Final Exam: This Friday @ 9:00

REMEMBER that our final exam is this Friday @ 9:00 (it's scheduled for 8:00, but I thought it was nicer to push it back to 9 because of the ice and the ungodly hour!).  The study guide for the exam can be found in the post below.  DO NOT bring any books to the exam--it's a closed book exam.  It shouldn't be tricky, however--if you did the work and came to class (which not everyone did!) you will do fine. 

I also want to do my annual Brit I book raffle, where I give out free British-themed books to a few members of class.  It's a simple 'thank you' for taking the course and making it one of the most valuable teaching experiences I've had at ECU.  Honestly, I loved teaching this course and will miss it incredibly next semester.  I appreciate all the hard work and enthusiasm!

See you on Friday... 

Extra Credit Questions: 2007 Adaptation of Northanger Abbey

This film is an excellent adaptation (though taking certain liberties) of Austen’s early novel, which was written in 1798 along with the first versions of Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility (then entitled First Impressions and Elinor and Marianne).  However, she revised the work in 1815 and changed it a bit, much as she did the other two works (which were more heavily revised).  That said, it represents an important transition from the world of wit and satire to the world of Romance and Gothic excess, which Austen parodies in Catherine Morland’s reading habits.  However, like Sense and Sensibility, Austen gives us satire from a woman’s point of view, and offers us unique insight into the “little” world of domestic concerns that few men could be bothered to take notice of. 

Answer TWO of the following…

1.         Though Austen doesn’t take us to the streets of London or the depths of Otranto, we do see the very real world of Bath, a notorious social center of the time.  How does Austen’s ‘tour’ of Bath offer a satire of the people, manners, and aims of high society as rich as anything in The Way of the World?  Be specific and cite an actual scene (or dialogue) from the film. 

2.         In the opening chapter of Northanger Abbey, Austen’s narrator admits that “[Catherine] never could learn or understand any thing before she was taught; and sometimes not even then, for she was often unattentive, and occasionally stupid.”  The film, too, shows Catherine as a somewhat unremarkable and not at all ‘wise’ at first.  Why do you think Austen creates such a untypical heroine?  How does this play into some of the themes of the book/film, as well as her taste in novels? 

3.         Why does General Tilney throw Catherine so unceremoniously out of his home?  What is her “crime”?  Why might his actions have seemed more ‘Gothic’ at the time than they do today?  What were the repercussions for Catherine, being sent home without a coach or a servant…and what fate might have awaited her once she got home? 

4.         How does the movie (like the book itself) seem to be a satire on novels in general?  What kind of novels does Catherine and her friends read, and why might reading, when done without sense/education, lead to trouble?  Additionally, how might this relate to our own times—to women (and men, perhaps) who read indiscriminately and view the world accordingly? 

Final Exam Study Guide

This is a relatively brief, but comprehensive exam covering all the works in class.  You may not bring your books to class or any notes.  The goal of the exam is simply to see how much you read and understood during our collective journey through the class.  Remember, a survey class like this one is designed to help you see how literature is informed by history and culture, and the relationship of one work to another as we move from the earliest ages of English literature to the late 18^th century.  For that reason, I want to see if you were able to make these connections and see the ‘family tree’ of British literature. 

The Exam will have 3 Parts:

PART I: Passages—a short passage from each work in class, which you will have to label by author, work, and the significance of the scene (in other words, what is happening here and why did I choose it?).  I will not give you the names of the authors or the books, so you should keep these in your memory.   

PART II: Art and Literature—I will have a painting on the screen which you will have to connect to a specific work and explain the connection between the two.  For example, what is each one doing, how do they relate to their specific moment in history, and how does the art help read the novel (or the reverse)? 

PART III: A ‘Big Picture’ Question—a question which asks how British literature fits into some aspect of modern culture, the modern high school/college curriculum, or simply into a study of human behavior/society in general.  You will be expected to draw from a few works in your answer. 

FINAL EXAM DATE: Friday, December 13^th @ 9:00

NOTE: All revisions of papers are due on this date as well.  Bring them to the exam at the latest, though I would prefer them even before this if possible.  You cannot turn in any revisions after the exam, nor can you revise a paper you didn’t turn in during the original due date. 

