Celebrating the Fransaskois Voice: <i>la nouvelle dramaturgie de La Troupe du Jour</i>
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Theatre for the Fransaskois Voice Following a theatre workshop offered by the Commission culturelle fransaskoise at College Mathieu in Gravelbourg during the summer of 1984, Alphonse Gaudet, Carmen Gareau, and Michel Quirion were inspired by Claudia Gendron (Gaudet, email 3 June) to establish a French theatre company in Saskatoon (Gaudet, email 15 June). Determined to develop a fransaskois theatre which highlighted self-exploration, self-definition, selfacceptance, and self-celebration, the three created La Troupe du Jour (LTDJ) in 1985. A devised piece, Azarie (October 1985) marked the debut of what was to become the company's focus on new play development. It repositioned the language debate in Saskatchewan by investigating the cultural marginalization of elderly Fransaskois in the provincial nursing-home system (Lusignan 7). The material hit a nerve with its public; the show became an instant success. Bypassing the repertories of Quebec and France, founding members became resolute in their endeavour to bring the fransaskois experience to their public. The first season's program announced their goals: [...] le reve est faire du theatre francophone, communautaire et professionnel, qui reflete la realite fransaskoise [...]. C'est par la creation et des representations textes fransaskois que la troupe espere developper un nouveau sens theatral dans la communaute francophone. (Qtd. in Forsyth 141) They incorporated LTDJ as a non-profit company in 1985 with Gaudet as its first artistic director. The time was ripe de passer a un theatre 'fait maison' qui serait le reflet du peuple fransaskois, sa langue, ses defis, ses mythes (Bonetto 3). This paper explores two questions. The first, What defines fransaskois playwrights?, draws attention to a binary feature I refer to as dis/bislocation and re-examines the notion of minority status as it applies to French-Canadians living outside Quebec. The second, How has LTDJ cultivated fransaskois playwriting?, examines the mechanisms LTDJ has instituted to develop new work since the arrival of Denis Rouleau. Dis/Bislocation of the Fransaskois Saskatchewan's first French settlers were a heterogeneous lot, hailing from Quebec, France, Belgium, and the United States (Beaulieu par. 25). (1) Linguistically compatible despite cultural differences, they merged into an unusual minority population due to extraordinary circumstances, as Roger A. Lalonde noted in 1974: Ces gens ont ete metamorphoses par l'experience l'expatriation, par les mesures repressives contre le francais et par tous les autres evenements survenus au cours leur histoire. Tous cela faisait d'eux des > (2). (Qtd. in Beaulieu par. 25) Settlers straddled two geographies, both there in linguistic expression and social customs, and here in practice, living and negotiating the tensions in the gap between the two. LTDJ's fransaskois playwrights follow this pattern: like the first settlers, linguistic compatibility and cultural hybridity are features they share. Geographically and culturally severed from the place where their French originated (dislocation), these individuals constantly negotiate two francophonies (bislocation), the formative one from the pays d'origine which is hors contexte in the geographical present, and the current one which dynamically lives and transforms in a Saskatchewan context. Unless a fransaskois playwright is a recent transplant from Quebec or has been assimilated into Quebec culture, joual plays an inconsequential role in the linguistic idiosyncrasies found in fransaskois plays. David Baudemont writes in an idiom particular to France, specifically to Alsace where German and French cohabit; Ian C. Nelson, a Francophile originating from Nottingham, England, has adopted an Ile-de-France French distinctively coloured by French argot; Madeleine BlaisDahlem and Raoul Granger incorporate certain spoken idiosyncrasies of quebecois in their writing, but belie their Quebec origins with a standard French that occasionally is encroached upon by English constructs, such as syntax, vocabulary, and colloquial expressions. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».