The Dreamers in La Place de l’Etoile
Surrealism was an important literary and artistic movement that developed in Paris. Unlike Dadaism, one of its forefathers, it’s more well-organized and influential. The central idea of Dadaism was basically anti-everything, which made it strongly destructive. Yet it never really constructed any rules or theories, which were against its nature. Surrealism was similar to Dadaism in denying traditional culture and values. Both Dadaism and Surrealism were pessimistic and nihilistic in a sense. However, the Surrealists took action while the Dadaists didn’t. The surrealists considered their works as their intrusion. Consequently, for two or three years Surrealism’s activities and members coincided with those of Dadaism, but then the publication of Andre Breton’s Manifesto of Surrealism in 1924 established its supremacy, its greater creative potential. The Surrealists tended to arrange images in illogical and absurd ways to indicate the various human states of sub/unconsciousness. Surrealism insisted that reality is grasped by the subconscious, the irrational, rather than the conscious. Thus the Surrealists proposed to unify the contrary levels of consciousness and sub/unconsciousness, dream and reality, objectivity and subjectivity into a new level of “super-realism.” The Surrealists practiced a technique known as “automatic writing,” and many hailed Robert Desnos as the most accomplished practitioner. This technique involved drifting into a trance and then recording the associations and leaps of the sub/unconscious mind. The fantasized works, as a result, are more mysterious and thus hard to interpret. However, there are still some key themes and concepts in surrealist works, such as the quest, the city (especially Paris), the night, dreams, surprises, coincidences, and the championing of liberty in all walks of life.
The best way to understand a Surrealism play like Robert Desnos’ La Place de l’Etoile, not surpringly, is to understand Surrealism first. As mentioned above, Surrealism put much effort into portraying the sub/unconsciousness of human beings, mostly dreams. In La Place de l’Etoile, once the scenes are considered as dreams, the “plot” suddenly “makes sense” and manages to show the idea of Surrealism:
The world of dram is allusively and delicately evoked in this fantasy having in part to do with the proliferation of starfish in Paris. Despite the subtlety of its methods, the intention of La Place de l’Etoile is as ambitious as any drama in the post-Jarry theatre: the abolition on stage of all boundaries usually accepted for practical reasons—those lying between wakeness and sleep, between the li8ving and the dead, the possible and the impossible, for example. Desnos more than vaguely accomplishes the evocation of the blatantly anti-realistic world of his beliefs in his play. It proceeds with a lyrical delicacy that is far more characteristic of the finest works of Surrealism than those who associate it with the obvious heresies of a Dali might imagine it to be. (Benedikt and Wellwarth: xxxi)
The first sentence of the quotation shows two elements of the play: the dream and the starfish. These elements lead to various questions: In what way can one prove that this play is composed of dreams? Who are the dreamers? What does the starfish stands for?
This is a play of dreams without doubt. First of all, the author hinted it: in Act IV, after the fire, Maxime’s line goes: “Look at our bed. This foaming sheet crashing on the pillow, that we drown in. It’s a beautiful voyage, you know, with a wreck eventually certain.” and Athenais answers “Maxime, Maxime, don’t talk like that; I’m afraid of the sea’ I’m afraid of the night. Will I ever again dare to go to bed?” In Act VI, the Third Drinker sees Athenais and responds: “Good evening, my lovely one, don’t dream of fires now.” In the dialogue of the fireman, the Second Fireman says, “Let’s go to sleep, the only thing we can do, while the fires are smoldering in readiness. The night is too calm not to end in flames.” In the same act:
Maxime: Ah! Can it be that I’m dreaming?
Fabrice: This night is too calm to end without some nightmare.
Maxime: No nightmares, even… They’re for other dreams than ours. (306)
Besides, the setting of time in the play is usually dawn or night; the scenes are quiet and shaded, and in ACT VII the stage is even hung with black velvet.
Secondly, the “plot” (if there’s any) and the settings help to confirm it. In Act IV, Anthenais enters in a dress of era 1860, and when Maxime finally notices it, he asks, “what’s the meaning of that costume?” and doesn’t really care for any response. In the following act, the Barkeeper tells the drinkers a fire he once witnessed; yet it’s exactly the fire Anthenais and Maxime just experienced. Moreover, one of the characters at least, can control what to happen next: in Act VI when Gerard is speaking to himself, the policeman wakes up and asks for Gerard’s ID. Gerard keeps on murmuring and acts as if no one else is there. At last the Policeman threats to arrest him, and Gererd suddenly commands: “You stay there now; be good, do you hear me? Be good and don’t move,” and the “goes away…while the Policeman remains motionless, as if frozen stiff.” All these examples, and I’m just giving a few of them, are directing the readers to conclude it as a world of dreams. To put it more exactly, it’s a play formed by the juxtaposition of dream images.
