Dryden- An Essay on Dramatic peosy

Hello,

This blog is based on Sunday reading activity given by Dilip Sir. You can find some interesting arguments upon Dryden in it. 

 For backgrond reading you can visit this link. 

Background Reading

 1. Do you find any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's defination of play ? 

Aristotle's tragedy: A noble character's problems lead to their own downfall, making the audience feel emotions.

Dryden's play: It's just a form of entertainment with different stories and characters, not just tragic ones. Aristotle is specific, Dryden is general.

So we can see that Aristotle is talking in larger sense on the other hand Dryden is talking in general.

2. If you are supposed to give your personal prediction, would you be on the side of Ancient or Modern? 

If I have to predict than I will be one the side of modern because they are more liberal in every way. 

For example, as Dryden mentioned in the eassy that violation of unties helps in making play more interesting. In modern times, people are accepting every kind of entertainment. For surviving in present time every kind of scene must be included in the play and that's what Dryden emphasised. 

In addition, moderns used ancient play for imitation but they provides new storyline with new perspective. Apart from that modern used blank verse and other prose writing which is near to audience that is why I am in fever of Moderns.

3. Do you think that the arguments presented in the favour of French plays  against English plays are appropriate? 

We can find some arguments valid and some invalid. 

• Talking about violation of unities which Lisedius stated against English plays that it cannot followed it, it is wrong. Breaking the unities can helped in writing variety of genres. 
• English plays also based on well-known stories of King and monarchy. However, we can find that it deals with common people too. So now when we are coming out from the threshold of old age every man has right to come into the literature. Moreover, the majority of the audience of the play belonging from the common people so how far writers only write upon well-known stories. Shakespeare and Marlowe even other Renaissance writers brought up the idea of making a common man hero. 
• English writers and plays also deal with truth and fiction. For example, Macbeth in reality has all different story but Shakespeare made it fiction with use of some truths. The Spanish Tragedy also deals with same kind of truth and fiction elements. So the argument of Lisedius upon this can be proved wrong. 
• English plays have fat plot, but it adds vivisious in the play. In the real life incidents happened with so many things such as in the King Lear we can find sub-plot which adds more liveliness in the play. In the play every character has their own story so fat plot can helped us in understanding deep situations. Subplot of Gloucester and his son play vital role in tragedy of King Lear, so that fat plot provides better image.
• In the English plays most of the time apart from central character, other characters are neglected. Nevertheless, in Modern English play it is appearnt that even retelling of the story can tell the story. For example minor characters of Hamlet get place in the other play. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" is  a play written by Tom Stoppard is one of them.
• Discription of ridiculous and absurd things can entertain audience. Potter's scene in Macbeth gives comic relief. Even the fighting scenes can provide feelings of chivalry.
• Catharsis emerges from death scenes. It creates audience's direct connection with the play, and which leads to delight and pleasure. Dryden also agreed on it that mind can not discriminate between reel and real so it provides same kind of feelings and deeper connections. 
• French plays provides good narration, but reality is far more different. How far writers only write upon good things. Human nature should be celebrated and it has grey shed which means evil side too, that's what English play write upon. Dryden belongs to Neo-classical age and it is famous for its rational and realistic approach towards the literature so that English play also used it. 

4. What would be your preference so far as poetic or prosaic dialogues are concerned in the play? 

I believed that prosaic dialogues are more appropriate in the modern time. At the end literature is for the people and what people absorb it can be written. So, according to time dailogues are more preferable. 

5. Any topic of your choice but pertaining to Dryden as father of criticism.

 John Dryden is often referred to as the "father of English literary criticism." He played a significant role in shaping the way we analyze and evaluate literature. Here's a brief explanation in simple terms:

John Dryden, who lived in the 17th century, was like the first teacher of how to really understand and talk about literature. He showed people how to look at poems, plays, and stories and figure out what makes them good or bad. Think of him as the first person to teach us how to "critique" or judge literature. His ideas on what makes good writing have influenced how we study and appreciate literature even today. So, he's like the "father" of literary criticism, teaching us how to think and talk about books and stories.

Work Cited: 

Barad, Dilip. An Essay on Dramatic Poesy: John Dryden. 2012. ResearchGate, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20320.87040https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20320.87040.