Sunday, 27 November 2016
Thursday, 24 November 2016
Double face of English in India
Roll no: -23
Paper :– 12
Topic
:- Double face of English in India
Email id- rivapandya.rp@gmail.com
Year :-
2015-2017
Submitted to
:- M.K Bhavnagar university, Department of English
Double face of English in India:-
English plays a conflicting double role in India in policy
and practice in public platform and private choice and in symbolic,allegiance
and instrumental use.After Independence
a pattern of bilingualism has emerged at the executive, legislative
,legal and educational domains with English and an Indian languages .At the
popular level however preference for English has increased in spite of
political opposition to it. English is declined as our official language. Now,
in our India, we have two official languages: Hindi and English and one
language that the regional language as our official language.Being a global and
link language, English language has become an important tool for various fields
like, education, business, journalisma etc. But it plays double roles in
country like “India”. There were many controversies for English language in its
initial stage; it plays a conflicting
double role in India.
English language is just a medium, not our goal, but it has
become our need. Because, nowadays, the higher-education is only in one
language available that is English language. while dealing with the English
language in education, the first and the fundamental problem is that we face
some cultural conflict. Our belief system is completely different from the
English Culture. Every language represents its culture and belief system. We
can not translate our myths,feelings,idea or belief system or our cultural
ideology into English Language.so sometimes it is very difficult to use or
learn English language in India.
Socio-Cultural
dimension creates the Satanic Image of English Language towards us while
learning it. we face some difficulties while translating some words in English
like, we can not write in English, “Hanuman is a servant of Lord Rama.”
Here, we can find the conflict while translating our ideas into English. It
completely changes the meaning of the information that we want to convey. There
is a lot of difference between the words like, “Bhakta”
and “Servant”.
When we write “Servant” for translating the word “Bhakta”, at that
time, it kills the real meaning or originality of the word “Bhakta”.
By this example, we can understand that it is impossible to translate our
cultural belief into English language.
Parliament passed the official language bill providing for
the continued use of English without time limit giving legal status to the
assurance given by the prime minister Nehru in the parliament to the opponent
of hindi four years earlier.English now is the associate official language of
the union.As far as the states are concerned the legislative of most states
passed bills making one or more of its language after linguistic reorganisation
of the states the official language of the states with provision for continued use
of English,one state Nagaland passed a bill making English as official language
and some states have passed no bill yet in this regard.So in most states and
union the official work is transacted in English and in one or more Indian
languages differing in the extent and administrative levels of their use.
English is taught as a language for its instrumental value
in school and colleges compulsorily in almost all parts of the country with the
exception of a very few states, where it is an optional or non-examinable
subject. At the secondary school stage a student should learn at least three
languages and one of them is English uniformly throughout the country.
So English has been spread all over the country, except some
states of India, which don’t follow the English language as a
compulsory subject. It can be possible that the satanic image of the English is
responsible behind this reason. The double role of the English language creates
the chaotic situation in a way that it can be impossible to solve this problem.
After independence, the number of students learning English
has greatly increased, but their level of competence in English has decreased.
This thing completely shows the policy and practice of the English language.
English is taught in the school, but the policy that is made which is not
followed by the teachers or we can say that it is not put into practice. That’s
why at the very initial stage (school level) students are facing difficulties
to learn the English language.
This is the biggest problem in the country like India that
the policy which are made for teaching English, are not put into practice by
the teacher so the very beginning stage of learning English, difficulties are
created by this confusion or folly. Perhaps, this creates the satanic image of
English in the minds of the students.
After the second world war the power of English increased
internationally in the political and commercial spheres.It was perceived that
India will have some natural advantage in the world politics and commerce by
officially remaining an English using country.There was a growing awesome fear
that the knowledge gap cannot be caught up by the Indian languages in content
and in vocabulary by interaction.The increased international morality and
possibilities of higher education abroad which gave new returns to the already
advantage,the importance of English education.The language despised as language
of satans by the freedom fighters came to be praised as the boon of sarasvati
the goddess of learning .
English has become more and more Indianised grammatical and
functionally due to its use by a large number of Indians think to increased
education, commerce and journalism and the Indian English was no more foreign.
It’s
because of widely use of English language became it our own Indianised English.
English also proved as Satan in India because English is not
used in lower level – in a particular situation, so English cannot be the language
of day-to-day conversation in India and it has only become medium to go for
higher education and the age of specialization. We learn English as a subject not as language.people can not easily
pronounce in English or it is also difficult to speak or learn because this
language is use as second language in India so students also face some problems
to learn English because it is not their mother tongue.so it can be satanic
side of English
India is multicultural country English serves as a link
language across the nation .There are many states in India and each states has
it's own culture and language so we can
not easily understand eah and every
language or we sometimes face some difficulties to communicate with each other
because of less knowledge of other states language so for that we have to
learn English so we can easily communicate with other states or countries or English is
an international language so it is easy for conversation.
