WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:01.960 Okay, let's unpack this. We are embarking on 00:00:01.960 --> 00:00:05.759 a deep dive today into a life so rich with cultural, 00:00:05.980 --> 00:00:10.740 political, and personal controversy that it genuinely 00:00:10.740 --> 00:00:13.660 defies any easy definition. It really does. The 00:00:13.660 --> 00:00:16.500 subject is known universally by just two initials, 00:00:16.500 --> 00:00:20.000 BB. We are, of course, talking about Brigitte 00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:21.899 Bardot. And when you dive into the source material 00:00:21.899 --> 00:00:25.219 for Brigitte Bardot, you quickly realize... You're 00:00:25.219 --> 00:00:27.160 not just looking at the career of a successful 00:00:27.160 --> 00:00:30.019 actress. I mean, not at all. No. You're charting 00:00:30.019 --> 00:00:33.060 the trajectory of a massive, almost uncontrollable 00:00:33.060 --> 00:00:37.020 cultural phenomenon. She was this. This revolutionary 00:00:37.020 --> 00:00:39.820 force, a lightning rod for post -war societal 00:00:39.820 --> 00:00:42.560 change in the 50s and 60s. Absolutely. But then 00:00:42.560 --> 00:00:44.640 she's spent the entire second half of her life 00:00:44.640 --> 00:00:46.840 using that immense celebrity capital in ways 00:00:46.840 --> 00:00:49.280 that are often profoundly challenging, legally 00:00:49.280 --> 00:00:51.920 contentious, and frankly, very isolating. Right. 00:00:51.979 --> 00:00:54.280 And that's our mission today, to gain a really 00:00:54.280 --> 00:00:57.420 thorough understanding of these two radically 00:00:57.420 --> 00:00:59.619 conflicting phases of her life. We need to follow 00:00:59.619 --> 00:01:02.380 the path from the electrifying screen icon, that 00:01:02.380 --> 00:01:05.379 period between, what, 1952 and her retirement. 00:01:05.680 --> 00:01:08.780 And connected directly to the fiercely dedicated, 00:01:09.239 --> 00:01:12.680 sometimes legally troubled animal rights warrior 00:01:12.680 --> 00:01:16.060 she became from 1973 all the way to the present 00:01:16.060 --> 00:01:18.640 day. And the sources for this are really comprehensive. 00:01:18.700 --> 00:01:22.379 They give us a full biographical profile detailing 00:01:22.379 --> 00:01:25.730 her early. very rigid life, her groundbreaking 00:01:25.730 --> 00:01:29.109 filmography, all those complicated personal relationships, 00:01:29.310 --> 00:01:32.250 and of course, the numerous legal battles that 00:01:32.250 --> 00:01:34.590 have really defined her later years. If we frame 00:01:34.590 --> 00:01:37.209 her entire existence as a study in pure contradiction, 00:01:37.510 --> 00:01:40.310 it's just spectacular. I mean, how does the woman 00:01:40.310 --> 00:01:42.430 who the French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir 00:01:42.430 --> 00:01:45.810 called a locomotive of women's history, the absolute 00:01:45.810 --> 00:01:48.390 symbol of sexual freedom, how does she become 00:01:48.390 --> 00:01:50.609 a figure who's been fined six times by French 00:01:50.609 --> 00:01:53.629 courts for inciting racial hatred? It's an incredible 00:01:53.629 --> 00:01:55.769 pivot. And how does she manage that while at 00:01:55.769 --> 00:01:58.310 the same time earning global accolades, including 00:01:58.310 --> 00:02:00.670 PETA awards and recognition from the U .N. for 00:02:00.670 --> 00:02:04.209 her unwavering, all -consuming fight for animals? 00:02:04.430 --> 00:02:06.750 It's a huge psychological tightrope walk. And 00:02:06.750 --> 00:02:08.129 we have to remember she wasn't just a global 00:02:08.129 --> 00:02:10.289 star. For a time, she was basically a French 00:02:10.289 --> 00:02:12.289 diplomatic tool. You're talking about the de 00:02:12.289 --> 00:02:14.930 Gaulle quote. Exactly. President Charles de Gaulle 00:02:14.930 --> 00:02:18.330 famously observed that Bardot was a French export. 00:02:19.150 --> 00:02:22.330 As important as Renault cars. I mean, think about 00:02:22.330 --> 00:02:25.490 that. She was national branding. Wow. So to understand 00:02:25.490 --> 00:02:28.229 the gravity of her defiance later in life, we 00:02:28.229 --> 00:02:30.250 first have to understand the rigidity of the 00:02:30.250 --> 00:02:32.909 world she was defying. So let's start right at 00:02:32.909 --> 00:02:35.250 the beginning. OK, so the story of Brigitte Bordeaux 00:02:35.250 --> 00:02:38.129 is often presented as this like sudden eruption 00:02:38.129 --> 00:02:42.270 of sexual liberation. But the roots of her rebellious 00:02:42.270 --> 00:02:44.169 nature, they're actually found in an incredibly 00:02:44.169 --> 00:02:49.099 conservative, tightly controlled and. Prosperous 00:02:49.099 --> 00:02:51.259 environment. Precisely. She was born and raised 00:02:51.259 --> 00:02:54.840 in Paris's luxurious 16th arrondissement. This 00:02:54.840 --> 00:02:57.419 was the bastion of the French bourgeoisie. It 00:02:57.419 --> 00:02:59.800 was a world of rigid Catholic convention. Her 00:02:59.800 --> 00:03:02.099 father was an engineer, an industrial factory 00:03:02.099 --> 00:03:05.219 proprietor. Her maternal grandfather was an insurance 00:03:05.219 --> 00:03:08.319 director. This was a family of success, of status, 00:03:08.479 --> 00:03:11.310 and a very, very severe discipline. And the sources 00:03:11.310 --> 00:03:15.110 detail a truly pivotal traumatic incident that 00:03:15.110 --> 00:03:17.990 seems to have just galvanized her future rebellious 00:03:17.990 --> 00:03:21.150 streak. It created this deep permanent reservoir 00:03:21.150 --> 00:03:24.270 of resentment toward her parents. It wasn't just 00:03:24.270 --> 00:03:26.810 a distant or chilly environment. There was a 00:03:26.810 --> 00:03:29.330 specific moment of profound emotional injury. 00:03:29.610 --> 00:03:32.310 That moment is absolutely key to understanding 00:03:32.310 --> 00:03:35.710 her later iconoclasm. Bardot and her younger 00:03:35.710 --> 00:03:38.069 sister, Mijanu, were playing, and they broke 00:03:38.069 --> 00:03:40.469 their parents' favorite face. Now, while the 00:03:40.469 --> 00:03:42.449 physical punishment was common at the time, her 00:03:42.449 --> 00:03:45.550 father whipped them 20 times, the emotional response 00:03:45.550 --> 00:03:48.530 was arguably far more damaging. Because they 00:03:48.530 --> 00:03:50.659 were subsequently treated. like total outsiders 00:03:50.659 --> 00:03:53.500 in their own home. Yes. Her father demanded that 00:03:53.500 --> 00:03:55.740 they address their parents using the formal distancing 00:03:55.740 --> 00:03:58.539 French pronoun, vous, rather than the familiar, 00:03:58.680 --> 00:04:01.139 tu. And for anyone who doesn't speak French, 00:04:01.199 --> 00:04:03.539 can you explain why that's so significant? Well, 00:04:03.599 --> 00:04:06.099 in French culture, using vous within your immediate 00:04:06.099 --> 00:04:09.000 family is profoundly cold. It's reserved for 00:04:09.000 --> 00:04:11.020 strangers, for the elderly, or people of higher 00:04:11.020 --> 00:04:13.960 status. It was calculated devastating psychological 00:04:13.960 --> 00:04:16.600 tool designed to enforce distance and obedience. 