Themes of play The School for Scandal

 

Honour seems to be in short supply in School for Scandal: Lady Teazle is considering abandoning the ideas of integrity that she learned growing up in the country, Joseph is ready to betray his brother to secure a wealthy wife, and Charles is hopelessly in debt to moneylenders. Even Sir Oliver, whose Honour should be above question, is ready to assume a disguise to test his nephews’ true nature. By the conclusion of the play, however, it is clear that only the gossips lack true Honour. Lady Teazle realizes that she values her husband and has proven her worth. Charles, though foolish and intemperate with gambling and money, is Honourable. He pays off his debts and is willing to help a poor relationship without being asked. Sir Oliver’s deception unmasks Joseph’s hypocrisy. 

Sheridan asks his audience to question the morality of society in this play. Slandering one’s neighbours, acquaintances, and friends is entertainment. There is no real interest in the truth, and even less consideration is given to the damage that such gossip causes. In the early acts of School for Scandal, the subjects of such gossip are not known to the audience, who cannot determine the truth of Lady Sneerwell and Mrs Candour’s observations. By the last act, it becomes clear that these gossips need absolutely no element of truth to fuel their stories. The falling of the screen in Joseph’s library and the confrontation that took place immediately after are fresh in the audience members’ minds. The earlier scene serves as a nice contrast to the speculation and innuendo that engages the gossip.

 Trying to determine the truth occupies much of Sheridan’s play. Lady Sneerwell and Snake are engaged in deception and falsehood, and Joseph is willing to bend the truth to get what he wants. When Sir Oliver, disguised as old Stanley, approaches Joseph to ask for money, Joseph easily claims that he has no money. Joseph even blames his brother, Charles, stating that Charles’s free-spending has left Joseph without funds. Of course, the gossips have no interest in the truth. Their goal is to entertain one another with wild speculation. When compared to such exciting exaggerations as gossip’, reality and truth are simply uneventful.

 This is certainly a play about wealth. The poor in London was much too busy trying to find shelter and food to engage in such idle distractions as gossip or gaming. Wealth really sets the characters in this play apart from the rest of society. For instance, Sir Peter complains that his wife spends too much on silk dresses and fresh out-of-season flowers. Charles spends his money gaming and drinking with his friends, and the moneylenders are on their way to being wealthy thanks to idle young men such as him. Maria is the object of Joseph’s plotting only because she is wealthy, and Sir Oliver is primarily interested in the morals of his nephews only because he plans to leave them his wealth.

The School: A Comedy of Manners

 

The School for Scandal is an excellent example of a Comedy of Manners. It is a blatant attack on the superficiality of the upper class, pointing up their lack of morals and misplaced attention. In a Comedy of Manners, the characters are very clear and we know exactly who they are the moment they appear, not just by their appearance and actions, but by their names. Lady Sneerwell, Sir Benjamin Backbite, and Snake all carry their negative qualities in their names. The Surface brothers are all about what's on the surface -- Joseph appears moral but really isn't while Charles presents the opposite.

The School for Scandal is a brilliant parody of modern metropolitan society. It is one of the most entertaining satires on the lives of ladies and gentlemen who live in so-called modern society. Sheridan, in fact, is a close observer of the upper-class milieu of his time. He lived in Bath for a while, which was a very fashionable city at the time. Bath was, in reality, a gathering place for stylish English upper-class ladies and gentlemen. They used to go there to have a good time. And it's possible that Sheridan was thinking about all of these things when he wrote this play.

In his play The School for Scandal, Sheridan passionately criticizes the technique of scandal-mongering.  Lady Sneerwell is a scandal-representative and her circle, which includes both men and women from the upper crust of society, offers us a clear picture of their slanderous gossiping habits. These people are morally bankrupt because they do not spare their acquaintances and spread scandalous news and rumours about them. As we progress through the play, we discover that Lady Sneerwell engages in scandal-mongering to exact revenge on those who have previously made her a victim of this wickedness. However, the other members of her group engage in this behaviour only for pleasure.

