PRINCIPAL TYPES OF COMEDY – COMEDY OF MANNERS

 

Variously called restoration comedy, artificial comedy and sex comedy, comedy of manners represents a comic subgenre that rose to eminence during the restoration age in England. Arguably the most famous dramatic variety at the time, it remained in vogue throughout the period, achieving peak popularity during two distinct phases. The first of this that occurred during the 1670s is dominated by the works of two playwrights namely William Wycherley, whose important plays are The Gentleman Dancing Master (1672), The Country Wife (1674/75), and The Plain Dealer (1676), and George Ethrege whose most notable drama is The Man of Mode or Sir Fopling Flutter (1676). The second phase of popularity that comedy of manners experienced happened in the 1690s when it supposedly reached its utmost refinement in the plays of its most celebrated exponent William Congreve, whose important works include The Old Batchlor (1693), The Double Dealer (1694), and The Way of the World (1700).

 

    It is noteworthy that in critically appraising comedy of manners, there are particularly two formative influences that we need to contend with. These are the humour comedies of Ben Jonson and the wit comedies of John Fletcher, both of which played a vital role in shaping the framework of restoration comedies. The point that these plays actually came to exert such a defining impact is in fact only natural, considering the handicap that confronted English drama specifically in the realm of comedy in the immediate aftermath of the restoration. To explain, when theatres reopened after a hiadus of 18 years, playhouses were forced to stage some of the more popular older plays, as they did not have a resident supply of playwrights to provide them with new ones. As far as comedies were concerned, this naturally meant that they invariably enacted plays by Jonson and Fletcher, allegedly two of the most famous comic playwrights of pre-restoration times. Thus when new comic plays came to be subsequently written in the form of comedy of manners, works by these two playwrights became the two staple sources of inspiration. It must however be acknowledged that though both played an influential part in shaping the framework of comedy of manners, the wit comedies of Fletcher involving genteel characters and intrigues perhaps exercised a stronger impact than the humour comedies of Jonson. This of course was not owing to any literary consideration, but entirely warranted by the altered context that came to prevail with regard to the theatre post the interregnum. Unlike during the renaissance when playhouses were frequented by people pertaining to a wide cross section of the society, in the restoration they by and large became an exclusive property of the privileged class. The plays therefore sought to deliberately cater to the taste of the aristocracy, and Fletcher’s plays served the purpose more effectively than Jonson’s, which mainly dealt with personages of the lowly and middling sort.

 

    Though extremely popular during the restoration, comedy of manners became a cause of intense backlash by the turn of the 18^th century, which resulted in them being ousted from public favour. It is however noteworthy that unlike other forms of dramas that came to prevail at the time, such as for instance the heroic play and she-tragedy, comedy of manners made a strong come back into theatrical reckoning after the setback. The revival in fact has been a telling one in that until relatively recent times, comedy of manners were by and large recognized as the only distinctive form of restoration drama that is worth taking note. It must be said even now, after other forms of plays from the era have come to receive their due recognition, comedy of manners retain their status as by far the most quintessential dramatic variety to emerge from the restoration. They indeed continue to remain as popular as ever today, as they have done so for many years thus far. A discussion of their characteristic features that follows bear out a clear picture of why they epitomize an immensely alluring form of drama.

 

Sophisticated Manners: Comedy of manners are principally called so because they essentially deal with the way people behave or conduct themselves. It is however noteworthy that in dealing with human conduct, these plays do not engage with those common attributes that characterize the dealings of all people in general, but with the sophisticated manners of a specific class of people namely the urban aristocracy. This is where we need to understand the importance attributed to maintaining a refined veneer among the restoration upper class. Though polished manners are viewed as symptomatic of a cultured or civilized disposition, they are essentially considered as put on or pretentious. For the elite class of men and women portrayed in the restoration comedy however, manners epitomize a reflection of character, an exhibition of the true self. It is not what one does that matters for these people, but how it is done. The refined characters of the comedy of manners typify a class for whom appearances are everything, who view sophistication in conduct as the most telling hallmark of nobility. The flipside of this code is of course that very often polished behavior becomes a cover up, a justifiable pretext for concealing unscrupulous acts. Manners thus acquire the significance of a double edged sword in a comedy of manners, exemplifying simultaneously a token of noble character and a vindication of immorality. In these plays therefore, polished behavior is not merely depicted but satirized. This is to say, they are exposed as ultimately superficial in scope, which explains why comedy of manners are also referred to as artificial comedies.

