We have talked about the dangers of le theatre before, and and Francoise de Graffigny seems to find danger on the stage as well. In letter sixteen, she writes (or Zilia);
"They took me to a place where they enact, rather like in your palace, the actions of men who are no more, but with this difference: we evoke the memory of only the wisest and most virtuous, I think that here they celebrate only the insane and the wicked. Those who represent these figures rage and storm about like madmen; I have seen one take his fury so far that he killed himself."
My first reaction to this letter is - Did the actor really kill himself or was he such a good actor that he fooled Zilia. Then, I think about what kind of plays she might have seen, maybe some Moliere. If I had never seen a play or movie before, what kind of people and actions do I think should be represented and displayed for the public? Probably wise and virtuous ones to help spread wisdom and virtue. But, are comedies done so that the representations of vice lead men to their virtue (enlightenment reader?)? It makes me wonder what is worth celebrating via performance, and how does it vary from culture to culture?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This passage struck me as quite comical. Now, I am not a theatre performer in the structure of a play, but hey, I do stage work. The stage has definitely been a place to reveal the insane and the wicked and a place to push boundaries. I think I need to post a full blog on this - perhaps tying it in with Zilia's understanding of written and spoken word, as plays are written and performed.
ReplyDeleteIt's also interesting to compare this passage with her second visit to the theater where she becomes so inspired she explores the possibility of universal language. So, another way of asking this question is, does the theater speak a universal language? Is that what makes it dangerous and/or inspirational?
ReplyDelete