00:04:17.100 --> 00:04:19.660 So if we just pause on that for a second. that 00:04:19.660 --> 00:04:22.259 punishment is a perfect microcosm of her lifelong 00:04:22.259 --> 00:04:26.199 struggle. It basically trained her from a very 00:04:26.199 --> 00:04:29.600 young age to resent formality, hierarchy, and 00:04:29.600 --> 00:04:31.519 any institution that tried to impose emotional 00:04:31.519 --> 00:04:34.779 constraint. She spent the rest of her life rejecting 00:04:34.779 --> 00:04:37.079 the voo of authority. That's a brilliant way 00:04:37.079 --> 00:04:40.600 to put it. That trauma absolutely fuels the intense 00:04:40.600 --> 00:04:43.480 need for personal, immediate freedom that defines 00:04:43.480 --> 00:04:46.019 both her screen persona and her later activism. 00:04:46.379 --> 00:04:48.600 She needed an outlet. She needed an outlet. And 00:04:48.600 --> 00:04:50.819 amidst this rigidity, her mother encouraged her 00:04:50.819 --> 00:04:52.980 natural inclination toward dance, particularly 00:04:52.980 --> 00:04:55.300 during World War II when social activities were 00:04:55.300 --> 00:04:57.910 limited. So dance... which requires absolute 00:04:57.910 --> 00:05:00.649 physical control, paradoxically becomes her first 00:05:00.649 --> 00:05:03.790 taste of personal agency, her path out. Absolutely. 00:05:03.889 --> 00:05:06.490 And that talent was refined, leading to a huge 00:05:06.490 --> 00:05:09.589 step in 1949 when she was accepted into the prestigious 00:05:09.589 --> 00:05:12.529 Conservatoire de Paris. She trained rigorously 00:05:12.529 --> 00:05:15.129 for three years under the renowned Russian choreographer 00:05:15.129 --> 00:05:18.129 Boris Nazev. This early discipline shows you 00:05:18.129 --> 00:05:20.470 that her later wildness was founded on deep training 00:05:20.470 --> 00:05:23.790 and focus. But the shift from diligent ballerina 00:05:23.790 --> 00:05:27.149 to public figure... It kind of bypassed the stage 00:05:27.149 --> 00:05:29.170 and went straight into publishing and celebrity 00:05:29.170 --> 00:05:32.529 culture. It did. Helene Gordon -Lazareff, who 00:05:32.529 --> 00:05:34.569 was the director of two major magazines, Elle 00:05:34.569 --> 00:05:37.569 and Le Jardin des Modes, hired the young Bardot 00:05:37.569 --> 00:05:41.189 as a junior fashion model in 1949. And that's 00:05:41.189 --> 00:05:43.709 where the visibility just exploded. It really 00:05:43.709 --> 00:05:46.910 did. Just a year later, at age 15, on March 8, 00:05:47.050 --> 00:05:50.810 1950, Bardot appeared on the cover of Elle. And 00:05:50.810 --> 00:05:53.930 that cover was magnetic. It led directly to an 00:05:53.930 --> 00:05:56.430 acting audition for the director, Marc Eligre. 00:05:56.610 --> 00:05:58.970 She didn't get the role, but she did meet the 00:05:58.970 --> 00:06:01.089 man who would guide her initial career and become 00:06:01.089 --> 00:06:04.050 her first husband, Roger Vadim. And their connection 00:06:04.050 --> 00:06:06.990 was immediate and intense, but her parents were 00:06:06.990 --> 00:06:09.350 fiercely opposed. She was still just a teenager, 00:06:09.589 --> 00:06:11.610 and this relationship with an older man like 00:06:11.610 --> 00:06:14.050 Vadim was deemed scandalous in their conservative 00:06:14.050 --> 00:06:16.470 social circle. The opposition was so strong, 00:06:16.470 --> 00:06:18.189 her father actually bought her a train ticket. 00:06:18.850 --> 00:06:21.009 intending to send her away to England to finish 00:06:21.009 --> 00:06:23.209 her education and just break up the relationship. 00:06:23.629 --> 00:06:26.850 Yes, and this confrontation pushed Bardot to 00:06:26.850 --> 00:06:29.370 an extreme reaction, which really demonstrates 00:06:29.370 --> 00:06:31.970 that all or nothing intensity that would mark 00:06:31.970 --> 00:06:34.389 her entire life. This is a pretty dramatic story. 00:06:34.529 --> 00:06:36.589 The sources confirm the dramatic escalation. 00:06:36.790 --> 00:06:39.550 She threatened suicide, specifically by putting 00:06:39.550 --> 00:06:42.629 her head into an oven. It was a horrifying, desperate 00:06:42.629 --> 00:06:45.970 act. Wow. Her parents intervened just in time, 00:06:45.970 --> 00:06:48.089 but the crisis forced a complete capitulation 00:06:48.089 --> 00:06:50.709 from them. They accepted the relationship, but 00:06:50.709 --> 00:06:53.769 only under one condition. She had to wait until 00:06:53.769 --> 00:06:56.350 she turned 18 to marry Vadim. So she marries 00:06:56.350 --> 00:06:59.029 him in 1952 and the professional career begins 00:06:59.029 --> 00:07:02.189 almost instantly. Her first paid film role was 00:07:02.189 --> 00:07:05.730 a small part in the 1952 comedy Crazy for Love, 00:07:05.910 --> 00:07:08.410 which earned her 200 ,000 francs. What was that 00:07:08.410 --> 00:07:11.670 in real terms at the time? It was about 575 U 00:07:11.670 --> 00:07:13.509 .S. dollars, so certainly not superstar money, 00:07:13.629 --> 00:07:15.649 but it was a foot in the door. A start. A start. 00:07:15.769 --> 00:07:18.250 And critically, her subsequent roles immediately 00:07:18.250 --> 00:07:21.009 started to define her public image. Her second 00:07:21.009 --> 00:07:23.740 role was in Menina. The Girl in the Bikini from 00:07:23.740 --> 00:07:27.000 1952. The title really says it all. This is where 00:07:27.000 --> 00:07:29.399 she began the global popularization of the bikini, 00:07:29.519 --> 00:07:32.199 an item of clothing that had only recently been 00:07:32.199 --> 00:07:34.879 invented and was still seen as highly controversial. 00:07:35.399 --> 00:07:37.660 I mean, it was banned on some European beaches, 00:07:37.839 --> 00:07:40.660 let alone in the US. And this notoriety was just 00:07:40.660 --> 00:07:43.480 amplified when she arrived at the 1953 Cannes 00:07:43.480 --> 00:07:45.939 Film Festival. She was photographed extensively 00:07:45.939 --> 00:07:48.480 in the new swimwear, deliberately courting attention 00:07:48.480 --> 00:07:51.579 and scandal. She was effectively establishing 00:07:51.579 --> 00:07:54.079 herself as a symbol of unapologetic sexuality 00:07:54.079 --> 00:07:57.220 before she was even 20. And before she became 00:07:57.220 --> 00:07:59.360 the definitive global blonde, she was actually 00:07:59.360 --> 00:08:02.000 still brunette in these early roles. That aesthetic 00:08:02.000 --> 00:08:13.860 shift, which was purely accidental, became Uh 00:08:13.860 --> 00:08:27.980 -huh. That blonde hair became inseparable from 00:08:27.980 --> 00:08:30.240 the global BB image, marking the final stage 00:08:30.240 --> 00:08:32.919 of her transformation into the icon. Okay, so 00:08:32.919 --> 00:08:35.179 the blonde transformation coincided perfectly 00:08:35.179 --> 00:08:38.019 with the seismic event that launched her from 00:08:38.019 --> 00:08:40.860 a French starlet to a true international superstar. 00:08:41.500 --> 00:08:45.759 The 1956 film and God Created Woman. This was 00:08:45.759 --> 00:08:48.419 the moment everything changed. It was Roger Vadim's 00:08:48.419 --> 00:08:51.559 directorial debut, filmed in Saint -Tropez, and 00:08:51.559 --> 00:08:54.440 it featured Bardot as Juliet, an immoral teenager 00:08:54.440 --> 00:08:57.639 who is free -spirited, unapologetically sexual, 00:08:57.740 --> 00:08:59.740 and totally indifferent to social constraint. 