Free Essays

The impact of Climatic Change on the Decline of Black French Truffle


1.2 Background

Truffles grow under a very sensitive environment; they naturally occur in the Mediterranean region of Europe. This has been a mysterious crop grown under a veil of secrecy for years in this region of Europe (Ruffles Estate, 2013). This crop is regarded as a delicacy and has sustained its appeal to food lovers all around the world. Truffle are actually a unique edible mushroom that grows underground also regarded as a fungus and is considered a delicacy complimenting the best foods worldwide. Its aroma as well as flavour is commonly described as unique (Ruffles Estate, 2013). The most preferred quality in truffle market is the black French truffle also known as Tuber melanosporum is one of the most expensive varieties in the market and occurs naturally in parts of France also geographical referred to as the Mediterranean basin (Jolly, 2012). However, the Tuber melanosporum is becoming scarcer, and there is a common idea that this scarcity is due to global change of the climate (Jolly, 2012). This has led to a sharp price increase of this rare commodity, but most of all is the concern of the gradual decline in its availability. Europe, and more so, the Mediterranean basin has seen a steady decline of this rare species over the last 40 years (FAIR, 2000). This decline has been both in quantity, as well as quality, however this paper will examine the former.

1.3 Project Aims and Objectives

This project’s principle aim is to collect and analyse data using both quantitative and qualitative methods to understand the increasing decline in the production of black truffles from France also referred to as Perigord truffle and Tuber melanosporum. In this regard, the project will adopt cause-effect deductions, hypothesis testing, and observations to develop understanding this decline in truffle production and in particular whether it affects the natural occurring or cultivated truffles. A secondary aim of this project considers the reasons for the decline of production of the black French truffle. This project, through careful analysis of related research acknowledges the fact that there is a general decline in natural occurring truffle and that this decline is associated with various factors. The study seeks to identify the main reason for the decline in production and harvesting of black French truffles. The study also aims at providing recommendations to address the decline in truffle production. This study will be documented accurately in order to provide subsequent researchers with all the information necessary to further the development in this field of study.

Literature Review

In consideration of Truffles biological and ecological growth and development Smith and Read (1997), assert that root symbionts are most significant in checking the ecosystem function in most temperate forests of the world, and this includes the rare ectomycorrhizal fungi. Their main function is the provision of the much needed trace minerals to the truffles as well as protection from drought, disease causing agents and pests (Garbaye, 2000; Govindarajulu et al., 2005). Smith and Read (1997) further add that truffles reciprocate provision of food and protection from disease with provision of carbon to the micro-organisms. The ecology in these temperate regions is complexly interconnected, the mushrooms that are produced by the micro-organisms and are significant sources of food for the animal populations in the forests (Carey et al., 2000).

However, according to FAIR (2000), the black truffles production in Europe has dramatically declined over the last half century, this is both in quality as well as quantity. Furthermore, efforts have been made to increase the vegetation that promote truffle growth, but the decline has persisted. This trend had been identified earlier by Cherfas (1991), and in his research, he claimed that the decline had begun over 100 years ago in the natural habitat, in the temperate forests. The cause of this decline in the growth and development of black truffles has been the subject of inquiries and research. There is still little explanation for these long term decline in both natural and cultivated truffle.Research is needed to help understand this decline, the real difficulty lay in understanding the underground microbial since experimental environments fail to match the necessary real world conditions (Macdonald et al., 2005). As a matter of fact Lamon et al (2009) agree that there is scarcity of much needed extended observations of quantitative data generated from natural the natural setting.

Chevalier et al. ( 2001), assert that both Tuber melanosporum and Tuber magnatum are the most valuable species in the market. These varieties are also the endangered species at the brink of extinction. Hall et al. (2001), in their findings explain that geographically, Tuber melanosporum naturally occurs in France, Italy, Bulgaria and certain areas in Europe. Martin, F. et al (2010), specifically examines the decline in the production of Tuber melanosporum, however, he also adds that they naturally occur in the Mediterranean habitat. Sourzat (2002), in the french publication, explains that T. melanosporum’s fruits best in its natural setting characterized by rocks, forests that are open that are generally warm with mild winter seasons, as well, as regular precipitation in the summers. In addition, best production is expected on the slopes where the produce receives protection from excessive cold and dry wind. According to Hall et al. (2001), research reveals that truffieres grown in rainy areas with lower temperatures and have not yielded any truffles. In fact, truffles of the T. melanosporum species grew best in climatic regions with between 600-1500 mm average precipitations, average temperatures of 18-21 degree Celsius in the summer and the winter, an average of 1-8 degree Celsius (Zambonelli & Di Munno, 1992). It seems areas that continuously have frozen ground in the cold seasons are not suited for the growth of T. melanosporum because the fruits spoil when frozen.

Fontana and Bonfante (1971) in their publication introduce the idea of growing truffle fungi in an artificial environment. They explain that this idea was to supplement the deficit of the produce collected in the natural habitat. This method was developed back in the 1970s indication that the decline of truffle had already been the cause of concern in the market. By the turn of the millennium, truffle grown in orchards accounted for half of the truffle produced around the world (Hall et al., 2003). It also important to note that a majority of these orchards are developed within truffles natural geographic areas.

Having highlighted the required natural habitats for the truffles, and in reference to their decline, there are several suggestions based on various research on this decline. Cherfas (1991) traces back the history of this decline by asserting that the number of mushroom species gathered in every foray dropped from 72 to 38 between 1912 and 1982 in the Netherlands. In the same publication, it is revealed that chanterelles in central European market in mid 1970s were found to have reduced in size 50 times than those in 1950s. Hall et al.(2003) in their publication reveal that, by the 20th Century, T. melanosporum in the French market had dropped to 2000 tons annually and a further decline was witnessed by the turn of the 21st Century by 150 tons. It is true that the truffle harvesting in France has been an affair by a small number of people who mainly collected them from their natural setting. As seen in the previous paragraph, there is an increase in production of truffles in orchards as a supplement to the dwindling natural supply. In a later publication Hall et al., (2007), affirm that the decline in natural truffle harvest has persisted and is at an all time low of between 12 to 150 tonnes per year from the 1000 to 2000 tonnes in the 1990s. The steady decline in the production of truffle has led to the rise in price per unit over the last decade with an increase in demand (Lee, 2008).

The decline of French Truffle has been a point of concern in the scientific research circles with some as Hall et al. (2003) in their study, pointing at water and air pollution, in addition to other factors including, the dynamism in forest structure and the lack of knowledge in traditional gathering as a result of world wars. Similar findings have been published in a report by Amaranthus (2007) citing destruction of truffle natural habitat, urban development, among the reasons for the decline. Such factors are most likely to continue reducing the production figures and specifically those in their natural settings (Amaranthus, 2007; Hall et al., 2007). Garvey and Cooper (2004), in their report further allude that this decline in natural habitat has resulted in the production of truffles on cultivated farms where the trees or truffieres are inoculated. However, these remedies cannot beat the native oak and hazel vegetation as the major producer of the French black truffles in France.

In the recent years, the decline in truffle has been experienced in many regions of the world and especially the fast declining French black truffle or the Tuber melanosporum. However, it appears that most researchers are turning to climate as the main culprit. Buntgen et al.(2012) in their study on drought induced truffle decline explains the effect of climate on the production of truffle. They claim in their research that the effect of climate can either be directly or through the truffles symbiotic host vegetation. This literature review delves much into this article because of its relevance to the topic. Buntgen et al. (2012), provide in depth review on the yearly inventory of regional collection of truffle from Spain consisting of Aragon, France mainly a Perigord or Tuber melanosporum, and Italy a combination of Piedmont and Umbria. In this analysis, they indicate that the change in truffle production between 1970 and 2006 was similar between the species from Spain and France that is Aragon and Perigord respectively. Their analysis also found a lack of similarities in changes of production between Perigord and Piedmont–Umbria from France and Italy respectively. This observation from the regional-scale coherency is consistent with Sourzat (2002) observation that western mediterranean basin is the home of truffle fruiting. In addition, the harvests of Aragon and Perigord have revealed significant correlation, this the authors relate to the similarity in summer precipitation, whereas lack of correlations was found between Piedmont and Umbria production and precipitation (Buntgen et al., 2012). The difference in levels of sensitivity here is understandable because the Piedmont and Umbria experience double summer precipitation than Spanish Aragon with Perigord ranging in between (Zambonelli & Di Munno, 1992). The average of the three, truffle production outcomes, their regional mean correlated both positively and negatively at higher significant level of 99.9 percent with between June and August rainfall totals as well as maxima temperatures.

The authors, Buntgen et al.(2012), posits in their analysis that both the natural and the cultivated truffles in the Mediterranean are seasonal and are subjected to the season between November and February a claim supported by Mello et al., (2006). In addition, this is dependent on the summer condition with rainy and cold weather instrumental in the fruit body development as supported by Gallot, (1999) in his publication more than a decade prior to Buntgen et al., (2012). Buntgen et al. (2012) postulate that given the relationship between fungi and host vegetation, there is bound to be competition for moisture due to the amount of rainfall in this season and this correlate significantly at 99.9 percent level with the yield. Fischer and Schar, (2010) present a suite of a dozen climatic models leading to rise in mean temperatures and decrease in rainfall totals for the Mediterranean region until the end of the 21st Century. This is indicative of the increased summer evapotranspiration. It is interesting to note that the simulated southwest European climatic conditions representing the last ten years are consistent to the drop in the production of truffle harvest (Buntgen et al., 2012). Nonetheless, Buntgen et al. (2012), state that it is unclear whether the truffle will reach tipping points as a result of the projected shift in climate, this is regard to their physiological and biogeochemical fruit body development. In their assumption, the expected or projected summer dryness will result in a sustained decline, in truffle yield, while the regions north of Alpine arc are most likely to provide suitable habitat for the truffle due to their calcareousness. Based on their observations, Buntgen et al.(2012), are inclined to the idea that climatic change and more so reduced summer precipitation and increased temperatures are the cause for truffle yields in the Mediterranean basin the natural habitat of T. melanosporum. Mello et al. (2006), in their analysis claim that the reduction in future summer rainfall coupled with summer aridity will result in drought resistant strain of T. melanosporum within its natural setting or distribution range. Samils, et al, (2008) in their research predict that the expected drop in truffle harvest in the Mediterranean region, will have a significant impact not only on the local tourism, but the agriculture as well as the global prices of this valuable commodity. This is most likely to increase the value of other varieties with artificial metabolism and not specific to the requirements of their ecological niche as the T. melanosporum (Mello et al., 2006;Gallot, 1999). This might see an increase in T. aestivum cultivation in areas where traditionally T. melanosporum was predominant as well as an increase in demand of truffle from non-traditional T. melanosporum producing regions outside Europe (Buntgen et al., 2012).

Splivallo et al. (2012), in their analysis of the Burgundy truffle, suggest that the change in climatic conditions that were said to have begun a century ago has no impact on the current burgundy truffle distribution. However, they concur with Buntgen et al.(2012) on the impact of climatic change on species with narrower ranges such as the French black truffle, Perigord or Tuber melanosporum, and Italy a combination of Piedmont and Umbria. They support this by claiming that if the climate fails to restrict the distribution of these two species, then even a slight temperature increase in northern Europe as predicted by Buntgen et al. (2012) might result in its northern expansion. They confirm what Chevalier et al.(2001) had outlined that rainfall, soil composition are also factors that contribute to the decline in the production of Perigord. Splivallo et al. (2012), concur with Buntgen et al.(2012) assertion that other options will be needed to avert the looming shortage of this truffle species, success cultivation lies in orchard farming as a change from the current empirical practices. They claim that cultivation of truffle in a bid to mitigate the effects of climate change which is a major cause of the decline should be based on scientific evidence. Therefore, the rise in temperature, in its self, will not be sufficient for the shift of truffle production in the northern European region (Splivallo et al., 2012).

Methodology and Procedure

3.1 Research Design

This study will adopt a mixed methods research design. This process entails collecting and analysing data using both quantitative and qualitative methods to understand the research problem comprehensively. When both qualitative and quantitative methods are combined in research, they supplement each other allowing a comprehensive analysis of the research problem (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). According to Charles & Mertler (2002), quantitative methods deal with numerical data using cause-effect deductions, hypothesis testing, and observations to develop an understanding of the research issue. On the other hand, qualitative methods require the researcher to develop a complete picture of the research issues by conducting an in-depth analysis of words, as well as, compiled reports by the study participants. In this approach, the researcher adopts a constructivist approach to have a complete understanding of the problem centred on different contextual aspects (Charles & Mertler, 2002). In the mixed research methods, the uses pragmatic philosophy by affirming that truth is what works. Therefore, mixed methods integrate both text and numerical data to give a clear overview of the research problem. In this regard, this study will use surveys and interviews since they are the most popular data collection research tools (Creswell, 2002). In the first step of data collection, a web-based survey will be used, and data analysed using discriminant function. The qualitative method will involve semi-structured interviews to collect textual data from people to regarding the decline of Truffles.

3.2 Research Sample

The target population sample will be about 1,200 environmentalists and hoteliers in France regarding the decline of truffles. These individuals are people who have been working in the hotel and environmental sectors in France. For the first quantitative stage of the research, a convenience sample will be chosen comprising individuals studying truffles decline, locals, and environmentalists, as well as, hoteliers. For the qualitative phase of the research, a smaller sample will be used to understand the main issue regarding the decline of French truffle (Creswell, 2002, p. 194). This is to ensure the selected participants will give appropriate answers to the research questions. Besides, for the qualitative part of the research, participants will be notified of their selection for voluntary follow-up individual interviews. Given the use of mixed methods research in the study, selection of participants for the qualitative part will rely on the outcomes of the quantitative stage. The use of this approach will ensure the researcher gets a multidimensional outlook of the research problem. For this research, the participants will be chosen centred on the statistically significant difference outcomes of the discriminant function analysis.

3.3 Data Collection

For the quantitative phase of the research, a cross-sectional survey will be used; this implies that statistics will be gathered at one point in time (McMillan, 2000). The survey used for this research will be of different formats including multiple choices, yes/no questions, self-evaluation items, and open-ended questions. The questionnaire will comprise twenty four questions divided equally into six sections. The first section will contain questions regarding truffles and the participant’s understanding of truffles measured on a 7-point Likert scale. The second part will evaluate the participants’ awareness regarding the decline of truffles using a 7-point scale. The third part will provide information regarding the factors participants believe to cause a decline in truffles. The current issues regarding management of truffles will constitute the fourth part while the fifth segment will provide data answering how ecological factors influence truffles survival. Demographic questions will be in the sixth part of the survey regarding data about the participants’ age, residency, gender, and employment among others. Besides, the final question in the survey will be open-ended asking for additional information about truffles decline in France. The survey will be web-based accessible through a URL address given to the participants.

For the qualitative method, in-depth semi-structured face-to-face interviews will be used to collect data. Half of the research sample will be interviewed regarding the research question. Historical texts will be further used to validate the data collected from the interviews. The interviews will include twenty open-ended questions pilot-tested before the interviews. The interviews questions will be formulated based on the results from the quantitative method. During the interview, the participants will be debriefed to obtain reliable information for the interview questions though, they will be issued with the questions prior to the interviews. The interviews will be tape recorded with the participants’ consent and a copy of the transcript emailed to them after the interview. The respondents will also be allowed to review their answers for the interview transcripts to ascertain their correctness.

3.4 Data Analysis

Prior to the statistical analysis of the survey results, the data will be screened on both univariate and multivariate levels. This will help the research detect any multicollinearity in the collected data. Any data that shows a high probability in another category will be excluded during the analysis since they may give a poor model fit (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2000). The research’s data screening will entail descriptive statistics for the variables, linearity and homoscedasticity, normality, multivariate outliers, multicollinearity and singularity. The descriptive statistics will be tabulated, and a frequency’s analysis conducted to determine the validity of the survey questions. The discriminant function analysis will be used to determine the proportion by which the variables differ, and classify the functions into predictable groups. The results will then be reported in the form of discussion. Nonetheless, all the statistical analyses will be conducted using Statistical Package for Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 11.0.

In most qualitative research, data collection and analysis progress concurrently. For the qualitative analysis, data collected from the interviews will be coded and analysed for premises using the Qualitative Software and Research (QSR) N6 for qualitative data analysis. Furthermore, a visual data display will be used to identify the relationship in the data collected from the interviews. Data analysis for this phase of the research will involve creating a comprehensive description of the results; the researcher situates the cases in its context to make the case descriptions, and premises related to particular activities in the study’s outcomes (Creswell & Maitta, 2002). The researcher will construe the meaning of the results and describe them in the discussion section of the research proposal.


Amaranthus, M., 2007. Independent Truffle Expert’s Report in Product Disclosure Statement for

the Oak Valley Truffle Project. Oak Valley Project.

Buntgen, U. et al., 2012. Drought-induced decline in Mediterranean truffle harvest. Nature

Climate Change, 2, pp.827-29.

Carey, A.B., Colgan, W., Trappe, J.M. & Molina, R., 2000. Effects of forest management on

truffle abundance and squirrel diets. Northwest Science , 76, pp.148–57.

Charles, C.M. & Mertler, C.A., 2002. Introduction to educational research. 4th ed. Boston, MA:

Allyn and Bacon.

Cherfas, J., 1991. Disappearing mushrooms: Another mass extinction?. Science, pp.254: 1448.

Chevalier, G., Gregori, G., Frochot, H. & Zambonelli, A., 2001. The cultivation of the Burgundy

truffle. In Proc Second Intl Conf on Edible Mycorrhizal Mushrooms. Christchurch: Crop & Food Research Limited. pp.1-12.

Creswell, J.W., 2002. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative approaches to research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson Education.

Creswell, J.W. & Maitta, R., 2002. Qualitative research. In N. Salkind, ed. Handbook of research

design and social measurement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. pp.143-84.

FAIR, 2000. Improvement of the organoleptic quality of European truffles (EUROTRUFFE).

Cooperative Research Measures.

