INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 06 (2025)
678
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF “POETIC ART” BY NICOLAS BOILEAU AND
“RULES OF LITERATURE” BY ABDURAUF FITRAT
Sarvinoz Baratova Sherbekovna
Alisher Navoiy Tashkent State University of Uzbek Language
and Literature Tashkent, Uzbekistan
E-mail:
Abstract:
This article provides a comparative-analytical study of two influential works in
literary theory: Poetic Art by the French classicist Nicolas Boileau and Rules of Literature by
the Uzbek intellectual Abdurauf Fitrat. Despite being produced in different cultural and
historical contexts, these works reveal significant typological similarities. Both texts address
fundamental literary issues such as the relationship between form and content in poetry, the
theoretical basis of dramaturgy, and the role of the poet. Through detailed textual analysis, this
paper identifies shared aesthetic principles and differences in approach, contributing to broader
discussions on comparative poetics and universal trends in literary development.
Keywords:
Poetic Art, Rules of Literature, typological similarity, tragedy, literary theory,
comparative poetics
Introduction
In the modern era of comparative literature studies, identifying typological similarities among
different literary traditions has gained increasing significance. Such parallels often arise not
from direct influence or borrowing, but from the emergence of similar literary phenomena
shaped by comparable socio-historical, cultural, and philosophical contexts. These typological
similarities reflect universal patterns of human thought and creativity across national literatures.
This article examines the comparative and analytical dimensions of two significant literary
treatises: “Poetic Art” by French classicist Nicolas Boileau and “Rules of Literature” by Uzbek
enlightener Abdurauf Fitrat. Despite their distinct cultural and temporal contexts—17th-century
French Classicism and early 20th-century Uzbek enlightenment—their theoretical reflections
on poetry, form and content, drama, and the nature of tragedy reveal striking commonalities.
The study aims to explore these shared principles and divergences through a typological lens,
contributing to a broader understanding of how literary theory evolves within varying
civilizational paradigms. Despite being separated by time, geography, and language, both
authors articulate fundamental principles about poetry, aesthetics, and dramatic form. For
example:
1. On Form and Content in Poetry
Boileau, writing within the framework of French Classicism, emphasizes that meaning must
take precedence over form. He asserts:
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 06 (2025)
679
Above all, let sense and meaning guide the pen.
(Kamol J., 2019)
Fitrat similarly underscores the primacy of meaning over formal features such as meter and
rhyme. He contrasts Cho‘lpon’s free-verse poem Kleopatra with traditional rhymed verses from
Sufi Olloyor’s Sabot ul-ojizin, concluding that true poetry derives its power from emotional and
intellectual depth, not merely structural regularity:
“Cho‘lpon’s Kleopatra lacks rhyme and meter, yet it is a poem. Sufi Olloyor’s rhymed, metered
lines may not qualify as poetry at all.”
(Fitrat, 2009)
2. On Brevity and Expressiveness
Both authors value concise and meaningful expression. Boileau advises:
“Be brief, clear, and vivid in narration.
Prolonged stories breed boredom.”
(Kamol J., 2019)
Fitrat echoes this, warning against excessive ornamentation that dilutes the essence of thought.
He promotes clarity and cohesion, suggesting that description must not overshadow the
intended message.
3. On the Nature and Role of the Poet
Boileau stresses that mediocrity in poetry is unacceptable. He asserts:
“In other professions, one may achieve fame despite mediocrity, but in poetry, such mediocrity
is a form of incompetence.”
(Kamol J., 2019)
Fitrat, too, elevates the emotional and spiritual sensitivity of the poet, stating:
“True poetry contains a spiritual power that stirs the blood, plays the nerves, shakes the mind,
and arouses the senses.”
(Fitrat, 2009)
According to Fitrat, poetic ability is closely tied to the emotional perceptiveness of the writer.
4. On Drama and Tragedy
Both authors also explore dramatic genres. Boileau narrates how tragedy, once considered
vulgar, evolved into an esteemed form in French literature:
“A hundred hearings are not worth one scene viewed;
Tragedy once crude, now commands praise.”
(Kamol J., 2019)
Fitrat classifies literature into three main genres: lyric, epic, and dramatic (“Tomosha”). He
elaborates on the performative and collective aspects of drama, noting:
“Dramatic success depends not only on the writer’s talent but also on the performers’ skills.
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 06 (2025)
680
Only through synergy can a dramatic work achieve greatness.”
(Fitrat, 2009)
He further contends that tragedy must be emotionally complex and evoke fear and awe.
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of Boileau’s “Poetic Art” and Fitrat’s “Rules of Literature” highlights
the convergence of literary thought despite vast geographical and historical distances. Both
scholars emphasize the primacy of meaning over form, the emotional and intellectual power of
poetry, and the significance of structure and depth in dramatic works—especially tragedy. Their
ideas underscore the necessity for harmony between content and artistic expression, and the role
of the poet or playwright as a mediator of deep human experience.
Moreover, both Boileau and Fitrat offer insightful critiques of mediocrity in literary creation,
advocating for artistic excellence rooted in emotional authenticity and technical mastery. Their
shared views on poetic sincerity, dramatic construction, and audience engagement reaffirm the
idea that certain aesthetic values transcend cultural boundaries.
Ultimately, this typological comparison not only enhances our appreciation of two great literary
theorists, but also reinforces the universal foundations upon which literary art is constructed. It
encourages further cross-cultural literary dialogue and comparative scholarship, opening new
avenues for understanding global literary heritage.
References :
Boboyev, T. (2002). Fundamentals of Literary Studies. Tashkent: Uzbekistan Publishing House.
Kuronov, D. (2020). Fundamentals of Literary Theory. Tashkent: Innovation-Ziya.
Qosimov, A., Hamroqulov, A., & Xo‘jayev, S. (2019). Comparative Literary Studies. Tashkent:
Akademnashr.
Fitrat, A. (2009). Selected Works. Tashkent: Ma’naviyat.
Kamol, J. (Ed.). (2019). The Art of Poetry: An Anthology. Yangi Asr Avlodi.
