Assingments by vishva gajjar

Assignments
Of Vishva Gajjar
Collections of Assignments of All Papers Provided by Faculties
of English Department during MA Edu. Year 2018-2020
Vishvagajjar27@gmail.com
3/3/2020

1
Contents
Seven Deadly Sins in Doctor Faustus ............................................................................................................4
Introduction of Writer: .............................................................................................................................4
Overview of Play: ......................................................................................................................................5
Seven Deadly Sins: ....................................................................................................................................6
Conclusion:................................................................................................................................................8
Plato's Objections to Poetry and Aristotatle's Defense to Poetry................................................................8
Introduction: -...........................................................................................................................................9
Plato’s Objection to Poetry: -....................................................................................................................9
The nature of poetry:..............................................................................................................................12
poetic inspiration:...................................................................................................................................12
Conclusion: -............................................................................................................................................13
Character of Eklavya from 'The Purpose'....................................................................................................13
Introduction : ..........................................................................................................................................14
About Author :-.......................................................................................................................................14
About Play “The Purpose” :- ...................................................................................................................14
Conclusion: -............................................................................................................................................18
Psychological growth in Gulliver’s Travels..................................................................................................18
Introduction:...........................................................................................................................................19
Introduction of Novel:.............................................................................................................................20
♦ Psychological Growth of Gulliver in the Novel: ...................................................................................21
Conclusion :-............................................................................................................................................23
Justify the title of th novel ‘Sense and Sensibility’......................................................................................23
Character sketch of Elinor Dashwood:.......................................................................................24
Elinor’s Sisterly Solicitude about Marianne’s Welfare:...........................................................................24
Elinor: not a Money- Minded Woman:...................................................................................................25
Some other excellent qualities of Elinor:................................................................................................25
The character and personality of Marianne Dashwood: ........................................................................25
Conclusion:..............................................................................................................................................27
Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism -Matthew Arnold..................................27
INTRODUCTION:......................................................................................................................................28

2
The Best Self or the Right Reason & the Ordinary Self:..........................................................................29
Conclusion:..............................................................................................................................................31
“TRADITION AND INDIVIDUAL TALENT”......................................................................................................31
(Part-1) :......................................................................................................................................................32
IN ENGLISH LITERARY CRITICISM “TRADITION” IS USED AS A PHRASE OF CENSURE:-...........................32
CRITICISM IS INDISPENSABLE FOR CREATIVE ACTIVITY: .........................................................................32
THE IMPORTANCE OF TRADITION TO INDIVIDUAL TALENT:...................................................................32
“TRADITION” DEFINED:...........................................................................................................................33
THE CLOSE RELATIONSHIPAND INTERDEPENDENCE OF THE PAST AND PRESENT: ................................33
THE RELATIONSHIP OF A POET’S WORK TO THE GREAT WORKS OF THE PAST:.....................................33
LITERATURE AS A CONTINUITY: ..............................................................................................................34
(Part-2)........................................................................................................................................................34
THE PROCESS OF DEPERSONALISATION: ................................................................................................34
EMOTIONS AND FEELINGS:-....................................................................................................................35
THE INTENSITY OF THE ARTISTIC PROCESS:............................................................................................35
(PART – 3)....................................................................................................................................................36
ELIOT AND NEW CRITICISM: ...................................................................................................................36
CRITICISM OF ELIOT: ...............................................................................................................................36
What is Cultural Studies?............................................................................................................................37
What is Cultural Studies?........................................................................................................................37
What Cultural Studies doing in English Department or in Literature Class? ..........................................38
Limitations of Cultural Studies:-..............................................................................................................40
Conclusion: -............................................................................................................................................42
Liberal Humanists: the 'Bloomsbury' Group...............................................................................................42
 The Modern Period:.....................................................................................................................42
 The Postmodern Period:.............................................................................................................42
 Characteristics:.............................................................................................................................43
 The „Bloomsbursy‟ Group: ..........................................................................................................43
Critical Analysis of “The Scarlet Letter” ......................................................................................................45
 About Author:................................................................................................................................45
 About Novel: .................................................................................................................................46
 Critical Analysis:...........................................................................................................................46
Negritude - Nadine Gordimer's Major Novels ............................................................................................48

3
NEGRITUDE - NADINE GORDIMER'S MAJOR NOVELS.............................................................................49
 A World of Strangers :.................................................................................................................49
 Occasion for Loving :.......................................................................................................................50
 A Sport of Nature :..........................................................................................................................51
 My Son's Story: ...............................................................................................................................51
Learning Through Attending and Observing...............................................................................................52
 Reasons for Attending:...............................................................................................................53
 The Effect of Distractions:...........................................................................................................54
 Observing:.....................................................................................................................................54
 Listening: .......................................................................................................................................55

4
Seven Deadly Sins in Doctor Faustus
Name :VishvaGajjar
Roll No. : 45
Stream : M.A.
Main Subject : English
Semester : 1
Paper no. 1 – Renaissance Literature
Assignment topic : Seven Deadly Sins in
Doctor Faustus
Mentor : Dr. Dilip P. Barad Sir
Department of English
Bhavnagar University
Batch : 2018-2020
Introduction of Writer:
Christopher Marlowe also known as Kit Marlowe was born on26 February 1564 and died on 30 May
1593, was an English playwright, poet and translator of the Elizabethan era. Marlowe was the foremost
Elizabethan tragedian of his day. He greatly influenced William Shakespeare, who was born in the same
year as Marlowe and who rose to become the pre-eminent Elizabethan playwright after Marlowe's
mysterious early death. Marlowe's plays are known for the use of blank verse and their overreaching
protagonists.
Some of his works are as under:
 Tamburlane
 The Jew of Malta
 Doctor Faustus
 Edward 2
 The Massacre at Paris

5
Overview of Play:
Faustus is the protagonist and tragic hero of Marlowe‟s play. He is a
contradictory character, capable of tremendous eloquence and possessing awesome
ambition, almost wilful blindness and a willingness to waste powers that he has gained
at great cost. When we first see Faustus, he is just preparing to embark on his career as
a magician. Before practicing magic, he imagines piling up wealth from the four corners
of the globe, reshaping the map of Europe (both politically and physically), and gaining
access to every scrap of knowledge about the universe. He is an arrogant, self-
aggrandizing man, but his ambitions are so grand that we cannot help being impressed,
and we even feel sympathetic toward him. He represents the spirit of the Renaissance,
with its rejection of the medieval, God-centred universe, and its embrace of human
possibility.
But Faustus also possesses an obtuseness that becomes apparent during his
bargaining sessions with Mephastophilis. Having decided that a pact with the devil is the
only way to fulfil his ambitions, Faustus then blinds himself happily to what such a pact
actually means. Sometimes he tells himself that hell is not so bad and that one needs
only “fortitude”; at other times, even while conversing with Mephastophilis, he remarks
to the disbelieving demon that he does not actually believe hell exists. Meanwhile,
despite his lack of concern about the prospect of eternal damnation, -Faustus is also
beset with doubts from the beginning, setting a pattern for the play in which he
repeatedly approaches repentance only to pull back at the last moment. Why he fails to
repent is unclear: -sometimes it seems a matter of pride and continuing ambition,
sometimes a conviction that God will not hear his plea. Other times, it seems that
Mephastophilis simply bullies him away from repenting.
Bullying Faustus is less difficult than it might seem, because Marlowe, after
setting his protagonist up as a grandly tragic figure of sweeping visions and immense
ambitions, spends the middle scenes revealing Faustus‟s true, petty nature. Once
Faustus gains his long-desired powers, he does not know what to do with them.
Marlowe suggests that this uncertainty stems, in part, from the fact that desire for
knowledge leads inexorably toward God, whom Faustus has renounced. But, more
generally, absolute power corrupts Faustus: once he can do everything, he no longer
wants to do anything. Instead, he traipses around Europe, playing tricks on yokels and
performing conjuring acts to impress various heads of state. He uses his incredible gifts
for what is essentially trifling entertainment. The fields of possibility narrow gradually, as
he visits ever more minor nobles and performs ever more unimportant magic tricks, until
the Faustus of the first few scenes is entirely swallowed up in mediocrity. Only in the
final scene is Faustus rescued from mediocrity, as the knowledge of his impending
doom restores his earlier gift of powerful rhetoric, and he regains his sweeping sense of
vision. Now, however, the vision that he sees is of hell looming up to swallow him.
Marlowe uses much of his finest poetry to describe Faustus‟s final hours, during which
Faustus‟s desire for repentance finally wins out, although too late. Still, Faustus is
restored to his earlier grandeur in his closing speech, with its hurried rush from idea to
idea and its despairing, Renaissance-renouncing last line, “I‟ll burn my books!” He
becomes once again a tragic hero, a great man undone because his ambitions have
butted up against the law of God.

