Guilbert de Pixérécourt

• Born: January 22, 1773
• Birthplace: Nancy, France
• Died: July 27, 1844
• Place of death: Nancy, France

Other Literary Forms

Guilbert de Pixérécourt is known only for his plays.

Achievements

Guilbert de Pixérécourt is known as the father of melodrama. In his hands, melodrama became a colorful dramatic instrument that included the components of tragedy, comedy, pantomine, comic opera, fantasy, and vaudeville. In his Théâtre choisi (selected plays), he lists among his 120 plays 63 dramas and melodramas, 9 comedies, 21 comic operas and lyric dramas, 8 fantasies and pantomimes, and 17 vaudevilles. In the large enterprise of adapting the popular genre to please his contemporary audience, Pixérécourt at times collaborated with other writers and with musical composers, such as Nicolas Brazier and Victor Ducange.

Literary historians have advanced several theories on the evolution of melodrama and Pixérécourt’s role in it. Although scholarly arguments represent a diversity of opinions, there tends to be agreement that melodrama is an extension of the dramatic tradition of both the neoclassical and the bourgeois theater that preceded it. Although traditional neoclassical drama was intended for a more erudite audience, the melodrama addressed itself to a less well educated public. Consequently, the genre disregarded many of the codes and rules governing conventional theater in favor of a more colorful, realistic, and emotional representation. Jules Marsan, a well-known literary critic of the period, points out that the melodrama constituted a predictable step in the evolution of eighteenth century theater because of the increasing demands of a larger and more popular audience. Classical masterpieces by such famous playwrights as Pierre Corneille, Jean Racine, Molière, and their imitators no longer expressed the mood of the times. The modern spectator preferred an entertaining and rapidly moving social drama to detailed analysis, and the prose of everyday speech to poetry. In addition, as its name indicates, melodrama was interspersed with song and instrumental music.

Having chosen the genre as his preferred vehicle of expression, Pixérécourt dedicated his creative talent to its development. Known as the “Corneille of the boulevards,” he supervised the many details—music, scenery, costumes—in the production of his plays and carefully directed rehearsals. “Enfin j’ai régné pendant trente ans comme un roi absolu” (in a word, for thirty years I reigned supreme), he commented on his long-lived ascendancy in the boulevard theaters. Beyond Paris as well, Pixérécourt’s melodramas were celebrated. Many were staged for enthusiastic provincial audiences, and some were translated and performed in other countries, including England, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Holland, and Russia.

Biography

In many ways, the emotional situations of René-Charles Guilbert de Pixérécourt’s melodramas reflect the upheavals and perils that he experienced firsthand. From his early youth until the end of his life, he was subject to dramatic events. Pixérécourt was born on January 22, 1773, into a noble provincial family, which included several distinguished members. His grandfather had served as adviser to Charles of Lorraine, and his uncle, for whom he was named, was a doctor of theology who had served as chaplain to King Stanislas of Poland. The family had received the title of nobility at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Although little is known about his mother, his father is characterized by Edmond Estève as having “une âme de féodal” (the soul of a feudal lord). Nicolas Charles Georges Guilbert, a former army officer, fully intended to rear his son in the strict manner of the ancien régime. Consequently, the young Pixérécourt’s upbringing was severe. “Ma première jeunesse a été arrosée de larmes” (my earliest youth was sprinkled with tears), the playwright reminisced in his declining years. He also observed that his sadness and need of affection in his childhood underlay the sentimental perspective of his plays.

Although the young Pixérécourt was interested in art and literature, he received neither encouragement nor recognition until he was in secondary school, where he won books as prizes for his academic excellence. The year 1785 was important because the book awards marked the beginning of a lifelong pleasure of book collecting and a step toward the definition of his career goals. During his school years, Pixérécourt also demonstrated a talent for drawing, which would help him to earn a living later in Paris and would attract his interest in the scenic design of his plays. He did not, however, pursue a career in the arts immediately but chose law as his future profession. Unfortunately, it was impossible for him to realize his plans, for at the conclusion of his studies, the Revolution erupted, and his family’s financial condition changed dramatically. Although Pixérécourt was horrified by revolutionary terror and abuses, he decided not to emigrate as other young men of aristocratic families were doing. Nevertheless, his father insisted on enrolling him in a royalist army in Coblentz. No doubt remembering the harsh military exercises of his childhood, Pixérécourt was repelled by army life and yearned to escape. He requested a month’s leave and, disguised as a beggar, returned to France. He was able to reach Nancy without incident but in continuing on to Paris encountered numerous obstacles. Having no money and in danger of being arrested as a defector, he was saved only through the intervention of a friend who took him in.

