Essay on
Dramatic Poesy
-Dryden
John Dryden
was one of the most shining stars of the Restoration Age, that’s why this age
is also known as the age of Dryden. He was the great critic. So, Dr.Samuel
Johnson quotes as...
“The Father of
English Criticism, who first taught us to
Determine upon
principles the merits of composition”
His Life:
Born-9,
August, 1631, Aldwincle, Thrapston, Northampire, England.
Death-1
May,1700(aged 68 years) London, England.
Occupation-Poet
Laureate, Critic, Dramatist.
Education-At
Cambridge University.
His Creative
Works:
Ø Preface to the Fables
Ø Preface to the Indian Emperor
Ø The Wild Gallant
Ø An Essay on Dramatic Poesy
Ø All for Love
Ø Absalom and Achitophel
Ø Macflecknoe.
But,
here we are Only Concerned with ‘An Essay on Dramatic Poesy’. So let’s discuss
this essay in detail.
An Essay on
Dramatic Poesy: Introduction
Dryden
developed a very ingenious plan of writing his essay. In 1665 great plague
broke out in London. In order to escape from the infection of the plague, many
people left London. So, Dryden takes this situation and develops a plan to
write a great treatise on drama. He imagines the he and his friends sails
out of London in a boat on the river of thames.so,to avoid boredom the
journey, they decide to hold some useful discourse on the theory of drama in
different ages in Greece,Rome,France and of England. They decide to allot one
age to each of the four friends.
Each taking up
the defense of dramatic Literature of one country or one age. Crites speaks for the Greek and the Roman
dramatists and their principles. Lisideius expresses his view that the French
drama is superior to the English drama. So, he favors French dramatists. Eugenius claims that the English Drama of the
last age in England is better than the Ancient Dramatists. Neander (For Dryden himself) pleads for
England and Liberty. So, Dryden holds that ancient principle should be
respected, but should not be followed blindly.
Dryden’s definition of drama
Here,
Dryden expresses his views on Drama that what a play should be, therefore, he
defines drama as
“Just and
Lively Image of human nature,
Representing
its passions and humors,
And the
changes of fortunes to which it
Is subject,
for the delight and instruction Of mankind”.
Therefore,
Dryden and his friends talk about what a play should be, further, Lisideius
conveys his view about Drama as ‘a just lively image of Human nature ‘.after
this discussion, they start to give their views and discuss the advantages and
disadvantages of French and English Drama. At last the debate goes on about the
comparison between Ancient and Modern writers.
Violation of
the three unities
As far as the
unities of the time, place and action are concerned. This group further
discusses the playwrights like Ben Jonson, Moliere and Shakespeare with a
deeper insight. John Dryden himself.
Also defenses
English tragic-Comedy.
He comments
that the French plays may be more regular but they are not as lively as that of
English. For example in William Shakespeare’s Plays the more lively and just
images of life can also be observed. Therefore, Dryden here condemns French
Plays s lack of just and lively image.
Eugenius’s
arguments on the superiority of the Moderns over the Ancients
Eugenius
defends the English dramatists of the last age with a highly penetrating
insight. It is true, he says that the Ancients Greek and Roman scholars laid
down many basic principles of Drama. The English authors gave due respect to
them, but they had no clear-cut concept of dividing a Play into Acts. The
Dramatist set the voyage of dividing a play into five acts. Most of the Ancient
Greek Playwrights wrote their plays on highly popular episodes of Thebes or
troy on which many narrative poems, epics and plays had already been written.
Therefore, the spectators found nothing new in them. Many times they spoke out
the dialogues before the actors spoke them. The English Dramatist wrote their
Plays on new Themes. In Comedies, the Greek and Roman playwrights repeated
common theme of lost children coming back to their home after gap of many
years. This often repeated theme lost its interest to the spectators.so,the
English Dramatist invented new and interesting themes. In all these respects
the English Dramatists of the last age were better than the Greek or Roman
Dramatists.
