The difference between Liberal criticism and -isms….

The difference between Liberal criticism and -isms….

If we start to study the traditional criticism and modern/recent/contemporary criticism, particularly after 1950s…we can notice many changes and differences in-between the two. Traditional criticism is also known as Liberal Criticism. In such criticism, the genre (poetry, drama, fiction etc.) finds a prior place and treated (instead of say…criticized) liberally. It means that the critic can take any form or piece of literature and start to analyze it from his viewpoint. Take the example of ancient Greek Literature… Plato or Aristotle… they have chosen Drama as well as an epic form (Which is called ‘Poetry’ in amalgamation) to make the part of criticism. Liberal criticism is the output of some reaction to another criticism. Take the example of Plato’s ‘Dialogue’ …it was a reaction to the contemporary presentation in the genre like Drama or the depiction of the Gods, people, and society in the epic. So he ‘banished the poets from his ideal commonwealth’. Plato’s attack was the abuse of the poetry and Aristotle defended poetry through his ‘Poetics’… by giving appropriate illustrations and examples. The same thing is with English Criticism also. The first major piece of English Criticism is Sidney’s ‘An Apology of Poetry’ (1579) in which he says that he is a writer and it is his profession. It is his duty to defend his profession from the Abuse. He defends the poetry against the attack of Stephen Gosson who deliberately and ridiculously dedicated his essay ‘The School of Abuse’ to gentleman Sir Philip Sidney. Dryden, the father of English Criticism also defended literature from his own viewpoint in ‘An Essay on Dramatic Poesy’ (1668). He deafened how English is superior to French in every respect and how contemporary modern playwrights are benefited with the experience from the ancient writers... Then we have Pope’s ‘Essay on Criticism’ and Dr. Johnson’s ‘Lives’ and ‘Preface to Shakespeare’. Dr. Johnson’s ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ is the direct justification of the plays and techniques used by Shakespeare. Here the writer and his work are at the center of the criticism. Wordsworth defends theme, language, the formation of poetry in his ‘Preface to Lyrical Ballads’ (1799), while Victorian Arnold tries to use the formula of ‘touchstone’ method to differentiate between a classic piece of the genre and ordinary writing. In the sense of Liberal Criticism, T. S. Eliot is far ahead due to his coinage of new phrases and concepts. Objective Co-relative, Conceit, Unification of Sensibility etc. are the terms gifted by him to the literary world. His easy, ‘Traditional and Individual Talent’ tries to fuse between the contribution by the traditional writers in the literary field and how skillfully an individual can use it to enlighten the world of literature. His essay ‘The Metaphysical Poets’ points out that the poets of the Age of Reason were completely failed to follow the ‘Unification of Sensibility’ while Metaphysical poets were the great achiever in this sense. Eliot’s ‘Hamlet and His Madness’ completely rejects the high artistic status to Shakespeare’s play ‘Hamlet’ due to lack of Objective Co-relative and he charges it with artistic failure. ‘What is Classic?’ completely deals with Virgil and his ‘being of the last classic’. I.A. Richards rejects the idea of outside influences in the text and decides to be ‘practical’ in criticizing a text. There are many more critics who are abode to the concept called Liberal Criticism. But the trend changed rapidly in the 20th Century and every critic has started to find the roots in some –isms.

We always hear –isms…like Marxism, Fascism, Nazism, Nationalism, Feminism, Modernism, Post-modernism, Structuralism, Post-Structuralism, Historicism, Colonialism, Post-colonialism, Absurdism, Surrealism, and Dadaism and nowadays…it is Presentism. What are these isms? Where are they come from? First, let me give you a well-known example. There is a glass of water…filled half with water. The optimist says ‘It is half-filled.’; the pessimist says, ‘No. It is half-empty.’ But virtually speaking it is fully filled - with water and air. He must be realist or rationalist. Four isms come here…optimism, pessimism, rationalism, and realism. These isms are nothing but the approach, attitude, viewpoint, the way of looking to the things and ideas and your perception about them. There is no need for you to refer the heavy canon of literature to understand the concept of these isms. Practices come first, then generalization and then come to the theory. These isms are found everywhere, anywhere, anytime…the only thing you have to do is…to keep your senses open. Following such isms means wearing a goggle of particular color…you see the world in the same color. It shapes our attitude and vice-versa. How…?... In the upcoming discussion, we are going to discuss these ideas/theories/concepts…I hope you to enjoy it. It is a universal truth that ‘Playing with language is learning language’…similarly…Play with literature and learn the theories…easily….
I dedicate all this discussion to my English Teachers who ‘risked’ teaching me….

