Thursday, December 31, 2015
Jacques Coulardeau at Amazon (3)
TRIPPING
ENDLESSLY
ALL
ALONG THE DOWNFALL
Jacques COULARDEAU
Illustrations
Annunzio COULARDEAU
CONTENTS
Saint Austremonius p. 5
Psychophagus p. 7
Sun Sand and Strife p. 9
Casus Belli at the Casa Dei p.
11
Haunted p. 30
Memory Blocks p. 45
One Happy Morning p. 56
Perth Wolfenstein p. 67
Birds of a Feather p. 100
Fearless John’s Prayer to the Black Virgin
Of La Chaise-Dieu Abbey church
p. 114
All these poems
and stories are dedicated to Lucretia who helped crossing the long depression
between the mountain of hostile war and the mountain of reconstruction.
Some people,
some events played an enormous role in those years, The University of Perpignan
in their Mende unit; the Festival of La Chaise-Dieu and sacred music, music,
and music again; Michel Thénot of Central Parc with whom I visited
dozens of Romanesque churches running after Black Virgins; in Sri Lanka Sujeewa
and Sudarshani and the confrontation with elephants; and then Paris with
several life-ghosts who made me recapture life: many were named Arthur but some
stand out, Ivan, Paula and Animata. Special mention to Christian Gauchet,
Ghalib Hakkak and Père Emmanuel Gobilliard.
They are too
numerous to be named all. They are legions and that’s how we survive on this
earth, satiated with love, friendship and mental and spiritual experience.
© Jacques COULARDEAU & Annunzio COULARDEAU
KINDLE DIRECT PUBLISHING, September 26, 2012
Amazon.com/.co.uk/.fr/.de/.it/.es/ etc.
ASIN: B009GIANZE
$5.35 on Amazon.com -- €4,12
on Amazon.fr
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 12:17 PM
0 comments
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Jacques Coulardeau at Amazon (2)
Right at the Bottom of the Urn [Kindle Edition]
Jacques COULARDEAU (Author),
Annunzio COULARDEAU (Illustrator)
The score is full of notes, filled
with notes, notes and bars that have no shape at first, except going up and
down, at times clustered in bunches here and there. The composer looks at his
score, perfectly and neatly printed in world-class toner on the paper. And he
has the sudden envy – and he has that sudden envy every single time he comes to
the end of a composition – to be able to take it and shake it and rearrange it
all haphazardly, maybe one day even empty it into the kitchen drain or flush
all those notes down the toilet in the bathroom. Good riddance.
To Ivan Eve,
at a time when the sky was all smiles
From his Lord Wotton
at a time when he fell for Dorian Gray
the toy of the Lord Shiva of all Perdition
preparing for the shiva’h of his youth
lost in the seven veils of his maturity
Product
Details :
File Size: 675 KB –
Simultaneous Device
Usage: Unlimited
–
Publisher: Editions La
Dondaine; 1st edition (May 15, 2010) –
Sold by: Amazon Digital
Services, Inc. –
Language: English –
ASIN: B0099LG6UY –
Amazon Digital Services, Inc., September 12, 2012
$5.27 includes VAT & free
international wireless delivery via Amazon
Whispernet on Amazon.com;
€ 4,11 TTC & envoi gratuit via réseau sans
fil par Amazon Whispernet on Amazon.fr.
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 11:47 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
Jacques Coulardeau at Academia.edu (45)
TIMOTHY
OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED
Abstract:
The whole question I am concerned about is whether a
TV series, any TV series can be analyzed only at the purely technical, filming,
shooting and editing, level or if it can be dealt with as a work of fiction
that has to be considered like any work of fiction, as seriously as we would
consider Shakespeare or Walt Whitman.
I am not satisfied with all such technical approaches that only speak of
ellipses and flash backs and flash forwards and the angle of the take or the
camera, the zooming details and movements.
I am not satisfied with those who consider a TV series, since it has to be
popular, as having to be banal, hollow, void, meaningless and not being able to
be analyzed the way any other work of fiction would and should be analyzed.
I deeply agree with the practice of Great Britain where an actor can –
and must or at least is recommended to – have a parallel career on the stage,
for TV and for the cinema. I regret the USA do not have that practice. We
know the result when we compare British series and American series.
What’s more I don’t see why so many directors – and critics – consider film
directors cannot direct a TV series, and they generally concede Twin Peaks as being an exception of a rather marginal man
in the world of television. That’s grotesque.
I watched all these seasons in one go, two episodes per night and I summarized
some general ideas only at the end. It is thus a living experience of this
series and I think that’s how TV has to be taken, as a living experience. It is
not because Dexter was killed – was he really killed – in his TV series that
the author Jeff Lindsay does not have the right to keep him alive and to go on
with his adventures. And we had already been used with such discrepancies
between the TV series and the novel series.
Yet a series has a problem with its end. It has to come to an end in some kind
of flourish, fireworks, fanfare, brilliant twist. Prison Breaks is one of the
best as for that, and yet two years later they are speaking of bringing it back
to the screen. How are they going to revive the main character? The actor is
available but the character was buried.
Sir Conan Doyle has already done that with his Sherlock Holmes that he killed
at least once and nearly killed several times to just bring him back to life to
satisfy public demand. That was literature you are going to say, and then what!
Maybe TV series are also fiction.
Let me tell you here that I find it funny when some pretend to deal with
history in fictional series and to have a good historian as a guarantee that
all they say in the series is pure history, like Un Village Français by
Frédéric Krivine and the retired university professor Jean-Pierre Azéma who
found a juicy supplement to his retirement instead of teaching a few years more
(65 is the sacred age at which all researchers have to retire in France, even
in medicine, so that some just move to the USA to go on with their scientific
work). Sorry to deceive you Mr Krivine, either you are an author and you
respect the rules of fiction, and you work for television and you respect the
rules of TV series and that goes against anything having to do with historical
truth, especially since there is no truth, there are only points of view and
Jean-Pierre Azéma is just one point-of-viewer among many others; or you are a
historian and then you should be teaching your point og view about history to
some university students. We are not watching your series to have any
historical truth, sorry point of view, hammered into our thick skulls.
Luckily, otherwise they would reinvent the Bible.
Research
Interests:
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 3:02 PM
0 comments
Monday, December 28, 2015
A miracle of action and nostalgia in 18 DVDs
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED –
2010-2014
THE COMPLETE FIRST SEASON – 2010
The first season of a series
always gives the recipe and you have to taste it. If the recipe is good, you
will like the sample you taste and you will get attached, addicted or just
mesmerized and faithful. Otherwise you will have to drag your feet through all
the seasons you bought on a special deal.
The character Deputy US Marshal
Raylan Givens is the centerpiece of the series and he better be original and
true to life. The actor is essential and he is good, even good looking. He is a
cop who shoots always first but never before the other gets or tries to get his
artillery out. It always ends badly, for the other of course. This starts with Raylan
killing a Very Important Person from the drug business in Miami, Florida.
We all know V,I and P are the first three letters of VIPer and that this snake
is particularly poisonous, though less efficient than a rattlesnake. But that’s
only the starting block of the series. Raylan is railroaded back to Kentucky where he was
coming from, back to the very city where he grew up and the very city he had
thought he had left forever, and ever, till his justified killing of a drug VIP
brought him back.
Then the character and the series
is a mixture of features that make it unique. First the accent is southern and
it takes some time for those who are not used to it to either get it or go back
to it if they have had some experience in that field. The second element is
that he is a Clint Eastwood of the new age. He has a cell phone and he is clean
and he wears a two or five gallon hat as a distinctive trait. Dirty Harry was
slightly dirty at times. But as a high plains drifter he is quite trendy in
this world of the Internet of Things.
Then Raylan has a personal
dimension with a father, a stepmother though no mother, nor siblings. He has
his high school girl friend he did not marry and the woman he married and then
divorced, and her subsequent second husband. He has all his old friends with
whom he did all kinds of antics, some definitely not entirely legal. His best
friend, if he is a best, is one of the sons of the local drug king who is just
out of prison. Raylan’s father was the agent of that chap during his barred
vacation, but he did not do good. So he has problems. The high school girl
friend and paramour married one of the sons of the local drug lord. She finally
killed him in strange conditions. The drug lord wants to get rid of his other
son who was sent to prison by Raylan but managed to get out rather fast because
of various circumstances, but he comes out a Christian reborn in Jesus.
