Jean Toomer - In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens by Alice Walker -

                                 In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens by Alice Walker - Summary

Walker describes Jean Toomer's exploration of the Reconstruction South. Toomer found women sexually abused and lost, but who he saw to hold power, spirituality and beauty of which they were not aware. They were waiting for these unknowns to be made known. In the meantime they did not appreciate any aspects of life. These black women were artists whose creative forces were abandoned to the hardships of life.

Black women who were able to create such as Phillis Wheatley and Zora Hurston had divided loyalties, between black and white cultures. They were raised in both and their art is not genuinely hers but confused due to this. Many have criticized Wheatley's poetry for glorifying white people but Walker understands that art for Phyllis was a soulful practice and it sustained her.

This is not the end of the story, for the next generation of black women has survived. There is now the quest for black female identity. Society is not understanding of this strife.

The question arises of how so many women were in touch with their spirituality despite of the oppression and abuse.

Walker tells the story of her mother, who eloped at seventeen in the late 1920s. Walker is the youngest of eight children. Her mother worked tirelessly in the fields and at home all day. She found spirituality and creativity in her domestic undertakings, such as the planting of magnificent gardens, the only medium available to her. These expressions of creativity were anonymous, but they live on in Walker's stories. Not only the dry facts live on but their spirit. Walker feels an urgency to preserve them.

When her mother works in the garden, she is brilliant and radiant. She makes beauty within the poverty in which they lived. Such ability is characteristic of black women. Through this exploration of her mother's heritage she found her expressive creativity. In this way, many other mothers leave their marks on their children, and inspire them through the spirit and beauty that they recognized to create themselves.

In Search of Our Mothers’ Garden

 In Search of Our Mothers’ Garden

Alice Walker’s essay, In Search of Our Mother’s Garden, talks about her search of the African American women’s suppressed talent, of the artistic skills and talents that they lost because of slavery and a forced way of life. Walker builds up her arguments from historical events as well as the collective experiences of African Americans, including her own. She uses these experiences to back up her arguments formed from recollections of various African American characters and events. Walker points out that a great part of her mother’s and grandmothers’ lives have been suppressed because of their sad, dark pasts. But all of these are not lost because somehow, these are manifested in even the smallest things that they do, and that they were also able to pass it down to the very people that they loved. Our search of our mother’s garden may end back to ourselves.

Walker builds up her argument by mentioning the experiences of other people in the essay. One of them is Jean Toomer, a poet in the early 1920s. He is a man who observed that Black women are unique because they possessed intense spirituality in them, even though their bodies endure every aspect of punishment in every single day of their lives. They were in the strictest sense Saints – crazy, pitiful saints. Walker points out that without a doubt, our mothers and grandmothers belong to this type of people. By building up on the observations of Toomer, she was somehow able to show how hard it was to be a mother or a grandmother or even just a woman at that time, one reason perhaps is that they are black. The mothers and grandmothers at that time endured all of this without any hope that tomorrow will be different, be better. Because of this, they were not able to fully express themselves. They were held back by their society.

Another black character that she used to build her argument is Phillis Wheatley, a Black slave girl with a precarious health. Phillis is a poet and a writer at her own right, but unfortunately, she wasn’t able to do much with it because she was a slave. She didn’t have anything for herself, worse, she didn’t even own herself. Her futile attempts for self expression would be washed up by forced labor and pregnancies. She lost her health, and eventually her life without fully expressing herself through her gift for poetry.

Alice Walker used the story of Phillis to establish the understanding that indeed, African American women at that time were not allowed or didn’t have the luxury of time to exercise their gifts, to hone their talents and abilities, and use them to fully express themselves. By doing so, Walker proves that our mothers and grandmothers lived a boxed life back then, with no way to channel to them emotions and thoughts other than hard labor and forced servitude. She pointed out that we wouldn’t know if anyone of them would’ve bloomed to be poets, singers, actresses, because they never really had the chance to know what they can do.

By building up her argument using these two accounts, she is also presenting very strong evidence to her claim. These accounts were personal experiences of real African American people, and these are not just isolated cases. These are shared experiences not just by these two but by all of their people. Walker can confidently say that there is a lot of Phillis Wheatley in those times, perhaps including her mother and grandmothers. This is concrete evidence because it is not fictional, it is not imaginary, or something conceived out of Walker’s creativity. Slavery, forced pregnancies, poverty, and artistic suppression were the realities during the time of our grandmothers. No one can deny this, and no one can deny the existence of Phillis or the accounts of Jean Toomer.

Considering Alice Walker’s authority in her arguments, she could be considered as an expert, a reliable source of information on the topic. First off, she is an African American woman, who had her fair share of poverty in her childhood. She was born and raised by hardworking parents, who really had to work day and night to provide for their family. Also, she witnesses first hand that even though her mother may not be a poet or a novelist; she was an artist in the truest sense. Her artistic side is manifested in her gardens and the beautiful flowers that she grows. Alice Walker witnessed all of this, experienced first hand what it was like to be poor and seemingly talentless.

The accounts that Alice Walker used to prove her points and back up her arguments were African American history that she was all too familiar with. It may have been shared to her by her families, or simply a collective knowledge passed down from one generation to another. She is also well-educated, a wide reader, and an artist. She often cites Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own, relating a white woman’s plight to a black woman’s hardships. She emphasizes that even though she recognizes Woolf’s point about society’s unfair treatment to women of her time, Walker still believes that black women suffered the most (Walker). There is simply nothing that could compare to the artistic suppression that her mother and grandmothers experienced.

