Coleridge's Thinking activity

“A poem of any length neither can be, nor ought to be, all poetry”. 

Difference between prose and poem is as follow:

(1). Prose and poem both are most probably same but presentation of both are not same. The difference is between the combination of those elements and objects aimed at the poem and Prose. Coleridge make use of certain artificial arrangement of words with the help of metre. As a result composition will be a poem, merely because it is distinguished from composition in Prose by metre, or by rhyme. Poem have musical construction whereas prose is flat forward like news papers, magazine, fiction etc. So here we can say that prose has simple language and subject and it's aimed to be strict to the truth whereas poem's aimed to give pleasure.

(2) Coleridge considers to distinguish poem from poetry Coleridge points out that "poetry of the highest kind may exist without the contra distinguishing object of a poem " Poem is a form of poetry. Poetry means to create or to make. Poetry is the art of creating a poem. Poetry is something going on in the poet’s mind; how to create a poem using language, metre etc. with his imagination.

>Example of prose:

(3)When you set out to tell a story in prose, it’s called a novel or short story and essay which you familiar with it very well (depending on length). Stories can also be told through verse, but it’s less common nowadays. Books like Harry Potter and mobydick are written in prose.

Thinking activity on Aristotle's Poetics

1) I dont agree with platos obsection to fredom of expretion of liberty .According to plato bellive literature shoud splended .Beacause of media use fredom of expretion in news.

2)
I have studid many tragedy in B.A programme in which Ghashiram kotawal ,we have see hamartia and concept of tragedy also .Ghashiram was main protogonist and tragic hero.

3)I have studied many tragedy in B.A programme,Othello is wriiten by shakspeare in this tragedy do not follow the aristotelian litarary tradition

4)Yes i have studied othello during B.A programme , othello is main protogonist in the tragedy his hamartia was the character of othello some time many activity working without acthion.

5)Yes most probebly tragedy follow aristotle's rules for example,"Oedipus","tuglaq".

Thinking activity: pehredar Piya Ki.

I think this serial is completely regressive because marriage can not be possible between nine years old Ratan and Diya who is almost teenager. It should be banned from both the point of view, from the perspective of child marriage and from the social concern, because it favours child marriage just for protect someone(trivia reason), and after all the televisions are the mirror to the society, what television serial and movie shows to the audience they adopt. So, it can produce a kind of bad image or influence on the mind of children and on the youth of India that's it should be banned.

Thinking activity on dryden's dramatic poesy.

1) Do you any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden's definition of Play?
Ans: yes, there is huge difference between Aristotle's definition of tragedy and Dryden's definition of play.
According to Aristotle a play or a tragedy  must be an imitation of person's serious side and an imitation of the aspects of life. But according to Dryden a play must be just and lively image of human natture.
2) If you are supposed to give your personal predilection, would you be on the side of the Ancient or the Modern? Please give reasons.

I would go towards moderns because ancients always cling towards their former rules and regulation of drama they strictly follow every unity and rules made by ancients. on the other side modern dramatist always tries to do something new in their way of writing, and tries to mingle the stories of ancients and their own ideas and ideology which gives pleasure to the audience and after all only the audience are the factor which one dramatist always wanted.
3) Do you think that the arguments presented in favour of the French plays and against English plays are appropriate? (Say for example, Death should not be performed as it is neither 'just' not 'liely' image, displaying duel fight with blunted swords, thousands of soldiers marching represented as five on stage, mingling of mirth and serious, multiple plots etc.)

Actually, we can not judge either French plays or English Drama because both having their own charm and specialty in particular fields.  Now the question is about showing some type of scene on stage, I think it is all right to show death scene or love scene on stage, duel fight with blunted swords these all things are normal to show because audiance knows that they are watching play not reality so there is no harm to show these things. Now mingling of mirth and serious or too many sub plots, that is the choice of writer, and tragi-comedy it is good invention or too many sub plots are also acceptable they somehow make play iteresting. So the arguments which are presented against English drama and in favour of french drama is unappropriate.

