Reading Proust's In Search of Lost Time in 2014 discussion

Please use the thread below to comment on The Dreyfus Affair by Piers Paul Read.

Although the intention is to read the book between 14th June and 18th July please feel free to add comments at any time.

I started reading this today.

A concern of mine was that I never read a book in English, as it's not my first language, but so far it's going smoothly. Reading it on Kindle helps to quickly look up words I don't know.

I've only read the Preface and Chapter 1. I'm glad to see that before getting properly into the Dreyfus Affair, the author is giving us a political and religious context of France some years before it all happened, as well as where the Jewish people stood in society.

I'm glad it's going ok Renato. I should start it today, once I've finished GW (only 40 pages to go). The book goes right back to the French Revolution, I believe, which should help put the Affair into context.

Yes, you're right. It goes right back to the French Revolution. It helps me a lot since in school we've only studied it superficially and I don't really remember much anyway :)

It's quite useful the approach that Read has adopted with these introductory chapters; he's highlighting the events that led to the anti-Dreyfus attitudes amongst Catholics and conservatives in France, especially in the army.

Yes, this was very nice and helped me to understand better the whole context.

What gets a little confusing for me though is that there are a lot of names and rankings in the military and chiefs of government etc..

But I think so far I understand everything that's going on, it's just not a read as fast as it is normally for me.

I must admit it is a bit confusing with all the military personnel, duels & financial scandals but I think at the moment the author is just introducing us to the environment in which the Dreyfus Affair appeared.

Duels: I find them to be so interesting. How crazy it is that people used to solve their problems that way!!

[And to think our narrator apparently fought one! I wonder if we'll get more details about it in the next volumes... was Proust ever involved on a duel?]

Renato wrote: "[And to think our narrator apparently fought one! I wonder if we'll get more details about it in the next volumes... was Proust ever involved on a duel?]
"

We wondered about this before didn't we? I thought it was impossible because it would involve getting up early :-). However, I found this which suggests that he did indeed fight at least one duel.

Ch 6: It's fascinating to see the events that are leading up to Dreyfus's court martial and how little evidence they have on him. Paty just has a hunch that Dreyfus is guilty though partly based on his handwriting analysis.

Mercier is now in the position where he either lets Dreyfus free and have to face the wrath of the right-wing anti-semitic press or put him on trial even though he knows there's not enough evidence. Sandherr seems happy enough to let Mercier make the decision as he'll get it in the neck whichever way he goes.

It's interesting that they're getting into a 'conspiracy theory' mindset where when they uncover no evidence then that's just proof of how devious and dastardly Dreyfus is...and besides he's the sort who'd be a spy (i.e. a jew form Alsace-Lorraine but also clever, academic, aloof). Even Du Paty says that Dreyfus should be released if there's not enough evidence.

This would be quite amusing if it were fiction (imagine 'The Dreyfus Affair' by Joseph Heller) but as it's not fiction it's quite shocking. And even more so when you realise that it has parallels with more recent scandals and events.

Jonathan wrote: "We wondered about this before didn't we? I thought it was impossible because it would involve getting up early :-). However, I found this which suggests that he did indeed fight at least one duel. "

Thanks for that! So indeed it happened. Now I want to know about the one the narrator fought! :)

Back to The Dreyfus Affair: reading now it's way more fluid. Chapter 6 was impossible to put down, and I was really sleepy, but wanted to finish it.

I was about to mention as well that if this book were fiction, it would be really good. The plot is so intricate and there was really an organic built up of events that led to the trial. I try to put myself in Dreyfus' shoes but I simply can't even imagine how I would react to all of this. The army degradation scene, in particular, is just absurd. It's a public ritual of humiliation and you simply have to stand there and take it.

Du Paty's twisted inverted logic is mind-blowing to follow, and I can't believe that although people actually noticed this, still they let him conduct the case.

Lucie's devotion to Dreyfus is really touching. Even knowing he was unfaithful to her, still she stands by his side and promises to always be there.

This is the hut described in chapter 7.

Roman Polanski is currently directing a film about the affair named D.

When Picquart gets a sample from Esterhazy's handwriting and asks Alphonse Beterillon to analyze it:

"‘Why, that’s the handwriting of the bordereau.’
‘And what if it were written quite recently?’ Picquart asked.
‘Then the Jews have trained someone in the course of a year to imitate his handwriting.’"

This is so annoying!!!!

Renato wrote: "Roman Polanski is currently directing a film about the affair named D."

Well, if it's by Polanski, it should be good...shouldn't it?

I'd quite like to see how he handles it.

My thoughts exactly! :)

Renato wrote: "When Picquart gets a sample from Esterhazy's handwriting and asks Alphonse Beterillon to analyze it:

"‘Why, that’s the handwriting of the bordereau.’
‘And what if it were written quite recently?’ ..."

And this is from Beterillon, not du Paty! Du Paty just comes across as an anti-Semite but Beterillon seemed to be a bit more reasonable.

With Picquart's discovery it's yet another chance that the military had to correct the initial mistake. I would say that the first instance was before the court martial when they all realised (including du Paty) that they didn't have enough evidence to convict Dreyfus.