In this essay, she is appealing to a general audience, with no specific race or ethnicity. I think this essay was written to highlight the African American women of her mother and grandmother’s time, who were unable to express their talents and hone it to its full potential. This essay is written to inform anyone and everyone reading it about their stories, and of her discovery of her mother’s garden. She was glad to know that it is possible for African American women to express themselves even unknowingly, that it is up to us to discover these “gardens.” She is appealing to the readers in general that even though some people like our mothers and grandmothers seem talentless or artistically inferior, it doesn’t mean that they really lack the talent. It just means that were not looking hard enough to find it.

Alice Walker’s method of using personal experience and historical accounts allow her to truthfully see and say what has really happened. She doesn’t have to make up hypothetical events because she already has a basis for her arguments. Jean Toomer’s recollections and Phillis Wheatley’s experiences are enough proof of her argument. If some people would disagree with what she’s saying, she can always go back to their experiences, to how Phillis suffered without fully using her gift, or what Toomer saw in the streets in the early Twenties. But because of this, I think Walker is somehow limited to the sad and pitiful stories of the past. Well, in reality, most of the stories of African Americans were really sad and pitiful, but still, Walker failed to mention of any successful artist who rose from the ranks of slaves to write her own story. It is either this kind of story really didn’t exist at that time, or Walker just didn’t mention it, since it wasn’t the focus of her essay.

            Alice Walker concluded her essay by saying that Phillis Wheatley’s mother was also an artist, and that the achievements of their daughters were in some way brought about by their mothers. Her conclusion states that the mother is somehow responsible in every achievement of their daughter. Any artistic output by a person is also a product of their mother. Indeed, their children are their best creations, their very own wonderful gardens. This conclusion is related to her method because it goes back to how Phillis Wheatley’s mother was somehow responsible for her daughter’s artistic sense, and that beyond the poverty and the hardships that our mothers and grandmothers experienced during their times, they were still able to artistically express themselves through their children, their very own wonderful gardens.

NORTHROP FRYE: THE ARCHETYPES OF LITERATURE

 NORTHROP FRYE: THE ARCHETYPES OF LITERATURE

Click here to read original essay

Introduction

Northrop Frye was born in Canada in 1921 and studied at Toronto University and Merton College, Oxford University. Initially he was a student of theology and then he switched over to literature. He published his first book, Fearful Symmetry: A Study of William Blake in 1947. The book is a highly original study of the poetry of Blake and it is considered a classic critical work. Northrop Frye rose to international prominence with the publication of Anatomy of Criticism, in 1957 and it firmly established him as one of the most brilliant, original and influential of modern critics. Frye died in 1991. On the whole, he wrote about twenty books on Western literature, culture, myth, archetypal theory, religion and social thought. The Fables of Identity: Studies in Poetic Mythology is a critical work published in 1963. The present essay, “Archetypes of Literature,” is taken from the book. In the essay Frye critically analyses literature against the backdrop of rituals and myths. He interprets literature in the light of various rituals and myths. Frye has divided the easy into three parts. The first part deals with the concept of archetypal criticism. The second part throws light on the inductive method of analysis of a text. The third part focuses on the deductive method of analysis. All the methods fall under structural criticism.

 

Part-I THE CONCEPT OF ARCHETYPAL CRITICISM

Literature can be interpreted in as many ways as possible, and there are different approaches to literature, and one among them is the archetypal approach. The term “archetype” means an original idea or pattern of something of which others are copies. Archetypal approach is the interpretation of a text in the light of cultural patterns involved in it, and these cultural patterns are based on the myths and rituals of a race or nation or social group. Myths and rituals are explored in a text for discovery of meaning and message. In recent times this type of critics. approach to a text has gained popularity. James George Frazer and Carl Gustav Jung are the two great authorities who, have greatly contributed to the development of archetypal approach. Frazer was a social anthropologist and his book The Golden Bough makes a study of magic, religion and myths of different races. Jung was a psychologist associated with Freud. The “collective consciousness” is a major theory of Jung. According to Jung, civilized man “unconsciously” preserves the ideas, concepts and values of life cherished by his distant forefathers, and such ideas are expressed in a society’s or race’s myths and rituals. Creative writers have used myths in their works and critics analyze texts for a discovery of “mythological patterns.” This kind of critical analysis of a text is called archetypal criticism. T.S. Eliot has used mythical patterns in his creative works and The Waste Land is a good example of it. Northrop Frye in his essay does not analyze any particular myth in a work and in fact, he presents an analysis of “mythical patterns” which have been used by writers in general.

 

Two Types of Criticism and the Humanities

Like science, literary criticism is also a systematized and organized body of knowledge. Science dissects and analyses nature and facts. Similarly literary criticism analyses and interprets literature. Frye further says that literacy criticism and its theories and techniques can be taught, but literature cannot be taught, rather it is to be felt and enjoyed. Indeed, literary criticism is like science and it can be creative. There are two types of literary criticism: a significant and meaningful criticism, and a meaningless criticism. A meaningless criticism will not help a reader in developing a systematic structure of knowledge about a work of literature. This kind of criticism will give only the background information about a work. A meaningless criticism will distract the reader from literature. Literature is a part of humanities and humanities include philosophy and history also. These two branches of knowledge provide a kind of pattern for understanding literature. Philosophy and history are two major tools- for interpretation of literature and archetypal criticism is based on philosophy and history of a people. Archetypal criticism is meaningful criticism.

Formalistic Criticism & Historical Criticism

There are different types of criticism and most of them remain commentaries on texts. There is a type of criticism, which focuses only on an analysis of a text. Such a criticism confines itself to the text and does not give any other background information about the text. This type of formalistic or structural criticism will help the readers in understanding a text only to some extent. That is, a reader may understand the pattern of a text, but how the pattern is evolved, he cannot understand without the background information, which may be called historical criticism. Structural criticism will help a reader in understanding the pattern of a text and historical criticism will make the reader’s understanding clearer. What the readers require today is a synthesis of structural criticism and historical criticism. Archetypal criticism is a synthesis of structural criticism and historical criticism.

