Older more aged literature usually is far superior to new less seasoned literature. Many readers may not see it this way because of how the older literature was written. The way readers are supposed to interpret that piece of literature isn’t always the way it is interpreted. The School for Scandal’s use of sophisticated humor makes it harder for modern readers to enjoy it.
The School for Scandal is a Restoration play, or a satirical piece about those times (Barbra Dozier Web). Richard Brinsley Sheridan portrayed the upper class of the time in this play by showing the hypocrisy that is occurring and showing one of people’s favorite pastimes of the era, destroying other people’s reputations (Shuaib Asghar Web). When Sheridan portrayed this he did it in a humorous way. Many of these jokes and comical scenes are rather hard for modern audiences to enjoy. Sheridan wrote in a way very different then his fellow writers of the time. The School for Scandal can seem very static and slow moving if it is not performed well (Robert Hogan Web). The same applies if it is being read. Just reading the play, does not give the reader an opportunity to see how Sheridan pictured his scenes unfolding, therefore modern audiences have a hard time understanding the jokes and funny scenes.
Think about comedy movies. Would they be as humorous as they were before if the actors weren’t portraying them? Would situational humor still be funny even though it couldn’t be seen? The same goes for The School for Scandal. Sheridan uses witty exchanges and comical situations to show his characters’ shortcomings (Dozier Web). The actions of the characters are what create the humor in the scenes. Sheridan kept the action to a minimum when he wrot...
... middle of paper ...
...ociated University Presses, 1986. 274-285. Rpt. inNineteenth-Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Juliet Byington. Vol. 91. Detroit: Gale Group, 2001. Literature Resource Center. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.
Sawyer, Newell W. "The Decline of a Tradition." The Comedy of Manners: From Sheridan to Maugham (1931): 1-21. New York: Russell & Russell, 1969. Rpt. in Literature Criticism from 1400 to 1800. Ed. Michael L. LaBlanc. Vol. 92. Detroit: Gale, 2003. Literature Resource Center. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.
Sheridan, Richard Brinsley, and Frederick Wilse Bateson. The school for scandal. London: Benn ;, 1979. Print.
Whipple, Edwin P. "Richard Brinsley Sheridan." The North American Review 66.138 (Jan. 1848): 72-110. Rpt. in Nineteenth-Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Laurie Lanzen Harris and Sheila Fitzgerald. Vol. 5. Detroit: Gale Research, 1984. Literature Resource Center. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.
1970, pp. 7-8. Rpt. In The Chelsea House Library of Literary Criticism. New York.:Chelsea House Publishers, 1988.
Heberle, Mark. "Contemporary Literary Criticism." O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. Vol. 74. New York, 2001. 312.
JB Priestley uses dramatic devices to make An inspector calls a modern day morality play, to do this he uses dramatic devices, such as dramatic irony and tension in order to convey the message through the entire play. They are used accurately considering the time in which the play is set. Priestley also uses the characters as dramatic devices, they symbolise the dramatic devices, an example of this is Priestley makes us hate Mr. Birling because he symbolises capitalism, and in Priestley’s eyes capitalism is wrong. Throughout the pl...
in Twentieth- Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Janet Witalec. The. Vol.
...Chrie, D., (ed.), Nineteenth Century Literature Criticism. Detroit, MI: Gale Research Company, 1986. Vo. 13, pp. 53-111.
Moulton, Charles Wells. Moulton's Library of Literary Criticism of English and American Authors through the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: Volume 1. New York: Frederick Ungar, 1966. Print.
"Morton, Thomas - Introduction." Literary Criticism (1400-1800). Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg. Vol. 72. Gale Cengage, 2002. eNotes.com. 2006. 21 Feb, 2011
Forum 19.4 (Winter 1985): 160-162. Rpt. inTwentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg and Lawrence J. Trudeau. Vol. 192. Detroit: Gale, 2008. Literature Resource Center. Web. 30 Nov. 2013.
Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Linda Pavlovski. Vol.
Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Jay Parini. Vol. 14. Detroit: Gale Research, 1987. Literature Resource Center. Web. 24 Jan. 2012.
New York Times Book Review (1968): 42, 44, 46. Rpt. in Nineteenth- Century Literature Criticism. Eds. Laurie Lanzen Harris and Sheila Fitzgerald.
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. "Essay date 1935." Twentieth-Century Litirary Criticism 9. Ed. Dennis Poupond. Detroit: Gale Research, 1983. 316-317
Twentieth Century Literary Criticism 115 (1929): 121-126. JSTOR. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. "Dictionary.com."
- - -. “Literature Criticism from 1400 to 1800.” http://go.galegroup.com. N.p., 1988. Web. 9 Dec. 2010. .
During the 1700s, England’s plays and literature went through a period referred to as Restoration Drama. Throughout the period, there were quite a few playwrights, such as Dryden, Sheridan, and Congreve, and a few different types of drama introduced to the audiences. Dramas included Heroic and three types of comedies, which will be explicated within the essay. It was just before the 18th century that the comedies were becoming more popular with English audiences. Famous playwright Richard Brinsley Sheridan wrote his The School for Scandal at this time. The School for Scandal follows the idea of Laughing Comedy with its witty dialogue and the hypocritical characters. Sheridan was quite clever while writing this play by making it somewhat satirical