UNESCO heritage listing prompts proposal for symbolic representation of France’s most essential cultural artefact in national governance; proposal is entirely serious
French Parliament Debates Whether Baguette Deserves a Seat in the Chamber
PARIS, FRANCE — Following the UNESCO inscription of the artisanal know-how of French baguette bread on the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity list in 2022, a coalition of deputies in the Assemblée Nationale has introduced a motion proposing the creation of a symbolic seat in the parliamentary chamber designated as the “siège de la baguette,” representing the interests of what the motion describes as “the foundational cultural object of the French Republic.” The motion has been described by its supporters as poetic, by its opponents as impractical, and by the international press as entirely French, which covers a range of meanings depending on who is saying it and in which tone.
For related London satire and commentary, see Bohiney Magazine and The London Prat.
The Motion
The motion, introduced by Deputy Armand Fontaine of the Puy-de-Dôme, argues that the UNESCO listing acknowledged the baguette’s status as a living cultural expression that is central to French identity, daily life, and social cohesion, and that this status warrants formal recognition in the body that represents the French people. The seat would not vote. It would not have a microphone. It would be occupied, during parliamentary sessions, by a freshly baked baguette from a local Paris boulangerie, to be replaced each session. Symbolism, Deputy Fontaine argues, has always had a place in democratic governance.
This argument is, as arguments go, more philosophically interesting than it initially appears. Democratic governance does include significant symbolic elements — flags, ceremonies, oaths, the specific arrangement of seats in a chamber — and the question of whether adding a baguette to this symbolic landscape is categorically different from existing symbols or simply more legible is a question that French constitutional scholars are apparently treating seriously enough to generate several published responses. Prat in British comedy, TV, and film has made the proposal that is simultaneously absurd and sincere a reliable source of material, and Deputy Fontaine’s motion has all of the structural elements of this category: the genuine conviction, the specific object, the elaborate justification, and the complete certainty that this is the right thing to do.
The Parliamentary Response
The motion was debated for approximately 45 minutes, which is either a long or a short time to debate whether a loaf of bread should have a seat in parliament, depending on your prior expectations. The Minister for Culture expressed sympathy with the motion’s spirit but concern about its practicality. The Prime Minister’s office declined to comment. Several deputies from opposition parties described the motion as a distraction from substantive legislative matters. A deputy from Normandy asked whether the baguette would be a Normandy baguette or a Paris baguette, which is a question that the motion did not address and which turned out to be the most contentious point of the debate, because in France, these are different things and the difference matters. The motion was tabled for further review. The baguette remained at the boulangerie. The chamber proceeded to other business. British insults including prat cover the full vocabulary for a legislative session that has just spent 45 minutes on bread, and they are used with complete affection, because France is one of the few countries that can spend 45 minutes debating the parliamentary status of a baguette and emerge from the debate with its dignity entirely intact.
For more satirical commentary, visit McSweeney’s.