Halleluiah!
Raylan’s whole problem is that he
has to get rid of the drug circle and at the same time spare his “best” friend
turned reborn Christian. The rest is detail and funny, well written and
inventive.
This season ends up on a
cliffhanger. They are all dead except Raylan, his “best” friend whose father
was killed by the only survivor of the Miami
drug club. The “best” friend, who is called Boyd actually, goes after the
running girl and we understand Raylan goes after them. What happens next is for
next season, precisely. There is no real deep thinking or philosophy in this
series. It is more so far what I would call southern folklore and standard US Marshal
cop-lore in the boonies.
I should have spoiled nothing
because what I have said is the normal pattern that we know from the very start.
The pleasure is in the detail, the small elements, people, epiphenomena, and
that or those you will have to discover yourself in five hundred and fifty two
minutes of running time and the thirteen episodes. Good luck.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED –
2010-2014
THE COMPLETE SECOND SEASON – 2010
This second season does not bring
the big surprise we could have expected. The Bennett family who have been
controlling Harlan County for two or three generations, this Bennett family
being in the hands of the mother, with no father available, but with three sons
the mother uses as her direct servants and hit men, let’s say slaves in crime
because that is what it is, this family has to come to an end one day and
generally it happens with a lot of pain and suffering.
Why does it have to come to an
end?
Because the power of this family
is based on crime: illegal cultivation of marihuana at a very high level, grand
style and all, for tremendous amounts of money. Because the power of this
family is reinforced by one son who is the local sheriff and has turned the
local police force into a gang to enforce and reinforce the power of and the
decisions of the mother. Because the other two sons are plain criminals and
nothing else, killing for fun and torturing for kicks. Because some company
from outside decides that the tremendous amount of coal that is hidden in these
Kentucky mountains has to be taken out and the Bennett family is an obstacle to
this industrial venture and has to be either bought, or even bribed, or
eliminated. Since the sons are die-hard criminal minds there is no other way
but to eliminate them, and get rid of the mother.
The agents of that cleansing
mission will be the Deputy US Marshall Raylan Givens from the Givens family, a
rival family to the Bennetts, and the Crowders, another rival family to the
Bennetts. Raylan is the only one who is on the side of more or less legal
means, the use of force if it is justified. The other members of these two
families are on the side of justice for themselves, vengeance for their dead,
revenge for their businesses and lives. So they want the Bennett empire to be
split up into pieces and the viable pieces to be entrusted, or recuperated, by
them.
So the brothers have to go one
after another. One is shot dead by a girl he tried to molest and whose father
he had killed, the second ends up in prison, the third, the local sheriff, ends
up badly too and the mother has her own fate on her own hands. The chief of a
tribe, or a clan, of a gang deserves some modest reward in their ends, in this
case her end, face to face with Raylan.
The details you’ll have to get
from the 13 episodes, but we knew from the very beginning that this second
season was the end of the monstrous criminal corrupt dictatorship or a dumb
mother and her three slaves of sorts, and sons by name.
There are tricky moments to
eliminate secondary corrupt dummies, and some sensitive moments about the girl
whose father was assassinated by the Bennetts. There are also some surprising
moments concerning the two female characters, Raylan’s ex-wife who became his
new girl friend, and his high school lover of sorts who is connected to one of the
last surviving Crowders. Not to speak of Raylan’s step mother he calls his aunt.
A very strong woman but to be strong is nearly a disadvantage when confronted
to unethical criminals.
But I am sure you will enjoy the
suspense. At the end, which could have been the end of the series, Raylan has
applied for some promotion out of Kentucky
or the Marshall service, he has just learned some good news about his ex-wife
and we do not know what will happen. That’s not a cliff hanger but that will be
a new start next season.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED –
2010-2014
THE COMPLETE THIRD SEASON – 2011
This third season is crucial now
the main gang has lost their head, their chief. The only actors are the black
gang and Crowder’s gang that has recuperated Arlo Givens, Raylan’s father. The
new element that is going to animate the whole season is the arrival of the son
of a Detroit gangster, rejected by his own
father and who is playing the carpetbagger of the 21st century in Kentucky. That means
this season is going to be business as usual in an unusual circumstantial situation
with the invasive action of an invader from the North who does not seem to know
how things are going down South.
Locally we only have one element
that has some deeper meaning: the sheriff of the main county of the action has
to face re-election. Boyd Crowder and his gang decide to play their pack of
cards to get their own man elected. The Detroit
invader tries to pay the incumbent sheriff to keep him in office. In fact the
election is very tricky and the result is astounding. We must always consider
being a newcomer in an elective job is necessarily a handicap but American
elections are full of surprises. Remember the 2000 presidential election “won”
by decision of the Supreme Court who stopped the recounting of several millions
of votes that were not exactly correct. No allusion of course to rigged
elections of any sort that are not possible in the USA:
that’s typical of third world countries or Asia or Europe, hence of everywhere
except the USA.
The second question is the place
of a black gang among several white gangs in the South. Segregation is still
real and effective though now some members of the black gang are not that clean
or faithful as for their own gang and they may give some information to the
other side, turning a tricky situation into a very messy situation.
What’s left then if the social
and cultural issues are rather light?
Some good intentions that are
both illegal and ethical but they create more problems than the conflicts they may
solve. The objective is not to shoot all gangsters down, but to put them in
prison, at least for a while, and if they have to be shot, they must not be
shot dead. That’s the real problem for Raylan Givens, but he seems to be
becoming civilized.
The season then ends on a good
fine rich situation since most gangsters are eliminated, except one, the black
piggy bank is broken and the content is brought to light from the depth of the
stomach of this piggy bank and Raylan visits his ex-wife who is presently
pregnant with his own child to make sure she is OK at her sister’s where she
found refuge from the saucy bullet-ridden situation at “home,” if a police
corps is a home of any kind.
So we end without a cliff hanger
really but with a nearly cleaned up plate. So how are they going to renew the
situation to have new “adventures” in this southern jungle to put on the
platter of next season?
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED –
2010-2014
THE COMPLETE FOURTH SEASON – 2012
This Season is tricky since so
many of the old traditional outlaws in Harlan County have already been dealt
with, I mean flipped over like flip cards and ended up right on their heads,
brains and skulls spilled over the sidewalk. We knew there was a connection
with Detroit in
the drug business or heroin distribution and that there were only two local
actors left. But Detroit
was furious because the network was being both strangled and drained. So they
had to do something about it. First to obtain the merger of the two opposed
actors and then to protect the network against Deputy US Marshall
Raylan Givens who is definitely not a gift, a present, a blessed contribution
to the wealth of business, meaning outlawed business of course.
The Detroit people tried to take over and they
sent some cleaning teams but unluckily they failed. That’s when we start
understanding the real stake and it is Drew, that dead heroin higher-up gangster
or dealer who actually faked his death in Harlan County and disappeared leaving
a body behind him and some unluckily identity that was taken care of by Arlo
Givens. The two million dollars of heroin went into the local business, made
the county rich and the very few people who knew who Drew was kept their mouths
shut and just became well-off and even rich. But Arlo Givens cheated, of course
and naturally, and he kept the bag and the Drew driver’s license ID hidden in a
wall of his house. For some absurd reason a couple of young people were sent to
recuperate the bag but it ended up in the hands of the US Marshalls.
Too bad! Arlo was supposed to have burnt it. And his cheating will not benefit
him in the ends since his end is going to be miserable and unhappy. That’s what
happens when you play poker – so to say – with bad boys.
And that’s the story of the
season.
1-
to find out who Drew is in the county, under
which identity he is hiding;
2-
to get him in the hands of justice so that he
could get a deal with the local public attorney or prosecutor in exchange of
his telling who is who in the vast US network of heroin, or at least the branch
growing out of Detroit;
3-
to save a poor young naïve but not innocent
prostitute who was the witness of some crime by one of the surviving Crowders,
and at the same time to bring her into safety in the hands of the US Marshalls
so that she could bring the last Crowders down, or at least one of them, the
others being either eliminated or under some suspended fateful ending:
4-
to protect Raylan’s ex-wife who is going to give
birth to his child, knowing that in the hands of the Detroit criminals she is a
very good hostage, hence very valuable and thus has a high level of added value;
5-
to enable the child to be born safe and secure;
6-
to get Raylan suspended for thirty days, a
suspension for sure, but a golden suspension indeed that is in fact a forced
vacation;
7-
finally to manage to get the bad guy from Detroit that menaced
Raylan’s wife killed in a way or another, though not by Raylan and not with
Raylan’s gun.
