Molière: The Complete Richard Wilbur Translations

by Molière, Richard Wilbur (Translator), Adam Gopnik (Introduction)

For the 400th anniversary of Moliere’s birth, all of Richard Wilbur’s unsurpassed translations of Molière’s plays–themselves towering achievements in English verse–are brought together for the first time in this two-volume gift set.

One of the most accomplished American poets of his generation, Richard Wilbur (1921-2017) was also a prolific translator of French and Russian literature. His verse translations of Molière’s plays are especially admired by readers and are still performed today around the world. “Wilbur,” the critic John Simon wrote, “makes Molière into as great an English verse playwright as he was a French one.” Now, for the first time, all ten of Wilbur’s unsurpassed translations of Molière’s plays are brought together in two-volume boxed set, fulfilling the poet’s vision for the translations.

The first volume comprises Molière’s delightful early farces The Bungler, Lover’s Quarrels, and The Imaginary Cuckhold, or Sganarelle; the comedies The School for Husbands and The School for Wives, about the efforts of middle-aged men to control their young wives or fiancés, which so delighted female theater goers in Moliere’s seventeenth-century France; and Don Juan, Molière’s retelling of the timeless story, performed only briefly in the playwright’s lifetime before pious censure forced it to close and not part of the repertoire of the Comédie-Française until 1847.

The second volume includes the elusive masterpiece, The Misanthrope, often said to occupy the same space in comedy as Shakespeare’s Hamlet does in tragedy; the fantastic farce Amphitryon, about how Jupiter and Mercury commandeer the identities of two mortals ; Tartuffe, Molière’s biting satire of religious hypocrisy; and The Learned Ladies, like Tarfuffe, a drama of a household turned suddenly upside down. These volumes include the original introductions by Richard Wilbur and an introduction by Adam Gopnik on the exquisite art of Wilbur’s translations.

Genres: Literature, Classics, Plays, Fiction, Drama, Poetry, France

1230 pages, Hardcover

Published November 9, 2021

About the author

Sophisticated comedies of French playwright Molière, pen name of Jean Baptiste Poquelin, include Tartuffe (1664), The Misanthrope (1666), and The Bourgeois Gentleman (1670).

French literary figures, including Molière and Jean de la Fontaine, gathered at Auteuil, a favorite place.

People know and consider Molière, stage of Jean-Baptiste Poquelin, also an actor of the greatest masters in western literature. People best know l'Ecole des femmes (The School for Wives), l'Avare ou l'École du mensonge (The Miser), and le Malade imaginaire (The Imaginary Invalid) among dramas of Molière.

From a prosperous family, Molière studied at the Jesuit Clermont college (now lycée Louis-le-Grand) and well suited to begin a life in the theater. While 13 years as an itinerant actor helped to polish his abilities, he also began to combine the more refined elements with ccommedia dell'arte.

Through the patronage of the brother of Louis XIV and a few aristocrats, Molière procured a command performance before the king at the Louvre. Molière performed a classic of [authore:Pierre Corneille] and le Docteur amoureux (The Doctor in Love), a farce of his own; people granted him the use of Salle du Petit-Bourbon, a spacious room, appointed for theater at the Louvre. Later, people granted the use of the Palais-Royal to Molière. In both locations, he found success among the Parisians with les Précieuses ridicules (The Affected Ladies), l'École des maris</i> (<i>The School for Husbands</i>), and <i>[book:l'École des femmes (The School for Wives). This royal favor brought a pension and the title "Troupe du Roi" (the troupe of the king). Molière continued as the official author of court entertainments.

Molière received the adulation of the court and Parisians, but from moralists and the Church, his satires attracted criticisms. From the Church, his attack on religious hypocrisy roundly received condemnations, while people banned performance of Don Juan . From the stage, hard work of Molière in so many theatrical capacities began to take its toll on his health and forced him to take a break before 1667.

From pulmonary tuberculosis, Molière suffered. In 1673 during his final production of le Malade imaginaire (The Imaginary Invalid), a coughing fit and a haemorrhage seized him as Argan, the hypochondriac. He finished the performance but collapsed again quickly and died a few hours later. In time in Paris, Molière completely reformed.

