Indian Writing in English : Presentation

To evaluate my presentation Click Here

Indian Writing in English from RuchiJoshi27

Literary Theory and criticism : presentation

To evaluate my presentation Click Here

Literary Theory&Criticism from RuchiJoshi27

Neo-Classical Literature : Presentation

To evaluate my presentation Click Here

Neo-classical Literature from RuchiJoshi27

Renaissance literature : Presentation

Hello friends,

This presentation is a part of my academic studies. I have delivered this presentation in MA sem-1 at Department of English, MKBU under the guidance of Dr.Dilip Barad (Head of English Department, MKBU)

♦️Presentation subject: Renaissance Literature

♦️ Presentation topic:

Renaissance Martyre:Dr.Faustus & Karna in different age with different backgrounds

   

Renaissance literature from RuchiJoshi27

                 

You can listen my presentation from my Youtube Channel. To listen click here. Your feedback and comments will certainly play role of remarkable guidence for me to improve.

This presentation has been clipped also, which shows it's worth and more views.

Correction points

Certainly you might thinking, why I am sharing this here? What's big in this if someone has clipped one of slide from this presentation. But what is remaining or needs to ponder upon for this topic is, I was guided by my professor as this is good attempt to compare but very essential point is that which period can be considered as Renaissance or what is the actual ? I mentioned in my presentation that 'What Aurobindo said about India was already existed before centuries!' But my professor Dr.Dilip Barad made correction needed to share here that Renaissance means light and Renaissance comes after darkness. What Aurobindo says Renaissance in India is  after the darkness of British rulers. There should be darkness before the age of Karna means Mahabharata? So, both can be considered as Renaissance spirit but to prove as Renaissance martyrs is difficult and even complicate one. 

I think this guidance also helps to you to keep points while thinking about this topic. Earlier I didn't mentioned this in my blog but I think now it needs to share here for better understanding.

Thank you.

MA SEM-1(Indian writing in English)

Representation of society in "The Purpose"


Abstract:

Society plays very significant role in any person’s life. As we know that that man is social animal and cannot live by escaping the society, but we should not forget that society also creates kinds of barrier for a man in his lifting up. From the ages, on the different grounds like class, caste, race or gender, rich, poor etc. society plays very vital role in characterization.  Some condition and norms of society just like a thrones in way of flourishing and achievements. Following the same way, society also plays significant role in one’s failure as being partial with.

T.P.Kailasam made a small character of Mahabharata a hero of "The Purpose" and at the same time he criticized the Indian caste & creed system where a talented person is not equally seen.

Kailasam's uniqueness lie not merely not in evoking our sympathies for Eklavvya, Karna, Keechaka but level of tragic heroes - who were masculine, skillful and capable of achievement. Another area of the relationship between education and society is through the arrangement of the entire society into a hierarchical order that is, through the social structure in which education plays a prominent and significant role in fixing educated individuals into social classes.

Kailasam focused tradition on contemporary social problems, a deeply compassionate vision of the human struggle, an almost Shakespearean power to evoke sympathetic laughter and amazing grasp of the living language of man, combined with the gift of using artistically for dramatic purpose.

The concept of purpose is completely changed from the original mythical story. The struggle for one's identity is established through 'Nishada' - Eklavya. Socialization term becomes very important when talking about how society is responsible in education.

Relationship between education and society!

Kailasam's time India divided into castes and subcastes. So, he portraits character as lower class victim of fake rules and regulations that one cannot enjoy even basic fundamental rights. But worthy to note that, Eklavya faced all the problems and comes out in flying Colors. Kailasam transform characters passive victim to active participants.

Exception from society:

No matter how much one may try to escape from the society or to leave the society behind, the society never allows anyone to become independent. Yes, it is truly that man is an integral part of the society but it is necessary for the development of the individual that the society should be rejected when there is a major setback. Not only hard work, effort are sufficient, but a person has to put his life in his steadfast morale. Even so, no matter you escape a society may be, but society will never let you escape! So we should say here that, one should have courage concentration and commitment to fulfill the most difficult task just as Eklavya.

Social system supposes a social structure consisting of different parts which are interrelated in such a way as to perform its functions.

For each function the society is composed of a set of institutions and the social system is closely linked with it in one way or another.
familial institutions, religious institutions, educational institutions,
economic institutions and political institutions.