You can trust Raylan to be able
to get everything through with the most numerous surprises possible. That leads
us to an end without any real cliffhanger. A baby is going to be born during
recess. The merger will be solved among the two gangsters. The poor Boyd
Crowder will get some respite and maybe even a promotion and his future wife will
be taken in custody. The Black gang, on the other side of the racial divide,
will manage to get out sprinkle white though not clean. Drew will be in custody
and the young naïve etc. prostitute will be safe since her ex-madam is in
custody too. And Raylan is on vacation. Happy fishing and lucky idleness, Sir,
Mister Master Sir, do not forget we are in the South!
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED – 2010-2014
THE COMPLETE FIFTH SEASON – 2013
This fifth season is tricky since
all the local Harlan County families are dying like hell, so some props
have to be brought into the Kentucky
landscape. The first one is a whole family from Florida, the Crows, like the
birds that are both parasites and scavengers, and they take over the Crowders
with all kinds of conflicts going along with this coup d’état if not putsch.
The second one through the friends in Detroit
comes from Mexico
with heroin. And that is the heart of the season with Raylan Givens more and
more sidetracked by his chief Art to the point of this chief making a mistake
in procedure and getting severely wounded. The worst part of the situation is
that a ten year old boy is mixed up in this Crow family, and like with birds
crows do not like smaller birds like sparrows and robins. So the boy has a lot
of problems with his mother, when she is revealed to be his mother, and with
his uncles when they are revealed to be his uncles.
The violence in this season is
extremely serious but always the mark of some kind of paranoid or hysterical or
even psychotic derangement of the various criminals who are like a bunch of
spiders locked up in a glass pot. They are ready to eat one another if they
cannot get even with the cops and kill them before getting back to eating one
another alive if possible. They try the latter but they are so corrugated that
they cannot shoot a weapon straight.
This criminal milieu reveals that
family links, in other words blood relations, are an absolute dictatorship, a
bond that cannot be cut loose or untied, a connection that is more than a rope,
a real cable, and not made of some vegetal fiber but made with stainless steel.
Blood means slavery. And on the other side within this blood entourage the
stronger individuals consider they have all rights to do what they want and to
be followed, obeyed by all other members. It is very bad luck to be a child in
such an environment because then you are a pack mule at best and a body shield
at worst. You can imagine if being a boy is not easy in that criminal family,
what it would be to be a girl.
There is there a real lesson
about human society. The lower you go into crime and hooliganism, the more
disorganized and disjointed human relations become, in fact there is nothing
human left, just the animal instinct not to survive but to kill. These people
are not even animals who kill to feed or to defend themselves, but beasts who
kill for the pleasure of killing and who torture as long as possible before
killing to inflict pain, suffering and humiliation. Strangely enough these men
only consider a menace to their manhood as having the chance of getting some
kind of influence on their behavior, otherwise dying for them is nothing at
all, whereas losing their masculinity is unbearable. You should see them then
crawling and begging. They have no decency, no honor, no dignity.
That’s the main dimension of this
series: it does not use any subtle intrigue or plot on the criminal side. It is
only sheer force and mere violence.
On the cop side you have the
ruffians, like Raylan, who manipulates the criminals into killing one another,
maiming each other, mutilating themselves even, let’s say by accident, but
these cops are always getting what they want: the death and elimination of the
criminals if possible without going to a court of justice and saving on
judicial costs. The second type is those who try to proceed by the rules and by
the book, Miranda and all. They know X or Y is going to commit a crime but
there is no need for them to make it come faster and thus blocking them, nor to
do anything else but wait for the crime to have been committed. The last type,
generally the bosses, is so frigid in front of these criminals that they prefer
not seeing the crime that is coming rather than sending cops who might be a
little bit rough.
So we are justified in thinking
that such police forces are in fact by far ineffective, impotent in front of
real crime, and this frustration largely explains that then some may become
criminal in their turn by taking some ethnic categories of people, young, male
and colored, meaning black or very dark, as prime targets for their harassment
that can lead to some innocent casualties among these populations. That
consequence of bad police work in the USA is not really hinted at in this
series, but we know better.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ELMORE LEONARD – TIMOTHY
OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED – 2010- 2014
THE COMPLETE SIXTH SEASON – 2014
The
final season of a series like this one is very complicated. It has to take all,
or at least the most dangerous criminals down, in prison, in the earth or
whatever other way they can imagine. So you have to understand that there is no
spoiling in telling you that all except two end up dead or in prison, only two
actually in that last category. And two on the loose, on the run, vanished in
thin air. No spoiling in telling you Raylen Givens ends up in Miami, Florida,
as had been announced for a while. He is a good daddy to his daughter, a
visiting or visited daddy more than a real in-house one. His ex wife and mother
of his daughter is of course with a second
second-choice husband, nothing to brag about. Not handsome but probably
not crooked either, and yet the muscle man type, rough on the outline and hairy
all over, working class and physical. A real man in one word even if he won’t
win any Mister Universe competition.
The
only thing I will not tell you is about Raylan’s hat, his famous twenty-gallon
Stetson hat. Apparently he has to bury it in the last episode or so. Bury it in
some deeply spiritual way that sounded like some crucial scene in some
A-cowboy-movie like Pale Rider or some other B-cowboy-movie with John Wayne
like never mind the title they are all the same.
But it
is time to summarize this series. As I said, and they managed to keep that
steadily till the end, it was a cross between a Clint Eastwood series and a
country-rockabilly musical without singers nor dancers. The charm was in the
southern accent which was authentic for some actors and an approaching
imitation for others, but believable enough, and beyond these criminals seen as
individuals you could see crime as an organized society with its own hierarchy
within every gang and a special very confrontational hierarchy among the gangs,
knowing that the black gang is completely out though they are the last resort
gang that provides the various white gangs with technical and emergency help
when needed. They are hated but they are very good at what they are doing like
fake IDs and passports, the security blanket of a hideout or some rescue money
or even team when things are getting a little bit sour.
Then
the hierarchy is very geographical. At the top are the local family gangs and
each family fights against all the others and the originality of this series is
that a very effective though slightly Dirty Harry in style US Marshall is
brought into Kentucky to help the local US Marshalls dismantle the gang system and
bring down the die-hard last-longest gang based on the Crowder family and a
couple of allies who hate them but have to serve them. So the seasons went on
and on bringing down one gang after the other.
The
family structure of these gangs is normally centered on a man, but there was
one exception, and that really was an exception, of one gang centered on a
mother and her sons. It so happens that out of one of these gangs one son
changed routes and went up the highway instead of down the low way. He became a
US Marshall and he of course was the only one
who could be of any help since he had been educated with them all and he knew
all their little secrets and their weak points and it never was endurance. Patience
was the main asset you had to have if you wanted to bring them down, these
gangsters.
The
final hierarchy was geographical again since it was the various routes followed
by the substances they sold on the black market that had to come from outside.
So they tried, and had to try, getting in touch with people from Detroit or people from Mexico
and it turned fiery and bitter very fast because in Kentucky they hated the guts of these
outsiders and these outsiders looked down upon these red necks. This is shown
very well in the various seasons.
The
final element that is of interest is the spectacle you get of all the various
polices in a state like Kentucky: two federal agencies, FBI and US Marshalls,
state troopers and state police, and then the police of every single county
whose sheriffs are elected by the people in a brilliant atmosphere of thriving
prosperous corruption. When you know that and the fact that the police of Harlan County
cannot cross the boundary line of the county, you imagine the mess and ease
with which one criminal can cross that line. One crossing point is a bridge
with the line right in the middle which became the meeting point of all
negotiations, all exchanges, all encounters between bands, gangs and various
police teams. That means in the US police work is impossible, coordination is a
dream and when it is tempted it turns into a nightmare, and the local cops are
very simply trained to profile the appearance of a passer-by by his look, skin
color, hat, way of walking and other attitudinal and behavioral elements and
when a total stranger is profiled into one dangerous category at first sight
using a weapon becomes not an option but a reflex. And the only information
they can get is from snitches or confidential (criminal) informers.