Fischer, E.M. & Schar, C., 2010. Nature. Geoscience, 3, pp.398–403.

Fontana, A. & Bonfante, P., 1971. Mycorrhizal synthesis between Tuber brumale Vitt.and Pinus

nigra Arnold. Allionia, 17, pp.15-18.

Gallot, G., 1999. La truffe. INRA.

Garbaye, J., 2000. The role of ectomycorrhizal symbiosis in the resistance of forests to water

stress. Outlook on Agriculture , 29, pp.63-69.

Garvey, D. & Cooper, P., 2004. Increasing the productivity of truffieres in Tasmania. RIRDC.

Govindarajulu, M. et al., 2005. Nitrogen transfer in the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Nature

, 435, pp.819-23.

Hall, I.R., Brown, G.T. & Zamboneli, A., 2007. Taming the Truffle. The History Lore and

Science of the Ulimate Mashroom. Timber Press.

Hall, I., Byars, J. & Brown, G., 2001. The Black Truffle: Its History, Uses and Cultivation.

Christchurch: New Zealand Institute for Crop & Food Research Limited.

Hall, I., Yun, W. & Amicucci, A., 2003. Cultivation of edible ectomycorrhizal mushrooms.

Trends in Biotechnology, 21, pp.433–438.

Jolly, D., 2012. $1,200 a Pound, Truffles Suffer in the Heat. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 2 December 2013].

Lamon, L. et al, 2009. Environmental Science Technology, 43, pp.5818–5824.

Lee, B., 2008. Taking Stock of the Australian Truffle Industry. Barton: Canprint.

Macdonald, R.W., Harner, T. & Fyfe, 2005. Macdonald, R. W., Harner, T. & Fyfe, J. Sci. Total

Environ. J. Sci. Total Environ., 342, pp.5–86.

Martin, F. et al, 2010. Tuber melanosporum. Nature , 464, pp.1033–38.

McMillan, J.H., 2000. Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. 3rd ed. New

York: Addison-Wesley Longman.

Mello, A., Murat, C. & Bonfante, P., 2006. FEMS Microbiol.. Lett, 260, pp.1–8.

Ruffles Estate, 2013. An Internationally Recognised Gourmet Experience. [Online] Ruffles

Estate Available at: HYPERLINK “” [Accessed 2 December 2013].

Samils, et al, 2008. Econ. Bot., 62, pp.331–40.

Smith, S. & Read, D.J., 1997. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. London: Academic Press.

Sourzat, P., 2002. Guide pratique de trufficulture. Station d’experimentation sur la truffe. Le

Montat: Lycee professionnel agricole et viticole de Cahors.

Splivallo, R. et al., 2012. Is climate change altering the geographic distribution of truffles. Front

Ecol Environ, 10, pp.461–62.

Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S., 2000. Using multivariate statistics. New York: Allyn & Bacon.

Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C., 2003. Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social

sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Zambonelli, A. & Di Munno, R., 1992. Indagine sulla possibilita di diffusione dei

rimboschimenti con specie tartufigene: aspetti tecnico-colturali ed economici. Ministero dell’Agricoltura e delle Foreste.

Free Essays

With reference to the headscarf debate in France, analyze the extent to which laicite has played a major role in the French law 2004-228.


On March 15th, 2004 the government of French Republic passed a law that banned the wearing of “conspicuous signs” of religious affiliation in public schools (Bowen, 2007). Whilst this law affected Jewish skullcaps, large crosses, Sikh turbans, many scholars (i.e. Wing and Smith, Tarhan) believe that its main purpose was to ban the wearing of the headscarves, known also as hijab by young Muslim girls. Currently there are approximately 5 million Muslims living in France (CIA, 2012). The majority of them are the immigrants from former French colonies in North and West Africa. Muslims constitute 5-10% of the French population, while Islam is the second largest religion in France (Tarhan, 2011). Hence, the law from 2004 led to objections and protests amongst French Muslims. They regarded the decision of French government as a sign of discrimination and violation of religious freedom in France (Wing and Smith, 2006). French government, in turn, emphasized that French secularism (known also as laicite), assuming separation between state and religion, was a main reason standing behind its decision (Astier, 2004)). Until nowadays the French law 2004-228 is very controversial. The supporters of this law believe that a ban on religious symbols confirmed a secular character of French Republic and defended French national identity. They also postulate that a ban contributed to a greater equality amongst women and men within Muslim society. The opponents, in turn, emphasize a largely symbolic character of the ban, as it affected only Muslim girls attending public schools and did not apply to Muslim women on the streets or university students. The opponents often also rejected laicite as a basis of the French law 2004-228. Instead, they postulate that a fear of multiculturalism and growing division within the French society, especially after September 11th, had a key impact on the governmental decision (Scott, 2005).

The following essay aims to examine whether French secularism, laicite, was a key factor responsible for the banning of headscarves in France. First, the essay explains the role of female headscarf in Muslim religion and tradition in order to understand a strong objection against a ban from Muslim side. Second, the essay presents shortly a debate on wearing headscarves in France that had its beginning in the 1980s. Further, the essay considers the concept of laicite in France and its impact on passing the French law 2004-228. The essay analyzes other factors that influenced on the banning of religious symbols in France in order to compare their role and the role of laicite in passing the law. Finally, the essay considers the ban as an unsuccessful reform and presents policy recommendations.

The role of headscarf in Muslim tradition

The headscarf[1] is an important religious symbol in the Islamic tradition. The Quran,

perceived as the source of Allah’s command by Muslims, states that: “believing women (…) should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, or their brothers’ sons or their sisters’ sons, or their women or the servants whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex, and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O you Believers, turn you all together towards Allah, that you may attain Bliss.” (Quran 24:31)Therefore, following Allah’s law, Muslim women are obligated to remain modest and to cover their beauty. Moreover, the Quran says: “O Prophet! Tell Thy wives And daughters, and the Believing women, that They should cast their Outer garments over Their Persons (when outside): That they should be known (As such) and not Molested” (Quran 33:59). It indicates that there are two purposes of the wearing of headscarves by Muslim women. First, headscarf should protect Muslim women from gazes of strange men and from being an object of stranger’s desire. Second, headscarf should help to distinguish Muslim women from women of other religions (Syed, 2001). It is worth adding that the Quran does not state precisely which parts of woman’s body should be covered. Hence, there are different types of head (and body) coverings amongst Muslim women in various countries, depending on Quran’s interpretation and culture. They range from the simple hijab, covering the head and neck to Afghani burqa, covering the entire body and leaving only so-called mesh screen so that the woman is able to see (Wing and Smith, 2006). Further, the following sentence from the Quran: “O Prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better so that they may be recognized and not annoyed” (Wing and Smith, 2006, p.751) indicates that Muslim men are also obligated to Quran to make sure that their wives have got appropriate covering when they leave their houses.

With the beginning of decolonization in the 1950s and the 1960s, the European countries, in particular France and the United Kingdom, had experienced massive immigrations from the Middle East and African countries. Most of the immigrants were Muslims. Hence, the Western countries, characterized by Christian roots had to face different religion, culture and values brought to the Europe by Muslims. Headscarf has become one of the most visible elements of these differences in the European’s public eyes (Wing and Smith, 2006).

Headscarf debate in a contemporary France

There are currently around 5 million of Muslims in France, constituting 5-10% of the total French population (CIA, 2012). Mostly they are immigrants from the regions such as the Maghreb, the Middle East, Turkey and Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Additionally there is an increasing number of people of European descent in France who are deciding to convert into Islam. In the recent years, Muslims in France has strongly manifested its cultural and religious separateness. They aimed to “create an Islamic identity with local institutional, societal and cultural structures” (Wing and Smith, 2006, p.753) and they focused on building new mosques and loud practices of their religion. It led to Islamophobic tendencies in France which were often manifested by hostility, discrimination in employment and housing as well as larger socio-economic exclusion of Muslim society. Currently Muslims continue to be separated from the rest of French society. Key indicators of this exclusion are limited access to the education for Muslims, houses in the urban ghettos (known also as the zones of economic and social exclusion) but also lack of involvement in French political life and culture from the Muslim side.

The debate on headscarves in France has got its root in 1989 and is known as the affaires de foulard (Scott, 2005, p. 1). At that time, three Muslim girls were expelled from their secondary state school in the town of Creil after they refused to take off their headscarves. Although it was not a first such a case (the director of this school had earlier banned Jewish students from wearing the Kippah in school), it brought an extensive attention of French media. The director of school argued that he made a decision on the basis of French laicite[2], a concept postulating separation between the state and religion (Tarhan, 2011). Muslim society was supported by Catholic, Protestant and Jewish leaders. Together, they postulated that laicite should have been regarded as toleration for other religions rather than condemnation of religion (Scott, 2005). This approach was also accepted by the former Minister of Education, Lionel Jospin. He announced that religious symbols and clothing at schools were allowed as long as they did not threaten other religious beliefs (Tarhan, 2011). Despite this governmental announcement, a number of similar cases has dramatically increased between 1989 (400 cases) and 1994 (3000 cases), what led to racial and religious violence in France (Bowen, 2007). In 1994 the tensions were so intense that education staff were sending letter to the French government, asking for advices on how to deal with the situation. In result, new Minister of Education, Francois Bayrou implemented new rules on religious symbols in schools. He allowed only discreet symbols in schools, while he prohibited ostentatious symbols. Discreet symbols were defined as those that “demonstrated personal religious conviction” (Tarhan, 2011, p.18), while ostentatious – as those that led to discrimination and differences into the educational communities. Bayrou’s claim was controversial and brought the attention of French media. In result, the Conseil d’Etat, the highest administrative court in France, decided to investigate the controversial issue. The court rejected Bayrou’s decision and obligated school administrations and teachers to make decision on the actions of their students. The French government appointed a Muslim woman, Hanifa Cherifi, as a governmental mediator responsible for handling the wearing of headscarves. In result, the issue has grown quiet for nine years (Scott, 2005).

The issue of headscarves was brought to the public attention again in 2003, when the Minister of Interiors and Cults, Nicolas Sarkozy postulated that Muslim women should take off their headscarves while posing for official identity photographs. As Muslims became an important minority in France with the beginning of the twenty first century, Sarkozy’s claim reflected growing frustration and intolerance towards visibility of religious symbols in public places amongst French politicians and society. It also brought back the issue of headscarves in schools. In effect, French President, Jacques Chirac formed a commission led by Bernard Stasi in order to investigate the implementation of laicite in French educational institutions.

. Students, teachers, intellectuals and also the European Commission got involved in the work of Stasi’s Commission. Muslim girls chose to be interviewed undercover, as they wanted to voice their opinions about wearing the hijab anonymously. The report produced by Stasi’s Commission presented an in-depth study on the role that the hijab plays in the Muslim community. In reference to Islam, one of the most important results was that young Muslim girls, that used to grow up in a society dominated by western culture and values found difficult to reaffirm their identities as Muslims by the way they had to dress. Further, it showed that young Muslim girls were often not participating in classes such as P.E (physical education) as they were afraid of violence and assaults from Muslim men’s side. Moreover, Muslim girls often confessed that they were being forced to wear the hijab by their families and peer groups. The Stasi’s Report also drew open other issues surrounding Muslim women such as female genital mutilation and forced marriages (Vaisse, 2004). The Stasi’s Report pointed out that the existence of religious symbols in schools was not compatible with the concept of laicite. The Report postulated that the veils were responsible for the alienation of women. As secularism and gender equality were regarded as the important features of laicite, the Report recommended banning religious symbols in schools[3] (Wing and Smith, 2006). It is important to add that the critics of the Stasi’s Report aimed to undermine the validity of the report. They postulated that the report was mainly based on western perceptions on the hijab and Muslim women. The link between forced marriages, female genital mutilation and the hijab, were all based upon the commission negative image of Islam, there was no empirical research to back their findings (Schiek and Lawson, 2011). Muslim women argue that the hijab is worn voluntarily and it brings them a sense of belonging and community (Schiek and Lawson, 2011).

Following the Stasi’s Report, on February 10th, 2004, French National Assembly passed the law on the banning conspicuous religious symbols in schools. A huge majority of the Assembly, 494 members, were in favour of the ban, while only 36 members voted against the ban. At the same time, 31 members abstained from voting. Similarly, on March 3rd, 2004, the French Senate also passed the same legislation. 276 voters were in favour of the ban, while 20 of them voted against the ban (Weil, 2009). The implementation of the new law was preceded by three demonstrations, respectively, on December 21st, 2004; on January 17th, 2005; and on February 14th, 2005 that aimed to stop passing the law 2004-228. Mohammed Latreche, an Islamist activist mobilized and encouraged French citizens to participate in these demonstrations. He established a political party, Pati des msulman de France (the Party of French Muslims) with the headquarters in Strasburg. The demonstrations, showed the Muslim publics outrage at the law that was about to be passed. The legislative ban was regarded as an attack on Muslims with the Muslim society. Two girls even went as far as hunger strikes to show their opposition to the ban. Some posters propagated slangs such as ‘Stasi killed me’ and ‘1 veil= 1 vote’ (Bowen, 2007). Officially, the law was implemented on March 15th and it is known as the law 2004-228. Despite the demonstrations, the legislative ban in France has been largely supported by the French society. According to Pew Research Centre (2006) 78% of the French population have supported the ban, while only 22% of the population have regarded the banning as a bad idea.

The concept of laicite and its impact on the banning of headscarves in France

Many scholars (i.e. Wing and Smith, Scott) believe that the concept of laicite was a

key factor behind the decision on the banning of headscarves in France. Laicite has a long tradition in France and hence, it is crucial to analyze its influence on the ban of religious symbols. As it was mentioned above, laicite, known also as a French secularism, postulates separation between the state and religion as well as freedom of religion (Tarhan, 2011). It can be viewed as passive neutrality or non-intervention by the state in the private religious domain. This interpretation suggests that the exercise of religion in the private sphere is permissible, and that the French state will not openly support overt religious practices in public spheres (Scott, 2005). Another interpretation of the laicite’ can be viewed as a more active secularism, in terms of which the nation is promoted as a fundamentally political society fiercely independent of any religious authority (Wing and Smith, 2006), and one in which the values of the state can be defended through the concept of L’ORDRE PUBLIC in order to justify interference where necessary with some religious organisations. This definition of laicite’ gives the government more control over public institutions and the amount of religious activity that goes on there, for example schools (Weil, 2009).

The concept of laicite was developed during the French Revolution (1789). Initially it concerned the separation between the state and the Catholic Church, which played a major role in France in the seventeenth century. Revolutionaries aimed to redefine citizenship and nationhood and hence, to separate Catholicism from the French identity. New citizenship was meant to be universal, secular and inclusive. Instead, the French Revolution led to ‘xenophobic nationalism’ (Tarhan, 2011, p.4) which targeted foreigners as well as priests, rebels, political opponents and noblemen. Similarly, the Revolution started to reject religion rather than tolerate it. The laicisation of French public schools began with an article that was passed on June 28th, 1833. This law entailed that primary school teaching should have no religious affiliation. Further, laicite was implemented in France through the creation of the public school system, in the years 1881-2 with Jules Ferry’s public school laws (Bowen, 2007). However, despite these steps Catholicism remained an important element of French regime until the end of nineteenth century. More significant changes started in 1901 when France passed a new law, Law of Association according to which religious associations became obligated to have a state supervision. Further, in 1904 the religious communities were forbidden to provide education. In result, approximately 30,000 of clergy lost their teaching jobs and stopped taking salaries from the state. Nonetheless, the legislation passed in 1905, known as the Separation Act, is regarded as first meaningful success of secularists in France (Tarhan, 2011). The 1905 law has become the legal guideline for the separation of the state and the church. The word laicite did not appear in the 1905 law. However, the first article of the law emphasized freedom of religion in France, as it stated that: “the republic ensures freedom of conscience. It guarantees the free exercise of religions with the sole restrictions decreed hereafter in the interest of public order” (Tarhan, 2011, p.7). The second article, in turn, declared that “The Republic does not recognize, fund or subsidize any religion. […]State, departmental and commune budgets, together with all expenses relating to the exercise of religions will be abolished.” (Tarhan, 2011, p.7) and hence, it guaranteed state’s neutrality towards religions. The legislation from 1905 gave a political and legal character to the concept of laicite in France. More importantly, it indicated that laicite was a process that had emerged in France through the confrontation about national identity between Clerics and Republicans (Scott, 2005).

Although the concept of laicite in France does not show any historical links to the Islam religion, the ban on religious symbols from 2004 seems to emphasize an impact of laicite on the French politics and tradition. Nowadays laicite is regarded in France as one of the foundations of French Republic and the French collective (national) identity (The Economist, 2004). It represents a sharp contrast to Anglo-American model of multiculturalism. French believe that laicite guarantees tolerance, freedom of religion, peace as well as social cohesion. Further, laicite postulates a sharp division between public and private spheres. Religion and ethnicity can be manifested in the private sphere. However, the only visible legitimate identity in the public sphere should be French national identity. Further, the laic state has right to interfere in the religious issues if the national unity and common values of the French Republic are threatened (Weil, 2009). According to the concept, Muslim society should accept French norms and culture in order to become a part of French political unity. Nonetheless, Muslims have become a significant minority in France, unwilling to adopt French tradition and lifestyle. Instead, they strongly manifested own culture, tradition and identity (The Economist, 2004). Islam was perceived not only as a religion but also as a rigorous lifestyle that rejected Western values such as liberty, freedom and laicite. Muslims were often regarded as the extremist group. Hence, French started to perceive Muslims and Islam religion as the threads to the French national unity that had to be addressed and resolved. The debate on headscarves in France confirms this negative perception of Muslims within French society (Tarhan, 2011).

