Review on hindi play based on " Hard Times"

                       Hello! I am divya parmar. Hear I am writing blog for give review on one hindi play which is based on Victorian novel "Hard Times" by Charles Dickens. In thses blog first I write about introduction or background of the novel and then I write about summary, After that I give review of hindi play which is based on novel. 

                       " Hard Times : for these times" is the tenth novel by Charles Dickens. It was first published in 1854. The book surveys English society and satirises the social and economic conditions of the era. The novel covers themes like Utilitarianism, Fact vs Fancy, Officiousness and spying and Morality.

➡️ SOCIAL BACKGROUND OF VICTORIAN LITERATURE OR SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AGE: s

-class devision: upper class, middle class and lower class

                

               The Victorian Era in Britain was dominated by the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901). Although it was a peaceful and prosperous time, there were still issues within the social structure. The social classes of this era included the Upper class, Middle class, and lower class. Those who were fortunate enough to be in the Upper class did not usually perform manual labor. Instead, they were landowners and hired lower class workers to work for them, or made investments to create a profit. This class was divided into three subcategories: Royal, those who came from a royal family, Middle Upper, important officers and lords, and Lower Upper, wealthy men and business owners. we can find more characteristics like,

- capitalism

- industrialism

- democracy

- social unrest

- the ideal of peace

➡️ SUMMARY OF THE NOVEL : 

                 Hard Times is an 1854 novel by English author Charles Dickens. Taking place in three parts named after a Biblical verse, “Sowing,” “Reaping,” and “Garnering,” it satirizes English society by picking apart the social and economic ironies of its contemporary life. The novel takes place in a fictional industrial town in Northern England called Coketown, modeled partially on Manchester. The novel is best known for its pessimism regarding the state of trade unions and the exploitation of the working class by capitalist elites.

                Book 1, “Sowing,” begins from the point of view of school superintendent Mr. Gradgrind. An exacting educator, he interrogates a student named Sissy, revealing his inclination to punish students who are unable to speak strictly in facts. His two sons are named after famous thinkers, Malthus and Adam Smith, and his daughter is named Jane. Gradgrind’s friend Josiah Bounderby is a rich mill owner who constantly reflects on the fruits of his difficult childhood and unshakable entrepreneurial spirit. The two convene and decide to expel Sissy because they think she is disrupting the school. However, they learn that her father has orphaned her in the belief that she might lead a better life without his influence. Mr. Gradgrind offers Sissy, who wants to join the circus, a chance to return to school to work for his wife. She decides on school in the hope that she will find her father again.

               Other characters important to the novel include Stephen Blackpool, a mill worker who struggles with a marriage to an alcoholic wife whom he cannot leave; and Mrs. Sparsit, the assistant to Bounderby who rebuffs Blackpool’s appeal to Gradgrind for advice. Louisa is proposed to by Bounderby and ambivalently accepts. Her brother Tom arrives to say farewell as she leaves for Lyon.

                   "Reaping” begins at Bounderby’s bank in the middle of Coketown. One of Sissy’s classmates, Bitzer, has teamed up with Mrs. Sparsit to watch over it after dark. A man appears and asks for the way to Bounderby’s, claiming he has come from London at the request of Gradgrind. He introduces himself as James Harthouse. Harthouse meets Bounderby who tries to impress him with absurd stories about his youth, boring him. However, he is infatuated with Louisa, whose brother Tom now works under Bounderby.

                   Later, a union meeting assembles where the activist Slackridge announces that Blackpool is a traitor for refusing to be part of the union. Bounderby scapegoats Blackpool for the uproar, firing him. Louisa and Tom meet Blackpool, giving him pity money, while Tom asks him to meet him at the bank after his shift. As he does, a robbery occurs in the bank; Blackpool is accused of being the criminal. Meanwhile, Mrs. Sparsit is suspicious of the relationship between Louisa and Harthouse, believing it is adulterous. She follows Louisa on her way to her father’s home but loses her. Louisa faints at her father’s doorstep after an incoherent statement about her repressed emotions.

                   “Garnering” begins at Bounderby’s London hotel. Mrs. Sparsit informs him of her mistaken finding that Louisa and Harthouse are lovers. Bounderby goes with her to Louisa’s residence at Stone Lodge, where Gradgrind insists that Louisa is not in love with Harthouse, and had merely fainted after a personal crisis. Bounderby grows angry with Mrs. Sparsit, delivering an ultimatum that Louisa return immediately lest he calls off the marriage. Louisa ignores his demand. Sissy tells Harthouse to leave Coketown forever, while Bounderby suspects that Louise and Tom are plotting against him.

               One Sunday, Sissy and Rachael come upon Stephen trapped in a pit, having fallen into it on the way to Coketown. A group of locals pulls him out, but he dies after stating his innocence. The two women now suspect Tom of robbing the bank and framing Stephen. Sissy regrets having helped Tom escape to the circus. They go there and find him wearing blackface. Gradgrind appears, working with the circus owner, Sleary, to help Tom escape to Liverpool, from where he will leave the country. Blitzer valiantly arrives, throwing off the plot in an attempt to arrest Tom, inadvertently allowing Tom to escape.

               At the end of the novel, Bounderby fires Mrs. Sparsit for her many mistakes. The narrator projects into the characters’ future lives, stating that Bounderby will die on the street of an unknown affliction. Mr. Gradgrind will become a political outcast, Tom will perish in America after apologizing to Louisa. Louisa never marries again; she will live a life of charity and kindness, and will have a happy and imaginative life with Sissy’s children. Hard Times, though almost all of its many characters face despair, suggests that the actions of individuals deeply affect even the distant futures of their lives.

