Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Un souffle de vent révisionniste…


Les responsables des organisations juives sont-ils sincères dans leurs constantes dénonciations de l’antisémitisme ? A tout propos et même hors de propos ils crient au loup ou, plutôt, à « la bête immonde dont le ventre est encore fécond ». Au besoin ils inventent ce prétendu antisémitisme, soit à l’occasion d’attentats bidon ou de faits divers sans rapport avec la haine des juifs, soit en portant au compte de l’antisémitisme ce qui n’est en fait que de l’antisionisme. Si la France, pour ne prendre que cet exemple, était en proie à un antisémitisme chronique, elle ne se choisirait pas pour président de la République un petit-neveu de rabbin qui, au surplus, s’entoure de juifs, se rend à Jérusalem pour y déclarer sa flamme à l’Etat d’Israël et, fût-ce de manière symbolique, engage militairement la France dans le camp israélien. En revanche, les responsables des organisations juives paraissent sincères quand ils dénoncent les dangers de ce qu’ils appellent le « négationnisme ». Le spectre du révisionnisme les hante et ils ne savent de quelle façon le conjurer car, malgré un battage frénétique en faveur de « la Shoah », ils voient le spectre grandir.


Alors que leur comportement en Palestine leur aliène déjà une bonne partie du monde, les juifs de combat notent que leur propagande shoatique suscite dans les jeunes générations une lassitude qu’en Amérique on appelle « Holocaust fatigue ». La religion de « la Shoah » nous est certes imposée par la gent politique et par le petit monde de la presse, de la radio, de la télévision et du cinéma mais, sur Internet, « une insupportable police juive de la pensée » ne parvient décidément plus à endiguer le flot des écrits qui remettent en cause les mythes de la seconde guerre mondiale. En outre, depuis peu, sans doute précisément sous l’influence d’Internet avec ses forums de discussion, ses chats, ses sites d’informations et ses blogs, on constate que, paradoxalement, le monde de l’imprimé et de la librairie commence de s’ouvrir au révisionnisme. Il faut dire qu’aujourd’hui le vieux monde des imprimés et des périodiques, qui était relativement facile à contrôler (particulièrement en France avec l’obligation du dépôt légal), a du souci à se faire s’il veut affronter la concurrence des ouvrages numériques, lesquels vont continuer à proliférer sans grande possibilité de filtrage, de contrôle et de censure.


Tout récemment, à en juger par la publication en français d’un certain nombre de livres de tendance révisionniste, il semble que, parmi les auteurs, les éditeurs et les diffuseurs, on commence à s’enhardir, quitte à risquer la comparution en justice. On sait que, même dans des pays non dotés d’une loi antirévisionniste, le pouvoir en place trouve le moyen de harceler, de condamner, d’extrader ou d’emprisonner les dissidents, mais aujourd’hui en Allemagne, en Australie, aux Etats-Unis, au Canada, en Suisse, en Belgique, en Grande-Bretagne et en France on se met à défier les instances qui proscrivent la liberté de recherche en histoire. Tous les chefs d’Etat des nations occidentales ont, tour à tour, lancé l’anathème contre les révisionnistes mais en pure perte puisque les rebelles paraissent s’enhardir à proportion. Nicolas Sarkozy dit avoir soudain éprouvé un sentiment de profonde admiration à l’égard de l’Etat d’Israël lorsque, à Jérusalem, il a « visité le mémorial de Yad Vashem dédié aux victimes de la Shoah ». On peut l’en croire mais tout homme averti qui a visité soit Yad Vashem, soit tout autre mémorial du même style sait qu’il a eu sous les yeux et à portée de main la preuve que « la Shoah » n’est qu’une religion bâtie pour l’essentiel sur des inventions, des bobards et d’abjectes croyances nées des épreuves de la guerre.


Publiés simultanément en septembre et en octobre 2009, quatre ouvrages de langue française marquent ce retour au réel et à l’histoire.


Le premier, préconisant la révision du mythe de Guy Môquet, illustre le souci de revenir à la méthode historique la plus classique et la plus sévère. Les conséquences d’un tel retour à la norme seront mortelles pour toute une série de gros mensonges que les vainqueurs de 1945, et non pas seulement les Soviétiques, nous ont imposés sur le compte des vaincus, en particulier au procès de Nuremberg.


Le deuxième ouvrage invite à la révision, devant le tribunal de l’histoire, de condamnations prononcées par la justice helvétique contre les révisionnistes Jürgen Graf et Gaston-Armand Amaudruz ; le surtitre peut surprendre : « Pire que les chambres à gaz ! », mais il trouve sa pleine justification aux pages 78 et 110 du livre.


