A great book, that I bought after visiting France. Wish I had read it before our trip! It really helps explain why the French are like they are. Not rude, just having different ideas of "public" and "private" issues. Best point - make sure you say "bonjour" before asking directions!
Also, a very easy and quick read.

60 Million Frenchman is split into three sections (1) French history (why certain events helped make the French the way they are). (2) French system (detailed analysis of almost every aspect of current--as of 2000--French life). (3) Projections for the future.

I liked part one a lot. I think the chapters on the Algerian War and World War Two were particularly apt in explaining how the French mindset has been shaped in recent decades. Part two was good in spots, and reeeeally boring in spots. For example: first there's a whole chapter on grands ecoles, then, because that was apparently not enough, there was a whole chapter devoted exclusively to ENA. I liked some of the chapters on the political stuff though, and how different the French ideas of judicial and executive power are from the American.

Part three was relatively short, a beautiful quick read after slogging through part two. It basically paves the way for what they discuss in their other book (The Story of French). All in all, it's an informative, mostly well-written, detailed look at French history, language, culture, technology, and politics--a perfect read if you're a Francophile, or if you're just wanting to learn more about the French mindset.

Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong...
They could have left the title at that. This book does a great job of explaining cultural differences, history, education, politics, attitudes toward food, dating and many things we anglophones are curious about. There was no need to add the snarky "Why we love France but not the French". Was that to sell more books during a time of anti-French sentiment? It took me 3 more years to buy the book, which is after all, quite good. Bad title! I have many friends in France, speak it fluently and agree with the authors that there is much more to learn than words. More to selling books than naming them too, it would appear!

Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong...
They could have left the title at that. This book does a great job of explaining cultural differences, history, education, politics, attitudes toward food, dating and many things we anglophones are curious about. There was no need to add the snarky "Why we love France but not the French". Was that to sell more books during a time of anti-French sentiment? It took me 3 more years to buy the book, which is after all, quite good. Bad title! I have many friends in France, speak it fluently and agree with the authors that there is much more to learn than words. More to selling books than naming them too, it would appear!

Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong often times feels like a Francenstein's (spelling deliberate) monster. It begins well enough, offering insight into the "spirit" of French society, and indeed gives highly valuable information, especially regarding the French ideas of personal vs. public space, which every visitor should know. However, as the reader nears the middle of the book the work takes on a text-book quality, which becomes dry and redundant. To boost, what the writers pass as an anthropological study seems to be more or less notes taken during conversations with a few of their French friends. Add to this a few glaring inaccuracies, particularly in the last chapter, and by the end one is left wondering what exactly the point of the work was, or who exactly the audience is that it was meant for. Neither assumption of the book's subtitle was addressed in any sort of clarity. Some more rigorous editing certainly would have strengthened it. I left the book knowing more than I cared to about the ENA, and not enough about the essence of what it means to be a Frenchman/woman.

Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong often times feels like a Francenstein's (spelling deliberate) monster. It begins well enough, offering insight into the "spirit" of French society, and indeed gives highly valuable information, especially regarding the French ideas of personal vs. public space, which every visitor should know. However, as the reader nears the middle of the book the work takes on a text-book quality, which becomes dry and redundant. To boost, what the writers pass as an anthropological study seems to be more or less notes taken during conversations with a few of their French friends. Add to this a few glaring inaccuracies, particularly in the last chapter, and by the end one is left wondering what exactly the point of the work was, or who exactly the audience is that it was meant for. Neither assumption of the book's subtitle was addressed in any sort of clarity. Some more rigorous editing certainly would have strengthened it. I left the book knowing more than I cared to about the ENA, and not enough about the essence of what it means to be a Frenchman/woman.

This book really delves into why the French are the way they are, as cliche as it sounds. The authors do a great job in explaining how French history has shaped the psyche of the people and the government of today. I am still reading this, so I'll probably have more to say once I'm done. I am totally dumbfounded by the all encompassing power the State (French government) has over its people. All roads run to Paris, literally, kind of like how the Arc de Triomphe is situated. I've always had many questions about the French culture, that my French husband has never been able to adequately answer and this book does the trick!

I only wish someone had written this book and given it to me 32 years ago when I came to live in France!! For having lived only 2 years in this country, the authors got it right most of the time.

"Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong" is a moderately interesting book on the social differences of the French for an American point of view. The authors Nadeau and Barlow look into French culture, history, socialism,and economy but are not very analytical in their study of the French lifestyle. Would not be especially useful as a scholarly reference book, but good for one who is generally interested in French customs.

Wyote (the reviewer just below) is pretty right about this book. The weakest point, for me, is the posture of naivete: why should anyone be surprised that "regulated, taxed, bureaucratic, globalization-resisting" France should be doing well? France has done well for a long time, with just a few intervals of decline, and has always disdained liberal free-market ideology. Only a dogmatic neo-con could assume that any society not gung-ho for globalization must be wrong.
I've also traveled in France, first in the 1960s and most recently last year. My first visit, I had long messy hair and a backpack, and spoke no French; I was touchy about "attitude" and I left with an "ugly American" hostility to all things French. My French is still feeble, but the more I've visited, the more I've come to love the French as much as their art and their food.
Besides, sixty million Frenchmen couldn't agree on anything enough to be all wrong. And nearly a hundred million Americans were dead wrong about George W Bush.

Wyote (the reviewer just below) is pretty right about this book. The weakest point, for me, is the posture of naivete: why should anyone be surprised that "regulated, taxed, bureaucratic, globalization-resisting" France should be doing well? France has done well for a long time, with just a few intervals of decline, and has always disdained liberal free-market ideology. Only a dogmatic neo-con could assume that any society not gung-ho for globalization must be wrong.
I've also traveled in France, first in the 1960s and most recently last year. My first visit, I had long messy hair and a backpack, and spoke no French; I was touchy about "attitude" and I left with an "ugly American" hostility to all things French. My French is still feeble, but the more I've visited, the more I've come to love the French as much as their art and their food.
Besides, sixty million Frenchmen couldn't agree on anything enough to be all wrong. And nearly a hundred million Americans were dead wrong about George W Bush.

