Tuesday 11 October 2016

THE ELIZABETHAN PERIOD.


HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE
THE ELIZABETHAN PERIOD.

PROSE FICTION.
The period saw the beginning, among other things, of English prose fiction of something like the later modern type. First appeared a series of collections of short tales chiefly translated from Italian authors, to which tales the Italian name ’novella’ (novel) was applied. Most of the separate tales are crude or amateurish and have only historical interest, though as a class they furnished the plots for many Elizabethan dramas, including several of Shakspere’s. The most important collection was Painter’s ’Palace of Pleasure,’ in 1566. The earliest original, or partly original, English prose fictions to appear were handbooks of morals and manners in story form, and here the beginning was made by John Lyly, who is also of some importance in the history of the Elizabethan drama. In 1578 Lyly, at the age of twenty—five, came from Oxford to London, full of the enthusiasm of Renaissance learning, and evidently determined to fix himself as a new and dazzling star in the literary sky. In this ambition he achieved a remarkable and immediate success, by the publication of a little book entitled ’Euphues and His Anatomie of Wit.’ ’Euphues’ means ’the well—bred man,’ and though there is a slight action, the work is mainly a series of moralizing disquisitions (mostly rearranged from Sir Thomas North’s translation of ’The Dial of Princes’ of the Spaniard Guevara) on love, religion, and conduct. Most influential, however, for the time—being, was Lyly’s style, which is the most conspicuous English example of the later Renaissance craze, then rampant throughout Western Europe, for refining and beautifying the art of prose expression in a mincingly affected fashion.

Witty, clever, and sparkling at all costs, Lyly takes especial pains to balance his sentences and clauses antithetically, phrase against phrase and often word against word, sometimes emphasizing the balance also by an exaggerated use of alliteration and assonance. A representative sentence is this: ’Although there be none so ignorant that doth not know, neither any so impudent that will not confesse, friendship to be the jewell of humaine joye; yet whosoever shall see this amitie grounded upon a little affection, will soone conjecture that it shall be dissolved upon a light occasion.’ Others of Lyly’s affectations are rhetorical questions, hosts of allusions to classical history, and literature, and an unfailing succession of similes from all the recondite knowledge that he can command, especially from the fantastic collection of fables which, coming down through the Middle Ages from the Roman writer Pliny, went at that time by the name of natural history and which we have already encountered in the medieval Bestiaries. Preposterous by any reasonable standard, Lyly’s style, ’Euphuism,’ precisely hit the Court taste of his age and became for a decade its most approved conversational dialect.
In literature the imitations of ’Euphues’ which flourished for a while gave way to a series of romances inaugurated by the ’Arcadia’ of Sir Philip Sidney. Sidney’s brilliant position for a few years as the noblest representative of chivalrous ideals in the intriguing Court of Elizabeth is a matter of common fame, as is his death in 1586 at the age of thirty—two during the siege of Zutphen in Holland. He wrote ’Arcadia’ for the amusement of his sister, the Countess of Pembroke, during a period of enforced retirement beginning in 1580, but the book was not published until ten years later. It is a pastoral romance, in the general style of Italian and Spanish romances of the earlier part of the century. The pastoral is the most artificial literary form in modern fiction. It may be said to have begun in the third century B. C. with the perfectly sincere poems of the Greek Theocritus, who gives genuine expression to the life of actual Sicilian shepherds. But with successive Latin, Medieval, and Renaissance writers in verse and prose the country characters and setting had become mere disguises, sometimes allegorical, for the expression of the very far from simple sentiments of the upper classes, and sometimes for their partly genuine longing, the outgrowth of sophisticated weariness and ennui, for rural naturalness. Sidney’s very complicated tale of adventures in love and war, much longer than any of its successors, is by no means free from artificiality, but it finely mirrors his own knightly spirit and remains a permanent English classic. Among his followers were some of the better hack—writers of the time, who were also among the minor dramatists and poets, especially Robert Greene and Thomas Lodge. Lodge’s ’Rosalynde,’ also much influenced by Lyly, is in itself a pretty story and is noteworthy as the original of Shakspere’s ’As You Like It.’
Lastly, in the concluding decade of the sixteenth century, came a series of realistic stories depicting chiefly, in more or less farcical spirit, the life of the poorer classes. They belonged mostly to that class of realistic fiction which is called picaresque, from the Spanish word ’picaro,’ a rogue, because it began in Spain with the ’Lazarillo de Tormes’ of Diego de Mendoza, in 1553, and because its heroes are knavish serving—boys or similar characters whose unprincipled tricks and exploits formed the substance of the stories. In Elizabethan England it produced nothing of individual note.

***Will be continued***

THE CANTERBURY TALES

THE CANTERBURY TALES
CHAPTER SUMMARY / ANALYSIS
Introduction to the Sergeant at Law’s Tale
The host realizes that one-fourth of the day had already passed away and urges the pilgrims not to waste any more time. He then asks the Sergeant at Law to tell a story and reminds him in a legal sounding language of his to do so. While the Sergeant at Law has no intention of dishonoring his commitment, he complains that Chaucer has already written all the good stories that can be told. He further announces that he will speak in prose and tell his story plainly.
The Sergeant at Law’s Tale
Summary 
Once upon a time a group of wise, sober and honest traders lived in Syria. They exported spices, gold, satins, etc far and wide. It so happened that the leading traders of this prosperous group made up their minds to go to Rome for business purposes. During their stay in Rome the Syrian traders came to know about the incredible beauty of Constance, the daughter of Roman Emperor Tiberius Constantinus. Constance was commended for her remarkable beauty, humility, strength of character, holiness, generosity and graciousness. After finishing their business these merchants sailed back home to .
They were on good terms with the Sultan and after every foreign trip they would inform him of the news of various countries and the wonders that they had either heard of or seen. The merchants, among other things, told the Sultan about Lady Constance. The Sultan was captivated by Lady Constance’s description and resolved to make her his wife. The Sultan sent for his Privy Council and quite plainly told them that he would die if he could not win her over.
The Sultan’s problem engendered a great debate on the issue. Nothing except marriage seemed feasible. But the councilors foresaw that no Christian ruler would be willing to let his heir marry a Muslim. The Sultan was so much in love with Constance that he dismissed this religious objection and declared that he would convert. Soon all his Syrian subjects also converted Christianity.
The Roman emperor made magnificent preparations for his daughter’s wedding. When the day of departure finally arrived Constance was overcome with sorrow and wept at being sent away to a strange land and being distanced from her friends. An unhappy Constance tearfully set sail for Syria.
In the meanwhile the Sultan’s mother, who was very angry at her son’s renunciation of the teachings of the holy Koran for the sake of Constance, summoned some of her counselors and made them pledge that they would rather die than renounce their Muslim faith. The She told them to make a pretense of accepting and to kill all the Christians at the end of the banquet that she would arrange to celebrate her son’s wedding. The Sergeant at Law denounces the evil maliciousness of the Sultan’s mother.
The Sergeant at Law’s Tale - Part 2
Summary 
The Sultan received Lady Constance and the accompanying her with great joy. A splendid crowd of the Syrian subjects had turned out for the occasion. After the wedding ceremony, the Sultan, Constance and all the Christians went to the banquet hosted by the Sultan’s mother. Suddenly her conspirators entered and hacked all the Christians including the Sultan to pieces. Even the Syrian subjects who had converted to Christianity were not spared. Only Lady Constance was left alive. The widowed Constance was captured and set adrift in a well-provisioned sailing vessel. Her little boat tossed upon the stormy waves for more than three years and by divine grace finally landed in Northumberland.
The constable of the castle found the worn out Constance in the wrecked vessel and took her home to his wife. They took care of her and soon enough Constance’s tirelessness won everybody’s hearts. The and his wife, Hermengild, like the rest of the inhabitants of Northumberland, were heathens. Under Constance’s influence secretly converted to Christianity. One day Constance miraculously cured a blind man and converted the heathen constable to Christianity.
However this peaceful state of affairs was too perfect to last long. Satan made a young Northumbrian knight fall in love with Constance who spurned him. One night the knight burning with the desire to take revenge murdered and put the blood stained knife in Constance’s bed so as to implicate her. The grief stricken constable found the murder weapon in Constance’s bed and produced her before Alla, the King of Northumberland. Nobody in court could believe that Constance could have perpetrated such a foul act. The knight however publicly testified that Constance had killed . At this moment a mysterious voice was heard which condemned the knight for falsely defaming a disciple of Christ. This marvel astonished those present in court and everybody including King Alla embraced Christianity. The knight was sentenced to death for his perjury and King Alla married Constance. However Donegild, the King’s tyrannical mother, didn’t approve of this marriage.
Constance gave birth to a beautiful son while the King had gone on an expedition to Scotland. The child was christened Maurice. The constable sent a message to Alla to inform him of the happy news but the King’s evil mother interfered with the message and instead wrote a false letter saying that Constance had given birth to a horrible and fiendish creature. Although Alla was grief stricken he reconciled himself to his fate and accepted it as God’s will. The King wrote a message instructing the constable to keep the child and Constance safely until his return. However once again intercepted the message and wrote a letter commanding the constable to set Constance and her child adrift in a boat within 3 days. Accordingly Constance along with her son had to once again endure hardships to prove the strength of her faith.
The Sergeant at Law’s Tale - Part 3
Summary 
When Alla returned from his Scottish expedition, he was consumed with grief at the loss of his wife and child. Upon questioning the constable and the messenger Alla soon discovered Donegild’s evil hand in the plot and killed his mother.
Constance had to sail for more than five years and endure many hardships before her ship touched land. In the meanwhile, the Roman emperor heard about the massacre of the Christians in Syria and the tragic fate that befell his daughter. He dispatched a senator with an army to Syria to exact revenge. The Roman soldiers killed the Syrians and then victoriously set sail for Rome. On the return voyage the senator came upon Constance’s boat and brought her back to Rome. Constance had lost her memory and didn’t recognize Rome as her homeland and lived with the senator and his wife.
Alla decided to go to Rome to do penance for the bad luck that had befallen his beloved Constance. The news of Alla’s pilgrimage spread throughout Rome and the senator went to receive him. Alla invited the for dinner. Constance’s son, Maurice, accompanied the senator to the banquet. Alla was struck by the child’s resemblance to Constance. Alla then went to see Constance and explained his innocence and the role played by his evil mother in distorting the messages.
There followed a joyous reunion and Constance requested Alla to invite her father, the Roman Emperor, to dinner without revealing anything about her. Soon Constance was reunited with her father. Alla then returned with Constance to Northumberland and lived happily. But earthly joys are transient and Alla died after one year. The widowed Constance returned to Rome and lived with her father. Her son Maurice later became the Emperor of Rome.
Notes 
The story of Constance is also told by John Gower in ‘Confessio Amantis’ (Lover’s Confession) and is the basis of the verse romance ‘Emare’ but Chaucer’s immediate source was the Anglo-Norman chronicle of 1355 by Nicholas Trivet. Chaucer compressed Trivet’s story a great deal and has added philosophical musings to adapt it to the character of the learned Sergeant at Law.
The Sergeant at Law’s Prologue is a close translation of Pope Innocent III’s pamphlet titled "On Despising the World". The Prologue has little thematic connection with the tale that follows. This has led commentators to suggest that Chaucer perhaps intended the Prologue to function as the tale and only later added the tragic tale of Constance.
The Sergeant at Law declares in the Prologue that he will speak in prose but proceeds to deliver a story in verse form.
The plot of the Sergeant at Law’s Tale revolves around the central character of Constance who is the epitome of perfection and goodness. She embodies the highest Christian virtues and ideals of conduct. She is exceptionally beautiful, patient, humble, generous, optimistic and retains faith in the goodness of God during all her ordeals. She is the daughter of the Roman Emperor. She is married twice to a pagan ruler, converts both her husbands to Christianity, is treacherously betrayed both the times by a vengeful mother-in-law, and is set adrift on the stormy seas both the times. The plot does seem fantastically incredible but Chaucer makes no attempt to explain Constance’s good fortune. Chaucer simply accepts Constance’s survival as a miracle of the merciful God.
The focus of the tale is upon the goodness and perfection of Constance. Every incident serves to highlight her fortitude and faith in God. The reader feels compassion for her miseries and is happy when she is finally reunited with her second husband, King Alla. The plot is cumbersome and superfluous. The essence of the tale lies in magnifying Constance’s virtuous character.
The Epilogue of the Sergeant at Law’s Tale
The host congratulates the Sergeant at Law for narrating such an excellent Tale and requests the Parson to tell another handsome Tale. But the Parson checks the host for swearing in the name of God. Fearing that they will now hear a sermon, the Sea captain declares that they need to hear a merry Tale, one devoid of philosophy and the jargon of law.
*** Will Be Continued ***
THE CANTERBURY TALES
CHAPTER SUMMARY / ANALYSIS
The Cook’s Prologue
Summary
The Cook has thoroughly enjoyed The Reeve’s Tale and thinks that the Miller had justifiably received what he deserved. The Cook then offers to tell a funny story that actually happened in his city. The host jokingly adds that he must tell a good tale to compensate for all the stale pies that he has sold to the pilgrims. The Cook, named Roger, takes this joke in a good spirit and tells his tale.
The Cook’s Tale
Summary 
An apprentice Cook lived in London. He was a good looking man of a stocky build and had stylish long black hair. He danced so well that people named him Perkin Reveler (Peter Playboy). He would sing and dance at every wedding feast. He was fonder of the tavern than of minding the shop-counter. He spent most of his time in the company of his own sort of people and went with them for dancing, singing and gambling. His master came to know about his loose habits when he noticed money missing from the shop-counter. Although the master tolerated Perkin, one day he decided that one rotten can spoil the entire basket and dismissed Perkin. However Perkin was unaffected by his dismissal and was instead glad because he was now free to enjoy himself all night. He moved in with his friend whose wife kept a shop to mask her activities as a prostitute.
Notes 
The Cook is a repulsive figure. His suppurating sore suggests filthy personal habits and the Host accuses him of serving stale food. The Cook’s Tale is unfinished. It deals with an apprentice cook. It was probably intended as the last merry tale in the first fragment. Its plot is very similar to the earlier tales. The plot contains an eligible woman, the wife of the apprentice’s friend who keeps a shop to mask her activities as a prostitute. Perhaps this is an indication that there are two rivals vying for the hand of this lady - her dissolute husband and Perkin Reveler. However since the plot does not develop the reader does not get the full picture. Perhaps the Cook’s Tale was meant to be more raunchy than the Reeve’s tale through which Chaucer intended to depict the London low life. The setting of the Cook’s tale with its taverns and shops is a sharp contrast to the glamorous world of The Knight’s Tale.

*** Will Be Continued ***

Astrophil and Stella #9

Astrophil and Stella #9
BY SIR PHILIP SIDNEY

Queen Virtue’s court, which some call Stella’s face,
Prepar’d by Nature’s choicest furniture,
Hath his front built of alabaster pure;
Gold in the covering of that stately place.
The door by which sometimes comes forth her Grace
Red porphyr is, which lock of pearl makes sure,
Whose porches rich (which name of cheeks endure)
Marble mix’d red and white do interlace.
The windows now through which this heav’nly guest
Looks o’er the world, and can find nothing such,
Which dare claim from those lights the name of best,
Of touch they are that without touch doth touch,
Which Cupid’s self from Beauty’s mine did draw:
Of touch they are, and poor I am their straw

Astrophel describes the different elements of Stella's beautiful face. Her forehead is alabaster; her hair is gold; her mouth is made of red porphir; her teeth are pearls; and her cheeks are a combination of red and white marble. The windows of this palace, Stella's eyes, look over the world, but anyone looking will discover that there is nothing in the world that is as beautiful as Stella's face.
Analysis:                                            

Astrophel depicts Stella's beauty as a sort of architectural design of Nature. Not only does her face possess all of Nature's best "furniture" (or facial features), it is equipped with the very best materials: gold, alabaster, pearl, marble, and so forth. Compared to this wealth, Astrophel is nothing but a pauper who tracks in ink and paper. He recognizes that he is unworthy of entering "Queen Virtue's Court."