Conclusion:
No doubt English is difficult for learners because some times it creates
problem to translate .But it is very useful in official and educational
fields.English is an international language so Indian can learn and also use as
an occupational purpose .so here English plays a conflicting double role in
India as satan or as saraswati , it is not like good and bad but we can say
that English language is like two sides of one coin in India.
To evaluate my assignment
To evaluate my assignment
Critique on the three chapters of Black skin white mask
Roll no -23
Paper – 11
Topic
:- Critique on the three chapters of Black skin white mask:
Email id- rivapandya.rp@gmail.com
Year :-
2015-2017
Submitted to
:- M.K Bhavnagar university, Department of English
Critique on
the three chapters of Black skin white mask:
Introduction:-
Frantz Fanon
was a french philosopher revolutionary and author.He wrote his first book Black
skin white mask an analysis of the negative psychological effect of colonial
subjugation upon black people.It is published in 1952.
This book is
about the mindset or psychology of racism by frank fanon a psychiatrists. The
book looks at the condition which goes through the minds of black and white
people. A distinguished French Caribbean African psychiatrist and writer
negritude group but soon rejected their philosophy and developed his own theory
of racial and colonial theory.
This book is
divided in eight chapters. Fanon talks about psychology of white colonizers and
black people’s desire to be like white men. The
black people want to be white. They suffer a lot and being white they want to
be superior . Black people also known as Negro.The white people hate the black
people. He also talks about issue of
language, marriage between white and black and psychology behind it, white
mindset of ruling, black’s inequality and struggle for human
existence. He explains his all the arguments of psychology with real examples
of his surrounding.
Lets see
first three chapters of the book Black skin white mask,
1)The Negro
and Language :
Language
construct the idea of civilized or uncivilized.This chapter deals with the
language of white people. It shows that language of White people is in power
position and Language of Black people has lesser importance. In this chapter the author discusses that if
a black person does not learn the white man’s language
perfectly, he is unintelligent yet if he does learn it perfectly, he has washed
his brain in the world of racial ideology.
So, Black people have to learn the language of White people.
The white
man always considers black man fully unhuman. There is no matter how much
education they have or well they act. White people, feels fear of the black
people as they viewed the black as mindless, violent or animal. White man
thinks that they will take white women from them. Fanon says that he has only
one duty and one right; he has a right to demand human behavior from the other.
He has a duty that he never lets his decision renounce his freedom. Fanon
cannot accept the fact that ever possible in France between white and black.
Fanon is talking about behavior he says they have to need to be free from that
obsession being black in the mental condition.
2)The woman
of colour and the white man:
The second
chapter is about the psychology behind the marriage between white men and black
women . In this chapter Fanon talks about internalize racism.
According to
Fanon, the acts of love and admiration are directly tied to who and what we
value. And he gave reasons that why women of colour go after white men, putting
down men of their own colour!
Fanon says,
“Authentic love …entails the mobilization of psychic drives basically freed of
unconscious conflicts.”
In other
words, he cannot seek to love unless he has rid himself, in this case, of his
inferiority complex. Fanon explains that, these black women do not truly love
white men but they just love their colour. They marry with them to deal with
their own hang-ups about race. And it is because the black woman feels
inferior.
The black
woman wants to marry with white people because she wants to be “white” or superior. She thinks being a
black woman she is inferior or she wants to be white because of white man’s skin, looks up to white people and looks down on black
people. The vision and dream of black woman is towards the white to achieve
forbidden values of being white.
Here Fanon
takes as his examples three women: Mayotte of Martinique and Nini and Dedee of
Senegal. Mayotte who wrote a book about her life and Nini and Dedee are
characters from “Nini” a story by
Abdoulaye Sadji. They are part white which makes them determined not to “slip back among the ‘nigger’ rabble.” The character Nini is a silly typist. A man who is and
accountant with the waterways company, proposes marriage but in the end they
have the police tell him to stop his “morbid insanities” because he is black and she is half white. He has offended
her honor. Meanwhile another man with a good government job proposes to Dedee
but this time it is a dream come true because he is white. Mayotte was entering
the white world but a white man cannot make you white. Mayotte, the third
woman, had an affair with a married
This black woman does not truly love this
white man but she loves his color. She goes with him not out of love but to
deal with her own emotional problems about race. It is because the black woman
feels inferior that she hopes to obtain admittance to the white world.
3)The man of
color and the white woman:
Fanon is a black psychiatrist from Martinique.