00:08:59.980 --> 00:09:03.259 A perfect artistic mirror of Bardot's own rebellious 00:09:03.259 --> 00:09:06.139 nature. Exactly. And the film's success was astronomical, 00:09:06.500 --> 00:09:08.340 especially in the United States. It became the 00:09:08.340 --> 00:09:10.399 highest -grossing foreign film ever released 00:09:10.399 --> 00:09:12.940 up to that point, pulling in a staggering $4 00:09:12.940 --> 00:09:17.730 million. And that success... The film scandalized 00:09:17.730 --> 00:09:20.570 conservative America. Its themes of overt female 00:09:20.570 --> 00:09:24.269 sexuality and non -monogamy were just unheard 00:09:24.269 --> 00:09:26.610 of in mainstream cinema. It was so controversial 00:09:26.610 --> 00:09:28.909 that theater managers screening it in some U 00:09:28.909 --> 00:09:31.090 .S. cities were actually arrested on obscenity 00:09:31.090 --> 00:09:33.929 charges. Wow. This reaction solidified her defining 00:09:33.929 --> 00:09:36.929 nickname, the sex kitten. I think the key point 00:09:36.929 --> 00:09:40.090 here is the timeliness of her arrival. She arrived 00:09:40.090 --> 00:09:42.429 exactly when the postwar culture was ready to 00:09:42.429 --> 00:09:45.490 shed its constraints, but lacked a visual symbol 00:09:45.490 --> 00:09:47.730 for that freedom. That's exactly what the sources 00:09:47.730 --> 00:09:49.909 highlight. The Life magazine journalist Paul 00:09:49.909 --> 00:09:52.850 O 'Neill wrote in 1958 that Bardot's timing on 00:09:52.850 --> 00:09:55.799 the American scene was just... immaculate. The 00:09:55.799 --> 00:09:58.940 U .S. public was, and I quote, hungry for something 00:09:58.940 --> 00:10:01.980 racier and more realistic than the familiar domestic 00:10:01.980 --> 00:10:04.559 product. Right, because American actresses of 00:10:04.559 --> 00:10:06.919 the time were largely confined to roles as wives, 00:10:07.139 --> 00:10:10.080 sweethearts, or maybe cautious rebels. Bardot 00:10:10.080 --> 00:10:12.720 was raw, sun -soaked, and utterly indifferent 00:10:12.720 --> 00:10:14.799 to being liked. Totally indifferent. But the 00:10:14.799 --> 00:10:16.740 most important stamp of approval didn't come 00:10:16.740 --> 00:10:19.059 from Hollywood. It came from the French intellectual 00:10:19.059 --> 00:10:23.200 elite. In 1959, the philosopher Simone de Beauvoir 00:10:23.789 --> 00:10:26.490 a giant of 20th century feminist thought, wrote 00:10:26.490 --> 00:10:29.090 the famous essay The Lolita Syndrome entirely 00:10:29.090 --> 00:10:31.649 about Bardot. And this is where the analysis 00:10:31.649 --> 00:10:34.330 moves beyond mere celebrity. De Beauvoir's validation 00:10:34.330 --> 00:10:36.850 elevated Bardot from a sex symbol to a social 00:10:36.850 --> 00:10:39.389 theory. It absolutely did. De Beauvoir declared 00:10:39.389 --> 00:10:42.409 her the most liberated woman of France and, critically, 00:10:42.610 --> 00:10:44.950 a locomotive of women's history. What does De 00:10:44.950 --> 00:10:47.690 Beauvoir mean by that locomotive comment? It 00:10:47.690 --> 00:10:49.490 implies she wasn't following history, she was 00:10:49.490 --> 00:10:51.330 dragging it forward. She was dragging it forward 00:10:51.330 --> 00:10:54.440 just by existing. De Beauvoir argued that the 00:10:54.440 --> 00:10:56.759 traditional female path required women to be 00:10:56.759 --> 00:10:59.879 either virginal or maternal, trapped in domesticity. 00:11:00.120 --> 00:11:03.360 Bardot defied this by embodying existential freedom. 00:11:03.659 --> 00:11:06.320 She was a woman who was fully present, fully 00:11:06.320 --> 00:11:09.500 sexual, and defined entirely by her own choices, 00:11:09.600 --> 00:11:11.919 not by her relationship to a man or her role 00:11:11.919 --> 00:11:15.440 in society. She was a natural being, not a manufactured 00:11:15.440 --> 00:11:18.940 social product. This essay provided the intellectual 00:11:18.940 --> 00:11:21.659 context necessary for the world to take her seriously 00:11:21.659 --> 00:11:24.440 as a cultural force, not just a physical one. 00:11:24.539 --> 00:11:26.440 And commercially, that intellectual validation 00:11:26.440 --> 00:11:30.480 translated into massive earnings. By 1958, Bardot 00:11:30.480 --> 00:11:32.539 was officially the highest paid actress in France. 00:11:33.070 --> 00:11:35.190 And she used that leverage. We see her continuing 00:11:35.190 --> 00:11:37.850 to deliver huge hits, demonstrating her ability 00:11:37.850 --> 00:11:40.509 to carry a film regardless of the genre. Naughty 00:11:40.509 --> 00:11:42.629 Girl in 50 Seidel, co -written by Vadim, was 00:11:42.629 --> 00:11:45.629 a hit. Babette Goes to War in 59, a comedy set 00:11:45.629 --> 00:11:47.750 during World War II, was the fourth biggest movie 00:11:47.750 --> 00:11:49.950 of the year in France. But her biggest success 00:11:49.950 --> 00:11:52.690 in France, and a film that gave her genuine acting 00:11:52.690 --> 00:11:55.450 credibility, was the intense courtroom drama 00:11:55.450 --> 00:11:59.309 The Truth from 1960, directed by Henri -Georges 00:11:59.309 --> 00:12:02.179 Clouseau. This film was meticulously publicized 00:12:02.179 --> 00:12:05.179 and critically acclaimed. It earned her the 1961 00:12:05.179 --> 00:12:08.320 David DiDonatello Award for Best Foreign Actress 00:12:08.320 --> 00:12:10.779 and received an Academy Award nomination for 00:12:10.779 --> 00:12:13.139 Best Foreign Film. It proved she had commercial 00:12:13.139 --> 00:12:16.460 appeal far beyond those sunny Saint -Tropez melodramas. 00:12:16.580 --> 00:12:18.960 But that production was famously grueling, right? 00:12:19.059 --> 00:12:21.600 And the intensity led directly to personal upheaval. 00:12:21.740 --> 00:12:24.139 It did. Because even as she was professionalizing 00:12:24.139 --> 00:12:26.700 her celebrity, her pride at life was a constant 00:12:26.700 --> 00:12:29.590 source of stress and drama. The chaos of her 00:12:29.590 --> 00:12:31.690 relationships ran parallel to her professional 00:12:31.690 --> 00:12:34.730 ascent. The source material shows this relentless 00:12:34.730 --> 00:12:37.529 cycle of intense connection and painful detachment. 00:12:37.690 --> 00:12:39.970 Her relationship with her and God -created woman 00:12:39.970 --> 00:12:42.169 co -star Jean -Louis Trintignant complicated 00:12:42.169 --> 00:12:44.649 her marriage to Vadim, which led to their divorce 00:12:44.649 --> 00:12:47.980 in 1957. Bardot and Trintignant lived together, 00:12:48.159 --> 00:12:50.559 but his mandatory military service often separated 00:12:50.559 --> 00:12:53.080 them, creating a lot of strain. And during one 00:12:53.080 --> 00:12:55.460 of those separations, she had an affair with 00:12:55.460 --> 00:12:57.860 the musician Gilbert Bécaud, which effectively 00:12:57.860 --> 00:13:00.620 ended the Trintignant relationship. And the emotional 00:13:00.620 --> 00:13:03.399 fallout was severe. Following the final breakup 00:13:03.399 --> 00:13:06.320 with Trintignant in early 1958, she suffered 00:13:06.320 --> 00:13:08.340 a reported nervous breakdown while she was in 00:13:08.340 --> 00:13:11.129 Italy. The sources confirm a subsequent, though 00:13:11.129 --> 00:13:13.809 denied, suicide attempt involving sleeping pills. 