Eleonora Galindo Martnez

December 3rd 2014

On Drydens Mac Flecknoe.

Everyone, at some point in their lives, has disliked or quarrelled with someone to the
point of concocting all manner of improper remarks and denominatives to refer to said
repudiated individual, and there is no shortage of poets who have taken this common
occurrence and furnished it with confidence and style, often giving birth to true
masterpieces. John Dryden is no exception, and proves his mastery of comical wit in Mac
Flecknoe, the mock-heroic dedicated to his contemporary Thomas Shadwell. In it he
presents Shadwell as the heir of Richard Flecknoe, a successful but untalented writer, as a
parody of Shadwells pretention of being Ben Jonsons heir1.
The term mock-heroic refers to a text written in the elevated style of epic poetry but
that deals with a trifling or vulgar subject. According to Bates, Dryden is the first writer of
mock-heroic in English, but, unlike his predecessors in other languages, he does not base
his work on a traditional epic story (174). Although its authorship was guessed at and
affirmed by many of the original readers, Mac Flecknoe circulated as an anonymous
manuscript until 1693, when it was publicly acknowledged along with Absalom and
Achitophel to be Drydens work (Robertson 243).
Epic generally begins with an invocation to the Muse or to another great source of
inspiration for the poet, which Dryden changes for All human things are subject to decay, /
And when fate summons, monarchs must obey (1-2), a reflection upon the inevitability of
death and the passing of time. As his beginning of satiric play he compares Flecknoe to
1 Mac (son of) Flecknoe.

Caesar Augustus, who stands as glorious ruler of Nonsense but that nearing death finds
himself in need of choosing an heir. His evaluation of his many sons renders Shadwell
who in accordance with the rules of mock poetry is referred to as Sh, in an also
mocking attempt to disguise his identity as the only one capable of continuing his
legacy properly, as he is Mature in dullness from his tender years, [] stands confirmed
in full stupidity and never deviates into sense (16, 18, 20). This is another characteristic
of satire, which Dryden exploits amply throughout the poem: the exposition of defects as
remarkable qualities of a character.
Dryden, through the voice of Flecknoe, embarks on a 40-line description of
Shadwells proficiency in dullness as well as his arrival to be anointed as the new king,
working with references to classical literature (43), Shadwells works as well as some of
their contemporaries (29, 42, 54, 57, 59), and even making a relation between Flecknoe as
John the Baptist and Shadwell as Jesus (29-30), besides remarking on his subjects fatness
and the pride Flecknoe took on being doted upon by the Portuguese king (25, 36).
The poem continues in the voice of its initial speaker, describing the scene, chosen by
Flecknoe, in which Shadwell is to be crowned and reign over, set in the lowest district of
Augusta the brothels of London, which, in Drydens opinion, is where Shadwells work
belongs. The coronation takes place over No Persian carpets but scattered limbs of
mangled poets, and the attendance is conformed of Martyrs of pie, and relics of the bum
(98-102), who are contained by yeomen led by Herringman 2 (104-105). Dryden states
that for Shadwell to be crowned king of Nonsense there must be a sacrifice of good poetry
and to be witnessed only by those worst and unsold, and the ones who allowed these two to
be published equally.
2 Editor of both Dryden and Shadwell. (NA 907)

Mac Flecknoe takes over the throne, more glorious in his dullness than his
predecessor, taking a vow to maintain true dullness and to have [no] peace with wit, nor
truce with sense. He rises as king by office and priest by trade, and releases twelve
owls as symbol of his unrelenting stupidity, a reference to Romulus seeing vultures when
first arriving in Rome.
Flecknoe speaks again in praise of his blessedly obtuse son, asking for Heavens
blessing upon his reign and for his advance in new impudence, new ignorance (146). He
advises Shadwell neither to seek to write enlightened pieces nor to take ideas from others,
but to exploit his natural talents, thus achieving the quality and success Flecknoe had.
Suddenly his advice shifts and becomes Leave writing plays and to write acrostics (205206). Then he takes his leave in another biblical echo: he is pulled into the earth by a
mystical wind and his robe falls upon Shadwell, as Elijahs mantle fell upon Elisha after he
was carried to Heaven.
The poem is divided in five unequal sections: lines 1 to 63 are centred on Flecknoes
realisation and praise of his heir, 64 to 93 on Mac Flecknoes new kingdom, 94 to 148 on
his coronation, 144 to 210 on Flecknoes advice and farewell, being the last seven lines the
abrupt and ultimately meaningless departure of the old king, who is forgotten after the
ascension of his son. It is written in heroic couplets as befits an epic, however satirical,
and as it was one Drydens preferred styles. It deviates from this structure in five occasions,
where three rhymed lines appear instead of two; these variations do not seem to have a
defined pattern, but they function as a pressure outlet after the squareness of the couplets.
However rigid the structure the poem flows easily, and the phrase in line 208 offers a clear
description of the whole: to torture one poor word ten thousand ways. That is, without
question, one ability any scholar should aspire to.