I read this book during my vacation in France, which was during the early part of the French presidential elections. The book was moderately insightful. The authors gave a nice, brief background to the major issues in French politics, both domestic and international, which will help anyone understand the news. The history of France after WWII is covered better than any high school textbook, and that is what most people will probably learn from this book: the legacy of WWII, the Algerian war, and so on. They were a touch defensive on behalf of the French against their critics, but only just a touch, and that can be excused since the book's target audience includes people who have heard the critics but not the French.

The analysis is fairly shallow: you can expect more than you'd get from a newspaper, about the same as Newsweek or the Economist, but much less than you'd get from a good Atlantic or Harpers article.

With every election, the book becomes a bit more obsolete, and the authors appear to update it regularly. There's an election happening as I write this review, so if I were you, and you don't mind, I'd wait 6-7 months to see if a new edition comes out.

I am an American living in the Midwest of the United States. 2 years ago I did not speak a word of french. I have been studying french with several native french speakers for the last 18 months and have come to genuinely love the language. However, my curiosity about the French people and French culture has been largely unaddressed in my learning.

Sixty Million Frenchmen has now filled that void. I devoured the book in a weeks time and highly recommend it anyone seeking to begin to understand WHY the French do what they do and WHY the French are the way they are. From cultural issues including privacy, art, language, rhetoric, education and of course, French cuisine, to the continuing influences of World War II and the War in Algeria (which I had never even heard of in my country's World History classes) and the total centrality of French government in every aspect of French life, this book covers all of these ideas with wit and prose that will keep you glued to the book.

For a non-Frenchman seeking an introduction to the WHY's of everything French I highly recommend this very enjoyable book.

Merci beaucoup to the authors and bonne chance to future readers!

I had just read A Year in the Merde and loved it. My husband and I go to France very year, love everything about it, especially the differences between the U.S. and France. So many of the customs are unexplainable to us, one being that whenever we go to anyplace in France, we expect it to be closed. The hours the stores keep I cannot figure out, and the hours of the restaurants vary also. We see a sign that says(in French) open all the days, we go the next day and the place is FERME(closed). A Year in the Merde points out so many differences, I just laughed and laughed, as none are serious, just something you must deal with.
We were told that 60 Million Frenchmen was also a very funny book. It is not. Not one bit. Do not buy it if you are looking for something light.

I'm a transplanted Canadian who has been living in Paris for the past five years. Thrilled to find a book about France and its sometimes baffling ways written by my compatriots, I bought it instantly, but I must say, I have never been more disappointed in a book purchase. This work is rife with glaring inaccuracies, sweeping generalities and even spelling mistakes! Seemingly basing their work on their own unsubstantiated observations rather than on any real journalistic research, Barlow and Nadeau lead their readers by the nose down a path of falsehoods that leave uninitiated francophiles believing that France and its people can be summed up so contritely, and the rest of us wondering "What Fantasy-land France are they talking about?".

I absolutely do not understand why reviewers like "Elsa" and John Carr say that the writers think North America is right and the French are wrong. I didn't see any of that attitude at all in the book. They simply tried to define the differences. Of course, they noted that their North American readers would find many things surprising, which is perfectly true. They didn't say the North American approach was better. And "Elsa", when the cover says "..and why we love France but not the French" the "we" is not the authors themselves - it's a reference to the well-known stereotypes held by so many North Americans. Remember, it's a book published for a certain readership.

That said, what about the book? I've spent much less time in France than I would like, though I speak pretty good French (probably with a Canadian accent as I lived in Montreal for nine years.) I thought the central insights into the fundamental importance of the centralized state, the lesser emphasis on money as a yardstick (good thing too!), and the descriptions of the health service and educational system, were fascinating. Clearly, from the comments of some of the French reviewers, they didn't get everything right, and missed out somewhat on the range and variety of social forms in that large country. But as an (ex) Brit, I recognized many ways in which the French style was basically just a further stage along the scale away from North America (particularly the US). Britain also allows a much bigger role for the central government, though not as much as France (in spite of the silly Thatcher/Blair way that Britain has followed at America's heels). The market is NOT a good basis for running every aspect of society.

A huge value of the book is to make North American readers appreciate just how very different another society can be, even one that superficially they may think is like them - democratic, industrialized, etc. One feels that probably no-one in the current American adminstration has any understanding of these major differences of attittudes and culture, stemming from so many centuries of history (and trauma). Then, if they can be so ignorant of a modern Western state, how can they have the faintest understanding of the inner drives of nations further removed - Arab, Persian, Indian, Chinese....And after getting some feeling for the tremendous extent of the differences, we may reflect that however different their guiding philosophies may be, for the nations involved, they work, and perhaps it is none of our business to try to change them. That would be a good message to take away from this book.

This is a very well researched and well written book. It is almost like reading a textbook at times but the information provided is so interesting you will want to remember every little detail. I understand the French more than I ever imagined I could afer reading this book.

