Francois Grunwald, A Path out of Exile: With Gurdjieff in Post-War Paris, Red Elixir, 2025
This is a significant book for anyone interested in Gurdjieff, his system, and Western Esotericism. Such an emotional impact does it make that it would be tempting to overstate its value, but I think I can put it like this: rather than deal with the ideas in a comprehensive way, Grunwald describes their impact on his life, and that of others. To that end, a number of contextual details from his life are also provided: the first fifty or so pages are setting the scene. What he says about Gurdjieff is of considerable value in filling out the details of Gurdjieff’s life from 1946 to his death on 29 October 1949, and provides some powerful details of the funeral. In addition, he provides fresh perspectives on Henriette Lannes, Jeanne de Salzmann, Pierre Aboukler, and Jean Vayyse most of all. There are certain facts about Gurdjieff’s life I had not known before (e.g. that Gabo had saved Gurdjieff’s life in Moscow, in undisclosed circumstances, and at the baths, Gurdjieff would show the scars from his bullet and other wounds, and compare them to those of the men with him, some of whom had been wounded in WWII, pp. 158 and 135 respectively).
This is a translation from the last third of the fuller volume, Un chemin hors de l’exil. I have had that book since 2018. I have not checked the omissions from that portion. My spot checks on accuracy of translation indicate that the translation from the French is good, but the German translations are a little loose, e.g. “Ihre” does not mean “my”, p. 172. The French is almost 600 pages long, this one is 176. I have only scanned the first two thirds of the French, but I do not think it is relevant to people whose main interest is Gurdjieff, although it would explain to us that, for example, his birth-name was Franz but it was later changed. However, that is a minor-point, and does not detract from the considerable value of the book.
It is written as if it is a letter to Richard (Dill), explaining what matters to Grunwald and drawing lessons from his life for the younger man’s benefit. But clearly it was also intended for a wider audience. The section in this book tells how he became a French citizen after the war, having fought against the Germans, established himself and his family in France, met Lannes and Gurdjieff, and focuses on those relationships. But also central is his friendship with Ludolf Schild whom he had met in the Foreign Legion (26). Schild did meet Lannes and Gurdjieff, but although he lived near the latter, rarely saw him for reasons I could not enter into. However, his death-bed testament to Grunwald (140-142) may be the highlight of the book. I will not quote it; if you are interested, you will buy the book and read this astonishing passage in context. My sense is that although I cannot understand why Schild stayed away, he was truly a pupil, perhaps even a comrade, of Gurdjieff.
That is a basic overview. Another most important element in this book is how Grunwald often remarks that people might meet Gurdjieff, but if they were not properly prepared, or otherwise not disposed in a certain manner, the meetings would be disastrous, and they would never return (60, 74, 89-90, 92, 149). In this respect, he says of Beelzebub, “… this text repelled many of my group companions. Even Mme de S[alzmann]., who had directed the superb French translation with Henri [Tracol], was not, it seemed to me, passionate about the book. I became convinced of this during the discussions we had on the subject of producing a German translation.” (75) This fact is of abiding significance for our groups: people need to be prepared before exposure to groups, exercises and Movements: but what the preparation should be cannot be reduced to a detailed schedule.
His brief comments on the Toasts to the Idiots are significant. Recently, a godless heretic challenged the text of Mr Adie’s contemporaneous notes, which refer to the “Superior Idiot.” This wretched sinner insisted on Bennett’s “Super Idiot.” Of course, not only this translation but also the French original (e.g. p.473) give the true reading, in accordance with Mr Adie’s infallible notes: “Superior.” But other comments on the Toast are of abiding value (72, 73, 78, 156).
In one place, Grunwald refers to Gurdjieff teaching Jeanne de Salzmann how to dodge bullets in post-WWI Germany, but there is also this passage, alluding to documents I had not dreamt the existence of. In 1964, to help prepare Grunwald for commencing groups in Germany, de Salzmann gave him some materials Gurdjieff had produced for his ill-starred attempt to begin an institute there in about 1920 or 1921. He wrote that most of the articles: “horrified me. These writings advocated, in a way that made my hair stand on end, a pathetic occultism, hackneyed and trivial, a continuation of the thousand year-old Germanic Empire for which “Herr Gurdjieff” had the necessary material at the ready.” (98)
While the concept of “chief feature” is rarely referred to in those groups I have been present at (Two Rivers Farm being an honourable exception), I was intrigued to find that Gurdjieff was using this concept into his last years, and Grunwald provides an illuminating anecdote of what Gurdjieff told a young man who asked him what his chief feature was. (157)
The big omission from the book is the contemplative exercises. Surely Mme Lannes taught them, but I found nothing of any value about them. Little is said about the Movements, but what is said about how Gurdjieff taught and devised them is of value (84-86).
I will close with one anecdote, which I had heard before but only now is making an impact on me. Gurdjieff had been telling his jokes about the national characteristics of the English, I wish and scotch. One evening Bennett asked Gurdjieff to which people he would compare consciousness. In an unforgettable passage which I take as relating to Christ and the preparation for Him, Gruwnwald writes: “Mr G slowly turned his eyes on all those present who were expecting a joking response. But the answer came penetrating: “Consciousness is Jewish.” No comment. In the grave silence with followed, everyone ponded and kept to themselves. Mr G went quite regularly to the Russian orthodox cathedral on rue Daru to attend religious services.” (125-126)
The short paragraph about the rue Daru immediately followed the anecdote, and places it in context.
Could the “Consciousness is Jewish” comment be a reference to psychoanalysis?
What is the train of thought which leads to this surmise?
Perhaps Gurdjieff was making an observation of the then fashionable attempt to explain/describe consciousness assembled by Freud and his largely Jewish inner circle?
I appreciate your sincerity and your effort. What I meant by asking about the train of thought was that there is no connection between Gurdjieff’s comment and the proposed referent: Freud and psychoanalysis. It is as if I suggested that a reference to Jewish cuisine was to the New York bagel. First, “consciousness” is a big thing: psychoanalysis is a small thing – and what is more, Gurdjieff disliked it. He put it firmly in the “unconscious” basket. Next, just because Freud and most of his early circle were Jewish, it does not follow that Gurdjieff would consider them as essentially Jewish – they were of course quite irreligious. Gurdjieff’s comment must relate to something to do with the quintessential Jewish nature.
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Joseph. It was just an impression which came to me, that perhaps Mr. Gurdjieff was indeed having a bit of a joke and was referring to the idea of “consciousness” promulgated by the mainstream. Freud and his circle admitted to being heavily influenced in their thinking by their Jewish heritage. Anyway, just a thought! Cheers
Hi, I question the attribution of the term “super idiot” to JG Bennett, because prior to his statements it had been the norm in English language discussions of these toasts. For example, Toomer: “ The toasts were drunk, scaling up from ordinary idiots to super idiots, arch idiots, hopeless idiots, compassionate idiots, squirming idiots, square idiots, round idiots…. “ . And Gurdjieff was recorded as describing Orage as his super idiot.
Grunwalds memories of the toasts are surely faulty for he surely has got the sequence very wrong, and if he is demonstrably in error over this, then could this cast doubt on the veracity of his other remarks and anecdotes?