An Essay on Dramatic Poesie by John Dryden
This blog is written as a task assigned by the head of the Department of English (MKBU), Prof. and Dr. Dilip Barad Sir. Here is the link to the professor's research article for background reading: Click here
In this blog I am sharing my own understanding about Dryden's The Dramatic Poesy.
John Dryden
Dryden's Role in English Criticism:
John Dryden is widely recognized as the "Father of English Criticism" . This title, coined by Dr. Samuel Johnson, highlights Dryden's pivotal role in shaping literary criticism during the Restoration age.
Why He's Considered the "Father"
Before Dryden, literary analysis was often less structured. While figures like Sir Philip Sidney did engage with critical ideas, Dryden brought a new level of rigor and systematic thought to the field. He was the first to establish a coherent framework for understanding and evaluating literature, particularly in his seminal work, An Essay of Dramatic Poesie .
Dryden's Key Contributions
Dryden's contributions went beyond simply critiquing plays. He introduced key concepts and a methodology that would influence generations of critics. His work provided a well-defined structure for analyzing dramatic form and function, building upon the principles of ancient critics like Aristotle.
Dryden as Neo- Classical Critic:
Dryden is called a neoclassical critic because he followed the ideas of the ancient-classical critics. The 18th century is known as the “Neo-classical Age” since writers of that time were inspired by classical authors like Horace and Virgil. In Dryden’s works, we can clearly see the influence of Aristotle and Longinus. He does not always give strict definitions, but rather descriptions and even this style comes from Aristotle’s way of explaining poetry. In this way, Dryden carries forward the classical tradition into his own time.
What is Dramatic Poesy?
In 1668, Dryden published Essay of Dramatic Poesy, a leisurely conversation between four contemporary writers, with Dryden himself appearing as Neander. In this work, he defends English drama against the supporters of both ancient Classical drama and the French Neoclassical theatre. At the same time, he tries to discover general principles of dramatic criticism and seeks to justify drama as a genuine and legitimate form of poetry.
Dramatic Poesy:
The word poesy means “poetry,” so Dramatic Poesy refers to the art of drama written in the spirit of poetry. It includes both the writing of plays and the critical principles that guide them. In 1668, John Dryden published his famous An Essay of Dramatic Poesy. The work is presented as a lively dialogue between four characters—Crites, Eugenius, Lisideius, and Neander (Dryden himself). In this discussion, they debate the merits of ancient Classical drama, French Neoclassical theatre, and English drama. Dryden, through Neander, defends English drama for its variety, truth to life, and power to move emotions, even when it does not strictly follow the classical unities. He also explores the purpose of drama, arguing that it should be a “just and lively image of human nature” and should both instruct and delight the audience. This essay is considered one of the first important works of English dramatic criticism and shows Dryden’s balanced approach respecting classical rules but valuing creative freedom.
How Dryden Differs from Classical Tradition?:
Plato: Dryden skips Plato’s “twice-removed” idea. He wants a just and lively image engaging, not dull.
Aristotle: Unlike Aristotle’s focus on catharsis, Dryden balances delight and instruction.
Idealism → Realism: From idealized portrayals, Dryden moves to life as it is, showing passions, humors, and fortune, adding a touch of realism that sets him apart.
The Three Unities Debate:
1. Crites – The Rule-Follower
Crites strides onto the stage with a ruler in hand, pointing at a blueprint of the perfect play.
Motto: “Order, coherence, perfection!”
Belief: The three unities are non-negotiable. Every play must stick to one action, unfold in a single stretch of time, and happen in one place.
Why: Only then can a play feel natural, focused, and emotionally gripping. The audience won’t be distracted—they’ll be swept into the drama.
Influence: He bows to Aristotle, as if the Greek sage whispers in his ear: “Unity is the soul of tragedy.”
2. Lisideius – The Traditionalist
Lisideius enters with a scroll of classical texts, nodding to both the Greeks and the French.
Motto: “Respect the masters!”
Belief: The unities are a badge of excellence. Sophocles, Euripides, Racine, Corneille—they all knew the secret: discipline breeds brilliance.
Why: Following tradition ensures your play shines with elegance, sophistication, and reverence for those who came before.
Charm: To Lisideius, art without respect for the past is like music without melody.
3. Neander (Dryden) – The Balanced Voice
Neander strolls in with a quill behind his ear and a mischievous twinkle in his eye.
Motto: “Rules are tools, not chains.”
Belief: The unities can guide a play, but forcing them is like stuffing a wild horse into a stable it stifles imagination.
Why: Drama thrives when it feels natural. A story must breathe, wander, and surprise. If unity gets in the way, it’s a problem; if it serves the story, it’s a boon.
Wisdom: “Let the rules bow to creativity, not the other way around.”
