French culture dies again

There is a type of story that American and British journalists in France know will always score in their papers. It is the genre that we call "The death of..." On quiet news days, you fill in the blank. It can be corner café, baguette, the concierge, the railway sleeping car and so on (I am as guilty as anyone).

It's an easy hit because ancestral envy in the Anglo-Saxon soul is tickled by the idea of the demise of some cherished Gallic tradition. The winner in this field is culture. We have been writing this obituary periodically since... well, about the mid-18th century when Voltaire proclaimed the demise of French thought.

Time magazine has just taken the old chestnut out for a whirl with a cover story in its European edition. "The Death of French Culture," mourns the cover with a picture of a fake Marcel Marceau, the mime who died two months ago, weeping over a rose. Alongside, it asks: "Quick, name a living artist or writer from France who has global significance."

That question of course says more about the self-centred obsession of American -- "Anglo-Saxon" culture than anything else. If you ask the question on continental Europe, Latin America, Africa, China or Japan, you'll be told plenty of French names, from cinema and music to architecture and fiction. You don't need to read Time's long article because you know that it will run round the old pitch, touching the familiar bases.

 

I don't want to mock my colleagues at Time. Our trade likes cycles. We revive the cafe and the baguette periodically and I notice that Time ran a special reviving French culture only seven years ago.   

This year's version says that the land of Proust and Monet, of Sartre and Piaf, has "lost its status as a cultural superpower". France has produced no great cinema since the 1960s new wave of Truffaut and Godard. The nouveau roman has killed French writing. Contemporary art has abandoned Paris and so on....

The Time thesis has attracted some attention here because France is in a defensive mood. "The attack could just be laughed off if it were not for the fact that some of the criticism hits home," said Libération. "Our country is said to have sunk into introspection at a time when the world is moving very fast and it's struggling to produce popular culture."

Antoine Compagnon, an eminent literature professor, wrote in Le Monde, that it is true that the American intellectual avant-garde is no longer inspired by French thinkers as they were in the post-war era by André Malraux, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.

But the French don't have to be so gloomy. If the world is no longer looking to France for inspiration, it's not for lack of French energy. The main reason is the ascendance of American global might and the weight of the English-speaking cultural -- or rather entertainment -- outlook that comes with it. As much as France would like to be, it is no longer a universal model. It is less accessible. You can be well educated without being conversant in much that hails from this mid-sized nation of 60 million.

France has done a good job of holding on to its separateness and not just because the state protects and subsidises native production. There may be a lot of self-indulgent dross movies, but for the past two decades, French films have kept their audience and their share of about 50 percent of the box office. No other European country comes close. A new wave of young directors is making a splash. The most admired film of the season is La Graine et le Mulet, an immigrant family drama made by Abdellatif Kechiche, a director of Tunisian origin [picture below]. French movies -- and not just Gallic nostalgia trips like Amélie and La Vie en Rose -- sell well abroad. Sixty-million people watched them outside France last year. France's latest to next February's Hollywood Oscars is Persepolis, an animated version of the caustic comic strips of Marjane Satrapi, a French Iranian.

The new mixed culture verve is scoring in music, whether rap and electro or the French-bred international artists such as Manu Chao. A French firm, Vivendi, owns Universal Music, which is the global number one recording major. French painters may be unsung, but their architects are stars. Look at Paul Andreu and his new Beijing Opera and Jean Nouvel's forthcoming Guggenheim museum for Rio de Janeiro.

On the publishing front Time mocks the fact that France publishes 700 novels in the fall yet few are translated for the United States. Perhaps, but they are still translated there more there than those of any other language.

But the best proof of the still powerful attractions of French culture is the broadest one. Paris is the world's most visited city and France the top tourist destination. People are not just coming to look at old museums. They come to admire and enjoy the most permanent of all French arts -- l'art de vivre. Gilles Martin Chauffeur summed it up in Paris Match this week.

France does not to pretend to rule any more with its literature or its music but with a certain sweetness of life. .. France charms less with its books and its canvases than with its Chanel No5, the banks of the Seine, its cafe terraces, its foie gras and the Christmas lights on the Avenue Montaigne

Comments

[Claudia]

Thank you ,Charles!

[Monika]

Sometimes I come to think that the fact that one country's culture is not internationally successfull is not necessarily something to mourn.
It can mean chance. Chance to avoid standardisms that go well everywhere in any country. Chance to develop a niche culture that bursts with originality. That's where avant-garde may come from.

[Frank Schnittger]

"A French firm, Vivendi, owns Universal Music, which is the global number one recording major" -CB

It's not really a good idea to have spent a fortune buying a business which has been in freefall for the past few years. They would have been better off buying Google or Youtube.

Yes, its great being a popular tourist destination - so was Ireland when it was in almost terminal decline - but is that all France aspires to be? France used to lead the world in so many ways, and not all of them could be measured by GDP or tourist numbers.

Has France given up that aspiration?

[Helene]

As Charles wrote, it's not France who has given up "leading the world", but rather the Anglo saxon might and way of thinking that have become global.

[Daniel Strohl]

Charles,

Nice and interesting article. Good "pour le moral", since too many French are permanently complaining and criticizing instead of enjoying what they have got in most parts of France – plenty of space, beautiful countryside, architecture, peace, most of the time well functioning « services publics » and health care and, last but not least, good food at an affordable price for most of the people, at least if they take the time to cook at home.

"They come to admire and enjoy the most permanent of all French arts -- l'art de vivre".

Sunday, at 1h30 pm on TF1, in « Reportages », there was an interesting reporting on a few British working in the UK, but having their families living in France, either close to the UK in Northern France – for instance, a farrier crossing the Channel once a week with his van fitted with his tools, to work in Derbyshire - or in SE France or elsewhere, travelling to the UK with low costs flights.

Their families live most of the time in small and unknown villages where housing prices are still affordable. They all seemed to have adapted quite well (the reason obviously being that they had made the necessary and not always easy efforts). They found that the cost of living and transportation was cheaper than in the UK; that they had relations with their neighbours, which apparently was not always the case back home. Most of the « émigrés » seemed also to appreciate the local village markets with their fresh products and « couleur locale ».

It seemed to be almost (too) idyllic...

[Valerie]

I have no pity for the French talking heads who react and over-react to this type of article. At least 2 or 3 talk shows on FR TV have used this article as an opportunity to debate the question and make the point that American culture sucks by their standards.

It's one guy writing for Time Europe, after all, not some planetary concensus. What thin skins these people have!

The French don't even believe that the USA has any culture worth mentioning and don't hesitate to reiterate that belief at the drop of a hat, even to an American's face and on most FR TV/radio shows going, so, you know what? If they can't take an occasional article about the state of French culture, to heck with them.

[Daniel Strohl]

Frank,

"They would have been better off buying Google or Youtube".

Yes, no doubt. But Google is probably not (or even was not at the time of purchase of Universal Music) in the same price category ...

"Has France given up that aspiration?"

If one wants to "lead the world" in at least a few ways, one should have first of all an economic weight lost by France in the past 20 years or so. And second, a will which has been diluted thanks to our various socialist theories ("work less and earn more", egalitarianism through levelling by the bottom while having the people believe that it was levelling by the top - I am referring to our "Education Nationale" - and so on).

May be the aspiration will truly come back if things improve through steady efforts. But this will take time. For the moment, economics have priority.

[unkle]

Funny how people overreact on this... Every body agrees that US have a culture. I love Philip Roth, Norman Mailer, Jeff Koons and Tony Kushner, among many others. Just sad that we just get Letterman/24h on TV, but what people start to get is that TV is NOT culture. Equivalently, french culture is no longer on TV, and this is what make us fear its disparition: its has changed its targetted audience. This is true from any country. Any body .ooking at US TV knows this. France is just getting the same: we need to go out again, and that's great.

[Marguerite.]

Merci Charles de dire du bien de la France!
Vous auriez pu aussi mentionner dans les "atouts" de ce pays pour les etrangers: le charme et l'elegance des Parisiennes. Meme s'ils sont un peu decus car la realite ne correspond pas toujours exactement a leurs reves, c'est la premiere chose que les etrangers mentionnent quand ils parlent de Paris...avec les restaurants !

