Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

of Grimarest's brain by giving it a date. He was so unfortunate as to fix on a year, 1641, when to Narbonne the King did not go. It might have been expected that the death, or rather the murder, of Cinq-Mars and of De Thou were events sufficiently note-worthy to prevent a mistake in dating a voyage which was disgraced by so foul a mockery of justice. But, waiving the error of 1641 for 1642, it may safely be affirmed that the whole affair is a pure fabrication, especially as the reasons assigned for Molière's supplying his father's place (even admitting that it happened to be his father's turn to wait on the King), namely, the age and infirmities of the elder Poquelin, are notoriously too ridiculous to deserve a moment's consideration. He was at that time in the vigour of manhood, only forty-six years of age; and as to infirmities, they did not prevent him, twenty years later, from discharging those very duties with respect to which Grimarest, Voltaire, and Co. now pronounce him superannuated. Suffice it to say that Lagrange and Vinot, in the memoir already spoken of, are utterly silent on the voyage in question. From them we learn that when Molière had finished his collegiate course, he applied himself to the study of the law, a fact which shows that Molière was destined for the liberal professions, and thus corroborates the fact already insisted on in these pages with respect to the position of M. Poquelin. Allowing three years for the prosecution, real or nominal (a distinction not peculiar, we apprehend, to Molière's day), of his legal craft, we shall have brought down our narrative to the year 1645, being the twenty-third of Molière's life natural, and the first of his life theatrical.

This last point is placed beyond the reach of doubt by testimony of the most unequivocal character. We cannot, however, speak with the same amount of certainty as to the causes which induced Molière to abandon such of the liberal professions as he may previously have had in view, for the fitful vicissitudes which then-nor only then-accompanied the lives of players:

Those purple emperors who in buskins tread,
And rule imaginary worlds for bread.

This were no doubt a tempting opportunity to throw in a few glowing paragraphs about the impetuosity of genius, which leads men to disregard the ordinary dictates of prudence in order to win them a niche in the temple of Fame, which occasionally proves to be the temple of Famine. The writer of these pages, however, contents himself with the humbler part, of laying before his readers the following extract from

Commencement of Molière's Dramatic Life.

9

the Historiettes' of Tallemant des Réaux, which tends to prove that the efficient cause of Molière's abandoning the forum for the foyer' had much more to do with the inspirations of a petticoat than with those of genius. At the close of a most interesting sketch of the chief actors of his day, this contemporary of Molière adds:

[ocr errors]

A

young

fellow

I will wind up with Béjart. I have never seen her act, but she is said to be the best actress going. She is with a provincial 'troupe.' She has acted at Paris, but that was in a third 'troupe,' which only stayed there a short time. named Molière quitted the benches of the Sorbonne to go after her: he was for a long time in love with her; used to give hints to the 'troupe,' which he ultimately joined on his marriage with Béjart. He is the author of some cleverish plays: as an actor he is nothing extraordinary, except that he makes you laugh.

Now, if we bear in mind that this extract was penned in the year 1656, when Molière's reputation was both small, and confined to the provinces (for, as we shall presently see, Molière had not yet returned to Paris), we shall not feel ourselves justified in cavilling at the statement it contains because that prosy old gossip, Tallemant des Réaux, has substituted theology for law, and raised a mistress to the rank of a wife.

In plain words, we believe that the actress in question, Madeleine Béjart, offered greater attractions to young Molière than the pages of Cujas and Tribonian; and as this lady was some years his senior, and not by any means inexperienced in the wiles of the world, we can easily believe that both she and her family-for there were four Béjarts in the troupethought it a very good speculation to enlist the services of a well-educated young man such as Jean Baptiste Poquelin. To this name was added, in the year aforesaid, 1645, the more famous surname of Molière.

One more circumstance remains to be mentioned before we take our leave of the year which inaugurated Molière's dramatic career. We shall best consult brevity by quoting the words of his biographer, Lagrange :

Il tâcha dans ses premières années de s'établir à Paris avec plusieurs enfants de famille, qui, par son exemple, s'engagèrent comme lui dans le parti de la comédie, sous le titre de l'Illustre Théâtre mais ce dessein ayant manqué de succés (ce qui arrive à beaucoup de nouveautés), il fut obligé de courir par les provinces du royaume, où il commença à s'acquérir une fort grande réputation.

A play by one Magnon, printed in 1645, which adds to its title of Artaxerce the words 'representée par l'Illustre Théâtre,' shows what we are to understand by 'ses premières années.'

With regard to Molière's provincial life, which occupies a

6

space of not less than twelve years, our information is so flimsy and fragmentary that we think it best to avoid the temptation of filling up lacunæ with imaginary hypotheses, by referring the reader once for all to the works of Messieurs Taschereau and Bazin, or the Biographie Universelle, where he will find all needful, and some needless, particulars respecting that obscure period, from 1646 to 1658, which Molière spent at Nantes, Vienne, Bordeaux, Lyons, Pézenas, Béziers, Grenoble, and Rouen; the most important facts being that the Etourdi was acted at Lyons, in 1653, and the Dépit Amoureux at Béziers, in 1656. We shall then ask him to accompany us to scenes of a very different character: from the barber's shop at Pézenas, we find ourselves transplanted to that other Babylon, the Court of the Fourteenth Louis,-a king in bud, for Mazarin yet lives. Gladly would we recal that 24th day of October, 1658, when the chief of a company of strolling players first made his bow before a monarch whose taste for everything truly great in letters, art, and science, was characteristic of one whose very vices have a dash of grandeur. After assiduous efforts, Molière succeeded-and we may believe he owed his success to De Conti's patronage-in obtaining permission to assume the title of the troupe de Monsieur,' the King's brother, and to give a theatrical entertainment devant leurs Majestés, et toute la cour.' There was much to abash a stouter heart than his. The place itself-the 'salle des gardes' of what was called the 'vieux Louvre,' from its being built in the reign of Henry II.-he can scarcely have felt at home in. But what was that to the company! A king who, though young, was always cold and grave, even to austerity; then, perhaps, yet colder and graver than usual, for he was on the eve of leaving Paris on an errand of which the ostensible object, to compass a marriage, would only serve more effectually to frustrate an object yet dearer-the gratification of a passion. Mazarin, too, for we cannot but suppose him to have been present-sate with a care-knit brow, plotting dramas on a wider stage, and meditating how he can thwart his King and serve his country by breaking off the intrigue, or yet worse (for so he deemed it), the marriage, between Louis and his niece. It were idle to speculate on the other personages present. This much we know, that not the least severe of Molière's trials was the fact that among the spectators were the 'troupe royale' of the 'Théâtre de l'Hôtel de Bourgogne.' The lordly lines of Corneille's Nicomede, a noble play, had scarcely died upon the ear, when Molière came forward. Yes! there he stands! In stature he is far from imposing; in feature he is anything but comely. To judge from the way in which

