1) Choose one
or other of the two most dramatically complicated scenes in the latter half of
the play, and formulate a question as
to how it should be played – it could be about a character’s style of entrance,
or about how fast something should be played, or about an expression of face or
voice at a crucial moment. One spot is the Joseph Surface screen / trunk scene
(4.3. 110-425); the other spot is the scandal-mongering scene (5.1.10-150). We’ll
then take a look at this moment, and your question, in class.
or
2) Lady Teazle
has a fine speech at the end of act 4. What do you think of it, and of her?
or
3) What
exactly is Sir Peter Teazle saying to Joseph at 4.3.205-219 (overheard by Lady
Teazle) … and why is this important? What do you think about Sir Peter’s
character here?
or
4) The regular question of course applies. What
sort of comedic ending is this? Is it more or less satisfying than others we’ve
seen so far? Why? Or discuss something else we haven’t mentioned.
I love the screen scene - now I understand what that reviewer we mentioned in class meant when he said that the audiences saw this scene and wondered 'if anything could be cleverer'. The dialogue is so witty and has so many double meanings. It's a hilarious scene, but it's also very emotionally charged - lots of peoples' lives and reputations are at stake. I'm curious as to how this could be performed so that the hilarity of the scene is taken advantage of without forgetting the gravity of the vey precarious situation. I wonder if the characters already in on the secret (mostly Joseph, as the visible conspirator) could get more agitated in a realistic fashion as the drama unfolds, and the new entrants to the scene (Sir Peter and Charles), who don't know about the hidden people/meanings all over the scene, could preserve the comedy by getting too close to the secrets without realizing the danger. Still, I think the scene is written to lean towards comedy - the situation is just ludicrous, and that helps you forget how horrible it is. I wonder how the scene could be performed to be more nerve-wracking than funny - maybe if the whole thing was slowed down, and Joseph kept his panic to the quiet, hand-wringing type.
ReplyDeleteI am so… entertained by this ending. It’s not a “good ending” in the slightest because everything is achieved through “immoral” ways, yet it’s a good ending because people get their just desserts and it’s all so backstabby (I guess that says something about my sense of humour, sorry).
ReplyDeleteIn the end, I really do have to say that Snake and Moses are foils: they’re minor characters who can play the game, but one is “honest” and one claims that he shall never be. They succeed in dupes. One gives/lends money, and one accepts it as bribes.
(There was one line that said something along the lines as “what the devil Jew” and I think it was meant as an expletive of frustration in general about the whole situation, but if you stick a convenient comma in there, all of the potentially “nice” things about Moses get turned around. So it depends on acting/directing, I guess. There was also the bit where Joseph is asked if he’s hiding a woman or a Jew in his room: why are they correlated [besides the shame factor]?)
And I didn’t want to initially, but I really do like Charles. I think his heart is in the right place at times, which is more than anyone else in the play. It’s difficult to overlook the debt, but he’s humorous, honest (!) and compassionate, so that works in his favour. Plus be breaks the fourth wall at the end, which I’m a sucker for.
At the start of this whole play, we were asking why everyone walks in on Lady Sneerwell while she’d dressing. By the end, I think that’s answered (although Lady Sneerwell is a surprisingly minor character in this ~affair~, in comparison to all that initial drama): this play is about invasion of privacy? Because we end with the entire Town infringing on a personal space as well-- everyone storms the Teazles’ residence when he’s supposedly dying a painful and bloody death. The gossip is a verbal invasion, and the scene with the screens is the literal lifting of the veneers that many of these characters walk about with, revealing their true selves. Again, I feel like the only people who are real without being cloaked in some form or the other are Moses and Snake; Charles, however honest in terms of wearing his intentions on his sleeves, is part of the scandal via rumour, so I don’t feel like he qualifies as being “maskless” in this case.
And can I just say that I’m /so/ excited to see this played.
This comedic ending is worth exploring. Charles and Maria end up together, Peter and Lady Teazle reconcile their marriage. Whether they decide to give up on gossiping one cant be sure, and I think that would be the important for a happy comedic ending that the correct way to live it emphasized at the end. Or, it could be that the societal norm is replaced, and maybe gossiping is so ingrained in the culture that returning to that norm at the end it fine with everybody. Lady Teazle does leave the "school for scandal" which perhaps indicates that she is done with gossip, because she has seen how much harm it caused. As for Charles and Maria, I just want to express my frustration as to why the good girls always marry men who are lesser. Either way, Charles has not reformed in anyway, but Maria is there to help him stay the straight and narrow. So I suppose this works for a comedic ending in a way. It is almost similar to the Rover, when Willmore and Hellena marry, and there is an assumption that Willmore with fix his ways (which we all had a lot of trouble believing). Overall, I think this can fit into the classic comedy ending, with marriage, reconciled marriage, and the fall of the "evil" Lady Sneerwell.
ReplyDeleteWhen Lady Teazle is faced with a very uncomfortable situation, she tries her best to get out of it with her honor in tact. After she and Joseph are discovered by Charles, and although it is obvious that she is having a relationship with Joseph, she does not deny that she has been the one to pursue Joseph. She is somewhat honest at the end of Scene IV, and admits that although she did pursue Joseph, she has repented since and will no longer continue her relationship with him. This allows Sir Peter to trust Charles now more, since he denounces any relationship with Lady Teasle and claims that Joseph and Lady Teazle appear to be intimate only seconds before they are revealed. Charles seems amused by this discovery, but still that doesn't stop Lady Teazle from not appearing embarrassed for what has just happened. I think this shows that Lady Teazle has a somewhat strong personality. She gathers her thoughts, comes up with a speech and isn't afraid to admit what she did, corrects things by saying she will not longer pursue Joseph, and simply walks out.
ReplyDelete