Next post will be on Structuralism, Post-structuralism, and Deconstruction

Thanks.
(Inconveniences related to syntax, grammar, punctuation etc. are regretted.)
©ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TO MR. ANIL AWAD

Anil Awad

English NET/SET Consultant

9922113364 (Also WhatsApp)

9423403368 (BSNL)

anilawad123@gmail.com

Shakespeare was born at Stratford-upon-Avon...

Shakespeare was born at Stratford-upon-Avon...

Stratford-upon-Avon - Confirmed. It is the place and known by the name only.

It has nothing to do with a preposition... It's a name - Stratford-upon-Avon.

Traditionally it is accepted as Stratford-upon-Avon.

There is nothing wrong in using ON...but if it's a matter of accuracy... Then it must be UPON. It has a historical sense...

The word 'Stratford-upon-Avon' has used throughout different ages of English Literature (Restoration, Neoclassical, Romantic, Victorian)

Governance

The administrative body for the town is the Stratford-upon-Avon Town Council, which is based at the Town Hall in Sheep Street. The Stratford-on-Avon District Council is based at Elizabeth House, Church Street, and the Stratford-upon-Avon Town Trust is based in the Civic Hall, Rother Street. The Town Council is responsible for crime prevention, cemeteries, public conveniences, litter, river moorings, parks, grants via the Town Trust and the selection of the town's mayor.

Shakespeare's Birthplace is a restored 16th-century half-timbered house situated in Henley Street, Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, England, where it is believed that William Shakespeare was born in 1564 and spent his childhood years. It is now a small museum open to the public and a popular visitor attraction, owned and managed by the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. It has been referred to as "a Mecca for all lovers of literature".

Avon is also a river...a city is dwelt near the bank UPON the river... Never ON the river itself.

The River Avon or Avon is a river in or adjoining the counties of Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Gloucestershire in the Midlands of England. Also known as the Warwickshire Avon or Shakespeare's Avon, it has been divided since 1719 into the Lower Avon, below Evesham, and the Upper Avon, from Evesham to above Stratford-upon-Avon.

Improvements to aid navigation began in 1635, and a series of locks and weirs made it possible to reach Stratford, and to within 4 miles (6.4 km) of Warwick. The Upper Avon was tortuous and prone to flooding and was abandoned as a means of navigation in 1877. The Lower Avon struggled on, and never really closed, although it was only navigable below Pershore by 1945.

Restoration of the lower river as a navigable waterway began in 1950 and was completed in 1962. The upper river was a more daunting task, as most of the locks and weirs were no longer extant. Work began in 1965 on the construction of nine new locks and 17 miles (27 km) of the river, using mainly volunteer labor, and was completed in 1974 when it was opened by Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. Plans to extend the navigable river to provide a link with the Grand Union Canal at either Warwick or Leamington Spa have met with some opposition.

AJ Long and Edward Albert considered whole England (Geographically) and English Literature while writing the History of English Literature. And of course, they are modern historians. But throughout the ages (For last 800 years)- UPON is carried on. When Shakespeare was born, at that time, the place was known as Stratford-upon-Avon... Not Stratford-on-Avon.

So...Shakespeare was born at Stratford-upon-Avon...

But, WHY DID HE BORN AT ALL?

I am dumb when my students say to me - Why did he born, Sir? If he didn't born at all....it would have saved our half of the energy while studying literature.

And my genuine answer is - Drop Shakespeare while preparing for Net/SET.

Only two kinds of people prefer to talk on Shakespeare - the scholars who had devoted their whole life to study Shakespeare... Or the people who don't know much about English Literature.

Why do you waste months on studying Shakespeare for only one or two unpredictable questions? Utilize your time for other topics.

Drop Shakespeare.

Keep Reading. Keep Preparing.

Thanks.

Anil Awad

English NET/SET Consultant

9922113364 (Also WhatsApp)

9423403368 (BSNL)

anilawad123@gmail.com

Absurdism and Existentialism: A Meditation.

Absurdism and Existentialism: A Meditation.