For Monday: Early Views & Modern Views of S & S

FORGOT TO POST!  You can turn this in any time this week...

For Monday: Early Views & Modern Views of Sense and Sensibility (pp.313-333)

·         Unsigned Review (Feb.1812)

·         Unsigned Review (May 1812)

·         Pollock, from British Novelists (1860)

·         Anonymous, from Miss Austen (1866)

·         Meynell, from The Classic Novelist (1894)

·         Farrer, from Jane Austen (1917)

·         Fergus, First Publication (1991)

Answer TWO of the following…

1. What qualities do both the 1812 reviews agree on in their first reading of Sense and Sensibility?  In general, how do both ‘read’ the novel, and do we generally agree with this assessment today?  Is there anything one or both miss or avoid that we discussed in class as an essential part of the work?  (Note that neither review knew Jane Austen’s identity—the title page originally said “By a Lady”). 

2. In the late Victorian era, when Jane Austen began to become famous, there was a notable shift in how she was read—and what she was appreciated for.  Alice Meynell typifies this when she writes that “Miss Austen’s art and her matter are made for one another.  Miss Austen’s art is not of the highest quality; it is of an admirable secondary quality” (321).  What qualities do Meynell—and others—find somewhat inferior or ‘second rate,’ and how might Austen’s own ‘sensibility’ be called into question as an author? 

3. Reginald Farrer writes that “But its tremendous successors set up a standard besides which ‘Sense and Sensibility’ is bound to appear grey and cool; nobody will choose this as his favourite Jane Austen, whereas each one of the others has its fanatics who prefer it above all the rest” (324).  How does Farrer make this claim in his article, and how might the other writers support the idea that S & S is somehow lacking or formative of the ‘real’ Austen?  Did her contemporaries feel the same way?

4. According to Jan Fergus’ essay, how did Austen feel about Sense and Sensibility and her writing in general?  Remember that, according to her nieces and nephews, she was ashamed of writing and kept all of it hidden (indeed, she scarcely even read poetry around them!).  What picture of Austen, the writer, emerges from this carefully constructed historical account of her publications? 

For Wednesday/Friday: Sense and Sensibility, Chs.V-XIV

Answer TWO of the following…

1. Clarie Tomalin, in her biography of Jane Austen, quotes a letter from Austen’s mother to her new daughter-in-law:  “I look forward to you as a real comfort to me in my old age, when Cassandra is gone into Shropshire & Jane—the Lord knows where!”  This suggests, perhaps, that her mother didn’t know what to make of her or what to do with her wayward daughter.  In general, Jane Austen had a rocky relationship with her mother and mothers don’t come off very well in her novels, much less in Sense and Sensibility.  Discuss the role of mothers in these final chapters, and how Austen defines the difference between a good and bad, or perhaps effective or ineffective, mother.  Note—think of all the mothers in the novel, not just Elinor and Marianne’s. 

2. One of the most interesting scenes in the novel is the reappearance of Willoughby and his conversation with Elinor on a “dark and stormy night.”  Though this may have turned into a Gothic event, Austen brings it somewhere else entirely.  What is the purpose of this scene to your reading of the novel?  Is it simply a way to “rescue” him from his Gothic devilry?  How does Elinor react to his speech, and how does it affect her feelings toward Marianne’s future relationship with Colonel Brandon? 

3. Elinor’s mother, reflecting on the match between Marianne and Colonel Brandon, notes that “the Colonel’s manners…their gentleness, their genuine attention to other people, and their manly, unstudied simplicity is much more accordant with her real disposition, than the liveliness—often artificial, and often ill-timed, of the other [Willoughby]” (240).  Do you agree with this assessment of the match between Marianne an Brandon?  Does Elinor?  Why do you think Brandon decided to marry her instead of Elinor?  How might Austen comment on this match in the novel’s closing pages?

