0915142 FR322 1

Microcosms of Society in Revolutionary Theatre

The upheaval of the Revolution had a significant impact on social hierarchy, established institutions

such as the monarchy and also how people expressed themselves. Freedom of the press saw an

abundance of pamphlets and publications which allowed prevailing ideas to become widespread, yet

there also became a way of accessing the illiterate and prolific Third Estate: through the theatre. The

Revolution influenced heavily what was put on the contemporary stage, within the plays ‘every major

upheaval, indeed every significant shift in political opinion, was reflected with remarkable alacrity’1.

A well-written pièce no longer meant success for a playwright, he had to be engagé. Those involved

in theatre could ‘vouchsafe their revolutionary credentials,’2 something that became increasingly

necessary as the Revolution progressed. To do this plays often contained microcosms of the Ancien

Régime to be turned in ridicule, microcosms representing the abuses of the clergy or indeed the

superiority of the sans-culottes. This essay aims to explore such microcosms and also other symbols

and representations in order to reveal the contemporary state of society. Focus will be on three plays

spanning the period from the start of the Revolution to the infamous Terror: Charles IX3, Le Couvent4

and Le Jugement dernier des rois5. This essay then aims to discuss the difficulties in claiming that

microcosms are truly representative of society due to the ubiquitous use of theatre as a tool for

propaganda.

The shift in the types of microcosms displayed in the plays underpins the notion that they are

indeed reflective of contemporary society, which was equally as ephemeral. The focus of the

1 Marvin Carlson, The Theatre of the French Revolution (New York, Cornell University Press, 1966) p.V2 Patrick D. Murphree, ‘The Spectacle of the Cloister in French Revolutionary Drama,’ at <http://www.cesar.org.uk/cesar2/conferences/cesar_conference_2006/Murphree_paper06.html>, consulted on 06/02/2013.3 Marie-Joseph Chénier, Charles IX, ou l’école des rois in Daniel Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution (Paris, Union Générale D’Éditions, 1973) All quotations will refer to this edition, page numbers will appear in brackets after the quotation.4 Olympe de Gouges, Le Couvent ou les voeux forces, (Paris, chez la veuve Duchesne : chez la veuve Bailly : et chez les Marchands de Nouveautés, 1792) All quotations will refer to this edition, page numbers will appear in brackets after the quotation.5 Sylvain Maréchal, Le Jugement dernier des rois, in : Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution (Paris, Union Générale D’Éditions, 1973) All quotations will refer to this edition, page numbers will appear in brackets after the quotation.

0915142 FR322 2

microcosm paralleled the focus within society, whether this was on the monarchy, the clergy or the

power of the people. Indeed Marie-Joseph Chénier’s Charles IX touches upon many of these themes

as the playwright was benefitting from a relaxing in censorship, his previously banned play could thus

be put on the stage. His representation of both the clergy and the monarchy was radical. Although not

particularly significant as a theatrical piece, the socio-political aspect made the tragedy a success.

Marvin Carlson remarks that the role that theatre played had changed at the start of the Revolution,

instead of being mere entertainment ‘[it] became a tool’6. Chénier saw how to represent his

revolutionary alliances: by creating unmistakeable microcosms. Indeed the court of Charles IX

parallels that of Louis XVI in such a way that the spectators would not fail to see it.

Charles IX establishes a kingdom in disorder by portraying the horrific Saint

Bartholomew’s Day massacre. The decision to focus on this event is particularly topical as the

massacre is heavily associated with monarchical abuse. Matters are made worse by the depiction of

Charles IX as indecisive, a weak king, who confesses that he is always ‘prêt à l’obéissance’ (Charles,

p.215). Links between the sixteenth-century king and Louis XVI would have been ineluctable. He is

quick to change his mind upon hearing the persuasive discourses of others, the Cardinal’s speech

reveals the capriciousness of the King in Act II scene II, Charles IX is quick to respond ‘J’obéirai;

c’en est fait, j’y consens’ (Charles, p.217). Yet it is the power of one character in particular that is of

interest, as it underpins the notion of the court as a microcosm of Louis XVI’s in 1789. Catherine de

