The Battle of the Sexes in French Cinema, 1930–1956 by Noël Burch

7/27/2019 The Battle of the Sexes in French Cinema, 19301956 by Nol Burch

1/15

Nol Burch and Genevive Sellier

Translated by Peter Graham

The Battle of the Sexesin french cinema, 19301956


2/15

T tt t xsin rench cinema, 19301956

Nol Burch and Genevive Sellier

Translated by Peter Graham

Duke University Press

Durham anD lonDon

2014


3/15

st 2014 k Uvsty Pss

A ts svdPtd t Utd tts A d-

sd by Kst K

yst Gd P P by s It ysts, I.

Lby Css Ct--Pbt t

, N, 1932

[ d ds sxs d s, 19301956. Es]

T btt t sxs F , 19301956 / N d

Gvv ; tstd by Pt G.

s Ids bb s d dx.

iSBn 978-0-8223-5547-2 (t : k. )

iSBn 978-0-8223-5561-8 (bk. : k. )

1. M-w tss t ts. 2. Mt ts

FHsty20t ty. I. , Gvv. II. ,

N, 1932 d ds sxs d s, 19301956.

st : III. t.

pn1995.9.m27B8713 2013

791.4309440904d23 2013018959


4/15

"

Contents

Itdt 1

Part I. The Prewar Period, 19301939

Ct 1. P C-Fy R 15

Film Analyses 54

Part II.

The German Occupation, 19401944:Fathers ake a Backseat

Ct 2. Csttd Fts 91

Ct 3. W t v t Pty 103Ct 4. Msyy Ls O 114

Ct 5. Abst M, F M 125

Ct 6. W k Ct T sty 133

Ct 7. TZazou F: A ssdt ty d t Ot 140

Ct 8. A W Fd wt H s 150

Ct 9. Gt M Fs d Nw Fts 164

Film Analyses 180

Part III. The Postwar Period, 19451956:Settling of Scores

Ct 10. T stbz Ets t Lbt 237

Ct 11. Rst t Pt Od 269

Film Analyses 305

Cs 341

Rs 347

Idx 357


5/15

"

Introduction

alhough neiher t ts ts bk s td st, s-

t s t kd tt s d F v t st y ys s, d t t sty stts, dbt skd

desire to approach lm analysis rom a resh angle. Tis required a considerable

s t vw t t tt t dss tt -

t stds F, qt t t tdt s stts

d t sty, v, s Cst Mtzs ky tbt t t dbt,

b sts d syyss.

Nt tt t sty t s b xd tty F:

v s Gs ds st sv svys t sbjt, yss v sd t ttt t w, t y jst

v ty d, s t wys b vy ssb. t t t-

tude o angles rom which such a protean object as the cinema can be ap-

ds bt tq, , dsty, bsss, t,

popular culture, an institution, and an instrument o propagandawe eel

tt F ss v s d t tk dvt s t-

t s d w t stdy t sty stts.

Ts s b xd by t dty tt ssts d s-tory specialists have in communicating with each other, the ormer oen being


6/15

2

inroDucion

tsst s d t xtd t sbjt stdy (d v!) t

b b w t s t s wy v t d, t tt td

t sttz t s jst sv ss d t vk ts

tv ty. Ev t st tt st wk t

vw (F 1977/1988; G 1984) tts ts t d -

t t ( t ts s): s sv t t t

o a political ideology on civil society or to conrm the existence o an ideology

tt ss v t . Wt w ttt t tt s

t bsd t s tsvs.

T , tv t dt t wy t s bt dd d

sd, s bby d d t xss s -

y. t t ds vtss s sttt ts w t, ws

y x d vy dvs ds (ss, tv, t, ts,

t, sts, st, s, d, d s ) q s

o the kind that the art historian Pierre Francastel wanted to see applied to

t.

O bk s t st ws t b t sts t-

y st s wt s-d sd kwd t

s bjt d t s ts tt v b dvd t yz t.

A t s tt v d t wy w k t s, t

should also be made o the airly recent discipline o cultural studies, developedfy Es-sk ts, w sks t dstd t syb

productions o a given society without reerence to the evaluation grid im-

posed by the dominant culture. In France, Pierre Bourdieus (1979/1984) revo-

lutionary approach to the sociology o culture adopted similar criteria, but

Fs tst vw t s s vsv tt t ts s d t tt

kind o historical research, which is dicult to nd anywhere except in the

wk st k Ps Oy (1989).

