Corneille under Molière’s mask

  Turning to the dictionary compiled by French professor Fropol, there is an entry explaining the entry citing the words of an idiot written by the poet Jean Dadieu: “Ah: to express surprise, to ask for an explanation or to express doubt. Example: “You Did you know that it was Ko Naiyi who wrote Molière’s script. ”
  Huh?” Reasons for
  This seemingly joking remark is not groundless. In December 2001, in the international lexical statistics publication “Quantitative Linguistics”, which is known for its seriousness, Dominique Rabe, a lecturer at the University of Grenoble in France, and his Siri, the son of an applied mathematics researcher, published an article in English saying: “We have evidence that many of Molière’s plays may have been written by Corneille.”
  According to Rabe and his son, they used information technology to compare Corneille with Molière’s work, found between Corneille’s 1644 comedy masterpiece “The Liar”, and Molière’s 16 plays, including the famous “Madame’s School”, “The Hypocrite”, “Don Juan”, ” Works such as “The World Weary”, “The Host of the Dinner Party”, “The Miser”, and “The Schoolgirl” are very close in terms of vocabulary.
  In fact, it was thought of a long time ago to pluck the “great comedies” of Molière Because, in the same play, farce and serious comedy are mixed, which often makes some readers suspicious. However, through the dissemination of school textbooks, Molière has become a “people’s writer”, a French republic, from a comedian favored by the king. The icon of the French became a symbol of French genius, a model against the church and embodies the spirit of the republic.
  Corneille’s appearance, it will not wait until 1919, when the French writer and scholar Pierre Louis was 49 years old, he was eagerly studying again and again. Corneille’s works, looking for the characteristic marks of Corneille’s writing hidden in Molière’s script. When he read “The Host of the Dinner Party”, he came to the conclusion that “Moliere can imitate Corneille can be fake.” In fact, this script may be It was written by Corneille. He also found that Molière did not leave behind any original manuscripts that would prove his literary authorship.
  But in the 17th century it was common practice to destroy manuscripts as soon as the work was printed. As a result, there are hardly any original manuscripts of Corneille.
  According to Pierre-Louis, it is well known that Molière and Corneille collaborated in the 1671 ballet comedy Psyche. Among them, Molière’s office has its name, and it is indicated that Corneille also participated in the cooperation. But this was the only time Corneille had signed on as a collaborator, and Louis deduced whether the two of them had drawn up a secret cooperation agreement in Rouen, 13 years ago, in 1658—that is, Corneille wrote, Morrie Sadly published. The former wants money and free expression, the latter wants sensation and fame. Before this agreement, Molière engaged in his farce, and then he threw himself brilliantly into the “great comedy”.
  Relying on his own judgments, Pierre-Louis persistently analyzes Corneille’s style, mapping the rhythm of his prose, creating tables of consistent language, and lists of alternate words for letters. In 1919, it was a sensation. Waiting for a response to him, he became the target of contempt from all over the country after a long period of intense abuse and threats. Because, at that time, it was impossible to discuss Molière in the whole country. Later, the situation even deteriorated to the point where the French Comedy Theatre had to file a lawsuit. Pierre-Louis had to remain silent, but two years later he continued his research. He died in 1925. Today, the researcher has at least 3,000 unpublished notes about Gao Naiyi. Regrettably, after the death of Pierre-Louis, most of this valuable information was lost everywhere.
  In 1949, Miss Fraser
  , a young Scottish scholar, appeared, who had never studied Lewis’ material. However, after her personal research, she also confirmed that Gao Naiyi had written works for Molière and others without his signature. As soon as his monograph “The Death of Solon, A First Manuscript of Corneille” was published, it was refuted by Molière’s supporters, saying don’t touch our Molière, our essence.
  In 1957, the French novelist and critic Henri Prayer, who had hosted the series “New World”, questioned it again and published a book entitled “Cornay under the Mask of Molière”. As a result, there were still protests.
  Thirty years later, another researcher named Hippolyte Udell appeared. The literary lover also bought some material from Lewis’ successor and set about writing his monograph. In 1990, he published Molière or the Author of the Imagination, a critical look at the activities of his characters in order to meet the needs of the royal family from behind the social causes. Udell and other researchers have long wanted to find an “authority” to support this conclusion in lexical statistics, but they have not yet achieved it.
