Episode Transcript
Transcripts are displayed as originally observed. Some content, including advertisements may have changed.
Use Ctrl + F to search
0:12
Good evening, everyone. Welcome
0:14
to Shakespeare and Company. Shortly
0:17
after 9 p.m. on .m. on Friday November
0:20
suicide bombers blew themselves up bombers
0:22
blew themselves up outside the Stade de
0:24
France, while France played Germany in a
0:26
football match attended by Hollande. Hollande. following morning 130
0:29
1 a .m. the following morning down in victims
0:31
were dead, gunned down in the restaurants and
0:33
on the terraces of the 10th and
0:35
11th in the Battaclin in the hall. Another 416 Hall. were injured,
0:37
almost 416 people were injured,
0:39
almost 100 of them two more died in
0:41
a shootout with of the attackers were also killed and
0:43
two more died in a shootout with police a
0:45
few days after. after. Almost
0:47
six years later, in in September 2021, in
0:49
a specially in a specially built just
0:51
just across the river from here in
0:53
the Pali da Justis, the trial began of 20
0:55
men accused of involvement in these
0:57
attacks. attacks. Fourteen were were present, six were
1:00
six were tried in and only and
1:02
only one, had taken part had taken part
1:04
in the attacks themselves, being the others
1:06
being involved in the planning, logistical support
1:08
or assisting the terrorists. With
1:11
a of mostly second several
1:13
of whom had so far refused to testify, many
1:16
wondered if the immense white box built
1:18
to house the built turn out to be
1:20
an immense white elephant. to be an immense much,
1:22
returning little. much, returning
1:25
yet what becomes clear while reading clear
1:27
while reading V13, Emmanuel Carre's account of
1:29
the proceedings. of the is
1:31
that for those present, that for defendants,
1:33
victims, lawyers, judges, journalists
1:35
and observers, and it was
1:37
anything but. anything but. Instead, the
1:39
criminal trial, the longest in French
1:41
legal history, became, as became, as near the
1:43
end of his account, writes a unique
1:45
experience of horror. a unique experience
1:48
of horror, pity, presence. and
1:50
presence. How it so so is many ways
1:52
the subject of the book of also
1:54
of our conversation tonight. conversation tonight. A A
1:56
collection of the the authors for Lobs
1:58
magazine. Lobs magazine, is a work benefits from
2:00
the immediacy of having been written as a
2:03
weekly chronicle, in which the author offered himself
2:05
up, in mind but also in body, so
2:07
that readers too could take their place on
2:09
the courtroom benches, be part of this unique
2:12
experience. V13 is almost unbearably moving in ways
2:14
I had anticipated. but also profound and humane
2:16
in ways that I hadn't. It shows the
2:18
best and worst in us and the vast
2:21
gray areas in between. To my mind, it
2:23
is an immensely important work of literature, which
2:25
is why I'm not only very pleased that
2:27
it's now available to English readers, but also
2:30
that I have the opportunity to discuss it
2:32
with the author tonight. Please join me in
2:34
welcoming Emmanuel Carrere to Shakespeare and Company. Thank
2:42
you Adam, thank you for coming.
2:45
I just I must apologize for
2:47
my English which is what it
2:49
is but I will and we
2:52
will do our best. You will
2:54
help me. We certainly will. When
2:57
I was reading V13, one of
2:59
the things that kept coming to
3:01
mind was actually the first sentence
3:04
of your previous book, Yoga, where
3:06
in the English translation you say,
3:08
seeing as I have to start
3:11
somewhere, and you go on to
3:13
choose a point where you started
3:16
the book, and of course, later
3:18
in writing the book, you would
3:20
choose a point where the book
3:23
ended. In the case of V13,
3:25
of course, the situation was different.
3:27
didn't choose the start or the
3:30
end, it was the start or
3:32
the end of the trial. And
3:34
you didn't in a sense choose
3:37
the narrative because in another way
3:39
that was almost imposed by the
3:42
court itself. So to begin, could
3:44
we talk a little bit about
3:46
V13 almost as a literary project?
3:49
How did it feel different to
3:51
your previous books? And did you
3:53
feel restrained by these constraints or
3:56
in some way liberated? D.
4:00
only real decision that
4:02
I made was to
4:04
attempt the trial. So
4:06
to decide that, I
4:08
will attend this trial,
4:10
which was supposed to
4:12
last six months, and
4:14
which in fact lasted
4:16
nine months every day,
4:18
go every day to
4:20
the Palais Justice, very
4:22
close from here. And
4:25
to help me to
4:27
do this, I submitted
4:29
the idea of the
4:31
weekly magazine Lops to
4:33
write a column every
4:35
week about that. And
4:37
they said, well, they
4:39
said yes, and I
4:41
am grateful to them
4:43
for this, because, you
4:45
know, it's not, it's
4:47
something for a newspaper
4:49
to take the, to
4:51
the Saint-Gégé Commendé, to
4:54
commit to publish every
4:56
week, two pages of
4:58
the, you know, there
5:00
are also, actually, there
5:02
are a lot of
5:04
things that can seem
5:06
more important, and they
5:08
said, no, you will
5:10
have your two pages.
5:12
every week and they
5:14
never never no actuality
5:16
justified to take me
5:18
my to take me
5:21
my two pages and
5:23
that was all I
5:26
In fact, I thought
5:28
that, well, I committed
5:30
myself to do this,
5:32
but I said, I
5:34
told myself and told
5:37
them the people of
5:39
Lops that if it
5:41
was, if I didn't
5:43
want to do it
5:45
anymore, well, I can
5:48
quit, it's not. And
5:50
I was never tempted
5:52
to quit. Even if
5:54
it was sometimes extremely,
5:56
come on, the terrifying,
5:59
the ex- emotionally,
6:02
something very, very, very,
6:05
something terrible. It was
6:07
also sometimes extremely boring.
6:09
And even when it
6:12
was boring, it was
6:14
interesting. And I never,
6:16
never felt the temptation
6:19
to leave this. In
6:21
fact, even if old,
6:23
old what that was
6:26
terrible, Honestly, I say
6:28
that I liked to
6:30
come to this court
6:33
every day for weeks
6:35
and weeks and months
6:37
and months back. Also,
6:40
when you do this,
6:42
there is also some
6:45
kind of community, there
6:47
is something, and also
6:49
I really enjoyed this.
6:52
this process of writing.
6:54
I had to write
6:56
to give to on
6:59
Monday morning to loves
7:01
the dispatches I have
7:03
written during the weekend.
7:06
It was exactly the
7:08
same. the same number
7:10
of signs. I remember
7:13
7,7, 8,800 signs. Are
7:15
these signs from these?
7:17
Letters. Letters. Letters. It's
7:20
in English, it's words
7:22
for us, it's letters.
7:25
And I never give
7:27
them back, give it
7:29
late, I never wrote
7:32
more or less than
7:34
my, the amount of
7:36
letters that was decided.