Le troisième ouvrage est un plaidoyer en faveur des réprouvés appelés ici «Neg’» comme « Nègres » ou « Neg’ » comme « Négationnistes ». L’auteur est une spécialiste du monde noir, dont elle a commencé à étudier l’histoire à partir de recherches universitaires menées à Cuba ; à ses yeux, dans la lutte commune à mener contre les forces modernes d’oppression, les peuples noirs, du fait de leur histoire, se trouvent dotés de plus de discernement et de plus de ressources que les peuples qui ont eu l’habitude de se faire obéir ; au passage, avec un courage qui se rencontre peu chez les universitaires, elle révèle qu’elle est « l’Inconnue » qui m'a interrogé et m'a donné la parole dans En Confidence / Entretien avec l’Inconnue.


Le quatrième ouvrage enfin provient d’un journaliste français de la grande presse, qui, sous un nom de plume, s’interroge sur le rôle et le devoir de l’historien quand ce dernier se retrouve face à ce que prescrit et à ce que proscrit la tyrannie. Son érudition historique et l’élan qu’il imprime à ses démonstrations n’ont d’égales que sa révolte et son espérance.


Le 18 juin 2010 paraîtra en principe un Manifeste révisionniste (« Un spectre hante l’Europe ; c’est le spectre du révisionnisme ») et l’année suivante verra la publication par un historien français d’un ouvrage révisionniste intitulé Le Grand Mensonge. En attendant, saluons le livre qui, publié en mai 2009, aura fait office de brise-glace dans ce que Serge Thion a nommé « la banquise » d’une histoire figée : d’abord mis à l’index en France, Sarkozy, Israël et les juifs est en passe de devenir un best-seller.


Aux dernières nouvelles, le CRIF (Conseil représentatif des institutions juives de France) lance un nouvel appel en faveur de la censure contre ce qu’il appelle « le racisme et l’antisémitisme », c’est-à-dire, en premier lieu, contre ce qu’il nomme « le négationnisme ». Il demande à Michèle Alliot-Marie, ministre de la Justice et des Libertés (sic), que sur Internet une surveillance s’exerce notamment en ce qui concerne «les forums de discussion, les chats, les emails, les sites web et les blogs » <http://www.crif.org/index.php?page=articles_display/detail&aid=17404&artyd=2> On a bien lu : le CRIF demande à la police de la République française d’ouvrir les emails, c’est-à-dire la correspondance privée des Français. Faut-il être en proie à la panique pour en arriver à une telle aberration ! Mais, au fait, pourquoi tant d’affolement chez les puissants et les riches de ce monde devant ces révisionnistes qui, eux, sont sans pouvoir et sans argent ? Serait-ce parce que ces privilégiés commencent à découvrir que la puissance et la richesse ne peuvent rien ici contre la simple recherche de l’exactitude historique ?


On est tenté d’expliquer le comportement des puissants en rappelant que « le pouvoir absolu rend absolument fou ». Mais cette explication est insuffisante; elle permet de comprendre la faiblesse du fort mais elle n’explique pas la force du faible. Sa propre force, le faible la puise dans le sentiment que les riches en font décidément trop pour être honnêtes. Le faible a raison. Les enquêtes et les analyses en attestent amplement : « la Shoah » est un mensonge historique qui, en Palestine et ailleurs, permet au puissant de dicter sa loi, au maître d’exploiter l’esclave et au riche de multiplier ses rapines et ses vols .


On comprend que les puissants du jour s’inquiètent pour l’avenir, à la fois, de l’Etat d’Israël et de la religion de « la Shoah ». On comprend aussi qu’un souffle d’espoir naisse enfin aujourd’hui dans le camp des humiliés et des offensés.


18 novembre 2009


***


1) Jean-Marc Berlière et Franck Liaigre, L’affaire Guy Môquet / Enquête sur une mystification officielle, Paris, Larousse, 2009 [octobre], 160 p., 12 € ;


2) Ouvrage collectif [16 auteurs : des Suisses, des Français, des Italiens et un Iranien], “Pire que les chambres à gaz !” / Deux procès politiques au scanner, Editions de Cassandra [Case postale 144, CH 3960 Sierre], 2009 [septembre], VI-233 p., 25 € ;


3) Maria Poumier, Proche des Neg’, BookSurge, 2009 [octobre], 165 p., 12,50 € ;


4) Hannibal, A quoi sert l’histoire ? Paris, DIE (Diffusion International Edition), 2009 [octobre], 216 p., 20 €.