00:13:14.110 --> 00:13:16.629 She recovered within several weeks, but it just 00:13:16.629 --> 00:13:19.929 shows. She was a woman of extremes, professionally 00:13:19.929 --> 00:13:23.149 successful but emotionally volatile, constantly 00:13:23.149 --> 00:13:25.389 seeking an authenticity that seemed to escape 00:13:25.389 --> 00:13:28.350 her grasp. Moving into the early 1960s, we see 00:13:28.350 --> 00:13:31.389 Bardot deliberately attempting to shed that pure 00:13:31.389 --> 00:13:34.830 sex kitten label. She starts diversifying her 00:13:34.830 --> 00:13:36.629 film choices and working with the giants of the 00:13:36.629 --> 00:13:39.230 French New Wave. This era is so crucial for her 00:13:39.230 --> 00:13:41.309 legacy because it shows her commitment to high 00:13:41.309 --> 00:13:43.809 art, not just commercial success. Louis Mille's 00:13:43.809 --> 00:13:47.929 1962 film, A Very Private Affair, was semi -autobiographical, 00:13:48.169 --> 00:13:50.950 explicitly inspired by the intense, suffocating 00:13:50.950 --> 00:13:53.490 scrutiny of her own life. And perhaps more importantly, 00:13:53.710 --> 00:13:55.970 she partnered with Jean -Luc Godard, arguably 00:13:55.970 --> 00:13:57.750 the most important director of the French New 00:13:57.750 --> 00:14:00.649 Wave, not just once, but twice. That's enormous 00:14:00.649 --> 00:14:03.669 validation. She starred in the critically revered 00:14:03.669 --> 00:14:07.250 Le Mepre, or Contempt, in 1963. which is this 00:14:07.250 --> 00:14:10.110 meta commentary on filmmaking and relationships. 00:14:10.549 --> 00:14:13.830 She also made a cameo in his 1966 film Masculine 00:14:13.830 --> 00:14:16.269 Feminine. By working with directors like Mal 00:14:16.269 --> 00:14:18.850 and Goddard, she demonstrated she was more than 00:14:18.850 --> 00:14:21.549 just a pinup. She was a serious cultural collaborator. 00:14:21.629 --> 00:14:23.409 Of course, the inevitable calls from Hollywood 00:14:23.409 --> 00:14:26.629 came, seeking to harness her bankability. But 00:14:26.629 --> 00:14:28.710 her attempts to fully crack the American market 00:14:28.710 --> 00:14:31.759 were. Well, largely underwhelming. Yes, she made 00:14:31.759 --> 00:14:34.200 two significant attempts. The first was a brief, 00:14:34.240 --> 00:14:37.159 almost cameo appearance in Dear Brigitte in 1965 00:14:37.159 --> 00:14:40.240 with James Stewart, which didn't really resonate 00:14:40.240 --> 00:14:42.960 with audiences. Then came the ambitious Western, 00:14:43.179 --> 00:14:46.440 Chilako, in 1968, co -starring Sean Connery, 00:14:46.440 --> 00:14:48.740 who was riding high on his James Bond fame. But 00:14:48.740 --> 00:14:51.100 Chilako failed commercially, and the experience 00:14:51.100 --> 00:14:53.179 seems to have solidified her commitment to staying 00:14:53.179 --> 00:14:56.200 in France. It did. And it's an interesting little 00:14:56.200 --> 00:14:58.960 anecdote that she reportedly rejected Connery's 00:14:58.960 --> 00:15:01.539 advances during the filming. She later joked 00:15:01.539 --> 00:15:04.019 that she wasn't a James Bond girl, suggesting 00:15:04.019 --> 00:15:06.679 a rejection of the mainstream manufactured glamour 00:15:06.679 --> 00:15:09.100 that Hollywood represented. She just preferred 00:15:09.100 --> 00:15:11.639 the messy existential freedom of French cinema. 00:15:11.860 --> 00:15:14.740 However, she proved she could still deliver global 00:15:14.740 --> 00:15:18.340 commercial dynamite when paired correctly. Viva 00:15:18.340 --> 00:15:21.799 Maria. from 1965 where she starred alongside 00:15:21.799 --> 00:15:25.039 fellow French icon Jeanne Moreau was a major 00:15:25.039 --> 00:15:28.759 worldwide hit. That film was massive. It cemented 00:15:28.759 --> 00:15:30.960 her place as a major cinematic force globally 00:15:30.960 --> 00:15:33.419 and earned her a BAFTA nomination for Best Foreign 00:15:33.419 --> 00:15:36.100 Actress. She was proving time and again that 00:15:36.100 --> 00:15:38.600 she could define the era on her own terms. Now, 00:15:38.620 --> 00:15:40.799 her music career often gets treated as a footnote, 00:15:40.840 --> 00:15:42.500 but it was actually prolific and surprisingly 00:15:42.500 --> 00:15:45.320 experimental. Yeah. She recorded over 60 songs, 00:15:45.480 --> 00:15:47.740 partnering with major figures, most notably Serge 00:15:47.740 --> 00:15:50.659 Gainsbourg, but also Bob Zagri and Sacha Distel. 00:15:50.970 --> 00:15:53.169 And these weren't just novelty songs. Tracks 00:15:53.169 --> 00:15:55.950 like Harley Davidson, Lama Draug, and Contact 00:15:55.950 --> 00:15:59.250 were huge hits across Europe. But the story that 00:15:59.250 --> 00:16:02.129 really defines her musical career involves one 00:16:02.129 --> 00:16:04.649 of the most infamously scandalous duets ever 00:16:04.649 --> 00:16:07.789 recorded. Je t 'aime moi non plus. Okay, let's 00:16:07.789 --> 00:16:09.549 really get into the dynamics surrounding this. 00:16:10.669 --> 00:16:12.629 Bardot recorded the original version of this 00:16:12.629 --> 00:16:16.590 duet with Gainsbourg, but the track was so overtly 00:16:16.590 --> 00:16:19.549 sensual, including breathy moans and simulated 00:16:19.549 --> 00:16:22.570 intimacy, that she immediately worried about 00:16:22.570 --> 00:16:25.149 the impending scandal. She was absolutely terrified 00:16:25.149 --> 00:16:27.549 of the potential cultural backlash, which is, 00:16:27.629 --> 00:16:29.509 you know, ironic considering her reputation. 00:16:29.889 --> 00:16:32.409 She pleaded with Gainsbourg not to release it. 00:16:32.490 --> 00:16:35.149 He had a deep respect for her and he complied. 00:16:35.149 --> 00:16:37.309 He shelved the original version entirely. And 00:16:37.309 --> 00:16:39.330 then he went on to record and release the now 00:16:39.330 --> 00:16:41.429 iconic... version with his new partner, Jane 00:16:41.429 --> 00:16:44.370 Birkin, the following year. Right. And that Birkin 00:16:44.370 --> 00:16:46.350 -Gainsbourg track, of course, became a massive 00:16:46.350 --> 00:16:48.789 hit and was banned by radio stations all across 00:16:48.789 --> 00:16:51.090 Europe, further cementing its scandalous reputation. 00:16:51.610 --> 00:16:54.289 But what's fascinating is that Bardot's original, 00:16:54.490 --> 00:16:57.190 more explosive version didn't officially see 00:16:57.190 --> 00:17:00.330 the light of day until 1986, long after she had 00:17:00.330 --> 00:17:02.899 retired from public performance. Yeah. But in 00:17:02.899 --> 00:17:05.200 a sign of her enduring power, when Universal 00:17:05.200 --> 00:17:07.940 Music released its back catalog online in 2006, 00:17:08.519 --> 00:17:11.359 Bardot's version suddenly became a major globally 00:17:11.359 --> 00:17:14.640 downloaded hit. Her influence spans decades, 00:17:14.700 --> 00:17:17.240 even when the material itself is decades old. 00:17:17.380 --> 00:17:20.140 And politically, before her grand exit, France 00:17:20.140 --> 00:17:22.799 made this profound gesture of acceptance toward 00:17:22.799 --> 00:17:27.440 her wildness. From 1969 to 1972, Bardot served 00:17:27.440 --> 00:17:30.029 as the official face of Marianne. the symbol 00:17:30.029 --> 00:17:31.990 of the French Republic. I mean, think about the 00:17:31.990 --> 00:17:34.910 symbolism of that. The sex kitten literally replaced 00:17:34.910 --> 00:17:36.930 the previously anonymous effigy to become the 00:17:36.930 --> 00:17:39.170 face of French liberty, reason, and nationhood. 