I t d , t, t tvy t stwhas been crowned with success in Franceto get the cultural legitimacy o

t zd by bt t tts d t stt-

ts s d t t t stt t t

dts t t xs d (d s wys vt)

t s tv t dt. Ts s t

w v dtd bk.

Finally, the most recent but by no means least important ramication o

t Nw Hstyt sty w, t t sty d -tss b t F wt t v vs Gs by


7/15

3

inroDucion

d M PtsHistoire des emmes en occident(1991), ws st

v s d by t ts stt t wv tt t -

t d syb dss dt w tt s t

basis o our societies. Te historical precision o that collective work, which

is based on the premise that sexual identities are not essences but relation-

ships and dierentiation processes inherent in a given society and period,

lent a useul extra dimension to the work o English-speaking historians

particularly in the eld o gender studieswhich, while substantial, was all

too oen sub specie aeternitatis. Moreover most o those same historians

work on cinematic representations o gender was chiefy, i not exclusively,

d wt U.. . It y s b t s tt, v s

Laura Mulveys (1975/1981) trailblazing essay, any analysis aimed at under-

std t syb t d ts stt s ds sx

tss d t b d dty t F , ss tt

have precisely to do with history in general and cultural history in particu-

lar. We do, then, distance ourselves rom the principal eminist theories in

Es-sk ts s s w w d b t k -

svs t t t tt y yss stts d ts

wd b tst y t w dwd wt sx wss ( -

ment implicit in Modleski [1988]). Just as the French cinema continues to

be aimed at spectators o both sexes without discriminating between them,we eel that gender relations concern men just as much as they do women.

Eqy, w v t wd t t st A sts, w

t ss ss, w tt t vy d d

vy t tt ss s dy ttd wt t ss d.

I t d, w w wd k wk t b s s t t

ramework o the struggle or sexual equality, we regard as o secondary impor-

t t tt stt stt, w b sd s

basis or reassessing movies against the grain, so to speak, in other words, with-t y y ttt t s st d s vt (Pt

1989; and, rom a critical viewpoint, Williams 1988). We are more interested in

dty d dstd t y ft d tdty -

t d ts t v d, ty s, ty

k F d t d d stdy, t stts st s sty

, tt t t jty w, t st t t 1970s, d -

tzd t vs wt t s d bt tts

t F (Fss 1992; Rsv 1993; Vt 1995).O ds t s t d 193056 ws tvtd by vs -


8/15

4

inroDucion

tors. First, as can be seen rom publishers catalogues, university degree courses,

d t-s s, st s d ts stds t

vy wt F vs d b t Nw Wv vd t

scene at the beginning o the 1960s and tend to look down on them, apart

rom a handul o established masterpieces. Tis can easily be explained by

t sty t F d t by t yd

byLes Cahiers du cinma, ws s w btd t ts t

t Nw Wv ks w t t t d t 1950s

by bw sd t vs t. t b Nw Wv vs

become totally incomprehensible once cultural benchmarks disappear, it is

perhaps high time to rescue rom oblivion those twenty-six years o French

cinema, rom the beginning o the talkies to the rise o the New Wavea

period notable in France or enjoying the highest cinema attendances and

dw t wdst s st s. F t d t 1950s

, vt st -qty bt bt tw-td

syst, t d , stt tt ssts tdy

btt ws. Istv t tsts tt v, v t

past orty years or so, led cinephiles to preer Hollywood classics to French

s v t s d, w t t tt s t k bk v tt

dt s s t dstd ts , ts t, d ts s

F sty t t. M y tt ws t s t st, ty s t stdy Hywd vs -

s t dstd w t s tt we .

T tt d s sd t s t b t t st

ss: F ws t t t dkst d st tt ys

in its recent history; during the 1930s violent political clashes took place in

ts t d s; ty w wd by t

y w, st ty dt d t b, dtd

t d dsst, w t d t ys G -t wt ts ttdt ss, s, d t; y t

Lbt, w kd bt dv d t d ,

w F d st t b t wd w. Tt stt ws

d by Fs bty t s t s t d w, wt

t w-kw t t d dst ts. ys t,

sty sd w , tt dty d t s sty.

