An Essay of Dramatic
Poesy Summary by John Dryden.
Prepared by: Dhaval
Diyora
Roll No: 05
Paper – 3: Literary
Theory & Criticism
M.A (English): Sem
-1
Enrollment No :
2069108420190013
Batch: 2018-20
Email:
d.d.diyora@gmail.com
Submitted to: Smt
.S. B Gardi, Department of English, MK Bhavnagar University.
Topic: An Essay of
Dramatic Poesy Summary by John Dryden.
To evaluate my assignment click here
John Dryden 1631–1700
father of modern English
poetry and criticism
English poet, critic,
playwright, and translator.
John Dryden, an English
poet and dramatist who would dominate literary efforts of The Restoration, was
born on August 19, 1631, in Aldwinkle, Northamptonshire, England. He received a
classical education at Westminster School and Trinity College, Cambridge, then
moved to London in 1657 to commence his career as a professional writer. His
first play, The Wild Gallant (1663), was a failure when first presented, but
Dryden soon found more success with The Indian Queen (1664) which he
co-authored with Sir Robert Howard and which served as his initial attempt to
found a new theatrical genre, the heroic tragedy. Although George Villiers' The
Rehearsal, a vicious satire of heroic tragedy, brought a quick end to the form,
Dryden still managed to produce a number of successful works in this genre
including The Indian Emperor (1665) and Secret Love (1667) which mixed heroic
tragedy with contemporary comedy.
The young playwright's
reputation grew quickly, and in 1668, only ten years after his move to London,
Dryden was appointed Poet Laureate of England. (He was later stripped of the
title because of religious differences when William and Mary came into power.)
That same year, he agreed to write exclusively for Thomas Killigrew's
theatrical company and became a shareholder. Both his first offering, Tyrannick
Love (1669), and his successful follow-up, The Conquest of Granada by the
Spaniards (1670), are examples of heroic tragedy. In 1672, however, perhaps
sensing the demise of his short-lived genre, Dryden turned his hand to comedy
and produced Marriage A-la-Mode, a brilliant battle of the sexes. Dryden's
relationship with Killigrew's company continued until 1678 at which point he
broke with the theatre (which was floundering in debt) and offered his latest
play, Oedipus, a drama he had co-authored with Nathaniel Lee, to another
company.
In his later years,
Dryden turned to poetry and solidified his reputation as the leading writer of
the day with such masterpieces as Absalom and Achitophel. However, he continued
to write for the theatre, producing such plays as Don Sebastian (1689), the
story of a king who abdicates his throne after discovering that he has
committed incest, and Amphitryon (1690), a brilliant retelling of the classic
myth. He also adapted a number of Shakespeare's plays icluding The Tempest and
All for Love (1677), a retelling of Antony and Cleopatra. In addition, he wrote
the libretto for several operas including The State of Innocence (1677) (an
adaptation of Milton's Paradise Lost) and King Arthur (1691) with music by
Purcell.
John Dryden died in
London on May 12, 1700, and was buried in Westminster Abbey next to Chaucer. He
left behind almost 30 works for the stage as well as a major critical study (An
Essay on Dramatic Poesy) and a number of translations including the works of
Virgil.
Major Works
Apart from the encomiums
or complimentary poems of his early years, Dryden is well-known for his
satirical verse. The Popish Plot (1678-81), a thwarted attempt by the Earl of
Shaftesbury and others to exclude Charles's Catholic brother, James, from his
right of succession to the throne, provided Dryden with the topic for what
critics consider his greatest work, Absalom and Achitophel, a satirical attack
on Shaftesbury and his confederates. This work inaugurated a phase of satirical
and didactic verse which directly influenced the development of Augustan poetry
in the next century, especially that of Alexander Pope. The poem was followed
in 1682 by Mac Flecknoe, a mockheroic poem which was directed at the poet
Thomas Shadwell, a literary antagonist of Dryden. Allied to Absalom and
Achitophel in tone, Mac Flecknoe displays Dryden's mastery of rhythm and
cunning verbal attack. The same year there also appeared a shorter, more
serious satiric poem titled The Medall, which again was aimed at Shaftesbury
Introduction
Criticism flourished in
England during the restoration of Stuarts. An Essay of Dramatic Poesy deals
with the views of major critics and the tastes of men and women of the time of
Dryden. The work is in the form of semi-drama thus making abstract theories interesting.
