To evaluate my assignment click here   

Name: Dodiya meghana J

Roll no: 11

Topic: Tennyson and Browning a study of poet’s

Paper: (6) The Victorian Literature

Email: mdodiya26@gmail.com

Submitted to: department of English

v   Introduction:

v      Robert Browning (1812-1889)

“How good is man’s life, the mere living? How fit employ All the heart and the soul and the senses forever in joy” In this new song of David from Browning from Borrowing’s soul, we have a suggestion of the astonishing vigor and hope that characterize all the works of Browning, the one poet of the age who, after thirty years of continues work, was finally recognized and placed beside Tennyson, and whom future ages may judges to be a greater poet perhaps, even, the greatest in our literature since Shakespeare.

v      Robert Browning place and massage:-

                     Browning’s place in our literature will be better appreciated by comparison with his friend Tennyson whom we have just studied. Tennyson is first the artist and then the message is always the important thing, and he is careless, too careless, of the form in which it is expressed. Tennyson, whose work is always artistic, never studied art, but was devoted to the science; while Browning whose , work is seldom artistic in form, thought that art was the most suitable subject for man’s story.

·      Alfred Tennyson (1809-1892)

                                  Alfred Tennyson is a man, who reads this haunting poem of “Merlin and The Gleam” finds in it a suggestion of the spirit of the poet’s whole life, - his devotion to the ideal as expressed in poetry, his early romantic impressions, his struggles, doubts, triumph, and his thrilling message to his race. Throughout the entire Victorian period Tennyson stood at the summit of poetry in England.

                    Tennyson was not only a man and a poet; he was a voice of a whole people, expressing in exquisite melody their doubts and their faith, their grief and their triumphs. In the wonderful variety of his verse he suggests all the qualities of England’s greatest poets. The dreaminess of Spencer, the majesty of Milton, the natural simplicity of Wordsworth, the fantasy of Blake and Shelly, the narrative vigor of Scott and Byron- all these striking qualities are evident on successive pages of Tennyson’s poetry.

Characteristics of Tennyson’s poetry:-

·      If we attempt to sum up quality of Tennyson, as shown in these works, the task is difficult one; but three things stands out more or less plainly.

·      First, Tennyson is essentially the artist. No other in his age studied the art of poetry so contently or with such singleness of purpose; and Swinburne rivals him in melody and the perfect finish of his verse.

·      Second, like all the great writers of age, he is empathetically a teacher, often a Leader. In the preceding age as the French Revolution, law lessens was more or less common, and individuality was the rule in literature.

·      Third, Tennyson’s theme, so characteristic of his age, is the reign of order – of law in the spiritual world, working out the perfect man. ‘In Memoriam’, ‘Idylls of the King’, ‘The Princess’,- here are three widely different poems; yet the theme of each, so far as poetry is kind of spiritual philosophy and weighs its words before it utters them, is the orderly development of law in the natural and in the spiritual world.

v     Tennyson’s Works:-

                    Tennyson is the central poet of the nineteenth century. Tennyson’s works it may be well to record two things, by way of suggestions first, Tennyson’s poetry is not so much to be studies as to be read and appreciated and second, we should by all means begin to get acquainted with Tennyson in the days of poetry, is to be eternally young, and like Adam in Paradise, to find every morning a new world, fresh, wonder, inspiring, as if just from the hands of God.

“In Memoriam (1850)”

“The princess – a serio-comic blank verse (1847)”

“Ulysses (1842)”

“Tears, idle tears (1847)”

“Chiefly Lyrical (1864)”

“Maud (1864)”

“Arthurian Idylls of the king (1859)”

                             Robert Browning his fellow worker. The differences in the two men are world-wide. Tennyson was man, hating noise and publicity, loving to be alone with nature like Wordsworth. Browning was sociable, delighting in applause, in bustle of big world. At his death in 1892, was mourned as “the voice of England.” Of the poems of 1842, we have already mentioned those best worth reading. The Princess, A Medley (1847), a long poem of over three thousand lines of blank verse, is Tennyson’s answer to the question of woman’s rights and woman’s sphere, which was then, as in our own day, strongly agitating the public mind.

                                In this poem a baby finally solves the problem which philosophers have pondered ever since men began to think connectedly about human society. A few exquisite songs, like“Tears, Idles, Tears”, “”Bugle song”, and “Sweet and Low” from the most delightful part of this poem, which in general is hardly up to the standard of the poet’s later work. The poem “The Princess” tells the story of a heroic princess who forswears the world of men and founds a women’s university where men are forbidden to enter. The Prince to whom she was betrothed in infancy enters the university with two friends, disguised as women students. They are discovered and flee, but eventually they fight a battle for the princess’s hand. They lose and are wounded, but the women nurse, the man back to health. Eventually the princess returns the prince’s love. Several later including Gilbert and Sullivan’s comic opera princess Ida.

