Surrealism supposedly grew out of or outgrew Dada in Paris, the two movements come from very different time periods and cultural contexts. Dada was a wartime movement, founded in the midst of an international slaughter of young men, led by a deluded and incompetent class of elites. Although the Dada artists advertised themselves as being “anti-art,” the exiles in Zurich were against traditional art and its vaunted ideals. Far from being opposed to the basic idea of art, the Dada artists strove to find new ways to make new art in a new ways.
0 Comments
Realism is a literary movement that attempts to describe life without idealization or romantic subjectivity. Although realism cannot be precisely timed or limited to any period, it is most often associated with a movement in 19th-century France (approximately 1840-1890). The term "realism," which was originally used by the thirteenth-century scholastics to describe a belief in the reality of ideas, in the 19th century became associated with a group of writers who claimed it as a slogan for the movement. Friedrich Schiller was the first who used it as a literary term. In his letter to Goethe, on April 27, 1798, he wrote, "realism cannot make a poet." Contrary to him, in the "Ideen," No. 6 in 1798, Friedrich Schlegel claimed that that "all philosophy is idealism and there is no true realism except that of poetry."Honoré de Balzac, the author of "La comédie humaineis" is considered to be a precursor of the movement, but the first work that belonged to the Realism were the novels of Gustave Flaubert and the short stories of Guy de Maupassant in France, Anton Chekhov in Russia, George Eliot in England, and Mark Twain and William Dean Howells in the USA. Realists mainly focused on middle-class characters in their everyday environments and highly downplayed the plot. The Anglo-American novelist Henry James developed his characters to such a high degree that it evolved into subgenre - the psychological novel.Later, realism evolved into literary movements such as Naturalism and Stream of Consciousness and, with the arrival of avant-garde art in the late 19th century, was abandoned in favour of more abstract styles.
Main characteristics: Faithful representation of life Concentrating on middle-class life and preoccupations Scenes of humble lifeCriticism of social conditions Characters are in centre of interest as opposed to a plot Subjects portrayed with simplicity and respect but little elaboration Honest, matter-of-fact style Objects or figures are represented impartially and objectively Commonly, the term Literary Devices refers to the typical structures used by writers in their works to convey his or her message(s) in a simple manner to his or her readers. When employed properly, the different literary devices help readers to appreciate, interpret and analyze a literary work.
Two Kinds of Literary DevicesLiterary Devices have two aspects. They can be treated as either Literary Elements or Literary Techniques. It will be convenient to define them separately. Literary Elements have an inherent existence in literary piece and are extensively employed by writers to develop a literary piece e.g. plot, setting, narrative structure, characters, mood, theme, moral etc. Writers simply cannot create his desired work without including Literary Elements in a thoroughly professional manner. Literary Techniques, on the contrary, are structures usually a word s or phrases in literary texts that writers employ to achieve not merely artistic ends but also readers a greater understanding and appreciation of their literary works. Examples are: metaphor, simile, alliteration, hyperbole, allegory etc. In contrast to Literary Elements, Literary Techniques are not unavoidable aspect of literary works. To have a better understanding of Literary Devices, it is useful to look at their definition and examples: Common Literary Elements
Literature can be interpreted in as many ways as possible, and there are different approaches to literature, and one among them is the archetypal approach. The term “archetype” means an original idea or pattern of something of which others are copies. Archetypal approach is the interpretation of a text in the light of cultural patterns involved in it, and these cultural patterns are based on the myths and rituals of a race or nation or social group. Myths and rituals are explored in a text for discovery of meaning and message. In recent times this type of critics. approach to a text has gained popularity. James George Frazer and Carl Gustav Jung are the two great authorities who, have greatly contributed to the development of archetypal approach. Frazer was a social anthropologist and his book The Golden Bough makes a study of magic, religion and myths of different races. Jung was a psychologist associated with Freud. The “collective consciousness” is a major theory of Jung. According to Jung, civilized man “unconsciously” preserves the ideas, concepts and values of life cherished by his distant forefathers, and such ideas are expressed in a society’s or race’s myths and rituals. Creative writers have used myths in their works and critics analyze texts for a discovery of “mythological patterns.” This kind of critical analysis of a text is called archetypal criticism. T.S. Eliot has used mythical patterns in his creative works andThe Waste Land is a good example of it. Northrop Frye in his essay does not analyze any particular myth in a work and in
