eJournals Papers on French Seventeenth Century Literature 39/76

Papers on French Seventeenth Century Literature
0343-0758
2941-086X
Narr Verlag Tübingen
2012
3976

In Francion’s Shadow: “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre

2012
Anne Theobald
PFSCL XXXIX, 76 (2012) In Francion’s Shadow: “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre A NNE T HEOBALD Charles Sorel’s first comic novel, the Histoire comique de Francion, was a great success in the seventeenth century. It was published as three editions in 1623, 1626, and 1633, and several other editions with minimal changes to the text were printed between 1635 and 1686. Antoine Adam asserts that these editions demonstrate the enduring success of Francion and its importance throughout the seventeenth century. 1 Sorel’s third comic novel, Polyandre, histoire comique, however, was arguably as much of a failure as Francion was a success. A novel’s failure can be measured in several ways, including the number of editions, comments made by the author and his contemporaries, and reader reception. Polyandre failed in all three of these categories. It was left unfinished when it was published in 1648, which was likely a strategy on Sorel’s part to ensure the publication of a continuation 1 Adam writes that the editions of Francion that followed those of 1623, 1626, and 1633 “n’apportent de modifications, ni au fond du récit, ni même au style. Mais elles sont importantes à relever parce que leur grand nombre prouve la vogue du Francion, son succès durable, l’importance que les hommes du XVII e siècle lui attribuèrent” (Romanciers du XVII e siècle [Paris: Gallimard (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), 1958] 1258). Sorel, too, writes in La Bibliothèque françoise, “Pour un livre qui ait la vraye forme d'un roman, on nous met en jeu l’histoire comique de Francion, laquelle a esté imprimée pour la premiere fois il y a plus de quarante ans, et qui semble estre autorisée, en ce que depuis si longtemps plusieurs se plaisent autant à la voir que le premier jour, aprés plus de soixante impressions de Paris, de Roüen, de Troyes et d’autres lieux, outre qu’elle a esté traduite en anglois, en allemand et en quelques autres langues” (La Bibliothèque françoise [1664], 2 nd ed. [Paris: Compagnie des Libraires du Palais, 1667, Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1970] 173-174). Anne Theobald 66 of the novel. 2 However, the strategy failed; only one edition of Polyandre was published in the seventeenth century, presumably due to readers’ dissatisfaction or lack of interest. As for contemporaries’ comments, Emile Roy writes that in 1656, l’Abbé de Pure referred to Polyandre in a scene of his comedy La Précieuse as the most detestable novel of the century. 3 Several critics have offered explanations as to why Polyandre failed to appeal to readers. Sorel himself admits that Polyandre lacks “la belle forme du roman” because “il n’est point achevé” and “il semble n’estre qu’un fragment, les principaux personnages, n’y ayans point fait sçavoir leurs fortunes.” 4 Jean Serroy asserts that in trying to paint a picture of contemporary bourgeois society, Sorel failed to create a fictional world within the novel; in his view, the plot of Polyandre is nothing but the banal passing of time by uninteresting characters. 5 Another source of reader frustration seems to be the protagonist. Whereas Francion is presented as inconsistent and changing, Polyandre’s character is much more stable and constant. Hence Martine Debaisieux suggests that Polyandre approaches the classical esthetic, representing human nature as permanent and universal as opposed to the baroque esthetic which preferred a mobile and unpredictable representation. 6 Instead of appealing to idealist conceptions of genre (such as Sorel’s explanation), to organicist views of fiction (Serroy’s interpretation), or to retrospective periodization (the “baroque” vs. the “classical” conception of human nature), this paper will propose an “ethos”-based view of the novel’s failure, centered on the ethical expectations of the novel incarnated by the character of Francion, and on Polyandre’s failure to represent a world corresponding to these expectations. Originally, the Greek term ēthos designates “moral character,” that is, the set of habits that make a person praiseworthy. It is one of the “proofs” 2 Patrick Dandrey also suspects that leaving Polyandre unfinished was a “stratégie éditoriale pour forcer le libraire à accueillir une suite à l’ouvrage s’il rencontre le succès” (Preface, Polyandre [Paris: Klincksieck, 2010] XII). 