Works by Eric-Emmanuel Schmitt have been translated into more than 30 languages; they are published and staged in theaters of over 50 countries. Five of his plays have been staged in Ukraine (Kyiv, Lviv, Kharkiv, Donetsk) and his four prose works have been published in Ukrainian (Kalvaria Publishing House). It will be noted that a few attempts have already been made to invite him to Ukraine, but to no avail. This resulted in a myth about a kind of a refined snob, unavailable for communication, who demands theaters to pay him high honoraria and does not tolerate any tiny changes to be made in the texts of productions. As a translator of three of his plays, I got involved in the nuances of creative cuisine and was enchanted by his versatility: a combination of a clear masterful construction with painful emotionality and subtly deep understanding of theater. As I saw it, the author’s media image and personality disagreed. A private talk shattered this feeling and proved that he indeed is a paradoxical man who with his undeniable and phenomenal success testifies to the most important thing: we are living in the time of questions, not answers.
The image of a snob vanished right away as soon as the writer started talking. When after the late arrival to the meeting in Kyiv’s Young Theater host Yurii Makarov explained the delay by force majeure, Schmitt admitted that he could not appear in public in the state of undress, as his trousers were torn during the trip. The person sitting next to me on the left commented that probably the reason was about the particular generosity of Ukrainian cuisine the previous evening. One way or another, the playwright does not avoid the role of a buffoon – probably namely this role is the best alter ego of Schmitt the philosopher.
What is the secret of his success? I think Schmitt cannot be squeezed into stereotypes, like the myth about dividing drama works into commercial popular and exploring topical ones, which raise acute problems. Besides, this topicality for some reason is supposed to refer mostly to rascals, freaks, maniacs, and other marginal types. With his creative work Schmitt denies these cliches. So, the writer and philosopher writes complicated intellectual texts, but this elite literature enjoys immense success. So, the theses “the public is silly” and “masses seek primitive” simply do not work.
AN INCONVENIENT AUTHOR
When during my stay in Paris I inquired about modern dramaturgy, Eric-Emmanuel Schmitt was named the first, as a French author whose works are most frequently staged all over the world, and I immediately felt he was a commercial author. In Ukraine commercialism means cheap novels rather than intellectual drama. How could intellectuality and commercialism combine? Hearing these words, Schmitt burst out laughing:
“My standpoint is as follows: I am an inconvenient author. I am an intellectual writer loved by audience, big audiences. Since it is hard to understand who I am, it does not keep within the bounds, so I am called a commercial author. In France there is a strict division between state-run theaters and commercial ones. My plays are staged mostly in the system of private theaters, therefore I am called a commercial author, but it does not have any relation to cheap literature.”
The writer treats the reader and spectator with respect as an interesting interlocutor and even turns them into co-authors. Could it be one of the secrets of his works?
I have spent nearly two days with Schmitt, listening to his answers to the questions asked in the Young Theater, Ye bookstore, or simply talking, and now I can tell about the writer’s thoughts about himself, his creative work, life, theater, and our time.
The conversation in the Young Theater started with the fundamentals and sacral question: how did a professional philosopher, author of dissertation, and teacher coming from a refined family become a budding playwright? For Schmitt’s literary debut took place quite late, when he was 30.
“I have always been writing, since my childhood. I wrote my first novel at age 11,” Schmitt admitted, “I read all novels about Arsene Lupin, found out that there were no more left, took a notebook and started writing a sequel A New Adventure of Arsene Lupin. Actually, I continue to do the same: I write books I lack. At the age of 16 I was a member of the lyceum’s theater studio. After staging Jean Anouilh’s Antigone we did not know what else to stage, so I wrote my first play ...or Why the Peas are Green? You can see that at that young age I was asking questions too, although they were not global. I felt happy when I saw the production. But at the same time I understood that I was not mature enough and that I was not thinking deep enough to be a writer. I needed experience and knowledge. Besides, I was a very emotional person. That was how I entered a philosophy department. I think philosophy is a skeleton, I need knowledge to be steady on my legs in this life. Besides, I wanted to overcome my hypersensitiveness. Lisa’s words in Little Marriage Crimes about two minds, modern intellectual and ancient instinctive, still remain topical for me. For a long while I could not reconcile these two individualities in myself and actually it has taken me 10 years to unite emotionality and rationality in my own self.”
DERRIDA TAUGHT ME THE UNDERSTANDING OF FREEDOM
Jacques Derrida was Schmitt’s professor of philosophy. One of the questions was whether he felt the influence of his teacher.
