The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby

 

1) How did the film capture the Jazz Age - the Roaring Twenties of the America in 1920s?

In 1920’s America – known as the Jazz Age, the Golden Twenties or the Roaring Twenties – everybody seemed to have money. The nightmare that was the Wall Street  Crash of October 1929, was inconceivable right up until it happened. The 1920’s saw a break with the traditional set-up in America. The Great War had destroyed old perceived social conventions and new ones developed.

The Roaring Twenties proved to be something of a paradox. At the same time women enjoyed more freedoms and danced in the Jazz Age, there were those who pushed for Prohibition-era restrictions.

The Roaring Twenties definitely has a reputation. Based on the name alone, the Jazz Age seems like a pretty fun time to be alive. However, it was a decade fraught with conflict between old and new schools of thought. Post-war ideals about immigration, religion, piety, and sexuality were all on contested.

As is usually the case, one facet of society desired a different way of life than the rest. In the case of the 1920s, the older majority pined for the post-war "return to normalcy" that Warren G. Harding promised. In contrast, young people shunned the rigid Victorian lifestyle in favor of independence, open-mindedness, and decadence.

The 1920s were overall a freeing time for women as they earned the right to vote on August 18, 1920 and continued their involvement in the workforce. However, women also began testing the waters of a new form of freedom — their own bodies. With higher hemlines, women found themselves able to ride bicycles, in stark contrast to the heavy Victorian dress which was limiting to their activities.

2) How did the film help in understanding the characters of the novel?

The film begins with a voiceover of Nick Carraway telling a doctor that his father always told him to see the good in others. It is here that we first hear the titular characters' name: Gatsby. Gatsby is apparently the only person in whom Nick has ever seen true good.

Nick then tells the viewer about his past. As the camera pans past the bustling crowds of New York City in the 1920s, Nick tells us that while he originally wanted to be a writer, at the time of his meeting Gatsby, he worked on Wall Street as a bond broker. Nick moves into a cottage on Long Island, next door to a giant mansion that belongs to Gatsby. He visits his cousin, Daisy Buchanan, who is married to the brutish and very wealthy former athlete, Tom Buchanan. Nick has dinner with Daisy, Tom, and their friend Jordan Baker, a professional golfer. Their dinner is interrupted when Tom gets a phone call from a woman with whom he is having an affair. When Nick goes home that night, he sees a figure in the gloom he believes is Gatsby, staring at a green light on the Buchanan's dock across the harbor.

Tom invites Nick to go to the Yale Club with him, but they end up picking up Tom's mistress, Myrtle Wilson, in a dingy neighborhood called the Valley of Ashes, and then going to an apartment that Tom keeps for Myrtle in Manhattan. There, they have a party. Nick has alcohol for the second time in his life, and enjoys the party, later waking up on his own porch, unsure of how he got back. He receives an invitation to go to one of Gatsby's parties, which are notoriously lavish affairs that attract a "who's who" of New York society.

Nick goes to the party, where he runs into Jordan Baker, and they speculate about Gatsby's true identity. After they meet Gatsby, he asks to have a private conversation with Jordan. Later, Gatsby invites Nick to go to lunch with him in New York. The following day, as Gatsby and Nick drive towards the city, Gatsby tells Nick about his past, but Nick doesn't quite believe he's telling the truth. They go to a speakeasy bar, where alcohol is served, and Gatsby introduces Nick to his business associate, Meyer Wolfsheim, who appears to be involved with some shady business deals. Later, Nick meets Jordan for a drink, and she tells him that Gatsby and Daisy know each other and were once in love. She then tells him that Gatsby wants Nick to invite him and Daisy over for tea, so that they can be reunited.

Nick invites Gatsby and Daisy over for tea the following day, and they meet. It is awkward at first, but they manage to get more and more comfortable with each other, and eventually become romantically entangled once again. At Gatsby's mansion, Daisy remembers her love for Gatsby, but laments the impossibility of their love. Nick then narrates that Gatsby was born to a poor farming family, but later encountered a wealthy man named Dan Cody, whom he rescued from a storm. Cody becomes a mentor to Gatsby, but after Cody died, Gatsby was cheated out of money that Cody left him by Cody's family.

Gatsby throws another party, which Daisy, Tom, and Nick attend. Daisy tells Gatsby that she wishes they could run away together, and Gatsby insists that she tell Tom she never loved him. Tom grows more suspicious of Gatsby's business dealings.

The following day, Nick, Daisy, Tom, Gatsby, and Jordan have lunch at the Buchanan estate. When Tom sees the spark between Daisy and Gatsby, he becomes infuriated and suggests they all go to the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan. Tom takes Gatsby's yellow car, driving Jordan and Nick, and Daisy and Gatsby drive Tom's car. When they stop for gas in the Valley of Ashes, Myrtle sees Tom driving the yellow car. Later, at the Plaza, Tom asks Gatsby prying questions about his past, claiming that he never went to Oxford, and humiliating him in front of Daisy. Gatsby tells Daisy to tell Tom that she has never loved him, but Daisy is uncomfortable and unwilling to do so. Tom provokes Gatsby when he suggests that Gatsby will never fit in with the wealthy. Gatsby becomes violently angry, nearly punching Tom, which horrifies Daisy.

Gatsby and Daisy drive home in Gatsby's yellow car. As they drive through the Valley of Ashes, Myrtle and George are having an argument. Myrtle runs out into the street and tries to stop the car, thinking it is Tom driving. The car hits her and kills her instantly. While Daisy and Gatsby stop for a moment, they quickly move on. Tom, Nick, and Jordan come upon the scene. Horrified to learn that Myrtle is dead, Tom tells George that it was Gatsby who killed Myrtle, and encourages him to take revenge.

Back at the Buchanan estate, outside in the garden, Gatsby reveals to Nick that Daisy was the one at the wheel when Myrtle was killed. When Nick spies on Daisy and Tom inside the house, he hears them planning to make some phone calls to the police and go away for awhile. Nick does not reveal Daisy and Tom's plans, as Gatsby says he will wait for Daisy to call him the following morning to make arrangements to run away together. After staying up all night and listening to Gatsby tell him his life story, Nick leaves Gatsby.

We see Nick at work, visibly distracted. Meanwhile, we see Daisy looking at her phone as she considers calling Gatsby. Gatsby goes for a swim in his pool to kill time while he waits for Daisy's call. The phone rings, Gatsby hears it, and excitedly begins to get out of the pool. However, he does not see George Wilson behind him, who shoots him in the back. He falls into his pool, dead, just as George turns the gun on himself. We then see it was Nick, not Daisy, who was calling. Daisy has chosen Tom.

Gatsby is blamed for the affair with Myrtle and her murder, and not a single person who came to his parties comes to his funeral. Nick is disgusted, and leaves New York. We see him put the final touches on a manuscript, Gatsby, which he re-titles The Great Gatsby.

3) How did the film help in understanding the symbolic significance of 'The Valley of Ashes', 'The Eyes of Dr. T J Eckleberg' and 'The Green Light

The Valley of Ashes is a barren wasteland that lies between East and West Eggs and the city. It is grey and desolate, filled with the working class like George and Myrtle Wilson. In the novel, it serves a symbol of the poverty and working class that are so near to the rich and elite class. Fitzgerald places the Valley of Ashes so that any of the rich characters, Tom and Daisy or Gatsby, must travel through this desolation in order to get into the city; hence making this symbol even more poignant – poverty is very near and hard to ignore. The grey and ashy appearance of the Valley of Ashes serves as a direct contrast to the colorful glamour of the nearby Eggs. The eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleberg are present on a billboard in the Valley of Ashes. This billboard is old and faded, so much so that all that remains is the eyes from an advertisement. They symbolize a moral force looking down on the characters – a god-like force, if you will. This symbol is placed, of course, where the working class is, not the elite class. Perhaps Fitzgerald’s comment on the lack of morality among the upper class characters of Tom, Daisy, Jordan and Jay Gatsby.

