Analysis of "After great pain, a formal feeling comes"
What the speaker says in the first
stanza explains how after a time of great pain or sorrow, an individual
experiences a type of numbness. This numbness is like the silence of a formal
event, maybe an event such as a funeral as suggested by the mention of "Tombs."
This is the period in the lifetime of pain in which the individual questions if
this is truly happening to them and also how long they've been experiencing the
numbness. Also the reader sees in the first stanza a type of dehumanization of
the individual who experiences the pain as exhibited by describing the
individual in terms of their nerves and heart. This use of synecdoche serves to
exhibit how pain overwhelms an individual.
In the second stanza the speaker
discusses how an individual attempts to function when they are overwhelmed by
pain. They go through life mechanically and with little purpose. They merely do
what is necessary to maintain a semblance of life though inside they feel very
little, as if they are dead. Inside they have "a Quartz contentment, like
a stone," and this implies that what they experience has numbed them
inside. This could also be another symbol of death because many tombs are made
of stone, and of course a tomb is a fairly formal setting.
The final stanza relates how an
individual feels after they have passed the period of numbness and pain. They
remember as a time of necessity and dread. The speaker calls it the "Hour
of Lead," and this name shows how an individual drags himself through this
time without feeling, much like a nonliving item. Only after a long time can a
person remember the experience and finally let go of the pain and become part
of the living once more.
To me, this poem seemed very accurate but to the point of exaggeration. Of course an individual experiences a type of uncaring following a traumatic event such as the death of a loved one but the speaker suggests that the person barely functions after the event. I've been through a few traumatic experiences but I am stronger because of them and I never truly became numb.
Aristotle's Theory of Poetic Imitation
Aristotle's Theory of Poetic Imitation
Plato was the first to use the word “imitation” in
relation with poetry, but Aristotle breathed into it a new definite meaning. So
poetic imitation is no longer considered mimicry, but is regarded as an act of
imaginative creation by which the poet, drawing his material from the
phenomenal world, makes something new out of it.
In Aristotle's view, principle of imitation
unites poetry with other fine arts and is the common basis of all the fine
arts. It thus differentiates the fine arts from the other category of arts.
While Plato equated poetry with painting, Aristotle equates it with music. It
is no longer a servile depiction of the appearance of things, but it becomes a
representation of the passions and emotions of men which are also imitated by
music. Thus Aristotle by his theory enlarged the scope of imitation. The poet
imitates not the surface of things but the reality embedded within.
The medium of the poet and the painter are
different. One imitates through form and colour, and the other through
language, rhythm and harmony. The musician imitates through rhythm and harmony.
Thus, poetry is more akin to music. Further, the manner of a poet may be purely
narrative, as in the Epic, or depiction through action, as in drama. Even
dramatic poetry is differentiated into tragedy and comedy accordingly as it
imitates man as better or worse.
Aristotle says that the objects of poetic
imitation are “men in action”. The poet represents men as
worse than they are. He can represent men better than in real life based on
material supplied by history and legend rather than by any living figure. The
poet selects and orders his material and recreates reality. He brings order out
of Chaos. The irrational or accidental is removed and attention is focused on
the lasting and the significant. Thus he gives a truth of an ideal kind. His
mind is not tied to reality: “It is not the function of the poet to
relate what has happened but what may happen – according to the laws of
probability or necessity.”
History tells us what actually happened; poetry
what may happen. Poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular.
In this way, he exhibits the superiority of poetry over history. The poet freed
from the tyranny of facts, takes a larger or general view of things, represents
the universal in the particular and so shares the philosopher’s quest for
ultimate truth. He thus equates poetry with philosophy and shows that both are
means to a higher truth. By the word ‘universal’ Aristotle
signifies: “How a person of a certain nature or type will, on a
particular occasion, speak or act, according to the law of probability or
necessity.”
The poet constantly rises from the particular to
the general. He studies the particular and devises principles of general
application. He exceeds the limits of life without violating the essential laws
of human nature.
