Four goals of culture study assignment paper 8

Department of English,
M. K. Bhavnagar University     
Name :-  Mansi Upadhyay
Roll No :- 18
Email Id :- mansiupadhyay06@gmail.com
Department :-M. A.English department
Submitted to :-  Dr. Prof. Dilip Barad
(Head of English Dept. M.K. Bhavanagar University)
Semester :-  2
Paper No :-  8 (Cultural Studies)
Assignment :- four  goals  of culture  study.
Introduction:-
                               The word “culture” itself it so difficult to pin down, “cultural studies” is hard to define. As far as cultural study is concerned, it has broader meaning because we see from various perspective then an individual can know what actually it lays in the meaning. Therefore firstly it becomes my job to deconstruct the meaning of culture as the meaning is elaborated according to different critics so at first we will have glance on the meaning of culture.
 What is cultural studies?

                                    Cultural studies is very hard to define it but cultural studies is not so much a discrete approach at all, but rather a set of practice. With the reference book of Elice Walker novel is ‘The color Purple’ (1982). Through this book, the professor identifies African American literary and cultural sources and described the book’s multilayered narrative structure, moving on to the brief review of its feminist critique of American gender and racial attitude. Students and professor discuss the key facts and the different approaches of the novel.
                                     A student raises her hand and says about the film version of Steven Spielberg, angry responses from many African viewers. The class member gave the reactions to the points examine the interrelationship among the race, gender, popular culture, the media, and the literature. They question cultural conventions both the side- historical and contemporary.
                                      Cultural studies is not “a tightly coherent, unified movement of agenda”, but a “loosely coherent group of tendencies, issues and questions”. Cultural studies is composed with the Marxism, post-structuralism and post-modernism, feminism, gender studies, anthropology, sociology, race and ethnic studies, film theory, urban studies public policy, popular cultural studies and post-colonial studies. And those fields concentrate with social and cultural forces that either create community or cause division.
                                        We can take the example of Jacques Derrida’s ‘Deconstruction’. Deconstruction is a theory and practice of writing which questions and claims to undermine the assumption that the system of large language provides grounds that are to adequate to establish the boundaries, the coherent or the unity, and the determine meaning of literary text.
                                         The discipline psychology has also entered the field of cultural studies. For example Jacques Lucan’s psychoanalytic the theory of the unconscious structured as a language promoted a special a special importance to the language and power as symbolic system.
                                           Michel Foucault came to an idea of power is a whole complex of forces, it is that which produced and what happened, accepted ways to thinking, writing, and speaking and practice that embody, exercise and amount the power. Foucault’s ‘Genelogy’it includes many things by the traditional historians, from the archetypal blue prints four prisons to the memory of deviants
Four Goals of Cultural Study


(1)     Cultural Studies transcends the confiner of a particular discipline such as literacy criticism or history.
(2)     Cultural studies are politically engaged.
(3)     Cultural studies deny the separation of ‘high’ and ‘low’ are elite and popular culture.
(4)     Cultural studies analyze not only the cultural work, but also the means of production.

1. )     Cultural studies transcend the confines of a particular discipline such as literary criticism or history.
                            Cultural studies practiced as critical inquiry, Representation and boundry 2 cultural studies involve securitizing the cultural phenomenon of a text. Cultural studies are not necessarily about literature in a traditional sense or even about ‘art’.
                              Intellectual works are not limited by their own “border” as single texts, historical problems or discipline and the critics own personal connections to what is being analyzed may also described. Cultural studies practitioners are “resisting intellectual” who see what they do so“an emancipator project” because it erodes the traditional disciplinary divisions in most institutions of higher education. It is for students who sometimes mean that the professor might make their own opinion to the political view part of the instruction which leads to the problems. But this kind of criticism is an engaged rather than detached activity.

2. )  Cultural studies are politically engadged :

            Cultural critics see themselves as “oppositional” not only within their own disciplines but to many of the power structures of society at large. They question inequalities within power structures and seek to discover models for restructuring relationships among dominant and “mirority” or “subaltern” discourses. Because meaning and individual subjectivity are culturally constructed they can thus be reconstructed. Such a notion, taken to a philosophical extreme, denies the autonomy of the individual whether an actual person or a character in literature, a rebuttal of the traditional humanistic “Great Man” or “Great Book” theory and a relocation of Gestnetics and culture from the ideal realism of taste and sensibility, into the arena of a whole society’s everyday life as it is constructed.

3.  )  Cultural studies denies the separation of high and low or elite and popular culture.
                               
                               “Cultured” person used to mean being acquainted with“highbrew” art and intellectual pursuits. Cultural critics work to transfer culture to include mass culture, or popular, folk or urban.
                                  Jean Baudrillard and Andreas who were the theorists and argued that after World War II the distinctions among high, law and mass culture collapsed and they cite other theorists such as Pierre Bourdieu and Dick Hebdige on how“good taste” and reflects prevailing social, economic and political power bases. Their argument for white superiority and worldwide domination of other races especially Asians.
                                    French historian Michel de certeau, cultural critic examine “the practice of everyday’s life” studying literature as an anthropologist world, as a phenomenon of culture, including a culture’s economy. Transgressing of boundaries among discipline law and high can make cultural studies research paper with the title: - The birth of Captain Jack Sparrow; an analysis and four sources of Johnny Depp’s funky performance in Disney’s pirates of the Caribbean: The course of the Black Pearl (2003), you could research cultural topics ranging from the trade economics of the sea two hundred years ago.   
4. )   Cultural Studies analyses not only the cultural work, but also the means of production.

