Doctors in Spite of Themselves (WAS: RE: Responding to the Honourable Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance)

[David Ross Whiteley]

Gentlemen, my congratulations.  Fabulous performance.
 
I'll admit you initially had me fooled.  Indeed, I was quite puzzled why two
academics would publicly humiliate themselves with public displays of
intellectual sloppiness and childish shenanigans--but in retrospect it seems
so clear what this was:  a stellar performance of virtual invisible theatre.
Hats off to you both!
 
Please see below for the awarding of points, but first if I may...:
 
"What do customers ultimately buy after viewing this item?"
 
Subscribers to CANDRAMA who enjoyed the good doctors' performance should
also appreciate the attached excerpt--in much the same tone--from my
Alexandrine rhymed verse translation of The Misanthrope (not, unfortunately,
The Doctor in Spite of Himself, which would have been so much more à
propos!).  This was first produced by Third Wall Theatre Company in Ottawa
in 2004, to popular and critical acclaim.  The translation itself was highly
lauded (if I do say so myself) and ever since, people have been pestering me
to seek further productions and publication.  Many feel this text is
particularly suited to University/College/Conservatory/even High School
staging, based on it's fresh, accessible, irreverent tone (though also owing
to cast size and familiarity of the original text).  So it may prove of
particular interest to many CANDRAMA subscribers.  
 
My intention with this translation was to introduce contemporary vocabulary,
speech patterns, cultural references and æsthetics while retaining
line-by-line faithfulness to Molière's original in terms of story and
structure, to create a new work that would be as appealing to 21st century
Canadian (and more broadly English-speaking) audiences as the original was
to its audience.  I believed that Alexandrine rhyme was an important tool to
recreate the pleasure of the original piece (one almost universally
abandoned by other translators) but that other forms of "exactitude" of
translation would result in a distance between text and audience that isn't
desirable and is profoundly unfaithful to the spirit of the original.  In
other words, I sought to create not a museum piece but instead a faithful
revival of the work in a very different set of cultural circumstances (with
a change of tone a necessary part of that cultural adaptation).  I leave
others to judge both the pertinence of this goal and my success at it (to
which purpose the attached excerpt is quite insufficient--email me to
request a copy of the full text), but reactions I've heard are fairly
unanimously affirmative on both points.
 
Unfortunately, as a director and actor I've been too preoccupied with more
immediate projects and more familiar undertakings to do any follow up with
this text to date.  I lack any experience with seeking publication or even
production opportunities outside of my familiar enclave of emerging Ottawa
pro and semi-pro theatres, and this has fed my procrastination.  As a
result, my Misanthrope has been languishing in obscurity for two years, but
I (and many others!) believe it to merit much more than a single production.
I would very much appreciate not only direct expressions of interest
(whether to produce, publish or otherwise revisit the work), but any advice
any of you may have as to how best to pursue further life for this text in
any guise.  
 
I'm also keenly interested to produce more English Alexandrine rhymed verse
adaptations of Molière and others.  Perhaps other subscribers would
themselves be interested in commissioning a similar transadaptation, or know
of others who might be?  If so, I would be very keen to hear from you.
 
Heck, I'd be pleased to hear others are interested by this little
preoccupation of mine, regardless of whether you have ideas for any possible
further life for it or not!  So please send comments and questions to me at
david at ncf.ca.
 
Thanks in advance, and once again kudos to Drs. Kirkley and Egervari on a
highly entertaining performance!
 
Now, as promised, to award points and declare a winner!
 
-  Initially, I found it odd but nothing more that Dr. Kirkley would
sabotage his case with what I know recognize as a tongue-in-cheek éloge to
the "beer and popcorn" election débâcle.  "Myriads of individuals making
very poor consumer choices" sounds wryly pseudo-academic but isn't nearly as
funny as the original, and lacks clarity to its reference. A direct quote
would have served better.  No points.
 