➡️ REVIEW OF HINDI PLAY WHICH IS BASED ON NOVEL HARD TIMES : 

- They tells novel's background by talking eachother 

                    Drama starts with the discussion about play by chorus. where he gives information about the play. The play which is based on Charles Dickens novel Hard Times, is performing by khilona theatre for childran. it is a very good musical adaptation of novel. In chorus talking one person ask that, " sar why we performing these old novel for play ? " In replay of that chorus informs him that "whatever story or novel is old or new, all the stories are imaginative." In the context of that they give message that in every story there is deep meaning or morals hiding and by the imagination and mind Power, audience can imagine that. 

 

                    chorus tells the setting of the novel. where he said that , "The city which is known as coketown, that city is also imaginative" there is song performance by all performers. the song tells the situation or social background of the Victorian age or industrial background of 18th century.song's lyrics are.......

कमाल की कहानी है ! ये है तो बड़ी पुरानी जी....

पर गौर से जो देखेंगे तो साफ नजर आयेगी,

सच्चाई इसमें आज कि......

छू न जाए बात जो आज की,

तो जो चाहे सो कहेना जी।

तो Charles Dickens की तरह हम क्यों ना करे कल्पना?

coketown जैसे एक शहेर की,

रोज जिसके आसमान में साफ साफ दिखता है ये धुआ!

धुआ क़ाला हर मौसम में,

रंग जहा की नदी के निर्मल पानी का भी हो चुका है बैंगनी!

युग मशीनों कारखानों का जमाना यू समझो की आ चुका है।

materialism पैर अपने अच्छी तरह जमा चुका है।

हर व्यापारी नेता को ये खेल समझ में आ चुका है,

आए हो इस दुनिया में तो काम करो कुछ ऐसा......

हाथोंहाथ माल बिके अच्छे खासे दाम मिले,

ताकि और ज्यादा हो मुनाफा।

emotion, imagination या compassion से भी कभी पेट भरता है क्या?

इनके बदले paund या dollar किसीको मिलता है क्या?

इसी लिए तो नज़र में उनकी करुणा और सहानुभूति या किसी से हमदर्दी है बेकार की चीजें.....

चीज़े है ये बेकार की।

कमाल की कहानी है ये! है तो बड़ी पुरानी जी...

                   After that we can see how Mr gradgriend gives importance to fact. But at the end he himself regretted about his own lession of fact for the life. 

- chorus's discussion about three parts of novel

                    After every scene chorus comes and, in talking way give information about Next seen and general information about work. After one scene corus gives information about novel which is divided in three parts: 1 sowing,

  2 reaping, 3 garnering.

                  After that we can see the circus scene, incident of Cecilia's father escapes, mr.gradgriend take Cecilia with him. Cecelia wants to wait for his father. But lewisia ask her to why? And to answer her, Cecelia sing A song of her imagination of Happy ending. In play we can see the reality that owners of miles called labour to hands. 

                 At the end we can conclude that every scene and every character portrayed very well. Scenes like Lousia and mr. bounder by's marrige, mrs,pagler visit to see mr. bounded by and story reach at climax, ms.sparsit's spy on every character, Tom's planning to rub the bank, all crimes goes on head of stehan Blackpool etc... And the most important scene is portray very well. where mr, gradgriend feel very regretted about to fail in life's lession of fact. He accepts that his definition of fact to live life is totally wrong.

PAMELA OR VIRTUE REVARDED

                   Hello! I am divya parmar. Hear I am writing blog on famous epistolary novel by Samuel Richardson. In these blog first I discuss about novel's introduction and after that about writer and then we discuss about following question. 

 QUESTION: Is Pamela a reliable narrator? If Yes, then Why? If No, then Why..

                      'Pamela or virtue rewarded' by Samuel Richardson published in 1740. Samuel Richardson's Pamela: or Virtue Rewarded gives us one of the eighteenth century's most famous love stories, though the novel may not sound very romantic to modern readers. In it, a rich gentleman named Mr. B relentlessly pursues the virginity of a beautiful and chaste serving girl named Pamela. An unscrupulous rake, Mr. B, wishes for nothing more than to have his way with the young girl. He repeatedly tries to rape and assault her. Unfortunately for Mr. B, Pamela is a paragon of virtue, and she always manages to escape his attacks. Eventually, Pamela's innate goodness reforms Mr. B, and he gives up his pursuit, instead offering her his hand in marriage. In a surprising twist, Pamela eventually accepts Mr. B's proposal and becomes the wife of her would-be rapist.

ABOUT SAMUEL RICHARDSON: 

                     Samuel Richardson, (baptized Aug. 19, 1689, Mackworth, near Derby, Derbyshire, Eng.—died July 4, 1761, Parson’s Green, near London), English novelist who expanded the dramatic possibilities of the novel by his invention and use of the letter form (“epistolary novel”). His major novels were Pamela (1740) and Clarissa (1747–48).

SUMMARY OF THE NOVEL

                  Pamela is a fifteen-year-old maidservant in Bedfordshire. She is innocent and virtuous. She serves Lady B, who is kind to her. Unfortunately, Lady B has just passed away. Pamela is nervous about her work situation, as she does not come from money. Lady B’s son, Mr. B, promises to keep her and all the other servants employed.

               Mr. B begins making advances towards Pamela. At first, they are just verbal, as she reports to her parents. She promises she will do everything to preserve her virtue. Her parents agree with her, but advise her if Mr. B ever makes physical advances towards her she should return home, despite their impoverishment. Soon thereafter, Mr. B makes a physical advancement towards Pamela, which she rebufs. He attempts to pay her to keep her quiet, but she refuses and tells her friend the housekeeper, Mrs. Jervis.

