René Schérer

File:René Schérer (1983).jpg

René Schérer (1983)

René Schérer (born 25 November 1922) is a French philosopher and professor emeritus at the Paris 8 University, author of works on communication and phenomenology, he has devoted several studies to Charles Fourier, the problems of childhood and hospitality.

In the 1960s, when phenomenology dominated the philosophical field, René Schérer contributed to making Husserl's work known in France. He is also known as a commentator of Heidegger. After May 68, Schérer developed a thought on utopia and childhood influenced by Fourier. He defended a reinvention of pedagogy and the child-adult relationship. Schérer analysed the "childhood system", i.e. the way in which permanent surveillance of the child is instituted. In his main work, Emile perverti, Schérer speaks of the panopticon of childhood, shortly before Michel Foucault extended this concept to the whole field of disciplinary society in Discipline and Punish.

In the 1970s, he was also involved in homosexual activism. Schérer was known as the teacher and lover of Guy Hocquenghem, with whom he co-wrote two books.

Criticising the omnipresent surveillance of children and the denial of their desires, René Schérer was accused of advocating paedophilia in his writings, which he denied. He was briefly accused in 1982 in the Coral affair, before being cleared and his accuser condemned for slanderous denunciation.

Several of his articles and books published in the 1990s and 2000s focus on hospitality, which he contrasts with sovereignty and the raison d'état.

Biography

Family

René Schérer was the son of Désiré Schérer (1877–1955), chief of staff at the Corrèze prefecture, and Jeanne-Marie Monzat (1886–1970). His grandfather, Laurent Schérer, caretaker at the Tulle Arms Factory, was born in 1840 in Still, Alsace.

He is the younger brother of the filmmaker Éric Rohmer.

Education and early teaching career

A former student of the Lycée Edmond-Perrier in Tulle and of the École normale supérieure (class of 1943 Letters), René Schérer began as a philosophy teacher in secondary education. He was awarded the Agrégation in Philosophy in 1947 and in 1960 he defended his doctoral thesis at the University of Paris, "Structure and foundation of human communication: a critical essay on contemporary theories of communication".

In 1964 he published his first book, Husserl: sa vie, son œuvre ("Husserl: His Life and Work"), and the following year his thesis in a condensed form. He republished his thesis in 1971 in a revised version and under the title Philosophies of Communication, the revised version having taken on a more Marxist and revolutionary perspective after May 1968.

Career and activism

In 1962, he became a professor of Guy Hocquenghem, with whom he had a romantic relationship, and who later became his colleague at the university, collaborating with him on several books. When their relationship began, Hocquenghem was not yet sixteen years old. René Schérer was later close to the Homosexual Front for Revolutionary Action, of which Guy Hocquenghem was one of the major figures.

His early work reflects a knowledge of German philosophy and thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, G. W. F. Hegel and Max Stirner, including the phenomenology of Husserl and Heidegger.

The publication of Le Nouveau Monde amoureux (1967), a hitherto unpublished text by Charles Fourier, in which the latter defends the free expression of everyone's desires, constitutes a fundamental step in the intellectual itinerary of René Schérer, who subsequently devoted several studies to Fourier. In Charles Fourier ou la Contestation globale, Schérer considers that Fourier's utopian thought does not belong to the "unrealizable" but to the "not yet realized". For Schérer, Fourier's thought is the starting point for a series of studies on the themes of utopia and childhood, in which he defends the idea of a "utopia of compenetration, that is to say, the establishment of a society in which the expression and satisfaction of the most diverse and singular attractions will be accomplished in a climate of approval and mutual happiness".

In the post-May 68 climate, Schérer taught at the University of Vincennes, where he was one of the leading figures along with Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Félix Guattari, François Châtelet and Georges Lapassade. He was also a contributor to the journal Chimères created by Deleuze and Guattari.

On childhood, Schérer developed a way of thinking in line with Gilles Deleuze's concept of "becoming a child": the child and the adult would mutually enrich each other in a "compenetration" constituting an alternative to the education inherited from Rousseau, in which the child would be as much a formator of the adult as the adult is a formator of the child. Schérer's work also deals, but in a more peripheral manner, with homosexuality, which he conceives, in a theoretical proximity with Gilles Deleuze and Guy Hocquenghem, above all as a subversive practice, within a revolutionary framework.