7:39
So there was something
7:41
very... sounds
7:43
strange because if you consider
7:45
the what was the emotional
7:48
content of this that you
7:50
know for the writer that
7:52
I was it was very
7:54
comfortable I really enjoyed doing
7:56
this on the subject of
7:58
the writing because of course
8:00
you had that weekly column
8:03
and you had to write
8:05
it because what you could
8:07
have done I suppose is
8:09
attend the trial and then
8:11
begin the book afterwards. But
8:13
of course my sense was
8:16
that that would have been
8:18
a fundamentally different book. and
8:20
a fundamentally different Emanuel career
8:22
writing that book. Certainly, in
8:24
fact, that I have been
8:26
thinking about doing this, I've
8:29
been thinking of doing a
8:31
book, writing a book, attending
8:33
exactly what you say, attending
8:35
the trial, and then write
8:37
a book after using all
8:39
the notes that I'm... It
8:41
would have been a different
8:44
book, in fact... I
8:50
have to say that. I don't
8:52
know what would have been this
8:54
book. So I think I prefer
8:57
this one because because Well,
9:01
if you write a book
9:03
about that, maybe, or maybe
9:05
I would have been a
9:07
bit paralyzed by the idea
9:09
that it was such a
9:11
huge sugé, something so important
9:13
that it would have been
9:15
a bit solemn. And the
9:17
fact of writing this, you
9:19
know, on this weekly written,
9:21
there was something more, maybe
9:23
more spontaneous, more, well, who
9:25
can compare what exists to
9:27
what doesn't exist it doesn't
9:30
matter but but well there
9:32
was a moment where I've
9:34
been thinking well first I
9:36
write these these these dispatches
9:38
every week and then I
9:40
write the big book and
9:42
in fact I had no
9:44
desire to write the big
9:46
book after that. I didn't
9:48
have the smallest desire to
9:50
spend one or two more
9:52
years of my life with
9:54
writing about GED. it's it's
9:56
so I don't know what
9:58
is the adjective it's yeah
10:01
we we you said we
10:03
can't compare obviously a book
10:05
that exists with a book
10:07
that doesn't exist but we
10:09
can in one sense compared
10:11
it with with your previous
10:13
books and one feeling I
10:15
had I felt a different
10:17
Emmanuel Carre, in the sense
10:19
to, for example, the one
10:21
we might find in yoga
10:23
or the one we might
10:25
find in l'orium, in as
10:27
much as, I think, both
10:29
of those books, as much
10:32
as they are about the
10:34
subjects, are also, you are
10:36
also the subject of those
10:38
books, your life and your...
10:40
your mind. Whereas I think
10:42
it functions in a slightly
10:44
different way with the V13
10:46
and the only way I
10:48
could think to describe it
10:50
is almost like you act
10:52
almost as like a vessel
10:54
through which your reader could
10:56
experience the trial and it
10:58
felt like a new thing.
11:00
Yeah. Maybe, no I guess
11:03
it's... It's
11:06
out of
11:08
minimum decency.
11:11
Yes, I
11:14
felt a
11:17
bit well.
11:22
Rel relieved of myself in
11:24
it. As you say, it's
11:26
as if I was, I
11:28
am watching, listening, thinking, trying
11:30
to give my impressions, but
11:33
it's not, de sombre presence,
11:35
de discretes. Yes, yeah, very
11:37
discreet presence. Sometimes it's more
11:39
invasive. One thing, let's talk
11:41
a little bit about the
11:44
setup of the trial itself
11:46
because in many senses this
11:48
was a very unconventional trial.
11:50
It was unconventional obviously because
11:52
of the crime that being
11:55
tried. It was unconventional because
11:57
of the space. And you
11:59
talk a little bit about
12:01
how when they were deciding
12:03
where to hold the trial,
12:06
there was places that could
12:08
have held it but didn't
12:10
seem to have the gravitat
12:12
for such a trial. And
12:14
then there were places like
12:17
the Palais de Justis, which
12:19
feels like it has the
12:21
gravitat, but didn't have the
12:23
logistical capacity. So it ended
12:25
up in a sort of
12:28
a temporary white cube which
12:30
felt both in one sense
12:32
at least at the beginning
12:34
very very clinical and very
12:36
cold and almost abstract and
12:39
yet towards the end of
12:41
the book you describe you
12:43
use you compare it to
12:45
a cathedral in some sort
12:47
of would you be able
12:50
to just talk a little
12:52
bit about how you felt
12:54
about that space and how
12:56
your feelings towards it changed
12:58
as a trial progressed? There
13:00
was a very conscious will
13:03
of the French state to
13:05
make this trial, to make
13:07
it an example, like some,
13:09
you know, the answer of
13:11
democracy, of the law, the
13:14
state of law to Barbari.
13:16
And if you, well, It's
13:20
at the beginning, has
13:23
some other people, chronicleur
13:26
judicious, right? Legal journalists.
13:28
Yeah, legal journalists. I
13:31
was a bit, not
13:34
really, well, I thought
13:36
it was a bit,
13:41
It's a good intention,
13:43
a good intention, a
13:45
good intention, that it
13:47
was a bit worthy,
13:49
we might say. Yes,
13:51
yes, yes. And in
13:53
fact, it's what happened.
13:56
I really, I think
13:58
it's what happened. I
14:00
think this trial really
14:02
an example of what
14:04
should be, how justice
14:06
should function in a
14:08
democratic state. It was
14:10
not, you know, there
14:12
was reasons, there was
14:14
a lot of money
14:16
in it, and justice
14:19
usually is poor. But
14:21
this example, it worked.
14:23
I think it worked,
14:25
I think, and I
14:27
think that A
14:30
lot among the people who
14:32
wear, you know, the, the,
14:35
the, the party, civil, the
14:37
family, the, yeah, the, the,
14:39
the civil parties, the victims
14:41
and the families and the,
14:44
yeah, the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs,
14:46
yeah, the plaintiffs, yeah, among
14:48
the plaintiffs. I
14:51
don't know. There were people,
14:53
there were quite a lot
14:56
of people who at the
14:58
end of the trials, strangely
15:01
enough, say they were satisfied.
15:03
They were satisfied. They had
15:05
the feeling that something, you
15:08
know, you can't talk of
15:10
catacis or something, but there
15:12
was something of that kind
15:15
of happened. Because every, you
15:17
know, Everyone played his part
15:19
in the theater of the
15:22
justice at a very very
15:24
high level. The magistrates, the
15:26
lawyers, the... Even I think
15:29
the journalists, you know, all
15:31
this community of people who
15:33
gather there for every day
15:36
for almost one month, one
15:38
year, they took their... what
15:40
they were doing very, very
15:43
seriously. And there was a
15:45
very impressive dignity. Yeah. You
15:47
know, that's not the kind
15:50
of word that I use
15:52
easily, you know, like I
15:54
am the kind of guy,
15:57
I just, Jerry Canopu, I
15:59
am. I'm a
16:02
very well critical
16:04
usually and it
16:07
really was something
16:09
and to attend
16:11
this month
16:14
after month was really an
16:16
incredible experience. We'll talk a
16:18
little bit about the different
16:20
elements of what built up
16:22
to that experience and you
16:24
mentioned the the plaintiffs. Now
16:26
it's interesting because I can't
16:29
remember who it was that
16:31
said this to me but
16:33
I remember being told in
16:35
the past that the justice
16:37
system is not there for
16:39
the victims. The justice system
16:41
is there because society, the
16:44
nation or whatever has been
16:46
wounded, its rules have been
16:48
transgressed, and that is why
16:50
for example when there is
16:52
a murder trial you don't
16:54
let the parents of the
16:56
victim hand down the sentence.