With the exception of laicite, there were also other factors that had an influence on the ban of religious symbols in France. As stated in the Stasi’s Report, the ban aimed to empower Muslim women and to guarantee greater equality amongst the Muslim women and men. However, in this case, the ban was just a symbolic gesture, as it only applied to the young Muslim girls in public schools and did not affect adult Muslim women, working in some public places or just walking on the streets (Bowen, 2007). In contrast, there are several external factors that might have influenced the timing of headscarves debate in France. When the first debate on headscarves took place in 1989, the Communist system in the Central and Eastern Europe collapsed. Instead, the Europe experienced massive inflows of Muslim immigrants and spreading Islam religion across the European countries. Hence, Islam quickly started to be perceived as a thread to the Western values that replaced an old thread, communism. Further, in 1994 there was a civil war in Algeria, a former colony of France that was caused by the conflict between the secular military government of Algeria and Islamic fundamentalists. The Algerian conflict indicated a possibility of similar problems between the state and its largest religious minority in France. Finally, in 2003 the Europe was still strongly affected by the consequences of September 11th (2001). Additionally, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the worsening of the conflict between Israel and Palestine resulted in sharp divergence between the West and Islam culture. At that time, French Muslims definitely identified with the Muslims in other parts of the world and the wearing of headscarves manifested such identification. French government, on the other hand, faced real threads of terrorism. Hence, the main principle of French defense became to prevent French citizens and institutions from potential challenges to their integrity (Scott, 2005).


To sum up, the ban of religious symbols in schools implemented in France in 2004 was very controversial and led to numerous protests and demonstrations in France. The supporters of the ban underlined the secular character of France and the need to separate religion from the public sector. The opponents, in turn, postulated a minor impact of the ban, as it only affected Muslim schoolgirls, constituting relatively insignificant percentage of Muslim female population in France.

Without a doubt, laicite had a key impact on the legislative ban. However, the main factor behind the governmental decision was not separation between the religion and the state, regarded as a traditional element of the concept of laicite. In the contemporary France, key elements of laicite have become nation identity and unity. As the French society was characterized by a strong division on Muslims and non-Muslims as well as by strengthening Muslim influences, the French conservative government of Chirac has become responsible for protecting the French national identity. The ban was believed to be a successful tool to achieve this goal. Except laicite, there was a number of international events such as Afghan war, Iraqi war or Israeli-Palestinian conflict that strengthened Islamophobic in Western countries, in particular in secular France that has always been characterized by the opposition to multiculturalism and foreignness. Although some scholars postulate that gender equality was also a factor influencing French decision on the ban, there is no strong evidence to support this claim. In fact, the ban affected only small number of young Muslim girls being in public education.

Nowadays it is certain that Muslims have to accept cosmopolitan values and freethinking if they aim to stay in the Western countries. Currently a number of Western countries such as United Kingdom, Spain or Germany have been characterized by a trap of two conflicting cultures. However, forcing Muslims to go against their religious practices, as applied in France seems to be counterproductive. The ban of religious symbols in France led to the riots (2005) in so-called les cites, ghettos focusing North Africans and Arabs that spread around the major French cities. During these riots two Muslim teenagers were accidently killed. However, the ban of religious symbols could have disastrous consequences. Young Muslims, rejected by the French government and regarded as a second-class society, often accept extremism and violence as the solution of their problems. The example of the United States demonstrates prominently the negative consequences of rejecting and underestimating its ethnic minority. The young, radical Muslims in the US, trained by the conservative European imams became responsible for the dramatic events from September 11th (Kiersh, 2008).

The French government should have learnt a lesson from the United States and should stop pushing its Muslim society towards extremism and encouraging violence amongst them. Instead, the French government should establish a long-term strategy in order to incorporate their Muslim minority into the environment they regard as unfriendly. The government must develop new, comprehensive measures that will help Muslims to identify with the rest of the French society and to become involved in various aspects of French lifestyle. In order to achieve these goals, the French government must focus on the reduction of job and housing discrimination in the first place as well as on changing the attitudes within the French policy towards Muslim male immigrants. The French government can expect that other European governments (in particular British, German and Spanish governments) will be also willing to address the problem of separation between Muslims and mainstream society, as they struggle with the same problem. Together, these countries have enough resources to implement reforms and changes so that the Muslims can assimilate with the rest of the societies. Also the United States could probably get involved in such a cross-countries program in the framework of the War on Terror. Without a doubt, the European governments would be more willing to accept such a form of terrorism fighting rather than military interventions in the Middle East. The following concept requires in-depth analyzes and detailed policy planning. However, it would definitely bring larger and more positive outcomes than the ban of religious symbols in public schools (Kiersh, 2008).

List of references:
Astier, H., (2004). The deep Roots of French Secularism [online] available from: <> (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Bowen, J., (2007). Why the French do not like the Headscarves. New Jersey: Princeton University
CIA, (2012). The World Factbook: France [online] Available from: <> (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Kiersh, A., (2008). Why the Headscarf Ban is wrong for France [online] Available from: <> (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Morin, R. and Horowitz, J., (2006). European debate the Scarf and the Veil [online] Available from: (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Scott, J., (2005). Symptomatic Politics: The Banning of Islamic Head Scarves in French Public Schools. New Jersey: Institute for Advanced Study.
Schiek, D and Lawson, A., (2011). European Union Non-Discrimination Law and Intersectionality: Investigating the Triangle of Racial, Gender and Disability Discrimination. London: Ashgate Publishing.
Syed, , (2001). Women in Islam: Hijab [online] Available from: <> (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Tarhan, G., (2011). Roots of the Headscarf Debate: Laicism and Secularism in France and Turkey. Journal of Political Inquiry, 4, p. 1-32.
The Economist, (2004). The war of the headscarves [online] Available from: <> (Accessed on 25.04.2012).
Vaisse, J., (2004). Veiled Meaning: the French Law Banning Religious Symbols in Public Schools. Washington: The Brookings Institute.
Weil, P., (2009). Why the French Laicite is liberalCardozon Law Review, 30(6), p.2699-2714.

Wing, A. and Smith, M., (2006). Critical Race Feminism Lifts in Veil?: Muslim, Women, France and the Headscarf Ban. California: UC Davis.

[1] The headscarf wore by Muslim women is commonly known as hijab in the Europe. However, Quran uses two Arabic terms: “khimar” and “jilbaab” in reference to headscarf or veil.

[2] The concept of French laicite will be discussed in details in the next chapter.

[3] It is worth adding that Stasi’s Report also postulated the recognition of majority religious feasts as public holiday. However, this law was not passed.

Free Essays

Study Guide for French Revolution

Study Guide for French Revolution * Brinton’s model of a revolution: * Symptomatic Phase- all social classes are unhappy (peasants are scared of change, bourgeoisie want change) * Moderate Phase- revolution begins in hopes of control (radicals feel like there isn’t ENOUGH change) * Radical Phase- a strong men from a radical group gains and assumes power * Convalescence Phase- revolution has a setback; moderate groups regain power * Estates: First Estate: Clergy (less than 1% of population) * Upper Clergy: noble by birth/bishops * Lower Clergy: peasant class/priests * Second Estate: Nobility (less than 2% of population) * Privileged class * Absolute monarch would cause them to lose power * Third Estate: Common People (97% of population) * They pay all the taxes for the country * Includes the bourgeoisie, urban workers, peasants and serfs * Sans-culottes: radical lower class workers Louis XVI: King of France during the revolution; he was slow to make decisions about the revolution * Marie Antoinette: France disliked her from the minute she married Louis XVI because she was Austrian and did not have a child for the first 7 or 8 years, and disregarded the struggle the public was going through * Old Regime: the social and political system before the revolution began * Cahiers- nobility Estates-General: under the Old Regime there was a legislative assembly with representatives from each estate; this system is very unfair because the 1st and 2nd estates would usually agree with one another and the third estate (which was obviously much larger than the other estates) was left in the dust; Louis XVI called them together when he heard about the revolution * Abbe Sieyes: a priest that wrote a pamphlet about the 3rd estate, which created the revolution to some extent because it made the third estate think about how little power they have; also this pamphlet helped the Old Regime urn into the National Assembly * National Assembly: the new legislative system in which the amount of representatives from the third estate was doubled, but the voting didn’t change (so in the end it helped with nothing) * Tennis Court Oath: Louis XVI locks the National Assembly out of their meeting spot at Versailles, so they go to an inside tennis court that’s near; the National Assembly took an oath saying that they would not separate, but reassemble whenever certain situations required a reorganization, at least until the constitution of France was created * The Bastille: July 14th, 1789;a large group of people bombarded the royal prison; it was a symbol of tyranny * The Great Fear: riots and violence spread to the countryside of France; people went on a rampage because they were afraid the king was forming an army and was going to attack them; National Assembly takes action to keep things in order * The Law of the Fourth of August: National Assembly abolishes feudalism (on paper, but in reality it doesn’t actually stop) * Emigres: French term meaning someone who has left/migrated out of the country * Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen: influenced by Rousseau; not a radical document; only benefit wealthy men * “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity”: French motto March of the Women to Versailles: the goal was to bring the King back to Paris, so people could speak to him about important situations whenever they wanted * Civil Constitution of the Clergy: a law created that made the State have control of Church; priests were forced to swear an oath of loyalty to the revolution * Olympe de Gouges- a girondist woman who created the Declaration of the Rights of Woman, which was after the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen was created * Jacobins- the most radical group that wanted Paris to be the center of government; represented interests of sans-culottes * Girondists- another radical group that favored decentralized government; feared sans-culottes * Legislative Assembly: National Assembly voted themselves out of existence and created this new assembly; it lacked experience because there was a rule that said anyone from the National Assembly couldn’t be in the Legislative Assembly * The Marseillaise- France National Anthem; also it is an area in France * Flight to Varennes: the royal family tried to escape and flee to Austria to live with Marie’s family; unfortunately they were caught ecause common people knew Louis XVI’s face from the currency (money) in France; after this people saw Louis as a traitor * National Convention: the NEW government of France during the Reign of Terror (radical phase of the revolution) * Robespierre- radical Jacobin; dictator of the Radical Phase; led the Committee of Public Safety * Committee of Public Safety: a radical group that tried to eliminate anyone who was against the revolution; killed them using the guillotine * Danton- led/roused up the sans-culottes; Robespierre eventually executed him * Jean Paul Marat- bitter, angry newspaper writer, who took his anger out on the revolution; killed by the girondist, Charlotte Corday * Universal manhood suffrage- every man can vote, class doesn’t matter * Reign of Terror- period of time (during the radical phase) were there was a lot of violence stirred up by conflicts between the Jacobins and the Girondists; over 25,000 people were killed * Republic of Virtue- Robespierre tried to create this as part of the de-Christianization in France * Guillotine- an enlightened, democratic, and humane way to kill people; it was equal for everyone and someone’s class didn’t change the way they were killed * Levee en Masse- a law that said that everyone should someone support the revolution; men could fight in battles, old men could sell things; and women could be nurses for the injured men * Directory- government of France after the Reign of Terror; very corrupt; their only success was creating a better army by increasing patriotism; people who were originally involved in the Reign of Terror were now being attacked in what is known as the “White Terror”; they revived Catholicism; ruled by rich bourgeoisie * Napoleon Bonaparte: short, but extraordinarily energetic man from the island of Corsica, who believed he was destined to do great. In order to succeed and get what he wanted, he would do anything (Machiavellian). He created a new government: consulate. He tricked people into voting for him by making it seem like it was a democracy when he was going to dictate the country anyway; declared himself Emperor and crowned himself as a symbol of true power; he made sure that there was no freedom of speech for citizens and he restored Catholic Church * Josephine de Beauharnais: Napoleon’s first wife * Coup de’ etat: French term for overthrowing something * Plebiscite: everyone votes for something and someone simply counts to see how many greed or disagreed (very democratic) * Napoleonic Code: legal code that Napoleon created and brought everywhere; based on old Roman law and influenced modern day French law * Continental System: main goal was to hurt Great Britain economically, but it backfired on Napoleon * Duke of Wellington: the man who defeated Napoleon in his last battle (Battle of Waterloo) * Peninsular War: fought Portugal * Guerilla Warfare: hide and ambush * Russian campaign: on June 24th, 1812, Napoleon ignores the advice from his advisors and invades Russia; the weather randomly turned winter-like plus the unfamiliar size of Russia helped defeat Napoleon * Scorched-earth policy: Russians would burn everything in their path to create hardship for their enemies * Elba: an island that Napoleon was exiled to * Hundred Days: Napoleon came back to France after he was exiled, Louis XVIII was afraid so he fled, Napoleon was in control for 100 days * St.

Helena: the second island Napoleon was exiled to; he died there * Klemens von Metternich: the Prince of Austria; also the President of the Congress * Congress of Vienna: a meeting in Austria; nobles who were in the Congress wanted everything to just go back to the way it was before the Revolution, which was reactionary * Balance of Power- a new diplomatic system that created an equal amount of power for different sections of government * Lord Castlereagh- British representative in the Congress of Vienna * Talleyrand- French representative in the Congress of Vienna * Principles of Peace Statement: * Legitimacy- if someone was legitimate or not, so they could rule * Compensation- something, typically money, awarded to someone as to make amends for loss, injury, or suffering * German Confederation- the Congress of Vienna voted to destroy the Holy Roman Empire and create the German Confederation, taking hundreds of miniscule states and creating 15 main states within the association

Free Essays

American and French Revolutions

A watershed event in modern European history, the French Revolution began in 1789 and ended in the late 1790s with the ascent of Napoleon Bonaparte. During this period, French citizens razed and redesigned their country’s political landscape, uprooting centuries-old institutions such as absolute monarchy and the feudal system. Like the American Revolution before it, the French Revolution was influenced by Enlightenment ideals, particularly the concepts of popular sovereignty and inalienable rights.

Although it failed to achieve all of its goals and at times degenerated into a chaotic bloodbath, the movement played a critical role in shaping modern nations by showing the world the power inherent in the will of the people. Prelude to the French Revolution: Monarchy in Crisis As the 18th century drew to a close, France’s costly involvement in the American Revolution and extravagant spending by King Louis XVI (1754-1793) and his predecessor had left the country on the brink of bankruptcy.

Not only were the royal coffers depleted, but two decades of poor cereal harvests, drought, cattle disease and skyrocketing bread prices had kindled unrest among peasants and the urban poor. Many expressed their desperation and resentment toward a regime that imposed heavy taxes yet failed to provide relief by rioting, looting and striking. In the fall of 1786, Louis XVI’s controller general, Charles Alexandre de Calonne (1734-1802), proposed a financial reform package that included a universal land tax from which the privileged classes would no longer be exempt.

To garner support for these measures and forestall a growing aristocratic revolt, the king summoned the Estates-General (“les etats generaux”)–an assembly representing France’s clergy, nobility and middle class–for the first time since 1614. The meeting was scheduled for May 5, 1789; in the meantime, delegates of the three estates from each locality would compile lists of grievances (“cahiers de doleances”) to present to the king. The French Revolution at Versailles: Rise of the Third Estate France’s population had changed considerably since 1614.

The non-aristocratic members of the Third Estate now represented 98 percent of the people but could still be outvoted by the other two bodies. In the lead-up to the May 5 meeting, the Third Estate began to mobilize support for equal representation and the abolishment of the noble veto–in other words, they wanted voting by head and not by status. While all of the orders shared a common desire for fiscal and judicial reform as well as a more representative form of government, the nobles in particular were loath to give up the privileges they enjoyed under the traditional system.

By the time the Estates-General convened at Versailles, the highly public debate over its voting process had erupted into hostility between the three orders, eclipsing the original purpose of the meeting and the authority of the man who had convened it. On June 17, with talks over procedure stalled, the Third Estate met alone and formally adopted the title of National Assembly; three days later, they met in a nearby indoor tennis court and took the so-called Tennis Court Oath (“serment du jeu de paume”), vowing not to disperse until constitutional reform had been achieved.

Within a week, most of the clerical deputies and 47 liberal nobles had joined them, and on June 27 Louis XVI grudgingly absorbed all three orders into the new assembly. The French Revolution Hits the Streets: The Bastille and the Great Fear On June 12, as the National Assembly (known as the National Constituent Assembly during its work on a constitution) continued to meet at Versailles, fear and violence consumed the capital. Though enthusiastic about the recent breakdown of royal power, Parisians grew panicked as rumors of an impending military coup began to circulate.

A popular insurgency culminated on July 14 when rioters stormed the Bastille fortress in an attempt to secure gunpowder and weapons; many consider this event, now commemorated in France as a national holiday, as the start of the French Revolution. The wave of revolutionary fervor and widespread hysteria quickly swept the countryside. Revolting against years of exploitation, peasants looted and burned the homes of tax collectors, landlords and the seigniorial elite.

Known as the Great Fear (“la Grande peur”), the agrarian insurrection hastened the growing exodus of nobles from the country and inspired the National Constituent Assembly to abolish feudalism on August 4, 1789, signing what the historian Georges Lefebvre later called the “death certificate of the old order. ” The French Revolution Turns Radical: Terror and Revolt In April 1792, the newly elected Legislative Assembly declared war on Austria and Prussia, where it believed that French emigres were building counterrevolutionary alliances; it also hoped to spread its revolutionary deals across Europe through warfare. On the domestic front, meanwhile, the political crisis took a radical turn when a group of insurgents led by the extremist Jacobins attacked the royal residence in Paris and arrested the king on August 10, 1792. The following month, amid a wave of violence in which Parisian insurrectionists massacred hundreds of accused counterrevolutionaries, the Legislative Assembly was replaced by the National Convention, which proclaimed the abolition of the monarchy and the establishment of the French republic.

On January 21, 1793, it sent King Louis XVI, condemned to death for high treason and crimes against the state, to the guillotine; his wife Marie-Antoinette (1755-1793) suffered the same fate nine months later. Following the king’s execution, war with various European powers and intense divisions within the National Convention ushered the French Revolution into its most violent and turbulent phase. In June 1793, the Jacobins seized control of the National Convention from the more moderate Girondins and instituted a series of radical measures, including the establishment of a new calendar and the eradication of Christianity.

