A comedy of manners is a satire generally directed against the social pretensions, manners and conventions of an existing culture. The characters in a comedy of manners tend not to be well-developed personalities, but types. Plot is less important than atmosphere, dialogue and satire (witty when possible). Character development is unimportant because the actors stand not for real people but as social types to be ridiculed for their nonconformity to the sensibilities of the day. Plot is secondary because it doesn’t serve to further the purpose of mockery. A distinguishing mark of the typical comedy of manners is an illicit romantic contest involving witty participants.

The questionable morality of such entertainments led to something of a decline in their popularity, only to be later revived by men such as Oscar Wilde.

In the play soon to disgrace the “fundamentalist” world, The Importance of Being Earnest, the very virtue of seriousness is mocked. What one ought to be serious about is glibly dismissed as trivial and what is trivial is elevated to serious pontification. In fact the whole moral world is turned on its ear. The Victorian social virtue of visiting the sick is mocked by a debasement known as bunburying. A quick skimming of the first act shows contempt for such biblical virtues as learning, seriousness, honesty, respect for age and family, sex, truth and marriage. And that’s just off the top of my memory. I’m nearly certain other things are mocked as well: certainly my memory is not improving with age.

In Act I, Algernon says of women: The only way to behave to a woman is to make love to her, if she is pretty, and to some one else, if she is plain.

In Act II, Gwendolyn says of men: Outside the family circle, papa, I am glad to say, is entirely unknown. I think that is quite as it should be. The home seems to me to be the proper sphere for the man. And certainly once a man begins to neglect his domestic duties he becomes painfully effeminate, does he not? And I don't like that. It makes men so very attractive. Cecily, mamma, whose views on education are remarkably strict, has brought me up to be extremely short-sighted; it is part of her system; so do you mind my looking at you through my glasses?

Indeed the play has an interesting subtitle, one that really should not be missed given the fundamentalist pretenses of today: A Trivial Comedy for Serious People.

So you need to get the picture clearly in your mind’s eye. Here we have a fundamentalist educational institution at the latter end of church history performing a play. And not just any play, a play by a convicted (and as we say today: a flaming) sodomite. And not just a play by a sodomite, but a comedy of manners which liberally and gratuitously mocks biblical virtues. And not only a play by a sodomite mocking Christian virtues, but doing it all in such a formal way as to undercut any attempt at earnest or serious conduct of life.

I do hope you can appreciate the irony here. It is so rich, I fear getting a pimple just telling you about it!

When we say that the church has declined to such a degree that bumpkins now set the tone and standards for the movement, our comments are dismissed as being malicious. As to whether they are true or not I leave to those who care to consider the facts, and at the bottom is a short list of alphabetized websites for easy reference.

You wonder, as these Midwestern art-lovers gather in their bubba-college theater to giggle at the savaging of the virtues of traditional piety, if there were a better word than “bumpkin”, what would it be?

Are these people laughing at the mockery of honesty, prudence, fidelity, seriousness, the overturning of the role of the sexes and contempt for elders? Or do these people not have a clue as to the cultural meaning of what they laughing at? Do they have no understanding of form? Do they not appreciate how Wilde makes his attack on virtue, or do they just see a work of literature as a string of one-liners? Where did they develop this sensibility, watching Shakespeare or Gilligan’s Island?

And I have a few more questions of a personal nature: Is this a religious movement worth saving? Maybe it should be preserved as an exhibit for the Ripley’s Believe It Or Not! museum?

Where are the men in this movement? Are they entirely unknown because they dutifully stay at home? If there are any men on the board of Maranatha Baptist Bible College, will they be laughing at this play?

Is separatism still the idea that justifies this movement? And if so, what might it a good thing to separate from if not performances of works like The Importance of Being Earnest?

Will students be required to attend a theater entertainment which contains lines like: “The only way to behave to a woman is to make love to her, if she is pretty, and to some one else, if she is plain”. Or will the play be bowdlerized by an excision of such lines.

Can we call this serious behavior?

________________________________________________________

[link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde[/link]

[link]http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde[/link]

[link]http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/owilde.htm[/link]

[link]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/wilde/wildeaccount.html[/link]

[link]http://www.litencyc.com/php/speople.php?rec=true&UID=4718[/link]

[link]http://www.public.iastate.edu/~spires/Concord/earnest.html
[/link]