John Dryden (1631-1700)

A great playwright, exceptional poet, fine translator, solid critic, and an excellent satirist, John Dryden
wore many hats during his living. He was a legendary figure of the seventeenth century who ranks
amongst the greatest English poets such as John Donne and John Milton and the greatest
playwrights such as William Shakespeare and Ben Johnson. As far as prose, literary criticism and
translation are concerned, he had no peers who matched his capability and competence. Dryden is
credited with writing the greatest heroic play of the century, ‘The Conquest of Granada’, the greatest
tragicomedy, ‘Marriage A-la-Mode’, the greatest tragedy of the Restoration, ‘All for Love’, the greatest
comictragedy, ‘Don Sebastian’ and one of the greatest comedies, ‘Amphitryon’. His writing style was
unique, mostly employing the daily patterns and rhythms used in everyday speech. His works so
much so dominated the Restoration Period that the phase is proudly remembered in the literary circle
as the ‘Age of Dryden’.

Dryden was born to a Puritan family in Northampton shire. The childhood of John Dryden was spent
at Tichmarch, where his parents resided after their marriage; his boyhood passed at Westminster to
which he was admitted to a scholarship. At Westminster he wrote an elegy commemorating the
memory of a school fellow, Lord Hastings, and translated the third satire of a Perseus as a school
task. He joined Trinity College, Cambridge in 1654. He graduated in 1654, but did not obtain a
fellowship. About 1657 he went to London as clerk to the chamberlain of Cromwell.

*In 1658, on the death of Lord Protector Cromwell, he penned a poem ‘Heroique Stanzas’ a tribute to

Cromwell. The content of the poem was cautiously written with prudent emotional presentation.

*Two years later, he celebrated the Restoration of the Monarchy and the jubilant return of Charles II

with the penned verse, ‘Astraea Redux’ which was an authentic royalist panegyric. He portrayed a

royal image of Charles II as the restorer of peace and order.

*The establishment of the monarchy coincided with his establishment as the leading poet and critic of

the time. He rendered his complete support, loyalty and commitment to the new government which

was visible with the publication of his works, ‘To His Sacred Majesty: A Panegyric on his Coronation’

and ‘To My Lord Chancellor’ both released in 1662.

*It was while looking to court a patron that he started to make a living by writing for publishers and the

general public instead for the aristocrats and the royalties. He started writing poems that celebrated

public events.

*In 1662, he was elected as an early fellow of the Royal Society. However, the membership was

withdrawn four years later due to non-payment of the dues.

*With the appointment of Charles II as the leader, society witnessed an upsurge in the demand for

entertainment and showbiz. The theatres, which had closed down due to the Puritan ban, reopened to

packed audiences.
*He soon found himself busy writing scripts and plays for theatre. His first stint at the same was for

the theatrical comedy of humors, ‘A Wild Gallant’. The play was not much successful and did nothing

to up his reputation.

*Following the unsuccessful debut venture, in 1664 he came up with two more plays, ‘The Rival

Ladies’ and ‘The Indian Queen’. Both the plays had the same fate as their predecessor and were not

major hits.

*Meanwhile, a plague erupted in London due to which the King’s Court relocated to Oxford. The

change of place turned profitable for this budding playwright who came up with his next venture, a

heroic drama by the title, ‘The Indian Emperor’ in 1665. The play was received well by the audience.

Inspired by the tragedies of the year 1666, including the Naval War and the Great Fire of London, he

penned the poem, ‘Annus Mirabilis’ in 1667. The poem was grandly received and secured him the title

of Poet Laureate in 1668 and Historiographer Royal in 1670. Same year, he was conferred with an

MA by the Archbishop of Canterbury. He did not let go of his essay writing as well and in 1668 came

up with his first major critical work, ‘Essay of Dramatic Poesy’. ; ‘Annus Mirabilis’ in 1667, the basis

for his reputation as the father of English literary criticism. Dryden was appointed poet laureate.
In 1670 Dryden was appointed the Poet Laureate and this office he held for eighteen years.

