Man of Mode

The introduction to my version of The Man of Mode discusses the various characters who have been thought to represent real-life figures (Dorimant as the Earl of Rochester, etc.). It then suggests that the importance of this representation lies in “the way in which they emphasize the closeness of the play to the Restoration "beau monde." What exactly is the beau monde? And, was this type of character parallel typical in Restoration drama? Would the audience have understood the connections at the time?

In Act III scene ii, Harriet and Busy discuss female “powdering, painting, and patching,” sparked by Harriet’s refusal to let Busy fix her hair and Busy’s mention of a Lady Dapper who, by opposite, is obsessively particular about her looks. Busy admits that Dapper is “too pretending,” while Harriet compares a woman who pretends beauty to a man who pretends wit. Is there a female “fop” figure? And, if so, is Harriet touching on a typical aspect of that character?

Witty Title

To what extent are Mrs. Loveit and Harriet a new type of woman in The Man of Mode? Mrs. Loveit does not simply let go of Dorimant but seeks out Flutter’s assistance, even though she hates him. She leaves on her own, cursing the rest of the play. Harriet refuses Dorimant’s advances until the end of the play. Both women act without the consent of men and seem independent. As such, does this play herald a new beginning of “woman” in this time period?

Is Man of Mode typical of restoration drama? Is the superficial subjects, numerous characters of “ill-repute” and “whorish” nature standard? Just wondering…

Man of Mode II

In one scene, the titular hero, Sir Fopling, wishes Dorimant to study himself dancing in a reflection of a mirror: "Why hast not thou a glass hung up here? A room is the dullest thing without one [... and] correct the errors of his motions and his dress" (IV.ii). But Dorimant considers it a "shadow of himself." What might this illuminate the larger issue of international style and cosmopolitan foppery? Alongside my previous question, how might the quotations from English poems complicate this relationship?

Man of Mode I

In Etherege's play, characters quote and appropriate poems and songs for various purposes, but often as a way of providing a witty aphorism that carries some sort of "authority." The original context of Edmund Waller's nationalistic poem "On the War with Spain," for instance, is quite different than the intertextual work it's being put to at the start of the play. How does this use of intertextuality work alongside the themes of foppery, courtship, and internationality?

The Man of Mode

1. The Man of Mode exhibits more female suspicion of the “hero” than plays previously read in this class. We see this suspicion especially through the character of Bellinda. After witnessing Dorimant’s poor treatment of Mrs. Loveit, Bellinda begins to fear that he will one day treat her the same way. She decides to pursue him anyway, but before becoming deeply involved in an affair with him, she makes him promise not to see Mrs. Loveit except in public, and announces that she refuses to see him for another fortnight. Seeing Dorimant at Loveit’s house shortly thereafter, Bellinda learns the relatively easy way that he is a false lover. Bellinda has averted the catastrophe that befalls such women as Angellica of The Rover. How does this evident suspicion on the part of the female conquests affect our reading of this play (especially as opposed to our reading of plays such as The Rover or The Country Wife in which Willmore and Horner successfully charm and dupe their conquests without triggering the blatant suspicion, uneasiness and even loyalty tests that we see in The Man of Mode)? What is the effect of the difference in gender dynamics between plays? What should we make of the fact that even with this difference, Harriet still remains fairly unsuspicious and marries Dorimant much as Hellena marries Willmore?
2. Early in the play, love/marriage and religion are repeatedly and critically compared. Medley states: “I confess I am but of an untoward constitution, apt to have doubts and scruples; and in love they are no less distracting than in religion. Were I so near marriage, I should cry out by fits as I ride in my coach, ‘Cuckold, cuckold!’ with no less fury than the mad fanatic does ‘Glory!’ in Bethlem” (1.1). Love/marriage and religion are presented as equal sources of anxiety, insecurity, and even madness. What does this interrogation of two such “sacred” institutions say for assumptions about love/marriage and religion? What is Etherege doing by presenting this seemingly sacrilegious comparison? How does the placement of this comparison early in the play set the mood and response of the audience to the following love/marriage plots? Meanwhile, religion is hardly mentioned again in later acts. What is it doing here?

Class Business

Is there a considerable shift in the class relations/tensions between the plays we've read before and The Man of Mode? From what I can remember, comments surrounding class-specific behavior, appearance, and modes of expression were previously introduced by and aimed toward those of a similar class - generally upper - poking fun at one another for appearing of a lower class, reminding them of when they were so, or that they can easily become so. Even comments directed at a social inferior seemed to have less severity than they do in this play. What seems to me to mark the difference is, for the earlier plays, a fear or anxiety about one's own perhaps unstable class affinity. Whereas, for The Man of Mode, there appears to be a more stable and concrete class separation that tends to produce feelings of hatred or disgust of the inferior classes rather than feelings of fear or anxiety that one appears, was, or can become a member of such a class. Is this true?


Also, I have a number of historical questions: How common would it be to see masked women on the street? What was the developing social understanding of male/male homosexuality? Or, what was the developing social understanding of male/male friendships? Everyone seems to be off to do some kind of 'business' all the time... what sort of 'business'? There seems to be this developing mystery surrounding what men do when out on 'business'. Why?

