Moby-Dick
Ishmael travels in December from Manhattan Island to New Bedford, Massachusetts with plans to sign up for a whaling voyage. The inn where he arrives is overcrowded, so he must share a bed with the tattooed cannibal Polynesian Queequeg, a harpooneer whose father was king of the fictional island of Rokovoko. The next morning, Ishmael and Queequeg attend Father Mapple's sermon on Jonah, then head for Nantucket. Ishmael signs up with the Quaker ship-owners Bildad and Peleg for a voyage on their whaler Pequod. Peleg describes Captain Ahab: "He's a grand, ungodly, god-like man" who nevertheless "has his humanities". They hire Queequeg the following morning. A man named Elijah prophesies a dire fate should Ishmael and Queequeg join Ahab. While provisions are loaded, shadowy figures board the ship. On a cold Christmas Day, the Pequod leaves the harbor.
Ishmael discusses cetology (the zoological classification and natural history of the whale), and describes the crew members. The chief mate is 30-year-old Starbuck, a Nantucket Quaker with a realist mentality, whose harpooneer is Queequeg; second mate is Stubb, from Cape Cod, happy-go-lucky and cheerful, whose harpooneer is Tashtego, a proud, pure-blooded Indian from Gay Head, and the third mate is Flask, also from Martha's Vineyard, short, stout, whose harpooneer is Daggoo, a tall African, now a resident of Nantucket.
1) Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
Robert Louis Stevenson, one of the masters of the Victorian adventure story, was born in Edinburgh, Scotland, on November 13, 1850. He was often sick as a child, and respiratory troubles plagued him throughout his life. He enrolled at Edinburgh University at the age of seventeen with the intention to study engineering, but ended up studying law instead. He became a qualified lawyer but did not pursue the profession, choosing instead to become a full-time writer. As a young man, he traveled through Europe, leading a bohemian lifestyle and penning his first two books, both travel narratives. Stevenson felt constrained by the strict social norms of the Victorian era during which he lived, and many of his works demonstrate a sharp tension between upstanding duty and reckless abandon.
2) Tughlaq
Tughlaq written by Girish Karnad in 1964, is his best loved play, about an idealist 14th-century Sultan of Delhi, Muhammad bin Tughluq, and allegory on the Nehruvian era which started with ambitious idealism and ended up in disillusionment.
Joe Keller and Herbert Deever, partners in a machine shop during the war, turned out defective airplane parts, causing the deaths of many men. Deever was sent to prison while Keller escaped punishment and went on to make lots of money. In a work of tremendous power, a love affair between Keller's son, Chris, and Ann Deever, Herbert's daughter, the bitterness of George Keller, who returns from the war to find his father in prison and his father's partner free, and the reaction of a son to his father's guilt escalate toward a climax of electrifying intensity.
Winner of the Drama Critics' Award for Best New Play in 1947, All My Sons established Arthur Miller as a leading voice in the American theater. All My Sons introduced, themes that thread through Miller's work as a whole: the relationship between fathers and sons, and the conflict between business and personal ethics.
William Somerset Maugham was born in 1874 and died in 1965. He is one of the most popular writer of English fiction and drama.he has written many fiction work like "The Moon and Six Pence" , "Cakes and Ale" and of Human Bondage". Once he visited Indian in 1938 and by affecting by Indian philosophy in wrote "The Razor's Edge". He is a great story teller who shows he is story's are construction of plots. He is story's are concerned with human follies and foibles. He is also master in presenting, Ironies of life.
The depiction of a psychological study of a woman's suffering / Isolation :
"The Mother" is a touching story of a jealous and possessive woman whose name is La cachirra. when the story opens we find a quarrel between la cachirra and the porter from the very begining the readers get the quarrel some of her. Which gives a hint of her isolation and sufferings. She lives on her own without disturbing her neighbors. But she becomes very possessive when her son currito visits her. Currito ,no doubt loves his mother but not as much as his mother does other new characters are introduced in this story named Pilar and Rosalia. Currito false in love with rosalia at the very first sight when his mother comes to know about his affair which rosalia she become very horrible and violent. she does not want ant woman let her son rob. Rosalia desert love Currito and becomes a rival of La cachirra.
They psychological state of La cachirra mind can be found understood very easily. For she has spend seven years in jail to save to his child from the torture pape santi, as the took shelter from him. She has been living with out son for many years. after coming back from the jail she lives again without her son as he has stay away from her for his work, so as a mother it is quite natural. she longs for her only child because she has none in the world but her only Currito. La cachirra becomes the representative of all women. who suffer from the paint of isolation.
So far as her psychological status is concerned she earns readers sympathy. She is right from her point of few that currito should give her priority. She is the woman who craves for someones company in her life as she has been alone along time La cachirra is a woman who has suffers a lot throughout her life on the other side Currito does in justice to his mother.
La Cachirras life centers around her love for her son and as a wretched woman she is shaken by curritos love for an other woman Rosalia and as a result she stabs in to her nack and kills her.
Conclusion:
To, sum up, can say that La cachirra's possessiveness and insecurity cause her isolation, she becomes the representation of those woman who are psychological disturbed her abnormal behavior is the out come of human sufferings in which Maugham is genius.
