistance was, in the beginning, no more than a scattering of individual initiatives and actions which, from a distance, might wrongly be thought of as insignificant. A closer look is therefore required.

    General de Gaulle flies to London

    French citizens tuned in to their radios at 12.30 pm on 17 June 1940 to hear Marshal Pétain speak of the need to “stop the fighting” and ask “the adversary” whether he was prepared to join him in seeking “a means of putting an end to hostilities”. To put it plainly, the new prime minister was announcing that he had requested an armistice. Three hours earlier, General de Gaulle had taken off for England from Mérignac aerodrome. That afternoon, he met with Winston Churchill, whom he told of his desire to make an appeal over the radio waves. This was by no means a given: the Foreign Office – which hoped the terms imposed by the Germans would be unacceptable – was not burning its bridges with the Pétain government, now based in Bordeaux after leaving Paris on 10 June, and the British ambassador was having regular meetings with Pétain.

    The call to arms of 18 June

    That did not stop De Gaulle, on the morning of the 18th, from writing the message he wanted to broadcast on the BBC. Meanwhile, Churchill put the finishing touches to the speech he would make before the House of Commons that afternoon, which has gone down in history as the “finest hour” speech: “Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’” For that reason, Churchill was absent from the war cabinet meeting which began at 12.30 pm. Having heard of the appeal which De Gaulle wanted to make, the cabinet opposed its broadcast by the BBC “for as long as it can be hoped that the Bordeaux government will act in the interests of the alliance”. It was not until Churchill gave his full support for the idea that the decision was overturned. Around 6 pm, De Gaulle, unaware of these hesitations, recorded his message, which would be broadcast at the end of the 10 o’clock news. The BBC did not keep the recording, for the important speech of the day was surely Churchill’s.

    The content of the call

    Charles de Gaulle gave lengthy consideration to the content of his call to arms of 18 June, during the course of government meetings in which he participated until 16 June as Undersecretary for War, and which saw passionate discussions about the solution to be adopted: armistice, surrender or continuation of the fight from the Empire. De Gaulle’s approach was the exact opposite of that taken by Pétain the day before. The defeat was due to the German army’s mechanical strength, which could be overcome by superior mechanical strength. The French army may be out of the running on French soil, but all the resources to defeat Hitler were to be found around the world (the British Empire held the seas, the United States was an industrial powerhouse). Following this geopolitical analysis, De Gaulle called on all specialists of the war effort (soldiers, officers, factory workers, engineers) who were on British soil then or might be in the future, to get in touch with him. He ended his appeal with a profession of faith – “Whatever happens, the flame of resistance must not and shall not be extinguished” – and by situating the nascent action in time: “Tomorrow, I shall broadcast again from London.”

    Despite this announcement, De Gaulle did not broadcast on the BBC again until 22 June, the day the armistice was signed between France and Germany, signalling the end of British hopes of seeing Pétain change his mind about talking to the enemy. Although an appeal of 19 June is reproduced in De Gaulle’s War Memoirs, it was not broadcast by the BBC.

    The fact is that his position was unstable and, truth be told, unprecedented. With no mandate of any kind and not a particularly well-known figure, De Gaulle was a lone man seeking to restore France’s prestige and take it back into a conflict which its official government had abandoned. His position was so precarious that he had to agree to amend his text at the request of the British. The first lines of the authenticated text broadcast by General de Gaulle are well known: “The leaders who, for many years, have been at the head of our armed forces have formed a government. That government, alleging the defeat of our armies...” They are different from those which he actually spoke into the microphone: “The French government has asked the enemy under what terms fighting might cease. It has declared that, if those terms are not honourable, then the struggle should continue.” In other words, in the recording made at the BBC, he had to tone down his message.

    First period in the wilderness

    18 to 28 June was a difficult time for De Gaulle. He had to compromise with a British government still expecting the arrival in London of political leaders of a different calibre. During this unsettled period, the British made contact with Georges Mandel – who had left for North Africa on 21 June aboard the Massilia – and General Noguès, Resident-General of the Protectorate of Morocco, senior officials capable of embodying the French wake-up call. As for De Gaulle, he held his ground, speaking on the BBC on 24 and 26 June.

    Georges Mandel

    Georges Mandel, Minister for the Colonies, 8 November 1939. © Excelsior-L’Équipe/Roger-Viollet

     

    Between 25 and 27 June, the senior French officials across the Empire sided with the Bordeaux government, while the politicians who had left aboard the Massilia were arrested on arrival in Casablanca. De Gaulle now seemed like the only alternative. On 28 June, a British government communiqué recognised him as “the leader of all free Frenchmen, wherever they may be, who rally to him in support of the Allied cause.” It was both much and little. Much because the symbol he was was beginning to count. Little because that odd title told of the trouble they had in describing his role according to the usual diplomatic criteria. Ultimately, he was now the French interlocutor and partner to the British. The agreement signed on 7 August between Britain and Free France sealed that alliance in three points: 1. The Free French Forces, while accepting the instructions of the British command, were an army in their own right. 2. The General could establish a civilian and military administration. 3. His movement would be funded by the British, who would be reimbursed once the war was over.

