Talk:Louis-Ferdinand Céline

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Who wants to had something about his anti-semism ?

There is another, longer article on the same person: Louis Ferdinand Celine.
S.

I have moved the article to Céline - it is a pen name, like Voltaire, Stendhal, and Molière, and is not associated with his given names. john k`


Contents

[edit] Biography Section

I have taken the liberty of adding headings to the "Life" section. I tried to take care to add information about anti-semitism/collaboration in an NPOV manner. Most of the information I added came from a New York Times obituary from the 60s.

Judging from the volume of discussion regarding Celine's antisemitism and collaboration, I felt that this aspect deserved a special subheading in the biography section. (Most of the information gleaned from the NYT obit was already replicated in this article. I thought the bit about Celine acting as personal physician to Petain added some insight though.)

On a personal note: I still can't figure out if he gets what I call a James Brown pass (IE: seperating art from artist - reprehensible politics/behavior: but art merits spending a few dollars at the record/book store). Maybe I'll try to find a good short story of his before deciding to dive into "Installment"....


[edit] Poor family

I have read that his parents belonged to the middle class or even upper-middle class. Can anyone verify this or that wich is stated in the article?

Lower middle class, actually ; what in France is known as petit bourgeoisie, like the shopkeepers and various seedy proprietors who populate his works. Prairie Dog

[edit] Was he a far right supporter?

why is he listed in some link of biographies of people of the far right?

I know he was considered a Nazi collaborator. His books don't generalize almost at anytime and also don't recall something more anti-Semitic than anti-British, e.g.--Luci_Sandor  09:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Luci thanks for your correct statement, apart from some of his pacifist pamphlets he was not particularly anti-semitic and he was much to humane to be a true anti-semite. As such I am pissed off at the self righteous posturing of morons and on their interpretation of Celine. THANKS

His first pamphlet, Bagatelles pour un massacre, (1937) was highly pacifist in nature but even more so enti-semitic. at this time the far right began using Celine's name in speeches as a political ally. his second pamphlet, L'ecole de Cadavres, (1938) was even more so, to the point where the left virtually abandoned him, even for his persuasive pacifism, and the right even found him too strong for their tastes, a charicature, if you will. it was for these pamphlets that he was charged with defamation of national character and for collaboration with the enemy. he was imprisoned 11 months and later released, and again charged, found guilty in 1950, and sentenced to a year's inprisonment, 50,000 francs fine, and confiscation of all this property (he was later amnestied). --Ben iarwain 20:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I think its fairer to say he abandoned the left. Its merely the likes of Gide wanted to adopt him. As for charged with collaboration most of France did and the shame is the punative nature of retribution. Poor old Petain got short shrift too and he was a legend. He did say anti-semitic things yes, not denying, but I find them hard to believe. In the sense of I dont think he was actively anti-semitic, first and foremost Celine was a satirist/humanist and his rants pointed at a deeper sense of misery.

Céline never abandoned the left because he was never part of any left wing organization. After having published Voyage au bout de la nuit in 1932 people considered Céline to be left wing, but that was merely an assumption based on Céline's anarchistic and nihilistic view of society. In his pamphlets Bagatelles pour un massacre (1937), L'école des cadavres (1938) and Les beaux draps (1941) Céline displayed the most horrible and gruesome antisemitisme ever published in Western Europe.--Willem Huberts 14:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

No Willem he did not, Hitler and Himmler did or even Luther. Dont be dramatic. And I stand be he did abandon the left, he flirted with the left hence Mea Culpa and his trip to the USSR. Its common for right wingers to once have been to the left, Mussolini but also LaRochelle. Anyway dont be dramatic...

Could you show us a source that states Céline belonged to the left or flirted with the left? I always prefer facts to opinions. By the way: please sign your contributions, it's more pleasant to know whom we're talking to... --Willem Huberts 15:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If I knew how to I would. He was invited to the USSR by the socialists and he accepted, is that an adequate fact? Lars

I'm sorry to say, but you're wrong. He went to the USSR to collect and spend the money he earned after having sold I don't know how many copies of the Russian translation of Voyage au bout de la nuit. In those days it was impossible (for any author, regardless their ideological point of view) to export money to outside the USSR, one had to spend it inside the USSR. He never visited the USSR after being invited by the government. He went there on his own, accompanied by no one, invited by no one.--Willem Huberts 12:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Which begs the question how did he get in, his visa was an invitation by the USSR as such an invitation 21:20, 19 June 2006 82.69.130.150

Please sign your contributions. Furthermore, please show your sources. How do you know his visa was an invitation by the USSR?--Willem Huberts 20:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Its me Mr Huberts after a long time, but a visa is GRANTED by a government, as an author he went there to collect his royalties which the censored Soviet press had waiting for him, however he could only spend Soviet money within the Soviet Union, to do so he was invited by the Soviet government... I win you lose :-) Lars —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.93.102 (talk) 23:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Move

Yes, of course this should be moved. Septentrionalis 18:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Céline was not a fascist(?)

I have read quite an amount of material regarding Céline, and I have gotten the impression that he was not a fascist. He was an anti-Semite but neither a nazi nor a facist. He argued not to go to war against Hitler and Germany (partly) because of his extremely pacifist convictions. He was an outspoken critic against Hitler (even though he said it was because Hitler had "jew blood" in him) and the concept of aryan supremacy. On one occasion, during a lectur on something like the "awfulness" of the judeo-communism or jodeo-marxism or something like that, he interupted the speaker with "why don't you talk about aryan stupidity?".

I belive that him being listed as a fascist on several lists on Wikipedia is incorrect. But then again I might be wrong. Feel free to correct me if that is the case. --Blackfield 23:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I've read some of Céline's books and there is nothing in them that could be unequivocally identified as fascist. Rather, he seems to combine extreme misanthropy and an attendant racism, with the pacifism that led him to oppose war with Germany and to ally himself to the Vichy government (a pacifism that was against organized war, which he believed was a racket, not against violence in general). I haven't read his pamphlets, but the quotes and commentary I've seen suggest that they are virulently anti-Semitic, indeed so anti-Semitic that it's not clear whether he's being quite serious. For instance:
If you really wish to get rid of the Jews, then there aren't 36,000 means to chose from, 36,000 different faces to make. The solution is simple: racism! And not a little bit, from the lips outwards, but integrally, absolutely, inexorably, like Pasteur's perfect sterilization: Let them all croak to begin with, then we'll see. -From Bagatelles pour un massacre ("Trifles for a massacre"), 1937
From what I've seen, the pamphlets are very peculiar and not at all like what would have passed for a political tract in the Anglo-Saxon world. They're written in colloquial, often vulgar language, and are filled with strange personal asides gratuitous pornography. The impression I get is that they were intended as works of literature and that Céline was a nihilist who didn't really care about politics but wanted to be outrageous. Still, the fact of the matter is that he opposed war with Hitler, supported the Vichy government, wrote in collaborationist newspapers, and publicly supported the extermination of Jews, so in practice he advanced fascist causes. -- Eb.hoop 21:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Claims made in the French article

The French version of this article claims, among other things, that:

  • Céline was wounded in the right arm, not the head, during his military service.
  • He visited the Ford plants in Detroit for a mere 36 hours and was never a medical advisor for that company.
  • During the four years that he spent in Denmark after his release from prison, he lived in a confortable house owned by his lawyer.
  • After being pardoned in 1951, he signed a very generous publishing contract with Gallimard. The stories he often repeated in interviews and in his later books about his poverty are therefore false.

All of these points contradict the text of the English article. I encourage someone to look into this. -- Eb.hoop 05:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there are a lot of inaccurate and even false statements being made in the article (the French article is not entirely correct either though). I will attempt to clean it up in the near future.--Blackfield 18:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

He was discharged with a head wound. He worked in the Ford plant and wrote a subsequent paper on conditions of the poor. His poverty at end of life, not sure, know his house was looted and he probably was not as rich as he should/felt he was.

[edit] Head wound?

Céline has always spread the myth that he had been trepanated after being struck in the head in 1914 during WWI. He even said on many occasions that doctors had inserted a plate into his skull. Céline liked to tell stories and to dramatize things. The head wound is one of them. Three citations to prove him wrong (and all those who believe the story of the head wound):

  • In later life he talked much about his wounds. Again and again he claimed that he had been struck in the head and that the doctors had inserted a plate into his skull. Jean Ducourneau, editor of the Oeuvres complètes, has unearthed the surgeons' report. He finds no mention of a head-wound. Destouches was treated for an arm-wound and the operation left him with a stiff right shoulder. His friends recall seeing the deep scar that ran down to his elbow. But the head-wound is pure invention. (Source: Patrick McCarthy, Céline. Allen Lane, London, 1975, p. 24-25. ISBN 0-7139-0767-3.)
  • Bien entendu, ni trépanation ni même trauma crânien, et rien non plus à ce sujet dans le certificat établi le 24 février 1915 par le médecin major Laurens et le médecin principal Moty à l'hôpital annexe de Vanves, qui mentionnaient simplement: Plaie perforante du bras droite par balle, entrée 1/3 supérieur face antéro-interne, sortie 1/3 inférieur face postéro-externe, libération et suture du nerf radial. (Source: François Gibault, Céline: le temps des espérances 1894-1932. Mercure de France, Paris, 1978, p. 159.)
  • On sait aujourd'hui que sa fameuse trépanation ne fut qu'un mythe. Si Céline resta toute sa vie invalide à 70 pour 100, il le dut uniquement aux séquelles de sa blessure au bras. (Source: Frédéric Vitoux, Céline. Pierre Belfond, Paris, 1978, p. 57. ISBN 2-7144-1178-9.)

--Willem Huberts 06:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Madness and Rage

I believe madness and rage detracts from the scope of the article. It is not supported with any evidence. There is no mention in biographies available he suffered, or showed symptions compatible with mental illness. As clinical observations, madness and rage, they don't tell us anything. It is quite possible he may have been afflicted with some form of mental illness, but you better get a source if you continue to make this claim. Rast

I put a citation request some time ago on the statement about Céline's alleged descent into madness and rage, but so far none has appeared. I propose to remove this biased and subjective comment, unless some appropriate reference can be provided in the near future. White Guard 05:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed though his later stuff does read like paranoia 101

I discovered Céline late in life, and became very much intrigued with him. His putative anti-semitism is a mystery to me. While the extent of it is controversial most authorities declare that it was genuine and rabid, yet I have read no explanation of it's roots nor any other analysis of it's nature. Is there any explantion for it or analysis of it's developement in his formative, or, for that matter, later years? It is not enough to tell me that he was anti-semitic. When such an insightful writer strongly holds an intransigent, irrational view, especially one with such violent consequences, then what is the significance vis-à-vis his thought process?

[edit] His anti-semitism

The biographies I have read on Celine all include references to his anti-semitism. If that isn't sufficient, there's always the pamphlets, and other references scattered across his books. One biographer suggested the cultural climate of Celine's Paris as being anti-semetic. Culturally sanctioned bigotry if you will. I'm inclined to believe that. Desparaging remarks regarding Jews are just that, remarks. Celine made deparaging remarks about everything--life, death, and everything in between. To apprehend the unimaginable, concerted, conscious effort of Nazi Germany to extinguish Jewish lives is certainly no idea Celine shared. Celine always has "nazi" and "anti-semitism" included in information about him, usually even before they talk about him as a writer! --Rastighfan 01:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I discovered Céline late in life, and became very much intrigued with him. His putative anti-semitism is a mystery to me. While the extent of it is controversial most authorities declare that it was genuine and rabid, yet I have read no explanation of it's roots nor any other analysis of it's nature. Is there any explantion for it or analysis of it's developement in his formative, or, for that matter, later years? It is not enough to tell me that he was anti-semitic. When such an insightful writer strongly holds an intransigent, irrational view, especially one with such violent consequences, then what is the significance vis-à-vis his thought process?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Louis-Ferdinand_C%C3%A9line"

[edit] His nazism and antisemitism

Sorry for my bad english. There is a problem in

he was identified by the public with the Nazi occupation, despite his consistent contempt for their ideology (and all others).

Celine writes :

« Si demain Hitler me faisait des approches avec ses petites moustaches, je râlerais comme aujourd’hui sous les juifs. Mais si Hitler me disait : « Ferdinand ! c’est le grand partage ! On partage tout ! », il serait mon pote ! » (Bagatelles pour un massacre, Denoël, 1937, p. 83).

« Je veux les [les Juifs] égorger... (...) Lorsque Hitler a décidé de « purifier » Moabit à Berlin (leur quartier de la Villette) il fit surgir à l’improviste dans les réunions habituelles, dans les bistrots, des équipes de mitrailleuses et par salves, indistinctement, tuer tous les occupants ! (...) Voilà la bonne méthode. » Lettres à Marie Canavaggia, Du Lérôt éd., 1995.

And Philippe Burrin (historian) :

« Ses pamphlets de l’avant-guerre articulaient un racisme cohérent. S’il dénonçait en vrac la gauche, la bourgeoisie, l’Église et l’extrême droite, sans oublier sa tête de Turc, le maréchal Pétain, c’est pour la raison qu’ils ignoraient le problème racial et le rôle belliciste des juifs. La solution ? L’alliance avec l’Allemagne nazie, au nom d’une communauté de race conçue sur les lignes ethnoracistes des séparatistes alsaciens, bretons et flamands. » Philippe Burrin, La France à l’heure allemande, 1940-1944, Seuil, 1995, p. 63.

[edit] Copyright Violation

This is an OTRS related investigation...

The Wikimedia Foundation was just notified by a third party that a section of this article (the sentences "Pessimism pervades Céline's fiction as his characters sense failure, anxiety, nihilism, and inertia. Céline was unable to communicate with others, and during his life sank more deeply into a world of madness and rage.", with the Citation Needed tag) are a copyright violation, lifted from: [1] or an earlier Grolier work with a 1993 Grolier copyright.

This appears to have been due to the former article Louis Ferdinand Céline having been a copyright violation lifted straigth from that other website or original reference verbatim when it was created in 2002. See the first edit there: [2]

As far as I can tell, that's all that's left of the original copyright violation material.

If necessary, I will remove and attempt to rewrite those sentences. I think it would be better if people who are more familiar with the subject matter, those who have edited the article, determine the best way forwards to rewrite it all so that there's nothing left that was stolen from someone else's work. I will monitor this page and if insufficient progress is made this week, do something towards the end of the week.

Sorry to drop this on everyone here. Apparently this is a 5-year old copyright timebomb someone left lying around, and we just had someone dig it up and point it out to us. Georgewilliamherbert 03:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Céline was bitter, possibly ill, but a raging madman?

According to Stanford Luce, in his introduction to Conversations with Professor Y, Céline was a "poet of delirium". This can be seen in large sections of Journey to the End of the Night, Death on the Installment Plan, Féerie for Another Time, Normance(the entire book), Guignol's Band, London Bridge, Castle to Castle, North, and Rigodoon. Often the character explicity falls into a spell from a fever. His unique style involved using hallucinations in order to exaggerate emotion. His heroes are cowards and loners and without any illusions of what society really amounts to. To say that he became a raging madman is unfair since he regained some respect back from the French reading public and critics.

He was definitely misanthropic and racist, yet he had a correspondence with an American Jewish professor, Milton Hindus, that resulted in a meeting between the two during his eighteen month imprisonment in Denmark. Gide believed his most anti-Semitic pamphlet, Bagatelles pour un massacre, had to be viewed as a satire of all the fascist pamphlets and newspapers because it was so outrageous. According to Luce, upon return to France he was harassed in 1951 by a Communist party demonstration outside his home in Meudon. This ended when the mayor of Meudon, Henri Albert, publicly defended him and said that he had paid the price for whatever crime that might have been attributed to him and threatened to call the National Guard troops. Of course, Céline committed no crime whatsoever and was released from the Danish prison where the authorities had refused extradition to France for sedition on the grounds that there was no evidence.

Céline was a fascist, racist, and a coward like too many Frenchman after WWI. His contention was that France's problems were a result of WWI, the English, the Americans, the Communists, and the Jews. His style reflected the polemics of the Paris newspapers and the French slang (argot)of the working-class sections of Paris. Luce points out that in his racist pamphlets he calls Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt, and all who are not pacifists "Jews". In the introduction to Death on the Installment Plan, Ralph Manheim notes that Céline's narrator often has persecution mania. According to the Twayne World Authors Series: Louis Ferdinand Céline by David O'Connell, this corresponds with the author's bitterness for not being promoted in his medical career by his Jewish superior and also inferior to a Jewish man who married his former girlfriend, an American ballet dancer named Elizabeth Craig. In addition to this, Céline was also impotent.

Céline was hated most by the Communists and the bourgeois for his pamphlet Mea Culpa, which ripped the Soviet Union, and for the pacifism he advocated in Journey to the End of the Night. People need to think twice about calling Céline a fascist since it is not entirely true. He is more like a French Wyndham Lewis. The main difference being that Lewis changed his mind and left Britain when his work became unpopular. Both men received death threats for supposed fascism. Céline had to leave to avoid being purged by the Communists in the Resistance. Mary Hudson, who translated Féerie pour une autre fois compared that work to Jonathan Swift and James Joyce in its poetical and polemic style. He may have been demented but Charles Bukowski was declared 4-F and psychologically unfit for WWII service whereas Céline was decorated for his wounds in WWI. It is no secret that Bukowski worshipped Céline. Bukowski ran with a crowd of American Nazis in his youth, yet this has not stopped his influence on contemporary pop culture in America and Europe.

Someone needs to remove the "raging with madness" sentence that supposedly violates copyright law on account of its absurdity. He was definitely bitter. Anybody who was forced to leave his country on account of deaththreats from Communists only to become imprisoned for eighteen months and then granted amnesty would be bitter for good reason. Pistolpierre 03:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Having read Céeline and dealt with other right-wing writers, and knowing quite well what Fascism is like (I'm Italian), I have to partially agree with Pistolpierre. Céline disliked war, and proabably feigned a wound or exploited that wound to get out of W.W.I. The attitude of Bardamu, the protagonist of Voyage, to war, is absolutely negative: to him was is just madness and horror. Thus he can't be a real fascist: fascism extols violence, war and warlike attitude. Fascism was founded by W.W.I veterans like Balbo and Mussolini who were proud of their war experience. On the other had, what it really questionable is Céline's antisemitism and racism, and his collaboration with the Nazi. That is the real problem. Which doesn't mean he was one of the greatest writers of the 20th century, and a terribly funny writer. He was a great writer AND a horrible individual (have you ever read what Ernst Juenger says of Céline in his W.W.II diaries?). Many great classics we worship today were disreputable individuals in their private life. So what?--213.140.21.227 (talk) 13:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

This article needs to let the facts do the talking. There are weasel words, a general lack of hard facts, and, what I feel is, straight-up opinion. I will be making a bold edit soon and will take into consideration all of the above and parts of the French article. Brandoid (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

No offense but to say that Céline was not a racist, specifically anti-Semite and anti-Chinese, is pretty ignorant, unless of course you simply are unfamiliar with the texts that are described in this article. In any event you seem to have ignored the bits about his pamphelts. You seem to be questioning whether they are racist. Please explain how they are not racist. If you can I will stop removing your first tag, should you restore it (I deleted it). You should look into the large sections dealing with Céline's (or his narrator)racist views in two studies, one by Merlin Thomas and the other by David O'Connell. Have you read either Bagatelles, École des cadavres, Les beaux draps or Rigodoon? How can somebody write pamphlets saying that the Jews are going to massacre the Gentiles and that the "international Jewish conspiracy" is in cahoots with Britain against France and NOT be perceived as a racist? If you are arguing that the term "anti-Semite" should be simply racist, you may have a point however in the case of Céline he is specifically anti-Semite. He calls Pierre Laval an Arab in some places and a Jew in others. Bagatelles is 400 pages of anti-Jewish, anti-British, anti-American rhetoric. It is written in the style of the Fascist newspapers and offers quotes from the Talmud and Jewish statesmen to support the anti-Semitic paranoia that the Jews are trying to massacre the Gentiles. In Rigodoon his target is the Chinese. The last pages are about how "only the blood matters." If that's not racist, nothing is. If you think that the second paragraph of the Work section could be improved I would agree with you. However I strongly disagree that this article warrants either one of your tags. Pistolpierre (talk) 15:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

–What? If you read what I wrote, there are problems in wordings. I am fully aware of Celine's viewpoints. However, there is very little information detailing how people know he is fascist, etc. Please do not remove tags until problems are fixed. I'm not trying to start a battle with you. I agree with everything you have said here, but the article does not state even so much. I am replacing the tags and I am hoping that, together, we can make this article great. Brandoid (talk) 20:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

??? There is very little detail showing he had fascist political beliefs and was a racist? He called for a Franco-German alliance in 1937 in Bagatelles. This was to the right of the French and the German fascists. He said the Jews and British were conspiring against the French and Germans. Did you read anything I wrote? Are you going to comment on Rigodoon, Bagatelles, École des cadavres, and Les beaux draps? I'm waiting for you to explain how the section "Anti-Semitism and Exile" does not address these overtly racist and fascist pamphlets.Pistolpierre (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hahahaha. You are a most unpleasant person! You are making this far more trouble than it's worth. Take a look at the French page (although you most likely lack the abilities to read it) for an example of a more mature explanation of his works. Have fun working on this by yourself. Brandoid (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Ha ha ha??? How am I an unpleasant person? Are you going to explain how the section "Antisemitism and Exile" does not clearly address the information you are looking for? I don't mean to sound to rude, but it is like you are not even reading the article. Everybody knows that Germany was a Fascist country since March 1933. Only a fascist would call for an alliance with a fascist country based on race and in order to fight the British and the Soviets.Pistolpierre (talk) 04:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The French article explicitly states he was an anti-Semite and goes even further by mentioning his contributions to Fascist newspapers during the Occupation. If you want to improve the article why don't you mention his "solution" of an alliance between Bretons, Flemish, Alsatians and the Germans based on their "Aryan" blood. That will confirm the perception that exists that Céline had a fascist conception of race. He says the Jews are racially mixed and therefore unpure. The bold sentences explicitly mention his racism and anti-Semitism. The existing section "Anti-Semitism and Exile" mentions these pamphlets. Feel free to post this filth in the English article in order to improve it. I think it is best left alone. Pistolpierre (talk) 12:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Céline s’exprime alors par une série de pamphlets violemment antisémites. En 1937, paraît Bagatelles pour un massacre puis, en 1938, L'École des cadavres. Ces livres connaissent un grand succès : il y étale un racisme et un antisémitisme radicaux, mais aussi le désir de voir se créer une armée franco-allemande et une apologie de Hitler qui n’aurait aucune visée sur la France : Template:Guil[1]
Et dans L'École des cadavres (1938) :Les juifs, racialement, sont des monstres, des hybrides, des loupés tiraillés qui doivent disparaître. […] Dans l’élevage humain, ce ne sont, tout bluff à part, que bâtards gangréneux, ravageurs, pourrisseurs. Le juif n’a jamais été persécuté par les aryens. Il s’est persécuté lui-même. Il est le damné des tiraillements de sa viande d’hybride. (L’Ecole des cadavres, Paris, Denoël, 1938, p. 108).
Après la défaite et l'occupation de la France, Céline rédige un troisième pamphlet : Les beaux draps, où il dénonce non seulement les Juifs et les francs-maçons mais aussi la majorité des Français, soupçonnés de métissage. Le pamphlétaire demande également, entre autres considérations, une réduction du temps de travail (à 37 heures, pour commencer) et prédit un avenir noir à l’Allemagne et à la collaboration, cela déplaît tant au régime de Vichy (critiqué dans l'ouvrage) que le livre est mis à l’index. L'écrivain adresse ensuite une quarantaine de lettres ouvertes publiées par les organes les plus virulents de la collaboration tout en restant en marge.
Dans ces lettres il se présente comme le pape du racisme, déplore l’insuffisance de la répression contre les Juifs, les francs-maçons, les communistes et les gaullistes. Il publie en 1944 Guignol's band, récit de son séjour de 1915 en Angleterre.
Plusieurs interprétations ont été données de l’antisémitisme célinien, qui se déchaîne dans cet extrait d’une lettre à sa secrétaire littéraire :
Template:Guil (Lettres à Marie Canavaggia, Du Lérôt éd., 1995).
Ainsi, selon l'historien Philippe Burrin: Ses pamphlets de l’avant-guerre articulaient un racisme cohérent. S’il dénonçait en vrac la gauche, la bourgeoisie, l’Église et l’extrême droite, sans oublier sa tête de Turc, le maréchal Pétain, c’est pour la raison qu’ils ignoraient le problème racial et le rôle belliciste des juifs. La solution ? L’alliance avec l’Allemagne nazie, au nom d’une communauté de race conçue sur les lignes ethnoracistes des séparatistes alsaciens, bretons et flamands.}} (La France à l’heure allemande, 1940-1944, Seuil, 1995, p. 63.)
Burrin écrit encore: Autant qu’antisémite, il [Céline] est raciste: l’élimination des juifs, désirable, indispensable, n’est pas le tout. Il faut redresser la race française, lui imposer une cure d’abstinence, une mise à l’eau, une rééducation corporelle et physique. […] Vichy étant pire que tout, et en attendant qu’une nouvelle éducation ait eu le temps de faire son œuvre, il faut attirer par le “communisme Labiche” ces veaux de Français qui ne pensent qu’à l’argent. Par exemple, en leur distribuant les biens juifs, seul moyen d’éveiller une conscience raciste qui fait désespérément défaut.}} (ibid., p. 427.)

uh, i love celine but this article is totally biased and filled with more opinion than fact, no question. you should pay respect to him and his work by presenting both objectively. -D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.199.55 (talk) 17:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)