He starts this chapter by saying of himself: I want to be recognized not as
Black but as White. By loving me she proves to me that I am worthy of a white
love. I am loved like a white man. I am a white man. Here Fanon gives the
example of Jean Veneuse, the hero of an autobiographical novel by Rene Maran.
Jean Veneuse came to France from the Caribbean when he was three or four. He
lost his parents. He was brought up by boarding schools in France, the only
black student in a sea of white. He has a lonely childhood. When the other
students go home for the holidays, he is left alone at school. He grows up
French and falls in love with a white woman. He wonders about his motives. May
be it is simply because he was brought up European and so desires European
women just like any other man in Europe. When he works in Africa as a civil
servant he proves to be just as bad as the whites. May be it is not revenge
that he wants but to separate himself from his race or even some how to become
race less.
But here Fanon says that Veneuse’s troubles run much deeper. He was left alone in the world by
his mother as a small boy. He is hung up on that. So he is afraid to love and
be loved. He holds everyone at arm’s length, even the woman he wants to
marry. Therefore we cannot take any general conclusions from Veneuse’s case.
Conclusion:
Every black
man and mulatto have only one thought to be like white to gratify their
appetite for white woman, to marry white woman. They started denying their
culture and woman and marry white girl, less for love than satisfying their ego
and inferiority.so here we can see in these chapters that black people wants to
be a white or wants to be superior like white people,but white people believes
that they are evil or terrorist because their skin is black so how black people
identify by their skin or color.so here fanon talks about white colonizers and
the desire of black people.
To evaluate my assignment
To evaluate my assignment
Symbolism in Scarlett Letter
Roll no -23
Paper – 10
Topic
:- Symbolism in Scarlett Letter
Email id- rivapandya.rp@gmail.com
Year :-
2015-2017
Submitted to
:- M.K Bhavnagar university, Department of English
vIntroduction:
Nathaniel Hawthorne is one of the most prolific symbolists in American
literature .He has a perfect atmosphere for the symbols in The Scarlett letter
because the puritans saw the world through allegory. for them simple patterns like meteor , streaking
through the sky became religious or moral interpretations for human events. He
represents various symbols in this novel and all symbols are important to
understand the novel.
Ø Symbolism in Scarlett letter:
§ The Scarlet Letter "A"
The Scarlett
letter is meant to be a symbol of shame, but instead it becomes a powerful
symbol of identify to Hester. And also symbolizes her adultery.It symbolizes
Hester's sin and shame.The letter 'A' is sewn into her clothing,she wears
it on her chest and literally marking
her as an adulterer.The letter's meaning shifts as time passes.originally
intended to mark Hester as an adulterer,the "A" eventually comes
to stand for Able. For Dimmesdale and
Hester, the scarlet letter stands for agony, which Hester displays in her isolated
life and which Dimmesdale displays in his deteriorating health. By the end of
the novel, the townspeople think that Hester's scarlet "A" stands for
Ability, for she has become a generous helper for the poor and downtrodden and
a wise counselor for their problems She takes ownership of that letter, which
makes it sort of a cool symbol for her identity. She's a marked woman, but
she's not going to take the punishment lying down.
The gesture
of Dimmesdale's placing his hand over his heart is also symbolic. It is the
minister's attempt to cover his mark of sinfulness and prevent his exposure. It
also suggests his nervous condition and reflects his grieved state.
§ Pearl
Pearl is
Hester's daughter, as well as a symbol for sin and redemption. There's a duality
in Pearl's existence, as she's a living reminder and symbol for Hester's
adultery, her sin.she represents not only sin but also the vital spirit and
passion that engendered that sin. she also represents Hester's blessing or hope
of redemption . As the novel progresses
and Pearl matures she symbolizes the deteriation of Hester's like by constantly
asking her about the scarlet letter "A". Pearl in a sense wants her
mother to live up to her sin and, she achieves this by constantly asking her about
the scarlet letter. Another peice of evidence that shows how Pearl symbolizes
the sin Hester has committed, is when the town government wants to take Pearl
away from her Revrend Dimmsdale convinces the government that Pearl is a living
reminder of her sin. This is essentialy true, Hester without Pearl is like
having Hester without sin.
thus pearls
existence gives her mother reason to live ,bolstering her spirits when she is
tempted to give up.It is only after Dimmesdale is revealed to be pearl's father
that pearl can become fully human.until then she functions in a capacity as the
reminder of an unsolved mystery.
