Oscar Wilde entirely dedicates this play to the exploration of the way a woman can be saved from destruction in this society of appearances. A woman was the victim of an imbroglio in the past and abandoned her daughter. This woman comes back and the daughter ignores her relation to her. She is brought back into societry by the daughter's husband who knows the truth but does not want his wife to know it. But there is some kind of malediction that flies over the heads of these women. The daughter nearly does the same mistake as her mother but she is saved by her mother who accepts to be tainted in her daughter's place. Bus Oscar Wilde must think there is some kind of reward for a good deed and all is well that ends well, and this play has a happy ending. In spite of all the melodramatic sentimentalese atmosphere, Oscar Wilde definitely explores in this play the great disadvantage of a woman in society. Men can do nearly all they want. Women are extremely limited and have to walk a very straight and narrow line. Oscar Wilde seems to be ahead of his time as for the fate of women: he seems to aspire for real equality for them, though he shows in all possible ways that this is impossible in his society.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Perpignan

My first experience reading Oscar Wilde... and certainly not my last.

Wilde's sardonic wit and ineffable satire had me enchanted from page one. Wilde writes with devastatingly appealing witticisms, and with a style and cleverness matched by few other authors. It is said that he is one of the more oft-quoted authors in the English language, and I now understand why.

In addition to axioms and aphorisms of pure genius, the plot both captivates and surprises the reader. Lady Windermere discovers that her husband has been cheating on her, and a folly of misunderstandings and poor advice then unfolds; all the while satirizing society.

This play is very interesting to read (according to me). I saw a lot of hypocracy and snobery of people in this play. But a lot of peole said that the plays of Oscar Wilde have no satire, means, there is no factor of politics, socials,etc. I think, what he wrote in this plays and other plays had something to critize the people in that time. I want more information about Lady Winderemere's Fan, I mean what is the background of Wilde wrote yhis novel. Is there any important effects so that he wrote this first play?

In researching the Gunnison Massacre and the Steptoe Expediton in the 1850's I found this book to be the ultimate source of information on these obscure but important events in American and Mormon history. Dr. Fielding was a professor of history at BYU. His extensive research is combined with a well written account of how John Gunnison, an Army Topographer, and the book he wrote on the Mormon's in 1852 would drastically impact the course of history. The book documents the events in that period that eventually lead to Mountain Meadows Massacre and the "invasion" of the US Army in 1857. Anyone with an interest in Mormon or American history should read this book.

An emotional story about a simple man and his three friends, all of whom are just looking for honest people in life and a place where they can all just live together and mind their own business. A bit like an eighteenth-century version of "Friends" or "Party of Five."

