Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot | Imitations of Horace by Alexander Pope | Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. John Arbuthnot was a close friend of Alexander Pope, Jonathan Swift, John Gay, and other Augustan satirists of the Enlightenment age. Together, they made the famous Marcus Scriblerus Club and often wrote critical satires against the corruption and other ills of the court and society. In 1733, Alexander Pope began writing Imitations of Horace which was a collection of satirical poems written in the style of classical poet Horace. Rather than being a mere translation, it was a modification of Horace’s poems in which Pope used contemporary references of his time and attacked the high and mighty of the society including King George II of Great Britain and Prime Minister Robert Walpole.

Originally Horace wrote the poem to satirize the rule of king Augustus. He was criticized because he questioned the usefulness of poets. Pope criticized King George II in his imitation though there hardly was any comparison between Augustus and King George II. While Augustus was a mighty ruler with exceptional qualities of leadership, integrity, sagacity, and intelligence, George II was a feeble figure with little control over the reign. Queen Caroline actually controlled the whole Royal power. George II was born in Hanover, Germany and he hardly had any touch with British culture, nor did he show any interest in learning the traditions of Great Britain. He became close to Robert Walpole who was notoriously famous for large-scale corruption in royal dealings. Thus, these two became the major target of Pope’s satirical poems. Horace’s patron for his satires was Maecenas while Bolingbro supported and inspired Pope to write his imitation. Maecenas offered the Sabine farm to Horace where he could write without interruption while Pope’s Sabine farm became the Twickenham.

Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot:

In 1734, Dr. Arbuthnot, who was the Royal physician of Queen Anne, wrote a letter to Pope in which he informed that he is suffering from a lethal illness. Arbuthnot expressed his concerns for the safety of Alexander Pope who had become quite infamous because of his continuous satirical works in which he openly named and criticized many people of power. Pope was grateful for Arbuthnot’s concerns and he was very sad about his ill health. Thus, he decided to write an Epistle as an answer to his letter. Pope was attacked and criticized by other authors in the meanest ways possible. He suffered from Pott disease, a kind of tuberculosis of the spine that rendered him with stunted growth and a severe hunchback. Those who couldn’t find a mistake in his writings, often drew caricatures of him in a bad light, attacking his physical inabilities. In the Epistle to Arbuthnot, Pope attacks the critics and writers attacking his literary works while he defends his style of satirical writing. Pope explains his character in this letter and courageously expresses that he is not afraid of his opponents though he is worried about those who pretend to be his friends.

In Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot, Pope explains his life, motives, and reasons for being a satirical poet. In a way, it is a poem concerning Pope’s self-justification and self-realization. He not only criticizes his detractors but also criticizes himself while praising Joseph Addison as a genius and good writer. He sketches himself as "an envious and malicious monster" whose "satire springs from a being devoid of all natural affections and lacking a heart." he criticizes many detractors including Sporus (John Hervey), Colley Cibber, Harley, Bavius, Bishop, Philips, and Sappho.

Initially, Pope wrote it as a simple letter but then he converted it into a dialogue between him and Arbuthnot. Epistle to Dr. Abuthnot was added as the preface or the first poem of Imitation of Horace in 1751. The poem is a long canonical poem containing 419 lines written in heroic couplets. Many of the phrases Pope invented and devised in this poem became hugely popular and noteworthy. Some of them are “damn with faint praise,” where Pope ridicules the flatterers who pretend to be his friends, and “Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel,” mentioning Lord Hervey and criticizing his torturous and corrupt behavior. Lord Hervey was a political advisor of Queen Caroline and he was too harsh against Alexander Pope. He made assumptions regarding some of Pope’s allusions with no true evidence they pertained to him. Mary Wortley Montague used to be a close friend of Alexander Pope and his patron but she took offense to Pope’s The First Satire of the Second Book of Horace (ll. 83–84) and joined Lord Hervey in criticizing him. Pope mentioned her too in the Epistle by her name Montague. The poem satirizes cowardly critics, hypocritical pedants, insipid patrons of the arts, and corrupt sycophants, and it caricatures Pope’s contemporaries.

The poem can be divided into seven parts or sections.

Summary of Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot:

First Section (Lines 1-68)

“Shut, shut the door, good John! fatigu’d I said, / Tye up the knocker, say I’m sick, I’m dead.”

The poem begins as Pope asks his male servant John to shut the doors. Pope doesn’t want to let the budding poets in his house and compares them with dogs and mad people who ran away from the mental institutes of Bedlam and Parnassus. These new authors and writers are the result of the new printing presses. They lack any quality and acumen of a writer yet, are attracted towards the profession because of the foolish patrons who think of making easy money. Such amateur poets continue to follow Pope everywhere he goes even in his lovely grotto.

“They pierce my Thickets, thro’ my Grot they glide.”

These writers come with their pens and papers, asking him to correct or improvise their sham writings. Some of them try to bribe and cajole Pope to correct their writing. Some others would try to coerce and threaten him or blackmail him so that he may amend their write-ups and their drama or poem may succeed and become famous. However, Pope is not afraid of anything and he denies helping them. Rather he offers them sane advice that of Horace and asks them to wait for nine years before publishing a poem. None of them agrees with him so he now wants John to shut the door.