The eyes of Dr. T. J. Eckleburg can be seen as a symbol of an all-seeing God. This remarkable piece of advertising, displayed on a decaying billboard in the Valley of Ashes, stands as a constant reminder that, no matter what we do, God sees everything. The Almighty may not play a large part in The Great Gatsby, but he's there all the same, watching over the various characters as they engage in all manner of appalling behavior.

None of the characters in the story appear to pay more than lip service to the belief that God exists. For Gatsby, wealth and social acceptability are his personal deities, at whose altars he regularly worships.

As for the Buchanans, high social status is their god, which explains why Daisy, despite conducting an affair with Gatsby and telling him that she loves him, is not prepared to ditch Tom for Jay.

This appearance of the green light is just as vitally important as the first one, mostly because the way the light is presented now is totally different than when we first saw it. Instead of the "enchanted" magical object we first saw, now the light has had its "colossal significance," or its symbolic meaning, removed from it. This is because Gatsby is now actually standing there and touching Daisy herself, so he no longer needs to stretch his arms out towards the light or worry that it's shrouded in mist.

However, this separation of the green light from its symbolic meaning is somehow sad and troubling. Gatsby seemingly ignores Daisy putting her arm through his because he is "absorbed" in the thought that the green light is now just a regular thing. Nick's observation that Gatsby's "enchanted objects" are down one sounds like a lament—how many enchanted objects are there in anyone's life?

Now the light has totally ceased being an observable object. Nick is not in Long Island any more, Gatsby is dead, Daisy is gone for good, and the only way the green light exists is in Nick's memories and philosophical observations. This means that the light is now just a symbol and nothing else.

But it is not the same deeply personal symbol it was in the first chapter. Check out the way Nick transitions from describing the green light as something "Gatsby believed in" to using it as something that motivates "us." Gatsby is no longer the only one reaching for this symbol—we all, universally, "stretch out our arms" toward it, hoping to reach it tomorrow or the next day.

4) How did the film capture the theme of racism and sexism? 

Throughout human history, race has been an integral part in understanding how humans interact. F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is no different. During the 1920s, race relations were much different compared to today.  In The Great Gatsby, the story is presumably dominated by the Caucasian race. Also, Tom seems to represent some the racial ideology of the time period. It is very possible that Jay Gatsby was in fact African-American in The Great Gatsby. We can see this by his mannerisms and the way he interacts with other characters.

Throughout The Great Gatsby, there are few people of the non-white race mentioned.  This is seen when Nick says, “As we crossed Blackwell's Island a limousine passed us, driven by a white chauffeur, in which sat three modish negroes, two bucks and a girl.” (Fitzgerald 69). Also, Nick says “A pale, well-dressed Negro stepped near.” (Fitzgerald 139) during the aftermath of Myrtle’s death. These are the only times that someone’s race is explicitly described as non-white. Throughout the book, Fitzgerald does not specify the race of all of the characters. Most of the people portrayed in The Great Gatsby are upper class.

There are many differences to be found between F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, written in 1925, and the movie directed by Baz Luhrmann in 2013. These differences are examples of how times have really changed. In 1925, instances of racism and sexism were not uncommon. However, racism and sexism are not really tolerated or accepted in today’s time. To suit the modern audience, instances of racism and sexism were omitted in the production of the movie. Many other differences can be found between the movie and the book.

He makes several racist and sexist remarks. It is easy to dislike his character. On pages 12-13, Tom says, “Have you read ‘The Rise of the Colored Empires’ by this man Goddard?”...”The idea is if we don’t look out the white race will be---will be utterly submerged. It’s all scientific stuff; it’s been proved.” “Its up to us, who are the dominant race, to watch out or these other races will have control of things.” Although Tom is an easy character to hate, it is not apparent that he is the sole villain to the story. He is not necessarily what destroys Gatsby in the end. In the book, it is Tom’s goal to have Wilson lash out at Gatsby. He does not out right tell Wilson that Gatsby is to blame for Myrtle’s death. He instead just tells Wilson the car that kills his wife is yellow. In movies there always has to be a villain. The producers decided to make Tom the villain. Tom practically tells Wilson that Gatsby is to blame for the death of his wife, Myrtle.

5) Watch the video on Nick Carraway and discuss him as a narrator.

Nick's capacity as the narrator is interesting because, as noted above, he is not the focus of the book. Though the story is told from his perspective, it is Jay Gatsby and his attempts to re-win the heart of Daisy Buchanan, that are the true focus of the book. This grants him a bit of the third person perspective which we discussed above. Nick is emotionally uninvolved in the love triangle that evolves between Gatsby, Daisy, and her husband Tom. This allows him to view the situation clearly and judge events dispassionately.

This is aided by any real lack of interesting or transformational storyline on Nick's part. Nick tells us he is struggling through the bond business while half-heartedly pursuing the golf star, Jordan Baker. Neither are of particular interest to the reader because they are not important to Nick either. He freely admits this when he breaks up with Jordan over the phone near the end of the book. This allows the story of Tom, Daisy, Gatsby, and the social circles they move in to take center stage. Nick attended university with Tom and is Daisy's cousin. This helps us trust the moral judgments he makes of the characters involved and further lends credibility to Nick's positive response to Gatsby's manners and actions.

Northrop Frye: Archetype Literature and Myth or religion

1. What is Archetypal Criticism? 

Archetypal criticism is a type of literary criticism examining the presence of archetypal characters within a piece of literature. Such characters can be found in works of fiction, long or short, and in more poetic works. The archetypal character is a simple character template recognizable to all readers. Archetypal criticism is a part of social anthropology and psychoanalysis. The idea of character archetypes is based on the works of psychologist Carl Jung. An archetype is essentially a character prototype. Such prototypes find their ways into all modes of literature and story across generations, cultures and languages. While the idea of such basic characters was developed by Jung in the 20th century, the word itself has been in use in England since the 1540s.Jung was from Switzerland and was the first to reject the then pervasive idea of tabula rasa. Tabula rasa is an idea whereby all babies are born as blank slates. This goes back to the theological discussions of the 4th and 5th centuries about how God gives babies souls and they are born sinful. Jung argued that each baby is instead born with a built-in archetypal template. This template remains only potential until the child grows up.Northrop Frye was a Canadian thinker who built upon Jung’s ideas. He cared less about the how and why of natural-born archetypes and more about their functions and effects. He believed that archetypes and archetypal criticism form an important part of literature. The archetypes allow stories and literature to refresh and reform itself again and again. This means old stories can be told in a new way, but with the archetypes present to give it meaning to people.

2.What does the archetypal critic do?

Archetypal criticism argues that archetypes determine the form and function of literary works, that a text's meaning is shaped by cultural and psychological myths. Archetypes are the unknowable basic forms personified or concretized in recurring images, symbols, or patterns which may include motifs such as the quest or the heavenly ascent, recognizable character types such as the trickster or the hero, symbols such as the apple or snake, or images such as crucifixion all laden with meaning already when employed in a particular work.