Astrophil and Stella

Astrophil and Stella #10
BY SIR PHILIP SIDNEY

Reason, in faith thou art well serv’d, that still
Wouldst brabbling be with sense and love in me:
I rather wish’d thee climb the Muses’ hill,
Or reach the fruit of Nature’s choicest tree,
Or seek heav’n’s course, or heav’n’s inside to see:
Why shouldst thou toil our thorny soil to till?
Leave sense, and those which sense’s objects be:
Deal thou with powers of thoughts, leave love to will.
But thou wouldst needs fight both with love and sense,
With sword of wit, giving wounds of dispraise,
Till downright blows did foil thy cunning fence:
For soon as they strake thee with Stella’s rays,
Reason thou kneel’dst, and offeredst straight to prove
By reason good, good reason her to love.
Astrophel mocks Reason for its attempt to cultivate his loving mind. He urges Reason to climb the Muses' hill or seek the inside of Heaven rather than waste time attempting to instill rationality in Astrophel's mind. Even if Reason did continue to fight, Astrophel declares, as soon as he was faced with Stella's eyes he would fall to his knees. Immediately, even Reason would be so overcome by Stella's beauty that Reason would give himself up in her name.
Analysis:
This sonnet mirrors Sonnet 4 in its presentation of Reason as a sort of grumbling old schoolmaster. Astrophel possesses a tone of familiar contempt for Reason, declaring that Reason is well served in his defeat. Astrophel only lessens his contemptuous tone when Reason succumbs to Stella and falls to his knees. In the final couplet of the sonnet, Sidney describes the truth behind the conflict between reason and love. Even the most intelligent person can succumb to rationalizations, putting reason in the service of desire. As in Sonnet 4, Astrophel emphasizes that public standards of reason and virtue are irrelevant in the private world of love.

Astrophil and Stella #10
BY SIR PHILIP SIDNEY
Reason, in faith thou art well serv’d, that still
Wouldst brabbling be with sense and love in me:
I rather wish’d thee climb the Muses’ hill,
Or reach the fruit of Nature’s choicest tree,
Or seek heav’n’s course, or heav’n’s inside to see:
Why shouldst thou toil our thorny soil to till?
Leave sense, and those which sense’s objects be:
Deal thou with powers of thoughts, leave love to will.
But thou wouldst needs fight both with love and sense,
With sword of wit, giving wounds of dispraise,
Till downright blows did foil thy cunning fence:
For soon as they strake thee with Stella’s rays,
Reason thou kneel’dst, and offeredst straight to prove
By reason good, good reason her to love.
Astrophel mocks Reason for its attempt to cultivate his loving mind. He urges Reason to climb the Muses' hill or seek the inside of Heaven rather than waste time attempting to instill rationality in Astrophel's mind. Even if Reason did continue to fight, Astrophel declares, as soon as he was faced with Stella's eyes he would fall to his knees. Immediately, even Reason would be so overcome by Stella's beauty that Reason would give himself up in her name.
Analysis:
This sonnet mirrors Sonnet 4 in its presentation of Reason as a sort of grumbling old schoolmaster. Astrophel possesses a tone of familiar contempt for Reason, declaring that Reason is well served in his defeat. Astrophel only lessens his contemptuous tone when Reason succumbs to Stella and falls to his knees. In the final couplet of the sonnet, Sidney describes the truth behind the conflict between reason and love. Even the most intelligent person can succumb to rationalizations, putting reason in the service of desire. As in Sonnet 4, Astrophel emphasizes that public standards of reason and virtue are irrelevant in the private world of love.

The Nymph’s Reply to the Shepherd BY SIR WALTER RALEGH

The Nymph’s Reply to the Shepherd 
BY SIR WALTER RALEGH

If all the world and love were young, 
And truth in every Shepherd’s tongue, 
These pretty pleasures might me move, 
To live with thee, and be thy love.

Time drives the flocks from field to fold, 
When Rivers rage and Rocks grow cold, 
And Philomel becometh dumb, 
The rest complains of cares to come.

The flowers do fade, and wanton fields, 
To wayward winter reckoning yields, 
A honey tongue, a heart of gall, 
Is fancy’s spring, but sorrow’s fall.

Thy gowns, thy shoes, thy beds of Roses, 
Thy cap, thy kirtle, and thy posies 
Soon break, soon wither, soon forgotten: 
In folly ripe, in reason rotten.

Thy belt of straw and Ivy buds, 
The Coral clasps and amber studs, 
All these in me no means can move 
To come to thee and be thy love.

But could youth last, and love still breed, 
Had joys no date, nor age no need, 
Then these delights my mind might move 
To live with thee, and be thy love.

Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë


Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë

Jane Eyre is a novel by English writer Charlotte Brontë. It was published on 16 October 1847, by Smith, Elder & Co. of London, England, under the pen name "Currer Bell." The first American edition was published the following year by Harper & Brothers of New York.

Summary:
Jane Eyre is a young orphan being raised by Mrs. Reed, her cruel, wealthy aunt. A servant named Bessie provides Jane with some of the few kindnesses she receives, telling her stories and singing songs to her. One day, as punishment for fighting with her bullying cousin John Reed, Jane’s aunt imprisons Jane in the red-room, the room in which Jane’s Uncle Reed died. While locked in, Jane, believing that she sees her uncle’s ghost, screams and faints. She wakes to find herself in the care of Bessie and the kindly apothecary Mr. Lloyd, who suggests to Mrs. Reed that Jane be sent away to school. To Jane’s delight, Mrs. Reed concurs.
Once at the Lowood School, Jane finds that her life is far from idyllic. The school’s headmaster is Mr. Brocklehurst, a cruel, hypocritical, and abusive man. Brocklehurst preaches a doctrine of poverty and privation to his students while using the school’s funds to provide a wealthy and opulent lifestyle for his own family. At Lowood, Jane befriends a young girl named Helen Burns, whose strong, martyrlike attitude toward the school’s miseries is both helpful and displeasing to Jane. A massive typhus epidemic sweeps Lowood, and Helen dies of consumption. The epidemic also results in the departure of Mr. Brocklehurst by attracting attention to the insalubrious conditions at Lowood. After a group of more sympathetic gentlemen takes Brocklehurst’s place, Jane’s life improves dramatically. She spends eight more years at Lowood, six as a student and two as a teacher.
After teaching for two years, Jane yearns for new experiences. She accepts a governess position at a manor called Thornfield, where she teaches a lively French girl named Adèle. The distinguished housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax presides over the estate. Jane’s employer at Thornfield is a dark, impassioned man named Rochester, with whom Jane finds herself falling secretly in love. She saves Rochester from a fire one night, which he claims was started by a drunken servant named Grace Poole. But because Grace Poole continues to work at Thornfield, Jane concludes that she has not been told the entire story. Jane sinks into despondency when Rochester brings home a beautiful but vicious woman named Blanche Ingram. Jane expects Rochester to propose to Blanche. But Rochester instead proposes to Jane, who accepts almost disbelievingly.
The wedding day arrives, and as Jane and Mr. Rochester prepare to exchange their vows, the voice of Mr. Mason cries out that Rochester already has a wife. Mason introduces himself as the brother of that wife—a woman named Bertha. Mr. Mason testifies that Bertha, whom Rochester married when he was a young man in Jamaica, is still alive. Rochester does not deny Mason’s claims, but he explains that Bertha has gone mad. He takes the wedding party back to Thornfield, where they witness the insane Bertha Mason scurrying around on all fours and growling like an animal. Rochester keeps Bertha hidden on the third story of Thornfield and pays Grace Poole to keep his wife under control. Bertha was the real cause of the mysterious fire earlier in the story. Knowing that it is impossible for her to be with Rochester, Jane flees Thornfield.
Penniless and hungry, Jane is forced to sleep outdoors and beg for food. At last, three siblings who live in a manor alternatively called Marsh End and Moor House take her in. Their names are Mary, Diana, and St. John (pronounced “Sinjin”) Rivers, and Jane quickly becomes friends with them. St. John is a clergyman, and he finds Jane a job teaching at a charity school in Morton. He surprises her one day by declaring that her uncle, John Eyre, has died and left her a large fortune: 20,000 pounds. When Jane asks how he received this news, he shocks her further by declaring that her uncle was also his uncle: Jane and the Riverses are cousins. Jane immediately decides to share her inheritance equally with her three newfound relatives.
St. John decides to travel to India as a missionary, and he urges Jane to accompany him—as his wife. Jane agrees to go to India but refuses to marry her cousin because she does not love him. St. John pressures her to reconsider, and she nearly gives in. However, she realizes that she cannot abandon forever the man she truly loves when one night she hears Rochester’s voice calling her name over the moors. Jane immediately hurries back to Thornfield and finds that it has been burned to the ground by Bertha Mason, who lost her life in the fire. Rochester saved the servants but lost his eyesight and one of his hands. Jane travels on to Rochester’s new residence, Ferndean, where he lives with two servants named John and Mary.