4) What would be your preference so far as poetic or prosaic dialogues are concerned in the play? 

I think both are equally important and mostly doesn't matter it is prosaic or poetic only matters is meaning or the depth of the dialogue. Well rhymed and meteric poetic lines if don't have depth of meaning than that rhymed lines are worthless. So baisically it doesn't matter the dialogues are in prosaic lines or poetic lines the deep understandig which dialogue gives that is important and every dialogue may be don't need to give deep meaings then even it is upon writers choice in which he wants to write.

Question answer in Robinson Crusoe novel

I have given task by my teacher to answer some question on novel and movie Robinson Crusoe here I give link of that task.
http://poojabajadeja.blogspot.in/2017/08/worksheet.html

Introduction

Robinson crusoe is 18th century novel by daniel defoe. It was published in 1719. It is an adventure story of character Robinsn crusoe. The real life adventure of Alexander selkirk who was a scottish privatees and royal navy officer who spent more than four years as a casteway after being marooned by his captain on an uninhabited island in the south pacific ocean. This real life adventure formed the basis of daniel defoe's novel Robinson crusoe.

1) Colonial discourse in Robinson crusoe

This novel is full of slavery system or colonialism which is very dark side of history and we never want it to heppen again but in this novel we can see it clearly.
According to wikipedia "Colonialism occurs when a country or a nation, or territories outside of its border(boundaries of the country) by turning those other lands, regions or territories in to a colony, usually it is a more powerful, richer country that takes control of a smaller, less powerful region or territory.

In this novel the first event of slavery or colonisation we can see when crusoe is travelling moorish pirates atteck on ship and enslaved crusoe and others after some period of time crusoe and one boy named xury escaped from the trap of moorish pirates and picked up by portugese captain, though crusoe feel the slavery then even he sold that boy named xury to make himself free. In Brazil he started his business and again he go for buy slaves and there is shipwrecked and he landed on humanless island and starting feel himself as king of that island. He is all alone there and in aloofness all we want is someone with we can talk normaly and on that humanless island he saved one boy who is prey of cannibals and make him slave rather then friend, the first thing he do is naming that boy as Friday which shows his power as master and he called Friday "my man Friday". After coming back home again he once again go to visit that humanless island and he used the word "my land". From all this elements we can clearly see the colonial discourse in this novel.

2) How colonialism works in our life? (In contemporary time/ of our surrounding, give examples)

It is true that now we are free and we love our feeling of freedom but are you seriously free or stil ruled by britishers? I say that we are stil ruled by western countries. How? Let me show you. Can you do one thing for me... Imagine a very beautiful or handsome person front of you and you are talking with him or her and praising his or her beauty....
What is in your imagination? Let me guess a very handsome or beautiful person who has white skin. Am I right? Well I can say yes because most of us think that beauty means white we can not think beauty in black. This is what shows that we are stil colonised. We are living in india and as dilip sir says that our god Krishna is black our godess Kali Ma is black we worship black, black is accept in our society and this is what our culture then even most of people craving for whiteness. Why? You are not able to see your self beautiful in real or natural skin color that you got. This is the reasons all buys fairness creams. This is the effect of colonisation which is not physicaly now but it is mentaly. Our mind is ruled by western ideas. This is how colonialism works in our life.

3) Do you think that movie is different than original novel? Write about some changes done in the movie.

Yes, movie is different than novel in many ways..
• The movie is only focused on one voyage while in novel before landing on humanless island Crusoe also does voyage to London and Brazil.
• In movie Crusoe has Dog as pet while in original novel Crusoe has Perrot and Goat as pet.
• In movie Friday is not slave while in novel we can see the totle submission of Friday.
• In movie Friday has his own voice when Crusoe shows the power of gun Friday did not afraid and he also show his power with wood while in novel when Crusoe shows power of gun Friday starts worshiping gun and Crusoe.
• In movie when Crusoe talks about religion Friday also talk about his God and riligion and did not accept Christianity as superior then his riligion while in novel Friday starts belive that his religion is inferior and starts beliveing in Christianity.
• In movie the relation between Crusoe and Friday is of friends while in novel Crusoe is master and Friday is slave.
• In movie Crusoe needs Friday that is the reason Crusoe goes to say sorry to Friday while in novel Friday needs Crusoe he apologise.
• In movie there is one image of Crusoe's wife while in novel there is no discription of love for his wife.