Médicis is a foreign villainess whose influence is far-reaching; it is stated as a reference to la reine-

mère that there are ‘des femmes gouvernant des princes trop faciles’ (Charles, p.204). Foreign

dominance is an undeniable reflection of Marie-Antoinette, the Austrian scapegoat for all that was

wrong with France. Act II scene IV reveals the power of Catherine de Médicis, as she is able to

persuade the King of Coligni’s guilt. This is a microcosm of contemporary fears of Marie-

Antoinette’s power due to the ‘countless accusations [that] Marie-Antoinette dominat[ed] Louis

XVI’7. Doyle refers to the Queen’s sway in Necker’s dismissal, stating ‘the air had been full of far

6 Marvin Carlson, The Theatre of the French Revolution, p. 207 Pierre Saint-Amand (trans. By Jennifer Curtiss Gage), ‘Terrorizing Marie-Antoinette’, Critical Inquiry, 20:3 (Spring, 1994) pp. 379-400, p.385

0915142 FR322 3

from groundless rumours that the [...] Queen [was] pressing for Necker’s dismissal’ 8, such influence

even goes as far as the drafting of the minister’s speech which ‘had not enjoyed a free hand’9.

Displacement of blame onto the female-figure is also present in the play, it allows for the notion that a

sovereign is essentially benign. Although this appears counterintuitive to a modern reader who knows

the fate of Louis Capet, this play was shown in the early days of the Revolution where it was still

possible to be a revolutionary and a monarchist, to be sure many members of Jacobin club were still

constitutional monarchists10. This contemporary opinion was also held by the playwright himself,

revealed in the ‘discours préliminaire’:

O Louis XVI ! roi plein de justice et de bonté, vous êtes digne d'être le chef des Français.

Mais des méchans veulent toujours établir un mur de séparation entre votre peuple et

vous.11

One can thus deduce that the court of Charles IX is in fact a microcosm of such sentiments. ‘Des

méchans’ are symbolised by Catherine de Médicis and the Cardinal in the play. The monarch

eventually reveals himself to be remorseful, he is aware of the gravity of his actions: ‘je ne suis plus

un roi, je suis un assassin’ (Charles, p.266), there is still hope for the King, and therefore for Louis

XVI. This idea is reinforced by the character of Henri de Navarre, revealed to be a strong ruler, a ‘roi

magnanime’ (Charles, p.208). Not all rulers are malevolent; such a microcosm reflects the spirit of

the times, which was quick to change.

However one institution does not escape the wrath of the playwright so easily: the Church.

The Revolution saw a growth in anticlericalism, revealed in the decision to sell Church assets 12. The

Cardinal embodies the abuses of the Clergy, illustrated in Act IV scene V where he blesses the

murderer’s weapons. His hold on the kingdom is thus a microcosm of the Church’s authority over

France: ‘Ce n’est pas lui qui règne, et la France est à nous’ (Charles, p.207). Susan Maslan goes

further in her exploration of the text by professing that the play actually ‘encouraged the anticlerical 8 William Doyle, The Oxford History of the French Revolution (Oxford, Oxford University press, 2002) ch. 49 Ibid10 Graham E. Rodmell, French Drama of the Revolutionary Years (London, Routeledge, 1990) p. 7011 Marie-Joseph Chénier, Charles IX, ou l’école des rois (Paris, Chez Bossange et Compagnie, Commissionnaires en Librairie, 1790) p. 612 Graham E. Rodmell, French Drama of the Revolutionary Years, p. 73

0915142 FR322 4

feeling that had become a veritable fashion in the Paris of 1789’13. The Cardinal embodies traits

associated with the Church, he was cunning, a powerful influence over the King, and intolerant,

especially of other religions: ‘tous les protestants sont ennemis des lois’ (Charles, p.229). This

microcosm reveals the changes taking place in contemporary society with the selling of Church assets

and the permission to portray the clergy on stage.

