1000 Years of Annoying the French

Product Information

A bonus is that the humor is on point most of the times which by itself this saves the book in many cases. 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. 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. 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:

1000 Years of Annoying the French also Readers who enjoyed 1000 Years of Annoying the French also

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. Coming after the scuttling of the French fleet at Toulon by the Vichy Régime, it was the last blow to a fleet that, whatever the Brits might think of it, was in 1939 the fourth in the world after Britain, the United States and Japan; also, as the Naval Encyclopedia admits, it "had been saved from the budgetary misconceptions of aviation or the erroneous tactics of the Army"!That's preposterous! Churchill never liked de Gaulle (and vice versa)! The only truth is that the Americans wanted to bypass the Général and to establish an Allied (read: "all-American") government in France, but as of Churchill, better read this Associated Press summary: «It’s no secret Winston Churchill and Charles de Gaulle didn’t like each other. But documents released Tuesday reveal just how deep their antipathy ran with Britain’s prime minister at one point musing about eliminating the French general as a political force. ... Several of the documents indicate that Churchill wanted to withdraw Britain’s support for the man who later became France’s president. ... Churchill, who was in Washington, exchanged memos and telegrams with his Cabinet in London and is shown to agree with U.S. fears that de Gaulle was "too dictatorial" and an Anglophobe. The French leader "hates England and has left a trail of Anglophobia behind him everywhere," Churchill wrote. ... Churchill wrote in a telegram to his deputy, Clement Attlee, and Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden on May 21, 1943. "I ask my colleagues to consider urgently whether we should not now eliminate de Gaulle as a political force." In another memorandum to Eden, Churchill includes intelligence information that he said described de Gaulle as "thoroughly unfriendly both to Britain and to the United States and that while affecting communist sympathies he had fascist tendencies."» The humorous aspect of the book also gave it a very irreverent tone, which didn't bother me except that it too often derailed in salacious gossipy remarks that were often NOT entirely true or based in fact. And, of course, there's nothing humorous about goodness or kindness or noble deeds, so you will finish the book thinking there hasn't been a single moment of true courage or goodness or self sacrifice in a thousand years of history. And the most interesting thing for me was that while researching this book, I found that our versions of the same events are like two completely different stories – the French see history through tricolour-tinted glasses and blame the Brits (and after about 1800, the Americans) for pretty well every misfortune that has ever befallen France. Sometimes they’re right – we have done some nasty things to the French in the past – but often they’re hilariously wrong, and I have tried to set the record straight. 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.»

1000 Years of Annoying the French by Stephen Clarke - Goodreads

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. 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! During World War II, the British hated their French allies almost as much as they hated their Soviet allies.

Select a format:

The narrative flows well and is littered with jokes such as those mentioned above. But this is not history dumbed down, it is as informative as any core text book. Who knew that modern champagne was invented in England, that Dom Perignon tried to remove the fizziness from the French stuff because the bottles kept exploding whereas the English went crazy for it and the fizzier the better?

1000 Years of Annoying the French - Penguin Books UK

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!) One of the most frequent questions I get when doing readings and talks is: why is there such a love-hate relationship between the French and the Brits?

History is often looked upon as "boring" or "too-serious" and this is true in many cases, but as deep as humor has roots inside the humanity, a funny author can makes wonders. So from that point of view it gives great pleasure to hit the French with la baguette de l'histoire. Clarke's witty writing helps a lot. But it is not thoughtless bashing, Clarke's book actually hits upon an interesting topic: the way national identities are constructed and how historical events are greatly distorted in that process. We and the other. You could easily write a book about every country in Europe and the ridiculous deviations of history. The most interesting example in this book is obviously (to me) the story of Jeannne D'Arc. It is rather hilarious how the national memory erases the fact that the poor girl was sentenced to death by her own people for wearing trousers. Mon Dieu! If you are really interested in the historical field of national memory I would highly recommend The Invention of Tradition by Eric Hobsbawm. And having written this book, I finally understand where the never-ending tensions come from. The fact is that our history isn’t history at all. It’s here and now. 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.