3 “Polyandre obtint si peu de succès, qu’en 1656 l’abbé de Pure ne craignait pas de le citer dans une scène de sa comédie de la Précieuse, comme le plus détestable roman du siècle” (La Vie et les œuvres de Charles Sorel [Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1891] 186). 4 La Bibliothèque françoise 176. 5 “L’intrigue de Polyandre se réduit à peu de choses: aucun de ces épisodes hauts en couleur, qui forment la trame des destins héroïques, ou anti-héroïques, mais seulement l’écoulement banal et régulier du temps” (Roman et réalité: Les histoires comiques au XVII e siècle [Paris: Minard, 1981] 398). 6 Le Procès du roman: écriture et contrefaçon chez Charles Sorel (Saratoga: Anma Libri, 1989, Orléans: Paradigme, 2000) 165-170. “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 67 in rhetoric: the speaker persuades and gains the confidence of an audience through his own ēthos, which is reflected in the speech he is giving. The other two “proofs” are the audience itself, when its emotions are aroused by the speech, and finally the material presented by the speech. 7 The ēthos most likely to succeed is one that creates confidence in the speaker, that makes him trustworthy. Even a character such as Francion, who is represented as changing throughout the novel, is “trustworthy,” in the sense that the audience is let in on his jokes. Above all the audience participates, through Francion, in the escapades that provide comic relief, and this active participation is what both gives Francion palpable contours as a character and speaker, and arouses the correct “comic” emotions in the audience. In Polyandre, however, it is as if, in rhetorical terms, Sorel had forgone the first two proofs for the last, in writing a novel presented by a colorless and unengaged speaker. In the following pages, I will demonstrate, through examples of several episodes in the novel, how this rhetorical move, intentional or not, 8 affects the substance of the fictional world of the novel. In a way, though, the fictional worlds of the two novels seem continuous. As its title indicates, Polyandre, histoire comique shares many common characteristics with the Histoire comique de Francion. The two novels have a similar structure; both consist of a succession of episodes strung together by 7 See Aristotle, Rhetoric, I.ii.3-6. It should be added that the 17 th -century audience, in the early as in the late century, was profoundly influenced by rhetorical culture (see the classic Marc Fumaroli, L’Âge de l’éloquence: rhétorique et "res literaria" de la Renaissance au seuil de l'époque classique [Genève: Droz, 1980, 2002]), and would have been so even in settings that are not prima facie rhetorical, such as the reading of a novel. For a more “substantive” definition of the moral character that is most apt in gaining the confidence of the audience, see Cicero (De oratore, II.43.182), who lists, among the required qualities, a certain reserve (pudor), affability (comitas), social ease (facilitas), generousness (liberalitas), softness and moderation (mansuetudo), piety or reverence (pietas), charm (gratus animus), lack of covetousness and ambition (non appetens, non avidus). When a character such as this is forced to display emotion, it is all the more convincing. Francion, clearly, excells in only some of these attributes, but then, within the comic context, he does very well. Polyandre, on the other hand, seems only to possess reserve, moderation and reverence. 8 When Sorel refers to the fragmentary nature of Polyandre and explains that the principal characters “[n’ont] point fait sçavoir leurs fortunes,” he shows some awareness of the importance of ethical construction of character (whether it be the narrator-protagonist or the characters he encounters). Anne Theobald 68 the encounters of their protagonists. 9 There are also obvious parallels between the characters and the plots of the two novels such that a reader familiar with Francion cannot help but think of it when reading Polyandre. 10 For example, the episode in which the crowd at the Foire Saint-Germain proclaims Orilan the king of lovers echoes the episode in Francion in which Hortensius is made to believe he has been chosen as the king of Poland. Another similarity between Francion and Polyandre is that Sorel compares both novels to theatrical comedy. Sorel writes in the first paragraph of the 1633 edition of Francion that his histoire comique will imitate comedy (“la comédie”) in all things. 11 Similarly, in the Advertissement aux lecteurs of Polyandre, Sorel refers to the characters in his novel as “actors of our play” (“Acteurs de nostre piece”). 