They also unleashed the bloody Reign of Terror (“la Terreur”), a 10-month period in which suspected enemies of the revolution were guillotined by the thousands. Many of the killings were carried out under orders from Robespierre, who dominated the draconian Committee of Public Safety until his own execution on July 28, 1794. His death marked the beginning of the Thermidorian Reaction, a moderate phase in which the French people revolted against the Reign of Terror’s excesses. The French Revolution Ends: Napoleon’s Rise

On August 22, 1795, the National Convention, composed largely of Girondins who had survived the Reign of Terror, approved a new constitution that created France’s first bicameral legislature. Executive power would lie in the hands of a five-member Directory (“Directoire”) appointed by parliament. Royalists and Jacobins protested the new regime but were swiftly silenced by the army, now led by a young and successful general named Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821). The Directory’s four years in power were riddled with financial crises, popular discontent, inefficiency and, above all, political corruption.

By the late 1790s, the directors relied almost entirely on the military to maintain their authority and had ceded much of their power to the generals in the field. On November 9, 1799, as frustration with their leadership reached a fever pitch, Bonaparte staged a coup d’etat, abolishing the Directory and appointing himself France’s “first consul. ” The event marked the end of the French Revolution and the beginning of the Napoleonic era, in which France would come to dominate much of continental Europe. Similarities America ; France Revolutionary Twins?

The American and French Revolutions were fought several years and an ocean apart. However, they feature enough similarities that some people initially consider them “mirror struggles. ”  After all, there are some easy comparisons:  both revolutions occurred in the later eighteenth century. Both subverted an existing, monarchical government. Finally, both created ripe conditions for constitutionalism and deep patriotism. But dig more deeply, and you’ll find that this “same revolution, different continent” concept is not as tidy as it initially appears.

Further similarities between the two revolutions are just different enough to produce profound distinctions between the two revolutions. Although most scholars believe that the two revolutions influenced one another (as well as had profound worldwide impact), each revolution is a very distinct and singular struggle for freedom, identity, and an improved way of life. Indeed, scholars have built entire careers on this subject, and rich debate and information is available online or at your local library. However, here are a few fundamental elements shared by the revolutions, with intricate but important differences highlighted: Causes

Both the American Revolution and the French Revolution were borne of dire economic conditions. Economic challenges definitely contributed to the basis for both revolutions. However, each nation’s money-related woes were quite unique. The American Revolution had roots in the financial pressure that Britain placed on the New World; because Britain was economically dependent on the colonies, it kept taxing them. However, the colonists didn’t oppose the taxation itself. They were more vexed by the lack of a reasonable basis for the taxation, feeling that they received little or no benefit from their unds that were being spent “back in the old country. ”  This phenomenon—commonly known as taxation without representation—infuriated the colonies, building the basis for their revolt. Classic images of hungry, poverty-stricken French peasants are still familiar. Indeed, the pre-revolution French economy was dismal and had been for decades. As a second-tier trading nation, France was unable to pay off national debts using the scant amount of money it received on the taxes for traded goods. To make up for this deficit, the King imposed further taxes, especially on the peasants.

Paradoxically, the wealthiest nobles were not obligated to pay taxes. This allowed the King to successfully sell titles, pulling the two social classes further apart. So although the British tax-related woes were also tied to royal greed and exploitative control, they were relatively common to any new colonist establishment. France’s case, while certainly tax-related, was more deeply rooted in a historic division of social class. Although the rich and poor had long been separated, the King’s selling of titles totally isolated the two groups.

This resulted in famine and extreme poverty for the lower classes, and left them no choice but to revolt. Goals Both revolutions were undertaken with the goal of independence in mind. The American Revolution was not initially or even primarily fought for independence. Independence almost became a “by-product” of the colonists’ initial attempt to remove unfair taxes levied on them by British Parliament. On the other hand, France’s decades of class division and its burgeoning interest in thinkers like Rousseau (who emphasized the importance of human rights) sparked a popular interest in a more independent way of life.

The influence of speeches, articles, and pamphlets from gifted writers and orators like revolution leaders Jacques-Pierre Brissot and Maximillien Robespierre also fueled this desire for freedom. Finally, the success of the American Revolution (and the colonists’ resulting independence from British rule) arguably acted as an incentive for revolt. American-French Relationships Both revolutions spurred a strong response from the other nation. Before 1789, most people (excluding the Americans of the new United States) lived with the general form of government their ancestors had known for centuries, sually hereditary monarchy. After the French Revolution began in 1789, no form of government could be accepted as legitimate without justification. The revolutionaries established a republic in 1792, and henceforth republicans around the world would challenge monarchists. Overall, the French Revolution offered the world something totally novel: an ideology that allowed and encouraged the questioning of historic power structures. This ideology borne of the French Revolution laid the groundwork for other ideologies, including nationalism, socialism, and eventually communism.

In fact, early communist leaders Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels both commented extensively on the French Revolution, hoping to find important lessons for building and governing communities. North Americans showed special interest in the French Revolution, believing the events of 1789 drew heavily on their own experience with Britain. The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen seemed to borrow strikingly from the states’ bill of rights. Even more direct influence took place when American Thomas Jefferson, resident in France at this time, passed along specific ideas to the legislators through the Marquis de Lafayette.

Although the French Revolution took a far different path than the North American variety, this interaction was close, so it is not surprising that the initial U. S. reaction to the French Revolution was positive. Not all Americans approved of the France’s methods. For example, John Adams declared his early and ongoing disapproval, and the Federalist Party’s support began to waver toward the Revolution’s end. The Reign of Terror also did little to create American approval and drew criticism from some prominent American statesmen.

However, the Jefferson-led Republican Party remained largely supportive throughout most of the revolutionary decade. Famous Documents Both revolutions produced similar and seminal political documents. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen was adopted in France in August 1789 by the National Constituent Assembly. Drafted by the Marquis de Lafayette, it was intended as part of a transition from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy, and presented the ideas of popular sovereignty and equal opportunity.

This document, which defined a set of universal individual and collective rights, was to be considered valid in all times, in all places, for all people. This novel way of thinking totally contradicted the traditional French idea of people being born into a nobility or into another favored class. It also eliminated the concept of people enjoying or being denied special rights based on family lineage of status, which clearly dismantled centuries of French ruling structure. The principles outlined in the Declaration sprung from the theories of philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau and other Enlightenment thinkers.

However, the French Declaration is at least partly inspired by the declaration of Human Rights contained in the U. S. Declaration of Independence, adopted on July 4, 1776, and on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, developed by American George Mason in June 1776, which was itself based on the English 1689 Bill of Rights. The Declaration of the Rights of Man also showed similarities to the United States Constitution (1787) and the United States Bill of Rights, which was adopted in 1789, at approximately the same time as the Declaration of the Rights of Man.

Like the U. S. Constitution, The French Declaration provided for a national defense, and emphasized equality before taxation (which was distinctly different from traditional France, in which the Catholic Church and the nobility were exempt from most taxes). Like these American documents, France’s Declaration prohibits ex post facto application of criminal law and proclaims the presumption of innocence to a crime suspect. Finally, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and addresses freedom of religion.

The Declaration departs from seminal American documents in some important ways. It’s vital to note that the Declaration is largely individualistic. It focuses less on the rights of a political or religious group and more on the singular citizen, thus straying from America’s “we the people” stance. The Declaration also fails to address the freedom of assembly, liberty of association, or the right to strike, which were important American tenets. Differences Self-Identification and Independence * France was a well-established nation long before the French revolution. It was not facing any acute external dangers in the late 1780s.

In contrast, the American revolution was a struggle for self-identification and independence from another nation. In France, the essential motive of the revolution was a stratification transformation of the society because “the third estate” saw the clergy and the nobles as social parasites. Attitudes Toward Monarchy * The Americans were not anti-monarchists from the very start. They considered their rights as the British subjects were being violated, and their main complaints were aimed against the British Parliament. In France, the revolution was very much against the monarch and his power.

Revolutionists saw the monarch as a traitor and acted aggressively toward the royal family. That led them to accuse the monarch of conspiracies against the French people, which in turn led to the execution of the royal family. Social Stratification * Social equality was not the main concern of the American revolution. Slavery was abolished in the Northern states, but it did not drastically influence the social stratification of American society. In France, the whole social structure was made up of three traditional estates: clergy, nobles and others. The revolution transformed all of them.

Elimination of the traditional privileges based on the social origin was the main goal of the French revolution. Revolution and Religion * The American patriots did want to break with the Church of England, but the American revolution was not driven by a religious goal. The French revolution was, and it accomplished most of those goals. It eliminated the privileges of the clergy. Monasteries and churches were closed, the monks and nuns were encouraged to return to the private life. Many priests were killed. The Cult of Reason emerged during the revolution as part of the new France’s plan to “de-Christianize” the country.

It stressed enlightenment and rationalism over the believe of a deity. Revolutionary Values and Mottos * John Locke formulated three basic values which were adopted by the American patriots: life, liberty and property. They fought for the idea that governments were obliged to preserve these values. The French revolution proclaimed three values too: liberty, equality and brotherhood, or death. The last part was adopted during the period of terror in 1793-1794. Thus, the common value shared by both revolutions was the pursuit of liberty.

Free Essays

Differences Between the French and Spanish

Englishmen migrated to the New World because they wanted independence, political freedom, and economic opportunity. The Spanish came as conquerors; the resulting political system was entirely autocratic and solely devoted to the furthering of the motherland. Spain gave its colonies little self-rule. Instead, Spanish rulers dictated all the policies of its New World territories. The English and Spanish both wanted to explore and find new territories too politically and economically control. The Spanish colonies developed economically by using the Encomienda system.

In this system, Spanish lords exploited and manipulated Native Americans and used them to do manual labor on the land. The Spanish looted large amounts of gold, silver, and other valuables from this new land. This tradition continued into the seventeenth century as Spanish ships would come annually to bring gold and other valuables back to Spain. The Spanish tax burden was very unevenly distributed: it fell more on the poor than the rich, heavily on the agricultural sector, and on Castile far more than Aragon or the Basque country.

But the Spanish government’s expenditure continued to climb: – in the first twelve years of Philip III’s reign, he spent over 40 million ducats on the Low Countries’ wars alone. To cover the shortfall, the Spanish government both borrowed money by being interested in bearing state bonds and assigned the revenues from future years to the bankers if they would pay the defense contracts for the present year. By 1607 the government had a debt of almost 23 million ducats and had assigned away all its revenue for four years ahead. By 1644 the crown’s income was pledged to 1648; and by 1664 the crown owed more than 21 million ducats.

The English Colonies had abundant natural resources. Their economy prospered in the fur trade, fishing, lumbering, farming and other industries that produced raw materials. This abundance of natural resources stimulated trade into the colonies as developed industries in Europe required raw materials to convert into refined goods. Combined with England’s tradition of partial representation, the English Colonies had a large degree of self-government. In 1603, moderate Puritans in England hoped the new monarch, James I, would be sympathetic to their iews, since he had been raised in Calvinist Scotland. Although this did not prove to be the case, the Puritans still tried to work within the religious system while he was king. The colonies all had some form of a representative assembly that was voted in by popular support. While only white male landowners could vote, this still constituted some degree of democracy. In some colonies, even the governors were decided by popular vote. The English and Spanish colonies were established for completely different reasons. England colonizes North America.

English colonies were first established by the Puritans who were seeking refuge, freedom of religion, and economic opportunity. The English colonists enjoyed far more freedom. English had established dominance in North America. The Spaniards came to America’s on accident in a futile attempt to find an alternate trade route to china, with a thriving community, complex architecture and cities of gold. Conquistadors, soldiers, and missionaries were the primary Spanish colonizers; farmers and traders came later. Colonies were governed by crown-appointed viceroys or governors. Settlers had to obey the king’s laws and could make none of their own.

Free Essays

French and Indian War Dbq

The aftermath of the French and Indian War triggered unpredictable changes in the relationship between Britain and its American colonies. The immense debt and re-engagement of Britain in the American politics caused tensions and discontent among the colonists. After the war, Britain and its colonies seemed to have grown closer together politically, but the economic and ideological differences caused numerous conflicts that eventually led to the American Revolution. The French and Indian War brought the colonies much closer to Britain than they had been in for over a century.

Together they fought off a common enemy, the French; and were celebrating a joyous victory. They had eliminated the French presence from the North American continent, as the map in document A portrays, which caused the settlers to celebrate the involvement of Britain. In Rev. Thomas Barnard’s sermon and George Washington’s letter, the patriotic feelings they have towards their King and their country are quite visible. However, the people’s contentment did not last long. The British thought themselves superior over the colonists.

As exemplified in a Massachusetts soldier’s diary; it was clear that the colonists were not treated as real Englishmen. This caused infuriation amongst the colonial soldiers who deserved to be recognized as much as the English subjects were. When the Parliament began to pass unwanted acts on them, the colonists furiously protested the sudden changes. After more than a century of Salutary Neglect, the colonies were used to managing their own affairs. The French and Indian War caused the British to reappear once more in their lives.

Since the war produced a major debt, Britain decided to tax the colonies. The mother country believed they should share the burden of taxation with the people of England. The colonists were outraged at the taxes, as they believed they were not equally represented in the Parliament. In document H, a newspaper masthead portrays how upset the early Americans were about the Acts; especially the hated Stamp Act. The masthead was obviously hoping to encourage the readers to stand against the taxes. To gain capital and protest the unjust taxes the colonists began trading illegally with non-British nations.

Britain was outraged at this apparent betrayal which was demonstrated by the British Order in Council. It stated that the Commissioners of the Treasury were witnessing fraud and expansion in the colonies. When the French and Indian War ended, the colonists were sure they would finally have freedom to expand as far as they want. However, the Parliament quickly passed the Proclamation of 1763 which forbid them from crossing the Appalachian Mountains. This upset the settlers immensely as they had expected a reward for their victory, not a series of Acts.

In reality, Britain passed the Proclamation to stop further conflicts with Native Americans. In Canassatego’s speech to the representatives of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, the tensions between the Indians and British colonists were easily noticeable. The Parliament wanted to avert more disagreements over land. Nonetheless, the colonists decided to ignore the law and cross the line anyway. The French and Indian War altered the relations between the colonists and Britain in staggering ways.

After the changes took place, there was no going back to the way things were before. The initial failures of the British army showed the colonists that even the greatest military in the world was not invincible. When the pressures from the Parliament became too unbearable, the colonists had the courage to stand up to its mother country. They met in gatherings like The Stamp Act Congress and discussed their grievances. In the end their mutual discontent and desire for independence eventually led to the American Revolution.

Free Essays

Biguine French Movie Review

Title-Biguine Director- Jacques Boumedil Year- 2005 Type- Drama Main actors: Micheline Mona and Max Telephe 1) The main characters granddaughter narrates the story over the radio. Hermansia and Tiquitaque travel to St-Pierre with a group of other plantation workers looking for a new life and they come to a cliff and see the volcano and the harbor. They walk around the city amazed by urban the atmosphere. They are particularly interested in the jewelry and other material goods that are sold in the city center. 2) Hermansia – Hermansia is a black plantation worker who moves to St-Pierre to pursue her passion to be a singer.

At first she is reluctant to embrace the city but eventually her music becomes popular and up lifts her community. Her lyrics capture her desire to live life to the fullest and rise up from the oppression the black community faces from that French and Europeans on the island. Tiquitaque- Tiquitaque is Hermansia’s husband and is also a musician. He is excited to be in a new city but disappointed that wealthy individuals will not hire him and his wife to perform at their social functions. The upper class does not like the rural black music that the two play, especially the drums which were popular among the slaves in the plantations.

However, Tiquitaqu learns to play the clarinet and develops his own style of music that is popular among the upper class and lower class alike. The Creole music is high tempo and inspires movement and dance. 3) The film takes place in St-Pierre, Martinique. 4) At first Hermansia and Tiquitaque are not successful as musicians so Hermansia works as a maid and Tiquitaque works on the docks. Hermansia buys Tiquitaque a clarinet and he develops his own style of music and is hired play at parties. At these parties he normally would play the waltz and polka and other European style music.

Tiquitaque starts to play a style of Creole on his clarinet that inspires people around the town and unites their communities. Their Creole music, he and his wife perform at cabarets, which symbolizes freedom for the repressed lower class people. People start to enjoy the music and whites and blacks come together to dance. Their music becomes extremely popular in the city. At the end of the movie, the volcano next to the city erupts and symbolizes the new culture that is developing in Martinique in the ninetieth century. 5) Overall, I did not enjoy this film because the plot was not well developed and the movie didn’t have any action.

The majority of the movie was listening to the couple sing. Although, the music was beautiful the movie did not have much substance. Therefore, I would not recommend this movie to anyone. 6) I learned a lot about Martinique’s culture while watching this movie. I saw many landmarks in the city of St-Pierre including the volcano. I also listened to Creole music for the first time and I enjoyed its upbeat rhythm. Additionally, Martinique was French colony in the ninetieth century and its main export was sugar. Thus, many slaves where brought from Africa to work on the plantations, which resulted in a large black community on the island.

Free Essays

French Court System

The French court system is a double pyramid structure. There are two separate orders: administrative courts and judicial courts. Each order has a pyramid structure, with a single court at the top and various courts at the base. Litigants displeased with a court decision can seek a review before the next court up in the hierarchy. In each order, a single court of last instance ensures that the lower courts interpret the law in the same way. The administrative courts settle disputes between users and public authorities. The Conseil d’Etat hears cases in first and last instance. It is both adviser to the government and the supreme administrative court. •The courts with general competence are the administrative courts, administrative appeal courts and the Conseil d’Etat (as a jurisdiction). •Administrative courts with special competence are the financial courts (Court of Auditors, Regional Courts of Auditors, Court of Budget and Financial Discipline) and various other tribunals like the disciplinary bodies of professional orders.