                                        Marxist critics have long recognized the importance of such paraliterary question as these: who supports a given artists? Who publishes his or her book, and how are these book distributed? Who buys book? For what matter who is literate and who is not? A well-known analysis of literary production is Janice Redway’s study of American romance novel, Reading the Romance, Woman, patriarchy and popular literature which demonstrates the textual effect of publishing industry’s decision about the books that will minimize its financial risks. Cultural studies thus join subjectivity and the cultural in location to individual lives with engagement a direct approach to attacking social ills. Cultural studies practitioners deny, “Humanism” or“the humanities” as universal categories which resembles the goals and values of humanistic and democratic ideals.

Thank you

Short note :vakrokti, riti and auchitya assignment paper 7

Department of English,
M. K. Bhavnagar University     
Name :-  Mansi Upadhyay
Roll No :- 18
Email Id :- mansiupadhyay06@gmail.com
Department :-M. A.English department
Submitted to :-  Dr. Prof. Dilip Barad
(Head of English Dept. M.K. Bhavanagar University)
Semester :-  2
Paper No :-  7 ( Literary Theory and Criticism 2 ( 20th Century western and Indian poetics)
Assignment Topic :- Short note : Vakrokti , Riti , And Auchitya.

Preface:

                            Indian poems are based on Sanskrit poetry. Sanskrit poetry developed in all directions, like " Ramayana " and " Mahabharata ". Ramayana is written by "Valmiki" as the first poem in Sanskrit. Ramayana is not only hard work of valmiki but also composition of many different things. This way Mahabharata ,Slokas , Parvas , Vedas , Upnishadas are also very important in literature.
                             In Indian Poetic Bharatmuni ,Panini, Kalidas, Kuntaka , Bhamaha and many other great poets who wrote about the history and about the culture of India. In the sense of poetry means both type of meanings - to be read, to be heard and drama which is to be seen.here poetic of Indian form in that first In SANSKRIT languge Poem divived to many forms and that some Holy book and popular of in Sanskrit language Namely Was ‘KAVASHASTRA’ in this book poem divide regarded as :


                                In this chart we saw that many poet use of own language of literal work of form and creative works of them writing of poetry. Here every in part of poetry which organize of own main characteristics of own fingers.

                              Categorize Indian poetic theory very important and useful to us understanding of Indianpoetic. Every form and construct  of very inserting finding of literary poet of poetry and play or drama. Herecatalog of central idea of every branch development of them:
 
                                       Here many source evolution of theory and many typesformatting of poetic construct of literacy text and words. What is basic structure of poem that found many branches of literature?In this branches are not only divide to get oppositemeanings but main aim they have been put of different way to poem’s heart and poetry meanings.In chiefly six branches are very famous of literature and that theory was very useful to understating to history were how to create of over poet define various type poetry.

                                         Indian poetics creation time many concepts like which establishment on that time. Indian poetry and Indian literature in general, has a long history dating back to Vedic times. They were written in various Indian languagessuch as Vedic Sanskrit,Classical Sanskrit. Poetry in foreign languages such asSanskrit and English also has a strong influence on Indian poetry. The poetry reflects diverse spiritual traditions within India. In particular, many Indian poets have been inspired by mystical experiences.Poetry is the oldest form of literature and has a rich written and oral tradition.Indian aesthetics is a vast field. Any attempt to discuss it in such a brief space as this can only be sketchy and deal with the broad tendencies. Hence, here I have only attempted to give its brief overview with reference to major trends. Many Theory Growth in  medieval day. They classified regards …
 Short note:- Vakrokti, Riti And Auchitya.
1) Vakrokti:-
Vakrokti is also a part of language of literature. Vakrokti has special importance in literature not only as a separately but also as a important special element.

  " Kuntaka " is known as the originator of the  - Vakrokti school. He worked on his " Vakroktijivitam ".

 Vakrokti is the most misunderstood and misinterpretation one. It means striking ness in word and meaning of Vakrokti is :-              Vakrokti :-  Vakra  +  Ukti
Vakra :- Crooked indirect or unique.
      Ukti :- Poetic expression or speech



Here in Vakrokti " Six Gunas " ( Qualities ) are identified inliterary style.

1. Aucitya
2. Saubhagya
3. Madhurya
4. Prasada
5. Lavanya
6. Abhijatya


Example :-


                         There is an example of the famous play " Mudrarakshasa " by " Vishakhadatta " discussed a very sharply Vakrokti speech by Shiva , when one day in the morning he comes a home with Ganga on his head to the utter concentration of Parvati. He is caught on the wrong foot by the jealousy. As a wife Parvati asks him questions and Shiva gives replies very meaningfull.
Parvati  :- Who is this blesses damsel on your crest ?

Shiva :- Shashikala ( Crescent of moon or lady's name )

Parvati :- Ohh !!!!! is that the name of the lady ???

Shiva :- surely !!! How is it you have forgotten her name?

Parvati :- My query is about the lady and not the moon.

Shiva :- Let then Vijaya , the lady in attendence reply and not the moon.