Literary Criticism is a Science

Science explores nature and different branches of science explore different aspects of nature. Physics is a branch of science, which explores matter and natural forces of the universe. Physics and Astronomy gained their scientific significance and they were accepted as branches of science during the Renaissance. Chemistry gained the status of science in the eighteenth century, and so did Biology in the nineteenth century. Social Sciences assumed their significance as part of science in the twentieth century. Similarly, literary criticism, today, has become systematic in its analysis, and therefore it could be considered as a science. Based on this concept, a work of literature may be critically (or scientifically) evaluated, says Northrop Frye. Among the tools of criticism, he uses the two methods: structural criticism and historical criticism. The two concepts, he explains in detail in the second and third parts of this critical essay respectively.

 

                                                                      Part-II

THE INDUCTIVE METHOD OF ANALYSIS Structural Criticism and Inductive Analysis

Towards the close of the first section, Frye contends that structural criticism will help a reader in understanding a text, and in his analysis, he proceeds inductively. That is, from particular truths in a work, he draws forth general truths. Owing to jealousy, Othello, in the Shakespearean play, inflicts upon himself affliction and this is the particular truth of the drama from which the reader learns the general truth of life that jealousy is always destructive. This is called the inductive method of analysis under structural criticism, and Frye discusses this in detail in this section of the essay. An author cannot intrude into his text and express his personal emotions and comments. He should maintain absolute objectivity. A critic studies a work and finds out whether an author is free from textual interference. This is a sort of psychological approach also, and this method of criticism helps the reader in understanding an author’s personal symbols, images and myths which he incorporates in his works. At times the author himself may be unconscious of the myths, symbols etc., which he has exploited in his works, and the critic “discovers” such things.

 

Historical Criticism and Inductive Analysis

Under the second type of criticism called historical criticism, a critic interprets the birth of a text and resolves that it is an outcome of the social and cultural demands of a society in a particular period. The social and cultural milieus are the causes responsible for the creation of a work. Quite evidently the historical-critic plays a major role in the understanding of a text. In fact, both structural criticism and historical criticism are a necessity in archetypal criticism and neither can be dispensed with. But either of them alone does not explain a work completely. A historical critic discovers common symbols and images being used by different writers in their works, and resolves that there must be a common ‘source from which writers have derived their symbols, images and myths. The sea is a common symbol used by many writers over the years and therefore it is an archetypal symbol. Not only symbols, images and myths are archetypal; even genres are archetypal. For example, the genre of drama originates from Greek religion. Thus the historical inductive method of criticism helps the readers in understanding not only symbols, images and myths, but also the very genre itself.

The Collective Unconscious or Racial Memory

Archetypal criticism dissects and analyses symbols, images and mythologies used by a writer in his works, and these symbols, myths and rituals have their origin in primitive myths, rituals, folk-lore and cultures. Such primitive factors according to Jung lie buried in the “collective unconscious” which may otherwise be called “racial memory” of a people. Since a writer is part of a race, what lies in his “unconscious” mind is expressed in his works in the form, of myths, rituals, symbols and images. Archetypal criticism focuses on such things in a work. In archetypal criticism, under the reductive method of analysis, a critic, while elucidating a text, moves from the particular truth to the general truth. A particular symbol or myth leads to the establishment of a general truth. Works of art are created in this way and their origin is in primitive cultures. Literature is produced in this manner over the years.

Archetypal Criticism and Its Facets

Archetypal criticism is an all-inclusive term. It involves the efforts of many specialists, and at every stage of interpretation of a text, it is based “on a certain kind of scholarly organization.” An editor is needed to “clean up” the text; a rhetorician analyses the narrative pace; a philologist scrutinizes the choice and significance of words; a literary social historian studies the evolution of myths and rituals. Under archetypal criticism the efforts of all these specialists converge on the analysis of a text. The contribution of a literary anthropologist to archetypal criticism is no small. In an archetypal study of Hamlet an anthropologist traces the sources of the drama to the Hamlet legend described by Saxo, a thirteenth century Danish historian in his book entitled Danes, Gesta Danorum. He further traces the sources of the drama to nature myths, which were in vogue in the Norman Conquest period. Thus an anthropologist makes a threadbare analysis of the origins of Hamlet under archetypal criticism.

Part - III

DEDUCTIVE METHOD OF ANALYSIS Rhythm and Pattern in Literature

An archetypal critic, under the deductive method of analysis, proceeds to establish the meaning of a work from the general truth to the particular truth. Literature is like music and painting. Rhythm is an essential characteristic of music and in painting, pattern is the chief virtue. Rhythm in music is temporal and pattern in painting is spatial. In literature both rhythm and pattern are recurrence of images, forms and words. In literature rhythm means the narrative and the narrative presents all the events and episodes as a sequence and hastens action. Pattern in literature signifies its verbal structure and conveys a meaning. In producing the intended artistic effect, a work of literature should have both rhythm (narrative) and pattern (meaning).

Rhythm in a Work

The world of nature is governed by rhythm and it has got a natural cycle. The seasonal rhythms in a solar year are spring, winter, autumn and summer. This kind of rhythm is there in the world of animals and in the human world also. The mating of animals and birds rhythmically takes place in a particular season every year and the mating may be called a ritual. A ritual is not performed frequently, but rhythmically after a long gap and it has a meaning. The mating of animals has the meaning of reproduction. In the world of nature also rituals are rhythmic. Crops are planted and harvested rhythmically every year and they have their seasons. At the time of planting and harvest, sacrifices and offerings are made and they have a meaning: fertility and consummation of life. In the human world rituals are performed voluntarily and they have their own significance. Works of literature have their origins in such rituals and the archetypal critic discovers and explains them. He explains the rhythm of the rituals, which are the basis of literature in general.