Te Brigitte Bardot bombshell burst on the scene in 1956, the point at which

w b stdy t s.Hwy t tt d t ys t Ot, w


9/15

5

inroDucion

we have studied more particularly because, at a time when the French were

t t st d t sty, t d

vy t : wt st, t ws t y ss s tvty

tt ws tzd by t tts d b, t t dv -

t, tt d d s xss sty w t ss

d bs w d by t d ss Vy d t G

y s. W w t tt t ws tt s t dv

more deeply into the lm production o the time, which had hitherto been

dsssd by sts s y d tt t

t 1930s (Js 1983).

It ws, t ty, t bss t bt w td btw

t stt b t w d d t Ot tt w

b t stt t, w sd t b b t by qy

kd s tt d stw . O dt t s

vs w xd ws d t t sty t t s v

t . w wtd, t s t 194044 d, vy

proportion o Frances output (180 movies out o the 220 produced), while

in the case o the 1930s and the postwar period we ocused on a very broad

s s tt ws sttv vy d vy

d t v, ty v sd qttv t, wt ts

o the time or later. Indeed as we progressed in our research, we elt the need tod ts qttv t, wt t st tt wt w dd s t

bst s w ts tt sdd d wt t sss tt w t

b d s dd d tt d sty x wy

t b t ts fts d tdts, dss sttys. Ts

vs w t s s ts t bs t, bt w -

d t dt wy, w qd s t sw s t

tss bty s td by s sty s d t dstt t x-

tdy t t t bs t t. As st, tt vs sy t t t, bs ty w t t

wk stbsd ts, t b s s tt.

As ds t t ss, t s ty ds

to take into account the specicity o the cinema, and o French cinema in

t, ws t t dvs xtsvy ts -

ts btw d w d/ btw t s sx. I

t wds, yss t stts d ts s

t xss s y bd s bt t st t -tv ty sbjt (t s d t t ts


10/15

6

inroDucion

t stt ss t t) d t vd stt svs t t yt

tss t dvtd t t ws bty.

It was also the work o Ginette Vincendeau, a British-based French re-

s, tt sd s wt t stt t dtk. I dd-

t t kb yss t J Gb yt (1985; Gt d

Vincendeau 1993), her main contribution to our understanding o French

t 1930s s bsvt t wy t -

sts d vs dd btw t b t

tks d t b 1940 (1989). Ad w svs w b t vy

tt s vs tyy ty dd-d w ts t

ss xty s ts wt vy y w. As V-

deau suggests, this pattern was probably overdetermined by actors that ob-

td t t t, s s t t tt t d sts w t dy

d t t qts t tks bs ty d bkd t

tt, w t s t dy y ds ws sdd qt

. tss w t kb bs bs

vs d ts s, ty t st

t 191418 w (MM 1981). Tt tt s sd, w-

y t y t, t tvs t t, ws w v w

ws dstsb s w v d d, k F

w (t N Cd), td t t s stt sbss.t t dsb tt tv tt s Od, s Vd ds, s

t sk d tt sttt. W wt t

other ormulation she proposes: an incestuous pattern. Apart rom a handul o

movies labeled realist, whether or not carrying the additional epithet poetic,

w J Gb sy s t t d wty t,

t st tst t ts w s s tt t sbjt t

tsy s v Ods Et (t d, d t t y

d Fd), bt t t s sttv t Lw w ts t stt s d t t t dt. T t incests ks t

possible to tie that lm theme in with a whole psychosocial paradigm in real lie

tt xtdd w byd d s btw d d y

w, s sx bs s by st w v t s

not just what a psychoanalyst might describe as a antasy, as Nancy Huston

(1979) d M-Vt Ls (1994) v sy td t.

Now i the origin o that pattern o the incestuous couple is to be seen

as arising not rom a universal, hence innocent, psychical phase o humanontogenesis (i Freud is to be believed) but rom a hidden yet very real vio-


11/15

7

inroDucion

sty, ts wdsd t s tt dd (st

td vs) bs t k ss. T sx s-d s

ty Lts s R, Hy , Js y, d Vt F, -

bd wt t sbssvss y w ws s d s w

so quickly orgotten, can be interpreted as a denial o the crumbling patri-

archal edice, a denial symptomatic o a ear o changes already under way

( 1991/1994).

