Overview of “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy” by John Dryden

John Dryden's “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy” (1668) is a significant critical work written
during the Restoration period. It presents a dialogue among four fictional characters who
discuss the merits and shortcomings of classical, French, and English drama. Through this
discussion, Dryden outlines his views on dramatic poetry, defending English drama against its
critics and advocating for a balance between tradition and innovation.

Background of the Essay

Dryden wrote the essay during a time when the English theatre was being restored after the
Puritan suppression of public performances. As part of this cultural revival, there was a
renewed interest in dramatic theory. Dryden's work responds to criticisms of English drama by
classical purists and French advocates who favoured more rigid structures and unity of form.

Structure of the Essay

The essay is structured as a conversation between four characters:

1. Crites: Defends the classical drama of the Greeks and Romans, emphasizing its adherence
to the unities of time, place, and action.

2. Eugenius: Critiques the strict classical rules and praises the modern drama for its variety
and flexibility.

3. Lisideius: Advocates for French drama, commending its refinement and adherence to
decorum.

4. Neander: Represents Dryden's own views, defending English drama for its creativity,
blending of genres, and emotional impact.

The dialogue format allows Dryden to present multiple perspectives on drama while
subtly steering the argument in favour of English theatre.

Key Themes and Arguments

1. The Unities of Time, Place, and Action

Crites begins by praising the classical unities, arguing that they ensure clarity and coherence
in the narrative.
According to him:

1. The unity of time confines the action to a 24-hour period.

Neander, Dryden’s voice, counters this by stating that strict adherence to the unities often
results in unnatural and constrained storytelling. He argues that English drama, which allows
for multiple locations and plots, reflects the complexity of real life and engages the audience
more effectively.

2. The Superiority of Classical Drama

Crites extols the virtues of ancient drama, citing writers like Aristotle and Horace as
benchmarks of excellence. He claims that classical playwrights like Sophocles and Euripides
created timeless works because they adhered to established rules.

Eugenius challenges this by pointing out flaws in classical drama, such as their
simplistic plots and lack of dramatic variety. He highlights the achievements of modern
playwrights, who create complex characters and more intricate plots.

3. French Drama vs. English Drama

Lisideius praises French drama, particularly the works of playwrights like Pierre Corneille and
Jean Racine. He admires their strict adherence to the unities, polished language, and emphasis
on decorum. According to Lisideius, French plays avoid violent scenes onstage, prioritizing
elegance and moral lessons.

Neander disagrees, criticizing French drama for being overly restrictive and lacking in
emotional depth. He defends English playwrights like Shakespeare and Ben Jonson, who create
dynamic characters and blend comedy and tragedy. Neander argues that this mixture appeals
to human nature and offers a richer theatrical experience.

4. The Role of Tragicomedy

Neander advocates for the English practice of blending tragedy and comedy, which he sees as
a more accurate reflection of life’s complexities. While critics claim that mixing genres violates
dramatic decorum, Neander insists it adds variety and engages audiences more deeply.
He cites Shakespeare as a master of this approach, blending profound emotional moments with
light-hearted humour to create a balanced and impactful narrative.

5. The Role of Imagination in Drama

Dryden, through Neander, emphasizes the importance of imagination in drama. He argues that
drama is not merely about replicating reality but about creating an artistic representation that
resonates with the audience. English dramatists excel in this by embracing creativity and poetic
expression.

6. The Function of Drama

The essay highlights drama’s dual purpose: to entertain and to instruct. While classical purists
prioritize moral instruction, Dryden believes that English drama achieves both objectives by
appealing to the emotions and intellect of the audience.

