Ben Jonson’s Criticism

Introduction

Ben Jonson is a poet and dramatist than a critic.  There is plenty of criticism in his poems, plays, prefaces and in his dedications.  “Timber” or “Discoveries” is one of his famous critical work.  In all his criticism, he wanted writers to write well not by chance but knowingly.  All Ben Jonson’s plays are modeled on the Latin drama.  In his criticism, he follows Aristotle and Horace.  “Discoveries” is a collection of notes that he made from time to time.

His Classicism

Jonson did not like the classic for their own sake but he wanted to raise the English standards on par with the Greek and Latin.  English literature, according to Ben Jonson, had passion, imagination and expression in excess.  Even Shakespeare had everything in excess.  Jonson found well-tried law in “Poetics”.  In his notes, he talks about the need of unity of action and unity of time.  A story is an imitation of one action.  A plot must have a beginning, a middle and an end.  Action in a comedy or tragedy should be fit; it should give rise to the conclusion of the play.  Jonson says that a play can exceed the 24 hours time because life has so many digressions, so art can also have digressions.  Every part of a play should be one and whole.

The Qualifications of a Poet

Jonson, like Sidney, calls a poet a ‘maker’ or ‘feigner’.  Like Sidney, he calls poetry as the queen of arts.  There are five requirements for a good poet: what he should be by nature, by exercise, by imitation, by study and by art.  Poetry is largely an outcome of training and practice.  A poet or the maker should have good natural wit.  To perfect a poem a pet should imitate nature.  He can also imitate what others have said.  Jonson also asks the poets to study.  He believes in Bacon’s statement – ‘reading maketh a full man’.  He follows Aristotle and Horace and says that art can lead a poet to perfection.

His Observation on Style

Ben Jonson is against the Elizabethan use of extravagant expression.  He has no use for words for their own sake.  Words mean thoughts.  Words are like the relation between body and soul.  Words are lifeless without soul.  It should be used aptly.  To use words one should require three necessities – to the read the best authors, observe the best speakers and exercise of his own.  He  repeats his remarks on imitation, when he talks about reading the best author.  He thinks that our mind and memory are sharpened when we read other writers.  The same will happen when a writer listens to a good speech.  A writer should not be content with the first word and with the first arrangement of words.  He should revise them repeatedly and arrive at the best.  A writer should write for the learned people.  He can use ancient words, which are majestic.

Estimates on Bacon and Shakespeare

In his critical works, Ben Jonson talks about Montaigne, Spenser, Marlowe, Sidney, Donne, Bacon and Shakespeare.  Bacon passes the test fully.  According to Jonson, Bacon spoke neatly, more weightily and suffered less emptiness and idleness.  His own writings resembled Bacon’s.  bacon, according to Jonson, would say twenty things in ten words.  Shakespeare is an honest and open natured poet.  He has brave notions and gentle expressions.  He has powerful wit.  He frames his own rules with his wit and he succeeds.  He has more virtues than vices.  He is someone to be praised than to be pardoned.

His Liberal Concept of Rules

Jonson also talks about the rules given by the ancients.  He wants a writer to read and learn as much as possible.  He never advises them to rest in the soul authority of what they read.  If a writer finds some truth and fitness that the ancients haven’t found he can say it in his own way.  A writer can consider the classics as their guides and not as commanders.

Conclusion/The Value of His Criticism

Jonson saw some danger in the English literature.  Shakespeare and Bacon had their own lights to guide them but not other writers.  Jonson in his criticism, address to the other English writers.  He is not against new paths, provided they conform to nature and reason.  He also advises critics.  he asks critics to look at the intricacies of poetic art.  To judge a poet one must be a best poet.  To sum up Ben Jonson’s criticism we can use the word ‘the curb’ – the necessity of submission to a code of conduct both on the part of the writer and the critic.

summary of Stephen Leacock's "With The Photographer"

            Stephen Leacock is a modern English prose writer.  He has written many prose pieces.  All his prose pieces are known for their subtle humour.  They talk about real life situation.  With The Photographer is a short prose that describes the Leacock’s experience with a photographer.  Leacock, as is the regular case, gets a bitter experience.