The court that Chénier thus represents is a microcosm of the monarchy currently reigning in

1789. A focus on such a microcosm reveals the burning issues present early in the Revolution. A

reform was necessary and was indeed reflected in the focus on laws and the people in The Declaration

of the Rights of Man (August 1789), and discussions of drafting the first Constitution. However, the

shift of focus will soon be from the monarchy to the monastery as anticlericalism was increasingly

present.

Although there is only a year between Charles IX and Olympe de Gouges’ Le Couvent, the

type of Microcosm on display reveals the changes within society. The Church takes centre stage in de

Gouges’ play as her convent becomes a symbol which encompasses repressive ecclesiastical orders.

1790 saw the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, announcing their subordination to the government.

Equally, there were discussions on closing down monasteries and convents. Such a focus is replicated

within Le Couvent, indeed the ‘convent play’ became a genre in itself, and a popular one, during the

Revolutionary years14. The fact that de Gouges successfully portrays the contemporary opinions about

the clergy is revealed through the popularity of the play which had over eighty performances, the

usual being around ten15. Another explanation for the shift from monarchy to monasteries is also

explored by Carlson, who states that ‘the Comédie company […] agreed to attack a part of the feudal

system for which few of them had any particular warm feelings-the Church.16’ This reveals that there

were still royalist tendencies within society, yet abhorrence of the Church was ubiquitous. A convent

13 Susan Maslan, Revolutionary Acts, Theater, Democracy, and the French Revolution (Baltimore, The John Hopkins University Press,2005) p. 4114 Graham E. Rodmell, French Drama of the Revolutionary Years, p.1515 Janie Vanpée, ‘Performing Justice: The Trials of Olympe de Gouges’, Theatre Journal, Vol. 51, No. 1, Women, Nations, Households, and History (March, 1999) pp.47-65, p.5616 Marvin Carlson, The Theatre of the French Revolution, pp. 20-21

0915142 FR322 5

thus becomes an effective microcosm to attack feudal society whilst not straying from hope of a

constitutional monarchy.

Le Couvent presents an institution that abuses its power by forcing young girls, like Julie to

take vows and become trapped within the system. Indeed the extent of the Church’s cruelty is

revealed by Julie when she says ‘vous désapprouvez la violence qu'on veut me faire.’ (Couvent, p.31)

Use of the word ‘violence’ has a significant impact, especially when paired with the repeated referral

to Julie as an ‘innocente victime’ (Couvent, p.38)., reinforcing the notion that such an act by the

church is in fact a crime against all that is natural. Indeed it is clearly stated that ‘Les loix, l'humanité,

les droits de la nature, nous protégeront contre le fanatisme’ (Couvent, p.50). The play continues with

this notion when the Commissaire invades the convent in order to save Julie and the Curé exclaims

that ‘la justice vient à notre secours!’ (Couvent, p.54). What happens within de Gouges’ convent thus

becomes a microcosm for the proceedings of contemporary society. The Declaration of the Rights of

Man had promised to protect the liberty of others, highlighted in Article V: ‘nul ne peut être contraint

à faire ce que [la loi] n’ordonne pas’17. The National Assembly had gone further by targeting the

Church in order to safeguard liberty. Article XX of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy stated:

‘titles and offices[…] both regular and in commendam, for either sex, as well as all other

benefices and prestimonies in general, of whatever kind or denomination, are from the day

of this decree extinguished and abolished and shall never be reestablished in any form.’18

This meant an official withdrawal of the ‘recognition of existing vows and [an opening of]

monasteries for those inmates who chose their freedom’19. De Gouges states her intentions for her

convent to be a microcosm of current society when she explains in the preface of her play: ‘J'en ai

puisé les matériaux dans le sein de l'Assemblée Nationale’ (Couvent, p.iii). One can therefore witness

the context surrounding Le Couvent within the convent itself: the fanaticism of the church with its

17 Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen de 1789 <http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/histoire/dudh/1789.asp > accessed 02 Janurary 201318 The Civil Constitution of the Clergy < http://history.hanover.edu/texts/civilcon.html> accessed 16 February 201319 John McManners, The French Revolution and the Church (London, S.P.C.K., 1969) p. 31

0915142 FR322 6

attack of innocent ‘victims’, reinforced by the enclosed space a convent creates. This negligence of

the people at the hand of the Church was equally present in the Cahiers de Doléances:

‘That the ecclesiastical tithe be taken from the large tithe-collectors of this parish, who do

not fulfil any of their obligations for maintenance of the church or relief of poor people, of

whom they take no care and to whom they give no charity’20.

