GLEN NICHOLS
The genre réceptions in Canada is known almost exclusively from discussions and translations of Marc Lescarbot's Le théâtre de Neptune en Nouvelle France (1606).1 Yet there are at least five other available examples of this type of play performed in Quebec between 1658 and 1810. Created and performed to celebrate unique occasions, each play reflects very particular social and artistic conditions. At the same time, all the plays maintain identifiable traditional features in both structure and substance. This combination of one-time-only performances and strong traditionalism make the réceptions important contributors to early Canadian theatre. This article examines all six known texts to see how each adds to an understanding of the coherent group, with emphasis on the lesser known eighteenth and nineteenth-century examples. In addition, the four later texts also appear here for the first time in English.
Le genre théâtral appelé «réceptions» est connu au Canada presque exclusivement par les discussions et les traductions du Théâtre de Neptune en Nouvelle France de Marc Lescarbot (1606).1 Mais il y a au moins cinq autres exemples de ce genre créés au Québec entre 1658 et 1810. Chaque pièce était représentée pendant une fête unique et reflète les conditions sociales et artistiques de son époque. Également, tous les textes conservent certaines caractéristiques traditionnelles dans leurs structures et leurs sujets. Cette combination de représentation unique et de traditionalisme fort est au centre de la contribution des réceptions au théâtre ancien au Canada. Cet article examine tous les six textes encore existants afin de déterminer comment les textes individus ajoutent à notre compréhension du genre cohérent. On met plus d'attention sur ceux du dix-huitième et du dix-neuvième siècles qui sont moins connus. Finalement, les quatre derniers textes apparaissent ici pour la première fois en anglais.
Although this scene appeared at first to be merely conventional, it was too expressive not to produce a profound impression. Thus, there was no one in the audience who was not moved to tears. (Réception for Bishop Saint-Vallier, January 1727)
Thus, in 1727 the boarding-school students at the Hôpital Général de Québec impressed their invited audience with a short theatrical piece in which they recited verses, exchanged brief dialogues, and sang short songs before the assembled convent community and a few guests. The performance was part of a larger celebration marking a special anniversary in the convent. Although the piece followed the traditional réception form closely, it was distinct and richly inspired by the very particular circumstances in which it was produced.
This play and a second piece from the same convent written in 1797 are two of a small group of plays including Lescarbot's well-known sea pageant from 1606 (Le théâtre de Neptune en Nouvelle France), the 1658 Seminary-student piece dedicated to welcoming Governor d'Argenson to Quebec, and two more recently-uncovered plays presented in honour of the headmasters of the Collège de Montréal in 1800 and 1810. In effect, these six plays are the only known, complete texts of so-called réceptions in Canada. However, despite a recognition of the form shown by its frequent, though general, inclusion in histories of drama in Canada, the extant examples have never been treated comprehensively as a group, nor have there been any translations of the later texts. This article, while serving as a general introduction to the new translations of the réceptions from 1727, 1797, 1800 and 1810, will address that lacuna by considering these pieces within the context of their generic companions.
Réceptions were short theatrical presentations created as part of special, one-time-only celebrations in honour of specific individuals (the "recipients"); indeed, the name comes from the occasions they were written for ("receptions"). Given their highly ephemeral origins, it is no surprise they were considered by their creators to be of limited longterm value. An analogy might be our regard for last year's Christmas tree: a meaningful, but disposable decoration. Consequently, evidence of réceptions is relatively rare. In addition to the six events for which we have extant texts, only three other known occasions seem to have included a réception, although none of these texts have survived. They are the welcoming of governors d'Ailleboust and Lauzon to Quebec in 1648 and 1651, and a celebration at the Hôpital Général for the Mother Superior's sixtieth anniversary in 1807. A fourth possibility is a 1659 "representation... given...in honour of Monseigneur [Laval] the bishop of petraea" (Thwaites 107). Laval had only recently arrived in the colony and the description of the event would seem to come close to the others in the line-up; however, as Doucette (19) explains, the prelate had already been officially welcomed and so this performance couldn't be a "réception, in its strict sense."2
In any case, the lack of extant examples from the years between 1658 and 1727 is troubling at the very least. Although the absence of evidence is not proof, Burger suggests that the tradition of réceptions was "lost" as other types of plays took precedence ("Les Spectacles..." 37). I would rather submit that the intermittent nature of the evidence results from the ephemerality of the form. While there may have been any number of réceptions performed over the centuries, there is evidence of only very few; indeed the six extant texts represent a large majority of the total number of possible known events.