The judicial courts settle disputes between persons and sanction offences against persons, property and society. There are three categories of judicial court: •the courts of first instance: – the civil courts: district courts, regional courts, commercial courts, employment tribunals, agricultural land tribunals, social security tribunals; – the criminal courts: . ordinary courts: police courts, regional criminal courts, assize courts; . specialised courts: juvenile courts, military courts, political courts and the maritime criminal court; local courts, created by Act 2002-1138 of 9 September 2002 to meet the need to make justice more accessible, swifter and capable of dealing more appropriately with small claims and minor offences. Local courts have lay judges; •the courts of second instance: the appeal courts; •the supreme court: the Court of Cassation, responsible for ensuring compliance with the rules of law applied by lower courts. It judges the form and not the merits, unlike the courts of first and second instance, which judge the facts.

Free Essays

French Imperialism in Vietnam

The average person in France was unaware of conditions in their African colonies. And the same can be said concerning French rule in Vietnam, where the French were equally oppressive. In the late nineteenth century, the French overthrew a feudal monarchy and fought long, extended military campaigns against resistance to their rule. Many of Vietnam’s educated elite opposed French rule and would not work for the French, but the French found a few opportunistic Vietnamese who would. In Vietnam, and elsewhere in Indochina, Frenchmen grabbed lands, and they built plantations that produced rubber and other forest products.

In the first decade of the twentieth century, France’s colonial administration in Vietnam encouraged French commercial enterprises. They built railways, roads and hydraulic works to serve these enterprises. Vietnam was a thickly populated, predominately peasant society, but projects that would have served Vietnamese farmers were ignored. Vietnam’s farmers continued to suffer from the usual droughts and floods. Per capita rice consumption declined. And what had been Vietnam’s handicraft industry was destroyed.

A new class of Vietnamese had come into being: people who labored for the French as servants, or who labored in French-owned mines, on French-owned plantations, at French construction sites or in French-owned factories. The French paid them as little as they could — hardly enough for survival, and sometimes not enough. As in Africa, the French were taxing the Vietnamese and drafting them to labor on public works. On one such project — the Hanoi-Yunnan Phu railway — 25,000 Vietnamese died. Conditions in Vietnam in general were creating a decline in Vietnam’s population.

The French in Vietnam established a monopoly in the production of salt, alcoholic beverages and opium. They taxed consumption of these. They encouraged Vietnamese to buy their opium, and money gained from their opium trade was an important part of the colonial administration’s income. A French company, Fontaine, held a monopoly in making and selling alcoholic beverages in Vietnam, and all other distilling was banned and severely punished with imprisonment and confiscation of property. And in 1902 the colonial administration made buying alcoholic beverages compulsory, each

Vietnamese village having to consume a definite quantity in proportion to its population — more of the behavior that French commerce and government dare not perpetrate on people in France. In 1908, Vietnamese farmers responded to a rise in taxes by marching to the French administration headquarters. For weeks, thousands of peasants picketed the governor’s office in Hue and made passionate speeches, not only against taxes but forced labor. The protest spread, and the French countered with ferocity. Demonstrators were gunned down.

Whole villages were razed to the ground. Thousands were arrested, and two Vietnamese scholars who had spoken against French policies were executed. But in Vietnam and Africa, while French commercial operations were benefiting privately owned French companies, revenues from France’s colonies were not paying the cost of maintenance and administration. Average French taxpayers — like British taxpayers — were subsidizing their nation’s colonies. -________________________________________________________________________________________________

Free Essays

Why Does John Fowles’ “The French Lieutenant’s Woman”?

The novel “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” was made possible because of the haunting image of a woman in John Fowles’ imagination at the dock looking to the sea. The main character of the novel is Sarah Woodruff who is an impoverished former Victorian educator. Sarah was labeled in the territory as “Tragedy” or the “French Lieutenant’s Whore” because she was thought to loss her virginity to the departed sailor Varguennes. In the story, there is a noble Englishman named Charles Smithson who happened to saw Sarah while he was walking along the shore with his fiancé Ernestina Freeman.

Ernestina was a daughter of a wealthy shop owner. In the long run, he has a ploy to help Sarah as shown in his multiple meetings with her. In due course, he became attracted to Sarah until he pursued her. Unable to overcome his desires, they made love for the first time in a hotel room and he was shocked to his discovery that she was still a virgin. The history of her seduction on Varguennes as the one who got her virginity was therefore a lie. Charles became beguiled to Sarah. He realized that this lie had alienated Sarah from the society where she belongs and which is of paltry morals and fickle-minded that Sarah learned to detest.

Charles then broke his engagement to Ernestina and offers marriage to Sarah instead. Sarah declined the offer and runs away. The lost of Charles’ engagement made him isolated and estranged from the Victorian society and Ernestina’s affluence as well. He looked for Sarah and found her as a model for the pre-Raphaelite painter Dante Gabriel Rossetti in London. From this, John Fowles offered multiple endings.

The multiple endings style presented by John Fowles in his novel is a capturing technique to the readers’ attention. He offers variable choices of ending to the reader because as we all know every book has its own group of diverse readers. To satisfy this and to acknowledge the readers of your work, offering them a several endings is professional enough to recognize their patronization of your work. Another reason why John Fowles offered multiple endings is to develop critical thinking to readers and to know their selves better through knowing what they want. For readers who intend to develop their skills as writer, Fowles give different options of how to make an ending.

Through the ending, the façade of the characters behind the story and the purpose of the story are being more defined and delineated. This also gives us an idea that a story is a story that in fact starts in the beginning and ends only in the ending. Sounds irony as it is, it means that the extremes of the story tells us of what to expect and how to supposedly read the novel. It tells us that story has its twists and turns but may still be straight ahead depending on the focus of the reader.

The novel offered a blissful and joyful ending and a futile and wasted ending. From these, I preferred the blissful and joyful ending as the whole course of the novel is full of tragedy and showing a hopeless case. The happy ending affirms a reunion of Sarah and Charles together with their daughter. The hopeless ending is they decided to part forever after all the sacrifices. Also, the character of Sarah if this is the ending is being detested because she is portrayed as a deceitful and fraudulent woman and as a whore she really is though she was a virgin to Charles.

As an affectionate satire under Victorian plot and setting, the curiosity of the reader to the ending of the story must be satisfied and sultry at the same time. The narrative manner of the story is self-referencing and the characters Sarah and Charles have the reasoning and feat of a twentieth century which is one more century advance than their time. They are expressive of what they want and do what they have to carry out instead of behaving being under the dictates and morals being entailed to them by the society where they belong. Through sexual communication, the main characters had evolved and undergone personal development.

The first ending, wherein Charles marries Ernestina to follow the expected norms in the society to retain class status quo, showed the true lifestyle and ways of life at those time wherein the writer didn’t deflect the ideals at those times. As usual, the consequence of such ending and kind of plot directs a marriage that is not happy and successful.

In this ending also, the fortune of Sarah was not elaborated but focuses on Charles’ part where he let Ernestina know that he had an affair before once to a woman he referred as a French Lieutenant’s Whore. He did not further detail the story and did not need to include the worst particulars for the matter to be closed. This is a fine ending but not much causing reaction to the readers because this is common to people under a lifestyle where class is important. The ending is calm and does not offer much emotion and catastrophic sceneries.

In another ending, Charles chose Sarah and broke his engagement to Ernestina. This is an ending where love is chosen against all odds and mind was overruled. As expected, this has lead to unlikable consequences because of the present society where they belong. Charles became dishonored, humiliated, and shamed for choosing Sarah who had an appalling status in the society. Consequently, Charles was also disinherited from his uncle who then remarries where he got an heir. Sarah left for London without the knowledge of Charles. Charles who had loved Sarah so much did not stop finding her for several years.

One time he found her in London where Sarah was a model. Charles found out that he had a child and the ending was left open where there is an inference of reconciliation and reunion as a family. This ending has so much to offer and the expected ending if it has to be a happy ending. The spice in the ending is the notion that no matter how many typhoons passed your way there is an appropriate time that it will calm down soon. It is like expecting a sunny day at the end of the rain. It gave our human nature a chance to get up and tells us that trials are just temporary. It gave readers an idea of the natural circle of life and giving them hope that their struggles and sacrifices are not wasted because in due time, the fruits of these will soon be reaped.

In terms of character of Sarah, It tells the reader that what we think of us depends on what we allow others to think of us. In this world full of critics and prejudice, you have to be strong and be able to defend yourself because you alone knew yourself most and its limitations that you must not allow others to treat you as inferior to them. The more you allow a person to treat you that way, the more you are giving them right to invade your privacy and dignity until one day it is too late for you to realize that you lost everything. You lost what you should have defended, kept, cared, and guarded.

In this multitude and variable persona and guise behind the character of Sarah, Fowles was able to offer to readers another ending. This ending has its plot same as the second ending where Charles found in London as a model for the pre-Raphaelite artists. Here, there is no reconciliation that happened and their reunion was unpleasant. He found out that he is only used by Sarah but in the process, he contemplated that it is for the better as he learned to reflect and became aware to return to his old self. On the other hand, Sarah had chosen to conceal the existence of their child to avoid extending their relationship.

This type of ending further builds up on the real character of Sarah if is she trying to hold true of what people think of her or is she really that kind of girl. Inquisitiveness and nosiness in a reader’s disposition will be triggered and the nature of a person of criticizing and judging surfaces. Many questions may arouse such as does Sarah loves maneuvering people if she knows she could exploit them through their feelings like Charles who loves and respects her so much? Or is she a connoisseur liar and indeed with few morals that must not be given a chance or must not be loved at all?

In the novel, it was reflected that Fowles has difficulty choosing what the ending should be, the truer and more preferred ending, by disguising in the novel as the man watching the man Charles in the train. He finally decided then to initially have the happy ending then the final as the sad ending. Here it can be reflected that there is an author involvement and intervention in the novel. This technique is a landmark in literature because multiple endings and author involvement and intervention are truly unique and innovative. But is this accepted in the world of literature? Or is this innovative technique acceptable and tolerable in literature?

As we can see, these denigrations have been passed by Fowles successfully as most critics found this technique as more interesting and a demonstration of exceptional talent. Any imitation or adaptation of this technique will be judged and reviewed as not creative, inventive, imaginative, or original at all. The multiple endings technique is also a manipulative style of the author to his readers. He made them raise questions and arouse their curiosity. Others interpret that the author is anxious and thirst for a psychological need to control. But it must still not be ignored that each reader has its own ability to analyze and understand what they read, thus, this aspect in readers’ being cannot be controlled by the author.

While reading the novel not because of the story but due to evaluating why the author made several endings for the story, I can not help to think that maybe the author had taken too lightly or failed to appreciate the ability of the readers for independent thinking and understanding. But looking positively, maybe the author just wanted to satisfy his readers in terms of a happy or sad ending. The ending they will choose will satisfy each type of reader with their expectations being met. Generally, Fowles had been a good puppet master unlikely to uncover of his purpose behind the novel. What we knew is that he had made a remarkable move in the literature world.


William Stephenson, Chester College of Higher Education. “The French Lieutenant’s Woman.” The Literary Encyclopedia. 10 Oct. 2002. The Literary Dictionary Company. 23 July 2007. ;;UID=796;

Free Essays

French Revolution: Ultimately a Failure

Liberte, Egalite, and Fraternite were the main principles of the French revolution. However, it was a time where these three ideals would be twisted into nothing more than moral and physical violence. The revolution was ultimately a failure which spun out of control and began to murder itself. The French wanted Freedom from its absolutist ruler, but in turn saw themselves being governed by the devil. These citizens wanted a sense of brotherhood amongst their country, but saw their nation being torn apart by violence.

Furthermore, the third estate sought to benefit from a new government that promised equality; however, the result was a further imbalance in an already corrupt society. Ironically, the gruesome reign of terror which was fabricated by the French government, contradicted the ideals of which the very revolution stood for, further illustrating the utter failure of this event. In the beginning, the French saw the revolution as a way to improve their lives, but this path quickly turned into a horrifying ascent into oblivion, which aside from immense suffering, achieved nothing.

During the reign of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, revolutionary ideas flourished through the age of enlightenment. However, Louis made a crucial mistake by aiding the American Revolution; although it was a military success, it was an economic failure. France was bankrupt and the people were starving; they watched as their monarchs, nobles and aristocracy live a life of luxury and wealth while they suffered through poverty, drastically changing how the citizens perceived their monarch. Soon this resentment transformed into pure hatred and nothing could be done to change their minds.

Before long the people revolted and Louis’ powers were stripped away, a new man was then put in his place, Robespierre. Maximilien Francois Marie Isidore de Robespierre was a man who had great power and abused it; to some he was “The Incorruptible”, but in reality was a blood thirsty dictator. As a young man, he studied the law and held a reputation for honesty and compassion. He sought to abolish the death penalty and refused to pronounce a required death sentence after becoming a judge : A victor who kills his captive enemies is called a barbarian!

A grown man who kills a child that he could disarm and punish seems to us a monster! An accused man condemned by society is nothing else for it but a defeated and powerless enemy. Before it, he is weaker than a child before a grown man — to erase from the code of the French the blood laws that command judicial murders, and that their morals and their new constitution reject. I want to prove to them: 1- that the death penalty is essentially unjust and, 2- that it isn’t the most repressive of penalties and that it multiplies crimes more than it prevents them.

However, as the revolution progressed so did his ideas; he soon became the head of the Jacobin club, a radical group who advocated exile or death for the French nobility. By this time the once soft and kind-hearted man, was now replaced by one who had developed a great love of power along with a reputation of intolerance, self-righteousness and cruelty . Robespierre quickly came to a conclusion that the end would justify the means, and that in order to defend the revolution against those who would destroy it, the shedding of blood was justified.

Merlin de Thionville who was a member of several French legislative bodies said commented that: “In those days so rotten had France become that a bloody mountebank without talent or courage, whose name was Robespierre, made every citizen tremble under his tyranny”. The French now lived under fear and oppression of a man who no longer cared for the people of the revolution but rather the revolution itself. Using his great oratory skills he successfully demanded the execution of the king and queen without fair trial or judgement, saying that “Louis must die so that the revolution may live”.

In January 1973 Louis XVI was executed, followed by his wife ten months later. By his own words he had become a monster, “A victor who kills his captive enemies is called a barbarian” . A nation cannot be one when the people do not believe in the ideals of the government. The revolution was merely a civil war which pitted citizens against one another. While many people believed in the revolution, they did not accept the extremist ideas of the Jacobins, and for that thousands of ordinary people were targeted and killed.

The September Massacres was a subsequent mass killing of prisoners, after news that the Prussian Army had invaded France. On September 3, 1792, crowds of French citizens stormed into the prisons where they attacked prisoners and refractory clergy, regardless of their status as counter revolutionary. An account of this event by Nicolas-Edme Restif illustrates the torture the citizens inflicted on the prisoners who were their “brothers”: There had been a pause in the murders. Something was going on inside. . . . I told myself that it was over at last.

Finally, I saw a woman appear, as white as a sheet, being helped by a turnkey. They said to her harshly: “Shout ‘Vive la nation! ‘” “No! No! ” she said. They made her climb up on a pile of corpses. One of the killers grabbed the turnkey and pushed him away. “Oh! ” exclaimed the ill-fated woman, “do not harm him! ” They repeated that she must shout “Vive la nation! ” With disdain, she refused. Then one of the killers grabbed her, tore away her dress, and ripped open her stomach. She fell, and was finished off by the others. Never could I have imagined such horror. I wanted to run, but my legs gave way.

I fainted. When I came to, I saw the bloody head. Someone told me they were going to wash it, curl its hair, stick it on the end of a pike, and carry it past the windows of the Temple. What pointless cruelty! . . The number of active killers who took part in the massacres was about one hundred and fifty. The rest of Paris looked on with fear or approval, and the rest behind closed shutters, signifying the destruction of unity through the people. With a country whose citizens mercilessly killed one another, how could the French have a sense of Fraternite amongst themselves?

A Nation is not united under fear and death but rather through peace and prosperity, which was clearly the opposite of the French Revolution. Equality was promised to the third estate, but the revolution did not create a balance. What it did was further upset the structure of society. In turn the first and second estate was removed from power, and the bourgeoisie put in their place. The rest of the third estate which included the peasants and the working class (sans-culottes), were left with nothing: They were the working people, the farmers, the shop owners, the trades people, the artisans, and even the factory workers.

They were among the prominent losers of the first, more subtle revolution. While the middle class and wealthy classes benefitted greatly from the revolution, the sans-culottes saw their livelihoods disappearing and inflation driving them to fight for survival. The sans-culottes and peasants were generally poor and had little power, they could not vote, hold office, or own land because they did not have the means to do so. Since they could not own land, peasants were angry that they had traded one master for another; once again they had found themselves at the bottom of the ladder.

The Sans-culottes atoned for this by aligning themselves with the Jacobins. While this alliance gave them a facade of power, they were nothing more than henchmen to a group of radical thinkers who needed people to do their dirty work. However, at the end, many of the Sans-culottes found themselves imprisoned and executed by the very revolutionary tribunals that they had supported. The revolution gave nothing more than an illusion of what the common masses craved; while the first and second estates were gone, a new powerful and cruel organization made up of the bourgeoisie were put in their place.

The Reign of Terror was designed to fight the enemies of the revolution; with that in mind the revolution was no longer about freedom, equality and brotherhood, but rather an extremist form of revolutionary ideals. Anyone who had not aligned themselves with the Jacobin rule or had talent and power were seen as a threat to the new revolution, they were subsequently dubbed as traitors and sentenced to the guillotine. For the first time in history, terror became an official government policy, with the intent to use violence to achieve political goals.

In the course of this reign the new regime managed to execute thousands of people who were considered as having the potential to stand up or overthrow the government. Through this, scores of influential people were falsely accused. In one particular execution, a woman by the name of Mme Roland uttered the words that have been immortalized by history, “O Liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name”. She was right, the revolution had abused and committed crimes against not only the idea of liberte, but also of egalite and fraternite.

