Cummings
Guides Home..|..Contact
This Site
.
.
Plot
Summary
By
Michael J. Cummings...©
2003
.
.......In
a downstairs room of their old mansion, Dorothy Hardcastle tells her husband
that they need a little diversion–namely, a trip to London, a city she
has never visited. Their neighbors, the Hoggs sisters and Mrs. Grigsby,
spend a month in London every winter. It is the place to see and be seen.
But old Hardcastle, content with his humdrum rural existence, says people
who visit the great city only bring back its silly fashions and vanities.
Once upon a time, he says, London’s affectations and fopperies took a long
time to reach the country; now they come swiftly and regularly by the coach-load.
.......Mrs.
Hardcastle, eager for fresh faces and conversations, says their only visitors
are Mrs. Oddfish, the wife of the local minister, and Mr. Cripplegate,
the lame dancing teacher. What’s more, their only entertainment is
Mr. Hardcastle’s old stories about sieges and battles. But Hardcastle says
he likes everything old–friends, times, manners, books, wine, and, of course,
his wife.
.......Living
in their home with them is their daughter, Kate, a pretty miss of marriageable
age, and Tony, Mrs. Hardcastle’s son by her first husband, Mr. Lumpkin.
As a boy, Tony bedeviled his stepfather, Mr. Hardcastle, with every variety
of mischief, burning a servant’s shoes,  scaring
the maids, and vexing the kittens. And, Hardcastle says, “It was but yesterday
he fastened my wig to the back of my chair, and when I went to make a bow,
I popt my bald head in Mrs. Frizzle’s face.”
.......Now
as a young man, Tony has become a fat slob who spends most of his time
at the local alehouse. Soon he will come of age, making him eligible for
an inheritance of 1500 pounds a year with which to feed his fancies. Mrs.
Hardcastle wants to match Tony with her niece and ward, Constance Neville,
who has inherited a casket of jewels from her uncle. As Miss Neville’s
guardian, Mrs. Hardcastle holds the jewels under lock and key against the
day when Constance can take legal possession of them.
.......While
Mr. and Mrs. Hardcastle discuss the London trip that is not to take place,
Tony passes between them and sets off for the alehouse, The Three Pigeons.
Mrs. Hardcastle chases out the door after him, saying he should find something
better to do than associate with riffraff.
.......Alone,
Mr. Hardcastle laments the follies of the age. Even his darling Kate is
becoming infected, for now she has become fond of “French frippery.” When
she enters the room, he tells her he has arranged for her to meet an eligible
young man, Mr. Charles Marlow, a scholar with many good qualities who “is
designed for employment in the service of the country.” Marlow is to arrive
for a visit that very evening with a friend, Mr. George Hastings. Young
Marlow is the son of Hardcastle’s friend, Sir Charles Marlow. Kate welcomes
the opportunity to meet the young man, although she is wary about her father’s
description of him as extremely shy around young ladies.
.......By
and by, Constance Neville comes in for a visit. When Kate tells her about
young Mr. Marlow, Constance tells her that her own admirer, Mr. Hastings,
a friend of the Marlow family. Miss Neville welcomes the attentions of
Hastings but laments Mrs. Hardcastle’s attempts to pair her with her “pretty
monster,” Tony, in an effort to keep Miss Neville’s jewels in the family.
Tony and Constance despise each other.
Tony Plays Trick
.......Meanwhile,
at the alehouse, Tony is having a ripping good time singing and drinking
when Hastings and young Marlow come in asking for directions to the Hardcastle
home. Having just arrived in the area from London after a wearisome trip,
they have lost their way. Tony, who resents Mr. Hardcastle’s treatment
of him lately, sees a way to get even: He tells Marlow and Hastings that
Hardcastle is an ugly, cantankerous fellow and that his daughter is a “tall,
trapesing, trolloping, talkative maypole.” But, he says, Hardcastle’s son
(meaning himself) is a “pretty, well-bred youth that everybody is fond
of.” Marlow says he has been told otherwise, namely, that the daughter
is “well-bred and beautiful; the son, an awkward booby, reared up and spoiled
at his mother’s apron-string.”
