SLSL, 'UtR' Who won?

[jbor]

on 24/2/03 5:21 AM, Paul Mackin at paul.mackin at verizon.net wrote:

> M, in the pay of Germany, wants war (perplexing, since so does France),
> which does not come about, so in that respect M is not successful. The
> question is, is M's personal triumph over his rival devalued by
> Porpentine's  secret desire to escape the whole bloody scene even at the
> ultimate price? Interesting question? I don't really see some of the
> motivations going on.

The interesting thing about all these national alliances is how fickle they
are. Early on in the story, considering the prospect of the party at the
Austrian Consulate and "the Situation" (which gets recycled in _V._),
Porpentine summarises the way the nations were stacking up against one
another at that particular point in time:

      At the moment it was a bad job all round. Sirdar Kitchener, England's
    newest colonial hero, recently victorious at Khartum, was just now some
    four hundred miles further down the White Nile, foraging about in the
    jungle. A General Marchand was also rumored to be in the vicinity.
    Britain wanted no part of France in the Nile Valley. M. Delclassé,
    Foreign Minister of a newly formed French cabinet, would as soon go to
    war as not if there were any trouble when the two detachments met. As
    meet, everyone realized by now, they would. Kitchener had been
    instructed not to take any offensive and to avoid all provocation.
    Russia would support France in case of war, while England had a
    temporary rapprochement with Germany, which of course meant Austria
    and Italy too. (106)

I'd say that's pretty accurate, the product of research or knowledge beyond
the Baedeker. There's more than a hint in the story that the contest between
Porpentine and Moldweorp goes much deeper than national rivalries, that they
are working for more powerful and less visible interests (i.e. what will
eventually become "They" in GR).

> Interesting to think of this century-ago example of British/French
> rivalry in comparison to the present day one. Chirac vs Blair. This time
> the Brits (government at least) want war and the French don't. The U.S;
> is a completely new factor in the equation. However can European rivalry
> be a factor as well?

Saw an interesting program last night about how much FDR absolutely detested
de Gaulle, from about '43 onwards, with Churchill and Ike caught in the
middle, and how FDR tried his darnedest to stop de Gaulle from becoming the
French leader after the war. Even to the point of diplomatic intrigue,
overtures to Stalin, talk of war between France and the U.S. etc.

best