Thinking Activity on "Waiting For Godot" by Samuel Beckett

This blog is part of my academic activity. To see the task and more information click here.

What connection do you see in the setting (“A country road. A tree.Evening.”) of the play and these paintings?

“Longing” is painting by Caspar David Fredrich. He has drawn two paintings and both painting have same background of nature. From these paintings samuel Beckett has got inspiration for his setting of the play “Waiting For Godot”. Other than this there is no more connection between these image and setting of the play because Fredrich belongs to romanticism, his depiction of nature has different meaning, and Beckett’s depiction of nature has different meaning. Fredrich wants to show nature as healer and soothing to humans, while in Beckett’s play nature don’t has anything to do with characters. So, these paintings are inspiration for setting of the play and I don’t find any more connection.

The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of tree in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves - ?

The tree in the play is reflecting nature. Mostly people take nature as something which coordinate with human. Romanticism also sing a song of nature as supporter in every ups and downs in human life. But in this modern play Beckett shows nature as totally indifferent from human life. Here tree stands for it self and not representing any character from play. It don’t has anything to do with the quest and misery of any human’s  life. In second act there are leaves on tree which shows it does not wait with Vladimir and Estragon for Godot. Nature don’t need any Godot and it also don’t sympathies with human beings. It doesn’t have rationality but human always try to give rational meanings to it. It works on its own way and it has its own world.

In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot?

In both acts coming of night and moon, we can interpret it as that both Vladimir and Estragon has killed the time successfully. They have killed one day of their life. In other way we can interpret it as temporary end of their waiting for Godot. As when night comes they come to know that now Godot will not come. We can also interpret it as the hope of rise of next day and coming of Godot. We may can say that their Godot is night, because when moon rises and night comes they both says “let’s go”. Though they don’t move but they stop saying that they are waiting for Godot.

The director fills the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?

Director fills setting with debris which shows that how freckle the materializing world is. It brakes down and don’t has capacity to stand again while on the other hand there is barren tree which in next act has some leaves. Nature or we can say reality can stand and sustain on its own, while cultural or fake things can be brake down in to the pieces. To show this shattered nature of world may be director has fills the setting with debris.

The play begins with the dialogue  “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?

The beginning of the play it self suggest the meaninglessness of life. “Nothing to be done”. There is nothing in life to do. Though human beings always try to find some meaning in life same as Vladimir and Estragon tries to find meaning in waiting and also while killing the time. Doing nothing is also doing something. It don’t has any meaning but we always try to rationalize it. But at the end of the day every thing is meaningless.

Do you agree: “The play (Waiting for Godot), we agreed, was a positive play, not negative, not pessimistic. As I saw it, with my blood and skin and eyes, the philosophy is: 'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." (E.G. Marshal who played Vladimir in original Broadway production 1950s)?

Yes, I am agree that this play is not pessimistic. Because the central theme of the play is waiting, which means hope, hope of something to be done or get or come. The whole life of human is passed with this waiting. It is true that no matter what happens but life goes on. It does not wait and stop for anything or any one it just go with flow. No matter Godot come or not the life of every one and everything goes on. One can commit suicide but other lives are still living and will keep on living. So this play is not pessimistic play, it is positive play.

How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolical significance of these props?

The props like hat and boots are representing human’s attraction towards mind or body. Hat symbolically represents the mind as Vladimir is with hat and he keep on thinking, same with lucky, when he starts thinking then to stop him one has to remove his hat. While Estragon has hat but he don’t use it he is more concentrate on his boots which are not comforting to him. In second act when he finds fit to him he is satisfy with it. It shows that how some people are constantly thinking and how some are constantly comforting their bodily needs. With this vast difference also both are at same place.

Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity of slavishness is unbelievable?

Yes, the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. Because he has started loving his slavishness, his chains and because of that he don’t even feel like slave and even when his master is blind he don’t think of free him self. We also have these kind of slaves in our society who has loving masters and they don’t feel that their master is using them as slave. Such chains should be broken but slave them selves don’t want freedom.

Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or  . . .

According to me Godot is an object of never ending desires. One after another we keep on changing our object of waiting. Ultimately our destination is death but while waiting for death we keep dangling carrot front of our eyes to not see directly in the eyes of death. So some times our Godot arrives and we create new Godot and some times Godot doesn’t arrive and we keep on waiting. When our final Godot arrives our wait ends. Our death is our final Godot.

“The subject of the play is not Godot but ‘Waiting’” (Esslin, A Search for the Self). Do you agree? How can you justify your answer?

I do agree with Martin Esslin. Because if Godot was subject of the play at the end we might have some clarity that who is Godot and may be he will come also at the end. But the subject of the play is waiting. It is so because Beckett wants to make us feel the flow of time during waiting, and how our whole life is only waiting for death. So we can say that the subject of play is waiting and not Godot.

Do you think that plays like this can better be ‘read’ than ‘viewed’ as it requires a lot of thinking on the part of readers, while viewing, the torrent of dialogues does not give ample time and space to ‘think’? Or is it that the audio-visuals help in better understanding of the play?

I think that this type of play should be viewed and read both. First one should have background knowledge of the play, otherwise they will not get any thing. After background reading this play should first watch, this is not advisable for all literature but plays like this one should be watch first. Because the visual and audio will help to get the sense of the play and after this the play should be read for deeper understanding. While watching the torrent of language will not allow to think deeply so after getting the texture of the play if one will read it will help in better understanding.

Which of the following sequence you liked the most:
Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting
Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts
Conversation of Vladimir with the boy

I like the conversation of Vladimir and the boy because it is so relatable. Many time it happens in our life that we are eagerly waiting for something and at the end we didn’t get it and the irritation we feel same we can feel in conversation of Vladimir and boy. So I like this conversation most.

  Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?

Yes I do feel existential crisis during screening of the movie. It is felt when Vladimir and Estragon both are trying to kill time by asking questions and meditation and all that things. At that time I feel that how we are also doing the same, these all things does not make any sense in larger structure of life but we are keep on doing such things just to kill time hor we are waiting for our death.

Vladimir and Estragon talks about ‘hanging’ themselves and commit suicide, but they do not do so. How do you read this idea of suicide in Existentialism?

In our innumerable list of desire, one is death also. Vladimir and Estragon also have that desire. We can say that they are fed up with waiting daily and trying to kill them selves, but because it is not easy they don’t do so. According to Existentialism suicide is not the solution. Existentialism says that even if there is no meaning in life but it doesn’t mean that one should end their life. That is why Vladimir and Estragon thinks to do so but they don’t.