That’s
the problem with Raylan Givens. He had the bad habit of shooting faster than
his shadow took to open one eye and he had to learn some restraint. But he
managed and strangely enough he remained fair and faithful to the woman who was
not really involved but entangled in the Crowder gang to the last moment and
even when after all that noise, but well you will have to find that out by
yourself. Somewhere deep under Raylan Givens was a sentimental baboon or maybe
puppy. That’s the main interest in the man. He was able to feel some emotions,
some passion even though he would never admit it because he is a man and in his
gang and anti-gang training sessions a real man does not feel any passion,
emotion or sentiment. The surprising element is that he survived but we knew
that from the very start. Maybe they could have tried an ending à la Prison
Break or Dexter. A little bit lackluster.
Dr
Jacques COULARDEAU
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 2:48 PM
0 comments
The last one, the end, the closing season. Tears and cries all around.
ELMORE
LEONARD – TIMOTHY OLYPHANT – JUSTIFED – 2010- 2014
THE COMPLETE SIXTH SEASON – 2014
The
final season of a series like this one is very complicated. It has to take all,
or at least the most dangerous criminals down, in prison, in the earth or
whatever other way they can imagine. So you have to understand that there is no
spoiling in telling you that all except two end up dead or in prison, only two
actually in that last category. And two on the loose, on the run, vanished in
thin air. No spoiling in telling you Raylen Givens ends up in Miami, Florida,
as had been announced for a while. He is a good daddy to his daughter, a
visiting or visited daddy more than a real in-house one. His ex wife and mother
of his daughter is of course with a second
second-choice husband, nothing to brag about. Not handsome but probably
not crooked either, and yet the muscle man type, rough on the outline and hairy
all over, working class and physical. A real man in one word even if he won’t
win any Mister Universe competition.
The
only thing I will not tell you is about Raylan’s hat, his famous twenty-gallon Stetson
hat. Apparently he has to bury it in the last episode or so. Bury it in some
deeply spiritual way that sounded like some crucial scene in some A-cowboy-movie
like Pale Rider or some other B-cowboy-movie with John Wayne like never mind
the title they are all the same.
But it
is time to summarize this series. As I said, and they managed to keep that
steadily till the end, it was a cross between a Clint Eastwood series and a
country-rockabilly musical without singers nor dancers. The charm was in the
southern accent which was authentic for some actors and an approaching
imitation for others, but believable enough, and beyond these criminals seen as
individuals you could see crime as an organized society with its own hierarchy
within every gang and a special very confrontational hierarchy among the gangs,
knowing that the black gang is completely out though they are the last resort
gang that provides the various white gangs with technical and emergency help
when needed. They are hated but they are very good at what they are doing like
fake IDs and passports, the security blanket of a hideout or some rescue money
or even team when things are getting a little bit sour.
Then
the hierarchy is very geographical. At the top are the local family gangs and
each family fights against all the others and the originality of this series is
that a very effective though slightly Dirty Harry in style US Marshall is
brought into Kentucky to help the local US Marshalls dismantle the gang system and
bring down the die-hard last-longest gang based on the Crowder family and a
couple of allies who hate them but have to serve them. So the seasons went on
and on bringing down one gang after the other.
The
family structure of these gangs is normally centered on a man, but there was
one exception, and that really was an exception, of one gang centered on a
mother and her sons. It so happens that out of one of these gangs one son
changed routes and went up the highway instead of down the low way. He became a
US Marshall and he of course was the only one
who could be of any help since he had been educated with them all and he knew
all their little secrets and their weak points and it never was endurance. Patience
was the main asset you had to have if you wanted to bring them down, these
gangsters.
The
final hierarchy was geographical again since it was the various routes followed
by the substances they sold on the black market that had to come from outside.
So they tried, and had to try, getting in touch with people from Detroit or people from Mexico
and it turned fiery and bitter very fast because in Kentucky they hated the guts of these
outsiders and these outsiders looked down upon these red necks. This is shown
very well in the various seasons.
The
final element that is of interest is the spectacle you get of all the various
polices in a state like Kentucky: two federal agencies, FBI and US Marshalls,
state troopers and state police, and then the police of every single county
whose sheriffs are elected by the people in a brilliant atmosphere of thriving
prosperous corruption. When you know that and the fact that the police of Harlan County
cannot cross the boundary line of the county, you imagine the mess and ease
with which one criminal can cross that line. One crossing point is a bridge
with the line right in the middle which became the meeting point of all negotiations,
all exchanges, all encounters between bands, gangs and various police teams. That
means in the US police work is impossible, coordination is a dream and when it
is tempted it turns into a nightmare, and the local cops are very simply
trained to profile the appearance of a passer-by by his look, skin color, hat,
way of walking and other attitudinal and behavioral elements and when a total
stranger is profiled into one dangerous category at first sight using a weapon
becomes not an option but a reflex. And the only information they can get is
from snitches or confidential (criminal) informers.
That’s
the problem with Raylan Givens. He had the bad habit of shooting faster than
his shadow took to open one eye and he had to learn some restraint. But he
managed and strangely enough he remained fair and faithful to the woman who was
not really involved but entangled in the Crowder gang to the last moment and
even when after all that noise, but well you will have to find that out by
yourself. Somewhere deep under Raylan Givens was a sentimental baboon or maybe
puppy. That’s the main interest in the man. He was able to feel some emotions,
some passion even though he would never admit it because he is a man and in his
gang and anti-gang training sessions a real man does not feel any passion,
emotion or sentiment. The surprising element is that he survived but we knew
that from the very start. Maybe they could have tried an ending à la Prison
Break or Dexter. A little bit lackluster.
Dr
Jacques COULARDEAU
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 1:50 PM
0 comments
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Jacques Coulardeau at Amazon (1)
La Parole de Saint Chrosome [Explicit]
Jacques Coulardeau
SATAN I LOVE YOU
Oh!
Yes I do!
Yesterday I was alone
All alone in my loneliness
Yesterday I asked Satan
Who are
you?
I am your best friend
Bone skin and flesh at once
I am the light of your mind
Daylight moonlight and sunlight
I am the solace of your heart
Some day the solstice of it […]
Amazon.com / Amazon.fr
Product Details /
Détails sur le produit
Total
Length / Durée totale: 44:48
Genres:
Miscellaneous / Divers
Format: Explicit
Lyrics / paroles explicites
ASIN: B006DHBBWA / B006DDFRXI
$6.99 / €8,39
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 12:47 PM
0 comments
Saturday, December 26, 2015
Voltaire n'est pas ce que l'on dit. Voltaire is not that thrilling!
Jacques Coulardeau at Academia.edu (44)
Le comique de
Voltaire est souvent mélodramatique et larmoyant
THÉÂTRE
COMPLET DE M. DE VOLTAIRE, CONFORME À LA DERNIÈRE ÉDITION, ROME SEPTIÈME –
FACSIMILÉ PAR ULAN PRESS
Discussion
Une seule remarque
formelle : il manque quatre pages (126-127 et 134-135) et une page et
totalement illisible (350).
VOLTAIRE –
L’INDISCRET – 1725 […]
VOLTAIRE – L’ENFANT
PRODIGUE – 1736 […]
VOLTAIRE – LA PRUDE
- 1747 […]
VOLTAIRE – LA FEMME
QUI A RAISON – 1949 […]
VOLTAIRE – NANINE – 1749 […]
ISAAC NEWTON AND JUDAISM […]
Voltaire (1694-1778) me trotte, avec ou sans béquilles, dans la tête depuis
très longtemps, depuis qu’en quatrième ou troisième nous nous passions dans le
lycée municipal de Bordeaux, dit Collège Moderne, les passages expurgés de
Candide fait prisonnier par des pirates qui fouillent de fond en comble le
bateau et ses passagers et passagères. C’était peu de temps avant que l’on
interdise « La Religieuse » (1966-67) de Jacques Calmette, ce film
adapté de Denis Diderot.
Mais une citation de ce Voltaire grand amateur de citations s’impose
aujourd’hui comme une vérité éternelle et pourtant tellement mise en doute.
