Molière in Tokyo

During the conference, you attended a presentation of excerpts from L’Astrologue ou les faux présages, a play co-written with AI, the Obvious collective and the Théâtre Molière Sorbonne. As a Molière specialist, how do you view AI’s ability to recreate the language and dramaturgical mechanisms of 17th century theatre?

Keiko Enomoto: This event was designed to present the Théâtre Molière Sorbonne’s (TMS) work on reconstructing 17th century theatre to a Japanese audience, as well as its exploration of the relationship between AI and human creativity through the Molière ex Machina project.

Founded by Georges Forestier, professor emeritus at Sorbonne University, the TMS has been conducting a thorough programme of experimental archaeology since 2017 aimed to reconstruct the diction, delivery, physical performance and stage aesthetics of 17th century French theatre based on available sources. In a French theatrical landscape largely dominated by contemporary productions, this approach strikes me as essential because it allows the audience to physically experience a classical worldview that has become difficult to observe today.

When TMS brings an imaginary world to life on stage, specific to the 17th century, as spectators, we are initially struck by the presence of the classical world. I believe that the audience therefore primarily absorbed the 17th century atmosphere even before forming a critical judgement on the work. Regarding Molière’s dramaturgy, I believe, as explained by Mickaël Bouffard and Hugo Caselles-Dupré of the Obvious collective, that this project must above all be understood as an experiment aimed at better understanding the principles of Molière’s writing. Before the text took shape through a long dialogue between human and machine, the AI was not only fed his works, but also documentation on his intellectual and cultural environment. This process recalls the 16th and 17th centuries, when the appropriation of Latin models contributed to the development of French language and literature. It similarly reflects a dynamic of transformation that resonates with contemporary practices of human and AI co-creation.

How was this project, which combines theatrical heritage and AI, received in Japan? 

K.E.: Many of the participants had backgrounds in science and technology, and the questions asked were less about a literary or theatrical perspective and more about curiosity regarding AI’s ability to generate a Molière-esque dramatic universe.

The focus seemed to be primarily on the possible forms of collaboration between humans and machines, as well as on the future evolution of creative processes. This event brought together a Japanese and French audience, with a significant number of French attendees; I therefore think it is important to remain cautious before considering these reactions as representative of Japanese society as a whole. 

The conference also paid tribute to Georges Forestier, who passed away in 2024. In your view, what role do initiatives such as the TMS play in promoting Molière internationally and among younger generations today?

K.E.: Thanks to the TMS’s performances, researchers, students and enthusiasts of French theatre have been able to gain a practical insight into the method that Georges Forestier had been developing for years around 17th century theatre. This first performance by the TMS in Japan at Otsuma Women's University, as part of the conference of the Kantō branch of the Japanese Society for French Language and Literature (SJLLF), was in itself a form of tribute to his work and his spirit.

Since 2022, I have regularly attended TMS performances and was convinced that this approach would resonate in Japan. I organised their visit with that in mind. The idea was to enable Japanese audiences to experience 17th century French theatre in a sensory way. The TMS is known for their unique approach that presents the classics not merely as texts, but as an embodied experience on stage. In my view, their approach was particularly well suited to the expectations of many Japanese audiences, students, and researchers regarding Molière’s theatre. They presented it not merely as a text, but as a sensory experience that conveyed the coherence of a theatrical universe and a worldview specific to that particular era.

Furthermore, what strikes me as interesting is that the TMS does not merely seek to reconstruct the past, but also to engage with profoundly contemporary issues. I find it highly symbolic that this company, which is dedicated to recreating the vanished world of 17th century theatre, is simultaneously engaging in a dialogue with a technology as current as AI.

What kinds of collaborations currently exist between Sorbonne University alumni in Japan and Japanese academic or cultural institutions?

K.E.: To my knowledge, this was the first time the Sorbonne University alumni gathered in Japan in this format. For my part, I had organised the visit of the TMS as a Molière specialist, but I found it very interesting to see this project evolve into a forum for interaction between the university, research, cultural exchanges and the alumni network.

I also feel that the reception held on 5 March at the French Embassy helped to highlight new forms of exchange between France and Japan.

As an alumna of Sorbonne University, what do you think is the main message this play sends to an international audience regarding the relationship between French literary tradition and AI?

K.E.: In my perspective, the Molière ex Machina project is not simply a demonstration intended to show that AI could write ‘in the style of Molière’. What strikes me as essential is rather the way in which the dialogue between humans and AI allows us to reconsider the creative principles and dramaturgical mechanisms specific to Molière. Beyond the technical experimentation, this process raises more fundamental questions: what is creation? What is an author?

I also find it interesting that this collaboration with AI resonates with the creative practices of the 16th and 17th centuries, at a time when French language and literature were gradually taking shape. Imitation, translation, rewriting and dialogue with earlier works were not merely means of learning: they were directly involved in the very processes of literary creation. French literature itself built its distinctive character through such dynamics. In my opinion, the project employs contemporary technology to render visible the creative and intellectual processes that are ordinarily inaccessible to observation. It is not simply a matter of producing a text ‘in the style of Molière’, but of exploring how an author’s style can be learnt, analysed and reconstructed. In other words, making collaborative creation with AI a space for analysing the very principles of Molière’s creative process.

Of course, AI is not an autonomous creative entity: it is always human beings who choose, guide, correct and give meaning. In my view, this project aims less to determine whether AI can create literature than to question the way in which we understand classical works and the very act of creation today. For my part, it is an attempt to make visible, through a dialogue between humans and AI, creative and cognitive processes that usually remain invisible.

If an AI were ever to reinterpret a major figure from Japan’s cultural heritage, such as Chikamatsu Monzaemon, how do you think the Japanese public would react? 

K.E.: If a similar project were undertaken in Japan, focusing on an author such as Chikamatsu Monzaemon, the collaborative use of AI and human creativity in the reinterpretation or creation of works might, as in France, not be viewed entirely favourably. In Japan, great importance is attached to the figure of the author, as well as to the ways in which works are transmitted within theatrical traditions and katas (forms and codes of performance passed down through family lineages). It is also relevant to consider this point from a comparative perspective with regard to the reception of the production in France.

However, traditional Japanese arts have never been about freezing the past: kabuki, for example, is an art form based on the transmission of tradition as well as the gradual transformation over time, across audiences, society and techniques. When an actor performs a kata, their body, voice and stage presence differ from those of their predecessors. The sets, costumes, techniques and sensibilities of the audience also evolve, gradually transforming stage productions and modes of expression. Transmission therefore does not consist merely of reproducing the past, but of bringing past works to life in the present. In Japan, tradition and new technologies are not necessarily seen as opposed: some artists actively incorporate contemporary technologies or re-examine forms of performance that have been lost today.

Therefore, the issue is not so much one of rejecting AI itself. If AI is used to analyse the structures of Chikamatsu’s plays, the dialogues, the character development or the rhythm of jōruri, this could constitute an interesting scientific approach. On the other hand, the idea that AI could surpass or replace the original author would undoubtedly call for a great deal of caution.