The Classical Model: Literature and Knowledge in Seventeenth-Century France 9780801432125, 080143212X

Citation preview

Classical

Model Literature

and Knowledge

in

Seven teen th-Cen tun France

H ARRIl

I

Si ONI

The Classical Model Literature

and Knowledge

in Seventeenth-Century

France

Harriet Stone Literature has

its

own

strategies for ordering

information. In this elegant and insightful

book about the formation of knowledge

in

seventeenth-century France, Harriet Stone asks

what those

strategies

limits of science

conveyed about the

and about the

ronment of the period.

cultural envi-

A propensity for rea-

son and control pervaded literature as well as science, allowing classical literature to serve

as a

unique laboratory for exploring the

model of representation developed by

sci-

ence. Literary texts have influenced the

es-

tablishment and transformation of the para-

digms grounding knowledge by drawing tention to meanings that the paradigms to

atfail

name. Stone identifies not only the momentous

achievement of the discovery of the

method but

also the

scientific

more subde process of

in literature

through which

ideas were continually tested

and redefined.

experimentation

She

offers close readings of works by Rotrou,

Corneille, Racine, Moliere, cauld,

and

Furetiere, ters

La Rochefou-

Lafayette, as well as by Descartes,

and

frame the

Pascal.

Her first and

last

chap-

literary texts within a discus-

sion of Foucault's analysis of classical science. (

lassie al

writers

began

to

encode

their

own

Once they did, not only science but literature became an authority for mapping

world.

>n firmed

on back flap)

12'/

*•* Hi

s.

THE CLASSICAL

MODEL Literature

and Knowledge

in

Seventeenth-Century France

Harriet Stone

Cornell University Press Ilh.ua

.iii.l

London

—

—

Selections from Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences,

Alan Sheridan (New York: Vintage, 1973), are copyright © 1966 by Editions Gallimard. Reprinted by permission of Georges Borchardt, Inc., and Roudedge

trans.

(Tavistock) for the author.

Copyright

©

1996 by Cornell University

Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information, address Cornell University Press, Sage House, 512 East State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850.

All rights reserved.

First

published 1996 by Cornell University Press.

Printed in the United States of America

© The paper in

this

book meets the minimum requirements

of the American National Standard for Information Sciences

Permanence of Paper

for Printed Library Materials,

ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Stone, Harriet

The

Amy, 1953model literature and knowledge

classical

:

in seventeenth-century

France /

Harriet Stone, p.

cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 0-8014-32 12-X 1.

French

France.

3.

(alk.

literature

Literature

paper)

— 17th

— History and —France. Knowledge, Theory

century

and science

criticism.

4.

2.

of.

Classicism I.

Tide.

PQ245.S78

1996 840.9004—dc2Q

95-5 2 449

For Jonathan Stone

and Melissa Stone

1

Contents

Preface

i\

Introduction: Modeling a Classical Discourse

1

1.

Frame Theory: Foucault, Rotrou, and Corneille

2.

Perspectives

3.

The

Play

Is

on Knowledge: Andromaque and the Thing:

The

24

Berenice

Inscrutable Subjects of

Moliere, Descartes, and La Rochefoucauld 4.

The Refracted Gaze:

5.

The Art of Naming: The Taxonomies of Furetiere,

Zaide

and La

and Pascal

Princesse de Cleves

95 130

Descartes,

170

Conclusion: Final Perspectives

1

Bibliography

219

Index

[vii]

1

Preface

In

this

book

I

situate literature as

knowledge that developed

an equal partner

in the search for

in seventeenth-century France

watchful eye of the absolutist court.