.......Taken
aback, Tony can only hem and haw. Then, deciding to work a mischief, he
tells them the Hardcastle home is too far to reach by nightfall but that
there is a nice inn just up the road. The “inn” is, of course, the
Hardcastle home. When Marlow and Hastings arrive there, they note that
the inn is old but commendable in its own way. Hastings comments that Marlow
has traveled widely, staying at many inns, but wonders why such a man of
the world is so shy around young women. Marlow reminds him that he is shy
only around young ladies of culture and bearing. Around women of the lower
classes, he is a nonstop talker, a wag completely at ease. Hastings replies:
“But in the company of women of reputation I never saw such an idiot, such
a trembler; you look for all the world as if you wanted an opportunity
of stealing out of the room.”
.......When
Mr. Hardcastle enters, he welcomes them as the expected guests–the Marlow
fellow who is to meet his daughter and Marlow’s friend Hastings. However,
the young men–believing that they are at the inn described by Tony–think
Mr. Hardcastle is the innkeeper, and treat him like one, giving him orders
to prepare their supper and asking to see the accommodations. Hardcastle
is much offended by their behavior, thinking them the rudest of visitors,
for he remains unaware that they think they are at an inn. He keeps his
feelings to himself.
.......When
Hardcastle goes upstairs with Marlow to show him his room, Hastings runs
into Constance Neville and, through his conversation with her, realizes
that he is at the Hardcastle home, not an inn. Hastings decides to keep
the information a secret from Marlow, fearing that Marlow would react to
the mix-up by immediately leaving. Thus, he allows Marlow to believe that
Constance and Kate are also guests at the “inn.”
.......When
Marlow finally meets Kate, his shyness all but tongue-ties him. Almost
every time he starts a sentence, Kate has to finish it. But she compliments
him on being so clever as to bring up interesting topics of conversation.
All the while that they talk, Marlow lacks the courage even to look at
her face. He does not even know what she looks like.
.......In
another room, Tony, who has returned from the pub, and Constance are insulting
each other, as usual, to the dismay of Mrs. Hardcastle. After Hastings
observes their spitfire give-and-take, he tells Tony he will take the young
lady off his hands if Tony will help him win her.
.......“I’ll
engage to whip her off to France, and you shall never hear more of her,”
Hastings says.
.......Tony
replies: “Ecod, I will [help] to the last drop of my blood.”
Hardcastle
Annoyed
.......Mr.
Hardcastle, meanwhile, is becoming more and more annoyed with Marlow for
treating him like a lackey. Alone on the stage, Hardcastle laments, “He
has taken possession of the easy-chair by the fire-side already. He took
off his boots in the parlour, and desired me to see them taken care of.
I’m desirous to know how his impudence affects my daughter.”
.......Kate
has been upstairs changing into casual clothes. When she comes down and
talks with her father, she bemoans Marlow’s incredible shyness while Hardcastle,
in turn, complains about Marlow’s rudeness. They wonder whether they are
talking about the same person.
.......While
they converse, Tony, who knows where his mother keeps everything, gets
the casket of jewels Mrs. Hardcastle is holding for Constance and gives
it to Hastings as an inducement for Hastings to run off with Constance.
Later, Mrs. Hardcastle discovers it missing and thinks a robber is about.
.......Meanwhile,
a maid tells Kate that Marlow believes he is at an inn. The maid also tells
her that Marlow mistook Kate for a barmaid after she changed into her casual
attire. Kate decides to keep up the charade, changing her voice and demeanor
in Marlow’s presence.
.......When
he strikes up a conversation with her, he says she is “vastly handsome.”
Growing bold, he adds, “Suppose I should call for a taste, just by way
of a trial, of the nectar of your lips.” (To audiences attending the play,
Marlow’s bold behavior is not at all surprising, for they are aware that
Marlow is a different man when in the presence of women of the servant
class.) When old Hardcastle observes Kate and Marlow together, he sees
Marlow seize Kate’s hand and treat her like a milkmaid. He’s thinking of
turning Marlow out. When he makes his feelings known to Kate, she asks
for an hour to convince her father that Marlow is not so bold and rude
as her father believes he is. He agrees to her proposal.
.......The
plot thickens at this point, for another visitor will shortly arrive–Marlow’s
father, Sir Charles Marlow. It seems Miss Neville happened on a letter
to old Hardcastle in which Sir Charles announced that he would arrive at
the Hardcastle home a few hours after his son made his appearance. When
she tells George Hastings of Sir Charles’s expected arrival at any minute,
George worries that Sir Charles–who is aware of George’s fondness for Constance–will
somehow upset their plans to run off together. Constance asks whether the
jewels are safe. George assures her they are, for he has sent the jewels,
via a servant, to Marlow for safekeeping.