An attempt to make connections

Similarly to "The Country Wife," there are several references to "breeding" in this play.  In particular, we see much concern for the breeding of women.  This seems to be tied up in the "wit" of women.  Do these lines, and more than once speeches, reflect a historical moment in which women were gaining more access to education?  Could these also be a direct commentary (positive or negative) on the presence of actresses?  Or even a growing number of (public) female playwrights?  How can we connect this back to the Jacobean conception of the definition of proper (male) breeding?

Also present in "The Country Wife" was the presence of "the cosmopolitan."  Although we saw this in Jacobean comedy as well, the figure and attitudes towards him differ here.  Can we trace a larger social role for this stereotypical character through the 17th century?  Is this just another character absorbed into the "fop" definition Adam discussed last class?

Man of Mode

The plot in "The Man of Mode" depends on deception and pretense, "affectation" and "veneer," with the occasional praise of a character such as Emilia for being genuine. Lying is such a matter of course in the play that Young Bellair and Harriet get along famously in their partnership to deceive both their parents. Is the play commenting on a lack of genuineness in how late 17th c. londoners interacted with an related to one another? What are other possibilities for the centrality of deception in the play?

Harriet and Mrs. Loveit seem to be the only two characters who see through Dorimant's charades. Harriet concedes that Dorimant is "agreeable and pleasant," though insists he is false: "he does so much affect being so, he displeases me" (124). Mrs. L. recognizes D.'s contrived jealousy, which he uses to have reason to distance himself from her: "he is not jealous, but I will make him so, and be revenged a way he little thinks on" (129). What enables these womens' insights to D's true nature, while others have the wool pulled over their eyes?

Given the play's ambiguous title, and the many parallels between the two characters throughout, how different are Fopling and Dorimant, really? What can readings of the distinctions illuminate?

Acts of physical, material, and verbal self creation -- represented as elaborate and necessary social deceptions -- abound in The Man of Mode. Is "honesty" even possible here, or is every representation/interaction simply part of an elaborate game of gaining cultural capital?

Dorimant {taking the peach} (I,i)

The Dramatis Personae distinguishes the players by class much the same way the play attempts to set the ‘grander’ people from those street vendors and servants ‘beneath’ them. This spread is also mirrored in the theater’s viewing audience, “You have an exact account, from the great lady ‘i th’ box down to the little orange-wench.” (III,ii) Yet, many characters without titles are also intentionally even without names. From the Orange-woman and shoemaker, to the “Hampshire” guy (called so just because he hasn’t, like the other staff, been shipped back from France) a kind of social consciousness is at work here. In light of this, it is less ironic that the first scene shows Dorimant, one of the “Gentlemen” relying on one of the nameless as a matchmaker and ‘fellow’-gossip (by the way, the orange-woman serves as effective at tattling as any of the ‘ladies’ in the play.) But why won’t these well brought up people just “pay her for the fruit,” (I,i) what would be to them a mere pittance, just some loose change in their pockets? It seems like they are stringing them along in order to extract more information rather than choice produce. Is it more annoying for the orange-woman to be constantly asking for money than for the upper class to be avoiding their part of the exchange?

Fanning the Flame

Many in The Man of Mode relish vexing the opposite sex, and no object appears to signal the flurry that ensues more so than the fan. Dorimant introduces how this gadget functions early on, “I have not had the pleasure of making a woman so much as break her fan, to be sullen, or forswear herself, these three days.” (I,i). Next, Medley announces how this masque (vizard) serves the victim, “She could not have picked out a devil upon earth so proper to torment her. H’as made her break a dozen or two of fans already, tear half a score points to pieces and destroy hoods and knots without number.” (II,i) But fans are also used as tools for etiquette class, as in the scene between Young Bellair and Harriet where its uses are unlimited, “At one motion play your fan, roll your eyes, and then settle a kind look upon me,” and Now spread your fan, look down upon it, and tell the sticks with a finger.” Further on, the acting lesson continues, but this time the stunts are more physically challenging, “Clap your fan, then both in your hands, snatch it to your mouth, smile, and with a lively motion fling your body a little forwards. So! Now spread it, fall back on the sudden, cover your face with it, and break out into a loud laughter.—Take up! Look grave and fall a-fanning to yourself. Admirably well acted!” (III,ii) How are woman associated or compared with the kind of instrument they use for deception?

It’s Not About You, Sir!

The Man of the Mode is meant not so much to satirize a type of character as to mirror the audience’s adjustment with the period by pointing out it “represents ye all.” In both the Prologue and the Epilogue, London’s manners and attitudes are being wrestled with, where on “the stage like you, will be more foppish grow.” This organic relationship of stage/audience/stage keeps renewing afresh, “’tis not so wise an age/But your own follies may supply the stage.” Scroope and Dryden are clear that neither make judgments upon the other because, like playwrights, “men grow dull when they begin to be particular.” (III,iii) Instead, this play reveals the time and place’s interest with itself, but not to the detriment of isolating the individual from the whole, “Yet every man is safe from what he feared,/For no one fool is hunted from the herd.”

The Man of Mode

In Act 1.1 (pg96) the Shoemaker states, "...there's never a man i' the town lives more like a gentleman with his wife than I do. I never mind her motions; she never inquires into mine..." Strangely, once again, this seems to be the best method for a successful marriage for the time. I just wonder, do people feel that, since Young Bellair seemed naive, will the shoemakers marriage be more successful. By disobeying his father, it seems he would be in a better situation than the Shoemaker, but true love never succeeds in these plays.

