Show Hide image

"Twitter, at its worst, is a megaphone for lunatics"

Rob Brydon on Steve Coogan, Hackgate and the perils of celebrity.

Your new autobiography, Small Man in a Book, ends just as you become successful. Why?
It was a good dramatic point to end, at the age of 35, at the British Comedy Awards, which I used to watch year in, year out. When I first became successful, I was surprised people talked about my struggle. Being on the inside looking out, I didn't see it that way. Now I see it - with the way I was scraping along and how much debt I was in, if I were looking at it from the outside, I'd say, "Maybe it's not for you."

Was there a moment when it all went right?
I made the decision to leave college and work in radio, which sent me off that road. I often wonder where I would be now, if I'd not done that.

You starred in The Trip with Steve Coogan. Who had the harder role?
I think Steve's is more attractive - it's more dramatic, more introspective. But lightness is underestimated, in my opinion.

Why did that show work so well?
The age thing was very important; we were 45, starting to feel the effects of middle age on our body. And the slow pace - Michael [Winterbottom, director] is remarkable. Of all the creative people I've known, he has least regard for his audience, in a good way: he just tells his story.

Have you seen Coogan's campaign on phone-hacking and the tabloids - and his attacks on the Daily Mail's editor, Paul Dacre?
Of course. And the Mail followed it up, with the most awful photo of Steve it is possible to find. I love the choosing of photographs in newspaper articles. It's laughable, but people eat it up.

Did you see him thundering on Newsnight?
I did. Whatever you think of Steve, and I'd be the first to say he's objectionable on many levels, he stands up for what he believes in. It's remarkable to watch someone like [the ex-News of the World executive] Paul McMullan, who said: “If we catch a few corporate wrongdoers then you're a price worth paying." Whoa! What, a few innocents get killed? No! "You're happy to walk down the red carpet . . . you should be happy to be hacked." It's like saying: "You were happy to get into the taxi driver's car; he took you to Deptford where you wanted to go - yes, he assaulted you along the way, but it's a bit rich for you to complain." And there was so much envy in his tone. If you envy that, go and do it, Paul McMullan! Go and be an actor.

But some celebrities do play the system.
That's something else. We're talking about artists or performers. The others are marketing people, publicists, showmen. What I've never understood about some sections of the press [is] how you live with yourself knowing what you're doing is going to wilfully upset . . . people with feelings and families. We're not talking about war criminals here.

Do you ever wish you took more serious roles?
Not especially. I don't take that view of the dramatic inherently having more worth than the comic. I made a conscious decision about four years ago that I was just going to do what I liked.

Why is there snobbery about comedy?
Those people can fuck off. Only this morning I read on Twitter -

You don't read your @s, do you?
No. I stopped looking myself up. At its best, Twitter is a lovely community. At its worst, it's a megaphone for lunatics.

Are you tempted to reply?
I don't think I've ever succumbed. It comes back to not viewing you as a human being. You're that bloke on the telly; you're advertising breakfast cereal. The assumption is that you've got money coming out of your arse.

In the book, you talk about how the nature of laughter has changed since the 1970s and become more self-aware. Why has it?
Now, there are 57 channels and nothing on. Then, there was a gratitude that came from [knowing] we haven't got much choice here. That has to change the relationship to some degree between audience and performer, it has to.

Who are your influences?
I'm wary of someone who says, "I don't have any influences." Bollocks, you're just too up your own arse to admit that. We don't want to bang on about me, but certainly I can see all mine when I'm on stage: Ronnie Corbett, Barry Humphries, Dudley Moore, Jackie Mason, Woody Allen. Sometimes I feel like a big fraud.

Was there a plan for your career?
I wanted to be funny and entertain. That word's got a bad rap. I listened to Michael McIntyre talking about the stick he gets. People say, "Oh, he just points things out." Well, all right, you go and point things out.

Is there anything you regret?
Good lord, yes. A million things.

Are we all doomed?
Yes, we're all going to die. As a father, I feel bad saying that, as you always want to put a good face on for your kids. But it was ever thus.

Defining Moments

1965 Born in Swansea
1985 Leaves Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama for a job at Radio Wales
1989 Moves to London. Becomes presenter of a home-shopping channel
2000 Co-writes Human Remains for BBC. Takes role of Keith in Marion and Geoff
2006 Marries second wife, Claire Holland
2007 Returns to South Wales as Uncle Bryn in the breakthrough Gavin and Stacey
2010 Stars in The Trip with Steve Coogan

Helen Lewis is deputy editor of the New Statesman. She has presented BBC Radio 4’s Week in Westminster and is a regular panellist on BBC1’s Sunday Politics.

REGIS BOSSU/SYGMA/CORBIS
Show Hide image

How memories of the Battle of Verdun inspired a new era of Franco-German co-operation

The fight at Verdun in 1916 set a precedent for peace that lives on at the heart of Europe.

How do you clear up after a battle that took the lives of more than a quarter of a million men? In Britain we don’t have much experience of this kind. There hasn’t been a major war on British soil since the 1640s, and that wasn’t a shock-and-awe inferno of industrial firepower (although it is estimated that a greater percentage of Britain’s population died in the civil wars than in the Great War).

The French, however, fought the Great War on home soil. The ten-month Battle of Verdun in 1916 stands out as the longest of the conflict, and one of the fiercest, with fighting concentrated in a small area of roughly 25 square miles. The terrain was pounded by heavy artillery and poisoned with gas; nine villages were reduced to rubble and never rebuilt – remaining on the map to this day as villages détruits.

In November 1918, soon after the Armis­tice, Monseigneur Charles Ginisty, the bishop of Verdun, was appalled to see mounds of unburied corpses and myriad bones still scattered across the blasted landscape – what was left of men who had been literally blown to bits by shellfire. “Should we abandon their sacred remains to this desert,” he asked in anguish, “littered with desiccated corpses . . . under a shroud of thorns and weeds, of forgetting and ingratitude?”

Ginisty became the driving force behind the ossuary at Douaumont, at what had been the very centre of the battlefield. This he intended to be both “a cathedral of the dead and a basilica of victory”. It is a strange but compelling place: a 450-foot-long vault, transfixed in the middle by a lantern tower, and styled in an idiosyncratic mix of Romanesque and art deco. To some visitors the tower looks like a medieval knight stabbing his broadsword into the ground; others are reminded of an artillery shell, or even a space rocket. Creepiest of all is what one glimpses through the little windows cut into the basement – piles of bones, harvested from the field of battle.

Sloping away downhill from the ossuary is the Nécropole Nationale, where the bodies of some 15,000 French soldiers are buried – mostly named, though some graves are starkly labelled inconnu (“unknown”). Each tomb is dignified with the statement “Mort pour la France” (no British war grave bears a comparable inscription). The nine villages détruits were given the same accolade.

For the French, unlike the British, 1914-18 was a war to defend and cleanse the homeland. By the end of 1914 the Germans had imposed a brutal regime of occupation across ten departments of north-eastern France. Verdun became the most sacred place in this struggle for national liberation, the only great battle that France waged alone. About three-quarters of its army on the Western Front served there during 1916, bringing Verdun home to most French families. Slogans from the time such as On les aura (“We’ll get ’em”) and Ils ne passeront pas (“They shall not pass”) entered French mythology, language and even song.

Little wonder that when the ossuary was inaugurated in 1932, the new French president, Albert Lebrun, declared: “Here is the cemetery of France.” A special plot at the head of the cemetery was set aside for Marshal Philippe Pétain, commander at the height of the battle in 1916 and renowned as “the Saviour of Verdun”.

The ossuary must surely contain German bones. How could one have nationally segregated that charnel house in the clean-up after 1918? Yet officially the ossuary was presented as purely French: a national, even nationalist, shrine to the sacrifice made by France. Interestingly, it was the soldiers who had fought there who often proved more internationally minded. During the 1920s many French veterans adopted the slogan Plus jamais (“Never again”) in their campaign to make 1914-18 la der des ders – soldier slang for “the last ever war”. And they were echoed across the border by German veterans, especially those on the left, proclaiming, “Nie wieder.”

For the 20th anniversary in 1936, 20,000 veterans, including Germans and Italians, assembled at Douaumont. Each took up his position by a grave and together they swore a solemn oath to keep the peace. There were no military parades, no singing of the Marseillaise. It was an immensely moving occasion but, in its own way, also political theatre: the German delegation attended by permission of the Führer to show off his peace-loving credentials.

Memory was transformed anew by the Second World War. In 1914-18 the French army had held firm for four years; in 1940 it collapsed in four weeks. Verdun itself fell in a day with hardly a shot being fired. France, shocked and humiliated, signed an armistice in June 1940 and Pétain, now 84, was recalled to serve as the country’s political leader. Whatever his original intentions, he ended up an accomplice of the Nazis: reactionary, increasingly fascist-minded, and complicit in the deportation of the Jews.

***

The man who came to embody French resistance in the Second World War was Charles de Gaulle. In 1916, as a young captain at Verdun, he had been wounded and captured. In the 1920s he was known as a protégé of the Marshal but in 1940 the two men diverged fundamentally on the question of collaboration or resistance.

De Gaulle came out the clear winner: by 1945 he was president of France, while Pétain was convicted for treason. The Marshal lived out his days on the Île d’Yeu, a rocky island off the west coast of France, where he was buried in 1951. The plot awaiting him in the cemetery at Douaumont became the grave of a general called Ernest Anselin, whose body remains there to this day. Yet Pétain sympathisers still agitate for the Marshal to be laid to rest in the place where, they insist, he belongs.

After 1945 it was hard for French leaders to speak of Verdun and Pétain in the same breath, although de Gaulle eventually managed to do so during the 50th anniversary in 1966. By then, however, la Grande Guerre had begun to assume a new perspective in both France and Germany. The age-old enemies were moving on from their cycle of tit-for-tat wars, stretching back from 1939, 1914 and 1870 to the days of Napoleon and Louis XIV.

In January 1963 de Gaulle – who had spent half the Great War in German POW camps – and Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, who first visited Paris to see the German delegation just before it signed the Treaty of Versailles, put their names to a very different treaty at the Élysée Palace. This bound the two countries in an enduring nexus of co-operation, from regular summits between the leaders down to town-twinning and youth exchanges. The aim was to free the next generation from the vice of nationalism.

France and West Germany were also founder members of the European Community – predicated, one might say, on the principle “If you can’t beat them, join them”. For these two countries (and for their Benelux neighbours, caught in the jaws of the Franco-German antagonism), European integration has always had a much more beneficent meaning than it does for Britain, geographically and emotionally detached from continental Europe and much less scarred by the two world wars.

It was inevitable that eventually Verdun itself would be enfolded into the new Euro-narrative. On 22 September 1984 President François Mitterrand and Chancellor Helmut Kohl stood in the pouring rain in front of the ossuary for a joint commemoration. In 1940 Sergeant Mitterrand had been wounded near Verdun, and Kohl’s father had served there in 1916, so personal memories sharpened the sense of political occasion. During the two national anthems, Mitterrand, apparently on impulse, grasped Kohl’s hand in what has become one of the most celebrated images of Franco-German reconciliation.

“If we’d had ceremonies like this before the Second World War,” murmured one French veteran, “we might have avoided it.”

Institutional memory has also moved on. In 1967 a museum dedicated to the story of the battle was opened near the obliterated village of Fleury. It was essentially a veterans’ museum, conceived by elderly Frenchmen to convey what they had endured in 1916 to a generation that had known neither of the world wars. For the centenary in 2016 the Fleury museum has undergone a makeover, updated with new displays and interactive technology and also reconceived as a museum of peace, drawing in the Germans as well as the French.

With time, too, some of the scars of battle have faded from the landscape. Trees now cover this once-ravaged wasteland; the graveyards are gardens of memory; the EU flag flies with the French and German tricolours over the battered fort at Douaumont. Yet bodies are still being dug up – 26 of them just three years ago at Fleury. And even when the sun shines here it is hard to shake off the ghosts.

Exploring the battlefield while making two programmes about Verdun for Radio 4, the producer Mark Burman and I visited l’Abri des Pèlerins (“the pilgrims’ shelter”) near the village détruit of Douaumont. This was established in the 1920s to feed the builders of the ossuary, but it has continued as the only eating place at the centre of the battlefield. Its proprietor, Sylvaine Vaudron,
is a bustling, no-nonsense businesswoman, but she also evinces a profound sense of obligation to the past, speaking repeatedly of nos poilus, “our soldiers”, as if they were still a living presence. “You realise,” she said sternly at one point, “there are 20,000 of them under our feet.” Not the sort of conversation about the Great War that one could have anywhere in Britain.

David Reynolds is the author of “The Long Shadow: the Great War and the 20th Century” (Simon & Schuster). His series “Verdun: the Sacred Wound” will go out on BBC Radio 4 on 17 and 24 February (11am)

This article first appeared in the 11 February 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The legacy of Europe's worst battle