               Mr. B continues to make advances towards Pamela, including trying to kiss her while she undresses for the evening after hiding in her closet. She faints, which dissuades Mr. B from continuing. Pamela threatens to return home to her parents. Mr. B is against this and thwarts her return.

                   He offers Pamela more money, then marriage to a Lincolnshire clergyman named Mr. Williams. She refuses and packs her bags to return home. Mr. B tricks Pamela and sends her to his estate in Lincolnshire. He also writes her parents telling them he has sent her away to preserve her virtue, as she has had an affair with a penurious clergyman. Pamela’s father does not believe him and attempts to retrieve her at the Bedfordshire estate, but she is not there. Pamela begins a journal in Lincolnshire, hoping one day her parents will read it and understand. She is virtually a captive there, under the watch of Mrs. Jewkes, the spiteful housekeeper. Mr. B writes to Pamela and invites her to be his mistress. She refuses. Pamela begins to plan her escape and enlists the help of Mr. Williams. They exchange letters leaving them next to the sunflower in the garden. Mr. Williams tries his best to help her, even asking the local gentry for assistance. They refuse due to Mr. B’s social standing, advising Mr. Williams to marry Pamela.

               Mr. Williams asks Pamela to marry him to help her escape, but she refuses. Pamela is concerned when Mr. Williams is robbed, wondering if Mr. B set the robbery up to steal her letters. She is determined to escape but gives up on this idea when she is hurt during her attempt. Mr. B soon arrives at Lincolnshire. He again asks Pamela to be his mistress and she refuses. Mr. B and Mr. Jewkes come up with a plan for Mr. B to finally seduce Pamela. He dresses up as a female servant named Nan and pretends to be drunk. As Nan, he sneaks into Pamela’s bed. When Pamela realizes what is happening, she has a violent fit, similar to a seizure.

               After Pamela’s fit, Mr. B’s demeanor changes. He seems regretful in his actions, but continues to pursue her, albeit without force. Pamela begs him to stop his advances. He admits that he loves Pamela, but feels he is unable to marry her due to the social gap. Pamela is shocked, but somewhat stirred by his confession. She hopes he means what he says. Mr. B leaves his estate for a few days. While he is gone, Pamela is stopped by a fortuneteller who says Mr. B is trying to force her into a sham marriage. She rethinks her burgeoning affection for Mr. B. When Mr. B returns, Mrs. Jewkes gives him some of Pamela’s recent writings. After reading them, his affection for Pamela only grows. He feels guilty for the way he has treated her and promises to make things right by marrying her. Pamela is still suspicious of him and denies him, asking to return home. Mr. B is upset and angry, but allows Pamela to go home. Pamela feels strangely sad.

               On her way home, she receives a letter from Mr. B, imploring her to return and marry him. He speaks of reform and changing his ways, and Pamela, believing him, decides to return. On her return, they wonder how the gentry will react to their marriage, and Pamela tells Mr. B why she was wary of his proposal. He admits he thought of luring her into a sham marriage, but changed his mind. The gentry accept Pamela easily, due to her charm. Her father comes looking for her, worried that she is now a mistress, but is happy and excited to see her engaged and content. Mr. B and Pamela are soon married. Pamela then has a hostile interaction with Mr. B’s sister, Lady Davers where she effectively holds Pamela hostage, disparaging her social status. Lady Davers forces Mr. B to confess to a dalliance he had as a young man. Pamela learns there was a child produced from this dalliance named Miss Goodwin. He introduces Pamela to Miss Goodwin, who believes Mr. B is her uncle. Miss Goodwin’s mother is happily married in Jamaica.

               Mr. B sets up Pamela’s parents to look after Mr. B’s estate in Kent. Lady Davers ultimately accepts Pamela. Pamela has many children with Mr. B and visits with her family often. She is happy and takes Miss Goodwin under her wing, ensuring that she becomes as pious as Pamela.

EPISTORY NOVEL: 

                    epistolary novel, a novel told through the medium of letters written by one or more of the characters. Originating with Samuel Richardson’s Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded (1740), the story of a servant girl’s victorious struggle against her master’s attempts to seduce her, it was one of the earliest forms of novel to be developed and remained one of the most popular up to the 19th century. The epistolary novel’s reliance on subjective points of view makes it the forerunner of the modern psychological novel.

PAMELA IS REALIABLE NARRATOR OR NOT?

                    Richardson’s Pamela is often credited with being the first English novel. Although the validity of this claim depends on the definition of the term novel, it is not disputed that Richardson was innovative in his concentration on a single action. By telling the story in the form of letters, he provided if not the “stream” at least the flow of consciousness of his characters, and he pioneered in showing how his characters’ sense of class differences and their awareness of the conflict between sexual instincts and the moral code created dilemmas that could not always be resolved. These characteristics reappear regularly in the subsequent history of the novel. Above all, Richardson was the writer who made the novel a respectable genre.

                   

TO THE SKYLARK BY WILLIAM WORDSWORTH

                           Hello! I am divya parmar. Hera I am writing blog on William Wordsworth's poem 'To the skylark' William Wordsworth was the great figure among the romentic posts. In these blog firstly I discribe Wordsworth very briefly and after that I discuss about the poem. 

                     Before discuss about poem, let's discuss about the poet.