When I started reading the book published by Source Books Inc. called Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong by Jean Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow, I thought it was just going to be another boring book I had to read for class. Much to my surprise it is quite interesting and has a creative way of helping the reader understand why the French are perceived as conceited. It involves a husband and wife, Jean Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow and their two year journey through France. They are a bilingual, cross cultural couple who wanted to learn more about the French and why they live their lives the way they do.
This book is split up into three different sections, separated by chapters. The first part of the book is I think the most interesting. It talks about the values of the French and their rich heritage. Their land, privacy and their love for grandeur are some of the key points in the chapters that help describe why we should never try to understand the French. In chapter two, "land on their mind," describes a situation in southern France when a McDonald's restaurant was being built in a small town. The locals did not like this idea of such a commercial fast food restaurant being built in their town. They decided to protest and destroyed the building. Most people in the media thought this protest was against globalization but they were wrong, it was about protecting their land. The
place where this McDonalds was built is the home of the one of a kind Roquefort cheese. They are trying to protect their industry in this town and they view the McDonalds as something that makes their land not as special. It almost devalues it. When is the last time you ever thought about protesting as a McDonalds was being built down the street? I know all I think is that it will be good when it opens so I can get a McGriddle in the mornings. This is one of the main points that the book gets across to its readers. There is a huge difference in the way the French people think and the way North Americans think. The spirit of the French and preserving their culture is abundant throughout the country and the first couple chapters of the book describe why they are so arrogant and reluctant to change.
The second part of the book deals with the structure of the country, government and some of the past wars they have been involved in as a country. This part of the book was kind of boring. It was extremely informative but seemed a little too wordy to retain any real knowledge of the history. I found my mind wandering a lot while trying to get through this part of the book. It basically explains WWII and the French role in the war and how the French came to the point of the importance of their version of state. In America we have a completely different view of what the term state means. We have the federal government then the states have individual rights. In France it is run a littledifferently. They don't really have a local government. One of the stories that stick out in my head was about a Frenchman not picking up after his dog when
he did his business on the street. In America, you get a hefty fine and ticket for something like that but in France they do not have anyone enforcing these laws. This is because the French "people pay high taxes and expect the state to do its job." The French believe there is only one government in France and do not understand our version of state and local governments with different laws.
The Third part of the book is split up into chapters that explain the changing world around France and their views on things such as immigration, economics, and the wealth of the country. Some countries believe that France is resisting globalization but really they are developing in their own way. Apparently, only 10 percent of the country was using the internet in 1999. That is a really small number for such a fast growing technology service. This is because they developed their own system called Minitel which is similar to the internet. The French have their own way of going about things and this is one of them. The immigration policy in France is minimal. The French do have a high Muslim population but a lot of the immigrated population lives in French ghettos. I found it interesting that the government can not ask about race or origin on any documents so France has no records of how many different nationalities there are. In the US everything we fill out has the boxes to fill out race. Only about 3.5 million people are immigrants in France and most of them lie on the census forms and say they were natural born citizens. Reading this book really helped me realize and understand why the French are the way they are. I finished reading this book a while after I visited
Paris, France. While I was in Paris I wondered why no one freely spoke English to me. I know I read some information online about France and was warned that they will only speak English if you speak French first. I really didn't think that would be an issue until I got there. When we arrived in France I was starving. There was a little place that made sandwiches right next to our hotel. I went up to the man working there and asked for a sandwich in English. He looked at me blankly. I was embarrassed that I did not know the language so I started looking through my pocket dictionary trying to tech myself how to ask for a sandwich. If it weren't for Christina and her minimal French I would have starved. After I received the sandwich the man revealed that he knew a little bit of English. Ever since that moment I realized the people who warned me about trying to speak the language were right. I learned the term "je voodray" very quickly. It helped open the doors of communication. As we visited the school in Paris, I got a good feel for what the culture was like from the lecture we listened to. The teacher told us "do not try to understand the French people; you will waste your time." This I quickly learned was true. One thing that the book helped me with was finding a better understanding on why I shouldn't try to understand the French. It gave me a good background on the culture and government. It seems that everything the French do has some sort of hidden meaning or purpose for preserving their rich culture. There are no questions asked, things are the way they are. During Jean Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow's trip they had a chance to make friends, visit different places and really get engulfed in the culture. They asked so many questions I would not even dreamed of but they asked them and explained them in a way the reader can understand. I wish I would have read this book before my trip to Paris because I would not have gotten so flustered when I tried to order a sandwich. I had a great time in Paris and it got me excited to learn more about the culture and come back, knowing the French Language and getting more out of the experience. If I would have known what I read in the book I would have looked at the trip a little differently. Paris was defiantly different than all the other places that we visited. In Germany, they are all so eager to use their English and get to know you but in France you have to ask the questions and have to try and develop a relationship with people. I think that is why France was my favorite place to visit on our European excursion, because we had to try harder to be a part of the culture. It makes you appreciate things more.
Most of the book Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong was really good. I suggest anyone who goes to France to read it. It will give you a good outlook on the French people and will try and help you have a better understanding of the culture which is needed if you have never been there before. You can also read the book out of order. The chapters are set up in a way that is easy to skip around if you want to learn about something different. Although some parts of the book were kind of dry I am glad I had a chance to read it, and it helps me prepare for my next trip to Paris!

This year in my French 4 class, we had to read most of the chapters from this book. It actually turned out to be very interesting rather than a chore though! If you want to know exactly why the French are French, this is a pretty accurate book. There are some generalizations as with any book on such a large topic would have to have. Also, two actual teachers from France came to my class and we asked them questions specifically from this book and some things were less than true at least for the two of them. However, this book is about the experiences of the two authors, so don't let that discourage you. If you want to learn more about the culture of the French, this book will do the job. You could always travel there and find out for yourself as well!

This book was such a welcome addition to my collection of books on France. This journalist/author/couple reveal many aspects about French behavior, sometimes referred to as the "codes" that are unspoken but understood among the French, and now revealed for an American audience. After reading this book, I felt I had a much better depth of understanding that has helped me to appreciate more fully the articles on France in journals like the Econmist. It is useful, for preparing for a trip to France, or in understanding current events reported in the news involving France. While the book was written from a heavily Paris-centric point of view, it covers alot of territory, literally and figuratively, which help Americans to understand and appreciate cultural differences between themselves and the French. I was particularly intrigued by their explanation of the French love of rhetoric, and how French citizens influence the policy process through public protests.

I loved this book. It really goes in-depth into the historical bases for soooooooo many things about the French that really are so different from us Americans (North Americans, including Canadians). It's entertaining but often not light reading -- a lot of government, politics and economics -- but it's one of the most detailed, fact-based analyses of the French and why they are the way they are. I wish there was more on culture and family, the personal side to the French, but that's a minor complaint and I have read other books that cover these topics. I would love another book from these authors on those topics, however, because they are so thorough. They began with several entertaining anecdotes on such topics, but the majority of the book talks more about the "practical" side to French culture.