The story is narrated in first person. The narrator was sent to sea when still a boy and became a mate at the age of twenty five. The setting is sea during the year 1818, when the Spanish colonies in South America were fighting for independence.
The writer sailed in the ship named, ‘The Good Intent’. The ship was laden with gun powder. It was sent to help a revolution. She had a crew of eight. As the ship contained gun powder, They were not allowed to smoke or light the lanterns. But the Captain used to light the candle when he went to bed or when he looked over his charts on the cabin table. Therefore the regulations didn’t apply to him.
Finally they reached the coast of South America and a boat came towards them rowed by two men, one was an Irishman and the other was an evil-looking native pilot. The native pilot was “skinny, cowardly, quarrelsome fellow”. He picked quarrel with everyone. He lighted the pipe and the narrator became angry and tried to stop him. The pilot tried to push him. He raised his hand and the pilot fell down and pulled out his knife. The narrator slapped his murderous face. The next morning when the narrator awakened, he found himself bound. His hands and legs were tied. The ship was in the hands of the Spaniards and all the seven members of the ship were killed except him.
This story was about a sixty-year-old black servant, Aunt Rachel, who is very powerful. Her employer Misto C has always seen her happy and cheerful, and that's when the story began. Aunt Rachel explained that even though she was a slave before, she loved her husband and their seven children dearly. She then remembers the time when her mistress went broke and had to auction off all of her slaves. Her husband and children were all auctioned off. Her youngest son, Henry, said that when he was old enough he would run away and work so he could buy her freedom. When Aunt Rachel was purchased she was taken to Newbern, where she became the family cook. When the Union Army Officers came into town, her owner, a Confederate colonel, left his slaves behind. The officers respected Aunt Rachel. Rachel always asked the officers if they have seen Henry and she gave a description of him. One night, there was a ball in the Union Headquarters, which was also Rachel's house. She overheard a young man telling the soldiers that he wouldn't return with them. The next morning that same young man returned to the house. As soon as Rachel saw the man she knew that it was her Henry.
The protagonist of the story is a peasant named Pahom, who overhears his wife and sister-in-law argue over the merits of town and peasant farm life. He thinks to himself "if I had plenty of land, I shouldn't fear the Devil himself!". Unbeknownst to him, Satan is present sitting behind the stove and listening. Satan abruptly accepts his challenge and also tells that he would give Pahom more land and then snatch everything from him. A short time later, a landlady in the village decides to sell her estate, and the peasants of the village buy as much of that land as they can. Pahom himself purchases some land, and by working on the extra land is able to repay his debts and live a more comfortable life.
The postmaster first took up his duties in the village of Ulapur. Though the village was a small one, there was an indigo factory near by, and the proprietor, an Englishman, had managed to get a post office established.
Our postmaster belonged to Calcutta. He felt like a fish out of water in this remote village. His office and living-room were in a dark thatched shed, not far from a green, slimy pond, surrounded on all sides by a dense growth.
The men employed in the indigo factory had no leisure; moreover, they were hardly desirable companions for decent folk. Nor is a Calcutta boy an adept in the art of associating with others. Among strangers he appears either proud or ill at ease. At any rate, the postmaster had but little company; nor had he much to do.
At times he tried his hand at writing a verse or two. That the movement of the leaves and the clouds of the sky were enough to fill life with joy—such were the sentiments to which he sought to give expression. But God knows that the poor fellow would have felt it as the gift of a new life, if some genie of the Arabian Nights had in one night swept away the trees, leaves and all, and replaced them with a macadamised road, hiding the clouds from view with rows of tall houses.
Rosemary Fell, a wealthy young married woman, goes to Curzon Street to shop at a florist's and in an antique shop (in which she admires, but does not buy, a beautifully painted small ceramic box). Before going to the car, Rosemary is approached by Miss Smith, a poor girl who asks for enough money to buy tea. Instead, Rosemary drives the girl to her plush house, determined to show her "that dreams do come true" and "that rich people did have hearts." At the Fells' home, Miss Smith eats her fill of food and tea. She then begins to tell Rosemary of her life until Rosemary's husband, Philip, comes in. Although initially surprised, Philip recovers and asks to speak to Rosemary alone.
In the library, Philip conveys his disapproval. When Rosemary resists dismissing Miss Smith, Philip tries another, more successful, tactic: He plays to Rosemary's jealousy and insecurity by telling her how pretty he thinks Miss Smith is. Rosemary retrieves three five-pound notes and, presumably, sends the girl away (a far cry from Rosemary's first vow to "look after" and "be frightfully nice to" Miss Smith). Later, Rosemary goes to her husband and informs him that "Miss Smith won't dine with us tonight." She first asks about the antique box from the morning, but then arrives at her true concern, quietly asking Philip, "Am I pretty?" The story ends with this question.
It1) How do you understand memory and history with reference to your reading of this novel.
At the end we come to know that memory has record something which is good or which we think it's a good and its preserved by us and when we think it's good about us then we preserve but one more thing is that memory is not perfect memory is in perfect so we cannot rely on some of the thing is perfectly clear in our mind in our memory also but something is not clear and after letter on its mixing so we cannot rely that what exactly happened in past
Same way we find in history that history is written by historian and its base on the someone's memory and its deal with the evidence but we can find that history is always problematic just because whenever that accident or event happened at that time how we remember then give interpretation or language used its depend upon that if that accident or event is good for us then we preserve different way but when that event or accident husband memory then we will do different kind of interpretation.
