Comparisonitis

“Later that day Fitzroy looked at his earlier blog and realized that ‘universal commonality’ sounds pretty stupid and a little pretentious. Accepting his faults he moves on….”

I think ‘universal commonality’ sounds like two words that mean the same thing. I guess that would make me a superfluously unnecessary writer. Hmm. But I stand close to my point that I was trying to make in my previous blog about Dryden’s ‘An Essay of Dramatic Poesy’ and that was that it was laying a foundation for the merits of English criticism. Plus celebrating English works at the same time.

I think each person writing in their particular time has only what has gone before him draw from. Its drawing from this common source that makes it difficult for a writer to know if their contribution is one that has any use for the eyes of others. It is only in retrospect mostly, that we get any sense of our contributions to society. So thinking that what we have to say is great before it is received by the masses may be foolish and a little scary. But I don’t think it’s as cut and dry as that.

Looking to other works to try to figure out your own merit is akin to adopting a certain mindset to decide what is worthy. This type of mindset, when it is adopted, may render a writer impotent. Constantly looking to the works of others in order to find merit for your own style is what a gospel sermon I know calls ‘Comparisonitis’. The art of difference can serve to, in a way, entrench certain modes of though and even to take away from modern contributions as works of substance. It would then seem like a sticky situation to get out of, this malady of comparison, because as we all know it’s hard to stop comparing your self to others. Better to focus on the moment and find the pleasure that is present in your own now. If a writer received no pleasure from a piece of writing, it wouldn’t exist. This is as true five hundred years ago as it is today.

Enter Dryden. The defeat of the Spanish armada was a time of celebration for England, noting that the period also brought about the establishment of a parliamentary style government and protestant rule, I think it highlights a long slow movement in English contemporary thought to establish England’s place as a leader in cultural contribution. It was a great time to wake up and recognize what England had to offer as opposed to looking to other countries for any type of cultural enrichment. This celebration can be seen in the chief players in ‘An Essay of Dramatic Poetry’ and in how they are opposed with one another. We have Crites and Lisideius on one side of the main arguments and we have Eugenius and Neander on the other. Both Crites and Lisideus only seem to support ancient and foreign works respectively while Eugenius and Neander speak for modern English works. Don’t get me wrong though, the essay does kind of smack of its own propaganda with its timing and its stance with England at the centre (Hey since we thrashed a bunch of foreigners in our coastal waters, why not thrash foreigners in print as well!), but it still manages to use proper tools of criticism by making use of comparison, evaluation and description. Dryden uses the essay to ground criticism so that it represents something more than mere pious propaganda. It is this grounding that gives the essay its credibility and gives England something to talk about.