Elsewhere Aristotle says, “Art imitates
Nature”. By ‘Nature’ he does not mean the outer world of
created things but “the creative force, the productive principle of the
universe.” Art reproduce mainly an inward process, a physical energy
working outwards, deeds, incidents, situation, being included under it so far
as these spring from an inward, act of will, or draw some activity of thought
or feeling. He renders men, “as they ought to be”.
The poet imitates the creative process of
nature, but the objects are “men in action”. Now the ‘action’ may
be ‘external’ or ‘internal’. It may be the action
within the soul caused by all that befalls a man. Thus, he brings human
experiences, emotions and passions within the scope of poetic imitation.
According to Aristotle's theory, moral qualities, characteristics, the
permanent temper of the mind, the temporary emotions and feelings, are all
action and so objects of poetic imitation.
Poetry may imitate men as better or worse than
they are in real life or imitate as they really are. Tragedy and epic represent
men on a heroic scale, better than they are, and comedy represents men of a
lower type, worse than they are. Aristotle does not discuss the third
possibility. It means that poetry does not aim at photographic realism. In this
connection R. A. Scott-James points out that: “Aristotle knew nothing
of the “realistic” or “fleshy” school of fiction – the school of Zola or of
Gissing.” Abercrombie, in contrast, defends Aristotle for not
discussing the third variant. He says: “It is just possible to imagine
life exactly as it is, but the exciting thing is to imagine life as it might
be, and it is then that imagination becomes an impulse capable of inspiring
poetry.”
Aristotle by his theory of imitation answers the
charge of Plato that poetry is an imitation of “shadow of shadows”, thrice
removed from truth, and that the poet beguiles us with lies. Plato condemned
poetry that in the very nature of things poets have no idea of truth. The
phenomenal world is not the reality but a copy of the reality in the mind of
the Supreme. The poet imitates the objects and phenomena of the world, which
are shadowy and unreal. Poetry is, therefore, “the mother of lies”.
Aristotle, on the contrary, tells us that art
imitates not the mere shows of things, but the ‘ideal reality’ embodied
in very object of the world. The process of nature is a ‘creative process’;
everywhere in ‘nature there is a ceaseless and upward progress’ in everything,
and the poet imitates this upward movement of nature. Art reproduces the
original not as it is, but as it appears to the senses. Art moves in a world of
images, and reproduces the external, according to the idea or image in his
mind. Thus the poet does not copy the external world, but creates according to
his ‘idea’ of it. Thus even an ugly object well-imitated
becomes a source of pleasure. We are told in “The Poetics”: “Objects
which in themselves we view with pain, we delight to contemplate when
reproduced with minute fidelity; such as the forms of the most ignoble animals
and dead bodies.”
The real and the ideal from Aristotle's point of
view are not opposites; the ideal is the real, shorn of chance and accident, a
purified form of reality. And it is this higher ‘reality’ which is
the object of poetic imitation. Idealization is achieved by divesting the real
of all that is accidental, transient and particular. Poetry thus imitates the
ideal and the universal; it is an “idealized representation of
character, emotion, action – under forms manifest in sense.” Poetic
truth, therefore, is higher than historical truth. Poetry is more
philosophical, more conducive to understanding than Philosophy itself.
Thus Aristotle successfully and finally refuted the charge of Plato and provided a defence of poetry which has ever since been used by lovers of poetry in justification of their Muse. He breathed new life and soul into the concept of poetic imitation and showed that it is, in reality, a creative process.
Analysis of "After great pain, a formal feeling comes"
Analysis of "After great pain, a formal feeling comes"
The central theme of this poem seems
to be the omniprescence and omnipotence of pain and how pain overwhelms an
individual to the point of unfeeling.
