Serre-Connes Discussion on Grothendieck
Serre-Connes Discussion on Grothendieck
Jean-Pierre Serre
and
Alain Connes
concerning Serre-Grothendieck correspondence
Alain Connes : I propose that our discussion begins precisely in the year
1955. I read what Grothendieck says. He says “The year 1955 marks a crucial
turning point in my mathematical work, that of the passage from analysis to
geometry.”. And he says “I still remember this striking impression, all sub-
jective, certainly... as if I were leaving arid and bitter steppes.”.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, it’s not nice for what he was doing. So there,
we have to tell you that Grothendieck has gone to Nancy and there, on some
topics that were quite fashionable, but a little restrictive,
Alain Connes : the topological vector spaces. Yes that’s it, he had almost
solved all the problems in the area.
Alain Connes : And I think it was the first time that Grothendieck applied
his method that Serre described as being... “To solve problems, they must be
allowed to dissolve themselves in a rising tide of general theory”. (They laugh.)
Jean-Pierre Serre : It was a topic that was a little blocked. One has
had the impression that he had solved just about every question. In fact, not
1. Subtitles to be improved : Denise Vella-Chemla, 1.4.2020.
1
quite true. There were counter-examples to find. There were pretty counter-
examples, Banach... There were pretty good examples to find, but he did not
find, but he had enough.
Alain Connes : So, this means finally, it’s my conjecture, that the mo-
ment, he has bifurcated from the analysis, it was certainly what he wanted
to do. And he must have wanted to fork. It was at the time of his second
thesis, he was asked to exhibit...
Jean-Pierre Serre : So, you have to explain what the second thesis is,
because it no longer exists. At the time, when one was passing one’s thesis,
one had the main thesis done. And then the jury gave you another subject. It
was a subject that was given to the person with his agreement, in general. It
was going pretty well familiarly. That’s often. But not always familiarly. So
what ? The person in question was talking about half an hour or 20 minutes
about this. And it was, it was very good. And I think that Grothendieck has
had more or less to choose his subject. In addition, you see, the link with
sheaves... What was said at this time is that we realized that his nuclear
spaces theory was so good that you could make tensor products, Kunneth...,
Kunneth’s formula worked at such a point that I sold Grothendieck’s theory
to Bott, one or two years after. I told him “You know, you have a product
of varieties, you must act as if it was a tensor product, and that’s all ! Eve-
rything works.
Alain Connes : Yes. Not only that, absolutely, but the philosophical idea,
in fact, that are behind the nuclear spaces is that they are finite-dimensional
spaces. That is, in fact, that they behave like finite dimensional spaces.
2
Jean-Pierre Serre : It’s a little technical.
Alain Connes : So, the question I wanted to ask you about that, precisely,
is when did Grothendieck come into the Bourbaki group ?
3
really at least at the beginning, and then afterwards, I will talk about some-
thing else. But how does Grothendieck manage to gain your trust ? In a way,
I think there is one point that strucked me a lot. This is the moment when
he understands your duality through the Ext, that is to say, you tell him it’s
really hard-working (rupinant in french ?), true, but it’s the trust between
you two.
Jean-Pierre Serre : This trust between us, it had come at least two years
before you. I had gone to Nancy. Yes, I taught a little Rational Mechanics in
Nancy (laughing), but I had it in horror. I was also giving a topology semi-
nar, I discussed somewhat with Grothendieck, I saw very closely his nuclear
spaces, you see. It hit me a lot because this idea was very beautiful. It was
very, very beautiful this idea concerning tensor products. So we were confi-
dent, we had already trusted for a long time.
Jean-Pierre Serre : For me, it was redaction. It was redaction for him
too. It was the same. He says “To understand something, I need to write it.
And for this, he wrote it, but for me, there was nothing original about it.
Alain Connes : , For me, there was something that strucked me a lot there.
Alain Connes : Yes, there were Axioms on abelian categories, but not
only. It’s at the level of examples. Well, of course, the main example was the
abelian groups’bundles,
Jean-Pierre Serre : It had not been done, but it was known that it was
realisable.
4
Alain Connes : Of course it worked, okay. But hey, there was the nuance
between the Cech’s aspect to calculate the cohomology. But in fact, what
strucked me a lot, I remember, when I read this article in detail, it was ano-
ther example that looks like nothing, but I’ll come back to that later. This
is the example of what he called diagrams categories.