.......Unfortunately,
unknown to Hastings, Marlow has told the servant to give the casket of
jewels to the “landlady” for safekeeping. So the jewels are back where
they were originally, in Mrs. Hardcastle’s possession (as Miss Neville’s
guardian). Tony tells his mother a servant was responsible for misplacing
them. Satisfied, she returns to the task of promoting a romance between
Tony and Constance, unaware that Hastings and the young lady are plotting
to abscond.
.......Marlow
is by now captivated by the barmaid and says to himself, “She’s mine, she
must be mine.”
.......Meanwhile,
old Hardcastle has had enough of impudent Marlow and orders him to leave.
Marlow protests. Hardcastle rants and exits in a huff. When Kate enters,
she realizes Marlow now knows something strange is going on, so she reveals
that the inn is Hardcastle’s house. However, she describes herself as a
“relative”–a “poor relation” who helps out. As such, she knows, Marlow
will continue to talk to her freely, since a “poor relation” is the same
in standing as a barmaid. Marlow, shaken and deeply embarrassed, says,
“To mistake this house of all others for an inn, and my father's old friend
for an innkeeper! What a swaggering puppy must he take me for! What a silly
puppy do I find myself!
.......Marlow
tells the “poor relation” that he will be leaving, in view of the circumstances,
but notes that she has been the only positive thing that happened to him
during the confusing and disconcerting ordeal. His words help to identify
the feeling she felt for him when they met: love. Her scheme of posing
as a barmaid/poor relation to find out his real feelings–a scheme in which
she stooped to conquer–has proved wise.
.......Further
mix-ups develop involving Miss Neville’s jewels and Mr. Hastings’ planned
elopement with Constance. Tony is implicated as the trickster who set in
motion the comedy of errors by telling Marlow and Hastings that the Hardcastle
home was an inn.
.......When
Sir Charles arrives, he and old Hardcastle have a laugh about the mix-ups,
but Hardcastle tells Kate that he is still unconvinced that Marlow is anything
but rude and insulting. To prove that Marlow is a worthy man, Kate enacts
one final scene as the poor relative while Marlow converses with her and
Sir Charles and Hardcastle listen behind a screen. In the end, Kate reveals
her identity to Marlow, and everyone understands the mistakes of the evening.
.......But
there is a further development: Old Hardcastle reveals that Tony is “of
age”–and has been for three months, meaning he has a right now to make
up his own mind about his future. Immediately, as his first act as his
own man, Tony goes against his mother’s wishes and refuses to marry Constance
Neville, freeing her to marry Hastings–and qualifying her to receive the
jewels. In the end, the young lovers–Kate and Marlow, Constance and Hastings–are
betrothed.
.......Mrs.
Hardcastle comments, “This is all but the whining end of a modern novel.”
.
Setting
.
Most of the action takes
place in the Hardcastle mansion in the English countryside, about sixty
miles from London. The mansion is an old but comfortable dwelling that
resembles an inn. A brief episode takes place at a nearby tavern, The Three
Pigeons Alehouse. The time is the 18th Century.
Characters
.
Mr. Hardcastle Middle-aged
gentleman who lives in an old mansion in the countryside about sixty miles
from London. He prefers to the simple rural life and its old-fashioned
manners and customs to the trendy and pretentious ways of upper-crust London.
Mrs. Dorothy Hardcastle
Wife of Mr.
Hardcastle. Unlike her husband, she yearns to sample life in high society.
She also values material possessions and hopes to match her son (by her
first husband) with her niece, Constance Neville, in order to keep her
niece's inheritance in the family.
Charles Marlow Promising
young man who comes to the country to woo the Hardcastles' pretty daughter,
Kate. His only drawback is that he is extremely shy around refined young
ladies, although he is completely at ease–and
even forward–with women of humble birth and
working-class status. He is a pivotal character in the play, used by author
Goldsmith to satirize England's preoccupation with, and overemphasis on,
class distinctions. However, Marlow's redeeming qualities make him a likeable
character, and the audience tends to root for him when he becomes the victim
of a practical joke resulting in mix-ups and mistaken identities.
Kate Hardcastle Pretty
daughter of the Hardcastles who is wooed by Charles Marlow. When he mistakes
her for a woman of the lower class, she allows him to continue to mistake
her identity, thus freeing his captive tongue so she can discover what
he really thinks about her.