This all the way where movie is quite different then the original novel.

4) Do you think, movie is describing anti-colonial elements? Can you describe reason?

Yes movie is describing anti-colonial elements like there is no master-slave relationship. From the very first meeting of Cruso and Friday, Crusoe request to become friends they both are friends not master and slave. In novel Friday is totally submited to Crusoe but in movie Friday has his own voise he argues and he questions also. In movie Crusoe never think himself as king of that humanless island and he also feel bad about slavery system when Friday talk about it and he also cries a lot on the death of Friday which shows his feelings for Friday. The reason can be the change of time that movie is showing anti-colonial elements. The original novel is written in 1719 while the movie is in 1997 and changing of time is reason that movie shows anti-colonial elements.

Social Hirearchy in Gulliver's Travels nove

Social hierarchy in gulliver's travels

                Gulliver's travels is written by jonathan swift.it is prose satire on human nature and political situation jonathan swift by putting gulliver in dofferent place and society, he satirised deeply the human nature.

Let's first see the definition of hierarchy.....

1) A graded or ranked series.

2) The classification of a group of people according to ability or to economic, social or professional standing.

                      Here we only focus on social hierarchy that gulliver wants to reach. It is not only about earning more money if he want only that he can be robber that is easy way then to go on voyages but with money he also want reputation or respect in society thatis the reason why gulliver decides to go on voyages.

                      He also says that his father has small estate that shows that gulliver belongs to middle class family he also not able to attend university he just complete his collage in emanuel college while in 18th century england was a place in which education was a key to certain position in society. He says that he want positin i society and for that he want money and this is the reason he decides to go on voyages.

                      In his first voyage to lilliput, when he arrives in lilliput he was a prisnor but because of his size, he is usefull to the king he also starts learning lilliputian language to converse with them and also starts taking parts in their social customs like rope dance or stick dance. He want some special place in lilliputian society and king himself given him a title after he won the war and his possition become higher then the treasurer filmnap and he make him to leave the lilliput. He also want his reputation stainless he argues on false rumours of gulliver's afair with higher rank lilliputian lady. So in this first voyage he achieve social hierarchy by won the war against blefusku.

                       After returning from lilliput he has some money and also good house that shows he is moving towards upper class from middle class. Hs son is going to school now and his daughter is on needlework. After stay at home for some time he again ready for new voyage and he also says that he does voyage for improving his future. Here we can see that he only does voyages for making money he has no intention to get knowledge about new world or land.

                      On his second voyage he reach to brobdingnag. At here he is like jester. The situation is reversed when he is in lilliput he has power but in this land of giant he is like unnoticable for them. Here again he starts learning new language to communicate with queen. This is his first step to live in palace rather then with farmer. He also feel great when he make farmer's daughter in palace as his caretaker he feels that it is better to live in palace as servent rather then in small house. He feel power and possition when he hasmany servents around him to take care of him. In this voyage also he managed to reach social hierarchy as he works for farmer and then by his language he make his place in royal palace.

                      He returns england more by accident than by choise. When he reaches home one servent open door for him now they have one servent also this again shows that he kee trying to make his level up in society.

                     In third voyage to laputa where he met people who is same as his size but they all are busy in finding or thinking on some stupid questions and they don't notice that gulliver can learn language very quick and they don't value gulliver's knowledge and skills. So here he fails to reach social hierarchy. Soon he leave that place and then at lagado where he also can't find place for him in their grand academy. He returns home and stay for five months with his wife and children happily.