fact, he presents an analysis of “mythical patterns” which have been used by writers in general. Two Types of Criticism and the Humanities Like science, literary criticism is also a systematized and organized body of knowledge. Science dissects and analyses nature and facts. Similarly literary criticism analyses and interprets literature. Frye further says that literacy criticism and its theories and techniques can be taught, but literature cannot be taught, rather it is to be felt and enjoyed. Indeed, literary criticism is like science and it can be creative. There are two types of literary criticism: a significant and meaningful criticism, and a meaningless criticism. A meaningless criticism will not help a reader in developing a systematic structure of knowledge about a work of literature. This kind of criticism will give only the background information about a work. A meaningless criticism will distract the reader from literature. Literature is a part of humanities and humanities include philosophy and history also. These two branches of knowledge provide a kind of pattern for understanding literature. Philosophy and history are two major tools- for interpretation of literature and archetypal criticism is based on philosophy and history of a people. Archetypal criticism is meaningful criticism. Formalistic Criticism & Historical Criticism There are different types of criticism and most of them remain commentaries on texts. There is a type of criticism, which focuses only on an analysis of a text. Such a criticism confines itself to the text and does not give any other background information about the text. This type of formalistic or structural criticism will help the readers in understanding a text only to some extent. That is, a reader may understand the pattern of a text, but how the pattern is evolved, he cannot understand without the background information, which may be called historical criticism. Structural criticism will help a reader in understanding the pattern of a text and historical criticism will make the reader’s understanding clearer. What the readers require today is a synthesis of structural criticism and historical criticism. Archetypal criticism is a synthesis of structural criticism and historical criticism. Literary Criticism is a Science Science explores nature and different branches of science explore different aspects of nature. Physics is a branch of science, which explores matter and natural forces of the universe. Physics and Astronomy gained their scientific significance and they were accepted as branches of science during the Renaissance. Chemistry gained the status of science in the eighteenth century, and so did Biology in the nineteenth century. Social Sciences assumed their significance as part of science in the twentieth century. Similarly, literary criticism, today, has become systematic in its analysis, and therefore it could be considered as a science. Based on this concept, a work of literature may be critically (or scientifically) evaluated, says Northrop Frye. Among the tools of criticism, he uses the two methods: structural criticism and historical criticism. The two concepts, he explains in detail in the second and third parts of this critical essay respectively. Part-II THE INDUCTIVE METHOD OF ANALYSIS Structural Criticism and Inductive Analysis Towards the close of the first section, Frye contends that structural criticism will help a reader in understanding a text, and in his analysis, he proceeds inductively. That is, from particular truths in a work, he draws forth general truths. Owing to jealousy, Othello, in the Shakespearean play, inflicts upon himself affliction and this is the particular truth of the drama from which the reader learns the general truth of life that jealousy is always destructive. This is called the inductive method of analysis under structural criticism, and Frye discusses this in detail in this section of the essay. An author cannot intrude into his text and express his personal emotions and comments. He should maintain absolute objectivity. A critic studies a work and finds out whether an author is free from textual interference. This is a sort of psychological approach also, and this method of criticism helps the reader in understanding an author’s personal symbols, images and myths which he incorporates in his works. At times the author himself may be unconscious of the myths, symbols etc., which he has exploited in his works, and the critic “discovers” such things. Historical Criticism and Inductive Analysis Under the second type of criticism called historical criticism, a critic interprets the birth of a text and resolves that it is an outcome of the social and cultural demands of a society in a particular period. The social and cultural milieus are the causes responsible for the creation of a work. Quite evidently the historical-critic plays a major role in the understanding of a text. In fact, both structural criticism and historical criticism are a necessity in archetypal criticism and neither can be dispensed with. But either of them alone does not explain a work completely. A historical critic discovers common symbols and images being used by different writers in their works, and resolves that there must be a common ‘source from which writers have derived their symbols, images and myths. The sea is a common symbol used by many writers over the years and therefore it is an archetypal symbol. Not only symbols, images and myths are archetypal; even genres are archetypal. For example, the genre of drama originates from Greek religion. Thus the historical inductive method of criticism helps the readers in understanding not only symbols, images and myths, but also the very genre itself. The Collective Unconscious or Racial Memory Archetypal criticism dissects and analyses symbols, images and mythologies used by a writer in his works, and these symbols, myths and rituals have their origin in primitive myths, rituals, folk-lore and cultures. Such primitive factors according to Jung lie buried in the “collective unconscious” which may otherwise be called “racial memory” of a people. Since a writer is part of a race, what lies in his “unconscious” mind is expressed in his works in the form, of myths, rituals, symbols and images. Archetypal criticism focuses on such things in a work. In archetypal criticism, under the reductive method of analysis, a critic, while elucidating a text, moves from the particular truth to the general truth. A particular symbol or myth leads to the establishment of a general truth. Works of art are created in this way and their origin is in primitive cultures. Literature is produced in this manner over the years. Archetypal Criticism and Its Facets Archetypal criticism is