16:58
And yet in this trial,
17:01
this decision was made to
17:03
give the first, I believe,
17:05
if I remember, five weeks
17:07
of testimony to the plaintiffs.
17:09
And first of all, as
17:11
a piece of writing, and
17:13
it's extraordinary, and it's a
17:16
difficult read, but it's a
17:18
very profound and very moving
17:20
read. Do
17:22
you think in one sense that
17:24
was tipping the scales of justice
17:26
in a way? Was that sort
17:28
of did they have to reinvent
17:30
justice for the trial to have
17:32
the effect you just described? First,
17:37
these five weeks of testimony
17:39
of the victims, of testimonies
17:42
of the victims, it was
17:44
impressive, it's not the word,
17:46
it was devastating, I don't
17:49
know what is the right
17:51
word, it was, you know,
17:54
we came back at home
17:56
and we spent the night
17:59
crying, it's even the less
18:01
sentimental of us. That, and
18:03
it creates a stranger situations
18:06
with the people we live
18:08
with, with my wife, my
18:11
friends, you know, you, you,
18:13
you, Listen, you see things
18:15
that it's not really possible
18:18
to communicate them. So for
18:20
there were weeks during which
18:23
the people with whom you
18:25
attended this were the closest
18:28
people to you because they
18:30
were the only people with
18:32
whom you shared this experience,
18:35
which was impossible to communicate.
18:37
It was so violent, so
18:40
moving some type of... But
18:43
it lasted five weeks and
18:46
after that there were weeks
18:48
and months of you know
18:51
of of explanations from policemen
18:53
from things and that is
18:56
so there was time for
18:58
this you know for this
19:01
incredible emotional, from this
19:04
amount of emotion to
19:06
be, if not forgotten,
19:09
but yeah, we're standing,
19:12
digested in some way.
19:14
Digested, metabolized, I would
19:17
say. You know, as
19:19
most of the lot
19:22
of writers are interested
19:24
in trials, in true
19:27
crimes, and some of
19:29
us write about them,
19:32
I did, I did,
19:34
I wrote a book
19:37
called The Adversary, which
19:40
is about a true
19:42
crime story, and In
19:46
fact, we are more
19:48
interested in the murderers
19:50
and the criminals than
19:52
in the in the
19:55
victims or in the
19:57
plaintiffs. The plaintiffs, the
19:59
victims, well, we are
20:01
we are we are.
20:03
for them, but what
20:05
seems interesting, fascinating is
20:08
the criminals. Here it
20:10
was the contrary. Here,
20:12
in fact, the criminals,
20:14
maybe because they were
20:16
a common voodoo second
20:18
stringers. Second stringers, Jeanette.
20:21
It's from your wonderful
20:23
translation, actually. When they
20:25
are second stringers. But
20:28
yeah, I think it would
20:31
have been the same with
20:33
the guys who were not
20:35
second stringers, but first stringers,
20:37
if it's something like that
20:39
exists, they were honestly desperately
20:42
uninteresting. We did our best
20:44
to get interested to them
20:46
because it's the work of
20:48
the justice to get interested
20:50
in the criminals and to
20:53
try to understand them. what
20:56
they said was they have
20:58
they had to say was
21:01
so poor so stupid so
21:03
well we tried to but
21:05
on the other hand I
21:07
don't I will not I
21:10
don't want to realize all
21:12
you know the the plaintiffs
21:14
or the survivors but there
21:16
was maybe I think something
21:19
like 300 of them who
21:21
took who came to the
21:23
bar and who was bailed.
21:25
20 minutes so sometimes one
21:28
hour to tell what happened
21:30
to them. All of them
21:32
were not as moving as
21:34
the other and I must
21:37
say that there is something
21:39
very cruel that there is
21:41
the logic of a casting.
21:43
That you know that also
21:46
for journalists they think well
21:48
this one is good. The
21:50
suffering is equal that some
21:52
of them are you know
21:55
have a They
21:57
are powerful, they have the right
22:00
words, they have the... have the
22:02
right presence, they are well, charisma,
22:04
I guess. But most of the
22:07
plaintiffs and the survivors, they were
22:09
the most interesting. Some of them
22:11
were incredibly moving and some of
22:14
them had the That's
22:16
not only that something terrible
22:18
happened to them, but they
22:20
found the words to them.
22:22
They found the way to
22:24
stand, the stance, the way
22:27
to be in front of
22:29
the court, of the accused,
22:31
which were on their left.
22:33
You know, there was the
22:35
court there. They were in
22:37
the bar and there they
22:40
were. There were
22:42
some, some of
22:44
them looked at
22:46
the accused, some
22:49
of them didn't.
22:51
And the different
22:53
stances, the different
22:55
way of being
22:58
there, the different
23:00
way of crossing
23:03
this terrible, terrible, terrible experience
23:05
that they have lived that
23:08
left them for, some of
23:10
them crippled from them traumatized
23:13
until the end of their
23:15
life or in the, or
23:18
in the, in the, in
23:20
the morning, is it? Well,
23:23
it was. a
23:26
human experience that
23:28
I never was
23:30
confronted to something
23:33
like that. And
23:35
that was not
23:37
only these five
23:40
weeks, which were,
23:42
as I said,
23:44
extremely moving. But
23:47
also, some of the, not
23:50
all of them, and some
23:52
of these plaintiffs, they stayed
23:54
there. They attempted the trial,
23:56
so they were interested. And
23:59
so they... slowly
24:01
there was a it
24:04
was there was a
24:06
become they began to
24:09
create an informal community
24:11
at the beginning at
24:14
the beginning from for
24:16
instance I was very
24:20
I was very shy, I
24:22
didn't dare to come to
24:24
see these people, but after
24:27
a moment, well, we went,
24:29
we met, we were in
24:32
the same, we didn't have
24:34
the same benches, different benches
24:36
for the press and for
24:39
the plaintiffs or for the.
24:41
But, for the public, that,
24:44
well, we began after slowly
24:46
to meet at the coffee
24:48
machine and to go and
24:51
for I've sandwiched outside at
24:53
the... And there was this,
24:55
I would say, a smaller...