As it was impossible to look for work, Pixérécourt spent his time reading Edward Young and Jean-Pierre Claris de Florian, whose influence proved decisive in his choice of a career. In fact, he was so impressed with Florian that he prepared an edition of the playwright and novelist’s unpublished works. Energized from his reading and experiences, Pixérécourt began writing immediately and within a short time had composed a drama in four acts, Sélico: Ou, Les Nègres généreux (Selico: or, the noble Negroes), which he sold outright to the director of the Théâtre Molière. Even though unforeseen circumstances prevented the play from reaching the stage at that time, the author, encouraged by the sale of his first work, enthusiastically composed another, Claudine: Ou, L’Anglais vertueux (Claudine: or, the virtuous Englishman), a one-act comedy that was accepted at the Théâtre Favart.

Just as the young artist was becoming deeply involved in his work and felt success within his reach, he was again interrupted. This time, the French government required all Frenchmen between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five to register for conscription. Therefore, the young artist returned to Nancy, where he entered the eleventh cavalry division. While in military service, he encountered an unusually cruel government official, about whom he wrote a one-act play, Marat-Mauger. The production was halted by the revolutionary committee at the moment of its opening at the Théâtre de Nancy. Pixérécourt escaped arrest and somehow maneuvered a medical discharge from the army. Back in Paris, he continued to live precariously and in constant danger. Yet, in spite of reversals, an influential friend, Lazare Carnot, came to his aid, obtaining for him an appointment as clerk in the war office. It was only through the constant intervention of Carnot that Pixérécourt, who was under threat of being recognized as a former rebel emigrant, could continue to earn his living and not fall into Maximilien Robespierre’s hands. Yet even with the security of having suitable employment, he yearned to return to the theater. Accordingly, in 1795, he left his post in the war office in order to write, and, in addition, he married Marie Jeanne Françoise Quinette de la Hogue. In his memoirs, he speaks of the financial difficulties of his first years of marriage, when he was attempting to support a wife and child and, at the same time, to establish himself in the theatrical world. At this point, he returned to his talent of drawing to help meet his financial obligations.

Professional success came in 1797, with his one-act comedy Les Petits Auvergnates (the little Auvergnates). Seventy-three showings in Paris and thirty-nine in the provinces gave Pixérécourt the means to dedicate himself to his first love, the theater. During the following thirty years, he became the recognized master of melodrama, delighting large audiences both in Paris and in provincial cities. His works held universal appeal, as was proved by numerous translations. Though 120 plays represent an impressive body of work, they do not comprise the sum of his literary activity. The playwright did not confine his energetic talent to composition; he also became an administrator in Parisian theaters: the Opéra-Comique and the Gaîté. In 1835, a fire at the latter theater nearly ruined Pixérécourt financially and brought his brilliant career to an abrupt end. Consequently, he was forced to sell his beloved country home at Fontenay-sous-Bois and the library he had cherished. This catastrophe, exacerbated by declining health, forced him to leave the theater. Although Pixérécourt withdrew from active life, he spent his final years preparing a valuable edition of his selected plays. He returned to his birthplace, where he died in 1844.

Analysis

In his memoirs, Guilbert de Pixérécourt speaks of his inspiration and his artistic intentions: “C’est avec des idées religieuses et providentielles; c’est avec des sentiments moraux que je me suis lancé dans la carrière épineuse du théâtre” (I launched out into the thorny career of theater with religious and providential ideas and with moral sentiment). Pixérécourt accomplished what he set out to do; a high moral purpose uplifts all of his works. In the struggle between good and evil that dominates the plots of the melodramas, good always triumphs, and in its victory the virtues of generosity, charity, and love are constantly rewarded while the vices of avarice, egotism, and hatred are scorned.

