Assignment on Bharatmuni's Natyashastra and Rasa theory

To evaluate my assignment click here

Name: Dharaba Rayjada
Semester: 2
Roll No.: 7
Paper No.: 7 Literary Theory and Criticism
Enrolment No.: 2069108420180045
Email id: dharabarayjada021@gmail.com
Year: 2017-19
Submitted to: Department of English Maharaja Krishnkumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Bharatmuni and his Natyashastra

Bharatmuni was an ancient Indian theatrologist and musicologist. He wrote the “Natyashastra”, a theoretical treatise on ancient Indian dramaturgy and histrionics especially Sanskrit theatre. He was consider as the father of Indian theatrical art forms.

The tradition considers the Natyashastra as an additional Veda. A version of the Natyashastra had been in existence before the 3rd century. The Natyashastra is a compendium of performed arts such as drama, music, dance. The Natyashastra was used through the fifteen hundred years of Sanskrit literary thought as the bedrock of literary theory.

Bharatmuni was maker of Rasa theory. It is necessary to remind ourselves that the Natyashastra is not devoted solely to the exposition of Rasa theory. Rasa theory is only a fragment of the entire compendium.

The Natya

As per description of Bharatmuni, The Natya is depiction and communication pertaining to the emotions of the entire triple world, occasionally piety, occasionally sport, occasionally wealth, occasionally peace of mind, occasionally laughter, occasionally fighting, occasionally sexual passion, occasionally slaughter, the pious behavior of those who practice religion, the passion of those who indulge in sexual pleasure, the repression of those who go by a wicked path, the act of self-restraint of those who are disciplined, creating boldness among those who are impotent, enthusiasm among those who consider themselves brave, comprehension among those who lack understanding, as also wisdom among the learned, graceful pleasure for those who wield power, steadiness and comfort for such as are afflicted with pain and misery, the ways of earning wealth for those who live by money, courage for those whose mind of emotions, built on the stuff of many stages and situations and imitating the conduct of the world, that is what this Natya is which I have produced.

Natya is based on actions and it will produce wholesome instruction, create courage, pastime, entertainment and pleasure. The Natya Bharatmuni says that, I assure you, will be an imitative presentation of all the seven islands. In fact the nature and behaviors of the world, intimately connected with happiness and misery, as rendered by physical and other forms of acting is to be called Natya.

Rasa Theory

In English Rasa is known as the rhetorical sentiments. There is eight rhetorical sentiments recognized in drama and dramatic representation are named as follows…
1) Erotic (Shringar)
2) Comic (Hasya)
3) Pathetic (Karun)
4) Furious (Raudra)
5) Heroic (Veer)
6) Terrible (Bhayanak)
7) Odious (Bibhatsa)
8) Marvelous (Adbhut)

The term Rasa has twofold significance: it means the ‘aesthetic content’ of literary art and also ‘aesthetic relish’ which reader or spectator enjoys. No literary impart can ever proceed without rhetorical sentiments and aesthetic relish. Rasas arise from a proper combination of the stimulants (Vibhav), the physical consequents (Anubhav), and the transient emotional states (Vyabhichari bhav). Throygh this aesthetic flavor and relish are produced.

These various emotional states reach the abiding mental conditions, the latter attain the quality of rhetorical sentiments, or become aesthetically relishable. Now one may ask that why it is called Rasa? We can answer it as, because it is capable of being tasted or relished.

There is interconnection between Bhava and Rasa. One may have question that weather emotional states turned out from the rhetorical sentiments or rhetorical sentiments turned out from the emotional states? We can answer it like as the combination of food spices and vegetables lends the cooked food a distinct relishable taste, in the same way the emotional states and sentiments leas each to the distinct level of an experiences.

As from a seed a tree grows and from the tree, flowers and fruits so all the sentiments stands as the root, the emotional states have their settled position for the sake of the sentiments.

The origin of all other sentiments are the four basic sentiments, Erotic, Furious, Heroic, and Odious. The Comic sentiment becomes possible from the Erotic, the Pathetic from the Furious, the Marvelous from the Heroic and the Terrible from the Odious.

Now lets have a look at all Rasas, their colors, their deities and what they represents.

1) The Erotic or Shringar Rasa, this rhetorical sentiment represent the beauty and love. The color of this is light green and the deity of this is Vishnu.


2) The Comic or Hasya Rasa, this sentiment represents happiness. The color of this is white and the deity of this is Pramatha.


3) The Pathetic or Karun Rasa, this Rasa represents sadness, pity or grief. The color of this is grey and the deity of this is Yama.


4) The furious or Raudra Rasa, this represents the anger. The color of this is red and the deity of this is Rudra.


5) The Heroic or Veer Rasa, this represents the courage, bravery or pride. The color of this is yellow-red. The deity of this Rasa is Mahendra.


6) The Terrible or Bhayanak Rasa, this sentiment represents the horror or terror. The color of this sentiment is black and the deity of this is Kala.


7) The Odious or Bibhatsa Rasa, this represents the disgust and aversion. The color of this is blue and the deity of this is Mahakal.


8) The Marvelous or Adbhut Rasa, this sentiment represents the mystery or curiosity. The color of this sentiment is yellow and the deity of this is Brahma.

The relation between emotional states and rhetorical sentiments. Now the matter of emotional states, the stable or permanent mental states (Sthayibhava) are eight like, love, laughter, sorrow, anger, energy, fear, disgust, and astonishment, and the transitory states (Vyabhicharibhava) are thirty two. There is a further separate group of eight psycho-physical states. These fortynine emotional states should thus be recognized as the casual factors for the artistic revelation of the poetic content, from these arise the Rasas by the quality of universality.

Like the men who become subordinate to the human being who occupies the position of a matter commanding them the other emotional states take the shelter of the permanent states by being subordinate to them and on account of their excellence the permanent states attain the status of Rasa. The transitory emotional states become their retinue.

At last Bharatmuni talked about the spectator, that, who can regarded as spectator and who is the ideal spectator. In answer of that he describe his views as below.

He says, a person who can watch the dramatic performance with all his senses undistracted, is pure and honest, is expert in judging the pros and cons, who can ignore a fault, and lovingly appreciate merit is to be regarded as a spectator in the dramatic performance.

 In answer of second question he says, one who experiences delight when he sees the delightful, experiences sorrow when pathetic things are presented, anger in the presentation of anger, fear in fear, such a person is to be known as the ideal spectator.

At last he says, thus, a person who is able to entre in the particular imitation of an emotional state, and is endowed with these qualities is to be known as a spectator of that particular presentation.

Conclusion

So, this is all about Bharatmuni, his Natyashastra and Rasa theory. In Rasa theory now there is nine rhetorical sentiments. May be this one added later as Bharatmuni only talk about the described eight Rasa and the ninth one is Shanta Rasa or Relaxation which represents the peace and state of mind. Normally this last Rasa can not be experienced because may be everyone’s mind is super busy in many things, in peaceful nature also the mind never stops working so this may be not experienced often as other sentiments are experienced.

