The house, now occupied by the performers of this theatre, was built
at the beginning of the revolution by the late duke of Orleans, who,
according to the opinion of those best acquainted with his schemes of
profit, intended it for the representation of the grand French opera,
for which, nevertheless, it is not sufficiently spacious.
It stands adjoining to the south-west angle of the _Palais du
Tribunat_, with its front entrance in the _Rue de la Loi_. Its façade
presents a row of twelve Doric columns, surmounted by as many
Corinthian pilasters, crowned by their entablature. On the first
story is an exterior gallery; ornamented by an iron balustrade, which
runs the whole length of the façade, and communicates with the lobby.
On the north side, and at the back of the theatre, on the
ground-floor, are several covered galleries, bordered by shops,
which communicate with the _Rue St. Honoré_ and the _Palais du
Tribunat_.
The vestibule, where four stair-cases terminate, is of an elliptic
form, surrounded by three rows of Doric pillars. Above the vestibule,
which is on the ground-floor, are the pit and lobby. The inside of
the house, which is immoderately lofty, presents seven tiers of
boxes, and, in the circumference, six Corinthian pillars. The
ornaments, numerously scattered, are in relief. At a certain
elevation, the plan of the house is changed by a recess made facing
the stage. Two angels, above the stage-boxes, shock the eye by their
enormous size. The boxes to the number of two hundred and twenty-two,
are said to contain thirteen hundred persons; and the pit, including
the _orchestre_,[1] seven hundred and twenty-four, making in all two
thousand and twenty persons. The construction of this house is
remarkable for iron only being employed in lieu of wood. The
architect was LOUIS.
This theatre, which was begun in 1787, was finished in 1790, when,
all privileges having been done away, it was first opened by a
company of French comedians, who played tragedy and comedy. It then
took the name of _Théâtre Français de la Rue de Richelieu_, which
street was afterwards and is now called _Rue de la Loi_. Being opened
at the commencement of the revolution, it naturally adopted its
principles; and, when the National Convention had proclaimed the
Republic, it assumed the pompous name of _Théâtre de la République_.
The greater part of the actors who performed here, rendered
themselves remarkable for their _revolutionary_ ardour, and, during
the reign of terror, it became a privileged theatre.
The _Comédie Française_ in the _Faubourg St. Germain_, which, in its
interior, presented the handsomest playhouse in Paris, was called
_l'Odéon_ a few years ago, and, since then, has been reduced by fire
to a mere shell, the walls only being left standing. In 1789, this
theatre appeared to follow the torrent of the revolution, and changed
its name for that of _Théâtre de la Nation_. Nevertheless, the actors
did not, on that account, relinquish the title of _Comédiens
ordinaires du Roi_. Shortly after, they even became, in general, the
declared partisans of the old _régime_, or at least of the court.
Their house was frequently an _arena_ where the two parties came to
blows, particularly on the occasion of the tragedy of _Charles Neuf_,
by CHÉNIER, and of the comedy of _L'Ami des Loix_. The former of
these pieces, represented in the first ebullition of the revolution,
was directed against the court; and the comedians refused to bring it
on the stage, at the time of the assemblage of the national guards in
Paris, on the 14th of July, 1790, known by the title of _Federation_.
The latter was played after the massacres of September 1792, and had
been composed with the laudable view of bringing back the public mind
to sentiments of humanity, justice, and moderation. The maxims which
it contained, being diametrically opposite to those of the plunderers
who then reigned, that is, the members of the _commune_ of Paris, the
minority of the National Convention, the Jacobins, Cordeliers, &c.
they interrupted the representation, and, after a great uproar, the
piece was prohibited.
This minority of which I have just spoken, having succeeded in
subduing the majority, nothing now stopped the rage of the
revolutionary party. All those who gave them umbrage were imprisoned,
and put to death with the forms of law. The comedians of the French
theatre were thrown into prison; it appears that they were, both men
and women, partly destined for the scaffold, and that if they
escaped, it was through the address of a clerk of one of the
Committees of Public Welfare or of Public Safety, who repeatedly
concealed the documents containing the charges brought against them.
It is said that the comedians purpose to prove their gratitude, so
long delayed, to this young man, without putting themselves to any
expense, by giving for his benefit an extraordinary
representation.[2]
At length the happy 9th of Thermidor arrived; the prisons were thrown
open; and, as you may well imagine in such a nation as this, the
French comedians were not the last to be set at liberty. However,
their theatre was not immediately restored to them. It was occupied
by a sort of bastard _spectacle_, with the actors of which they were
then obliged to form an association. This did not last long. The
French comedians were received by the manager of the lyric theatre of
the _Rue Feydeau_, whom they afterwards ruined. The actors of comedy,
properly so called, contrived to expel those of tragedy, with whom
they thought they could dispense; and, shortly, they themselves,
notwithstanding their reputation, were deserted by the public. The
heroes and heroines, with Mademoiselle RAUCOURT at their head, took
possession of the theatre of the _Rue de Louvois_, and there
prospered. But, after the 18th of Fructidor, (5th of September, 1797)
the Directory caused this house to be shut up: the reason assigned
was the representation given here of a little comedy, of ancient date
however, and of no great importance, in which a knavish valet is
called MERLIN, as was the Minister of Justice of that day, who since
became director, not of the theatre, but of the republic.
Mademoiselle RAUCOURT, who was directress of this theatre, returned
with her company to the old theatre of the _Faubourg St. Germain_,
which then took the name of _l'Odéon_.
In the mean time, the theatre of the _Rue de Richelieu_ had
perceptibly declined, after the fall of Robespierre, and the public
appeared to have come to a positive determination to frequent it no
longer. The manager of the _Théâtre Feydeau_, M. SARGENT, formerly a
banker, who was rich, and enjoyed a good reputation, succeeded in
uniting all the actors of the _Comédie Française_ and those of the
_Théâtre de la République_. This effected his own ruin. When he had
relinquished the management of the undertaking, the government took
it in hand, and definitively organized this tragic and comic
association, to superintend which it appointed a special
commissioner.
The _repertoire_ (or list of pieces which are here played habitually,
or have been acted with applause) is amazingly well furnished, and
does infinite honour to French literature. It may be divided into two
parts, the ancient and the modern. It is the former that deserves the
encomium which I have just bestowed. In the line of Tragedy, it is
composed of the greater part of the pieces of the four principal
pillars of the temple of the French Melpomene: namely CORNEILLE[3],
RACINE, CRÉBILLON, and VOLTAIRE, to whom may be added DU BELLOY, as
well as of some detached pieces, such as _Iphigénie en Tauride_ by
GUIMOND DE LA TOUCHE, _Le Comte de Warwick_ and _Philoctète_ by LA
HARPE. The modern _repertoire_, or list of stock-pieces, is formed of
the tragedies of M. M. DUCIS, CHÉNIER, ARNAULT, LEGOUVÉ, and LE
MERCIER.
In the line of Comedy, it is also very rich. You know that, at the
head of the French comic authors, stands MOLIÈRE, who, in this
country at least, has no equal, either among the ancients or the
moderns. Several of his pieces are still represented, though they are
not numerously attended; as well because manners are changed, as
because the actors are no longer able to perform them. Next to
MOLIÈRE, but at a great interval, comes REGNARD, whom the French
comedians have deserted, for much the same reason: they no longer
give any plays from the pen of this author, who possessed the _vis
comica_, except _Les Folies Amoureuses_, a pretty little comedy in
three acts. We no longer hear of his _Joueur_ and his _Légataire
Universel_, which are _chefs d'oeuvre_. There are likewise the works
of DESTOUCHES, who has written _Le Glorieux, Le Dissipateur_, and _La
Fausse Agnès_, which are always played with applause. _Le Méchant_,
by GRESSET, is a masterpiece in point of style, and _La Métromanie_,
by PIRON, the best of French comedies, next to those of MOLIÈRE and
REGNARD. Then come the works of LA CHAUSSÉE, who is the father of the
_drame_, and whose pieces are no longer represented, though he has
composed several, such as _La Gouvernante_, _L'École des Mères_, _Le
Préjugé à la Mode_, which, notwithstanding, their whining style, are
not destitute of merit, and those of DANCOURT, who has written
several little comedies, of a very lively cast, which are still
played, and those of MARIVAUX, whose old metaphysical jargon still
pleases such persons as have their head full of love. I might augment
this list by the name of several other old authors, whose productions
have more or less merit.
The number of modern French comic authors is very limited; for it is
not even worthwhile to speak of a few little comedies in one act, the
title of which the public scarcely remember. According to this
calculation, there is but one single comic author now living. That is
COLIN D'HARLEVILLE, who has written _L'Inconstant_, _Les Châteaux en
Espagne_, _Le Vieux Célibataire_, and _Les Moeurs du Jour_, which are
still represented. _Le Vieux Célibataire_ is always received with
much applause. In general, the pieces of M. COLIN are cold, but his
style is frequently graceful: he writes in verse; and the whole part
of _L'Inconstant_ is very agreeably written. Indeed, that piece is
the best of this author.
FABRE D'EGLANTINE is celebrated as an actor in the revolution (I mean
on the political stage), and as the author who has produced the best
piece that has appeared since _La Métromanie_. It is the _Philinte de
Molière_, which, in some measure, forms a sequel to the comedy of the
_Misanthrope_. Nevertheless, this title is ill chosen; for the
character of the _Philinte_ in the piece of MOLIÈRE, and that of
FABRE'S piece scarcely bear any resemblance. We might rather call it
the _Égoiste_. Although the comic part of it is weak, the piece is
strongly conceived, the fable very well managed, the style nervous
but harsh, and the third act is a _chef-d'oeuvre_.
