What do you think?
Rate this book
Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong
The French...
-Smoke, drink and eat more fat than anyone in the world, yet live longer and have fewer heart problems than Americans
-Work 35-hour weeks, and take seven weeks of paid holidays per year, but are still the world's fourth-biggest economic power
So what makes the French so different?
Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong is a journey into the French heart, mind and soul. Decrypting French ideas about land, privacy and language, Nadeau and Barlow weave together the threads of French society--from centralization and the Napoleonic Code to elite education and even street protests--giving us, for the first time, a complete picture of the French.
368 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2003
437 people are currently reading
3374 people want to read
About the author
Jean-Benoît Nadeau
24 books64 followersAuthor, journalist and conference speaker, Jean-Benoît Nadeau has published seven books, over 900 magazine articles, won over 40 awards in journalism and literature, and given more than 80 lectures on language, culture and writing. His books include Sixty Million Frenchmen Can’t Be Wrong, The Story of French and The Story of Spanish, which he co-authored with his wife, Julie Barlow. He currently resides in Paris, France, with his wife and their twin daughters.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 285 reviews
February 7, 2008
60 Million Frenchman is split into three sections (1) French history (why certain events helped make the French the way they are). (2) French system (detailed analysis of almost every aspect of current--as of 2000--French life). (3) Projections for the future.
I liked part one a lot. I think the chapters on the Algerian War and World War Two were particularly apt in explaining how the French mindset has been shaped in recent decades. Part two was good in spots, and reeeeally boring in spots. For example: first there's a whole chapter on grands ecoles, then, because that was apparently not enough, there was a whole chapter devoted exclusively to ENA. I liked some of the chapters on the political stuff though, and how different the French ideas of judicial and executive power are from the American.
Part three was relatively short, a beautiful quick read after slogging through part two. It basically paves the way for what they discuss in their other book (The Story of French). All in all, it's an informative, mostly well-written, detailed look at French history, language, culture, technology, and politics--a perfect read if you're a Francophile, or if you're just wanting to learn more about the French mindset.
I liked part one a lot. I think the chapters on the Algerian War and World War Two were particularly apt in explaining how the French mindset has been shaped in recent decades. Part two was good in spots, and reeeeally boring in spots. For example: first there's a whole chapter on grands ecoles, then, because that was apparently not enough, there was a whole chapter devoted exclusively to ENA. I liked some of the chapters on the political stuff though, and how different the French ideas of judicial and executive power are from the American.
Part three was relatively short, a beautiful quick read after slogging through part two. It basically paves the way for what they discuss in their other book (The Story of French). All in all, it's an informative, mostly well-written, detailed look at French history, language, culture, technology, and politics--a perfect read if you're a Francophile, or if you're just wanting to learn more about the French mindset.
May 3, 2010
So far, the book is proving to offer interesting insight in the mind of the north americans, not the french. I know the french. We're neighbours. I go there often. A couple of my best friends are french. France makes sense to me. The french make sense to me. The book, therefore, is for me an experience in reverse psychology - undestanding the mindset the authors come from that makes them write the way they do about the french. The things that surprise them or that they deem worthy of writing about are completely ordinary for me, but it makes me notice that for others this isn't so.
Some of the generalizations the book makes are not to my liking; neither are some of the oversimplified conclusions they reach.
Ok, it's clear I am not going to finish it. The prose was less than fluid and the authors' frame of mind eventually began to annoy me.
Some of the generalizations the book makes are not to my liking; neither are some of the oversimplified conclusions they reach.
Ok, it's clear I am not going to finish it. The prose was less than fluid and the authors' frame of mind eventually began to annoy me.
June 1, 2023
Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong by Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow is an incredibly well researched piece about how the French work, behave, and live. The history, French system, and future are written very well and reads very much like a textbook. It's informing, gives insights into many aspects of the French (history, cultural practices, language, health, etc.), and can open your eyes into the French culture as a whole.
Personally, I couldn't connect with this book well. I wasn't engaged and got bored easily. It's the kind of book I'd need a professor to break down and explain. Perhaps in audiobook form, I might have been more engaged. Regardless, I can tell the research was well down and it is written well. It just didn't connect to me personally.
One star out of five. The book just isn't for me, hence the one star. For how well it's written, someone else will thoroughly enjoy it!
Personally, I couldn't connect with this book well. I wasn't engaged and got bored easily. It's the kind of book I'd need a professor to break down and explain. Perhaps in audiobook form, I might have been more engaged. Regardless, I can tell the research was well down and it is written well. It just didn't connect to me personally.
One star out of five. The book just isn't for me, hence the one star. For how well it's written, someone else will thoroughly enjoy it!
November 10, 2019
As indicated by the title, this 2003 study, written by Canandians Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow, attempts to explain why French and American people like to disparage each other and how we Americans especially tend to be irrationally prejudiced against the French. David Lettermen is still making jokes about the French giving into the Nazis in 1940, and Groundskeeper Willie on The Simpsons has our young people calling the French "cheese-eating surrender monkeys." We seem to forget that the French helped us win the Revolutionary War, sold us the Louisiana Purchase for a very cheap price, then gave us the gift of the Statue of Liberty, and we responded by giving them McDonald's (which is currently making a naturally thin populous fatter). When President Bush was mad at President Chirac back in 2002 for not supporting Bush's (moronic) war in Iraq, I had to threaten my students with death if they started calling French fries "freedom fries." I give all this as a background to Nadeau and Barlow's statement in their first chapter that Americans judge the French unfairly because we Americans do not relate to the fact that French civilization is much older and more complex than ours, and their culture is shaped by much more history and events. "Americans have no past while Europeans are loaded down by ancient customs, habits, and prejudices that shape their behavior" (7). Also, even though the French are as ethnically diverse as Americans, they are bound together by a peculiar culture. We Americans unjustly hold the French to a New World standard, the authors state. "But they're no more New World than the Japanese" (9). Subsequent chapters describe how the French traditionally value their territory as well as their private space. For example, for the French, adultery is a sin, but not one to be judged by the public (à la President Clinton). "The French expect people in power to run the country, not set moral standards . . . The French are primarily concerned about the impact [adultery] has on family life" (39). Other chapters note how France is still behind the U.S. in terms of feminism ("It may take a couple of generations for women to bump the grumpy old men out of France's power ring" [59]), but way ahead in eloquence. "The emphasis on rhetorical skill shows up in every level of society in France. Even the beggars in the Paris subway do their best to be eloquent, each almost ritualistically following the the same order of ideas" (63). Subsequent chapters review the effects of World War II and Algeria's war of independence on French thought, the French penchant for absolutism, and the phenomenon of how the French cherish their language as a monument. The authors also discuss the French philosophy of education, law enforcement, economics, and "the choreography of protest." Finally, they speculate on France in the future. "Since their World War II purgatory, the French have learned to live with the idea that they are neither the biggest, nor the strongest, power on earth. But they still believe they are the best" (284). Consequently, the French retain their bad image in the United States, and, ironically, the French still get a bad rap for being the only country with a tendency toward anti-Americanism. (There must be dozens of those!) The ending chapters note how France has adjusted easily to the Euro and to its role as the head of the European Community, although the French character remains unique. "Yes, Europe is changing the French. But the French are going about it their own way" (339).