I

under the

take seriously literature's capac-

to order a view of the world, detecting in the vision of things

ity

offered by writers of fiction a key to understanding

how meaning

fashioned. In the crafting of literature's forms, in the display of there exists a legitimate science. This

is

ery but the science of representing what

is

art,

am

referring to the scientia of the classical

not the science of

is

its

dis


same and different, to observe of representation, it becomes impossible resentation into

h«>w.

wuhm

the

hi all

characters through a single model. In his preface to Les mots this

work and

toire

de lafolie

Us choses Foucault

et

disi

attempt to write a histOfJ ( The History of Madness) offers what Ik his earlier

t

n

of the Other, a history of difference, or, more precisely, the re of difference. In contrast, the "history of the order of things"

is, he Same: "of that which, for a given cultun both dispersed and related, therefore to be distinguished by kinds and to be collected together into identities" (xxiv/15). Identities and differences are determined; then all things sharing certain \< "marks," are grouped together in the same class. But literature, I contend, testifies to the sustained existence of an Other that is not epistemologically "mad," unavailable to us through representation. This Other is not Foucault's Other, whose voice has been suppressed by history; it is not the human subject expelled ("so as to exon the interior danger") or imprisoned, shut away inside representation ("in order to reduce its otherness" [xxiv/15]). Certainly there is a political Other in these texts characters who are excluded because their religion, sex, or race marks them as a threat to a stable political order. The text's Other can be said, moreover, to mirror the real Others of the seventeenth-century monarchy the Frondeur, the for-

claims, a history of the

—

—

women who challenge the court in v> I am referring specifically, battlefield.

eign power, the Oriental, the

on the the Other that underlies these

salons as well as ever, to

that

is

a product of the text's

th

h

Other own representation. The example historic relations, to the

Us choses as the moment 01 tiaiiMtion between two episiemol. through which and b\ which the human I 1*1 ami lm own p in that world, at the mi i that never possible difl their partition, their parturition, separating < and ehd in Iss mots et

all

differe nce, in that

impoa

birth oi

The Classical Model

[26]

The room depicted studio.

On

the

left side

in a self-portrait his

artist's

large,

and presumed

the artist

— stands behind

model, and on

stands in the

is

— that

his easel.

us, since the

same space

is,

his

The

be Velazquez's own double as represented

to

artist's

gaze

fixed

is

on

viewer of Velazquez's masterpiece

as the king

and queen who pose

for the

room hangs a series of dimly far wall we distinguish a mirror

double. At the rear of the

lit

paintings. Near the center of this in which the reflection of the royal couple appears. At the back of the room, to the right of the mirror, a marshal holds open a curtain in a doorway that connects to a passage. Posed with his feet on different steps and with one knee bent, this figure suggests movement. Yet we cannot know whether he is coming or going. On the right-hand side of the composition more paintings are hung between two windows. These paintings and the windows are visible primarily as frames, since

they are situated at right angles to the viewer. Foucault calls attention to the fact that the

window on the extreme

right,

which

is

the light

source for the painting, illuminates both the studio depicted in the

and the unrepresented area in front of it in which the king and queen are presumed to be posing for the artist (5/21). In the foreground of the painting, extending from the easel to the far right, is a group of spectators which includes the young Princess Margarita, who is positioned between two maids of honor. The one to the left is offering the Infanta a glass of water. Behind the attendant on the painting

right appear two additional court figures. In the lower right-hand cor-

ner of the painting are two dwarfs, the smaller of whom, a boy, stands

under the window with his foot resting on a dog in the foreground. Examining the painting from left to right, we can therefore playfully

distinguish three primary focal points: the painter; the royal couple reflected in the

A

framed mirror; and the spectators in the foreground.

fourth area depicts the marginalized presence of the inscrutable

marshal

who

observes the scene from the rear of the studio as he

and queen and not by any of the figures in the painting. The significance of his position is one that I will highlight in a manner intended to cast Foucault's own analysis in a somewhat different light. What is striking about Velazquez's work is that the royal couple, who are ostensibly the model for the entire composition, appear nowhere in it. The king and queen are invisible, although they constitute the painting's anecdotal subject, its raison d'etre from the point of view of narrative. Only the couple's reflection in the mirror and the many glances turned toward them as they stand outside the painting enters/leaves, seen only by the real king

I-

mme

Theory

(27]

affirm their presence. Foucault identifies

the far wall as the direct reflection in the

space beneath the frame.

