36 pages • 1 hour read
William CongreveLove for Love
Fiction | Play | Adult | Published in 1695A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Act IIChapter Summaries & Analyses
Act II Summary
The second Act opens in Foresight’s house. As his name implies, Foresight believes himself to have the power of predicting the future and recognition of good and bad omens through his studies of astrology; his speech is full of references to astrological conventions and forecasts. When Angelica enters the room, she is a confident and strong-minded young woman, openly teasing her uncle about his “false prophecies, ridiculous dreams and idle divinations” (2.69) and calling him “a nuisance to the neighborhood” (2.70). Foresight is angered by Angelica’s teasing, but Angelica remains defiant, even hinting to her uncle about his wife’s infidelity. Angelica leaves, and Sir Sampson Legend enters to visit Foresight.
Sir Sampson forms an immediate contrast with Foresight as a man of more pragmatism. He mocks Foresight’s superstitions and speaks with satisfaction about the impending return of his son Ben, and how Valentine has agreed to forfeit his inheritance for the repayment of his debts. When Foresight grows offended at Sir Sampson’s mockery of astrology, Sampson relents and tries to soothe him so as not to jeopardize the proposed marriage between Ben and Foresight’s daughter Prue.
Jeremy arrives with Valentine, who wishes to speak with Sir Sampson. Valentine has come to plead for mercy, protesting against the harshness of the conditions of their agreement. Valentine and Sir Sampson begin to argue heatedly with one another, and their debate reveals two very different conceptions of parenthood and filial obligation: Sir Sampson believes that Valentine, as his son, owes him total obedience and respect, while Valentine argues that his father ought to treat him with more mercy. Sir Sampson refuses to relent, telling Valentine he must learn to live by his own wits—an ironic foreshadowing of the ruse of insanity Valentine will use later in the play.
The men exit the room, and Mrs. Frail and Mrs. Foresight enter. Mrs. Foresight accuses Mrs. Frail of indiscreet conduct with men in public, but it is soon revealed that both women are guilty of conducting affairs, and they vow to keep one another’s secrets. Mrs. Frail reveals to Mrs. Foresight that she has hopes of winning over Ben for herself, as she has heard that he will now inherit all of his father’s estate. Mrs. Foresight says that Miss Prue is fond of Tattle, and she agrees to help conspire to lead Miss Prue away from the intended match with Ben.
Tattle and Miss Prue enter the room. Miss Prue is open in her admiration of Tattle, and her innocence contrasts sharply with the worldly cynicism of Tattle, Mrs. Foresight, and Mrs. Frail. Mrs. Frail and Mrs. Foresight begin to manipulate Miss Prue by speaking of how she will never be satisfied with Ben instead of Tattle. The two women then deliberately leave Miss Prue and Tattle alone together. Tattle begins to instruct Miss Prue in the art of high-society seduction, coaching her on how to be evasive and coy in place of her naturally honest disposition. The scene ends with Miss Prue agreeing to go to her room and wait for Tattle there.
Act II Analysis
While Act I introduces us to the conflict between romanticism and cynicism in love, Act II builds upon the themes of conflicts between parents and children. The debate between Sir Sampson and Valentine is quite telling, in that it reveals something of both their personalities and the opposed ideologies they represent. Sir Sampson regards his sons as owing him total obedience; Valentine regards his father as owing him unconditional forgiveness and love. When Valentine appears at Foresight’s house to ask that his father release him from the harsh terms of their agreement, he tries to appeal to Sir Sampson’s “fatherly fondness” (2.262) and accuses him of “barbarity and unnatural / usage” (2.290-91) in depriving him of more money.
Sir Sampson, for his part, rejects Valentine’s language of emotion and ties of affection in favor of language that is proprietorial: “Why, sirrah, mayn’t I do what I / please? Are you not my slave? Did not I beget you?” (2.292-93). While Valentine’s rhetoric tries to frame the parent-child bond as one built on affection, Sir Sampson’s rhetorical style instead frames the relationship in terms of ownership and obligation. Sir Sampson even wonders aloud why he had children, thinking of them only in terms of their inconvenience and expense: “Why, nothing under an / emperor should be born with appetites” (2.316-317). It is important to note that Sir Sampson’s proprietorial attitude applies to both of his sons: He also regards Ben’s match with Foresight’s daughter as a foregone conclusion, simply because it is his will that Ben marry her. Thus, regardless of whether his sons are obedient or disobedient, Sir Sampson regards them as deserving no will or agency of their own.
The thematic preoccupation with dependency and agency within parent-child relationships is complemented by the contrast between fate and agency in the debate about astrology between Foresight and Sir Sampson. Foresight’s name is ironic: He believes himself to have great insight thanks to his studies of astrology and other occult arts, but he is actually a foolish and rather gullible man who is laughed at by the other characters. Nonetheless, Foresight’s beliefs are important in the sense that they represent a worldview in which the fate of all humans are determined by the astrological circumstances of their birth. Sir Sampson represents a more pragmatic viewpoint; he urges Foresight to “leave superstition” (2.175), and claims, “we shall know one another’s faces without the / help of a candle, and that’s all the stars are good for” (2.179-80). It is significant that Sir Sampson forcibly rejects the idea of a lack of agency in an astrological sense, while nevertheless seeking to deny his sons agency in a pragmatic sense. This contradiction in Sir Sampson’s attitude reveals that Sir Sampson’s own behavior and attitude might not always be as consistent or as pragmatic as he would like to believe, an element of his characterization that will become more apparent in Act V, when he behaves foolishly and impulsively in wishing to marry Angelica.
Tattle’s attempted seduction of Miss Prue in this Act also speaks to a deepening of the contrast between romanticism and cynicism in love that was first touched upon in Act I. Miss Prue is at first characterized as an innocent, simple girl who is ignorant of the ways of the world. Tattle instructs her in the art of seduction by claiming that honesty is useless, and that “all well-bred persons lie” (2.550). It is fitting that Miss Prue and Ben were originally intended for one another: Before Tattle’s seduction, Miss Prue is—as Ben will soon appear to be in Act III—innocent and honest. Her rapid transformation at Tattle’s hands speaks to how easily someone can become corrupted in worldly society; this is a transformation that Ben will manage to resist.