6
Seven Deadly Sins:
He does nothing to protect Germany or the poor. Instead he commits many mortal and venal sins:
1. Pride : (the mother of all sins: believing too much in our own abilities interferes with us
recognising the grace of God).Faustus casts aside the doctrines available to him, scorning them for being
too easy or simplistic for him. He therefore is unsatisfied with being mortal, i.e., subject to the laws of
nature and God. He believes God will not give him the answers he deserves while he is on earth, so turns
to Lucifer instead.
2. Covetousness : (the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual).
Faustus requests that Mephistopheles brings him ‘money, possessions and sensual delights’ every day,
temporal satisfactions that are nothing in comparison to what is promised by God in Heaven.
3. Envy : (the desire for others’ traits, status, abilities, or situation) Faustus envies the Emperor, the
Pope, Lucifer and even God for having power and status beyond him. He summons Mephistopheles so
that he can use him to have a power he hopes will exceed the power of them all.
4. Anger : (when love is overcome by fury) Faustus is so furious at Benvolio’s mockery of him that
he indulges in a petty act of spite by conjuring a pair of antlers to appear on the man’s head. When he
cannot face the truth the Old Man offers him – that forgiveness is his if he asks God for it – he becomes
angry and asks Mephistopheles to call demons to torture the Old Man to his death.
5. Gluttony : (an excessive desire to consume more than that which one requires) At the end of his
twenty-fourth year, with death close, Faustus is ‘swilling and revelling with his students’ in a feast with
‘food and wine enough for an army’.
6. Lust : (an excessive craving for the pleasures of the body) The Old Man pleads with Faustus with
love to repent and call on God’s mercy. Faustus, prizing flesh over spirit, wastes his remaining time on
lechery rather than heed his advice. He instructs Mephistopheles instead to summon Helen of Troy for
his lover. She is simply a likeness conjured by the demon but Faustus tells her ‘rivals for your love can
burn down Wittenberg in their longing to have you home’. Where is his promise to protect Germany
now?
7. Sloth : (the avoidance of physical or spiritual work) The slothful person, like Faustus, is unwilling
to do what God wants because of the effort it takes to do it. He summons Mephistopheles and signs the
contract with Lucifer so he can have knowledge, possessions and experiences on-tap without any effort
on his part.

7
He performs pranks, not blessings. He uses his incredible gifts for what is essentially trifling
entertainment e.g. antlers, cherries, summoning visions of past heroes and heroines. ‘This genius who
can conjure wonders on request’ becomes a conjuror not a do-gooder who performs ‘pranks and jokes,
making monkeys of his enemies.’ He ridicules the Pope and the clergy with jests and wicked tricks.
He succumbs to despair and presumption. By despair, Faustus ceases to hope for his personal
salvation from God, for help in attaining it or for the forgiveness of his sins. Despair is a sin because
causes a person to lose faith in the promise of God’s goodness, justice and mercy.
Faustus presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from
on high), and presumes upon God’s almighty power and mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without
conversion and glory without merit) – ‘What can God do to me anyway, with Mephistopheles at my
shoulder? I’m safe.’
The Seven Deadly Sins that Mephistopheles's devil friends conjure to amuse Faustus are an
allegory in the purest sense of the term.
An allegory is an abstract concept that appears in a material, concrete form. And in this case, the
seven deadly sins (which separate a person from God forever if they're not repented) appear as actual
people.
In front of Faustus, Pride, Covetousness (Greed), Envy, Wrath, Gluttony, Sloth, and Lechery
(Lust) march in the weirdest parade that ever paraded. They describe their parentage—that is, where
and whom they came from—and defining characteristics.
Medieval drama had a long tradition of representing the Seven Deadly Sins as people, so when
Doctor Faustus was first performed, the Sins would probably have come onstage in immediately
recognizable costumes. The audience would have known exactly what was going on And even we
modern folks are in on the joke. The things the Sins tell Faustus about themselves are exactly what we'd
expect: Gluttony, the sin of overindulgence in food and drink, complains that his parents left him "only"
enough money for thirty meals and ten snacks a day, while Sloth, the sin of laziness, doesn't even have
enough energy to describe himself (okay, that's pretty funny, Marlowe).
In the medieval tradition of allegory, a character's relationship with the Sins tells us which side
he's on—God's, or the devil's. Three guesses where Faustus falls. He just laughs about them, which tells
us not only that he's on the side of the devil, but also that he's there because he doesn't take sin as
seriously as he should. Not cool, dude.

8
Conclusion:
This way we can know about the play and the character of Doctor Faustus.
Plato's Objections to Poetry and Aristotatle's Defense to Poetry
Name :VishvaGajjar
Roll No. : 45
Stream : M.A.
Semester : 1
Paper no. 3 – Literary Criticism
Assignment topic : Discuss the Plato’s
Objections to Poetry and Aristotatle’s Defense
to Poetry.
Mentor : Dr. Dilip P. Barad Sir

9
Batch : 2018-2020
Introduction: -
Here, we will discuss the objection of Plato to poetry and defence of Aristotle to
poetry. The debate is quite logical. Let‟s have a glance upon it.
Plato‟s Objection to Poetry: -
Plato’s theory of Mimesis or imitation: The arts deal with illusion or they are imitation of an
imitation. Twice removed from reality. As a moralist Plato disapproves of Poetry because it is immoral,
as a philosopher he disapproves of it because it is based on falsehood.
Philosophy is better than poetry because philosopher deals with idea/truth, whereas poet deals
with what appears to him / illusion. He believed that truth of philosophy was more important than the
pleasure of poetry.
Plato was the most distinguished disciple of Socrates. The 4th BC to which he belonged was as age of
inquiry and such Plato’s chief interest was Philosophical investigation which from the subject of his great
works in form of Dialogue. He was not a professed critic of Literature and his critical observations are
not found in any single book.
He was the First Systemic Critic who inquired into the nature of imaginative literature and put forward
theories which are both illuminating and dialogues are full of his gifted dramatic quality. His Dialogues
are the classic works of the world literature having dramatic, lyrical and fictional elements.
According to Plato all arts are imitative or mimetic in nature. He wrote in The Republic that ‘ideas are
the ultimate reality’. Things are conceived as ideas before they take practical shapes. So, idea is original
and the thing is copy of that idea. Carpenter’s chair is the result of the idea of chair in his mind. Thus,
chair is once removed from reality. But painter’s chair is imitation of carpenter’s chair. So, it is twice
removed from reality. Thus artist/poet take man away from reality rather than towards it. Thus, artist
deals in illusion.

10
Plato’s three main objections to poetry are that poetry is not ethical, philosophical and pragmatic, in
other words. He objected to poetry from the point of view of Education, from Philosophical point of
view and from moral point of view.
According to Plato, poetry is not ethical because it promotes undesirable passions, it is not philosophical
and does not provides true knowledge, and it is not pragmatic because it is inferior to the practical arts
and therefore has no educational value. Plato then makes a challenge to poets to defend themselves
against his criticism. Ironically it was Plato’s most famous student, Aristotle, who was the first theorist to
defend literature and poetry in his writing Poetics.
Plato felt that poetry, like all forms of art, appeals to the inferior part of the soul, the irrational,
emotional cowardly part. The reader of poetry is seduced into feeling undesirable emotions. To Plato, an
appreciation of poetry is incompatible with an appreciation of reason, justice and the search for truth.
He suggests that poetry causes needless lamentation and ecstasies at the imaginary events of sorrow
and happiness.
To him Drama is the most dangerous form of literature because the author is imitating things that he /
she does not understand. Plato seemingly feels that no words are strong enough to condemn drama.
Plato is, above all, a moralist. Plato’s question in Book 10 is the intellectual status of literature. He states
that, the good poet cannot compose well unless he knows his subject, and he who does not have this
knowledge can never be a poet. His point is that in order to copy or imitate correctly, one must have
knowledge of the original. Plato says that imitation is twice removed from the truth. Stories that are
untrue have, no value, as no untrue story should be told in the city. He states that nothing can be
learned from imitative poetry.
Plato’s commentary on poetry in Republic is overwhelming negative. Plato’s main concern about poetry
is that children’s minds are too impressionable to be reading false tales and misrepresentation of the
truth. He is essentially saying that children cannot tell the difference between fiction and reality and this
compromises their ability to discern right from wrong. Plato reasons that literature that portrays the
gods as behaving in immoral ways should be kept away from children, so that they will not be influence
to act the same way.
Another objection is that it is often viewed as portraying either male dominance or female exploitation.
Plato does not views may be deemed narrow-minded by today’s society, but one must remember that
Plato lived over 2000 years ago. He probably wrote Republic with the best intentions for the people of
his time. While his views on censorship and poetry may even seem outlandish today, Plato’s goal was to
state what he judged to be the guidelines for a better human existence.

11
1. Plato‟s objection to Poetry from the point of view of
Education :
 In the ‘The Republic’ Book 2- He condemns poetry as fostering evil habits and vices in children. Homer’s
epics were part of studies. Heroes of epics were not example of sound or ideal morality. They were
lusty, cunning and cruel – war mongers. Even Gods were no better. Thus, he objected on the ground
that poetry does not cultivate good habits among children.
2. Objection from Philosophical point of view:
 According to Plato, Philosophy is far better than the poetry because Philosophy deals
with „idea‟ and Poetry is twice removed from „Original Idea‟.
 Plato says: “The imitator or maker of the image knows nothing of true existence; he
knows appearance only … the imitative art is an inferior who marries an inferior and has
inferior offspring.”
3. Objection from the moral point of view:
 Plato verdicts that, “Poetry waters and nourishes the baser impulses of men emotional, sentimental
and sorrowful.
 “Soul of man has higher principles of reason (which is the essence of its being) as well as lower
constituted of baser impulses and emotions. Whatever encourages and strengthens and the rational
principal is good, and emotional is bad.” – In his same book – ‘Republic.’
These are Plato’s principles charges on poetry and objection to it. Before we pass on any judgment, we
should not forget to keep in view the time in which he lived. During his time:
1. Political instability.
2. Education was in sorry state. Homer was part of studies-
misrepresented.
3. Women were regarded inferior – slavery.
4. Best time of Greek literature was over corruption and degeneration in
literature.
5. Confusion prevailed in all sphere of life-intellect, moral, political and
education.

