Thursday, 7 April 2016

My presentation(sem-2)

Paper:-5
Topic: Differences between Elinor and Marinne
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, 2 April 2016

Important features of cultural studies.


Name:- Rathod  Neha  R.
Class:- M.A. sem-2
Roll no:- 29
Year:- 2016-2017
Paper:- 8
Assignment Topic:- Important features of
                               cultural studies.                          
                       Features of Cultural Studies

(1)            Power Relation and its influence and shape on cultural practices:

            In several instance earlier in this chapter we noted the cultural and new historical emphases on power relationships. For example, we noted that cultural critics assume ‘‘oppositional’’ roles in terms of power structures, wherever they might be found. Veeser, we pointed out, credited the new historicists with dealing with, ‘‘questions of politics, power, indeed on all matters that deeply affected people’s practical lives’’. And of course there are the large emphases on power in the matter of Jonathan Swift’s Laputa, as previously noted.
              Let us now approach Shakespeare’s ‘‘HAMLET’’ with a view to seeing power in its cultural context.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, these two characters that we study under the approach of cultural studies. After the play within the play, Claudius is talking privately with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet’s fellow students from Wittenberg. In response to Claudius’s plan to send Hamlet to England, Rosencrantz delivers a speech that-if read out of context-is both an excellent set of metaphors and a summation of the Elizabethan concept of the role and power of Kingship:

The singular and peculiar life is bound
With all the strength and armor of the mind
To keep itself from noyance, but much more
That spirit upon whose weal depends and rests
The lives of many. The cease of majesty
Dies not alone, but like a gulf doth draw
What’s near it with it. It is a massy wheel
Fixed on the summit of the highest mount,
To whose huge spokes ten thousand lesser things
Are mortised and adjoined; which, when it falls,
Each small annexment, petty consequence,
Attends the boisterious ruin. Never alone
Did the king sigh but with a general groan.

            Taken alone, the passage is a thoughtful and imagistically successful passage, worthy of a wise and accomplished statement.

         But how many readers and viewers of the play would rank this passage among the best-known lines of the play-with Hamlet’s soliloquies, for instance, or with the king’s effort to pray, or even with the aphorisms addressed by Polonius to his son Laertes? We venture to say that the passage, intrinsically good if one looks at it alone, is simply not well known.

  Why?

    Attention to the context and to the speaker gives the answer. Guildenstern had just agreed that he and Rosencrantz would do the king’s bidding. The agreement is only a reaffirmation of what they had told the king when he first received them at court. Both speeches are wholly in character, for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are among the jellyfish of Shakespeare’s characters. Easy it is to forget which of the two speaks which lines-indeed easy it is to forget most of their lines altogether. The two are distinctly plot-driven:

     Empty of personality, sycophantic in a sniveling way, eager to curry favor with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. Weakly they admit, without much skill at denial, that they ‘‘were sent for’’. Even less successfully they try to play on Hamlet’s metaphorical ‘‘pipe,’’ to know his ‘‘stops,’’ when they are forced to admit that they could not even handle the literal musical instruments that Hamlet shows them. Still later these nonentities meet their destined ‘‘non-beingness,’’ as it were, when Hamlet, who can play the pipe so much more efficiently, substitutes their names in the death warrant intended for him.

             If ever we wished to study two characters who are marginalized, then let us look upon Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

    The meanings of their names hardly match what seems to be the essence of their characters. Murray J. Levith, for example, has written that ‘‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are from the Dutch-German: Literally, ‘garland of roses’ and ‘golden star.’ Although of religious origin, both names together sound singsong and odd to English ears. Their jingling gives them lightness, and blurs the individuality of the characters they label’’.

       Lightness to be sure. Harley Granville-Barker once wrote in an offhand way of the reaction these two roles call up for actors. Commenting on Solanio and Salarino from ‘‘The Merchant of Venice’’, he noted that their roles are ‘‘cursed by actors as the worst bores in the whole Shakespearean canon; not excepting, even those other twin brethren in nonentity, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’’.

       Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, they are pawns for Claudius first, for Hamlet second. Because they know that the power on the hand of Claudius and their more constant motive is to please the king, the power that has brought them here. Their fate, however, is to displease mightily the prince, who will undermine them and ‘‘hoist with own petard.’’ Claudius was aware of power, clearly, when he observed of Hamlet’s apparent madness that ‘‘Madness in great ones must not unwatched go’’. With equal truth Rosencrantz and Guildenstern might have observed that power in great ones also must not unwatched go.

      In short, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are no more than what Rosencrantz called a ‘‘small annexment,’’ a ‘‘petty consequence,’’ mere nothings for the ‘‘massy wheel’’ of kings. Through this we can conclude that that type of characters have same speech as hero has though they have not much attention as hero has. We seemed in various movies that supporting characters sometimes gave the idea that how to meet hero to heroine and then hero take action on that. Sometimes what happen that supporting characters are more important than hero.  For Example- In the novel Tughlaq by Girish karnad. No doubt that it is historical play but in which Girish Karnad presented same thing.  With the approach of the cultural studies we seemed in this novel that both characters Aziz and Aazam are marginalized but they both are having more commonsense than the king Tughlaq has. For example – When Tughlaq passed the rule that all coins are translated into copper that time that both characters know that when we translated coins into copper, every one made this coins and there is no any comparison and hierarchy between any of them that is why they both of them collected all silver coins with the thinking of that that when good king came and changed this nonsense rule that time these all coins help him to became rich. Not only in this matter but there are various matter that is proved that that both characters are very intelligent than hero rather the king.

(2)            Cultural studies is not simply the study of cultural as though it was a discrete entity divorced from its social or political context. Its objective is to understand culture in all its complex forms and to analyze the social and political context within which it manifests itself.

(3)             Culture in cultural studies always performs two functions: it is both the object of study and the location of political criticism and action. Cultural studies aims to be both an intellectual and a pragmatic enterprise.

(4)             Cultural studies attempts to expose and reconcile the division of knowledge, to overcome the split between tacit (that is, intuitive knowledge based on local cultures) and objective (so-called universal) forms of knowledge. It assumes a common identity and common interest between the knower and the known, between the observer and what is being observed.

(5)            Cultural studies is committed to a moral evaluation of modern society and to a radical line of political action. The tradition of cultural studies is not one of value-free scholarship but one committed to social reconstruction by critical political involvement. Thus cultural studies aims to understand and change the structures of dominance everywhere, but in industrial capitalist societies in particular.

(6)            Features of cultural studies is that it share four goals:
                           
   Cultural Studies transcends the confines of a particular discipline such as literary criticism or history.

    Cultural Studies is politically engaged as we discussed above the power relation which is related with political things. Cultural critics see themselves as ‘‘oppositional,’’ not only within their own disciplines but to many of the power structures of society at large. They question inequalities within power structures and seek to discover models for restructuring relationships among dominant and ‘‘minority’’ or ‘‘subaltern’’ discourses.

 Cultural Studies denies the separation of ‘‘high’’ and ‘‘low’’ or elite and popular culture.

4      Cultural Studies analyzes not only the cultural work, but also the means of production.

Conclusion:

      In short we can say that as we discussed the characteristics of cultural studies it also have some own limitations. The weaknesses of cultural studies lie in its very strengths, particularly its emphasis upon diversity of approach and subject matter. Cultural Studies can at times seem merely an intellectual smorgasbord in which the critic blithely combines artful helpings of texts and objects and then ‘‘finds’’ deep connections between them, without adequately researching what a culture means or how cultures have interacted.

click hear evaluate to my assignment






Posted by at No comments:

Northrop Frye:- Archetypal criticism

click hear evaluate my assignment
M.K. Bhavnagar university
department of English
Name:- Rathod  Neha  R.
Class:- M.A. sem-2
Roll no:- 29
Year:- 2016-2017
Paper:- 7
Assignment Topic:-    Northrop Frye - Archetypal criticism 
Northrop Frye:- Archetypal criticism
Introduction about Northrop Frye:-