What the speaker says in the first stanza explains how after a time of
great pain or sorrow, an individual experiences a type of numbness. This
numbness is like the silence of a formal event, maybe an event such as a
funeral as suggested by the mention of "Tombs." This is the period in
the lifetime of pain in which the individual questions if this is truly happening
to them and also how long they've been experiencing the numbness. Also the
reader sees in the first stanza a type of dehumanization of the individual who
experiences the pain as exhibited by describing the individual in terms of
their nerves and heart. This use of synecdoche serves to exhibit how pain
overwhelms an individual.
In the second stanza the speaker
discusses how an individual attempts to function when they are overwhelmed by
pain. They go through life mechanically and with little purpose. They merely do
what is necessary to maintain a semblance of life though inside they feel very
little, as if they are dead. Inside they have "a Quartz contentment, like
a stone," and this implies that what they experience has numbed them inside.
This could also be another symbol of death because many tombs are made of
stone, and of course a tomb is a fairly formal setting.
The final stanza relates how an
individual feels after they have passed the period of numbness and pain. They
remember as a time of necessity and dread. The speaker calls it the "Hour
of Lead," and this name shows how an individual drags himself through this
time without feeling, much like a nonliving item. Only after a long time can a
person remember the experience and finally let go of the pain and become part
of the living once more.
To me, this poem seemed very accurate but to the point of exaggeration. Of course an individual experiences a type of uncaring following a traumatic event such as the death of a loved one but the speaker suggests that the person barely functions after the event. I've been through a few traumatic experiences but I am stronger because of them and I never truly became numb.
Short note on the Language theory and learning theory of ALM
Theory of language: The theory of language underlying the Audio-lingual Method is Structuralism. According to the structural view, language has the following characteristics:
<> Speech is more basic to language than the
written form.
<> Language structure and form are more significant
than meaning.
<> Elements in a language are produced in a
rule-governed (structural) way.
<> Language samples could be exhaustively described
at any structural level of description.
<> Language is structural like a pyramid, that is,
the linguistic level is a system within a system.
<> Languages are different since every language has
its own unique system.
Theory of Learning: The theory of learning
underlying the Audio-lingual Method is Behaviorism, including the following
principles:
<> Human beings learn language in the same way as
other habits are learned through the process of training or conditioning.
<> As language learning is a process of habit
formation, repetition leads to stronger habit formation and greater learning.
<> The learning of a foreign language should be the
same as the acquisition of the native language.
<> The habits of the native language will interfere
with target language learning.
<> Language cannot be separated from culture as
culture represents the everyday behaviour of the people who use the target
language.
<> Language learning is the outcome of stimulus
(what is taught) – response (learner’s reaction to what is being taught) –
reinforcement (approval or disapproval of the teacher) chain.
<> Positive reinforcement helps the students to
develop correct habits.
<> Mistakes should be avoided as they help to form
bad habits.
<> Analogy is a better foundation for language
learning than analysis.
Aristotle’s concept of tragedy
The very
word ‘tragedy’ brings to mind Aristotle and the Poetics. Aristotle
defines tragedy as, “a representation of an action that is worth serious
attention, complete in itself, and of some amplitude; in language enriched by a
variety of artistic devices appropriate to the several parts of the play;
presented in the from of action not narration; by means of pity and fear
bringing about the purgation of such emotions”. This definition has wide
implications. The definition clearly falls into two parts. The first part
tells us about the nature of tragedy, its object, manner, and medium of
imitation; the second part points out the function of tragedy.
After having given a
definition of tragedy, Aristotle comes to the consideration of the formative
elements of tragedy. He gives six formative elements of tragedy which
determine its quality, namely —Plot, Character, Thought, Diction
Spectacle and Song. Three of these i.e. Plot,
Character, and Thought are internal aspects; three, namely, Diction, Spectacle,
and Song, are external aspects.
