Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage: Language, Identity, Nation 9780773598683

Citation preview

r o b e r t l e pa g e o n t h e t o r o n t o s t a g e

27761_Koustas.indd 1

2016-04-01 13:15:34

27761_Koustas.indd 2

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage Language, Identity, Nation

j a n e k o u s ta s

McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal & Kingston ∙ London ∙ Chicago

27761_Koustas.indd 3

2016-04-01 13:15:34

©  McGill-Queen’s University Press 2016 ISB N ISB N ISB N ISB N

978-0-7735-4674-5 (cloth) 978-0-7735-4675-2 (paper) 978-0-7735-9868-3 (eP DF ) 978-0-7735-9869-0 (eP UB)

Legal deposit second quarter 2016 Bibliothèque nationale du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, through the Awards to Scholarly Publications Program, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Funding has also been provided by the Brock S S HRC Institutional Grant and by the Brock Humanities Research Institute. McGill-Queen’s University Press acknowledges the support of the Canada Council for the Arts for our publishing program. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Book Fund for our publishing activities.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Koustas, Jane, 1954–, author Robert Lepage on the Toronto stage: language, identity, nation /  Jane Koustas. Includes bibliographical references and index. Issued in print and electronic formats. isb n 978-0-7735-4674-5 (cloth). – is bn 978-0-7735-4675-2 (paper). – isb n 978-0-7735-9868-3 (eP DF ). – is bn 978-0-7735-9869-0 (eP U B ) 1. Lepage, Robert, 1957– – Criticism and interpretation. 2. Theater – Production and direction – Ontario – Toronto. I. Title. PN2308.L46K69 2016

792.02'32092

C 2016-900608-5 C 2016-900609-3

This book was typeset by Interscript in 10.5 / 13 Sabon.

27761_Koustas.indd 4

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Dedicated to the memory of Barbara, Shawn, and Marilyn in recognition of their valuable scholarship and treasured friendship

27761_Koustas.indd 5

2016-04-01 13:15:34

27761_Koustas.indd 6

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Contents

Acknowledgments ix Introduction 3 1 Robert Lepage: Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  16 2 Robert Lepage Meets the R OC Circulations, Romeo and Juliette, The Dragons’ Trilogy, Vinci, Tectonic Plates, Polygraph 50 3 The “Love Affair” Begins Needles and Opium, The Seven Streams of the River Ota, Elsinore, The Geometry of Miracles 85 4 The World Leader on the Toronto Stage The Far Side of the Moon, Lipsynch, Eonnagata, The Andersen Project, The Blue Dragon 114 Conclusion 149 Notes 153 Bibliography 183 Index 205

27761_Koustas.indd 7

2016-04-20 12:31:04

27761_Koustas.indd 8

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Acknowledgments

The so-called single-authored book is frequently the result of collaboration among numerous dedicated individuals, and I owe a debt of gratitude to many. I wish to thank Micheline Beaulieu, previously at Ex Machina, without whose expertise, cooperation, diligence, and cordiality this book would not have been possible. Mille mercis, Micheline. I am grateful as well to the research assistants at Brock University who got and kept the files in order and to Lisa LaFramboise for assistance with an early version. Thanks as well to the expert, efficient, and very patient editorial team at McGill-Queen’s University Press. Funding for this project was provided by the Brock University Advancement Fund, the Brock University SSHRC Institutional Grant, and the Brock Humanities Research Institute. This book would not have been possible without the grant awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. My thanks go as well to the team at the Hamilton General Hospital and at the ABI Clinic. Thank you for your support and encouragement. My friends and colleagues provided much appreciated reassurance and positive energy. And to my family, thanks, as always, for patience, cheer, and devotion.

27761_Koustas.indd 9

2016-04-01 13:15:34

27761_Koustas.indd 10

2016-04-01 13:15:34

r o b e r t l e pa g e o n t h e t o r o n t o s t a g e

27761_Koustas.indd 1

2016-04-01 13:15:34

27761_Koustas.indd 2

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Introduction

Quebec actor, cineaste, dramaturge, and director Robert Lepage has earned an international reputation for himself and his Quebec-based theatre company, Ex Machina. He is recognized as a world leader in  the production of innovative theatre for a global community. Lepage’s success on the national and international scene is well established and has been acknowledged by numerous prestigious awards, including the Governor General’s Performing Arts Award for Lifetime Artistic Achievement in 2009, the Europe Theatre Prize in 2007, and the soriq (Société des relations internationales du Québec) Award in 2000 in recognition of his promotion of Quebec culture outside Quebec. In 2013 he was presented with the Glenn Gould Prize. Lepage is only the fourth Canadian to receive this international honour since its inception in 1987 – the others were Leonard Cohen, Oscar Peterson, and R. Murray Schafer – and, at fifty-five, he was then the youngest. Although Lepage enjoys such international prestige, however, this study considers the history and importance of his success in Toronto and the complex position and positioning of the artist and his global theatre with respect to a somewhat more local community: English Canada. Scholarship on the theatre and cinema of Robert Lepage centres on the importance of negotiations with the Other: Karen Fricker’s Globalisation of Robert Lepage, Chantal Hébert and Irène PirelliContos’s discussion of metaphorical voyages and multidisciplinarity in Théâtre, multidisciplinarité et multiculturalisme, Ludovic Fouquet’s Robert Lepage, l’horizon en images, Erin Manning’s exploration of deterritorialization in Ephemeral Territories: Representing Nation, Home and Identity in Canada, Sherry Simon’s article “Robert Lepage

27761_Koustas.indd 3

2016-04-01 13:15:34

4

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

and the Languages of Spectacle,” and Aleksandar Dundjerovic’s ´ focus on crossings in The Cinema of Robert Lepage: The Poetics of Memory all point to the importance of mediation with the Other through language, culture, or theatrical practices, particularly in the context of globalized theatre. For the present study, I have chosen first to consider Lepage’s encounter with a more immediate, arguably more significant Other – English Canada, also referred to as the Rest of Canada (the roc). I go on to analyze Lepage’s importance as a player on the Canadian and international theatre scene and in the landscape of political, cultural, and linguistic identity, and propose that, while the triumph and popularity of Lepage’s theatre is very much global, the artist’s relationship with the roc nevertheless remains a central component of the identity question consistently addressed in his work. While this approach, in which I consider Lepage as formed by and in conversation with Toronto, by no means contradicts any emphasis on globalization, and indeed adds another port of call, it brings to the fore a fundamental relationship critical to a fuller understanding of his work. It was Lepage’s relationship with English Canada that shaped his work initially, and throughout his career his reception in Toronto has served as a feedback loop that has influenced his productions.1 Rather than respond solely to the global themes in his work, Toronto audiences saw aspects of the city’s own identity reflected in his theatre. Lepage also “staged” and developed Toronto’s understanding of theatre on a broader intercultural and trans­ national scale. The city’s embrace of Lepage, whose oeuvre steps beyond a narrowly defined concept of national theatre, also led Toronto to redefine its position with respect to Canadian theatre and to step out of the national space and aspire to a position as a cultural metropolis on the international scene. When asked about his dual loyalty to Canada and Quebec, Lepage once stated, “Quebec is a small, incestuous society that I am proud to be a part of.”2 Commenting on his creative inspiration, he confessed to being still very much a kid, “always more interested in playing with the box than with the gift that came in it.”3 These statements introduce ideas central to understanding the notion of identity and its importance in his work. First, he is a proud Quebecker and, while recognizing the limits of this perhaps sometimes closed society, he also understands the importance of the ties that bind, even those that bind too tightly. Second, with respect to the box,

27761_Koustas.indd 4

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Introduction 5

Lepage suggests an entirely different take on the over-used expression “thinking outside the box.” Lepage plays with the box itself, reshaping and transforming it to make it do and mean new things. His work suggests that if we are hemmed in or contained by the box, we can perhaps rethink the box itself rather than try to manipulate or change the contents. This is more than thinking outside the box: this is making the box work for us. If we are boxed in by a small incestuous society, for example, we can try to redefine the limits and the shape of the box, while still recognizing the importance of boundaries in our sense of identity and belonging. Indeed, as early as 1990, Vit Wagner, one of Lepage’s first admirers and subsequently a long-standing fan, stated, in an article significantly entitled “Theatre Kicks Down All Boundaries,” “The theatre of Quebec is the theatre of the world.”4 Lepage frequently demonstrates that he enjoys playing with the box of the theatre and the stage spaces that he transforms. Indeed, the Ex Machina website begins with the image of a box opening and then breaking down into different shapes. The use of technology in his work suggests, moreover, that Lepage really savours playing with the toy as well. A French critic labelled him “The Inspector Gadget of the theatre.”5 His use of video, sophisticated soundscapes, and staging that resists convention, for instance, transforms the theatre box and its traditional practices. This reference to boxes is perhaps also a helpful way to look at the work of this extraordinary dramaturge who has redefined the shape of theatre itself and has reconfigured the larger “boxes” – whether of language, our binary translation practice, culture, geography, or geopolitical contexts – into which Canadians place themselves and others. Among the many boxes that come to mind when discussing Canadian identity are, of course, those of the two solitudes. Another over-used, and arguably outdated expression (since one should perhaps talk about multiple solitudes), it nonetheless still serves as shorthand to describe the relationship between Quebec and English Canada. The acronym “roc,” the Rest of Canada, coined by the eminent translator and translation scholar Philip Stratford, is used to denote the “other” solitude, the non-Quebec, non–French-speaking factor in the “two solitudes” equation.6 While Stratford himself ­suggested the more accurate and more contemporary image of the double helix rather than circles depicting two solitudes, cultural exchange between French and English Canada remains nonetheless

27761_Koustas.indd 5

2016-04-01 13:15:34

6

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

at the forefront of discussion about Canadian literary systems and translation practices. Titles such as Two Solicitudes, Échanges entre les deux solitudes, or even the trailer for the 2006 Quebec film Bon Cop Bad Cop, which announces, “cet été les deux solitudes se rencontrent,”7 clearly rely on this common currency and indicate its relevance in the cultural imagination beyond the political arena. The broadcasting of important events such as the Olympics or national commemorations in both languages, for example, underscores the ongoing relevance of official bilingualism – meaning in French and in English – in the public sphere. For all Canadians, bilingual labelling is part of daily life.8 Toronto’s reflexive response to Lepage is conditioned by this ever-present side-by-side duality that is part of the artist’s own makeup. The city’s appreciation of Lepage’s multilingual, transcultural theatre stemmed from its experience with translation “d’une langue officielle à l’autre”9 and the need to reconfigure the model, to circumvent the stand-off version, and to embrace multiculturalism, which was also becoming an increasingly important element in the city’s own identity. From this perspective, the Toronto/roc audience was different from that of other ports of call on Lepage’s global itinerary. Thus, while globalization in and of Lepage’s theatre remains an important research focus, it is nonetheless instructive to consider Lepage’s fundamental and ongoing relationship with what was, and indeed may continue to be, his most proximate Other. This is not to suggest that his relationship with the roc is either the most important, or the most powerful, vector in his and his theatre’s global ­voyage. Indeed, in later productions such as The Andersen Project, Lipsynch, and The Blue Dragon, the presence of English Canada, so marked in Circulations and The Dragons’ Trilogy, seems to have been eclipsed in favour of more complex models of interaction more akin to notions of globalization or glocalization than to the image of  two, even overlapping, circles. Nonetheless, Lepage’s ongoing “love affair” with Toronto10 merits attention. While it would be inaccurate to claim that Toronto is representative of the entire roc, the importance of this city on the Canadian cultural scene and, in particular, its reception of Lepage render it a focus of study worthy of special attention. I offer here an overview of Lepage’s impact on the Canadian theatre scene through an analysis of his success in Toronto from the late 1980s to the first decade of the millennium, in order to demonstrate

27761_Koustas.indd 6

2016-04-01 13:15:34

Introduction 7

that Lepage’s triumph in Toronto changed the dynamics of Canadian theatre by suggesting new ways of “enacting the nation in imagined theatre.”11 Toronto participated in the global trajectory and success of a Quebec playwright who brought a new vision of theatre that placed it beyond the confines of language, geography and politics, and conventional terms of nationhood. Unlike his Quebec compa­ triots who, either because of professional jealousy or reluctance to  support a Quebecker whose theatre (in which English is used), resolutely sidestepped the sovereigntist agenda, Toronto embraced Lepage for moving the city, its theatre, and the roc beyond the Bi  and Bi12 (bilingualism and biculturalism) world of translation, standoff politics, and its emphasis on cultural difference and a distinct society. Lepage found a deus ex machina solution to the question of the two solitudes by “playing” with, and beyond, this very notion. Furthermore, just as Lepage’s characters, and indeed the artist himself, evolved from being Quebec and/or Canadian nationals to being global citizens, Toronto’s theatre, thanks in part to Lepage, developed its potential as an international site on the global map of cultural tourism. Lepage’s arrival in Toronto, Canada’s largest theatre scene, was not this city’s first taste of Quebec theatre.13 Gratien Gélinas had triumphed in the 1950s and Michel Tremblay drew crowds consistently for over two decades between 1972 and 1997. However, before the arrival of Lepage, Quebec theatre was French-language theatre in English translation. As I have argued elsewhere when discussing Quebec theatre in translation in Toronto in the 1970s and 1980s, “theatre exchange failed to bridge the two solitudes not because of a shortage of productions, for indeed Quebec theatre became a staple of the Toronto season, but because of the perspective from which Quebec plays [in translation] were viewed and reviewed.”14 Robert Wallace, a former editor of Canadian Theatre Review, accused the Toronto theatre scene of being “wrongheaded”15 and explained: “Indeed, my general concern with the reception of Quebecois plays in Toronto originates with my discomfort over the attitudes with which they often appear to be approached, not just by the critics who review them but also by the companies that produce them. In a word, I would typify these attitudes as Toronto-centric, adding to the historical complaint … that Toronto’s artistic institutions suffer from an arrogance that leads them either

27761_Koustas.indd 7

2016-04-01 13:15:35

8

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

to appropriate or dismiss whatever appears to them as genuinely ­different.”16 With Circulations in 1985, Lepage introduced Toronto to bi- or multilingual theatre that bypassed and transformed conventional notions of translation, which place source and target languages, audiences, and cultures in binary opposition. He redefined, defied, or transgressed the traditional labels of “québécois.” EnglishCanadian, roc, or Other and thus destabilized the attitudes described by Wallace: he was the only Quebecker to do so. Matthew Fraser, then the Globe and Mail arts critic, was quick to recognize the creative genius of Lepage’s theatre as well as its potential to transform traditional boundaries between Canada’s two major theatre communities: “If it is true that the best thing for an artistic community is a gust of creative influence from another culture, then Circulations could be just such a catalyst.”17 The positive response to and emphasis on Lepage’s ability to plunge the roc into another sort of otherness, deracinated from the traditional Bi and Bi, stand-off model, continued throughout Lepage’s presence in Toronto, where he remained very much in the critical limelight. Indeed, almost as a riposte to Robert Crew’s 1988 lament that “Robert Lepage has yet to receive the wide and prolonged exposure in Toronto that he deserves,”18 in 2002 Lepage was listed in Maclean’s as number five in a list of the fifty most influential Canadians on the contemporary cultural scene. Significantly, the article congratulates Lepage as “Quebec’s biggest theatrical export” for having “spanned the cultural divide that is English and French.”19 As early as 1987 Lepage was identified in the Globe and Mail as “the reigning king of Quebec theatre.”20 From Tectonic Plates, which was heralded as a “masterful voyage through place, time and human evolution,” to Polygraph, where Lepage was considered to be in “top form,” and on to Needles and Opium, a “hot ticket item” that opened the 1994 6th World Stage Festival and featured Canada’s most “innovative performance artist,” Lepage’s theatre became for the Toronto audience “a potent fix.”21 The mutual decision by the roc and Lepage to open the Today’s Japan festival with the Canadian premiere of The Seven Streams of the River Ota in 1995 confirmed Lepage’s “histoire d’amour avec le public torontois.”22 Even the missteps – the technologically troubled Elsinore (1995) and the wandering Geometry of Miracles (1998) – garnered sympathetic, if not entirely positive, critical and box office responses. While The Far Side of the Moon did not earn the unanimous accolades reserved for some earlier

27761_Koustas.indd 8

2016-04-01 13:15:35

Introduction 9

productions such as Seven Streams, critics celebrated Lepage’s return in 2000. Robert Cushman of the National Post notes, “After his most recent productions, the clever but pointless one-man Hamlet and the dismally ragged Geometry of Necessity [sic] (the Frank Lloyd Wright one), we were praying for Lepage’s return to form and our prayers have been answered, and then some.”23 After The Far Side of the Moon, Toronto critics maintained a sustained if long-distance relationship with Lepage. Zulu Time, the remake of The Dragons’ Trilogy,24 and the Montreal restaging of Lepage’s production of the Bartok and Schoenberg operas (Blue­ beard’s Castle and Erwartung, directed by Lepage on commission from the Canadian Opera Company) merited critical attention. Kâ, Lepage’s joint project with Cirque du Soleil in Las Vegas, was covered by both the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail.25 The Busker’s Opera26 and early versions, including a performance in Vancouver, of The Andersen Project were reviewed by the Toronto press, thereby demonstrating the roc’s ongoing interest in Lepage. His return with Lipsynch, as part of the Luminato Festival, after a nine-year absence from the Toronto theatre scene was announced eight months in advance, and after the premiere, critics proclaimed “Long Live Lipsynch.”27 He triumphed again in the fall of 2009 with Stravinsky’s The Nightingale and Other Short Fables, a joint production with the Canadian Opera Company. Toronto anxiously anticipated his return in 2010 with Eonnogata and The Andersen Project. The Blue Dragon followed in 2012.28 Lepage was honoured as one of the world’s creative geniuses along with fellow Quebecker Guy Laliberté in the 2001 Harbourfront extravaganza World Leaders: A Festival of Creative Genius.29 In June 2010, twenty-five years after his first show in the city, Toronto awarded him the prestigious Dora Mavor Moore award. Commenting on the World Leaders festival at Harbourfront, John Ralston Saul stated, “I couldn’t help remarking as I watched Lepage’s theatre that the core of his theatre came out of this place, out of our experience.”30 Saul’s emphasis on “this place” and “our experience” merits consideration. He emphasizes here the unique importance of the Canadian experience. The roc was at the heart of Lepage’s theatre as an inspiration and as a critical audience that, in becoming part of his feedback loop, was different from other audiences. For Saul, author of Reflections on a Siamese Twin: Canada at the End of  the Century, Lepage and the roc share a common vision and

27761_Koustas.indd 9

2016-04-01 13:15:35

10

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

experience. Indeed, Saul rejects binary notions of identity, claiming that “Canada is always at its worst when it gets into one of these little crisis situations where it thinks that there are only two possibilities and you’re on one side or the other. The country is too complicated for that.”31 Saul describes Canada as a soft country, not meaning weak but rather signifying a country with a flexible, complex identity. Erin Manning, while in no way hinting at the appropriation of the québécois Other so evident in Saul’s comments in the World Leaders festival program cited above, includes Lepage’s work in her study of “cross-cultural texts that, albeit ‘Canadian,’ demonstrate symptoms of a world in flux where cultures speak out against the violence of territorial cohesion and enforced homogeneity.”32 In this study I posit that Lepage’s popularity with the roc can be attributed to his own and his theatre’s capacity to free the Toronto audience from the “bind of binarism”33 through theatre that draws the audience to places and theatrical spaces beyond or between that traditional divide, to a “world in flux.” While Lepage was initially identified as an ardent separatist,34 Toronto reviewers, and presumably Toronto audiences, did not focus on his personal or professional nationalist stance. Toronto was enamoured with the global, universal, multicultural, international, and multilingual Lepage rather than being preoccupied with his political sentiments. Indeed, Lepage’s own interpretation of his Quebeckness seems increasingly vague. He stated that when in Canada he identifies as québécois but when working in Europe or Asia views himself more as a Canadian.35 However, it is not merely that outside of Quebec he felt, and was seen as being, more Canadian than québécois, but also that his work, viewed from the roc’s perspective, encouraged audiences to see beyond the traditional two solitudes, to appreciate theatre that was international in scope and method, and to position themselves at the interface between languages, signs, cultures, and theatrical practice. As Sarah Hood notes, Lepage’s theatre demanded as well that his audience approach theatre differently, with a greater awareness of the power of language, including its aesthetic value: “Lepage explains that he likes to let the audience participate actively in making ­connections and piecing together the story. One way of doing this is to use languages that are not familiar to the listeners; it forces them to pay attention to the different parts of the narrative … A [third] reason for his repeated use of many tongues is simply aesthetic:

27761_Koustas.indd 10

2016-04-01 13:15:35

Introduction 11

Lepage is as much aware of the sound of his work as of the visual elements.”36 This challenge to audiences stands in sharp contrast to the impact of other Quebec playwrights on the Toronto scene. Tremblay, for instance, while enormously popular, remained very much the representative of the other solitude.37 It would be naïve, nevertheless, to suggest that Lepage has bypassed all notions of cultural or linguistic identity. First, he is still usually identified as a Quebecker, québécois, or French Canadian, albeit somewhat arbitrarily, and hence, Saul’s comments aside, as an – or the – Other. Early articles focused on his bilingual upbringing and personal bilingualism.38 Second, it was his recognized status as an Other, or a representative of the Other, that afforded him special status on the Toronto scene and provided him with a creative space and energy different from that available in Quebec, where he was chez lui. Indeed, this space resembled the liminal, in-between space that he created for his roc audience. Commenting on the success of Needles and Opium, Lepage stated in an interview: “Le fait de voir ma pièce ouvrir la 6ième édition du World Stage de Toronto est important pour moi … Toronto, c’est à la fois chez moi et un pays étranger. Quoi de mieux? J’ai le meilleur des deux mondes.”39 Clearly, Lepage’s notion of being “chez moi” in Toronto contrasts sharply with the notion evoked by the concept of two solitudes or even by the term “the Rest of Canada”: he sees himself, and his theatre, and indeed perhaps his nation, as being both “at home” and “away” from the perspective of Toronto, thereby implying a very different way of perceiving the French language, otherness, Quebec, and Quebec theatre. Michael Cronin, in his study on translation, describes the pulsation between otherness and familiarity that motivates translation: Travellers or translators beholden to exoticism will exploit binary contrasts … in the formulation of both translation and travel. On the other hand, it is the positing of some degree of “similarity” that makes travel conceivable or translation practicable. In the absence of the common ground of “similarity” … the traveller would be condemned to solipsistic isolation and the translator to a prison-house of (native) langue. The Other may in a fundamental sense be unknowable but that does not mean that we have nothing in common. The analog operation of the translator/­ traveller is that pulsation, the oscillation between what we know

27761_Koustas.indd 11

2016-04-01 13:15:35

12

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

and do not know, positing neither total familiarity (imperialism) nor total difference (racism).40 It is my view that the pulsation, or oscillation, between otherness and familiarity identified by Cronin in his study on travel and translation, both of which are central tropes in Lepage’s theatre, remains a key element in his success with the roc. Lepage and his audience see in each other the charm and intrigue of the exotic and, at the same time, a satisfying dose of the known and knowable; the result is a paradoxical experience of familiar otherness.41 The striking difference between Lepage’s success in Toronto and his frequently fraught relationship with Quebec audiences and critics is worth noting. Commenting on the box-office success of The Geometry of Miracles, Stéphane Baillargeon of Le Devoir acknowledges Lepage’s almost perfect record in Toronto: “Il y a deux ans, Elsinore, son adaptation techno solo de Hamlet avait été mal accueilli, un des rares échecs de ce côté-ci du roc.”42 Lepage himself was keenly aware of the special status his position as the Other afforded him on the Toronto scene, and indeed alluded to the contrast between this and the frequently cold and harshly critical reception he received in Quebec: “Torontonians are very indulgent, as we say in French. They allow you to try stuff. People are very critical too, but you feel that they are willing to say, ‘Well, he tried this and this is what I think about it.’ The audiences are very supportive. You don’t feel the guillotine if you’ve gone wrong.”43 Indeed, he felt that the same treatment was reserved for fellow Quebeckers Gilles Maheu and Denis Marleau. In an article significantly entitled “Asymétrie du miracle,” which refers to the disparity between the Toronto and Quebec critics’ reception of The Geometry of Miracles, Lepage noted: “Les gens comme Gilles et Denis ont compris qu’il fallait présenter les premières mondiales ailleurs qu’au Québec. On n’est pas une menace à Toronto … On ne sent pas là le même négativisme, la même agressivité. Je ne suis plus vexé de tout ça même si je l’ai été avant.”44 Commenting on Lepage’s return to Toronto in 2010, Marianne Ackerman, the Montreal Gazette theatre critic highly respected for her understanding and incisive criticism of Quebec ­theatre in both English and French,45 made a similar observation: “For years, Lepage got middling reviews from Quebec critics who resented his early eagerness to work in English. Toronto doesn’t come freighted with that baggage. Here, he’s simply accepted for who he is:

27761_Koustas.indd 12

2016-04-01 13:15:35

Introduction 13

a great experimental artist who came to theatre from a side door.”46 In Toronto, Lepage was neither a total outsider nor a “threat,” as he was in Quebec, where his use of English was considered a sell-out if not treason. Charles Taylor, in his influential essay on the Canadian geopo­ litical and cultural space in Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition,” reflects on the need for recognition in defining identity: “The thesis is that our identity is partly shaped by recognition or absence, often by misrecognition of others, and so a person or group can suffer real damage, real distortion, if the people or society around them mirror back to them a confining or demeaning or contemptible picture of themselves. Non-recognition or misrecognition can inflict harm, can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted, reduced form of being.”47 Taylor’s analysis holds true for Lepage, whose success in Toronto can indeed be attributed in part to the need for recognition and acceptance experienced by both parties (in other words, by both the roc and Lepage). While this need may have led to misrecognition to the extent that Toronto chose to ignore Lepage’s openly separatist views, it also meant the unravelling of the belief that all Quebec theatre was firmly and immovably anchored in Quebec, and resolutely francophone and separatist. Anxious to prove its ongoing interest in Quebec theatre and its awareness of upcoming and established stars, and to earn a place on the international theatre scene, Toronto continued to support Lepage even through and after failures. Lepage himself, while cloaking himself in his Quebec identity, also sought recognition from the Other that had been, and remained, a significant player in his personal and professional life. Thus, while Lepage’s “love affair” with the roc is undeniably a result of his theatrical vision, genius, and global focus, his special relationship with this audience is also due to the desire of both parties to gain the recognition of the Other. Through multilingual, multicultural, multimedia theatre that took the roc beyond traditional geographic, political, and linguistic boundaries, Lepage facilitated his acceptance and recognition as both a Quebecker and a Canadian. Having been accepted in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada as both an outstanding artist and a Quebecker, Lepage found a “creative home away from home”48 at some distance from the nationalist linguistic debate that continued in the Quebec artistic community. The Glenn Gould Prize, named in honour of one of Toronto’s most

27761_Koustas.indd 13

2016-04-01 13:15:35

14

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

renowned and beloved sons, was, no doubt, a particular distinction for an artist for whom Toronto had played such an important role. The Toronto, and English Canadian, audience’s interpretation of this staging of identity and nationhood offers interesting insights into existing and evolving perspectives on the notion of the two solitudes. One critic notes, “chez Robert Lepage, c’est par le voyage, le mouvement vers l’Autre, l’étranger, qu’un Québécois tente de découvrir ce qui le touche et l’anime.”49 Indeed, in its position as “l’étranger,” the Toronto audience offers an important perspective from which to consider Lepage’s portrayal of, interaction with, and impact on the Other. The introduction to the collection “Small Books on Theatre & Everything Else,” under the direction of Jen Harvie and Dan Rebellato, begins: “The theatre is everywhere, from entertainment districts to the fringes, from the rituals of government to the ceremony of the courtroom, from the spectacle of the sporting arenas to the theatres of war. Across these many forms stretches a theatrical continuum through which cultures both assert and question themselves.”50 With “rule-breaking mastery of stagecraft,”51 Lepage brought to Toronto boundary-breaking productions and questioned and asserted Quebec, Canadian, the roc’s and global cultures, as well as the intercultural. His theatre thus redefined, reconfigured, and reconsidered language, identity, and nation and the relationship among them. I approach Lepage’s productions in order of staging: Circulations (1985), The Dragons’ Trilogy (1986–88), Vinci (1988), Tectonic Plates (1988), Polygraph (1990), Needles and Opium (1994), The Seven Streams of the River Ota (1995), The Geometry of Miracles (1998), The Far Side of the Moon (2000), Lipsynch (2009), Eonnagata (2010), The Andersen Project (2010), and The Blue Dragon (2012). I have chosen to focus only on original productions written or co-written by Lepage, so I will not discuss Macbeth (staged with drama students in Toronto in 1993), Bluebeard’s Castle and Erwartung (1992), Peter Gabriel’s Secret World Tour (1993, directed or co-directed by Lepage), The Nightingale and Other Short Fables (2009), or Totem (2010). I will, however, include Romeo and Juliette (1989) and Elsinore (1995) because of their relevance to my central thesis. The division of the project into chronological segments allows us to investigate the evolution of the reception of Lepage’s work in Toronto. A detailed description of each production, a summary and analysis of the critical response, and an analysis

27761_Koustas.indd 14

2016-04-01 13:15:35

Introduction 15

of the production from the conceptual, theoretical framework will help us critically examine the role and position of Lepage’s theatre from the perspective of Canadian and Quebec identity in the context of globalization. The bibliography lists each production, as well as scholarly articles, books, and critical response in the national and international press, interviews, and other relevant publications. I pay particular attention to critics’ and scholars’ discussion of language, identity, and identity politics. This will be a valuable research tool for other Lepage scholars, particularly those for whom access to Ex Machina files is difficult and whose experience with Lepage’s work is limited because of the limited availability of published texts, one of Lepage’s trademarks. I hope that, in situating Lepage on the Toronto theatre scene, this study will be of interest to scholars of theatre history in Canada and Toronto theatre, as well as to those whose work is dedicated to Quebec theatre and to Lepage.

27761_Koustas.indd 15

2016-04-01 13:15:35

1 Robert Lepage Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other 1

If the hauntingly disembodied voices at the beginning of The Dragons’ Trilogy claim, “I have never been to China,”2 the dig through the sand in the parking lot and the subsequent voyages through space, time, languages, and representations of culture remind the spectator that it is frequently the image of the Other, the imagined meeting or voyage, rather than a direct confrontation, that stirs the imagination and inspires reflection on one’s own identity. Indeed, the Chinatown of The Dragons’ Trilogy was that of Lepage’s memory and, for the Chinese immigrants of Quebec City who actually lived there, the remnants of a home left behind, irretrievable but not forgotten. For the author, however, having grown up in the shadow of Quebec City’s Chinatown, the presence of the exotic – however authentic or inauthentic the representation – harkened compellingly to a language and culture beyond the socioeconomic and linguistic limits of his St Sacrement and Montcalm neighbourhoods. Lepage’s work in theatre and film was influenced by his own upbringing, in which confrontation with the anglophone Other was a daily occurrence.3 Born into a working-class family in predomina­ tely francophone Quebec City in 1957, Lepage grew up with three siblings, two of whom were adopted anglophones. His parents, largely because of displacement for military service during the Second World War, were also fluent in English. Lepage explains that his family was unusual because “it was a mix of all kinds of things: children who had been adopted and children who were biological and the two adopted children were adopted in English Canada, so they were brought up in English and we [he and his sister Lynda] were brought up in French.”4 This bilingual upbringing was exceptional in 1950s

27761_Koustas.indd 16

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  17

and 1960s working-class Quebec City, and collision or confusion between French and English, over the choice of television programs, for instance, occurred frequently.5 Relating this daily confrontation with otherness to the larger Canadian-Quebec political scene, Lepage stated: “My family is a metaphor for Canada. I have this strong impression that we are of the same flesh even if it is not the case.”6 This notion of originating from the “same” flesh, of being in negotiation rather than in conflict with the other, of sharing but not belonging to the same cultural linguistic community, underlies Lepage’s performances. While the success and popularity of his theatre is certainly global, his complex relationship with English Canada – and in particular, his ongoing “love affair” with Toronto – remains a key element in the identity question central to his theatre.7 In this chapter I focus on Lepage’s personal life, his theatre career (including his place on the Quebec and Toronto theatre scenes), and the link between the two. As Lepage readily admitted to Mark Fisher, “There’s no distinction between my work, my personal life, and my love life. My private life is my work.”8 Lepage scholars, particularly Karen Fricker and Aleksandar Dundjerovic, ´ focus on the importance of Lepage’s upbringing in relation to his theatre and, consequently, to his positioning as an artist in Quebec, in Canada, and on the international scene. Lepage is frequently seen as functioning in a liminal space, between or across languages, cultures, time zones, and geopolitical boundaries, and therefore bypassing or transgressing their concomitant relationship to identity. This notion of between-ness is reflected in Dundjerovic’s ´ introductory chapter to Robert Lepage, entitled “Cultural and Artistic Biography: Robert Lepage in-between Worlds.” Lepage was set apart by virtue of growing up in a bilingual home in a city in which the linguistic divide was also economic (the commercial power was held by the anglophone elite), political (Quebec politicians were continually caught in power struggles with Ottawa), and even geographic (the francophone working class were huddled in the Lower Town at the base of the promontory, as suggested in Roger Lemelin’s 1944 novel, Au pied de la pente douce);9 however, he was further marginalized by a condition, alopecia, experienced when he was five, which resulted in permanent and total hair loss.10 About alopecia he has said: “[It was] the basis for my life. It completely sculpted my personality and my way of seeing the world. It was nothing like being in a normal world … You feel after a point that you’d be happier if

27761_Koustas.indd 17

2016-04-01 13:15:35

18

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

you were crippled because people don’t make fun of people who are crippled. The main impact is realising the immense cruelty of the world towards anything that it is not normal.”11 A terrifying experience with drugs when he was fifteen that led to a lengthy depression set him apart even further, as he became a recluse glued to the television and content to build models of Quebec City.12 Early signs of his homosexuality may have added to his confusion and sense of being caught between. It was his sister Lynda (now Lynda Beaulieu, his agent and exe­ cutive assistant), who introduced him to the theatre, convincing him at one point to audition for a school play. Lepage’s attraction to the theatre is frequently linked to his unusual, traumatic childhood, as theatre offered a means of escape through becoming another person. In theatre, Lepage found “a hiding place much larger and infinitely more exciting than [his] parents’ bedroom” where he could “disguise [him]self, hide [him]self behind a group.”13 In an interview with Josette Féral, Lepage further admitted this link between his ­theatre and his personal conflicts and inhibitions: “On fait tous un peu les spectacles par thérapie.”14 Fricker notes the fundamental contradiction of needing to disguise oneself in order to find true self-expression.15 Having found a way out of his self-imposed solitude (albeit through disguise) and into the society for which he seemed a poor fit, Lepage let no obstacle, neither being under age nor his failure to complete his high school exams, stand between him and his goal when he enrolled in the acclaimed Conservatoire d’art dramatique de Québec at the age of seventeen. The required age was eighteen, and according to Dundjerovic, ´ Lepage’s youth and inexperience gave him an advantage. He passed the rigorous audition.16 As Lepage admits, however, he was not a successful naturalist actor because he was unable to become sufficiently emotionally engaged.17 The Conservatoire did, nonetheless, introduce him to Jacques Lecoq’s techniques. Marc Doré, an instructor and former pupil of Lecoq, encouraged Lepage to explore improvisation and creation through the use of everyday objects, a technique that subsequently became the basis of Lepage’s own theatre. Graduating from the Conservatoire in 1978 but unemployed, Lepage travelled to Paris with Richard Fréchette, a classmate who shared a similar fate, and they enrolled in Alain Knapp’s workshop at his Institut de la personnalité créatrice. The experience, as Lepage himself notes, introduced him to a form of theatre that, while

27761_Koustas.indd 18

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  19

demanding, was better suited to his talent as an actor-creator and to  his manner of engaging with the audience; Knapp’s technique allowed him to turn his so-called weaknesses, such as reserve and control, into attributes and a personal style.18 He describes Knapp’s style and its effect on him: “very exacting, very difficult to grasp and [he] demanded a poetic abandon that very few people could deliver. The work of the actor-creator, as he conceived it, was a little like squeezing a lemon to get its juice. For Richard and me, his approach corresponded exactly to what we had dreamed of, to what we wanted to do. I had always been told that I didn’t commit myself enough, that I didn’t know how to tell my own story, and there I was suddenly being told the exact opposite. For Knapp, my reserve and control allowed me to act better, to tell my own story better.”19 Upon his return to Quebec, Lepage and Fréchette founded Théâtre Hummm, which adapted and created texts staged primarily in community theatres and schools.20 Lepage was a regular participant as well in Quebec’s famed improvisational theatre, La Ligue nationale d’improvisation, an obvious wink for the Quebec audience at La Ligue nationale de hockey, and its shows were indeed structured like hockey matches. Actors were assigned to teams who wore traditional hockey-style sweaters and the audience was seated around the stage as if in an arena. Lepage, whose talent was well suited to the fast-paced, improvised, always live and always changing theatre environment, became a regular and very popular player. Far from seeking to become integrated into the established Quebec theatre community, he now sought new directions for theatre: I’ve never been interested in theatre as such. In my adolescence, I was more interested in theatricality. The reason, in my opinion, there’s such a big difference between theatre and theatricality is that where I come from theatrical history is extremely young – about 50 years old or so – so we don’t have any classics, our classics are borrowed … When I say that I’m more interested in theatricality, it’s because I think the taste for young creators, actors or directors in Quebec, at least in the seventies, come[s] much more from seeing rock shows, dance shows, performance art, [than] from seeing theatre because theatre is not accessible … And then theatre that was there was theatre that was already dead: not reflecting anybody’s identity, not actually staging the preoccupations of the people.21

27761_Koustas.indd 19

2016-04-01 13:15:35

20

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

In the mid-1980s, Lepage and Fréchette merged Théâtre Hummm with the experimental Théâtre Repère, established in 1979 by Jacques Lessard, a former instructor at the Conservatoire. Lessard based his technique on Anna Halprin’s methods (rsvp: Resources, Score, Valuation, Performance).22 He adapted this process-oriented approach to theatre creation through the notion of repère, or landmark, devising a method based on ressources, partition (or score), évaluation, and représentation (=repère), whose purpose was to challenge the traditional power of the text and playwright by giving priority instead to theatricality and the many other non-textual languages of theatre. The ressource component, for example, was to be a concrete object, such as the map used later in Lepage’s Circulations (1984), rather than an abstract idea.23 Lessard explains: “Les cycles R EPÈR E sont un instrument de travail extrêmement précieux qui donnent au créateur des balises et des outils à la fois qu’une grande liberté de l’imaginaire et de la sensibilité. Mais ils ne sont pas une formule miracle et ne donnent pas de génie. Ils ne s’expliquent pas … ils s’improvisent; ils ne donnent pas de talent … ils facilitent son utilisation. Et, ce qui est primordial, ils reposent sur un principe: créer à partir du concret et non à partir des idées.”24 While Lepage eventually found close adherence to the Repère cycles to be too prescriptive, the method nonetheless served as the basis for the development of his own multidisciplinary, non–text-based theatre, in which he is a player or “deviser.”25 He explains: “The writing starts when you perform and it’s a difficult thing to comprehend for a lot of people in this field of work because we’re used to the traditional hierarchy of the author … Everything’s supposed to be freezewrapped and sealed and delivered to the audience … I’ve always believed … that writing starts the night that you start performing … and you end up writing things on the day after the closing of the show.”26 Lepage saw himself as neither sole author nor director: “The actors improvise and write their own text. They decide for themselves what they should say.”27 During this time Lepage also became involved in cinema, playing, for example, the role of René in Denys Arcand’s ground-breaking film Jésus de Montréal. He credits this experience as well28 for his innovative approach to theatre creation and production. In 1984 Lepage created Circulations for Repère. This was followed by the collaborative blockbuster and landmark The Dragons’

27761_Koustas.indd 20

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  21

Trilogy, in which Lepage acted and directed, and which toured over six years to fourteen countries. As Dunderjovic notes, “The success of The Dragons’ Trilogy in London’s Riverside Studios in 1989 marks Lepage’s entry into the milieu of international contemporary intercultural theatre, and comparison of his theatrical language to that of Peter Brook.”29 Lepage was also exploring solo performance, and Vinci, his first solo production, premiered at Montreal’s Théâtre Quat’Sous in March 1986. In his next solo production, Aiguilles et opium (1991), Lepage pushed even further the integration of technology and cinematic techniques that he had introduced in Vinci, and that soon became his trademark. The production toured until 1994 when Lepage was replaced by Yves Jacques, who continued to perform the piece until 1996. In 1987, while officially still with Repère, Lepage co-wrote and co-directed Polygraph with long-time friend and collaborator Marie Brassard. There were significant changes between the premiere, staged in Quebec City, and subsequent performances, which ran until 1990, as Lepage and Brassard pushed the Repère methods to develop the work-in-progress approach that became another Lepage trademark. A film version was made in 1996 and, as a final and significant departure from Lessard’s techniques, the text was published.30 Lepage, Brassard, Fréchette, and Michel Bernatchez, another long-time friend and collaborator, left Théâtre Repère. Lessard was committed to producing only experimental and extremely ephemeral fringe theatre, while Lepage and the others saw the potential of appealing to a larger more mainstream and international audience. After several commissioned pieces, including Le songe d’une nuit d’été for the Théâtre du Nouveau Monde in 1987 and Les plaques tectoniques, begun initially with Théâtre Repère, Lepage moved to Ottawa in 1989 to become the youngest artistic director of the French-language section of the National Arts Centre, a position he held until 1993 while continuing with his own solo performance work.31 In 1994 Lepage created Ex Machina, his own multidisciplinary, multimedia theatre company based in his hometown, Quebec City, a move that signalled yet another break with convention, as Montreal was recognized as the provincial theatre capital. This move isolated him further from the “local” québécois theatre scene, including the Montreal critics. On the Ex Machina website, the name and mission are described as follows:

27761_Koustas.indd 21

2016-04-01 13:15:35

22

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

In 1994, when Robert Lepage asked his collaborators to help find a name for his new company, he had one condition: the word theatre could not be part of the name. Ex Machina is thus a multidisciplinary company bringing together actors, writers, set designers, technicians, opera singers, puppeteers, computer graphic designers, video artists, contortionists and musicians. Ex Machina’s creative team believes that the performing arts – dance, opera, music – should be mixed with recorded arts – filmmaking, video art and multimedia. That there must be meetings between scientists and playwrights, between set painters and architects, and between artists from Québec and the rest of the world. New artistic forms will surely emerge from these gatherings. Ex Machina wants to rise to the challenge and become a laboratory, an incubator for a form of theatre that will reach and touch audiences from this new millennium.32 The company, which included some former members of Théâtre Repère, established headquarters in the Caserne, a former fire station, in 1997.33 In this high-tech theatre-cum-laboratory, a multi-use facility that includes a black box studio, offices, digital studios, and  carpenters’ and sound engineers’ workshops, Lepage and Ex Machina have since created and produced The Seven Streams of the River Ota (1994), Geometry of Miracles (1998), Zulu Time (1999), The Far Side of the Moon (2000), La Casa Azul (2001), The Busker’s Opera (2004), a new version of The Dragons’ Trilogy with a new cast (2003), and 1984, an opera based on the novel by George Orwell, composed and conducted by Lorin Maazel (2005). These were followed by The Andersen Project (2005); Lipsynch (2007); Igor Stravinsky’s The Rake’s Progress, which premiered at the Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie in Brussels in April 2007; The Blue Dragon (2008); Eonnagata (2009); Playing Cards: Spades (2012) and Playing Cards: Hearts (2013). In 1992 Lepage staged Bluebeard’s Castle and Erwartung as a double opera bill for the Canadian Opera Company, and the following year he directed Peter Gabriel’s Secret World Tour. His earlier experiment with opera led him to direct The Damnation of Faust in Japan (1999), Paris (2001, 2004, and 2006), and New York (2009), and to produce his latest collaboration with the Met in New York City, Wagner’s Ring cycle. In 2002 he once

27761_Koustas.indd 22

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  23

again collaborated with Peter Gabriel to direct Growing Up Tour. He later designed and directed KÀ, a permanent Cirque du Soleil show in Las Vegas, which premiered in February 2005. In 2008, for Quebec City’s 400th anniversary, Robert Lepage and Ex  Machina created the largest architectural projection ever achieved: The Image Mill.34 Another Cirque du Soleil production, Totem, was launched in the summer of 2010. This trajectory has been exceptional: from a working-class Quebec neighbourhood in the twilight of Duplessis’s grande noirceur to the most prestigious venues of the international theatre circuit; from a relatively unknown Quebec actor-creator who, in the early eighties, had never been to China, to a jet-setting superstar whose globe-spanning flight path includes, indeed, Asia. As Lepage has observed, Quebec has a very brief theatre history,35 and this has conditioned both the potential and his desire to find himself a place on the theatre scene. While the first play penned on present Quebec territory dates back to Marc Lescarbot’s Théâtre de Neptune, presented in 1606 in Port Royal, Nouvelle France, theatre scholars concur that genuinely authentic French Canadian or Quebec theatre began only in the 1950s.36 While Montreal was on the Toronto–New York theatre circuit and hence welcomed Sarah Bernhardt, Emma Albani, Mounet-Sully,37 and other big names, there was no tradition of writing and staging homegrown works that reflected the social and political reality of the province. This notwithstanding works of some notoriety but limited impact such as Louis Honoré Fréchette’s Félix Poutré, a play based on the 1837 rebellions as well as his Papineau (1880), Louis Petitjean’s 1920 melodrama La petite Aurore l’enfant martyre, the radio plays, many of which were conservative political propaganda, or Paysannerie, the dramatized version of Grignon’s Un homme et son péché (1946), which gathered a considerable audience but hardly broke into the realm of high quality drama. It was not until Gratien Gélinas with his Fridolin sketches, initially included in vaudeville-type variety shows and broadcast on the radio, that the Quebec audience experienced quality theatre drawn from its own experience. As Jean-Cléo Godin observes: “Ainsi, en faisant de Fridolin une sorte de héros très fortement identifié au milieu, Gélinas a réussi à assurer une certaine pérennité à une formule fatalement victime de l’actualité dont elle se nourrit; surtout, il a ouvert la voie à un théâtre véritablement québécois, un théâtre dont les situations, les personnages et la sensibilité ne soient pas empruntés d’ailleurs.

27761_Koustas.indd 23

2016-04-01 13:15:35

24

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Fridolin, c’est l’étape nécessaire que constitue la rencontre et la ­récupération d’une culture populaire.”38 In addition to signalling the ticket-purchasing power of the theatre-going public of Quebec, and particularly Montreal, Gélinas’s 1948 landmark Tit-Coq, an evolution of his Fridolin, demonstrated that the “French-Canadian experience” (as it was then called) was genuinely stage-worthy. Both the language and the social and political preoccupations were rich enough to nourish local theatre. Furthermore, there was sufficient talent and market power to stage authentic Quebec theatre. Both Gélinas and, only a short time later, Marcel Dubé were writing during, and hence against, the regime, which lasted until the premier’s death in 1959. Characterized by patronage politics, isolationism, an extremely conservative, right-wing, and intolerant ideology, and a solid alliance between the Catholic Church and the state, Duplessis’s Union Nationale government of la grande noirceur held the FrenchCanadian population into which Lepage was born in an iron grip. In addition to Tit-Coq, plays such as Gélinas’s Bousille et les justes (1959) and Dubé’s Un simple soldat (1957) staged the hardship of  working-class or rural French Canadians trapped by poverty, ignorance, and language, and crushed by the dual authority of a church and government whose educational, economic, and social policies left them ill-prepared for post–Second World War progress. Catholic and francophone, with a rural mentality but frequently an urban existence, the population could not compete and succeed in an economy run largely by an anglophone, educated elite. In 1960 Liberal Jean Lesage came to power and the social and cultural reforms that were initiated, including a clear division between church and state and the laicization of education and social institutions, led to what is commonly called the Quiet Revolution. In the multimedia projection production entitled Le Moulin à Images/The Image Mill, created in 2008 to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Quebec City, Lepage describes the social and political transformation from the Duplessis years to the Quebec of the sixties: “Sous la règne de Maurice Duplessis, la société québécoise s’ankylose, mais à l’aube des années 60 un vent de nouveau commence à souffler annonçant de profonds changements sociaux et des réformes majeures des institutions.”39 Theatre too was given a new élan. Anxious to modernize Quebec and to develop its identity, the provincial government invested ­heavily in cultural projects. André Bourrassa explains: “La crise du

27761_Koustas.indd 24

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  25

théâtre québécois survient au moment où toutes les valeurs sont remises en question, en même temps que la politique passe de la droite de Maurice Duplessis au centre-gauche de Jean Lesage; il s’opère de profonds changements de structures sociales … La création tant attendue d’un ministère québécois de la Culture et celle, inespérée, d’un ministère de l’Éducation allaient avoir des conséquences directes et indirectes sur le théâtre.”40 Michel Tremblay’s 1968 landmark play, Les belles-soeurs, heralded what was soon labelled “le nouveau théâtre québécois.”41 Characterized by joual, the street slang associated with the poor working class, particularly in east-end Montreal where the play is situated, Les belles-soeurs, and indeed the other plays in Tremblay’s Plateau de Montréal series, staged the frustration of the urban, poor, francophone working class whose subjugation by the church, limited education, and poor language skills had left it on the sidelines of the economic boom. Peppered with profanity and English words, the characters’ joual traps them in a socioeconomic ghetto. Power belongs to the English commercial class and to those who can master its language, as Michèle Lalonde compellingly expresses in her now legendary 1971 recitation of her poem “Speak White.”42 Indeed, this frustration had been staged earlier by such memorable characters as Dubé’s Joseph who, upon hearing of his father’s demotion by his anglophone employer, exclaims: “Tu leur [the English bosses] as pas cassé la gueule le père? Tu leur as pas cassé la gueule? … Tout ce qu’ils ont réussi à faire de toi en trente ans, c’est un colleur d’étiquettes? Rien de plus? Une fois que tu leur as donné tes meilleures années?”43 Tremblay and other playwrights of the period, such as Jean Barbeau, Michel Garneau, and Jean-Claude Germain, were, therefore, naturally associated with the separatist movement, which they heartily embraced. Separatists saw an independent Quebec as the only solution for release from the colonial stranglehold and for affirmation of its own identity. Tremblay signals the importance of this quest for identity and its concomitant link to language when discussing his 1970s play Hosanna: I do not mean that they [Hosanna and Cuirette] are Quebec or symbols or images of Quebec. But their problems with the wider society are political problems. Because they are the fringe group in society, this society in a way hates them. But they want to be happy and they want to be somebody. Hosanna is a man who

27761_Koustas.indd 25

2016-04-01 13:15:35

26

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

always wanted to be a woman. This woman always wanted to be Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra. In other words, this Québécois always wanted to be an English actress in an American movie about an Egyptian myth in a movie shot in Spain. In a way, that is a typically Québécois problem. For the past 300 years we were not taught that we were a people, so we were dreaming about somebody else instead of ourselves. So Hosanna is a ­political play.44 The seventies saw many new voices in Quebec theatre, such as Marie Laberge, Jeanne-Mance Delisle, and Louis Saia, and feminist playwrights such as Denise Boucher. Quebec welcomed the explorations of new forms of theatre by Le grand cirque ordinaire and Gilles Maheu’s Carbone 14, and particularly collective theatre. Writing in 1978, Claude Des Landes stated: “Liberated from its dependence on literature and purely aesthetic pretentions, theatrical expression now relates to pragmatic given facts … If authors like Robert Gurik, Michel Tremblay or Jean Barbeau … had as their major preoccupation to extricate us from the ruts of passivity and colonialism of our history, the present generation, that of collective creation, let us foresee a utilization of the new stage whose immediate results one cannot be satisfied to evaluate according to a certain scale. Our entire dramaturgy has just gone through a new cycle.”45 The period remained dominated, however, by writers such as Tremblay whose theatre, grounded in identity politics and resolutely set in Quebec, spoke out largely against English Canada. It was into this environment that Lepage graduated upon completion of his diploma at the Conservatoire in 1978. Openly separatist, until very recently perhaps,46 Lepage like all Quebec artists and intellectuals would have welcomed the triumph of René Lévesque’s Parti Québécois in 1976. Because of his bilingual upbringing, however, his relationship with the language of the conqueror differed from that of other Québécois. For him English was not a language imposed by the 1969 Official Languages Act, responsible for bilingual labelling, mandatory language lessons (especially for civil servants), and countrywide courses and programs designed to expose students to both cultures, but rather an everyday occurrence without the overtones of adversarial, colonial power brokerage. Indeed, he relates how his adopted brother David had been bullied for speaking English.47 Thus, while he readily proclaimed his separatist stance,

27761_Koustas.indd 26

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  27

his relationship with the menacing, overpowering anglophone Other was radically different from that of other artists of his generation and influenced his representation of the Other, positioning him and his theatre very differently on the Canadian theatre landscape. Thus, while scholars of Quebec theatre concur that openly political, nationalist theatre had yielded to more multifaceted theatre by the 1980s, it was nonetheless into this climate that Quebec theatre, and indeed many of its important players, were born, and this milieu conditioned their stance with respect to English Canada. Erin Hurley states: “Le théâtre des années 1980 semble prendre du recul par rapport au modèle dominant d’un théâtre de la québécité et insiste plutôt sur l’image visuelle … les arts de la scène abandonnent en quelque sorte le regard sociocritique et le mode réaliste afin d’embrasser de nouvelles formes d’expression et de renouveler le langage scénique. La critique sociale des années 1970 cède la place à un traitement plus prononcé de la forme, autant dans le milieu théâtral qu’en danse.”48 It is important to recognize as well, as do Chantal Hébert and Irène Perelli-Contos, that Lepage was one of many artists contributing to “le théâtre de l’image” and to multidisciplinary and multicultural theatre, as Yann Rousset describes it: “Qu’est-ce que réellement le théâtre? On conviendra qu’il est devenu de plus en plus périlleux, depuis des années 1980, d’en arrêter une définition homogène. Aborderions-nous la question de la fin du règne du logos, que nous devrions traiter de celles de l’éclatement des frontières entre les disciplines artistiques, des emprunts (historiques, thématiques, linguistiques, artistiques, etc.) faits par des créateurs du théâtre actuel à d’autres cultures, de la mondialisation des médias et de l’expansion rapide des nouvelles technologies.”49 If Lepage was only one among many dramaturges incorporating both multiculturalism and multidisciplinarity in his theatre, as suggested above, he was arguably the one who pushed the furthest the  boundaries of technology, interdisciplinarity, and particularly cultural borrowing, straddling and cultural crisscrossing in an effort to reach and appeal to a larger public. Lepage was also one of the few Quebec dramaturges to seriously court the Toronto theatre scene and to actively seek venues outside of Quebec and Canada, particularly on the festival circuit.50 Dominique Lafon notes: En quatre ans, Ex Machina obtient le plus gros chiffre d’affaires de toutes les compagnies provinciales, plus que le tnm, plus que