25:00
I put maybe 100
25:02
people, I say maybe
25:04
80s, something like that,
25:06
of plaintiffs, journalists, lawyers,
25:09
who befriended in a
25:11
way, and some of
25:13
them became real friends
25:15
for me at least
25:17
among the plaintiffs, two
25:20
persons, that one which
25:22
is maybe one with
25:24
the... the one of
25:26
the heroes of this
25:29
of this book who
25:31
is like that and
25:33
who are still very
25:35
well friends we shared
25:37
something really important and
25:40
and I think it's
25:42
it's a cement for
25:44
a friendship for life
25:46
and there was also
25:49
for instance for something
25:51
that impressed me which
25:55
is also which illustrates
25:57
what I was saying.
26:00
the fact that
26:02
this trial was
26:04
a success, that
26:07
it worked. Usually,
26:09
and it's perfectly human,
26:11
the people who are
26:13
on the side of
26:15
the victims, they consider
26:17
that the lawyers of
26:19
the accused, well, they
26:21
are a bit like
26:23
them. If they defend
26:25
them, well, it means
26:27
that they are on
26:29
their side, which is
26:31
not true. But it's,
26:33
and here, and it
26:35
means it means a
26:38
great democratic maturity to
26:40
be able when you
26:42
have been your, when
26:44
maybe your loved one
26:46
was murdered or you
26:48
have been crippled or
26:50
something like that at
26:52
the Batak law, to
26:54
have coffee and discuss
26:56
absolutely in
26:58
a friendly way with someone
27:00
who is who is the
27:02
who defends one of not
27:04
the killers because they were
27:06
not the killers but one
27:08
who were on this side.
27:10
You know having this capacity
27:12
is it's it's something that
27:14
impressed me a lot and
27:16
it was not because they
27:18
were you know they had
27:20
this abstract idea of that
27:22
of the of the law
27:25
of democracy the state and
27:27
the power of the power
27:29
of the state and the
27:31
power of the power of
27:33
the But because we have
27:35
been all together in this
27:37
and that there was this
27:39
proximity which created naturally this
27:42
this capacity of which which impressed
27:44
me a lot. You mentioned Nadia.
27:46
There's a moment. There's this quite
27:49
remarkable thing that happens. Nadia lost
27:51
her daughter at the Labeliki Cafe,
27:53
which was a few hundred meters
27:56
from her house. And in the
27:58
and weeks and months I think
28:00
following the attacks her daughter's friends
28:03
would come and gather in their
28:05
apartment and the first time they
28:07
came they gathered and they sat
28:10
there in silence and then as
28:12
the days went on they started
28:14
speaking more and more about Lamia
28:17
the Nadia's daughter who was lost
28:19
and when I read that section
28:21
it put me in mind a
28:23
little bit there seemed a parallel
28:26
between what was happening at the
28:28
trial in a sense? Yes, yes,
28:30
yes, in a sense, yes, yes,
28:33
I would say that. Like there
28:35
was a community forming and also,
28:37
I don't know if it's overstating
28:40
it to say a healing taking
28:42
place. Healing, I don't know, catacis,
28:44
I don't know, but this, it
28:47
was about communities. There was a
28:49
community. The thing that happened in
28:51
this trial was not only a
28:54
commodity, the verdict, that it was
28:56
about to commit. And it was
28:58
not. It was not designed for
29:00
this. It was designed to illustrate
29:03
the power of law and it
29:05
succeeded. But there was this kind
29:07
of collateral effect which was the
29:10
creation of this community which I
29:12
felt really privileged to be a
29:14
witness. Can I talk about not
29:17
only to witness, to take part,
29:19
not only to witness, to take
29:21
part. Can we just talk a
29:24
little bit concerning the, I think
29:26
specifically the plaintiffs, your choices as
29:28
a writer? Because one thing that
29:31
interested me already was what, the
29:33
detail that had been filtered by
29:35
the trial. So already, I think
29:37
you talk about the case files,
29:40
if they'd been piled up, could
29:42
have been, I think it was
29:44
53 meters high. So that was
29:47
all of the details. Then they
29:49
produced a document of 300 or
29:51
some pages, which people read which
29:54
people read. And it struck me
29:56
that then your role as a
29:58
chronic... this was again in a
30:01
sense to act not necessarily as
30:03
a filter but to choose what
30:05
you are going to expose your
30:07
readers to and this seemed particularly
30:10
pertinent in the case of the
30:12
plaintiffs because of course you heard
30:14
a lot of very distressing things.
30:17
And in the book, we read
30:19
a lot of very distressing things,
30:21
but I also feel there were
30:24
choices made. So for example, when
30:26
you write about the Battaclon, and
30:28
there's a chapter titled La Fos,
30:31
so in English, in the pit,
30:33
I think it is. And in
30:35
this chapter, You
30:37
give the entire chapter to
30:40
the words. It's only about
30:42
him, yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
30:44
Could you talk a little
30:47
bit about what informed those
30:49
choices? Well, you know, sometimes
30:51
what people said was so
30:53
powerful that the best I
30:56
felt I could do was
30:58
to quote, to open, to
31:00
quote, as precisely as I
31:03
can, because it was not,
31:05
you know, you can't tape,
31:07
you ought to, but I,
31:09
I, I, I, I wrote
31:12
as fast as I can.
31:14
I compared with some of
31:16
my colleagues wrote. And sometimes,
31:19
for instance, for the guy
31:21
who is the girl Maya.
31:23
Maybe one of the first
31:25
of these testimonies that was
31:28
so So that's well I
31:30
think the best thing I
31:32
can do is to is
31:35
to to to quote the
31:37
quote and to to last
31:39
try to to let you
31:41
hear her voice and and
31:44
also after there was two
31:46
weeks of three weeks of
31:48
testimonies of the bataklo and
31:52
I took a lot a
31:54
lot of those things like
31:56
that and there was a
31:59
moment I decided to take
32:01
one or two sentence from
32:03
each of the people who
32:05
had been telling the story
32:07
and to try to... to
32:10
make and to make
32:12
some kind of come
32:15
on derai editing like
32:17
a kind of oral
32:19
history yes of oral
32:21
history that is some
32:23
kind of compression of
32:25
the horror of the
32:28
batak long but that's
32:30
what I say is
32:32
said just before it
32:34
was it's very there
32:36
were really many testimonies
32:38
and and not all
32:41
of them were even
32:43
if the sufferings were
32:45
equal, the talent to
32:47
express them is not
32:49
equal. It's not really
32:51
fair, but there were
32:54
among these people who...
32:56
told their stories. Some
32:58
of them were, and
33:00
I, and you know,
33:02
me and my colleagues,
33:04
the other, uh, the
33:07
coniqueur, the other journalists,
33:09
basically, we choose the
33:11
same. It's, it's, uh,
33:13
That's what I said.
33:15
It's very, it's terrible.
