Nouveaux Philosophes to Estates General 1977–1979 307
an interview between P. Sollers and B.-H. Lévy, the latter
claims to have been ‘beaten up’ at the Estates General. ‘Beaten
up!’ One can hope that such an eloquent defender of human
rights knows the meaning of and weights this expression [.. .].^18Given the great number of participants and the stir which the
Estates General caused in the media, Derrida was forced to agree to
having photographs taken of him, albeit reluctantly. In this respect,
too, the weekend in question was a turning point. But Derrida’s
relations with the press remained diffi cult. For example, shortly
before the event, he refused to allow Le Matin to publish an inter-
view he had given Catherine Clément, since he was dissatisfi ed with
the transcription. She told him in no uncertain terms how disap-
pointed she was: this interview was to have been the main piece in a
special number on the Estates General and it seemed to her insult-
ing that, ‘in such an incredibly casual way’, Derrida had decided to
withdraw it, ‘unilaterally and without any possible discussion’.
It’s clear you know nothing about a journalist’s profession.
[.. .] Academics despise and sometimes hate journalists: you
are one of their number. [.. .] No doubt you are a great philo-
sopher. But this gives you no right at all to despise those who
also work in language. [.. .] I also think that it’s incredible you
can’t get out of this deadlock, since it’s clear that your relations
with the press are full of problems on every side, and it’s easy to
guess why, if you always behave the same way.^19Clément had hit the nail on the head, in many respects. Derrida’s
mistrust of the press and the media, like Bourdieu’s, would last for
a long time, leaving the fi eld open to the nouveaux philosophes, who
occupied the territory without any qualms.^20
But the impact of the Estates General was not just confi ned to
these events, however spectacular. On the institutional level, the
extent of the mobilization had a considerable eff ect. On television,
on the evening of 16 June, the Minister for Education claimed not to
understand what – in the presidential decree aff ecting the implemen-
tation of the Haby Reform, which had not even been fi nally decided
on – could be so alarming for philosophy; there must have been mis-
information or misunderstanding.^21 The eff orts of Jacques Derrida
and Roland Brunet had not been altogether in vain: while the most
innovative ideas of the Greph would remain a dead letter, the Haby
Reform was never implemented and the teaching of philosophy in
terminale was safe for a long time to come.