Linda Bree. Sarah Fielding. Twayne English Authors 522. Boston: Twayne, 1996. 176pp. US$33.00. ISBN 0805770518.
Bree's goal is to show Sarah Fielding's life and work "not as a sister or friend of the literary great but in her own right as a prominent writer and scholar"(Bree vii ). Sarah Fielding is a well-structured book. It is enjoyable to read for its succinctness, clarity and style. Bree presents her work in a convenient manner: a preface, a chronology, and ten chapters, each devoted to a singular work. For example, chapter one encapsulates her biography, chapter two deals with David Simple written in 1744 and chapter three deals with Familiar Letters written in 1747. This format allows one to research a particular aspect of the writer and her career with ease.
Bree adequately presents a summary of Fielding's life in her first chapter, "A Woman of Singular Energy, Learning, and Ability." Despite the difficulties in tracing Sarah Fielding's life for lack of sources, Bree's summary leaves us with thoroughness. Her depiction of Fielding's early troubled and chaotic family life treats to how Sarah became an independent woman. Bree explains Fielding's later life which was plagued with financial trouble to which her brother was of little avail. Bree makes clear Henry Fielding's rather lacking support throughout her life whether it be intellectual or financial: "the attitute [sic] imputed to Henry is consistent with the view of Sarah that he presents in the preface to David Simple and with the distinctly unappealing nature of the learned female as a figure in his own fiction"(20). An especial analysis of her formal and informal educations defines Fielding's academic growth from Mrs. Rooke's school to an independent scholarship with the intellectual crowd at Salisbury. Bree also credits part of Fielding's academic success with her friendship to Samuel Richardson.
Bree adequately presents evidence which credits Sarah Fielding's scholarship. Bree proves this by drawing attention to the many references in her works as a source of scholarship: "As references and citations in her fiction make clear, she became formidably well educated in British literature. She was familiar not only with Shakespeare...but also with Spencer, Ben Johnson, and Dryden, as well as the more recent poems and plays of Alexander Pope, Sir Richard Steele, and George Lillo"(12-3). Although Bree does not deny Henry's influence in Sarah's life, she certifies her academic independence from him. Her study and translation of Xenophon's Memoirs of Socrates demonstrates her skill as an independent, perseverant and dedicated scholar: "She was determined that her translation of Xenophon would be respectable by the standards of classical-that is, male-scholarship"(21).
Bree uses Sarah Fielding's Advertisement from David Simple as the basis of her argument in which she claims that Fielding "was making it clear at the outset of her book [that it] was not merely a story, or a series of stories, that set out to entertain but that it would also contain instructive advice"(30). She argues that David Simple is a moral teaching on "the commercial and capitalist principles perceived increasingly to dominate [18th century] human relations and society's structures"(34). To this end she shows that the characters Daniel and Livia, two of the book's greater antagonists, are representatives of the principles of commerce: These characters's "'even-handed' logic of contractual principles, reduced to its essence, merely justif[y] outright selfishness, the specific reverse of David's ideal true friendship"(34).
Without specifically saying so, Bree portrays Sarah Fielding as an 18th century feminist. She argues that David is a sedate hero by comparing him to Sir John Galliard thereby portraying David Simple as a "very unmasculine"(32) character. By first legitimizing the use of a male protagonist to pro-feminist ends, Bree represents David as the incarnation of the morality Fielding thought men should possess. "For Sarah Fielding drinking and womanizing, far from being the natural characteristics of an innocent and naïve young man, were symptoms of serious moral faults"( 33).
Bree's convinces us further on this pro-feminist stance when she discusses the character of Cynthia. After reading the argument one is left feeling as though Cynthia is the true heroine of the novel and that perhaps Sarah Fielding based this character on herself. One can see the similarities between Fielding and Cynthia; specifically on the issue of marriage. "[H]aving rebelled against the idea of being a servant to a husband...[Cynthia] openly asserts that sensible women who marry fools for material gain 'prostitute themselves'"(38-9). Bree inevitably draws a parallel between Fielding and Cynthia which could have been interesting had she chosen to follow it. Instead Bree leaves the reader to assimilate for him- or herself the similarities between Fielding and Cynthia.
Bree's disposition on portraying Sarah Fielding as a literary genius does not account enough for David Simple's shortcomings. For instance, she shows the use of the male protagonist for feminist ends and she shows Cynthia as the 'true' hero of the novel, but she does not account for the dullness of flat and static characters such as Mr. Varnish or Mr. Spatter. Also, Bree doesn't account for the fractional structure of David Simple, but only says that it is "episodic"(31).
Bree is weak when she defends the intrusive narrator of David Simple. She claims that a bond is formed between narrator, text, and reader and that this is central to the communication of the 'morals' of David Simple. This argument is detached from the gist of her other arguments and is less convincing. She does not account for the possible downfalls of such a narration which can be regarded as simply a convenient way to end a chapter for an inexperienced writer. As a literary device Fielding's narrator can be viewed as a device that distances the reader from anything the author strives to communicate through her characters.
Also, Bree's attempt to legitimize Isabelle's story in David Simple is not very convincing in contrast to her feminist arguments about the condition of women's rights in the 18th century. Bree seems to run out of breath as she tries to justify a parallel between Isabelle and David. She laces a certain amount of her argument with open-ended questions which she calls "'what if' scenarios"(44) that do little in terms of convincing her point. Isabelle's story, as the critics point out, remains perhaps a failure of the novel.
Linda Bree is successful, however, in arguing against the critics who dismiss David Simple as a simple plot-driven story of marriage. Bree shows how other 18th century novels and David Simple differ in their treating of sex in general thereby showing other novels to be less concerned with "mental as well as physical attraction"(42). In David Simple, Bree points out, "sexual desire is often portrayed by Fielding not as an aspect of romance but as a destructive passion"(43). Further, Bree's maintenance of Fielding's Advertisement keeps Fielding's purpose clear-that is to entertain and instruct.
Overall, Linda Bree's Sarah Fielding makes the point that Fielding deserves the recognition proper to her numerous literary achievements. Bree's book, being the first full-length study on Sarah Fielding, is a successful study at portraying her as a "prominent writer and scholar" (vii).
Greg Sommerville

I was quite excited to find an eversion of The Governess, as no other versions are currently in print right now. I assumed, particularly as there was no information to the contrary, that my ebook would be printable. It isn't and this information is difficult to access (it only appears at the bottom of the link to FAQ's that appears in the left hand margin). These books are also unreturnable.

More upsetting is the fact that this version omits the prefatory material to the book--the dedication and preface. Both are crucial to the overall text. Indeed, it could be argued that they provide a key to interpreting the text.

So, buyer be warned. While this is a rather inexpensive book, it is both incomplete and unprintable, which limits usability in a major way.