Wednesday, June 19th, 2013
Facebook / Twitter / Tumblr / Podcast

c. 1845 / France

Gustave Flaubert Conducts a Workshop

Tags:
,
,
,
,

flaubert.jpg

Bouvard and Pécuchet decided to write a play of their own.

The difficult part was finding a subject.

They tossed around ideas while having lunch, followed by coffee, an indispensable liquor for the brain, then by a digestif or two. Then they lay down on their beds to take a nap. After that, they strolled around the orchard, went out to find inspiration, took long walks side by side, and returned home exhausted.

Or else they shut themselves indoors. Bouvard cleared off the table, set some blank paper in front of him, dipped his quill in the inkwell, and sat with his eyes glued to the ceiling; Pécuchet meditated in his armchair, legs stretched out and head lowered.

Sometimes they felt a shiver, like the breath of an idea. Before they could capture it, it had vanished.

But there are ways of finding subjects. You pick a title at random, and a story flows from it. You develop a proverb, or combine several adventures into one. None of these methods bore fruit. They skimmed through books of anecdotes, volumes of famous court cases, a stack of histories, all in vain.

And they dreamed of being performed at the Odéon, imagined the spectacle, missed Paris.

“I was meant to be an author, not to bury myself in the country!” said Bouvard.

“Same goes for me,” answered Pécuchet.

An inspiration struck him: if they were having such trouble, it was because they didn’t know the rules.

They studied The Practice of Theater by d’Aubignac, plus a few works that weren’t so outdated.

The key questions were discussed. Can comedy be written in verse? Does tragedy cross the line when it takes its subject from modern history? Must the hero be virtuous? What kinds of villains should it contain? At what point do horrors become excessive? The details should all point toward a single end; the interest of the plot should increase; the ending should correspond to the beginning—of course!

“Show us a new wonder in each line,” says Boileau.

How does one show a new wonder? “In all you write, observe with care and art / To move the passions, and incline the heart.”

How do you go about inclining the heart?

So rules were not enough—you needed genius as well.

And even genius wasn’t enough. Corneille, if you listened to the French Academy, had no understanding of theater. Geoffroy disparaged Voltaire. Racine was mocked by Subligny. La Harpe roared at the very mention of Shakespeare.

Disgusted by the classical critics, they gave the more recent ones a try, and read through theater reviews from the newspapers. What cheek! What thickheadedness! What a lack of integrity! Insults were heaped upon masterpieces, reverences made to platitudes—and the inanities of those who passed for wise, and the stupidity of others who were considered witty!

Perhaps they should trust in popular opinion instead? But often they didn’t like the applauded works, while something about the booed ones appealed to them.
Thus, the opinion of professionals was misleading and the judgment of the crowd was not to be believed.

Bouvard posed the dilemma to his friend Barberou. Pécuchet, for his part, wrote to his friend, Professor Dumouchel.

Barberou was astounded by how much the provinces had softened their brains. Old Bouvard was turning into a dope—in short, he “wasn’t getting it.” Theater was a consumer product like any other. You go to a show to enjoy yourself. Good means entertaining.

“You nitwit!” cried Pécuchet. “What entertains you might not entertain me—and everyone, even you, will get tired of it sooner or later. If plays are necessarily written to be performed, how come the best ones are always read?” And he awaited Dumouchel’s reply.

According to the professor, a play’s immediate reception proved nothing. The Misanthrope and Athalie were flops in their day. Zaire is no longer understood. Who today still talks about Ducange and Picard? And he recalled all the great successes of their time, from Fanchon the Organ Grinder to Gaspardo the Fisherman, deploring the decadence of today’s stage. This was due to a disregard for literature—or rather, for style.

  1. 1
  2. 2
Bookmark and Share
Love this? Subscribe to Lapham's Quarterly today.
Please enter a first name.
Please enter a last name.
Please enter an address.
Please enter a city.
Please select a state.
Please enter a valid
zip code.
Please select a country.

Canadian subscribers add $10; All other international subscribers add $40.

Post a Comment

Note: Several minutes will pass while the system is processing and posting your comment. Do not resubmit during this time or your comment will post multiple times.

Published In
Arts & Letters
About the Text

From Bouvard and Pécuchet. Sent to study law in Paris at the age of nineteen, Flaubert became distracted by “the bitter poetry of prostitution,” contracting a venereal disease from which he never fully recovered. In his works of fiction he sought to imitate God by being “present everywhere and visible nowhere.” The publication of Madame Bovary in 1856 resulted in his being brought to trial on the charge of contributing to public depravity.

Art is a jealous mistress, and if a man have a genius for painting, poetry, music, architecture, or philosophy, he makes a bad husband and an ill provider.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1860
Visual Aids
Working Relationships The interconnected lives of whales, bees, pigeons, horses, and rats.
Art, Photography, & Illustrations View a selection of art from our latest issue.
Charts & Graphs All of our charts and graphs, pulled from the pages of Lapham’s Quarterly.
Events & News
June 15 / The summer issue of Lapham's Quarterly, "The Sea", hits newsstands and mailboxes. More
Apropos

Vague Premonitions

The Great Beyond

Subscribe
Current Issue Animals Spring 2013
Blogs

Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

Audio & Video
LQ Podcast:
Animal Minds
Jane Goodall, Irene Pepperberg, Virginia Morell, Frans de Waal, and others discuss our ever-expanding understanding of animal minds, and what exactly it means for us humans.
Eponym
Lewis H. Lapham is Editor of Lapham's Quarterly. He also serves as editor emeritus and national correspondent for Harper's magazine.
Site Sponsor
Recent Issues