Archetypal criticism gets its impetus from psychologist Carl Jung, who postulated that humankind has a "collective unconscious," a kind of universal psyche, which is manifested in dreams and myths and which harbors themes and images that we all inherit. Literature, therefore, imitates not the world but rather the "total dream of humankind." Jung called mythology "the textbook of the archetypes"

3. What is Frye trying prove by giving an analogy of ' Physics to Nature' and 'Criticism to Literature'?

Northrop Frye compares “Physics to Nature” and “Criticism to Literature”. Physics is a systematic study of nature, but a student of Physics will say that he/she is learning Physics not nature. Similarly, Criticism is a systematic study of literature. We cannot learn literature but criticism of literature can be learnt.

4.Share your views of Criticism as an organised body of knowledge. Mention relation of literature with history and philosophy

Criticism is the organized body of knowledge. That through we look at various approaches.  Literature have a vital reaction with History and Philosophy. Both of strong pillars of the literature. In between literature grown. Philosophy as important as history or vice versa. In history we find that past events, action and scene. In philosophy we look for  morality, ethics and wisdom. Let's see how literature made up, literature is all about ideas and events. Without event we not get any idea and  without idea no literature.

5.Briefly explain inductive method with illustration of Shakespeare's Hamlet's Grave Digger's scene.

Inductive method – Example to Rule

Northrop Frye gives example of Gravedigger’s scene from “Hamlet” to explain this method. To study this scene we need to go step by step backwards to study this method:

a.)       First, the question of existence can be seen. Every man dies at one point.

b.)       Second, image of corruption can be seen.

c.)       Third, we see Hamlet’s love for Ophelia.

Hamlet represents Archetypal hero who is ready to die for his love.

This method moves from “Particular to General”.

6.Briefly explain deductive method with reference to an analogy to Music, Painting, rhythm and pattern.Give examples of the outcome of deductive method?

In the Deductive method we see that the Process going on general to particular. If we take reference to an analogy to music  then we can say that move in time whether the painting presented  space in terms of arts. In both cases organizing principle recurrence. So the reputation  is gives us general ideas.

In music Rhythm is temporal and in painting pattern is spatial. In the reading of the book we feel  both elements together.

Music has rhythm and Painting have pattern. We might not understand music at once and we might understand painting at first look. Literature is a bridge between music and painting. Words in literature bring the rhythm of music and pictorial image all together. This method moves from “General to Particular”.

7.Refer to the Indian seasonal grid (in the blogpost). If you can, please read small Gujarati or Hindi or English poem from the archetypal approach and apply Indian seasonal grid in the interpretation.?

In school time we have studied seasonal poem in Gujarati,

કેસુડાની કળીએ બેસી ફાગણિયો લહેરાયો...

We studied in BA William Wordsworth's poem 'The Daffodils' and in this poetry Wordsworth gives a definition of poetry.

Also in MA, we studied 'Wordsworth and Coleridge - the study of poets' 

John Keat's poetry 'Ode to Autumn' and 'The Human Seasons'.

Literature and Religion: Northrop Frye - ritual, myth and the archetype of literature

The term Myth is beginning a brief study of the opinions and definitions of the theorists and intellectuals of the relevant disciplines like Anthropology, Sociology, Cultural Studies and Literary Criticism. The term myth has multiple dimensions in the philosophical, social, cultural and psychological premises.

Myths are usually considered as fairy tales or beautifully narrated escapes of imagination created by old people for their entertainment or consolation in the face of mysterious natural phenomena. Myths have a profound impact on human lives even as they are formed by, the way human beings live.

Northrop Fry in The Secular Scripture points out that myth is a drive towards a verbal outline of human experience. It is the external presence in the psyche.  Many things have been handed down to humanity in a Satanist form in human nature, manifesting itself in man’s dream that enables a person to glimpse the past.

Northrop Frye extract archetypes and essential mythic formula from the genres and individual plot patterns of literature. He tended to emphasize the circumstance of mythical patterns in literature. He assumed that myths are closer to the elemental archetype than the artful manipulations of sophisticated writers. The death or rebirth theme was often said to be the archetype of archetypes and was held to ground in the cycle of the seasons and the organic cycle of human life.

Frye makes the distinction of shifting the notion of the archetype from the psychological to the literary. Frye proposes that concealed symbolic narratives exist across all humankind and all history, and have the potential to influence our lives at an almost invisible level. Thus, he makes myth his most important concept, supporting a new poetics that is the principle of his mythological framework.

As Northop Frye puts, the typical forms of myth become the conventions and genres of literature. Frye presents the following example of a mythic scheme with which to understand art, based upon the cycle of fertility myth. Each season is associated with a literary genre: comedy with spring, romance with summer, tragedy with autumn, and satire with winter. Comedy is associated with spring because the genre of comedy is characterized by the birth of the hero, revival, and resurrection. In addition, spring symbolizes the defeat of winter and darkness. 

Romance and summer are connected because summer is the culmination of a life in the seasonal calendar, and the romance genre ends with some sort of triumph, usually marriage. Autumn is the dying stage of the calendar, which parallels the tragedy genre because it is known for the death of the protagonist. Satire is associated with winter because satire is a dark, disillusioned and mocking form and the defeat of the heroic figure. Frye formulated that the totality of literary works constitutes a ‘self-contained literary universe’ which has been created over the ages by the human imagination.

waiting for godoth

Samuel Beckett's 'Waiting for Godot' is a commercially successful experimental play. The main attraction of the play which captured the attention of the larger audience and many good readers is the central theme of 'nothingness' - practically nothing happens in the play and there is not any development in the plot yet the significance lies in the nothingness of it. Because nothing in the setting of the play changes, the characters are waiting and the audience is also waiting with the characters but the waiting is endless.

 1.What connection do you see in the setting (“A country road. A tree.Evening.”) of the play and these paintings?

Firstly, one should inquire into the very idea of a tree in order to understand its use in literature as a symbol or metaphor. For example, a 'tree' is always associated with nature and one of the profound age of Nature in the history of English Literature is that of Romantic Age where the natural objects have been represented in a variety of ways. 

                            Since a long period of time, trees in great works of art have been represented in mysteriously varied ways- everything from the powerful and divinely secretive methods of nature to immortality, to the imagination, to family, to individual. Hence, individually and collectively the idea of the same object differs. 

                            Similarly, one such play of an Irish playwright Beckett presents this image of a tree differently in the setting of his play. The setting of the play 'Waiting for Godot' by Samuel Beckett is inspired by two paintings by Caspar David Friedrich - a 19th-century German Romantic landscape painter. The title of this painting is 'longing'. 

                            In 1975, in Modern Painting and the Northern Romantic Tradition, his book about the kind of modern painting that expresses spiritual longing, Robert Rosenblum offered Friedrich as a source for painters such as Gottlieb and Rothko, whose versions of intense nothingness he demonstrated to be similar illustrations of "the search for the sacred in the secular modern world."

Here longing means the deep desire and craves for something. Waiting in the play is connected with the longing of the painting. In the painting two people, probably, are seen as watching the sunrise and sunset. The more significant thing is that both the paintings have a similar background of Nature. In one painting nature(tree) stands for bright hope and in the second one, it stands for despair. Inspired from these paintings, Samuel Beckett used the thematic concern and significance of tree in his play and director Michael Lindsay-Hogg in his 2001 film called 'Waiting for Godot' an adaptation of Beckett's play also uses the tree to signify the barrenness of life, the anguish of human existence. 

                                    But it becomes hard to draw more comparison between these paintings and Beckett's play because Casper David Friedrich's paintings contain hugely romantic elements, his depiction of nature has a different and optimistic meaning and Beckett’s depiction of nature has an altogether different meaning.