*Beginning 1670, he came up with the two parts ‘The Conquest of Granada’ and the comedy,
‘Marriage a la Mode’. Equally fine in a different mode was his tragedy All for Love (1677), based on

Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra and written in a flowing but controlled blank verse. He had earlier

adapted The Tempest (1667), and later he reworked yet another Shakespeare play, Troilus and Cressida (1679)

In 1674, he wrote a tribute for Milton in the form of a musical adaptation of the latter’s Paradise Lost

entitled, ‘The State of Innocence’. However, the play remained unperformed.

In 1676, he penned his best heroic play, ‘Aureng-Zebe’ which had a prologue that denounced the use

of rhyme in serious drama.

*In 1681, he came out with the political satire on Monmouth and Shaftesbury, Absalom and

Achitophel. Despite being his first attempt at satirical writing, it went on to become the greatest

English satires of all time. Since the work favoured Charles II and attacked the Whigs, it drew support

from the royalist and the aristocrats as well.

Following year, he came up with a sequel of his first satirical work, this time in collaboration with

Nahum Tate, Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel. Same year, he attacked Shaftesbury
supporters with his work entitled, ‘The Medal’. Dryden published early in 1682 The Medall, a work full of

unsparing invective against the Whigs, prefaced by a vigorous and plainspoken prose “Epistle to the Whigs.” In

the same year, anonymously and apparently without Dryden’s authority, there also appeared in print his

famous extended lampoon, Mac Flecknoe, written about four years earlier. What triggered this devastating

attack on the Whig playwright Thomas Shadwell has never been satisfactorily explained; all that can be said is

that in Mac Flecknoe Shadwell’s abilities as a literary artist and critic are ridiculed and with such good-

humoured contempt that his reputation has suffered ever since.

Alongside satirical work, he build his interest in theology and came with his first venture in the genre titled,

‘Religio Laici’. Translated as ‘A Layman’s Faith’ the work argued Christianity over Deism

His later works include the poems, ‘Threnodia Augustalis’, ‘To the Pious Memory ... of Mrs Anne

Killigrew’ and ‘A Song for Saint Cecilia's Day’.

The Revolution of 1688 resulted in ascendance of William III to the throne. Following this turn of

events, he faced a major downfall as he was not only deprived of his laureateship, but replaced by his

old enemy, Shadwell.

During the later years, he survived a living by translating the works of Horace, Juvenal, Ovid,

Lucretius, and Theocritus. His work involved making classic English literary work accessible and

readable to the general public. His most ambitious project as a translator was released in 1697 under

the title, ‘The Works of Virgil’ and in 1700 as ‘Fables Ancient and Modern’.

An Essay of Dramatic Poesy

with the views of major critics and the tastes of men and women of the time of Dryden.
The work is in the form of semi-drama thus making abstract theories interesting. In the late 17th
century, Shakespeare was severely criticised for his careless attitude towards the mixing of genres. It
was Dryden who elevated Shakespeare to height for his natural genius.The narrative of An Essay of
Dramatic Poesy has four debaters among whom, Neander is the one who holds the views of Dryden.
Unlike other characters, Neander does not diminish the arguments that are on contrary to his views.
Though he himself favours modern drama, he does not blame others.

Summary
The beginning of the narrative An Essay of Dramatic Poesy or Of Dramatic Poesie is as follows. A
battle is going on between England and the Netherlands.Four gentlemen namely Crites, Eugenius,
Lisideius and Neander are travelling by boat to see the battle and start a discussion on modern
literature.

Crites opens the discussion by saying that none of his contemporaries (i.e. moderns) can equal the
standards and the rules set by ancient Greeks and Romans. Eugenius restrains him from wasting
time on finding demerits. He asks him to find relative merit in Greeks and Moderns.

Views of 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.

Views of 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 on 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.

Views of Lisideius

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.

Views of 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 (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”.

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.

At the end of the discussion, there is an argument between Crites and Neander over rhyme in plays.
Crites believes that Blank Verse as the poetic form nearest to prose is most suitable for drama.

On the other hand, Neander defends rhyme as it briefly and clearly explains everything. The boat on
which they all were riding reaches its destination, the stairs at Somerset House and the discussion
ends without any conclusion being made.