Example :- " Robson " suicide
:- " Adrian" suicide
Now how we remember this 2 suicide that's depend upon us this 2 is event and how we need them and how we remember that's become a history.
2) How do you understand the concept of suicide with reference to your reading of literature ranging from Renaissance play Hamlet, 20th cen Existentialist philosophy and this 21st cen novel The Sense of an Ending?
If we go with the religion then suicide is Immoral thing and if someone has done then that person not get some spiritual ceremony at the end of his life that's why that suicide is very bad corruption practice which has not play on religion base it's a crime.
Talking about Renaissance time play "Hamlet " 'the Prince Hamlet' never think about to die he survive just because you want to Saravan that's why and Hamlet also want to win Throne that's why maybe his " EROS" are so powerful that man has server.
Albert Camus (1913–1960) began his philosophical essay The Myth of Sisyphus with the famous line "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide"
In the novel we find it to suicide was attempt , when robson and committed suicide, at that time people started knowing that that one person committed suicide and all the narration going with him after getting suicide till then no one knows him after that everyone know him so it's better than committed suicide and there is not a single connection with morality that concept has changed.
When "ADRIAN" committed suicide at that time Tony and his friend talking " that he was first in everything"
We can say that suicide is not cup of tea for people just because that's need more courage that's why.
Maybe we can say that suicide is final art and how we create that art is more important like we see in Adrian suicide that he make clear cut that after cutting his hand he made not server but death. So in that way we can say that if our all thing is completed there is nothing to you desire or wishes are full free then we can committed suicide it's our gift which we get accidentally and we can end this life and we give back to the nature now no need for this body and our life.
1)Brown states on his website that his books are not anti-Christian, though he is on a 'constant spiritual journey' himself, and says that his book The Da Vinci Code is simply "an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate" and suggests that the book may be used "as a positive catalyst for introspection and exploration of our faith."
--> main median brown was right about his work that it's just work of literature .
Maybe Da Vinci talk about some of the darker side of Christianity but ,if you see novel try to explore the Christianity and related myth, as we all know that mythical story are never true it's just human beings imagination so maybe we can except that this work Da Vinci Code maybe just try to explore the darker side of Christianity and there is nothing wrong just because it's a literature. It's depend upon us that how we see and how we interpreter the work if we find some of the meaning then there is meaning if we think that it's the same work then there is no problem.
2) “Although it is obvious that much of what Brown presented in his novel as absolutely true and accurate is neither of those, some of that material is of course essential to the intrigue, and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman has retained the novel's core, the Grail-related material: the sacred feminine, Mary Magdalene's marriage, the Priory of Sion, certain aspects of Leonardo's art, and so on[1].” How far do you agree with this observation of Norris J. Lacy?
If we see biblical reference then we come to know that 4 out of only one gospel was talking about Meri McDonald's marriage, so that's why we have no historical proof and if there is written that it's in biblical reference but not yet any Emperor proof we find so it is difficult to believe.
The secretary meaning
If we see that sometime separate family and represent to the pagan religion note in Christianity we find it just because as other religion are also believe in patriarchy and Christianity also believe in patriarchy so there is a doubtful on Shepherd feminine just because sometime we believe that purity come with the man but we forget that woman has home that only has power to give a life in this universe that's why the sacred feminine is more powerful than other.
Priory of Sion
Some of the historian and some of the Ancient people tell that Priory of Sion is a secret committee whom save or preserve some of the secret related to Christianity and they are built for preserve Second form related to Jesus Christ after death of Jesus Christ there reserve some of the cigarette which may not remain for the normal human beings.
That secret who was the Holy Grail and the Merry McDonald's dead body these two things they are hiding.
Leonardo da Vinci and his art
Might be possible that leonardo-da-vinci also one of the member of Priory of Sion and he was try to keep some of the secret from other people or they are against to the church and now they are blackmailing to judge just because they know some of the secret which can destroy basic foundation of Christianity is religion and as some of the historian says that Da Vinci was one of the best painter and he tried to secret something from world and in his painting we find some of the secret that is the interpretation which we give on his painting.
Some other people says that may be on some of the conspiracy theory tell that Da Vinci was facing some of the medical illness that's why when he was your life it's become difficult to read that's why if other person have to read Da Vinci's work then that person needs Mirror to read that all things.
3) (If)You have studied ‘Genesis’ (The Bible), ‘The Paradise Lost’ (John Milton) and ‘The Da Vinci Code’ (Dan Brown). Which of the narrative/s seem/s to be truthful? Whose narrative is convincing to the contemporary young mind?
Start with geniuses some of the chapter we have study or read but not perfectly we have study or read geniuses so it is difficult to give comment on that.
Show with paradise lost and we find that when you believe in patriarchy then that work is perfect just because it in the whole lost of the Paradise by a woman so if you believe in patriarchal then Paradise Lost is perfect but it's not convincible too young generation this because nowadays the women and men both become equal then there is nothing differentiate between them so if we do deeply reading of paradise lost then we find that maybe it's a writer personal life be described in his work and also one more thing was that the paradise lost maybe not convince to other people just because paradise lost as reference with biblical that's why it is more difficult to understand.