Can we do any political reading of the play if we see European nations represented by the 'names' of the characters (Vladimir - Russia; Estragon - France; Pozzo - Italy and Lucky - England)? What interpretation can be inferred from the play written just after World War II? Which country stands for 'Godot'? So far as Pozzo and Lucky [master and slave] are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland." (Bert Lahr who played Estragon in Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?

This play is written after world war II. So effect of world war was reflected in play. If we go by the names than Vladimir stands for Russia, Estragon for France, Pozzo for Italy and Lucky for England than Godot will stand for Germany. Hitler is the one who is waited by every one. When he came he came he destroyed every thing. If we want to see Pozzo and Lucky, master and slave, Pozzo stands for England and Lucky for Ireland. Though Pozzo becomes blind Lucky don’t free himself. Same because Ireland is small country and for its own goods it sticks with England.

The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have no change in Act I and Act II of the play. Even the conversation between Vladimir and the Boy sounds almost similar. But there is one major change. In Act I, in reply to Boy;s question, Vladimir says: 

"BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?

How does this conversation go in Act II? Is there any change in seeming similar situation and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify?

Majorly both the acts are similar but in act 2 the conversation of Vladimir and Boy has some changes. It goes like…

“BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw me and that . . . (he hesitates) . . . that you saw me. (Pause. Vladimir advances, the Boy recoils. Vladimir halts, the Boy halts. With sudden violence.) You're sure you saw me, you won't come and tell me tomorrow that you never saw me!”

In first act he mentions both of them but in second act he only talk about himself. Here Vladimir has become selfish. We can connect the story of two thieves which was told earlier that one was saved and one was damned. Here he also want to be the one who was saved. He emphasize on remembering only him.

Thank you.

Interpretation Challenge - "Breath" by Samuel Beckett

This blog is part of my academic activity. To see the task please Click here...

“Breath” by Samuel Beckett

CURTAIN up
1. Faint light on stage littered with miscellaneous rubbish. Hold about five seconds.
2. Faint brief cry and immediately inspiration and slow increase of light together reaching maximum - together in about ten seconds. Silence and hold for about five seconds.
 3. Expiration and slow decrease of light together reaching minimum together (light as in 1) in about ten seconds and immediately cry as before. Silence and hold about five seconds. 

CURTAIN Down

Yes. Don’t be surprise this is whole play of 32 seconds. Yes only 32 seconds. When I first watched it I was like, that’s it? Play over? It is funny but I was thinking that what it feels like when you buy a ticket for watching a play and to relax your self for 2 to 3 hours and play ends in just half minute. Jaws down and may be anger also that what is this? Let it be very clear, some artist create their art for art sake and some create it for life sake. Some work of art are meant to be understood and not to just entertain. This play is for understanding by taking help of existentialism and absurd.

“Breath” is a play by Samuel Beckett. This play was first performed in 1969. There are many versions available for this play and all have something to do different than others. The play is highly absurd. There is no human and nothing happens, no dialogues, we only hear cry, sound of breath and only see garbage on the floor. Absurd play mainly have existentialism as a theme, which this play also has. What is existentialism? It has it's own definition but I want to say that existentialism is an idea which makes you realize that life doesn’t have any meanings but then even to keep living life happily and with freedom of choice. It simply suggest to enjoy the meaninglessness. Through this perspective I am here trying to interpret the play.

Starting and ending is typical with curtain up and down and we can take it as symbol of birth and death of every human which is similar to all. Then there is a miscellaneous rubbish all on the floor. This we may can interpret as our life, that same as this rubbish our life also don’t as any meaning. Or we can interpret it as that by our choices we make our life like garbage, meaningless and purposeless. Increase and decrease of light we may can interpret as ups and downs, which we feel during our life span or we also can interpret it as hope. The cycle of finding and loosing hope. The hold we can interpret as wait, which Samuel Beckett’s another absurd play “Waiting For Godot” also represents. Every time wait for something and at end wait for the death. Breath, we may can take as our existence and holding it in-between we may can take it as a thought or trying of committing suicide and when again exhaling of breath may can take as failed suicide attempt and still living.

Further more in the rubbish on the floor we can find the hospital garbage. Hospital in which we take birth and may be our death might can come in hospital, we can interpret it as that the first and the last moment of life is also lying with garbage. We can find computer also in garbage, again our technology, on which we are very proud is same as garbage. We can find Swastika also in rubbish, which indicates that with technology and rationality our spirituality is also in lying in garbage. In a way by all these things we can come to know that every thing which we think as something great in our life doesn’t has any meaning. Every thing in life is absurd.

There is modern interpretation of this play in which many things are changed. It is longer than the script and also includes the things which are not in the script like humans, nature and song. In original play nothing moves just a voice of breathing but in this modern play the picture is moving. One thing is remain same the voice of breath. In this modern play also whole life of person is shown from childhood to the adulthood or may be death. Where everything is on the floor like garbage. No meaning pf anything whatever has done through out the life. Every thing is meaningless. There is one song also included the name of the song is “Koyaanisqatsi”. The song is by Philip Glass, it is from movie with the same name as song which is directed by Godfrey Reggio. This word “Koyaanisqatsi” in Hopi language it means unbalanced life. Which we can interpret as the uncertainty of life. By all these changes also the essence remain as it is, existentialism.

Thank you.

Existentialism

This blog is part of my academic activity. To see the task click the link given below.

 http://dilipbarad.blogspot.com/2016/09/existentialism-video-resources.html?m=1

What is Existentialism?

“A philosophical theory or approach which emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of will.” Soren Kirkegaard, Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Simone de Beauvoir, these are the names of existentialists philosophers. Here I am sharing some of the thoughts which I like the most in given videos on existentialism.

1) The though of making triangle of individuality, freedom and passion rather than center and periphery. These are the three sides of existentialism. And the second one is idea of philosophical suicide. People do physical suicide but some, who encountered with existentialism and can not accept it as it is, those people commit philosophical suicide. They kill their thoughts or grab any other source for stand, they are committing philosophical suicide.

2) People think that life is absurd and that’s why one should die. Is it dying a real solution? No it is not. Life is absurd and meaningless but life is for living. There is also one idea of every human’s fascination of death. It is shown in video that human wants divorce from life and wants to make death a mistress. (Patriarchy… ha ha) But I like the idea that how every one wants death and how every one also fears death.

3) Everybody is singing song of absurdity of life, but here it is said that there is human and there is world, both will collide and then absurdity will take place. Imagine if there is no human being in the world, no question of life will come and no question of absurdity will come. So absurdity is the ultimate truth of life accept it.

4) We all are followers and that’s why our life has no meanings. Why? Because we are following values which are created by others. We don’t have our own values. By following the values given by others, they are same like us, human beings, those who also don’t has meaning of life. By following them we are removing our individual space and started becoming part of herd.

5) If one truly wants to give meaning to it’s own life one has to create it’s own values. After creating one needs to judge and has to make choice. After taking final decision, one has to take the responsibility of own choice and by taking responsibility one will have it’s own path to walk and own rules to follows Some says that being individual means being narcissist, but it is not like that. An individual is just making it’s own path which is according to individual is best for it self. So being different than others doesn’t means narcissist.

6) Now one may say that, what is the problem in following divinity. The answer is that by following divinity what you will get as meaning of life will be divine perspective and not human perspective. The problem with divine perspective is that it is not human perspective and it also ignore the most important thing of human, which is mortality. So we can not find our meaning of life which has immortal perspective. Our existence on world is temporary, so we should participate in life, and should live it as our own wish. We are not here to be just spectator.


7) Friedrich Nietzsche, who gave idea of “Ubermensche”. It is the philosophy for freedom. Freedom of doing whatever human wants. As it says that no universal morality can make us individual or give us the meaning to life. So what “Ubermensche” do is make it’s own morality.

8) Existentialism is very broad idea. It does not appeal only to the mind but heart also. It is called existential sensibility. Which means that if mind wants to know the meaning of life our heart also wants to feel life deeply. So existentialism applies at both level. By creating own meaning of life one also enjoy the life at fullest.  Between all these things one has to suffer a lot. Mostly people find suffering as curse to life, but here it is said that suffering is not our enemy, it is our great friend, through which we learn the difficult and thought transforming lessons, which may be no one else will able to teach us.


9) It is mostly believed that everyone has essence of their existence, and it is sure that one take birth for doing that particular thing only, say for example, the fan, the essence of fan is decided before making of fan. Same people believe about human beings also. But Sartre came and he gave his own thinking which says that in case of human beings it is the “existence precedes essence”. This phrase needs attention and pondering, because we are not animals or trees or electronics. We are human and human first take birth and then they decide their own essence by their own choices. Every human being is born to do something but what?, that will decided by it own self after having existence. The meaning which your life has should be given by you only. It is upon an individual to make their own path or follow others path. If an individual creates its own path and give their own meaning to the life then the life which is lived by an individual is called authentic life.

Which Video I Like the Most and Why?

I like the last video most, because it talks about living life authentically. To create our own path, our own essence and our individual identity, different than other human beings. Because of this idea I like this video most.

My Understanding of Existentialism

As per my thinking, existentialism is knowing one’s own self and then creating one’s own self, on their own choices. It says that whatever we do in our life is ultimately has no meanings but by creating our own path we are creating meaning of our own life. This is what existentialism is about. Being individual is existentialism. We can take example from movie “Jab We Met”, in this movie the character of Geet is individual or existentialist. In movie she says that she wants to enjoy her life on her own conditions and that is why she does whatever she like because at the end of the day she don’t want to blame others that because of you my life is like this, she says she will know that whatever is happening to her is because of her choice and she will accept it and will be happy. So this is what existentialism means, make your own choices by your self take responsibility of your choices and live life at its fullest.

Thank you.

"The Kite Runner" - Book Review

“For you, a thousand times over.” – Hassan

How ridiculous it feels to tell someone and prove it, and how hurting it is to someone that by doing all good thing what you get is hate, or hate is big word though, we can call it abhorrence. We believe that by doing bad things you will get bad results, but what about those who does good through out their life and then even got bad fruits. This means god is unjust. The story is upon growing life of two children Amir and Hassan. On the tree it is written that, “Amir and Hassan, Sultans of Kabul.” I don’t believe this sentence.

“The Kite Runner”, first novel by an Afghan born American novelist Khaled Hosseini, which was published in 2003. The setting of the novel is mostly in Afghanistan and in America. Reading this novel is like roller – coaster ride, though at some point events are predictable. It also includes the Soviet and Taliban attack on Afghanistan and also an attack on twin towers. All characters are developed very strongly. The book gives some shocks also, it doesn’t go as we expect but that is what the real story is, which don’t go as you want.

Friendship, the bond without  shackles. A relationship which has been created without any force and by our own choice. But here the friendship is also same as love, one sided. Amir never thought Hassan as his friend and on the other hand for Hassan no one is as important as Amir. There is pain from both the side but of different kind. Weather to call it jealousy or pain but Amir has done something which changed the life of everyone.

There is struggle, struggle between master and servant, loyalty and necessity, legitimate and illegitimate, privileged and unprivileged, humanity and religion, fear and truth, Pashtuns and Hazaras, coward and brave, pure and impure, and struggle between life and death. With these struggles of human there is something else which also is suffering, the whole Afghanistan. The fundamentalists has make the country lifeless. Every where people living there don't know when and how they are going to die. Living with constant fear is like the candle which is burning from both the side. Then even they are living in hope of getting freedom and life again. The situation of country can not be worst than this that professor has become beggar. In short some snake has made whole Afghanistan poisonous that taking breath is also dangerous.

With these all turmoil life of Afghanistan, Amir and Sohrab is going on. With these ups and downs they are there to see their life. I am not going to tell you that who is Sohrab may be it will lead you to read the book.

There is one line in novel, "There is a way to be good again." Yes there is a way to stop regretting and start taking actions, there is a way to have good life again, there is a way to be just human and nothing else. There is always a way, there always will be. The only need is to just find out that way and walk towards it with guts in heart and one day you will get results.

Thank you.

"Mourning Becomes Electra" Movie Review

Love, the base on which most relations are standing. How pure and important we found this feeling of love, but the question is, is it true that love is pure? Does with feeling of love can’t we find mixture of other feelings? We all know the answer, love is not pure it has many other feelings like jealousy, possession, insecurity, hatred and revenge, does not matter in which relation. Because every love relation has these kind of feelings. Can anyone imagine these feelings in one family? Yes consciously or unconsciously we have these feelings in family but most of the time these feelings are under control. What happens if we have over acuteness of feelings, answer is simple, same what happens with “Mannon” family.