                   Perhaps the most loved of all Tennyson’s works is “In Memoriam”, which on account of both its theme and its exquisite worship, is “One of the few immortal names that were not born to die.” The immediate occasion of this remarkable poem was Tennyson’s profound personal grief at the death of his friend Hallam. As he wrote lyric after, inspired by this sad subject, the poet’s grief became less personal and the greater grief of humanity mourning for its dead and questioning its immortality took possession of him. Gradually the poem became an expression, first of universal doubt, and then of universal faith- a faith which rests ultimately not an reason or human love is the theme of the poem, which is made up of over on hundred different lyrics.

                 “In Memoriam”, he insists that we must keep our faith despite the latest discoveries of science. Hewrite; “strong, son of God, immortal love,

Whom we, that have not seen thy face,

By faith, and alone, embrace,

Believing where we can not prove,”

The poem begins as a tribute to and invocation of the strong son of God; since man, never having seen God’s face, has no proof of his existence, he can only reach god through faith.

At the end of the poem, he concludes that God’s eternal plan include purposive biological development. Thus, he reassures his Victorian readers that the new science does not mean the end of the old faith and the poem also reflects Tennyson’s straddle with the Victorian growing awareness of another sort of past; the vast expanse of geological time and evolutionary history.

“Crossing the Bar”

              In ‘Crossing the Bar’, Tennyson is speaking about his own impending death. Within the poem. The image of the see is used to represent the “barrier” between life and death. The construction of this metaphor centers on the image of ‘Crossing the bars; a “bar” is physically a bar of sand in shallow water. The “bar” which Tennyson must cross, however, can only be crossed in one direction. This is made explicit in a couple of ways by the poet.

“Ulysses”

‘Ulysses’ is a poem in blank verse by the Victorian poet, Tennyson. The character of Ulysses in Greek Odysseus has been explored widely in literature. The adventures of Odysseus were first recorded in Homer’s Iliad and, Odyssey. His Ulysses and the Lotus-Eater’s draw upon actual incidents in Homer’s Odyssey.

“Tears, Idle Tears (1849)”

                  This poem was about the passion of the past, the abiding in the transient. “Tears, Idle Tears”, to analyze, his experience, and in the full light of the disparity and even apparent contradiction of the various elements, bring them into a new unity, he secures not only richness and depth but dramatic power as well.

         Tennyson’s various work treat issues of political and historical concern, as well as scientific matters classical mythology and deeply personal thoughts and feelings. Tennyson is both of a poet of penetrating introspection and a poet of the people; he plums the depth of his own consciousness while also giving voice to the national consciousness of Victorian society.

v    Conclusion:

       Tennyson and Browning both are Victorian Age poet. Robert Browning Was in almost every Respect Tennyson’s opposite. What chiefly interested him was the study of human soul.Both are dominated it in the middle of century.


To evaluate my assignment click here   

To evaluate my assignment click here   

Name: Dodiya Meghana J

Roll No: 11

Paper No: (8) Cultural studies

Topic: Study of Hamlet

Enrolment No:

M.A: Sem-2

Year: 2015-16

Email: mdodiya26@gmail.com

Submitted To: Department of English M.K.B.U.-Bhavnagar University

v  Introduction:-

                  ‘Hamlet’ it is Play written by Shakespeare. Hamlet it’s one type of revenge play also. ‘Hamlet’ is the story of a prince Hamlet who wants to take revenge of his father’s death by his uncle Claudius.

v  Study Of Hamlet:-

                  In cultural studies examines power relationship also. It new Historical emphasis on it. For example, we noted that cultural critics assume “oppositional “roles in terms of power structure, wherever they might be found. we all are know about that the novel of Jonathan swift’s Gulliver Travel in the third voyage Laputa, as previously noted there are the large emphasis on power in this novel. Let’s us now approach Shakespeare’s Hamlet with a view to power in its cultural contex.Hamlet is the play within the play. we all know about that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern both are minor character in the play ‘Hamlet’. Claudius talking privately with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet’s fellow students from Wittenberg. In response to Claudius’s plan to send hamlet to England, Rosencrantz delivers a speech that-if read out of context-is both an excellent set of metaphors and a summation of the Elizabethan concept of the role and power of kingmenship:

The singular and peculiar life is bond with all the strength and armor of the mind to keep itself from noyance, but much more that spirit upon whose weal depends and rests the lives of many. The cease of majesty Dies not alone, but like a gulf doth draw what’s near it with it. it is a massy wheel Fixed on the summit of the highest mount, To whose huge spokes ten thousand lesser things are mortised and adjoined; which, when it falls, each small annexment, petty consequence, attends the boisterous ruin. Never alone did the king sigh but with a general groan.

