Dryden's The Dramatic Poesie
This blog is in response to the task given by Dr. Dilip Barad sir. In this blog I am sharing my own understanding about Dryden's The Dramatic Poesy.
What is Dramatic Poesy?
In 1668, Dryden published Essay Of Dramatic Poesie, an Essay, a leisurely discussion between four contemporary writers of whom Dryden (as Neander) is one. This work is a defense of English drama against the champions of both ancient Classical drama and the Neoclassical French theater; it is also an attempt to discover general principles of dramatic criticism and attempts to justify drama as a legitimate form of poetry.
John Dryden:
Dryden was the prominent English critic, poet, translator and playwright. He dominated the Literature of Restoration age and was the representative writer of the Restoration age. This age was also known as ‘Age of Dryden.’
He was known as ‘Father of English Criticism’, and it was coined by Dr. Samuel Johnson.
Who is known as father? The one who originates or propagates in a particular manner. And Dryden was the one who gave a new way or idea about English Criticism. Sir Philip Sidney, before Dryden, considered himself to be a critic but comparing it to Dryden we realize that he has done no critic work. After Aristotle Dryden is the one who gave a well formed definition of the play.
Dryden as Neoclassical critic:
Dryden is known as a critique of neoclassical. As we see, why is the 18th century known as neo- classical? We find that because the writers of that period followed or were inspired by classic writers like Horace or Virgil. And We find influences of Classical writers like Aristotle and Longinus on Dryden. He is not telling that he is giving definition but it is description and this is influence of Aristotle, getting influenced by Aristotle’s definition. In this sense he is carrying classical/ ancient tradition.
Here we saw how he is similar to classic writers now we will see how he differs from classic writers.
Dryden differing from classical writers:
If we divide the definition of play in Three parts.
- A just and lively image of human nature
- Representing its passions and humors, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject
- For the delight and instruction of making.
Plato says that poetry is mere copy, secondhand imitation. Still Dryden, contracting to Plato uses the word ‘image’ in his definition and also clarifies it to be ‘lively’. We see that this drags Dryden away from Plato.
Adjacently, Aristotle in his definition of tragedy ends with the therapeutic word ‘Catharsis’ while Dryden ends with ‘Delight and instruction’ of mankind. Dryden gives emphasis on both delight and instruction while Aristotle gives emphasis on purification of feelings. Dryden makes a difference and says it represents ‘Life as it is, patience and humor are not static; it changes with the passing of time.’ So in the definition of Dryden we can see a touch of realism which is different from classical tradition.
Definition of Play by Dryden:
“ A play ought to be a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passion and humors, and the change of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind”.
About Dramatic Poesy:
Dramatic Poesy is an essay written in the form of Conversation between four people; Eugenius (Charles Sackville), Crites (Sir Robert Howard), Lisideius (Sir Charles Sedley) and Neander ( John Dryden). The Dramatic poesy deals with several topics like: Ancient vs moderns, Unities, French and English drama and Separation of tragedy and comedy vs tragicomedy. We will discuss this topic briefly in a further blog. Through dialogues they are showing their favor and opposition on various topics.
Concept of Three unities:
In ‘The Essay of Dramatic Poesy’, the concept of unities is shown through the discussion among Crites, Eugenius and Neander.
Crites: Crites talk in favor of the three unities and advocate the three unities by saying that ancient plays, for example the French place completely followed the three Unity which made place more effective and good play. He says that the unity of time helps to imitate nature well, as well as the unity of action allows us to understand the play smoothly. If we adopt two actions in the play it destroys its unity.
Lisideius also agrees with Crites and supports that ancient dramatists are Superior as they followed the unities.
Neander, who is the voice of Dryden, gave his balanced judgment, that plays which fulfill conditions are good whether they follow unities or not. He disapproves of ancient and French plays as they follow Unity by force and make their play simple and narrow their own imagination. Besides, they sacrificed beauty by following the unity. Defending the English play he gives an example of William Shakespeare he says that he does not follow the unities in his play but his play has a variety of plot. He has grown his Individual ability, he has his own genius. The basic aim of the play is to provide delight to the audience and William Shakespeare an English dramatist is able to do this through his wisdom without observing any dramatic Unities.
Ancient vs Modern Playwright:
Crites argues in favor of the ancients: they established the unities; dramatic rules were spelled out by Aristotle. The superiority of the Ancients is established by the very fact that the Moderns simply imitate them, and build on the foundations laid by them. He also claims that he established three units, which are employed by both French and English playwrights such as Ben Jonson. As a result, they are affected by the ancients.
Eugenius favors the moderns over the ancients, arguing that the moderns exceed the ancients because of having learned and profited from their example. he adds that by their own labor the Moderns have added to what they have gained from them, with the result that they now excel them in many ways. In their comedies, no doubt they introduce a few scenes of tenderness but, then, their lovers talk very little. They wrote without any definite plan and when they could write a good play their success was more a matter of chance and good fortune than of ability.