[Jorg Andersen]

You're right about the self-obsession of the American world and their British subsidiary. Every time you read a US magazine list of "all-time greatest" this or that, it's about 85 percent American and British, with a few Anglo-friendly imports thrown in, like Pedro Almodovar, Gabriel Garcia Marquez or Solzhenitsyn. It's stunningly ignorant for Time to sneer that no living creative French person is world famous.

[Terry]

I dont think Time's article and Sarkozy's latest visits to the President and the rapprochement are a coincidence. Dont forget, most U.S. media are leftist. That means pro-France and ANTI-U.S. Time Magazine is vehemently anti Bush. It enjoyed poking Bush about the fallout with Chirac and how the French were right. Time Mag., which I consider a liberal, anti-US paper probably annoyed with Sarkozy's chumminess with Bush. This is probably their petty little way of tweeking the French for it.

Anyway, right this day down because here's where I will defend French culture and bemoan mine. If culture is determined by movies then we are in trouble. The U.S. puts out nothing but "cookie cutter movies". These are movie ideas you have seen but the plot slightly different. Then there are the bloody sequels-over and over again. American movies have little to offer.

As to books, some of my favorite authors are foreigners and some French. Dumas, Hugo, Voltaire, Rand, Hayek, Tolkien. Who are the American writers who can compare with these persons? It may be true that none have arisen to that stature more recently. But I dont think many of our writers have ever risen to this level. I dont think much of modern art, but I got engaged under a picture by Boucher in the New York Museum of Art. As for music, the English and Americans still dominate this area.

My wife would tell you that the French still have quite a lot of influence over fashion although it has declined a bit. French food is always popular.

It's really in the area of political influence as a world power that France has declined. But, as a culture, I think rumors of its' death are widely exaggerated.

(a million francs if you identify the author of that quote I just stole)

[Mary Chin]

I read the same article, and at the end, it states that any hope for the revival of French culture comes, not from mainstream French tradition, but from its immigrants. Charles mentions two, "Abdellatif Kechiche, a director of Tunisian origin" and "Marjane Satrapi, a French Iranian". Perhaps Charles and Time Magazine do not disagree that much.

[Becca]

Regarding Universal Music, I work there and so have something to say about it. It was purchased for a particular reason, so that J6M could have content to sell over his cellphones. And we all know what happened with him. But YouTube or Google would not have fulfilled that ambition. The ironic part is that what he predicted is coming to pass and is one of the few bright spots in this industry.

Why does Vivendi hold on to the music unit? I don't think they really want to. When the sale of all the other entertainment properties to NBC happened a few years ago, we were told "The French" (as Vivendi is always called amongst the execs here) wanted to unload Universal Music as well. NBC wouldn't take it.

Any sale now would come at a great loss, thanks to what Messier paid. That's the only reason Vivendi owns Universal Music.

[Bob in Colorado]

Mr. Bremner - some observations:

Why would anyone care what Time Magazine has to say?

You have made a fundamental error - one should never use the words "rap" and music in the same sentence (except perhaps in contrast).

Modern/contemporary art is largely a sham and a scam, and will ultimately be recognized as such.

The American intellectual avant-garde is a pack of idiots.

"Anglo-American popular culture" is a vast wasteland.

The British deserve to rot in hell for the invention of Banality TV.

The dreck and drivel broadcast on American TV is beneath me. Most of it is beneath my notice; the rest is beneath my contempt. I haven't watched it for at least a decade. I would rather be stuck in a confined space with a smoker than someone watching the idiot box.

I actually went to the movies twice last year - to see "The Phantom of the Opera" and the latest "Pride and Prejudice." Otherwise, I haven't been to see a movie this century. I can't imagine going again for at least a decade. It's not that I don't get out - I recently spent $500 for three tickets to a mediocre production of La Traviata.

There are many things I would like to see in France (Notre Dame, la Palais Garnier, the grave of la Dame aux Camellias, le Chateau de Cirey), but I doubt that I will ever come. My French isn't good enough to hide the fact that I am an American, and I will not pretend to be Canadian, so I would not expect to be welcome.

[Seb]

Very good piece of journalism, thank you. That's what we can expect from a foreign correspondent: going against clichés. Now I'm glad to go back to France for the Xmas recess.
I will dance TECTONIK for sure, another French modern cultural aspect that could cross the Channel very soon, couldn't it?

[Robert Marchenoir]

Thank you, Charles. That's a gallant gesture from you.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid you are wrong. Or you'll be proven wrong in a very few years.

Check the different international studies about educational achievement. French pupils' scores are much lower than American or British ones.

Alain Bentolila, who teaches at university, says that a full third of his students are unable to find the right words to express their thoughts (don't ask how brilliant these might be).

That's during their third year into university.

And what are these young people studying?

Linguistics.

[Chris Smith]

The Time article was crude but it made a point that Mr. Free Market Sarkozy would be well to heed. Despite spending megamillions of French taxpayer euros on promoting its cultural product abroad, and despite protectionist laws, quotas, subsidies, and grants (as well as bribes in the form of medals and other “honors”), France is churning out movies and books that fewer and fewer people care about.

On the bright side (as I try to highlight in my website Frenchculturenow.com) much of the successful “French” art that the government takes credit for is produced by first-generation immigrants from Asia, Africa, latin america, and eastern Europe. Without this new and alien creative blood (for whom France is a convenient host), the country’s name would even be less present in the world’s cinemas, libraries, and concert halls.

Unfortunately, the French government has a combative, cold war mentality and still fights the “guerre des idees” against the boogeyman of Anglo-American influence, with massive diplomatic and financial counter-propaganda. Every French embassy and consulate around the world has 2-3 full-time staff distributing money and medals and throwing champagne parties in an effort to promote French language and culture. But to what end? And cui bono? The main beneficiaries are not France’s creative types, artists and writers, but the political appointees and Enarque-technocrats who monopolize the hundreds of cushy sinecure posts as cultural counselors and attaches.

[Graham Palmer]

@Jorg Andersen
Having some one that has visited France often since 1960 and spent about 6 months a year since 2000 I find his comment irrelevant. Almodovar is Mexican, Marquez is Colombian, and Solzhenitsyn is Russian . Where are the French Examples? As much as I would like to I cannot quote one (don't give me Celine Dion), and as much as I am a fan, Aznavour and Sardou and not well known outside of France.

[rockinred]

Why on earth should an American magazine - even the venerable Time - be given any credibility at all when commenting on culture? America doesn't understand that there's a difference between art and entertainment, and in the movies for example, box-office is the benchmark of success, not content or intrinsic worth.

[Actu75]

Of course most French would as I share Mr Brenner's revigorating views. It definitely feels good to see the representant of the most eminent anglo saxon media relevantly attack the endless repetition of the most common anglo saxons clichés towards gallic culture.
The cultural exception stance surely has produced more than it should "self-indulgent dross movies" (or other formes of creation). And as far as TV or cinema is concerned I wish our directors or screen writers could take more inspiration from british productions. But that's another story.
And however as Terry's old foe would have put it "le bilan est globalement positif".
It also has not prevented french artists to mix cultural influences (as in fact we have always done since the Renaissance in this country).

[christopher muir]

Much as I have enjoyed visits to the US and been stimulated over the years by her writers and composers, I feel that something has gone very wrong in that country. Time Magazine knows it well and is thrashing around trying to maintain a cultural superiority in the face of an increasingly critical world reaction to the present US administration. One day, special French-US cultural liaisons, as exemplified by the Aaron Copeland-Nadia Boulanger days, should blossom again - in better and less confrontational times.

[Frank Schnittger]

Terry - people seem to have missed your positive comments about France (has your monkey surrendered?) and your Mark Twain reference. Can I have my million Francs in Euros please?

[Valentin]

Funny, I always considered Time a conservative rightwing magazine. It declared GW Bush Person of the Year twice, in 2000 and 2004 - and not for bad reasons. I was a Time subscriber for a while, but especially since 2003 it displayed SUCH a support for the war in Iraq, such admiration for W's policies that I couldn't renew that subscription.
(btw I consider Newsweek quite leftish)

[Axel]

I believe that the new national theatre in Beijing has been built by Paul Andreu.

[Yes, you're right of course, Axel. I have inserted Andreu's name with Nouvel. Thanks. CB]

[Mads]

Terry,
I claim the million francs!! Was it not Oscar Wilde who originally uttered this famous phrase?