Description of Molière's Person.

II

he plants his feet, you would think he was doing duty as a parenthesis: he has a good calf, but still it does not help to keep him upright; he stoops forward, as if his shoulders were bent on effecting a meeting; his mouth is wide, his lips remarkably thick, his nose large, not pointed, but so shaped as if Nature had foreseen how often its owner would turn it up; his eyebrows are black, and so shaggy that the orbs beneath seem like a soft still light athwart a tree; as much of the forehead as is not hid by the wig is slightly concave; neck he has little or none. What strikes you most in his face is the tone of sorrowful earnestness, the settled melancholy, which forms, if we may so speak, the background of the expression. Akin to this is the serenity and calmness which gait and feature alike bewray. The whole cast of the man's countenance reminds you, in this respect, of the statues of Terence and Menander (both of them genuine), casts of which, by the way, are to be seen at Sydenham. In all three, you would not hesitate to say that powers of observation were developed in the highest degree. The reader, however, will ask, how came it that a man so ungainly as Molière met with such eminent success as an actor. As to our description, we can only state that it is warranted, not merely by bust and portrait, but by extant accounts of him by men who saw him on the stage. These accounts, however, we believe to be perfectly compatible with the most signal triumphs. For the great fascination of Molière's person we apprehend to have been, that every limb and muscle of his body had something to say for itself: he had all that eloquence of silence for which great actors are so conspicuous; we mean that, even when the tongue was mute, a gesture, a twitch of the lip, a shrug of the shoulder, were rife with speech. To use the words of a contemporary, he was an actor every inch of him, from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet. A short, sharp cough, which was habitual to him, did him good service, we are told, in exciting the laughter of his audience. Look at him now, as he modestly thanks their Majesties, Louis and his mother, for the kind indulgence with which they had witnessed the performance of his troupe' in the Nicoméde; mark the adroitness with which he drops a compliment at the feet of the rival and royal 'troupe,' by saying that he and his actors were but feeble copies of those first-rate models.' 'As, however, His Majesty had graciously tolerated their rustic ways, he humbly craved permission to exhibit one of those entertainments which had gotten him some reputation, and with which he had regaled the provinces.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The piece represented a one-act farce, called the Docteur Amoureux-has not come down to us, much to Boileau's regret,

[ocr errors]

the very dust of Molière's writings being precious as gold, The triumph of the author-actor was so complete, his rendering of the docteur' so perfect, that the King gave him per

[ocr errors]

mission to establish himself at Paris.

La salle du Petit-Bourbon lui fut accordée pour y représenter la comédie alternativement avec les comédiens Italiens. [Hence the phrase 'aux Français,' by way of distinction from the Italian troupe.'] Cette troupe dont M. de Molière était le chef, et qui, comme je l'ai dit, prit le titre de la Troupe de Monsieur, commença à représenter en public le 3 Novembre, 1658, et donna pour nouveautés, L'Étourdi et le Dépit Amoureux, qui n'avaient jamais été joués à Paris.-Lagrange, 9.

In spite of the absence from Paris of the Court, in spite of the presence of a giant, plus a whale*-two serious rivalsMolière's success in the capital was by no means inferior to that which had attended him in the provinces. As we now find ourselves in presence of Molière's published works, it behoves us to say a few words on each of the plays by which this triumph was secured.

We have spoken of triumph and success. Still, we think it would be sheer affectation to withhold our candid opinion, that if the man who wrote the Etourdi had not written the Tartuffe and the Misanthrope, no one would think of admiring, much less reading it. The fact is, the only merit which fairly belongs to it is relative in kind and inferior in degree: relative in kind, because in Lilliput Gullivers are Gogs, and, incredible as it may appear, the Etourdi outtopped the comedies of Scarron and Scudéri, by which it was preceded, as much as it was itself surpassed by those productions of Molière by which it was followed; inferior in degree, because the play is made up of a number of episodical incidents and intrigues, which succeed one another like the slides of a magic lantern, and which have no further connexion than the common object they endeavour to compass.

Et chaque acte dans la pièce est une pièce entière.

Still, amid all the defects which impartial criticism may discover in this play, we must in justice remember that the flow of language, the animation of the dialogue, the quickness of the repartee, give undeniable proof that a vast stride has been effected in this, the maiden comedy of our author.

Greatly inferior even to the Étourdi is the next play, the Dépit Amoureux, taken as a whole. We make this reserve, because one of the scenes (the scene from which the play takes its name) is perhaps the most charming in all Molière's works.

t

*Notes Historiques sur la vie de Molière, p. 53.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »