Raymond Aron and the French Intellectuals

Author(s): Victor Brombert

Source: Yale French Studies, No. 16, Foray Through Existentialism (1955), pp. 13-23
Published by: Yale University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2929143 .
Accessed: 22/12/2014 07:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Yale University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Yale French
Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT

RaymondAron and the

French Intellectuals
Toynbee
is bornto be unhappy.-Arnold
An intelligentsia

Karl Marx optimistically prophesiedthatat the decisivehour of

of the bourgeoisworldwould
the intellectuals
the class struggle,
rallyto thecause of theproletarianRevolution.If we are to trust
RaymondAron,this fatefulhour has come: the intellectuals of
Franceconsiderthemselves destinedto guidetheworkers; theyare
seducedby thehistoric in whomtheyhail
missionof theproletariat
a new Messiah who, throughsuffering, has assumedthe heroic
role of a collectiveSaviourentrustedwiththe redemption of the
Universe;theyare in the processof beingconverted to a new
religion.Of course,Aron's personalview is thatthe intellectual
belongsin theliterary ratherthan
cafesof Saint-Germain-des-Pres
withthedisgruntled workersof theParisianRed Belt.Most of his
recentarticles,manyof whichhave been collectedin Polemiques
(Gallimard,1955), and morerecently hisbookL'Opiumdes Intel-
lectuelstendto provethispoint.Joyand generous clappingofhands
fromthe traditional Righthave greetedhis perseveringeffortsat
debunking, thoughsome have been a littledisturbedby Aron's
scepticalconclusionsand wouldhavepreferred an evenmoreintran-
sigentstand.In a way, Aron's positionis not an enviableone.
He wouldso muchhave likedto avoid whathe describesas the
outworn betweentheRightand theLeft: he hopednot
alternative
to be pigeonholed.Yet,it wouldseemthatthehackneyed alternative
stillfacestheFrench,and thoughtheRightno longerenjoyscalling
itselftheRight,theLeftis stillverymuchawareof beingtheLeft.
Onlya fewmonths ago,an entireissueofLes TempsModerneswas
devotedto the question,and thereis muchtalk in France of a
NouvelleGaucheand perhapsevensomenostalgiaforthegood old
days of the FrontPopulaire.
Needlessto say,Aron'sfrontal attackon theFrenchintellectuals
foolsno one,leastof all Aronhimself. Everybody knowshe is not
certainly
talkingof all intellectuals, notof a ThierryMaulnieror of
the collaborators of La Table Ronde. Everbodyknowsfull well
whomhe meanswhenhe writesthatthe intellectuals have been
seducedby themythof theRevolution becausethatmythseemsto
offera mystical community obsessedbythe"solitude
to philosophers

13

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Yale French Studies
des consciences."In fact, some of his articlesare outspokenly
aimedagainstSartreand his group.'
How is one to accountforthestrangeattitude of theseintellec-
tuals?How is it thatthesesupposedly clear-thinking,well-meaning
writersand journalists are so unsparing in theircriticismof the
slightest
shortcomings of thedemocracies, and so obstinatelyindul-
genttowardrealcrimesso longas theyare perpetrated forthesake
of an orthodoxdoctrine? These are the specificquestionsthatlie
at the originof L'Opium des Intellectuels. The answer,according
to Aron,is themythof theLeft,the mythof theRevolution, the
mythof the Proletariat-three mythsthathave mergedinto one
Big Mythendowedwithhypnotic power.
But whyhas the hypnosisbeen so effective? Again,Aron has
readyanswers.Ever sincetheRevolutionof 1789, theprestigeof
theLefthas beenso greatin Francethatevenitsfoeshaveadopted
itsvocabulary. Ideologicalconfusionhas beentheresult.The Com-
munists veryshrewdly learnedearlyin thegamethe art of posing
as therightfulheirsto eighteenth-centuryRationalistthought. They
knewthattheFrenchin generallove theword"revolution," forit
givesthemtheillusionof perpetuating theirpast grandeur. As for
theintellectuals,theydisplaya particular fondness forthe termas
wellas fortheconceptbecause,in theirquestforcerebralstimula-
tionin politics,theyare chronically attractedto extremes:reform
seemsto themboringand prosaic;revolution appearsto themexcit-
ing and poetic.Justas theesthetedenouncesthephilistine, so the
Marxistthinker denounces thebourgeois. Artistand intellectual
thus
feelat one in theirfightagainsta commonenemy.Moral non-con-
formism becomesa literary theme,and the notionof revoltone
of thecommonplaces of art.The fecundity of upheavalsis an idea
withwhichmanya Romanticand post-Romantic mindhas toyed-
and it is not surprising thatthe mythof the Revolutionshould
serveas a refuge forutopianthought and playthepartof a mysteri-
ous intercessorbetweentherealand theideal.Add to thisa certain
nostalgiaforoutwornChristian dreams,and it becomesclear why
theProletariat shouldhave replacedtheMessiahand givenriseto
refreshed hopes. Of course,thereis also a scientific
millenaristic
It is only fair to recall, however,that duringthe later 1940s and into the
1950s Sartre,far frombeingthe darlingof the Communists, was a positive
bugbearto them.L'Hurnanitedenouncedhis DirtyHands as "a dirtyplay,"
and his essay on "Materialismand Revolution,"recentlypublishedin trans-
lation (Literaryand PhilosophicalEssays,PhilosophicalLibrary,1955), can
still awaken the enthusiasmof so stout an anti-Communist as William
Barrett.-But we cannot trace here Sartre'spolitical evolution,so rich in
nuances,scruples,ambiguitiesand frustrations, or decide to what degree,
and withwhat particularqualifications, the term"fellowtraveler"may be
applied to him today.

