Finally, having overcome my laziness, I post this account for fellow fans or silent lurkers.
I had the chance of meeting Pauline Acquart at the final representation of Andreas.
After being somewhat disappointed on the festival d'Avignon, partially because I had to face there adversities such as the crowd, the heat, mosquitos, fatigue, I decided to give it another try, in better circumstances. Also I kind of hoped that maybe the cast would come out to talk with the spectators after the play, as they use to. Also, since the play itself left me confused, but interested, I wanted to try again, see if I could understand more of it, and maybe even like it. So I invited a friend and we went, on a Saturday for 7:30PM.
I won't go into the description of the play again. See my review here (I since revised some of my opinions, especially on the "not wanting to learn more" part):
viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1708&start=2902 (and following posts)
This time we were seated at the right close to the stage, so we could observe all the actors' faces. Overall, it was much clearer and more agreeable, because I knew what was coming next and how it could be related. The story is still quite obtuse but I didn’t feel lost nor drowned. The pacing was more bearable, surprisingly I wasn't bored like the first time, but I didn't feel rushed too and too eager to see Acquart (I kept in mind that hers was a secondary role). The mood was dark, the actors performed gravely.
I paid more attention to Acquart’s first role to try to discover why the hell she doesn't talk half of the time. She plays the doctor's daughter, who tells her father that she doesn't like that the Stranger (aka Andreas, the main character) is coming in their house. But the conversation is cut short when the Stranger and doctor's wife arrive. After that, Acquart just sits on a bench, silent. It intrigued me the first time. Now I noted that her character has ascendancy over her father, because at one point she stands up and leaves, and the father quickly throws in an excuse to leave too. But I didn't come up with a satisfying answer.
I was pleased to see her still barefoot in her second role, that of a nun of a charity hospital, who recites curses from the Deuteronomy (not from the Exodus, as I said in the review) to Andreas. It was also cool that Pierre Baux got to smoke his cigar on stage, althought it wasn’t outdoors like le cloître des Célestins. Given actual anti-smoking propaganda and the evertightening regulations, it felt almost subversive.
When the play was over, we went to the hall, and waited there, since the guard told us that the actors would come. The crowd quickly decreased. Not a long time after, Châtel came out, and after phoning outside he went to the bar. We approached him and had a little chat when he was available (he talked to someone else before that).
I kind of half praised him for the play and told him that I went twice being an Acquart' fan. Then we talked a little about her roles. He said that the doctor's daughter had a strong parallel with the Stranger's story, because he abandoned his own wife and daughter to wander. Châtel saw this Acquart's role as one of the keystones of the play. It was weird, since she isn't much present and there are much stronger themes, but I won't dispute his vision, I guess he made much more connections than me. He also told, speaking highly of her, that he met Pauline when he was coming out of a theatre in Paris, and, since he had seen Naissance des pieuvres and was impressed with her, he proposed her a part in Andreas.Originally, the nun (her seconde role) was an old priest, but having Acquart, it seemed more appropriate to let her do it, because putting a young girl in that heavy and ominous role added to the impact.
We talked some more, about whether he was going to publish his rewritten version of Strindberg's play (maybe, he replied), if this was his first play (no, the second one), if stage director was a decently paid profession (he implied that it was not, his main profession if teaching dramatic technique at Bruxelles' university). Then we parted ways and went to lean against a wall again, waiting.
Finally, and after Nathalie Richard and Pierre Baux came out, Pauline appeared, accompanied by a guy (Enzo Giacomazzy, assistant to the director) and Thierry Raynaud. After smoking outside, they went to the bar, and stood close to us, turning their backs and talking joyfully. Just at the moment when I was deep in reflection about how I could adress her, she turned to us herself and asked if we were here for the play. I replied that of course we were.
She was handed a Heineken can and opening it sprinkled over everybody, and my vest (I was close). She was confounded and said sorry. I don’t really remember what I said, this was told me afterwards by my friend.
I told her what I thought of the play. But I added about some reserves I had about it. She said that the heaviness of the play was varying between representations, and that for exemple the day before they performed more lightly and that the public was more reactive, and that today the public was more absorbed. She added that, perhaps because of the fact that this representation was the final one, they accentuated the seriousness and tragedy of the story.
I asked her about her nearly silent role. She told that it frankly wasn't that interesting, that there was nothing to do except look at her hands or the actors'. When I told that for Châtel it seemed pretty important, she was amused.
(I don’t know when exactly it was, but there was Thierry Raynaud running in the hall pretending to be a seagull. «Look, I’m a seagull, I’m a seagull!» he yelled. He even broke into our circle for a second. This I don’t remember, my friend told me afterwards. I guess my mind was away, and even though I looked at him, I didn’t see.)
I told that I went to the play twice, here and in Avignon, at the beginning of the festival. She said that it was awful, because she was very nervous and tense before coming on the stage, and asked me why I returned this time. I told that I was a fan; she seemed surprised and flattered. When I added having seen other things beside
Water Lilies, it surprised her even more (it was pleasing to see her reactions on her labile face). We (I and my friend and then Pauline) talked about our studies. Hers aren't finished now, she started twice but interrupted each time, because she obtained a role. So for now it was in stand by. She would continue acting as long as she has roles. And if not, she added jokingly (or at least I hope so), she would reconvert to assistant like Enzo.
My friend asked Enzo about what was exactly his job. He told us that he must take notes on what the director says, because very often he forgets or repeats but differently. And even if the play appeared to be square and very calculated, it was more because of the repetition than because of the strict and structured director's vision.
We talked some more about Strindberg’s plays and the prices of the books. Then Pauline returned to the fact that I said being a fan (it must've struck her
), and asked us if we had done much road to come see her. We replied no, and that maybe 2 hours of road would be too much of a price. We laughed.
But the chat was almost over, because the cast was gathering to go eat, and she was called. But before she left, I asked her about her role in J
amais contente. She said that she plays the protagonist's older sister, but that she doesn't know how much of her has been kept, since she hasn't seen the movie yet. I told her that I shall gladly see it anyways.
Then we kissed (not the
kiss kiss, nor the french kiss of course
, but only
la bise!
) goodbye.
It was a very pleasant experience, she was great and open and forthcoming. Very alive and nice. I never hoped it would go so well, or that I would chat with her for that long. And I cannot describe accurately her speech or mimics, she has a very expressive and labile face, but that added to the pleasure of meeting her. She laughed often, and seemed to be interested in who we were too; it was very pleasing.
As final words, I would also add that for me it was a kind of liberation too. I dreamt, yes, but never thought that it would happen, nor that I wouldn't fail in establishing a good conversation. I thought that I would be too shy. But surprisingly I wasn't, and it helped me realise that the obstacles weren't so impossible to cross that I imagined before. I became more confident as a result.