“Mourning Becomes Electra” is a play by Eugene O’Neill. Which is originally published and performed in 1931. There is one black and white film also, which is adaptation from the play. That is the American film by Dudley Nichols, which is released in 1947. The film has some minor changes but by and large remain faithful to the original play. It also has divided in three parts like “The Home coming”, “The Hunted” and “The Haunted”.

There is mainly four members in Mannon family. They all love each other and also hate each other but differently. That love and hate leads family to collapse. Play and movie both shows Oedipus and Electra complex very effectively. Lavinia Mannon, daughter of Christine and Ezra Mannon. She loves her father and hates her mother. When her father spend time with her mother she can’t bear that and tries to keep her father away. Christine, mother of Lavinia and Orin also loves her son Orin. She also want him for herself. Christine loves Adam Brant also, because he is also a part of Mannon family and he resembles the Mannons in looks. This love is not same which anyone normally in family has but this love is of body also. Lavinia also once says that, “I want to be wife of my father.” And because of that she also denies Peter’s marriage proposal. From this way we can say there is element of Electra complex.

Same way we can see Oedipus complex also. Orin loves his mother Christine and he want to live with her alone. He told his mother that they both will go to island after Marring Lavinia with Peter. He also don’t like his father and he kills Adam Brant when he comes to know about his mother’s affair with him. He promise his mother that he will make her happy. After the death of Christine, Orin turns towards Lavinia because now Lavinia looks same as her mother and Orin as his father.

With love we can see the motives of revenge in this movie. Adam Brant behaves like he loves Christine because he wants to take revenge of his mother. Christine kills Ezra because she wants her freedom. She hates Ezra from very first day of marriage that’s why she plans to kill Ezra. Lavinia conspires against her mother with the help of Orin and kills Adam Brant after that Christine also commit suicide, at that time Lavinia says that it is justice. So, she take revenge of her father’s death. Orin also commit suicide because he thinks his mother wants revenge of Adam. This is how revenge leads whole Mannon family to the end.

Mannon family has very fishy past and that past has never leaved Mannons, take it physically or mentally. The past of Adam with Mannons, past of Christine with Ezra, past of Lavinia with Adam and also her conspiracies, past of Christine’s death till the end stays with Orin and at the end also Orin writes the manuscript of past of Mannons. At the end Lavinia also locks herself in Mannon house with past of Mannons. These all are mental past but after death of Christine and Ezra, their looks comes to Orin and Lavinia. They both started resembling their parents. This is how past never left Mannons.

At the end of the movie Lavinia decides to lock her self in room and punish her self because Orin has written in his history that Lavinia is criminal and now she don’t want mannons in world she wants to end her family as she is last mannon. We feel at the end that Lavinia is coward. She accepts to torture herself till death in that house but like all her family members she don’t has that courage to commit suicide.

At the end we can understand that every feeling in human being is important but when feelings becomes more stronger more you hurt other people.

Thank you.

Journey with Dr. Jay Mehta Sir

"ज़िन्दगी क्या है जानने के लिए

जिंदा रहना बहुत ज़रूरी है

आज तक कोई भी रहा तो नहीं"

- “Triveni” by Gulzar.

I want to start this blog by any poetic lines because on whom I am going to write he his die – heart fan of poems. He also uses poetry in his teaching. The big thing is he taught us Poe’s horror story with poetic lines. Yes I am talking about Dr. Jay Mehta, who has this ability to teach anything with poems. Our sir and head of the Department of English, Dr. Dilip Barad, MKBU, has invited Dr. Jay Mehta, who is working at Ahmedabad, to talk on the short stories of Edgar Allan Poe. He has talked about short stories like…

1) The Tell Tale Heart
2) The Black Cat
3) The Fall of the House of Usher
4) The Cask of Amontillado
5) The Purloined Letter
6) The Gold Bug
7) Session on Poems (Creative Writing)

When he first came in our class, he said that I make you assure that I never let you feel boar in my class, and he proves this words, because of his teaching style we have not get bored in his class. His teaching style is very unique. When he was teaching us, he often gives example from movies and also recite the appropriate lines of poems, when he read the stories we can actually feel the emotions which those words conveys and he also make us understand by doing some of acting. With all these things he take us to the flight of Poe’s world of horror, fear, intrigue, unusualness, death, terror, mystery, puzzle, detective and most importantly the animal like face of human.

First Jay sir has started teaching us horror stories of Poe. Very first thing he says that,  “Poe has believed that not a single word should be wasted.” Sir has made us realize by reading original stories that every word has some thing to convey and every word is connected. In horror stories of Poe, he shows us the human beings who has over acuteness of senses, who are cold blooded murderers. They don’t have guilt on their acts. They called their act of murder a task, an assignment, a project, which are used in positive sense but they are using it differently or they are trying to make us think positively on their act. Most of stories have first person narrator but some also have third person narrator.

Jay sir has told us that all science of mind disease are developed after the time of Poe and without knowing anything about this Poe has successes fully leads us to the dirty roads of human mind and because of this Poe’s story has universality. With the use of psychology and Freud, sir make it easy to understand. “The Tell Tale Heart”, “The Black Cat”, “The Fall of the House of Usher”, and “The Cask of Amontillado” these are the horror story and “The Purloined Letter” and “The Gold Bug” are detective and treasure hunt stories. In his detective and treasure hunt stories also he don’t write things which are unnecessary.

On the last day we have session on poems, where sir has told us to bring our creative writing if we are writing and then he will give us some guidance. So first sir start with his one of poem, as he is also writing poems and then some of the students from which I was also one who choose to read their own creation. Sir has liked every poem and then he suggest us some of structure of poems to follow and gave us some big names of poets. He also told us to watch the video of poet reciting their poems because it is very necessary to learn, the audience don’t have anything and by words only we have to convey our feelings so the art of reciting is very important. Jay sir has that art of recitation. He also has read some of his poems from which one has phrase like, “હુ જાતે જાદુગર” and on this I want to say that indeed sir is magician. He has very good ability to teach effectively and also remembering, writing and reciting number of poems by heart.

With all these things our four days journey with Jay sir has become precious. Indeed what he taught us about Poe is going to help us in our study. Jay sir has said that, “A poem a day keeps psychiatrist away” he make us fall in love with poems. We are very thank full to him to come at our department and share his knowledge with us and also to Dilip Barad sir to invite him for us.

Thank you.

