This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69- 11,657 JOSEPH, Arnold, 1927- THE REAPPRAISAL OF RACINE IN TWENTIETH CENTURY FRENCH CRITICISM: THEMES AND PERSPECTIVES. [Portions of Text in French], The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1968 Language and Literature, modern University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan (c) Copyright by Arnold Joseph 1969 THE REAPPRAISAL OF RACINE IN TWENTIETH CENTURY FRENCH CRITICISM: THEMES AND PERSPECTIVES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University sy Arnold Joseph, B.S., M.A. The Ohio State University 1968 Approved by _ - U Adviser Department of Romance Languages ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The guidance of Professor Hugh M. Davidson, my adviser in this project, is gratefully acknowledged. On all occasions, the many suggestions clarifying and giving direction to what follows were offered with patience and tact. While I have not always attained the high standards of scholarship exemplified by Professor Davidson's counsel and his own publications, they will remain ideals to strive for in the search and imparting of knowledge. ii VITA March 10, 1927 Born - Saarbrucken, Germany 1952 . B.S., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1952-195h, 1961-1963 Teaching Assistant, Department of Romance Languages, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 195U . M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 195^-1957 Teaching Assistant, Department of French, University of California, Berkeley, California. 1957-1960 Instructor of French, Department of Modern Languages, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma. 1963-1968 Assistant Professor of French, Department of Modern Languages, Denison University, Granville, Ohio. FIELDS OF STUDY Major field: French Language and Literature. Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Language and Literature. Pro­ fessors Alexander Schutz, Ronald Walpole, Olin Moore, Stanley Aston, Percival Fay, Edward Meylan. Studies in Modern French Literature. Seventeenth Century - Professors Robert Rockwood, Alvin Eustis. Eighteenth Century - Professors George Havens, Francis Carmody. Nineteenth Century - Professors Don Demorest, Charles Carlut. Twentieth Century - Professor Charles Blend. Minor fields: Spanish Literature - Professors Edwin Morbey, Kenneth Scholberg. Italian Literature - Professor Luigi Borelli. German Literature - Professors Oscar Seidlin, Bernhard Blume0 iii CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 11 VITA, FIELDS OF STUDY iii PART I. The Reappraisal: Themes of Racine Criticism 1 Introduction. The Influence of the Twentieth Century on Racine 2 I Reshapers of the Racine Ityth 12 II Transformations of Racine: Reinvention and Translation 2k III Racine's Verse: A School for Poets la IV The "Mise en scene": Artistic Media in Combina­ tion 57 V Psychology: Racine or Freud? 80 PART II. The Reappraisal: Perspectives of Racine Criticism 99 Introduction. Formats of Classification for Racine Criticism 100 I Perspectives of Literary History: Rene Jasinski, Vers le vrai Racine 120 II Socio-historical Perspectives: Lucien Goldmann, Jean Racine, dramaturge H a III Perspective of Racinian Anthropology: Roland Barthes, "L'homme racinien" 16U IV Conparative Analysis of Jasinski, Goldmann and Barthes: A Cycle of Critical Activity 182 Conclusion 196 BIBLIOGRAPHY 201 PART I THE REAPPRAISAL: THEMES OF RACINE CRITICISM INTRODUCTION THE INFLUENCE OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY ON RACINE Michel Butor, in a lecture entitled "Creation and Criticism, recently developed the thesis that the writing of a new book is basically an attempt to reorganize a mass of books already existing. Inspiration and creation, he maintained, come from a critical stimulus. By thus giving antecedence to the critical impulse Butor arrives at the conclusion that it is feasible to consider the effect of a set of conditions upon situations having already occurred. In terms of liter­ ature we may therefore speak of the influence of the "Nouveau roman" on Balzac. Butor's premise is a reversal of the traditional approach to literary criticism. In addition to conceiving the work of art in its chronological progression toward a critic, we now recognize a corollary operating in the opposite direction. A reciprocal relationship, as in a dialogue, exists between the critic and his subject. Instead of exercising a unilateral influence, art now enters into a bilateral relationship with Criticism. The possibilities of this idea are being actively explored by contemporary critics and we, for our part, will put it to a test on Racine. Our purpose is to view his tragedies from the vantage point ^Delivered at Denison University, Granville, Ohio, March 20, 1968. 