                                The 'longing' maybe 'waiting' but then there is no further comparison possible. The 'waiting' for Beckett is in the indifference and uncaring universe. The most astonishing thing is that in Act 1 there are no leaves in the tree but in Act 2, Beckett gives a tree a few leaves. 

                                    Fredrich seems to be romantic in his visionary output because of his association with the romanticism in Germany but at the same time, as one of the great Romantics, Friedrich also departed from the charming landscape painting of his contemporaries, setting sparse accents in his nearly empty oil paintings. With his radical image design, he was one of the modern artists of his time. On contrary, being a romanticist he looks to catch the endless experience of nature.

                                    The depiction of debris and the barren tree, in the play, suggest abandonment, compounded by the dull plot or no plot or story element and uneven compositional balance of narration. Beckett’s simple images are often deceptive and transmographic – ideas that resist any artistic tendency to linger over specificity or detail. The discussion among Estragon and Vladimir with respect to the "tree" status is likewise significant for Godot.

2.The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of tree in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves - ?

The tree is a symbol in the play. It can be said that the tree itself is a character as any other character. Generally, it is observed that a character grows in the work of art by learning from the experiences. This kind of character is called a developing character. But the play Waiting for Godot explores a static situation and static or flat characters. The characters think to move but they do not move. 

"Waiting for Godot' does not tell a story; it explores a static situation. "Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful." On a country road by a tree two tramps, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting." (Esslin) 

                                 Hence, there is not any mental progression in the characters but on the other hand, an object that is the tree can be seen as growing. From the leafless tree in Act 1 to a tree with four to five leaves in Act 2. 

                                    Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot and there is a tree in the background which can be assumed a representative of Godot. The leafless tree in Act 1 represents a lack of vitality and meaning. 

Estragon: [despairingly] Ah! [Pause.] You’re sure it was here?

Vladimir: What?

Estragon: That we were to wait.

Vladimir: He said by the tree. [They look at the tree.] Do you see any others.

Estragon: What is it?

To wait by the tree for Godot signifies as if the tree is associated with Godot. The tree, in this scene, serves as an organizing plot device which anchors Vladimir and Estragon to the location that will remain constant on stage throughout Godot’s performance. They are waiting there, on stage, because “he” (presumably Godot) told them to wait by the tree.

                                    Here, Vladimir calls the tree 'a willow tree' for the image of the willow tree is religiously charged, both in the Celtic and Christian traditions. A willow tree is a sign both of grief and of hope for a new life and a willow tree is always planted on the cemetery of the dead. As Godot is not appearing, both characters are entertaining themselves in the philosophizing the tree for which Samuel Beckett can be assumed to have displayed or signified the true activity of the philosophers is to entertain themselves in their leisure time. 

As the characters argue about the nature of the tree (as a beaconing object) by which they were told to wait for Godot, they simultaneously call its role as a symbol into question. If we entertain the common interpretation of Godot’s (lack of) arrival as symbolizing salvation for Vladimir and Estragon (i.e. Waiting for Salvation), then the characters, as early as the sixth page of the play, negate the tree’s possibility as a “site of salvation.” For, in questioning its existence as a tree, Vladimir and Estragon question salvation itself. Despite their simultaneous faith and eschatological scepticism towards Godot’s arrival, the characters remain rooted to the spot, in vain, waiting for Godot.

                                    In Act 2, the tree stands for itself and not representing any character from the play. It doesn’t have anything to do with the quest and misery of any human’s life. It is growing at its own pace and time. In the second act, there are leaves on the tree which show it does not wait with Vladimir and Estragon for Godot. Nature doesn’t need any Godot and it also doesn’t sympathies with human beings. It is completely indifferent towards human existence or even human misery. 

                                              It doesn’t have rationality but human always try to give rational meanings to it. The natural object like a tree is devoid of any human purpose but it is the humans who try to justify the significance or give a tree its meaning which for a tree is completely useless!

ESTRAGON: 

(suddenly furious). Recognize! What is there to recognize? All my lousy life I've crawled about in the mud! And you talk to me about scenery! (Looking wildly about him.) Look at this muckheap! I've never stirred from it!

                                  It can be derived that what is there to remember in such a meaningless existence. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong in assuming that the leaves of the tree are increasing the hope of Estragon and Vladimir as because, sprouting of the leaves can be a sign of hope but it is an illusionary hope for both the characters in their meaninglessness.

3.In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot?

In both the acts of the play, the scenes of the moon at night can be interpreted as the time passes. It is an indication that time has passed and the next sunrise is going to be a good one- 'GODOT WILL COME" the next day. Hence, the night passes, time passes. In a larger context, it is the time passing period in the endless waiting. As the older people wait for death and everyday figure out their days that when are they going to get salvation in the same manner, both these characters are waiting for their salvation which GODot can only provide them. 

                                 In another way, we can interpret it as per the manner in which Beckett shows the importance of time in Waiting for Godot through the symbol of the moon. The moon is a noticeable symbol to the characters and the audience as well, whenever they see the moon; they know that the night has come which means that it is the time to leave and have a rest, also the moon shows that the time is in progress to them. Both the characters- Vladimir and Estragon find the moon as a sign of mercy to them to end their suffering as well as a relaxation in their futile act of waiting.

4. The director feels the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?

In the 2001 released film by Michael Lindsay-Hogg, the director takes the artistic liberty in designing the setting of the play where he uses the debris in the setting may be to create the effects of a catastrophe of the World War. The director fills the setting with some debris comprising of waste and broken bits of rocks connoting the unimportance of life, the meaninglessness and futility of our actions that how the things become pointless whenever we destroy or create an enormous structure. The debris also symbolized the after-effects of the war as if the War had broken out and huge planes and aircraft have been destructed in the bombing and turned into plains and plateau. It also strikes our attention on the cities and states being destroyed in a bombing by the superpowers and creating the victim countries into a complete mess. 

                              Additionally, the debris is the opposite of nature, the debris is a human-created useless waste. It also symbolizes the 'powerless Powerfullness' of the humans. Humans in the greed of their material world have the strength to destroy but when it comes to reconstructing and healing, this powerfulness turns into complete and bare powerlessness.

5. The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?

"Waiting for Godot' does not tell a story; it explores a static situation. "Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful." On a country road by a tree two tramps, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting." (Esslin) 

                                    As Martin Esslin puts it, the play is surrounded by nothingness. And Beckett begins his play with a dialogue -

ESTRAGON:(giving up again). Nothing to be done 

                                        This statement - "Nothing to be done" is repeated almost four times in the play. This statement carries deep philosophical meanings. It defines the struggle to Find Meaning in Purposeless Life. The very form of the play Waiting for Godot indicates the unbearably repetitious nature of life altogether. Samuel Beckett provides us with two acts in the play – two acts which both follow the same basic plotline. A repetitious existence renders all efforts to struggle futile; in a life that repeats the same events over and over, individuals like Estragon and Vladimir can only wait out a seemingly unending, mind-numbing existence and, at best, find ways to pass the time. 

                                    Hence, through the opening scene, Beckett clears the idea of nothingness. This line represents the whole idea- the central struggle of human begins as a thematic concern. It symbolizes the nothingness of existence, the purposeless life, the life devoid of meaning and as nothing can be done within life and nothing can be done while waiting for Godot. It shows how nothing can really mean something as there is the context within this play.

6. Do you agree: “The play (Waiting for Godot), we agreed, was a positive play, not negative, not pessimistic. As I saw it, with my blood and skin and eyes, the philosophy is: 'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." (E.G. Marshal who played Vladimir in original Broadway production 1950s)?