"The Reluctant Fundamentalist" - Movie Review

This blog is part of my academic activity, here you can view the given task...
https://dilipbarad.blogspot.com/2015/09/postcolonial-studies-film-screening.html

Fundamentalist, an extremist. Doesn't matter in which way extremist but it will be always harmful. This one word fundamentalist, makes Changez Khan to think about his decision to help Terrorist. The novel "The Reluctant Fundamentalist" is written by Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid, which is published in 2007. Director Mira Nair's movie "The Reluctant Fundamentalist" which is released in 2012 is also based on this novel.

The novel and movie both follows frame narrative. The story is of young Pakistani boy with American dream, Changez Khan. He is enjoying his life in America and he used to say that he loves America but suddenly one thing happened and it changes his whole life.

The movie starts with the kidnapping of American professor, who is teaching at Lahore university. Then Bobby comes to take interview of Changez, who is also teaching at same university. Bobby is CIA agent. The interview is happening at Lahore cafe and all together there is flashback in which Changez is telling his life in America. Here we can find some post colonial elements also, and I am here trying to see those elements.

First we can see the racism which America practice after the attack on 9/11. Changez is Muslim and Pakistani, and on only this basis he has been arrested also. He also has checked at airport for just being a Pakistani and Muslim.

After the attack his life in America has become terrible. All are looking towards him with doubt, and asking him if he knows anything about the attack. His American girlfriend, Erica also used his identity as Pakistani and not same as any other individual. These things hurt him most. These generalization of people just because of their identity and nationality is something wrong practiced in America. Because of all these thing he leave America and came back to Pakistan.

The idea of loving and believing west countries as superior and better than our own east nation is also a post colonial idea. Like Changez there are many people who wants to go to western countries and find problems in their own countries. But after going there the reality comes face to face and then our nation is more lovable to us. Changez also came back because he realize how the racism works and how west is thinking about east and how they doubt the dignity of people. Then he starts believing in serving his own nation. So he becomes professor at Lahore university and teach students the lessons of non violence and tolerance.

One dialogue spoken by Changez when he starts giving interview to Bobby that "Looks are deceiving." How in post colonial time truth which has been told to us can might be wrong. The generalization of people in America is wrong. Just because person looks different, it doesn't mean they are terrorists. Same way CIA has doubt on Changez for kidnaping of American professor but it is not the case. The proofs on basis of which CIA doubt on Changez are post truths, they are deceiving.

The idea of fundamentalism is also shown very beautifully. It seems very good in business but when Changez hear it from the mouth of terrorist, he comes to know about the damage which this word and the harm of walking on this path can, he denies to accept the path of fundamentalism.

Further than all these things the movie is worth watching. At beginning we have melodies Sufi music and use of Urdu words. The movie kept some suspense also which make watching more interesting and at the end of the movie the words of Changez are worth listening. Which gave us message of not taking eye for an eye and of non violence.

Thank you.

Midnight's Children - Movie Review

This blog is part of my academic activity, here you can see the given task...
https://dilipbarad.blogspot.com/2015/09/postcolonial-studies-film-screening.html

"Midnight's Children" a novel by  British - Indian author Salman Rushdie and "Midnight's Children" film was made and released in 2012 directed by Canadian - Indian director Deepa Maheta.

The story is about two boys who born at 12 at midnight when India got its independence. Saleem and Shiva. Story involves four generation from grand father of Saleem to the son of Saleem. Both Saleem and Shiva has telepathy power to call other children who born at that same night in that one hour. They called themselves midnight's children. It also talks about emergency by Indira Gandhi. This movie has postcolonial aspects. Here we are trying to see some postcolonial aspects which movie has.

The birth of Saleem and Shiva at same time, it also shows the birth of two nations India and Pakistan. And with growth of both these boys the growth of two nations are also shown.

There is strong voice of Marxism. Poor become rich, rich become poor. And because of this Marry, the midwife at hospital changes the babies for her personal reason, which cause very big harm to both boys and family also.

The India which is shown is after independence. Normally shown as poor, because British has left India in to the ashes. In school where Saleem is studying there is picture of Lord Macaulay, and it is written that, "This man brought civilization to savages." Here savage means Indians and the quote wants to say that British brought us civilization. India is shown as the nation of snake charmers in this movie, which has used British lenses to see India.

When it talks about Indira Gandhi and her Emergency. Camera works very effectively and frame the narrative which says, "Zero years of independence." Which simply means the colony of Brits are over but after that our own people started making colonies. Movie also has one line like, "India is prime minister and prime minister is India." Which refers to dictatorship.

There is spittoon used as symbol, symbol of memory and how that memory becomes amnesia. All wants to have that memory and wants to tell their own story accordingly.

Chutneyfication of identities is very well presented here. Which shows India is a mixture of so many things like chutney. There is mixed identities. Our protagonist also don't know who is his real biological parents and he find it out the situation becomes worst. At the end Saleem tame Marry as her mother.

Magic realism is something which is shown as part of India. Parvati who knows magic called by people as witch. Because they think magic is craft of illusion. Parvati used to believe in her magic. She has one disappear box also which she used to save Saleem and her child. There is every time absurdity in marriage. Science and superstition has simultaneously shown in the movie.

These are some points, which film tries to show. But all art is at basic level for entertain. The movie is quit boring. May be it is good tool for study but not for entertainment.

Thank you.

On Reparation From Britain to India

When it comes to take proud on our ancestors deed, we are always there, but, when it comes to feel sorry on our ancestors deed, our immediate answers are why we say sorry for what we didn't do. "An Era of Darkness: The British Empire in India" the book by Shashi Tharoor asking for reparation from Brits what they ancestors had done to India. And he is asking with logic, here are some points I am agree with Tharoor that for that British do owe a reparation to India.

1) Economical damage

All knows that Brits came India in the name of free trade, but we all know that the trade on gun point is not a free trade. Tharoor very clearly says that British is wealthy because of India. What British does is they broke the trade which was practiced in India. India's cloths, he gave two names of city Dhaka and Murshidabad, both are famous for their cloths but Brits take all raw   to England make cloths there and sell it to India in double prize, they have sold Indians their good with double prize. Same is with gold and grains. In name of tax they leave peasants starving. Basically they have looted India in name of free trade. Tharoor says there are Mughals ruler in India they also looted India but they spent only in India, while what Brits does they sent all to their parent country and make India poor. The India which is exporter they make it importer. Because of they take all wealth of India there is still poverty in India. So they done huge harm to India, they should give reparation.