At Ferndean, Rochester and Jane rebuild their relationship and soon marry. At the end of her story, Jane writes that she has been married for ten blissful years and that she and Rochester enjoy perfect equality in their life together. She says that after two years of blindness, Rochester regained sight in one eye and was able to behold their first son at his birth.

Many years went away by Emad A. Ghani


Many years went away by Emad A. Ghani

Many years went away 
With their joy and pain 
But 
Their memories
In my land stay
A dry land without rain
Neither flowers with breeze sway
There no dreams or fain
In this land
The memories will die some day
And
Will be taken away 
By life's train

Rapunzel by Brothers Grimm Fairy Tales




Rapunzel by Brothers Grimm Fairy Tales


Once upon a time there was a man and a woman who had long in vain wished for a child. Finally the woman came to believe that the good Lord would fulfill her wish. Through the small rear window of these people's house they could see into a splendid garden that was filled with the most beautiful flowers and herbs. The garden was surrounded by a high wall, and no one dared enter, because it belonged to a sorceress who possessed great power and was feared by everyone.
One day the woman was standing at this window, and she saw a bed planted with the most beautiful rapunzel. It looked so fresh and green that she longed for some. It was her greatest desire to eat some of the rapunzel. This desire increased with every day, and not knowing how to get any, she became miserably ill.
Her husband was frightened, and asked her, "What ails you, dear wife?"
"Oh," she answered, " if I do not get some rapunzel from the garden behind our house, I shall die."
The man, who loved her dearly, thought, "Before you let your wife die, you must get her some of the rapunzel, whatever the cost."
So just as it was getting dark he climbed over the high wall into the sorceress's garden, hastily dug up a handful of rapunzel, and took it to his wife. She immediately made a salad from it, which she devoured eagerly. It tasted so very good to her that by the next day her desire for more had grown threefold. If she were to have any peace, the man would have to climb into the garden once again. Thus he set forth once again just as it was getting dark. But no sooner than he had climbed over the wall than, to his horror, he saw the sorceress standing there before him.
"How can you dare," she asked with an angry look, "to climb into my garden and like a thief to steal my rapunzel? You will pay for this."
"Oh," he answered, "Let mercy overrule justice. I came to do this out of necessity. My wife saw your rapunzel from our window, and such a longing came over her, that she would die, if she did not get some to eat."
The sorceress's anger abated somewhat, and she said, "If things are as you say, I will allow you to take as much rapunzel as you want. But under one condition: You must give me the child that your wife will bring to the world. It will do well, and I will take care of it like a mother."
In his fear the man agreed to everything.
When the woman gave birth, the sorceress appeared, named the little girl Rapunzel, and took her away. Rapunzel became the most beautiful child under the sun. When she was twelve years old, the fairy locked her in a tower that stood in a forest and that had neither a door nor a stairway, but only a tiny little window at the very top.
When the sorceress wanted to enter, she stood below and called out:
Rapunzel, Rapunzel,
Let down your hair to me.
Rapunzel had splendid long hair, as fine as spun gold. When she heard the sorceress's voice, she untied her braids, wound them around a window hook, let her hair fall twenty yards to the ground, and the sorceress climbed up it.
A few years later it happened that a king's son was riding through the forest. As he approached the tower he heard a song so beautiful that he stopped to listen. It was Rapunzel, who was passing the time by singing with her sweet voice. The prince wanted to climb up to her, and looked for a door in the tower, but none was to be found.
He rode home, but the song had so touched his heart that he returned to the forest every day and listened to it. One time, as he was thus standing behind a tree, he saw the sorceress approach, and heard her say:
Rapunzel, Rapunzel,
Let down your hair.
Then Rapunzel let down her strands of hair, and the sorceress climbed up them to her.
"If that is the ladder into the tower, then sometime I will try my luck."
And the next day, just as it was beginning to get dark, he went to the tower and called out:
Rapunzel, Rapunzel,
Let down your hair.
The hair fell down, and the prince climbed up.
At first Rapunzel was terribly frightened when a man such as she had never seen before came in to her. However, the prince began talking to her in a very friendly manner, telling her that his heart had been so touched by her singing that he could have no peace until he had seen her in person. Then Rapunzel lost her fear, and when he asked her if she would take him as her husband, she thought, "He would rather have me than would old Frau Gothel." She said yes and placed her hand into his. She said, "I would go with you gladly, but I do not know how to get down. Every time that you come, bring a strand of silk, from which I will weave a ladder. When it is finished I will climb down, and you can take me away on your horse. They arranged that he would come to her every evening, for the old woman came by day.
The sorceress did not notice what was happening until one day Rapunzel said to her, "Frau Gothel, tell me why it is that you are more difficult to pull up than is the young prince, who will be arriving any moment now?"
"You godless child," cried the sorceress. "What am I hearing from you? I thought I had removed you from the whole world, but you have deceived me nonetheless."
In her anger she grabbed Rapunzel's beautiful hair, wrapped it a few times around her left hand, grasped a pair of scissors with her right hand, and snip snap, cut it off. And she was so unmerciful that she took Rapunzel into a wilderness where she suffered greatly.
On the evening of the same day that she sent Rapunzel away, the fairy tied the cut-off hair to the hook at the top of the tower, and when the prince called out:
Rapunzel, Rapunzel,
Let down your hair.
she let down the hair.
The prince climbed up, but above, instead of his beloved Rapunzel, he found the sorceress, who peered at him with poisonous and evil looks.
"Aha!" she cried scornfully. "You have come for your Mistress Darling, but that beautiful bird is no longer sitting in her nest, nor is she singing any more. The cat got her, and will scratch your eyes out as well. You have lost Rapunzel. You will never see her again."
The prince was overcome with grief, and in his despair he threw himself from the tower. He escaped with his life, but the thorns into which he fell poked out his eyes. Blind, he wandered about in the forest, eating nothing but grass and roots, and doing nothing but weeping and wailing over the loss of his beloved wife. Thus he wandered about miserably for some years, finally happening into the wilderness where Rapunzel lived miserably with the twins that she had given birth to.

He heard a voice and thought it was familiar. He advanced toward it, and as he approached, Rapunzel recognized him, and crying, threw her arms around his neck. Two of her tears fell into his eyes, and they became clear once again, and he could see as well as before. He led her into his kingdom, where he was received with joy, and for a long time they lived happily and satisfied.

Monday 10 October 2016

Beloved by Toni Morrison.


Beloved by Toni Morrison.
Beloved is a 1987 novel by the American writer Toni Morrison. Set after the American Civil War (1861–1865), it is inspired by the story of an African American slave, Margaret Garner, who escaped slavery in Kentucky late January 1856 by fleeing to Ohio, a free state. In the novel, the protagonist Sethe is also a slave who escapes slavery, running to Cincinnati, Ohio.