Assignment on "Culture and Anarchy" by Matthew Arnold

To evaluate my assignment click here


Name: Dharaba Rayjada
Semester: 2
Roll No.: 7
Paper No.: 6 Victorian Literature
Enrolment No.: 2069108420180045
Email id: dharabarayjada021@gmail.com
Year: 2017-19
Submitted to: Department of English Maharaja Krishnkumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

“Culture and Anarchy” by Matthew Arnold

Matthew Arnold was an English poet and cultural critic, who worked as an inspector of schools. He has been characterized as a Sage writer, a type of writer who chastises and instructs the reader on contemporary social issues and in his “culture and anarchy” he is doing the same. “Culture and Anarchy” is a series of periodicals essays, first published in Cornhill magazine 1867-68 and collected as a book in 1869. The preface was added in 1875. Arnold’s famous piece of writing on culture established his high Victorian cultural agenda. Which remained dominant in debate from the 1860s untill the 1950s.

Sweetness and light

The essay starts with the Latin line, “ Estote ergo vos perfecti” which means “Be ye therefore perfect”. In the very beginning Arnold told us that this all essay is about be perfect. This phrase ‘sweetness and light’ he take from the book of Jonathan swift, ‘Battle of Books’. Sweetness and Light is the first chapter of his essay, in which he talks about the culture and its importance. According to Arnold culture is moving towards the perfection. On the starting of this chapter he is talking about the curiosity. He says that everyone should have curiosity to know more about culture. He says, “pleasure is in seeing things as they are and it implies a balance and regulation of mind which not often attained without fruitful effort, and which is the very opposite of the blind and diseased impulse of mind which is what we mean to blame when we blame curiosity.”

Then he says there is another view of culture which look towards the love of neighbor, impulses action, help and beneficence, desire for removing human errors, clearing human confusion, diminishing human misery, and desire for leave world better and happier than past. So in his view it is not only about curiosity but also about perfection. He says to love perfection, is a study of perfection. If one is intelligent being yet more intelligent. Then he quote Bishop Wilson who says, “To make reason and the will of God prevail” in further Arnold says that to see things as they are, to get the universal knowledge, to be happy this all things make the will of God prevail and by all these things the true characteristics of culture is manifested.

Then he emphasizing on act rather then think. He says, “ It is in making endless addition to itself, in the endless expansion of its powers, in endless growth in wisdom and beauty, that the spirit of the human race finds its ideal. To reach this ideal, culture is an indispensable aid, and that is the true value of culture.” He says not a having and resting but a growing and becoming. He emphasizing on inward growth rather then outward growth like wealth. As he talk about perfection, he also says that it is not about individual perfection, it is about the perfection of whole society, the perfection in masses, so he thinks that everyone should take others also with themselves on the path of perfection.

Arnold called all industries and wealth a machinery. He says that all are now running behind machinery and he consider it the most dangerous thing. He says that if we continue to run after machinery like this then everything will be turned in machinery right from our freedom to the religious organization. We should run after pursuing the culture not machinery. He gave example of coal, that at that time people used to think coal as their greatness but Arnold says that it is not our greatness, our greatness is in having spiritual condition. Then he create an situation and says that if England will swallowed by sea tomorrow which England should be remembered? Then he compare his time with the time of Elizabeth which consider his time with the time of Elizabeth which consider as the time of splendid spiritual effort, and he says the time of Elizabeth should remembered.

Then he talk about the power of middle class people but he also says that now they all become philistines – the people who believe most that our greatness and welfare are proved by our being very rich, and who most give their lives and thoughts to becoming rich, according to Arnold these people are philistines. He believes that they have to change their view.

Then he talk about religion more important because it has broader scale for perfection, with greater masses of men. And he think religion as most considerable effort after perfection the human race has yet made. Then he consider puritans as the best who made effort to persuit religion. He says that though puritans failed at some level but then even their idea of perfection is appropriate. He thinks puritanism as necessary to grow the moral fiber of English people.

Then he also talk about democracy. At that time democracy is new and Arnold give it a name ‘Jacobinism’. At last he says that the man who works for sweetness also works for light, who works for light also works for sweetness but who works for sweetness and light both they also works to make reason and the will of God prevail. The pursuit of perfection, then, is the pursuit of sweetness and light – Arnold said.

Doing as one likes

As in first chapter Arnold talking about the sweetness and light and through that the journey to the perfection and the values and importance of culture. Here in this second chapter he is showing the danger of anarchy – doing as one likes.

He says that if everybody starts doing as they like the society will move towards the anarchy and he consider anarchy as the danger zone. He says that the whole society will ne chaotic, because, if everybody starts doing as they likes, killing as they like, hitting as they like, meet as they like, enter as they like, the whole system of society will disturbed. He further says that English society always tends to be in favor of personal liberties but he has fear of coming anarchy in English society.

He says that our thoughts and actions are always should be guided with the best light for that culture is beneficial not anarchy. For that he gave example of Hyde park protestors and dissenters to prove that how chaotic world would become as one likes. He also talk about the authority of people should be given to the one state and for that he talk about the ‘best self’, he says that, “it is ‘our best selves’ to whom the authority must be given. Because it is truest friend and when anarchy is a danger, to this authority we may turn with sure trust, culture suggests one to us in our best self.”

At last he says that, “first, never go against the best light you have, secondly, take care that your light do not be darkness.” So, these are the views of Arnold on anarchy.

Three classes

In this third chapter Arnold talking about the three class of the society, Barbarians, Philistines, and Populace. As they are normally known as aristocratic class, middle class and working class.

He gave the name Barbarians to the aristocratic class. Arnold says that this class have their own liberal practices and anarchical thoughts. The leisure class and the manners and outward great look everything comes to this class, but they don’t have inward greatness.

Arnold gave name Philistines to the middle class people. In a German sense Philistines means uncultured people. These are the people ho always busy in trade and commerce, and these are the one who brought material prosperity in society.

The third is Populace, the working class. They are the helper of the empire builders and they are exploited by both Barbarians and Philistines because of their poverty. Arnold consider them raw and half developed.

Arnold find mistake in three of the classes as according to him no one is perfect. Therefore he is talking about developing a best self, who will lead these three classes towards the perfectness and away from the machinery.

Hebraism and Hellenism

Hebraism and Hellenism, two different way of human life. Both are totally different from each other. Hebraism fall under the idea of Bible. They believe in religion and strictly follow the biblical idea. While on the other hand Hellenism fall under the idea of Hellenic beauty. Hebraism believes in action and Hellenism believes in thinking. Arnold also says that human prefer to act rather then think and he also says that human don’t think right always their thinking is also faulty.