27761_Koustas.indd 27

2016-04-01 13:15:35

28

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Carbone 14. Ce succès n’a rien à voir avec la réputation personnelle de son directeur, avec le succès des productions qui ne lui apportent que 30% du financement sous forme de subventions, mais il doit tout à une gestion de coproduction internationale qui, elle, finance 70% du budget de fonctionnement. L’ouverture sur le monde qui consiste à créer des productions non en fonction d’un public local, mais pour une diffusion multiculturelle se trouve ainsi justifié non seulement par la mondialisation, mais aussi par la rentabilité. Aller chercher le public, non plus l’attendre, telle pourrait être la devise de Robert Lepage, qui fait déjà école.51 Discussing the Toronto productions of The Dragons’ Trilogy and Tectonic Plates, Wallace as well comments on Lepage’s international ambitions: “both productions were created with an eye to touring the expanding festival circuits of both North America and Europe.”52 Indeed, most of the creative voices mentioned above, in regard to collective and feminist theatre, for example, did not travel as extensively. Therefore, Lepage, as a representative of new directions in Quebec theatre who sought to work outside Quebec, became all the more interesting to a Toronto audience that wished to remain in touch with the Quebec theatre scene and also to find a place on the transnational theatre circuit. It is probable that Lepage’s international itinerary, and the concomitant financial advantages – including federal grants, as noted by Lafon – made him as well the envy of many Quebec theatre professionals and sparked the ire of Montreal critics, whose anglophone counterparts had claimed their “local” star. Perhaps not entirely coincidentally, Lepage’s decision to expand beyond his “incestuous society” coincides very closely with Montreal’s demise.53 Michael McKinnie notes: “It is easy to forget that, for most of Canada’s existence, Montreal was the country’s most populous city and its largest economic motor. In a national context, the expansion of Toronto’s theatre industry through the 1970s coincides with a time when Toronto overtook Montreal as Canada’s largest city, both in terms of population and as a centre of finance and industry. Theatre in Toronto – as an industry – was, therefore, not only part of a cultural transformation taking place in the city, it was part of an economic one taking place nationally as well.”54 Travel, as both a trope in his work and a production strategy, set Lepage apart from other Quebec dramaturges who, in addition to being stay-at-homes in terms of their production itinerary, staged

27761_Koustas.indd 28

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  29

plays set largely in Quebec and very much focused on, influenced by, and written for “a small incestuous society.” While this is less valid for Gilles Maheu and others engaged in imagistic theatre, it is decidedly the case for Michel Tremblay, whose characters rarely left la rue Fabre. In contrast, the cosmopolitan city is central in Lepage’s work. From his early Circulations to the more recent Blue Dragon, his productions are set in vibrant, urban sites of world-renown, home to some of his audiences, exotic to others, but recognizable to most. The New York City skyline in Circulations, the Paris Opera in The Andersen Project, the London underground in Lipsynch, and the Shanghai zoo in The Blue Dragon are all landmark, city spaces. This focus on the urban not only set Lepage apart from many of his Quebec counterparts, particularly at the beginning of his career, but once again aligned his theatre with the cosmopolitan aspirations of the Toronto theatre scene. Indeed, The Dragons’ Trilogy is set partially in Toronto. In a more general sense, the staging of recognizable cityscapes, which include Toronto, renders his work more relevant to an international audience. As Lafon notes above, he was creating not for a local public but for multicultural distribution and global recognition. For Toronto, Lepage’s global renown, reach, itinerary, and focus afforded audiences the opportunity to experience Quebec theatre that not only stretched beyond the limits of “more Montreal misery”55 but put them and their city both on the stage, in some cases, and on the global circuit. It is possible that this outward-looking, “beyond the box” strategy that took Lepage and his characters outside Quebec was responsible as well for his relatively poor reception in Quebec, compared to Toronto. If, as suggested above, some Quebec playwrights had moved beyond the nationalist agenda, audiences and particularly critics, especially those writing for the openly separatist Le Devoir remained attached to sovereigntist politics. Lepage’s global focus and itinerary, and its concomitant funding, including that from the federal government, as well as his popularity in the roc, would have compromised his position with those who saw separatism as central to cultural production. The fact that his theatre does not promote this cause made it more interesting to the roc audience attracted by the “familiar otherness”56 described by Cronin and experienced as baleful by ardent nationalist Quebeckers. Indeed, in The Blue Dragon, Pierre expresses his frustration with his compatriots and the stalled nationalist struggle, including its very thinly

27761_Koustas.indd 29

2016-04-01 13:15:35

30

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

veiled xenophobia. After going to Quebec for his mother’s funeral, he returned disillusioned to his “home” in Shanghai. Explaining this decision to Marie he states: “Well, last year when I went back for my mother’s funeral I had a twinge of nostalgia. Seeing the old comrades from art school and family again. But it didn’t last for very long. I spent the rest of the week watching tv with my father because we had nothing to say to each other. And it dawned on me that Quebec hadn’t changed. The same provincial people all wrapped up in their own affairs, the same fear of anything foreign, the same nationalism that goes nowhere.”57 Travel beyond “chez lui,” beyond the box and far from the “small incestuous society,” remains a central trope of Lepage’s work, and the itinerary of both the company and the characters is decidedly global, from the heroine’s encounter with a New York mugger in Circulations to the complex and somewhat uncomfortable status of Frédéric, the Quebec artist commissioned by the French Opera to write the libretto for The Andersen Project (about Hans Christian Andersen), which was described as a sort of “Europudding” by the director of the Palais Garnier in The Andersen Project. This motif remains a constant.58 Lepage commented: “My work is always about travel, about different cultures expressing themselves in different languages. And if you want to understand the people and the politics of a country, all you have is [sic] to look at a map, to draw out lines and colors and territories … I am very shy in one way. I don’t have confidence in what I am doing, but my one confidence is my national identity. I don’t feel I have to prove that. When you are sure of your identity, you travel. When you are sure of who you are, when you are not looking for it, or trying to prove who you are, it is much easier to work with the people who are supposed to be the ones trying to assimilate you.”59 The positioning or juxtapositioning of oneself with respect to outsiders in an effort to better understand one’s own identity is an essential element of Lepage’s theatre. Indeed, it is perhaps the motivation for the global focus in the itinerary, scope, and thematic structure of his work. Referring to Frédéric’s voyage, Josette Féral notes, “This is also the meaning that can be ascribed to the travels of the characters who crisscross the world, both literally and figuratively, in order to travel better within themselves and to (re)find themselves, to discover their identity rather than simply affirming it.”60

27761_Koustas.indd 30

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  31

It is Lepage’s encounter with this more immediate, arguably more significant Other, namely Toronto, which, for Quebec, remains very much an Other, that is the focus of this study. Using a Lacanian approach, Fricker demonstrates that Lepage stages his own and his nation’s identity in order to question, interpret, and test their mutual interaction. She observes: “The discursive production of personal and national identity mirror and perpetuate each other in the works … we can read these thinly fictionalised self-depictions as Lepage’s attempt to ‘other’ himself – to use the stage as a mirror through which he can see his own reflection.”61 Nonetheless, Lepage’s triumph in Toronto merits particular attention. Féral, in “The Dramatic Art of Robert Lepage: Fragments of Identity,” addresses the issue of identity and negotiation with the Other within the framework of Canadian political philosopher Charles Taylor’s discussion on modernity and multiculturalism. Similarly, Dundjerovic´ states that “the concern for  language and communication in Lepage’s theatre emerged in response both to the cultural duality (English and French) in Canada and to two opposing forces – those of the isolationism of Quebec’s nationalist politics and the internationalist Quebeckers who needed to connect to the world and get out of its linguistic enclosure.”62 Lepage’s success in Toronto was conditioned by his need, as a Quebecker, both to escape the linguistic borders of his home province and, as suggested earlier, to seek recognition from the Other, as well as by Toronto’s need to recognize, or demonstrate recognition of, a major voice from Quebec whose theatre, perhaps more strategically than serendipitously, dovetailed well with Toronto’s aspirations to attract “global” theatre and to build cultural tourism. In a 2008 document entitled Creative City Planning Framework, then Toronto mayor David Miller is quoted: “We must put creativity at the heart of Toronto’s economic development strategy.”63 Theatre, like other arts, is a potential player in an economically based and driven plan for Toronto to generate cultural capital,64 as suggested by Richard Florida: “Toronto is at an inflection point, to strive for greatness as one of the world’s magnet creative cities or to be a really good second-tier city. All the ingredients are here.”65 Lepage’s combination of exoticism and familiar otherness translates well as global cultural capital in Toronto. His being “home away from home” and chez lui in Toronto66 hints at the duality or  doubling referred to above, a key element in Lepage’s work. A

27761_Koustas.indd 31

2016-04-01 13:15:35

32

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

hallmark of Lepage’s theatre is the experience of an artist who, through travel, goes deeper into himself, and beyond and outside himself through his art. The artist is both self and Other, demonstrating this duality central to the identity question. In plays such as Vinci and The Andersen Project, Lepage “stages” the role of the artist and of theatre as a transformer, manipulator, and generator of multiple, even conflicting, identities that hark back to his own dual (at least) loyalties. Ludovic Fouquet notes: “Lepage’s work incessantly underlines the doubling of personality, this doubly-representative figure of identity. The individual character doubles and transforms (see Philippe and André, the two faces of the same individual, or Frédéric Lapointe and the director of the Opera Garnier, who can be viewed as the double figure of the creator and his manipulator). In fact, it would be quite impossible to imagine the actor without his shadow (a theme that the Andersen project stresses), or the character without his double.”67 If Lepage’s own dual belonging drew him to the rest of Canada and, as suggested above, inspired much of his work, the Toronto theatre community was, in a similar play of contrasts, eager to claim him as a fellow Canadian while playing the card of his Quebec origins and international star status. Twenty-five years after Lepage’s arrival in Quebec with Circulations, the Montreal theatre critic Marianne Ackerman, with whom Lepage worked, asked: “Is Robert Lepage the darling of 21st century Toronto? It often seems that Quebec’s master of borderless art and this city were destined for communion. Toronto, at once open to the world and yet frequently uncertain of its position, and Lepage’s internationalism are a natural fit. Cultures and languages collide onstage, yet there are no messages about identity politics, the essence of so much traditional urban drama.”68 Just as Lepage’s theatre evolved between his first Toronto production in 1985 and those of 2012, the Toronto theatre scene also changed. Indeed, it is important to recognize that during these years Lepage was by no means an isolated dramaturge on a solitary stage but rather a player in a dynamic, synergetic theatre scene in which he became a willing, welcome, and influential participant. As McKinnie notes in his discussion of post-1970s theatre in Toronto, “It is not only the experience of theatre-going that can produce ­sentiment,69 but the existence of theatres as cultural institutions that  can create sentiment in a city’s life.”70 McKinnie focuses on the  importance of both space/place and time, remarking that “the

27761_Koustas.indd 32

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  33

corollary of this spatial concern is also a temporal one.”71 He notes, for example, that theatre companies acquired particular identities closely associated with their geographic neighbourhoods such as “a hip, slightly scruffy part of Queen Street (Passe Muraille), the vibrant gay and lesbian community at the intersection of Church and Wellesley”72 that distinguished them from the mainstream (St Lawrence Centre) and earned them a place in the increasingly intricate tapestry of the Toronto theatre scene at an exciting time in its history.73 If McKinnie highlights the connectedness of theatre companies to their neigbourhoods, Ric Knowles underlines the salutary and synergetic interconnectedness in the broader Toronto theatre community. Commenting on the absence of isolated single ethnic enclaves in the city’s core and the resulting openness and opportunities for exchange and interaction, he observes: “The urban geography of contemporary downtown Toronto facilitates working across difference … Downtown neighbourhoods are mixed and flow into one another, allowing for the performance of genuinely intercultural exchange and genuine intercultural identities not pre-scripted by official multiculturalism.”74 Lepage arrived, then, on an urban theatre scene at a particular moment and, as in the notion of the chronotope,75 both time and place variables must be factored into the equation of his success;76 he starred on the global stage of the du Maurier theatre at a time when the Toronto theatre scene was expanding, when post-1980 referendum interest in Quebec was mounting and when, conceivably, Toronto sought a vision of Quebec beyond Michel Tremblay’s desperate housewives. This timing made him, as Ackerman noted, “a natural fit.” Commenting on Toronto’s stature on the theatre scene, McKinnie notes: “Although the popular claim that Toronto is now the third-largest urban centre for English-language theatre in the world (after New York and London) is more often asserted than substantiated, there is little doubt that the city’s theatre industry has become a part of local and, through its role in generating tourism, transnational service economy to a degree that it simply was not in the 1960s and 1970s.”77 Susan Bennett, in her study “Toronto’s Spectacular Stage,” also convincingly argues that theatre was a major driver in the city’s economic development as it built its reputation as a cultural tourism capital.78 While Lepage’s productions could not compare in scope, intended audience, or focus to mega-productions such as The Lion

27761_Koustas.indd 33

2016-04-01 13:15:35

34

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

King, and indeed, as will be discussed below, are at opposite ends of the theatrical spectrum, his theatre nonetheless contributed to this push to put Toronto on the theatre map. Indeed, his success on the global stage followed, and perhaps determined, his trajectory on the  Toronto theatre scene. From his early Toronto production, Circulations, which was staged before a small audience, to the globally wired Blue Dragon at the Royal Alexandra Theatre, a landmark space in the entertainment district, Lepage successfully ran the gamut of Toronto theatre spaces, competing against the mega-productions while at the same time having “circulated” on the international scene for over twenty-five years. The inclusion of Lipsynch in the 2009 Luminato Festival, Toronto’s Festival of Arts and Creativity “born [in 2007] out of the cultural and creative energy of the city of Toronto,”79 confirmed Toronto’s recognition of Lepage as a major player in the city’s aspirations for global city status. Luminato’s founders “shared the vision of a Festival that would reflect the authentic richness of the arts in Toronto, would take its vitality from the diversity of the city’s cultural communities, and would touch all residents while also inspiring visitors from around the globe to come to Toronto to experience Luminato Festival.”80 Indeed, in the Creative City Planning Framework, Luminato is listed among other projects which together establish that “Toronto is riding an unprecedented wave of creative and cultural successes.”81 By the 1990s the success of gay theatre companies such as Buddies in Bad Times, of feminist companies such as Nightwood Theatre, of women’s drama,82 or of projects by the Ontario Multicultural Theatre Association or Cahoots Theatre Projects, which focused on visible minority playwrights, were challenging traditional social, cultural, and linguistic boundaries, and bringing new voices, new writers, and theatre that corresponded to the pluralistic demographics of  Canadian society. Knowles comments on these developments: “Much has happened since Toronto has been the subject of extended scholarly treatment, but perhaps the most significant development of the last two decades has been the emergence of a vibrant, interdependent ecology of intercultural performance that crosses cultures and disciplines, challenges the hegemony of whiteness on the city’s stages and reflects the cultural differences that are visible on the city’s streets and streetcars.”83 Similarly, in discussing Cahoots Theatre Projects, and the new place of so-called minoritized theatre practice, Mayte Gómez argues: “It is

27761_Koustas.indd 34

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  35

no longer a matter of course to agree on what is ‘Canadian’ or what is ‘professional’ let alone how ‘art’ or ‘theatre’ should be defined.”84 Toronto was open to new ways of doing and viewing theatre from a  multicultural perspective that dovetailed with Lepage’s staging of  cultural, linguistic, and geographic border crossing. Knowles, acknowledging the contribution of the above theatre companies as  well as of fu-Gen, First Nations, Red Sky, the AfriCanadian Playwrights Festival and other similar projects, discusses diversity and “urban intraculturalism.” According to his analysis: “An example of the kind of intercultural performance ecology is coming into being in the city of Toronto … The contemporary intercultural performance ecology of Toronto is a complex web of interconnections among individuals and companies working in solidarity across their acknowledged differences.”85 Noting the proximity of both the locations and the mandates of these companies born from and rooted in urban intraculturalism,86 Knowles further points out: “Native Earth’s offices are in Toronto’s art-centered Distillery District, next to the offices of Nightwood Theatre, one floor below those of Modern Times Stage Company and not far from the Carlton Street offices of fu-G e n or the Queen Street East home bases of Obsidian and Cahoots. One of Native Earth’s office staff … was also founding director of fu-g e n , playwright in residence at Cahoots Theatre Projects, director of a recent production at Carlos Bulosan, artistic producer of the CrossCurrents intercultural play development at Factory Theatre.”87 Likewise, Jerry Wasserman observes in his article “Where Is Here Now?: Living the Border in the New Canadian Drama” that the English Canadian theatre scene had become increasingly diversified. Through his métissage of languages, identities, and geo-political and socio-cultural markers, and as he had done through his interrogation of a singular identity and sense of belonging, Lepage contributed to the changing Toronto theatre scene. Describing Toronto theatre’s “new look,” Wasserman comments: “As the pluralism of what Verdeccia calls ‘this Noah’s ark of a nation’ (Fronteras 73), has come to be increasingly reflected on Canada’s stages, the borders between here and there, home and exile, margin and mainstream have blurred … Today, Canadian plays peopled by African-, Latino-, Native- and Indo-Canadian characters, among many hyphenated others, examine personal and cultural boundaries complicated by  postcolonial hybridization, media manipulation and fractious

27761_Koustas.indd 35

2016-04-01 13:15:35

36

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

diasporic politics. The construction of new ‘imagined communities’ … has become the locus of some of most exciting work in the Canadian theatre.”88 While Lepage staged the immigrant experience rather than theatre by immigrant writers as studied by Wasserman and Knowles, his frequently hyphenated, or otherwise complexed-identity characters, also found themselves on blurred borders wondering “where is here now?” In his discussion of nationhood and theatre, Alan Filewood makes similar observations: “Theatre is not simply a matter of staged representation: it is an event both physical and symbolic; it transforms experience into a community narrative; and it materially constructs in the audience the community it addresses in its texts … the theatre as a process models deep social structures … I argue that Canadian theatre can as a whole be considered as a meta-performance that literally enacts the crisis of nationhood.”89 Just as the physical theatre scene (in terms of space and concomitant objectives and audience) had evolved from Lepage’s first performance, the concept of Canadian “national” theatre had also changed, thereby, over time, continually redefining the roc/Quebec divide. From this perspective, Lepage’s globally travelled and focused theatre can be seen as a major contributor to the evolution of the Toronto theatre scene and to the redefinition of Canadian national theatre. It is not without irony that the impetus to deliver the roc from a narrowly defined concept of nation came from Quebec, which was frequently blamed for the division. Furthermore, writers such as Carole Fréchette, Daniel Danis, Serge Boucher, Yvan Bienvenue, Normand Chaurette, Larry Tremblay, Michel Marc Bouchard, immigrant authors such as Wajdi Mouawad, and other Quebec dramatists arrived on the Toronto scene in the 1990s and in the new millennium and, while their plays were staged in English translation, theirs (unlike Tremblay’s) did not focus on Quebec nationalism. Therefore, they did not directly invite reflection on the bind of binarism.90 Like Lepage, these Quebec playwrights suggested another interrogation of identity and belonging beyond the geopolitical boundaries of nation and language. As Jane Moss notes, a new Quebec theatre, which could be called post-identity theatre for the expression of the postmodern condition, raised serious questions about human nature, spiritual and emotional emptiness, and the relationship between language and identity outside a nationalist agenda.

27761_Koustas.indd 36

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  37

Ranking second after Michel Tremblay among Quebec authors staged in translation in Canada91 (Lepage is not counted because of his plays’ bi- or multilingualism), Michel Marc Bouchard had an immediate impact on the Toronto theatre scene when his Lilies: or The Revival of a Romantic Drama (Linda Gaboriau’s translation of Les Feluettes, ou La répétition d’un drame romantique)92 was performed at the Theatre Passe Muraille in 1991. The Tale of Teeka (Gaboriau’s translation of L’histoire de l’oie), a play for young audiences, was featured in the World Stage Festival in 1992. Bouchard remained a presence on the English-language theatre scene with plays in translation at the Shaw Festival, Stratford, and other venues,93 and Jackie Maxwell, artistic director at the Shaw Festival, stated: “More than any writer I know, Michel Marc can mix the political and the poetical together.”94 While his plays delve into nostalgia, especially historically situated accounts of artists fighting to put on their work, the political does not have the nationalistic overtones, or not-so-veiled purpose, of playwrights like Tremblay; the artist’s struggle, for example, is more pan-Canadian if not universal. During an interview in Toronto, Bouchard commented: “Why do we hate, or are afraid of the intellectual, the scientific, the artistic? … We experience that now, on both sides of this country, especially with the government we have at Ottawa right now.”95 Furthermore, Bouchard’s poetical side is what captured and kept the Toronto audience.96 As director Eda Holmes states, in comparing him to Tennessee Williams: “he brings poetry to the harsh realities of his characters.”97 Like Lepage, Bouchard and other “post-identity” Quebec playwrights contributed to the widening of the Toronto theatre horizon, to its burgeoning cosmopolitanism, and to its desire to be a world-renowned theatre city. Lebanese-born and Quebec-based dramatist, cineaste, actor and director Wajdi Mouawad offers an interesting comparison to Lepage.98 Like Lepage, Mouawad claims inspiration from, loyalty to, and identity with several nations and languages; he describes himself as “Lebanese in his childhood, French in this way of thinking and Québécois in his theatre.”99 In 2007, following in the footsteps of Lepage, Mouawad was appointed artistic director of the National Arts Centre French theatre for a five-year term. When his film Incendies was featured at Luminato 2011, Mouawad earned the label “Canadian theatre wunderkind.”100 He was awarded the prestigious Dora Mavor Moore Award in 2007 for Scorched, the English

27761_Koustas.indd 37

2016-04-01 13:15:35

38

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

version of this play translated by Linda Gaboriau, which was premiered and remounted at the Tarragon Theatre and earned a Dora award for its director, Richard Rose. The second play in an intended tetralogy, all translated by Gaboriau, which includes as well Littoral (Tideline) and Forêts (Forests), this production, like the others, centres on the quest for ancestors during a sweeping voyage across space and time that encompasses memories and experiences from childhood, war, and exile. Earlier productions include Wedding Day at the Cromagnons.101 Mouawad too, then, earned national and international recognition by challenging geo-political, temporal, and aesthetic boundaries (his plays deal with torture, incest, rape, and the consequences of war). His presence on the Toronto theatre scene, therefore, furthered the “creative city” project by bringing to the audience world-class, world-travelled, and world-focused theatre. It would be difficult to support with hard evidence the contention that Lepage had paved the way for these Quebec-based dramaturges. It is evident, however, that Lepage did contribute to the broadening of the Toronto audience’s understanding of and appreciation for the “Other” theatre and its capacity to stretch notions of language, identity, and nation. Lepage’s impact on Toronto is rooted in his distinctiveness with respect to other Quebec dramaturges. While these more recent arrivals brought theatre less grounded in Quebec’s political identity politics to Toronto, they nonetheless remained Quebec plays in English translation. According to Sherry Simon, Lepage’s productions “challenge the idea of translation as transmission, to replace it with a concept of translational culture.”102 Louise Ladouceur, in her comprehensive Making the Scene. La traduction du théâtre d’une langue officielle à l’autre au Canada, notes, for example, that more than forty-three French-language plays were translated into English between 1985 and 2000. 103 In her study, Lepage is mentioned only twice, however, and never studied in detail, because this standard binary, Bi- and Bi- translation pattern and practice, however laudatory, cannot account for his simultaneously multilingual productions. Ladouceur includes him among artists whose work breaks down, bypasses, or overflows the boundaries of the “d’une langue officielle à l’autre” model. Describing imagistic theatre, she writes: “Même dans le théâtre de l’image, où l’accent est mis sur l’aspect visuel du spectacle au détriment du texte, on voit se former de nouvelles

27761_Koustas.indd 38

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  39

esthétiques verbales distinctes, comme les montagnes plurilingues de Robert Lepage.”104 As I have shown elsewhere, Toronto critics rose to the challenge of imagistic theatre, including those involving translation; they too were seeing beyond the box of Bi and Bi translation and nationalistic, Quebec-centred theatre: Once viewed somewhat patronizingly, much like Krieghoff’s paintings, Quebec theatre in translation [staged in Toronto], with the arrival of Tremblay, received genuine recognition, but from a perspective that went partially against the spirit of the plays … The arrival of new voices such as Claude Meunier, Gilles Maheu [and] René-Daniel Dubois signalled new directions in Quebec drama. Deliberately more universal, this theatre was frequently well received in Toronto from a perspective that coincided more closely with its original intent. Critics acknowledged the translator more frequently, although not always favourably, thus demonstrating a better understanding of the difficulties of theatre translation and increased respect for the play’s origins.105 Furthermore, as suggested by the du Maurier World Stage begun in the 1980s and by the Luminato Festival begun in 2007, Toronto increasingly sought artistic internationalism that would complement the city’s economic and multicultural transnationalism and marketing goals. As Knowles notes: “In its promotional material, the city of Toronto regularly makes two significant claims: to be the world’s most multicultural city and to the third most active theatre centre in the English-speaking world.”106 These twin aspirations of promoting multiculturalism and securing Toronto’s place on the global theatre circuit are echoed in comments on the initial meeting of Luminato founders Tony Galiano and David Pecaut: “The arts were one of the most powerful means available to engage the many immigrant cultures converging in Toronto in a common project of city building … the two passionate city-builders found their mutual beliefs in the transformative power of the arts, and thus, Luminato Festival was born.”107 As early as 1989, Wallace, who had spent two years in Quebec immersing himself in the theatre scene, commented that Quebec theatre was moving “more and more towards internationalism … more

27761_Koustas.indd 39

2016-04-01 13:15:35

40

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

deliberately than ever aiming at incorporating a variety of languages into their work.”108 Thus, the evolution of Lepage’s theatre, from his early Circulations, which drew on the place of Quebec in North America, to the 2010 productions of Eonnagata and The Andersen Project, to The Blue Dragon in 2012, with its much more international focus, cast, and itinerary, corresponds as well to the Toronto theatre scene’s desire to “go global,” as it were. Indeed, this desire is echoed in the title of McKinnie’s study City Stages: Theatre and Urban Space in a Global City, in which he considers the urban geography of Toronto theatre. In relation to the evolution of this theatre scene, he writes: “at the time of centennial [1967], Toronto saw itself primarily as part of the nation. Today [2007], Toronto sees itself primarily as part of the globe, and its civic self-fashioning has changed to reflect this fact.”109 Lepage’s arrival, therefore, coincided with, and contributed to, the globalization of the Toronto theatre scene. Patrick Lonergan’s discussion of theatre and globalization is particularly pertinent in this context. While focusing on the case of Ireland, Lonergan convincingly argues that theatre is changing worldwide in four general ways: First, globalization has created new opportunities for writers (like Pinter and Michael Keegan-Dolan) and theatre companies … to travel internationally. The availability of these opportunities has altered the way theatre is made, received, produced and studied. Second, playwrights and audiences are now coming to terms with the social changes wrought by globalization. Issues such as asylum seeking, tourism, multiculturalism and interculturalism, universal human rights, and the growth of foreign direct investment have become more prominent on the world stage since the early 1990s. Even if these themes are not always considered explicitly by dramatists, they have influenced the reception of many plays. Third, many recent formal developments in drama may be explained in relation to globalization. Such changes include a reduction of the importance of spoken language in favour of visual spectacle, the compression of action into shorter scenes, the homogenization of setting and dialogue, and the increasing use of monologue.

27761_Koustas.indd 40

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  41

Finally, globalization complicates – and in some case renders obsolete – many of the categories used to study dramatic literature and performance. What does “nation” or “region” mean in a globalizing world?110 Lepage’s focus on an international itinerary, social changes such as tourism and multiculturalism, the visual spectacle, and the blurring of national, linguistic, and cultural boundaries places him – and hence the audience that welcomes him – very much at the fore of contemporary global theatre as described by Lonergan. Hence, while still welcoming “one of its own,” the Toronto audience, like its counterparts worldwide, had the opportunity to partake of and contribute to world-class and globally based and internationally toured theatre. The emphasis on the sensory, on the visual spectacle, is indeed what sets Lepage apart. In playing with the box, he changes the perspective away from language and its concomitant “baggage” in the roc context.111 Lepage expects and cultivates different kinds of engagements, shifting the emphasis from the spoken text to the visual, evoking all the other (international) languages of theatre. This repositioning of the audience sensorially, affectively, and culturally requires greater audience engagement,112 and, as outlined above, while Lepage was not the only dramaturge to do make this requirement from the Toronto stage, he was certainly the most successful and important Quebec artist to do so as consistently. Furthermore, he included the reflexive experience of the Toronto audience in his global success and trajectory and was very much conditioned by this experience, as suggested by his characterization of Toronto as being “chez moi mais à l’étranger.”113 Toronto’s position and role were thus very different from those of New York, London, Paris, or the many other ports of call on Lepage’s global artistic and geographic voyage. As mentioned earlier, for both Lepage and this Toronto audience, because of their shared sense of common, if not identical, ground, Lepage’s theatre was not simply another exercise in globalization. Féral argues that at least part of Lepage’s international appeal and success lies in the quest for identity central to all of his productions: “I would like to suggest that one of the reasons for Lepage’s phenomenal success – success among such widely differing cultures as those of North America, Europe and Asia – springs from the fact that his audiences, no matter what their cultural origins, unconsciously find in his work the model of today’s constructions of identity, and the

27761_Koustas.indd 41

2016-04-01 13:15:35

42

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

values linked to them.”114 Thus, while Lepage’s theatre may appeal to a global audience, its significance and impact will differ according to the individual audience’s, and indeed individual audience member’s, own construction of and quest for identity. Lonergan makes a similar point when he distinguishes between universal/homogenous theatre, what Dan Rebellato calls “theatre that is everywhere and everywhere the same”115 – “McTheatre”116 – and reflexive theatre, for which “the reception is everywhere different [and] the meaning of a play is not so much determined by authorial intention as audience’s willingness to interpret the play in relation to individual and/or communal concerns.”117 In her condemnation of artists such as Robert Wilson, whom she accused of appropriating the foreign culture, Erika Fischer-Lichte underlines the limitations of theatre conceived for a monocultural audience. She states that Western dramaturges who “direct their work primarily at audiences of their own culture”118 eliminate both the inspiration and the opportunity for reflexive theatre. This was not the case, however, in Toronto. Knowles, discussing the Toronto and other urban theatre scenes, points to the “increasingly mixed cultural make-up of urban centres” and locates “interculturalism no longer simply on the stage or between the stage and the auditorium but within the audience itself.”119 For the purposes of this study, global theatre, which implies the interaction of different theatrical traditions, languages, and cultures, rather than their effacement, and invites a reflexive response, is distinguished from universal, or McTheatre,120 which eliminates difference. Lepage’s approach to acting also positions him and his theatre on the global stage and in the position of reflexive theatre. In The Purpose of Playing, Robert Gordon identifies major approaches to acting in twentieth-century Western theatre. The sixth and final approach, “performance as cultural exchange; playing one’s otherness,” which Gordon associates with Eugenio Barba,121 is central to the work of Ex Machina. Gordon explains: “The new idea is that personal encounters with alien performance traditions provide a necessary technique of alienation from the performer’s own inherited culture, allowing her to discover a unique performing identity through an intercultural exchange with a foreign tradition … In an increasingly globalized world, this postmodern tendency to ‘mix and match’ forms and techniques of performance from around the world may well herald the start of a new epoch in the history of performance.”122 The integration of Asian dance traditions (The Seven

27761_Koustas.indd 42

2016-04-01 13:15:35



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  43

Streams of the River Ota, Eonnagata, and The Blue Dragon) and meditation exercises of George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (The Geometry of Miracles), the frequent inclusion of other art forms borrowed, for example, from dance, the circus, and puppet theatre (The Far Side of the Moon, Eonnagata, The Andersen Project), as well as co-operation with other theatre companies (Lipsynch) and artists from different traditions (Lipsynch, The Blue Dragon) are all examples of intercultural exchange contributing to his global vision and impact. Patrick Caux and Bernard Gilbert suggest that Ex Machina aims to continue to work in this direction. In their discussion of Le Dragon bleu, they state: Pendant la rédaction de ce livre, les artisans d’Ex Machina réfléchissaient notamment aux défis qu’ils souhaitent relever lors des années à venir. Parmi ceux-ci, on relève le souhait d’aller se produire devant les publics de pays graduellement plus accessibles comme la Chine, la Russie et l’Inde, où, en fait la compagnie n’a présenté jusqu’à présent que très peu de spectacles. Pour Ex Machina, le choc de la rencontre avec ces cultures riches de fortes traditions théâtrales devrait provoquer des métissages qui se transformeront, à leur tour, en de nouvelles manières d’aborder la scène. Déjà, des œuvres en développement comme Le Dragon bleu sont nourries par ce dialogue avec des cultures qui apparaissent de moins en moins étrangères.123 Caux and Gilbert suggest, then, that Lepage’s global vision is based not on appropriation of other, particularly non-Western, theatre ­traditions, but rather on genuine exchange. Similarly, Gordon, like Lonergan, makes a distinction between the “movement toward the effacement of the cultural distinctions that make the theatre of one country different from that of another – a phenomenon one might class as globalization,” and theatre that increases “awareness of the cultural differences that make the performance forms of each country unique, and a tendency to cultivate – at times at the risk of fetishizing – the specificity of alien theatrical forms.”124 Patrice Pavis makes a corresponding distinction in his study of intercultural theatre, which, he suggests, requires spectators to position themselves at the interface, in the “between zone,” in an effort not merely to understand the “foreign” culture but to appreciate the interaction between the familiar and the foreign or, as is

27761_Koustas.indd 43

2016-04-01 13:15:35

44

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

sometimes the case with Lepage, among two or more foreign c­ ultural signs and languages. As Pavis states: “Pour comprendre la culture étrangère source, le spectateur ne doit pas se transplanter en elle, mais se situer par rapport à elle, assumer la distance temporelle, spatiale, comportemental entre les deux.”125 Knowles, in his Theatre and Interculturalism, investigates “theatrical attempts to bridge cultures through performance, to bring different cultures into productive dialogue with one another on the stage, in the space between the stage and the audience, and within the audience.”126 He convincingly argues for the use of the term “intercultural,” since it suggests dialogue and interaction, however initially unsettling or disruptive, as opposed to commodification or appropriation: “I prefer ‘intercultural’ to the other terms available – cross-cultural, extracultural, intracultural, metacultural, multicultural, precultural, postcultural, transcultural, transnational, ultracultural and so on – because it seems to me to be important to focus on the contested, unsettling, and often unequal spaces between cultures, spaces that can function in performance as sites of negotiation.”127 For him, artists such as Robert Wilson are guilty of creating “random postmodern collages,” which do not invite cultural discourse and the creation of “new hybrid identities.”128 Knowles joins Rustom Bharucha and other critics in condemning productions like Peter Brook’s The Mahabharata, as appropriations anchored in a colonial project between, in unequal terms, the “west and the rest.”129 For Knowles, “the new interculturalism … involves collaborations and solidarities across real and respected material differences within local, urban, national, and global intercultural performance ecologies.”130 While Lepage was accused of orientalism, as I discuss below in my examination of The Dragons’ Trilogy, his theatre progressively relied on more genuine transnational and intercultural exchange among theatre traditions, practitioners, and praxes. In this study I contend that Lepage does not create “random ­postmodern collages” or attempt to efface cultural difference, borders, or boundaries, and is not, therefore, merely an exoticizing intercultural theatre artist. Rather, his productions celebrate and cultivate difference and thus create a different, and arguably more demanding, experience for the audience. And he was not alone on the roc theatre scene to expect increased audience engagement and, consequently, responsibility. Christine Lenze, citing Simon Ortiz in her discussion of a First Nations’ production, comments on these

27761_Koustas.indd 44

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  45

emerging expectations: “The interactive nature of the performance, and concern over what is required of the audience, suggest a sense of response-ability to the performance in which the ‘story is not only told but it is also listened to, it becomes whole in its expression and perception.’”131 Once again, Lepage, who deliberately destabilizes linguistic, cultural, and theatrical practices and traditions, thus requiring more from the audience, proves himself very much “a natural fit” on the evolving roc theatre scene. In Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition,” Charles Taylor introduces a concept useful to the study of both the themes and theatricality of Lepage’s work. While Taylor’s concept of the fusion of horizons, as outlined below, embraces cultural recognition and appreciation in a broader context, it offers an interesting perspective from which to consider both Lepage’s theatre practice and the impact and direction of his theatre. Taylor observes: “For a sufficiently different culture, the very understanding of what it is to be of worth will be strange and unfamiliar to us. To approach, say, a raga with the presumptions of value implicit in the well-tempered clavier would be forever to miss the point. What has to happen is what Gadamer calls a “fusion of horizons.” We learn to move in a broader horizon, where what we have formerly taken for granted as the background to valuation can be situated as one possibility alongside the different background of the formerly unfamiliar culture. This fusion operates through our developing new vocabularies of comparison, by means of which we can articulate these contrasts.”132 It is important to recognize that Taylor refers to the fusion of horizons, rather than simply to fusion, which would imply blending to the point perhaps of effacement. Like Pavis, he emphasizes the intersection, and hence the interaction, of the familiar and the “foreign,” which places the audience in the interstice and requires that it negotiate the space and the difference. In Lepage’s work, artistic creation spans time and history as the artist travels within and beyond himself. Historical timelines of art, divisions between time zones, and linguistic, cultural, and geopolitical lines or boundaries intersect, or fuse as the artist seeks his place and that of his art, thus allowing movement within a broader horizon. Furthermore, the fusion and boundaries of notions of identity and belonging are paralleled in a mise-en-scène or by a theatre practice that ignores or reconfigures conventional, theatrical boundaries and divisions, and goes beyond the box. There are, for example,

27761_Koustas.indd 45

2016-04-01 13:15:36

46

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

really no formal scene changes and few, if any formal divisions, and these are usually for practical purposes only; in plays that last nine hours, for example, characters frequently change costumes and roles before the audience’s very eyes. The use of technology transforms storylines, characters, stage sets, and all the languages of the theatre, blending them seamlessly through a fusion of images and symbols: the boxed space of theatre is itself transformed. Therefore, as in Taylor’s model, contrasts are not articulated through division or categorization but rather through transition or fusion. Ackerman makes a similar observation when she observes: “Transformation is a recurring theme in Lepage’s work, though it is more often visual than psychological; his stories tend to illustrate ideas rather than dramatize conflict. Both Lepage and his pieces are relentlessly cool – lush imagery is typically combined with minimalist dialogue, audacity paradoxically paired with understatement.”133 The chapters that follow will demonstrate that, while the Toronto audience may have been just one of many non-Quebec audiences to welcome and appreciate Lepage, it, like others, interpreted his work from its own reflexive standpoint, from the position of its own construction of identity, and from its own perspective on intercultural theatre. Unlike most other destinations on his global circuit, however, Toronto was for Lepage “a home away from home,” a chez lui in the other language, culture, and perhaps sometimes solitude, and as such merited a special status. As Taylor observes, “We define [our identity] always in dialogue with, sometimes in struggle against, the identities our significant others want to recognize in us.”134 The discussion of Lepage’s work suggests that, while perhaps not the only significant other in Lepage’s personal and dramatic universe, Toronto, English Canada, or the Rest of Canada participates in the dialogue as Lepage and his characters construct identity, explore language, search for recognition, and struggle against or with misrecognition by the Other in the Canadian and Quebec national, cultural, identifactory equation.135 While recognizing that the voices of critics are perhaps no more reliable a measure of Lepage’s practice than they are a unanimous measure of audience reception, discussions of reception nonetheless must heavily, and perhaps regrettably, rely on published reviews, as these are the only remaining record of response. Their subjective bias is, however, recognized. Wallace, for instance, in discussing the critical

27761_Koustas.indd 46

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  47

response to Quebec theatre in Toronto, underscores the inevitability of critics’ social circumstances influencing their evaluations. This is particularly significant in relation to the notion of “place” and in situations when the artist is considered to be the “representative” of the other culture. The range of reactions elicited by recent productions of work by French-Canadian playwrights and Québécois theatre companies in Toronto can be quickly illustrated by sampling reviews published in Toronto’s daily press. These reviews must be understood, however, as the subjective reactions of individuals whose perceptions often are not shared by others be they inside or out of Toronto … I introduce such an elementary point both to acknowledge my rejection of the possibility of critical “objectivity” and to admit my belief that all criticism – which I define as interpretation and evaluation – is ideologically marked by the critics’ social circumstance. While this obviously includes many factors, knowledge of “place” in a work or, to make literal use of the vernacular metaphor, knowing “where it is coming from” is particularly important when the work issues from – and is ­perceived to represent – another culture.136 Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged that critics, however biased (and Lepage had significant detractors, such as Robert Lévesque of Le Devoir), are both experts and gatekeepers in that they influence attendance and condition reception. Anton Wagner, when speaking of cultural gatekeepers in the introduction to his influential collection of essays on theatre criticism in Canada, suggests that critics perform best when somewhat distanced from their communities: “Reviewers in both the nineteenth and twentieth centuries wrote their most ­incisive criticism when in positions of relative power and independence from their communities.”137 This study frequently quotes Quebec-based critics commenting on performances in Toronto. The contributors to Wagner’s collection of incisive essays demonstrate how criticism has described, defined, and influenced theatre in Canada. From Gina Mallet, the Toronto Star’s controversial critic who announced the demise of Canadian theatre in an article entitled “Theatre Is Going the Way of the Dodo,”138 to Kate Taylor of the Globe and Mail, whose ardent support does not curb her sometimes sharp, but always insightful criticism, reviewers for the Toronto

27761_Koustas.indd 47

2016-04-01 13:15:36

48

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

press have, as the contributors to the above collection demonstrate, been highly influential in setting the direction of Toronto theatre. In addition to Kate Taylor, who is frequently quoted, Montreal-based Marianne Ackerman and Ray Conlogue are of particular interest to my study. As Leanore Lieblein states, Ackerman brought her interest in Quebec politics to her theatre criticism: “[Her] interest in the politics of Quebec theatre made her not only a critic but an advocate. Determined to bridge the gap between Montreal’s French and English theatre communities, she not only reported on both but represented them to each other.”139 Given Lepage’s attempts to bridge, or bypass, that gap, it is easy to understand Ackerman’s particular interest in the playwright, with whom she in fact worked. Like Ackerman, Conlogue, the Globe and Mail theatre critic from 1979 to 1991, was, as the title of his study Impossible Nation: The Longing for Homeland in Canada and Quebec suggests, very much interested in the chasm between Quebec and the roc, and thus brought to his reviews his insight and interest in politics. His enthusiasm for Lepage, whose work raises similar questions of about homeland and nationhood, therefore comes as no surprise. As Robert Nunn explains, during his thirteen-year career as a theatre critic Conlogue found himself in a curious dilemma. The Globe and Mail, for which he worked, targeted the business and professional communities, whose support of theatre, particularly of somewhat controversial, and particularly publicly funded, productions, was very thin. Nunn notes: “He regards Canadian theatre as a public art of great social importance, and is eloquent on the price that is already being paid in order to gain more support from business … Conlogue very wittily calls corporate sponsors’ preference for non-controversial, upbeat family entertainment ‘Capital Realism.’”140 While Nunn reproaches Conlogue for his bias against openly gay, lesbian, and feminist dramaturgy, he acknowledges his contribution as an advocate and a voice for Canadian theatre: “He is neither outside nor inside, but alongside speaking to the readership of the Globe on behalf of theatre in Canada [italics in text].”141 Furthermore, Nunn recognizes the merit of Conlogue’s large body of theatre criticism: “But this bias [against gays, lesbians, and feminists] must be balanced against the fact that for the most part he can be counted on for lucidly written theatre criticism grounded in precise recall of the look, pace, and feel of the production. More important perhaps is his passionate support of Canadian theatre as a necessity of cultural life.”142

27761_Koustas.indd 48

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Living, Confronting, and Staging the Other  49

Thus, while it is recognized that reviewers are not necessarily representative of the entire audience and, as Pierre Bourdieu contends,143 that reputations are not forcibly the result of any intrinsic greatness but rather the product of entire sets of relationships among producers, artists, critics and so forth, critical response is nonetheless the access point for many audience members and remains the only lasting trace for the researcher.144 My study’s heavy reliance on reviews stems as well from its focus; namely, to analyse Lepage’s success with the audience and the critics from the perspective of Toronto. While Taylor, Ackerman, Conlogue, and the numerous other critics whom I quote bring to their reviews not only their own biases but perhaps those of their readership and employers, they are also recognized experts in their field who shared Lepage’s interest in identity politics. In my reliance on reviews I also acknowledge “the bias involved in Western critics’ preoccupation with results rather than creative processes,” as identified by Barba.145 As Gordon explains, “this tendency to analyze and evaluate finished performances as products, rather than to examine the process that determine their creation, he [Barba] has called the ‘spectator’s ethno-centrism.’”146 Given Lepage’s use of the work-in-progress model, critical emphasis on product is particularly regrettable. However subjective and biased they may be, however, theatre reviews nonetheless constitute the most complete and representative record of the reception of his work. In sum, in this study I undertake a consideration of Lepage’s success in Toronto through the prism of the politics and performance of language, identity, and nation, by examining critical response as well as the evolution of both the artist and his audiences.

27761_Koustas.indd 49

2016-04-01 13:15:36

2 Robert Lepage Meets the ROC Circulations, Romeo and Juliette, The Dragons’ Trilogy, Vinci, Tectonic Plates, Polygraph

In the program for Robert Lepage’s first Toronto production, Circulations, Quebec City theatre critic Martine R.-Corrivault enjoins potential theatre-goers: “À voir absolument avant de décider de ne plus jamais mettre les pieds au théâtre parce que cet art serait dépassé.”1 Corrivault nicely encapsulates the power and impact of this landmark production, which was judged best Canadian production at la Quinzaine Internationale de Théâtre de Québec (1984). The play charted new territory for Théâtre Repère (it was in fact inspired by a map) as well as for theatre communities and audiences. Circulations was based on a concrete visual source (the map), a combination of languages, and the integration of music, and it relied on the work-in-progress model, and the collective creative experience. It introduced both Quebec and Toronto audiences to what were to become Lepage and Ex Machina’s trademarks. It also exposed them to revolutionary theatre, and thus appealed to new audiences, especially, as Corrivault intimates, to those who found conventional ­theatre outdated. In the program, Jacques Lessard describes the production as “a show of motion, image and sound … performed a third in French, a third in English, and a third in movement, [which] can therefore be easily understood and appreciated by an international (adult) public.”2 With Circulations, Lepage “set the stage” for the hallmark of his success in Toronto; namely, visual, sensorial theatre by a québécois artist that reached well beyond, and even defied, the linguistic, geopolitical, and cultural divide. It also took both the playwright and the main characters beyond Quebec, differentiating them radically

27761_Koustas.indd 50

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 51

from the stay-at-home heroes of Michel Tremblay and other Quebec dramatists. Lepage also put both himself and Toronto on the map as this production, like many to follow, travelled internationally. Thus began Lepage’s contribution to the future promotion of Toronto as a global cultural capital through his exploration of Canadian and Quebec language, identity, and nation. Indeed, the printed program includes a “road map” outlining the “Itinerary” or the “Show Development” from the Prologue to the Break Dance in New York. As Lessard explains, this background material, rather than being an abstract inspiration, is a crucial feature of Théâtre Repère: Since 1980, at Le Théâtre Repère, our shows have been ­conceived according to a work process called, “les cycles r epèr e ,” r e : REssource p : Partition e : Évaluation r e : REprésentation Les cycles R E P È R E are a very precise work instrument which gives the creators marks, tools, as well as a very large freedom of imagination and sensitivity. But they are no miracle recipe and do not offer inspiration and genius. They cannot be explained … they must be acquired. They do not offer talent, but help its use. More important, they lie on a principle; create from the concrete and not from ideas. A ressource [sic], should it be visual, tactile, olfactory or acoustic, imposes itself; the creator’s sensitivity then starts working inspired by a drawing, a song, a road map, a poem. This is how “couples,” “à demi-lune,” “en attendant” and today “circulations” were brought to life. None of these shows is alike. However, they look like the artists which created them and they have the same thing in common; the soul before anything.3 The fact that the map, the concrete source, is indeed a road map of Massachusetts and Rhode Island addresses another theme: the combining and colliding of languages and cultures across geopo­ litical boundaries. In this production, Louise leaves her home in Quebec and, as the itinerary suggests, heads to New York City via Massachusetts, with a stop at the beach in Providence, Rhode Island. Lepage is staging the importance and attraction of the urban, with

27761_Koustas.indd 51

2016-04-01 13:15:36

52

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

the Big Apple as the final destination. It is a journey of both escape and reconciliation, for she leaves on the day before her father, jailed for having raped her, is to be released. The blue lines on the road map, as well as representing the roads, suggest the veins of the human circulatory system; for, as Louise sets out to voir le monde (see the world), she embarks as well on an inner voyage. Making this link, Lepage describes the production as “precise as a street light but as agile and energetic as the blood system.”4 Louise must, however, undertake a linguistic and cultural journey as well, since her travels take her beyond the comfort zone of her traditional linguistic territory (she must communicate in English) and cultural landmarks (Superman/Clark Kent rescues her from being mugged in New York). A combination of music and old-fashioned, expressionless language-learning tapes, with their stilted and decontextualized phrases, constitutes the play’s soundscape. While several reviewers draw a parallel between the use of these tapes and Ionesco’s La cantatrice chauve, it is not so much the flatness and meaninglessness of the words, as in Ionesco’s play, but their recontextualization that invites reflection on their significance: the New York mugger claims, “I need soap. I need toothpaste,” and Superman assures her, “the pleasure is all mine.”5 Almost as a foregrounding of Lepage’s more recent work, Lipsynch, Louise and Clark Kent lip-synch the disembodied phrases of a restaurant dialogue as they dine in a New York restaurant. As Marianne Ackerman of the Montreal Gazette notes: “Absurdity and failure to communicate are important themes. Language as a toy and image as truth are the components from which Quebec City’s Theatre Repère has built a fascinating evening of theatre.”6 The combination of the tapes and the languages with the music made this “show of motion, image and sound”7 truly multimedia and transcultural. As Lepage reported to Corrivault: “Without music, Circulations is just an average play. But, with Bernard Bonnier’s processing of sounds into ‘musical loops of words’ the play changes. The strangeness of the words and situations (frequently very usual) is what makes this anecdote comical and basically, we want it to be entertainment. The point is to find a well-balanced mixture for each element and avoid confusing the intention. The human warmth warms up the technical coolness and vice-versa.”8 The program claims that the play is trilingual, communicating through English, French, and movement, and this innovative combination of English, French, and the languages of theatre, including

27761_Koustas.indd 52

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 53

music, was not lost on the rest of Canada (roc), in Toronto and beyond. After a short run at the National Arts Centre in Ottawa in February 1985, Circulations ran for twelve performances in Toronto, and then travelled to Edmonton and Vancouver. As noted earlier, the Globe and Mail’s Matthew Fraser was quick to appreciate not only the entertainment value of the production but also its potential for pulling theatre in new directions. He comments on the “textured text” in an article significantly entitled “A Riveting Road of Aural and Visual Poetry”: “The creators of Circulations are exceptionally talented artists who are stretching and twisting the language of theatre into bizarre and fascinating shapes.”9 The soundscape, including the use of music and the synthesizer, forced the Toronto audience to circulate, like Louise, among languages and media; the language mix created no difficulties of comprehension (thanks to the other languages of theatre in play) but rather invited reflection on the use and power of language/s. While this mix was described by Robert Crew of the Toronto Star as “multi-media mish-mash,”10 Fraser foretold the immediate and lasting impact of this “gust of creative influence from another culture”: “Rare is the play that is so inno­ vative, so utterly different, it makes you feel as if you have just ­witnessed something extraordinary.”11 The “extraordinary” was, at least in part, the blurring of linguistic and geographical boundaries, as the audience, no longer able to rely on binary and frequently compromised translation of québécois ­theatre (as experienced in productions of Tremblay in translation), had instead to attend to the three languages used on stage. This play  introduced Toronto, therefore, to another important trope in Lepage’s theatre, which would later be emphasized, in particular, in Lipsynch. Transfer between languages, like the travel described by Michael Cronin (see chapter 1), is neither seamless nor obstacle-free. If Canadian bilingualism gives the misimpression that languages can exist side by side with no hint of power brokerage or political overtones, or that they can be switched, exchanged, or smoothly and harmoniously translated, Louise’s, and hence the audience’s, experience suggests the contrary: circulation between languages is not as simple as “turning the box around.”12 Nonetheless, communication remains possible. Rooted in the Bi and Bi context, Toronto’s reflexive response would differ from that of other audiences. The roc found itself plunged into the other language, experiencing otherness from the other side and having, therefore, more “response-ability” in

27761_Koustas.indd 53

2016-04-01 13:15:36

54

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

that it was stimulated to engage more actively and reflexively. Rather than the usual source/target translation to which it was accustomed, the audience experienced “a play” on the very idea of translation through the use of the tapes. Many reviewers highlighted the importance of the soundscape and creative expression through movement. John Hare of the Ottawa Citizen noted that “the use of sound effects and music sets awardwinning Canadian production apart,” and he commented further on the creative use of the languages of theatre: “From the collective theatre movement, they have taken the visual focus as an alternative to the established theatre’s dependence on words as the chief medium of expression.”13 Liz Nicholls’s review in the Edmonton Journal captured both the roc’s potential resistance and the production’s capacity to move it to new places: “Even those hard-core Anglophones who are convinced that all right-thinking people prefer English should kick themselves if they blow the chance to see one of Quebec’s innovative troupes in action this weekend.”14 It was perhaps Lepage’s determination to breach or, perhaps more accurately, to sidestep this gap between the roc and Quebec that inspired the play. Louise sets out with both a geographic material guide (the map) and a linguistic guide (her Walkman, loaded with English-language learning tapes) to meet, confront, and perhaps conquer the Other. However, as Charles Taylor and other theorists have recognized (see chapter 1), confrontation with the Other also leads to self-­ discovery, an inner voyage Lepage identified from the outset. When Louise encounters the beach bums in Providence or the mugger or Superman in New York, she is not meeting the actual Other but rather the stereotypical images performed by her fellow québécois actors. Lepage, Jacques Lessard, François Beausoleil, and indeed the entire cast and crew, in playing the Other, are othering themselves in order to better understand both their own and their audience’s interpretation and (mis)understanding of others. Through her misadventures, it becomes clear that Louise’s maps and language tapes are inadequate tools for mapping either her inner or her outward journey as she attempts to discover the Other and herself. While she crosses the lines on the map and alternates discreetly between two languages, she must also cross increasingly blurred cultural divisions. Only by seeking more nuanced cultural sensitivity rather than embracing stereotypes can she “travel” from “Break down in New York” to “Break dance in New York.”