Pattern in a Work

It has already been established that in literature pattern is recurrence of images, forms and words. Patterns are derived from a writer’s “epiphanic moments.” That is, a writer gets the concepts of his work or ideas of his work in moments of inspiration and he looks into the heart of things. Then he expresses what he has “perceived” in the form of proverbs, riddles, commandments and etiological folktales. Such things have already an element of narrative and they add further to the narrative of the writer in his works. A writer expresses what he has “perceived,” and he uses myths either deliberately or unconsciously, and it is the critic who discovers the archetypes, the myths, in a work and explicates the patterns in the work. Both pattern and rhythm are the major basic components of a work.

The Four Phases of the Myth

Every myth has a central significance and the narrative in a myth centres on a figure that may be a god or demi-god or superhuman being or legend. Frazer and Jung contend that in the development of a myth the central figure or central significance is the most important factor and many writers have accepted this view. Frye classifies myths into four categories:

1. The dawn, spring and birth phase. There are myths dealing with the birth of a hero, his revival and resurrection, defeat of the powers of darkness and death. Subordinate characters such as the father and the mother are introduced in the myth. Such myths are the archetypes of romance and of rhapsodic poetry.

2. The zenith, summer and marriage or triumph phase. In this phase, there are myths of apotheosis, (the act of being raised to the rank of a god), of sacred marriage and of entering into Paradise. Subordinate characters in these myths are the companion and the bride. Such myths are the archetypes of comedy, pastoral and idyll.

3. The sunset, autumn and death phase. These are the myths dealing with the fall of a hero, a dying god, violent death, sacrifice and the hero’s isolation. The subordinate characters are the traitor and the siren. Such myths are the archetypes of tragedy and elegy.

4. The darkness, winter and desolation phase. There are myths dealing with the triumph of these powers. The myths of floods, the return of chaos and the defeat of the hero are examples of this phase. The ogre and the witch are the subordinate characters here and these myths are the archetypes of satire.

These are the four categories of myths, which Frye identifies and they recur in different types of works written by different writers. Indeed they constitute the bases of many great pieces of literature.

Quest - Myth

In addition to the four categories of myths mentioned above, Northrop Frye discusses the quest-myth also which was supposed to have been developed from the four types of myths. In the quest-myth, the hero goes in quest of a truth or something else, and this type of myth recurs in all religions. For example, the Messiah myth is a quest myth of the Holy Grail (a Christian myth) in the last part of The Waste Land. Sacred scriptures of all religions have their own myths and an archetypal critic will have to examine them closely for an appropriate interpretation of texts. From an analysis of the archetypes of myths, a critic can descend to make a study of the genres and from the genres he can further descend to the elucidation of a text in terms of myth. This type of dissension in criticism is called the deductive method of analysis. That is, the critic moves from the general truth (a myth) to an elucidation of the particular truth (the truth of why a character behaves so) in a text. In this way a critic can analyse from myths how a drama or a lyric or an epic has been evolved. Frye further says that, almost all genres in every literature have been evolved from the quest-myth only. It is the duty of an archetypal critic to analyse myths and establish the meaning and message of a work.

Literary Criticism and Religion

There is a close relationship between literary criticism and religion. In his analysis, a literary critic considers God as an archetype of man who is portrayed as a hero in a work. God is a character in the story of Paradise Lost or The Bible, and the critic deals with Him and considers Him only as a human character. Criticism does not deal with any actuality, but with what is conceivable and possible. Similarly religion is not associated with scientific actuality, but with how things look like. Literary criticism works on conceivability. Likewise, religion functions on conceivability. There can be no place for scientific actuality in both, but what, is conceived is accepted by all. Both in religion and literary criticism, an epiphany is at work. It is a revelation of God or truth and it is a profound insight. It originates from the subconscious, from the dreams. In human life there is a cycle of waking and dreaming and in nature also, it could be seen and it is the cycle of light and darkness. Waking and dreaming, and light and darkness are two antithetic factors, which bring about epiphany in a person. It is during the day that man develops fear and frustration, and it is in the dark of the night his libido, the strong force of life, awakens and he resolves to achieve. It is the antithesis, which resolves the problems and misunderstandings of man and makes him perceive truth both in religion and literary criticism.

The Comic Vision and the Tragic Vision in a Myth

Both art and religion are alike and they aim at perfection. Perfection is the end of all human efforts. In art it is achieved through dreaming (imagination) and in religion it is through visualization. Perfection can be achieved in literary criticism also and it is the archetypal critic who does it through an analysis of the comic vision of life and the tragic vision as well in a work. The central pattern of the comic vision and the tragic vision in a myth is detailed below:

1. In the comic vision of life, in a myth, the “human” world is presented as a community, or a hero is portrayed as a representative of the desires of the reader.

Here the archetypes of images are symposium, communion, order, friendship, and love. Marriage or some equivalent consummation belongs to the comic vision of life.

In the tragic vision of life, in the “human” world, there is tyranny or anarchy, or an individual or an isolated man, or a leader with his back to his followers or a bullying giant of romance, or a deserted or betrayed hero. In addition to these, there will be a harlot or a witch or other varieties of Jung’s “terrible mother” in the tragic vision of life.

2. In the comic vision of life in a myth, the “animal” world is presented as a community of domesticated animals, usually a flock of sheep, or a lamb, or one of the gentler birds (usually a dove). The archetypes of images are pastoral images. In the tragic vision of life, in the “animal” world there are beasts, birds of prey, wolves, vultures, serpents, dragons and so on.