Tony Lumpkin Son
of Mrs. Hardcastle by her first husband. He is a fat, ale-drinking young
man who has little ambition except to play practical jokes and visit the
local tavern whenever he has a mind. When Tony comes of age, he will receive
1,500 pounds a year. His mother hopes to marry him to her niece, Constance
Neville, who is in line to inherit a casket of jewels from her uncle. Tony
and Miss Neville despise each other.
George Hastings
Friend of Marlow who loves Constance Neville.While Marlow is busy with
Kate, Hastings is busy with Constance. Hastings hatches a plan to elope
with Constance and receives the help of Tony, who wants to erase Constance
from his life–and his mother's constant efforts
to match him with Constance.
Constance Neville
Comely young lady who loves Hastings but is bedeviled by Mrs. Hardcastle's
schemes to match her with Tony. Constance, an orphan, is the niece and
ward of Mrs. Hardcastle (who holds Miss Neville's inheritance in her possession
until she becomes legally qualified to take possession of it) and the cousin
of Kate.
Sir Charles Marlow
Father of young Charles.
Servants in the Hardcastle
Household
Maid in the Hardcastle
Household
Landlord of the Three
Pigeons Alehouse
First Fellow, Second
Fellow, Third Fellow, Fourth Fellow Drinking companions of Tony Lumpkin.
.
.
Type
of Play
.
She Stoops to Conquer
is a comedy of manners, meaning that it ridicules the manners (way of life,
social customs, etc.) of a certain segment of society, in this case the
upper class. The play is also sometimes termed a drawing-room comedy.
The play uses farce (including many mix-ups) and satire to poke fun at
the class-consciousness of 18th Century Englishmen and to satirize what
Goldsmith called the "weeping sentimental comedy so much in fashion at
present."
Style
and Structure
.
Goldsmith's style is wry,
witty, and simple but graceful. From beginning to end, the play is both
entertaining and easy to understand, presenting few words and idioms that
modern audiences would not understand. It is also well constructed and
moves along rapidly, the events of the first act–in
particular, references to Tony Lumpkin's childhood propensity for working
mischief and playing playing practical jokes–foreshadowing
the events of the following acts. There are frequent scene changes, punctuated
by an occasional appearance of a character alone on the stage (solus
in the stage directions) reciting a brief account of his feelings. In modern
terms, the play is a page-turner for readers. Goldsmith observed the classical
unities of time and place,
for the action of the play takes place in single locale (the English countryside)
on a single day.
.
First
Performance
.
Goldsmith completed the
play in 1773. It was first performed at Covent Garden Theatre in London
on March 15 of that year. It was well received. Over the last two centuries,
it has become one of the most popular comedies in English literary history.
It is still performed often today throughout the English-speaking world.
Acting
Approach
.
She Stoops to Conquer
generally requires actors to deliver restrained, subtle performances for
a production of the play to be successful. Overacting, typical in so many
modern motion-picture comedies, can ruin the play. The best comedic actors–like
Laurel and Hardy, W.C. Fields, Peter Ustinov, and Peter Sellers–use
a straight face to bend people over with laughter.
Themes
.
Theme One
.
Appearances are deceiving,
or you can't judge another human being by the quality of his or her wrapping.
This appears to be the central theme of the play, as demonstrated primarily
by the behavior of Young Marlow and Mrs. Hardcastle. Until Kate teaches
him a lesson, Marlow responds to women solely on the basis of their status
in society. He looks down on women of the lower class but is wholly at
ease around them; he esteems women of the upper class but is painfully
shy around them. Like the London society in which he was brought up, he
assumes that all women of a certain class think and act according to artificial
and arbitrary standards expected of that class. As for Mrs. Hardcastle,
she appears to assess a person by the value of his or her possessions.
.
Theme Two
.
Love ignores social boundaries.
Although prevailing attitudes among England's elite classes frown on romance
between one of their own and a person of humble origin, Marlow can't help
falling in love with a common "barmaid" (who is, of course, Kate in disguise).
.
Theme Three
.
There is hope for flawed
humanity. Although Marlow makes a fool of himself as a result of his
upper-class biases, Kate has enough common sense to see through the London
hauteur encasing him and to appreciate him for his genuinely good qualities–which
are considerable, once he allows them to surface. Also, Mrs. Hardcastle,
in spite of her misguided values, enjoys the love of her practical, down-to-earth
husband. He, too, is willing to look beyond her foibles in favor of her
good points.
.
Theme Four
.
Money breeds indolence.
Tony Lumpkin will get 1,500 pounds a year when he comes of age. Thus, without
financial worries, he devotes himself to ale and a do-nothing life.