But their themes are lust, cruelty, murder, and bloodshed, which instead of arousing admiration and pity arouse “horror and terror”. Instead of punishing vice and rewarding virtue, they have often shown a prosperous wickedness, and an unhappy piety. Instead of providing the necessary information to the audience through dialogues the Ancients often do so through monologues. Horace himself has recommended this rule, but the Ancients violated it frequently.
Mixture of tragedy and comedy:
Dryden's view on Tragi-comedy clearly brings out his liberal classicism, greatness and cleverness as a person. Mixing the sad and the comic provides dramatic relief. The real test of excellence is whether dramas have been (accomplished or gained with effort) by the English drama.
Verse controversy:
Crites objects to rhyme in plays
"Since no man without premeditation speaks in rhyme, neither ought he to do it on the stage."
He cites Aristotle as saying that it is, "best to write tragedy in that kind of verse . . . which is nearest prose" as a justification for banishing rhyme from drama in favor of blank verse. Even though blank verse lines are no more spontaneous than are rhymed lines, they are still to be preferred because they are nearest nature: Rhyme is incapable of expressing the greatest thought naturally, and the lowest it cannot with any grace: for what is more unbefitting the majesty of verse, than to call a servant, or bid a door be shut in rhyme?
Neander: defending it Neander says that the word written or chosen should be natural. Rhyme itself would look natural if it goes through runoff lines. Blank Verse is no verse at all. It is simply poetic prose. Tragedy is a serious play representing nature exalted to its highest pitch; rhyme being the noblest kind of verse is suited to it, and not to comedy. He adds a reason for favoring the rhyme as it adds pleasure to poetry. Which can easily provide delight which is the main aim of plays.
Conclusion:
The dramatic poesy has successfully explained the merits and demerits of English and French drama. Also explained that it is not necessary to follow the rules and conventions, more delightful work can be done by coming out of bondages.
Further I have answered the worksheet questions.
Do you see any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play?
Yes there seems a vast difference between Aristotle's definition of tragedy and guidance definition of the play.
Aristotle's definition of tragedy states that ‘tragedy is an imitation of an action’ that means according to the Plato the first imitation of the original idea ( truth). While the definition of play by Dryden clearly states that it is an image, the word image is directly used in the definition, In terms of Plato it is secondhand imitation.
The other difference we see is in Aristotle's definition of tragedy the action is ‘serious and complete in itself’ While in Dryden’s definition of the play the image is subjected to be ‘lively’ which shows Dryden is close to realism.
Also Aristotle's definition of tragedy ends with the therapeutic word ‘catharsis’ Aristotle emphasis on purification of feeling. While Dryden's emphasis is on delight and instruction, According to him delight should be the major outcome of a literary work and instructions is secondary. He focuses on both delight and instruction while Aristotle focuses on catharsis.
If you are supposed to give your personal predilection, would you be on the side of the Ancient or the Modern? Please give reasons.
We cannot deny the fact that modern, young society is standing on the shoulders of ancient, elderly society. They are the pillars of society so it is obvious that being on the side of the ancient is not wrong. But we should not forget that when we are standing on the shoulders we can see far things clearly. So here one can argue that younger people who are on the shoulders of elderly society are more clear in their views as they are able to see things at a distance, they are able to predict the future in a better way than elderly people.
It's not wrong in following the ancient ideas the one who is following the ancient ideas is not an orthodox person but we should also remember that a modern person has the power of both has the ideas of both ancient and the modern era, by combining the two ancient and the modern ideas he would be he is able to create something new which is more strong than the ideas created or came from the ancient time. So I personally would go on the side of the modern time or Modern era as it is stronger than the ancient period as it has strong pillars and strong ideas of ancient time.
What would be your preference so far as poetic or prosaic dialogues are concerned in the play?
The poetic is in relation to the poetry while Why is a descriptive writing in comparison of both poetry tends to be more expensive as it has a rhythm, rhyme and it has a different feel of a sound which we can listen and it gives pleasure to us why throws is very much straight forward and it has no decoration in the its language it contains lines.
If you look at the language of Shakespeare and old English it becomes difficult for us to even understand a poetic dialogue. At this time we feel that prosaic dialogue is better than poetic dialogue.
With my personal preference, I think poetic dialogue is more effective as it has a reader and writer and the rhythm and life enables us to stick to see and it makes a greater effect on our mind for example “And I will come again, my luve, Though it were ten thousand mile.” Is a line from the poem Red Red Rose if the same thing is written in a project way ‘I will come even after I am ten thousand miles away.’ The poetic lines will be easily remembered by us while we would need to read twice or thrice to project life so my personal preference is too poetic dialogue in simple language.
Also if you look at the language of Shakespeare and old English it becomes difficult for us even to understand a poetic dialogue. At this time we feel that prosaic dialogue is better than poetic dialogue.
I hope this blog is useful to you. Thank you for visiting.
[words- 2000]
No comments:
Post a Comment