Since the death of FABRE, another piece of his has been acted,
entitled _Le Précepteur_. In this piece are to be recognized both his
manner and his affected philosophical opinions. His object is to
vaunt the excellence of the education recommended by J. J. ROUSSEAU,
though the revolution has, in a great measure, proved the fallacy of
the principles which it inculcates. As these, however, are presented
with art, the piece had some success, and still maintains its ground
on the stage. It was played for the first time about two years ago.
The surname of EGLANTINE, which FABRE assumed, arose from his having
won the prize at the Floral games at Toulouse. The prize consisted of
an _eglantine_ or wild rose in gold. Before he became a dramatic
author, he was an actor and a very bad actor. Being nominated member
of the National Convention, he distinguished himself in that
assembly, not by oratorical talents, but by a great deal of villainy.
He did not think as he acted or spoke. When the _montagnards_[4] or
mountaineers, that is, those monsters who were always thirsting for
blood, divided, he appeared for some time to belong to the party of
DANTON, who, however, denied him when they were both in presence of
each other at the bar of the revolutionary tribunal. DANTON insisted
that he who had been brought to trial for a just cause, if not a just
motive, ought not to be confounded with stealers of port-folios.[5]
They were both sentenced to die, and accordingly executed.
Among the comic authors of our age, some people would reckon
DUMOUSTIER, whose person was held in esteem, but whose works are
below mediocrity. They are _Le Conciliateur_, a comedy in five acts,
and _Les Femmes_, a comedy in three acts. The latter appears to be
the picture of a brothel. They are both still played, and both have
much vogue, which announces the total decline of the art.
There is a third species of dramatic composition, proscribed by the
rules of good taste, and which is neither tragedy nor comedy, but
participates of both. It is here termed _drame_. Although LA CHAUSSÉE
is the father of this tragi-comic species of writing, he had not,
however, written any _tragédies bourgeoises_, and the French declare
that we have communicated to them this contagion; for their first
_drame_, _Beverley, ou le Joueur Anglais_ is a translation in verse
from the piece of that name of our theatre. The celebrated LEKAIN[6]
opposed its being acted, and affirmed with reason that this mixture
of the two species of drama hurt them both. MOLÉ, who was fond of
applause easily obtained, was the protector of the piece, and played
the part of _Beverley_ with success; but this _drame_ is no longer
performed on the Parisian stage. Next to this, comes _Le Père de
Famille_, by DIDEROT. It is a long sermon. However, it presents
characters well drawn. This species of composition is so easy that
the number of _drames_ is considerable; but scarcely any of them are
now performed, except _Eugénie_ and _La Mère Coupable_, by
BEAUMARCHAIS,[7] which are frequently represented. I shall not finish
this article without reminding you that MERCIER has written so many
_drames_ that he has been called _Le Dramaturge_. All his are become
the prey of the little theatres and the aliment of the provincial
departments. This circumstance alone would suffice to prove the
mediocrity of the _drame_. MONVEL, of whom I shall soon have occasion
to speak, would well deserve the same title.
[Footnote 1: This is a place, so called in French theatres,
comprising four or five rows of benches, parted off, between the
place where the musicians are seated and the front of the pit.]
[Footnote 2: It is not mentioned whether these sons and daughters of
Thespis, who have since gained a great deal of money, have offered
any _private_ remuneration to their benefactor, rather to their
guardian-angel.] [TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: The scan of this footnote was
imperfect. Some of the text was interpolated.]
[Footnote 3: Of course, PIERRE CORNEILLE is here meant. THOMAS
CORNEILLE, who was surnamed the Great, must not, however be
forgotten. THOMAS is the author of _Ariane_ and _le Comte d'Essex_, a
tragedy much esteemed, and which is deserving of estimation.]
[Footnote 4: Thus called, because they formed a very close and very
elevated group at one of the extremities of the hall of the National
Convention.]
[Footnote 5: FABRE D'EGLANTINE was tried for having, in concert with
certain stock-jobbers, proposed and caused the adoption of decrees
concerning the finances.]
[Footnote 6: LEKAIN said humourously that to play the _drame_ well,
it was sufficient to know how to make a summerset.]
[Footnote 7: Every one is acquainted with the two comedies written by
this author, _Le Barbier de Seville_ and _Le Mariage de Figaro_. The
astonishing run of the latter, which was acted one hundred and fifty
succeeding nights, was greatly owing to BEAUMARCHAIS having there
turned into ridicule several persons of note in the ministry and the
parliament: _La Mère Coupable_, which is often given, is the sequel
to _Le Mariage de Figaro_, as that piece is to _Le Barbier de
Seville_.]