The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century

THE BURDEN OF RESPONSIBILITY is a marvelous book of intellectual history -- specifically 20th-Century French intellectual history, although some of the ideas discussed remain relevant today and have a truly global reach. Essentially the book consists of three moderately long essays (each about 50 pages) on Léon Blum, Albert Camus, and Raymond Aron. Judt attempts to connect the three figures under the umbrella of "responsibility". That effort is a little strained, although all three certainly rejected the role of an intellectual as commentator or kibitzer on his times and instead took seriously, at least on some issues, the notion of social engagement. Also in common among the three was a decidedly liberal political orientation that nonetheless firmly excluded communism (at least for most of their respective public lives), so much so that each was excoriated by the principal cliques of the French Left for his anti-communism. Finally, each was led by his principles and integrity to positions that he had to maintain virtually alone; each was in a sense an outsider. I previously knew very little about Léon Blum. From the essay on him I learned a lot about French politics in the first half of the 20th-Century, including how thoroughly and disgustingly permeated it was by virulent anti-Semitism. (Vichy France certainly was not solely and simply the handiwork of the occupying German Nazis, foisted upon the French wholly against their inclinations.) But Blum, admirable though he was, is not one of the intellectual heroes of the 20th-Century, and the essay on him does not provide compelling reason to buy and read this book. But the essays on Albert Camus and Raymond Aron are compelling, and each by itself is reason for reading the book. I would be pleasantly surprised to find a better discussion of either man's thinking. At bottom, Albert Camus was not really an intellectual. "He could not match Aron for intellectual firepower, nor challenge Sartre's merciless polemical ascendancy. But then neither Aron nor Sartre shared Camus's comprehensive sensitivity to his time and its troubles." Camus had both a sensuality and a fundamental morality that were basically inimical to an intellectual. He also had an elemental honesty, so that as the world after WWII and into the `50s became more and more complex Camus was unable, in good conscience, to offer guidance or opinions and he gradually retreated into silence. Aron, on the other hand, was better equipped, intellectually, to dispassionately analyze the complexities of 20th-Century politics. Indeed, Judt's essay convinces me that Aron was one of the great intellectuals and clear-headed thinkers of the Century. Aron's acceptance of the relativism of historical knowledge yet simultaneous insistence on the necessity (actively or by default) of making choices and taking actions with consequences is invigorating, as is his realism. The human political condition "is never a struggle between good

Perhaps this review isn't justified (I have only read the section on Camus), but this book is a marvel. Tony Judt has created perhaps the most endearing written portrait of Albert Camus I have ever read. If you are interested in the artist's life, please do yourself a favor and read this book (then read Olivier Todd's full biography). Albert is presented here in a most proper fashion: ambiguous but dignified, somewhere between Pascal and Nietzsche. (Much like the characters in his works, no?) FYI: Judt has written a forward for the new translation of "The Plague" - due out soon, I hope. To summarize: Thanks, Tony.

Though this book is not intended to offer three character sketches per se, it has done more to bring these great twentieth-century Frenchmen to life for me than any other work I've read. Judt is able to bring some continuity to the idea of intellectual integrity by not only describing what each of these men stood for but also what they stood against. Yes, they all stood against Communism (with a big C), but each of them stood against elements of political and intellectual fashion in defense of their own convictions as well. Blum stood against malice. Camus, against moral relativity. And Aron, against intellectual ignorance and conformity. Together they did more to defend the human condition from political and intellectual tyranny than all other twentieth century French intellectuals. This is a powerful look at how the temptations of intellectual and political affiliation need not take the place of rigor and conviction. And, to be honest, it's lucid presentation of each character nearly brought this one to tears. Deserves to be read by a general audience, or anyone who continues to be mystified by these great French figures.

Tony Judt's "The Burden of Responsibility" makes a fitting companion volume to his earlier "Past Imperfect" (1992). While that volume was concerned with how some of the most important post-war French intellectuals willfully blinded themselves to Stalinist atrocities, "Burden" shows us the obverse. Judt presents us with three clearly-written and balanced portraits of men who refused to let ideology shield them from confronting the complexities of their times. Each of these three men - Leon Blum, Albert Camus, and Raymond Aron - were men of the Left but they refused to adhere to the (then-)standard line of justifying Communist political violence and terror in the name of the higher goal of revolutionary social transformation. The difficulties that each of these men faced in trying to etch out a moral and practical political position between the bitterly divisive ideological contests of their times, in Judt's view, makes each of these men distinctive. Yet, the author is even-handed enough to point out each of his protagonists' failures - Blum's inability to create a workable governing coalition or a rational economic policy, Camus's philosophical ineptitutdes, and Aron's rather mandarin arrogance, for example. Judt is fair enough to accept that many of their opponents's criticisms of them were justified (he doesn't turn his protagonists into saints or martyrs) but convincingly argues that each man gauged the issues of their day - (Socialism for Blum, Algeria for Camus, and Marxism for Aron) more accurately than their more ideologically-driven counterparts. All this is by way of saying that "The Burden of Responsibility" carries an unstated but not-so-discreet warning against the theoretically-driven academic left of our day. In his intelligent appraisal and recognition of three men who moved past the boundaires of ideological thinking and faced the contemporary issues as they actually existed, Judt also presents us with a model of intellectual enagement that goes beyond mere word-spinning. Both an compelling history of men caught in conflicts of their times (and Judt situates them in their epoch with masterly ease) and an engaging polemic, "The Burden of Responsibility" is an essential read for anyone interested in modern intellectual history.

This is one of the most illuminating books on mid-20th century French history I have come across. Tony Judt says a great deal in a short amount of space, and he says it in a manner that is clear and straight to the point. His strong sympathies with Blum, Camus and Aron are obvious, and perhaps a little more needs to be said to explain why so many other French intellectuals lost their way in these years amid the temptations of right-wing extremism, communism and plain self-importance. But that would have turned it into a different kind of book. Tony Judt has done a fine job in reminding us of the courage and good sense of these three men, who did more than most to uphold the dignity of their country in hard times. Congratulations, too, to the University of Chicago Press for publishing such an elegant volume.