WILLIAM WORDSWORTH'S LIFE:

                     William Wordsworth (7 April 1770 – 23 April 1850) was an English Romantic poet who, with Samuel Taylor Coleridge, helped to launch the Romantic Age in English literature with their joint publication Lyrical Ballads (1798). The second of five children born to John Wordsworth and Ann Cookson, William Wordsworth was born on 7 April 1770 in what is now named Wordsworth House in Cockermouth, Cumberland, (now in Cumbria), part of the scenic region in northwestern England known as the Lake District. William's sister, the poet and diarist Dorothy Wordsworth, to whom he was close all his life, was born the following year, and the two were baptised together. They had three other siblings: Richard, the eldest, who became a lawyer; John, born after Dorothy, who went to sea and died in 1805 when the ship of which he was captain, the Earl of Abergavenny, was wrecked off the south coast of England; and Christopher, the youngest, who entered the Church and rose to be Master of Trinity College, Cambridge.

                       Wordsworth's father was a legal representative of James Lowther, 1st Earl of Lonsdale, and, through his connections, lived in a large mansion in the small town. He was frequently away from home on business, so the young William and his siblings had little involvement with him and remained distant from him until his death in 1783. However, he did encourage William in his reading, and in particular set him to commit large portions of verse to memory, including works by Milton, Shakespeare and Spenser. William was also allowed to use his father's library. 

                  William also spent time at his mother's parents' house in Penrith, Cumberland, where he was exposed to the moors, but did not get along with his grandparents or his uncle, who also lived there. His hostile interactions with them distressed him to the point of contemplating suicide.

                           Wordsworth was taught to read by his mother and attended, first, a tiny school of low quality in Cockermouth, then a school in Penrith for the children of upper-class families, where he was taught by Ann Birkett, who insisted on instilling in her students traditions that included pursuing both scholarly and local activities, especially the festivals around Easter, May Day and Shrove Tuesday. Wordsworth was taught both the Bible and the Spectator, but little else. It was at the school in Penrith that he met the Hutchinsons, including Mary, who later became his wife.

                         After the death of Wordsworth's mother, in 1778, his father sent him to Hawkshead Grammar School in Lancashire (now in Cumbria) and sent Dorothy to live with relatives in Yorkshire. She and William did not meet again for nine years.

                    Wordsworth made his debut as a writer in 1787 when he published a sonnet in The European Magazine. That same year he began attending St John's College, Cambridge. He received his BA degree in 1791. He returned to Hawkshead for the first two summers of his time at Cambridge, and often spent later holidays on walking tours, visiting places famous for the beauty of their landscape. In 1790 he went on a walking tour of Europe, during which he toured the Alps extensively, and visited nearby areas of France, Switzerland, and Italy.

TO THE SKYLARK BY WILLIAM WORDSWORTH:

Ethereal minstrel! pilgrim of the sky!

Dost thou despise the earth where cares abound?

Or, while the wings aspire, are heart and eye

Both with thy nest upon the dewy ground?

Thy nest which thou canst drop into at will,

Those quivering wings composed, that music still!

Leave to the nightingale her shady wood;

A privacy of glorious light is thine;

Whence thou dost pour upon the world a flood

Of harmony, with instinct more divine;

Type of the wise who soar, but never roam;

True to the kindred points of Heaven and Home!

                             ‘To a Skylark’ is an ode to the songbird, skylark. In this poem, the poet praises certain qualities of the skylark which are unique to it. And he praises its nature.The setting of the poem is the wide sky. Though there are instances when the earth is mentioned, most of the poem takes place in the sky. After all, ‘sky’ is there in the name of the bird the poem is about.

Stanza: The poem is made of two stanzas of six lines each.

Rhyme: The poem follows the rhyme scheme ABABCC. The last words of the first and third lines, of second and fourth lines, and the fifth and sixth lines, rhyme with each other.

Imagery: There is some imagery in the poem. In the first stanza, we see a nest in a dew-covered ground. In the third stanza, we see the nightingale in a shady forest.

Personification: In line four of the second stanza, the skylark is said to thrill the bosom of the plain. Now plains do not have a bosom which only leads to the inference that the speaker personified the plain.

Oxymoron: There is an oxymoron, more of a contradiction in the second line of the third stanza. The skylark is said to have a privacy of glorious light, meaning it has privacy in the open sky.

                          The skylark is a daring songbird since it flies so high into the sky. There is a strong bond between him and his home. The songs he sings in the sky spread throughout the plains. He sings independently of the seasons. The speaker tells the skylark to leave the nightingale to her dark forest. He has all the glorious light to himself. He floods the land with his divine songs. He is wise that raises high but remains connected to his roots, remaining true to both the sky and the earth.

Words: 1045

Resources: Wikipedia, poetry.com

The general characteristics of metaphysical poetry.

                      Hello! I am divya parmar. Hear i am writting a blog to complete class thinking activity which is given by Dilip barad sar. In these blog I am writing about general characteristics of metaphysical poetry and some poems which is included in our syllabus. videos of teaching metaphysical poetry by Rk mandaliya sar, are very helpful to us. 

QUESTION: WHAT IS METAPHYSICAL POETRY? WHAT IS THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF METAPHYSICAL POETRY? 

                 the word ‘metaphysical poetry’ is a philosophical concept used in literature where poets portray the things/ideas that are beyond the depiction of physical existence. etymologically, there is a combination of two words ‘meta’ and ‘physical in word “metaphysical”.’ the first word “meta” means beyond. so metaphysical means beyond physical, beyond the normal and ordinary. the meanings are clear here that it deals with the objects/ideas that are beyond the existence of this physical world. let us look at the origin of word metaphysical poetry in more detail.

THE ORIGIN OF THE WORLD "METAPHYSICAL"

                 In the book “Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets (1179-1781)”, the author Samuel Johnson made the first use of the word Metaphysical Poetry. He used the term Metaphysical poets to define a loose group of the poets of 17th century. The group was not formal and most of the poets put in this category did not know or read each other’s writings. This group’s most prominent poets include John Donne, Andrew Marvell, Abraham Cowley, George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, Thomas Traherne, Richard Crashaw, etc. He noted in his writing that all of these poets had the same style of wit and conceit in their poetry.

