-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
French politician: Assassin's Creed: Unity 'makes travesty of the French Revolution'
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
Gunslinger
Member
/thread right there lol.
I HAVE been to school in France (Being Spanish, so I'm impartial here) and they are kinda fond of it. To them, it's really the first and last revolution of the people. When you point out the crimes that were commited and its overall failure (I mean, after 26 years of political inestability and invading half of Europe only to lose it, dictatorial monarchy was instaured again) they say it's really about the intention, the example that it set, yadda yadda.
To be honest I agree, Englishmen will always say they had democracy a hundred years before, but their parlamentary tradition was unique, and you can always say Cromwell
It is also true that the Revolution and the Napoleonic invasions set the ground for all the democratic revolutions in the 1840s-1860s.
Alx
Member
Well like I mentioned earlier, you have to take into account the political colors of the guy who said that. He's more or less the replacement of the (now mostly dead) French communist party, and he's catering to people who still dream of a real revolution where the poor people will overtake the rich people who they consider as "the bad guys". Well he's no Besancenot, but he's just behind.
I'm sure he would have loved the game if it had pictured the revolution with flowers and songs and great enlightened ideas, versus cruel and oppressing aristocrats that totally had it coming. Reminding people that revolutions are also a source of chaos and violence doesn't help his cause.
I think most French people (those who went to school anyway) are aware of the dire consequences of the Revolution itself. We were taught everything about the Terror and the bloody executions (my history teacher was actually big on Robespierre, and never tried to hid his "dark side"). If anything, the more twisted conception is about the Empire that followed, since it was a monarchy and dictature, but after centuries of worshipping Napoleon, we still tend to consider him as a great leader (which is probably completely different from what you get to learn in Spain... I've seen the Goya paintings
).The thing is that both the revolution and the Empire played a big role in the definition of the country. First the revolution broke all rules, and I mean all of them. It may have started as an insurrection out of anger, but in the end it removed everything : aristocracy, religion, military officers, measurement units, time units, rights of men and women, ... The Empire afterwards was a more constructive evolution in a country in chaos. Many of the modern French institutions were born then, from the civil laws, the army organization, the high education schools, the different ministeries,...
So yeah in the end we French value that part of out history, that's when modern France started to be born. It was a terrible time and probably not the best way to change a country (not the most peaceful anyway), but well, that's how it happened.
None
Next you'll tell me that Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette isn't historically accurate either
It probably was because of the part with the stripping
Would have been too cinematic to be real.
I think most French people (those who went to school anyway) are aware of the dire consequences of the Revolution itself. We were taught everything about the Terror and the bloody executions (my history teacher was actually big on Robespierre, and never tried to hid his "dark side"). If anything, the more twisted conception is about the Empire that followed, since it was a monarchy and dictature, but after centuries of worshipping Napoleon, we still tend to consider him as a great leader (which is probably completely different from what you get to learn in Spain... I've seen the Goya paintings
The thing is that both the revolution and the Empire played a big role in the definition of the country. First the revolution broke all rules, and I mean all of them. It may have started as an insurrection out of anger, but in the end it removed everything : aristocracy, religion, military officers, measurement units, time units, rights of men and women, ... The Empire afterwards was a more constructive evolution in a country in chaos. Many of the modern French institutions were born then, from the civil laws, the army organization, the high education schools, the different ministeries,...
So yeah in the end we French value that part of out history, that's when modern France started to be born. It was a terrible time and probably not the best way to change a country (not the most peaceful anyway), but well, that's how it happened.
The classes I took were actually more about the two world wars, but they did worship the Revolution. It's not that the Terror was hidden, but that it was justified. Something similar happens with the Civil War here in Spain, where the crimes commited by communists and anarchists are pretty much diminished in front of those of the fascist side.
Actually, here in Spain we learn how stupid were Charles IV (Who gave away his throne to Joseph Bonaparte, known as Pepe Botella for his supposed alcoholism) and Ferdinand VII, who could be mildly described as a despotic, murderist son of a bitch.
Napoleon is studied pretty objectively, as the militar who took power and then invaded Europe with great, innovative strategies.
Ol No Bones
Banned
The French revolution was very messy. A lot of moving parts.
Without defending Mélenchon, which I don't like and is the agressive kind of leftist that I can't stand, those who say "it's just a game and not meant to portray History accurately" kinda miss the point.
Politicians often make the news about video games when they complain about them being violent, never because of what they actually are about. I don't know enough about the French Revolution to tell whether he's right or not (and since I'm French, I can't say I'm proud of it) but it's a major part of our history and I think this is a question we shouldn't blow off like that.
Politicians often make the news about video games when they complain about them being violent, never because of what they actually are about. I don't know enough about the French Revolution to tell whether he's right or not (and since I'm French, I can't say I'm proud of it) but it's a major part of our history and I think this is a question we shouldn't blow off like that.