33:17
It's cruel to think
33:20
that it works like
33:22
a casting. Yeah, at
33:24
the moment. And there
33:26
was this, this very,
33:28
very precise thing that
33:30
when people began their
33:33
testimony, we ordered the
33:35
journalists, we were, some
33:37
with laptops, some with
33:39
notebooks, some with notebooks,
33:41
we've, with notebooks, but
33:43
we've known books, but
33:46
expecting the beginning. Is
33:48
it worth making notes
33:50
or not? And if
33:52
the fingers, you know,
33:54
and when something, for
33:56
instance, Maya, everyone... Immediately,
33:59
well, yeah. after
34:01
two sentences, well, you thought that
34:03
it was it. You have to
34:05
get it. One thing with Maya,
34:07
and this was a subject I
34:10
wanted to come onto, I think
34:12
one of the things that's most
34:14
moving about the testimony as you
34:16
quoted, is, I mean, of course,
34:19
what happened on the night itself,
34:21
but also what her life has
34:23
become afterwards. And I can't remember
34:25
where the phrase is used now,
34:28
but this idea of living I
34:30
don't remember, it's the gentleman who,
34:32
well, will come on to him
34:34
in a minute, but he talked
34:37
about living a damaged life. And
34:39
before we come on to talk
34:41
about that, maybe now will be
34:43
a good time to read the
34:46
extracts. So Emmanuel is going to
34:48
read an extract in French, and
34:50
then I will read the same
34:52
extract from the English translation. A
34:57
emotion sha-slot, a concentrate on
34:59
humanity's sha-slot, a visage sha-slot.
35:01
The most particularly rapid o'er-soument
35:03
that's sheve, I will abode
35:05
in a race of collective
35:07
and accrueate in Castile. Shakine
35:10
Ivanula alabar, and you have
35:12
prepared his own text, invitees
35:14
fami, his family, and sesame.
35:16
This is a moment crucial
35:18
de sevee. As a faincere,
35:20
muegal, leisne en-trovile de cliche
35:22
and la se. O'boudin de
35:24
meers, séfine. The president d'isse,
35:26
mercy, m'er, de monsie. The
35:28
president d'is, mercy for all
35:31
the travées, ha-a-thorness, ha-a-a-wick-lézote. At
35:33
least, at the time we
35:35
have changed on their malleur
35:37
and their own pastel. The
35:39
companion is a tour, and
35:41
we are in a convari.
35:43
It is a good idea
35:45
that people have sat here
35:47
at the rest of the
35:49
place, or point that for
35:52
constable rapporteur d'oeuvres, and it
35:54
may process. place, a better
35:56
place, a better place, and
35:58
a better place, and a
36:00
better place, and a better
36:02
journey, the premier, and a
36:04
journey, and a journey, and
36:06
a journey, a lot more,
36:08
and a journey, a better
36:11
time, and a better time.
36:14
to work with a new patient
36:16
in total profiles of process, the
36:18
interrogator of his accusate, and a
36:21
situation where he is facing grisies,
36:23
with elmontrist, who is part of
36:26
the unique debtele, a new foreign
36:28
rapporteur or the supporter of the
36:30
French France Almani. The interview with
36:33
Brooklyn, but the idea of a
36:35
party, for a minute conscience that
36:37
you have acquired share, What's wrong
36:40
with you is, is that the
36:42
plan on Biance is a board
36:44
of state? It is the work
36:47
that it is sullved at the
36:49
south of the Une Expausion. Replies,
36:51
that the three terrorists who have
36:54
suffered a lot of asthma et
36:56
a second after the failure to
36:59
sedate a massac, but commissantarivate a
37:01
total porpointre, du nier, a partipan
37:03
puneisha, and we need notuic in
37:06
sole person. but
37:08
I'm not sure that project
37:10
a statue-exposive, and yet is
37:13
a crew. And it is
37:15
a crew that is a
37:17
crystal on the jude of
37:20
Maryland. And it is a
37:22
new capacity. We predict that
37:24
it is an arbitrary, but
37:27
no. The fijuayous that the
37:29
attain exists too poor. It
37:31
is a good idea, a
37:34
traversal Europe's accordo. It is
37:36
a few of the poor
37:38
who have made the may
37:41
viv, and a l'alcom d'afortome
37:43
de Fertome. The post-tintel Revique
37:45
has been a new-end-a-laclicence-y. So,
37:48
compuice de fe, and the
37:50
return eviuraptice. The met-n'humous, astumniac,
37:52
a puree, soutoument o'er-niac, a-pore,
37:55
suroutoument o'er-toury, who saw a-tourne,
37:57
a-tak, a-thoury, a-taw-taw-taw-a-taw-taw-taw-taw-a-taw-a-taw-taw-taw-taw-taw-a-a-taw-a-taw-taw-taw-a-taw-taw-a-taw-a-a-taw-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a- us de
37:59
France, I just have it.
38:03
Preatsure-de-strapesque-tullmaudublin, Marilyn,
38:06
but to-sur-surraled-tubber-amptitub-plastic,
38:09
the crude
38:12
of dismat-conest
38:15
extratesate-sauge, and
38:18
the sur-sak,
38:21
se-tub, devonle-akou,
38:24
el-lid, I'll
38:27
be al-hullmontre,
38:30
m'uilu-lion, I'll-lion-lionturelion-lion-lion-pris-prisseltub-prisseltub-prisseltub-prisseltub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub-tub
38:34
mercy. And this is the nut. So
38:36
this is in the English translation by
38:38
John Lambert. One emotion
38:41
dispels another. One part of humanity displaces the
38:43
next. The immense psychotherapy of the five weeks
38:45
that are now coming to an end has
38:47
had the beauty of a collective narrative and
38:50
the cruelty of a casting call. Each witness
38:52
came to the stand, read their prepared text,
38:54
invited family and friends. It was a crucial
38:56
moment in their life to describe what was
38:59
no doubt an equal amount of suffering. Some
39:01
found the right words and moved their listeners,
39:03
others reeled off cliches and bored them. After
39:05
half an hour it was time to move
39:08
on to the next. The presiding judge would
39:10
say, thank you for your comments, standard phrase,
39:12
or if the testimony was particularly powerful, thank
39:14
you for your moving words. After which the
39:17
speaker would head back up the aisle and
39:19
sit down with the others. The Battagong survivors
39:21
are lucky in their misfortune. They're not alone.
39:23
They're surrounded by others in the same situation.
39:26
They go drinking together. They form a brotherhood.
39:28
Since the start, they're the ones who have
39:30
attracted the most attention, to the extent that
39:33
it must be constantly pointed out that the
39:35
correct term is Paris attacks trial and not
39:37
Battagong trial. Those who were on the terraces
39:39
complain that they are already second-class victims, but
39:42
the truly forgotten are those who were at
39:44
the stab de France. They were only given
39:46
one day, the first, and that day now
39:48
seems a very long way off. Before we
39:51
move on to a completely different phase of
39:53
the trial, the questioning of the accused, I'm
39:55
reminded of one of these testimonies which has
39:57
not been. all but faded
40:00
into the past. past. That of
40:02
a of a graceful but very despondent young
40:04
woman who went with her TV crew
40:06
to do a report on the fans at
40:08
the the fans at the France-Germani match. piece was already
40:10
in the can, the but then in a second
40:12
thought that cost her dearly, she said they
40:14
should do some atmospheric shots outside the stadium.