Such a fierce attack of this institution within the play is a lucid parallel to the same attack in

society. However Le Couvent is not absolute in its condemnation of Clergymen, yet this only serves to

underpin de Gouges’ microcosm. The Curé stands as a stark contrast to the Grand-Vicaire. He is

tolerant, just and sensitive to the plight of Julie. The Curé also seems willing to work with the new

order which highlights the importance of the law: ‘les vrais Magistrats sont l'appui des opprimés’

(Couvent, p.54). Indeed the curés in de Gouges’ contemporary society were equally as open to the

reform, ‘it was unthinkable that the curés would desert the Revolution and wreck the reform’ as it

greatly enhanced their status21. This enhancement is also reflected in the play as the Abbesse states:

‘M. le Curé sera désormais le Pasteur que je consulterai sur l'administration de ma maison.’ (Couvent,

p.82). The convent thus encompasses the same dependencies on law, attacks on the church, and

characters becoming symbolic of their order, evident in the case of the Curé.

As Terror becomes announced as a form of government in September 1793, the previous

institutions of the Monarchy and the Church are viewed as having no redeeming features. Indeed

society saw no room for moderate opinions, expressed in the previous arrest of the Girondins after

eighty thousand armed sans-culottes are used to pressurise the National Convention22. Such ideals

filtered as far as the theatre, where the Terror had no tolerance for theatrical pieces performed to

provide amusement, dramas had to serve the needs of the new French republic23. Such intolerance is

represented in our final play, Le Jugement dernier des rois. Sylvain Maréchal’s carnivalesque

20 Cahier of the Parish of St. Germain d’Airain, trans. Laura Mason in: The French Revolution: A Document Collection (New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999) p. 5621 John McManners, The French Revolution and the Church, p. 4622 Steven Kreis, The French Revolution: The Radical Stage, 1792-1794 <http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture13a.html> accessed 16 February 201323 Michael E. McClellan, The Revolution on Stage: Opera and Politics in France, 1789–1800 (2004) < http://www.nla.gov.au/harold-white-fellows/the-revolution-on-stage> accessed 12 December 2012

0915142 FR322 7

approach to theatre creates a platform for both the monarchy and ecclesiastical order to be ridiculed.

The playwright’s ‘upside-down’ world in fact presents a microcosm of society, which was doing the

exact same thing. France had beheaded both their King and Queen and sans-culotte mobs were

growing influential; powerful enough to impose the arrest of the Girondins. Society was indeed a

mirror image of the Ancien Régime. The fact that this play spoke so clearly to its audience, who, given

the nature of this genre, would have been of a lower class,24 is reflected in the popularity of the play.

Rousselin describes in the Feuille de Salut Public that:

‘Le Jugement dernier des rois[…] a été reçu avec enthousiasme […] parce qu’on ne traita

jamais de sujet plus à l’unisson des désirs des spectateurs, aussi glorieux pour les Français et

d’un intérêt plus général’. 25

Maréchal’s play was effective as it was a clear representation of society. There are many microcosms

in the play that can be explored in order to reveal the context surrounding Le Jugement dernier des

rois. For instance studies have been conducted on the significance of the volcano within the piece 26. It

is indeed an important element of the play: it acts as a microcosm for the reign of the Terror. As Jean-

Marie Apostolidès remarks, it symbolises, more specifically, the guillotine so often associated with

the period.27 This is an important aspect of contemporary society as March of 1793 was the first

month in which the Revolutionary Tribunal condemned more than one hundred people to death in

Paris and this number rapidly increases.28 Thus as the guillotine loomed in Maréchal’s society, it

loomed equally in his play. It is important to note here that the play was first performed in October