2) Riti

                             The riti School of poetics is represented fully by its chief exponent Vamana, author of kavyalankar sutravritti, who flourished in Kashmirtowards the close of the eight century A.D.Vanmna says in Kavyalankar  books write about Riti :-
ivi=Q4a  pdrcna irit‰ a ivi=qo g8oTma a

                           when dhvni theory’s anandvardhayan defined of poem soul is Dhavni that time Vamna oppositely put on view about own fillings and describe that guna and almakara is toytally different of each other. Vamana's riti is anticipated in the marga of the south Indian writer Dandi, author of kavyadarsha. The distinctions between the vaidarbha style and the gaudya style was known even to Bhamasha , the earliestimportant writer who was in against of praising the vaidarbha and condemning the gaudya , and said that both style have their own place in good literature.But in Dandin we find the earlier partiality for vaidarbha and aversion to gaudiya given great prominence. He takes the vaidarbha style as the best and says that it contains all ten poetics qualities properly balanced. Those ten qualities are: -

1. Ojas:  strength through the use of long compounds
2. Prasad:  clarity & lucidity
3. Shlesha:  well knittedness
4. Samata:  evenness of sound within a line
5. Samadhi:  ambivalence through the use of metaphors
6. Madhurya:  sweetness
7. Sukamarata: softness & delicacy
8. Udaratva:  exaltation
9. Arthavyakti: lucidity of meaning
10. Kanti: grace

                          Vamana took the ten gunas of Bharata and Dandi but hr traced all gunas separately as belonging to the expression and as belonging to the meaning thus masking their number twenty. He defined them in his own way to suit his theory of Riti and stated that at the gunas existed clearly and fully in the Vaidarbha riti which only a few of them exited in other ritis.
                       To the early styles vaidarbha and gaudiya style of ancient writers. Vamana added a third one called Panchali all these are geographical names and suggest the style popular in those regions and he defines these ritis in his own way:
        i.       Vaidarbha: According to vamana vaidarbha is that style which is untouched by even the slightest blemish, which is full of all the qualities and which is a scoot as the lute.
    ii.            Gaudiya style: the gaudiya style is characterized by Ojas and Kanti but it devoid of madhurya and  saukumaryo it is full of long  compound and bombastic words.
 iii.            Panchali : panchali is the style which has the qualities of Madhurya  and saukumarya and is devoid of ojas and kanti. It is soft and resemble the puranic style

                In their all of over things like that very interesting way of vamanna explain that how can poet make in common to different way of thinking. The Riti School developed by vamana was a serious attempt in this direction on all later critics.There theory is also useful to poetic version of totally depend not on one things but many things and some abstract is
very important   Role of model.
3)  Auchitya :

                                     Ksemendra made ‘Auchitya’ the defines Auchitya as the property of an expression being an exact and appropriate analogue of the expressed. The theory of property or appropriateness claims that in all aspect of literary composition. There is the possibility of a perfect, the, most appropriate choice of subject, of ideas, of words, of devices as such, it has affinities with Longinus’s theory of the sublime.
                               The concept of propriety with reference to custom, subject, characters and sentiment recourse in almost all theorists and is often discussed in association with figures of speech, guan, dosa and rites.
                               Acharya Ksemendra was main founder of this theory and his books ‘AUCHITYAVICHARCHRCHA’ that his acceptable of ‘Poem Atama’s  as a Achitya’  and also writes that’s defined of like:

AOicTy rsi3#3Sy iS9rkarSy «ittm\ a

                 That means poetry should be made by vastu,rasa,dhvani,and all over things were important but only for appreciable Achitya. If the poetry repentance of without almakara, guna, that  not for good qualities but very poor things of reproduce.Anandavardhana relates this principle specifically to rasa. It has been used for propriety in delineating bhavas according to character and in the choice of margas.
                               According to the speaker, content and type of literary composition areas, locations or sites of literary compositions where the concept of Auchitya is pertinent.

TO Sum up:


                                         Finally, there are all theory properly their condition may be true and right of his way through writing of literature. Indian poetics in such concepts of very valuable tools of evolution of work of art and some other related things. Here most important that we are not evolution to only for in one theory. All of theorist has right and true of his own view and poetry and literature creator got idea that all over theory possible to use of most kind of work.








Thank you

Hebraism and Hellenism in culture and anarchy assignment paper no 6

Department of English,
M. K. Bhavnagar University     
Name :-  Mansi Upadhyay
Roll No :- 18
Email Id :- mansiupadhyay06@gmail.com
Department :-M. A.English department
Submitted to :-  Dr. Prof. Dilip Barad
(Head of English Dept. M.K. Bhavanagar University)
Semester :-  2
Paper No :-  6 ( The Victorian Literature)
Assignment Topic :- Hebraism and Hellenism in culture and Anarchy.
Introduction: Matthew Arnold


           
                           Matthew Arnold (24 December 1822 – 15 April 1888) was an English poet and cultural critic who worked as an inspector of schools. He was the son of Thomas Arnold, the famed headmaster of Rugby School, and brother to both Tom Arnold, literary professor, and William Delafield Arnold, novelist and colonial administrator. Matthew Arnold has been characterised as a sage writer, a type of writer who chastises and instructs the reader on contemporary social issues.