April 9, 2012
I'll start with the good points :
The authors have really tried to understand how we French function as a society, and to find explanations for it in our (very bloody) history. They did get a few very clever insights, and made me smile a few times in self deprecation.
Now the bad points : the book is presented as a pseudo scientific study. Unfortunately, the scientific demarch is hopelessly flawed.
Once the authors got a working theory, they twisted all their "evidence" to fit the pattern, disregarding any hint they might have got that their theory gave only very partial explanations to the phenomena observed. That is unfortunately frequent in soft science, but annoying all the same.
Besides, the sources used are biased. Not voluntarily ! (I hope) The authors used as sources people they met, who gave their view of French society.
A few of them were neighbors in a very popular neighbourhood, but most of them were met socially (in a hiking cub among other places). The network of friendships they then developped was mostly among the moneyed intelligensia, and led to a very recurrent problem in France. There are enormous errors printed about the French civil servants, because the people who described the workings of civil service are not part of the rank and file, they're executives.
There is nearly no information to be had on the French middle and lower middle class in the book. Pity. Not only am I part of it, but it forms roughly 65% of French society. From this essay, one might deduce that France is composed of Enarques, Polytechnicians, other draduates from "grande ecoles", who steer the boat, "an army of civil servant" who transmit the steering,and unqualified workers and poor immigrants who are steered. The reality is fortunately richer and more varied, and this doesn't show at all.
In retrospect, the research conducted was a good initiative, the results are interesting, but it's a pity the slice of society used to get info was so thin.
The authors have really tried to understand how we French function as a society, and to find explanations for it in our (very bloody) history. They did get a few very clever insights, and made me smile a few times in self deprecation.
Now the bad points : the book is presented as a pseudo scientific study. Unfortunately, the scientific demarch is hopelessly flawed.
Once the authors got a working theory, they twisted all their "evidence" to fit the pattern, disregarding any hint they might have got that their theory gave only very partial explanations to the phenomena observed. That is unfortunately frequent in soft science, but annoying all the same.
Besides, the sources used are biased. Not voluntarily ! (I hope) The authors used as sources people they met, who gave their view of French society.
A few of them were neighbors in a very popular neighbourhood, but most of them were met socially (in a hiking cub among other places). The network of friendships they then developped was mostly among the moneyed intelligensia, and led to a very recurrent problem in France. There are enormous errors printed about the French civil servants, because the people who described the workings of civil service are not part of the rank and file, they're executives.
There is nearly no information to be had on the French middle and lower middle class in the book. Pity. Not only am I part of it, but it forms roughly 65% of French society. From this essay, one might deduce that France is composed of Enarques, Polytechnicians, other draduates from "grande ecoles", who steer the boat, "an army of civil servant" who transmit the steering,and unqualified workers and poor immigrants who are steered. The reality is fortunately richer and more varied, and this doesn't show at all.
In retrospect, the research conducted was a good initiative, the results are interesting, but it's a pity the slice of society used to get info was so thin.
April 21, 2008
True story: I love France. And sometimes really can't stand the French. Thankfully, the authors of this book kinda feel the same way. This book is a wonderful dissection of why the French are who they are and why we love them and are confused by them on a regular basis. The authors have done an excellent job of getting at the heart of what makes French government, culture and economics tick and really pinpoints the differences between France and other countries. I would have liked more comparison's to the United States, but the authors are Canadians, so hey, it is what it is. They were really able to put feelings I've had for years into complete thoughts and answer questions that I've probably been asking myself since I was a kid. I highly recommend this for anyone interested in French culture and what makes them tick.
December 6, 2011
Sixty Million Frenchmen Can’t Be Wrong often times feels like a Francenstein’s (spelling deliberate) monster. It begins well enough, offering insight into the “spirit” of French society, and indeed gives highly valuable information, especially regarding the French ideas of personal vs. public space, which every visitor should know. However, as the reader nears the middle of the book the work takes on a text-book quality, which becomes dry and redundant. To boost, what the writers pass as an anthropological study seems to be more or less notes taken during conversations with a few of their French friends. Add to this a few glaring inaccuracies, particularly in the last chapter, and by the end one is left wondering what exactly the point of the work was, or who exactly the audience is that it was meant for. Neither assumption of the book’s subtitle was addressed in any sort of clarity. Some more rigorous editing certainly would have strengthened it. I left the book knowing more than I cared to about the ENA, and not enough about the essence of what it means to be French.
February 7, 2024
3.5. Interesting but surprisingly dry and humourless anthropological survey of some aspects of French society primarily based on the authors’ experiences as researchers. Quite limited in its breadth, with little examination of popular culture, the arts, philosophy, cuisine, etc., and a greater focus on its institutions and political/economic history. Highly informative but doesn’t hold the attention.
October 17, 2012
I read this as part of a trilogy I've tackled by expatriate observers who have lived in France. The others are "A Year in the Merde" and "A Year in Provence." It's really just an exercise in self-discipline. Having been in France for over a year now, I hear myself being critical from merely anecdotal evidence, and I don't like it. So I decided I should see how other observers have found France and see in my observations match up.
