À la frontière de l’histoire des idées et de l’histoire de la psychiatrie, cet article étudie la genèse de ce qu’on appellera plus tard l’anti-aliénisme ou l’antipsychiatrie au xix^e siècle. La présente étude cherche à déterminer comment se déroule cette période de perturbation dans la profession à l’intérieur même des asiles en prenant comme point de départ le point de vue des patients, les aliénés eux-mêmes.

Le corpus s’appuie, pour ce faire, sur deux revues françaises à tendance anti-aliéniste entièrement éditées et rédigées par les aliénés des asiles de Bicêtre et de Charenton : L’Anti-Aliéniste et Le Glaneur de Madopolis. Suivant le corpus donné, l’article est divisé en deux parties distinctes, consacrées à chacun des journaux. La première se penche sur le journal des aliénés de Bicêtre, L’Anti-Aliéniste, dont cinq numéros, au moins, paraîtront entre le 1^er avril et le 1^er août 1893. La seconde partie est consacrée au journal des aliénés de Charenton, Le Glaneur de Madopolis, dont la mémoire ne subsiste que par les travaux de l’obscur aliéniste Henri Sentoux (1835–1880).

La première partie, consacrée au journal des aliénés de Bicêtre, L’Anti-Aliéniste montre comment, malgré l’abrogation (non officielle) de la loi de 1838 qui survient au cours de la Troisième République, le sentiment anti-aliéniste, qui fait écho à celui de Léon Gambetta et Joseph Magnin, persiste chez les aliénés. Quant au journal des aliénés de Charenton, Le Glaneur de Madopolis, publié pendant la seconde moitié des années 1860, il nous plonge au cœur de la polémique anti-aliéniste qui a cours à l’époque en France.

Les propos des principaux acteurs de ce charentonesque débat anti-aliéniste, qui des journalistes (Georges Maillard, Louis Jourdan et Gustave Isambert), qui des aliénistes (Henri Sentoux), qui des aliénés (les rédacteurs du Glaneur), sont ainsi mis de l’avant de façon à illustrer comment le débat dépasse largement le cadre du politique et de l’institution asilaire.

La réhabilitation de la médecine aliéniste par l’intermédiaire de ceux qui en bénéficient, les aliénés, est certes originale et remarquable. Mais elle génère quelques objections. Citons parmi celles-ci la critique adressée à Sentoux qui repose sur le fait que les extraits qu’il a recueillis ne sont peut-être pas représentatifs de l’ensemble du journal et que les parties les plus dérangeantes pour la profession, les plus ironiques peut-être, ont été laissées de côté. Consciemment ou inconsciemment. Qu’à cela ne tienne, on sent bien qu’une autre question intéresse Sentoux en celle des qualités intrinsèques du Glaneur de Madopolis, qu’il développera peu après dans sa thèse, De la surexcitation des facultés intellectuelles dans la folie. Le journal a tout à voir en effet avec la petite histoire de la folie et du génie en littérature.

Where history of ideas and history of psychiatry meet, this article studies the genesis of what we now call anti-alienism or antipsychiatry in the nineteenth century. The study aims to determine how this period of disruption takes place within the profession, particularly in the asylum itself, from the patient's perspective, i.e. the lunatics themselves, as a starting point.

To do so, the corpus is based on two journals, anti-alienists-inclined, written entirely by lunatics of the Bicêtre and Charenton asylums: L’Anti-Aliéniste [The Anti-Alienist] and Le Glaneur de Madopolis [The Gleaner of Madopolis]. The text is organized according to that corpus, in effect, marginal in regards to the issue of anti-alienism in France at the end of the nineteenth century. As determined by the corpus, the paper is divided in two separate parts, dedicated to each of the newspapers. The introduction details the whys and wherefores of the implementation of the Law of 30th June 1838 for the insane, which aims to frame the internment of the insane into lunatic asylums, what has thus become, for the supporters of what we will call anti-alienism or antipsychiatry, mentally retarded and disposed of their civic rights. In response to this new status for the insane, various anti-alienist movements emerged here and there at the turn of the second and third Republics, which include the insane. Chapter 1 looks at one of these movements, rooted in worlds of turmoil, namely in a lunatic asylum, Bicêtre. The propaganda organ of the movement being an unusual newspaper published by and for the insane in the middle of the enemy camp, rightly entitled L’Anti-Aliéniste [The Anti-Alienist], the struggle is lyric, the cantilena, epic. The second part of the article is dedicated to the lunatic related newspaper from Charenton, Le Glaneur de Madopolis [The Gleaner of Madopolis], whose memory is kept alive through research of the unknown and obscure alienist Henri Sentoux (1835–1880). Published during the second half of the 1860s, the newspaper brings us directly into the anti-alienist controversy prevailing in France at the time.