[colin grayson]

when I discuss this with my french neighbours they describe french culture as something they pay for through inflated taxes for the self aggrandisment of the ruling classes , nothing to do with the overwhelming majority of french people ; in other words just like everywhere else; TV is mostly imported junk ...the same junk as in the anglosaxon world

I can no longer speak of paris as I spend almost no time there due to the pollution , but as for the rest of france the change in the last 40 years has been dramatic ...at that time you knew you were in france by the clothes people wore , what they ate and drank , the cars they drove , and the way they furnished their houses

now , working wives buy frozen meals , jeans and cheap chinese imports are universally worn , german and japanese cars are taking over [ together with UK 4WD for those who can afford them ] ; wine consumption must be down by at least 50% [ and le gin tonic is on the up since I arrived ] ; as in the uk , university standards are plummeting towards american standards ;ordinary french homes are now being painted and decorated so that people are non longer ashamed to invite you in if you are a foreigner... in my part of france the young people no longer spend their early working years in paris , they go to the uk instead ...I don't mean the PhD's , but ordinary youngsters with a trade or profession

why has all this come about ? quite simple ... the information age and mondialisation ; maybe french is now finished as a world language , but the french are not stupid , they can pick out what they want and no longer are conned into being told that french is automatically best , and that most certainly includes so called culture

btw , I thought celline dionne was canadian except when she wanted to enter the eurovision song contest

[Johnny Foreigner]

Dear Bob in Colorado

Don't be so downbeat. If your living in cultural purgatory, give yourself a break, and go see the things you want to see. There are a lot of chin strokers who like to tick off the US, but, as has been widely said on here, the French love the US. Music, books, films, clothes, TV, the lot. Parisians love to cultivate their US friends. You don't even have to speak French these days. English-speaking has quietly been getting better; I know a number of hugely popular Americans here and their French is often pretty "sketchy". The papers love to stir it up, like CB says above. On the ground, it's a different picture. You'll be fine.

[Dominique]

The issue is not about death of french culture, but the death of culture, weather french or not.

Art and Culture may exist, but they are no longer considered as "above" trading, marketing and entertainment. They are now part of it. This may sound normal to anglosaxons, but this goes against the "mécène state" France cherishes so much.

Things are complex as talented people therefore go in new directions. While it is sad to see that "50 cent" is today's Maryline, that Marc Levy took Alexandre Dumas's place, it is normal to see the scenarii writers of "six feet under" or "desperate housewife" replacing Balzac with great talent! Image and screen replaced the book!

Regarding french music abroad, many french artist are world famous but no one knows they are french! Hair, Daft Punk, JUSTICE to name the first that come to my mind (if you get the first three secunds, you'd recognize them). They sing in "globish", and are no longer part of what used to be called "french culture".

More seriously and sadly, some start to say that the European civilisation is a "civilisation de l'écrit" (writing) that will have difficulties to adapt to the "civilisation de l'image". Africa will find it's way if oral language finally kills writen language.

[John Gregory Flinn]

"...Voltaire proclaimed the demise of French thought."

Perhaps Voltaire had in mind the collective polemic that Dr Pangloss preached. And the need for independent thought outside the modish received wisdoms of the day.
Which situation still appears to exist today albeit on a wider international scale.

There is a collective (anglo-saxon?) "democratic viewpoint" which even includes Art as Charles outlines. To be different or stray from these viewpoints, as France often does, can invite such philistinist clichés about French Culture as in 'Time' magazine.

"...the American writers who can compare with these persons?"

TERRY;- I feel you do your writers down somewhat. Arthur Miller and John Steinbeck made profound commentary on America of their time in a similar way that, e.g., Voltaire did on France of the mid 18th century.

[dot king]

If France's culture is to be judged by the standards of the rest of the world - ie Time journalists, then living French persons who are known outside France: certainly Charles Aznavour despite what is said above, Brigitte Bardot was certainly alive this morning or I'd have heard differently on the news, Jean-Michel Jarre is pretty damn famous too, Mireille Mathieu is much-loved in Japan. In the cinema, well, Audrey Tautou made a splash in both "Amélie" and the "Da Vinci Code", Lambert Wilson is one of Hollywood's favourite bad guys - and he's no slouch. More later, duty calls . . .

[qwerty]

When I think of Anglo-Saxon film directors I like, I think primarily of: Tim Burton (everything), the Coen Brothers (the Big Lebowski and just about everything), Stephen Frears (Dangerous Liaisons, My Beautiful Launderette). For English-language authors, I’d put: Brett Easton Ellis (everything), Philip Roth (the Human Stain), Ishiguro (Never Let Me Go), McEuan (Atonement).

Obviously it’s a question of taste, but isn’t there a difference in sheer scope and ambition between these directors and authors and French (or rather, “Germanopratin”) writers/film-makers such as Florian Zeller and whoever made the forgettable film I saw on Canal Plus the other day named “les Amitiés Maléfiques”?

Are there any living French authors who’ve written anything as intellectually and artistically satisfying, and such sheer fun, as “Possession” by AS Byatt? Is there a single young French author who has published, at twenty-four, a book of the scope of “White Teeth” (Zadie Smith)? What about Pessl’s “Special Topics in Calamity Physics”, whatever the hype?

Of course there is Modiano, and I also love Emmanuel Carrère (la Classe de Neige, Roman Russe) and Benaquista. Michel Gondry makes really good movies - but in the US (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind). But it’s the SCOPE and the UNIVERSAL APPEAL that seem to lack generally in French production.

However, I’d say that there probably isn’t a single author of whatever nationality or epoch who can touch Céline, who invented an entirely new language (maybe Joyce, but he’s unreadable for me) -- but he’s dead so cannot be categorised here.

[dot king]

To continue my list of famous French living people - but I realise we have no working definition of "culture" so like everyone else I'll make this as elastic as I can:
Gérard Dépardieu has surely been in films other than French? Carole Bouquet has certainly been a James Bond girl. How about Nathalie Dessay, recent recitals in NY? And how about Hélène Grimaud, concert pianist who until recently lived in Maine USA? Robert Alagna is French despite the Italian appellation. We can surely count Maurice Béjart who died so recently. I'm told that Arielle Dombasle went down well in Vegas (OK French by marriage not by birth) and her husband, the famous BHL, spends lots of time Stateside and has written a book about American culture . . .
Someone above said that if you choose to ignore what comes to you from elsewhere then you ignore and/or deny the culture of others - whatever definition you choose to give the word.
That's true - but the French don't do this. They read authors in translation from almost any original language, you can nearly always see "films d'auteur" américains in VO (version originale) - Woody Allen, Robert Altman, Coppola, Wang Kai Wong, Tarantino. And so on.
Peter Brook works in Paris, John Elliot Gardener is on the radio as I write.
Your honour, I rest my case. ;}

[Terry]

"Terry - people seem to have missed your positive comments about France (has your monkey surrendered?) and your Mark Twain reference. Can I have my million Francs in Euros please?"

Apparently, only you missed it. Did I not pay homage to Voltaire, Hugo and Dumas? Boucher is my favorite painter maybe next to Ruisdale.

For the most part, american movies are awful and have been since the 1970s ended. I dont think we judge culture just on movies, art, music, etc. Defining culture is rather elusive. There's much more too it.

As to the million francs, you are the winner. Of course, as you recognize francs are no longer worth anything. You may collect your winnings by coming to North Bergen, New Jersey by 4:00 p.m. today. Please bring two forms of i.d. Socialist Party cards are not accepted.

[Terry]

Mads said:

"Terry,
I claim the million francs!! Was it not Oscar Wilde who originally uttered this famous phrase?"

You lose. The answer was Mark Twain.

[Terry]

John Flynn said:

"TERRY;- I feel you do your writers down somewhat. Arthur Miller and John Steinbeck made profound commentary on America of their time in a similar way that, e.g., Voltaire did on France of the mid 18th century."

You are probably right. There are some noted American writers. Mark Twain and Ernest Hemingway. One might say Emerson and Thoreau too. In some ways, it is a manner of personal preference. Im am a little down on American writers. As far as novels go, I really cant stand any of these writers, especially John Steinbeck. He was a communist who really had nothing very interesting to say. The Red Pony-Of Mice and Men, yawn. Rather than the classics, my high school used to shove Steinbeck down are throats like bad medicine. I think I actually dozed off reading Old Man and the Sea. With the exception of maybe Hemingway, I dont think that these authors had the worldwide influence or stature that Hugo or Dumas did. However, the most influential English writers far outnumber the French writers. Dickens, Locke, Hobbes, Tolkien, Adam Smith, I can go on and on.

Unfortunately, I do agree with much of what Bob said about American tv. Although, I dont share is self loathing of America in general.

[Albert]

Neither England (note: England is a European country and not part of the US or some Anglo-Saxon federation -- I know it's difficult, and politically inconvenient, for our neighbours to accept this) nor France are at their peak when it comes to 'serious' culture at present, but they still do better than the US. Americans can't separate the word popular from culture, and, as surveys have shown, even college students struggle to answer questions like 'Name the capital of France?' They can hardly be expected to know who Patrick Modiano is (I recommend his new novel, ‘Dans le café de la jeunesse perdue’). Let's be fair, though, and admit that America produces some great art, both serious and popular. Tonight Bruce Springsteen performs in Paris.

[dot king]

ps - I mean of course Wong Kar Wai - je ne sais pas ce qui m'a prise - ça doit être l'émotion causée par le bonheur du président . . .
émue, oui c'est ça :)

[Pierre]

The problem is how self-centered America has become, not the end of French dominance (should Sarkozy invade the US just to please TIME Magazine ?).
The American Film Institute best movies' list doesn't include any foreign films. Foreign movies never win Academy Awards (but crap like "A Beautiful Mind" wins !). And foreign countries can only have one nominee...
By the way, if one look at the latest Grammy Awards nominees' list, one would say that American culture is six feet under. Can Amy Whine-house compare to Émilie Simon, for instance ?

[Pierre]

I forgot to mention the issue of Japanese animation "remade" for the USA, the remakes of movies and the US aversion to foreign cultures in general.

In France, songs in Turkish, Romanian, Italian and German managed to become hits. Many foreign filmmakers are well-known.

[Graham Palmer]

@Flinn

If you know any sizeable sample of Americans (most of whom have never left their State, let alone the USA) you will discover Aznavour = ??, Bardot (at least for the under 40s) pareil, Jarre-He gave a spectacular laser show in Houston in the 90s (I was there) and I can assure you that nobody in Houston today will recognize that name; Tatou-She was great in Amelie but that was seemn by less than 0.1% of movie-goers in the States because it was not shown in the mainstream theaters and a onetime appearance in a popular movie (DaVinci Code) may not bring recognition. Wilson, I do not know. Truffaut perhaps in "Close Encounters" and more recently Jean Reno.
Names that are recognized include Chanel, Cardin, Cartier, Hermes, Baccarat, Lalique...which may tell you something.

For you to appreciate my comments, I will tell you that I live and work in an University environment but have daily contacts-through family-with mainstream Americans. Thus I do not think that my perceptions are distorted in any way.

[isobel]

In response to Qwerty asking for a French Zadie Smith - I must confess I haven't read any Zadie Smith but how about Faiza Guene? I think she was 18 when her book "Kiffe kiffe demain" came out and she's definitely got talent.I agree about Benacquista, he's great , unfortunately I think I've read all his books now.
The French also have a brilliant radio station called FIP - plays every type of music imaginable, no adverts no ridiculous chat between tracks.Anyone not in France can get it on the internet via the radio france site www.radiofrance.fr.

[christopher muir]

It's not difficult to imagine a general American reaction, for example, to a French magazine headline such as: "La Culture Americaine - est elle Morte?" A French publication should promptly fire back a deserved salvo or two in the direction of TIME's bows.

[dot king]

Graham: what you say reinforces the point about rejecting or ignoring other cultures - of course it's true that if you live in the Apalachians or the Louisiana Bayous, or some point in Middle America you aren't likely to have heard of Audrey Tautou or Charles Aznavour (or maybe you do your fellow Americans a disservice) - and possibly you aren't likely to have read the latest Toni Morrison or Margaret Atwood - and maybe no Steinbeck or Mailer.
However if you live in France, you can go to Country & Western Music Festivals (there's even one here in the Back of Beyond) you will hear Kajun music on the radio and even whole programmes dedicated to it.

I think that although someone like Nathalie Dessay sings to packed houses in NY, her concerts wouldn't hold the same attraction in those parts of the USA where most people don't know anything or anyone outside their own state (as you say).
French culture is still going strong IMO, there's more originality in new "pop" music here. France has "la chanson française" - which still to some extent imposes a minimum of sense in the lyrics of new songs. A music of "wah wah, baby baby" is likely to be less popular than something with originality, observation and intelligence. There's a lot of "sameness" around of course, but while the world has a rash of voices like Norah Jones, there aren't that many Camille or Philippe Catherine around. Originality plus intelligent lyrics plus performance. This type of music doesn't export to the USA because of the language, but does it matter? I don't think so. Tastes in music, art, fashion, literature, any form of culture are somewhat personal anyway (les goûts et les couleurs, hein?), if we then talk about access to culture then that's a different matter.
Marc Lévy is one of France's most successful authors at present, though I don't rate his work as literature. He is translated into English though and Stephen Spielberg (no less) bought the rights to "Si c'était vrai", so the USA has been spoonfed a bit of adapted French culture.
I know that Amélie Nothomb is translated by American published-only authors, for Faber & Faber, for the USA market. "Stupeur and Tremblements" was a successful and excellent film (Ms Nothomb is Belgian - but French language) and I've been able to get both hers and Eric Emmanuel Schmitt's books in English for non-francophone friends.
So my message to the Time journalist is that French culture is there for the taking, alive and well thank you very much, and with an originality that apparently escapes him. His loss.

[Frank Schnittger]

"As to the million francs, you are the winner. Of course, as you recognize francs are no longer worth anything. You may collect your winnings by coming to North Bergen, New Jersey by 4:00 p.m. today. Please bring two forms of i.d. Socialist Party cards are not accepted. - Terry"

Trust an American lawyer to add some small print to the contract after it has been signed...

[QCD]

Terry: "Dickens, Locke, Hobbes, Tolkien, Adam Smith, I can go on and on."

Baudelaire Verlaine Rimbaud Apollinaire Larbaud Char Michaux Prévert, so can I. Maupassant Montesquieu Chateaubriand Zola Rousseau Du Bellay Saint-Pierre Mallarmé Fontenelle Mauriac Camus Sartre Molière Colette Sand Montaigne Saint-Exupéry Racine Corneille Ronsard Rabelais...

[Maggie G]

Hi Frank,

I was reading your piece about European identity on the other blog a few days ago, and then today I went back to see the new comments and discovered that the discussion has been hijacked by someone we know here on this blog (the lawyer, in fact, who added some small print to the million-franc Mark Twain contract).

And I was thinking, "Poor Frank! He's probably kicking himself for inviting us to check out his topic!"

Very sorry about your million francs, Frank -- better luck next time!

[Terry]

QCD:

The difference is that none of the authors you mentioned have really had the worldwide impact that the ones I mentioned. Rousseau excepted, of course.

[Monika]

Before we start a contest of "whose country has more writers", just let me say: it is difficult for a writer to cross language borders with having as much success as at home ....

Furthermore we could discuss eternally which writer may appear in that list and which not.

I for instance wouldn't have put Tolkien on the same list as Dickens but that's more of an ideological question ...

Btw. I think particularly in the recent years there had been interesting American movies far from pure commercial productions. Movies like "Babel", "L.A. Crash", just to name those which were successfull, put the emphasis on story and story-telling rather than fx fireworks.

[azloon]

we're all screwed, i'm afraid

(he says after a few days camping on a deserted mexican beach)

[dot king]

I think the time journalist's challenge was to name any LIVING French cultural figure.

Frank, I too went on to your Eurotribune site and had a couple of points to make about your initial post on Russia and its position in Europe, but by the time I had time to do anything the discussion had gone elsewhere!
Good intentions and all that.

Azloon, I take it you were alone on your Mexican beach, then how did you manage to get . . . ? I guess you just got lucky!! ;)

[QCD]

Dickens, Tolkien, JK Rowling, Arthur C Clarke, Frank Herbert, James Herbert, Louis de Bernières, Alain de Botton, Ian McEwan, mid Martin Amis, my list of awful(ly famous) english literateurs goes on and on.

[PB]

Terry,
Go to China and ask about Dickens, Locke, Hobbes, Tolkien, Adam Smith...
So many comment on this thread are self centered ! Anglo = the world... Impact in UK = global impact...

[Robert Marchenoir]

Isobel, about Faiza Guene: I would not qualify what she writes as "talented". Nice, yes. Cute, probably. Likeable and trendy because she comes from an ethnic minority in a city estate, sure.

But this is not literature. Just a media phenomenon.

[azloon]

DOT--

"we're all screwed"

no, not THAT.

unfortunately, a girl friday did not emerge from the desert to comfort me. lots of pelicans, though.

my reference was to the spirited defense here of various western cultures and their supposed ascendency/descendancy.

it's all a mirage.

american-style pop culture is taking us all down the toilet. the arguments heard here are really about how fast it is happening in our respective countries.

time magazine as an arbiter of culture? sort of like 'go daffy' criticizing european treatment of women.

that 'rag' is bathroom reading at best.

[Terry]

PB said:

"Terry,
Go to China and ask about Dickens, Locke, Hobbes, Tolkien, Adam Smith...'

Go to China, PB, and you will find that books that talk about freedom, democracy, capitalist economics are BANNED. I dont think you'll find many copies of Wealth of Nations in Peking.

Before you get yourself in a lather, kindly go back and read my earlier posts where I state that I believe french authors are superior to American ones as well as my comments on American movies and television.

One very good French movie by the way, Ridicule.

Also BTW: QCD. How did we forget Orwell? Also, not available in your Chinese Barnes & Noble.

[PB]

Very good point Terry
Then try the same thing in Japan, South Korea, Indonesia... What's your explanation this time ?
By the way, once there, check out the DVD shops for french movies, you'll find all the blockbusters as well as the classics.

[Paul]

Terry,
Wealth of Nations costs RMB 62.10 on the chinese based amazon.cn. You can find 1984 there too, RMB 19.

[Mary Catherine, US]

Graham Palmer

Get over yourself (though, as you revealed yourself as someone who lives and works in a University environment, this is mostly impossible to do).

To say with any sizable sample of Americans, most have never left their State, is beyong ludicrous.

'What' culture is, is too subjective, and I believe those who try to define it within narrow parameters are themselves 'uncultured'.

[Terry]

PB:

With regard to worldwide influence, I think you will find that "anglo" books and movies in those countries are more popular than the French. Japan, especially, experienced a profound US influence due to their occupation. We havent discussed sports as far as culture is concerned. The most popular are baseball, european football (invented by Great Britain), volleyball etc.

Again, the "anglo" influence has been greater in these areas then the French influence. But, if you read what I wrote earlier, you'd see that I dont necessarily believe that american writing or movies or television is better quality than the french. My favorite novels are Les Miserables, Lord of the Rings and The Three Musketeers. Two out of three aint bad.

Take a deep breath, PB, and just read carefully what I am saying rather than just assuming I am "dissing" the French (this time).

BTW: Yes, I advise all chinese citizens to feel free to buy "Animal Farm" on amazon.cn and have it delivered to their home address. I am sure the chinese secret service wont take any interest at all.

[Monika]

Since I love to contradict Terry who said:
"The difference is that none of the authors you mentioned have really had the worldwide impact that the ones I mentioned. Rousseau excepted, of course."

Sorry, but Molière is a wide read and played author in Germany, too, as much as Saint-Exupéry and Voltaire and Dumas (the count of Monte-Christo, the 4 Musketeers. How many hollywood movies had been made based on these novels?)

Rousseau you mentionned yourself.

And again: the fact that Americans read only few of French writers does not implicate that they aren't read elsewhere either. To extrapolate from American experience towards other countries and cultures is somewhat ethnocentric ....

[Valentin]

"'What' culture is, is too subjective"

A matter of aesthetics, ultimately... for me it's like comparing classical music with pop/rock whatever. "Sir" Jagger will never produce something even be comparable to a Haydn composition.
Standards do exist, the abundance of artistic works that we have today has nothing to do with quality (and quality isn't measurable by sales/audience rates, no matter how democratic we like to be)

""anglo" books and movies in those countries are more popular than the French"

Of course - and this is true all over the world; English is one of the easiest-to-learn languages IMO, and on the other hand, the marketing power of american publishing houses has NO competition at all, today.

[Valentin]

"'What' culture is, is too subjective"

A matter of aesthetics, ultimately... for me it's like comparing classical music with pop/rock whatever. "Sir" Jagger will never produce something even be comparable to a Haydn composition.
Standards do exist, the abundance of artistic works that we have today has nothing to do with quality (and quality isn't measurable by sales/audience rates, no matter how democratic we like to be)

""anglo" books and movies in those countries are more popular than the French"

Of course - and this is true all over the world; English is one of the easiest-to-learn languages IMO, and on the other hand, the marketing power of american publishing houses has NO competition at all, today.

[Dominique]

Terry,

"european football (invented by Great Britain)"

this is a very good example of a cultural "anglo saxon centrism" that is wrongly spread as if it was "the universal truth". (a bit like telling that Chritopher Columbus discovered America : that is eurocentered)

Please see the history according to Wiki (in english! i spare you the french one!)

"Games revolving around the kicking of a ball have been played in many countries throughout history. According to FIFA, the "very earliest form of the game for which there is scientific evidence was an exercise of precisely this skilful technique dating back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries BC in China (the game of Cuju)."[9] In addition, the Roman game Harpastum may be a distant ancestor of football. Various forms of football were played in medieval Europe, though rules varied greatly by both period and location.

The modern rules of football are based on the mid-19th century efforts to standardise the widely varying forms of football played at the public schools of England."

[Paul]

"English is one of the easiest-to-learn languages". Again, that's a self centric view. It is only (partly) true if you already know a european language. Otherwise, it's just as difficult as learning korean for an english speaker.
Anyway, nice to see that China (and amazon) suffers even worse predjudices than France does.

[QCD]

Valentin, children in every country in the world have a respectable grasp of their mother language by the age of 5. Ergo, each language presents the same level of difficulty.

English may appear easier to learn for being so much more widespread than any other language. But given the number of people here who ignore the difference between 'lose' and 'loose' (or 'end' and 'ending'), I wouldn't underestimate its ability to trap and snare. Even the americans can't master it. In his latest film but one Woody Allen had his two protagonists saying 'snuck' instead of 'sneaked'!

[dot king]

"Company man" - a(n) hilarious film about an American English teacher who corrects everyone all the time. Recommend it. :)

[Terry]

Monika:

Again, you didnt read what I wrote very well. Two of my favorite books are Les Miserables and Three Musketeers. I dont think any american authors have written anything that compares with their cultural influence. That said, I think that the English have MORE writers who have had similar influence worldwide. There may be a few more French writers that I am unfamiliar with. The point is that the English have produced far more influential writers.

[Terry]

Dominique:

"Games revolving around the kicking of a ball have been played in many countries throughout history. According to FIFA, the "very earliest form of the game for which there is scientific evidence was an exercise of precisely this skilful technique dating back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries BC in China (the game of Cuju)."

Yes, and does that mean that because some caveman kicked a stone a couple times, HE invented soccer?

The modern game as we know it was developed in England. It was spread throughout the world by British railway workers.

[Terry]

Valentin said:

"Standards do exist, the abundance of artistic works that we have today has nothing to do with quality (and quality isn't measurable by sales/audience rates, no matter how democratic we like to be)"

I agree with this. I do tend to think that the "anglo's" have had more influence. And, a lot of this is due to reasons that dont have to do with quality. England spread its influence as a colonial power. Also by building railroads all over the world. England also led the world in book production at one point only to be replaced by the US. The movie and recording industries began in America. America's influence spread throughout the world wherever it's armies went, not so dissimiliar to the Romans. I also think that the quantity and quality of English writers were better than the French. But, as Valentin notes, that is rather subjective.

[Dominique]

Terry,

The one who "spreads" is not always the one who "invents". Two different words describe two different things.

[Valentin]

Paul and QCD,

Regarding English, it is quite difficult to learn for asians, indeed. But compared to other european languages, or even with other asian languages, it actually is MUCH MUCH SIMPLER.
It's not to mean it's a simplistic language, but that its structure makes it easy to learn ENOUGH TO COMMUNICATE - compared with other languages.
Loose is a good example: I am certain ALL anglophones understodd what the person meant, from the context !
Learning the tens of thousands of signs and nuances of Chinese is not quite the same thing.
Also comparing English to French or German is definitely in favour of English, wr to the ease to learn *enough to communicate*.

