To sum up the Evidence. A fine Gentleman, is a fine Whoring, Swearing, Smutty, Atheistical Man. These Qualifications it seems compleat the Idea of Honour. They are the Top-Improvements of Fortune, and the distinguishing Glories of Birth and Breeding! This is the Stage-Test for Quality, and those that can't stand it, ought to be Disclaim'd. The Restraints of Conscience and the Pedantry of Virtue, are unbecoming a Cavalier: Future Securities, and Reaching beyond Life, are vulgar Provisions: If he falls a Thinking at this rate, he forfeits his Honour; For his Head was only made to run against a Post! Here you have a Man of Breeding and Figure that burlesques the Bible, Swears, and talks Smut to Ladies, speaks ill of his Friend behind his Back, and betraies his Interest. A fine Gentleman that has neither Honesty, nor Honour, Conscience, nor Manners, Good Nature, nor civil Hypocricy. Fine, only in the Insignificancy of Life, the Abuse of Religion and the Scandals of Conversation. These Worshipful Things are the Poets Favourites: They appear at the Head of the Fashion; and shine in Character, and Equipage. If there is any Sense stirring, They must have it, tho' the rest of the Stage suffer never so much by the Partiality. And what can be the Meaning of this wretched Distribution of Honour? Is it not to give Credit and Countenance to Vice, and to shame young People out of all pretences to Conscience, and Regularity? They seem forc'd to turn Lewd in their own Defence: They can't otherwise justifie themselves to the Fashion, nor keep up the Character of Gentlemen: Thus People not well furnish'd with Thought, and Experience, are debauch'd both in Practise and Principle. And thus Religion grows uncreditable, and passes for ill Education. The Stage seldom gives Quarter to any Thing that's serviceable or Significant, but persecutes Worth, and Goodness under every Appearance. He that would be safe from their Satir must take care to disguise himself in Vice, and hang out the Colours of Debauchery. How often is Learning, Industry, and Frugality, ridiculed in Comedy? The rich Citizens are often Misers, and Cuckolds, and the Universities, Schools of Pedantry upon this score. In short, Libertinism and Profaness, Dressing, Idleness, and Gallantry, are the only valuable Qualities. As if People were not apt enough of themselves to be Lazy, Lewd, and Extravagant, unless they were prick'd forward, and provok'd by Glory, and Reputation. Thus the Marks of Honour, and Infamy are misapplyed, and the Idea's of Virtue and Vice confounded. Thus Monstrousness goes for Proportion, and the Blemishes of Human Nature, make up the Beauties of it.
The fine Ladies are of the same Cut with the Gentlemen; Moraima is scandalously rude to her Father, helps him to a beating, and runs away with Antonio.Don Sebast.
Love for Love. p. 20.
Provok'd Wife. p. 64.
Chap. 1. & 2.[296] Angelica talks sawcily to her Uncle,[297] and Belinda confesses her Inclination for a Gallant.[298] And as I have observ'd already,[299] the Toping Ladies in the Mock Astrologer, Spanish Fryar, Country Wife, Old Batchelour, Orphan, Double Dealer, and Love Triumphant, are smutty, and sometimes Profane.
And was Licentiousness and irreligion, alwaies a mark of Honour? No; I don't perceive but that the old Poets had an other Notion of Accomplishment, and bred their people of Condition a different way. Philolaches in Plautus laments his being debauch'd; and dilates upon the Advantages of Virtue, and Regularity.Mostel. A. 1. 2.
Trinum. A. 2. 1. A. 2. 2.
Enuch. A. 3. 3.