§ The Scaffold
The scaffold
is a symbol of penitence and God's platform on the Day of Judgment. It is a
reflection of appearing before the Almighty in one's weakness. Because of the
comparison, Dimmesdale has great difficulty in standing on the platform and
confessing his sins. He first does it under the cover of darkness for no one to
see him, as if he were trying to hide from God himself. In the end, however, he
bravely stands on the scaffold and confesses his sin in the light of day and
before a crowd of people. The confession finally gives him a sense of peace.
§ The Prison
It is
made out of wooden and reflects the harsh weather conditions with stains on it
and subsequently attention shifts to the prison door.
The prison,
presented in the opening chapter of the novel, is a symbol of isolation and
alienation, foreshadowing the life that Hester will lead even after she leaves
its confines. While Hester lives in the prison of alienation, Dimmesdale lives
in the prison of his unconfessed guilt, and Chillingworth is imprisoned by his
vengeance. Pearl, alone, remains free.So the prison door symbolizes the oldest
heritage sinfulness of humanity and how it is a steady legacy from the ancient
times.The prison symbolizes a black stain of society on the civilization
§ The Rose Bush
The narrator
choose to begin his story with the image of the rosebush beside the prison
door.It symbolizes the nature to endure and outlast man's activities.It also
represents the futility of symbolic interpretation the narrator mentions
various insignificances that the rosebush might have never affirming or denying
them never privileging one over the others.
The rose
bush growing across from the prison respresents a constant reminder of
salvation and hope to all the prisoners. Later in the book Pearl states that
she was plucked from the rosebush and was born. This symbolizes that Pearl is
the key to not only Hester's salvation, but to Dimmesdale and indirectly to
Chillingsworth. Pearl was born into a world of sin and for her to be saved,
everyone must find their salvation through her. It represents a light in the
darkness of Hester's sin.
§ The Meteor
As
Dimmesdale stands on the scaffold with Hester and pearl ,a meteor traces out an
"A" in the night sky.To Dimmesdale the meteor implies that he should
wear a mark of shame just as Hester does. The meteor is interpreted differently
by the rest of the community which thinks that it stands for "Angel"
and marks Governor winthrop's entry into heaven .But Angel is an awkward
reading of the symbol .The puritans commonly looked to symbols to confirm
divine sentiments . In this narrative symbols are taken to mean what the
beholder wants them to mean .The incident with the meteor obviously highlights
and exemplifies two different uses of symbols puritan and literary.
§ The Forest
The forest
is symbolic of Nature, both in its darker and lighter aspects. When the rays of
sunshine fall on Pearl but do not reach Hester, they symbolize her inability to
find happiness or warmth. The pervading darkness is suggestive of the dull
gloom in her life. That darkness is dispelled when she meets with Dimmesdale
and plans to flee from Boston with him. As a symbol of her freedom, she throws
away the scarlet letter and undoes her hair. Appropriately, a flood of sunshine
illuminates the forest, dispelling the darkness.
§ Colors
Hawthorne
also gives symbolic meanings to the colors that he employs in the novel. The
dark, sober, sable garments that Hester wears represent her dull and gloomy
life filled with grief, guilt, and sorrow.
The color of the letter carries special
significance. It is red because that is the color associated with the devil,
and the Puritans believed that Hester's sin was a mark of Satan.while black
tends to signify hidden sins or the things that society doesn't want to face.
Since
Dimmesdale's sin is hidden while Hester's sin is visible to the entire
community, he is frequently embodied by blackness. He is burdened by 'the black
secret of his soul' .
At one
point, Hester talks with Chillingworth and refers to him as 'the Black man that
haunts the forest'Here, the black man does not only refer to Chillingworth, but
also Satan.Ironically, the innocent Pearl fashions a letter "A" to
wear herself, but she makes it out of seaweed that is bright green, the color
of life itself. Black is also used in the novel. Mistress Hibbins practices
black magic throughout the book, and many suspect Chillingworth of doing the
same.
Conclusion:
Nature also
plays a vital role in Scarlett letter.Every chapter in The Scarlet Letter has
symbols displayed through characterization, setting, colors, and light.
Hawthorne's ability to introduce these symbols and change them through the
context of his story is but one of the reasons The Scarlet Letter is considered
his masterpiece and a peerless example of the romance novel.
To evaluate my assignment
To evaluate my assignment
Relationships between Vladimir and Estragon
Roll no -23
Paper – 9
Topic :- Relationships between Vladimir and Estragon
Email id- rivapandya.rp@gmail.com
Year :-
2015-2017
Submitted to
:- M.K Bhavnagar university, Department of English
Relationships between Vladimir and Estragon
Waiting for
Godot is Samuel Beckett's most famous work. Originally written in French in
1948, Beckett personally translated the play into English.He often focused on
the idea of "the suffering of being." Estragon and Vladimir are
waiting for godot . Godot can be understood as one of the many things in life
that people wait for.
The play has
often been viewed as fundamentally existentialist in its take on life.
Vladimir and
Estragon are the main protagonists of the play, Waiting for Godot. In hearing
the play read, even the most experienced theater person will often confuse one
of the characters for the other. Therefore, the similarities are as important
as the differences between them.
The name Vladimir
can mean prince, man of the people or ruler of peace. Estragon has the
connotative meaning of estrogen.Vladimir is the soul or mind, the conscious
and practical one and Estragon is the
body.
Vladimir and
Estragon are waiting for Godot, some indication that life is meaningful or an
escape. Both are tramps dressed in costumes which could be interchanged - big
boots which don't necessarily fit, big bowler hats, baggy and ill-fitting
suits. Their costumes recall the type found in burlesque or vaudeville houses.
The opening scene with Estragon struggling with his boots and Vladimir doffing
and donning his hat to inspect it for lice could be a part of a burlesque
routine. Such comic episodes continue until the characters and the audiences
are bored with it.
Estragon
represents the physical split and Vladimir the mental split of the assumed
person, Estramir. Beckett strictly
limits Estragon to physical awareness. He cannot think, nor act of thinking. He
never feels mentally tired, but physically; Whereas Vladimir always thinks
philosophically. He also plays at thinking. He, unlike Estragon, feels mentally
tired, and does not suffer physically (except kidney disease).When men are too
happy or too sad, their physical reactions don’t match with
their thinking, and their physical bustles seem strange or absurd.
We see in this play that Estragon engaged in
trying to take off and put on his boots; While Vladimir is engaged in taking
off his hat, peering in it and putting it on his head. Hat and boot represents
the mentality of people's mindset. Boot is symbolized lower or poor thinking.
It also represents Estragon’s poor memory, while hat is the symbol of power.
These two extreme behaviors show the affinity of Estragon with body, and
Vladimir with mind.
Vladimir is the person who is aware of his own
cog-like existence in the world, and says: "All my life I’ve tried to put it from me, saying Vladimir, be
reasonable, you haven’t yet tried everything. And I resumed
the struggle.”
But
Estragon who represents the physical entity says, having failed taking off his
boot, “Nothing to be done” physically. The hat is used to wear
on head, and head symbolizes mind/brain. The boot is used to wear in legs, and
leg has nothing to do with thinking or mind.
Wherever is
body, there is hunger. Throughout the play, Estragon feels hunger thrice. Once
he is given bones by Pozzo. And twice he is given carrot by Vladimir. Mind
never gets hungry like this; rather it helps body to get its food (carrot). We
do not find Vladimir being hungry, but providing Estragon with carrots.
Body has
nothing to do with memory and past. If it has any relation with past, it is the
marks of wounds that are lefts on it. Estragon hardly remembers about his past.
He says,
“That’s the way I
am. Either I forget immediately or never forget.” He could remember the bones, the kick, and
so. But he cannot recollect Pozzo and Lucky. He also does not identify the
place; While Vladimir recognizes the place, persons, and also remembers the incidents
from the past.
Honour and
pride are abstract things that only a mind could understand them, not a body.
Estragon is found begging for money and bones. But Vladimir suggests him not to
beg since they (Estramir) are not beggars.
Estragon,
however, is dependent upon Vladimir, and essentially he performs what Vladimir
tells him to do. For example, Vladimir looks after Estragon's boots, he rations
out the carrots, turnips, and radishes, he comforts Estragon's pain, and he
reminds Estragon of their need to wait for Godot. He wants to leave but is
restrained from leaving by the fact that he needs Vladimir.Estragon is the less
intelligent one; he has to have everything explained to him. Vladimir is more
masculine and contemplative and Estragon is more feminine and emotion-driven of
the duo
Vladimir would be the equivalent of the
straight man in burlesque comedy. He is also the intellectual who is concerned
with a variety of ideas. Of the two, Vladimir makes the decisions and remembers
significant aspects of their past. He is the one who constantly reminds
Estragon that they must wait for Godot. Vladimir seems to know more about
Godot. Vladimir often sees religious or philosophical implications in their
discussions of events, and he interprets their actions in religious terms; for
example, he is concerned about the religious implications in such stories as
the two thieves who were crucified on either side of Jesus. Vladimir correlates
some of their actions to the general concerns of mankind. In addition to the
larger needs, Vladimir also looks after their physical needs.