Leacock goes to a photographer to get himself photographed.  He waits for an hour and he is called into the inner room.  The photographer is a grave man.  The photographer is not satisfied with the Leacock’s face.  He says that Leacock looks ugly.  He then concludes that he would shoot three quarter view of Leacock.  Leacock acknowledges this and starts reasoning about the decision but the photographer do not respond or care for what Leacock is talking. 

The photographer hides himself behind the camera and comes out of it.  He comes close to Leacock.  Leacock thinks that the photographer is going to kiss him but he turns Leacock’s face that would be good for a pose.  The photographer gives a series of instructions like close mouth, droop ears, roll eyes, turn face, expand lungs, etc., to Leacock.  Leacock is confused and he is frightened.  Leacock becomes impatient, he scolds the photographer, and the photographer clicks a shot.  Leacock is shocked.

The photographer asks Leacock to check the proof on Saturday and the photograph would be delivered by Sunday.  On Saturday Leacock is further shocked on seeing the proof.  The photographer says that he has edited the eyebrows and the mouth.  He also plans to edit his ears.  Leacock shouts at the photographer asking for a photograph that would resemble him.  He says that he loves his original face than the altered one.  He leaves the photo studio with tears.

Summary of R. Parthasarathy’s Exile from Homecoming

R. Parthasarathy is a famous Indian English poet.   He hails from the southern parts of India.  As the title, Exile from Homecoming, announces, R. Parthasarathy comes home after spending sometime abroad, but he is not able to fit himself in the current scenario culturally, linguistically, sociologically and psychologically.  The poem builds on the idea of the poet feeling exile and isolated, in spite of familiar things that surround him.

            The persona opens the poem by sharing his linguistic instability or inability.  He accepts that his tongue is been tied by English and he is not fluent with Tamil, as he was abroad.  He expects people to speak good Tamil, as been used in good old Tamil literature and scriptures.  His expectations are in vain and his hopes vanish, when he hears people use Tamil that is articulated by the characters in celluloid world or cinema.

            The persona moves on to brief his attempts to establish relation with his relatives.  The family members gather at a Tiruchchenur for family function, which happens after 1959, when his grandfather died.  They come in crowded buses loaded with dust of many years of memory.  The relatives gather in groups and sit without much formality.  They ear the packed food they have brought for lunch.  He looks at Sundari, probably his relative, who had once climbed up and down a tamarind tree with the poet.  She is married and has three daughters clinging to her like three planets.  The poet cannot relate himself with his relatives and with the circumstances.  He stays aloof and he claims expertise when it comes to farewell.  He feels guilty of losing his familiar tradition.  He regrets for throwing stones from a glass house built by his father.  He has evaded from his father’s footprints and he hopes that his son will not follow him in the future.

            The poet walks near river Vaigai that flows in Madurai, his hometown.  He is not satisfied with the sight it offers him.  He calls it as river once and not as a river.  The river is barren and empty without water.  Boys get into the river to play with paper boats.  Buffaloes also loiter in the river and they diminish it into a pond.  It is filled with hair and stale flowers.  Though the banks of the river are full of temples and other sacred things, the happenings inside the river are mean and degrading.  No emperor or poet can talk or boast of river Vaigai.  Not even birds like kingfisher and egrets come to river Vaigai. 

            The poet walks home.  The roads are dusty, which fills his eyes.  The streets are jammed with traffic.  His thoughtful walk is answered by the barking dogs.  He goes home and climbs up the stairs carefully only to be tripped off over the mat.

            The poet persona becomes fed up with things around the world.  He considers himself as a poet and a creator.  All he could do is defined a poet.  He looks himself as a poet and comes out defining him.  A poet is someone who becomes fat (fills his brain) by reading many old poems and poets.  He also reads more commentaries.  He is been invited to conferences and sometimes to schools and colleges to teach.  The poet is against himself being a poet and abuses himself of being one.

            The poet persona is finally willing to retire from life, yet he is not content with life.  He establishes himself as a freelancer.  He prays to god that a few of his articles should be published in newspapers and his prayers are sometimes answered.  He concludes the poem with a compelling thought of contentment that he should go through his life with “small change of uncertainities.”