Every person who placed their head upon the guillotine, were there because the three ideals which the revolution stood for were corrupted to support the extremist views of the Jacobins. The modern era has unfolded the shadows of the French revolution. Ultimately this time period did not bring any successes, but rather the opposite. The revolution was purely the product of a few conspiratorial individuals who brainwashed the masses into subverting the old order. The promises of egalite, equalite, and fraternite, were soon lost as violence and bloodshed set in.

The French were eager to be free of the constricting class system and absolute monarchy. However, the people found themselves under the rule of a man who oppressed the people into an absolute state of obedience. Furthermore, the French wanted a sense of unity throughout their country, but instead resorted to the brutal murders of their own people. Ultimately, this reformation was caused by an upset in the balance of equality amongst the classes. The third estate was promised equal status by the revolution, but in the end only the bourgeoisie emerged victorious.

Ironically, the reign of terror distorted the three main ideals for which the revolution stood for. Through the guidance of corrupted leaders, these ideas were washed away in bloodshed. The French revolution is an usurpation of power gone wrong, at the end of this ten year period, nothing was gained, yet everything was lost. The people who once saw this transformation as the answer to an oppressive regime soon realized that had simply set themselves up for a meeting with death.

Free Essays

French Fishtail Braid

Demonstration speech I. Introduction A. Greeting and hook: Most of you probably already know how to do a simple braid and maybe some of you can do a French Braid, but do you know how to french fishtail braid? B. Thesis: Today I will show you how to do a French fishtail braid. C. Credibility statement: I personally love to do this braid because it’s intricate looking but easy to do. I have done it many times and really enjoy doing it. D. Main points: First I will talk about preparing the hair, then I will discuss the process of French fishtail braiding.

I’ll give some helpful tips and finally I will show you a finished braid. II. Body (Transition statement: To prepare for this hair design, you are going to need some supplies) A. Getting the supplies, brushing hair and damp vs. dry hair 1. What you will need. a. A brush to detangle. b. One pony tail holder. c. A mirror. d. Some bobby pins to pin away stray hairs. e. Hair spray 2. To begin preparing whoever’s hair you’re braiding, start by brushing or combing the hair. 3. It doesn’t matter if the hair is dry or wet. But it is easier to braid wet hair because it doesn’t have so many flying pieces. Transition statement: Once the hair is prepared, let’s move on to the process of braiding. ) B. How to begin the braiding. 1. Gather a small handful of hair from the back center of the head, as though starting a classic French braid. 2. Separate the hair into two sections. 3. Take a skinny strand of hair from the right side of the face, pull it back and cross it over to join the left hair section 4. Take a skinny strand of hair from the left side of the face, pull it back and cross it over to join the right hair section. 5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until all hair is incorporated into the two sections.

You may now pull the rest of your hair into a ponytail or continue braiding the “tail” part of the braid. 6. Take a skinny strand of hair from the right section, cross it over to the left section and pull tight. 7. Take a skinny strand of hair from the left section, cross it over to the right section and pull tight. 8. Repeat steps 6 and 7 until all hair is braided. Secure the end with a hair tie. C. Tips and tricks 1. You can put the hair band on your wrist before you start, that way all you have to do is slide it off your wrist and it’s right there when you need it. . A spritz of hair spray as you go helps keep the braid neat while you keep working. 3. For a messier look, tease your hair before braiding. 4. Doing the fishtail braid while your hair is wet will give it a firmer grip, creating a more precise braid. 5. Try a fishtail braid bun if your hair is long. Start the braid and then wrap it in a bun. 6. For a Katniss Everdeen look from Hunger Games, start French fishtail halfway up one side of your head and wrap it down the other side. 7. For thicker hair, consider using thicker strands for better control. III. Conclusion Transition statement: Now you can see that creating a French Fishtail Braid is a simple variation of the regular French Braid. A. Main points: Don’t forget, when you are creating your own Fishtail French Braid, remember these tips; 1. Get your supplies all out and ready before you begin. 2. Practice using two instead of three strands of hair to accomplish the braid. 3. Wet hair is a great tip to keep the braid neater and finish it all off with hair spray. B. Closer: and as we come to an end I hope that I was helpful and that you all have a good understanding of how to do a french fishtail braid.

Free Essays

American vs. French Revolution

Compare and Contrast Essay American vs. French Revolution Throughout the years, our world has faced drastic and far-reaching changes in the way people think and behave. Countries have managed to constantly change their way of viewing things and started by placing action of what they thought. Two great examples about these conversions are the American and the French Revolution. This times in history, where vital for the formation of nations all over the world and was able to leave a legacy until today.

Whereas some people consider these changes as minimal, the American and French Revolution changed the way governments were formed around the world. The French Revolution started in France 1789 which turn out to be a period of radical social and political up heal in France. France was left really poor after helping with the American Revolution a few years before. One of the main conflicts found between the government and the people was that they were charging the poor for taxes while the nobles weren’t paying at all. When the citizens realized it, the governed decided to overthrow the government which at this time was ruled by Louis XVI.

More and more people joined the opposition to the existing governing constitution. The Girondin was one of the most important devices in the French revolution due to the fact that many executions of the national party took place there. It was considered a scary time in the country because of the many executions that were held to back up any revolutionary activities. A few years later, Napoleon Bonaparte established an end to the revolution by declaring himself the ‘First consul’ of France, however didn’t quite develop a stable government for later.

In the other hand, the American Revolution years earlier back in 1775. The main reason for why this war took place was because the 13 American colonies wanted to break apart from their “mother land”, Great Britain. Unlike the French, the American battle was fought as a war with guns and canons in where troops seize to obtain power for their country. After 3 years of war, the French and the United States created the Franco-American Alliance in 1778. This was one more step towards the Americans gaining power over their land.

This finally concluded in 1783 when they signed the Treaty of Paris which ended the war. However, Independence Day in the United States is celebrated the 4th of July because that same date back in 1776 was when the famous piece written by Thomas Jefferson was signed by the one of the most important people in American history. The declaration stated their freedom as a legit nation and grants them the title of the United States of Americas. As you can see, both revolutions have their differences among with their similarities.

One of the obvious ones is that the American Revolution was the one who created this revolutionary movement in world history and inspired other nations who were struggling for their rights (in this case France). France returned them the favor of inspiration by helping them fight against the British and contributing in what was needed. Another similarity was that they both had a written piece (Declaration of Independence and The rights of man) which introduced how the people wanted to be treated. In this fight for what the people believed was right, I’m sure you noticed various differences among the two.

First of all, the American Revolution took place an ocean away from the country of origin and the French Revolution was held in France itself. Another difference mentioned before is that the American Revolution was developed through war and battle. France in the other hand was more of executions and conflicts between the people and the government. One of the most important contrarieties was that the United States incarnated America as a state of democracy and created a long lasting government that is still held today.

The French tried to do something similar however they weren’t able to. As you can see, the Revolutions, with their differences and similarities, managed to reform their countries in their own way. Weather it was through war or through executions, the people managed to say how they wanted to be ruled and accomplished it. In my opinion I think that the revolutions were and will continue to be one of the most important events in world history and that we will forever have an effect on how our world can behave.

Free Essays

French Rev

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION PAST YEAR ESSAY QUESTIONS No. | PAPER| ESSAY QUESTION| 1| O/N 2001| Why did Louis XVI fail to satisfy the demands of the revolutionaries in France during the period 1789-1793? | 2| M/J 2002| Why did the French revolution become increasingly radical during the years 1789-94? | 3| O/N 2003| Which of the grievances of the Third Estate in France in 1789 were the most important? Explain your answer. | 4| O/N 2004| How far and why did the aims of revolutionaries in France change during the period from 1789 to 1793? 5| O/N 2005| Why during the period 1789 to 1793 did Louis XVI fail to satisfy the demands of the French revolutionaries? | 6| M/J 2006| From 1789 to 1799, who posed the more dangerous threats to the French Revolution: its internal or its external enemies? | 7| M/J 2007| Why did Louis XVI’s policies from 1789 fail to prevent his execution in 1793? | 8| O/N 2008| Why did the French ancien regime collapse in 1789? | 9| 0/N 2009/(11)| ‘The economic difficulties of France in 1789 were more serious than the political problems. How far do you agree with this judgement? | 10| O/N 2009/(12)| How far, and why, did the aims of the revolutionaries in France change during the period from 1789 to the execution of Louis XVI in 1793? | 11| M/J 2010/ (13)| ‘The most important problem of the French ancient regime was poor quality leadership. ’ How far do you agree with this judgement? | 12| O/N 2010/ (11)| Why did the rulers of France from 1789 to 1799 fail to hold on power? 13| O/N 2010/ (13)| Why did the summoning of the Estate-General in 1789 not solve the problems of the ancient regime? | 14| M/J 2011/(11)| Why was Louis XVI executed in 1793? | 15| M/J 2011/ (13)| Did Robespierre and the Jacobins do more to save or to endanger the French Revolution? | 16| O/N 2011/ (12)| Explain the rise and fall of the Jacobins in France during the period from 1789 to 1794. | 17| O/N 2011/ (13)| Why were the attempts to reform the ancient regime in France up to 1789 unsuccessful? |

Free Essays

Cross-cultural Communication and French Culture

Individual Assignment: “Euro Disneyland” 1. Using Hofstede’s four cultural dimensions as a point of reference, what are some of the main cultural differences between the United States and France? PDI: Power Distance IDV: Individualism MAS: Masculinity UAI: Uncertainty Avoidance PDI: Power Distance IDV: Individualism MAS: Masculinity UAI: Uncertainty Avoidance The main cultural differences when using the Hofstede dimensions are in the dimensions Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance. It is clear that French culture accepts and welcomes a relatively big power gap.

This means that it is hirarchical country where power and the flow of information is determined much more by hierarchy then in America, where this gap is less accepted by people with less power. The other big difference is France’s hight level of uncertainty avaoidance. The French would like to control the future as much as possible, they are not risk takers. The Americans on the other hand have low uncertainty avoidance that makes them risk takers, this coppeled with extremely high indiviualism and very low power distance makes them very entrepreneurial.

They act on their own and are less likely to accept the status quo when someone has more power then them. French culture also has low masculinity which means it’s a femini culture. This means that soft skills and the family are very important in France. This can be seen by France’s extensive social welfare systhem. 2. In what way has Trompenaars research helped explain cultural differences between the United States and France? Trompenaars research is based on 46000 managers from over 40 countries who answered questionnaires based on their experiences in many different cultures.

Trompenaar and his colleague Charles Hampden-Turner (“The Seven Dimensions of Culture” 2012) created a model where national culture is determined by 7 dimensions. First an important dimension is the individualism – collectives dimension. Americans are very individualistic. In the French culture work, decision-making and power is attributed to the collective. This can also be also seen in the Achievement vs. Ascription dimension. In America individual achievement is valued highly. France’s culture is more “Ascription” based, that means that the title and status you were born into determines your social level more then individual contribution.

This is called “reproduction sociale. ” The research is valuable because the methology is fact based and quantitative. The 7 dimensions look at factors that are not deemed relevant by Hofstede and give a more in depth picture of cultural differences. 3. In managing its Euro Disneyland operations, what are three mistakes that the company made? The biggest mistake first and foremost was that Disney did not understand the needs and behaviour of the customer. The customer was severely misunderstood and that let to many operational and cultural mistakes.

Only 40% of the customers were French, many were vacationing Americans and Japanese. The French people expected to be able to buy wine and Disney initially did not offer it. Large luxury hotels were built for people who were expected to spend a week in the parks, however Europeans see theme parks as daytrips. Mistakes were made when misjudging breakfast and lunch routines and dishes, witch lead to long lines and bad service. The second mistake was not being able to convince the French that Disneyland is not an American assault on French culture.

The French society was hostile from early on. Public intellectuals called the park an assault on French culture and farmers blocked the entrance of the theme park on opening day. The third mistake was the high pricing of tickets and hotel nights. Europeans have more vacation days then Americans, with similar income levels that means that the French have less expendable income per vacation day then the Americans. Disneyland reacted to the mistakes by changing the name to “Disneyland Paris” this created a stronger bond with the city and France.

Then wine was sold and the dining experience was adapted to meet customer needs. Also day ticket and hotel nights were cut by a third. The result of the changes was an increase in visitors from 8. 8 million in 1994 to 11. 7 in 1996. Based on its experience, what are three lessons the company should have learned about how to deal with diversity? The biggest lesson that they should have learned is that cultural differences matter. It is not possible to take the exact same concept that is working in America and apply it in another cultural context and then expect the same outcomes.

This is especially relevant when it comes to behaviour. The second lesson is trying to have a better understanding of who the customer is and what he wants before the launch. Extensive customer research has to be done. In the Euro Disney case many of the customers where not French and many of the French customers did not want or expect to eat the best French food in Disneyworld. They saw Disneyworld as American and therefor expected an American customer experience that included, self-service and American food.

However they also expected wine, so research is needed to understand the subtleties, what French culture can be left out when offering an American experience and what cannot. The entry into a market has to be careful and transparent in order to get more local support. The discussions with the government and the local population should not only be about the tax benefit Disney can get, but heavily focused on the positive effects Disney can bring to a host nation. These advantages, such as jobs and increased tourism have to vehemently communicated to the public.

The third lesson is to focus on opening new theme parks in emerging economies. Not only are there less attractions to compete with, Disneyland Paris is competing with the city of Paris for tourists, but also are they more open to western influences and products. Disney symbolises America. So sell America where there is demand for her, like China. Bibliography: graph (http://geert-hofstede. com/dimensions. html) ——————————————– [ 1 ]. http://geert-hofstede. com/france. html

Free Essays

Radicalization French Revolution

Reasons radicalization of French Revolution By the end of September 1791, the National Assembly announced that its work was done. In many ways, the Constitution of 1791 seemed to fulfil the promises of reform which had been first uttered by the men of 1789. All Frenchmen could now be proud that the following rights had been secured: equality before the law, careers open to talent, a written constitution, and parliamentary government. Hence, there was a sizeable faction within the National Assembly who were satisfied and claimed the Revolution to be at an end as its primary aims had been achieved.

However, by 1792 the revolution moved in a more radical and violent direction. Why the revolution became radical is often debated, and there are essentially two main reasons as to why it did so. First, a counter-revolution, loyal to Church and King, was led by the noble and the clergy and supported by staunch Catholic peasants. This threatened the changes of the revolutionaries; therefore they turned to drastic measures. Second, the economic, social, and political discontent of the urban working classes also propelled the Revolution in the direction of radicalism.

These were the small shop-keepers, artisans and wage earners, referred to as ‘sans-culottes’. Popular discontent and Jacobin agitation was evident in August as the city council was overthrown and the Commune of Paris was established. Despite the revolutionaries drafting a constitution, they now had no monarch as the royal family was under house arrest. By September the capital was in a state of chaos as more than 1,200 people were killed. This took place in order to maintain revolution and keep it moving forward.

Although the constitution was already enshrined and the citizens had their freedom and liberties, there was still plenty of public dissent and disapproval as to whether or not these laws would help create a new government and prevent the country from breaking apart. The people had come this far and were not prepared to watch their efforts lead to failure or the restoration of an absolute monarchy. As a result of this radical forces were able to get citizens on side by claiming the constitution of 1791 did not meet the demands of all the people.

Radicals led the Commune, discarded the old constitution and called for a National Convention to revise a new one. In January 1793, Louis XVI was executed and the Jacobins condemned their actions by claiming that the monarchy had to be abolished in order to eliminate as many of the royalist and monarchists that remained. France was declared a republic and it could be suggested that his death signified the emergence of nationalism as people remained loyal to the radicals. In addition to this, it highlighted the point where radicalism would dominate the revolution.

The revolution faced strain as it coped with the weight of foreign war and civil war which caused the revolutionary leadership to grow more radical. Moderate reformers – the Girondins, had previously dominated the National Convention, but this was to change. Division within the convention began to emerge within the Convention as the Jacobins and Girondins desired different aims. Factional disputes resulted in the replacement of the Girondins with the Jacobins – the far more radical of the two.

The Jacobins claimed it was their duty to save the revolution and their strengths helped gain them the support of the sans-culottes. It was the premise of the Jacobins that they should eradicate the “enemies” and secure the destiny of the revolution through the destruction of counter-revolutionary forces. The Jacobins managed to grip firm control of the Convention and the French Nation. Essentially, they were now the government. However, with the strain of civil war, economic distress and threats of foreign invasion, they realised strong leadership was required in order to save the revolution.

The CPS assumed tight leadership in April 1793, and it has been argued that the reign of terror followed from this. The Committee ordered arrests and trials of counter-revolutionaries and imposed government authority. However, there was no turning back from the radical phase that the people had voluntarily entered. By summer, the reign of terror had spread over France, spearheaded by the infallibility of Robespierre, began persecuting even the innocent. It can be seen it was far too radical as even the moderate Girondins were accused of counter-revolutionary actions and expelled from the Convention.

What was once a legislative, two-sided body had now become an authoritarian oligarchy led by radicals. It has been argued that this was a step backwards in the revolution as it imitated an absolute monarchy, without the safeguards of constitution. Around 17,000 people died as a result of the terror, and this was to be a stage in the revolution that could not be undone. In the summer of 1794 there seemed to be less need for terror and the republic seemed a reality. With the 9th Thermidor, the machinery of the Jacobin republic was dismantled.

Leadership passed to the property owning bourgeoisie. The government then changed hands to the five-man directory and radicalism had been effectively thwarted. However, France was still at war with the rest of Europe and leadership began to pass into the hands of generals, which ultimately saw the emergence of Napoleon Bonaparte. France was not prepared for such social and political upheaval, and the resulting shift towards a republic would change the country forever.

Free Essays

Comparison of the French Revolution and the Salem Witch Trials

Coincidence and certainty —– comparison of the French Revolution and the Salem Witch Trials As we have learned on the class, these two distinguished historical events, the French Revolution and the Salem Witch Trials have obvious similarities and certain differences, we pay attention to them because these are two of the miserable man-made chaos in human history (although French Revolution has great positive importances to France and the whole world, there was unnegeletable chaos and massacres, that’s what I what to illustrate above).