12 Because of the many parallels between the two novels, the reader expects Polyandre to resemble Francion, and in some ways, he does. But the key way in which he differs from Francion is his lack of participation in comic episodes in the novel, and I propose that this constitutes a major source of reader frustration. In rhetorical terms, Francion gains the “confidence” or “faith” of the reader, his or her adherence to the narration, whereas Polyandre does not. First, it is important to briefly identify some general differences that separate the two novels, starting with their narration and scope. The majority of the 1623 edition of Francion is narrated by the protagonist in 9 According to Dandrey, the structure of Polyandre, “une intrigue joyeuse, ou plutôt une succession d’épisodes facétieux […] reliés par le seul hasard des rencontres que fait son héros,” is similar to that of Francion (Preface XII). 10 Dandrey also notes specific parallels between the characters of the two histoires comiques: “Musigène avoue jusque par son nom avoir été Musidore; Gastrimargue récupère les traits d’Hortensius, pédant du collège, profiteur affamé et amoureux pitoyable; Guérinette, la folle qui se prend pour sa maîtresse, évoque Collinet, bouffon de cour qui usurpe éventuellement les fonctions de son protecteur Clérante” (“Polyandre ou la critique de l’histoire comique,” Charles Sorel polygraphe, ed. E. Bury and E. van der Schueren [Lévis, Québec: Presses de l’Université de Laval, 2006] 315). 11 “Cet Ouvrage cy les imite [les comédies] en toutes choses, mais il y a cela de plus que l’on y voit les actions mises par ecrit, au lieu que dans les Comedies il n’y a que les paroles, a cause que les Acteurs representoient tout cela sur le Theatre. Puisque l’on a fait cecy principalement pour la lecture il a fallu descrire tous les accidens, et au lieu d’une simple Comedie, il s’en est fait une Histoire Comique que vous allez maintenant voir” (Histoire comique de Francion, in Romanciers du XVII e siècle, ed. A. Adam [Paris: Gallimard (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), 1958] 1270). 12 Charles Sorel, Polyandre, histoire comique, ed. P. Dandrey and C. Toublet (Paris: Klincksieck, 2010) 4. “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 69 first-person as he recounts memories from his past to his friend, Raymond; the use of the first-person also makes the reader sympathetic to the protagonist. In the 1626 and 1633 editions, a third-person narrator follows Francion on many (mis)adventures. Although it is uncertain exactly how much time passes during the Histoire comique de Francion, the reader learns a considerable amount about the protagonist’s life. In Polyandre, on the other hand, a third-person narrator recounts the events of seven consecutive days in the life of the protagonist, and the reader learns relatively little about his past. The opportunities for an identification with the character are thus severely limited, given the horizon of expectations created by Francion. Another major difference between the two histoires comiques is their social settings. Francion covers a lot of ground, traveling in both France and Italy and meeting many different kinds of people. In the Advertissement d’importance of the 1626 edition of Francion, Sorel writes, “dans mon livre on peut trouver la langue Française toute entiere […] Qui plus est j’ay representé aussi naïvement qu’il se pouvait faire, toutes les humeurs, et les actions des personnes que j’ai mises sur les rangs.” 13 Sorel repeats his intention to represent characters “naïvement” in Polyandre, but the setting is restricted to a small bourgeois social circle in contemporary Paris. 14 The two protagonists’ personalities are also different, and the way they are set up by the author differs significantly from one to the other. Francion is depicted as exuberant and exceptional. 15 He is a seducer, a trickster, and an entertainer. He amuses audiences within the text as well as the reader with funny tricks, disguises, and plays. Polyandre, on the other hand, is described as subtle and refined in the Advertissement aux lecteurs. More of an everyman, he is an “honnête homme bourgeois” in a bourgeois milieu. A brief episode that serves to describe Francion’s ethos occurs in the first book of Sorel’s first histoire comique. Francion first appears disguised as 13 Francion 1262. 14 As Dandrey observes, “En matière sociale, l’universalité ou du moins la multipolarité d’un roman de formation teinté de couleurs picaresques se réduit à l’unité de temps, d’espace et de mœurs d’un roman bourgeois parisien” (Preface XVI). 