This article reviews Jean-Paul Dufiet's analysis of Maeterlinck, Beckett, and Lagarce's plays, exploring how they subvert classical dramaturgy by abandoning action and dramatic progression.
Extract
[...] Practices: Linguistics, literature, pedagogy, The dramaturgy without action: Maeterlinck, Beckett, Lagarce - Jean-Paul Dufiet (2021) - Review of article Instructions: After reading an article written by a theater specialist, you will respond to these questions in a critical manner (do not paraphrase but show critical thinking, as in a review of an article): -Does the article raise a question? A problem? Which one? -What is the thesis developed in the article? Where is it located? -What is the antithesis of the article? Is it formulated in the form of self-objection within the article? If not, can you imagine it? [...]
[...] The article does not explicitly include an antithesis, but one can imagine an objection in the form of a critique of the effect of this 'dramaturgy without action' on the audience's engagement. In the traditional framework, action and conflict allow for capturing the audience and transmitting an emotional and cathartic experience. By refusing these elements, Maeterlinck, Beckett, and Lagarce risk establishing a cold, introspective, and obscure theatre, where the absence of action and dramatic progression could cut the audience off from the theatrical experience. Another potential critique would be that this type of theatre could confine itself to an elitist intellectualism, limiting its accessibility and ability to reach a wider audience. [...]
[...] Dufiet questions the possibility of a theatre where action, traditionally indispensable to dramatic progression, is almost or completely absent. This absence of action raises questions about how the theatrical text remains dramatic, breaks away from Aristotelian conventions, and expresses a new form of theatricality specific to the authors studied. Dufiet's thesis highlights that the absence of structuring action in Maeterlinck, Beckett, and Lagarce's plays constitutes a genuine subversion of classical dramaturgy. This 'dramaturgy without action' results from a redefinition of the roles of characters and their speech, which detach themselves from Aristotelian mimesis to join a form of introspection and eternal waiting. [...]
