OTOH, they do celebrate Lafayette in Vendée where Lafayette is considered a regional hero. The famous theme park Puy du Fou has one of its attractions dedicated to Lafayette.
> famous theme park Puy du Fou
For people unfamiliar with this: Puy du Fou was created by a nationalistic politician born in the region. This politician, Philippe de Villiers, is getting closer and closer to the french far right, he's anti islam, anti europe, anti migrants, and go as far as to say that the French government is on its way to give away part of its territory for it to be ruled under sharia.
I have no experience with the park but from the articles I found I wouldn't be surprised if every "historical" events presented there are heavily interpreted/romanticised
Another famous recent event is that they bought one of Joan of Arc ring, but it was mainly a nationalist move more than something important to preserve (Joan of Arc is from the east / north part of France) (for more infos: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anneaux_de_Jeanne_d%27Arc).
Overall, the parc is an entertainment place as much as a political tool, but not a lot of people are aware of it, and most of them are eating their propagande like the true story of France (due to lack of education on history mainly).
This a political or controversial view? News to me.
A not bad alternative view on the subject.
The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World
Catherine Nixey
Nationalism is in some cases legal, but it’s not respectable and we need not dignify it as such.
All sources are biased but some are more biased than others. Nationalists are the last people I'd trust to give an accurate depiction of their country's history.
Just like medias owned by far right or far left entities will put a far right or far left spin on everything they treat.
I never said it was a crime, I'm just saying that the park creations shouldn't be interpreted as factual nor accurate depiction of historical events.
It's like arguing that Jesus did XYZ because that's what you saw in the movie "the passion of the chirst". As I said in another comment, as long as you don't pretend you're providing historical facts it's all good, but it's not the case here.
Or this year's interpretation of Cyrano de Bergerac [2]?
I do not get where this complaint about "historical facts" comes from.
The story about Vendée and Lafayette is not even in this year's programme [3] and I truly believe that French should be ashamed for shaving it off.
They've impoverished themselves and now they have one less thing to whine about.
[1] https://www.puydufou.com/france/en/les-chevaliers-de-la-tabl...
As a side note, I must say the park is a genuine wonder in itself, and I highly recommend it to anyone if you can go there.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puy_du_Fou#Une_vision_orient%C...
And a wrong take that try to push a political agenda.
It's a fun park but don't take history lesson history here are more that political oriented legends.
They are like history channel ...
Even right wing historians find the orientation of the puy du fou wrong.
Ainsi, comme le soulignent Jean-Clément Martin, historien spécialiste de la Révolution française, de la Contre-révolution et de la guerre de Vendée, et Valérie Sottocasa, maître de conférences en histoire moderne à l'université Toulouse-Jean-Jaurès, le spectacle, « d'emblée militant et symbolique »12 exalte « le mythe d'un âge d'or durant lequel nobles et gens du peuple étaient soudés par un même idéal communautaire »11 mais « qui a servi jusqu'à nos jours à consolider une culture politique dont témoignent les commémorations du Puy du Fou, sans doute les plus spectaculaires du genre11 ». La mobilisation des populations locales dans le cadre d'« une association défendant les valeurs de la famille et de la tradition » s'inscrit dans ce cadre : il s'agit de « populariser une idée de l'histoire de France teintée de Contre-Révolution »13, comme le montrent en outre dans les années 1980 et 1990 les thématiques des colloques qui s'y déroulent ou l'utilisation de la venue d'Alexandre Soljenitsyne. Jean-Clément Martin et Charles Suaud font remarquer en outre que le spectacle de la Cinéscénie dépeint une société paysanne vendéenne faussement uniforme « privée de ses contradictions internes, soumise aux aléas des saisons et des traumatismes extérieurs », occultant à la fois les affrontements ayant eu lieu en Vendée entre catholiques et protestants pendant les guerres de religion et les rapports de domination économique et sociale13.
No wonder Jean-Clément Martin*s* of the world are angry.
It may be conductive to have some legends even if that stuff doesn't fly with your history teacher.
That they take a slightly different view at historical events is ever more outrageous, but it only shows how one-sided and politicized history education is in France.
FYI, I am an outsider not really interested in French politics, just happened to leave in a nearby country.
The value of Puy du Fou is in the teaching of pluralism while being hightly entertaing in the process.
There are science and facts. You can't teach false facts to people.
Note that I never said that Puy do Fou presents the true facts. But the attacks of French historians on Puy du Fou I saw so far are not based on facts at all.
Then why are history books filled with false facts? And that's in the case the government didn't decided to suppress history classes altogether, as it might make people think (I'm referencing the deletion of history classes in scientific high shool section). Paille et poutre...
The French Revolution is always told from the point of view of losers. Most of its most prominent actors ended losing at some point and the whole thing ends with an epuration followed by a military coup.
The myth surrounding the Revolution has little to do with who won or lost. Like most of what the French view as their history, it is a construction dating from the rise of nationalism at the end of the 19th century.
It’s mainly the history from a « républicain » point of view. Also served with a blatant pro European federalism take.
Nothing wrong per se, but we should have a critical view on what we were fed with.
One thing I noted though is that one has to know French history and French culture to fully appreciate. The scene about the travel of Laperouse is told by the captain of the 2nd ship. Figures around the pond speak in the voice of Depardieu. The whole Lafayette story is a major blow to the official teaching of the French Revolution, you have to know the extent at which the same teaching of history is imposed on everyone to fully appreciate the courage of the park administration.
Historians don't care.
Governments and politicians do.