Author: imrantosharit

SETTINGS OF JAMES JOYCE’S NOVELS

. England, which from the twelfth century had controlled portions of Ireland, gained near-complete dominance of the island in the sixteenth century. Irish resentment towards the conquerors was strong, especially when under King Henry VIII the English monarchy became Protestant, while Ireland clung to Roman Catholicism. Irish Catholics became victims of religious persecution in their own country. Unjust agricultural policies also contributed to the difficulties. Most Irish land was owned by absentee landlords and leased to tenant farmers. It was an inefficient system that was in part responsible for a series of Irish famines, the most terrible of which occurred after the failure of the potato crop in 1848. Over a million people died during this famine. From time to time, revolutionary heroes—like the eighteenth-century patriots

Wolfe Tone and Hamilton Rowan admired by young Stephen—aroused Irish hopes for independence, only to be crushed. In Joyce’s youth, confrontation was once again in the air. The Land League, led by Michael Davitt and Charles Stewart Parnell, had campaigned ‘ successfully for agricultural reforms. Other groups campaigned for Irish cultural independence by promoting the use of Gaelic, Ireland’s native tongue, rather than the English brought by Ireland’s conquerors. Perhaps most important was the campaign for Irish Home Rule, self-government through an independent Irish parliament. The Home Rule campaign was led by Charles Stewart Parnell. Parnell’s leadership in the British Parliament had succeeded in winning over his colleagues to Home Rule.

Before the bill was passed, however, Parnell’s enemies exposed his personal relationship with the married Katherine (Kitty) O’Shea, with whom he had been living secretly for many years.

The Parnell affair divided Ireland. Parnell’s own party deposed him, the Catholic Church denounced him, and his British backers withdrew their support. Parnell died of pneumonia shortly afterwards, in 1891, when Joyce was nine. (In the scene in Chapter One, the feverish Stephen dreams of his hero’s funeral procession.) Irish politics remained hopelessly tangled after Parnell’s downfall. Some groups still wanted to work for independence by peaceful means. Others believed that violence was necessary. Irish nationalists, like Stephen’s friend Davin, joined a group called Sinn Fein, whose military arm was called

The Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB). Remnants of the IRB later became The Irish Republican Army, known as the IRA. The Sinn Fein’s armed Easter Sunday Rebellion of 1916 against the British was unsuccessful in its attempt to seize Dublin and proclaim a republic. The British outlawed the group in 1918 and sent in troops (“Black and Tans”) to round up remaining guerrilla fighters.

Nevertheless, the Irish Free State (now the Republic Of Ireland) was established four years later; it included most, but not all, of Ireland. The six counties of the northern region of Ulster remained, as they are now, a part of Britain—but violently divided over religious issues. Thus, the long tradition of Anglo-Irish conflict continues to this day. The influences of Ireland on Stephen appear to him as a part of the labyrinth in which he is entangled; he feels that he must escape it. The country is the very opposite of Stephen’s ideal, because the Irish have allowed themselves to be shaped by alien forces and cultures. They are, in this view, victims of two empires, the British, which controls them politically, and the Roman Catholic, which rules them spiritually from Rome. That this is foreign to Ireland’s true nature is made very clear when Stephen, now a Student at University College, enters a house owned by the Jesuits. He senses the history of the place and asks himself, “(Was the Jesuit house extraterritorial and was he walking among aliens? The Ireland of Tone and of Parnell seemed to have receded in space”. Tone and Parnell were Irish nationalists; Stephen will also soon find out that the Dean of Studies is an Englishman. So the Jesuit house is “extraterritorial”; not really part of Ireland at all.

Part of Stephen’s quest is to break through this Irish net of foreign-dominated cultural history and create an art that is free. He has been aware, from a very young age, of the conflict in Ireland because the fierce quarrel that erupts at the family Christmas dinner makes a deep impact on him. It shows the divisions between the Irish regarding their own history and destiny. Dante Riordan supports the Church, which opposed Charles Parnell, the Irish nationalist who nearly brought Home Rule to Ireland. The Church in general opposed Irish nationalism. Opposing Dante are Stephen’s father and Mr. Casey, who argue that Ireland is a “priest-ridden” country; the Church is a harmful influence. As Stephen matures, he does not take sides; he transcends the debate. He will not side with the nationalists because he sees no hope in that path, based on the way the Irish people have treated their own leaders. He tells his friend Davin that “No honorable and sincere man.

has given up to you his life and his youth and his affections from the days of Tone to those of Parnell but you sold him to the enemy or failed him in need or reviled him and left him for another”. Nor does Stephen have any interest in following the Roman Catholic Church, which would merely be to follow a system and a doctrine laid out by an authority external to himself. Stephen does want to do something for his country, but he wants to free it through art, not politics. Or religion. This is clear from his penultimate diary entry, when he goes to “encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race”

Settings of James Joyce’s Novels
Joyce fled from Dublin to the mainland of Europe, but Dublin never left him. He wrote about the city for the rest of his life— in Dubliners, Portrait of the Artist, Ulysses, and Finnegan’s Wake. Dublin is more than the backdrop of Portrait of the Artist. It is also the symbol of Stephen’s discontent. The drab, stagnant city is seen as the heart of a paralyzed Ireland that stifles the aspiring young artist. The city’s streets, through which Stephen constantly wanders as he works out his future, are like the labyrinth (maze) constructed by his eponym, the mythical Daedalus. For both of them the only escape is flight.