                    
Born: Herman Northrop Frye
July 14, 1912
Sherbrook, Quebec, Canada
Died: January 23, 1991 (aged 78)
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
School: Archetypal literary criticism, Romanticism
Main interests:
Imagination, archetype, myth, The Bible
Notable ideas:
Archetypes of literature, classless culture
Influences:
Giambattista Vico, Oswald Spengler, William Blake, I. A. Richards, F. R. Leavis
Influenced:
Harold Bloom, Margaret Atwood, B.W. Powe Herman Northrop Frye, CC FRSC (July 14, 1912 – January 23, 1991) was a Canadian literary critic and literary theorist, considered one of the most influential of the 20th century.
Frye gained international fame with his first book, Fearful Symmetry (1947), which led to the reinterpretation of the poetry of William Blake. His lasting reputation rests principally on the theory of literary criticism that he developed in Anatomy of Criticism (1957), one of the most important works of literary theory published in the twentieth century. The American critic Harold Bloom commented at the time of its publication that Anatomy established Frye as "the foremost living student of Western literature."[1] Frye's contributions to cultural and social criticism spanned a long career during which he earned widespread recognition and received many honours.
Definition between Archetypal Criticism:-
·      Archetypal criticism looks in literature for patterns and traces them through works of classical antiquity into modern text, and interprets those reverberations as symbols or Manifestations of universal human conflicts and desires.
·      The archetypal means original idea or pattern of something of which others are copies.
What is archetypal criticism?    
Archetypal criticism argues that archetypes determine the form and function of literary works that a text's meaning is shaped by cultural and psychological myths. Archetypes are the unknowable basic forms personified or concretized in recurring images, symbols, or patterns which may include motifs such as the quest or the heavenly ascent, recognizable character types such as the trickster or the hero, symbols such as the apple or snake, or images such as crucifixion (as in King Kong, or Bride of Frankenstein)--all laden with meaning already when employed in a particular work.
Archetypal criticism gets its impetus from psychologist Carl Jung, who postulated that humankind has a "collective unconscious," a kind of universal psyche, which is manifested in dreams and myths and which harbors themes and images that we all inherit. Literature, therefore, imitates not the world but rather the "total dream of humankind." Jung called mythology "the textbook of the archetypes" (qtd. in Walker 17).
Archetypal critics find New Criticism too atomistic in ignoring intertextual elements and in approaching the text as if it existed in a vacuum. After all, we recognize story patterns and symbolic associations at least from other texts we have read, if not innately; we know how to form assumptions and expectations from encounters with black hats, springtime settings, evil stepmothers, and so forth. So surely meaning cannot exist solely on the page of a work, nor can that work be treated as an independent entity.
Archetypal images and story patterns encourage readers (and viewers of films and advertisements) to participate ritualistically in basic beliefs, fears, and anxieties of their age. These archetypal features not only constitute the intelligibility of the text but also tap into a level of desires and anxieties of humankind.
Whereas Freudian, Lacanian, and other schools of psychological criticism operate within a linguistic paradigm regarding the unconscious, the Jungian approach to myth emphasizes the notion of image.
What is Northrop Frye’s contribution to the archetypal criticism?

Bodkin’s Archetypal Patterns in Poetry, the first work on the subject of archetypal literary criticism, applies Jung’s theories about the collective unconscious, archetypes, and primordial images to literature. It was not until the work of the Canadian literary critic Northrop Frye that archetypal criticism was theorized in purely literary terms. The major work of Frye’s to deal with archetypes is Anatomy of Criticism but his essay The Archetypes of Literature is a precursor to the book. Frye’s thesis in “The Archetypes of Literature” remains largely unchanged in Anatomy of Criticism. Frye’s work helped displace New Criticism as the major mode of analyzing literary texts, before giving way to structuralism and semiotics.

Frye’s work breaks from both Frazer and Jung in such a way that it is distinct from its anthropological and psychoanalytical precursors.

In his remarkable and influential book Anatomy of Criticism (1957), N. Frye developed the archetypal approach into a radical and comprehensive revision of traditional grounds both in the theory of literature and the practice of literary criticism.

For Frye, the death-rebirth myth that Frazer sees manifest in agriculture and the harvest is not ritualistic since it is involuntary, and therefore, must be done. As for Jung, Frye was uninterested about the collective unconscious on the grounds of feeling it was unnecessary: since the unconscious is unknowable it cannot be studied. How archetypes came to be was also of no concern to Frye; rather, the function and effect of archetypes is his interest. Frye proposed that the totality of literary works constitute a “self-contained literary universe” which has been created over the ages by the human imagination so as to assimilate the alien and indifferent world of nature into archetypal forms that serve to satisfy enduring human desires and needs. In this literary universe, four radical mythoi (i.e. plot forms, or organizing structural principles), correspondent to the four seasons in the cycle of the natural world, are incorporated in the four major genres of comedy (spring), romance (summer), tragedy (autumn), and satire (winter).   
Within the overarching archetypal mythos of each of these genres, individual works of literature also play variations upon a number of more limited archetypes – that is, conventional patterns and types that literature shares with social rituals as well a with theology, history, law, and , in fact, all “discursive verbal structures.” Viewed arhetypally, Frye asserted, literature turns out to play an essential role in refashioning the impersonal material universe into an alternative verbal universe that is intelligible and viable, because it is adapted to universal human needs and concerns.  There are two basic categories in Frye’s framework, i.e., comedic and tragic. Each category is further subdivided into two categories: comedy and romance for the comedic; tragedy and satire (or ironic) for the tragic. Though he is dismissive of Frazer, Frye uses the seasons in his archetypal schema. Each season is aligned with a literary genre: comedy with spring, romance with summer, tragedy with autumn, and satire with winter.