14

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT
questfora scientific
accountofhistory. But mostimportant perhaps
(accordingto Aron) are someprivatepreoccupations: theintellec-
tualshavefinancial (in Russiathereare Stateeditionsof
difficulties
writers'works);theywouldliketo playa politicalrole,butfeelthat
theyarepreachingina desert;theycannotstandindifference, andcon-
sequentlywelcometheprospect of beingpersecuted;theyare proud
andcannotbearto see France'sculture contaminatedwithAmerican
ideals.Naiveutopianism,a senseoffrustration, doseofmasoch-
a little
ism,ambition forpower,hopeformaterialadvantageand a hidden,
thoughactive,aristocratic
chauvinism-these are theravaging causes
ofthemaladythatArondiagnoses. The symptoms areserious:distor-
tionofmindand abdication to totalitarian
modesofthinking.
PerhapsAron's analysisappearssomewhatover-simplified.More-
over,thediseasehe diagnosesis notreallya newone. Unquestion-
ably,manyintellectuals-andnot onlythe rank and fileof Les
Temps Modernes and Esprit-have been attractedto the views
oftheLeft,and eventheextreme Left.Eversincethemiddleof the
nineteenth century,Francehas witnessed a steadyproletarizationof
itsintelligentsia.
In 1860,thebrothers Goncourtalreadynotedwith
some bitterness thatthe new generation of artistsand journalists
no longerbelongedto thewell-to-do bourgeoisie(as did thegenera-
tionof 1830) but that,compelledto fightforits bread,thisnew
bohemelived, struggled and hated like a trueproletariat.Jules
Valles, in his trilogyJacques Vingtras,has drawnthe pathetic
caricatureofyoungmenofhumbleorigins pushedby theirambitious
parentsintotheteaching professionwheretheywouldfindmediocre
and unstablepositions. A trueintellectual
proletariatthuscameinto
being,and finally led to syndicalist
organizations such as theCon-
federationGenerale des TravailleursIntellectuelsand the Com-
pagnonsde l'Intelligence(foundedin 1921). Thissocialandpolitical
consciousness was further intensified
by ideologicalstruggles and
was brought to a climaxby crisessuchas theDreyfuscase which,
in the wordsof Thibaudet,was a real intellectualtempest. Afraid
to take sideswithinjusticeand withthe privileged classes,afraid
above all to provetoo moderatein theirthinking, theintellectuals
becameincreasingly ashamedof theirapathy,of theirinefficiency
in the fieldof political action. The Ligue des Droits de l'Homme
seemedan unsatisfactory answer.Flatteredby the Communists,
impressedby the promises,if not by the results,of the Soviet
experiment, fromwhatNizan has called social original
suffering
sin, theywillinglyclosed theireyes to criminalmethods.They
developeda philosophyof the lesserevil. Romain Rolland,in
spiteof his polemicswithHenriBarbusse(1921-1922), in spite
of his cryin tyrannos!
becameconverted to Bolshevism
and wrote