Crites’s
arguments in favor of the Ancients
Crites begins
defending the Ancient Greek and Roman Poets and dramatists, and expresses his
views that Ancients are better than the Modern one. The Ancient writers set
rules of drama like, Aristotle also laid down the principles of the three
unities of time place and action. By the unity of Time he meant that the action
of a play should not be exceed “Compass of a natural day”, By the Unity of
Place he meant that scene ought to be continued in the same place from the
beginning to the end for the stage s “But one and the same Place”. It is
Unnatural to shift the action from one place to another, especially to distant
places. This will give the greatest likelihood to untruth. By the Unity of
action, he meant that there should not be two or more actions. There should be
only one action at a time to cover the whole Plot. The Ancient observed the
three dramatic unities faithfully, and The Romans, The French, and The English
dramatists tried their best to observe them, though not always
successfully.Thus, The Ancients are our first law-givers as well as models for
the Moderns to follow.
Lisideius view
in favor of the superiority of the French drama over the English Drama
Defending the
French Drama and Dramatist, Lisideius says that they far surpass the English
and even the Greek dramatists.Corneill and some other French dramatists have so
reformed their theatre that no European theatre stands comparison to it. So as
far as the three dramatic unities are concerned, the French Dramatists observe
them more faithfully than the Greeks themselves who propounded them. In
observing the unity of time, they are so scrupulous that the action in some of
their plays is limited to only twelve hours. The French are equally faithful in
observing the unity of place. Many of them limit to the very spot of ground
where the play is supposed to begin.However, none of them exceeds the compass
of the same town. Equally conspicuous is the observance of the unity of action.
There are under plots in their plays.
Further, the
French generally write their tragedies on well-known historical facts which the
people can easily comprehend. They do not make their plots so complicated that
the spectators may lose their patience. In their plays the hero is most
important, and rest of the characters are marginalized to him.Finally,The
French write their plays in beautiful rhyming verse which is far sweeter than
the blank verse in which the English plays are written. To Sum Up, The French
playwrights are superior to the English.
Neander’s view
in favor of English Drama
Dryden in the
person of Neander rises up in defence of English dramatists and strongly pleads
that English Dramatist are fully justified in not slavishly accepting the
classical principles in many respects. They have developed their own principles
and proved themselves to be superior to the Greek and French dramatists in many
ways. In the First place French drama, whether comic or tragic, lacks in
emotion and passion. English dramatists surpass them in both. The English
tragedies produce fear and pity more powerfully, and their comedies excel in
producing delightful humors and Romantic love. He equally defends the insertion
of under plots which highlight the main plot.
Coming to the
dramatic unities of Time and Place, he says that their observance might
adversely affect the total impact of a play. It is unbelievable that sufficient
material for the plot of a good play.Finally, coming to Shakespeare, he says
“He was the man who of all modern, and perhaps ancient poets, had the largest
and most comprehensive soul. He was naturally learned; he needed not the
spectacle of books to read literature; he looked inwards and found him there.
The Ancient
versus Modern Playwrights
Here, by this
essay, John Dryden makes comparison between Ancients versus Modern
Playwrights.Crites makes favor of the Ancients by giving some views about them.
A. Crites
favors the Ancients
The first
significant thing which favors Ancients that they are acknowledged models of
the modern. They had a special technique for writing drama is that of
perfection. And further, Crites expresses his views that the Ancients were
honored and rewarded by the merits of their drama. They closely observed nature
and depicted faithfully in their plays. The Rules and unities of composing
drama, which were made by the Ancients. Therefore, Crites favors Ancients
rather than Moderns.
B. Eugenius
favors Moderns
Eugenius tries
to reply to Crites by making Modern dramatists better than that of Ancients. Of
course, Moderns have written drama the way the Ancients were written. But, they
have not blindly imitated them. Their themes of the
drama were similar, but not Moderns tried to present the same thing in a better
way and in a different way. They have perfected the division of plays and
divided their plays not into acts but into various scenes. The Ancient observed
the three unities of time place and actions are not perfect. In fact, the
Moderns tried to get perfection of these unities in their dramas.Ancients’s
plays do not perform one of the function of drama, that of giving delight as
well as instruction. There was no rule to punish vice, but even, they have mostly
shown a prosperous wickedness. Therefore, by giving the reply to Crites in
favor of Moderns, Eugenius tries to differentiates Moderns from the Ancients.
Mixture of
tragedy and comedy
Being a
liberal Critic, Dryden, who tries to give his view on mingling of tragedy and
comedy.sometimes, it may be possible that one becomes bore after watching
comedy drama. so here, the same thing is told by Dryden that the eye can pass
from an unpleasant object to pleasant one.so,also the soul can move from
the tragic to the comic. There were no rules of mixing tragedy and comedy in
their plays. But, they had written play of tragedy, no comic elements were
there. But, perhaps, Aristotle would have revised his rules. That’s why, Dryden
puts here that “Had Aristotle seen the English plays, He might have changed his
mind”.Hence,the views of John Dryden proves that he is more frank as well as
liberal as he suggests the mixture of Tragedy and Comedy must be there.