12
 Example: philosophers and thinkers like Socrates were imprisoned, forced to drink wine and kill
him.
 Now, let’s move to Aristotle; who defence poetry in very generous way.
Plato confused the study of ‘aesthetic’ with the study of ‘moral’. Aristotle removed that confusion and
created the study of aesthetics.
Plato was great poet, a mystic and philosopher. Aristotle- the most distinguished disciple of Plato was
critic, scholar, logician and practical philosopher. The master was an inspired genius every way greater
than the disciple except in logic, analysis and common sense.
He is known for his critical treatise: 1) The poetics and 2) The Rhetoric, dealing with art of poetry and art
of speaking.
For centuries during Roman age in Europe and after renaissance, Aristotle was honoured as a law-giver
and legislator. Even today his critical theories remain largely relevant, and for this he certainly deserves
our admiration and esteem.
But he was never a law-giver in literature. The poetics is not merely commentary or judgement on the
poetic art. Its conclusion is firmly rooted in the Greek literature and is actually illustrated form it. He was
a codifier; he derived and discussed the principles of literature as manifest in the plays and poetry
existing in his own day.
His main concern appears to be tragedy, which in his day was considered to be the most developed form
of poetry. In his observations on the nature and function of poetry, he has replied the charges of Plato
against poetry, wherein he partly agrees and partly disagrees with his teacher.
The nature of poetry:
poetic inspiration:
Theory of Inspiration:
 Aristotle agrees with Plato in calling the poet an imitator and creative art, imitation. He imitates one of
the three objects – things as they were /are, things as they are said / thought to be or things as they
ought to be. In other words, his imitation what is past or present, what is commonly believed and what

13
is ideal. Aristotle believes that there is natural pleasure in imitation which is in-born instinct in men. It is
this pleasure in imitation that enables the child to learn his earliest lessons in speech and conduct from
those around him, because there is a pleasure in doing so. In grown up child – a poet, there is another
instinct, helping him to make him a poet – the instinct for harmony and rhythm.
 He does not agree with his teacher in ‘poet’s imitation is twice removed from reality and hence
unreal/illusion of truth. To Prove his point, he compares poetry with history. The poet and the historian
differ not by their medium, but the true difference is that the historian relates ‘what has happened? the
poet, what may/ought to have happened? – the ideal. Poetry, therefore, is more philosophical and
higher thing than the history, which expresses the particular, while poetry tends to express the
universal. Therefore, the picture of poetry please all times.
 Aristotle does not agree with Plato in function of poetry to make people weaker and emotional/too
sentimental. For him, Catharsis is ennobling and humble human being.
 So far as moral nature of poetry is concerned, Aristotle believed that the end of poetry is to please;
however, teaching may be given. Such pleasing is superior to the other pleasure because it teaches civic
morality. So, all good literature gives pleasure which is not divorced from moral lessons.
Conclusion: -
Plato judge’s poetry now from the educational standpoint, from the philosophical standpoint and the
ethical one. But he does not care to consider it from its own standpoint. He does not define its aims. He
forgets that everything should be judges in terms of its own aims and objective its own critic of merit
and demerit. We cannot fairly maintain that music is bad because it does not paint, or that painting is
bad because it does not sing. Similarly, we cannot say that poetry is bad because it does not teach
philosophy of ethics. If poetry, philosophy and ethics had identical function, how could they be different
subjects? To denounce poetry because it is not philosophy or ideal is clearly absurd.
Character of Eklavya from 'The Purpose'
Name :VishvaGajjar
Roll No. : 45
Stream : M.A.

14
Semester : 1
Paper no. 4 – Indian Writing in English
Assignment topic : Discuss the Character of
Eklavya (in reference to other Characters) from
‘The Purpose’.
Mentor :MedamHeenabaZala
Batch : 2018-2020
Introduction :
The play “The Purpose” is written by very famous and well-known playwright T.P.Kailasam. His
full name is ThyagarajaParamasivaKailasam. He was playwright and prominent writer of Kannada
Literature comedy earned him the title: the father of humorous plays” and later he was also called as
“One and only Kailasam for Kannada”.
About Author :-
T.P.Kailasam is remembered as the father of Modern Kannada drama, the man of genius whose plays
revolutionized the kannada stage. Kailasam focused on contemporary social problems, a deeply
compassionate vision of the human struggle, an almost Shakespearian power to evoke sympathetic
laughter and an amazing grasp of the living language of men, combined with the gift of using it
artistically for dramatic purpose.
About Play “The Purpose” :-
‘The Purpose’ is a Myth; which is taken from “Mahabharata”. It contains a story of ‘Archery’
which took place in forest. Arjuna was a small boy who goes to guru Drona’s ashram for learning archery
with pandvas and their cousin brothers Kauravas. Guru Dronacharya was best in archery. Bhishma

15
knows that so he sent his grand children to learn archery from him. Arjuna was the favourite student of
Guru Drona. In ‘Mahabharata’ Arjuna was shown fast learner, whereas in ‘Purpose’ by
T.P.KailasamArjuna represented slow learning than the Eklavya. In; Purpose’ Eklavya is the protagonist.
‘Purpose’ – the title suggests its meaning that the aim of teaching archery but only to the royal children
for Guru Drona, Purpose of learning archery for Arjuna and for Eklavya.
For Arjuna to learn Archery was to become great Archer in his era; whereas to Eklavya; his purpose after
learning the Archery was symbol of selflessness. He wanted to learn Archery because he wanted to
become saviour of innocent animals. Here, in ‘Purpose’, Kailasam represents that the Arjuna is
completely personal and to Eklavya it was totally opposite to Arjuna.
The difference in the same incidence between Mahabharata and
Purpose:-
Usually when we see in Mahabharata, we find that character of Arjuna is highlighted. Moreover,
readers find that unjust is done with Eklavya. After guru Drona’s Propound for ‘Thumb’ to Eklavya as
Guru Dakshina Story moves to Arjuna’s training of archery and did not capture the pain of an lost Thumb
(to an Archer his most precious weapon is his Thumb).
Whereas in “The Purpose” Kailasam focus on the Eklavya and his after condition. He represents Eklavya
as the protagonist of the play and depicts him as a “Tragic Hero”. Here, the readers somehow satisfied
with Kailasam’s idea to focus on Eklavya.
After sacrifices thumb Eklavya regret that it was not his authority to smutch a major weapon from
innocents’ saviour. He was the only who could save those animals with his archery skill without hurting
them, but now he won’t be able to do so.
Character overview of Drona:-
AS we discussed before that Drona was a great Archer. He had first promised to Bhisma that he
would never teach Archery to any other child except Pandvas and Kauravas (Royal Children) and the
second promise he done to Bhisma and Arjuna both that he would make Arjuna the greatest archer of
the era. So, after knowing that the Eklavya is more allegeable and desirable guy to be a great archer
than the Arjuna. Although, shake of his two promises he resisted Eklavya to become his guru (teacher).
Character of Arjuna :-

16
Arjuna is the third child among five Pandvas. He was the favourite child to Bhishma, Guru Drona
and Lord Shree Krishna too. In “The Purpose” we find Arjuna is selfish at some extent (we do not find
the same in “Mahabharata”. The character of Arjuna was highly glorified among all other characters in
Mahabharata.). He also feels jealous fromEklavya after acknowledge that he can be more powerful and
greater archer than him. He also threatened Guru Drona that if he will break his promise then he will tell
this to Bhishma, so better to send Eklavya away. Here, we find the very ideal character of Mahabharata
juxtaposes and depicted as cheaper character in “Purpose”. My verdict leads me there were we can say
Kailasam’s sympathy to Eklavya pushes him to represent Arjuna cheaper than him or may be the Ved
Vyas had biases towards Pandvas and depicted Eklavya at inferior state.
Character – Sketch of Eklavya :-
Eklavya is the protagonist of the play “The Purpose”. He is a Nishada boy. He always speaks whatever is
the truth. He has great esteem. He really likes the technique of Guru Dronacharya but he also
recognized Arjuna as his companion. In Mahabharat he is not powerful character, but in this play he is
powerful character drawn by T.P.Kailasam.
Once he was talking with his mother about archery that he wants to become best archer in the
world, that time his mother told him that Guru Dronacharya was the best teacher for Archery if he
accepts you as a student then this way you can became best archer. At that time he decided that he will
learn archery from Guru Dronacharya and try to convince him to teach him archery, but guru
Dronacharya denies him because he a teacher of Pandvas and Kauravas. He tells him that “I am a
teacher of Princes so I can’t teach you”
When Eklavya enters into the ashram, he expresses his feelings with these words; “(Looking all
around him) this does look like exactly the place mother spoke of :”A wide vast grassy play ground with
bejewelled and beautifully dressed handsome young princes at bow sword and mace exercises… being
taught their lessons by a tall and noble looking Brahamana” is how She described it! And it all fits in
every bit!”
He was so interested in the archery that he thought that he must not miss a word of Drona. This
shows his love for him. He loves Gur Dronacharya and he has respect for him this thing we can see in the
dialogues that are spoken by Eklavya in this play. During this entire situation Eklavya was not noticed by
any one ‘he just shares his feeling with his own self. He tries to prepare himself because now he was
going to present himself to Guru Drona. He already knows that because of his cast, may be Drona will
not teach him but he thinks that because of his aim to become a great archer who wants to help others
he would have to dare for him.
He has very good capturing ability which is seemed here when he listened Guru Drona preaches
to Arjuna before giving him training that to become a great archer is in one’s hand only. One should be