If we go with Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code then we can find people easily connect with novel and might be accept just because we can find that there are normal human beings they are in problem and they try to come out of this situation and finally they are getting some of the questions answer and which connected with history and some of the meat and it's becoming a reality and also the one more thing which is not found in Genesis and also in paradise lost that was suspense thriller which we not find in other work that's why that normal people can convince by Dan Brown's work The Da Vinci Code if people seeing movie then also they are convince.
4) What harm has been done to humanity by the biblical narration or that of Milton’s in The Paradise Lose? What sort of damage does narrative like ‘The Vinci Code’ do to humanity?
If we go in history then we can find that in Christianity is rise then we find that The Lost of Constantinople then Rome become powerful and after that we see that pop become more powerful than King and suddenly we find that pop become more rigid region and also the church are become more powerful by wealth and other way to become a puppet of pop and one more thing was that pop very great life and they started new way to kill people and that new weapon was religion and rule and regulation by that they have kill lots of poor people and also a woman the call women as a witch and they burn in public place and in the dark ages Christianity has sorrel Crusade will happen that's why they have lost so many people normal people are also kill on the name of religion.
In Brown's novel we find that one of the character who is historian and he spend his whole life to know the secret of holy grill and he want to explore the darker side of Christianity and he want to destroy the power of church and you want to explore that how charge has done bad thing with humanity that's why he want to preserve humanity.
5) What difference do you see in the portrayal of 'Ophelia' (Kate Winslet) in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, 'Elizabeth' (Helena Bonham Carter) in Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein or 'Hester Prynne' (Demi Moore) in Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter' or David Yates's 'Harmione Granger' (Emma Watson) in last four Harry Potter films - and 'Sophie Neuve' (Audrey Tautau) in Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code? How would justify your answer?
If you see in Hamlet and Frankenstein and Scarlet Letter director has move camera all over the women's body part which is not important but still camera has roll over to the women's body part that is not good sign if we see the original work there is not a single dimensional what we see in the movie that is the differentiate between the original work and which we see in the movie and one more thing was that it's not a camera which moves on the woman's body but it's a representation of Mens eyes which move on the women's body that is the very bad thing which train in movie but if you see Da Vinci Code movie in then you can find that are not a single kissing scene of some of the new DP is not receive present just because in this full movie we can find that how the intellectuality of women is represent not the woman's body is important as we can see it or we can feel it or it's our interpretation , Sophie was very intellectual more than doctor London
So we can say that whole movie based on the intellectual it not based on the woman's figure or woman body so in this whole movie we find that the women represent as a intellectual but not as a thing.
6) Do novel / film lead us into critical (deconstructive) thinking about your religion? Can we think of such conspiracy theory about Hindu religious symbols / myths?
Yes it is by watching movie or reading novel we can come to know that how religion has destroyed so many things lots of poor people and women by religion. Yes we can find it just because of lots of darker side in Hinduism we can find it and which was hidden by our religion gurus or many other people hiding the truth what exactly Godse they make that type of statement that which help them not help to other people if we see in Hindu religion we find that if you belong to the upper status then your life is too good you get a chance everywhere any religious ritual you want to do in your home people are love you it's become a celebration when you doing so in that way we can say that in Hindu religions so many evilness are there which was hidden still not reveal maybe nowadays in modern time it is there but we have changed the design we have modernize religion that's why we cannot identify but still they are there and still they are attacking to to the humanity.
7) Have you come across any similar book/movie, which tries to deconstruct accepted notions about Hindu religion or culture and by dismantling it, attempts to reconstruct another possible interpretation of truth?
1) MOHALLA ASSI
[ NOT :- use headphone if you watching the video ]
8) When we do traditional reading of the novel ‘The Da Vinci Code’, Robert Langdon, Professor of Religious Symbology, Harvard University emerges as protagonist and Sir Leigh Teabing, a British Historian as antagonist. Who will claim the position of protagonist if we do atheist reading of the novel?
On my point of view Sir Leigh Teabing, was the protagonist of this movie just because he want to reveal The Secret that's why he was doing for humanity not for on his self just because he want to save humanity and he want to expose the Church has the destroyed humanity and the poor people and woman that's why he was protagonist.
On my point of view Robert Langdon was not protagonist of this movie.
9) Explain Ann Gray’s three propositions on ‘knowability’ with illustrations from the novel ‘The Da Vinci Code’.
a. 1) Identifying what is knowable
b. 2) identifying and acknowledging the relationship of the knower and the known
c. 3) What is the procedure for ‘knowing’?
The White Tiger is the debut novel by Indian author Aravind Adiga. It was first published in 2008 and won the 40th Man Booker Prize in the same year.The novel provides a darkly humorous perspective of India's class struggle in a globalized world as told through a retrospective narration from Balram Halwai, a village boy. In detailing Balram's journey first to Delhi, where he works as a chauffeur to a rich landlord, and then to Bangalore, the place to which he flees after killing his master and stealing his money, the novel examines issues of religion, caste, loyalty, corruption and poverty in India Ultimately, Balram transcends his sweet-maker caste and becomes a successful entrepreneur, establishing his own taxi service. In a nation proudly shedding a history of poverty and underdevelopment, he represents, as he himself says, "tomorrow."
