Francis Bacon was a man who was brilliant in many ways: as a scientist, as a philosopher, and as an enthusiastic innovator in the methods of science, which he considered to be means for establishing the dominion of man on earth. Bacon is remembered mostly for having worked out the inductive method.He began with such phenomena of nature as are presented to us, but he intended to go beyond the phenomenal data, to reach knowledge of the form. Nature and form are terms that recall to mind the metaphysics of Aristotelio-Scholasticism. But, as used by Bacon, these terms have a different meaning:
The metaphysical support for these natures and forms is not treated by Bacon. The only metaphysics consistent with a phenomenalistic physics is mechanical atomism. Therefore, the differences between phenomena depend upon nothing more than the different positions of atoms regulated by movement.
Even if we grant that Bacon's method leads to a knowledge of what he calls the forms (the laws of nature), such a knowledge will only indicate that until the present day the phenomena were regulated by such laws or forms. But this does not prove that tomorrow these phenomena will obey the same laws. In other words, Bacon does not give us a metaphysics -- independent of the phenomena -- which would be the support of these same phenomena.It seems, however, that Bacon did not realize the phenomenalistic consequences of his method, and hence could still affirm that the traditional metaphysical world exists alongside his phenomenal world. The later philosophers of Empiricism showed that this is an untenable position, and concluded that all reality is pure phenomenon
I heartily welcome you. This blog has been creatively designed to help my students who have opted English language and literature as their main subject
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Elaine Showalter and Feminism
Elaine Showalter, an American literary critic, feminist, and writer on cultural and social issues, is one of the founders of feminist literary criticism in United States academia, developing the concept and practice of gynocritics.[4] Showalter coined the term 'gynocritics' to describe literary criticism based in a feminine perspective. Her A Literature of Their Own is a typical example.
In her analysis of the historical development, Showalter presents three important stages of women's writing. First, the imitation of the mainstream literary tradition: second, the protest against the standards of this dominant tradition concerning social values and rights: and third, self-discovery which aims at a search for identity. Showalter identifies these stages as Feminine, Feminist and Female[3]. The Feminine period covers the years between 1840-1889; the Feminist period 1890-1920, and the Female period starts in 1920 and comes to the 1960s. It continues with its renewal of perspectives with the advent of the women's movement after the 1960s. Showalter's contribution to the feminist criticism centres on her rediscovery of the forgotten women writers falling into these stages.
Feminists‟ mission is to end all forms of exploitation & injustice against the women. They have a moral obligation to combat against tyranny and subjugation. In order to accomplish feminism's objectives it may be inevitable to oppose religion and economic exploitation, but not intrinsic. Their goal is only to oppose oppression, exploitation and injustice. Feminists advocate social, political & economical rights for women equal to men.
In her analysis of the historical development, Showalter presents three important stages of women's writing. First, the imitation of the mainstream literary tradition: second, the protest against the standards of this dominant tradition concerning social values and rights: and third, self-discovery which aims at a search for identity. Showalter identifies these stages as Feminine, Feminist and Female[3]. The Feminine period covers the years between 1840-1889; the Feminist period 1890-1920, and the Female period starts in 1920 and comes to the 1960s. It continues with its renewal of perspectives with the advent of the women's movement after the 1960s. Showalter's contribution to the feminist criticism centres on her rediscovery of the forgotten women writers falling into these stages.
Feminists‟ mission is to end all forms of exploitation & injustice against the women. They have a moral obligation to combat against tyranny and subjugation. In order to accomplish feminism's objectives it may be inevitable to oppose religion and economic exploitation, but not intrinsic. Their goal is only to oppose oppression, exploitation and injustice. Feminists advocate social, political & economical rights for women equal to men.
Arnold -----Preface to Poems of 1853
In the preface to his Poems (1853) Arnold asserts the importance of architectonics; ('that power of execution, which creates, forms, and constitutes') in poetry - the necessity of achieving unity by subordinating the parts to the whole, and the expression of ideas to the depiction of human action, and condemns poems which exist for the sake of single lines or passages, stray metaphors, images, and fancy expressions. Scattered images and happy turns of phrase, in his view, can only provide partial effects, and not contribute to unity. He also, continuing his anti-Romantic theme, urges, modern poets to shun allusiveness and not fall into the temptation of subjectivity.