Next, Aristotle
examines the plot of Tragedy. Tragedy imitates ‘actions’ and its plot consists
of a logical and in evitable sequence of events. The action must be complete,
i. e. it must have a beginning, middle and an end. The beginning is that from
which further action flows out, and which is intelligible, and not consequent
of dependent on any previous situation. A satisfying end is that which follows
inevitably from what has gone before, but which dose not lead to further
action. The middle is that which follows inevitably upon what has gone before,
and also leads on to an inevitable conclusion.
The action of a tragedy
must be of a certain, ‘magnitude’, and the word may be taken to have been used
in the sense of, ‘size’ or, ‘length’. It must be long enough to permit an
orderly development of action to a catastrophe. Too short an action cannot be
regarded as proper and beautiful. Neither should it be too long.
Aristotle divided the
plot of tragedies into two kinds 1) simple and 2) complex. A simple plot
is that in which the change in the fortune of the hero takes place without
property and discovery. A complex plot is that in which change of is
accompanied by a discovery or a reversal or both. Aristotle prefers a complex
plot, for it startles and captures attention most effectively.
The function of tragedy,
Aristotle says, is to present scenes of “fear and pity”, and thus to bring
about a ‘catharsis’ of these emotions. But he does not supply any expiation of
this function, so it is variously interpreted. Characterization has been placed
next to plot in “The poetics”, perfect. Aristotle is ambiguous in relation to
the term “appropriateness of the characters”. Either they must be life like or
true representative of actual human nature.
As regards the
characters in a Tragedy, Aristotle likes the playwright to aim at four things.
First, the character should be good. Secondly, the portrayal should be
appropriate. Thirdly, the characters should be life-like. Last , the characters
should have consistency. In general, the ideal tragic hero should be neither
too good nor too bad. He should be the intermediate kind of personage, one not
pre-eminently virtuous and just whose misfortune is brought about by hamartia,
i. e. an error of judgment.
Aristotle’s conception
of the tragic hero finds in Chapter XIII of the poetics. The feelings
of pity and fear, according to Aristotle, are the distinctive mark of
tragic imitation. It therefore follows that the change of fortune in tragedy
must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man falling from prosperity to adversity
because this kind of thing would merely shock us and would excite neither pity
nor fear. Similarly, a bad man must not be shown in tragedy as passing from
adversity to prosperity because this sort of thing would be absolutely alien to
the spirit of tragedy.
The Greek conception of
tragedy was different from the modern conception. Today, we regard Tragedy
as a story with an unhappy ending. But this was not the Greek conception. Greek
tragedies were serious in tone, but many of them had happy endings.
In conclusion, it should be noted that Aristotle’s theory of Tragedy is entirely based on the Greek drama with which he was familiar. Hence, lies view are sometime limited and not universal. But he is in the real sense, the founder of literary views and theories upon which the subsequent literary aesthetics have more securely based themselves. His views on tragedy are the ‘history’ of tragedy.
THEME & CRITICAL APPRECIATION OF “DADDY” by Sylvia Plath
THEME & CRITICAL APPRECIATION OF “DADDY”
On the hand “DADDY” is strongly autobiographical, a story of suppressed soul having the natural desire to be loved on the extreme level. On the other hand “DADDY” is the representative of the collective identity of crushed femininity by male-dominated society. Moreover “DADDY” is an unrestrained outburst of a woman who after unending suffering decides to end her life with her own hands uttering.
“I’m through.”
From very beginning of the poem, SYLVIA PLATH confesses that not only in her childhood when her father was alive but also she haunted by her father’s personality even for her whole life. Her father had completely overpowered her for her whole life though she died when she was eight.
“For thirty years, poor and white
Barely daring to breath or Achoo.”
Stunning enough in the second stanza of the poem, SYLVIA PLATH expresses her hatred towards her father as:
“DADDY”, I have had to kill you
You died before I had time….
But as the poem proceeds, complex attitude of SYLVIA PLATH is suicide to be with dead father.
I was ten when they buried you.