    Noguès

    General Noguès with the sultan’s two sons, one of them the future King Hassan II of Morocco, Fez, 1940. © Roger-Viollet

     

    The cycle that began on 18 June 1940 ended on 24 October with the establishment of an embryonic government, the Conseil de Défense de l’Empire (Empire Defence Council). This was made possible by the rallying of certain colonial territories to Free France: Chad, Cameroon and Congo. But in September 1940, a naval expedition organised with the British to Dakar failed due to the determined response of the local Vichyist authorities. It was a bitter failure, which proved what a difficult task Free France had before it, and undermined its credibility vis-à-vis the British.  Struggling on, Free France nevertheless gained some ground, taking Gabon and thus control of Equatorial Africa. By the end of 1940, there were around 35 000 Free French.

    In his War Memoirs, in 1954, describing his situation as he crossed the Rubicon by crossing the English Channel, General de Gaulle says he felt “alone and utterly powerless”. The description was entirely apt. The call to arms of 18 June 1940 was an extremely bold gamble, which could have left its originator tragically isolated. By August 1940, that risk had been averted, but there was still a great deal to be done.

     

    Français libres Dakar

    Free French of the expeditionary corps on their way to Dakar, September 1940. © Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération

     

    Early individual initiatives in France

    René Cassin, who joined General de Gaulle in London on 29 June 1940, entitled a book of his memoirs, published in 1974, Les Hommes partis de rien, le réveil de la France abattue, 1940-1941 (The men who started from scratch: the awakening of a demoralised France, 1940-41). The phrase “the men who started from scratch” could equally well be applied to those men and women who, in a metropolitan France split into two main zones by the armistice, were doing their bit to refuse defeat and its consequences. In both zones, public opinion was anaesthetised and overwhelmed by the defeat of May-June 1940. The state of paralysis was so great that the pioneers of what was to become the Resistance were just a handful of men and women left to their own devices and driven by a refusal to give in.

    Among them was Jean Moulin. Refusing to sign a document attributing responsibility for deaths by the Germans to Senegalese troops of the French army, Moulin was beaten black and blue, then thrown in a cellar of his prefecture in Chartres, with the threat of more to come the following day. The 41-year-old prefect of Eure-et-Loir cut his own throat that night, 17 to 18 June 1940, i.e. before General de Gaulle’s call to arms. Moulin could have signed the shameful document and asserted, justifiably, that he had been made to agree to reprehensible things under duress. Yet he refused, preferring to brave death, because some compromises cannot be accepted without betraying oneself.  Here was the act of an isolated conscience that, without weighing up the pros and cons, kept firmly to its course, sticking to its decision. In this, Moulin was certainly a pioneer of this resistance, which began as individual refusal, without speculation as to the chances of victory.

    Jean Moulin

    Jean Moulin, prefect of Eure-et-Loir, and the Feldkommandant, Chartres, July 1940. © Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération

     

    The same night that Moulin attempted to take his own life, Edmond Michelet, a 41-year-old broker, Christian Democrat and father of seven, posted through letterboxes across the town of Brive a tract that reproduced a text by Péguy: “In wartime, he who does not surrender is my man, whoever he is, wherever he comes from, and whatever his party. And he who surrenders is my enemy, whoever he is, wherever he comes from, and whatever his party.” With this, he was calling for a necessary awakening of consciences.

    Meanwhile, in July 1940, the 52-year-old socialist militant Jean Texcier, an employee of the Ministry of Commerce, produced on a typewriter his Conseils à l’Occupé (Advice for the Occupied), which he distributed across his home city of Paris. The 33 pieces of advice were concerned with dignity, not fighting, and encouraged people to surround the occupier in a glass sphere. But in the summer of 1940, it was already quite something. Indeed, the last piece of advice went further: “There’s no point telling your friends to go and buy this at the bookshop. You doubtless have just one copy and it’s up to you to guard it safely. So, make copies of it and give them to your friends, who in turn will make copies. Happy occupation for the occupied!” Thoughts were already on spreading the word about refusal.

    Germaine Tillion left the Aures mountains, Algeria, on 30 May 1940, her 33rd birthday, after taking part in an ethnographic expedition there. On returning to Paris and learning of the armistice, she did not consider for one minute not doing the opposite of what Pétain was advocating. In search of contacts, she went to the headquarters of the Parisian Red Cross. There, she heard about a colonel in his seventies, Paul Hauet, who, like her, found the armistice unacceptable. Meanwhile, Hauet, who had come in late June to Place Denys-Cochin, between Les Invalides and the École Militaire, to pay his respects to General Mangin, whose statue had just been taken down by Wehrmacht sappers, had encountered Colonel Maurice Dutheil de la Rochère there, his fellow student at the Polytechnique, a fervent nationalist who saw the armistice as the ultimate dishonour. So emerged one of the first shoots of what was to become the Groupe du Musée de l’Homme https://www.cheminsdememoire.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/editeur/MC05.pdf, comprised of people who shared professional ties (linguist Boris Vildé, anthropologist Anatole Lewitsky, librarian Yvonne Oddon) or came from common friendship circles or militant social groups (Jean Cassou, Claude Aveline, Agnès Humbert, Marcel Abraham, Simone Martin-Chauffier). With branches outside Paris, this group developed more quickly and effectively than the other groups formed by like-minded individuals with a desire to act. It paid the price, suffering brutal repression, which broke it up in February 1941.

