Wikipedia or Bust!
Let me break it down for you: I worked at a supermarket over the entire non-denominational winter break, constantly putting off the writing of this essay until a later date, self-assured in my ability to pull things out of the fire at the last minute. I planned to come back to Southampton on the thursday before this was due in, but a badly-planned doctor's appointment and my desire to 'hang out' with my friends one last time meant I instead returned on saturday evening - by which point the library had closed for the weekend, my time was low, and no scholarly sources were within my grasp.
A quick digression - I understand that we were technically in 'holiday time', but to close a University library on the sunday before everyone returns to class(to, presumably, hand in vital work) is irresponsible and smacks of complacency on the part of the University administration. To so strand students such as myself in the oft-mentioned faeces creek without a suitable oar is an irresponsible use of the money I and many others have paid this establishment. That is not an argument to be discussed in depth in this essay, however, hence it is only a digression.
So, we return to our hero(me) in this veritable quagmire - no sources, little time, and almost no motivation. To get this thing done was going to require "something pretty fucking spectacular" (Pegg & Stevenson, 2001, Episode 7). Alas, that has not happened, as you can tell from what you're reading right now. I have jokingly titled this essay 'Wikipedia or Bust!' because I knew it would ruffle some feathers at first glance, although I have not used Wikipedia at all.
Another modest digression - I am a firm, staunch, and other words meaning 'sincere', believer in the power of Wikipedia. "Large groups of people are smarter than an elite few" (Surowiecki, 2004, blurb) and although many academics, threatened by Wikipedia's omnipresence and it's ability to destroy the walls keeping information from the impoverished masses, argue that the whole thing is worthless because "anyone can edit it" (tvFANatic20, 2007, TV.com messageboards), it is in fact this very aspect that makes Wikipedia so much more trustworthy than other sources.
When an English professor writes a paper on 'Lord of the Flies' does he have a group of his peers constantly checking, critiquing and conversing about his ideas, theories and aspersions? No, but on Wikipedia this is exactly what happens - the 'Lord of the Flies' article has pages of discussion by members of the Wiki-community on what should be included, what is important about the novel, dozens of arguments about it's themes and more. Wikipedia is referred to as the "home of the C+ term paper" (Ze Frank, 2004, SXSW Interactive Web Awards), but I truly believe it can help people get As, Firsts and Shiny Gold Stars. Not least because it's done so for me in the past.
I'm nearly done with this "modest digression" (Me, Now, This Essay) but I do want to quickly say that Wikipedia is part of the grand future of learning - a time when knowledge won't be locked up in buildings I have to pay £9000 a year to enter, when degrees will be worthless as facts stream freely from wi-fi to brain cell, when scholars who so prided themselves on their onanistic, circle-jerk referencing systems will be quaint reminders of a horrible past.
(That is, of course, if we make it through the fuel crisis, manage to cool the planet down, somehow save the global economy and dodge a few asteroids as we careen through existence, Godless and alone, frightened and angry, desperate and selfish. You just can't beat the human condition, huh?)
So, clearly, I'm not talking at all about Restoration Comedy/Theatre. I'd apologise for that, but I know for a fact that I'm a fantastic writer, and this might be the most entertaining bunch of words you read all day. So I'm just going to plow through, and make myself chuckle with all these wonderful letters and hope that, whilst "brevity is the soul of wit" (Shakespeare, 1603, Can't check the page right now, but I think we all know it's in Hamlet) loquaciousness is also the instrument of the mini-Holden Caulfield.
I promised on my website that this essay would include "astute political reference[s] to the Simpsons" (Ze Frank, 2006, 8th December Show), but I don't know where I can call someone a "cheese eating surrender monkey" (Keeler & Groening et al., 1995, The PTA Disbands!). I would positively hate to include the phrase in a way that didn't gel with the rest of this strictly-structured piece just to keep to my solemn oath to the 3 or 4 readers I maintain on my homepage, so I shall not make any attempt to do so, other than in this paragraph. And perhaps the next - who knows, we may get lucky.
Originally I did want to talk about how Restoration Comedy influenced Woody Allen's seminal "Annie Hall". The asides, the comfortably rich and work-shy protagonists and the turbulent romance that comprises the film's plot are all elements that fit comfortably in many Restoration period plays and texts.
Another interesting connection between these two seemingly disparate subjects is the fact that when one Googles "annie hall restoration" the first page that comes up is a blog from the City University of New York talking about the poetic styles of the period, written by someone identifying as 'annie hall(sic)' with many interesting points that would go wonderfully in this essay if it had been correctly done, and if weblogs were deemed 'academic'.
What a lovely coincidence.
I had wanted to talk about the introduction of women into the theatre, say something meaningful or inspired about it, because the roles gender plays in the world we live in is currently a major point of interest for me due to gender identity issues I am coming to terms with(as evidenced... everyday, I suppose). The problem with coming up with something insightful is that one must know an awful lot about the subject(which brings us back to my procrastination followed by the library closure). Also, it's hard to say something new about an event that happened hundreds of years ago. A lot of people have talked and written about the subject.
Even if I managed to think of a completely original point, the likelihood that I would agree with it would be tiny. The series of synaptical events that would lead to an inspired, original, sincere and noteworthy comment on the subject would require some kind of miracle. And for my opinion on miracles, we must only turn back a page and re-read the phrase "Godless and alone".
I've just saved this document for the first time, which is quite irresponsible. I know for a fact that if my computer had crashed and I had lost all of this work, I would not have bothered to re-write everything, and simply have handed in air(or something close to it) tomorrow. Like I said - irresponsible, right?
I have saved this document with the ignominious title of "essay.txt". I know what you're thinking - "someone got a dictionary for Christmas, huh?" Well, I received two, thankyouverymuch, but I knew the word 'ignominious' even before I looked it up to check I was using it in the sentence correctly, so there.
We've got about 244 words left, so I suppose I should put the conclusion here. I've never really been good at this bit - always seen it as rather pointless, a quick repetition of everything that came before, except with some faux-intellectual remark at the end(in Sixth Form I was a fan of ending with "And maybe that's the point"(Morris, 1997, Crime)) I was also a fan of parentheses, and still am, apparently.
So - the conclusion. In conclusion, although I am a ridiculously intelligent individual, a lack of discipline and child-like hope that my essay will somehow do itself have ruined my chances of producing a decent, academic piece. Luckily, my teenage sense of nihilism and belief that if this is how things are then this is how things are meant to be have stopped me entirely from caring in the slightest.
Most importantly, for all the fun I have in the 'Key Moments' lectures, and for all the cool stuff I learn about theatre history in them, I didn't come here to learn about how Cromwell's Puritan beliefs ruined theatre for a little while until his death and Charles' return brought about a cultural renaissance. I came here to study comedy. If this essay was titled "Steve Coogan: From Cult Comedy Super-Star to Hollywood Sellout in 6 Easy Steps" I would've been committed to doing a good job. But it wasn't, so I wasn't. And maybe that's the point.
There, that's exactly 1500, not including title. I'm done.