3. In the comic vision of life, in the “vegetable” world of a myth, there is a garden, a grove or park, or a tree of life, or a rose or lotus. The examples of the archetypes of Arcadian images are Marvell’s green world and Shakespeare’s forest comedies.

In the tragic vision of life, in the “vegetable” world of a myth, there is a sinister forest like the one in Milton’s Camus or at the opening of Dante’s Inferno, or a heath or wilderness, or a tree of death.

4. In the comic vision of life, in the “mineral” world of a myth, there is a city, or one building or temple, or one stone, normally a glowing precious stone. These are presented as luminous or fiery. The example of the archetype of image is a “starlit dome.”

In the tragic vision of life, the “mineral” world of a myth is seen in terms of deserts, rocks and ruins, or of geometrical images like the cross.

5. In the comic vision of life, in the “unformed” world of a myth, there is a river, traditionally fourfold, which influenced the Renaissance image of the temperate body with its four humours.

In the tragic vision of life, this world usually becomes the sea, as the narrative myth of dissolution is so often a flood myth. The combination of the sea and beast images gives us the leviathan and similar water-borne monsters.

After discussing the central pattern of the comic vision and the tragic vision in a myth, Frye introduces W.B. Yeats’ “Sailing to Byzantium” as a befitting and famous example of the comic vision which, in the poem, is represented by the city, the tree, the bird, the community of sages, the geometrical gyre and the detachment from the cyclic world. It is either tragic or comic vision of life which determines the interpretation of a symbol or myth, says Frye.

Conclusion

Of the different approaches of literary criticism, Northrop Frye has established the validity of the archetypal approach and its relevance in the elucidation of a text. Like works of literature, criticism is also creative and an archetypal critic discovers the meaning of a text and the motives of a character. No human endeavor is independent and the work of an archetypal critic is inclusive of formalistic criticism (or structural criticism) and historical criticism. Both J.G. Frazer and C.G. Jung opened up new vistas in archetypal or mythical criticism and Frye has obviated the impediments in the appreciation of a text. In mythical criticism, both the inductive method and the deductive method are effective tools and neither can be dispensed with, according to Frye. If one method explains a text based on the derivation of a general truth from the particular, the other method does it the other way round. Both the methods are complementary, and if either of them is unexploited, archetypal criticism will be incomplete. Archetypal approach to a text has contributed to the establishment of a systematic and comprehensive concept of literary criticism.

Why the Novel Matters - D. H. Lawrence

Why the Novel Matters

D. H. Lawrence’s critical essay ‘Why the novel matters’ was published in the collection titled Phoenix in the year 1936. In this essay Lawrence speaks about the importance of the novel and tries to establish the superiority of the novelist above other professions.

In an attempt to illustrate the importance of the novel Lawrence explains the importance of life and the living man. He says that the whole living man, the man alive, is more important than his thoughts, ideas, his mind, or his stomach or liver or kidney or any other parts of his body. Lawrence says that this is what scientists and philosophers fail to understand. According to Lawrence a novel shows life and its characters are nothing but man alive. The novelist understands the importance of life and the man alive. Therefore the novelist is better than the scientist or the philosopher.

Lawrence begins the essay by commenting upon the saying ‘a sound mind in a sound body’. He calls it a funny superstition that people think of themselves as a body with a soul in it. He questions why one thinks of one’s hand as something subordinate to the mind that operates it. The hand has a life of its own. It has knowledge and can think and act for itself. The hand is as much a part of the living man as the mind. The pen held by the hand however is not alive. A man alive extends only to his fingertips. Lawrence says that whatever in a man is alive constitutes the man alive. The hand, skin, freckles, blood and bones are very much alive and part of the man alive. The living body therefore must not be compared to inanimate objects like tin cans or clay vessels.

Lawrence in this essay tries to explain why the novelist is better than the philosopher or the scientist and in order to do so he explains the importance of the man alive. According to Lawrence the novelist possesses an intricate understanding of the man alive more fully than a parson, a philosopher, or a scientist. The parson speaks about souls in heaven and the afterlife. But for the novelist heaven is in the palm of his hand and the tip of his nose which are alive. The novelist is not concerned about life after death. He is wholly concerned about life at present and with the man alive. The philosopher speaks about infinite knowledge possessed by the pure spirit.  But for the novelist there is no knowledge beyond what the living body can perceive. For philosophers nothing but thoughts is important. These thoughts Lawrence says are nothing but ‘tremulations on the ether’. They are not alive. They are like radio signals floating in the air which are meaningless until they reach the receiver – a radio device that decodes the signals into a meaningful message. Similarly when thoughts are received by a man alive they become meaningful and can alter the man’s life. But the thoughts nevertheless are not alive. It is only because the man alive receives them that they become alive. Only a man alive can be stimulated by thoughts. Thus the living body is more important than the message conveyed by thoughts.

According to Lawrence nothing is more important than life. Living things are more valuable than dead objects. A living dog is better than a dead lion but a living lion is better than a living dog. Lawrence says that scientists and philosophers find it difficult to accept the value of the living. For the philosopher nothing but thoughts matter. For the scientist a living man is of no use. He only wants a dead man whom he dissects and observes under the microscope. For a scientist a man is a heart, a liver, a kidney, a gland or a tissue. But for the novelist the only thing that matters is a whole living man. Lawrence refuses to believe that he is a body or a soul or a brain or a nervous system. He considers himself to be a complete whole made up of all these parts, a whole that is greater and more significant than the individual parts. And for this reason he is a novelist and he considers himself superior to the saint, the scientist or the philosopher.   