Yes, I strongly agree that this play is not pessimistic, rather it provides optimistic rationality which is the significance and futility of waiting. Theologically, this play is suggesting GODOT as GOD and because the central theme of the play is waiting, that is hope, it describes the futility of hope in our lives. 

                                      The Life of human beings are surrounded in and around hope and depends on the waiting, HOPE.  The whole life of a human is passed with this waiting. Life is a continuing process and it requires something to hold on so generally, human beings tend to rely on hope. Similarly, Estragon and Vladimir both the characters are relying solely on the waiting - Waiting For Godot. But they are forgetting that they do not need any Godot for the continuation of their journey. Hence, the play is optimistically dealing with the philosophy of existentialism. 

'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." - E.G. Marshal 

                                    The circle of time is endless and as long as life exists, time is going to record the footsteps.

7. How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolical significance of these props?

The props like hat and boots are representing human’s attachment towards the mind or body. 

                                Hat symbolically represents the mind as Vladimir is with hat and he keeps on thinking, same with lucky, both use the hat as a tool for thinking and with Lucky, one has to remove his hat to make him stop thinking. It displays the mechanical life of human beings, it seems as if when one switches on- the thinking process starts and when one switches off the thinking process should end. While Estragon has hat but he doesn’t use it he is more concentrating on his boots which are not comforting to him. 

                                The boots are a symbol of daily struggling — Estragon is constantly affected by his boots, always taking them off and putting them on but never makes a difference. (Ajemian) This routine struggle of the fitting is described by Beckett. The second Act describes the hat as finally fit for him. Estragon’s boots, instead of symbolizing rational thought processes on the other hand symbolize the fact that there is nothing to be done for the two men in a less pensive and more active way. Estragon, who focuses more on boots than hats, is more earthy and realistic because he is more grounded than Vladimir.

8. Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity of slavishness is unbelievable?

When Milton says -

"The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven"

Similarly, it cannot be denied that it is  

the mind which which can make itself powerful and capable of ruling over other and it is the mind which accepts the surrendering and subjugation of others. 

                     Yes, I do think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. Obedience to authority is the tendency people have to try to please those in charge. Psychological evidence indicates that people tend to respect and follow those whom they perceive to have legitimate authority. This can lead to trouble if it causes people to fail to exercise their own independent ethical judgment. Similarly, Lucky is habituated with his being as a slave or rather he has become Pozzo's slave in such a way that it is hard for him to even think of his being a slave. It is a satire on human beings that how they become a slave of religion, politics unconsciously that they fail to realise the real and true identity of themselves and they consider their original identity as some marks of the masters. Lucky is a submissive slave. He carries heavy luggage, thinks and dances for his master. He taught all the higher values of life - beauty, grace, the truth of the first water'.

                             He is the mind - the spiritual side of man which is spoiled in such a way that it totally is unaware of its own subjugated identity and is colonized mentally by the master.

Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. As he carries the baggage physically, he has a mental unconscious baggage of his identity as a slave who is incomplete without his master. The luggage and the rope around lucky are very interesting symbols. If the behaviour of Lucky is not putting down the baggage and his obedience seems extremely irritating and nauseatic to us then we should ask one statement that -

 Are we putting down the theological baggage which was handed to us when we were children as a tool of playing with our sentiments?

People are carrying these baggages unknowingly- Is there any escape from all these?

Are the rope and the luggage invisible markers form which we are trying to liberate ourselves? 

As Lucky is tied with a rope, aren't we tied to something?

9. Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or  . . .

When we read the play and try to situate the invisible character Godot in the context, we realize that it may be the divine power which is described by the boy (god's messenger). When we try to look for the number of times the word Godot is referred to in the play, we can certainly say that the word Godot is referred to 23 times in the play. Here is some significant reference-

VLADIMIR:

To Godot? Tied to Godot! What an idea! No question of it. (Pause.) For the moment.

...

POZZO:

who has your future in his hands . . . (pause) . . . at least your immediate future?

...

BOY:

(in a rush). Mr. Godot told me to tell you he won't come this evening but surely tomorrow

...

VLADIMIR:

He said that Godot was sure to come tomorrow. (Pause.) What do you say to that?

ESTRAGON:

Then all we have to do is to wait on here.

                     So, through this references, one can surely say that GODOT can be God. When Alan Schneider, who was direct the first American production of 'Waiting for Godot', asked Beckett who or what was meant by Godot, he received the answer

"If I knew, I would have said so in the play"

                  Hence, it is open to the interpreter to interpret the identity of Godot or to see Godot as an object also. As the title is 'Waiting for Godot' - the Godot is for whom or for what are we waiting!

10. “The subject of the play is not Godot but ‘Waiting’” (Esslin, A Search for the Self). Do you agree? How can you justify your answer?

If the title of the play is to be interpreted in a significant way then one is bound to think more on the etymological meaning of the word GODOT. Of course, it is strange and arouses curiosity but along with that, the character of Godot is mentally present in the play and not physically. So, the GODOT, throughout the play remains as a mysterious and annoying figure. One can convincingly agree with Martin Esslin's words- 

"Yet whether Godot is meant to suggest the intervention of a supernatural agency, or whether he stands for a mythical human being whose arrival is expected to change the situation or both of these possibilities combined, his exact nature is of secondary importance." 

         Hence, this statement surely emphasizes that the subject of the play is not Waiting but Godot. But 

" The act of waiting as an essential and characteristic aspect of the human condition. Throughout our lives, we always wait for something and Godot simply represent the objective of our wanting - an event, a thing, a person, death."

 the subject of the play with reference to above mentioned lines is not Godot but waiting!

11. Do you think that plays like this can better be ‘read’ than ‘viewed’ as it requires a lot of thinking on the part of readers, while viewing, the torrent of dialogues does not give ample time and space to ‘think’? Or is it that the audio-visuals help in better understanding of the play?

I think that this type of play should be viewed and read both. As we know that reading literature widens our perceptions and opens a variety of perspectives and also widens our imaginative powers. Screening of film based on texts helps in shaping our imagination in a perfect mould and shape. So, I believe, initially, one should read the original text and should develop the background knowledge of the play to get a proper idea.  After background reading this play one is free to watch, this is not advisable for all literature but plays like this one should be watched first. 

                      “Show, don’t tell,” is the motto that any good writer lives by. His words stir the reader’s imagination, thereby transporting him to the described scene. This is one of the engrossing elements of literature. 

                     Films are better vectors to reach and inform a vast audience. Films bring texts to life. Moreover, the concrete images of the film are easier to remember long after their display than the imagined ones required for reading.

                                  Beckett's plays are full of good and philosophically rich dialogues while watching the film these dialogues are skipped to be deeply pondered so it is advisable to read the play and then watch the film. Because the visual and audio will help to get the sense of the play for better understanding.

12. Which of the following sequence you liked the most:

o   Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting

o   Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts

o   Converstion of Vladimir with the boy

Though Beckett issuing the most simple language in his plays, his simple language is deceivingly philosophical. The philosophically rich statements in the conversation of Vladimir and Estragon when they are killing time in questions and conversations while waiting in one of the various scenes which I found having profound significance.

13. Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?

Widely interpreting, the thematic concern of the play revolves around endless waiting and meaningless utterances of the characters. Yes, I felt the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifferent Universe during the screening of the film in the attempt to commit the suicide scene.  
Vladimir: (Silence. Estragon looks attentively at the tree.) What do we do now?
Estragon: Wait.
Vladimir: Yes, but while waiting?
Estragon: What about hanging ourselves?
Vladimir: Hmm. It´d give us an erection.
Estragon: (highly exited). An erection!
Estragon: Let´s hang ourselves immediately!
Vladimir: From a bough? I wouldn´t trust it.

