ANALYSIS - The Memoirs of Simone Veil, which will be transferred on July 1 to the Pantheon, reveal a freedom of tone and positions often surprising for a young reader, explains Guillaume Perrault.

In his memoirs, Jean-François Revel said he was struck by the now very simplified, if not false, presentation of historical events he himself had experienced in his youth. The more the decades separating facts accumulated, the less the evocation of the past seemed precise, faithful and nuanced. We have a similar feeling in front of the often sketched portrait of Simone Veil, transferred to the Pantheon 1st July as well as her husband. To avoid the agreed words, nothing beats the reading of the memoirs of this strong personality, A life (Stock editions, 2007). The book reveals a freedom of tone and often surprising positions. Simone Veil, frequently, is not where we expect.

About war and deportation first. Simone Veil opposed in all its strength, in 1971, the public financing and the diffusion on national television of the documentary Grief and Mercy from Marcel Ophülswhile sitting on the ORTF Board of Directors. "The 1970s had reversed the trend of the 1950s," she wrote. At the celebration of a France united in resistance to the occupier had succeeded another "dominant thought, equally simplifying. From now on, the young people were delighted to be told that their parents had all behaved like bastards, that France had acted abominably, that for four years the denunciation had been omnipresent and that with the exception of Communists, not a single citizen had done the slightest act of resistance. Grief and Mercy It was a fitting tribute to this autoflagellation concert, and it was for this reason that I found this film unfair and partisan. Besides, he spared us no false shortcuts. "

Prohibition of incitement to abort

"Contraception consecrates the freedom of women and the control they have over their bodies, from which they dispossess men. (...) Abortion, on the other hand, does not remove women from the authority of men, but bruises them. "

The presentation of the behavior of the inhabitants of Clermont-Ferrand by the director betrays his "rough maneuvers", Judge Simone Veil. She adds that she would have been "ashamed" to see this film then broadcast on national television, out of respect for the Villeroy family who had hidden her in Nice at the risk of their lives from the autumn of 1943. S acting from the law on abortion, Simone Veil presents it in terms that differ from the presentation prevailing today. "Contraception consecrates the freedom of women and the control they have over their bodies, from which they dispossess men. It therefore challenges ancestral mentalities. Abortion, on the other hand, does not remove women from the authority of men, but bruises them, "she wrote.

In his memoirs is attached his speech of 26 November 1974 to the Assembly. However, at the podium, Simone Veil explains thatshe does not propose to dedicate a right to abortion, but to authorize abortion in case of "distress situation". It assigns to the bill, among its objectives, that of "dissuading the woman" to resort to the abortion (while recognizing the possibility of deciding it, let's repeat it) by bringing to this one a financial and moral support . If the woman chooses to resort to an abortion, adds Simone Veil, this decision "should not, everyone feels it, be taken by the woman alone, but also by her husband or companion". If the bill authorizes information on abortion, "it prohibits the incitement to abortion by any means because this incentive remains inadmissible".

His address to the Assembly in 1974, faithful expression of his thought of the time according to his memoirs

Simone Veil intends not to have the IVG reimbursed by the Social Security (except in two cases: if the abortion is motivated by the concern to protect the health of the woman or if this one can not afford to pay) . It justifies its decision by the will to emphasize the difference between contraception (reimbursed by the Social Security from the same fall of 1974 at its initiative) and the abortion "that the society tolerates but that it can not take care of nor encourage. It is common to read today that Simone Veil's speech at the time did not reflect his thinking and was a tactical concession to the conservative right. Without pretending to be categorical about this delicate subject, we can affirm that nothing in the Memoirs of Simone Veil acknowledges this thesis.

In her book, this one presents her public position in 1974 as the faithful expression of her thought at the time, as well, it seems, as when she wrote her Memoirs. How many other passages in her memoirs Simone Veil makes young readers understand that they know her badly! Placing on the past the ideas, the words and the sensibility of the present - in other words, anachronism - is definitely the scourge of history.

The editorial advises you:

• Tears and memories at the Shoah Memorial for the tribute to Simone Veil
• Simone Veil: a great woman for the Pantheon
• Simone Veil: what was her intention in 1975 and what has become of her law since
• Simone Veil, the extraordinary destiny of a woman of convictions

Guillaume Perrault e

Grand reporter at Figaro and FigaroVox

Source: © Guillaume Perrault: "These aspects of Simone Veil that our time prefers to forget"

Guillaume Perrault: «Ces aspects de Simone Veil que notre époque préfère oublier» added by RichardA on 30 June 2018
View all posts by RichardA →