17
strong and stabile at his aim and this way one can achieve his goal. Here, Eklavya knows very well that
his aim is very noble. At sometimes he also becomes negative like his aim cannot be noble than Arjuna;
he is very hard-working. Although he goes to Guru Drona,
I have tried hard ever do hard, Sir, to learn by myself… But it Does seem not
possible, Sir, to Learn all by one’s own self!”
With the help of above lines, we can say that he is really tries hard to convince Drona to teach
him. His manner of expressing is like child explaining something to elders.
When he denies to teach, Eklavya leaves and decided to create a statue of guru Drona and he
would learn the archery with the inspiration of the statue; than he becomes successful and being to be a
scholar in archery. When guru Drona saw that Eklavya could shut up the mouth of a barking wild dog
with his bow very skilfully; by aiming them at correct place to knit the mouth of that dog to save
Pandvas. It shows his skill in Archery. Everyone was socked, ‘Who did this?’ Guru Drona asked! Eklavya
came and exclaimed positively that he did this. Guru Drona asked him who taught him this he replied,
“From you Gurujee!” Drona asked with praise “How?” He never taught him. Then Eklavya led them to
the statue of Guru Drona which he made and worshiped. Arjuna was upset with this. Guru Drona seems
self-centred here when he thinks about promise and reputation for shake of these; he propounds for his
‘Right hand Thumb’ as a Guru-Dakshina. So, that Eklavya can never do archery. To save his promise and
reputation he did not realize that he has become mean for this. Because to beg for Guru-Dakshina is
only for whom who has actually taught to his student and at last that student offers the Guru-Dakshina
to his guru. Here, Eklavya took Drona’s statue as a teacher but seemingly Drona was not there to teach
him, he rejected him. So, he had no right to ask for Guru-Dakshina.
Comparison between Eklavya and Arjuna :-
The similarity between both the characters is that both want to become the world’s best archer.
Though, the aim is same, the purpose is different. Arjuna has the personal purpose and Eklavya has
purpose to save innocent animals. The name or the title of the play “The Purpose”; which given by
playwright appropriately, with the centre of the story.
Contrast between Arjuna and Eklavya :-
Now, let’s talk about contrast or difference between these two characters Eklavya and Arjuna;
that these both the characters have their own aspects and different point of views about the purpose of
learning archery. In their childhood, Eklavya tells Arjuna face to face that Arjuna cannot improve it and
will continue his archery like he is doing at that time. This shows that Eklavya is self-learner and fast
learner, whereas Arjuna comparatively slow learner. Eklavya never loses his temper in small matters
whereas Arjuna has hasty nature.

18
After Eklavya lost his thumb he feels very depressed and expresses his feelings with these words:
“Will you all please leave me tomy own self?”
“You know it will never be farewell between us, Gurujee.”
“Gods! My fawns in distress! And I too helpless myself to help them.”
Comparison of Eklavya and Karna :-
I took this character of Karna because he has so many similarities with Eklavya’s Character. Let’s
see.
Karna had a same question as Eklavya had (Karna was a character from Mahabharata). Basically,
Karna was Kunti-Putra (Son of Kunti by Lord Sun) So he was Kshatriya, but he was brought up by a sut-
couple and so that he known as Sut-Putra. He also wanted to learn from ‘Shree Parshuram’. But,
because of his cast Parshuram could not teach him. Here, Karna speaks lie to Parshuram and get
knowledge. When Parshuram comes to know that he is kshatriya, he got angry but instead cursed him
that “on suitable time (needy time), you would forget your all learning skills”.
Here, the similarity between Eklavya and Arjuna is only that they both are deserving and could
not get justice because of casteism. Eklavya speaks truth and loses his thumb (most needy weapon for
Archery) whereas Karna speaks lie and also loses his skills at last.
Conclusion: -
So, we can say that here in this play Kailasam tried to give justice to Eklavya’s character which is
not there is in original myth. Here he tries to destroy or break the real myth of Mahabharata. This the
typical style of T.P.Kaisasam that he breaks the old rules in his all works either it is a play or any other
work.
Psychological growth in Gulliver‟s Travels.
Name :VishvaGajjar
Roll No. : 45
Stream : M.A.

19
Semester : 1
Paper no. 2 – The Neo-Classical Literature
Assignment topic : Discuss the
Psychological growth in Gulliver’s Travels.
Mentor :Medam Heenaba Zala
Batch : 2018-2020
Introduction:
Jonathan Swift (30 November 1667 – 19 October 1745) was an Anglo-Irish satirist, essayist,
political pamphleteer (first for the Whigs, then for the Tories), poet and cleric who became Dean of St
Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin.
Swift is remembered for works such as A Tale of a Tub (1704), An Argument Against Abolishing
Christianity (1712), Gulliver's Travels(1726), and A Modest Proposal (1729). He is regarded by
the Encyclopaedia Britannica as the foremost prose satirist in the English language, and is less well
known for his poetry.
Although, it is a travel fiction, very popular in those day. Swift uses it to laugh at the stupid ways
of people in politics at that time. It is at once a delightful, fantastic story of adventure for children, a
political allegory and serious controversies and on the morals of the age. The book is written in the form
of a travelogue.
Hence, Gulliver’s Travels is considered to be the most famous example of Jonathan Swift’s
satirical works. The hero and narrator of the story is Lemuel Gulliver, an English Physician who opts to
travel as a ship’s surgeon.

20
Introduction of Novel:
The book is mainly divided into four parts, each dealing with Gulliver’s experience in a different
fantasy land. They are as below:
1. Lilliput
2. Brobdingnag
3. Laputa
4. Houyhnhnms
♦ Overview of Voyages:
1. Lilliput:
A voyage to Lilliput, deals with Gulliver’s experience on the land of dwarfs, who were no more than six
inches tall. It is on one level an absorbing tale of the adventures of the giant Gulliver among the
Lilliputians and on another level rich in allegorical references to the politics on land of England. It’s all
about a scathing satire on the moral pettiness of humans as seen in the behaviour of the Lilliputians. On
this land people are filled with the sense of their own importance and cannot view themselves with
objectivity. Their pride and boastfulness are revealed as ridiculous when perceived from Gulliver’s
Travels.
2. Brobdingnag:
On this voyage the situation of Gulliver is totally opposite then the first one. Here Gulliver is now
marooned and dwarfed in the land of giants who are over forty feet tall. Here, Swift satirizes the
physical grossness of the human and the ugliness of the human body. The malignancy of humans as a
political animal portrayed in the person of Gulliver. On this land he is little more than an insect and at his
best, an amusing toy. Gulliver ends up in a miniature box which is picked up by a giant eagle and
dropped into the ocean. This signals his departure from Brobdingnag and the beginning of his third
voyage to Laputa.
3. Laputa:
During this voyage he is floating on air. At this voyage he also travelled to other four islands which are
Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glubbdubdrib and Japan. The representation of these four islands is a satire on the
scientist and philosopher of the age. Here, we find hierarchy structure in Laputa, because the floating
island represents the distance between the government and the people. The is concerned for the
people, but he never tries to go at their place and meet them. Here, Gulliver is neglected by king often
when he suggests him to stay in contact with his people. Through the people of Laputa, Swift ridicules
the experiment of the royal society and allied institutions of the time. After a long journey to Japan,
Gulliver returns to England before setting out on his final voyage to the land of the Houyhnhnms.
4. Houyhnhnms:

21
This experience of Gulliver narrates that the this was the land of the Houyhnhnms or horses and the
Yahoos. These horses are creature governed solely by reason, free from any emotion or passion. While
the Yahoos who physically resemble human beings are ruled by ‘animals’ instincts. The human is placed
between the two extremes of rationality and animality. Gulliver is repulsed at being identified with the
Yahoos on the land of Houyhnhnms. In conversation with the master horse (whose language Gulliver has
learnt) he explains the customs practiced in England, including the wearing of clothes by Humans (who
are resemble as Yahoos), the government of the people, the legal system, and the uses of money as
instruments of purchase. The master horse doesn’t believe when Gulliver says him that in England
horses are trained by a man to ride over it. Many of the concepts cannot be translated into the
Houyhnhnm’s language as their vocabulary and range of experience were limited. At some extent
Gulliver whimsies to be a one of the Houyhnhnms and he grows content living with his Houyhnhnm
master and hopes to be as like them as possible, but he has to leave the island after all he is a Yahoo to
the Houyhnhnms.
♦ Psychological Growth of Gulliver in the Novel:
When we come to this point, in novel Gulliver visits four different islands and meets different
people and also has different atmosphere. In movie we find that Gulliver returns to home after nine
years; he could not even recognize his wife and son. His mental condition seems to be ill. He is even sent
to the mental asylum for psychological treatment. Gulliver himself could not accept his arrival to
England because for the past nine years he spent his life on four different fantasy lands. He is still in the
illusion of that voyages and behaves weirdly.
In novel we find that Gulliver returns home (England) after each voyage for two months and
spends time with his family. In novel we don’t find psychological illness which is represented in the
movie version.
In his first voyage (Lilliput) we find that Swift satires on people and politics or politicians that how
human beings live? What point of view they carry to move? Here, Gulliver is a giant and Lilliputians are
like toy size.
1. Moral Pettiness:
People mostly do wrong things on the name of religion, ideals and morals or morality. They
merely hurt each other, doing nothing else.
2. Grandeur and Self-Importance:
‘Humans’ always stays busy in highlighting themselves to others instead of doing worth full
deeds. He/she always concentrates on his own reputation, importance, appearance, status etc.
Basically, they become self-centred.
3. Pride, Vanity and Boastfulness:
Human beings are usually found with these three qualities: Pride, Vanity and Boastfulness. They boast
for their life-style, status etc. This thing is generally happening in upper class people, but they forgot
that no one has higher authority than the Nature. They are always seen with fake pride and vanity.