At twenty I tried to die
And get back, back, back to you
To present her utter hate to her father, SYLVIA PLATH uses allusion of Holocaust Jews, Swastika & Fascism to emphasise the idea of the oppressor and the oppressed. She is quite successful in presenting the oppression of her father but that is not enough, she admits her ambivalent nature as:
Every woman adores a Fascist
The boot in the face, the brute
Brute heart of a brute like you
Not that alone, SYLVIA PLATH’s life afterward became more frustrated when her own choice, her most violently loved husband, Ted Hughes left her for a woman. It is very important to note that SYLVIA PLATH has suicidal death as well as the woman did the same thing for whom Ted Hughes left SYLVIA PLATH. It was not a coincidence that SYLVIA established relation with a person who was like her father in appearance. As the time passed, their relationship became more and more hopeless and SYLVIA had to say:
If I’ve killed one woman, I’ve killed two…
The VAMPIRE who said he was you
The images of her father and husband merge into each other and at last in concluding stanza hate overpower SYLVIA. Her conscience becomes the villagers as:
And the villagers never liked you
They are dancing and stamping on you….
DADDY, DADDY, you bastard, I’m through
One of the most notable features of S. Plath’s poetry is her use of colour. Her images of “black shoe”, “grey toe”, “black man”, “black telephone”, “Daddy’s black fat heart”, all serve the purpose dark and morbid things while speaker’s own pretty red heart represents purity and passion which is obviously in contrast with the former.
To conclude, we can say unhesitatingly that “DADDY” is truly a haunting poem because it basically explains SYLVIA PLATH’s descent into depression and then suicide. A prominent critic rightly observes the poem “DADDY” as:
“Graphically macabre, hallucinatory in their imagery, but
full of ironic wit, technical brilliance and tremendous
emotional power, poetry of this order is a murderous art”
==========;==========
A Brief Summary of Aristotle’s “Poetics”
Aristotle opens the Poetics by defining poetry as Mimesis or imitation. Imitation is the common principle of all arts. Some arts imitate by means of colour and shape; while some imitate by means of voice.
Aristotle never gives an explicit analysis of the term
‘imitation.’ He has taken the term from Plato, who believes that art is the
copy of the copy, twice removed from truth. Aristotle’s conception of imitation
is a corrective to Plato. Art imitates the world of man’s mind. Art is not mere
imitation. It is a re-creation. “Poetry is something more philosophic and of
graver import than history, since its statement are of the nature rather of
universals, whereas those of history are singulars.”
Poetry, according to Aristotle, is imitation of men in
action. They may be even as they are. In Tragedy, men are better than they are,
while in Comedy men are worse than they are. In Tragedy, the characters are
good, but if they are almost deified they cannot rouse our sympathy. Similarly
in Comedy, the men are worse than they are. They are worse than common men not
as regards any and every sort of fault, but only as regards one particular
kind, the ridiculous which is a species of the ugly.
Aristotle divides the poetry into the narrative and dramatic.
The narrative poetry is known as the Epic, while dramatic poetry is Tragedy or
Comedy. Whenever there was the imitation of the good and noble, there was the
birth of Tragedy and Epic; when the poets imitated the ignoble and the mean,
they produced Comedy and Satire.
Epic poetry and Tragedy have been contrasted by Aristotle.
They have three similarities; 1) they are metrical, 2) they are imitations of
serious subjects in a grand style, and 3) the poets try to idealize the
characters. Meanwhile, the differences between them are; 1) the Epic is in
narrative form, written in one single kind of verse or metre, while Tragedy is
written in a number of metres. 2) an Epic does not observe the unity of time,
it may cover many days, while Tragedy observes the unity of time and endeavours
to keep within a single circuit of the sun, i.e. one day.
Tragedy is an imitation of an action; the language will have
pleasant accessories, which means language, rhythm and tune. The action of the
Tragedy should be complete. It must have a beginning, middle and end. If there
is an abrupt beginning, it will not be intelligible to the readers or the
audience. The length of the play must also be appropriate, neither too short
nor too long. If it is too short or too long, the unity and wholeness of it
will be lost sight of. The end must also be emotionally and intellectually
satisfying. He said that the end of Tragedy is Catharsis or Purgation or
emotional relief. The direct object of Tragedy is to arouse pity and fear – the
pity of the audience is for the hero, while the fear is for themselves.