« La philosophie, la seule
philosophie, cette sœur de la religion, a désarmé des mains que la superstition
avait si longtemps ensanglantées; et l’esprit humain, au réveil de son ivresse,
s’est étonné des excès où l’avait emporté le fanatisme. » (Voltaire, Traité
sur la tolérance, 1763, chapitre IV, «Si la tolérance est dangereuse, et chez
quels peuples elle est permise»)
C’est en notre période cruelle beaucoup plus qu’une simple citation. Et
c’est pour moi maintenant devenu un pèlerinage. Depuis plus de dix ans je
remonte dans un sens et dans l’autre le Boulevard Voltaire de Paris de la Place
de la Nation à la Place de la République de mon hôtel au Syndicat National des
Auteurs et des Compositeurs, bien plus loi il est vrai, rue Taitbout que
j’atteins tout le temps en passant devant la Synagogue de la rue de la
Victoire, ses grilles municipales au garde-à-vous et son CRS dans sa guérite
vitrée de garde 24 heures sur 24 et 7 jours sur 7. J’ai parcouru ainsi ce
boulevard plusieurs centaines de fois et j’ai chaque fois regardé le Bataclan
au point de ne même plus le voir.
Mais l’actualité m’a tout à coup rappelé à la réalité et m’a ré-ouvert les
yeux de la mémoire et j’ai revu ce bâtiment que je ne remarquais plus depuis
longtemps. Et ce Boulevard Voltaire m’est alors apparu comme l’axe suivi le
soir du 13 Novembre 2015 par des commandos en formation de combat armé de
bombes et de religion. Et je suis passé devant le Bataclan et traversé la Place
de la République bien des fois depuis particulièrement dans les mois qui ont
suivi quand de véritables parterres de cierges, bougies, fleurs, messages
chantaient la tolérance et mon projet de traiter du théâtre de Voltaire et de
la philosophie dans ce théâtre se trouva un peu cerné et recentré sur une pièce
devenue au cours des siècles plutôt confidentielle, même si le metteur en scène
et auteur José Valverde la connaît, car il faut bien le dire le théâtre de
Voltaire était un théâtre d’agitprop philosophique en son temps, et parfois
même un peu sentimentalement mélodramatique à la Greuze. Jean Jacques Rousseau
n’était pas beaucoup mieux. On est chez ces auteurs bien loin de Pierre de
Marivaux (1688-1763) ou de Pierre de Beaumarchais (1732-1799). Denis Diderot
(1713-1784) est presque un prodige dans cet ensemble philosophique plus que
dramaturgique.
Mais voilà ici le premier travail sur un certain nombre de comédies qui ne
sont pas parmi l smeilleures pièces de
Voltaire et qui ne laisseront pas beaucoup de gens rêver car ces comédies sont
larmoyantes et pathétiques pour ne pas dire mélodramatiques. Je réserve Mahomet
et Les Guèbres pour Avignon.
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 2:05 PM
0 comments
Friday, December 25, 2015
Le comique de Voltaire est souvent mélodramatique et larmoyant
THÉÂTRE COMPLET DE M. DE
VOLTAIRE, CONFORME À LA DERNIÈRE ÉDITION, ROME SEPTIÈME – FACSIMILÉ PAR ULAN
PRESS
Une seule remarque formelle : il manque quatre pages (126-127 et
134-135) et une page et totalement illisible (350).
VOLTAIRE – L’INDISCRET – 1725
Petite pièce mignonette mais cruelle qui serait du boulevard grinçant
aujourd’hui par les temps qui courent. Le portrait est à la hache dans un bois
si tendre qu’il en tombe en miettes. Un pauvre jeune homme de bonne société,
courtisan qui plus est ne sait que se vanter de ses petites amours auprès de ceux
qu’il appelle ses amis, alors qu’il ne les connaît pas.
Bien sûr, se vantant de sa dernière amourette, qu’il dit être sérieuse,
pour une veuve – bien dotée bien sûr – auprès de gens qu’il dit être des
confidents alors qu’ils sont des concurrents, il se trouve gros jean comme
devant, perdant par devant et par derrière, floué et même un peu plus,
quasiment sentimentalement violé, par ces compétiteurs tricheurs mais qu’il a
littéralement et abondamment arrosés de toutes les munitions dont ils avaient
besoin pour le mettre à plat, le liquider, le mitrailler au point d’en faire de
la charpie.
Il est peut-être indiscret, mais il est surtout bête à lier. Il ne sait pas
choisir ses amis et il ne sait pas évaluer le niveau de confidence et de
confiance qu’il peut investir dans des connaissances en définitive accidentelles,
de complaisance et sans la moindre profondeur. Plus idiot que moi, tu meurs.
Et mourir il doit, seul, abandonné, vilipendé et simplement rejeté par la
bonne société, qui de toute façon est la mauvaise puisque aristocratique et
courtisane. Mais ne nous y trompons pas : ce n’est qu’une question de
hiérarchie. Si vous êtes en haut tout au sommet vous pouvez révéler tout ce que
vous voulez sur qui que ce soit, même bien sûr et surtout des calomnies
fieffées. Si vous êtes ne serait-ce qu’un cran plus bas le sommet vous
rejettera car vous devenez dangereux pour leur prestige en osant faire ce que
eux seuls sont autorisés à faire et la masse soutiendra cette élite car la masse
est par définition acquiesçante et elle trouve la mise à l’index, le pilori et
l’exécution publique (la roue comme pour Jean Calas) des plus amusantes. On rit
toujours des malheur des autres ne serait-ce que parce qu’ils sont un cran plus
haut que vous. Cela comme flatte leur amour propre.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
VOLTAIRE – L’ENFANT PRODIGUE –
1736
Voltaire est un obsédé de la Bible et de la religion chrétienne qu’il
n’arrête pas de réécrire dans ce qu’il considère sa pureté car les hommes n’ont
selon lui jamais fait qu’abuser de cette religion divine, la pervertir, la
vilipender. Pour lui la religion chrétienne – mais surtout pas la juive et
encore moins la musulmane – est la seule religion vraie avec le seul dieu
unique vrai. Il se veut tolérant pour les autres à condition que les autres
respectent la loi de l’État, de la majorité et les souverains qui règnent sur
notre bien commun qu’est la patrie. Cependant le terme et le concept de citoyen
sont totalement marginaux dans une vision politique qui fait que nous sommes les
sujets de nos souverains et que nous n’avons aucun droit de rébellion, de
soulèvement, de mouvement de masse. Seule la raison des philosophes peut
éclairer ces souverains et permettre ainsi l’évolution de la société et des mœurs
dans le bon sens qui est essentiellement vu comme un adoucissement.
Ce décor étant planté la réécriture de cette parabole biblique est des plus
touchante.
Fini le travail et le labeur qui a permis l’accumulation de biens dans la
famille, une seule famille. On a deux familles, toutes les deux richement
dotées de biens, de terres ou simplement de liquidités. Quant à savoir
l’activité qu’ils peuvent bien faire, nenni, pas chez Voltaire. Mais le fils
prodigue qui revient ne sera pas reçu par le festin du cochon (pas cachère) ou
du veau (bien cachère) que l’on tue, car dans cette maison il n’y a pas de
cochon ni de veau (adieu veau, vache, cochon, couvée…) qu’on élève et qu’on
engraisse. Alors il ne pourra être reçu que par la livraison d’un banquet par
quelque traiteur de cour si possible venu de la grande ville en fiacre.
Deux familles, avec deux fils d’un côté et une fille de l’autre. Des deux
fils l’aîné est le fils prodigue qui bien qu’amoureux de la voisine casse tout
pour aller semer son ivraie dans des terres sauvages, pour aller s’enivrer
d’alcools et d’amours tout aussi sauvages, toutes aussi sauvages. Les deux
pères, notons qu’il n’y a pas de mères, syndrome courant chez Voltaire
semble-t-il, comme celui d’un fils et d’une fille à marier à toutes les sauces
même le smoins sacrées, decident de marier l’un son fils cadet doté d’un droit
d’aînesse par défaut de l’aîné réel, et l’autre sa fille qui n’aime absolument
pas ce fils cadet fait aîné, surtout qu’il est de noblesse de robe, il est
président de je ne sais quelle cour de justice ou parlement à Angoulème ou
quelque part dans cette région, entre Bordeaux et Cognac. Er en plus il est un
fat jusques et y compris dans son nom qu’il porte fièrement puisque c’est
Fierenfat.