Ces ouvrages peuvent se commander auprès des éditions Akribeia, 45/3, Route de Vourles, 69230 Saint Genis Laval (ajouter 5 € de port pour un livre et 6, 50 € pour deux livres et plus).


Peuvent également se commander auprès d’Akribeia :


Robert Faurisson, En Confidence / Entretien avec l’Inconnue, Pierre Marteau éditeur à Milan, 2009 [avril], 78 p., 10 € ;


Paul-Eric Blanrue, Sarkozy, Israël et les juifs, Oser dire, éditeur à Embourg (Belgique), 3e édition, 2009, 207 p., 16 €.


A Revisionist breeze is blowing…

Are the officials of Jewish organisations sincere in their constant denunciations of anti-Semitism? At any moment, and for no apparent reason, they’re apt to cry wolf or, rather, yell about how “the womb of the horrid beast [that gave birth to Nazism] is still fertile”. If need be they invent this purported anti-Semitism, either on the occasion of phoney attacks or of other incidents unrelated to hatred of Jews, or else put down to anti-Semitism what is in fact merely anti-Zionism. If France, to take but this one example, were prey to chronic anti-Semitism she would not choose for President the grand-nephew of a rabbi, who, what’s more, surrounds himself with Jews, visits Jerusalem to declare his undying love to the State of Israel and, albeit in a token manner, commits France militarily to the Israeli camp [1]. On the other hand, the Jewish organisations’ leaders do seem sincere when they speak out against the dangers of what they call négationnisme (“Holocaust denial”). The spectre of revisionism haunts them and they don’t know how to ward it off for, despite frantic media hype in favour of “the Shoah”, they see the spectre growing.


While their behaviour in Palestine is already alienating a good part of the world, the “battle Jews” note that their shoatic propaganda is giving rise, in the younger generation, to a weariness which in America is called “Holocaust fatigue”. The religion of “the Shoah” is of course imposed on us by the political clan and the little world of the press, radio, television and cinema but, on the Internet, “an unbearable Jewish thought police” are decidedly no longer able to contain a flood of writings calling the myths of the second world war into question. Lately, moreover, and doubtless precisely due to the influence of the Internet with its discussion forums, chatrooms, information sites and blogs, it may be observed that, paradoxically, the realm of the printed page, including the book trade, is beginning to open up to revisionism. It must be said that today the old world of print and periodicals, which was relatively easy to monitor (particularly in France, with the mandatory copyright registry), has cause to worry if it intends to face the competition from digital books, which are bound to go on proliferating without offering much chance for filtering, monitoring and censorship.


Quite recently, judging by the publication in France of a certain number of revisionist-leaning books, it seems that, amongst authors, publishers and distributors, there is a budding boldness, even if it means risking a court summons. It’s well known that, even in countries not fitted with an antirevisionist law, the regime in place will find a way to harass, convict, extradite or imprison dissidents, but today in Germany, Australia, the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Belgium, Britain and France, some people have taken to defying the authorities that ban freedom of research in history. In the western nations, all heads of State have, by turns, cursed the revisionists but all to no avail, as the rebels seem to grow bolder proportionately. Nicolas Sarkozy says he felt a sudden sense of deep admiration for the State of Israel when, in Jerusalem, he “visited the Yad Vashem memorial, dedicated to victims of the Shoah”. One may well believe him but any reasonably informed man who has visited either Yad Vashem or any other memorial of similar style knows he has had before his very eyes, and at arm’s length, proof that “the Shoah” is but a religion built for the most part on inventions, lies and sordid beliefs born of the hardships of war.


Published simultaneously in September and October of this year, four books in French mark this return to the real and to history.


The first, advocating an examination of the myth of the adolescent French “résistant” Guy Môquet, illustrates a concern to come back to the most conventional and severe historical method. The consequences of such a return to standards will be fatal for a whole slew of fat lies that the victors of 1945, and not just the Soviets, imposed on us at the expense of the vanquished, particularly at the Nuremberg trial.


The second book calls for a review, before the tribunal of history, of the convictions by the Swiss courts of the revisionists Jürgen Graf and Gaston-Armand Amaudruz; the surtitle may come as a surprise: “Worse than the gas chambers!”, but pages 78 and 110 show that it is fully justified.


