Architypal criticism

Hello everyone, I am Mansi Gujadiya. In this blog i will discuss about few questions about architypal criticism. This all questions i find my answers in chatGTP.

Question 1:-What is architypal criticism ?

Archetypal criticism is a literary theory that examines the recurring symbols and motifs found in literature, as well as the underlying patterns and themes that are associated with these symbols. Archetypes are universal symbols, images, and patterns that are found in myths, stories, and cultural traditions across time and place.

Archetypal criticism seeks to identify and interpret these universal symbols and themes, and to explore how they relate to human experience, psychology, and culture. This type of criticism often focuses on works of literature that contain archetypal characters, settings, or plot patterns, such as the hero's journey, the battle between good and evil, or the quest for knowledge and self-discovery.

Archetypal criticism draws heavily on the theories of psychologist Carl Jung, who believed that archetypes are deeply embedded in the human psyche and are a part of the collective unconscious, shared by all members of a culture or society. Through the study of archetypes, archetypal critics aim to understand the deep-seated, fundamental human experiences and desires that are expressed in literature and other forms of art.

Question 2:-What is contribution of Northrop Frye in archetype criticism ?

Northrop Frye was a Canadian literary critic and theorist who made significant contributions to the field of archetypal criticism. He is known for his influential work "Anatomy of Criticism", in which he developed a comprehensive framework for literary criticism based on archetypal principles.

Frye's approach to archetypal criticism emphasizes the idea of a "mythical universe" that underlies all literature. He argues that every work of literature can be analyzed in terms of a set of archetypal patterns and themes, which are drawn from the collective human experience and reflect fundamental human concerns and desires.

Frye identified four primary archetypal patterns or "myths" that recur throughout literature: comedy, romance, tragedy, and irony/satire. He argued that each of these myths expresses a fundamental human concern, such as the desire for reconciliation (comedy), the search for identity and self-discovery (romance), the struggle against fate and mortality (tragedy), or the critique of social and cultural values (irony/satire).

Frye also developed the concept of the "anagogic" level of literature, which refers to the spiritual or metaphysical dimension of literary works. According to Frye, the anagogic level represents the ultimate expression of the archetypal patterns and themes, and reveals the deepest, most transcendent aspects of human experience.

Frye's work has had a profound influence on literary criticism and theory, and his ideas about archetypal patterns and themes continue to be widely studied and debated in the field.

Question 3:-What do archetypal critics? With example 

Archetypal critics analyze literature by examining the use of archetypes, or universal symbols and patterns, in the text. They look for recurring images, motifs, and themes that are shared across cultures and time periods, and consider how these archetypes reflect deeper human experiences, desires, and fears.

For example, an archetypal critic might analyze the use of the hero archetype in J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. The hero archetype represents a character who embarks on a quest or journey, overcomes obstacles, and achieves a great victory. In "The Lord of the Rings," the hero archetype is embodied by Frodo Baggins, who sets out to destroy the powerful ring that threatens to enslave the world. The archetypal critic might explore how Frodo's journey reflects universal human concerns, such as the struggle against evil, the quest for self-discovery, and the desire for transformation and renewal.

Another example of archetypal criticism can be seen in the analysis of the mother archetype in Toni Morrison's novel "Beloved." The mother archetype represents nurturing, protection, and fertility, and is often associated with the life force and the natural world. In "Beloved," the mother archetype is embodied by the character of Sethe, who is fiercely protective of her children and willing to do anything to keep them safe. The archetypal critic might explore how Sethe's motherhood reflects deeper human experiences of love, sacrifice, and the primal urge to protect and nurture one's offspring.

Overall, archetypal criticism seeks to understand how literature reflects and shapes our understanding of the world and ourselves, by tapping into the deep-seated, universal symbols and patterns that are shared across cultures and time periods.

Question 4:-Every organized body of knowledge can be learned progressively, and experience shows that there is also something progressive about the learning of literature. Our opening sentence has already got us into a semantic difficulty." Explain the semantic difficulty. 

