Dryden's Essay on Dramatic Poesy
Krishna Baraiya's blog
Dryden's Essay on Dramatic Poesy
John Dryden (1631–1700) was an influential English poet, playwright, and critic, often regarded as the leading literary figure of his time. He is best known for his work during the Restoration period, a time when English literature flourished after the Puritan Commonwealth era. Dryden's major contributions include his satirical poems, such as "Absalom and Achitophel," as well as his plays and literary criticism. He was appointed as the first official Poet Laureate of England in 1668, solidifying his status as a central figure in English letters. Dryden's work played a significant role in shaping English literature, particularly through his mastery of heroic couplets and his emphasis on classical influences.
John Dryden, an influential literary figure in the Restoration period, made significant contributions to English drama, particularly through his mastery of heroic tragedy, his use of the heroic couplet, and his exploration of themes that reflected the political and social climate of his time.
Definition of Dryden's drama :
"Drama is a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humors, 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 (and not merely reproduces) human actions.
Definition of tragedy by Aristotle :
Tragedy 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 (catharsis) of these emotions."
Different between Dryden's drama & Aristotle's tragedy :
Aristotle's Tragedy:
1. Catharsis:
Tragedy should evoke feelings of pity and fear, leading to a purging of emotions (catharsis).
2. Hamartia:
Tragedy involves a heroic protagonist's error in judgment (hamartia) leading to their downfall.
3. Reversal of fortune:
Tragedy features a reversal of fortune from good to bad.
4. Unity of action:
Tragedy should have a single, unified plot.
5. Emphasis on plot:
Plot is the most important element of tragedy.
Dryden's Drama:
1. Mixture of emotions:
Drama should evoke a mixture of emotions, not just pity and fear.
2. No requirement for hamartia :
Dryden's drama doesn't require a heroic protagonist's error in judgment.
3. More flexible plot structure:
Dryden's drama allows for multiple plotlines and subplots.
4. Emphasis on character development:
Character development is crucial in Dryden's drama.
5. Inclusion of comedic elements:
Dryden's drama often incorporates comedic elements.
๐ข๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐๐ถ๐ณ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ๐
> Aristotle focuses on tragedy, while Dryden discusses drama more broadly.
> Aristotle emphasizes plot and catharsis, while Dryden prioritizes character development and emotional variety.
> Dryden's definition is more flexible and inclusive, reflecting the evolution of drama since Aristotle's time.
We all khow that Dryden's definition was influenced by the Restoration period's theatrical practices and the works of William Shakespeare, who expanded on Aristotle's concepts.
According to my opinion :
๐ ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ป ๐๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ :
According to my opinion now modern thoughs is very needed in literary drama because......๐๐ป
1. Modern perspectives offer cutting-edge ideas, innovative solutions, and new insights into contemporary issues.
2. Modern approaches often prioritize diversity, inclusiveness, and social justice, promoting a more just and compassionate society.
3. Embracing modernity brings adaptability, progress and the ability to face new challenges and opportunities.
๐๐ฟ๐ด๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ป๐ด๐น๐ถ๐๐ต ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ :
Arguments in favor of French plays:
1. Portrayal of Death :
French plays argue for handling death with more dignity and seriousness, while English plays trivialize it. This argument is correct, as the portrayal of death can have a significant impact on the tone and theme of a play.
2. Duel fighting with blunted swords:
French plays are praised for using blunted swords, which make the duels less violent. This argument is somewhat valid, as it points to a difference in staging, but it cannot be a decisive aspect of game evaluation.
3. Representation of large armies:
French plays are criticized for using few actors to represent large armies, while English plays are seen as more realistic. This argument is invalid, as theatrical conventions often require a creative representation of scale.
4. Mixing of fun and serious tones:
French plays are argued to effectively balance fun and seriousness, while English plays are seen as inconsistent. This argument is correct, because consistency of tone and style are important aspects of playwriting.
5. Use of Multiple Plots:
French plays are praised for using multiple plots effectively, while English plays are seen as disjointed. This argument is somewhat correct, as multiple plots can enrich a play, but also lead to complexity.
Arguments against English dramas:
1. Lack of realism:
English plays are criticized for their unrealistic portrayal of death, duels and military. This argument is somewhat correct, as realism can add to the impact of drama, but may not be necessary for all productions.
2. Dissonant Tone:
English plays argue for struggling with the balance of fun and seriousness. This argument is correct, as tone consistency is crucial to audience engagement.
3. Poor use of multiple plots:
English plays are seen to struggle to integrate multiple plots effectively. This argument is somewhat correct, as multiple plots can be challenging to manage.
prosaic dialogues in a play is well according to me.
I believe that prose dialogues are more effective than poetic dialogues in many aspects of playwriting. They provide a more realistic and relatable way of communicating, making the characters and their interactions feel more authentic and engaging. Prosaic language is closer to everyday speech, making it easier for the audience to understand and connect with the characters.
Even prosaic dialogues can express complex thoughts and feelings clearly and directly, without relying on elaborate metaphors or fictional language and ideas. This makes the play feel more grounded and realistic, which can be especially effective in dramas or dramas that focus on character development.
Everyday language, idioms and colloquialisms can also be used here, which can add to the realism of the play.
Comments
Post a Comment