Toward a Generic Theory of Restoration Comedy: Some Preliminary Considerations

T o w a rd a G en eric T h eo rymlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA o f R esto ra tio n C o m ed y: S o m e P relim in a ry C o n sid era tio n s B R I A N C O R M A N Tre ating a time-bound body of literature generically presents two basic sets of problems to the critic— problems arising from the neces­ sity for defining the genre itself and problems arising from the neces­ sity for defining the unique features of its actual embodiments in a particular age. Restoration comedy has a history and identity of its own within the larger history and identity of comedy in general. Its definition depends in part on a definition of comedy, a requirement that at best provokes skepticism in most critics. Moreover, in a highly traditional form with a long history, formal changes are gradual, not sudden, piecemeal, not wholesale. The origin and development of Restoration comedy are thus so difficult to isolate that many critics doubt that they can be isolated profitably at all. Extraordinary similarities have nevertheless always been observed among Restoration comedies. An educated reader or theatergoer can encounter a play for the first time and identify it not only as a comedy but as a comedy of the Restoration. From such shared and common experiences follow what R. S. Crane calls “the two complementary 423 424 / WVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA B R I A N C O R M A N id e asof age s and traditions,”1 the structural realities of literary history. As a result the generic critic of Restoration comedy must anticipate the scope of the theorist who demands an awareness of the comedy of other periods; a time-bound theory will be of little generic signifi­ cance. At the same time the critic must prepare for the scrutiny of the historian who insists on a thorough knowledge of the period; a theory which pretends to deal with Restoration comedy must account for more than Etherege, Wycherley, and Congreve. Since my immediate goal is an answer to the question “W hat is Restoration comedy?” a strictly generic approach is not appropriate. Generic theory helps place Restoriation com edy in the comic tradition and provides a useful vocabulary for inquiry. But specifying the distinguishing features of R estoration comedy is essentially a historical problem. I also have a second goal— to investigate the development of Resto­ ration comedy— a goal, I suspect, behind most discussions of Restora­ tion comedy. The concept of the age is thus all the more important. Anne Righter claims that Restoration drama is “positively schizo­ phrenic,” that the “disjunction” between comedy and tragedy is one “for which no precedent existed in any earlier theatre”— and the separation of critical studies into studies of comedy and studies of tragedy would tend to substantiate her claim.2 Yet few writers pro­ duced either form exclusively, and most also indulged in mixed forms, much to the chagrin of critics of Restoration drama for three hundred years. Thus a central figure like Dryden enters the standard histories of Restoration comedy through the side door, often with apologies. Comic plots are excised from Secret L o ve or T h e Spanish F riar and treated in isolation. Restoration comedy cannot be understood fully without a knowl­ edge of the other forms of Restoration drama, not only because their histories are parallel but because their shared conventions help explain all genres. Recognizing that the Dorimants and the Almanzors are in many ways different versions of the same character type, for example, clears up a number of potential interpretive difficulties in the comedies and in the heroic plays, and provides an approach to mixed forms as well. More concretely, Alithea s loyalty to Sparkish continues to puz­ zle critics of T h e C o u n try W ife who cannot take seriously her G eneric T heory o f R estoration C om edy ImlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH 425 straightforward appeal to her honor. Her statements make more sense when set alongside of Almahide’s similarly puzzling loyalty to Boabdelin : A lm a h id e. This day...