00:17:39.329 --> 00:17:41.710 It was a formal acknowledgement that the rebellious 00:17:41.710 --> 00:17:43.829 youth culture she symbolized had become mainstream, 00:17:44.269 --> 00:17:47.809 patriotic even. Yet by 1973, at the relatively 00:17:47.809 --> 00:17:51.559 young age of 39, she decided she was done. She 00:17:51.559 --> 00:17:54.559 made her final film with Vadim Don Juan, or If 00:17:54.559 --> 00:17:56.500 Don Juan Were a Woman, in which she played the 00:17:56.500 --> 00:17:58.980 title male role. And Vadim noted that the production 00:17:58.980 --> 00:18:00.720 felt like the end of something for their shared 00:18:00.720 --> 00:18:02.740 creative journey. She followed that with one 00:18:02.740 --> 00:18:05.740 last film, the edifying and joyous story of Kalina, 00:18:05.819 --> 00:18:08.319 and then she was simply gone. Her explanation 00:18:08.319 --> 00:18:10.960 for retiring was perfectly Bordeaux. She called 00:18:10.960 --> 00:18:13.500 it a way to get out elegantly. She just walked 00:18:13.500 --> 00:18:15.480 away from the relentless pressure of being an 00:18:15.480 --> 00:18:18.279 icon, choosing self -determination over continued 00:18:18.279 --> 00:18:21.630 stardom. So she retires from the stage in 1973, 00:18:22.029 --> 00:18:24.990 seeking a quieter existence, but the private 00:18:24.990 --> 00:18:27.329 life she sought to protect remained far more 00:18:27.329 --> 00:18:30.269 dramatic than any script she ever touched. When 00:18:30.269 --> 00:18:32.309 you look at her history, the sheer number of 00:18:32.309 --> 00:18:34.779 relationships she had is just striking. It speaks 00:18:34.779 --> 00:18:37.259 to her restless nature and her constant search 00:18:37.259 --> 00:18:39.940 for fulfillment and passion. She had four marriages, 00:18:40.259 --> 00:18:43.859 Roger Vadim, Jacques Charrier, the German millionaire 00:18:43.859 --> 00:18:46.559 Gunter Sachs, and her current husband, Bernard 00:18:46.559 --> 00:18:50.339 Dormal, whom she married in 1992. But her total 00:18:50.339 --> 00:18:53.019 count of documented romantic relationships tallied 00:18:53.019 --> 00:18:55.480 17. And her personal philosophy on relationships 00:18:55.480 --> 00:18:58.200 was brutally honest, almost dismissive of stability. 00:18:58.680 --> 00:19:00.660 She characterized her pattern as leaving when 00:19:00.660 --> 00:19:03.039 the present was getting lukewarm and said that 00:19:03.039 --> 00:19:05.460 the moment passion faded, she was packing my 00:19:05.460 --> 00:19:08.279 suitcase. But the greatest complexity and arguably 00:19:08.279 --> 00:19:10.759 the most damaging chapter of her personal history 00:19:10.759 --> 00:19:13.880 centers on the intensely negative experience 00:19:13.880 --> 00:19:16.220 of her only pregnancy with Jacques Charrier. 00:19:17.069 --> 00:19:19.269 This is a crucial area to examine because it 00:19:19.269 --> 00:19:21.970 shows the profound and tragic gap between her 00:19:21.970 --> 00:19:24.890 public image as a liberated woman and her private 00:19:24.890 --> 00:19:27.430 distress. She was unequivocal about her lack 00:19:27.430 --> 00:19:29.710 of desire for motherhood. She stated directly 00:19:29.710 --> 00:19:32.089 in her memoirs, I am not a mother, nor do I want 00:19:32.089 --> 00:19:34.529 to be one. But since abortion was illegal in 00:19:34.529 --> 00:19:36.769 France at the time, she felt completely trapped 00:19:36.769 --> 00:19:39.299 by the pregnancy. And the sources reveal real 00:19:39.299 --> 00:19:41.980 desperation. She attempted repeated dangerous 00:19:41.980 --> 00:19:44.500 measures to end the pregnancy herself, including 00:19:44.500 --> 00:19:46.680 punching herself in the stomach and repeatedly 00:19:46.680 --> 00:19:49.420 requesting morphine from her doctor, hoping for 00:19:49.420 --> 00:19:51.980 a miscarriage. This just illustrates a woman 00:19:51.980 --> 00:19:54.440 pushed to the very edge of her physical and psychological 00:19:54.440 --> 00:19:57.359 limits by societal constraints she usually brushed 00:19:57.359 --> 00:20:12.609 aside. The aftermath was severe. It resulted 00:20:12.609 --> 00:20:14.950 in profound depression. Following his birth, 00:20:15.049 --> 00:20:17.289 she attempted suicide. And when you read her 00:20:17.289 --> 00:20:19.390 own reflections on the experience, which she 00:20:19.390 --> 00:20:22.349 published later in her 1996 memoir, Initial S 00:20:22.349 --> 00:20:25.930 is BB, the language is genuinely shocking. The 00:20:25.930 --> 00:20:28.730 phrases she used were deeply hurtful, directed 00:20:28.730 --> 00:20:30.710 at the one person she was supposed to cherish. 00:20:30.970 --> 00:20:33.289 She wrote that her son was a cancerous tumor 00:20:33.289 --> 00:20:35.670 and that she would have preferred to give birth 00:20:35.670 --> 00:20:38.289 to a little dog. Now, we have to remember the 00:20:38.289 --> 00:20:40.710 context of that shock, because she later tried 00:20:40.710 --> 00:20:43.349 to explain the comments, saying, I'm not made 00:20:43.349 --> 00:20:46.009 to be a mother, I'm not adult enough, but the 00:20:46.009 --> 00:20:49.549 immediate rejection was also physical. She refused 00:20:49.549 --> 00:20:51.869 to breastfeed Nicholas, and the child reportedly 00:20:51.869 --> 00:20:54.650 sensed her deep agitation when she held him and 00:20:54.650 --> 00:20:57.259 would start to cry immediately. This sounds like 00:20:57.259 --> 00:20:59.700 a just heartbreaking situation fueled by deep 00:20:59.700 --> 00:21:02.140 emotional immaturity on her part and a profound 00:21:02.140 --> 00:21:04.420 inability to cope with an unwanted situation. 00:21:04.779 --> 00:21:07.259 It was. And when she divorced Cherry, he gained 00:21:07.259 --> 00:21:10.240 sole custody and the damage was lasting. The 00:21:10.240 --> 00:21:12.619 final rupture came years later when Nicolas Jacques 00:21:12.619 --> 00:21:15.299 and Jacques Charrier jointly sued her and her 00:21:15.299 --> 00:21:18.240 publisher in 1997 for those incredibly hurtful 00:21:18.240 --> 00:21:20.200 remarks published in the memoir. And the court 00:21:20.200 --> 00:21:22.940 agreed that the language was defamatory and cruel. 