With the recent protests from French youths about the new employment law Prime Minister Villepin forced through, I felt very much "in the know" and had an excellent understanding of the various aspects of the controversy. I was able to discuss it more intelligently with others as a result of this book, and I was surprised at how much detail I retained from this detailed book. It is densely packed and I found myself rereading various sections. Be sure to have a quiet space to read or you will miss important info!

If you are deeply interested in the French, I would highly recommend this book. If you are content with the Peter Mayle and Yvone Lenard books as informal and subjective views into the French (I love these as well), you might find this book overwhelming, but otherwise it is an excellent read for the true Francophile.

I've always been a Francophile. Maybe because of my first name being French, Paul McCartney wrote a song about it with French phrases. So I took French in high school...and many years later, wound up living several months a year there. So, this book helped me understand how the French think, their culture, and how their history has shaped their lives. For example, the decentralization/centralization explanation helps me whenever I face French Bureaucracy. This is a must-read for someone planning any length of visit to France.

Newpapers and magazines often like to remark that the French are very different from Americans, and according to the authors of this book, it's true. The authors go into great detail on the factors both historical and political that have shaped the French psyche. It's very interesting to see how the French mind has been shaped by history.

For those who are looking for a book on which fork to hold and what presents to bring when visiting a Frenchman's house, this is not the book for you. However, if you're looking for a book that will shed some light on the possible influences on the French way of thinking, then this is definitely the book for you. If you are going to visit, and definitely if you're going to live in France, you should pick this up so that you'll have a better understanding of the people you meet.

I'm French and with that book I learned so much about my own country, really ! and I can only remember two very minor things that seemed incorrect, the rest is right on the money.
From the title and the cover, it could be seen as a humorous book, but no, it's a very detailed look at the innards of France, how it evolved, how the gov controls things, how the politician are perceived and corrupt ... I wish there was an French equivalent to "eye-opening" :)

So basically this book is about why France and the French evolved into what we see today. This book helped me to better understand my inlaws and my better half. I learned that they weren't being rude when they correct my French in mid-sentence and other useful tips. The book is very cleverly written and has some nice descriptions about certain parts of France. This is not a travel book but more of a sociologist study of France. If you are interested in what it is like to live in France, then check out C'est la Vie or Paris to the Moon.

This is a very good description of the French character, and it ilustrates why the French do not "get" the Americans, and viceversa.
Afer reading it you will "get" the French, or at least understand their system, and where they are coming from.
For Americans (and obviously French Canadians)the French system is flawed, and shouldn't work; here. And that is absolutely correct, it is flawed and wouldn't work, here, with American or Canadian citizens.
The point that the book makes is that the system works quite well, "there" with French citizens. It also shows why the French don't "get" the Americans, they look at us with the same biases that we look at them, and conclude that our system is flawed, and shouldn't work; here, because it wouldn't work there.
All in all a very enlightening book.

Keep in mind that this book is not a tourist guide, neither a scholarly work of anthropology. Rather, it's an eloquent compilation of historical events, statistical fact and simple anecdotes. The fact that some chapters seem heavily anti-American and others Franco-bashing highlights how evenhanded the authors formulate their thesis, they outline the virtuous and flaws of both the Anglo and French socioeconomic models. The only shortcoming is the initial premise; "why are the French so different." I believe a lot of information in this book will not only help to understand French idiosyncrasy, in addition, it should give the Anglo readers a wider view inside several other cultures, especially the (romance language realm). There the question might be: why are the Americans so different... and who ever heard of 30-minute lunch...

The French are known for their high productivity and prosperity, despite a thirty-five-hour work week, hour-and-a-half lunches, annual seven-week paid vacations, and a lack of unions; their long life expectancy, despite a diet of rich food, wine, and cigarettes; and their high taxes, national health care, and big government. Authors Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow are Canadian journalists who moved to Paris in 1999 to complete a two-year study of the French resistance to globalization from a cultural and economic perspective. They were puzzled by the "French Paradox:" despite "high taxes, a bloated civil service, a huge national debt, an over-regulated economy, over-the-top red tape, double-digit unemployment, and low incentives for entrepreneurs" France boasts the world's highest productivity index and ranks as the third-largest exporter and fourth-biggest economic power in the world(pp. vii-viii). Having done their french homework, SIXTY MILLION FRENCHMEN CAN'T BE WRONG is the insightful end result of their three-year study.

In their book, Nadeau and Barlow examine why the French are unique by delving into their politics, economics, and culture almost from an ethnological perspective, despite their lack of any obvious formal training as ethnologists (Nadeau has a bachelor's degree in history and political science; Barlow has an honour's degree in English Literature. Both work as journalists.) and their limited (i.e., three-year) immersion into French culture. In their examination of French attitudes and policies relating to civil service, privacy and media, education, charities, unions, social welfare, the legal system, politics, foreign policy, history, and language, Nadeau and Barlow nevertheless succeed in providing their readers with a better understanding of all things French. A fascinating must read for anyone interested in the cultural differences between the U.S. and France.

G. Merritt

"Sixty Million Frenchman..."., like its title, is a bit off. The authors present themselves as cultural anthropologists .Their method is to interview their randomly-acquired French friends. The technique works well for the first section, "Spirit", since it is mostly opinion-based, as another reviewer noted. However, when the authors apply it to the the structure of the government , it is less sucessful. "Julie" and "Jean-Benoit" have an irritating habit of giving "Gustave's" and "Daniel's" views on government as gospel. They plug the foundation that funded their three years in France repeatedly, they discuss the social events around this foundation's 75th birthday, and even the trip that the foundation head makes to visit them, presumably all on the foundation's money.

Eventhough i've been living in France for More than 3 years now, I've learned many things by reading this book. Explaining "The french way of doing things" through historical facts clarifies significantly the image of modern day France.

