CCoollbbyy QQuuaarrtteerrllyy Volume 18 Article 5 Issue 2 June June 1982 PPllaayy''ss tthhee TThhiinngg:: AA SSttuuddyy ooff GGaammeess iinn tthhee AAllcchheemmiisstt Carol A. Carr Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Colby Library Quarterly, Volume 18, no.2, June 1982, p.113-125 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Colby. It has been accepted for inclusion in Colby Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Colby. Carr: Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in the Alchemist Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in The Alchemist by CAROL A. CARR ALTHOUGH much admired, The Alchemist has always presented cer .n. tain problems for the critic. How did Jonson intend us to under stand his play? Is it a comedy or a satire? Is Lovewit to be applauded or condemned? Such debates are owing largelyto the intriguingmixture of tones in the play: individual passages elicit diverse responses, and it is difficult to evaluate the impact of the playas a whole. Nevertheless, developments outside the field of literature have in recent years pro vided new material with which to approach these questions. Games both their theory and their practice-have become the object ofstudyin a number ofdisciplines, and the resultinginsights provide help in under standing Jonson's work: for The Alchemist, consisting of a series of interrelated games, can be seen as an exploration of man at "play." To saythat TheAlchemistis about games is not to saythat it is a friv olous work. Thetwentieth centuryhas seenthe increasingrecognitionof the importance of games in our lives, and we have come to understand that "play" can be deadly serious. Studies of games have shown that they are not occasional, isolated phenomena: the patterns ofplay found in childhood frolic and adult contests of skill are found as well in daily social interaction, in personal-even intimate-relationships, and in international events such as wars. Thus, games themselves, even in their simplest forms, reflect patterns which are highly significant to us. I Our growing perceptions about the nature of games enable us to approach The Alchemist anew. The play consists almost entirely of games-of separate yet related confidence games played on a variety of gulls, and of a grand contest between the two chief rogues, Face and Subtle. These games are obviously designed as means for Jonson to present the follies and abuses of his times, yet they can yield new in sights when approached from the perspectives furnished by twentieth century studies in the psychology and aesthetics of games. Jonson was 1. Twentieth-centurymaterial on gamesiscopiousand far ranging, touchingonsuchwidelydiver gentfieldsasmathematics,psychology,andsocialsciences.Perhapsthetwomostimportantlandmarks inthereevaluationoftheroleofgamesandplayinhumanexperienceareFreud'sBeyondthePleasure PrincipleandvonNeumannandMorgenstern's TheoryofGamesandEconomicBehavior.Areviewof gametheorycanbefoundinGamesandDecisionsbyR.D.LuceandH.Raiffa.ForthisessayIwillbe drawing on two popular but quite different approaches to games, both written for the layman: Eric Berne's GamesPeople Play: The PsychologyofHuman Relationships(New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1964) and Johan Huizinga's Homo Ludens: A Study ofthe Play Element in Culture, trans. George Steiner (New York: Harperand Row, 1970[firstedition, London: 1938]). 113 Published by Digital Commons @ Colby, 1982 1 Colby Quarterly, Vol. 18, Iss. 2 [1982], Art. 5 114 COLBY LIBRARY QUARTERLY not anticipating such analyses; he was observing errant humanitybefore him and recreating the enduring patterns which only lately we have begun to label. The individual games between the rogues and their victims demon strate Jonson's observations ofman's complexpsyche. Thegulls present a fascinating variety of mental types. Most interesting from this view point are Dapper, Drugger, and Sir Epicure. All come to Subtle for money. Dapper wants a familiar so he can win at gambling, Drugger wants his shop set up so it will be profitable, and Sir Epicure wants the philosopher's stone so he can make gold. However, they are really at tracted to Subtle's den for other reasons as well, reasons often far more importantthan money. Thisis whywe shortlyfind Dapperwaiting upon his Aunt of Faery, Drugger hoping to marry a widow, and Sir Epicure chasing Dol. The original object, money, is partly or totally obscured. The games Subtle and Face play with these gulls are aimed at their underlying psychological motivations as much as their desire for gain. For this reason the rogues are successful even when'the gulls keep losing money. Beforeanalyzing the games