15

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Yale French Studies
to the anarchistLibertairein 1927 thatRussia was in danger,
thattheimperialist coalitionwas trying to crushit, thatnot with-
standingits errorsand even its crimes,Russia represented the
greatest,the most powerful, the most fecundhope for modern
Europe.Without her,no liberty was thinkable! Hand in handwith
thisnewfaithwenta tasteformartyrdom. The God thatFailed,a
collectionof essaysby re-converted and redeemedconverts, amply
demonstrates how,in variouscountries, menlike ArthurKoestler,
Ignazio Silone, RichardWright,Andre Gide, StephenSpender
attempted to curethemselves of theirsenseof socialguiltby deny-
ingtheveryvaluestheyhelddear,and weretempted to submitto
a partydisciplinewhichwouldgivethemreliefandsatisfy theirneed
to bear witnessby providing an intellectualmartyrdom. Koestler
describesthiscultof the "prolo,"thisobsessionof all the Com-
munistintellectuals.Barelytolerated in theParty,theyattempted in
vain to imitatethe archetypal, broad-shouldered workerof the
Putilovfactories, gave up wearingties,made suretheirnailswere
dirtyand did theirbestto castratetheirthinking. Yet theydid not
succeedinresembling theidealcomradeIvanIvanovich. Thephenom-
enon was not limitedto any singlecountry.In a recentbook,
CzeslawMiloszhas describedthe Polishintellectuals' nostalgiafor
the masses,2theirreadinessto swallow the "Murti-Bing" pills
importedfromthe East and scientifically preparedto soothethe
anguish ofdecadent andtormented souls.The diseaseArondiagnoses
was alreadydiagnosed, in 1929,byEmmanuelBerl: theintellectual
is attracted
to Communism because,in bourgeoissociety, he smells
the odor of death.3The verysons of the bourgeoisie, like Hugo-
Raskolnikov in Sartre'sMains sales, suffer fromthe stench,deny
theirfamily tiesandsetoutto forgeforthemselves a freshvirginity.
Manyadmirers ofSartrehavebeendisturbed bythenebulousness
of his social metaphysics and appalledby the increasing boredom
whichemanatesfromthe thicklycluttered, indigestiblepages of
Les TempsModernes. Evensomecharacters in Simonede Beauvoir's
Les Mandarinsprotestagainstthis apparentestheticabdication:
Lambertobservesbitingly that Dubreuilh'sVigilance(read: Les
TempsModernes)has givenup printing novelsand shortstories
in orderto stuffits issueswithsocial documents and reportages.
Perhaps,in Beauvoir'spost-war world,theintellectual secretlyfeels
or fearsthathe has no longeranything to contribute to art or
thought."In thecountry of Diderot,VictorHugo and Jauresit is
assumedthatcultureand politicsgo handin hand.For a longtime
Paris took itselffor Athens.Athensno longerexists,that'sfin-
2
The CaptiveMind, New York, Knopf,1953.
-Mort de la pense'ebourgeoise,Paris,Grasset,1929.

16

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT
ished . . ." Scriassine,like Raymond Aron, points to the disease
and denouncesthe heresy.He prophesiesthatDubreuilh(read:
Sartre)will abandonliterature. He is the articulateand horrified
witnessof Dubreilh'scriminal silencewithregardto Sovietconcen-
trationcamps.The entirenoveldescribesthemoralplightof leftist
writersafterthewarand theLiberation:theirearlyoptimistic dream
ofpursuing theworkof theResistancemovement and ofperpetuat-
ingtheunitedfront;theirfaithin Russiaas theincarnation of the
socialistexperiment;theirincreasing awarenessofdictatorial
methods
withintheU.S.S.R.; theirresentment and despairat findingthem-
selves caughtbetweenthe "imperialistic" UnitedStates and the
Russiaoftheconcentration camps.
The moralbackground of thenovelis a somberone: thefailure
of theFrontPopulairein thethirties; the"dirt"duringtheGerman
occupation; lifein theResistancemovement; thetortured and dead
comrades;France'sfall to the statusof a third-rate power;the
atombombon Hiroshima-allthesesomehowconvinceDubreuilh
(and to some extentPerron) thatthe morality of the individual
can no longerbe efficacious, thatthe onlyhope lies in the social
Revolution, thattheonlyonescapableand worthy ofpreparing and
fightingforthisRevolutionare the industrial, urbanworkers, that
theonlyorganization qualified to speakforand lead thisproletariat
is the CommunistParty. Ergo . . . if one cannot help actively,if
onefindsithardto agreewitheverything, onecan at leastkeepone's
mouthshut."I do not claimthatthe Partyis beyondcriticism;
I do claimthatone has to deservetherightto criticize." Readers
of Les TempsModernesmay remember Sartre'sironicanswerto
Camusduringthepolemicaland insulting exchangeof open letters
in the summerof 1952. Many of the arguments of thisthree-year
old quarrelhave been transposed by Simonede Beauvoirin her
novel.Dubreuilhknowsthatprivatemorality and social morality
are no longercompatible;thus,havingto choosebetweentelling the
truthor appearingas theenemyof theCommunists, he prefersto
remainsilent.Holdinghimself and his generation guilty,he denies
himselftheprivilege of divulgingdocuments thatrevealthe "con-
centrationist"methodsof the Sovietregime.He confessesto his
wife:"My dutiesas an intellectual,therespectfortruth-theseare
The onlythingthatcountsis to knowwhether
all trifles. bydenounc-
ing the camps,one worksfor or againstmen." This statement
illumines theentirepolitical
significantly positionofintellectuals
such
as Dubreuilh:theywantto assumethe role of an opposition, a
minority outsideof butalliedto theCommunist Party.The position
is an untenableone, as Dubreuilhsoon discovers. And fora while
it mightseemthatScriassinewas rightin statingthatthe French
intellectualshad reacheda blind alley: Dubreuilhsees thatthe