A Tragedy, according to Aristotle, has six parts of elements;
Plot, Character, Thought, Diction or Language, Melody or Music, and Spectacle.
Plot is the soul of Tragedy. It must be a complete whole and should have
logical coherence. The plot of Tragedy should deal with ideal or universal
truth. Plot are generally divided into two types – simple and complex. A simple
plot is a plot without peripeteia and anagnorisis, while a complex is one
having peripeteia or anagnorisis both. Peripeteia means the change of fortune;
and anagnorisis means discovery, recognition or revelation. The third element
in plot, beside peripeteia and anagnorisis, is tragic suffering, i.e. murder or
persecution displayed on stage.
Aristotle is in favour of avoiding three types of plot. A
good man must not be seen passing from happiness to misery, or a bad man from
misery to happiness. If it happens, it may be morally satisfying, but
nevertheless it will not move us to pity or fear.
As regards the characters in a Tragedy, Aristotle likes the
playwright to aim at four things. First, the character should be good.
Secondly, the portrayal should be appropriate. Thirdly, the characters should
be life-like, i.e. true to type and equally true to human nature. Last, the
characters should have consistency.
In general, the ideal tragic hero should be neither too good
nor too bad. He should be the intermediate kind of personage, one not
pre-eminently virtuous and just whose misfortune is brought about by hamartia,
i.e. an error of judgment.
In Tragedy, according to Aristotle, has six types of
discovery. First, the discovery by means of signs or tokens. These signs may be
congenital, or they may be acquired, for example, in Ulysses, the nurse could
identify Ulysses through his scar. Second, the self revelation of a person. For
example, in Iphigenia in Tauris, Orestes reveals himself to his sister. Third,
the discovery through the effect of associations. For example, in the Tale of
Alcinous, Ulysses weeps when the minstrel’s harp reawakens the past for him.
Fourth, The discovery as the result of reasoning. For example, in the
Chouphori, there is a statement “Someone who is like me has come; no one is
like me except Orestes; therefore it is Orestes who has come.” Fifth, It arises
from the fallacious reasoning. For example, In Odysseus the False Messenger,
the speaker said that he would know the bow, which he had not seen. It is
obviously absurd that a person should recognize a thing hither to unknown.
Sixth, the discovery which is brought about by the incidents themselves.
Every Tragedy must have its complication and its
denouement. Complication means that part of the story from the beginning to the
stage immediately before the significant change to good or bad fortune. And by
denouement is meant the part from this change to the end of the Tragedy. The
deepening of the plot is ‘complication’, and the unravelling of complication is
‘denouement’. A master artist should know them well. There are four types of
Tragedy – Complex Tragedy which depends exclusively on peripeteia and
anagnorisis, Tragedy of Character which emphasizes the moral character of the
hero, Tragedy of Suffering which deals with the suffering of the hero as in the
play of Ajax, and Spectacular Tragedy which offers excellent spectacles as in
Peleus.
Aristotle also defines a letter, a vowel, a semi-vowel, a
syllable, a connecting-word, an article, a noun, a verb, case, inflexion, and a
phrase. He also dwells at length on metaphors. The language abounding in an
unfamiliar usages has some dignity, for it is lofty. There are two main
extremes – meanness and extravagance, which are to be avoided. The best
language must be that lying in the middle of them.
Aristotle’s discussion of Epic poetry is rather fragmentary.
