9 August 1631- 12 May 1700

Plays: All for Love

England’s Poet Laureate in 1668

A Satirists

• Four Scholarly Speakers with critical objectives
  1. Eugenius is Charles Sackville
  2. Crites is Sir Robert Howard( Brother in Law of Dryden)
  3. Lisideius is Sir Charles Sedley
  3. Neander is John Dyrden (Neander means new man)

They represent the rich and the scholarly… the first three figures stand the three…

• The other side is Dryden’s take.
• Historical Context

Immediate Background- Battle of Lowestoft

Dryden celebrates this victory ( as though to celebrate this he wrote an essay on Dramatic Poesy)

• one of the key issues is the glorification of the English dramatic practice and tradition.
• It is the first systematic discourse of all European Drama( beginning with Greek and Classical drama to the nearest contemporary)
• Dryden is a socratic person… meaning he uses socratic method. The 4 speakers have dialogues.

Ancient and Modern

The four arguments make it lively. The discussions is a flexible it can be.

Eugenius:

Eugenius favours modern dramatists. However, instead of telling about the virtues of moderns, he criticises the faults of Classical playwrights. According to him, the Classical drama is not divided into acts and also lacks originality.

Their tragedies are based on worn-out myths that are already known to the audience and their comedies are based o overused curiosity of stolen heiresses and miraculous restorations.

There disregard poetic justice. Instead of punishing the vice and rewarding the virtue, they have often shown prosperous wickedness and an unhappy devotion. The classical drama also lacks affection.

The Heroes of Homer were lovers of appetite, food etc, while the modern characters of French drama gave up everything (sleep, water and food) for the sake of love.

E=M, C=C, L=F, N=

Crites:

Crites favours classical drama i.e. the drama of Aristotle who believed that drama is ***“imitation of life”***. Crites holds that drama of such ancients is successful because it depicts life. He says that both classical and neoclassical favour rules and unities (time, place and action).

According to Crites, modern dramatists are shadows of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Seneca and Terence. E.g. Elizabethan dramatist Ben Jonson borrowed from Classics and felt proud to call himself modern Horace. The classical is more skilful in language than their successors. At this, he ends up his conversation.

Lisideius: He supports the French Classics

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: He appreciates contemporary English play writes. He is appreciative of Ben Johnson.

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 (who defended Shakespeare’s disregard of unities), 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 who of all the modern and perhaps ancient poets, and 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.

He belongs to Neo Classicism as well.

/