17

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Yale French Studies
minority does nothavea chance,thattheintellectual no longerhas
any part to play,nor anything to say, thathe is powerless,that
literature has lostitsrights,thatone can onlywritemeaningless or
harmful books.But in spiteof thistemporary defeatism, he does
notcapitulate. Stillconvincedthatthereis no longerany salvation
fortheindividual, Dubreuilhonce morethrowsall his energiesinto
thepoliticalbattle.Like a truetragichero,he knowshe is doomed;
hisis a lucidandpainfulawareness ofthehopelessness ofhisposition
and thefutility ofhisaction.Yet he organizes anotherweeklypaper
and goes to his inevitable doom,fighting.
RaymondAron'sbook and Simonede Beauvoir'snovelappeared
duringthesame literary season (1954-1955); butit is not merely
thischronological coincidencethatsuggestsa juxtaposition of the
twoworks.On different levels,andwithdifferent means,theydiscuss
verysimilarproblems-onlyBeauvoir'snovelis a usefulcorrective
to Aron'sstudy.The problemis not quite as simpleas he seems
to imply.Aron'sfearsare verylegitimate, his generalizations are
pertinent, his pointof viewis thatof commonsense."Politically"
speaking,one feelsstrongly temptedto agree.Only,some of the
premisesare morecomplexthanAron makesthemout to be. To
beginwith,whatis an "intellectual"? Aron,veryrapidly, offers some
definitions: in thebroadsenseof theword,thecategory includesall
the non-manual workers.In a narrowsense,it is limitedto the
liberalprofessions (lawyers,doctors,teachers).In a stillnarrower
sense,it comprises theartists,thescientistsand thepopularizers of
knowledge. If one is to applya social criterion,one arrivesat still
another definition.Froma moralpointofview,thedefinition involves
a problemof objectives(obviouslya professorof Law is more
of an intellectual thana lawyer);fromtheeconomicpointof view,
it raisesthequestionof whether a "dilettante"shouldbe included.
Aronseemsto believethattheintellectuals are thosewho translate
opinionsintotheories, whoare notsatisfied withliving,butwantto
thinktheirexistence.
It wouldseem,however,thatnot one of thesedefinitions, taken
separately, is fullysatisfactory.The notionof a cultural6liteis
muchtoo broada conceptwhenappliedto advancedcountries such
as France.A psychological definitionwould soon degenerate into
caricature. A professional definition
does nottakeintoaccountthe
senseofvocation, theconcernforvalues,thestriving forobjectives:
it neglects theethicalaspectof thequestion.Anyattempt at a social
definition tendsto be arbitrary and evensectarian:it throws together
withoutdistinction professionals,bureaucrats, white-collar prole-
tarians,and reducesall thesecategoriesto a non-existent common
denominator. The moraldefinition failsto pointto the degreeof
social responsibility involved.The philosophico-historical definition