Reviews

[Jason Furman · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is impossible not to be happy when reading Richard Wilbur’s translations of Molière (a little like the feeling one has reading , which is probably not an accident because Wodehouse also wrote light comedies including drawing on many of the tropes explored by Molière like the wily servant and bungling master). And it is a testament to the extraordinary translations that the Library of America—known for everything from Alexander Hamilton to Mark Twain—did a two volume set of this French writer along with an excellent introductory essay by Adam Gopnik, an interview with Richard Wilbur, and Wilbur’s prefaces to all the plays. But otherwise no footnotes or scholarly apparatus, which are really not needed. And all published on beautiful paper. It could not be more exciting to have all of these together. (Note, they are basically all of Molière’s verse plays and one play in prose, Don Juan, but Wilbur never translated the other major prose plays including The Miser and The Imaginary Invalid.

I read all of these at least once before, originally tearing through them about thirty years ago and then two more about twenty years ago which were more recent translations. This time I re-read them over the course of about nine months.

Molière is not as sophisticated as Shakespeare. The characters do not have the same depth or complexity. They don’t change. He doesn’t have the range—everything here is a comedy and most of them in a similar note. In fact, they feel more like tales from Boccacio’s The Decameron or Cervantes’ Exemplary Novels in that they have one theme or concept and then draw out as much amusement until the inevitable and not overly suspenseful happy resolution. That concept could be a possessive guardian trying to keep their ward from learning about other men or a Misanthrope who thinks it is important to always say what is on your mind or a religious hypocrite or a family some of whom put highly abstract learning ahead of everything else. There is a lot of farce and satire but they transcend both.

Here are a few brief comments on each of them, which were collected in the volume in the order they were published. And I should say they generally get better and more sophisticated as it goes—if for some reason you only want to read one volume make it the second one.

The Bungler: A classic wily servant with more and more complicated schemes to hook up his master with the woman he loves but all thwarted by the dim-witted bungling master. I believe it was Molière’s first five act play and it is somewhat repetitious without a major foil for its satire like the later ones, still enjoyable in its own right (not just for the sake of completism).

Lovers’ Quarrels: Another story of lovers thwarted but eventually successfully come together, left me with the same feeling as The Bungler.

Sganarelle, or The Imaginary Cuckold: A classic farce, Sganarelle (a recurring name in Molière with some recurring traits) becomes convinced his wife is cheating on him, cue mistaken identities, mistaken assumptions, and more.

The School for Husbands: Two brothers each have wards they plan to marry. One is controlling and one is easygoing, guess which one it works out for?

The School for Wives: This is the best in the first volume and the first that really explores/satirizes a very memorable character type. And also the first to have a strong female character, Agnès who is raised in isolation by her paranoid guardian and aspiring husband Arnolphe but ends up being much more resourceful than he had expected in finding her own love.

Don Juan: A prose play, reasonably similar to the story in Mozart’s Don Giovanni (in fact one of its sources), it is not in verse and has moments of comic relief but is not really comedy. Like other versions, Don Juan is a villain but also one does not completely believe his condemnation.

The Misanthrope: Another classic, so to speak, Alceste believes in telling only the truth and condemns everyone who does otherwise—or at least almost everyone because he is in love with a girl (Célimène) who is the opposite in most everything respect. This play does not just have strong characters (both male and female), it also has a thought provoking set of arguments about the value of radical honesty vs. the need for society to have a greater degree of pragmatism and politeness. In some ways this tension, like the plot, is never resolved.

Amphitryon: The only ancient tragedy, this is the story of Zeus disguising himself, seducing a woman (not that hard when he is disguised as her husband), and fathering the child that ends up being Hercules. It is done with lots of witty banter, gods making amusing asides, and implicit mocking of the official order of things.

Tartuffe: This genuinely is among the best of the plays, about a religious hypocrite who at first captures certain family members through psychological manipulation but then attempts to ensnare them in a legal and blackmail scheme. It is resolved by a deus ex machina, which is a bit of a weakness, and is less ambiguous and thought provoking on issues like honesty and hypocrisy. But it is just perfectly done comedy and an incredibly memorable character (plus the best servant in Molière, which is saying a lot).