DEFINITION OF METAPHYSICAL POETRY:

                 “Highly intellectualized poetry marked by bold and ingenious conceits, incongruous imagery, complexity and subtlety of thought, frequent use of paradox, and often by deliberate harshness or rigidity of expression”

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE METAPHYSICAL POETRY: 

                 A group of poet emerged in the second half of the 16th century whose poetry is identified as the metaphysical poetry. It was Dr. Samuel Johnson- A classicist of the age, who named poetry of John Donne and his school, As the metaphysical poetry. Johnson used these term while writting about the life of Abraham Cowley in his biographical work with the tittle"THE LIVES OF ENGLISH POETS" Dr. Johnson wanted to criticise the poetry of donne and his followers by using the term "metaphysical poetry". But with the passing of time the same term became the term of 'Appraisal' for their poetry. Dr. Johnson has passed on one remarkable comment stating that the poetry of metaphysical poets stood a trayal of "their finger but failed in trayal of the ears" Dr. Johnson wants to states that there is no music and rhythm in their poetry. 

                 Metaphysical poetry talks about deep things. It talks about soul, love, religion, reality etc. You can never be sure about what is coming your way while reading a metaphysical poem. There can be unusual philosophies and comparisons that will make you think and ponder.The most important characteristics of metaphysical poetry is “undissociated sensibility” (the combination of feeling and thoughts).

                   Even though it talks about serious stuff, it talks about it in a humorous way. The tone is sometimes light. It can be harsh sometimes too. The purpose is to present a new idea and make the reader think.

                    Another characteristic of such poetry is that it is unclear. Because it provides such complicated themes, the idea of metaphysical poems is somewhat not definite. It is different for every person. It depends on the perception and experiences of the reader. Every person will take something different out of the same poem based on their beliefs and understanding.

                 Metaphysical poetry is also short. It uses brief words and conveys a lot of ideas in just a small number of words. There are many maxims in this type of poetry too. John Donne introduced sayings into metaphysical poetry.

                  The unusual comparison of things in poetry is one of its unique and most interesting characteristics. All the metaphysicals have ability for unusual witty comparison , juxtaposition, and imagery. These unusual comparison are metaphysical conceits. As Donne in Twicknam Garden uses expression “spider love” that is contrary to the expectations of the readers. In the same poem, Donne also compares a lovers tears to wine of love that is unusual use of juxtaposition. Conceit compares very dissimilar things. For example bright smoke, calling lovers as two points of compass, taking soul as dew drop, etc.

                      The metaphysical poetry is brain-sprung, not heart-felt. It is intellectual and witty. According to Grierson, the two chief characteristics of metaphysical poetry are paradoxical ratiocination and passionate feelings. As Donne opens his poem “The indifferent” with a line with a paradoxical comment. “I can love both fair and brown”

Other unique feature of this poetry is Platonic Love. The word is taken after Plato. Platonic love is a non-romantic love. There is no lust or need of physical contact. It is spiritual love and is mostly for God.

                             Another feature of the metaphysical poetry is its fantastic lyrics style. As A. C. Word said: “The metaphysical style is a combination of two elements, the fantastic form and style, and the incongruous in matter manner”. The versification of the metaphysical poetry is also coarse and jerky like its diction. The main intention of the metaphysicals was to startle the readers. They deliberately avoided conventional poetic style to bring something new to the readers. Their style was not conventional and the versification contrast with much of the Elizabethan writers. 

It arouses some extreme level of thoughts and feelings in the readers by asking life-altering questions. 

THE METAPHYSICAL POEM : "Death be not proud"

                 "Death be not proud" is a Holy sonnet by John Donne. This sonnet is addressed by the poet to death it self. The aim of the poet behind writing the sonnet is to nullify the fear of death. The poet has presented altogether a different pictures of death in the present sonnet.

                    The Sonnet opens with the poet's instruction to death that there is no need for death to be proud to anything ofcourse there are people who consider death mighty and dangerous. But poet belives that death is neither mighty nor dangerous. Death believes that it has the capacity to kill people. But the poet is of opinion that death is neither might nor dangerous. it has no capacity to kill anybody. if the poet is asked to draw a picture of death, the poet would draw a picture of man enjoying sound sleep and taking rest. If death offers rest and sound sleep to the people, pleasure should be derived out of death. And nobody should be afraid of.

                      the poet gives one example to nullify the fear of death. Even the best of human beings have gone with that the soonest. one can give a number of examples to prove that the best of people go with death without getting disturbed. And many of them have gone the soonest. we can give the example of kits and kalapi , who left this world very soon. 

                         According to the poet death is a slave of 4 elements. those four elements are fate, chance, kings and man in distress. The ‍ meaning of death comes to a person only when death is decided by faith or chance or King aur men in distress. There are three residential places for death to live. those places are poison,war and sickiness. The meaning is whosoever invites sickness or poison or war such a person invites a death. Death always leaves in poison, sickness and war. The poet find one remarkable difference between how death causes sleep and how sleep is caused a mother death.Death causes sleep in a sudden stroke but mother's charms and her mother affection cause a sleep very slowly and gently. 

                      The poet concludes then the death is nothing more than the short sleep. After one short sleep we get up with the eternal and this statement of John donne indicates that donne believes in the theory of rebirth. If death is treated in this manner nobody will be afraid of death. These is how the end of the poem John donne tries to convince all that there will be no fear of death and that is self will die. Because nobody will be afraid of death. 

