Possibly a Better Play because a Women Wrote it?

To be honest I am one of the students in the class that are totally missing a lot of meaning in and behind these plays. But I have tried to do my best and I think it just might get better. Why? Well, there was a play titled “The Rover; or, The Banished Cavaliers”. I was very surprised that I enjoyed the play because when I read the introduction it really did not sound too different from the others. The contemporary issues that were presented are indeed forceful and because of this I thought especially I would not appreciate the play but I found that because of the attention towards women having more freedom and expression in the play made it more appealing to me. Especially the character Hellana, who I assumed would be a quite typical nun, but there was “nunthing” nun about her and I liked that and I began to see how the theatre would have played a role in establishing the progress of women’s rights and towards a better equality between men and women.

Although the characters behavior, again, was predictable, there was more substance I found because all had an important part in the play. It did appear that there was an equal stage time for the genders, which both shared similar, if not, the same problems and situations.

Another surprising theme for me was the actual violence including the ‘rapes’ in the play. When the introduction mentioned these I was not impressed at all, but I did state in other posts that the lack of action was basically annoying. So it was fun reading about the fights. The rapes I am still not too sure of, especially the last one, I think I should read it over again. I am missing something. But I think the action in the play was needed, and possibly a better play because the other plays did not have action.

In the beginning I found the play to be very “play like” in respect to its form of speaking to each other as characters and to the audience; however, I noticed, or maybe just my imagination, that later in the play it looked as if the play and characters were developing at the same time. I picked this notion up particularly on page 257, I noted that there was a sudden shift from a speaking form to a more speech like formation in the play. The style seemed more refined and elegant almost because I imagined the characters as being serous and I liked this. I am not a fan of the nonsense that occurs in the play, this one nor the one pervious, but I felt that maybe because the play was complete that possibly the characters themselves were complete.

But again, I am not good at interrupting plays from the eighteenth century. Just a few thoughts.

Question

I was hoping this was going to be addressed in class but the opportunity did not come up. So, I know it might help me and possibly some other students to know we should read the play. Reading the short introduction does not help that much and so I pose the question for example: ‘How would have the audience reacted to “The Country Wife”‘? This play is a comedy and more direct than “Marriage A La Mode with references to affairs and honourable behaviour but would have the content been shocking at all? It is a relief that such issues are being addressed publicly or would the production of the play be outrageous?

If I can understand how the audience reacted in the Eightenth Centrury I might be able to get more out of the plays.

am, [if you are wondering Willliams name is now Jeta]

Ideas before the end…

I am not done reading the whole play. I just thought I would write some ideas down before I forgot, so bare with me.

Is it just me or does this sound like the last play, Marriage A La Mode? What strikes me the most is the references to the “orange wenches at the playhouse” plus every one and everything has the “pox”. And a question- everyone in the town knows each other because they have all slept together and now Mr. Pinchwife wants to keep his wife out of site the twons people so she does not get to know the community memebrs9 he he, that is a joke). 
If I could guess what happens Mr. Horner will like and possibly do more than that if he has the chance, I bet, Mrs. Pinchwife (she seems a little out going). Plus it would be funny if he changed his morals for a women whom he should hate, like the rest of them.  Prediction first made page 100.

This ‘understands the town’ must be important not just for sexual content but possibly for satirical gestures towards the higher class because of the sexual nature included with the position (he he, another joke).

I am having troubles determining if Mrs. Pinchwife really does want to meet other men or if she is just arousing her husband, I would not put it past her or another man who she will come in contact with but I guess I am a little confused.  Because it is interesting when her husband actually tells her that a man is attracted to he: “I tell you then that one of-the lewdest fellows in Town, who saw you there, told me he was in love with you.” Why would do this? Could he possibly trust her with this information- I am willing to bet no.

Anyway, good enough for now. I must find a new name for my bunny- formally known as William Shakespeare. Why formally- he is not a he but a she.

KEBA

Marriage A La Mode: False Fires of a Fantastic Glory

Thank you for the supportive comments.

Marriage A La Mode: False Fires of a Fantastic Glory

In short: a)predictable plot and characters, b) play on words for sexual excitement, c) usual play formation with no surprises from beginning to the conclusion, d) satirical mockery of the private lives of the rich [economic separation], e) unique language structure around the characters and their personalities [importance of speech], probably so many other aspects but this is enough for now.

a) predictable plot and characters: The plot is not original but maybe it was during the Seventeenth Century. However, since it is a comedy audiences would have been laughing at the characters who were performing common behavior- sexual, devious, self deserving and, oh yes, acting to ones duty. These attributes are normal to anyone really and therefore, the contents of plot is not difficult. It would have had to been predictable for people to laugh without paying great attention to every detail.
As for the characters the men act like men and the women, well act like men too. What is interesting is how Dryden represents the women as having men qualities, such as action (the fact they do, dress like men, and say things, a lot of things) and lust (well, speaks for its self). The main female characters are humorously chaste yet under neither it all, they are just as self deserving as the men for gain/game of some sort. What I think is smart is the fact that Dryden uses “mature” adult figures so represent the hysterical lives of the rich (later discussed further down) and uses the younger couple originally from the pastoral world outside of the rich realm to represent real love in the end. Does he not?

b) play on words for sexual excitement: I could just rewrite the whole play but I wont. I am sure we have lots of favorite examples. One that stands out is when Palamede and Rhodophil are speaking about how the masquerade was established, interesting because it is like he confesses to her and tries to make it seem that is okay to do what men do, and then she tries to make it like women are always in it for love. Ha Ha! I just find it funny.

Rhodophil: I believe it was invented first by some jealous lover to discover the haunts of his jilting mistress or perhaps by some distressed servant to gain an opportunity with a jealous man’s wife.

Palamede: No, it must be the invention of a women: it has so much subtlety and love in it.

c) usual play formation with no surprises from beginning to the conclusion: I do not know about anyone else but nothing surprised me other than nothing happened. Kind of a disappointment. I think the audience would have enjoyed a little action.

d) satirical mockery of the private lives of the rich [economic separation]: The private lives of the rich and famous are now exposed to be laughed and mocked at by everyone. Who would not see this play? It is always nice to see that “they” the people we work for and hand all our money to are just dirty like us “lower ground dwellers”. Ironic that the sane characters in the play are the servants who actually use rational to herd the cattle. I mean the people they are loyal to.

e) unique language structure around the characters and their personalities [importance of speech]: This is were it would have been really handy to know French. Wow, I will admit, I think I lost a lot of meaning throughout the play because I was to lazy to look up the words. So I know it is important because Dryden uses the distinction of language throughout the play but I think I will wait to see if anyone brings it up in class.

So there are just a few thoughts. I guess I am more concerned about the gender roles and how they are similarly represented yet the traditional gender roles still apply. Weird, but I think I will read Alan’s blog to find out.

Thanks.
am

Note: Blog Virgin

This is my first blog like a few of you in the class, so this is all new to me as well.

I will admit that this class will be a difficult one for me personally. Sometimes students leave one particular course for the very end well, Restoration Drama is it for me. However, I get to do something new, read what other students are thinking and sharing, and learn from the whole experience. But since I am new at this I will take any advice I can get, so feel free to give comments (especially spelling and my terrible syntax). Just do not throw by blog against a wall please. I am trying.

am