SOURCE: "Michel Tremblay's Seduction of the 'Other Solitude,'" in Canadian Drama, Fall, 1976, pp. 217-23.

[In the following essay, McQuaid explains Tremblay's success in English Canada by examining the social concerns, "highly" theatrical nature, and indigenous québécois qualities of his plays.]

In 1970, anglophone Canadians suddenly learned that the québécois were serious about conserving their heritage and that meant more than the old sections of Montréal and Québec city. Two years later, the Tarragon theatre produced A Toi Pour Toujours, ta Marie-Lou, to be followed by Hosanna and Les Belles Soeurs in 1974. We all read the critics and noted that Tremblay was daring to write in "joual", so we sought out the French scripts, if we considered ourselves competent in the language. However, most of us were not familiar enough with a Montréal accent to comprehend Tremblay's notation of the celebrated "joual", so we reverted to English.

The critics also told us that Tremblay borrowed theatrical techniques from Brecht, Tennessee Williams and Beckett. We nodded approvingly, because, after all, we were still suffering from colonial inferiority complexes.

So, we went to the Tarragon to see this new wonder who came from that unknown land, and who came so highly recommended. Once in the theatre, we no longer had the impression that we were watching something foreign to us. We were gripped by our mores—Puritan, if you please, as opposed to Jansenist, which shows how similar the two codes are. We were shown realistic/theatrical characters, we heard outraged demands for change. It was only when we were released from an immediate emotional response to Tremblay, that we fit his play back into its original Eastern Montréal context.

Tremblay has had an historical advantage, writing when he did, because Québec's demands for cultural autonomy served as an example for wavering self-determinating efforts in English Canada. That is not to discredit him, merely to say that he chrystalized similar concerns in both cultures. He portrayed characters who were struggling with the same things many Canadians were—poverty, inferiority complexes vis-à-vis Europeans, alienation, especially among women in urban settings, restrictive moral codes inherited from an even more rigid age. Things were changing rapidly socially and when we were confronted with these problems in the theatre, they had a great impact. Thus, Tremblay served as an emissary between the "two solitudes" and demonstrated, inadvertently, that we were struggling with similar problems.

Evocative theatrical techniques also helped to bridge that gap. Excluding their social implications, Tremblay's creations are compelling. Yet, once again, what Tremblay does so well—demystification of the theatre was starting to happen to English Canada. Especially at the Tarragon theatre, James Reaney, for instance, was using homely objects and regional accents, to reduce the sacred nature of theatre which has always existed.

Along with demystification, Tremblay's plays have a tribal unity, both in form within each of the plays and as an entire body of works. Many of the characters re-appear, as is well demonstrated in Il était une fois dans l'ést, the film presentation of the Tremblay/Brassard world.

So, there are three factors which aided Tremblay to succeed in English Canada: social concerns, in which English Canadians were implicated, the highly theatrical nature of each play and a simultaneous movement in both cultures, out of colonial, into indigenous (or tribal) theatre. An examination of Tremblay's texts will serve as an elaboration of these points.

English Canadians are implicated in the social problems which are dealt with. Essentially, the three plays produced at the Tarragon, concern women in revolt. The feminist movement had been getting a lot of publicity, it is true, but, more important, women's roles were being re-evaluated, by both men and women. Tremblay's women question their responsibilities, but within a context which is far enough removed from the comfortable housewife/part-time career women of most English Canadian women who go to the theatre, to avoid making us feel uncomfortable.

Tremblay's women are literally enclosed in the house, with their still-large families. Large families are a cultural phenomenon associated with Québec. Yet, neither the children nor the neglectful husbands are shown on-stage, so the criticism is not to be directed at them, but at the women themselves. The women in Les Belles Soeurs and Marie Louise, notate the repetitive drudgery of their lives. Each has her own way of escape: accusing her husband of ruining her life, as Marie-Louise does; dreaming of how to "spend" her stamps, for Germaine Lauzon, and alcohol for Hélène, in En Pièces Détachées.

