La Scène symboliste (1890–1896): pour un théâtre spectral (review)

Although this book is written in an engaging and readable style, its focus on a limited period in the development of symbolist theatre may restrict its interest. Among its target audience the publisher’s website includes students, teachers, researchers of theatre and literature, theatre professionals and amateurs. On the one hand, it is a valuable resource for students and an informative and inspiringly atmospheric read for those with a professional or amateur interest in theatre or in the symbolist period in general. On the other hand, if evaluated in terms of its original contribution to scholarly research and its success in outlining a convincing argument structured by a rigorous methodology, it falls short of the mark. Mireille Losco-Lena’s main thesis rests on the establishment of a distinction between the diverse and varied character of the dramatic texts produced in the symbolist period and the coherence of the aesthetics established in the process of staging those dramatic texts. She claims that both Paul Fort at the Théâtre d’Art and Aurélien Lugné-Poë at the Théâtre de l’Œuvre sought ‘un même type de théâtricalité’ (p. 12). This shared theatrical vision was based on collaborative effort and on a challenging of contemporary theatrical norms. Losco-Lena successfully establishes the main features of a symbolist staging aesthetic in respect of both directors’ work. However, while it is recognized that their interest was confined to a certain kind of symbolist drama, there is no discussion either of the rationale for this or of the relationship between their artistic aspirations and the substantial body of symbolist drama that fell outside their field of interest. This selectivity is problematic because it undermines the author’s claim that there is a distinction between the coherence of a given mode of scenic representation and the incoherence of the textual output of the same period. Discussion of the different elements of the mise en scène, decor, music, and acting fostered by both companies is more inclusive and is both engaging and insightful. Detailed analysis and visual elucidation of scenic attempts to realize Maurice Denis’s vision of ‘la sensation transposée dans le plan ornemental’ (p. 45) go some way towards substantiating the publisher’s claim that this is the first French publication dedicated to the symbolist scenic aesthetic. This claim is further strengthened by means of a tantalizing discussion, in the opening chapter, of the spectral nature of audience engagement; here, the author makes a sensitive attempt to define the dreamlike engagement of the audience, who turn aside from the cumbersome reality of the scene before their eyes to become ‘un metteur en scène inconscient’ (p. 21). What is somewhat disappointing is the way in which scholarly references cited are not securely anchored in an overarching argumentative framework. The strength of this study lies less in its articulation of a persuasive, well-supported academic argument than in the vivacity of the writing and the opening up of the material to a general readership.