I t stdy d ts, t s t t tt s

whole, at all times and in all places, have displayed ear and mistrust o the

emale sex (Dinnerstein 1978). Given that context, under the particularly

oppressive and outmoded patriarchy o 1930s France (McMillan 1981), such

s sx sbss by t d-w w tk td d

vtby td s -w ks t d xs b-

st t t. b s, w ws ssb t

w tt ts ts s? F ( zt

vd by st wts)? F tt bs? F tts? T

ty ks ( t bdst ss) d t bvd

t? At t st w v s d wk, y ts st y-

tss ss t s t b dstb.

O d t b tt w k t dst dty t-

s twd t st d ts, w tt s wd b smokescreen: ear o war, ear o the loss o national identity, ear o the Other?

Tt s t ytss vd by F sts w ty bsv

tt ty t t stt ts btw -

ts d btw t sxs (t-Mt 1989; G 1984; d L -

tque 1977). However that may be, such representations also probably refect a

w xbtd by dst s ss d t vy

sb dds t st zts t t (d 1995).

Tese same issues take on a completely dierent complexion in the light t stt vts tt d s xt -

hs o French lms produced between 1940 and 1944 under the German

Ot d t t Vy vt. Wt w s stt t

s d tt d s vtb st t Lw t Ft by

tszd Lw t Mt. Ts vs, w s t b d st

vs t d, b ttbtd, s w svs ttd t d,

t t t dt d t dsdt tt ttd t ty sy

sstd wt t Td Rb d ts td s st. Ts yt-ss tds t sbsttt, v t t sts tt t


12/15

8

inroDucion

w d, t xst s y s w s ts ss

bty: d td w vsd t t (w td

tt t tk tt ts) d w d t by

d dst, k s t t dsdtd s-

ty ( tttd ty t tdtst t d ts t, t

right-thinking Catholic press), or by a dynamic gure that oreshadowed a

t ss ( -w st, s, x, Ls As v

Aurlien 1944).

Tt s y stt ss, w b dttd t

work o the great majority o male directors, has its le-wing and its right-

wing versions (which comes as no surprise, given that we are talking about

France, where this division is traditional). But how can one explain why so

many movies are capable o being interpreted in various ways (Le Ciel est

vous [Te Woman Who Dared], 1944, s t st btd x) d d

t tst s bvsy wt t s t wty ts t

realism did with the complacent athers o the boulevard lms or Marcel

Ps Pv?

P Lb (1990) ts tt t v ts d t -

war period in France was one o political and ideological conusion. Yves

Chalas (1985) argues that the Dbcle and the Occupation caused people in all

sts sty Rsstts t bts, t-w Vy-ites (supporters o Charles Maurras, traditionalist Catholics) to le-wing

Vyts (ws P F, t d t st Pty) d v

t bvs wt-d-s yt y vy st

s, w dsbs s tsd b ts.

Lt s k tt sy t t tdttdy tv-

s tt s ssv sts d d Vy. T t

t t w tt b d t ttty -

dt t t t s b t t btd t t t d dv-td by P Pt. Gd M (1975) ts tt ts t ws -

ty d by t xds J 1940, w F v t t,

st, d Ps td t bk t d, b, d dst

sty tt d b t s vs s 1936 d d d t -

tt t st t vd Gs, d st t t

st, w s std tt t t st. Cst F (1989)

ts t tt, ddty Pts d, t Vyt ds t

promote the arming world resulted in the creation o a rural French ethnogra-y (t t Ms P Ats d dts) d j


13/15

9

inroDucion

documentary school, the most amous example o which was Georges Rou-

quiersFarrbique (which was actually made aer the war but grew directly out

Vys s). dy, w tt t ty,

t ds F, d t qty ts dts d tt

rom the increasingly absurd principles o liberal capitalism, we can take a

more dialectical view o that phenomenon: the aspirations embodied in France

d Vy bt by t t d d by t -

tvts std by tt t, b s t tt t sts

st-dy y. I tt t, t bs s t s tt t s s-

tk t dsb t d bty tt d v sty, t st

d t st tw ys t Vy vt, sy jtv ts.

Nw t s s t t sts ftd, x, t stt

ss w ds, dd t btd E dU

, ws sttd ws t ty t ss ds t Td

Rb d t v d s dt t t tys

emale members. Tose hopes o a greater empowerment or both sexes in

sty, s w s w ts s d w t

td ( d R 1990), ty fd t Ot

.