The third is a plea in favour of the outcasts called in its title the “Neg’s” as in “Nègres” (Niggers), or “Neg’s” as in “Négationnistes”. The author is a specialist of the Afro-Caribbean world whose history she began studying with her academic research in Cuba; in her view the Black peoples’ history has bestowed on them more discernment and greater resources for use in the common struggle with the modern forces of oppression than on the peoples who have previously been accustomed to being obeyed. In the course of her essay, with a courage seldom seen amongst academics, she reveals that she is “l’Inconnue”, the Unknown Woman who asked me questions and let me speak in the interview entitled En Confidence / Entretien avec l’Inconnue.


Finally, the fourth book comes from a French journalist of the mainstream press, who, under a nom de plume, wonders aloud about the role and duty of the historian when faced with those things that are prescribed and proscribed by tyranny. His historical erudition and the fervour he imparts to his demonstrations are equalled only by his spirit of revolt and of hope.


On June 18, 2010 (the 70th anniversary of Charles de Gaulle’s wartime call to resistance) there will be issued, if things go according to plan, a Revisionist Manifesto (“A spectre is haunting Europe; it’s the spectre of revisionism”) and the following year will see the publication by a French historian of a revisionist work entitled Le Grand Mensonge (The Great Lie). Meanwhile, let’s salute the book which, published in May 2009, will have served as the “ice-breaker” for what Serge Thion named “the ice floe” of rigidly set history: initially placed on the Index in France, Sarkozy, Israël et les juifs is poised to become a best-seller.


The latest news is that the main French Jewish organisation, the CRIF (Conseil représentatif des institutions juives de France), is launching a new appeal in favour of censorship against what it calls “racism and anti-Semitism”, that is, first of all, what it terms “négationnisme”. It has made a request to Michèle Alliot-Marie, minister of Justice and Freedoms (sic), for surveillance to be effected on the Internet as concerns, notably, “discussion forums, chatrooms, e-mails, websites and blogs” (http://www.crif.org/index.php?page=articles_display/detail&aid=17404&artyd=2). You’ve read correctly: the CRIF is asking the police of the French Republic to open the e-mails, that is, the private correspondence of the French. What sheer panic there must be for things to have reached such an absurd state! But, in truth, why do we see such madness amongst the mighty and rich of this world in the face of the revisionists who, at their end, have no might and no money? Could it be those privileged few are starting to realise that power and wealth can do nothing here against the simple quest for historical exactitude?


One is tempted to explain this conduct on the part of the powerful by recalling that “absolute power maddens absolutely”. But this explanation is insufficient; it allows us to understand the weakness of the strong but not the strength of the weak. The weak are drawing their strength now from a sense, so to speak, that the way the rich are so decidedly overdoing things, they simply can’t be honest. The weak are right. As the investigations and analyses thoroughly attest, “the Shoah” is a historical lie that, in Palestine and elsewhere, enables the mighty to lay down their law, the masters to exploit their slaves and the rich to keep on robbing and stealing.


It’s understandable if the mighty of our day are worried for the future of both the State of Israel and the religion of “the Shoah”. It’s also understandable that a breath of hope should arise today in the camp of the humiliated and the wronged.

November 18, 2009


***


1) Jean-Marc Berlière and Franck Liaigre, L’affaire Guy Môquet / Enquête sur une mystification officielle (The Guy Môquet case: inquiry into an official mystification), Paris, Larousse, 2009 [October], 160 p., €12;

2) Various authors [15 contributors from Switzerland, France and Italy, one from Iran], “Pire que les chambres à gaz!” / Deux procès politiques au scanner (Worse than the gas chambers! Two political trials under the scanner), Editions de Cassandra [Case postale 144, CH 3960 Sierre, Switzerland], 2009 [September], VI-233 p., €25;

3) Maria Poumier, Proche des Neg’ (Close to the Neg’s), BookSurge, 2009 [October], 165 p., €12.50;

4) Hannibal, A quoi sert l’histoire? (What use is history?), Paris, DIE (Diffusion International Edition), 2009 [October], 216 p., €20.

These books can be ordered from Akribeia, 45/3, Route de Vourles, 69230 Saint Genis Laval, France (add €5 postage for one book and €6.50 for two or more). Also available from Akribeia:

Robert Faurisson, En Confidence / Entretien avec l’Inconnue, Pierre Marteau, publisher in Milan, 2009 [April], 78 p., €10;

Paul-Eric Blanrue, Sarkozy, Israël et les juifs, Oser dire, publisher in Embourg (Belgium), 3rd edition, 2009, 207 p., €16.