·     Comedy is aligned with spring because the genre of comedy is characterized by the birth of the hero, revival and resurrection. Also, spring symbolizes the defeat of winter and darkness.
·     Romance and summer are paired together because summer is the culmination of life in the seasonal calendar, and the romance genre culminates with some sort of triumph, usually a marriage.
·     Autumn is the dying stage of the seasonal calendar, which parallels the tragedy genre because it is, (above all), known for the “fall” or demise of the protagonist.
·     Satire is metonymized with winter on the grounds that satire is a “dark” genre. Satire is a disillusioned and mocking form of the three other genres. It is noted for its darkness, dissolution, the return of chaos, and the defeat of the heroic figure.

The context of a genre determines how a symbol or image is to be interpreted. Frye outlines five different spheres in his schema: human, animal, vegetation, mineral, and water.
·     The comedic human world is representative of wish-fulfillment and being community centered. In contrast, the tragic human world is of isolation, tyranny, and the fallen hero.
·     Animals in the comedic genres are docile and pastoral (e.g. sheep), while animals are predatory and hunters in the tragic (e.g. wolves).

·     For the realm of vegetation, the comedic is, again, pastoral but also represented by gardens, parks, roses and lotuses. As for the tragic, vegetation is of a wild forest, or as being barren.

·     Cities, temples, or precious stones represent the comedic mineral realm. The tragic mineral realm is noted for being a desert, ruins, or “of sinister geometrical images” (Frye 1456).

·     Lastly, the water realm is represented by rivers in the comedic. With the tragic, the seas, and especially floods, signify the water sphere.
Frye admits that his schema in “The Archetypes of Literature” is simplistic, but makes room for exceptions by noting that there are neutral archetypes. The example he cites are islands such as Circe[1]’s or Prospero’s which cannot be categorized under the tragic or comedic.

Example of archetypal criticism:-
Example1                                                                            The Hero: He or she is a character who predominantly exhibits goodness and struggles against evil in order to restore harmony and justice to society e.g. Beowulf, Hercules, D’artagnan from “The Three Musketeers” etc.
Example 2
The Mother Figure: Such a character may be represented as Fairy Mother who guides and directs a child, Mother Earth who contacts people and offers spiritual and emotional nourishment, and Stepmother who treats their stepchildren roughly.
Some examples are:
In Literature: Lucy and Madame Defarge from Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities”, Disely from Faulkner’s “The sound and The Fury”, Gladriel from “Lord of the Rings”, Glinda from the “Wizard of Oz” etc.
In Fairy Tales: Characters such as the stepmother in “Cinderella”, fairy godmothers, Mother Goose, Little Red Riding Hood etc.
In Mythology: The mythological figures of Persephone, Demeter, Hecate, Gorgon, Medusa
Example 3
The Innocent Youth: He or she is inexperienced with many weaknesses and seeks safety with others but others like him/her because of the trust he or she shows in other people. Usually, the experience of coming of age comes in the later parts of the narratives such as Pip in Dickens’ “Great Expectation”, Nicholas in Dickens’ “Nicholas Nickelby”, Joseph from Fielding’s “Joseph Andrews” etc.
Example 4
The Mentor: His or her task is to protect the main character. It is through the wise advice and training of a mentor that the main character achieves success in the world e.g. Gandalf in “The Lords of Rings”, Parson Adams in Fielding’s “Josep Andrews”, and Senex in L’Engle’s “A Wind in the Door” etc.
Example 5
Doppelganger: It is a duplicate or shadow of a character that represents the evil side of his personality. Examples are in popular literary works such as Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Poe’s William Wilson, Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde etc.
Example 6
The Scapegoat: A character that takes the blame of everything bad that happens e.g. Snowball in Orwell’s “Animal Farm” etc.
Example 7
The Villain: A character whose main function is to go to any extent to oppose the hero or whom the hero must annihilate in order to bring justice e.g. Shere Khan from Kipling’s “The Jungle Book” stories, Long John Silver from Stevenson’s “Treasure Island”” etc
Archetypes in Situations:
Example 8
The Journey: The main character takes a journey that may be physical or emotional to understand his or her personality and the nature of the world. For example, Dante’s “The Divine Comedy”, Fielding’s “Joseph Andrews”, Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travel” etc.
Example 9
The Initiation: The main character undergoes experiences that lead him towards maturity. We find such archetypes in novels like Fielding‘s “History of Tom Jones, a Foundling”, Sterne‘s “The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman”, Voltaire’s “Candide” etc.
Example 10
Good Versus Evil: It represents the clash of forces that represent goodness with those that represent evil.