Among the themes subsequently addressed by René Schérer is that of hospitality, which he conceives not only as an ethic, but as "a mode of being based on an erotic". For him, hospitality is a practice that opposes the national interest and the logic of the Nation and transgresses differences of class, age, race and gender. Hospitality is conceived by him as "erotic and subversive". This theme is developed in Zeus hospitalier, a work based on Schérer's analysis of myths and ethnological studies, and on his re-reading of the works of Guy Hocquenghem and Jean Genet. L'écosophie de Charles Fourier and Passages pasoliniens, published respectively in 2001 and 2006, address, on the basis of the works of Fourier and Pasolini (in particular the film Teorema), the question of the modification of the passion of desire or love through hospitality.

In 2007, at the age of 85, he commented on the history of his life and work in an interview with Geoffroy de Lagasnerie, Après tout: entretiens sur une vie intellectuelle, published by Cartouche.

In 2007, the director Franssou Prenant made a documentary film about him, Le Jeu de l'oie du professeur Poilibus.

In 2011, following the model of Gilles Deleuze's Abécédaire with Claire Parnet, director Suzy Cohen invited René Schérer to create an ABCs, in which each letter of the alphabet is used to select a word that will provoke an encounter with an idea. The interview essentially revolves around the margins, the welcome of the foreigner and openness to the other. The documentary was released in 2012 under the title 26 lettres et un philosophe ("26 letters and a philosopher").

The Coral affair

In 1982, René Schérer, known for his criticism of pedagogy and his thoughts on children's desires, was implicated in the Coral affair, named after an alternative education centre where he had been involved and where sexual abuse of teenagers had allegedly taken place. Schérer was charged with inciting minors to debauchery, on the basis of a slanderous denunciation, the author of which, Jean-Claude Krief, a young adult who had done a training course at the Coral, was eventually convicted.

Falsified documents were circulated, implicating personalities such as Michel Foucault, Félix Guattari, and even the Prime Minister at the time, Pierre Mauroy. Claude Sigala, director of Coral, denounced Krief as a mythomaniac, himself a paedophile, having fraudulently passed himself off as a Coral leader; he also mentioned the possibility of a political plot, which could target Coral's "libertarian and self-management way of life".

Schérer was quickly exonerated after the confrontation with his accuser. However, in the words of Maxime Foerster, who devoted a study to him, he was subjected to an "unprecedented media lynching", which resulted in his entire work being "ostracised". On 29 October 1982, Jean-Claude Krief retracted his statement and spoke of political manipulation; his lawyer, Jacques Vergès, stated that his client had been subjected to pressure aimed at discrediting certain members of the government. The police investigations found no evidence of foul play. Jean-Claude Krief retracted part of his story in November 1982. Michel Krief, Jean-Claude's brother and author of some of the accusations, was found dead; the investigation concluded that he had committed suicide, but his death gave rise to new rumours. The following year, the authors of the book Dossier P... comme police raised the possibility of a plot by certain members of the RG to destabilise Jack Lang.

The affair ended in 1987 with the conviction of several Coral employees for consensual sex with adolescents under 15 years of age, and their release, the sentence of the convicted being covered by the months spent in prison during the period of preventive detention. Claude Sigala, director of the centre, received a thirty-month suspended sentence for "indecent assault without violence on minors under 15", without having ceased to claim his innocence.

File:René Schérer and Guy Hocquenghem.jpg

René Schérer and Guy Hocquenghem

Guy Hocquenghem devoted a roman à clef to the affair, Les Petits Garçons, in which he portrays René Schérer as "Stratos", a "professor with a broken career" whose thoughts and writings on childhood have been confused with criminal acts. In the novel, there is an open letter to a great intellectual, Michel Foucault, who is criticised for not immediately taking up the cause of "Stratos" in the face of defamation. The narrator explains that "Stratos" does not defend "sexuality" with children, but criticises the distancing of the "erotic" in relationships and the suspicion of any proximity between an adult and a child.

Thought

The "system of childhood"

In the context of the reflections of the post-'68 period, René Schérer devoted himself to a re-reading of Charles Fourier, from whom he drew inspiration for thinking about the question of childhood.

