This novel is problematic. To anyone poised to attack me with the specious argument that the novel reflects the moral orthodoxy of the time and can therefore be exempt from any criticism in this department: beware, your efforts to enlighten me will be in vain. Fair Stood the Wind for France is astoundingly insensitive towards the French Occupation and the entire dynamic of the novel is typical of wartime propaganda: Allied heroism and moral rectitude is a shining beacon against the ignominy of the French surrender. But perhaps the meat of this review is that I will always be angered by authors that champion a brave woman's sexual appeal to a greater extent than her courage.
For a novel marketed as a story of redemption, resistance and romance, this is remarkably devoid of emotion. This renders Fair Stood the Wind for France all the more compromised when we consider that the plot is very much driven by a fanciful relationship between a downed British airman and a young French woman. Despite the language barrier (somewhat compromised by Franklin’s rusty yet serviceable French), the two fall irrevocably in love. Except that they don’t. They really, really don’t. Franklin’s entire attitude towards his love-interest reads like a predatory old man. Hear me out. This love-interest in question is a sweet, unworldly girl named Françoise. Yet, Françoise is very rarely ever referred to as Françoise. Bates takes great pains to dehumanise her with the definite article: to friends, family and lovers, Françoise is known as ‘the girl’. ‘The girl’ is perhaps appropriate for the first third of the novel, but once the couple are on more… intimate terms, surely Franklin could manage to humanise her with her own given name? Their relationship escalates absurdly fast and seems to bud from nowhere but Françoise’s sex appeal. Franklin cannot describe any event without paying an interminable tribute to her ‘clear, dark eyes’ or ‘smooth breasts beneath her blouse’. No, they don’t connect on any psychological level either - unsurprisingly. In turn, her unfounded and specious devotion to Franklin belies any of the agency she exhibits elsewhere in the novel: it is her only apparent motivation. Not the state of her country, or the fates of her mother, brother or her father. Give me one solid character trait of Françoise, go on, I dare you. Franklin preys upon her naivete and apparent lack of life experience. She functions as no more than a plot device: sure, she helps save Franklin on more than one occasion, but she is never established as a real character; she doesn’t gather a personality, just in the way that the other French characters remain stereotypically gauzy, aloof and whimsical. And let’s not forget the frequent incidents of what read like sexual assault. Franklin is constantly touching her up, without Françoise giving him any reason to believe that she consents to this. No, I’m not nitpicking, read this:
Franklin, after partially removing Françoise's blouse and being told not to, whines, "You said you'd do anything for me." Then, following said assault/tryst, he asks (oh so tenderly, as Bates likes to remind us) : "Did you mind what happened to-night?"
Did she mind? Did she MIND?
'No' means no.
On a fundamental level, the style is incredibly dated. Bates relies extensively on exposition, and his prose is extremely repetitive in its word choice and phrasing. Awkward adverbs include ‘acidly’ (not in the modern sense, but referring to bile, nausea and other bodily fluids - nice) and the euphemism ‘sickness’ to describe vomit. Unfortunately, much of the tension that raises its head in the final two chapters is compromised by this sort of circumlocution. But there are redeeming factors. Of course there must be. The banter of the squadron is wonderfully endearing and the ambience of the French landscape is exquisite. There is also one profound act of sacrifice at the very end of the novel which adds a shade of redemption and perhaps the only compelling moment of the entire story. And the opening ending certainly saved us from the saccharine crap that would inevitably have followed.
Wow, I can’t believe how angry this made me, especially on a reread. This should have, in theory, done much for women in roles of resistance. Instead, it does a profound disservice to Françoise and almost belittles the sacrifices that she made. Why can’t brave, resourceful and reasoning women exist without the unnecessary burden of sex appeal?! At least I should be grateful that the war is certainly not as sentimentalised as so many modern interpretations are these days. Travesties like The Tattooist of Auschwitz and The Nightingale, I’m looking at you. I’m sad that I didn’t enjoy this as much as I had hoped: oh, Françoise, honey. Snap out of it, girl! It’s a shame, Mr Bates - you were doing really well, too.