click hear evaluate my assignment 




Posted by at No comments:

A studies of Poets Tenyson & Browing

 click hear evaluate my assignment 
Name:- Rathod  Neha  R.
Class:- M.A. sem-2
Roll no:- 29
Year:- 2016-2017
Paper:- 6
Asssiment :- Poets Tenyson & Browing

 A study of poets Tennyson and Browning

Tennyson and Browning are writing in defined poetic forms: Browning uses the classic form of the heroic couplet, and Tennyson uses the “In Memoriam” stanza structure that he has created specifically for this poem and that consists of four lines of iambic tetrameter rhyming ABBA. Both do not break their rhyme and meter.
Tennyson and Browning are Victorian period poets. Victorianism differs from Romanticism in dramatic ways. For instance, Romanticism presented an idealized view of nature and of the joys of simple rural living. For Victorian, nature became a cold hard reality. Tennyson even refers to nature’s bloodied claws.
The Romantic period, society was feeling the expensiveness class and the poetry of the Romantics reflected this expansive feeling, with a focus on individualism and self.

 Alfred Lord Tennyson

Born: 6 August 1809
Died: 6 October 1892
Occupation: Poet Laureate
Tennyson was born in England. He was born in to middle – class family but also had a noble and royal ancestry. His father, George Clayton Tennyson was rector of Somersby.
Tennyson and two of his elder brothers were writing poetry and a collection of poems was published                                            locally when Alfred was only 17.
Education
Tennyson was first a student of Loath Grammar School for four year [1816-1820] and then attended King Edward 5th Grammar School, Loath. He entered Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1827. Where he joined a secret society called the Cambridge Apostles.
At Cambridge, Tennyson met Arthur Henry Hallam and William Henry Brookfield, who became his closest friends.
In 1829, Tennyson was awarded the Chancellor’s Gold Medal at Cambridge for one of his first pieces, “Timbuctoo”. He published his first solo collection of poems, Chiefly Lyrical in 1830.
In the spring of 1831, Tennyson’s father died so it is necessary to leave Cambridge before taking his degree.
In 1833 Tennyson published his second book of poetry, which included his well – known poem, “The Lady of Shallot”.  Tennyson and his family were allowed to stay in the rectory for some time but later moved to High Beach, Essex, about 1837, leaving in 1840.
In 1850 Tennyson get high position with the publication of In Memoriam dedicated to his friend, Hallam. In the same year he married Emily Sellwood, whom he had known since childhood, in the village. They had two sons Hallam Tennyson named after his friend and Lionel.
After William Wordsworth’s death he was appointed to the position of poet Laureate; Elizabeth Barrett Browning and Leigh Hunt had also been considered.
Tennyson was the first to be raised to a British peerage for his writing. A passionate man with some particularities of nature, he was never particularly comfortable as a peer.
Towards the end of his life Tennyson revealed that his “religious beliefs: also defined convention, learning towards agnosticism and pandeism.
Tennyson continued writing into his eighties. He died on 6 October 1892 at Aldworth, aged 83. He was succeeded as 2nd Baron Tennyson by his son Hallam, who produced an authorized biography of his father in 1897, and was later the second Governor General of Australia.
 Tennyson and the Queen
Tennyson was praise by Queen Victoria. His work, and in her diary that she was “much soothen pleased by reading”.
The art of Tennyson’s poetry
In his writing he used wide range of subject matter, from medieval to classical myths and from domestic situations to observation of nature as source material for his poetry. The influence of John Keats and other Romantic poets help him to reach richness of his imagery and descriptive writing. He also handled rhythm. Tennyson possessed the strongest poetic power, which his early readers often attributed to his.
Tennyson’s Poetry
“Marianne”
“The Lady of Shalot”
“The Lotos – Eaters”
“Ulysses”
“Tithonus”
“The Epic”
“Tears, Idle Tears”
“In Memoriam”
“The Charge of the Light Brigade”
“Crossing the Bar”
 Tennyson’s Poetry
“In Memoriam”
The poem begins as a tribute to and invocation of the “strong son of God’. Man never seen God’s faced and has no proof of his existence he can only reach God through faith. The poet attributes the sun and moon to God, acknowledges him as the creator of life and death in both man and animals. Man cannot understand why he was created but he must believe that he was not made simply to die.
The Son of Gods seems both human and devines. Man has control of his own will, but this is only so that he might exert himself to do God’s will. All of man’s constructed systems of religion and philosophy seem solid but are merely temporal, in comparison to the eternal God.
The speaker asks that God that God help foolish people to see his light. He repeatedly asks for God to forgive his grief for “thy creature, which I found so fair.”The speaker has faith that this departed fair friend lives on in God, and asks God to make his friend wise.
Ulysses
Ulysses declares that there is little point in his staying home “by this still healthy” with his ode wife, doing out rewards and punishment for the unnamed masses who live in his kingdom.
He speaking to himself that he “cannot rest from travel” but feels compelled to live to the fullest and swallow every last drop of life. He has enjoyed all his experiences as a sailor who travels for everyone who wanders and roams the earth.
Ulysses declares that it is boring to stay in one place, and that to remain stationary. He wishes “to follow knowledge like a sinking star” and forever grow in wisdom and in learning.
In the final stanza, Ulysses addresses the mariners with whom he has worked, traveled and weathered life’s storms over many years. Ulysses and his mariners are not as strong as they were in youth, they are not as “strong in will” and are sustained by their resolve to push onward relentlessly; “To strive to seek to find, and not to yield”.