2 3 of the twentieth century and to determine some of the transformations imposed upon him by our contemporaries <> This study will attempt to compile a selective "etat present" of Racine, based on those expres­ sions of the critical impulse which recognize his vitality and rele­ vance to our time. Our project can be conceived structurally as a scheme of three concentric spheres. The inner one contains the fundamental subject, Racine's tragedies. We focus upon aspects of this nucleus through the eyes of selected readers viewing it from various angles in the second sphere. From our own points of observation in the outer sphere we ob­ serve the activities between the other two. This geometric representation can be expressed in more tradi­ tional terms, provided care is taken to exclude notions of a scale of values and of temporal sequence between the three divisions. We might say then, that we are involved in three phases of literary activity: the work of art, criticism of that work, and finally criticism of cri­ ticism. Let us stress that in neither scheme do the three components operate separately. The last two (criticism and criticism of criti­ cism) , are concurrent extensions of the first (the work of art): they increase its frame of reference and function simultaneously with it. The reader to whom we direct our findings is the student of French literature who is about to re-read Racine. With him in mind, we have made the assumption that, rather than to offer meanings for various elements in the tragedies, we can be of greater service by examining a more fundamental problem. Our primary questions concern altitudes and perspectives for embarking on the creative reading of Racine. We want to know how the tragedies have been assimilated into the conceptual framework of our century; we would like some indication of their ca­ pacity for generating in reader and spectator a subjective and per­ sonal reaction; we hope to learn in what manner Racine's immediacy has been felt by particular individuals. In short, what has Racine to of­ fer the twentieth century, and how do we reciprocate? These problems can indeed be treated in terms of artists other than Racine. For a number of reasons however, he is a particularly suitable subject. In the course of three centuries his art has been consistently read and performed. By and large it was received favor­ ably and recognized as the symbol of classical perfection. Even during the era of Romanticism which spanned for Racine one of those intervals which works of genius inevitably spend in the limbo of relative ob­ livion, the plays were at least studied in classrooms and passed on as tradition. But in spite of the critical attention lavished on them they remain among the most enigmatic of masterpieces. Although Lanson considered it a closed subject Racinian drama continues to change its ' mask and to require revised conjectures from the reader. But not from all readers. Our first chapter deals with the prob­ lem of Racine's accessibility. Is there something for everyone as Sainte-Beuve asserts or is the audience limited by factors inherent in the tragedies? Are there criteria of culture, sensitivity and even age for those desiring to experience them? Do preconceptions inherited as part of the "Racine myth" interfere with creative reading of his drama? 5 Transformations of Racine in modern works of fiction are ana­ lyzed in the second chapter. Two selections from the pages of Gide and Proust are examined in detail, to demonstrate, in practice, the bilateral critical relationship outlined above. The opening two chapters function as a unit, first making clear the necessity for reappraisal of Racine and then, by means of precedents, showing that certain kinds of reappraisal are indeed inevitable. In the final three chapters of Part I we reduce the scope of our field of observation to focus in turn on three themes or subjects relevant to Racine: poetry, theater and psychology* Our perspective does not change. The general questions it leads us to ask also remain the same: How has the twentieth century perceived Racine in terms of the selected themes? In what manner do contemporary readers continue to adapt and transform these themes? Poetry and theater have an obvious priority over other themes we might have included in our selection. Whatever else Racine's works are considered to be, or not to be, it is agreed that they are first and foremost dramatic poems (or poetic dramas). Our third choice, psychology, was selected because it is for us personally, a more fa­ miliar vehicle to the essence of the plays than other ideologically oriented themes. The preference of others for ontology, sociology, biography, or other alternatives is easily justified. Any or all of them could have performed the same function in dealing with our cen­ tral questions. The wish to avoid redundancy, in terms of our study 6 of perspectives, is one of the factors leading to the change in ori­ entation of Part II. Let us note that by utilizing the term "theme" we are doing so from a position in the outer spheres of the model introduced above. As critics of criticism we are observing how critics have isolated certain qualities of the plays. From the point of view of Racine one cannot speak of these topics as '‘themes" since the author does not write about poetry, or psychology, or Jansenism.