I'd like to hear Dot's expert opinion on this, btw :)

[Paul]

Valentin,
That's pretty much what we said. What you said was "Of course - and this is true all over the world; English is one of the easiest-to-learn languages IMO". Now you admit that "it is quite difficult to learn for asians". Well, that represents quite a big chunk of the world... That's what I was trying to point out when I said you had a self centric view.

[Valentin]

Paul, I don't admit to anything. I said English is one of the easiest, that is, compared to other tongues. Compared to others, English is easy, which doesn't mean it is not difficult for Chinese. Only comparatively, even for them, it's easier than others.

If you make the distinction between a relative statement and an absolute one, you'll see there's no contradiction in what I said.
Anglo culture permeates other cultures (asian or european or others) far easier than any other culture (asian or european...) because of the language and of the US/UK cultural messianism.

(again "language easy to learn" is to mean, enough to communicate - most people in the world have a very simplistic understanding of english lyrics, for instance)

[millier marc]

the death of french culture after the death of the french "haute culture then the french wine , the french cuisine ,and french cinema, french music and also architecture and the french painter what the english news ppaper will annonce the next time.the death of FRANCE!!!!!!!!!!! what else ..!!!!!! but we are always alive!!!!!!!!!

[Paul]

Yeah. Whatever. You win. I don't even know what the conversation is about at this point.

[dot king]

Marc - Time is an American magazine - the English (as in the other sidde of La Manche) have a great respect and liking for French culture. Just to give one tiny example - the BBC serialises French literature just as much as it does Austen or Hardy. I can bring to mind just in a second: Germinal, Education Sentimentale, Cousine Bette, Madame Bovary, Bel Ami, Nana, Le Comte de Monte Cristo . . . liste non-exhaustive.
The productions and casting were always excellent - and French films go on release, though in specialised, therefore limited cinemas.
Paul, yes, the point of any blog goes out of the window once Valentin contributes a spot of his "highmindedness" whatever the subject.

[millier marc]

YES its true
"La graine et le mulet" is the greatest movie of this year in France.
About suburb there are several numner.
77. 78..91..92..93..94..95..
92 is the depart the richest of France.the former sarkozy one..
93 is the depart with a lot of foreign people.CLICHY SOUS BOIS..No bois there!!!! LA COURNEUVE ..SAINT DENIS..I used to live there .
n

[dot king]

Valentin, fancy you asking for my "expert" opinion!!:)
Well, since you do, I'll say that language-learning and its ease depends on the motivation of the learner and the clarity and resourcefulness of the teacher to a very large extent. In a general way though, one can say that the English language follows
its gramatical and spelling rules in about 70% of cases. French is more "obedient" to its language rules, roughly 90%.
You only have to think of the myriad instances of nonstandard spelling and pronunciation in English and you'll see why that is. However, you only need to be observant and a little thoughful to work that one out, not an "expert", but thanks for the compliment :)

[Valentin]

The conversation was about why anglo culture is so popular while French culture seems to "die".

One of the reasons is the difficulty to learn the basics of the language. French basics are much more difficult to learn than English ones.
All European languages are difficult for Asians, but amongst them, French is particularly difficult.

Also French don't necessarily see their culture in a commercial way, while Hollywood's reason to live is to sell as much as possible.
Anglo salesmen function in a way like catholic missionaries. By expanding their market, they spread culture - and - which makes it even worse - with no regard to quality.

No one wants to "win" anything, btw.

[Valentin]

Dorothy,
my question was not about the irregularity of the English language, but about its quality to convey information with simple structures.
You don't need to learn many rules or many words to be able to communicate fluently - which is less possible in French IMO.
Thanks for your friendly thoughts sinon, I actually believed you might have an interesting input. Au temps pour moi, I should've kept to the real topic here: why Sarko took Bigard to Rome ! :)

[Monika]

"Monika:

Again, you didnt read what I wrote very well. Two of my favorite books are Les Miserables and Three Musketeers. I dont think any american authors have written anything that compares with their cultural influence. That said, I think that the English have MORE writers who have had similar influence worldwide. There may be a few more French writers that I am unfamiliar with. The point is that the English have produced far more influential writers." (Terry)

Don't get me wrong but my point was rather that I think you start from your own experience concerning which books were influential and which were not. This experience was surely formed during your school and university education and by the cultural environment (=American cultural environment) which put you more often in contact with "anglo-saxon" literature. It is not your fault. Everyone is obliged to do so. One has to extrapolate from what one has learned unless told otherwise.

In Germany for instance Goethe is seen as the climax of literature and he had and still has influence on cultural life. We grow up with this knowledge. What we aren't told is that in other countries this is not necessarily the case, that his influence and esteem is more limited to the German speaking world (which is rather small as you know). Although Goethe actually is read elsewhere, too, as I had to learn ...

[Monika]

"The conversation was about why anglo culture is so popular while French culture seems to "die".

One of the reasons is the difficulty to learn the basics of the language. French basics are much more difficult to learn than English ones.
All European languages are difficult for Asians, but amongst them, French is particularly difficult.

Also French don't necessarily see their culture in a commercial way, while Hollywood's reason to live is to sell as much as possible.
Anglo salesmen function in a way like catholic missionaries. By expanding their market, they spread culture - and - which makes it even worse - with no regard to quality.

No one wants to "win" anything, btw."

Nonsense. Sorry to say that harsh word but the (supposed) simplicity of a language is definitely not the reason for the prevalence of a certain culture while the (presumed) difficulty of another is not the reason for downfall of a culture.

The fact that (American!) English and particularly the American culture (I like to emphasize at this point that I don't speak of British culture even though Brits do speak English) has such a strong impact is a direct result from WW2 and the following cold war.

When the war was finished literally the whole of Europe was devastated where people suffered famine and lack of shelter in many parts. The number of refugees and displaced people were enormous.

The whole human effort was put to rebuild and to feed and then later to reactivate economical and industrial activity from literally zero in many parts.

While in America the sheer productivity of goods was intact. I've just recently watched a documentary about the war production in America during the war. The numbers in which they were able to produce war ships, planes and such things in such a short time were simply astonishing (sorry, I don't remember the numbers).
Then came the Marshal Plan (payed not unselfishly of course) that aimed in the shadow of the beginning of the cold war to help Europeans to rebuild --- and to buy American goods where European one were still not available.

And of course America seeks to deepen its influence in the world. Coupled to their economical and military power they are able to do that.

While Japan and Western Europe may have a similar economic power the will to spend as much money on military power is much less. Btw. every European nation on its own is surely too small to rival.

I wonder if it is something to regret. Imho I don't think so.

If we are afraid of loosing our culture (but I am not) it is up to us to preserve and to develop our own. Do I need a culture that spreads everywhere? I don't think so. If that what we produce is attractive to others, it'll be taken. If not, what does it matter?

Btw. in Roman times the lingua franca was Latin and the prevailing culture was Roman. Surely not because Latin was such a simple language ...

Last but not least
A merry X-mas (and Happy Chanukka to Terry) and a Happy New Year to all of you. We'll read us again next year ;)

[dot king]

Yes, Valentin, since you bring it up, why DID Sarko take Bigard to the Vatican?
Sorry to have disappointed you, but I expect you're used to it!

[dot king]

Valentin, I thought a little in the way of approximate statistics about the grammatical and orthographical complexities of the English language to would indeed be "input".
If a language has a set of rules which it then doesn't follow, then it would seem evident that it could be less easy to learn that one which is more rule-following. That was what you were meant to infer. It doesn't matter though that you didn't. Perhaps there were people who did. :)
You say that French is hard for an Asian to learn, yet as I've mentioned in another thread, the Asian pupils in my classes in the UK were often the best French learners. And their home languages were alphabetically completely different - not to mention the orientation of text or script.
So, perhaps as usual, you are basing your "facts" on the difficulties you experienced in learning French. You found English easier . . . et alors?
That just means you found English easier, not that English IS by definition easier.