     

    Germaine Tillion

    Germaine Tillion in 1935. © PVDE/Bridgeman Images

     

    These individual awakenings were also marked by clandestine departures to England. Such was the case of Jacques Bingen, 32, a civil engineer of the École des Mines and graduate of the École Libre des Sciences Politiques, who escaped to Gibraltar, from where he wrote to the British government on 6 July 1940: “I am safe and sound having escaped Nazi soil, and am ready to join the British Empire and fight Hitler to the death. I have lost all I had, my money (not a penny to my name), my work, my family, who stayed behind in France and whom I may never see again, my country and my beloved Paris. But I am a free man in a free country and that is what counts above all else.”

    An array of motivations

    What were the motivations of the pioneering members of this Resistance, which had to come up with all of its actions from scratch? Extremely varied: they ranged from militant anti-fascism, to the Germanophobic nationalist tradition, to the desire to preserve the Republic and see France keep its place on the world stage. The common denominator was most certainly patriotism, the determined refusal to accept a France which, under pressure from the Germans, had ratified an armistice with such draconian terms. Mingled with it was an ethical awakening, in the sense that accepting defeat and attributing it to what Pétain called, on 20 June, “the spirit of enjoyment” were morally intolerable.

    In this initial stage, it was individuals who rose up against a situation they considered unacceptable. They chose in isolation to fight. How to go about it? No one really knew in the summer of 1940. From that moment on, in the northern zone, and from winter 1940-41 in the southern zone, those individuals came together to form cells, through chance encounters in which they cautiously found out what the other knew. These cells, each with a few dozen members at most, set up escape lines for escaped prisoners of war and airmen shot down over enemy territory, left handwritten graffiti and later stickers on walls, and wrote and distributed pamphlets. In the unoccupied zone, Marshal Pétain’s prestige was the biggest obstacle to overcome to recruit willing participants. In the occupied zone, the ubiquitous German presence and the harshness of the repression acted as a spur. Thus, Germaine Tillion wrote that the early cells “multiplied at the speed of infusoria in tropical waters.” Even so, these were tough beginnings.

    The importance of a symbol and the power of legend

    In such a difficult and hostile setting, symbols matter. The call to arms of 18 June soon served as an anchor point, becoming the symbol of refusal and the ongoing struggle. Yet although Free France and the internal Resistance groups did not make regular contact until autumn 1941, when France’s first political envoy, Yves Morandat, arrived from London, the 350 words spoken on 18 June 1940 were of paramount importance to the battle that was under way. Up until mid-1943, General de Gaulle’s great strength would be precisely that he was a symbol, even if being just a symbol would also be his main weakness.

    de Gaulle Mont Valérien

    Official opening of the Memorial of Combatant France, Mont Valérien, 18 June 1960. © Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération

     

    In late July/early August 1940, posters addressed “To all French people” were put up across London and other British cities, with what purported to be a transcription of the call to arms of 18 June, which few people had heard in France and even fewer volunteers in England were familiar with. It summed up the content of the call with a single phrase which De Gaulle had not uttered on 18 June: “France has lost a battle! But France hasn’t lost the war!” The call to arms and the poster are clearly two distinct texts. In representations, however, they merged to form a single credo, and so the legend of the leader of Free France was born. He may not have impelled the Resistance in occupied France from day one, in 1940, but his bold words of 18 June did give him a privilege of precedence which nothing and no one could dispute. Thus a “place of remembrance” began to be fashioned, which has permeated representations right up to the present day. “The passage of time, the prestige of his ten-year reign, France’s decline in the 2000s and the authority of his War Memoirs contributed, as De Gaulle wanted, to making 18 June, together with the myths inherited from the French Revolution, the founding act of our current Republic.” (Jean-Louis Crémieux-Brilhac)

    Author

    Laurent Douzou - Lecturer of contemporary history, Sciences Po Lyon

    The Historial Charles de Gaulle

    France Forever, 1942, mobile in the form of a Cross of Lorraine, by Alexander Calder, Musée de l’Armée. © 2020 Calder Foundation, New York / ADAGP, Paris

    Rear Admiral Luc Pagès

    Luc Pagès. © Ordre de la Libération

    2020: “De Gaulle Year”

    Exhibition 1940, il est devenu de Gaulle (“1940: he became de Gaulle”), 15 February to 17 October 2020, Charles de Gaulle Memorial, Colombey-les-Deux-Églises

    Official launch of the 150th anniversary of the Franco-Prussian War

    1945 – The liberation of Colmar

    Gravelotte

    The Hall of Remembrance ©Jwh at Wikipedia Luxembourg

    It is mid-August 1870 and Napoleon III has declared war on Prussia. Moselle is set to be the scene of three bloody battles, including the Battle of Gravelotte.

    Resource page: Musée de la Guerre de 1870 et de l'Annexion
    Press pack
     

    The Battle of Gravelotte (to the Germans) or Saint-Privat (to the French) took place on 18 August 1870, west of Metz. It paved the way for the French army’s capitulation and Napoleon III’s surrender, on 2 September 1870, at Sedan.