This is partly because much of what he has written on Tragedy applies to Epic
also. Like a Tragedy, an Epic should also deal with single event. The action
should be single, whole and complete, having a beginning, middle and end. As
Tragedy, it also can be divided into two groups – simple and complex. The
simple Epic turns on the moral character of the hero while the complex Epic
turns on suffering and passion. Heroic hexameter is the right metre for an
Epic. An Epic poet should speak as little as possible in his own person. In an
Epic, the element of the marvellous should be introduced. Probable
impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
About Criticism, he says that the poet should aim at the representation
of life: and there are ways of representation – either as they are, or as they
are said to be or seem to be, or as they ought to be. In poetry,
improbabilities may be justified as long as the art attains its true end. It
also may be justified on the ground that they idealize the reality. They may
also be poetically true, though not actually true.
In the last section of the Poetics, Aristotle discusses the
relative merits of Epic and Tragedy. In Epic, it free from the vulgarity of
acting; while in Tragedy, the vulgarity is the fault of the actors. Aristotle
insists that Tragedy is the better form of art as it has all element of Epic,
besides, it also has music and spectacle to which Epic can lay on claims. Its
effect is more compact and concentrated, and also more unity than Epic. That’s
why he said that Tragedy is the better form of art.
A Brief Introduction on Poetics
Plato was the first to use the word “imitation” in relation with poetry, but Aristotle breathed into it a new definite meaning. So poetic imitation is no longer considered mimicry, but is regarded as an act of imaginative creation by which the poet, drawing his material from the phenomenal world, makes something new out of it.
In Aristotle's view, principle of imitation unites poetry with
other fine arts and is the common basis of all the fine arts. It thus
differentiates the fine arts from the other category of arts. While Plato
equated poetry with painting, Aristotle equates it with music. It is no longer
a servile depiction of the appearance of things, but it becomes a
representation of the passions and emotions of men which are also imitated by
music. Thus Aristotle by his theory enlarged the scope of imitation. The poet
imitates not the surface of things but the reality embedded within.
The medium of the poet and the painter are different. One imitates
through form and colour, and the other through language, rhythm and harmony.
The musician imitates through rhythm and harmony. Thus, poetry is more akin to
music. Further, the manner of a poet may be purely narrative, as in the Epic,
or depiction through action, as in drama. Even dramatic poetry is
differentiated into tragedy and comedy accordingly as it imitates man as better
or worse.
Aristotle says that the objects of poetic imitation are “men
in action”. The poet represents men as worse than they are. He can
represent men better than in real life based on material supplied by history
and legend rather than by any living figure. The poet selects and orders his
material and recreates reality. He brings order out of Chaos. The irrational or
accidental is removed and attention is focused on the lasting and the
significant. Thus he gives a truth of an ideal kind. His mind is not tied to
reality: “It is not the function of the poet to relate what has
happened but what may happen – according to the laws of probability or necessity.”
History tells us what actually happened; poetry what may happen.
Poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular. In this way, he
exhibits the superiority of poetry over history. The poet freed from the
tyranny of facts, takes a larger or general view of things, represents the
universal in the particular and so shares the philosopher’s quest for ultimate
truth. He thus equates poetry with philosophy and shows that both are means to
a higher truth. By the word ‘universal’ Aristotle signifies: “How
a person of a certain nature or type will, on a particular occasion, speak or
act, according to the law of probability or necessity.”
The poet constantly rises from the particular to the general. He
studies the particular and devises principles of general application. He
exceeds the limits of life without violating the essential laws of human
nature.
Elsewhere Aristotle says, “Art imitates Nature”. By ‘Nature’ he
does not mean the outer world of created things but “the creative
force, the productive principle of the universe.” Art reproduce mainly
an inward process, a physical energy working outwards, deeds, incidents,
situation, being included under it so far as these spring from an inward, act
of will, or draw some activity of thought or feeling. He renders men, “as
they ought to be”.
The poet imitates the creative process of nature, but the objects
are “men in action”. Now the ‘action’ may be ‘external’ or ‘internal’.