Stephen’s family starts out living in Bray, an affluent sea side village to the south of Dublin. However’ financial problems force the family into the city, first to the suburb of Blackrock, and then to a series of progressively bleaker dwellings in the city’s shabbier sections. As you might expect, these downhill moves color Stephen’s view of the city and of his life. The Dublin streets reflect his dissatisfaction. There even comes a time when, disgusted with himself, he finds comfort in their foul-smelling filth—they match his own darker moods and self-disgust. The real Dublin of Joyce’s time had its gracious sections adorned by eighteenth-century Georgian brick houses and by many handsome monuments. It also had the natural beauty of Dublin Bay, the outlet of the River Lifer. Stephen is not completely blind to this beauty. In his frequent walks, he goes to the water. It is on the harbor’s seawall, called the Bull that he clearly hears the call of his artistic destiny, and on the Bay Shore that he sees the girl who becomes a symbol of the freedom and beauty he seeks. (Some see the Lifer and the sea as symbols of the “stream” of Stephen’s thoughts and as the sites of his rebirth and baptism as an artist.) But it’s the seamy side of Dublin that haunts Stephen in all its sordid detail: water-logged lanes, putrid puddles, dung heaps, odors of fish, “horse piss and rotted straw.” Despite any momentary feelings of communion, Stephen must reject the “dull phenomenon or Dublin”—and Ireland—as an environment suitable for artistic growth, even though both city and country will remain a rich source of the art itself.

Ans. In a drama, the introductory scene and the concluding scene are important. The former sets the scene, puts forward the problem, and brings in the important characters, the latter brings all the things to a close by way of resolution. It leaves the reader with the final impression about the whole thing, about the solution of a problem, or the fate of a protagonist. The last scene of King Oedipus is important in many respects.
In the last scene both queen Joscata and king Oedipus come to know about the truth they were searching Queen Jocasta learns about it a bit earlier than Oedipus. As soon as she does learn about the truth she withdraws herself from the court, locks herself in her room and hangs herself to death. Immediately afterward, Oedipus comes storming after her with a sword in hand. He breaks down the door and discovers that the queen has already committed suicide He takes her body down and gently places it on the floor Suddenly he removes the gold brooches from her dress and pierces his eyes with their pins. Blood gushes out of his eyes, and he shouts that he will no longer have to look upon his shame The chorus moans in pity Oedipus cnes out in anguish that he wishes he died while still a child. Creon comes, consoles Oedipus, and sends for Atigoneand Ismene, daughters of Oedipus. The girls come in weeping, go to their father. Oedipus blesses them but worries that the world will reject them because of the sins of their father. He also requests Creon to look after them. He tells Creon to banish him from Thebes but Creon says he has to wait till he receives guidance from the oracle. Oedipus moves towards the palace, his arms still round the children. But Creon tells him to leave the children. Oedipus is led away. The chorus chants song moaning about the sad story of Oedipus. –
The last scene brings to the forefront certain facts about the tragedy and its protagonist. The tragic end of Oedipus affects us profoundly because his fall is a fall of an extraordinary man. He has been a great king all through, with great ability to rule his kingdom, and with his strong feeling for the citizen’s welfare, to extract their deep respect for himself He has feelings for his daughters’ welfare, and out of his deep concern for them, requests Creon to look after them. He says he is not so worried about his sons because he believes that they will be able to fend for themselves, and it is the softer sex, the girls that need special care when they are guardianless.
Bernard Knox, commenting on the last scene, says, “… the play ends as it began, with the greatness of the hero.” Now the greatness of Oedipus is a different kind of greatness. He is blind and helpless, but he is now cognisant of the universal order. Like the blind Teiresias he has a more penetrating vision of the reality. The two themes are ultimately reconciled in the last scene the themes of the greatness of the gods and the greatness of man. This reconciliation is tragic, “for the greatness of the gods is most clearly and powerfully demonstrated by man’s defeat. Bernard Knox again says, “Oedipus is symbolic of all human achievement: his hard-won magnificence, unlike the everlasting magniflcence of the divine, cannot last, and while it lives, shines all the more brilliant against the sombre background of its impermanency.” One great man is gone, but there emerges a better world under the leaderhip of another man, Creon, though less able, yet more stable because he is free from the weakness that the greater man had.

