Name::- Sneha Agravat
Batch:- 2020-22(MA sem 1)
Paper 1:- (literature of the Elizabethan and Restoration period)
Roll no.:-17
Enrollment no.:-3069206420200001
E-mail Id :- snehaagravat2000@gmail.com
Submitted to:- S.B.Gardi Department Of English Maharaja krishnkumarsinhji Bhavngar University
Absolam and Achitophel as a Political Satire:-
Introduction:-
Absalom and Achitophel written by John Dryden is a political satire. Since Dryden was belong to Restoration period so we can easily say Dryden’s this work is mirror of that period. We have found several historical stories through this poem. In this period, there were several political parties in England. Among them Whig and Tory were common. Whig was Protestant and against the king and Tory was Catholic and supporter of king. As the relation between these two parties was not good so when they expressed anything through their writing they used satire form in their writing for opposite party. In this way, satire became popular form among the parties, but as a poet or writer, Dryden used satire as a literary form in his poem in a good way.
Brief summary of poem:-
Absalom and Achitophel is a landmark political satire by John Dryden. Dryden marks his satire with a concentrated and convincing poetic style. His satiric verse is majestic, what Pope calls: “The long majestic march and energy divine”. Critics have unanimously remarked on Dryden’s capacity to transform the trivial into the poetical; personal envy into the fury of imaginative creation. The obscure and the complicated is made clear and simple. All this transforming power is to be seen at the very beginning of Absalom and Achitophel. The state of ‘Israel’ is easy to understand and yet Dryden shows himself a master both of the Horatian and the Juvenalian styles of Satire. He is urbance witty devastating and vigorous, but very seldom petty.Absalom and Achitophel is "generally acknowledged as the finest political satire in the English language". It is also described as an allegory regarding contemporary political events, and a mock heroic narrative. On the title page, Dryden himself describes it simply as "a poem".
The poem, which is written in heroic couplets, is about the Exclusion crisis, a contemporary episode in which anti-Catholics, notably the earl of Shaftesbury, sought to bar James, duke of York, a Roman Catholic convert and brother to King Charles II, from the line of succession in favour of the king’s illegitimate (but Protestant) son, the duke of Monmouth. Dryden based his work on a biblical incident recorded in 2 Samuel 13–19. These chapters relate the story of King David’s favourite son Absalom and his false friend Achitophel (Ahithophel), who persuades Absalom to revolt against his father. In his poem, Dryden assigns each figure in the crisis a biblical name; e.g., Absalom is Monmouth, Achitophel is Shaftesbury, and David is Charles II. Despite the strong anti-Catholic tenor of the times, Dryden’s clear and persuasive dissection of the intriguers’ motives helped to preserve the duke of York’s position.
A second part of the poem—largely composed by Nahum Tate, playwright and poet laureate of Britain, but containing 200 lines by Dryden that were directed at his literary rivals Thomas Shadwell and Elkanah Settle—was published in 1682.
Before describing Absalom and Achitophel as a political satire, we need to know the definition of the widely used literary technique, satire.
Satire:-
Satire is a form of literature, the proclaimed purpose of which is the reform of human weaknesses or vices through laughter or disgust. Satire is different from scolding and sheer abuse, though it is prompted by indignation. Its aim is generally constructive, and need not arise from cynicism or misanthropy. The satirist applies the test of certain ethical, intellectual and social standards to men and women, and determines their degree of criminality or culpability. Satire naturally has a wide range; it can involve an attack on the vices of an age, or the defects of an individual or the follies common to the very species of mankind.
Absolam and Achitophel : Basically a Political Satire:-
Dryden called Absalom and Achitophel ‘a poem’ and not a satire, implying thereby that it had elements other than purely satirical. One cannot, for instance, ignore the obvious epic or heroic touches in it. All the same, the poem originated in the political situation of England at the time and one cannot fail to note that several political personalities are satirised in it. Published in November 1681, the theme was suggested by the king to Dryden . At this time, the question of succession to King Charles had assumed great importance. The Earl of Shaftesbury had been thrown into prison to face a charge of high treason. There were two contenders for the succession. Firstly, Charles’ brother James, Duke of York, a known Roman Catholic; the second contender was Charles’ illegitimate son, the Protestant Duke of Monmouth. The Whigs supported Monmouth while the Tories supported the cause of James in order to ensure stability in the country. There was great public unrest on account of the uncertainty of succession. King Charles II saw to it that the Exclusion bill brought before Parliament, to exclude the succession of his brother James, could not be pushed through. The earl of Shaftesbury, a highly ambitious man, sought to capitalise on this unrest. He also urged Monmouth to rebel against his father. The King, though fond of his illegitimate son, did not support his succession because that would have been against law. The Earl of Shaftesbury was arrested on a charge of high treason and lost popular support.
The aim of Dryden was to support the King and to expose his enemies. Of course, Charles had his own weaknesses; he was extremely fond of women. But Dryden puts a charitable mantel over his sexual sins. He is mild in dealing with his real vices. The king himself did not think unfavourably of his love affairs. Sexual licence was the order of the age and as such, it did not deserve condemnation. Dryden has nothing but praise for the king’s moderation in political matters and his leniency towards rebels. Dryden’s lash falls on the King’s enemies particularly the Earl of Shaftesbury. He was reckless politician without any principles who, “ having tried in vain to seduce Charles to arbitrary government had turned round and now drives down the current”. Dryden dreads the fickleness of the mob and he is not sure to what extremes a crowd can go. However, the king’s strictness and instinct for the rule of law won for him popular support and he was able to determine the succession according to his desire. Dryden’s reference to the godlike David shows his flattery of the King and his belief in the “Theory of the Divine Right of Kings”.