    Musée de la Guerre 1870 et de l'Annexion - 11, rue de Metz - 57130 Gravelotte
    - Tel.: +33 (0)3 87 33 69 40 -
    contact.musee-guerre-70@moselle.fr
     
    > Return to results

    Practical information

    Address

    57130
    Gravelotte

    Maurice Genevoix

    1890-1980
    © Famille Genevoix

    Maurice Genevoix by himself

     

    Maurice Genevoix was born on 29 November 1890 in Decize (Nièvre), a “little town straddling the Loire”.

    His distant forebears were devout Swiss Catholics, who had fled the Calvinist repression, taking refuge in France. Hence their surname, Genevois (“native of Geneva”), the “s” later being replaced by the Limousine “x”. Maurice’s father, Gabriel Genevoix, the son and grandson of a chemist, was himself a business agent. He settled in Châteauneuf-sur-Loire shortly after marrying, and took over his sick father-in-law’s wholesale grocery business.

    My mother was twenty when I came into the world. It was in her arms that I drifted, a year later, to Châteauneuf. To drift [Genevoix uses the obscure French word valer, a sailor’s term], meaning to go with the flow, to entrust oneself to the current and, symbolically, to fate.

    He was to remain in Châteauneuf for many years. There, he and his younger brother, René, born in 1893, lived the happy, carefree years of true, eager childhood, “given to them completely”. Those years moulded his budding sensibility and introduced him, day after day, to “an eternally virgin, wondrous, endlessly blossoming world”.

    Life moved, for me, at the pace of childhood, making each day a small eternity.

    That “world” was also the world of the “Asile”, the nursery school he was sent to from the age of 22 months, followed by the “big school”, the village primary where he wore the cross that rewarded the good pupils – though that did not stop him from being a “hot-headed” child.

    We were impossible, due to sheer vitality. On my way back to school after lunch, long before I reached rue du Mouton I could hear, over the rooftops, the shouts of a hundred prepubescent voices. And I would start running.

    All ‘pupils’, all in black aprons, all in it together, all equal before the secular prophets; and yet as different as their citizen parents.

    He would speak often of his family life in Châteauneuf, of his mother Camille, tender and cheerful, of the “shop” where he discovered the sounds and smells of life, and the three houses in which he lived.

    As my child’s personality was awakened, my own way of perceiving and feeling, I threw myself hungrily into the world that was offered to me. I discovered the street, the gardens, the people in their shops and workshops, the riverbanks too, the paved quaysides where the heavy mooring rings lay sleepily beneath the weeds and the rust, the tarred fishermen’s skiffs, the shoals of bleak turning over in the soapy swirl at the back of the wash house.

    I consider it more than ever a great privilege to have spent my childhood in a little pre-war French town.”

    But it would all change when, aged 11, he was sent away to boarding school in Orléans, 20 km away, for seven years.

    For the first time, I found myself enrolled: number 4. Life as a boarder at a French state lycée in the early years of this century was not unlike life in the army. All that is evoked by the word ‘barracks’, I experienced it there, aged 10, at Lycée Pothier, on rue Jeanne d’Arc, in Orléans: a cold, noble street, straight as a ruler, drawn rigorously taut between rue Royale and the cathedral of Sainte-Croix.

    He found consolation in his great liking for camaraderie, his talent for drawing and a love of reading, which opened up a whole other world to him. Jules Verne bored him, but he was full of enthusiasm for Hector Malot’s Sans famille, before immersing himself in London, Kipling, Daudet, Dumas and, above all, Balzac, who left him “flabbergasted. How shocking!” And he longed for only one thing: Sundays and the holidays, when he would regain his freedom and the warmth of family life.

    But in 1903, at the age of 12, he lost his mother.

    On 14 March 1903, an early spring morning of indescribable magnificence, I was called to the headmaster’s office in the middle of class. He ‘prepared’ me, if I dare put it that way. Uncomfortable, certainly pitiable, he perhaps hesitated to deal me the blow outright. But from the very first moment, the look in his eyes and his faltering voice plunged me into the corrosive depths of despair, a gasping teenager suddenly faced with the hardest thing of all.

    That teenager who, when the summer holidays came, wandered endlessly along the banks of the Loire found, in Châteauneuf, a house in darkness and a father overcome by grief, whose sadness, growing deeper by the day, caused him to make demands which a boy so close to childhood could not recognise or understand. The intense hunger for freedom which boarding school silently aroused in his subconscious drove him to an intolerance which the grieving man could not tolerate. So he fled, disappointing a call that refused to be expressed.

    Since then... I know, I have learnt, it is a certain world order that has no use for the death of a young woman or a child. But I also know full well that my revolt was a man’s thing, that my refusal, beyond that closed grave, was what justified my own survival, my acceptance of the world, of the beauty of the dawn and the evening, the purity of the air we breathe, the children I myself would have. For how many years did I wake at night, my heart beating with joy, my ears still buzzing with the sound of a voice that had just called me, my hands warm from clutching my mother’s hands? My face was wet with tears, sweet tears, even after waking. Old man that I had become, I refound a young mother, smiling and tender; it was her, today once more, after the hardships of the years, who rekindled deep in my heart the invincible love for life that would only be extinguished with my death.

    Maurice Genevoix was a brilliant pupil, and his father decided he should continue his studies. “Early on, when I was 13 or 14, I was tormented by the need to express myself, to write.