15 Jeanne Goldin writes, “Né comme Gargantua, au milieu de la fête, sous le signe du vin, il est un homme de plaisir et de désir. Séducteur impénitent, contempteur des sots, farceur plein de ressources, il a ‘cette liberté consciente d’elle-même; cette assurance d’être toujours à sa place, cette aisance que l’esprit, au-delà des apparences sociales, conserve par devers lui’” (“Structures métaphoriques et unité narrative; le livre I de l’Histoire comique de Francion” [Papers on French Seventeenth Century Literature 4-5 (1976)] 131). Goldin quotes G. Cazenave, “L’image du prince dans les premiers romans de Sorel” (XVII e siècle 105 [1974]) 24. Anne Theobald 70 a pilgrim as part of a scheme to seduce Laurette, his love interest, by tricking her husband, Valentin. Later in the first book, Francion describes his performance to his friend, Raymond, in first-person: “Je fis accroire à tout le monde [du village de Laurette] que je venois du pelerinage de Nostre Dame de Montferrat; […] J’allay jusques au Chasteau où je treuvay Valentin qui me receut courtoisement et prit avec des remerciments fort honnestes un de ces chapelets que je luy presentay.” 16 He says that Valentin asked him several questions about his relatives and where he came from and that he improvised without any problem: “Je luy forgeay là dessus des bourdes nompareilles […] Les discours que je luy tins après ne furent que de foy, de penitence et de miracles, si bien qu’il me prenoit desja pour un petit Sainct qui auroit quelque jour place dans le Kalendrier.” 17 By explaining his trick in first-person, Francion lets Raymond, and more importantly, the reader, in on his joke. Furthermore, Francion’s description of his pilgrim act entertains Raymond: “Le Gentil-homme […] se mit en après si fort a penser aux plaisants succez qu’il venoit d’entendre, qu’il le pensa resveiller [Francion], en riant a gorge desployée.” 18 The reaction of the reader echoes Raymond’s. Francion therefore simultaneously gains the reader’s confidence and entertains him with “first-hand” comic material. Not only does Francion’s narration of his past in first-person encourage the reader to share his perspective, but the persona he projects as a good entertainer is affirmed by the reaction of Raymond, his audience in the text. Although there are some rare instances in Polyandre in which the protagonist plays a “joker,” he is not presented as the primary source of entertainment in the text as Francion is. The comic effect of Polyandre comes mainly from other “extravagant” characters. 19 One example of this takes place in the first book when Polyandre is in a carriage with Musigène, 16 Francion 97. 17 Francion 97. 18 Francion 100. 19 Debaisieux demonstrates that in Francion, it is difficult to categorize any specific character as “extravagant” because madness and reason coexist: “le protagoniste à la ‘teste cassée’ peut tenir un discours rempli de ‘fantasques imaginations’ […] aussi ‘extravagant’ que celui de Collinet. Inversement, le discours du (sage) fou contient des ‘raisons aussi preignantes que celles des plus profonds philosophes’” (168). In Polyandre, however, extravagant characters are represented as marginalized. Debaisieux suggests that this change in representation follows an ideological modification in the perception of madness; she writes that according to Foucault, while the early seventeenth century was curiously hospitable to madness, the “grand renfermement” of the classical period categorized it as “altérité” (167-168). “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 71 “le poète crotté,” and Orilan, “l’amoureux universel,” as well as Néophile, the son of a wealthy financier. Néophile wants advice about how to react to an embarrassing experience that he has just had at the home of his maîtresse, Aurélie. In that episode, Néophile mistakes Guérinette, a servant and “madwoman,” for Aurélie, and as he is attempting to woo her, Aurélie walks in on him. While Musigène, Orilan, and Polyandre are in the carriage, they pass the time by giving Néophile suggestions about what to do next. Musigène recommends that Néophile write poetry for Aurélie, saying that nothing works better than an ode or an elegy: “O quel charme ont de belles Stances! Quelle est la puissance d’une Ode ou d’une Elegie! ” 20 Orilan laughs at Musigène’s suggestion and says that it is silly to give affection to only one woman; it is much better to love as many as possible. 21 Polyandre, however, does not participate in the advice game. Instead, he prefers to listen and be amused by the other characters: [Polyandre] croyait qu’il s’était trouvé avec des hommes de la plus plaisante humeur qui fussent dans Paris, et comme la plupart des choses qu’il voyait dans le Monde, luy semblaient être des Comedies joüées expres pour le faire rire, il fit beaucoup d’état de celle-cy, et parce qu’il pensait n’avoir guere de temps à être avec de si excellens personnages, il disait peu de chose craignant de leur ôter le loisir de parler. 