22
In his second voyage (Brobdingnag) Swift satires on physical grossness and ugliness of human kind.
Here, Gulliver is an amusing toy in Giant’s world. Swift also satires on malignancy as political animal. It
develops the sense which represents the ‘mud of politics’ and ‘wore power of chair’; which leads to
disaster.
If we compare the first two voyages, we will find ‘rule of reverse situation’. It means on Lilliput,
Gulliver is giant and in power position whereas in second voyage- Brobdingnag we find him among
giants and he is treated as toy for amusement by farmer, his wife, queen, dwarf etc. Here, he felt bad
upon himself. He realizes the place he had in Lilliputians. It suggest that:
“ One always stays below to another,
And he could ever find the higher
Authority to him; basically there is no
Highest authority.”
Moving on to the third voyage (Laputa- Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glubbdubdrid and Japan). With these
voyages’ Swift satires on magicians, scientists and on social hierarchy (into a political context). He also
satires on the philosophers of the age.
Here, Gulliver finds social structural hierarchy in Laputa, when he was on the floating island
(Laputa) with King, he finds that king is concerned for his people who live below him, but he never tries
to go there and meet them personally to know their problems.
It suggests the best thought for anarch. While a King on his “Chair” he must concentrates to his
people and their need. There is always gape remain between a King and his people, but to remove that
gape always in king’s hand. Basically Swift tries to convey that,
“Authority always stands for bellow’s wellbeing.”
But, instead to think over it authority always misused by “Authority”.
Now let’s come to the final voyage (Houyhnhnms). Here, Swift satires on human nature and their
fake wishes for money and all. Moreover we find here that the authority is horses (Houyhnhnms) not
Yahoos (resemble as Mankind, but wild like animal).
Conversation between Gulliver and Houyhnhnm-Master, we find that they do not have knowledge
of custom practices, legal system, social hierarchy, wearing cloths and all, money as the instruments of
purchase, etc. Seemingly they are far from ideals and morals (seems practical). They have lack of
emotions and feelings. They two have good conversation upon matrimonial matters. In Houyhnhnms
there is no casticism and classicism which being an error to coupling. It is just a shake of creating new
generation. Generally, we do not find this sense in Human Kind. Even they are also greedy as human
kind (but in other manners)
At one point (in movie version) Gulliver throw the precious stone which was with him. Because, he
thought he would never return to his home-land and in this world of Houyhnhnms it has no values at all.

23
When, Gulliver returns to his Home-Land, he tries to put his experience front of all other. Very
firstly he was rejected and mocked by those people as he was in illusion or not in his sane. Later, his tells
was acceptable by all.
We find that Gulliver’s returning to home also brought the knowledge for well human being. His
Psychology developed, because he could find the problems in his people, government and as a human in
his own.
That’s true that if one wants to capture whole picture; one need to get rid out the picture first and
then only he can see that whole picture clearly.
When Gulliver spends his most time out of his world; he was able to find other different worlds. So
that he could find what should be reformed and what should be changed? This helped him to find
himself somewhere better place. It proved betterment to him.
Conclusion :-
Swift seems to indicate to us that the nature of human is complex and defies definition unlike that
of the Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms.
The book for all its harsh satire and anger, instructs humans to see themselves with humility and
honesty.
The imagery of size is used in Gulliver’s Travels to draw attention to misplaced human pride and
the fact that power and self-importance depend entirely on circumstances and are not inherent in
human nature.
Justify the title of th novel „Sense and Sensibility‟.
Paper 05 Assignment Romantic Literature
VishvaGajjar
Roll No. 33
Paper No. 5 – The Romantic Literature
Topic – Justify the title of the novel „Sense and Sensibility‟
S. B. GardiDeperatment of English
Bhavnagar University.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justify the title of th novel ‘Sense and
Sensibility’.
Sense and Sensibility (1811) by Jane Austen offers a clue to the central theme of the novel. The
word ‘’ Sense ‘’ in the title means the capacity of a person to maintain his or her emotional equilibrium,
while word ‘’ Sensibility ‘’ means and inability to maintain such an equilibrium, and tendency to be

24
carried away by an excess of emotion. Thus, the word ‘’ sense ‘’ interpreted as a capacity for emotional-
restraint, while the word ‘’ Sensibility ‘’ may be taken to mean a lack of emotional self- restraint.
Character sketch of Elinor Dashwood:
Elinor-‘’ the more important of the two possible heroines. ‘’
Elinor Dashwood is undoubtedly the heroin of this novel and at any rate, the more important of
the two heroines which this novel seems to possess in the opinion of several critics who even believe
that the other heroin, namely Marianne Dashwood, is the more important of two. Whatever be the
case, Jane Austen herself intended Elinor Dashwood as the novel’s heroine. Throughout, the novel
Austen at pain to establish the greater importance of Elinor by comparison with Marianne. Though the
critics are of the opinion that Austen has failed in her effort to justify and prove her intention.
Elinor, who is the eldest daughter of Mrs. Dashwood, and who is nineteen years of age when the
novel opens, is described as possessing strength of understanding and coolness of judgement which
qualify her to her mother’s adviser and counselor. Elinor disposition is affectionate and her capacity to
keep her feelings strictly under control, she feels somewhat perturbed by the excess of Marianne’s
sensibility.
Mrs. John Dashwood’s opposition to Edward’s Affection towards Elinor becomes attached to a
young man named Edward Ferrars who is the brother of the wife of Elinor’ step- brother, John
Dashwood. It is an act of reciprocity of Elinor’s part to feel attached to Edward Ferrars who has first
given distinct signs of having become emotionally interested in her. However, this affair is prevented
from developing because the hostility of John Dashwood’s wife to any attachment between her brother
and her husband’s step- sister. After the removal of Mrs. Dashwood and her three daughters from
Norland Park in Sussex to Barton cottage in Devonshire, Elinor and the other members of the family
expect Edward Ferrars to pay them a visit at that place; but he does not turn up. Elinor does not
experience any deep grief on account of this disappointment because she knows how to keep her
feeling in check. She has formed a high opinion of Edward’s merits and qualities; but, if he has not come
to see her, she can endure the feeling of a disappointment with great fortitude. She never feels dejected
or melancholy; and her self-command is remarkable. She avoids company; and she does not appear
restless or dissatisfied as result of Edward’s failure to visit her.
Few months later; Elinor receives a big shock when she learns that the young man, with whom
she had been in love all this time, is committed to marry another girl, namely Lucy Steel. This disclosure
has come to Elinor from Lucy Steel herself. She also included that the engagement between them to had
taken place four years ago. This stunning disclosure certainly upset and even grieves Elinor; but she is
able to withstand even this emotional shock which could have overwhelmed and prostrated and other
girl. Elinor becomes disappointed and gloomy, but she does not lose her interest in life and, in fact,
continues to take a keen interest in all those activities in which she had previously felt interested.
Elinor‟s Sisterly Solicitude about Marianne‟s Welfare:
As we have already noted Elinor is devoted to her whole family, and not only to her mother. In
Marianne’s troubles cause no end of distress to her. Willoughby’s growing friendship with Marianne
upsets Elinor a good deal because Elinor does not the real nature of this friendship. Very soon her worry

25
becomes true when Willoughby’s abrupt departure for London happens, this disturbs the whole
Dashwood family but Elinor more particularly. And in London Willoughby’s unaccountable indifference
to Marianne creates more pitiable. Now, Elinor, who is feeling much distressed by her sister’s
predicament, tries her condition become almost critical, Elinor’s grief is intense. Indeed, next only to
Elinor feels all the time worried, distressed, or tormented by Marianne’s misfortunes. Her solicitude and
anxiety about Marianne occupy Elinor’s thoughts even more than her own emotional setback. This trait
of Elinor’s character is certainly admirable.
Elinor: not a Money- Minded Woman:
One other aspect of Elinor’s character is also noteworthy. She is not a money- minded person. In
this respect she offers a sharp contrast to Mrs. Fenny Dashwood who is obsessed with money and who
would go to any length to save every penny in orders to add to the prosperity of her family. Elinor’s
husband would be having very moderate income; and she herself does not have any fortune. She and
Edward would be living at Delaford parsonage a most frugal kind of life; but Elinor has no regrets about
it. Nor does she feel jealous of Marianne who has become prosperous and affluent through her
marriage with Colonel Brandon. This is another admirable trait of her character.
Some other excellent qualities of Elinor:
Furthermore, Elinor is not a garrulous woman. Nor does she believes in ideal gossip or in
spreading rumors as Mrs. Jennings is in habit of doing. Withal Elinor is neither too talkative nor a match-
maker of any kind. She is a dignified, highly, respectable, well- mannered, considerate, civil, and decent
type of woman who would bring credit to any company, and who would certainly bring much credit to her
husband, the person of Delaford.
The character and personality of Marianne Dashwood:
1. AN Embodiment of Sensibility:
Marianne’s abilities were in many respects quit equal to Elinor’s. She was sensible and clever,
but eager in everything; her sorrows and her joys could have no moderation. She was generous,
amiable, interesting; she was everything but prudent. The resemblance between her and her mother
was strikingly great. Marianne is evidently meant to embody ‘’ Sensibility ‘’ or a tendency to feel too
much. A person of this kind feels too happy when there is an occasion for happiness, and too sad when
there is an occasion for sadness.
2. Her assessment of the character of Edward:
Marianne has a talent for music. She can play on piano and can sing well. While Elinor is good at
drawing. Marianne is equally good at music. It is therefore natural for Marianne to react unfavorably to
Edward Ferrars who has no ear for music. Marianne’s assessment of the character of the Edward Ferrars
is widely, different from that of Elinor. According to Marianne Edward is a very amiable but that there is
something lacking in him. Edward’s figure she says, is not striking; it has none 0f that grace which she
would expect in the man who has been able to win Elinor’s heart.
3. A woman of feelings and sentiments:

26
It is evident, then, Marianne is absolutely different from Elinor in her judgement of men.
However, Marianne does not speak to Elinor candidly about Edward because she would not like to hurt
her sister. We may also note that, while Elinor had bidden good bye to Norland Park with a feeling of
perfect composure, Marianne had shed many tears at leaving a place where she had lived for a long
time.
4. The quick development of friendship between Marianne and Willoughby:
The physical appearance of Marianne certainly does her much credit. She is more handsome
than Elinor, and her figure is more striking. She has a lovely face; her complexion is uncommonly
brilliant; her features are all good; her smile is sweet and attractive; and in her eyes, there is life, a spirit,
and eagerness which delight everybody who sees her. It is therefore natural for Willoughby to feel
attract by her. After having carried the injured Marianne to her house, Willoughby becomes a daily
visitor at Barton Cottage; and friendship now begins between him and Marianne. The physical attraction
between the two is strengthened by the fact that Willoughby seems to admire the same writers who are
Marianne’s favorites. They also find that their enjoyment of dancing and music is mutual, that it arises
from general conformity of judgement in everything which relates to both those arts. Their tests are
found to be strikingly similar. The same books, and the same passages in those books, are liked both. As
for Marianne herself, she begins to see bright vision of her future with Willoughby.
5. Marianne’s distress at Willoughby’s sudden departure for London and her Illness.
Marianne’s distress is acute when Willoughby one day suddenly announce to her and other
members of Dashwood family that he is leaving for London unexpectedly at the behest of his guardian,
Mrs. Smith. Marianne, with her strong sensibility now begins to experience such intense misery that her
condition become pitiable. She spends sleepless nights, and she weeps for the whole day after
Willoughby has left; and in this context the author says: ‘’ her sensibility was potent enough.’’ Moreover,
she soon learns that Willoughby got married to a rich heiress (Miss. Grey); and the cup of her misery is
now full. We can imagine what she must have felt on this occasion because of her acute and profound
sensibility. Soon afterwards Marianne falls ill. The illness is attributed to a chill but the psychology basis
for this illness cannot be ignored.
6. A great change in her; and her marriage:
When Marianne recovers, Elinor tells her of Willoughby’s visit. Marianne come to assess what
has passed with sense rather than emotion, and sees that she could never have been happy with
Willoughby’s immoral and expensive nature. She comes to value Elinor’s conduct in a similar situation
and resolve to model herself after Elinor’s courage and good sense. Marianne is now changed person.
She has already expressed her sense of remorse to Elinor; and she already acknowledge her debt to her
sister who had never ceased to attend upon her, to look after her, and to do everything in her power to
console and comfort her despite the setback to her power to console and comfort her despite the
setback to her own emotional well-being and the setback to her own love-affair. Marianne now makes
up her mind to devote herself wholly to her family- her mother and her two sister- and to think of
nothing else. However event takes a different turn. In due course she begins to like man, namely Colonel
Brandon. Few years after Elinor’s wedlock with Edward, Marianne marries Colonel Brandon, having
gradually fallen deeply in love with him.

27
7. Her second palace in the novel….
Marianne is certainly a likeable person, though we, on our part, do not feel as attracted by her
as we are by Elinor. There is a basic weakness in Marianne’s character. Elinor may be suffering from a
deficiency of feeling; but Marianne’s excessive capacity for feeling is by no means a sign of any moral or
intellectual superiority. Excessive feeling in person is undoubtedly a weakness. To moan or to grow
when overtaken by a disappointment or a in frustration of a hope; to spent sleepless night and feel
miserable in the face of hurdles and obstruction- these are by no mean to be regarded as virtues in
human being. Some critics regard Marianne as the center of the novel and as the true heroine of the
novel; but we find it impossible to agree with this view. A heroine she may be; but, as a heroine she
occupies a second place, a place next to Elinor whose strength of character and whose capacity to
withstand misfortune entitle her to our respect and admiration.
8. Social deficiencies and lapses:
In certain other respect too we find Marianne not up to the mark. She is often brusque where
she should be civil and courteous. She is often indifferent where she should show some degree or
friendship. She is often unsociable and inclined to shun company. Many times, what we actually find is
that Marianne avoids Mrs. Jennings has devoutly and sincerely attended upon Marianna’s critic’s illness.
On several occasions we find Marianne leaving the room just when some visitors have arrived.
She is often visible indifferent to Sir John Middleton and, of course, to her step- brother John Dashwood
to whom Elinor is always polite.
Conclusion:
In short, Marianne is a sentimental kind of a girl and, therefore, entirely different from Elinor
who can exercise full control over her feelings. And it is this basic difference between two sisters which
explains the title of the novel, and which also explains the different reactions of the two sisters on
various occasions, and in dealing with various persons in the course of the story.
Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism -
Matthew Arnold
Paper 06 : Assignment Victorian Literature
VishvaGajjar
Roll No. 33

28
Paper No. 6 – The Victorian Literature
Topic – Culture and Anarchy – An Essay in Political and
Social Critisim – Metthew Arnold
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social
Criticism -Matthew Arnold
INTRODUCTION:
Matthew Arnold (1822–88) was one of 19th-century England’s most prominent poets and social
commentators. He was for many years an inspector of schools, later becoming professor of poetry at
Oxford University. Amongst his books, perhaps the best known is Culture and Anarchy (1869), in which
he argues for the role of reading ‘the best that has been thought and said’ as an antidote to the anarchy
of materialism, industrialism and individualistic self-interest.
Culture and Anarchy is a controversial philosophical work by Arnold. And it composed during a
time of unprecedented social and political change, the essay argues for a restructuring of England's
social ideology. It reflects Arnold's passionate conviction that the uneducated English masses could be
molded into conscientious individuals who strive for human perfection through the harmonious
cultivation of all of their skills and talents. A crucial condition of Arnold's thesis is that a state-
administered system of education must replace the ecclesiastical program which emphasized rigid
individual moral conduct at the expense of free thinking and devotion to community. Much more than a
mere treatise on the state of education in England, Culture and Anarchy is, in the words of J. Dover
Wilson, “at once a masterpiece of vivacious prose, a great poet's great defense of poetry, a profoundly
religious book, and the finest apology for education in the English language.”
Arnold divides the society of England into three classes - The Aristocratic Class, the Middle Class
and the Working Class. He finds Anarchy very common in these classes and analyses them with their
virtues and defects. He designates the Aristocratic class of his time as the Barbarians, the Middle class as
the Philistines and the Working class as the Populace.
We normally find three classes in Ships which also indicates exact social hierarchy in world. As
elite class people enjoy seating idly on deck of the ship, Middle class people enjoying dance and food at
the medieval floor, whereas, working class people hardily works for whole day at the rest floor of the
ship. Their constant attempt makes ship floating upon ocean.
His scrutiny of three classes of his time proves him a good experienced critic. For Aristocratic
class, he views that this class lacks adequate courage for resistance. He calls this class the Barbarians
because they believe in their personal individualism, liberty and doing as one likes; they had great
passion for field sports. Their manly exercise, their strength and their good looks are definitely found in

29
the Aristocratic class of his time. Their politeness resembles the Chivalry Barbarians, and their external
styles in manners, accomplishments and powers are inherited from the Barbarians.
The other class is the middle class or the Philistines, known by its mundane wisdom, expert of
industry and found busy in industrialization and commerce. Their eternal inclination is to the progress
and prosperity of the country by building cities, railroads and running the great wheels of industry. They
have produced the greatest mercantile navy. So, they are the Empire builders. In this material progress,
the working class is with them. All the keys of progress are in their hands.
The other class is the working class or the populace. This class is known raw and half-developed
because of poverty and other related diseases. This class is mostly exploited by the Barbarians and
Philistines. The author finds democratic arousing in this class because they are getting political
consciousness and are coming out from their hiding places to assert an English man's heaven- born
privilege of doing as he likes, meeting where he likes, bawling what he likes, and breaking what he likes.
Despite such class system, Arnold finds a common basis of human nature in all. So, the spirit of
sweetness and light can be founded. Even Arnold calls himself philistine and rises above his level of birth
and social status in his pursuit of perfection, sweetness and light and culture. He further says that all
three classes find happiness in what they like. For example, the Barbarians like honor and consideration,
field sports and pleasure. The Philistines like fanaticism, business and money making and comfort and
tea meeting, but the Populace class, hated by the both classes, likes shouting, hustling and smashing and
beer. They all keep different activities by their social status. However, there are a few souls in these
classes who hope for culture with a desire to know about their best or to see things as they are. They
have desire to pursue reason and to make the will of God to prevail.
The Best Self or the Right Reason & the Ordinary Self:
Here he discusses the best self or the right reason and the ordinary self that can be felt in the
pursuit of perfection only. In this regard, he talks about the bathos (excessive pathos, insincere
sentimental pathos), surrounded by nature itself in the soul of man, is presented in literary judgment of
some critics of literature and in some religious organizations of America. He further says that the idea of
high best self is very hard for the pursuit of perfection in literature, religion and even in politics. The
political system, prevalent in his time, was of the Barbarians. The leaders and the statesmen sang the
praises of the Barbarians for winning the favor of the Aristocrats. Tennyson celebrates in his poems the
glory of the great broad-shouldered genial Englishmen with his sense of duty and reverence for the laws.
Arnold asserts that Tennyson is singing the praise of the philistines because this middle class is the
backbone of the country in progress. The politicians sing the praise of the populace for carrying their
favors. Indeed, they play with their feelings, having showed the brightest powers of sympathy and the
readiest power of actions. All these praises are mere clap-trap and trick to gain applause. It is the taste
of bathos surrounded by nature itself in the soul of man and comes into ordinary self. The ordinary self-
enforces the readers to misguide the nation. It is more admirable, but its benefits are entertained by the
representatives and ruling men.
Arnold wants to bring reform in education by shifting the management of public schools from
their old board of trustees to the state. Like politics, in education the danger lies in unchecked and
unguided individual action. All the actions must be checked by the real reason or the best self of the

