o be or not to be Molière: that is the latest 
            question wreaking havoc among French academics. 
            In "Corneille in the Shadow of Molière," a book recently 
            published in France, Dominique Labbé, a specialist in what is known 
            as lexical statistics, claims that he has solved a "fascinating 
            scientific enigma" by determining that all of Molière's masterpieces 
            — "Le Tartuffe", "Dom Juan," "Le Misanthrope," "L'Avare" — were in fact the work 
            of Pierre Corneille, the revered tragedian and acclaimed author of 
            "Le Cid." 
            "There is such a powerful convergence of clues that no doubt is 
            possible," Mr. Labbé said. The centerpiece of his supposed discovery 
            is that the vocabularies used in the greatest plays of Molière and 
            two comedies of Corneille bear an uncanny similarity. According to 
            Mr. Labbé, all these plays share 75 percent of their vocabulary, an 
            unusually high percentage.
            
            Mr. Labbé's claim has upset more than the insular world of 
            scholars. In the French collective consciousness, Molière is 
            perceived as something of a national Shakespeare. Written in large 
            part for Louis XIV and his court, Molière's comedies instantly 
            became symbols of French culture thanks to their extraordinary 
            dramatic range and extensive popular and scholarly appeal. As Joan 
            Dejean, a professor of 17th-century French literature at the 
            University of Pennsylvania, explained, Mr. Labbé is trying to debunk 
            a national myth. "Molière is the so-called greatest author of the 
            French tradition, so there are significant stakes if you undermine 
            that," Ms. Dejean said.
            Throughout the wickedly hot French summer, newspaper columnists, 
            television commentators and radio shows have been debating Mr. 
            Labbé's heretical claim. 
            Mr. Labbé isn't the first to call Molière's genius a masquerade. 
            Throughout the 20th century, a French poet named Pierre Louys and several amateur literati made similar allegations drawn 
            from lists of linguistic and biographic concurrences. In the wake of 
            these shaky exercises in literary sleuthing, Mr. Labbé contends he 
            has infallible statistical evidence of Corneille's "fingerprints" 
            all over Molière's greatest works. 
            As early as December 2001, Mr. Labbé published an article on the 
            topic in the Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, which he later 
            developed in "Corneille in the Shadow of Molière." His conclusions 
            are based on a statistical tool called "intertextual distance" and 
            developed by his son, Cyril Labbé, a teacher in applied mathematics 
            who claims to have tested the method on thousands of different 
            texts.
            This method measures the overall difference in vocabulary between 
            two texts by determining the relative difference in the occurrence 
            of words. Thus, the lower the number, the more likely that the works 
            are from the same author.
            And the Labbés concluded that — in 16 plays by Molière — the 
            lexical distance with two early comedies by Corneille is 
            sufficiently close to zero to prove that the texts are indeed 
            written by the same hand. They felt especially encouraged in their 
            conclusions by the fact that Molière and Corneille once collaborated 
            publicly on "Psyché," a "comédie-ballet" composed in 1671. 
            According to Mr. Labbé, the motive for a covert collaboration is 
            clear: Corneille wanted money and Molière fame. Immediately, 
            scholars of all stripes reacted vehemently, portraying Mr. Labbé as 
            a charlatan chasing an improbable literary scoop. And Mr. Labbé 
            himself defensively admitted: "I am mostly a statistician and barely 
            a literary critic at all. And I am certainly not a specialist of the 
            17th century." 
            And that's the problem, said Georges Forestier, an authority at 
            the Sorbonne on 17th-century theater: "Statisticians like Labbé 
            think they have found the ultimate tool to determine authorship, and 
            they use it to aggrandize their position in the field." In his eyes, 
            a strictly scientific approach to authorship is dangerously 
            revisionist, because it omits the textual analysis. "Statistics," 
            Mr. Forestier explained, "should be used only as an auxiliary to 
            complement literary analysis and historical data." 
            Indeed, at the heart of this debate lies a more fundamental 
            question about the use and abuse of scientific tools in the field of 
            letters. Jean-Marie Viprey, a researcher in lexical statistics and 
            literature at the University of Besançon in France, accuses Mr. 
            Labbé of using the veneer of statistical analysis and computer 
            sciences to fool laymen into taking a ludicrous conceit for a 
            groundbreaking discovery. Mr. Viprey takes apart the very principles 
            on which the Labbés have operated.