         Taken alone, the passage is a thoughtful and imagistically successful passage, worthy of a wise and accomplished statesmen. But how many readers and viewers of the play would rank this passage among the best-known lines of the play-with Hamlet’s soliloquies, for instance, or with the king’s effort to pray, or even with the aphorisms addressed by Polonius to his son Learters? We venture to say that the passage, intrinsically good if one looks at it alone, is simply not well known.

                              Attention to the context and to the speaker gives the answer. Guildenstern had just agreed that he and Rosencrantz would do the king’s bidding. The agreement is only a reaffirmation of what they had told the king when he first received them at court. Both speeches are wholly in character, for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are among the jellyfish of Shakespeare’s characters. Easy it is to forget which of the two speaks which lines-indeed easy it is to forget most of their lines altogether. The two are distinctly plo-driven: empty of personality sycophantic in a sniveling way, eager to curry favor with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. Weakly they admit, without much skill at denial, that they “were sent for”. Even less successfully they try to play on Hamlet’s metaphorical “pipe,” to know his “stops,” when they are forced to admit that they could not even handle the literal   musical instrument that Hamlet shows them. Still later these nonentities meet their destined “non-beingness,” at it were, when Hamlet, who can play the pipe so much more efficiently, substitutes  their names in the death warrant intended for him.

If ever we wished to study two characters who are marginalized, then let us look upon Rosencrantz Guildenstern.

                      The meanings of their names hardly match what seems to be the essence of their characters. Murray J.Levith, for example, has written that “Rosencrantz Guildenstern are from the dutch-german: literary, ‘garland of roses’ and ‘golden star’. Although of religious origin, both names together sound singsong and odd to English ears. Their jingling gives them lightness, and blurs individuality of the characters they label.

                           This details do not seen to fit the personality and general vacuity of Shakespeare’s to incompetents. So it becomes necessary to know and have a look at what they do and what is done to them. They were students at Wittenberg. They return to Denmark, apparently at the direct request of Claudius. They try to pry from hamlet some of his inner thoughts, especially of ambition and frustration about the crown. Hamlet foils them. They crumble before his own questioning. As noted above, Claudius later sends them on an embassy with Hamlet, carrying a later to the king of England that would have Hamlet summarily executed. Thought they may not have known the contents of that “grand commission”, Hamlet’s suspicion of them is enough for him to contemplate their future-and to “trust them as adders fanged’’.

                    Hamlet may well see himself as righting the moral order, not as a murderer, and much has been said on that matter. But let us take note of another dimension: the implications for power. Clearly Hamlet makes reference in the lines just noted to the “mighty opposites” represented by himself and Claudius. Clearly, too, the ones of “baser nature” who “love to this employment” do not matter much in this struggle between powerful antagonists. They are pawns for Claudius first, for Hamlet second. It is almost as if hamlet had tried before the sea voyage to warn them of their insignificant state, he calls Rosencrantz a sponge, provoking this exchange:

Hamlet: …..  Besides, to be demanded of a sponge! What replication should be made by the son of ta king?

ROSANCRANTZ: Take you me for a sponge, my lord?

Hamlet: Aye, sir, that soaks up the king’s countenance, his rewards, his authorities. But such officers do the king best service in the end. He keeps them, like an ape, in the corner of his jaw, first mouthed, to be last swallowed. When he needs what you have gleaned, it is but squeezing you and, sponge, you shall be dry again.

                        We all know about that princes and king always stands of power position. In Hamlet the character of Hamlet is also stand power position and second Polonius and Claudius both they have on motives to exercise. The king Claudius always wanted to be a king and so that is Hamlet’s hidden wanted also there is. Claudius was aware of power, clearly, when he observed of Hamlet’s apparent madness that “Madness in great ones must not unwatched go”. With equal truth Rosencrantz and Guildenstern might have observed that power in great ones also must not unwatched go.