Summary:
Beloved begins in 1873 in Cincinnati, Ohio, where Sethe, a former slave, has been living with her eighteen-year-old daughter Denver. Sethe’s mother-in-law, Baby Suggs, lived with them until her death eight years earlier. Just before Baby Suggs’s death, Sethe’s two sons, Howard and Buglar, ran away. Sethe believes they fled because of the malevolent presence of an abusive ghost that has haunted their house at 124 Bluestone Road for years. Denver, however, likes the ghost, which everyone believes to be the spirit of her dead sister.
On the day the novel begins, Paul D, whom Sethe has not seen since they worked together on Mr. Garner’s Sweet Home plantation in Kentucky approximately twenty years earlier, stops by Sethe’s house. His presence resurrects memories that have lain buried in Sethe’s mind for almost two decades. From this point on, the story will unfold on two temporal planes. The present in Cincinnati constitutes one plane, while a series of events that took place around twenty years earlier, mostly in Kentucky, constitutes the other. This latter plane is accessed and described through the fragmented flashbacks of the major characters. Accordingly, we frequently read these flashbacks several times, sometimes from varying perspectives, with each successive narration of an event adding a little more information to the previous ones.
From these fragmented memories, the following story begins to emerge: Sethe, the protagonist, was born in the South to an African mother she never knew. When she is thirteen, she is sold to the Garners, who own Sweet Home and practice a comparatively benevolent kind of slavery. There, the other slaves, who are all men, lust after her but never touch her. Their names are Sixo, Paul D, Paul A, Paul F, and Halle. Sethe chooses to marry Halle, apparently in part because he has proven generous enough to buy his mother’s freedom by hiring himself out on the weekends. Together, Sethe and Halle have two sons, Howard and Buglar, as well as a baby daughter whose name we never learn. When she leaves Sweet Home, Sethe is also pregnant with a fourth child. After the eventual death of the proprietor, Mr. Garner, the widowed Mrs. Garner asks her sadistic, vehemently racist brother-in-law to help her run the farm. He is known to the slaves as schoolteacher, and his oppressive presence makes life on the plantation even more unbearable than it had been before. The slaves decide to run.
Schoolteacher and his nephews anticipate the slaves’ escape, however, and capture Paul D and Sixo. Schoolteacher kills Sixo and brings Paul D back to Sweet Home, where Paul D sees Sethe for what he believes will be the last time. She is still intent on running, having already sent her children ahead to her mother-in-law Baby Suggs’s house in Cincinnati. Invigorated by the recent capture, schoolteacher’s nephews seize Sethe in the barn and violate her, stealing the milk her body is storing for her infant daughter. Unbeknownst to Sethe, Halle is watching the event from a loft above her, where he lies frozen with horror. Afterward, Halle goes mad: Paul D sees him sitting by a churn with butter slathered all over his face. Paul D, meanwhile, is forced to suffer the indignity of wearing an iron bit in his mouth.
When schoolteacher finds out that Sethe has reported his and his nephews’ misdeeds to Mrs. Garner, he has her whipped severely, despite the fact that she is pregnant. Swollen and scarred, Sethe nevertheless runs away, but along the way she collapses from exhaustion in a forest. A white girl, Amy Denver, finds her and nurses her back to health. When Amy later helps Sethe deliver her baby in a boat, Sethe names this second daughter Denver after the girl who helped her. Sethe receives further help from Stamp Paid, who rows her across the Ohio River to Baby Suggs’s house. Baby Suggs cleans Sethe up before allowing her to see her three older children.
Sethe spends twenty-eight wonderful days in Cincinnati, where Baby Suggs serves as an unofficial preacher to the black community. On the last day, however, schoolteacher comes for Sethe to take her and her children back to Sweet Home. Rather than surrender her children to a life of dehumanizing slavery, she flees with them to the woodshed and tries to kill them. Only the third child, her older daughter, dies, her throat having been cut with a handsaw by Sethe. Sethe later arranges for the baby’s headstone to be carved with the word “Beloved.” The sheriff takes Sethe and Denver to jail, but a group of white abolitionists, led by the Bodwins, fights for her release. Sethe returns to the house at 124, where Baby Suggs has sunk into a deep depression. The community shuns the house, and the family continues to live in isolation.
Meanwhile, Paul D has endured torturous experiences in a chain gang in Georgia, where he was sent after trying to kill Brandywine, a slave owner to whom he was sold by schoolteacher. His traumatic experiences have caused him to lock away his memories, emotions, and ability to love in the “tin tobacco box” of his heart. One day, a fortuitous rainstorm allows Paul D and the other chain gang members to escape. He travels northward by following the blossoming spring flowers. Years later, he ends up on Sethe’s porch in Cincinnati.
Paul D’s arrival at 124 commences the series of events taking place in the present time frame. Prior to moving in, Paul D chases the house’s resident ghost away, which makes the already lonely Denver resent him from the start. Sethe and Paul D look forward to a promising future together, until one day, on their way home from a carnival, they encounter a strange young woman sleeping near the steps of 124. Most of the characters believe that the woman—who calls herself Beloved—is the embodied spirit of Sethe’s dead daughter, and the novel provides a wealth of evidence supporting this interpretation. Denver develops an obsessive attachment to Beloved, and Beloved’s attachment to Sethe is equally if not more intense. Paul D and Beloved hate each other, and Beloved controls Paul D by moving him around the house like a rag doll and by seducing him against his will.
When Paul D learns the story of Sethe’s “rough choice”—her infanticide—he leaves 124 and begins sleeping in the basement of the local church. In his absence, Sethe and Beloved’s relationship becomes more intense and exclusive. Beloved grows increasingly abusive, manipulative, and parasitic, and Sethe is obsessed with satisfying Beloved’s demands and making her understand why she murdered her. Worried by the way her mother is wasting away, Denver leaves the premises of 124 for the first time in twelve years in order to seek help from Lady Jones, her former teacher. The community provides the family with food and eventually organizes under the leadership of Ella, a woman who had worked on the Underground Railroad and helped with Sethe’s escape, in order to exorcise Beloved from 124. When they arrive at Sethe’s house, they see Sethe on the porch with Beloved, who stands smiling at them, naked and pregnant. Mr. Bodwin, who has come to 124 to take Denver to her new job, arrives at the house. Mistaking him for schoolteacher, Sethe runs at Mr. Bodwin with an ice pick. She is restrained, but in the confusion Beloved disappears, never to return.
Afterward, Paul D comes back to Sethe, who has retreated to Baby Suggs’s bed to die. Mourning Beloved, Sethe laments, “She was my best thing.” But Paul D replies, “You your best thing, Sethe.” The novel then ends with a warning that “[t]his is not a story to pass on.” The town, and even the residents of 124, have forgotten Beloved “like an unpleasant dream during a troubling sleep.

All My Sons by Arthur Miller Summary

All My Sons by Arthur Miller Summary

Joe and Kate Keller had two sons, Chris and Larry. Keller owned a manufacturing plant with Steve Deever, and their families were close. Steve's daughter Ann was Larry's beau, and George was their friend. When the war came, both Keller boys and George were drafted.

