Rice University Parody and Its Implications in Sydney's Defense of Poesie Author(s): Arthur F. Kinney Source: Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, Vol. 12, No. 1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1972), pp. 1-19 Published by: Rice University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/449970 . Accessed: 22/12/2013 19:48 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected]. Rice University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 138.253.100.121 on Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:48:21 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Parodyand Its Implications inSydney's Defenseof Poesie A R TH UR F. KINNE Y Sir Philip Sidney's Defense of Poesie consciouslyparallels and bur- lesques Stephen Gosson's Schoole of Abuse (1579) in form (the classical oration), issues (listed in Sidney's reprehensio), authorities,and even illustrationsas well as in style, notably the use of euphuism.This was because Sidney recognized that-although he disagreed with Gosson's apparent position against all poetry and the simplicityand crudityof Gosson's work-his disagreementwith Gosson was not a substantial one; he resortedto parody to mask the similarityof his own argument in his "Defense." Since the comparison of texts demonstrateshow clearly this was the case, we must now redate the compositionand distributionof Sidney's treatise as late fall or early winter 1579/80.