In my point of view, after analysing different aspects of their backgrounds , we can say that besides the differences, there are also reasonable similarities between both of the events. To compare and contrast the French Revolution and the Salem Witch Trials, I would like to separate the topic into several parts associated with the events to illustrate my idea. Differences: 1, The Salem Witch Trials happened on 1692, while the French Revolution exploded on 1789, which means that these two events have a time gap of almost one hundred years. , Meanwhile, The Salem Witch Trials happened in Massachusetts, America, and the French Revolution at first bursted in Paris, France, and then spreaded around the whole country, the location is another difference. 3, Massachusetts, at that time was a colony of Great Britain, the overall social economy remained undeveloped as agricultural-based villages, no more to say the capitalization and modernization; while France in 1789 had already become one of the strongest country in Europe with a great economy development. , 1692 in Massachusetts, society was in the control of the colonists from Great Britain, villagers were kept in a primitive agricultural life, the main conflict in that region, in my opinion, was the gap between the rich and the poor among the villagers. 1789 in France, people were divided into three stages, first stage consisted of bishops and priests, second stage consisted of aristocrat and royalty, and the third one consisted of bourgeois and peasants, while Bourgeois had become the most effective and active status in France by their talents and hardworking, they didn’t enjoy any privileges and political rights; peasants ere under tough taxations and suffered from poverty. So the conflicts between the third stages and the first two stages were getting more and more serious. 5, 1692 in Massachusetts, most people were uneducated, thus inevitably had superstitious beliefs such as ghost and witch, effected by these kinds of beliefs, they were easily aroused and provoked, caused panic, then they could help going mad and doing crazy things. 789 in France, most people had been influenced by “the enlightement”, more and more people believed the thoughts of liberty, equality and fraternity, thus disappointed with the social fact. Similarity: 1, Among people who got involved into these two events, there were large amount of uneducated and poor persons: villagers in Massachusetts, and peasants in France. 2, I want to use the word “conformity” to explain the chaos and massacres of both events psycologically.

Why were there so many innocent people sentenced to death penalty at last? Why did persons who used to be kind become brutal and blinded accused the others? I believe that on one hand, people have a trend to believe something which is believed by the majority, which has driven people in Massachusetts to accuse others of witches without any reasonable evidence and made people in France believe that some people were guilty to be traiters.

On the other hand, when under a disordered situation, people lost their own sense of judgement and justice, in order to protect themselves from being accused guilty, they had to set up others to prove that they themselves were innocent. 3, Both of the events, fierce and terrible as they became, were finally terminated, with in my opinion, shows that human history has a strong ability of self-recovery and development. The society changes after great chaos and people learn and make progresses, that’s how we grow up.

Free Essays

Silence: Silence: a Thirteenth-Century French Romance

The writer begins Silence by calling himself Master Heldris of Cornwall and saying his wish not to have his work spread among wealthy people who don’t know how to appreciate it. He refers to them as “the kind of people”, which clearly shows his negative attitude toward those who he describes as “prize money more than honor”, or “want to hear everything but do not care to make a man happy with some reward they might wish to give”.

The phrase “at the beginning of the work”, or “before I begin to tell my story” are repeated three times throughout the opening: one at the start, one at the center, and one at the end right before the writer starts telling the story. This, together with strong words such as “command”, “request”, repeatedly reminds the readers of the writer’s demand to preserve his work and of his deep hatred toward greedy people. The writer’s strong feeling against avaricious men is expressed clearly: “I feel tremendously compelled, stung, goaded [into talking about this]”, and “It bothers me terribly”.

Several different negative words and phrases are also used to depict those people throughout the text: “greedy”, “nasty”, “petty”, “fools”, “intoxicated with Avarice”, “those hateful men”. He tells problems relating to those people from the perspective of a poet: “serve them well, as if they were your father: then you will be most welcome, judge a fine minstrel, well-received”, or “very bad cheer and a sour face, that’s what you’ll always get from them” when you ask for something. The bitterness in each sentence and the clear descriptions shows that the writer seems to have experienced those problems himself.

He disgusts greedy people and views them as pathetic creatures that have a dreadful life as they try to “pile up wealth” and “yet afraid of losing it”: “a man afraid is not at peace he is miserable and ill at ease. Wealth only makes a man mean-spirited and makes him toil without profit. All he does is soil himself” Greedy men “rob” world “of all pleasure”, and lost their trust in everyone, even their own wives: “he doesn’t want her spend any of it, “for one missing penny would mar the perfection of those thousands marks he lost sleep over”.

The writer emphasizes that owning property does not make life easier nor brings one any “joy and festivity” if one do not know how to use and share it wisely: “lost sleep”, “ill”, “miserable”, “stingy”. Capitalizing Avarice, the writer refer to Avarice as a dangerous goddess who traps fools in her maze of wealth, let them honor her as “their sovereign lady and wet nurse”, but betrays them, leaves them “drunk” and “intoxicated” and “driven to disgrace themselves”. While hating those fools, the writer is seriously concerned and cry :”O greedy people, alas! las! ”. He repeatedly refer to the “locked away” wealth as “disgrace”, “shame”, and even a dirty substance: “dung”. Comparing unused wealth and dung, he further devalues property: “at least dung enriches the soils”, while greedy men “abuse this earthy life” and “enclosed their courts with shame forever”. Dung is often referred to as dirty and worthless, yet it has a function that benefits the planet, while wealth, often related to luxuriousness and enjoyment, neither brings comfort to its owner nor influence the world positively at all.

Several comparisons are also used near the end of the opening to address the same point: “assets are worth less than manure”: “just as wheat is worth more than weeds”, rose” more than daisy, goshawk more than falcon more than buzzard, good wine than stagnant water, bittern than magpie, and most of all “ honest poverty is of greater worth than a thousand marks without joys and festivity”. The comparisons start from small plants to birds to the main subjects: honest poverty versus useless wealth.

This proves that wealth and greed are inferior and shameful, while praises generosity as superior and honorable. At the end of the opening, after all the hatred has been expressed, the writer says he now can begin his story “without a lot of fuss and bother”. Since the overall theme of the story relate to property and the problems relating to the right to own it, it appears that the writer does not just simply tell us his feeling toward greed and wealth but his main goal is to prepare us with a basic background of the story.

The transition from the opening to the story is thus smoother. The story begins with the description of King Evan as a wise king who “maintained peace in his land” and apply strict rules to control his people. What King Evan has is wealth, power and respect so obviously troubles are unavoidable. This obviously connects to the theme mentioned in the opening, therefore, readers can catch up with the story more easily.

Free Essays

Path of Democracy Throughout the French Revolution

“The French Revolution was a decisive period in the shaping of the modern west. It implemented the thought of the philosophies, destroyed the hierarchical and corporate society of the Old Regime, which was a legacy of the Middle Ages, promoted the interests of the bourgeoisie, and quickened the growth of the modern state” ( Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 462). The aristocracy of France was also weakened by the Revolution. The nobles no longer had their ancient rights and privileges making them ordinary people. In the nineteenth century, the ruling class was no longer decided upon by noble birth but by property.

This trait was shown before the Revolution. Also the French government was now ran by the aristocrats and the bourgeois. With the bourgeois being given high positions because of their wealth, talent, ambition, and opportunities, they would have an important role in the political life of France. The French Revolution changed the Old Regime, based on a dynastic state, into the modern state it is today. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen concluded that the state was no longer a separation of provinces or estates; it was also no longer a possession of the monarch’s that he believed belonged only to him.

The idea of the Declaration showed that the state now belonged to the people as a whole and its power must come from the people to succeed. The people now had the characteristic of individuality of no longer being separated into nobles and commoners. Many surrounding lands took the ideas and reforms of the French Revolution as inspiration to create their own revolution over their land. “During the nineteenth century, the French Revolution served as a frame of reference for the various political constellations: liberalism, socialism, and conservatism” ( Perry. Chase.

Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 462). Before the Revolution, the state was still closely linked to its religion. Each state had a state church that was the ruling power. “By disavowing any divine justification for the monarch’s power, by depriving the church of its special position, and by no longer limiting citizenship to members of a state church, the Revolution accelerated the secularization of European political life” (Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 463). The Revolution did away with administrative ways of the Old Regime, and imposed rational ways to the state.

Highest ranks of land and position were given to men by their talent and no longer by their birth line. The Revolution also did away with peasantry working obligations, and based taxes on the people’s income. By showing that an ancient order could be overpowered by a new one, The French Revolution inspired other generations to revolt against their abusive model societies. This created three forces with the modern state: total war, nationalism, and a fanatic utopian mentality. These ideas went against the ideas of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and could be destructive to what the French Revolution was creating. The French Revolution also gave birth to the modern nationalism” ( Perry. Chase. Jacob. Jacob. Von Laue, p. 463). During the Revolution, the entire nation was directed loyalty. This view was seen as dangerous by many philosophers because it was feared that it would setback the progress of the Revolution. The Revolution looked to reconstruct society on the basis of Enlightenment ideals. These ideas were soon crushed by the terrors and fears of the dangerous forces that had begun to rise in the later years of the Revolution. These forces almost succeeded in ruining what the French reformers had created.

Free Essays

Especially the French Revolution and Napoleonic Era

French Revolution/ Napoleonic Era WHEN THE KING TOOK FLIGHT * National “Constituent” Assembly, the new assembly not only set to work drawing up France’s first constitution, but engineered a wholesale transformation of French political and social structures that went far beyond anything most of them had requested in their grievance lists. * During the French Revolution, the Legislative Assembly was the legislature of France from 1 October 1791 to September 1792.

It provided the focus of political debate and revolutionary law-making between the periods of the National Constituent Assembly and of the National Convention. * The Legislative Assembly was driven by two opposing groups. The members of the first group were primarily moderate members of the bourgeoisie that favored a constitutional monarchy, represented by the Feuillants, who felt that the revolution had already achieved its goal. [1] The second group was the democratic faction, for whom the king could no longer be trusted, represented by the new members of the Jacobin club. 2] This group claimed that more revolutionary measures were necessary. [ * the citizens of Varennes had been asked to elect their own municipal and regional governments and to participate directly in the day-to-day implementation of new laws * Louis XVI fleeing the very constitution he had sworn to defend * Appearance of soldiers in Varennes had led to enormous tensions. We know that this action was part of the general movement of troops intended to protect the king’s escape, a conspiracy in which Bouille was intimately involved. The king’s flight had dangerous conspiracies involving foreign soldiers and perhaps foreign armies * The night the king suddenly appeared in a small town in northeastern France is arguable one of the most dramatic and poignant moments in the entire French Revolution. * Local inhabitants=reshape their lives * Louis’ most pervasive impact on the train of events probably came less from what he did than from what did not do: from his very lack of leadership, his indecision and inconsistency WATERLOO: JUNE 18, 1815 The errors made by Napoleon and other French commanders during the Waterloo campaign were severe, indeed perhaps even decisive * His own destiny was almost more important to Napoleon than the thousands—and finally millions—of lives that were lost in the course of his pursuit of it * Hundred Days (stage four) FRENCH REVOLUTION APP * Directory, a body of five directors that held executive power in France

Free Essays

Elizabeth Visits Gpc’s French Subsidiary Discussion Questions

ELIZABETH VISITS GPC’S FRENCH SUBSIDIARYDiscussion Questions 1. What can Elizabeth Moreno do to establish a position of power in front of French managers tohelp her accomplish her assignment in five days? Explain. The French tend to regard authority as residing in the role and not the person; Elizabeth willneed to find subtle ways to accentuate her expertise, her advanced degree in Chemistry, andher role as Vice President. Further, she will need to demonstrate an intellectual flexibilitywhile allowing the French to show their ability to grasp complex issues and evaluatesolutions. . What should Elizabeth know about “high-context” vs. “low-context” cultures in Europe? Explain. Countries in Europe do not share the same cultural context; France is more high-context thanGermany. As a result, Elizabeth should pay especially close attention to the cultural contextof the communication including: the medium, the source, the setting, proxemics, paralanguageand object language. 3. What should Elizabeth include in her report so that future executives and scientists avoidcommunication pitfalls?

Elizabeth could help her peers by noting communications processes that worked and noting which processes failed. She should provide as much information about the communication context as possible. 4. How can technical language differ from everyday language in corporate communications? Technical language is often shared across cultures (the Arabic word for computer is“computer”). Technical language is communicated through its own communication channels —papers, proceedings and journals. These journals are often, though not always, prepared inEnglish.

While technical jargon creates a common or shared language on some levels, it doesnot eliminate the problems associated with cross-cultural communication 1. drawing from your understanding of verbal and nonverbal communication patterns from this chapter,explain what elizabeth moreno can do to establish her position in front of french managers. how can she get them to help her accomplish her assignment in five days Since the only exposure elizabeth ever had before regarding her langauage barrier is her two weeks vacation in french. Elizabeth needs to develop her nonverbal communication instead with he fellow employees in French subsidiary by being her friendly and flexible self, showing a good manners, and having easy-to-talk-with facial expression. Because it is very important for Elizabeth to maintain having a good relationships with the employees at the office, she should at least mastered the french organizational cultures. 2. what should elizabeth know about high context versus low context cultures in europe ? how can this knowledge help her be successful there? First we need to know the definition of low context and high contex. Here are the brief explanations about it

A low context culture is one in which things are fully (though concisely) spelled out. Things are made explicit, and there is considerable dependence on what is actually said or written. A high context culture is one in which the communicators assume a great deal of commonality of knowledge and views, so that less is spelled out explicitly and much more is implicit or communicated in indirect ways. In a low context culture, more responsibility is placed on the listener to keep up their knowledge base and remain plugged into informal networks.

Low context cultures include Anglos, Germanics and Scandinavians. High context cultures include Japanese, Arabs and French. Implications Interactions between high and low context peoples can be problematic. Japanese can find Westerners to be offensivelyblunt. Westerners can find Japanese to be secretive, devious and bafflingly unforthcoming with information French can feel that Germans insult their intelligence by explaining the obvious, while Germans can feel that French managers provide no direction

Low context cultures are vulnerable to communication breakdowns when they assume more shared understanding than there really is. This is especially true in an age of diversity. Low context cultures are not known for their ability to tolerate or understand diversity, and tend to be more insular. Based on the aforementioned explaination, since Elizabeth have a job in French that has a high context cultere, she needs to mastered or at least has a decent understanding on how to communicate non-verbally with the employees. It will efectively help her to succeed there. 3. hat should elizabeth include in her report, and what should be the manner in which it is communicated so that future executives and scientists avoid communications pitfalls ? The report Elizabeth prepares for GPC must include the organizational cultures offered in the French subsidiary, She should include how the French employees socialize with each other, the way they speak, communicate and interact with each other. This will help assist future expat’s from getting culture-shock. Elizabeth could help her peers by noting communications processes that worked and noting which processes failed.

She should provide as much information about the communication context as possible. Develop Cultural Sensitivity Elizabeth must inform her peers that it is very important to know the receiver and to translate the message in a form that will most likely be understood as anticipated. Employees must make sure there messages goes through to the receivers, in order to do that they should become aware of their own cultural and way of speaking and how it affects the communicating process in a different Country. . how can technical language differ from everyday language in corporate communications? Simply because when we talk about firms, corporates, etc it means we talk about organizational cultures with its formality. That automaticaly differentiate the use of language from everyday’s life language. Develop Cultural Sensitivity Elizabeth must inform her peers that it is very important to know the receiver and to translate the message in a form that will most likely be understood as anticipated.

Employees must make sure there messages goes through to the receivers, in order to do that they should become aware of their own cultural and way of speaking and how it affects the communicating process in a different Country. Careful encoding In translating his or intended meaning into symbols for cross cultural communication the sender must use words, picturs or gestures that are appropriate to the recivers frame of reference. Language translation is only part of the encoding process; the message also Proemics-deals with the influence if proximity and space on communicatin with both personl space and office lay out.

What should Elizabeth include in her report, and what should be the manner in which it is communicated so that future executives and scientists avoid communications pitfalls? The report Elizabeth prepares for GPC must include the organizational cultures offered in the French subsidiary and to develop cultural sensitivity, she should include how the French employees socialize with each other, the way they speak, communicate and interact with each other.

This will help assist future expat’s from getting a culture-shock when in the country. Elizabeth could help her peers by explaining the communications processes that worked and failed. She should provide as much information about the communication context as possible. Elizabeth must inform her peers that it is very important to know the receiver and to translate the message in a form that will most likely be understood by both arties Employees must make sure there messages goes through to the receivers, in order to do that they should become aware of their own culture and way of speaking and how it affects the communicating process in a different Country. Elizabeth should also Present a proposal for the GPC to invest more money into International Human Resource management which will be able to provide more training for future employees and teach them how to speak the language, communicate in the host country and understand the culture, the hand gestures used in the country, what is acceptable and what is not.

Free Essays

Dickens’ Views on the French Revolution

Dickens’ views on The French Revolution Revolutions have occurred since the first oppressed people got fed up with a tyrannical leader. It has been the cry of the downtrodden since the beginning of time. Revolution is a word that symbolizes hope for a better future. It can be a dangerous thing because if not successful life for the common people might get worse than it originally was. Even if successful the new leaders can be as bad as those preceding. Dickens captures the essence of a revolution gone bad in his novel A Tale Of Two Cities.

The intent of this short essay is to discuss and analyze Dickens’ treatment of the theme of revolution in A Tale of Two Cities. It will attempt to show you how Dickens changes his mind midway through the novel about whether or not the revolutionaries in France are better than their aristocratic predecessors. When the novel first journeyed into France, it was to a poor district in Paris by the name of St. Antonie. A barrel of wine had fallen from the back of a cart in front of a small wine shop owned by a monsieur Defarge. People from all around rushed to see what had happened.

The people were so poor that the very chance to drink wine, even off the dirty street was too tempting to pass up. They drank out of cupped hands and even went as far as to squeeze wine from a rag into an infant’s mouth. Their hands were stained red by the wine. It is a pitiful and prophetic scene. It is prophetic in that later these same poor peasants whose hands are stained red with wine will have them stained red with the blood of the nobility, and the streets will run with the blood of a revolution as it does with the wine.