He says that even the imitation of Shakespeare is risky for a young writer, who should imitate only his excellences, and avoid his attractive accessories, tricks of style, such as quibble, conceit, circumlocution and allusiveness, which will lead him astray.
Arnold commends Shakespeare's use of great plots from the past. He had what Goethe called the architectonic quality, that is his expression was matched to the action (or the subject). But at the same time Arnold quotes Hallam to show that Shakespeare's style was complex even where the press of action demanded simplicity and directness, and hence his style could not be taken as a model by young writers. Elsewhere he says that Shakespeare's 'expression tends to become a little sensuous and simple, too much intellectualised'.
Shakespeare's excellences are 1)The architectonic quality of his style; the harmony between action and expression. 2) His reliance on the ancients for his themes. 3) Accurate construction of action. 4) His strong conception of action and accurate portrayal of his subject matter. 5) His intense feeling for the subjects he dramatises.
His attractive accessories (or tricks of style) which a young writer should handle carefully are 1) His fondness for quibble, fancy, conceit. 2) His excessive use of imagery. 3) Circumlocution, even where the press of action demands directness. 4) His lack of simplicity (according to Hallam and Guizot). 5) His allusiveness.
As an example of the danger of imitating Shakespeare he gives Keats's imitation of Shakespeare in his Isabella or the Pot of Basil. Keats uses felicitous phrases and single happy turns of phrase, yet the action is handled vaguely and so the poem does not have unity. By way of contrast, he says the Italian writer Boccaccio handled the same theme successfully in his Decameron, because he rightly subordinated expression to action. Hence Boccaccio's poem is a poetic success where Keats's is a failure.
Arnold also wants the modern writer to take models from the past because they depict human actions which touch on 'the great primary human affections: to those elementary feelings which subsist permanently in the race, and which are independent of time'. Characters such as Agamemnon, Dido, Aeneas, Orestes, Merope, Alcmeon, and Clytemnestra, leave a permanent impression on our minds. Compare 'The Iliad' or 'The Aeneid' with 'The Childe Harold' or 'The Excursion' and you see the difference.
A modern writer might complain that ancient subjects pose problems with regard to ancient culture, customs, manners, dress and so on which are not familiar to contemporary readers. But Arnold is of the view that a writer should not concern himself with the externals, but with the 'inward man'. The inward man is the same irrespective of clime or time.
He says that even the imitation of Shakespeare is risky for a young writer, who should imitate only his excellences, and avoid his attractive accessories, tricks of style, such as quibble, conceit, circumlocution and allusiveness, which will lead him astray.
Arnold commends Shakespeare's use of great plots from the past. He had what Goethe called the architectonic quality, that is his expression was matched to the action (or the subject). But at the same time Arnold quotes Hallam to show that Shakespeare's style was complex even where the press of action demanded simplicity and directness, and hence his style could not be taken as a model by young writers. Elsewhere he says that Shakespeare's 'expression tends to become a little sensuous and simple, too much intellectualised'.
Shakespeare's excellences are 1)The architectonic quality of his style; the harmony between action and expression. 2) His reliance on the ancients for his themes. 3) Accurate construction of action. 4) His strong conception of action and accurate portrayal of his subject matter. 5) His intense feeling for the subjects he dramatises.
His attractive accessories (or tricks of style) which a young writer should handle carefully are 1) His fondness for quibble, fancy, conceit. 2) His excessive use of imagery. 3) Circumlocution, even where the press of action demands directness. 4) His lack of simplicity (according to Hallam and Guizot). 5) His allusiveness.
As an example of the danger of imitating Shakespeare he gives Keats's imitation of Shakespeare in his Isabella or the Pot of Basil. Keats uses felicitous phrases and single happy turns of phrase, yet the action is handled vaguely and so the poem does not have unity. By way of contrast, he says the Italian writer Boccaccio handled the same theme successfully in his Decameron, because he rightly subordinated expression to action. Hence Boccaccio's poem is a poetic success where Keats's is a failure.
Arnold also wants the modern writer to take models from the past because they depict human actions which touch on 'the great primary human affections: to those elementary feelings which subsist permanently in the race, and which are independent of time'. Characters such as Agamemnon, Dido, Aeneas, Orestes, Merope, Alcmeon, and Clytemnestra, leave a permanent impression on our minds. Compare 'The Iliad' or 'The Aeneid' with 'The Childe Harold' or 'The Excursion' and you see the difference.
