{"id":4372,"date":"2014-03-28T17:25:09","date_gmt":"2014-03-28T17:25:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/?p=4372"},"modified":"2014-03-28T17:25:09","modified_gmt":"2014-03-28T17:25:09","slug":"hypocrite-lecteur-the-soldiers-return","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/2014\/03\/28\/hypocrite-lecteur-the-soldiers-return\/","title":{"rendered":"Hypocrite Lecteur: The Soldier’s Return"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mrs. Belcour.\u00a0 Come, come, cheer up; endeavour to forget that Manly ever lived.<\/p>\n

Belinda.\u00a0 Never, madam ! The only consolation I can afford myself is, that he fell fighting those battles which must for ever remain imprinted on my heart.<\/p>\n

Mrs. Belcour.\u00a0 Yes: he with your gallant father fell by their noble general’s side on Egypt’s shores ; with him they conquered, and with him they fell. (Hook 7)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"SoldiersReturnTitle\"<\/a>When you are reading a British comedy from 1805\u2014and the comedy is titled The Soldier’s Return<\/i>, and you have just learned that poor Belinda our protagonist is about to be \u201cmarried to-night\u201d (4), to a certain Lord Broomville, and believes that now \u201call my <\/i>ideas of future happiness are crushed\u2014destroyed\u201d (7)\u2014and then read the above exchange, learning that Belinda’s intended is believed to be dead, you can immediately conclude that the man’s resurrection is imminent.<\/p>\n

I mean, come on. A dead lover and an unhappy arranged marriage to an older man? In the world of comedy, the dead man can’t resurrect fast enough in such a situation. You just need to pay attention, and wait and watch for his return. And sure enough: in Theodore Hook’s The Soldier’s Return<\/i>, the soldier returns after only about three scenes, and, of course, to his own distress, \u201cI have found Belinda, the object of my hopes and anxiety, on the eve of marriage with a lord Broomville\u201d (11).<\/p>\n

Thus we have all of the things you need for a standard comedy, with the true lovers separated by forces outside of their control, who ultimately, of course, reunite through a series of implausible events. It’s predictable, yes, but ultimately it’s really all about how we get there to this end, and this play does so in the most amusing and unpredictable methods possible. Theodore Hook, our playwright, has a sharp wit, and the play excels at the mockery of the British upper crust, with aristocrats saddled with ridiculous names like Lord Broomville; with young foppish men dressed so absurdly in \u201cthe present slang fashion\u201d (10) that the lower class can \u201ctake a fellow of the royal society for a groom\u201d (10); and with supposedly cultured people who \u201cpositively abominate\u201d (20) the opera, yet \u201cevery body goes, and ’tis the every body that makes it delightful\u201d (2).<\/p>\n

\"The

The American edition of the text includes a list of both British and American casts<\/p><\/div>\n

Unfortunately, though the play was performed in London in 1805 at Drury Lane, Hook himself seems to have received little press for this play, possibly because of his age. \u201c[The Soldier’s Return <\/i>was] his first effort\u201d (Barham 14), and \u201cplaced the author in the proud position of a successful dramatist\u2014\u00e6tat<\/i> 16\u201d (14), but I could find no contemporary reviews, merely affectionate but nonspecific references to Hook himself, as \u201cthat lively young author\u201d (\u201cThe Arbitrator\u201d 183). The play received apparently little notice, and his own biographer too gives only backhanded praise, saying \u201cinartificial as was the plot, and extravagant the incidents. . .\u00a0 the whimsicalities of an Irishman, played by Jack Johnstone, the abundance of puns, good, bad, and indifferent, borrowed and original, the real fun and bustle, carried it along triumphantly\u201d (Barham 14).<\/p>\n

In America, it was \u201cperformed at the New Theatre, Philadelphia\u201d (1) in 1807, but here too, no one took notice of The Soldier’s Return<\/i>, though its top-billed actor, a Mr. Rutherford\u2014who played Lord Broomville\u2014seems to have attracted some attention in other roles. One William Wizard calls him \u201cLittle RUTHERFORD, the Roscius of the Philadelphia theatre\u201d (Wizard 117), which makes little sense until one sees a different article, which says \u201cthis gentleman’s person is much in the way of his theatrical success ; and, indeed, when, one after the other, so many individuals present \"SoldiersReturnSong\"<\/a>themselves on the boards, all below hero-measure<\/i>, we cannot but lament it deeply that no expedient can be thought of, for adding to their inches\u201d (\u201cThe Theatre\u201d 1). It seems Rutherford was a short man, and, since William Wizard also writes satirically that a great critic \u201cfinds fault with every thing\u2014this being what I understand by modern criticism<\/i>\u201d (Wizard 117), this was a problem.<\/p>\n