So far, I've only completed this volume. I found it useful and interesting and worth the read. None the least interesting because of the chorus of diametrically opposed views by reviewers who have also lived here. I learned much of myself in the reading, becausue I see how these authors -while at times writing what seems to be some well-researched material -- also draw a number of sweeping conclusions about the culture in general from just one or two anecdotal experiences or observations by just one or two individuals, albeit French ones. Made me realize I need to be careful about doing the same thing myself.
I would not recommend reading it alone and claiming to "know" France. I would highly recommend doing so in the context of what I'm doing. Read a bunch of them and then draw your own conclusions.
So far, I've only completed this volume. I found it useful and interesting and worth the read. None the least interesting because of the chorus of diametrically opposed views by reviewers who have also lived here. I learned much of myself in the reading, becausue I see how these authors -while at times writing what seems to be some well-researched material -- also draw a number of sweeping conclusions about the culture in general from just one or two anecdotal experiences or observations by just one or two individuals, albeit French ones. Made me realize I need to be careful about doing the same thing myself.
I would not recommend reading it alone and claiming to "know" France. I would highly recommend doing so in the context of what I'm doing. Read a bunch of them and then draw your own conclusions.
Read
April 26, 2021Read a couple of chapters. Bounced hard. Not for me! Left unrated. I'm done.
Too bad. Sounded interesting.
Too bad. Sounded interesting.
March 9, 2017
First of all I'm indebted to this book for introducing me to Marcel Aymé who I probably would not have discovered otherwise. I loved Le passe-muraille (The Man Who Walked Through Walls in the English translation), a book of fantastical short stories set in or inspired by life in occupied France.
This book however is not great. It starts strong but eventually becomes more like a textbook. The personal anecdotes and biographical sketches are great; numbing detail about things like the civil code less so. And other than Aymé I feel like there weren't many other literary references which is a bit surprising considering the importance of French literature.
This book however is not great. It starts strong but eventually becomes more like a textbook. The personal anecdotes and biographical sketches are great; numbing detail about things like the civil code less so. And other than Aymé I feel like there weren't many other literary references which is a bit surprising considering the importance of French literature.
January 30, 2009
This book is a detailed study of the French as products of their history and culture. Although claiming not to be a history book, it uses French history to explain how the French spirit developed, and how it influences the civil, political, and social structure in France today. As the authors, two bilingual Canadian journalists, claim in their introduction, it is not a story of the renovation of a house in Provence; it does, however, contain the story of their two years in France and what they encountered in their quest to understand the French. It was an eye-opening and illuminating journey in understanding how the French think differently from North Americans about all aspects of life, from food and personal privacy to education, government, and democracy itself. An excellent experience that will add depth to the next trip to Paris!
October 28, 2008
Definitely not light reading -- this isn't a trivial book, despite the humorous title and cover.
Felt like I was back in one of my International Relations classes, probably upper division if not graduate. Very informative, and worth reading -- especially for anyone planning on spending time in France.
Felt like I was back in one of my International Relations classes, probably upper division if not graduate. Very informative, and worth reading -- especially for anyone planning on spending time in France.
April 3, 2017
This book takes a look at French culture through the lens of politics. The values that people hold in France are highlighted through the way that they organize themselves politically. The authors include historical examples and personal anecdotes to back up their ideas. If you're looking to learn about the political system used in France, this goes into detail on that.
September 18, 2023
I enjoyed this book way more than I expected! & it was a bit bigger than I anticipated! I learned a lot about french culture, politics, education & way of life. From my personal experience I have seen a lot of these concepts play out in my time here in France. I appreciated how they would use french words dispersed throughout the book-felt like it improved my vocabulary!
October 25, 2014
When I first saw how thick and dense the book was, I thought it would take me a few weeks to read it but I was instantly captivated and actually finished it in just a few days! The book is surprisingly entertaining, considering it's a compendium of history, geography, politics, ethnology, etc...
The book offers a very acute and insightful analysis of France, the French and the way our country works. I learned quite a few things and actually had a few "aha!" moments when I thought "why did I never think of that before?!" I think this book should be mandatory reading for my French compatriots;) The book is very clear about historical facts (which explains my aha! moments) and the way our institutions work. It really heps understand France as a whole.
The book is also surprisingly accurate, considering it was written by foreigners who only spent two years living in France. There were very few mistakes (José Bové is not taken very seriously by the French). I don't think that there is that much sympathy for civil servants, on the contrary, but that is just my point of view and not an actual mistake. At one point the authors write about English words used in France and mention that people do their walking after work, which I've never heard before. The expression sounds a bit strange so I'll ask around to find out if other people know about this;)
The only thing that really bothered me was the repetition of some passages and sentences. I just didn't see the point in this, especially when the same sentence was repeated on two consecutive pages. It is especially surprising since the rest of the book is very fluid and well-written.
Still, this was an excellent read and one of the most interesting books I've read this year.
The book offers a very acute and insightful analysis of France, the French and the way our country works. I learned quite a few things and actually had a few "aha!" moments when I thought "why did I never think of that before?!" I think this book should be mandatory reading for my French compatriots;) The book is very clear about historical facts (which explains my aha! moments) and the way our institutions work. It really heps understand France as a whole.
The book is also surprisingly accurate, considering it was written by foreigners who only spent two years living in France. There were very few mistakes (José Bové is not taken very seriously by the French). I don't think that there is that much sympathy for civil servants, on the contrary, but that is just my point of view and not an actual mistake. At one point the authors write about English words used in France and mention that people do their walking after work, which I've never heard before. The expression sounds a bit strange so I'll ask around to find out if other people know about this;)
The only thing that really bothered me was the repetition of some passages and sentences. I just didn't see the point in this, especially when the same sentence was repeated on two consecutive pages. It is especially surprising since the rest of the book is very fluid and well-written.
Still, this was an excellent read and one of the most interesting books I've read this year.