2) Damage to Human Lives

 The huge massacre at Jaliyanwala bagh, which no one can forget. This is just a instant memory, there is much more than  this. Shashi says, Indians do have tax system but it is liberal, like when there is draught, at that time peasants got relaxation from tax but   Brits are not like that. They left them starve to death, Tharoor mentioned Churchill here, who used to left people starve to death. Tharoor also talks about the torture and the physical violence which Brits used to do on Indians. Great harm to ancestors of India by ancestors of British. So this is one  reason why British should do reparation to India.

3) Psychological Damage

Brits used to do violence physically but they also have done great harm on people's mind. India, where every color people lives, Brits came and consciously or unconsciously conditioned the mind of Indians that white is superior, every other color is inferior, because of this still today the people of India believes white as superior and wish to have white skin. India do have caste system but Brits are the one who gave India racism also.

These are the enough reasons as per my thinking, why British should do reparation to India. Admitting what British Empire had done to India needs guts, by doing this Brits will not become less but there will be confession that these things will not repeat.

Thank you.

Edward Said on "Orientalism"

How fascinating it is to know what other countries are thinking about our country. But what if we come to know that others are thinking differently than what we are? Professor Edward Said of Columbia is looking towards these aspects. He has written a book called "Orientalism". The book is translated in 26 languages. He is saying that Orientalism is a theory,   analyze the various lenses through which west is looking towards east. In his interview with MEF, he has talked deeply on his book Orientalism. Here I am pointing out some of the concepts on Orientalism discussed by Said in his interview. Here I am sharing the video of that interview.

1) Motionless Image of Orient

When it is asked to Said on started looking from the perspective of Orientalism, he has answered that the picture of East from West's perspective it does not match with the experience of living in the east. He also says that every form of art is presenting the same picture of east. He also has given example of one scholar researching on middle east he talks same about other eastern country, so Said is pointing out that for all western people whole east is same. I am very surprised by hearing this that west has same image of east from centuries, still and non developing. So those who creates knowledge about east that created knowledge is not innocent and surprisingly west also believes that since many centuries one can remain undeveloped or as a freeze world. So this concept make Edward Said to ponder upon and show then real image of orient.

2) Power Creates Knowledge

Here Edward Said is talking about that how it is necessary to have power to create a new knowledge. Here he gives example of Napoleon, who comes to Egypt to rule but by knowing everything about them and then tell them what they don't have, and how they are powerful then natives. And on the other hand Egypt don't have any kind of knowledge about Napoleon, because they don't have power to go and study other country and create knowledge about them. This is what Said is talking about. This knowledge which is created by power is not innocent. It has its own agendas to use only some part of information to create certain image front of all.

3) Different Orientalism

In this Edward Said is talking about two types of orientalism, one is direct and second is indirect. Then he gives example of orientalism of Britain and of America. Britain has its colony over half of the world and Britishers were their in east, they have experienced the life in east and what they think about east is direct orientalism. While on the other hand America is never been in east. So the knowledge of east is indirect to them, and this is what indirect orientalism is. Experience always matters, so we can identify the difference between direct and indirect orientalism.

4) Focus of Image 

What if someone repeatedly says that in India only Hindu lives? After some time people will start believing it. They will forget the diversity for which India is known for. Same is happening with middle east and Muslim peoples. All media, news papers and even movies also portray a Muslim character in only one way as terrorist. Because of this image world has forgot to questions of common sense also. People have started looking towards Muslim identities only as religious extremists. All Muslims are generalized. And because of this generalization the world is forgetting that terrorist exists every where but not every one is terrorist. Here Said has shared his own experience as middle eastern when any terrorist activity happens people readily believes that you will know what it is for and much more. Why the world is doing this. Answer is simple their mind is conditioned in such a way that they don't even realize that they are making mistakes. They forget that they have been shown only one side of coin, they have never also tried even to turn the coin and have a look at other side of it.

5) Inventory and Co - Existence

After all these things Edward has said that this all is keep on happening because, from orient there is no inventory. Inventory of history which people don't know. This face of middle east which every one is recognizing wrong. So here Said is talking about inventory to have parallel study of orient. Edward says very important thing, "That would be the notion of writing an inventory, historical inventory, which would try to understand not only to understand one's self but to understand one's self in relation to others and to understand others as if you would understand yourself." Then he talks about co - existence. He asks that can we co - exist with fear, if not then we have to try to understand each other with contrapuntal studies and not as others but as our self.

Thank you.

Learning Experience from Dr. Balaji Rangnathan Sir

Our Head of the Department and professor Dr. Dilip Barad has invited Dr. Balaji Rangnathan from the Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar to our Department of English, MKBU.

Balaji sir was came here to deal with postcolonial studies. He was came here for 3 days and the topics which are discussed by him are,

1) Black Skin, White Mask by Frantz Fanon
2) Edward Said on Orientalism
3) A Tempest by Amie Cesaire
4) Imaginary Homelands by Salman Rushdie
5) How to prepare for competitive exams like Net/Set

When he first started talking we are amazed by his ascents. It takes us 5 minutes to adjust with his ascents because he has very different ascents then us. But we enjoyed a lot his three days lectures.

Then he started talking about post colonialism and ask us why we are studying post colonialism? We all are giving him reasons and he said that the era of post colonialism has gone. Now we are living in globalized world, there should be paper on globalization then post colonialism.

On 14th September 2018, When he was giving basic knowledge about post colonialism at that time he said that state is reality but nation is imagination. I like this idea very much. Then he given us the basic idea of Fanon in "White Skin, Black Mask" and further he discussed 8 chapters which is given in the text. He says Fanon talks about sexuality as base in human nature. Then he talks about inferiority complex, and the two reasons of feeling this complex, one is economic and second is epidermatization. Then how color of skin is natural but it becomes cultural, particular case of lady named Mayotte Capecia, agency, and psychology of black consciousness. He also talks about the people of middle class, who never resist. He clearly says that the revolutions are never come from middle class people.

on 15th September 2018, he talks about Edward Said on "Orientalism" and "A Tempest" by Amie Cesaire. When he is talking about Orientalism he taught us that Edward Said is particularly talking about middle east. Then he says Orientalism is not just an idea but it is a material idea, philosophical discourse and now it has become academic. Edward Said has taken this idea from two books of Michel  Foucault, one is "Archeology of Knowledge" from which he has taken idea of knowledge and second is "Discipline and Punish" from which he has taken the idea of power. Orientalism is about the different way through which west looks towards the east.

Then he taught us about "A Tempest" by Amie Cesaire make us understand the difference between "The Tempest" by Shakespeare and "A Tempest" by Amie Cesaire. Also advice us to read original texts.