In the wider society the individual is treated and judged in terms of ‘Universalistic’ standards.

Within the family the child’s status is ascribed, it is fixed by birth. However, in advanced industrial society, status in adult life is largely achieved. Scholars have also analyzed the relationship of education and society in terms of ‘Marxian perspective’. Chief among them are Louis Althusser, Samuel Bowels and Herbert Gintis.

According to Althusser, a French philosopher, as a part of the superstructure, the

educational system is ultimately shaped by infrastructure. It will therefore reflect the relations of production and serve the interests of the capitalist ruling class. It can be also said that education is conditioned by the social structure.

Eklavy's Guru Dakshina:

In our ancient myth, Eklavya was asked to give Dakshina but here the student willingly decides to do so. For dignity of his Guru's promise he gave important part of the body. Social Origins and Orientation of

Students and Teachers:

Education is a social concern. It is a social process. Education has been given greater prominence in India for years.

Main purpose of Eklavya's life:

(1) Eklavya belongs to the third category whose "one aim is in his labour that others might reap the harvest his toils without the least profit to himself."
(2) Lord Krishna of the playlet seems to be debused as highly selfish and partial.

Equality of Educational Opportunity:

The equalization of educational opportunities is essentially linked with the notion of equality in the social system. But for getting an education he must have equal opportunities like other members of the society. Eklavya and Arjuna both have qualities to learn archery but power or caste plays vital role. Even though, he learns himself, he sacrifices his thumb. He embarked upon a programme of self-study in the presence of clay image of Drona. He achieves a level of skill superior to that of Arjuna.

The loyal Eklavya cripple himself, thereby reducing his abilities as in archer. This is that military skills that the prince needed to learn. Eklavya hurts by Drona refuses and practiced in front of the statue every single day. After refusal he struggled a lot and achieved the skill on his own.

Here, we can see Eklavya as subaltern and marginalized hero raised a serious question about caste system and glimpse of…
" How the marginalized tribes were treated by the dominates Aryan people?"

Here, we can find dormant pattern to the treatment of castes and communities. Society stratified and hierarchized on the basis of caste, class, creed and religion.

Caste structure of the society

What happens to their old identities that are defined by their castes and hierarchies in society when they begin identifying with themselves! Idea of identity as defined through VARNASHRAMA. Play reveals the sensibility of T.P.Kailasam in his dealing with the issue of Identity and equality in education.

"It may be easy to overcome one's caste, but to overcome one's caste consciousness is really difficult."

It goes against the rule of morality on hunting expedition in the forest the dog was barking and his mouth was shut by the arrows shot by Eklavya. Dronacharya and Bhishma are representative of society that,.
"How shameless they were, they wore the mask of civility."

Deprived of basic rights if education

Every human being has equal right over education, whether one is King or poor! The key is laid out here on the fact that karma must be given more priority than birth. The right to get his basic punishment from Ekalavya is also stripped, just because he is not a Kshatriya? To what extent can this be justified! Guru Drona does not have to teach archery to Eklavya, yes, it cannot be denied that even Drona himself is not able to impart education and knowledge to every person of the society.

But the question that, "why?" Who has given this right to society to take away the rights of another person?

Individuals such as grandfather Bhishma have spread the evils of immorality in the society. Not only that, it can be fought against other states, but to what extent can one accept that the voice can be heard, the way in which a person can challenge someone is to cut short or take away?

Here, Dronacharya argues and also ready to teach him archery but that time Arjuna reminds Guru Drona his promise and denies to him. Kailasam can linked the broader purpose of nationalist movement of India to rewrite India's past as a foundation of nationalistic feeling, movement and sense of self. He emphasizes on tradition which has requirement of modernization.

Eklavya becomes scapegoat of dominated caste hierarchy. At the end of the play - "The Purpose" Eklavya repents and becomes revolutionary but here one question is raised if Eklavya was true archer! In Mahabharata there is no reference of him after his sacrifice. In handling the theme of "The Purpose" Kailasam lays an emphasis on the power of penance its potentiality of concentration and a single minded efforts on the hand and the purpose of doing a thing on the other.

Thus, Kailasam adopts the modern concept of democracy and socialism is traced in the ancient benevolent monarchy which idea is expressed in the statements like

"the king is like a common man and common man like a king and hero of the play is portrayed as one who is wedded to truth.