Whilst the text is riddled with references to the cultural scene of the time, it is not
difficult for a casual reader to understand its purpose: the ridicule of a rival artist through a
carefully planned and politely sarcastic piece, managed so successfully that to this day
Shadwells image remains that presented on Mac Flecknoe. However personal the attack
undoubtedly is, the purpose of the satire is not only to spite on Shadwell, but to show how
important it is for the poets of a nation to be talented and have good taste, otherwise
their deficiencies will be seen as reflections of the country they live in. Marshall argues that
even if Mac Flecknoe is a very personal piece, if had been written by other than Dryden it
would not have the same impact as it did and still does (76).
Shadwell and Dryden had been friends once, until their disagreements surpassed their
ability to stand the other. They differed in political matters Shadwell was a Whig and
Dryden was a Tory , religion as the subtitle proclaims, Shadwell was a Protestant whilst
Dryden had a Catholic inclination and literature there was constant quarrel over what
was more valuable in a text, asides from personal preferences, the latter for Shakespeare
and the former for Jonson, differences which had been public since they met and had been
constantly used in satires by both parties. But Mac Flecknoe does no longer present the
friendly mockery of previous works: it is viciously demeaning but its sting is softened
through the use of specific language. I can be argued, however, that its composition as a
mock-heroic enhances its offence.
Dryden, in a quest much like the Cyrano de Bergeracs in Rostands play, uses every
resource on his power to express his disregard for his once colleague. Thomas Shadwell as
a man, not a poet, if he ever esteemed Dryden as his true friend, must have been certainly
hurt at reading himself being depicted as a coarse and low writer whose writing is so vilely
poor he hammers virtue with his pathetic words, that [his] inoffensive satires never bite

(200-202) and that the venom in his heart dies when touching his pen; an oaf destined to
destroy all the finesse and virtue to be found in poetry; as the heir of a fool instead of his
dearest Jonson; as a clown whose work is only fit for whores and drunkards.
Aside from the multitude of vulgar qualities he bestows upon his victim, Dryden
satirises a crucial topic at the time, which is widely developed in Absalom and Achitophel:
the continuation of the royal line. As a royalist, his frequent use of the subject might
have not put him in danger, but his manner of presenting it was nonetheless daring, which
also contributed to his downfall when Charles II was deposed.
Something always worth noticing in an author is self-critique, which is hinted at
when Dryden mentions Shadwells editor, who also happens to be his. If he is questioning
the quality of the works being published by this man and proclaiming them as unfit for a
sophisticated audience, the question arises as to whether Drydens own works are adequate
to be placed in such high ground. His talent cannot be denied, but the doubt is left hanging
as to what he really thought of his own work.
Thanks to Drydens wit, history remembers Shadwell as the brute presented in this
satire, but study upon his work gives evidence that although he was by no means equal to
Dryden or to his beloved Jonson, he was not as bad as Dryden paints him. In fact, after the
deposition of King Charles II, who had been Drydens benefactor, it is Shadwell who is
considered the new poet laureate. His momentary success, however, has hardly managed to
place him out of the footnotes to which Dryden condemned him in that fateful 1682.

Bibliography
Bates, Catherine. The Cambridge Companion to the Epic. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2010.
Greenblat, Stephen, ed. The Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Major Authors.
Eighth Edition. New York: Norton & Company, 2006.
Marshall, Ashley. The Practice of Satire in England, 16581770. Baltimore: JHU Press,
2013.
Morrissey, Lee. The Constitution of Literature: Literacy, Democracy, and Early English
Literary Criticism. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008.
Robertson, Randy. Censorship and Conflict in Seventeenth-century England: The Subtle
Art of Division. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press, 2009.