Dryden's Essays on Dramatic poesy
This blog is assigned by Barad sir you check out questions here Here
John Dryden, a central figure in the Restoration literary scene, is often regarded as the father of English literary criticism. His work," An Essay of Dramatic Poesy" (1668), is one of the most significant contributions to English literary theory. Written during the Restoration period, a time when English drama was undergoing significant changes, this essay captures Dryden’s deep engagement with the evolving nature of drama and the critical debates of his time.
Discuss any differences you observe between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play.
Aristotle's defination of Tragedy:
Aristotle, in his Poetics, defines tragedy as "an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude," aiming to evoke pity and fear in the audience, leading to a catharsis, or purgation of these emotions.
Imitation of a Serious Action: Aristotle emphasizes that tragedy should imitate actions that are serious and complete, invoking emotions like pity and fear, ultimately leading to a catharsis or emotional purification.
Structured Components: Aristotle outlines a clear structure, including a beginning, middle, and end, along with essential elements like plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle, and melody.
Unity of Action: He stresses the importance of the unity of action, where the plot revolves around a single central theme without unnecessary subplots.
Dryden's definition of play:
"A play ought to be a just and lively imaging of human. nature, representing its passions and humors and the changes of. fortune to which it is subject for the delight and instruction of man. kind."
Dryden acknowledges that plays are not just about evoking catharsis but also about providing entertainment, often blending serious and comic elements.
Focus on Entertainment: Dryden, in his critique and formulation of drama, often leans towards the play being a form of entertainment that balances between pleasing the audience and adhering to certain artistic norms.
Flexibility in Structure: Unlike Aristotle’s rigid structure, Dryden is more accepting of deviations, including the mingling of tragedy and comedy, and the use of multiple plots, reflecting a more modern, eclectic approach.
Adaptation to the Audience: Dryden’s approach is more pragmatic, focusing on what works for the contemporary audience, including elements like love interests and
spectacle, which might not always align with the classical unities.
If you were to express your personal preference, would you side with the Ancients or the Moderns? Provide reasons for your choice.
When choosing between the Ancients and the Moderns, I tend to prefer the Ancients because they prioritize a strong structure and clear themes in their plays. Aristotle’s emphasis on catharsis the emotional cleansing experienced by the audience really connects with the idea of drama as a deep exploration of the human experience. Although the strict rules about time, place, and action might seem limiting, they actually help keep the play focused and powerful.
On the other hand, the Moderns, like Dryden, take a more relaxed approach, mixing different genres, tones, and even plots. This can lead to creativity and new ideas, but it can also weaken the play’s central theme. While I appreciate the Moderns' flexibility, the clarity and intensity of the Ancients have a lasting appeal that I find hard to ignore.
Evaluate whether the arguments presented in favor of French plays and against English plays are appropriate. For example, consider the portrayal of death, duel fights with blunted swords, the representation of large armies by a few actors, the mingling of mirth and serious tones, and the use of multiple plots.
The debate between French and English plays often centers on differences in style and how closely they follow classical rules.
French Plays:
Portrayal of Death: French plays often show death offstage to avoid graphic images. This follows classical rules of decorum but can sometimes lessen the dramatic impact.
Duel Fights with Blunted Swords: Duels in French plays often use blunted swords or symbolic gestures, which can look artificial but keeps the scene refined.
Unity of Action and Time: French plays usually follow strict rules about having one main plot and taking place in a single day. This keeps the story focused but can limit its scope.
English Plays:
Mingling of Mirth and Serious Tones: English plays often mix comedy with tragedy, creating a complex and engaging experience, but this can sometimes make the tone feel inconsistent.
Representation of Large Armies by Few Actors: English plays might show large armies with just a few actors, which can be seen as creative but might stretch believability.
Multiple Plots: English plays frequently use several plots, adding depth to the story, but this can sometimes make the main theme less clear.
State your preference for poetic or prosaic dialogues in a play and explain your reasoning.
I prefer poetic dialogue in plays because it adds beauty and depth to the language, making it more powerful and memorable. Poetic dialogue uses rhythm and imagery to create a strong emotional impact, which makes the characters’ experiences feel more meaningful.
For example, in Shakespeare's plays, the poetic structure gives the dialogue a musical flow and helps express complex emotions in a way that feels natural but elevated. This makes important moments in the play more intense and moving for the audience.
While prosaic dialogue captures everyday speech and feels realistic, it doesn’t have the same richness and impact as poetic dialogue. That’s why I prefer poetry in plays—it can turn ordinary moments into something extraordinary.
Reference :
AI tool (chat gpt)
Photo from:
No comments:
Post a Comment