> Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > Never could read Dryden, myself. Pope, yes, but Dryden's like getting
> > teeth drilled.
>
> I much prefer Pope, but Religio Laici & Macflecknoe, as well as the
> Virgil translation, are quite wonderful.
Pope is a lot smoother than Dryden, but Dryden is gnarlier. I guess that's the same thing, isn't it?
It's like oh say Buxtehude vs. Vivaldi. Oh okay, that's very unfair to Pope. But we're talkin' first approximation here.
> He could be awful, however, in a way that Pope couldn't
And good in a way that Pope couldn't -- the poor little snobbish hunchbacked parvenu was too interested in appearing well-bred.
Dryden is Grub Street. Pope is Twit'nam. As a big Dryden fan, I demand to know: Just when was he awful?
--
Michael Smith mjs at smithbowen.net http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org