About Film :-
Slumdog Millionaire is a 2008 British drama film that is a loose adaptation of the novel Q & A (2005) by Indian author Vikas Swarup, telling the story of Jamal Malik, age 18, from the Juhu slums of Mumbai. Starring Dev Patel as Jamal, and filmed in India, the film was directed by Danny Boyle, written by Simon Beaufoy, and produced by Christian Colson, with Loveleen Tandan credited as co-director.
As a contestant on the Indian version of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Jamal Malik surprises everyone by being able to answer every question correctly. Accused of cheating, Jamal recounts his life story to the police, illustrating how he is able to answer each question correctly.
After its world premiere at the Telluride Film Festival and later screenings at the Toronto International Film Festival and the London Film Festival,Slumdog Millionaire had a nationwide release in the United Kingdom on 9 January 2009, in India on 22 January 2009,[10] and in the United States on 23 January 2009.
Regarded as a sleeper hit, Slumdog Millionaire was widely acclaimed, being praised for its plot, soundtrack, direction, and performances, especially Patel's. It was nominated for ten Academy Awards in 2009 and won eight—the most for any 2008 film—including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Adapted Screenplay. It won seven BAFTA Awards including Best Film, five Critics' Choice Awards and four Golden Globes. However it was also the subject of controversy, especially in India, due to its portrayal of Indian society, the use of the word "slumdog" in the title and perceived exploitation of some of the younger actors.
In the novel white tiger we can see that beginning of the novel start with most wanted criminal with red bag , police are looking towards this guy and narrator or speaker like Balram Halwai he himself describe how government ( police ) make mistake to writing about him , making Sachin mistakes he gives justification or try to breakdown what police has explain in that wanted poster line by line he try to break it.
In film the beginning with scene of interrogation by police to protagonist in that way the movie start.
And main centre of the film is one reality show where protagonist go and give correct answer and he achieve money but the host of the reality show didn't like that so call the police and the protagonist was integrated by police men.
2. Indianness
In the novel white tiger we see that :-
1) Train
2) Cricket
3) Caste system
4) Class system
5) Believe in religion
6) Darker side of India
7) Lighter side in India
8) Corruption in election
9) How politician are corrupt
10) Very bad condition of education
11) Marriage
12) Powerful corporate world
13 ) Very Vital role play by police
14) Darker side represent in village
15) Comparison between Chinese people and naxalite.
16) call centre
17) globalisation
18) child working in tea shop
In the film we can see that :-
1) train
2) poverty
3) communal riots
4) real estate
5) reality show
6) child trafficking
7) portrait of Indian darker side
8) representation of poverty like Dharavi
9) using landmark to represent Indian image in different way
10) cricket
11) call centre
12) protagonist working as a pune in call centre
3. List of questions asked in the film. If you have to replace or add a few questions, which questions would you like to add. Remember, questions shall be in-tune with the screenplay of the film .
In this movie the all question are related with protagonist life,so that's why I don't think that any question want to change. All question are apt and, there is no need to change for any questions.
4. On what grounds can u deconstruct the film with reference to post colonial tools / theories.
1) Representing potty
2) Using the landmark in different contacts
3) Train represent as a symbol ( imperialism )
4) call centre
5) Huge building represent the difference between rich people
And poor people.
6) Underworld people are controlling the business of real estate
7) how toilet also is a problem
5. Compare with Texture and Treatment of subject content in film and novel.
1) in film and novel we see that there is a darker India and lighter India are represent but major let's focus on darker side more than lighter.
These are the things which is common in film and novel
1) Light and darkness
2) caste and class conflict
3) richness and poor
4) corrupt police
5) The protagonist are uneducated
These are the differentiate which we find in film and novels
1) in film the protagonist deal with reality show,
In the novel we see that product honest deal with the Chinese premier.
2) In film we can see that religion is in centre,
In the novell we see that caste and religion is important
3) In film there is nothing outsider but it's become a globe globalised,
But in novel protagonist was focus on those who are outsider and who is insider
4) In film we see that protagonist is get success by his observation skill, and also by knowledge just because he never get a chance to educate him.
But in the novel we see that protagonist want to educate but the circumstances and not in favour that's why he leave the school and started earning money and finally by killing someone get success.
5) in film maybe we can say that there is a some kind of poetic justice,
But in novel we cannot find any kind of poetic justice.
Same of the Hindi Film example :-
1) Bajrangi Bhaijan
The Book Thief is a 2005 historical novel by Australian author Markus Zusak and is his most popular work.
After the death of Liesel's younger brother on a train to Molching, Liesel arrives at the home of her new foster parents, Hans and Rosa Hubermann, distraught and withdrawn. During her time there, she is exposed to the horrors of the Nazi regime, caught between the innocence of childhood and the maturity demanded by her destructive surroundings. As the political situation in Germany deteriorates, her foster parents conceal a Jewish fist fighter named Max Vandenburg. Hans, who has developed a close relationship with Liesel, teaches her to read, first in her bedroom, then in the basement. Recognizing the power of writing and sharing the written word, Liesel not only begins to steal books that the Nazi party is looking to destroy, but also writes her own story, and shares the power of language with Max.