1793, the day after Marie-Antoinette’s execution. This event would have been on the minds of all

spectators and therefore a comparison of the deaths of the monarchs in Le Jugement dernier des rois

with those of Marie-Antoinette and Louis XVI would have been overwhelming; making the volcano

24 Emmet Kennedy, Marie-Laurence Netter, James P. McGregor, Mark V. Olsen, Theatre, Opera and Audiences in Revolutionary Paris (London, Greenwood Press, 1996), p. 7525 Alexandre Rousselin in no112 of the Feuille de Salut Public, 29 vendémiaire (20 October) Cited in : Daniel Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution, p. 171 26 See: Sanja Perovic, ‘Death by Volcano: Revolutionary Theatre and Marie-Antoinette’, French Studies, 11:04 (Nov 2012), pp. 1-15, or: Jean-Marie Apostolidès, ‘La Guillotine littéraire’, The French Review, 62 :6 (May 1989) pp. 985-99627 Jean-Marie Apostolidès, La Guillotine littéraire, p. 99228 Marvin Carlson, The Theatre of the French Revolution, p. 184

0915142 FR322 8

and the guillotine one and the same. Much like in society, the downfall of the King or Queen is not

sufficient, death becomes the only solution. Maslan has conducted a rather extensive study on the

theatricality of revolutionary society and states that executions were indeed highly theatrical,29 thus

the borders between Maréchal’s play and society become blurred making it an effective microcosm.

The death of these monarchs represents the death of the entire Ancien Régime in France. Indeed this

homology is continued even within the title of the piece. The use of the word ‘ jugement’ reflects the

trial and condemnation of Louis XVI and also refers to the Revolutionary Tribunal, a powerful engine

of the Terror, put in place to protect the interests of the republic. This aids in buttressing the idea that

the volcano is a metaphor for the guillotine; just as the volcano spares the good Viellard and the sans-

culottes, the guillotine protects good republicans by ousting the Ancien Régime and all those against

the new order.

Just as the volcano is a microcosm for the removal of French monarchy, it equally is symbolic

of a new ‘natural’ governing of society. It is immediately established that in this new order it is the

sans-culottes that rule as it is they who enter ‘menant [les rois] en lesse avec une chaîne’ (Jugement,

p.291). The influence of the sans-culottes within the play is a microcosm of the power that the

ordinary people then had, or at least thought they had. The Jacobins used, and therefore gave more

power to, the mob, in order to control the streets of Paris and intimidate more moderate members of

the Assembly30. One may also witness the importance accorded to the peuple in the speeches of

Robespierre: his constant mention of the citoyen and his rights, or even in this statement, where he

declares: ‘La démocratie est un état où le peuple souverain’.31 The sans-culottes in the play thus

become a microcosm for the Third Estate under the Terror. This is also reflected in way of speaking

within the text. The monarchs are more inclined to refer to their sans-culotte counterpart in the vous

form: ‘pardonnez-moi’ (Jugement, p.291) marking respect. Naturally they are often replied to in the tu

form, lacking respect but also reflecting the abolition of tutoiement32 within contemporary society.

29 Susan Maslan, Revolutionary Acts, Theater, Democracy, and the French Revolution, p.7630 James Maxwell Anderson, Daily Life During the French Revolution (USA, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007) p. 18531 Maximilien Robespierre, Sur les principes de morale publique (February 1794) < http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29887/29887-h/29887-h.htm#17940205> accessed on 13 December 201232 Peter McPhee, A Social History of France: 1780-1880 (London, Routeledge, 1992) p.79

0915142 FR322 9

The juxtaposition of the sans-culottes with the monarchs serves to highlight their inherent ‘goodness’.

This is demonstrated for example in the Viellard’s story, his exile is due to arbitrary power and

becomes contrasted with the unanimous, therefore democratic, choice to exile these European

sovereigns.