The Learned Ladies: In some ways I liked this even more than Molière, it is a similar structure—a family that is victim to a schemer, but here a man who purports to be of learning not of religion. And unlike Tartuffe, it is resolved with a clever ruse instead of a deus ex machina. Lots and lots of memorable characters both the main ones but also several of the minor ones too.

As happy as I was reading these, I’m sad they’re over—and can’t wait to return. (I just wish more of them were in American theaters, I’ve seen Tartuffe twice but have never seen any of the others.)

[Keith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Volume 1

The Bungler *** -- This is an excellent Plautian comedy in which the clever servant helps his master get the girl of his dreams. It has a long tradition, including Shakespeare’s Two Gentlemen of Verona.

This play spins the story a little differently, with servant’s master contiually bungling the servant’s (Mascarille’s) well-made plans. Moliere’s play is witty and energetic, quickly moving from one farcical situation to another, and it’s not hard to see why it was so popular in his time, and is still entertaining to us today.

(Would it be rude, however, to note that the final denouement occurs without the servant’s clever plotting? I don’t want to spoil the fun, though.)

Although the Plautian comedy has long been out of style, Moliere gives it life and vigor. Theatre lovers and theatre historians will enjoy this farce. If you’re not a Moliere lover, you can probably skip it. (1/22)


Sganarelle, the Imaginary Cuckold *** -- This humorous one-act play piles misunderstanding upon misunderstanding to create a zany imbroglio, but it ends (somewhat) happily. It is certainly the origin of many sitcom farces. It lacks the depth and characterization of The Misanthrope or Tartuffe, but it is mildly amusing. It’s not required reading. (1/22)


School for Husbands*** -- This is a delightful farce in the spirit of Plautus. There’s no clever slaves to drive the plot, but the play contains the same resourceful characters. There is a very nice comeuppance at the end when justice is served.

Other than the message about treating women with respect and trust, the tale is vapor thin. It is, though, a very well-crafted hour’s entertainment.

Note: There is a brief mention of a new law from the King limiting the wearing of clothes with frills and lace. Wilbur mentions it briefly in the introduction as well. It isn't made clear so I wanted to note those laws were not so much to discourage frivolous and outrageous fashions, it was done to make sure the non-nobility did not dress like -- and were not as elegant as -- the nobility. (10/16)


Don Juan *** -- The translator notes that the “pervasive ambiguity of the work, which offended the devout of Moliere’s day, is for [contemporary audiences] a source of richness and nuance.”

I fail to see the nuance or ambiguity in the play. It seems a rather tired, trite morality play. Yes, Don Juan is reprehensible. He is a sociopath. Everyone in the play condemns his behavior. He’s the stereotypical evil doer (i.e., the amoral/immoral atheist/materialist/skeptic).

So where is the ambiguity? The amazing thing to me is that this play was banned in Moliere’s lifetime. (What would they have thought of Richard III or Macbeth or Tamburlaine?) Christopher Marlowe’s Faustus (or Goethe’s, for that matter) is a much more nuanced/ambiguous (and thus more dangerous) presentation of evil.

This play is not without its charms. It's quite amusing in places (as you’d expect from Moliere). Don Juan’s repartee with Sganarelle and the other characters is amusing. Just don’t expect any complicated portrayal of good and evil. Although the plot is dark, the general tone is very light and superficial. (12/13)



Volume 2

Here are my thoughts as I re-read the plays:

The Misanthrope ***** – What makes this savage satire of Parisian society so memorable are the characters. In a few words, Moliere brings them to life and makes them three dimensional. They don’t have the depth of a King Lear, but they are vivid and moving. And their interaction is splendidly done and the play is full of memorable scenes such as Alcestes’ critique of Oronte’s verse (1.2 & 4.1), and Arsinoe’s and Celimene’s mutual put down (3.5). This is great theatre.