27761_Koustas.indd 54

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 55

With Circulations, Lepage and company thus break new ground for several decades of staging, confronting, playing – and playing to – the Other. However, the company also tackled the extremely delicate, controversial, and perhaps even politically incorrect concept of portraying the Other through the tourist gaze, a perspective that would be called into question in subsequent productions. If Louise, both thematically and theatrically, is entitled to the tourist gaze as she assumes that role in her outward travels, those she meets along the journey, such as the beach bum and mugger, are outsider interpretations of Americans and Americanization. While Lepage and his company may have openly acknowledged this by comically playing with the stereotypes, they nonetheless trod dangerously close to the perilous ground of portraying the Other through one’s own (that is, Western or québécois) prejudices. This issue came to the fore in Lepage’s next Toronto production, The Dragons’ Trilogy. If Circulations was Toronto’s introduction to Lepage’s recurring themes of travel, confrontation with the Other, and transgression and transformation of geopolitical and linguistic boundaries, it was also the city’s initiation to the breaking down or transformation of the box space of the theatre that is typical of Lepage’s work. In a production in which “ingenious simplicity meets high-tech sophistication,”15 the audience is taken almost seamlessly through simple set changes, from Quebec, to a motel room, to a beach, to a New York City restaurant, with minimal props and no formal structured scene changes. As Hare notes, “Every part of the stage is moved along with some inventive props, such as a model of the skyline of New York, in order to give a sense of movement.”16 In Louise’s motel room, the empty shirts on hangers stand in for the men who once occupied them, and the actors become the bathroom fixtures. At one point the scene is shown from the angle of the moon, with the actors sitting on chairs laid against the floor, resulting in an “aerial” photo. This change of perspective, one of Lepage’s signatures, somewhat destabilizes the audience, forcing it to reconsider its own spatial position just as it must reposition itself with respect to language and the Other. The moon also features in the New York City skyscape as background to a restaurant scene. Louise’s sojourn at the beach is depicted by her attempts to stay afloat on an air mattress with the help of two male companions, whose arrival on set with towels and beach balls sets the stage. The final transformation from “break down” to “break dance” in New York is achieved when images of

27761_Koustas.indd 55

2016-04-01 13:15:36

56

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

violence and alienation are turned into rock-video choreography. This was Toronto’s first taste of a theatre experience in which “the visual inventiveness of the company and Lepage’s direction simply take your breath away.”17 Whereas with Circulations Lepage and his company set out to blur, transgress, and confront geographic, cultural, and linguistic boundaries, Romeo and Juliette, a joint production with the roc, somewhat blatantly confirmed the lingering presence of these divisions. Indeed, it was perhaps to the hard-core anglophones described above by Nicholls that this production was addressed. While it never made it to the Toronto stage, Lepage’s 1989 production of Romeo and Juliette was nonetheless a significant, if somewhat lacklustre, foray into the roc beyond Toronto. Still, it is worthy of brief discussion because of the sharp contrast between this and other Lepage productions, including Circulations. Co-directed with Gordon McCall and produced in cooperation with Nightcap Productions of Saskatoon, as part of its Shakespeare on the Saskatchewan Festival, this production staged, perhaps somewhat too obviously, the roc-Quebec divide. The press release describes it as follows: “Artistically, this is a daring attempt for two Canadian theatre companies, one normally totally English and one normally totally French to work hand in hand on a bilingual production … and not just on any production, but something never tried before, a bilingual Shakespearean production involving two culturally distinct theatre companies. The collaboration of these two Artistic Directors from the two solitudes of this linguistically fragile company speaks well for the degree of risk involved. The simple functional question of how an English-speaking Theatre Company and a French-speaking Theatre Company relate, integrate and create is part of this innovative challenge.”18 McCall directed Romeo’s family with an all-western cast while Lepage, still with Théâtre Repère, and the francophone cast of Juliette’s family rehearsed separately in Quebec City. The two groups met in June to prepare for the performances, which ran from 19 July to 12 August 1989, significantly at the same time as the “nationbuilding” Jeux Canada Summer Games. Jean-Marc Dalpé, now a renowned playwright from Northern Ontario, prepared the translation, billed as “a careful layering of various regional French dialects … reflecting not only the French of Quebec but as well the various regions outside the mother province.”19 The play was performed in

27761_Koustas.indd 56

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 57

both English and French, although, significantly, when Romeo and Juliette were together, they communicated primarily in English.20 This patently obvious, and clearly acknowledged, effort to bridge the two solitudes was infused from the outset with a perhaps too earnest social purpose. Lepage claimed that the opportunity for collaboration was “important both artistically and socially,” and McCall similarly welcomed the chance to “create something exciting and culturally significant for our Festival, our community and hopefully, for other parts of our country.”21 Céline Bonnier, who played Juliette, described it as “tellement actuel.”22 And McCall was explicit: “The project is about the Canadian mosaic. It’s also about Romeo and Juliet.”23 The Globe and Mail review is subtitled “Bilingual Play Drives Home the Reality of the Two Solitudes.”24 Notwithstanding the tragic ending, this attempt to stage harmony and comprehension between Canada’s largest (at that time) cultural and linguistic groups has the English Montagues and the French Capulets feuding in Verona, a twentieth-century town in Saskatchewan. Set in part along a road, a metaphor for the TransCanada Highway, which holds the country together, the play is performed primarily from the box of a truck. Blue-jeans–clad Juliette drives a ’52 Ford pick-up and Romeo a ’65 Pontiac, onto which a  drunken, tequila-swigging Mercutio passes out and into which beer-swilling prairie boys occasionally crash their own Pontiacs. ­ The  final scene finds the star-crossed lovers stretched out on the highway under blankets and surrounded by emergency road flares and buzzing traffic. While it was rumoured that McCall and Lepage had a falling out that stymied any further joint pursuits, including predicted tours of the production, the play was a huge success both at the box office and for the participants themselves. Somewhat (and no doubt unintentionally) ironically, McCall claimed that the level of cooperation in the play on and about language left him “speechless.”25 The play was held over for an additional week, boasting a total of fifty-two play dates, and drew theatre crowds of 95 percent capacity. There were very few complaints about the presence of French because, as McCall observed, “if you speak both languages, or know the play, the show is easy to understand.”26 Furthermore, the Quebec actors, as Lepage noted, aware of the possibility of miscomprehension, emphasized the other languages of theatre: “It really brings you down to the essential things of the character. What’s the basic idea

27761_Koustas.indd 57

2016-04-01 13:15:36

58

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

of the scene? What’s the basic emotion? So instead of us bumping into the language, it kind of squeezes the juice out of the lemon because you really have to be clear to find something that will be understood.”27 This was, therefore, an “enriching” experience, in Lepage’s words. McCall, equally enthralled with the experience and response, asked, “Why hasn’t anyone thought about doing this play this way before?”28 While Romeo and Juliette falls somewhat outside the scope of the present study, lies out of chronological sequence, and is quite marginal to Lepage’s oeuvre, it nonetheless poignantly and stridently illustrates the political and cultural landscape into which Lepage arrived in the mid-eighties. Bilingual theatre outside Quebec was seen to be political. Indeed, McCall stated the obvious: “This is political, sure.”29 The sharpness of the play’s political edge is very evident in the discussions of the language noted above. Surely Shakespeare buffs, however unilingual, would not have difficulty deciphering the lines, to say nothing of following the story, in whatever language! It could only be their resistance to French that would interfere. The experience also brought home to Lepage the importance of cultural difference above and beyond language and including theatre craft, so important in his subsequent work: “It’s also important that people know that this is not really about language. You see a bilingual production and immediately you say ‘Oh it’s about the language issue.’ Language is just the skin of a culture, not the whole thing. The play is about two different cultures, two different ways of thinking. It was so remarkable going through this process: Quebec actors train differently; the use of music is different, the rehearsals are different, the actors’ unions in English Canada have different rules.”30 English Canadian and Quebec theatre operated not only in different languages but according to different rules, and efforts to bridge and cooperate, however laudatory and successful, were clearly seen from one of the two solitudes, the angle imposed by the bind of binarism. Lepage’s success in dismantling, detouring, and destabilizing these cultural, geopolitical, and linguistic divisions in other productions becomes, therefore, all the more significant. In sum, the production was clearly framed within the context of identity politics. Furthermore, the “teams” from roc and from Quebec were performing their respective identities. The directors acknowledged the need for mutual recognition as well as the danger of potential misrecognition. Lepage observed: “You have these stereotypes. But I

27761_Koustas.indd 58

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 59

think we were surprised and very happy to see how impassioned the Saskatoon actors were.”31 The choice of play, in the tradition of other adaptations such as West Side Story, added a political and linguistic dimension to the original feud and, in this case, required both parties to meet quite literally halfway, or to cross the road. However, Lepage and McCall’s choice also draws more attention to the real or perceived distance between the two solitudes than to the possibility of closing the gap. Just as the deaths of the protagonists can hardly be interpreted as reconciliation, so the need to anchor a joint production in such stereotyped and oppositional positions, and the subsequent parting of the ways of the two collaborators, was an indication of the distance that had yet to be travelled. Some years later, when Needles and Opium was being fêted in Toronto, Lepage remarked, “If Canada were a country, there would be healthy competition between Montreal and Toronto the way you get in Germany when Mercedes-Benz decides to build a factory in a certain city because the culture is livelier there.”32 In the light of Romeo and Juliette Lepage’s other work takes on particular significance. If, for both the roc and Quebec, the question of national unity could be understood and interpreted through Romeo and Juliet, then misrecognition and the need for recognition were clearly at a high point. Circulations may have centred around language and the place of Quebec and Quebec French in North America; but nonetheless, as the title clearly suggests, it focused neither on division along the geopolitical space of a highway and provincial boundaries nor along linguistic lines, as in Romeo and Juliette, but rather on circulation and communication between and beyond. The production introduced audiences in Toronto and English Canada to the multimedia, multilingual, multicultural techniques that were to become Lepage’s trademarks. Romeo and Juliette did not yield any long-term results, other than promoting Lepage outside of Toronto, but nonetheless, as Lepage himself admits, it introduced him to different ways of doing theatre. While bilingual, this production would not qualify as the intercultural theatre described by Gordon33 and Knowles, but it nonetheless required Lepage to confront and work with the Other and his perceptions of the Other in terms of theatre practice. It was with his next Toronto production, following Circulations, that Lepage firmly established his reputation as “a sorcerer of the

27761_Koustas.indd 59

2016-04-01 13:15:36

60

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

stage” and source of “the biggest splash of a Canadian new wave.”34 The Dragons’ Trilogy was featured in the du Maurier World Stage Festival from 31 May to 3 June 1986, and returned again to the Factory Theatre from 18 to 28 May in 1988. As early as 1986, Toronto recognized Lepage as a player on the world stage and thus as a contributor to the city’s goal to become a global cultural capital. If it was largely an “undiscovered treasure” when it first opened, it became “one of the most acclaimed productions” when it returned to Toronto, suggesting that the city would indeed “be seeing a lot more of Lepage’s innovative and spectacular work.”35 Indeed, with The Dragons’ Trilogy, Lepage caught the wave, or perhaps helped to set the trend, of new developments on the Toronto scene in at least two ways. First, it “stages” the city; in the second part of the play the  characters have relocated from Quebec to Toronto. Michael McKinnie notes: “If it is true that theatre has become an important part of Toronto over the past four decades, it is equally true that Toronto has become an important part of theatre during this time.”36 Second, while representing the “local,” Lepage, as a participant in the du Maurier World Stage festival, also contributed to the growing trend to “go global,” demonstrating yet again that he was a “natural fit.” McKinnie underlines the importance of the du Maurier theatre and festival as symbols of Toronto’s new look as a global city: “Insofar as any city can be thought a ‘world city,’ Toronto’s theatre industry provides one persuasive reason for including it in this category … The fact that its [Harbourfront’s] longest-standing tenant is  a biennial international theatre festival (the du Maurier World Stage) also suggests that Harbourfront has been more successful in representing itself as transnational venue than as a local one.”37 As with all Lepage’s productions, The Dragons’ Trilogy drew its inspiration from a concrete material source, in this case, a parking lot in Quebec City. “Once you find that first resource, that first image,” Lepage explains, “everything falls into place. Take The Dragons’ Trilogy. The parking lot gave us three levels: if you scrape the surface, you find things of everyday life, of today; if you dig deeper, you find the past, mysterious objects found in the earth; and finally, if you keep on digging, you’ll reach China. Chinese philosophy is essentially Taoist philosophy, a belief in the harmonious interaction of all things in the universe. Well, there are three important Chinatowns in Canada, Vancouver, Quebec City, and Toronto. That gave us the west, the centre, and the east. The parking lot became a

27761_Koustas.indd 60

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 61

sort of toy model for the universe.”38 Originally a trilingual (English, French, and Chinese) and eventually, with the addition of Japanese, a quadrilingual production, The Dragon’s Trilogy was billed as a “lyrical epic about the meeting of cultures.”39 According to Dominique Lachance, the audience is confronted with five languages: “de grands pans en anglais, d’autres en québécois, certains en français, plusieurs en chinois et quelques-uns en japonais.”40 The production takes the audience on a cultural and linguistic voyage that spans seventy-five years and three cities: from the prewar, Depression years to the late 1980s in Quebec, Toronto, and Vancouver. While a brief summary cannot do justice to a six-hour production in which, as in all Lepage productions, movement, technology, and the other tools of the Ex Machina arsenal are central – earning for Lepage the label of a “faiseur d’images”41 – it is nevertheless useful to consider the storyline. Jason Whiting, the Globe and Mail theatre critic at the time, describes the production: “Divided into three acts running two hours apiece, The Dragons’ Trilogy follows the lives of two French girls, close friends in Depression Era Quebec, and charts what occurs when their lives are swept apart across three different decades and cities. Rounded out by six other actors who play multiple roles, The Dragons’ Trilogy is a work of powerful symbolism and imagery centring on the themes of war, exile and cultural identity.”42 The titles are based on pieces in mah jongg. The first part, “The Green Dragon” (1910–35), which symbolizes water and traditionally corresponds to spring and birth, takes place in Quebec City. There Jeanne and Françoise, twelve-year-old cousins and close friends, are fascinated and terrified by nearby Chinatown and particularly by the laundryman, Mr Wong. Their lives are changed dramatically by the arrival of William Crawford, a British shoe salesman who grew up in Hong Kong. In exchange for opium, Crawford teaches Mr Wong to gamble. When she is sixteen, Jeanne, now pregnant by her neighbourhood boyfriend, is given to Wong as payment for a gambling debt incurred by her alcoholic father, and she is forced to marry Mr Wong’s son, Lee. “The Red Dragon” (1935–50) symbolizes earth and is associated with summer and fire. Jeanne is now in Toronto, working in Crawford’s shoe store and living with Lee and his two aunts. Her daughter, Stella, now five, contracts meningitis. Françoise, who has joined the Canadian Women’s Army Corps, is transferred to Camp

27761_Koustas.indd 61

2016-04-01 13:15:36

62

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Borden and finds her cousin Jeanne. (Françoise later fulfills her dream of travelling to England.) Jeanne discovers she has cancer and, after entrusting Stella to the care of Sister Marie-de-la-Grâce and the Hôpital St Michel Archange in Quebec City, she commits suicide. Meanwhile, in Japan, Yukali, the daughter of an American solder and a geisha who was killed in Hiroshima, symbolically b ­ uries her mother twenty years after the bombing. In “The White Dragon,” the symbol of air and autumn (1960–90), Françoise’s son, Pierre, has opened an art gallery in Vancouver where he meets Yukali. Stella dies as a result of poor medical care. In the earlier version, Crawford perishes when his plane plunges into the ocean as he was returning from Toronto to Hong Kong. In more recent productions, Pierre meets Crawford in Vancouver, where the latter is starring in a film on geriatric junkies in Toronto.43 Crawford commits suicide by immolation, while reminiscing about Hong Kong. In addition to balancing the first and final acts, Crawford’s return allows greater development of this character; he no longer appears as the token Englishman. Pierre returns to Quebec to console his mother, Françoise, who was Stella’s godmother, and he announces his decision to travel to China while he and Françoise watch the passing of Halley’s Comet from the parking lot shown in the first scene. The production is staged in a sort of giant sandbox that is used initially as the parking lot. The transformation of this space, Lepage’s “toy model for the universe,”44 into three Chinatowns, relies heavily on the interference and intersection of cultures, personal and col­ lective histories, journeys, prejudices, symbols, and philosophies, as  well as languages. The program reads: “From a Quebec City Chinatown (1910) to the parking lot it has become today, from the kitsch China clichés to the great Oriental philosophies, the protagonists take a long journey, like a network of roads meeting and cutting themselves, meeting again, passing each other, coinciding or simply running parallel. Going west (from Quebec to Toronto, then to Vancouver), the characters head towards this Orient they will reach nowhere but in themselves, an Orient made of their own fears and of their dreams … a lost paradise that could probably mean the meeting of their own mortality.”45 Like many voyages staged in earlier productions, the journeys of Jeanne, Françoise, and Pierre into their pasts and into themselves involve language. French, English, Chinese, and Japanese are spoken simultaneously, sequentially, or in

27761_Koustas.indd 62

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 63

combination. In several scenes, notably the first one, the audience hears the same lines spoken in Chinese as well as in either French or English or both. The play opens with a disembodied voice saying, in three languages, “I have never been to China.”46 Deliberately heavy accents also suggest the underlying presence of another language. Hence, the Chinese laundryman’s words, “The store is burn,” are understood by the English shoe salesman as “A star is born,” suggesting confusion not only of languages but also, ironically, of cultural landmarks. As actress Marie Michaud interprets it, “simple linguistic confusion between ‘the store is burned’ understood as ‘a star is born’ points to one of the themes of the Trilogy: the desirability of an end to the inevitable clash of commerce between nations, societies and a celestial unity.”47 However, the comical aspect of this exchange and confusion – and it does generate laughs – hints at something far less noble: the Englishman’s xenophobia and imperialism. In earlier productions, there was no translation; the actors spoke French, English, or Chinese as appropriate, and the audience therefore experienced several cultures and languages simultaneously. Even in recent productions in which surtitles are used, the public is still exposed to several languages and thus remains on the interface. (The recent published version includes passages in French, English, and Mandarin). Once again, as in Circulations, it is frequently the incomprehensibility of the spoken words, their sounds, their disorienting effect on the audience, and their determining role in a power relationship that motivate the production. Furthermore, the inaccessibility of language forces the spectator to rely on the other languages of theatre, which Lepage uses so ingeniously and of which the set itself is a significant component. In this production, Lepage transformed the theatre “box” into an open space with the “sandbox” at the centre, where there is a small booth that serves as the kiosk for the parking lot, the entrance to the laundry, an x-ray booth, and the boutique in the airport. The inclined roof of this structure is also used. There is, therefore, no traditional stage, nor curtains, wings, or other trappings of a conventional theatre, and the audience is seated on bleachers on both sides. The notes read: “Une aire de jeu rectangulaire, recouverte de sable et entourée d’un trottoir. À l’une des extrémités, une petite guérite en bois au toit incliné vers l’arrière, munie d’une porte à fenêtre vitrée et de deux autres fenêtres sur chacun des côtés. Une échelle est appuyée sur le mur arrière … De chaque côté du plateau, sur la longueur, trois

27761_Koustas.indd 63

2016-04-01 13:15:36

64

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

bornes de bêton et des gradins où les spectateurs prennent place se faisant face.”48 The transformation of this central space from the parking lot of the first scene to the opium and gambling den, to a kitchen, to the geisha’s room, to the shoe store in Toronto, to a skating rink, to a doctor’s office, to a square in China, to an art gallery, to an airport, and back to the parking lot again is accomplished through the use of just a very few props, with no formal scene changes – although, because of the length of the production, there are intermissions. Interestingly, the production further solidified Lepage’s link with Toronto; Michael Levine, a highly regarded English-Canadian designer who divided his time between London, New York, and Toronto, contributed to the set design. Commenting on this collaboration as well on Lepage’s signature style, Wallace remarks: “the innovative approach to design … is a central and consistent focus of Théâtre Repère’s work. Collaborating with Robert Lepage in advance of the company’s rehearsals, Michael Levine … developed a set of images that provided the visual vocabulary for the company’s improvisations in their creative rehearsals.”49 In one memorable scene, for instance, Lee’s shoe store becomes a skating rink, and Françoise and her boyfriend join others in the skaters’ waltz, their shoes lined up neatly. Then the music changes abruptly to a military march and leads to a military-style assault in which chairs, tables, and particularly the many neatly aligned pairs of shoes are thrown out of place. While Lee is trying to tidy up the shoes, the soldiers, now wearing skates, march over them, destroying the shoes with their skates.50 This transformation of a simple prop into a metaphor is one element of the Repère method, and is recognized as signature Lepage. In this case, the shoes are initially mere props that suggest a shoe store and relate back to the initial scene with Crawford. Once scattered and eventually damaged or even destroyed by the skates transformed into weapons, the shoes represent their owners and the havoc wreaked upon their lives. For some audiences, the shoes would hark back to photographs from Nazi death camps, featuring piles of shoes taken from the victims. As in Circulations, the smooth, seamless transition between scenes, and thus between time periods, and between geographical and linguistic spaces, contributes to the sense of borderless movement and fused horizons. Of all the Lepage productions to play in Toronto and elsewhere, The Dragons’ Trilogy definitely generated the most (although not

27761_Koustas.indd 64

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 65

uniformly) favourable critical and academic response, sold the most tickets, and travelled the most frequently and widely. An entire issue of Jeu was devoted to the play in 1987, and the text was published in 2005.51 Recognized as “un spectacle envoûtant” when it first opened in Quebec City in the fall of 1985 and heralded as “imagistic theatre at its best” when it played in Toronto for a second time in 1988, The Dragons’ Trilogy was declared a “masterpiece” by the Times of London, and praised for its “dazzling originality” and described as “exhilarating” by the New York Times.52 In 1989 Le Devoir proclaimed: “Les dragons enflamment le tout-Paris.”53 The production toured for seven years in more than thirty cities. Influential British theatre critic Irving Wardle stated that the show “triumphantly demolishes the idea of Canada’s cultural dependence on Europe and the United States,”54 confirming its importance in a new appraisal of Canadian theatre. The Dragons’ Trilogy “returned triumphant” as “the cornerstone” for the 2003 Festival de Théâtre des Amériques in Montreal.55 The Montreal performance alone generated no fewer than thirty reviews, including pieces in Le Monde and in Swedish and German newspapers.56 With the exception of “The White Dragon,” the remake of the 1985 production introduced few changes, though an entirely new cast, and notably the presence of two non-Quebec actors, added a new dimension. Having triumphed in Montreal, the production continued to draw rave reviews in Limoges, Berlin, Zagreb, and Madrid, and returned to Quebec in December 2003. Monique Giguère of Le Soleil sums up the tour as follows: “Le succès a un bail avec Robert Lepage. En 25 ans de carrière au théâtre, une pluie d’honneurs s’est abattue sur l’auteur-acteur-metteur en scène-dramaturge-cinéaste. Sacré prophète en son pays, Robert Lepage promène un nom mythique sur les scènes du monde entier. Ses œuvres ne vieillissent pas. Créée pour la première fois en 1985, La trilogie des dragons poursuit depuis 18 ans sa fabuleuse odyssée aux quatre coins du globe.”57 Before turning our attention to this production’s staging of contact and confrontation with the Other as represented, at least in part, by language, it is important that we emphasize the importance of The Dragons’ Trilogy in the history of both Lepage and Quebec theatre. Marie Gignac, one of the original performers, suggests in an article in which she discusses the “remake” of the production that La trilogie was also the cornerstone of the company: “La trilogie a

27761_Koustas.indd 65

2016-04-01 13:15:36

66

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

longtemps été un spectacle référence pour nous. C’est là qu’on a posé les bases de notre langage artistique. Toutes les thématiques que nous abordons, les univers, comme l’Orient, la quête d’identité, personnelle et collective, le rapport à l’autre, la quête de l’autre, le frottement avec les autres cultures, La trilogie contenait tout ça.”58 Furthermore, the trilogy was also a defining moment in Quebec theatre in general. In an article significantly subtitled “Je me souviens,” Voir critic Luc Boulanger reflects on the magical premiere performance and the production’s lasting impact: Lepage had discovered a new way to do and view theatre and assured his place on the world stage. Boulanger observes: “Un choc théâtral. Un moment de grâce. Un pur ravissement. Un envoûtement. Les superlatifs manquent. Tous ceux qui, comme moi, en juin 1987, ont vu dans le hangar humide et désaffecté du Vieux-Port de Montréal la première mondiale de l’intégrale de La trilogie des dragons en gardent un souvenir impérissable … Le spectacle du Théâtre Repère est emblématique de l’ouverture sur le monde de la dramaturgie québécoise … En montant un spectacle trilingue racontant la vie de trois générations de personnages dans les Chinatowns de Québec, Toronto et Vancouver, Robert Lepage sortait des cuisines brunes et des tavernes enfumées pour voyager de par le monde.”59 Marie-Hélène Falcon, the organizer of the Festival de Théâtre des Amériques, describes La trilogie des dragons as an “œuvre qui a changé la face du théâtre au Québec.”60 Indeed, the return of La trilogie des dragons was seen as an opportunity to reflect upon the evolution of Quebec theatre and society from a before-and-after perspective. According to Josée Chaboillez: “La trilogie des dragons permet également de constater le chemin parcouru, non seulement artistiquement, mais socialement et collectivement. En effet, jamais autant qu’aujourd’hui l’Asie et l’Orient tout entier, n’aura été si accessible et si convoité par les Occidentaux. L’étranger, le Chinois du Québec des années 20 et même son fils, le Torontois Mr. Lee des années 50, s’ils gardent leur spécificité et même leur mystère, n’ont jamais été aussi proches de nous. En refaisant le voyage des dragons vert, rouge et blanc, c’est aussi le trajet des 16 dernières années qui se dessine.”61 It was also a pivotal moment for Toronto theatre. Fully engaged in the the debate on the Multiculturalism Act (officially passed in 1988 but inserted in the Constitution in 1982), which cast the notion of the Other and the two solitudes in a new light, and, on the local

27761_Koustas.indd 66

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 67

scene, eager to promote world theatre, as demonstrated by the du Maurier World Stage in which The Dragons’ Trilogy was featured, Toronto enthusiastically welcomed “exciting, innovative theatre” that addressed these issues.62 As Conlogue observes: “The story has strictly speaking, no beginning or end. It is spoken mostly in English, French and Chinese, and according to the company, is an attempt to understand the spiritual life of Canada where people live in the clash and cacophony of different cultures, even as the value of their ancestral values recede in time … He uses an intellectual construct – three cultures in Canada – and laboriously creates a story out of them.”63 At a time when Quebec theatre in Toronto meant Tremblay in translation, Conlogue was quick to send the audience to Lepage to ­discover “the direction of the most exciting theatre in Quebec.”64 Lepage continued to earn triumphant accolades from the critics and support from the audiences when he and The Dragons’ Trilogy (in various forms from a three-hour to a six-hour and back to a three-hour version) returned in 1988. As significant as the critics’, and presumably the audience’s, appreciation of “the images … of a quality that reveals Robert Lepage … as a magician comparable with the young Peter Brook” was their understanding of this production as a “leaping across cultural frontiers” and its relevance to their own experience.65 Highlighting both aspects, Crew notes, “This three and a half hour kaleidoscope of the Canadian multicultural experience is imagistic theatre at its best.”66 If one critic commenting on the use of French lamented, “Ah, if only more French had been stuffed down my throat,” and another dismissed the language mix as a mere “Canuck Cavalcade,”67 still others, Crew among them, expressed their ease with it: “The use of three languages creates little problem; most of the scenes have emotional clarity and are sustained by a drive and an energy that sweeps you along.”68 Mira Friedlander, in particular, likened the play’s architecture and language mix to opera: “Lepage … works in a verbal medium, then layers his work with an operatic vocal orchestration. Single voices build to choral crescendos riding on top of piped-in music, sometimes growing to actual words to finish in undefined sound; it carries the emotional evocativeness of a well-structured aria. The operatic image is furthered by the use of three languages … So rich are the images accompanying the speeches that, like opera, understanding each and every word is immaterial. Somehow, it all makes inner sense.”69

27761_Koustas.indd 67

2016-04-01 13:15:36

68

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

It was this “inner sense” that not only made the production relevant in terms of the common reference points described by Patrick Lonergan in his work on the global stage, but also drew, and held, the Toronto public. This was an inner sense, as John Ralston Saul notes, that confirmed our experience.70 The intertwining of images, languages, history, and seemingly lived experience drew the audience to a space beyond language and cultural division and binary politics. In the words of Toronto critic Marc Czarnecki, “It weaves words, sound and images into a total experience that overcomes language barriers in a single, action-packed leap of the imagination.”71 It thus drew the city closer to its position on the world stage and to its goal of becoming a global, cultural capital. In The Dragons’ Trilogy, Quebec, Toronto, and Vancouver all appear equally exotic and equally local through the eyes and lives of the characters who find themselves there, creating a common ground. For Jeanne as a child, Quebec’s Chinatown is as unfamiliar as Vancouver is for Yukali, and Pierre’s French in Vancouver sounds as out of place as Wong’s Chinese in Quebec. The Other is no longer  clearly defined, and hence seems less threatening. The coexistence of languages, identities, and cultures becomes part of a shared Canadian experience. Linguistic, geopolitical, and cultural barriers, in a medium akin to opera, can be lived differently, and transgressed. Michel Bernatchez, the production manager, noted: “In different places different things seemed to please the audience. The show has many aspects that touch people and I say that with all the humility required.”72 In other words, this is reflexive, rather than the homogenous theatre as described by Lonergan;73 not theatre that is everywhere and everywhere the same but theatre whose reception is everywhere different. Lepage neither assumes nor seeks to address a monocultural audience, but relies on the power of intercultural theatre and on the interest and appreciation of culturally diverse audiences. Indeed, for Michel Tremblay, La trilogie opened his eyes to the international potential of Quebec theatre: “la révélation – les Américains diraient epiphany – fut pour moi totale et d’une importance capitale: je venais d’être propulsé au rang de citoyen du monde après m’être battu pour m’octroyer le droit d’être citoyen de mon propre pays.”74 While Lepage’s staging of the experience of the Other seemed both innovative and appropriate in the eighties, the legitimacy of assuming of the Other’s voice in an effort to represent, and indeed perhaps

27761_Koustas.indd 68

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 69

to appeal to, a global audience later came under scrutiny, as Fricker notes: “The global circulation of Lepage’s productions throws the ambiguity of these representations of otherness into particular focus. Because the difficulty in locating a stable subject position is central to contemporary understandings of individuality, his stories of characters searching for self-knowledge have considerable appeal among privileged Western audiences. But differing responses to his representations of ethnic otherness indicate the risk of assuming a unified discursive community where one no longer exists. This disparity of response brings home the dialectical relationship between the global and the local and underlines the crucial role that context plays in the reception of cultural productions.”75 Just as Rustom Bharucha attacks appropriation of Eastern theatre by Peter Brook and others as a “continuation of colonialism, a further exploitation of others,”76 Jennifer Harvie, in an article significantly entitled “Transnationalism, Orientalism and Cultural Tourism: La trilogie des Dragons and The Seven Streams of the River Ota,” denounces Lepage’s use of the East as “a vehicle for Western fantasies, denying the East’s own autonomy and self-determination.”77 She accuses Lepage of adopting a “tourist gaze” in a production that “engage[s] Orientalist East/West binary constructions that are probably disruptive.”78 Evidence from the play would suggest, however, that Lepage may have been keenly aware of the kitschy China clichés he was staging and, rather than promote them, sought to expose, exploit, or even explode them. As Conlogue observes: “Cultural values range from sentimentalized kitsch to profound philosophical differences, an idea seen in a delicate and extraordinary scene where old Wong remembers China. Blinds are drawn in the parking lot hut and shadow puppets of a sailing junk and a house are seen by candlelight. The images are kitsch – a Chinese junk, a house like a pagoda – but they are real to Wong, and they are fading. In the end, he burns the paper junk and the paper pagoda.”79 It is worth noting as well that the Asian characters, however much they may be stereotyped, are not cast in a negative light. Wong, the Chinese laundryman and opium dealer, is not held responsible for Crawford’s decline; the latter first appears as a somewhat dissolute and disoriented travelling shoe salesman who was not even aware that the store no longer existed. The geisha, while once again a stereotype, is nonetheless portrayed very much as a victim, first of the American soldier who

27761_Koustas.indd 69

2016-04-01 13:15:36

70

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

impregnates and abandons her, and then as a fatality of the bombing. Lee, Wong’s son, is an entirely admirable character who accepts his Caucasian pregnant bride and another man’s child and establishes himself and his family in a respectable retail business in Toronto. And it is Lee who objects to Stella’s institutionalization, insisting that she belongs with “her” family. Cultural stereotyping, particularly when québécois, non-Asian actors are asked to portray Chinese and Japanese characters, nevertheless remains problematic. Indeed, the 2003 version addresses, though perhaps does not entirely resolve, this problem by introducing non-Quebec actors of “authentic” origin: Crawford is played by Tony Guilfoyle, a Brit, and Yukali by Emily Shelton, who is of Japanese ancestry. In discussing the evolution of his role in this regard, Guilfoyle notes: “In the 1985 version, this guy was a romanticised ideal of an Englishman abroad. That’s fair enough if he’s an individual, but if he is a manifestation of colonialism, then you want to portray that. And our perceptions of colonial powers have changed. So now my character comes into it quite young and full of energy, falls in with opium dealers and, rather like a great empire, slips into decline.”80 In Fricker’s view, the extent to which cultural stereotyping and problematic (mis)representation of the Other are overcome by changes to the cast and text remains debatable. To her, the remake somewhat overcompensates for the clichéd images of the original production, and the changes merely highlight the issue: The point of contention here has always been to what extent the naiveté and objectification that central characters Jeanne and Françoise initially exhibit toward both the Chinese and English emigrants to their community is actually endorsed by the production itself … There is definite progress indicated, however, toward a more rounded and complex vision of the non-Québécois characters, underlined here by what appears to be conscious (and sometimes overbearing) overacting of the national clichés early on. In this context, the casting of one English and two [sic] Asian actors to play the foreign roles (the original cast were all white Quebecers) feels like a misstep: It makes literal what the production seems otherwise at great pains to point out are ­externalized, distant impressions of otherness.81

27761_Koustas.indd 70

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 71

Rather than undo the clichés, the use of genuinely English and Asian actors draws attention to them; the stereotypes are embedded in the text itself. It is important in our consideration of this issue to place the production in the context of the time. Robert Bellefeuille, who joined the team later, made the following observation after the performance at the National Arts Centre, then under Lepage’s direction, in 1995: “Dans toutes les villes où on joue, le public est toujours ému … En ce moment, l’Orient a beaucoup d’influence dans la vie des NordAméricains. On parle beaucoup de taoïsme, et on voit des gens faire du tai chi dans les parcs le matin. La trilogie, c’est l’Orient qui rencontre l’Occident, la réunion de Ying et de Yan. C’est ce qui fait que le spectacle est si riche.”82 Thus, while Lepage and his cast may indeed have been presenting their subjects through a tourist’s gaze, this was met, in part, by the audience, who perhaps shared similar everyday perceptions of the Orient but were nonetheless taken to a theatre and cultural space that transformed their perception. The Orient of the play was also a destination on the characters’ and audience’s inner journey as they met their perceptions, however distorted, of the Other while on a voyage of self-discovery. As Ex Machina’s notes suggest, the characters headed toward the imagined Orient of their own conception.83 The play was thus never intended to accurately represent Asia but rather the inner and imaginary journey that the characters and audience take to discover the Orient within themselves. Indeed, when discussing his subsequent Hiroshima (which was to become The Seven Streams of the River Ota), Lepage recounts seeing three thousand Japanese Elvis impersonators in Tokyo: “I was struck by the fact that they can’t be him [Elvis] so what they are doing in fact is creating something new. They’re not negating our [North American] culture, they’re eating it up and transforming it.”84 This differs radically from simply borrowing in order to appropriate. Lepage explains further: “In my Hiroshima project, we borrow from Japanese calligraphy, which is very exciting artistically. But if one of my actors wears a kimono, I want him to continue to be a Quebecker.”85 While they play Asian roles, the actors are not trying to convince themselves or the audience that they are “authentic.” They, and hence the audience, are conscious of their role and may be no more convincing than the Japanese Elvis imitators. This

27761_Koustas.indd 71

2016-04-01 13:15:36

72

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

perspective somewhat belies Michael Billington’s concern about the need or desire to “reconcile a separate culture identity with universal brotherhood.”86 Lepage is not aiming for reconciliation but rather for the reconsideration, and perhaps eventual transformation, of fixed notions of identity, including that of the Other. The actors do, however, bring to the fore “models” of Asianness and therefore stage archetypes of otherness that invite interrogation of one’s perceptions of the Other and hence of one’s own place in the identity equation. Lepage’s claim that he is “dramatizing cultures,” even though these may be Western perceptions of cultures rather than individuals,87 propels this questioning to a level beyond one’s own cultural, linguistic, and geopolitical space. Referring to Lepage’s return to Quebec and to his refusal in the 1990s of large, international projects, Conlogue notes that “the irony of his monastic retreat to his hometown, Quebec City … is that the work he is constructing is perhaps the most ‘international’ of our time.”88 It is interesting that the problem of the tourist gaze, highlighted as well in my earlier discussion of Circulations (see page 50), came to the fore primarily at the time of the remake of the trilogy, when immigrant dramaturges such as Wajdi Mouawad were beginning to make their own mark,89 For the Toronto audience of the eighties, however, Lepage created a theatre space that transcended or transgressed the linguistic, cultural, and provincial divide to which ongoing political debates over the 1985 Multiculturalism Act and the Meech Lake Accord of 1987, and contemporary theatre practices such as Tremblay in translation, had accustomed it.90 Furthermore, because of Lepage’s success on the international stage, Toronto audiences could claim him as “Canadian,” as many of the articles cited above suggest, while recognizing his Quebec roots: if he was chez lui, they were also chez eux in a theatre space that encompassed French, English, Toronto, Quebec, and beyond. The play’s evolution in Quebec from the 1980s to 2003 was paralleled by the development of immigrant theatre that gave new writers their own voices, transformed the theatre landscape,91 and hence called into question any “outside” representation of the Other. However, the Toronto production of the eighties caught the audience at a moment when the concept of the Other was as topical as it was confounding. The whole notion of a Canadian identity, and even of the two solitudes, was in question. Lepage’s representation, and perhaps even misrecognition, of the Other invited the audience into a theatre space

27761_Koustas.indd 72

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 73

that blurred distinctions and encouraged reflection. Positioned on the interface between languages, the roc found itself on both – or perhaps more accurately on all – sides of cultural, linguistic, and geopolitical divisions. Two other significant productions, Vinci and Tectonic Plates, both of which staged complex voyages of identity had in the meantime appeared in Toronto as well. In Vinci, a solo performance by Lepage, the meeting of languages and cultures, and the confrontation with the Other are also central: the title is a play on Caesar’s victorious boast, uttered as the cultural conqueror acquired new territories, and refers as well to the artist of the Mona Lisa. The main character, Philippe, travels through Europe, with stops in London, Paris, Cannes, and Florence, to cope with his anguish over the recent suicide of a dear friend. Focusing in part on the Mona Lisa (played by Lepage), the play centres on the role of the painting as an international cultural icon. Identities and languages – Quebec and continental French, Italian, and English – blend and clash, creating both comic and poignant scenes: a girl (played by Lepage) in a Paris Burger King discourses on the meaning of “Burgerkingness,” turns her face and becomes the Mona Lisa. The British tour guide’s condescending attitude toward his “little French-Canadian” clients differs substantially from the blind Italian guide’s ability to convey, through the generosity and sensitivity of his expression and gestures, the shape and feeling of a cathedral. While the former, who shares through translation a language with his interlocutors, fails to connect with his audience, the latter, who speaks Italian to a public that presumably does not, is able to engage in genuine communication. Thanks to the Italian guide’s deeply felt desire to reach his audience, the untranslated speech defies cultural and linguistic barriers and is the more successful. As in all of Lepage’s work, a geographical journey that takes the character beyond the limits of his or her own language and culture, and thus invites reflection on assumed notions of identity through direct confrontation with the Other, is central to this production. As noted in the previous chapter, for Lepage, it is through the voyage, the movement towards the Other, that one discovers what touches and motivates oneself.92 The first of Lepage’s solo performances in Toronto, Vinci introduced its audience to the tremendous depth and  breadth of Lepage’s talent as a performer and dramaturge.93

27761_Koustas.indd 73

2016-04-01 13:15:36

74

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Commenting on his solo productions, Lepage notes, “Le solo impose un choix entre trois modes de communication: le monologue intérieur, la conversation avec le public ou le dialogue avec une personne absente de la scène. Généralement, je préfère la troisième option parce qu’elle donne plus de liberté et permet d’intégrer les deux autres modes.”94 Relying primarily on the last two techniques, namely conversation with the audience or with someone off-stage, Lepage takes on the shape, persona, language, and even gender of characters ranging from the distraught photographer Philippe to the Mona Lisa, to the voyeur in a public shower in Florence – rendered old with the aid of shaving cream to depict a white beard – to the Italian and British tour guides. He leads the audience on an exploration of multiple, and permeable identities as languages and icons blend and collide, signalling both their interference and their interdependence. As the program states, Vinci is an artist, a village, and a victory boast, but here, above all, a voyage and a questioning: “Le Vinci qui vous est proposé ne se veut pas le portrait d’un peintre, mais plutôt une évocation sensible d’un voyage, d’un trajet, d’un questionnement tout simple.”95 Through his own meeting with and understanding of the characters he encounters along the way, all of whom are marked by otherness, the main character, Philippe, gradually comes to terms with himself; and through poignant and comical scenes such as that described by Conlogue, Lepage conveys the importance of art not as a diluted universal value that is everywhere the same, but rather, as an internationally understood point of reference: “Memorable characters. A girl in a Paris Burger King discourses like a French savant on the meaning of Burger Kingness satirizing philosophy. The ‘she’ – and this is still Lepage – suddenly throws her face in a certain way, and we can see that she is the Mona Lisa. An Italian intellectual, speaking Italian (with subtitles), tells us that art is a subtitle to life.”96 If Philippe, a self-acclaimed tourist, could legitimately be accused of employing the tourist gaze, which he shares with the audience, the use of the cultural icons of the Mona Lisa and Burger King brings the audience, as Conlogue observes, to an intercultural space where the kitsch and the sacred clash and combine – a space that belongs to no one. If the authenticity and sincerity of icons such as the Chinese junk and lanterns used in the Dragon’s Trilogy perhaps suggest Orientalism – although as Conlogue suggests, Lepage may well have been exploiting their kitsch value – the Mona Lisa and the

27761_Koustas.indd 74

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 75

Burger King logo are clearly being appropriated here and through comic effect are used to create a common ground where everyone, or no one, is a tourist. Lepage’s ridiculing of the British tourist guide and his attitude toward the French-Canadian tourists clearly has a political edge, but beyond that, he is mocking the model, whatever the nationality, of the haughty, know-it-all, and condescending guide; and this apolitical common ground is strengthened by his contrasting portrayal of the enormously sensitive and extraordinarily communicative Italian counterpart who, even without language, can explain art. If for Caesar veni, vidi, vici signalled the conquering of cultures, Lepage staged instead their meeting and “came and conquered” Toronto once again,97 with a production that took his audience outside the familiar language divide to the international, intercultural space of art and the artist, and moved the city closer toward its goal of achieving global cultural status. French, English, and Italian are all brought to bear. Lepage may have been accused of behaving “like a kid in a toy store gleefully playing with all sorts of gadgets and gizmos,” but he was also praised for the “magic” of the performance.98 Like that of Circulations, the set of Vinci is artfully pared down, featuring only a few props: a chair becomes a seat on a plane, a camping tent that is erected only after a comical struggle with clanging poles that chime with the background music, and a now-legendary tape measure used to mark out everything from the dimensions of a cathedral to Michael Jackson’s moonwalk. All are brought to life through Lepage’s passion and ingenuity. Once again relying on the Repère model, Lepage drew his inspiration from a material resource, here da Vinci’s sketch of the Virgin Mary and St Anne in London’s National Gallery.99 Images of da Vinci drawings, the Mona Lisa, the cathedral, and Big Ben are flashed onto a screen, to the accompaniment of a stunning musical score by Daniel Toussaint. Shadow and hand puppets extend Lepage’s reach as a solo performer. Discussing this production in an interview in Canadian Theatre Review, Lepage explains how he created the design: “I wanted to design a kind of environment I would like to play in … When I looked at the set, I understood that the lower part was heavy, related to the ground, and very Cartesian; and that the upper part was light, airy, suggesting the idea of flying. This set revealed itself to be a metaphor of the paradox within each artist. So the show developed itself about what is art and how does the artist create.”100

27761_Koustas.indd 75

2016-04-01 13:15:36

76

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

If this production appears technically unsophisticated in com­ parison with more recent works, its very simplicity demonstrates Lepage’s ability to transform an empty theatre space and simple objects into a rich tapestry of images that transport the audience well beyond the confines of the traditional box. This production also announced what was to follow: a move away from text-based theatre to imagistic productions with a global focus and itinerary. Liam Lacey, commenting on his conversation with Lepage, suggests that “the move toward a ‘global’ theatre where text becomes secondary to sounds and images may be one of Quebec’s most exciting contributions to theatre.”101 It also, as noted above, serendipitously coincided with Toronto’s quest for global theatre. Philippe, the bereaved québécois artist, discovers, through an experience with which many audience members could surely identify, that seeking solace through escape leads one back to oneself and hence to the real source of sorrow. The possibility that comfort and greater self-awareness may be found through confrontation with other languages and cultures, and through the power of artistic expression, which (paradoxically in this case) are all in fact within the character, once again took the Toronto audience on a poignant multilingual voyage of discovery beyond the traditional itinerary. The program observes: “Pourtant le protagoniste du spectacle n’est qu’un jeune photographe québécois. Son nom à lui ne porte pas le poids d’un mythe. Il s’appelle Philippe, simplement. Mais sa quête d’une certaine intégrité artistique devrait nous toucher autant que les angoisses d’un grand génie italien.”102 The audience could identify with Philippe’s grief while at the same time experiencing his ­difference and otherness, as well as the geographic and linguistic itinerary of his voyage. If Circulations, The Dragon’s Trilogy, and Vinci all focused on individuals’ quests for identity and belonging through confrontation with an- or the Other, Lepage’s next Toronto production, Tectonic Plates, as the title suggests, drew its inspiration from the far more extensive metaphor of seismic movement and collision of the continents. The central characters include: Kevin, an American tourist; Antoine, a deaf-mute; Madeleine, an artist; Constance, a drifter and heroin addict; and Jacques, a bilingual transvestite. In Tectonic Plates, they move, connect and separate like the geographical land masses alluded to by the title, their stories converging under the gaze

27761_Koustas.indd 76

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 77

of a psychiatrist who remains on stage. The play brings together characters from South America, Italy, Alaska, and Quebec who switch languages among French, English, Spanish, and Italian. Once again, confrontation with the Other and the interference of different languages is important, since the central narrative and the much more subtle subtext rely on their combining and colliding. As Shawn Huffman notes: “Communication is not immune to drift either. The dispersal of meaning, from its emission to the chance that it will be intercepted and correctly decoded, is also a major issue in Lepage’s play.”103 This drift is illustrated, for example, when Kevin, who is practising his hesitant French, tries to pick up Jennifer, Jacques’s drag identity. Thinking that Jacques is a woman, Kevin readily admits to being frustrated by “le sexe.” Only when he gives the example of “la café” do Jacques and the audience realize that he is referring to gender in language. His inability to recognize that Jennifer is a man and his subsequent disappointment are paralleled by his confusion between English and French words and meanings. Both the potential and the failure of language to allow for genuine communication are tragically illustrated in one of the final scenes. Thanks to a mutual friend, who recognized Jacques’s voice on the radio, Jacques’s former lover Antoine finds Jacques in New York. Antoine uses a method of “hearing” to kill Jacques. A deaf mute, Antoine places his hand on his interlocutor’s throat to “read” the vibrations of the vocal cords and thus is able to understand his words. His final conversation with Jacques ends when, using this same gesture, he strangles his erstwhile lover in love-torn despair. Language, in any form, fails the characters in their efforts to draw closer and, like the continents, they remain apart. Staged as part of the du Maurier World Stage Festival in June 1988, thus once again underlining Lepage’s role in Toronto’s global theatre, Tectonic Plates was initially conceived to include up to twenty “plates,” but only five were ready for the Toronto version. Subsequent performances in Montreal were cancelled at the last minute because the play was not ready. As Lepage’s colleague Michel Bernatchez reported: “Il y avait beaucoup d’éléments dans la version qui devrait être présentée à Montréal. Peut-être que la pièce aurait remporté du succès mais ce n’était pas ce que nous voulions faire. Ici, elle change chaque soir, elle n’est pas encore tout à fait prête mais elle a maintenant du bon potentiel.”104 For the most part though, the Toronto public welcomed this “masterful voyage through space,

27761_Koustas.indd 77

2016-04-01 13:15:36

78

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

time and human evolution,” even though it was a work in progress, and applauded the pairing of Lepage and celebrated set designer Michael Levine, a collaborative venture from two of Canada’s most impressive talents.105 Interestingly, Quebec critics were quick to announce that “le spectacle n’est pas prêt et doit être annulé,” although they admitted, only very reluctantly, that the play, and indeed Lepage, had a future, thus confirming the earlier reference to Toronto’s “very indulgent” reaction and Lepage’s feeling of being chez lui.106 Jean Beaunoyer, acknowledging, somewhat begrudgingly, Lepage’s success outside, and in spite of Quebec, wrote: “Il faudra bien reconnaître un jour, ici même au Québec, qu’il s’agit d’un événement de portée internationale, que notre théâtre éclate actuellement à la face du monde et que cette pièce [Les Plaques] est déjà attendue en Europe. En novembre, 90, on la présentera à Glasgow, c’est réglé. Par la suite c’est Londres, Paris et d’autres capitales.”107 While the play was criticized for being too fragmented,108 critics did recognize Lepage’s ability to at least temporarily align the plates through communication that transcends the language barrier. In Rick Groen’s analysis: “Here the symbols are  the main course and the narrative only an appetizing spice. Consequently [Lepage] uses the spoken word as a kind of musical counterpoint to the visual icons. The actors switch freely from English to French to Spanish to Italian, the different languages just another formidable barrier in our doomed quest for a universal grammar, a continental restoration.”109 However formidable the language barrier, it was clearly not enough to deter either the Toronto audience or the critics. Indeed, as in earlier productions, the switching of languages, while highlighting the potential tension caused by crossing the language divide, also took the audience to a space where that mix no longer prevented communication. As both Huffman and Groen note, the public, being positioned at the interface of languages, was asked to rely as well on the other languages of theatre, including the expressive power of the arts, as the play stages the displacement and the meeting of the “continents.” Huffman observes: “Tectonic Plates … charts drift in terms of people, the relationships they form, and their necessary link to what could be described as a sexual diaspora. Art is the major instrument through which drift is identified and tracked in this play. Visual art, music, and literature signal the affective displacement and span, if only temporarily, the separateness that divides

27761_Koustas.indd 78

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 79

the characters.”110 Indeed, at the end of the play, two grand pianos are pushed together to suggest the meeting of the continents and their inhabitants through the shared medium of the arts. Once again, the theatre space and props become metaphors that participate in the production’s thematic development, while at the same time expanding or reconfiguring the box space. The plot of Tectonic Plates takes place in Montreal, New York, and Venice, all islands surrounded by water (as if small continents), and a pool of water occupies the stage throughout much of the play. Huffman adds that the notion of being adrift between languages, between male and female sexuality (Jennifer/Jacques), between the past and the present (Constance is haunted by a previous incestuous relationship), and among the three cities is central to the play: “Tectonic Plates takes place in these cities and tells the story of drifting people and of the underlying currents that convey them to various places, forcing them to separate from the continents of people to which they were once joined and to carry out their individual quests.”111 As Wallace points out in his discussion of the production, here too it was the Repère technique that inspired the set: “Using a creative method developed by Lawrence Halprin of the San Francisco Dancers Workshop, Théâtre Repère creates its scenarios and scripts by a collective process heavily dependent on free association; in this process, concrete or physical objects such as the pool or globe … are used to stimulate the ideas, feelings, memories, and impressions that the company reworks as theatrical images and dramatic situations. Lepage, as artistic director of the company, usually directs its productions – though never in isolation from the group.”112 Water is central. In one particularly memorable scene, Jacques reenacts an encounter with Skadi, a Scottish goddess who “could split the continents in two with one blow of her sword”113 and who demands the spilling of the blood of a young man to render the earth fertile. The struggle takes place in the water, where Jacques is emasculated, his blood tinting the water around him and his symbolic neutering suggesting his struggle with his own sexuality. For Yves Jubinville, the pool of water becomes a sort of mise en abyme of theatre itself, metafictionally mirroring the process of theatrical representation on stage.114 Characters and props, such as portraits of Georges Sand and Chopin, are frequently reflected in the pool, creating distorted images. Furthermore, as the production was conceived

27761_Koustas.indd 79

2016-04-01 13:15:36

80

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

for theatre in the round, with spectators on raised scaffolding surrounding the stage and looking into it, the entire theatre space would have been reflected. The audience, therefore, must also set adrift its preconceived notions of theatre as representation as it sees its own reflection in the pool. Once again, Lepage transported the audience well beyond the fixed limits of the box. In spite of its success in Toronto, Lepage recognized later that Tectonic Plates was too ambitious in scope and theme, hence its cancellation in Montreal. He subsequently returned to a more local, Repère-based model. He realized, as Lonergan suggests, that a local story can have global meaning. In 1994, discussing his then-upcoming Seven Streams of the River Ota, Lepage commented on the need to remain local: “The question is how can I say ‘yes’ [to the offer of big projects] without being swallowed up? How can I say ‘no’ to these projects so that I can do Quebec?”115 Indeed, another break with the Repère model and the local proved unsuccessful. Echo, an adaptation of the prose poem A Nun’s Diary by Montreal anglophone writer Ann Diamond, was staged at Theatre Passe Muraille. This was a joint project with the then newly formed Montreal Theatre 1774,116 founded by Marianne Ackerman and Clare Schapiro and dedicated to bilingual theatre. As the founders expressed its mission: “The mandate of the company is to create projects in which anglo- and francophone artists can work together, and through their work, to explore both cultures, the perception of and their influence upon each other.”117 The script of Echo was prepared in both French and English, and thus represented a return to an earlier binary notion of French- and English-language theatre and the need for translation. As with Romeo and Juliette, Lepage saw Echo as an opportunity to bring Canada’s two largest theatre communities together; and, no doubt with a somewhat sidelong glance at Polygraph, which opened a few weeks later, he observed: “It [getting the two communities together] is like the Berlin Wall. And that hasn’t cracked.”118 Critics had little more to add. Crew’s review of Echo describes it as “a profound disappointment”: “Unlike Echo, the result [Polygraph] is a structured, disciplined and cohesive work of art.”119 Clearly, Lepage’s departure from the strategy of combining languages that he had used in earlier productions, to instead confirm their difference and independence in Echo, was not well received.

