Scribe and LegouvÉ

Augustin EugÈne Scribe was born at Paris, December 24th, 1791. He studied law but manifested early in life a strong inclination toward the drama. The first of his plays to be favored with the full approval of the public was Une nuit de la garde nationale, written in 1816, in collaboration with Delestre-Poirson. Thereafter, his success was great and continued. He produced plays in rapid succession for two and even three theaters at the same time. Many of them were written jointly with some collaborator. In 1816 appeared also Le nouveau Pourceaugnac and Le solliciteur, highly praised by Schlegel.

In 1820 Scribe was engaged to write exclusively for a new theater established by his friend Poison, under the patronage of the Duchesse de Berri. In less than ten years (1821-30) he produced over one hundred plays. Among the best of these are: Le mariage enfantin, Le colonel, La loge du portier, Le baiser au porteur, La reine de seize ans, La marraine, Le diplomate, Le plus beau jour de la vie, and Le mariage de raison.

For the ThÉÂtre-FranÇais he supplied the following plays: ValÉrie (1822), Le mariage d’argent (1827), Bertrand et Raton (1833), Une passion secrÈte (1834), La camaraderie (1837), Le verre d’eau (1840), Adrienne Lecouvreur (1849), Les contes de la reine de Navarre and La bataille de dames (1851), Mon Étoile (1853), Feu Lionel and Les doigts de fÉe (1858). Several of these are still widely known.

Adrienne Lecouvreur, which is described elsewhere, was written with Ernest LegouvÉ (1807-1903) and is a really beautiful play.

La bataille de dames, also written with LegouvÉ, is well known for its rapid action and sprightly dialogue.

Scribe also composed the libretti of the following operas: La dame blanche (1825), by BoÏeldieu; La muette de Portici (1828), Fra Diavolo (1830), Le cheval de bronze (1835), and others, by Auber; Robert le Diable (1831), Les Huguenots (1836), and Le prophÈte (1849), by Meyerbeer.

He wrote a number of novels, among which are Carlo Broschi, Judith, Le roi de carreau, and Maurice. Though widely read, they made no great literary mark.

In 1836 the French Academy elected Scribe to membership.

His productivity was enormous. Either alone or in collaboration, he produced over four hundred plays. At least three hundred and fifty of these have been printed separately in various collections of dramas, as Le thÉÂtre de madame, La France dramatique, Le magazin thÉÂtral, and Le thÉÂtre illustrÉ. A complete edition of his works has now been published by Calmann-LÉvy, Paris.

His many successful plays gave him large financial returns and his wealth increased rapidly. He left the most considerable fortune ever accumulated by any author of France.

He died at Paris on the 20th of February, 1861.

Scribe was not great in a purely literary way. His style is not all that could be desired. Neither was he a profound thinker or psychologist, nor a herald of new ideas. His ideas of morality were those current in his time. His world is that of the materialistic and self-satisfied bourgeoisie of the reign of Louis-Philippe. His shortcomings are manifest and have been severely handled by more than one eminent critic.

It is, nevertheless, undeniable that Scribe was a master at handling the plot and action of a drama. He possessed a most intimate knowledge of the technique of plays and the requirements of the stage. He excelled in the art of maintaining the interest of the spectator by skillful and rapid changes in the situation, by an abundance of action, and by a vivacious and lifelike conversation. He possessed in a very high degree the power to please and entertain an audience and to produce the desired theatrical effect.

When M. Octave Feuillet (1821-1890) succeeded EugÈne Scribe as a member of the French Academy, on March 26th, 1863, he said in his address of reception: “Un des arts les plus difficiles dans le domaine de l’invention littÉraire, c’est celui de charmer l’imagination sans l’Ébranler, de toucher le coeur sans le troubler, d’amuser les hommes sans les corrompre: ce fut l’art suprÊme de Scribe.”

And in his response to this discourse, M. Vitet (1802-1873) thus eulogized the remarkable inventive genius of Scribe.—“Il y avait chez Scribe une facultÉ puissante et vraiment supÉrieure qui lui assurait et qui m’explique cette suprÉmatie sur le thÉÂtre de son temps. C’Était un don d’invention dramatique que personne avant lui peut-Être n’avait ainsi possÉdÉ: le don de dÉcouvrir À chaque pas, presque À propos de rien, des combinaisons thÉÂtrales d’un effet neuf et saisissant; et de les dÉcouvrir, non pas en germe seulement ou À peine ÉbauchÉes, mais en relief, en action, et dÉjÀ sur la scÈne. Pendant le temps qu’il faut À ses confrÈres pour prÉparer un plan, il en achÈve plus de quatre; et jamais il n’achÈte aux dÉpens de l’originalitÉ cette fÉconditÉ prodigieuse. Ce n’est pas dans un moule banal que ses fictions sont jetÉes. S’il a ses secrets, ses mÉthodes, jamais il n’en sert de la mÊme faÇon. Pas un de ses ouvrages qui n’ait au moins son grain de nouveautÉ.... Scribe avait le gÉnie de l’invention dramatique.”