With this moral basis in mind, Pixérécourt invented a dramatic system that would achieve his ethical objectives while pleasing the audience by encouraging participation and evoking both laughter and tears. Rejecting the neoclassical preference for artificial, formal language—which, he said, made the peasant sound like the prince—Pixérécourt was nevertheless fundamentally conservative in his dramaturgy. He was not eager to overturn all vestiges of theatrical tradition, such as the three unities that had governed classical drama; instead, he adapted these elements according to the requirements of each plot in an attempt to render the play convincing and well organized. Pixérécourt not only insisted on careful preparation and high standards in artistic composition but also required professionalism in his actors and recommended constant interaction among author, director, producer, stage manager, and actors. He believed that the playwright should be present at all rehearsals.

The Tale of Mystery

Pixérécourt achieved his objectives in his first melodrama. The Tale of Mystery, enthusiastically received more than three hundred times in Paris and more than one thousand times in the provinces and translated into several foreign languages as well, serves as an excellent and in many ways typical example of Pixérécourt’s melodrama. Although he did not invent the genre of melodrama, he was praised by one critic as having begun a renaissance in the theater with this play.

The principal appeal of the play resides in its successfully communicated message and colorful and musical staging. Indeed, Pixérécourt rarely invented new material; instead, he borrowed his protagonists and situations from history, contemporary life, or popular novels. In the case of The Tale of Mystery, he took his theme from a novel written in 1798 by François-Guillaume Ducray-Duminil. Notwithstanding the thematic borrowing, which because of name recognition heightened interest in the play, The Tale of Mystery is not a subservient imitation. Pixérécourt transformed the story into a lively performance filled with music, dance, colorful scenery, pantomime, and rapid dialogue. The author embodies the polarized concepts of good and evil in his protagonists; virtuous qualities are exemplified in the innocent Coelina, whose parents are dead and who is threatened with the loss of her inheritance to her uncle, the evil Truguelin, who is conspiring for his niece to marry his son Marcan. Coelina is surrounded by her cousin Stephany, who loves her; Tiennette, her confidante and housekeeper to her uncle, with whom she lives; and a devoted mute beggar, Francisque, who is eventually revealed as her real father. Truguelin is assisted in his ambitions by an obedient servant.

The spectators, knowing the outcome in advance, can applaud the virtuous throughout the play and await the final happy union of Coelina and Stephany with pleasant anticipation. Nevertheless, the expectation of a triumphant conclusion does not exclude suspense. Pixérécourt holds the spectator in a state of uncertainty as the villain Truguelin’s sinister plans constantly threaten the lives and happiness of the innocent. Interest is further heightened by staccato dialogues in single alternate lines that underscore moments of conflict and fear. In contrast to the rapid colloquy that casts the antagonist against the heroine and her supporters, longer and majestically placed grandiloquent statements on virtue serve to strengthen the moral communication of the play. Moreover, the delineation of good and evil is reinforced by a tremolo from the orchestra announcing the entrance of virtuous and malevolent characters and thus preparing the audience for the following scene.

The movement of the play is smooth, transitions are artfully prepared, and expository remarks are woven into the design of the plot in a natural manner. The overall structure of the melodrama, typified in The Tale of Mystery, supports the play’s basic message. Each act performs a distinct function. The first presents a happy, innocent situation and introduces the problem that will jeopardize the happiness of the main characters. The second act shows the maneuvers of the antagonist and the extent to which he will go to accomplish his desires. Finally, the third act witnesses the struggle between good and evil and the eventual triumph of virtue. The success of The Tale of Mystery must be attributed in large part to its clear organization, audience participation, and gratifying surprise coup de théâtre in the final denouement. No doubt the audience gave a standing ovation on learning through the discovery of her birth certificate that Coelina was the daughter of Francisque, whom they had come to love during the course of the play.

In fact, the role of Francisque is an important unifying element in the play. While interpreting his gestures and sensitive facial expressions, the spectator becomes curious and intently follows the revelations that lead to his identification. The contrast between the lively musical and conversational background and Francisque’s silence renders the mute’s every movement telling and intriguing. Developing the role of a nonspeaking character proved successful, and Pixérécourt used the device in other melodramas as well, including The Forest of Bondy and Christophe Colomb. The Tale of Mystery constitutes a powerful beginning to Pixérécourt’s melodrama and to the development of the art of pantomime. The play makes a vital statement on the significance of gesture in literary expression. Audiences were particularly appreciative of this visual communication, which complemented and at times even surpassed the symbolic richness of the dialogue.