Then he talked with us about Net/Set exams and told us to take it as competitive exams and not like any other academic exams. He advice us to read available material and not going for preparing everything by self when it is available. It is data based exam so collect data and do smart work then hard work.

On 16th September 2018, he has talked about "Imaginary Homelands" by Salman Rushdie. He has discussed four essays with us which are Imaginary Homelands, Commonwealth Literature Does Not Exist, On Palestine Identity, The New Empire Within Britain. In which he has talked about host nation and parent nation, post colonial literature and new literature, Palestine’s, the different problem of Britain about racism.

While talking all these things he has given examples from archeology, psychology, philosophy, movies, and he also has shared his own experience of travelling. With all these things he has made his class interesting. Surely in these limited time he has given too much knowledge which will going to help us during exams and in life also. The way he taught us with variety of things made learning interesting and we are very thankful to Balaji sir for coming here and give his precious time and knowledge to us and we are also thankful to our Head of the Department Dr. Dilip Barad sir to invite such a dignitary to taught us.

Thank you.

Thinking Activity of "To The Lighthouse" by Virginia Woolf

This blog is part of my academic activity, the link of given task is here...
http://dilipbarad.blogspot.com/2014/09/worksheet-virginia-woolfs-to-lighthouse.html

1. How can you explain that 'what' Virginia Woolf wanted to say (for example, the complexity of human relationship, the everyday battles that people are at in their relationship with near and dear ones, the struggle of a female artist against the values of middle/upper class society etc) can only be said in the way she has said?

The narrative technique which Virginia Woolf has chosen is the best way to say what she wanted to say. She don’t want anything which make people cry or laugh, she wants to tell something which make people think, think about their behavior,  their relationships. Every human being has complexity of thoughts which can not be seen from outer appearance, to see that conflict one has to dive deep in to the mind of human being and stream of consciousness technique is the technique which can help best to Virginia. By using this technique she very beautifully shows the inner complexity of feelings and memory towards the people with whom we lived our life, and how our emotions and impressions are continuously shifts.

2. Do you agree: "The novel is both the tribute and critique of Mrs. Ramsay"?

Yes, I am agree that the novel is both the tribute and critique of Mrs. Ramsay. Virginia Woolf was rebel during her age. Then even if she is putting a domestic character like Mrs. Ramsay we can say that it is for criticizing the stereotypes of woman and for that she is putting a total opposite personality Lily. By showing Mrs. Ramsay as an idea  woman Woolf tries to criticize the way society see the role of woman. In this novel Mrs. Ramsay is a way through which whole family converse with each other but we also can see that till she is alive no relations of family was healthy but after her death all problems have seems to resolve. This way it is critique of Mrs. Ramsay.

On the other hand it is also tribute to Mrs. Ramsay, because after her also she has lived in the memory of everyone. At the end also she is the subject of Lily’s painting and when she completes her painting and she got her vision which is Mrs. Ramsay. At the end whole Ramsay family goes to the lighthouse because it was the wish of Mrs. Ramsay and family wants to fulfill it. So these ways the novel is also tribute to Mrs. Ramsay.

3. Can we read Mrs. Ramsay in context of the idea of Ideal Indian Woman - Karyeshu dasi, Karaneshu manthri; Bhojeshu mata, Shayaneshu rambha; Kshamayeshu dharithri, Roopeshu lakshmi; Satkarma yukta, Kuladharma pathni.

The shloka which is given here can be translated as "Who works as maid, advice as minister, feeds like mother, pleases in bed like heavenly beauty Rambha, beautiful as goddess Lakshmi, forgive as earth, these six virtues who has is a ideal wife." Though the link which is given here will give a different idea about looking towards the shloka but what both have same is it needs to erase one’s self from the root, one needs to be submissive, which Mrs. Ramsay  posses. We can see in novel that she often works too much that she fell unconscious, she advise Mr. Ramsay to go and give lectures on  philosophy, she cooks what everyone wants to eat and in large quantity, she also please Mr. Ramsay in bed, she is beautiful and she forgive all misbehave which done to her. So yes she has every quality of ideal wife as per Indian myth but what she don't have is her own self.


4. Considering symbolically, does the Lighthouse stand for Mrs. Ramsay or the narrator (Virginia Woolf herself who is categorically represented by Lily)?

Yes I think at some extent lighthouse is symbolically stand for Mrs. Ramsay. For whole family and guest she is the one who stands with light in her hand to show directions to the others. She suffers alone from all miseries of her self and of others also. She constantly have inner conflicts like the waves at sea-shore. But I also feel that lighthouse symbolically stands for Lily Briscoe also. As she is representing Virginia Woolf, we can say as a woman artist in Victorian age she has to suffer a lot and that suffering of standing alone, more searching and at some level guiding others to start walking on their own path, it suggests that lighthouse is symbolically stands for Lily Briscoe. As a woman artist she has to stand in against of whole society and that constant suffering is we can see as sea waves. So I found the symbol of lighthouse more for Lily Briscoe than Mrs. Ramsay.

5. In the article by Joseph Blotner, two myths are patterned together. Name the myths? How they are zeroed down to the symbols of 'Window' and 'Lighthouse'? How does the male phallic symbol represent feminine Mrs. Ramsay?

The first myth which is shown here is of Rhea and Demeter. First Mrs. Ramsay is compared with Rhea. Rhea is Greek goddess, and her husband is killing all her child but he saves the Zeus. We can see same with Mrs. Ramsay as she is also saving James from Mr. Ramsay. Saving in the sense of anger. Both Mr. and Mrs. Ramsay treat James differently. Mrs. Ramsay treat James in a sense which create anger in James mind for his father, she behaves front of James as she is trying to save him. Secondly she is compared with Demeter. Demeter is a daughter of Rhea and goddess of corn and fertility. It is said that when she is in sorrow whole earth becomes barren. Demeter is more worshiped by men than women, same as men are in more need of Mrs. Ramsay than women. Every men in summer house are need the help of Mrs. Ramsay in one or the other way. More importantly Mr. Ramsay and James. Further more the story of "Fisherman and his Wife" if read by changing the gender we can see it is Mr. Ramsay who is more demanding of sympathy then Mrs. Ramsay. Mrs. Ramsay is here to give everyone.

The second myth which is described is of Oedipus, who kills his father and marry his mother. The relation between James and Mrs. Ramsay and James hatred towards his father reflect the Oedipus complex in him. He always think to kill his father because he want his mother care for only him and live only with him. When Mrs. Ramsay died that place is taken by Cam but then even his feelings for his father is not changed. When Cam also have sympathy for her father James again thought that his father has stolen her. But at the end may be this hate has been vanished because Mr. Ramsay praise James for handling boat very well and Cam thought that James got at last what he always wanted.