Each of these characters seems to have ties to the country, or have strong knowledge of it. When the dances are played, the constantly refer to the music as the "country fiddle". I assume this was popular for the time, but is it popular for a group of people who lie on the fringe of the city? Was it more popular in the country? For people who seem to detest the country, it seems strange to me that the popular music seems to come from there.

Topicality and Ill-fashioned fellows

In a footnote in my edition of The Man of Mode, David Wormersley refers to the "extreme topicality" of the play. While we have seen many contemporaneous allusions in plays throughout the semester - particularly as they relate to fashionable places in the city of London - references to pastimes, people, places and fashions of the moment do indeed seem extreme in Etherege's play. What makes this play more of a particular cultural moment than other plays we have read this semester, perhaps even more so than The Country Wife? How is it related to its own time? What kind of cultural capital is important in The Man of Mode in comparison with other plays?

What is the purpose of the intrusion of "four ill-fashioned fellows" smelling of tobacco and coffee houses in III.iii? Are they merely meant to highlight the gentility of the play's main characters, particularly Sir Fopling who appears in the scene, or are they acting as a kind of parody of the men about town?

The Men of Mode

This play contains a vast quantity of verbal ticks (Flutter's lisp, the Orange-Woman's "gad", the Shoemaker's " 'zbud"). Why so many linquistic quirks and why from these characters?

What does "of mode" mean? Is Old Bellair's use of it in Act V Scene 2 complentary of derogitory?

Women and Letters

In my presentation on The Man of Mode, I focus on masculinity and the construction of the gentleman. There is also a related topic: femininity and the construction of the gentlewoman. How do the female characters use rhetoric and action to construct themselves as gentility? Do women also rely on wit, charm, and power? How do Harriet, Emilia, Loveit, and Bellinda reflect and refract the feminine?

Dorimant sends a number of letters throughout the play. For example, he sends Mrs. Loveit a letter, all the while setting her up for a fight and end to their relationship. Dorimant also receives a letter from Molly, who appears to be a prostitute. What are the roles of these letters in the larger scope of the play? Why does Etherege include such letters? What rhetorical and theatrical purposes do they serve?

Out with the old...

Members of the older generation in Etherege's play occasionally reference the "old" way of doing things, as opposed to the "new" -- in fashion, courting, dancing, etc. Given that The Man of Mode was staged in 1676, is it feasible to read these references as capturing a lingering nostalgia for pre-war styles, or are they merely generational markers? Considering the ongoing popularity of adaptations and "improvements" of pre-war plays, was there a palpable sense of historical divide in the theatre of the 1670s?

Sin as a means of social mobility

In I.i, Dorimant's shoemaker makes some pointed remarks about the apparent socio-economic stratification of sin: when Medley charges the shoemaker with having "brought the envy of the world upon you by living above yourself. Whoring and swearing are vices too genteel for a shoemaker", the laborer replies with "'Zbud, I think you men of quality will grow as unreasonable as the women: you would engross the sins o' the nation. Poor folks can no sooner be wicked but th'are railed at by their betters."

Is this perception of specific vices as belonging to specific classes a Restoration representation of "blue collar" and "white collar" immorality? (A fruitful comparison might be made to De Flores in "The Changeling".)

Commerce and Acting in A Man of Mode

“Admirably well acted!”
In 3.2, Harriet and Young Bellair “instruct” each other’s “look and gestures” in order to pretend to be lovers. Bellair claims it was “admirably well acted!” (116). In 3.3, Harriet teases Dorimant, and “Acts him,” asking “is this not like you?” (126). It seems all the more self-referential to have the characters engage in this sort of play. How is this sort of “acting” different from what we’ve seen before? Is it more like "mimicking," which is a phrase that pops up occasionally in the play? What does it suggest about the society of A Man of Mode, and about those watching the play?

Selling Oranges, Selling Information
Within the first scene, we are thrust into a sort of “commerce of gossip” with the character of the (rather sassy) orange-woman. When Dorimant refuses her fruit, she provokes him with hints about Harriet’s arrival in town, and he in turn refuses to pay her until she divulges more information. In a play full of the romps and romances of the idle rich, I am intrigued by the role of this lower-class woman, as well as the various footmen, servants, etc. in the play. Is the gossip in this play truly like an economy on its own? What do we make of the orange-woman’s character and her place in this universe?

Rhetorically Drunk

Early in IV.i, Dorimant, as Mr. Courtage, mockingly laments the loss of "forms and ceremonies, the only things that uphold quality and greatness" (133). Is he just leading Lady Woodvill on? Or could the play be theorizing the truth of a larger social issue?

After being chastised by Dorimant, the Shoemaker says something interesting; "You would engross the sins o' the nation" (I.i. p.96). Is he pointing out something like a trend of appropriation by dispossession? Or are the Shoemaker's lines indicative of a call for the end of an aristocratic moral hypocrisy?

Reputation; Fops a la Francaise

How does Dorimant’s attitude toward reputation and public display contrast with Horner’s from The Country Wife? How do their respective attitudes toward reputation intersect with their temperaments toward women?

With all the pressure put on fops in this play (the staging of, debates over, commentaries on, etc.), how much are fops stand-ins for cultural dismissals of French style and fashion? Are fops just another body through which anti-French humor (an English theatrical staple) is transmitted?

