May 3, 2017

Marine Le Pen uses that "absurd?!" argument I recommended.

I'm not saying Marine Le Pen's people read my blog. I'm just saying that I offered the argument:
I thought of this — absurd?! — argument in her favor: She purposely plagiarized because it would (and did) cause her antagonists to repeat words that have a meaning that influences people to vote for her.

Hmm. Let's say her speechwriters just screwed up. What do you think of using my absurd theory as rhetoric to cover up what was only embarrassing mistake? Now, caught, she could say: Of course, I used Fillon's words. He is absolutely right, but you cannot vote for Fillon now. You can only vote for me or Macron. I honor what Fillon said. I could not think of more perfect words. And now my opponents — who are also Fillon's opponents, believe me — are criticizing me for using those words, but listen to those words! They are the correct words! France is a set of values and principles transmitted from generation to generation, as passwords. It is a voice, an extraordinary, singular voice that speaks to all the peoples of the universe....
And she used it:
And Le Pen added to the intrigue later Tuesday, claiming in a television interview that the plagiarised passages had been deliberately used, likely in an effort to curry favour with Fillon supporters.

"We have in part the same vision of France as voters for Francois Fillon, of its greatness, the role that it must play in the world," Le Pen, a 48-year-old former lawyer, said.

"If we hadn't have done it, you wouldn't have spoken about it," she said of the apparent ploy. "We know you so well, we know how it works."
Notice that she used both aspects of the argument I suggested: 1. That it honors Fillon and connects her to him, and 2. That it was intended and worked as a device to get the media to carry the message.

IN THE COMMENTS: antiphone said:
It's analogous to sampling in music.She appropriated parts of his work to create a new piece. When you hear the speeches side by side it's clear that it was meant to be recognized. check it out here:

I absolutely agree with you. The cadence and phrasing are so similar that it takes the place of larding in "As Francois Fillon said." It reminded me of that theater piece with a male actor playing Hillary Clinton and a female playing Trump reenacting one of the debates. Look at how in rehearsal, the actors did their lines with the video of the original playing:



The 2 voices match in the same way in the Fillon/Le Pen side-by-side video.

20 comments:

J2 said...

Yikes. Global thought leader. Must be a rush.

Quayle said...

Where is the link to the "Althouse Political Advice Portal", so you get a cut of the proceeds?

David Begley said...

Althouse + Meade to Paris next week.

J2 said...

Paris by cruise line stowaways.

Tank said...

Womansplaining.

traditionalguy said...

Is this the revelation? Women like LePen and LaAlthouse think like LaTrumpe, the woman in Trump.

After all, the WWF is owned by a woman. Old Female secret is that Fake wrestling tricks the men.

The first woman President of France is here, not counting The Courtesans.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

LeTrolled.

traditionalguy said...

Breaking News: Bridget Bardot says do not vote for Macron because he has empathy free steely eyes.

The women are warning us. Watch out for the WWF villain guy.

Jaske said...

Are you sure you want to connect yourself to Le Pen? If it gets out, the New Yorker will write an article about "Alt- right-House".

CJinPA said...

Wow. Good call, professor. We live in interesting times.

Ann Althouse said...

I started the whole "Alt-" thing.

tcrosse said...

Oddly enough, Mme. Salonneuse, your verbiage was much more French than Le Pen's.

Craig Howard said...

Ah, des faux nouvelles! Elle apprend vite.

antiphone said...

It's analogous to sampling in music.She appropriated parts of his work to create a new piece. When you hear the speeches side by side it's clear that it was meant to be recognized. check it out here.

Balfegor said...

I suppose it's the new Trump style of conservative-ish politics -- you know the media hate you with a mad, slavering rage, so you need to trick them into carrying your message for you without their realising it. Like a kind of SEO.

Well, it's working, I suppose.

Once written, twice... said...

Ann would never give Obama or the leader from the left cover for plagiarizing a speech. She would join in on the pile on. But for the right she is more than happy to support plagiarism as being some grand ploy. Thank god Ann is now retired from academia!

BTW, I am not at all surprised that Ann now likes Le Pen.

Balfegor said...

Re: Once written, twice . . .

Ann would never give Obama or the leader from the left cover for plagiarizing a speech. She would join in on the pile on. But for the right she is more than happy to support plagiarism as being some grand ploy. Thank god Ann is now retired from academia!

Hmm. Well, let's see what she wrote when Obama ripped off some choice lines from Deval Patrick? (Actually, I think they had the same speechwriter, who just recycled a couple of lines for his new client):

The question isn't really what counts as plagiarism. We're not imposing sanctions. The question is whether seeing the similarity between the 2 men — Obama and Patrick — makes us think Obama's speechifying is not all that special. And if our good opinion of him is based mainly on his speeches, then we have reason to examine why we're supporting him. But politics is full of stock phrases, contagious memes, and brainstormed messages. If attacks like this work, we'll never hear the end of it. For example, the NYT has this tale of a Bill Clinton "stealing" the phrase "force the spring" found on a sheet of paper in a dead man's typewriter. Do we want every speech larded with acknowledgements? As my wise old friend Joe Blow likes to say.... On the other hand, if that were the rule, you'd probably paraphrase to keep it short — and hide the theft. But it wouldn't be theft if the idea expressed was as unremarkable as the one Obama lifted from Patrick.

Not highlighting Obama's cleverness in stealing lines (for reasons she explains), but also not exactly "join[ing] in on the pile on."

Chuck said...

So it was intentional plagiarism?!? And the intent was to get caught at intentional plagiarism?

Why not quote it, with attribution, and say what it is you are doing?

Is it essential, Althouse, for there to be some initial deception, some dishonesty in order to make this strategy work? If so, let's call it what it is. A stunt. And in fact, a dishonest stunt.

mockturtle said...

Of course anyone who's anybody looks to Althouse for advice.

n.n said...

Strategic thinking, perhaps. It is surely what France needs to survive in a liberal world.