[1] During last January’s Israeli offensive, he sent a French navy frigate to patrol the Gaza coast and so help block “weapons smuggling” to the Palestinian resistance.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Ahmadinejad: The Black Box [of the Holocaust] should be opened

In Power, Issue No. 368 (November 1, 2009), p. 2-3, Ingrid Rimland writes: “The intrepid Iranian President denies the Holocaust and warns Europeans of the Zionists: ‘They Cling Like Ticks’ ”. Aired on IRINN, September, 2009 [See Memri’s transcription, September 18, 2009, Clip No. 2247 http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/358/2247.htm] I. Rimland goes on to write: “Following are excerpts from a speech delivered by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which aired on IRINN, September 18, 2009.”


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: Even before World War I, there was some talk [about forming] a very vicious and twisted organization to take over the entire world. Using their experience from colonialist days, they planned to take over all the nations, along with the material and spiritual resources of the world.


After World War I, exploiting the lack of vigilance of the region's peoples and of the Muslims, they turned the land of Palestine into the mandate of the old colonialism – England. During that period, the organized criminal Zionists created an atmosphere that enabled them to invade the land of Palestine. Under the guise of purchasing farms, orchards, and lands, they plundered a vast part of the land, using weapons, slaughter, and terror. With the help of the English government, and with the support of the spearheads of the English government, they turned the people into refugees.


Before World War II, the talk intensified and the activities increased. In the European countries, the very twisted show of "anti-Semitism" began. Of course, some governments and their people always hated the Jews because of the ugly conduct of some of them. They wanted to drive the Jews out of Europe. But anti-Semitism was planned mainly by some European governments and politicians, and by the Zionist network. They made hundreds of films, wrote hundreds of books, spread rumors, and conducted psychological warfare, in order to drive them away, to the land of Palestine.


Four or five years after World War II, they suddenly claimed that during that war, the Holocaust affair had taken place. In other words, according to their claims, several million Jews were burned in the crematoria. They created two slogans. The first was about the injustice suffered by the Jewish people. By means of lies, very twisted propaganda, and psychological warfare, they created the notion that the Jews suffered injustice, and, secondly, that they needed a land and an independent state. They acted so effectively that some of the world's politicians and intellectuals were also deceived and influenced.


With regard to that false injustice, I have said some things in the past four years. I do not want to repeat all these points, but I would like to talk about how deeply-rooted this "injustice" is, and how false it is. We asked them the following question: If the Holocaust that you talk about was real, why don't you allow the subject to be studied? One can freely research any issue, except for this issue, which is sealed. It is a black box, which they do not allow to be opened or reexamined. They do this in order to exploit it. We say to them: This affair, which was so important, which served as a pretext for a certain land to be occupied, for many wars to be waged, for millions to be displaced, for hundreds of thousands to be killed or wounded, for families to be destroyed, for the entire Middle East region to be living under the shadow of threats and insecurity... If this event is so important, why don't you allow it to be deciphered and opened, so that the truth and the facts about it will be revealed to all the peoples?


Today too, the most important issue in the world is Palestine. If a war breaks out in Iraq, we believe it is due to the provocation of the Zionists. If it happens in Afghanistan, it is because of their provocation. If Sudan is oppressed, it is due to Zionist seduction. We consider all the arrogant, colonialist schemes to be inspired by the Zionists.


[...]


We asked them: If the Holocaust took place – and let's suppose that it did – where did it take place, if not Europe? Who are the people who claim to have done it? The European governments. Where did antisemitism begin? In Europe. Who started it? Those European statesmen and politicians. In order to drive some of the Jews out of Europe and settle them in Palestine, the Europeans themselves started antisemitism. Until now, the [Europeans] have promoted two contradictory processes – they planned antisemitism themselves, and they support the crimes of the Zionists without reservation.


[...]


Both are intended to achieve the colonialist goals. It is all done in order to dominate our region and the world. But they claimed that [the Jews] should have their own land. If we accept this logic, and we grant this right to all ethnic groups and peoples, what will happen? In my opinion, before granting them this right, we should grant it to the red-skinned people of America. Hundreds of millions of red-skinned people lived in a vast region. They had their own culture, their own customs, and their own civilization. You invaded, you perpetrated mass killings, you slaughtered them by the millions, and you occupied their land. If we agree that there should be an independent Jewish state in Palestine, and in the lands of others – then we must accept that the land of America should be returned to the red-skinned people.