Climax
The climax occurs when Kate
reveals her true identity to young Marlow while Hardcastle and Sir Charles
listen behind a screen.
.
An
Essay on the Theatre
Or, a
Comparison Between Laughing and Sentimental Comedy
By
Oliver Goldsmith
Written
in 1772
.
.......The
theater, like all other amusements, has its fashions and its prejudices:
and when satiated with its excellence mankind begin to mistake change for
improvement. For some years tragedy was the reigning entertainment; but
of late it has entirely given way to comedy, and our best efforts are now
exerted in these lighter kinds of composition. The pompous train, the swelling
phrase, and the unnatural rant, are displaced for that natural portrait
of human folly and frailty, of which all are judges, because all have sat
for the picture.
.......But
as in describing nature it is presented with a double face, either of mirth
or sadness, our modern writers find themselves at a loss which chiefly
to copy from; and it is now debated, whether the exhibition of human distress
is likely to afford the mind more entertainment than that of human absurdity?
.......Comedy
is defined by Aristotle to be a picture of the frailties of the lower part
of mankind, to distinguish it from tragedy, which is an exhibition of the
misfortunes of the great. When comedy, therefore, ascends to produce the
characters of princes or generals upon the stage, it is out of its walks,
since low life and middle life are entirely its object. The principle question,
therefore, is, whether, in describing low or middle life, an exhibition
of its follies be not preferable to a detail of its calamities? Or, in
other words, which deserves the preference,–the
weeping sentimental comedy so much in fashion at present, or the laughing,
and even low comedy, which seems to have been last exhibited by Vanbrugh
and Cibber?
.......If
we apply to authorities, all the great masters of the dramatic art have
but one opinion. Their rule is, that as tragedy displays the calamities
of the great, so comedy should excite our laughter by ridiculously exhibiting
the follies of the lower part of mankind. Boileau, one of the best modern
critics, asserts that comedy will not admit of tragic distress:–
..............Le
comique, ennemi des soupirs et des pleurs,
..............N'admet
point dans ses vers de tragiques douleurs.
.......Nor
is this rule without the strongest foundation in nature, as the distresses
of the mean by no means affect us so strongly as the calamities of the
great. When tragedy exhibits to us some great man fallen from his height,
and struggling with want and adversity, we feel his situation in the same
manner as we suppose he himself must feel, and our pity is increased in
proportion to the height from which he fell. On the contrary, we do not
so strongly sympathize with one born in humbler circumstances, and encountering
accidental distress: so that while we melt for Belisarius, we scarcely
give halfpence to the beggar who accosts us in the street. The one has
our pity, the other our contempt. Distress, therefore, is the proper object
of tragedy, since the great excite our pity by their fall; but not equally
so of comedy, since the actors employed in it are originally so mean, that
they sink but little by their fall.
.......Since
the first origin of the stage, tragedy and comedy have run in distinct
channels, and never till of late encroached upon the provinces of each
other. Terence, who seems to have made the nearest approaches, always judiciously
stops short before he comes to the downright pathetic; and yet he is even
reproached by Caesar for wanting the vis comica. All the other comic writers
of antiquity aim only at rendering folly or vice ridiculous, but never
exalt their characters into buskined pomp, or make what Voltaire humorously
calls a tradesman's tragedy.
.......Yet
notwithstanding this weight of authority, and the universal practice of
former ages, a new species of dramatic composition has been introduced,
under the name of sentimental comedy, in which the virtues of private life
are exhibited, rather than the vices exposed; and the distresses rather
than the faults of mankind make our interest in the piece. These comedies
have had of late great success, perhaps from their novelty, and also from
their flattering everyman in his favorite foible. In these plays almost
all the characters are good, and exceedingly generous; they are lavish
enough of their tin money on the stage; and though they want humor, have
abundance of sentiment and feeling. If they happen to have faults or foibles,
the spectator is taught, not only to pardon, but to applaud them, in consideration
of the goodness of their hearts; so that folly, instead of being ridiculed,
is commended, and the comedy aims at touching our passions without the
power of being truly pathetic. In this manner we are likely to lose one
great source of entertainment on the stage; for while the comic poet is
invading the province of the tragic muse, he leaves her lovely sister quite
neglected. Of this, however, he is no way solicitous, as he measures his
fame by his profits.
.......But
it will be said, that the theater is formed to amuse mankind, and that
it matters little, if this end be answered, by what means it is obtained.
