Tartuffe is perhaps one of the most famous comedies written by Moliere and is still performed regularly to this day. In this latest rendition of Tartuffe done at the Theater Royal Haymarket, Gérald Garutti and Christopher Hampton collaborated to create a new adaptation that is in both French and English- a presumably fitting and interesting tribute to the ways that the French and English languages, have interacted and affected each other since the Norman conquest in 1066. Now, as a general rule, I find multi-lingual productions of just about any theatrical piece to be fascinating (this approach increases accessibility, puts languages and their cultures in direct conversation with each other, and brings artists of many backgrounds together for the sole purpose of creating art, to name just a few of the possible outcomes). Quite frankly, I had high hopes for this production, especially given the long history between the two countries and the limitless possibilities that could come into play based on this between the characters of Tartuffe. Unfortunately, I was left quite disappointed as the bilingual aspect of the show was never fully developed in favor of other points the creative team wanted to make. This left the changes between French and English feeling almost arbitrary and nonsensical as they were seemingly done at random with little justification as to why they were taking place.
The production concepts behind Christopher Hampton’s adaptation were certainly ambitious enough. Tartuffe, was not only to be performed in both French and English, but was also then set in modern-day Los Angeles. Tartuffe himself rings true to the leaders of mega churches and televangelists found all around the U.S.- the ones who promise salvation or healing or whatever a person might need if only you keep sending them more money. Those who prey off the desperate in the name of salvation provide an excellent parallel to what a modern-day Tartuffe character might be. Indeed, many televangelists only begin to face repercussions when their greed becomes too great to ignore, as Tartuffe does when he tries to usurp Orgon’s place and take ownership of his property. This production could have been quite interesting indeed had it been decided to focus on the effects of monetized religion in America and would have presented a more cohesive picture than what made its way onstage.
Gérald Garutti chose to overhaul the ending of Tartuffe and replace the deus-ex-machina King character that brings Tartuffe to justice with that of Donald Trump. Pending on how one interprets the end of Moliere’s script, this parallel drawn could be both interesting and apt. A rich businessman gaining power and then using it to protect other rich businessmen is certainly not an unfamiliar notion and, indeed, could provide cutting social commentary if done well. Garutti and Hampton, unfortunately, present a caricature of a final scene where they assume that the audience knows nothing about the events of the past two years and is thereby quite heavy-handed in packing the “greatest hits” of the Trump candidacy and administration into the final ten minutes of the play. Given how polarizing a character Donald Trump is, and how much he has and continues to dominate the new cycle this approach reads as heavy-handed and in poor taste. It leaves the audience feeling ever so slightly sympathetic for Tartuffe- who is supposed to be the villain of the piece. Above all, what this production suffered most from was its refusal to focus on just one of its many production concepts that, individually, would have made for a fascinating and relevant rendition of Tartuffe. In its refusal to do so, the audience is left with a vague idea of many unrealized concepts that leave the production feeling disjointed and without the grace and genius of the original.