How many ethnic groups and tribes are there in Europe itself? How many claims are there? If we accept this logic, 72 independent states should be established in Europe, and countries like Russia should be torn to pieces. What would happen to the world? Would it be possible to find any safe and secure place in the world?


This logic is the foundation of insecurity and widespread wars in the world. This logic will encourage everybody to take up arms and use them to resolve problems. This is inhuman and false logic. Let's assume that we accept this logic for the Jewish people. Where should they settle? Who acted towards them with injustice? Why should they settle in Palestine? Why not America, Europe, or Canada? That way, you could support them and maintain their security, and they would have no concerns. We have no objection to [the Jews] going and living in their countries, but they want to be generous at the expense of others. Why should Palestinians pay the price? You yourselves publicly declare that you committed crimes. It should be you who are placed on trial and who pay the damages. Instead, you committed the crimes, and the Palestinians and other people of the region pay the price.


[...]


Confronting this regime and opposing Zionists are a national duty, as well as religious and Islamic duty, and a human duty. Even the people of Europe and America despise the Zionists. They hate them. They feel humiliated by the Zionists, who are a burden on them.


[...]


I believe that with the complete formation of the global Zionist network, they have seized control of the fate of the European governments, and of the US government. To the independent countries in the world, I would like to say: You should know that the influence of the Zionist network on your culture, your politics, and your economy is tantamount to a violation of your independence. They cling like ticks. The moment they gain influence, they never stop.

November 11, 2009

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Quand Céline, peu avant sa mort, se confiait à un journaliste américain

Tout récemment, dans un message adressé à un correspondant français, j’ai été amené à écrire:


Pour moi, « la trilogie allemande » (D’un château l’autre / Nord / Rigodon) constitue une épopée de l’Allemagne. C’est, je le redis, un cavalier français qui l’a écrite, un cavalier qui, en 1914, pied à terre, a été si grièvement blessé par une balle allemande que, jusqu’à la fin de son existence, il en a souffert.


Il y a évidemment là [de la part du cavalier Destouches] une attitude quasi incompréhensible pour des générations de néo-Français, soûlés au gaz d’Auschwitz et auxquels, dès l’école, on apprend à aller cracher sur les tombes du vaincu.


J’ajoutais qu’en 1960 Céline avait fait à Robert Stromberg, journaliste (juif ?) d’une revue littéraire américaine, la déclaration suivante à propos de Nord :


Ça parle de la manière dont les Allemands ont souffert pendant la guerre. Personne n’a écrit sur ce sujet… Non ! Non ! Vous êtes supposé ne pas mentionner ça, la manière dont ils ont souffert… Restez tranquille… Chut ! (Il met le doigt sur les lèvres). Ce n’est pas bien de parler de ça… Pas un mot… Non ! Seul l’autre côté a souffert ! Chut !


C’est en relisant l’un des Cahiers Céline que j’ai redécouvert cette interview et, en particulier, ce dernier passage (Cahiers Céline 2, NRF / Gallimard, 1976, p. 172-177 ; p. 174). La traduction en était signée d’Henri Godard qui écrivait : « Cette interview, parue en anglais pendant l’été de 1961, semble dater de l’été précédent. Stromberg, précisant dans le texte d’introduction que Céline s’adresse à sa femme en français, donne à penser que dans l’interview elle-même [Céline] s’exprimait directement en anglais. » Pour ma part, je me demande si l’interview ne daterait pas plutôt du début de l’année 1961 puisque, aussi bien, on y lit : « J’ai presque 67 ans – en mai j’aurai 67 ans ». Né le 27 mai 1894 (« je suis né en mai, c’est moi le printemps »), Céline est mort le 1er juillet 1961.


La traduction française comportant des coupures, qui sont d’ailleurs signalées au lecteur, j’ai pensé qu’il serait intéressant de retrouver dans son intégralité l’article de Stromberg (« A Talk with L.-F. Céline », Evergreen Review [New York], vol. V, n° 19, juillet-août 1961, p. 102-107). J’en ai reçu le texte grâce à l’obligeance de correspondants étrangers, dont l’un est le révisionniste américain Michael Hoffman, un fervent célinien. Les portions qui ont été traduites en français par H. Godard sont ici reproduites en gras.


Evergreen Review 19, 1961 ROBERT STROMBERG


A TALK WITH LOUIS-FERDINAND CELINE


It is a very strange feeling, to be seeing Celine. Celine the terrible! Celine the outraged! Celine the put upon! Celine the Fou!


