TABLE TALK
An old comedy revived
DENIS BROGAN
The election and installation of M Georges Pompidou as President of the Fifth Re- public has produced a great deal of non- sensical comment. So has the nomination of M Chaban-Delmas as Prime Minister and the organisation of his cabinet. There were people who thought that M Poher, one of the great obscure figures in recent French history, the 'Ted' Agnew of France, could really hope to beat M Pompidou.
But what has interested me has not been the solemn thoughts provoked by the elec- tion of M Pompidou or the wide assump- tion that his main business is to get Britain into the Common Market, a very insular view even if one takes for granted that it is a good idea for anybody—but the revival of some of the more amusing aspects of the politics of the Third Republic. With what pleasure I saw the speculation about the future occupants of very important ministries! With what pleasure I saw people putting themselves forward who had no very obvious claims to cash in on the victory of M Pompidou and, indeed, of Gaullism, to which they had not notably contributed themselves! With what pleasure I saw some of the permanent illusions of the left expressed by M Mitterand, who seems to regard himself as in some way the legiti- mate President of the French Republic who has been cheated of his rights!
For once, I find myself in agreement with M Andre Philip in his article in Le Monde, in which he pointed out that all the political events of the last year in France had been signs of the deep conservatism and reluc- tance to change which marks France, and has marked it for a very long time. It was the General's willingness to innovate in a big way which was slapped down in the referendum; it was M Faure's willingness to innovate in a big way in the educational world that is the main public explanation of his exclusion from the new cabinet. Elaborate calculations that if all the people who didn't vote at all or who voted for M Poher or even the handful who voted for M Defferre (and in effect for M Mendes- France) had all got together with the Com- munists, they would have defeated M Pompidou may be true. No doubt they would have; but as we say in Scotland, `If ifs an' ans were pots and pans, there'd be nae ca' for tinkers.' So we are going to
have for some years to come a Gaullist succession both in the National Assembly and in the Elys4e. But it will be Gaullism with a difference, and it is the difference which, in a sense, cheers me up.
The grounds for my cheer are, I must admit, frivolous. Under the General the amount of good clean—or even good dirty —fun was inadequate for commentators. The only people who made a good thing out of the Gaullist republic were the brilliant parodists of La Cour in Le Canard Enchaine. Since I am a fanatical admirer of Saint-Simon (of course I mean the Duke, not the socialist Count) I was fascinated by the brilliance of the parody and often of its relevance. I think parody reaches its height in French and not in English. Even Sir Max Beerbohm was not the equal of Proust as a parodist. The team of La Cour was premature in resigning its censorial office because there can be no doubt that the new regime and the old opposition will provide all the materials it can possibly need for its Saint-Simonian imitations, al- though they will be of the Saint-Simon of the Regency of the Duke of Orleans rather than of the monarchy of Louis xtv.
Then there has been the highly enter- taining (but not in the least surprising) dis- covery that the Gaullists want to keep what they think they have won. They successfully defended their political position in the general election of last year; they have now defended it in the election to the presi- dency. The appeals for them to be 'big' about it all and give away a number of the most important jobs to recent converts or recent deserters struck me as engagingly naive. The moral of the parable of the labourers in the vineyard has never been accepted by practising politicians. I have great admiration for both the ability and the character of M Rene Pleven, but I can see why the Gaullists regard him with only tepid enthusiasm. In the same way, I can see why M Chaban-Delmas has taken M Giscard d'Estaing as Finance Minister, be- cause he did contribute something. I pre- sume, to the election of M Pompidou; but many of the faithful will compare M Gis- card d'Estaing's career with that of a wobbling marshal in 1814-15 rather than with that of a really devoted follower of the Emperor like Davotit.
But I am still more entertained by the plaintive bleating of the editor of Figaro that the Finance Minister should be M Pinay. M Pinay is about as old as the General, and I should think intellectually shows more signs of wear and tear. 1 have no reason to believe that he has had any new financial or other ideas for some time. But he does represent the France of the little man preached by that deplorable sophist Alain. M Pinay is a man of great probity. He is, like the maternal grandfather of William the Conqueror, a tanner. He comes from the Loire, which is not as good as being an Auvergnat like MM Pompidou and Giscard d'Estaing. But at this moment in French history, he would not have been impressive as the imitator of Baron Louis or the late Raymond Poincare.
But the Assembly will not feel as awestruck in the presence of M Pompidou as it did in the absence of the General. The careful organisation of the Assembly to give the benefit of the doubt to the govern- ment will prevent some of the more im- becile antics of the Third and Fourth Re- publics. Fewer people can hope to attain that emblem of place for the French politician, le portefeuille.
Then, whereas the intrigues and con►- binazioni in the days of the General re- called the ancien regime, today I think they will recall the regime which is most like the Fifth Republic. the Second Empire. This, by the way, is not a term of abuse, because in many ways the Second Empire provided a much more intelligent govern- ment than a great deal of the Third Re- public provided. But there will be some of the old intrigue for intrigue's sake, elaborate manoeuvring and marching in one direction in order to attain an object in the opposite direction which characterises the politics of our ancient universities. Many of the intrigues will come to nothing, but they will keep people busy and out of mis- chief.
Possibly the first thing the left could do which would be useful for France and for the future of this vague Boyg-like monster, la Gauche, would be a re-consideration of a great deal of French political history in the nineteenth century. since it is now surely obvious that the creation of a parlia- mentary republic was not the divine plan to which all French creation moved? And there will be a change not only in the character of the social visitors to the Elysee but in the relationship between the President and the people, who will think, without total implausibility, of themselves as residing in the Elysee. Nobody could have thought this when the General was reigning.
There will never again be a plausible story of the kind which was circulating when the General, to most people's surprise, chose M Pompidou of the Rothschild Bank to be his Prime Minister. M Pompidou, it was said. had been in the habit of phoning up the Baron Elie de Rothschild every morn- ing to report for service. He is supposed to have forgotten his new functions, and, phoning up the Elysee. he began, 'Bonjour. Monsieur le Baron'. The answer, it was said, was 'Cc n'est pas le baron; c'est le roi'.
I look forward to visiting Paris in the future and getting more entertainment out of it than I have in recent years. But of course providing entertainment for British visitors is not what the French people ex- pect of their government. although it is what they may get.
Previous page