an all-inclusive term. It involves the efforts of many specialists, and at every stage of interpretation of a text, it is based “on a certain kind of scholarly organization.” An editor is needed to “clean up” the text; a rhetorician analyses the narrative pace; a philologist scrutinizes the choice and significance of words; a literary social historian studies the evolution of myths and rituals. Under archetypal criticism the efforts of all these specialists converge on the analysis of a text. The contribution of a literary anthropologist to archetypal criticism is no small. In an archetypal study of Hamlet an anthropologist traces the sources of the drama to the Hamlet legend described by Saxo, a thirteenth century Danish historian in his book entitled Danes, Gesta Danorum. He further traces the sources of the drama to nature myths, which were in vogue in the Norman Conquest period. Thus an anthropologist makes a threadbare analysis of the origins of Hamlet under archetypal criticism. Part - III DEDUCTIVE METHOD OF ANALYSIS Rhythm and Pattern in Literature An archetypal critic, under the deductive method of analysis, proceeds to establish the meaning of a work from the general truth to the particular truth. Literature is like music and painting. Rhythm is an essential characteristic of music and in painting, pattern is the chief virtue. Rhythm in music is temporal and pattern in painting is spatial. In literature both rhythm and pattern are recurrence of images, forms and words. In literature rhythm means the narrative and the narrative presents all the events and episodes as a sequence and hastens action. Pattern in literature signifies its verbal structure and conveys a meaning. In producing the intended artistic effect, a work of literature should have both rhythm (narrative) and pattern (meaning). Rhythm in a Work The world of nature is governed by rhythm and it has got a natural cycle. The seasonal rhythms in a solar year are spring, winter, autumn and summer. This kind of rhythm is there in the world of animals and in the human world also. The mating of animals and birds rhythmically takes place in a particular season every year and the mating may be called a ritual. A ritual is not performed frequently, but rhythmically after a long gap and it has a meaning. The mating of animals has the meaning of reproduction. In the world of nature also rituals are rhythmic. Crops are planted and harvested rhythmically every year and they have their seasons. At the time of planting and harvest, sacrifices and offerings are made and they have a meaning: fertility and consummation of life. In the human world rituals areperformed voluntarily and they have their own significance. Works of literature have their origins in such rituals and the archetypal critic discovers and explains them. He explains the rhythm of the rituals, which are the basis of literature in general. Pattern in a Work It has already been established that in literature pattern is recurrence of images, forms and words. Patterns are derived from a writer’s “epiphanic moments.” That is, a writer gets the concepts of his work or ideas of his work in moments of inspiration and he looks into the heart of things. Then he expresses what he has “perceived” in the form of proverbs, riddles, commandments and etiological folktales. Such things have already an element of narrative and they add further to the narrative of the writer in his works. A writer expresses what he has “perceived,” and he uses myths either deliberately or unconsciously, and it is the critic who discovers the archetypes, the myths, in a work and explicates the patterns in the work. Both pattern and rhythm are the major basic components of a work. The Four Phases of the Myth Every myth has a central significance and the narrative in a myth centres on a figure that may be a god or demi-god or superhuman being or legend. Frazer and Jung contend that in the development of a myth the central figure or central significance is the most important factor and many writers have accepted this view. Frye classifies myths into four categories: 1. The dawn, spring and birth phase. There are myths dealing with the birth of a hero, his revival and resurrection, defeat of the powers of darkness and death. Subordinate characters such as the father and the mother are introduced in the myth. Such myths are the archetypes of romance and of rhapsodic poetry. 2. The zenith, summer and marriage or triumph phase. In this phase, there are myths of apotheosis, (the act of being raised to the rank of a god), of sacred marriage and of entering into Paradise. Subordinate characters in these myths are the companion and the bride. Such myths are the archetypes of comedy, pastoral and idyll. 3. The sunset, autumn and death phase. These are the myths dealing with the fall of a hero, a dying god, violent death, sacrifice and the hero’s isolation. The subordinate characters are the traitor and the siren. Such myths are the archetypes of tragedy and elegy. 4. The darkness, winter and desolation phase. There are myths dealing with the triumph of these powers. The myths of floods, the return of chaos and the defeat of the hero are examples of this phase. The ogre and the witch are the subordinate characters here and these myths are the archetypes of satire. These are the four categories of myths, which Frye identifies and they recur in different types of works written by different writers. Indeed they constitute the bases of many great pieces of literature. Quest - Myth In addition to the four categories of myths mentioned above, Northrop Frye discusses the quest-myth also which was supposed to have been developed from the four types of myths. In the quest-myth, the hero goes in quest of a truth or something else, and this type of myth recurs in all religions. For example, the Messiah myth is a quest myth of the Holy Grail (a Christian myth) in the last part of The Waste Land. Sacred scriptures of all religions have their own myths and an archetypal critic will have to examine them closely for an appropriate interpretation of texts. From an analysis of