40:16
outside the stadium. It was that she was
40:18
knocked off her feet by the blast. blast. Let's
40:21
recall that the the terrorists who blew themselves
40:23
up at the Stade de France the inept enough
40:25
were to do so inside the stadium the it
40:27
would have been a massacre, have but as
40:29
they got there too late to go inside, go
40:31
outside where there wasn't a soul around where where
40:33
they only managed to kill a single person.
40:35
which is not is not much in view of the general tragedy.
40:38
although although this one casualty is no less
40:40
dead and his children no less orphaned. Among
40:43
the things an explosive belt belt
40:45
projects and screws and screws, one of
40:47
the nuts the itself in Marilyn's
40:49
cheek in Marilyn's cheek. could have
40:51
been disfigured, but she wasn't. she wasn't.
40:53
might be tempted to say she got off lightly, she but
40:55
that's not the case. but that's not The cheerful The
40:57
woman she once was no longer exists. was
40:59
no longer She talks about that young
41:01
woman that danced, laughed and crossed Europe with
41:04
a backpack with a whose skin she had loved
41:06
to live had if she were a ghost. if she
41:08
were a ghost. She was fired from her new
41:10
dream job. job. Her Her relationship fell apart, apart.
41:12
she returned to live with her parents,
41:14
her life Her life shrank. She's now
41:16
unemployed, Insomniak. Afraid. She afraid. at
41:19
the She jumps at the slightest noise.
41:21
She's always checking the emergency exit. And what's
41:23
more, more, nobody cares about what she's
41:25
been through. through? So you were a victim of the
41:27
the attacks. you you at the batticle? No? On
41:29
the on the then? No? At the Stadt
41:31
de France? Was there a bombing at Was
41:33
there a bombing at the Stade de Oh, I had I had no
41:35
idea. To make sure she To make sure she
41:37
remembers what everyone else forgets, Marilyn carries
41:39
around with her a small plastic tube
41:41
containing the 18mm nut that was removed
41:44
from her cheek. from her cheek. before
41:46
the court the court, tube from her bag
41:48
tube the nut from the tube and says from
41:50
the I'll show it to you, but I'm keeping it. but
41:52
I'm keeping it. she puts it back in her
41:54
bag. in her bag. 250 other other testimonies
41:56
will follow and obliterate her own.
41:59
her own. forget Marilyn
42:01
as she walked away
42:04
alone. So graceful and
42:06
so sad with her
42:08
nut in his little
42:11
tube. What that seems
42:13
to underscore is. the
42:17
fact, and it's a cliche which
42:19
you deal with in the book,
42:21
and which in fact, I think
42:23
one of the accused even tries
42:25
to raise at a moment this
42:27
idea that what doesn't kill you
42:29
makes you stronger. And we see
42:32
a lot of strength from the
42:34
plaintiffs, a lot of strength, and
42:36
a lot of heroism in the
42:38
way they have rebuilt their lives,
42:40
but never the sense that what
42:42
happened to them had made them
42:44
stronger. I
42:48
never heard that. The horrible
42:51
thing is that thing was
42:53
said, told to them by
42:56
Salab, the slam, who is
42:58
the, you know, the main,
43:00
the only one among the
43:03
accused who he didn't kill,
43:05
that he was supposed to
43:08
be part of the commando,
43:10
who was supposed to kill,
43:13
who was supposed to kill.
43:15
and who and the other
43:18
one killed and were killed
43:20
and he didn't kill because
43:22
at the last moment he
43:25
said that the belt with
43:27
with the explosive either didn't
43:30
work or did he didn't
43:32
decide what didn't want to
43:35
use it's it's not clear
43:37
at all that He was
43:39
being the survivor of the
43:42
commando, he was the important,
43:44
the important character among the
43:47
accused and so everyone was
43:49
very interested about what Salad
43:52
Islam thinks, what's about Salad
43:54
Islam feels and says. remember.
43:56
I'm here in France, but
43:59
I see it's a pleasantry
44:01
as a rule. We have
44:04
had an important, only a
44:06
few important, only a few
44:09
important, only a few important,
44:11
a chapeau, book outro-grove, pouly,
44:14
d'is-de-de-de-de-ke-el-can, and a no-travokat-de-de-de-de-de-you-t, People
44:16
said that they were making
44:18
him wear a hat that
44:21
was far too big for
44:23
him and one of the
44:26
lawyers said, well, since his
44:28
head is swelling as he
44:31
speaks. And so by the
44:33
end of the trial, well,
44:35
he addressed to the plaintiffs,
44:38
he tried to do something,
44:40
maybe it was sincere, it
44:43
was well intentioned that it
44:45
was. He said, well, that
44:48
he was terribly sorry for
44:50
the suffering, but that he
44:52
was sure that it made
44:55
them the better persons than
44:57
the... in the mouth, in
45:00
the lips of Salab, the
45:02
Islam, the argument, the idea,
45:05
well, what doesn't kill us
45:07
makes us stronger, was a
45:09
bit displaced. And it was
45:12
received like this. And what
45:14
it also seems to do
45:17
is a point which comes
45:19
up several times in the
45:22
book. And I think in
45:24
a sense both benefits the
45:27
book and makes it the
45:29
book it is is you
45:31
write the trial prevents the
45:34
long view. So concerning you
45:36
know what what the historical
45:39
conditions that led to the
45:41
development of jihadism and that
45:44
led to these attacks the.
45:46
the wider context of the
45:48
war in Syria, the West's
45:51
attacks in the Middle East,
45:53
all these kind of things,
45:56
in a sense, when we'll
45:58
come onto the defense in
46:01
a minute, but they was
46:03
kind of pushed out. the
46:05
context of the trial. Yeah,
46:08
the same salab this lamb
46:10
who said this horrible stupidity
46:13
that I quoted. I think
46:15
out of goodwill, but well,
46:18
voila. But he said something
46:20
else, which was surprisingly interesting.
46:23
He said, I try
46:25
to quote it precisely,
46:28
he says, you people,
46:30
you judges, when you
46:32
talk about us jihadists,
46:34
It's as if you
46:37
were reading only the
46:39
last page of a
46:41
book. You should have
46:44
read the whole book.
46:46
And this was, the
46:48
business seemed to me,
46:50
I didn't know where
46:53
it took this, but
46:55
it's very profaned and
46:57
you count. Well, it's
46:59
something. It's really something.
47:02
And I have
47:04
been thinking, I
47:06
have some, I
47:08
really constantly add
47:11
this idea in
47:13
mind. I think
47:15
there was a
47:17
real attempt from
47:19
the, during this,
47:21
this trial to
47:26
Well, at least to
47:28
read a summary of
47:31
the whole book, there
47:33
were interventions of historians,
47:35
of specialists, of geodes,
47:38
which were good, which
47:40
were really clever, smart
47:43
and clear, and it
47:45
was very useful, I
47:47
think. But, well, the...