In the late 17th century, Shakespeare was severely criticised for his careless
attitude towards the mixing of genres. It was Dryden who elevated Shakespeare
to height for his natural genius.
The narrative of An
Essay of Dramatic Poesy has four debaters among whom, Neander is the one who
holds the views of Dryden. Unlike other characters, Neander does not diminish
the arguments that are on contrary to his views. Though he himself favours
modern drama, he does not blame others.
Summary of An Essay on Dramatic Poesy
The beginning of the
narrative An Essay of Dramatic Poesy or Of Dramatic Poesie is as follows. A
battle is going on between England and Netherlands. Four gentlemen namely
Crites, Eugenius, Lisideius, and Neander are travelling by boat to see the
battle and start a discussion on modern literature.
Crites opens the
discussion by saying that none of his contemporaries can equal the standards
and the rules set by ancient Greeks and Romans. Eugenius restrains him from
wasting time on finding demerits. He asks him to find relative merit in Greeks
and Moderns.
Views of Crites
Crites favours classical
drama i.e. the drama of Aristotle who believed that drama is “imitation of
life”. Crites holds that drama of such ancients is successful because it
depicts life. He says that both classical and neoclassical favour rules and
unities (time, place and action).
According to Crites,
modern dramatists are shadows of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Seneca and Terence. E.g.
Elizabethan dramatist Ben Jonson borrowed from Classics and felt proud to call
himself modern Horace. The classical is more skilful in language
than their successors. At this, he ends up his conversation.
Views of Eugenius
Eugenius favours modern
dramatists. However, instead of telling about the virtues of moderns, he
criticises the faults of Classical playwrights. According to him, the Classical
drama is not divided into acts and also lacks originality. Their tragedies are
based on worn-out myths that are already known to the audience and their
comedies are based o overused curiosity of stolen heiresses and miraculous
restorations.
There disregard poetic
justice. Instead of punishing the vice and rewarding the virtue, they have
often shown prosperous wickedness and an unhappy devotion. The
classical drama also lacks affection. The Heroes of Homer were lovers of
appetite, food etc, while the modern characters of French drama gave up
everything (sleep, water and food) for the sake of love.
Views of Lisideius
Lisideius favours French
drama of earlier 17th century. French drama led by Pierre Corneille strictly
followed unities of time, pace and action. The French dramatists
never mix tragedy and comedy. They strictly adhere to the poetic justice i.e.
reward the virtue and punishment of the vice. For this, they even alter the
original situation. The French dramatists
interweave truth with fiction to make it interesting bringing elements that
lead to fate and borrow from history to reward the virtuous which he was
earlier deprived of. They prefer emotions over plots. Violent
actions take place off stage and are told by messengers rather than showing
them in real.
Views of Neander
Neander contradicts
Lisideius arguments favouring superiority of French drama. He talks about the
greatness of Elizabethans. For him, Elizabethans fulfil the drama’s requirement
i.e. imitation of life. French drama raises perfection but has no soul or
emotions as it primarily focuses on plot. For Neander, tragicomedy
is the best form of drama.
He believes that
subplots enrich the drama. This French drama having single plot lacks this
vividness. Further Samuel Johnson (who defended Shakespeare’s
disregard of unities), he believes that adherence to unities prevents depth.
According to him, deviation from set rules and unities gives diverse themes to
drama. Neander rejects the argument that change of place and time
diminishes dramatic credibility in drama.
For him, human actions
will seem more natural if they get enough time to develop. He also argues that
Shakespeare is “the man who of all the modern and perhaps ancient poets, and
largest and most comprehensive soul”. Francis Beaumont and John Fletchers’
dramas are rich in wit and have smoothness and polish in their language.
Neander says, “I am apt
to believe the English language in them arrived at its highest perfection”. If
Ben Jonson is a genius for correctness, Shakespeare excels him in wit. His
arguments end with the familiar comparison, “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.” Thus for him,
Elizabethans are superior because they have a variety of themes, emotions,
deviations, wit. They do not adhere to rules as well. Thus their drama is really
an imitation of life.
Views on Rhyme in Drama
At the end of the
discussion, there is an argument between Crites and Neander over rhyme in
plays. Crites believes that Blank Verse as the poetic form nearest to prose is
most suitable for drama. On the other hand, Neander defends rhyme as
it briefly and clearly explains everything. The boat on which they
all were riding reaches its destination, the stairs at Somerset House and the
discussion ends without any conclusion being made.
Reference:
Reference:
Oh this is exactly what I was looking for..
ReplyDelete