Hebraism, as its strictly follows the bible, it also make people aware about sin and they always try to keep distance from sin. While Hellenism prefer to see things as they are and also find beauty in everything. Hebraism follows the strictness of conscience and Hellenism follows the spontaneity of consciousness.

There is some similarities in both of this term. Hebraism thinks bodily desire as an obstacle to the right action, and, Hellenism thinks bodily desire as an impediment of right thinking. So, both of them thinks body as an obstacle. Both of them have same concluding aim, the perfection and salvation of human.

While Arnold says that these both are important for perfection, so he believes in keeping harmony between of these idea and try to get perfect. As Socrates states that, “ The best man is he who tries to make himself perfect and the happiest man is he who feels that he is perfecting himself.”

Porro Unum Est Necessarium

The title is in Latin which says that, ‘but one thing is necessary’. Arnold says that everything which we posses but above all that things the man’s perfection is necessary. Everyone should have Sweetness and Light. English society is full of liberal ideas and the democracy is very new to English society at that time and because of that Arnold fear the anarchy, and he says that above all that things there should be control upon people as he also describes the harms of doing as one likes.

Like Hebraism and Hellenism there should be mutual understanding and balance. The society have many malice and from all that things one should come to the best of all point. English people have very big industries and wealth and science but One must have a standard and ideal of perfection and happiness.

At last Arnold talks about many problems in society and also try to give solution of that problems.

Conclusion

This is how Arnold tries to justify his views about culture and importance of culture. In this essay he describes very well that how culture is necessary and anarchy is harmful for English culture.

Assignment on The Novelists of The Romantic Age

To evaluate my assignment click here


Name: Dharaba Rayjada
Semester: 2
Roll No.: 7
Paper No.: 5 The Romantic Age
Enrolment No.: 2069108420180045
Email id: dharabarayjada021@gmail.com
Year: 2017-19
Submitted to: Department of English Maharaja Krishnkumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

The Romantic Age

The Romantic age is partly a reaction of industrialization. The period basically considered as Romantic age is 1798 to 1837. The age started with the publication of Lyrical Ballads by Wordsworth in 1798. This age also know as back to nature because in this age mostly the literature is produced on the theme of Nature and beauty. Basically in this age the development of poetry is at highest peak but other literary forms like novel and essays are also developed in this age. Here we are looking at the Novelists of the age.

Though novel also make marked development in this age mostly the domestic and historical type of novels. The big name among novelists of Romantic age is Scott and Austen. There are many novelists in this age but here I mention some of them.

Novelists of the age

1) Walter Scott
2) Jane Austen
3) Maria Edgeworth
4) John Galt
5) William Harrison Ainsworth
6) Thomas Love Peacock

Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832)

Walter Scott was born in Edinburgh and he was educated at the high school of Edinburgh and university of Edinburgh, where he achieve powerful memory. His father was lawyer. Scott has love affair with some Perthshire lady and he married the daughter of a French exile.

In 1806, he got the valuable post of clerk of session. In 1809, he starts the business with John Ballantyne. Scott’s “Waverley” novels gave him enormous success. In last years of his life, he had a slight paralytic seizure. It passed but it left him with a clouded brain. He refused to desist from novel writing or even slacken the pace. Other illness followed his early lameness becoming more marked. After an ineffectual journey to Italy, he returned to Abbotsford, and died within sound of the river he loved so well.

He also wrote many poems like, ‘The minstrelsy of the scottish border’, ‘The eve of st. John’, ‘The lay of the last minstrel’, ‘Marmion’- this work consider as his masterpiece, ‘Rokeby’ and etc. In 1814 he gave up writing poetry and turned to prose mainly to the novels.

His collection of 45 narratives, he made “Waverley”, which first issued anonymously in 1814. After that he wrote many novels like, ‘Guy Mannering’, ‘The antiquary’, ‘The black dwarf’, ‘Old mortality’, ‘Rob roy’, ‘The heart of midlothian’, ‘A legend of montloso’, ‘The bride of lanmermoor’, and these all novels mostly have scene of Scotland but some of them don’t have the historical Scotland.

As he produced the number of novels, we can find hurridity in his work. Many time it reflects in a work like sometimes it developed very carelessly and finished anyhow, his characters are also developed in hurriedness so sometimes they also finished weakly after they have begun strongly.

He is great contributor to the novel. To the historical novel he brought a knowledge that was not pedantically exact, but manageable, wide and bountiful. To the sum of this knowledge he added a life giving force, a vitalizing energy, an insight and a genial dexterity that made the historical novel entirely new species. Scott often called the prose Shakespeare. He resembles Shakespeare in the free manner in which he ranges high and low, right and left, in his search for material. His villains often melodramatic and hero – heroines wooden and dull. He has much of Shakespeare’s genial, tolerant humor in which he strongly resembles also his great predecessor Fielding.

His style lacks suppleness, but it is powerful, solid, and sure. In his use of the Scottish vernacular he is exceedingly natural and vivacious.

Jane Austen (1775-1817)

Jane Austen was born at Steventon. She educated at home. She is a daughter of Hampshire clergyman. Her father was a man of good taste in the choice of reading material, and Jane’s education was conducted on sound lines. Her first published works were issued anonymously and she died in middle age, before her merits had received anything like adequate recognition.

The chronology of Jane’s novel is not easy to follow, for her works were not published in their order of composition. Her first novel was “Pride and Prejudice” which consider as her masterpiece. Then, ‘Sense and Sensibility’, ‘Northanger Abbey’. In between 1798 and 1811 there was a pause in her writing, but then followed in quick succession. Her other three great novels, ‘Mansfield Park’, ‘Emma’, and ‘Persuasion’.

Her plots skillfully constructed and severely unromantic. Her first work beginning as burlesque of the horrible in fiction, finishes by being an excellent example of her ideal novel. Life in her novels is governed by an easy decorum and moments of fierce, passion or even deep emotion, never occur. Only the highest art can make such plots attractive, and Jane’s does so.

Her characters are developed with minuteness and accuracy. They are ordinary people, but are convincingly alive. Her method of portrayal is based upon acute observation and a quite but incisive irony. Her male characters have a certain softness of thaw and temper, but her female characters are almost unexceptionable in perfection of fiction.

Her place in the history of fiction is remarkable. Her qualities are of a kind that are slow to be recognized, for there is nothing loud or garish to catch the casual glance. The taste for this kind of fiction has to be acquired, but once it is acquired it remains strong. Jane has won her way to a foremost place and she will surely keep it.

Maria Edgeworth (1767-1849)

Maria spent most of her life in Ireland. She wrote numerous books but it is little read in contemporary times, though she is popular during her time. Her works are divided in three class.
1) Shorts story for children
2) Irish tales
3) Full length novels

She wrote, ‘Simple Susan’ and ‘Early Lessons’ for the children. Then in her Irish tales, ‘Ormond’, ‘Castle Rackrent’ and ‘The Absentee’ and in her full length novel we can include, ‘Belinda’, ‘Leonora’ and ‘Patronage’ kind of works.

She always over simplify the life and characters in her works to show the triumph of virtue. Her field is same as Jane Austen and she writes simply.

John Galt (1779-1839)

John was born in Ayrshire, and afterwards he move to Greenock. If we talk about his career, he tried many things like first he was clerk then in London he was worked in bar then for some business he goes abroad and then in Scotland he produced large amount of literary work.

His best novels are, ‘The Ayshire Legatees’ which contains much amusing Scottish narratives, then, ‘The Annals of the Parish’ which considered as his masterpiece. Though he has more value as painter then writer.

William Harrison Ainsworth (1805-82)

He was born at Manchester and son of a solicitor. After some attempt to study law he took to literature as a career, in 1840 he became editor of “Bentley’s Miscellany”. Then in 1853 he acquired the “New Monthly Magazine”.

He is among the early imitator of Scott. He produces great numbers of novel which cover many periods of English history. His first work is ‘Sir John Chiverton’ but he got success with ‘Rookwood’. His other works are, ‘Jack Sheppard’, ‘The tower of London’, ‘Windsore Castle’, etc…

His style of writing is poor and unpolished but when he is in his right vein he can give the reader a vigorous narrative and we can see it in his “Rookwood”.

Thomas Love Peacock (1785-1866)

 He was born at Weymouth and a son of London merchant. He has unsuccessfully tried a number of clerical and business posts before joining the East India Company in 1819. At there he served as chief examiner.

He tried his hand in verse also but he is famous for his novels. He wrote seven novels…
1) Headlong Hall
2) Melincourt
3) Nightmare Abbey
4)  Maid Marian
5)     The Misfortunes of Elphine
6)     Crotchet Castle
7)     Gryll Grange

 His novels consist mainly of discussions phrased in a concise, polished satire, in which characters embodying contemporary ideas dissect themselves with devastating effect. 

Conclusion

 These are the some novelists of the Romantic age who contribute their best to the English literature. There are other minor novelists also. During this period there is one type of novel which is also written and famous during this age is gothic novels, in which the scary tales are written.

Power and Media

Here I'm giving response to given academic task on power, media and truly educated person. Here is the link of task... http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2017/03/cultural-studies-media-power-and-truly.html

Cultural studies, media and power

It is hard to define cultural because it has different definition at different places and everyone has their own culture which can not be denied and also defined so, it is also hard to bind cultural studies in one particular definition. Cultural studies is also very hard to understand. It always breaks the difference between high and low, it puts everything under same umbrella. It needs deep thinking and if you fail to dig deep, cultural studies also fails.

Second thing is, it always looks critically at power and that makes cultural studies “politically incorrect” and it will become hard to survive between majority of “politically correct” and “Right wingers”. It is impossible to talk about cultural studies without the study of power and media. Now a days media is one of the element which control our perceptions and power also uses media. So, by studying media and power we come to know how power works over media.

Power

In democracy power has concern with people. Power is every where but we failed to identify it. Power governs the particular things, it is every where from family to work place. Here we are talking about civic powers. There is 6 types of civic power like,
1 physical power
2 wealth
3 state action
4 social norms
5 ideas
6 numbers

Physical power controls harmful behavior to the society. In this fast growing world now everything is possible with money so if you have wealth, you have power. We are living in democracy and we elect some one to take decisions in favor of people but that decisions also control us. Social norms are the things which don’t have any official law but it creates their own laws as per their comfort or thinking. Ideas also have power, if you have interesting ideas the people will start be with you and it also talk about the 6th power the numbers of people which supports your idea and have one voice with you and you have power.

Power is everywhere around us. To read power, one has to start thinking about the things which happens around them. Think how it happens and which type of power is working behind it. After having habit of doing this one can understand the power and also can save themselves from the trap of power.

Noam Chomsky is talking about mass media and how mass media controls the perceptions of large numbers of populations. In our day to day life who decides how certain things works. Well, seemingly it is the government but behind that it is mass media or news papers, news channels which control our perception. We blindly believe what news channels telling us but, before showing any news to us news channels also filters the news. They decide what to show and what not to show, they decides how debates are going to end, in a way every certain things which news channels are showing is pre-decided and planned or we an say scripted. Media controls the elite group of population and it makes us think in a way which they want.

At last they are talking about that what actually is being truly educated person and as Noam Chomsky says, “Its not important what you cover in class, its important what you discover”. It is about to inquire and create constructively, independently without external controls. Truly educated person has the spirit of questioning, they don’t accept what comes to them they question in a certain way to identify the fact.

So, this is how power controls media and media controls us but the work of truly educated person is not to believe everything first question then believe what comes your understanding says.

Thank you.

Deconstruction by Derrida

Here I'm giving answer of the given thinking activity on post-structuralism or deconstruction. The link of the task is http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2015/03/deconstruction-and-derrida.html

                                                                  (Jacques Derrida)

1) What do you understand by deconstruction? (Remember: if you think you understand deconstruction, you don't)


Derrida deny to give the proper definition of deconstruction as he believes that one can not give final definition for once and for all. Deconstruction is not only for the sake of breaking something it is to ask different questions to the text and trying to find new meanings of text. It is also about the decentering the center.  Structuralist critic will read the text against itself so as to expose what might be thought of as the 'textual
subconscious', where meanings are expressed which may be directly contrary to the surface meaning.

2) Read an ad or TV serial or film or literary text as post-structuralist critic.

As per M.H.Abram’s, “Derrida emphasizes that to deconstruct is not to destroy; that his task is to dismantle the metaphysical and rhetorical structures operative in a text not in order to reject or discard them, but to reconstitute them in another way.” So, here I’m also trying to analyze the movie “Anand” which is directed by Hrishikesh Mukherjee and it’s dialogues are written by Gulzar. It starts Rajesh Khanna as hero and Amitabh Bachchan is also there as supportive actor. This movie was released in 1971. 

The main idea which movie discussed is the way of living life. The hero named Anand has a very rare cancer, Lymphocercoma of the intenstine and it can not be cured. Though Anand knows that he has only 6 months life then even he enjoy every moment of life. He don’t want to pass his last days in hospital, he ran away from it. There is very famous dialogue of Anand, “Babumoshai, life should be big not long.” He has all philosophical meanings of life and try to live it at its highest peak but as Derrida says that, “Nothing is outside the text” we also can find the lose stone of the movie in itself. 

It is the conflicting force with in the movie itself to dissipate the seeming definiteness of its structure and that force is when Anand speaks the dialogues like, “Please save me, I don’t want to die.” This is that lose stone which movie has because through out the whole movie Anand is talking about the happy life and meanings of life but at the end why he says that he don’t want die?, why he didn’t say that now I can die peacefully because I live my life as I wanted to? He does everything to make others happy then even why there is a wish for living? This small two lines dialogue has change the whole meaning of movie. By putting this dialogue the movie shows two conflicting ideas together and by doing that movie it self become reason for breaking the established meaning of movie. 

Thank you.

Gerard Genette's "Structuralism and literary criticism"

Here I'm giving my answer of the given task. The link of the task is given below...
http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2015/03/structuralism-and-literary-criticism.html

Being a structuralist critic, how would you analyse literary text or TV serial or film? You can select any image or TV serial or film or literary text or advertisement and apply structuralist method.



Structuralism In Genette’s words, ‘if the writer questions the universe, the critic questions literature, that is to say, the universe of signs. But what was a sign for the writer (the work) becomes meaning for the critic (since it is the object of the critical discourse), and in another way what was meaning for the writer (his view of the world) becomes a sign for the critic, as the theme and symbol of a certain literary nature’.

Here I’m doing structuralism of the advertisement of Vodafone. In this ad they are not speaking any particular word it mostly based on symbols.

The ad starts with the symbol of Vodafone on the screen and one dog which is also a symbol of Vodafone. Here they use the dog to show their towers of network. You can also see that at first that dog is relaxing but suddenly he stand up and start running. Now if you notice the background it shows the hilly area and there is village so we can read it as that there is village between hilly areas and mostly there is no one who use Vodafone but suddenly a boy comes who later shows in the ad he uses Vodafone network and all towers(dog) are alert and they start their work. It is also wants to show that wherever you are Vodafone is everywhere.

After that you can see in this three images, in first image there is only a small hole from where the dog makes their way, then in second image there is woods which are like obstacles and the dogs are jumping over that then they shows stairs, in short they wants to say that they will provide their network by passing every obstacles came in between their way.

 After that as per shown in this image all Vodafone dogs are running and there is also one other dog who is not from Vodafone. Now as Vodafone shows their towers by dogs then the other dog here also suggest the tower of someone else’s company. They wants to show that there is only one tower of other company in rural or hilly areas where as Vodafone has many towers in that area and they all are running means working. In short they wants to say that Vodafone has very strong network.

After that there is image that all dogs are near one boy which shows that that boy is using Vodafone and all dogs are staring at the boy which in a way wants to show that there is full network. They all are near the user of Vodafone and as per shown in second image the Vodafone user is satisfy with Vodafone service.

The dog which Vodafone use for their symbol is called Pug. The pug dog known for being sociable and gentle companion dogs but here I don’t see them as anything else but towers of Vodafone network because in the very beginning Vodafone shows their symbol with red line so I interpret all the sings in particular way.

Structural analysis of two poems

My Love is like to ice, and I to fire:
How comes it then that this her cold so great
Is not dissolved through my so hot desire,
But harder grows the more I her entreat?
Or how comes it that my exceeding heat
Is not allayed by her heart-frozen cold,
But that I burn much more in boiling sweat,
And feel my flames augmented manifold?
What more miraculous thing may be told,
That fire, which all things melts, should harden ice,
And ice, which is congeal’d with senseless cold,
Should kindle fire by wonderful device?
Such is the power of love in gentle mind,
That it can alter all the course of kind.
By Edmund Spenser

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
By Robert Frost

The poem by Edmund Spenser “Ice and fire” is about his beloved. He says that his love is like fire and his beloved is like ice which means that poet’s beloved is ignore the love of poet. In the poem by Robert Frost “fire and ice” Frost talking about the end of the world that weather it will end on fire or ice then he says that both have ability to destroy world.

As we first see the word like fire and ice, the first thing came in our mind is that fire is something bad and ice is something good but here in this both poem though they both have different theme but then even both poet shows that fire is good and ice is suggest something bad. Edmund Spenser says that his love is like fire but his beloved is like ice who ignore every effort of poet and Frost also compare his passionate desires with fire and hatred with ice. So I found that both privileged fire on ice.

Thank you.

Northrp Frye's Archetypal criticism

Here is my answer of the given task. The link of the task is as below...
http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2014/12/northrop-frye-archetypes-of-literature.html

1) What is archetypal criticism? What does the archetypal critic do?

As per dictionary meaning “Archetype” means a skeleton or a particular structure or pattern of something specific and  In literary criticism the term archetype denotes recurrent narratives designs, patterns of action, character-types, themes, and images which are identifiable in a wide variety of works of literature, as well as in myths, dreams, and even social rituals. The work of Archetypal critic is to find a particular pattern in literature and as per their research literature follows the cycle of birth and death and re-birth it also follows the natural cycle, seasons and also solar cycle. So from this type of research the archetypal critic does their work.

2) What is Frye trying to prove by giving an analogyof 'physics to nature' and 'criticism to literature'?

By giving an analogy of ‘physics to nature’ and ‘criticism to literature’ Frye in a way trying to say that as the student of physics studied nature but they didn’t say that they are studying nature they say they are studying physics same way the students of literature are studied the criticism of literature, they are not studied literature because literature is not like science it can not be taught but the criticism of literature can be taught so here Frye trying to prove that what we studied is not literature but criticism of literature.

3) Show your views of criticism as an organised body of knowledge, mention relation of literature with history and philosophy.

As Northrop Frye says that we are not studying literature but we studying the criticism of literature and after that he says that criticism is an organized body of knowledge because everything which we are doing in criticism has scientific pattern and to support this idea he says that philosophy and history both are the pillars of literature and by doing criticism we also studied events of history and ideas of philosophy. So in this way philosophy and history both have connected to the literature.

4) Briefly explain inductive method with illustration of shakespeare's Hamlet's grave digger's scene.

Inductive method is like moving towards from specific to general observation. Like from the grave digging scene of ‘Hamlet’ we move towards some general observations like the scene of graveyard always shows that something bad will going to happen or the death will happen, second is everyone is mortal whether it is servant or king, then we can see that when work become regular it will no more affect such as to others like digging grave for someone is sad but diggers are singing a song. The conversation between both diggers shows the real situation of that age like corruption and blind faith for someone who did suicide. So this is inductive method that from a particular scene we are moving towards some general observations.

5) Briefly explain deductive method with reference to an analogy to music, painting, rhythm and pattern. Give examples of the outcome of deductive method.

Deductive method is something in which we are observing general things first and then from that observation we are moving towards something specific. In music we have rhythm and it takes time to understand and in painting it has patterns which can be understand in one glance. Music travel in time and painting is in spatial. Literature has both like when we start read something it takes time to complete and appreciate like music but when we complete reading we can see the whole picture of that book or anything which we read in front of our eyes like painting, so from this deductive method we come to know that literature moves in time and also it is spatial.

