Before the preview of Molière’s “The Miser,” presented in the style of commedia dell’arte at the Théâtre de Verdure this Thursday, Nice Première met with Didier Dupuis, the director and leading actor. They discussed commedia dell’arte and theater in general…
Nice Première: Is Molière still relevant in contemporary society?
Didier Dupuis: In my opinion, Molière is not outdated; he is endearing. We have maintained the original text, and this does not detract from its understanding. On stage, we play, we make faces, there’s action. As a result, even five-year-old children can engage with this world.
NP: Commedia dell’arte according to Didier Dupuis?
DD: I prioritize improvisation, audience participation. It happens that people return to the same show to see what has changed. We have maintained a great spirit of open-air theater. Our company has its own signature, we don’t take inspiration from anyone. My direction is never fixed; the actors know they can make suggestions, often live. It’s about fun, buffoonery; we’re always flirting with a line, similar to what clowns do in the circus, always with great respect for the audience, however.
NP: Why keep the elements of classical theater: the masks, the swords, the costumes…?
DD: My actors play multiple roles in the same show. Commedia dell’arte requires a great rigor in composition. The mask allows an actor to change their physical appearance, their voice. We aim for a true artistic performance. Moreover, we have retained the real traditional masks.
NP: Do you think commedia dell’arte had become outdated?
DD: It is true that Commedia had fallen into obsolescence for several years. In the Alpes-Maritimes, only our company, Voix du Silence, still practices it. Actually, it’s a demanding show; it requires acrobatics, singing, and improvisational skills. It demands constant dynamics and a broad range of actors. But this genre is making a comeback.
NP: Your view on contemporary theater?
DD: It’s too intellectual. Our company likes popular theater, in the noble sense of the word. The issue with contemporary theater is that it positions itself as preachy. It’s not true to say: ‘Art brings us back to culture.’ I believe that the audience is intelligent. Above all, they seek an exchange. Our wish is to make the audience happy, to help them forget their worries. I think that’s what they’re also looking for.
NP: What future for the Nice stage?
DD: That is more a matter of companies than of the City Hall. Among them, there have been too many interconnections. Although, it’s unfortunate that there isn’t a 200-seat theater in Nice.
NP: And the future of theater?
DD: Today, it’s a bit difficult for the spectacle. People tell us price is important. But producing a show is expensive. So, it feels like we cannot afford to make mistakes. If someone finds a show boring, they’ll say theater is boring.
NP: The Festival of Avignon seems to be struggling…
DD: We need to distinguish the issues. Many companies complain of a flop by blaming Avignon. It’s like at the Galeries Lafayette, there’s always something happening. We managed to put on a great show in 2003, despite a strike by intermittents. You have to defend your theater, be very dynamic. But it is true that this festival has become too expensive for theater companies. A system has set in. Avignon thrives on the festival. The biggest earnings occur during it. Some companies pay the price. However, I advise going to Avignon; there’s a unique atmosphere there.
NP: Has theater become an industry?
DD: Yes, increasingly. Even though it pains me to say it, it has become a product. Patrons no longer exist. So, you struggle to find a sponsor. But we can’t just live a hippie lifestyle. We are forced to go out and promote, to communicate. Especially here, there is a very large choice of spectacles, so one must place information right in front of the spectators. At the same time, having a choice is a good thing. It has evolved in a good direction, compared to a few years ago.
NP: What do you think about the demands of the theater intermittents?
DD: I think the subsidy payments are poorly distributed. There are companies receiving hundreds of millions of euros, others make do with shoestring budgets. We also faced this. We know we have an audience, so they stop assisting us. Yet, we have always managed to pull ourselves out on our own. If we wait for subsidies, we can’t function. So, I am for and against subsidies. It is crucial not to rest on your laurels. If you start waiting for subsidies for four months, you never do anything. Ultimately, it’s the public that makes artists, not subsidies.