"The world's highest productivity index and rank as the third-largest exporter and fourth-biggest economic power?" France?! What kind of pinko NYT-like propaganda is this. These false statements sap the credibility of this book. Here are some FACTS:

PRODUCTIVITY The American workplace produces the largest single national share of output, and it does so with high efficiency. With just 5 percent of the global labor force, the American workplace produces 21 percent of global output. (http://www.epf.org/pubs/labordayreports/2004/awrfindings.asp)

As of the book's publishing date (and that of the reviews), France was the 5th economy - not the 4th. And smaller than California's, by the way.

Total GDP 2002 (World Bank 2003 data)
In millions US dollars / Per Capita Income
1) United States 10,416,818 /$37,600
2 Japan 3,978,782 / $28,000
3) Germany 1,976,240 / $26,000
4) United Kingdom 1,552,437 / 25,000
5) France 1,409,604 /$25,000

MANUFACTURING PRODUCTIVITY - data for 2003

From: http://www.bls.go
"Revised data for 2003 show that the increase in U.S.
manufacturing productivity (+9.7 percent) was the second highest
among 14 economies compared, according to the U.S. Department of
Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. This was below the increase
recorded in Japan (+11 percent) and ahead of Korea (+9 percent).

This is how FR and US compared in output per hour and total output:

United States 9.7 / 4.5
France 1.9 / - 0.5 (that's negative 0.5!)

And while at it, don't forget UNEMPLOYMENT (US 4.7%, France 10%)
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/ForeignLabor/flsjec.txt

I don't know about 60M French, but Nadeeau is dead wrong. And there's more: failing healthcare and education, rotten pension system. There is virtually no aspect of everyday life than compares favorably with the US. Oh, the wine and heart disease...right. But did you know that they have much higher cancer mortality because people get diagnosed later, have limited access to expensive procedures and medicine? But the have the red wine.

You want reality? Find some other book. "A Year in the Merde," perhaps?

I'm a true Parisian (born in Paris) who lived in the US and remained at times intrigued by political and cultural differences
I just finished reading the book, and strangely enough found it extremely useful for better understanding my own country. Most comments and analysis I read about politics or culture are written from a single background perspective, whether North American, or French.
What I really enjoyed in this book is the deep understanding of both civilizations of the authors, and the way they can pinpoint and explain differences using history, traditions, linguistic, and geography.
For instance, French centralization and lack of local initiatives is most of the time a real pain and the source of multiple frustrations when lived from the inside."60 Million..." helped me to understand why such system prevails, where it comes from, even what benefits it brings and how it can sometimes balance the shortcomings
To the same token, I have always had a hard time understanding the relation individuals entertain with the Government and the Community in the US. The book did again a good job, as it effectively compared both systems and mentalities.
I strongly recommend this book to those interested in better understanding both cultures.

I think the major problem with this book is that it can't decide if it's a text or a guide for expats. It kind of misses both boats.

The first point is that they keep refering to "Anglo-Americans". I'm a bit mystified as to who they're talking about. English speakers? It kind of cuts out a few countries, including large chunks of Britian (who aren't all English). A small point but the kind of oversight that got annoying after awhile.

It was very Paris-based, which skewed their view. I barely have heard of José Bové or ENA and I've been in France for nine years. I knew about them but they aren't as big a deal as this book makes of them. Speaking of, on page 67, they don't understand why the American journalist says his name "Hosay". Well, that's how it's pronounced in English! It IS a Spanish name. The French version is Joseph. That really bugged this Californian (which had its fair share of José's).

Also, on another small point, on page 179 it says that French children are potty trained a year ahead of American kids. I've had three children in France and two are in the school system. Trust me, they all train at the same time as their N. American counterparts, some earlier, some later. To go to school, they only need to wear underware and the teacher will take them to the pot. Most moms wouldn't consider it truly trained and if they aren't (like one of mine) you simply call the school and wait until they are. No big deal.

The bigger point here, is that French parents are comfortable putting their children in other's care (very big generalization) than most parents in English speaking countries (or "Anglophones" as those of us living here refer to ourselves). But the authors didn't catch on to this. It would have made an interesting point.

I can't find where they talk about it but they assume that standard French accent is Paris. It's not. News readers are taught the Loire Valley accent which is flatter and smoother than the distinctive, yet charming Parisian accent. I've lived in both areas so that struck me as they are now writing a book on the French language. Hope they get it straight before it comes out!

I was glad to see the topic of the Algerian war covered. That was something new and refreshing. They also explained a lot of the details of French institutions, which was great for me since I've never looked into it. I'm just curious if other readers, especially those who don't live here will find so facinating. My degree's in Political Science and International relations and it was a little detailed for me!

There are some great books for those interested in the habits of the French but I can't really recommend this one except for the truly adicted.

This is a very readable and enjoyable introduction to French "culture." More specifically, the authors want to explain various features of France to North Americans. They are certainly qualified to do this, being fully bilingual journalists; he is Quebecois, she is Ontarian. Though they are Canadian, they are writing for a US audience as much as for a Canadian one, and they regularly compare all three countries.

The book consists of three parts: "Spirit," "Structure," and "Change." The part on Spirit is by far the best. It provides a good entry to diverse aspects of the French mindset, sometimes using the device of "studying the aborigines" in France. These include, for example, the French attitude toward land, their fondness for grandeur, and their notions of private and public space. The section is full of anecdotes and discussions with French people, and these voices come through very well.

The section on "Structure" is much less successful. Perhaps, as a political scientist, I am inclined to be overly critical of those who discuss politics without the analytical apparatus that the discipline uses. Still, I see that other reviewers were also disappointed in this section. I think the problem is that the authors rely too much on "regular people" as sources. This strategy works really well when people are talking about their own views of things, as in the "Spirit" section. It doesn't work so well when people are talking about things outside themselves, especially if those things may require some expertise to understand, such as the economy.