00:21:23.470 --> 00:21:26.529 They won a significant victory. She was ordered 00:21:26.529 --> 00:21:29.269 to pay Cheria 17 ,000 pounds and Nicholas 11 00:21:29.269 --> 00:21:32.450 ,000 pounds in fines. Her relationship with her 00:21:32.450 --> 00:21:35.349 son remained deeply strained for decades. She 00:21:35.349 --> 00:21:38.269 wasn't even invited to his wedding in 1984. The 00:21:38.269 --> 00:21:40.890 legal action solidified the distance she herself 00:21:40.890 --> 00:21:43.210 had created. However, the source material does 00:21:43.210 --> 00:21:46.000 offer a small measure of healing. as of recent 00:21:46.000 --> 00:21:48.880 reports from 2018 she and nicholas who is now 00:21:48.880 --> 00:21:50.740 a grandfather himself are reportedly on good 00:21:50.740 --> 00:21:53.400 terms they speak regularly and visit once a year 00:21:53.400 --> 00:21:56.460 it speaks to the slow difficult process of attempting 00:21:56.460 --> 00:21:59.160 to reconcile a lifetime of regret and complexity 00:21:59.799 --> 00:22:01.900 And shifting briefly to her material wealth, 00:22:02.099 --> 00:22:04.039 despite walking away from her lucrative film 00:22:04.039 --> 00:22:06.880 career early, Bardot has maintained significant 00:22:06.880 --> 00:22:10.019 financial independence. Her estimated net worth 00:22:10.019 --> 00:22:13.299 hovers around $65 million, and it's worth noting 00:22:13.299 --> 00:22:15.420 she made about $4 million just from that controversial 00:22:15.420 --> 00:22:18.900 1997 memoir. She also retained ownership of the 00:22:18.900 --> 00:22:21.200 properties that became synonymous with her image. 00:22:21.799 --> 00:22:24.799 She owned Le Castellet, a massive 14 -bedroom 00:22:24.799 --> 00:22:27.480 villa in Cannes, which she listed for sale recently 00:22:27.480 --> 00:22:30.599 in 2020. But she still resides at L 'Amadrague 00:22:30.599 --> 00:22:32.700 in Saint -Cyr -sur -Mer, which she bought back 00:22:32.700 --> 00:22:35.619 in 1958 and where she retreated after retirement. 00:22:35.880 --> 00:22:38.359 And that retreat speaks to her lifelong defiance 00:22:38.359 --> 00:22:40.759 of convention, a final anecdote that links her 00:22:40.759 --> 00:22:43.329 personal life to that rebellious streak. She 00:22:43.329 --> 00:22:45.309 was officially awarded the Legion of Honor in 00:22:45.309 --> 00:22:48.450 1985, one of France's highest distinctions, but 00:22:48.450 --> 00:22:50.869 famously refused to attend the ceremony and declined 00:22:50.869 --> 00:22:53.509 the award. This move put her in the company of 00:22:53.509 --> 00:22:56.390 other iconoclasts like Sartre and Camus, further 00:22:56.390 --> 00:22:58.930 solidifying her rejection of institutional recognition. 00:22:59.230 --> 00:23:01.970 She will not be constrained, even by accolades. 00:23:02.250 --> 00:23:05.529 Okay, so when she retired in 1973, she didn't 00:23:05.529 --> 00:23:08.829 embrace a quiet life. She simply redirected that 00:23:08.829 --> 00:23:12.579 formidable, all -consuming passion. She pivoted 00:23:12.579 --> 00:23:14.920 completely from performing for human audiences 00:23:14.920 --> 00:23:17.319 to protecting animals, becoming a vegetarian 00:23:17.319 --> 00:23:20.390 and focusing her immense energy on welfare. This 00:23:20.390 --> 00:23:23.529 transition was total and immediate. In 1986, 00:23:23.809 --> 00:23:26.309 she founded the Brigitte Bardot Foundation for 00:23:26.309 --> 00:23:28.750 the Welfare and Protection of Animals. And to 00:23:28.750 --> 00:23:30.730 guarantee its funding, she didn't just rely on 00:23:30.730 --> 00:23:33.029 donations. She auctioned off her own personal 00:23:33.029 --> 00:23:35.269 belongings, her jewelry, items from her films. 00:23:35.509 --> 00:23:38.569 That's a huge sacrifice for an icon who relies 00:23:38.569 --> 00:23:42.130 on her possessions and her image. How much did 00:23:42.130 --> 00:23:44.329 that initial auction raise? It raised 3 million 00:23:44.329 --> 00:23:47.430 francs, which was approximately 430 ,000 U .S. 00:23:47.430 --> 00:23:50.720 dollars in 1986. That provided the seed funding 00:23:50.720 --> 00:23:53.059 for the foundation, demonstrating her absolute 00:23:53.059 --> 00:23:55.420 commitment. And the establishment has recognized 00:23:55.420 --> 00:23:57.900 her dedication, too. She's a member of the UN 00:23:57.900 --> 00:24:00.579 Environment Program's Global 500 Roll of Honor 00:24:00.579 --> 00:24:03.579 and received a PETA Humanitarian Award in 2001. 00:24:03.880 --> 00:24:06.779 And her early direct action campaigns were dramatic 00:24:06.779 --> 00:24:09.339 and instantly globalized because of her celebrity. 00:24:09.799 --> 00:24:12.400 Absolutely. One of the most famous actions occurred 00:24:12.400 --> 00:24:15.480 in 1977 when she met Paul Watson, the founder 00:24:15.480 --> 00:24:18.259 of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. She 00:24:18.259 --> 00:24:20.299 joined his operation, condemning the massacre 00:24:20.299 --> 00:24:23.420 of seal pups on Canadian ice floes. Critically, 00:24:23.619 --> 00:24:25.940 the photos of Bardot posing with the seal pups 00:24:25.940 --> 00:24:28.420 circulated worldwide. Her presence gave the issue 00:24:28.420 --> 00:24:31.059 instantaneous, unprecedented global attention. 00:24:31.480 --> 00:24:33.720 Her campaigns have been varied. She strongly 00:24:33.720 --> 00:24:36.319 opposed horse meat consumption in France, going 00:24:36.319 --> 00:24:39.230 so far as issuing death threats in 1994. though 00:24:39.230 --> 00:24:41.630 the sources do indicate she was responding defensively 00:24:41.630 --> 00:24:43.609 to threats she herself had received. And she 00:24:43.609 --> 00:24:46.170 has dedicated huge resources to practical aid, 00:24:46.250 --> 00:24:49.309 not just public protests. For example, she funded 00:24:49.309 --> 00:24:51.750 a mass sterilization and adoption program for 00:24:51.750 --> 00:24:55.509 Bucharest's estimated 300 ,000 stray dogs, donating 00:24:55.509 --> 00:24:59.049 over $140 ,000 over two years starting in 2001. 00:24:59.509 --> 00:25:02.289 Her recent activity shows no decrease in intensity. 00:25:02.650 --> 00:25:05.670 Just this year, in 2024, she appealed directly 00:25:05.670 --> 00:25:07.829 to President Macron to grant political asylum 00:25:07.829 --> 00:25:10.339 to Paul. Watson demonstrating her continued willingness 00:25:10.339 --> 00:25:12.759 to engage politically on animal issues. Which 00:25:12.759 --> 00:25:14.839 brings us to the core contradiction that defines 00:25:14.839 --> 00:25:17.849 her later life. We have this globally respected 00:25:17.849 --> 00:25:20.990 animal rights warrior, but she's also a deeply 00:25:20.990 --> 00:25:23.970 controversial political figure, having been convicted, 00:25:24.029 --> 00:25:27.289 what, six times for inciting racial hatred as 00:25:27.289 --> 00:25:30.529 of November 2021. This is critical context for 00:25:30.529 --> 00:25:33.269 understanding the isolated, defiant figure she 00:25:33.269 --> 00:25:35.930 became. And we have to report these facts impartially. 00:25:36.089 --> 00:25:38.910 Her legal troubles frequently stem from the collision 00:25:38.910 --> 00:25:41.650 between her passion for animal welfare and her 00:25:41.650 --> 00:25:44.609 strong anti -immigrant far right political views, 00:25:44.730 --> 00:25:46.599 particularly. concerning the ritual slaughter 00:25:46.599 --> 00:25:48.900 of animals. So let's detail some of those convictions 00:25:48.900 --> 00:25:51.319 for the listener, providing the necessary context. 