4. Related to the above, how is Elinor and Edward’s ultimate match a satisfying or convenient one?  Is she settling for a man who, though he loved her, was unable to sacrifice his sense for his sensibility?  Or is he the man more “accordant” with Elinor’s beliefs and character?  Should she have married Brandon?  Does Austen want to frustrate our desires as readers, or is she seeking to satisfy the demands of her age?

For Monday: Sense and Sensibility, Chs.11-Ch.4 (Vol.3) & Paper #3

NOTE: For Monday, there are no questions--just read up to Ch.4 of Volume III of Sense and Sensibility.  An in-class writing will probably await you!  The Paper #3 assignment follows:

Paper #3: A Sense of Sensibility 

Choose ONE of the following options...

1. Discuss how contemporary audiences understood or tried to make sense of both Otranto and Sense and Sensibility.  How did the reviewers/critics represent the aesthetic values of the time, and how did each work fit into this?  Examine the reviews I gave you in class on Walpole and Sir Walter Scott’s Introduction, as well as the “Early Views” of Sense and Sensibility on pages 313-324.  Were these works very much of their time—or were the considerably ahead of their time?  In what ways?  Also, are there qualities and/or characters we admire that Austen and Walpole’s age was oblivious to? 

2. In the excerpt from Raymond Williams on “Sensibility,” he writes that “It is a very difficult word, both in its senses and variations within this historical period, and in its relations within the very complicated group of words centered on sense” (333).  Using his various definitions of sensibility, explain how both The Castle of Otranto and Sense and Sensibility explore and define this ambiguous term.  How does sensibility frame the plot, the characters, and the very philosophy of the work itself?  What makes them full of “sensibility,” and do the works complement or contradict each other? 

3. In Deborah Kaplan’s essay, “Mass Marketing Jane Austen,” she notes that “Neither of the recent films suggests that female friendships are sufficient to sustain an alternative emotional life for heroines without men...[but] The presentation of women’s relationships is more complex in Sense and Sensibility.  The filmmakers were concerned that the film not seem to be about “a couple of women waiting around for men”” (408-409).  Watch one of the versions of Sense and Sensibility, either the Ang Lee 1995 version, or the more recent 2007 Andrew Davies/BBC production.  Discuss how Sense and Sensibility is “marketed” to a modern audience.  What remains, what changes, and whose story do we ultimately get?   As you write this, discuss why you think these changes were made, and if sometimes, a change is necessary to preserve a “truth” of the novel.  (Please avoid merely giving a thumbs-up or thumbs-down movie review)

REQUIREMENTS

·        At least 4-5 pages, double spaced

·        At least 2-3 secondary sources; you must use an essay or essays from the Norton edition of Sense and Sensibility

·        A true conversation between you, the novels, and other sources; don’t simply have a monologue where you say what you liked and disliked about the books

·         Due MONDAY, DECEMBER 2^nd by 5pm (you can turn it in earlier if you want more time to revise it, of course)

For Wednesday: Austen's Sense and Sensibility, Chs.3-10 (pp.109-155)

Answer TWO of the following:

1. Sense and Sensibility was originally an epistolary novel entitled Elinor and Marianne, which Austen revised thoroughly to suit a more 19^th century taste in the early eighteen teens. However, these chapters contain several letters which were probably part of the original text.  What is the purpose of including letters between the characters, and how does it affect what we read, and how we see, this part of the story? 

2. In some ways, Sense and Sensibility is Austen’s most Gothic novel, as it contains secrets, scandals, and seduction unknown in her other works.  How do these Gothic elements (which may have been much stronger in the original version) cohere with the rest of the novel?  Do they seem out of place?  Or are they Austen’s attempt to hint at the darker world behind the facade of Enlightenment manners (remember Goya’s maxim: the sleep of reason produces monsters!). 

3. In William Deresiewicz’s book, A Jane Austen Education, he writes, “For Austen, before you can fall in love with someone else, you have to come to know yourself.  In other words, you have to grow up.  Love isn’t going to magically transform you, make you into a better or even a different person...it can only work with what you already are” (220). How does this apply to Marianne specifically?  In what ways does she not know herself, or expect to be transformed by love?  How does this account for her tremendous disappointment in London?