Ans. Tragic irony is a form of dramatic irony in which a character who is about to become a victim of disaster uses words that have one meaning and quite another to the spectator or those who are aware of the real situation.
in King Oedipus there is brilliant use of tragic irony to highlight the weaknesses in Oedipus’ personality and to foreshadow the tragic conclusion of the play.
In the very beginning of the drama Oedipus proclaims that he will make a resolute effort to trace the murderer of Laius. He utters curse upon the killer and upon those who are sheltering the criminal. These become ironical because the audience guess from what Teiresias says that Oedipus himself will ultimately prove to be Laius’s murderer.
The scene of quarrel between Oedipus and Teiresias contains a good amount of tragic irony. Teiresias, as a prophet, knows everything, but Oedipus is ignorant of his own guilt. Teiresias does not like to disclose the secret, but Oedipus forces him to disclose it. But the king does not accept what he says. The audience becomes aware of the truth of Teiresias’s statement, but it is rejected by Oedipus.
Tragic irony is also evident in Oedipus’s attitude towards Creon. Oedipus charges Creon with plotting against him in collaboration with Teiresias. Though Creon strongly defends himself with convincing argument, Oedipus tends to disbelieve him, and threatens to punish him. The audience who are already aware of the real truth, feel the ironic significance of what Oedipus says to Creon, and the attitude he shows towards him. In the final scene, the roles are reversed; Oedipus becomes the supplicant, and Creon the authority. Tragic irony comes to be fully realized.
Queen Jocasta’s account of the oracle also provides tragic irony. Jocasta is sceptical of the oracle. To prove the falsity of the oracle, she gives an account of what she and her husband did to the new-born baby who was to kill his father. But ultimately her ideas are falsified towards the end.
After Oedipus hears the oracle from Corinth, when he was the Corinthian prince, he believes that he is the son of Polybus and Merope, and tries to falsify the oracle by fleeing from Corinth. But all that he does in an effort to falsify the oracle, ironically contribute towards the fulfilment of the prophecies of the oracle. Jocasta’s dealings with the Corinthian messenger is full of tragic irony. She mocks the oracles, but she does not realize that her mockery will turn against herself. The messenger remarks that Jocasta is the “true consort” of the man like Oedipus. Jocasta tells Oedipus that the news brought by the Corinthian messenger proves the hollowness of the oracles because Polybus, Oedipus’ f4ther died a natural death But all these prove ironical at the end.
The song of the chorus sings that the King Oedipus is the son of some god and a mountain nymph. It attributes divine, parentage to Oedipus. The words of Corinthian shepherd prove that the words of the chorus are false
In addition to the irony in the episodes there is irony in the inversion of the whole action. The homeless wanderer Oedipus by delivering the city of Thebes from the Sphinx and marrying Jocasta, became a king. But ultimately he becomes a homeless wanderer again. And the wanderer who was once bright eyed with his strong traveller’s staff, now. uses the staff to feel the way before him as he is old and blind. Thus the whole drama King Oedipus is full of irony from its very beginning to the end.

Ans. “Ode to the West Wind” is one of the most famous poems by Shelley and it was published in the same book, which consists of his famous drama, Prometheus Unbound, and many magnificent lyric poems. He wrote this poem in the autumn of 1819 in Florence. The poem is considered as one of the noblest lyrics in English. It bears testimony to the poetic genius that Shelley was.

Structurally the poem is divided into five stanzas or cantos. Each stanza is in sonnet form. The ode consists of five sonnets. Every sonnet consists of four terza rima (a three-line verse) with traditional terza rima rhymes and a rhymed couplet. The first three stanzas are the address of the wind and at the same time the characterization description of the wind. All of three stanzas end with the “0 hear” prayer. In the fourth stanza, personal elements penetrate in the poem and Shelley compares himself with the wind. He makes fervent plea to the wind to lift him up as he bleeds falling on the ‘thorns of life’. The last stanza is a prayer to the forceful spirit of the wind to use him for regeneration of humanity. Shelley ends on a note of optimism — “0, Wind,/ If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?”

In the poem, the West Wind is presented as a powerful force. Shelley makes myths of the autumnal West Wind as a great force which possesses redeeming power. It is gigantic, wild, restless power, free and unbounded. Two contrasting aspects of the wind are underlined in the first three stanzas — its terrifying destructive power and its gentle fostering influence. It is simultaneously a destroyer and a preserver. On the earth, the wind drives away dry leaves of trees like “ghosts from an enchanter fleeing”. It also carries the winged seeds and deposits them in the “dark wintry bed”, where they remain buried throughout the winter. The same wind will also make them germinate in the spring. It also sweeps wild storm clouds along on the firmament from the bottom of the sky to the peak of the sky. The wind also makes its mighty influence felt on the sea. It stirs the Mediterranean sea to its depth. It makes a lashing progress through the waters of the Atlantic, dividing the mighty Atlantic’s ‘level powers’ into two halves, its impact reaching miles below to turn the submarine nature grey in fear. Thus, the mythical might of the wind cover the earth, the sky and the seas.

“Ode to the West Wind” is a lyric. The music swells like the surge of the West Wind. Shelley uses a number of poetic devices in order to bring his ideas home. The dramatic alliteration in the opening line, ‘Wild West Wind’, announces energy and force. The wind is personified and has been given a mythical stature. The poem is replete with images and metaphors. There is a rapid succession of images in the poem. The poet’s emotion is at the peak when he makes fervent appeal to the wind to make him its ‘lyre’. His use of emotive language is noteworthy.