47:50
a trial is not
47:52
a place for writing
47:55
history but it's not
47:57
that it was part
47:59
of the you know
48:02
the the different approaches,
48:04
exactly like, you know,
48:07
psychiatrists, as psychiatric experts,
48:09
you say something about
48:11
the accused, it was,
48:14
there was also this
48:16
historical dimension that was,
48:19
which was about the
48:21
story of Arab countries
48:23
and people during the
48:26
last century or even
48:28
more. You
48:31
know, we were not at
48:33
the university for this, but
48:35
there was an attempt to
48:38
do that. As you can
48:40
see, I am extremely positive
48:42
regarding this, the way this
48:44
trial took place. And one
48:46
of the ways of this
48:48
history, another way this history
48:51
was kind of tried, they
48:53
tried to bring it into
48:55
it was through the use
48:57
of this technique I suppose,
48:59
which I had not come
49:01
across before, but which is
49:04
very much linked to the
49:06
Klaus-Barbie trial, this idea of
49:08
the class of rupture. So
49:10
this is this idea of
49:12
in some ways, you know,
49:14
recontextualizing the attacks almost as
49:17
I guess. an act of
49:19
war rather than an act
49:21
of terrorism. I must explain
49:23
for maybe that during the
49:25
trial of Klaus Barbier who
49:27
was a senior officer of
49:30
the Gestapo in Leon and
49:32
known as the Boucher de
49:34
Leon, which are of Leon
49:36
who has a... And who
49:38
was captured in Bolivia, I
49:41
think, by search Glasgow in
49:43
a concerned, I think in
49:45
the late 80s. Well, the
49:47
trial of Klaus Barbier was
49:49
really presented exactly like this,
49:51
like a pro se policitor.
49:54
It was not only the
49:56
process of this German officer,
49:58
but also the paucet. for
50:01
the memory, for the
50:03
for the for France
50:06
to understand something of
50:08
its past. And there
50:10
was the, the, come
50:13
on the level card,
50:15
the lawyer, the lawyer
50:17
of Klaus Barbie, was
50:20
the very famous and
50:22
notorious Jacques Vergesz, who,
50:24
uh, Verres was a
50:27
very, uh, courageous militant
50:29
militant in the war
50:32
of Algeria on the
50:34
side of the Algerian
50:36
independence. He was a
50:39
very, you know, a
50:41
great fighter in the
50:43
fight, the anti-colonialist church,
50:46
fight. And He developed,
50:48
and from this, from
50:50
this base camp, if
50:53
I can say, he
50:55
became the lawyer of
50:57
all the ex-nases and
51:00
he was the, he
51:02
defended Pol Pot in
51:05
Cambodia, of all the
51:07
dictators. It's a very
51:09
fascinating character. There is
51:12
an extraordinary film about
51:14
him that was made
51:16
by Barbets Hrodier, which
51:19
is called La Vocad,
51:21
La Terre, and I
51:23
advise you to watch
51:26
it if you can.
51:28
I certainly you can't
51:30
find on any platform
51:33
on there. And so
51:35
this is to say
51:37
that. Verges, there were
51:40
50 lawyers who represented
51:42
the plaintiffs, the families
51:45
of the victims, the
51:47
descendants, and he was
51:49
alone one against 50
51:52
of them. The defendant
51:54
of Barbi. And he
51:56
developed the idea of
51:59
what he called the
52:01
defense of rupture, defense
52:03
of rupture. which consisted
52:06
to say, okay, we
52:08
are you. are the
52:10
French state. You are
52:13
the French state. You
52:15
decide to accuse and
52:18
to judge Mr. Barbier
52:20
for torturing French resistance
52:22
in Leon. OK, he
52:25
did. that you the
52:27
French army tortured Algerian
52:29
rebels during the Algerian
52:32
war if you okay
52:34
if you if you
52:36
tell me about what
52:39
Barbie did in Leon
52:41
I shall always answer
52:43
you what the French
52:46
army did in the
52:48
in Algeria which is
52:51
in a way But
52:53
you can also say
52:55
that the fact that
52:58
the French army tortured
53:00
Algerian rebels was not
53:02
a reason not to
53:05
judge Klaus Barbi, but
53:07
there was always. in
53:09
what said the accused
53:12
of the trial, the
53:14
idea that to consider
53:16
themselves not as terrorists,
53:19
but I as a
53:21
courageous resistance against, you
53:24
know, the American order,
53:26
something against the They
53:28
say, well, they see
53:31
what the Americans did
53:33
to our friends in
53:35
Iraq or something like
53:38
that, which is, says
53:40
the scupa, and the...
53:43
There was also this question
53:45
which was the Alarier de
53:47
la de la de la
53:49
the which is well which
53:51
is very very great. It's
53:53
a group problem. was important,
53:55
exactly as you say, that
53:57
things be said. Yeah, and
53:59
I think for me, when
54:02
I was reading, it felt
54:04
like this was, it was
54:06
very important that this be
54:08
said in the trial. It
54:10
wasn't going to have an
54:12
effect on, there was no
54:14
chance that the trial was
54:16
going to be refrained, but
54:18
it felt important that it
54:20
be said. And I think
54:22
it's one of the most
54:24
fascinating episodes in a sense
54:26
in the book, is with
54:28
this man known as, well
54:30
his name, is Patrick Jardan.
54:32
And Patrick Jardan was the
54:34
father of one of the
54:36
victims. And you've talked a
54:38
lot about the nobility expressed
54:40
by the victims and their
54:42
families and this kind of
54:44
benevolence. And he was quite
54:46
the opposite. In fact, he
54:49
kind of got up on
54:51
to the stage and he
54:53
said, you describe him as
54:55
a massive, graceless man who
54:57
starts by congratulating the crime
54:59
brigade commander for killing that
55:01
scum Sami, Amimur. And then
55:03
he said, people say I'm
55:05
full of hatred, your honor,
55:07
and it's true, I do
55:09
hate. And what discussed me,
55:11
most of the parents of
55:13
the victims who don't. and
55:15
it felt again in an
55:17
account that takes everything in
55:19
and I think you even
55:21
you even say this at
55:23
like it was important for
55:25
you to hear this. In
55:27
fact in fact there was
55:29
the the trial was very
55:31
I had a lot of
55:33
dignity always. The victims, the
55:36
parents, the family of the
55:38
victims, they also, most of
55:40
them, have great dignity. They
55:42
had very, something very noble,
55:44
which is not, they didn't
55:46
forgive. But they had, they
55:48
tried to understand, there was
55:50
this, this, this, well, there
55:52
was a young man whose
55:54
wife had been killed on
55:56
the terrace, who wrote a
55:58
book which called von Neuripana
56:00
and you will not have
56:02
my hate. And that was
56:04
a bit, here I can
56:06
be, a bit, a very
56:08
bit, ironic. It was the
56:10
mantra of the, of the,
56:12
of the, of the trial,
56:14
the vonuripana and you will
56:16
not have my hate. And
56:18
so, I admire this. But
56:22
I think that it was
56:24
absolutely necessary to hear a
56:26
man who was not that
56:28
noble, who was not that
56:30
great elevation of soul, and
56:33
who said, well, do you
56:35
kill this guy who killed
56:37
my my daughter? May I
56:39
hate them? I want them
56:41
to burn in hell. I
56:43
want the... I think, well,
56:46
I think if you killed
56:48
my daughter, I would think
56:50
this, think the same thing,
56:52
not only, thank you, but
56:54
not only, and at least
56:56
it was necessary that this
56:59
word be heard also, that
57:01
there was an exception to
57:03
this ocean of noble feelings.