Estragon is
concerned mainly with more mundane matters: He prefers a carrot to a radish or
turnip, his feet hurt, and he blames his boots; he constantly wants to leave,
and it must be drilled into him that he must wait for Godot. He remembers that
he was beaten, but he sees no philosophical significance in the beating. He is
willing to beg for money from a stranger (Pozzo), and he eats Pozzo's discarded
chicken bones with no shame. Estragon, then, is the more basic of the two. He
is not concerned with either religious or philosophical matters. First of all,
he has never even heard of the two thieves who were crucified with Christ, and
if the Gospels do disagree, then "that's all there is to it," and any
further discussion is futile and absurd.
One cannot
separate body from mind. They live together. In the absence of one, another has
no value. So, Vladimir and Estragon always live with each other.
As mind
controls body, Vladimir controls Estragon in the worst suicide situations.
Therefore, Estragon represents the body of a person, to have simple
understanding, of Estramir; while Vladimir represents mind (soul) of Estramir.
This is the
way that Beckett unconsciously split Estramir into two different aspects of a
single person: Estragon as body and
Vladimir as mind or soul
To evaluate my assignment
To evaluate my assignment
Thursday, 7 April 2016
My presentation sem-2
paper-5
Topic-Theme of marriage in sense and sensibility
Marriage theme of sense and sensibility from rivapandya
Topic-Theme of marriage in sense and sensibility
Marriage theme of sense and sensibility from rivapandya
paper-6
Topic-Social issues in Oliver twist
paper-7
Topic-Northope Frye's five spheres in his schema
Paper no-7 from rivapandya
Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Victor a true villain in Frankenstein.
click here to evaluate my assignment
Name: Pandya Riva M
Dr.Frankenstein originates from the 1818 novel, Frankenstein, by Mary Shelly. Victor’s full name is Victor Von Frankenstein, and he is a tragic character who started out as a medical student trying to achieve necromancy. He illegally dug up bodies and sewed them together to make a living creature that would later become known as the Frankenstein Monster.
Name: Pandya Riva M
RollNo: 25
Paper: 5
Topic: Victor a true
villain in Frankenstein.
The novel “Frankenstein”
gives a lot of scenarios that could portray a person to think differently on
who the real victim is in the story. Many think that Victor is the victim because
he loses all that he owns. Others may think that the monster is the victim,
because victor betrays and abandons him leaving him to be lost in a world that
wasn’t ready for him. In my thoughts it is Victor that is the victim, but not
victim to the monster but to himself. Victor play roulette with his work and
letting it get too close to his outer life in society. He lets himself become
too attach to his work causing him to under think his real life choices. There
for because of these un-thought through choices they come back around to hit
him in the rear.
Part of what makes Victor
Frankenstein his own victim is that he would become too obsessed with his work,
let it control his life. Victor abandons his family and father in there time of
need letting his work get the best of him. Because of this Victor loses his way
taking his experiments to levels of unorthodox that the world was not yet ready
for. Partly why the university in the story discontinued there support and
didn’t want him introducing his studies and ethics to the school and public. He
let his work basically drive him mad. It
was that insanity that had fueled his obsession to dive deeper and darker into
the place no one dared venture.
Victor had gone down a dark path and with that path came
clouded decisions. After letting his work and studies cloud his mind he delve
into his work even deeper. Because of this he went to extent that wouldn’t be
accepted by the public. After the university discontinued their support in
Victor’s studies he went to places un-thought of for his supplies and
specimens. He would go to graves other the recently desist to dig up their
corps for the body parts he would need for his deranged experiments. His
devotion to his experiment became too attach and when his mind found clarity,
too much damage too had been done.
The real villain of
Frankenstein isn't the creature, but rather his creator, Victor. At first
glance, the monster in Frankenstein is a symbol of evil, whose only desire is
to ruin lives. He has been called "A creature that wreaks havoc by
destroying innocent lives often without remorse. He can be viewed as the
antagonist, the element Victor must overcome to restore balance and tranquility
to the world." But after the novel is looked at on different levels, one
becomes aware that the creature wasn't responsible for his actions, and was
just a victim of circumstance.
Dr.Frankenstein originates from the 1818 novel, Frankenstein, by Mary Shelly. Victor’s full name is Victor Von Frankenstein, and he is a tragic character who started out as a medical student trying to achieve necromancy. He illegally dug up bodies and sewed them together to make a living creature that would later become known as the Frankenstein Monster.
Victor wanted his creation to be beautiful, immortal, and
super human. Immortal and superhuman? Yes, Beautiful? No. The creature was so
hideous, that Dr. Frankenstein fled the lab in horror. The monster was gone the
next day, but the unhinged doctor started seeing him everywhere.
Victor's fears were confirmed when his younger brother,
William Frankenstein, was found dead. On that same night, he saw an evil
looking silhouette in a storm. Victor knew that the monster had done it, even
when his servant Justine was found with William's locket.