the archetypes of myths, a critic can descend to make a study of the genres and from the genres he can further descend to the elucidation of a text in terms of myth. This type of dissension in criticism is called the deductive method of analysis. That is, the critic moves from the general truth (a myth) to an elucidation of the particular truth (the truth of why a character behaves so) in a text. In this way a critic can analyse from myths how a drama or a lyric or an epic has been evolved. Frye further says that, almost all genres in every literature have been evolved from the quest-myth only. It is the duty of an archetypal critic to analyse myths and establish the meaning and message of a work. Literary Criticism and Religion There is a close relationship between literary criticism and religion. In his analysis, a literary critic considers God as an archetype of man who is portrayed as a hero in a work. God is a character in the story of Paradise Lost or The Bible, and the critic deals with Him and considers Him only as a human character. Criticism does not deal with any actuality, but with what is conceivable and possible. Similarly religion is not associated with scientific actuality, but with how things look like. Literary criticism works on conceivability. Likewise, religion functions on conceivability. There can be no place for scientific actuality in both, but what, is conceived is accepted by all. Both in religion and literary criticism, an epiphany is at work. It is a revelation of God or truth and it is a profound insight. It originates from the subconscious, from the dreams. In human life there is a cycle of waking and dreaming and in nature also, it could be seen and it is the cycle of light and darkness. Waking and dreaming, and light and darkness are two antithetic factors, which bring about epiphany in a person. It is during the day that man develops fear and frustration, and it is in the dark of the night his libido, the strong force of life, awakens and he resolves to achieve. It is the antithesis, which resolves the problems and misunderstandings of man and makes him perceive truth both in religion and literary criticism. The Comic Vision and the Tragic Vision in a Myth Both art and religion are alike and they aim at perfection. Perfection is the end of all human efforts. In art it is achieved through dreaming (imagination) and in religion it is through visualization. Perfection can be achieved in literary criticism also and it is the archetypal critic who does it through an analysis of the comic vision of life and the tragic vision as well in a work. The central pattern of the comic vision and the tragic vision in a myth is detailed below: 1. In the comic vision of life, in a myth, the “human” world is presented as a community, or a hero is portrayed as a representative of the desires of the reader. Here the archetypes of images are symposium, communion, order, friendship, and love. Marriage or some equivalent consummation belongs to the comic vision of life. In the tragic vision of life, in the “human” world, there is tyranny or anarchy, or an individual or an isolated man, or a leader with his back to his followers or a bullying giant of romance, or a deserted or betrayed hero. In addition to these, there will be a harlot or a witch or other varieties of Jung’s “terrible mother” in the tragic vision of life. 2. In the comic vision of life in a myth, the “animal” world is presented as a community of domesticated animals, usually a flock of sheep, or a lamb, or one of the gentler birds (usually a dove). The archetypes of images are pastoral images. In the tragic vision of life, in the “animal” world there are beasts, birds of prey, wolves, vultures, serpents, dragons and so on. 3. In the comic vision of life, in the “vegetable” world of a myth, there is a garden, a grove or park, or a tree of life, or a rose or lotus. The examples of the archetypes of Arcadian images are Marvell’s green world and Shakespeare’s forest comedies. In the tragic vision of life, in the “vegetable” world of a myth, there is a sinister forest like the one in Milton’s Camus or at the opening of Dante’s Inferno, or a heath or wilderness, or a tree of death. 4. In the comic vision of life, in the “mineral” world of a myth, there is a city, or one building or temple, or one stone, normally a glowing precious stone. These are presented as luminous or fiery. The example of the archetype of image is a “starlit dome.” In the tragic vision of life, the “mineral” world of a myth is seen in terms of deserts, rocks and ruins, or of geometrical images like the cross. 5. In the comic vision of life, in the “unformed” world of a myth, there is a river, traditionally fourfold, which influenced the Renaissance image of the temperate body with its four humours. In the tragic vision of life, this world usually becomes the sea, as the narrative myth of dissolution is so often a flood myth. The combination of the sea and beast images gives us the leviathan and similar water-borne monsters. After discussing the central pattern of the comic vision and the tragic vision in a myth, Frye introduces W.B. Yeats’ “Sailing to Byzantium” as a befitting and famous example of the comic vision which, in the poem, is represented by the city, the tree, the bird, the community of sages, the geometrical gyre and the detachment from the cyclic world. It is either tragic or comic vision of life which determines the interpretation of a symbol or myth, says Frye. Conclusion Of the different approaches of literary criticism, Northrop Frye has established the validity of the archetypal approach and its relevance in the elucidation of a text. Like works of literature, criticism is also creative and an archetypal critic discovers the meaning of a text and the motives of a character. No human endeavor is independent and the work of an archetypal critic is inclusive of formalistic criticism (or structural criticism) and historical criticism. Both J.G. Frazer and C.G. Jung opened up new vistas in archetypal or mythical criticism and Frye has obviated the impediments in the appreciation