  In an interview in December 2002, Rabe still confirmed with “99.9%” certainty that Corneille’s “The Liar” and some of Molière’s works were produced by the same person. Why do these works with similar vocabulary give rise to the idea of ​​author’s replacement? Now, vocabulary statistics researchers know that the similarity and difference in the overall evaluation of vocabulary between texts will vary by author, era, theme, and subject matter. different. In information analysis, accurately measuring these parameters will be a big headache. But he confirmed that a revolutionary lexical calculation called the “line gap” had been implemented: in combination with other lexical processing methods, the role of the author could be discerned within these factors. Its greatest effect is that thousands of different texts have been tested. According to their experience, the “interline gap” index varies from 0 to 1. When the index is below 0.2, then the two texts compared are the same author. Among the more than ten plays of Molière mentioned above, some works have even lower comparison indexes.
  In 2003, Rabe and his son published Corneille in the shadow of Molière, which also received a lot of abuse. But Rabe’s research conclusions inspired the ideas of researchers in literature, applied mathematics, and vocabulary statistics. But opponents argue that Rabe and his son’s empiricism can only make assumptions, and can not lead to “any evidence.” Although they must have indexed thousands of original texts, this statistical approach is “partial and biased.” Why Rabe’s “interline gap” completely ignores syntax, while Gaomo’s text is composed of rhythmic verses, while Rabe and his son consider these useless and focus their main research on a large number of words. However, most disputes over authorship of ancient literary texts are caused by careful analysis and statistics of the position of words and the structure of verses. In the same year, Philippe Vidal’s investigative monograph “Moliere-Cornay, a Legendary Lie” was published.
  In 2004, another monograph titled “The Corneille-Moliere Affair, The Greatest Literary Deception” was published, which was quite eye-catching. The book’s author, Denis Boissier, a playwright, said humbly in an interview that he knew that as a researcher, he couldn’t and couldn’t know everything. Therefore, in the ten years before the creation, I have studied all the monographs and a large number of related books by the predecessors in this field, and there are more than 740 books. Combined with three full years of reading, I made more than 2,000 pages of notes. Finally, he disclosed the life and professional relationship between Gao and Mo in the book, and concluded that Molière was always busy with roles such as actor, theater director, theater manager, and organizer of royal entertainment activities. He has never written any plays performed by his troupe under his signature.
  The beginning and end of the cooperation
  In 1606, Corneille was born into a wealthy family in Rouen, and he himself had worked as a lawyer. Because of his love for drama, when he was young, he wrote his tragic debut “Merritt” on the theme of his failed love and put it on the stage. Later, he devoted himself to drama creation. His brilliance came in 1637, when his play “Cid” was successfully staged, which received rave reviews and unprecedented pomp. The play is hailed as the pinnacle of classical tragedy creation. However, the drama-obsessed Cardinal Richelieu, the Prime Minister of the Louis XIII era, was jealous of the talent and success of Corneille, who had been a member of his writing team, and criticized and banned the play. Gao Naiyi was an arrogant and sensitive person, and in the following years, he simply stopped writing. However, life is real. This academician of the French Academy has no allowance since 1651, he is not good at financial management, and has several children of himself and others to support, making life almost difficult.
  Why did Corneille join forces with Molière to write for him? Undoubtedly, Corneille is a sober and practical person. The direct reason is that one is the extremely difficult economic situation; the other is that his tragic creation seems to have entered the dead end. In addition, the glory of his former tragic master did not allow him to write comedies again, and his opponents scolded his new works. All of this puts it in a bind. The only way out is to join forces with Molière, and comedy is no stranger to him. He is proud and confident in his writing skills, his mastery of genres. But there were already many well-known playwrights at that time. Why did Molière choose Cornelius? This is because Cornelius has many qualities and habits that are admired. Without the arrival of Molière, Corneille’s drama career would have ended bleakly. So, in 1659, he decided to appear as an incarnation, accepted Moliere as his spokesperson, and became the real author of the satirical comedy signed by “Moliere”. In 1662, he never wanted to leave his hometown of Rouen, and he settled in Paris with his younger brother Corneille, who wrote the script. In “The Life of Corneille”, written in 1702 by Corneille’s nephew, who is regarded as one of the main bases of the Gao-Mo alliance agreement, when talking about the two people’s cooperation “Psek”, he wrote: In the shadow of his name, he indulges in an excess of tenderness that might damage his reputation. But in conjunction with Molière, it can allow other “excesses” such as sarcasm, sarcasm, and revenge. He’s always been a great playwright, signed on or not.