Alain Connes : But now, I’m going to explain to you what it is and
the role it played. I think afterwards, but it’s also a conjecture. In fact, what
is he doing ? He has a whole chapter on this example. And what does he say ?
Alain Connes : He says you take a small category and you take the func-
tors of this small category towards the abelian groups. It’s a diagram category
for him. And after that, he checks of course that yes, it’s an abelian category,
everything works, etc.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, indeed. It’s an idea that was certainly not in
the air.
Alain Connes : If you want, it’s this part that interested me a lot as an
innovative part, I will come back to this.
Alain Connes : I agree, of course, of course. But I’ll come back to it later.
In fact, so, I heard in one of the interviews that you gave that it makes you
react when people think they’re wrong when they talk about a revolution.
about the theory of schemes, I think we agree, it was in the air. In fact, you
think this idea goes back to Krull
5
Jean-Pierre Serre : because Krull was an algebrist. We had the feeling
that he guessed the geometry that was behind. And in any case, he built the
Krull rings with localization.
Jean-Pierre Serre : but he had not jumped the step to go to the projec-
tive. He was affine. The geometry when it stays affine, it stays glued.
Alain Connes : Of course, it does not work, it’s not interesting enough.
What also strucked me a lot, when I studied all that, is at what point Gro-
thendieck came to an ideal world. Why ? Because Serre and several other
people were giving a seminar in Princeton on schemes at the time and they
wrote it, Dieudonné helped him to write a little bit.
Jean-Pierre Serre : So, I do not know, but he was stateless. It was not
so simple for him.
Alain Connes : At the level of schemas. Well, it’s clear. Also, the same,
I mean, The matching is ideal at the motives’level. That’s great because we
6
see, in 64, in your correspondence, you talk about motives’metaphysics, etc.
Jean-Pierre Serre : And what the correspondence does not show, is that
in fact, a consequence of a lot of remarks he made. I told him “you know,
between varieties, if we admit Weil’s conjectures, cohomology cuts itself into
pieces...”. And things simmered in his skull, of course, but then he did some-
thing I could never have done myself. He had the idea to define this, with an
extraordinary courage
Jean-Pierre Serre : because I would have never thought that the alge-
braic cycles were strong enough to do that. He had the courage to start that.
It may be wrong
Alain Connes : yes, it was a good start. And then, there is another ab-
solutely essential part. And I’ll tell you what I know. You will correct me.
It’s for etale cohomology. So what I’ve heard told, but I do not know if it’s
true. You corrected me. What I heard told is that you are the one who gave
a seminar, at Chevalley Seminary
Alain Connes : in 58. seminar in which you explained that to have locally
trivial bundles in terms of algebraic groups, it was necessary to take etale
coverings, and that at the exit of your seminar,
7
Jean-Pierre Serre : instantaneously because I had presented systemati-
cally, I made an H0 , well the H0 , it’s obvious, I made the H1 , but I didn’t
have the intellectual courage to say “it could do an H2 ”, since him, he said
instantaneously. And it is perfectly correct. It’s a legend that, for one time...
Jean-Pierre Serre : This thing made the thing, it triggered. And in some
sense, you’ll watch to the text I wrote, I wrote it this way, I wrote H1 . I had
the good cohomology in dimension 1, it was my idea. I went out of the idea
that the H1 of Zariski for coverings is ridiculous since we find NOTHING.
So you put them by force in the machine and it makes that you obtain a
good H1 but I didn’t have the idea. If I had been answered on this, I would
have said it was necessary to have new ideas in greater dimensions since him...
Jean-Pierre Serre : But you know, Weil told me one day, it strucked me
“It is the optimists who demonstrate theorems.
Alain Connes : Well, but you have not to be too optimistic. But he is
surely right.
Alain Connes : So this is good. Then there is a notion that I would like
to address. I think I know what will be your reaction.
Alain Connes : Well, for me, one of the great discoveries of Grothendieck
is the notion of topos.
8
Jean-Pierre Serre : The notion of... ?
Jean-Pierre Serre : I don’t even know what it is. I didn’t really make
the effort to understand exactly because as soon as there were categories in
abundance, I stopped, I nearly blocked on those subjects.
Alain Connes : I must admit that I had exactly the same attitude until
a few years ago and that finally, I think that it is a notion that one can
appreciate only when one meets it independently.
Alain Connes : Okay, so. So, in fact, if I ask you when Grothendieck in-
vented toposes ?
Jean-Pierre Serre : That does not tell me anything. I know one speaks
a lot about this notion, it’s fashionable, and all that. Okay, but it’s exactly
what I thought.
Alain Connes : There is another distinction. that you make in several in-
terviews, which is a little like the distinction between, precisely, Grothendieck
did between functional analysis and algebraic geometry. You make a small
distinction between algebraic geometry and the theory of modular forms.
9
Alain Connes : the rising tide of general theories.
Jean-Pierre Serre : And that, for me, was incarnated in precise things
with modular forms. My conjecture, for example on Galoisian representa-
tions, the conjecture on elliptic curves. All of this, for me, took shape. near
1967 ; 67, yes, It was a big year for me.
Jean-Pierre Serre : For number theory, because that’s the year when
there was motives theory. I saw right away that the motives were related,
you see.
Jean-Pierre Serre : But for me, it’s only in 67 that I see it must be
linked... Yes, because it’s at this time that there was the Weil’s article on
elliptic curves.
Jean-Pierre Serre : that was confirming that elliptic curves would have
to correspond to modular forms. It’s just that until then, it was a kind of
vague hope,
10
Alain Connes : I understand, I agree
Jean-Pierre Serre : until that, it was not concrete. Weil didn’t have the
notion of conductor but nearly, but I had this notion so I can state more pre-
cisely the conjecture. So, she became absolutely convincing. It was incredible.
Jean-Pierre Serre : And this makes me a lot more effect, you see.
Jean-Pierre Serre : And at more basic levels, whenever there are matches
that are a bit surprising, it touches me. Although Grothendieck, this disgus-
ted him. He does not like it, he does not like it.
Alain Connes : Yes, all that, it comes out perfectly from the correspon-
dence.
Jean-Pierre Serre : It’s a bit of a point of view. It’s more romantic when
you have things with no obvious relationship between them, and finally they
are the same. It’s just “a marriage was at sky. This is love at first sight.
Alain Connes : That’s it. But precisely, we are getting closer to a period
where, well, from 68, of this period a little cloudy for Grothendieck, we will
talk less about mathematics.
11
Alain Connes : It is nearly in 70 that he leaved the IHES.
Alain Connes : But in any case, he spent two years at College de France.
It’s you who invite him to College de France for 2 years.
Jean-Pierre Serre : it was a pulpit for foreign scientists that was for a
year initially. We renewed the national agreement the year after and we did
not want to renew it after.
Alain Connes : Why ? Did he make enemies ? Do you mean he didn’t be-
have correctly ? What happened and...
Jean-Pierre Serre : This was not his place because, listen, he was spen-
ding his time, at that moment, saying that we had not to make science, that
we had not to do maths, that it was time for ecology. So if he didn’t want
to make science, he had to go elsewhere. I was not happy anyway that the
CNRS would have found a place for him, I feeled it was not good
Jean-Pierre Serre : The first year, there was no problem. He did a course.
12
He did a course, I do not know what.
Jean-Pierre Serre : No, I think that is in the second year. The second
year, yes, he gave us as subject of his course, You know the subjects that a
professor must give in june He gave us something about Ecology.
Alain Connes : Hou la ! It was at this point ? I believed he had given two
subjects.
13
vice. Yes, I answered that it was difficult when the people skin is involved. I
remember that I told him that if some can’t be killed, while others can... It
is true that some countries actually protected scientifics during war. I think
the USSR, for example, protected scientists in those times. They killed them
for political reasons, eventually. But they did not want them to be killed in
the war anyway.
Alain Connes : effectively, there are a number of letters actually that have
not been answered.
Alain Connes : Yes, in 61, I believe. So there are a number of letters where
we can see he did not answer. And there was a letter on which I was very,
very curious about whether you had seen it after or what. And that’s when
Dwork demonstrated the rationality of zeta functions. I’m very curious about
how he reacted.
Alain Connes : Ah ? He didn’t care ? He did not care. It was outside his
scheme, of his program, so he did not care.
Alain Connes : he did not want to turn away from his objective.
14
Jean-Pierre Serre : It was an accident, we had demonstrated this a little
earlier than we should have. I tell you. When did I work on Riemann-Roch,
me ? about 50.
Alain Connes : Yes, you tell it in the interview of Coliot-Thélène. You are
the first who had the idea that it was an Euler characteristic.
Alain Connes : Yes, and this is very important, in fact. You never publi-
shed that.