Celine lives in Meudon, on the fringe of Paris. He lives in a three-story nineteenth-century wood and mortar house with his wife Lucette Almanzor and about half-a-dozen dogs, as near as I could count. His wife, he says, is the owner of the house.


"I thought you were coming tomorrow… I wasn't expecting you… I haven't prepared… I thought tomorrow… come in, come in."


Those were his first words. He addressed his wife in French, telling her to take my coat, to get me a chair. He is a large man – but he is bent. He moved slowly, a shuffle – as if he were too weak to do anything else – to the other side of a large room that seemed to be a combination kitchen, dining area and writing room. He sat down at a large round table, pushing to one corner, and some of it to the floor, piles of books, papers and magazines and made room for us to talk.


"What is it you want? Who is this for? I don't want scandal! I've had enough."


When I satisfied him finally, he settled more comfortably in his seat.


"There is a good deal of interest in you in America," I began.


He dismissed this with a blow of air and a wave of his hand. "What interest? Who is interested? People are interested in Marlene Dietrich and insurance-that's all!"


"How have you been feeling, are you still practicing medicine?"


"No, no more, I gave it up six months ago, I'm not well enough."


"Do the people here know you as Celine?" (Celine's real name is Louis-Ferdinand Destouches, M.D. [Docteur])


"They know me well enough to be unpleasant about it."


He gave no further explanation.


"What do you do with most of your time?"


"I'm around the house always… the dogs… I have things to do… I keep busy… I don't see anyone, I don't go out… I'm busy."


"Are you writing?"


"Yes, yes, I'm writing… I have to stay alive, so I write… No! I hate it. I have always hated it… it is the most terrible thing for me to do… I never liked it, but I'm good at it… it does not interest me in the least, the things I write – but I have to do it. It is torture, it is the hardest job in the world."


His face is bony, gaunt, and it is gray; and his eyes are terrible things to look into; he was angry at the thought of still having to work.


"I am almost 67 – in May I shall be 67… to do this torture, the hardest job in the world…"


Gallimard, his publisher, recently brought out his latest book, North. "It is about how the Germans suffered during the war," Celine said. "No one has written about that… no! no! you're not supposed to mention that, how they suffered… keep quiet… shhh!" He put his finger to his lips for quiet. "It isn't nice to talk about that… be still… NO! only the other side suffered… shh!"


Among Celine's books translated into English are Death on the Installment Plan [Mort à crédit, 1936], Journey to the End of the Night [Voyage au bout de la nuit, 1932] and Guignol's Band. Celine had been accused by many responsible people of having written inflammatory and anti-Semitic articles and pamphlets during the German occupation of France. They appeared in a number of French newspapers and were reportedly reprinted by the Germans for consumption in Germany. His books, however, were banned in Nazi Germany. As a result of these accusations he was forced to leave the country. He went to Denmark where he lived for six years, but spent two of those years in a Danish jail.


"Why did you go to Denmark?"


"I had money there. I had nothing here."


"Were you forced to leave France… did the government tell you to leave… did you leave of your own account?"


"They tore up my apartment in Montparnasse… [Montmartre]"


"Who?"


"Madmen, that's who… they tore everything I owned, everything I had… I was out at the time, with my wife, when we came back the apartment was destroyed… ruined… everything murdered… I went to Denmark."


A few days following my talk with Celine I met a former member of the French resistance movement who happened to have been in on the raiding party Celine had spoken of. I was assured by this man that if CeIine had been home when the raiders struck, he almost certainly would have been murdered.


"Why were you in jail in Denmark?"


"I was a criminal of war."


"Were you accused of collaboration?"


"I said criminal of war! Don't you understand! Criminal of war! I was not accused of collaboration… I was a criminal of war! Is that clear!"


"You were supposed to have written things against the Jews."


"I wrote nothing against the Jews… all I said was that 'the Jews are pushing us into war,' that's all. They had a fight with Hitler and it was none of our business, we shouldn't have mixed into it. The Jews have had a war of lamentation for two thousand years and now Hitler has given them more lamentations. I have nothing against the Jews… it is not logical to say anything good or bad about five million people."


That was the end of the discussion on this subject. Celine came back to France in 1950, after the six unhappy years in Denmark.


Even when he came back a great cry was heard from many quarters of the French press and from many government officials who demanded that he be further punished. Nothing was done officially, however, but from Celine's own inferences, his neighbors made it quite plain what they thought of him.


