Hudibras

Hudibras is a mock heroic poem from the 17th century written by Samuel Butler. The title comes from Spenser’s Faerie Queene.

The work is a satirical polemic upon Roundheads, Puritans, Presbyterians and many of the other factions involved in the English Civil War. The work was written in three parts in 1663, 1664 and 1678 although an unauthorised edition came out in 1662.

Published only four years after Charles II had been restored to the throne and the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell being completely over the poem found an appreciative audience. The satire is not balanced as Butler was fiercely royalist and only the parliamentarian side are singled out for ridicule. Butler also uses the work to parody some of the dreadful poetry of the time.

The epic tells the story of Sir Hudibras, a knight errant who is described dramatically and with laudatory praise that is so thickly applied to be absurd and the conceited and arrogant person is visible beneath. He is praised for his knowledge of logic despite appearing stupid throughout, but it his religious fervour which is mainly attacked:

For his Religion, it was fit To match his learning and his wit; 'Twas Presbyterian true blue; For he was of that stubborn crew Of errant saints, whom all men grant To be the true Church Militant; Such as do build their faith upon The holy text of pike and gun; Decide all controversies by Infallible artillery; And prove their doctrine orthodox By apostolic blows and knocks; Call fire and sword and desolation, A godly thorough reformation, Which always must be carried on, And still be doing, never done; As if religion were intended For nothing else but to be mended.

His squire, Ralpho, is of a similar stamp but makes no claim to great learning knowing all there is to know from his religion or “new-light” as he calls it. Butler satirises the competing factions at the time of the protectorship by the constant bickering of these two principle characters whose religious opinions should unite them.

These are fawning but barbed portraits and are thought to represent personalities of the times but the actual analogues are, now as then, debateable. "A Key to Hudibras" printed with one of the work's editions and ascribed to Roger L'Estrange names Sir Samuel Luke as the model for Hudibras. Certainly, the mention of Mamaluke in the poem makes this possible although Butler suggests Hudibras is from the West Country making Henry Rosewell a candidate. The witchfinder, Matthew Hopkins, John Desborough parliamentarian general and William Prynne lawyer all make and appearance and the character of Sidrophel is variously seen as either William Lilly or Paul Neale.

Butler is clearly influenced by Rabelais and particularly Cervantes' Don Quixote. But whereas in Cervantes, although being mocked, the readers sympathies are obviously supposed to be with the noble knight, Hudibras is offered nothing but derision.

The title comes from the name of a knight in Edmund Spencer's Faerie Queene who is described as "not so good of deeds as great of name" and "more huge in strength then wise in work". Spencer in turn probably got the name from the legendary English king Rud Hud Hudibras.

Hudibras was written in an iambic tetrameter in closed couplets, with surprising feminine rhymes. The dramatic meter portends tales of dramatic deeds but the subject matter and the unusual rhymes undercut its importance. This verse form is now referred to as Hudibrastic.

Plot The knight and his squire sally forth and come upon some people bear-baiting. After deciding that this is anti-Christian they attack the baiters and capture one after defeating the bear. The defeated group of bear-baiters then rallies and renews the attack capturing the knight and his squire. While in the stock the pair argue on religion.

Part two describes how the knight's imprisoned condition is reported by Fame to a widow Hudibras has been wooing and she comes to see him. With a captive audience, she complains that he does not really love her and he ends up promising to flagellate himself if she frees him. Once free he regrets his promise and debates with Ralpho how to avoid his fate with Ralpho suggesting that oath breaking is next to saintliness:

For breaking of an oath, and lying, Is but a kind of self-denying; A Saint-like virtue: and from hence Some have broke oaths by Providence Some, to the glory of the Lord, Perjur'd themselves, and broke their word;

Hudibras then tries to convince Rapho of the nobility of accepting the beating in his stead but he declines the offer. They are interrupted by a skimmington, a procession where women are celebrated and men made fools. After haranguing the crowd for their lewdness, the knight is pelted with rotten eggs and chased away.

He decides to visit an astrologer, Sidrophel, to ask him how he should woo the widow but they get into an argument and after a fight the knight and squire run off in different directions believing they have killed Sidrophel.

The third part was published 14 years after the first two and considerably different to the first parts. It picks up from where the second left off with Hudibras going to the widow's house to explain the details of the whipping he had promised to give himself but Ralpho had got there first and told her what had actually happened. Suddenly a group rushes in and gives him a beating and supposing them to be spirits from Sidrophel, rather then hired by the widow, confesses his sins and by extension the sins of the Puritans. Hudibras then visits a lawyer—the profession Butler trained in and one he is well able to satirise—who convinces him to write a letter to the widow. The poem ends with their exchange of letters in which the knight's arguments are rebuffed by the widow

Before the visit to the lawyer there is a digression of an entire canto in which much fun is had at the events after Oliver Cromwell's death. The succession of his son Richard Cromwell and the squabbles of factions such as the Fifth Monarchists are told with no veil of fiction and no mention of Sir Hudibras.

John Dryden

With Pope, Dryden is a celebrity of the Restoration. For the sake of the GRE, you need to know his poem "MacFlecknoe." His "Epigram to Milton" also shows up with regularity, thought there are numerous poems that the GRE could choose to test over.

*“Mac Flecknoe”

Like Pope's "Rape of the Lock," Dryden's "Mac Flecknoe" is a relatively short poem that is worth reading.  And like "The Rape," it is a mock epic.  In it, Dryden attacks his contemporary, Thomas Shadwell in heroic couplets. The mock epic is characterized by grandiose language describing mundane, trivial things.

“Absalom and Achitophel”

A political allegory that uses biblical figures and events to stand in for a political crisis current in Dryden’s time o Note the names: Absalom, Achitophel, and King David o Written in heroic couplets

"All For Love"

All for Love, or the World Well Lost (1677), Dryden’s tragedy of Antony and Cleopatra, represents a turning point in his career as a dramatist. Abandoning his practice of composing his plays in rhymed couplets (a method he had earlier encouraged in his Essay of Dramatic Poesie)(1668), Dryden shows here the mastery of an artist at the height of his powers. The play is especially impressive in creating genuine emotion and dramatic tension within the rigorous strictures of the neoclassical theatre; the unities of time, place, and action are strictly observed, but the story loses none of its power as a result. The work has obviously suffered in its inevitable comparison to Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra—when read, Dryden’s play is usually offered as an illustration of the inadequacies of Restoration tragedy when compared to that of the English Renaissance—but such comparison is fundamentally misguided, as it ignores the vastly different conditions of performance and composition between the two eras. A masterpiece in its own right, All for Love is a product of its time, and cannot be judged according to Shakespearean standards. Indeed, a comparison of the two plays might cede Dryden the victory in certain areas. While Shakespeare’s play ranges widely over time and place, creating an epic but often awkwardly meandering sense of scope, Dryden’s tightly focused composition allows a greater degree of emotional intensity and insight—without the ability to show battles, multiple settings, or the sweeping changes of time, Dryden manages nevertheless to create a work of genuinely tragic pathos. If Dryden’s meek Cleopatra is no match for what is perhaps Shakespeare’s most brilliantly rendered female character, his Antony is a startlingly astute portrait of a great man in crisis. Most importantly, though the two authors tell the same tale, their versions are driven by quite different artistic visions: if Shakespeare’s art is motivated primarily by the passion of history’s most famous lovers, Dryden’s interest lies in the clash between the personal and the political—the dramatic clash in the play is not between the lovers and the world that seeks to divide them, but between Antony’s duties as a statesman and a Roman, and his passionate desire for the woman he loves.