'pk' a fearless criticism on religion

'pk' a fearless criticism on religion

                  Hello! I am divya parmar and hear i am presenting one movie review or criticism on religion. firstly I am giving general information about film and after that I am discuss the religious criticism by movie! by watching video we can see that the how religion effect on our life! 

ABOUT FILM 'PK' 

                  PK is a 2014 Indian Hindi-language science fiction comedy-drama film. Directed by Rajkumar Hirani and written by Hirani and Abhijat Joshi. It was jointly produced by Hirani and Vidhu Vinod Chopra under the banners Rajkumar Hirani Films and Vinod Chopra Films respectively. The film follows an alien who comes to Earth on a research mission, only for the remote control for his spaceship to be stolen and sold to a godman. He befriends a television journalist and in his quest to retrieve the remote, questions religious dogmas and superstitions. The film stars Aamir Khan in the titular role with Anushka Sharma, Sushant Singh Rajput, Sanjay Dutt, Boman Irani and Saurabh Shukla in pivotal roles.

                 The film 'pk' is directed by Rajkumar Hirani. And written by Rajkumar Hirani and abhijat Joshi. The film produce by Vidhu vinod Chopra and Rajkumar hirani. starring cast of the movie are Amir khan, anushka sharma, shushant sinh Rajput, Sanjay Dutt, Boman Irani, Saurabh Shukla. 

Realesed date = 19 December, 2014

Running time= 152 miniutes

Budget= ₹85 crore

                 PK was released on 19 December 2014. It received generally positive reviews, with praise for the performances, particularly by Khan, and its portrayal of superstitions. The film received eight nominations at the 60th Filmfare Awards, winning two. Additionally, it won five Producers Guild Film Awards, and two Screen Awards. PK garnered the Telstra People's Choice Award at the Indian Film Festival of Melbourne. Produced on a budget of ₹850 million (approx. $12 million), PK was the first Indian film to gross more than ₹7 billion and US$100 million worldwide. 

                  At the time, it emerged as the highest-grossing Indian film of all time and ranks as the 70th highest-grossing film of 2014 worldwide. The film's final worldwide gross was ₹854 crore (US$140 million). It currently stands as the 5th highest grossing Indian film worldwide and 5th highest-grossing film in India.

short summary of pk movie plot by Abhijat Joshi 

                 P. K. is a comedy of ideas about a stranger in the city, who asks questions that no one has asked before. They are innocent, child-like questions, but they bring about catastrophic answers. People who are set in their ways for generations, are forced to reappraise their world when they see it from PK's innocent eyes. In the process PK makes loyal friends and powerful foes. Mends broken lives and angers the establishment. P. K.'s childlike curiosity transforms into a spiritual odyssey for him and millions of others. The film is an ambitious and uniquely original exploration of complex philosophies. It is also a simple and humane tale of love, laughter and letting-go. Finally, it is a moving saga about a friendship between strangers from worlds apart.

FEARLESS RELIGIOUS CRITICISM BY MOVIE: 

                  PK is a fearless critique of religious bigotry and the ways of India's proliferating Godmen, but the film's message is shorn of rancour and bitterness. It is instead cloaked in humanity and humour, which accentuates its impact no end. The screenplay, written by Hirani and Abhijat Joshi, takes make-believe elements on one hand and draws upon the realities of our times on the other to deliver a fantasy so unique and original that it takes your breath away.

                 PK delivers an entertaining tale that touches upon the social and political ills that plague us but it does so without falling out of line with the need to keep the story simple and straightforward.PK is a film that restores one's faith in the much maligned Bollywood idiom. It demonstrates that the so-called clichéd conventions of Mumbai's popular cinema can, in hands as able as Hirani's, yield entertainment of the very highest pedigree.

                  The film opens in the desert of Rajasthan where a stark naked alien (Aamir Khan) alights from a spaceship looking lost and forlorn. He belongs to a planet where clothing is unheard of and words as we earthlings know them are redundant because its inhabitants need nothing more than pure thoughts to communicate. A theft leaves him stranded and the extra-terrestrial begins a search for the remote control device that he needs to communicate with his spaceship. His adventures on earth bring him in contact with a jovial Rajasthani band master Bhairon Singh (Sanjay Dutt), a spunky television journalist Jaggu Sahni (Anushka Sharma), and a greedy head of a religious cult, Tapasvi Maharaj (Saurabh Shukla).

RELIGION OR COMPANY? 

                     In following video we can find that tapsvi which is the symbol of religious person. one old person shares his problem with tapsvi that his wife is paralaised from last 6 months and asks for path to slove that problem. tapsvi do reacts as he talks with God and give him solution that if the old man go to visit their another temple. god will help his wife to getting well! Hear pk claims the question that how it is possible? also prove his point he give valuable argues. 

                  At another point we find that religion relate with fear! when person stuck in problem and feel fear for something, they started to praying to God! Hear in these video we found pk give idea of god or company. he put one stone and beside it he put some coins in front of college! where students have their exam fear. student started put money in front of that stone and praying for good. it shows us that in these modern time religion became buisness! 

THE CONCEPT OF WRONG NUMBER: 

                     In religion people are started blindly trust on religious people! but by the movie we find that there are so ma y wrong thing are going on! and we have to stop blindly trust on that things.

                   At the conclusion we can say that the pk movie is the satire on religion! after release these movie so many religious people provoked and they don't want to see the movie and another side there are so many people changed their point of view for religion. 

character study of Absalom and Achitophel

                     Hello! I am divya parmar. Hear i am writting blog to complete task on "Absalom and Achitophel" 

 _ summary of "ABSALOM AND ACHITOPHEL" 

                  Absalom and Achitophel is a mock heroic epic by John Dryden that satirizes the British Whig Party, which sought to prevent the succession of James, Duke of York, to the English throne. The Whigs, a political party, tried to break the traditional line of succession and prevent James, Duke of York, from ascending to the throne.

                 With a gentle and mild hand, King David rules Israel within the time before polygamy may be a sin and priest-craft begins. He spreads his seed throughout the land and has many offspring, though his true wife is Michal. Of his illegitimate children, none is more glorious and beloved than Absalom. Absalom wins renown in foreign fields and is agreeable in mind and countenance. David loves him and indulges his every whim.

                  David’s reign doesn’t remain peaceful, however. The Jews are capricious, tempestuous people that often throw off their ruler for a replacement one. They mutter and complain, but nothing comes of it while they’re disunited. However, old plots are revived, stoking the Jews’ fear of the heathen Jebusites, whose land that they had taken way back. Factions fire up and start to threaten the govt.

                  Achitophel, a wise and witty councilor of David’s, sees this as his moment. he’s restless and desirous of fame, so he decides he must find how to ruin David. he’s conscious of how easily swayed the people are, and he turns to the handsome Absalom into his pawn. Achitophel compliments and charms Absalom, telling him that it’s a shame his low birth seemingly precludes him from taking the throne.

                 His father’s legal successor is Absalom’s uncle, a wretched man. Achitophel fills Absalom’s head with praise; albeit Absalom loves his father, Achitophel’s subtle comments about his father’s weaknesses begin to affect him. He sees himself as destined for greatness.

 

                 Achitophel devises his plan and sends Absalom bent the people to curry their favor and switch them against his father. He warns the young man of his uncle and tells him he must go for the crown while his father still lives. Achitophel begins to figure within the populace, fomenting dissent and unrest. Absalom goes before the people and wins their love easily. His popularity and pomp distract from the plot at hand. Finally, King David speaks, asserting his legitimacy and power during a manner that brooks no refutation or dissension. This secures his enemies’ downfall and his own long rule. 

question : make a list of characters who favoured King David (Charles 2) and those who were against him.

Answer: In 'Absalom and Achitophel' we found so many characters. But hear protogonist is Absalom. these charcters also relate with biblical characters. John drydon's character makes very good heroic satire. 

- charcters in favour of king Devid

- character of king Devid

                 The third king of Israel. David is a merciful and kind king who does not have a male heir to inherit the throne. As such, the crown will ascend down a “collateral line” after David’s death to his brother. As he has many mistresses, David also has several illegitimate sons, but he loves Absalom the most, and the people of Israel likewise love Absalom and herald him as a national hero. David gives Absalom everything he wants, and he would give him the crown, too, if he could. Over time, however, David’s dishonest counselor, Achitophel, begins to stir up resentment for David and encourages Absalom to rise up against his father to ensure that David’s brother will not ascend the throne. Both Absalom and Achitophel confuse David’s mild nature for weakness, and after David runs out of patience, he is forced to exert his God-given power over the people of Israel and remind Absalom, Achitophel, and the people that he can strike them all down if he chooses. 

                    As David speaks to the Jews, a massive crack of thunder is heard through the land, and all of Israel knows David is their rightful king. Dryden’s David is an allegory for King Charles II of England, and like David, Dryden argues that Charles has a divine right to the throne, which Charles’s son, the Duke of Monmouth tried to usurp in Dryden’s time. Dryden was an ardent supporter of the monarchy and Charles II, and his portrayal of David in “Absalom and Achitophel” reflects this support, but he does not depict David as perfect. On the contrary, Dryden is critical of Charles’s leniency and even pokes fun at his rumored promiscuity, but Dryden nevertheless implies that Charles has been chosen by God to be the king of England, and that right cannot be appropriated by Parliament or the people.

  - characters who were against king Devid

 

- Absalom as the protoganist of the satire

                     David’s illegitimate son and the protagonist of “Absalom and Achitophel.” David does not have any legitimate heirs to the throne, but Absalom is his favorite child. Absalom is handsome and ambitious, and he has made himself a hero at war. The people of Israel love Absalom almost as much as David does, and Achitophel believes that the Jews would accept Absalom as their king. Achitophel begins to encourage Absalom and herald his birth and blood as royal, and he tries to convince Absalom to rebel against David. Absalom, however, is not a malicious man, and he doesn’t initially believe he has a right to the crown, but he is eventually worn down by Achitophel’s flattery and his own growing desire for more power. 

                         Absalom agrees to rebel against David, and as he travels Israel in a procession with Achitophel, Absalom conforms to Achitophel’s deceitful ways. Absalom and Achitophel mistake David’s mercy and good nature for weakness, but David soon loses patience with both Absalom and Achitophel. David asserts his power as king before the people of Israel and effectively shuts down Absalom’s rebellion, but Dryden never does say what becomes of Absalom. Absalom metaphorically represents Charles II’s illegitimate son James Scott, the 1st Duke of Monmouth, who rebelled against Charles and the throne in Dryden’s time. Through the character of Absalom, Dryden ultimately argues that Charles and his brother James both have a divine right to the crown that is not extended to Monmouth.

                       Dryden’s depiction of Absalom implies that Dryden does not think Monmouth a wholly terrible person, but someone who is merely tempted and blinded by power; however, Dryden also suggests that Monmouth’s common birth automatically excludes him from ascending the throne. Dryden argues through Absalom that Monmouth’s play to power, specifically his attempt to seize a position of power that rightfully belongs to another, is a sin against God. Dryden doesn’t entirely denounce Absalom’s ambition (he even celebrates his exploits at war), but he does argue that usurping the throne is completely unethical.

- Achitophel as the antagonist of the satire

                        A deceitful counselor to King David and the antagonist of “Absalom and Achitophel.” Of all the men who oppose David within the government, Achitophel is the most influential. He is smart, ambitious, and morally flexible. He pretends to be David’s friend, but in actuality, he either wants to rule Israel or completely destroy it. Achitophel stokes the “malcontents” of the Jews and incites anti-Jebusite hysteria in an attempt to ruin David, and then he encourages David’s son Absalom to rebel against him. Achitophel hates David’s brother, the heir presumptive, and he wants to make sure that he never ascends the throne. Achitophel begins his plan to ruin David by claiming David is a Jebusite, and while he knows that his argument is “weak,” he also knows the Jews fear the Jebusites, and his approach proves very effective. As Achitophel works on Absalom, Achitophel’s trusted men wreak havoc with the Sanhedrin and try to bring David down from inside the government. 

                 Achitophel finally convinces Absalom to rebel, and they embark on a procession through Israel to further ingratiate Absalom with the people and identify enemies to their cause. However, Achitophel has mistaken David’s mercy and mild temper for signs of weakness, and when David finally loses his patience, Achitophel is reminded of David’s divine power. Dryden’s Achitophel represents Anthony Ashley Cooper, the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, a Member of Parliament during Dryden’s time and the main supporter of the Exclusion Bill. Shaftesbury was the founder of the Whig party, which sought to exclude Charles II’s brother James from the throne, and he was a major opponent of Charles throughout his reign. What comes of Achitophel is never revealed in Dryden’s poem, but historically speaking, Shaftesbury was tried for treason after encouraging Charles’s son the Duke of Monmouth, to rebel against the crown, but he was later acquitted. Through Achitophel, Dryden suggests that Charles and James both have just claims to the throne and is not for Shaftesbury, Monmouth, or Parliament to infringe on that power.

                       Hear I discussed brief about characters. the well wishers and suppoters of the king devid were always honest to him. even when we analysis the characters of Absalom we found that till end he wants to support kind devid. he was the illegitimate son of King but he give him everything which he want. so in starting Absalom don't want to stand against king devid but Achitophel's misguide make him against to his father. 

words: 1565

Image : 3

paragraph : 21

resources : litcharts.com, super summary

"post-truth" the word of the year 2016

               Hello! I am divya parmar and I am writting blog to complete sunday reading activity. Hear i am giving some points of  view on word "post-truth". also I am giving some points to clear  about the word post truth.

explanation of the word "post-truth" 

                 "post-truth" word became very well known in the year 2016-2017. post truth word related with political world. 2016. Oxford Dictionaries has declared "post-truth" as its 2016 international word of the year, reflecting what it called a "highly-charged" political 12 months.It is defined as an adjective relating to circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than emotional appeals.Its selection follows June's Brexit vote and the US presidential election.

               Oxford Dictionaries' Casper Grathwohl said post-truth could become "one of the defining words of our time".Post-truth, which has become associated with the phrase "post-truth politics", was chosen ahead of other political terms, including "Brexiteer" and "alt-right" from a shortlist selected to reflect the social, cultural, political, economic and technological trends and events of the year.

Oxford Dictionaries says post-truth is thought to have been first used in 1992.However, it says the frequency of its usage increased by 2,000% in 2016 compared with last year.

                    Defined by the dictionary as an adjective “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”, editors said that use of the term “post-truth” had increased by around 2,000% in 2016 compared to last year. The spike in usage, it said, is “in the context of the EU referendum in the United Kingdom and the presidential election in the United States”.

               Oxford Dictionaries’s word of the year is intended to “reflect the passing year in language”, with post-truth following the controversial choice last year of the “face with tears of joy” emoji. The publisher’s US and UK dictionary teams sometimes plump for different choices – in 2009 the UK went for “simples” and the US for “unfriend”; in 2006 the UK went for “bovvered” and the US for “carbon-neutral” – but this year teams on both sides of the Atlantic chose the same word.

                the increase in usage of post-truth saw the term eventually emerge ahead of the pack. “We first saw the frequency really spike this year in June with buzz over the Brexit vote and Donald Trump securing the Republican presidential nomination. Given that usage of the term hasn’t shown any signs of slowing down, I wouldn’t be surprised if post-truth becomes one of the defining words of our time,” predicted Oxford Dictionaries president Casper Grathwohl.

               “It’s not surprising that our choice reflects a year dominated by highly-charged political and social discourse. Fuelled by the rise of social media as a news source and a growing distrust of facts offered up by the establishment, post-truth as a concept has been finding its linguistic footing for some time.”

- points which collected throughout the video: 

➡️ The word "post-truth" connect with the whole political world. In the year 2016 Oxford dictionary declared the "post-truth" as word of the year but we can notice throughout these following video that the word introduce earlier than that. 

➡️ Second point which I noticed throughout the video is a hindi line,  सत्य जो है, वह विश्वास के आगे हार रहा है! People are started blindly trust on the political leader or the person who is on the post of power. Even people are educated, aware about the right and wrong Still they are started blindly trust. That's why truth and right things are getting failure in front of blindly trust on political leaders. 

➡️ Third thing which I noticed about the term post- truth, is about the people. People started voting to that leaders who speaks in favour of the subject of their interest. When election comes, political leaders started to give fake promises to people and people started believe and gave their votes. But the end of all over things , situation remaining the same! 

➡️ "Post-truth" word introduce us with the world of lie. 

➡️ In following video I found one more point that people like to accept rather than questioning! People started accept wrong things rather than challenge it! 

                     Hear i put noticed points from the debate video and also I put my explanation on that point.                                                                                                                                 

word count- 768 words

images- 3

video-1

paragraph-12