The semantic difficulty in the opening sentence is related to the word "progressive". The sentence suggests that every organized body of knowledge can be learned progressively, which implies that there is a sense of linear progression or advancement in the process of learning. However, the sentence goes on to suggest that there is also something progressive about the learning of literature, which is less clear.

In this context, the word "progressive" has two different meanings. In the first part of the sentence, "progressive" is used to describe the idea of learning in a linear, step-by-step fashion, where one acquires knowledge in a sequential manner. However, in the second part of the sentence, "progressive" is used to describe the idea that learning literature is an ongoing, evolving process, where one's understanding of a text can change and deepen over time.

So, the semantic difficulty in the opening sentence is related to the dual meaning of the word "progressive", which can be interpreted in two different ways that are not necessarily compatible with each other. The sentence is suggesting that there is a paradox in the idea of learning literature, which cannot be fully captured by the notion of linear progression, but instead requires a more fluid, evolving approach to knowledge acquisition.

Frye identified four primary archetypal patterns or "myths" that recur throughout literature: comedy, romance, tragedy, and irony/satire. He argued that each of these myths expresses a fundamental human concern, such as the desire for reconciliation (comedy), the search for identity and self-discovery (romance), the struggle against fate and mortality (tragedy), or the critique of social and cultural values (irony/satire).

Frye also developed the concept of the "anagogic" level of literature, which refers to the spiritual or metaphysical dimension of literary works. According to Frye, the anagogic level represents the ultimate expression of the archetypal patterns and themes, and reveals the deepest, most transcendent aspects of human experience.

Frye's work has had a profound influence on literary criticism and theory, and his ideas about archetypal patterns and themes continue to be widely studied and debated in the field.

Question 5:-as above - "The relation of criticism to religion, when they deal with the same documents, is more complicated. In criticism, as in history, the divine is always treated as a human artifact. God for the critic, whether he finds him in Paradise Lost or the Bible, is a character in a human story".

The quote suggests that the relationship between criticism and religion can be complicated when they deal with the same texts or documents. The author notes that in the context of criticism and history, the divine is always treated as a human artifact. This means that when critics analyze religious texts or stories, they approach them from a human perspective, rather than assuming that the divine elements are literal or absolute truth.

The quote goes on to explain that for the critic, God (or other divine figures) is treated as a character in a human story, rather than a divine being outside of human experience. This means that the critic looks at the role of God or other divine figures in the text as a literary or narrative device, rather than assuming that their actions and beliefs are infallible or beyond critique.

Overall, the quote suggests that the relationship between criticism and religion is complex because critics approach religious texts with a different set of assumptions and tools than religious believers. While religious believers may see their texts as literal or divine revelations, critics approach them as human artifacts that can be analyzed and interpreted in the context of their historical and cultural background. This can lead to different ways of understanding and interpreting religious texts, and different perspectives on the role of God and other divine figures in human stories.

Orlando:- A biography Movie Review

 Hello everyone in this blog i will discuss about Virginia Woolf's novel Orlando movie review.

Question 1:- write your view on movie Orlando.What difference and similarity have you noticed in movie Vita and Virginia and Orlando?

Introduction of novel

           Orlando: A Biography is a novel by Virginia Woolf, first published on 11 October 1928. Inspired by the tumultuous family history of the aristocratic poet and novelist Vita Sackville-West, Woolf's lover and close friend, it is arguably one of her most popular novels; Orlando is a history of English literature in satiric form. The book describes the adventures of a poet who changes sex from man to woman and lives for centuries, meeting the key figures of English literary history. Considered a feminist classic, the book has been written about extensively by scholars of women's writing and gender and transgender studies.

Analysis of movie

       In England during 1600, Orlando is a young aristocrat who wins the admiration and affection of Queen Elizabeth I. She gives him the deed to his ancestral home and warns him, "Do not fade. Do not wither. Do not grow old." Her words have a prophetic ring of truth as far as Orlando's destiny is concerned.

During the Great Frost of 1603, Orlando falls madly in love with Sasha, a Russian princess. Although he is willing to give up everything for her, she abandons him. He falls into a deep sleep and awakens in 1650.