EPILOGUE:

After the discussion we can say that, from the ages, lower and middle people are suffering from this hierarchical system of society. Thus, Socialization is the process through which a person, from birth through death, is taught the norms, customs, values, and roles of the society in which they live. This process serves to incorporate new members into a society so that they and it can function smoothly. Society plays a major role in introduction of any person The role of socialization is to acquaint individuals with the norms of a given social group or society

MA SEM-1(Literary theory & criticism)

Dryden's defense of Tragicomedies



Preface:

Dryden's most important prose work- "Of Dramatic Poesy, An Essay" gives him the reputation as the Father of English literary criticism. Most of the writers like.. William Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, John Milton in England and Pierre Corneille - all are masters and specialized in drama and consequently the so-called battle of the ancients and moderns.

The most critical comparison of Greek and Roman writers with more recent ones- was fought chiefly in that era or time. Dryden is not a rule bound critic yet he tied down to classical unities means… He is in favor
in English modern plays but does not disparage the ancients. Throughout the essay, "The Essay of Dramatic Poesy" treats drama as a form of imaginative literature and hence his remarks on drama apply to poetry as well.

Dryden represented the conflicting claims of the two sides as a debate among four friends. One of them favors the ancient over the modern theatre. One modernist prefers the French drama, whereas Dryden himself likes the lifelike drama of English theatre to French tragedy, which he considers beautiful but lifeless.


Dryden includes the five points in this essay which are as below:
 Theses Five points are:



Tragicomedy:

In literature, Tragicomedy is defined by many critics as a dramatic genre, the tragic and the comic to produce mixed tragicomic responses.

This is the term that can get anyone into trouble finding and thinking about this phase of evolution. The historical growth and development of the play have contributed immensely to the tragicomedy as a new form.

Any change or new attitude is always first opposed, rejected and eventually accepted by the masses then becomes a part of the people's lifestyle. But to make any change a part of people's lifestyles, someone has to run a massive campaign every now and then. A similar campaign was run by John Dryden for the tragic-comedy. formative period of English tragicomedy, extending from 1564 to 1600, while denoting no landmark in the development of the subject, may be taken as the approximate date of certain changes in the drama that materially affect the growth of tragicomedy.

"Neither is it so trivial an undertaking, to make a tragedy end happily; for 'tis more difficult to save than 'tis to kill. The dagger and the cup of poison are always in a readiness; but to bring the action to the last extremity, and then by probable means to recover all, will require the art and judgment of a writer, and cost him many a pang in the performance."

With the domain of tragicomedy thus encroached upon by tragedy, the result was that the conception of the former kind -- in the minds of the critical at least -- became restricted to a play admitting both serious and comic parts,  a feature which, in fact, had always been more or less characteristic of tragi-comedy in the past. Dryden's four later plays of the type are obviously constructed with this notion in mind, and the same is true of others of the period. This conception, furthermore, while making no provision for the character of the dénouement, evidently tacitly concedes that the serious plot shall end happily.

 Dryden is careful to call his "Don Sebastian" ( 1690) a tragedy, although it admits as elaborate a comic plot as the "Spanish Friar"; and with only one or two exceptions the title name is never applied in the Restoration period to tragedies of comic  admixture.

From first to last throughout the period the idea of tragicomedy as a play of two-fold plot is pretty consistently supported both in theory and practice, and is to be remembered as a heritage that the age passed on to future criticism.

Before discussing about Dryden's defense of tragicomedies, let's have a look over arguments of four critics:

(1) Eugenius:
Eugenius favors the moderns over the ancients, because he argues that Modernist have model so that they learn from that and gives new ideas from their example.

(2) Crites:
Crites argues in favor of the ancients because he says that ancients established the unities of 'Time, Place and Action.' And the rules of Aristotle's drama still now followed by French playwrights.

For example:
Crites also gives the example of the famous playwright - Ben Jonson who follows the ancients. Crites also objects to rhyme in plays because he says that no one can speak throughout in rhyme.

 On the stage or his real life, he cites Aristotle as saying that…
"It is best to write tragedy in that kind of verse which is nearest prose".
As a justification for..
"Banishing rhyme from drama in favor of blank verse."