The poem starts with the natural and the moves to the personal finally turning to the universal. Shelley deftly blends the natural, the personal and the universal in the same poem. It also captures the past, the present and the future. Shelley finished this great poem optimistically believing in the rise of humanity.

Critically evaluate the ‘Five Ways’ of Aquinas to prove the existence of God

Table of Contents

• Critically evaluate the ‘Five Ways’ of Aquinas to prove the existence of God.
  • Motion
  • Causation
  • Contingency
  • Goodness
  • Design

CRITICALLY EVALUATE THE ‘FIVE WAYS’ OF AQUINAS TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.

Thomas Aquinas’s five methods of demonstrating God’s presence, including motion, cause, contingency, excellence, and order, begin with some of the measurable world’s phenomena.

MOTION

Motion is indeed a very straightforward occurrence, observed in the real world by physical perception. If objects can induce movement of their own, that means they live independently, so nobody has to move them. It is not out of necessity that situations exist, but because of contingency.

The Prime Mover triggers all action, and God is the Prime Mover. The use of the Aquinas way of motion could lead one to doubt God’s existence. However, when sickness or long diseases inflict us or natural calamities such as hurricanes, tornadoes, landslides and so on also strike the planet, one might ask oneself, “the prime mover is responsible for all these devastations and traumatic events.’

The goal and wisdom of the Prime Mover behind all of these are somewhat difficult to fathom. If natural calamities do not exist or have induced them to happen, will we miss anything? The response is yes, and we will miss a lot of material. Thus, there are kinds of calamities in which one feels, sympathizes, and empathizes with the other being.

Many living things experience a desire to offer a helping hand, and if it were not for the natural calamities, both of these might not be. One would definitely agree with Gottfried Wilhelm Von Leibniz’s notion of the ideal possible universe, considering the complexities of motion and natural calamities and their effects on human beings.

CAUSATION

The Way of Causation says that all new products and events consist of the principle of a cause, and for this sequence of production and events, there must be a first cause. For example, a bus cannot run by itself but by petrol, diesel, or mobile.

Yes technically, it would not travel without power. There are other elements that must also work together to make the bus work. However, it is primarily the fuel that makes the bus driver or run. The result is the acceleration of the bus, and it is the fuel that induces this effect.

The wider and much larger facts of humanity, the world, and the cosmos itself can be clarified using this comparison. The above things are only the influence of the cause of greater or supreme force.

The Supreme Being induces these effects by an order instilled in the essence of all that can be attributed to all the effects. Therefore, this is not a prerequisite for him to create any result all by himself when he/she has the ability.

The first cause is not induced and independently exists, which means that it is contingency rather than need. One may assume that the first cause, which is not caused, is due to all the consequences. The universe is very enigmatic and tends to amaze human minds. At times, things appear to be in breach of common law, which is difficult to describe scientifically.

CONTINGENCY

The way of contingency notes that for its life, everything relies on everything. Anything that depends for life on an external source is dependent. Contingent entities may only be brought into being by a being of necessity.

Contingent things are coming to life-changing and eventually composing them. The basic question is who gives life to such contingents. It is possible to make anything about a contingent being. Nevertheless, that does not suggest that a dependent being is a being of necessity. For instance, giving birth, though it seems like a contingent being will bring about life, it is actually only by the Necessity’s made, planned or programmed means that perhaps the contingent is capable of making something.

GOODNESS

The maximum of a particular thing, as per the way of goodness, is the origin of that particular thing, be it smaller or greater and essential or negligible. It suggests that the snapshot of the limit is anything such as heat, water, and goodness, and every real action is fully determined by the maximum.

Existence on earth and elsewhere, if any, is born from the very root, or maximum, of life that we call Heaven. Nevertheless, as long as we work with positive aspects, following the rule of goodness process, we feel perfect. The very existence of God, it does render one doubt.

Why does God, who is infinitely good and great, allow evil to occur? Perhaps the creature will never be able to grasp the maker. Our notion is that goodness is simply the lack of bad, but God still has the ability to turn good into evil. Goodness will well up from the spot and individuals who are least expected, which really looks very disconcerting and inappropriate.

DESIGN

The way of nature often referred to as teleology, says that from the source, which none other is then God comes to order and wisdom or intellect. All that travels and has to be has a meaning, and an external cause, who is Heaven, confers this purpose. To follow a natural path, any natural occurrence is planned.

Any phenomena, though often deviate from the natural direction. Even such deviating events could be purposeful, but it can be difficult for the human mind to understand it. It is true that plans will often alter the normal course and follow an odd course, but the unusual course can even be part of the plan, but it seems weird and inappropriate to the human mind.

Thus, we can evaluate the existence of God in the five ways that Aquinas describes.