If Victor truly cared for Justine, he did nothing to defend
her when she was trialed and hanged (though what could he have done?). Dr.
Frankenstein set out to the Alps to find the monster and take his revenge on
him. When he found the monster, he berated it with empty threats, and cursed it
for its evil.
The monster took Victor to his hut and told him about what
happened to him after he abandoned him, of how he had been hated and shunned
mankind. He had lost his mind and set out for revenge against Dr. Frankenstein
for creating and abandoned him. He had killed William on finding out that he
was a Frankenstein, and framed Justine for the murder. He told Victor that he
had reformed, and that all he wanted in life a companion. The monster told
Victor that as his father, he owed him some happiness, and promised that if he
made him a bride, he would leave human kind alone forever. Victor agreed to do
this only for the sake of his fellow man.
Victor did the same thing he did before, and created a
female version of the monster. But when he saw the monster watching through
window, and thought of giving the monster happiness after what he had done to
him, the despicable doctor went into a rage and destroyed the lifeless bride.
He regretted this treachery on his wedding night, when the
monster killed his best friend Henry, and his new wife Elizabeth. Victor went
insane, and had to be locked up for a while. When he was released, he chased
the monster all the way to the Arctic, where he was picked up by a ship.
He told the
captain the tale of him and the monster. Victor was in a weakened condition,
and when called the captain to talk to him, it would be the last conversation
he ever had. He said he no longer hated the monster he created. He now knew
that he had failed it, so Victor was responsible for the acts of evil it
committed. But he told the captain that it had to be destroyed, and that he,
the captain, had to be the one to do it. Dr. Frankenstein then died of
exhaustion.
As a romantic
novel Victor is responsible, because he abandoned his creation. As an archetype
novel, Victor is the villain, because he was trying to play god. Finally,
Victor as a Gothic novel, Victor is at fault, because, he and the creature are
two different parts of the same person. If Frankenstein is looked at as a
romantic novel, Victor, not the creature, is truly the villain. When Victor
created the creature, he didn't take responsibility for it. He abandoned it,
and left it to fend for itself.
Monday, 4 April 2016
Derrida and Deconstruction
Name:- Pandya Riva M.
Roll no:-25
Paper:-7
Topic:- Derrida and Deconstruction
Derrida is a French philosopher, born in Algiers in 1930. He is
perhaps best known for developing the analytical technique of
deconstruction. He was a founding father of deconstruction, a
controversial system of analyses which challenges the basis of
traditional western thought. Derrida evolves deconstruction as a
strategy of critical questioning directed towards exposing
unquestionable metaphysical assumsions and literary language. In his
celebrated work of grammatology, Derrida unravels in details his main
philosophical contention on deconstruction.
Deconstruction
Deconstruction means a way of reading that concern itself with
decentering with unmasking the problematic nature of all centres.or
it is a critical outlook concerned with the relationship between text
and meaning. A close and critical reading of a written text to
uncover the ways of thinking that constrain our impressions or
conceptualization of the world.
This idea has been extended to other forms of text - for example,
visual art and architecture.
The technique may often be (miss)used in a destructive manner.
However, Derrida's original aim was not to destroy, merely to point
out hidden assumptions and contradictions that shape a text.
Derrida himself is often viewed with deep suspicion, if not hatred,
by many academics. It seems that deconstruction has a nasty habit of
biting hard into people's pet ideas and theories.
What does this mean for us?
Derrida disputes the idea that a text (or for us, a communication)
has an unchanging, unified meaning. He challenges the author's
intentions, and shows there may be numerous legitimate
interpretations of a text. This is where the idea of "the author
is dead" arises: once the text is written, the author's input is
finished. The meaning (any meaning) is up for grabs, in other words.
Identify binary opposition
Notice what a particular text or school of thought takes to be
natural, normal, self-evident, originary, immediately apparent, or
worthy of pursuit or emulation. Or, notice those places where a text
is most insistent that there is a firm and fast distinction between
two things. It is the most important part of deconstruction .Binary
opposition means to look at what is not in a story. There are two
part of it,
1) Dominant, 2) Oppressed or no dominant.
1) Dominant, 2) Oppressed or no dominant.
For Saussure The binary opposition was the means by which the unit
of language have value of meaning..Each unit is defined against
which it is not. With the categorization terms and concept tend to be
associated with a positive or negative. For e.g.: Man-woman,
presence-absence, Reading-writing etc..
Derrida argued that this oppositions were arbitrary and inheritantly
unstable. Deconstruction is regarded as a forum of
anti-structuralism. It rejects most of assumsions of structuralism
and more vehemently binary opposition on the grounds that such
oppositions always privilege one term over the other that is
signified over the signifier. For e.g.:- The words Light and Dark.