The revolution in France is necessary for the good of the people and Dickens seems to be right behind the peasants. His views are expressed most clearly when he shows how uncaring the aristocrats were to the plight of the common people. A specific point of this is when he had the Marque de Evremonde say, after running over a small child, “It is extraordinary that you people cannot take care of yourselves or your children… How do I know what injury you have done my horses. ” (A Tale of Two Cities 112) Judging from how the aristocrat is portrayed, Dickens continues to support he peasants right up to the beginning of the revolution. Dicken’s sympathies shifts rather quickly from the mob of French patriot revolutionaries to the plight of the aristocrats and their families. In the time before the revolution any noble could have any commoner thrown in jail without reason or a trial, just on a suspicion, as was done to Dr. Manette by the Evremonde brothers. This did change after the revolution, when any person at all could be thrown in jail with a good chance of execution by La Guillotine for any reason at all.

The aristocrats in particular had no chance at all, as is shown by this quote, “Let him be, he will be judged in Paris. ” The response being “Judged, ay! , and condemned as a traitor. ” (A Tale of Two Cities 259) Dickens has no love for the mob either. While describing their wild dancing and singing and murder in the streets, he does not speak as if he holds them in high regard. In one case in particular, he seems to really despise their actions and speaks out against them through the rational voice of the narrator, “There were no fewer than five hundred people, and they were dancing like five thousand demons. (A Tale of Two Cities 290) In closing, I reiterate the thesis statement, that things did not improve and in some cases got worse than before. In the long run it was best for the French people as a whole but Dickens is right when he implies that the French Revolutionary mob was composed mainly of animals like Madame Defarge whose interests lay with revenge rather than the improvement as a whole of their society. While it lasted, the French Revolution was one of the most barbaric periods in the history of the world.

Free Essays

Effects of Nationalism After French Revolution

After the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Era, people were brought together by the French army marching through their country. During the nineteenth century nationalism became a great aspect of life. Both writer and artist works were greatly influenced by nationalistic ideals and brought people together. Nationalism became a very popular thing after the Napoleonic Era, when people saw how the French carried themselves as a people of a nation. This is when other nations started to strive for links between their people.

One major forerunner was language. People saw language as one way to unify as a nation, and create a brotherhood between its people. The whole idea of roots and back story also influenced the literature of the nineteenth century as well. Many writers works were influenced from the nineteenth century was influenced by Nationalistic ideals. One set of writers who showed the idea of nationalism were the Brothers Grimm in their Grimm’s Fairy Tales. Grimm’s Fairy Tales is a collection of German fairy tales all in one book.

They used these collection of fairy tales to create a German identity, by saying these were the tales passed on from generation to generation in German culture. Another writer that shows nationalism is Aleksandr Pushkin in his work The Bronze Horseman. The Bronze Horseman tells the tale of Evgenii and how he ends up going mad and getting killed by the statue of Peter. This shows nationalism in the fact that in the introduction of the poem, he talks about the founding of St. Petersburg and how great Russia is. Artist also had many works that portrayed nationalistic ideals.

One piece of art that without a doubt showed nationalism was La Liberte guidant le peuple by Eugene Delacroix. This painting depicts “Mother France” leading her people into battle during the French Revolution. It shows Mother France with torn clothes and a French flag above her head which show how she wanted to bring her people all under the French flag and join them together. Another painting that depicts nationalism is The Bard by John Martin. This painting shows a Welsh bard running from a massacre that had just happened in a town off in the background of the painting.

This showed nationalism in the idea that no matter what the English would send upon the Welsh they would always stand strong as a people and never give in to the English repression. All these different works show different aspects of nationalism. The Brother Grimm with the Grimm’s Fairy Tales, showed German nationalism in the fact that it created German folklore for people to come around. Aleksandr Pushkin’s The Bronze Horseman showed nationalism in that it tells how great Russia is and no matter what happens it will forever keep its greatness.

Eugene Delacroix’s painting La Liberte Guidant le people shows French nationalism in that it shows the French people all coming together under one flag to fight alongside Mother France and were willing to die for her. In The Bard by John Martin shows Welsh nationalism in that no matter what the English did to them they would never give in. In sum, nationalism became a major aspect of life in the nineteenth century. People came together and many new nations began to form in response to these new ideals of nationalism. Nationalism led to many great things, like the unification of Germany in 1871.

Free Essays

French Revolution

At the end of Frances revolution in 1799, the French citizens got what they wanted. Starting with the storming of the Bastille, the French revolution lasted three years. With the revolution finally coming to an end, the French people got a new leader that they long awaited, a new government and constitution, and all together a whole different country. While at the time, people were arguing whether or not the revolution was a necessary event. A little bit more than two hundred years later, we now know that it was a necessary event.

The French revolution was a necessary event, because there was widespread hunger that needed to be changed, they got rid of a king and queen that was disloyal to their country, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen was written. During and before the French Revolution, hunger was everywhere. In Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, Dickens shows how bad the situation in France was by saying “… was the sigh, Hunger. IT was prevalent everywhere.

Hunger was pushed out of the tall houses, in the wretched clothing that hung upon poles and lines; Hunger was patched into them with straw and rag and wood and paper; Hunger was repeated in every fragment of the small modicum of firewood that the man sawed off; Hunger stared to eat. Hunger was the inscription on the baker’s shelves, written in every small loaf of his scanty stock of bad bread; at the sausage-shop, in every dead-dog preparation that was offered for sale.

Hunger rattled its dry bones among the roasting chestnuts in the turned cylinder; Hunger was shred into atomics in every farthing porringer of husky chips of potato, fried with some reluctant drops of oil (Dickens 34, source D). ” Also, with the prices of bread rising, most people relied on what they can grow; they sometimes even ate grass, to keep them alive. With a King and Queen that only cared about themselves, there is no doubt that hunger is the first reason why the French Revolution was a necessary event.

Along with the hunger that made the French Revolution necessary, The Declaration of The Rights of Man and of The Citizen also made it a necessary event. It was a necessary event, because it was saying that they wanted a new government and wanted to get rid of the current government. It also gave citizens many new rights, including: “1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good. 2. The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man.

These rights are liberty, security, and resistance to oppression. (source A). ” Those are only two of the total seventeen rights. This is a good thing that came out of the revolution, and the second reason why it was a necessary event. With all of the hunger and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen making the French revolution a necessary event, the overthrow of the King and Queen also made it necessary. With the young King and Queen barely 20 years old, it was almost guaranteed that they didn’t know how to run a country.

This excerpt from a handout about Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, called “The Ancien Regime,” shows how little the King was prepared to run the country. “Louis XVI, a member of the Bourbon family, was neither intelligent, hardworking, nor firm of purpose (Lacey, source G). It was only an amount of time when they finally executed King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. The killing of the King and Queen is the last reason why the French Revolution was a necessary event.

Starting with the storming of the Bastille, the French Revolution lasted about ten years. During this period, France got a new leader, government, and a whole new country. While many people would argue that was not a necessary event, we now know that is was, because there was a widespread hunger that needed to be put to an end, the Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen was written, and they got rid a King and Queen that cared only about themselves.

The pros of the French revolution outweigh the cons, making the French Revolution a necessary event. Works Cited “Declaration of the Rights of Man-1789. ” The Avalon Project. 2008 Lillian Goldman Law Library. 22 July 2009. Web. Dickens, Charles. A Tale of Two Cities New York: Signet Classic, 2007. Print. Lacey, Robert, ed. “The Ancien Regime” The French Revolution Jackdaw Portfolio No. 147 Amawalk, NY: Jackdaw Publication, 1976. Print.

Free Essays

French Revolution

Do you agree with the idea that French revolution ushered in an era of a new political cultural explicate. Keith baker defines the term revolution as ‘a transformation of discursive practice of the community, a moment in which social relations are reconstituted and the discourse defining the political relations between individuals and group of radically recast. ’(3) According to Albert soboul, the French revolution is situated in the very heart of the history of the contemporary world.

A classic bourgeois revolution, it represented- by the uncompromising abolition of feudalism and the seigniorial regime- the starting point for the capitalist society and a liberal representative system in the history of France. Gary Kate has divided the recent historians of the French revolution into Marxist on the left, ‘neo conservatives’ on the right and ‘neo liberal’ in the centre. Marxist endorses the entire revolution . neo liberals supports the early, less violent stages of the revolution and neo conservatives deploring it together.

The Marxist interpretation on the French revolution can be summarized in the following manner: it was not simply a political struggle from (evil) absolute monarchy to (good) democratic republicanism but represented a deeper shift from feudalism to capitalism. The revolution was led by an alliance between a bourgeois elite and popular class, against the landowning nobility. Liberals or Whigs believes that French revolution was important to move the French and the European from a pre modern to a modern society. This fraction has been paralysed because of inter conflict.

The virtues of revolutionary change were the declaration of the right of man and citizens, abolition of feudalism, reorganisation of judiciary and administration. Neo conservatives projected the whole idea of revolutionary change as illiberal. The neo conservative thinkers have their own pet history of the French revolution. Jacob talmon says that the French state became a totalitarian democracy during terror. The history given by the Talmon was attacked by the liberal historians(7). Talmon and Furet’s history has much in common.

Both of them see a direct line from Rousseau though Sieyes to Robespierre. Both of them see the terror an essence of the revolution. Neo liberal historians argue that the revolution was primarily not a failure. They say that the revolutionaries destroyed the ancien regime and restructured the society that made the 19th century liberal state possible. According to them class should be defined not by political interests but by profession and social interests. Alphonse aulard was awarded the first chair of the history of the French revolution at the Sorbonne.

According to aulard the abuses of the monarchy was responsible and justifiable for the violent uprising of the 1789. The constitution of the 1719, according to aulard provided the monarchy with too much power. The revolution reached halfway because of people like Danton and other activists in Paris. Aulard says that it was their efforts which led to insurrection of 10th august 1792 and the declaration of France’s first democratic republic based on universal make suffrage. It was the peak point of the revolution according to aulard.

After the World War 1, another historian Albert matheiz, a student of aulard, gave his theory on the French revolution. He says that Danton was a corrupt bourgeois politician. He was in favour of Robespierre. He argues that the life of most Parisians was improved during the time of terror. Robespierre was not a dictator according to matheiz. He was the democratic politician who was working according to the demands of the workers. He also founded a society by the name of society of Robespierrist studies; this society also published their own scholarly journal, annales.

He also links the Bolshevik revolution to the French revolution. George Lefebvre (1874-1959), albert soboul (1914-1982) and Michel vovelle(b. 1933) were hugely inspired by the writings of albert matheiz. Crane brinton, a Harvard historian says that the revolution was constructed by ‘moderates ‘who fought the forces of the ancient regimes and constructed a government based on noble virtues of liberty and equality. He say that the Jacobins contained of rich and poor on the basis of tax records recording and they were bond together because of ‘a philosophy, an ideology, a faith and a loyalty. Alfred cobban brings in a view which was different then that of Marxist historians. He is doubtful about the fact that the revolution was led by a rising bourgeoisie. He also says that only 13% of the population that was involved in the revolution was of the merchant class or financier class. The leaders of the revolution came from the local, petty public officials and the likes, the people who had no connection with the regime. According to cobban the revolution was social in nature.

Francois Furet wrote an article denouncing what he called the revolutionary catechism by which Marxist historians explained the revolution. He presented a sophisticated theory of the revolution’s origins and character. By depriving the old corporate structure of the society of their power, according to this theory, the crown induced its subject to grant moral authority to the ‘men of letters’ he completed the analysis of the revolutions origins by describing the channels by which the new revolutionary ideology came to permeate French society. Furet says that the ideas of enlightened scholars such as jean-Jacques Rousseau were the nucleus of the revolution. Furet writes that, the revolution embraced a radical ideology of popular sovereignty so that any abuse of power could be excluded so long as it was achieved in the name of the people. (1) Roger Chartier calls for an ‘enlargement of perspective’ that included the analysis of other practices. It’s not sufficient to study ideology and instead he calls for ‘an approach in the terms of cultural sociology. ’ He expands the field of investigation by adapting the insights from Jurgen Habermas.

He do not believe that the forms of intellectual sociability or the institution of public sphere themselves produced democratic or radical ideas. (4) According to baker, the revolution’s free fall into rousseauian democracy was not the product of 1792-3, when the nation was at war, but was the result of deliberate decisions made by the national assembly as early as the summer of 1789. According to baker the terror occurred not only because of what happened in 1792 or 1793, but because of the way in which political power and violence had been reconceptualized in 1789(6).

For baker the relationship between ideas and events is not as straight forward as often suggested. Baker always criticises the historians for treating the ideas as they were capable of influencing actions. According to him the perceived influence of ideas on events is an illusion. He says that the proper object of the intellectual history is therefore the way in which people have used particular kind of statements to make particular claims. These ways of instruments, of making claims baker calls ‘discourse’. (2) One of the recent significant trends of the French revolution is of the women’s and gender history.

Joan Scott believes that feminists beginning with Olympe De Gouges have been handicapped by the political terms that defined liberation as the right of ‘man’. She challenged the exclusion of woman from the right of man, she argued on the basis of features of that woman alone possessed or was though to possess. Scott observed that citizens were seen as an active, free, rational and concerned with public good, attributes typically associated with men, while woman were defined preoccupied with private or domestic concerns and also emotional and dependent.

It was American feminists because of whom history started taking into account the fate of women in history in the year 1979; three American feminists published a collection of documents discussing the women in the French revolution. The new research made us realize that woman also paid a huge role in the French revolution. Benefiting from the advances made in other fields, historians have become interested in how the revolutionaries refashioned the gender role for both man and woman and how ideas regarding manhood and womanhood influenced the way revolutionary statesman conceived of the new regime(8).

Lynn hunt is one the best feminist historian that one could think of in this regard. In her study she explores why the Jacobins replaced Marianne with Hercules as the anthropomorphic symbol of French nation. Revisionist and the new feminist scholar’s shares two essential attitudes about the revolution: both groups think that the revolution marked one step backward in the woman’s right and both gave credence to the ideas of Rousseau- it was his idea that gave rise to the new notion of female domesticity(9). Religion and revolution is also a part of this debate.

One of the major historians in this regard is Dale Van Kley. In his article, ‘church state and the ideological origins of the French revolution: the debate over the general assembly of the gallican clergy in 1765’, he argues that many of the political ideas that would characterize the revolutionary and the post revolutionary period developed in the pre-revolutionary disputes between believing Catholics over the proper organization of the French church. His interpretation of the religious roots of the revolutionary and the post revolutionary political thought emphasizes continuities.

Another historian Mona Ozous explains the phenomena of revolutionary festivals. She says that the revolutionaries after attacking the traditional catholic worship as ‘fanatical and supportive of tyranny, understood the need to replace the old form of religious life with new doctrine and symbols and above all rituals. She believes that the revolutionary festivals provide the sense of scared that Catholicism had previously furnished. She emphasizes that the revolutionary festivals manifested the sense of inauguration and beginning (5).

She says in the rituals of the new festival people found a conviction that the humanity was moving from a unhappy past to an entirely new period of history. She also considers Freud in her analysis of the revolutionary festivals. Freud understood festivals as moment of transgression. Points at which the normal rules governing social behaviour were violated. Freud has been criticized by Ozous. END NOTES: 1) Conceptualizing the French revolution: problems and methods. Page number 3. 2) Conceptualizing the French revolution: problems and methods. Page number 10. ) Conceptualizing the French revolution: problems and methods. Page number 13. 4) Conceptualizing the French revolution: problems and methods. Page number 15. 5) Conceptualizing the French revolution: problems and methods. Page number 20. 6) The French revolution: introduction by Gary Kates. Page number 8. 7) The French revolution: introduction by Gary Kates. Page number 10. 8) The French revolution: introduction by Gary Kates. Page number 13. 9) French revolution: introduction by Gary Kates. Page number 15. Dimple Bhati 279 History hons 3rd year b

Free Essays

French Cinema

French Cinema Scene analysis The scene from the movie Rules of The Game by Jean Renoir shows many camera techniques and uses the camera to clench the true meaning of the screen. I will be discussing and analyzing the scene. The film beautifully demonstrates the use of precise shots and perfectly executed scenes. Throughout the scene of The Rules of the Game the camera is like another person in the room. It is invisible and wanders throughout the building almost like it is someone following what is happening.

This makes for an interesting and new perception never seen before by film viewers. At one point in the scene the camera gets trapped and has to zoom out as though it is being caught. Along with the presence of the camera you can notice rack focusing, the lighting is obviously controlled. The scene begins with a near foreground and pans out to far background as they move throughout the building. One of the greatest aspects of the scene and the film is the incredibly long takes and long shots.

This allowed us to be able to grasp whatever we wanted to see in every shot. Jean Renoir used montage editing; this gave the audience the freedom to choose what they wanted to see within the scene. The viewers are able to edit their own idea of the shot. As the scene progresses the camera moves weightlessly with the focus on the foreground while the two in the background escape through a door. The use of separation from the hallway to the main room acts as a sort of barrier between shots.

Although on take it feels as though it is separated into two. The primary focus of this shot is to establish the idea that Schumacher is looking for Saint-Aubin. The concept is that the viewer needs to choose who to look at. It forces the viewer to be crossed between the main focus and the deep focus. There is no cut of the camera which would cause all prior viewer attention to be diminished. Because of the fluid camera movement it makes for a realization of what is going on in the background. The final concept is the montage that Jean Renoir uses.

The faint light hearted piano music adds to an overall mood and feeling of the shot. For the most part the movie could be seen as dreary but this scene adds an almost lighthearted tone as they move from the conversation in the hallway to the bigger room. Overall the film scene is a masterpiece in that the camera moves in such a way that allows the viewer to feel like you are right in the action. With All the techniques put into this particular shot you can clearly see that this is one of the greatest films ever made.