Women's Role in French Socitey

Our discussion last Friday on La Tondue was very interesting because it seemed to have very similar aspects to a backlash on French women that occurred in the last decade of the eighteenth century, and the backlash that occured directly following World War I (which we have discussed in class). In all of these, the general trend tends to be a reassertion of control over the female gender to keep women in the more traditional role within the private sphere (as opposed to the political sphere).

In the backlash of the eighteenth century, the role of women in French society had reached a very high point. Over the century upper class women hosted salons, and though they were not encouraged to speak or debate, they played the important role of inviting the intellectuals of the time, cultivating social connections between them, and guiding discussions if they appeared to not be going in the direction intended (which is arguably a huge role because the saloness could influence the outcome of discussion). Similarly, women of the lower classes began exercising political power during the Revolution by storming hte Bastille, organizing and participating in bread strikes, storming the palace and arresting the royal family, and forming influential political organizations (Society for Revolutionary Women). The role of women was incredibly modern, but after the assassination of Marat by Charlotte Corday and the execution of many women leaders during the Jacobin Terror, it seemed apparent that it would not last.

La Tondue can be viewed in very much the same way. These women were accused of involving themselves in the politcal sphere by aiding Nazis in the regime established in France, and were punished for it. In so doing, they broke their traditionally established role that remains outside the politics. But, by doing continuing similar activity with the Allied soldiers and incurring the same wrath, one gets the sense that France was at a failure to come to terms with not spearheading modernity. By the mid nineteenth century, France was no longer the intellectual capital of Europe, and they had now been defeated twice by Germany in a quarter of a century. It seems ironic that the French would resort back to traditional ideals instead of attempting to foster a more modern view.

Passing and Hiding in the Christian World

When comparing and contrasting the hardships that Jewish people faced in the concentration camps with those that "hid" in Germany or conquered territories, it is impossible to deny that there existed some similarities, but it seems that, overall, Jewish people who were forced into extermination camps were subjected to an infinitely more horrific experience.

The argument can be made that both experiences were physically and psychologically similar; Jewish people who were forced into hiding experienced food shortages and trouble finding sustenance, while the rations given in camps were severely inadequate. Psychologically, both individuals did have to deal with the sense that their nation (and later practically all of Europe, after the Third Reich succeeded in capturing most of the European mainland) had turned against them on something as arbitrary as religion or ethnicity. However, theses comparisons can only be made in the broad sense.

Physically, those who went into hiding were not beaten and battered to the extent that those who experienced the atrocities of the cams were. In many cases, individuals in hiding were relied on strenuous labor for food and shelter, but it is hard to imagine these individuals working ten to twelve hour days on food rations that would only enable them to survive for three to six months. Psychologically, those who went into hiding did not witness their friends and families being seperated into lines designated for mass executions or have to ponder that their survival came at the expense of another's life. Those in hiding may have witnessed the initial rounding-up of Jewish people for "relocation," the experience is more affecting when death is seen as inevitable (though it can be said that fear of being rounded up could lead to severe paranoia). Individuals in camps had everything seized from them, while those who were in hiding still maintained some sense of freedom (many people in hiding were able to move to different towns or territories in search of betterment provided they had documentation).

Given this analysis it seems impossible to compare the two experience in anything but broad terms. It is true that existence under both circumstances would be horrible, but those who were in hiding had a better standard of living and a higher survival rate.