Having established the importance of the man alive and the novelist Lawrence proceeds to explain the significance of the novel. Lawrence calls the novel a book of life. According to him books are like thoughts - nothing but ‘tremulations on the ether’. They are meaningful only when a man alive receives them. But he says that the tremulations of a novel are more powerful than any other book and it can make a whole man alive tremble. This means that the novel has the capacity to influence a man more effectively than any other book.  For example the ideals of Plato makes the ideal being in a man tremble. Similarly the sermons or the Ten Commandments affect only a part of a man alive. But a novel is capable of shaking the whole of a man alive. This is because a novel deals in nothing else but man alive. In this regard Lawrence calls the Bible a ‘great confused novel’.  All its characters – Adam, Eve, Sarai, Abraham, Isaac – including God are nothing but man alive. For Lawrence, the Bible, Homer and Shakespeare are all great novels because they communicate to the reader. Their wholeness affects the whole of man alive. They do not stimulate growth in a particular direction but shake the whole man alive into new life.

According to Lawrence the strength and appeal of a novel lies in the dynamic nature of its characters which reflects the importance of constant change in the life of a man alive. Nothing is constant and if something is forced to remain constant it loses its value and power along with the passing of time. There are no absolutes. There is only a constant flow and change and even change is not absolute. A man today is different from what he was yesterday and tomorrow he will be different from what he is today. A man loves a woman because of the constant change in her. It is the change that startles and defies and keeps a man and woman in love with each other. Loving an unchanging person is like loving an inanimate object like a pepper pot. But even amidst change one needs to maintain one’s integrity. However Lawrence says that putting a finger on one individual trait makes one as fixed as a lamp post. It seems as if a man has made up an idea about himself and is trying to trim himself down to fit into it. Lawrence says that one can learn about the importance of change from a novel. In a novel the characters do nothing but live. But if they begin to act according to a fixed pattern – always remaining good or bad – the novel loses its life force. Similarly a man in his life must live and not try to follow a pattern or else he becomes a dead man in life. Lawrence however says that it is difficult to define what is living. Different men have different ideas about what they mean by living in life. Some go to seek God while others seek money, wine, and women, yet others seek votes and political reforms. In this Lawrence says that the novel is a guide which helps to differentiate between a man alive and a man who is dead in life. A man may eat his dinner like a man alive or merely chew his dinner as a dead man in life. A man alive shoots his enemy but a dead man in life throws bombs at people who are neither his friends nor foes.

Finally Lawrence says that the most important thing is to be a whole man alive and the novel provides guidance in this matter. A novel helps a man to see when a man is alive and when he is dead in life. The novel helps to develop an instinct for life. This is because the novel does not advocate a right path or a wrong path. The concept of right and wrong vary according to circumstances. A novel portrays this unpredictable and varying nature of life making the reader realize that life itself is the reason for Why The Novel Matters| D.H. Lawrence | Summary and

Analysis

D. H. Lawrence’s critical essay ‘Why the novel matters’ was published in the collection titled Phoenix in the year 1936. In this essay Lawrence speaks about the importance of the novel and tries to establish the superiority of the novelist above other professions.

In an attempt to illustrate the importance of the novel Lawrence explains the importance of life and the living man. He says that the whole living man, the man alive, is more important than his thoughts, ideas, his mind, or his stomach or liver or kidney or any other parts of his body. Lawrence says that this is what scientists and philosophers fail to understand. According to Lawrence a novel shows life and its characters are nothing but man alive. The novelist understands the importance of life and the man alive. Therefore the novelist is better than the scientist or the philosopher.

Lawrence begins the essay by commenting upon the saying ‘a sound mind in a sound body’. He calls it a funny superstition that people think of themselves as a body with a soul in it. He questions why one thinks of one’s hand as something subordinate to the mind that operates it. The hand has a life of its own. It has knowledge and can think and act for itself. The hand is as much a part of the living man as the mind. The pen held by the hand however is not alive. A man alive extends only to his fingertips. Lawrence says that whatever in a man is alive constitutes the man alive. The hand, skin, freckles, blood and bones are very much alive and part of the man alive. The living body therefore must not be compared to inanimate objects like tin cans or clay vessels.

Lawrence in this essay tries to explain why the novelist is better than the philosopher or the scientist and in order to do so he explains the importance of the man alive. According to Lawrence the novelist possesses an intricate understanding of the man alive more fully than a parson, a philosopher, or a scientist. The parson speaks about souls in heaven and the afterlife. But for the novelist heaven is in the palm of his hand and the tip of his nose which are alive. The novelist is not concerned about life after death. He is wholly concerned about life at present and with the man alive. The philosopher speaks about infinite knowledge possessed by the pure spirit.  But for the novelist there is no knowledge beyond what the living body can perceive. For philosophers nothing but thoughts is important. These thoughts Lawrence says are nothing but ‘tremulations on the ether’. They are not alive. They are like radio signals floating in the air which are meaningless until they reach the receiver – a radio device that decodes the signals into a meaningful message. Similarly when thoughts are received by a man alive they become meaningful and can alter the man’s life. But the thoughts nevertheless are not alive. It is only because the man alive receives them that they become alive. Only a man alive can be stimulated by thoughts. Thus the living body is more important than the message conveyed by thoughts.

According to Lawrence nothing is more important than life. Living things are more valuable than dead objects. A living dog is better than a dead lion but a living lion is better than a living dog. Lawrence says that scientists and philosophers find it difficult to accept the value of the living. For the philosopher nothing but thoughts matter. For the scientist a living man is of no use. He only wants a dead man whom he dissects and observes under the microscope. For a scientist a man is a heart, a liver, a kidney, a gland or a tissue. But for the novelist the only thing that matters is a whole living man. Lawrence refuses to believe that he is a body or a soul or a brain or a nervous system. He considers himself to be a complete whole made up of all these parts, a whole that is greater and more significant than the individual parts. And for this reason he is a novelist and he considers himself superior to the saint, the scientist or the philosopher.  