The only intention of Dryden to write this poem was to support King Charles II. The King himself asked Dryden to write a poem satirizing the Whig party and particularly its leader Shaftesbury. Dryden was also supporter of Tory. He was called Staunch Tory. He used satire very strictly for that people who were against the King Charles II and made plan to dethrone him.
First, Dryden attacked Earl of Shaftesbury. With his brilliant tricks he represented Shaftesbury as hypocrite. We found Shaftesbury a smooth talker and with his this capability, he convinced Duke of Monmouth to go against his father.
Dryden also attacked Protestant group. The Protestant group was in fear that if James, the brother of King Charles II, came to the throne then Roman Catholics would be beneficial and would be in power. Here, it is notable that James, the Duke of York was thought to be a follower of Pope of Roman Catholic. Instead, Protestants wanted to see the Duke of Monmouth in the throne of England. In Absalom and Achitophel, Dryden tried to show the traitorous activities of the Whig against their king.
In the seventeenth century England, religion played a big role in ruling the country and politics and religion were closely related to each other. Both Protestant Christians and their rival Roman Catholic were in cock fight to grab the power of the country. To prevent Roman Catholics from getting into the power of England, a clergyman, Titus Oates, in favor of Protestants, also made a plan and claimed that James and Roman Catholics had tried to kill the King Charles II in order to make James as the king of England which was later proved wrong.
Dryden in Absalom and Achitophel also criticized Duke of Buckingham with whom he had personal conflict. When Dryden joined as a poet-laureate and historiographer to the government in 1670, he got both money and recognition. Being jealous of Dryden’s such prosperity, some contemporary high officials started making fun of him. Duke of Buckingham was one of those people. In his literary work, The Rehearsal, he strongly criticized Dryden. In Absalom and Achitophel, Dryden took the revenge of making fun of him. In his poem, Dryden compared the Duke of Buckingham to the Biblical character Zimri, who being lured of the throne of Israel, killed his master and ascended to the throne thought Zmiri could only survive for seven days as the king of Israel. In reality, Duke of Buckingham was initially a friend of King Charles II, but when the religious chaos between Whig and Tories started, he joined the Whig, the rebel group of King Charles II.
In Absalom and Achitophel, Dryden did not focus much on the Duke of Monmouth who in the poem is compared to Absalom. Instead, he criticized much about Shaftesbury who is compared to Achitophel. According to Bible, Achitophel was a counselor to the court of King David, father of Absalom. When Absalom set to fight against his father, King David, Achitophel joined Absalom’s side. So, Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel would be much more related to the Biblical incident of Absalom and Achitophel, if he gave much importance on the Duke of Monmouth while making satire. However, Dryden mostly attacked Shaftesbury (symbolizing Achitophel in the poem). There are some political reasons behind it. At that time in England, Shaftesbury was in lead of the Whig, who placed “The Exclusion Bill” to the House of Commons. So, Dryden wanted to save King Charles II from any volatile situation due to the continuing rebellion. That is why; Dryden gave much importance while making satire. Another reason is that Dryden might have though that if he criticized Duke of Monmouth much then he would be more furious and as the Duke of Monmouth was an illegitimate child of King Charles II, Dryden tried to make a compromise between the King and Duke of Monmouth so that the movement over the religion and power could be stopped.
In Dryden’s time, satire became popular, especially among the political parties. In that time, Dryden wrote this poem. It is his best work. Now, this satire poem is considered as a classical work of Dryden in English literature.
Political Satire Cast in Biblical Mould:
Dryden chose the well known Biblical story of Absalom revolting against his father David, at the wicked instigation of Achitophel, in order to satirise the contemporary political situation. The choice of a Biblical allegory is not original on dryden’s part, but his general treatment of the subject is beyond comparison, as Courthope points out. But all the while Dryden takes care to see that the political satire in not lost in the confusion of a too intricate Biblical parallelism. The advantage of setting the story in pre-Christian times is obvious as it gave Dryden had at once to praise the King and satirise the King’s opponents. To discredit the opponents he had to emphasise on Monmouth’s illegitimacy; but at the same time he had to see that Charles (who was Monmouth’s father) was not adversely affected by his criticism.
Conclusion:-
Dryden is correctly regarded as the most vigorous and polished of English satirists combining refinement with fervour. Dryden is unequalled at debating in rhyme and Absalom and Achitophel displays his power of arguing in verse. It may be said that Absalom and Achitophel has no rival in the field of political satire. Apart from the contemporary interest of the poem and its historical value, it appeal to the modern reader lies in its observations on English character and on the weaknesses of man in general. His generalisations on human nature have a perennial interest. Dryden triumphed over the peculiar difficulties of his chosen theme. He had to give, not abuse or politics,but the poetry of abuse and politics. He had to criticise a son whom the father still liked; he had to make Shaftesbury denounce the King but he had to see to it that the King’s susceptibilities were not wounded. He had to praise without sounding servile and he had to criticise artistically. Dryden achieves all this cleverly and skilfully. Achitophel’s denunciation of the king assumes the shades of a eulogy in Charles’ eyes. Absalom is a misguided instrument in Achitophel’s hands. The poem is certainly a political satire, but it is a blend of dignity with incisive and effective satire.
References:-
1)“Absalom and Achitophel as a Political Satire.” Sid, 2013. Sid, www.google.com/amp/s/desdemonaliterarism.wordpress.com/2013/05/12/absalom-and-achitophel-as-a-political-satire/amp.
2)Dryden, John. Absalom & Achitophel. Clarendon Press. 1911. page 86.
3)Tate, Nahum. The Second part of Absalom and Achitophel; a Poem. Printed for Jacob Tonson (1682).
Word count:-2239
No comments:
Post a Comment