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?