Though blank verse lines Re no more spontaneous than rhymed, it is better to prefer blank verse because they are "nearest nature". Rhyme is incapable of expressing the greatest thought naturally and the lowest it cannot with any grace.

The reply of Neander to this objection that, rhyme by admitting that "verse so tedious" is inappropriate to drama. "Natural" rhymed verse is, however, just as appropriate to dramatic as non-dramatic poetry.

(3)Lucideius:

Lucideus argues that French drama is superior to English drama, Because of this opinion the French writer's close firmly to the classical separation of comedy and tragedy.
"No theatre in the world has anything so absurd as the English tragicomedy...in two hours
and a half hours, we run through all the fits of Bedlam."

(4)Neander:

Neander favors the modern English plays, but does not disparage the ancients. He has some critical things to say of French Drama.

Neander says to French drama that…

"They are indeed the beauties of a statue, but not of a man."

Because, those beauties of the French poesy are such as will raise perfection higher "where it is" but are not sufficient to "give it where it is not."

Dryden also goes on to defend tragicomedy and hives the powerful argument that, "A continued gravity keeps the spirit too much bent; we must refresh it sometimes." Tragicomedy increases the effectiveness of both tragic and comic elements by the way of contrast.

"We have invented, increased and perfected a more pleasant way of writing for the stage, tragicomedy."

Neander criticizes French drama essentially for its smallness because French drama has one plot without sub-plots and due to this tendency the play shows little action, the survival observation of the unities, dealth of plot and narrowness of imagination are all qualities which render it inferior to English drama.

In short, English drama has sub-plot, broadness in imagination and all unities - means all rules of Shakespeare. Dryden stands his criticism of French Drama into his reasoning for his preference for
Shakespeare over Ben Jonson. "Shakespeare had the largest and most comprehensive soul" while Jonson was "the most learned and judicious writer which any theatre ever had." Neander gives the first priority to Shakespeare because of his greater scope, his greater faithfulness to life as compared to Jonson's relatively small scope and French/classical tendency to deal in "the beauties of the statue, but not of a man.

Let's discuss how Dryden defends the English tragic-comedy or mingling of “mirth with serious plot”

 “In his defense of Shakespeare mingling of the tragic and the comedy, Dryden ceases to be a classicist and goes over to the other camp.”

Dryden is free in his attitude towards the mingling of the tragic and comic. He "ceases to be classicist and goes over to the other camp."

Arguments of Dryden in defence of tragic-comedy

1. Contrast when placed near, set off each other
2. Continued gravity depresses the spirit, a scene of mirth thrown in between refreshes. In short.. comic scene produces relief, though Dryden doesn't explicitly say so.
3. Idea of comic relief
4. Emotions does not destroy compassion.

Example:
The serious effect which tragedy aims at is not disturbed by mingling of
tragic and comic. Just as their eye can pass from an unpleasant object to a pleasant one. So, also the soul can move from tragic to the comic and move more swiftly.
"If there is unhappiness, we can understand the importance of happiness."
5. Contrast is far better than simple one.
6. English plays have new way of writing which ancients have lack. So, if they had tragic comedies, perhaps Aristotle would have revised his rules.
7. There is the question of the change of the taste.
 Because…
"The ancients cannot be a model for all times and countries, what pleased the Greeks would not satisfy an English audience."

It is possible that, if Aristotle sees the drama of English, he might have changed his mind. The real test of excellence is not strict firm to rules or
Conversations, but whether the aims of dramas have been achieved. They are achieved by the English drama. Dryden's greatness, shrewdness and presentation as a critic and on the view of "Tragic-Comedy" clearly brings out his liberal classicism and prove that English Drama are better than French.

In "Preface to Shakespeare" Dr.Johnson accepted Dryden's view that mingling of the tragic and the comic - provides dramatic relief. But, he further says that.. Comedy is truer to nature, for in nature is also good and evil, joy and sorrow, mingle in countless ways. Here, Dryden himself hinted the truth to nature, while defending the irregularities of the English drama in formalities of the French one.

EPILOGUE:

Dryden also try to demonstrate the superiority of the English plots. The French plots are barren, while the English ones are copious and more varied. French plays have only one action, every scene and every character contributes to further the same action.
"French plays lack the charm of variety."