22 This is a significant difference between Polyandre and Francion. Whereas Francion never misses an opportunity to entertain the people around him, Polyandre prefers a more passive role of being entertained by others. The entertainment experienced by the reader thus changes: whereas in Francion, the adventures recounted and performed by the narrator-protagonist are a rhetorical “proof,” as it were, of the story itself, and allow a higher belief, or adherence, to the fictional world, in Polyandre the narrator seems as detached from the story as the reader, leaving open the question of adherence to the fiction. Another step is required for the audience to be engaged 20 Polyandre 33. 21 “Si vous en aimez plusieurs à la fois, c’est s’assujettir veritablement, mais ce n’est qu’avec liberté, ce qui est la plus-noble, & la plus tolerable de toutes les servitudes […] Pour moy je fay profession d’aimer tout ce qui est beau, & je voy autant de raison d’aimer la pluspart des filles que je connoy, que de ne m’arrester qu’à une” (35). Francion has a similar philosophy; he confides to Raymond that even after making a commitment to Nays, “je n’ay pas laissé d’avoir la curiosité de voir d’autres beautez dont j’ay mesme fait de l’estime. […] la nature n’a t’elle pas donné la veuë et le jugement aux hommes pour contempler et admirer toutes les beautez du monde? ” (Francion 470). 22 Polyandre 44. Anne Theobald 72 by and in the comedy, a step that a readership used to the rhetorical effectiveness of Francion might be unwilling to make. Although he is mostly an observer throughout the novel, there is one important episode in which Polyandre actively entertains an audience within the text. It takes place near the end of the novel, in book five of six. Madame Ragonde, Aurélie’s devout grandmother, arrives unexpectedly as Orilan is entertaining Polyandre and his friends in Aurélie’s salon. After Madame Ragonde criticizes the state in which she finds the house, Polyandre enters the room disguised as Frère Polycarpe. The disguise is so convincing that, at first, none of his friends recognize him: “Ragonde ne le connoissoit pas, & ses filles mesmes avoient de la peine d’abord à juger qui il estoit, quoy qu’il leur semblât qu’elles avoient veu quelque part un pareil visage: Enfin Phronyme poussant Aurelie du coude, luy dit, ne voyez vous pas que c’est Polyandre? Elle le reconneut alors, quoy qu’il eust entierement changé de forme.” 23 When Madame Ragonde asks who this man is, Aurélie plays along with Polyandre, saying that he is Néophile’s moral counselor. Polyandre introduces himself as “le pauvre frere Polycarpe” and speaks at length about the Introduction à la vie dévote. Madame Ragonde is completely convinced and charmed by Polyandre’s act, and Aurélie cannot hold back her laughter: “il luy fut impossible de dompter l’envie qu’elle avait de rire, à quoy elle avait résisté jusque alors: Elle éclatta fort haut, ce qui excita sa sœur et sa nièce à en faire autant.” 24 What happens after Polyandre’s “performance” separates it from Francion’s. First, instead of praising Polyandre’s acting, Aurélie criticizes him for fooling Madame Ragonde: “n’y a-t’il pas à reprendre en ce que vous venez de faire? N’est-ce pas une hypocrisie d’avoir voulu passer pour plus devot & plus mortifié que vous n’estes? ” 25 Secondly, Polyandre’s response to her question is ambiguous: “Hà, Madame, respondit Polyandre, assez serieusement; je sçay bien que je ne suis pas dans la haute vertu; mais en ce qui est des sentiments que j’ay declarez, je vous asseure que ce sont les miens propres, que j’ay en toute sorte d’occasions, touchant les sottises du Monde que je condamne eternellement […].” 26 By indicating that Polyandre responds “assez serieusement,” the narrator hides the protagonist’s mindset and prevents the reader from being in on the joke. While the reader suspects that Polyandre’s response is tongue-in-cheek, that he does not truly believe 23 Polyandre 296. 24 Polyandre 298. 25 Polyandre 311. 26 Polyandre 311. “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 73 what he told Madame Ragonde, the hint of ambiguity prevents the reader from fully trusting him. Although the narrator describes this episode as one of Polyandre’s “galanteries ordinaires,” it is one of the rare scenes in the novel in which Polyandre actively participates in creating a comic effect. 27 For Andrew Suozzo, the Polycarpe episode is an illustration of the protagonist’s ethos: “Polyandre has lived up to his name—‘Un homme… qui est propre à beaucoup de choses, & mesme à tout faire’—for he has demonstrated a protean adaptability.” 