Estragon: We can always try



                                 More Surprisingly, the play has more number of scenes where both Vladimir and Estragon thinks and converse about suicide because of boredom raised due to the waiting. They think it better to end up their lives than to wait because they belives that their lives are unworthy of living. Essentially, value and lack of purpose are simultaneously removed from their lives by Vladimir and Estragon which, therefore, leads them to contemplate suicide without ever committing it.

14. Vladimir and Estragon talks about ‘hanging’ themselves and commit suicide, but they do not do so. How do you read this idea of suicide in Existentialism?
"Suffering is an essential part of human existence"

Humans consume much of life in suffering or trying to stay away from suffering, yet there is little accuracy or steadiness in the word what we call as ‘suffering’. In the play, Vladimir and Estragon because of their sufferings think and talk about hanging themselves and commit suicide.
15. Can we do any political reading of the play if we see European nations represented by the 'names' of the characters (Vladimir - Russia; Estragon - France; Pozzo - Italy and Lucky - England)? What interpretation can be inferred from the play written just after World War II? Which country stands for 'Godot'?
This play is composed after world war II. So the impact of the war seems natural to be reflected in the play. In the event that we pass by the names informs us about the Vladimir who is the representative of Russia, Estragon stands for France, Pozzo for Italy and Lucky for England than Godot will represent Germany. Everyone's waiting for Hitler, everyone has hope in Hitler that he will do something but nevertheless, Hitler is the person who is held up by each one and who never shows up. And when he felt to show up. he shattered the nations into debris land. 
                                                               On the other hand that we need to see Pozzo and Lucky, as master and slave, Pozzo represents England and Lucky for Ireland. Despite the fact that Pozzo becomes blind Lucky doesn't free himself. Same since Ireland is a little nation and for its own products and development it sticks with England.

16.So far as Pozzo and Lucky [master and slave] are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland." (Bert Lahr who played Estragon in Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?

So far as Lucky and Pozzo (slave and master) are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland. 
                   There was a very bitter and sataric  reference. Pozzo as England is the master- a well stabled nation and lucky is like Ireland which is like  slave and is depending on the master England for the economic stability. The condition depending upon other as a slave for personal value is conditioned in the mind of Lucky. Though Ireland  is  separate country then too it wants to become a slave.
17. The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have no change in Act I and Act II of the play. Even the conversation between Vladimir and the Boy sounds almost similar. But there is one major change. In Act I, in reply to Boy;s question, Vladimir says: 
[BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?]
How does this conversation go in Act II? Is there any change in seeming similar situation and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify?
The more things change, the more they are the same. The waiting represents the action of time. What seems to be similar is paradoxically presented in the play. The change is permanent and everything keeps on changing. When we look from the farther viewpoint we feel that everything is static but from the nearest sight everything appears to be changing and the most amazing thing is that the time keeps on repeating the events. Pozzo is expressing his frustration about the concept of time and the passage of time. 
                     Almost, nothing changes in the play, both the acts have same situations happening but the conversation of Vladimir with boy is absolutely necessary to observe selfishness of Vladimir.
                 This change in act 2 can be interpreted with reference to the story of the two thieves were one is damned and the other is given salvation.

Written Assignment: History of 20th Cen Lit

 Q-1 Explain ‘Stream of Consciousness?

Ans:-

Stream of Consciousness Definition:-

Stream of consciousness is a style or technique of writing that tries to capture the natural flow of a character's extended thought process, often by incorporating sensory impressions, incomplete ideas, unusual syntax, and rough grammar.

Stream of Consciousness:-

Stream of consciousness writing is associated with the early 20th-century Modernist movement. The term “stream of consciousness” originated in psychology before literary critics began using it to describe a narrative style that depicts how people think. Stream of consciousness is used primarily in fiction and poetry, but the term has also been used to describe plays and films that attempt to visually represent a character's thoughts. Stream of consciousness writing allows readers to “listen in” on a character's thoughts. The technique often involves the use of language in unconventional ways in an attempt to replicate the complicated pathways that thoughts take as they unfold and move through the mind. In short, it's the use of language to mimic the "streaming" nature of "conscious" thought. Stream of consciousness can be written in the first person as well as the third person.

What Makes Stream of Consciousness Different? :-

traditional prose writing is highly linear one thing or idea follows after another in a more or less logical sequence, as in a line. Stream of consciousness is often non-linear in a few key ways that define the style: it makes use of unusual syntax and grammar, associative leaps, repetition, and plot structure.

• Syntax and grammar:-

Stream-of-consciousness writing does not usually follow ordinary rules of grammar and syntax . This is because thoughts are often not fully formed, or they change course in the middle and become "run-on sentences," or they are interrupted by another thought. So grammar and syntax can be used to replicate this process in ways that aren't grammatically or syntactically "correct," but that nonetheless feel accurate. For instance, in Death in Venice, Thomas Mann uses subtly irregular syntax and grammar to help convey his main character's gradual descent into madness as part of a stream of consciousness passage that begins: "For beauty, Phaedrus, take note! beauty alone is godlike and visible at the same time."Additionally, writers of stream of consciousness often use punctuation in unconventional ways.

• Association:-

Stream of consciousness also makes use of associative thought. In this style of writing, writers transition between ideas using loose connections that are often based on a character's personal experiences and memories. The idea is that this technique helps writers convey the experience of human thought more accurately than they could by using  a series of ideas connected with clear, logical transitions. Associative thought can seem "random" as it leaps from one thing to the next, with the help of only ambiguous or seemingly nonexistent connections, even as it can also feel similar to the actual random leaps that are a part of people's everyday thoughts. As an example, characters' thoughts are often presented to the reader in response to sensory impressions fragmented observations describing what the character sees, hears, smells, feels, tastes, and so on.

• Repetition :-

Writers might use repetition to indicate that the character keeps coming back to, or is fixating on, a certain thought or sensory impression. Repeated words and phrases can act as a signpost, pointing readers towards significant themes and motifs. For example, if a character's mind is constantly returning to the scent of a woman's perfume, the reader might conclude that the character is fascinated by or attracted to that woman.

• Plot structure:-

Many writers who employ stream of consciousness also experiment with structure, incorporating elements like multiple unreliable narrators or a nonlinear plot structure. Some writers shift rapidly between the perspectives of different characters, allowing readers to experience the “stream of consciousness” of multiple people. For example, in one chapter of his novel Sometimes A Great Notion, Ken Kesey alternates between the thoughts, emotions, and impressions of several characters (including a dog), using italics and different styles of punctuation to indicate which character is thinking each word, phrase, or sentence. Some writers may also choose to arrange events out of chronological order or to give readers details about the past through a character’s memories. In The Sound and the Fury, William Faulkner conveys many important events and details through memories that arise as part of his different characters’ streams of consciousness.

Stream of Consciousness in Literary History

The term “stream of consciousness” originated in the 19th century, when psychologists coined the term to describe the constant flow of subjective thoughts, feelings, memories, and observations that all people experience. Beginning in the early 20th century, however, literary critics began to use “stream of consciousness” to describe a narrative technique pioneered by writers like Dorothy Richardson, Marcel Proust, James Joyce, and Virginia Woolf. Many of these writers were interested in psychology and the "psychological novel," in which writers spend at least as much time describing the characters’ thoughts, ideas, and internal development as they do describe the action of the plot.