Finally, though Scribe is not generally accorded the rank of a great author, it must be acknowledged that he was one of the world’s greatest dramatic entertainers.

Ernest LegouvÉ was born at Paris in 1807. His father was Gabriel-Marie-Jean-Baptiste LegouvÉ (1764-1812), a French poet. Ernest LegouvÉ was a littÉrateur and dramatist. His best known plays, written in collaboration with Scribe, are Adrienne Lecouvreur (1849) and La Bataille de dames (1851). LegouvÉ died in 1903.

Adrienne Lecouvreur, one of the most talented actresses in the history of the French stage, was born, according to the parish records, at Damery, near Épernay, in Champagne, on April fifth, 1692. Her father was Robert Couvreur and her mother Marie Bouly.

When ten years of age, she came with her parents to Paris. She manifested very early a marked talent in recitation which soon attracted wide and favorable attention. Her first attempts at acting were decidedly successful.

Having received very careful theatrical training from Le Grand, she was engaged, in 1708, by Mlle. FonprÉ, directress of the theater of Lille, to play at that theater. Later she became the leading actress of the theater of LunÉville, and it is thought that she played also at Metz. In 1711 she was first actress of the theater of Strassburg and had become very popular.

Her career at the ComÉdie-FranÇaise began on the 27th of March, 1717. On May 14th she appeared in the Électre (1708) of CrÉbillon (1674-1762) and as AngÉlique in Georges Dandin (1668) by MoliÈre (1622-1673). Her success was complete, and it was freely acknowledged that she was beginning as the greatest actresses ordinarily finish.

The actress whose memory was then most popular was Mme. ChampmeslÉ (1642-1698), who had won renown in the theater of Racine. At the time of Mlle. Lecouvreur’s dÉbut at Paris, her principal rivals were Mlle. Desmares (retired in 1721), a niece of Mme. ChampmeslÉ; and Mlle. Du Clos (1670-1748).

The style of speech on the stage had been too declamatory and somewhat stilted and unnatural. It was, in contrast to this, the directness and simplicity of the elocution of Adrienne, in a word the sincerity and naturalness of her work, which especially appealed to the public, and enabled her, as the leading exponent of something better in the art of the stage, to hold her own against all rivals and intrigues.

Her rÉpertoire was very large and her activity very great. In ten months she played 139 times. Among the leading rÔles in which she appeared in various years were the following: (1) in plays by Pierre Corneille (1606-1684)—Pauline in Polyeucte, ChimÈne in Le Cid, and CornÉlie in PompÉe; (2) in plays by Jean Racine (1630-1699)—the title rÔles in IphigÉnie, BÉrÉnice, and PhÈdre, Atalide in Bajazet, ZarÈs in Esther, and Antigone in La ThÉbaÏde; (3) in other plays—Électre in Électre and Éricie in Pyrrhus by CrÉbillon; Agathe in Les Folies amoureuses by Regnard (1655-1709); AngÉlique in Les Fils ingrats by Piron (1689-1773); Constance in InÈs de Castro by La Motte-Houdard (1672-1731); and Jocaste in the Œdipe of Voltaire (1694-1778).

After seeing Mlle. Lecouvreur in the rÔle of Constance in the interesting tragedy InÈs de Castro, Voltaire is said to have thus expressed his appreciation: “Mlle. Le Couvreur a jouÉ le rÔle de Constance avec dignitÉ et dÉlicatesse.... OÙ le sentiment domine... elle est au-dessus de tout ce que j’ai jamais entendu.”

Among the numerous admirers of Adrienne was the count Maurice de Saxe (see Notes), who, after various love affairs and scandals, was attracted to this eminent young actress on his second visit to Paris, in 1721. Their love was mutual and the friendship continued for several years. When, in 1725, he wrote to France for money, to enable him to secure the duchy of Courlande, Adrienne sold her jewels and silver plate and thus raised for him the sum of 40,000 francs. Nevertheless, he failed in this enterprise and, after years of absence, he returned to Paris, October 23d, 1728. Differences in taste and especially the infidelity of the count caused an estrangement.

