Lovelorn

By Joseph Lestrange

Madame has ceased to love her husband.  It is evident and very sad to see, and I don’t even know them.  They are sitting in a restaurant eating their dinner in silence.  The restaurant could have taken its menu from a book on solid French cuisine, offering the great staples of the table: cassoulet, moules marinières, blanquette de veau, boeuf bourguignon. He is having a coq au vin, she the mussels.  The food is good. They eat.

A word emerges now and then, from her, from him, but no conversation.  This is so unlike the French, especially Parisians, who are voluble always and especially so over a good meal like theirs.  Breaking bread for them is not grounds for simply eating, but for mutual entertainment, for companionship.  The etymology of companion in English and compagnon in French is the same and means more or less the person with whom we eat our bread. Parisians know this from birth—or the family dining table—and it is as natural to them as breathing. Eating in silence is an unnatural act.

Monsieur and Madame are simply eating their food.  It would be nice to think they are tourists from some dour northern part of the world, but the waiter greeted them as regulars, and they answered him in Parisian French.  Perhaps you might conclude, and I might agree with you, that they are tired or perhaps just talked out—at least for this evening.  They are in their sixties, anyway, and have been married for many years.  Maybe they’ve had a fight.  As Jacques Brel sang in La chanson des vieux amants many years ago, Bien sûr, nous eûmes des orages, and he was only singing about a twenty-year love affair, but of course, we’ve had our storms, all of us.  Still and all, there is no tension between them, no leftovers from a quarrel that project themselves across the dining room or even their table, and besides how many Parisian couples after a fight would go out to eat in a neighborhood bistrot under the eye of a familiar waiter?  Even Parisians, certainly, can fall silent from time to time for no particular reason, and—after how many years? thirty? forty?—taking a breather now and then does no harm.

This could be the beginning and the end of it, except for one piece of evidence that indicts Madame for lovelessness.  It is a touch comic, but sad, like the best circus clowns, and even sadder because this is not a performance, and the clown always knows what he is doing to evoke the contradictions of laughter and melancholy.

Monsieur does not.  He wears a hairpiece.  It must have been fitted years ago, but since that time he has lost more hair below the crown at the back of his head.  When he gets up in the morning and puts on his rug, he probably aligns the front as he always has—carefully, just so, always in the same place above his forehead: perhaps he has measured the distance from his eyebrows so he knows where the front should be placed and battened down.  But he does not know this leaves a gap of two or three centimetres between the hard edge where the toupee ends and the slightly ragged and curved line where his remaining hair begins.

Those two or three centimetres, about an inch, may not be much if we are considering the expansion of the waistline or the width of the foot with age: too bad, but who really notices or cares?  But at the back of Monsieur’s head, the gap looks as big and empty as a football pitch, a movie screen, the beach at low tide.  And I think Madame has ceased to love him because the loss of the hair, the ripping of the seam between la perruque and les cheveux, could not have happened overnight any more than a glacier shrinks a kilometre in a day or two.  It makes me wonder how long it has been since the first bright line of white scalp appeared—and how long Madame has held her peace about his piece.  A couple of years?  Five or six?  Long enough. Too long.

Monsieur does not know, but everyone else does.  He is probably retired—the French retire young—but he must go out to restaurants, to the boulangerie around the corner for bread, to visit friends, to walk around the neighborhood, and chez le coiffeur to get his hair cut.  Is there a conspiracy of silence about his hairpiece?  Perhaps his friends and neighbors would feel uncomfortable saying, Well, mon vieux, time for a new rug, and the clerks in the stores would think it impolite to say anything at all.

But his barber?  Has Madame bribed the hair cutter?  Certainly, Monsieur would be bad advertising for le coiffeur if (or rather when) he was seen emerging from the salon with his bizarre bald spot.  That makes no sense.  But, ah, there is another way.  They are frugal—saving was no doubt Madame’s idea once they retired—and she cuts his hair.  No conspiracy and no embarrassment.  She owns his silly bald spot, her comic, dejected two or three centimetres of power over him.

If he rules the roost at home in matters of politics or where they will take a vacation or what they will have for dinner, she knows he’s not the cock of the walk.  He may grow as serious, even oracular, as he wants—French men have a knack for this kind of delivery—but he might as well be making a speech about la grandeur of France with his fly open: the audience notices one thing, only one, and that is his sad absurdity.

I wonder what has made Madame cease to love her husband and, worse, to make him a second-rate clown in the eyes of others—bad enough that he is one in her eyes.  Who could possibly tell?  One slight or a lifetime of them?  Infidelity?  Bad breath?  Or just indifference?  Too many possibilities without any probability of a good answer.  Let it be.

That’s what I do.  But I am nagged by culture.  This should not happen in Paris, this sad marital state of affairs—maybe in a Canadian village or a dark Norwegian town, not Paris.  Paris is a city for lovers.  Paris is a place to fall in love, be in love, stay in love, despite the storms, and where we can make love over dinner—and do, even if we are old and losing our hair.  I don’t want to feel lovelorn, even vicariously.  I want to believe that the chorus of Brel’s lovely song about old lovers is the truth, that “from light of dawn until the end of day, I love you still, you know, I love you.”