4. How does society respond to the Marianne/Willoughby affair?  Does the extended family (Lady Middleton, Miss Jennings, the Palmers) become more full of ‘feeling’ here, or do they remain a largely comic or satirical backdrop?  Is Marianne or Willoughby more censured for their behavior?  What does this say about the ‘way of the world’  in Austen’s day?

For Monday: Sense and Sensibility, pp.57-109 (approximately)

No questions for Monday, but keep reading to around Ch.2 or 3 of Volume II.  I'll give you an in-class question to respond to based on some event or theme in these chapters.  You can also expect Paper #3 next week as well, for those of you who have to write it! 

See you in a few days...

For Friday: Austen's Sense and Sensibility, Chs.1-15 (pp.5-56)

Answer TWO of the following…

1. How does the novel (at least in the opening chapters) dramatize the late eighteenth-century debate of reason over emotion, or sense vs. sensibility?  What view does Austen (or the narrator) seem to take on the subject?  Cite a specific passage in support of your reading.

2. Where do we see Austen, the satirist, at work in these early chapters?  Though her work is classified more with the Romantics and Victorians, Austen was a child of the Enlightenment—and had read Tom Jones, The Way of the World, and many similar works.  What characters offer us a satirical insight into English manners, customs, and conventional opinions? 

3. Unlike many conventional romances or novels, Austen’s men are rarely romanticized—and indeed, seem to hover very close to the ground.  In describing Edward Ferrars, she writes, “[he] was not recommended to their good opinion by any particular graces of person or address.  He was not handsome, and his manners required intimacy to make them pleasing” (14).  Why do you think her men lack this dashing, romantic character—even the potential love interests? 

4. Though Sense and Sensibility is not a gothic novel, it follows many of Walpole’s ideas about sensibility and the blending of reality and romance.  What scenes or events might owe something to Walpole’s example, particularly regarding feeling and sympathy?  Are Elinor and Marianne descendants of Mathilda and Isabella? 

For Monday: Early Reviews of The Castle of Otranto

The Afterlife of Otranto: Read “Sir Walter Scott’s Introduction” (pp.3-15)

Answer TWO of the following…

1. Many early reviews of Otranto—though initially laudatory—became critical when Walpole revealed himself as the author.  According to one review from May 1765,

“It is, indeed, strange, that an Author, of a refined and polished genius, should be an advocate for re-establishing the barbarous superstitions of Gothic devilism!...Under the same banner he attempts to defend all the trash of Shakespeare, and what that great genius evidently threw out as a necessary sacrifice to that idol, the blind multitude.” 

Based on your reading, what is this critic referring to, and what might have struck him as so “devilish” that only makes us smile today?  How might this review reflect the aesthetics of the Enlightenment which Walpole, and others, were striving to correct in their works? 

2. Sir Walter Scott, in his famous 1811 Introduction to the work, writes that “Romantic narrative is of two kinds—that which, being in itself possible may be a matter of belief at any period; and that which, though held impossible by more enlightened ages, was yet consonant with the faith of earlier times.  The subject of the Castle of Otranto is of the latter class” (10).  Why does Scott feel that only the “latter class” is worthy of Romantic narrative, and how does he compare the novels of Mrs. Radcliffe (who wrote the more famous Gothic novel, The Mysteries of Udolpho) unfavorably to Walpole? 

3. Clara Reeve, who wrote her own version of Otranto set in England, The Old English Baron (1778), criticized Walpole for his Gothic excesses.  As she writes, “the reason is so obvious, the machinery is so violent, that it destroys the effect it is intended to excite.  Had the story been kept within the utmost verge of probability, the effect had been preserved, without losing the least circumstance that excites or detains the attention.”  Do modern readers read the book like Reeve—is it too much, too improbable, too silly?  Or does her critique also reflect the prude temper of Enlightenment taste? 

4. Scott, as a Romantic writer, felt that Otranto was a seminal work that laid the foundation for much of the Romantic movement.  How does he use Otranto as a kind of historical specimen for the “change” that was in the air in the mid-18^th century?  To this end, does he think Otranto is more important as a work of literature or a work of history; in other words, should we respect it or love it? 