It may be the action within the soul caused by all that befalls a man. Thus, he
brings human experiences, emotions and passions within the scope of poetic
imitation. According to Aristotle's theory, moral qualities, characteristics,
the permanent temper of the mind, the temporary emotions and feelings, are all
action and so objects of poetic imitation.
Poetry may imitate men as better or worse than they are in real
life or imitate as they really are. Tragedy and epic represent men on a heroic
scale, better than they are, and comedy represents men of a lower type, worse
than they are. Aristotle does not discuss the third possibility. It means that
poetry does not aim at photographic realism. In this connection R. A.
Scott-James points out that: “Aristotle knew nothing of the “realistic”
or “fleshy” school of fiction – the school of Zola or of Gissing.” Abercrombie,
in contrast, defends Aristotle for not discussing the third variant. He
says: “It is just possible to imagine life exactly as it is, but the
exciting thing is to imagine life as it might be, and it is then that
imagination becomes an impulse capable of inspiring poetry.”
Aristotle by his theory of imitation answers the charge of Plato
that poetry is an imitation of “shadow of shadows”, thrice
removed from truth, and that the poet beguiles us with lies. Plato condemned
poetry that in the very nature of things poets have no idea of truth. The
phenomenal world is not the reality but a copy of the reality in the mind of
the Supreme. The poet imitates the objects and phenomena of the world, which
are shadowy and unreal. Poetry is, therefore, “the mother of lies”.
Aristotle, on the contrary, tells us that art imitates not the
mere shows of things, but the ‘ideal reality’ embodied in very
object of the world. The process of nature is a ‘creative process’; everywhere
in ‘nature there is a ceaseless and upward progress’ in everything, and the
poet imitates this upward movement of nature. Art reproduces the original not
as it is, but as it appears to the senses. Art moves in a world of images, and
reproduces the external, according to the idea or image in his mind. Thus the
poet does not copy the external world, but creates according to his ‘idea’ of
it. Thus even an ugly object well-imitated becomes a source of pleasure. We are
told in “The Poetics”: “Objects which in themselves we
view with pain, we delight to contemplate when reproduced with minute fidelity;
such as the forms of the most ignoble animals and dead bodies.”
The real and the ideal from Aristotle's point of view are not
opposites; the ideal is the real, shorn of chance and accident, a purified form
of reality. And it is this higher ‘reality’ which is the object of
poetic imitation. Idealization is achieved by divesting the real of all that is
accidental, transient and particular. Poetry thus imitates the ideal and the
universal; it is an “idealized representation of character, emotion,
action – under forms manifest in sense.” Poetic truth, therefore, is
higher than historical truth. Poetry is more philosophical, more conducive to
understanding than Philosophy itself.
Thus Aristotle successfully and finally refuted the charge of
Plato and provided a defence of poetry which has ever since been used by lovers
of poetry in justification of their Muse. He breathed new life and soul into
the concept of poetic imitation and showed that it is, in reality, a creative
process.
Differences between terms 'Approaches and Methods' of ELT
Five differences between the terms 'Approaches and Methods'
are given below:
|
S.N |
Approach |
Method |
|
1 |
An approach refers to the general assumptions about what language is
and about how learning a language occurs (Richards and Rodgers, 1986). In other word
approach refers to an act or means
of coming near
or approaching as in the
expression ‘made an
approach’. |
A method is a practical implementation of an approach or it is a word
meaning ‘a way’ or ‘a process’. |
|
2 |
Someone approach
a problem with a view to tackle it. So the word ‘approach’ is based on
‘tackling’ things. |
Someone resort
to a method with a view to solving
a problem. So the word ‘method’ is based on solving problems. |
|
3 |
The
approach is just a concept. |
Method
is a step by step procedure. |
|
4 |
Someone will
fail to tackle problems if his/her approach is not good and effective. |
Someone will
fail to solve the problems if his/her method is wrong or ineffective |
|
5 |
An approach to a business problem
will pave the way for the
finding of a method to solve it. |
The
approach has to be good for the method to
follow. |
