Nothing to me was more amusing in the “brou-ha-ha” that triggered MAGAs during the Paris Opening Ceremonies. Their myopic and narrow view of what art and history can be, as well as their whining about blasphemy (while being the target audience for the Trump Blasphemy Bible), made me laugh really hard as I watched it unfold on-line the other night. Nothing shows American tribalism in its purest form (and earns us the scorn and mockery of the world) than criticizing the art and culture and history of another country–one that has existed centuries and centuries longer than ours can ever dream of lasting–and being offended by probably one of those strongest and most respected cultures of all time in the fucking world is why Europe is currently laughing at us as uncultured idiots.
(And for the record, there would be no United States without France. Period. We had no navy and therefore couldn’t have trapped Cornwallis at Yorktown. Know your own fucking history, MAGA morons, and miss me with all the “We saved France from the Germans twice!” bullshit. We were repaying a debt that can never be fully repaid, and if you think the French aren’t grateful–they honor our fallen soldiers far more than we do…especially taking into consideration the MAGA’s hero wouldn’t even visit the cemeteries in Normandy because it was “raining”, i.e. “it takes too long to do my face and hair to go out into the rain.”)
My personal favorites were the uneducated whines about the French mocking Marie Antoinette by showing her holding her head and singing from the disembodied face. Um, the French hated her, and whether she was to blame for France’s cratering economy or not is besides the point. She wasn’t a martyr, and the French have never regretted executing either her or her husband Louis XVI. France doesn’t regret its revolution and toppling its monarchy in the least. There is no revisionist history in France, like how the Russians have done with rehabilitating the Romanovs–and that was more about distancing themselves from the Bolsheviks more than anything else. There have been a lot of books over the years that have tried to rehabilitate her, and make modern readers have sympathy for her. I’ve never really understood this, even as I myself was convinced into pitying her for being stupid and pretty vapid (Victoria Holt’s The Queen’s Confession was the first of these apologist books I read) and getting unfairly blamed by the French people for their problems–which existed long before she came from Vienna to be their dauphine and eventual queen.
In a nutshell, she never had a chance with the French people. She was Austrian, and Austria had been a mortal enemy of France’s since the marriage of Maximilian of Austria to Mary of Burgundy in 1476. The rise of Prussia as a militaristic power in the early eighteenth century had both France and Austria alarmed; so France changed its natural alliance with Prussia (an enemy of Austria’s) and partnered up with Austria and Russia. The result was the Seven Years’ War, which ended with France losing its global empire and bankrupting the country–which was already on shaky economic ground. The unpopular alliance with Austria was further cemented by the marriage of the young dauphin to the Austrian princess in 1770. The people and court hated her almost from the start, but even without the “enemy princess” stuff, she was the symbol of a hated alliance that had cost the country a lot of its pride and income sources, making the economic issues in France even worse1. The smears from rival factions at court–in which politics were treated as a game everyone was playing, for good or bad, no matter how much it weakened the monarchy and aristocracy–or even more egregious: how it weakened and destabilized France on the world stage. The inequality in France–and the carelessness of the aristocracy in believing the people would never rise against them–was a gathering storm all through the 1780’s, and even worse, the French support of the American Revolution caused France to default on its debt not once but twice that decade. Louis XVI was an ineffectual king at a time when France needed a strong king who could take the reins and fix things with reform, but it was not to be.
And in the end, the Bastille was stormed on July 14, 1789, and four years later the French executed their by-then deposed king and queen–and most of the aristocracy that hadn’t fled abroad when they could.
The French are very proud of their revolution; their national anthem (this entry’s title) was the song of the French Revolution, and their national flag is the flag of the revolution. Why would anyone think the French have rehabilitated the reputations and historical views of the king and queen they executed in a revolution that is still a source of national pride?
I’ve always found the way English and American writers love to rehabilitate the reputations of reviled kings and queens throughout history. Do the British celebrate Charles I as an English martyr and saint? They do not–although modern writers definitely are apologists for him and his awful wife. The way Americans–the original anti-monarchists in the world–are so fascinated by royalty and apologists for their awfulness is an irony that would have confused the founders…as well as how many Americans seem to be on board with authoritarianism.
Seriously, Americans. Read a fucking book sometime, and stop embarrassing us all on the world stage.
- This is why Les Liaisons Dangereuses was such an electrifying work when it was published in the 1780s; we’ve enjoyed it as a modern entertainment, but the time that has passed since it was published has removed the sting from what was at the time an indictment of the French aristocracy’s immorality. ↩︎
Queer and Loathing in America 