The publication of the newspaper L’Anti-Aliéniste in 1893 is instructive in terms of how the anti-alienist opinion (which echoes the opinion voiced by Léon Gambetta and Joseph Magnin), despite the (non-official) repeal of the Law of 1838 that occurred during the third Republic, still exists among lunatics. For Sentoux, on the basis of Le Glaneur de Madopolis, the stereotypical view of the mad left to vegetate, wandering the grim corridors or the padded cell, depending on their state, of a deteriorating institution, is not true. It is unworthy and unacceptable; for both alienists and lunatics. They are much brighter. Although this may seem paradoxical, their imagination is fertile. Their intelligence is reflected in their productions that are, as Sentoux mentioned on a few occasions, far superior than those provided by several journalists.

Five issues of the journal L’Anti-Aliéniste, at least, appeared between April 1st and August 1st, 1893. Alienists and the insane are subscribers. Apparently, everyone had an opinion about this blistering attack. The New York Times, publishing a box from the London Daily News, even wrote a few words on the subject. With the aim of encouraging revolt against current authority, the editorial staff of L’Anti-Aliéniste is abundantly patriotic. There must be an unconditional halt to this diabolical confinement, an actual machine to detain and exclude disturbing individuals from society. With Le Glaneur de Madopolis, the matter we are addressing begins with the vehement criticism from a Figaro journalist, Georges Maillard, who, after a very impressive Charenton concert, is taking from this “special” science of alienism, physicians who practise it, and informal settlements where we warehouse and “treat” mentally ill people. The retort will come quickly, Sentoux promptly replying. In response to Maillard, Sentoux, then a Charenton intern, springs to the defence of the profession to which he aspired to and in 1867 publishes a booklet entitled Figaro et Charenton. Les fous journalistes et les journalistes fous. Littérature comparée [Figaro and Charenton. The mad journalists and the journalists mad. Comparative literature]. If Maillard is the first to be targeted, the entire journalistic profession is to blame. Now is the time to combat preconceived notions against an asylum system (Sentoux's brainchild) from all sides. Sentoux's defence is simple; it demonstrates that madness should not be judged on appearances. They are sometimes misleading. The evidence relied against Maillard was taken from the mythical newspaper of the Charenton lunatics, Le Glaneur de Madopolis [The Gleaner of Madopolis]. And between both Figaro and Glaneur, when sections are examined side-by-side, this evidence is considered the wisest, the most reasonable. Hence the presence in the title of the words “Littérature comparée” [comparative literature]. After Maillard, Sentoux is inspired by fellow journalists Louis Jourdan and Gustave Isambert in an article which continues to explore the issues of Fous journalistes et journalistes fous. For the latter, the judgements made by Jourdan and Isambert concerning the asylum system are too quick, their ignorance: too important. The information available to them is incomplete, their criticism: unfounded. It is their job, perhaps. In response to their criticism, for Sentoux, asylums are much more charitable and benevolent. They are almost a blessing for the person who has the opportunity to visit them. For Sentoux, much more so than the asylums, it is the madness itself that became profitable for the less well-off. For those who, otherwise, would be languishing in ignorance.

A rehabilitation of alienist medicine by the people who have benefited from it, i.e. lunatics, is certainly original and impressive. But the demonstration generates certain objections presented in the article's conclusion. One may believe, for instance, that Sentoux had improperly collected extracts that were relevant to his work, to his claims. That Sentoux had failed to consider the rest of the newspaper. That Sentoux excluded the most disturbing parts. Some of the excerpts from Le Glaneur, indeed, suggest that editors of the newspaper conceal some of the words. For fear of reprisal perhaps. If he perceived something, however, he neglects to develop this point further. According to his thesis, which will be published that same year under the title of De la surexcitation des facultés intellectuelles dans la folie [On the over excitation of intellectual faculties in madness], another issue torments him: that of intrinsic qualities of the Glaneur de Madopolis [Gleaner of Madopolis]. The newspaper, in fact, has everything to do with the history of genius and madness in literature.