January 19, 2023
This one surprised me a little. It's a really terrific examination of why the French and France are who/what they are (circa 2000 C.E.). The authors (two Canadian journalists) concoct an interesting mix of observations on French history, politics, society, economy and culture to explain the French and their country. The book is replete with facts, anecdotes, and savvy analyses written well enough to keep the pages turning. I enjoyed this read immensely. Like many Americans, I feel a real antipathy toward the French writ-large, but reading this book helped me to view the world through French eyes.
I hope the insights I've gained will allow me to consider the French and their actions less harshly than I have in the past. I thank the authors for giving me a more mature outlook on a country and a people they so obviously love and understand. They have made me want to visit France again and reassess my former opinion. I suspect the book is a little dated, given that a lot has happened to all of us during the past 20+ years. Still, the book is a treasure and I highly recommend it to anyone with the slightest interest in the subject.
I hope the insights I've gained will allow me to consider the French and their actions less harshly than I have in the past. I thank the authors for giving me a more mature outlook on a country and a people they so obviously love and understand. They have made me want to visit France again and reassess my former opinion. I suspect the book is a little dated, given that a lot has happened to all of us during the past 20+ years. Still, the book is a treasure and I highly recommend it to anyone with the slightest interest in the subject.
February 8, 2022
เป็นหนังสือที่ค่อนข้างสื่อได้ครอบคลุม ทุกแง่มุมของประเทศๆนึง
ในที่นี้คือ ฝรั่งเศส ซึ่งทำให้เราเข้าใจที่มาที่ไปเกือบทั้งหมดว่าทำไมคนกระเทศนี้จึงไม่ค่อยเหมือนใครในโลก ผ่านการฝังตัวของผู้เขียน และผ่านการเล่าประวัติศาสตร์ แบบค่อนข้างตรงไปตรงมา ดูไม่อวย พยายามเข้าอกเข้าใจอยู่ แต่ก็ไม่ง่าย 555และ บา
มุมก็คอมเมนต์ได้แสบอยู่เหมือนกัน
สนุกดี
ในที่นี้คือ ฝรั่งเศส ซึ่งทำให้เราเข้าใจที่มาที่ไปเกือบทั้งหมดว่าทำไมคนกระเทศนี้จึงไม่ค่อยเหมือนใครในโลก ผ่านการฝังตัวของผู้เขียน และผ่านการเล่าประวัติศาสตร์ แบบค่อนข้างตรงไปตรงมา ดูไม่อวย พยายามเข้าอกเข้าใจอยู่ แต่ก็ไม่ง่าย 555และ บา
มุมก็คอมเมนต์ได้แสบอยู่เหมือนกัน
สนุกดี
May 11, 2022
Je pense que ce livre est l'un des meilleurs livres de voyage à lire pour découvrir la France. Le travail est très naturel et académiquement fluide. L'auteur propose une vision large de la France avec plus d'expérience sociale, sans vous plonger dans des informations d'archives, sans vous submerger d'informations. C'est pourquoi j'ai trouvé le livre très réussi. Lors de l'apprentissage d'une langue, il est très important de connaître le pays où cette langue est parlée ou la nation qui parle cette langue. Je crois qu'il est très important d'apprendre la culture afin de faire connaissance avec ce pays ou cette nation. J'ai acheté ce livre l'année où j'ai commencé à apprendre le français, pour en savoir plus sur la culture française qui m'avait intéressée auparavant. Le titre et le contenu du livre m'ont beaucoup impressionné. Le titre dans lequel le livre a été traduit dans ma langue maternelle, le turc, était plus intéressant que ce titre. Le titre du livre est "Pourquoi nous aimons la France mais nous n'aimons pas les Français?" Beaucoup de mes amis ont été impressionnés par le titre du livre et ont acheté ce livre. Certains n'ont pas fini le livre parce qu'ils ne l'aimaient pas. Mais j'ai continué à lire parce que je pensais que le livre était très utile. A l'aide de ce livre, j'ai fait une présentation sur la France à des lycéens. Les élèves du secondaire ont également beaucoup aimé cette présentation et le contenu du livre. J'espère que d'autres livres comme celui-ci seront écrits.
September 13, 2024
Don’t be fooled I didn’t read the full book but probably ready around 65% but I’m counting it
January 30, 2016
France stymies Americans. They eat what they want, but seemingly don't get fat. Their government is happily involved in health, education, industry, and business, but they have one of the most robust economies in the world. How do they do it? What makes them tick? Jean-Benoît Nadreau and Julie Barlow were dispatched by a government foundation to find out just that very thing. Having lived in France for several years and made a study of it, they represent their findings in the fascinating Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong: Why We Love France but Not the French
All of Gaul, Julius Caesar wrote, is divided into three parts -- and so is this book. The first examines the personal aspects of French culture: notions of privacy, the importance of language, the art of cuisine, the deep connection the French have with their land. Part II, "Structure", examines the culture of civics and governance, and part three demonstrates how those elements of French culture are adapting to the future. Although it covers a wide range of topics, the editing is such that the three parts fit neatly together to present a solid and comprehensive picture. That picture is formed in part by the centrality of the State. Although Americans might interpret a central state as a an overwhelming powerful central government, the State is more fundamental in France. It is not an outside thing that people relate to: it is the environment. France is the state: its very creation, a pillar of order erected from the chaos of feudalism. The French republic is not a federation of provinces and cities it is the Public Thing in itself, wielding enormous power and expressing that through a strong military or money but through the way it enmeshes itself in the lives of the French, creating in part the French culture itself. Most striking for me was the use of language:
When French mayors talk about their constituents, they never use the word 'citizens'. No one talks about the 'citizens of Lyon' or 'the citizens of Toulouse' Mayors speak of their administrés, (literally, their 'administereds'). The French can only be citizens of one thing, the one and indivisible Republic, and that entity 'adinisters' them at the local level through mayors." p. 146
Although in America the state mostly exists as an apparatus for economic interests, in France it seems to exist more for the public welfare, not just business. The idea is at least easy to take seriously, as the French government takes an interest in the lives of its people, providing plenty of support for new parents. What a delightfully exotic idea to American ears, that the state is there to enhance the quality of life! Quality is another strong theme --- the opening sections address the French fondness for grandeur and eloquence. Life is to be savored, not merely purchased. Another choice quotation:
"The way the French see it, the economy should serve the social well-being of the country, not the other way around. Former prime minister Lionel Jospin is famous for having said "Oui à l'économie de marché, non à la société de marché" (Yes to a market economy, no to a market society)." (p. 276)
The powerful State and the emphasis on quality are joined in the French attitude toward education: there exist in France several academies which exist just to produce an elite caste of people to ensure that this powerful state is being run correctly. The civil service is fashioned along the lines of an army, and this elite is its officer corps. Americans who see higher education as elitist would be positively scandalized by the idea that the French seek to create it deliberately, but in France governance is too important not to be taken seriously.