A modern writer might complain that ancient subjects pose problems with regard to ancient culture, customs, manners, dress and so on which are not familiar to contemporary readers. But Arnold is of the view that a writer should not concern himself with the externals, but with the 'inward man'. The inward man is the same irrespective of clime or time.
Sunday, July 03, 2011
MATILDA who told lies
Joseph Hilaire Pierre René Belloc was one of the most prolific writers in England during the early twentieth century. His style and personality led to the nickname, "Old Thunder".He was an ardent proponent of orthodox Catholicism and a critic of many elements of the modern world.His "cautionary tales", humorous poems with a moral, such as Matilda, who told lies and was burnt to death, are the most widely known of his writings. Belloc's heroine is one of several figures he conceived in satirizing the moralistic tales used in Edwardian England to instill proper behavior in children.Matilda, an incorrigible fibber, calls the fire brigade out on a false alarm; later, when fire does indeed break out, she is disbelieved and left to burn to death.The tale overall is macabre rather than funny, both because its denouement is not especially inventive and because death by fire is all too common.
This poem is about a girl who always tells lies. Because of this habit, she lost her life as on one believed her when she was speaking the truth.Matilda has obviously not heard the story of the boy who cried wolf. Matilda a minor girl told such dreadful kids that liquods would hardly take a breath of relax. Her aunt, who was a believes of truth, once she too believed Matilda when she called for help on telephone. She dialed the number of emergency fire service. She cries, ``Fire!'' causing a great brouhaha composed of clanging fire wagons, water-drenched drawing rooms, and humiliated female relatives When the came to help her, it was confermed that there had harrode nothing. Due to which her aunt sawed some amount as find to let the fire men to go away. One night her aunt went to theatre and let Matilda alone at home as punishment for telling lies.. But it all comes back to her when the house really burns down and no one believes in her cries of alarm. That very night, fire broke out really. Matilda cried for help but on one minded whatever she was saying as they thought that, she is telling lies. Rapidly heat increased and Matilda along the house was burned. And when her aunt came back from theatre, it was too late to do any thing.Matilda, along with her abode, is reduced to ashes.
Belloc's macabre, Edwardian moral tale with blackly humorous panache are important features of this poem. Smoky palette is perfect for the fiery subject matter, particularly in the characterization of Matilda, with her malicious dark eyes and rotund appearance. Paired with other stories on truth telling or read on its own, this has story-time potential for tough-minded moralists The poem is hilarious - one of Belloc's Awful Warning poems - and the illustrations of a beady-eyed, sneaky looking Matilda set it off beautifully.who told lies will be burned to death.
This poem is about a girl who always tells lies. Because of this habit, she lost her life as on one believed her when she was speaking the truth.Matilda has obviously not heard the story of the boy who cried wolf. Matilda a minor girl told such dreadful kids that liquods would hardly take a breath of relax. Her aunt, who was a believes of truth, once she too believed Matilda when she called for help on telephone. She dialed the number of emergency fire service. She cries, ``Fire!'' causing a great brouhaha composed of clanging fire wagons, water-drenched drawing rooms, and humiliated female relatives When the came to help her, it was confermed that there had harrode nothing. Due to which her aunt sawed some amount as find to let the fire men to go away. One night her aunt went to theatre and let Matilda alone at home as punishment for telling lies.. But it all comes back to her when the house really burns down and no one believes in her cries of alarm. That very night, fire broke out really. Matilda cried for help but on one minded whatever she was saying as they thought that, she is telling lies. Rapidly heat increased and Matilda along the house was burned. And when her aunt came back from theatre, it was too late to do any thing.Matilda, along with her abode, is reduced to ashes.
Belloc's macabre, Edwardian moral tale with blackly humorous panache are important features of this poem. Smoky palette is perfect for the fiery subject matter, particularly in the characterization of Matilda, with her malicious dark eyes and rotund appearance. Paired with other stories on truth telling or read on its own, this has story-time potential for tough-minded moralists The poem is hilarious - one of Belloc's Awful Warning poems - and the illustrations of a beady-eyed, sneaky looking Matilda set it off beautifully.who told lies will be burned to death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)