Modes of malice and self-analysis

Malice as entertainment
"Malice," "Malicious" and other forms of the word are used frequently in "Man of Mode," sometimes in ways that suggest the fun of being malicious. Is this an amoral world that delights in malice, and if so, is it in any way "redeemed" by the end of the play? (I'm thinking of Dorimant's surprising kindness to the women he's thrown over.)

Self-Analysis
The characters take self-conscious pains to scrutinize their own and everyone else's behavior, going so far as to describe and enact gestural minutia. Does this tendency to "tell, not show" or to "narrate the action" seem like an effective use of a medium (the theater) that exists as a world of show? What does it show us beyond the "manners" being satirized?

Deep Play

On two different occasions, Dorimant refers to "deep play." He says that "deep play is now in private houses." By counterbalancing this "deep play" with "play in public spaces," is Etherege creating a metaphor for public and private theaters? What is the importance of the distinction between private and public "play" in this work?

Etherege's Senex

In the first act, Medley likens Bellair's disobedience to his father as "but despising a coach, humbling yourself to a pair of galoshes," etc--i.e. it is a petty, almost quotidian social task. Both Old Bellair and Lady Woodvill complain about "youth these days" several times in the play, hinting at the young/old divide commonplace to comedy. The senex is certainly not completely diminished here, but what is the role of this "stock" character?

Poor Mrs. Pinchwife

Through Horner’s exposure of the true nature of “virtuous” women, the play criticizes hypocrisy—affecting virtue to uphold one’s reputation appears to be a greater sin than the act that threatens to sully that reputation in the first place. Why, then, is Mrs. Pinchwife ultimately punished for her attempts at honesty? Horner, for all his railing against affectation, forces her to “tell more lies” in the last scene and swear virtue to her husband. Doesn’t this simply reinforce the imprisonment Pinchwife imposes on his wife for which he is ridiculed throughout the play?

Would it have been possible for Mr. and Mrs. Pinchwife to get divorced? In V.iv, Mrs. Pinchwife notes that “every day, at London here, women leave their first husbands, and go and live with other men as their wives” (210-11). At the end of the scene, she laments, “I must be a country wife still too, I find, for I can’t, like a city one, be rid of my musty husband and do what I list” (389-91). Is this simply a sign of Mrs. Pinchwife’s “country” ignorance? Even Mr. Pinchwife states that he must be a husband “against [his] will, to a country wife”—what is keeping them together?

Jokes--I like jokes...

I have always had the following problem when I read drama: I don’t really get the jokes that make a play funny (or when I do, the joke is long dead). It was only, in fact, after I read the comments on our blog and some background that I put the play into a less serious context. Yet, after the background reading, I wonder to what extent are all the dirty jokes (a lot of which I just glazed over) satire as well? I can’t get over the comparison of mistresses with books (I.i.), Horner getting himself set up with all the ladies and all the double meanings that go along with it, Horner comparing impotence with cowardice, and that Horner gets away with it all at the end, no change, no seeming remorse (is that a joke?)! To what extent are we to take the casual banter as humor when it could also be read in a more sinister and darker manner?

On the other hand, Pinchwife seems to be a bumbling idiot and that seems to be where satire fits in. Margery makes a fool of decorum, cits, and rules of sophistication. Is the plot with Pinchwife meant to counteract Horner’s situation? Or are the two supposed to play and affect the other (in a way that I’m missing)?

The Country Wife

I'm wondering what to make of the play's portrayal of women. Lady Fidget and her "virtuous gang" seem to enjoy a rather masculine sexual freedom, yet they don't appear as troubled as the male characters of the play when they discover they are sharing Horner's favors. It doesn't seem that we should take an overly harsh or negative view of their behavior, but rather Sir Jasper's for being so credulous. In what ways might this relate to the significance of Lady Fidget having the last words of the play? She notes that "whilst to them you of achievements boast,/They share the booty, and laugh at your cost." Does this suggest the relationship between men who have shared the same sexual conquest is an issue of competition and power as contrasted with the "virtuous gang who are content to share?.

Also, Horner notes "A foolish rival and a jealous husband assist their rival's designs." Does this hint at a judgment about who is the greater fool in the play - one who knows he is being cuckholded or one who doesn't? The play shows that neither blind trust nor extreme scrutiny are effective methods of assuring a wife's fidelity. Does it suggest there are any effective methods or are women presumed to always cheat regardless of their husbands' behavior?

Publicity and Secrecy

Just as we are about to get the expected unravelling or public-exposition scene at the end of The Country Wife we get just the opposite; a heap of lies and whispers that protects or creates a system of mutual deceit, secret privilege, and hidden knowledge that is to the advantage of so many characters within the play. The original privacy of certain information has, by end of the play, reached a level of publicity that supports and extends rather than disassembles and limits the advantage it gives to all those who are aware of it and keep it hidden. Also, this web of secrets and lies is not spun by a single great trickster but by the cunning and opportunism of many who seek to gain or be protected by its being spun. What does this mutuality mean for the success of Horner's plot? In other words, does he succeed or fail, or is it no longer a question of success or failure since his original secret has been co-opted by others for their own benefit? Also, what are the larger implications of this more balanced mixture of publicity and privacy toward an understanding of wit as an art-form, moral standard, and/or cultural intelligence? Particularly when set against the more usual calculated leaking of private knowledge into the public as seen in Epicene and throughout most of The Country Wife?