Bien obligée d’obéir elle rate cependant le coche juste à temps, une heure
avant les noces, parce que le vrai aîné débarque avec un confrère de misère ancien
valet pour prendre du service chez l’un ou l’autre des deux pères.
Reconnaissance, ébullience, effervescence, excitation et révolution. La fille
retombe amoureuse du vrai aîné contrit et repenti. Le cadet repassé d’aîné à
cadet en est tout confus et contusionné et tout finit pour le mieux dans le
meilleur des mondes. Les deux pauvres hères qui arrivent errants dans cette
ville de province avaient même envisagé de redevenir des paysans et de gagner
leur pain à la sueur de leur front et à la force de leurs poignets en cultivant
non pas leur jardin puisqu’ils n’avaient rien, mais les champs de quelque
hobereau ou seigneur plus ou moins féodal. Candide toujours à fleur de peau.
« Vois-tu d’ici ces gens dont la fortune
Est dans leur bras ; qui, la bèche à la main,
Le dos courbé, retournent ce jardin ?
Enrôlons-nous parmi cette canaille ;
Viens avec eux, imite-les, travaille,
Gagne ta vie. » dit Jasmin, le valet abandonné.
Et Euphémon-fils, le cadet ruiné, amplifiera immédiatement la
« canaille » en « ces vils humains, moins hommes
qu’animaux ». Qui peut dans le domaine du mépris social dire plus ?
Mais ne croyez pas que tout cela est gratuit. La philosophie parfois
perverse de Voltaire suinte entre certains vers qu’il dit de cinq pieds alors
qu’ils sont de dix syllabes, comme par exemple :
« Oui je suis las de tourmenter ma vie,
De vivre errant et damné comme un juif ; » dit Jasmin, encore
lui.
Et surtout sans majuscule sur Juif, et ça c’est Voltaire ou les imprimeurs
de son temps.
Est-ce que cette réécriture mélodramatique à fin heureuse et donc
dramati-certainement-pas-tragi-comique de la parabole biblique apporte quoi que
ce soit ? J’en doute fort et ce ne serait même pas du bon boulevard même
dans les théâtres de poche de Montparnasse et même en considérant la veuve
éconduite qui court après le Président du parlement de Cognac. A quand la
réécriture de la Nativité en comptant et décrivant les contractions de la
pauvre Marie ? Surtout que dans ce domaine des mariages de convenances et
de profits Molière a déjà donné et beaucoup mieux.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
VOLTAIRE – LA PRUDE - 1747
Malgré ses protestations en introduction que sa pièce n’est qu’une pâle
traduction ou adaptation de la pièce « The Plain Dealer » de William
Wyncherley – qu’il écrit avec une faute
d’orthographe ? qui se comprend d’ailleurs en ces temps-là où
l’orthographe y compris des noms propres était aléatoire – sa pièce est de
lui-même si elle est un plagiat et je serais fort d’accord qu’elle est un pâle
plagiat.
Le titre réfère à la femme centrale de la fable qui se prétend une prude
pour mieux couvrir ses malversations qui sous le couvert de pruderie joue de
libertinage pour simplement exploiter avec celui avec qui elle a un contrat de
mariage – cassable il est vrai mais qui ne le sera pas, cassé bien sûr – les
hommes imbéciles qui tombent dans ses rets. Ils y perdent du temps, de
l’honneur et tous les biens qu’ils peuvent confier à cette prude perverse.
Ainsi elle entretient, mais aux frais des entretenus, une cour d’amoureux
et de victimes. Elle a un contrat de mariage (promesse qui peut être rompue)
avec un « cassier » que l’on comprend comme étant un ancêtre des
banquiers ; elle entretient une liaison de précieuse intéressée avec un
Chevalier pour qui de toute façon ce sport courtois n’est qu’un sport et rien
d’autre ; elle flatte un autre homme, capitaine de vaisseau de commerce,
qui lui a confié tout son bien avant de partir sur son dernier voyage qui se
termine par la destruction du bateau par des pirates – tiens, tiens on dirait
Candide – et qu’elle envisage de voler hardiment ; et elle joue à l’amour
avec un jeune Turc, qui est en fait la nièce d’un autre personnage masculin
mais déguisée en garçon, et notre prude tombe dans le panneau jusqu’à la fin
malgré les révélations intermédiaires que ce garçon est une fille.
Pour compliquer la chose l’oncle de cette jeune fille est amoureux de la
nièce de notre prude, mais cela risque simplement de n’être qu’une amourette
distractive, et la jeune fille elle-même est amoureuse du capitaine qui est
amoureux de la prude et que la prude a décidé de plumer. La jeune fille, prise
jusqu’au bout pour un garçon, est celle qui va révéler à cet homme grugé que la
prude n’est qu’une grugeuse, si ce mot peut être inventé.
Il s’agit donc d’un plagiat mais à la sauce voltairienne, donc terriblement
appauvri, même si l’auteur plagié, William Wyncherley, dûment listé dans
Wikipedia, n’a rien pour rivaliser avec le dernier auteur dramatique sérieux en
Angleterre avant le 19ème siècle, à savoir Ben Jonson qui a fait
mieux, beaucoup plus fort et infiniment plus spirituel que notre prude de Voltaire.
Et nous ne dirons rien de Marivaux cent fois plus léger, subtil et fin.
Il n’en reste alors ici qu’une charge satirique contre la classe moyenne
supérieure de l’époque, les bourgeois juste en dessous de la noblesse, qui est
une classe sociale non reconnue et qui n’a qu’un but dans la vie, s’enrichir et
s’amuser sans rien faire pour gagner à la sueur de leurs mains les moyens de
cet amusement. L’intrigue est cousue de fil blanc et le déguisement de la fille
en garçon et en fille à la fin est risible mais non amusant. Ben Jonson et
« The Silent Woman » a fait cent fois mieux. Marivaux est aussi un
expert des déguisements, sans compter l’ancêtre de tous, Shakespeare. La
volonté de Voltaire de distraire la classe supérieure des nantis, nobles ou
non, avec les babioles comportementielles des nouveaux riches de l’époque est
devenue pitoyable aujourd’hui et absolument risible, sans le moindre plaisir de
ce rire qui n’est pas jaune mais totalement hostile.
Concluons avec la nièce de la prude qui déclare sans la moindre profondeur,
ni pudeur intellectuelle : « Point de mémoire est ma
philosophie. » Mais elle n’est qu’un personnage secondaire. Cependant
Dorfise, notre prude qui plus ets veuve, a de l’amant parfait une vision
idyllique :
DORFISE :
« Un ami tendre, aussi vif que prudent,
Qui possédât les grâces du jeune âge,
Sans en avoir l’empressement volage ;
Et je me trompe à votre air tendre et doux,
Ou tout cela parait uni dans vous. . .
Vous possédez aussi l’art de vous taire !
Ah ! vous avez tous les talents de plaire.
Jeune et discret ! » (Acte III, Scène 2)
Et tout cela dit à une fille que le texte prétend être de 18 ans, mais
aussi de moins de 18 ans, et que j’évaluerais plutôt aux alentours de 15,
déguisée en garçon et courtisée comme tel. Plus gay et plus pédophilique que
moi tu meurs, mais Shakespeare a tellement fait mieux, sans compter Marivaux.
Définitivement « Adin’, cachez ce sein que je ne saurais voir. »
Ou bien « Voltair’, cachez ce sex’ que je ne saurais
voir ! »
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
VOLTAIRE – LA FEMME QUI A RAISON
– 1949
Petite pièce en trois faux actes qui eût du être en un (brouillon corrigé
dans les papiers de Voltaire) qui n’a que l’ambition d’être distrayante tout en
dépeignant une philosophie de la vie économique plus qu’économe, jouisseuse
plus que jouissive, matrimoniale plus que débauchée. Comment vivre heureux dans
la jouissance de son bien entre amis et en famille. Le confort et le plaisir
bourgeois en quelque sorte dans le mariage incontournable.