                 It is instructive to note that the reality of power reflective of Shakespeare’s time might in another time and in another culture reflect a radically different worldview. In stoppard’s version, they are even more obviously two ineffectual pawns, seeking constantly to know who they are, why they are here, where they are going. Whether they “are” at all may be the ultimate question of this modern play. In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Stoppard has given the contemporary audience a play that examines existential questions in the context of a whole world that may have no meaning at all. Although it is not our intention to examine that play in great detail, suffice it to note that the essence of marginalization is here: in this view, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are archetypal human beings caught up on a ship-spaceship Earth for the twentieth or the twenty-first century that leads nowhere, except to death, a death for person who are already dead. If these two characters were marginalize in hamlet, they are even more so in Stoppard’s handling. If Shakespeare marginalized the powerless in his own version of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Stoppard has marginalize us all in an era when in the eyes of some all of us are caught up in forces beyond our control. In other words, a cultural and historical view that was Shakespeare’s is radically reworked to reflect a cultural and philosophical view of another time-our own.

Conclusion:

                    In cultural study two characters in Hamlet is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern both are marginalized characters. They were innocent but they wanted to help both hamlet and Claudius but they had to sacrifice their lives too. Hamlet does not think of his two best friends with whom he has spent a lovely time and decide to put and end to their deaths. Whether in Shakespear’s version of stoppard’s , Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are know more than what Rosencrantz called a “small annexment,” a “petty consequence ,” mere nothings for the “massy wheel” of kings. 

To evaluate my assignment click here   

To evaluate my assignment click here   

Name: Dodiya Meghana J.

Paper No :(5)The Romantic Literature

Topic Name: Narrative technique in Frankenstein

ROLL NO: 11

Email: mdodiya26@gmail.com

Submitted to: Department of English

v    Introduction:-

Marry Wollstonecraft Shelley was an English novelist, short-story writer, dramatist, essayist, biographer and travel writer, best known for her Gothic Novel Frankenstein: or the modern Prometheus .she was born 30,1797somers tower London, United Kingdom. She was only 19 year old when she began the novel. By age 21, she was acknowledged as the author.

v   Major Characters in Frankenstein:

v Narrative Technique in Frankenstein :

                Mary Shelley had many narrative conventions hitherto followed by earlier writers.jane Austen had written many novels, but the area, she covered was restricted to one or two families. since the novel is said to have originated in the so-called ‘ghost-story’ contex,she fell back on the gothic tradition ,but altered it drastically .so much so that the novel as it was published could hardly be called Gothic ,for ,with a few exceptions, no supernatural trappings. As a literary heiress two great and eminent intellectuals,  Mary seems to have examined and tested all existing convenions,but she found none which could suit her: she invented her own-a hybrid of ‘Chinese box’, ‘point of view’, ‘indirections ‘and framed or Embedded Narrative was taken by Walton Who writes to his sister Mrs.saville.

    Mary shelly wrote the novel ‘Frenkenstein.she is write the structure of the novel is style of narrative technique. Mary Shelley uses a multiple narrative uses the voices of multiple characters within the text. Epistolary narratives can also use letters to detail parts of the plot and storyline. Some readers may forget, as they move through the novel, that Walton is responsible for telling the story of victor and his creation.

                         The novel opens with four letters written by Walton to his sister, Mrs.saville. The letters are written in first person. At the end of letter, Walton agrees to hear the stranger’s tale. The stranger declares that his destiny is deter min, nothing can change it.Undersatnding the importance of the stranger’s tale, Walton decides to take note son the story.

·      I have resolved every night, when I am not imperatively occupied by my duties, torecord, as nearly as possible in his own words.

·      Therefore, this sets the narrative voice-Walton’s telling of victor’s story.

The whole story is narrated through first person narration with two different viewpoints. First is from the viewpoint of Frankenstein; and the other, Walton. In this article, I am going to discuss the use of first-person narration to show the reliability of the story.

    There are three different narratives in Frankenstein:- 

ü  A  Framing device is used whena someone’s story is told through letters.

ü The readers is introduced to Robert is writing to his sister about his adventures in searching for the Northpole, the Robert and the audience meet victor.

ü Victor than tell Robert history about he ended up in the North Pole. The reader learns of his creature, victor’s past..Essentially the story of Frankenstein.

         The circumstances give birth to Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein read like something from a Gothic story in themselves. Mary Shelley’s Frenkenstein,a story of scientific transgression and cautionary warning about the need actions; and John polydori’s the vampyre, a tale which influence Bran stocker’s novel Dracula.