Having established the importance of the man alive and the novelist Lawrence proceeds to explain the significance of the novel. Lawrence calls the novel a book of life. According to him books are like thoughts - nothing but ‘tremulations on the ether’. They are meaningful only when a man alive receives them. But he says that the tremulations of a novel are more powerful than any other book and it can make a whole man alive tremble. This means that the novel has the capacity to influence a man more effectively than any other book.  For example the ideals of Plato makes the ideal being in a man tremble. Similarly the sermons or the Ten Commandments affect only a part of a man alive. But a novel is capable of shaking the whole of a man alive. This is because a novel deals in nothing else but man alive. In this regard Lawrence calls the Bible a ‘great confused novel’.  All its characters – Adam, Eve, Sarai, Abraham, Isaac – including God are nothing but man alive. For Lawrence, the Bible, Homer and Shakespeare are all great novels because they communicate to the reader. Their wholeness affects the whole of man alive. They do not stimulate growth in a particular direction but shake the whole man alive into new life.

According to Lawrence the strength and appeal of a novel lies in the dynamic nature of its characters which reflects the importance of constant change in the life of a man alive. Nothing is constant and if something is forced to remain constant it loses its value and power along with the passing of time. There are no absolutes. There is only a constant flow and change and even change is not absolute. A man today is different from what he was yesterday and tomorrow he will be different from what he is today. A man loves a woman because of the constant change in her. It is the change that startles and defies and keeps a man and woman in love with each other. Loving an unchanging person is like loving an inanimate object like a pepper pot. But even amidst change one needs to maintain one’s integrity. However Lawrence says that putting a finger on one individual trait makes one as fixed as a lamp post. It seems as if a man has made up an idea about himself and is trying to trim himself down to fit into it. Lawrence says that one can learn about the importance of change from a novel. In a novel the characters do nothing but live. But if they begin to act according to a fixed pattern – always remaining good or bad – the novel loses its life force. Similarly a man in his life must live and not try to follow a pattern or else he becomes a dead man in life. Lawrence however says that it is difficult to define what is living. Different men have different ideas about what they mean by living in life. Some go to seek God while others seek money, wine, and women, yet others seek votes and political reforms. In this Lawrence says that the novel is a guide which helps to differentiate between a man alive and a man who is dead in life. A man may eat his dinner like a man alive or merely chew his dinner as a dead man in life. A man alive shoots his enemy but a dead man in life throws bombs at people who are neither his friends nor foes.

Finally Lawrence says that the most important thing is to be a whole man alive and the novel provides guidance in this matter. A novel helps a man to see when a man is alive and when he is dead in life. The novel helps to develop an instinct for life. This is because the novel does not advocate a right path or a wrong path. The concept of right and wrong vary according to circumstances. A novel portrays this unpredictable and varying nature of life making the reader realize that life itself is the reason for living. The end result of the novel is the whole man alive.  Thus Lawrence asserts that the novel is a book that can touch the life of a whole man alive and that is why the novel matters. living. The end result of the novel is the whole man alive.  Thus Lawrence asserts that the novel is a book that can touch the life of a whole man alive and that is why the novel matters. 

UENL 207 General English II MCQ

Elements of Composition By Ramanujan

Elements of Composition By Ramanujan

A. K. Ramanujan was not only an enlightened poet, but also a philologist, a folklorist, a translator, a scholar and a playwright. Well-versed with the languages of Kannada and English, Ramanujan had done a fair amount of research in the languages of Tamil, Telugu and Sanskrit. A firm believer in a non-standardized and local form of Indian literature, he wrote a compilation of his poems in his book “The Collected Poems” and was posthumously awarded for it as well.

Introduction to Elements of Composition:

“Elements of Composition” is a poem that skims through the life of the poet in small events that are placed according to the timeline that his life follows. It is an ode to the life that we all live; of how we all are just composed of elements that give rise to our birth and later, on our demise, become one with those same elements that spouted our existence. The poet touches upon different components of memories, from nostalgia, to affection and later of an overall experience, all revolving around the concept of the “Tree of Life”, which believes humanity to be closely interlinked with nature. 

Setting of Elements of Composition:

Ramanujan, who was known for encouraging local and experimental creation of literature, narrates this poem to support an unconventional truth about how life is not limited by time or by form and keeps changing constantly to hold the circle of life together. The lines “self-tangled in love and work” and scary dreams, capable of eyes that can see” talk about the play of emotions that bind the individual with its journey in life. A nature of constant change is also vital in the life of a being, described by Ramanujan in the lines “Only by moving constantly, the constancy of things” and further goes on to describe events in his life that involved this change, like the changing of his uncle’s fingers while he narrated stories to him in their shadows, or like the changed expression of panic on his sister’s face moments before she is about to get married. He further narrates that as he passes through life, he takes what he finds and also leaves back affections, seeds and skeletons only to return to his natural composition, that is, the earth’s soil from which he had first sprouted.

Summary of Elements of Composition:

Ramanujan’s poem revolves around the theme of the “Tree of Life” and is also an ode to the process of life and evolution itself. Ramanujan talks about the vital nature of change in the journey of life and goes on to describe instances in his lifetime that transformed through time. He begins his poem with his creation through the elements around him and ends with his statement of diminishing his existence with his reunion with those same elements, thus watering the hypothetical “Tree of Life”.

Critical Analysis of Elements of Composition:

The poet describes his firm belief in the circle that life follows, illustrates these views beautifully through events and situations from his life that support his conception. He involves the reader into his world of amalgamation where nothing is constant. He provides insights through instances in his life that makes this poem an honest review and thus brings the reader up-close and personal to his thinking. The poem describes emotions and memories as lessons and simple joys that life has to offer and truly asks of the reader to treat life like the God given gift that it is believed to be.

