Answer TWO of the following...
Q1: In Act IV, Joseph attempts to seduce Lady Teazle in an interesting manner. What is his argument for taking an indiscretion against Sir Peter, and why is Lady Teazle almost convinced by it? What does this say about the morals of a so-called "man of sentiment"?
Q2: In Act III, scene 1, Sir Peter intends to make amends with his wife, and within two pages they're getting a divorce. Clearly, he has no interest in this--and as we later see, neither does she--so how are they each tricked into acting the "role" of a maligned wife and husband? Why do their arguments strike us as curiously artificial and borrowed?
Q3: In one of the most hilarious and ironic scenes in the play, Charles proves his "candor" (rather than his sentiment) to Sir Oliver, disguised as the money lender Master Premium. How does he do this, and are his actions proof of his profligate nature...or a tonic to his brother's subterfuge? How are we supposed to read/respond to him in this scene?
Q4: Which scene in the play reminds you of the Hogarth print above (which we examined in class on Monday)? How are both the artist and the playwright using farce and satire to exposed the debased values of the English aristocracy? Also, who ultimately exposes Joseph's plans?
Q1: Joseph surface begins again an attempt to retain his surface image and lose the idea of him and Maria's relationship in the mind of Lady Teazle. He immediately tries to swash the idea to her, even though the audience knows the contrary. He also tries to appeal to Lady Teazle by making her feel confident of her own innocence in all matters, therefore building her esteem and ego, taking her mind off of the matters at hand. In reflecting solely on her innocence and well-being her thoughts are no longer directed toward Joseph, but toward her self and her "suffering." The morals involved with this man of sentiment are nothing more than ploys to disguise his own motives for self advancement.
ReplyDeleteQ4: Act IV, Scene III I believe closely mirrors Hogarths painting. We see the same sneakiness in characterization as well as attempted distractions running amuck in both scenes. The parallels exist to reveal the shallowness of the aristocracy as well as their ploys of self indulgence and manipulation. The comedic value of the characters feeble attempts to hide and learn what the other is doing, only to be exposed later, adds a great deal of satirization. We watch as Sir Peter ironically exposes Joseph's schemes in front of his own wife unbeknownst to her. Charles simply exasperates
Charles simply extends the circumstances through his candor, and brings to light the remainder of the events, and the stories unfold.
ReplyDeleteGood responses...though Joseph also assures her that she has to cheat on her husband to obey him: after all, if he suspects you of an infidelity. it would be "improper" to prove him wrong. You might as well do it if he thinks you have. As he says, "for your husband should never be deceived in you--and in that case it becomes you to be frail in compliment to his discernment (48). This scene shows the corruption of the youth by polished society wits who can use words/logic to "mask" their true intentions.
ReplyDeleteQ1: In Act IV Joseph is trying to convince Lady Teazle she should cheat on her husband. Joseph tells her "when a husband entertains a groundless suspicion of his wife...the original compact is broken, and she owes it to the honor of her sex to outwit him" (4.3.48). This scene shows Joseph just as he is - a person who tries to keep up his surface appearance as a "man of sentiment," but who is actually a corrupt man.
ReplyDeleteQ3: Charles sells all his family paintings to "Mr. Premium" so he can borrow money from him. Sir Oliver agrees, but is secretly outraged by it. Throughout the sale, he makes asides that reinforce his disapproval: "Heaven deliver me! his famous Uncle Richard for ten pounds!" (4.1.42). Charles proves himself, however, because he refuses to sell the painting of Sir Oliver, even after "Mr. Premium" offers him double the amount. Because of his refusal to sell the painting, Sir Oliver is soothed.
Q. 2. Their arguments seem very artificial because they fight over the most trivial things. Their fights seem very much on the surface. It's like everything they do has to turn into an argument. They're also trying to play too much into the roles thought of in that day. They were told that an old man and a young woman cannot get along. It's like they're trying too hard to make their relationship all about.
ReplyDeleteQ 4. The scene that reminds me the most of Hogarth's painting is the scene at the end of Act IV. When Joseph, Lady Teazle, Sir Peter, and Sir Charles, it is so funny. It is almost exactly as the scene above. It's like Joseph is the lady in the picture, so it's kinda like reversed roles. However, Lady Teazle is the woman because she is trying so hard to play into the societal roles. After analyzing the role, it's funny to see just how accurate that picture is to the story.