The Problem of Names and Subjectivity in Corneille’s Rodogune

Abstract

Imprisoned in the Bastille, Voltaire's Ingenu is introduced by his cellmate to French theater. After Racine's Iphigenie, Phedre, Andromaque, and Athalie have sent the young Huron into tearful rapture, the Jansenist recommends another tragedy: Lisez lui dit Gordon; on dit que c'est chefd'oeuvre du theatre; les autres pieces qui vous ont fait tant de plaisir sont peu de chose en comparaison. Corneille's favorite of his own tragedies, (1) however, leaves the Ingenu perplexed: Apres avoir lu tres attentivement la piece, sans autre dessein que celui d'avoir du plaisir, il regardait son ami avec des yeux secs et etonnes, et ne savait que dire. (2) The bafflement, or perhaps indifference, of Voltaire's fictional reader differs enormously from the response of early modern theater audiences, terrified by Corneille's portrait of evil in the tragedy's undoubted heroine, Cleopatre. (3) Mlle Dumesnil's performance, for instance, was so powerful that le parterre tout entier, par un mouvement d'horreur aussi vif que spontane, recula devant elle, de maniere a laisser un grand espace vide entre ses premiers rangs et l'orchestre. On the same occasion, the actress was apparently punched in the back by an old soldier crying, Vas, chienne, a tous les diables, an action she took as the most flattering praisa she had ever received. (4) The response of Voltaire's character, particularly when contrasted with that of the theatre audience, perfectly illustrates Serge Doubrovsky's description of Rodogune as une enigme pour la critique; (5) for if scholars have debated the problem of evil in the tragedy, (6) its analysis of power, (7) religion, (8) and providence, (9) and its depiction of gender relations, (10) one of its fundamental problems--that of the heroine's name--remains unresolved. By employing various theoretical paradigms, particularly Judith Butler's account of naming and subjection, this article proposes a solution to that problem and, by demonstrating that Rodogune is concerned with the formation and integrity of the self, it also aires to show that Cornelian tragedy has metaphysical rather than exclusively political dimensions. (11) The public display of the name is, as Jean Starobinski has argued, fundamental to the nature of the Cornelian hero: Chez Corneille, l'ostentation et defi prendront souvent la forme d'une exhibition du nom. Il suffit que heros reaffirme son nom, et se proclame fidele a celui-ci: il se sera ainsi 'decouvert tout entier' aux yeux d'un temoin universel. (12) Certainly names are central to Rodogune's plot, which hinges on two acts of naming by the two principal female characters. While the play's dedication to the prince de Conde values warfare and political action as honorable occupations for a man, within the tragedy itself a woman can hold no lasting political power in her own right: Le peuple epouvante, qui deja dans son ame / Ne suivait qu'a regret les ordres d'une femme, / Voulut forcer la reine a choisir un epoux (1.1.47-49). Cleopatre can now no longer rule as regent, (13) and so must reveal the name of her eldest son and heir: Un seul mot aujourd'hui maitre de ma fortune / M'ote, ou donne a jamais sceptre, et Rodogune, says Antiochus (1.1.75). Cleopatre is aware that her power derives from this act of nomination (the giving of a proper name that identifies and constitutes a character) as she tells Ne saurais-tu juger si je nomme un Roi, C'est pour commander, et combattre pour moi? J'en ai choix en main avec droit d'ainesse, J'userai bien du droit que j'ai de nommer. (2.2.493-98) In the secondary plot, the royal princes and Laonice would have the taciturn Rodogune disclose the name of the man she loves: Garde-toi de nommer mon vainqueur (1.5.385). Both Cleopatre and Rodogune are thus compelled to perform acts of predication in that they must attach to preexisting names a title (of heir or lover) that would clarify the identity of another character. …