Dryden's Defence of English Drama

Dryden’s primary objective in An Essay of Dramatic Poesy is to defend the English tradition
of drama against criticisms from classical and French advocates. He champions the following
aspects of English drama:

1. Flexibility of Form: English drama’s lack of strict adherence to the unities allows
for richer, more complex storytelling.
2. Emotional Engagement: By blending tragedy and comedy, English plays evoke a
broader range of emotions.
3. Imaginative Scope: English playwrights, especially Shakespeare, are praised for
their creative use of language and their ability to depict human nature vividly.
4. Relatability: The English emphasis on realistic characters and situations makes
their plays more relatable to contemporary audiences.

Dryden’s Style and Literary Approach

Dryden employs a conversational tone in the essay, making complex ideas accessible to
readers. The dialogue format allows him to present opposing viewpoints without outright
dismissing them. His arguments are grounded in examples from classical, French, and English
literature, lending credibility to his views. Dryden’s prose is marked by clarity and eloquence,
reflecting his belief that criticism should be both instructive and enjoyable.
Significance of the Essay

“An Essay of Dramatic Poesy” is a landmark in English literary criticism. It bridges the gap
between classical and modern theories of drama, advocating for a balance between adherence
to tradition and creative innovation. The essay also reflects the cultural and artistic priorities of
the Restoration period, emphasizing the value of drama as a reflection of human experience.

Dryden’s defence of English drama, particularly his celebration of Shakespeare, has

Conclusion

In “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy”, John Dryden engages in a thoughtful debate on the merits
of classical, French, and English drama. Through the voices of his fictional characters, he
examines fundamental questions about the purpose, form, and function of drama. Ultimately,
Dryden champions English theatre for its imaginative power, emotional depth, and ability to
capture the complexities of human life. His balanced approach to criticism and appreciation of
diverse dramatic traditions make the essay a timeless exploration of dramatic art.

The main argument of John Dryden's “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy” revolves around the
value and strengths of English drama in comparison to classical and French drama. Dryden
argues that English drama, despite criticisms for its lack of strict rules, is superior because of
its creativity, emotional richness, and ability to represent the complexities of life. The essay
presents this argument through a dialogue among four characters, each representing different
perspectives on drama.

Key Points of the Argument

1. Defence of English Drama Against Classical Criticism

Crites, representing the classical view, praises ancient Greek and Roman drama for following
strict rules like the unities of time, place, and action. These rules ensure order and clarity in the
plot.
Neander (Dryden's voice) counters that while these unities provide structure, they can restrict
creativity. He argues that English playwrights like Shakespeare and Ben Jonson use multiple
plots and settings to reflect life’s complexity and unpredictability.

Close Reference: Neander praises Shakespeare for excelling in portraying human nature:

"He was the man who of all modern, and perhaps ancient poets, had the largest and most
comprehensive soul."

2. Blending of Tragedy and Comedy

Classical and French critics disapprove of mixing genres, claiming it breaks dramatic decorum.

Neander defends the English practice of tragicomedy, saying it mirrors the mixture of joy and
sorrow in real life. This blending enhances emotional engagement and makes plays more
relatable to audiences.

Close Reference: Neander justifies the blending of genres, stating:

"The most pleasant and delightful part of all poetry is that which is mixed with profit and
delight."

3. Critique of French Drama

Lisideius, the French drama advocate, praises its refinement, decorum, and strict adherence to
rules. French plays focus on moral lessons and avoid violent or sensational scenes on stage.

Neander criticizes French drama for being too polished and lacking emotional depth. He argues
that English drama’s boldness and variety captivate audiences more effectively.

Close Reference: Neander contrasts French and English plays, saying:

"Our plays have a more masculine fancy, more spirit, and more force."

4. Imagination and Realism in English Drama

English drama embraces imagination, presenting rich, varied plots and dynamic characters.
Neander argues that it balances realism with artistic creativity, making it both entertaining and
thought-provoking.

He acknowledges that English plays may not always follow strict rules but defends this as a
strength rather than a flaw.
Close Reference: Neander emphasizes the imaginative power of English drama:

"We have many who introduce it so naturally and with so much wit, that we are pleased more
with their writing than with the strict observance of the unities."