beingplayedbetweentherogues andthese three gulls, we need a few critical terms and a schemawhich will help us see the psychological patterns at work. Eric Berne provides these in his well-known book, Games People Play, a psychoanalysis of games. Berne defines a game as "a recurring set of transactions, often repeti tious, superficially plausible, with a concealed motivation." He sug 2 gests that games can be analyzed by studying the ego states involved. When the Adult ego state operates, we react to experience objectively. When the Parentego stateoperates, we react as our parents did or as we conceive they should have. When the Child ego state operates, we react inpatterns fixed in earlylife. Agame is ostensiblya transaction between two adults, but in reality at least one player is operating on a Child or Parent level. Berne is primarily concerned with "unconscious games," games played by people not fully aware of what they are doing. Nevertheless, his analysis applies as well to the types ofgames seen in The Alchemist, games which he labels "angular transactions." These games are con sciously planned, with the Adult in control, and are designed to yield dividends. In this category Berne places the confidencegames ofprofes sional impostors as well as the games played by businessmen and re ported in trade journals. An example Bernegives ofthe latter is that of 3 a salesman angling for a purchase who tells the customer that he prob ably cannot afford the item. The saleman is aiming at the Child in the customer who will think, "I'll show that arrogant fellow."4 2. Berne, p. 48. 3. Berne, p. 49. 4. Berne, p. 33. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq/vol18/iss2/5 2 Carr: Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in the Alchemist CAROL A. CARR 115 The games between Face and Subtle and the various gulls are similar to Berne's example. Superficially their appeal is to the gull's desire for money; underneath they are flattering or cajoling the ever-present Child in their victim. The gulling of Dapper is a good example. On one level the game is fairly clear. Dapper comes to Subtle for a "rifling fly" so he can win on his occasional gambling outings. Subtle and Face skillfully change this desire to that ofa "great" familiar and finally to a visit with the Queen ofFaery (who in less than fifty lines becomes Dapper's aunt). The goal is increased each time by appealing to Dapper's greed. Subtle objects that he will win all the money in town ifhe gets a great fan1iliar, and "Her Grace" is revealed to be "a lone woman, / And very rich" (I.ii.155-56).5 This analysis, however, does not account for all that occurs in the scene. Certainly when we first see Dapper he does not seem very con cerned with money: I had a scurvy writ or two to make, And I had lent my watch last night to one That dines today at the sheriff's, and so was robbed Ofmy pass-time. (I.ii.5-8) On the surface this is merely Dapper's excuse for being late, but Dapper is revealing much about himselfin these lines. He is trying to pass for a man ofin1portance-who owns a watch and knows men who dine at the sheriff's. He is presenting himselfas a gallant by the language he uses his references to his "pass-time" and his "scurvy" writ. A few lines later he drops the pretentious foreign term''chiaus." Dapper, in short, is playing man-about-town, and this game as much as his desire for money accounts for his appearance at Subtle's. Just as he "Consorts with the small poets of the time" and "can court / His mistress out of Ovid" (I.ii.52-58), Dapper displays an interest in gambling as part of his role. This underlying reason for Dapper's visit helps make clear the other appeals besides greed which the rogues employ. Forexample, Face plays a companion role of gallant, as his language reveals: Hang him, proud stag, with his broad velvet head. But for your sake I'd choke ere I would change An article of breath with such a puck-fist! (I.ii.61-63) Dapper's own illusions are thus confirmed by the company he keeps. Moreover, Subtle's role as a simple, fearful man who is easily gulled gives Dapper a sense of worldly know-how. Ifwe return then to Berne's system, we seethat on onelevel the trans action is between adults: Dapper wishes to buy a familiar to win money. But on a second level the rogues appeal to the Child in Dapper by 5. Ben Jonson, The Alchemist, ed. Alvin B. Kernan (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1974). All further references to TheAlchemistareto thiseditionand will appearin thetext. Published by Digital Commons @ Colby, 1982 3 Colby Quarterly, Vol. 18, Iss. 2 [1982], Art. 5 116 COLBY LIBRARY QUARTERLY assuming complementary roles to Dapper's man-about-town. The first appeal is straightforward, and Dapper should be capable of reversing himself if he sees that he is getting nowhere. However, he does not openlyacknowledgehis desireto be agallant but rather pretendsto him self and others that he is one. His relationship with Subtle and Face reinforces this image, and thus it is in Dapper's interest to keep the game going and to resist seeing through the obvious duplicity of the rogues. Theironyisthat the man who most wants to bethought worldly is the one most prime to be gulled into believing in his Aunt of Faery. A similar pattern can be seen in the rogues' deception of Drugger, even though the gulls are quite unalike. Rather than a would-be gallant, Drugger wants to be thought of as a "good man." As a shopkeeper he seeks to please people in order to gain patronage. Although Drugger comes to Subtle for advice about setting up his business so he will thrive, he does not seek money alone but also confirmation ofhis own image.6 As a result heis willing to give Subtlegifts just so he will be well thought of, and often the gulling of Drugger is simply the evocation of the shopkeeper's ideal: Face. 'Shalt give his worship a new damask suit Upon the premises. Subtle. 0, good Captain! Face. He shall, He is the honestest fellow, Doctor. (II.vi.72-74) Drugger, likeall thegulls, gets no financial profit from his association with the rogues, but he does get the other satisfactionshe seeks. To rein force his picture of himself as a trustworthy man, one who above all "serves" his customers, Druggerwants someoneto makedemands upon him, someone to praise him, and someone to direct him. The rogues answer each of these needs. Both send him scurrying on errands, to fetch a suit, to fetch the widow, to fetch the parson. Face's role is mainly to praise him continually. He introduces him to Subtle with a long speech on his goodness and his honesty, and he constantlyrefers to him as "honest Abel." Subtle's role is more indirect but also more ef fective. In Berne's terminology, he matches the eager-to-please "Child" in Drugger with the complementary role ofcommanding "Parent." He does not just give Drugger trade secrets, a horoscope, and directions for setting up his shop; hetotallytakes over his life. Subtle uses a brisktone and the imperative when addressing Drugger. He pretends to complete knowledge ofhis past and future. And in true parent fashion he shortly offers to arrange amarriage for him. It is no wonder that Drugger finds the relationship with the rogues so gratifying. Sir Epicure Mammon is a far more complex gull than either Dapper or Drugger. Both he and Tribulation Wholesome represent grievous 6. Berneseestheconfirmationofan imageasa major function ofgames. Seeespeciallypage45. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq/vol18/iss2/5 4 Carr: Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in the Alchemist CAROL A. CARR 117 vices in Jonson's age-the corruption of social and religious orders. Nevertheless, like the more venial gulls, Dapper and Drugger, Sir Epi cure provides us a glimpse into the psychology ofgulling, and his inter actions with the rogues reveal a good deal about the nature of games. Sir Epicure is the epitome of overweening ambition. Dapper's desire to be a gallant and Drugger's to be a good businessman pall beside Sir Epicure's plans for power and grandeur. As his repeated phrase "Be Rich" indicates, he at times sees himself as a god.7 But Sir Epicure's blasphemy has another side to it which is generallyoverlooked, and this second element is the keyto the psychologyemployed in his gulling. It is first clearly seen in his reactions when caught with Dol: "0, my volup tuous mind! I am justly punished" (IV.v.82). This looks forward to his last statement in the play: I will go mount a turnip-cart and preach The end 0' the world, within these two months. (V.v.81-82) Sir Epicure's ultimate judgment ofhimselfin traditional religious terms and his determination to inflict a penance on himself do not indicate a sudden change in character. Nor is the consistencybetweenthese actions and his earlier ones to be explained merely bythe fact that he is a "man ofextremes,"s although this he is. Instead, ifwe take Sir Epicure's reli gious orthodoxy as a given, we see that it explains a good deal of his behavior which might otherwise be puzzling. Sir Epicure, as his words and actions in the last act make explicit, views himself as a "sinner." This explains the particular form that his gulling takes, wherein he is led to believe that he is fooling a "notable, superstitious, good soul" (11.ii.l02) andlaterthat hisiniquityis revealed and his hopes destroyed through divine intervention. As we have seen with Dapper and Drugger, the rogues' modus operandi is for Subtle to take on an opposite role (naive to gallant Dapper, commanding to ser vile Drugger) and for Face to take on a companion role (man-about town, admirer of goodness). So, too, with Sir Epicure: Subtle is the pious holy man and Face is the smiling panderer. In a sense, then, Sir Epicure's gulling is an acting out of a little morality play, with the rogues assuming the proper roles to complement Sir Epicure's idea of himself. Such an interpretation would explain Surly's characterization of Sir Epicure as . . . a grave sir . . . A wise sir, too, at other times ... [but one who will] With his own oaths and arguments make hard means To gull himself. (II.iii.279-82) 7. See Myrddin Jones, "Sir Epicure Mammon: A Study in Spiritual Fornication," Renaissance Quarterly, XXII (1969), 233-42. 8. Alvin Kernan, note to V.v.82, in hiseditionofthe play. Published by Digital Commons @ Colby, 1982 5 Colby Quarterly, Vol. 18, Iss. 2 [1982], Art. 5 118 COLBY LIBRARY QUARTERLY Sir Epicure unconsciously seeks his own "just punishment." We seethis in his actions toward Dol, particularlyifwe compare them to Volpone's in a similar situation. Volpone's seduction of Celia, taking place in his own isolated house where she is brought by her husband, could be ex pected to succeed. In contrast, Sir Epicure's prospects with Dol appear risky even to himself, and Face clearly emphasizes the dangers: "Ifthe old man should hear or see you . . . The very house, sir, would run mad" (IV.i.12-13). Sir Epicure's failure to take heed is a result of his sense of himself asa sinner who must inevitably be punished. Sir Epicure, then, plays "lecher" the way Eric Berne suggests some people play "alcoholic": "Present experience indicates that the payoff in 'Alcoholic' (as is characteristic ofgames in general) ... is the hang over.... The transactional object ofthe drinking, aside from the per sonal pleasures it brings, is to set up a situation where the Child can be severely scolded not only by the internal Parent but by any Parental figures in the environment who are interested enough to oblige."9 Sir Epicure seeks to be caught so Subtle can scold him. (This incidentally would also explain why he enjoys Surly's companionship, for the gamester spends most of his time upbraiding the knight.) In his treatment of Sir Epicure, then, Jonson probes the psychology ofgulling in depth and reveals a basic principlethat is frequently seen at work in rogue plays: the gull actively participates in his own deception, for unconsciously he seeks to be chastised. Modern psychology has shown Jonson's insights here to be valid, and this is one reason that the play, for all its topicality, rings true. For the Jacobeans, however, the pattern had moral implications as well. It makes gulling a form of pun ishment and the rogue, for all his culpability, a servant to a just end. Thus the ironic patternofself-punishment reveals amoral order at work in men, despite their own base aims. Jonson's views here are similar to those Middleton developed in working with the rogue: that sin is its own punishment, and wit turns finally on itself. II THE RICH varietyofgulls in TheAlchemistand the differingtreatments Jonson accords them account for the widely divergent critical views of the play-seen both as Jonson's most cynical and as his gayest. Cer 10 tainly in the psychology that lies behind Sir Epicure's actions, we see Jonson suggesting the serious implications of the rogues' amusing games. However, on the whole, the tone of the play is much closer to the jovial humor we get in Jonson's treatment of Dapper and Drugger 9. Berne, pp. 75-76. 10. It is judged his most cynical by Gabriele Bernhard Jackson in Vision and Judgment in Ben Jonson's Drama(New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1968), pp. 67-68, 87-92. J. B. Steane supports the oppositeviewinhisintroduction, TheAlchemist(London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967),pp. 1-26. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq/vol18/iss2/5 6 Carr: Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in the Alchemist CAROL A. CARR 119 than it is to the darker humor associated with Sir Epicure. This is be cause, although Sir Epicure is the central gull in the play, he is not the central figure. The Alchemist instead focuses on that "venture tripar tite"-Face, Subtle, and Dol. Thetrio ofrogues dominates. At least one ofthem appears in all but three scenes ofthe play, and whentheyare on stage, they generally monopolize the dialogue. Even the loquacious Sir 11 Epicure is often reduced to half-liners in their presence. As a result, the tone ofthe play is largely set by the rogues, and the more serious impli cations developed through the individual games are not emphasized. The central position oftherogues inthe plotgives unityto what could be merely a collection of gullings. Jonson establishes in the first act a game between Subtle and Face to "prove today who shall shark best" (I.i.160). According to these terms, all the separate gullings are a part of this larger game. Thus, although each can be seen as revealing in itself a sharp satirical portrait or a significant psychological insight, we must always view the gullings from another context as well-as demon strations ofthe rogues' skill, as points in an ongoinggame. Moreover, 12 this larger game is not given the moral implications that the individual gullings are. It is presented as an open contest of skill, like an athletic event between equally-matched opponents. As a result, the audience is encouraged to adopt the attitude ofan amused spectator towards it, and this attitude colors the audience's reaction to the playas a whole. To understand fully the effect which the rogues' contest has on The Alchemist, we need to explore the ideaofgame from another viewpoint. The psychological approach continues to provide insights-as we shall see, the outcome ofthe game is based largelyonthe mental assumptions ofthe two combatants; however, psychological motivations are not em phasized here to the extent that they were in the gulling of Dapper, Drugger, and Sir Epicure. Although the rogues do try to nlanipulate each other, the game between them is basically an open contest entered into for their own amusement. The approach which is most rewarding here is aesthetic-a-study of how their game delights us as a perfor mance and how it affects the play's tone and our feelings towards the rogues. Of use in this approach is another study of games which preceded Berne's and on which he drew. Johan Huizinga's Homo Ludens: A Study ofthe Play Element in Culture is broader in scope and different in emphasis. Whereas Berne noted briefly the aesthetics ofgames when he wrote ofthe elimination of wasteful moves and the resulting stream lining of form, Huizinga explores this element in depth. His study dif- 13 11. The exceptions are scenes II.i, III.i, and V.i (and in the first Face has an offstage line). The rogues, ofcourse, do not dominatein allthe scenesinwhich theyappear. 12. JoyceVan Dykesuggeststhatthepointsofthegamearekeptquiteliterally,thattheroguestally uptheamountofmoneyeachgetsfromthegullshehimselfhasrecruited.See"TheGamesofWitsin TheAlchemist," Studiesin English Literature, 1500-1900, XIX (Spring 1979), 259. 13. Berne, pp. 55-56. Published by Digital Commons @ Colby, 1982 7 Colby Quarterly, Vol. 18, Iss. 2 [1982], Art. 5 120 COLBY LIBRARY QUARTERLY fers from others, he states, inthat they ignorethe "profoundlyaesthetic quality" of play}4 Huizinga is not so much interested in diagraming forms ofgames as in isolating the "play-mood" which is at their heart. Huizinga's definition of play provides a useful way of looking at the contest between the two rogues: Wemightcallita freeactivitystandingquiteconsciouslyoutside "ordinary"lifeasbeing "not serious," but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly. It is an activityconnectedwithnomaterialinterest, andnoprofitcanbegainedbyit. Itproceeds withinitsown proper boundariesoftimeandspaceaccordingto fixed rules andinanor derly manner. IS Subtle and Face "play" in much the same way. The rogues have been gulling dupes for some time when The Alchemist opens, and we are to assume that Subtle and Dol, at theveryleast, will continuetogull others after it closes. But the contest between Subtle and Face is a different matter. Itis carefullylimitedto this dayandthis house. Itis enteredinto voluntarily but formally, probably with a handshake upon the word "Agreed" (1.i.160). The rules are unspoken but clearly implied in the references to "articles" and "instruments." Most important, however, is that unlike the gulling ofthe·dupes, the contest between the ro.gues is begun for its own sake, for the "fun" ofit, without the ulterior purpose ofgaining money. Thus it is a kind ofornament on the basic business 16 ofthe day. Despitethis fact-or perhaps because ofit-it is played with vigor and intensity. The rogues' contest opens with a dare-"prove today who shall shark best"-and daring is a pronounced trait in all their actions. The very fun ofthe gullings seems to lie in their risk, in the intriguing element of danger. Thus Surly is approached even though he threatens to prove intractable merely because "to ha' gulled him / Had been a mast'ry" (III.iii.7-8). So, too, the rogues take on all comers, and each gulling is pushed to its absolutelimits. In consequence, the trio has increasing dif ficulties handling all their clients, and a remarkable tension builds. The best analogyfor the feeling producedis the suspenseweexperiencewhen watching a juggler add ball after ball to his act: we wait for, although we do not wish for, all to come tumbling down. We identify with the juggler in his difficulties, and when he succeeds, we experience a sense of exhilaration. So, too, in The Alchemist. The possible difficulties produce an excitement which makes us forget ethics and identify with the rogues. Then when the hardest trick is performed, when even Surly is turned away, tension is released in a flood of joy. The style with which the rogues approach their tasks is another prod- 14. Huizinga, p. 20. 15. Huizinga, p. 32. 16. Thisdistinctionbetweenthe"serious"hoodwinkingofthedupesandthe"playful"contestbe tweenFaceandSubtleisbaseduponthedominantmoodofthegames.Itshouldnotbepushedtoofar, for the essenceofgameisthe paradoxicalmixtureofseriousnessand play. Forthisreason Huizinga placed "not serious" inquotationsinhisdefinition ofplayabove. Seealso Berne, pp. 18,49. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq/vol18/iss2/5 8 Carr: Play's the Thing: A Study of Games in the Alchemist CAROL A. CARR 121 uct of the playful attitude which their game encourages. Rather than simply milking the gulls for their money, they continuallyembroider on their roles, doing far more than is necessary. An example is Face's de scription of Dapper as he introduces him to Subtle. To lure the young man on, Face evokes the clerk's ideal ofhimselfas agallant; however, it is for his own pleasure that Face also skillfully weaves into his account the actual banality ofDapper's life. Thus we learn that Dapper, in addi tion to consorting with the poets and studying Ovid, is "thesolehopeof his old grandmother" and "has his ciph'ring perfect" (I.ii.53-55). These elements are for Face's and Subtle's benefit-and ultimately for ours. Here we experience a different sort of pleasure, not from the re lease of tension but from delight in the aesthetic elements which the game takes on. The style with which the rogues carryontheirgullings is not unrelated to the daring with which they approach them. Their embroidering on their roles, their elaborate, witty speeches, are an overdoing, and hence always threaten, however slightly, to topple the entire edifice. In a sense each double entendre dares the gull to open his eyes. Moreover, the rogues' elaboration is often at cross purposes with the pressing needs of the moment. They are able to pun wittily and speak charminglywhile at the same time they carryon a very exacting and very risky confidence game and when at any moment another gull mayappear. Theaudience's pleasure in the rogues' style, then, is closely tied up with its pleasure in their audacity. It is the pleasure of seeing wit produced under pressure and form created out of disorder. It is the pleasure in the rogues' 17 sprezzatura, their achievement of a style which belies its own difficulty. It is akin to the pleasure we receive from a poem composedinacomplex stanza form. This enjoyment which the audience derives from the rogues' game af fects in turn its feelings toward them. First, caught up in the dynamics of the contest, the audience suspends judgment. Moral standards are not so much bent as ignored; we are simply not interested in judging. However, our feelings toward the rogues as a result of the game go further than this neutral stance. We do not just tolerate them, we begin to applaud them. There are two basic reasons for these feelings. For one, there is the positive value which style and daring hold. A person who can create something aesthetically pleasing in form or language cannot help but be admired. We grant artistic "license" to such a per son and can overlook to some extent the dubiousness of his methods. 17. Robert E. Knoll in "Howto Read TheAlchemist," CollegeEnglish, XXI (1960), 456-60, has pointed out that the playrelies heavilyon repetition, that eachgullingis kept separateand follows a simplepatternofintroduction,neglect,andresolution.Thisanalysisisbasicallytrueoftheplay'sform (althoughIwouldarguethatthereismoreinterweavingthanhesuggestsinthesecondhalfoftheplay), butitdoesnotaccuratelyreflectthewaywefeelinreadingorseeingit.Thisisbecauseweseetheaction from the rogues' viewpoint, and whereas Jonson maybe neglectingthegulls wearealwaysexpecting them. That is, we perceive simultaneously both the simple orderly form and the great disorder-po tentialorovercome-which lies right behind it. Published by Digital Commons @ Colby, 1982 9