thl

\

paints a EuIMcngth poitiait

him. and hci parents.

|

ntl diti
>t Hegelian poilotoph) and the question The Interrupted Dialectic: Philouffo. hychoa Hopkins UiuVersit) Press, igoa], chap (

mating i

ethics

hns

The Classical Model

[46]

does not by necessity engage him in another one, such that the connection

and the continuity between the two make

for only

one

action;

which

does not occur here, where Horace returns triumphant with no need whatsoever to

nor even to speak to her; and the action

his sister

kill

would be sufficiendy ended with

no

into another, with

because the hero risk,

The

his victory.

from one danger

fall

cause, here creates an effect that

from a public danger, where the

falls

where

into a private danger,

the worse

is all

entire State

only a question of his

it is

and, moreover, from an illustrious danger, where he could

own

.

.

that Camille,

.

who

at

life,

victim

fall

only gloriously, into one from which he cannot escape unscathed. to this

is

occupies only a secondary role in the

Add first

three acts, where she yields the primary role to Sabine, assumes the pri-

mary

role in the last two acts.

fait

une action double, par

le

apres etre sorti

du premier. L'unite de

peril

Cette mort

fait l'unite d'action; et

n'est

que

autre,

la sortie

que

quand

meme

la liaison et la

de ce

meme

cessity, fait ici il

y va de tout

un

sa victoire. Cette

il

tombe en un plus,

les trois

premiers

.

.

.

elle; et

si

ce

necessairement dans un

deux n'en

qu'une action;

fasse

aucun besoin

Taction serait [suffisam-

peril particulier, peril illustre,

peril infame,

que Camille, qui ne

actes, et y laisse le

la tragedie

l'autre, sans ne-

mauvais que d'un peril public, ou

d'un

comber que glorieusement, en un sans tache. Ajoutez

si

chute d'un peril en

effet d'autant plus

l'Etat,

d'un heros dans

revient triomphant sans

de parler a

pour dire encore

sa vie, et,

ou tombe Horace

peril

est garanti, la piece est finie,

peril l'engage

ou Horace

ici,

de tuer

ment] terminee a

en

continuite des

ce qui n 'arrive point sa soeur ni

il

second

tient

ou

dont

que

il

ou

le

il

il

n'y va

que de

ne peut

ne peut

suc-

sortir

second rang dans

premier a Sabine, prend

le

premier

en ces deux derniers. (Examen 248-49)

Horace's murder of Camille than

is

his defeat of Curiace.

interests in

ultimately ics

is

a far

more equivocal

act of heroism

Even though Camille betrays the

state's

denying the glory of Horace's military conquests, Tulle

condemns

the hero's response to her. Nonetheless,

crit-

— notably Serge Doubrovsky— have favored "Corneille the creator"

over "Corneille the critic," defending the unity of action as "one

unique movement in two stages." According to this logic, Camille's challenge is even more trying, and more appropriately taxing to a hero than Curiace 's, since as a sister she represents a greater assault

Promt Ihrvry

on

need That is,

to assert himself against

his

ity."

precisely because she

is

a

m -ntimeut and •entimentalblood n th-

all

I.

eatre soi-m^m*) Camille represents the greater odm ,

aspirations. This reading allows us to see in

CamiDe'l nun

mise

en abimeoi the frame story about the hero's ability to sa for his country.

it

is

likewise this event as

— a sign — that contributes

representation

mance

But

of what

as

is

breaks

it

absent from

to the ordering of

th

tin

knowledge lure.

we note that the ptaty an be eit graphed according to the same compositional structure that Foucault emphasizes in Velazquez's painting. Tulle makes the ultimate det mination to pardon the hero and to bury the sister he murdered. Maker and keeper of law, the king can thus be said to occuj>\ the space of the painter. Horace as hero functions like the royal image This view becomes clearer

if

i

reflected in Velazquez's mirror. Camille duplicates the marshai'l po-

framed doorway. Le

sition in the

vieil

Horace, Valere, and Sabine,

participants in Horace's "trial," as critics frequently refer to

all

a
\sk\.