 

Amorous Intrigues: The characters in a comedy of manners typically epitomize a promiscuous class of belles and beaus, who are given to a carefree creed of libertine living. For this seemingly sophisticated lot, the very idea of sexual fidelity represents a misguided notion to be scoffed at, something that runs completely counter to the essence of existence as they know it. Not required to work, they mainly keep themselves preoccupied through devising intrigues or schemes to deceive each other, which almost always involve an adulterous or extra-marital interest to contend with. Amorous as they are, the intrigues lack any sense of romance. This is to say, love making and not love per se is the desired goal of these intrigues, which are ultimately incited by motives of pleasure and profit, the former perhaps more strongly than the latter. Hoodwinking an unsuspecting husband by seducing his wife, befooling an unsympathetic or interfering elder, disentangling oneself from an affair that had lost its charm, these  exemplify some of the most prevalent types of intrigues in a comedy of manners. It is of course needless to say that the characters do not exhibit any remorse or repentance, regardless of whether they fail or succeed in their intrigues. The ultimate impression we gather at the conclusion of the play is that they would most probably go on to fabricate newer intrigues, which are characteristically framed along similar lines of amorous deception.

 

Witty dialogues: By far the most redeeming feature of a restoration comedy, its jewel so to say, is the stylistic aspect exemplified in its dialogues. Dialogues in a comedy of manners do not simply epitomize a mundane means of relaying information, but a lively mode through which the characters showcase their intellectual astuteness. This of course should not be taken to suggest that the dialogues were ornately poetic or philosophical. They are on the contrary conspicuously prosaic but tellingly witty and ingenious, the kind meant to pull the rug from right under your opponent’s feet. After all, the sort of intellect the aristocratic personages depicted in these plays favoured was more the practical variety which enabled them to assert their superiority in a verbal dual, and not any lofty reflections of a kindred soul. The point is simply that in the elite society portrayed in a comedy of manners, scruples had no say, adultery, deception, clandestine affairs, were all not just permissible but fashionable. There was however one taboo, and it was the unwritten rule that explicit exhibition of one’s emotions was thought of as unbecoming of a person, and therefore to be implicitly avoided at all cost. So for instance even upon coming to know that his wife is having an affair with another man present in that same room, the husband is expected not to openly confront him. Doing so in fact would only result in the husband becoming a butt of ridicule, being branded as an uncouth barbarian, or most likely a country bumpkin. The only recourse open to him at such an occasion is to vent his emotions discretely, through engaging his rival in a repartee, a kind of verbal fencing match, in which the interlocutors strive to outshine one another via witty rebuttals. Wit thus epitomizes the one foolproof ammunition that characters in a restoration comedy have at their disposal, and it is those capable of wielding it most effectively in their social dealings with the others that eventually prevail.

 

Empowered Heroine: Restoration drama marks the dawn of a new era for women on the English stage, in that apart from being allowed to perform as actors, they were also bestowed with more prominent and empowered roles in the plays. . Nowhere is this point more forcefully and memorably manifested than in the projected image of the heroine in a restoration comedy. The female lead in a comedy of manners is typically a self-assured mistress, who matches perhaps at times even overshadows her male counterpart. For instance, like the men of the times, she is a sexually vivacious creature, who does not shy away from scandal, and is not afraid to exhibit her erotic inclinations. She is similarly intelligent, who can hold her own in a clash of wits against any man, and capable of coming up with the most ingenious intrigues. A being of indomitable self-will, she refuses to be led or dictated to by anyone, remaining stubbornly resolute in her prerogative to accept or reject any suitor of choice. She claims her place alongside a man as not just his partner, but an equal stake holder whose wishes and words ought not to be ignored due consideration. The restoration comic heroine is thus a person who is her own mistress, free, frank and fearless, who demands for a more just and equitable position on the question of gender relationship.

 

Fops: Fops are the fool’s counterpart in a restoration comedy, but unlike his opposite number from the Elizabethan era, he is not a pseudo philosopher, rather a pretentious gallant whose comic impact stems from his contrast with the central figures. To elaborate, in comedy of manners sophisticated deportment and intellect are practically everything that a person needs to thrive socially, and the main characters by virtue of their noble stalk develop it naturally. The main business of a fop is to imitate the mannerisms and astuteness of these genuinely aristocratic personages, in an attempt to be identified as similarly hip and sharp. However, as they are not really noble in birth or breeding, and do not have an authentic access to that mode of lifestyle, they find themselves incapable of carrying the cultivated traits with the easy grace of the truly highborn, tending to exaggerate them in their bearings. The upshot is that they come to exemplify funny eccentrics, whose conduct becomes more a cause for ridicule than admiration. It is notable that fops typify a distinct breed of fools peculiar to a comedy of manners, who have not been seen on the English stage before or after the restoration.