[dot king]

Monika: sorry, I have to react (with humour) to this:
"(I like to emphasize at this point that I don't speak of British culture even though Brits do speak English)"
Can we spare a little thought that if the lingua franca of the USA is English, it's because the English took it there with the Pilgrim Fathers - since when the language and culture have dramatically diverged. So I think we can speak of an English culture that is British, one that is American, Australian, South African. and I daresay we could talk of variations from region to region . . .
As I said this comment is not without a grain humour intended - I knew what you meant - it just struck me as a strange way of seeing things.
Bon weekend, Christmas cake to ice, I could be some time . . .
Happy Christmas to one and all.

[Valentin]

Monika:
" Sorry to say that harsh word but the (supposed) simplicity of a language is definitely not the reason for the prevalence of a certain culture"

I tend to think it is one of the reasons, albeit indirect, since the basics needed to express in "vulgar" English are simple - not the English language as a whole.
I know people able to communicate well enough with spare knowledge - while unable to write a column in English.
And why else English imposed itself as a "lingua franca", if not for the relative facility to learn its basics.

Dorothy's observations are quite pertinent too. Latin was a lingua franca, it's true, but rather for the intellectual people and the upper classes. It compares little with tourists, students, media, nearly anybody today using English: as a necessary means to connect any two cultures. No one will ask an Albanian to learn Finnish: they'll exchange in English. This creates a natural "market" (or permeable area) for anglo culture.

As to the degree of irregularity, Dot's remarks are quite common-sensical in an organised learning system.
My angle was different: when you learn a new language fast and as an adult, it's different, intuition helps a lot,especially for the irregular part. In English, a mistaken tense or forgotten rule has little consequence: your partner will understand what you mean anyway. In French every detail has a meaning and people are easily confused.
Also, stuff like the lack of gender in English simplifies things.

Dorothy speaks of her Asian kids. I suspect they're more concentrated and work more. But besides all this: I based my remarks on my experience with adult chinese. I noticed the kind of mistakes they make (revealing the logic they're used to), the effort they make to COMPLETELY REPHRASE a sentence in French, because l'esprit de la langue is so different.

Otherwise, I agree with all other remarks from Monika about WW2 and the rest.

[Valentin]

Monika:
"If we are afraid of loosing our culture (but I am not) it is up to us to preserve and to develop our own"

That might prove quite difficult in a marketised society, where bookstores, publishing houses, cinemas, video distribution chains etc are all linked to Hollywood and the media Majors, which are all american (yes, even Vivendi, even Sony).
They promote american street culture, they have the money to spread it, small independent French or German houses can barely make a couple of films a year (and their lack of means is obvious).

It took the French state to make laws protecting the national culture - and it seems to work quite well. I wouldn't count on capitalists and freemarketeers for that, they're in a conquer-all-and-burn-to-the-ground logic - and they're mostly american.

Sinon yes, indeed, happy holidays to all, merry Christmas to the latranians :) and a happy 2008 to CB and everybody else here !

peace
Valentin

[Daniel Strohl]

Dot King, Valentin

My first "mother language" was Alsatian. As a small boy, I had to learn French before WWII (and German during WWII) then French again after WWII. After that came English (au collège seulement, puis un peu de pratique).

I had no particular difficulties with English, except may be for the pronunciation. IMO, French is more difficult than German which is more difficult than English. Or the other way round : English is (for a person speaking an Indo-European language) the most easiest to learn of these three languages, especially due to its (relatively) simple grammar and spelling rules.

However, I am not able to make comparisons with any other language, especially not with an Asiatic one.

But I have a dim recollection of an interview, may be 30 years ago, of an English writer (who mastered also French) who explained that he had lived in Malaya when he was young. He said, as far as I am able to remember, that Malayan is a language with a very clear and straightforward structure.

Therefore, we should ask a Malayan speaking English, French and German which of these three languages is the easiest (or the least difficult) to learn !

[Paul]

Daniel
So starting from Alsatian, you found it more difficult to reach a working level of German than English ?

[Dominique]

the easiest : Indonesian language!

to walk : jalan
to walk around : jalan jalan

l'enfant : anak
les enfants : anak anak

je mange : saya makan
tu manges : kau makan

je mangeais : saya makan sudah
tu mangeais : kau makan sudah

je mangerai : saya makanv belum
tu mangeras : kau makan belum

amazing! the very idea that plural can be obtained by saying the word twice is an absolute joy to me!

[Daniel Strohl]

Paul,

"So starting from Alsatian, you found it more difficult to reach a working level of German than English ?

No, of course not. What I intented to say is if one wants to speak and write correctly a language, one has to comply with its grammar, syntax and spelling rules. These rules are simpler in English - no declensions, may be less irregular verbs, no "Du" and "Sie" ... Furthermore, English sentences are in most of the cases shorter, i.e "simpler".

Dominique,

Do you know if Indonesian is related with Malayan (for instance like French with Italian) or if it is possibly almost the same language ?

In French, the Indonesian syntax doesn't work quite well.

Ex. : Une bise
- être en bise bise avec quelqu'un ...

JOYEUX NOEL A TOUS !

[QCD]

You're all missing the point. The relative complexities of a given language's grammatical structure are as nothing compared to the mental effort involved in learning the vocabulary.

haus, whether casa, house or maison, is equally difficult to learn.

Merry Xmas
Pierre

[Valentin]

Oh dear, Paul, you're only enforcing our point.

I've read somewhere that while the English vocabulary is quite larger, the number of CURRENTLY USED words is about 50% greater for French !
Older studies say the same: basic English vocabulary was established at some 1500 words, while the French one was 2500-3500 words (based on statistics as well as linguistic research).
Everyday life French vocabulary being much richer, it will also be much more difficult to memorize and combine into phrases. English will thus spread much easier (especially that Hollywood is not known for its richness of vocabulary) while a complex language from a complex, intellectualized culture won't appeal to the wide masses of chinese, indian, or african.

Returning to grammar, here's a comparison of the two languages:
http://french.about.com/library/bl-differences.htm

French is much more complex (on 10 criteria out of 13).

[Daniel Strohl]

Pierre - QCD,

"haus, whether casa, house or maison, is equally difficult to learn".

If your postulate is true (and it is probably true if for instance a Russian wants to learn English, French or German), then the main difference will be the grammar.

The Russian will probably have less problems with the German grammar (declensions with "only" 4 cases instead of 6 in Russian) than with the French or English grammar, where declensions are not present.

However, due to history, there are many Russian words of French and German origin which will facilitate the learning of the vocabulary(ies).

[dot king]

After the 1789 Revolution, didn't the French government order a review the dictionary, taking out all the "surplus" words? So at this point I understand, a number of synonyms disappeared from usage - at least officially.
This has never happened to the English language dictionary.
When I do translations, I often find the French not more but less expressive, and quite often have to elaborate in English to keep to a faithful intention of the words in French. To give a small example, recently I translated some adoption papers. The prospective parents and their entourage came across in French as possibly not good candidates, yet their application had been wholeheartedly approved by the competent services, but the whole had been expressed in language that was rather "reducteur", clipped and official. For example the psychologist wrote that it was Madame who had had a series of miscarriages, which was a touch unnecessary, and was also couched in terms that made it seem like it had been her fault.

The same is true of school text-books. It isn't the inaccessibility, or the dry terms in which you can couch it, of language that render it rich.

I do think English is more flexible and dynamic, giving more opportunities for creativity - eg (an everyday example) when a footballer is sent off the pitch, he has to stay behind "the sidelines" (noun) - from this evolved the verb "to sideline" and now a commentator might say "he's been sidelined". Equally if you want to see something on the skyline (noun) you can "skyline" it (verb); when we throw something away, now we say we've "binned" it so waste-bin (noun) has given us a verb "to bin".
It may be that this kind of flexibility / evolution applies equally to French, but I haven't noticed it, not in my work, nor my neighbourhood, nor my literary environments.
I've noticed too that Azloon will often use the term "his bad" or "his good". "Bad" and "good" are adjectives in English-English, but seem to have become nouns in American English usage. No quarrel with that - language is, and should be, dynamic - and it is there to serve us and enable us to communicate. We need to master it as well as possible to serve our purposes - I quote a teacher of my close acquaintance "it's only a comma, you're much bigger than it is and yet you're scared of using it? N'importe quoi!" (This teacher works in a bilingual environment :)).
IMO trying to say which language is richer is the wrong way to take the argument, it's being open to the differences and usages that is interesting.

