Anti-Préciosité in the Drama of Thomas Shadwell
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
England’s literature, as well as her society, was affected by préciosité which originated in France and made its appearance in England during the reign of Charles I. Prevalent during the first decade of Charles II’ reign was the comic theme of the love-game in which a gay hero and heroine in accordance to the inflexible code of the time would make a point of not being serious, carry on a witty courtship, but would never marry. This code called préciosité, in which the lady was accorded divine characteristics, appeared in many of the Restoration dramas including those of John Dryden, William Congreve, William Wycherley, and George Farquhar. Not all seventeenth-century dramatists, however, were in favor of préciosité as we can see in the comedies of Thomas Shadwell. It is the purpose of this paper to show evidence of anti-préciosité as it appears in the plays of Shadwell. Serving best to illustrate this point are the following comedies: The Sullen Lovers: or, the Impertinents (1693), The Virtuoso (1691), The Squire of Alsatia (1693), Bury Fair (1689), and The Scowrers (1691). For example, since the précieuse, the heroine, was the center of préciosité, much of Shadwell’s ridicule is of her. Most prominent of his comedies in this aspect is Bury Fair. Wildish says of Madam Fantast, “I must confess, God has given her one good Face; but by her most insupportable Affectation, she screws it into twenty bad ones.” As well as making jabs at the précieuse, Shadwell ridicules the lovers. This is perhaps best seen in The Sullen Lovers, and even narrowed down in the character of Sir Positive-At-All. Since préciosité was often seen in Restoration comedies, and, the précieuse was the center of Restoration comedy, and, moreover, when Restoration comedy deals with love, it is a conscious mixture of préciosité and anti-préciosité elements, and a knowledge of préciosité increases the appetite for the mock-précieuse and furnishes a target for manners wit, it seems that Shadwell’s attack on préciosité would be an important part of seventeenth-century drama.
Abstract
England’s literature, as well as her society, was affected by préciosité which originated in France and made its appearance in England during the reign of Charles I. Prevalent during the first decade of Charles II’ reign was the comic theme of the love-game in which a gay hero and heroine in accordance to the inflexible code of the time would make a point of not being serious, carry on a witty courtship, but would never marry. This code called préciosité, in which the lady was accorded divine characteristics, appeared in many of the Restoration dramas including those of John Dryden, William Congreve, William Wycherley, and George Farquhar. Not all seventeenth-century dramatists, however, were in favor of préciosité as we can see in the comedies of Thomas Shadwell. It is the purpose of this paper to show evidence of anti-préciosité as it appears in the plays of Shadwell. Serving best to illustrate this point are the following comedies: The Sullen Lovers: or, the Impertinents (1693), The Virtuoso (1691), The Squire of Alsatia (1693), Bury Fair (1689), and The Scowrers (1691). For example, since the précieuse, the heroine, was the center of préciosité, much of Shadwell’s ridicule is of her. Most prominent of his comedies in this aspect is Bury Fair. Wildish says of Madam Fantast, “I must confess, God has given her one good Face; but by her most insupportable Affectation, she screws it into twenty bad ones.” As well as making jabs at the précieuse, Shadwell ridicules the lovers. This is perhaps best seen in The Sullen Lovers, and even narrowed down in the character of Sir Positive-At-All. Since préciosité was often seen in Restoration comedies, and, the précieuse was the center of Restoration comedy, and, moreover, when Restoration comedy deals with love, it is a conscious mixture of préciosité and anti-préciosité elements, and a knowledge of préciosité increases the appetite for the mock-précieuse and furnishes a target for manners wit, it seems that Shadwell’s attack on préciosité would be an important part of seventeenth-century drama.
참고문헌 (16)
- 이병은, "Préciosité in Milton’s Poetry", 밀턴연구, 8, pp.281~302 (1998)
- Berkeley, David S., "The Art of ‘Whining’ Love", Studies in Philology, 52(3), pp.478~496 (1955)
- Berkeley, David S., "Préciosité and the Restoration Comedy of Manners", Huntington Library Quarterly, 18(2), pp.109~128 (1955)
- Berkeley, David S., "An Unnoted Sense of ‘Whining’", American Speech, 27(3), pp.225~228 (1952)
- Bruce, Donald, "Topics of Restoration Comedy" (1974), Victor Gollancz
- Combe, Kirk, "Introduction: Considering Shadwell", Restoration, 20, pp.94~97 (1996)
- Dryden, John, "The Works of John Dryden 20 vols" (1956), U of California P
- Malone, Francis Edward, "Précieuse Gallantry in Farquhar's Plays" (1952), Oklahoma State UP
- Nelson, T. G. A., "Pre-loved Partners in Early Modern Comedy", Studies in Philology, 97(3), pp.362~378 (2000)
- Nicoll, Allardyce, "A History of English Drama, 1660-1900. Vol. 1, Restoration Drama, 1660-1700" (1955), Cambridge UP
- Parnell, Paul E., "The Etiquette of the Sentimental Repentance Scene, 1688-1696", Papers on Language and Literature, 14, pp.205~217 (1978)
- "ProQuest Literatue Online"[URL]
- Smith, John Harrington, "The Gay Couple in Restoration Comedy" (1948), Harvard UP
- Shadwell, Thomas, "Shadwell, the Ladies, and the Change in Comedy", Modern Philology, 46(1), pp.22~33 (1948)
- Styan, J. L., "Restoration Comedy in Performance" (1986), Cambridge UP
- Wheatley, Christopher J., "Without God or Reason: The Plays of Thomas Shadwell and Secular Ethics in the Restoration" (1993), Bucknell UP