Stream of Consciousness vs. Interior Monologue 

Both interior monologue and stream of consciousness involve the presentation of a character's thoughts to the reader. However, there are differences between the two. In interior monologue, unlike in stream of consciousness, the character's thoughts are often presented using traditional grammar and syntax, and usually have a clear logical progression from one sentence to the next and one idea to the next. Interior monologue relates a character's thoughts as coherent, fully formed sentences, as if the character is talking to him or herself. Stream of consciousness, in contrast, seeks to portray the actual experience of thinking, in all its chaos and distraction. Stream of consciousness is not just an attempt to relay a character's thoughts, but to make the reader experience those thoughts in the same way that the character is thinking them.   

Stream of Consciousness Examples

Stream of consciousness became widespread as a literary technique during the Modernist movement that flourished in the years just before and then after World War I (the early to mid 20th century). Even as Modernism gave way to other movements, it remained as a technique, and is still used not infrequently today.

Stream of Consciousness in Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf :-

Virginia Woolf is known for using stream of consciousness in her writing. The novel Mrs. Dalloway follows the thoughts, experiences, and memories of several characters on a single day in London. In this passage, the title character, Clarissa Dalloway, watches cars driving by:

Woolf does more than simply say "Mrs. Dalloway watched the taxis and thought about her life." Rather, she lets the reader into the character's thoughts by using long sentences with semicolons to show the slow drift of ideas and the transitions between thoughts. Readers are able to watch as Mrs. Dalloway's mind moves from observations about things she is seeing to reflections on her general attitude towards life, and then moves on to memories from her childhood, then back to the taxi cabs in the street, and finally to Peter, a former romantic interest. This is an excellent example of using associative leaps and sensory impressions to create a stream of consciousness. Woolf manages to convey not only the content but the structure and process of Mrs. Dalloway's thoughts, a fact which is all the more impressive because she does so while writing in the third person.

Stream of Consciousness in Beloved by Toni Morrison :-

Toni Morrison uses stream of consciousness in passages throughout Beloved. In this passage, readers hear the voice of a character named Beloved who seems to be the spirit of the murdered infant of another character named Sethe. Morrison doesn't use proper capitalization or grammar throughout the passage . In the place of punctuation, Morrison simply inserts gaps in the text. She also makes use of repetition: when Beloved repeats the words, "I am not dead," she seems to be willing herself to live through a kind of mantra or incantation. Morrison uses run-on sentences and lack of punctuation to show the frantic urgency that Beloved feels when she finds herself alone in death, and to convey her deep desire to be reunited with Sethe effectively letting readers "listen in" on her thoughts.

Stream of Consciousness in The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock by TS Eliot :-

Modernist poet TS Eliot uses stream of consciousness techniques in his famous poem, "The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock."The poem generally follows traditional grammar and syntax, but Eliot moves from idea to idea and sentence to sentence using associative thought. For example, when he thinks of walking on the beach, he is reminded of mermaids. And while it's not immediately clear what peaches and mermaids have to do with old age, the passage shows readers something about how the speaker's mind wanders.

Stream of Consciousness in As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner :-

Like Virginia Woolf, William Faulkner is known for his use of stream of consciousness. In this passage from his novel As I Lay Dying, the character Jewel expresses his frustration that, as his mother is dying, his half-brother is noisily building her a casket just outside her window.The repetition of the phrase "one lick less" helps convey the way Jewel seems to bristle at the repetitive noises made by the saw and the adze outside the window, each noisy "lick" a reminder of his mother's impending death. His sentences also take strange turns and arrive at unexpected places, as when he begins a sentence with a memory of Cash falling off a roof, moves on to lament the constant train of visitors to his mother's room, and ends quite memorably by asking  "because if there is a God what the hell is He for." The passage is incredibly effective at depicting the dizzying range of thoughts and emotions Jewel experiences as he visits the room of his dying mother.

Why Do Writers Use Stream of Consciousness?

Stream of consciousness originated in the late 19th and early 20th century as part of modernist literature. Many of the writers who pioneered the use of stream of consciousness were attempting to create new literary techniques to better represent the human experience—especially in a modern, urban, industrialized world. Today, writers who use stream of consciousness may feel that this technique is more honest or "true to life" than more conventional narrative styles, which force thoughts and ideas into logical and easily digestible sentences.

Writers use stream of consciousness not only to show what a character is thinking, but to actually replicate the experience of thinking, which allows the reader to enter the mind and world of the character more fully. Many people find stream of consciousness writing to be difficult to read, and indeed it does require readers to think in different ways—but this is actually one reason why many writers choose to use the technique. Readers may have to work a bit harder to discern the meaning of a particular sentence, or make inferences about the relationship between seemingly unrelated thoughts in order to fully understand the events of the story, but this is what makes reading stream of consciousness a rich and radically different experience from reading conventional prose.

 words:- 1866

Works Cited

1.Baldwin, Emma. "Stream of Consciousness". Poem Analysis, https://poemanalysis.com/literary-device/stream-of-consciousness/. Accessed 5 June 2021.

 2. Frisella, Emily. "Stream of Consciousness." LitCharts. LitCharts LLC,  5 May 2017. Web. 13 Jun 2021.

3. IvyPanda. (2021, February 16). Stream of Consciousness in Joyce's and Conrad's Works. Retrieved from https://ivypanda.com/essays/stream-of-consciousness-in-joyces-and-conrads 

Written Assignment: Literary Theory and Criticism

1. Explain the value of figurative language expounded by I.A.Richard. ?

Ans :-

I.A Richards as a critic of Figurative Language :-

In criticism if we remember some important and well-known critics then we must remember I.A Richards, in full Ivor Armstrong Richards, who was born Feb. 26, 1893, Sandbach, Cheshire, Eng.—died Sept. 7, 1979, Cambridge, Cambridge shire), English critic, poet, and teacher who was highly influential in developing a new way of reading Poetry that led to the New criticism and that also influenced some forms of reader-response criticism.
Richards was educated at Magdalene College, Cambridge, and was a lecturer in English and moral sciences there from 1922 to 1929. In that period he wrote three of his most influential books: The Meaning of the Meaning (1923), a pioneer work on semantics; and Principles of Literary Criticism (1924) and Practical Criticism (1929), companion volumes that he used to develop his critical method.

The latter two were based on experimental pedagogy: Richards would give students poems in which the titles and authors’ names had been removed and then use their responses for further development of their “close reading” skills. Richards is best known for advancing the close reading of Literature and for articulating the theoretical principles upon which these skills lead to “practical criticism,” a method of increasing readers’ analytic powers.
During the 1930s, Richards spent much of his time developing Basic English, a system originated by Ogden that employed only 850 words; Richards believed a universally intelligible language would help to bring about international understanding. He took Basic English to China as a visiting professor at Tsing Hua University (1929–30) and as director of the Orthological Institute of China (1936–38). In 1942 he published a version of Plato’s Republic in Basic English. He became professor of English at Harvard University in 1939, working mainly in primary education, and emeritus professor there in 1963. His speculative and theoretical works include Science and Poetry (1926; revised as Poetries and Sciences, 1970),Mencius on the Mind (1932), Coleridge on Imagination (1934), The Philosophy of Rhetoric(1936),SpeculativeInstruments (1955), Beyond (1974), Poetries (1974),and Complementarities (1976). His verse has been collected in Internal Colloquies(1971) and New and Selected Poems (1978).

Four Kinds of Meaning :-

A study of his practical criticism together with his work ‘The Meaning of meaning reveals his interest in verbal and textual analysis. According to him a poet writes to communicate and language is the means of that communication. Language consists words so study of study of words so study of words is significant to understand the meaning. The meaning depends on.