6) Refer to the Indian seasonal grid if you can please read small Gujarati or Hindi or English poem from the archetypal approach ad apply Indian seasonal grid in the interpretation.

                                                               (Indian seasonal grid)

Here I found one Hindi poem on all Indian seasons which has particular archetype which we can see from the poem. The poem is as below…

सूरज तपता धरती जलती।
गरम हवा ज़ोरों से चलती।
तन से बहुत पसीना बहता,
हाथ सभी के पंखा रहता।

आ रे बादल! काल्रे बादल!
गरमी दूर भगा रे बादल!
रिमझिम बूँदें बरसा बादल!
झम-झम पानी बरसा बादल!

लो घनघोर घटाएँ छाईं,
टप-टप-टप-टप बूँदें आईं।
बिजली चमक रही अब चम-चम,
लगा बरसने पानी झम-झम!

लेकर अपने साथ दिवाली,
सरदी आई बड़ी निराली।
शाम सवेरे सरदी लगती,
पर स्वेटर से है वह भगती।

सर्दी जाती, गरमी आती,
रंग रंग के फूल खिलाती।
रंग-रँगीली होली आती,
सबके मन उमंग भर जाती।

रात और दिन हुए बराबर,
सोते लोग निकलकर बाहर।
सरदी बिलकुल नहीं सताती,
सरदी जाती गरमी आती।

Here we can see the difference in archetypal season of west and in indian seasonal grid like for west summer is time of romance while in indian season summer is consider as very harsh season, for west winter or rainy season is harsh while in india these both season consider as good for romance and harvesting and love. This all things we can see in this poem like here summer is consider as harsh while winter and rain is consider as good.

Thank you.

The Medium

Don’t think I am a fool
My mind is a working tool
I can see the trap
And being you a crap
Use my vehicle to reach your goal
I am not your escaping hole
You are lucky to have my healthy silence
I used to kill people by my deadly silence
My life is not open invitation to you
You are not allowed to peep through
Angle face but devil you
Its better to say adieu.

I.A Richards

I.A Richards who along with T.S Eliot consider as the pioneer of new criticism gave an idea of close reading of text and also verbal analysis of text. He also gave the theory of practical criticism. Here also I tried to analyze one song’s lyrics from the movie “Always kabhi kabhi” and the lyricist is Amitabh Bhattacharya and sung by Benny Dayal, Roshan Abbas, and Apeksha Dandekar.

Antenna Lyrics

Antenna.. (Antenna.. Antenna.. Antenna….)
Frequency.. (Frequency.. Frequency.. Frequency……)
Not catching.. (Not catching.. Not catching.. Not catching…..)
Not matching.. (Not matching.. Not matching.. Not matching…..)
Frequency.. (Frequency.. Frequency.. Frequency……)
Antenna.. (Antenna.. Antenna.. Antenna….)
Frequency.. (Frequency.. Frequency.. Frequency……)
Sapne hamare hai toh
Chasma tumhara kyun lagaye
Sapna hamara hai toh
Rasta bhi hoga na humara
Chalane kaho toh chale
Rukne ko bolo ruk jaye..
Aapke remote pe hume
Nahi chalna gawara..
Baatein karna humari kabhi
Tum jo kaho woh dohrayen
Yahin dil mein chupade
Always dard humara
Chahe jo bhi kahen
Kabhi tum problem samajh na paaye
Kabhi bhule se bhi
Signal pakad na paye kyun humara
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna..
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
Galti humari kya
Jo haan mein haan
Tumhari na milaye..
Badta hi jata hai
Kyun voice ka level tumhara
Dono hi taraf se jo baatein ho
Toh samajh mein aaye..
One way sunenge kyun
Yeh lecture FM tumhara
Mein bhi kharche uthao
Zara kum jo hamari toh chalega..
Mile badle mein uske
Jo hume zyada time tumhara..
Chahe jis frequency pe set
Karke bhi samjhaye..
Kabhi bhule se bhi
Signal pakad na paye kyun humara..
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna..
Hum hai jahan
Iss life ki galiyon
Se nikal ke hi
Wahan pahunche ho tum
Toh phir kaho
Har baat jo hum bole
Usse ignore kyun
Karte ho tum..
Kabhi samjho humari
Zara apni bhi hume samjhado
Hai jo beech mein apne
Woh mit jaye farak humara
Chahe jo bhi kahen
Kabhi tum problem samajh na paaye
Kabhi bhule se bhi
Signal pakad na paye kyun humara
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta match..Antenna
Antenna..nahi karta catch..Antenna..
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
Antenna..nahi karta match..antenna
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
Antenna..nahi karta catch..antenna
You don’t know the frquency
Why can’t you just let me be
Antenna..

These are the lyrics of the song ‘Antenna’ from the movie “Always,kabhi kabhi”. I didn’t seen the movie so I can’t tell perfectly that in which situation this song takes place but by watching video of this song and by lyrics I got the right idea of this song. It is may be because the topic of the song is quite understandable without checking any connection. But there is many examples which shows that to understand any literary work one should have historical sense, say for example there is “Shiva tandav stotra” as a song in the movie “Bahubali” and the lyrics are as below…

 "Jata kataha sambhramabrama nillimpa nirjari,
Vilola veechi vallari viraja mana moordhani,
Dhaga dhaga daga jjwala lalata patta paavake,
Kishora Chandra shekare rathi prathi kshanam  mama"

Now this language is Sanskrit and to understand it first we need translation or the knowledge of the language and suppose we know the language but don’t know about Lord Shiva then we find problem in understanding this lines and if we translate it in English it is something like as below…


"The Spiritual river is moving through his entangled, knotted hair
Strands of hair are like huge waves

His Forehead is shining brilliantly like fire

The crescent of moon on his head i an adornment

It gives me immense pleasure and my love for him grows every second"

After getting translation also we can’t find for whom it is written if we don’t know that from whose head the river is moving and who has moon on his head. So the historical sense is need to understand the core meaning.

The song lyrics which I present here has a common issue of generation gap between parents and children and some lines can also be told to society. Because pf the generation gap and the different thinking of parents and children there is always a conflict between both of them and in many cases children has to follow parents because of their authority on their children. Here in this song children wants to describe their problems and thinking to their parents.

It starts with words like antenna and frequency which don’t give any idea of the song. We have to go further in lyrics and it the children told to their parents about their dreams and they deny to walk on the path which they decide for them and next says that in whatever way we want to told you about our thought you never got an idea and the lyrics comes like ‘antenna nahin karta match antenna’ which wants to say that Our thoughts doesn’t match or you don’t understand our thoughts.

Then children deny to obey their parents and they told to have conversation from both the side and ask for their time not money and again they said that their parents don’t understand them. After that they ask that you are also at same stage on your age then why you don’t understand us and again they ask to talk and try to understand each other.

