In his article The Beggars Opera as Opera and Anti-Opera, critic Peter Lewis first analyzes the title of John Gays The Beggars Opera as something that was not originally intended to be an actual opera in the traditional sense of the word. In making this claim, Lewis is largely in agreement with modern critics regarding the role of the play but provides a more complete explanation of what Gay accomplished. He points out how one of Gays closest friends, Alexander Pope, intentionally named his pieces with names that would suggest to an educated public content that would be almost exactly opposite of what was presented. Because the word opera was being used in England to refer almost exclusively to Italian opera, which had a heavy, serious tone to it, Lewis argues Gays use of the word opera in his title is intended to tell his potential audience that he is about to make fun of the Italian traditions. This assumption is supported by a brief history of the opera in England,
illustrating how in the period immediately before Gay produced this work, the entertainment scene in England was just emerging from a period of confinement within the private home and restrictions in that it had to constantly include music. The tendency was to shift to the Italianate opera as a public event, but some writers, such as Gay, were becoming concerned about the loss of the English voice in the public world. Because most of the people couldnt understand Italian, the entertainment was delightful to the ears, but not stimulating to the mind at the same time that the antics of the singers off stage were detracting from the seriousness of the music. Gay, and many others, felt the time had come to introduce a bit of English humor and artistic voice. Much of Lewis article therefore focuses on the various ways in which the Beggars Opera differs from the traditional forms of Italian opera, proving it as both opera and the opposite of opera at one and the same time.