The controversies which arise about [Jean Anouilh's] plays stem from the fact that he escapes clear-cut identification. This is due not to obscurity in his oeuvre or deviousness on his part but simply to the Protean aspect of his plays. They are variations on given themes, and as such they give the impression that they constitute contradictions. This apparent inconsistency may originate in the ambiguous behavior of the protagonists. But it is simply a fact of life that ambiguity is an integral component of man's plight in relation to himself and others; thus to ask that an image of man be in clear and unambiguous focus is to ask for comforting falsehood. Besides, if man is a "disconsolate but gay animal," as Anouilh asserts, won't he be a paradox to himself?
The isolated works of some authors give evidence of those authors' characteristics, but a particular play of Anouilh reveals at best only a few elements of his work, never his total make-up. Any one of his plays can only be judged as one hue in the spectrum of his oeuvre. It is interesting to discover that a reading of all of Anouilh's plays reveals a yearning on the author's part to treat each piece as a step in a progression. This interpretation is supported by the presence in newer plays of lines quoted from preceding plays. And as one notes in novels of Balzac or Faulkner, mere names in earlier parts of Anouilh's work appear as full-fledged characters in later plots. (pp. 4-5)
This is a free excerpt of 253 words. There are 3,101 words (approx.
10 pages at 300 words per page) in the full critical essay.
Read the rest of this Criticism with our Anouilh, Jean 1910–: Critical Essay by Marguerite Archer Access Pass.