30
individual. It is the opinion of some people that the state may not interfere into affairs of education. The
liberal party men believe in liberty, the individual liberty of doing as one likes and assert that
interference of the state in education is a violation of personal liberty. Arnold says that such ideal
personal liberty has still indefinite distance.
Moreover, he has the experience of twenty- four years as the inspector of schools. It provided
him so much time to meet the different classes and examine their behaviors and habits. This experience
pursued him to write 'Culture & Anarchy'. In his book, he has also discussed various topics about true
culture. In this book, he has discussed Hebraism and Hellenism.
In the inception of the topic, he discusses doing and thinking. His general view about human
beings is that they prefer to act rather than to think. He rejects it because mankind is to err 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 follows the voice of its conscience and its best light,
but it is not the light of true reason except darkness.
He talks about the great idea to know and the great energy to act. Both are the most potent
forces, and they should be in harmony by the light of reason. So, they are Hebraism and Hellenism. He
insists on the balance of the both thought and action (Hellenism and Hebraism). The final aim of
Hellenism and Hebraism is the same as man's perfection and salvation. He further discusses 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. He points out that the Greek philosophy
considers that the body and its desires are an impediment to right thinking, whereas Hebraism considers
that the body and its desires are an obstacle to right action.
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. 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.
Hellenism and Hebraism both are directly connected to the life of human beings. Hellenism
keeps emphasis on knowing or knowledge, whereas Hebraism fastens its faith in doing. He describes
that the Bible reveals the truth which awards the peace of God and liberty. The 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 asserts that there is enough of Hellenism in the English nation, and he
emphasizes on Hebraism, because it is based on conduct and self- control. He admits that the age is
incapable of governing itself in the pursuit of perfection, and the bright promise of Greek ideal is faded.
Now the obedience or submission must be to the rules of conduct, as expressed by the Holy Scripture
(Bible). Hellenism lays its main stress on clear intelligence, whereas Hebraism keeps main stress on firm
obedience, moral power and character.

31
Conclusion:
Thus, the mission of Arnold's culture is that each individual must act for himself and must be
perfect himself. The chosen people or classes must dedicate themselves to the pursuit of perfection, and
he seems to be agreed with Humboldt, the German Philosopher, in case of the pursuit of perfection. So,
it is essential that man must try to seek human perfection by instituting his best self or real reason;
culture, in the end, would find its public reason.
“TRADITION AND INDIVIDUAL TALENT”
Paper 07 : Assignment Literary Criticism
VishvaGajjar
Roll No. 33
Paper No. 7 – Literary Theory and Criticism
Topic – Critique on „Eliot as a Critic‟
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“TRADITION AND INDIVIDUAL TALENT”
T.S.Eliot’s “tradition and individual talent” was published in 1919 in the egoist – the times
literary supplement. Later, the essay was published in the sacred wood: essays on poetry and criticism in
1920/2. This essay is described by David lodge as the most celebrated critical essay in the English of the
20thcentury. The essay is divided into three main sections:
(1) The first gives us Eliot’s concept of tradition.
(2) The second exemplifies his theory of depersonalization and poetry.
(3) The third part he concludes the debate by saying that the poet’s sense of tradition and the
impersonality of poetry are complementary thing.

32
(Part-1) :
IN ENGLISH LITERARY CRITICISM “TRADITION” IS USED AS A PHRASE
OF CENSURE:-
In English literature and criticism we rarely come across passages illustrative of the right use due
emphasis on the term “tradition”, from time to time we apply the word in expressing our grief for its
absence. We cannot make a reference to “the tradition” or to “a tradition”; at most, we use the
adjective in saying that the poetry of so and so is “tradition” or even “too tradition”. The word appears
rarely and when it does appear, it is used as a phrase of censure.
In English criticism, according to Eliot, we have a deplorable lack of that critical insight which
views a particular literary work or a writer in the context of a wider literary tradition. The English literary
critic does not give due weight and consideration to tradition in evaluating the writers of the past and in
appreciating the poets of the present. He uses “tradition” in a derogatory sense.
CRITICISM IS INDISPENSABLE FOR CREATIVE ACTIVITY:
The critical activity paves the way for, sustains and guides the creative activity. Just as the
creative genius of each nation possesses some distinguishing. Traits, certain aptitudes and inclinations,
being the expression of that nation’s life: in the same way each nation, each race has certain
distinguishing habits of mind reflected in critical activity. And just as it is not easy for a nation to acquire
a self-awareness of the defects and limitations of its creative habits of mind, in the same way it is
difficult for a nation to cultivate a consciousness of the shortcomings of its critical habits of mind. English
nation in Eliot’s opinion suffers from a similar unawareness of the short coming and limitation of its
critical genius. The English are familiar with the critical writing in French often leads an Englishman to
believe that the French people are more critical, and consequently less spontaneous. Eliot strives to
dispel this fallacy by emphasizing the importance of criticism which, according to him, is as
indispensable to creative activity as breathing is to life. Criticism expresses our responses to a particular
work of art: it expresses the feelings and emotions and intellectual reaction of a reader in relation to the
book he reads.
THE IMPORTANCE OF TRADITION TO INDIVIDUAL TALENT:
Eliot says that the Englishmen have a tendency to insist, when they praise a poet, upon those
aspects of his work in which he least resembles anyone else. In these aspects of his work they try to find
out what is individual, what is the peculiar essence of that man. They try to find out the difference of the
port with his contemporaries and predecessors, especially with his immediate predecessors. They try to
find out something that can be separated in order to be enjoyed. But if we study the poet without bias
or prejudice, we shall often find that not only the best, but the most individual parts of his work may be

33
those in which the dead ports, his ancestors, asserts their immortality forcefully and vigorously. We find
the dead notes in the present poets not in their impressionable period of adolescence. But in the period
of their full maturity. According to Eliot tradition and individual talent go together.
“TRADITION” DEFINED:
Tradition is not the handling down .or following the ways of the ancients blindly. It cannot be
inherited. It can only be obtained with great labor. It involves a historical sense. Which enables a poet to
perceive not only the pastness of the past but of its presentness. A creative artist, though he lives in a
particular milieu, does not work merely with his own generation in view.
He does not take his own age, or the literature of that period only as a separate identity. But
acts with the conviction that in general the whole literature of the continent from the classical age of
the Greeks onwards and in particular the literature of his own country. Is to be taken as a harmonious
whole. His own creative efforts are not apart from it. But a part of it.
THE CLOSE RELATIONSHIPAND INTERDEPENDENCE OF THE PAST AND
PRESENT:
No poet or artist of any kind has his full meaning and significance alone. His importance, his
appreciation is the appreciation of his kinship with the poets and artists of the past generations, you
cannot value him alone; you must set him for contrast and comparison, among the poets and writers of
the past. This, to Eliot, is a principle of aesthetic, and not merely of historical criticism. The necessity for
the individual talent to conform to the tradition is not one-sided; what happens when a new work of art
is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the works of art which preceded it. “The
existing monuments form an ideal order among themselves, which is modified by the introduction of
the new work of art among them. The existing order is complete before the new work arrives for order
to persist after the supervention of novelty, the whole existing order must be, if ever so slightly, altered;
and so the relations, proportions, values of each work of art toward the whole are readjusted; and this is
conformity between the old and the new. Whoever has approved this idea of order of the form of
European of English literature, will not find it preposterous that the past should be altered by the
present as much as the present it directed by the past.”
THE RELATIONSHIP OF A POET‟S WORK TO THE GREAT WORKS OF THE
PAST:
The poet, who understands the presentness of the past, also understands his responsibilities
and difficulties as an artist. Such an artist will fully realize that he must inevitably be judged by the
standards of the past. In saying that an artist is finally to be judged by the standards of the past. Eliot
does not imply that he is to be pronounced better or worse than the previous poets or that the
standards prescribed by the previous critics are to be applied in judging their works.

34
LITERATURE AS A CONTINUITY:
Eliot points out a significant difference between the past and the present. The difference is that
“the conscious present is an awareness of the past in a way and to an extent which the past’s awareness
of itself cannot show” Eliot covers the possible objection that his doctrine requires a ridiculous amount
of erudition and that much learning deadens or perverts poetic sensibility. He says that there is a
distinction between knowledge and pedantry. “Some can absorb knowledge; the more tardy must sweat
for it. Shakespeare acquired more essential history from the Plutarch than most men could from the
whole British museum. What is to be insisted upon is that the poet must develop or procure the
consciousness of the past and that he should continue to develop this consciousness throughout his
career”. He believes that it is the awareness of tradition that sharpens the sensibility. Which has a vital
part to play in the process of poetic creation.
(Part-2)
He starts the second part of his essay with: “honest criticism and sensitive appreciation is
directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry”.
The artist or the poet adopts the process of depersonalization, which is “a continual surrender
of himself as he is at the moment to something which is more valuable. The progress of an artist is a
continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality,” there still remain to define this process of
depersonalization and its relation to sense of tradition.
THE PROCESS OF DEPERSONALISATION:
Eliot explains this process of depersonalization and its relation to the sense of tradition by
comparing it to a chemical process – the action which takes place when a bit of finely foliated platinum
is introduced into a chamber containing oxygen and Sulphur dioxide. The analogy is that of the catalyst.
He says: “when the two gases previously mentioned (oxygen and Sulphur dioxide) are mixed in the
presence of a filament of platinum they form Sulphuric acid if the platinum is present: nevertheless the
newly formed acid contains no trace of platinum. And the platinum itself is apparently unaffected: has
remained inert, neutral, and unchanged. The mind of the poet is the shred of platinum. It may partly or
exclusively operate upon the experience of the man himself; but, the more perfect the artist, the more
completely separate in him will be the man who suffers and the mind which creates; the more perfectly
will the mind digest and transmute the passions which are its material.