In general, the French way is presented as neither better nor worse than the English and American systems, but simply different. I for one am both attracted and disturbed by the aspects of French culture revealed here because of the varying attitudes I have for individualism and the role of the state. One can't deny the results, though, and after reading this and various other works about French culture I can't help but think they have better priorities.
And with that, my reading and reviews for Bastille Day is finally done. Until next year, anyway!
All of Gaul, Julius Caesar wrote, is divided into three parts -- and so is this book. The first examines the personal aspects of French culture: notions of privacy, the importance of language, the art of cuisine, the deep connection the French have with their land. Part II, "Structure", examines the culture of civics and governance, and part three demonstrates how those elements of French culture are adapting to the future. Although it covers a wide range of topics, the editing is such that the three parts fit neatly together to present a solid and comprehensive picture. That picture is formed in part by the centrality of the State. Although Americans might interpret a central state as a an overwhelming powerful central government, the State is more fundamental in France. It is not an outside thing that people relate to: it is the environment. France is the state: its very creation, a pillar of order erected from the chaos of feudalism. The French republic is not a federation of provinces and cities it is the Public Thing in itself, wielding enormous power and expressing that through a strong military or money but through the way it enmeshes itself in the lives of the French, creating in part the French culture itself. Most striking for me was the use of language:
When French mayors talk about their constituents, they never use the word 'citizens'. No one talks about the 'citizens of Lyon' or 'the citizens of Toulouse' Mayors speak of their administrés, (literally, their 'administereds'). The French can only be citizens of one thing, the one and indivisible Republic, and that entity 'adinisters' them at the local level through mayors." p. 146
Although in America the state mostly exists as an apparatus for economic interests, in France it seems to exist more for the public welfare, not just business. The idea is at least easy to take seriously, as the French government takes an interest in the lives of its people, providing plenty of support for new parents. What a delightfully exotic idea to American ears, that the state is there to enhance the quality of life! Quality is another strong theme --- the opening sections address the French fondness for grandeur and eloquence. Life is to be savored, not merely purchased. Another choice quotation:
"The way the French see it, the economy should serve the social well-being of the country, not the other way around. Former prime minister Lionel Jospin is famous for having said "Oui à l'économie de marché, non à la société de marché" (Yes to a market economy, no to a market society)." (p. 276)
The powerful State and the emphasis on quality are joined in the French attitude toward education: there exist in France several academies which exist just to produce an elite caste of people to ensure that this powerful state is being run correctly. The civil service is fashioned along the lines of an army, and this elite is its officer corps. Americans who see higher education as elitist would be positively scandalized by the idea that the French seek to create it deliberately, but in France governance is too important not to be taken seriously.
In general, the French way is presented as neither better nor worse than the English and American systems, but simply different. I for one am both attracted and disturbed by the aspects of French culture revealed here because of the varying attitudes I have for individualism and the role of the state. One can't deny the results, though, and after reading this and various other works about French culture I can't help but think they have better priorities.
And with that, my reading and reviews for Bastille Day is finally done. Until next year, anyway!
January 7, 2018
Canadian authors Jean-Benoît Nadeau and Julie Barlow lived in France from 1999 to 2001 on a fellowship to study why the French resist globalization. The result is “60 Million Frenchmen Can’t Be Wrong,” which expands upon the initial assignment and attempts to explain how and why the French are different from Americans and other nationalities. They also describe how the French are evolving in what the authors portray as mostly positive ways. I like to use my kindle to highlight remarkable insights and thought-provoking relevations, and this book has more highlights than any other kindle book I have read.
There are many examples of the authors giving very favorable treatment to behaviors that are unique to the French and that North Americans might question. One example that is frequently referred to deals with globalization. In 1999, activist farmer José Bové inspired a group of sheep farmers to “symbolically dismantle” a McDonald’s restaurant under construction in Larzac in protest of globalization and other issues. The authors present the rationalization for this act of protest as a result of the unique relationship that the French have with their land. The authors make this act of protest seem almost understandable, but they never discuss the complete disregard by the protestors for the property of others, so this argument is difficult for me to appreciate.
On the other hand, the authors make a very sound argument in support of French journalism. The International Herald Tribune (a partnership of the New York Times and the Washington Post at the time) published a story in 2000 about the interaction between France and the United States following windstorms that destroyed millions of trees in France. According to the IHT, after the storm, middle school students from Fayetteville, Georgia persuaded the Forestry Association to donate five thousand trees so France could replace the lost Versailles trees. The French returned three thousand seedlings because they failed to meet European Union regulations. The American writers did not specifically criticize the French, but they seemed to intentionally leave the impression that French bureaucrats were the villains in the story. French journalists included one additional fact (completely omitted by the IHT journalists) that Europe’s entire wine industry was wiped out in the late nineteenth century by a parasite which arrived on evergreen seedlings from the United States.
In chapter 16, Civil Society: Invisible Helping Hands, the authors describe how ‘for profit’ and non-profit organizations function in France. It is disappointing that the authors devote six paragraphs to a spelunkers’ non-profit organization and only two paragraphs to churches. Apparently the authors and/or the French consider spelunkers three times more significant than churches.
The appendixes add much value to this book, but the absence of footnotes raises questions. The authors claim to be business writers, but some of their financial assertions seem questionable. For example, even though the authors were in France while France was transitioning from francs to euros, the authors show most financial amounts in pounds. And the authors exaggerate the strength of the French economy by labelling it the fourth strongest in the world. In 2000, it had the fifth highest GDP and in 2016, it has the sixth highest. In both years, the GDP of the United States is 7.5 times the size of France’s and the GDP per capita of the United States is 40% higher than France’s.