CRITICS ON JOHNSON AND HIS PREFACE TO SHAKESPEARE

W:K. Wimsatt. Johnson entertained very sound views about the philological part of an editor’s duties. His performance in this respect was, by modern standards, uneven, capricious, often notably deficient. But by any standards illustrated upon his own day, his performance was extraordinary. For reasons in part no doubt well known in the relation with Garrick which we have noticed, Johnson did only a spotty job in the department of textual collation. At the same time, he restored many readings of the First Folio and was the first editor to realize its sole authority among the other folios. In the department of explication, or, as it was then called, ‘elucidation, of the difficult passages in Shakespeare Johnson relied for the most part on his own sturdy good sense and general awareness of human nature, but now and then he made good use too of the historical perspectives which he had learned in his Dictionary labours and in which had great confidence and took a justifiable pride. Perhaps the largest philological virtue which Johtison displayed was that of restraint in the department of emendation, humility in the face of his author’s text, respect for what was given.

Jean H. Hagstrum. Samuel Johnson practiced most of the forms of literary criticism known to his day. He emended corrupt passages and explained obscure and difficult ones. He traced the development of an author’s genius — that ‘chemical process’, in the words of contemporary review of his criticism, by which the earliest yield is ‘transmuted into a substance of a more valuable kind” while “still preserving some analogy to its pristine form’. He occasionally studied “the gradual progress and improvement of our taste’, and he comprehended “as it were in one view the whole circle of the arts and sciences, to see their mutual connection and dependencies. But above all he sat on the judicial bench of criticism, inquiring into the beauties and faults of literary works and denouncing” with great accuracy on the merits of literary productions” His own learned labours resulted in an edition of Shakespeare which a contemporary scholar has characterized as “the best which had yet appeared’ and still one of the few editions which are indispensable. Johnson himself held the task of a scholarly editor in the highest possible regard. ‘Conjectural criticism demands more than humanity possesses Let us now he told no more” he said, glancing at Pope, “of the dull duty of an editor”.

JOHNSON’S HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Jean H. Hagstrum Thus literary research is often based upon a desire to determine the extent of an authors originality. If “the highest praise of genius is original invention’ — and no dictum of Johnson is more characteristic than this — it follows that criticism must be silent until it is determined just how original the author was; and that can be discovered only by means of scholarly tools. The apparatus criticus, which displays what the author knew, quoted, copied and echoed, has never been justified on better grounds than these. At least when he wrote his most important critical document, the Preface to Shakespeare Johnson considered historical investigation of literature to be of far greater dignity than determining the rank of any particular performance.

Delphic oracle in King Oedipus

Delphi is the site of the ancient temple and oracle of Apollo in Greece. It is located on the slopes of Mount Pamassus. It was the centre of the world in ancient Greek religion. According to legend, the oracle was originally sacred to Gaea, and Apollo acquired it by slaying her child, the serpent Python. From 582 BC Delphi was the site of Pythian games. The oracle was consulted not only on private matters but also on affairs of state.
Oracle of Apollo was the source of divine communication delivered in response to a petitioner’s request. Ancient Greece and Rome had many oracles. The most famous was that of Apollo at Delphi. There the medium was a woman over 50 called the Phythia. After bathing in the Castalian spring, she would apparently descend into a basement cell, mount a sacred tripod, and chew the leaves of the laurel, sacred to Apollo. Her utteranaces were often highly ambiguous; they were interpreted by priests.
The Delphic oracle plays a very important role in King Oed4rns. It controls the action of the play almost at every step. It is indeed the foundat on of the whole play. The drama is based upon a myth which has its origin in the Delphic oracle. During the time of Sophocles the Delphic oracle enjoyed a high prestige and authority, and the belief in it was regarded as an essential part of religion.
In the drama King Oedipus the Delphic oracle sets the plot in motion. Creon brings the news that the sufferings of the Theban people will be relieved only if the murderer of the late King, Laius, is traced and expelled from the city or put to death. Oedipus immediately announces his resolve to obey the oracle. The opening .words of the chorus refer to the message of the Delphic oracle, “From the Pythian house of gold, the gracious voice of heaven is heard.”
Thus it is evident that everybody concerned has full faith in the words of the Delphic oracle. The message of the Delphic oracle is the motivating force behind Oedipus’s undertaking to find out and punish the criminal — the undertaking which is the main substance of the play.
Jocasta mocks the divinations of the oracle when she hears of the natural death of King Polybus of Corinth; he was to have been killed by his son, Oedipus, according to the oracle. But her mocking proves to be a tragic irony when the real truth is discovered at the end that Oedipus was not the son of Polybus.
Earlier, King Lalus, was told by the oracle that a son born to Jocasta would kill his father and marry his mother. In order to avoid fulfilment of this prophecy, whenOedipus was born, Laius riveted his ankles, and handed him over to a servant whom he instructed to leave the child on a mountain to die there from exposure. The servant, out of compassion, handed the child over to a Corinthian shepherd who gave the child to King Polybus of Corinth who was childless. Oedipus was brought up as the prince of Corinth but suspicion was created in Oedipus’s mind when a drunken man once suddenly remarked that he did not seem to be the son of Polybus. Oedipus again consulted the oracle which repeated the same prophecy. So, Oedipus left Corinth in order to avoid killing his (supposed) father Polybus, but all in vain. Through an intricate process the prophecies of the oracle that Laius would be killed by his own son, that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother, and beget brother sons and daughters.
The Delphic oracle thus plays a very vital role in King Oedipus.