“I was 20 at that time and I wanted to provoke Derrida, to contradict him, to purposefully explain things in ‘anti-Derrida’ manner. But Derrida was an extraordinary personality: he forgave me for these provocations and showed me how ridiculous it was. But with time I understood that I did feel his influence in my creative work. Most importantly, he taught me to understand freedom,” Schmitt says. “For example, I employ Derrida’s method in my novel about Adolf Hitler, which consists of two parts, actual and imaginary, and tells about what he could have become if he had entered an art academy. The initial moment of thinking is not universal, you need to destroy a cliche and try an alternative. This has also showed in my novel The Gospel According to Pilate, which by its form resembles a detective, but it seems to be an investigation conducted by a philosopher. Pilate as a contemporary of Jesus Christ investigates the disappearances of a dead body. Actually, Christianity starts with the mystery of a missing dead body. And he finds himself in a blind alley. From rational Rene Descartes’s point of view, it cannot be resolved, for this is a mystery. Something exists beyond our reason. In this story I am not Pilate, rather his wife Claudia. It seems to me I have jumped into faith in the same way.”
It will be noted that in the past Schmitt, like a character from Little Prince got lost in a desert and for a long while was alone with the sky, without food and water. He entered the desert an atheist, he came out of it a believer, keeping in secret what actually happened there. But the path of the believer was thorny, too. To Makarov’s remark that European intellectuals of the new time usually turn to faraway religions Schmitt admitted that he had such a flaw, too.
“The thing is I was born to an atheistic family, later I studied and taught philosophy, which was hardly favorable for religiousness. Besides, I am a Frenchman, hence – a snob. I became a believer under the stars in the Sahara desert – and I started to view the world differently,” the writer admitted. “But I started with Tibetan Buddhism. This was my primal instinct – to turn to something as remote as possible. Incidentally, I understood that I was a Buddhist from the question a journalist asked me after my novel Milarepa was published, the first book in my ‘Cycle of Invisible.’ But another thing is more important, to speak with respect about different manner of thinking, not from the viewpoint of religion, rather out of a desire to cognize and understand another person.”
Your philosophic past resulted in one more play, The Libertine, which tells about the French philosopher Denis Diderot, the topic of your thesis. What was the main impetus for this play?
“I wanted to tell about this astonishing personality, his contradictoriness. And a real fact became an impetus for writing the book,” Schmitt went on, “The thing is that another leading character in the play, Madame Trebouche, also had a real prototype – she was an artist and at the same time a thief. One day she was painting Diderot’s portrait and she asked him to undress. The philosopher was embarrassed, but he obeyed. Madame Trebouche understood that Diderot was sexually appealed to her. He commented on this in quite an original manner: ‘I am not as firm as he is.’ Actually, this funny episode started the play. Ambiguity is very important in a work. There cannot be only one opinion and one view of a situation.”
I WROTE MY FIRST REAL PLAY WHEN I WAS 30
Schmitt told how spontaneously his theater career began:
“I wrote my first real play when I was 30 – it was about the trial of Don Juan by his ex-lovers. Having obtained classical education, I decided to act like ancient Greek dramaturgists – to use a myth and knock it together with reality. I think today everyone asks Don Juan’s question: what stays after desire? How long do relations last? How to distinguish between passion and love? These questions are still actual today.
“When I wrote the play, I decided to send it to an actress I liked very much. Fortunately, she was sick and had enough time to read it. She became fond of it, thus opening for me the doors of theater – it was a comedy on Champs Elysees. That was a kind of paradox: though I have never written musical comedies, my career started namely there.”
Schmitt practically avoided the question on how a philosopher can feel the nature of theater: “It would be the same to ask how a fish learns to swim. Of course, I have read drama works, like Shakespeare, Moliere, etc.”
What is closer and more interesting to you, drama works or prose?
“Spontaneously I am a dramaturgist, because drama is a dialogue, debates, questions. I have forged myself as a prose writer in order to embody the plots that cannot be inserted into drama. The plot gives a hint to me as for what kind of work it will be, a drama or prose. But I don’t get as much satisfaction from prose as from theater. Writing for theater is very natural for me. Yes, I have read many plays, by Shakespeare, Moliere, etc., but my plays are spontaneous. Theater is a natural thing for me, I love it.”
AN ACTOR AND A PLAYWRIGHT ARE OPPOSITE STANDPOINTS
But rumor has it you are afraid of stage...
“I think that an actor and a playwright are two opposite standpoints. An author is living an unreal life of fantasy, whereas an actor really appears in public. Actor is very much dependent on the will of other people, and this is a faraway thing for me. I play the roles innerly – I can be either Ibrahim, or Mozart. But it was hard for me to appear on stage, especially at the beginning. This time I have told myself that I need to play the role of ‘an outstanding writer Eric-Emmanuel Schmitt,’ but I have understood I can converse normally – and this is good.”
Do you change your texts, depending on the performance of actors?
“As a rule, I don’t, but I watch the mise en scenes, emotions, situations at rehearsals and during the performances, and use this experience for my future works.”
What is more interesting for you, actual performances or rehearsals?
“Performances, I don’t like watching the rehearsals. I need to feel the audience, its emotions, this energy. I feel need for contact, a dialogue of actor’s performance and the audience.”
(Unfortunately, Schmitt has seen only one Ukrainian production of his plays, Enigma Variations staged by Lviv-based Zankovetska Theater, but he was pleasantly impressed by the show.)