Despite the two-hundred years separating the earliest and latest extant texts, the plays reveal strong similarities in purpose, context, and structure. This does not mean that the pieces are merely dead repetitions of formulae this long continuity might imply. Their flexibility of content and detail, linking each text to a unique occasion, suggests the genre was a living, vital form--built on traditional models, but fully responsive to the immediate real needs of particular performance situations.
Previous discussion of these plays in general histories, however, has been sporadic and largely focused only on the earliest texts, in particular that of Lescarbot. Typical is André-G. Bourassa's 1994 article, "Le didascalos: Contributions à l'histoire de l'enseignement du théâtre au Québec, 1535-1885." He first carefully catalogues a number of sixteenth-century paratheatrical events; then, in the page devoted to Lescarbot's pageant, he describes several European precursors and links the performance to Champlain's "Ordre de bon temps" events (109). The 1658 piece for d'Argenson gets one sentence, as does the non-extant 1659 presentation for the newly arrived Laval (111). From that point forward his attention turns to public performances of canonical plays by Corneille, Molière and others. A similar pattern is seen in Leonard Doucette's Theatre in French Canada: Laying the Foundations, 1606-1867. Although the analysis contains more detailed comparisons to other performance events, his only addition to the usual discussion is the 1727 Hôpital Général piece for Saint-Vallier (31-34). Annotated performance catalogues assembled by Beaudoin Burger (1974 and 1976) mention all six extant réceptions and these works are important source references.
The European antecedents of Lescarbot's piece have been particularly well treated in not less than three different articles. Hannah Fournier's 1981 article, "Lescarbot's 'Théâtre de Neptune': New World Pageant, Old World Polemic" (3-11) provides an important international context for the Canadian play by analyzing the 1606 text as a royal entry. Roméo Arbour's 1976 article, "'Le théâtre de Neptune' de Marc Lescarbot," in Le théâtre canadien and Renée Lelièvre and Monique Baillet's 1969 article, "Une entrée triomphale en Acadie en 1606" (134-141) both present details of the Canadian context and discuss various specific European entries which shed light on Lescarbot's composition. But again the focus of all three is exclusively the earliest text. Likewise, introductions to translations of the 1606 and 1658 plays provide limited discussion of the individual texts.
A useful starting point for a description of Canadian réceptions is Fournier's 1981 analysis of the function of royal entries (reading, as Fournier implies, "recipient" for "ruler," and "institution [represented by performers]" for "subject town"): "The entry was the visible sign of a contract between [recipient] and [institution], the [recipient] assuring the prosperity and protection of the [institution] by his power; the [institution], in return, offering its loyalty and all of its resources in exchange" (3). The exchange of homage and beneficence is central to the performances' function as "visible signs" of a social contract between at least two hierarchically-related constituents in an institution or community, and it is this aspect which sets the réceptions apart from other theatrical events. In addition, two secondary but closely related characteristics are essential to these six plays:
1. All are addressed to at least one identifiable
individual present in the audience for the performance; in sometimes complex
metatheatrical constructions, this individual usually also fulfils an actual
or symbolic role within the drama itself.
2. All were produced expressly for significant
social occasions (which strongly influence the individual texts) and were
not intended for repeated production.
The six extant pieces also share several other textual and performance aspects:
1. All develop a similar three-part textual
structure which is adapted to suit particular performance occasions.
2. These examples are composed almost
entirely in verse (in various forms), in elevated registers, and in celebratory
tones.
3. All blend topical references to the
actual context of the performance occasion with symbolic references to
classical or Christian sources.
4. The performances frequently involve
the exchange of symbolic gifts in recognition of the qualities of the person
to whom the piece is addressed.
Because they are so integral to the form, the first cluster of essential characteristics will be addressed in this paper's comprehensive treatment of the examples. The more limited textual and performance attributes will be discussed in the introduction to the translation texts that follows.