With regard to the link between May 68 and the thinking on childhood developed by Schérer in the 1970s, he explained in 2021, returning to his work in an interview given to the magazine Lundi matin:

It was essentially 68 which gave me the idea... I had previously done a few small papers on this, I had spoken about it in class when I was a teacher at Louis-le-Grand and at Henri IV, but I hadn't written a book about it. It was the movements of the high school students, which had their roots in childhood, in classes not only known as superior but also in classes known as preparatory, the sixth and the fifth, which accentuated this. On the one hand, it was a real movement in the street, and on the other hand, a trend in the analysis of situations. [...] Some authors had shown that real childhood was not on the side of the childhood manufactured by families or schools. There was therefore a reaction against this dogmatic, pedagogical and limited vision of childhood, a movement that opened up the imagination, myths, stories, etc.

From Fourier, Schérer retains in particular the criticism of commerce, the family and the school. He also insists on the fact that Fourier, but also Saint-Simon and Proudhon, "do not reason so much from social classes and the class struggle, even if they accept this notion, but [...] function from the incursions of desiring thought. [...] [These thinkers] help to think what does not belong precisely to the class struggle, but which belongs to underlying forces that animate society, which are not connoted in a precise way by the class struggle, which the class struggle forgets, which the class struggle leaves in the background. It may be that the class struggle takes place, but the situation of women or children remains strictly the same, that of a situation of domination and exclusion, among the workers as among the rich. Schérer develops a way of thinking that seeks to establish "passages" between the world of children and that of adults.

In 1974, a year before Michel Foucault extended this concept to all areas of disciplinary society in Discipline and Punish, René Schérer denounced, in Émile perverti, the "panopticon of childhood", that is to say the way in which childhood can never escape the adult gaze.

Emile perverti is an essay devoted to the relationship between the surveillance instituted by pedagogy, the denial of the child's desire and the prevention of any sexual act committed by the pupil. Schérer would later explain that Emile perverti is "a book that was commissioned from me by the Mame publishing house, which is a religious publishing house, about the introduction of sex education in France, and which rejected it. That's why I presented it to Laffont, because Jean-François Revel, who was the director of the collection, liked the book very much and accepted it."

In Emile perverti, Schérer points out that the main risk invoked by Rousseau to justify the permanent surveillance of Emile is the possibility that he might masturbate. According to Schérer, this prohibition of any sexual act by the child is intended to make him integrate the idea of adult, heterosexual and genital sexuality as the standard to be reached. Yet, Schérer argues, "there are not two sexualities, that of the child and that of the adult, which serves as a goal and a norm, but only one, not that of the adult, but the sexuality caught up in a network of tensions which, outside the adult, begins to project 'the child' and to constitute it."

He denounces the "infantilizing action" of the school and questions the conclusions of authors such as Françoise Dolto on the harmful character for children of sexual acts and promiscuity with adults. For him, "The first pedagogical relationship is controlled by desire".

Schérer then studies the relationship between the pupil Alcibiades and his teacher Socrates (which could fall under the heading of pederasty, already distinguished from paedophilia, by Plato in the Symposium) in order to analyse the way in which Socrates refuses this relationship, the pedagogical relationship being already defined at the time as not being sexual:

We posit that the pedagogical relationship is essentially perverse, not because it is accompanied by pederastic relations between teachers and pupils, but precisely because it denies and excludes them. And, having excluded pederasty in order to be able to constitute itself as such in the form that we know today, it can only reinclude it this time in the form that it is agreed to call a perversion.

In the same book, analysing Henry James's The Turn of the Screw, he sees a metaphor for education in the action of the young educator who, wanting to protect the child from perverse and supposedly paedophilic ghosts, ultimately brings about his death. In the conclusion of his book, Schérer calls on "the sect of teachers and pedagogues" to be "attentive to the passionate attractions of children" and to help them "to satisfy the immensity of their desires, outside of families and against them".

