Essay on Dramatic Poesy by John Dryden

Essay on Dramatic Poesy by John 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.