Many of us associate light with goodness or positive thing. The same
with up and downs with up having the more positive condition.
Differance
Differance is a French word coined by the French philosopher and
deconstructionist, Jacques Derrida. The word is a play on several
other words that illustrate Derrida’s
meaning. The concept of differance is a complex theory that tries to
illuminate the way words are used and how their specific meaning is
derived. Derrida called difference a "neographism," meaning
a term that is neither a word nor a concept and is used to describe a
literary idea. So one word leads to another word and that word leads
to other and finally we cannot come out of the dictionary so there is
no final meaning to any word ,.for example:- the word, interest if we
look at the dictionary it has various meanings like, hobby, money, a
group of people etc..2) Bat one meaning of it is cricket bat another
is flying animal.
Saussurian sign is equal to signifier which signifies something
but Derridian sign is free play of signifiers, signifying nothing.
This is a chain of signifiers which is never stop.(we assume that we
understand), So meaning is always postponed and you can never reach
the final meaning.
Logocentricism and Phonocentricism
Logocenricism means logo as centre, source of knowledge or
human beings, while Phonocenricism means the speech or writing
binary, speech is supposed to single presence of the speaker.
.
.
To speak a little bit of Derrida, it might be said that like the
logocentrics of old we anal-retentive, logo-phallo-centric
philosophers privilege logos –
that is, meaning, reason, spirit and we take speech to be prior, in
the order of signification, to writing. And by privileging speech
over writing, we privilege presence over absence. So speech is
practice of presence while writing is absence it means that when
writer write something, the reader is not present at that time.
Language is speaking rather than writing.
Metaphysics of Presence
Derrida borrows this phrase “Metaphysics
of Presence” from
heideggar.By logos or presence, derrida signifies “ultimate
referent” a
self-certifying and self-sufficient ground or foundation available to
us totally outside the play of language itself that serves to be a
“center”
to guarantee the structure of a linguistic system.
For instance,
-Hut
-House
-Palace
Its relationship to the other words (a house is bigger than a hut but
smaller than a palace.) Derrida focuses on the center of it and then
tries to deconstruct that center.
Decentring the center
According to derrida, the center also closes off the play which it
opens up. As center it is the point at which the substitution of
contents, elements or terms is no longer possible.Futher says that
center is paradoxically “within
the structure and outside it”
or even “the center is
not the center”
Structure, Sign and play:
This essay was read at the John Hopkins international
colloquium “The language of criticism and the science of man”
Derrida demonstrates how structuralism as represented by the
anthropologist Claude Levi Strasuss which sets out as a criticism or
rejection of science and metaphysics can be read as embodying
precisely those aspects of science and metaphysics which it seeks to
challenge. “There are thus two interpretations of interpretation of
structure, sign of free play. The one seeks to decipher, dreams of
deciphering a truth or an origin which is free from free play and
from the order of sign, and lives like an exile the necessary of
interpretation. The other which is no longer turned toward the
origin, affirms free play and tries to pass beyond man and humanism.”
Derrida in this essay notes that language bears within itself the
necessity of its own critique. The essay is considered as
inauguration of poststructuralist as a theoretical movement.So
Structuralism began as a criticism or attack on metaphysics or
science is another.
The centre is paradoxically within the structure and outside it;
the totality has its centre elsewhere. The centre is not the centre.
As we know that meaning is always postponed. So criticism also can
never go outside of the tradition It uses the same assumption that
tradition is using .Darrida says that its happens because of a
language. Language has always lack of something. So the final meaning
can never be grasped its postponed. Whenever we make a philosophical
statement the ultimate meaning is already postponed. So the language
demands critique. And derrida says that Deconstructive writing is
most of the time auto critical, it means that it questions itself.
Finally, Derrida points out the two reasons for schools of
interpretations which are irreconcilable yet exist simultaneously: 1)
the interpretation which seeks to decipher an original Truth that is
uncluttered by free play, and 2) the interpretation which affirms the
role of free play within the system.
His philosophy of not being centered in a single one philosophy has
validity. Derrida, as taught in the school of deconstruction,
encourages the use of several perspectives (several centers, so to
speak) to view a concept. This does not help to affirm any holistic
view, but it enables a chance to find common ground between
perspectives even though the idea seems impossible. To me, if the
purpose of free play is to de-center within a system, then it is
perhaps possible to use the idea of free play to develop and enlargen
the system in order to accommodate new centers for thought. This
seems to be the point of the post-modern spirit: finding new ways of
viewing the world that is not set in any specific system, but
constantly moving around with the principles of free play in order to
participate in the world better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)