    He left Orléans to do university preparatory classes at the Lycée Lakanal in Sceaux, “which had grounds where we could smoke pipes and a family of deer, penned in, just like us.”

    Though not work-shy, he remained eager for freedom and, readily rebellious, jumped over the fence every morning to go and have a cup of coffee at the bar-tabac in Bourg-la-Reine.

    In 1911, he was awarded a place at the prestigious École Normale Supérieure, on rue d’Ulm, in Paris, but decided to do his military service first. He was assigned to the 144th Infantry Regiment. Yet, contrary to what you might think, he did not find this year of “military servitude” a hardship.

    All in all, (...) compared to the servitude of the lycée, (it) left me with the memory of a happy liberation, dotted with comic episodes.”

    He even refers enthusiastically to his period with the battalion of Joinville.

    Those weeks, that year, were definitely among the happiest of my life. Excitement, harmony, challenges set oneself, the simple daily happiness of discovering, with wonder, that the resources of one’s body were still equal to the bold behaviour of one’s youth.”

    At the École Normale, between 1912 and 1914, he was a student of the director, the historian Ernest Lavisse, who, in 1916, would write the foreword to his first book, Sous Verdun (English title: ’Neath Verdun).

    The university, with its open forums, its free choices, its abundance, its contrasting individuals, was a continuation, on a different level, of the enchantments of my early youth.”

    The irony, the refusal to be taken in, the virtuosity of a critical mind put through unremitting training... The best of what I owe the (École) Normale, I owe to the normaliens.”

    He owed it also to two men: Paul Dupuy, the École’s general secretary, with whom he was to exchange almost daily correspondence for thirty years, and Lucien Herr, the librarian, “who knew everything and gave everyone the key to what they were looking for.”

    Dupuy and Herr (…) remain, in my eyes, the guardians and examples of an oft forgotten, or little-known, humanity, whose decline or abandonment is not a credit to the times in which we live.”

    In 1913, for his diploma of higher studies, he presented a noteworthy thesis on “Realism in Maupassant’s novels”, which appeared to promise him a brilliant university career.

    “First in my year, I saw the avenues of an easy university career open up before me. I had already chosen from among them, at least virtually. I did not feel cut-out to be a high-school teacher. If I was to teach, it would have to be students close to my age. If I had an interest in arousing curiosity, I wanted to be free from constraint, without the worry of having to get through a syllabus in the year. For that reason, upon graduation, I intended to apply for posts at foreign universities.”

    The outbreak of war prevented him from sitting his teaching examination. Mobilised on 2 August 1914, he joined the 106th Infantry Regiment, as a second lieutenant, in Châlons-sur-Marne. He left, with no flower in his rifle, saddened to the core, but at the same time “curious; intensely, entirely open and receptive, interested to the point of forgetting my apprehension and my fear.”

    But within a few weeks, “this tremendous melee, which remained monstrously in human proportions”, plunged him into a world of blood, pain and horror.

    Everything, always: rain on the pallid back of a dead man, shells that bury and unearth, that roar, and howl with strange shrillness, giving out horrible, cheerful sniggers.

    More and more frequently, as our fatigue grows, feverish images burst forth with the explosions: springing up, whole bodies in tatters; falling against the parapet, backs broken, like Legallais; headless, the head ripped off in one go, like Grandin’s, Ménasse’s, Libron’s, which rolled back to us from the neighbouring shell-hole in its brown woollen balaclava; scattering from mound to mound these sticky little things that you could reach out your hand and gather up; where do they come from, and what were their names? Desoigne? Duféal? Or Moline?

    It scarcely leaves us now; we feel our chests squeezed, as if by an almost immobile hand. Against my shoulder, Bouaré’s shoulder starts trembling, gently, interminably, and somewhere a moan rises up from entrails of the earth, a regular groaning, a kind of soft, slow singing. Where is it? Who is it? There are men buried nearby. We search; it distracts us.

    He took part in the Battle of the Marne and the march on Verdun. After four months at Les Éparges, his battalion was sent to the “Calonne trench”, a strategic forest road the ran along the Hauts de Meuse hills. There, on 25 April 1915, he was hit by three bullets in the arm and chest, severing his humeral artery. He was evacuated to Verdun hospital, then on to Vittel, Dijon and Bourges. For him, the war was over. After seven months of treatment, he was discharged with 70% invalidity.

    In August 1916, he returned to Paris, to work as a volunteer for the Franco-American Fatherless Children of France Society and, at Paul Dupuy’s invitation, lodged at the École Normale. But he rejected the suggestion put to him by the school’s new director, Gustave Lanson, to resume his studies with a view to sitting his teaching examination.

    Monsieur, we have changed a lot. In all ways, in fact. Morality, culture, justice, all that the word civilisation stood for we have had to call into question.

    Paul Dupuy had been encouraging him for months to write a book based on his memories of the war, which he had recorded in little notebooks. That book was to be Sous Verdun. Written in just a few weeks, with a foreword by Ernest Lavisse, it was published in 1916, heavily censored. That first book was followed by Nuits de guerre (1917), Au Seuil des Guitounes (1918), La Boue (1921) and Les Éparges (1923). All these titles received unanimous praise, and were subsequently brought out in a single volume, Ceux de 14.