For Wednesday: The Castle of Otranto: Preface to the First & Second Edition (17-25), and Chapters 1-2

Answer TWO of the following…

1. Walpole engaged in a cunning act of Gothic marketing in the Preface to the First Edition, writing that “Belief in every kind of prodigy was so established in those dark ages, than an author would not be faithful to the manners of the times, who should omit all mention of them” (18).  How does the First Preface try to ‘frame’ the story to the reader, and considering that this is a fraud, why did he feel it was necessary to make the story a work of the ‘dark ages’? 

2. The Castle of Otranto, as discussed in class, was riding the wave of the ‘sensibility’ movement, which was all about the expression of strong emotions of love, pity, awe, joy, and terror.  How does sensibility color the narrative, either in the emotions of the characters, or the twists and turns of the story itself?  You might also consider how it supports Goya’s maxim that “the sleep of reason produces monsters.” 

3. As the Preface to the Second Edition informs us, Shakespeare was a major influence on Walpole’s novel.  Where do we see the Shakespearean influence (perhaps more his plays than his Sonnets)?  For example, Shakespeare modeled most of his plays on old histories or romances, yet modernized them for his audience.  How might Walpole be doing much the same thing?  Are there other links between Walpole’s characters, situations, themes, or language?  Consider specific works of Shakespeare you have encountered—Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, King Lear, Othello, etc. 

4. In Chapter II, Jerome (the monk) is hiding Isabella from Manfred’s lecherous intent.  Manfred orders Jerome to give her up with the statement, “I am her parent…and demand her” (53).  Why might we consider The Castle of Otranto a work about the relationship between parents and children, or perhaps the older and younger generation?  How does this theme run through the first two chapters, and create moments of Gothic anxiety about filial obligations—and in the passage quoted here, even a hint of incest?  (Freudian scholars have a lot to say about this work!) 

For Monday: Sensibility and the Gothic

For Monday's class, I'll give you an introduction to the movement of sensibility that swept through England and Europe in the mid 18th-century, and also gave rise to the Gothic movement, as instigated by Horace Walpole's novel, The Castle of Otranto.  We will start discussing that novel for Wednesday's class, so you can expect questions on Monday.

Monday will also be the absolute last day you can turn in Paper #2 for credit (though you will lose 20 points).  After that, you'll get a zero.  Remember, if you didn't turn in Paper #1 you must do Paper #2.  Otherwise you will fail the course.  Please e-mail me with questions/concerns.

See you next week!

For Monday: Fielding's Tom Jones (the BBC series, that is)

Another slight change of plan: instead of jumping right into the Gothic movement and The Castle of Otranto, I decided to give you the week to work hard on your Paper #2 (due on FRIDAY, revised date)!  Also, I won't be able to teach on Friday, since I'll be returning from a literary conference in Tulsa.  So as a way of connecting back to The Way of the World, I want to watch some scenes from the BBC's adaptation of Henry Fielding's classic 18th-century novel, Tom Jones.  Though we don't have time to read it (it's over 800 pages long!), even from the film we'll see numerous connections to the play, and you can better imagine the world Mirabell, Mrs. Fainall, and Miss Millamant lived in.

See you tomorrow...

For Wednesday: Congreve, The Way of the World, Act V

Answer TWO of the following...

1. Why do Mirabell/ Millamant/ Mrs.Fainall win in the end?  Are they the ‘moral’ group as opposed to Mrs. Marwood/Mr.Fainall?  Have they been more real or authentic throughout the play—or simply at the end?  In short, are we rooting for them throughout, and is this ending satisfying (does it give us the expected happy ending)?  Or is it almost arbitrary who wins and who loses? 

2. Though Lady Wishfort is initially a farcical character, how does Congreve make her a sympathetic—and even tragic—figure by the Final Act?  Examine a scene that might show her as more than the butt of a sex joke, and why we (and perhaps Mirabell?) might pity her. 

