In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

R e g n a rd a n d C o llin d ’H a rle v ille rqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA o n L e g a c ie s b y B a c h e lo r U n c le s P H I L I P K O C H In the eighth year of the eighteenth century, the ComedieFrangaise first performed a play by Jean-Frangois Regnard, L e L eg a ta ire u n iv e rse l (January 9, 1708). The century had but eight years still to run when, in the winter months again (February 24, 1792), the same theater, under the “Revolutionary” title of Theatre de la Nation, presented a new work by another Jean-Frangois, sumamed Collin d’Harleville: L e V ie u x C eU b a ta ire. Instantaneous successes, both com­ edies were rapidly acclaimed as masterpieces of their respective au­ thors. Such random coincidences1 would hardly legitimize a compara­ tive study, were it not for yet another factor. In the course of its initial run, L e V ie u x C eU b a ta ire was the object of a lively journalistic debate on its originality.2 Taking note of the accusations of imitation, in the “Avertissement” to the published play, Collin freely avowed his debts, among them the following: “Je pourrais citer aussi le commandeur du P ere d e F a m ille [by Diderot]... et surtout le G e ro n te du L e g a ta ire u n iv e rse l, qui a bien aussi ses collateraux et sa gouvem ante.”3 Although the reference to the L eg a ta ire was somewhat playful, it reveals itself, on examination, to be funda­ mentally true, for the two comedies display resemblances in a matter as elemental as the underlying dramatic situation. Both plays involve 291 292 / P H IL IP K O C H old bachelor uncles and nephews who wish to be remembered in their wills. Indeed, one might say there could be no XWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA leg a ta ire u n iv e rse l if there were no v ie u x celib a ta ire. Even the age of two uncles (Geronte in the L e g a ta ire , M . Dubriage in the C e lib a ta ire ) is quite close— sixtyeight and sixty-five, respectively— as is, presumably, that of the nephews, Eraste and Armand. The two male leads of each play also have female roles dependent on them. The young men are in love— Eraste with Isabelle (L e g a ta ire ), Armand with Laure (C e lib a ta ire ) — while the two elderly gentlemen are attended by “gouvemantes”— Geronte by Lisette and M . Dubriage by M me Evrard. Thus, not only is the basic dramatic situation identical, but four principal characters of each play also maintain common relations. It would be improper to push the parallels too far. Since Collin is not making a carbon copy of his predecessor’s play but, rather, express­ ing his own artistic concerns, we must expect significant differences that are immediately apparent even in the common roles. Because Geronte is in very poor health (while M . Dubriage is of sound body), the matter of writing the last will is more urgent in the L e g a ta ire . Unlike Eraste, who has easy access to Uncle Geronte, Armand has been disowned unjustly by M . Dubriage and must hide his true iden­ tity, under the name of the servant Charle, in his uncle’s house, from which he has been banned for some ten years. Further, while Eraste is only secretly affianced to Isabelle, it is well known that Armand and Laure are married, although most members of the Dubriage household are incapable of recognizing them on sight. As for the g o u v e m a n te s, their divergences should become apparent in the course of this study. Besides the common roles, nonparallel parts can be found: in the L eg a ta ire, Crispin, Eraste’s valet, and Isabelle’s mother, M me Argante; in the...

pdf

Share