28 However, “galanteries ordinaires” is a much better description of Francion’s activities; he makes his friends (and the reader) laugh so often that the comic episodes are difficult to count. Perhaps Sorel intended to include more funny scenes featuring Polyandre in a continuation of the novel. However, as it is, the reader waits the length of five books (296 pages) before the protagonist becomes—briefly—the star of the show. In book two, another episode seems, at first glance, to be an exception to the rule of Polyandre’s ethos; however, this episode actually reinforces the sideline position of the protagonist in terms of the source of the comic effect in the novel. At a ball, Polyandre plays an amusing trick on Orilan. After many women accuse Orilan of being “inconstant, trompeur & perfide,” the “amoureux universel” entertains both himself and the guests with an extravagant response to the women’s accusation: [Orilan] pensa qu’il le faloit faire [se défendre] par un acte d’obeïssance, & que mesme c’estoit une manière de jeu qui luy donneroit autant de recreation qu’aux autres. Il se mit donc un genoüil en terre, & tenant le flambeau d’une main, & son chapeau de l’autre, il parla en cette manière. Belles & vertueuses Demoiselles; Si j’estois veritablement coulpable du crime dont l’on m’acuse, je ne meriterois pas seulement de faire amende honorable devant vos beautez incomparables; Il faudroit mettre mon corps en plus de morceaux, que les Bacchantes ne mirent celuy d’Orphée, ou 27 “[Polyandre] voulut faire une de ses galanteries qui luy étaient ordinaires, lorsqu’il pretendait de se donner du passe-temps à luy même, pour le moins autant qu’il en donnait aux autres. […] il ressemblait à quelque Frere Oblat qui venait de la campagne, ou à quelque pourvoyeur et solliciteur de Convent” (296, 297). It is telling to note that the reader has really no evidence that these “galanteries” are an ordinary occurrence; to the contrary, all we have learned about the character of Polyandre seems to indicate the opposite. The third-person narrator has to point out that Polyandre is often entertaining because it does not manifest itself in his “ordinary” actions. 28 The Comic Novels of Charles Sorel: A Study of Structure, Characterization and Disguise (Lexington, KY: French Forum, 1982) 95. Anne Theobald 74 Medée celuy de son fils, & mesme il le faudroit reduire en Atomes imperceptibles. 29 Orilan’s speech fills nearly two pages, and the narrator confirms that he succeeds in entertaining his audience: “il y avoit une risée si grande par toute la salle, de le voir en cette posture, & de l’ouyr parler si plaisamment, que l’on ne croyoit pas qu’il se pust rien trouver de plus agreable.” 30 But Polyandre has a trick up his sleeve to try to steal the show. The narrator explains that Orilan has shaved his head and wears a wig because he hates his red hair, and Polyandre has arranged for Orilan’s wig to be lifted off his head. The protagonist’s prank also succeeds in entertaining the audience: “Orilan creut presque que cela se faisoit par quelque enchantement, & toute la compagnie eut un agreable passetemps, de le voir avec sa teste raze qui le rendoit fort laid, & de ce qu’il faisoit de si plaisantes postures, dans son estonnement meslé de fascherie.” 31 But instead of praising Polyandre for his funny trick, the narrator praises Orilan’s good character: mais pource que l’excellence de son naturel estoit de ne point trouver de sujet de fascherie, où les autres se fussent irritez comme d’un grand affront & d’une extréme offence, [Orilan] n’en fit que rire, & souslevant son manteau au dessus de sa teste, pour la couvrir comme d’un froc, il dit; Il faut faire de necessité Vertu. Les Dames voyant combien je souffre de maux pour elles, en seront plus touchées de compassion. 32 In this rare episode of Polyandre in which the protagonist plays the role of trickster, the tone is very different than in Francion. Instead of celebrating Polyandre’s cleverness, the narrator admires Orilan’s graciousness. Although Polyandre’s trick amuses the audience, Orilan is presented as the true star of this comic episode. Here and in the Polycarpe episode, we see that like Francion, Polyandre is capable of acting and entertaining an audience, but throughout the majority of the novel, he prefers to observe others’ performances. As a general rule, he does not reveal much about himself to the other characters, and thus the reader has the impression of not really knowing Polyandre. Even in the two instances in the histoire comique in which he tells stories to entertain his friends, Polyandre is not the subject of his own comic material. 29 Polyandre 77. 30 Polyandre 79. 31 Polyandre 80. 