                             Matthew Arnold was one of the great critic of Victorian age. He was a British Poet and Cultural Critic who worked as an inspector of schools. Arnold has been characterized as a Saga writer, a type of a writer who chastises and instructs the reader on contemporary social issues.  Arnold is a one the literary figure of Victorian age, and He comes next to Browning and Tennyson. He has the experience of twenty – four years as the inspector of schools and so it provided him so much time to meet the different classes and society and he examine their behaviors and their habits. His comparative experiences at the home and abroad yielded such essays as, The Popular Education of France, with Notices of That of Holland and Switzerland, A French Eton, or Middle-Class Education and the State, and Schools and Universities on the Continent, all of which influenced the ideas which found expression in Culture and Anarchy.
                      Matthew Arnold has wrote one essay on culture and social issues titled “Culture and Anarchy”. This essay considered as his one of the masterpiece of social criticism. Arnold mostly known for his this essay in which he has criticizes the culture and society and gave clear vision of Victorian issues of his time.

Culture and Anarchy:-



                                       Culture and Anarchy, major work of criticism by Matthew Arnold, published in 1869. In it Arnold contrasts culture, which he defines as “the study of perfection,” with anarchy, the prevalent mood of England’s then new democracy, which lacks standards and a sense of direction. Arnold classified English society into the Barbarians (with their lofty spirit, serenity, and distinguished manners and their inaccessibility to ideas), the Philistines (the stronghold of religious nonconformity, with plenty of energy and morality but insufficient “sweetness and light”), and the Populace (still raw and blind). He saw in the Philistines the key to culture; they were the most influential segment of society; their strength was the nation’s strength, their crudeness its crudeness; it therefore was necessary to educate and humanize the Philistines. Arnold saw in the idea of “the State,” and not in any one class of society, the true organ and repository of the nation’s collective “best self.” No summary can do justice to Culture and Anarchy, however; it is written with an inward poise, a serene detachment, and an infusion of subtle humour that make it a masterpiece of ridicule as well as a searching analysis of Victorian society. The same is true of its unduly neglected sequel, Friendship’s Garland (1871).

                            This essay written in six parts here the summarizes of Arnold’s aspects of culture that will bring human society to greater perfection and the aspects of modern life that bring human society towards anarchy:

The names of these six chapters of the essay:

1.    Chapter – 1 “Sweetness and Light”
2.    Chapter – 2 “Doing as One Likes”
3.    Chapter – 3 “Barbarians, Philistines, and Populace”
4.    Chapter – 4 “Hebraism and Hellenism”
5.    Chapter – 5 “Porro Unum est Necessarium”
6.    Chapter – 6 “Our Liberal Practitioners”

Hebraism:

               “Hebraism is the identification of a usage, trait, or characteristic of the Hebrew language. By successive extension it is often applied to the Jewish people, their faith, national ideology, or culture.”
                    The word “Hebraism” describes a quality, character, nature or method of thought, or system of religion attributed to the Hebrew people. It is in this sense that Matthew Arnold contrasts Hebraism with Hellenism.

Hellenism:

                          “The word “Hellenism” derived from the Greek word “Ellinismos”. In Greek, Ellinismos has been used to describe the people of Greek lineage and also to describe a set of values for living that were invented by the ancient Greeks.”
                            Hellenism, generally used by historians to refer to the period from the death of Alexander the Great to the death of Cleopatra and the incorporation of Egypt in the Roman Empire in 30 B.C.E. Egypt was the last important survivor of the political system which had developed as a consequence both of the victories of Alexander and of his premature death. The word Hellenism is also used to indicate more generically the cultural tradition of the Greek-speaking part of the Roman Empire between Augustus and Justinian and/or the influence of Greek civilization on Rome, Carthage, India, and other regions which were never part of the empire of Alexander.
                          In this essay he has discussed Hebraism and Hellenism. Arnold defines this chapter and presents his ideas about Hebraism and Hellenism. He has quoted from Bishop Wilson, “First, never go against the best light you have; secondly, take care that your light be not darkness. "These two forces we may regard as in some sense rivals,--rivals not by the necessity of their own nature,   but as exhibited in man and his history,--and rivals dividing the empire of the world between them.  And to give these forces names from the two races of men who have supplied the most signal and splendid manifestations of them,  we may call them respectively the forces of Hebraism and Hellenism.
                  Hebraism and Hellenism are religious disciplines that incorporate similar language in their teaching. Arnold argues that these are the two prime driving forces in the world with each interacting strongly with the others. Some time they both are in harmony, at that time one may have a stronger effect than the opposing force. Hellenism is a Greek teaching and focuses on seeing the world and reality as it really is and spontaneity. As we seen above Hebraism is obviously Hebrew, and put stress upon have personal obedience and strictness of the conscience. While there are many differences in both of these teachings, they each emphasize the fact that desire is a very human characteristic as well as the need for the love of God.

                             In the beginning of this topic, Arnold discusses about doing and thinking. His general view about human being is that they prefer to act rather than think. He rejects it because mankind is to error and he cannot always think right, but it comes seldom in the process of reasoning and meditation, or he is not rightly guided by the light of true reason. The nation which follows the voice of its conscience and its best light, but it is not the light of true reason except darkness. Arnold gave his opinion that, the nation is energy or the capacity of doing but it is not intelligence or capacity of thinking rightly. Such energy that has the sense of obligation and duty must be related to the best light.

