John Dryden, "MacFlecknoe" (1684) "Annus Mirabilis" (1667) Criticism
Genre: Verse satire ("Mac"), commendatory or "public" verse ("Annus"), and prose essay.
Form: rhyming couplets ("heroic couplets," though "Mac" is "mock epic verse"), four-line stanzas of rough iambic pentameter rhyming abab ("Annus"), and prose. For a modern parody of the "mock heroic" style, see "Al Pope"'s Ratiad (1994).
Characters: "MacFlecknoe" is the mocking Scottish form for "son-of-Flecknoe," and the character stands for Thomas Shadwell, whose pretention to be taken for the inheritor of Ben Jonson's poetic tradition Dryden skewers by making him the son of Richard Flecknoe, a poet even Shadwell would see was dull. Other characters represent contemporary or recent poets (Heywood, Decker, Shirley, Fletcher), or they are allegorical, part of the epic "machinery of the gods" by which Dryden mocks Shadwell, making him inherit the throne of Nonsense. "Annus Mirabilis" personifies London as a Queen in ways that strongly evoke the late Elizabeth I, but in the context of Dryden's imperial vision, she is courted now by merchant fleets who bring her jewels and other trade goods from the Empire's far-flung colonial "suitors."
Summary: Click here for some small-group discussion guides on each of these works.
Issues and Research Sources:
The Restoration confronts readers with a radically "modern" world, including naked celebrities like Charles II's courtesans daring us to look away and drunken atheists like the earl of Rochester telling us we are fools if we think we are not merely material animals. Such tradition-breaking "modes" cry out for satire. The satirist is the traffic cop and arts reviewer of the modern world run amuck. Freedom of expression and thought has its price, a fee for folly and pettiness and crime and vice that is collected by satire's public exposure of these faults. Rude children have been chalking or carving insults into public surfaces since the days of classical Greece and Rome, but nobody confuses "Rufus Cretensis has a funny looking nose" with witty satire. The former (see Sidney) mistakes for wit what is mere vulgarity and the mockery of physical deformities. The latter punctures inflated egos and makes obvious the failings of the famous (and the would-be famous). Satire's victims have done something to deserve the verbal lash, whereas mere bullying is undeserved. The most successful satires are uncomfortable for their targets to witness, and Dryden attempts to distinguish good from bad satire by the effects it has upon them by distinguishing "raillery" [overt condemnation] from artful satire: "A witty man is tickled [by satire] while he is hurt in this manner, and a fool feels it not. The occasion of an offense may possibly be given, but he cannot take it [without admitting the fault]. If it be granted that in effect this way does more mischief; that a man is secretly wounded, and though he be not sensible himself, yet the malicious world will find it out for him; yet there is still a vast difference betwixt the slovenly butchering of a man, and the fineness of a stroke that separates the head from the body, and leaves it standing in its place. A man may be capable, as [English hangman] Jack Ketch's wife said of his servant, of a plain piece of work, a bare hanging; but to make a malefactor die sweetly was only belonging to her husband" (2257-8). Dryden's "decapitation" metaphor contains at least two important meanings for the (usually male) target of the satire: headlessness a metaphor for mindlessness and life-threatening challenges to a way of thinking; and headlessness as symbolic castration, also linked to speechlessness/silence (see Freud and Lacan).
Note that the essay on satire (above) praises the character "Zimri" from Absolom and Achitophel--see p. 1804-5, ll. 544ff., for that excellent and accurate characterization of George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham, who was forced to admit the truth of it.
Especially consider what Aphra Behn will show the English twenty years later in Oroonoko. Dryden's religious epistemology represents a type of doctrine sometimes called "fideism," a reliance on faith rather than reason for religious matters so as to unplug morality from the hard facts about society and nature which were being discovered by science. This later becomes rationalized by the "Deists" like Leibniz, who argued that God's role in the universe was reasonably demonstrable (though by circular logic) and that, therefore, this was the best of all possible worlds (since God, the omnipotent, would have done better if He could).
(ll. 287-292--see the Norton for longer extracts of the whole poem)