Alain Connes : But excuse me, excuse me. When you say you did that,
you did that with sheaves, Zariski, and so on.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes that’s it... Hum, no ! At the time, wait, I was
Zariski or I was complex analysis ? No, I was complex analysis. It was before
GAGA. I made FAC and GAGA at the same time. So, this one was complex
analytical. Simply, I did not want the existing demonstrations. I did not want
because... when I found the one I wanted, and the one I wanted, you must
know it, it is. You have a divisor D and what you’re showing is that if you
know it for D, you know it for D +P where P is a point, you can walk around
15
like that, and when D = 0,...
Alain Connes : Of course, and in what year did you do this ? Nearly 53.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Well, let’s see, my thesis was in 51. I stopped doing
homotopy groups almost immediately. In 52, it was the Cartan seminar on
Stein varieties. And very quickly, I was raised in Preparing classes, like you in
fact, with the idea that it is the projective geometry that is good. The affine
geometry, that’s joke. However, Cartan, it’s affine geometry. Stein varieties
are open stuff, and compact things have a certain charm...
Alain Connes : By the way, your correspondence starts with a big mistake
of Grothendieck who says that the quotient of a Stein variety by a group...
16
Alain Connes : but there is still a key point in what you did is the use of
Zariski topology, sheaves for Zariski’s topology.
Jean-Pierre Serre : This is just after. And this is to speak about me,
not to speak about Grothendieck.
Alain Connes : It doesn’t matter, it’s completely clear. in fact, when you
look at a certain distance, I, as a not specialist of this at all, that is, if you
want, the influence of Leray...
Alain Connes : Yes, yes, that, you said it several times that you did not
have to think. The typewriter, an hundred pages paper, as if it existed yet.
Alain Connes : Okay, it’s true, however, there is the letter that you will
write him and that I find very, very relevant if you want. When you received
Crops and sowing. It was in 86, I think. Then you wrote to him and if you
want, I would be sorry for not citing you well, but it is very important.
17
Jean-Pierre Serre : You made photocopies.
Alain Connes : “One thing strikes me in the texts that I have had the
possibility to see. You are astonished and you are angry by the fact your
alumni did not continue the work that you have begun and conducted lar-
gely to good. But you do not ask yourself the most obvious question, the one
to which every reader expects you to answer : “why you, you have abandoned
the work in question ?”.
Alain Connes : But what is more interesting is that you have an idea.
Alain Connes : So you say “I have the impression that despite your so
well known energy...
Jean-Pierre Serre : Even if there are people who are intellectually very
strong like Thompson for instance, or Bombieri is very strong, but Grothen-
dieck was an animal force.
18
Alain Connes : Okay, so you say “you were just tired of the work that you
had done. Especially since there were also SGAs.”. I remember that SGAs,
well, SGA3 I think the algebraic groups, SGA4 were Topos. And then you
say : “I remember in particular the rather disastrous state of SGA5.
Alain Connes : And this was terrible. You say : They were reduced to
assert without proofs the commutativity, down to the nearest sign to be op-
timistic and those commutativities were essential for the future.
Alain Connes : Okay, but then, what you are saying is really, very, inter-
esting. You say something... I think I should read more because I’m going
to stop in the middle. You say “one may wonder, for example, if there is
not a deeper explanation than the simple fatigue of having to carry at arm’s
length so many thousands of pages. So, you say, you describe it somewhere.
We approach math where one does not attack a problem head on, but wraps
it up and dissolves it in a rising tide of general theory. All right, that’s the
way you work and what you did shows that it works effectively at least for
SVT and algebraic geometry.”. And after, you say and I’ll let you talk. “It’s
a lot less clear for number theory.
19
modular forms. He didn’t understand nothing at modular forms. He was
extraordinary of incomprehension, sometimes, because when it did not fit
within its framework, okay. I told him modular shapes. He told me “But
your modular forms, it makes no sense because you see your variety of mo-
dules, it is affine and so at infinity, you put artificial conditions.” Since me,
I had 100 years or 150 years of modular forms behind me. I knew it was a
good theory. When we see it, we don’t resist. Not him, they were formulas
for him. He could not handle with formulas.
Alain Connes : Okay. Okay. Okay. So what are you saying here, actually,
you say further than in fact, in number theory, precisely, all mathematics can
come in and
Jean-Pierre Serre : In any case, you can see that I agree with everything
that you quoted. I have not changed my mind since that time.