27761_Koustas.indd 80

2016-04-01 13:15:36



Lepage Meets the ROC 81

After Romeo and Juliette and Echo, Lepage never returned to the more conventional Bi and Bi version. He continued to be formed by and in conversation with the roc, but in ways that detoured the two-dimensional model, thereby taking himself, his theatre, and his Toronto audience to more nuanced, multifaceted theatre spaces and experiences. Lepage’s next acclaimed Toronto production was Polygraph, for which he and Marie Brassard received the 1991 Chalmers Canadian Play Award. In terms of languages used, theme, and theatricality, Polygraph represented a return to Lepage’s method of blurring rather than highlighting traditional boundaries. Commenting on this feature, he notes: “This is the Quebec personality. Of course Quebec is very European and French right now but it is also very American. The richness of our works is that blend. We are very much more midAtlantic than anybody else.”120 The play also represented a return to  the “piling up” of languages and images; according to Crew, “[Lepage] is pleased with the blend of styles it contains, unifying the linear storytelling approach favoured in anglophone cultures with the more metaphorical, piling-up-of images style preferred by other European cultures.”121 But Polygraph was a departure from Lepage’s usual format in that it was based on a lived experience. The dramaturge had been indirectly involved in a murder investigation, which included a polygraph test, and this, set against the background of world events such as the fall of the Berlin Wall, was the creative ground for the play. In Crew’s view, it was “the darkest thing [he] had ever written or staged.”122 Described as a “metaphysical detective story,”123 Polygraph was featured in the du Maurier Ltd. Habourfront Quay Works, from 20 February to 3 March 1990, and ran at the same time as the largely unsuccessful Echo. Lepage and Marie Brassard both wrote and starred in this “rich and provocative evening of imagistic theatre, acted and directed with passion and panache” in which, writes Crew, the “Quebec maestro was in top form.”124 Lepage plays a forensic doctor from East Germany who works in Montreal and who, as the Berlin Wall backdrop suggests, carries a great deal of cultural and emotional baggage. He befriends Lucie, an aspiring actress, who witnesses a murder and is then murdered, or perhaps not, in the presence of the doctor and her neighbour François, a waiter and student. François, a sadomasochist, was previously a suspect in another

27761_Koustas.indd 81

2016-04-01 13:15:37

82

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

murder case. Coincidentally, and somewhat obviously so, he was interrogated with a polygraph in the building where the doctor works, and the film for which Lucie is auditioning is based on his story. In short, there is a film about a real-life murder within a play that unfolds like a film, including cross-fades and slow motion reprises. The distinction between the film image of the murder and the real life event, between fiction and truth is blurred. Whereas the purpose of a polygraph is to distinguish fact from fiction, the play stages instead the possible manipulation, or at least misinterpretation of the truth. For example, Lucie is trying out for a part and must practise her scream of terror. This quickly segues into a scene in a subway when Lucie, still screaming, is being helped by the doctor. While it is initially unclear whether Lucie is really screaming or still acting, it is soon revealed that she had witnessed a suicide. The production is composed of twenty-five sequences that are introduced, as if in a film, clapperboard style. Dialogue, mime, dance, and music, and a score by Yves Chamberland and Pierre Brosseau combine to create seamless transitions as the “real” story of the murder and its film version begin to conflate. Mirrors are transformed into film screens, TV auditions become police interrogations, and floating skulls are contrasted with sex scenes. An autopsy scene, during which a doctor coolly describes a body scientifically sliced in two, segues into a description of the Berlin Wall by François, who studies political science. Both characters refer to dissection “right through the heart.”125 In his description of the Montreal production, the Globe and Mail’s Stephen Godfrey praises Lepage’s ability to reconfigure the theatre box and to challenge his audience through his inventive use of theatre space to stage this blurring of the boundaries between truth and fiction, and between theatre and the other arts: “Polygraph is never less than fascinating. Using dialogue, mime, dance, music and lighting as means of frustrating and then illuminating the linear, the narrative and the rational, it captures the greatness of what theatre – and only theatre – can do.”126 The background of the Berlin Wall is physically present in the form of a red brick wall that runs across the entire playing area and occasionally seeps blood. This production, like others by Lepage, involves the intersecting of languages (French, English, and German) and cultures, and the breaking down of walls that separate. If in earlier plays art spanned divisions, if only momentarily, here it is the lonely and isolated characters’ need for companionship and their

27761_Koustas.indd 82

2016-04-01 13:15:37



Lepage Meets the ROC 83

search for the “truth,” however ambivalent it may remain, that draws them together across traditional barriers – barriers that, like the wall, fail to keep people apart. In a story based on discovering the (physical) identity of both the victim and the murderer, identity once again plays a key role. If miscommunication and misinterpretation confound the murder investigation, the characters’ longing to step out of their “roles” as actress, waiter, and doctor pushes them to reach out to the Other and hence to rethink, if not refigure, their own identities. It becomes clear that the murder mystery is only a pretense for a much more personal and, simultaneously, much more universal story about relationships across, or at the interface, of languages, cultures and – particularly against the background of the wall – geopolitical space. As Conlogue observes, “In the guise of a murder mystery, Lepage manages once again to move without effort to the innermost chambers of human relationship and identity, and at the same time, to sketch the outlines of the human movements of our time.”127 While the productions discussed above do not obviously borrow theatre traditions and practices from other cultures, and hence do not firmly establish Lepage and Ex Machina in Gordon’s and Knowles’s category of intercultural theatre, they nonetheless bring to the fore the important role of the Other and of otherness in this theatre. Whereas the characters in Romeo and Juliette were securely camped in their mutually exclusive solitudes, those in Circulations, The Dragons’ Trilogy, Vinci, Tectonic Plates, and Polygraph play and interpret otherness and, through “playing one’s otherness” arrive, through a recognition akin to that described by Charles Taylor, at a better understanding of themselves while taking the audience on a similar journey. Furthermore, these plays introduced Toronto and the roc to an international theatre voice, to an international theatre perspective, and to Lepage’s potential to contribute to the city’s bid for a spot on the global stage. Commenting on the language mix, Lepage noted in 1989: “Even if we speak of seemingly unimportant things that only concern two little girls in a small place in Quebec [as in The Dragons’ Trilogy], using other languages to translate what they are saying or referring to implies that this is happening all over the world. It’s a way of universalizing small things that seem unimportant but are important.”128

27761_Koustas.indd 83

2016-04-01 13:15:37

84

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Sarah B. Hood, in her article on bilingual theatre in Canada, which included a discussion of Romeo and Juliette, remarks on the potential of bilingual theatre: “[It] can help bridge the gap between our two [roc and Quebec] theatre communities. Given the relatively small audience for theatre in this country, it is remarkable that we have developed almost entirely separate theatre worlds, French and English. For actors, writers, directors and their audiences, bilingual theatre may be one good way to share the ‘best of both worlds.’”129 It was not, however, by pursuing further work along the model of Romeo and Juliette that the best of both worlds was achieved but rather through Lepage’s multi- or interlingual and, eventually, transcultural theatre, which transcended and deracinated traditional notions of bilingualism so that he could indeed declare, during the staging of his next Toronto success, Needles and Opium: “Toronto, c’est à la fois chez moi et un pays étranger. Quoi de mieux? J’ai le meilleur des deux mondes.”130

27761_Koustas.indd 84

2016-04-01 13:15:37

3 The “Love Affair” Begins Needles and Opium, The Seven Streams of the River Ota, Elsinore, The Geometry of Miracles

We have seen how Lepage and his company transgressed linguistic and geopolitical barriers and staged the multicultural experience in their earlier productions. With Needles and Opium and subsequent productions during the late eighties and early nineties they went further, clearly establishing themselves as international performers on the world stage engaged in “performance as cultural exchange; [in] playing one’s otherness.”1 As in Vinci, Needles and Opium stages what had become and would continue as Lepage’s signature combination: a troubled artist undertakes a voyage that forces new levels of self-revelation and, through confrontation with an Other, raises questions about the role of artistic creativity. The obstacle-ridden trip, originally intended to provide solace through escape, thus becomes a perhaps somewhat painful voyage of personal and artistic self-discovery. As Michael Cronin notes, it is the obstacles that make the journey worthwhile. He discusses the significance of the standard postcard greeting, “Having a wonderful time! Wish you were here,” and concludes: “Happy holidays make for poor reading … Travellers’ tales gain in interest as they tell not of what went right but of what went terribly wrong … Without the obstacles, there is no consecration. It is the obstructions that give meaning to the journey and ensure that there is a story to tell at the journey’s end.”2 The blending of artistic, geographic, linguistic, and cultural trajectories and itineraries, and the confrontation with the concomitant obstacles, project these productions beyond the local. As the artist travels within and beyond himself, artistic creation acquires new

27761_Koustas.indd 85

2016-04-01 13:15:37

86

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

dimensions and begin to span time and history. The historical timelines of art, geographical routes, geopolitical lines or boundaries, and divisions between time zones overlap and intersect as the artist seeks his place and that of his art. As Josette Féral sees the process: “The artist, in his consciousness of himself and of the world, in his knowledge of memory and space, and in the necessary integrity which his own definition requires, becomes the very figure of authenticity as a moral ideal. His works and his art become the place and the means of exchange and dialogue, moving from the individual towards the universal.”3 If previous Lepage productions (with the notable exception of Vinci) found the artist very much in the North American context and continent, Needles and Opium pushes the characters and, perhaps even more significantly, the cultural references – and hence the exploration and overlapping of art and identity – much further; the production explores the interdependence of love, drugs, and art, and the art of the artists who are consumed by all three.4 The program notes read: “One night in 1949, on the plane bringing him back to France, Jean-Cocteau writes his Lettres aux Américains, in which fascination and disenchantment intertwine: he has just discovered New York where he presented his most recent feature film, L’Aigle à deux têtes. At the same time, Miles Davis is visting Paris for the first time, bringing bebop with him to the old continent. Parisian jazz fans are ecstatic. As the notes of ‘Je suis comme je suis’ linger in the air, Juliette Greco opens her arms to him.”5 Lepage distills the idea behind Needles and Opium: “[It] is about Davis, and Cocteau and their search for inspiration. And they look for it in dope, love and trappings and they’re often disappointed. But it’s this disappointment, this deception that is the actual inspiration.”6 It is worth recalling Lepage’s own devastating experience with drugs, which may have inspired this consideration of the costs of creative ecstasy. Robert, a lovesick québécois artist lodged in the Hôtel la Louisiane, a rundown hotel on Paris’s Left Bank, unsuccessfully attempts to phone his lover in New York, while images of Miles Davis, Jean Cocteau, Juliette Greco, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Erik Satie, all of whom had a connection with the room in which he is staying, haunt him and the theatre space. The juxtaposition clearly demonstrates Lepage’s earlier comment about the proximity of Quebec, French, and American cultures. He notes: “The richness of our works is that

27761_Koustas.indd 86

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 87

blend – we are very much more mid-Atlantic than anybody else.”7 Indeed, Robert frequently finds himself mid-Atlantic in simulated flight as he criss-crosses the ocean in the guise of Cocteau and Davis, both of whom found fame and fortune on opposite sides of the Atlantic. As a québécois tourist, however, he need go no further than his bathtub in order to “soak up” the other culture: “I always have the impression I am marinating myself in the sediment and dirt of all the great artists and intellectuals of the 1940’s and 50’s.”8 Just like Davis and Cocteau who, unbeknownst to themselves, more or less passed each other mid-flight between France and the United States, and who both returned from their trips transformed, Robert’s time and space travel plunges him into “the boundary-bending set of graphic meditations on love, heartbreak and pain”9 that brings him to the edge of the abyss. If the artist-travellers of earlier productions had a comparable inner voyage and awakening, it was arguably very much within the confines of their North American experience. Robert’s is a more authentic, international, and universal inner trajectory, as the influences he encounters are not the stereotypical images such as the Orient, the Mona Lisa, or New York, but rather the original music of Davis, Cocteau’s own Lettre aux Américains, Juliette Greco, and Davis’s lovers, shown in silhouette – all internationally recognized symbols of art and artists’ troubled lives. As in earlier productions as well, the set and staging of Needles and Opium contribute to the border and boundary crossing. Robert travels through space and time, and across languages and cultures – but all from within the confines of his seedy hotel room. His virtual travel is entirely effected by means of a set. One moment he is flying through the air with the use of a harness while lighting simulates propellers; the next moment plunges him into a spiral vortex that seems to suck him in behind the stage. A background of high-rise buildings flashing upward as he somersaults makes him seem to be in freefall, his potential death signifying the smashing of the meaning of things, the freefall of an entire generation, onto the sidewalk below. At another point, bits of plumbing rearrange themselves on a screen to become Davis’s trumpet, and a silhouetted hand plays them as Davis’s music washes through the theatre. Geoff Chapman underlines both the virtuosity and originality of the set and the impact of the production: “As the spare, penetrating beauty of Davis’ music fills the Gothic, operatic atmosphere, Lepage ranges through Robert’s dream worlds, sometimes suspended in a harness but seemingly

27761_Koustas.indd 87

2016-04-01 13:15:37

88

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

floating in the air with large fans metamorphosing into aircraft propellers, then suddenly, through backdrop fill, tumbling past Big Apple high-rises … There’s more here than optical trickery, purposeful improbability and mind games with previously unknown rules. This is multi-media theatre that’s never been seen before, daring and dramatic despite his calm delivery.”10 The ability of Robert, both the character and the dramaturge, to span physical and metaphysical distance is amplified by another technique that has become a Lepage trademark: the use of video. In one memorable scene, for example, Robert is silhouetted against a stage-height video of an addict (in his own image) injecting himself with a syringe. As Féral notes, video allows Lepage to project, both literally and figuratively, the notion of multiple, and sometimes ­conflicting and conflicted, identities: It is perhaps the recourse to video that most expresses this play on doubling. When the video is live, that is to say, when the intervention of video is direct and it records the characters already in action on the stage, it doubles them, it observes them, it becomes their mirror … It is the presence of the other and of the self, of the other within the self, that Lepage’s dramaturgy once again characterizes here. Furthermore, the fact that Lepage himself plays all the parts … allows this constitutive duality of the subject to metamorphose in a multiplicity of ways. The diversity of the characters reflects back on the diverse facets of a single individual with all the numerous ambiguities and paradoxes of human nature.11 As I have earlier remarked, this ability to play, and to play to, the notion of dual – if not multiple – identities was a factor that contributed to Lepage’s popularity in Toronto; his quest, and that of his characters, to find their identity discovered in the Toronto audience the proximate, significant Other in the dialogical equation of recognition described by Charles Taylor.12 However, Robert’s exploration of, and “marinating” in, the identity of the various previous occupants of the room once again blurs the distinction between the “us” and the “them.”13 While playing the québécois artist, Lepage demonstrates the interconnectedness of art and the artists and the multilayering of identity. He explains: “That [the hotel room in Paris] gave me the pretext to write this thing. It’s

27761_Koustas.indd 88

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 89

one thing to do a play about great people but if you want to move the audience you have to give them something to identify with. So I created this character who’s an alter ego of myself.”14 The Toronto audience could identify with and define itself against the “midAtlantic” québécois character who himself straddles, embodies, and projects North American and French icons and identities. Matt Wolf records Lepage’s characterization of the piece: “a triangle of Davis, Cocteau and my own little boring story, and that’s what I wanted to say: you don’t need to be a well-known artist to be connected to certain things in these great geniuses work. For a North-American Francophone like me, I’m asking, ‘Why am I doing art this way?’ It’s  important to see all these old European surrealist roots and newer things like jazz and black culture that’s actually embedded in everything.”15 Once again, communication in any language, either in  French or English or through any medium – Davis’s music or Cocteau’s writing – is compromised; Robert does not manage to connect with his lover through the Parisian telephone operator (who does not understand his Quebec French) just as the previous occupants of the room remained very solitary. If their art, like that of da Vinci, was in in fact a vehicle, it did not necessarily bring them closer to those they were trying to reach in their personal lives. As Jack Kirchhoff noted in his review, “The du Maurier World Stage theatre clearly wanted a hot ticket Canadian opener and it got one in Robert Lepage’s Needles and Opium.”16 This was a Canadian production for the world stage and audience that illustrated Lepage’s role in promoting Toronto as a global cultural capital. The world was indeed his stage,17 and Toronto, eager to promote its place on the international circuit, embraced this opportunity. Lepage was credited with having brought his “worldly view” to Harbourfront, and it was this production, which took the roc on a decidedly more complex exploration of otherness, that cemented his love affair with Toronto, “à la fois chez [lui] et un pays étranger.”18 Lepage was granted Ontario’s Chalmers Canadian Play Award for Needles and Opium. As Ray Conlogue notes in his review of the production, it was Lepage’s ability to stage this combination of the experience, and hence challenge, of the foreign with the comfort of the familiar that earned Lepage top billing in the World Festival: “a striking feature of Lepage’s theatre: It is filled with strange and exotic symbolism, but it always feels as casual and welcoming as a Sunday breakfast at the Golden Griddle.”19

27761_Koustas.indd 89

2016-04-01 13:15:37

90

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

While it would be inaccurate to qualify this production as truly intercultural theatre, however engaging the juxtaposition of the exotic and the hominess, Lepage nonetheless does rely on the audience’s recognition of internationally known icons, which, in the spirit of Patrick Lonergan’s comments on reflexive theatre, will be interpreted differently depending on the audience.20 Indeed, even if not all the icons are recognized, the play’s value as a portrait of the artist-traveller stranded in a liminal space and struggling to find his identity is not diminished. Although Needles and Opium does not draw on other theatre traditions to create genuinely intercultural theatre, as characterized by Robert Gordon21 and Ric Knowles, The Seven Streams of the River Ota, Ex Machina’s subsequent production, and one of its greatest successes in Toronto, does move the theatre and the audience in that direction. And The Seven Streams of the River Ota at the same time constituted an undisputed confirmation of Lepage’s foothold in Toronto and his role in advancing the city’s aspirations for global status. It was not without some irony and amazement that Robert Lévesque, the legendary theatre critic for Le Devoir, upon learning of Harbourfront’s decision to open the Today’s Japan festival with Lepage, remarked: “C’est officiel, la première nord-américaine du très ambitieux et très attendu spectacle de Robert Lepage sur le cinquantenaire d’Hiroshima aura lieu … à Toronto.”22 A subsequent article by Lévesque was sarcastically entitled “Hiroshima mon détour,”23 thereby questioning the locus of Lepage’s allegiance. The Seven Streams of the River Ota crosses linguistic, geographic, time, and historical zones as it stages three great calamities of the twentieth century over a period of fifty years: the bombing of Japan, the Holocaust, and the aids epidemic. Lepage explains: “I like pivotal moments, and a pivotal moment in our century is The Bomb. Before it, the world seemed to be solid; afterward, it was just a stage set that could be burned up and thrown away. And Hiroshima brought Japan out into the world. Its values are different from ours and in the next century those two world views will have their own struggle.”24 Variously set in Hiroshima immediately after the bombing, in modern Japan, in a New York rooming house in the 1960s, in a central European concentration camp during the Second World War, in contemporary Amsterdam, in Quebec, and elsewhere,25 the six-hour play stages the collision and combination of Eastern and

27761_Koustas.indd 90

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 91

Western cultures and languages. The title is in fact a metaphor for the seven parts of the play and for the city of Hiroshima itself, which is built on the seven streams of the river. It also evokes the seven branches of the menorah. The stories, like the streams, eventually flow together. Lepage summarizes the play: “It’s about seven characters who come from different parts of the world; if we go into their background, we’re bound to wind up in different parts of the world but the main location of each story is Hiroshima.”26 The Seven Streams opens in a house on the River Ota, with the meeting between Nozomi, a disfigured survivor of the Hiroshima bombing, and Luke O’Connor, an American g i photographer sent to Hiroshima to document the extent of the disaster. Despite stomping insensitively across the gravel and through the tranquility of Nozomi’s Zen garden, he is invited by her to photograph the damage, including her scarred back, which is not seen by the audience; the blindingly bright flash of his camera suggests the bomb’s glare. Augmented by actual footage, this opening scene invites the audience to reflect both on devastating encounters with the Other and on reconciliation; Luke and Nozomi have a child, Jeffrey (identified as Jeffrey 2) who eventually meets Luke’s American son, also named Jeffrey (identified as Jeffrey 1). ˇ Another stream of the play follows Jana Capek, a Czech Jew and Holocaust survivor who retreats to a Zen monastery in Japan. While in Theresienstadt, a Nazi concentration camp for artists, Jana had met Sarah, an opera singer, who took the eleven-year-old Jana under her wing, telling her the story of Madama Butterfly. Knowing what fate awaits her, Sarah commits suicide, leaving a daughter, Ada. In the 1950s and 1960s, Ada meets both Jeffrey 1, who works in New York as a photographer, and Jeffrey 2. They share a run-down rooming house with other down-and-out artists. Jeffrey 1 teaches Ada his art, and she in turn becomes a famous photographer.27 When in the 1990s Jeffrey 1 discovers that he is hiv positive, he and Ada, a Dutch citizen, marry so that he can benefit from the assisted suicide program. Jeffrey 2 marries Hanako, a blind Japanese translator, who meets Sophie, an actress in a Quebec theatre company commissioned to play a French farce by Feydeau as part of theatre festival in Hiroshima.28 The door-slamming, underwearexposing Feydeau play is comically reproduced when Sophie and the Canadian ambassador have a one-night stand during which Pierre is conceived. Hanako and Jeffrey 2 have a son, David. Jeffrey 2 inherits

27761_Koustas.indd 91

2016-04-01 13:15:37

92

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

his mother’s house in Hiroshima. Following an introduction from the Canadian ambassador, Hanako takes in a boarder from Quebec, Sophie’s son, Pierre Lamontagne (who some audience members may recall from The Dragons’ Trilogy), with whom she has a relationship in spite of their considerable age difference. There are about thirty characters, played by a cast of ten. The introduction to the print version encapsulates the convoluted storyline: “The Seven Streams of the River Ota makes Hiroshima a literal and metaphoric site for a theatrical journey through the last halfcentury. In The Seven Streams, Hiroshima is a mirror in which seeming opposites – East and West, tragedy and comedy, male and female, life and death – are revealed as reflections of the same reality.”29 As the characters and storyline criss-cross the Atlantic and Pacific, the dialogue switches back and forth among several languages; French, English, Japanese, Czech, and Polish are all spoken, and frequently without translation. The public therefore experiences two, if not more, languages simultaneously and, like the characters, finds itself at the interface. Indeed, translation is frequently subverted through the deliberate confusion of the source and target languages. For example, English and French surtitles, traditionally used to accommodate a target “foreign” audience, are used when Japanese is spoken on stage. English and French therefore appear to be the target, rather than source, languages, even though neither Lepage nor his company actually speaks Japanese. The confusion, interference, and clash of cultures and languages is aptly demonstrated in the following excerpt as Sophie, a québécois actress who finds herself disoriented and alienated in Osaka, attempts to explain her presence in Japan. She blames colonialism for her absurd position as a Quebec actress in a French play staged in Japan to represent Canada at the World’s Fair: “Mais qu’est-ce que vous voulez que ça me fasse! Feydeau, j’aime pas ça … Vous êtes diplomate vous? … Expliquez-moi donc ça qu’on fasse venir un metteur en scène de Montréal, pour nous apprendre à parler à la française dans une pièce française, et que c’est ça qui représente le Canada à l’exposition universelle d’Osaka!? Je vais vous le dire, c’est quoi, c’est parce qu’on est colonisé … Ça me donne envie de sacrer … tabarnac d’hostie de calice de saint-ciboire!”30 The absurdity of the cultural mix is highlighted by the staging as Sophie’s lines are translated simultaneously into English by a Japanese translator situated on stage who translates the string of swear words as “expletive.”31

27761_Koustas.indd 92

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 93

Indeed, Sophie’s sense of absurd displacement is mirrored in the production of the play itself; it is worth recalling that it was in Toronto that Quebecker Robert Lepage’s The Seven Streams of the River Ota premiered at the 1995 Today’s Japan Festival. In another version of The Seven Streams, the play performed by Sophie and company was The Marquis de Sade by the Japanese writer Yukio Mishima (rather than the Feydeau farce they staged in the 1995 Toronto production and which appears in the published version). The intermingling of stories, languages, and travel itineraries described above is reminiscent of Lepage’s earlier productions; one critic wryly commented, “All that’s missing from this memorable voyage is the frequent flyer points.”32 However, in The Seven Streams, it is the deliberate, carefully planned, and articulated integration of non–North American, non-European, and, in this case, Japanese, theatre traditions that brings Lepage and Ex Machina closer to the model of intercultural theatre described by Gordon, Lonergan, Knowles, and Patrice Pavis.33 In this case, Lepage himself made the first step. Before incorporating Japanese decor, dress, Butoh dancing, and Japanese puppets into this production, he and the company travelled to Tokyo and staged the play there. “We screened the whole show before a Japanese audience before we took it there [to Tokyo] out of fear that it might be misinterpreted. Japanese society is highly coded. There is a lot of protocol and the potential for mixed messages.”34 It is worth noting as well that Lepage’s and Ex Machina’s own travel and production itinerary had expanded considerably since the time of The Dragons’ Trilogy, created when they “had never been to China,” and now included numerous trips to Asia. In 1993, for example, he had directed a production of The Tempest in Tokyo. If, during his first visit, he commented that he had “l’impression de vivre dans un jeu de Nintendo,” in the course of subsequent visits his appreciation rapidly changed.35 As Rémy Charest explains: “Le Japon a-t-il autre chose à offrir au monde que des gadgets électro­ niques? Le célèbre metteur en scène y est allé, il a vu. Et fut conquis.”36 Lepage’s vision of Asia as a whole evolved considerably: “Quelques voyages plus tard, c’est une vision plus profonde qu’il a, la vision d’une culture à la fois raffinée et baroque, faite de transparence, et qui absorbe l’Occident plutôt que l’imiter.”37 Not only had Lepage and Ex Machina developed a greater understanding and appreciation of Asian culture as seen by North Americans but they had also

27761_Koustas.indd 93

2016-04-01 13:15:37

94

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

seen the role of North American culture in Japan. Lepage brought this enhanced understanding and appreciation to this production. The Japanese influence goes well beyond the storyline, language, sets, or wardrobe. Japanese consultants and Japanese co-producers gave advice on scenes about their country; without careful handling, for instance, the discussion of Hiroshima could have been offensive.38 Just as the seven streams of the River Ota flow under Hiroshima, a current of Japanese influence flows through the play. As Lepage notes: “A lot of the way the play is performed is Japanese. Close to Kabuki, the form, the way people enter, the way the dance suddenly appears.”39 Indeed, according to John Bemrose, the Asian influence seems to have been present in all of Lepage’s works, and extends here well beyond the East-meets-West thematic of The Dragons’ Trilogy: “There has always been a hint of Japan in Robert Lepage’s theatrical works. From their severely stylized beauty to their measured pacing, shows such as The Dragons’ Trilogy (1985) and Vinci (1986) are powerfully reminiscent of traditional Japanese theatre.”40 With The Seven Streams the Toronto audience was taken well beyond the comparatively comfortable space of a North American artisttraveller’s confrontation with the Other, as occurred in Circulations, Vinci, or Needles and Opium, or the Canadian multicultural zone of The Dragons’ Trilogy, to the unfamiliar network of symbols and signs that inspired Lepage.41 It is noteworthy that Sonoyo Nishika, a Japanese technician, was in charge of the lighting. Lepage commented on the importance of the combination of codes in Japanese theatre, their complexity, and their influence: “Pour le public occidental, il est difficile d’être confronté à une telle quantité de codes. Le buto, avec des troupes comme Sankai Juku, passe un peu mieux la rampe sur la scène internationale, vraisemblablement parce que le monde de la danse est plus ouvert à des vocabulaires différents et qu’il accepte un plus grand degré d’abstraction. Mais au théâtre, on ne connaît pas les codes et on apprécie mal les pièces. Intégrer des techniques différents – et donc des codes différents – de la vidéo, de la chanson, de la calligraphie chinoise, de l’opéra, comme dans Les Sept branches de la rivière Ota, c’est une influence japonaise très directe.”42 The magic and mystery of what was dubbed the “Lucky Seven” immediately won over Toronto audiences and sent the critics into superlatives.43 Suzanne Dansereau confirmed Toronto’s “histoire d’amour” with Lepage, and Kate Taylor, who begins her review by

27761_Koustas.indd 94

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 95

criticizing the work-in-progress model, “used as an excuse by an overextended artist for presenting half-finished material,” congratulated the company on “a spectacular vindication of the imagistic style and evolutionary philosophy of Quebec theatre director Robert Lepage.”44 Even though the Toronto production included only five streams, she concluded: “It is already a masterful theatrical debate between survival and surrender that testifies to the great creativeness of Lepage’s evolutionary and collaborative approach.” Other critics were similarly lavish with their praise: “Awesome Ota,” Jon Kaplan and Jill Lawless called it; the play “floods the senses,” John Coulbourn declared; and Bemrose joined the chorus with “Robert Lepage again displays his stage genius.”45 As significant as the critics’ and presumably the audiences’ willingness to embark on “Lepage’s luxury river cruise” was their ability to follow the “flood of breathtaking imagery and innovation” that exposed them both to the interference and conflict of languages and cultures and to their possible reconciliation.46 Luke’s unintentional violation of Nozomi’s sacred space and place by trampling through her Zen garden; Jeffrey 1’s battle with his homosexuality, and Jeffrey 2’s, with his mixed Japanese-American heritage; Sophie’s struggle with jetlag and disorientation; the translator’s difficulty with certain words;47 and even the Canadian ambassador’s wife’s disdain for Japanese food – all these elements emphasize the challenges or the obstacles of cultural, geographical, and linguistic displacement. Nevertheless, the production stresses primarily the opportunities for growth and reconciliation through the fluid, flexible, transformable nature of identity and the confrontation with the Other, however stressful this may initially be. Jana’s relocation to Hiroshima is indeed far less troubling than the import of a Canadian production of Feydeau, played by Quebec actors, to a Canadian festival in Hiroshima. Anton Wagner traces some memorable instances of identity transformations: “The fluidity of Lepage’s approach is evident in an early scene in which walking pedestrians, seen as shadows against a projected street-scene, suddenly become passengers on a train. Later, in the most entrancing of many stunning sequences, an image of the older Jana taking a photo of Pierre in a kimono becomes the younger Jana photographing Ada’s mother, which finally transforms into Jeffrey’s father, the original photographer, taking a photo of Jeffrey’s mother, the original owner of the kimono, before returning full circle.”48 Just as the separate characters, storylines, and languages

27761_Koustas.indd 95

2016-04-01 13:15:37

96

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

collide and blend, so the Japanese and North American theatrical codes, symbols, and meanings, initially in separate streams, flow together to create a breathtaking and profoundly moving “river of rebirth”49 through the use of visually stunning tableaux, seamless scene changes, and the creative use of video and film and music. Thanks to Carl Fillion’s superbly flexible set, “the transformations are both mysterious and shocking, and underline just how fluid individual identity really is.”50 As Wagner observes, the final scene, in which the kimono is passed from one character to another as their stories and identities intertwine, and they in turn wear the kimono in the same way that they “wear” their Japanese-ness, transforms the theatre box into an open, multidimensional space in which traditional gender, language, and geopolitical borders are blurred or fused.51 Just as in the first segment the panels of Nozomi’s house slide to reveal the interior, to become a train, to transform into a screen on which photographs of Nozomi’s wedding are projected, and to once again portray a train, the audience slides seamlessly across time, place, language, and culture as the scenes blend from one to the next. In one particularly moving scene, the young Jana, imprisoned in Terezin, is rehearsing with a French magician, a fellow prisoner, who measures her for a magic box from which she is to disappear by hiding behind a mirror in the box. Her innocent question, “Are all the people who disappeared hiding behind mirrors?” hauntingly foreshadows the next scene.52 She is hidden in this box, to “disappear” and avoid deportation. Like the kimono or the panels in Nozomi’s house, the box, a simple prop, becomes a metaphor for both imposed and deliberate disappearance; the box of the theatre is thus transformed into a dynamic, multidimensional space in which objects, places, characters, and their concomitant identities fuse and transform. If Sophie’s condemnation of the staging of a Feydeau farce by a Quebec company sent to represent Canada in Japan underscores the danger of importing cultural products wholesale without consideration of the target market or audience, Toronto’s staging of The Seven Streams of the River Ota demonstrates its confidence in Lepage’s ability to serve as a broker between the East and the West. Ex Machina was invited to open the Today’s Japan Festival, billed as the largest exhibition of contemporary Japanese arts and culture held in North America up until 1995. Hosting the festival clearly fed into Toronto’s plans to become – and to market itself as – a global

27761_Koustas.indd 96

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 97

cultural capital, and the choice of Lepage illustrates the city’s confidence in him to achieve this goal. The $6.5 million festival offered a mix of drama, dance, visual arts, architecture, literature, film, and public lectures mostly by Japanese artists. The Seven Streams of the River Ota and a contemporary opera entitled No No Miya, which was a dismal failure, were among the few Canadian (broadly writ to include Quebec) contributions. It is perhaps in this context that the play’s role is best understood, and accusations of orientalism and the Western gaze most accurately discussed. Jennifer Harvie, for instance, accuses Lepage of the type of orientalism described by Edward Said: orientalism as a strategy for “put[ting] the Westerner in a whole series of possible relationships with the Orient without ever losing him the upper hand.”53 If, however, Harvie accuses Lepage of providing “snap shots” based on “a fantasized, aestheticized past” of “a Japanese culture that it constructs or even fetishizes,” she also recognizes that both this play and The Dragons’ Trilogy “work to critique and intervene in that arrogance [of imagining transnational communication] and productively explore transnational connections.”54 James Reynolds raises comparable concerns: “Ota’s dramaturgy foregrounds and plays productively with the ontological condition of performance … suggesting its own form as an expression of the Buddhist view on impermanence … An audience familiar with the spiritual-aesthetic concepts that Ota translates may yet recognize their presence within the adaptation. But the relative invisibility of translated spiritual-aesthetic concepts when divorced from context, means that Ota risks producing only formal effects.”55 Reynolds claims that Lepage introduces a spiritual pedagogy in the play that, while it allows the play to be read differently in different contexts, thus facilitating travel, introduces a “didacticism alien to the spiritual-­ aesthetic concepts that the production explores.”56 Traditionally empty Zen spaces, for instance, are filled in, even crowded, with multiple narratives and characters and meanings. Thus Reynolds’s accusations are based more on what he sees as Lepage’s distortion, and hence exploitation, of the spiritual aesthetics that are supposed to underlie the play. While the arguments of Harvie and Reynolds are both compelling, it is important to recognize that Lepage and Ex Machina were here no more than in The Dragons’ Trilogy (which opened with the statement “I have never been to China”) claiming to represent the Orient or Japan. As the character Jana states in the first scene, the play is

27761_Koustas.indd 97

2016-04-01 13:15:37

98

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

about people’s interaction with Hiroshima, whatever their background: “The Seven Streams of the River Ota is about people from different parts of the world who came to Hiroshima and found themselves confronted with their own devastation and their own enlightenment. For if Hiroshima is a city of death and destruction, it is also a city of rebirth and survival.”57 Furthermore, as both Harvie in her discussion of transcultural connections and Reynolds in his study of the meta-communication of spiritual pedagogy demonstrate, this interpretation of the Orient, however baleful, nonetheless allowed the play to travel. Toronto was not the only venue for The Seven Streams of the River Ota or Les sept branches de la rivière Ota; the production opened in Edinburgh (a very early version was  panned) and travelled to France, Italy, Denmark, Barcelona, Switzerland, Germany, and of course Tokyo. In Toronto, however, it served to negotiate the intersection or interference of the Western and Eastern traditions, albeit from the perspective of the former, as it served as the Canadian content in a festival dedicated to Japan. Unlike the production of Feydeau, which Sophie qualified as yet another example of colonialism, The Seven Streams staged not the import or imposition of culture and language but rather the potential for interaction and hence enhancement. By staging the North American premiere of the play in this festival, Toronto confirmed not only its love affair with Lepage but his place chez eux, both as a representative of the other culture (Quebec) and as one of its own, capable of staging and promoting Toronto as globally engaged and culturally in tune – capable, like the Japanese, of both absorbing and appreciating a different culture without resorting to cheap imitation. This global direction and the need to integrate all the languages of theatre are reflected in Lepage’s comments on the play: “C’est la direction qui nous intéresse, la compagnie et moi, de plus en plus. Je crois que ça tient aussi au monde cn n dans lequel nous vivons, où chacun sait tout sur l’autre presque instantément. C’est un monde où les emprunts se multiplient, les rapports entre les cultures se développent de plus en plus. Forcément, on se dirige vers une voie de superposition, d’intégration.”58 The Seven Streams of the River Ota successfully avoided the pitfalls of Madama Butterfly, for example, with its inaccurate and clichéd portrayals of the Other from a Western perspective. Lepage instead invited the audience to accompany him on his own voyage to and from Japan and to encounter the obstacles en route. As one critic

27761_Koustas.indd 98

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 99

noted, “The distance an audience traverses in The Seven Streams of the River Ota is mighty hard to measure.”59 If The Seven Streams confirmed Toronto’s love affair with Lepage, his next production, Elsinore: Variations on Shakespeare’s Hamlet (Harbourfront Premiere Dance Theatre, 20–27 April 1996) tested the city’s fidelity. Lepage’s one-man Hamlet, in which he played all the roles, relied extensively on technology, primarily a large turntable disk that proved regrettably unreliable, earning for Ex Machina the nickname “Machina Imperfecta.”60 One performance was cancelled after the first fifteen minutes because of technical problems.61 Lepage excused this by quipping, “You can’t make a Hamlet without breaking eggs.”62 Performances in Edinburgh and Chicago were also cancelled for similar reasons. Pierre St Armand, the troupe’s production and technical manager at the time, described the device: “a platform, a big square grid that is raised and lowered, with screens on both sides for film and video projections … It’s a floating wall that is upright at the beginning … an aluminum frame, 14 by 16 feet. It creates a new environment – a revolving table and a rectangular space in the centre with a system controlled electronically. We worked with a lot of engineers.”63 Lepage’s third solo and second all-English performance in Toronto was eagerly anticipated. Christopher Winsor, responding to expressed concerns about box-office success, exclaimed six months before the opening, “A new one man show from Lepage diving financially? Not ’til Birnam Wood comes to Dunsinane.”64 The Globe and Mail’s Kate Taylor, having seen the play in Montreal, was equally enthusiastic: “If the text of Hamlet died from exhaustion long ago, many traditional stagings of the play are simply exercises in wreath laying. But let there be no exaggerated claims about the miracles that this Elseneur [the French language title], for all of its brilliant innovation, can perform. Lepage has not revived the corpse but rather dances with huge exuberance on its grave.”65 Somewhat prophetically, Sid Adilman, also a fan, announced, “This is theatre in which images, often generated by computer, are more important than or at least as important as words.”66 The one-week run at Harbourfront was sold out well in advance. As Lepage himself noted, he took considerable liberty with the text: “It’s a very personal version of Hamlet. Of course, it’s Shakespeare’s script, but I’ve cut it everywhere and re-pasted it and done lots of

27761_Koustas.indd 99

2016-04-01 13:15:37

100

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

crazy things. People will recognize the story … but I’ve only kept what I wanted to say with it. It’s a way of like gluing or pasting pieces together to try to write it yourself.”67 It was notably not Lepage’s first experience with this text nor the first time he had reworked it. When playing René in Denys Arcand’s 1989 film Jesus of Montreal, his character insists on including a version of Hamlet’s soliloquy as a condition for taking part in an updated version of the mystery play. The lines from “die: to sleep” to “fly to others that we know not of” are spoken by one of the disciples after the crucifixion and before the resurrection. René/Robert remarks that he will never be cast as Hamlet.68 St Armand described the show as an “adventure of the computer … a kind of rock and roll show for the theatre”69 that relied on visual effects that allowed Lepage to play Ophelia, the King, the Queen, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Laertes, a steward, and the gravedigger – and also to converse with others. This dependence on special effects and on the audience’s knowledge of the text led Lepage to sacrifice the language. Chapman praised “Lepage’s thrilling imagination,” and declared the show a “curtain-raiser for 21st century theatre” but nonetheless remarked that “Lepage speaks the text indifferently, the great soliloquies are not great, the muffled overdubbing of voices seemed pointless.”70 Robert Cushman, while describing the play as “dazzling,” also commented on the text, noting that Lepage “lost it.” Cushman suggested that, by taking on all the roles and relegating the text to second place in a technically dazzling production that was not, however, problem-free, Lepage was “spreading himself too thin.”71 London critics described the production as “a cold array of theatrical effects.”72 Kate Taylor, in a subsequent review, makes a similar point and underlines as well the differences between the critical response in Quebec and in Toronto, suggesting once again Toronto’s greater tolerance for Lepage: “Elsinore [the English language title], the one-man Hamlet that Lepage performed at World Stage, is all show. Filled with dozens of delightful magic tricks that allow Lepage to play all the roles in the Shakespearean tragedy, it fails to reveal any clear idea of why Hamlet should be a solo act. That has led critics to complain that Elsinore is all form and no content, but paradoxically Quebec reviewers have been the least forgiving on that score. Entranced by the visual trickery, English critics have noted the problem but given Lepage good reviews … Some Quebec critics, perhaps tiring of Lepage’s showmanship, have

27761_Koustas.indd 100

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 101

preferred to see the glass as half-empty, and complained of the show’s coldness and narcissism.”73 Although the elaborate set created occasionally insurmountable technical problems, it nonetheless reinforced Lepage’s title as “the king of the computer castle” capable of producing some memorable transformative moments.74 In one scene, a darkly clad Hamlet, surrounded by white mesh, stands upright to then become Ophelia clothed in a lace dress, with Hamlet’s legs still visible, thus demonstrating Lepage’s point about the characters all being in Hamlet’s mind.75 A confrontation between Hamlet and the King is staged through the use of the spinning table, on which sit a chalice and crown. When the crown and cup are directly in front of Lepage, he is playing the king. He spins around and these royal symbols face him at the other end of the table as Lepage becomes Hamlet. Sword fights and other confrontations are staged using mirrors. The line “What a piece of work is man” is cleverly staged with large projections of Eadweard Muybridge’s serial photograph of a naked man running and Leonardo da Vinci’s drawing of the human body inside a circle and square. While Elsinore did not engage the audience in travel across cultures and languages as in earlier productions, it nonetheless invited the audience to explore the blurring of the traditional boundaries among characters. The critical response suggests, however, that Lepage’s obsession with the box, and its possible transformations had led him to dangerously neglect the toy. Two years later, while confirming Lepage’s overall success in Toronto, Stéphane Baillargeon commented on Elsinore’s poor reception: “Il y a deux ans, Elsinore, son adaptation techno solo de Hamlet avait été mal accueilli, un des rares échecs de ce côté-ci du roc.” In fact, Baillargeon described Lepage as “le chouchou du World Stage.”76According to critics outside Quebec, and we can assume audiences as well, downplaying or poorly playing the text in favour of a technically dazzling spectacle that did not always come together indeed constituted a “misstep.”77 It is significant, too, that Elsinore represented a significant departure from Lepage’s tried and true formula; namely, an original account of a troubled artist struggling with a loss, trying to find him/ herself, and coping with an identity crisis while undertaking a voyage of self-discovery to unfamiliar linguistic, cultural, and geographical territory. This play, As Lepage himself claimed, was based on a collage version of the original Shakespeare and takes place entirely

27761_Koustas.indd 101

2016-04-01 13:15:37

102

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

in the solo character’s mind: “Hamlet’s head is a place called Elsinore where all the characters live.”78 Lepage had, therefore, “turned away from political matters to explore an inner or domestic landscape.”79 As he notes, coming from a background in which Hamlet did not feature so prominently, he sought to explore and re-invent it: “In French-speaking Canada, Hamlet is something you’ve seen on tv Friday night at 11 pm with Laurence Olivier … I’m really performing it as if it’s not new as written. There’s also the paradox that there’s something about the discovery of this text that I’m trying to hold there … There’s no universal Hamlet. I think it’s been written to grow, be organic and change with the times when it’s performed.”80 None of the critics hint at the effect of Lepage’s departure from the previously successful formula of productions such as Ota that spanned time periods, languages, cultures, and geopolitical borders, and raised issues of political relevance, to an entirely “cerebral” interpretation of an English classic by someone who was less familiar with it than were many of the audience members. The negative reaction, however, may have been related to this shift in focus. Moreover, Lepage simply could not deliver on a text on which delivery was indeed everything; the audience, well acquainted with both the play and the reputations and performances of previous Hamlets (including Laurence Olivier, John Gielgud, Richard Burton, and Simon Russell Beale), were not sufficiently seduced by the dazzling magic of the staging to forgive the clumsiness of the performance. For the roc, this was merely another in a long line-up of Hamlets, many produced by world-renowned directors-auteurs such as William Poel, Konstantin Stanislavsky, Heiner Müller, and Richard Eyre. Robert Wilson, Peter Brook, and Charles Marowitz had taken an equally creative approach to the text, notably the latter’s Hamomlet (1972). In addition, by shying away from the play’s political overtones, as he describes below, and staging an introspective Hamlet, Lepage chose to deny himself his previous status as a privileged Other from the other solitude: “To do a one-man show allows you to explore in depth certain themes and completely avoid others. So of course there is no political aspect … But things like incest and schizophrenia become extremely incarnated in the fact that you are alone, that you get to play all the characters. When I do Ophelia, there’s a bit of Hamlet speaking, there’s a bit of Gertrude, and there’s an advantage to do that.”81 While the performance and the technical failings were

27761_Koustas.indd 102

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 103

both blamed for the production’s negative reception, it is also possible that the staging of an English classic with an emphasis on incest and schizophrenia did not fit into the imaginative space that the Toronto audience had reserved for Lepage and which he had created for himself. Thus, while Elsinore provided ample headspace for Lepage to “other himself,” it did not afford him the opportunity to engage the issues of language, identity, or nation that had won over audiences and critics in previous productions. Absent was the pulsation between familiarity and otherness that had become his market niche. Furthermore, with a remake of Shakespeare, he was not contributing to the global cultural city model that was among Toronto’s priorities; departure from the global focus yielded negative results. In sum, he was the roc’s creative genius when he played the exoticized Québécois in intercultural productions but merely a poor mimic of the dominant culture when he played Shakespeare82 in a technically troubled anglocentric remake that challenged, and relied too heavily on, his reputation as the “Inspector Gadget of theatre.” Although disappointed with Elsinore, the Toronto audience had not lost confidence in Quebec’s “miracles worker.”83 The Geometry of Miracles, one of “several hot shows” at the du Maurier World Stage Festival (16–20 April 1998), “the latest chapter in Lepage’s 13-year affair with the city” and further affirmation of his perceived contribution to the city’s goals, was sold out months in advance.84 Lepage chose the festival for the premiere performance of the production, which, unlike other plays that had toured before arriving in the Queen City, had been staged previously only in Ex Machina headquarters. According to one Quebec critic, half of the Montreal cultural press was in Toronto for the premiere, keenly aware of the fact that “Lepage est plus présent dans la ville reine que dans la cité du maire Bourque.”85 Pat Donnelly of the Montreal Gazette unabashedly commented, “Ask Robert Lepage why he chose Toronto to launch his latest epic, The Geometry of Miracles, and he’ll tell you it’s because he gets the visitor’s treatment here.”86 The production was covered extensively by the Quebec press. In The Geometry of Miracles, which loosely follows the life of architect Frank Lloyd Wright, the father of organic architecture, and his relationship both with his wife, Olgivanna, and (vicariously) with her spiritual guru G.I. Gurdjieff, founder of the Institute for Harmonious Development near Paris, as well as Wright’s relationship

27761_Koustas.indd 103

2016-04-01 13:15:37

104

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

with his students, the audience is once again taken on a cultural journey that defies time and geographic and linguistic barriers. The play covers roughly thirty years but is told in flashbacks as Olgivanna tries to convince her son-in-law to exhume Wright’s body for cremation so that their ashes can be scattered together. Different and seemingly disparate languages, cultures, and stories once again clash, coincide, and combine as the story moves from Russia, to Paris, to Wisconsin, and to the Arizona desert, while the language switches back and forth among English, French, Serbo-Croat, and Russian. Surtitles are provided only occasionally, thus forcing the audience from time to time to experience two languages simultaneously or, when titles are not used, to rely on the play’s other languages: dance, in the form of tai-chi–like movements taught by Gurdjieff, is used extensively, and seems as uprooted in the Arizona desert as Olgivanna’s Serbo-Croat. About half of the ten-member cast are in fact dancers. As in Circulations, Vinci, Tectonic Plates, The Dragons’ Trilogy, Polygraph, Needles and Opium and The Seven Streams of the River Ota, the audience experiences a language mix and must remain on the interface. Lepage similarly returns to sweeping, ambitious, imaginative sets and staging reminiscent of these earlier performances. Peter Marks of the New York Times observed: “Geometry of Miracles … is the hugely ambitious Mr. Lepage’s latest big canvas experiment in bringing a complex visual esthetic to the world of ideas. The 3-hour-and-45 minute work … is another instalment in what one might call Cirque de Lepage, a veritable three-ring circus of images and effects that could only have been assembled in hallucinations if not in Ex Machina’s workshops.”87 Ornate set pieces include, for example, a giant revolving eye to depict memory, a tent magically drawn out of the desert, backdrops of Wright’s drawings and Lascaux cave paintings, and a giant sandbox to represent the desert, onto which real showers fall. Multipurpose drafting tables, folding chairs, and other instruments of the trade are among the few props: a table becomes an automobile and Lenin’s tomb, and the chairs become a train that transports the audience across continents as well as back in time. A huge angled backdrop transforms the desert into a lush forest. Images on screens are also used to convey Wright’s philosophy that a building should seem to rise from its surrounding environment. Janice Kennedy adds an interesting point: “Lepage and his large technical team succeed best,

27761_Koustas.indd 104

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 105

somewhat oxymoronically, in their recreation of the natural world, an appropriate achievement for a work about a man who revered nature and who defined organic architecture.”88 As Lepage explains, however, “the challenge was to do a show about architecture with no buildings, a show about Frank Lloyd Wright’s spiritual legacy as well.”89 The market crash of 1929 is stunningly portrayed by the fading voices of stockbrokers who march nude across the desert. The car crash that kills Olgivanna’s daughter is brilliantly staged in slow clips. A Johnson Wax executive tap dances his dictation from a table top, and Wright’s students try to demonstrate the principle and beauty of a windowless building by balancing plates on wine glasses. Once again, the audience is swept across time, space, and languages by sets and staging that dazzle as they draw the audience in – but also, regrettably, distract. For the Toronto audience, these signature box-reconfiguring Lepage moments overwhelmed a weak text, and the contemporary maxim that “less is more” was blatantly ignored. New York critic Peter Marks, like his Toronto counterparts, acknowledged the “miracle” but nonetheless recognized the problems. Early in its development as a work in progress, he observed that the production “drifts off in so many tangents that it tends to lose its sense of direction, like a tourist who wanders off the main road for a bit of sightseeing one too many times.”90 Chapman similarly damned the production with faint praise: “The loose, rambling structure of the piece, which concludes in bizarre fashion and by then seems to have incorporated every new idea Lepage has had since The River Ota sagas … nonetheless does not wreck its eminently watchable quality and the time goes by.”91 Coulbourn observed that “the geometry [was] askew in a rambling work that [was] still very much a work in progress.”92 Kennedy concluded that the beautifully staged exercise, which brings together Mr Johnson of Johnson’s Wax, one of Wright’s clients, Lenin and Stalin, stockbrokers, and members of Wright’s Taliesin Fellowship (including a Quebecker), never “quite delivers,” as Frank Lloyd Wright remains “buried under the weight of theatrics.”93 In an article entitled “Cold Geometry a Rickety Structure of Abstract Ideas,” Kate Taylor compares The Geometry of Miracles to Lepage’s previous success and, while recognizing his innovative use of language, comments on his failure to successfully incorporate it here:

27761_Koustas.indd 105

2016-04-01 13:15:37

106

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Increasingly, Lepage explores both multidisciplinary performance and exaggerated naturalism, writing scenes in whatever language they would normally occur, scripting resolutely unpoetic dialogue and, at times, delivering whole passages in real time. The multilingual River Ota powerfully vindicated that ambitious philosophy with a death-bed scene in which the leaden pace and banal dialogue created a subtle but exquisite sense of tragedy and elements like an operatic aria were seamlessly integrated into the main drama. This time, an international cast, heavy with credits in dance and laden with various accents rarely delivers a performance that is more than passable. With the English script spoken badly, the abstract speeches never achieve poetry and the minimalist dialogue never achieves naturalism.94 It is clear from these reviews, however, that the play’s lukewarm reception was due not to its language or cultural mix. Indeed, as Taylor suggests, the audience expected and welcomed this. It was rather the production’s rough edges that drew criticism. Miracles suffered critically not, as one might have presumed a decade earlier, because of the Toronto audience’s unfamiliarity with Lepage’s multicultural, multifaceted theatre, but because it seemed unfinished. Lepage remained acknowledged as being capable of further expanding the horizons of Canadian and Quebec theatre and audiences, and was among the few to successfully do so. Discussing productions by other artists who introduced foreign languages through subtitles or other technics, Wagner underscores that Lepage was the only dramaturge able to capture Toronto audiences with theatre in languages other than English. He notes, “The reality is that audiences, for all of Toronto’s multi-cultural hue, haven’t exactly flocked to foreign language productions – the popularity of Lepage’s multilingual efforts notwithstanding.”95 It was indeed just prior to the opening of this show that Lepage praised Torontonians “indulgence” with shows in which things sometimes go askew.96 Indeed, Wagner ends his article with a summary of Lepage’s “historic ties to  Harbourfront” and to Toronto, his “creative home away from home.”97 It is in the light of the negative reviews earned by Elsinore and The Geometry of Miracles that Lepage’s next Toronto production, The Far Side of the Moon, takes on particular significance. Cushman

27761_Koustas.indd 106

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 107

greeted the production with approval: “After his most recent productions – the clever but pointless one-man Hamlet and dismally ragged Geometry of Necessity [sic] (the Frank Lloyd Wright one), we were praying for Lepage’s return to form. Our prayers have been answered and then some.”98 If, as suggested above, Lepage’s return to form perhaps entailed staging more finished and less ragged and technologically troubled productions, it may also have meant his remaining within his market niche, the staging of familiar otherness; there had been nothing of either Lepage’s or his audience’s two-sided feeling of being both at home and away from home in either Elsinore or Miracles. Neither production offered the opportunity for recognition or misrecognition of the Other or the dialogue or confrontation with the Other that had figured prominently in earlier productions. Furthermore, if the themes of Hiroshima, the Holocaust, and aids resonated with a wide community, Wright’s story was decidedly less familiar and, therefore, less relevant. Elsinore and Miracles did not invite a reflection on identity, language, and nation that, as was becoming more evident, was a key ingredient in Lepage’s success. If the question of personal identity did arise in these productions, as with Hamlet’s struggle with his sexuality, the context was too far removed to cement a firm enough connection with the audience; Hamlet’s struggles were internal. When Marianne Ackerman suggests that Lepage, “the darling of 21st century Toronto,” is “Quebec’s master of borderless art,” the Quebec and Toronto factors remain important elements in the equation even in the absence of any explicit message about identity politics.99 As Féral suggests, it is perhaps the unconscious recognition of the values and constructions of identity that makes the plays relevant. For the roc audience, a rewriting of Hamlet and a retelling, however imaginative, of Frank Lloyd Wright’s life, particularly his relationship with his wife, would have little to say about their own concept of identity and its relationship to that of the Quebec artist. While Lepage did in The Geometry of Miracles to some extent retain the previously successful blending of stories, languages, and cultures, in The Far Side of the Moon he resolutely returns to the more convincing and arguably more relevant formula of the Quebec artist on a voyage of self-discovery and healing. The Far Side of the Moon finds Philippe lost in space. A failed, or at least failing, academic based in Quebec City, Philippe tries to explain in his doctoral thesis, in philosophical terms, the need for the moon landing; his

27761_Koustas.indd 107

2016-04-01 13:15:37

108

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

thesis “attempts to illustrate that Man’s interest in space travel is motivated not by curiosity but by narcissism.”100 At the same time, Philippe is preparing a video destined for space aliens in which he  explains life on earth. Haunted by his mother’s suicide101 and tormented by his enormously successful, totally fatuous brother, Philippe searches for contact with an Other beyond the confines of the planet. His frustration with being earthbound is aptly staged when the door of the washing machine in a laundromat becomes the porthole of a space capsule into which he gleefully embarks. The title of the play invokes Philippe’s obsession both with the moon and with his relationship with his brother, André. It was long thought, entirely narcissistically, that the moon was merely a reflection of the earth; the discovery of its far, and dark, side revealed as much about the heavenly body as it did about those gazing upon it. In the play, each brother sees his reflection in his brother’s face, even though they are very different, perhaps even representing two halves of one whole – mirror images, or opposing sides. The difference between the two brothers is aptly illustrated when the ironing board that Philippe has been using to prepare his late mother’s clothes for a charity donation morphs into his brother’s exercise machine; André, a stylish metrosexual, is entirely absorbed with his own appearance while his brother is coping with the practicalities of their mother’s death. Lepage, playing Philippe, explains their relationship in the prologue directed to the audience: “Until the invention of the telescope and the first observations of Galileo, people thought the moon was a gigantic mirror … much later, in the 20th century … the world was stunned to discover that the moon had a second visage … this evening’s performance tells the story of the competition between two brothers each discovering in the face of the other a mirror image of his own vanity and disfigurement.”102 While language and its potential incomprehensibility do not play as central a role in this solo performance, travel, clashes with the Other, and the sentiment of finding oneself adrift between cultural and temporal zones remain key elements; Philippe’s unsuccessful thesis studies the differences between the American and Soviet space programs, but his meetings with an eminent Russian scientist are ruined by scheduling problems due to time zone differences. While the otherworldliness of the storyline might suggest the contrary, this production is firmly anchored in the Canadian/Quebec context. Comparing this to Lepage’s two previous productions, Mira