DESCRIBE SHELLEY AS A POET OF NATURE

 Write a note on Shelley is a poet of Nature.

Attitude towards nature: Like other Romantic poets, Shelley is an ardent lover and worshipper of Nature. Nature is to Shelley, as it is to Wordsworth, a spiritual reality. Shelley looks upon Nature, as Wordsworth does, as a never -ending source of solace and inspiration. Like Wordsworth, he believes that there is in Nature a capability for communicating with the mind and emotions of man. Yet there is a fundamental difference between these two poets in their treatment of Nature. Wordsworth endows Nature with a spirit, Shelley goes much further to provide it with an intellect. He also lends a dynamic quality to the forces of Nature in a way that the other Romantics have never been able to do. J. A. Symonds remarks: “Shelley is one with the romantic temper of his age in ascribing to Nature a spiritual quality and significance and in regarding man’s life as dynamic and progressive. But he goes beyond romanticism in his idea of a vigorous dynamic life of Nature.” Shelley loves Nature and can extract joy in its company and rid himself of his sufferings and feelings of loneliness. His admiration for Nature, thus finds expression in his essay On love: “I’here is eloquence in the tongue less wind and a melody in the flowing brooks and the rumbling of the reeds beside them, which by their inconceivable relation to something within the soul awakens the spirit to a dance of breathless rapture and brings tears of mysterious tenderness to the eyes, like the enthusiasm of patriotic success, or the voice of one’s beloved singing to you alone.”

Utilitarian aspects of Nature: Shelley considers Nature to be a companion endowed with a power of ridding human beings of their pain and agonies. This view of Nature has its origin in Shelley’s personal experience. Whenever he is sad, he turns to Nature and succeeds in drawing comfort from it. During his days in Italy, the worst days in his life, he keeps trying to find joy in the beautiful Italian landscapes. In Lines Written Among the Euganean Hills Shelley displays a mystic involvement with Nature. He finds in Nature a never-ending source of delightful images. The sun is to him not just a nature phenomenon, but something, “broad, red, radiant, half-reclined on the level quivering line of the waters crystalline.” The surrounding scenic beauty of the Euganean Hills succeeds in soothing his melancholy for the moment and fills him with a radiant optimism heightened by his musings on the so-called islands of
Delight:

Many a green isle needs must be
In the deep wide sea of Misery,
Or the mariner, worn and wan,
Never thus could voyage on-
Day and night and night and day,
Drifting on his dreary way

Shelley’s love for the dynamic in Nature. While Wordsworth is fond of the static and quiet aspects o( Nature, Shelley is fascinated by the dynamic. He himself has admitted: “I take great delight in watching the changes of the atmosphere.” This explains his great love for the sky and the resultant composition of his sky-lyrics- Ode to the West Wind, The Cloud, and To A Skylark. the West Wind never rests and it moves speedily and continuously to perform its functions over land and sea and in sky. The cloud and the skylark show an equally intense restlessness. Shelley is ever conscious of the changes in Nature and her periodic regeneration; these lines in Adonais may be quoted as an illustration:

Ah, Woe is me! Winter is come and gone,
But grief returns with the revolving year:
The airs and streams renew their joyous tone;
The ants, the bees, the swallows reappear.

Shelley, it may be said, loves to see Nature in all its forms; but there is no doubt that the doings of Nature are more important to him than merely those forms.

Symbolism drawn from Nature: Shelley frequently goes out doors to look for symbols to give concrete shapes to his abstract thought and emotions. Having a stronger insight into Nature than other poets, he finds in it an inexhaustible source of such symbols. His poetry becomes more meaningful and more vigorous whenever he finds in Nature a cymbal to suit his purpose. In the West Wind, Shelley finds various symbolic meanings. To him the wind is at once a destroyer and a preserver, and hence a symbol of change. He uses the wind as a symbol of his own personality-”tameless and swift, and proud “. Finally, the wind is made the symbol the forces that can help bring about the golden millennium in which the sufferings of mankind will be replaced by pure happiness. Similarly, the could which changes but never dies is regarded by Shelley as a symbol of his belief in immortality and his yearning for some kind of supernal status, and the skylark symbolizes his hopefulness of the liberation of mankind through the efforts of poet–prophets. In Adonais “pansies” have been used to symbolizes the fate of Shelley’s poetry while “violets” stand for his modesty and innocence. The sky, stars, sun, moon, wind and the river have frequently been used by Shelley as symbols of eternity. In Adonais, we find such a reference to the immortality of stars:

The sun comes forth, and many reptiles spawn;
He sets, and each ephemeral insect then
Is gathered into death without a dawn,
And the immortal stars awake again.