-  I started to clue in that something must be up with Dr. Egervari's
response.  While I was left cold by Dr. Egervari's fallaciously unfair,
straw man critique of Dr. Kirkley's position, and unconvinced by his
passive-aggressive use of retroactively-rhetorical questions to make his
point, I was highly entertained by his overall choice to make his offering
in the form of a pastiche of classic 1990's flame wars ("Oops! Did I click
'Reply ALL' by mistake?  How embarrassing for you!").  5 points.
 
-  I still hadn't quite worked out the joke by Dr. Kirkley's follow-up
(everything's so much more obvious in hindsight).  Of this I will simply
say:  immediately following "But that's a red herring.  And you know it,"
with "Respectfully," -- that's comedy GOLD.  10 points.
 
-  I finally realized the whole thing was an amusement on reading Dr.
Egervari's conclusion, which sent me googling to confirm that yes, it was
indeed World Invisible Theatre Day.  As for the score, Dr. Egervari
declaring a debate closed and in the same breath continuing the debate?
That joke's a bit tired, so only 5 points.
 
So, with scores tied at 10, I congratulate the two winners and thank and
applaud both of you for bringing a smile to my day. And for reminding us in
this ironic, buffonesque way that shared concern for the arts requires us to
overcome personal bias masquerading as informed opinion.  And also of how
academic debate is often merely dressed-up children's squabbles.  
 
Sincerely, 
David Whiteley
Artistic Director, mutatis mutandis
 
 


  _____  

From: Canadian Theatre Reserach [mailto:CANDRAMA at LISTSERV.UNB.CA] On Behalf
Of Tibor Egervari
Sent: November 30, 2006 6:45 PM
To: CANDRAMA at LISTSERV.UNB.CA
Subject: Re: Responding to the Honourable Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance


Dear Bruce,



Many thanks for your answers. They show clearly, and you state it at the
beginning, that we see things differently. Indeed, the only intent of my
questions was to register my dissenting opinion. Therefore, I see no reason
to pursue a debate that could go on forever. 

However, allow me one last remark concerning the original purpose of
subsidies. You should check Canada Council's original mandate (1957) that
has never been changed. You would pay particular attention to the order of
tasks that has been assigned to the organization. 

 Kind regards, 


Tibor



Bruce Kirkley wrote:


Dear Tibor:



Clearly we see things differently. But to answer your questions:



 1)     Why do you think that spending money earned by your fellow 

citizens is better employed according to your choices rather than to 

their own? 



Not MY choices, but rather collaboratively and consensually determined

national objectives.



2)     Have you thought that those citizens might spend those extra 

dollars to go to the theatre that became more and more expensive in 

spite of subsidies? (Remember, the original purpose of subsidies was to



allow for more, less wealthy people to attend. Nowadays, a normal

ticket 

price in any legitimate theatre in the country is almost a day's salary



at minimum wage.)



I doubt the vast majority of Canadians will be spending their extra

dollars at the theatre. They'll be needing them to pay for increased

user fees and privatized health care. And I disagree completely that the

original purpose of subsidies was simply to allow for less wealthy

people to attend. Their primary purpose was (and is) to nurture and

develop creativity and culture in this country.



3)     Has it occurred to you that today's children will become 

tomorrow's "individuals making very poor consumer choices"?



Um - yes. Which seems to me to be a powerful reason for setting

directions that will enable them to make wise consumer choices (such as,

for example, supporting the growth of a nation).



4)     Finally, don't you think that the vast majority of parents do 

care for their children and are quite capable of making responsible 

choices regarding their future?



Yes, of course they do. But that's a red herring. And you know it.



Respectfully,

Bruce



Dr. Bruce Kirkley

Theatre Department

University College of the Fraser Valley

45635 Yale Road

Chilliwack BC  V2P 6T4

(604)702-2613 office

(604)792-2615 fax

  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://artsservices.uwaterloo.ca/pipermail/candrama/attachments/20061201/2199ec60/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Misanthrope Act 3 Excerpt, by David Whiteley.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 29379 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://artsservices.uwaterloo.ca/pipermail/candrama/attachments/20061201/2199ec60/attachment.pdf>