Don’t play with love…Or, the love in the Misanthrope by Molière Recently I watched on internet, one of the most beautiful play that has ever been written, in my opinion: “The Misantrhope” by Molière, a play in 5 acts, written in 1666 and performed for the first time on the 4th June of the same year at the Palais-Royal in Paris. Surely it is a play with many biographical elements. In fact it was written not only during the loneliness and crisis of other two important plays (by MolièreI, such as the “Don Juan “and “the Tartufe”, but also during Molière’s depression after his wife left him. In the Misantrophe, Molière opts out the shattering comic sense, that is present in other works. Mostly, the character of Alceste affirms his own severe values, his idea of humanity that is rife with virtue. In the Misanthrope, Molière ridicules the norms and the hypocrisy of the Franch aristocracy of his time (But I’d venture to say he redicules the whole aristocracy of the 17th centuty), but he becomes more serious when he focuses on the lacks, the defects that every human being has got. The distinctive trait of the work, compared with other farce written in the 17th century, is that it shows more active and complete characther, like the two main protagonists: Alceste adn Celimene, who are opposed to more static characters, often used in the satire to criticize the social problems. Maybe it is the most peculiar work by Molière because, above all, it focuses on the evolution and the different hints of the characters, rather than on the plot. Even though during the Franch playwright’s age, the Misantrhope did not get the wished and deserved success, nowadays it is considered one of the masterpiece by Molière and certainly its topics are too much of today. (up-to date) The plot: Alceste is a young and intransigent idealist, sure that he can live a life without any reception and he doesn’t want to agree a compromise; unable to conciliate his morals with the social traditions. He loves the beautiful Célimène a young minx girl who likes the frivoulous life. Alceste would persuade her to give up to the frivoulous world for his love. But, at the end, the differences of their lives will be more and more clear, and their relationship ends. Alceste, disappointed, decide sto leave his country. Another important character is, surely, Filinte, opposed to his friend Alceste, because he is insensitive, creative and realist. He asserts that, the world – with its own bad habit, will never change, so the only possibility to live better in this is immoral, perversed and corrupted society, is to key to this fake world. So, Alceste runs after an impossible dream, that leads to a forthcoming defeat. The play ends with Alceste who, repudiated by everyone, gives up the high-society where he lives for a lonely life. But beyond the mains topics of the life, that is: the immoralità and the perversion of the society, the (difficult) relationship with the others, with the society itsself, the world, the notable point of view of the pièce is the love theme and above all the relationship with the loved woman. After seeing the play I thought so much about how this matter is very current: love that it is not a joke; we can’t joke with love, the difficulty to recognize and live a true love. And that we love what it is not worthwhile because it’s suitable for us, it hides our egotism (and abou the ever present trace of male chauvinism alla long rooted in the society), actually, because we want that the other is as we like (so the non totally acceptance of the other). And if he or she is not as we want him/her, we convince ourselves he/she does’t deserve us or hurts us. In my opinion, in the contadditions of love debated by Molière, love what is worthwhile, it is just a pretext often used,because it has got a strong dramatic impression (I venture to say) and it makes the eternal as well as distressing question about the difficulty to love. Love what is noti s worthwhile ( source of mistakes and discords all along), leads the characters to make a crucial choice about love, choosing between loving completely or self-esteem ( i.e. selfish love) Molière becomes a precursor – if I cas say like that – of one of the most important problems in the matter of the modern couples: the woman self-sufficiency. Both the two main characters give a life to his/her own universe, they compare each other on an even footing, and these two universes are both immovable. Alceste, a honest, sincere, intransigent as well as egotist and possessive, fights against this unreasonable passion, a passion that, sometimes, is touching. Yet, he begs the woman he loves so much, the easy Celimene, to lie to him.«[…] Try to seem faithful, and I will try to believe you are like that[..] (Act IV, scene III). Again, in the act V, the young man hopes to change her, to take her into his world, but it is only an illusion, because we can’t change someone just to make him/her as we want, some as we are. And we have any right to demand it. Throughtout absurd excuses,and using the refined language of the 17th century, Celimene tries to let understand to the dull Alceste, that she wants he accepts her exaclty as she is, that she doesn’t want to change herself for his sake.« If you love me, accept me as I am, because I will not change. Accept me as I am and I will accept you as you are.». she reiteretes. Alceste is an intransigent, prude, egotist and possessive man. Celimene is an easy, reckless and unfaithful girl. It seems almost impossible to meet, understand, love each other. But, if both of them accepted their weaknesses, their difference (if they were able to laugh at their difference), it could be a real victory on the love, on the self-esteem, that is the pride and love egoism. And, in any case it would be a sacrifice; but just those who are able to love, worthy of a true love, could carry out this sacriface. So, according to me, the main question Molière asks, and maybe everyone asks for – is: how can we recognize a true, great love? Probably when we realize that the only person in the world who is able to comfort us, is just the same who hurt us. So, we realize we are a couple. It can seem a paradox, but it is not completely absurd or impossible at all; in fact, overcoming and accepting the the other is different from us, and that if he or she will not changes for our sake, it doens’t mean we are not important for them. We are hurt, above all, by our egotistic certainity that we want to change that person because we love him or her, and just because they don’t want change for us, we feel distressed. And here there is another question: “The Misantrhope”, a play or a tragedy? It seems that the brother of the King Louis XIV, after a performance of Molière’s play, affirmed that: « When we lay laughing off, we should cry”» Is it really like that? Surely, to attend the end of a true love is always sad, “tragic”. Imagining the two lovers driven back in the deserto f their loneliness, is a distress, a defeat for the love itself. So, I think this is the message (or one of the messages, at least) Molière wanted to communicated. And I still wonder: who, among us, is able to love enough a man or a woman as to prefer their happiness to his own? Able to leave him/her to live as he/she likes, accoding theri style? To grieve over their frustrations and laughing at their de light? Grieve with them, laugh with them? So, accepting them exactly as they are, without claiming to change them only because we fall in love with them? PLAY (IF YOU WANT) If you want to play, play then. If you want to love, love then. But, remind, don’t play to love… you’d be defeated, in any case! Right, because you can’t play with Love (The Misantrhope- Act V, scene II) Rossella Zucaro
Posted on: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:11:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015