Nature imagery: Images drawn from Nature are abundant in Shelley’s Poetry. His images often produce a pictorial quality not to be derived even form paintings. His portrait of the Cloud is more vivid, more picturesque than the cloudscapes painted by Constable or Turner. The image of the sunrise in The Cloud is unequalled in its splendour:

The sanguine sunrise, with his meteor eyes,
And his burning plumes Outspread,
Leaps on the back of my sailing rack,
When the morning star shines dead.

In To A Skylark, image after image has been piled up in quick succession to give an idea of the bird- a “cloud of fire”, an “unembodied joy”, a “poet hidden in the light of thought”, “a golden glow- worm”; a rose “embowered in green leaves” and yet “scattering” its scent. The changing aspects of the West Wind are also Illustrated through a series of images. In Adonais, the imagery is Particularly rich in the stanzas depicting the advent of spring:

The airs and streams renew their joyous tone; The ants, the bees, the swallow reappear; Fresh leaves and flowers deck the dead seasons’ bier;
The amorous birds now pair in every brake; And build their mossy homes in field and brere, And the green lizard, and the golden snake Like unimprisoned flames, out of their trance awake.

Shelley has a natural talent for binding such images at will. When Wordsworth comes across an image, he takes care to ponder upon it until the poetry flowing from it is exhausted; he is miserly in his use of images because he does not find many of them. Shelley, on the other hand, is often seen to use one image for moment and then to throw it away for another; unlike Wordsworth, he can afford to do so.

Myth making out of Nature: Another aspect of Shelly’s Nature poetry is his tendency to make myths out of Nature. His profound insight into Nature and his capacity to feel it intensely account for his unique myth-making power. In his poetry he Personifies the forces of nature and gives to each one of them an Individuality, feelings and capacity to act. In Adonais, for instance, morning, thunder, ocean, winds, echo, spring and others are all impersonated and made to participate in the mourning for Keats. Clutton -Brock writes: “His myths were not to him mere caprices of fancy. They expressed by the only means which human language Provides for the expression of such things, that sense, which he Possessed, of a more intense reality in nature than is felt by other men. To most of us, the forces of nature have but little reality But for Shelley these forces had as mush reality as human beings have for most of us There is this difference between Shelley and primitive myth makers- that they seem to have thought of the forces of nature as disguised beings more powerful than themselves but still in all essentials human, or else as manifestations of the power of such beings. But to Shelley, the West Wind was still a wind, and the cloud, a cloud, however intense a reality they might have for him. In his poetry, they keep their own character and do not take on human attributes, though their own qualities may be expressed in imagery taken from human beings.”

Scientific knowledge of Nature: Shelley was a keen student of science during his youth. This is why most of his descriptions of Nature are based on the popular science of his day. The Cloud is the most finished illustration of Shelley’s knowledge of science. The poem almost seems to be written by meteorologist. His lines:

Sublime on the towers of my skiey bowers, Lightning my pilot sits-

clearly shows his knowledge of the relationship between clouds and electricity. Another line;

I change, but I cannot die……….

is again based on a significant scientific truth- the undying circulation of the water particles which form the clouds. That image in the poem-’Sunbeams with their convex gleams’- can also be cited to show that Shelley knows all about the atmospheric refraction of sun rays. Desmond King- He writes: “Writers who figure in the history of science, like Bacon and Goethe, are rare; but Shelley’s gift of expressing in his verse a scientific outlook which ‘permeates it through and through’ is even rarer. It is difficult to define this special scientific flavour. Probably its most important component is a persistent analysis of Nature: being eager to delve beneath the surface of appearance, instead of seeing things whole like Keats and Shakespeare, searching out the causal chain between one facet of Nature and another, and linking those facets imaginatively or metaphorically to interpret the scene described. It is in his command of this last technique that Shelley scores,”.

Don’t forget to share about “DESCRIBE SHELLEY AS A POET OF NATURE”

Discuss the function of chorus in King Oedipus.

DISCUSS THE FUNCTION OF CHORUS IN KING OEDIPUS.