Robert Browning


Born: 7 May 1812
Died: 12 December 1889
Occupation: Poet
Robert Browning was an English poet and playwright whose mastery of dramatic, verse, especially. He was the only son of Sarah Anne and Robert Browning. His father was a clerk for the Bank of England earning about $ 150 per year. Browning had one sister Sarianna.
By twelve, Browning had written a book of poetry which he later destroyed when no publisher cloud is a tutor. He had inherited substantial musical ability through his mother. His father sponsored the publication of his son’s poems.
In March 1833, Pauline, was published anonymously. It is a long poem composed in homage to Shelley and somewhat in his style. In 1838 he visited Italy, looking for background for Sordello, a long poem in heroic couplets. This was published in 1840.
In 1845, Browning met the poet Elizabeth Barrett, six years his elder, who lived with her father’s house in Wimpole Street, London. They began corresponding and gradually a romance developed between them, leading to their marriage and journey to Italy.’   The marriage was initially secret because her father disapproved of marriage for any of his children.
In the remaining years of his life Browning travelled extensively. Browning died at his son’s home Ca’Rezzonico in Venice on 12 December 1889.
Browning was awarded many distinctions. He was made LL.D.  Of Edinburgh, a life Governor of London University, and had the offer of the Lord Proctorship of Glasgow. But he turned down anything that involved public speaking.
Browning Poetry
“Porphria’s Love”
“Soliloquy of the Spanish Cloister”
“My Last Duchess”
“Home - Thoughts, From Abroad”
“Fra Lippo Lippi”
 “A Yoccata of Galuppi’s”
“Memorabilia”
“Two in the Campagn”
“Caliban upon Setibos”
“My Last Duchess”
This poem is loosely based on historical events involving Alfonse the Duke of Ferrara, who lived in the 16th century. The Duke is the speaker of the poem, and tells us he is entertaining an emissary who has come to negotiate the Duke’s marriage (he has recently been windowed) to the daughter of another powerful family. As he shows the visitor through his palace, he stops before a portrait of the last Duchess, apparently a young and lovely girl. The Duke begins reminiscing about the portrait. His musings give way to a diatribe on her disgraceful behavior: he claims she flirted with everyone and did not appreciate his “gift of a nine - hundred - years - old name”. As his monologue continues, the reader realizes with ever – more chilling certainty that the Duke in fact caused the Duchess’s early demise: when her behavior escalated: “[He] have commands; Then all smiles stopped together”.

Conclusion
The Victorian era, begin with, these poets writing. These both are considered monologues, to another persona within the poem. Both do not break their rhyme and meter. Browning the class from of the heroic couplet and Tennyson uses the “In Memoriam” stanza, a stanza structure that he has created specifically for this poem and that consists of four lines of iambic tetrameter rhyming ABAB. So we can say that they are extremely good Victorian poet because of their collection of wonderful.

click hear evaluate my assignment 

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)