The theatre was often regarded as an integral element of the ‘old hierarchical, monarchical

system that sanctified social and political distinctions.’33 It therefore becomes imperative to turn such

a notion on its head, Maréchal’s carnivalesque tendencies succeed in doing so. Such an intention was

stated by the playwright himself when addressing the citizens before the play commences. Maréchal

proclaims that he wants to stop the ridiculing of the lower classes and instead ‘parodier ainsi un vers

heureux de la comédie du méchant’ (Jugement,p.273). Such an idea may originate directly from

Robespierre’s speeches as he states : ‘il faut faire précisément tout le contraire de ce qui a existé avant

vous’34. Apostolidès lucidly explains that ‘le texte de Maréchal marque une rupture avec le théâtre qui

l’a précédé. Il crée un renversement, non seulement des thèmes mais des formes littéraires de l’Ancien

Régime’35 The entire play becomes an inversing of expectations, serving to make the whole notion of

the play a microcosm for the abolition of the Ancien Régime as well as the power of the sans-culottes

and the intense anticlericalism of the time. This microcosm reveals the changes in society since

Chénier’s Charles IX was put on stage. Maréchal cannot contemplate the notion of a benign ruler in

his play like the eponymous character in Chénier’s piece. After being abandoned on the island the

rulers reveal themselves as incapable of adapting to their new surroundings in the way the Viellard

did, this illustrates their incompatibility with the new order. The play therefore is a microcosm of

society, which was also revealing the incompatibility of the past order with contemporary life. Paris

was erasing indicators of the Ancien Régime, signs of feudality and monuments were being removed36.

Le Jugement dernier des rois demonstrates this degradation of monarchs as their clothes and finery

becoming progressively destroyed.

33 Susan Maslan, Revolutionary Acts, Theater, Democracy, and the French Revolution, p.7834 Maximilien Robespierre, Discours de Maximilien Robespierre sur la Constitution (May 1793) <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29887/29887-h/29887-h.htm#17930510> accessed on 06 January 201335 Jean-Marie Apostolidès, La Guillotine littéraire, p. 99336 Ibid, p.987, p. 990

0915142 FR322 10

Maréchal was indeed keen to represent his contemporary society, illustrated by his constant

use of microcosms and symbols. However the relentless scrutiny of theatre by police surveillance and

legislative calls for drama of an exclusively revolutionary nature37 meant that an element of

propaganda within theatre was inevitable. This becomes problematic if one wants to view the

representations within the contemporary plays as purely reflective of society. Plays became tools with

didactic purposes making them more representative of leading ideologies of the order than perhaps

true contemporary society. Indeed, this was particularly the case during the Terror, where the

influence of the theatre was being seized. This made theatre less free and therefore the vogue of

patriotism one witnesses was in line with what was demanded of the playwright. Indeed the

government ‘transformed the theaters themselves into “schools of the Revolution”, instruments

devoted to the dissemination of revolutionary ideology.’ Within Maréchal’s text, Terror ideology can

be witnessed in the ‘reminders of Rousseau and Defoe [...] throughout the play’38, such as the notion

of the noble savage. This becomes less illustrative of the thoughts of society, made-up largely of the

Third Estate who could not access the texts of such intellectuals, but rather of the model that the

government of the Terror wanted to propagate. The power of the sans-culottes demonstrated in

Maréchal’s text can also be seen as an instrument to inspire and manipulate the Third Estate into

agreeing with the new order, implying that this is what the Terror can bring them, rather than what

was really transpiring under such a reign. The Convention had actually diminished the influence of

the common-man by ceding their power unto representatives; therefore the sans-culottes within Le

Jugement dernier des rois become less credible as a microcosm for the lower orders.

The accuracy of the symbolisation of society can also be questioned within the plays Charles

IX and Le Couvent. Indeed Chénier particularly wanted to instruct the masses rather than represent

them by consistently ‘thinking of the didactic value of his tragedy’39. This was particularly useful in

the early days of the Revolution, in order to lucidly explain radical revolutionary ideals to an illiterate

37 Michael E. McClellan, The Revolution on Stage: Opera and Politics in France, 1789–1800 (2004) < http://www.nla.gov.au/harold-white-fellows/the-revolution-on-stage> accessed 12 December 201238 Graham E. Rodmell, French Drama of the Revolutionary Years, p. 16939 H. C. Ault, ‘"Charles IX, ou l'École des Rois": Tragédie Nationale’, The Modern Language Review, 48 :4, (Oct. 1953), pp. 398-406, p. 405