La fortune de la famille vient des Indes, sans que nous sachions de quelles
Indes il s’agit, par le père parti douze ans dans cette aventure. Il semble que
nous dussions comprendre qu’il s’agit des Indes occidentales, c'est-à-dire des
Antilles où le père serait allé faire fortune dans l’agriculture coloniale
fondée sur l’esclavage et le commerce des épices et denrées de luxe, le
célèbrte commerce triangulaire qui fit la richesse de Bordeaux, Nantes, Rouen
en France. Ce ne peut pas de toute façon être autre chose au milieu du 18ème
siècle.
La mère est restée derrière. Enfin et finalement une mère qui a le sens de
la misère d’où le couple et la famille sont sortis et le sens des affaires par
des placements judicieux et juteux des finances retournant du père. La mère
cependant est aussi judicieuse dans la gestion de la famille qu’elle dote d’un
hôtel digne de sa fortune avec du personnel, et dans la gestion de ses enfants
qu’elle dote d’une éducation décente mais il ne semble pas d’une carrière
vraiment époustouflante. On ne peut pas assurer la jouissance de la vie à des
jeunes gens en définitive désœuvrés et en même temps leur assurer une carrière.
Ils vivent donc des revenus des placements financiers faits par la mère et que
le père va simplement doubler en revenant. Deux millions c’est beaucoup et cela
doit bien rapporter quelques bonnes et trébuchantes dizaines de milliers d’unités
de la monnaie en cours à l’époque.
Mais Voltaire défend cette vie de placements financiers :
Madame DURU :
« On doit compte au public de l’usage du bien ;
Et qui l’ensevelit est mauvais citoyen ;
Il fait tort à l’État, il s’en fait à soi-même.
Faut-il sur son comptoir, l’œil trouble et le
teint blême,
Manquer du nécessaire, auprès d’un coffre-fort,
Pour avoir de quoi vivre un jour après la
mort ?
Ah ! Vivez avec nous dans une honnête
aisance.
Le prix de nos travaux est dans la jouissance,
Faites votre bonheur en remplissant vos vœux.
Être riche n’est rien : le tout est d’être
heureux. . .
Ne craignez rien, vivez, possédez,
jouissez… » (Acte III, Scène 5)
Et une variante supprimée est encore plus explicite sur cette moralité
bourgeoise avant même l’acceptation du terme dans le cadre d’un capitalisme pas
encore établi. Mais ce discours économique jouissif n’est pas l’intérêt de la
pièce. Ce qui en fait du théâtre c’est la situation hirsute composée par les
personnages.
La mère, Madame DURU, a deux enfants, un fils et une fille, comme il se
doit dans la tradition Voltairienne. Ces deux enfants devaient épouser les deux
enfants du « caissier » qui gère les finances de Monsieur Duru et sa
famille, à savoir Isaac Gripon, une fille et un fils bien sûr. Ce Gripon est un
peu fripon car il veut forcer la main à tout le monde sur la base du désir d’un
père bien lointain et ainsi marier un jeune homme à peine sorti de
l’adolescence à sa fille qui a 37 ans, ce qui est probablement ou à peu près
l’âge de la mère de ce jeune homme et un âge canonique à l’époque, un siècle
avant la femme de trente ans de Balzac. Le fils cadet de ce fripon Gripon doit
être en proportion, et bien sûr ces deux enfants arlésiens, puisqu’on ne les
verra pas, Philipotte et Philipot Gripon, n’ont pas de mère et n’ont pas de
profession détaillée, sinon que le fils prendra la succession de son père et la
fille est ménagère selon une morale de vie qui a peu à voir avec celle de
Madame DURU :
M. GRIPON :
« On se lève avant jour ; ainsi fait
votre père :
Imitez-le dans tout, pour vivre heureux sur
terre ;
Soyez sobre, attentif à placer votre argent ;
Ne donnez jamais rien, et prêtez rarement… »
(Acte I, Scène 5)
Digne morale de vie d’Isaac Gripon. Isaac, comme Isaac Newton, est un nom
biblique d’importance et Voltaire sait très bien ce dont il s’agit puisque les
Arabes de La Mecque se définissait dans sa pièce « Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet
le Prophète » comme fils d’Ismail, l’autre fils d’Abraham, le modèle même
du patriarche post-Noétique et post-Mosaïque, le patriarche qui obéit en tout à
dieu même quand ce dieu lui ordonne de sacrifier son fils, que ce soit Isaac du
côté juif ou que ce soit Ismail du côté islamique. Le nom n’est pas gratuit et bien
que Isaac Newton ne soit pas juif, le prénom qu’il tient de son père dont il
est orphelin à la naissance est-il un prénom juif ou simplement biblique et
quand on sait que Newton était un érudit hébraïque et Biblique, j’entends de
l’Ancien Testament, sans compter un historien fort lettré sur l’histoire du
peuple juif et du peuple d’Israël, on ne peut guère douter que Voltaire, qui
reconnaît dans son œuvre l’importance
scientifique et philosophique d’Isaac Newton, jouait ici avec un gripe-sous
Gripon portant un prénom juif d’usurier.
Et les deux enfants DURU vont, avec la complicité de leur mère et juste
avant l’arrivée de leur père, épouser un autre couple de jeunes gens, frère et
sœur bien sûr, issus d’une noblesse qui n’a pas de problèmes financiers et est
donc dotée. Trois couples frère-sœur et fils-fille et deux mariages. Mais
Shakespeare est allé jusqu’à quatre mariages dans une pièce (« As You Like
It » avec Hymen, dieu du mariage, venu bénir les mariages de Rosalind et
Orsino, Celia et Oliver, Phebe et Silvius, Audrey et Touchstone). Symbolique
union de la noblesse et de la bourgeoisie, rêve impossible mais Voltaire ne le
sait pas encore.
De là à dire que l’on a deux éthique qui s’affrontent, il n’y a qu’un pas
que je franchis allègrement. Voltaire défend une éthique bourgeoise de confort,
de jouissance et de spéculation plus que de travail qu’il oppose à une éthique
du travail, de la parcimonie et de l’austère gestion visant au profit maximum
de biens financiers et immobiliers. Il est très clair qu’il rejette les enfants
de ce grippe-sou dans la marge arlésienne, et l’éthique de ce fripon Gripon
hors de son entendement. Son Gripon est comme un Scrooge célèbre d’un auteur du
19ème siècle, si merveilleusement rendu par le couple antagonique
Gripsou et Picsou sur la planète Walt Disney créés respectivement en 1956 et
1947.
Vivent les nouveaux riches, mais hors de l’emprise des spéculateurs
austères, qu’ils soient calvinistes, luthériens ou juifs. Mais est-ce là un
thème encore présentable dans notre siècle connecté ?
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
VOLTAIRE – NANINE – 1749
Voilà une pièce dont le sujet est en or mais qui est arrivé sur la scène 29
ans trop tôt, c'est-à-dire 29 ans avant « Le Mariage de Figaro » de
Beaumarchais. Il s’agit De l’amour d’un noble pour une servante du plus bas
état. Est-il concevable qu’un noble, veuf et donc d’un certain âge, tombe
amoureux d’une servante jeune et donc qui pourrait être sa fille ou presque
alors qu’il a le droit de la prendre sans même demander sa permission ?
On a alors dans tout cela la matière d’une comédie sociale qui pourrait
être gentiment satirique tout en étant amusante. Même le père soldat retiré du
service pourrait ajouter une touche patriotique à la fable délurée d’une lutte
contre justement ce droit de prendre femmes et hommes comme on l’entend quand
on est noble pourvu que la cible ne le soit pas. Beaumarchais fera de ce sujet
un chef d’œuvre immortel. Voltaire en a fait une comédie mélodramatique franchement
larmoyante.
La volonté du Comte – tient cela me rappelle quelque chose – non seulement
de prendre Nanine mais de l’épouser est tout à fait inacceptable tant pour la
noblesse que pour le tiers état. Nanine ne cesse de le répéter et le Comte ne
prouve rien avec ses déclarations humanistes imposées de par son autorité de
noble qu’il fait reconnaître comme incontournable, à laquelle tout un chacun se
doit d’obéir. Ou est l’amour dans tout cela ? Et effectivement on voir mal
comment Nanine pourrait dans un seul souffle appeler son soldat de père démuni
de tout revenu « père » et la marquise de mère du Comte son mari si
elle l’épousait « mère ».