It was at this period that he became an admirer of the intriguing Duchesse de Bouillon (see Notes). This artful coquette now conceived a dangerous jealousy toward Mlle. Lecouvreur, which she concealed under a treacherous semblance of friendship and hospitality.

Although the testimony in the case is somewhat contradictory, it seems nevertheless strongly indicated that the duchess desired to poison her rival. In order to carry out this plot, the duchess is said to have engaged one Simeon Bouret, a young painter of miniatures. He was born at Metz in 1711 and came to Paris in 1727 and again in 1728. According to his sworn testimony, it was while engaged in painting the portrait of the duchess that she tried to persuade him to call upon Mlle. Lecouvreur and to give her a love potion which would turn her from the Comte de Saxe to someone else. He was summoned to a number of secret meetings with two masked men who, as the emissaries of the duchess, continued to urge him to carry out her design. Convinced, however, that the real purpose was to poison Mlle. Lecouvreur, he revealed to her the plot and afterward brought to her some lozenges which had been left for him by the mysterious agents in a secret place. Upon opening the package, Mlle. Lecouvreur and two other persons—Bouret and the Comte de Saxe—who were present were made ill by the emanations of the enclosed chemicals. The lieutenant of police was immediately informed of the affair. That same day (July 29, 1729), Bouret was imprisoned at Saint-Lazare. Meantime, Claire-Joseph Geoffroy, of the AcadÉmie des Sciences, analyzed the lozenges but rendered a doubtful report upon them. In the various interrogations to which Bouret was subjected, he continued to repeat the story as above. Liberated, October 23, 1729, he was again thrust into prison, January 23, 1730, at the instigation of the Duke de Bouillon. The duchess, having been advised that public suspicion rested upon her, undoubtedly desired to accomplish the ruin of her tool, the unfortunate Bouret, in order to save herself. Bouret wrote, on August 8, 1730, a touching appeal to M. HÉrault, lieutenant of police, in which he reiterated his innocence and attributed his continued imprisonment to his enemies. This letter bears the impress of truth. However, as nothing appeared to be accomplished by it, and he seemed to be destined to spend the rest of his days in prison, Bouret wrote again, August 24, to M. HÉrault, this time a totally different letter, calculated to placate his enemies and secure his own liberation, even at the apparent expense of the truth. Having implored the pardon of the duchess, whom he now claimed to have falsely accused, he obtained a tardy release, on the third of June, 1731.

It does not appear that Adrienne was really harmed seriously by the odor of the poison, which in the play causes her death. She had always been delicate in health and had suffered from many illnesses which interrupted her work as an actress. In her last year she had also many discouragements, among which were the death of her former teacher and fellow actor, Michel Baron (1653-1729), of the troupe of MoliÈre, the ingratitude of Piron, the intrigues of her rivals of the stage and in love, especially Mlle. Du Clos and the Duchesse de Bouillon, the infidelity of Maurice de Saxe, and the attempted poisoning.

Among the plays in which she participated toward the close of her career were PhÈdre, Horace, Électre, Le Malade imaginaire, and La Surprise de l’Amour. She was taken ill while playing in Le Florentin and Œdipe, on March 15, and died on the following Monday, March 20, 1730, at eleven o’clock in the morning. Voltaire, d’Argental, and a surgeon were present at her bedside.

Christian burial was refused by the clergy, because she had not received the last rites of the church. She had died while the priest for whom she had sent was on the way. She was therefore interred secretly and at night. It was probably near the bank of the Seine that this great actress was buried, though the exact place of her burial is uncertain.

Voltaire urged her fellow actors to resist and to denounce such unworthy treatment of her who had been one of the chief glories of the French stage. However, nothing appears to have been done. M. Grandval, who had just been received into the company of the ComÉdie-FranÇaise, pronounced her eulogy, composed by Voltaire. Numerous other persons also wrote very eulogistic and some even passionate appreciations in prose and in verse of her beauty, charm, grace, abilities, and triumphs.

A collection of letters entitled Lettres de Adrienne Le Couvreur, RÉunies pour la premiÈre fois et publiÉes avec notes, Étude biographique, documents inÉdits tirÉs des archives de la ComÉdie, des minutiers de notaires et des papiers de la Bastille, Portrait et fac-simile, par Georges Monval, Archiviste de la ComÉdie franÇaise, was published by Plon, Paris, in 1892. Many of these letters are remarkable for their graceful and charming style and give to Mlle. Lecouvreur a high rank as a letter writer.