Definitions of Feminity

In II.i. when Pinchwife enters the play and is responding to the inquisition of Horner and company concerning his wife, we are given an intriguingly "new" (based on our readings so far this semester) slant on how best to value women.  First, Pinchwife insists that his country wife is better than any city wife because, "At least we are a little surer of the breed there, know what her keeping has been, whether foiled or unsound" (p. 13).  Harcourt responds by suggesting that Pinchwife bring her to the city "to be taught breeding."  Can we apply this argument to all of the women in the play?  Are they continually being defined first, by where they were born (and subsequently on the kind of "breeding" they were subject to) and, secondly, by the implied and somewhat more predictable category of how they will breed, that is, how they will choose to have children?

Shortly after the lines mentioned above, Horner and Pinchwife discuss female wit.  Horner asserts that, "wit is more necessary than beauty."  Pinchwife responds, "What is wit in a wife good for, but to make a man cuckold?"  Do these views express a larger social shift in the perception of women?  Can women really be considered when discussing "wits"?  How can this problematize or expand our earlier discussions of what and who a wit can be?  Furthermore, what does this definition of wit and woman (and the possibility of one being both) do for the construct of marriage?

Beasts and Baggage

1. At the beginning of this play, Horner makes several sneering references to affectation. When Lady Fidget remarks, “affectation makes not a woman more odious” to men “than virtue” Horner answers: “Because your virtue is your greatest affectation, madam” (1.1.7). Horner also exclaims “A pox on ‘em, and all that force nature, and would be still what she forbids ‘em! Affectation is her greatest monster” (1.1.10). Horner practices the ultimate affection, however, and is also passing himself off as a sort of nature’s “monster.” The women refer to him as “beast” when they speak of his supposedly castrated state. How does affectation continue to play out as a theme in The Country Wife? Does Horner as an embodiment of affectation act as an agent for revealing the affectation of others? If so, how?

2. Throughout the play, Pinchwife constantly refers to his wife as “baggage”: “Come, how was’t, baggage?” (4.2.49). She, on the other hand, constantly refers to him as “bud.” What effect does the use and repetition of these “pet names” have? How do they characterize Mr. and Mrs. Pinchwife, their motives, and their tactics for dealing with one another?

Country Wife

During the scene 4, when all of the ladies and a few of the men end up in Horner's house, does Old Lady Squeamish know what is truly going on? It seems she goes back and forth--and then like most of the men do, says "Poor Mr. Horner...". During this part, I wasn't sure if she was quite familiar with the unspoken code of the Ladies of London.

Also, is Horner wealthy? He seemed to have money and could afford oranges (which I assume were fairly expensive), but I didn't understand how he would come about this money. And, while he was a man of some prestige--what right would he have to claim the company of Pinchwife's "brother in-law"? Wouldn't Pinchwife have the right to the final say in that, or is he overruled because he is from the country?

Finally, how is the dictated letter that Mrs. Pinchwife wrote completely let go? By the end, everyone forgot about it--Poor Mr. Horner.

The Country Wife II

Pinchwife, in an attempt to control his wife, forces her to write an abusive letter to Horner: "Write as I bid you, or I will write 'whore' with this penknife." We've seen characters try to manipulate letters, and the exchange of them, but this attempt is especially fierce and contemptuous. If his attempt clearly is a metaphor of his desire to control and shape her inner life, what does her manipulation of the documents illuminate about subjectivity, interiority, and gender on the Restoration stage?

On multiple occasions Pinchwife states (largely in reference to his attempts to enforce his wife's fidelity) that he "knows" or "understands" the Town. What does this mean? Considering the way he essentially creates every situation in which his wife nearly or actually escapes his control, would it be more appropriate to say that he "creates" the Town? (Is it "the Town" that corrupts, or Pinchwife's paranoia and representation of it?)

Does Alithea's concept of "honor" differ from that of the other women in the play? While Lady Fidget and company seem to value sign over substance insofar as "reputation" and "honor" are concerned, Alithea turns down Harcourt's sexual advances even though she could likely emerge from the liaison right under the nose of her unwitting husband-to-be -- and with society's perception of her honor intact. She also seems unusually earnest when she declares Sparkish a man "whom my justice will not suffer me to deceive or injure." Does Alithea ultimately hold herself to a standard of "honor" which values some internal code of ethics rather than others' perceptions of her sexual purity? How does this compare to other discussions of "honor" we've seen?

The Country Wife I

In Wycherley's play, "the country" is imported into "the town." The paranoiac Pinchwife believes that the former possesses an innocent naivette, and submissiveness, that the ladies of the town lack. But we soon discover that his "country wife" has all the same desires, and foibles, as the town-ladies. Ironically, however, she does romanticize the affair with Horner, wishing to marry him, which fuels the crisis in the final act. How does this ironic inversion of Pinchwife's expectations speak to the discussions of "the town" and "the country"? How does her infidelity speak to Pinchwife's overbearing paranoia?

Suspect sexuality?

Is it strange that Horner kisses Mrs. Pinchwife several times while she is dressed as a boy (II.ii)? While he obviously understands that she is in disguise, I wonder what the reaction to seeing two "men" kiss would have been. He also unashamedly praises this "pretty" and "handsome" youth. I can't help but be reminded of Clarimont's ingle in Epicoene in this scene.