During the war, Keller's and Deever's manufacturing plant had a very profitable contract with the U.S. Army, supplying airplane parts. One morning, a shipment of defective parts came in. Under pressure from the army to keep up the output, Steve Deever called Keller, who had not yet come into work that morning, to ask what he should do. Keller told Steve to weld the cracks in the airplane parts and ship them out. Steve was nervous about doing this alone, but Keller said that he had the flu and could not go into work. Steve shipped out the defective but possibly safe parts on his own.
Later, it was discovered that the defective parts caused twenty-one planes to crash and their pilots to die. Steve and Keller were arrested and convicted, but Keller managed to win an appeal and get his conviction overturned. He claimed that Steve did not call him and that he was completely unaware of the shipment. Keller went home free, while Steve remained in jail, shunned by his family.
Meanwhile, overseas, Larry received word about the first conviction. Racked with shame and grief, he wrote a letter to Ann telling her that she must not wait for him. Larry then went out to fly a mission, during which he broke out of formation and crashed his plane, killing himself. Larry was reported missing.
Three years later, the action of the play begins. Chris has invited Ann to the Keller house because he intends to propose to her--they have renewed their contact in the last few years while she has been living in New York. They must be careful, however, since Mother insists that Larry is still alive somewhere. Her belief is reinforced by the fact that Larry's memorial tree blew down in a storm that morning, which she sees as a positive sign. Her superstition has also led her to ask the neighbor to make a horoscope for Larry in order to determine whether the day he disappeared was an astrologically favorable day. Everyone else has accepted that Larry is not coming home, and Chris and Keller argue that Mother should learn to forget her other son. Mother demands that Keller in particular should believe that Larry is alive, because if he is not, then their son's blood is on Keller's hands.
Ann's brother George arrives to stop the wedding. He had gone to visit Steve in jail to tell him that his daughter was getting married, and then he left newly convinced that his father was innocent. He accuses Keller, who disarms George by being friendly and confident. George is reassured until Mother accidentally says that Keller has not been sick in fifteen years. Keller tries to cover her slip of the tongue by adding the exception of his flu during the war, but it is now too late. George is again convinced of Keller's guilt, but Chris tells him to leave the house.
Chris's confidence in his father's innocence is shaken, however, and in a confrontation with his parents, he is told by Mother that he must believe that Larry is alive. If Larry is dead, Mother claims, then it means that Keller killed him by shipping out those defective parts. Chris shouts angrily at his father, accusing him of being inhuman and a murderer, and he wonders aloud what he must do in response to this unpleasant new information about his family history.
Chris is disillusioned and devastated, and he runs off to be angry at his father in privacy. Mother tells Keller that he ought to volunteer to go to jail--if Chris wants him to. She also talks to Ann and continues insisting that Larry is alive. Ann is forced to show Mother the letter that Larry wrote to her before he died, which was essentially a suicide note. The note basically confirms Mother's belief that if Larry is dead, then Keller is responsible--not because Larry's plane had the defective parts, but because Larry killed himself in response to the family responsibility and shame due to the defective parts.
Mother begs Ann not to show the letter to her husband and son, but Ann does not comply. Chris returns and says that he is not going to send his father to jail, because that would accomplish nothing and his family practicality has finally overcome his idealism. He also says that he is going to leave and that Ann will not be going with him, because he fears that she will forever wordlessly ask him to turn his father in to the authorities.

Keller enters, and Mother is unable to prevent Chris from reading Larry's letter aloud. Keller now finally understands that in the eyes of Larry and in a symbolic moral sense, all the dead pilots were his sons. He says that he is going into the house to get a jacket, and then he will drive to the jail and turn himself in. But a moment later, a gunshot is heard--Keller has killed himself.

Postcolonialism


Postcolonialism

By definition, postcolonialism is a period of time after colonialism, and postcolonial literature is typically characterized by its opposition to the colonial. However, some critics have argued that any literature that expresses an opposition to colonialism, even if it is produced during a colonial period, may be defined as postcolonial, primarily due to its oppositional nature. Postcolonial literature often focuses on race relations and the effects of racism and usually indicts white and/or colonial societies. Despite a basic consensus on the general themes of postcolonial writing, however, there is ongoing debate regarding the meaning of postcolonialism. Many critics now propose that the term should be expanded to include the literatures of Canada, the United States, and Australia. In his essay discussing the nature and boundaries of postcolonialism, Simon During argues for a more inclusive definition, calling it “the need, in nations, or groups which have been victims of imperialism to achieve an identity uncontaminated by universalist or Eurocentric concepts or images.” The scale and scope of modern European imperialism, as well as its extraordinarily organized character, including the cultural licensing of racial domination, has sometimes led to the perception of colonization as a modern phenomenon. In fact, many critics propose that modern colonialism was not a discrete occurrence and that an examination of premodern colonial activities will allow for a greater and more complex understanding of modern structures of power and domination, serving to illuminate the operation of older histories in the context of both modern colonialism and contemporary race and global political relations.

Works of literature that are defined as postcolonial often record racism or a history of genocide, including slavery, apartheid, and the mass extinction of peoples, such as the Aborigines in Australia. Critical response to these texts is often seen as an important way to articulate and negotiate communication between writers who define themselves as postcolonial and critics who are not part of that experience. In her introduction to Post-Colonial and African American Women's Writing, published in 2000, Gina Wisker notes that the indictment present in many postcolonial texts tends to produce guilt or feelings of inherited complicity in many readers. Also, although writing about these texts may raise the level of awareness of both the texts and their writers, some postcolonial writers see reflected in this activity an arrogant assumption about the need for noncolonial cultures to recognize postcolonial writers. Similarly, other critics have noted that critical response that focuses entirely on the essential nature of black or Asian writers may also serve to marginalize their writing by supposing their experiences as largely a product of being “other” than European.
Postcolonialism includes a vast array of writers and subjects. In fact, the very different geographical, historical, social, religious, and economic concerns of the different ex-colonies dictate a wide variety in the nature and subject of most postcolonial writing. Wisker has noted in her book that it is even simplistic to theorize that all postcolonial writing is resistance writing. In fact, many postcolonial writers themselves will argue that their countries are still very much colonial countries, both in terms of their values and behaviors, and that these issues are reflected in their work. In her essay on postcolonialism, Deepika Bahri agrees, noting that while the definition of postcolonialism may be fairly boundaried, the actual use of the term is very subjective, allowing for a yoking together of a very diverse range of experiences, cultures, and problems. This diversity of definitions exists, notes Bahri, because the term postcolonialism is used both as a literal description of formerly colonial societies and as a description of global conditions after a period of colonialism. In this regard, according to Bahri, the notion of the “postcolonial” as a literary genre and an academic construct may have meanings that are completely separate from a historical moment or time period.

Some women colonial writers draw a relationship between postcolonialism and feminism. For many of these writers, who live in strong patriarchal cultures, language and the ability to write and communicate represent power. Some of these writers, for example, have noted that since the language of British-ruled colonies is English, literature written in English has often been used to marginalize and constrain female points of view. In the postcolonial period, however, language, and the ability to speak, write, and publish, has become an enabling tool for postcolonial authors

Directive by Robert Frost


Directive by Robert Frost


Back out of all this now too much for us,
Back in a time made simple by the loss
Of detail, burned, dissolved, and broken off
Like graveyard marble sculpture in the weather,
There is a house that is no more a house
Upon a farm that is no more a farm
And in a town that is no more a town.
The road there, if you’ll let a guide direct you
Who only has at heart your getting lost,
May seem as if it should have been a quarry—
Great monolithic knees the former town
Long since gave up pretense of keeping covered.
And there’s a story in a book about it:
Besides the wear of iron wagon wheels
The ledges show lines ruled southeast-northwest,
The chisel work of an enormous Glacier
That braced his feet against the Arctic Pole.
You must not mind a certain coolness from him
Still said to haunt this side of Panther Mountain.
Nor need you mind the serial ordeal
Of being watched from forty cellar holes
As if by eye pairs out of forty firkins.
As for the woods’ excitement over you
That sends light rustle rushes to their leaves,
Charge that to upstart inexperience.

Where were they all not twenty years ago?
They think too much of having shaded out
A few old pecker-fretted apple trees.
Make yourself up a cheering song of how
Someone’s road home from work this once was,
Who may be just ahead of you on foot
Or creaking with a buggy load of grain.
The height of the adventure is the height
Of country where two village cultures faded
Into each other. Both of them are lost.
And if you’re lost enough to find yourself
By now, pull in your ladder road behind you
And put a sign up CLOSED to all but me.
Then make yourself at home. The only field
Now left’s no bigger than a harness gall.
First there’s the children’s house of make-believe,
Some shattered dishes underneath a pine,
The playthings in the playhouse of the children.
Weep for what little things could make them glad.
Then for the house that is no more a house,
But only a belilaced cellar hole,
Now slowly closing like a dent in dough.
This was no playhouse but a house in earnest.
Your destination and your destiny’s
A brook that was the water of the house,
Cold as a spring as yet so near its source,
Too lofty and original to rage.
(We know the valley streams that when aroused
Will leave their tatters hung on barb and thorn.)
I have kept hidden in the instep arch
Of an old cedar at the waterside
A broken drinking goblet like the Grail
Under a spell so the wrong ones can’t find it,
So can’t get saved, as Saint Mark says they mustn’t.
(I stole the goblet from the children’s playhouse.)
Here are your waters and your watering place.
Drink and be whole again beyond confusion.

THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS Albert Camus

THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS



Albert Camus


Summary
The central concern of The Myth of Sisyphus is what Camus calls "the absurd." Camus claims that there is a fundamental conflict between what we want from the universe (whether it be meaning, order, or reasons) and what we find in the universe (formless chaos). We will never find in life itself the meaning that we want to find. Either we will discover that meaning through a leap of faith, by placing our hopes in a God beyond this world, or we will conclude that life is meaningless. Camus opens the essay by asking if this latter conclusion that life is meaningless necessarily leads one to commit suicide. If life has no meaning, does that mean life is not worth living? If that were the case, we would have no option but to make a leap of faith or to commit suicide, says Camus. Camus is interested in pursuing a third possibility: that we can accept and live in a world devoid of meaning or purpose.
The absurd is a contradiction that cannot be reconciled, and any attempt to reconcile this contradiction is simply an attempt to escape from it: facing the absurd is struggling against it. Camus claims that existentialist philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Chestov, and Jaspers, and phenomenologists such as Husserl, all confront the contradiction of the absurd but then try to escape from it. Existentialists find no meaning or order in existence and then attempt to find some sort of transcendence or meaning in this very meaninglessness.
Living with the absurd, Camus suggests, is a matter of facing this fundamental contradiction and maintaining constant awareness of it. Facing the absurd does not entail suicide, but, on the contrary, allows us to live life to its fullest.
Camus identifies three characteristics of the absurd life: revolt (we must not accept any answer or reconciliation in our struggle), freedom (we are absolutely free to think and behave as we choose), and passion (we must pursue a life of rich and diverse experiences).
Camus gives four examples of the absurd life: the seducer, who pursues the passions of the moment; the actor, who compresses the passions of hundreds of lives into a stage career; the conqueror, or rebel, whose political struggle focuses his energies; and the artist, who creates entire worlds. Absurd art does not try to explain experience, but simply describes it. It presents a certain worldview that deals with particular matters rather than aiming for universal themes.
The book ends with a discussion of the myth of Sisyphus, who, according to the Greek myth, was punished for all eternity to roll a rock up a mountain only to have it roll back down to the bottom when he reaches the top. Camus claims that Sisyphus is the ideal absurd hero and that his punishment is representative of the human condition: Sisyphus must struggle perpetually and without hope of success. So long as he accepts that there is nothing more to life than this absurd struggle, then he can find happiness in it, says Camus.

Camus appends his essay with a discussion of the works of Franz Kafka. He ultimately concludes that Kafka is an existentialist, who, like Kierkegaard, chooses to make a leap of faith rather than accept his absurd condition. However, Camus admires Kafka for expressing humanity's absurd predicament so perfectly.

Tuesday 4 October 2016

Marlovian Shakespeare Authorship Theory


William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare is arguably the most famous writer of the English language, known for both his plays and sonnets. Though much about his life remains open to debate due to incomplete evidence, the following biography consolidates the most widely-accepted facts of Shakespeare's life and career.
In the mid-sixteenth century, William Shakespeare's father, John Shakespeare, moved to the idyllic town of Stratford-upon-Avon. There, he became a successful landowner, moneylender, glove-maker, and dealer of wool and agricultural goods. In 1557, he married Mary Arden.
During John Shakespeare's time, the British middle class was expanding in both size and wealth, allowing its members more freedoms and luxuries, as well as a stronger collective voice in local government. John took advantage of the changing times and became a member of the Stratford Council in 1557, which marked the beginning of his illustrious political career. By 1561, he was elected as one of the town's fourteen burgesses, and subsequently served as Constable, then Chamberlain, and later, Alderman. In all of these positions, the elder Shakespeare administered borough property and revenues. In 1567, he became bailiff - the highest elected office in Stratford and the equivalent of a modern-day mayor.
Town records indicate that William Shakespeare was John and Mary's third child. His birth is unregistered, but legend pins the date as April 23, 1564, possibly because it is known that he died on the same date 52 years later. In any event, William's baptism was registered with the town of Stratford on April 26, 1564. Little is known about his childhood, although it is generally assumed that he attended the local grammar school, the King's New School. The school was staffed by Oxford-educated faculty who taught the students mathematics, natural sciences, logic, Christian ethics, and classical languages and literature.
Shakespeare did not attend university, which was not unusual for the time. University education was reserved for wealthy sons of the elite, and even then, mostly just those who wanted to become clergymen. The numerous classical and literary references in Shakespeare’s plays are a testament, however, to the excellent education he received in grammar school, and speaks to his ability as an autodidact. His early plays in particular draw on the works of Seneca and Plautus. Even more impressive than Shakespeare's formal education is the wealth of general knowledge he exhibits in his work. His vocabulary exceeds that of any other English writer of his time by a wide margin.
In 1582, at the age of eighteen, William Shakespeare married twenty-six-year-old Anne Hathaway. Their first daughter, Susanna, was not baptized until six months after her birth - a fact that has given rise to speculation over the circumstances surrounding the marriage. In 1585, Anne bore twins, baptized Hamnet and Judith Shakespeare. Hamnet died at the age of eleven, by which time William Shakespeare was already a successful playwright. Around 1589, Shakespeare wrote Henry VI, Part 1, which is considered to be his first play. Sometime between his marriage and writing this play, he moved to London, where he pursued a career as a playwright and actor.
Although many records of Shakespeare's life as a citizen of Stratford have survived, including his marriage and birth certificates, very little information exists about his life as a young playwright. Legend characterizes Shakespeare as a roguish young man who was once forced to flee London under suspect circumstances, perhaps related to his love life, but the paltry amount of written information does not necessarily confirm this facet of his personality.
In any case, young Will was not an immediate universal success. The earliest written record of Shakespeare's life in London comes from a statement by his rival playwright Robert Greene. In Groatsworth of Witte (1592), Greene calls Shakespeare an "upstart crow...[who] supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you." While this is hardly high praise, it does suggest that Shakespeare rattled London's theatrical hierarchy from the beginning of his career. In retrospect, it is possible to attribute Greene's complaint to jealousy of Shakespeare's ability, but the scarcity of evidence renders the comment ambiguous.
With Richard III, Henry VI, The Comedy of Errors, and Titus Andronicus under his belt, Shakespeare became a popular playwright by 1590.* The year 1593, however, marked a major leap forward in his career when he secured a prominent patron: The Earl of Southampton. In addition, Venus and Adonis was published; it one of the first of Shakespeare's known works to be printed, and it was a huge success. Next came The Rape of Lucrece. By this time, Shakespeare had also made his mark as a poet, as most scholars agree that he wrote the majority of his sonnets in the 1590s.
In 1594, Shakespeare returned to the theater and became a charter member of the Lord Chamberlain's Men - a group of actors who changed their name to the King's Men when James I ascended the throne. By 1598, Shakespeare had been appointed the "principal comedian" for the troupe; by 1603, he was "principal tragedian." He remained associated with the organization until his death. Although acting and playwriting were not considered noble professions at the time, successful and prosperous actors were relatively well respected. Shakespeare’s success left him with a fair amount of money, which he invested in Stratford real estate. In 1597, he purchased the second largest house in Stratford - the New Place - for his parents. In 1596, Shakespeare applied for a coat of arms for his family, in effect making himself a gentleman. Consequently, his daughters made “good matches,” and married wealthy men.
The same year that he joined the Lord Chamberlain's Men, Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet, Love's Labour's Lost, The Taming of the Shrew, and several other plays. In 1600, he wrote two of his greatest tragedies, Hamlet and Julius Caesar. Historians and scholars consider Hamlet to be the first modern play because of its multi-faceted main character and unprecedented depiction of the human psyche.
The first decade of the seventeenth century witnessed the debut performances of several of Shakespeare’s most celebrated works, including many of his so-called history plays: Othello in 1604 or 1605; Antony and Cleopatra in 1606 or 1607; and King Lear in 1608. The last of Shakespeare's plays to be performed during his lifetime was most likely King Henry VIII in either 1612 or 1613.