I had the feeling, sitting in Celine's kitchen, watching and listening to him, that in spite of all he said, in spite of all his natural crankiness and apparent loathing of personal contacts, he was pleased to have someone come to him, someone listen to him and to ask questions of him; to recall the past, to show that he was not forgotten – people were still reading Death on the Installment Plan and Journey to the End of the Night.


He was being discussed in spite of all the difficulties and the hatreds and foul taste he left with many. If there is any kind of spirit left in him at all, and it seems doubtful, it is a spirit which says "I know what's the proper music… I know the right tune… they hear nothing…"


"You once said that you couldn't read modern books, that they were 'stillborn, unfinished, not written…' Do you read anything now?"


"I read the Encyclopedia and Punch, that's all. Punch is not funny, they try to be funny but they are not."


"Is there anyone whom you consider to be a worthwhile writer today?" Before I could suggest anyone he snapped, "Who, Hemingway? He is a faker, an amateur… the French realists of the 19th century are a hundred times better." And he quickly rattled off a number of French writers, so quick that I did not get them.


"Dos Passos had a good style, that's all."


"How about Camus?" I asked innocently.


"Camus!" I thought he would throw the vase at me.


"Camus!" he repeated, astonished.


"He is nothing… a moralist… always telling people what is right and what is wrong – what they should do and what they should not do… get married, don't get married… that is for the church to do… he is nothing!"


Then Celine volunteered the English novelist Lawrence Durrell.


"A whole book about how a girl kisses, the different ways she can kiss and what this means… is that writing? That is not writing, it is nothing, a waste. I never had that in my books, my books are style, nothing else, just style. That is the only thing to write for.


"Who knows how many have tried to copy my style… but they can't. They can't keep it up for four hundred pages, just try it, they can't do it… that's all I have, just style, nothing else. There are no messages in my books, that is for the church!"

He blew the air and waved his hand, dismissing it all.


"No, my books will soon be forgotten, they mean nothing, books don't change anything, it means nothing… I have been everything, a cowboy in America, a bootlegger in London, a shark, everything in fact. I have worked since I was eleven. I know what it's all about… I know the French language. I can write, that's all.


"Listen to the conversation in the street… it has nothing to do with books… it is always 'Then I said to him… and he said to me and then I said' – actors, that's all. Everybody wants applause… the bishop says 'yesterday I spoke before two thousand people, tomorrow I will speak before three thousand'. That's religion! Look at the Pope – when people see the Pope they want to eat him! He is so fat – he eats too much, he drinks too much… actors, that's all they are! People are interested in insurance and good times – that's all.


Sex! That's [what] all the fight is about… everybody wants to eat everybody else. That is why they are afraid of the Blacks. He is strong! Full of strength! He will take over. That is why they are afraid of him… it is his time now, there are too many of them, he is showing his muscle… the white man is afraid… he is soft. He has been too long on top… the smell stinks to the roof, and the Black, he feels it, he smells it, and he is waiting for the take-over… it won't be long now.


"It is time for the yellow color… the black and the white will mix and the yellow will dominate, that's all. It is a biological fact, when black and white mix the yellow comes out strongest, that is the only thing… in two hundred years someone will look at a statue of a white man and ask if such a strange thing ever existed… someone will answer, 'No, it must have been painted on.'


"That is the answer! The white man is a thing of the past… he is already finished, extinct! It is time for something new. They all talk here, but they know nothing… let them go over there and then talk, it is another song there, I was in Africa, I know what it is, it's very strong, they know where they are going… the white man buried his head too long in the womb… he let the church corrupt him, everybody was taken in… you're not allowed to say anything like that… the Pope is watching, be careful… say nothing! heaven forbid… NO! It is a sin… you'll be crucified… keep it still… be quiet… be a nice dog… don't bark… don't bite… here is your pap… shut up!


"There is nothing inside them… they are like bulls, wave something to distract them; tits, patriotism, the church, anything in fact, and they will jump. It doesn't take much, it is very easy… they want always to be distracted… nothing matters… life is very easy."


For what seemed a long time, Celine said nothing. Finally, I said that I had never met a woman who was not sickened by his books, they can never finish them.


"Of course, of course, what did you expect… my books are not for women… they have their own tricks… bed… money… their own little games… my books are not their tricks… they know how to go about it…


"No, I don't see anyone anymore… yes, my daughter is living, she lives in Paris, I never see her. She has five children. I have never seen them." A long silence again. And then "… There is no doubt – I am a persecuted man… I am a leper." Silence. "You open the door and an enemy enters…" Silence. "I have to quit you now… I have to write." He walked me to the door.

4 novembre 2009