Sheridan has effectively mocked the people for their hypocrisy. Joseph Surface is a model of hypocrisy and self-righteousness. When Lady Sneerwell views Joseph as a greedy man in the very first scene, we get a clear image of his true character. She describes him as a wicked fellow. In fact, Joseph is a source of amusement for the audience. Throughout the play, we enjoy his hypocritical character. When he is discovered by Lady Teazle while pleading with Maria for her favour, we are ecstatic.

A variety of love romances are depicted in the drama The School for Scandal. Lady Sneerwell falls in love with Charles, and she employs Joseph to help her realise her ambition. On the other hand, Maria adores Charles, but Joseph wants to marry Maria, so he works with Lady Sneerwell. But we all know Joseph isn't in love with Maria; he merely wants to usurp her vast fortune, and Maria is well aware of this. As a result, she despises Joseph and informs her guardian, bluntly, that she cannot marry him. As the play progresses, we watch Lady Sneerwell and Joseph go to great lengths to prevent Charles' marriage to Maria. Every attempt, however, proves to be a fruitless one. Furthermore, Joseph is involved with Lady Teazle because she wants to tame a lover for the purpose of fashion.

After a careful reading, we see that Sheridan created the character of Charles to paint a sarcastic portrait of the young men of the day, who are not only extravagant in their behaviour but also have little regard for their elders.

Sheridan doesn't spare even modern journalism in this drama. He mocks the news media. As the play begins several newspapers and periodicals contain gossip columns. "The Town and Country Magazine" is one of these publications. This publication features a particular section dedicated to malicious rumours. Mr Snake is portrayed by Sheridan as a poet and critic, and he is contemporary society's representative of journalists.

To summarize, Sheridan has satirized the lifestyle of his contemporary men and ladies hilariously in this play. This play is unquestionably Sheridan's masterpiece, with all of the hallmarks of a traditional comedy of manners.

Character Sketch of Oliver Twist

 

Oliver Twist is the central character of the novel. He is also a link among the three different worlds depicted in the novel—the workhouse, the crime world and the world of the genteel middle-class people. He is, as a matter of fact, more of a symbol than a fully individualized character. In the opening sentence of the Novel, Dickens describes him as an item of mortality. Till the end of the novel, nothing is specifically known about his parents. The name that he bears is given to him just by chance. All this suggests that Dickens wanted to make him an instrument of exposing the inhumanity and the cal1ousness of the workhouse and the underworld.

Oliver is symbolic of the principle of good. If we appreciate Oliver, it is for his propensity towards always being good, and if we sympathize with him, it is for his being a deprived and outcast child. In any case, we accept him less as a real child and more as a symbol.

It should be noted that Dickens has nowhere fully described Oliver’s appearance. In fact, except for Rose Maylie, Oliver is the only major character whose appearance is not well depicted. However, we come to understand that he is delicate and handsome. He always looks innocent and the chief expression on his face is that of melancholy. 

Oliver looks innocent because he is innocent. Unlike some other novels where external appearances are utterly deceptive, in Oliver’s case there is a remarkable correspondence between his inward nature and external appearance. Sikes is evil and he looks evil. The sinister nature of Fagin is adequately reflected on his face, and so is Oliver’s innocence. When he collapses outside Mrs Maylie’s house, he looks not only weak but also innocent. Rose is sure that a childlike Oliver could never commit a robbery. Mr Brownlow low also does not need a second thought to convince himself of Oliver’s innocence. Even the sceptical Mr Grimwig easily acknowledges his goodness.

Most of his life of Oliver is spent under the care of scoundrels like Mr Bumble, Mrs Mann, the inconsiderate Mrs Sowerberry, the rogue Noah Claypole, the devilish Fagin, and the odious Sikes. Anyone living under the shadow of the wicked characters would have either completely succumbed to or turned into a rogue himself, but Oliver survives. Despite all the efforts made by Monks to convert him into a thief, Oliver persists in his goodness. That is why it has been said that he represents goodness. Dickens has made him so good that on occasions he ceases to be a convincing character.