                             Arnold said that Hellenism and Hebraism they should be in harmony by the light of reason, and talks about the great idea to know and the great energy to act. He considered both these forces very powerful and insists on the balance of the both thought and action. The final aim of these Hellenism and Hebraism is the same as man’s salvation and perfection.  Even when their language indicates by variation, — sometimes a broad variation, often a but slight and subtle variation, — the different courses of thought which are uppermost in each discipline, even then the unity of the final end and aim is still apparent. To employ the actual words of that discipline with which we ourselves are all of us most familiar, and the words of which, therefore, come most home to us, that final end and aim is "that we might be partakers of the divine nature"

                         Arnold also discusses further thing that the supreme idea with Hellenism or the Greek Spirit is to see things as they really are, and the supreme idea of Hebraism or the spirit of Bible is conduct and obedience. If Hebraism means only the knowledge of the Bible and the word of God, then Arnold has come to the defence of culture and says: “No man, who knows nothing else, knows even his Bible”!  Essential to Hellenism, on the other hand, is the impulse to the development of the whole man.

                         Arnold points out that the Greek philosophy considered that the body and its desires are an obstacle to right action. The root idea of the both is the desire for reason and the will of God, and the desire of love of God. Hebraism studies the universal order and observes the magnificence of God apparent in the order, whereas Hellenism follows with flexible activity. Thus, Hellenism acquires spontaneity of consciousness with a clearness of mind, and Hebraism achieves a strictness of conscience with its clarity of thought. Hellenism has more earnestness of free play of the intellect or a Plato says, “for ever through all the universe tends towards that which is lovely”.  In brief, Hebraism shows stress on doing rather than knowing, and follows the will of God. Its primary idea is absolute obedience to the will of God. 

                    Both these Hebraism and Hellenism are directly connected to the life of human beings. Hebraism fastens its faith in doing, where as Hellenism put stress on knowing or knowledge. The final aim of both is the partaking of divine life with knowledge and action. Arnold describes that the Bible reveals the truth which awards the peace of God and liberty. The easy and simple idea of Hellenism is to get rid of ignorance, to see things as they are, and to search beauty from them. Socrates ,  as Hellenic, 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.

                 In this treatise, Arnold says that there is enough of Hellenism in the English nation, and Arnold emphasizes on Hebraism, because it is based on conduct and self – control and admit that the age is incapable of governing itself in the pursuit of perfection, and the bright promise of Greek ideal is faded. The Obedience  or submission must be to the rules of conduct as expressed by the Holy Scripture. Hellenism lays its main stress on clear intelligence. Whereas Hebraism keeps main stress on firm obedience, moral power and character. Arnold explain and turns to Sin that spoils the efforts to achieve Hellenism. He gave his opinion that sin is an obstacle to perfection because it brings hurdles in knowing ourselves, it prevent man’s passage to perfection. He calls it is a mysterious power that is hostile to man. The discipline of the Holy Scripture teaches that how to avoid and stop the sin.  Hebraism speaks of becoming conscious of the sin and keeping away from it, Whereas Hellenism speaks of thinking clearly and seeing the things in their essence and beauty.

                         In this chapter Arnold also talked about Christianity and also talked about the idea of immorality as illustrated by the St. Paul, the Christian saint and Plato the Greek Philosopher and Thinker, but both have left something unexplained. So, its create a problem the problem of human spirit is still unsolved in both Hebraism and Hellenism. In all this writer finds triumph of the great movement of Christianity on the man’s moral impulses. Arnold Accepts that Renaissance re established Hellenism and man’s intellectual impulses in Europe and Puritanism embraced the blessing of both Hellenism and Hebraism. In time of Reformation, there was the more influence of Hebraism than the Hellenism, there was a grave return to the Bible and to doing the will of God from the heart.

                      There was superiority of Puritanism over Catholicism and it was moral, it has the result of its greater sincerity and greater earnestness. Arnold then says that the attitude of mind of Puritanism towards the Bible differs from the attitude of mind of Catholism toward the church. In the sixteenth century, therefore, Hellenism re-entered the world, and again stood in presence of Hebraism, — a Hebraism renewed and purged, but Hellenism of Renaissance lost its moral character. Arnold viewed on thing most that, Hellenism is of Indo-European growth, Hebraism is of Semitic growth; and we English, a nation of Indo- European stock, seem to belong naturally to the movement of Hellenism.

                          The greatness of the difference is well measured by the difference in force, beauty, significance and usefulness, between primitive Christianity and Protestantism. Eighteen hundred years ago it was altogether the hour of Hebraism; primitive Christianity was legitimately and truly the ascendant force in the world at that time, and the way of mankind's progress lay through its full development. In 16th century there was a reaction of Hebraism against Hellenism. If Hellenism was defeated by Hebraism, it shows that Hellenism was imperfect.

                        There was the defeat of Hellenism by early Christianity and the defeat of Hellenism by Puritanism was the result of Renaissance stress on the progress of humanism and science. And incline that the man to knowing himself and the world to seeing the thing as the spontaneity of consciousness. 

