Nicolas Mariot analyzes the way in which the Presidents of the Republic “ inhabit Their functions since 1848. From the inauguration of chrysanthemums to the practice of jogging, the incarnation of the Republic is a role that is learned and built over the “ apparitions »Publics of the heads of state.
It is by walking that we become president. This formula, built in the manner of a proverb, was chosen not without irony by Nicolas Mariot to entitle his work devoted to the presidential institution from 1848 to 2007. Indeed, Mariot starts from the observation that the historiography of the presidency is a poor parent of contemporary political history, which is often reduced to works “ hagiographic “, Maintaining the cult of the little sentences of the presidents and whose textbooks have caused devotion to the” The inauguration of chrysanthemums »To Gaullian maxims. This story of the presidency, qualified “ native By the author, reproduces the operating modes and the content of the institution, in the form of a gallery of portraits, without bringing critical looks.
A story of “ apparitions »From the Head of State
The book builds his analysis of the presidential institution based on the appearances of the Head of State. Nicolas Mariot proposes to work from a corpus of sources (presidential formulas, trips to the provinces, gallery of portraits), whom he considers neglected by political historians. The thesis defended is that one of the ways (not the only one) to analyze the formalization of the presidential role amounts to dealing with its public appearances (travel, trips, ceremonies, etc.). The argument is historic: deprived of means to address the nation directly and placed under the sword of Damocles Césariste, the Republican Head of State is based on one of the functions recognized by institutional texts (“ preside over national solemnities “) For “ Consolidate your function, create a repertoire identifying the presidential function in order to no longer make it depend on its holders and by anonymizing it to give charisma to the function itself ».
For Nicolas Mariot, it is possible to assert that the institution acquires and reaffirms in this ceremonial framework, beyond the legal and political transformations (…), some of the distinctive features which make it today immediately recognizable. According to him, the ontological rupture that certain authors identify and which would oppose the presidential institution under the Ve Republic with that of previous regimes, is not relevant. The author sweeps away all the arguments linked to the “ blandness »Presidents or constitutional differences. By taking an interest in the continuum of the appearances of the heads of state, he intends to identify the permanence linked to the incarnation of the Republic in the Head of State.
The long-term presidency: Bonapartist anti-model
Mariot voluntarily places his discourse at the crossroads of several disciplinary fields: sociology, political science, anthropology, rhetoric, political iconography, history but also geography are requested in order to analyze this corpus and to best serve the presentation of the thesis. It offers a relationship with chronology, unorthodox in the eyes of historians, but which allows it relevant rapprochements. He first registers his analysis “ in the long time », Expression which places him in the wake of the School of Annals or Braudel, without however that the reference to these schools makes him adopt a chronological progression. The terminals chosen (1848-2007) are controlled by this internal logic described above. Indeed “ The Bonapartist figure appears as an anti-model (…) It is thus against the figure of the providential man that is made, through the progressive sedimentation of a real Elysian creed, the forms of the Presidency of the Republic. »»
The construction of the work is complex because it is both chronological and diachronic, its plan alternating chronological rhythms. The analysis focuses initially on the multiple genes of the institution in its relationship to the personal government and the number: how to build a presidential ceremonial without resorting to formal means and fusional ties with the crowd whose Cesarist tradition seems ? We will read with interest the analysis of crossed tours which authorizes an interesting comparison between the presidents of the IIIe Republic and embarrassing baker, and how under the Ive Republic Vincent Auriol had to face the competition of the movements of General de Gaulle, which he forced by all the weapons of the protocol not to benefit from the same honors as him.
The book then opts for a synchronic perspective which endeavors to restore the forms and effects of the institution of the protocol both in terms of discourse and gestures (“ manufacture of the president’s formulas ), Before offering a reflection on the question of the transformations of the institution and the breathlessness of this credo.
Changes in the presidential function
Nicolas Mariot proposes a stimulating analysis which calls into question the compartmentalization of established disciplines, however exposing the risk of disciplinary messembly. The very scrupulous work of reconstruction of processions and displacements makes it possible to envisage a rigorous methodology of the link between the politician and the territory through cartography. Faced with a “ History in crumbs », This perspective makes it possible to build formal parallels and new paradigms. However, it can be regretted that chronology and analysis in particular of the period of the Second Republic are only rebuilt to serve the author’s thesis without restoring all its thickness.
Nicolas Mariot here declines a certain number of themes and approaches that we had read in particular in his previous work (CrowdsBelin, 2006). His thesis is interesting from the moment the analysis does not give in to the systemic trend. Indeed, by focusing his reflection on the actor, Mariot does not envisage the necessary interactions between all the actors in the formatting of politics. How, for example, the crowd, municipal councilors, media actors participate (or not) in the presidential dynamics ? Internal analysis amounts to isolate a factor among others. The concepts of appropriation and reception are thus excluded from the analysis of this work.
We could also formulate reservations on the iconographic dimension. The work, even if it makes a large place to a photographic corpus and offers interesting avenues, in particular as a support for correspondence, does not use it in the same way as the formulas of the speeches. Mariot’s analysis does not endeavor to show that the visual formula of the presidential ceremonial also obeys logics of image production and codes that seem to be overlooked.
It is by walking that one becomes president Sign up the history of the presidential institution but also its contemporary changes. Nicolas Mariot wonders as a conclusion: “ A story of the presidency is (still) possible »» ? If the presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy obeys one of the first cycles highlighted by the author, that of the rupture in relation to tradition, to which succeeds a return to the orthodoxy of the ceremonial, the exercise of power no longer seems to be from the same relationship to the territory and the institution.