An Essay on Dramatic Poesy by John Dryden

This blog task is based on the 'Bridge Course - Dryden's 'Essay of Dramatic Poesy'' assigned by Dilip Sir.

 John Dryden's Essay of Dramatick Poesy was likely written in 1666 during the Great Plague of London and published in 1668. Dryden's claim in this essay was that poetic drama with English and Spanish influence is a justifiable art form when compared to traditional French poetry.

The treatise is a dialogue among four speakers: Eugenius, Crites, Lisideius, and Neander. The four speakers are Sir Robert Howard [Crites], Charles Sackville (then Lord Buckhurst) [Eugenius], Sir Charles Sedley [Lisedeius], and Dryden himself (Neander means "new man" and implies that Dryden, as a respected member of the gentry class, is entitled to join in this dialogue on an equal footing with the three older men who are his social superiors).

1 : Discuss any differences you observe between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play.

Aristotle and John Dryden, two towering figures in the history of literary criticism, offer distinct definitions of tragedy and play, shaped by the cultural contexts and artistic philosophies of their respective eras. Aristotle, writing in ancient Greece, presents a more formalized and morally driven conception of tragedy, while Dryden, influenced by the dynamic and diverse Restoration theatre in 17th-century England, adopts a more flexible and inclusive approach to drama. These differing perspectives reflect the unique values and priorities of their times, offering valuable insights into the evolution of dramatic theory.

Aristotle and John Dryden indeed offer distinct definitions of tragedy and play, shaped by their respective cultural contexts and artistic philosophies.

Aristotle’s Definition of Tragedy :

In his Poetics, Aristotle defines tragedy as “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude.” He emphasizes the emotional impact of tragedy, specifically its ability to evoke pity and fear in the audience, leading to a catharsis, or purification of these emotions. For Aristotle, the structure of a tragedy is crucial—it should have a clear beginning, middle, and end, and be unified in terms of time, place, and action (the classical unities). The protagonist, often a noble figure, undergoes a reversal of fortune due to a tragic flaw (hamartia), leading to their downfall.

Dryden’s Definition of Play :

John Dryden, writing during the Restoration period, offers a more flexible and pragmatic approach to drama in his Essay of Dramatic Poesy. Unlike Aristotle, who focused on the moral and emotional aspects of tragedy, Dryden is more concerned with the broader concept of play or drama as an artistic form. Dryden acknowledges the evolving nature of drama and the different tastes of audiences. He defends the mixing of tragic and comic elements (tragicomedy) and the breaking of the classical unities, reflecting the more diverse and experimental spirit of the Restoration theatre. Dryden argues that drama should mirror life in all its variety, not just the lofty or serious aspects, and should be entertaining as well as instructive.

Cultural and Philosophical Contexts:

Aristotle’s Context : 

Aristotle's views are grounded in the classical Greek context, where tragedy was a highly formalized and respected genre with religious and moral significance. His emphasis on catharsis reflects the Greek belief in the therapeutic value of art in society.

  Dryden’s Context: 

Dryden, writing in 17th-century England, was influenced by the Restoration’s lively and diverse theatrical scene. His more inclusive definition of drama reflects a period of artistic experimentation and a broader audience base, including the influence of French neoclassicism and English Renaissance drama.

In summary, while Aristotle’s definition of tragedy is more rigid and focused on the moral and emotional purification of the audience, Dryden’s definition of play is broader, accommodating various dramatic forms and emphasizing entertainment and a reflection of real life.

2.State your preference for poetic or prosaic dialogues in a play and explain your reasoning.

I tend to prefer poetic dialogues in a play, primarily because they elevate the language and add a lyrical quality that can enhance the emotional and thematic depth of the performance. Poetic dialogue often allows for richer metaphors, more nuanced wordplay, and a rhythm that can intensify the dramatic experience. This form of dialogue can also give characters a heightened sense of presence, making their words resonate more profoundly with the audience.

However, the preference depends largely on the context of the play. In certain genres, like a modern drama or a play focused on realism, prosaic dialogue might be more appropriate as it can make characters feel more relatable and the situations more authentic. Ultimately, the choice between poetic and prosaic dialogue should serve the play’s overall tone, setting, and intention.

3.If you were to express your personal preference, would you side with the Ancients or the Moderns? Provide reasons for your choice.

I would side with the Ancients, particularly because of their emphasis on structure, form, and the timeless qualities of art. The Ancients, like Aristotle, placed a high value on the universality of themes, the cathartic function of tragedy, and the importance of unity in drama. Their focus on order, balance, and moral purpose in literature resonates with me as it provides a framework that has proven to be enduring and influential across centuries.

The disciplined approach of the Ancients, especially their emphasis on the classical unities and the moral dimensions of art, aligns with a belief in the transformative power of literature to not only entertain but also educate and refine the audience's sensibilities. The idea that art should strive toward ideals of beauty, truth, and goodness is a compelling one, offering a kind of artistic timelessness that speaks to the human condition in a profound way.

I also appreciate the innovations brought by the Moderns, especially their flexibility and willingness to break from tradition to explore new forms and ideas. But if I had to choose, the enduring principles and disciplined artistry of the Ancients hold more appeal for me.

4. Evaluate whether the arguments presented in favor of French plays and against English plays are appropriate. For example, consider the portrayal of death, duel fights with blunted swords, the representation of large armies by a few actors, the mingling of mirth and serious tones, and the use of multiple plots.

The arguments in favor of French plays and against English plays reflect different theatrical philosophies. 

- Portrayal of Death: French restraint in showing death aligns with their emphasis on decorum, while English plays prefer direct depiction for emotional impact.

- Duel Fights: French plays favor stylized, intellectual duels, whereas English plays use realistic combat to heighten drama.

- Representation of Armies: The French minimalism requires audience imagination, while English plays use vivid descriptions and staging for immersion.

- Mingling of Tones: French plays maintain a consistent tone, whereas English plays mix humor and tragedy, adding depth but risking tonal shifts.

Each approach has its merits, depending on the intended effect and audience preferences.

References:

1.Barad, Dilip. “William Wordsworth’s Preface to the Lyrical Ballads.” ResearchGate, Sept. 2023,https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17305.39521

2."Essay of Dramatick Poesie." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 27 Aug. 2024, 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay_of_Dramatick_Poesie. Accessed 28 Aug. 2024.

3. Image :

Take a look at this John Dryden : An Essay on Dramatic Poesy on Flipkarthttps://dl.flipkart.com/s/iXozqyNNNN

ISBN: 9789351873679, 9351873676.

Thank you.