Now a patron of the arts, Orlando invites the poet Nick Greene to his home. The artist's sole interest is to get a pension from him. Orlando shares his own poetic efforts and is stunned when Greene savages them.

By 1700, Orlando is ready for a change. He becomes ambassador to a central Asian country. At first the Khan is wary of this visitor noting that, "The English make a habit of collecting countries." But Orlando has no imperialistic intentions. In fact, he adapts easily to the Eastern way of life.

When the Khan's palace is attacked, however, Orlando finds himself incapable of joining in the battle. He falls into another swoon and this time wakes up as a woman. Looking into the camera, she notes, "Same person, no difference at all. Just a different sex."

Lady Orlando returns to England and is immediately attracted to the literary salons of the 1750s. However, seated beside Alexander Pope and other intellectuals of the day, she is taken aback by the vehemence of their male chauvinism.

She feels the sting of inequality again when she is informed that as a woman she has no rights to her ancestral home. Archduke Harry offers to marry her but Lady Orlando turns him down. The treachery of women has now been presented from both sides of the gender chasm.

A hundred years later, Lady Orlando finds love in the arms of Shelmerdine, an American adventurer. Shortly after he hits the open road, the pregnant Lady Orlando stumbles into the war-torn 20th century. She has a daughter and hands in a book about her exploits over the years. The editor at the publishing house tells her, "Increase the love interest and give it a happy ending." As for the finale of this film, we'll keep it secret so you can savor its mysteries.

There are many delights in Orlando including the sense luscious cinematography of Alexei Rodionov. The gender bending performance by Tilda Swinton is a marvel of sure-footedness and sensitivity. Her witty asides to the camera over the course of the 400-year journey are in keeping with the dreamlike quality of the story.

Quentin Crisp is quite a surprise as Queen Elizabeth I, while Heathcote Williams comes across effectively as the greedy poet Nick Greene. Lothaire Bluteau is enigmatic as the Khan. Charlotte Valandrey and Billy Zane fill the bill as Sasha and Shelmerdine, objects of Orlando's love.

As cultural commentator Judith Levine has reminded us, gender allows a person citizenship in only one country. Orlando gives us a passport to travel freely between masculinity and femininity. While it offers no blueprint for changes in sexual stereotypes, it does identify some of the limitations inherent in each role. Best of all, Orlando challenges us to honor the impulse of being "one with the human race." That's the essential spiritual message of this ageless magical mystery tour of gender.

Question 2:- Orlando.What difference and similarity have you noticed in movie Vita and Virginia and Orlando?

Orlando was written at the height of Woolf's career. It was an extremely popular book when it was published. In the first six months after publication it sold over eight thousand copies, whereas To the Lighthouse sold less than half that amount. Woolf's income from book sales nearly tripled with the publication of Orlando.

After finishing To the Lighthouse in 1927, Woolf was prompted by an attachment to her lover, Vita Sackville-West, and by a strong interest in biographical literature to begin Orlando. She wrote in her diary that Orlando was to be "Vita, only with a change from one sex to another." Sackville-West, like the novel's protagonist, was a wealthy woman from a historic and noble family. In the novel, Woolf mocks her friend's brooding, poetic nature, and her family's history, which is detailed in Vita's book Knole and the Sackvilles (1922). Vita and her husband, Harold Nicholson, both openly bisexual, proved great models for Orlando. The novel, replete with lesbian and bisexual undertones, explores the nature of gender difference and sexual identity. It was not entirely unique for its time; Orlando was published near the time of Radclyffe Hall's trial for obscenity for her portrayal of lesbian love in her autobiographical novel The Well of Loneliness. While Woolf's novel skirts explicit description of homosexuality, her sex changes imply a love that reaches across gender. Vita's son, Nigel Nicholson, wrote that Orlando was Woolf's "love letter" to his mother.

While Woolf endeavored to explore Vita through the novel, Orlando also gave her the opportunity to try her hand at the genre of biography. Woolf's father, Leslie Stephen, had spent enormous amounts of time working on the Dictionary of National Biography, an "official" work which gives the facts about the lives of many important English people. In Orlando, Woolf mocks such an attempt to present the facts. By only presenting the external life, Woolf felt that an "official" biography fails to capture the essence of its subject. Although the 'biographer' in Woolf's novel claims to be limited by documents and records, she fully explains Orlando's internal thoughts, feelings, and reflections. In this way, Orlando challenges the traditional notion of truth in description.

War poems

 Question 1:-compare one poem with war poems

Wilfred Owen, ‘Dulce et Decorum Est‘.

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,

Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,

Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs,

And towards our distant rest began to trudge.

Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots,

But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;

Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots

Of gas-shells dropping softly behind.

Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling

Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,

But someone still was yelling out and stumbling

And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.—

Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,

As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams before my helpless sight,

He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace

Behind the wagon that we flung him in,

And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,

His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;

If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood

Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,

Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud

Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—

My friend, you would not tell with such high zest

To children ardent for some desperate glory,

The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est

Pro patria mori.

In October 1917, Wilfred Owen wrote to his mother from Craiglockhart Hospital: ‘Here is a gas poem, done yesterday……..the famous Latin tag (from Horace, Odes) means of course it is sweet and meet to die for one’s country. Sweet! and decorous!’ Although he drafted the poem that October, the surviving drafts of ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ show that Owen revised and revisited it on several occasions thereafter, before his death the following November – just one week before the Armistice. (Tragically, the telegram informing Owen’s mother that her son had been killed in action the week before arrived the day of the Armistice, while everyone else was celebrating the end of the war.)

One of the most famous of all war poems, ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ (the title is a quotation from the Roman poet Horace, Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori or ‘it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country’) was written in response to the jingoistic pro-war verses being written by people like Jessie Pope. Indeed, Pope is the ‘friend’ whom Owen addresses directly in the closing lines of the poem. However, the poem is also a harrowing and vivid account of a poison gas attack, with a number of details which immediately stick in the memory, and haunt our dreams as they haunted Owen’s, showing how naive and damaging outlooks like Jessie Pope’s really were.

‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ is a fine example of Owen’s superb craftsmanship as a poet: young he may have been, and valuable as his poetry is as a window onto the horrors of the First World War, in the last analysis the reason we value his response to the horrific events he witnessed is that he put them across in such emotive but controlled language, using imagery at once true and effective. As he put it in the draft preface he wrote for his poems: ‘My subject is War, and the pity of War. The poetry is in the pity.’ We’ve selected some of Wilfred Owen’s best poems here. Listen to the actor Christopher Eccleston read Owen’s poem here. The manuscript of the poem is also fascinating

Trends and movements

Question 1:-Surrealism 

         Surrealism originated in the late 1910s and early ’20s as a literary movement that experimented with a new mode of expression called automatic writing, or automatism, which sought to release the unbridled imagination of the subconscious. Officially consecrated in Paris in 1924 with the publication of the Manifesto of Surrealism by the poet and critic André Breton (1896–1966), Surrealism became an international intellectual and political movement. Breton, a trained psychiatrist, along with French poets Louis Aragon (1897–1982), Paul Éluard (1895–1952), and Philippe Soupault (1897–1990), were influenced by the psychological theories and dream studies of Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) and the political ideas of Karl Marx (1818–1883). Using Freudian methods of free association, their poetry and prose drew upon the private world of the mind, traditionally restricted by reason and societal limitations, to produce surprising, unexpected imagery. The cerebral and irrational tenets of Surrealism find their ancestry in the clever and whimsical disregard for tradition fostered by Dadaism a decade earlier.

Surrealist poets were at first reluctant to align themselves with visual artists because they believed that the laborious processes of painting, drawing, and sculpting were at odds with the spontaneity of uninhibited expression. However, Breton and his followers did not altogether ignore visual art. They held high regard for artists such as Giorgio de Chirico (1888–1978), Pablo Picasso (1881–1973), Francis Picabia (1879–1953), and Marcel Duchamp (1887–1968) because of the analytic, provocative, and erotic qualities of their work. For example, Duchamp’s conceptually complex Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass) (1915–23; Philadelphia Museum of Art) was admired by Surrealists and is considered a precursor to the movement because of its bizarrely juxtaposed and erotically charged objects. In 1925, Breton substantiated his support for visual expression by reproducing the works of artists such as Picasso in the journal La Révolution Surréaliste and organizing exhibitions that prominently featured painting and drawing.