COMPARATIVE LITERATURE AND TRANSLATION STUDIES

            Some critics consider comparative literature as a subject and some do not consider it as a subject.  However, comparative literature depends very much on translation. Translation studies promote comparative literature.

            Comparative literature is a reaction against the narrow 19^th century nationalism.  It is originated in France in the year 1816.  Matthew Arnold popularized the term in England in 1848, through his lectures.

            Comparative literature is a study of intertextuality, for example, if we have to compare an English novel with that of an Oriya novel, we have to use English or Oriya as out medium.  Certain conditions determine high translation activities.  According to Evan Zohr, translation activity takes place when the literature is in its initial stage or when it is marginal.  For example, in 12^th century Europe the translation activity was significant because of a shift from epic to romance.

            In India there is craze for translation in recent times for two reasons:

1)      The writers or the critics want their literature to be translated into English or any other language because they want others to notice their literature and language.

2)      When their literature is translated there is so much scope of comparing their literature with other literary texts and its own text in source language.

Derrida’s theory of translation is very important.  He does not consider the source text as original because it is an elaboration of an idea, of a meaning and it in itself is a translation.   This idea about the original translation makes us conclude that translation is no more a secondary work.

To conclude, we could quote Susan Bassnett, who says “We should look upon translation studies as the principle discipline from now on, with comparative literature as a valued but subsidiary subject area.”

Biography - The Genre

What is Biography?

Biography, as an art form, developed recently.  Suetonius Lives of Caesars and Plutarch’s Lives are classical biographies, which are in the form of odd notes.  John Aubrey’s Brief Lives written in the 17^th century is more of a gossip.

In 1683, Dryden used the term ‘biography’ for the first time.  He defined biography as “the history of particular men’s lives.”  It does not have a proper form.  It is not governed by any artistic principle.  The Oxford dictionary defines biography as “history of lives of individual men as a branchy of literature.”  Harold Nicolson defines biography as “a truthful record of an individual, composed as a work of art”

Biography differs from history.  It is a record of the life of one individual.  It studies its subject both within and without.  The character and exploits of the subject are most important.  Biography should be no more than a formal praise than a verbal attack.  It should be a faithful picture of a subject, with virtues and faults.  Biography should be work of art, something that will leave the reader a lasting impression.  It should rebuild a living man from his death.  An ideal biography is like a novel of character with verifiable facts.  Apart from the artistic quality, a biography should also be helpful to a historian by giving the details of contemporary history.  A biographer must be truthful and beauty comes from it.

Pure and Impure Biography

            Pure biography would give a perfect picture of the development of both the external and the inner life of its subject.  A few factors may intervene as a hindrance to achieve it and this makes it impure.  The most common of the factors is to conceal the truth and speak nothing but good of the subject.  The Victorian biographers talk only about the virtues and the modern biographers talk only about the foibles.  Both are wrong.

The second factor making for impurity is author’s own views and prejudices.  The author must stand away from the subject so that he can view it clearly.  He must avoid his personal interest and have only professional interest.  The author should not substitute moral and other utilitarian aims in his biography.  Biography must stand or fall for itself.  It must be faithful to the history of the human soul.

Basis of Biographical Instinct

The basic instinct of biography is man.  The biographer should capture the individuality of his subject and show the common touch of humanity.  As in novel, biography’s psychological element has become more interesting and significant than mere record of events.

Difficulties of the Biographer

            It is extremely difficult for a biographer to present a life of a man who is not of his age.  Biography is a herculean task in which failure is more likely than success.  Another important difficulty is that it is difficult to contain a life history within certain pages.  Doing full justice to human life is impossible.  The next difficulty is that half of man is his thought.  It is difficult is bring the thought process of another man in the biography.  Even then English literature is rich with its biographies.

Modern Tendencies

            In modern days, biographers are intended in ruthless dissection of the subject.  Debunking is the popular used for biographies which talks about human weakness.  They belittle the characters by magnifying their trivial matters.  In modern days, application of psychology has resulted in over emphasizing certain motives.  Modern biographers are also interested in presenting the exact social background and environment of their subject.  The biographer must therefore be a historian, philosopher and a psychologist.