If mankind find delight in weeping at comedy, it would be cruel to abridge
them in that or any other innocent pleasure. If those pieces are denied
by the name of comedies, yet call them by any other name and, if they are
delightful, they are good. Their success, it will be said, is a mark of
their merit, and it is only abridging our happiness to deny us an inlet
to amusement.
.......These
objections, however, are rather specious than solid. It is true that amusement
is a great object of the theater, and it will be allowed that these sentimental
pieces do often amuse us; but the question is, whether the true comedy
would not amuse us more? The question is, whether a character supported
throughout a piece, with its ridicule still attending, would not give us
more delight than this species of bastard tragedy, which only is applauded
because it is new?
.......A
friend of mine, who was sitting unmoved at one of these sentimental pieces,
was asked how he could be so indifferent? "Why, truly," says he, "as the
hero is but a tradesman, it is indifferent to me whether he be turned out
of his counting-house on Fish Street Hill, since he will still have enough
to open shop in St. Giles'."
.......The
other objection is as ill-grounded; for though we should give these pieces
another name, it will not mend their efficacy. It will continue a kind
of mulish production, with all the defects of its opposite parents, and
marked with sterility. If we are permitted to make comedy weep, we have
an equal right to make tragedy laugh, and to set down in blank verse the
jests and repartees of all the attendants in a funeral procession.
.......But
there is one argument in favor of sentimental comedy, which will keep it
on the stage, in spite of all that can be said against it. It is, of all
others, the most easily written. Those abilities that can hammer out a
novel are fully sufficient for the production of a sentimental comedy.
It is only sufficient to raise the characters a little; to deck out the
hero with a riband, or give the heroine a title; then to put an insipid
dialogue, without character or humor, into their mouths, give them mighty
good hearts, very fine clothes, furnish a new set of scenes, make a pathetic
scene or two, with a sprinkling of tender melancholy conversation through
the whole, and there is no doubt but all the ladies will cry and all the
gentlemen applaud.
.......Humor
at present seems to be departing from the stage, and it will soon happen
that our comic players will have nothing left for it but a fine coat and
a song. It depends upon the audience whether they will actually drive those
poor merry creatures from the stage, or sit at a play as gloomy as at the
Tabernacle. It is not easy to recover an art when once lost; and it will
be but a just punishment, that when, by our being too fastidious, we have
banished humor from the stage, we should ourselves be deprived of the art
of laughing.
.
Author
Information
.
She Stoops to Conquer
was written by Oliver Goldsmith (1730?-1774), a playwright, novelist, poet,
and essayist. His most memorable novel is The Vicar of Wakefield
(1766). His most memorable poems are "The Traveller" (1764) and "The Deserted
Village" (1770). He was an excellent writer who was admired by the greatest
authors of his day. Goldsmith was born in Ireland as the son of an Anglican
minister. After graduating from Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland, he
studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland and the University
of Leiden in The Netherlands. Then he roamed Europe, eking out a living
by playing the flute and begging. After arriving in England in 1756, he
worked as an apothecary's helper, a physician, an assistant teacher at
a school, a translator of texts, and an author of magazine and newspaper
articles. After establishing his reputation as a major writer, he spent
his money just as quickly as he made it, gambling frequently, and was almost
always in debt. Though a polished writer, he was a clumsy conversationalist.
Though many of his fictional characters were attractive and desirable,
he himself was homely, vain, socially inept, and a poor manager of his
business affairs. Samuel Johnson–the great
essayist, poet, critic, and lexicographer–said
of him, "No man was more foolish when he had not a pen in his hand, or
more wise when he had" (qtd. in "Goldsmith, Oliver." Britannica 2001
on CD-ROM).
.
Study
Questions and Essay Topics
-
Research the life of Goldsmith.
Then determine to what extent the personality of Marlow reflects the personality
of Goldsmith.
-
Specifically, what incidents
or scenes in the play most effectively poke fun at the class-consciousness
of the English?
-
What is the most glaring fault
of each of the main characters?
-
What redeeming qualities do
the characters have?
-
Why does Tony despise Constance
Neville? Is the reason that his mother chose her for him? Or are there
other reasons?
-
What are the key mix-ups on
which the plot depends?
-
Which role in the play do you
think poses the greatest challenge for an actor? Explain your answer.
-
Write an expository essay focusing
on Goldsmith's considerable influence on playwrights of the 19th, 20th,
and 21st centuries. Identify several of the playwrights and explain in
what way Goldsmith influenced them.
-
Write an expository essay informing
readers of what a typical English theatre was like in the 1700's.
|