In English plays, there are numbers of sub-plots in addition to the main plot and subplots are carried forward along with the main action with 'Great Spirit.'
"It is wrong to suppose that sub-plot hinders the main action. The sub-plot are only different,
and not contrary or opposite to the main action."

French have acknowledged, that in English plays all the actions are closely and coherently knit together to form one organic whole. Aristotle had also put stress on unity of action only. Had this unity coherence been wanting, there would been have sufficient reason for Condemning the English. But, today we must admire them for their copiousness and variety which is a source of great pleasure for the audience.

MA SEM-1(Neo-Classical Literature)

A study of Human satire with reference to "Animal Farm" and the forth voyage of "Gulliver's Travels"

Abstract:
Man has spread chaos in every age, every time and every situation in one way or another. Humans do not know where they have reached in order to get ahead of themselves. This nature of human beings has been criticized by the writers and other artists in their works from years. Any artist or literary man tries to depict the real nature, original picture and true to life's image of human nature. Thus human beings are constantly changing from time to time, are changing mainly through nature, yet one thing has not changed. In one way or another, the human race has always put down its dignity & moral in the pursuit of the best in itself and has somehow become inferior. In novels, poems, and stories, humans are satirized with a focus on animals and other characters. In our Indian children's literature also there has been an attempt to teach the values of morality from the stories of the "Panchatantra" and from other myths.

Now, let’s discuss about human satire which is described as unkindly kind throughout both novel.

Before discussing about human satire with reference to these novels, let’s try to get idea about satire.

Satire:

Satire is an indirect way to strike the reality of a person, organization, community or anyone else. A satire is a work which uses humor, irony or wit to highlight the vices, follies and pretensions of individuals, institutions, communities or ideas. Satire is somehow criticizes an aspect of society through humor. Human satire becomes unbearable in George Orwell's "Animal Farm" & fourth voyage of "Gulliver's Travels" by Jonathan Swift.

It is said for Swift that…
“Pen in the hands of Swift is just like a dangerous instrument in the hands of child.”
The book can unified it does seem to be a collection of four separate satirical voyages. Swift who was saying that all mankind are worthless; it was Gulliver who thought. So, Swift set up the antithetical worlds of Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms to shock, not to define. Ironically, he worships reason but is almost wholly devoid of reason. The kind of a man Swift is and the kind of man Gulliver is are antithetical to one another. Swift let us see beyond Gulliver's narrative. Swift shows us that Gulliver is incapable of critical thinking and reasoning.
Houyhnhnms Voyage Man simply can't depend on abstract, impersonal, inhuman reason reason. Nor can he depend on technological innovation on history or on the "Modern" human studies.

Contrast between the houyhnhnms and the yahoos is extreme. Yahoos seem familiar but who or what they are is obscure. Gulliver wonders in island and discovers many kinds of tracks, human and animal. Gulliver's description of the Yahoos displays one of Swift's most effective satire. Here he doesn't identify the Houyhnhnms as rational horses. The horses are clean and sweet-smelling; their diet is temperate and vegetation. Yahoo, on the other hand, are human in form and feature. They are just like filthy beast and stink. Gulliver marked Yahoo-like self is hidden, Gulliver's identity is also hidden. He is, simply, more of a Yahoo than a Houyhnhnms. He lacks the humanity to see himself as a sort of Yahoo.

Swift has established the distinction between Gulliver, the horses and the Yahoos by using physical and concrete objects.

Perfection of nature:
Here Swift gives absurd idea about human nature and perfection of nature.

The idea of Yahoo's controlling a country is itself absurd. Every animal he swears abhors the Yahoo intuitively. His motive will be to "reduce them from their barbarous ways of living."

But question is that...
"Men lust for luxury, but once they have it, it breeds sickness. And who treats the sick?"

As we know that, Gulliver impressed by the virtues of the Houyhnhnms. Yahoos are directly and lascivious, lewd and coquettish. "The pig, Gulliver says, is sweeter than a Yahoos."
The Houyhnhnms base their society on their rational, passionless and innocent nature. They are a breed of moral animal, different from the Yahoos or Europeans (They have no literature, but do compose poetry which is moral and accurate.) Yahoos- unnatural beasts, he argues and we hated by every other animal.
Here, Swift puts Gulliver as a representative of the human race and by nature he finds himself as Yahoo. It is totally concerned with Gulliver's rehabilitation. Irony is a constant ingredient in Swift's description.

