REDEFINING THE “ENGAGÉ”: INTELLECTUAL IDENTITY AND THE FRENCH EXTREME RIGHT, 1898-1968 Sarah E. Shurts A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2007 Approved by: Dr. Donald Reid Dr. Lloyd Kramer Dr. Jay Smith Dr. Paul Mazgaj Dr. Christopher Browning ABSTRACT SARAH E. SHURTS: Redefining the Engagé: Intellectual Identity and the French Extreme Right, 1898-1968 (Under the direction of Donald Reid.) Intellectual historians today continue to treat French intellectual history as the study of the figures, institutions, and ideas of the Left. This approach ignores the presence of self- identified intellectuals of the Right who conceived of their values, role, communities, and their very identity as intellectuals, differently than those on the Left. By basing discussions of intellectual life on only one of two existing models, historians have done a disservice to the field. This study examines the construction of an alternative intellectual identity by the engaged thinkers of the extreme Right in France between 1898 and 1968. The work of self- proclaimed right-wing intellectuals Maurice Barrès, Ferdinand Brunetière, Henri Massis, Charles Maurras, Abel Bonnard, Ramon Fernandez, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, Alphonse de Châteaubriant, Maurice Bardèche, Jacques Laurent, and Alain de Benoist is used to trace this process of identity construction. From these case studies, it becomes apparent that throughout the twentieth century, intellectuals of the Right felt excluded from the cultural and political world by what they believed to be a hegemonic Left. This exclusion was not entirely a matter of perception, however, since the Left appreciated the authority of the role of the intellectual and worked to secure the concept for their own camp and to label the Right “anti- intellectual.” The Right’s resentment of this marginalization would become central to their construction of a new type of intellectual identity. In their struggle to legitimize their own ii vision of intellectual values, socio-professional communities, and experience while differentiating it from that constructed on the Left, they were attempting to redefine the concept of the intellectual according to their own perspective. This study attempts to bring the self-identified intellectuals of the extreme Right back into the narrative of intellectual history. It is also reveals the century-long struggle waged over the conceptualization of the intellectual between the Left and Right. While the model constructed by the Left has become synonymous today with the image of the intellectual, it was not the only version of intellectual identity throughout the century. It should, therefore, not be the only version considered in the narrative of French intellectual history. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am extremely grateful to have had the support of many excellent professors, friends, and family members throughout my graduate career. My initial foray into graduate studies was intended as more of a diversion than a professional path. I would not have continued on to earn my Ph.D. had it not been for the encouragement of several professors at UNC- Greensboro and the support of my advisor there, Dr. Paul Mazgaj. During my years at UNC- Chapel Hill, I have had the privilege of working with many exceptional historians and professors who have each helped to make me a better researcher, writer, and teacher. None have had as much influence on my work as the professors who agreed to serve on my dissertation committee. I would like to thank Dr. Lloyd Kramer who gave me new insight into the study of intellectuals and introduced me to the Intellectual history seminars at the National Humanities Center. Dr. Jay Smith served as my surrogate advisor during my first year at UNC-Chapel Hill and introduced me to the idea of identity construction. I would also like to thank both Dr. Kramer and Dr. Smith for their many letters of support for various grants and job applications. Dr. Christopher Browning nurtured my study of fascism and helped me to refine my arguments on collective identity in a writing seminar. And Dr. Mazgaj continued to provide encouragement and advice long after I left UNCG and shared his own research and publications with me. Most of all, however, I wish to thank Dr. Don Reid, my advisor at UNC-Chapel Hill, for his tireless advocacy of my work, his thoughtful critique of my writing and ideas, and his unending patience during the dissertation process. My every question or concern was answered with an immediate email, chapters were read iv and critiqued with amazing promptness, and a month did not pass without suggestions for reading, new angles of research, or ideas for improvement. I would not have applied for the UNC completion grant without his urging or received the Lurcy without his letters of support. A few lines of acknowledgment will never adequately express my gratitude for his guidance and his enthusiasm. He has helped me to become the best historian that I can and has provided a model of the professor and advisor that I one day hope to become. I would like to thank my friends and colleagues at UNC-Chapel Hill, particularly Bethany Keenan, Pam Lach, and Ben Pearson for their interest in my work and their thoughtful critique of my ideas. I would also like to express my love and gratitude to my family. William and Mary Shurts, Charles and Ruth Bishop, Erin and Brian Karl, David, Kelley, Philip, Bethany, and Kate Hovis have all supported me during my entire graduate career. Most of all, however, I want to thank my husband Matt. Through the eight years of my graduate school endeavors, he has been my strength. He has found time in his busy schedule to take care of our beautiful son Nathan so that I could make final revisions, has patiently listened to my ideas, and has always been willing to drop his own work to help me with mine. His steadfast devotion and his desire to help me accomplish my dreams remind me each day of how lucky I am to be his wife. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION ..………………………………………………………………1 The Historiographical Problem…………………………………………………...4 The Historical Conflict……………………………………………………..……14 Key Concepts: The Intellectual…………………………………………………..20 Identity …………………………………………………………………………. 26 The Right……………………………………………………………………...…30 Structure of the Study………………………………………………………...….35 II. THE DREYFUS AFFAIR, 1898-1902…………………………………………..39 1. LEFT-WING INTELLECTUAL IDENTITY DURING THE DREYFUS AFFAIR: DREYFUSARD INTELLECTUAL VALUES…………………...44 Dreyfusard Intellectual Communities and Networks………………………...50 The Dreyfusard Intellectual Experience……………………………………..57 The Dreyfusard Intellectual Model…………………………………………..61 2. THE INTELLECTUALS OF THE ANTI-DREYFUSARD RIGHT: THE CASE OF MAURICE BARRÈS……………………………………....62 Perception of Hegemony and Exclusion, Resentment, and the Struggle for Legitimacy……………………………………………………………….65 Differentiation of Intellectual Values: National Relativism and Enracinement……………………………………………………………72 Realism and Anti-Rationalism……………………………………………….77 vi Collectivism and National Socialism……………………………………...…80 Barrès and the Right-Wing Intellectual Model………………………………83 3. THE INTELLECTUALS OF THE ANTI-DREYFUSARD RIGHT: THE CASE OF FERDINAND BRUNETIÈRE……...…………………..….85 Perception of Hegemony and Exclusion, Resentment and the Struggle for Legitimacy………………………………………………………………..88 Differentiation of Intellectual Values: Collectivism and Anti-Individualism………………………………………………………...…95 Realism and Anti-Rationalism……………………………………………...100 Nationalism and National Socialism………………………………………..103 Brunetière and the Right-Wing Intellectual Model……………………...…106 4. THE WORLD OF THE ANTI-DREYFUSARD RIGHT: COMMUNITIES, NETWORKS, AND THE INTELLECTUAL EXPERIENCE……………………………………..…..109 The Anti-Dreyfusard Intellectual Experience………………………………120 The Right-Wing Intellectual Model During the Dreyfus Affair…………....124 III. THE NOUVELLE SORBONNE AND THE INTERNATIONAL THREAT: 1910-1920………………………………………………………..…126 5. LEFT-WING INTELLECTUAL IDENTITY DURING THE NOUVELLE SORBONNE AND WORLD WAR I ERA………....……….132 Reformist Intellectual Communities and Networks……………………...…143 The Leftist Intellectual Experience………………………………...……….149 The Reformist Intellectual Model…………………………………………..153 6. THE INTELLECTUALS OF THE TRADITIONALIST RIGHT: THE CASE OF HENRI MASSIS………………………………..…………154 Perception of Hegemony and Exclusion, Resentment and the Struggle for Legitimacy………………………………………………………...…….157 vii Differentiation of Intellectual Values: Classicism and Elitism……………..164 Realism …………………………………………………………………… 168 Nationalism and Defense of Western Civilization…………………………171 Massis and the Right-wing Intellectual Model…………………………..…175 7. THE INTELLECTUALS OF THE TRADITIONALIST RIGHT: THE CASE OF CHARLES MAURRAS…………...……………………...177 Perception of Hegemony and Exclusion, Resentment, and the Struggle for Legitimacy………………………………………………………………180 Differentiation of Intellectual Values: Realism and Royalism……………..187 Classicism and Traditionalism……………………………………………...193 Patriotism and Nationalism…………………………………………………196 Maurras and the Right-wing Intellectual Model……………………………200 8. THE WORLD OF THE TRADITIONALIST RIGHT: COMMUNITIES, NETWORKS, AND THE INTELLECTUAL EXPERIENCE………………………………………....202 The Right-Wing Intellectual Experience…………………………………...210 The Right-Wing Intellectual Model During the Nouvelle Sorbonne Debates…………………………………………………………..216