The key to the play is Celimene. She is the centerpiece, more so than Alceste. If she is not perfectly formed, if she does not neatly balance the coquette with the lover, the play falls apart and is unbelievable. As unimaginable as it seems for Alceste to love Celimene, the Moliere’s portrait makes it believable. Her tantrum when Alceste finds the note is wonderful and reminds me of the unorthodox love of Shakespeare’s Cleopatra. (Though Cleopatra’s love is heartfelt.)

This is must read/see. I’ll leave with this wonderful quote from Alceste about Oronte’s poetry:

“I’ll gladly praise his wardrobe, I’ll endorse
His dancing, or the way he sits a horse;
But, gentlemen, I cannot praise his rhyme.
In fact, it ought to be a capital crime
For one so sadly unendowed
To write a sonnet and read the thing aloud.” (4.1 p. 103) (10/17)


Tartuffe **** – Though not as brilliant as The Misanthrope, Tartuffe is a wonderful work. It built on the tradition of Plautus and laid the groundwork for the centuries of seat-squirming situation comedy that has followed.

Though subtitled The Hypocrite, I really think Tartuffe is more the con man. A hypocrite has core beliefs that he undermines willingly or unwillingly in his deeds or words. Tartuffe has no such principles to undermine. He is completely amoral. There is nothing to undermine.

The ending, of course, is completely ridiculous and a total cop out. And this is not helped by that eye-roll-inducing ego-massaging butt-kissing of the King. I guess a playwright does what a playwright must.

This translation by Richard Wilbur is not quite as good as his translation of The Misanthrope. (But that is brilliantly done and it would be hard to match it.) It’s hard to tell if the fault is with the translation or the original play. Tartuffe is in some ways a darker play with a serious thread woven through it. To me, it felt at times like the rime either unintentionally undercut the seriousness, or the seriousness unintentionally undercut the rime. It is a difficult tone that might have been more successfully achieved if the rime were employee more strategically, and less completely.

But this is a classic and for good reason. It is a highly enjoyable work. (01/19)


Amphitryon*** (05/04)


The Learned Ladies*** -- In this play, Moliere ridicules a group of people (mostly women) whose academic pretensions lead them to prizing fools while being intolerant of the rest of the world.

The play provides some comical takes on education, but sticks to a strictly moderate course where education is generally good, but too much is harmful.

While the play does not explicitly mock women’s attempt to be educated, it does frame it aa unnatural and anti-social, where the knowledge is fine but any attempt to use it would be absurd.

An insightful play, but a victim of its time and not as good as The Misanthrope (but what is?). (01/22)

[Sammy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone deserves to have read Wilbur's Molière.

[Randy Wilson · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the first poetry collections I read was by Wilbur and the elegance and freshness of his poetry astonished me. A couple years later I read a piece in the New York Review of Books about this Library of America collection of Moliere plays raving about these translations by Richard Wilbur so I bought it. The physical volumes are beautiful and I read the plays out loud so I could fully appreciate the sound of what Wilbur did in English with Moliere. This was the best aspect of the reading experience.

Some of Moliere’s drama and characterizations hold up but the narrowness of the milieu and the repetitions of the tropes from play to play got old. We are always in the company of aristocrats and there is typically a rogue character who makes for the drama of the piece. There is lots of back and forth with the main character who is hoodwinked by the charlatan and then very suddenly everything is resolved.

That said, some of the long set pieces and also the back and forth dialogue are wickedly droll and lots of fun reading as if I was standing in a powered wig on a stage. Also the tension created as the characters double and triple down on an obvious sham is comically pleasurable if in the end predictable. Mostly, I feel now like I have a sense of Moliere and what his work is all about. I also marvel at the amazing job Wilbur did making Moliere’s words shimmer and gleam in English.

[Carrol · Rating 5 out of 5]

As so many have said, this translation of Moliere is brilliant! Of course, one has to have great material to start with, and these plays are that. Not a lot happens in the plot, but oh the dialogue cuts like a knife. Moliere knew how to get right to the point while bringing the audience to tears in laughter. And Moliere is as applicable today as he was in 17th century France!

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are interested in hearing my discussion of this excellent two-volume set on my podcast, you can check it out here:

https://www.buzzsprout.com/2132180/13...