of a text. In mythical criticism, both the inductive method and the deductive method are effective tools and neither can be dispensed with, according to Frye. If one method explains a text based on the derivation of a general truth from the particular, the other method does it the other way round. Both the methods are complementary, and if either of them is unexploited, archetypal criticism will be incomplete. Archetypal approach to a text has contributed to the establishment of a systematic and comprehensive concept of literary criticism. Across more than two centuries of the United States, thousands of writers have penned the novels, poems and stories that are the nation's literary heritage. Here are two dozen that many might say have been America's most influential writers. In alphabetical order Maya Angelou 1928- Maya Angelou is one of the great voices of contemporary literature and as a remarkable Renaissance woman. She travels the world sharing her words of knowledge and wisdom. Willa Cather 1873-1947 Willa Cather worn in Virginia's Back Creek Valley. When she was 9 years old when her family moved to Red Cloud, Nebraska, where she found inspiration for some of her best-known works, O Pioneers! and My Antonia, about life on the American frontier. James Fenimore Cooper 1789-1851 James Fenimore Cooper grew up in Cooperstown, New York and is best known for his five-book Leatherstocking seriea which includes The Last of the Mohicans published in 1826. In his frontier tales, Cooper introduces the first American hero, Natty Bumppo, a white child raised by Delaware Indians who matures into an adventurous, honorable and fearless woodsman. Emily Dickinson 1830-1886 Emily Dickinson is known as one of America's most prolific poets. She wrote 1,800 poems while living as a recluse at her family's home in Amherst, Massachusetts. The poems about art, gardens, joy, love, death and grief. Most of her works were discovered in her bedroom after her death. Ralph Waldo Emerson 1803-1882 Ralph Waldo Emerson was an ordained minister from Boston. He was a philosopher, essayist and poet who explored the mind and man's relationship with nature. Emerson's vision and style can be seen in the essays Nature and Self-Reliance. William Faulkner 1897-1962 William Faulkner was a Nobel Prize-winning novelist and short story writer who wrote about the people, history and settings of his native Mississippi including the The Sound and the Fury, Absalom, Absalom!, Go Down, Moses and The Reivers. F. Scott Fitzgerald 1896-1940 F. Scott Fitzgerald was a native of St. Paul, Minnesota. he wrote novels and short stories about the optimism, aspirations and excesses of the Jazz Age, including This Side of Paradise, The Beautiful and the Damned and The Great Gatsby, which has been said to be among the greatest novels of the 20th century. Robert Frost 1874-1963 Robert Frost, a four-time Pulitzer Prize winner born in San Francisco, wrote much of his poetry about rural New England. Some of his best-known poems were After Apple-Picking, Mending Wall, Birches, The Road Not Taken and Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening. They were inspired by his observations in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont. Nathaniel Hawthorne 1804-1864 Nathaniel Hawthorne was known for his stories about sin, guilt and witchcraft in Puritan New England. he was born at Salem, Massachusetts. Among his popular works are the short story collection Twice-Told Tales, The Scarlet Letter and The House of Seven Gables. Ernest Hemingway 1899-1961 Ernest Hemingway was a novelist and journalist known for his war and romance stories, and his understated writing style. He won a Pulitzer Prize for his book The Old Man and the Sea and the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1954. His writing style was among those in a new era of fiction. He was a well known adventurer who loved to hunt, fish and act as a rugged outdoorsman. He was part of the so-called "Lost Generation" because he was in World War 2. Some say he was the most popular American novelist of the 20th century. Washington Irving 1783-1859 Washington Irving was open of the earliest American fiction writers. He was born in New York City. he wrote the timeless tales Rip Van Winkle and The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. Jack Kerouac 1922-1969 Jack Kerouac was a popular Canadian-American novelist, poet and literary iconoclast. It is said that William S. Burroughs, Allen Ginsberg and Jack Kerouac originated the Beat Generation of the 1950s. Kerouac has been said to have inspired later authors including Tom Robbins, Lester Bangs, Richard Brautigan, Ken Kesey and writers of the New Journalism. Kerouac also influenced The Beatles, Bob Dylan, Simon & Garfunkel and Jim Morrison. Kerouac's best-known book was On the Road about his travels. He also wrote The Dharma Bums, Big Sur andVisions of Cody. Ken Kesey 1935-2001 Ken Kesey was best known for his first novel, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and as a counter-cultural figure who was a link between the Beat Generation of the 1950s and the hippies of the 1960s. Stephen King 1947- Stephen King is an author, screenwriter, musician, columnist, actor, film producer and director who has sold more than 350 million copies of his books. He has written science fiction, fantasy, short-fiction, non-fiction, screenplays, teleplays and stage plays and is best known for horror fiction. He received The National Book Foundation's Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters. Among his works are Carrie,The Shining, The Stand and The Dead Zone. Harper Lee 1926- Harper Lee's only published novel is To Kill a Mockingbird about 1930s race relations in the South. For it she won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. She is from Monroeville, Alabama. Jack London 1876-1916 Jack London, born in San Francisco, drew on his experiences as a sailor, gold prospector and adventurer to write stirring tales about canines in the frozen North and voyages on the high seas in his best-selling novels The Call of the Wild, The Sea-Wolf and White Fang. Herman Melville 1819-1891 Herman Melville, born in New York City, is best known for Moby-Dick, an epic about an aggressive whale that destroys a whaling ship and its crew. Margaret Mitchell 1900-1949 Margaret Mitchell was born in Atlanta. She wrote Gone with the Wind, a romantic novel about the South during the Civil War. It won a Pulitzer Prize and has sold more than 30 million copies. Edgar Allan Poe 1809-1849 Edgar Allan Poe may have been America's first horror, mystery and science fiction writer. He wrote cryptic tales like The Fall of the House of Usher, The Tell-Tale Heart and The Raven. J.D. Salinger 1919-2010 J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye is one of the best-selling American novels of all time, with more than 65 million copies sold. It was the only full-length novel by the New York City-born author. John Steinbeck 1902-1968 John Steinbeck was born at Salinas, California, and became a Nobel Prize and Pulitzer Prize winning author. He piqued America's conscience with his stories about California's ethnic and immigrant groups, migrant workers and displaced sharecroppers. Among his best-known works are Of Mice and Men, The Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden. Harriet Beecher Stowe 1811-1896 Harriet Beecher Stowe was born in Connecticut and went on to become a major influence in the abolitionist movement. Her book Uncle Tom's Cabin revealed the horrors of slavery. Her writings were controversial and angered the South to the point she is credited with having some impact in starting the Civil War. She helped runaway and fugitive slaves and helped school them after the war. Related website » Hunter Thompson 1937-2005 Hunter Thompson was a journalist and author most famous for his novel Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. He was influenced in his early years by the Beat Generation. He is credited as the creator of Gonzo journalism in which reporters involve themselves in their stories. Other acclaimed works were Hell's Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs and Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72 He wrote for Rolling Stone magazine. Related website » Henry David Thoreau 1817-1862 Henry David Thoreau was an author, philosopher and naturalist at Concord, Massachusetts, best known for his writings about independence, spiritual discovery and self-reliance such as his essay Civil Disobedience and his book Walden about a two-year retreat to the woods near Walden Pond. Related website » Mark Twain 1835-1910 Mark Twain was born Samuel Clemens in Florida, Missouri. He was inspired to write his classic novels The Adventures of Tom Sawyer andAdventures of Huckleberry Finn by his childhood experiences in Hannibal, Missouri, and his job as a Mississippi River steamboat pilot. Known for his witty and satirical prose, and the colloquial dialogue of his characters, Twain has been called the Father of American Literature. The book about Huckleberry Finn has been controversial in recent years due to its use of racial epithets. Related website » Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. 1922-2007 Kurt Vonnegut was a prolific novelist blending satire, black comedy and science fiction. His best-known works were Slaughterhouse-Five,Cat's Cradle and Breakfast of Champions. Related website » Walt Whitman 1819-1892 Walt Whitman is ssid to be one of America's greatest poets. He was born ay West Hills, New York, and is best known for his poetry collectionLeaves of Grass and his poem O Captain! My Captain! about the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. Related website » Tom Wolfe 1931- Tom Wolfe is a best-selling author and journalist who was one of the founders of the New Journalism movement of the 1960s and 1970s. His works include The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, The Bonfire of the Vanities and The Right Stuff. Related web In The Study of Poetry, (1888) which opens his Essays in Criticism: Second series, in support of his plea for nobility in poetry, Arnold recalls Sainte-Beuve’s reply to Napoleon, when latter said that charlatanism is found in everything. Sainte-Beuve replied that charlatanism might be found everywhere else, but not in the field of poetry, because in poetry the distinction between sound and unsound, or only half-sound, truth and untruth, or only half-truth, between the excellent and the inferior, is of paramount importance.
For Arnold there is no place for charlatanism in poetry. To him poetry is the criticism of life, governed by the laws of poetic truth and poetic beauty. It is in the criticism of life that the spirit of our race will find its stay and consolation. The extent to which the spirit of mankind finds its stay and consolation is proportional to the power of a poem’s criticism of life, and the power of the criticism of life is in direct proportion to the extent to which the poem is genuine and free from charlatanism. In The Study of Poetry he also cautions the critic that in forming a genuine and disinterested estimate of the poet under consideration he should not be influenced by historical or personal judgements, historical judgements being fallacious because we regard ancient poets with excessive veneration, and personal judgements being fallacious when we are biased towards a contemporary poet. If a poet is a ‘dubious classic, let us sift him; if he is a false classic, let us explode him. But if he is a real classic, if his work belongs to the class of the very best . . . enjoy his work’. As examples of erroneous judgements he says that the 17th century court tragedies of the French were spoken of with exaggerated praise, until Pellisson reproached them for want of the true poetic stamp, and another critic, Charles d’ Héricault, said that 17th century French poetry had received undue and undeserving veneration. Arnold says the critics seem to substitute ‘a halo for physiognomy and a statue in the place where there was once a man. They give us a human personage no larger than God seated amidst his perfect work, like Jupiter on Olympus.’ He also condemns the French critic Vitet, who had eloquent words of praise for the epic poemChanson de Roland by Turoldus, (which was sung by a jester, Taillefer, in William the Conqueror’s army), saying that it was superior to Homer’s Iliad. Arnold’s view is that this poem can never be compared to Homer’s work, and that we only have to compare the description of dying Roland to Helen’s words about her wounded brothers Pollux and Castor and its inferiority will be clearly revealed. The Study of Poetry: a shift in position – the touchstone method Arnold’s criticism of Vitet above illustrates his ‘touchstone method’; his theory that in order to judge a poet’s work properly, a critic should compare it to passages taken from works of great masters of poetry, and that these passages should be applied as touchstones to other poetry. Even a single line or selected quotation will serve the purpose. From this we see that he has shifted his position from that expressed in the preface to hisPoems of 1853. In The Study of Poetry he no longer uses the acid test of action and architectonics. He became an advocate of ‘touchstones’. ‘Short passages even single lines,’ he said, ‘will serve our turn quite sufficiently’. Some of Arnold’s touchstone passages are: Helen’s words about her wounded brother, Zeus addressing the horses of Peleus, suppliant Achilles’ words to Priam, and from Dante; Ugolino’s brave words, and Beatrice’s loving words to Virgil. From non-Classical writers he selects from Henry IV Part II (III, i), Henry’s expostulation with sleep – ‘Wilt thou upon the high and giddy mast . . . ‘. From Hamlet (V, ii) ‘Absent thee from felicity awhile . . . ‘. From Milton’s Paradise Lost Book 1, ‘Care sat on his faded cheek . . .’, and ‘What is else not to be overcome . . . ‘ The Study of Poetry: on Chaucer The French Romance poetry of the 13th century langue d’oc and langue d’oil was extremely popular in Europe and Italy, but soon lost its popularity and now it is important only in terms of historical study. But Chaucer, who was nourished by the romance poetry of the French, and influenced by the Italian Royal rhyme stanza, still holds enduring fascination. There is an excellence of style and subject in his poetry, which is the quality the French poetry lacks. Dryden says of Chaucer’s Prologue ’Here is God’s plenty!’ and that ‘he is a perpetual fountain of good sense’. There is largeness, benignity, freedom and spontaneity in Chaucer’s writings. ‘He is the well of English undefiled’. He has divine fluidity of movement, divine liquidness of diction. He has created an epoch and founded a tradition. Some say that the fluidity of Chaucer’s verse is due to licence in the use of the language, a liberty which Burns enjoyed much later. But Arnold says that the excellence of Chaucer’s poetry is due to his sheer poetic talent. This liberty in the use of language was enjoyed by many poets, but we do not find the same kind of fluidity in others. Only in Shakespeare and Keats do we find the same kind of fluidity, though they wrote without the same liberty in the use of language. Arnold praises Chaucer’s excellent style and manner, but says that Chaucer cannot be called a classic since, unlike Homer, Virgil and Shakespeare, his poetry does not have the high poetic seriousness which Aristotle regards as a mark of its superiority over the other arts. The Study of Poetry: on the age of Dryden and Pope The age of Dryden is regarded as superior to that of the others for ‘sweetness of poetry’. Arnold asks whether Dryden and Pope, poets of great merit, are truly the poetical classics of the 18th century. He says Dryden’s post-script to the readers in his translation of The Aeneidreveals the fact that in prose writing he is even better than Milton and Chapman. Just as the laxity in religious matters during the Restoration period was a direct outcome of the strict discipline of the Puritans, in the same way in order to control the dangerous sway of imagination found in the poetry of the Metaphysicals, to counteract ‘the dangerous prevalence of imagination’, the poets of the 18th century introduced certain regulations. The restrictions that were imposed on the poets were uniformity, regularity, precision, and balance. These restrictions curbed the growth of poetry, and encouraged the growth of prose. Hence we can regard Dryden as the glorious founder, and Pope as the splendid high priest, of the age of prose and reason, our indispensable 18th century. Their poetry was that of the builders of an age of prose and reason. Arnold says that Pope and Dryden are not poet classics, but the ‘prose classics’ of the 18th century. As for poetry, he considers Gray to be the only classic of the 18th century. Gray constantly studied and enjoyed Greek poetry and thus inherited their poetic point of view and their application of poetry to life. But he is the ‘scantiest, frailest classic’ since his output was small. The Study of Poetry: on Burns Although Burns lived close to the 19th century his poetry breathes the spirit of 18th Century life. Burns is most at home in his native language. His poems deal with Scottish dress, Scottish manner, and Scottish religion. This Scottish world is not a beautiful one, and it is an advantage if a poet deals with a beautiful world. But Burns shines whenever he triumphs over his sordid, repulsive and dull world with his poetry. Perhaps we find the true Burns only in his bacchanalian poetry, though occasionally his bacchanalian attitude was affected. For example in his Holy Fair, the lines ‘Leeze me on drink! it gies us mair/ Than either school or college’, may represent the bacchanalian attitude, but they are not truly bacchanalian in spirit. There is something insincere about it, smacking of bravado. When Burns moralises in some of his poems it also sounds insincere, coming from a man who disregarded morality in actual life. And sometimes his pathos is intolerable, as in Auld Lang Syne. We see the real Burns (wherein he is unsurpassable) in lines such as, ‘To make a happy fire-side clime/ to weans and wife/ That’s the true pathos and sublime/ Of human life’ (Ae Fond Kiss). Here