Flirting in the country

In her covert letter to Horner, Mrs. Pinchwife reveals how she might go about flirting with Horner were they in the country. She says, "I'm sure if you and I were in the country at cards together, - so - I cou'd not help treading on your Toe under the Table - so - or rubbing knees with you and staring in your face, 'till you saw me - very well - and then looking down and blushing for an hour together" (IV.iii.199-204). Such liasons seem innocent in comparison to the overt flirtations we witness in London from Horner and Harcourt. But Mrs. Pinchwife insinuates something that the rest of the play seems to ignore - that infidelity and sexual liasons can indeed happen just as well in the country as they can in the city. Perhaps, then, the country bumpkin Mrs. Pinchwife and the country setting itself are not so innocent as her husband presumes. I guess my question is how dichotomous is the country/city split really in terms of sexual corruption? It seems to me that Pinchwife is being rather reductive in his claim that only the city can corrupt his wife in this way.

The Country Wife

The Country Wife includes a number of intriguing observations about the theatre itself. In particular it introduces the idea of the theatre as a place to be viewed (Act II Scene i). The audience isn't just viewing the action of the play, but is paying particular attention to the other members of the audience. Is this a concept that first appears during the Restoration or is it part of the Jacobean and Caroline stages? This viewing is portrayed by Wycherly as a necessarily sexualized interaction. Viewing and being viewed appear to be at the heart of the Wycherly's portrayal of adultery. Is this sort of argumentation Restoration specific, or is this understanding of 'view' part of anti-theatrical descriptions of theatre before the English Civil War?

The characters in The Country Wife and Wycherly (particularly in his stage directions) are particularly interested in physical location. Covent Garden, Russell Street, Cheapside, The New Exchange, Hampshire, Chateline's, and many other locations are being constantly referenced throughout the play. Is speaking the symbolic language of these places a form of cultural competence? Is Mrs. Pinchwife's lack of familiarity with London geography meant to portray her as 'ignorant' of culture? How does that relate to her husbands disconnect from the events of the city (as he returns from the country) that are highlighted in Harcourt's line, "He's come newly to town, it seems, and has not heard how things are with him [Horner]" (II.i)?

Women in Public

With a title like The Country Wife, one would expect much ado made about coming to town. Yet, the way the male characters carry on with worry about women entering a kind of ‘danger zone,’ I wonder how this place can cause such anxiety: “she and I’ll be rid of the town, and my dreadful apprehensions.” (III,ii) It seems that the connection between economic and sexual freedom is one cause: a husband “had better employ her (a wife) than let her employ herself.” (I,i) Advertising is another concern since it captures a woman’s attention and helps her navigate around town,

Said I, “I know where the best new sign is.” “Where?” says one of the ladies. “In Covent Garden,” I replied.” “Lord,” says another, “I’m sure there was ne’er a fine new sign there yesterday.” (I,i)

To further illustrate the contentious nature of the city, conflicting economic places are used to injure men and women’s relationships, “To beat his wife, he’s as jealous of her as a Cheapside husband of a Covent Garden wife.” (I,i) Immediately after this scene, Alithea lists the names of parks and shopping malls to educate Mrs. Pinchwife about where to go, which only aggravates her “passion for the town.” (V,ii) “Why sister, Mulberry Garden and St. James’s Park; and for close walks, the New Exchange.” (II,i) The act of stating specific places gets Pinchwife in such a tizzy as to anxiously call London “a frontier town.” (IV, ii) His only way out is to physically prevent his wife from going anywhere or seeing anyone, “but our wives, like their writings, never safe but in our closets under lock and key.” (V,ii) Yet, this kind of containment only ends up keeping the country wife ignorant of her surroundings and perhaps in more danger than if he had given her a street map, “I don’t know the way home, so I don’t.” (V,iv)

The Audience in the Play

Is this the first time that the theater audience features so prominently within the play itself? The Country Wife shows how the audience is of increasing interest to itself as well as to the playwrights whose work is currently being produced. Wycherley illustrates how the viewing public and those who might come to the theater for purposes other than seeing the play, might influence a particular performance. Here, the theater public is being displayed when Horner asks Dorilant and Harcourt if his appearance was appropriate to the venue, “With a most theatrical impudence; nay, more than the orange-wenches show there, or a drunken vizard-mask, or a great bellied actress; nay, or the most impudence of creatures, an ill poet; or what is yet more impudent, a secondhand critic.” (I,i) A greater indictment is of those in the audience who insist on hearing themselves speak rather than listening to those on stage, “And the reason why we are so often louder than the players is because we think we speak more wit, and so become the poet’s rivals in his audience. For to tell you the truth, we hate the silly rogues; nay, so much that we find fault even with their bawdy upon the stage, whilst we talk nothing else in the pit as loud.”’ (III,ii) I wonder if the behavior of the audience in the play is changing the behavior of those watching the production.

Current Debates and the Town vs. Country

In the writings from the chapter on “The Collier Controversy,” each author makes an argument for the position of drama in society. Collier attempts to show “misbehavior of the stage with respect to morality and religion” while Dennis maintains that “the chief end and design of man is to make himself happy,” which drama supports (493, 506). Although the essays were written in the late seventeenth century, their arguments still seem quite current in relation to debates about the media today. How different are our current comedies and tragedies from those of the late sixteen hundreds? How would a current debate about vice on the stage/media versus the pleasure of the stage/media be similar to the one we have read?