Very nice song with very nice idea but as per I.A Richards there is two types of sense in metaphor one is scientific sense second is emotive sense and if we look at this lyrics some may have questions like…

1) Humans don’t have frequency and antenna so there is cannot be question of catching signals.

2) Humans can not control by remote.

According to I.A Richards these types of metaphors can use in literary work and we have to look at its emotive sense and not the scientific one. Here metaphors are used like ‘antenna’, ‘signal’, ‘remote’, ‘one way’, ‘FM’, ‘frequency’ and this all have emotive meanings like thoughts, understanding, nature of having authority. 

There is also mixing of two languages Hindi and English and also the words from electronics like TV, FM, or satellite so it may create difficulty in understanding because of language. It shows that to understand literary work one has to have the knowledge of language, emotive sense, historical sense, social sense, political sense also because writer writes satires also. After looking this things we can say that the without all the sense they can’t able to understand the core meaning of the literary work.

Thank you.

Frankenstein

Thinking activity on Mary Shelly's "Frankenstein"

Here is the answer of the given task and also the link of the task 

 http://milanparmar94.blogspot.in/2017/12/worksheet-screening-movie-frankenstein.html?m=1

Mary shelly wrote gothic novel named “Frankenstein – The modern Prometheus”. This novel is about galvanism and it is science fiction also. This novel is published in 1818 and the setting on the novel is early 19th century.

1) What are some major difference between movie and the novel Frankenstein?

There is also movie adaptation by Kenneth Branagh but there are some difference between movie and the real novel.
First major difference we can find is that in movie Frankenstein’s friend Henry meet him at the university while in actual novel they both are childhood friends and Henry never visit that university.
Second major difference that in movie when Frankenstein create lady monster, the lady monster commit suicide while in actual novel Frankenstein himself kill the lady monster.
The third major difference which I found is that in movie at the end monster commit suicide and destroy himself on pile of Frankenstein while in novel monster went far away.
There are some minor difference also but these are the three I found major one.

2) Did this movie help you in understanding the plot of the novel?

Yes, definitely the screening of movie help me to understand the plot of novel because the novel has frame narrative and by reading and listening it will become confusing the movie helps in that area. Though there are some difference between movie and the novel but all over it is very helpful to understand the whole structure of novel.

3) Who do you think is real monster?

As per my opinion Victor Frankenstein is the real monster. Some thinks that monster is real monster but this is not the case because monster becomes monster and the reason is society and situations. The situations are taking place in such a way that monster is ready to become cruel to society. It is may be monster’s pay back to society as society give him rejection, sorrow and loneliness. In the case of Victor he himself chooses to become monster. I don’t think that society plays any role in case of Victor. Victor has false pride on his knowledge. He wants to be demi god. He wants to challenge the rules of nature, he wants to make dead one alive again. Though many people suggest him to not to go on that way but he didn’t listen and by collecting the body parts from different dead bodies he create one man. Which is totally a disaster. Victor himself become frightened by the look of his creation. After that also he said that he will burn his creation tomorrow if he burn it at that moment when he disappointed then may be there is no monster but he didn’t. He also step back from his responsibility of his creation. We can say that he wants to become like God but don’t posses the quality of becoming like God. He rejects his own creation and that is why monster is alone and become what society made him. If Victor would take responsibility of his creation and taught it how to live then may be the situation is not worst like this and may be monster will never become monster. So as per my thought Victor is real monster.

4) From where Mary Shelly get the idea for the novel Frankenstein?

It is told that at once, Mary, her lover Percy Shelly and Byron, these three are on holidays and Byron give challenge to write one novel to see who is best and from this Mary get the idea of writing “Frankenstein”.

5) Do you think the search for the knowledge is dangerous and destructive?

No I don’t think that the search for knowledge is dangerous or destructive, I think that the use of that knowledge make it dangerous or destructive. We can take example of Dr. Faustus who posses great knowledge but he just remain a mere musician as he don’t know that how to use that knowledge in appropriate way. Same thing happen with Frankenstein also, he possesses the knowledge but he don’t know how to use it. He uses his knowledge against the law of nature and that resulted in destructive way. So I think search for great knowledge is not dangerous but in which way that knowledge is used that becomes dangerous. We posses knowledge but one should also know the limits of human, one can not go against the nature and if anyone does that then it will lead us to the dangerous end same as Frankenstein.

6) What are some myths used by Mary Shelly in the Frankenstein?

There are several myths which are used by Mary Shelly like the myth from bible – the story of creation which is connected to Frankenstein created the monster same as God created the Adam. The difference is the creation of God is perfect while on the other hand the creation of Frankenstein is dangerous. Second myth Mary uses is of Narcissus who has obsessed with his own reflection in water and fall in love with it and decide not to leave that place and he just sit there and die by watching his own reflection. Same happen with Frankenstein as he is obsessed with his creation or the work of create something that he rejects all and live alone. The third myth which is used by Mary is, myth of Prometheus, who is angle and stole fire from heaven for human kind and got punished by God in same manner Frankenstein also wants to do good of society by make a man who is more powerful and more intelligent but it ultimately ends tragically. So these are some myth used by Mary Shelly.

7) Write about the narratology of Frankenstein.

The narrative style of “Frankenstein” is frame narrative or box with in the box. Narratology is study of narrative and Gerard Genette give term narratology. In this type of narrative style there is story with in the story and there can also be more than one narrator. In this novel there is three narrator one is Captain Walton who told story to his sister through letters. Second is Victor Frankenstein who telling the story to Walton and third is monster who is telling story to the Frankenstein. This is the narrative style of Frankenstein.

Thank you.

T.S Eliot "Tradition and Individual Talent"

Thinking activity of T.S Eliot's "Tradition and Individual talent"

Here isthe answer of given task and the link of the task is here...  http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2014/12/t-s-eliot-tradition-and-individual.html?m=1

1) How would you like to explain Eliot's concept of Tradition? Do you agree with it?

Concept of tradition for Eliot is in more larger sense. He does not find tradition as something in negative way, he rather takes it in positive way. For Eliot to follow tradition does not mean just slavish imitation it is something to add in the existing tradition. For Eliot tradition is not dead but it is something which always live. Yes I am agree with Eliot as he doesn’t believe the tradition as something which is at some time followed by living people of that time but it is rather a live and a new writer who don’t have anything their own unique it is something they are taking from the existing tradition and by their creativity they add their own new thing in the living tradition and make their place.

2) What do you understand by historical sense?

Eliot says that historical sense is necessary element for poet or writer because it gives them a sense of writing timeless and temporal. As Eliot says, “The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence” which means it is not about to know figures and facts of history but understand the time in which people are living and their ways of living and also how that past is present in contemporary time. Further he says, “This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional” which means that with the help of historical sense a writer can write timeless and temporal together and which makes the writer traditional and not the slavish imitation.