00:25:51.680 --> 00:25:54.640 The controversy first gained major traction with 00:25:54.640 --> 00:25:58.059 her 1999 book, Le Carré de Pluton. Correct. In 00:25:58.059 --> 00:25:59.960 that book, she criticized the ritual slaughter 00:25:59.960 --> 00:26:02.200 of sheep during the Islamic holiday of Eid al 00:26:02.200 --> 00:26:05.029 -Adha. But the critical context came in a section 00:26:05.029 --> 00:26:07.930 titled Open Letter to My Lost France, where she 00:26:07.930 --> 00:26:10.349 stated that her country was, quote, again invaded 00:26:10.349 --> 00:26:12.769 by an overpopulation of foreigners, especially 00:26:12.769 --> 00:26:15.289 Muslims. And what was the immediate legal consequence 00:26:15.289 --> 00:26:18.420 of that? A French court fined her 30 ,000 francs 00:26:18.420 --> 00:26:21.380 in 2000 for that specific comment. And the sources 00:26:21.380 --> 00:26:23.359 indicate that by this point, she had already 00:26:23.359 --> 00:26:25.880 been fined twice before for similar public remarks 00:26:25.880 --> 00:26:28.579 in the late 90s. The fines really underscore 00:26:28.579 --> 00:26:30.799 the seriousness with which French courts view 00:26:30.799 --> 00:26:33.839 violations of laws against inciting racial hatred. 00:26:34.099 --> 00:26:37.039 Her defiance continued into the 2000s, targeting 00:26:37.039 --> 00:26:40.599 major political figures. In 2008, she was convicted 00:26:40.599 --> 00:26:44.160 and fined 15 ,000 euros for a letter she sent 00:26:44.160 --> 00:26:46.400 to Nicolas Sarkozy. That letter was initially 00:26:46.400 --> 00:26:49.220 about religious slaughter practices, specifically 00:26:49.220 --> 00:26:51.500 her objections to the killing of sheep without 00:26:51.500 --> 00:26:54.299 anesthesia. But in that same letter referring 00:26:54.299 --> 00:26:56.960 to the Muslim population, she dramatically declared 00:26:56.960 --> 00:26:59.500 that she was, quote, fed up with being under 00:26:59.500 --> 00:27:01.700 the thumb of this population, which is destroying 00:27:01.700 --> 00:27:04.279 us, destroying our country and imposing its habits. 00:27:04.519 --> 00:27:06.660 And the prosecutors at the time made a point 00:27:06.660 --> 00:27:08.759 of stating their weariness with having to charge 00:27:08.759 --> 00:27:12.000 her repeatedly with racial hatred offenses. She 00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:14.440 was simply unwilling to modify her language or 00:27:14.440 --> 00:27:17.099 public stance. Her largest fine came much later, 00:27:17.200 --> 00:27:20.339 in 2021. This followed a highly controversial 00:27:20.339 --> 00:27:23.680 2019 open letter concerning animal cruelty on 00:27:23.680 --> 00:27:26.559 the French island of Réunion. In that letter, 00:27:26.640 --> 00:27:29.359 she called the inhabitants autocathones who have 00:27:29.359 --> 00:27:32.519 kept the genes of savages, and shockingly referenced 00:27:32.519 --> 00:27:35.460 reminiscences of cannibalism. That language resulted 00:27:35.460 --> 00:27:38.579 in a conviction on November 4, 2021, and her 00:27:38.579 --> 00:27:42.519 largest fine to date, €20 ,000. It just shows 00:27:42.519 --> 00:27:45.380 that even in her late 80s, her willingness to 00:27:45.380 --> 00:27:47.519 use inflammatory, politically charged language 00:27:47.519 --> 00:27:50.420 remains absolute. And it wasn't just human targets. 00:27:50.660 --> 00:27:53.380 That same year, she was fined for insulting hunters, 00:27:53.519 --> 00:27:56.019 calling them submen and drunkards who carry genes 00:27:56.019 --> 00:27:58.680 of cruel barbarism. Her insults are consistent. 00:27:58.859 --> 00:28:01.680 She uses language intended to delegitimize the 00:28:01.680 --> 00:28:03.940 humanity of anyone she views as an opponent to 00:28:03.940 --> 00:28:06.079 her core cause. And this political stance is 00:28:06.079 --> 00:28:08.599 reflected in her formal affiliations. She supports 00:28:08.599 --> 00:28:10.789 the far -right National Rally Party. For those 00:28:10.789 --> 00:28:12.930 unfamiliar with French politics, this is a party 00:28:12.930 --> 00:28:15.390 historically associated with strong anti -immigration 00:28:15.390 --> 00:28:17.809 and nationalist sentiments. And her husband, 00:28:17.990 --> 00:28:20.690 Bernard Dormal, is a former advisor to Jean -Marie 00:28:20.690 --> 00:28:23.470 Le Pen, the party's founder. Bardot has openly 00:28:23.470 --> 00:28:25.869 endorsed the current leader, Marine Le Pen, going 00:28:25.869 --> 00:28:28.009 so far as calling her the Joan of Arc of the 00:28:28.009 --> 00:28:31.049 21st century. This positions her firmly on the 00:28:31.049 --> 00:28:33.630 political fringe, completing her lifelong rejection 00:28:33.630 --> 00:28:35.650 of the French establishment that once adored 00:28:35.650 --> 00:28:37.950 her. And even her recent public appearances maintain 00:28:37.950 --> 00:28:41.420 this posture against modern socialists. In a 00:28:41.420 --> 00:28:44.579 major television interview in May 2025, her first 00:28:44.579 --> 00:28:47.859 in over a decade, she continued her iconoclastic 00:28:47.859 --> 00:28:50.279 attack on accepted social norms, particularly 00:28:50.279 --> 00:28:53.559 around feminism and harassment. She stated quite 00:28:53.559 --> 00:28:56.259 plainly, feminism isn't my thing. I like guys. 00:28:56.859 --> 00:28:58.980 And she went on to defend talented people who 00:28:58.980 --> 00:29:01.319 grab a girl's buttocks, suggesting that society 00:29:01.319 --> 00:29:03.380 shouldn't simply cancel people for such behavior. 00:29:03.579 --> 00:29:05.799 This demonstrates a consistent pattern. Whether 00:29:05.799 --> 00:29:08.240 it's the rigid codes of the 1950s or the new 00:29:08.240 --> 00:29:10.559 social constraints of the 2020s, Bordeaux finds 00:29:10.559 --> 00:29:12.960 something to defy. Despite the volatility of 00:29:12.960 --> 00:29:14.599 her later life and the intensity of her legal 00:29:14.599 --> 00:29:16.779 battles, the initial impact of Bibi is absolutely 00:29:16.779 --> 00:29:19.039 impossible to overstate. She didn't just model 00:29:19.039 --> 00:29:22.059 fashion, she revolutionized it. She is a definitive 00:29:22.059 --> 00:29:25.279 timeless style icon, serving as a muse for designers 00:29:25.279 --> 00:29:29.420 like Dior, Balmain, and Pierre Cardin. We still 00:29:29.420 --> 00:29:31.880 use her name today to describe an iconic look. 00:29:32.460 --> 00:29:35.259 The Bordeaux neckline. That wide open neck that 00:29:35.259 --> 00:29:38.640 exposes both shoulders, a classic symbol of effortless 00:29:38.640 --> 00:29:41.980 sensuality, is named after her due to her popularization 00:29:41.980 --> 00:29:45.059 of the style on screen and in photographs. It's 00:29:45.059 --> 00:29:46.900 a key piece of her legacy. And then there's the 00:29:46.900 --> 00:29:48.900 bikini. While she didn't invent it, she single 00:29:48.900 --> 00:29:51.359 -handedly launched it into mainstream acceptability. 00:29:51.680 --> 00:29:54.599 Her photographs at the 1953 Cannes Film Festival 00:29:54.599 --> 00:29:57.160 and her early film role in Menina, The Girl in 00:29:57.160 --> 00:29:59.880 the Bikini, made it a cultural phenomenon. She 00:29:59.880 --> 00:30:02.380 was key to taking the bikini from a scandalous... 