                   In his fourth and last voyage he reaches to the land of houyhnhnmns who are rational horses and there is yahoos also who are describe as savage humans. Again here gulliver try to learn language and start understanding common rules of houyhnhnmns society. Here he also try to convince houyhnhnmns that he is not yahoo and he use cloths to hide his body which is look like yahoo. This is also his attempt to achieve social hierarchy as he afraid to be in lowest possition of houyhnhnmns society.

                   At last he says that he is rational yahoo and told houyhnhnmns about his country houyhnhnmns don't understand the concept of cloths. In this society of horse gulliver also observe the real nature of humans and now he starts hating the human society now he don't want to make his possiton up in society he also want to live with this horses but they don't allow now gulliver returns home and now he don't care about his social status and he now live away from humans and starts live and talk with horses.

                  So, here we can conclude that he starts his journey or voyage with the intention of being up in society but he ends his journey with living away from society.

About Dr Faustus (a play)

bout play writer Christopher Marlowe. (from spark notes.com)

Christopher Marlowe Born in Canterbury in 1564, the same year as William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe was an actor, poet, and playwright during the reign of Britain’s Queen Elizabeth I (ruled 1558–1603). Marlowe attended Corpus Christi College at Cambridge University and received degrees in 1584 and 1587. Traditionally, the education that he received would have prepared him to become a clergyman, but Marlowe chose not to join the ministry. For a time, Cambridge even wanted to withhold his degree, apparently suspecting him of having converted to Catholicism, a forbidden faith in late-sixteenth-century England, where Protestantism was the state-supported religion. Queen Elizabeth’s Privy Council intervened on his behalf, saying that Marlowe had “done her majesty good service” in “matters touching the benefit of the country.” This odd sequence of events has led some to theorize that Marlowe worked as a spy for the crown, possibly by infiltrating Catholic communities in France.

After leaving Cambridge, Marlowe moved to London, where he became a playwright and led a turbulent, scandal-plagued life. He produced seven plays, all of which were immensely popular. Among the most well known of his plays are Tamburlaine, The Jew of Malta, andDoctor Faustus.
http://m.sparknotes.com/lit/doctorfaustus/context.html

*The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, commonly referred to simply as Doctor Faustus, is an Elizabethan tragedyby Christopher Marlowe, based on German stories about the title character Faust, that was first performed sometime between 1588 and Marlowe's death in 1593. Two different versions of the play were published in theJacobean era, several years later.[1](Wikipedia) 

Task on Doctor Faustus. Here is my answers.

1) The play directed by Matthew Dunster for Globe theatre ends with this scene (see the image of Lucifer). What does it signify?

1-When Dr. Faustus repenting from the depth of his heart...we can say that the tragedy of life is in what dies inside a man while he lives it means at the end of play Dr. Faustus realized that he chose a wrong path and at the end by his grief he indirectly dies inside and because of that fall of Dr. Faustus, Lucifer feel his great tripumphal against him. Thus,here the last scene of Lucifer signifies his great triumphal

.

2) Is God present in the play? If yes, where and how? If No, why?

2-yes there is god in the play. 'We only need the light when it is burning low & we only miss the sun when it starts to snow. 'The same way here Dr. Faustus didn't need any God or heavenly power because he has a power of his knowledge and slowly he fall and in last scene of play when Dr. Faustus repeanting there we can prove that there is indirectly god is present in the play in the mind of Dr. Faustus...

3) What reading and interpretation can be given to this image (see the image of Daedalus and Icarus) with reference to central theme of the play Dr. Faustus?

3-Greek myth of Icarus,a son whose father Daeduls give wings to him.wings which is Made by besswex but Icarus forget that truth ND flew closer and closer to the sun and cause of it his wings melt and he fall down on earth and died. Similarly here Dr Faustus d

Fall down from his higher position of knowledge.Lust for knowledge is good at Some level but cross the limitations it is bad... Thus we can say that this image of falling of Icarus shows the central theme of same falling of Dr. Faustus .