I've titled this article "The Hatred of the Columnist." The French columnist—because it truly is a French affliction—is such that he invents himself as master of time, of the world, and above all, of how it's doing. It's unbearable. Purge the columnists and pluck out the buds!
All these columnists gathered together amount to nothing more than a pub talk. With references.
I'll take the opening of France Culture's morning program as an example. For 30 years, I've listened to France Culture every morning. I'm what you might call a France Culture aficionado. Jean Lebrun's "Culture Matin" was part of my DNA. I loved it until its political correctness and partisanship became glaringly obvious with the Yugoslav Wars. Fortunately, he abandoned the ship he seemed to be single-handedly sinking.
But whatever anyone says, and even though this show ended up resembling the Titanic, Culture Matin was indeed a France Culture program—I mean, a France Culture program before the Laure Adler earthquake. Before France Culture became a subsidiary of Les Inrockuptibles. Before France Culture became synonymous with nothing but news. Or worse, current events.
Pierre Assouline, following Lebrun, tried his hand at interviewing a guest. It takes time to interview someone. It takes time to feel comfortable, to develop an idea in front of everyone, and so on. Unless you're interviewing a politician. Oh yes, that's right, we have a lot of politicians on France Culture in the mornings now. Jean Lebrun was a busybody, and towards the end of his tenure, he forgot to read his notes or his guests' books, or both. He succumbed to a prideful narcissism. And his "Court-Bouillon" program remained a draft. But Pierre Assouline stayed true to the "Culture Matin" concept and was eager to help the guest develop. After Assouline, everything fell apart. Apparently, some people at France Culture thought you fell asleep listening to him. And then, he wasn't part of the establishment, not a union member, so all of that obviously got on their nerves. After Assouline, news programs sprang up every thirty minutes, a real power grab. The 7:30 a.m. news ended around 7:40 a.m. at best. Before that, we had a column by a woman (parity, my good sir!), and after that, the international press review, a kind of verbal joust that Cécile de Kervasdoué seems to be waging with herself, but especially with two viruses omnipresent on the airwaves: anti-Catholicism and anti-paternalism. In the hate rankings, anti-Catholicism and anti-paternalism come right after Nicolas Sarkozy, which says a lot about the vulgarity in which this era revels. And the newspaper journalists are having a field day in the same vein, proving, moreover, just how much the government controls the media (1). The whole thing ends around 7:45 a.m. at best. The guest has ten or twelve minutes to think he'll actually say something before Olivier Duhamel, the epitome of political correctness, chimes in. All that time devoted to current events. In proportion to his speaking time, the guest becomes almost a commentator. The only kind we'd want to keep.
As if the news were moving so fast… As if the news demanded that we move so fast!
Jean Lebrun should have ended up on France Inter, like his younger counterpart, Nicolas Demorand, who completely transformed France Culture's morning show into a more conventional format like those found on France Inter or RTL—and then, ironically, moved to France Inter himself! Of course, the door was opening wider and wider, slamming shut everywhere, so much so that they even had a presenter from Canal Plus take over. Would anyone have ever imagined sinking so low? I, who was the first to condemn the late Lebrun and his Bosnian sidekick, would have begged him to come back if I'd been threatened with a Canal Plus presenter every morning on France Culture!
From the frying pan into the fire! But ever since Laure Adler, we've developed a taste for this kind of fragmentation. The listener mustn't get bored, they must be kept awake, connected to the world, and to prevent them from changing the channel, we change the channel for them. Incorrigible leftists who can't stand freedom. Incorrigible leftists who think that man must always be educated. Moral liberalism also hides something… Liberalism always hides something, whether moral or economic. It hides the end of humanity.
We should be able to say no. We should start a petition to bring Antoine Spire back to France Culture. Why? Because Spire was the only journalist on the station who could interview Octavio Paz, for example. Of course, Laure Adler could conduct a seductive interview, as only she knows how. But no one can interview Octavio Paz like Antoine Spire, pushing him to his limits, extracting what the great author doesn't want to say, doing his job as a journalist with talent. But to do your job as a journalist with talent, you have to have it. I don't mean to be mean here. That's not the point. There are enough pseudo-comedians who spend their time being mean for no reason other than to make the crackpots who populate the internet laugh, giggling like children in a schoolyard… But isn't that the norm now? The constant settling of scores.
There's still talent at France Culture. Voinchet is one example, Couturier another, Angelier and so on, and some are even commentators who would do better to put in some work to create a real program. Inserting a commentary should also correspond to a specific need, to develop an interview in one way or another. "Culture Matin" has become France Culture's morning show, and the commoners have taken over! It's the permanent reign of commentary on commentary. Most newspapers or magazines are already commentaries in themselves (what newspaper editors often call the added value of print media). We comment on the commentary. It's the reign of the local café. It's certainly not the Agora that some would have us believe because there are no exchanges. The worst offender is the political commentator. Hearing about Nicolas Sarkozy or Ségolène Royal every morning, all morning long, is vulgar. And again, we won't even try to be exhaustive. Inviting any writer, any painter, any artist (while avoiding variety artists) is never vulgar; their gaze will always imprint a vision of the world.
All these commentators polish their speeches so much, get so caught up in the importance of them, what can you say? We wouldn't want to cause too much pain here.
I focused on France Culture and its morning show, but everyone who listens to their own radio station knows that the commentator has taken center stage. They're there to synthesize, to explain, to intelligently the work for the listener. In my mind, the listener, especially the France Culture listener, doesn't want this synthetic syncretism; they're not averse to intellectual stimulation. But in fact, it's just the life of the modern world continuing here, as if nothing had happened. We're constantly bombarded with what to think, say, and do. We're treated like children; and that's why standards are lowered. Because it's easier to educate by lowering standards, because egalitarianism continues to reign.
Leave a comment