Rhymed verse
versus Blank verse
Heroic couplet
was used as a form of poetry in the Restoration Age as this form was mastered
by John Dryden. He puts his idea on Rhyme through the mouth of Neander, while
Crites attacks on Rhyme and puts forward his ideas that Rhyme must not be used
in the drama. Of course, it may be utilized in comedy plays, because a play is
made up of dialogues, if Rhyme is used, than the play seems unnatural or we may
call a Rhymed Verse play, which is not permitted to use it.
Neander’s
Defence
In making
attempt to give reply to Crites, Neander favors Rhyme and further says that
Rhyme makes the play natural.Therefore, it must be used in the play.Moreover,
he puts forward his view that Rhyme is different from Blank Verse. Rhyme is a
type of similar word at the end of the lines, while a Blank Verse stand alone,
which was used by Christopher Marlowe and other Elizabethans. In a form of
tragedy they used Rhyme.So, at last, Neander makes a comment and it indicates
that he favors Rhyme.
Comparison
between Shakespeare and Ben Jonson
In this essay,
Dryden makes comparison between two great Elizabethan Dramatists like William
Shakespeare and Ben Jonson. So let’s discuss this comparison in detail.
A. Shakespeare:
William
Shakespeare was one of the prominent dramatists of the Age of Elizabeth. He
describes the thing in such a way that not only one can see, but also you feel
it. He wrote 37 Plays and in which he portrayed all the things in his
Dramas and Sonnets. Though, he was not considered a great writer in the days of
Elizabethan.
B. Ben
Jonson:
Another writer
of high quality in the Elizabethan Age was Ben Jonson, who was considered
superior to William Shakespeare in those days. Because, Wit; Humour in his
Dramas makes him a learned man. Jonson was a judge himself, therefore, as one
can observe in his Dramas that he wrote plays, which contain Homour and Wit
also.
One critic
Atkins states,
“If I would
compare him with Shakespeare,
I must
acknowledge him with the more correct
Poet,
but Shakespeare the great wit, Shakespeare
Was the
Homer, or father of our dramatic poets;
Jonson
was the Virgil, the pattern of elaborate writing
I admire
him, but I love Shakespeare”.
So, Neander
expresses his view about this comparison. Now let’s explain his ideas about
another comparison between Fletcher and Beaumont in detail.
A. John
Fletcher
John Fletcher
belonged to the Age of Elizabeth, who was Dramatist of high quality and poet
too. Fletcher wrote most of his play as a comedy and of course his real talent
lay in it. By writing tragicomedy he generates laughter and power of arousing
emotions. John Fletcher was the first person, who Customized 10 syllable line
of Elizabethan Dramatic Blank Verse. The Themes of his plays were love or honor
.sometimes both theme or subject can be observed in a tragicomedy. So, he was a
man of technical abilities too.
B. Francis
Beaumont:
The most
influential play Wright and poet of Elizabethan Age. He also more wrote
comedies and his comedies help Beaumont to stand as a man of talent. He was
more famous for his tragicomedies, which he wrote with Fletcher. They both have
written ten Plays in collaboration. So these collaborations had helped to
establish both men in the ranks of the best dramatists. Therefore; Dryden makes
comparison of both the Dramatists.
hello , what can we write in shakespeare's dramatic poesie ?
ReplyDeletesuch a great criticism! thank you. :)
ReplyDeletenice attempt to explain the work. I am author at articlesjar.com
ReplyDeleteI'm amazed. Thank you sir . Great help .
ReplyDeleteThanks for this blog
ReplyDeleteappreciable explanation but i need more & more advantage regarding English Literature as possible as you can do
ReplyDeleteAppreciable work,such type of critic would be change the life of literary people..
ReplyDeleteNice Work
ReplyDeleteSuch a great works...praieworthy...written in a elaborated way...
ReplyDeleteAre you sure that they were fleeing from the plague, or to see clear view of Dutch and English war 3 June 1665
ReplyDeletethe work is well written for its content mostly but it has some grammatical errors to look up to for correction. Thank you though, the article was very helpful.
ReplyDeletei have problem in writing
ReplyDelete