57:06
I could talk to you about
57:08
this book for hours. One thing
57:10
I would like to finish on,
57:12
I guess, is leaving the book
57:15
behind or leaving the trial behind
57:17
to begin with. Now there's this
57:19
wonderful scene towards the end of
57:21
the book that takes place in
57:23
the Lidupale, the cafe that's a
57:25
stone's throw from here. And you
57:28
describe that evening, so this is
57:30
once a trial has finished, once
57:32
the verdicts have been handed down,
57:34
once the lawyers have taken off
57:36
their robes that are in their
57:38
civilian clothes. And you describe it
57:41
as the most extraordinary evening you've
57:43
ever spent or probably will ever
57:45
spend in your life. That was
57:47
very strange because nothing was planned
57:49
that after the verdict, well, all
57:51
of us, you know, it was
57:54
like also like a... The fondun
57:56
collinidvacos, the end of where you
57:58
have been living together for all
58:00
these... month and you know it
58:02
was not you'll not leave each
58:05
other like this so we do
58:07
what people usually do that well
58:09
we go and have a drink
58:11
before we're all exhausted it was
58:13
emotionally extremely demanding even the the
58:15
the the the the the the
58:18
the the waiting for the verdict
58:20
so that so we all most
58:23
many of us went to
58:25
this varsity de Paler who
58:28
is as you say very
58:30
close and in fact there
58:32
were a lot of us
58:34
and we began to to
58:38
have drinks and in fact
58:40
it lasted until four or
58:42
five in the morning and
58:44
there was a mix of
58:46
there were journalists lawyers battle
58:48
so some of the plaintiffs
58:50
some of them and and
58:53
who were all we all
58:55
got drunk I think and
58:57
there was something even
59:02
me, there was
59:04
a, we felt
59:07
relieved, we felt
59:09
sad to separate,
59:11
we felt very,
59:14
there was something
59:16
very fraternity or
59:19
something very, and
59:21
I'm not good,
59:23
I'm not I
59:28
tell it better in the book
59:30
than I am able to tell
59:32
with my poor English, but I'm
59:35
not very lyrical about that. But
59:37
that was really one of the
59:39
most incredible human gathering that I
59:42
ever attended and the most incredible
59:44
evening I ever took part. I
59:47
suppose now it's been it's been
59:49
two years since a book came
59:51
out in in French. You've had
59:54
some time to put some space
59:56
between between you the trial. So
59:58
I suppose my final question is
1:00:01
a two-pronged one. At the beginning
1:00:03
of the book, you're talking about
1:00:06
the desire to do this in
1:00:08
the first place. And you say,
1:00:10
a writer who no one has
1:00:13
asked to do this, and who,
1:00:15
as the Lakenian psychoanalysts say, is
1:00:18
only authorized by his desire, a
1:00:20
strange desire, this one. So I'm
1:00:22
curious to know if you've understood
1:00:25
that desire a little bit more
1:00:27
since then why you undertook this
1:00:29
project. And in addition to that,
1:00:32
as a writer, Do
1:00:35
you feel changed by this
1:00:38
experience? Understanding the desire and
1:00:40
the, it's very simple, I
1:00:43
knew it from the beginning,
1:00:45
I'm interested in law, I
1:00:48
am interested in crime, and
1:00:50
I am interested in religion,
1:00:53
and in the, you know,
1:00:55
the pathology commutations of religion,
1:00:58
so and the idea of
1:01:00
making a big journalistic commitment,
1:01:03
I liked it. So no,
1:01:05
I knew exactly why I
1:01:08
wanted to do that. That,
1:01:10
as I think maybe you
1:01:13
understand, you understood, things were
1:01:15
really different from what I
1:01:18
have expected, and there was
1:01:20
this strange and And
1:01:23
in a way,
1:01:26
a life-changing human
1:01:28
experience, of which
1:01:30
the book tries
1:01:32
to be the
1:01:34
testimony. But yes,
1:01:36
it changed something
1:01:38
for me. I
1:01:40
can't say exactly
1:01:42
what. At least
1:01:44
I've witnessed something
1:01:46
about humanity. that
1:01:49
I was not aware of and that
1:01:52
I tried to give to to to
1:01:54
write it as well. I can, as
1:01:56
I can. But no, it was, I
1:01:59
knew it was I
1:02:01
knew what I
1:02:03
wanted to do. I
1:02:05
I did I was in front
1:02:08
of something absolutely
1:02:10
different. different.
1:02:14
I think in think in fact it all
1:02:16
people to parting it. And it. the book will change I
1:02:18
think the book will change readers we're
1:02:20
they the it of the Well, we're going
1:02:22
to finish and the formal part of
1:02:24
the conversation. Please do stick around
1:02:26
and have a drink with us. Continue
1:02:28
the conversation with Emmanuel will be signing
1:02:30
in the back there. Continue the
1:02:32
conversation with each other. with All that
1:02:35
remains for you to say it's been
1:02:37
a great, great been a This is
1:02:39
a conversation honor, wanted to have for
1:02:41
years. wanted to have so I'm delighted it's
1:02:43
finally been able to been able to So
1:02:45
please join me one more time in
1:02:47
saying a great big a you to
1:02:49
you to you Adam. Thank you, Adam. you very
1:02:51
much. Thank
1:02:58
you for listening to the Shakespeare Shakespearean Company
1:03:00
podcast. If you've enjoyed this conversation, it would
1:03:02
be great if you could help us
1:03:05
spread the word by reviewing or rating
1:03:07
us in your us app or just by
1:03:09
sending the link to your friends. to your
1:03:11
And don't forget, if you'd like even
1:03:13
more from Shakespeare and Company, you can
1:03:15
subscribe now through Apple now through Apple for
1:03:17
just three for month. 3 euro a month. to both
1:03:19
are available in the show notes to
1:03:22
this episode. this episode. Production of this podcast
1:03:24
is all done is all here at Shakespeare
1:03:26
at Shakespeare and All music is by Alex is
1:03:28
by whose album, whose album Play is available to
1:03:30
buy or stream wherever you listen. wherever
1:03:32
We'll be back soon. soon. Until then, take
1:03:34
care thanks thanks again for listening.
Podchaser is the ultimate destination for podcast data, search, and discovery. Learn More