William Shakespeare died in 1616. His wife Anna died in 1623, at the age of 67. Shakespeare was buried in the chancel of his church at Stratford.


History of the Marlovian Shakespeare Authorship Theory
The idea that the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare were written by the same person was first suggested anonymously in 1819 in Monthly Review when an anonymous writer asked ‘Can Christopher Marlowe have been a nom de guerre assumed for a time by Shakespeare? ... This much is certain, that, during the five years of the nominal existence of Marlowe, Shakespeare did not produce a single play.’
The first person to publish a reversal of this idea, suggesting Marlowe wrote the Shakespeare canon, was lawyer and author Wilbur G. Zeigler. In the preface to his 1895 novel, It Was Marlowe: a story of the secret of three centuries, Zeigler explains his disenchantment with both the orthodox and Baconian narratives, and his reasons for forwarding Marlowe as the author: chiefly a ‘similarity of vocabularies, versification and thought of the Marlowe and Shakespeare dramas’ (as he summarises it in a letter of 1916). In the novel, he creates an imaginary narrative about how the deception might have occurred.
In 1901, Marlovian theory received an unexpected boost from Dr Thomas Corwin Mendenhall, a distinguished physicist and President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. An early exponent of 'stylometry', Mendenhall applied the statistical principle of frequency distribution to explore the idea that the occurrence of different word-lengths in a writer's work formed a unique pattern, which could be used to identify that writer's authorship of other texts. Asked by a wealthy Baconian to compare the distribution curves of Bacon and Shakespeare, he found no match; comparing Shakespeare’s plays with those of his contemporaries, he noted a 4-word ‘spike’ that no other playwright replicated - except Marlowe. He described the match as a ‘sensation’ and published his findings in Popular Science Monthly, with graphs showing an almost exact correspondence. Both writers used an average of 240 four-letter words per thousand, 130 five-letter words and 60 six-letter words, with other word-lengths close if not exact.
On the tercentenary of Shakespeare's death, in 1916, the Pulitzer prize-winning editor of Louisville's Courier-Journal, Henry Watterson, a friend of Mark Twain, supported the Marlovian theory, also through a fictional account of how it might have happened. This piece was the source of the information, subsequently pursued by Calvin Hoffman and others, that Marlowe died in Padua in 1627, nursed by someone called Pietro Basconi: a theory conclusively debunked in 2012 by a small group of Marlovian researchers.
The first essay solely on the subject was written by Archie Webster in 1923 in The National Review. In an article entitled ‘Was Marlowe the Man?’ Webster explored the problems orthodox scholars have found in matching the autobiographical content of Shakespeare’s sonnets with his known life: and offered a succinct but fairly comprehensive Marlovian reading of the sonnets.
In 1925, Leslie Hotson published his discovery of the inquest on Marlowe’s death. Though Hotson was in no doubt that Marlowe died in Deptford on 30 May 1593, his research revealed for the first time the name of Marlowe’s apparent killer – Ingram Frizer - and two named witnesses, Robert Poley and Nicholas Skeres. That all three were professional liars (secret service agents and conmen) and all connected to Marlowe’s friend and patron Thomas Walsingham threw the reliability of the inquest document into question.
Perhaps the most influential Marlovian was American theatre critic, press agent and writer Calvin Hoffman. In 1955 he published The Man Who Was Shakespeare, resting his case for Marlowe’s authorship mainly on numerous textual parallels between the works of Marlowe and Shakespeare, and outlining a possible narrative of events. In Hoffman’s version of the theory, a drunken sailor was killed to provide a substitute body, and Marlowe’s escape was orchestrated by Thomas Walsingham, whom Hoffman believed was Marlowe’s lover. Hoffman’s 1955 visit to Chislehurst, Kent, to open Walsingham’s grave in the hope of finding Shakespeare manuscripts, led directly to the formation of the UK Marlowe Society. Hoffman’s will founded the Calvin & Rose G Hoffman Memorial Prize, aimed to promote Marlovian scholarship. In addition to an annual essay prize, anyone providing 'irrefutable and incontrovertible proof' of Marlowe’s authorship of Shakespeare’s works will be awarded half the Trust Fund.
Marlovian theory was extended and deepened considerably by the work of Hoffman-inspired Dolly Walker-Wraight, who as A.D. Wraight published four books about Marlowe. In Search of Christopher Marlowe (1965) was a relatively orthodox biography. Christopher Marlowe and Edward Alleyne (1993), argued for Marlowe as the author of Edward III and challenged the conventional identification of the ‘upstart crow’. The Story that the Sonnets Tell (1994) developed Webster’s Marlovian reading of the sonnets. Shakespeare: New Evidence (1996) introduced discoveries, made jointly with Peter Farey in the Lambeth Palace Library archives, of papers concerning an intelligence agent named Le Doux, a possible posthumous identity of Marlowe.
1997 marked the launch of Farey’s website, a comprehensive resource for original documents and texts relating to Marlowe, and the home of his numerous essays on the Marlowe authorship theory. Farey is the only Marlovian to have twice been recipient of the annual Calvin Hoffman Prize (which has historically been awarded to orthodox scholars). Also in 1997, David More’s essay ‘Drunken Sailor or Imprisoned Writer?’ was the first to suggest John Penry as a viable substitute body for Marlowe. John Penry, imprisoned for his writing, was executed just three miles from Deptford on 29 May 1593, and the whereabouts of his body has never been discovered.
In 2001, Michael Rubbo, an award-winning Australian documentary film maker, made the TV film Much Ado About Something for PBS Frontline, exploring Marlovian theory and interviewing prominent Marlovians such as A.D.Wraight and Peter Farey, as well as orthodox academics such as Stanley Wells, Jonathan Bate and Charles Nicholl. Repeat screenings on PBS, as well as screenings on the BBC and Australia’s ABC led to this film influencing a new generation of Marlovians including Daryl Pinkson, Carlo diNota and Ros Barber.
2005 saw the publication of Rodney Bolt’s novel History Play, a well-received fictional biography of Marlowe as the author of Shakespeare’s works constructed from a combination of real and invented historical evidence.
In 2008, Carlo DiNota founded the The Marlowe-Shakespeare Connection blog, which has become a key repository of independent Marlovian scholarship. 2008 also saw the publication of Daryl Pinksen’s Marlowe’s Ghost: The Blacklisting of the Man Who Was Shakespeare. Pinksen compares Archbishop Whitgift’s English Inquisition of the 1590s with Senator McCarthy’s communist witch hunts of the 1950s, arguing that comparable conditions of political/religious paranoia and censorship might drive writers to similar solutions – in particular, the employment of a ‘front’ to protect a persecuted writer’s identity. He cites Dalton Trumbo, whose Oscar for the screenplay of the 1953 film Roman Holiday was for sixty years awarded to his front Ian McLellan Hunter.
In 2009, Mike Rubbo, Daryl Pinksen, Isabel Gortazar, Peter Farey, Carlo DiNota, Samuel Blumenfeld and Ros Barber founded the International Marlowe-Shakespeare Society, whose website provides permanent and updated Marlovian resources, as well as a discussion forum.

2010 marked the first academic paper on Marlovian Theory to be published in a peer-reviewed academic journal: Ros Barber’s ‘Exploring Biographical Fictions: The Role of Imagination in Writing and Reading Narrative’ (Rethinking History 14:2). Barber’s 2011 PhD in English literature made her the first professional Marlovian scholar. Her fictional exploration of the theory, verse novel The Marlowe Papers (2012), was winner of the Desmond Elliott Prize 2013, joint winner of both the Hoffman prize 2011 and The Authors' Club Best First Novel Award 2013, and longlisted for the Women’s Prize for Fiction 2013.