Randoms ideas concerning Susanna Centlivre’s A Bold Stroke for a Wife and John Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera

Due to the insane degree of work that I have had recently, I have been unable to write my thoughts about Susanna Centlivre’s “A Bold Stroke for a Wife”. Now, that I have time, I will write whatever idea comes to my head about the play in question. First, I must write that this play has been one of my favourites in the course (outside The Country Wife or The Rover), although that may not be saying much because I am not even particularly ecstatic about the plays that I considered good (no, The Fair Penitent is not one of them).

Like Behn’s The Rover, an absent father figure (dead, in this case) is the cause of Ann Lovely’s troubles. Due to her father’s past hate for “posterity” (Centlivre I. i. 85), he sought to prevent his daughter from marrying by placing “in the case of four men as opposite to each other as light and darkness” (Centlivre I.i. 93-95)  who are to decide her marriage partner.

Again, like Mirabell in The Way of the World, the Colonel uses deceitful means in order to obtain the love of Ann Lovely and her inheritance. Thus, he relies on diverse public masks in order to accomplish his private goal (a course of attack also manipulated by Horner who manipulates a public mask as a eunuch or Waitwell whose mask is Sir Rowland). Furthermore, in the Colonel’s affection for Ann Lovely, money and love are interlinked once again and the strict opposition to the presence of money in relationships (as in marriages of convenience) is again reduced in this play.

Centlivre’s play also reflects the effect of Collier’s tract against stage in that it seems to tone down references to sexuality and reduce the presence of rakish characters in order to conform to a moral standard. The Colonel does not appear to be a “reformed rake” like Mirabell and he consistently pursues a monogamous relationship throughout the play.

The Colonel’s adventures among the four wards were also very comical and his diverse masks contrasted with his private self revealed in his conversations with Freeman. Thus, the division between the private self and his public mask is underlined as a result (a recurring theme or aspect of these Restoration comedies). This hypocrisy is also underlined through Obadiah Prim who strives to keep a mask of respectability and moral purity, even though her “naked breasts troubleth my outward man” (II.ii 52-53) and reveal his repressed sexual desire for Ann (in adition, he even asked Mary to “show you a little, little bit of her delicious bubby” (II.ii. 106-107)).

As for Ann Lovely, her character is particularly interesting in that she is consistently in opposition to the actions of Mrs. Prim and Obadiah (such as the attempt to force her to wear “proper” clothes such as a “pinched cap and formal hood” (Centlivre II.i).  Despite her constant rebellion, she must still rely on a male character, the Colonel, in order to save her from captivity ( thus reinforcing traditional gender stereotypes) while simultaneously preserving her “honour”. In addition, marriage is once again posited as her the most desirable end for a woman like Lovely. 

While reading the play, I was also wondering whether Sackbut was one of the first positive representations of a character below the higher classes or the aristocracy (although he could be middle class or higher, so I may be wrong).

As for John Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera, it was arguably the most unique play that we have read so far in that it was primarily composed of lower class characters. I did not like it as much as A Bold Stroke for a Wife, although I did not think the latter play to be good neither. Like the Fair Penitent, I wish the Beggar’s Opera never existed. The group in class already revealed how the play was a satirical attack on the subject matter of the conventional Italian opera as well as Prime Minister Robert Walpole (probably spelled that wrong).

While it was the most unique play so far, it was also probably one of the most misogynistic or patriarchal play in the class because it reinforced the traditional sexual double standard between men and women by characterizing Lucy as an unalterably “fallen” woman and indulging in the licentious and rakish behaviour of Macheath. Unlike Lucy, Macheath is not punished for his promiscuous behaviour and is saved at the play’s end by the Beggar. Then again, virtually all of the plays in this course reinforced this double standard (and this is not surprising for Restoration and eighteenth century plays). While reading the play, I kept trying to find a descriptive noun for women that was not “hussy,” “slut,” or “wench”. Alas, I could not find a lot of words that were truly different from these examples.

On a side note, it is interesting to see the resurgence of a rakish character like Horner and Willmore after the excessive exploits of the libertine had disappeared at the beginning of the eighteenth century due to Jeremy Collier’s tract against the theatre. Similarly, the reversal of the traditional comedy’s idealization of marriage (as in A Bold Stroke for A Wife) for women was an original addition. However, because it was done in such a comical fashion, Gay was not attempting to discredit society’s conventional imposition of marriage upon women.

While I will probably write more in specific in relation to the Beggar’s Opera (considering I wrote very little and mostly unoriginal thoughts), I will stop for now and work on various essays, all of which will contribute to my eventual nervous breakdown.