From the many verses written in her honor by her faithful friend, Voltaire, the following are selected:

The Drama Adrienne Lecouvreur

The drama, Adrienne Lecouvreur, by Scribe and LegouvÉ, was written in 1848. Owing to the changing political conditions of the time, its presentation was delayed until the following year. During this period it is probable that certain alterations and additions were made in the play. In its completed form it was given for the first time at the ThÉÂtre-FranÇais, April 14, 1849. The celebrated actress Mlle. Rachel appeared in the title rÔle.

It is a so-called comÉdie-drame—a play in which there is a mingling of comic and tragic elements. It ends in tragedy.

The play deals sympathetically with the love of the talented Adrienne Lecouvreur, of the ComÉdie-FranÇaise, and Maurice, comte de Saxe (1696-1750). It portrays in a vivid and interesting way the rivalry and hostility of the Princesse de Bouillon and the tragic death of Adrienne.

The close connection of the plot with the ComÉdie-FranÇaise, where the entire second act takes place,[A] and the many literary allusions add much to the interest.

The action takes place at Paris in the month of March, 1730.

Adrienne Lecouvreur is a skillfully written play. Francisque Sarcey (1827-1899) calls it “une piÈce bien faite et trÈs bien faite.” (Quarante ans de thÉÂtre, IV, 261.) In general construction it is a compromise between the conflicting ideas of the classicists and the romanticists. This is evident in the treatment of the three unities. Unity of action is maintained, although several subordinate intrigues are suggested. Unity of place, in the strict sense, is disregarded, since the five acts occur in five different places. However, all are at Paris. Unity of time is essentially preserved, although its limits are somewhat exceeded.

Moreover, the author has adapted the play to the spirit and conditions of his own time. It is an epitome of France in 1848. One of Scribe’s methods was to combine in his personages historic characters of the time of the action with others who were his own contemporaries. Thus the characters in his plays are often composite in origin, and the different elements are combined and modified with judgment and skill. Probably he has never been excelled in the unerring dexterity with which he gathered the delicate threads of reality and fiction and wove them into a dramatic texture. There are striking parallels between some of the leading characters in Adrienne Lecouvreur and certain prominent persons of the middle of the nineteenth century. These resemblances are particularly marked between Adrienne and Mlle. Rachel (1820-1858), the actress who created this rÔle in 1849; also between Maurice de Saxe and NapolÉon III. Similar parallels could be shown between other contemporaries of Scribe and various personages of the play. These similarities have been carefully indicated by Mr. John Davis Batchelder in his interesting study: Un DÉtail de Technique dans un Drame d’EugÈne Scribe (“Adrienne Lecouvreur” et les influences de 1848), Paris, 1909.

It was especially for Mlle. Rachel and even at her request that Adrienne Lecouvreur was written. Moreover, it was well known in Paris that Rachel was to portray in the title rÔle many details of her own life and triumphs. She rehearsed her part repeatedly under the personal direction of Scribe. She was then at the height of her fame and enjoyed the friendship and protection of NapolÉon III.

Among the historic facts in Scribe’s portrayal of Adrienne Lecouvreur are: the love of Adrienne and Maurice de Saxe, the sale of her jewels to provide money for the equipment of his troops, the rivalry and enmity of the Duchesse de Bouillon, the public vengeance of Adrienne against her rival, the attempted poisoning of Adrienne by the Duchess, the professional rivalry and conventional declamation of Mlle. Du Clos, the simple and natural style of Adrienne, and the hostility of the clergy toward the latter.

Many alterations in the historic background have been introduced, only a few of which are here mentioned. The Princesse de Bouillon, a woman of Polish descent, has been given the rÔle of the Duchesse de Bouillon, a native Frenchwoman. It was the latter who was the rival of Adrienne for the love of Maurice de Saxe and who is thought to have attempted the poisoning. It was at a public presentation of PhÈdre at the ComÉdie-FranÇaise, not at the home of the Princesse de Bouillon, that Mlle. Lecouvreur denounced her rival. The attempted poisoning had occurred in 1729, not 1730, and thenceforth Mlle. Lecouvreur was not received at the homes of the Bouillons. She scrupulously avoided the members of the Bouillon family. Moreover, the love of Maurice de Saxe and Mlle. Lecouvreur was ended before 1730. After having accepted all her fortune to pursue his expeditions in Poland in 1725, he had cruelly abandoned the actress for her rival, the Duchesse de Bouillon (Michelet: Louis XV, pp. 91-94.) Nor did Mlle. Lecouvreur receive the Comte de Saxe during this later period. It is evident that Scribe has ameliorated the conduct of Maurice de Saxe toward Adrienne, in order that he may retain the interest of the spectator. For in the play he is always the principal hero and, though his loyalty is for a time in doubt, he regains at the last the confidence of the audience and the trust and love of Adrienne.