So,Now Let's have a look on each on them in detail :-

1 Sense:-

           Sense is very much important in the figurative language.  By sense it meant something that is communicated by the plain literal meanings of the words. Therefore it matters a lot.

2 Feeling:-

             Feeling deals with the emotions and sentiments of the writers.It Refers to emotional attitudes desire, will, pleasure, unpleasure and the rest words express feelings.so it is important.

3 Tone:-

            Tone is significant as far as Figurative language is concerned. Tone here means the writers attitude towards his audience. The writer chooses his words and arranges them keeping in mind the taste of his readers. Feeling is only state of mind.

4 Intention:-

           So far as intention is concerned in the figurative language. It is authors conscious or unconscious aim, it is the effect that one tries to produce. Also intention controls the emphasis, shapes the arrangement, or draws attention to something of importance. Hence it is very much important in the figurative language.

“Sources of misunderstanding in poetry”:-

The source is very much important in the figuratie language.In practical criticism a study of literary judgment, I.A.Richards has given the theory of Figurative language. He starts discussion first on sources of misunderstanding in poetry. He says that it is very difficult to find the source which creates misunderstanding. Further, he says that there are four sources of misunderstanding as far as are poetry is concerned. As one source of misunderstanding is connected with the other in different way it becomes very hard to diagnoses, with certainty, the source of some particular mistake or misunderstanding. This kind of source of misunderstanding can be possible but rarely.
To some readers meter and verse form of poetry are as powerful as distraction as a barrel organ or a brass-bend is to one trying to solve difficult mathematical. But as we know, meter and rhymes are essential part of poetry and cannot be differentiated. Therefore, the reader should a poem several times. Because the constant reading of poem can solve the problem regarding the meter and verse. Reader should read a poem for grasping the concept of it. Perhaps the constant readings can solve the various doubts about the poem. These misunderstanding of sense of the poetry must be solved by the reader. So that he can grasp the idea of the poem.
 Here I.A Richards also says that the source of the misunderstanding in the poetry.This complicated situation gives rise to misunderstanding or wrong notion that syntax is of less significant in poetry then in prose and that the proper way of understanding poetry is through a kind of guess-work, which may even be called intuition. Such notions are hard solve. Because they are true to some extent. This aspect of truth in poetry makes reader most deceptive and misleading. I.A. Richard warns his readers against this danger.Therefore I.A Richards also makes remarks.

“In most poetry the sense is as important as anything else;

It is quite as a subtle, and as dependent of the syntax as in

Prose; it is the poet’s chief instrument to other aims when it is not

Itself his aim. His control of our thoughts is ordinarily his chief means to the

Control of our feeling, and in the immense majority of instances we miss nearly everything

Of value if we misread his sense.

“The significance of visual memory”:-

Here in this essay of Figurative language the significance of the visual memory is very much significant in short we can also say that a proper understanding of figurative language required close study of the poem. Reader should read the poem into the context of close reading. its literal since must be carefully followed, but such literal reading must not come in the way of imagination appreciation of it judicious balance must be struck between literalism and imaginative freedom . The aim of the poem must be clearly understood for without such and understanding any judgment of the means the poet has used would be fallacious. New critics give importance to means first then the end of the poem. Because by doing this, they can learn the language – metaphor, figure of speech etc... At art, the end of the poetry can be achieved then the liberty can be given to analysis poem from anyway.

Source of Misunderstanding in Poetry:-

As far as misunderstanding is concerned many a times it occurs in the poetry in that misunderstanding occurs because sometimes what a poet wants to say and what the reader understand. So According to I.A. Richards there are four sources of misunderstanding of poetry. It is difficult to diagnose with accuracy and definiteness, the source of some particular mistake or misunderstanding of the sense of poetry. It arises from inattention, or sheer carelessness. I.A. Richards warns readers –In most poetry the sense is as important as anything else it is  quite as a subtle, and as dependent on the syntax, as in prose it is the poet’s chief instrument to other aims when it is not itself his aim. His control of thoughts is ordinarily his chief means to the control of our feelings, and in the immense majority of instances we misread his sense.” Hence I.A Richards makes remarks about the misunderstanding in the poetry.
                 But many times it is observed that sometimes Over-literal reading may cause misunderstanding in the poetry. Hence an over literal-reading is as great a source of misunderstanding. Careless intuitive reading and prosaic ‘over-literal reading are the simple-godes the justing rocks. Defective scholarship is a third source of misunderstanding in poetry. The reader may fail to understand the sense of the poet because he is ignorant of poet’s sense. Afar more serious cause of misunderstanding is the failure to realise that the poetic use of words is different from an assumption about language that can be fatal to poetry. Literary is one serious obstacle in the way of a right understanding of the poetic words. According to Richards-poetry is different from prose and needs a different attitude for right understanding.

The Nature of Poetic Truth:-

So far as the nature of the poetic truth is concerned, it differs from Scientific Truth as it is very well said by I.A Richards. In the principle of literary criticism he writes “It is evident that the bulk of poetry consists of statement which only the very foolish would think of attempting to verify. They are not the kind of things which can be verified.
So if it is connected with what was said in chapter 16 as to the natural generality of verge of reference, we shall see another reason why references as they occur in poetry are rarely susceptible to scientific truth or falsity. Only references which are brought in to certain highly complex and very special combinations, so as to correspond to the ways in which things actually hang together, can be either true or false and most references in poetry are not knit together in this way. But even when they are on examination, frankle false, this is no defect. Indeed, the obviousness of the falsity forces the reader to reactions which are incongruent or disturbing to the poem. An equal paint more often misunderstood, their truth when they are true, is no merit. Hence the nature of the poetic truth is very well observed by I.A Richards.

The Value of Figurative Language :-

In any literary work of art the value of figurative language is very much an inevitable part. Figurative language can create problems. It is difficult to turn poetry into logical respectable prose. Only through accuracy and precision is combined with a recognition of the liberties is combined with a recognition of the liberties which are proper for a poet, and precision is combined with a recognition  of the liberties which are a recognition of the liberties which are proper for a poet, and the power and value of figurative language.

Mixed Metaphors :-

In Figurative Language Mixed Metaphors has its own place because it gives ornaments to the language without it the poet is destined to write poetry because what the poet or any authors wants to say they say on the base of Mixed metaphors by using those it makes well-furnished language. Mixtures in metaphors work well if in the mixture the different parts or elements do not cancel each other out. The mixture must not be of the fire and water like ‘woven’ dose not mix well with sea and lightening, and so here the mixed metaphor is a serious fault.

Thus we may also say that the poet is rather negligent in the choice of means he has employed to attain his end. The enjoyment and understanding of the best poetry requires sensitiveness and discrimination with words a nicety, imaginativeness and deftness in taking their sense which will prevent the poem in question, in its original form, from attentive readers. Hence those mixed metaphors are necessary to make the language eye-catching as well as well-ornaments.

Words :-1932

Works Cited

      1.Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "I.A. Richards". Encyclopedia Britannica, 22 Feb. 2021, https://www.britannica.com/biography/I-A-Richards. Accessed 13 June 2021.

     2. Florman, Ben. "Figurative Language." LitCharts. LitCharts LLC,  5 May 2017. Web. 13 Jun 2021.

     3. Dr. devika, I.A.Richards – Practical Criticism. (2021). Retrieved 13 June 2021, from https://drdevika.wordpress.com/2016/11/12/i-a-richards-practical-criticism/