Controversy regarding the rhyme lines vs blank verse:
In An Essay of Dramatic Poesy, Dryden debates rhyme versus blank verse. The French, following Corneille and Racine, loved rhymed couplets for their elegance and musical charm, while English drama, like Shakespeare’s, often used blank verse for natural flow and dramatic freedom. Dryden defended rhyme, saying it gives dignity, clarity, and memorability to heroic speech, though critics worried it could sound artificial. The heart of the controversy lay between beauty and realism, music and natural speech. Dryden suggested a middle path: rhyme, when used thoughtfully, could be both graceful and dramatically effective.
Mixture of Tragedy and Comedy (Tragicomedy):
In An Essay of Dramatic Poesy, Dryden through Neander supports the English practice of blending tragic and comic elements in the same play. While French critics believed tragedy should remain serious and unbroken by humor, English dramatists like Shakespeare mixed the two to create contrast, variety, and a fuller reflection of human life.
Why English playwrights do it:
Life itself contains both joy and sorrow, humor and seriousness. Showing this mixture on stage makes plays feel more realistic and relatable.
Effect on the audience:
Comedy can relieve the tension of tragic scenes, making the emotional impact of sorrow even stronger when it returns.
Example:
In Hamlet, the grave-digger scene adds humor in the midst of tragedy, highlighting the play’s themes of death and fate while giving the audience a moment of emotional release.
•Further I have answered the worksheet questions:
1) Do you any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play?
Ans:
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”.
Definition of Tragedy by Aristotle
" is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions."
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 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 emphasizes 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 instruction is secondary. He focuses on both delight and instruction while Aristotle focuses on catharsis.
2) If you are supposed to give your personal predilection, would you be on the side of the Ancient or the Modern? Please give reasons.
Ans:
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 unities, 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:
He argues 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 the Ancients, 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.
Critique of the Moderns’ themes:
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.
Modern society stands on the shoulders of the ancient, elderly society. The elders are the pillars of our civilization, so respecting their ideas is natural. However, standing on their shoulders gives the younger generation a broader and clearer view of the world. This allows them to understand situations better and even anticipate the future more effectively than the elders.
Following ancient ideas is not wrong, and doing so does not make someone rigid or old-fashioned. Yet, modern individuals have the advantage of combining the wisdom of the past with new, contemporary ideas. By blending the old and the new, they can create stronger and more meaningful concepts. For this reason, I would side with the modern era, as it builds on the strength of the ancients while moving forward with fresh and powerful ideas.
3) Do you think that the arguments presented in favour of the French plays and against English plays are appropriate? (Say for example, Death should not be performed as it is neither 'just' not 'likely' image, displaying duel fight with blunted swords, thousands of soldiers marching represented as five on stage, mingling of mirth and serious, multiple plots etc.)
Ans.
The arguments presented in favour of French plays and against English plays are not entirely appropriate, as they are based on strict rules of plausibility, morality, and structural unity that do not fully apply to English theatre. French critics argued that death should not be performed on stage because it is neither ‘just’ nor ‘likely,’ duels with blunted swords are unrealistic, thousands of soldiers cannot be represented by a handful of actors, comedy should not mingle with serious tragedy, and plays should follow a single plot. While these points might make French drama orderly and morally strict, they overlook the conventions and artistic aims of English drama.
In English plays, deaths and duels are often symbolic or dramatized to create tension and emotional impact, and audiences accept the theatrical representation of large armies with few actors as part of the art. The mingling of comic and serious elements, as seen in Shakespeare, enriches the play by providing contrast and relieving tension, while multiple plots add depth, variety, and thematic complexity. Therefore, although the French criticisms emphasize order and realism, they are too rigid when applied to English plays, where emotional effect, imaginative storytelling, and symbolic representation are considered central to the dramatic experience.
4) What would be your preference so far as poetic or prosaic dialogues are concerned in the play?
Ans:
I would prefer poetic dialogues in a play because they bring a sense of rhythm, musicality, and elegance to the language, which enhances the emotional impact of the scenes. Poetic language allows playwrights to express intense feelings, moral dilemmas, and dramatic moments in a more memorable and elevated way, making the audience feel the depth of the characters’ experiences. For instance, soliloquies or key speeches often gain power and resonance through poetic form. On the other hand, prosaic dialogues are useful for conveying ordinary conversations, realistic interactions, or comic situations, as they sound natural and relatable. Therefore, a combination of both styles works best: poetic dialogue for important, emotional, or heroic moments, and prose for everyday, casual, or humorous exchanges. This blend ensures that the play is both dramatically compelling and realistically engaging, giving the audience a balance of beauty, emotion, and relatability.
References:
1.Barad, Dilip. “An Essay on Dramatic Poesy: John Dryden.” ResearchGate, June 2012,https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373767836_An_Essay_on_Dramatic_Poesy_John_Dryden
2.Barad sir's blog on Essay of Dramatic poesie by dryden, https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2015/09/drydens-essay-on-dramatic-poesy-short.html?m=1
Thank you!
No comments:
Post a Comment