27761_Koustas.indd 108

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 109

Friedlander writes: “Unlike much of Lepage’s previous work, The Far Side of the Moon has considerable humor. The jokes are often Canadian in context, even cheekily referring to the French/English issue. This is worth noting because with his penchant for addressing large themes, Lepage has often sacrificed the specific for the universal. This time the hugeness of this particular canvas does not overwhelm and gives the story immediacy and impact. As usual, this World Stage production will develop and some of the loose ends will no doubt be tied up. In the meantime, it seems that Lepage’s flight in space has brought him down to earth.”103 It is significant that in the Toronto version of this one-man show, Lepage speaks entirely in English. However, as he points out, this by no means compromises either its fundamental Quebeckness or its internationalism: “I’m an internationalist too. I spend a lot of time in English Canada. I’m very much aware of the English Canadian culture and I respect it a lot … I’ve always been a great believer that you can work in any language and still have a Quebec soul.”104 While there is no direct suggestion that the two halves of a whole, or mirror images, refer to English Canada and Quebec, the question of duality, of their being rival players in a larger game, is nonetheless central. Such dualities recur in the play. As an example, in the race to the moon the American astronaut seeks to navigate through the stars to a fixed point, whereas the Russian cosmonaut is a poetic explorer of the infinite cosmos. The brothers’ difference, resemblance, and rivalry are equally important. As Philippe expounds to the barman, “a cosmonaut sounds like someone who’s inspired and an astronaut sounds like someone who’s … very well-funded.”105 Furthermore, as Ludovic Fouquet and Féral have both observed,106 the staging of doubling can be interpreted as a representation of the dual belonging already mentioned – Toronto is Lepage’s home away from home. The jokes on the French and English highlight this. When André, the weather forecaster, disparagingly announces, “they are sending us all their bad weather again,” the clouds are clearly coming to Quebec from the direction of the United States and English Canada.107 In keeping with his earlier works, Lepage’s vision in The Far Side of the Moon also inescapably invites reflection on the notion of the Other. This theme is suggested particularly by the title of Dierdre Dolan’s interview with the dramaturge, “Drawing on the French Side of the Brain.” Fricker too notes in her discussion of this production that Lepage “communicates an understanding of narcissism

27761_Koustas.indd 109

2016-04-01 13:15:37

110

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

generally in keeping with that of Lacanian psychology; it is the attempt to see oneself in the other.”108 Fricker posits, in fact, that Philippe and André represent Quebec’s dual identity: the province’s loyalty to its French, European roots and its inevitable attachment to America: “Arguably, the production could be read as a commentary on the two sides of Québec’s identity, via the differences between the brothers. Philippe is a homebody who has never traveled outside the province/nation, and telemarkets for a Québec newspaper Le Soleil. He is therefore associated with the European, Francophone traditional aspects of québécois culture. André is more Anglicised, or, perhaps, globalised; he works for a global conglomerate based in the U.S. (the Weather Channel) … These attitudes and affiliations associate André with Québec’s americanité, that part of its culture that embraces its presence on the North American continent.”109 The Philippe/André distinction, then, would clearly resonate with the roc audience and recalls Lepage’s own claim that his family was a metaphor for Canada.110 The “French side of the brain,” represented by Philippe, is confronted with and challenged by the wider North American vision and identity. When Philippe disparagingly refers to the difference between the liquor laws in Ontario and Quebec, he recalls standard stereotypes. Having had too much to drink, he challenges the bartender’s last call: “Ben là, minuit et demi, last call … Je veux ben prendre des grandes gorgées pour donner une petite chance au staff mais bon … Je veux dire, Montréal, est-il encore au Québec, ou bien si, à cause des fusions, c’est déménagé en Ontario?”111 In spite of its apparent relevance, the play, while sold out well in  advance, received only mixed reviews. While critics remained impressed with Lepage’s clever staging, some were critical of the script. Robert Crew described it as “shallow and banal.”112 Kate Taylor, while zooming in on the duality discussed above, nonetheless found the play “a dry and bloodless piece of theatre.”113 Cushman, however, praised it for “the wittiest script in ages” and the “sly and superlative” staging.114 Coulbourn acknowledged “Lepage’s Giant Leap of Genius”115 while also commenting on the playwright’s longstanding relationship with Toronto and his ability to force the audience to rethink its relationship with the Other or others: “As usual, Robert Lepage had a few surprises up his sleeve when he pulled into the Première Dance Theatre last night for what has become a regular visit to du Maurier World Stage … Like the shows before it, Far Side blends Lepage’s fascination with contemporary stage electronics

27761_Koustas.indd 110

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 111

– video, television, rear-projected movies and mechanized set pieces – with a theatrical vision that forces the audience to look at the world around us from new perspectives.”116 If technology took over in both Elsinore and The Geometry of Miracles, it worked here, as Coulbourn suggests, with the trope and direction of the play. Friedlander makes a similar point, emphasizing the synergy between the technology and the theatrical vision: “For many years, Quebec’s Robert Lepage has been a regular fixture at the du Maurier World Stage, Toronto’s biennial festival of international theatre. But his last two offerings – the 1996 one-man adaptation of ‘Hamlet’ called ‘Elsinore’ and ‘The Geometry of Miracles’ in 1998 – were disappointments. Both were underdeveloped and had textual and technical problems. Happily, ‘The Far Side of the Moon’ is different. There is a cohesion and symmetry to the piece as well as a humanity that supersedes the gimmickry that has sometimes come to be associated with Lepage. Which is not to say that there aren’t many special effects. But this time they are integral to the action.”117 In reference to Lepage’s ongoing presence on the World Stage, the critics pointed to Lepage’s contribution to Toronto’s goal of becoming a global cultural city. Not only did Lepage force the audience to look at the world from different perspectives but he helped earn Toronto theatre the attention of the world. While in the previous two Toronto productions the text seemed to be superimposed on the images, in The Far Side, the role of the text is to set up the image. The death of the mother’s goldfish, the last living thing she left, is staged by a huge globe becoming an aquarium, the memory being figuratively brought down to earth, poignantly suggesting the “earthly” significance of even this minor event. The globe also serves as the backdrop for André’s weather broadcast. André owes his successful career to describing weather on earth and is confident in the conclusiveness of earthbound meteorology, but Philippe, in contrast, attempts to earn professional recognition by explaining the need to escape earth’s pull. In the final scene, Lepage is floating in the zero gravity zone with one hand reaching back to earth. As noted above, the washing machine and the ironing board, which also become a stretcher and a scooter, are elevated to the status of metaphor and integrated into the storytelling. The set is built around the laundromat, a long, grey, sliding wall that moves to reveal Philippe’s apartment, the interior of a plane, a hotel bar, the inside of an elevator, and an ominously empty lecture hall. The

27761_Koustas.indd 111

2016-04-01 13:15:37

112

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

transformation of the space is as dazzling as it is coherent. Videos of archival footage of Sputnik, astronaut puppets, and projections of Lepage himself pictured as an astronaut in grainy footage contribute to this staging of the relationship between humanity and technology, which takes the audience on a voyage beyond the confines of the traditional theatre space. In Elsinore Lepage’s focus seemed too limited, and in Geometry too scattered. The Far Side of the Moon seems to have brought him, paradoxically, more back to the earth, to his creative home away from home in which confrontation with the Other, even within oneself, recurs as a central theme. André Brassard, in his introduction to The Far Side, underscores the universal importance of difference and similarity, as staged through Philippe and André, and as experienced by Lepage and his roc audience: “Mais il témoigne néanmoins d’une pensée, d’une quête, d’une tentative de comprendre l’Humanité, sa place dans l’Univers, son rapport avec ses semblables, parfois si différents. Je crois que la seule chose qui nous soit commune, à nous tous, c’est justement la différence.”118 It was not until 2009 that Lepage returned to Toronto in an original production, this time with Lipsynch. In the fifteen years between the staging of Needles and Opium and The Far Side of the Moon, he had established Ex Machina as a regular presence on the du Maurier World Stage, and even his missteps did not shatter audiences’ confidence in this ability to “stretch the theatre world,” as acknowledged by his inclusion, along with thirteen others, including fellow Quebecker Guy Laliberté (founder of Cirque du Soleil), in World Leaders: A Festival of Creative Genius held at Harbourfront in October 2001.119 Lepage was recognized among world leaders as Quebec’s creative genius and “a renaissance man – author, director, designer, media-mixing artist and actor … one of the major creative forces in the world.”120 These accolades demonstrated not only Toronto’s appreciation of his work but also its acknowledgement of his importance on the world stage. Wagner had acknowledged Quebec theatre’s global status as early as 1990, already emphasizing its ability to break down all boundaries.121 Ex Machina productions from Needles (1994) to The Far Side of the Moon (2000) may not have met all the criteria established by Gordon or Knowles for genuinely intercultural theatre, in that none involved the direct involvement of other theatre companies.122 They did, however, address

27761_Koustas.indd 112

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The “Love Affair” Begins 113

performance as cultural exchange and encourage their actors to play their otherness. Ota in particular incorporated the integration of foreign theatre traditions, as did Elsinore. If The Far Side of the Moon was more stay-at-home, it nonetheless plunged the main character, and hence the audience, into an alien landscape in which language, disorientation, and unfamiliarity leave him stranded, struggling beyond familiar time, linguistic, and geopolitical zones. As significantly, these productions established Lepage and Ex Machina as major players on the globalized world stage, and thereby positioned Toronto on that same stage. Like other global theatre, as  defined by Lonergan, these productions travelled the world, addressed social changes brought about by globalization (the cultural tourism in Needles and Ota, the academic exchange in Far Side, the universality of cultural icons in Elsinore, the emphasis on Frank Lloyd Wright’s world culture), focused on visual spectacle rather than on text, and challenged traditional notions of belonging, nationhood, and linguistic, cultural, and geopolitical borders. But Toronto was more than merely another stop on a global itinerary. If the city had become Lepage’s creative home away from home, it was because his theatre and his audiences all found opportunities for recognition, for affirmation, and even for the contestation of Canadian and Quebec identities as these were, like theatre itself, challenged through globalization. As Georg Gadamer notes, “self-understanding always comes through understanding something other than the self, and includes the unity and integrity of the other.”123 Lepage and the roc were also motivated by the desire to “go global” as the Toronto theatre community sought to expand its horizons, through, for instance, the creation of the World Stage itself. Lepage and Ex Machina toured the globe with theatre that, however universally inspired and travelled, was not universally the same. For the Toronto audience, Lepage and his theatre, while firmly identified as québécois, nonetheless “came out of this place, out of our experience.”124

27761_Koustas.indd 113

2016-04-01 13:15:37

4 The World Leader on the Toronto Stage The Far Side of the Moon, Lipsynch, Eonnagata, The Andersen Project, The Blue Dragon

After The Far Side of the Moon in 2000, Lepage did not return to Toronto until 2009, with Lipsynch. While this nine-year gap would perhaps suggest that the love affair was waning, it is important to emphasize that Toronto in the interim maintained a sustained, if longdistance, relationship with Lepage and also that the playwright was otherwise occupied during those years, particularly on the festival circuit.1 Indeed, his return with four plays in rapid succession – Lipsynch in 2009, The Andersen Project and Eonnagata in 2010, and The Blue Dragon in 2012, as well as The Nightingale and Other Short Fables (2009) and Totem (2010) with Cirque du Soleil – demonstrates a solid long-term relationship with the Toronto audience. Lepage’s return to Toronto in the fall of 2009 was greeted with wild enthusiasm.2 Toronto critics continued to cover Lepage despite his absence; from Kate Taylor’s positive review of Zulu Time (Quebec City, 2000) to articles on the remake of The Dragons’ Trilogy, the 2003 Montreal restaging of Lepage’s production of the 1980s. The Montreal res­ taging of the Bartok and Schoenberg operas, Bluebeard’s Castle and Erwartung, directed by Lepage on commission from Toronto’s Canadian Opera Company, merited critical attention. The opening of KÀ, Lepage’s joint project with Cirque du Soleil in Las Vegas, was covered by both the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail.3 The Busker’s Opera (Montreal, 2004) was also covered by Toronto critics, though much maligned because of its potentially racist slurs;4 and The Andersen Project (Vancouver, 2006), was favourably reviewed5 before later coming to Toronto. The Globe and Mail’s coverage demonstrated Toronto’s sustained interest in Lepage’s work, announcing

27761_Koustas.indd 114

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 115

his return to the Festival TransAmériques in Montreal in June 2007 enthusiastically reviewing both the much-anticipated Lipsynch and Lepage’s version of the Berlioz opera La damnation de Faust (the Metropolitan Opera in New York, 2008), and celebrating his return with The Andersen Project, Eonnagata, and The Blue Dragon.6 His production of Wagner’s The Ring at the Met in the 2010–11 and 2011–12 seasons, as well as Totem, his collaborative project with Cirque du Soleil, received much critical attention. In the meantime, Lepage had also been recognized in 2002 by Maclean’s as one of Canada’s most influential Canadians.7 As mentioned, all of Lepage’s globe-trotting projects occupied him away from Toronto until 2009. His collaborative works with Cirque du Soleil and the Met kept him and his company outside English Canada, as did the production of other operas that never toured North America, such as 1984 by Lorin Maazel (Covent Garden, 2005), and Stravinsky’s The Rake’s Progress (Brussels, 2007). Other original productions simply didn’t last. Zulu Time was first staged in Zurich in 1999, where it earned very negative reviews. It was scheduled to represent Quebec in Quebec– New York 2001, a festival to be held in part at the World Trade Center in September 2001. Structured around scenes based on the international alphabet used in aviation (from Alpha to Zulu), the production focused on the anonymity, alienation, loneliness – and even the violence – experienced in airports, including the planting of a bomb. The crew and cast were on site when the events of 9/11 occurred, rendering the staging impossible, the subject matter offlimits, and the subsequent financial losses considerable.8 It has not been staged since. The remake of the The Dragons’ Trilogy was staged only in Quebec City and Montreal in North America. The Busker’s Opera, first staged in Montreal in 2004, was, as noted above, reviewed negatively in Toronto, and has never been produced there. It is worth noting as well that the du Maurier World Stage, Lepage’s venue in Toronto, maintained its condensed, fifteen-day festival time frame until 2007. In that year World Stage, thus renamed, expanded the tight festival time frame to showcase productions from January to June, and partnered with Luminato, the newly founded non-profit Toronto festival. In this context, Lipsynch, which had opened in a shorter, six-hour version in Newcastle, UK, in 2007, was brought to Toronto in the summer of 2009 for the North American première of

27761_Koustas.indd 115

2016-04-01 13:15:37

116

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

the nine-hour version.9 “Born out of the cultural and creative energy of the city of Toronto,”10 Luminato, founded in 2007, had an explicit aim to place Toronto on the global theatre/festival circuit: “The Luminato Festival embraces all fields of creativity and encourages cross-disciplinary collaboration and creation among leading artists and inspired thinkers of all kinds to transform Toronto, create a culture that is accessible to all people and impact Canadian and global arts.”11 The inclusion of Lepage in the line-up of the second year of the festival confirms Toronto’s recognition of his capacity to contribute to its aspirations of promoting urban globalism and to achieving status as a world-renowned theatre city. As I have proposed elsewhere, however,12 Lepage’s and Luminato’s role in the “festivalization” of Toronto merits consideration on the basis of Sylvain Schryburt’s work on the festival circuit, and as discussed in relation to The Andersen Project. Billing itself as “one of the preeminent arts festivals in North America, having commissioned over 66 new works of art, and featured 7,500 artists from 40  countries” by 2015,13 Luminato and its participants are, arguably, players in “a community of shared aesthetic concerns”14 rather than participants in theatre rooted in genuine global exchange. Indeed, Luminato was not without its detractors. Participants in the vibrant and burgeoning independent theatre scene objected to the supersized, global commercial spectacle epitomized by Luminato and in which Lepage seemingly became a willing player.15 However debatable the authenticity of the truly intercultural theatre experience offered by the festival circuit – and this is indeed questioned in The Andersen Project – Luminato makes a significant contribution to Toronto’s “creative city project”16 and to the city’s self-positioning as a global cultural capital. Furthermore, Lipsynch, however close its affiliation with Luminato and the festival circuit, centres on the overarching, globally recognizable metaphor of the human voice and its concomitant link to identity, culture, and nation; cultural conflict and intercultural exchange, rather than cultural commodification, are central to the production. This, and Lepage’s collaboration with other internationally based theatre practitioners and traditions, suggests that the dramaturge was a genuinely intercultural artist and not merely an exoticizing producer of festival-worthy material. Toronto critics went so far as to credit Lepage with the creation of a masterwork and with combining “in one tale all that is exceptional in live theatre.”17

27761_Koustas.indd 116

2016-04-01 13:15:37



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 117

In the theatre program for the Newcastle production of Lipsynch, Lepage introduces his thinking about the voice: “We often confuse voice, speech and language, but those are indeed three very distinct and totally different things. Lipsynch is about the specific signification of all three and their interaction in modern human expression … The voice is an internal machine that finds its ultimate expression outside of the body, but in order to examine it and try to understand it properly one needs to pull away from the visual stimuli for a while and go where the voice is ‘seated.’”18 It is worth recalling here that Lepage’s own upbringing in a bilingual household frequently entailed the cacophonic and even confrontational mix of languages. His emphasis on language, its distinction from voice and speech, and its importance in personal and collective identity are mirrored in the critical response to this production. Described as an “ensemble vocal,” Lipsynch was credited with having offered “une sublime mosaïque de personnages aux langues diverses, mais traversée par une même fragilité.”19 Lepage himself also states that the voice is “the dna of the soul, the unexplainable source of our being,” and that “il n’y avait rien de plus visuel que la voix.”20 Montreal critic Claudia Larochelle similarly emphasizes the links between language, identity, and voice, noting that “la voix humaine porte l’inscription de nos origines, sa parole dicte la voie qu’on suit pour trouver notre propre langue.”21 Hervé Guay of Le Devoir, also commenting on the play’s connections between voice, language, and origin or identity, writes, ‘‘Lepage aborde dans Lipsynch l’univers de la voix, son pouvoir affectif, ses possibilités d’expression et de transformation de même que ses liens avec l’identité et les origines.”22 Like all Lepage productions, Lipsynch relies on the interference and interconnection among languages and cultures: “a theatrical extravaganza of nine stories, magically interweaving continents and lifetimes in a search for origins, voice and identity,” as described by the Northern Stage billing.23 The work insists on the recognition of different languages and their contributions to individual and collective identity and heritage. While the challenges and rewards of the multicultural and multilingual experience form the central trope of Lipsynch, Lepage overtly defies and exploits conventional notions of dubbing, voice-over, sur- and subtitling, and translation, as well as their assumed role in overcoming language difference and the barriers associated with the multicultural experience. A close look at Lepage’s creative and

27761_Koustas.indd 117

2016-04-01 13:15:37

118

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

provocative use of traditional technical means of supplying voice from an ideological and transcultural perspective shows that he isolates, mismatches, reconfigures, and even subverts standard screen translation techniques, in order to reveal their interdependence and their relationship to voice, language, culture, and identity. He also stages the potential for miscommunication associated with these processes. Lepage thus challenges preconceived notions, suggested by the trend toward globalization, that the passage from one language to another can be smooth and obstacle-free, and questions the possibility of an entirely harmonious co-existence of languages and cultures, as portrayed in film and theatre productions in which dubbing and subtitling appear problem-free and totally reliable. In Lipsynch, the rough underside of the supposedly seamless transition from one language, community, culture, or voice, and hence identity, to another is exposed. Like Lepage’s other productions, Lipsynch takes spectators on a multilingual, multicultural journey. It qualifies as genuinely global theatre as defined by Lonergan both because of the langage mix and because of the issues it addresses: namely, human rights, asylum seeking, tourism, and the circulation of foreign capital. Nine stories link characters from Spain, Central America, Germany, Quebec, and England, and propose a series of alternative destinies in which language and identity remain in flux. Crucial to the superimposed stories, however, is their reliance on modern techniques of (super) imposing voice. Characters who initially meet while dubbing a film about a German Jewish musician collide with various others: with Stephen Hawking, whose computer-generated voice is a haunting reminder of both his genius and his handicap; with a Latin American victim of the sexploitation trade whose tragic story of absence of voice, and hence of agency, is told through an interpreter; and with others for whom the (in)ability to find and assume a voice, in both real and abstract terms, determines their destiny. As Toronto critic Alvaro Pascual-Leone noted: Over the last few decades, Lepage has won international acclaim for his ability to reinvent the stage using technology and to entrance audiences with visual wizardry. In some ways, Lipsynch is a departure for him. In this play, which is his newest work, it is the human voice that assumes centre stage. Elemental to identity, emotion and communication, the voice becomes an effective but

27761_Koustas.indd 118

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 119

unexpected site of violence, loss and redemption. For over nine hours, voices sing opera, scream heavy metal, improvise jazz and even cry for a mother’s milk. Voices are transmitted and transformed through telephone, radio and dubbing, faked through lipsynching and acting, and programmed through computers. Through recordings, the dead speak again, and in one extraordinary episode, the imaginary voices that invade a woman’s mind are represented in the chaos of an impenetrable snowstorm.24 First performed as a rehearsal before an invited audience at Ex Machina headquarters in Quebec in October 2006, Lipsynch premiered in Newcastle in February 2007. The production was then highlighted as one of the major events at the Montreal Festival TransAmériques in May–June 2007. (The name of the festival, which represents the “transculturel, transdisciplinaire, transfrontalier”25 nature of the performances, corresponds well to Lepage’s multi­ cultural, multimedia, multinational productions.) As in all Lepage productions, the piece was performed as a work-in-progress and changed throughout its journey across borders and time zones. The original six-hour version with seven stories expanded in the London performance in September 2008 to nine hours and nine stories. And then it came to Toronto. The storyline, albeit convoluted, is helpful for understanding how the geographic and temporal shifts of the various stories translate into the language, and hence the voice and speech displacements and cultural collisions that are the force of the production. Lipsynch revolves around nine main characters: Ada, Jeremy, Thomas, Sebastian, Tony, Marie, Maria, Lupe, and Sarah. Ada, an opera singer, is born in Vienna and educated in North America, but based in London; she adopts a son, Jeremy. His mother, Lupe, was a Latin American sex-trade worker who died on a plane while trying to flee with her son to Canada from Germany, where she had been lured believing that she was to become a mother’s helper. The play opens hauntingly with the universally understood cry of an abandoned baby in distress, to which Ada, a fellow passenger, responds. This is the child, later named Jeremy, whom she seeks out through the German and airport authorities and later adopts. As a young adult, Jeremy is frustrated with his mother’s efforts to turn him into a singer and uncomfortable with her new partner, Thomas, so he heads to the United States and works in the film industry, attempting to find his creative voice. Several years later,

27761_Koustas.indd 119

2016-04-01 13:15:38

120

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Jeremy shoots a film involving a curious array of international actors from France, Spain, and Germany; the film focuses on a relationship between an aspiring singer and her German Jewish voice coach during the Second World War. Jeremy becomes involved with the main actress, Maria, who later has a child with the German actor. Thomas, Ada’s partner, is a neurosurgeon based in London who operates on Marie, a Quebec singer and actress suffering from a brain tumour. Following the operation, Marie is left temporarily aphasic. The Toronto version includes a segment about Marie’s sister, a schizophrenic haunted by voices. Sebastian, a technician in a recording studio, is called back to Spain upon the death of his father. He is working in London with Tony Briggs on a recording of the myth of Echo. Briggs, whose main occupation was recording the messages for British Rail, is killed when he is thrown onto the tracks in front of an oncoming train. Sarah is Briggs’s half-sister and a victim of his abuse. The audience also learns that during a trip to Germany, Briggs had hired a pimp who sold him the services of a Latin American prostitute, Lupe, Jeremy’s mother. Briggs is, therefore, Jeremy’s father. This brief synopsis can do little justice to a nine-hour production that spans several countries (the UK, Germany, Spain, and Nicaragua) two generations, and four languages (French, Spanish, German, and English, all spoken with several different accents) and which involves numerous, admittedly somewhat melodramatic, plot twists. More significant is the way in which lip-synching, dubbing, voice-over, and voice recording serve as the common thread that weaves together stories and languages while challenging traditional notions of cultural and linguistic interaction. From his own experience of using sub- or surtitles, Lepage is keenly aware of their perils. In a very early version of The Seven Streams of the River Ota staged at the 1994 Edinburgh Festival, for instance, the audience struggled with titles that were out of synchronization with the play.26 Indeed, and somewhat ironically, the subtitles in Lipsynch also drew the ire of some critics. A Montreal commentator noted: “Jouant le chic carte du cosmopolitisme, vous serez accablé, comme moi de devoir ne regarder très souvent qu’une machine à sous-titres en petites lettres rouges … La vraie dramaturgie ne supporte pas de nous river constamment à décoder des lignes de texte sur une patente lumineuse.”27 Screen translation, dubbing, lip-synching, and other forms of voicing or re-voicing underpin Lipsynch and contribute to its exploration

27761_Koustas.indd 120

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 121

of the voice-language-identity relationship. The production opens with Ada’s moving rendition of the third movement of Górecki’s Symphony of Sorrowful Songs, specifically with the text written on the wall of the Gestapo prison cell by a teenage Polish girl to invoke the protection of the Virgin Mary. If in opera the power of the voice as an instrument frequently surpasses that of the libretto itself, an early example of the medium being the message, in this haunting “sorrowful song,” Ada’s ability to transform the prisoner’s helplessness into a powerful voice sets the stage for the stories of motherhood and agency that underpin the production. Indeed, in using it as a backdrop, Lepage is counting on his public’s familiarity with this piece. While it stands in sharp contrast with Jeremy’s karaoke number later in the production, the mechanics are similar: lyrics and melody are voiced by another. When Jeremy states, “words fail us, music transcends language,” he is summing up, albeit somewhat shallowly, the power of both Górecki’s and Ada’s voicing of the young girl’s silent sorrow, as well as his own karaoke number: “I’ve tried words. I’m too hoarse to shout … Two out of three ain’t bad.”28 Here, as in the initial opera piece, content and audio remain the same while the visual/optical element confers a different identity. Jeremy also notes that when language and cultures collide, music soars above. Opera requires listeners to adjust to linguistic difference by relying both on the power of the music and, in many cases, on their prior knowledge of the storyline. While modern operas are often staged with sub- or surtitles, which many true aficionados find both superfluous and annoying, Ada’s solo, sung in Polish, is not translated in Lipsynch. The power of the voice, which here includes the music, overcomes the language barrier. Jeremy’s karaoke number is a more popular version of this, although here, rather than soaring above cultural and linguistic difference, music is reduced to the common, globalized, denominator that is English. This part of the production also includes a restaurant scene reminiscent of Lepage’s earlier works, during which French, Spanish, German, and English are spoken without translation and almost simultaneously. Like the characters portrayed, the audience is expected to adjust to several languages and to appreciate their interaction and the combination of the cultures they represent rather than to reduce them to a common, world/major language such as English. Lip-synching, or a substitution for voice, is used most conventionally in Lipsynch when Maria, the actress in Jeremy’s movie, loses her

27761_Koustas.indd 121

2016-04-01 13:15:38

122

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

voice following a shouting argument with her husband over Jeremy’s misdirected affection. Suffering from a sore throat, she is unable to speak during the shooting of the final, tragic war scene, in which she finds her Jewish voice coach beaten and dying. Both actors initially get the giggles and the scene has to be shot several times, always without the voice track. Later, when lip-synching the scene in a sound studio, Maria reunites with Jeremy, who learns then that she and the German actor playing the teacher have a child. For the audience, the dissection of this scene into separate voice tracks as well its contextualization alter it radically, as the public is aware of the circumstances necessitating the retaping, including the outburst of laughter and the “real-life” relationship between the “movie” female student and her teacher. Although Maria is lip-synching her own voice, a twist on the standard karaoke process, the altered circumstances change the scene for the theatre public. This same scene is dubbed once again when Marie Lavallée, the Quebec woman who had temporarily lost the power of speech as a result of brain surgery, is hired to dub the French version. This is an extremely important moment for her, as it is her first contract after her recovery. In becoming the voice of another in her own language, she once again exercises her power of speech and thus literally and figuratively regains her voice, or place, as a member of the acting community. Both she and the French language of Quebec are empowered in the process. Having recovered the power of speech, she is able to use language to assert her cultural and professional identity. Through a contact in the studio, Marie meets Louise, who is deaf. Having lost her father when she was very young, Marie can no longer recall his voice and asks Louise to lip read, and hence re-voice, the silent home movies of her childhood. Marie’s desperation to rediscover her deceased father’s voice is a poignant reminder of the power and presence of the “real” voice and a twist on standard lipsynching. In this case, the lips are being used to create a text that is subsequently voiced, as the audio is missing. The text is not being adapted to match the lips, but rather the lips are determining the words. Later, when Marie asks Randy, a lip-synch specialist who claims to have “many voices in him,” to supply the voice to match the words provided by Louise, she is profoundly disappointed when he is unable to successfully recreate her father’s voice, a key element in her father’s identity and in Marie’s memory of him. Devastated by her own inability to remember her father’s voice, conscious of the

27761_Koustas.indd 122

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 123

importance of this in his identity, and acutely aware of the power of speech after the operation that left her temporarily aphasic, she is surprised to discover that, through adjustments in the sound studio, her own voice can be made to sound like that of her father. The technician notes, “la voix de ton père est dans ta voix.”29 The notion of a body being without a voice, as was the case both for Marie immediately after her surgery and for the film version of her father, is staged also through the use of images of Stephen Hawking and Pope Jean Paul II. As Thomas the neurosurgeon notes, both were able to reconnect mind and voice through the use of computer technology. The visual, audio, and content synchronies are seemingly aligned. However, the computer-generated voice then becomes merely a tool of communication and no longer an element of cultural and personal identity; in a clear jab at U.S. imperialism, Thomas points out that Hawking, an Englishman, speaks with an American accent and the Pope, despite his Polish origins, “communicates” in perfect English. Thus, while they have been re-equipped with speech and have once again found agency through voice, the connection to their own cultural and linguistic identity has been sacrificed. Marie’s schizophrenic sister, however, experiences the opposite problem. Surrounded by voices without “real” bodies, she struggles to cope in a world in which voice and body are meant to be aligned. If the loss of voice and/or speech translates as a loss of identity, of power, and of place and agency, other characters experience a similar deficit because of their inability to master language. Jeremy’s birth mother, Lupe, or Guadalupe, likely named after the Virgin of Guadalupe, is reduced to prostitution largely because she is unable to speak German or English. While in Nicaragua, she did not understand the initial negotiations between her uncle, who sold her, and the German pimp posing as a tourist, because the conversation took place in English. Once stranded in Germany, she is unable to seek help, explain her plight, or escape because she cannot communicate. Her dancing in a cage in the red-light district symbolizes her linguistic and physical imprisonment. Like the prisoner who cries out to the Virgin in Górecki’s Symphony of Sorrowful Songs, she too longs to be heard but is barred by the lack of appropriate language. It is only through a recording of her voice that her story becomes known. She is discovered by a Quebec documentary filmmaker whose project on sexploitation led her to Lupe and to others in similar circumstances.

27761_Koustas.indd 123

2016-04-01 13:15:38

124

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

In this documentary, Lupe’s true voice is heard in Spanish as she recounts the initial rape by her so-called employer. However, her body is not shown. Instead, she is hidden partially by a screen covering all but her head and legs. In an enormously disturbing scene, the image of a man’s body being probed and “man-handled” is projected on the screen over her own torso; Lupe has lost her body, symbolically and literally, to a man. Lupe’s tragic story, compellingly narrated in Spanish and symbolically represented by a body that is no longer her own, mirrors or echoes the initial “sorrowful song” in which horror and despair are voiced through another body. This process is hauntingly replicated when Tony Briggs narrates the Echo myth toward the end of the production. In fact, Tony, like Echo, is reduced to only a voice. A professional recording artist, Briggs was “the voice of British rail.” After he falls on the tracks into an oncoming train, it is the recording of his own voice that is used to  announce a delay due to “an obstacle on the rails.” Similarly, Lupe, having died on the plane, is survived only by her recorded voice in the documentary. In both cases, the visual component no longer remains. The reverse process occurs when a detective searches Briggs’s house following his death. Brigg’s appliances, including fridge, microwave, and phone, are equipped with recorded messages related to their function. However, the actual person who made the recording, rather than just the voice, is also present, rendering the scene very comical as the visual component is unexpected and, as is perhaps often the case, seems mismatched with the voice. For example, a sultry, come-hither voice actually belongs to an unattractive, middle-aged woman. The production includes numerous other examples of the reworking and creative use of lip-synching, re-voicing, voice recording, some humorous – such as the detective’s frustration as he attempts to follow the French-speaking gps system in his rented Mercedes in the company of the gps person seated in the back seat, or Jeremy’s offkey compilation of rock songs during his school concert – and others sad, as when Sebastian rips the tape out of a cassette recorder in order to prevent the details of his father’s funeral from being broadcast via the car-mounted speaker circulating throughout the city. All these scenes are inspired by, if not dependent on, re-voicing. However, unlike in standard theatre, where the public sees only the final product, here the process, and hence the linguistic and cultural transition and tension, are staged and become the production’s creative force.

27761_Koustas.indd 124

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 125

In the theatre program from the 2007 Newcastle production, Lepage states: “I often compare our evolving artistic process to the image of a tree. The audience only sees the trunk, bark, branches and leaves. But the artist should be preoccupied by the growth happening underground, in that the unseen network of roots digging erratically yet so expertly that it can hold, sustain and nurture the whole tree.”30 The public is exposed to the network of roots in the re-voicing and translation process, and hence to the cultural and ideological manipulation that this implies. Lip-synching is represented both as a form of empowerment, when Marie rediscovers herself and her father through re-voicing, and as a form of imperialism, when the production draws attention to the imposition of Stephen Hawking’s American accent. Furthermore, the use of many languages on stage, and concomitant subtitling, relies on the audience’s tolerance of and interest in accents, translations, and multilingualism; the production challenges traditional notions of world, major, and minor languages, and the need for lip-synching, which reduces all to one language. Lipsynch stages simultaneously the power and necessity of revoicing, as well as its limitations and even redundancy. For numerous scenes no translation is provided, and thus, while the leitmotif of screen translation drives the production, the audience is at times required to manage without. Above all, however, Lipsynch exposes re-voicing as a creative, multilayered, and complex process, or as the underground root network sustaining the entire tree. The allusive, harmonious co-existence of multiple languages and cultures is no easier to attain than problem-free language transfer, even in the controlled conditions of the recording studio: imposing one language over another (as in subtitling) and substituting languages through dubbing or re-voicing (as in translation) are, as Lepage demonstrates, fraught with obstacles. The unseen roots suggest the complexity of any process aimed at combining, aligning, synchronizing, layering, and managing the co-existence, overlapping, and possible interference of languages, cultures, and their concomitant identities. The length and complexity of the production, as well as the participation of other theatre companies, accustomed perhaps to more traditional techniques, resulted in a more elaborate set, more complicated staging, and fewer seamless transitions than Lepage fans had previously experienced. There are, nonetheless, some signature Lepage moments. Working with only three set pieces, he created “an everevolving world of wonders.”31 For instance, the two-tiered, panelled

27761_Koustas.indd 125

2016-04-01 13:15:38

126

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

set transitions smoothly from the interior of the airplane to a home office from which Ada directs her inquiries about the abandoned child. Her telephone calls are answered by officials, from various employees of Lufthansa to the German police, all played by Hans Piesbergen, who changes his hat, adjusts his tie and alters his voice slightly to change roles. The panels then become the interior of a train on which Ada accompanies Jeremy from Germany and London. The audience first sees him as a babe in arms, then viewed from the back and played by the diminutive Nuria Garcia, as a young boy, and finally as an adolescent played by Rick Miller. The young Jeremy tosses a ball, disappears, and then reappears to catch it as his older self. This seamless transition covers about fifteen years and takes only minutes as Garcia and Miller surreptitiously exchange places under the seat. Scenes in the London underground are cleverly staged with a moving train set, behind which run the names of familiar stations. More elaborate scene changes become part of the play when the stage manager, complete with headset, barks orders at the technicians as they set up the next scene. Video and projection are used extensively to portray, for example, Hawking and the Pope, Lupe, a renowned speech therapist, Marie’s operation, and her home movies. The production relies heavily on the soundscape, with music ranging from opera to hard rock to the various recordings, including electronically altered voices that allow men to play women and vice versa. However brilliant, the technology does not take over but rather supports the production. Brian Johnson expresses his wonder at the overall impression: “I came out of theatre feeling exhilarated and refreshed. I realized I’d been treated to one of the most breathtaking theatrical events I had ever witnessed. I use the word ‘theatrical’ with some hesitation, because it transcended theatre. With natural acting, miraculous staging, operatic arias and a soap-opera plot you could get lost in, Lipsynch was like watching TV or film in the flesh.”32 In Lipsynch, Lepage offers a more complex, more nuanced intercultural theatre than seen in his previous productions. While challenging the somewhat utopian, supposedly cosmopolitan notion that translation techniques such as lip-synching can compensate for language difference, Lepage and Ex Machina also incorporated techniques from other traditions – not by borrowing them, as in Seven Streams of the River Ota, but rather by structuring the play around various components created and staged by other companies; the

27761_Koustas.indd 126

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 127

notes acknowledge the Northern Stage (Newcastle) where Lipsynch was first produced, as well as Spanish actors (Carlos Belda, Nuria Garcia) who participated in the entire production through acting and writing, and also composed and performed decidedly discrete segments that, while fitting into the whole, nonetheless reflect their own background. Belda and Garcia took ownership, respectively, of the detective scene and the father’s funeral. Piesbergen, a German actor, also retained much of his cultural identity, including his accent, while contributing to the whole. While this direct collaboration with European companies and actors from an arguably similar, Western tradition would not present the same challenges as a QuebecJapanese co-production, for example, it nonetheless did involve genuine exchange untainted by power brokering; the influence of the eleven international writer-actors is clearly felt. As John Cobb, the Scot who runs the participating Théâtre sans Frontières Company in the UK, stated: “The show has the quality of a meeting of different national voices, maybe misunderstanding one another, but trying to understand. Because we’re nine [later eleven] actors from several countries, we all bring different rhythms, different speech patterns and different languages that create a complete world.”33 Patrick Lonergan highlights the importance of this type of cooperation in the era of globalization: “Through genuinely engaging with material outside of itself, national theatre comes to understand its own practices and methodologies better; through genuinely engaging with a culture outside of (or peripheral to) itself, a nation can broaden and deepen its attitudes towards ethics and citizenship.”34 In this production, conceptions of the Other, and of cultural and national belonging, are complex, as the audience follows the actors across languages, geopolitical boundaries, and cultures, finding itself in multilayered and destabilizing situations as the globally relevant issues of sex slavery, orphanage, adoption, international drug trading, and prostitution rings are addressed. This is not universal theatre that is everywhere the same but rather global theatre that is reflexive, inviting different receptions from different audiences. The language mix, geographical references, music, and poetry (the production includes two poems by Quebec poet Claude Gauvreau) would be experienced differently while, at the same time, the play invites reflection on common concerns and on the benefits of connection and communication. Toronto critic Richard Ouzounian offers a sensitive analysis:

27761_Koustas.indd 127

2016-04-01 13:15:38

128

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Stories from around the world were eventually woven together, sometimes too neatly, but always with an air of otherworldly influence. Lepage seemed to be looking at the discontent, fear and anxiety that fills society, trying to find simple connections between people that could take away some of the pain. His allusions to world events and specific locales are more oblique than [in] his other plays, but his message is almost an amalgamation of all of them. The walking wounded who fill the streets of every major city in the world are the people who Lepage seems to understand best. He offers them his compassion and the healing comfort of his gift for creating visual beauty. Connection and communication, he seems to be saying, is all we have, but if we use it right, that will be enough.35 Critics urged the Toronto public to witness “a work of such scope and ambition” in which “over nine hours, the voiceless gain voices and the play its heart.” Ouzounian concluded his accolades with a note of gratitude: “In a world full of tiny thinkers, let us thank Robert Lepage for daring to live large and taking us along on the journey.”36 Indeed, Lepage’s inclusion in the Luminato lineup, which featured productions from Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United States, erased any doubt about his presence on both global and Toronto theatre circuits as well as the desire of both parties to live large on the journey of globally travelled, recognized, and relevant theatre; the program notes credit Lepage (along with fellow contributor R. Murray Schafer) with “putting Canada in the spotlight of the world.”37 In Lepage’s next two productions, The Andersen Project and Eonnogata, intercultural and global theatre are challenged at the same time as they are celebrated. The Andersen Project was conceived upon an invitation from the Danish government to participate in the celebration of the bicentenary of Hans Christian Andersen and, like Eonnogata, exposes the international trafficking of stories and forms while at the same time exploiting them. In The Andersen Project, a one-man show,38 Frédéric Lapointe, jet-lagged, disoriented, and lonely, attempts to understand why he, a québécois writer, was commissioned by the Palais Garnier to prepare the libretto for an opera to celebrate Andersen’s anniversary. He quickly learns that he is merely the token non-European in an equally

27761_Koustas.indd 128

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 129

token European Union gesture of inclusion, a sort of Europudding, as the director of the Palais Garnier tells him. His Quebec French contrasting sharply with the Parisian opera director’s deliberately stilted and condescending commentary (in the French-language versions), and his English failing him during a meeting with the Danes, Frédéric, like other Lepage characters, wrestles with issues of language, identity, and belonging in confrontation with the Other. Promoted months ahead of its October première in Toronto, The Andersen Project was described, in March, as follows: The Andersen Project, an Ex Machina production presented by Canadian Stage is a modern-day, multimedia fairy-tale written and directed by Robert Lepage. The one-man show performed by Yves Jacques combines cutting-edge technology and ingenious props to create a world of theatrical illusion. An artist travels to Paris, at the request of a famed opera house, which has commissioned him to write the libretto for a children’s opera based on fairy-tales by Hans Christian Andersen. The experience enables him to explore questions of sexual identity, unfulfilled fantasies, a thirst for recognition and fame. The piece was commissioned by the Kingdom of Denmark in 2005 as part of their 200th ­anniversary celebrations of Hans Christian Andersen’s birth and originally starred Lepage.39 The play stages two other characters: Arnaud, the opera company’s fast-talking Parisian administrator whose personal life is unravelling on account of his sexual obsessions; and Rashid, a Moroccan janitor who has the unsavoury job of mopping up after clients at a peep show located underneath the apartment Frédéric is subletting. Arnaud becomes a regular customer of the peep show. In the original one-man show, Lepage played all three of these characters, as well as, occasionally, Andersen himself. Numerous other characters, including a wood nymph, a dog psychologist (Fred is both houseand pet-sitting), and Marie, the woman Fred has left behind, are represented virtually, through one-way telephone conversations or by other means. The play follows Fred as he, much like the wood nymph in one of Andersen’s tales, succumbs initially to the attraction, and ultimately to the dangers, of Paris. Again, like Andersen’s characters and the Danish author himself, Fred, Arnaud, and Rashid all harbour a dark side. Ultimately, and again conforming to the

27761_Koustas.indd 129

2016-04-01 13:15:38

130

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Andersen model, the animals find happiness and fulfillment (Fanny, the dog, has puppies), while the humans, like the dryad, pay for their ambition through loss. The return to a one-man show invited the stunningly brilliant integration of technology noted above. In this theatrical illusion, which spans decades and takes the audience from the Palais Garnier to a train trip with Andersen and to a grimy peep show, Ex Machina deployed many of the tools from its famous arsenal, ranging from simple props that recall the Repère technique, to the elaborate use of lights and screens, to puppetry and a sensational light and soundscape. The play opens with a screen image of the sumptuous crimson curtain of the Paris Opera. As Fred enters, the curtain is lifted and a giant image of Fred’s face is projected over that of an empty theatre. The image of the opera serves as the background for the final scene as well. The screen goes white and a rapper, who is also a graffiti artist, spray-paints a drawing of Andersen, to which he adds horns and a giant penis, on the blank wall. A bank of peep show cubicles is rolled out and Fred reappears. The peep show cubicles are transformed into telephone booths or work stations in an internet café. The ingenious use of minimal props creates seamless transitions and mesmerizing imagery as simple objects, such as a mannequin, are transformed into metaphors. Andersen’s ambiguous sexuality is hinted at during a scene in which he aggressively undresses a female mannequin, the final pull on her corset strings sending “her” spinning off-stage. Fanny, the dog, is staged through the use of a taut leash at which the public must imagine the invisible animal pulling. Puppets are used to depict the dryad, and shadow puppetry renders the telling of Andersen’s tale “The Shadow” particularly haunting. Sitting on Andersen’s suitcases, Fred begins the train trip from Copenhagen to Cologne as the famed storyteller, the background moving at a speed commensurate with the speed of the train at the time. The movement of the background scenery and the rhythm of the train on the tracks increase rapidly as he segues into his role as Fred and the train speeds up to contemporary standards. Through this use of cutting-edge technology in combination with simple objects such as the suitcases, the audience experiences theatre that reconfigures the box. Indeed, Lepage’s use of the Palais Garnier as a screen-saver–style background at the beginning and the end suggests a somewhat disparaging wink at this venerable institution and the

27761_Koustas.indd 130

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 131

rigid traditions it represents. At both the beginning and the end of production, the play’s actor literally turns his back on the Palais Garnier. Frédéric’s disorientation, distress, restlessness, and searching are reminiscent of the characters in Vinci, Seven Streams of the River Ota, Circulations, The Dragons’ Trilogy, Tectonic Plates, and The Far Side of the Moon. There is, however, a new twist in The Anderson Projet: Lepage/Fred is both the victim and the mastermind of the othering process. Karen Fricker recalls the familiar trope in her study of this and other productions: “Lepage expresses themes of selfhood and otherness in the work through the recurrent character of a Quebec artist on a journey towards self-realisation, which he acknowledges as an autobiographical figure.”40 In one of his many favourable reviews of The Andersen Project, the Toronto Star’s Ouzounian is a little more explicit: “Robert Lepage, arguably the greatest artist working in the Canadian theatre, has always sought inspiration from those strange wayward fellow travellers on the path of creation whose concerns have dovetailed with his. Whether it’s architect Frank Lloyd Wright or jazz composer Miles Davis, Lepage has found a way to reach out and make his particular form of Québécois iconoclasm match up with theirs.”41 Lepage readily acknowledges the autobiographical nature of the main character Frédéric Lapointe,42 who is albino, an obvious reference to Lepage’s own hair issues,43 and of his depiction of Andersen, a closet homosexual. In reply to the question: “The Andersen Project is about a Quebec artist at the mercy of a high-handed manager at the Paris Opera. That sounds like it could be you – is the satire autobiographical?” Lepage replied: It’s a strange project. It was a commission from the 2005 Hans Christian Andersen bicentenary and Denmark. They did this big bash where they commissioned choreographers, writers, filmmakers and directors to stage Andersen’s fairy tales. And I had been specifically asked not to do that, but to do something about him. I said I would do it if it could be about me … We want him to be bisexual because that’s what we all say when we’re gay and we don’t want to come out yet … I tried to create a character who had been commissioned to create a libretto based on an obscure Andersen fairy tale for the Paris Opera. And I had a lot

27761_Koustas.indd 131

2016-04-01 13:15:38

132

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

to say about the Paris Opera … So it became about a Québécois character, a colonized Canadian who gets to work in Europe and is manipulated by the artist-director.44 Frédéric’s status as a colonial is aptly illustrated in the following segment from Arnaud’s harried introduction, in which he endeavours to explain Fred’s role: Chaque année, l’Opéra national de France dispose de sommes supplémentaires qui lui sont octroyées par le Parlement européen pour l’encourager à coproduire avec d’autres pays membres de l’Espace économique européen … Évidemment, qui dit coproduction internationale dit nécessairement répartition des rôles créatifs … Je ne vous cacherai pas qu’il a quand même fallu faire quelques contorsions devant les gens du Parlement européen pour justifier qu’un Canadien se mêle d’adapter un conte scandinave. Mais bon, vous allez voir, mon assistante a très bien ficelé la chose, elle a dit que seuls les Canadiens pouvaient comprendre ce bel esprit nordique; qu’il y a, chez vous, cette belle lumière, ce beau silence, et surtout cette belle langue râpeuse qu’est le québécois, qui rappelle un peu les accents primitifs et bâtards du dialecte danois qu’utilisait Andersen pour rédiger ses contes, donc vous pouvez vous sentir tout à fait à l’aise et tout à fait le bienvenu dans cette aventure.45 Fred’s role as a willing ingredient in Arnaud’s Europudding is confirmed at the end of the play when, having discovered, quite accidentally, that he has been replaced by a Broadway author, he states: “Je suis venu ici pour me faire valider … Parce que c’est ça qu’on fait nous, les Québécois. Quand on veut être pris au sérieux, on vient se faire valider en France. Parce qu’on s’imagine que Paris est encore le centre du monde mais, de toute évidence, il ne l’est plus. Il faut juste se faire à l’idée.”46 As J. Kelly Nestruck of the Globe and Mail recognized, the three main characters (all played by Lepage or Jacques) struggle to find their place and recognition in a world in which status and identity – national for Rashid, professional for Arnaud, and national and professional for Frédéric – are in flux if not threatened: As in so much of Lepage’s dramatic oeuvre, The Andersen Project centres around a Québécois who journeys out of his

27761_Koustas.indd 132

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 133

home province and makes unexpected discoveries. But this may be his most intricately woven narrative, with everything reso­ nating against everything else in marvellous and expected ways. From Frédéric’s misguided attempt to find artistic validation ­outside of Canada, to Arnaud’s unsatisfying ejaculations in the peep-show booths, to Rashid’s furtive tagging of Metro station platforms with graffiti – each character is frustrated while trying to make his mark. (Only the dog Frédéric is babysitting has complete success in this department, making friends with half the trees in Paris during the course of the play.)47 For Lepage, however, who had clearly embarked on a similar adventure of validation in this production for the Danes, the colonization process works in both directions. Arnaud’s comments, cited above, demonstrate that money motivates and pushes the agenda of  so-called intercultural theatre; if Fred is searching for validation from the colonizer, the latter is equally dependent on the colonial subject’s buy-in. Furthermore, Andersen himself, in both The Andersen Project and Frédéric’s libretto, is exploited for his international reputation and appeal. Lepage’s attempt to other himself therefore takes a new twist. While Frédéric may be the autobiographical representation of the québécois artist seeking recognition, the lob at intercultural theatre, in which Fred has a role, somewhat ricochets, given the international dimension and trajectory of The Andersen Project. Thus, while the play does stage confrontation with the Other through, for instance, Fred’s struggle with Arnaud, the exploration of this encounter is multilayered. Arnaud, as well, is a pawn in the larger game of profit-motivated intercultural, festivaldriven theatre, in which the entire production, commissioned by the Danes, plays a role. Lepage is, therefore, exposing, if not spoofing “the unseen network of roots,” and the commodification of intercultural theatre, a cultural product of which he is purveyor and beneficiary in this and other productions.48 As Fricker observes: “The production extends Lepage’s narcissistic representation of his own concerns and experiences, but gives it an interesting new twist. His past productions have depicted emerging, struggling artists; here he addresses the particular concerns of [a] successful global figure.”49 Sylvain Schryburt, in his work on festivals, points to the perils of “circulation within this [international] highly competitive circuit.” He notes: “These same artists [Robert Lepage, Denis Marleau, Gilles

27761_Koustas.indd 133

2016-04-01 13:15:38

134

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Maheu, and Marie Brassard] need to pay what Bourdieu calls ‘right of entry’ which demands an ability to deliver on expectations common to the public, critics, experts and reviewers, who consume or profit by the internationalization of theatrical practice.”50 The need to please is aptly illustrated when Frédéric is sent to Det Kongelige Teater in Copenhagen to meet with the Danish company. A catastrophic interview is conducted in English, which is thereby presented as the international language of the theatre circuit. The interview ends when Frédéric, who struggles with the language, asks, “So … is there the questions?”51 The scene is particularly comical for audience members familiar with Lepage’s competence in English, while it nonetheless points to the levelling effect of participation in the network: Frédéric must compromise not only his language but also his vision in order to gain right of entry or recognition. For the Toronto audience, the more complex and layered confrontation with and the concomitant recognition or misrecognition by the Other was brought home through the use of language in The Andersen Project. In French-language productions, Arnaud’s Parisian French accent is deliberately overplayed to emphasize his snobbishness as well as his sense of superiority over Fred, who speaks what Arnaud calls “cette belle langue râpeuse qu’est le québécois.”52 In Toronto, however, Frédéric spoke in English while Arnaud spoke in French with subtitles, thus confounding traditional notions of otherness and placing the roc–Quebec balance in a new light.53 Not all critics welcomed this approach, not because of the linguistic politics it may have suggested, but rather because it complicated the staging.54 As noted above, however, there is a new twist in the production: the struggling artist of previous productions has now become a cog, and a somewhat disposable one, in the wheel of the much larger, profit-motivated intercultural mill. Lepage thus leads his roc audience into a theatre world in which concepts of national, international, and intercultural lose their determinacy, if not their relevance on the stage and elsewhere. In Schryburt’s analysis: “This systemic manifestation of globalization in theatre has thus sidelined the question of national boundaries and identities – to the point where they mostly serve to guarantee the truly international dimension of such events – and replace it with a community founded on shared aesthetic concerns that may be regarded as a new lingua franca for stage directors and aficionados.”55

27761_Koustas.indd 134

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 135

It is clear, from the 2010 lead-up to this production, as well as to that of Eonnagata, that Lepage, however serious his missteps, had again conquered the Toronto stage and audience: “To say that Torontonians love Robert Lepage,” writes Stéphanie Herge, “is kind of like saying that we love the Leafs. (Except that Lepage is, you know, insanely successful.) Ever since the Quebec City directoractor-writer filmmaker launched his opera career here 16 years ago, local audiences and critics have been tripping over each other for superlatives to describe the multi-tasker’s work. Last summer, we happily sat through his nine-hour mind blower, Lipsynch, at Luminato; and in the fall, we were slack-jawed when he created, as  far as we know, the only orchestra pit slash swimming pool in existence for the world premiere of The Nightingale and Other Short Fables at the C OC .”56 Torontonians were not disappointed. Definitely “worth the wait,” The Andersen Project was “a must see theatrically,” another “not to be missed marvel” by a magician whose work, once again, “reward[ed] theatergoers’ efforts.”57 As significant as the positive reviews, however, is the recognition of Lepage’s role in placing Toronto, and Canada, on the world stage with genuinely global theatre that brought to the audience new ways of doing and viewing theatre, whatever the perils noted above. Matthew Jocelyn, artistic director and general director of Canadian Stage, described Lepage as “a titan of the international stage and a visionary in Canadian theatre.”58 For the program notes, Jocelyn wrote: “Both prolific and visionary, Lepage has constantly created work that redefines what theatre means and what it can do both in terms of the complexity of the stories, and in terms of the visual vocabulary accessed on stage … Not only is his versatility remarkable, but so is the reputation he has gained across the globe. He is probably the most renowned Canadian artist present on the international scene, and his approach to stagecraft is modern, multi-faceted and invigorating.”59 Toronto welcomed the opportunity to be both a stop and a player on Lepage’s intercultural voyage, questioning, and itinerary even at the expense of being yet another ingredient in the Europudding. Identifying him as a theatrical pioneer, Toronto critic John Coulbourn confirmed Lepage’s role in transforming theatre and the audience: “In a career spent mining the world and all that’s in it for theatrical subjects and effects, Lepage has done much to change not

27761_Koustas.indd 135

2016-04-01 13:15:38

136

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

only the way we see theatre, but the way we see the world as well.”60 Similarly, in an article significantly headed “Why We Pay Rock Concert Prices for Robert Lepage,” Marianne Ackerman, with whom Lepage had worked in the past, reflected on his long-standing popularity, his lasting impact, and his ability through The Andersen Project and other productions to transform the theatre space and the audience of the roc: While conventional theatres battle for audiences, Lepage can charge rock concert ticket prices and still pack huge halls. Even people who don’t like theatre flock to his shows, particularly in Toronto, where his fan base is large and growing. He kicked off his opera career here, with 1993’s wildly successful Bluebeard’s Castle/Erwartung. The nine-hour extravaganza Lipsynch was a massive hit at the Luminato festival in June 2009, as was his staging of Stravinsky (complete with puppeteers in an orchestra pit filled with 67,000 litres of water) for the Canadian Opera Company a few months later. Now he’s back with a double bill: Eonnagata, a new piece starring the man himself, at the Sony Centre; and The Andersen Project at Canadian Stage.61 Clearly, even at the box office, Lepage remained “at the top of his game.”62 In Eonnagata, frequently listed as the second half of a double billing with The Andersen Project,63 the roc was taken on an international journey on which it was neither a thematic stop nor a reference point. There is almost no spoken text in Eonnagata. Lepage and his fellow dancer/actors recount, through dance and martial arts, the story of Charles de Beaumont, the Chevalier d’Éon, who was a cross-dressing spy and swordsman for Louis XV. Having dressed as a woman while “on duty” in the Russian court, de Beaumont was sent to England as a diplomat, where he was stranded after the Revolution. Among his diplomatic duties, he participated in the Treaty of Paris, which gave New France to the British. As Lepage explains, “And of course, we mustn’t forget that the Chevalier had a strong connection to Canada as well. He’s the guy who gave Canada to the English. He was the negotiator during the Treaty of Paris and convinced the English to keep Canada in exchange for Martinique … Ah yes, a very important figure in Canadian culture.”64 In England, de Beaumont eked