3. In the very last scene, Witwoud remarks, “what, are you all got together, like players at the end of the last act?” (75). This act of ‘unmasking’ reminds us that everything has finally been revealed: not only the actor/character’s ‘true’ faces, but the unmasking of plots, alliances, and legal documents.  How do you think the Final Act ‘unmasks’ Congreve’s satirical and/or moral message?  If none of this is real, what is “real” about the play—and the people in it?  What should we take away after the final curtain? 

4. As suggested earlier, the servants have a much larger role in late 17^th century society than their masters realized—or at least dared to admit.  How do the servants (Foible, Waitwell, Mincing) help create the ‘happy ending’ of this play, and in a large degree, control who wins and who loses?  Are the servants more ‘moral’ than their masters, or are they simply available to the highest bidder? 

For Monday: Congreve's The Way of the World, Act Four

NOTE: Only one question this time, but with a purpose: it serves as pre-writing for Option #2 of Paper #2 (if you choose to pursue it).

Act Four, Scene I contains possibly the most famous Restoration ‘love scene,’ where Mirabell woos Millamant and she (reluctantly?) accepts his proposal.  Consider how this passage should be staged in a modern performance: how can you bring out the wit, satire, and personalities under the mask?  In your response, analyze pages 50-53 and discuss how you ‘read’ individual lines and ideas.  How would you want your actors to interpret them—and the audience to understand them?  What does this dialogue reveal about the spirit of the times and the meaning of the play? 

In other words, do a close reading of this passage to help bring out the ideas and characterizations that you feel would help an actor ‘see’ his or her role.  What lines are especially important and reveal more than what they initially seem?  Where might we also see each character peeking from behind their mask to reveal themselves as they truly are?  How can you show us this in a performance?

Paper #2: Due October 25th (new due date)!

Option #1: The Sonnet Drama

I want you to arrange, edit, and shape the Sonnets into a short play for one or more actors.  To do this, you have to consider what ‘story’ you want to tell with the Sonnets, and how you can pick and choose (or even edit) sonnets to tell this story.  Ideally, you only want to use between 10-12 sonnets.  You should create an actual playscript which uses the sonnets as a monologue (or dialogue, or trialogue!) with stage directions, etc.  Consider if you want to use the entire sonnet, only part of it, or have different people speak different sonnets or different parts of a sonnet.  However you do it, by reading your drama, we should have a sense of a story unfolding, characters interacting with each other (even if the other characters are off-stage) and some kind of resolution: is this a tragedy, comedy, or something in-between? 

In addition, you must act as a ‘dramaturg,’ which is someone who works with a theatrical production to explain history, culture, and language to the actors.  To do this, your drama will be accompanied by a 4-5 page paper which explains why you chose the sonnets you did, how you read/understand them, and how the language advances a specific story.  Again, we might not ‘see’ this story without your analysis, so be very specific and show us exactly what you see in the language.  You should have at least 2 outside sources to help you read/interpret the Sonnets—and we have many resources in our library, such as Helen Vendler’s and Mark Mirsky’s excellent books on the sonnets (but don’t forget about JSTOR!). 

Option #2: The Battle of the Sexes

You are a ‘dramaturg,’ which is someone who works with a theatrical production to explain history, culture, and language to the actors.  Oklahoma Shakespeare In the Park has hired you to prepare a new version of The Way of the World for its audience—an audience, mind you, that knows very little about late 17^th century drama!  Your task is to ‘modernize’ the play for 2013 audiences without changing anything substantial about the play.  The words and the characters must remain the same, but you can stage it however you like—in 1920’s Chicago, etc.—to help us ‘see’ the relationships and ideas in the play.  Consider what will lessen the ‘period drama’ sting of the work and help us appreciate the comedy and the satire of Congreve’s language. 

Your paper should to do 3 main things: (1) explain how you intend to stage the play and what ‘ideas’ you hope the play should exhibit; (2) how we should read/portray specific actors in the play—help us understand who they are and how they relate to their historical period; and (3) close read 2 pivotal scenes so we understand how to act them and why they are important to the period and to the drama itself.  You should have at least 2 outside sources to help you read/interpret the play which you can find either in our library or on JSTOR, etc. 