    Genevoix wrote these war memoirs at Châteauneuf. He had left Paris on doctor’s orders, having had Spanish flu. But what was prescribed to him had soon “become a free choice”. In Châteauneuf, with his father, he was “overjoyed” to rediscover his childhood haunts, where nothing had changed in his absence. Thus, after being a “war writer”, he went on to depict the region of the Loire, with a first novel, Rémi des Rauches (1922), about returning to civilian life and being reunited with the river, his world of light. It was nonetheless a continuation of his wartime writings.

    “Rémi des Rauches is from 1922; I wrote it after La Boue and before Les Éparges (...) Yet although at no point does it evoke the war, or even mention it by name, it is still a war book.”

    But the river was at once soothing and liberating, and from then on he would never stop celebrating it.

    It was the Loire. Mistress of all the passing hours, mirror of the moonlight and the star-filled nights, of the pink mists on April mornings, the thin clouds streaking the September sunsets, the long beams of sunlight piercing the summer clouds, she took that evening and, with each passing moment, carried it gently away, on her tranquil currents, into the night.” 

    In 1925, aged 35, Genevoix published Raboliot, which won the Prix Goncourt.

    What a fine book!”  wrote the jury. “A fine book, filled with aromas, vigour, humanity... A simple, clear and lucid style, in which the slightest details are expressed exactly, the colour of the leaves, the shades of the horizon; the extreme precision of his eye, the perfect, succinct comparisons, in a word his admirable descriptive talent... The wonderful unity of the book, too, for, from beginning to end, the author goes straight to what he wants, what he feels: phrases at once fluid and energetic, rounded, shaped... Yes, it is a great book.

    To write it, he lived for weeks on a hunting ground bought by his uncle, “between Sauldre and Beuvron”.

    Adjoining a birch wood, surrounded by fish ponds and overlooking the lovely Clousioux lake, frequented by buzzards and herons, what could have been a better base for my writing projects than Trémeau’s gamekeeper’s cottage? I spent days there, nights too, with not an empty hour, not a dull moment: an osmosis between the land and me, the meadows of sedge, the sparse round oaks in the fine mist of the Beuvron, the yapping of a fox on a scent, the call of a bittern in the rushes, the breaking day, the first star, the leap of a carp, the gliding flight of a hunting buzzard.”

    Yet he encountered no model for a poacher. Alone, or with the gamekeepers, he learnt to ring the bell, to do the rounds with the lantern, to lay the snares. A free man, he was against all forms of “regimentation” – a word he would use often – to the point of preferring rebels and dissenters. From Raboliot to the great red stag of La Dernière Harde (English title: The Last Hunt), his entire oeuvre extols freedom considered as a natural asset.

    The instinct of freedom (...) has always guided my choices like a good, reliable companion.”

    During those years – 1925, 1926, 1927 – success, far from distancing Genevoix from the land of his birth, gave him the means to settle on the banks of the Loire, in a house to his liking. He found it by chance, one day in 1927, when strolling around Saint-Denis-de-l’Hôtel: a little country cottage, “abandoned by humans but peopled by birds and plants, which thrived there undisturbed.” It was called “Les Vernelles”. “I left the nests alone, those of the redstarts under the eaves, the blackbirds in the hedges, the lesser whitethroats in the bushy willows of the bank. From there, day after day for twenty years, I watched the sky change with the colours of the seasons, and listened to the bells of Jargeau answer those of Saint-Denis. I return there each year to see the wild strawberries ripen, until the time when the parasol mushrooms raise their hats beneath the acacias and the grass fires, smoking through the valley, announce the flight of the migratory birds.

    After the death of his father, who succumbed to a brief bout of pneumonia in July 1928, Genevoix decided to spend the rest of the summer at Les Vernelles. He stayed there with Angèle, who had been in the family’s service since 1898. With them they took a cat, who was so taken with the charms of Les Vernelles that, when they returned to Châteauneuf in September, it made its own way back to Saint-Denis-de-l’Hôtel. From this domestic anecdote, Genevoix was to make a novel, Rroû (1931), recently reprinted with a foreword by Anne Wiasensky. The book, together with La Boîte à pêche (1926; English title: The Fishing Box), marked the beginning of a particular kind of production by Maurice Genevoix: his romans-poèmes, or “novel-poems”. These included Forêt voisine (1933), La Dernière Harde (1938), Routes de l’aventure (1959) and Bestiaires (Tendre bestiaire and Bestiaire enchanté in 1969, Bestiaire sans oubli in 1971), much of them written at Les Vernelles.

    In early 1939, two months after the death of his first wife, he left Les Vernelles on a trip to Canada, where he gave a series of conferences over several months. He was to stay there until the eve of the war. The lover of the banks of the Loire was not looking for a change of scene on this trip, but rather to find “harmony within himself”. Upon his return to France, he published his travel notes (Canada, 1943) and went on to devote a number of books to that country: first, a collection of short stories, Laframboise et Bellehumeur (1942), then a novel, Eva Charlebois (1944). Canada was present, too, in Les Routes de l’Aventure (1959) and in his children’s short stories, L’hirondelle qui fit le printemps (1941) and L’Ecureuil du Bois-Bourru (1947).