                   Arnold defines how Hebraism and Hellenism have the same ends - so that "we may be partakers in divine nature" and thus they should be balanced in our society. Hebraism's close relationship with sin tends to make it too much about conduct and obedience, and not enough about seeing this as they really are. In history, there have been waves of Hebraism and Hellenism (Renaissance - Hellenistic; Reformation - Hubristic). Arnold values the "tenacity" of Hebraism but suggests that Hellenism is needed to make sure the "light" which this tenacity follows is not "darkness."

                      At the end we can say that Arnold’s argument is about the idea of Hebraism versus Hellenism. Hebraism represents the actions of people who are either ignorant or resistant to the idea of culture. Hebraists subscribe to a strict, narrow-minded method of moral conduct and self control which does not allow them to visualize a utopian future of belonging to an enlightened community. Hellenism signifies the open-minded, spontaneous exploration of classical ideas and their application to contemporary society.

                At the end of this part of this essay “Hebraism and Hellenism”  we can say that it must be added that the rule of life should be based on these theory of Hebraism and Hellenism because both has final aim that is man’s perfection or salvation. As in this part Arnold has defined very well concept about Hebraism and Hellenism on the other side he has also defined the things which are related to the politics, society, culture and other thing also comes in other chapters of the essay. This essay “Culture and Anarchy” ended with then Arnold idea and his thought that he how he gave different view about culture.






Thank you

Frankenstein with mythological approach assignment paper 5

Department of English,
M. K. Bhavnagar University     
Name :-  Mansi Upadhyay
Roll No :- 18
Email Id :- mansiupadhyay06@gmail.com
Department :-M. A.English department
Submitted to :-  Dr. Prof. Dilip Barad
(Head of English Dept. M.K. Bhavanagar University)
Semester :-  2
Paper No :-  5 ( The Romantic Literature)
Assignment Topic :-   Frankenstein With Mythological Approach.

• Introduction of Author Mary   Shelley’s
                              Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein: or, The Modern Prometheus (1818), was the daughter of the radical philosopher William Godwin, who described her as ‘singularly bold, somewhat imperious, and active of mind’. Her mother, who died days after her birth, was the famous defender of women’s rights, Mary Wollstonecraft. Mary grew up with five semi-related siblings in Godwin’s unconventional but intellectually electric household.
                            At the age of 16, Mary eloped to Italy with the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, who praised ‘the irresistible wildness & sublimity of her feelings’. Each encouraged the other’s writing, and they married in 1816 after the suicide of Shelley’s wife. They had several children, of whom only one survived.
                              A ghost-writing contest on a stormy June night in 1816 inspired Frankenstein, often called the first true work of science-fiction. Superficially a Gothic novel, and influenced by the experiments of Luigi Galvani, it was concerned with the destructive nature of power when allied to wealth. It was an instant wonder, and spawned a mythology all its own that endures to this day.
                            After Percy Shelley’s death in 1822, she returned to London and pursued a very successful writing career as a novelist, biographer and travel writer. She also edited and promoted her husband’s poems and other writings.
                          Mary Shelley's most famous novel, Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus, was released anonymously when she was only 21 years old. Only from its second edition, five years later, was her name to appear as the author. It was initially thought that the author was her husband Percy, as the book was dedicated to William Godwin, his political hero. The work came out of a competition proposed by Lord Byron in the summer of 1816 so as who could write the best horror story. The central idea came to Shelly in a dream where she saw a student putting together parts of a man's body and working through a big engine to animate it. She first wrote a short story but Percy encouraged her to expand it into a novel. The novel had at the center of its plot a failed attempt at artificial life, by the scientist Frankenstein, which produced a monster. The work is considered to be a mixture of science fiction, gothic novel, and having elements from the Romantic Movement.
                       Let’s clear the definition of myth and mythology before elaborating the mythological approach in Frankenstein in detail.

                        Myth is the word, which came to existence in the mid 19th century. Because earlier it was known as Mythos. It is a Greek word. Myth means story or word.
                          Myth critics concerned to find out those mysterious elements that inform certain literary works and that elicit, with almost uncanny force, dramatic & universal human reactions. Study of myth reveals about the mind and character of people. Myths are symbolic projections of people’s hopes, values, fears and aspirations. There are many misconceptions about myth in reality myth reflects more profound reality.

                         Traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the worldview of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon. Myths relate the events, conditions, and deeds of gods or superhuman beings that are outside ordinary human life and yet basic to it. These events are set in a time altogether different from historical time, often at the beginning of creation or at an early stage of prehistory. A culture's myths are usually closely related to its religious beliefs and rituals. The modern study of myth arose with early 19th-century.

• Mythological approach:

                         
                              Myth critic concerned to seek out those mysterious elements that inform certain literary works and that elicit, with almost uncanny force, dramatic and universal human reactions.
                            Archetypal patterns and the tensed structural wires of the masterpiece and that vibrate in such a way that a sympathetic resonance is set off deep within the reader.
                           Study of myths reveals about the mind and character of people. myths are symbolic projections of people’s hopes, values, fears, and aspirations. misconceptions about myths. In reality myths reflect more profound reality.
                          William Blake: the politics of vision: “myth is fundamental, the dramatic representation of our deepest instinctual life, or primary awareness of man in the universe, capable of many configuration, upon which all particular opinions and attitudes depend”.
                      Alan w. watts, “myth is to be defined as a complex of stories-some no doubt fact, and some fantasy- which, for various reasons, human being regards as demonstrations of the inner meaning of the universe and of human life”. Theory of shadow, anima and persona social mark of a god-fearing, prayerful, self-righteous spiritual immaturity clash between ego and the external world anima(if it can be considered as inner world) fails. Anima is usually projected on mother. Victor’s anima is presented through Elizabeth. Separation,  loss of harmony and no peace of mind. Faith-unfaithful faith and unholy quest.  Instead of admitting to his error and working maturely for a reconciliation victor continues with mistakes. Failure of personality integration or of individuation unable to confront his own psyche or assimilate his own consciousness. The world becomes a shadow or a gloom. Selfish and immature ego and the monster is the result of this devilish mind.




• Myth of Prometheus
                           
                              In Ancient Greek mythology, Prometheus was said to be the wisest of all the Titans. In the form of fire Prometheus is credited with bringing mankind knowledge and enlightenment. He stole fire from the Gods of Mount Olympus. For acting against the decree of the Gods, who wanted to keep the power of fire to themselves, Prometheus was harshly punished. He was chained to a rock to have his liver eaten out every day by an eagle. Every night his liver would grow back. This was to be his punishment for all of eternity.
                           The full title of Mary Shelley's novel is Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that Mary Shelley was influenced by this tale. Her husband Percy Shelley even began composing his own tale of Prometheus in the form of a poem entitled, Prometheus Unbound. He began composing this work right around the same time that Mary was publishing Frankenstein.
                           Aside from the title, Shelley borrows from the tale of Prometheus a sense of consequence resulting from seeking enlightenment and power. Victor is her modern incarnation of Prometheus. He as Prometheus was, is fascinated by the power of electricity (lightning). We can recall from the narrative the moment when he becomes captivated by its fantastical power.
                           It is from this power, that he has equipped himself with, that the inner torture he will suffer from the use of it stems. Immediately following the creation if the creature, Victor is ill with disgust for what he has done. His torture mirrors that of Prometheus'; undying and eternal. From the beginning of the novel, when Victor warns Walton of the consequences of his quest, to the conclusion when Victor again reiterates the misfortunes he has suffered as a result of his curiosity, Mary Shelley mimics the Prometheus tale. Perhaps, this is why she saw it as a fitting subtitle.


                                 Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein as a modern day version of the legend of Prometheus. Prometheus created men out of clay and taught them the "arts of civilisation" (Webster's World Encyclopedia CD-ROM 1999). Zeus, the chief god of the Titans, wanted to destroy Prometheus' creation but Prometheus stole fire from heaven to help mankind. Zeus punished Prometheus by chaining him to a rock where an eagle would feed on his liver during the day and each night the liver would grow back. Prometheus was able to bargain for his release because he knew a secret which concerned Zeus' future. Heracles shot the eagle and so Prometheus gained release. Victor Frankenstein is Shelley's modern Prometheus in that he, too, created man. The themes that relate to the myth of Prometheus in the novel are Frankenstein's torment, the monster's education, and the absolute determination of the individual spirit and how this determination can rival that of God. Shelley uses these themes to show that the human spirit is capable of many things - of noble pursuits that rival God himself, but also of the darkest of actions that draw comparisons with the acts of Satan.                                  Victor Frankenstein is in the first part of the book described as a very noble person, with human curiosities while not common to most people are nevertheless normal. Our sympathy is entirely with him. His desire for knowledge and his eagerness to achieve high goals and to bring the human race further in its effort to erase the pains and sufferings of mortality only make him seem more admirable. He seems to devote his whole life to the benefit of humanity.
                           Prometheus was also a myth told in Latin but was a very different story. In this version Prometheus makes man from clay and water, again a very relevant theme to Frankenstein, as Victor rebels against the laws of nature (how life is naturally made) and as a result is punished by his creation. Prometheus, a Greek Titan who sculpted man from clay and then stole the light of fire from the gods to give to man, these acts can be attributed to the enabling of civilization and the gift of knowledge man acquired from him. Zeus punished Prometheus; bound to stone while an eagle each day would eat away Prometheus's liver. Suffering this agonizing torment Prometheus would face his punishment for eternity. “Prometheus became a figure who represented human striving, particularly the quest for scientific knowledge, and the risk of overreaching or unintended consequences. In particular, he was regarded in the Romantic era as embodying the lone genius whose efforts to improve human existence could also result in tragedy.
• Myth of Narcissus
                              The myth of Narcissus in which the legend is there. A tale told by Roman poet Ovid.Eacho, a young girl who falls in love with Narcissus. In Greek mythology, the myth of Narcissus can be noticed. It tells that Narcissus was a hunter from the territory of Thespiae in Boeotia who was renowned for his beauty. He was the son of a river god named Cephisus and a nymph named Lyriope. He was exceptionally proud of what he did to those who loved him. Nemesis noticed and attracted Narcissus to a pool, wherein he saw his reflection and fell in love with it, not realizing it was merely an image. Unable to leave the beauty of his reflection, Narcissus died. Narcissus is the origin of the term narcissism, after this story this term came into existence.

                               The myth of Narcissus is one of the most known Greek Myths, due to its uniqueness and moral tale; Narcissus, was the son of River God Cephisus and nymph Lyriope. He was known for his beauty and he was loved by God Apollo due to his extraordinary physique. The myth of Narcissus comes in two different versions, the Greek and the Greco-Roman version, as both Conon the Greek and Ovid, the Roman poet, wrote the story of Narcissus, enhancing it with different elements.