It was the time of World War II. Germany, Japan, Italy were on one side and France, England, Russia America was to another side. The world was divided into many –isms. Nazism, Fascism, Racism, Marxism, Imperialism, Capitalism, Socialism, Nationalism. The war was fought not in-between a person to person...but -ism to -ism. These isms became the integrated part of the life of every individual of Western World...instead say that...the individual identity and individual-ism were sacrificed on the altar of these –-isms. Everybody has to fight to secure one or more of these -isms. The hierarchy was like –ISM>Nation>Military Unit and if you are still alive...then think about yourself. It created a chaos and millions of people died in the war – In Vain. Massacre and genocide took place in barbaric ways.
But the question is – Are these -isms more important than the life of an individual? What did we achieve from these –isms? Even the very existence of human being was of its stake and use of the Nuclear weapon at the end of the war even threatened the survival of human civilization on the earth. Literary world and thinkers were shaken and shocked by the horror of war. We, the humans, are really rare...the earth is rare and there is no any trace of any other civilization in the universe. We must secure ourselves. Survival of humanity is the best philosophy. We must secure the very existence of human being...and the existence of human being lies in the existence of an individual.

An individual represents everything. He is absurd, stupid, nonsense, has no manners, mis-communicates, very poor in knowledge and don't understand the philosophy or any -ism...but still he must survive...for the sake of humanity. There are some ‘inheriting values and principles' in his absurd behavior. Where is he inherited from? From his ancestors who were also humans. Although apparently, his behavior is absurd, it has ‘deep meaning' which is co-related to his very existence in particular and humanity in general. Why has he become so absurd? – Because he is confused and struggling to find the proper meaning of life in the MEANINGLESS WORLD. Life has been defined in many ways...and which meaning has to adopt for living, for existing...he has been failing frequently to get it but his search (quest) is going on and on and on..the failure to find meaning in the meaningless world...naturally resulted in absurdity...in his absurd behaviour...so the absurdism.

Now compare this absurdism and existentialism with other -isms...like Marxism, Fascism, Nazism, Nationalism, Capitalism...all these isms tried to bind humanity into one bundle but obviously sacrificed and denied the existence of an individual. Human beings are not an inanimate material...they are living creatures with subjectivity and thinking ability. And individual's philosophy can be different from the above-mentioned philosophy...it must be related to his existence...he wants to exists not to sacrifice himself...for any...any purpose... जी है तो जहाँ है...(If I survive...the whole world)...the intention of the life is not to find for what and why do we exist but WE MUST EXIST...and this is EXISTENTIALISM. Also...the above mentioned many –isms gave a solid foundation to the one or another kind of philosophy...they have logic, reasoning, paradigms and ways to achieve them...but since human behavior is a matter of subjectivity it doesn't fit for the above –isms, sometimes. From viewpoint of the above -isms...individuality is a kind of absurdity...they must share some or the whole part of the above mentioned -isms...if they can't they are ABSURD...but this ABSURDITY is the part of their survival...So is the ABSURDISM. ‘Meaninglessness' and ‘Nothingness' is the integrated part of Absurdism. Meaninglessness means...there is no such good or bad things...what happens...happens. Nothingness means there is neither any beginning nor any end.

Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche were two of the first philosophers considered fundamental to the existentialist movement, though neither used the term "existentialism" and it is unclear whether they would have supported the existentialism of the 20th century. Jean Paul-Satre was the first to associate the terms with ‘self-description'. We have traces of absurdism and existentialism in the writings of Dostoyevsky also. But it was Albert Camus who gave a solid foundation to the philosophy. He himself rejected the ideas that he is an existentialist - "No, I am not an existentialist. Sartre and I are always surprised to see our names linked..." But he couldn't reject his writing like The Myth of Sisyphus and incorporated into many of his other works, such as The Stranger and The Plague. And he was awarded the Noble Prize in 1957 for the same: "for his important literary production, which with clear-sighted earnestness illuminates the problems of the human conscience in our times" 

The genuine problem was – how to present the concept of absurdism on the stage. It is a very difficult task actually. .. SHOWING NOTHINGNESS THROUGH THE HAPPENINGS. But we have the genius like Thomas Becket, he accepted the challenge and brought the Absurd Play on the stage...after the chaos of World War II...the right time to represent the right philosophy. The waiting ended and we have ‘Waiting For Godot". Most of you have read or watched the play. EVERY TIME, EVERY PERSON HAS DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF THE SAME PLAY. Since the beginning, something is happening on the stage and it is for to show that ‘nothing' is going to happen... "Nobody comes, nobody goes, nothing happens. It's awful." Have you observed the speech of all the characters in the play, THEY TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING, BUT IT HAS NO MEANING. The whole play is all about Mr. Godot, who never comes. We have everything in the play – philosophy, logic, all –ism, reasoning, action and interaction, climax and anticlimax, all devices...but what do they mean? They mean nothing. They are just discussing. And how can they discuss such things...they have EXISTED. Conclusions from the discussion – Nothing. For audience – they have watched the play...every spectator has a different interpretation and no fixed conclusion (that is the specialty of the absurd play)...if many conclusions are there...many meanings to are there...and many meanings lead to meaninglessness.
 