The women are alone in the house and within this theatrically, as well as literally limited space, they are forced into confrontation with each other. Tremblay's most brutal metaphor for spiteful, despairing women, is the Gold Bond Stamp party in Les Belles Soeurs. A party turns into a manifestation of jealousy and cruelty. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf uses the same vehicle. The effects of a hermetic environment explode into aggression in both instances.

The women revolt against their suppressive ethical and financial environment. Marie-Louise is the most outstanding example of the generation of women for whom sexual relations were disgusting. Robertine in En Pièces Détachées and the older women in Les Belles Soeurs, belong to the same generation. Part of their disgust comes from a rigid Jansenist morality (substitute "Puritan" for English translations) and the other half of it was the risk of pregnancy. The women knew that another child meant financial hardship.

The second generation of women were actively liberating themselves from their mother's hardships. Carmen, Linda Lauzon and Hélène, are the representatives of this generation. Carmen accepts her limitations and doesn't delude herself about her career. Yet, as she says to Manon, her sister, the most important thing for her is to have reacted and to have escaped from the "marde" in which she was born.

Hélène and Linda Lauzon have not as successfully freed themselves as Carmen has, but they are trying to escape from the situations which cause their mothers so much frustration.

With both morality and financial conditions conspiring against them, the families of these women are not very happy either. There is alienation between all members of the family, as a result of no communication. They watch television or the husband spends the evening in the tavern. He is just as dissatisfied as the women are. The only two men in all of Tremblay's repertoire—Henri and Léopold—are exploited and unhappy in the factory. They have their respective avenues of escape; beer and/or compensation payments. All the other men are absent, because, as Tremblay says, "There are no men in Québec."

These problems implicate English Canadians as well. The breakdown of the family unit, labour unrest, dissatisfied women are world problems. Yet, specifically in English Canadian theatre at this time, the same problems were being treated. David French's Leaving Home had created a sensation and his main concern is also antagonism within the family. It may be considered that English Canada was even predisposed by David French, to accept Tremblay's examination of problems within a family.

However, that is not the only aspect of Tremblay which made him a success. Social comment is presented in a highly theatrical style, which is extremely compelling. This aspect of his plays needs no translation, because they are so fundamentally theatrical. Hosanna, which was successful even outside of Canadian context, is the most theatrical of all of Tremblay's works. It is a drama-within-a-drama, with Hosanna functioning on three levels—Elisabeth Taylor/Cleopatra, Hosanna and Claud; an often-neglected sense in the theatre, the sense of smell, personalizes Hosanna through her cheap, cloying perfume.

The play begins "in medias res", a dependable theatrical gambit, with Hosanna in her Cleopatra costume. From then on, the play is literally a prolonged striptease. It is a metaphorical striptease as well, paralleling the lovers' progression towards honesty. Hosanna's costumes, as well as her lover's costume of the "beau gars", is a disguise, in addition to being a borrowed theatrical personality. Thus, Hosanna is twice-removed from Cleopatra.

Tremblay uses essentially the same theatrical pretext in La Duchesse de Langeais. La Duchesse is impersonating La Grande Dame at the beginning of the play. She speaks directly to the audience, addressing us as "ma fille". A dramatic monologue has to be a delicate balance between dramatic impersonation and sympathetic honesty with the audience. That is where la Duchesse succeeds. She gives us a magnanimous mental striptease, yet still retains a fundamental dignity.

En Pièces Détachées is an example of another style which Tremblay uses, which is the statuesque, borrowed from Greek drama. The characters seldom speak to each other and they are very static visually on the stage. The same quality of the statuesque is found in Marie-Lou, Les Belles Soeurs and Bonjour Là, Bonjour, but En Pièces Détachées is a refinement of this style.

Within the reduced realism of the set, which allows free movement, Robertine and Henri remain static. Around them moves Hélène, sometimes drunkenly. The neighbour functions as a Chorus, leading the characters in the family in their chant "Chus pus capable de rien faire", "I am no longer able to do anything". All of the characters are literally immobile at the conclusion of the play.