Hecyr. A. 3. 4.[300] Lusiteles another Young Gentleman disputes handsomly by himself against Lewdness. And the discourse between him and Philto is Moral, and well managed.[301] And afterwards he lashes Luxury and Debauching with a great deal of Warmth, and Satir.[302] Chremes in Terence is a modest young Gentleman, he is afraid of being surpriz'd by Thais, and seems careful not to sully his Reputation.[303] And Pamphilus in Hecyra resolves rather to be govern'd by Duty, than Inclination.[304]
Plautus's Pinacium tells her Friend Panegyric that they ought to acquit themselves fairly to their Husbands, tho' These should fail in their Regards towards them.Stich A. 1. 1.[305] For all good People will do justice tho' they don't receive it. Lady Brute in the Provok'd Wife is govern'd by different maxims. She is debauch'd with ill Usage, says Virtue is an Ass, and a Gallant's worth forty on't.p. 3.[306] Pinacium goes on to another Head of Duty, and declares that a Daughter can never respect her Father too much, and that Disobedience has a great deal of scandal, and Lewdness in't.Stich. A. 1. 2.[307] The Lady Jacinta as I remember does not treat her Father at this rate of Decency. Let us hear a little of her Behaviour. The Mock Astrologer makes the Men draw, and frights the Ladys with the Apprehension of a Quarrel. Upon this; Theodosia crys what will become of us! Jacinta answers, we'll die for Company: nothing vexes me but that I am not a Man, to have one thrust at that malicious old Father of mine, before I go.p. 60.[308] Afterwards the old Gentleman Alonzo threatens his Daughters with a Nunnery. Jacinta spars again and says, I would have thee to know thou graceless old Man, that I defy a Nunnery: name a Nunnery once more and I disown thee for my Father.Ibid.[309] I could carry on the Comparison between the old and Modern Poets somewhat farther. But this may suffice.
Thus we see what a fine time Lewd People have on the English Stage. No Censure, no mark of Infamy, no Mortification must touch them. They keep their Honour untarnish'd, and carry off the Advantage of their Character. They are set up for the Standard of Behaviour, and the Masters of Ceremony and Sense. And at last that the Example may work the better, they generally make them rich, and happy, and reward them with their own Desires.
Mr. Dryden in the Preface to his Mock-Astrologer, confesses himself blamed for this Practise. For making debauch'd Persons his Protagonists, or chief Persons of the Drama; And, for making them happy in the Conclusion of the Play, against the Law of Comedy, which is to reward Virtue, and punish Vice. To this Objection He makes a lame Defence. And answers
1st. That he knows no such Law constantly observ'd in Comedy by the Antient or Modern Poets. What then? Poets are not always exactly in Rule. It may be a good Law tho' 'tis not constantly observ'd, some Laws are constantly broken, and yet ne're the worse for all that. He goes on, and pleads the Authorities of Plautus, and Terence. I grant there are Instances of Favour to vitious young People in those Authors, but to this I reply
1st. That those Poets had a greater compass of Liberty in their Religion. Debauchery did not lie under those Discouragements of Scandal, and penalty, with them as it does with us. Unless therefore He can prove Heathenism, and Christianity the same, his precedents will do him little service.
2ly. Horace who was as good a judge of the Stage, as either of those Comedians, seems to be of another Opinion. He condemns the obscenities of Plautus, and tells you Men of Fortune and Quality in his time; would not endure immodest Satir.De Art. Poet.[310] He continues, that Poets were formerly admired for the great services they did. For teaching Matters relating to Religion, and Government; For refining the Manners, tempering the Passions, and improving the Understandings of Mankind: For making them more useful in Domestick Relations, and the publick Capacities of Life.Ibid.[311] This is a demonstration that Vice was not the Inclination of the Muses in those days; and that Horace beleiv'd the chief business of a Poem was, to Instruct the Audience. He adds farther that the Chorus ought to turn upon the Argument of the Drama, and support the Design of the Acts. That They ought to speak in Defence of Virtue, and Frugality, and show a Regard to Religion. Now from the Rule of the Chorus, we may conclude his Judgment for the Play. For as he observes, there must be a Uniformity between the Chorus and the Acts: They must have the same View, and be all of a Piece. From hence 'tis plain that Horace would have no immoral Character have either Countenance or good Fortune, upon the Stage. If 'tis said the very mention of the Chorus shews the Directions were intended for Tragedy. To this
I answer, that the Consequence is not good. For the use of a Chorus is not inconsistent with Comedy. The antient Comedians had it. Aristophanes is an Instance. I know 'tis said the Chorus was left out in that they call the New Comedy. But I can't see the conclusiveness of this Assertion. For Aristophanes his Plutus is New Comedy with a Chorus in't.[......] Schol.[312] And Aristotle who lived after this Revolution of the Stage, mentions nothing of the Omission of the Chorus. He rather supposes its continuance by saying the Chorus was added by the Government long after the Invention of Comedy.Libr. de Poet. cap. 5.[313] 'Tis true Plautus and Terence have none, but those before them probably might. Moliere has now reviv'd them,Psyche.[314] And Horace might be of his Opinion, for ought wee know to the contrary.