Edit
Delete
There are many examples of the authors giving very favorable treatment to behaviors that are unique to the French and that North Americans might question. One example that is frequently referred to deals with globalization. In 1999, activist farmer José Bové inspired a group of sheep farmers to “symbolically dismantle” a McDonald’s restaurant under construction in Larzac in protest of globalization and other issues. The authors present the rationalization for this act of protest as a result of the unique relationship that the French have with their land. The authors make this act of protest seem almost understandable, but they never discuss the complete disregard by the protestors for the property of others, so this argument is difficult for me to appreciate.
On the other hand, the authors make a very sound argument in support of French journalism. The International Herald Tribune (a partnership of the New York Times and the Washington Post at the time) published a story in 2000 about the interaction between France and the United States following windstorms that destroyed millions of trees in France. According to the IHT, after the storm, middle school students from Fayetteville, Georgia persuaded the Forestry Association to donate five thousand trees so France could replace the lost Versailles trees. The French returned three thousand seedlings because they failed to meet European Union regulations. The American writers did not specifically criticize the French, but they seemed to intentionally leave the impression that French bureaucrats were the villains in the story. French journalists included one additional fact (completely omitted by the IHT journalists) that Europe’s entire wine industry was wiped out in the late nineteenth century by a parasite which arrived on evergreen seedlings from the United States.
In chapter 16, Civil Society: Invisible Helping Hands, the authors describe how ‘for profit’ and non-profit organizations function in France. It is disappointing that the authors devote six paragraphs to a spelunkers’ non-profit organization and only two paragraphs to churches. Apparently the authors and/or the French consider spelunkers three times more significant than churches.
The appendixes add much value to this book, but the absence of footnotes raises questions. The authors claim to be business writers, but some of their financial assertions seem questionable. For example, even though the authors were in France while France was transitioning from francs to euros, the authors show most financial amounts in pounds. And the authors exaggerate the strength of the French economy by labelling it the fourth strongest in the world. In 2000, it had the fifth highest GDP and in 2016, it has the sixth highest. In both years, the GDP of the United States is 7.5 times the size of France’s and the GDP per capita of the United States is 40% higher than France’s.
Edit
Delete
November 2, 2014
Although this book was written over a decade ago, it is a great study of the French people that is still relevant today. It is an anthropological assessment and takes a broad stance in how it assesses France. The authors are a Canadian couple so many of the ideas and comparisons are taken from a North American standpoint. A two year study of the French yields many quaint anecdotes as to how and why the French are as they are. In my own experience of France, the French, French language, culture and cuisine, I felt that I was already a true Francophile and knowledgeable about this great country. This book takes my understanding to a deeper level. It points out the reason for many intricacies of French behaviour that I had previously not properly understood. The tendency of French people to be over-correcting about language use is something I have noticed and although, I personally enjoy my linguistic skills being polished, I appreciate that the French do this in a seemingly pedantic way which some foreigners may find offensive. When you get to see the importance of l'Académie française and how it has affected the French language you can understand the pride the French take in their use of words and it is no surprise to learn that literary standards are on average a great deal higher in France than in other developed nations. The book does focus very heavily on the nature of French government. I now understand exactly what Jacobin is: the centralist tendency of French government, with power totally focused on Paris. It is interesting to see how the whole political system has developed, from early autocracy with supreme leaders to a well-balanced modern democracy. There were good explanations and descriptions of the French passion for food and their natural links to the peasants who work the land. I hadn’t realised about the French education system and the way they foster elites, in particular to train to work for their huge civil service. I had thought it was a university system similar to that of Britain or the USA but it quite apparently isn’t. I felt that the book overall gave me a great deal of insight into different aspects of France and opened the door for future study. The book was definitely worth reading as it improved my knowledge. It is a vital text for French studies.
August 4, 2016
Je comptais lire ce pavé, en me disant qu'en tant qu'étrangère vivant en France, j'aurais sûrement les mêmes points de vue que ce couple de journalistes en débarquant dans l'Hexagone. Ils font la comparaison entre le modèle français et le modèle nord-américain (États-Unis et Canada), montrant clairement les paradoxes français. Leur question de base était: what makes the French so different?
Le plus j'avance dans ma lecture, le plus je me pose des questions.
L'écriture de Jean-Benoît Nadeau et Julie Barlow est fluide avec des touches d'humour. Et c'est incroyable le nombre de choses qu'on apprend!
Essai sur le modèle français, ce livre est aussi un bijou d'histoire de la France, comme jamais décortiquée par l'Éducation nationale.
Avec ce livre, on voit la France avec un autre regard et on comprend beaucoup de choses qui ne sont pas explicites aujourd'hui et qu'on ne pouvait pas avoir découvert autrement si ce n'était par les recherches minutieuses.
À lire par les étrangers débarquant en France, et surtout surtout, par les Français eux-mêmes! ;)
Le plus j'avance dans ma lecture, le plus je me pose des questions.
L'écriture de Jean-Benoît Nadeau et Julie Barlow est fluide avec des touches d'humour. Et c'est incroyable le nombre de choses qu'on apprend!
Essai sur le modèle français, ce livre est aussi un bijou d'histoire de la France, comme jamais décortiquée par l'Éducation nationale.
Avec ce livre, on voit la France avec un autre regard et on comprend beaucoup de choses qui ne sont pas explicites aujourd'hui et qu'on ne pouvait pas avoir découvert autrement si ce n'était par les recherches minutieuses.
À lire par les étrangers débarquant en France, et surtout surtout, par les Français eux-mêmes! ;)
December 2, 2007
I was hoping I had found a book that was an in depth look at the culture and traditions of the French. This was more of a look at the government and political structures of France. Parts were so boring, I actually wound up just skimming the last bit of the book for something interesting to read.
September 22, 2012
This book was so poorly written and had so many grammatical errors that I couldn't read it.