There is very little action on the stage in any of Tremblay's plays. This is a stage metaphor for the theme of this play—entrapment, whether physical or psychological. It may be an interesting technique for experienced theatre audiences, but why was Les Belles Soeurs, for instance, such a success with drama departments in universities?

Tremblay had dared to use the language of his characters and of his environment. The language itself is a form of revolt, even within Québec theatre. In good English translation, the violence of Tremblay's language is conveyed. Therefore, it is only at the verbal level which his theatre could be called a "theatre of revolt". English Canadians were just beginning to talk about anti-americanism and nationalism, with residue sentiment sparked by Expo '67. They were, however, very curious to see Québec in the theatre, since visiting Québec is always so charming.

Tremblay did not portray the habitant and folk characters, which, until this time, was the image perpetuated by the bonhomme and ceintures fléchées of the Québec Winter Carnival. No, Québec and the theatrical experience in general was undergoing demystification. It was startling to realize that québécois were suffering from the same social problems as we were; to be shown that within families everywhere, there was alienation and non-communication.

David French's success in English Canadian theatre has already been mentioned. His theatre also dealt with the problem of the disintegrating family unit. The fact that French was a Newfoundlander who wrote good plays may have predisposed us to listen to another playwright, also from a relatively mystifying province.

In addition to a genuine desire to get to know each other as Canadians and to do away with stereotypes, there was a general movement away from colonialism in the theatre. We had seen all of Neil Simon's and Bernard Shaw's plays. Canadians want to encourage native talent. Docu-dramas and collective creations were producing a new theatrical form as well as informing Canadians of the variety of our experiences. Thus, Tremblay was fortunate to arrive at the peak of the Canadian awareness movement. That is not, however, to denigrate Tremblay, it is merely to say that he was part of the new interest in information about all things Canadian. His plays have a tribal unity which inspired and focussed Canadian nationalism within English Canada.

Many of the characters reappear, creating an impression of a tribe. La Duchesse is mentioned in En Pièces Détachées, Carmen's career is followed in Ste Carmen de la Main. There are three generations present within Tremblay's world and each generation has its specific qualities, which contribute to a sense of seeing an entire society. Like Margaret Laurence, Tremblay writes out of a microcosm which implicates all humanity.

Tribalism is manifested in another way. When Lisette de Courval in Les Belles Soeurs displays an attitude of superiority because she has visited Europe, or when Hélène in En Pièces Détachées resents the Frenchman who comes into the restaurant, a tribal reaction is elicited. A threat from the outside immediately unites a tribe.

Tremblay elicits a tribal response outside of Québec simply by virtue of being a very good playwright. "Discovered" Canadian talents always occasion a national pride. In strictly theatrical techniques, that is involved in the action on-stage through the use of chants, a ritualistic device, and the rhythmic pace of the plays. The acts in Bonjour Là, Bonjour are even designated as a vocal selection of music would indicate different groupings of singers. Duo, Trio and Quattor signal the number of actors in the scene. There is a musical quality in the hypnotic chants. Les Belles Soeurs accompany their chants with beating of feet as the québécois always do when folk music is played. Tremblay uses every theatrical trick to spellbind his audience.

It was not only the "other solitude" which Tremblay seduced. It must be remembered that Québec was also suffering from "colonialism" in the arts when Tremblay started to write. Jean-Claude Germain, in Canadian Theatre Review, Spring, 1976, uses this term specifically in his article on Québec's struggle against foreign domination in theatre. So, Tremblay's success in New York and in Paris produces a gleeful tribal pride at the reversal of this state of affairs.

Beyond an immediate reaction in the theatre, where Tremblay plays upon audience reaction as surely as any musician, he represents the first Canadian playwright to break through the language barrier of the French, even when, ironically, he writes in "joual", the most indigenous and inaccessible language of Canada. He has also contributed to a general movement out of colonial, into a tribal Canadian theatre.