When Nadeau and Barlow make generalizations about France, the US, or Canada, it's important to realize that all three of these are diverse countries. The authors have limited experience in each - - they don't have the same depth of knowledge about (say) Texas, British Columbia, or Marseilles and they do Paris, New York, or Quebec. As a result, the book jacket and other publicity material very much overstates its case. The jacket claims that there are a lot of answers in this book - - read it and you will understand France. Of course, it doesn't work that way. Still, if you read the book you will understand France better than you did before you read the book. You'll also enjoy the journey.

Many people have praised and quibbled with one or another of the authors' contentions in this book. After 4 years of living and working in France, (and quite a few more of same in the US), I think that they have done a very laudable job of exploring some of the differences between "French" and "North American" culture. What I like best about the book is its unapologetically journalistic style. In the space of just a few paragraphs it moves from profound insights to curious historical explanations to the authors being frankly puzzled (about the daily ritual of opening and closing shutters for example -- much discussed below by other reviewers). This informal and humble approach is one that I particularly like.

Since French language and culture have made many contributions to American culture and institutions (think of Jefferson or even the Bill of Rights), I would love to see people take advantage of this unpretentious, though likely imperfect, book to put aside stereotypes and see how two peoples have structured their worlds very differently.

Now what is needed is a friendly little book like this one that takes on the French stereotypes and distortions regarding what "liberal" America is all about. (Perhaps surprisingly, for the French in this context the word "liberal" means laissez-faire, supply-side economics.) For French university students, as an example, US colleges are remarkably elitist institutions because they are only for those rich enough to pay the exorbitant tuition. A few photos and thirty minutes of discussion are enough to convince most students that comparing French universities to North American ones based only on fees is a mistake. (French universities are virtually free and have only slightly better facilities than you might expect as a result.)

Speaking of universities, this book would be a good supplement to a N. American university course in French culture and institutions. (The main text would admittedly need to be more meaty and in French, but this one would prepare the terrain for anyone who runs the risk of living in France.) In the afterword the authors speak of having plowed through the second draft; unfortunately they left a few too many of their expressions and anecdotes hanging around in glaring proximity to one another. Towards the end of the book, the repetition made me grind my teeth. It's really a shame, but with 50 fewer pages the book would have been an even greater achievement.

This book taught me, and challenged a few of my ideas. (For example about the socialist nature of social security: I knew nothing about the German model of social security. -- This chapter may well soon need to be rewritten though, as some fundamental reforms seem to be moving the sécu a bit more towards the HMO system in the US. (The much publicised 1 euro per visit out-of-pocket fee since the beginning of 2005 is not really the issue, though that is certainly all the TV news networks have covered.)

In short, I am truly impressed by their synthesis. As a fan of languages (especially French) I am therefore looking forward to their next book.

The book is not totally without value but I believe that problems issue from a limited knowledge of the people of greater France plus for the purposes of comparison a lack of knowledge of the United States. I have lived for the better part of four years in the beautiful and rural Department of the Correze in what is considered southwest France. I came here to retire from Southern California. I have visited Paris a few times but am just as much a tourist there as most Americans.
Unlike the Nadeaux my knowledge of the French language is not first rate inspite of time spent here. Yet I am able to communicate well enough with many French in the area in which I live and have made close and interesting friends. They are most tolerant of my language failures and my nationality. They would be quite surprised to know that they close their shutters for privacy rather than for weather conditions or that they would never show the insides of their homes other than the Selon or Cusine to guests. Contrary to the book or perhaps contrary to Parisians, in the evening light emminates from my neighbors homes even to a kilometer away across a little valley to the village and the Maire and Ecole.One should also remember homes dating from the Middle Ages don't have a lot of windows or portals.

If political corruption is overlooked,as written, why is President Chirac facing charges of misuse of funds when he served as Mayor of Paris? The system here protects politicians from prosecution while serving in office but that ends when he leaves his elected positon. The former Gaulist Primier Juppe was certainly brought up for illegal political donations although he apparently did not personally benefit.
Jean-Benoit and Julie seem to be shocked that the President of France can give amnesty to any convicted criminal. Are they not aware that the U.S. President and the Governors of the 50 states have the same power? They define the National Police as "the equilivant of the F.B.I. in uniform." My neighbor Girard, a 'guardien de Pays' in the National Police at Tulle the Prefecture of the Correze will get a laugh out of that. Not even close. I'm a bit surprised that Canadians would not realize the National Police structure resembles more Canada's RCMP never the FBI. It covers all aspects of law enforcement and simply has no equilivant in the States.
Gendarms serve under the ministers of Defense and Interior and are a part of the military. They provide policing for most of the Communes and Villages of France There are 21,000 municipal Police who enforce minor crimes and traffic violations all over France. Not just in cities of less than 10,000 as stated in the book. They serve under the authority of the Mayor and are employed by the city in which they serve.
In the states our system of States and Counties simply cannot be compared to the French system of Departments and Regions but a "Commune" may consist of several villages which have their own mayors the writers are quite correct that things fiscal are handled at the commune lever. But the "Maire" of the village issues licenses and permits not the Commune.
The statements: "The French don't have very rich community lives" and "In U.S. communities life is the pillar of the entire social edifice". Are evidence of the writers narrow view of both nations. I would sumit they have spent little time in urban California or rural France.
Incidently their friends whom they describes as "Gourmands" may not be offended in the regions of Paris but in the Southwest it refers to a glutton. I suspect their friends would be happier being described a "gourmets".
I note with interests the five star reviews given this work are from those who have spent little or no time in France. I would submit that by far most American visitors never see the real France.
The writers generalize and reach quick conclusions even with their 3 years of French residency. Still, as stated, the book is of value and offers a fresh view of the subject.There are good historical links and information plus lessons for non-offensive conduct.
As for France, remember to keep an open mind.

My review is written as an American who does not speak French but loves the country and has visited a dozen times. While I cannot write with the authority of several other reviewers who are French, I found this book very interesting and helpful.

It is, of course, extremely difficult to know what is important in other cultures without study or introduction. Our first visits to France were marked by occasional blunders and a more than a few misconceptions. However we enjoyed our experiences and returned often. Nadeau and Barlow have helped us understand what's going on behind those literally closed doors.

