Previous Next

Chapter Nine

Summary: Chapter Nine: André Trocmé

After Nazi Germany conquered France in 1940, the defeated nation was allowed to set up a government in the city of Vichy that would do Germany’s bidding. For the rest of the war, France’s Jews lived under fear of being arrested and sent off to concentration camps. In the south, however, pastor André Trocmé led the people of his small village, Le Chambon-sur-Lignon, in resisting anti-Jewish policies. The villagers sheltered Jews that came to them and helped many Jews escape to nearby Switzerland. The people conducted their activities as unobtrusively as possible, but they refused to show loyalty to the regime. When a high Vichy official paid a visit, schoolchildren presented him with a letter that ended defiantly: “We have Jews. You’re not getting them.”

Why did the Nazis not simply deport the entire village? The best explanation, Gladwell believes, is that the villagers were Huguenots, descended from Protestants who had suffered greatly under Catholic persecution in earlier centuries. They were tough mountain people who knew the local terrain and had a long tradition of standing up to oppressors. Faced with the prospect of adding a fight against such people to their growing list of problems, the Nazis chose to look the other way.

There is, however, another question: why did the people of Le Chambon risk a confrontation in the first place? They could have turned Jews away, or at least not announced their presence to a visiting official. The answer, Gladwell believes, is the magnificent disagreeableness of people like André Trocmé. As a boy, the pastor lost his mother in an automobile accident. By the time he was an adult, he had seen too much, and lost too much, to make the same calculations an ordinary person would.

Analysis: Chapter Nine

Gladwell uses the “disagreeability” of André Trocmé as an illustration of what someone with a particular recklessness can achieve. Like other disagreeable innovators, Trocmé is not afraid of the consequences of his actions and does not care what anyone thinks of him. When Trocmé puts himself in danger, it is not because he is angry, but rather because he is motivated by his strong convictions. Trocmé is not the type of person to abandon his personal beliefs, even if it means jeopardizing his personal safety. As an important focal point, his stubbornness allows Trocmé’s community to also become “disagreeable.” The narrative proves Gladwell’s argument that underdogs can use the strength of their convictions to defeat powerful enemies. Gladwell again argues that the community’s strength comes from its resilience. As people of faith, they understand what it means to be persecuted. This idea supports Gladwell’s claim that surviving hardships results in courage.

Gladwell argues that people like Dr. Freireich, Wyatt Walker, Fred Shuttlesworth, and Trocmé are successful in instituting change because their motivations are pure. These men believed they were doing the right thing and were willing to work tirelessly in support of their convictions. Trocmé’s unwavering commitment to his beliefs confuses the fascist persecutors, and they are unsure of what to do. If the fascists kill Trocmé, the other residents of Le Chambon will continue to help the Jews. Trocmé, on the other hand, has nothing to lose. Gladwell argues throughout the book that those people are more likely to achieve greatness because they are willing to do whatever it takes to overcome challenges. The larger ethical considerations of acting only in service of personal convictions is not something that Gladwell is particularly interested in. In a different book, there may have been further opportunities for nuanced discussions of the idea of the ends justifying the means, but that is not the story that Gladwell is telling. He ends his discussion by underscoring the importance of reconsidering the definition of disadvantage because even the worst circumstances can lead to greatness.

Previous section Chapter 8 Next section Afterword

Take a Study Break