Maybe, I hope, I will see a couple on the street outside, not young, but with their arms around one another, walking under the trees in the glow of the street lights, carrying flowers and a bottle of wine.  The street is empty, except for me.  Maybe tomorrow all our luck and love will be better.  Maybe tomorrow I’ll have a good laugh at the expense of Monsieur. Or maybe tomorrow I will laugh at Madame.

© Joseph Lestrange

 

If you're coming to France (or for that matter anywhere) you can reserve your hotel here. To rent a car, Bonjour Paris recommends Auto Europe.

Please post your comments or questions and let them flow. Register HERE to do so if you need a Bonjour Paris user name and password.

Print

COMMENTS

  • Not Too Serious Madame. I would not take my comments too seriously. I adore Monsieur LeStrange's articles. They often bring a bit of fun, or an emotional depth for just a moment before I get back to legal issues and annoying fellow members of the Bar. And I do understand that they are not necessarily intended to be factual, but just a slice of life from his always interesting, sometimes enchanting, sometimes hilarious, sometimes bittersweet point of view. I just enjoy an occasional comment or just un peu of debate- I think it's a bit of fun - and may help me, a bit less than ten years from now, to also reach the age of seventy five with the brain cells very much intact.
  • Agnes Dupont

    Parisian Lover 1 Comments
    Be careful Young lady, I think you should read more carefully. Joseph Lestrange makes some suggestions about the husband. Did you read them? He mentions the man may have been unfaithful, had bad breath, perhaps he was indifferent. It does not matter. The author is observing what is in front of his eyes and of course giving his own interpretation of what he sees. Could he be wrong? Of course, but do you read his stories for facts or because they are amusing and often, like this one, very sad. When I read the words to Brel's song, I think I understood. I also wept. More heart, less argument. Perhaps I am too old to care for debates. They are very boring to me at seventy-five years old.
  • Why are you so sure? Why, Monsieur Picot, are you so sure that c'est impossible for Monsieur to have been the primary cause of the rent in the fabric of the relationship between Madame and Monsieur? I am not saying that I am certain that is the explanation - but simplement that the stretch of bare scalp below the postiche was not, for me, dispositive. Are you saying vraiment that French men never, ever can be so beaten down by life that they lose self respect - or at least enough self respect to be complicit in, par example, this hair horror? Is it so certain that Madame has such power over Monsieur that she alone could cause him for years to remain unaware of his hair plight? Is it really sensible to assume that he never ran his hand over his own head, or saw himself in a rear view mirror? And why oh why do I have to have had a bad love affair to have a sufficiently open mind to at least posit the possibility that in every relationship - including this one - there could be two possible explanations? I just don't get Monsieur Le Strange's automatic supposition - unless.............as is often the case.........he had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. Neanmoins, as you said, I am not French.......perhaps the average French man is so proud that he cannot be subject to ordinary human emotions and reactions. Peut-etre that is true. I don't know.
  • Thierry Picot

    Parisian Lover 1 Comments
    No Mademoiselle Kurlander, You need to spend more time in Paris--not for « seeing the sights » but observing the French . I am not any more a young man, but I can tell you that I and my friends can not imagine a French man of any age not caring that his postiche no longer fits him ; we consider this more a question of respect for oneself than of absurd vanity. As for your comments about his coldness toward his wife, it seems to me that you are expressing perhaps your own unhappiness with a past love affair . C'est triste, but that should not color your understanding of a story which seems to me very direct .

    T. Picot
  • Second point of View Why is it no possible that Monsieur is the one who has fallen out of love? That he has been so beaten down with life and the passage of time that he no longer cares, nor does he has hope for a new love, and just doesn't have the energy or care enough to get fitted for new hair? Perhaps that circumstance is accompanied by a very tight budget. Why is it not possible that Madame has become cold and distant because Monsieur stopped touching her cheek and holding her hand ? Because he started spending the mornings at a corner cafe with a newspaper instead of sitting across from her at the table for a croissant and coffee brewed in their home? Because he started treating her as a stranger or just a roomate with whom he had to take his turn to share the bathroom? Why assume that he never runs his hand over the back of his head, or sees his other side in a mirror? Why assume such power of Madame over Monsieur that she is keeping the secret of this ignominious expanse of scalp from him? What if he is the one whose heart has withdrawn, or iced over, and this detail about the back of his head is just not that importan to him, and he has no hopes of other loves because of his age or the atrophy of his heart and they are both therefore complicit in the scalp space, but that it may have begun because of a separation of soul from the direction of Monsieur.? Is that not possible?

POST A COMMENT

Please fill in all fields and then click Submit.
Once submitted, your comment will be sent for approval by one of our editors.

  • captcha

Premium Membership

Bonjour Paris is the Guide to Paris written by the top insiders in Paris. Join now and uncover all the secrets most American tourists will NEVER discover about Paris.


Ask a Question on Bonjour Paris