Alain Connes : You have not changed your mind, you have not changed
your mind. It’s important. There is the answer of Grothendieck in the cor-
respondence. I will not read it, but yes,
Alain Connes : No, no, no, no, no, I do not think so. I do not think I do
not think so. If you want, I think that I, what I tried to do was to slip into
the skin of Grothendieck to understand and try to understand how he could,
euh, how to say, if you want, I do not say that he has become paranoid, I
don’t like this word at all. I think there’s a word for that, it’s a buzz word,
it’s the word obsidional.
20
to cool them, you have to protect them, and so on. Yes, but as long as he
was in the mathematical world okay normal, we served him as a protection.
As soon as it became alone, the plant exploded.
Alain Connes : Let me say. It was a general thing, so I had said okay. And
then, you know how it is, a month before you start telling yourself “What
am I going to talk about ?”
Alain Connes : And then well, I was in very special circumstances because
I was taking care of my mother who was very sick. And at night, I read and
I read “The key of dreams”, which is one of the texts of Grothendieck.
Jean-Pierre Serre : I don’t know this text... Euh, yes, I know it, I have
watched it. because I have been impressed by some of the Grothendieck’s
dreams that have a level of details in their description. I remember a prin-
cess, or something like that, with statements, but I know I never have a
dream with such precision, my skull does not manufacture. It’s a matter of
even greater power of a skull to make mentally with your little neurons, de-
corations of a lady in her chair. The power of his skull was even visible in his
dreams.
21
Alain Connes : Absolutely. When I stumbled by flipping through it, rea-
ding this text on a passage that is absolutely beautiful. And it’s the passage
on his father, on what happened to his father who was an anarchist when he
was in prison, since he stayed more than ten years in prison in Russia. And
what happened to him at a given time and that was passed on to Grothen-
dieck by his mother. And Grothendieck describes it in an incredibly accurate
way, as you say.
Alain Connes : No, no, no. It was in the reality, in reality. he describes
what happened to his father, who was promised that he would be released
after ten years, where he counted the days etc. And by the time the date
arrived, he was not released. He started a hunger strike. And at the end of I
do not know, maybe three weeks or a month of strike hunger. There, he had
an illumination. Mystic, yes.
Alain Connes : It’s not very surprising, no, but if you want in this illumi-
nation, he forgave his jailers, etc. And the way this is written, it made that...
When I read it for the first time to my wife, in a moment before talking
about it in College, I had to stop in my reading so it was moving. So, in fact,
I read it in College, but it’s on that occasion, that I realised the fact that, at
the middle of 36 different things, there was in these texts, from time to time,
extraordinary things.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, Yes, I think that, yes, I do think so. I find no
adjectives. I started by thinking scornful, but that’s not quite the case. I was
skeptical, in any case on Grothendieck in 30 last years. Yes, but still, I agree.
It is clear that there are interesting things.
Jean-Pierre Serre : No, no, his skull didn’t degenerate but it exploded
rather than anything else and always intelligently, always intelligently.
22
Alain Connes : And if you want what this text taught me, this text that
I had discovered, what it taught me is that in fact, his father had never ma-
naged to do what he wanted to do. His father wanted to be a writer.
Alain Connes : And he had never been able to do it because he was all
the time doing things, etc.
Alain Connes : And what was found in his house when he died, we found
an incredible number of pages that are that are currently inaccessible.
Alain Connes : Yes, they are, they are guarded by a lawyer. Because the
kids don’t agree.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, that’s right, but they’ll be accessible one day.
They’re not lost.
Alain Connes : They are not lost exactly. But apparently, that, I find that
quite incredible. And, apparently, the main topic, you know, Grothendieck
had a mystical evolution, I will say.
23
Alain Connes : But apparently, the main subject of these thousands of
pages is actually, it’s the problem of evil. That is to say, he realized by being
mystical, being a religious in a certain way, well, in fact, there was a funda-
mental problem. Of course, he has tackled this problem and we do not know
what’s inside.
Jean-Pierre Serre : But one speaks about it, one speaks, one speaks...
Alain Connes : Me, I’m really very curious about... I do not know if it
will be possible, of course. Apparently, it’s at least thirty thousand pages.
Alain Connes : Thirty thousand pages if it’s not more, but well classified.
Jean-Pierre Serre : And are they typed or are they are handwritten ?
Alain Connes : I do not know, but now, with AI, it’s not a problem.
Alain Connes : Yes, of course, but we’ll be able to, now, I think it’s hand-
written, but we’ll just have to write a little software, that will transform all
that.
Jean-Pierre Serre : because his writing was not terrible. that’s not the
problem.