    Of all the countries I have been on my travels, Canada appealed to me the most (...). It presented me with themes which of their own accord were in harmony with my inner world.”

    In 1940, he left Les Vernelles for the Free Zone and spent the next two years in a village in Aveyron. There he wrote La Motte rouge (1946), a grim novel about intolerance and the Wars of Religion, which cannot be read without the key of the Occupation, as suggested in its epigraph: “It was a wretched and devastating time.”

    He also wrote a “journal of humiliating times” there, which disappeared in the turmoil and was only recovered much later. There he met his second wife, Suzanne Neyrolles, a widow herself and mother of a little girl, Françoise.

    After the invasion of the southern zone by the Germans, the three of them returned to Les Vernelles. But the house had been ransacked. He thought of selling it, but Suzanne set about restoring it to its former glory. Their daughter, Sylvie, was born there on 17 May 1944.

    She would laugh and lift her eyes to me, to witness her joy, entirely accepting of the world, its wonders and their miraculous inrush. What is love if it does not share, does not accept what it receives with the same movement with which it offers and gives?

    The war over, he resumed his travels and conference tours, which this time took him to Europe, the United States, Mexico and Africa (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Senegal, Mauritania, Guinea, Nigeria). After Canada, Africa sparked his creative imagination. Afrique blanche, Afrique noire, a book of travel impressions, was published in 1949 and the novel Fatou Cissé, also inspired by Africa, in 1954.

    He was attentive to the wide-ranging problems faced by these countries, including their political aspects. But for him, travel was above all an opportunity to discover a diversity of landscapes and customs and, beyond that, to recognise different ways of living, being and thinking, which he described as universal.

    I approached other cultures, perceived their genuine warmth and felt stir within me a feeling of human brotherhood, which had been awakened by my travels among real men.

    Elected to the Académie Française in 1946, to the seat of Joseph de Pesquidoux, he was invested on 13 November 1947, by André Chaumeix.

    One never enters here alone... For men of my age, there are, among the dead, those who have kept, and will keep forever, the face of youth. Of those young war dead, we, in our own youth and our mature years, have been painfully deprived.

    I regard as a moving privilege that I was lucky enough to freely encounter, over a third of a century, men so wholly and diversely men as most of my colleagues. I have greatly admired many of them, respected them all and formed friendships with some which are the pride of my life.

    In October 1958, he became Perpetual Secretary. He dusted down the venerable institution, set it up with great literary prizes and worked to enable the election of Paul Morand, Julien Green, Montherlant, etc.

    He also made sure the Académie played an active role in all the bodies responsible for the defence of the French language. Under his leadership, it asserted its presence and competence within the High Commission for the French Language, founded in 1966, and the International Council for the French Language.

    He would go to Les Vernelles as often as possible, to spend “days on (his) personal work”, but he now had to limit himself to shorter works. Among his short stories for children, Le Roman de Renard (1958; English title: The Story of Reynard) playfully made “the beasts talk” but, as a literary metaphor, it was also an ode to freedom.

    It is a tough, unending struggle for those wishing to safeguard their freedom this century.”

    He published a number of autobiographical writings too: Au Cadran de mon clocher (1960) and Jeux de Glaces (1961). He also rediscovered “the myths that drove (his) creativity”: the river, with La Loire, Agnès et les garçons, a novel he described as a transposition into adolescence of Jardin dans l’île, written much earlier, in 1936; the forest, with La Forêt perdue (1967);

    finally, with La Mort de près (1972) he took up his wartime memories once again.

    Around my 25th year, circumstances would have it that I should experience death, three times, at very close quarters. Put very precisely: to experience my own death, and survive. This memory has pursued me constantly, like weft entwining the warp of my days.

    I should add that it has helped me, and continues to do so, that I know, I am certain, and that certainty determines my current attempt: storytelling is a means of transmission, like the guardian of a message which ought to be beneficial.

    For a radio programme on France Culture, he wrote a series of animal stories that went on to be published as the collection Tendre Bestiaire (1968), soon followed by Le Bestiaire enchanté (1969) and Bestiaire sans oubli (1971).

    But the work associated with his duties was too much of a burden on his freedom. In 1974, he did what no other Perpetual Secretary had done before him: he resigned.

    On 9 October 197?, Joseph Kessel wrote to him: “I learnt rather belatedly of your decision. I know... I know... You have done the right thing. You have given us much and for a long time. And I am happy that you have your freedom once more. But from a selfish point of view, it is a blow. You were the bond, the element of friendship. You humanised the role so wonderfully.

    Maurice Genevoix would recount the pleasures, obligations and occasional disappointments of his position in a short work entitled La Perpétuité (1974).

    The centuries-old Académie is not short of perpetuals. It has the centuries on its side. It is wise and magnanimous. It will not hold it against me, writer that I am and mindful – as we all are, even those who claim not to be – of leaving behind me the hint of a wake in the shoreless ocean of time, that I changed perpetuity.”

    He returned to Les Vernelles, where, “time after time”, no matter what path he trod, he would always return.

    It was my house, my garden, my land, all I had ever needed in my life.”