Who are the dreamers of these dreams, then? Every one of them is. I’m going to pick three of the dreamers, Gerard, Maxime, and Fabrice, since they are the more outstanding characters in the play. Gerard is the first one that comes to my mind, since he is different from others in many aspects. He is the most conscious person in the play: he knows that he is dreaming and thus knows how to take control over it. He doesn’t act like this is the first time he shows up; however, gradually his senses come to. Gerard not only controls his own dreams, but also intrudes others’. From the text we can see Gustave, Gabriel and Casper (known as the three drinkers) consider Gerard as an old friend while Gerard claims that he has only seen them before once some place. Its either Gerard has dreamed of them before, or vice versa, and I think the former is more possible. Gerard may be seen as the central character of the play, although he doesn’t show up until Act V. At first Gerard is not comfortable with the situation, and immediately wants to run away from the bar. Later, he freezes the Policeman, and is very determined to give this monologue over and over again: “Mine is a peaceful disposition, very peaceful, and I’m going out under the stars and into the depths of the night.” He speaks as if he is hypnotizing and reminding himself that all this is but a dream and most importantly, a peaceful one. In Ac5t VII, Gerard is finally making a real conversation with others. He chooses Fabrice, and confesses his not understanding anything anymore, which can be taken as his opinion about his dreams: “Everybody knows me. There are even men whom I don’t recognize, whom I never ever seen and who nevertheless are my intimate friends, who can prove to me, and to whom not a single detail of my life—not even the most intimate—is known.” Then his following speeches echo his monologue, “I’m too peaceful a personality to be known well, and my own words sound strange to me as I speak them. They must have done a bad job of winding up the mechanism this morning.” (referring to his freezing the Policeman.); “I’m a peaceful personality, and you mustn’t attach too precise a sense to my words.” When he finishes the last line, he suddenly leaves in a haste. In Act VIII, as it’s like his hypnotism is working, he ends up invited by Anthenais to enter her house.
Another eye-catching dreaming character is Maxime. Unlike Gerard, he is not as conscious about his situation. His role is more ambiguous, and his part is over without specific endings—he leaves with Fabrice in different directions in Act VI and then never appears again; the last sentence he says is “No nightmares, even… They’re for other dreams than ours.” In this scene Maxime is keen for solitude, and says good-bye to Fabrice. Stop showing up doesn’t make this role less significant. After all, the name of the play is based on one of his action. I consider Maxime as the second-conscious person in the play mainly because of his last line and his often hilarious scenes. The starfish is of great concern for Maxime, and it seems to have something to do with Fabrice. “Five points! Five fingers on one hand, five senses. Here they all are.” Maxime keeps on saying this over and over. Everyone wants the starfish but once getting it they give it up. What does the starfish stands for anyway? Most likely it stands for Fabrice. It is also possible that the starfish is the symbols of dreams: the starfish is similar to human in some ways (at least in Maxime’s point of view) but is not human. Dreams ate so similar to reality yet are not reality. Maxime accepts that he should be the one who should keep the abandoned starfish. He never has thought to abandon the starfish, even when Fabrice turns him down, he still insists, “It will always be here.” In the last act of the play, Maxime is already gone, the room is empty without the starfish, while Fabrice is at the door. It’s a conclusion of Maxime’s part: gone with the starfish, without reason. Does he finally find out something? The playwright doesn’t tell, but it can be a clue for understanding of the character Fabrice.
If the last act is a dream of Fabrice’s, it obviously hints her fear. Maxime is the only person Fabrice seems to care about, though she seldom shows it. She is probably a prostitute. She is hunger for love and is smart enough to tell who is sincere in expressing their love to her. Maxime expresses his love by giving her his treasure, the starfish. Fabrice could not accept it because of its fragility, but tells him, “I’d like it better knowing it’s here. I’ll come to see it. Don’t be angry. Be as you are, as usual. I’ll come back to see it. I swear to you I will.” In the last act Fabrice does come, whether to see the starfish or Maxime we do not know, but neither of them will be there. Fabrice has some affection towards Maxime, if not love. Their dialogues are usually “as usual,” but both seem to be comfortable with that until in Act VII, Fabrice has a long speech which sounds as if she is talking in her dream, or drunk, either of it expresses her true emotion:
The fair Fabrice is as potted as a Polack…. There we are. … Good morning, how are you? … As usual? … No, something has changed today. And you, as usual? Yes… Then… Then, you love me… I love you…. (Pause) No! It’s too funny! He loves Fabrice, the adorable Fabrice.… No, but do you believe it’s true?
The “ as usuals” tell that it’s Maxime she’s talking to. The play ends with Fabrice’s looking for Maxime makes one wonder, is Maxime gone for good? Or like the starfish in the second act, Arthur and Maxime can’t find the starfish which is supposed to be one the mantelpiece, and when they search the whole house and there is still no sign of it, it’s right on the mantelpiece?
The illogical sequences of the acts are problem-causing when reading. Although being illogical is logical in dreams, Desnos was probably not simply arranging it for making the play more dream-like. For example, the last act has better effect than any other acts, since it is the results of some previous acts. Also, even the first act, which is the most distracting and non-relating act of all, allows the audience to know that it’s not going to be a realistic play. Its ridiculous atmosphere, as well as the killing-time talking style, raise the audience’s interest and make the actually heavy theme lighter.
Surrealist plays like La Place de l’Etoile have great influences on the Theatre of the Absurd. The most illogical and absurd dialogues in this play remind me of plays for the Theatre of the Absurd every now and then. Yet they are different in nature. The Absurdist playwrights use them as a way to mock, while surrealists are more likely to use them to create the eccentric make-laughing mood. Surrealist works are impossible to interpret correctly, because it’s based on the sub/unconscious of men. Interpreting a Surrealist play is like interpreting a dream. However, as the Surrealist insists, the mind activity of sub/unconscious is the source of truth and reality. As long as one re-organizes it in a proper way, the main idea isn’t so hard to grasp. I’m hoping this essay is leading to the right direction.
Works Cited
Modern French theatre: the Avant-garde, Dada, and Surrealism: an Anthology of Plays. edited and translated by Michael Benedikt and George E. Wellwarth. New York : Dutton, 1964.