Let me share my personal experience and experimentation with Absurd Play. As most of you know, I am also a Stage Actor and Absurd Plays are the part of my specialty. At that time, I was suffering from depression & bad-patch in my life, so many problems and many deceptions... so avoided any kind of social participation or stage performances. My friend Praffulkumar Kambale came to my apartment to live with me and to take my care. He is also a renowned stage actor and worked in more than thirty Marathi Movies. The stage is a passion for both of us...since childhood. It was a critical situation for me since I was also suffering from jaundice.

One of my students (Brutus or Tai Lung from Kung Fu Panda), whom I taught everything about stage and stage performances, came to see me and ridiculed my situation. For him, I was almost finished and he seemed quite happy with my condition. He had some hidden ambition...to take my place...to become a Master. As usual, I neglected his remarks and way of behavior. But my friend Prafullkumar got angry and challenged him that he himself (Prafulla) and I (myself) are going to participate in the upcoming competition...only 7 days to go. Again Brutus (Tai Lung ) laughed in Frankenstein manner and said that it will take 7 days to prepare the script itself. But Prafulla accepted the challenge and said, "Till the morning 7 o'clock we have a new script and if you still think you can do better than Anil sir in direction and performance, direct the absurd play. We will follow your every instruction." I was neutral, but Brutus (Tai Lung) laughed again. He thought it was impossible. It was 10 O'clock at night. He just said, "See you tomorrow." Again laughed at my condition ridiculously and left our flat.

The rule of the Absurd Playwriting for 'us' is that it must be finished within one stroke. Once you start to write...it should be completed...you should not take any break in writing. Who should write then? I already have many scripts in my stock. But Prafullkumar wanted something new. He took the challenge. He gave me some medicines, asked to sleep, took some papers and started to write the One Act Play...4 o'clock at morning, we have the script ‘सुरवंट आणि फुलपाखरू ' (Caterpillar and Butterfly)…24 pages and intermixing of Marathi, Hindi, and English. At 5 O'clock we were at the doorstep of Brutus (Tai Lung ) and asked him to read the script and to direct the play. He was struck. We know what was going to happen to him. He was even not able to read and recite the script completely and faded…directing Absurd play was far beyond of his capacity. Later, although I was sick, we started to practice in the room for consecutive 6 days. For background music, we decided to use only one tune on the DVD player and the light effect was given by one of my loyal students. Prafulla played the part of Caterpillar and I was the beautiful Butterfly. Two unknown people meet on the street and start a conversation aimlessly. Symbolically, we were representing the black and white side of the life…and its meaninglessness. Caterpillar is an ugly stage and Butterfly is the beautiful stage...two important steps in the origins of the beautiful butterfly.

It was 45+ minutes play since as per the rules of the competition, it must be. When we were performing on the stage, all my students (Brutus was also there to ridicule me), my Guide and many other colleagues came to see it. Renowned dramatists and actors were the juries for the competition. It was a huge success. For 45 minutes, the audience was struck by the actions and dialogues. We both reached to our height of performance and got high appreciation from the juries also. Prafullkumar won the award for Best Actor and Best Script and I won the trophy for best Direction...and Brutus/Tie Lung...? He stopped to be my pupil forever and I decided never to become Guru of anyone. As my younger brother and Admin Rakesh Agarwal says, two people cannot live in peace...the King and the Guru. Now I am at peace and do not want to lose it.

This performance taught me much about the absurdism and existentialism than any books. I performed it when I was at the stage of extinct and almost on the death-bed. Existentialism and Absurdism are the things to be experienced not merely to read. This is an unending topic. But I stop here.

I am really indebted to the parents of Albert Camus, Samuel Becket, and John Osborne...they gave birth to such genius...of all the age.

Thanks.

Pictures – Prafullkumar Kamble (before the performance) and Myself (after the performance) of the Absurd Play. In the same drapery, we played the roles - सुरवंट आणि फुलपाखरू i.e. Caterpillar and Butterfly.

Anil Awad

English NET/SET Consultant

9922113364 (Also WhatsApp)

9423403368 (BSNL)

anilawad123@gmail.com