3) What is the relationship between 'Tradition' and 'Individual talent' according to the poet T.S Eliot?

According to Eliot a new writer does not have anything their own and unique, tradition and individual talent both are not separate. Though individuals are not just imitating the tradition. New writers use their individual talent to expand or extent something new in existing tradition by keeping harmony with the tradition and give it more beauty and more meaning and also make their own place in the huge tradition. So tradition and individual talent both goes together.

4) Explain quote, "Some can absorb knowledge, the more tardy must sweat for it. Shakespeare from plutarch than most men could from the whole british museum"

In above given quote Eliot talks about the greatness of Shakespeare and his historical sense. Before he says that a writer or reader should have well read and also having the full understanding and knowledge of history but he find Shakespeare exception and then again he try to justify his thought and says that Shakespeare has seems to absorb the knowledge of his age and not only his age but the past ages also and he has the great understanding which learned men does not have. He says in this quote that historical sense or tradition is not inherited one must have to do a great labor to achieve this.

5) Explain "Honest criticism and sensitive appretiation is directed not upon the poet butupon the poetry."

In this quote Eliot wants to shift attention from the author to the text. Eliot wants to say that for the honest criticism the critic should only concern or focus on only the work not on the author or something else also they have to be free from all their prejudices then and then a critic can give a honest criticism on any work and for sensitive appreciation also to concern about only the work because a critic might have some problem or some prejudices about the author which should not affect the talent of the writer critic should forget all things while giving any views about any work and for make it honest concentration upon only a work is needed.

6) How would you like to explain Eliot's theoy of depersonalization? You can Explain with the help of chemical reaction in presence of catalyst agent, platinum.

To make the thought of depersonalizing clear Eliot uses science. He gave an example of chemical reaction. He describe the process of making sulfuric acid and he says that sulfuric acid made from sulfur dioxide and water but the process did not take place if platinum is not available though platinum plays very vital role in process then even it doesn’t have existent in sulfuric acid. Eliot also says the same thing that the man who suffers and the mind which creates both should different. Mind should absorb every emotion clearly and then with the full consciousness poet create a work it should not have any element of poet’s own self in work. Though the poet’s own self is necessary to create work but it should not reflect in work. This is what the theory of depersonalization.

7) Explain, "Poetry is not turning loose of emotion, but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality, but an escape from personality."

In above given quote Eliot again talk about the depersonalization. He says that  whenever poet create something their own self should not reflect in their creative work. Poet should learn to be aloof or detach when they create something. Eliot says poetry is impersonal it is not for showing one’s own emotion or self it is about escape from that emotions and self. Poet’s own self should not reflect in their own poetry or work.

8) Write two points on which one can write critique on "T.S Eliot as a critic."

As per my thinking one can write critique on Eliot’s two points
1) Eliot’s idea of Tradition
2) Eliot’s view of escape from emotion and escape from personality

These are the two points on which we can analyse T.S Eliot as a critic.
 

Thank you.

ख्वाब

आज मैने अपने आप को शीशे मे देखा
कुछ नया नहि था
रोज देखती हु
मगर आज कुछ अलग दिखा
थोडा सा गुस्सा थोडा सा गुरुर
बहोत सारे समजोते बहोत सारे ख्वाब
मगर आज मुजसे अपने आप से नजर नही मीली
एसा क्या हो गया मुजसे
थोडा सोचने के बाद पता चला
आज फिर एक समजोता हुआ था ख्वाब के आगे
एक बार फिर ख्वाब पीछे रेह गया

एक बार फिर कुछ छुट गया.

Matthew Arnold

Here I’m posting my answer of thinking activity on Matthew Arnold which is given to us by our professor. Here is the link of given task…
 http://dilipbarad.blogspot.in/2014/11/mathew-arnold-study-of-poetry.html

Do you agree with Matthew Arnold's views on detachment, disinterestedness, fallacies like historical and personal, touchstone method and his definition of poetry? If you agree, why and on what grounds do you agree? If you disagree, why and what are the points of disagreement?


Matthew Arnold, English poet and cultural critic of Victorian age and also inspector of schools. Here I am going to give my view on his three views or methods, first is his views on detachment and disinterestedness, fallacies like historical and personal, second is his ‘touchstone method’, and third is his definition of poetry.

The first great principle of criticism enunciated by Arnold is that of disinterestedness or detachment. Disinterestedness on the part of the critic implies freedom from all prejudices, personal or historical. On this view of Arnold I agree with him that for apt or honest criticism one has to leave all their prejudices about author also and work also. Though it is very tough to remain detach or disinterested from personal or historical views or prejudices, it take time to be like, but this method of criticize any work as per my thinking is right.

Arnold also says that, The business of criticism is neither to find fault nor to display the critic’s own learning or influence; it is to know “The best which has been thought and said in the world.” And to do this detachment and disinterestedness is necessary element which the critic need so on this point I am agree with Arnold.

Second in his “Touchstone method” he basically wants to say that , this method introduced scientific objectivity to critical evaluation by providing comparison and analysis as the two primary tools for judging individual poets. In a simple language he wants to say that for judging any new poet’s work we have to use one of best old poet’s best work and by taking best work of old poet we have to compare it with new poet’s work and analyze the new work and if its have the same quality which old work has then we can consider that new work as good or best work. Now on this view of Arnold I am not agree with him. There is no need of comparison. Everyone has their own qualities we can not expect to all to have same qualities and we can not consider one quality as best and other inferior. If we do this to all new works then we can not find novelty. If we take example of singing, nowadays there are many remake of old songs we can find, which sang by some new singers but the voice of old singer and new singer does not have same quality. Here I want to give example of the Hindi song ‘yeh rate yeh mausam’ which originally sang by Kishor Kumar and Asha Bhosle but the remake of this song which sang by Sanam Puri and Simran Sehgal does not have same quality which old one has. In old song we can find peace and the music is also calm but in new song we can find the spices of new music and the voice of both singer is also different but we can not say that old one is good and new one is bad. Both have their own quality, both songs are like by audience. So I am not agree with Arnold’s touchstone method, new things has to differ from old otherwise it will not call the new.

Third is his definition of poetry, “poetry is criticism of life, must conform to the laws of poetic truth and poetic beauty.” Poetic truth here means the truth and seriousness of matter and poetic beauty is felicity and perfection of diction and manner. On this definition I am agree with Arnold that poetry is criticism of life because we can find it in any work that the life or thoughts of poet is always reflect in their work. Second poet should serious about his subject, it doesn’t matter which subject poet has the poetry should reflect the subject that is called the seriousness of matter. The beauty of manner, appropriate use of diction give poetic beauty to the work. After all poetry or literature is for pleasure and for that these all elements are necessary. On this point I am agree with Arnold.  

Thank you.