Abstract EN:

If madness, in its widest sense, is indisputably better understood when it is considered as a relational phenomenon, we should not be surprised by its frequent manifestation in the theater, itself definable as a relational phenomenon in several respects. Where, in effets, can one find the theater's "essence" if not in its capacity, greater than of any other art form, to weave relationships instantaneously or with the greatest urgency when its survival is at stake ? however, madness and theater, both being relational phenomena, can then apppear to be antithetical if the former means alteration of the relationship whereas the latter's very existence depends on the relationship's cohesion. Is madness pushed to the limit not a kind of disintegration ? is the theater not, on the other hand, a communion of sorts ? this paradox, then, instead of removing madness from the stage, seems to link the theme of madness most intimately with the theater, our intuitive deduction being that madness and he theater do not come together on an anecdotal level, as do other themes and the theater, but that madness and the theater cannot avoid converging since the challenge that madness poses for the theater strikes it at its very heart, especially now, at the end of the twentieth century, when th theater's identity, function, and future have never seemed more uncertain. The parisian stage from the beginning of the twentieth century to the crisis of 1968, viewed in retrospect, is now seen as fertile ground for experimentation that only further strengthened the relationship between madness and he theater. During this whole period of time, paris remained the capital of performing arts, thus benefiting from the best of european theatrical repertories.