[Valentin]

Well it's a bit the way your argument turns too, Dorothy :) I was beginning to think about it, and your ending paragraph brought in a certain touch of finality that rejects debate. Now I'm no longer sure what to do about it. Pity for such good ideas to be muted like that.
:)

(Azloon is having fun speaking valley english, or ghetto slang, my bad instead of my mistake etc)

[Dominique]

Daniel Strohl,

Indonesian (officially Bahasia INDONESIA) is the very same language as Malay (officially Bahasia Malaysia). The language, as far as i remember, was choosen by the indonesian authorities for unifying a country made of 13000 islands and almost as many laguages. The accent sounds also very french and makes it quite easy for french speakers.

We could very well use the indonesian grammar in french with sentences like :

"Sarkozy, président d'une République qui lui avait donné trop de pouvoir pouvoir ne put s'empêcher de multiplier les conquête conquête féminines. Il avait également du mal à ne pas montrer qu'il avait des amis qui possédaient des milliard milliard."

[Valentin]

A friend of mine once said: "Après avoir marché marché, suis dans un café La Tour Maubourg".

Moral: You can do it with verbs too !! :))

[Maggie G]

Valentin,

In your list of "Comparisons of Characteristics" of French and English, it says that the subjunctive is "common" in French and "very rare" in English.

This observation must have been made by a British person, because in North America we DO use the subjunctive -- all the time.

When we first came to France and I had access to British newspapers in the local supermarket, I was constantly amazed by the lack of subjuctive in British newspaper reports. I even started a little notebook where I would write down sentences that particularly amazed me.

Where the British would say, "It is essential that the president is open with the public about the state of his marriage", we would say, "It is essential that the president BE open with the public about the state of his marriage."

Or the British would say, "It is mandatory that Khadafi sleeps in a hotel when he visits Washington", whereas we would say, "It is mandatory that Khadafi SLEEP in a hotel when he visits Washington".

After many years of reading Bristish papers now, I am still a little shocked every time I come across one of these "subjunctive-less" sentences, and they still seem so odd to me that I feel almost certain some Brit will challenge me over those two examples, and say it's NOT the way they would say it.

But it really IS!

I never really understood what the subjunctive was about until I started reading British newspapers, and all this really improved my understanding of the subjunctive in French.

If anyone knows how it came about that North Americans have retained this more "correct" and "traditional" way of speaking, while the Brits have lost it, I would be very grateful for an explanation.

[dot king]

Maggie: Oh! I must protest! (Well, it's a dirty job, but someone has to do it). Would that it were not so! :)

I don't read many British newspapers, so I can't confirm or deny whether use of the subjunctive is dead within their pages.
I can only say that I would have written the two sentences you cite with a subjunctive. And would have spoken them in the same way.
I am definitely British and I do correct my Anglophone pupils when they don't use a subjunctive where they should - in order that it help them understand the subjunctives they come across in French text. Given an equivalent, they usually understand.
However, I do think that journalists often write in spoken language which might not be so punctilious where the subjunctive is concerned. On the rare occasions I'm exposed to British TV, chez des amis, I'm always taken aback by the way announcers erm, well, erm, enunciate . . . They all seem to have a regional accent (fine, no problem) which has been rendered ridiculous by elocution lessons, even to placing emphasis on the wrong syllables. I find it grates horribly, and the tone is condescending.

That your Christmas continue merry and your New Year be happy, serene and satisfactorily subjunctive. :}

[dot king]

Valentin, Thanks for the explanation of Azloon's expression - I had understood. It was the difference in usage I was commenting.
BTW if you reread my last paragraph, it starts "IMO" therefore it doesn't reject debate it, it simply gives my opinion. And the last thing I would ever expect is that you accept it! :)
However, if you wish to concede that I'm right (cor blimey guv!), I think we should ask Charles to open write something celebratory . . . ;}

[Daniel Strohl]

Dominique,

Re : Malaya and Indonesia

Thanks for the info. It is always interesting to learn things about foreign languages.

As a merchant sailor, I have made one or two calls in Singapore and also in an Indonesian harbour. In the latter one (I do not remember which one it was), we played a football match against the crew of a British cargo ship. It was great fun, and we were rather thirsty after all the efforts. Therefore we had a few "drink drink" together with the Brits ... "Après l'effort, le réconfort".

The reason why I remember this match is that the British first officer ("second capitaine" in French) assisted to the match in a wheelchair on the sideline. He had apparently a health problem; if I remember well - it was may be 45 years ago - he was rather sturdy, with a beard. If this gentleman is a reader of Charles' blog, he will probably recognize himself ...

[Valentin]

Maggie:
Very interesting, I had never thought of that, personally I couldn't tell whether the English subjunctive is more or less used than the French one.
The person saying that on the about.com site was, I guess, an English teacher from the US, so I assumed her competent enough a judge.

Dot:

"When I do translations, I often find the French not more but less expressive"

Must be the same kind of feeling that made British papers say, for instance, stuff like:
"Fog over the Channel — Europe is cut off!" :))

"have to elaborate in English to keep to a faithful intention of the words in French"

No wonder, the spirit of the two languages is different, as is the style, the rhetoric.

"I do think English is more flexible and dynamic, giving more opportunities for creativity"

It has to be, given the pretty simple rules and low number of words in daily use. One has to be creative to express in two words notions for which there's no proper name.
I like a lot how English expression is so much more concise. Where French use a whole sentence, English sometimes only needs two words. French is quite complicate for quick'n'dirty daily use, unfortunately, and foreigners I know often get annoyed by the efforts needed.
With the result that English is learnt and spreads far easier. French is a bit the Christian Dior of the languages, with the good and bad that follow from that.

[Maggie G]

Dot,

I really don’t know what to think – you say you would use the subjunctive the same as I do, but then you also say, “However, I do think that journalists often write in spoken language which might not be so punctilious where the subjunctive is concerned.”

All I can say is that we were never taught a thing about the subjunctive – we just spoke that way and wrote that way automatically, and when I saw this odd other way of saying things in the British newspapers, I wouldn’t have had a clue what the difference was, except that I had learned about the subjunctive in French, and eventually figured out that was what it was. (And after that I finally understood what the subjunctive was all about in French.)

You are highly educated in linguistics, so maybe you were TAUGHT to use the subjunctive. We weren't taught, we just learned to speak that way naturally, the same as we learned to walk.

I have never noticed this subjunctive thing in British literature, but it is definitely there in the British papers. The paper I bought was mainly the Daily Telegraph, and also the Times. I bought them because I was always looking for interesting stories to use in English lessons. Burglar stories and rescue stories, with lots of unexpected twists and turns, always work well.

[Valentin]

It might be that US and Canadian English kept certain features of the 17th century English which were abandoned (or very rarely used) in British English.
The same happened with Canadian French. Here :
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1SEC820953

they mention archaisms and 17th century expressions still used in Canada while abandoned by modern French in France.

Maggie, I learned most of these aspects of English grammar at school - an old-fashioned grammar school where they had us parsing and analysing text faster than you can say "couteau". Expressions like "would it were not so" and "so be it" are examples I will ever associate with Mr Briggs the English master of form 2K.
I liked the idea of language as a huge machine for which you need all the components to make it work, and it's an image I still use when teaching French. Eg: "That sentence doesn't work because a moving part is missing" - set to seek out their own mistakes, my pupils generally find what's wrong - takes a bit longer, but I'm there to help them get things right - it serves in the long-term.
I can't remember however, being taught the word "subjunctive" in connection with the examples I cite.
In French we were "taught" the subjunctive in 6th form only - et je n'ai rien compris! It was only when I came to France as an au pair that I was shamed into getting a grip on the French subjunctive. I was sitting with a 3 year-old child sharing our goûter, she heard her mother call her and said "c'est maman, il faut que je m'en aille". From then on I tentatively slipped one in here and there, dredged around in my memory from school, was corrected, giggled at, whatever, but it finally sank in.
You're right though, I often notice that people who write for a living aren't necessarily in full control of the "huge machine".
Perhaps no-one teaches English in the same way now that I'm not there keeping an eye on things ;) Who knows?
How about in Canada? do they still teach language in the same way nowadays as they did when you were at school?
All my British friends complain about "standards dropping" in UK schools, but I'm not there so I can hardly comment - BUT they are never sure, my friends (non-teachers) when I ask them, just what they mean by "standards" which seems to be a word used in the assumption that everyone understands it in the same way.

Valentin: (sweetlepie) A little higher up this thread you put forward the