CornrtlU

rt la

dtaUrttqu* du hhI into gut HI |xm:

The Classical Model

[50]

Against I

whomever

may be

it

that

my

country uses me,

blindly accept this glory with joy;

That of receiving such commands

Must

stifle

in us all other feelings.

Whoever, ready

to serve his country, considers other things,

Prepares himself like a coward to do what he must;

This saindy and sacred duty breaks

Rome

has chosen

my

arm;

I

ties.

and sincere

is

As that with which

married the

I

other

examine nothing.

With a gladness that

And,

all

as full

sister, I will fight

the brother

to cut short this superfluous speech,

Albe has

named

you;

Contre qui que ce

no longer know you.

I

soit

que

mon

pays m'emploie,

J'accepte aveuglement cette gloire avec joie; Celle de recevoir de tels

commandements

Doit etouffer en nous tous autres sentiments. Qui, pres de

A faire Ce

le servir,

ce qu'il doit lachement se dispose;

droit saint et sacre

Rome

considere autre chose,

a choisi

mon

Avec une allegresse

Que j'epousai

rompt tout autre

bras, je

n'examine

lien.

rien.

aussi pleine et sincere

la soeur, je

combattrai

le

frere

pour trancher enfin ces discours superflus,

Et,

Albe vous a

nomme, je ne vous

connais plus. (2.3.491-502)

Refusing to see in Curiace anything but "an other

self,"

a challenge

what is his and hence a welcome test of his own ability to sacrifice, Horace enters the batde having repressed his emotion. If he projects a heroic image that all but subsumes the physical demands of the conflict, however, he proves vulnerable to new attacks not to to

kill

—

his

person

this

time but to his persona, his heroic identity.

In the scene that precipitates his attack against Camille, Horace

responds to her taunting challenge to the very standards that frame his glory.

She attempts

to invalidate

Rome,

its

sublime, as a criterion

She refuses to recognize the code of honor that exempts the hero from having to behave as a man:

for judging her brother.

Rome, the sole object of my resentment! Rome, for whom your arm has just sacrificed my

lover!

Frame

1

heory

Rome, who saw your birth, and whom potn heart adores! Rome, whom I hate because sh\


begins: the death of her husband, Hector, sends her into

grief before the

opening scene. In the course of the events dramati/

onstage, however,

and

a text that

saves the

life

Andromaque wins out

against her captor, Pyrrhus,

of her son Astyanax. Although qualified b\

\

In

tor's

absence, which continues to pain her, this final success crown

drama dedicated

to

exposing the heroine's resourcefulness. Br

from triumph to adversity. She cornea Rome the adored lover of Titus, the dead emperor's son; in the end she leaves Rome as Titus rises to power after having agreed to [>a\ the price of separating from her. Despite these differences, the In oines serve much the same function within the eptstemologj explored by Racine. The roles enacted by these characters impose within rep

follows the opposite path,

resentation a dramatic shift in perspective: the} effective!) reconfigure the play's

model

for knowledge.

[59]

The

[60]

Model

Classical

Beyond the Promise: Andromaque's Struggle

for

Meaning

The heroine's loss and sacrifice seem unpromising subjects for tracing how the epistemological field is expanded in the classical period. On the surface of things, both loss

and

sacrifice represent

by the model that the text uses to assign

identities. Yet

Andromaque's unique position within the loss, I

argue in

chapter that she

this

what

is

is

negated

by focusing on

society that

imposes her

a highly competent figure

whose role it is to open up the process of signification. In her performance we discover meanings other than those ordered by the model that Racine sets in place to frame her loss. Intended to vindicate the Trojans at the expense of the Greeks, this eminendy classical model is based on patriarchal rule and the privileging of the Same. For the Trojans, Sameness refers to the past as it shapes the present: the father as he bequeaths a heritage to the son; the hero as he defends his traditions against those of the enemy. Andromaque, her own pain notwithstanding, can be seen to represent the possibility of for-

mulating a new knowledge within

this

old order of things.

This model imposes a rationalist perspective on the drama.

term

rational refers

more

specifically, to the Trojans' efforts to

The

both to the concept of a logical discourse and,

resented by their Greek oppressors.

and Oreste succumb

On

contain the disorder rep-

Hermione and return Astyanax. The emphathe Greek side,

to psychic distress before the play's end,

Pyrrhus flouts his princes'

command

to

on perspective is appropriate because in Andromaque the opposition between order and disorder, system and accident, is direcdy connected to Racine's organization of visual space, and hence to point sis

of view as

provides a context for organizing the discrete elements

it

of the drama. Racine's audience would be expected to

condemn

the excesses of

passion realized in Hermione's frenzied call for Pyrrhus' to recognize failure in Oreste's tion. Nevertheless,

dromaque

it is

difficult

murder and

derangement following the assassinato interpret the striking image of An-

queen with which Racine ends the history of her struggle against Pyrrhus. This moment signals Andromaque's reign and the as

elimination of the threat against Astyanax, Troy's ultimate promise for the future.

Although history did see the death of

Racine could assume that his spectators would know is

careful to

end the play with the

child

still

only protected but in a position to pass on to

this child,

and he

this history,

and the mother not him the values defended

alive

Perspectives

by Hector.

on KnowUdgt

Racine presents a window into

1

time serves as a window away from

[6lJ

his

li

tations regarding Astyanax's fate in Kpire

and the

view that such expectations

of

%

»

t\ v\i>uld

(ode

as ihii\

— The Classical Model

[88]

Separating her from

all

that she represents for

Rome, Berenice's

per-

formance here will ultimately elevate her above her condition as abject queen, persona non grata. 25 In this mournful dialogue with her confidante, Berenice separates herself from what she terms her "vain ornaments." Refusing to wear her veils, she in effect distances herself from all supplements that condemn her in the eyes of the Roman Senate to being queen, Oriental, inessential, the outcast whose role is simply that of an object to be discarded once the real work of statecraft has begun. The veils recall by their inessential status the Orient as perceived by the Romans: a world whose riches lie passive before Western domination; an exotic and decadent land whose unfamiliar customs stir the Western imagination; an unreality in which obligations to the past which ties Titus to Vespasien; to the present needs of the state

—

all slip

away.

Now

a disheveled Berenice calls into question not only

her own power to be recognized in Rome, but also the power of Rome to

know

Rome

without the mediation of the Orient,

itself

believes will contaminate the empire.

herself be seen here a

body

in disarray

this

Other that

The Berenice who

lets

— the Berenice who exposes her unveiled body,

—seeks

Titus' pity but also forces his recognition.

In spite of a dispassionate refusal to claim any interest in her appearance, Berenice reveals herself to be both involved, engaged,

gaging in

this scene.

Her somber tone prevents us from

and en-

seeing in the

an attempt to deny her royalty, to effect a seduction of compromise by appearing to become less than Oriental, as she will later propose to be less than an empress: "I do not speak to you about a happy marriage" (Je ne vous parle point d'un heureux hymenee [4.5.1127]). Rather, by their absence the veils force Titus to "see his work," to contemplate the woman whom he has brought to Rome, and whom he is now preparing to send back. Berenice in this scene exercises the only power available to her in Rome, that of projecting before Titus an image which, in refusing the hero all possibility removal of the

of abstraction,

dency of

his

veils

all

identification with the sublime, denies the transcen-

power. Here the creature Berenice prepares to meet

unadorned the eye of her creator royal accoutrements which have

as

in

he contemplates her without the part attracted him to her. She

On abjection, see Julia Kristeva, Pouvoirs de I'horreur: Essai sur Uabjection (Paris: Seuil, 1980). For an application of Kristeva's study to Berenice, see Marie-Florine Bruneau, Racine: Le jansenisme et la modernite (Paris: Corti, 1986), chap. 7. 25

Knowledge

Perspectives on

him the

refuses

— that

now

veils,

I

i

Hon

ih
she forces Titus to confront his own abjection in

It is

resets the stage

to the latter

J

—

back onto

earlier Berenice reflected

she

Ho,

power as em hantretl but also as qu« he would have ho m him."

sign of her

of a great nation

[

ng her I

image that Titui remaim

the world's stage. 27 Even as he steps back from his bckwcd B«

he cannot successfully differentiate himself from Ah, prince! Swear to her that alwavs

agony

In

my

in

Taking even

My

to

court,

my

KM

h
n

whi< h the novel th Al.iiiui

.»