The important exchange of homage and beneficence central to the consideration of the réceptions as social contracts frequently appears in fairly complex forms. The best example of this is the 1727 piece. Jean-Baptiste de la Croix de Chevrières de Saint-Vallier had been Bishop of Quebec since 1688. By 1727, at the age of seventy-three and in failing health, he was worried for the future of his beloved Hôpital Général which he had been instrumental in establishing in 1692 and where he had been residing for the past fourteen years. Dedicated to providing housing and care for the indigent of the colony, the hospice and convent had always struggled financially on a small, precarious crown subsidy augmented by Saint-Vallier's own considerable contributions to its founding and maintenance, as well as his very personal involvement in its daily operations. However, it was located well outside of the town of Quebec itself, well outside the daily notice of the people who could most help the struggling institution, so the Bishop was quite right to fear it might be neglected once he had passed on. In addition, the Bishop's relationship with the various governors and even with the people of the town had not always been smooth. The infamous "Tartuffe affair" was typical of situations in which his rather pious and outspoken character could clash with more pragmatic secular interests, often alienating Quebec officials. Saint-Vallier's answer to the problem of the hospital's finances was to invite the newly arrived Governor and Intendant (Charles de Beauharnois and Claude-Thomas Dupuy) to the convent on the occasion of his anniversary in order to secure future support for the hospice by "officially" greasing the wheels of colonial power.
The anniversary was celebrated annually, but in 1727 the commemoration would be "extraordinary." To add to the usual Masses and prayers, Saint-Vallier commissioned a little play to be performed by the students of the boarding school he had recently (1725) established at the Hôpital Général.3 The play would allegorically and directly express both Saint-Vallier's request for official support of the hospital and his offer of loyalty to, and praise of, the new colonial leaders. At this moment in time, with new powers in the Chateau St. Louis and with his own failing strength, the establishment of a clear social contract was a critical political objective for Saint-Vallier. For us, it is important that he chose to manifest this in theatrical form.
Saint-Vallier, though, does not speak in his own voice of course, but through the voices of the students. He instructed his message to be delivered in allegorical terms, that he should be portrayed "Like Jacob, near the end of his life, asking his son Joseph to take care of his other children." This "portrayal" not only makes his request apparent, but also affirms Saint-Vallier as patriarch over everyone present. The Governor and Intendant, while senior to the other "children," are still "his son[s]." The play will compliment and praise the political leaders, but Saint-Vallier, as the representative of the Roman Church, is still at the head of the table. His request is not made from a position of apparent weakness, but from a moral highground, reminding them of their duty to support a worthy cause.
Reinforcing this position is the second significant homage-beneficence exchange featured in the play between the students and Saint-Vallier himself. A large percentage of the rather short play is devoted to recognition of the Bishop's tireless work for the convent and its needy residents. The young students express their loyal desire that he might live a long time yet, blessing the convent with his continued help now that he has such admirable supporters as Beauharnois and Dupuy to lighten his burden. While this exchange anticipates the later réceptions in which the head of a school is complimented by the students, it is more interesting here for the way it is tied to the "official" purpose of the piece. Having heard such praise for Saint-Vallier and his work, how can Beauharnois and Dupuy refuse to support the convent and hospital? Having heard the children say to them that "they have both received / From nature too generous and sensitive a heart / To keep them from / Answering [Saint-Vallier's] prayers," how could they turn a blind eye now? The potential impact of Saint-Vallier's play was augmented by the fact that he was not only represented on stage, but also seated in the audience, undoubtedly right next to his worthy guests. In effect, this metatheatrical extension doubles the presence of Saint-Vallier, increasing the persuasiveness of his political message.
The subsidy was indeed continued. The hospital and convent flourished. But whether the réception contributed significantly towards this achievement or not, we'll never know. Saint-Vallier obviously felt it was necessary and useful to attempt. However, Beauharnois and Dupuy were not politically naive and would have easily seen through the conventional compliments evidently contrived with Saint-Vallier's approval. In addition, unlike the other réceptions where there is evidence of a larger, public audience, no such evidence accompanies this piece. So, if there were no public audience, the appeals to the leaders' sensibility and moral duty were heard only by the closed community; there would be no "public" pressure for them to meet these expressed obligations. Perhaps the "rightness" of the cause was enough to inspire their support, or perhaps, not to put too cynical a turn on things I hope, the usefulness of maintaining a place well outside of town to house the indigents and incurably ill was just too good to pass up.
Although this réception is unusually rich in its political dimensions, the other earlier ones also offer intriguing glimpses of the uses to which these displays could be put. Although ostensibly simply a "good-natured frolic" (gaillardise), the 1606 piece by Lescarbot reveals political subtleties related to the homage-beneficence exchange it represents. Perhaps parallel to Saint-Vallier's efforts to put his own wishes into the mouths of others, Lescarbot, as second in command, makes very public his own loyalty and devotion to the returning commander, Poutrincourt, through the allegorical (and often amusing) presentation of his Tritons and Indians. His publication of Le théâtre de Neptune in his own collection of prose and poetry in 1609 suggests his desire to be associated with the sentiments of the piece. His New World voyage was at least partly motivated by a desire to distance himself from some injustice he had suffered in France (Wagner 6). Surely his laudatory verses here did him no harm in his successful campaign to have this wrong righted "by order of the court."
On a finer note, his real intended "recipient" of these expressions of fidelity and commitment to the French cause may not have been only the returning leaders, but also the soldiers and adventurers of Port Royal watching from shore. The outpost was, as Lescarbot says, "in danger of mutiny" (Wagner 7). As the expressions of moral duty and honourable action were supposed to impress the royal envoys listening to Saint-Vallier's play, so Lescarbot's expressions of loyalty and dedication could have been contrived to quiet any potential rebellion waiting for Poutrincourt on shore. The difference with the 1727 play, however, was the very public nature of the spectacle. But then, the political question possibly at stake in this circumstance was also a more public one.
The social contract between the various strata in the community (second in command to those above, and soldiers to authority figures) is represented in the réception. The manifestation of these relationships in the play is contingent upon circumstantial political factors which not only influenced the composition of the event, but also would have affected the reading of the original performance. In each case, the details are unique, but the reinforcement of a multi-level relationship is common to both.
Another very public réception was that for Governor d'Argenson in 1658 performed in the garden of the Jesuit college "in sight of all the people of Quebec." Fifty years on, the political situation of the growing colony was much more complex than what Lescarbot had known. Gone were the rather naive portrayals of First Nations' representatives with their bows and arrows and simple allegiances to Old World puissance. Replacing these are emissaries of intricate alliances between various First Nations and the French. The dangers to the colony are no longer the environment or internal division, but the very real and immediate threats posed by hostile, non-aligned First Nations. These then inform the construction of this later play.
The main social contract represented in the piece is between the new Governor and two general groups of "subjects," each with different needs and attitudes: the French inhabitants and the First Nations. In the first, but shorter section of the play (after the prologue) four "Frenchmen" speak in four identically structured stanzas to express in turn their thankfulness for d'Argenson's successful arrival, their fidelity to him, their praise of his recent victory over an Iroquois attack, and their expectations of future victories. These are similar both to the 1606 Triton section expressing loyalty and the suggestion of French supremacy, and to the 1727 passages praising God for Beauharnois and Dupuy's safe arrival. However, the specificity of the contemporary references and the sense of urgency in their appeals make the 1658 play unique within the basic réception framework.
Most of the play contains the presentations in native languages by representatives of various First Nations. Although the depiction of willing and happy submission to French superiority is similar to that portrayed in 1606, there is a real sense of desperation in their petitions which is not apparent in the very jolly Lescarbot creations. They weep at the "loss of [their] country"; they are "ruined"; they have become a "wandering, vagabond people" who suffer "war, sickness and famine." In this state they turn, "weeping with joy," to the "honour of [French] goodwill and the favour of [French] protection." These French constructions of First Nations peoples, like those created by Lescarbot, are intended to compliment the (French perspective of the) relationship, the social contract, they have with the newly arrived powers represented by Governor d'Argenson. In both cases, the réceptions reinforce the dominant French ideal of their relationship with the Nations around them. In the earlier one it is relatively simple and naïve; in the second it has become more politically complex, but no less dependent on the French (and very public) reading of the situation (and representation).
Finally, there is also a more subtle, secondary homage-beneficence relationship suggested in the 1658 réception which seems to foreshadow the one apparent in 1727. The piece was performed for the new Governor by the youths studying at the Jesuit College in Quebec, so the triangular situation of students-school-governor is very similar to that of 1727; however, the text appears to remain true to its stated intent: paying homage to the Governor, with minimal mention of the college.4 Whereas the 1727 piece very explicitly sets out to elicit assistance for the institution itself through the general beneficence of the new leaders, this earlier text seems to make no such appeal. Yet the clever incorporation of speeches in four First Nations' languages, followed by their translations into French, effectively shows off the talents and usefulness of the college and its members. Although there is no direct plea for support, the indirect appeal that the new Governor's beneficence should fall not only to the colony as a whole but also to the (talented and useful) college itself is strongly implied.
After 1727, we have no evidence of another réception for seventy years, until more than a generation after the British take-over of New France. In effect, these first three texts (1606, 1658 and 1727) can be viewed as a relatively coherent group which will contrast to the second triad of pieces from the post-French-colonial period. In each case there is the welcoming of an official public figure of significant power, there are important and sometimes complex political subtexts at work within the largely allegorical depiction of relationships in the play, and there is a clear impression of outside forces expressed in the details of the text. The essential characteristics are always present: "making visible" the relationships between hierarchically arranged members of the community, the address to identified "recipients" in the audience expressed in sometimes intricate metatheatrical constructions, and the explicit connection of the theatrical event to a special occasion and with specific purposes in mind.
