Scan barcode
A review by cinchona
She Stoops To Conquer by Oliver Goldsmith
4.0
A surprisingly funny and readable play with the classic Shakespeare-style mistaken identity twists but without the heavy wordplay. I quite liked it, to my surprise, even though I embarked upon reading it mostly as a sort of compare/contrast with Shakespeare thing.
Goldsmith and Shakespeare weren't contemporaries, the former being born a hundred years after the latter's death, but it seems the plot of comedic plays hadn't evolved too much in the interim. Rhyming prologue, five acts, one romance, one sub-romance, goofy parents, ends in double weddings, etc. The play involves class more directly than Shakespeare in a sort of Jane-Austen-y eighteenth century way, but other than that the plot is quite similar to the lighter Shakespearean comedies.
Perhaps the difference in time period shows most in the language, which seemed so readable it almost felt like cheating. Most of the puns were understandable! Not sure if it's the century, or an author who just wasn't as devoted to putting fifteen levels of meaning into every bloody word. The dialogue was positively understandable! The main male love interest mumbles idiotically in the presence of nice ladies, and his stammery half-sentences made me feel right at home. The whole thing is a couple hours read at most and that was quite refreshing really.
Which is not to say that I didn't at times miss Shakespeare's incredible wordplay, or his deep devotion to iambic pentameter. A good Shakespeare monologue is like watching a perfectly executed Olympic dive, and Goldsmith has the good sense to avoid anything so ambitious and stay on the shallow end of the linguistic swimming pool, contenting himself with quips and zingers and some decent banter here and there. It is easier to notice the incredibly contrived and predictable plot when you don't hang puns all over every thing, but honestly it's all in good fun and I enjoyed it immensely.
Goldsmith and Shakespeare weren't contemporaries, the former being born a hundred years after the latter's death, but it seems the plot of comedic plays hadn't evolved too much in the interim. Rhyming prologue, five acts, one romance, one sub-romance, goofy parents, ends in double weddings, etc. The play involves class more directly than Shakespeare in a sort of Jane-Austen-y eighteenth century way, but other than that the plot is quite similar to the lighter Shakespearean comedies.
Perhaps the difference in time period shows most in the language, which seemed so readable it almost felt like cheating. Most of the puns were understandable! Not sure if it's the century, or an author who just wasn't as devoted to putting fifteen levels of meaning into every bloody word. The dialogue was positively understandable! The main male love interest mumbles idiotically in the presence of nice ladies, and his stammery half-sentences made me feel right at home. The whole thing is a couple hours read at most and that was quite refreshing really.
Which is not to say that I didn't at times miss Shakespeare's incredible wordplay, or his deep devotion to iambic pentameter. A good Shakespeare monologue is like watching a perfectly executed Olympic dive, and Goldsmith has the good sense to avoid anything so ambitious and stay on the shallow end of the linguistic swimming pool, contenting himself with quips and zingers and some decent banter here and there. It is easier to notice the incredibly contrived and predictable plot when you don't hang puns all over every thing, but honestly it's all in good fun and I enjoyed it immensely.