27761_Koustas.indd 136

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 137

out a living, in part, by competing in fencing competitions while dressed as a woman. For a few years (1777–85), he was allowed to return to France but was required to dress as a woman. He died in England in 1810, where a team of surgeons determined that he was indeed male. His life, and the confusion surrounding both his gender and his role in international relations, continues to interest both historians and specialists in cultural and gender studies, and led to the term éonisme in French, which refers to cross-dressing, as well as to a Japanese manga and anime series.65 Drawing in part on the Japanese kabuki dance onnagata (also spelled onagata), which features male actors impersonating women,66 the production borrows and bends Western and Asian concepts of dance, gender, and theatre, and their concomitant relationship to identity. Eonnagata, the title being an obvious blending of the French aristocrat’s name and the Japanese form of a dance, is a stunning and vivid example of performance as cultural exchange as described by Gordon. Male dancers change, through the use of a kimono, into their female equivalents, and the familiar horizons of belonging are thus challenged and transformed. It is not so much that East meets West, that theatre meets dance, that history meets fiction, or that male meets female but rather that all of the above seamlessly fuse so that the audience’s understanding of the categories, or the horizons, is much broadened. The questions surrounding de Beaumont’s gender, both as a physical reality and a social construct, beg the further question of why this was important, thus inviting reflection on human nature. As one critic noted, “In form and content, Eonnagata is an inspired celebration of the fullness of a life lived beyond the categories society imposes.”67 Performers include Sylvie Guillem, a former classical ballerina who left the Paris Opera (no doubt a coincidence, but the venerable institution took a beating in The Andersen Project) and turned to contemporary dance; Russell Maliphant, a London-based choreographer; and Robert Lepage himself who, upon learning of Maliphant’s and Guillem’s interest in working with him, confessed: “I did a triple take. I was overweight and out of shape and didn’t feel confident. But I thought she was going to whip my ass and it’s going to be good for me.”68 The positive reviews of this “Japanese ballerina transsexual samurai kung fu dance show” suggest that Guillem had indeed successfully worked Lepage who, “dressed (and cross-dressed) in tights and

27761_Koustas.indd 137

2016-04-01 13:15:38

138

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

undertaking manoeuvres that would not disgrace a danseur noble … interacts with the aforementioned ballet professionals on something close to equal footing.”69 It was, however, the success of the “marriage of theatre, dance and history”70 that captivated the audience and critics such as Christopher Hoile: “Eonnagata is an exquisitely beautiful work created by Robert Lepage with dancers Sylvie Guillem and Russell Maliphant. The chance to see any of these three on stage would alone be reason enough to see the show; to see all three together provides a vision of the greatness artists can achieve in collaboration. Eonnagata combines the worlds of dance and theatre so elegantly that the new form they forge becomes the perfect vehicle to explore the nature of duality.”71 As Hoile suggests, the combination of theatre and dance contributes not only to the beauty of the production but also to the staging of the recurring theme of duality. Another critic wrote: “Eonnagata lives between worlds: half theatre, half dance, part French and part Kabuki, its main character a swordwielding diplomat who lived in turns as a man and as a woman.”72 All these contrasts were highlighted by costumes designed by the late Alexander McQueen, including a combination of an eighteenth-­ century frock coat and farthingale with a kimono and samurai skirt. Themes associated with duality, gender bending, and the fragility of our constructs of belonging are staged through dazzling transformations, such as that of the kabuki dancer into the swordsman or of the samurai warrior into the fan dancer. Swords, fans, plumes, and poles transform from scene to scene as symbols of male and female power. At one point, a table is flipped and becomes a mirror in which Guillem and Maliphant mimic each other’s movements. Lepage commented on de Beaumont’s Canadian connection and, indeed, the concept of duality, of dual belonging, as identified earlier in more overtly political productions, underlies this production. For Ouzounian, from Needles and Opium, which drew on Lepage’s own experience with drugs, through Lipsynch, which was based in part on Lepage’s own bilingual upbringing, to The Andersen Project, with its focus on the need for validation and on ambivalent sexuality, all of Lepage’s work, including Eonnagata, is, ultimately, about himself: “Every show that Robert Lepage creates is ultimately about one thing – Robert Lepage – and Eonnagata … is no exception. This is not to imply that Lepage isn’t a fit or varied enough subject to command our attention. Far from it. He’s one of the most original minds operating in the world today and the way he takes his

27761_Koustas.indd 138

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 139

personal concerns and changes them, through his own unique alchemy, into the stuff of high art, is nothing short of amazing.”73 Martin Morrow of the Globe and Mail underscored the significance of Lepage’s next Toronto production, The Blue Dragon (Royal Alexandra, 25 January–19 February 2012). While it confirms the city’s ongoing and long-standing interest in Ex Machina, the engagement, because of the venue, also suggests the broadening of Lepage’s audience base. Mirvish Productions, a long-time purveyor of smash hits and Broadway musicals, would not normally take an interest in theatre festival fare, and the inclusion of The Blue Dragon 74 in its winter program demonstrates the company’s confidence in Lepage’s widespread popularity and appeal to an audience more general than that of the festival circuit. Lepage brought reflexive theatre to the McTheatre stage. Morrow states: Toronto has enjoyed a steady diet of Robert Lepage’s genius in the last three years. The Andersen Project at Canadian Stage, Eonnagata at the Sony Centre, Lipsynch at Luminato, The Nightingale at Canadian Opera and Cirque du Soleil’s Totem at the Port Lands have served up a buffet of his work, from the avant-garde to the crowd-pleasing. Now Mirvish Productions has gotten in on the trend, bringing Lepage’s 2008 Chinesethemed play The Blue Dragon to the Royal Alexandra Theatre as part of its subscription season. It’s the perfect choice. For the uninitiated – like those Mirvish patrons more accustomed to commercial fare – it’s an excellent introduction to all that diehard Lepage fans cherish about the man’s work. That is, it tells a small, deeply human story which elegantly mirrors the larger world. And it does so with stage artistry so fluidly, breathtakingly inventive that it makes even big-budget Broadway musicals look dull. Or to compare it to the hit Mirvish show that just closed at the neighbouring Princess of Wales Theatre, The Blue Dragon is a Mozart flute solo next to Mary Poppins’s blaring brass band.75 Morrow describes The Blue Dragon as a “semi-sequel.”76 However, in a talk given at the National Arts Centre in Ottawa (25 March 2009), Lepage stated categorically that this production was not the sequel to The Dragons’ Trilogy but rather a new creation, as if Edith from All in the Family had started her own TV show. The Blue

27761_Koustas.indd 139

2016-04-01 13:15:38

140

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Dragon, or Le dragon bleu, was first staged in France in April 2008 and played in Grenoble (May 2008), Salamanca (June 2008), Los Angeles (November 2008), Ottawa (March 2009), Montreal (April 2009), and Vancouver (2010); it opened in Toronto in January 2012, with Henri Chassé playing the male lead. Long-time fans and followers of Lepage, such as Isabelle Porter of Le Devoir, will perhaps be forgiven for making the link between this recent creation and The Dragons’ Trilogy, the longest running, and perhaps most frequently travelled and cited play in the Ex Machina repertoire.77 I focus here, however, not on the validity or value of the label “sequel” but rather on the evolution of a concept central to both productions and, indeed, as has been argued above, to all of Lepage’s work, namely the construction, representation, and interpretation of the Other and its link to language, identity, and nation. While Ouzounian was less enthusiastic about this production than about Lepage’s previous Toronto engagement, he recognized the universality of the themes, and hence the play’s appeal to Toronto audiences, as well Lepage’s signature vision, technical skill, and creative energy: “The work is directed and co-authored by Quebec director Robert Lepage which means there are certain things you can count on, like an extraordinary visual sense, a technical precision that takes the breath away and underlying philosophical and moral issues that you could stay up all night debating … When you go on a journey with Lepage, the voyage is far more important than the destination, and you appreciate the skill with which the flight crew is transporting you rather than looking forward, for example, to a fluorescent-lit arrival hall at Pudong airport.”78 The play opens with  a calligraphy demonstration by the main character, Pierre Lamontagne, who, at the end of The Dragons’ Trilogy announced his upcoming sojourn in China. Fifteen years later, he owns an art gallery in Shanghai and lives in a loft in a converted airport hangar. When Claire, an old flame (and ex-wife) from Quebec, visits him, he is organizing an art show for a young Chinese woman, Xiao Ling, with whom he has a relationship. Claire is in China to collect a child whom she has arranged to adopt. Unlike Pierre, who remains attached to the idealism of art and with whom she went to art school, Claire opted for the purely commercial pursuits of the art world and became a very successful advertising agent. As is frequently the case in Lepage productions, the play begins with a scene portraying the tribulations of travel:

27761_Koustas.indd 140

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 141

Claire’s plane arrives late and her suitcase is lost. Jet-lagged, exhausted, and worried about her suitcase, in which she had gifts and supplies for her “daughter,” and, it is later revealed, wads of cash for the somewhat illegal adoption, Claire collapses in Pierre’s tiny one-bedroom, one-bed apartment. She drinks the ice wine she had brought him as a gift, leaving Pierre to sleep on the sofa in spite of the other, more intimate, arrangements he had had in mind. Later, she returns distraught without her “daughter,” the adoption having failed because there was no bonding and, without the money, no further interest. Once again, confusion of time and place play a role as Claire mistakenly goes to the art gallery to find Pierre and instead meets Xiao Ling, with whom she strikes up a friendship and spends the evening in bars. Later, during an outing to the zoo to see the pandas, Xiao Ling discovers she is pregnant, perhaps by Pierre. Claire offers to adopt the child and is roundly criticized by Pierre, who accuses her of exploitation; having sacrificed her child-bearing years to her career, she now attempts to buy a child the same way she would any other article in a duty-free shop – tax-free and outside any standard legal process. Claire returns to Canada but on a later business trip to China she discovers that Xiao Ling kept the child but is reduced to earning a living as a copyist, her own time and creative energy having been sapped by single motherhood. Distraught, impoverished, and overwhelmed, she is clearly incapable of caring (or unwilling to care) for the baby. Claire also locates Pierre, who, disheartened, is preparing to return to Quebec, his gallery and apartment having been expropriated. Using an old model camera, he is taking photos of Shanghai during a very rare snowstorm. The blue dragon is associated with winter. The dragon lives under the snow and symbolizes both death and rebirth. Invisible, it is generally represented by a blue flame. Three versions of the final scene are proposed: Pierre and Claire leave China with the child and Xiao Ling is left behind; Claire and the baby leave, while Pierre and Xiao Ling remain; Xiao Ling and Claire leave and Pierre and the baby stay in China. This production clearly reproduces many of the elements of The Dragons’ Trilogy. Like Pierre in The Dragons’ Trilogy, who is inspired after meeting Yukali, a Japanese artist, Pierre in The Blue Dragon is attracted both to an Asian woman and to her art. The mother-child and interracial relationships are also important in both plays, as Jeanne in the earlier production (played by Marie Michaud),

27761_Koustas.indd 141

2016-04-01 13:15:38

142

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

sixteen and pregnant in 1930s Quebec, is forced into marriage with a Chinese man and later compelled to give up her child; the geisha, like Madama Butterfly, is abandoned by an American soldier. The Blue Dragon offers an interesting reversal. As Pierre explains, abortion is as easy for Xiao Ling as a trip to the dentist, and Xiao Ling’s unplanned but easily remedied pregnancy stands in sharp contrast to Claire’s childlessness, also mirrored by the panda bears’ difficulty in reproducing. While both Claire and Xiao Lang miss out on the joys of motherhood, it is for opposing reasons: the ability to conceive and to raise a child differs entirely between the representatives of the two societies. The capacity of art to transgress boundaries between languages, cultures, and nations is also central to both productions. At the end of The Dragons’ Trilogy, Pierre, inspired by Yukali and her art, plans his sojourn in China. The Blue Dragon finds him running his own presumably successful art gallery. Xiao Ling, having given up her own provocative painting as a sacrifice for single-motherhood, is working as a copyist and reproducing mass copies of Van Gogh’s self-portrait in a part of the city famous for its knock-off Western art – a clear jab at globalization and the availability of made-in-China copies. This is all the more tragically paradoxical as Xiao Ling painted self-portraits based on photographs of herself taken during moments of trauma. Her passionless and artless copies therefore represent total abandon. There are, however, fundamental differences between the plays. While perhaps not entirely undoing the clichés of The Dragons’ Trilogy, Lepage and Michaud (she is listed as co-author) nonetheless address them. A deeper, broader understanding and appreciation are reflected both theatrically and thematically. While the notion of displacement is central to both, in The Blue Dragon displacement happens in reverse. Rather than actors “who have never been to China” playing the roles of Chinese, other immigrants, and their children, Pierre, the main character, is uprooted and placed in contemporary China. Had Lepage and his company not travelled extensively in Asia in the meantime, this too could be read as the Western gaze, simply from a different perspective, along the lines of the film Lost in Translation. However, Lepage had by then spent considerable time in Asia and was therefore well placed to represent the displaced, voluntarily exiled Westerner. In a Globe and Mail interview prior to the opening, Lepage observed: “When we did The Dragons’ Trilogy China

27761_Koustas.indd 142

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 143

was a big, mysterious piece of rock that we never thought would even move. It was impenetrable, impossible to deal with. And then suddenly there was this thaw, this opening up. By trying to know what happened to Pierre Lamontagne, now that he’s 50 and in a midlife crisis, you realize that China is also going through the same process. That was the impression that Marie [Michaud] and I had when we went to Shanghai in, was it 2008? A lot of the artists there were expressing these questions: Where do we go now? And are we allowed to go there? China was just feeling its way.”79 If, as Patrick Caux and Bernard Gilbert suggest, the Quebec contributors’ first contact with China was through Hergé’s racially biased Tintin adventure Le lotus bleu, Lepage’s and Michaud’s research sojourn in China, as well as their increased exposure to Asian art forms and practices, altered considerably their position and perspective as the Other.80 Furthermore, Xiao Ling is played by Tai Wei Foo, a Singapore dancer of Chinese origin. While she is undeniably acting in a Western-style production, the actress brings to her performance her own training and life experience, especially with respect to the collision of languages and cultures. Her performance as a Chinese artist, therefore, is decidedly more authentic than that, for example, of Marie Brassard playing a geisha in The Dragons’ Trilogy.81 In The Blue Dragon, Xiao Ling and Pierre converse in Mandarin while her conversations with Claire take place in English (in the Toronto production). Language, too, is approached from a different angle. If in The Dragons’ Trilogy heavily accented and stilted French or English was used by the Asian characters, played, once again, by an entirely québécois cast, in The Blue Dragon the Western character has the linguistic disadvantage. It is difficult to judge Lepage’s or Chassé’s82 competence in Mandarin, but it is entirely possible that native speakers would detect an accent and have no difficulty placing Pierre in the position of the outsider. This contrasts sharply with the position of the Asian characters in The Dragons’ Trilogy, whose struggle with the dominant language was portrayed by québécois characters whose understanding of the position of the exile could be approximate at best. Pierre’s obsession with tattoos, especially with that of the blue dragon, may symbolize his endeavour to integrate into Chinese society by marking his body, externally at least, with symbols of the host culture. If the Asians in The Dragons’ Trilogy remained apart, Pierre

27761_Koustas.indd 143

2016-04-01 13:15:38

144

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

attempts to fit in, and the difficulties of displacement and deracination are portrayed here through the eyes of a Westerner played by a Westerner, rather than from the point of view of an Asian played by a Westerner. The exile experience is therefore entirely reversed. China is portrayed not from the perspective of the outsider looking in, or with the Western gaze, but rather from that of the exiled situated in the other culture. As a Los Angeles critic remarked: “While the 5½ hour Trilogy explored the Eastern world as seen through the skewed eyes of the West – our local Chinatowns and clichéd images taking the place of first hand Asian experience – the new piece sends two characters directly to China and discreetly charts the collisions thereby created.”83 Furthermore, Pierre is openly critical of Claire who, having lost her luggage, arrives nonetheless with considerable Western baggage with respect to her stereotypical notion of China. She is concerned that the designer clothes in her lost suitcase, which she describes as Mao red, will be mass-produced within forty-eight hours. As an advertising agent, she sees China only as a huge market. During her second trip, she attempts to sell clichés of both Canada and China by promoting Mao-style caps decorated with maple leaves for the Olympic Games. For her, China is an exporter of babies and cheap knockoffs – it is she who finds Xiao Ling in the copiers’ district – and an importer of Western designs and values, from Kentucky Fried Chicken to Van Gogh. Indeed, Pierre accuses her of thinly disguised, Western-style racism. Rather than adopt an African or SouthAmerican child, which would have been easier, Claire opted for a Chinese girl, which, according to Pierre, better suited her style. He accuses her of having fallen into standard Western purchasing patterns, preferring an Asian, and thus barely visible minority, child, “her own little Chinese doll” who, according to the specs, should have a high iq and the capacity to become a violin virtuoso.84 Claire is thus held up as the more contemporary version of the Western gaze, and she stands in sharp contrast to Pierre. As noted above, in explaining his reasons for initially leaving and subsequently avoiding home, Pierre describes his frustration with Quebec, its politics and its narrow, even xenophobic, outlook.85 As Lepage explained in  an interview, “C’est un Québécois qui est exilé, qui s’est exilé un  moment donné, qui a beaucoup de choses à dire sur la société québécoise, mais qu’il ne peut pas vraiment dire au Québec.”86 For Pierre, therefore, his voluntary exile is an opportunity to both

27761_Koustas.indd 144

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 145

escape from and reflect on Quebec, and a chance to appreciate, and somewhat successfully integrate into, the Other, the Asia of his earlier imagination. Significantly, The Blue Dragon makes considerable use of authentic artifacts of Chinese culture, however largely writ, instead of relying on stereotypical images like that of the Chinese laundromat in The Dragons’ Trilogy. Publicity clips, such as those used to advertise Kentucky Fried Chicken, and Communist Party propaganda films underscore the confusion, interference, and difference of cultural values and the globally recognized power of the media to promote them. If The Dragons’ Trilogy attempted to introduce elements of Asian culture such as the legend of intertwining yin and yang cords, these too reflected a more poetic or imagined than real and experienced Asia. As Lepage explained in an interview: “On ramène une Chine qui est extrêmement réaliste en comparaison avec la Chine de La trilogie des Dragons qui était beaucoup plus poétique de l’ordre de l’imaginaire. Donc, c’est sûr que ce qui est confrontant pour un personnage comme Pierre Lamontagne dans la Chine d’aujourd’hui ce sont les valeurs de la société. Celles du passage furieux vers l’économie de marché, des bouleversements sociaux et de la remise en question de la vieille Chine rêvée.”87 The Blue Dragon successfully introduces a more complex, nuanced, and layered interpretation of contemporary China, particularly with respect to the clash of Western and Asian societies. For example, the play opens with a traditional-style Chinese dance, includes the party-line–style ballet with rifle and, toward the end, adds a modern dance in an atypical snowstorm. In the first scene, Pierre explains with profound admiration the ancient art of calligraphy, setting up a profound contrast with the copied Western paintings featured later. Macha Savitz commented on the Los Angeles performance: “Throughout the play, Lepage brilliantly marries traditional Chinese art, considered semi-divine in nature, with western technology and innovation with an elegant and refined aesthetic balance. The resulting combination is sublime. The viewer is left savouring the stunning and magical images that linger in the mind long after the encore.”88 The fusion of horizons is, therefore, achieved both thematically and theatrically since, once again, the box of the theatre space is reconfigured. Through the story and the use of the theatre space, the production stages the clash and/or harmonious balance of east and west. The stage is divided into two levels, which

27761_Koustas.indd 145

2016-04-01 13:15:38

146

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

serve as the arrivals and, later, departures areas at the airport, Pierre’s loft-style apartment, the art gallery and reception area, the bar, a train station, Xiao Ling’s miserable Shenzhen apartment, and the deck of a ship, among others. Through the use of screens and video projection, the stage is transformed into numerous spaces that mirror Pierre’s appreciation of the Chinese culture as well as his efforts to become integrated. The further division of the screen into panels also suggests the format used in a comic book harking back to Le lotus bleu.89 After a dramatic dance number, the play opens with Pierre seated at a desk as the Chinese calligraphy characters he is painting are reproduced on panels on the screen behind him. His comments set the tone as he introduces the audience to the importance of the visual elements in the culture and the play as well as to the exploration of the role of art and the artist. He states: “In the study of the art of Chinese calligraphy, the first thing you learn to trace is a single, distinct line. Despite is deceptive simplicity, this line is saturated with meaning because not only is it the Chinese word for one, it is also the line that divides the horizon into heaven and earth, what is above and what is below, the visible from the invisible … and if a picture is worth a thousand words, it can be said that – in China – a word is worth a thousand images.”90 Later, as the images are projected behind him, he again speaks: “A stone. A mountain. Pierre Lamontagne. Learning to write your name in Chinese for the first time can be a profoundly revealing experience. In my case, I discovered that my name is actually two different individuals. Myself – the rolling stone that gathers no moss, and my father – the unmoving, unyielding mountain with its three peaks and the stone actually tumbling from one of its cliffs.”91 Thus, Pierre’s voyage of self-discovery and his coming to terms with his roots, including his relationship with his father, are staged through the projection of calligraphy. In an interesting turn, the projection of one of Pierre’s letters becomes the positive sign on Xiao Ling’s pregnancy test, so that the modern (and to a certain extent Western) science and technology of both the test and the projection combine with ancient Chinese art. A similar effect is employed when Pierre is being tattooed by Xiao Ling. As she draws the blue dragon onto his back, the process is projected in a close-up image behind them on the screen. As he explains, his visits to the tattoo parlour, as well as the tattoo itself, reflect his status as an outsider seeking acceptance and recognition:

27761_Koustas.indd 146

2016-04-01 13:15:38



The World Leader on the Toronto Stage 147

“I’d go there [to the tattoo parlour] anytime I felt lonely or abandoned, the way others go to brothels or massage parlours.”92 He explains his choice of image: “A tattoo is nothing more than a map of one’s pain and pleasures. Mine is in the shape of a dragon; that devastating force that lives in all things, never seen, but always lurking in the long blue shadows of evening thunder.”93 In the projection, the tattoo takes up the entire screen, dwarfing Pierre in the centre and suggesting the importance the tattoo has taken in his life. The screen is once again used to follow Claire’s journey: the winding course of the Yangtze River and the scenery are projected onto panels occupying the entire stage space, while Chinese music, the rhythm following the river’s route, accompanies her on her trip. Images of the Shanghai cityscape appear as Claire and Xiao Ling cycle to the zoo, giving the impression of movement. The screen serves also as a backdrop for the dance numbers and for the projection of the dance scenes, showing, for example, the stylized backdrop of the patriotic military dances. Just as the film clip of the battle of Chinese warlords zaps into an advertisement for Kentucky Fried Chicken (and this is an authentic advertisement), the scenes blend and transform seamlessly, transporting the audience from the somewhat more familiar, though distinctly Chinese, space of Pierre’s apartment, to the liminal and easily recognized space of the airport, to the exotic space of the tattoo parlour. The distinctions, lines, horizons, and divisions between East and West, ancient and modern, as well as between the languages and cultures, thus become blurred or fused, and the box of the theatre and of the audience’s preconceived notions of space, otherness, and even art are challenged, if not reconfigured. As a result of their own extensive experience in Asia, the members of the company bring to the production a genuine appreciation and understanding rather than clichés or purely imagined images, as was arguably the case for the earlier production. In The Dragons’ Trilogy, Françoise and Jeanne, aged twelve and isolated in a working-class Quebec neighbourhood, repeat the popular myth, “if you dig far enough you will get all the way to China.”94 Some twenty-five years later, Lepage and Ex Machina, including Marie Michaud of the original cast, have indeed dug deeper, through the myths, stereotypes, and clichés, to discover contemporary China, a society in transition, where the ideals of Communism yield to Western-style capitalism, where artists in Shanghai were relocated to make space for a commercial complex, where calligraphy gives way

27761_Koustas.indd 147

2016-04-01 13:15:38

148

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

to mass-produced Van Gogh knockoffs, and where both babies and cheap souvenirs are big business. Even with the inclusion of an Asian actress and authentic artifacts of contemporary China, this cannot help but be a Western take, perhaps expressing Western anxiety as, infertile and starved for ideas, it faces a virile China.95 It would seem difficult to accuse Lepage and company of the orientalism and even racism charge levied earlier. As a Paris critic noted after the opening in France, “Deux décennies plus tard, le regard sur l’Empire du milieu ne se limite pas aux miroirs tendus par les ‘chinatowns’ du Canada.”96 What is staged instead is a perhaps melodramatic, but nonetheless compelling, story of cultural, linguistic, and social clash, confusion, and occasional reconciliation with the Other and, ultimately, with oneself, as the Quebec City paper Le Soleil suggested in 2012: “Lepage a expliqué durant l’écriture de La trilogie des drag­ ons avec Marie Michaud qu’il a des traits communs avec Pierre, qu’il a également joué dans le spectacle. Les deux avaient 25 ans, étaient des artistes de Québec, croyaient qu’il valait mieux tenter leur chance vers l’Ouest pour le développement de leur carrière (Lepage s’est établi à Montréal pendant un temps avant de revenir dans sa ville natale) et ni l’un, ni l’autre n’avaient jamais mis les pieds en Chine. ‘Pierre a toujours été une sorte d’alter ego’ explique Lepage … ‘J’avais toutes ces interrogations à propos du personnage, qui représentaient une excellente opportunité pour réfléchir aussi sur moi en tant qu’artiste.’”97

27761_Koustas.indd 148

2016-04-01 13:15:38

Conclusion

Richard Ouzounian, in an insightful article about the links between Lepage’s personal traumas (from hair loss to imposed bilingualism, to acceptance of his own homosexuality) and his vast body of work, suggests as well that for all its intercultural cogency, appeal, and itinerary, Lepage’s work remains, at some fundamental level, highly personal. Lepage situates himself and his theatre both in the roc– Quebec equation, thus demonstrating, as I have endeavoured to do in this study, the ongoing presence and influence of this extremely important Other: “This quest for finding yourself elsewhere troubles me. When you’re at home, you’re one person; when you’re abroad, you’re someone else. When I’m here [Toronto], I feel strongly québécois, which is a radically different society from the rest of Canada. But when I travel abroad, I feel like I am a Canadian. It’s a strange double identity … [The Chevalier d’Éon] was someone who knew how to use the fan as well as the sword … I understand that very well.”1 It was Lepage’s “strange double identity” that put him singularly in tune with the roc audience. Together, they not only explored and exploited familiar otherness, including the obstacles on the journey, but they reconfigured the box rather than simply “turning it around,” moving the audience, the dramaturge, and “Toronto’s spectacular stage” to global theatre such as that described by Patrick Lonergan. Lepage’s productions travelled the world, inviting new reflections on theatre, progressively staged social changes wrought by globalization (such as asylum seeking, multiculturalism, tourism, and human rights), relied heavily on the visual spectacle, and challenged traditional notions of nation and region. His theatre also developed toward

27761_Koustas.indd 149

2016-04-01 13:15:38

150

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

Robert Gordon’s model of performance as cultural exchange, which incorporates playing one’s otherness, and toward Ric Knowles’s notion of true intercultural theatre, thus postioning Lepage and Toronto at “the start of a new epoch in the history of performance.”2 According to Michael McKinnie: “The relationship between theatre and the city in Toronto has been fraught and filled with unexpected twists, both great and small. These complications and surprises, however, are what make the geography of that relationship so interesting.”3 The present study has demonstrated that Robert Lepage has been very much part of the intriguing fabric of twists, complications, and surprises on the Toronto theatre scene; hence the significance of this analysis in the context of scholarship that highlights his international success. It was in Toronto, his home away from home, that he was first welcomed, fêted, understood, and valued as both a Canadian and a Québécois. Here too he helped to put a city on the cultural tourism map and included its audience in his own global vision. From his entrance onto the Toronto theatre scene on the small performance space of the St Paul’s Square Theatre where Circulations was staged, to the du Maurier World Stage, to the St Lawrence Centre as part of the Luminato Festival and to the Royal Alex in the heart of the “entertainment” district, Lepage progressively contributed to, benefited from, and propped up the city’s bid to achieve recognition as a global cultural capital. While I have not attempted to do so in this study, it would nonetheless be worth asking if the Toronto theatre scene translates its own self-regard into productions or outlets or a theatre culture that, like Lepage, is about more than that.4 It is evident that, while the Toronto audience may have been just one of many non-Quebec audiences to welcome and appreciate Lepage, it interpreted his work from its own reflexive standpoint, from the position of its own construction of identity, and from its own perspective on intercultural theatre. Unlike most other destinations on Lepage’s global circuit, however, Toronto was chez lui in the other language, culture, and perhaps sometimes solitude, thereby conferring upon it a special status.5 He was not, therefore, merely another “foreign” curiosity from Quebec but rather an international, intercultural player who came “out of this place, out of our experience.”6 If Toronto offered Lepage “le meilleur des deux mondes” by giving him “the visitor’s treatment” in a cultural and linguistic environment in which he was both “at home” and “away” because of his dual loyalty, Toronto too had

27761_Koustas.indd 150

2016-04-01 13:15:38

Conclusion 151

the best of both worlds. By welcoming a voice from Quebec, it could experience Lepage’s familiar otherness and boast of its commitment and contribution to the development and redefinition of Canadian theatre while at the same time promoting the city as, and on, a global stage. Lepage enacted new identity models linked to language and nation, and thus pushed critics, theatre producers, and audiences to redefine Toronto’s position with respect to Canadian theatre. The critical discussion of Lepage’s work suggests that Toronto, English Canada, or the roc, while perhaps not the only significant Others in Lepage’s personal and dramatic universe, participated actively in the dialogue of self-discovery identified by Charles Taylor. As he observes: “This crucial feature of human life is its fundamentally dialogical character. We become full agents, capable of understanding ourselves, and hence of defining our identity through our acquisition of rich human languages of expression … People do not acquire the languages needed for self-definition on their own. Rather, we are introduced to them through interaction with others who matter to us – what George Herbert Mead called ‘significant others.’ We don’t learn the languages in dialogue and then go to use them for our own purposes.”7 Lepage and his characters constructed identity, searched for recognition, and struggled against or with misrecognition by the Other in the Canadian and Quebec cultural, identificatory equation through productions that fused horizons through all of the languages of theatre. Neither Lepage’s small incestuous society, nor the box, need define or confine. Describing Quebec theatre in general, Linda Gaboriau, an eminent translator of drama, notes: “The strength of the theatre of Quebec lies in the imaginary, the stillness of the sentiment, in the visual presentation of its ideas; and in a successful negotiation of the demands made by different cultural traditions. A true vision of quality, a resonating sensibility.”8 Lepage’s success in Toronto and elsewhere lies perhaps in his work’s power to negotiate difference and otherness, not through the depiction of conflict or division, but through the imaginary and the visual presentation of shared space and ideas, and through the broadening and fusing of horizons. Toronto afforded him the opportunity to remain a proud member of his incestuous society while transgressing, and hence transforming, the two solitudes. As such, it was a unique port of call, and indeed inspiration on his global trajectory. Unlike other destinations, Toronto was a “home away from home” that recalled and “played”

27761_Koustas.indd 151

2016-04-01 13:15:38

152

Robert Lepage on the Toronto Stage

upon Lepage’s own dual identity as québécois and Canadian while joining him on, and benefiting from, his global artistic and geographic journey; he staged the pulsation between familiarity and otherness. The importance of technology in Lepage’s work may suggest that he does indeed enjoying playing with the toy as he transforms the box of theatre space into a “riveting road of aural and visual poetry.”9 His theatre’s ability to redefine the traditional geopolitical, linguistic, and cultural boundaries and thus to challenge conventional notions of language, identity, and nation demonstrates as well that Lepage still likes reshaping, playing with, and redefining the Canadian/ Quebec box. As Montreal theatre critic Pat Donnelly noted as early as 1995, “Lepage is a national treasure, no matter how you define the nation.”10

27761_Koustas.indd 152

2016-04-01 13:15:38

Notes



introduction

1 The author gratefully acknowledges the anonymous evaluators’ comments. 2 Quoted in Grescoe, Sacré Blues, 132. 3 Quoted in Winsor, “At Play,” 35. 4 Wagner, “Theatre Kicks Down,” J3. 5 Baillargeon, “Lepage en stock,” B8. 6 Stratford, “Canada’s Two Literatures,” 131. 7 Atwood and Beaulieu, Two Solicitudes; Beaudet, Échanges culturels entre les deux solitudes; Basen, Epstein, Huard, and Tierney, Bon Cop, Bad Cop. 8 Indeed, some may recall Pierre Trudeau’s quip during a campaign in British Columbia. When a heckler complained that he was tired of seeing French on his cereal box every morning, Trudeau advised him to “turn the box around,” suggesting yet another way of redeploying the box! 9 Ladouceur, Making the Scene. 10 Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J14. 11 Filewood, Alan. “Performing Canada: The Nation Enacted in the Imagined Theatre.” Textual Studies in Canada 15, Spring 2002. 12 “Bi and Bi” is shorthand for the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism (1963–69), which led to the creation of the department of multiculturalism and the Official Languages Act. 13 Koustas, “From Homespun to Awesome.” 14 Ibid., 81. 15 Wallace, Producing Marginality, 217. 16 Ibid., 220.

27761_Koustas.indd 153

2016-04-01 13:15:38

154

Notes to pages 8–12

17 Fraser, “Riveting Road,” E9. 18 Crew, “Imagistic Theatre,” B4. 19 Maclean’s, “Enrichers,” 40. 20 Quoted in Wardle, “Théâtre sans frontières,” 32. 21 Godfrey, “Catch This Version,” C5; Crew, “Quebec Maestro,” C1; Kirchhoff, “Lepage’s Needles,” C1; Chapman, “Lepage Keeps Us Hooked,” B8. 22 Dansereau, “Toronto applaudit,” B10. 23 Cushman, “Lepage Returns,” B12. 24 Citron, “Lepage Work at New Fest,” R11; Conlogue, “Dragons’ Trilogy from Quebec,” D9; Whiting, “The Dragons Come Home,” R3. 25 Ouzounian, “Kâ,” A27; Posner, “Cirque,” R2. 26 Conter, “Cheap Slurs,” R4; Prokosh, “Bigotry Blamed.” 27 Ouzounian, “Robert Lepage’s Nine Hour Work,” E2; Sumi, “Long Live Lipsynch.” 28 Since the initial version of this study was written and revised, Lepage has been staged three times in Toronto. Occasional reference to these subsequent productions is made in the notes. Needles and Opium, in a revised version starring Marc Labrèche and featuring a second character, Miles Davis, played by Wellesley Robertson III in a non-speaking role, was sold out in the Canadian Stage 2013 season. It was included again in the 2014– 15 program (May 1–June 10). 887, commissioned for the PanAm Games, came to the St Lawrence Centre (July 14–19, 2015) as part of Panamania. Lepage’s role in this international event hosted in Toronto confirms his role in promoting the city’s status as a global cultural capital. 29 See World Leaders [festival program], n.p. 30 Ibid., n.p. 31 Saul, “Aurora Online.” 32 Manning, Ephemeral Territories, xxvii. 33 Blodgett, “How Do You Say Gabrielle Roy?” 25. 34 Manguel, “Theatre of the Miraculous,” 37. 35 Audet, “Ich bin ein Lepage,” A19. 36 Hood, “Bilingual Theatre,” 11. 37 Koustas, “From Homespun to Awesome.” 38 E.g., Manguel, “Theatre of the Miraculous.” 39 “Having my play open the 6th World Stage in Toronto was important for me … Toronto is both my home and a foreign country. What could be better? I have the best of both worlds”; Lepage, “Un Triomphe,” A12. (Unless otherwise noted, all translations from the original French are my own.) 40 Cronin, Across the Lines, 107.

27761_Koustas.indd 154

2016-04-01 13:15:38



Notes to pages 12–17

155

41 The author gratefully acknowledges the evaluators for this expression. 42 “Two years ago, Elsinore, his techno solo adaptation of Hamlet, was poorly received, one of his rare failures on this side of the roc”; Baillargeon, “Sorties et arrivages,” B8. 43 Quoted in Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J14. 44 “People like Gilles [Maheu] and Denis [Marleau] understood that premieres had to happen outside of Quebec. We are not a threat in Toronto. There is not the same negativity, the same aggressiveness. I am not the least bit angry even if I was before”; quoted in Baillargeon, “Asymétrie du miracle,” 12. 45 See Leanore Lieblein, “Marianne Ackerman at the Montreal Gazette.” Lieblein notes: “However, Ackerman’s interest in the politics of Quebec theatre made her not only a critic but an advocate. Determined to bridge the gap between Montreal’s French and English theatre communities, she not only reported on both but represented them to each other. In the process of doing so, her own theatre aesthetic evolved” (372). 46 Ackerman, “Toronto [Loves] Lepage,” 100. 47 Taylor, Multiculturalism, 25. 48 Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J14. 49 “With Lepage, it is through travel, through movement toward the other, a foreigner, that a Quebecker tries to discover what touches and moves him”; quoted in Lepage, Le Projet Andersen, cover. 50 Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism, vii. 51 James, “Altered Plates.”



chapter one

1 Sections of this and subsequent chapters have appeared previously in Koustas, “Robert Lepage Meets the roc.” 2 Lepage, Dragons’ Trilogy, 15. 3 Lepage’s 2015 play, 887, is based on his childhood. He calls it “autofiction” and states: “I reorganize the truth a bit to make interesting theatre” (K. Taylor, “In 887”). The program reads: “A riveting foray into the world of memory by internationally renowned director, playwright and actor Robert Lepage. This intimate Ex Machina production explores the collection and recall of memories in this digital age of data storage, as well as how theatre, an art based on the exercise of memory, is still relevant today (4).” 4 Dundjerovic, ´ Theatricality, 5. 5 In an interview discussiong his 2015 autobiographical play 887, Lepage recalls: “You’d watch Hockey Night in Canada, and Saturday nights there

27761_Koustas.indd 155

2016-04-01 13:15:39

156

Notes to pages 17–19

would be these big fights: ‘I want to watch it in French!’ ‘I want to watch it in English! … My brother, because he was stronger and he was older, he would steal the knob so we couldn’t change the channels any more. So, there was this odd thing going on in our family … even though we weren’t necessarily about politics.” K. Taylor, “In 887.” 6 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Alison McAlpine,” 56. 7 Wagner, “All the World’s a Stage.” 8 Quoted in Fisher, “Write Lines,” 13; see also Fricker, Globalisation, 17. 9 In 887, his autobiographical play, Lepage recalls how the move to 887 Murray Street in the Montcalm neighbourhood in the upper town was a triumph for his father, who had managed to move his family “up” the cliff to a more prestigious location. 10 In a 2015 interview Lepage, referring to his own life in Quebec City and his autobiographical play 887, stated: “People forget that the whole separatist movement in Quebec was not a French-English thing when it started. It became that at one point, but at the start it was a working-class struggle and it just happened that the poor class spoke mainly French and the upper class spoke English.” Ahearn, “Robert Lepage Reflects.” 11 Quoted in Fricker, “Globalisation,” 11. 12 Building blocks, including models of Quebec City, recur in his theatre. For example, in the The Dragons’ Trilogy, the young girls use shoeboxes to represent stores in the neighbourhood and play is staged in a giant sandbox. In The Seven Streams of the River Ota, the Japanese house is divided into block-styled compartments. The set for Blue Dragon is divided into blocks that recall comic strips. 887 centres around one large wooden block that converts to a model of an apartment building in dollhouse fashion, the inside of an apartment and a diagram of the human brain. The repositioning and reconfiguring of the blocks to create new theatre spaces suggests, once again, the trope of reshaping the box to make it work and a theatre practice that ignores or reconfigures conventional, theatrical boundaries and divisions. 13 Ducharme, “Destin planétaire,” 77; see also Fricker, Globalisation, 13. 14 “We all do theatre a little for therapy”; Lepage, “Robert Lepage: Il faut que l’acteur ait une soif de savoir,” 140. 15 Fricker, Globalisation 12. 16 Dunderovic, Robert Lepage, 8. 17 Allen, Robert Lepage. 18 Dunderovic, Robert Lepage, 9. 19 Quoted in Fricker, Globalisation 13.

27761_Koustas.indd 156

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 19–23

157

20 Productions with Hummm include L’Attaque quotidienne (1979), La Ferme des animaux (1979), and Saturday Night Taxi (1980). 21 Quoted in Dunderovic, Theatricality, 2. 22 Early productions include L’École c’est secondaire (1980), A demi-lune (1982), En attendant (1982), and Coriolan et le monstre aux milles têtes (1983). 23 For a detailed discussion of this method, see Dundjerovic, ´ Theatricality, 31–3. 24 “The R E PERE cycles are an extremely precious working instrument that give the creator the foundation and the tools as well as a great deal of imaginative freedom and sensitivity. But they are not a miracle formula and do not provide genius. They cannot be explained; they are improvised. They do not provide talent; they enhance the use of it. And, what is essential, they are based on a principle: create from the concrete and not from ideas”; quoted in Circulations [theatre program], 8. 25 Dundjerovic, ´ Robert Lepage, 13. 26 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Alison McAlpine,” 134–5. 27 Ibid., 139. 28 Allen, Robert Lepage. A hilarious dubbing scene in Jésus de Montréal may have inspired Lepage’s 2008 Lipsynch. Down-and-out actors are reduced to providing the dubbed voices for English-language porn films to be shown in Quebec. The actors, particularly the two aging, frumpy females, are entirely miscast. When one of the male actors does not show up for the recording of a ménage-à-quatre hot sex scene, the remaining actor, played by Rémy Girard, must read both parts, and mixes up the lines. He claims, however, that the audience, wrapped up in the action, will not be in any condition to notice. 29 Dundjerovic, ´ Robert Lepage, 14. 30 Lepage and Brassard, Le Polygraphe. 31 There were as well earlier productions, including Saturday Night Taxi (1980), L’Ecole c’est secondaire (1980), and Attendant (1982). 32 While Ex Machina may not fit exactly the definition of Barba’s “third theatre,” it nonetheless includes some of the key elements, notably through its “building of a culture based on the exploration of the relationships between different groups of practitioners, and between performers and new communities of spectators”; Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 335. 33 In 2014 it was announced that Lepage would be embarking on another theatre-construction project, Le Diamant, in Quebec City. 34 Ex Machina, “The Image Mill.”

27761_Koustas.indd 157

2016-04-01 13:15:39

158

Notes to pages 23–6

35 Dundjerovic, ´ Theatricality, 2. 36 Maillot and Godin, Le théâtre québécois. 37 See Legris, Larrue, Bourassa, and David, Le théâtre au Québec. 38 “By creating in Fridolin a hero strongly identified with the milieu, Gélinas succeeded in guaranteeing a certain perpetuity to a formula that is a victim of the contemporary context by which it is inspired; above all, he paved the way for genuinely Quebec theatre, a theatre in which the situations, characters, and feeling are not borrowed from elsewhere. Fridolin was the necessary step to the meeting and appropriation of popular culture”; Godin, “Orphelins ou bâtards,” 30. 39 “During Maurice Duplessis’s reign, Quebec society stagnated, but in the early sixties the winds of change brought in major social and institutional reforms”; Ex Machina, Moulin à Images. 40 “The crisis in Quebec theatre occurred at a time when values were being questioned and while politics was switching from Maurice Duplessis’s right to Jean Lesage’s centre left and there were major social changes. The much awaited creation of a Ministry of Culture and of a totally unexpected Ministry of Education would have a direct and indirect impact on the theatre”; Bourrassa, “Premières modernités,” 107. 41 Belair, Le nouveau théâtre québécois. At this time, the terms French Canada, French Canadian, and canadien français were replaced by québé­ cois for the francophone population living in Quebec. French Canadian was reserved for those in other parts of Canada. 42 Speak white pour parler du gracious living et parler du standard de vie et de la Grande Société un peu plus fort alors speak white haussez vos voix de contremaîtres nous sommes un peu dur d’oreille nous vivons trop près des machines et n’entendons que notre souffle au-dessus des outils Lalonde, Speak White. In 887 Lepage gives an impassioned recitation of this poem. In the play, he has been asked to read it for the fortieth anniversary of La nuit de la poésie, where it had had such an impact. 43 “You didn’t sock him one, Dad? You didn’t sock him one? All they managed to do with you after 30 years is to get you to stick on labels? That’s it? Nothing else? After you gave them your best years?”; Dubé, Un simple soldat, 58–9. 44 Tremblay, Interview, 283.

27761_Koustas.indd 158

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 26–30

159

45 Quoted in Usmiani, 109. 46 Audet, “Ich bin ein Lepage.” 47 Dundjerovic, ´ Theatricality, 6. 48 “Theatre of the 1980s moves away from the dominant model of theatre exploring Quebeckness and focuses instead on the visual image … Theatre arts abandon social criticism and realism in order to embrace new forms of expression and renew the languages of theatre. The social criticism of the 1970s gives way to an emphasis on form in theatre as well as in dance”; Hurley, “Le grand récit des arts de la scène,” 18. 49 “What really is theatre? It can be agreed that, since the eighties, arriving at an homogenous definition has become extremely problematic. Are we questioning the end of the era of logos that we should consider along with the explosion of the boundaries among artistic disciplines, borrowings (historical, thematic, linguistic, artistic) by contemporary theatre from other cultures and the globalization of media and the expansion of new technologies?”; Rousset, introduction, 7. See also Hébert and PerelliContos, La face caché du théâtre de l’image. 50 Lepage also out-travelled his English-Canadian counterparts. Vit Wagner observes: “It’s ironic that, while English is the universally recognized lin­ gua franca, French-Canadian theatre has much greater currency outside Canada than its anglophone counterpart. The travel itinerary of acclaimed director Robert Lepage would be the envy of most English-Canadian theatre artists”; Wagner, “Theatre Kicks,” 31. See also Schryburt, “New Dynamics.” 51 “Over four years, Ex Machina has the highest financial turnover of all of the provincial companies, more than tnm, more than Carbone 14. This success has nothing to do with the personal reputation of the director, with the success of the productions that only bring in 30% of the financing through grants, but is entirely due to international co-production that pays for 70% of the operating budget. Opening up to the world, which means creating productions not for a local public but for multicultural distribution, is therefore justified not only by globalization but by profitability. ‘Find the audience, don’t wait for it’ could be the motto of Lepage, who is showing how it’s done”; Lefon, “Robert Lepage,” 82. 52 Wallace, Producing Marginality, 199. 53 The language bill 101 is frequently blamed for the exodus of financial institutions from Montreal to Toronto 54 McKinnie, City Stages, 7. 55 McCaughna, Toronto Citizen, Mar. 29, 1974. 56 The author thanks the attentive evaluators of the manuscript for this and other suggestions.

27761_Koustas.indd 159

2016-04-01 13:15:39

160

Notes to pages 30–3

57 Lepage, The Blue Dragon, 40. 58 “As always with Lepage, it is through travel, the movement towards the Other, the foreigner, that a Quebecker attempts to discover what touches and drives him”; Théâtre du Nouveau Monde, Profil d’une grande saison 2005–2006. 59 Quoted in Crew, “Robert Lepage,” C4. Lepage was referring to his collaboration on Echo. 60 Féral, “Dramatic Art,” 147. 61 Fricker, Globalisation, iii. 62 Dundjerovic, ´ Robert Lepage, 3. 63 Toronto Arts Council, Creative City Planning Framework, 3. 64 Theatre is clearly linked to the cultural tourism ambitions suggested here. A 2003 report by the Culture Divison of Toronto City Council entitled “The Creative City” states “cultural institutions draw millions of toursist, bringing $450 to $600 million a year in economic benefits to just the hotel and food sectors.” For a more detailed analysis of theatre as part of cultural tourism, see Bennett, “Theatre/Tourism.” 65 Ibid., 4. 66 Lepage, “Un Triomphe,” A12; Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J14. 67 Quoted in (and translated by) Féral, “Dramatic Art,” 149. 68 Ackerman, “Toronto [Loves] Lepage,” 100. 69 McKinnie uses “sentiment” not to describe feeling but rather to indicate a social bond. He states: “Theatre is not only a market activity but also a sentimental one, valued as a way to create social bonds between people and their environment” (9). 70 Mckinnie, City Stages, 11. 71 Ibid., 5. 72 Ibid., 9. 73 In “Rendering a Neighbourhood Queer,” Alison Bain studies the Queen Street neighbourhood from the perspective of social and cultural geography and underlines the importance of the artistic, including theatre, community: “Within the context on two participant-facilitated discussion events, we discursively and artistically investigate queer world-making in the neighbourhood of Queen Street West” (424). 74 Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism, 76. 75 In The Dialogic Imagination, Bakhtin defines the chronotope: We will give the name chronotope (literally, “time space”) to the intrinsic connectedness of temporal and spatial relationships that are artistically expressed in literature. This term [space-time] is employed in mathematics, and was introduced as part of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. The special

27761_Koustas.indd 160

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 33–5

161

meaning it has in relativity theory is not important for our purposes; we are borrowing it for literary criticism almost as a metaphor (almost, but not entirely). What counts for us is the fact that it expresses the inseparability of space and time (time as the fourth dimension of space). We understand the chronotope as a formally constitutive category of literature; we will not deal with the chronotope in other areas of culture. In the literary artistic chronotope, spatial and temporal indicators are fused into one carefully thought-out, concrete whole. Time, as it were, thickens, takes on flesh, becomes artistically visible; likewise, space becomes charged and responsive to the movements of time, plot and history. This intersection of axes and fusion of indicators characterizes the artistic chronotope. The chronotope in literature has an intrinsic generic significance. It can even be said that it is precisely the chronotope that defines genre and generic distinctions, for in literature the primary category in the chronotope is time. The chronotope as a formally constitutive category determines to a significant degree the image of man in literature as well. The image of man is always intrinsically chronotopic. 76 Susan Bennett convincingly argues the importance of theatre in Toronto’s tourism agenda. She notes the importance of the creation of a theatre district and the huge revenue generating power of mega-musicals such as Mamma Mia and The Lion King. Toronto was eager to see, and sell, itself as a city “good enough” to host and stage these productions. 77 McKinnie, City Stages, 9. 78 Urban geographer Jamie Peck makes a compelling case for “Vancouverism,” an antidote to urban sprawl by privileging innovative design and planning of the downtown core, including the incorporation of cultural industries, such as theatre (386). Creating and supporting a theatre district or districts aligned with Toronto’s plan for economic growth and for the revitalization of the downtown core. 79 “History,” Luminato Festival, https://luminatofestival.com/pages/luminatofestival/history/. 80 Ibid. 81 Creative City Planning Framework, 2. 82 See Hadfield, Re: Producing Women’s Dramatic History. 83 Knowles, “Multicultural Text,” 74. 84 Gómez, Mayte, “Coming Together,” 30. 85 Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism, 75. 86 Knowles uses “intracultural” here because he is referring specifically to “inside” or “within” the Toronto community as opposed to “intercultural” meaning between or among different communities. He notes: “What is

27761_Koustas.indd 161

2016-04-01 13:15:39

162

Notes to pages 35–41

happening now in increasingly multicultural urban centres globally is the development of performance ecologies in which Indigenous and immigrant minority populations are working performatively to forge diasporic identities in relation not to the dominant culture – or not to the dominant culture alone – but to one another.” Theatre and Interculturalism, 60. 87 Ibid., 76–7. 88 Wasserman, “Where is the Here Now?” 83–4. 89 Filewood, Performing Canada, xvii. 90 Blodgett, Configuration, 25. 91 Ladouceur, Making the Scene, 49. 92 John Greyson directed a film version, which won the 1996 Genie Award for the best film in English. 93 See Ladouceur, Making the Scene, 130–42. 94 Quoted in Nestruck, “A Second Wind.” 95 Ibid., R4. 96 Bouchard became unwittingly embroiled in the conflict at the Factory Theatre when Ken Gass was fired. He pulled his Tom at the Farm from the 2012–13 program. It was rescheduled for Buddies in Bad Times in April– May 2015. 97 Quoted in Nestruck, “A Second Wind.” 98 Indeed, Mouawad himself underlined this connection. His play Seuls, staged at the National Arts Centre in October 2008, recounts the story of Harwan, a PhD student who is writing his thesis on Robert Lepage. 99 Broadway World, “Wajdi Mouawad’s Forests.” 100 Landau, “Weekend Luminato Picks.” 101 After being fired from the Factory Theatre in 2012, director Ken Gass launched the Canadian Rep Theatre 2014 season with Mouawad’s Pacamambo. 102 Simon, “Robert Lepage and the Languages of Spectacle,” 215. 103 Ladouceur, Making the Scene, 48. 104 “Even in imagistic theatre, where the accent is placed on the visual at the expense of the text, a new verbal aesthetic is created, like Robert Lepage’s plurilingual montages”; ibid., 215. 105 Koustas, “From Homespun to Awesome,” 101. 106 Knowles, “Multicultural Text,” 73. 107 “History,” Luminato Festival, https://luminatofestival.com/pages/luminatofestival/history/. 108 Quoted in Hood, “Bilingual Theatre in Canada,” 11. 109 McKinnie, City Stages, 19. 110 Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization, 5.

27761_Koustas.indd 162

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 41–4

163

111 The author gratefully acknowledges the anonymous evaluators for this useful observation. 112 It is notable that the emphasis on “gadgetry” and “stage trickery” and the visual, masked, or perhaps compensated for, predictable, frequently melodramatic plots (see Fricker, Globalisation) and thin texts. The lost and lonely artist and rival siblings, are, for example, frequently recurring themes. While these are all related to the fundamental quest for identity, the even trite, banal or convoluted storylines and flat scripts contributed to the negative reception of some plays such as The Geometry of Miracles, which just seemed to wander. The author acknowledges the anonymous evaluators for this observation. 113 “Both my home and a foreign country”; Lepage, “Un Triomphe,” A12. 114 Féral, “Dramatic Art of Robert Lepage,” 143. 115 Quoted in Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization, 87. 116 For a discussion of the mega-theatre industry in Toronto, see Filewood, 83–101. 117 Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization, 87. 118 Fishcher-Lichte, “Staging the Foreign,” 38. 119 Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism, 29. 120 McTheatre arguably falls squarely in the category, and expectations, of cultural tourism. If Lepage contributed significantly to Toronto’s promotion as a global cultural capital, it was not, however, through “universal” theatre that was everywhere the same. It is important to recognize, nonetheless, as does Susan Bennett that, “the tourist audience is a substantial one for theatre of all kinds and in many different locals” (“Theatre/ Tourism,” 425). 121 Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 6. 122 Ibid., 6–7. 123 “At the time of writing, the artists at Ex Machina are contemplating the challenges ahead. These include the desire to produce theatre for audiences that are gradually becoming more accessible like China, Russia, India where, in fact, the company has produced very few shows. For Ex Machina, the shock of meeting with these cultures rich in theatre tradition should lead to combinations that will lead to new ways of approaching theatre. Already, current projects, like Le Dragon bleu are drawing on this dialogue with cultures that seem less and less foreign”; Caux and Gilbert, Ex Machina, 58. 124 Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 354. 125 “To understand the foreign source culture, the audience must not transplant itself there but rather situate itself with respect to it, assume the

27761_Koustas.indd 163

2016-04-01 13:15:39

164

Notes to pages 44–48

temporal, spatial, and behavioural distance between the two”; Pavis, Théâtre au croisement des cultures, 289. 126 Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism, 1. 127 Ibid., 4. 128 Ibid. 129 Ibid., 21. Knowles provides an in-depth and engaging analysis of the debates between scholars and practitioners (such as Bharucha, Jaqueline Lo, and Helen Gilbert, and Brook’s supporters, including Patrice Pavis) and others like Erika Fischer-Lichte and David Williams. Pavis’s hour-glass model, which posits a one-way flow, comes under strenuous criticism. Equally problematic is the monocultural audience. According to Fischer-Lichte, Robert Wilson and others “direct their work primarily at audiences of their own culture.” (Ibid., 26–9.) 130 Ibid., 59. 131 Lenze, “The Whole Thing You’re Doing Is White Man’s Ways,” 76. 132 C. Taylor, Multiculturalism, 67. 133 Ackerman, “Toronto [Loves] Lepage,” 100. 134 C. Taylor, Malaise of Modernity, 33. 135 Bakhtin makes a similar argument with respect to the importance of the other: “There exists a very strong, but onesided and thus untrustworthy, idea that in order better to understand a foreign culture, one must enter into it, forgetting one’s own, and view the world through the eyes of this foreign culture … Of course, a certain entry as a living being into a foreign culture … is a necessary part of the process of understanding it; but if this were the only aspect, it would be merely duplication and would not entail anything new or enriching. Creative understanding does not renounce itself, its own place in time, its own culture; and it forgets nothing. After all, a person cannot actually see or make sense of even his own exterior appearance as a whole, no mirrors or photographs will help him, only others can see and understand his authentic exterior, thanks to their spatial outsideness and thanks to the fact that they are others … In the realm of culture, outsideness is the most powerful lever of understanding.” Bakhtin, Speech Genres, 7. 136 Wallace, Producing Marginality, 218. 137 Wagner, Establishing Our Boundaries, 24. 138 Ibid., 4. 139 Lieblein, “Marianne Ackerman,” 372. 140 Nunn, “Theatre,” 387.