March 18, 2017
France is a land of contradictions. It is nation where people have seven weeks of paid vacation a year, generally take an hour and a half for lunch, have one of the longest life expectancies on the planet, work in the fourth largest economy in the world, and have one of the finest health care systems in the world. It is also a nation that has one of the lowest rates of charitable donations in the developed world, where people expect the State to do everything because they pay so much in taxes, where the civil service makes up about a quarter of the working population, and where local initiative or self-rule is virtually non-existent. What explains these many paradoxes?
Authors Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow sought to discover the source of these contrasts and to learn why the French were so different. Living for three years in France, they worked almost as ethnologists, delving into all aspects of French political, cultural, and economic life, uncovering many things from an outsider's perspective. Writing about the French civil service, economy, media, education, charities, unions, social welfare system, courts, politics, foreign policy, history, and language, they provide a thorough and very readable primer on all things French.
One thing they point out is that the French as a people love power. They have a great disdain for compromise - both in politics and even in personal conversations - instead preferring winners and losers, embracing particularly in politics what the authors termed "jusqu'au-boustisme" (until-the-bitter-end-ism), of the tendency in politics to pursue winning even to destructive ends. An ultimate expression of this might be found in the fact that State is absolute in French politics and society; it tolerates no rivals, whether it was the Catholic clergy's onetime dominance over the nation's education system or the existence of any meaningful regional government tied to a local culture, though the latter has changed some in recent years. The French love for their politicians to exhibit grandeur (and the politicians love to exhibit it), practicing something called cumul des mandates (or simply the cumul); it is possible for one to hold more than one elected office at the same time (for instance for a time President Jacques Chirac was also mayor of Paris, the prime minister, deputy from his home region of Correze, and a deputy in the European Parliament). Indeed the French President is one of the most powerful heads of state in the democratic world, in many ways more powerful that the American President.
Some of this lover of grandeur is exhibited in the fact that the French state is very much a unitary one, not a federal one; the central government in Paris reigns supreme, even in matters in the U.S. that would be regarded as strictly local affairs, such as the choosing of school textbooks or in most cases the management of local police. For instance the mayor of Paris does not control local police or transport, but they are instead controlled by the central government. Only towns of less than ten thousand citizens are allowed to control their own police.
This tendency to have a highly centralized, almost absolutist democracy though is not entirely due to a French love of grandeur. Much of dates back to the centuries long attempts to create the nation of France and keep it together, to impose French culture and language on more distant regions. At the time of the Revolution, the doctrine of the Republique was that "nothing should come between the citizen and the State." The French State actually created what we today call France, assimilating very diverse populations, giving them a single nationality, eradicating any local power or local language, acting for decades with extreme suspicion of anything (including churches) that fostered any sense of local community beyond the instruments of the state. Though France has levels of local administration - the Commune, the Department, and the Region - these do not exactly correspond to Canadian provinces or American states in that they have no sovereign rights themselves or exhibit any significant sense of French separation of powers, but instead are for the most part representatives of the central government. In the case of the 99 Departments, they were created as a result of the Revolution, often designed to deliberately break up regional identities, dividing lands with local identities into more than one Department, often given non-historical, sometimes deliberately meaningless names. The advent of the Region in 1982 reversed this to an extent, as Regions reflect natural cultural divisions in France, such as the areas inhabited by the Bretons, Occitan, or Corsicans, though some in France fear that this may lead to federalism one day (while at the same time France has given increasing powers to the supranational European Union).
This is not to say that the French State is anti-democratic; it was founded with three principles, assimilation (or eradication des particularismes; eradication of local differences), interet general (or common good), and equality (not only equality of opportunity but also equal or identical law throughout France). The principle of assimilation had been a driving force in creating the Departments (though ironically has made integration of the growing Muslim community in France difficult as it has until recently been regarded as illegal to even recognize special status or differences among French citizens).
There are checks on the Republique. In addition to civil and criminal law, the French have administrative law, an entirely parallel legal system for dealing with matters relating how the State relates to the citizens, administrative tribunals that can rule against government and the state. The growing independence of judges is another check. Protests are a way of life in France, a legitimate method for citizens to curb the system, the authors detailing this uniquely French form of political expression at some length.
I have barely scratched the surface in my review of this fascinating book. It is an absolute must read for anyone wanting to do business or live in France.
Authors Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow sought to discover the source of these contrasts and to learn why the French were so different. Living for three years in France, they worked almost as ethnologists, delving into all aspects of French political, cultural, and economic life, uncovering many things from an outsider's perspective. Writing about the French civil service, economy, media, education, charities, unions, social welfare system, courts, politics, foreign policy, history, and language, they provide a thorough and very readable primer on all things French.
One thing they point out is that the French as a people love power. They have a great disdain for compromise - both in politics and even in personal conversations - instead preferring winners and losers, embracing particularly in politics what the authors termed "jusqu'au-boustisme" (until-the-bitter-end-ism), of the tendency in politics to pursue winning even to destructive ends. An ultimate expression of this might be found in the fact that State is absolute in French politics and society; it tolerates no rivals, whether it was the Catholic clergy's onetime dominance over the nation's education system or the existence of any meaningful regional government tied to a local culture, though the latter has changed some in recent years. The French love for their politicians to exhibit grandeur (and the politicians love to exhibit it), practicing something called cumul des mandates (or simply the cumul); it is possible for one to hold more than one elected office at the same time (for instance for a time President Jacques Chirac was also mayor of Paris, the prime minister, deputy from his home region of Correze, and a deputy in the European Parliament). Indeed the French President is one of the most powerful heads of state in the democratic world, in many ways more powerful that the American President.
Some of this lover of grandeur is exhibited in the fact that the French state is very much a unitary one, not a federal one; the central government in Paris reigns supreme, even in matters in the U.S. that would be regarded as strictly local affairs, such as the choosing of school textbooks or in most cases the management of local police. For instance the mayor of Paris does not control local police or transport, but they are instead controlled by the central government. Only towns of less than ten thousand citizens are allowed to control their own police.