we see the genius of Burns. But, like Chaucer, Burns lacks high poetic seriousness, though his poems have poetic truth in diction and movement. Sometimes his poems are profound and heart-rending, such as in the lines, ‘Had we never loved sae kindly/ had we never loved sae blindly/ never met or never parted/ we had ne’er been broken-hearted’. Also like Chaucer, Burns possesses largeness, benignity, freedom and spontaneity. But instead of Chaucer’s fluidity, we find in Burns a springing bounding energy. Chaucer’s benignity deepens in Burns into a sense of sympathy for both human as well as non-human things, but Chaucer’s world is richer and fairer than that of Burns. Sometimes Burns’s poetic genius is unmatched by anyone. He is even better than Goethe at times and he is unrivalled by anyone except Shakespeare. He has written excellent poems such as Tam O’Shanter, Whistle and I’ll come to you my Lad, and Auld Lang Syne. When we compare Shelley’s ‘Pinnacled dim in the of intense inane’ (Prometheus Unbound III, iv) with Burns’s, ‘They flatter, she says, to deceive me’ (Tam Glen), the latter is salutary. According to some theorists, the 20th century can be divided into two distinct periods; one characterized by the modernism movement and the other by postmodernism. Some believe that postmodernism was a response to modernism and hence consider them as two aspects of the same movement. There are some major differences between modernism and postmodernism. These distinctions make clear, the basic difference in the ways of thinking that led to these movements. The difference between modernism and postmodernism highlights the difference in the approaches towards life.Modernism describes a collection of cultural movements of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. It consists of a series of reforming movements in art, architecture, literature, music and applied arts. Modernism was characterized by a dramatic change of thought, whereby human intellect sought to improve their environment. There was a trend of improving every aspect of life by involving science and technology into it. Modernism brought about a reform in all spheres of life including philosophy, commerce, art and literature, with the aid of technology and experimentation. It led to progress in all the aspects of life by changing the approach of mankind of looking at them. Postmodernism means, 'after the modern'. It was a reaction to modernism and was influenced by the disenchantment brought about by the Second World War. Postmodernism refers to the state that lacks a central hierarchy and one that is complex, ambiguous and diverse. The developments in society, the economy and the culture of the 1960s were impacted by postmodernism.
Modernism Vs Postmodernism Modernism began in the 1890s and lasted till about 1945. Postmodernism began after the Second World War, especially after 1968. Modernism was based on using rational, logical means to gain knowledge while postmodernism denied the application of logical thinking. Rather, the thinking during the postmodern era was based on unscientific, irrational thought process, as a reaction to modernism. A hierarchical and organized and determinate nature of knowledge characterized modernism. But postmodernism was based on an anarchical, non-totalized and indeterminate state of knowledge. Modernist approach was objective, theoretical and analytical while the postmodernism approach was based on subjectivity. It lacked the analytical nature and thoughts were rhetorical and completely based on belief. The fundamental difference between modernism and postmodernism is that modernist thinking is about the search of an abstract truth of life while postmodernist thinkers believe that there is no universal truth, abstract or otherwise. Modernism attempts to construct a coherent world-view whereas postmodernism attempts to remove the difference between high and low. Modernist thinking asserts that mankind progresses by using science and reason while postmodernist thinking believes that progress is the only way to justify the European domination on culture. Modernist thinking believes in learning from past experiences and trusts the texts that narrate the past. On the other hand postmodernist thinking defies any truth in the text narrating the past and renders it of no use in the present times. Modernist historians have a faith in depth. They believe in going deep into a subject to fully analyze it. This is not the case with postmodernist thinkers. They believe in going by the superficial appearances, they believe in playing on surfaces and show no concern towards the depth of subjects. Modernism considers the original works as authentic while postmodernist thinkers base their views on hyper-reality; they get highly influenced by things propagated through media.During the modernist era, art and literary works were considered as unique creations of the artists. People were serious about the purpose of producing art and literary works. These works were believed to bear a deep meaning, novels and books predominated society. During the postmodernist era, with the onset of computers, media and advancements in technology, television and computers became dominant in society. Art and literary works began to be copied and preserved by the means of digital media. People no longer believed in art and literary works bearing one unique meaning; they rather believed in deriving their own meanings from pieces of art and literature. Interactive media and Internet led to distribution of knowledge. Music like Mozart, Beethoven, which was appreciated during modernism became less popular in the postmodern era. World music, Djs and remixes characterized postmodernism. The architectural forms that were popular during modernism were replaced by a mix of different architectural styles in the postmodern times. A relatively slow paced life that was driven by grounded principles became fast paced and lost its calm. |
BloggerHello everyone, I am Dhaval Purohit from Rajkot. I am lecturer of English & Communication skills in Atmiya college. Archives
September 2015
|