Just as the French fail to understand why Americans think the way we do, we have no idea why certain things are important to them and others are meaningless. Sixty Million... helps break down the codes, deciphers the hieroglyphics and eases the burden of being immersed in another very foreign culture. There is so much that divides us! And yet we are all humans with the same basic needs and desires.

I disagree strongly with the other reviewers who found Sixty Million... lacking. They wrote their reviews as insiders. Given their mission and goals, Nadeau and Barlow did a marvelous job of setting things into their proper places and patiently explaining, by examples and facts, French behavior. It is so very easy to criticize when you have made no attempt to undertake a similar project. I found no predication or prejudice toward America or France. The authors do a superb job of being objective.

My only concern is that the authors explained the effects of World War II and the Algerian War without any analysis of the First World War and its effect on French history and living conditions. Every single village and town we visited has a monument listing their dead in the Great War. Almost one hundred years have passed and the French still suffer in many ways from that shocking carnage. The Great War set the stage for all that happened in the twentieth century; this seems to me to be a singular lapse of reporting.

I very much enjoyed this book and highly recommend it.

The book is broken into three main sections, Spirit, Structure and Change. I found the section on spirit very perceptive, if the whole book had been like this then I would have given five stars, However I found the latter two sections, particularly the section on Structure rather boring and although they do contribute to the French identity I think their role was over stated in this book. I was also expecting a bit on French attitudes to drinking and smoking, after all that was mentioned on theback of the book. Recommended if you want to learn a bit about the way the country is structured and have an interest in French politics. If you want a book on the French themselves you're best to look elsewhere.

As a Frenchwomen leaving in the US for five years, I was really excited to read "Sixty million Frenchmen can't be wrong". As nice as the title sounds, I should have been warned by the subtitle. Why the authors don't like the French, as they are stating, is still a mystery to me. The book does not answer this statement. But it shows the spirit in which the book has been written.

As hard as it is to hear one's country explained and criticized by others, I was excited to have some professional opinion of the way North Americans view France. As a French living in the Midwest, I was looking forward to reading a more documented view of my country than what I had heard from my American friends. The authors being Canadian, I had expected a good deal of fairness and some open-mindness in dealing with a way of thinking so foreign to U.S. culture.

Alas! I quickly became tired of the pattern used to treat each problem. Invariantly, the authors state that something is "bad" because it is so different from the U.S. view on the matter (universal, state-owned health care is bad). Then they present some facts that refute their first affirmation (less citizen without health coverage, longer life-expectancy, better quality of life, ...) Finally they reached the same conclusion on each matter: "we don't understand it but we don't want to challenge our first impression that our views might not be universal".

Still, some of the opinions were good. Some even insightful.
They make a good point in explaining that the resistance to globalization is more an American obsession than a French one. However the authors seem to have some strange obsessions of their own (ENA (no accent on capital letters in French please!), the préfet,...). But nonetheless, I was blaming my feeling of frustration while reading, on some highly sensitive French feeling on my side.

At least, this is the opinion I held -or tried to hold- until I reached the last chapter, the one entitled "The meaning of Europe". Over and over again in this chapter, the authors write about Norway as being a member of the EEC and then the European Union, one that would have chosen not to belong to the Euro zone, ... As any eight grader of the European Union OR Norway would know, Norway does NOT belong to the European Union. Sweden does. And Sweden chose not to participate in the unique currency. This was the fact that confirmed the little attention paid to the writing and reviewing of the book. The blatant mistake that proved that the authors, not only don't know what they are writing about, but more caracteristicly, don't care.

In conclusion, I would say " Nice try, but next time get your facts straight and try to tackle the problem with -at least- some objectiveness".

Two writers/journalists take off to France and restyle themselves as amateur ethnographers, ready to explain and dissect the idiosyncracies of the French. A lively, personal style and wealth of amusing anecdotes make this an easy read.

Unfortunately there are many errors. Simple facts of name, date, or practice are confused or stunningly incorrect. Armchair anthropology abounds, and multi-faceted institutions, behaviours and histories are repeatedly essentialized into single, pale reflections. The book also suffers mistakes in language and consistency which the editor should've caught. Finally, although it reads as fresh and engaging, at root this is the same information one finds in all the other 'culture clash' manuals, albeit with superior presentation.

The bottom line? Well-written; interesting; incorrect. Perhaps useful as a gentle introduction to French culture, but follow it up with selections from more reliable sources.

Two American Ethnographers spent a year in France, being paid to study globalization's effect on France. They quickly realized that their American societal mores an incorrect context in which to do this evaluation. Instead, they describe the primary social and societal context which the French operate under.

This book is a wonderful tool for Americans to understand various French systems and customs. My only complaint is that it focuses almost exclusively on differences and relationships between the US and France.

Also, the title is a bit misleading as to the content of the book. The book, rightfully, is pretty value-neutral. It discusses differences between the French and Americans, without assigning right or wrong.

I eagerly awaited the arrival of this book and took it away with me on my annual vacation here in France. I have 5 weeks of holiday and like to save the best book to last. Well I was VERY disappointed with the repetitive work. I am an Australian who has lived in France for 2 years and am married to a Frenchman and a graduate of the grandes ecoles system to boot. Some of the hogwash in this book, the inaccuracies, the waffle were really hard to stomach. I have never been so amazed at the poor quality of the work of two so-called 'writers'. I read out passages of the book to my family-in-law who all happen to be comepletely bi-lingual. They scoffed along with me! How, after spending nearly 3 years in France can they get so many details wrong? If I were a director of the trust that supported their work I would be asking for my money back and some sort of justification of how they spent their time.

My verdict, if I could give no stars I would. Don't bother with this and do yourself a favour and buy 'Almost French' by Sarah Turnbull. She might not go into the economic or deep political explanations of this book BUT she is readable and what she does write is credible and amusing. I just wish there was a guarantee from Amazon and I could get my money back for Sixty Million....

