The Hedgehog and le Hérisson

Those who know me know that books are a big part of my spring stay in Charlottesville. (More will be revealed in future posts.) This year, the book theme started earlier than usual. I discovered at my knitting group that several of my friends there were members of the same book club, hosted by the New Dominion Bookshop, my favorite book store in Charlottesville. Opened in 1924, it still looks like a bookstore should.


Its mezzanine is host to a variety of book-signings throughout the year – and, as I discovered, a monthly book club, too. The discussion leader is one of the women in my knitting group. They were preparing to discuss a book I love, called “The Elegance of the Hedgehog” by French author and philosophy professor Muriel Barbery. It’s a surprising book club hit here in the United States.

Barbery’s book was also a surprise hit in France in 2006. It was described by her husband, whom she freely admits helped her create the story line and structure that links everything together, as a “gift-seller” – the sort of book people recommend or give to their friends. That’s the way it happened for me. My friend Ingrid told me I would love the book. I did. I, in turn recommended it to others. My friend, Joan – another American in Paris –and I read “l’Elégance du Hérisson” last year. We wondered at the time if it would translate well. Here was my chance to find out. I asked if I could join the discussion and was welcomed as both participant and “cultural consultant.”
By “translate well”, we didn’t mean the language. Alison Anderson seems ideally suited to translating this book. I read extracts of her work and thought that she kept the tone of the French as well as the different melodies of the two languages allow. But this book seemed to me a quintessentially French book – like a really good dinner party with hours of good food and conversation -- well turned and witty phrases, touches of philosophy, art, music, literature. Nothing too deep, perhaps, but elegantly said. The main characters are well drawn and accessible. But, if you knew little or nothing of the “caviar left”, the French intellectual, the role of the concierge, the Portuguese cleaning lady, the self-absorbed pretention of people from “the best families”, could you really appreciate the novel?
After my Saturday morning with an interesting and well-read group of people, my answer is “Partly.” The lone man in the group didn’t like the book at all and didn’t finish it. Several of the women expressed serious reserves, saying the characters seemed stereotypical and the book was hard to get into. Alison Anderson would not have been surprised. She says in her blog “Not everyone likes it; my own sister couldn’t finish it. That is the prerogative, and the duty, of Great Books, to be disliked, or misunderstood as much as they are loved and praised. “
My conclusion, after a stimulating morning, was that those who liked the book had appreciated the universal elements. Others had more cultural filters – things they either didn’t understand or understood but did not appreciate. I helped where I could but I learned, many years ago, that experience can’t be transmitted. I’ve had nearly forty years to try to understand the French and I learn something new every day. "Vive la différence".

Baron de Coubertin vs NBC

The French love the Olympics. They feel a proprietary interest in them. It was, after all, their own Baron de Coubertin who instigated the revival of the Games in 1896 and served as President of the International Olympic Committee from 1896 to 1925. France has hosted the Summer Olympics twice and the Winter Olympics three times.
Americans love the Olympics, too. The United States was one of the 14 countries present at the 1896 Games. They’ve hosted the Summer Games and the Winter Games four times each. And who can forget Avery Brundage, President of the IOC from 1952 to 1972?
I, also, love the Olympics. I acquired my first TV set in 1976 to watch the Innsbruck Winter Games. For years, every fourth February I spent as much time as I could in front of my French TV marvelling at the winter sportsmen and women. Every fourth August, I sat in front of my American TV for hours cheering on the athletes of the Summer Games.
That changed in 1996. I was so disappointed by the American Summer Olympic coverage that I made a vow never to watch the Games here again – a promise I kept until February 21st of this year. The dates of my Charlottesville trip meant that I would see half the Olympics in Paris and half in Charlottesville. At least I’d be able to compare. And compare I did.
In France, the Olympics is broadcast on public television. These channels have few commercials (and none, by law, after 8 p.m.) They are financed by a TV licence fee. The very idea of that makes many Americans gasp. But I am more than willing to pay the equivalent of 50 cents a day to have essentially commercial free TV.
Though much is made of French athletes and medal chances, French coverage --perhaps mindful of Baron de Coubertin -- never forgets that the Olympics are international. Knowledgeable and excited commentary about the strength of the Norwegian skiers, the elegance of the Chinese skaters, the daring of the American snowboarders might lead a distracted listener to believe that French athletes were winning all these events.
Sport itself provides all the drama. Favorites fall. Young athletes come out of nowhere to win their first medals. We see complete hockey games. (We also see 23 pairs of ice dancers doing very similar tangos to the same music for 2 hours and 50 ski jumpers trying to qualify for 40 places in the semi-finals of their event.) It’s just like being there – except you are warmer, more comfortable and can see better. And if you get too bored, you can do something else until the next event comes on. Since Vancouver is 9 hours earlier than Paris, many of the events took place in the middle of the night and lots of us had to rely on the two hour morning summary for our Olympic thrills.
American private television handles the games very differently. NBC paid $2 billion dollars to cover the Beijing and Vancouver Olympics and their goal is to earn all that money back and make a profit. Since many of the events took place when people were at work or school, NBC decided to do an “Olympics cabaret” every evening from 8 p.m. until midnight. By doing nothing live, they were able to weave sports highlights with filmed interviews and short documentaries on polar bears and husky dogs while breaking every four minutes for three minutes of commercials. (Yes, I counted.) Only on the final weekend, did they show three exciting live events. Do the American people like it this way? Some do; many don’t. But, as one of my friends said: “I watch it because otherwise I wouldn’t see anything.”
My comparison has been made and so has my decision. In 2012, it will be Baron de Coubertin’s Olympics for me.