\H

d
>!

ouitlv

[udovitz,

1

>>t

l

;

be Ideal

l

t

tup

•

*

K

(

(his radii

.»l

critics.

libilitics in

1

!

bnpbuabilit)

nana Stanton, "

French Litera

tcmmisi

iiitus

the no* c

imbia

I

Women's

nivcrsm

Pi

Ki( 1

(inn

Milk

1

I

mphasis

harfny/vnm

The Classical Model

[152]

expected to learn the virtues of fidelity from the vignettes about royal personages recounted to her by those who play a major role in her life: mother, husband, friend, and lover each narrates a piece of

The modeling process is not simple, however. Nancy Miller has shown how the princess's behavior is at variance with social norms as expressed in maxims. Similarly, John Lyons has demonstrated how the princess's knowledge is often out of step with court history. 29

examples put forward for her instruction. Lyons argues persuasively that though the novel means to structure knowledge according to the predictability of events, that

princess's

a

more

is,

on the

certainty that the future

the past, this iterative structure does not account for the

will follow

own

story.

30

The recurrent

specific failure,

patterning

is

but a symptom of

namely, the inability of representation to pro-

vide knowledge since the truth behind appearances at court

is

often

another appearance. Thus, the novel, reminiscent of La Rochefoucauld,

whom many

had a hand in its writing, shows uncover a more profound truth than that of

believe to have

the fallacy of efforts to

the feint of court gallantry. Consequently, representation does not so

much shape

a knowledge of the court as participate direcdy in the

court's celebration of less as

an

its

powers. Ultimately, representation functions

analytic device than as

an object in and of the court's

self-

promotion. Lafayette represents the court as a dynamic spectacle, a theater in

which the characters'

political aspirations

and

love interests are played

out time and time again: Ambition and gallantry were the soul of

and women

and the

equally.

and occupied men

There were so many interests and different intrigues,

ladies played such a role in them, that love

with politics and politics with love.

one thought about how either

this court,

boredom or

No one was calm

to advance, please, serve, or

idleness,

was always mixed

or indifferent; every-

harm; no one knew

and everyone was always occupied with

ei-

ther pleasures or intrigues.

29

The

novel contains four principal internal narratives, or mises en abime, which des-

Madame de Chartres tells Madame de Cleves about Diane de Poitiers (51-55); Monsieur de Cleves tells Madame de Cleves about Madame de Tournon and Sancerre, renarrating the story told to him by the latter (71-79); Madame la Dauphine tells Madame de Cleves about Anne Boleyn (90-92); and the Vidame de Chartres tells Nemours about his relation to the queen, a story Nemours later recounts to Madame de Cleves (104-20). ignate the princess as the object of moral instruction:

30

See especially Lyons's study of the intercalated

stories (Exemplum, 217-36).

.au

Tht AY/-

(153I

L'axnbitioii el la gaJanti

egalemeni

n

homilies

lea

cabales differentea

tOUJOUn mtlc aux

el let

Us femmet,

damea

w

\

plaisirs

ou des

Given the

u. .1

s>l
enteenth

and

Eighteenth

On

s

Cultural History. Oxford: Clarendon, 19 " La Frincesse de Cleves and the Mvth of ConitK Love-

Brody, Jules.

of Toronto Quarterly

I

38(1 969

)

:

1

•

/

,

Bruneau, Marie-Florine. Racine: Is jansenisme et la modernitt Pans Burke, Peter. The Fabrication of Louis \l\ New Haven: Yale I ih\t.

1

1

Iromaque.

revolt,

.

in

1

in

I

-

Bern

ille'a in 1

in Zaide,

1

1

j-,.

}(».

1

in the

of,

to

image

(o establish

1

j

168; defining

know!.

H

HlMolIt

soun

jornt).

.

I

IM11.

Nominalism, Noi man. Itntoid.

Ml

1

i

-

Tulle's,

52

Orient, 4, 187, 194;

split,

149. See also

in Zaide, 135-38; of

frame

202; rationalist, in Andromaque, 60-64, 72-73, 77; Renaissance, 70, 178; shift in, 59, 205. See also Gaze; Point of

view

Lafayette, Marie-Madeleine: Zaide;

Philosophy of science,

Racine, Jean: Berenice

Play within the play, 35-39, 57. See also

Oriental, 19, 88. See also

Turk

Mise en abime

Orientalism, 927129, 133, 192

Other, 4-5, 18; in Amphitryon, 103-4, 108, 1 10-1 1; in Andromaque, 64, 76;

84-93; Camille Foucault's, 19-20, 206; in the in Berenice, 81,

Maximes, 96,

1

opposed

26;

to

as,

Point of view, 60-61, 64-65, 70, 137. See also Gaze; Perspective

Pope, Randolph, xiin3

Popper, Karl, xivnio

Nemours's, 162;

Portrait: court, 164;

as,

science

as, in Zaide,

211; self

45;

model's

Same, 214; princess as,

213

xii, xiv,

165, 168;

131-

41, 146-49; Turk as, 194 Overriding of model, 4, 172, 207

Oriental, 136-39, 143, 148-49;

Princesse de Cleves's, 163-64; of royal

couple in Las meninas, 24-33, 37 - 38> 41, 47-49, 70-71. See also Image; Painting

Porush, David, xni, xiv/18 Painting, in Zaide, 143-45. See also

Frame; Perspective; Portrait; Velazquez, Diego Rodriguez

Poulet, Georges, 62/13, 68/19

La

ix,

Princesse de Cleves. See Lafayette,

Marie-Madeleine

Panofsky, Erwin, 178/19

Paradigm,

Posner, Donald, 24/12, 24/13

Promise, 60, 64, 69-70, 72-73

xv-xvi, 14, 18; in

Andromaque, 62-63; in the Dictionnaire,

Proprieties [bienseances], 5, 51/127,

194; in the Maximes, 117-19, 125; in

Proust, Jacques, 216-17, 217/13

76

the Pensees, 200, 202, 204-9 Pascal, Blaise:

"De

geometrique," 196/129; xii,

Racine, Jean, 58, 192; Andromaque,

l'esprit

Pensees, xi-

1,

170-71; based on omission,

160; in the Dictionnaire, 191,

193-94; 3-5, 33, 61, 152; of unities, 21; of unpatternable, 154 regularity of,

Pedagogy,

Mme

xii,

de Chartres's, 155-62,

166, 168, 178-79, 213

text, 7, 95, 97, 102, 210; in Amphitryon, 111; in the

1

20-2 1

1

,

l

72

>

Phedre,

13; in the 1

Orest, 81/121

Recontextualization,

xiii, 8,

13, 22, 48,

58, 109, 128, 172, 206; of

West by

East, 80, 132. See also

Contextualization

Timothy J.,

xiiin6, 2, 5/16, 6/18,

9/112, 17-18, 21, 21/134, 42/119,

Performance of

112, 116,

Ranum,

Reiss,

Pensees. See Pascal, Blaise

Discours, 98, 101,

59-78,

12-14

discours," 146-48 Pattern,

31/19,

3 ln9> 59. 77-94. »35.

22, 174, 195-211; "Trois

xi,

90, 94; Berenice, xi, 4,

Maximes,

29; in the Pensees,

loinn,

182/111, 188/120

Religion, xiv, 6, 9-10, 215, 217;

Descartes and, 183; in the Dictionnaire, 188,

192-93; in Horace,

.

Index

[tssl

(conL)

K