Film adaptation
The Book Thief premiered at the Mill Valley Film Festival on October 3, 2013, and was released for general distribution in the United States on November 8, 2013. The film received mixed reviews upon its theatrical release with some reviewers praising its "fresher perspective on the war" and its focus on the "consistent thread of humanity" in the story, with other critics faulting the film's "wishful narrative". With a budget of $19 million, the film was successful at the box office, earning over $76 million.
The Book Thief received Academy Award, Golden Globe and BAFTA nominations for its score. For her performance in the film, Sophie Nélisse won the Hollywood Film Festival Spotlight Award, the Satellite Newcomer Award, and the Phoenix Film Critics Society Award for Best Performance by a Youth in a Lead or Supporting Role – Female. The film was released on Blu-ray and DVD on March 11, 2014.
How Film ending.
Film focus on this three things :-
1) Hitler youth move ment
2) Kristallncaht
3) Nazi book burning
Example.
May be we can comparison between Liesel and malala.
Work cited
1) https://youtu.be/1HfpQ-K0gnU
2)https://youtu.be/yHzM1gXaiVo
3)https://youtu.be/-y0uwd9QAYE
4)https://youtu.be/92EBSmxinus
5)https://youtu.be/DES7fmumwZg
6)https://youtu.be/CXvs1vwiD0M
Bradbury's early life witnessed the Golden Age of Radio, while the transition to the Golden Age of Television began right around the time he started to work on the stories that would eventually lead to Fahrenheit 451. Bradbury saw these forms of media as a threat to the reading of books, indeed as a threat to society, as he believed they could act as a distraction from important affairs. This contempt for mass media and technology would express itself through Mildred and her friends and is an important theme in the book.
Fahrenheit 451 is a dystopian novel by American writer Ray Bradbury, first published in 1953. It is regarded as one of his best works. The novel presents a future American society where books are outlawed and "firemen" burn any that are found. The book's tagline explains the title: "Fahrenheit 451 – the temperature at which book paper catches fire, and burns..." The lead character, Guy Montag, is a fireman who becomes disillusioned with his role of censoring literature and destroying knowledge, eventually quitting his job and committing himself to the preservation of literary and cultural writings.
The novel has been the subject of interpretations focusing on the historical role of book burning in suppressing dissenting ideas. In a 1956 radio interview,Bradbury said that he wrote Fahrenheit 451 because of his concerns at the time (during the McCarthy era) about the threat of book burning in the United States. In later years, he described the book as a commentary on how mass media reduces interest in reading literature.
Maybe this book deal with some kind of a dystopian fiction or literature but, when we see historical then this novel deal with Second World War time and also focus on cold world war.
First thing that Fireman r appointed to save humanity but in this novel we find that the protagonist of the novel was save to people bye not reading any literature ebooks and ending kind of save or protect literatura material in their home or maybe not preserve any kind of literature work not found at home that is the duty of this Fireman in this novel.
And one day when you are doing duty key findings one lady has preserve some of the Literature river and that men's duty was to burn that all literature rework but he has not done he stolen one book and that book was Bible.
After few day is Chief Officer come to know that this fire man has some preserve literary work then all fire staff come at home and they tell him that destroy your home with on your hand, finally at the end of the novel that firemen go to the countryside where you find some of the people who preserve the literature Re that try to understand what was in past and they are also reading poems and many other literature your butt it's a nut technological time show that one and house meant was held that within a few minutes that fire men will be catch by police and that was happened all countryside will destroy but few people still save.
That was the Historical interpretation of the story or reason or metaphor :-
Later, as a teenager, Bradbury was horrified by the Nazi book burnings and later by Joseph Stalin's campaign of political repression, the "Great Purge", in which writers and poets, among many others, were arrested and often executed.
Shortly after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the conclusion of World War II, the United States focused its concern on the Soviet atomic bomb project and the expansion of communism. The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), formed in 1938 to investigate American citizens and organizations suspected of having communist ties, held hearings in 1947 to investigate alleged communist influence in Hollywood movie-making. These hearings resulted in the blacklisting of the so-called "Hollywood Ten", a group of influential screenwriters and directors. This governmental interference in the affairs of artists and creative types greatly angered Bradbury. Bradbury was bitter and concerned about the workings of his government, and a late 1949 nighttime encounter with an overzealous police officer would inspire Bradbury to write "The Pedestrian", a short story which would go on to become "The Fireman" and then Fahrenheit 451. The rise of Senator Joseph McCarthy's hearings hostile to accused communists, beginning in 1950, deepened Bradbury's contempt for government overreach.
The year HUAC began investigating Hollywood is often considered the beginning of the Cold War, as in March 1947, the Truman Doctrine was announced. By about 1950, the Cold War was in full swing, and the American public's fear of nuclear warfare and communist influence was at a feverish level. The stage was set for Bradbury to write the dramatic nuclear holocaust ending of Fahrenheit 451, exemplifying the type of scenario feared by many Americans of the time.
The year HUAC began investigating Hollywood is often considered the beginning of the Cold War, as in March 1947, the Truman Doctrine was announced. By about 1950, the Cold War was in full swing, and the American public's fear of nuclear warfare and communist influence was at a feverish level. The stage was set for Bradbury to write the dramatic nuclear holocaust ending of Fahrenheit 451, exemplifying the type of scenario feared by many Americans of the time.
હું દોસ્તી માં વિચાર તો હતો કે રૂપ નથી જોવા તુ.