Abt Cs, E v, J-P t, d A w vt-

y t y wts t tt t w xsd t dtty ss tdby t t. Hwv, LEtranger,Le Pige, dLes Chemins de la libert

(Aurlien, w ws ty fd by Es t, s s t),

s-dbt s d by vt syy, w s sy wt

dstss ts bks by t ty t t t jty s

o the period. Tis dierence between literature and cinema can perhaps be ex-

d by t s tsts t tw tst dss: t wt

stands alone and is an heir to a French cultural tradition that gives pride o

t t vs (Cqt 1982). At wts y b w t wd d t, ty d t wt t; ty wt tty.

T tv tst tt ks v (tt s t sy, bt t dts

team and the milieu o lm proessionals) has an attitude that is more re-

tv t t wd s st b t , d wss t

t (w ws t t t t s w) t

that people making movies were working in the present or the audiences

t t. Ad t s t t t ds t ,

w s t tv k, wt ssy t, t btv t t Ztstw vw s t ssy bd t.


14/15

10

inroDucion

Hwv tt y b, ts tty btw dtty ss

d tv vw t s w s tty bvs s t

. , d wks t ttt tv t

we nd emale egies surrounded by men in a state o crisis according to a

pattern similar to that o the most typical movies o the period. And Pierre

Laborie (1993) has pinpointed how the Catholic press o southwest France

sd J A s syb ty d sdty d t s d.

Te huge scale o the phenomenon in the cinema compared with its vir-

t bs tt, x, vs sv qsts -

swd d bby ts tt s d tt xd

t w, t st F: t sty vs t ts, bt

dvd d tv, v s t t v t. k

t , w dd ts d ts b dts t

social imaginaryalways supposing that such an identity crisis o the sexes

s d tt d?

Te male identity crisis that regularly comes in the wake o a war, that

supreme test o manly values (especially when it results in deeat), has begun to

be investigated in the case o other periods and other nations (Teweleit 1987

89; M 1987). As ds F t 1940s, d tt s -

st t tw t ts td by tt wt b -

wd by t Ot, t t Lbt d by -F st dtty ss sd b dvdd t tw ss: s wd by

bks. Fw tw ty tjts, t tv d d-

dt w t Ot ts t db (Panique [Panic],

1946), whose actions are exclusively directed against men, whereas the compla-

t ts t vt (Manges [Te Cheat], 1949), s t

t tt t tss F ss w d tsvs s ty

td t d, td tt w wd t t

sbssv ty yd b t w (d 1987).F stts t stw d , wv, y td-

tory; in the context o a dominant atmosphere o misogyny, and at a time

w vsLe Deuxime Sexe (1949) ws sd t b bst-s

t 1950s, b ty st vs, t d ss t

word, were produced. Oen remarkable, like Casque dor(Golden Marie, 1952),

they attempted to reveal the workings o patriarchal oppression by demon-

stt tt t ws s bd .

Tus more than any other means o expression, in our view, the cinemafts t dstbzt d ts F sty t 1940s


15/15

11

inroDucion

tt ws td by t d ty vts. I ts bk w s

their repercussions in the area o private lie traditionally regarded as being

vd by dt tty (t longue dure t sty -

tts).

Te sensitivity o the cinema to upheavals in the area o gender relations

bt bt by w d t Ot vs, w dd, w

t t vt s s. Mv b t t y -

s tb y ( t t) t s, w t

y t t tt, sd s dstt w s t b t

t sty t s ts b t

s bt t stt sts, vdd s -

garded as a mere refection, or counterrefection, o ideas elaborated elsewhere.

O bk tks t tty ws t ssts

overall analysis o the French cinema during the Occupation. wo side panels

st vvw t w d stw ds,

w vs dd. A t st s d by st

sts tt yz b vsy t w kw, ts

tt kwws xty w t dsvd s ttt. I

s, w ty t dstt w t stts st, wt t

zd by s, dvs t s y st t -

ment o ideas and orms but rom a particularly remarkable ability to bring outt tdts t d.

W wy tk ts w wd s sttd ss t t vs: q P tCtq Fs, M Abt d t F Av tt t Ct Nt d Ct, d Gb Cs t Ctq Ry d q.

I t s w d stw s, w v dtd t dt s, ws wv d t dt t dt w st b t s Ot s, v t sd vts tst tt d d t ts s s s s dt sttd.

Documents

The Battle of the Sexes in French Cinema, 1930–1956 by Noël Burch