Here’s a rewritten and expanded version of the provided text, aiming for a minimum of 600 words, presented in Markdown format.
The quip about Libération journalists being eco-conscious recyclers of their own trash, penned with a playful jab at Lola Lafon, resulted in a whirlwind of online activity. A MeTooMedia petition materialized, swiftly followed by a manifesto championed by Judith Godrèche. I must admit, the attention felt… significant. It was a peculiar form of recognition, a baptism by fire in the ever-turbulent waters of social media discourse.
This week, however, my focus shifts. It moves away from the swirling controversies and lands squarely on another collection of journalistic pieces, articles that, under different circumstances, might have found themselves serving a far more utilitarian purpose: wrapping fish. I’m talking about the work of Luc Le Vaillant, the guardian of the final page portrait in Libération, the newspaper originally founded by the intellectual titan Jean-Paul Sartre and presently under the ownership of Patrick Drahi.
Le Vaillant’s writing is a unique blend of styles. It is undeniably corrosive, often delivering its observations with a sharp, acidic edge. It can be, without a doubt, unjust, casting a critical eye on its subjects that might leave some feeling stung. Sarcasm is a constant companion to his prose, a mischievous glint in the words that adds a layer of playful cynicism. But, above all, it is unpredictable. This inherent unpredictability is the defining characteristic that distinguishes his work from that of, say, Lola Lafon, whose style, shall we say, tends towards a more…consistent trajectory.
With Le Vaillant, you simply never know what he’s going to write. He embodies the essence of his name, “Le Vaillant,” which hints at boldness, bravery, and perhaps even a touch of recklessness. This element of surprise is crucial. He’s a writer who keeps you on your toes, ensuring that predictability is banished from the reader’s experience.
The pleasure of revisiting these ephemeral texts, these pieces typically skimmed over in a cursory reading of the daily paper, now preserved in a more permanent and dignified form – printed and bound, no less – lies precisely in this element of astonishment. It is in the unexpected turn of phrase, the jarring juxtaposition of ideas, the sudden shift in perspective. The act of reading becomes an act of discovery, a journey into the unknown corners of the writer’s mind.
Surprise, in this context, is not merely a stylistic flourish. It is the very foundation of freedom. Let us pause for a moment to consider this. Surprise disrupts our preconceived notions, challenges our established beliefs, and forces us to confront the world with fresh eyes. It shakes us out of our complacency, preventing us from becoming passive recipients of information. It is the antidote to intellectual stagnation.
Articles in newspapers, like the very one you are currently reading, serve a multitude of purposes. They inform, they analyze, they opine, they entertain. But, at their core, they should also provoke. They should challenge the status quo, question the accepted narratives, and encourage critical thinking. They should spark debate, ignite conversations, and inspire action. Too often, however, journalistic writing falls into predictable patterns, adhering to established formulas and reinforcing existing biases. The news cycle becomes a self-perpetuating echo chamber, repeating the same tired narratives and failing to offer genuine insights.
Le Vaillant’s writing, in its deliberate unpredictability, actively resists this trend. It refuses to be confined by conventional expectations, constantly pushing the boundaries of what is considered acceptable or appropriate. He dares to be provocative, to challenge the reader’s assumptions, to offer perspectives that might be uncomfortable or unsettling. In doing so, he forces us to engage with the world in a more active and critical way.
The fact that these previously ephemeral pieces are now collected and preserved is significant. It elevates them beyond the fleeting realm of daily news and positions them as works of enduring value. It allows us to appreciate the artistry of Le Vaillant’s prose, to delve deeper into his unique perspective, and to recognize the power of surprise as a tool for intellectual liberation.
The original context of the writing is also worth considering. These were pieces intended for the back page of a newspaper, a space often relegated to lighter fare or human-interest stories. Yet, Le Vaillant consistently injects a level of intellectual rigor and stylistic flair that elevates these portraits far above the ordinary. He treats his subjects with a complex and nuanced understanding, refusing to reduce them to simple stereotypes or predictable narratives.
Furthermore, the connection to Jean-Paul Sartre, the founder of Libération, adds another layer of resonance. Sartre was a philosopher who championed individual freedom and existential responsibility. His work challenged conventional morality and encouraged people to question the established order. Le Vaillant, in his own way, embodies this spirit of intellectual rebellion, using his writing to disrupt, provoke, and challenge the status quo.
In conclusion, the collection of Luc Le Vaillant’s portraits is more than just a compilation of journalistic articles. It is a testament to the power of surprise, a celebration of intellectual freedom, and a reminder of the importance of critical thinking. It is a collection that deserves to be read, savored, and debated. It is a collection that, unlike some journalistic output, should definitely not be used to wrap fish. Instead, it should be used to nourish the mind.
