Monday, January 14, 2008

Duralex: A letter from (Yes! Yes! Yes!) "France"

The person calling himself Duralex replies to the posting below about Sarkozy and Duralex's insistance that the French are above tawdry tattle ...

Demented, moi ? Beneath my rhetoric I’m as cold as a snake and as sharp as a slaughterer’s [corrected] knife. I thought you already knew.

Oh, did I say so, really? Well, let me see. Here is all I could find:

Click here

I said: "Such "outings" as Lord Browne's or Peter Mandelson's wouldn't be possible in the French influenced area, for example, where homosexuality is not an issue. Do you know that the mayor of Paris is openly gay, and constantly re-elected? I might be wrong, but my bet is that no French tabloid would be interested in publishing the kind of "revelations" Jeff Chevalier sold to the Mail on Sunday. Homophobia is a big taboo in the French media. A positive taboo, for once. ” (08/05/2007)

Click here

I just said: “In the French area, no one cares about that sort of stuff.”

Which you enthusiastically interpreted and elaborated as follows: “In France, the appearance of not caring about such matters is probably more important than the expression of any interest in other people's sex lives – the old culture is above such things.” (09/06/2007)

Your words, chéri, not mine.

So no, I never said anything of the sort. The context of my statements was totally different from the one we are presently talking about. Back then the discussion was about the typically Anglo-Saxon preoccupation with who is gay or not among public persons, and the way your media use to fuel that kind of speculation. I never said the French are not interested in “the sex lives of their governing and celebrity classes”. I just said they are not prejudiced about their sexual orientation, which is not the same thing at all.

I can’t figure out why you’re calling out to me about this topic. My first language and literary culture are French, OK, but I’m Canadian and I don’t know much about French political life. Besides, I suppose that caring about the king’s (or whatever you call him) love life is something quite common all over the world. It’s natural curiosity, but unlike you I wouldn’t state it’s a sign of deep political conscience and maturity. I’d rather say it’s a sign of… ah, in informal French we say “ringardise” (a ridiculous traditionalism).

What I personally find more significant and interesting than this is that suddenly, the French president has become a valuable gossip topic in the Anglo-Saxon tabs and internet blogs. Maudit, even Perez Hilton is talking at length and peddling wild rumors about Mr Sarkozy’s relationship with Carla Bruni! This is truly unbelievable !

Mmmm. I remember some juicy stories about Giscard’s and Mitterrand’s escapades. And as far as I know, Sarko’s affair with Carla is in no way extra-marital. He’s officially divorced and so is she.

Well, as they use to say it comes with the territory. But in Mr. Sarkozy's case it seems to be part of the territory, and I’m afraid the French are not very happy about it. For the media are one thing, but the people’s opinion is a whole other story. Just read the comments on Perez Hilton, many of them come from French readers, and they are pretty steep. I also hear Sarkozy’s popularity is sinking in the polls. So yes, just as you say: the French finally grow up. But a bit too late…

8 comments:

Duralex said...

<< Duralex's insistance that the French are above tawdry tattle ... >>

Maudit qu'y m'énarve ! I NEVER SAID THEY ARE ABOVE IT. I just mean that there are times and places for it. Do you Brits speculate about whether your Queen and her husband are still having sex together ? Do they communicate about it in the media ?

The president of a democratic country is (theoretically) elected on a political basis. He has (presumably) not been put there to pimp his private life around. Doing it is a political mistake that is obviously costing Mr Sarkozy a lot.

Am I the only one who sees things that way ? I don't think so.

Duralex said...

Something else : without the quotes taken from your own article, my replies look illogical and inconsistent. Knowing your dishonest methods, I suppose you did that on purpose. Sigh.

Madame Arcati said...

People are at liberty to click through to the quotes - I would expect them to do some work instead of just sitting at their work stations idly eye grazing.

There's never a time or a place for tawdry tattle. If it's there to be tattled about, so it shall be. Nor can you pick and choose the things that are tattled about: sex is one of the great tattle topics - gay or str8 - and the impression I have of you Duralex (as well as the late Lorenzo that fiddler on the hoof Dinu) is that you would rather the media not publish anything on the private lives of those deemed luminous (y'know, Sarkozy, Britney, Lord Browne et al). I have accused you more than once of taking the part of celebs who usually are quite happy to trade some private life info for a media puff of their latest enterprise.

We Brits do speculate about the sex lives of our Queen and consort - the parentage of various children around the world is sometimes attributed to one or the other. As to Sarkozy, all that matters now is all this tattle out there - imagine, the President of France anxious to replace Cecilia with another statusque model as first lady as soon poss.

Once you're famous what was private, precious, intimate etc becomes the tattle - whether you're Sarkozy or some white trash popstar.

Duralex said...

<< you would rather the media not publish anything on the private lives of those deemed luminous (y'know, Sarkozy, Britney, Lord Browne et al). >>

No. The low press does their job, questionable though it may be. That's business : as long as they sell that crap, they'll print it. But fortunately they don't tell the people what they must think.

<< celebs who usually are quite happy to trade some private life info for a media puff of their latest enterprise. >>

I agree some of them actually behave that way. It's OK with me if Britney, Paris or Lindsay are making money on that display. Celebrity is their only "profession", they are individuals and free to make what they want with their public image. But the president of a great democratic country has another kind of responsibility. He just can't play that game with impunity. Tabernak ! :-)

forgotten ones fund/stephmastini said...

Am I the only one who sees things that way ? I don't think so.

Oui! Oui!

Duralex said...

Non, non ! :-)

Anonymous said...

http://perezhilton.com/2008-01-14-just-married-11#respond

Duralex is right : the French posters' comments speak for themselves.

Duralex said...

For those who can understand French subtleties without subtitles:

http://www.20min.ch/ro/entertainment/people/story/12017555