Young Hook’s play in America was thus presented in an environment of animadversion towards his lead actor, and, actually, towards drama in particular. Theater itself was \"SeriousInquiryTitle\"<\/a>not well regarded, as an American book here in the archives, A Serious Inquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Stage<\/i>, by the Rev. John Witherspoon (1812) reveals even in its opening pages. The opening recommends that \u201cDear Christian Brethren. . . in the name of the Great God our Saviour, whose Disciples you are. . . WITHHOLD ALL SUPPORT FROM THE PLAY-HOUSE\u201d (Miller et al. 5), as \u201cin its origin and history it has been a public nuisance in society, in its present constitution it is criminal, under every form it is useless, and it must necessarily tend to demoralize any people who give it their support\u201d (5).<\/p>\n

Nuisance, criminal, and useless? I think not, but still understand better perhaps why this play or any play may not have met great success in America at the time. Our play was merely in an environment not ready to receive it, and that needn’t hurt the play itself now. The play is really a witty romp through the aristocracy and comedy itself, coming to a completely surprising conclusion which lampoons conventional comedic formula: Manly has no choice but to challenge Lord Broomville to a duel over his intended marriage to Belinda (typical), but meeting him in person, finds that \u201cO gracious heaven!\u2014it is, it is\u2014\u2014my father\u2014!<\/i>\u201d (33).<\/p>\n

Thus, at the end of this play we are left with a surprise which we were not expecting. The father has been in the way of the marriage all along, but we didn’t even know it, and neither did he! Hook has employed the trope of the parent preventing the marriage, and subverted it, while simultaneously subverting the trope of the duel! For such things, along with the witty exchanges, should it be remembered.<\/p>\n

Consider this finally: A fashionable young man, Racket, asks his beloved, Miss Dashaway, \u201cwhy, am I not the very top of fashion?\u201d (23), to which she responds mockingly \u201cyes true ; because ’tis with men as with liquors, the lightest will always be uppermost\u201d (23). Funny, right? So, yes, perhaps this play itself may have seemed too light, but even being short, written by a sixteen-year-old, and largely forgotten, The Soldier’s Return <\/i>is a gem that continually and humorously tests our comedic expectations.<\/p>\n

Let’s not let it languish all the way at the \u201cvery top\u201d of drama.<\/p>\n

Daniel Allie is a senior undergraduate student in English. For his blog series Hypocrite Lecteur<\/i>\u00a0<\/strong>he will spend the Spring 2014\u00a0Semester\u00a0exploring\u00a0nineteenth-century literature\u00a0in a variety of genres from\u00a0the Rare Books Collection housed in Archives and Special Collections at the Dodd Research Center.<\/em><\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Arbitrator.\u201d Beau Monde, or, Literary and fashionable magazine<\/i> 2.14 (Nov. 1897): 181-185. Web. British Periodicals<\/i>. 15 March 2014.<\/p>\n

Barham, Rev. R.H. Dalton. The Life and Remains of Theodore Edward Hook<\/i>. London: Richard Bentley, 1849. Web. Google Books. 15 March 2014.<\/p>\n

Hook, Theodore Edward. The Soldier’s Return, or, What Can Beauty Do? A comic opera, in two acts<\/i>. Philadelphia: Mathew Carey, 1807. Print. [Dodd Center call number: A208]<\/p>\n

Miller, Samuel, et al. \u201cAn Address.\u201d A Serious Inquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Stage<\/i>, Rev. John Witherspoon. New York: Whiting and Watson, 1812. Print. [Dodd Center call number: A1019]<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Theatre.\u201d The Town<\/i> 2 (January 3, 1807): 1. Web. American Periodicals<\/i>. 15 March 2014.<\/p>\n

Wizard, William. \u201cTheatrics.\u201d Salmagundi; or, the Whim-Whams and Opinions of Launcelot Langstaff, Esq., and Others <\/i>6 (March 20, 1807): 117. Web. American Periodicals<\/i>. 15 March 2014.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mrs. Belcour.\u00a0 Come, come, cheer up; endeavour to forget that Manly ever lived. Belinda.\u00a0 Never, madam ! The only consolation I can afford myself is, that he fell fighting those battles which must for ever remain imprinted on my heart. … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":48,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4372"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/48"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4372"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4372\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4381,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4372\/revisions\/4381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4372"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4372"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs-dev.lib.uconn.edu\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4372"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}