REQUIREMENTS

·         For the Sonnet Drama: at least 10-12 Sonnets in a playscript, plus a 4-5 page dramaturgical paper

·         For the Congreve Production: at 4-5 page dramaturgical paper

·         At least 2 outside sources for both papers

·         Analysis, close reading, and specific ideas: avoid summary and losing your own voice in the paper—show us what you see and think

·         DUE FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25th 

For those who read the blog...

ALSO, for those interested, I've posted a link (on the right side of the screen) to my recently published Kindle-only novel, The Count of the Living Death.  I post it here because it relates to much of what we're reading in class: you can find references from Beowulf, The Sonnets, The Way of the World, and Sense and Sensibility.  It's a Young Adult 'fantasy' novel that is inspired by many of my own favorite books and themes, and anyone leaving Brit I will realize how and why I wrote it.  Feel free to read it--it only costs 99 cents to download, or you can borrow it--and 'grade' me for once!  I promise not to cry! :)

For Friday: Congreve's The Way of the World, Act Three...

There are no questions for Friday; instead, read Act Three and I'll give you an in-class writing response when you arrive in class. 

DON'T FORGET TO RECITE YOUR SONNET BY 3:00 TOMORROW (when I leave the office to pick up my kids)!!!

For Wednesday: Congreve's The Way of the World, Act Two

2012 Production of WOTW, Chichester Main Theatre 

Answer TWO of the following...

1.  If the first act shows us how society men think of women, in Act Two, how do society women think of men?  What ‘wit’ and satire do they share with themselves over men’s behavior and manners—or the institution of marriage itself?

2. How does Act Two play on the idea of masks and acting?  Part of the fun of this play is that the actors are playing people who are also playing roles with each other.  Who is acting and why?  How do we know this—and who else knows it?

3. On page 23, Mirabell says that “beauty is the lover’s gift; ‘tis he bestows your charms—your glass is all a cheat,” which echoes Sonnet 22, 113 (and many others) which claim that the lover sees his love in the mirror rather than himself.  Mrs. Millamant (unlike the Sonnets) is allowed to respond to this and they have an argument about it; what does she say and how might this be a woman’s response to Shakespeare’s claims about love? 

4. Discuss the conversation between Fainall and Mrs. Marwood on pages 16-19.  How does this scene play with the idea of being true/false as well as the tortured relationship of love in seventeenth century London.  What echoes of the Sonnets might we find here, too? 

For Monday: Congreve's The Way of the World, Act One

 Answer TWO of the following:

1. The names of the characters in The Way of the World (like most Restoration comedies) reflect the type of person they are; for example, “Fainall” means “feign all,” and “Wishfort” means “Wish for it [sex].”   What other elements in Act One seem to suggest that these are satirical characters in a Hogarth painting (for example) rather than a portrait of “real” life?

2. Examine Mirabell’s speech on page 5, where he begins, “And for a discerning man, somewhat too passionate a lover; for I like her with all her faults,; nay, like her for her faults.”  How might this passage echo some of the “Dark Lady” sonnets that we discussed on Wednesday?  What might this say about the nature of Mirabell’s love for Millamant?

3. Witwoud and Petulant (note their names) are the Laurel and Hardy (or more relevant comedy duo) of this play: both are buffoonish, improper, and completely crass.  How does Congreve satirize certain aspects of his society—and particularly, upper-class society—through their pretensions and prattle? 

4. Most current TV sitcoms or comedy shows (such as Saturday Night Live, etc.) rely on up-to-the-minute references and satire for their jokes.   In 10 years, few of these jokes will get the same kind of laughs, and in 20 years they will fall on completely deaf ears. The Way of the World is, in a way, a sparkling British sitcom, full of the same satire and cultural references.  Focus on a short passage that you feel is mean to be funny but somehow isn’t: what doesn’t translate?  What words, ideas, or references don’t tickle your funny bone?  Can you make sense of it through a close reading—or does it remain an exhibit in the Museum of Retired Comedy?