I think in this case, Pope's style was exemplary of the state of English-language poetry. He excelled in the form rather than challenging it. (I love his translation but it's certainly far from "accurate." A "re-performance" is a great way of putting it.)

An example of the opposite, as hackneyed as it is appropriate, is Moby Dick. Melville was a popular author who created something that was very out of sync with the era (to which previously he had suited his style) and as it turns out very interesting - but only once the zeitgeist had advanced.

Shakespeare is certainly also product of his time. What is meant is probably "dated" or "did not age gracefully" which is not exactly the same.

Today translators are expected to be reasonable faithful to the source material. Adding rhymes to verses which is not originally rhymed, like Pope does, represent an older tradition where the translator had more free reign. Modern readers would probably expect a more faithful translation.

Good question :).

Yeah Shakespeare is a great example.

The King James Bible might be the ur-example, as I’ve heard it said that it’s so influential it basically shaped the English language.

As another poster said, the phrase “product of its time” in this case is talking about if the language holds up over time or ends up sounding dated and thus loses its luster.