Tuesday, February 6, 2007

T.I.O.B.E.

Wow—what a ride this play is! It read so fast that I hardly had time to even absorb what it was about, besides a full-blown mockery of true love and the importance of marriage. This is the first play by Oscar Wilde that I have read, but I really would like to read more—it was very witty and fun.

The title is of course a bit ironic given that the name Earnest implies a sense of seriousness and properness about someone---neither of which described either of the two main characters, Jack and Algy, both of whom live double lives under the name “Earnest”. On the contrary, they were both outrageously absurd, silly, and quite ignorant. Their behavior in the play resembled nothing of the sort of behavior you would expect from grown men during the time period the play was written, making it all the more alluring to read about their crazy lives.

Although the plot deals with the twists and turns of Jack and Algy’s living double lives, refereed to as “Bunburying,” for this class I think it is the distinct lightness in which Wilde approaches the subject of love and marriage, and its relation to social class that is important. What I believe that Wilde is emphasizing is the absurdity of what makes marriage and love acceptable vs. unacceptable in society, i.e. the interrogation of “Earnest” by Lady Bracknell for her blessing in the marriage of her daughter Gwendolen. Although Jack meets most of her “social status” qualifications, such as owning land and a house on the correct street, Jack is still an unacceptable partner because he was found in a handbag in a train station. Algy, on the other hand, receives Lady Bracknell’s blessing in marriage to Cecily even though the two have only known each other a couple hours and can’t possibly truly love each other! Wilde is definitely poking fun at society’s value system!

I also read a couple reviews on this play linking Wilde’s inclusion of double lives in this play as a reference to being homosexual…but I didn’t get that at all! What did I miss??

No comments: