Wordsworh's preface to Lyrical Ballads

This blog is written as a comment under the Blog of Dr, Dilip Barad on viewing experience of  video and reply to the questions asked in blog. these video   prepare in Department of English, MKBU. These videos are about unit on "Wordswoth's preface on lyrical Ballads". here is my reply of it.

The videos are really helpful to us In creating a better understanding of the point about the wordsworth’s preface to the lyrical ballad.

The difference between classicism and romanticism is became quite clear. Classicist are believing in intellect as a guiding force. Whereas romantic were believing In imagination as guiding force. Classical were strongly following the rules and regulation while romantics are believing In free play of mind. For example, The writers of the Neo- classical age like pope and other where writing In the classical style of writing, And  they described city, urban life. Whereas Romantics were giving more importance to rustic life, their emotion, their way of life and so on. Romantic writers strongly felt that life of common people can also be the subject of poetry. because rustic people are close to nature, they are more innocent. Simplicity was the trademark of their poetry.

Classicists were believed In restrained (controlled) emotions. According to them emotions should be restrained. But romantics thought that poetry should be Spontaneous and unrestricted. Whatever they feel they are free  to express In simple manner. it means that it is not necessary to follow classical rules of writing, poetry can be written In simple language and for simple, common, rustic people. Even there is difference Indian their approach to life. Classicist were objective and romantic were subjective.

Wordsworth says what is poet rather than who is poet because generally we attached who with a person but wordsworth says what is poet it means that which are the qualities which makes poet different than other people, So He says what is poet. He says that poet is a man speaking to man, endowed with more lively sensibility. All can’t creat lively image as poet can. So here poet differs.  And more than that poet has greater knowledge of human nature. We all are living In this world, all are passing through same experiences, but we can’t express that In harmonius way whereas poet can. Poet can understand and express it very well. Poet has capacity to conjure people In the world of imagination. He is a person who creats verbal world Indian which we lost. Indian short poet is the person who has ability creat thing more beautiful than it actually is Indian reality,  And through which reader gets aesthetic delight.

Diction means choice of language. Language of poetry differs from the language of prose. So definitely question comes that what should be the language of poetry. wordsworth put emphasis on writing poetry  In the ordinary language of people, not a highly crafted poetical one. Simplicity was given priority. He believed that rural people are simple, innocent, so their language should be language of poem. The language of poetry should be the language really used by men. At the same time all the words/language cannot used Indian poetry, so Henry says it should be filtered and refined. And refined vernacular word should be diction of poetry. His language of poetry is easily understandable,   simple but highly philosophical.  one of his famous line  ‘I  wander lonely as a cloud’ is example of this.

Poetry is a spontaneous overflow of powerful feeling recollected Indian tranquillity. Hesays that enjoy the  the nature with open heart, and later Inyour  free time (tranquillity), sit down and try to recollect what you have seen/ experienced. Whenever you will remember that once again that powerful emotion will comes into your mind. And that experiences  collected Indian tranquillity is poetry according to wordsworth.

Thus, I have tried to give answer as per my comprehension.

 Thank you 

Digital Humanities

What is digital Humanities?

The digital humanities is an area of research, technique and creation concerned with the intersection of computing and the disciplines of the humanities. developing from the field of  humanities computing, digital humanity embraces a variety of topics ranging from curating online collections to data mining large cultural data sets. Digital humanities currently incorporates both digitized and both digital and born digital materials and combines the methodologies from traditional humanities disciplines such as history, philosophy, linguistic, literature, art, archaeology, music and cultural studies.

 What D.H doing at Eng. Dept.?

First, after numeric input , text has been by far the most traceable data type for the computers to manipulate. Unlike audio, video, and so on.

Second, there is  the long association between computers and compositions, almost as long and just as rich lineage.

Third, it is a modest but much promoted belle-altruistic project around hypertext and other forms of electronic literature that  continues this day and is increasingly vibrant and diverse.

Yes there is need to do more research in the field of literature because through the use of technology in the field of criticism we get do a lot better thing. For example no one can read text book of hundreds of year, but by making digital text we can evaluate  thousands of texts. For example which word is most use in that particular book is possible to know through this.

Ergodic discourse is a Greek word means ‘Ergos’= work, and Hodos= path.

Cyber texts are  not exclusively electronic or digital. A machine for the production of variety and expression. Traditional reader simply does not have the same degree of influence.

Games are labyrinths and worlds, rather than representations. Text as a machine with different parts and users.

This is great help in our regional languages, for example we can create digital text and do research in this.

Structuralism

 I have read Dilip Barad sir's  blog as a part of sem 2 study , and after this now I will try to analyze T.V. serial or advertisement through structuralist approach.

Structuralist critics like Ferdinand Saussure, Gerald Genette , Roland Barthes, Claude Levi-Strauss etc ., gave their valuable contribution in this approach. Structuralist critics founds basic common structure in every work. He says that skeleton is the structure and it is same every where. Similarly literature has a basic structure which we found common every where.

Here as per instruction rather than writing about structuralism I would  try to analyze like structuralist critic.

For example every literary text has a Beginning, Middle ( Climax) and End.

Movie like P.K. RANGRASIA, OH MY GOD  has a same structure- anti religion or challenges this ideas. If we take structuralist approach then OMG IS better than PK. Structure of both is same.

For example T.V. serial  CID  helps us to understand NARRATOLOGY.  Structure is same for example murder occurs, detection and murderer found by detective. This structure is same in every episode since 17 years. But they make changes in presenting it.

Most of hindi movies  or literature are same. For example  boy+ girl love each other but family is against it or vice versa family ready to marriage but children do not like each other.

We also find binary opposition every where. Good-evil, male-female, god- Satan, white-black.

This and other many common things are found everywhere. This are the few examples .

Thank you

Deconstruction / Poststructuralism by Derrida

 My interpretation of the questions about Deconstruction by Derrida is as follow.

First of all Deconstruction is really a bit difficult to understand, and one reason is that Derrida does not define the Deconstruction. First of all he asks that question that is it possible to define anything once and for all??  Or at what extent can we define something??? So he denies to define  deconstruction.

Derrida’s position is more  philosophical than real. He proves theoretically, not practically.

First of all Deconstruction is not a destructive activity, but it is an inquiry into the foundations of every thing. Deconstructionist critics goes deep into the foundation of text and then they try to subvert , undermine it. Derrida says that every text contains element which  can deconstruct itself.

Structuralist critics says that there is a meaning in the text but Poststructuralist critics says that there is no meaning at all. He talks about free play of meaning. And they also gave idea of supplementarity or decentering the center.

Derrida says that same text cannot be read in the same way. He also talks about free play of meaning that any word can be used for word. It is we who have given the meanings to everything.

We think that words takes us towards the meaning, but at the same time it also takes us away from the meaning. For example what is the meaning of the word “interest”??   we don’t know the meaning of this word, so we go to dictionary to find its meaning. And from dictionary we can get following meaning like…hobby, share in business etc. are meaning. If we take another word BAT, then we will find its meaning like…a kind of mammal,  an old woman, cricket bat  all this meaning we will get.   So what he tries to say that when we go to dictionary then we will find another word for that. The meaning of one word is set of another word, then what is the meaning of those words??.   So he says  FINAL MEANING IS ALWAYS POSTPONED.  According to him FINAL MEANING IS MYTH.

He also talks about phonocentricism and logocentricism  as well as metaphysics of  presence  and metaphysics of absence. He denies western tendency to privilege speech over writing. When we say I am man it means I am this not and that. So presence of one thing is absence of many things.

For example     FESTIVAL OF VASANTPANCHAMI  can be deconstructed.  At this day all the Muhurts  marriages are good. And at the same day  we worship goddess SARASVATI – symbol of education.  But both these opposite things    ( science VS  Nature,  Raw VS  cocked  debate) now a day Raw is corruption but actually it is natural .same way marriage is natural and education is  corruption.   When we go deep into the foundation at that time we found that puja , worship of Saraswati is problematic.  But somebody has merged this both. So when  we go deep into the foundations of this rituals we c an subvert, undermine,  blast the basic ritual.  This is the Deconstruction.

We can go deep into the foundation of anything and then we can deconstruct  it, subvert it, blast it, undermine it.

Thank you

One Night @ the call center by Chetan Bhagat

Chetan Bhagat ON@TCC blog 

(1) Contemporary issues in on@tcc:

From the beginning we are discussing the nature and function of literature. What is literature and what does literature do?Literature is not just imaginative stories written in leisure time only for entertainment. But it is reflection of time, place and society in which we are living. Literature is mirror or photographic image of society. Equally literature is also an X ray image portraying ugly, darker sides of society.

Similarly this novel also throws light on the contemporary issues of present society. All six major characters have their own problems in their personal life. Actually, they are not just imaginative characters, but they are mouthpiece or representative of majority of Indians.

Call center  is a place which unites all the six major characters. Bhagat calls Call centers  as a Soul destroying, air conditioned sweatshops. Most of people were considering it as a great help in boosting our economy. It gives new job opportunities to young people with handsome amount of salary.

But nobody was able to see the under current damage it does. This is the most productive and educated young generation of India. India was never so young before. But this young generation has to work according to American clock, have to talk in American accents and have to change even names also. For example Varun - Vroom, Shyam- Sam, etc.How painful it is to lose identity of one's own for the sake of others or job!!!!!. This is the newer form of slavery and colonization.(Slavery was never abolished; it is just changed to include everyone.-New work culture in office).

And more than that they condition the mind of youth by Ads. what does it mean to be young ?Being youth means  to eat pizza, to drink Coca-Cola, view item songs only. This conditioning is done to majority of people.

Apart from this other issues are also beautifully touched upon like... Love/ arranged marriage, breakup & patch up, Bossism, exploitation in modeling or other sectors, OLD MORALITY- NEW MORALITY, family values, constant fight of parents and its effect on children, low self esteem, emotional blackmailing, hire & fire work culture, anti- American sentiments and many more......

Anti- American sentiments are very strong in this novel. Bhagat through character of Vroom criticizes american policy. American DREAM is just myth. they are not happiest people. He also criticizes war mongering habit of america. those who fight a lot they are the most fearful people. vroom says  Americans suck the life blood out of our country’s most productive generation 

 ‘a thirty-five-year-old American’s brain and IQ is the same as a ten-years-old Indian’s brain. This will help you understand your clients. You need to be as patient as you are when dealing with a child. Americans are dumb, just accept it. this quote explains strong anti American sentiments.

2. Can you justify this observation?

“Bhagat's tone is pitch-perfect, hisObserver’s eye keenly focused on nuanceand detail. Verisimilitude is all: The firsttwo thirds of the novel evokes, indeedreproduces, the way the young callCenter workers think, talk, eat, and drink,Dress, date and behave.” (Tharoor).

Yes, it is quite true observation depicted in the novel of young people in the novel. Vroom complains about America and its negative effect on Indians. He also criticizes call centers. At that time someone says that if this is what happens then why don’t you leave the job. But he replies that I can’t, because I also want to live the way my other friends live. And for that he requires money.

“Bhagat has a talent for tapping into the zeitgeist; that he is not much older than the people he writes about makes him a particularly credible portrayal  of their world.”(Tharoor). 

☆ zeitgeist =¤The spirit of the age; the taste, outlook, and spirit /characteristic of a period.

¤spiritus mundi   
temper of the times

It is interesting observation by Shashi Tharoor that this is what "New" India is. Generally YOUTH hadn’t found enough space in past, especially in Indian writing in English. But Chetan Bhagat is able to catch the spirit of the age. This is what we find happening in and around world. The way youngsters live, eat, talk, drink, behave, spend money is brilliantly capture here. In DRYDEN's word it is JUST & LIVELY IMAGE of contemporary India.


Had Bhagat’s vision been shallow, he wouldn’t’t have been able to see “call-centers as soul- destroying sweatshop, soaking up the energies of young Indians who could be doing better for themselves and their country”. 

 Chetan Bhagat with this observation has captured the skeleton image of the undercurrents in the society

Many people criticize Bhagat's novels as simple, childish things without philosophical depth and keen observation. Though book is written in simple diction, it is not good idea to neglect its importance. It does present the skeleton image or undercurrent of society. It is a kind of reality which may gave shock to many people. Because working in call centers makes them submissive. Why they have to speak in American accents only?? Because if this people identifies them as Indians, then they may abuse Indians. Even if they abuse this people has to speak in decent language. This creates huge Psychological damage/ impact on the minds of the youngsters. It generates LOW SELF ESTEEM, which is found in the character of Shyam.

Corporate sectors USE energy of youngsters by showing dangling carrot. Success story of just 5% people are being told again and again. But what about other 95% people

.their stories never come out. It gives more opportunities to younger people. Because they are full of energy and enthusiasm. Older people cannot work like them. So they are thrown out of job. The same will happen with young generation also, that when their stamina will decrease, when they grew old they will be thrown away from job. (THROW AWAY CULTURE) .they is trapped, used as ploy. And when one comes to know about this, it’s too late.

This is what happening at present time. Everybody is not able to see the undercurrent effect. But Bhagat has very well presented these issues.

Here it is appropriate to use words of Coleridge that :-“ Had Mr. Wordsworth's poems been the silly, the childish things … they must have sunk at once, a dead weight, into the slough of oblivion, and have dragged the preface along with them.”  Similarly after so many years of its publication the book and writer both are still alive- read a lot by large number of people. Had it been worthless, childish thing people might have forgotten it. It has something which appeals to many.


★
Mannepean satire is a seriocomic genre, in Greek literature and Latin literature, in which contemporary institutions, conventions, and ideas were criticized in a mocking satiric style that mingled prose and verse.

At much extent this novel is example of it, because it also satirizes many institutions and ideas and conventions. For example Marriage institution, Bossism, work culture



 Cyberpunk:-

→(science fiction) A subgenre of science fiction which focuses on computer or information technology and virtual reality.

A cyberpunk character, a hacker punk, a high-tech low life.

There are few elements which leads us to read this novel as cyber punk.

-The "BUG" found in MS office is turned out as plot mover.

-open G mail account of Mr.Bakshi and as result fake mail drafted by Vroom is fine example of it.

Narrative technique:-

Apart from what is told in story, HOW part is also very important. Writer himself was traveling in train from Kanpur to Delhi. And then he meets a young girl, who tells him a story on condition of writing it as his  second novel. He listens the story, and story is told by  Shyam- one of the characters in the novel. In the beginning Shyam is introduced and then he introduces other major characters. So this narrative pattern in also very interesting.

PROLOGUE & EPILOGUE:-
Chetan Bhagat makes very good use of prologue and epilogue in his novel. In prologue, writer himself comes as character and talks with the reader.
It looks like Bhagat is well aware about the literary tradition of writing. Exact time and place of action is given. Which follows the Aristotelian unities of time, place and action. Deux ex Machina, is something which must be avoided. So he gives alternative narrative of  entire novel .which proves that God's intervention is not a mistake, but author deliberately does so.
There are many parallel/ similarities in Narrative technique of One Night @ The call center  by Bhagat and "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel- the  Canadian writer. For example beginning of the novel- Prologue. Both the writer himself present in the prologue telling how they got inspiration about writing their second novel. Both the writers meets person who tells them stories - a young lady in ON@tcc and an old man in Life of Pi. Both tell that you can meet the real people to collect more information.

Other parallel is Experience of God. There is not clarity about God, but rather it’s indicated and experienced. One can't say with surety that God is present or not.

And one more point is First person Narration in both the novels- Shyam and Pi- narrator and protagonist in both the novels.

EPILOGUE:-

And in the epilogue of both the novels alternative reading is given. When Japanese insurance agents listen the story of Pi, they are not ready to believe it. They say our company won’t believe this. So Pi tells another story replacing Animals with human beings. When Yann Martel asks what correct story is, Pi tells a story which I told you. But now it’s your story, you can write the way you wish. The same lines are also found in ON@tcc also. When Bhagat asks that people may not believe story with God's call. so the lady tells that you can replace the lines of God with Military uncle.

So, this is the parralel in Narrative technique in both novels, which is quite interesting.


★ Popular literature:-

ON@TCC is charged by many critics as popular literature.

But what is popular literature ??
Popular literature
Commonly lacks a sustained plot, worked

Out with close regard to cause and effect.
a good literary text should have cause &  effect justified. But here it is not so. God's call is there but its justification is not given. effect is there but cause is not justified.☆Still more characteristically it lacks the study of character and the intellectual analysis of such varied problems as occupy the fiction of the present age.
Why Bhagat's novel not won awards or critical acclaim ??- the reason is that characters are not well developed. All the characters are flat characters. God’s call comes and they easily accept without doubting or questioning. The details about characters upbringing is not given as it is given in Life of Pi. Pi believes in God, because from childhood he was grown up with stories of god. He believed in all the religions. So when he tells in the novel that I experienced god, it looks appropriate. Whereas in Bhagat's book it isn’t happening.

→The popular romances lay their stress chiefly on incident and adventure or simple intrigue, and set forth only the more familiar and accepted moral teachings.

ON@TCC:-It is not about something very great adventure characters are doing. What is written is the book is the day to day life of many people.And the moral teaching given by God is not something very great, because it is Chetan Bhagat's god. The kind of Teaching given in the book is already told in many books. He is just putting it in simple language. So it lacks that high seriousness. So it is appropriate to say that ON@TCC present an instinctive or traditional, rather than a highly reflective, philosophy of life. It does not raise or answerabstract questions also. It has happy ending, but life is actually not so. But Post Modern text never ends in clear cut way, but it does so.Because of all these reasons critics  have come to be regarded chiefly as the literature of children- because this kinds of stories were told in the beginning or at childhood of civilization. and if still these kinds of stories are told and people enjoy then we have to doubt whether humanity has evolved or not???

So, from much perspective this novel falls under the category of popular literature. But then even to degrade the text because it is popular is not a good idea. To be popular or classic is not in book's hand. Every text has its pros and cons.

To The Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf

• To The Lighthouse 

• it is a beauty of great literary texts that it remains open for various interpretations .the work can be praise for a point, at the same time can be criticize for that also.it is so complex that it is difficult to derive any conclusion from such literary texts.one fine example of this in the novel is character of Mrs. Ramsay."The novel is both the tribute and critique of Mrs. Ramsay".

• since the publication of the novel, till many years Mrs. Ramsay was considered as a heroine of the novel. She  is  a  dutiful  and  loving  wife of Mr. Ramsay. Mrs.  Ramsay  is  a  wonderful hostess  who  takes  pride  in  making  memorable  experiences  for  the  guests  at  the  family. Affirming  traditional  gender  roles  wholeheartedly,  she  lavishes particular  attention  on  her  male  guests,  who  she  believes  have  delicate  egos  and  need  constant support  and  sympathy.
• 
  
•   
• on the contrary, there is character of Lily Briscoe, who is completely different than Mrs. Ramsay.she is a single, individual person with beautiful gift of painting.Mrs.Ramsay and Lily Briscoe are women with different ideology.

• Mrs.Ramsay thinks that women should take care of family, husband, children and kitchen. And she insist others  comparing it with Shakespeare's " Taming of shrew”. She is conditioning other women to live under patriarchal structure, rather than becoming a radical, individual thinker this is the biggest objection feminist critics are having against Mrs.Ramsay.

• she is constantly satisfying ego of Mr.Ramsay.she works whole day-wakes up early, sleeps late at night, manages every household things.so in sense she is setting wrong model for women. That women has to sacrifice her own self for the sake of other.

• Mrs. Ramsay is the idea of Ideal Indian Woman.(reference to article)Thearticle is saying a kula dharma patni (perfect house wife) should possess the qualities like loyalty, intelligence, unconditional love, cheers for good causes, dedication, humility and boundless compassion.

• All this qualities are sprouting from Mrs.Ramsay.

• ★Symbolism:-
• 
  
•  Representation of a concept through symbols or underlying meanings of objects or qualities.
• To The Lighthouse is full of various symbols. The Lighthouse itself is the biggest symbol, suggesting many things.
• Lighthouse guides to those who are travelling in the sea. it is used for Mrs.Ramsay in the novel. She stands alone like lighthouse and keeps united to family. She is strong like lighthouse in between emotionally shattered family members. Lighthouse is also symbol of spiritual strength and emotional guidance. When there is no hope or direction in sea, it is lighthouse which helps there. The same important place is of Mrs.Ramsay holds in the novel.
• Charles Tansley tells Lily Briscoe that Women can’t paint or write. But at the end of the novel she completes her painting, which shows her stoicism like lighthouse. And this can be connect with writer herself that it is a women's determination to succeed in male oriented society.so whatever Lily is experiencing same thing might have experience by Woolf herself. But she stood like Lighthouse and guide other women that you can do whatever you want. Completion of painting suggests victory of woman. so that other can inspire from them.

• ★Lily's dilemma:-

• "... the wages of obedience is death, and the daughter that reproduces mothering to
• perfection, including child-bearing, already has on her cheeks the pallor of death. One reminded here of various texts by Lucy Irigaray, in which she attacks mothers for being, however unwillingly, accomplices in the patriarchal system of oppression." 

• This is about Prue Ramsay, who died because of illness related to child birth. Lily Briscoe thinks that Mrs.Ramsay always busy in match making and insist her also to get married. But what is the use of it? Mrs.Ramsay's her own daughter followed that and died. So Mrs.Ramsay was wrong. I AM MORE HAPPIER, Lily thinks.it is not that one has to get married to be happy in life.one can be more happy by remaining single.

• ☆What does cutting of 'Refrigerator' signify?

• in the beginning of the novel James cutting picture of Refrigerator from the 'Army and
• Navy' catalogue. on surface level it looks trivial and normal playing of a child but New reading gave new vision to understand this deep symbolism.
• Refrigerator is preserver, which preserves the thing for a longer period of time. at the same time it is unnatural also- not allow to.change.it means that Mrs.Ramsay anyhow tries to keep family united. She preserves the relation. It also signifies War and Consumerism - the two evils which walk hand in hand. And act against larger interest of Human Beings. And one more thing is that HE is allowed to cut not SHE.BOY'S PRIVILEDGED POSITION IN FAMILY

• it is still open for new interpretation.

• ☆ tale of the “Fisherman’s Wife”

• Mrs.Ramsay is reading story of Fisherman’s Wife in the novel.it has significance in the story. Mrs.Ramsay can be compared with Fisherman's Wife. Fisherman’s wife is greedy, always forced her husband to demand more from Fish.
• Both Mrs.Ramsay and Fisherman's wife makes unreasonable demands upon their husbands. The way man was right in story, similarly Mr.Ramsay was right in treatment of the children. He tells truth directly to James, that whether won’t be fine, where Mrs.Ramsay treats her emotionally.Mr.Ramsay says children should grow rational, because life is difficult.Mrs.Ramsay says make them happy today.

• ■ why did she weave such a misogynist tale into the fabric of a book which so eloquently challenges received patriarchal notions about the roles and capabilities of women?

• →Because if women can’t accept the truth and always goes with emotion, then it is also dangerous in relation.( for example domestic violence in present time)
• 
  
• and to understand this we have to subvert the fairy tale of Fisherman.-here woman Mrs.is acting with empathy.But there is a difference between emotional level of truth V/S rational level of truth (thinking).
• 
  
• ☆How do you interpret the last line of the novel
• (It was done; it was finished.

• Yes, she thought, laying down her brush in extreme fatigue, I have had my vision .) with reference to the ending of the film (After the final stroke on the canvass with finishing touch, Lily walks inside the house. As she goes ante- chamber, the light and dark shade makes his face play hide-and-seek. She climbs stairs, putsher brush aside, walks through the dark and light to enter her room. Gently closes the door - speaks: "Closed doors, open windows" - lies on the bed and with some sort of satisfactionutters: "Dearest Briscoe, you are a fool".)

• The novel is open ended, so there is possibility of much interpretation.
• one interpretation can be like this that she realize that way of living life of Mrs.Ramsay was perfect. IN MOVIE, they have presented in better way that Lily remembers Mrs.Ramsay, and also moves sensuously her hand over her body, goes into bedroom etc. symbolizes that may be she is ready to accept the role of Mrs.Ramsay.

• On the other hand we can say that she can never be as enduring as Mrs.Ramsay. No Doors, no windows, her painting is the best. She loves 'a room of her own', her loneliness,
• her art. Thus, it is critique of the. Sacrificial nature of Mrs. Ramsay.

Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett- & its Movie screening

I am not agree with those who are considering viewing 

(screening) of Waiting for Godot, a play ( movie version) a monotonous experience. Rather it is very humorous (on surface level only) and full of  short, repetitive dialogue. After viewing the movie, while returning home and throughout night, I was thinking WHAT WAS IT ALL ABOUT??? WHAT DOES IT WANTS TO SAY?? 

I was asking to myself.....

WHAT IS PURPOSE OF OUR ( ROUTINE, MECHANICAL)

 LIFE?ARE WE VLADIMIR & ESTRAGON???WHAT IS THE
 SIGNIFICANCE OF LIFE WE ARE LIVING?? OR WHAT IS

LIFE? WHY WE ARE LIVING?

I wanted to sleep, but this question not allowed me to do so. I had so many questions,  but no answer.

Samuel Beckett got inspiration for setting of the play  from a painting titled 'Longing' by Caspar David Friedrich. 

The setting of the play is A country road.  A  tree. Evening.

A tree is very important in the play. it is barren, in the first act, which suggests barrenness, hopelessness and despair. Where as in second act, few leaves grows to that tree. this symbolize hope that Godot must come. We can take another meaning that it suggests that they are waiting for so long time. it may be interpreted as a seasonal change. because leaves don’t come overnight.

☆ the  setting  with  some  debris.  Can you  read  any  meaning  in  the  contours  of  debris  in  the setting  of  the  play:-

Debris:-

• Rubble, wreckage, scattered remains of something destroyed.

• Litter and discarded refuse.

• The ruins of a broken-down structure.

• Large rock fragments left by a melting glacier etc.

this is the background where two tramps Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot.

this outside ruined, destroyed place symbolize their inner self, their mentality. debris itself represents the nothingness, uselessness of the thing they are doing. debris provides true background of the situation in which two tramps are.

  “Nothing  to  be done”

very first line of play is   “Nothing  to  be done”. and while play as such nothing significant happens. and this same dialogue repeats many a time. recurrence of Nothing again and again makes it something. 

Godot-a  positive  play,  not  negative

this point leads us to deep philosophical thinking. Vladimir & Estragon are waiting for Godot, but Godot never comes. so the waiting is endless, which may lead us to think that the play is negative play. but it is not so.

E.G.  Marshal's  view (who  played  Vladimir  in  original  Broadway  production 1950s) are very positive about the play. play is coming at immediately after World wars. large massacre lead people towards negation of life.

 so the views of E.G. Marshal becomes important that -No  matter  what—  atom bombs,  hydrogen  bombs,  anything—life  goes  on.  You can  kill  yourself,  but  you  can't  kill  life." this statement is very philosophical..

props used in Waiting for Godot by Beckett are hat and boot, and it has its own significance. nothing is useless or unintentional. it symbolizes something. props like hat and boot are meaningfully connected. Estragon and Vladimir plays trick with it. Vladimir thinks a lot, where as Estragon thinks about eating. and often he forgets that they are waiting for Godot. hat symbolizes thinking and Sticking boot of Estragon signifies a ditch, poor condition they are living.

Master Slave: Pozzo and Lucky

yes, too much obedience of slave Lucky to master Pozzo is irritating and nauseatic. play looks like a great satire on internalized slavery. it is surprising that even if master is blind , rather than runaway slave gives whip in master's hand to control. the ill treatment of Lucky by Pozzo is problematic. How can one be so obedient? and how can anyone treat other in such a torturing way? IT MAKES ATTACK ON SLAVISHNESS OF MIND. one's inability to break customs( thinking) and to be a true individual.

According to me Godot is Nothing, at the same time everything because it is open for personal interpretation. once Beckett was asked - who is Godot? he replied that if I would knew, then I might have told it in play !!!!!

one interpretation is possible that Godot, is nothing but God. which is common in  French to write with "OT" ( is added)God- Godot. Estragon and Vladimir have so many expectation from Godot. they thought that when he will come our all suffering will end. this leads us to think that Godot may be God.

Beckett left over reader to interpret  who is Godot? so we can compare it with anything. In our life, we all are waiting for something. life itself is nothing but waiting. so whatever one is waiting for curiously, and think that he will be happy after getting is Godot.

The  subject  of  the  play  is  not  Godot  but ‘Waiting’”  (Esslin,  A  Search  for  the  Self). Martin Esslin argues that, waiting is more important not Godot. Since its publication all were talking about Godot but Esslin says that Waiting is at the centre. Waiting is essential human condition of life. throughout our life, we all wait for something. Godot is just symbol, object, metaphor or event. after getting one (goal) we wait for other & it goes on . Waiting is infinite.

Waiting for Godot is better to read than view. Because it requires a lot of thinking. in Movie dialogues are spoken too fast which is difficult to understand. Reading allows free flow of imagination. where as in screening imagination gets controlled. At the same time Audio- visual is helpful in understanding content in better way. Students generally don’t like to read original text, so it is better to read & comprehend through Audio -visual. play comes from Europe, and we are not aware about their culture, myth, symbol etc. so for everybody it is not possible to understand. at this point movie is boon. Movie has ability to transfer the feeling of character into viewer.

Entire movie is carefully presented with many interesting sequences like Vladimir and Estragon killing time, episode of Lucky and Pozzo, etc.

both protagonist's attempts to kill time looks humorous, futile and meaningless. both debates over how to pass time- they do things like- lets abuse each other, let’s play Lucky and Pozzo, both tries to stand on one leg etc. this is really interesting as the same time deeply symbolic also.

Episode of Master - slave is carefully crafted one. Both Lucky and Pozzo come in both the acts. Pozzo beats Lucky, treats him roughly, calls him 'pig'. Vladimir is challenging through questions where as Estragon on the other side makes fun, creates laughter on the stage. the long speech of Lucky is also wonderful.

even the boy comes, is confusing that whether it is the same boy or not. the dialogues between Vladimir and boy are short. boy mostly replies in Yes or No. and sometimes don’t give any answer. and Estragon remains busy in eating & sleeping is also meaningful.

Yes, we feel existential crisis - Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot, but Godot never comes. we know that their waiting is absurd, futile. so what is the significance of things we are doing. Who am I ? Why am I here? why I am living? what will happen if I die?.- Nothing. we have no answers. our lives has very limited significance. so when we try to think in this direction it leads towards Existential crisis. I felt that crisis in second act, when boy reappears and tells that Godot, will not come today, but tomorrow he will come. this entire sequence turns hope into hopelessness, it leads to negation of life. Expression and soliloquy of Vladimir is wonderful to express this feeling.

Vladimir  and  Estragon  talks  about  ‘hanging’ themselves  and  commit  suicide,  but  they  do  not  do  so.- because of hope that Godot will come tomorrow, and he will do everything alright.

Existentialists says that we have habit of living, of breathing. We cannot leave these habit.

I am unable to find things regarding political reading of the play, it would be better if we discuss this point in class.