The 1727 réception is significant in this earlier group because it marks a transition from outdoor public performances to indoor private ones. It also signals a shift from political to personal tributes. In addition to the political praise of Beauharnois and Dupuy, commending their honour and worth while requesting their beneficence for the continued support of the Hôpital Général, the text also spends a great deal of time expressing more personal praise for Bishop Saint-Vallier himself and his continued work for the institution. While both spheres are implied in the earlier réceptions, they are interesting here because the political and personal aspects are to some degree separated. Although there is a considerable overlap (the two agendas are never exclusive), the political/public exchange is reserved largely for Beauharnois and Dupuy, while Saint-Vallier is commended on a more personal level, the play being performed in what was, effectively, his own private domain. This split in focus makes an important transitional comment, linking the seventeenth-century réceptions with the later ones which will be exclusively personal in emphasis. This transition from dominantly public and political to more private and personal is the most fundamental change between the earlier and the later groups of réceptions.
By 1797 the Hôpital Général had matured into a stable combination of convent, school, and hospital: it had seen numerous architectural enlargements, had survived the British bombardment of Quebec intact (being out of range of British missiles), and had become an important institution on the outskirts of the city. In August of that year, the Mother Superior of the community, Marie-Catherine Payen de Noyen de Saint-Alexis, celebrated her fiftieth year in the order of Les Augustines de la Miséricorde de Jésus responsible for the Hôpital Général. For this "extraordinary celebration," Father Jean-Baptiste Raimbault was asked to write a little "pastoral" in verse to be performed by the students of the boarding school.
The basic configuration of this play is very simple and reflects the basic hierarchical social contract manifest in the later réceptions: during anniversaries or other celebratory events, select representatives express the students' profound gratitude to the head of the school and their wish that she or he continue to bless them with knowledge and moral training. Because the occasion is an entirely in-house affair, relevant only to the institution itself, the audience is limited to invited guests and the texts contain none of the public political intrigue of the earlier group of réceptions. Despite this more limited sphere of reciprocal powers though, the essential exchange of homage and beneficence matches that found in the earlier extant examples.
The two nineteenth-century réceptions performed at the Collège (St. Raphaël) de Montréal/Petit Séminaire in Montreal are identical to this slightly earlier piece in their essential design. Both celebrate the nameday feasts of the incumbent school directors: Jean-Baptiste-Jacques Chicoineau on June 24, 1800 and Jacques-Guillaume Roque on July 25, 1810. Both men were French Sulpicians who fled to Montreal in the mid-1790's. Chicoineau, who served as Director of the Collège (St. Raphaël) de Montréal from 1796 to 1806, had the challenge of overseeing the institution during its three-year transition period following the disastrous fire in 1803 which destroyed the Château de Vaudreuil (Place Jacques-Cartier) where the college had been housed since 1773. Roque took over the directorship of the college, newly named the Petit Séminaire, when it moved into its new location further west on St. Paul near King Street (present day 708 rue St. Paul ouest) in 1806. He served as well-loved director for twenty-two years.
In appreciation for their continued teaching and guidance, the three leaders/mentors in these late, school-based réceptions are praised for personal qualities related to their educational positions: their wisdom and guidance, their patience and their generosity. But there are important differences. In the 1797 piece produced at the Augustinian convent, these are realized in religious terms. St. Alexis is "pure" and "sweet," her wisdom is described in terms of "prudence" and "virtue," her other qualities are esteemed to be piety and (spiritual) fervour. Not surprisingly, given the institutional context, these characteristics parallel closely the personal attributes praised in Saint-Vallier seventy years earlier.
On the other hand, the Montreal pieces produced by the "classical college" students of Latin, rhetoric, and classical literature, portray the personal qualities of their headmasters in more humanistic terms. Chicoineau is compared to Apollo, Themis, Saturn and Minerva; Roque's qualities are symbolized in floral tributes reflecting his leadership (the rose), his enlightenment (carnation), his learning (amaranthus), and his modesty, humility, patience, and generosity (the pansy).
While the "scholastic" réceptions all share the personal tone of tribute, the matter of gender seems to be behind these differences in the plays' symbolism. The convent school was for girls, the college for boys. The convent school objectives were largely limited to the arts, handiwork, and basic reading and writing: skills deemed useful for the future upper-middle-class ladies of Quebec. Qualities to be emulated were those of purity, obedience, and devotion to duty. The college on the other hand was training the community's future lawyers, doctors and priests, and so it pursued a thorough education in classical literature, as well as mathematics, rhetoric and philosophy. The characters praise the intellectual side more strongly, emphasizing the students' future social importance through the use of classical mythology.
It's worth pausing for a moment to consider in the light of these differences, the effect of gender in the 1727 play as well, which does not ignore the wife of the Intendant, Madame Dupuy, but addresses her specifically at three points in the presentation. In the first instance an entire stanza (ll.120-128) is dedicated to her as generous "mother" of the colony. The final two references equate her with "Loving Providence" (ll. 188-195, 227-235). It is notable that it is only these two all-female convent plays (1727 and 1797) which pay homage to women "recipients." In the closed conditions of the 1797 play this is hardly surprising, but in the male-dominated homage-beneficence exchange of 1727 it is remarkable that a woman was drawn into the social contract so strongly. On the other hand it is significant that the qualities praised in the women differ from those honoured in the men, even in the same play.
Despite the differences in detail, the events celebrated in these later plays are all personal ones; the accomplishments of the recipients are those directly related to the lives of the students. Because the master-student power relationship is essentially self-limited to the graduation of the students, the "loyalty" paid to the recipient in these texts is that of personal love and respect for the mentor, rather than the more public fealty of the earlier réceptions. To highlight this, all three end on similar, loving notes: "Through our songs and all our efforts, / To her goodness let us leave a pledge of our love." (1797), "Receive the sceptre and the crown, / Symbol of the power which binds our hearts to you." (1800), and "...our love for you will never fade" (1810). In the last example especially (but the same is strongly implied in the other texts), the intended longevity of the students' attachment to their mentors suggests their "repayment" will be in the continuity of the values taught by the college well beyond graduation.
This continuity of values is ultimately the most integral rationale behind these highly conservative pieces of theatre. Produced in recognition of the critical power structures relevant to the particular institution sponsoring them, the réceptions explicitly work to reinforce the existing hierarchy. Whether it be the relationship between colonial administrators and the colonists/soldiers or between European powers and the indigenous peoples around them in the New World, or indeed the relationship between a headmaster/mistress and the students of the school, the multi-levelled ranking is manifest both explicitly and symbolically in the texts. The relationships are expressed as perceived by the writers and approved by the hierarchy itself whose representatives are present at the performance and in whose voices the pieces often speak.
In response to (or perhaps in spite of) the apparent narrowing down or privatization of focus in these last three examples, we find a new and important development within the basic réception framework: a marked increase in character interaction. For the first time, characters are given meaningful names. The 1606 characters are only labelled Triton or Native 1, 2 or 3, and the natives in 1658 are identified simply by their nationality; the only characters with any sort of indicative names are the Universal Spirit and Forest Spirit. The presenters in 1727 and those representing "Frenchmen" in 1658 are identified by their real names. In 1797, however, the presenters are identified by the "names each carried according to her role." Deriving from (and reinforcing) the allegorical conceit of the play, the ten characters all bear names (Agnès, Myrtil, Chloe, Clemence, Hortense, Rosalie, etc) with important floral or Christian associations signifying the qualities being praised in Mother Superior. More distinctive still, the Montreal "classical college" plays borrow character names from the pastoral tradition which inspired them. So we find the plays peopled with contemplative shepherds like Tircis, Damon, Daphnis, Corydon, etc.
Also for the first time in an extant réception, the 1797 opening prologue (a feature common to the structure of all the texts) is delivered in dialogue. Agnès enters and asks what all the preparations she sees about her could mean. This causes Myrtil to exclaim in wonder how Agnès could not know what is behind all the excitement and to invite Chloé to explain it all to her (and thus to the audience). This Chloé does with great enthusiasm, and Agnès, obviously a fast learner, closes the prologue with her own commentary on the event, explaining how the main part of the piece will work. In a similar fashion, the 1800 réception opens with a character asking what all the excitement is about, the explanation serving as both exposition and the opening volleys of praise for M. Chicoineau. The only difference from the 1797 play is the more developed theatrical situation, with the students playing "Shepherds" gathering to present their homages to their "Mentor" shepherd.