This tendency to have a highly centralized, almost absolutist democracy though is not entirely due to a French love of grandeur. Much of dates back to the centuries long attempts to create the nation of France and keep it together, to impose French culture and language on more distant regions. At the time of the Revolution, the doctrine of the Republique was that "nothing should come between the citizen and the State." The French State actually created what we today call France, assimilating very diverse populations, giving them a single nationality, eradicating any local power or local language, acting for decades with extreme suspicion of anything (including churches) that fostered any sense of local community beyond the instruments of the state. Though France has levels of local administration - the Commune, the Department, and the Region - these do not exactly correspond to Canadian provinces or American states in that they have no sovereign rights themselves or exhibit any significant sense of French separation of powers, but instead are for the most part representatives of the central government. In the case of the 99 Departments, they were created as a result of the Revolution, often designed to deliberately break up regional identities, dividing lands with local identities into more than one Department, often given non-historical, sometimes deliberately meaningless names. The advent of the Region in 1982 reversed this to an extent, as Regions reflect natural cultural divisions in France, such as the areas inhabited by the Bretons, Occitan, or Corsicans, though some in France fear that this may lead to federalism one day (while at the same time France has given increasing powers to the supranational European Union).
This is not to say that the French State is anti-democratic; it was founded with three principles, assimilation (or eradication des particularismes; eradication of local differences), interet general (or common good), and equality (not only equality of opportunity but also equal or identical law throughout France). The principle of assimilation had been a driving force in creating the Departments (though ironically has made integration of the growing Muslim community in France difficult as it has until recently been regarded as illegal to even recognize special status or differences among French citizens).
There are checks on the Republique. In addition to civil and criminal law, the French have administrative law, an entirely parallel legal system for dealing with matters relating how the State relates to the citizens, administrative tribunals that can rule against government and the state. The growing independence of judges is another check. Protests are a way of life in France, a legitimate method for citizens to curb the system, the authors detailing this uniquely French form of political expression at some length.
I have barely scratched the surface in my review of this fascinating book. It is an absolute must read for anyone wanting to do business or live in France.
October 26, 2022
I enjoyed this book, yes there are some issues with it, of which I will get into, but as an overview of France during the early 2000s' this was a fascinating look at the country.
The three parts of the book attempt to explain why France is the way it is. Part 1 to me was the most interesting, being my geographical neighbour and yet knowing as little about it as I did prior to reading, the history of the country was fascinating; especially the second world war.
Now for the issues, and why it loses two stars; the premise of the book is that its a scientific study of France. There are flaws with this, as the data - apart from the political, historical and cultural facts (how the Grand Ecoles function as an example) is entirely through the lens of the co-authors. Everyone they speak too or interview, are people they meet through friendships and social groups which adds a flaw. In terms of a scientific study - the list of participants is too small to merit a full study of the country.
Further, the participants/friends of the authors are almost exclusively from Paris, and considered intellectual and middle class. There is not much from the immigrants into France, those from the so-called "desert" and the poor of France.
Another flaw within the narrative is the authors insistence in how all the people they meet instantly become friends and that they don't deal with many culture shocks.
Part 1 for me is where this book gets the most stars, if only for fulling the gap on my lack of knowledge on French History.
The three parts of the book attempt to explain why France is the way it is. Part 1 to me was the most interesting, being my geographical neighbour and yet knowing as little about it as I did prior to reading, the history of the country was fascinating; especially the second world war.
Now for the issues, and why it loses two stars; the premise of the book is that its a scientific study of France. There are flaws with this, as the data - apart from the political, historical and cultural facts (how the Grand Ecoles function as an example) is entirely through the lens of the co-authors. Everyone they speak too or interview, are people they meet through friendships and social groups which adds a flaw. In terms of a scientific study - the list of participants is too small to merit a full study of the country.
Further, the participants/friends of the authors are almost exclusively from Paris, and considered intellectual and middle class. There is not much from the immigrants into France, those from the so-called "desert" and the poor of France.
Another flaw within the narrative is the authors insistence in how all the people they meet instantly become friends and that they don't deal with many culture shocks.
Part 1 for me is where this book gets the most stars, if only for fulling the gap on my lack of knowledge on French History.
November 1, 2020
I read this book to gain a baseline understanding of the French. By reading this book I found some characteristics of the culture that charmed. Why does a democracy--such as US, particularly US--have to dumb everything down to the lowest denominator. Bestsellers are written at an increasingly lower educational level. Popular culture becomes more and brutal with a great amount of disrespect and brutality.
Instead in France, the French insist and largely succeed in democratizing culture by bringing culture up to the highest levels.
• In physical culture which leads to civic pride which leads to personal responsibility.
• In education which leads to social levels with an emphasis on developing leaders which leads to a better trained and educated meritocracy.
• In rhetoric which leads to better arguments/presentations which both source from and lead to better thinking and planning skills.
The French culture is another human construct with inherent limitations. Because everyone is French and no one is Algerian-French or North Americans-French for example, then it is difficult to determine if services are needed or provided for immigrants/refugees and their children.
Having reading how French democratize up, I now have a new argument and corresponding example of how democratized socialism can make the US better. The negative maybe bearable if we have a better level of social equality. We may not have to hope, pray, beg, etc. while others recognize that their best selves are served when we all serve each other.
Instead in France, the French insist and largely succeed in democratizing culture by bringing culture up to the highest levels.
• In physical culture which leads to civic pride which leads to personal responsibility.
• In education which leads to social levels with an emphasis on developing leaders which leads to a better trained and educated meritocracy.
• In rhetoric which leads to better arguments/presentations which both source from and lead to better thinking and planning skills.
The French culture is another human construct with inherent limitations. Because everyone is French and no one is Algerian-French or North Americans-French for example, then it is difficult to determine if services are needed or provided for immigrants/refugees and their children.
Having reading how French democratize up, I now have a new argument and corresponding example of how democratized socialism can make the US better. The negative maybe bearable if we have a better level of social equality. We may not have to hope, pray, beg, etc. while others recognize that their best selves are served when we all serve each other.
March 17, 2021
Written in 2004, some descriptions on France might not be applicable to today. But I was impressed by the indepth research on French history, culture, politics, economy, society etc. done by the author as a Canadian expat in France. Some of them could be subjective, but it's always good to understand the views from different perspectives.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 285 reviews