In William Wycherley’s The Country Wife, the characters often mention and/or go to fashionable locales, such as the theater and The New Exchange. This contrasts with the knowledge and experience of Mrs. Pinchwife, who is a naïve country woman with little experience in urban affairs. Mr. Pinchwife wants to prevent his wife from taking on any sophistication or habits of city life: he says, “Ay, my dear, you must love me only, and not be like the naughty town-women, who only hate their husbands and love every man else, love plays, visits, fine coaches, fine clothes, fiddles, balls, treats, and so lead a wicked town-life” (2.1.17). We later find that the town does corrupt Mrs. Pinchwife, in her love for Mr. Horner. But is this a simple case of country purity contrasted with town deviance? Why does Wycherley contrast the cultures of the two places? Which place, town or country, does he seem to support through his characters and their actions? Or, is he critiquing both cultures?

Class Warfare?

Is it possible to read the sexual triumph of Horner, who gets away with his ruse in the end, as actually a social triumph in a class war between the (newly re-established) aristocrat and the (Cromwellian, over-reaching) citizen? From Blunt in The Rover to Pinchwife in The Country Wife, these comedies of wit seem to rely on the gulling of characters who think of themselves as socially superior to their acquaintances, but who end up the butt of their own overly proud coventousness. Indeed, it seems as if wit itself -- represented usually by sexual prowess and conquest -- has migrated from being a city commodity before 1642 to being very much a court commodity in the Restoration. Is this emblematic of an implicit class conflict in post-1660 London?

Collier and the Anti-Theatrical Tradition

We've been looking now at how English theatrical traditions, conventions, and texts made the transition between the first and second halves of the century. I'm curious about the concurrent trend of anti-theatricalism in London, how it minded the gap, and what adaptations it underwent in the process.

Collier's inflammatory rhetoric seems to borrow a great deal from pre-war critics of the theatre (Puritan and otherwise); both use appeals to the authority of classical writers, both concede the argument that theatre could serve to properly edify the populace rather than corrupt it, both bring up the lewdness of the stage, and both decry in particular the effects of the theatre on the women of the city. But it seems that Collier -- and his opponents -- seem far less interested in the potential theological challenges that the theatre presents and instead take a heightened interest in its sexual license, especially the appearance of women in the audience and on the stage. Is this a reflection of the plays or the times or both? Is it possible to link Collier's perspective on the theatre to those of his early 1600s precursors?

The Country Wife

In IV.iii, Horner says of Mrs. Pinchwife's letter "'tis the first love letter that ever was without flames, darts, destinies, lying and dissemling in't." What is it about Horner and Mrs. Pinchwife's peculiar situation that enables such honesty, or what Horner perceives as honesty?

Throughout the play, city life in London is associated with passion, lust and love, posing great danger to a jealous husband. The country, on the other hand, represents safety from adultery. Have city and country spaces had the same symbolism in other plays we've read this semester?

Forcing Female Authorship, Forbidding Female Reading

After Sparkish makes his case against authors in III.ii, he damns "silly authors...all books and booksellers...and all readers, courteous or uncourteous." Later in the scene, he states that "virtue makes a woman as troublesome as a little reading or learning." The male fear of female reading comes up again when Pinchwife forbids his wife from purchasing play books at the New Exchange. There is a similar male anxiety over female writing in the play, yet instead of Pinchwife forbidding Mrs. Pinchwife from this act, he encourages it. After realizing that a letter from his wife could be a powerful tool against Horner's advances, Pinchwife coerces her to write, supplying words and sentiments in order to fulfill his plan. Of course, the real power ultimately lies in Mrs. Pinchwife's ability to write her own letter to Horner. What does the play's treatment of authors, books, and readers say about conceptions of female authorship? How is authorship, especially the ability to construct narratives about self (Horner's tale), an important tool in the social world of Restoration London?

A "Bellyful of Sights"

While at the New Exchange in III.ii, Mrs. Pinchwife exclaims that she "han't half [her] bellyful of sights yet" when her husband suggests they leave. This phrase neatly combines references to the "sights" of early London tourism and also Mrs. Pinchwife's viewings of London men (bellyful hints at pregnancy, therefore it also hints at adultery and Mrs. Pinchwife's attraction towards the London gallants). To Mrs. Pinchwife, London "sights" can be places (the New Exchange), signs (the horned-animal signs for taverns), books (the playbooks at the New Exchange), plays, people (actors, gallants), and behavior (that of the ladies). Many of these "sights" become more than simple gazing-objects for the naive "country wench," for they end up drawing her into London's social world, much to her husband's dismay. What is the connection between "sights" and "sight" in the play? Why is "sight-seeing" linked to adultery, female agency, and the fear of cuckoldry?