Now that they've basically altered, or mis-represented, the evidence with the secret dossier it's not just a case of a mis-trial.

Even worse, IMO, than Beterillon's response is General Gonse's response:

Gonse:'What does it matter to you if that Jew stays on Devil's Island?'
Picquart: 'But since he's innocent...'
Gonse: So what? That is not something that should enter into our calculations. If you keep quiet, no one will know'

Quite frightening really!

I do wonder though where this dialogue originally comes from. There's no footnote to it except to say that Gonse denied that he said this. It must have been from Picquart but no memoirs appear in the bibliography.

It's frightening, it's crazy and absurd... I'm getting quite annoyed with how everything happened.

I can't at how the same things they used to incriminate Dreyfus (handwriting etc) were used as arguments to defend Esterhazy saying it didn't mean he was guilty of treason.

And the fact that Esterhazy demanded a court martial with these words is just the cherry on top:

"‘As an innocent man, the torture I have been enduring for fifteen days is superhuman . . . Neither a refusal to prosecute nor a dismissal of charges, is enough to assure me the reparation I feel is my due. As an officer accused of high treason, I have a right to a court martial, which is the highest form of military justice. Only a decision reached there will refute . . . the most cowardly of slanders.’"

Renato wrote: "It's frightening, it's crazy and absurd... I'm getting quite annoyed with how everything happened..."

Although most of the decisions are annoying, unbelievable and frightening I think this book does a good job of trying to explain why they made the decisions they did - prejudice played a large part but there were other reasons. Fascinating!

Yes, it definitely does. I'm enjoying it more than I thought I would to be honest. I should read more non-fiction books!

Renato wrote: "Yes, it definitely does. I'm enjoying it more than I thought I would to be honest. I should read more non-fiction books!"

I used to read fiction and non-fiction more or less alternately but just lately I'm reading a lot more fiction. It's good to get back reading non-fiction though.:-)

How are you coping with reading it in English?

At first it was going slowly, but now I'm reading it practically as fast as I read in Portuguese.

Proust gets mentioned like a dozen times or so throughout the book it seems. It's nice to know he actually tried to do something for Dreyfus getting people to sign the petition to review the case. Did you get to that part already?

Proust was mentioned quite early on as well.

I'm still on chapter 9 as I keep on getting distracted by the World Cup. I'm hoping to finish it over the weekend but it'll probably take longer. As a Zola fan I'm looking forward to the chapter on his contribution.

I must admit I'm a bit confused over what, at this time, was public knowledge and what was known only to the military. For example the military carry on getting info from the German embassy from the same source, but I thought that the source of the original bordereau was revealed in Dreyfus's court martial.

I believe it wasn't public knowledge as Dreyfus's court martial was held on chambers. At that point, it was publicly stated they had knowledge that a French spy on the military was selling secrets to the German embassy, but not how they knew about this.

Thanks Renato. I noticed that Read helped clarify this when discussing the Esterhazy trial.

OMG! I thought when Cavaignac became War Minister that he would slowly reveal the truth. But no, it's even worse! He's hellbent on destroying the Dreyfusards and if possible taking them all to court for treason. But he has released the forged documents...

There is a book by Zola's English publisher, Vizetelly that documents Zola's time in England when he fled France: With Zola in England A Story of Exile. It doesn't add anything to the Dreyfus case but is interesting to see how, even in England, Zola had to remain undercover.

I too was certain that Cavaignac would finally reveal the truth, but no. At least, like you said, when he mentioned the forged documents it was a small but important step towards the truth.

I've been meaning to read Germinal, have you read it? Is it good?

'Germinal' is brilliant as are so many of Zola's books - but I'm a big fan of Zola so I'm biased.

I just ordered Germinal, should start reading it in July. :)

Back to Dreyfus, at first I felt he shouldn't have accepted the pardon, cause it wasn't the same as being acquitted and declared innocent in a trial. But at the end of the day, he suffered for so long, I think he just wanted to finally be free and be with his family. I got goosebumps reading of his first encounter with his children after so many years.

How do you feel about some of the Dreyfusards, like Lazare, blaming Dreyfus for accepting the pardon and saying he was only trying to save his own skin and not to help the Jewish cause?

Renato wrote: "How do you feel about some of the Dreyfusards, like Lazare, blaming Dreyfus for accepting the pardon and saying he was only trying to save his own skin and not to help the Jewish cause?
"

It's difficult reading this from a 21st Century viewpoint, where we know all the facts and live in a different world, to fully accept the pardon; i.e. that Dreyfus should accept that he's guilty of a crime that he didn't commit and for the military to get off scott-free. But, given that the army missed their last chance, with the second court martial, to close the case with some sort of honour, I can see that the compromise of the pardon was a brilliant political move - unsatisfactory to Dreyfus and the Dreyfusards but a way out of the deadlock that French society found itself in; and a way to defuse the immediate tensions.

It was revealing that Dreyfus's immediate reaction was to refuse the pardon but he quickly came round to the compromise position. I think, given the circumstances, he made the correct decision, both personally and for France.