00:30:01.930 --> 00:30:04.349 fashion statement to a universally accepted piece 00:30:04.349 --> 00:30:06.569 of beachwear. She also brought specific French 00:30:06.569 --> 00:30:09.470 domestic trends to global prominence, like the 00:30:09.470 --> 00:30:12.049 chacrute hairstyle, a large voluminous style 00:30:12.049 --> 00:30:14.950 similar to the beehive. And crucially, gingham 00:30:14.950 --> 00:30:17.890 clothes. After she wore a simple checkered pink 00:30:17.890 --> 00:30:20.529 dress by Jacques Esterelle to her wedding with 00:30:20.529 --> 00:30:23.269 Jacques Charrier, gingham became instantly fashionable 00:30:23.269 --> 00:30:25.930 worldwide. She defined a look that was casual, 00:30:26.480 --> 00:30:29.039 Effortlessly sensual and provocatively feminine, 00:30:29.259 --> 00:30:32.440 a stark contrast to the highly stylized, controlled 00:30:32.440 --> 00:30:35.839 glamour of Hollywood. Her status as a muse transcended 00:30:35.839 --> 00:30:38.960 France and even fashion. Her third husband, Gunter 00:30:38.960 --> 00:30:41.440 Sachs, commissioned eight Andy Warhol paintings 00:30:41.440 --> 00:30:44.720 of her in 1974. And her appeal to musicians was 00:30:44.720 --> 00:30:47.480 equally vast. Bob Dylan, for example, dedicated 00:30:47.480 --> 00:30:49.819 the very first song he ever wrote to Bardot. 00:30:49.940 --> 00:30:52.160 He also mentions her by name in his track, I 00:30:52.160 --> 00:30:54.220 Shall Be Free. She represented the ultimate, 00:30:54.359 --> 00:30:56.980 unattainable European bohemian dream for these 00:30:56.980 --> 00:30:59.000 American artists. Even the Beatles were swept 00:30:59.000 --> 00:31:01.400 up. John Lennon and Paul McCartney once planned 00:31:01.400 --> 00:31:03.220 to shoot an entire film featuring the Beatles 00:31:03.220 --> 00:31:05.859 in Bardot, though it never materialized. Lennon 00:31:05.859 --> 00:31:09.099 did finally meet her once in 1968, but his recollection 00:31:09.099 --> 00:31:12.029 suggests a moment of cultural burnout. I was 00:31:12.029 --> 00:31:14.369 on acid and she was on her way out. Beyond the 00:31:14.369 --> 00:31:17.029 fashion and art her visual identity created a 00:31:17.029 --> 00:31:20.599 new form of iconography. The enduring power of 00:31:20.599 --> 00:31:23.200 the Bardot pose, that famous modeling portrait 00:31:23.200 --> 00:31:26.039 shot around 1960 where she is dressed only in 00:31:26.039 --> 00:31:28.440 black pantyhose, cross -legged and cross -armed, 00:31:28.579 --> 00:31:31.359 has been emulated endlessly by modern celebrities, 00:31:31.539 --> 00:31:34.259 including Lindsay Lohan and Rihanna. It captures 00:31:34.259 --> 00:31:36.799 her unique blend of vulnerability and defiance. 00:31:37.099 --> 00:31:40.140 She also had a measurable economic and cultural 00:31:40.140 --> 00:31:42.759 impact on geography itself, what we might call 00:31:42.759 --> 00:31:45.559 the Bardot effect. She is singularly credited 00:31:45.559 --> 00:31:48.000 with popularizing the small fishing village of 00:31:48.000 --> 00:31:50.210 St. Louis. Tropez in France, turning it into 00:31:50.210 --> 00:31:52.170 the global playground for the rich and famous 00:31:52.170 --> 00:31:54.549 we know today simply by choosing to live and 00:31:54.549 --> 00:31:56.509 film there. And she had the same effect on the 00:31:56.509 --> 00:31:58.880 other side of the world. She popularized Armisão 00:31:58.880 --> 00:32:01.400 dos Buzios in Brazil, which she visited in 1964 00:32:01.400 --> 00:32:04.140 with her boyfriend at the time, Bob Zagri. That 00:32:04.140 --> 00:32:06.279 town today acknowledges her impact directly, 00:32:06.380 --> 00:32:09.240 hosting a statue of her by Cristina Mota. That 00:32:09.240 --> 00:32:12.420 is true cultural power -making, two obscure locations, 00:32:12.640 --> 00:32:14.779 global destinations, simply by visiting them. 00:32:14.960 --> 00:32:17.380 It's clear that her influence is profoundly visible 00:32:17.380 --> 00:32:19.960 in modern celebrities who have consciously adopted 00:32:19.960 --> 00:32:22.859 her aesthetic, including Kylie Minogue, Claudia 00:32:22.859 --> 00:32:26.099 Schlitter, and Scarlett Johansson. But true to 00:32:26.099 --> 00:32:29.779 her iconoclastic form, Bardot is confident that 00:32:29.779 --> 00:32:31.700 they only scratched the surface. She remains 00:32:31.700 --> 00:32:34.599 fiercely confident in her unique status, stating 00:32:34.599 --> 00:32:37.559 simply and accurately, none have my personality. 00:32:38.119 --> 00:32:40.779 And the attention hasn't stopped. Her enduring 00:32:40.779 --> 00:32:43.400 and deeply complex story was the focus of the 00:32:43.400 --> 00:32:47.099 2023 French drama TV series Bardot, which brought 00:32:47.099 --> 00:32:49.420 her narrative to a new generation. So what does 00:32:49.420 --> 00:32:51.549 this all mean for you, the listener? Brigitte 00:32:51.549 --> 00:32:53.849 Bardot's journey is a spectacular case study 00:32:53.849 --> 00:32:56.269 of the power and often the immense psychological 00:32:56.269 --> 00:32:59.049 burden of achieving such profound icon status. 00:32:59.549 --> 00:33:01.910 She began as the carefully managed daughter of 00:33:01.910 --> 00:33:04.769 a severe bourgeois family, exploded into the 00:33:04.769 --> 00:33:06.890 global symbol of sexual and existential liberation, 00:33:07.210 --> 00:33:09.569 and eventually channeled that foundational need 00:33:09.569 --> 00:33:12.529 for defiance into an isolated, legally contentious 00:33:12.529 --> 00:33:15.069 voice for animal protection. She traded the constraints 00:33:15.069 --> 00:33:17.390 of constantly having to be the global sex kitten, 00:33:17.529 --> 00:33:20.349 managed by handlers and studios, for the freedom 00:33:20.519 --> 00:33:22.900 of absolute outspokenness, regardless of the 00:33:22.900 --> 00:33:25.460 consequences to her public adoration or her legal 00:33:25.460 --> 00:33:28.960 peace. It suggests a deep, fundamental, perhaps 00:33:28.960 --> 00:33:31.779 unhealable need for control and authenticity 00:33:31.779 --> 00:33:34.539 rooted in that childhood trauma that neither 00:33:34.539 --> 00:33:37.200 fame, fortune, nor the French establishment could 00:33:37.200 --> 00:33:39.960 ever truly satisfy. Here's where it gets really 00:33:39.960 --> 00:33:42.019 interesting, though. If we go back to that pivotal 00:33:42.019 --> 00:33:45.480 year of 1973, consider the timing of her retirement. 00:33:45.990 --> 00:33:48.349 Did stepping away from the demands of being the 00:33:48.349 --> 00:33:51.369 cultural icon genuinely save her, offering her 00:33:51.369 --> 00:33:53.130 a path to self -fulfillment through activism? 00:33:53.430 --> 00:33:56.029 Or did it merely redirect that formidable, all 00:33:56.029 --> 00:33:59.049 -consuming passion into a new, equally extreme, 00:33:59.289 --> 00:34:01.950 equally public form of engagement, a far -right 00:34:01.950 --> 00:34:04.349 activist ultimately ensuring her continued role 00:34:04.349 --> 00:34:06.089 as France's most compelling and controversial 00:34:06.089 --> 00:34:08.730 export, unable ever to escape the public stage, 00:34:08.889 --> 00:34:10.670 something for you to mull over as you dive back 00:34:10.670 --> 00:34:11.489 into your own world?