I still like Darnton, but he's touching on an interesting subject here without understanding the depths of passion - I presume he's writing from the comfort of a university chair (and with no war experience), and he's a cultural historian - more, hmm, that's interesting! rather than having the passions of a political historian: to him, European postwar politics are just another interesting phenomenon to go 'hmm!' over, in a patronising way.

I do find it odd and worrying (if comments on this site are anything to go by) that Wajda's Danton is used as a teaching aid in schools/universities. When it came out, the impression I got was that it was received as a film more about 1983 than 1794. Wajda said the same, and in the pressbook (which Darnton doesn't quote) discusses the swinging pendulum of side-taking between communist -leaning historians and the right, very conscious that his film will be located in that 'tradition'. The (Polish) Pope beatified 99 Vendee 'martyrs' not long afterwards (how's that for timing?) It reminds me of the same sort of story told about postwar europe in 'Who Paid The Piper?' - Darnton scratches the surface here but doesn't see deeper, though he was writing in 84: by 89 the concerted effort to prevent the bicentennary being a rallying point for communism was clearer.