Voilà the inaugural post of an English-language blog on rue89, which is hopefully just the beginning of rue89's engagement with non-Francophone readers. This blog will look at French politics, media and culture with an American eye, while also training that eye back on the States.
It seems only fitting to begin on a day of other new ventures in France, namely the inauguration of the new president, Nicolas Sarkozy. Here we go. For an American watching the new French president taking office, what's most noticeable is what's missing : an oath. Americans are long accustomed to the image of a new-as well as re-elected-president on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, raising his right hand and swearing on the bible to uphold the Constitution.
Today, we saw Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysée Palace -the presidential residence and office- walk the outgoing president Jacques Chirac down the red carpet to his awaiting car, where they shook hands and shared a few words, making millions of amateur lip-readers out of the folks watching at home (see video here). The president -elect then headed back inside where the election's official vote count is read by the head of the Constitutional Council who then states that the fellow standing in front of him is the new president of the Republic. Newly invested with the power, he signs a document, and that's it. No oath spoken aloud by the president, just the simple declaration by someone else that he is now, well, The Man.
Most striking of all, though, is the location itself of the ceremony. Because American presidential inaugurations take place in front of Congress, the very act is a symbol of the (ideally) shared balance of power between the various branches of government, rather than being entirely focused the executive branch as we saw here today.
Equally odd is that the official vote count is read (which surely would have been an embarrassment to George Bush in 2000 were it to be an American custom as well), leaving a whiff of politics and campaign in the air on a day that is supposed to purely be about the government and not the battle to lead it. But of course here the new French president takes office a mere and perhaps too -quick ten days after the election- again, an impossibility in the U.S. in 2000 for obvious reasons-compared to two and a half months for an American president. Something between the two deadlines would seem about right.
The new president then gave a brief speech that in essence quite similar to his campaign speeches about the challenges that lie ahead. Perhaps because it is indoors, it doesn't have the booming grandeur and momentous quality that has kept inaugural addresses and the famous quotes from them part of contemporary American discourse.
But for all the talk of « Sarko the American, » this is still a very classic European and vaguely royal way of inaugurating a new leader. Sarko -excuse me, President Sarkozy- speaks of « rupture » with the past, even from his own right-of-center party's history. And yet it seems to me he's going be playing the trapeze artist, trying to balance between the tradition that is expected of him and the platform of change that he was elected upon. For the French and the rest of the world, these next five years of l'Administration Sarkozy are going to be interesting, to say the least.


























12
(Pour réagir, connectez-vous)
De Guillemette Faure
Eco89 | 02H00 | 17/05/2007 |
Super ce regard.
De
09H45 | 17/05/2007 |
Thanks for this Frenglish window.
I would like to add something : the first French President (1848) was much more American-like : 4-year term, oath and a Vice-President. In addition, only one single 4-year term was allowed.
But despite this limitation and the oath, President Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte made a coup before the end of his term, and subsequently made himself an Emperor…
Wisely enough, the subsequent republican constitutions avoided both limitation in the number of terms and oath !
Urbain
De Thierry Soulard
Forçat de l'info accro au net | 10H32 | 17/05/2007 |
Très bonne initiative, ce blog en anglais !
à Thierry Soulard
De
09H38 | 29/05/2007 |
Thanks a lot for this english version,it's definitely a vey good initiative in doing this !
Poliakoff
De NicolasB
Lycéen à Paris | 10H56 | 17/05/2007 |
Grant
Your article is very interesting. Not only it brings a different culture and a different language to Rue89 but I enjoy reading an American's man point of view over France.
Keep it up and I look foward to reading more of your articles.
De
12H31 | 17/05/2007 |
very good idea
félicitations
De
14H19 | 18/05/2007 |
Here is a good idea taking shape, hope you will carry on and we will get more views on French life coming the « Anglo-Saxon » world ; o)
De Justine
19H32 | 18/05/2007 |
I think this English version of street 89is an interesting initiative,maybe it wil help the french to learn how they are seen by other countries. In Northerb Europe France is often called the sick man of Europe. The French themselves tend to believe they are the navel of Europe, and maybe of the world. When reading that only 1 American out of 5 has ever left the US and hardly knows there are other countries on the globe it looks like it is not too difficult for President Sarkozy to become buddies with George Bush.I find it eery that the people who govern us, in these days of « mondialisation » are so small minded. Let us hope and pray that this first french president of the new generation will be interested in learning he is not alone on earth and on the world. One way to this is listening what others opinion is about who he is and how he acts.
De
21H25 | 18/05/2007 |
tks I will copy some articles to send to my friends all over the world to explain french policy and have an other view of CNN or Fox tv……….
Go head……….
Bruno Bernard Belgium
De Jean-Jacques Louis
22H09 | 18/05/2007 |
Très bonne idée. Le but d'un journal c'est d'être lu par tous. Et partout.
pravda.ru paraît dans quatre langues, eurasianet.org dans trois, People Daily dans une vingtaine.
En France, je pense que Rue89 réalise une première. Encore bravo.
De NicolasB
Lycéen à Paris | 17H00 | 19/05/2007 |
I don't understand your current position in this. Are you for prestigious inaugurations in front of the Capitol ? Or for a modest, yet rather luxurious, inauguration ?
First, I believe a president must have a decent and modest inauguration for his arrival. Why ? Simply because being a president isn't prestigious, but serving the nation correctly is prestigious. For example, George W. Bush had -- like many other American presidents -- an amazing inauguration, in front of the Capitol Hill, and live in front of many people ; but, let's face it, is Bush that good of a president ? So, does he merit such inaugurations for his arrival ? I don't know about you, but I don't think he deserves so much. Second, swearing on the bible immediately means you are swearing on something linked to religion. But is everybody in the US religious ? And does everybody enjoy hearing a president swearing on the bible, or even saying : « God Bless you » ? I don't think so.
Now, do not get me wrong, the United-States is an amazing nation, in which I lived for many years, but it does have few drawbacks -- especially this one.
De
15H41 | 20/05/2007 |
Bravo ! NicolasB. You're REALLY fair and balanced.
It's a pleasure to read comments as yours. I can
feel you've a clear mind and an honest soul as you
are able to express equidistant opinions, away of the fanatic positions from soi-disants democrats or republicans, leftists or right-wingers, who fill the blogs with their poison along the world.
CONGRATULATIONS.