1000 Years of Annoying the French

Product Information

After all those "Merde" (Paul West) novels in which Stephen Clarke showed a deep knowledge of the French psyche, but also of all those national clichés, I was expecting a little more from this jocular history of the mutual dislike between the two neighboring nations. William the Conqueror and Napoleon-the-dwarf (with very little body parts): they weren’t even French. During World War II, the British hated their French allies almost as much as they hated their Soviet allies. On the other hand, I am French, and I have discovered at my expense that this book does exactly what it says on the cover: it annoyed me. With such an amazing portrayal of French hypocrisy and silliness I think “1,000 Years” would fit nicely on the book shelves of Francophobes. In it they will find a full supply of delightful anecdotes, giving them all the amunitions they need to silence the arrogant French. Here are just a few: This is a very French trait. Today, if a big manufacturing company is in trouble, it will parachute in a graduate of one of France’s grandes écoles, someone who has studied business theory and maths for ten years but never actually been inside a factory. The important thing to the French is not experience, it is leadership – or, more exactly, French-style leadership, which mainly involves ignoring advice from anyone with lots of experience but no French grande école on their CV.”

So how did it happen that de Gaulle received Churchill's support? Well, he didn't. Not from Churchill himself. «But the British Cabinet, headed by Attlee and Eden, urged Churchill not to withdraw support from de Gaulle. The ministers said such a radical policy change was dangerous and cast doubt on some of the unfavorable reports about de Gaulle. ... The War Cabinet had the final word, and Churchill agreed to Britain’s continued championing of de Gaulle.» I love this book! This is how history should be passed on - the book is full of fascinating historical facts all built round the "special" relationship we have with our neighbours across the channel. It documents the often fractious history between France and England, throwing up a lot of information about the ripple effect this relationship has had on world events. The section on early American history is particularly fascinating.

Things have been just a little awkward between Britain and France ever since the Norman invasion in 1066. Fortunately—after years of humorously chronicling the vast cultural gap between the two countries—author Stephen Clarke is perfectly positioned to investigate the historical origins of their occasionally hostile and perpetually entertaining pas de deux. William Faulkner was talking about the Southern USA when he said that “the past is never dead. In fact, it’s not even past.” But exactly the same thing can be said about the French and the all English-speakers – no matter what we try to do in the present, the past will always march up and slap us in the face. Austria is a country founded on pastries, and a visit to a Viennese coffee shop makes you wonder how a nation that devotes so much energy to producing it's dizzying variety of delicious Kuchen and Torten could ever have done something so hideously uncake-like as support Hitler in 1938.”

To give the simplest of examples – go into the British Embassy in Paris, and what do you see in the first anteroom you enter? A grand portrait of the Duke of Wellington, the man who effectively ended the career of France’s greatest general, Napoleon Bonaparte. Essentially, a two-century-old defeat is brandished in the face of every French visitor to Britain’s diplomatic headquarters … in France’s own capital city. In Western Canada where I grew up we learned French in school, Parisian French...not Quebecois French. We did not have a great affection for the province of Quebec when I was growing up. I found this book absolutely hilarious. What a wonderful way to understand the historical significance of the events that have shaped Anglo-French relations for the past 1,000 years. Clarke covers the Battle of Hastings in 1066, The Hundred Years War, losing Canada on the Plains of Abraham (that was the French losing), Napoleon's defeat and every major event in Anglo-French relations. Calling a tenth- or eleventh-century Norman a Frenchman would have been a bit like telling a Glaswegian he’s English, and we all know how dangerous that can be.”Stephen Clarke เป็นนักเขียนที่ถนัดการเขียนแนวเสียดสี ที่มีลีลาฉกาจหาตัวจับยาก หนำซ้ำยังรุ่มรวยอารมณ์ขัน ผมชอบการหยิบแกมหยอกของชาวอังกฤษ-ฝรั่งเศสแน่ล่ะว่ามันออกชังๆหน่อยแต่พวกเขาให้เกียรติกันและกันมากเลยนะ มันเป็นการจิก-กัดโดยไม่รุ้สึกถึงการ”เหยียด” ซึ่งทำออกมาได้น่ารักมาก น่ารักแบบที่คิดไม่ออกว่าเหล่าชาติในอาเซียนจะเขียนถึงประเทศเพื่อนบ้านได้น่ารักแบบนี้ ตัวผมอยากให้เรามีหนังสือประวัติศาสตร์ประเทศเพื่อนบ้านที่เขียนได้อารมณ์สนิทกันขนาดนี้บ้าง Amongst all the good natured ribbing, Stephen Clarke gives an interesting history lesson on these two countries peppered with anecdotes and trivia. For example, Joan of Arc was actually sentenced to death not because she could hear the voice of God but because she wore trousers (it’s slightly more complicated than that but that’s the gist of it. She wore pantaloons. Burn her at the stake!) This book should be required reading for anyone who wants a better understanding of the history that exists between England and France - and essential for anyone who collects fascinating trivia. I always knew that the Norman's weren't French but it was interesting to discover that Napoleon was,technically,Italian and that baguettes and croissants originated in Austria! This book, as its name suggests, is a take on the history between England and France for the last ten centuries or so. Also suggesting from the title, this is no impartial take. Many historians take pride in claiming their unbiasesty but Clarke had no intentions to do so. Despite it being a whimsical ride for the most part, it did drag from time to time, and I was glad to get it over with. There are far too many dad jokes in here for me. He’s a writer, not a comedian.

A laugh out loud hilarious and perceptive look at the history of England and France and their relationship for the past one thousand years. This is no dry history book, but a humorous recounting with lots of pithy statements and witty asides. I loved the humorous approach because it was not politically correct and because humor often allows you to get closer to the truth and reality of a thing. This is not just a book filled with subtle humour and facts galore, it is a veritable history lesson. Despite the title, it is not an anti-French manifesto, far from it. As well as plenty of passage highlighting reasons to love the French, it reminds us of the many things the world has to thank France for. That said, it also takes time to debunk some myths that the French love to trot out. The fact that le croissant was a Belgian invention is particularly irksome to my French friends. I realize that any book that gives a balanced view of history is going to irritate French people a lot. So I’m really sorry, France, but the 1,000 years of being annoyed by les Anglo-Saxons aren’t over yet … He takes delight in pointing out that William the Conqueror was not French and that he loathed them as much as they loathed him and his barbaric Norman ways.I found the bits about the channel tunnel and entering the EU particularly interesting, because those are bits that I really knew very little about and -- given Brexit -- are quite timely. We Brits feel no resentment about 'losing' our American colonies. We're quite fond of independent Americans, and see them as distant cousins who can't spell our language properly. We've cooperated with America pretty amicably on projects like liberating Europe and inventing pop music. And we have no desire whatsoever to try and govern Texas.”

Another thing that should not be left unsaid is the part about colonization. Because this book shines a big bright spotlight on all the notable mistakes the French made and even some of the successes the British achieved, but tries to be as brief as possible about everything the British did wrong. It is very important to understand that you don’t get to see the whole picture here. The British part is casually mentioned in a few sentences here and there, while the French part takes up multiple long chapters. The Great Plague is one of the most compelling events in human history, even more so now, when the notion of plague—be it animal or human—has never loomed larger as a contemporary public concern Up your ass, Stephen! Up your ass. After all those "oh, but this French thing isn't French, it was borrowed from Britain, Austria or somewhere else!", maybe Stephen Clarke should have talked about how French Britain still is! Even if Guillaume le Conquérant (William the Conqueror) was a bastard, what happened and still happens today is that the House of Lords and the House of Commons are still French or Norman medieval, and endorsements to bills are made in Old French, using such phrasing: "Soit baillé aux Communes." "A ceste Bille les Communes sont assentus." "A ceste Bille avecque des Amendemens (or avecque une Amendement) les Communes sont assentus." "A ceste Amendement (or ces Amendemens) avecque une Amendement (or des Amendemens) les Seigneurs sont assentus." "Ceste Bille est remise aux Communes avecque des Raisons (or une Raison)." "Soit baillé aux Seigneurs." "A ceste Bille avecque des Amendemens (or une Amendement) les Seigneurs sont assentus." "A ceste Bille les Seigneurs sont assentus." And then, once royal assent is given, the law is announced by the Clerk of the Parliament in these words: « La Reyne le veult. » If this isn't hilarious, I don't know what is. A bonus is that the humor is on point most of the times which by itself this saves the book in many cases.The text is as tongue in cheek as you would expect and there are giggles aplenty. The first big laugh I had was when Clarke described William II (informally known as Rufus) of England as "a medieval Paris Hilton" for his indulgences and a love of "make up, dresses and yappy little dogs". Last year I asked my f-list to recommend to me their favorite "new" book that they had read in the past year (by "new" I mean "new to them"). I don't remember who recommended me this one, but I'd thank them if I did!