  Since then, he has hidden behind the scenes, and his philosophy of life has replaced his unparalleled talent. On the one hand, he still uses his own name to launch often-failed plays; on the other hand, he writes under his own name and produces a successful comedy. Usually, in that era, almost all famous actors had alternate authors on a regular basis. Corneille is just working with the ideal collaborator, and he himself does not expect to be a martyr. After all, telling the truth comes with a price. In this way, what he could not say, or could not express in his name, was conveyed through Molière’s voice. It is thanks to the protection of Molière’s name, and also the common and necessary practice of writing by aliases, that the writer is fortunately protected from the punishment of the church and even the power. Molière’s hope was, with the help of the best French poets, to become an actor as good as Floril. Molière’s victory was also Corneille’s victory. Thus, the old poet who sees through everything and the young and malleable comedian are linked by fate.
  How is the cooperation between the two of them? Do their temperaments match? In fact, Molière in life is also a person who rarely talks about melancholy. Although there are still many differences between them, they are still very tacit. After all, they are practitioners of the same class. Molière’s admiration for Corneille is sincere and, in a sense, a kind of respect for the ideal father. They have no antagonistic emotions in politics and religion, and belong to pure artists. Ko Naiyi is very cautious about his previous tragic rehearsal, such as the sets, costumes, and actors’ attitudes. But he was not interested in directing, it was entirely up to Molière to decide. Doing each other’s work, Corneille wrote the book he wanted to write. Artistically, Corneille’s only requirement for Molière was to perform his repertoire in a natural way. Although Molière can express everything with just his face. But he still strives to recite his lines as naturally as he speaks. Corneille believes that if an artist wants to make a living from art, he must make the public happy. So, when he chooses to write, he implements a “success strategy”: to make the royal family happy, to make the public happy, to attract more people to watch the performance, and to not make the academics hate it, in order to win the public’s voice. Its ultimate purpose is to create wealth.
  Conclusion pending
  Moliere’s situation after his death was quite tragic. Because he had offended the church during his lifetime, the church refused to hold a Christian funeral for him. His wife interceded with the king, and finally, only after the king’s intervention did he allow a hasty burial in the dark. The researchers believe that if he hadn’t fallen out of favor with the king, and had he not died suddenly in 1673, he would have enjoyed a state funeral. Had he been the real author, the king could have secured a place for him at the Académie Française, or an office as he did with Racine. If he was a great writer like Corneille and Racine, the king would not have allowed him to be treated so pitifully. The reason why the church that he had offended, rejected him like this, can only be explained by the fact that he was only the king’s favorite servant actor.
  After Molière’s death, Corneille also stopped writing in 1674. He moved twice, lived in increasingly bad neighborhoods, and finally died in Paris in 1684.
  Hundreds of years have passed. However, in today’s France, the debate about Corneille and Molière never stops. The fans of both sides call themselves researchers, and in the public opinion position of both sides, they express their opinions and disagree. But most French nationals still know very little about it. Undoubtedly, it was too difficult for the French to accept that their great playwrights never wrote with a pen. Denis Boissier is also pessimistic that future research development is not optimistic, and bluntly stated that the current situation is unchanged from 1919. Because there is too much resistance from official institutions such as the University of Paris and the Comédie de France. But the human mind is always free, and now, independent researchers have joined forces to make their voices of doubt and determination heard. They believe that, through hard work, the official myth of Molière will eventually be broken day by day. The truth of history is more beautiful than myth.

error: Content is protected !!