Central Idea of Elements of Composition:

This poem written by A. K. Ramanujan is an ode to the concept of the “Tree of Life” and how life begins with the death of another. The poet talks about events from his life that kept changing, much like his belief about life “only by moving constantly” lies the “constancy of things”. He believes that he himself, like every other individual and organism, is made up of the elements that surround him and will later decompose only to become one with it.

Tone of Elements of Composition:

The poem begins with Ramanujan describing his creation as a “self-tangled” amalgamation of not only the 5 elements that Hindu mythology believes in but also the elements listed down in the periodic tables used by scientists. He further narrates about the ever changing nature of life and how only if we ourselves keeping moving and changing with it, do we see the “constancy of things”. He then goes on to describe events from his life, like the changed expressions of his sister when she realises moments before her wedding about how her life will change forever and of how the riots in Nairobi has changed the way the residents live there. He later says that he passes through these events as they pass through them and on his demise, he shall decompose and become one with the same elements that once created him.

Conclusion:

Elements of Composition is a poem by Ramanujan that celebrates God’s art of composing organisms and the concept of the “Circle of Life” to show how beautiful and naturally connected the components around us can be. The phenomenon of old life decomposing to give rise to new life is illustrated perfectly with vivid experiences that also portray change as an equally important component of life. Ramanujan has crafted this poem skilfully to show the beauty of life along with the connection of an organism with its surrounding elements to play a major role in not just birth and death but also the entire purpose of evolution.

The Lotus - Toru Dutt

Sonnet-The Lotus

Love came to Flora asking for a flower

That would of flowers be undisputed queen,

The lily and the rose, long, long had been

Rivals for that high honour. Bards of power

Had sung their claims. “The rose can never tower

Like the pale lily with her Juno mien”-

“But is the lily lovelier?” Thus between

Flower-factions rang the strife in Psyche’s bower.

  “Give me a flower delicious as the rose

And stately as the lily in her pride”-

“But of what colour?”- “Rose-red,” Love first chose,

Then prayed, -“No, lily-white,-or, both provide”;

  And Flora gave the lotus, “rose-red” dyed,

And “lily-white,”- the queenliest flower that blows.

                                                                ~Toru Dutt

Explication of “The Lotus”

               Toru Dutt was an educated young woman who had traveled to Britain and France during her childhood.  British literature and culture influenced her and is demonstrated in various work by Toru, including “The Lotus”.  In the poem, Toru presents the idea that the lotus is the most beautiful of all flowers in order to establish superiority of the Hindu religion over other world religions.

“The Lotus”, begins with a conflict between the rose and the lily flower.  The goddess of love, Aphrodite, approached the flower goddess, Flora to create a flower who would undisputedly be the queenliest of all flowers.  Both the lily and the rose, used their “bards of power” in their fight over the queenliest flower title.  Bards is associated with Gaelic spiritual power traditions of England, Scotland and Ireland.  Toru uses Greek and Roman mythology as support for her Hindu beliefs and to establish her stand.   The rose is described as never reaching the level of the lily flower, because the lily has a strong willed demeanor.

               In line 8 of the poem, we reach the climax where all the flower groups form cliques in a bitter conflict within the soul’s essence.  The goddess Flora is given a task of creating a flower as “delicious as the rose” and “stately as the lily in her pride” (Dutt, 82)    Lines 9-14 of the poem, describes the solution to the problem of finding the queenliest flower of all.   Toru has Flora create a flower that is both red as a rose and white as a lily.  As a result, Flora creates a flower with the characteristics of a rose and a lily combined and created the beautiful lotus flower.

               Why did Toru chose the lotus flower as the queenliest of all flowers?  The lotus is a national symbol of India and the Hindu faith.  The overall theme of the poem is the pride of India’s culture and Hindu religion. The idea of Hindu being the ultimate religion of the world is the main focus of “The Lotus”.   Hinduism is polytheistic in nature and beliefs are practiced through idol worship.  The idols can be human, animal or natural, such as the Sun God. Each idol has a form of symbolism, which represents knowledge, wealth, and strength among a few things (Mullatti)  Toru wanted to acknowledge her Indian background for others to understand her love for her native country India.  Although she had traveled and received her education abroad during her childhood, she still believes India to be her home.   Indian tradition explains the lotus flower springs not from the earth but from the surface of the water and will remain pure and unblemished, not matter the impurity of the water.  The purity of the lotus expresses the idea of supernatural birth and the appearance of the first created entity from the ancient waters of chaos, thus the lotus is observed as the medium of the Hindu creator Narayana and his second being God Brahma (Mitra & Kaporr, 126).    Toru uses the idea of Greek and Roman goddesses to create a western understanding of Hinduism and its divine faith of the lotus.

               Toru had an ability to excel in her writing at a young age and is one of the most famous Indo-Anglican poets of India.  She mastered “The Lotus” in a Petrarchan style by separating the poem into two divisions, the Octave and the Sestet.  Toru was able to present the problem of searching for the queenliest flower in the octave, which was composed of the first 8 lines and resolved the issue by creating the lotus in the sestet, which consists of the last 6 lines.  She uses the rose and the lily in the poem to describe the West and the East.  The “lily” is a representation of the white race and the “rose” depicting the reddish skin tone of the eastern race, such as her native India.  Thus the poem “The Lotus” indicates a fusion between the West and East (Dutt, 82).  Although Toru herself was raised as a Christian with western ideology, she was able to relate herself back to her Eastern roots of India in the sonnet.  The lotus is a representation of Toru and her cultural encounters living in Western Europe (Dutt, 82).  She interlaces her Western experience and education in order to create herself as her beautiful native Indian lotus flower.