As Guy Hocquenghem writes in L'Après mai des Faunes, a book on post-'68 thinking, the reference to Fourier, a thinker of community and the plurality of passions, is opposed to the "return to Lacanian Freud" and the "return to Althusserian Marx". In 2007, in the book Après tout, based on an interview with Geoffroy de Lagasnerie, in order to summarise the reasons for his interest in youth in the 1970s, René Schérer evoked his encounter with young people, first as a teacher, then as an activist in dialogue with high school organisations, and finally as the lover of Guy Hocquenghem, who was then a high school student:

Because children and adolescents are asked to correspond to a completely artificial character. Later, I found in Foucault's work the word "device", which seemed to me particularly appropriate to designate the system I was denouncing: the pedagogical device of childhood [...] It seems to me absolutely indisputable that all modern and contemporary societies have found themselves faced with a pedagogical failure, have nurtured a pedagogical illusion without being able to find a balanced or harmonic mode, according to Fourier's terminology, of living with their childhood. The non-pedagogical mode would be this "walking together" that are the various "arrangements" presented by Co-ire, a "going with".

In 2010, René Schérer also explained in the journal Les Lettres Françaises: "There are therefore several motivations in the fact that I wrote about childhood: one of a theoretical, intellectual nature, and then there is also the fact that, in those years when I began to write Émile perverti, all the youth and childhood had gone outside".

From this delight in the fact that youth and childhood are "carried outside", Schérer develops a critique of the notion of children's irresponsibility, and therefore of adult power. In Le corps interdit ("The Forbidden Body"), he writes:

The principles in the name of which responsibility is either denied or given to the child are those of adult society. Everything related to responsibility concerns the maintenance of order and the institutions in place. A party is responsible when it does not question the legitimacy of power, a father that of the family, a school headmaster that of the institution, an educator that of the adaptation of the child to society with its ideology and norms.

In the 1970s, his reflections on childhood were also part of a polemical dialogue with psychoanalysis, initiated shortly before by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari in Anti-Oedipus, and which Schérer wished to extend. This was done in particular in Co-ire, number 22 of the journal Recherches, co-authored with Guy Hocquenghem and published in 1977, which analysed the various literary myths surrounding childhood. The work was partly inspired by the seminars on childhood that Schérer led at Vincennes.

About this joint work with Guy Hocquenghem, Schérer stated in Lundi matin: "We were in agreement on the point that the human sciences, psychology and sociology, have only given partial views of childhood, because these views are drawn from observation, from regulated interviews with children, and they do not take into account the imaginary, which is indeed the essential element in the approach to childhood. We approach childhood through a memory, through an imagination. Therefore, sciences that claim to be objective about childhood are less accurate than those that appeal to the subjectivity of memory and imagination".

In 2001, in the context of a controversy involving the rediscovery of a book by Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Co-ire was also exhumed as a work complacent with paedophilia, and designated in Libération as a "book on the sexual freedom of the child." Schérer sent a right of reply entitled "Non à l'amalgame", in which he justified itself:

What we wrote in 1977 is much less about sexuality, which is indeed the object of the dominant discourse of the time, than about the situation, the "institution" of childhood with its disciplinary encirclement of permanent control, its installation in the "panopticon", as I had already indicated in 1974 in Émile perverti. It is within this framework of an integral pedagogisation that we make the intervention of the famous "pederast" appear as an element of emancipation and liberation, where the modulation, the unclassifiable difference of the "r", borrowed from Genet, introduces the element of humour, of distancing, with which everything concerning "sexuality" properly speaking is to be understood.

In 2020, in the documentary L'Enfance mise à nu broadcast by France 5, Schérer returned to his writings, and repeated that it was not a question of defending sexuality between adults and children, but rather of criticising the distancing of sensuality in these relationships. In 2021, he also recalled that his works are "critical" and not "affirmative". He stated:

It would be wrong to say that I write only in generalities, because a thought that is only general is not so famous, but it is necessary to think from questions of principles, from critical questions. It is certain that [Co-ire] is a critical book, and absolutely not an affirmative book, like Emile perverti, which is also essentially critical. It is not particularly affirmative. It doesn't say "this is what should be", "this is what should not be". I have to say frankly that I am profoundly ignorant of what is to be or what is not to be. That's precisely what I'm getting around, I'm simply defining the framework in which we are situated.

In the same interview, Schérer explains again that "Co-ire is a digression, which was translated into German as "Myths and Rites of Childhood", it is not an experimental description, it is an experimentation starting from the mythologies that novels, that stories, that poetry have developed around childhood. The question is: what is developed about childhood that is necessarily done by adults?"

