What do you think makes this play so successful? Why is this a fun play?

Richard Steele: "the plot and incidents of the play are laid with that subtlety of spirits which is peculiar to females of wit, and is very seldom well performed by those of the other sex, in whom craft in love is an act of invention, and not, as with women, the effect of nature and instinct" ( The Tatler No. 19, May 14, 1709).
 

Do you agree with Steele? Can you see any difference in Centlivre's writing when compared to the men we have read this semester? What about his thoughts on love?

From Hume: "ultra-formulaic play, utterly representative in materials and tone of early 18th century utilization of stock materials from the late 17th century" (116) "Much of the play's substance is lifted from Jonson's The Devil is an Ass, and from either Moliere's L'Etourdi, or from the Newcastle-Dryden adaptation of it, Sir Martin Mar-all, or both.  Mrs. Centlivre's results with this material make an effective vehicle for theatrical romp, but no one has ever found much literary value in it.  Dobree calls the play `an empty comedy of intrigue, without any reality of emotion whatsoever'.  This judgment seems excessively harsh: Marplot has struck some readers as a highly engaging character, and Sir Francis Gripe's passion for his ward Miranda (and her response to it) seems to be very effectively if unattractively draw,.  Indubitably, though, most critics have felt that the basis of the play was its use of intrigue, Nicoll going so far as to call it `one of the masterpieces' of the `comedy of intrigue'.  (116-7) "Actually, though schemes loom large in the play, it relies much less on rapid action, sword-play, and suspense of outcome... What really occupies and entertains the audience is not intrigue, per se, but a veritable catalogue of comic devices and formulas" (117-8). "The audience does not, I think, ever get much concerned with the characters.  The four lovers are too characterless to elicit more than indifferent good-will;  the father-figures are too silly to seem really threatening, and we take them as pro forma blocking devices.  The one character who is more than papier mache is Marplot.  Oddly enough, both plot lines could easily have been contrived without him, yet he is the most memorable part of the play.  His frantic curiosity, good heart, and weakness of intellect make an engaging combination" (120). "Certain features of BB betray its period.  Nothing approaching bawdy appears, and though sentiment is played down, bit of it slip in.  Miranda is quite cautious, and when she pauses to `reason a little,' reviews Sir George coolly....  Nonetheless, BB is clearly a laughing and non-exemplary comedy. "Despite the decorum, we find no didacticism here at all.  Not one of the characters is viewed in exemplary fashion.  Mrs. Centlivre's concern is to breathe life into standard devices" (121).
 

Do you agree with Hume?

What about the characters in the play? Who do you find most interesting? Criticism focuses on Marplot.  Do you think this is a fair treatment of the play?

Could you find the Whig sentiments in the play? How can we see Centlivre's political stance?

The years 1709-10 were years of great political turmoil between Whigs and the Tories.  It started with the Whigs in power, and through propaganda and political maneuvering, the Whig government fell and the Tories took power.  But it was not a good time for "small fry" to state political allegiances.  But Steele had a role in government and was a supporter of Centlivre.

(external) Seminar on Restroation Drama (Spring, 1997) Introduction to Literature, Spring 1999 (Ray);Introduction to Literature: Society and Identity (Kate)