Simon declares that he is telling the truth; in context, he is lying whole heartedly. One of the most satires comes here that Gulliver still trying to become a horse or accepted by a horse or Houyhnhnms. Gulliver's gullibility and his simplicity are responsible for his downfall. He does not realize that human beings are infinitely more complex than Yahoos or the Houyhnhnms.

Animal farm:

Animal Farm satirizes the breakdown of political ideology and the misuse of power, and does so in the ingenious form of a beast fable. Animal Farm is covered with creative outreach and literature. Here George Orwell's central idea is something a little different and fun, because all the animals, pig eliminates the owner of the Manor Farm for their freedom and self-esteem and the special emphasis is on the fact that animals need to be separate from humans in order to stay good. This is the biggest sarcasm.

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again;
but already it was impossible to say which was which.
(chapter 10)"

Orwell's satire is an attempt to echo Russia and Stalinist times, but it becomes universal, not limited to just a specific time. Orwell describes it to humanity to the extent that this satire on humanity raised the reader's fury.

"Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all animals.”
Just as houyhnhnms are shown to be intellectually superior, Orwell has shown animals to be superior to humans. In each and every part of the novel, with every line, on the verbosity of human beings grows, and eventually the reader becomes overwhelmed. Leader of Pig says
that…

"And remember, comrades, your resolution must never falter. No arguments must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of others. It is all lies. Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."

Major pig's last words reflect the reader's tolerance to such an extent that the reader's blood withers.

His words are:

"I merely repeat, remember always your duty of enmity towards Man and all his ways. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. Whatever goes upon for legs, or has wings, is a friend. And remember also that in fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him. Even when you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices. No animal must ever live in a house, or sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money, or engage in trade. All the habits of Man are evil. And Above all, no animal must ever tyrannies over his own kind. Weak or strong, clever or simple, we are all brothers. No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal."

Here, Orwell strikes all the weak and harsh realities of mankind. The race to move past each other, even at the expense of darker competitions, to stay further from one another, to be in luxuries, and to ridicule all sorts of habits are condemned in one way or another. The concepts and principles of animalism are shown to be superior & greater than humanism. Most importantly, Orwell has used capital "M" everywhere where the word "Man" is used.

"Four legs good, two legs bad" this contained essential principle of Animalism and crucial satire upon human race. Whoever had thoroughly grasped it would be safe from human influence.

Is this not enough satire that weeps and groans to human race?
It was always the pigs who put forward the resolutions. The other animals understood how to vote, but could never think of any resolution of their own! As the novel progresses, the nature of pigs have been compared to the changing nature of humans. So to be certain, in imitation of human habits and walking on the way of human beings, the animals were destroyed. In the pretense of being human, the desire to suffer like human beings lost everything and eventually the freedom was also destroyed.

"War is war. The good human beings is a dead one."

Here we find that, as criminal victim himself - becomes suppressive. "Death to Humanity."

As human nature changes its rules according to its convenience, animals change their rules and change the fact of life.

EPILOGUE

Thus, through this discussion, we can say that through the ages, human has suppressed to other animals or to the other human beings in one or another way. Just because of this, with the passage of time, different critics of history has just tried to throw flashes upon humanity by satirizing it in different ways. Though this both novels, “Forth voyage of Gulliver’s Travels” and “Animal Farm” both are political satire and can also be considered as children’s literature. But genius and deep thinker can easily finds that it is not only foolish takings or stories to entertain or to enjoy, but this is something just like which must be accepted by us and we should have to do try to come out from this satire.

 This both were written before decades, but this represents human nature and just because of this Swift and Orwell both are still living in this 21st century as satirist.

This both satirists have given quite unique reflection of human nature in such a way that though they are satirizing upon us, still we are enjoying this reading and watching the scenes which shows that still we have impact of, which has shown by them.

Renaissance Literature

 

 

Hamlet as a Shakespearean Tragedy

 

 

 

Preface

 

In our day-to-day life, we are habituated of talking about tragedy whenever we watch plays or movies. But we have to think twice when we use the word tragedy. When some sad or threaten events or accidents happens within the play or movie, we called it tragedy, but tragedy has much & more significance than this.

 

Before entering into discussion about one of the greatest tragedy- HAMLET, let’s have a look upon Tragedy.

