Write a note on the criticism of Chaucer made by (a) Dryden and (b) Matthew Arnold. (MEG 101 CHAUCER)

John Dryden and Matthew Arnold, two prominent critics from different eras, have expressed their opinions on Chaucer's works.

John Dryden, in his Preface to the Fables (1700), considered Chaucer to be the "father of English poetry," an artist who made a significant contribution to the development of the language. He praised Chaucer's ability to capture the essence of his characters through their language and actions, describing him as a "judicious translator" who had the "talent of softening and refining" his material. However, Dryden also criticized Chaucer's "coarseness" and "obscenity," particularly in The Miller's Tale and The Reeve's Tale.

Matthew Arnold, in his essay "Chaucer" (1875), criticized Chaucer's language, calling it "corrupt and barbarous." Arnold claimed that Chaucer's style was too unrefined to be considered "high art," and that he lacked the "true poetic quality" that elevated other writers to greatness. Arnold also criticized Chaucer's subject matter, particularly in The Canterbury Tales, which he deemed as lacking in moral and spiritual depth.

Despite their different views, both Dryden and Arnold acknowledged Chaucer's importance as a literary figure. Dryden praised Chaucer's influence on the development of the English language and his ability to create vivid and realistic characters, while Arnold recognized his historical significance as a representative of a specific period in English literary history.