A Student's Guide to Sir Philip Sidney's "An Apology for Poetry"
Introduction: Meeting England's First Great Critic
Sir Philip Sidney (1554–1586) stands as a towering figure of the Elizabethan age. A celebrated poet, respected courtier, dedicated scholar, and valiant soldier, his career epitomized the Renaissance ideal of the courtier-scholar, and his influence permeated the highest echelons of Elizabethan culture. Yet one of his most lasting contributions was not a sonnet or a military victory, but a powerful piece of prose.
Published posthumously in 1595, An Apology for Poetry (also known as A Defence of Poesy) is the first major work of literary criticism in the English language. At a time when the arts were under attack from various quarters, Sidney stepped forward to craft a brilliant and enduring argument for the value of literature. This guide will break down the essential arguments of his famous essay for students new to the world of literary theory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The Context: Why Did Poetry Need an "Apology"?
To understand Sidney's Apology, we must first appreciate the attacks that provoked it. His defense was not written in a vacuum; it was a direct response to both immediate and ancient criticisms leveled against the arts, which he felt compelled to answer.
1.1. The Immediate Provocation: Stephen Gosson's "School of Abuse"
The most direct trigger for Sidney's essay was a 1579 pamphlet by Stephen Gosson titled The School of Abuse. This work was a fierce "Puritan attack" that condemned the perceived immorality of English playhouses and poetry. In a move of supreme irony, Gosson dedicated his pamphlet to Sidney himself. This dedication seems to have irritated Sidney rather than flattered him, motivating him to pen a comprehensive and scholarly rebuttal.
1.2. The Ancient Grudge: Plato's Banishment of Poets
Beyond Gosson's contemporary complaints, Sidney was also responding to a much older and more profound philosophical challenge: Plato's argument for banishing poets from his ideal Republic. Plato's core objections were twofold: he argued that poets could lead "the Guardians and citizens to immorality" and that poetry, as an imitation of life, is twice removed from reality (the world of ideal forms) and is therefore filled with lies.
It is against this backdrop of charges, both ancient and contemporary, that Sidney constructs his defense, not by offering a simple apology, but by elevating poetry to a position of supremacy above all other disciplines.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Core Argument: The Poet as the True Monarch
Sidney's defense hinges on a bold central claim: that poetry is superior to other fields of learning, most notably history and philosophy, because it is uniquely capable of moving people toward virtue.
2.1. The Poet vs. The Historian
Sidney's most audacious move is to elevate the poet above the mere recorder of facts. He argues that the poet, "lifted up with the vigor of his own invention, doth grow in effect another nature." The poet does not simply describe the world as it is; he creates a second, better nature. As Sidney memorably puts it:
"Nature never set forth the earth in so rich tapestry as divers poets have done... Her world is brazen, the poets only deliver a golden."
This contrast between the poet's "golden" world and the historian's "brazen" one can be broken down as follows:
The Historian | The Poet |
Stuck in the "brazen" world of what actually happened. | Creates a "golden" world of what's possible and what ought to be. |
Tied to "the mere truth of happenstance." | Free to create new forms like heroes, demigods, and other ideal figures. |
Bound by the constraints of "what was." | "freely ranging only within the zodiac of his own wit." |
2.2. The Poet vs. The Philosopher
If the historian is limited by facts, the philosopher is limited by difficulty. Sidney contends that philosophy, while showing the path to virtue, presents it in a dense and difficult manner that requires "attentive studious painfulness" to comprehend, making it inaccessible to many.
The poet, however, does more than just show the way; he "giveth so sweet a prospect to the way, as will entice any man to enter into it." This concept is best understood through the analogy of a sugar-coated pill. Here, the philosophical lesson on virtue is the bitter medicine, while the poet’s compelling story, vivid characters, and beautiful language are the sugar that makes the lesson irresistible.
Having established the poet's sovereignty over the historian and philosopher, Sidney proceeds to define the very nature and function of the art form he champions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The Purpose of Poetry: To Teach and to Delight
At the heart of Sidney's defense is his definition of what poetry is and what it does. He synthesizes classical ideas to present a clear and noble function for the art form.
