“Vichy/Algeria Syndrome”?

131 Pages·2016·0.51 MB·English

University of Massachusetts Amherst
ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst
Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014
2011
An End to the “Vichy/Algeria Syndrome”?:
Negotiating Traumatic Pasts in the French Republic
Justin W. Silvestri
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Follow this and additional works at:https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses
Part of theAfrican History Commons,Cultural History Commons,European History
Commons, and thePolitics and Social Change Commons
Silvestri, Justin W., "An End to the “Vichy/Algeria Syndrome”?: Negotiating Traumatic Pasts in the French Republic" (2011).Masters
Theses 1911 - February 2014. 546.
Retrieved fromhttps://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/546
This thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses 1911 -
February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
AN END TO THE “VICHY/ALGERIA SYNDROME”?: NEGOTIATING
TRAUMATIC PASTS IN THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

A Thesis Presented

by

JUSTIN W. SILVESTRI

Submitted to the Graduate School of the
University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

February 2011

History
© Copyright by Justin W. Silvestri 2011
All Rights Reserved
AN END TO THE “VICHY/ALGERIA SYNDROME”?: NEGOTIATING
TRAUMATIC PASTS IN THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

A Thesis Presented

By

JUSTIN W. SILVESTRI

Approved as to style and content by:

_________________________________________________
Jennifer N. Heuer, Chair

_________________________________________________
Jon B. Olsen, Member

_________________________________________________
Dianne Sears, Member

__________________________________________
Joye Bowman, Department Head
History Department
To my family, both here and across the sea
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to take this opportunity to extend my sincere gratitude to those who
contributed to this thesis and provided vital intellectual and moral support. Above all, I
would like to thank Professor Jennifer Ngaire Heuer for the steady guidance that she
provided throughout this project’s development. Her insightful direction, attention to
detail, and welcomed assumption of the role of taskmaster helped to keep this project on
track, particularly in those moments where I felt overwhelmed by the thesis’s ambitious
scope. Gratitude should also be extended to Professor Jon Berndt Olsen and his course on
Comparative Memory during the aftermath of World War II. Professor Without this
stimulating experience, I would not have explored this body of scholarship or have
produced the core content that would later be heart of this thesis. Many other academic
advisors must be recognized. Professor Dianne Sears’ advisory role in this project gave
me an open ear and a fresh perspective outside of my discipline. I would furthermore like
to thank Professors Neil Shipley, Jay Winter, and James Young for their attention and
advice.
Of course, academic advisors alone do not make the production of any scholarly
work possible. Critical input and emotional support came from a warm and loving
community of family and friends. I’d like to thank my parents for their love and support.
Their kind criticism of my subject’s relevance forced me to keep a watchful eye on the
thesis’s coherency. I would also like to express my love and gratitude to Randi, whose
loving attention, guidance, and admirable patience made this thesis much easier to
complete. All my thanks to the numerous ranks of friends and family who supported this
endeavor
v
ABSTRACT
REMEMBERING THE FRENCH REPUBLIC: REFLECTIONS ON MEMORY,
HISTORY AND REPUBLICANISM IN FRANCE

FEBRUARY 2011

M.A., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST

Directed by: Professor Jennifer N. Heuer.

Within the past few years, France has exhibited a changing relationship in regards
to its traumatic memory of its collaborationist and colonial past. The controversies of the
loi du 23 février 2005 and the 2007 Guy Môquet Commemoration displayed a new
openness to discuss and evaluate traumatic pasts associated with these two public acts.
Public debate during the two controversies focused on the difficult process of how to
incorporate these traumatic events into the national narrative. Furthermore, this process of
negotiation has opened up a vibrant discussion over what parties in France possess the
authority and the right to construct the nation’s history. Medical metaphors of neurosis
and repression no longer appear to fit French practices of commemoration and
remembrance.
The Fifth Republic’s legislative effort to dictate the content and character of
France’s past encountered significant resistance from a number of historians and
educators. These scholars criticized the inappropriate character of the French State’s
involvement in the writing of history. While they stood opposed to the State’s methods,
French historians and scholars came to frame their resistance to legislated history as
evidence of their loyalty to republican ideals, namely those of scientific inquiry and
laïcité. They too desired the creation of a shared national history, yet insisted that this
vi
history could only be formed by respecting the presence of multiple narratives. Other
scholars voiced their reservations that the restoration of traumatic narratives might further
social breakdown. Interestingly, historians expressed little concern for the role of the
general public in the writing of history and, at times, revealed a distinct apathy or active
mistrust of the public’s capacity to think historically.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................................v
ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................vi
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1
A. A Shrug And Silence: My First Encounter With Contested French Memory......................1
B. A Guerre mémorielle franco-française?.............................................................2

2. MEMORY, HISTORY, AND EDUCATION: A REPUBLICAN TRINITY.....................8
A. Defining Memory and Its Relationship to History.............................................8
B. Collective Memory and the Birth of the Modern Nation-State........................11
C. Inventing a Republican France and National Past............................................17
D. The Collapse of a Republican Past?................................................................ 21
E. Lois Mémorielles: the Rise of the Legislated Past............................................28

3. THE LOI DU 23 FÉVRIER 2005 AND OPPOSITION TO LEGISLATED
HISTORY………………………………………………………………………………..32

A. The Loi du 23 février 2005: A Panacea for Harkis and Pieds- Noirs
Suffering?...............................................................................................................32
B. Historians and Educators React Against Legislated History.............................42
C. The National Assembly is Forced to Reconsider the loi du 23 février 2005.....52
D. Imposing Silence: Resorting to Constitutional Annulment...............................58

4. THE GUY MÔQUET COMMEMORATION...............................................................62

A. Politics, Hysteria, and Nicolas Sarkozy’s histoire bling-bling..........................63
B. Nicolas Sarkozy’s Election and the Origin of the Môquet Commemoration....69
C. Grudging Acceptance and Scholarly Ire: Initial Reactions to the
Commemoration....................................................................................................72
D. The Commemoration Appears to Fall Apart.....................................................81
E. Why the Controversy?...................................................................................... 84

5. AN (OVER?)ABUNDANCE OF MEMORY?..............................................................86
viii
A. Neurosis and French Memory: A Satisfying Conceptual Model?................... 86
B. Demanding Rationality: French Historians’ Discomfort With Memory...........91

6. CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................99

APPENDICES

A.THE TRANSLATED ORIGINAL LOI DU FÉVRIER 2005............................101

B. GUY MÔQUET’S TRANSLATED LETTER.................................................107

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................108

ix