Spring-Loaded
Member
The "it's just a game" excuse can't absolve game makers of poorly handling serious, real-world subject matter, especially in games the developers of which have made a concerted effort to include such themes.
It would be interesting to hear some real historians giving their opinions. The quotes in the OP make it sound like Mélenchon isn't exactly bias free.
Alx
Member
The (not so) funny thing is, historians aren't bias free either. French historians have the reputation of having a strong right wing orientation, sometimes even to the extreme, so many would probably disagree with Mélenchon for the sake of it. But then is doesn't mean that all of them do.
It's still worth mentioning that Canadian historians were used as consultants for the game. Even if it's no guarantee that everything is historically validated (which it certainly isn't), it means that at least it's not purely artistic vision of that time.
Is Wolfenstein poorly handled as well?
Wolfenstein is a comedy
Spring-Loaded
Member
If someone made the argument that it was, I wouldn't write it off by saying "it's just a game."
A website made a historian play the game. He noted some inaccuracies - some clothes, the flag, this scene where the king speaks and no one listens to him. Biggest one was that the game shows more violence in the streets than there actually was.
He also said that a game like that could be used in schools to make students understand how was Paris at the time, even with these inaccuracies. A teacher I had also recommended us the movie "Enemy at the Gates", which used a fake story to portray how propaganda worked in WWII
whatever77
Banned
Bloody hell!" etc.
Alx
Member
That's interesting, do you have a link please ?
- "I find Wolfenstein offensive and historically inaccurate!"
- "It's just a game"
Seems like a good fit to me. And as Unity does, it also has disclaimers explaining what to expect.
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
Remember the
90s? The French Revolution has never been more accurately portrayed on screen, at least based on one trailer I caught 10 seconds of while flipping channels last night.
17
He mentioned the
Statue of Liberty still being in France,
Alx
Member
Merci beaucoup. ^_^
It's funny to see the guy fascinated by the historical details and not giving a shit about the game itself. "What mission objective ? Leave me alone, I'm checking if the King's speech is accurate...". He seemed to appreciate the reproduction of different buildings anyway.
It seems strange that they let slip mistakes like the top hat in the game, though. I've only seen those in a late 19th century context, I thought everybody would have known that.
*edit : that article reminded me of the one where a journalist showed LA Noire to his father, who lived in LA in the 50s, and spotted the place he knew and the mistakes that were made. It's always refreshing to see a completely different vision of a game in such situations.
Mostly vertical
I have no idea if the game is accurate or not but this is such a dumb defence for it.
Assassin's Creed takes itself seriously enough to be analysed like any movie or book would if put in the same position.
You can't avoid criticism by saying "it's just a game" because then you are painting the whole medium as void of anything meaningful.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Cool. It's nowhere near that simple, but it's good that it's a satisfactory argument for you
Wait, why are you all talking about that thing spoilered? Afaik it was built a whole bloody 90 years after the start of the French revolution?
There's multiple chronologic problems with AC: Unity. The french website LeMonde.fr had an interview with Mr "Antoine Vimal du Monteil", Associate Producter on Unity, about the anachronisms :.
- The french flag as we all know wasn't made in 1789 but in 1794.
- La Marseillaise (Allons enfants de la patrie...) wasn't written in 1791 but in 1792. It becames France hymn in 1795.
- La Bastille should be absolutly and completly destroyed in 1791.
And his answer was : "AC Unity is a mass audience product, not an History lesson."
I know for a lot of people that's nitpicking but come on, AC always been filled with tons of History details and tried to be as close as possible from the "real" History.
And now, as a French and because Ubisoft is, from the start, a French company (their first game was Zombi on the Amstrad CPC, the prequel of ZombiU) and put so many anachronisms in their own game who takes place in their own country... what a mess.
- The french flag as we all know wasn't made in 1789 but in 1794.
- La Marseillaise (Allons enfants de la patrie...) wasn't written in 1791 but in 1792. It becames France hymn in 1795.
- La Bastille should be absolutly and completly destroyed in 1791.
And his answer was : "AC Unity is a mass audience product, not an History lesson."
I know for a lot of people that's nitpicking but come on, AC always been filled with tons of History details and tried to be as close as possible from the "real" History.
And now, as a French and because Ubisoft is, from the start, a French company (their first game was Zombi on the Amstrad CPC, the prequel of ZombiU) and put so many anachronisms in their own game who takes place in their own country... what a mess.
Alx
Member
The AC serie was mostly created by the Canadian teams, it is no more a French license than, let's say Uncharted is a Japanese one.
And as was mentioned before, none of the previous episodes was really historically accurate, nor pretended to be.