The visual artists who first worked with Surrealist techniques and imagery were the German Max Ernst (1891–1976), the Frenchman André Masson (1896–1987), the Spaniard Joan Miró (1893–1983), and the American Man Ray (1890–1976). Masson’s free-association drawings of 1924 are curving, continuous lines out of which emerge strange and symbolic figures that are products of an uninhibited mind. Breton considered Masson’s drawings akin to his automatism in poetry. Miró’s Potato (1999.363.50) of 1928 uses comparable organic forms and twisted lines to create an imaginative world of fantastic figures.

About 1937, Ernst, a former Dadaist, began to experiment with two unpredictable processes called decalcomania and grattage. Decalcomania is the technique of pressing a sheet of paper onto a painted surface and peeling it off again, while grattage is the process of scraping pigment across a canvas that is laid on top of a textured surface. Ernst used a combination of these techniques in The Barbarians (1999.363.21) of 1937, a composition of sparring anthropomorphic figures in a deserted postapocalyptic landscape that exemplifies the recurrent themes of violence and annihilation found in Surrealist art.

In 1927, the Belgian artist René Magritte (1898–1967) moved from Brussels to Paris and became a leading figure in the visual Surrealist movement. Influenced by de Chirico’s paintings between 1910 and 1920, Magritte painted erotically explicit objects juxtaposed in dreamlike surroundings. His work defined a split between the visual automatism fostered by Masson and Miró (and originally with words by Breton) and a new form of illusionistic Surrealism practiced by the Spaniard Salvador Dalí (1904–1989), the Belgian Paul Delvaux (1897–1994), and the French-American Yves Tanguy (1900–1955). In The Eternally Obvious (2002.456.12a–e), Magritte’s artistic display of a dismembered female nude is emotionally shocking. In The Satin Tuning Fork (1999.363.80), Tanguy filled an illusionistic space with unidentifiable, yet sexually suggestive, objects rendered with great precision. The painting’s mysterious lighting, long shadows, deep receding space, and sense of loneliness also recall the ominous settings of de Chirico.

In 1929, Dalí moved from Spain to Paris and made his first Surrealist paintings. He expanded on Magritte’s dream imagery with his own erotically charged, hallucinatory visions. In The Accommodations of Desire (1999.363.16) of 1929, Dalí employed Freudian symbols, such as ants, to symbolize his overwhelming sexual desire. In 1930, Breton praised Dalí’s representations of the unconscious in the Second Manifesto of Surrealism. They became the main collaborators on the review Minotaure (1933–39), a primarily Surrealist-oriented publication founded in Paris.

The organized Surrealist movement in Europe dissolved with the onset of World War II. Breton, Dalí, Ernst, Masson, and others, including the Chilean artist Matta (1911–2002), who first joined the Surrealists in 1937, left Europe for New York. The movement found renewal in the United States at Peggy Guggenheim’s gallery, Art of This Century, and the Julien Levy Gallery. In 1940, Breton organized the fourth International Surrealist Exhibition in Mexico City, which included the Mexicans Frida Kahlo (1907–1954) and Diego Rivera (1886–1957) (although neither artist officially joined the movement). Surrealism’s surprising imagery, deep symbolism, refined painting techniques, and disdain for convention influenced later generations of artists, including Joseph Cornell (1903–1972) and Arshile Gorky (1904–1948), the latter whose work formed a continuum between Surrealism and Abstract Expressionism.

Question 2:-Dadaism

Dadaism Definition

Dadaism was a visual art and literary movement that flourished in Europe after World War I. The artists used their work to express their discontent towards the governments and policies that led their communities into war. They spoke out against violence, nationalism and were staunchly left and far-left wing in their  

Within the movement, artists, novel-writers, poets, sound media artists, and more experimented with their techniques and the reasoning behind their work. New visual art forms, like collage and sound poetry, flourished, as did the still popular process of cut-up writing. 