As for Lazare, it's understandable that he'd be annoyed by the pardon, but then he hadn't lived on Devil's Island for five years with the prospect of spending ten more years in prison.

Do you believe Dreyfus made the correct decision, Renato?

I agree with all your points, Jonathan.

Of course we know now that some time after the pardon, he was indeed declared innocent and rehabilitated into the Army. But it only came after serious changes in the French government and at that time, living in that situation and seeing so many attempts failing, it must have been difficult maintaing faith in justice, the army, the government.

I don't know if his decision was right or wrong, but I think I would probably do the same just so I could be free at last. And maybe I would've broken down earlier... I don't know if I would endure it for as long as he did. It's just so out of our reality and kind of impossible to even imagine.

One thing I missed though was accounts on his faith in God, in his religion. I wanted to know if he was sure God would in some way intervene or if all the injustice would be dealt with later, not in this life, as is a common thought for most religious people. And also if his faith diminished, if he felt he had been forgotten by God etc..

Renato wrote: "One thing I missed though was accounts on his faith in God, in his religion. I wanted to know if he was sure God would in some way intervene or if all the injustice would be dealt with later, not in this life, as is a common thought for most religious people. And also if his faith diminished, if he felt he had been forgotten by God etc.. "

I don't think he was particularly religious, if at all. The anti-Drefusyards would highlight his Jewishness but religion as such didn't seem to take up much of his time; he was committed to the French army and the secular state.

On page 135, when Dreyfus was on Devil's Island, PPR states that 'Dreyfus never lost his wholly secular outlook: even in the depths of despair, he never had recourse to any of the consolations offered by religious belief. The ideals which sustained him were secular: Truth, Justice, Honour, Courage, Loyalty, Duty.'

I found a Zola website that has loads of photographs of the Second Dreyfus trial at Rennes: see here. n.b. the penultimate photo shows the line of soldiers that lined the court steps when Dreyfus left.

Jonathan wrote: "On page 135, when Dreyfus was on Devil's Island, PPR states that 'Dreyfus never lost his wholly secular outlook: even in the depths of despair, he never had recourse to any of the consolations offered by religious belief. The ideals which sustained him were secular: Truth, Justice, Honour, Courage, Loyalty, Duty.' "

Ah, true! Thanks for pointing that out.

Also thanks for the link with all the pictures!

I'm now reading a compilation of Zola's articles and letters from that period about the affair. He was pretty involved and sure of Dreyfus's innocence. There is one in which he even says something along the lines that in the name of all of his work and his career, Dreyfus is innocent.

Renato wrote: "I'm now reading a compilation of Zola's articles and letters from that period about the affair. He was pretty involved and sure of Dreyfus's innocence. There is one in which he even says something along the lines that in the name of all of his work and his career, Dreyfus is innocent. "

I shall probably read J'accuse tomorrow as for some reason I haven't read it so far.

Zola's last novel, which was published posthumously, was a thinly disguised version of the Dreyfus Affair set in a Catholic school. I haven't read it but it's not supposed to be that good - it's called 'Verite' or 'Truth' in English. There's still so much more Zola that I want to read though that it will have to take its place at the end of the queue.

I was learning more about him. He has a series of 20 novels? Wow. Are they all good, how do you feel about them?

The Rougon-Macquart series of 20 novels is superb. There's not a duff one amongst them though some are better than others. It was my 'big reading project' before I started Proust. If you're interested you may want to check out the blog http://readingzola.wordpress.com - I've contributed a few posts to it. There's also a GR group currently reading the whole series I believe. You may want to wait until Proust is out of the way though or you won't have anytime to do anything else. :-)

Thanks! Yes I'll have to wait until next year before committing to that! Ah, time...

A very good novel about the whole Dreyfus affair, which does not seem to have been mentioned in these pages yet, is the one by Robert Harris, 'An Officer and a Spy', the winner of the Walter Scott Prize for Historical Fiction 2014. Riveting stuff. See:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
http://www.amazon.com/Officer-Spy-Rob...

Ben wrote: "A very good novel about the whole Dreyfus affair, which does not seem to have been mentioned in these pages yet, is the one by Robert Harris, 'An Officer and a Spy', the winner of the Walter Scott ..."

I think I did come across this novel when I was looking for material but at the time I was concentrating on non-fiction.

I assume you've read it Ben? It looks well worth reading.

I have indeed read it, Jonathan, and can heartily recommend it -- especially for someone who has been exposed to quite a bit of it through ISOLT. Although it does not purport to be an historical chronicle of the whole affair, it presents it in an easily digestible and fairly accurate form.

About time?
Last year, "...the French Ministry of Defense has for the first time made public the entire contents of the infamous secret dossier that the French army used against Captain Alfred Dreyfus,..." C. Weber
http://www.affairedreyfus.com

This article is a good place to begin, if you are curious about the Dreyfus Affair:

"Dreyfus, Proust and the Crimes of the Belle Epoque"
By Caroline Weber (Proustian at Columbia University)
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles...