No matter what the content or objective purpose of dialogues, however, they were uniformly written in what became known after the Restoration as the "plain, easy, and familiar" style.[7] Sentences were more conveniently broken up than heretofore, and there was increased lightness of tone. Though there was still a great deal of invective, Hugh Macdonald notes in "Banter in English Controversial Prose after the Restoration," that banter became prominent in the literature of disputation after 1660. On the other hand, "No one would expect to find a clear-cut division between banter, satire, sarcasm, burlesque, and abuse in every passage of a book written in the seventeenth century."[8] As Mr. Macdonald states, it is largely a question of emphasis. Employing a great deal of banter, Marvell reintroduced a tradition forgotten since the Marprelate tracts--that of treating a grave subject lightly yet with serious intention of reinforcing the argument. Restoration polemicists, with L'Estrange in the vanguard, quickly realized the advantages of this technique and claimed it as their own. _Citt and Bumpkin_ survives close scrutiny according to the critical criteria for evaluating dialogues suggested by Purpus and Macdonald. Although L'Estrange does use the genre for a specific controversial end, he does not lapse into a barren question-and-answer type of organization nor into that of an artificial didactic catechism. While he sketches a setting, develops characterization, and creates believable conversation, L'Estrange does not err in the direction of over-dramatization either. He provides all the requisite machinery to support the dramatic realism necessary in a successful dialogue, but he goes no further. Throughout _Citt and Bumpkin_, L'Estrange maintains the appropriate "plain, easy and familiar" style. The sentence structure is simple, and clauses are well punctuated. Abounding with colloquial expressions, contractions, and slang, the vocabulary is common and especially suited to the low characters. A bantering tone predominates, accompanied by passages employing irony, satire, and invective. There is not enough invective, however, to destroy the mood. If L'Estrange's Tory bias is perfectly evident, it is not aggressive enough to prevent the accomplishment of his polemic objectives. Although the republican political theories of the Whigs are attacked satirically in the first part of _Citt and Bumpkin_, they are stated and refuted in proper controversial style in the final pages of the pamphlet. On the whole, _Citt and Bumpkin_ conforms to the conventions of a successful dialogue; where it does not, the infringements are not great enough to destroy its artistic integrity.