Oliver’s one positive characteristic is his courage. In chapter 2, we are told nature or inheritance had planted a good sturdy spirit in Oliver’s breast which enabled him to survive the cruel regime of Mrs Mann’s baby farm. In the same chapter, he approaches the board and makes his famous demand, “please, sir, I want some more”. He is indeed as much prompted by his own courage as by the fear of that domineering and bullying senior boy who had threatened that he would eat raw the boy sleeping next to him if he were not given an additional helping of gruel. Still, it must have taken tremendous courage to approach the members of the boards given their inevitable fury. Further evidence of his courage is seen in chapter 3 when he resists being apprenticed to Mr Gamfield, the Chimney sweep and in chapter 6 when he gives a sound thrashing to Noah Claypole. The charity boy is older than Oliver and enjoys the patronage and help of Mrs Sowerberry and Charlotte. But once when Oliver is provoked by the disparaging marks of Noah about his mother, nothing can suppress his wrath, not even Mr Bumble, who despite the properly waxed cane in his hand, is frightened by Oliver’s audacity. His flight from Mr Sowerberry in chapter 7 is another proof of his being courageous. But after he goes to London, he is almost swallowed by his circumstances and after “this everything seems done to him and for him, and almost nothing is done by him”.

Oliver Twist as a social satire

              Dickens primarily used his creative genius as a weapon to attack and express his fury on the corrupt social institutions. Oliver Twist is a satire on the inhumanity, cruelty and corruption pervading the workhouses. Through this novel, Dickens also scolded the system of law and other social institutions.

            The first eleven chapters of the novel 'Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834' is satirized by Dickens. The act was made to reform but the situation had become worsened. This act had, on the one hand, abolished the generous Speenhamland system whereby Labourer's wages were supplemented to the subsistence level driving them to pauperism and finally to the workhouse. On the other hand, it made the living conditions in the workhouse very hard because it kept away capable men from them. The hardship was affected by the meagre food given at the workhouses, the separation of families on entering it, the want of exercise and the disgusting nature of the work done in the workhouse. Dickens also attacked on the inadequate medical facilities and other common services offered at the workhouses.

            The most callous 'economy' measures of the new Act was the sparse diet provided to the inhabitants of any workhouse. Dickens says that for the board, the workhouses had become a regular place for public amusement, thus they set few things rightly. They contracted with the waterworks to lay on supply of water without any limit and with the corn factory to provide periodically small quantities of oatmeal and gave three meals of thin gruel a day with an onion twice a week and half a roll on Sundays. In chapter two, when we go through the popular scene of Oliver's asking for more food, it is informed that the bowls in which food was served were never washed.

            In Baby farms, children were kept from the most delicate age to the age of fifteen but the arrangements to look after them were very poor and insufficient. In the baby farm whose in-charge was Mrs Mann and where Oliver had lived for nine years, she received seven pence half a penny per head and per week. Mrs Mami is remarked as a very great practical philosopher'. She is a lady of 'wisdom and experience'. The children suffer from starvation and 'she appropriated the great part of the weekly stipend to her own use'.

            Dickens has also satirized the want of healthy exercise in the open air for the farm boys and the inexperienced doctors. There were several works in those baby farms like stone-breaking, bone-crushing or oakum picking. Dickens says that parish doctors were usually inexperienced and low-rated. Such doctors had attended to Oliver's mother Agnes during her labour pain.

              Another social institution which is attacked by Dickens' satirical weapon is the court. Here satire is not pungent or sharp but blended in farce. In chapter 3 the magistrate was least concerned with the boy and was about to sign the indenture but fortunately, his eyes catch the glimpse of Oliver's pale and terrified face. But in later scenes, Mr Fang, the magistrate, serves the real purpose of Dickens. He was utterly heartless and cruel. Oliver got fainted in front of him but Mr Fang took it as his pretension. He says that the boy is too cunning and wants to make them fools. He is not of belief to treat any convict leniently. Besides, Mr Bumble is announcing 'the law is an ass-a idiot'.              

             In Oliver Twist, there is an indirect satire on the incompetence and inefficiency of policemen also because Fagin and Sikes like criminals are functioning easily under their eyes but they (police) fail to catch them (criminals).

            Dickens satire reveals how conscious he was of the happenings in his society. His novels created an atmosphere of public awareness. He made an appeal to the human heart and surely influenced the emotional attitudes of thousands of people towards the contemporary problems of society.