Principles of Dadaism 

 explore a few of the fundamental principles of dadaism.

Humor and wit

Emphasis on creativity

Elements of whimsy and nonsense writing

Use of different typography

Belief in artistic freedom

Desire to evoke an emotional reaction

Interest in shock value

Irrationalism and imagination

Spontaneous creation

Question 3:-Expressionism 

What is expressionism?

Expressionism was an art movement and international tendency at the beginning of the 20th century, which spanned the visual arts, literature, music, theatre and architecture. The aim of Expressionist artists was to express emotional experience, rather than physical reality.

Which painters are associated with expressionism?

Edvard Munch, Egon Schiele, Oskar Kokoschka, Wassily Kandinsky, Franz Marc, Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Vincent van Gogh and Henri Matisse.

When did expressionism start?

Expressionism started in 1905 and lasted till approximately 1920.

Waiting for Godot

 Hello everyone, in this blog i will discuss about some questions related to one play" Waiting for Godot " written by Samuel Beckett.

Introduction

   Waiting for Godot is a play by Samuel Beckett in which two characters, Vladimir  and Estragon , engage in a variety of discussions and encounters while awaiting the titular Godot, who never arrives. Waiting for Godot is Beckett's translation of his own original French-language play, En attendant Godot, and is subtitled (in English only) "a tragicomedy in two acts".

Question:-1 What does the tree with four or five leaves signify?

Answer:-

          The tree is described as bare when the play opens, but by the secondary act, the tree has a few leaves on it. This suggests the passage of time but also the presence of life and vitality. It may also indicate a passing of seasons: perhaps from winter to spring, signifying a new beginning

          Upon his return to to scene in Arct II, Vladimir notices the tree’s new four or five leaves where before it was barren and concluded dead. His visible anxiety (shown through stage directions) about it signifies his awareness of how strange that a tree suddenly has life.

Question 2:-Can we do any political reading of the play if we see European nations represented by the 'names' of the characters (Vladimir - Russia; Estragon - France; Pozzo - Italy and Lucky - England)? What interpretation can be inferred from the play written just after World War II? Which country stands for 'Godot'?

Answer

         Yes, we can interpret the political reading in which Vladimir stand for Russia, Pozzo stand for Italy, Lucky stand for England and Estragon stand for France. So, we can connect this to the world war in which these all countries destroyed by Godot means Germany that is why Vladimir asked to the boy that is Godot beating? Then boy replied yes. So we connect Godot with Germany means Hitler, who destroyed many countries and killed thousands of people. And other interpretation of Pozzo and Lucky master and slave in which we connect Pozzo with England and Lucky with Ireland, so in this matter Ireland struggling a lot with England and recently we have seen Brexit pact.

Question:-3 "BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?

Answer 

VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?

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

Ans. Yes, there is change in both acts. In act1 Vladimir told to the boy that tell Godot that you saw us. So, here Vladimir taked about both Vladimir and Estragon while in second act Vladimir told the boy that tell Godot that you saw me, so here Vkadimir talked about his self he does not mention the name of Estragon. So, in act 2 Vladimir seems selfish.

 Question 4:-In both acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this 'Coming for night and moon' when actually they are Waiting For Godot?

Answer

        We can interpret this moon as brightness in the night so, I think Beckett want to convey through this moon's brightness in the night means though the darkness of night there is somewhat hope like the brightness of the moon. So, we should not lost our hope, every day is new day.

Question 5:-What is the meaning of the terms 'Apathia, Aphasia and Athambia' in Lucky's speech? "... divine apathia divine athambia divine aphasia loves us dearly with some exceptions for reasons unknown…"

 Answer

         To begin his speech, Lucky first paints a picture of a pious God that is “personal”. He later destroys that image in the readers mind by describing God using three words: apathia, athambia, and aphasia. Apathia means a lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern. Athambia means impartibility, to be incapable of being upset or not easily excited. And lastly, aphasia means loss of the ability to comprehend or express speech. These three words characterize God as impersonal. When he uses the word divine, he is referring to God as God is often portrayed as a divine being. So he is saying that God is apathetic, meaning that he does not intervene. God is imperturbable; he has never been reached or could be reached by living human beings. And God is aphasic, meaning that he is silent and has never spoken and never will, even to prove his very own existence. The three words also represent human society as a whole. Lucky interprets that the human civilization is gradually becoming wrapped in apathy as we do not seek out others; wrapped in athambia as others are unable to reach us; and wrapped in aphasia as there is no more voice, just a bunch of meaning less words used to fill up space. 

Question 6:-'A better solution to the tramp's predicament than to wait is, suicide". Is it really so? Why they fail to commit suicide?

 Answer   

        In an absurd play, the characters generally lose their identity. In Waiting for Godot, we find tramps as characters. They lose their identity in Act II. Their relationship is in doubt. They spend the night apart. Life to them is an endless rain of blows. Estragon and Vladimir have lost their identity. The other pair of characters Pozzo and Lucky become blind and dumb respectively. Suicide is a recurrent temptation.

Question 7:-Explain: "Godot might become as image of what Sartre calls "Bad Faith".

Answer 

         In Jean- Paul Sartre's philosophy, "Bad Faith" refers to the state in which an individual denies their own freedom and authenticity, instead choosing to conform to societal expectations or to hide behind false beliefs about themselves. Here, In 'Waiting for Godot' the characters of Vladimir and Estragon are seen as embodying this concept as they spend the entirety of the play waiting for the mysterious Godot, who never arrives. Their passivity and lack of agency in the face of their existential Predicament can be seen as a form of bad faith.

Question 8:- Explain:"One hardly feels the absurdity of some things, on the one hand, and the necessity of those other things, on the other, (for it is rare that feeling of absurdity is not followed by the feeling of necessity), when one feels the absurdity of those things of which one had just felt the necessity (for it is rare that the feeling of necessity is not followed by the feeling of absurdity)"

Answer 

      This statement is discussing the idea that things that may seem absurd or unnecessary at one point in time can later be seen as necessary and vice versa. It's suggesting that one's perspective can change and that thing that once seemed absurd. Similarly, things that once seemed absurd may later be seen as necessary. It's a reminder that one's understanding of something can evolve over time.

Practical criticism

 Hello everyone, in this blog i will discuss about criticise one poem. This poem was given by Dilip Barad Sir.

Introduction

     In this task sir give 20 poem. And we choose one poem according to over roll number.And i try to criticise of poem according to new criticism theory. Here is a link of 20 poem Click here

New Criticism was a formalist movement in literary theory that dominated American literary criticism in the middle decades of the 20th century. It emphasized close reading, particularly of poetry, to discover how a work of literature functioned as a self-contained, self-referential aesthetic object.

                        Clothes:कपड़े

तुम लाए कपड़े

और सब नंगे हो गए

तुमने कहा

पहन कर इसे हम सभी

सभ्य सुसंस्कृत हो जाएंगे

सब बर्बर हो गए

फिर तुमने कहा

अच्छा ऐसे नहीं ऐसे पहनो

इतना नहीं इतना पहनो

ऐसा पहनो वैसा पहनो

पर हमारे हिसाब से पहनो

जिसे आसानी से उतारा जा सके

चाहे घर हो संसद हो या हो सड़क

कपड़े से तुम कितना खेलते हो

बंद कमरे में नंगा होओगे खुद

और स्त्री को कर दोगे नंगा

कहोगे यह नंगापन नहीं प्रेम है

फिर तुम्हीं मर्यादा संस्कृति की रक्षा में

किसी स्त्री को कर दोगे खाप में नंगा

कहोगे उसका परिवार था ही इस लायक

तुमने यह भी कहा

कपड़े से कुछ नहीं छुपता

इंसान विचारों से होता है नंगा

इस तरह तुम

सामंती लैंगिक क्रूरता से

छुपाते रहे नंगापन

औद्योगिक घरानों की सांठगांठ से

जो मेहनत की रक्त में

कपड़े बुन रहे थे

तुम करते हो भेद कपड़े से

कौन कितना कमाता है

किसकी हैसियत कितनी है

वह विकसित है कि अविकसित है

कपड़े में लिपटा व्यक्ति इंसान नहीं

अमीर है या गरीब है

वह नर है कि मादा है

उसकी जाति क्या है

उसका धर्म क्या है

कौन करेगा यह कनफेशन

कि जब तक तुम्हारे कपड़े नहीं आए थे

कोई नंगा नहीं था

~ vikas rai (not sure) from FB page Artist Against All Odd (AAAO)

 This poem is written by Vikas Rai. But it is not sure because this poem is taken from one Facebook page.

Problematic things in poem 

पहन कर इसे हम सभी

सभ्य सुसंस्कृत हो जाएंगे

          In this line poet said that when human wear a Clothes, they become a polite and sophisticated. And they behave like a good human. But this comparison is  not  right. A person's behavior is not known by wearing a good clothes. When clothes come in life it become a control of society.

फिर तुमने कहा

अच्छा ऐसे नहीं ऐसे पहनो

इतना नहीं इतना पहनो

ऐसा पहनो वैसा पहनो

पर हमारे हिसाब से पहनो

 

          In this line poet said that the clothes we decide you  wear this. No more and no less than that.But what we wear,this is over personal choice. We are not wear clothes that other person say.When clothes come in life it become a control of society.

ऐसा पहनो वैसा पहनो

पर हमारे हिसाब से पहनो 

            In this line poet use this word "हमारे हिसाब से पहनो"So who is this person? Poet not said that person's name. But we can say that this is a over  petriacry society.

कपड़े से कुछ नहीं छुपता

इंसान विचारों से होता है नंगा 

 Comparison between clothes and think. Because clothes are non living. Thinking is over own.

चाहे घर हो संसद हो या हो सड़क

Poet mention parliament word in this poem. But now day's poet use a large sense to write their poem. So it is normal in now days.  this word is connected with politics.

औद्योगिक घरानों की सांठगांठ से

           In poem is about clothes. But poet mention Industrial idea. Poet say that if you wear a dury clothes that means  you are a poor people.

Literary devices

1. Satire

पहन कर इसे हम सभी

सभ्य सुसंस्कृत हो जाएंगे

सब बर्बर हो गए. 

     

           In this line poet satire on modern clothes fashion.poet said that when human wear a Clothes they become a polite.but now days this is not happen.

जिसे आसानी से उतारा जा सके

चाहे घर हो संसद हो या हो सड़क

कपड़े से तुम कितना खेलते हो

       Poet satire on rapist person .Also satire on today's  women condition. Women are not safe in home, parlament and even a road.

Language

Poet use a simple language in this poem. Readers easily understand meaning of poem. But in a simple language poet said a Deep meaning.

Paradox

       In the writing of poems, paradox is used as a method by which unlikely comparisons can be drawn and meaning can be extracted from poems both straightforward and enigmatic. In this poem poet compare clothes to parlament and industrial idea.

Irony

       Paradox and irony as New Critical tools for reading poetry are often conflated, they are independent poetical devices. Irony for Brooks is “the obvious warping of a statement by the context” whereas paradox is later glossed as “a special kind of qualification which involves the resolution of opposites.”

Irony functions as a presence in the text – the overriding context of the surrounding words that make up the poem. Only sentences such as 2 + 2 = 4 are free from irony; most other statements are prey to their immediate context and are altered by it.

Analysis of poem

The poem describes the situation where people wear clothes to hide their nakedness, but it becomes a facade for power and wealth. The poet criticizes the unequal treatment of people based on their clothing and the exploitation of the workers who make the clothes. The poem highlights the need to look beyond clothes and embrace true humanity and empathy.

Conclusion

        

          This  poem was written in Hindi, that criticizes cultural and societal norms related to clothing and modesty. The lyrics seem to suggest that people are imposing restrictive clothing standards in the name of culture and tradition, but in reality it is just a way to control and exploit others. The poem also mentions the hypocrisy of these norms and how they are used to shame and degrade women.