24
Jean-Pierre Serre : We will not take care of that.
Alain Connes : We will not take care of that. So now, I wanted to point
you out another fact that I do not know if you know. Of course, you surely
knew Paolo Ribenboim.
25
time ago, well before 2000. On the publication of that, and finally, I hesitated,
and I gave unfavorable opinion, because really, he says trully nasty things,
on Deligne, Illusie,
Jean-Pierre Serre : and for those people there, who are good people, to
see this written, published and to which they can not answer, you see. It was
really unpleasant, for Deligne, in particular.
Jean-Pierre Serre : I think maybe it was SMF that was asking the ques-
tion Perhaps it’s a guy from SMF who contacted me ? But I hesitated because
it’s interesting, there is no doubt.
Alain Connes : There is a lot of interesting things. That is to say all the
polemical side. well, if we could leave it out, the rest would go to you.
Alain Connes : Yes that’s it. That’s it, a time it’s typed, it’s between 500
and 600 pages.
Alain Connes : What he wrote at the beginning, it’s to say that he tried
to write something which baits the reader, etc. He didn’t succeeded in doing
that, well, I want to say the non-mathematician reader...
26
that. I heard that recently. Well,
Alain Connes : No, no, well, it’s better to stay away from that. But OK.
But if you want, it’s true that I regretted that the passages really interesting,
because there are interesting passages, were inaccessible.
Alain Connes : And it was not trivial to have his permission, but you
know what happened. Nobody knows it. That, I do not know if I should talk
about it.
Alain Connes : ... what happened at the 50th anniversary of IHES. It was
a little earlier. It was in the month of september.
Jean-Pierre Serre : No, I heard talk about something like that. So they
sent him those books in time ?
27
to the Director.
Alain Connes : Why not ? It happened that the director was absent at
that time...
Jean-Pierre Serre : Aïe ! And that at that moment, the person who ans-
wered Grothendieck was not the Director, if you want, Then, there started
to be a muddle because finally, the answer was a bit of a generic answer. If
you want, saying that good, etc. And there, the tone is mounted.
Alain Connes : Well, not saying that it was not possible, but let’s say that
there would be delays, and so on.
Alain Connes : That’s not what he wanted. So, the tone is mounted. Gro-
thendieck wrote a much more... letter, as he was able to do.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, more energetic, yes, already that he was ener-
getic by nature.
Alain Connes : And then the Director was back and the Director tried to
answer
Alain Connes : Yes, of course, but then he tried to fix things. He tried
to fix things in explaining that he was absent, and so on. But the tone was
up and Grothendieck phoned to Lafforgue, while Laurent Lafforgue was at
home. So Lafforgue is an admirer of Grothendieck absolutely unconditional.
28
As you know, he has his picture on his desk, etc. And one day, Lafforgue
returned home, the phone rings when he hears a voice that says...
Alain Connes : Of course, he was in the Pyrenees since 90. Here, we were
in 2008, we were in 2008 already. Since then, I think 91 or 92. he was already
in Pyrenees.
Alain Connes : Well, maybe you’re going to laugh. I thought it was not
a coincidence. That the place where Grothendieck was refugeed was called
Lasserre because in Crops and sowing, there is a whole development on yin
and yang, and so on. And on the idea that Grotendieck rightly has a feminine
side in his approach to mathematics, that is not completely meaningless. So,
the fact that he is a refugee,
29
Alain Connes : Absolutely. For him, you, you were the prototype of the
masculine.
Alain Connes : And all that is explained in great detail in Crops and so-
wing.
Jean-Pierre Serre : But he was taking this in a serious way. All that,
by the way, is a feature of Grothendieck. He took everything in a serious way.
Alain Connes : Yes, by the way, it’s a question I wanted to ask because,
finally, what stands out a lot of these writings is that we did not not feel like
he has a sense of humor.
Alain Connes : Yes, that’s for sure, but not the sense of humor.
Jean-Pierre Serre : No, it’s not compatible. I can not imagine myself
having heared him laugh. Maybe for other things
Alain Connes : Yes, but you say it’s not compatible. seeing the interview
with Cartan, we can not not being struck by the fact that Cartan has an
incredible sense of humor.
Jean-Pierre Serre : Yes, but Cartan could not have done Grothendie-
ck’s artwork, with a character as his one. Either me, by the way. Yes, I think
there is some... I don’t know how to say, it asks for an incredible strength.
Not compatible with the need of laughs.
30
(Laughs from Alain Connes)
31