"We are learning much from frequent attendance at the theatres": The influence of 19th - century sexual problems plays on Michael Field's

以迈克尔·菲尔德为笔名的作家凯瑟琳·布拉德利（1846-1914）和伊迪丝·库珀（1862-1913）一生中出版了27部诗剧。然而，尽管学术界对菲尔德的诗歌作品越来越感兴趣，“对戏剧的批判性研究相对较少”（塞恩和帕雷霍-瓦迪略，2009：第48页）。事实上，对菲尔德的戏剧作品并没有现代完整的批判性研究。此外，菲尔德的戏剧在很大程度上被视为其诗歌的参考点（参见：弗雷泽[2006]和塞恩[2007]），或者被挖掘出与布拉德利和库珀对性别和性的非传统方法有关的传记材料（参见：比克尔[2006]和柯比[2017]）。至关重要的是，这些方法忽略了布拉德利和库珀参与的多重当代戏剧网络。这对夫妇观看了许多19世纪晚期伦敦舞台上最经典的演出，从亨里克·易卜生的《鬼》（1891）到奥斯卡·王尔德的《理想丈夫》（1895）。他们还与当时许多著名的戏剧家交流。例如，王尔德在《悲剧玛丽》（1890）中对菲尔德的人物塑造提出了建议。此外，尽管菲尔德的戏剧都没有公开演出——除了《记忆问题》（1893）——布拉德利和库珀打算让他们的许多作品“踏板”（布里斯托2019，第124页）。这一意图强化了考虑他们与更广泛的维多利亚戏剧文化接触的重要性，因为正如Jacky Bratton（2003）所指出的那样，维多利亚时代的观众依赖于“戏剧内部”（第43页）的意义制造过程，包括引用当代戏剧的广泛网络。为了解决这一学术差距，我的博士学位试图将菲尔德的戏剧置于更广阔的戏剧背景中。我的主要关注点是19世纪的社会问题剧，尤其是易卜生的作品。我将重点关注他们19世纪90年代的诗剧——布拉德利和库珀最专注于为伦敦舞台制作作品的时期（布里斯托，2019年）。此外，由于女性性行为是19世纪80年代/90年代社会问题剧的“痴迷”（Eltis：第114页），我将主要分析菲尔德对社会越轨女性角色的描述。超越当前主要强调这些角色的社会颠覆性的Field批评，我将更多地关注布拉德利和库珀如何引用可识别的易卜生主题和表演惯例，使他们能够颠覆和批评当代社会问题戏剧中具有挑衅性的性别政治，以及他们的诗歌所借鉴的find -de- sie 'cle诗歌传统。为了做到这一点，我将大量利用大英图书馆收藏的布拉德利和库珀的信件和日记，以及博德利图书馆自己的多本未发表的菲尔德诗剧草稿。本研究是对这一时期女性剧本研究已有学术成果的有益拓展。《安娜·法卡斯》（2019）阐释了多萝西·莉顿的《Thyrza Fleming》（1895）是如何使用易卜生主义的主题来批判当代男性剧作家的父权结构的。然而，关于19世纪女性对易卜生的反应的最新研究只研究了基于当代背景和女权主义问题的自然主义戏剧作品（见：Hill[2018]和Farkas）。菲尔德的诗剧在风格和形式上都与易卜生的自然主义有所区别，因此，在更广泛的戏剧流派和文学形式中，为女性对19世纪80年代/90年代性问题戏剧的反应提供了重要的见解。鉴于戏剧是19世纪消费最多的艺术媒介（布拉顿：第40页），对易卜生文化影响的更深入理解有助于跨各种文学和非文学媒介对当代女权主义话语进行必要的跨学科调查。

Throughout their lifetimes, Katharine Bradley (1846-1914) and Edith Cooper (1862-1913), the writers behind the pseudonym Michael Field, published over twenty-seven verse-dramas. However, although there is growing academic interest in Field's poetic works, "there are relatively few critical studies of the dramas" (Thain and Parejo-Vadillo, 2009: p.48). Indeed, there is no modern full-length critical study of Field's dramatic works. Moreover, Field's dramas have largely been treated as reference points for their poetry (see: Fraser [2006] and Thain [2007]) or mined for biographical material pertaining to Bradley and Cooper's unorthodox approach to gender and sexuality (see: Bickle [2006] and Kirby [2017]). Crucially, these approaches ignore the multiple contemporary dramatic networks in which Bradley and Cooper participated. The pair watched many of the late 19th-century London stage's most canonical performances, from Henrik Ibsen's Ghosts (1891) to Oscar Wilde's An Ideal Husband (1895). They also communicated with many of their day's leading dramatists. Wilde, for instance, advised Field on characterisation in The Tragic Mary (1890). Furthermore, although none of Field's dramas were publicly performed - excepting A Question of Memory (1893) - Bradley and Cooper intended for many of their works to "tread the boards" (Bristow 2019, p.124). This intention reinforces the importance of considering their engagement with wider Victorian theatre culture since, as Jacky Bratton (2003) argues, Victorian audiences relied on an "intra-theatrical" (p.43) process of meaning making, involving the citation of a broad network of contemporary dramas. In order to address this gap in scholarship, my DPhil seeks to situate Field's dramas in their wider theatrical context. My primary focus would be upon 19th-century social problem drama, particularly Ibsen's work. I will focus upon their 1890s verse-dramas - the period when Bradley and Cooper were most intensely fixated on producing work for the London stage (Bristow, 2019). Furthermore, as female sexuality was the "obsession" (Eltis: p.114) of 1880s/90s social problem plays, I will predominantly analyse Field's depictions of socially transgressive female characters. Moving beyond current Field criticism, which mainly emphasises these characters' social subversiveness, I will focus more upon how Bradley and Cooper's citation of recognisable Ibsenian motifs and performance conventions allowed them to subvert and critique the provocative gender politics of both contemporary social problem dramas as well as the Fin-de-Sie'cle poetic traditions that their verse draws upon. To do this, I will draw heavily upon the British Library's extensive collection of Bradley and Cooper's letters and diaries in addition to the Bodleian Library's own multiple unpublished draft copies of Field's verse-dramas. This research valuably extends upon existing scholarship on female playwriting in this period. Anna Farkas (2019) illustrates how Dorothy Leighton's Thyrza Fleming (1895) used recognisable Ibsenian motifs to critique both patriarchal structures as contemporary male playwrights. However, most recent scholarship on 19th-century female responses to Ibsen only examines naturalistic dramatic works, grounded in contemporary settings and feminist issues (see: Hill [2018] and Farkas). Field's verse-dramas are stylistically and formally distanced from Ibsen's naturalism, therefore providing important insights into female responses to 1880s/90s sexual problem plays across a broader array of theatrical genres and literary forms. Given drama was the most consumed artistic medium of the 19th-century (Bratton: p.40), greater understanding of Ibsen's cultural influence aids essential inter-disciplinary investigations into contemporary feminist discourses across a variety of literary and non-literary mediums.