 

 

What is Tragedy?

 

In very common words, a very sad event or situation, especially one that involves death.

 

According to Aristotle,

 

 “Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is admirable, complete (composed of an introduction, a middle part and an ending), and possesses magnitude; in language made pleasurable, each of its species separated in different parts; performed by actors, not through narration; effecting through pity and fear the purification of such emotions.”

 

Shakespeare has, to some extent, tried to follow Aristotle's definition of tragedy. But some of the old-fashioned customs have tried to discover on the stage. Breaking down some old concepts and concepts that could not be shown on the screen, he introduced a new veil to the audience and became immortal in the history of literature. Perhaps this is why even if we read Shakespeare's characters today, their characters seem to be lively.

 

Now the Question is,

 

What is Shakespearean Tragedy?

 

Shakespeare's concept of tragedy is newer, more advanced and universal than all other tragedy concepts. Breaking down the old-fashioned customs and traditions in the theater world and introducing us to a new scene!

 

Only Aristotle contradicted one of the times and gave God the human-centered play Shakespeare, breaking the tradition of the only God-centered plays that were more powerful and responsible for the downfall of human being or tragic hero.

 

Now if we look at the main features of Shakespearean Tragedy are:

 

Shakespeare's concept of Tragedy

 

There are some certain features which makes it apart from other tragedies or from other plays. In Shakespeare’s tragedy, we can find some general characteristics also. First let’s have look upon it.

 

Shakespeare’s concept of tragedy

 

(1) Tragic Waste

(2) Character and Destiny

(3) Three complicating features

(i)Tragic Waste

(ii) The supernatural ghosts and

     Witches

(iii) The role of chance

 

(4) The Melodramatic elements

(5) No poetic Justice

 

Now let's examine the features of Hamlet with Shakespearean Tragedy.

 

(1)Tragic Hero

 

There can be three types of tragic hero:

(1) Good man coming to bad end

(2) Bad man coming to good end

(3) Bad man coming to bad end

 

If we look at the character of HAMLET, then Hamlet is the best example of a tragic hero an intelligent, but he couldn't move on past one thing, which led to his death. Not once but twice did Hamlet have the opportunity to take revenge but due to his virtues he could not attack from the back and retaliate. In the end, when the plot is betrayed by Hamlet to kill him, the audience also gets sympathy for Hamlet. And this same characteristic of Hamlet proves him to be a truly tragic hero. the observed of all observers.'

 

(2) The tragic flaw

 

The tragic fate of the hero often triggered by a tragic flaw in the hero's character. The hero contributes in some way, shape or form to disaster in which he perishes. When we consider the tragedies of ancient times, the downfall of the hero is seen as something wherein the fortune has caused the collapse of the hero, which does not lead to blame on the hero. Moreover, the hero can be released by saying that God is almighty. Whereas in the tragedy of Shakespeare human karma is given more prominence. Even more, in the tragedy of Shakespeare, human karma is responsible for the degeneration or upward motion of human beings. Hamlet's overthinking and inability to take action becomes HAMLET's tragic flaw and is responsible for its downfall also.

 

From two of Shakespeare's characters, ACTION WITHOUT THINKING and THINKING WITHOUT ACTION among ACTION WITHOUT THINKING seem to be placed here. A student of philosophy may not be passionate or even think of any work for a while is even shown an artistic skill. Even when searching for the ghost and finally killing Claudius, he cannot kill him at the time of prayer which also shows his scholarship.

 

Thus, Hamlet's tragic flaw leads him to his downfall and ultimately to the downfall of everyone.

 

 

(3)True to life (Nature)

 

The tragic hero of any tragedy must stick to his nature until his final breath. The hero has to be so devoted to his nature, attitude that the creation of the situation can do whatever it takes to pierce its basic characteristics, which is usually human nature. The hero of the tragedy should neither be too good nor too bad. Even if a person is much good and there is a mishap with him, instinct cannot be accepted, and even if a person is very bad and something very good happens to him, one cannot be readily accepted. That means the hero must be true to type.

 

Just like Othello can't think of himself before making a decision or action because if Othello was told that he would have been once thought before killing his beloved Desdemona, Othello's answer was the same that if I think, there was no time. If I had spent my time in thinking, it would not be what I am today!

