Philippa Smith Feb 1, 2020:

Tout ça pour ça ! ;-)

Mark Nathan (asker) Feb 1, 2020:

Well yes, I could add a note explaining Larzac, and that certainly has some appeal, but when I asked the author for clarification they said not to mention Larzac, because they thought it would require too much explanation; they even said they might remove it from the French version.

Philippa Smith Feb 1, 2020:

@Mark You've probably made a choice by now, but to add an extra two pennyworth: if this is an objective article talking about the situation specifically in France, why would you want to find something else to stand in for the reference to Larzac? I would keep it and add a very brief note explaining the reference.

Daryo Jan 31, 2020:

"moqué par d’autres" explains the part "le Larzac fait toujours les frais de bonnes [blagues] potaches = those who don't support the "Larzac movement" make about them the kind of jokes you would expect from schoolboys i.e. resort to that "level" of humor.


Maybe s.t. along the lines of "[the Larzac movement] gets dismissed by them with schoolboy jokes (/ crude jokes?)."

ph-b (X) Jan 31, 2020:

« moqué par d’autres » donc il s'agit bien de dérision et ça n'a rien à voir avec les « plaisanteries/blagues (de) potaches » (càd hoaxes/pranks, and not jokes, in French). L'auteur s'est un peu mélangé les pinceaux...

Mark Nathan (asker) Jan 31, 2020:

So something like "jokes about environmentalists persist"

Mark Nathan (asker) Jan 31, 2020:

Comment from author La lutte du Larzac est devenue le symbole du combat ecolo, en positif pour certains et moqué par d’autres...

ph-b (X) Jan 31, 2020:

de bonnes potaches ? Odd. As a native speaker, I would have expected sthg like de bonnes blagues de potaches. Even that, however, would have been strange: blague de potaches literally means "schoolboy's/girl's prank" and I don't see how it would fit here. Another ex. of a writer not using the right words? I think that Philippa's "subject of derision" is likely to be the meaning here, but this would have to be checked.
Incidentally, the article mentioning them does not to me denote any lack of objectivity: there are still a lot of people who deride, rightly or wrongly, what happened in Larzac and mentioning this in an article is appropriate.
By the way, I can't see any pun in the source text, but I would be interested to know the reason why the author chose these terms.

Daryo Jan 31, 2020:

From the point of view of "[l’opinion publique et] les élites conservatrices ou économiques" the whole Larzac movement will be seen as "a bunch of silly/naive kids posing as grown-ups", so for that audience the Larzac protesters would be an ideal target for "bonnes blagues potaches"

So it does add up - this article is presenting objectively the biased views of les élites conservatrices.

SafeTex Jan 31, 2020:

@ Mark and all Yes, why not replace the pun with a metaphor! It gets the idea across too and that was my point. If the article had gone on to explain a bit about Larzac, I would not have been so reticent about the two suggestions so far.

Mark Nathan (asker) Jan 30, 2020:

Perhaps something like "environmental activists still suffer from a tree-hugger image".

Mark Nathan (asker) Jan 30, 2020:

Very good point Safetex, but I think I need to sort out the first problem before attempting to offer any kind of equivalent!

SafeTex Jan 30, 2020:

@ all Hello

Isn't there a second and maybe third problem that most readers may well not know what Larzac is referring to and what follows is not going to help them much to work out what the heading means (without counting the likely pun explained by Philippa) in relation to the article.

I'll suggest a possible completely alternative heading (pun) which may well shock some as it is so far from the French, but perhaps gets the idea across nevertheless.

Mark Nathan (asker) Jan 30, 2020:

I understood it the same way as Philippa. What is confusing is that this article is supposedly presenting an objective view. A lot of people obviously thought that Larzac was a fine example of successful activism, at the time it had thousands of sympathizers and was described as a "beautiful fight" by Sartre. Yet the article seems to suggest that it is "toujours" the subject of derision. It just doesn't add up. I think I'll have to query it.

Philippa Smith Jan 30, 2020:

@Marco I think it's a contraction of "blagues potaches".

philgoddard Jan 30, 2020:

I think it may be "blagues potaches". "Bonnes" could be a scanning error, or a description of the jokes.
I hope the opinions are not those of the author :-)

Marco Solinas Jan 30, 2020:

To Asker Could there be a typo or could something be missing in your source text? "Potache" is masculine and "bonnes" is not in accord with it.