32 Polyandre 80. As Suozzo observes, “through his wit and graciousness, [Orilan] wins a certain degree of admiration. Contrary to the normal laws of automatic humiliation, he shows that he has the mental resources to triumph in a potentially degrading situation” (70). “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 75 Instead, the subject is Gastrimargue, yet another extravagant character who is a combination of the comic types of pédant, avare, and parasite. In Polyandre’s first story, Gastrimargue wants to appear rich by having a carrosse, but he is willing to spend very little money on one. The story is a comic success: “Polyandre racontant cecy de fort bonne grace, donnoit beaucoup de satisfaction à tous ceux qui l’écoutoient.” 33 His second story, “Amours de Gastrimargue,” also entertains the audience within the text, and it introduces a character named Hermotin who has a lot in common with Francion. Polyandre describes Hermotin as “un homme qui aime fort à passer son temps, aux despens des folies d’autruy.” 34 While Francion recounts his own adventures of which he is the star, Polyandre recounts another character’s mises en scène and disappears in the background. Even though Polyandre’s material is somewhat entertaining, it fails to establish an emotional connection between the character and the reader. The reader is told that other audiences find the material amusing, but the ethos of Polyandre is insufficient to enable the reader to engage in it. Why, precisely, would Francion’s ethos be more successful? In a similar way, it is difficult to pinpoint Francion’s character—he is surely as Protean as his successor—but for a different reason. Because Francion constantly disguises himself and plays roles, we don’t know much about him, but we do know that he is a good actor and entertainer because we have experienced it along with the audience within the text. Francion’s rhetorical ethos relies not on character traits such as superficial truthfulness and reliability, but on two narrative devices: a participatory stance vis-à-vis the comic episodes he is making the reader believe in, and a willingness to let the reader have access to knowledge about himself as a seducer, trickster, and entertainer. So the reader is in on Francion’s jokes, and his ethos, despite his manipulation of other characters in the fiction, transmits a certain truthfulness. Once the reader is persuaded (and entertained) by such an ethos, his expectations will have been formed for the next time a similar character presents himself. But the ethos of Polyandre is very different. He is described as seeing the world as a comedy to watch, not as a comedy to participate in. For the seventeenth-century reader expecting a new Francion, the much more reserved and passive Polyandre would have been frustrating as a protagonist. The way in which Francion performs his ethos, the character that charms his audience, has already undermined the sort of ethos represented by Polyandre. Gaining confidence by letting the audience participate in the entertainment he creates, in the tricks he pulls, creates 33 Polyandre 328. 34 Polyandre 358. Anne Theobald 76 expectations: it makes it impossible for Polyandre to gain the adherence of his audience by standing by and not participating. It’s not just a matter of going from a trickster as protagonist to a trustworthy but usually dull observer, it’s a matter of how the ethos of the protagonist is established by the narration. This possible reader reaction might be echoed by one of the characters in the novel. During Polyandre’s visit at Aurélie’s house in book three, the madwoman Guérinette comments that Polyandre has “une mine passable, mais il me semble trop serieux et trop suffisant.” 35 “Suffisance” is precisely what a good narrator/ orator should not project, since presumptuousness relegates the audience to an inferior status; it reduces its participation in the world that the narrator would like to engage it in. But most importantly, we are not allowed to look at Guérinette through the protagonist’s mischievous eyes while she is saying this, as would be the case in Francion, and this is what the audience expects. Along with the change in ethos between Francion and Polyandre, it is important to note a change of general tone between the novels. The Histoire comique de Francion, especially the 1623 edition, has many characteristics in common with the genres of fabliau and farce, and Francion has many traits of the trickster character that is often found in those genres. But Polyandre seems to represent a break with comic tradition because it contains much less farce. Some critics describe it as a predecessor of le roman de moeurs or the novel of observation. 