Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T04:28:59.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Monsieur Macbeth: from Jarry to Ionesco

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2007

Peter Holland
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame, Indiana
Get access

Summary

SHAKE SPEARE EN FRANCE

The ‘afterlife of Macbeth’ in France raises issues which any study of ‘Shakespeare offshoots’ must address, but extends them to a different linguistic and cultural situation: what constitutes ‘adaptation’ as it moves towards a new work; the intertextual status of the new work and reception by its audiences; the historical moment and contexts in which it is written and received, from theatrical fashions to national and world events; to politics broadly speaking; to its place in the developing oeuvre of its adaptor. In France, circumstances have coincided to make this play exceptionally intriguing, beyond the defamiliarization which anglophone readers may experience in considering a play beyond our own linguistic boundaries. As a case history, French Macbeths require rather more history than may be necessary elsewhere: in order to draw the portrait I need the landscape, setting Alfred Jarry and Eugène Ionesco in a series of conjonctures, for however well established and confident French theatrical culture was in either period, it was always vulnerable to innovative attack. The treble, even quadruple context means beginning with a brief reminder of early French translations of Shakespeare; moving to how Shakespeare was known (not quite ‘read’ and ‘seen’), via the French Opera composer, Verdi (whose second version of Macbeth was revised for Paris, with Paris conventions in mind); before concentrating on a schoolboy publicist and a Rumanian playwright. Two things above all: in France, as elsewhere in continental Europe, ‘Shakespeare’ never implied ‘familiar’, and, until the last two decades never implied ‘known’ at all. Concomitantly, unfamiliarity has allowed the erection of a genealogy which is widely accepted, and, as I shall demonstrate, false.

Type
Chapter
Information
Shakespeare Survey
An Annual Survey of Shakespeare Studies and Production
, pp. 112 - 125
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×