Ans. The history of chorus goes back to: the ancient Greeks. In the beginning it was a group of dancers and singers who, wearing masks, sang and chanted verse at religious festivals. Lateron, the chorus was used in Greek tragedies where it served mainly as a. commentator on the action. It represented traditional moral, religious,: and social attitudes. Beginning with Euripides the chcus assumed primarily a lyrical function. The other Greek dramatists, Aeschylus and Sophocles, used lt successfully in their dramas. The chorus plays an important role in King Oedzpus. The chorus enters after the prologue, and represents the point of view and the faith of the Thebans, and therefore, of the audience. The chorus acts as one of the dramatis personae. After the entry of the chorus the list of the essential characters: in the drama is’ complete, and the main action of the play begins. It marks the stages of the action of the drama.
The opening song of the chorus has two themes: the raging plague in Thebes, and the message from Delphi. The prologue has given these themes already, but the song of the chorus does not give a sense of repetition; rather it makes the themes more immediate, and creates a mood of fear and apprehension. The second ode or song of the chorus comes after the denunciation of Oedipus by Teiresias. It expresses its feeling of perplexity in view of the accusations; it can neither disbelieve the prophet, nor believe him due to its respect for Oedipus. The conflict in the mind of the, chorus represents the conflict in the mind of the audience. The third song of the chorus expresses the reverence it has for the laws of the gods, and denounces the pride of Oedipus and Jocasta. The fourth song speculates about the royal origin of Oedipus. It is full of tragic irony. The last song expresses that happiness is short-lived, as is the fate of Oedipus. The chorus is not just a spectator but a commentator which takes notice of the changing situations and developments and expresses its reaction to them. Its songs express different themes at different-times during the progress of the action of the drama. As an upholder of religious piety. the chorus sings of the sanctity of religion, drawing upon the moral lessons from the various happenings in the drama. Nol only does the chorus exwess .its reactions to the changing and developing plot, but it also takes part in the dialogue, and for that matter, in the action, even though it is unable to influence the course of events to – any appreciable degree. For example, when Oedipus proclaims his purpose- of tracing Laius’ killer- and utters a curse upon the criminal, the chorus says that the oracle should have indicated the identity of the murderer. In this way, the chorus participates in the dialogue throughout the drama. Sometimes the chorus provides a change of the scene which the audience can imagine. When Oedipus and Teiresias are angrily arguing with each other, the chorus focuses attention upon their conflict, and the scene becomes lively, close and immediate. ,When they depart from each other, the song of the chorus focuses on a wider aspect, and the audience becomes aware of the concern of the whole city about the matter. Sophocles has thus used the chorus for various purposes in the drama. His handling of the chorus for dramatic purposes has been very effective throughout the drama King Oedzpus. He has not only followed the Greek tradition of chorus, but has founded it on a more solid basis.

Ans. There has been much controversy among the great critics on the question whether fate is responsible for Oedipus’ suffering or his hamartia is. Some argue that fate is responsible, some others argue that Oedipus’s personal fault (hamartia) is responsible for his tragic consequences. C.M. Bowra, a very perceptive critic, suggests that the punishment of Oedipus is undeserved. He says, “It is not a punishment for insolence, nor in the last resort it is due to any fault of judgement or character in the man”. While Kitto, another critic, says, “that Sophocles is not trying to make us feel that an inexorable destiny or a malignant god is guiding the events.” He of course, holds Oedipus’s weak side of character as partly, not fully, responsible for his tragedy. R.B. Sewall, yet another critic, says about Oedipus, “Whatever he may have thought he was doing, the act stands in the play as his culminating act of freedom, the assertion of his ability to act independent of any god, oracle, or prophecy.”
We have mentioned three notable critics’ opinions regarding the question, and these opinions represent extreme views— Oedipus’s absolute freedom of action at the one extreme, and the exclusive role of fate at the other.
King Laius was told by the Delphic oracle that a son born to Jocãsta would kill his father and marry his mother. So, as soon as Oedipus was born, Laius, in order to escape the oracle, riveted the baby’s ankles, gave it toa servant to leave it on the mountain to die from exposure there. But the servant out of sympathy, gave it to a Corinthian shepherd who in turn gave it to King Polybus who was childless. Oedipus was brought up as the prince of corinth. But when a young man remarked in a drunken state that Polybus was not his father he consulted the oracle in Corinth which repeated the same prophecy as was given to his father Laius. In order not to commit this crime Oedipus fled from Corinth and determined never to.return until Polybus died. On his way towards Thebes he encountered a. monster, Sphinx, who was eating up every Theban who failed to solve its riddle. Oedipus solved the riddle, and Sphinx killed herself.
Proceeding farther, Oedipus encountered King Laius at a place where three roads met. A quarrel ensued, and Oedipus killed Laius, and all his men except one who fled. The Thebans made him king of Thebes, and gave him the queen, as a reward for freeing the Sphinx. Thus Oedipus unwillingly killed his father Laius, and married his mother Jocasta. Several years later a plague descended on the city and the oracle said it was due to the fact that the murderer of Laius still lived in the country. Oedipus launched a drive to find out the killer, and ironically discovered that he hithself was the killer. Jocasta committed suicide, and Oedipus blinded himself.
From the plot of the story it is apparent that the oracle came true. The oracle prophesied the fate of Oedipus even before he was born. But some critics like Sewall thinks that what happens to Oedipus is the result of his actions as a free agent— actions owing to his hamartia, his pride and haughty temper. At this point let us suppose that Oedipus had no hamartia, and then those things would not have happened. But he did have hamarEia and the things prophesied happened. Hence the perplexity, and. differences of opinion of great critics. The perplexity is due to their overlooking of the principle of causality — every event is the cause of the succeeding event. It is a scientific law and it works everywhere.
If we apply this principle of causality to the case of Oedipus we find that Oedipus’s fate preceded his hamartia, even before his birth. So his hamartia is the result of his fate, not the cause. From the cosmological point of view everything in the universe is prefixed, things happen as they are designed, in a series cf seeming cause and effect. Oedipus’s fate was predesigned, and his nature was already so framed as to produce the events that were fated for him. They were so inexorable that he could not evade them even though he tried.