At last "The Window" is symbolically female and "The Lighthouse" is symbolically male. Virginia Woolf has shown female as love and life giver while on the other hand she has shown male has hatred, violence and fatal. In a way she wants to say that female energy is necessary to function. By Virginia Woolf the quality of giving birth by female is emphasized here over male.


6. What do you understand by the German term 'Künstlerroman'? How can you justify that 'To The Lighthouse' is 'Künstlerroman' novel? (Key: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/325047/Kunstlerroman)

Künstlerroman is a German term which can be translated as "artist novel". Basically this term means a novel where the growth of artist is shown, mainly as a painter, musician or poet. In this type of novels the biographical elements are strong, because they describe their struggle as a writer or artist. In Virginia Woolf's " To The Lighthouse" we can see the growth of poet and painter is shown. Augustus Carmichael as poet and Lily Briscoe as painter. In both the cases it is shown that how a artist struggle for one thought or feeling that can lead towards the creation or how it is hard to paint our mind on canvas. At the end of the novel both the artist have their own creation. Augustus Carmichael has his collection of poems and Lily Briscoe has her vision in painting and at the end Virginia Woolf also had her novel. So we can say that this novel is künstlrrroman novel.


7. "... the wages of obedience is death, and the daughter that reproduces mothering to perfection, including child-bearing, already has on her cheeks the pallor of death. One reminded here of various texts by Lucy Irigaray, in which she attacks mothers for being, however unwillingly, accomplices in the patriarchal system of oppression." (Viola). In light of this remark, explain briefly Lily's dilemma in 'To The Lighthouse'. 

By these lines we can say that Lily is in dilemma because of patriarchy and the women who consciously or unconsciously accomplice with patriarchy. We can see in the novel that Lily is attracted towards the Bank but she is not showing her feelings in sense of marriage because she don't want to be like Mrs. Ramsay. She is not happy with Mrs. Ramsay because she is the one who supports patriarchy and also want her daughter to do the same. These lines shows that by following the order one gets death  Prue died because she follows her mother's order to get marry. The reason of the Prue's death is child birth, which again is the idea of ideal or perfect woman given by Mrs. Ramsay while bringing up her daughters. In process of becoming perfect she died. This is shows Lily's dilemma, that she is seeing all these things front of her eyes but can not change the mind of women around her.


8. You have compared the 'beginning' and the 'ending' of the novel and the film adaptation of the novel directed by Colin Gregg. Do you think that the novel is more poignant than the movie? If yes, do you ascribe the fact that the power of words is much greater than that of the screen / visuals?

Both the beginning and ending of novel and movie are different. In novel we are wandering by the mind of the characters, while movie is giving introduction to all. We can see in movie we can understand but the sharp narrative is in the novel. At the end also both differs. In novel Lily put her brush in extreme fatigue but she stays with her art, that tiredness is of giving birth to something and she is enjoying her creation by staying there. While in movie she runs in to the house, which is discomforting to me. She behaves in the movie like she doesn't care about her painting and her vision, which is totally different from novel. I am agree that while making movie one has to add changes because the language of novel and camera differs but here in this case novel is more poignant than movie.


9. How do you interpret the last line of the novel (It was done; it was finished.
Yes, she thought, laying down her brush in extreme fatigue, I have had my vision.) with reference to the ending of the film (After the final stroke on the canvass with finishing touch, Lily walks inside the house. As she goes ante-chamber, the light and dark shade makes her face play hide-and-seek. She climbs stairs, puts her brush aside, walks through the dark and light to enter her room. Gently closes the door - speaks: "Closed doors, open windows" - lies on the bed and with some sort of satisfaction utters: "Dearest Briscoe, you are a fool".) 

The last lines of novel and movie both are different. In the novel Lily's last line is "I have had my vision" and in the movie it is "Dearest Briscoe, you are a fool". So if we take reference to understand novel's last line, from my perspective, it is the realization of Lily what she actually wants. She is fool to thinking about being like Mrs. Ramsay, she got her vision in her painting. Now she will continue with her painting and not with the thought of being like Mrs. Ramsay.


10. What does the catalogue named as 'Army and Navy' signify? What does cutting of 'Refrigerator'  signify?

The catalogue named "Army and Navy" signifies by its name that war and consumerism, both are connected. Virginia Woolf here may tries to criticize capitalism during her time. The refrigerator in that catalogue, which first is a symbol of modernism and accepting new technology. Refrigerator is tool of conserving the things and prevent it to change naturally. We can connect Mrs. Ramsay with refrigerator, because she also tries to preserve the feelings. She is accepting new technology but she want her daughters like her with the old mindset and stereotypes. James is cutting refrigerator, which may seen as Mrs. Ramsay is the one who is preserving James' feelings.


11. Why did Virginia give such prominence to the tale of the “Fisherman’s Wife”? In particular, why did she weave such a misogynist tale into the fabric of a book which so eloquently challenges received patriarchal notions about the roles and capabilities of women? 

By giving place to the story like "Fisherman and His Wife" we can see that Virginia Woolf is trying to criticize here the way woman is portrayed in the story. She also wants to criticize the women who thinks these types of stereotyping real and also believe in that, that they themselves are like this only. This notion of believing her self less this is criticized here. On the other hand we can see that this particular story is subverted here. It is misogynist but the use of the story here is different. The Fisherman's wife is here connected with Mr. Ramsay and the Fisherman who is fulfilling every demand of his wife is here Mrs. Ramsay, who is also fulfilling the demands of Mr. Ramsay. So in these ways we can see the meaning of using this story is changed.


12. How is India represented in 'To The Lighthouse'? (Read this blog for passing reference)

The people from west have different lenses to look towards the India. In "To The Lighthouse" also there are many reference of India but all are different. At some place India to west world is like a land which is unknown to them and far away from them, so they don't have any direct connection with India. While on the other hand it is represented as a country of wealth and jewels. The jewels of India is own by western people with proud of possessing it. At some place it also becomes the land of desire, great romance, adventure and happiness. Mostly when west is attracted towards India is because of the high level of spirituality in India. So when Augustus Carmichael is going to India is considered as some kind of achievement. It also shows the patriarchy in India as it also refers that it is ruled by men folk. So these are the different ways in which India is represented in "To The Lighthouse".

Thank you.