Analysis Of Marianne In Chains By Robert Gildea

1439 Words 6 Pages
During World War II, France had given in an signed an armistice of peace. France was easily invaded because things were all over the place. France was not a united nation, they had a disorganized army, no formal government, and a wrong assumed attack plan. Ultimately, there was a feeling of French weakness but with a good reason. France wanted to save anything they could to preserve their culture and politics. Marianne in Chains, written by Robert Gildea explores the daily lives of the French under German Occupation in World War II, allowing the reader to better understand the experiences of the French. In his book, Gildea argues that the French still lived a complex life under the German Occupation. Gildea conveys, “What is most striking …show more content…
Gildea explains that most men were POW and could not return to France if they fled before the Occupation. Women were worried that their husbands would not return from war. According to the mayor of the small town Bauge, Gildea discusses, “France will be what mothers have made it.” Imprisoned husbands affected the women the most, women were left having to raise their children on their own. During the Occupation, Petain gave families incentives to have more children. If a woman had fifteen children, Petain would be his or her godfather. Women were unable to have legitimate children if their husbands were away at war. In Vichy France, in order to have a population boom, divorce was banned before three years of marriage. The wife of a prisoner of war could not be divorced based on the fact that she was sleeping with someone else. During the Occupation, part of France’s slogan was changed from fraternity to family. But this is seen as hypocritical because family cannot be that important if you are sleeping with other men to get special rewards and please the nation of …show more content…
He tends to contradict himself in his argument quite often. He talks about how the French ended up collaborating with the Germans in order to survive. Although it was by force, it was still collaboration. In the Demonstrators chapter, Gildea contradicts his argument. Gildea states, “These demonstrations may be either dismissed as childish pranks of little consequence or given the status of a kind of ‘pre-resistance’ that led on to more decisive acts.” Therefore, Gildea discusses the idea that the demonstrators could be classified as resistors. Gildea also contradicts himself in the chapter of Sinners. Gildea exclaims that during the Occupation, France began to deport Jews to the Germans and followed the idea of no Jewish businesses. Gildea discloses, “Most serious of all, there is much evidence, particularly from the process of Aryanization, that Gentiles were quick to dump Jewish partners and only too happy to take over their businesses. Anti-Semitism, the evidence firmly shows, was not confined to the Vichy regime.” Most French people listened and followed to the Anti-Semitic ways of the

Related Documents