“I was impressed, I was convinced by the performance of Ukrainian actors. Compared with the French, Ukrainians are more emotional, considerably more sentimental, and I was impressed by this. And I liked this. It seemed to me I understood Ukrainian. This evoked the feeling of brotherhood. This is what I like about theater, it unites people from different countries.”
Another mystery: you understand woman, woman’s soul. How do you succeed in this?
“For the most part, there have been male characters. Theater has saved me, because I had to write female roles. I could not write them based on my own experience. But I observe a lot and this helps me understand the essence of a woman. Certain roles have real prototypes.”
I PUT ON A MASK AND IT HELPS ME TO TELL MORE TRUTH
Do you use facts from your own life for your works?
“I am a litterateur, not a literalist, i.e., I prefer distance in what concerns the characters, this is more real. I tell not only about myself, but about all of us. I put on a mask, which allows me to tell more truth. For example, I can put on a mask of a jealous man to show my inclination for jealousy which I restrain in real life.”
Do you write roles for concrete actors?
“I have numerous images of actors in my head. But it would be the same as a composer writing music specially for a concrete violin. In the same way, I write generally.”
Critics say some roles have been created specially for certain actors – Frederic for Jean-Paul Belmondo, or Enigma Variations for Alain Delon.
“No, those are simply the roles that were first played by these actors. It is they who say so, not me, this is a lie. On the whole, I have never written at anyone’s order. I have received numerous proposals of this kind from famous actors whom I love very much. I could have become a billionaire if I accepted them, but I cannot do that. This is not my story. I have created all of my roles for myself.”
One of very important questions that concern Ukrainian theater-goers is what is your attitude as an author to realization of your works? In particular, are you ready for radical interpretations?
“It is hard to be honest in this question. For example, I liked the Lviv production of Enigma Variations. The actors were absorbed in the roles, they put their heart in every cue. Although the director did not follow my remarks, he offered his own scenic methods of expression, very good as well. I did not feel betrayed. After all, I write remarks mostly for the readers, rather than directors, for people who read the play to better imagine what is going on on stage. But I reject some of the proposals that I received from directors or actors. For example, for some reason they have offered to let women play men’s roles in Enigma Variations. I said ‘no.’ It goes specifically about men. Therefore as long as I live I will protest against these versions. And when I die I will probably turn over in the coffin.”
YOU PERCEIVE MUSIC IRRATIONALLY, NOT ONLY WITH YOUR EARS, BUT YOUR LEGS AND ENTIRE BODY, TOO
Another important question is music as an important part of the works (like the title of the play Enigma Variations) and characters, in particular Beethoven and Mozart.
“My entire life is connected with Mozart. The thing is, when I was 15, music saved my life. I was in the state of terrible depression and I seriously considered committing suicide. It was then that I found myself at a rehearsal in Lyon Opera. Can you imagine? An old worn out building, all dusted, with no decorations, and a fat singer in awkward gown... But when she started singing I was astonished, so beautiful her singing was. She brought me back to light. If so beautiful things exist in this world, it is worth living. Mozart is a key to beauty and excitement. On that day I was saved by art and I found the meaning of life. Music is a very powerful kind of art, you perceive it irrationally, not only with your ears, but your legs, your entire body, too. It can excite you in a matter of 15 seconds, whereas I need to write Oscar and Lady in Pink for this. But the purpose is the same, to recover.
“I like to listen to an orchestra, live music, I don’t like ‘canned goods’ (CDs). Likewise, I like theater more than cinema. Music and literature combine easily for me. For example, music helped me in the play Enigma Variations. It goes about love, which is always a mystery for me. Two men love a woman and don’t know about this. One of them is her husband, another one – her epistolary lover. When the woman dies, her husband finds the letters from another man and starts writing on her behalf. That is how they continue her life on earth. This is a strange story of love between two men with a woman as a mediator. I think love has no sex, it does not have to be sexual. And stories of love about deeper feeling without sex are more powerful, like mother’s, father’s love, or a child’s love to parents.”
Aren’t these two men reflecting “two different minds”?
“Yes, I identify myself with both of these men. Znorko embodies the image of an ideal remote love, whereas Larsen is the love we experience in everyday life. Love is never one and the same, it is always different. I almost created the play in my mind, but it was lacking something, and then I heard this piece performed by St. Petersburg Orchestra, Enigma Variations – 14 variations of non-existing melody. This is the image of love for me. It is like a melody you cannot discern. In love it is impossible to own or know another person – you can only be fond of the mystery. To love is to devote yourself to another person whom you will never cognize, it is like visiting a mystery. That was how I found a solution for the play.”
Who is more important in the work, the author or the reader?
“I think the text exists only if it has a reader. I write for other people, but I demand from the reader to create the book on a par with me. I don’t like drawn-out descriptions. I develop my works in the way there is always space left for the reader – to complete, invent what is missing, which makes the reader more active and attentive. One reader told me once, ‘It is strange, but I still remember your novel well, although I read it 10 years ago.’ I replied: it is because he ‘co-wrote’ it with me.”