    There he wrote Un jour (1976), a novel he had been mulling over for some time, which is also a philosophical text: “That of a day like any other, like yesterday, like tomorrow, in which love and death, war, devotion and friendship, storms and calmer weather all come to pass, a weird and wonderful tale perhaps, that carries us over the infinite planet where we are, but where the beauty of things is only what it is if it is divine, beneath a sky whose immensity raises the invincible hope of men.”

    With this book, which was a great success, he found his loyal readers once again. It was followed by Lorelei (1978), a novel of teenage confrontation, in which a German boy and a French boy, with their different temperaments, are torn between hate and friendship.

    His last book, Trente Mille Jours (1980) – 30 000 days of memories since his childhood in Châteauneuf – established him, together with television, as a household name. The general public rediscovered the storyteller, the Loire wanderer, the passionate ecologist even before the term existed, the lover of language who spoke such pure French, a witness of his century and an ardent defender of his heritage. People fell for his charm, his culture without pedantry, his attention to others, his ability to capture the human in every man.

    Life went on, the life of a man among men, with his share of sorrows and joys; and, year after year, always engaged. I am one of those who have never been tempted, save during my months at the front (...), to keep a private journal. What’s the use, if there is not a page of what they write and publish where they are not entirely – as I’ve just said – engaged? What begins as a barely audible call, a temptation besieged by anxiety, is gradually revealed to be an inner force which, by a fatal sequence of events, little by little makes a vocation into a way of life, or life into a vocation. That is just how I experienced it, how I have always written.”

    He still had other projects, a collection of “Spanish short stories” and also a “possible book” that would once more address “childhood and initiation”. But he died suddenly on holiday in Javea, Spain, on 8 September 1980, shortly before his 90th birthday.

    Fortunately, memory is selective. It knows the dead it is dealing with, it lives off them as much as it does off the living.. There is no such thing as death.. I can close my eyes; I shall have my heaven in the hearts of those who remember me.”

    Simone Veil

    1927-2017

    A Holocaust survivor, author of the French abortion act and strongly pro-European, Simone Veil died on 30 June 2017, at the age of 89. That day, French political life lost one of its greatest, most illustrious figures. On 1 July 2018, Simone Veil was the fifth woman to enter the Pantheon... >> Read the full article at: www.gouvernement.fr


     

    “Our heritage is there, in your hands, in your thoughts and your hearts, in your intelligence and your sensibility.”*

     


    * Extract from Simone Veil’s 2010 speech >> Resource via www.ambassadeurs-memoire-shoah.org

     

     “There are now no more than a handful of Auschwitz survivors left. Soon, our remembrance will rely only on our families, on the State, and on the institutions that have made it their mission, in particular those responsible for sites like the one you are at today. It will also be a source of inspiration for artists and authors, like an object that escapes us, for better or for worse. Above all, our remembrance must be integrated and reconciled with the teaching of history in schools, making pupils and teachers essential intermediaries in the important process of transmission.


    It will be up to you to see that our memory lives on, to pass on our words and the names of our dead comrades; and our terrible experience, too, of barbarity taken to its extreme, whereby the most primary  human instincts were pandered to as the workings of a cruel modernity.


    Humanity is a fragile veneer, but that veneer exists. By talking about this other world of camps and torment into which the Jews were thrust, we are telling you of this abomination, but we are also bearing witness to the reasons for not giving up hope. Firstly, for some of us, there were those who helped us during the war, through at times simple, at times perilous actions that contributed to our survival. There was camaraderie among prisoners, which, although not systematic, had such a beneficial effect. Then, for that tiny minority who returned to France in 1945, life was intensified, resumed with its joys and its sorrows.


    If only our laughter would resonate with you like our immense sadness.


    Our heritage is there, in your hands, in your thoughts and your hearts, in your intelligence and your sensibility.


    It is for you to ensure that vigilance is not an empty word, an appeal echoing in the void of numbed consciences. The Holocaust may have been a unique phenomenon in human history, but the poison of racism, antisemitism, the rejection of ‘strangers' and hate are not the preserve of any one period, culture or people. They are a daily threat, at different levels and in varying ways, everywhere and always, last century and in this new one. That world is yours. It is built on the ashes of Auschwitz.


    Yet your responsibility is not to give in to misguided and confused ideas. Suffering is intolerable; but not all situations are the same. Be sure to show discernment, as time distances us ever further from these events, making their trivialisation a perhaps even greater menace than denial. Teaching about the Holocaust is not a vaccine against antisemitism or totalitarian abuses, but it can help to forge the consciences of each and every one of you. It should make you think about the mechanisms and consequences of this dramatic story. Our testimony exists as an appeal to you to embody and defend democratic values, rooted in absolute respect for human dignity, that are our most precious legacy to you, the youth of the 21st century.

     

    > Simone Veil, archives d'une vie

    > Documentary

    Simone-Veil-memoires-d-une-immortelle

    The story of an exceptional life based on Simone Veil’s private archives. Five years before she died, Simone Veil gave all the files, official documents, notes she had written, letters she had received – all the “papers” she had patiently kept throughout her lifetime – to the Archives Nationales. “Simone Veil, mémoire d’une immortelle” is a moving historical portrait of a woman whose uprightness, open-mindedness and acute sense of the meaning of the State and justice make her an example to many. Directed by Pierre Bonte-Joseph A Public Sénat production.