0915142 FR322 11

audience. Therefore, as Rodmell accurately claims: ‘[Charles IX] can now only be regarded as a piece

of propaganda’40. Chénier utilised the popularity of theatre in order to promulgate ideas, such as

anticlericalism. Although this was already a sentiment found within society, it was further

‘encouraged’ within the play, as previously explored. By grouping spectators together Chénier hoped

that the heightened emotions in the room twinned with the strong didactic message of his play would

‘reshape a multitude of individual spectators into a single body’41. One may therefore query the

reliability of his microcosms: was a foreign villainess really to blame for the state of the nation? Had

Louis really understood the demands of his people? To be sure, Louis certainly did not want a written

constitution as he still firmly supported the absolute monarchy he had inherited; equally the extent to

which Marie-Antoinette had the power to cause the downfall of the kingdom of France is disputable.

However Olympe de Gouges’ use of microcosms differs to the other two playwrights as they

remain representative of society rather than distorting it to fit leading ideologies or contain didactic

messages. Indeed, the female playwright was a constitutional monarchist therefore one can read into

her microcosms even further to interpret a different intention than just as tools to sully the Ancien

Régime. Rather than using the convent as a device to represent the repressive nature of the

ecclesiastical order against the people of France, it becomes a microcosm for the life of women under

the new regime. Such a purpose is clearly in harmony with de Gouges’ political views as she goes on

to write La Déclaration des droits de la femme et de la citoyenne, which seeks to criticise the new

regime’s failure to equate woman’s status with man’s as a citizen. Such notions can be found in Le

Couvent where gendered rhetoric is put into the mouths of men within the play: ‘sexe faible et

malheureux’ (Couvent p.21). The convent itself can be seen as a microcosm of the shift from Ancien

Régime to the Revolution. Indeed Murphree has asserted that ‘exterior spaces are more strongly

identified with male characters and secular desires.’42 Therefore the set designs which portray both the

inside and outside of the convent use the walls as a line of division between male and female, secular

and religious and therefore the Revolution and the Ancien Régime. By doing this de Gouges has

40 Graham E. Rodmell, French Drama of the Revolutionary Years, p. 6341 Susan Maslan, Revolutionary Acts, Theater, Democracy, and the French Revolution, p. 3442 Murphree, ‘The Spectacle of the Cloister in French Revolutionary Drama.’

0915142 FR322 12

allowed for a representation of the oppression of women in both regimes. Although Julie may appear

freed from imprisonment in the ecclesiastical system at the end of the play, she instead moves into her

female role as ‘wife’ and then presumably ‘mother’. This reflects the Revolutionary ideals of getting

people to reproduce more, due to a belief in a diminishing population, and also illustrates the very

revolutionary thinker Rousseau’s idea that a rejection of the maternal role would taint civilisation 43.

Women cannot escape their social roles and the play’s convent is a microcosm of that. De Gouges

therefore has utilised the device of microcosms to reflect her society’s treatment of women and does

not stray as overtly as the other playwrights into the domain of propaganda.

The theatre had undeniable power throughout the course of the Revolution and the

playwrights at the time were cunning enough to appropriate it and use it for their own uses. Through

an examination of the microcosms within three plays of the Revolution it becomes clear that the

theatre sought to represent its contemporary society, whether that be the court of Louis XVI, the

plight of women or the reign of the Terror. However the Revolutionary period was full of propaganda

in images, pamphlets and songs; the theatre was no different. This therefore makes it difficult to

discern if the aforementioned microcosms are representative of their society or if they are being seized

for propagandistic purposes in order to encourage revolutionary action, to criticise the new order or to

promote an ideology. Notwithstanding the playwright’s intentions, the symbols within the texts do

stand as an effective view into Revolutionary society and offer some intriguing cause for discussion.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES:

Cahier of the Parish of St. Germain d’Airain, trans. Laura Mason in: The French Revolution: A Document Collection (New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999)

Chénier, Marie-Joseph, Charles IX, ou l’école des rois in Daniel Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution (Paris, Union Générale D’Éditions, 1973)

43 Christine Roulston, ‘Separating the Inseparables: Female Friendship and Its Discontents in Eighteenth-Century France’, in Eighteenth-Century Studies, Volume 32, Number 2, (1998-99) 215-231, p. 240.