27761_Koustas.indd 164

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 48–55

165

141 Ibid., 395. 142 Ibid., 402. 143 Bourdieu writes: “It is the charismatic ideology, in effect, which directs the gaze towards the apparent producer – painter, composer, writer – and prevents us asking who has created this ‘creator’ and the magic power of transubstantiation with which the ‘creator’ is endowed. It also steers the gaze towards the most visible aspect of the process of production, that is, the material fabrication of the product, transfigured into ‘creation,’ thereby avoiding any enquiry beyond the artist and the artist’s own activity into the conditions of the demiurgic capability”; Bourdieu, Rules of Art, 167. See also van Rees, “Modelling the Literary Field.” 144 Box office tallies, while interesting, are not be trusted as ticket sales depend on many factors including competing events, the time of year, the weather at the time of the performance, ticket prices, etc. 145 Quoted in Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 353. 146 Ibid., 353.



chapter two

1 “Must absolutely be seen before deciding to never go to the theatre again because you consider this art form outdated”; Circulations [theatre program], n.p. 2 Circulations [theatre program], n.p. 3 Ibid., n.p. 4 Ibid., n.p. 5 Quotations from the play come from the author’s notes on the 1 March performance at the Canadian Repertory Theatre production that ran 26 February to 8 March 1985 in Ottawa, Ontario. 6 Ackerman, “‘Circulations’ Works as Collective Effort,” B9. 7 Circulations [theatre program], n.p. 8 Quoted in Corrivault, “Collective Exploration.” 9 Fraser, “Riveting Road,” E9. 10 Crew, “Canadian Rep’s Best,” C7. 11 Fraser, “Riveting Road,” E9. 12 See note 8, Introduction. 13 Hare, “Use of Sound Effects,” C13. 14 Nicholls, “Innovative Play Stunning and Fun,” G3. 15 Ibid., G3. 16 Hare, “Use of Sound Effects,” C13.

27761_Koustas.indd 165

2016-04-01 13:15:39

166

Notes to pages 55–63

17 Ibid., C13. 18 Nightcap Productions, “Fifth Anniversary.” 19 Ibid. 20 For a discussion of the language mix, see Nolette, 94–5. 21 Ibid. 22 Quoted in Rempel, “To Be, or What?” 36. 23 Quoted in Bean, “French Playwright Doing Translation,” C1. 24 Lacey, “All the Road’s a Stage,” C9. 25 Quoted in Cox, “Sacré Bleu!” A18. 26 Quoted in Rempel, “To Be, or What?” 36. 27 Quoted in Cox, “Sacré Bleu!” A18. 28 Lepage, quoted in Cox, “Sacré Bleu!” A18; McCall, quoted in Lacey, “All the Road’s a Stage,” C9. 29 Quoted in Lacey, “All the Road’s a Stage,” C9. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 Quoted in Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 33 Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 6–7. 34 Bemrose, “A Sorcerer of the Stage,” 53; Czarnecki, “Biggest Splash,” n.p. 35 Conlogue, “Dragon’s Trilogy: A Masterful Tapestry,” C10; Crew, “Imagistic Theatre at Its Best,” B4. 36 McKinnie, City Stages, 3. 37 Ibid., 9, 18. 38 Quoted in Manguel, “Theatre of the Miraculous,” 37. 39 This statement is used in The Dragon’s Trilogy Publicity File, held in the Ex Machina Archives at La Caserne, Quebec City. 40 “Large sections in English, others in Quebec French, several in Chinese, and some in Japanese”; Lachance, “Trilogie des dragons,” 61. 41 “Image maker”; Hébert and Perelli-Contos, La face cachée, 59. 42 Whiting, “Dragon Comes Home,” R3. 43 While the other parts remained essentially the same, “The White Dragon” was considerably modified in the 2003 version. Of particular note is the cutting of the scene where Pierre finds himself on a mountaintop. Other scenes, such as the one discussed above in which Crawford is featured, were added. The discussion is based on the Montreal production staged during the Festival de Théâtre des Amériques, May 2003. 44 Quoted in Manguel, “Theatre of the Miraculous,” 37. 45 Dragons’ Trilogy [theatre program], Factory Theatre, n.p. 46 Brassard et al., La trilogie des dragons. 47 Quoted in Dragons’ Trilogy [theatre program], Mark Taper Forum, n.p.

27761_Koustas.indd 166

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 63–6

167

48 “A rectangular performance space, covered in sand and surrounded by a sidewalk. At one end, a small booth with a windowed door and windows on either side, and an inclining roof. A ladder is leaning up against the back wall. Along the sides, three concrete pillars and bleachers where spectators sit facing each other”; Brassard et al., La trilogie des dragons, 14. 49 Wallace, Producing Marginality, 199. 50 This scene had particular resonance in Poland, which at the time of the production had recently experienced a show of military strength. 51 See “Cahiers de théâtre, ” Jeu 45, 4 (1987); Brassard et al., La trilogie des dragons. 52 Bennett, “Trilogie des dragons,” n.p.; Crew, “Imagistic Theatre at Its Best,” B4; Campbell, “Dragons’ Trilogy,” 20; Manguel, “Theatre of the Miraculous,” 34. 53 Bury, “La critique parisienne accueille favorablement La trilogie des ­dragons,” 11. 54 Quoted in Whiting, “Dragon Comes Home,” R3. 55 Ibid. 56 Sections of the following discussion have appeared previously in Koustas, “Staging the/an Other,” 395–414; Koustas, “Robert Lepage’s Language/ Dragon’s Trilogy,” 35–50. 57 “Robert Lepage has a lease on success. Over his twenty-five year career, the author, actor, director, producer and film maker has been showered with honours. A holy prophet in his own country, Robert Lepage’s name has mythical status in theatres around the world. His works do not age. Staged for the first time in 1985, La trilogie des dragons has been following its odyssey to the four corners of the world”; Giguère, “Robert Lepage,” B3. 58 “La trilogie was always a point of reference for us. It is on this that we built our artistic language. All of the themes we tackle, the universe, the Orient, the quest for identity both personal and collective, the relationship with the Other, the search for the Other, the bumping up against other cultures, all of that was in La trilogie”; quoted in Lessard, “Les dragons nouveaux.” 59 “A theatrical shock, a moment of grace. Pure delight. Enchanting. There are just not enough superlatives. Everyone who, like me, in June 1987 saw the world premiere of the full length version of La trilogie des dragons in the humid and abandoned hangar of Old Montreal will never forget it … The Théâtre Repère production is emblematic of Quebec theatre’s opening up to the world … By staging a trilingual production telling the story of three generations in Quebec, Toronto and Vancouver Chinatowns, Robert Lepage left behind the grimy kitchens and smoky taverns to travel the world”; Boulanger, “La trilogie des dragons.”

27761_Koustas.indd 167

2016-04-01 13:15:39

168

Notes to pages 66–71

60 “A work that changed the face of Quebec theatre”; St Hilaire, “Acte de transmission,” 1. 61 “La trilogie des dragons also provides the opportunity to measure the distance travelled, not just artistically but socially and collectively. In fact, never before have Asia and the entire Orient been so available and sought after by Westerners. If the foreigner, the Chinaman in Quebec in the 20s and even Mr Lee, his Torontonian son in the 50s, retain their specificity and even their mysteriousness, they have never seemed so close to us. The trajectory of the green, red and white dragons is also that of the sixteen years they represent”; Chaboillez, “Redécouvrir Lepage.” 62 Conlogue, “Dragon’s Trilogy from Quebec,” D9. 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid. In the same article he acknowledges both the importance and overlooking of Circulations when he states, “Théâtre Repère had one earlier show in Toronto, Circulations, but it is not well known here.” 65 Wardle, “Masterpiece of Revivalism”; Fraser, “Finale 87 Arts East,” C10. 66 Crew, “Imagistic Theatre at Its Best,” B4. 67 Pennington, “Daring, Dazzling Dragon’s Trilogy,” 76. 68 Crew, “Imagistic Theatre at Its Best,” B4. 69 Friedlander, “‘Dragon’s Trilogy’ an Epic.” 70 Quoted in World Leaders [festival program], n.p. 71 Czarnecki, “Biggest Splash of a Canadian New Wave.” 72 Quoted in Wagner, “Dragon’s Trilogy,” D6. 73 Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization, 5. 74 “For me, the revelation was total and of major importance. The Americans would say an epiphany. I was propelled to the status of world citizen having battled for years to earn the right to be a citizen in my own country”; quoted in Caux and Gilbert, Ex Machina, 11. 75 Fricker, Globalisation, iv. 76 Bharucha, Theatre and the World, 14. 77 Harvie, “Transnationalism, Orientalism and Cultural Tourism,” 123. 78 Ibid., 111. 79 Conlogue, “Dragon’s Trilogy: A Masterful Tapestry,” C10. 80 Burke, “Making a Connection.” 81 Fricker, “La trilogie des dragons,” 34. 82 “In all the cities in which we tour, the audience is always moved … Right now, the Orient has a great deal of influence in North American life. Taoism is discussed a lot, and people do tai chi in the parks in the morning. The trilogy is the Orient meeting the West, the union of Yin and Yang. That’s what makes it such a rich show”; Poulin, “Le public.”

27761_Koustas.indd 168

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 71–7

169

83 Dragons’ Trilogy [theatre program] Factory Theatre, n.p. 84 Quoted in Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 85 Ibid. 86 Billington, “Happy Occident,” 38. 87 Quoted in Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 88 Ibid. 89 See Koustas, “Staging the/an Other.” 90 The only negative reception occurred in Manitoba in 1990, when the Meech Lake Accord was blamed for the audience’s intolerance of French; Prokosh, “Bigotry Blamed.” 91 See Koustas, “Images of Alterity.” 92 The cover of Le Projet Andersen reads, “c’est par le voyage, le mouvement vers l’Autre, l’étranger, qu’un Québécois tente de découvrir ce qui le touche et l’anime” (Lepage, Le Projet Andersen, cover). 93 Lepage also performed Vinci at the Calgary Olympics in 1988. In 2015 he once again performed a solo play, 887, in conjunction with another international sports event, the PanAm games. The choice of Lepage at two major, international games where Canada hosts the “world” speaks to the city’s confidence in his ability to attract and entertain a global audience. 94 “Solo performances require a choice among three means of communication : interior monologue, conversation with the public or dialogue with a person not on stage. I generally prefer the third option because it allows greater freedom and the possibility to integrate the other modes”; quoted in Caux and Gilbert, Ex Machina, 43. 95 “The Vinci that is being proposed to you is not the portrait of a painter but rather a sensitive evocation of a voyage, a route, simply put, a questioning”; Vinci [theatre program], n.p. 96 Conlogue, “Where to Draw the Line,” A23. 97 Crew, “Quebec’s Lepage,” D1. 98 Crew, “Quebec’s Lepage,” D1; Conlogue, “Where to Draw the Line,” A23. 99 Lacey, “Going Forward,” D7. 100 Lefebvre, “New Filters,” 33–4. 101 Lacey, “Going Forward,” D7. 102 “However, the play’s protagonist is merely a young Québécois photographer. There is nothing mythical about his name. His name is simply Philippe. But his search for a certain artistic integrity should touch as deeply as the the angst of the great Italian genius”; Vinci [theatre program], n.p. 103 Shawn Huffman, “Adrift: Affective Dislocation in Robert Lepage’s Tectonic Plates,” 162.

27761_Koustas.indd 169

2016-04-01 13:15:39

170

Notes to pages 77–84

104 “There were many elements in the version that was supposed to be staged in Montreal. Maybe the play would have been successful but that is not what we were trying to do. Here, it changes every night. It is not entirely ready yet but now there is great potential”; Beaunoyer, “Attaqué par la ­critique,” D1. 105 Godfrey, “Catch This Version,” C5; Wagner, ‘Two Emerging Theatre Masters,” E3. 106 Montessuit, “Lepage n’est pas prêt”; Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J1. 107 “It must one day be recognized even here in Quebec that this is an event of international importance, that our theatre is presently exploding on the world scene, and that Europe is already waiting for this play. In November 90, it will be staged in Glasgow, that’s settled. Next, London, Paris and other capitals”; Beaunoyer, “Attaqué par la critique.” 108 Quill, “Fragmenting Civilization,” C8. 109 Groen, Review, A17. 110 Huffman, “Adrift,” 167. 111 Ibid., 155. 112 Wallace, Producing Marginality, 199–200. 113 Quoted in Huffman, “Adrift,” 161. 114 Ibid., 156. 115 Quoted in Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 116 The name commemorates the restoration of theatre in Quebec with a performance of Molière by British soldiers after an eighty-year ban on theatre. The company produced a play, L’Affaire Tartuffe, based on the 1774 event. 117 Quoted in Lieblein, “Marianne Ackerman,” 381. 118 Crew, “Robert Lepage a One-man Theatrical Whirlwind,” C1. 119 Crew, “Quebec Maestro,” F4. 120 Quoted in Crew, “Robert Lepage a One-man Theatrical Whirlwind,” C1. 121 Ibid. 122 Ibid. 123 Godfrey, “Riveting Exploration,” D9. 124 Crew, “Quebec Maestro,” F4. 125 Lepage, Le Polygraphe [film]. 126 Godfrey, “Riveting Exploration,” D9. 127 Conlogue, “Lepage’s Evocative Polygraph.” 128 Quoted in Hood, “Bilingual Theatre in Canada,” 11. 129 Hood, “Bilingual Theatre in Canada,” 13. 130 “Toronto is both home and a foreign country. What could be better? I have the best of both worlds”; Lepage, “Un Triomphe de Plus,” A12.

27761_Koustas.indd 170

2016-04-01 13:15:39





Notes to pages 85–91

171

chapter three

1 Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 6. 2 Cronin, Across the Lines, 56. 3 Féral, “Dramatic Art,” 154. 4 In the 2014 and 2015 productions by the Canadian Stage, Wellesley Robertson III, an African Canadian, has a non-speaking role as Miles Davis. The recent productions focus much more directly on racial issues, including the impossibility of Davis’s relationship with Juliette Greco in 1950s America. This emphasis places the play more squarely in the thematics of global theatre as defined by Lonergan. Interculturalism appears more stridently as a central trope of the play. 5 Canadian Stage, Needles and Opium, n.p. 6 Quoted in Winsor, “At Play,” 35. 7 Crew, “Robert Lepage,” C1. 8 Lepage, Needles and Opium [playscript], 7. 9 Chapman, “Lepage Keeps Us,” B8. 10 Ibid. 11 Féral, “Dramatic Art,” 150. 12 C. Taylor, Malaise of Modernity, 33. 13 Lepage, Needles and Opium [playscript], 7. 14 Quoted in Wagner, “The World’s His Stage,” G11. 15 Quoted in Wolf, “Robert Lepage,” H50. 16 Kirchhoff, “Lepage’s Needles,” C1. 17 Wagner, “Robert Lepage,” K1. 18 World Leaders [festival program], n.p.; Lepage, “Un triomphe de plus,” A12. 19 Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 20 Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization. 21 See Gordon, Purpose of Playing. 22 “It’s official. The North-American premiere of Lepage’s very ambitious and long awaited play marking the 50th anniversary of Hirsoshima will take place in … Toronto”; Lévesque, “Toronto s’offre,” B8. 23 Lévesque, “Hiroshima mon détour,” B8. This is a play on the title of Marguerite Duras’ film Hiroshima, mon amour. 24 Conlogue, “It’s a New Renaissance,” C9. 25 For further discussion, see Koustas, “Shifting Identities in the Theatre of Robert Lepage,” 136–48. 26 Adilman, “Robert Lepage’s Vision,” H1. 27 The Toronto version includes another character, Linda, a Montrealer, who befriends Jeffrey and Ada. She is Patricia’s sister.

27761_Koustas.indd 171

2016-04-01 13:15:39

172

Notes to pages 91–5

28 While it is too early in Lepage’s career to find here an even indirect jab at the festival circuit, it is worth noting that Lepage was clearly mocking the wholesale import of cultural products for their market, rather than artistic, value. 29 Fricker, introduction, i. 30 Lepage and Ex Machina, Seven Streams, 87. 31 Ibid., 88. 32 Coulbourn, “Seven Streams Floods Senses,” 54. 33 Pavis, Théâtre au croisement des cultures. 34 Quoted in Winsor, “Magnificent Seven,” 36. 35 “Felt like I was living in a Nintendo game”; quoted in Charest, Robert Lepage, 47. For Lepage’s subsequent visits to Asia, see Charest, 47–55. 36 “Does Japan have anything to offer other than electronic gadgets? The famous director went, saw, and was conquered”; Charest, “Pélerinage,” 34. 37 “Several trips later, he had a deeper vision, a vision of a refined and baroque culture built on transparency that absorbs rather than imitates the West”; Charest, “Pélerinage,” 35. 38 Adilman, “Robert Lepage’s Vision,” H1. 39 Quoted in Adilman, “Robert Lepage’s Vision,” H1. 40 Bemrose, “River of Surprises,” 113. 41 Winsor, “ Magnificent Seven,” 36. 42 “For the Western audience, it is difficult to be faced with so many codes. The butoh, the companies like Sankai Juku work a little better on the international stage probably because the dance world is more open to different vocabularies and accepts more abstraction. But in theatre, we don’t know the codes and do not understand the plays. Integrating different techniques, video, songs, Chinese calligraphy, opera as in Les sept branches de la Rivière Ota is a direct Japanese influence”; Charest, “Pélerinage,” 40. 43 Winsor, “Magnificent Seven,” 36. The Montreal production made the Globe and Mail’s Top Ten list of theatre productions for 1997; Globe and Mail, “Top 100,” C22. 44 Dansereau, “Toronto applaudit,” B10; K. Taylor, “Lepage Plumbs New Depths,” C1. 45 Kaplan and Lawless, “Awesome Ota”; Coulbourn, “Seven Streams Floods Senses,” 54; Bemrose, “River of Surprises,” 114. 46 Winsor, “Magnificent Seven,” 36; Wagner, “Lepage’s Seven Streams,” B3. 47 At one point Sophie corrects the translator who has confused tu, the past participle of the verb se taire, “to become silent,” with tué from the verb tuer, “to kill.”

27761_Koustas.indd 172

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 95–102

173

48 Wagner, “Lepage’s Seven Streams,” B3. 49 Adilman, “Robert Lepage’s Vision,” H1. 50 Bemrose, “River of Surprises,” 114. 51 Wagner, “Lepage’s Seven Streams,” B3. 52 Lepage and Ex Machina, Seven Streams, 49. 53 Quoted in Harvie, “Transnationalism,” 110. 54 Ibid., 122, 124. 55 Reynolds, “Double-Edge,” n.p. 56 Ibid., n.p. 57 Lepage and Ex Machina, Seven Streams, 10. 58 “This is the direction in which the company and I increasingly want to move. I think it comes from the cnn world in which we live where everyone knows everything almost instantly. It’s a world where borrowing is everywhere, there are more and more links among cultures. We are being pushed towards superposition, integration”; quoted in Charest, “Pélerinage,” 40. 59 Coulbourn, “Seven Streams Floods Senses,” 54. 60 Kirchhoff, “Arts Ink Machina Imperfecta,” C3. 61 Ibid. 62 Quoted in Chapman, “Hamlet Brillant,” D3. 63 Quoted in Adilman, “Robert Lepage Is the King,” J2. 64 Winsor, “New One Man Show.” 65 K. Taylor, “Dancing Exuberantly,” C1. 66 Adilman, “Robert Lepage Is the King,” J2. 67 Quoted in Donnelly, “It’s All Lepage,” D1. 68 Arcand, Jesus of Montreal. Lepage had also directed numerous productions of Shakespeare, including Macbeth, Coriolan, La Tempête (1992), and A Midsummer’s Night Dream (1992). 69 Quoted in Adilman, “Robert Lepage Is the King,” J2. 70 Chapman, “Hamlet Brillant,” D3. 71 Cushman, “Shades of Hamlet,” C3. 72 Quoted in Globe and Mail, “Critics Pan,” C1. 73 K. Taylor, “Lessons from All the World’s a Stage,” C6. 74 Adilman, “Robert Lepage Is the King,” J2. 75 Donnelly, “It’s All Lepage,” D1. 76 “Two years ago, Elsinore got negative reviews, one of his rare failures this side of the roc.” In fact Baillargeon describes Lepage as the “darling of the World Stage”; Baillargeon, “Sorties et arrivages,” B8. 77 Wagner, “One of Lepage’s Few Missteps.” 78 Quoted in Donnelly, “It’s All Lepage,” D1. Lepage elaborated, “The place, the surroundings, the family of Hamlet are very much representative of

27761_Koustas.indd 173

2016-04-01 13:15:39

174

Notes to pages 102–8

that which takes place in this famous character’s mind … For me, each scene represents a part of the head of Hamlet … It is as if Shakespeare had taken the head of Hamlet and had dissected every part of it. And, after this dissection, there remained this skull, which has become the ­universal cliché of Western theatre”; quoted in Bissonnette, “Historical Interculturalism,” 44. 79 Quoted in Boulanger, “Au coeur du sujet,” 33. 80 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Richard Eyre.” 81 Bissonnette, “Historical Interculturalism,” 43. 82 The author acknowledges the evaluator for this succinctly worded observation. 83 Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J14. 84 K. Taylor, “Cold Geometry,” C13; Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J1. 85 “Lepage has a greater presence in the Queen City than in Mayor Bourque’s town”; Boulanger, “La philosophie dans le boudoir.” 86 Donnelly, “Lepage Work Is All over the Map,” C2. 87 Marks, “Muse and Architect as One,” E5. 88 Kennedy, “Greatness Buried,” D3. 89 Rickerd, “Robert Lepage,” 19. 90 Marks, “Muse and Architect as One,” E5. 91 Chapman, “Lepage Pulls Off a Miracle,” E12. 92 Coulbourn, “Geometry’s Askew,” 18. 93 Kennedy, “Greatness Buried,” D3. 94 K. Taylor, “Cold Geometry,” C13. 95 Wagner, “All the World’s a Stage,” G11. 96 Quoted in Wagner, “Miracles Worker,” J1. 97 Ibid. 98 Cushman, “Lepage Returns,” B13. 99 Ackerman, “Toronto [Loves] Lepage,” 100. 100 Lepage, “Far Side of the Moon” [playscript], 2. 101 Fricker focuses on the role of motherhood in this and Lepage’s other plays: “Smothering and intense mother-son relationships are a representational trope of Lepage’s work, from Françoise and Pierre in the Trilogy to Elsinore’s engagement with the bond between Hamlet and Gertrude, to Sophie and Pierre in the final boîte of Ota. Far Side both continues this pattern and attempts to step out of it … Lepage creates his most literal representation to date of the desire to escape adult subjectivity and make the impossible journey back to unity with the maternal figure”; Fricker, “Globalisation,” 269–70.

27761_Koustas.indd 174

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 108–12

175

102 Lepage, Far Side of the Moon [playscript], 1; quoted in Fricker, Globalisation, 267. 103 Friedlander, “Abroad the Farside,” 45. 104 Lepage, “Drawing on the French Side of the Brain,” B6. 105 Lepage, “Far Side of the Moon” [playscript], 14; quoted in Fricker, “Globalisation,” 273. 106 Lepage’s work repeatedly underscores the doubling of personality, a doubly representative figure of identity. The individual doubles and transforms (see Philippe and André, the two faces of the same individual, or Frédéric Lapointe and the director of the Opera Garnier, who can in fact be viewed as the double figure of the creator and his manipulator). In fact, it would be quite impossible to imagine the actor without his shadow (a motif that The Andersen project stresses), or the character without his double (Fouquet, Robert Lepage, 75; see also Féral, “Dramatic Art,” 150). 107 Lepage, Far Side of the Moon [playscript], 24. 108 Fricker, Globalisation, 267. 109 Ibid., 271. 110 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Alison McAlpine,” 56. 111 “What? Twelve-thirty and it’s last call? I’ll gulp it down to give the staff a break, but still. I mean, is Montreal still in Quebec or has it moved to Ontario because of mergers?”; Lepage, “Far Side of the Moon” [playscript], 49. 112 Crew, “Too Little too late,” A31. 113 K. Taylor, “Air’s a Bit Thin,” R12. 114 Cushman, “Lepage Returns,” B12. 115 Coulbourn, “Lepage’s Giant Leap.” 116 Ibid. 117 Friedlander, “Abroad the Farside,” 45. 118 “He demonstrates nonetheless an effort, an endeavour to understand humanity, its place in the universe, its relationship to its fellow creatures however different. I think the only thing we have in common is difference”; Brassard, preface, 8. 119 World Leaders [festival program], n.p. 120 Ibid., n.p. 121 Wagner, “Theatre Kicks Down All the Boundaries,” J3. 122 “The new idea is that personal encounters with alien performance traditions provide a necessary technique of alienation from the performer’s own inherited culture, allowing her to discover a unique performing identity through an intercultural exchange with a foreign tradition … In an

27761_Koustas.indd 175

2016-04-01 13:15:39

176

Notes to pages 113–17

increasingly globalized world, this postmodern tendency to ‘mix and match’ forms and techniques of performance from around the world may well herald the start of a new epoch in the history of performance”; Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 6–7. 123 Gadamer, Truth and Method, 83. 124 World Leaders [festival program], n.p.



chapter four

1 Schryburt, “Structure of Theatre Festivals.” 2 K. Taylor, “At Last, Another Great Show,” R6; Whiting, “Dragon Comes Home,” R3; Everett-Green, “Conversion of Robert Lepage,” R1. 3 Ouzounian, “Kâ Is Talk,” A27; Posner, “Cirque Unveils Over the Top Ka,” R2. 4 Conter, “Cheap Slurs Beggar Opera,” R4. 5 Harris, “A Play Marked by Genius,” R5. 6 Citron, “Lepage Work at New Fest,” R11; Renzetti, “Robert Lepage Invades the Land of Alcopops,” R3; Houpt, “… and the Devil,” R1; Whiting, “Dragon Comes Home,” R3; Lepage, “Monday Q&A,” R3. 7 Maclean’s, “The Enrichers: 50 Most Influential Canadians.” 8 Koustas, “Zulu Time.” 9 Sections of this discussion have appeared previously in Koustas, “Robert Lepage’s Lypsynch: Staging the Multicultural Experience.” 10 “History,” Luminato Festival, https://luminatofestival.com/pages/luminato-festival/history/. 11 “Mission,” Luminato Festival, https://luminatofestival.com/pages/ luminato-­festival/mission/. 12 Koustas, “La mondialisation.” 13 “History,” Luminato Festival, https://luminatofestival.com/pages/luminato-festival/history/. 14 Schyrburt, “The Structure of Theatre Festivals.” 15 The author thanks the evaluator for this insightful comment. 16 Toronto Arts Council, Creative City Planning Framework. 17 Cushman, “In the End,” TO9; Coulbourn, “World of Wonders”; Cushman, “In the End,” TO9. 18 Lipsynch [theatre program], n.p. 19 “A sublime mosaic of characters of different languages but connected by the same fragility”; St-Jacques, “Ensemble vocal,” Arts et spectacles sec., 5. 20 Quoted in Gardner, “Mission Impossible,” 26. “Nothing is more visual than the voice”; quoted in Saint-Pierre, “Voix humaine.” 21 “The human voice bears the inscription of our origins, speech determines the path we follow to find our own language”; Larochelle, “Lipsynch.”

27761_Koustas.indd 176

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 117–31

177

22 “In Lipsynch Lepage confronts the universe of the voice, its emotional power, its possibilities of expression and transformation as well as its links to identity and origin”; Guay, “L’événement Lipsynch,” B8. 23 Quoted in Whetstone, “Lepage’s ‘Baby’ Is about to Be Born,” 24. 24 Pascual-Leone, “‘Lipsynch’ Makes Audience Sink Deep.” 25 “Transcultural, transdisciplinary, transborder”; Festival TransAmériques [festival program], 3. 26 In an article entitled “Compelling Despite the Confusion,” one critic noted: “For example, during a scene delivered in German, the subtitles projected above the actors’ heads got out of synch with the action. So an actress who was gaily dancing about the stage was asked, ‘Why are you crying?’ then ‘Was your baby Jewish?’”; Courier and Advertiser, “Compelling Despite the Confusion.” 27 “Playing the cosmopolitan card you will be forced, like me, to frequently look at the screened subtitles in red letters. Real dramaturgy does not tolerate our having to constantly to decode lines of text on an illuminated gadget”; Jasmin, “‘Contre’ un Robert Lepage?” 28 Quotations from the play are taken from the author’s notes; no published version or playscript exists. 29 “Your father’s voice is in your voice.” 30 Lipsynch [theatre program], n.p. 31 Coulbourn, “World of Wonders.” 32 Johnson, “Live Cinema, Epic Theatre.” 33 Gallant, “All the World’s His Stage.” 34 Lonergan, Theatre and Globalization, 162. 35 Ouzounian, “Lipsynch,” E16. 36 Coulbourn, “World of Wonders”; Nestruck, “Over Nine Hours,” R1; Ouzounian, “You’ll Find It Rewarding,” E1. 37 Luminato Festival 2009, 21. 38 Yves Jacques replaced Lepage in the Toronto production. 39 Broadway World, “Canadian Stage Company.” 40 Fricker, Globalisation, iii. 41 Ouzounian, “Robert Lepage Work Rewards.” 42 In an earlier production, the main character was Frédéric Watson, not Frédéric Lapointe, which hinted at a linguistic duality highlighting the autobiographical reference. In Toronto, the character’s name was used in its anglicized form; he was referred to as Fred. 43 When asked about the play’s autobiographical dimension, Yves Jacques, referring to Andersen’s famous tale, replied: “Robert was the ugly duckling when he was growing up. He had that sickness where he lost all his hair and everyone laughed at him for being so awkward, but then he became the beautiful swan he is today” (quoted in Ouzounian, “Andersen Project,” E1).

27761_Koustas.indd 177

2016-04-01 13:15:39

178

Notes to pages 132–5

44 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation [with Johnson].” 45 “Every year, the European Parliament gives the Paris National Opera extra funding to encourage co-production with other European economic partners … Obviously, international co-production means sharing the creative roles … I will not try to hide from you that getting the European Parliament to accept that a Canadian got involved in adapting a Scandinavian folktale took some doing. But, as you will see, my assistant pulled it together nicely. She said that only Canadians could understand that wonderful northern spirit; that where you’re from, there is that beautiful light, that marvellous silence and especially that wonderfully rough Québécois language reminiscent of the primitive accents and bastardized Danish dialect that Andersen used to write his folk tales so you can feel very much at ease and most welcome in this adventure”; Lepage, Le projet Andersen, 22. 46 “I came here to feel validated. Because that’s what Québécois do. When we want to be taken seriously, we go to France to look for validation. Because we think that Paris is still the centre of the universe but, obviously, it isn’t anymore. We just have to accept it”; Lepage, Le projet Andersen, 87. 47 Nestruck, “Andersen Project.” 48 Lipsynch [theatre program], n.p. 49 Fricker, Globalisation, 275. 50 Schryburt, “Structure of Theatre Festivals.” 51 Lepage, Le projet Andersen, 40. 52 Ibid., 22. In his review “The Andersen Project is Irreverently Witty,” Coulbourn noted Lepage’s multilingual play with language: “Sometimes, he abandons his audience to long Fren-glish monologues that are all but unintelligible in either official language. At others, he allows his story to wander while he experiments … it is nonetheless must-see theatricality.” 53 See Leroux, “Le Québec en autoreprésentation.” 54 Coulbourn, “Andersen Project.” Nestruck comments, in his review “Robert Lepage Remains at the Top of His Game,” “As for the decision to have francophone Frédéric speak in English, while Arnaud speaks in French (with subtitles), I understand it was a necessary compromise to accessibility. Unfortunately, Arnaud’s opening speech becomes nearly incomprehensible spoken by Jacques in mile-a-minute French-accented English.” 55 Schryburt, “Structure of Festivals.” 56 Verge, “Two Robert Lepage Productions.”

27761_Koustas.indd 178

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 135–43

179

57 Nestruck, “Andersen Project”; Coulbourn, “Andersen Project”; Ouzounian, “Robert Lepage Work Rewards.” 58 Quoted in Broadway World, “Yves Jacques Leads.” 59 Andersen Project [theatre program], n.p. 60 Coulbourn, “Best Theatrical Shows of 2010”; Coulbourn, “Andersen Project.” 61 Ackerman, “Toronto [Loves] Lepage,” 100. 62 Nestruck, “Andersen Project.” 63 c b c News, “Lepage Double Bill.” 64 Quoted in Ouzounian, “History Meets Personal History.” 65 See, for example, the Chevalier d’Eon manga, available for order at Manga-news.com, http://www.manga-news.com/index.php/manga/ Chevalier-dEon-le/vol-1, and the email forum discussion at Le Chevalier d’Eon—Anime, http://www.hyjoo.com/sujet-26234.html. 66 A Globe and Mail article entitled “Genre Bender” discusses the popularity of kabuki, onagata, and dancer Tomasaburo Bando (18). 67 Hoile, “Eonnagata.” 68 Lepage, “Robert Lepage in Conversation [with Johnson].” 69 Knelman, “Front St. Theatres,” E7; Kaptainis, “Breaking the Boundaries,” B10. 70 Ouzounian, “Unique Exploration,” E9. 71 Hoile, “Eonnagata.” 72 Dotan, “Robert Lepage Returns.” 73 Ouzounian, “History Meets Personal History,” E1. 74 Sections of this discussion have appeared previously in Koustas, “Staging the/an Other: The Dragons’ Trilogy Take II.” 75 Morrow, “Lepage’s Blue Dragon,” R6. 76 Ibid. 77 Porter, “Une suite,” B8. In Ex Machina, Caux and Gilbert identify The Blue Dragon as the final segment of the series. The green, red, and white dragons stand for spring, summer, and autumn respectively, and the blue dragon symbolizes winter: “Les quatre dragons: Pour La trilogie des dra­ gons et Le Dragon bleu, Ex Machina a choisi une interprétation de la mythologie chinoise dans laquelle les quatre dragons symbolisent le cycle des saisons. La première pièce était faite de trois parties : le dragon vert, le dragon rouge et le dragon blanc. Le dragon bleu vient maintenant compléter le cycle” (61). 78 Ouzounian, “Blue Dragon Feeds the Eyes.” 79 Lepage, “Monday Q&A,” R3.

27761_Koustas.indd 179

2016-04-01 13:15:39

180

Notes to pages 143–8

80 Caux and Gilbert, Ex Machina, 60 81 Referencing The Dragons’ Trilogy, Robert Cushman describes Tai Wei Foo’s dancing as “the revenge of Madame Butterfly” (Cushman, “Guy with the Blue Dragon Tatttoo,” TO4). 82 In an interview before the Toronto show, Henri Chassé stated: “I worked with a dialect coach for both the English and the Chinese. It’s very different – I certainly couldn’t do an interview in Chinese! I have this new phrase that I have to say and it’s only three words, but when I come to that part I kinda go ‘oh boy.’ So I technically speak Chinese but I don’t know Chinese. It’s a strange experience” (Chassé, “b ww Interviews”). 83 Verini, “Blue Dragon,” 6. 84 Lepage and Michaud, Blue Dragon, 105. 85 Ibid., 40. 86 “It is about an exiled Quebecker who has a lot to say about Quebec society but cannot really say it in Quebec”; quoted in Bilodeau, “Un Dragon bleu ovationné.” 87 “The China here is very realistic compared to that of La trilogie des dra­ gons which was much more poetic and imaginary. It is certain that what is challenging for a character like Pierre Lamontagne in today’s China are the society’s values, those of a frantic shift to a market economy, social upheaval, and the questioning of traditional values”; Porter, “L’histoire sans fin de Robert Lepage,” E3. 88 Savitz, “North American Theatrical Premiere,” 1. 89 Caux and Gilbert, Ex Machina, 60. 90 Lepage and Michaud, Blue Dragon, 5. 91 Ibid., 132. 92 Ibid., 57. 93 Ibid., 59. 94 Brassard et al., La trilogie des dragons, 17. 95 Nestruck, “Lepage Taps Our Anxieties,” R1–2. 96 “Two decades later, the view on ‘the Middle Kingdom’ is not limited to mirror images of Canadian Chinatowns”; Fauchet, “Le Dragon Bleu ­nouvel opus.” 97 “Lepage explained during the writing of La trilogie des dragons with Marie Michaud that he was somewhat like Pierre, whom he played in the production. Both were 25-year-old Quebec City artists who thought it would be better for their careers to head west (Lepage worked in Montreal for a while before returning to his native Quebec City) and neither one nor the other had ever set foot in China. ‘Pierre was always a sort of alter ego,’ Lepage explains … ‘I had all of these questions about the

27761_Koustas.indd 180

2016-04-01 13:15:39



Notes to pages 149–52

181

character, which made it an excellent opportunity for me as well to think about myself as an artist’”; Le Soleil, “Robert Lepage,” 37.



conclusion

1 Quoted in Ouzounian, “History Meets Personal History,” E1. 2 Gordon, Purpose of Playing, 6–7. 3 McKinnie, City Stages, 21. 4 The author gratefully acknowledges the evaluator for this comment. 5 Lepage, “Un Triomphe,” A12. 6 Saul, World Leaders program, n.p. 7 C. Taylor, Malaise of Modernity, 32. 8 Quoted in Hicks, “Imagination Import,” 157. 9 Fraser, “Riveting Road,” E9. 10 Donnelly, “Lepage Marathon Is a Winner,” E5.

27761_Koustas.indd 181

2016-04-01 13:15:39

27761_Koustas.indd 182

2016-04-01 13:15:39

Bibliography

Ackerman, Marianne. “‘Circulations’ Works as Collective Effort.” Review of Circulations, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre de Quat-Sous, Montreal. Montreal Gazette, 19 November 1984, B9. – “Toronto [Loves] Lepage.” Toronto Life, November 2010, 100–1. Adilman, Sid. “Robert Lepage’s Vision.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 4 November 1995, H1. – “Robert Lepage Is the King of Elsinore Computer Castle.” Review of Elsinore, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 6 April 1996, J2. Ahearn, Victoria. “Robert Lepage Reflects on Personal and Collective Memories in 887.” The Canadian News. http://www.680news. com/2015/07/13/robert-lepage-reflects-on-personal-and-collectivememories-of-quebec-in-887/. Allen, Jeremy Peter, dir. Robert Lepage. National Film Board, 2009. The Andersen Project [theatre program]. Ex Machina. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged by Canadian Stage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto, 21–30 October 2010. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Arcand, Denys, dir. Jesus of Montreal. Montreal: Centre National de la Ciné­ matographie (cnc), Communication, Gérard Mital Productions, 1989. Atwood, Margaret, and Victor Beaulieu. Two Solicitudes: Conversations. Translated by Phyllis Aronoff and Howard Scott. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1998. Audet, Daniel. “Ich bin ein Lepage.” Le Soleil, 13 April 2006. A19. Baillargeon, Stéphane. “Asymétrie du miracle.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Le Devoir, 18 April 1998, A1, A12. – “Lepage en stock.” Le Devoir, 29 February 2000, B8.

27761_Koustas.indd 183

2016-04-01 13:15:39

184 Bibliography

– “Sorties et arrivages.” Le Devoir, 18 April 2000, B8. Bain, Alison. “Rendering a Neighbourhood Queer.” Social and Cultural Geography 16, 4 (June 2015), 424–43. Bakhtin, Mikhail. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, eds. Austin: University of Texas Press. 1986. – The Dialogic Imagination. Michael Holquist, ed. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981. Basen, Leila, Alex Epstein, Patrick Huard, and Kevin Tierney. Bon Cop, Bad Cop. Dir. Eric Canuel. Toronto: Alliance Atlantis Vivafilm, 2006. dvd. Bean, Sheila. “French Playwright Doing Translation of Romeo and Juliet.” Review of Romeo and Juliette, directed by Robert Lepage, Nightcap Theatre, Saskatoon, sk. Star-Phoenix, 18 March 1989, C1. Beaudet, Marie-Andrée, ed. Échanges culturels entre les deux solitudes. Sainte-Foy: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 1999. Beaunoyer, Jean. “Attaqué par la critique, Lepage réplique avec une grande œuvre.” Review of Tectonic Plates, directed by Robert Lepage, L’Implanthéâtre, Quebec. La Presse, 25 November 1989, D1, D4. Belair, Michel. Le nouveau théâtre québécois. Ottawa: Leméac, 1973. Bemrose, John. “A River of Surprises.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Maclean’s, 20 November 1995, 113–14. – “A Sorcerer of the Stage.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Maclean’s, 23 May 1988, 53. Bennett, Paul. “‘La trilogie des dragons’: A la recherche de l’Orient profond.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, l’Implanthéâtre, Quebec. Le Soleil, 14 November 1985. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. Bennett, Susan. ‘La scène spectaculaire à Toronto.’ Sociologie et sociétés 37, 1, 109–23, http//id.erudit.org/iderudit/012279a. – “Theatre/Tourism.” Theatre Journal. 57, 2005, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 407–28. Bharucha, Rustom. Theatre and the World: Performance and the Politics of Culture. London: Routledge, 1993. Billington, Michael. “A Happy Occident – East and West Come Together in a Six-hour Spellbinder.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Barbican, London. Guardian (London), 12 November 1991, 38. Reprinted in Theatre Record 11, 23 (1991): 1412–13. Bilodeau, Maxence. “Un Dragon bleu ovationné.” Radio-Canada.ca, 23 April 2008, http://www.radio-canada.ca/arts-spectacles/ PlusArts/2008/04/23/001-dragon_bleu.asp.

27761_Koustas.indd 184

2016-04-01 13:15:39

Bibliography 185

Bissonnette, Sylvie. “Historical Interculturalism in Robert Lepage’s Elsinore.” Comparative Theatre Review 20, 1 (2010): 40–55. Blodgett, E.D. Configuration: Essays on the Canadian Literatures. Downsview: ecw Press, 1982. – “How Do You Say Gabrielle Roy?” In Camille R. LaBossière, ed., Trans­ lation in Canada, 13–34. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1983. Boulanger, Luc. “Au Coeur du sujet.” Voir, November 1995, 33. – “La Philosophie dans le boudoir.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Voir Montréal, 23–30 April 1998. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. – “La trilogie des dragons, 16 ans plus tard: Je me souviens.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstrom, Montreal. Voir, 15 May 2003, http://voir.ca/scene/2003/05/14/ la-trilogie-des-dragons-16-ans-plus-tard-je-me-souviens. Bourdieu, Pierre. The Rules of Art. Translated by Susan Emanuel. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996. Bourrassa, André. “Premières modernités (1930–1965).” In Legris et al., Le théâtre au Québec, 1825–1980, 89–111. Montreal: vlb, 1988. Brassard, André. Preface to La face cachée de la lune, by Robert Lepage, 7–8. Quebec: L’instant même, 2007. Brassard, Marie, Jean Casault, Lorraine Côté, Marie Gignac, Robert Lepage, and Marie Michaud. La trilogie des Dragons. Montreal: L’instant même, 2005. Broadway World. “Wajdi Mouawad’s Forests Opens in Toronto.” 6 April 2011.http://www.broadwayworld.com/toronto/article/Tarragon-TheatrePresents-Wajdi-Mouawads-Forests-Opens-427-20110419-page7#. – “Canadian Stage Company & Sony Centre for Performing Arts Announce Lepage’s Eonnagata & The Andersen Project.” 10 March 2010, http://toronto.broadwayworld.com/article/ Canadian-Stage-Company-Annouces-Lepages-EONNAGATA-THEANDERSEN-PROJECT-20100310. – “Yves Jacques Leads The Andersen Project Premiere.” 30 September 2010, http://toronto.broadwayworld.com/article/yves-jacques-leadsthe-andersen-project-premiere-10211030-20100929-page5. Burke, Jim. “Making a Connection.” Metro (North-West), 8 November 2005. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. Bury, Jean-Paul. “La critique parisienne accueille favorablement La trilogie des dragons.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre de Boulogne-Billancourt, Paris, France. Le Devoir, 24 April 1989, 11.

27761_Koustas.indd 185

2016-04-01 13:15:39

186 Bibliography

Cahiers de théâtre Jeu 45, 4 (1987). Campbell, James. “The Dragons’ Trilogy.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Riverside Studios, London. Times Literary Supplement, 15 November 1991, 20. Canadian Stage. “Canadian Stage Announces the 2010–2011 Season.” Press release. 16 March 2010, http://www.mooneyontheatre.com/2010/ 03/17/canadian-stage-canstage-announces-a-new-season-2010-2011and-a-new-vision/. – Program Notes: Needles and Opium, 2015. Caux, Patrick and Bernard Gilbert. Ex Machina: Chantiers d’écriture scé­ nique. Montreal: L’Instant même, 2007. cbc News. “Lepage Double Bill Heads to Toronto.” 10 March 2010, http:// www.cbc.ca/news/arts/theatre/story/2010/03/10/lepage-toronto.html. Chaboillez, Josée. “Redécouvrir Lepage.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Festival des Amériques, Usine d’Alstrom, Montreal, www.radio-canada.ca/culture/modele-document. asp?section=theatredanse&id Entite=760. Transcription of Guide Culturel Radio-Canada. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. Chapman, Geoff. “Hamlet Brilliant as One-man Show.” Review of Elsinore, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 21 April 1996, D3. – “Lepage Keeps Us Hooked with Needles and Opium: Multi-media Performance an Adroit Kick-off to World Festival.” Review of Needles and Opium, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 10 April 1994, B8. – “Lepage Pulls Off a Miracle.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 17 April 1998, E12. Charest, Rémy. “Le pèlerinage nippon de Robert Lepage.” L’Actualité, 15 September 1995, 34–40. – Robert Lepage: Quelques zones de liberté. Quebec: L’instant même/ Ex Machina, 1995. Chassé, Henri. “bww Interviews: The Blue Dragon’s Henri Chassé.” Interview by Kelly Cameron. BroadwayWorld.com, http://toronto. broadwayworld.com/article/ BWW-Interviews-THE-BLUE-DRAGONs-Henri-Chasse-20120112. Circulations [theatre program]. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged Théâtre de la bordée, Quebec, 21 March–7 April 1984. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City.

27761_Koustas.indd 186

2016-04-01 13:15:39

Bibliography 187

Citron, Paula. “Lepage Work at New Fest.” Globe and Mail, 24 May 2007, R11. Conlogue, Ray. Impossible Nation: The Longing for a Homeland in Quebec and Canada. Stratford, on: Mercury Press, 1996. – “Dragons’ Trilogy from Quebec Exciting, Innovative Theatre.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, Brigantine Room, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 3 June 1986, D9. – “The Dragons’ Trilogy: A Masterful Tapestry of Image.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 20 May 1988, C10. – “It’s a New Renaissance and We Have to Be Ready.” Globe and Mail, 9 April 1994, C9. – “Lepage’s Evocative Polygraph Possesses a Disquieting Beauty.” Review of Polygraph, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 23 February 1990, C6. – “Where to Draw the Line between Narcissism and Performance Art?” Review of Vinci, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre Centre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 21 January 1988, A23. Conter, Alan. “Cheap Slurs Beggar Opera.” Review of The Busker’s Opera, directed by Robert Lepage and Kevin McCoy, Spectrum de Montreal, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 24 February 2004, R4. – “Lepage Revels in Modern Operas.” Review of Bluebeard’s Castle and Erwartung, directed by Robert Lepage, Opéra de Montréal, Place des Arts, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 15 March 2004, R4. Coulbourn, John. “The Andersen Project Is Irreverently Witty.” Review of The Andersen Project, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Sun, 22 October 2010, http://www.torontosun.com/ entertainment/columnists/john_coulbourn/2010/10/22/15796381.html. – “Best Theatrical Shows of 2010.” Toronto Sun, 24 December 2010, http://www.torontosun.com/entertainment/stage/2010/12/24/ 16666391.html. – “Geometry’s Askew.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Sun, 17 April 1998, 18. – “Lepage’s Giant Leap of Genius.” Toronto Sun. Review of The Far Side of the Moon, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Sun, 20 April 2000. Reproduced at Jam! Showbiz Theatre Reviews, 20 April 2000, http://jam.canoe.ca/Theatre/Reviews/F/ Far_Side_Of_The_Moon/2000/04/20/pf-741984.html.

27761_Koustas.indd 187

2016-04-01 13:15:39

188 Bibliography

– “Seven Streams Floods Senses.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Sunday Sun, 5 November 1995, 54, Showbiz section. – “A World of Wonders.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Sun, 15 June 2009, http://www. torontosun.com/entertainment/columnists/john_ coulbourn/2009/06/15/9797801-sun.html. Courier and Advertiser. “Compelling Despite the Confusion.” 19 August 1984. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Cox, Bob. “Sacré Bleu! The Bard’s Gone Bilingual.” Review of Romeo and Juliette, directed by Robert Lepage, Nightcap Theatre, Saskatoon, sk. Calgary Herald, 12 July 1989, A18. Crew, Robert. “Canadian Rep’s Best Was Too Little Too Late.” Review of Circulations, directed by Robert Lepage, Canadian Rep, Toronto. Toronto Star, 28 February 1985, C7. – “Imagistic Theatre at Its Best.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 19 May 1988, B4. – “Quebec Maestro in Top Form.” Review of Polygraph, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 21 February 1990, F4. – “Quebec’s Lepage Comes and Conquers.” Review of Vinci, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre Centre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 20 January 1988, D1. – “Robert Lepage a One-man Theatrical Whirlwind.” Toronto Star, 28 January 1990, C1, C4. – “Too Little Too Late from Lepage.” Review of The Far Side of the Moon, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 20 April 2000, A31. Cronin, Michael. Across the Lines: Travel, Language, Translation. Cork, Ireland: Cork University Press, 2000. Culture Divison of Toronto City Council. “The Creative City.” http://www. city.toronto.on.ca./culture/creativity.htm. Cushman, Robert. “The Guy with the Blue Dragon Tattoo: Robert Lepage’s Latest Work Is a Potent Spectacle.” National Post, 14 January 2012, TO4. – “In the End, Luminato Did Get a Masterwork.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. National Post, 20 June 2009, TO9, http://www.nationalpost.com/story. html?id=d31a2b50-1fe0-434c-87b6-317696ad6738&k=19108.

27761_Koustas.indd 188

2016-04-01 13:15:39

Bibliography 189

– “Lepage Returns to Dazzling Form.” Review of The Far Side of the Moon, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. National Post, 21 April 2000, B12. – “Shades of Hamlet.” Review of Elsinore, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 22 April 1996, C3. Czarnecki, Mark. “The Biggest Splash of a Canadian New Wave.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Metropolis, 19 May 1988. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Dansereau, Suzanne. “Toronto applaudit Les sept branches de la rivière Ota de Robert Lepage.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. La Presse, 5 November 1995, B10. Donnelly, Pat. “It’s All Lepage from Hamlet to Gravedigging.” Montreal Gazette, 3 November 1995, D1. – “Lepage Marathon Is a Winner.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Montreal Gazette, 6 November 1995, E5. – “Lepage Work Is All over the Map.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Montreal Gazette, 18 April 1998, C2. Dotan, Hamutal. “Robert Lepage Returns to Toronto with Eonnagata.” Review of Eonnagata, directed by Robert Lepage, Sony Centre, Toronto. Torontoist, 19 November 2010, http://torontoist.com/2010/11/ robert_lepage_returns_to_toronto_with_eonnagata/. The Dragons’ Trilogy [theatre program]. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Factory Theatre, Toronto, 18–28 May 1988. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. The Dragons’ Trilogy [theatre program]. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Mark Taper Forum, Los Angeles, 14 September–14 October 1990. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Dubé, Marcel. Un simple soldat. Montreal: Les Quinze, 1981. Ducharme, André. “Destin planétaire.” L’Actualité, June 2003, 71–9. Dundjerovic, ´ Aleksandar. The Cinema of Robert Lepage: The Poetics of Memory. London: Wallflower Press, 2003. – Robert Lepage. New York: Routledge Performance Practitioners, 2009. – The Theatricality of Robert Lepage. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007. Everett-Green, Robert. “The Conversion of Robert Lepage.” Globe and Mail, 26 January 2009, R1.

27761_Koustas.indd 189

2016-04-01 13:15:39

190 Bibliography

Ex Machina [website]. http://lacaserne.net/index2.php/lacaserne/intro/. Ex Machina. Moulin à images [production poster]. 2009. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Fauchet, Benoit. “‘Le Dragon Bleu,’ nouvel opus théâtral et visuel de Robert Lepage.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, La Comète, Châlons-en-Champagne, France. Agence FrancePresse, 19 April 2008. Posted on PatWhite.com [blog], 21 April 2008, http://patwhite.com/node/4303. Féral, Josette. “The Dramatic Art of Robert Lepage: Fragments of Identity.” Contemporary Theatre Review 19, 2: 143–55. Festival TransAmériques [festival program]. Montreal, 23 May–7 June 2007, http://www.fta.qc.ca/sites/fta.qc.ca/files/documents/fta_programme_officiel_2007.pdf. Filewood, Alan. “Performing Canada: The Nation Enacted in the Imagined Theatre.” Textual Studies in Canada 15, spring 2002. Fischer-Lichte, Erika. “Staging the Foreign as Cultural Transformation.” In Erika Fischer-Lichte, Josephine Riley, and Michael Gissenwehrer, eds., The Dramatic Touch of Difference: Theatre, Own and Foreign, 277–87. Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr, 1990. Fisher, Mark. “The Write Lines.” Herald (Glasgow), 27 March 1999, 12–14. Fouquet, Ludovic. Robert Lepage: L’horizon en images. Quebec: L’instant même, 2005. Fraser, Matthew. “Finale 87 Arts East: Leaping in Triumph across Cultural Frontiers.” Globe and Mail, 26 December 1987, C10. – “A Riveting Road of Aural, Visual Poetry.” Review of Circulations, directed by Robert Lepage, St Paul’s Square Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 1 March 1985, E9. Fricker, Karen. “The Dragons’ Trilogy.” Review of La trilogie des dragons, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstrom, Montreal. Variety, 23 June 2003, 34. – “The Globalisation of Robert Lepage: Québécois Cultural Politics and Contemporary Theatre Practice.” PhD diss., Trinity College, University of Dublin, 2005. – Introduction to The Seven Streams of the River Ota, by Robert Lepage and Ex Machina, i–vii. London: Methuen, 1996. Friedlander, Mira. “‘Dragon’s Trilogy’ an Epic of Unforgettable Grandeur.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Tonight, 26 May–9 June 1988. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec.