18

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT
(such as theone providedby ArnoldToynbee)provesto be alto-
gether tooabsoluteand too detachedfromthepoliticalcontingencies
of a givenperiod.4As forthepoliticaldefinition,
it raisesa delicate
question:do nottheintellectuals
affirmtheirpoliticalstandbyreac-
tionratherthanthrough adhesionto any givenpoliticalparty?
Is therethenno commondenominator? VincentBerger,thehero
of Malraux' Les Noyers de l'Altenbourg,observes, during the
symposium whichbringstogether philosophers fromvariouscoun-
tries,thatthesefacesso diversely and profoundly characteristicof
the different
nationsto whichtheybelong,nevertheless resemble
each other."My fatherdiscoveredto whatextentthe intellectuals
constitutea race."But a "race,"ofcourse,whichis to be recognized
through moralratherthanphysicaltraits.
One hesitatesto undertake thismoralportrait. Sensibilitymodeled
on thought; faithin theefficiency of ideas as an organizationalforce
in the tangibleworld;the utilization of cultureas an instrument
for criticizing
tradition; the unselfish,gratuitous pursuitof truth,
but,simultaneously, thepursuitof a humanitarian ideal; thetrans-
missionor preachingof moralvalues; the sensation,now proud,
now humiliated, of existing outsidethe social framework, and yet,
on thewhole,an obvioussympathy forthelaboringsegments of the
countryand a consequentattraction to leftistpoliticalparties;a
feelingof "not belonging" and of impotence; jealousyof men of
action;the cult of revolt,sometimes even of anarchy;the nearly
obsessivefearof finding himselfon the side of injustice;nostalgia
forthemassescoupledwiththecomplexesof a "filsde bourgeois"
ashamedofbelonging to theprivileged classes-theseconstitute only
some of the morepermanent traitsof thatstrangecreature,the
and particularly
intellectual, of theFrenchsubspecies.
The son of VincentBergerdiscovers,to the tuneof the 1940
defeat,thatan intellectual is notjust a personto whombooksare
necessary,butanymanto whoman idea, elementary thoughit may
be, can becometheguidingprinciple of life.Perhapsevena certain
brandof asceticism is the appanageof the intellectual. The man-
darin,accordingto Simonede Beauvoir,is a kindof puritan:the
veryidea of luxuryaffrights him.In spiteof failuresand humilia-
tions,he obstinatelyreturns to his self-assignedtasks.Asceticin his
cultof work,he provesto be equallyasceticin his relationswith
fellowmen: not so muchwithconcretemen as with"humanity,"
towardwhichhe feelsunequivocally responsible.Nothingcould be
morecharacteristic thanthescruplesof one Sartreanhero(Mathieu
in Les Cheminsde la Liberte) whoblamesand eveninsultshimself
fornotsuffering enoughforthefar-away, anonymous victims ofthe
Valenciabombing."One cannotsuffer forwhatone wantsto," is
4A Studyof History,IV-VI, OxfordUniversityPress, 1939.

19

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Yale French Studies
the bitterremarkof Mathieu.But it is a bitterremarkprecisely
becausehis "role"as an intellectual seemsto incitehimto givean
accountof man'stragedy. Dubreuilh,in Les Mandarins, asks him-
self: "Whatdoes it mean,the factthatman neverceases talking
about himself?and whyis it thatsome men decide to speak in
thenameof others:in otherwords,whatis an intellectual?" But
the veryquestionimpliesthe answer:the intellectual is precisely
the one who has decidedto speak,and speakup, in the nameof
humanity.
Primarilya witness, also considers
theintellectual himself involved,
perhapsguilty,particularly whenthe suffering is distantand the
victim Muchfunhas beenmadeofthissenseof"global"
inaccessible.
responsibility.In a symposium organizedby PartisanReviewon
thesubjectof"ReligionandtheIntellectuals" (February-May 1950),
JamesAgee mockingly describesthesepoor peoplewho have been
badgeredhalfout of theirmindsby "the dailyobligationto stay
aware of, hep to, worked-upover,guiltytowards,activeabout,
the sufferings of people at a greatdistanceforwhomone can do
nothing whatever." He scornfully refersto thisacutesenseof social
responsibilityas a sortof playing-at-God (He beingin exile) over
everylittleaccidentor incident, withthe senseof virtueincreasing
in ratioto thedistance.ThoughRaymondAroncan hardlybe said
to speakforthe Christian faithin thewisdomand mercyof God
(and in theultimate reignof justice),he too considersit somewhat
pompousandillusory to worryat a greatdistanceaboutthepeasants
of India who do not eat enough,the mistreated Negroesof South
Africa,the worker-priests affectedby the Papal decisionor the
ex-Communists pursuedbyMcCarthy. But one thingbothAgee and
Aronseemto forget:to speakup forothersevidently also implies
to suffer for and withothers-to suffer, and sometimes even to
expiate.Primarily a witness,the intellectual also wishesto be a
martyr. Since God is in exile,who remainsto give an accountof
humandestiny? Hand in hand withsincerescruplesand authentic
humility goes an immensepride,the modemintellectuals' hybris.
Maybe it is thisverypride-the prideof suffering and the pride
of persecution-that explains,betterthananyothersinglefact,the
undeniable attractionof themillenaristicdream-theories ofMarxism
and the immanent sacrednessof the proletariat. The intellectual
rediscovers the antiquemythof the redemption of the Universe
through suffering.

