La Vie en bleu: France and the French since 1900 [Paperback]

This is a book for those who are already reasonably familiar with the outlines of French history in the 20th century. For them Kedward's formidable researches (the bibliography of Selected Further Reading runs to 26 pages) will provide a mass of details not easily found elsewhere; but it seems to me that he takes quite a lot of previous knowledge for granted (one tiny example out of very many: he assumes that readers know what the Schlieffen Plan was), and even for those who do have a good general knowledge, the book is quite densely written and in places rather stodgy (in at least one chapter - chapter 7 - almost impenetrably so). Kedward's ambition is to be thoroughly comprehensive - a tall order even for 650 pages of text. The result is that often the text is studded with the names of everybody who was anybody in France, and in places it reads a bit like a catalogue. In chapter 6, for example, every artist of significance is given about a sentence or two, which serves as a reminder to those who know something of their work, but cannot really bring it to life for those who do not. The arrangement of the book is chronological, but social and economic history - worthy, but sometimes, I fear, very dull - take up much more space than political history; character sketches of leading politicians are extremely compressed - just the odd adjective or two - and so are accounts of French foreign policy, though all the main events are featured. It all makes for rather dry reading.

It is, I think, much more difficult to write the domestic history of France than, say, the domestic history of Britain during the same period - largely because of the multiplicity of French political parties, the constantly shifting coalitions and the resulting short-lived nature of the governments of the Third and Fourth Republic. The governments of the Fifth Republic were somewhat more stable, but even then there are more parties, more shifting political groupings and more complications than we have in British history - not to mention three periods when powerful presidents have to cohabit with prime ministers and legislatures which are opposed to them. Kedward also makes it clear that the social structure of France is exceptionally complex, for not only is there the divide between Paris and the countryside, but the countryside is by no means homogeneous: rural areas vary enormously from left to right.

It is helpful that the book is very well organized, with frequent cross-headings; and it seems to me that the texture lightens somewhat from Chapter 10 - about a third of the way through - onwards.

For myself, I would single out the following as particularly valuable discussions:

- The role of women is given much attention throughout.

- There is an excellent account of the French resistance and of how it was interpreted after the war. One would expect no less from one of the leading historians of that topic.

- Kedward's anger about the folly and viciousness of French colonialism after World War II is manifest. Suppression of the nationalist movements in the colonies was ferocious from the very beginning: Kedward says that the massacre of some 10,000 to 15,000 Algerians in May 1945 (beginning on VE Day!) and an even bigger death toll from aerial bombardments in Vietnam in 1946 were barely mentioned in the French press at the time. But it is odd that there is no mention in the book of Syria and the Lebanon becoming French mandates or on their later achievement of independence. There is also just one paragraph on the Suez War of 1956 (and that does not figure in the index).

- Rightly, much attention is given to farmers, who carry so much more weight in France's politics than they do in Britain.

- Much importance is given to Jack Lang, Mitterand's Minister of Culture, in shaping the cultural climate of France: again a phenomenon that one could not find in Britain.

- There is the problem of ethnic minorities and whether or how to integrate them in French society. As portrayed here, the passions aroused in France are even stronger than they are in Britain, with Le Pen`s Front National a much more powerful influence in France than the National Front is in Britain. It has led to a passionate debate whether admirable diversity within a single French identity or dangerous divisiveness best describes France today.

- Parallel with that debate is the discussion, to which Kedward pays a lot of attention throughout the book, of the many different ways in which the French have interpreted their past. This had been an issue in the 19th century because of the long-lasting and traumatic polarization created by he French Revolution. In the second half of the 20th century it was the problem of how to come to terms with Vichy and also with the Algerian war. As an attempt to heal the wounds, amnesia was for many years promoted by the authorities, and in his last chapter Kedward traces the debates as that amnesia was challenged and broke down.

The treatment of French politics is scandalously scanty in even the British quality press, and this book, hard going though it is, is indispensable for those who really want to know in more detail what has been going on in our neighbour just across the Channel.

When you read this book ,misconceptions and ignorance disappears.
This book details the hidden depth of France as a country, and people's identity whether in their village, department, and as a nation.
It should make us all reflect on what is our own personal Englsh identity.

I was looking for a book that would give me an insight into French society, and this book failed to deliver, not least because the author assumes a fair amount of prior knowledge about France. Also, the book is written in a dry and academic manner, which makes reading it more of a chore than a pleasure. The author is a professor at Sussex University, so I shouldn't be too surprised on that score.

The section which describes France's post War adventures in Vietnam and Algeria is very good, and quite an eye-opener.

I'd hoped that the book would explain why French political parties are more fluid than the static entities of UK politics, but the author didn't explore that question. I would have got more from the book if there had been more comparison with other European countries, e.g. how did the success of the French Front National compare with that of other far right parties in Europe?.