પન હું ખોટો હતો , મિત્ર તા પન રૂપ જોઈ ન કરાય છે.
લોકો ભૂલી જાય છે, કરે લા ઉપ કાર એ માનવ કે વા.
હું તો માનતો હતો કે મિત્રતા મા રૂપ નથી જોતા.
પણ હું ખોટો હતો ને ,ખોટો પુરાવાર પણ થયો.
મિત્રતા પણ રૂપ જોય થાવા લાગી , સાહેબ.
એ મિત્ર જે તમારો સાથ આપે જે દિ આખો સમાજ (પ્રમિ) છોડી ચાલો જાય,
તો પન એ મિત્ર જે તમારી સાથે ઉભા હોય એ મિત્ર.
મિત્રો શું માગે બસ તમારી પાસે માંન, પાન.
પન જો તમે એ પણ ન આપી સકો તો .
તમે મીત્ર નો ફરજ નથી બજાવી રહી યાં.
જો તમે તમારા પ્રેમી સાથી રહી સક તા હો,
સાહેબ તો તમે તમારા મીત્રો સાથે પન સમય બિતા વો.
જો તમે તમારા પ્રેમી ની બાહો માં રહી સકો છો,
તો પછી તમે તમારા મિત્રો ને સાથે પન રહી જ સકો.
જો તમને તમારા પ્રેમી સાથે ફરવા મા કોઈ મુશિ બત ન હોય તો ,
તમે તમારા મિત્રો સાથે બોલવા માં શું પરેશાની,
બસ આજ સવાલ છે મારો ,શું છે એનો જવાબ?
કોને ખબર આ નો શું જવાબ હસે .
પન કોક દિ આ નો પન જવાબ મલ્સે આવી મ ને આશા છે.
જો લોકો એ ના પ્રમી સાથે ફરી શકે છે, એ પન નિર્ભય થઈ ને તો,
કેમ એ એના મિત્રો સાથે લોકો ની સામે બોલા વામા સમાજ આડો આવે છે?
કેમ આવું થાતુ હસે ખબર નઈ, પન એ નો પન જવાબ આપ જો.
જો તમે તમારા પ્રેમી ની સાથે ફરી સકો છો ,તો તમે તમારા મિત્રો ને પન બોલાવી સકો છો.
બસ માહી પૂછે છે સવાલ એ ના મિત્ર ને દોસ્ત તું કમ
ભૂલી જા છો મારી મિત્ર તા ? શું મારી દોસ્તો એટલે હલકી છે કે,
તારી મોહો બત સામે મારી મિત્રતા જીવી પન સકતી નાતી ?
બસ એજ સવાલ મારા મિત્ર ન ??? તો તારી નીયાત મા ખોટ છે .
શું હું ખાલી હું તારા માટે એક વસ્તુ જ છું ????
में वेसे शहार आया जह हूसन का सौदा होता है।
पहले बात दील से दिल की हुई थी।
न जाने क्यूं ये दिल से हुसन का है गाय।
कहा तो यह था कि इस शहार में
मोहोबत होती हैं पर न जाने क्यूं अब जिस्मबजी हो रही है।
में पागल अंधिरे नगरी में उजाला ठूड रहा था।
हुसन के बाजार में ,में दिल का सौदा कर रहा था।
ये हुसन - ए - सहर में सब कुछ बिकता है जनाब,
यहां जिस्म बिकता है , ईमान बिकता है।
मुजे लगा दिल से दिल का सौदा होगा।
पर येतो हुसन से हुसन का घाटेका का सौदा हो गया।
जहा मोहोबात ढूड रहा था, यहां हुस्न ठूडा जा रहा था।
आख़िर कार मेंभी दिल से दिल का सौदा कर आया।
पर यह सौदा किसी शिस्ट समाज या खानदानी जगह पे नही हुआ,
पर यह सौदा मेरे दिल और उन अंधेरी रातो की गली यो में ,
बज रहे धुधरू ओ के साथ हुआ।
हा मूजे पता है ये शिस्ट समाज का कोय सौदा नथा पर यसी अंधरी सहर में ,
लाल मधियं रोशनी में मुजे दिल से दिल का सौदा मिला।
सायद ये किसी शिस्ट समाज के लिऐ ये गेर - जमानती था ,या वाजिब सौद न था ,
पर मेरे लिए सचा सौदा था।
इसी लिए माही के गए करे दिल से दिल का सौदा, तो मुनाफा होई।
जो करे सौदा जिसम का तो ठाई सब्दो का क्या मोल र जयी।
Name : Goswami mahir pari c.
Sem : 3
Roll no. : 21
Email Id : goswamimahirpari786@gmail.com
Enrollment no : 20691084201180021
Submitted to : Department of English MKBU
Topic : Edgar Allan Poe’s working style
There may be no more a macabrely misogynistic sentence in English literature than Edgar Allan Poe’s contention that “the death… of a beautiful woman” is “unquestionably the most poetical topic in the world.” (His perhaps ironic observation prompted Sylvia Plath to write, over a hundred years later, “The woman is perfected / Her dead / Body wears the smile of accomplishment.”) The sentence comes from Poe’s 1846 essay “The Philosophy of Composition,” and if this work were only known for its literary fetishization of what Elisabeth Bronfen calls “an aesthetically pleasing corpse"—marking deep anxieties about both “female sexuality and decay”—then it would indeed still be of interest to feminists and academics, though not perhaps to the average reader.