The 1810 text develops the complexity of the prologue, but maintains its basic function within the réception structure. Interestingly, it also returns to the use of floral tributes seen in the 1797 piece. It opens with a dialogue in which Daphnis asks why the floral presentation has been pulled apart, whether there is some dissension among the presenters. Damon responds by inviting Daphnis to judge the different symbolic floral homages, choosing the most appropriate for the "recipient." The ensuing discussion sets the stage for the presentational speeches and the praise of M. Roque.
At its core, each réception depicts a complex relationship between the recipient and the stage performers. In addition, while the recipient is clearly a member of the audience and is addressed by the performers as such, he or she also maintains a semi-role in the performance itself, at least symbolically. He or she is, after all, both owed the respect and duty of the institution and is, simultaneously, a member of it. This duality influences the construction of the réceptions themselves. In the pieces from the Collège de Montréal/Petit séminaire, this is underlined by the inclusion of MM. Chicoineau and Roque in the respective lists of "acteurs" or "personnages"; they are even given character names (Mentor and Tircis). Although they have no lines in the texts, they are clearly the general interlocuteurs of each piece as a whole. Tircis (Roque) is even indicated on the simple stage diagram, included in the Ville-Marie text, showing the character placements. The "recipients" complete the symbolic interlocuteur role by, in the end, accepting the praises and the symbolic gifts of flowers, implying their "response" to the dramatic "contract" and concluding the theatrical moment.
The 1797 piece, while very similar in general to the Montreal plays (dialogue, "characterization," and floral tribute), is more evidently rooted in the larger anniversary activities which surround it. Although Catherine Saint-Alexis is not addressed directly by the speakers of the réception itself, she is addressed at the beginning and end of the ode portions which bracket the dramatic centre. She likewise silently responds to the event by accepting the floral gifts, but also has more important participation. The entire day is hers. She is the focus and very active participant in various special celebrations starting before dawn and running into the afternoon; immediately after the réception she takes the floor herself to address the community and offer to Bishop Denaut (who had travelled up from Montreal for the occasion) a gift representing artistically the story of her own name-saint.
These metatheatrical aspects extend beyond the characters to the use of the space itself. The limited information available suggests that the pieces were produced with minimal staging in public areas of the institutions. In 1797, the place "represented" is indeed the place itself, so Agnès's question about the decoration of the play is simultaneously asking about the reality of the convent's community hall. With the enhanced characterizations in the 1800 and 1810 pieces, this duality is equally evident, though more complex.
With the pastoral conceit well established by the character names and in the dialogue references, the "stage is set" for a completely "representational" performance; however, the focus on the "characterized" recipient as audience-member and performer, and the symbolized discussion of the mentor's qualities throughout the piece, mean that the actual reality of the context is foregrounded by the represented action. The students are playing shepherds drawn from classical literature who are discussing the wonders of their master-shepherd in order to most effectively extoll his virtues and by so doing prolong his praiseworthy direction of the "troupeaux" and the shepherd community. The conceit is a simple theatrical metaphor for what the students are really doing in the here and now, praising their school's director with the goal of (symbolically) assuring his continued guidance and help for the school. However, the double situation of the recipient being in the audience and in the play world folds the metatheatrical conceit onto itself. The performance is at once a representation of a thing and the thing being represented, the boundaries between the two remaining fluid and unresolved.
This phenomenon is as true for the situation of Neptune and his Tridents in 1606 as for the shepherds and "Tircis" in 1810. In addition to the binding characteristics of structure and surface appearance, it is this essential matrix which both distinguishes the genre as a whole and provides its flexibility as a viable theatrical means. Essentially the réceptions are strongly traditional in form, demonstrating remarkable continuity over two centuries. This is only half the story, though. The réceptions also reflect a wide diversity of situations and situational demands, offering the possibility of considerable flexibility within a range of structural characteristics.
The pieces reflect precise moments in time and place, both in their topicality and symbolism; the shift from political to personal focus seen here, as well as the unique responses to circumstances indicated by specific contextual references (from inclusion of First Nations groups in the seventeenth century and funding and political considerations in the early eighteenth, to scholasticism in the post-French-colonial plays), point to a living, vital theatre form which combined strong tradition with clear contextual immediacy, adapting the received form to suit new situations, needs, expectations, and beliefs. The pieces reveal real people expressing their view of the world, conscious of the inherited forms, but with joy and energy, recreating them for their own immediate, occasional use.
NOTES
1 Various English translations
of Lescarbot's work are available: W.W.Grant (Toronto: Champlain Society,
1914; rpt of 1618 translation); Harriette Taber Richardson (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1927); Edna B. Polman (New York: Samuel French, 1927); Eugene
and Renate Benson (in Canada's Lost Plays Vol 4. Ed. Anton Wagner.