35
EMOTIONS AND FEELINGS:-
The elements of the experience of the poet are of two kinds-emotions and feeling. They are the element
which entering the presence of the poet’s mind and acting as a catalyst, go to the making of a work of
art, the final effect produced by a work of art may be formed out of several emotions into one, it may be
formed out of a singly emotion or out of the feeling invoked in the poet by various words and images. It
is also possible that it may be composed of feeling alone, without using any emotions. Thus the poet’s
mind is a receptacle for seizing and storing up numberless feeling, phrases, images, which remain there
until all the particles which can unite to form a new compound are present together.
“……as one of those
Who o’er Verona’s champion try their speed?
For the green mantle; and of them he seemed,
Not he who loses, but who gains the prize.”
It is in this image, according to Eliot, that Dante gives the feeling attached to it. It cannot be said
that the poet arrived at it all of a sudden. No can it be regarded as simply developing out of the
preceding lines. This “feeling” remained in suspension in Dante’s mind till the preceding complex details
of the canto prepared an apt combination for this feeling to appear.
THE INTENSITY OF THE ARTISTIC PROCESS:
Eliot believes that the greatness of a poem does not depend on the greatness or the intensity of
the emotions but on the intensity of the artistic process e.g. in Agamemnon the artistic emotion
approximates to the emotion of an actual spectator; in Othello to the emotion of the protagonist
himself. “But the difference between art and the event is always absolute”, “the ode of Keats contains a
number of feelings which have nothing particular to do with the nightingale, but which the nightingale,
partly perhaps because of its attractive name, and partly because of its reputation, served to bring
together.”
Eliot says that “the poet has not a “personality” to express, but a particular medium, which is
only a medium and not a personality, in which impressions and experiences which are important for the
man may take no place in the poetry, and those which become important in the poetry may play quite a
negligible part in the man, the personality.”

36
(PART – 3)
In the last section of “tradition and the individual talent” Eliot says that the poet’s sense of
tradition and the impersonality of poetry are complementary things. He tries to divert the interest from
the poet to the poetry for it would conduce to a jester estimation of actual poetry, good or bad. He says
that “very few know when there is an expression of significant emotion, emotion which has its life in the
poem and not in the history of the poet. The emotion of art is impersonal. And the poet cannot reach
this impersonality without surrendering himself wholly to the work to be done. and he is not likely to
know what is to be done unless he lives in what is not merely the present, but the present moment of
the past, unless he is conscious, not of what is dead, but of what is already living” a constant and
continual awareness of tradition is very necessary for the port.
ELIOT AND NEW CRITICISM:
Eliot inspired and informed the movement of new criticism. This is somewhat ironic, since he
later criticized their excruciatingly detailed analysis of texts. Yet, he does share with them the same
focus on the aesthetic and stylistic qualities of poetry, rather than on its ideological content. The new
critics resemble Eliot in their close analysis of particular passages and poems.
CRITICISM OF ELIOT:
Eliot’s theory of literary tradition has been criticized for its limited definition of what constitutes
the canon of that tradition. He assumes the authority to choose what represents great poetry, and his
choices have been criticized on several fronts, for examples, Harold bloom disagrees with Eliot’s
condescension of romantic poetry, which, in the metaphysical poets (1921) he criticized for its
“dissociation of sensibility.” Moreover, many believe Eliot’s discussion of the literary tradition as the
“mind of Europe” reeks of euro-centrism. He does not account for a non-masculine tradition. As such,
his notion of tradition stands at odds with feminist, post-colonial and minority theories. Kenyan author
James Ngugi advocated a commitment to nation works. Which speak to one’s own culture, as compared
to deferring to an arbitrary notion of literary excellence. As such, he implicitly attacks Eliot’s subjective
criterion in choosing an elite body of literary works. Post-colonial critic Chinua Achebe also challenges
Eliot, since he argues against deferring to those writers, including Conrad, whom have been deemed
great, but only represent a specific cultural perspective.
Harold bloom presents a conception of tradition that differs from that, of Eliot. Whereas Eliot
believes that the great poet is faithful to his predecessors and evolves in a concordant manner, bloom
envisions the “strong port “to engage in a much more aggressive and tumultuous rebellion against
tradition.

37
In 1964, his last year, Eliot published in a reprint of the use of poetry and use of criticism, a
series of lectures he gave at Harvard university in 1932 and 1933, a new preface in which he called
“tradition and the individual talent” the most juvenile of his essays.
What is Cultural Studies?
Paper 08 : Assignment Cultural Studies
VishvaGajjar
Roll No. 33
Paper No. 8 – Cultural studies
Topic - What is Cultural Studies and its limitations?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is Cultural Studies?
‘Culture’ word itself is hard to define.
‘Cultural Studies’ is loosely a group of tendencies, issues and questions arising from a social turmoil of
the 1960s.
It is composed of elements of:
 Marxism,
 Post-Structuralism,
 Post-Modernism,
 Feminism,
 Gender studies,
 Anthropology,
 Race,
 Sociology,
 Ethnic Studies,
 Film theory,
 Urban Studies,
 Public Policy,
 Post-Colonial Studies,
 Popular Cultural Studies
 those fields which concentrates on social and cultural forces that either create community or
cause division or alienation.

38
Lateron discipline of Psychology has also arrived in Cultural Studies.
It is to erase boundaries between 1. High-Low, 2. Classic-Popular literary texts and 3. Literature-
Other Cultural Discourses.
As we know that Cultural Study refers many of the disciplines, it is natural that it will have
limitations. We know that if we concentrate on more than one work at a time, we could not give every
work the same importance and attention. Here, it happens with Cultural Studies too.
To define cultural studies, we should have one glance upon that what is ‘Culture’?
According to Merriam Webster dictionary, Culture means, “the way of thinking, behaving, and
living of people.”
Another meaning of ‘Culture’ is ‘set of Standards’.
Moreover, the culture means, “the arts, and other manifestation of human intellectual
achievement regarded collectively.” In other sense we can also say that, “ideas, customs, and social
behavior of a particular people of society also known as ‘Culture’”.
Now, the question is what ‘Cultural Studies’ is?
“Cultural Studies are innovative interdisciplinary field of research and teaching that investigates
the way in which culture creates and transforms individual experiences everyday life, social relations
and power”.
Now the prime concern is that where it (culture) can be studied? Or In which departments it has
studied?
Also in other departments like,
 Archeology
 Botany
 Agriculture
 Philosophy
 Geography
What Cultural Studies doing in English Department or in Literature Class?
A collage class on the American novel is reading Alice Walker’s ‘The Color Purple (1982).’ The
professor identifies African American literary and cultural sources and describes the book’s multilayered
narrative structure, moving on a brief review of its feminist critique of American gender and racial
attitudes. Students and professor discuss these various approaches, analyzing key passages in the novel.
Class members respond to these points, examining interrelationships among race, gender, popular
culture, the media, and literature.
This class is practicing Cultural Studies. But, the word ‘Culture’ itself is so difficult to pin down;
“Cultural Studies” is hard to define.

39
As PratickBrantlinger has pointed out, culture studies is not “a tightly coherent, unified
movement with a fixed agenda,” but a “loosely coherent group of tendencies, issues, and questions.”
Arising from the social turmoil of the 1960s, cultural studies is composed of elements of,
Marxism, post- structuralism, and post- modernism, feminism, gender studies, anthropology, sociology,
race and ethnic studies, film theory, urban studies, public policy, popular culture studies, and
postcolonial studies. The discipline of psychology has also entered the field of cultural studies.
· Cultural Studies approaches generally share four goals.
1) First, cultural studies transcend the confines of a
particular discipline such as literary criticism or history.
Cultural studies are not necessarily about literature in the traditional sense or even about ‘art’.
Intellectual works are not limited by their own “borders” as single texts, historical problems, or
disciplines, and the critic’s own personal connections to what is being analyzed may also be described.
For students, this sometimes means that a professor might make his or her own political views part of
the instruction, which, of course, can lead to problems. But, this kind of criticism, like feminism is an
engaged rather than a detached activity.
2) Cultural studies is politically engaged.
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 relationship among dominant and “minority” or “subaltern”
discourses. Because meaning and individual subjectivity are culturally constructed, they can thus be
reconstructed. Such a notion, taken to philosophical extreme, denies the autonomy of the individual,
weather an actual person or a character in literature, a rebuttal of the traditional humanistic “great
man” or “great book” theory, and relocation of aesthetics and culture from the ideal realms of test and
sensibility, into the arena of a whole society’s everyday life as it is constructed.
3) Cultural studies deny the separation of “high” and “low”
or “elite” and “popular culture”.
You might hear someone remark at the symphony or at end art museum: “I came here to get a
little culture”. Being a “cultured” person used to mean being acquainted with “highbrow” art and
intellectual pursuits. But isn’t culture also to be found with a pair of tickets to a rock concert? Cultural
critic’s today work to transform the term culture to include mass culture, weather popular, folk, or
urban. Following theorists Jean Baudrillard and Andreas Huyssen, cultural critics argues that after world
war 2 the distinction among high, low and mass culture collapsed, and they site other theorists such as
Pierre Bourdieu and Dick Hebdige on how “good test” often only reflects prevailing social, economic,

Assingments by vishva gajjar

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Assingments by vishva gajjar

Similar to Assingments by vishva gajjar (20)

More from VishvaGajjar

More from VishvaGajjar (17)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Assingments by vishva gajjar