I'm an American who's been living in Paris for 4 years now. I've read a few books on France before, and always learned from them. This book is no exception. What I liked about this book is it really studied the French from different angles. For example, a lot of detail was given on their school system, government, and history (especially the wars). I've been here 4 years and I learned so much about the French that I never knew before. I feel like I have a much better understanding of the French.

While living here I constantly find myself comparing France to the US. France does a lot of things right, such as universal healthcare, 7+ weeks of vacation per year (this year was higher than normal with 38 days). But there is a cost: Taxes are high, there is a 19.6% VAT tax. Gas is 3 times the price in the US. There are very little part time jobs. Most jobs are in Paris and the housing is insanely expensive (a 100 year old 1 bedroom apartment costs as much as a brand new 1400 sq foot home in Arizona). If you read this book you'll understand a little more of these tradeoffs. I wish the book had focused more on this angle as I think this is one of the most interesting.

I also highly recommend "French: Friend or Foe". it deals more with the social aspects of living in France.

-Michael

I was disappointed by this book. It is predicated on the assumption that the USA is `right' and that France, au contraire, is `wrong'. It makes many references to an Anglo-American view of the world, but British readers will have little sympathy with the authors' advocacy of federalism and will see little difference between the incapacity of local government in the UK and in France.

The chapters on French history and the education system are interesting but not original.

There are several howlers in the book. For example France has no active volcanoes, Norway is not a member of the European Union and it's preposterous to claim that `In Britain, all doctors are civil servants'.

To be fair, the authors occasionally concede that a lot of what France stands for makes sense, but ultimately this book is a justification for the prejudices of North Americans, written for a US audience and funded by a US trust.

France is a land of contradictions. It is nation where people have seven weeks of paid vacation a year, generally take an hour and a half for lunch, have one of the longest life expectancies on the planet, work in the fourth largest economy in the world, and have one of the finest health care systems in the world. It is also a nation that has one of the lowest rates of charitable donations in the developed world, where people expect the State to do everything because they pay so much in taxes, where the civil service makes up about a quarter of the working population, and where local initiative or self-rule is virtually non-existent. What explains these many paradoxes?

Authors Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow sought to discover the source of these contrasts and to learn why the French were so different. Living for three years in France, they worked almost as ethnologists, delving into all aspects of French political, cultural, and economic life, uncovering many things from an outsider's perspective. Writing about the French civil service, economy, media, education, charities, unions, social welfare system, courts, politics, foreign policy, history, and language, they provide a thorough and very readable primer on all things French.

One thing they point out is that the French as a people love power. They have a great disdain for compromise - both in politics and even in personal conversations - instead preferring winners and losers, embracing particularly in politics what the authors termed "jusqu'au-boustisme" (until-the-bitter-end-ism), of the tendency in politics to pursue winning even to destructive ends. An ultimate expression of this might be found in the fact that State is absolute in French politics and society; it tolerates no rivals, whether it was the Catholic clergy's onetime dominance over the nation's education system or the existence of any meaningful regional government tied to a local culture, though the latter has changed some in recent years. The French love for their politicians to exhibit grandeur (and the politicians love to exhibit it), practicing something called cumul des mandates (or simply the cumul); it is possible for one to hold more than one elected office at the same time (for instance for a time President Jacques Chirac was also mayor of Paris, the prime minister, deputy from his home region of Correze, and a deputy in the European Parliament). Indeed the French President is one of the most powerful heads of state in the democratic world, in many ways more powerful that the American President.

Some of this lover of grandeur is exhibited in the fact that the French state is very much a unitary one, not a federal one; the central government in Paris reigns supreme, even in matters in the U.S. that would be regarded as strictly local affairs, such as the choosing of school textbooks or in most cases the management of local police. For instance the mayor of Paris does not control local police or transport, but they are instead controlled by the central government. Only towns of less than ten thousand citizens are allowed to control their own police.

This tendency to have a highly centralized, almost absolutist democracy though is not entirely due to a French love of grandeur. Much of dates back to the centuries long attempts to create the nation of France and keep it together, to impose French culture and language on more distant regions. At the time of the Revolution, the doctrine of the Republique was that "nothing should come between the citizen and the State." The French State actually created what we today call France, assimilating very diverse populations, giving them a single nationality, eradicating any local power or local language, acting for decades with extreme suspicion of anything (including churches) that fostered any sense of local community beyond the instruments of the state. Though France has levels of local administration - the Commune, the Department, and the Region - these do not exactly correspond to Canadian provinces or American states in that they have no sovereign rights themselves or exhibit any significant sense of French separation of powers, but instead are for the most part representatives of the central government. In the case of the 99 Departments, they were created as a result of the Revolution, often designed to deliberately break up regional identities, dividing lands with local identities into more than one Department, often given non-historical, sometimes deliberately meaningless names. The advent of the Region in 1982 reversed this to an extent, as Regions reflect natural cultural divisions in France, such as the areas inhabited by the Bretons, Occitan, or Corsicans, though some in France fear that this may lead to federalism one day (while at the same time France has given increasing powers to the supranational European Union).

This is not to say that the French State is anti-democratic; it was founded with three principles, assimilation (or eradication des particularismes; eradication of local differences), interet general (or common good), and equality (not only equality of opportunity but also equal or identical law throughout France). The principle of assimilation had been a driving force in creating the Departments (though ironically has made integration of the growing Muslim community in France difficult as it has until recently been regarded as illegal to even recognize special status or differences among French citizens).

There are checks on the Republique. In addition to civil and criminal law, the French have administrative law, an entirely parallel legal system for dealing with matters relating how the State relates to the citizens, administrative tribunals that can rule against government and the state. The growing independence of judges is another check. Protests are a way of life in France, a legitimate method for citizens to curb the system, the authors detailing this uniquely French form of political expression at some length.

I have barely scratched the surface in my review of this fascinating book. It is an absolute must read for anyone wanting to do business or live in France.