Playgoing and Fidelity in The Country Wife

Playing and Playgoing in The Country Wife

I was struck by how many references to playgoing there were in The Country Wife. Sparkish mentions seeing a new play and sitting in what he calls “the wit’s row” (1.1, p. 12). In 3.2, he explains this as the place where the “wits” sit and “are so often louder than the players because we think we speak more wit, and so become the poet’s rivals” (p. 33). Pinchwife takes his new bride to the theater, but sits in the “eighteen-penny place” rather than the choice seats so as to hide her beauty from his friends (2.1, p. 14). While there, Mrs. Pinchwife is obviously enamored of the actors, who are “the goodliest, properest men” (2.1, p. 16), causing a lengthy conversation about the dangers of the playhouses (she may lust after the players, and she may be lusted after by men in the audience). Mrs. Squeamish mentions men who keep “little playhouse creatures” (2.1, p. 23). Pinchwife says a mask is “as ridiculous a disguise as a stage-beard” (3.1, p. 31), and Mrs. Pinchwife tries to buy two plays (3.2, p. 35).

Although metatheatrical elements abound in 17^th century drama, we haven’t seen such direct interaction with the processes of playgoing in anything we’ve read so far. In a play so concerned with seeing and being seen, how might we understand the social aspects of the playhouse in the Restoration? Is Wycherley making jokes at the expense of his audience by having Sparkish in particular believe himself a wit that might talk back to the actors? Pinchwife sees the theater as decidedly corrupting for a number of reasons, yet risks exposing his wife to the eyes of libertine men to see a play. How do these references function in the play? Is it just another fashionable thing to do (like going to restaurants, walking around parks, etc.), or might it be a self-referential joke?

Fidelity Testing and the Dangers of Display

The triangle of Sparkish, Alithea, and Harcourt was interesting to me because it reminded me of the fidelity tests we have seen in the past. I am particularly thinking of Shirley’s Hyde Park, where Trier insists Lord Bonville spend time with his fiancé Julietta to test her love, only to loose her to his rival. The main difference in The Country Wife is that Sparkish is so concerned with showing off his fiancé that has no idea he is testing Ailthea’s fidelity, and Ailthea continually insists that Harcourt is seducing her and is loyal to a fault. Indeed, Ailthea is the only woman who does not lie and plot in the entire play.

Why this inversion? At the simplest level it is quite amusing, as it sets up Sparkish against Pinchwife, and aligns him with Sir Jasper Fidget. Sparkish explains it thus: “That [Harcourt] makes love to you is a sign you are handsome; and that I am not jealous is a sign you are virtuous” (3.2, p. 36). Things become even more complicated with the letter business to Horner, causing Ailthea to see Sparkish as a jealous man (all through the machinations of the maid Lucy). Is this a warning for men to keep their wives under a watchful eye, and be aware of the dangers of displaying a wife? A suggestion that women assert themselves in their choice of husband? What do we make of the maid Lucy’s role in all this?

Soldiering Women and the Limits of Wit

In the first scene, Pinchwife says, "Good wives and private soldiers should be ignorant" (I.i. p.13). A few lines later, Horner echoes this comparison of women to soldiers. I was intrigued by this comparison, but a little disappointed that it does not occur again explicitly in the play. Does the two characters' likening of women to (potentially) aggressive male figures point to a link between their own aggressive natures and the sexual violence alluded to in the play? In context, Horner and Pinchwife use this comparison derisively, but I get the feeling that they are hinting at some deeper truth. If women really are like soldiers of fortune, isn't this a potent critique of marriage, since oaths mean little and money (or gifts) means everything? Why isn't this comparison drawn out beyond the first act?

Like Tim, I was surprised at how many times Pinchwife says that he knows the city, "But I think I know the town" (III.ii. p.31), yet he does not make use of his knowledge for his own gain. Spurred on by his recounting of what city life is like, Mrs. Pinchwife develops a yearning for plays and other things that living in the city entails. If Pinchwife does know the city, he is a different type of wit than those of Jonson's Epicoene. Is he just less successful at navigating the social landscape? Or are there important changes in the social life of London that demand more than just wit? This play seems to imply that things like cuckoldry are inevitable; if it is not by one person, a man will be cuckolded by another. Wit enables a character like Horner to manipulate the senes, yet he still must sacrifice some power, both to the men and the women. I wonder does Pinchwife really know the town? Does anyone?

Aging Wits & Sexual Politics in The Country Wife

Pinchwife is a character in flux; a reformed wit/libertine/rover type who now staves off the advances of his former friends toward his wife. He is not credulous like Sparkish, but has a deep knowledge of the city, its habits, and vices. Why is he so inept and unable to convert this knowledge into power? Is it common in Restoration comedy to stage a figure like Pinchwife, too old to revel anymore and trying to settle down, shifting roles from libertine wit to witless cuckold?

How much sexual power do women attain in The Country Wife? I would argue that it’s a significant amount. Though Horner willingly undergoes social humiliation to cover up his sexual conquest, scenes like 4.3 and 5.4 depict Horner’s subjugation to female sexual power. (What I want to emphasize is that the would-be sexual “hero,” like Behn’s Willmore, is as much a subject to sexual power as he is a commander of it). With her husband in the next room, Lady Fidget goes in to Horner for a “pretty piece of china,” and Mrs. Squeamish demands, “I’ll have some china too.” The ensuing dialogue complicates the typical trope of female acquisitiveness for commodities; Horner is made a willing sex item that women seize. In the final scene, Horner becomes exactly the kind of plaything for the women that he vowed he would only pretend to be. Moreover, female sexual honor is preserved/excused at play’s end, not just Horner’s. Is Wicherley taking a ploy originally devised for a privileged male and making it do more work for the female characters?