Suite+Française

Please write a brief response to the book in which you provide a quote that you consider interesting, puzzling, or provocative, and create a question based on that quote that might provide meaningful discussion. Remember to place the quote in context the way you would in a summer reading journal.

Benjamin Edwards

Irene Nemirovsky, the author of //Suite Francaise//, beautifully conveys her ideals and opinions of the Second World War through the eyes of many different families, each one bearing a different position and role in French society. In the second part of her novel, //Dolce//, Nemirovsky depicts the French world after she has been occupied by German forces for over a year. This book revolves around one character in particular, Lucile Angellier, who falls in love with Bruno von Falk despite the village’s countless protests. The two have very few similarities, which isn’t in the least surprising given their opposition on the views of warfare. However, the two share one passion—the love of music. While bonding over the ‘Scarlatti sonata’, Bruno brings up a profound point that is rarely ever verbalized: //“The individual or society?” (p. 284)//. Lucile mulls over this pressing question. Throughout the novel, this idea was tossed around between the mass exoduses of Paris to the quaint countryside where the horrors of war were still endured. During a time of crisis, it seems, people react differently. Should we save ourselves from this destruction, or will our hands instinctively grab onto a loved one so that they may be spared as well? A person’s true self is surely exposed during war times, making battle all the more dreadful.

-Erin Davis

To what extent this novel is true-to-life—in the particulars, I mean—is hard to say, but there’s much of its story that strikes close to fact, especially in the humanity she grants her principal players—and there are many. It’s a humanity more human than humane, though, for in focus always here is the rawness of people’s wants and needs when forced to live differently than they have a right to live. For certain, Nemirovsky’s bleak outlook, and cynical view of societies at large, justified in the months she was writing the book, is laid bare: “A good education is precisely designed to correct the instincts of human nature” (301). “What separates or unites people is not their language, their laws, their customs, their principles, but the way they hold their knife and fork” (315). But this dark tone never completely overwhelms the power of the work for, despite her social shifting—and social commentaries—, the author grounds her key characters’ stories in the earthy realities of people for whom war is ever painful but never surprising; in fact, it seems rarely dramatic such is the everyday sad truth faced by many Europeans in the first half of the twentieth century. To what extent the book’s unfinished ending is true-to-life is known, sadly. Irene Nemirovsky’s life was certainly unfinished, and yet they took it anyway, and anyone pages away from finishing her book should by all means read on into the appendices to see just how ominous and real those pages became for her and her husband, Michel Epstein, and just how frantic and fearful their lives became before they ended. It gives us pause then to consider her lingering thoughts and hear in them a wish. As related in the Appendix I, she shared as her “deepest conviction” her three-fold belief in what lives on: 3. God 2. Art 1. Our humble, day-to-day lives I wish hers had lived longer.

-Childs Smith

Nemirovsky's work introduces the reader to the situation in which the characters find themselves, trapped in a world of uncertainty as to their fate. After our introduction to the situation and the characters facing it the author moves to the culture shock they experience when faced with accommodating the soldiers during the German invasion, a situation that is forced upon them and a situation they have no control over. The characters often have nothing in common as far as their backgrounds are concerned but in the present are held together by the need and desire to survive the German invasion. Some characters choose to simply survive while others choose resistance and strong opposition to the German invaders all the while facing physical stress and mental chaos. Nemirovsky shows the emotional stress faced by each character: “How sad the world is, so beautiful yet so absurd...” a quote that shows the outlook she has on the world as it is faced with the tragedy of the German invasion, will to survive overshadowed by the harsh reality that her world may never be the same.

-Brennan Aust

Nemirovsky’s two-part novel begins by familiarizing the readers with a multitude of specific familial circumstances. We observe these characters’ struggle to escape the dangers of the approaching war, enabling us to find a relatable aspect and imagine ourselves undergoing such a drastic life alteration. Just to name a few, the lives of the Péricands, Charles Langelet, the Michauds, are presented—each with a different approach to escape the same devastation. The author then shifts to detailing the interaction between the French families and the German soldiers whom they were forced to accommodate. However, //Suite Francaise// is written as much more than details about a difficult situation; instead, the novel allows the readers to analyze the way of life society has enforced upon us and causes us to question our own purpose. To elaborate, three major themes form the structure of the novel, including social class distinction, conflict between the individual and societal responsibility, and exposure of human’s true character. The beginning of the novel immediately allows us to recognize the relatable experiences occurring between the many families despite their range of backgrounds. However, each family views their own situation as entirely unique, focusing solely on the survival of their loved ones. As one character became overwhelmed, swamped by the failed attempts to escape the danger as well as the unknown condition of her son, she exclaimed, “But why are we always the ones who have to suffer?...Us and people like us? Ordinary people, the lower middle classes…Who’s wrong? Who’s right?” (177). I found this quote intriguing because it accurately portrays the desperation caused by the war; it also allows us to understand war’s power, a force that is only able to triumph when we lose all sense of unity and blame other innocent victims. It becomes evident that the characters do not recognize the war’s impact on their society as a whole, a realization which would have allowed for intensified collaboration among the community members and possibly resulted in less individual struggle. It is also important to recognize war’s ability to expose true human character. The narrator states that, “Important events—whether serious, happy, or unfortunate—do not change a man’s soul, they merely bring it into relief, just as a strong gust of wind reveals the true shape of a tree when it blows off all its leaves. Such events highlight what is hidden in the shadows” (180). This quote raises a key question: Do devastating times have the power to alter who we really are or do such disastrous circumstances allow our true self to emerge more than it ever has before? In my opinion, I agree with what I perceive to be Nemirovsky’s point. Our individual self does not transform entirely under devastating situations but instead these experiences allow our true identity and inner self, whether good or bad, to emerge as the key controller of our actions. -Rachel Kupferman

= = The foundation that Nemirovsky’s book is laid upon is the fundamental question of whether of not tragedy alters a man. Although a person acts one way in the bright sun does not mean that they will be the same once the storms role in. The question though is if the storm alters the character of a human being, or just reveals a hidden part of a person’s makeup. This question is well addressed during “Storm in June”, the first part of her attempted 5 part book. The “storm” happens when the Germans occupy the town during World War II and ultimately force the French out. Not only does this sudden evacuation erupt the French’s way of life, but also forces the families into survival mode. A great example of this is when Charles Langelet runs out of petrol and is unable to obtain it. This results in Charles stealing petrol from a young, innocent couple on their way to the female’s parent’s house. Once Charles Langelet arrives home safely, both him and his porcelain, Nemirovsky reflects upon the outcome of a man’s character after a tragedy by saying “Important events - whether serious, happy or unfortunate - do not change a man's soul, they merely bring it into relief, just as a strong gust of wind reveals the true shape of a tree when it blows off all its leaves. Such events highlight what is hidden in the shadows; they nudge the spirit towards a place where it can flourish” (180). The way that the characters responded to the crisis can no better portray their true character. Throughout the novel this question is left for the readers to ponder, the question of whether tragedy changes a person, or just reveals what is underneath the surface. --Caroline Pacal = =