Downsview: CTR, 1982: 38-48).
Return to Article
2 A similar situation,
though, occurs in 1727: the Governor and Intendant had already been "officially"
welcomed five months before Saint-Vallier's little play, which is clearly
labeled a "réception."
Return to Article
3 It is no accident that
the founding of the school was also in response to financial difficulties.
The tuition paid by the upper middle-class families for the education of
their daughters was viewed as an useful source of revenue. (MSV 254)
Return to Article
4 The only direct reference
to the College is in the opening speech by the "Universal Spirit." He gestures
to the representatives of the First Nations, indicating that they are being
played by "the elite of our little French academy."
Return to Article
WORKS CITED
Arbour, Roméo. "'Le théâtre de Neptune' de Marc Lescarbot." Les archives des lettres canadiennes tome 5: Le théâtre canadien-français. Montréal: Fides, 1976. 21-31.
Le bouquet de M. Roque (Petit-Séminaire de Montréal, 1810) in Louis Adolphe Huguet-Latour, Annuaire Ville-Marie Origine, utilité et progrès des institutions catholiques de Montréal. Montréal: Eusèbe-Senécal, 6me livraison du Supplement de l'édition de 1864, 1873. 293-299.
Bourassa, André-G. "Le didascalos: Contributions à l'histoire de l'enseignement du théâtre au Québec, 1535-1885." L'Annuaire théâtrale 16.1 (1994) 107-141.
Burger, Baudouin. "Les spectacles dramatiques en Nouvelle-France (1606-1760)." Les archives des lettres canadiennes tome 5: Le théâtre canadien-français. Montréal: Fides, 1976. 33-57.
-------. L'activité théâtrale du Québec, 1765-1825. Montreal: Editions Parti-pris, 1974.
Burke, Catherine and Adèle Cimon. Les Ursulines de Québec, depuis leur établissement jusqu'à nos jours. Québec: Darveau, 1863.
Corriveau, Jeanne. "Le Théâtre collégial au Québec. L'apport de Gustave Lamarche." Les archives des lettres canadiennes tome 5: Le théâtre canadien-français. Montréal: Fides, 1976. 169-201.
Doucette, Leonard. Theatre in French Canada: Laying the Foundations 1606-1867. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984.
Fournier, Hannah. "Lescarbot's 'Théâtre de Neptune': New World Pageant, Old World Polemic." Canadian Drama 7.1 (1981): 3-11.
Lelièvre, Renée and Monique Baillet. "Une entrée triomphale en Acadie en 1606." Revue d'histoire du théâtre 21.2 (1969): 134-141.
Lescarbot, Marc. Le théâtre de Neptune en Nouvelle France (1606) in Les muses de la Nouvelle-France. Paris: Jean Millot, 1609, 19-29. See Note 1.
Monastère de Nôtre-Dame des Anges. Monseigneur de Saint-Vallier et l'Hôpital Général de Québec [MSV]. Quebec: Darveau, 1882 [compiled by Mère St.Félix (Helen O'Reilly)].
La pastorale de M.Chicoineau (Collège de Montréal, 1800), in Louis Adolphe Huguet-Latour, Annuaire Ville-Marie Origine, utilité et progrès des institutions catholiques de Montréal. Montréal: Eusèbe-Senécal, 2me livraison du Supplement de l'édition de 1864, 1872. 244-247.
Principaux faits historiques concernant le Monastère des Augustines et l'Hôpital Général de Québec 1620-1995. Quebec: Les Augustines de la Miséricorde de Jésus du Monastère de l'Hôpital Général du Québec, 1993.
La réception de Mgr le vicomte d'Argenson (1658), ed. Luc Lacourcière. Anthologie poétique de la Nouvelle-France. Québec: Presses de L'Université Laval 1966, 58-64. [One translation and introduction in English is available: Angus J. MacDougall, "An Historical Sidelight --Quebec 1658." Culture 4 (January 1950): 15-28.]
La réception de Saint-Vallier (1727) in Monastère de Nôtre-Dame des Anges. Monseigneur de Saint- Vallier et l'Hôpital Général de Québec. Quebec: Darveau, 1882. 262-269.
La réception de Saint-Alexis (1797) in Monastère de Nôtre-Dame des Anges. Monseigneur de Saint- Vallier et l'Hôpital Général de Québec. Quebec: Darveau, 1882. 469-474.
Thwaites, Reuben Gold, ed. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents. 73 vols. New York: Pageant, 1959.