Hello friends, welcome to my blog. This blog is about Dryden's "Dramatic Poesy". This task given by Dr. Dilip Barad sir.
John Dryden :-
John Dryden was a prominent English poet, critic, translator, and playwright who dominated the literary life of the Restoration Age; therefore, the age is also known as the Age of Dryden. He was a Cambridge Scholar, literary genius and critic, and considering his extraordinary literary contribution he was credited with the honour of poet laureate of England in 1668.
Definition of the play :-
"A play ought to be a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind."
According to the definition, drama is an 'image' of human nature and the image is ' just' and 'lively'. By using the word 'just' Dryden seems to imply that literature imitates human action. For Dryden, 'poetic imitation' is different from an exact, servile copy of reality, for the imitation is not only 'just', it is also 'lively'.
When the group talks about the definition of Drama Lisideius expresses his views about Drama as " a just and lively image of human nature".
Eugenius ( Charles Sackville) :-
Who favors the moderns over the ancients argued that the moderns exceed the ancients because of having learned and profited from their example.
Eugenius says that " the moderns have profited by the rules of the ancients" but moderns have " excelled them". He points first to some discrepancies in the applications of the Unities, mentioning that there seem to be four parts in Aristotle's method: the entrance, the intensifying of the plot, the counter turn, and the catastrophe. But he points out that somewhere along the line, and by way of Horace, plays developed five acts.
Critics (Sir Robert Howard):-
Critics develops the main point in defending the ancients and raises objections to modern plays. The modern are still initiating the ancients and using their forms and subjects, relying on Aristotle and Horace, adding nothing new and yet not following their good advice closely either, especially with respect to the Unities of time , plac and action. While the unity of time suggests that all the action should be portrayed within a single day, the English plays attempt to use long period of time sometimes years. In terms of place, the setting should be the same from beginning to end with the scenes marked by the entrances and exits of the persons having business within each. The English,on the other hand,try to have all kinds of places, even far off countries, shown within a single play. The third unity, that of action, requires that the play " aim at one great and complete action", but the English have all kinds of subplots. Which destroy the unity of the action.
Lisideius ( Sir Charles Sedley):-
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 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.
Neander:-
Neander contradicts Lisideius’ arguments favouring the 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 the plot. For Neander, tragicomedy is the best form of drama. Both sadness as well as joy are heightened and are set side by side. Hence it is closest to life.
He believes that subplots enrich the drama. This French drama having a single plot lacks this vividness. Further Samuel Johnson, 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 of all the modern and perhaps ancient poets, and the 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.
1)Do you any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play?
Dryden's play of definition “Just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours, and the. changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the. delight and instruction of mankind.”
Aristotle's d definition of Tragedy is, “A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious and also, as having magnitude, complete in itself; in appropriate and pleasurable language;... in a dramatic rather than narrative form; with incidents arousing pity and fear,effecting the proper purgation- catharsis of these and similar emotions.”
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 'liely' image, displaying duel fight with blunted swords, thousands of soldiers marching represented as five on stage, mingling of mirth and serious, multiple plots etc.)
In Dryden's essay in the 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 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 . They prefer emotions over plots. Violent actions take place of stage and are told by messengers rather than showing them in real.
Thank you!
Word :- 1138
No comments:
Post a Comment