But Poe has much more to say that does not involve a romance with dead women. The essay delivers on its title’s promise. It is here that we find Poe’s famous theory of what good literature is and does, achieving what he calls “unity of effect.” This literary “totality” results from a collection of essential elements that the author deems indispensable in “constructing a story," whether in poetry or prose, that produces a “vivid effect.”
To illustrate what he means, Poe walks us through an analysis of his own work, “The Raven.” We are to take for granted as readers that “The Raven” achieves its desired effect. Poe has no misgivings about that. But how does it do so? Against commonplace ideas that writers “compose by a species of fine frenzy—an ecstatic intuition,” Poe has not “the least difficulty in recalling to mind the progressive steps of any of my compositions”---steps he considers almost "mathematical." Nor does he consider it a “breach of decorum” to pull aside the curtain and reveal his tricks. Below, in condensed form, we have listed the major points of Poe’s essay, covering the elements he considers most necessary to “effective” literary composition.
Know the ending in advance, before you begin writing.
“Nothing is more clear,” writes Poe, “than that every plot, worth the name, must be elaborated to its dénouement before any thing be attempted with the pen.” Once writing commences, the author must keep the ending “constantly in view” in order to “give a plot its indispensable air of consequence” and inevitability.
Keep it short---the "single sitting" rule.
Poe contends that “if any literary work is too long to be read at one sitting, we must be content to dispense with the immensely important effect derivable from unity of impression.” Force the reader to take a break, and “the affairs of the world interfere” and break the spell. This “limit of a single sitting” admits of exceptions, of course. It must—or the novel would be disqualified as literature. Poe cites Robinson Crusoe as one example of a work of art “demanding of no unity.” But the single sitting rule applies to all poems, and for this reason, he writes, Milton’s Paradise Lost fails to achieve a sustained effect.
Decide on the desired effect.
The author must decide in advance “the choice of impression” he or she wishes to leave on the reader. Poe assumes here a tremendous amount about the ability of authors to manipulate readers’ emotions. He even has the audacity to claim that the design of the “The Raven” rendered the work “universally appreciable.” It may be so, but perhaps it does not universally inspire an appreciation of Beauty that “excites the sensitive soul to tears”—Poe’s desired effect for the poem.
Choose the tone of the work.
Poe claims the highest ground for his work, though it is debatable whether he was entirely serious. As “Beauty is the sole legitimate province of the poem” in general, and “The Raven” in particular, “Melancholy is thus the most legitimate of all poetical tones.” Whatever tone one chooses, however, the technique Poe employs, and recommends, likely applies. It is that of the “refrain”—a repeated “key-note” in word, phrase, or image that sustains the mood. In “The Raven,” the word “Nevermore” performs this function, a word Poe chose for its phonetic as much as for its conceptual qualities.
Poe claims that his choice of the Raven to deliver this refrain arose from a desire to reconcile the unthinking “monotony of the exercise” with the reasoning capabilities of a human character. He at first considered putting the word in the beak of a parrot, then settled on a Raven—“the bird of ill omen”—in keeping with the melancholy tone.
Determine the theme and characterization of the work.
Here Poe makes his claim about “the death of a beautiful woman,” and adds, “the lips best suited for such topic are those of a bereaved lover.” He chooses these particulars to represent his theme---“the most melancholy,” Death. Contrary to the methods of many a writer, Poe moves from the abstract to the concrete, choosing characters as mouthpieces of ideas.
Establish the climax.
In “The Raven,” Poe says, he “had now to combine the two ideas, of a lover lamenting his deceased mistress and a Raven continuously repeating the word ‘Nevermore.’” In bringing them together, he composed the third-to-last stanza first, allowing it to determine the “rhythm, the metre, and the length and general arrangement” of the remainder of the poem. As in the planning stage, Poe recommends that the writing “have its beginning—at the end.”
Determine the setting.
Though this aspect of any work seems the obvious place to start, Poe holds it to the end, after he has already decided why he wants to place certain characters in place, saying certain things. Only when he has clarified his purpose and broadly sketched in advance how he intends to acheive it does he decide “to place the lover in his chamber… richly furnished.” Arriving at these details last does not mean, however, that they are afterthoughts, but that they are suggested—or inevitably follow from—the work that comes before. In the case of "The Raven," Poe tells us that in order to carry out his literary scheme, “a close circumscription of space is absolutely necessary to the effect of insulated incident.”
Throughout his analysis, Poe continues to stress—with the high degree of repetition he favors in all of his writing—that he keeps “originality always in view.” But originality, for Poe, is not “a matter, as some suppose, of impulse or intuition.” Instead, he writes, it “demands in its attainment less of invention than negation.” In other words, Poe recommends that the writer make full use of familiar conventions and forms, but varying, combining, and adapting them to suit the purpose of the work and make them his or her own.
Though some of Poe’s discussion of technique relates specifically to poetry, as his own prose fiction testifies, these steps can equally apply to the art of the short story. And though he insists that depictions of Beauty and Death---or the melancholy beauty of death---mark the highest of literary aims, one could certainly adapt his formula to less obsessively morbid themes as well.