0915142 FR322 13

Chénier, Marie-Joseph, Charles IX, ou l’école des rois (Paris, Chez Bossange et Compagnie, Commissionnaires en Librairie, 1790)

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy < http://history.hanover.edu/texts/civilcon.html>

La Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen de 1789 <http://www.assemblee-Nationale.fr/histoire/dudh/1789.asp >

de Gouges, Olympe, Le Couvent ou les voeux forces, (Paris, chez la veuve Duchesne : chez la veuve Bailly : et chez les Marchands de Nouveautés, 1792)

Maréchal, Sylvain, Le Jugement dernier des rois, in : Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution (Paris, Union Générale D’Éditions, 1973)

Robespierre, Maximilien, Discours de Maximilien Robespierre sur la Constitution (May 1793) <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29887/29887-h/29887-h.htm#17930510>

Robespierre, Maximilien, Sur les principes de morale publique (February 1794) < http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29887/29887-h/29887-h.htm#17940205>

Rousselin Alexandre, in no112 of the Feuille de Salut Public, 29 vendémiaire (20 October) Cited in : Daniel Hamiche, Le théâtre et la Révolution

SECONDARY SOURCES:

Anderson, James Maxwell, Daily Life During the French Revolution (USA, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007)

Apostolidès, Jean-Marie ‘La Guillotine littéraire’, The French Review, 62 :6 (May 1989) pp. 985-996

Ault, H. C. ‘"Charles IX, ou l'École des Rois": Tragédie Nationale’, The Modern Language Review, 48 :4, (Oct. 1953), pp. 398-406

Carlson, Marvin, The Theatre of the French Revolution (New York, Cornell University Press, 1966)

Doyle, William The Oxford History of the French Revolution (Oxford, Oxford University press, 2002)

Kreis, Steven, The French Revolution: The Radical Stage, 1792-1794 <http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture13a.html >

Kennedy, Emmet Marie-Laurence Netter, James P. McGregor, Mark V. Olsen, Theatre, Opera and Audiences in Revolutionary Paris (London, Greenwood Press, 1996)

Maslan, Susan, Revolutionary Acts, Theater, Democracy, and the French Revolution (Baltimore, The John Hopkins University Press,2005)

0915142 FR322 14

McClellan, Michael E., The Revolution on Stage: Opera and Politics in France, 1789–1800 (2004) < http://www.nla.gov.au/harold-white-fellows/the-revolution-on-stage>

McManners, John, The French Revolution and the Church (London, S.P.C.K., 1969)

McPhee, Peter A Social History of France: 1780-1880 (London, Routeledge, 1992)

Murphree, Patrick D., ‘The Spectacle of the Cloister in French Revolutionary Drama,’ at <http://www.cesar.org.uk/cesar2/conferences/cesar_conference_2006/Murphree_paper06.html>, consulted on 06/02/2013.

Perovic, Sanja, ‘Death by Volcano: Revolutionary Theatre and Marie-Antoinette’, French Studies, 11:04 (Nov 2012), pp. 1-15

Rodmell, Graham E., French Drama of the Revolutionary Years (London, Routeledge, 1990)

Roulston, Christine ‘Separating the Inseparables: Female Friendship and Its Discontents in Eighteenth-Century France’, in Eighteenth-Century Studies, Volume 32, Number 2, (1998-99) 215-231

Saint-Amand, Pierre, (trans. By Jennifer Curtiss Gage), ‘Terrorizing Marie-Antoinette’, Critical Inquiry, 20:3 (Spring, 1994) pp. 379-400

Vanpée, Janie, ‘Performing Justice: The Trials of Olympe de Gouges’, Theatre Journal, Vol. 51, No. 1, Women, Nations, Households, and History (March, 1999) pp.47-65

WORD COUNT: 4943