On peut rêver mais dans ce cas on fait une pièce de science fiction. Pour
le théâtre au 18ème siècle ce n’est pas vraiment possible. Alors on
écrit un roman ou on écrit un conte de science fiction, mais on ne prétend pas
écrire une pièce comique et réaliste avec un tel sujet dramatique et totalement
irréaliste quarante ans avant la Révolution Française qui abolira ces
privilèges. Un noble peut sans déchoir entretenir une maîtresse roturière dans
une chaumière de son domaine, mais certainement pas en faire son épouse
légitime.
On comprend alors l’impression de décousu et de cousu au fil blanc que l’on
ressent scène après scène de fuite en avant dans un drame psychologique que
Voltaire n’a même pas compris vraiment. Il fait lire à cette pauvre Nanine un
livre en anglais sur l’égalité de tous les hommes. Combien de servantes même un
peu éduquée au point de savoir écrire et lire pouvaient en 1749 lire
l’anglais ?
Mais Voltaire n’en est pas à une invraisemblance près. Dans la préface il
se moque de Corneille qui dans Rodogune attribue à Rodogune, sœur de Phaartes, roi des Parthes, les vers
suivants :
« Il est des nœuds secrets, il est de
sympathies,
Dont par le doux rapport les âmes assorties
S’attachent l’une à l’autre, et se laissent piquer
Par je ne sais quoi qu’on ne peut
expliquer. » (Corneille, Rodogune, Acte I Scène 5)
en ces
termes : « De bonne foi, croirait-on que ces vers du haut comique
fussent dans la bouche d’une princesse de Parthes, qui va demander à son amant
la tête de sa mère ? » Notons d’abord que la dite Rodogune ne parle
pas à son amant à ce moment-là mais à Laonice, sœur
de Timagène, gouverneur des deux princes en question dans cette discussion
entre lesquels le cœur de Rodogune balance, et confidente de Cléopâtre. C’est
en plus de la part de Voltaire ignorer complètement la culture des gens allant
au théâtre en 1645, le public éduqué du moins en latin et qui savait
l’expression de Tertullien qu’ils ont appris à traduire à l’école ou à
l’université, expression suffisamment connue de ce public pour que Bossuet dans
son oraison funèbre du Père Bourgoing en 1662 la cite ainsi :
"La chair changera de nature, le
corps prendra un autre nom; même celui de cadavre, dit Tertullien [ca. 160-220,
Carthage], ne lui demeurera pas longtemps; il deviendra un je ne sais quoi, qui
n'a point de nom dans aucune langue"; tant il est vrai que tout meurt en
nos corps, jusqu'à ces termes funèbres par lesquels on exprimait nos malheureux
restes: Post totum illud ignobilitatis elogium, caducae carnis in originem
terram, et cadaveris nomen; et de isto quoque nomine periturae in nullum inde
jam nomen, in omnis jam vocabuli mortem. »
Si ainsi l’amour est lié à la mort,
l’amour devient tragique et cette allusion à la mort devient une préparation
sinistre à la demande de la tête de la susdite mère. Et si Voltaire avait cité
la suite de ces quatre vers il aurait alors vu la profondeur tragique de cet
amour quand Rodogune dit quelques vers plus loin concernant les deux
princes :
« Je voudrais être à lui si je n'aimais son
frère ;
Et le plus grand des maux toutefois que je crains,
C'est que mon triste sort me livre entre ses
mains. » (Acte I, Scène 5)
Il rejette sur la base de cet argument faussé le mélange des genres et ne
comprends pas que c’est une limite du théâtre classique français qui veut que
le tragique ne côtoie que du tragique, ce qui tourne l’amour en conflit
tragique chaque fois qu’il apparaît dans une tragédie des auteurs classiques
comme Corneille ou Racine, alors qu’il deviendra un élément comique dans un
auteur comme Molière. Ce refus du mélange des genres amène Voltaire à faire de
la comédie qui en devient larmoyante quand il veut ajouter à l’amour une
dimension non pas tragique mais dramatique et il se retrouve dans le
mélodramatique qui en devient pathétique bien avant son invention au 19ème
siècle, mais il est vrai assez pratiqué par Jean Jacques Rousseau et surtout en
peinture par Greuze.
Je crois qu’il aurait du méditer un peu sur cette exergue de l’oraison
funèbre de Henriette-Anne d’Angleterre de 1970 par Bossuet : « Vanitas vanitatum, dixit Ecclesiastes;
vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas. » Il lui manque en théâtre le
sens de la mesure dramatique et probablement de culture. Il eût pu apprendre de
Shakespeare l’art du mélange des genres qui ne devient jamais mélodramatique, mais
qui est rarement pratiqué il est vrai au théâtre en général parce qu’il produit
des relâchements de tension qui peuvent détruire l’effet dramatique et le
suspens, bien que cela n’arrive jamais chez Shakespeare. Finalement dans cette
pièce sur ce sujet, en évitant la science fiction et le mélodramatique, Beaumarchais
va produit peu de temps après un chef d’œuvre universel, alors que cette pièce-ci
de Voltaire est désolante.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
ISAAC NEWTON AND JUDAISM
Date: Fri Jul 3 09:31:53 1998
Posted By: Robert Macke, Grad
student, Physics, Washington
University
Area of science: Science
History
ID: 899255273.Sh
Message:
Robert,
Alas, no, Isaac Newton was not a jew. However, you ask a
good question which requires a somewhat more elaborate answer than just 'no.'
Isaac Newton was born in Woolsthorpe, England
on December 25, 1642, and was given the name of his then-deceased father
Isaac. He was baptised into the Church
of England on January 1, 1643. However,
his early education had some very strongly Puritan influences. As well, his grammar school education in
Grantham included Biblical studies and he learned to read Hebrew.
There is strong evidence that in the early 1670's, Newton became an
Arian. (That is, a follower of the ideas
of a 4th century Alexandrian priest by the name of Arius, who believed that
Christ was not equal in stature to God the Father.) This was a heresy that he kept secret, though
he carried his beliefs with him to the grave.
At the time, he became very well versed in all of the
Biblical texts, as well as the writings of many of the more prominent
theologians, and published a number of theological papers of his own.
In the latter part of his life, Newton took an interest in ancient history.
He wrote a text entitled "Chronology of Ancient
Kingdoms," published posthumously in 1728, which used as a basic reference
the Old Testament, and supported Jewish history at the expense of all other
accounts, which he believed were exaggerated at best.
I believe the following passage best describes Newton's views toward
Judaism:
"Tracing the history of the Church back to the
earliest days of Judaism, Newton
wrote that all nations were originally of one religion based on the moral
precepts of Noah's sons. This religion was passed on to the great
Hebrew patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Moses later carried it to Israel...." [Christianson, G., In the Presence of the
Creator; Isaac Newton and His Times, The Free Press, New York, 1984, pp 566-567.]
Newton saw Judaism as the progenitor of the Christian Church, and
as such early Jews stood apart from all other ancient people. His writings give strong support to the Jews'
special place in history.
Well, I hope you find this answer as fascinating as I did.
---Bob Macke
MIT S.B. Physics 1996 in St. Louis Ph.D. candidate, Physics
January 4, 1643 – March 31, 1727
Isaac
Newton was not Jewish. Clearly. However, there are some connections: he knew
Hebrew, was very well versed in Jewish history, and considered Christianity a
derivative of Judaism.
So, we'll just slap a verdict here
and go back to writing about Duffman...
One minor problem. Should we say
"Not a Jew", or "Sadly, not a Jew"? Yes, questions like
these keep us awake at night.
On one hand, gravity, laws of
motion, the reflecting telescope, one of the smartest men ever, etc, etc, etc.
Sounds like a lock for "Sadly".
On the other hand, calculus.
Thanks for that invention, Sir Isaac. We were forced to take three semesters of
calculus in college. Those long nights struggling with double and triple
integrals are not easily forgotten. Or forgiven.
And when, in our last calculus
class ever, the professor told us that everything we'd worked so hard to learn
was not only essentially useless but could be better done by computers, well...
Verdict: Not
a Jew.
BUT
what about his father, his mother, his grandparents, etc? JC
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 3:09 PM
0 comments