LITERARY CRITICISM |1

SIMILARITY AND DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JOHN DRYDEN

AND SIR PHILIP SIDNEY AS A CRITIC WITH RESPECT TO
THEIR ESSAYS
SIMILARITY

SIDNEY’S VIEW ON POETRY

John Dryden and Philip Sidney are united in recognising poet’s significance. Sidney sees
poets as a mediator between historians and philosophers. He says that poetry is the first light
giver to ignorance. He also says that poetry is the old and more superior form than other
branches of knowledge. For instance Vedas, Mahabharata, Ramayana, The Bible, The Quran
are in poetry. He says the first philosophers and historians became popular in the manner in
which they used poetry. For example, Psalms by David and Dialogues by Plato are in the
form of poetry. In his work ‘Apology for poetry’ he says,

“And truly, even Plato, whosoever well considereth shall find that in the body of his
work, though the inside and strength were Philosophy, the skin as it were and beauty
depended most of Poetry”

Though Plato’s subject is of highly philosophical content, there is a touch of poetry in it.
Greek and Roman people regarded the poets as Sage or prophet. Sidney says there is no
nation that has been without a poet and there is no primitive or barbarous who has failed to
receive the delight and instructions from poetry. Sidney defines poetry as follows,

“Poetry is an art of imitation, a representing, counterfeiting or figuring forth, to speak

metaphorically a speaking picture with this end to teach and delight”

More than anyone else, only poet can fulfil this end. He then shows the superiority of poetry
to history and philosophy. He says, a philosopher teaches by percept and a historian teaches
with examples only, but a poet employs both precept and examples. Philosophers teach virtue
by showing what virtue is and what vice is through their argument. The argument will not be
so clear and it lacks aesthetic beauty. Historians teach virtue by showing the experience of the
past ages that is tied to what actually happened. It will be tied to particular truth and not
general possibilities. The poet performs the dual task. Poetry deals with both and so it is
universal. According to Sidney, the poet deals with what might or should be not with
what is or what has been.

He then says, all the art form will have nature as the principal object of imitation but the poet
is not tied to this subject because they are not a mere imitator, they are creator who creates
another nature better than the nature they observed. Furthermore he defends poetry against
the Puritan’s charge that is it is not a mother of lie, it is the oldest of all branches, and it
teaches as well as delights. It does not debase or misuse the mind of man; it is the man’s wit
that abuses poetry. Plato who is considered as an enemy of poetry, he banished poets from his
ideal commonwealth, but his work ‘Dialogue’ is in the form of poetry.
 LITERARY CRITICISM |2

DRYDEN’S VIEW ON POETRY

Dryden also celebrates poetry’s delightful instructions; he also celebrates the
humanity found in imperfection. According to Plato, the function of poetry is ‘to instruct’.
According to Aristotle, function of poetry is ‘to delight’. According to Horace, function of
poetry is ‘to instruct and to delight’. According to Longinus, the function of poetry is ‘to
transport’. Dryden concluded that the final end of the poetry is ‘to delight and to transport’
rather than to teach and instruct. He says, poetry has the power to transport men into heroes.
Example in Shakespeare’s “Troilus and Cressida” the Trojan hector transforms into a tragic
hero. Following are the Dryden’s words ‘Delight is the chief, if not the only end of poetry,
instruction can be admitted but in the second place, foe poesy only instructs as it
delights’

Similar to Sidney, Dryden also says, a bare imitation of nature cannot be a great
poetry. Poetry should imitate only a part of nature, only then it will be beautiful and
delighting. The poet is not an imitator or even a teacher, he is a creator. He creates a new
thing out of life and nature.

Dryden says, the fancy should not run wild. To control this fancy the poet must have
restraining power of good sense judgement and discretion. Only then, a poet can present the
image of life and nature more perfect than the real life of man, breaking of all its deformities
or faults. According to him, poet is the creator of the ideal but not the real.

DIFFERENCE

SIDNEY’S VIEW ON 3 DRAMATIC UNITIES

Sidney is a strong advocate of 3 dramatic unities of time, place and action. According
to him, a play is believed to be a real copy of life only if three unities are observed. He regrets
that none of the English play except Gorboduc has three unities to some extent.

UNITY OF TIME: he says that the action of the play should not exceed the natural
day of 24 hours. If it exceeds the time limit, the play would appear to be unnatural. He says
nothing could be more absurd than this.

UNITY OF PLACE: he says that the action of play should not shift frequently from
one distant place to another. Also the same stage has to be taken as garden, graveyard, island
to show the shipwreck and as a battlefield. But this should not strain the mind of the
audience. It should not lead to confusion and this should be equally avoided.

UNITY OF ACTION: he says that there should be no mixture of comic and tragic
scenes. Comedy should be comedy and tragedy should be tragedy from the beginning to the
end. They should not be mixed up. King and clown should not be mixed up in the stage.
 LITERARY CRITICISM |3

DRYDEN’S VIEW ON 3 UNITIES

Dryden’s view on 3 unities is expressed through the persona of Neander in “Essay on
dramatic poesy”. He says that, it would not have been possible for the varieties of English
plays, if the English dramatist had followed the unities of time and place.

According to him, the unity of action is not infringed by the introduction of large number
of persons or events since all tend to be united in a whole. He says that variation of different
places can be shown through painted scenes.

SIDNEY’S VIEW ON TRAGICOMEDY

Sidney strongly disapproves tragicomedy. He says it the worst kind of writing.
Tragicomedy is neither a pure tragedy nor a pure comedy but a blending of two. He says, in
tragicomedy the serious scenes will lose its importance when it comes after a comic scene.
There will be no proper effect among audience.

He says, in a right spirit, a comedy should be full of delight, tragedy should produce
pity and fear and admiration. Following are the words of Sidney,

“The whole tract of a comedy should be full of delight, as the tragedy should be still
maintained in a well raised admiration”

He says, tragicomedy produces neither pure delight nor pure compassion. A comic scene in
the midst of tragic scene or a tragic scene in between in the midst of comic scenes is not fit
for ‘chaste ears’

DRYDEN’S VIEW ON TRAGICOMEDY

Dryden defends tragicomedy through the following points.

1. Just as eye can pass from unpleasant thing to a pleasant thing, soul can also move
from tragic to comic. It can do much more swiftly.
2. Mirth does not destroy compassion, that is, a serious effect of tragedy is not disturbed
by mingling of tragedy and comedy.
3. When mirth comes along with tragedy, it gives the same soothing effect as the
insertion of music in between the acts by the chorus.
4. The tragicomedy is developed by the principle of contrast. Only contrast shows the
goodness of other.
5. He says continuity of mirth and pathos leads to numbness.
6. We always need refreshment in between a long journey. Similarly we need a break in
between a tragic play and so comic scenes are added.
7. If the play is believed to be the real copy of life, it must have the blending of tragedy
and comedy because our life has many ups and downs. It will not be the same always.

Thus Dryden and Sidney have similar opinions about poet’s significance and they differ in
their view on 3 dramatic unities and tragicomedy.
LITERARY CRITICISM |4