Sir Philip SIDNEY (1554-1586)

Sir Philip Sidney was born in Kent in 1554 and died in Netherlands in 1586. He was a
courtier, soldier, poet, diplomat. He won admiration at an early age for his courtly skills and
intellectual curiosity. He is often cited as an archetype of the well-rounded “Renaissance man”.
His talents encompassed not only poetry and cultivated learning but the virtues of statesmanship
and military service. His most famous work is called An Apologie for Poetrie or The Defence of
Poetry. Sidney wrote Defence of Poetry before 1583.
Apologie for Poetrie is in many ways a seminal text of literary criticism. It represents the
first synthesis in the English language of Renaissance literary criticism. It draws on Aristotle,
Horace, and more recent writers such as Boccaccio and Julius Caesar Scaliger. It raises issues –
such as the value and function of poetry, the nature of imitation, and the concept of nature It was
written as a defence of poetry against a Puritan attack on poetry entitled The School of Abuse by
Stephen Gosson.
Sidney produces a wide range of arguments in defence of “poor Poetry”. One of the
major arguments discussed in the Apologie is chronology or antiquity of poetry. He argued that
poetry has been held in high esteem since the earliest times, it has been ‘the first light-giver to
ignorance.’ Poetry in all nations has preceded other branches of learning. The earlier Greek
philosophers and historians were, in fact, poets. The second argument is the authority of ancient
tradition. It is an “argument from tradition”. Both the Greeks and the Romans honoured poets.
The Romans called the poet "Vates" which means a Foreseer or a Prophet. Poetry has a prophetic
character. The third argument is the relation of poetry to nature. In Greek, the word 'Poet' means'
‘Maker’ or ‘Creator’. The poet is a 'maker', a creator in the real sense of the term. While all other
arts are tied to Nature, 'the poet is not a slave to Nature.’ This suggests the divine nature of
poetry as a God-like activity.
additionally, the function of poetry as imitation is the fourth argument. Sidney defines
poetry as “an art of imitation”, a “speaking picture.” Its end is to teach and delight, and the object
of both teaching and delighting is goodness. According to Sidney, there are three kinds of poetic
imitation: religious poetry that praises God, philosophical poetry which imparts knowledge of
philosophy, history, astronomy etc, and right or true kind of poetry which is the first and most
noble sort of poetry. In this kind, poets ‘most properly do imitate to teach and delight’. The poet
is free of dependence on nature: The poet is not restricted to any given subject matter, any given
sphere of nature.
Moreover, the status of poetry among the various disciplines of learning is the fifth
argument. He argued that poetry is superior to all other branches of learning. Also, the end of all
learning is virtuous action, and poetry best serves this end. In this respect poetry is superior, both
to history and philosophy. While philosophy presents merely abstract precepts, and history deals
with concrete facts or examples of virtue, poetry combines both these advantages.
Another argument is based on the status of poetry among the various disciplines
of learning.
 He demonstrates that peotry presents universal truths like philosophy, but it does
them through concrete examples, like History. It teaches virtue in a way intelligible even
to the ordinary men. It also moves us to virtuous action. This is so because its truths are
conveyed in a delighted manner; it allures men to virtue 
The last argument is about the relationship of poetry to truth and morality. Sidney
now addresses the specific charges brought against poetry by Stephen Gosson in The
School of Abuse. The charges include the claims that poetry is a waste of time, it is
mother of lies, and it is nurse of abuse. Also, Plato had rightly banished the poets from
his ideal world.
Sidney dismisses the first charge on the basis that there is no learning as good as
poetry in reaching and moving to virtue and no other learning discipline can both teach
and move so much as poetry. He rejects the second charge that poets are liars saying that
of all writers under the sun the poet is the least liar, the Astronomer, the Geometrician,
the historian, and others, all make false statements. The poet affirms nothing, and
therefore never tells lies. What the poet presents is not fact but fiction embodying truth
of an ideal. To the third charge, Sidney replies that poetry does not abuse man’s wit, it is
man’s wit that abuses poetry. The fault lies not with poetry, but with the contemporary
abuse of poetry. The abuse of poetry should not lead to a condemnation of poetry itself.
Poetry is a double-edged sword: It can be used badly or well, and it is unwise to abandon
any kind of knowledge altogether because of the possibility of the abuse of it. The most
serious charge that Sidney confronts is that Plato banished poets from his ideal republic.
For Sidney, Plato warned men not against poetry but against its abuse by his
contemporary poets who filled the world with wrong opinions about the Greek gods.
To sum up, I reviewed Sidney’s work An Apologie for Poetrie. His arguments in his
defense of poetry’s significance are discussed. Moreover, I discussed the charges that
accuse poetry by philosophers and his response to those charges.