betweenthe intellectual
Thereis anotheraspectof therelationship
and theextremeLeftwhichArondoes notconsider-andrightfully
so,foritdoesnotenterintotheschemeofhispolemics.The mystical
marriage withtheextreme
of theintellectual Leftreallyrestson a

20

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT
basic and mutualmisunderstanding. If one examinesthatmarriage
moreclosely,one soon discoversthatthe proletarian and revolu-
tionary elements of theLeftneverceased expressing theircontempt
and distrust of the"egg-head." ArthurKoestlerdescribes withgreat
vividness theatmosphere of suspicionthatreignedin thepartycells
and thementaltortures undergone by himand his fellowintellec-
tuals:barelytolerated, theirpositionwas somewhat akinto thatof
the "usefulJews"duringtheHitlerregimewho werepermitted to
surviveand worespecialarmbandsto preventtheirbeingsentto
a gas chamberby mistake.The workerswerethe "Aryans"of the
Party.
This attitudeis not a new one. It is verycharacteristic that
Proudhon, one of the raresocialistwriters to have comefromthe
lowerclasses (thoughMarx calledhima petit-bourgeois socialist),
refused all hislifeto be consideredan intellectual.
No lesssignificant
was theattitude oftheFrenchdelegatesto theFirstCongressof the
WorkersInternational in Geneva (1866): pointingto the danger
oftheorganization beinginvadedand underminded byunscrupulous,
ambitious and privileged schemers, theyaskedforthe exclusionof
all intellectuals.Far fromacceptingthem,the revolutionary Left
tendsto considerthemas enemiesor as subversives. Did notLenin,
in 1907, referto themas cowardlymenialsof the counter-Revolu-
tion,as self-satisfied narcissienamouredof the dung-heapsthat
surround them?The violenceofthetonecorresponds to theblackest
phaseof thereactionaftertheruthless crushingof the 1905 insur-
rection.Nevertheless, the bitternesstowardthe intellectual remains
a constantfact.They are contrasted to the manualworkersand
accusedof plotting to use theignorant proletariat
as an instrument
for selfishgains. Bakuninrepeatedlyaffirms the impossibility of
converting to socialismthe arrogant and cast-conscious "aristocrats
of the intellect."Karl Kautskyadvisesthe Partyto protectitself
againstthesesuccess-hunters. HubertLagardelle,in a speechdeliv-
eredto a groupof socialiststudents in 1900, refersto the intelli-
gentsiaas a "floating" group,withbourgeoissympathies and con-
temptfortheworkers, in searchof power,usingpoliticsforselfish
aims and devoidof a practicaleducation.Accordingto him,they
can onlybe used as spokesmen, as phonographs to propagatethe
wishesandthedecisionsoftheproletarian movement. Paul Lafargue
goes even further,
and in Le Socialisme et les Intellectuels(1900),
possess neithera sense of
bluntlystates that the intellectuals
nor civic courage,that theyare merelyfitto be the
solidarity
clownishentertainersof a payingclientele.In 1912, aftersome
GeorgesYvetot
resoundingarticlesin the Bataille Syndicaliste,
decidedto excludetheintellectuals
fromtheC.G.T. (Confederation
Generaledu Travail) underpretext thattheybelongto secondary