27761_Koustas.indd 190

2016-04-01 13:15:39

Bibliography 191

– “Abroad the Far Side of the Moon.” Review of The Far Side of the Moon, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Variety Movie Reviews, 1 May 2000, 24. Gadamer, Hans Georg. Truth and Method. New York: Crossroad, 1989. Gallant, Paul. “All the World’s His Stage.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. Eye Weekly.com, 3 June 2009, http://www.eyeweekly.com (article no longer available online). Gardner, Lyn. “Mission Impossible: It’s Nine Hours Long, It Took Five Years to Make – and There’s No Script.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Northern Stage, Newcastle, UK. Guardian [London, UK], 19 February 2007, 26. Giguère, Monique. “Robert Lepage: La face cachée d’un dragon du théâtre.” Le Soleil, 14 December 2003, B3. Globe and Mail. “Critics Pan Lepage’s One-man Hamlet.” 13 January 1997, C1. – “Genre Bender.” 11 February 2012, Fashion and Beauty, 18. – “The Top 100.” 27 December 1997, C22. Godfrey, Stephen. “Catch This Version – It’s Magic.” Review of Tectonic Plates, directed by Robert Lepage, Jean Talon Train Station, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 24 March 1990, C5. – “A Riveting Exploration of Memory and Survival.” Review of Polygraph, by Robert Lepage and Marie Brassard, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre de Quat’Sous, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 18 November 1988, D9. Godin, Jean-Cléo. “Orphelins ou bâtards: Fridolin, Tit-coq, Bousille.” In Le théâtre québécois, ed. Laurent Maillot and Jean-Cléo Godin, vol. 1, 2nd ed., 29–41. Montreal: Hurtubise hmh, 1973. Gómez, Mayte. “‘Coming Together’ in Lift Off! ’93: Intercultural Theatre in Toronto and Canadian Multiculturalism.” In Ric Knowles and Ingrid Mündel, eds., “Ethnic,” Multicultlural, and Intercultural Theatre, 30–47. Toronto: Playwrights Canada Press, 2009. Gordon, Robert. The Purpose of Playing: Modern Acting Theories in Perspective. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006. Grescoe, Taras. Sacré Blues: An Unsentimental Journey through Quebec. Toronto: Macfarlane, Walter & Ross, 2001. Groen, Rick. Review of Tectonic Plates, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre Centre, Toronto, 3–5 June 1988. Globe and Mail, 1 June 1988, A17. Guay, Hervé. “L’événement Lipsynch?” Le Devoir, 4 June 2007, B8.

27761_Koustas.indd 191

2016-04-01 13:15:40

192 Bibliography

Hadfield, D.A. Re: Producing Women’s Dramatic History: The Politics of Playing in Toronto. New Canadian Criticism Series. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2007. Hare, John. “Use of Sound Effects and Music Sets Award-winning Canadian Production Apart.” Review of Circulations, directed by Robert Lepage, National Arts Centre, Ottawa. Ottawa Citizen, 16 February 1985, C13. Harris, Michael. “A Play Marked by Genius at Every Level.” Review of The Andersen Project, directed by Robert Lepage, Vancouver Playhouse, Vancouver. Globe and Mail, 9 May 2007, R5. Harvie, Jennifer. “Transnationalism, Orientalism and Cultural Tourism: La trilogie des dragons and The Seven Streams of the River Ota.” In Joseph Donohoe and Jane Koustas, eds., Theater sans frontières: Essays on the Dramatic Universe of Robert Lepage, 109–27. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2000. – and Dan Rebellato, series editors’ preface. In Ric Knowles, Theatre and Interculturalism. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010. Hébert, Chantal, and Irène Perelli-Contos. La face cachée du théâtre de l’image. Quebec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2001. – Théâtre, multidisciplinarité et multiculturalisme. Quebec: pul, 2001. Hicks, Colin. “Imagination Import: Reception and Perception of the Theatre of Quebec in the United Kingdom.” In Sherrill Grace and Albert-Reiner Glapp, Performing National Identities: International Perspectives on Contemporary Canadian Theatre, 145–60. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2003. Hoile, Christopher. “Eonnagata.” Review of Eonnagata, directed by Robert Lepage, Sony Centre, Toronto. Eye Weekly.com, 19 November 2010, Ex Machina, http://lacaserne.net/index2.php/reviews/eonnagata/ eonnagata. Hood, Sarah B. “Bilingual Theatre in Canada / Le théâtre bilingue au Canada.” Theatrum, winter 1989/90, 9–13. Hopkins, D.J, Shelley Ore, and Kim Solga (eds.). Performance in the City. Basingstoke, Hampshire, U K, and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Houpt, Simon. “…And the Devil Takes His Due.” Review of Berlioz’s La Damnation de Faust, directed by Robert Lepage, Metropolitan Opera, New York, ny. Globe and Mail, 10 November 2008, R1. Huffman, Shawn. “Adrift: Affective Dislocation in Robert Lepage’s Tectonic Plates.” In Joseph Donohoe and Jane Koustas, eds., Theater Sans Frontières: Essays on the Dramatic Universe of Robert Lepage, 155–70. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2000.

27761_Koustas.indd 192

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 193

Hurley, Erin. “Le grand récit des arts de la scène au Québec.” Globe: revue international d’études québécoises 11, 2 (2008): 11–23. James, “Altered Plates.” Time Out, 5–12 December 1990. n.p. Jasmin, Claude. “‘Contre’ un Robert Lepage?” Poing comme net, 7 June 2007. http://www.claudejasmin.com/wordpress/?p=646. Johnson, Brian. “Live Cinema, Epic Theatre.” Brian D. Johnson Unscreened, Maclean’s, 20 June 2009, http://www2.macleans. ca/2009/06/20/live-cinema-epic-theatre/. Kaplan, Jon and Jill Lawless. “Awesome Ota.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Now Magazine, 9 November 1995. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. Kaptainis, Arthur. “Breaking the Boundaries of Age and Gender.” Review of Eonnagata, directed by Robert Lepage, Sony Centre, Toronto. National Post, 19 November 2010, B10. Kennedy, Janice. “Greatness Buried under Weight of Theatrics.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Ottawa Citizen, 18 April 1998, D3. Kirchhoff, H.J. “Arts Ink Machina Imperfecta.” Globe and Mail, 24 April 1996, C3. – “Lepage’s Needles a Potent Fix.” Review of Needles and Opium, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 11 April 1994, C1. Knelman, Martin. “Front St. Theatres to Host Lepage Spectaculars.” Toronto Star, 11 March 2010, E7. Knowles, Ric. “Multicultural Text: Intercultural Performance: Performing Intercultural Toronto.” In D.J. Hopkins, Shelley Orr, and Kim Solga, eds., Performance and the City, 73–91. Bastingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan, 2009. – Theatre and Interculturalism. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010. Koustas, Jane. “From Homespun to Awesome.” In Joseph Donohoe and Jonathan Weiss, eds., Essays on Modern Quebec Theatre, 81–109. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1995. – “Robert Lepage Interfaces with the World on the Toronto Stage.” In Joseph Donohoe and Jane Koustas, eds. Theater Sans Frontières: Essays on the Dramatic Universe of Robert Lepage, 171–91. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2001. – “Shifting Identities in the Theatre of Robert Lepage.” In Danielle Schaub and Christl Verduyn, eds., Identity, Community, Nations, 136–48. Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2002.

27761_Koustas.indd 193

2016-04-01 13:15:40

194 Bibliography

– “Zulu Time: le paratexte paradoxal.” L’Annuaire théâtral 34 (2003): 81–96. – “Images of Alterity on the Quebec Stage.” In Susan Ireland and Patricia Proulx, eds., Textualizing the Immigrant Experience, 65–83. Westport: Praeger, 2004. – “Robert Lepage’s Language / Dragons’ Trilogy.” International Journal of Canadian Studies / Revue internationale d’études canadiennes 30 (2004): 35–50. – “Staging the/an Other: The Dragons’ Trilogy Take II.” International Journal of Francophone Studies 9, 3 (2006): 395–414. – “Robert Lepage’s Lipsynch: Staging the Multicultural Experience.” In M. Conrick, I. Lemée, and V. Regan, eds., Multiculturalism and Integration: Canadian and Irish Experiences, 97–115. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2010. – “1984–2009: Robert Lepage Meets the roc.” In K. Mezei, S. Simon, and L. von Flowtow, eds., Translation Effects. 345–58. McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2014. – “Robert Lepage: la mondialisation du théâtre et le théâtre mondial.” In Patrick Leroux and Hervé Guay, eds., Le spectacle de la parole: le théâtre québécois contemporain et ses discours, 351–96. Montreal: Nota Bena, 2014. – and Joe Donohoe, eds. Robert Lepage: Theater Sans Frontières. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2001. Lacey, Liam. “All the Road’s a Stage for Shakespeare with a Twist: Bilingual Play Drives Home the Reality of Two Solitudes.” Review of Romeo and Juliette, directed by Robert Lepage, Nightcap Theatre, Saskatoon, sk. Globe and Mail, 7 July 1989, C9. – “Going Forward by ‘Working Backward.’” Globe and Mail, 19 January 1988, D7. Lachance, Dominique. “La trilogie des dragons: On nous raconte une histoire inoubliable et enthousiasmante.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstrom, Montreal. Le Journal de Montreal, 27 May 2003, 61. Ladouceur, Louise. Making the Scene. La traduction du théâtre d’une langue officielle à l’autre au Canada. Montreal: Nota Bene, 2005. Lafon, Dominique. “Robert Lepage: Le solitaire du Québec.” Jeu 86 (1998): 77–82. Lalonde, Michèle. Speak White. Montreal: Hexagone, 1974. Landau, Emily. “Weekend Luminato Picks: Incendies, 1000 Tastes, One Thousand and One Nights and more.” http://www.torontolife.com/

27761_Koustas.indd 194

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 195

informer/toronto-events/2011/06/18/weekend-luminato-picks-incendies1000-tastes-one-thousand-and-one-nights-and-more/. Larochelle, Claudia. “Lipsynch: Une fresque d’une humanité déroutante.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Festival TransAmériques, Montreal. Journal de Montréal, 3 June 2007, Arts et spectacles. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Lefebvre, Paul. “New Filters for Creation.” Canadian Theatre Review 52 (fall, 1987): 30–5. Legris, Renée, Jean-Marc Larrue, André-G. Bourassa, Gilbert David. Le théâtre au Québec, 1825–1980. Montreal: vlb, 1988. Lemelin, Roger. Au pied de la pente douce. Montreal: Stanké, 2009. (Orig. publ. 1944.) Lenze, Christine. “The Whole Thing You’re Doing Is White Man’s Ways: fareWel’s Northern Tour.” In Ric Knowles and Ingrid Mündel, eds., “Ethnic” and, Multicultural, and Intercultural Theatre, 76–82. Toronto: Playwrights Canada Press, 2009. Lepage, Robert. Circulations. Théâtre Repère. Staged Théâtre de la bordée, Quebec, 21 March–7 April 1984. – “Drawing on the French Side of the Brain: Robert Lepage on Cultural Sovereignty and Language’s Limits.” Interview by Deirdre Dolan. National Post, 19 April 2000, B6. – La face cachée de la lune. Quebec: L’instant même, 2007. – “The Far Side of the Moon.” Playscript. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. – Lipsynch. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged Salle Pierre Mercure 1–7 June 2007, Montreal. – “The Monday Q&A: Robert Lepage.” Interview by Martin Morrow. Globe and Mail, 9 January 2012, R3. – “Needles and Opium.” Playscript. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. – 887. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged Bluma Appel Theatre, St Lawrence Centre, 14–19 July, 2015, Toronto, Ont. – , dir. Le Polygraphe [film]. Prod. Philippe Carcassonne, Ulrich Felsberg, Madeleine Henrié, Bruno Jobin, and Jean-Pierre Michel. In Extremis Images, Road Movies; Dritte Produktionen GmbH, Cinéa sa, 1996. – Le projet Andersen. Quebec: L’instant même, 2007. – “Robert Lepage: Il faut que l’acteur ait une soif de savoir.” Interview by Josette Féral. In Mise en scène et jeu d’acteur: Entretiens, vol. 2, Le corps en scène, by J. Féral, 133–56. Montreal: Éditions Jeux / Carnières; Belgium: Éditions Lansman, 1998.

27761_Koustas.indd 195

2016-04-01 13:15:40

196 Bibliography

– “Robert Lepage in Conversation.” Interview by Brian D. Johnson. Maclean’s, 28 October 2010, http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/10/28/ robert-lepage-in-conversation/. – “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Alison McAlpine at the Le Café du Monde, Quebec City, 17 February, 1995.” In Maria Delgado and Paul Heritage, eds., Contact with the Gods: Directors Talk Theatre, 130–57. New York: Manchester University Press, 1996. – “Robert Lepage in Conversation with Richard Eyre.” Interview with Richard Eyre. 10 January 1997, Lyttelton Theatre. Platform Papers. National Theatre, http://microsites.nationaltheatre.org.uk/2627/ platform-­papers/robert-lepage.html. – “Un Triomphe de plus pour Robert Lepage à Toronto avec Les aiguilles et opium.” Interview by Suzanne Dansereau. La Presse, 11 April 1994, A12. – and Marie Brassard. Le Polygraphe. Translated by Gillian Raby. London: Methuen Drama, 1997. – and Ex Machina. The Seven Streams of the River Ota. Toronto: Random House, 1996. – and Marie Michaud. The Blue Dragon. Illus. Fred Jourdain. Toronto: Anansi, 2011. – Le dragon bleu. Illus. Fred Jourdain. Quebec: Alto, 2011. Leroux, Patrick. “Le Québec en autoreprésentation: Le passage d’une dramaturgie de l’identitaire à celle de l’individu.” PhD diss. Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris III, 2009. Lessard, Jean. “Les dragons nouveaux.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstom, Montreal. Théâtre Québec 1, 31 (29 April 2003): 1. (No longer available online.) Lévesque, Robert. “Hiroshima mon détour.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Le Devoir, 7 November 1995, B8. – “Toronto s’offre la création du Hiroshima de Robert Lepage.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Toronto. Le Devoir, 17 February 1995, B8. Lipsynch [theatre program]. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged Northern Stage, Newcastle, U K, February 2007. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Lieblien, Leanore. “Marianne Ackerman at the Montreal Gazette 1983– 1987.” In Anton Wagner, ed., Establishing Our Boundaries: EnglishCanadian Theatre Criticism, 371–85, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.

27761_Koustas.indd 196

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 197

Lonergan, Patrick. Theatre and Globalization: Irish Drama in the Celtic Tiger Era. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Luminato Festival 2009 [festival program]. Toronto: Luminato Festival, 2009. Maclean’s. “The Enrichers: 50 Most Influential Canadians.” 18 February 2002, 40. MacDougall, Jill. Performing Identities on the Stages of Quebec. New York: Peter Lang, 1997. Maillot, Laurent and Jean-Cléo Godin, eds. Le théâtre québécois. Vol. 1. 2nd ed. Montreal: Hurtubise hmh, 1973. – , eds. Le théâtre québécois. Vol. 2. Montreal: Hurtubise hmh, 1980. Manguel, Alberto. “Theatre of the Miraculous.” Saturday Night, January 1989, 33–42. Manning, Erin. Ephemeral Territories: Representing Nation, Home, and Identity in Canada. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 2003. Marks, Peter. “The Muse and Architect as One, Propagating Immortal Forms.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. New York Times, 23 April 1998, E5. McCaughna, David. “More Montreal Misery.” Toronto Citizen, 29 March 1974. McKinnie, Michael. City Stages: Theatre and Urban Space in a Global City. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007. Montessuit, Carmen. “Lepage n’est pas prêt et le spectacle doit être annulé.” Le journal de Montréal, 30 May 1989. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Morrow, Martin. “Lepage’s Blue Dragon Breathes Fire.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, Royal Alexandra Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 13 January 2012, R6, http:// www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/ lepages-blue-dragon-breathes-fire-onstage/article630446/. Moss, Jane. “Les théâtres post-identitaires: états des lieux,” Canadian Literature 187 (winter 2006), 57–71. Nestruck, J. Kelly. “A Second Wind of Fascination.” Globe and Mail, 11 April 2015, R4. “The Andersen Project: Robert Lepage Remains at the Top of His Game.” Review of The Andersen Project, directed by Robert Lepage, St Lawrence Centre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 22 October 2010, http:// www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/the-andersenproject-robert-lepage-remains-at-the-top-of-his-game/article4330111/.

27761_Koustas.indd 197

2016-04-01 13:15:40

198 Bibliography

– “Lepage Taps Our Anxieties Again.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, National Arts Centre, Ottawa. Globe and Mail, 30 March 2009, R1–2. – “Lepage World Premiere an Epic of Moments.” Globe and Mail, 13 September 2008, R18. – “Over Nine Hours, the Voiceless Gain Voices and the Play Its Heart.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Luminato Festival, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 8 June 2009, R1. Nicholls, Liz. “Innovative Play Stunning and Fun.” Review of Circulations, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre Français d’Edmonton, Edmonton. Edmonton Journal, 16 March 1985, G3. Nightcap Productions. “Fifth Anniversary Extra Special for Shakespeare on the Saskatchewan.” Media release. 10 March 1989. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. Nolette, Nicole. Jouer la traduction. Ottawa: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa, 2015. Nunn, Robert. “Theatre – Transgression or Tribal Celebration? Ray Conlogue at the Globe and Mail.” In Anton Wagner, ed., Establishing Our Boundaries: English- Canadian Theatre Criticism, 386–406, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Ouzounian, Richard. “The Andersen Project: Look at Writer’s Dark Side Not a Fairy Tale.” Review of The Andersen Project, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 21 October 2010, E1. – “The Blue Dragon Feeds the Eye but Starves the Heart.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, Royal Alexandra Theatre, Toronto. Toronto.com, 11 January 2012, http://www.toronto.com (article no longer available on site). – “History Meets Personal History.” Review of Eonnagata, directed by Robert Lepage, Sony Centre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 13 November 2010, E1, http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/theatre/ article/889861--history-meets-personal-history-for-robert-lepage. – “Kâ Is Talk of Vegas.” Review of Kâ, directed by Robert Lepage, mgm Grand, Las Vegas, Nevada. Toronto Star, 3 February 2005, A27. – “Lipsynch.” In “The Century So Far: Stage,” Toronto Star, 26 September 2009, E16, http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2009/09/26/lipsynch_2007.html. – “Robert Lepage Work Rewards Theatregoers’ Efforts.” Review of The Andersen Project, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. TheStar.com, 21 October 2010, http://www.thestar.com/

27761_Koustas.indd 198

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 199

entertainment/theatre/article/879539--robert-lepage-work-rewardstheatregoers-efforts. – “Robert Lepage’s Nine Hour Work: Lipsynch joins Luminato.” Toronto Star, 29 October 2008, E2. – “A Unique Exploration of Sexuality.” Review of Eonnagata, directed by Robert Lepage, Sony Centre, Toronto. TheStar.com, 19 November 2010, E9. – “You’ll Find It Rewarding, but Can You Find the Time?” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Bluma Appel Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 7 June 2009, E1. Pascual-Leone, Carlos. “‘Lipsynch’ Makes Audiences Sink in Deep.” Excalibur, 17 June 2009, www.excal.on.ca (article no longer available on website). Pavis, Patrice. Le théâtre au croisement des cultures. Paris: José Corti, 1990. Peck, Jamie. “Vancouver’s Suburban Involution.” City 18, 4/5 (Aug.–Oct. 2014), 386–415. Pennington, Bob. “Daring, Dazzling Dragon’s Trilogy.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Sun, 20 May 1988, 76. Porter, Isabelle. “L’histoire sans fin de Robert Lepage.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre du Trident, Québec. Le Devoir, 14 December 2008, E3. – “Une suite pour La trilogie des Dragons.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Théâtre du Trident, Québec. Le Devoir, 30 April 2007, B8. Posner, Michael. “Cirque unveils over-the-top KA.” Review of KÀ, directed by Robert Lepage, M G M Grand, Las Vegas, Nevada. Globe and Mail, 3 February 2005, R2. Poulin, Andrée. “Le public est toujours ému.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, National Arts Centre, Ottawa. Le Droit, 26 June 1992. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Prokosh, Kevin. “Bigotry Blamed for Play’s Reception.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, mtc Warehouse Theatre, Winnipeg. Winnipeg Free Press, 23 May 1990. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Quill, Greg. “Fragmenting Civilization Too Heavy for One Sitting.” Review of Tectonic Plates, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre Centre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 6 June 1988, C8. R.-Corrivault, Martine. “Collective Exploration.” Le Soleil, 22 March 1984.

27761_Koustas.indd 199

2016-04-01 13:15:40

200 Bibliography

Rempel, Byron. “To Be, or What?” Review of Romeo and Juliette, directed by Robert Lepage, Nightcap Theatre, Saskatoon, sk. Alberta Report, 24 July 1989, 36. Renzetti, Elizabeth. “Robert Lepage Invades the Land of Alcopops.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Northern Stage, Newcastle, UK. Globe and Mail, 3 March 2007, R3. Reynolds, James. “The Double-Edge of the Dramaturgical Sword: Spiritual-Aesthetic Translation in Robert Lepage and Ex Machina’s The Seven Streams of the River Ota.” Paper presented at “Invisible Presences: Translation, Dramaturgy and Performance,” Queen’s University, Belfast, on 4 April 2011. Rickerd, Julie Rekai. “Robert Lepage.” tci: Theatre Crafts International 32, 7 (1998): 19. Rousset, Yann. Introduction to Chantal Hébert and Irène Perelli-Contos, Théâtre: multidiscipliniarité et multiculturalisme, 7–11. Quebec: Presses de l’Université de Laval, 2001. Saint Lawrence Centre for the Arts. Panamania @ St. Lawrence Centre for the Arts. July 2015. Saint-Pierre, Christian. “La voix humaine.” Review of Lipsynch, directed by Robert Lepage, Festival TransAmériques, Montreal. Voir.ca, 17 May 2000, http://voir.ca/scene/2007/05/17/robert-lepage-la-voix-humaine/. Saul, John Ralston. “Aurora Online with John Ralston Saul.” Interview by Jeremy Mouat. Aurora Online, no. 1997, http://aurora.icaap.org/index. php/aurora/article/view/25/36. – Reflections on a Siamese Twin: Canada at the End of the Century. Toronto: Penguin, 1997. Savitz, Macha. “North American Theatrical Premiere: The Blue Dragon.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, Freud Playhouse, ucla Campus, Westwood, ca. Epoch Times, 27 November 2008, 1–2, http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/arts-entertainment/bluedragon-7813.html. Schryburt, Sylvain. “New Dynamics between the Local and the International.” In Stéphan Gervais, Christopher Kirkey and Jarrett Rudy, eds., Quebec Questions: Quebec Studies for the Twenty-First Century, 443–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. – “The Structure of Theatre Festivals and Its Community of Shared Aesthetic Concerns.” Paper given at “The Mirror Crack’d” conference, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, May 2011. Simon, Sherry. “Robert Lepage and the Languages of Spectacle.” In Joseph Donohoe and Jane Koustas, eds., Theater sans Frontières: Essays on the

27761_Koustas.indd 200

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 201

Dramatic Universe of Robert Lepage, 215–31. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2000. Le Soleil. “Robert Lepage veut faire simple.” 11 January 2012, 37. St Hilaire, Jean. “Acte de transmission.” Le Soleil, 22 May 2003, arts et vie, 1. St-Jacques, Sylvie. “Ensemble vocal.” La Presse, 26 May 2007, arts et spectacles, 5. Stratford, Philip. “Canada’s Two Literatures: A Search for Emblems.” Canadian Review of Comparative Literature 6, 2 (1979): 131–8. Sumi, Glenn. “Long Live Lipsynch.” Now, 7 June 2009, http://www. nowtoronto.com/daily/story.cfm?content=169813. Taylor, Charles. The Malaise of Modernity. Toronto: Anansi, 1991. – Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition.” Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992. Taylor, Kate. “In 887, Robert Lepage Examines His Childhood amidst Rise of the flq.” Review of 887, directed by Robert Lepage, St Lawrence Centre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 9 July 2015, http://www. theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/in-887-robert-­ lepage-examines-his-childhood-amidst-rise-of-the-flq/article25398978/. – “The Air’s a Bit Thin on Lepage’s Moon.” Review of The Far Side of the Moon, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 21 April 2000, R12. – “At Last, Another Great Show from Robert Lepage.” Review of Zulu Time, directed by Robert Lepage, Carrefour International de Théâtre, Quebec City. Globe and Mail, 20 May 2000, R6. – “Cold Geometry a Rickety Structure of Abstract Ideas.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 18 April 1998, C13. – “Dancing Exuberantly on Hamlet’s Grave.” Review of Elseneur, directed by Robert Lepage, Monument National, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 15 November 1995, C1. – “Lepage Plumbs New Depths in River Ota.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Globe and Mail, 6 November 1995, C1. – “Lessons from All the World’s a Stage.” Globe and Mail, 27 April 1996, C6. – “Trilogy Revives Brilliant Ideas.” Review of La trilogie des dragons, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstom, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 5 June 2003, R3. Toronto Arts Council. Creative City Planning Framework. http://www. torontoartscouncil.org/TAC/media/tac/Reports%20and%20Resources/ City%20of%20Toronto/creative-city-planning-framework-feb08.pdf.

27761_Koustas.indd 201

2016-04-01 13:15:40

202 Bibliography

Tremblay, Michel. Interview by Geraldine Anthony. In Stage Voices: Twelve Canadian Playwrights Talk about Their Lives and Work, 271– 91. Toronto: Doubleday, 1978. Usmiani, Renate. Second Stage: The Alternative Theatre Movement in Canada. Vancouver: ubc Press, 1985. van Rees, Kees. “Modelling the Literary Field: From System-theoretical Speculation to Empirical Testing.” Canadian Review of Comparative Literature 24, 1 (1997): 91–101. Verge, Stéphanie. “Two Robert Lepage Productions Coming to Toronto, Both Shorter than Nine Hours.” Toronto Life, 11 March 2010, http:// www.torontolife.com/hype/curtain-call/2010/03/11/two-robert-lepageproductions-coming-to-toronto-both-shorter-than-nine-hours/. Verini, Bob. “The Blue Dragon.” Review of The Blue Dragon, directed by Robert Lepage, Freud Playhouse, ucla Campus, Westwood, ca. Daily Variety, 14 November 2008, 6. Vinci [theatre program]. Théâtre Repère. Dir. Robert Lepage. Staged Harbourfront Quay Works, Toronto, 20–23 January 1988. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Wagner, Anton, ed. Establishing Our Boundaries: English-Canadian Theatre Criticism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Wagner, Vit. “All the World’s a Stage.” Toronto Star, 16 April 1998, G11. – “Dragon’s Trilogy Rates Raves of the World.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Factory Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 13 May 1988, D6. – “Lepage’s Seven Streams a Flood of Breathtaking Imagery and Innovation.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 5 November 1995, B3. – “Miracles Worker: Working Miracles the Organic Way.” Review of The Geometry of Miracles, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 11 April 1998, J1, J14. – “One of Lepage’s Few Missteps.” Toronto Star, 11 April 1996. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec. – “Robert Lepage: The World’s His Stage.” Toronto Star, 2 April 1994, K1, K6. – “Theatre Kicks Down All the Boundaries.” Toronto Star, 16 June 1990, J3. – “Two Emerging Theatre Masters Pool Their Talents in Tectonic Plates.” Review of Tectonic Plates, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier Theatre Centre, Toronto. Toronto Star, 3 June 1988, E3.

27761_Koustas.indd 202

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Bibliography 203

Wallace, Robert. Producing Marginality: Theatre and Criticism in Canada. Saskatoon: Fifth House Publishers, 1990. Wardle, Irving. “Masterpiece of Revivalism.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, du Maurier World Stage, Toronto. Times [London, U K], 18 June 1986, 19. – “Théâtre sans Frontières.” Independent on a Sunday, 25 November 1990, 32. Wasserman, Jerry. “Where is the Here Now?: Living the Border in the New Canadian Drama.” In Ric Knowles and Ingrid Mündel, eds., “Ethnic,” Multicultural, and Intercultural Theatre, 83–94. Toronto: Playwrights Canada Press, 2009. Whetstone, David. “Lepage’s ‘Baby’ Is about to Be Born.” Journal [Newcastle, UK], 15 February 2007, 24. Whiting, Jason. “The Dragon Comes Home.” Review of The Dragons’ Trilogy, directed by Robert Lepage, Usine d’Alstrom, Montreal. Globe and Mail, 21 May 2003, R3. Winsor, Christopher “At Play with Robert Lepage.” Eye, 7 April 1994, 35. – “Magnificent Seven: Robert Lepage’s Luxury River Cruise.” Review of The Seven Streams of the River Ota, directed by Robert Lepage, Premiere Dance Theatre, Toronto. Eye Weekly, 9 November 1995, 36. – “A New One Man Show from Lepage Diving Financially? Not ’til Birnam Wood Comes to Dunsinane.” Backstage, 9 November 1995. Ex Machina Archives, La Caserne, Quebec City. Wolf, Matt. “Robert Lepage: Multicultural and Multifaceted.” New York Times, 6 December 1992, H50. World Leaders: A Festival of Creative Genius; 31 May–3 June 1986 [festival program]. Toronto: Harbourfront, 2001.

27761_Koustas.indd 203

2016-04-01 13:15:40

27761_Koustas.indd 204

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Index

Ackerman, Marianne, 48, 52, 80; on Lepage, 12–13, 32–3, 107, 136 Adilman, Sid, 99 Aiguilles et opium. See Needles and Opium Andersen Project, The (2005), 116, 128–36; characters, 127–9, 132– 3; critical reception, 9, 114, 131; global vision, 6, 128; identity in, 32, 129, 132–3; as journey, 30, 131; language use, 129; Lepage on, 131–2; otherness in, 129, 131, 133–4; staging, 129–31; storyline, 128–31 appropriation, 10, 42, 44, 69 audience: engagement of, 41–2, 44– 5; language awareness, 10–11; and Lepage, 106, 135, 150–1; and otherness, 14, 53–4, 71, 107, 110–11; in reflexive theatre, 90, 127–8; in Toronto, 12, 14, 41–4 Baillargeon, Stéphane, 12, 101 Bain, Alison, 160n73 Bakhtin, Mikhail, 160n75, 164n135 Barba, Eugenio, 42, 49, 157n32

27761_Koustas.indd 205

Barbeau, Jean, 25–6 Beaulieu, Lynda (née Lepage), 18 Beaumont, Charles de, Chevalier d’Eon, 136–7 Beaunoyer, Jean, 78 Belda, Carlos, 127 Bellefeuille, Robert, 71 belles-soeurs, Les (Tremblay), 25 Bemrose, John, 94–5 Bennett, Susan, 33, 163n120 Bernatchez, Michel, 21, 68, 77 bilingualism, 53; in Canadian theatre, 56, 58, 80, 84; Lepage and, 16–17, 26–7, 117; official, 6, 26 Bluebeard’s Castle/Erwartung (Bartók/Schoenberg, 1992), 8, 114, 136 Blue Dragon, The (2012), 6, 9, 34, 40, 42–3, 139–48; alternative versions, 139–40; Asian elements, 143, 145, 147–8; calligraphy as theme, 145–6; characters, 143–5; critical response, 140, 148; displacement in, 141–5; vs Dragons’ Trilogy, 141–5; as journey, 140– 1, 146–7; language use, 142–3;

2016-04-01 13:15:40

206 Index

Lepage on, 139–40, 142–5; motherhood in, 141–2; Quebec in, 29–30; racial concerns, 141–2, 144; set and staging, 145–7, 156n12; storyline, 140–1; tattoos as theme, 143, 146–7 Bonnier, Bernard, 52 Bonnier, Céline, 57 Bouchard, Michel Marc, 37 Boucher, Denise, 26 Boulanger, Luc, 66 Bourdieu, Pierre, 49 Bourrassa, André, 24–5 Bousille et les justes (Gélinas), 24 Brassard, André, 112 Brassard, Marie, 21, 81, 143 Buddies in Bad Times, 34 Bulosan, Carlos, 35 Busker’s Opera, The (Montreal, 2004), 8, 114–5 Cahoots Theatre Projects, 34–5 Canada: cultural exchange in, 5–6; identity issues, 9–10, 14, 72; Lepage family as metaphor, 17. See also Quebec; Toronto; two solitudes Canadian Opera Company, 136. See also specific productions Canadian Rep Theatre, 162n101 Canadian Stage, 154n28, 171n4 cantatrice chauve, La (Ionesco), 52 Carbone 14, 26, 27–8 Casa Azul, La (2001), 22 Caux, Patrick, 43, 179n77 Chaboillez, Josée, 66 Chapman, Geoff, 87–8, 100, 105 Charest, Rémy, 93 Chassé, Henri, 140, 143 chronotope, 33

27761_Koustas.indd 206

Circulations (1985), 8, 34, 40, 50–6; as journey, 30, 51–2, 54–5, 59; language use, 52–4; Lepage on, 52; map as theme, 20, 50–2, 54; production history, 53; staging, 52–6; storyline, 51; Western gaze in, 54–5 Cirque du Soleil, 9, 23, 114–15 Cobb, John, 127 Cocteau, Jean, 86–7 colonialism: Lepage and, 92, 132– 3; Quebec theatre and, 25–6, 92; in theatre, 44, 69–70. See also Western gaze communication. See language; miscommunication Conlogue, Ray, 48, 74, 83, 89; on Dragons’ Trilogy, 67, 69, 72 Conservatoire d’art dramatique de Québec, 18 Coulbourn, John, 95, 105, 110–11, 135–6, 178n52 Creative City Planning Framework (City of Toronto), 31, 34 Crew, Robert, 8, 53, 67, 80–1, 110 criticism, 46–9. See also specific critics and productions Cronin, Michael, 11–12, 85 cross-dressing, 136–8 cultural tourism, 31, 33–4, 163n120 Cushman, Robert, 9, 100, 106–7, 110 Czarnecki, Mark, 68 Dalpé, Jean-Marc, 56 Damnation of Faust, The (Berlioz), 22, 115 Dansereau, Suzanne, 94 Davis, Miles, 86–7

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Index 207

Delisle, Jeanne-Mance, 26 Des Landes, Claude, 26 Diamond, Ann, 80 displacement, 92, 95, 141–5 Dolan, Deirdre, 109 Donnelly, Pat, 103, 152 Doré, Marc, 18 doubling (dual identity), 88, 109, 138, 149, 151–2 dragon bleu, Le. See The Blue Dragon Dragons’ Trilogy, The (1985), 16, 20–1, 29, 59–71, 147; Asian ­elements, 143, 145; vs Blue Dragon, 141–5; characters, 142; critical response, 64–5, 67, 114; displacement in, 142–3; global focus, 28, 63; identity in, 72; importance, 65–7; as journey, 61–3, 68; language use, 61–3, 67; Lepage on, 60–1, 142–3, 145; motherhood in, 141–2; as orientalist, 62, 69–72, 97; otherness in, 68–72; production history, 65; racial concerns, 141–2; remake (2003), 22, 65–6, 70–1, 72, 114–15; set and staging, 60–4, 156n12; settings, 60–2, 68; storyline, 61–2, 67; Western gaze in, 69–73, 144. See also Zulu Time dubbing, 100, 117–22, 125 Dubé, Marcel, 24–5 Dubois, René-Daniel, 39 du Maurier World Stage. See World Stage Dundjerovic, ´ Aleksandar, 17, 31 Duplessis, Maurice, 23–5 Echo (1990), 8–1 Echo (myth), 124

27761_Koustas.indd 207

887 (2015), 155n3, 156n12, 158n42, 169n93 Elsinore: Variations on Shakes­ peare’s Hamlet (1996), 99–103; as adaptation, 99–102; characters, 101; critical reception, 8, 12, 100–3, 107, 111; as intercultural, 113; as introspective, 102–3, 107; Lepage on, 99–100, 102; as self-discovery, 101–2; staging, 99–101, 111; text use, 99–102 Elvis impersonators, 71 empowerment, 122, 125 Eon, Chevalier d’ (Charles de Beaumont), 136–7 Eonnagata (2009), 22, 128, 136–9; Asian elements, 137; critical reception, 138; dance in, 136–8; identity in, 137–8; Lepage on, 136 Ex Machina, 5, 21–3, 27–8, 42–3, 112–13; in Asia, 93–4, 147; collaborative works, 43, 126–7; government support, 28–9; international focus, 85, 93, 113. See also Lepage productions Factory Theatre, 35, 162n96 Falcon, Marie-Hélène, 66 Far Side of the Moon, The (2000), 106–12; critical reception, 8–9, 110–11; as journey, 108; language use, 109; otherness in, 108–10, 112–13; staging, 111–12; storyline, 107–8, 110; text use, 111 Félix Poutré (Fréchette), 23 Féral, Josette, 30, 31, 41–2, 107, 109; on Needles and Opium, 86, 88

2016-04-01 13:15:40

208 Index

Festival TransAmériques, 119 Filewood, Alan, 36 Fillion, Carl, 96 Fischer-Lichte, Erika, 42 Florida, Richard, 31 Foo Tai Wei, 143 Fouquet, Ludovic, 32, 109 Fraser, Matthew, 8, 53 Fréchette, Louis Honoré, 23 Fréchette, Richard, 18–21 French Canadian (as term), 158n41 Fricker, Karen, 17–18, 31, 109–10, 133; on Dragons’ Trilogy, 68, 70 Friedlander, Mira, 67, 108–9, 111 fu-ge n, 35 fusion (of horizons), 45–6 Gaboriau, Linda, 37–8, 151 Gabriel, Peter, 22–3 Gadamer, Georg, 113 Galiano, Tony, 39 Garcia, Nuria, 126–7 Garneau, Michel, 25 Gass, Ken, 162n96, 162n101 Gauvreau, Claude, 127 Gélinas, Gratien, 7, 23–4 Geometry of Miracles, The (1998), 103–6; critical reception, 8, 12, 103, 105–7, 111; language use, 104; Lepage on, 12, 105; staging, 104–5, 111; storyline, 103–5; text, 105; as work in progress, 105–6 Germain, Jean-Claude, 25 Gignac, Marie, 65–6 Giguère, Monique, 65 Gilbert, Bernard, 43, 179n77 Glenn Gould Prize, 3, 13–14 Globe and Mail, 48, 114–15. See also individual critics

27761_Koustas.indd 208

Godfrey, Stephen, 82 Godin, Jean-Cléo, 23–4 Gómez, Mayte, 34–5 Gordon, Robert, 42–3, 49 Górecki, Henryk, 121 grand cirque ordinaire, Le, 26 Greyson, John, 162n92 Groen, Rick, 78 Guay, Hervé, 117 Guilfoyle, Tony, 70 Guillem, Sylvie, 137–8 Gurdjieff, George Ivanovitch, 43 Gurik, Robert, 26 Halprin, Anna, 20 Halprin, Lawrence, 79 Hamlet (Shakespeare), 99–100, 102. See also Elsinore Harbourfront, 81, 99. See also World Stage Hare, John, 54–5 Harvie, Jennifer, 14, 69, 97–8 Hawking, Stephen, 118, 123, 126 Hébert, Chantal, 27 Herge, Stéphanie, 135 Hiroshima, 71. See also Seven Streams of the River Ota Hiroshima (city), 62, 90–2, 98 Hockey Night in Canada, 155n5 Hoile, Christopher, 138 Holmes, Eda, 37 Un homme et son péché (Grignon), 23 Hood, Sarah B., 10–11, 84 Hosanna (Tremblay), 25–6 Huffman, Shawn, 77–9 Hurley, Erin, 27 identity: Canadian, 9–10, 14, 72; defining, 13; doubling of, 88,

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Index 209

109, 149, 151–2; fusion of, 45–6; language and, 116–18, 123–4; Lepage and, 4–5, 30–1, 48–9; multiple, 32, 88–9; in Quebec theatre, 26, 38; voice and, 122–4. See also specific productions Image Mill, The (2008), 23–4 imperialism, 12, 63, 125, 132 improvisation, 18–20, 64, 119 Incendies (dir. Mouawad), 37–8 Institut de la personnalité créatrice (Paris), 18–19 interculturalism. See theatre, intercultural Jacques, Yves, 21 Jean Paul II, Pope, 123 Jésus de Montréal (dir. Arcand), 20, 100 Jocelyn, Matthew, 135 Johnson, Brian, 126 joual, 25 Jubinville, Yves, 79 KÀ (Cirque du Soleil, 2005), 9, 23, 114 kabuki, 94, 137–8 Kaplan, Jon, 95 Kennedy, Janice, 104–5 Kirchhoff, Jack, 89 kitsch, 62, 69, 74–5 Knapp, Alain, 18–19 Knowles, Ric, 33–5, 39, 44 Laberge, Marie, 26 Lacey, Liam, 76 Lachance, Dominique, 61 Ladouceur, Louise, 38–9 Lafon, Dominique, 27–8 Lalonde, Michèle, 25

27761_Koustas.indd 209

language: audience awareness of, 10–11; failure of, 52–4, 77, 123– 4; and identity, 116–18, 123–4; mixing of, 38, 51, 83, 107, 125; and multiculturalism, 117–18; of theatre, 25, 54; transcendence of, 78; translation of, 38, 52–3, 117–18, 120–1. See also bilingualism; miscommunication; voice; specific productions Larochelle, Claudia, 117 Lawless, Jill, 95 Lecoq, Jacques, 18 Lenze, Christine, 44–5 Lepage, David, 26 Lepage, Lynda (Beaulieu), 18 Lepage productions, 14, 40, 149– 50; Asian elements, 42–3, 71–3; as autobiographical, 131–2, 138– 9, 149; critical reception, 46–9, 69, 90, 163n112; dance in, 42–3, 104, 136–8, 145; displacement in, 92, 95, 141–5; doubling (dual identity) in, 88, 109, 138, 149, 151–2; global focus, 28, 30–1, 41–4, 63, 80; identity as theme, 4–5, 30–2, 41–2, 48–9, 58–9, 107; improvisation in, 18–19, 20; journey as theme, 30, 52, 73; kitsch in, 62, 69, 74–5; language mixing in, 51, 83, 107; as liminal space, 11, 17; as minimalist, 45–6; motherhood in, 121, 141–2, 174n101; multidisciplinary, 42–3; operatic, 8, 22, 114–15, 121; otherness in, 30–2, 68–73, 83, 107; Quebec in, 61, 68, 144–5; Quebec reception, 12–13, 28–9, 90; self-discovery in, 54, 85–7, 101–2, 131, 146, 151; and

2016-04-01 13:15:40

210 Index

separatism, 29–30; solo works, 21, 73–6, 99–103, 106–12, 128– 36; staging, 4–6, 46, 55–6, 149, 152; technology use, 5, 21, 46, 99, 110–12, 152; unsuccessful, 56–9, 80; urban focus, 29, 51–2; as visual spectacle, 41, 50, 113; as works in progress, 21, 49, 95, 105, 119. See also Ex Machina; specific works Lepage, Robert: as actor-creator, 18–20, 42, 73–4, 88, 137–8; alopecia and, 17–18; Asian experiences, 93–4, 142–3; awards and honours, 3, 9, 13–14, 50, 89, 112, 115; bilingualism, 16–17, 26–7, 117; childhood and family, 16–18, 26; cultural identity, 10– 12, 31, 151–2; drug experiences, 18, 86; and “familiar otherness,” 11–12, 29, 31–2, 37, 107; film career, 20–1, 100; as intercultural artist, 6, 23, 116, 152; personal life, 17–18; scholarship on, 3–4, 17; as separatist, 7, 10, 13, 26–7; theatre training, 18–19; travels, 18–19, 27–8, 93–4, 142–3. See also Lepage productions Lesage, Jean, 24 Lescarbot, Marc, 23 Lessard, Jacques, 20, 21, 50–1 Lettres aux Américains (Cocteau), 86 Lévesque, Robert, 47, 90 Levine, Michael, 64, 78 Lieblein, Leanore, 48 Ligue nationale d’improvisation, 19 Lilies: or The Revival of a Roman­ tic Drama (Bouchard), 37 lip reading, 122 Lipsynch (2009), 115–28; alternative versions, 34, 119, 134;

27761_Koustas.indd 210

characters, 119; as collaborative effort, 126–7; critical reception, 9, 117–19, 128, 134–6; as global theatre, 6, 118, 135–6; language use, 117–18, 120–5, 134; Lepage on, 117, 125; motherhood in, 121; staging, 121, 125–6; storyline, 118–20; voice as theme, 116–19 lip-synching, 121–2, 125 Lonergan, Patrick, 40–2, 127 lotus bleu, Le (Hergé), 143, 146 Luminato Festival, 34, 37, 39, 115–16, 128 Maazel, Lorin, 22, 115 Mahabharata, The (Peter Brook), 44 Maheu, Gilles, 12, 26, 29, 39 Maliphant, Russell, 137–8 Mallet, Gina, 47 Manning, Erin, 9 Marks, Peter, 104–5 Marleau, Denis, 12 Maxwell, Jackie, 37 McCall, Gordon, 56–8 McKinnie, Michael, 28, 32–3, 40, 60, 150 McQueen, Alexander, 138 “McTheatre,” 42, 139 Metropolitan Opera (New York), 22, 115 Meunier, Claude, 39 Michaud, Marie, 63, 141–3, 147 Miller, David, 31 Miller, Rick, 126 Mirvish Productions, 139 miscommunication, 52–4, 83, 89, 118. See also language Modern Times Stage Company, 35 Montreal, 21, 23, 28 Morrow, Martin, 139

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Index 211

Moss, Jane, 36 Mouawad, Wajdi, 37–8 moulin à images, Le (2008), 23–4 multiculturalism, 6, 66, 117–18; in theatre, 27, 33–5, 39 multilingualism, 38, 125 National Arts Centre (Ottawa), 21, 37 Native Earth Performing Arts, 35 Needles and Opium (1994), 21, 85– 90; alternative versions, 154n28; artistic creativity as theme, 85–6, 88–9; characters, 86–8; critical reception, 8, 11; as intercultural, 171n4; as journey, 85–7; Lepage on, 86–9; otherness/identity in, 85–9, 113; set and staging, 87–8; storyline, 86–7 Nestruck, J. Kelly, 132–3, 178n54 Nicholl, Liz, 54 Nightcap Productions (Saskatoon), 56 Nightingale and Other Short Fables, The (Stravinsky), 9, 136 Nightwood Theatre, 34–5 9/11 (September 11, 2001), 115 1984 (Maazel, 2005), 22, 115 Nishika, Sonoyo, 94 No No Miya, 97 Northern Stage (Newcastle, U K), 126–7 nuit de la poésie, La (1971), 25, 158n42 Nunn, Robert, 48 Obsidian Theatre Company, 35 Ontario Multicultural Theatre Association, 34 operas, 8, 22, 97, 114–15, 121. See also specific productions

27761_Koustas.indd 211

orientalism, 62, 69–72, 97–9. See also Western gaze Other, 3–4; English Canada as, 26–7, 146–7; Lepage as, 11, 32. See also otherness otherness: familiar (binary), 11–12, 29, 31–2, 37, 107; in Lepage works, 30–2, 68–73, 83, 107; in theatre, 42–3, 72. See also identity Ouzounian, Richard, 127–8, 131, 138–40, 149 Pacamambo (Mouawad), 162n101 PanAm Games (2015), 154n28 Papineau (Fréchette), 23 Pascual-Leone, Alvaro, 118–19 Pavis, Patrice, 43–4 Paysannerie (Grignon), 23 Pecaut, David, 39 Peck, Jamie, 161n78 Perelli-Contos, Irène, 27 Petitjean, Louis, 23 Piesbergen, Hans, 126–7 plaques tectoniques, Les, 21. See also Tectonic Plates Playing Cards (2012, 2013), 22 Polygraph (1990), 8, 21, 80–3 Porter, Isabelle, 140 projet Andersen, Le, 169n92. See also The Andersen Project Purpose of Playing, The (Gordon), 42 Quebec: cultural projects, 24–5; under Duplessis, 24; English Canada and, 5–6, 26–7; Lepage on, 81; in Lepage productions, 61, 68, 144–5; Lepage productions in, 23; and Lepage works, 12–13, 28–9, 90; separatism in, 156n10;

2016-04-01 13:15:40

212 Index

as xenophobic, 29–30. See also theatre, Quebec Quebec City, 16–18 Quebec–New York 2001 (festival), 115 Quiet Revolution, 24–5 racism, 12, 114 Rake’s Progress, The (Stravinsky, 2007), 22, 115 R. Corrivault, Martine, 50 Rebellato, Dan, 14, 42 Repère method, 20–1, 51, 64, 75, 79. See also Théâtre Repère Reynolds, James, 97–8 Ring cycle (Wagner), 22, 115 Robertson, Wellesley, III, 154n28, 171n4 roc (Rest of Canada), 5; as feedback loop, 4, 9–10; and Lepage works, 4, 9–10, 12, 56–9, 151; as Other, 4, 8, 53–4. See also Canada; Quebec; Toronto Romeo and Juliette (1989), 56–9; identity in, 58–9; Lepage on, 57–9; staging, 57–8; two solitudes in, 56–7, 59 Rose, Richard, 38 Rousset, Yann, 27 Saia, Louis, 26 Saul, John Ralston, 9–10 Savitz, Macha, 145 Schapiro, Clare, 80 Schryburt, Sylvain, 133–4 Scorched (Mouawad), 37–8 separatism: Lepage and, 7, 10, 13, 26–7; in Lepage productions, 29–30; in Quebec, 156n10; and Quebec theatre, 7, 25–6, 29, 36–8

27761_Koustas.indd 212

Seuls (Mouawad), 162n98 Seven Streams of the River Ota, The (1995), 90–9; alternative versions, 93, 98, 120; Asian elements, 93–4; characters, 91–2; critical response, 8, 94–5; as didactic, 97; displacement in, 92, 95; as intercultural, 93, 106, 113; language use, 92; Lepage on, 80, 90, 94, 98; orientalism in, 97–9; otherness/identity in, 95–6; set and staging, 96, 156n12; storyline, 90–2; as work in progress, 95. See also Hiroshima Shaw Festival, 37 Simon, Sherry, 38 simple soldat, Un (Dubé), 24 songe d’une nuit d’été, Le, 21 “Speak White” (Lalonde), 25, 158n42 speech. See language St Armand, Pierre, 99–100 stereotyping, 54–5, 69–72. See also orientalism Stratford, Philip, 5 subtitles/surtitles, 120–1 Symphony of Sorrowful Songs (Górecki), 121 Tale of Teeka, The (Bouchard), 37 Tarragon Theatre, 38 Taylor, Charles, 13, 31, 45–6, 151 Taylor, Kate, 47, 94–5, 105–6, 110, 114; on Elsinore, 99–101 Tectonic Plates (1988), 28, 76–80; characters, 76–7; critical response, 8, 77–8; language use, 77–9; set and staging, 79–80; storyline, 79; as work in progress, 77–8. See also Les plaques tectoniques

2016-04-01 13:15:40

Index 213

theatre: bilingual, 58, 80, 84; Canadian, 4, 6–7, 36, 45, 58; codes of, 93–4, 96; collaborative, 126–7; collective, 26, 28, 79; commodification of, 133–4; and community, 36; context and, 69, 71–2; criticism in, 47–8; as cultural exchange, 42–3, 137; as escape, 18; feminist, 26, 28, 34; gay, 33–4; global, 28, 40–4, 60, 89, 113, 118, 127–8; imagistic, 38–9, 67, 76, 81, 99; immigrant, 36, 72; Japanese, 93–4, 137; languages of, 20, 41, 52–4, 57–8, 63, 78, 98, 151; multicultural, 27, 33–5, 39; multidisciplinary, 27, 42–3; multilingual, 38; multimedia, 87–8; national, 36, 127; process-oriented, 20; reflexive, 42, 53–4, 68, 90, 127–8; vs theatricality, 19–20; ticket sales, 165n144. See also theatre, inter­‑ cultural; theatre, Quebec; theatre, Toronto; specific productions theatre, intercultural, 42–4, 93, 112–13, 116, 133–4, 149–50; Lepage and, 21, 27–8; in Toronto, 33–5, 42 theatre, Quebec, 28–9, 58; history, 23–6; identity politics in, 26, 38; internationalism in, 39–40; and Lepage, 7, 28; Lepage and, 19–20, 27; Montreal as centre, 21, 23; post-identity, 36–8; and separatism, 7, 25–6, 29, 36–8; in Toronto, 7–8, 11, 27, 36–8, 46–7; in translation, 7–8, 37–9 theatre, Toronto, 150; alternative, 34–5; evolution of, 32–6; intercultural, 33–5, 42; interna-

27761_Koustas.indd 213

tionalism in, 4, 13, 29, 38–40, 67, 75; Lepage effect on, 36, 38, 89, 135–6; Lepage successes, 8–9, 12– 13, 31, 67, 75; multiculturalism in, 33–5, 39; post-1970s, 32–3, 36–8; Quebec productions in, 7–8, 11, 27, 36–8, 46–7. See also Luminato Festival; World Stage théâtre de l’image, 27 Théâtre de Neptune (Lescarbot), 23 Théâtre du Nouveau Monde (tnm), 21, 27 Théâtre Hummm, 19–20 Theatre Passe Muraille, 37, 80 Théâtre Repère, 20–1, 64, 79. See also Repère method; specific productions Theatre 1774 (Montreal), 80 Tintin (Hergé), 143 Tit-Coq (Gélinas), 24 Today’s Japan (festival, 1995), 8, 90, 96–8 Tom at the Farm (Bouchard), 162n96 Toronto, 4, 6; international aspirations, 4, 13, 31, 96–7, 113, 116; Lepage productions in, 14, 41, 135; as Lepage second home, 10–12, 46, 84, 112–13, 150–2; in Lepage works, 6–2, 68. See also theatre, Toronto; specific theatres and festivals Totem (Cirque du Soleil, 2010), 23, 115 tourism: cultural, 31, 33–4, 163n120; tourist gaze, 54–5, 69–73, 144 Toussaint, Daniel, 75 translation, 52–3; Quebec plays in, 7–8, 37–9; subversion of, 117–18, 120–1

2016-04-01 13:15:40

214 Index

Tremblay, Michel, 7, 11, 25–6, 29, 68 Trudeau, Pierre, 153n8 two solitudes (Canada), 5–6, 9–10, 14; Lepage and, 7, 10, 72–3; in Quebec, 26–7, 146–7; Quebec theatre and, 7–8; in Romeo and Juliette, 56–7, 59 Vancouver, 62, 68, 161n78 Vinci (1986), 21, 73–6; critical reception, 75; identity in, 32, 73; as intercultural, 74–5; language use, 75; Lepage on, 74–5; set and staging, 75–6; storyline, 73 voice, 117; and identity, 122–4; loss of, 121–3; re-voicing, 120–2, 124–5. See also language Wagner, Anton, 47, 95, 106, 112 Wagner, Richard, 22, 115 Wagner, Vit, 5, 159n50

27761_Koustas.indd 214

Wallace, Robert, 7–8, 28, 39–40, 46–7, 64, 79 Wardle, Irving, 65 Wasserman, Jerry, 35–6 Wedding Day at the Cromagnons (Mouawad), 38 Western gaze, 54–5, 69–73, 144. See also colonialism; orientalism; stereotyping Whiting, Jason, 61 Wilson, Robert, 42, 44 Winsor, Christopher, 99 Wolf, Matt, 89 World Leaders Festival (2001), 9–10, 112 World Stage, 37, 39, 77, 111, 115; as global theatre, 60, 89, 113. See also specific productions xenophobia, 29–30, 63 Zulu Time (1999), 8, 114–15

2016-04-01 13:15:40