3.1. What is Poetry? A "Speaking Picture"
Borrowing from Aristotle's concept of mimesis (imitation), Sidney offers a comprehensive definition of poetry:
"Poetry is an art of imitation, for so Aristotle termeth it in the word mimesis--that is to say, a representing, counterfeiting, or figuring forth--to speak metaphorically, a speaking picture--with this end, to teach and delight."
In essence, poetry imitates life not as a mere copy, but as a vivid and communicative "speaking picture" designed to engage the audience's mind and emotions.
3.2. The Dual Mission: Teaching Virtue, Providing Delight
This "speaking picture" has two interconnected goals:
- To Teach: For Sidney, the ultimate goal of teaching is not simply imparting knowledge (gnosis), but inspiring action (praxis). The poet's true aim is to move readers to "virtuous action."
- To Delight: This is not about simple amusement or laughter, which Sidney dismisses as a "scornful tickling." Rather, it is a profound "aesthetic delight" that engages the soul. Following an Aristotelian tradition, Sidney suggests this deeper delight can even be found in the sorrow of a tragedy, which moves us more profoundly than the fleeting laughter of some comedies. The "sorrowful Delight" of tragedy offers a more poignant and meaningful experience.
Armed with this definition of poetry's noble purpose, Sidney turns to systematically dismantle the specific charges leveled against it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Sidney's Rebuttals: Answering the Charges Against Poetry
Sidney cleverly dismantles the main arguments against poetry, often turning his opponents' logic against them with remarkable rhetorical skill.
4.1. The Charge: Poets are Liars
The most persistent charge, inherited from Plato, is that poets are liars because they create fiction. Sidney's defense is a masterclass in logic:
- Poets Never Affirm: Sidney argues that to lie is to claim something false is actually true. However, poets never present their fictional worlds as literal fact. As he states, "The poet, he nothing affirms, and therefore never lieth."
- The Real Liars: According to Sidney, other professions are far more likely to lie. The historian, for example, does affirm things as fact and, operating within the "cloudy knowledge of mankind," can "hardly escape from many lies."
- Figurative Truth: A wise reader understands that poets speak "allegorically and figuratively." They convey deeper truths through fiction, and it is the reader's job to interpret them, not to mistake them for literal statements.
Herein lies the brilliance of Sidney's argument. He masterfully turns Plato's central accusation—that poetry is a fiction twice removed from reality—into its greatest defense. By stating that the poet "nothing affirms," Sidney weaponizes the very "fictionality" of poetry to grant it a unique immunity from the charge of lying.
4.2. The Misconception: Poetry is Just Rhyme and Verse
Sidney also addresses the simplistic view that poetry is merely a technical exercise in meter and rhyme. He argues that the true essence of a poet lies much deeper.
"[I]t is not rhyming and versing that maketh a poet [...] But it is that feigning of notable images of virtues, vices, or what else, with that delightful teaching, which must be the right describing note to know a poet by."
A true poet is defined not by technical skill alone, but by a powerful imagination and a profound moral purpose. This forward-thinking argument—that poetic essence lies in imagination and vision, not just form—anticipates the core tenets of the Romantic movement centuries later.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Conclusion: The Enduring Defense
In An Apology for Poetry, Sir Philip Sidney's primary achievement was to establish the nobility of poetry. He argued that it is not a trivial diversion but a powerful force with the unique ability to move humanity toward virtue more effectively than any other discipline.
His most important contributions can be summarized as follows:
- Elevating the Poet: He redefined the poet not as a mere imitator, but as a creator of "golden" worlds who is superior to the fact-bound historian and more persuasive than the abstract philosopher.
- Defining the Purpose: He articulated poetry's powerful dual mission: to teach and to delight, with the ultimate aim of inspiring virtuous action (praxis).
- Creating a Timeless Defense: He crafted brilliant arguments against censorship and the dismissal of art that remain startlingly relevant.
Sidney's essay is far more than a historical artifact; it is a living blueprint for defending the humanities against charges of frivolity, immorality, or falsehood—charges that reappear in different forms in every era, including our own age of "cancel culture." Centuries later, his clear-eyed and passionate arguments continue to resonate, reminding us why the voice of a "defender of literature" is, and always will be, essential.