 

Likewise if Hamlet wasn't overthinking this, Hamlet wouldn't be Hamlet.

 

(4)Three complicating factors:

 

In the character of Hamlet, we can find these three complicating factors are being true to his character that elements of supernatural power of King Hamlet, abnormal condition of mind in Hamlet. Role of chance and fate also plays vital role to bring tragedy of Hamlet.

 

(i)Some abnormal condition of mind:

 

The play is genuinely seen as one of the most humanistic stories ever written. Hamlet's portrayal of a mental health condition is the subject of a study. The key aspect of Hamlet's nature is how to justify, how a person can change his behavior and attitude in the sixth part of the clock. When talking to Horatio, HAMLET seems wise, while talking to Claudius and others, he seems to have lost his mental balance, and Polonius feels that talking to Hamlet is a scary thing Seems to be.

 

(ii) The supernatural ghosts and witches:

 

In Shakespeare's time, beliefs about supernatural elements and ghosts were somewhat higher. And even so, literature which cannot cover the present time or even cannot reach the climax of universality is not true literature. Shakespeare knows, and truly understands human nature and here serves the same things.

 

 

 

 

(5)Character and destiny

 

Hamlet is the man of unbounded knowledge, an innocent-hearted innocent scholar. Here, fate doesn’t play significant role in man’s fall. But man’s deed leads to his tragic flaw or tragedy.

 

 

(6)The conflict

 

Inner as well external besides the outward conflict between individuals or groups of individuals, there is also an inner conflict and torments within the soul of the tragic hero.

 

(7)The tragic waste

 

The death of a hero is not an ordinary death; it encompasses the loss of an exceptionally intellectual, honest, intelligent, noble, and virtuous person. In a tragedy, when good is destroyed along with evil, the loss is known as a "tragic waste." Shakespearean tragedy always includes a tragic waste of goodness.

 

As Hamlet says himself to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern:

 

"What a piece of work is a man ! How noble in reason! How infinite in faculties! In form, in moving, how to express and admirable! In action, how like an angel! In apprehension, how like a god! The beauty of the world! The Paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?"

 

(8)Catharsis

 

Precisely how to interpret Catharsis- which in Greek signifies "purgation", or "purification" or both- is much disputed. It can be called "the "pleasure of pity and fear."

 

As the basic way to distinguish the tragic from comic or other forms, and he regards the dramatist's aim to produce this effect in the highest degree as the principle that determines the choice and moral qualities of the tragic protagonist and the organization of the tragic plot.

 

(10)No poetic justice

 

Talking of tragedy in the context of Aristotle, the poetic justice must be found at the end of any tragedy. But Shakespeare gives us an idea of the bare reality. How can we justify poetic justice at every stage of our lives! Thus, comic relief and poetic justice are indispensable in any tragedy. Marlow in Dr.Faustus finally accepts surrender but Shakespeare's Hamlet fights to the final breath, yet finally he gets poetic justice or not, and to what extent it can still be called justice is becoming a topic of intense debate.

 

If Hamlet also dies in the end, Claudius also dies and Gertrude doesn't even survive, is it poetic justice to have the entire kingdom fall into the hands of Fortinbras? And if this is true justice, then what is the value of poetic justice?

 

 

(11)Serenity at the end

 

Before discussing about serenity at the end of the play, let's have a brief look upon serenity.

 

Serenity means,  the quality of being peaceful and calm that worried by nothing, freedom from distinguishing or oppressive thoughts or emotions. It can be also called an often imaginary place or state of utter perfection and happiness, just as state of being actual or complete. If we try to find an example from HAMLET, Shakespeare puts a great quote in the mouth of Horatio and Hamlet are:

 

HORATIO

If your mind dislike anything, obey it. I will forestall their repair hither and say you are not fit.

 

HAMLET

Not a whit. We defy augury. There’s a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, ’tis not to come. If it be not to come, it will be now. If it be not now, yet it will come—the readiness is all. Since no man of aught he leaves knows what isn’t to leave betimes? Let be!

 

 

 

 

 

 

EPILOGUE

 

Thus, through this discussion, one can come to conclude that, Shakespeare provides to people what they wanted. He portrays human nature which is unchangeable and that’s why. Still whenever one talks about tragedy, discussion mustn’t be complete without Shakespeare and of his great tragedy “HAMLET”.