               Frenkenstein’narrative technique explained and simplified Frankenstein present us with a Chinese box style narrative –this means that there are narration within narration.                                             

v  Structure  and Narrative:-

            The structure of Frankenstein is very largely determined by the way in which the narrative is organized: this is fully discussed in the section Narrative is framed by another, so that different parts of the story are recounted by different narrators.

v  Basic structure:-

         Largely, the novel consists of a single story which takes Frankenstein from childhood in Geneva to his death in the Arctic board captain Walton’s ship. All the action of novel arises from:                      

v      When other stories are told-such as that of the de Laceys, Justine or Elizabeth-they are subordinate to this central action.

v Comparison with Walton:-

         The clasest the novel comes to what might be an alternative, or, sub-plot is the story of Captain Walton. But this plot, with its special importance on aim, analysis and obsessive search for new discoveries is in reality a kind of echo of Frankenstein’s story, and the main reason why Walton welcomes victor so warmly is that he finds him a kindred spirit. However, the stories do diverge, in that Walton, unlike.victor,is forced to acknowledge and accede to the wishes of other people. Whereas Frankenstein can pursue his studies in isolation, Walton is depended on his crew. When his crew demand to return to England upon their ship becoming lie-bond, Walton has to submit to their demands.

v         Narrative Technique:-

               One of the main effect this style of narration has on the narrative, is it makes it unreliable. We are told different versions of the storey and what we are told by Walton is third person. Do we believe the creature’s storey about himself? Before meeting the DeLacey’s he was inarticulate and ‘Childlike’. He did not recognize human emotions so how can he portray them to the reader.

                There are a Lot of idea about why Shelly chose to use this style of narration. Victor says he wants to ‘penetrate the secrets of nature’-clarifying that science is all about trying to find out how the wold works. In this sense, it could be said that victor is trying to adopt the roll of god…all seeing, highlighting how victor is fighting a losing battle against science. Victor and the creature have separate narrations, just as they have separate lives. Victor created creature, and so therefore had the responsibility to take in the rose of the mother; the protector. Instead of facing up to what he had done, he ran away from his responsibilities and left the creature to frend for himself. Victor and the creature going their separate ways reflect their separate narratives.

v   Frame Narrative:

                 We all know about that frame narrative also .Frame narrative is a literary technique used to contain an embedded narrative, story within a story also to provide the reader with context about the main narrative. A frame narrative, also known as a framing narrative or a frame story, might be found in the beginning, middle or end of the story. It can also connect this type of structure as all the stories. This frame narrative technique achieves a number of effects, influencing how we read and understand the text, and also influencing response to the characters and narrators. Firstly, the fact that the stories of all three narrators seems to cocur adds credibility to narrative this is, however, deceptive, as each narrator is able to give his own view of events without danger of contradiction-all three are together only after the death of Fleckenstein. In addition to this ,both Frankenstein and Walton are able to edit only their own stories but those of the “framed’narrators.We have,really,only Walton’s version of events-he gives his version of Frankenstein’s version of his story-and we are under no obligation to believe Walton. The second effect of the frame narrative is that it provides us with a number of perspectives, giving more than one version of the truth. Remembering that we remember that the narratives of the creature and Frankenstein are coloured by the retelling of their tales, we are presented with three different personal views on the story.

      The frame structure also works well because Shelley builds suspense from the beginning. By being able to view victor first after his pursuit of the Monster, the reader wants to know what made victor so sick, why he was pursuing a creature, and what brought him to such a remote location. By using Walton as the overall narrator to whom the story is told, Shelley can easily begin with the suspenseful ‘’present’’ and flash back to the causes of victor’s condition. We all know about that victor Frankenstein and Walton both are mirror character.so, Frame narrative technique used in the novel of Mary Shelley.

v   For example of ghost story :

                      We all know about the story of Frankenstein is Ghost-story also. There are many Horror shows are our Indian TV serial and also Bollywood and Hollywood type of movie.  

For example TV horror serial like Aahat, Bhut aaya, Aap biti, AAHAT, Shhh koi hai, kala saya, koi aane KO hai ,this type of TV serial where a women or a men take a revenge of his death  in Every story.

‘The Witch ‘Movie also a horror movie the age-old concepts of witchcraft, black magic and riveting story also.

v     Conclusion:

                    We all know about the story of Frenkenstein.it is also Ghost story. Mary Shelley is used narrative technique and frame narrative structure in this novel Frankenstein. Finally the frame narrative reinforces the message of the text-anyone behaving like Frankenstein will come to no good-by having the entire story told in the barren wastes of the Arctic. We all know about that Frankenstein had failed and was at death’s door as the narrative began-we were presented with this ‘warning ‘at the beginning of the text, as well as its being shown to us more directly and in greater detail at the end.

To evaluate my assignment click here