Robinson Crusoë

In keeping with his objective to impart a moral message within a colorful and entertaining framework, Pixérécourt concentrated on immersing the audience in a changing environment from act to act and from play to play. Always conscientious in creating an authentic physical setting, the playwright specialized in generating the atmosphere of the locale and historical time in which the action occurs. To this end, local color included not only visible elements such as scenery, costumes, and properties but also audible features such as music and song. Robinson Crusoë stands out as a model work that transports the audience into another world. The success of the three-act melodrama, with its 366 showings in Paris and 386 in the provinces, confirmed the popular approval of Pixérécourt’s plays. Enthusiastic boulevard theatergoers were willing to wait in line for hours before curtain time at the Porte Saint-Martin.

Assuredly, the success of Robinson Crusoë must be attributed to its popular subject and the playwright’s imaginative approach. The hero was known and appreciated from Daniel Defoe’s novel of 1719. Yet, having borrowed the protagonist, his faithful servant Vendredi (Friday), and his parrot, Pixérécourt proceeded to apply both creativity and research that culminated in an innovative work. To the small core of original characters, the playwright added a host of others, so that there would be an ample range of relationships with their accompanying emotions necessary to the genre.

In the melodrama, the heretofore deserted island is filled with Caribbean natives, including Friday’s father, Iglou, and a ship of mutineers led by Atkins, an English petty officer, who abandon their captain, Don Diégo. As the first act unfolds, it is discovered that Don Diégo is Crusoë’s devoted brother-in-law who had set out with Crusoë’s wife, Emma, and son Isidor to find the sailor who was shipwrecked sixteen years earlier. These innocent victims are seconded by a faithful and humorous sailor from Provence and an elderly housekeeper, who, along with Friday, intervene constantly on behalf of their mistress and master. The ensuing conflict for possession of the boat favors alternately Crusoë’s small group, then the mutineers. When nearly all hope is lost, Iglou mobilizes his Caribbean tribe, and, disguising them as a forest, turns defeat into a stunning victory for the virtuous friends of his son. The scene of the moving forest, reminiscent of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth (pr. 1606), constitutes a colorful and amusing coup de théâtre. At the conclusion of the play, there is jubilant celebration with singing, dancing, and smoking of the peace pipe before the departure of Crusoë, his family, and his friends.

Although the hero rejoices on returning to his family and civilization, referring to the island as “témoin de mes longues souffrances” (witness of my long suffering), he states at the end of the play that he hopes to return one day. It is possible that this statement represented as well the feelings of the spectators, for they had been absorbed in a beautiful and exotic atmosphere that had been carefully constructed. Scene after scene of natural splendor, colorful native traditions, costumes, and music produced an exciting theatrical event and constitute the genuine innovation of the play.

The structure of the melodrama follows a well-established pattern with each act performing a function. A state of innocence and impending gloom prevails in the first act, followed by full-blown conflict and multiple reversals in the second and a final reversal in the third. Virtue and happiness are restored at the conclusion; evil is literally brought to its knees as the mutineers beg for pardon. In his characters, too, the playwright continues to depict virtues and faults in a simplified fashion; Peter Brooks well describes Pixérécourt’s characters as “pure forms.” Always faithful to their essential definition, they do not undergo development in the course of the action; instead, their strength lies in the clarity with which they present conflicting values.

It was through such larger-than-life creations that Pixérécourt chose to bring morality to his audience without incurring the risks inherent in dealing with specific events and people of his times. His early and unsuccessful attempt, in Marat-Mauger, to dramatize a political event persuaded him of the advantage of concentrating on a universal message. The Tale of Mystery and Robinson Crusoë are important because they illustrate in both form and content the qualities that made Pixérécourt’s theater so popular and influential, as well as the limitations which have determined his place in literary history.

Bibliography

Brooks, Peter. “The Aesthetics of Astonishment.” The Georgia Review 30 (Fall, 1976): 615-639. This article looks at the lively performance style that marked the melodramas of Pixérécourt.

Brooks, Peter. “The Text of Muteness.” New Literary History 5, no. 3 (Spring, 1974): 549-564. This essay looks at the contrast between the muteness of the character Francisque and the music and conversation that characterize Pixérécourt’s melodramas.

Marcoux, J. Paul. Guilbert de Pixérécourt: French Melodrama in the Early Nineteenth Century. New York: P. Lang, 1992. Marcoux examines Pixérécourt’s life and work and the French popular theater. He focuses on The Forest of Bondy: Or, The Dog of Montargis and The Tale of Mystery.