36 The depiction of several days in the lives of ordinary bourgeois characters in a contemporary setting (as opposed to a setting featuring an exceptional character like Francion) was a new idea in 1648. Furetière had a similar project in Le Roman bourgeois, a novel that also failed in terms of number of editions published in the seventeenth century. It is likely that readers simply were not yet interested in fiction about ordinary characters, especially during the height of popularity of the heroic novel. In terms of the socio-political atmosphere, too, the practical ethos of Francion, which foregrounds cleverness and manipulation (in Aristotelian terms, panourgia) 37 when dealing with contingency, was very much in tune with the troubled years of 1648 to 1653. The reflective, passive stance of Polyandre, which foregrounds judgment, moderation, and self-control, is more in tune with a later atmosphere of the court and the pacification of the 35 Polyandre 141. 36 See especially Serroy. 37 See Nicomachean Ethics, VI.xii.9-10. Cleverness is a capacity to negotiate contingency to your own advantage, but it is not prudence (phronēsis) which is directed toward a noble goal. “Ethos”-based Failure in Charles Sorel’s Polyandre 77 nobility. In 1648, and in the years immediately following, the perils of the state made contingency into the main feature of any “contemporary” world, and the need for cleverness in dealing with unforeseen and barely controllable situations, was much more obvious than connecting with a rational world order by moderation and distance. In personal terms, however, it is clear that Sorel was not concerned with the socio-political atmosphere, but he was indeed affected by sales. From his remarks about Polyandre in the Bibliothèque françoise, it seems that Sorel was disappointed by the failure of the novel. 38 He describes it as lacking “la belle forme du roman” because the reader does not find out what becomes of the characters at the end, while in fact it appears that Sorel wanted to write a continuation of the plot but was unable to do so due to lack of reader interest in the first edition. This suggests that Sorel misjudged readers’ tastes. They were expecting a new Francion when Sorel gave them Polyandre. But the protagonist as a disengaged observer of his social surroundings did eventually become popular, and although Polyandre failed to appeal to readers of the seventeenth century, Sorel was clearly ahead of his time with the idea for its protagonist’s ethos. Works Cited Adam, Antoine. Introduction. Romanciers du XVII e siècle. Paris: Gallimard (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), 1958. Aristotle. The “Art” of Rhetoric. Trans., ed. John H. Freese. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Trans., ed. Howard Rackham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926. Cazenave, Gil. “L’image du prince dans les premiers romans de Sorel.” XVII e siècle 105 (1974): 19-28. Cicero. De Oratore. Trans. E.W. Sutton and H. Rackham. London: William Heinemen, 1942. Dandrey, Patrick. “Polyandre ou la critique de l’histoire comique.” Charles Sorel polygraphe, ed. E. Bury and E. Van der Schueren. Lévis, Québec: Presses de l’Université de Laval, 2006. ---. Preface. Polyandre. Ed. P. Dandrey and C. Toublet. Paris: Klincksieck, 2010. Debaisieux, Martine. Le Procès du roman: écriture et contrefaçon chez Charles Sorel. Saratoga: Anma Libri, 1989, Orléans: Paradigme, 2000. Foucault, Michel. Histoire de la folie à l’âge classique. Paris: Gallimard, 1972. 38 Dandrey suggests that the passages dedicated to Polyandre in the Bibliothèque françoise imply that Sorel was “chagriné et courroucé” by the lack of success of the book and that he found its poor reception to be “injuste” (Preface X). Anne Theobald 78 Fumaroli, Marc. L’Âge de l’éloquence: rhétorique et "res literaria" de la Renaissance au seuil de l’époque classique. Genève: Droz, 1980, 2002. Goldin, Jeanne. “Structures métaphoriques et unité narrative; le livre I de l’Histoire comique de Francion.” Papers on French Seventeenth Century Literature 4-5 (1976): 117-140. Roy, Emile. La Vie et les œuvres de Charles Sorel. Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1891. Serroy, Jean. Roman et réalité: Les histoires comiques au XVII e siècle. Paris: Minard, 1981. Sorel, Charles. La Bibliothèque françoise (1664). 2 nd ed. Paris: Compagnie des Libraires du Palais, 1667, Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1970. ARTFL-FRANTEXT. Web. ---. Histoire comique de Francion. In Romanciers du dix-septième siècle. Ed. Antoine Adam. Paris: Gallimard (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), 1958. ---. Polyandre, histoire comique (1648). Ed. P. Dandrey and C. Toublet. Paris: Klincksieck, 2010. Suozzo, Andrew. The Comic Novels of Charles Sorel: A Study of Structure, Characterization and Disguise. Lexington, KY: French Forum, 1982.