The "puerile erotic"

In 1976, Schérer praised the literary quality of Tony Duvert's novel Diary of an Innocent. Duvert was an open pedophile. However, he also criticized Duvert's "youthful desire", that is to say the fantasy of a certain childhood, in order to satisfy the desires of an adult. On this subject, Schérer had written already in Émile perverti that "the problem of the youth "sexual revolution" will always be blocked as long as it was posed in the alternative adolescence/maturity. We will always be dealing with a precocious adult or a retarded adolescent."

This difference with Tony Duvert, who defended pedophilia in the name of sexual liberation and the unveiling of an infantile sexuality, was also noted by the sociologist and historian Antoine Idier, in his biography entitled Les Vies de Guy Hocquenghem: "As Foucault does about "sex," Schérer and Hocquenghem assert that the discourse claiming to "liberate" the child is only the flip side of the discourse that "represses" him; both discourses participate in the same production of childhood."

In 1978, Schérer published the essay Une érotique puérile. In this work, he analyzes the erotic representations of childhood and especially adolescence in literature, but he is also interested in the ways in which adolescents describe their own experiences of love and eroticism, based on diaries and letters written by them.

As he had already done in Co-ire (written with Guy Hocquenghem), Schérer addresses in Une érotique puérile the childish fantasy of being hijacked by an adult, and, in adolescence, the "pivotal" function that an older person with whom the adolescent has a relationship may occupy (especially in cases of discovery of homosexuality). Schérer observes that this relationship is often unsatisfactory:

A non-familial, non-pedagogical relationship between an adult and a child is an indispensable condition of possibility for the emergence of foundational puerility. The "pivotal" role is frequently played by the pederast, who, however, is not always in a position to fulfil it [...] The pederast boasts that he is the only one to maintain a reciprocal personalist love with the child, or quite simply, the only one capable of forming him, of "bringing him a lot". He deludes himself: what is important, on the contrary, is that he allows the explosion of affirmative childishness which provokes the blurring of roles, denies copy and model, suppresses, in the absolute clarity of the simulacrum, all distinction of age and power between adult and child.

According to Schérer, the question is thus less that of the link between the adult and the child, or of the place of sexuality in existence, than of the possibility for the child or the adolescent to affirm his desires: "Puerile eroticism comes to replace the "frivolous panic" of Sex, by opposing to the arbitrariness of its functional order founded on the abstraction of all that carries, complicates, enriches pleasure, the shimmering range of combinations to which its game lends itself. As long as an adult comes to favor him, the child, a little demon, spreads out all his magic paraphernalia. Moreover, Schérer castigates the "imbecile legislation" which exerts a "segregating action between children and adults" He postulates that "[a]n eroticism [...] radiates from children, from which the adult seeks to guarantee himself, because he senses the greatest of dangers there. So he sets up barriers where passages should be made and a free way opened to the development".

As Michel Foucault had done, Schérer analyzes in Une érotique puérile minutes dating from the 19th century, constituting the first forms of repression of non-violent indecent assaults committed on minors, and concerning acts committed by a peasant with children and adolescents. Schérer analyzes the way in which the children and adolescents were, according to him, "trapped" by the accusers in order to accuse the accused, and sees in this case of morality the premises of contemporary repression. In particular, he establishes a link between this repression and an increased control of the working classes:

But it is certainly not pederasty that is primarily targeted. The name is not even known: it is the harmful training, the domestic theft, the idea of a shady collusion against the father of the family. Through this mistrust of visible and familiar offences, legal intervention against morals can creep in, because it finds a ready-made ground.

In the conclusion of his book, René Schérer advocates "a low-cost reform" of the "segregation" which, according to him, the articles of the penal code relating to sexual majority represent, a reform "[which] would suffice to remove the obstacles which oppose the production of multiple harmonic relationships. [...] There would no longer be a childhood folded in on itself in the presence of a dull maturity, but the diversity of the combinations to which it alone, in its always reborn invention, is capable of giving rise".

Schérer was a signatory of several petitions dealing with erotic relations between adults and minors, and making consent the keystone of the analyses made of these cases. As the editors of the article Le système de l'enfance ("The Childhood System") published in the magazine Lundimatin in October 2020 wrote, in these petitions, "in each case, it is a matter of calling for the word of children or adolescents to be taken seriously, even when they say they have not been coerced, and of denouncing the fact that acts that are not rape can be considered crimes." For these same reasons, in 1978, at the trial of Jacques Dugué, tried for sexual abuse of minors, René Schérer testified on behalf of the accused.