                                   According to Conon, Aminias, a young man fell in love with Narcissus, who had already spurned his male suitors. Aminias was also spurned by Narcissus who gave the unfortunate young man a sword. Aminias killed himself at Narcissus’ doorstep praying to the Gods to give Narcissus a lesson for all the pain he had provoked. Narcissus was once walking by a lake or river and decided to drink some water; he saw his reflection in the water and was surprised by the beauty he saw; he became entranced by the reflection of himself. He could not obtain the object of his desire though, and he died at the banks of the river or lake from his sorrow. According to the myth Narcissus is still admiring himself in the Underworld, looking at the waters of the Styx.

                            The myth presented by Ovid the poet is slightly altered. According to this myth, Narcissus’ parents were worried because of the extraordinary beauty of the child and asked prophet Teiresias what to do, regarding their son’s future.Teiresias tell them that the boy would grow old only if “he didn’t get to know himself”. When Narcissus was sixteen he was walking in the woods and Nymph Echo saw him and felt madly in love with him. She started following him and Narcissus asked “who’s there”, feeling someone after him. Echo responded “who’s there” and that went on for some time until Echo decided to show herself. She tried to embrace the boy who stepped away from Echo, telling her to leave him alone. Echo was left heartbroken and spent the rest of her life in glens; until nothing but an echo sound remained of her. Nemesis, though, the Goddess of Revenge, heard the story and decided to punish Narcissus. From this point the stories are similar; Narcissus sees himself in the pond and he is amazed by the beauty of the reflection. Once he figured out that his love could not be addressed, he killed himself.

                             Mary Shelley has given another title to this novel is "Modern Prometheus", but she could also have referred to it as the Modern Narcissus. Victor presents, in fact, all the important characteristics of the narcissistic personality disorder as defined in the myth of Narcissus. Who has having sense of self-importance, preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success; exhibitionism; cool indifference or feelings, and interpersonal disturbances, including exploitativeness, alternation between over idealization and devaluation, and lack of empathy. Moreover, Victor demonstrates the paradoxical nature of narcissism, where self-love exists with self-hate, and fragile self-esteem results in a sense of entitlement, the expectation of receiving special favors from others without assuming reciprocal responsibilities. In addition to, we may say that Victor pursues fantasies of unlimited power and glory with monomaniacal intensity. He experiences the profound depression often accompanying a narcissistic disorder, dejection, loss of interest in the external world, inability to love, and a lowering self-esteem, culminating in an expectation of punishment. It is as if he has internalized a poisonous object, the Creature, who is now consuming his heart.








Thank you


           

P :- 8 post structuralism and deconstruction presentation

Presentation paper 8 from mansiUpadhyay17

P :- 7 Theory of Depersonalization presentation

Presentation paper 7 from mansiUpadhyay17

P :- 6 Politics of Relationship in Middlemarch presentation

Presentation paper 6..... from mansiUpadhyay17

P :- 5 Myths in Keat's Odes presentation

Presentation paper 5 from mansiUpadhyay17

I.A.Richard : Figurative Language

I.A.Richard : Figurative Language

                           Ivor Armstrong Richards born 26 February 1893 and death 7 September 1979. I.A.Richards, was an English educator, literary critic, and rhetorician whose work contributed to the foundations of the new criticism, a formalist movement in literary theory, which emphasized the close reading of a literary text, especially poetry, in an effort to discover how a work of literature functions as a self-contained, self-referential aesthetic object. 

                         Ivor Armstrong Richards is pioneer in the domain of new criticism.

His most famous works:

1) The meaning of meaning

2) The principles of literary criticism 

3) The practical criticism

     Here i discuss about practice criticism or Figurative language.

A) Four kinds of meaning

B) Two uses of language

C) on simile, metaphor, symbol

I applied his theory on this poem

 મારી આંખે કંકુના સૂરજ આથમ્યા ….

મારી વે’લ શંગારો વીરા, શગને સંકોરો
રે અજવાળાં પહેરીને ઊભા શ્વાસ!
         મારી આંખે કંકુના સૂરજ આથમ્યા ….

પીળે રે પાંદે લીલા ઘોડા ડૂબ્યા;
ડૂબ્યાં અલકાતાં રાજ, ડૂબ્યાં મલકાતાં કાજ
રે હણહણતી મેં સાંભળી સુવાસ!
         મારી આંખે કંકુના સૂરજ આથમ્યા ….

મને રોકે પંછાયો એક ચોકમાં;
અડધા બોલે ઝાલ્યો; અડધો ઝાંઝરથી ઝાલ્યો
મને વાગે સજીવી હળવાશ!
         મારી આંખે કંકુના સૂરજ આથમ્યા ….

         – રાવજી પટેલ

                       When we read word by word this poem there are not get proper meaning in the poem. so this poem very problematic to read word by word. another thing is that poet used effective and figurative language like as, 'kanku', 'vahel', 'shag', anjvala'...etc. may be, post used this all this word connected with death and marriage because when people died during that time used all that thing as same as marriage time. but i can't say this is proper interpretation of poem. here poet used archetypes things symbolically. thus, i have say that we automatically put in difficultly to understand the concept of poem.

Thank You