21

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Yale French Studies
professions, displayno groupinterest, and havenotsuffered enough.
To be sure,thedangerof fascism, and in particular theSpanish
civilwar, changedthe tuneconsiderably. But the sharpcriticism
leveled at the intellectuals by socialistsand Communists alike,
rankledin theirconscience.Consideredfaithless, arrogant, ready
forcompromise, theysuffer fromthe contempt in whichtheyare
held. In the wordsof Sartre'shero Mathieu,theyfeel "innocent
and guilty, too severeand too indulgent, powerless and responsible,
boundup witheveryone and rejectedby all." Is Brunetnot there
to remindhim that he is only a watchdogof the bourgeoisie?
But strangely enough,even Brunet,the Communist, feelsuneasy:
"Intellectual.Bourgeois," he mutters to himself."Separated forever.
Tryas I may,we willneverhavethesamememories." "You are not
one ofus," saystheCommunist Gaigneuxto hispartycomrade, the
youngprofessor Jourdan(in Marcel Ayme'sUranus).Like King
Philip'shaunting wordsin Verdi'sDon Carlo ". . . ella giammai
m'am6!"thatawarenessof the gulfthatseparatesthemfromthe
proletariatechoesin theirmindsand contributes verylargely to what
Aroncalls the estrangement of the intellectuals.
Estrangement fromall quarters:theattitude oftheRightis hardly
morefavorable. Simonede Beauvoir,in an articleon contemporary
rightist
thought (Les TempsModernes, issues112-113.114), shows
thatthe bourgeoisie also distruststhe intellectual.There exist,of
course,bourgeois theorizers,thosewhomtheMarxistsdisparagingly
call the peddlersof illusion.To be sure,rationalist thoughthas
been forthe bourgeoisworldan instrument of liberation;but this
veryrationalist thought is also a double-edged weapon.The bour-
geoisiedisplaystowardthe intellectual an ambivalent attitude:the
veryintellectuals whomostardently combatMarxismare considered
withsuspicion. The word"intellectual" easilyassumes,fortheRight
as well as the Left, a pejorativemeaning.The "solid" citizen
(Sartre'ssalaud), remembering thelow esteemin whichhe is held
byartistandphilosopher sincethenineteenth century, considers them
as non-conformist, prodigalsons,foreveron the vergeof denying
theirorigins.As for the more outspokenly reactionary elements,
theirattitude is evenmoreviolent.EdouardBerth,an ardentroyalist
andsympathizer withtheActionFranqaise, gaveventto thisviolence
in a long-forgotten book, Les Mefaitsde l'Intellectuel
but significant
(1914): comparing theintellectuals andpedanticschool-
to ignorant
masters,he seesin theman anti-heroiccastethatattempts to impose
on the modernworldnauseatinghumanitarian ideals, deniesthe
and nationalistic
military
age-oldheroic,religious, values,and strives
to replacetheseby a morality of cowardice.

22

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTOR BROMBERT
"An intelligentsia is bornto be unhappy," writesArnoldToynbee.
And it is perhapsthe causes of this unhappiness thatRaymond
Aronhas failedto analyzein his book. The social metaphysics of
Sartremaybe nebulous;he, and hisfollowers, maybe too quickto
denouncerelativeills and too readyto ignoreconcreteproblems
through a "proudwillto thinkforall of mankind." Unquestionably,
a kindof Promethean hybrischaracterizesthe modemintellectual.
Butthathybris is onlyone aspectofthemodemPrometheus. For he
is also sincereand profoundly humble.Severetowardhimself, he is
awarethathis tragedy is notexclusively
a personalone. Caughtup
in a dramaof ideas,he nevertheless feelsisolatedand lonely.Like
Vigny'sMoses,he suffers frombeingmisunderstood and frompro-
vokinghostility. In a worldin whicheverything is beingcategorized
and defined, he findsit difficult,
yetnecessary,to defineand situate
himself.He choosesto take sides, and throughthis choice only
provokesfurther tensionbetweenextremes. His idealism,his quest
for absolutes,make him an easy preyto imaginary scruplesand
arbitrary solutions.Politically he mayerr-and Aronmay
speaking,
be as justified
in hisalarmas he is in hisironicstatements aboutthe
incorrigiblenaiveteof thosewho willalwaysbe thefirstto fillthe
concentration camps.The ironymaybe prophetic. But is thealarm
reallyjustified? Thatis anotherquestion.Aronhimself has written,
in an articlefortheFigarolitteraire (September 27th,1952), that
revolutionariessuchas Sartrehave neveryetdisturbed thesleepof
anybanker.Perhaps,afterall, thisis not a politicalproblem?

23

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 07:26:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions