Talk:Louis-Ferdinand Céline
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Louis-Ferdinand Céline is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France and Monaco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
 |
||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Who wants to had something about his anti-semism ?
There is another, longer article on the same person: Louis Ferdinand Celine.
S.
I have moved the article to Céline - it is a pen name, like Voltaire, Stendhal, and Molière, and is not associated with his given names. john k`
Contents |
[edit] Poor family
I have read that his parents belonged to the middle class or even upper-middle class. Can anyone verify this or that wich is stated in the article?
Lower middle class, actually ; what in France is known as petit bourgeoisie, like the shopkeepers and various seedy proprietors who populate his works. Prairie Dog
[edit] Was he a far right supporter?
why is he listed in some link of biographies of people of the far right?
- I know he was considered a Nazi collaborator. His books don't generalize almost at anytime and also don't recall something more anti-Semitic than anti-British, e.g.--Luci_Sandor
09:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Luci thanks for your correct statement, apart from some of his pacifist pamphlets he was not particularly anti-semitic and he was much to humane to be a true anti-semite. As such I am pissed off at the self righteous posturing of morons and on their interpretation of Celine. THANKS
His first pamphlet, Bagatelles pour un massacre, (1937) was highly pacifist in nature but even more so enti-semitic. at this time the far right began using Celine's name in speeches as a political ally. his second pamphlet, L'ecole de Cadavres, (1938) was even more so, to the point where the left virtually abandoned him, even for his persuasive pacifism, and the right even found him too strong for their tastes, a charicature, if you will. it was for these pamphlets that he was charged with defamation of national character and for collaboration with the enemy. he was imprisoned 11 months and later released, and again charged, found guilty in 1950, and sentenced to a year's inprisonment, 50,000 francs fine, and confiscation of all this property (he was later amnestied). --Ben iarwain 20:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I think its fairer to say he abandoned the left. Its merely the likes of Gide wanted to adopt him. As for charged with collaboration most of France did and the shame is the punative nature of retribution. Poor old Petain got short shrift too and he was a legend. He did say anti-semitic things yes, not denying, but I find them hard to believe. In the sense of I dont think he was actively anti-semitic, first and foremost Celine was a satirist/humanist and his rants pointed at a deeper sense of misery.
Céline never abandoned the left because he was never part of any left wing organization. After having published Voyage au bout de la nuit in 1932 people considered Céline to be left wing, but that was merely an assumption based on Céline's anarchistic and nihilistic view of society. In his pamphlets Bagatelles pour un massacre (1937), L'école des cadavres (1938) and Les beaux draps (1941) Céline displayed the most horrible and gruesome antisemitisme ever published in Western Europe.--Willem Huberts 14:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
No Willem he did not, Hitler and Himmler did or even Luther. Dont be dramatic. And I stand be he did abandon the left, he flirted with the left hence Mea Culpa and his trip to the USSR. Its common for right wingers to once have been to the left, Mussolini but also LaRochelle. Anyway dont be dramatic...
Could you show us a source that states Céline belonged to the left or flirted with the left? I always prefer facts to opinions. By the way: please sign your contributions, it's more pleasant to know whom we're talking to... --Willem Huberts 15:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
If I knew how to I would. He was invited to the USSR by the socialists and he accepted, is that an adequate fact? Lars
I'm sorry to say, but you're wrong. He went to the USSR to collect and spend the money he earned after having sold I don't know how many copies of the Russian translation of Voyage au bout de la nuit. In those days it was impossible (for any author, regardless their ideological point of view) to export money to outside the USSR, one had to spend it inside the USSR. He never visited the USSR after being invited by the government. He went there on his own, accompanied by no one, invited by no one.--Willem Huberts 12:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Which begs the question how did he get in, his visa was an invitation by the USSR as such an invitation 21:20, 19 June 2006 82.69.130.150
Please sign your contributions. Furthermore, please show your sources. How do you know his visa was an invitation by the USSR?--Willem Huberts 20:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move
Yes, of course this should be moved. Septentrionalis 18:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Céline was not a fascist(?)
I have read quite an amount of material regarding Céline, and I have gotten the impression that he was not a fascist. He was an anti-Semite but neither a nazi nor a facist. He argued not to go to war against Hitler and Germany (partly) because of his extremely pacifist convictions. He was an outspoken critic against Hitler (even though he said it was because Hitler had "jew blood" in him) and the concept of aryan supremacy. On one occasion, during a lectur on something like the "awfulness" of the judeo-communism or jodeo-marxism or something like that, he interupted the speaker with "why don't you talk about aryan stupidity?".
I belive that him being listed as a fascist on several lists on Wikipedia is incorrect. But then again I might be wrong. Feel free to correct me if that is the case. --Blackfield 23:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Claims made in the French article
The French version of this article claims, among other things, that:
- Céline was wounded in the right arm, not the head, during his military service.
- He visited the Ford plants in Detroit for a mere 36 hours and was never a medical advisor for that company.
- During the four years that he spent in Denmark after his release from prison, he lived in a confortable house owned by his lawyer.
- After being pardoned in 1951, he signed a very generous publishing contract with Gallimard. The stories he often repeated in interviews and in his later books about his poverty are therefore false.
All of these points contradict the text of the English article. I encourage someone to look into this. -- Eb.hoop 05:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, there are a lot of inaccurate and even false statements being made in the article (the French article is not entirely correct either though). I will attempt to clean it up in the near future.--Blackfield 18:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
He was discharged with a head wound. He worked in the Ford plant and wrote a subsequent paper on conditions of the poor. His poverty at end of life, not sure, know his house was looted and he probably was not as rich as he should/felt he was.
[edit] Head wound?
Céline has always spread the myth that he had been trepanated after being struck in the head in 1914 during WWI. He even said on many occasions that doctors had inserted a plate into his skull. Céline liked to tell stories and to dramatize things. The head wound is one of them. Three citations to prove him wrong (and all those who believe the story of the head wound):
- In later life he talked much about his wounds. Again and again he claimed that he had been struck in the head and that the doctors had inserted a plate into his skull. Jean Ducourneau, editor of the Oeuvres complètes, has unearthed the surgeons' report. He finds no mention of a head-wound. Destouches was treated for an arm-wound and the operation left him with a stiff right shoulder. His friends recall seeing the deep scar that ran down to his elbow. But the head-wound is pure invention. (Source: Patrick McCarthy, Céline. Allen Lane, London, 1975, p. 24-25. ISBN 0-7139-0767-3.)
- Bien entendu, ni trépanation ni même trauma crânien, et rien non plus à ce sujet dans le certificat établi le 24 février 1915 par le médecin major Laurens et le médecin principal Moty à l'hôpital annexe de Vanves, qui mentionnaient simplement: Plaie perforante du bras droite par balle, entrée 1/3 supérieur face antéro-interne, sortie 1/3 inférieur face postéro-externe, libération et suture du nerf radial. (Source: François Gibault, Céline: le temps des espérances 1894-1932. Mercure de France, Paris, 1978, p. 159.)
- On sait aujourd'hui que sa fameuse trépanation ne fut qu'un mythe. Si Céline resta toute sa vie invalide à 70 pour 100, il le dut uniquement aux séquelles de sa blessure au bras. (Source: Frédéric Vitoux, Céline. Pierre Belfond, Paris, 1978, p. 57. ISBN 2-7144-1178-9.)
--Willem Huberts 06:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Madness and Rage
I put a citation request some time ago on the statement about Céline's alleged descent into madness and rage, but so far none has appeared. I propose to remove this biased and subjective comment, unless some appropriate reference can be provided in the near future. White Guard 05:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed though his later stuff does read like paranoia 101
I discovered Céline late in life, and became very much intrigued with him. His putative anti-semitism is a mystery to me. While the extent of it is controversial most authorities declare that it was genuine and rabid, yet I have read no explanation of it's roots nor any other analysis of it's nature. Is there any explantion for it or analysis of it's developement in his formative, or, for that matter, later years? It is not enough to tell me that he was anti-semitic. When such an insightful writer strongly holds an intransigent, irrational view, especially one with such violent consequences, then what is the significance vis-à-vis his thought process?
[edit] His anti-semitism
I discovered Céline late in life, and became very much intrigued with him. His putative anti-semitism is a mystery to me. While the extent of it is controversial most authorities declare that it was genuine and rabid, yet I have read no explanation of it's roots nor any other analysis of it's nature. Is there any explantion for it or analysis of it's developement in his formative, or, for that matter, later years? It is not enough to tell me that he was anti-semitic. When such an insightful writer strongly holds an intransigent, irrational view, especially one with such violent consequences, then what is the significance vis-à-vis his thought process?
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Louis-Ferdinand_C%C3%A9line"
[edit] His nazism and antisemitism
Sorry for my bad english. There is a problem in
he was identified by the public with the Nazi occupation, despite his consistent contempt for their ideology (and all others).
Celine writes :
« Si demain Hitler me faisait des approches avec ses petites moustaches, je râlerais comme aujourd’hui sous les juifs. Mais si Hitler me disait : « Ferdinand ! c’est le grand partage ! On partage tout ! », il serait mon pote ! » (Bagatelles pour un massacre, Denoël, 1937, p. 83).
« Je veux les [les Juifs] égorger... (...) Lorsque Hitler a décidé de « purifier » Moabit à Berlin (leur quartier de la Villette) il fit surgir à l’improviste dans les réunions habituelles, dans les bistrots, des équipes de mitrailleuses et par salves, indistinctement, tuer tous les occupants ! (...) Voilà la bonne méthode. » Lettres à Marie Canavaggia, Du Lérôt éd., 1995.
And Philippe Burrin (historian) :
« Ses pamphlets de l’avant-guerre articulaient un racisme cohérent. S’il dénonçait en vrac la gauche, la bourgeoisie, l’Église et l’extrême droite, sans oublier sa tête de Turc, le maréchal Pétain, c’est pour la raison qu’ils ignoraient le problème racial et le rôle belliciste des juifs. La solution ? L’alliance avec l’Allemagne nazie, au nom d’une communauté de race conçue sur les lignes ethnoracistes des séparatistes alsaciens, bretons et flamands. » Philippe Burrin, La France à l’heure allemande, 1940-1944, Seuil, 1995, p. 63.