In 2001, in a right of reply to the newspaper Libération, Schérer defended himself from having advocated crimes committed against children. He refers to the term "pedophilia" as "a catch-all 'concept', an amalgam of heterogeneous notions in which one mixes two-year-old babies with pubescent teenagers, consensual liaisons with violent ones, in which one confuses caresses with murders, in which the smallest gestures are close to sordid crimes (which often do not concern children) and are themselves criminalized. A word that strikes with infamy, in the same way, acts, looks and thoughts."

Émile perverti, his most famous work, was republished in 2006: in the preface to the new edition, Schérer notes that "The illusion of an erotic Eden extended to childhood is no longer in favor with the public. Its rating is at zero. [...] It is not a question any more of opening the young bodies to the contact of the others, to the affective heat of the embraces, but of holding them at distance, of isolating them. He adds however: "History proceeds in zigzag, not by dialectical accumulation. A fact suitable to console those who despair."

Criticism

In 2008, a colloquium was devoted to Schérer in Bordeaux, as well as an issue of the philosophical journal at the Paris 8 University. In October 2011, at the Paris 8 University, a study day is devoted to his work.

However, since the 1970s, Schérer has been the object of criticism and accused of advocating pedophilia. In 1971, the editors of Politique-Hebdo refused to publish an interview with Schérer because — according to the testimony of the deputy editor at the time, Hervé Hamon — of what they considered to be his "pro-pedophile positions". In 1976, Daniel Zimmermann, while publishing Schérer's Le corps interdit in the "Sciences de l'éducation" collection, a book criticizing the distancing of the body in the pedagogical relationship, accompanied the volume with a critical preface, in which he reproached Schérer for speaking "in the name of the children" like the pedagogues he denounced elsewhere, and for forgetting that the child, supposedly the trainer of the adult in the encounter with the latter, did not wish to train the adult.

Maxime Foerster, author of an essay on Schérer published in 2007, says he shares Daniel Zimmerman's criticism of Schérer's views and does not believe in the possibility of valid, i.e. discerning, sexual consent by the child; he nevertheless considers Schérer "the great thinker of childhood, not only for his critique of modern pedagogy, but also for the way he restores [...] the subversive magic of childhood constituting the latter rather as a biologically defined and essentialized way of being in the world", and believes that Schérer's relationship with pedophilia is rather equivalent to "becoming one's own pedophile", that is to say, to find and let blossom the child that is in oneself by practicing "the daily detour of minors on oneself in order to escape the work of educastration promoted by society".

Jean-Claude Guillebaud classifies the writings published in the 1970s by René Schérer on the question of childhood in the category of "sententious pedophile militancy". However, he adds: "Today [in 1998] René Schérer, who has significantly amended his point of view, remains an important and estimable philosopher."

American historian Julian Bourg judges that, despite their academic credentials, Schérer and Hocquenghem were not far from Gabriel Matzneff and Tony Duvert in their views on childish desires, and Michel Onfray considers that René Schérer takes shelter "behind the Fourierist guarantee to justify pedophilia in almost all of his philosophical works for more than forty years."

Some philosophers defended the importance of René Schérer's work, whether it be his developments on childhood or on hospitality. In 2008, while discussing the work in the journal Chimères, Alain Brossat saluted the republication of Emile perverti and the courage of its author. In December 2017, invited to Paris 8 for an exceptional session of the seminar on the relationship between art and politics that René Schérer continued to lead at that time, a session intended to pay tribute to him before his retirement, Alain Badiou expressed himself as follows:

I would like to say here that this endurance is all the more admirable that he was certainly not spared formidable assaults coming from a manipulated opinion, as well as from the powers of the State. His thought of childhood, of a very great originality, as a dialectical moment of the becoming of the subject, and as the focus of what will become his relation to the other, thought which was renewed from Rousseau by Fourier as by the contemporary thought of sexuality, unleashed against him the most vile imprecations and insinuations. But if there is one quality that one must recognize in my comrade Schérer, it is that he is not a man to bend.

At the same conference, Jacques Rancière stated that "René is one of those who have made it possible for this institution to remain somewhat faithful to the spirit of a certain number of us who left for Vincennes in the fall of 1968."

External links

• Works by René Schérer at Gallica