Samuel Daniel - Defence of Rhyme II Elizabethan Criticism

Samuel Daniel born in 1562 is a poet and a critic, par excellence. He is one of the most brilliant stars in the firmament of 16th century English poetry. His poems are well a claimed and praised for their sweetness of rhyming and also for their purity of language William Brown calls him "well languaged Daniel". Spenser regards him as "the new shepherd late of spring".

Samuel Daniel’s 'Defence of Rhyme' published in 1603 is a reply to Thomas Campion's 'Art of English Poetry'.  In this treatise, Daniel maintains and discusses the fitness of English language for rhymed verse (poetry). Thomas Campion criticized English language in the following way:

"...the vulgar and artificial custom of rhyming hath, I know, deterred many excellent wits from the exercise of English Poetry."

 But Samuel Daniel refutes this charge and defends English rhyme by stating that it finally gives pleasure and thus it achieves the chief aim of poetical composition. Moreover, he says that it is also sanctioned by custom and nature. Custom and nature are more reliable guides then theory and practice of the Greeks and the Romans. In his blind adherence and following of classical mythology, there is always a danger of the versifier (poet) sacrificing the beauty of English language.

 DANIELS DISAGREEMENT WITH CAMPION:

It was very painful for Daniel to hear Campion's remark that the vulgar and artificial custom of rhyming has deterred (prevented) many excellent poets from the exercise of English Poetry. Campion was of the view that a new form of versification should replace rhyme. But Daniel said very bitterly that if Campion had written a poem of excellence in the line of English rhyme he (Daniel) would have admired it as a masterpiece. He further added and said that on the contrary, Campion has deprived English language of its present form and brought nothing but "a few loose and uncharitable epigrams. “Daniel denies the judgment of Campion and bitterly asks:

 "Who has asked Campion to sit in the judgment or a rhyme?"

 CAMPION TO SHOW OFF HIS SKILLS:

Daniel asks a very serious question:

 "From whom has Campion taken the pain of introducing 

a new form of versification into English language?"

Daniel maintains that if he has introduced this for the learned, it was of no use because every grammarian has already learnt prosody. And if he has introduced this new form of versification for the ignorant, it is in vain, because if they (ignorant poets) become versifiers English poetry is likely to have lean numbers instead of the flat rhyme. Thus, Daniel wants to say that it was more showing of his skills on the part of Campion.

 CUSTOM AND NATURE:

According to Daniel, custom (tradition) and nature (natural art of versification) are more reliable guides than theory and practice of the Greek and the Latin poets. In imitating the Greek and Latin masters, the English versifiers should know what, how much and when to obey. They should also know what numbers suit the nature of English language. In short, he wants to say that the English poets should not blindly follow the Greek and Latin masters (custom or tradition). They should imitate the traditional poets considering the nature and limitations of their own English language.

 ANCIENT ENGLISH NUMBERS IN FOREIGN TITLES:

Daniel also discusses the types of meter and how they suit English language. Here, he talks about all the eight types - iambic, trochee, anapaest, dactyl, spondee, pyrrhic etc. An iambic verse in English is only the plain ancient verse consisting of 10 syllables and 5 feet. This new form, according to him, would have been better, if it had not violated the accent of English language. The trochee is like the known measure of the former ancient English verse. The elegiac is nothing but the ancient accustomed measure of five feet. The other four numbers or types are the measures that have been familiarly used by the English poets. So, Daniel concludes:

 "All these eight numbers are only the ancient English 

numbers but are clothed in foreign titles."

 Every English versifier needs to find out the best suitable meter from these eight considering the idiom of English language.

 DANIEL, NOT AGAINST INNOVATIONS:

Though Daniel is of the view that custom and nature are the ultimate guides to the versifiers (poets) and that the poets should not rely on practice and exercise of classical writers, it does not in any way mean that he is against innovations. He is not against the invention of new poetic techniques.

 1) Daniel emphasized that any innovation should not disgrace the existing customary rhyme, but it should enrich the charm of the English language and add beauty to it.

 2) He says about English poetry that couplets used in long and continued poems are very tiresome. But here, we may argue that he cannot condemn this kind of writing because what is disgusting to Daniel maybe delightful to others.

 3) He also says that tragedy would be better in blank verse than in the rhymed verse.

 4) He rejects mixing of feminine and muscular rhymes.

 CONCLUSION:

Though Samuel Daniel advocates for natural and customary versification, he is a romanticist in the sense that he also leaves space for the versifiers (poets) to make innovations in rhyme. But he is of the view that innovations should enrich the rhyme. Daniel also asserts that the introduction of foreign words and phrases into English poetry may spoil the charm of the language. So he suggests that they should be ‘Anglicized’ to fit the English language. Thus, Daniel's 'Defence of Rhyme' is indeed a landmark in the field of critical theories of writing poetry.