Ancient and Modern writer 2 debate

Ancient and Modern

It is foolish idea to compare two distinct things and derive conclusion from them, that who is better. Comparison is okay but what is the need to prove one as superior and other inferior?

the same debate is also there in the Battle of the Books by Jonathan Swift, in which books discuss who is better Ancient or Modern?.

In that books Ancients are compared with Honeybees  and moderns are compared with Spiders. Ancients gathers so many material (honey) from here and there, and Moderns use them like Spiders. Eating the fruits of work done by Ancients without hard work. Moderns are lucky that they have raw material, model how to write. Ancients had done lot of works and moderns are just  copying or imitating them.

From Modern point of view , we can criticize Ancient that- As said by T.S.ELIOT in Tradition and Individual Talent, while discussing Historical sense-  that influence of past ruins the new talent. under the influence of great writer it  becomes difficult for Individual to write.

As well as we can defend modern that, they are not  copying Ancients but adding much more in that. New plot structures, experimentive narrative technique, Psychological portrayal of character, fusion of various arts into literature etc. are gift of Modern writers.

so to think of mutual existence of both is a better idea. it is our conditioning of mind since childhood to compare and contrast two things, whether possible or not.

Generalizing anything is major problem. there are plenty of Ancient writers. how can one say that they were good or bad- how can you generalize?? some of them may be artist with great literary abilities , some may not!!!!!! so judge individual by reading them, whether Ancient or Modern. similarly all Ancients are Great Classics and all Modern are rubbish, childish , it is not so.

so even John Dryden, in his essay Of Dramatic Poesy- through characters of Crites, Lesidius, Eugenius, Neander does not give any  conclusion, but gives voice to both.

both are interdependent, like two sides of a coin.

Discussion of Ancient and Modern should not be for who is better, it should be more filename tally about how "history" itself functioned and should be read, thus it should be about the relationship between past and present, humanity and nature, and human understanding and knowledge.↓↓

This is also fact that contemporary society fails to understand/ judge writers. they became great classic only after their death. for exampleThomas Hardy- his novels were banned when he was alive. priests have burn his book ( Tess of D'Urbervilles-a pure woman) and drank ashes in coffee. and now he is classic writer.

Even during Elizabethan era Shakespeare was also writing for masses. he was popular not classic. Ben Jonson was holding important place  at that time, writing for Queen. ( Royal family). but today Ben Jonson is almost lost. so time will judge artist. contemporary audience may be wrong.

Even Chetan Bhagat is popular modern writer. but being popular, best seller don’t make him good writer. upcoming time will judge him. Today's Modern are Ancients of tomorrow.

So we have to think about the mutual coexistence of both.