Second Section (Lines 69-124)

After explaining his troubles of being famous, Pope explains how dangerous it can be. He says that though they pretend to be his admirers, most of them are his jealous detractors wishing to destroy him. He says that these poetasters and admirers are like Midas and are unreliable. He then criticizes such poets who used to be his admirers and then joined the gang of dunces. He ridicules Reverend Laurence Eusden, poet and clergyman, whose drunkenness while serving as poet laureate became legendary; James Moore Smythe, who adopted some of Pope’s work into poorly written drama and joined the dunces in their attacks; Edmund Curll, who published unauthorized work by others as well as notorious literature; and Bernard Lintot, a publisher of most of Pope’s early writing.

“And has not Colly still his Lord, and Whore: / His Butchers Henley, his Free-masons Moor?
Does not one Table Bavius still admit? / Still to one Bishop Philips seem a Wit?
Still Sapho—”Hold! For God-sake—you’ll offend; / No Names—be calm—learn Prudence of a Friend.” (97-102)

He then criticizes a few popular poets using their names including Colley, Henley, Bavius, Bishop Philips, and Sappho. Colley Cibber was the current poet laureate of Britain while Henley was a politician and public orator. Bavius was a poet who attacked and criticized the works of Virgil and Ovid. He criticized Alexander Pope’s works too.

Then Dr. Arbuthnot interrupts him and warns him not to use any names. He ridicules Pope and says that he too satirizes these people and though he is twice taller than Pope, he never uses any name directly. Dr. Arbuthnot advises Pope to learn prudence from him. Pope says that he would prefer to be brave and he is not afraid of taking names. Pope then further complains about the budding amateur writers who would often come to him with requests to amend their dramas and poems that have been rejected by the theatres and production companies. They will try to flatter him and say that his nose is longer than Ovid’s nose and he is better than Hercules or Alexander the Great. Pope says that he knows he is a pretty ordinary man and doesn’t fall into their trap.

Section Third (Lines 125-146)

In this section, Pope expresses how and why he became a satirical poet. He mentions that he was not good with numbers (mathematics) but when he tried, numbers (Poetic meters) naturally came to him. “I lisp’d in Numbers, for the Numbers came.” He says that poetry came naturally to him, by instinct. Nobody asked him to write poetry but he did it by himself. He writes because his friends like Swift, Granville, Congreve, John Gay, and William Walsh enjoyed reading his poetry. Dr. Arbuthnot questions him why he publishes his poetry if it is written for his close friends? Pope answers that his close friends push him to publish his work. Swift, Congreeve, and John Dryden himself convinced him to publish his poems because they liked them and wishes the general audience to cherish his work so Pope published them.

Section Fourth (Lines 147- 260)

Pope attacks critics in this section and says that during the initial days of his career, he used to write descriptive poetry with no ‘sense’ in it. His poetry was insipid and meaningless just like that of Lord Hervey. During those early days, he used to listen to the critics and was very concerned about their advice. But then he noticed that the critics, whose advice he meekly attempted to follow, had never written a word of poetry themselves. How then could they claim to evaluate John Milton and Shakespeare, much less the work of Alexander Pope and his contemporaries? He satirizes Ambrose Philips and declares him to be a plagiarist who copies works from Greek literature to earn money. He says that if Ambrose is forced to write original works only, he would fail to write any more than eight lines in a year.

Then he praises Joseph Addison and says that he learned a lot from Joseph Addison who is a genius writer and essayist. He says that Addison’s defect is that he wants to dominate the literary world. He thinks that he is the greatest of all writers. Pope calls him a coward because while he criticizes and ridicules other writers fiercely, he is afraid of being attacked by other writers himself.

“Curst be the Verse, how well soe’er it fl ow, / That tends to make one worthy Man my foe” (183– 184).

Pope then says that he is not the one who cannot praise the good work of others and he will never satirize anyone through his poetry just because they have hurt his vanity, though he has been criticized by others for hurting their false ego and vanity. Pope says that he criticizes and satirizes only those who deserve his criticism for their menial work and immoral behavior. He also satirizes foolish patrons like Lord Halifax who love being flattered. Pope says that Lord Halifax helps the poetasters who flatter him.

Section Five (Lines 261- 304)

In this section, Pope suggests that he is tired of his detractors and asks the poetasters to let him leave live in a peaceful manner. He says that there is no reason for them to be jealous of him because irrespective of the popularity of his works, he hardly made any money and he is burdened with debt. He says that he is no great person but someone very normal who prays to god every day. He says that only dunces fear him. A dunce is one “Who reads but with a Lust to mis-apply, / Make Satire a Lampoon, and Fiction, Lye.” However, “A Lash like mine no honest man shall dred, / But all such babbling blockheads in his stead” (303-304)

He says that only corrupt liars and fraudsters would fear his satire and works while a man with an honest heart and good intentions needs not to fear him because he will never criticize such an honest person.

Section Six (Lines 305-333)

In this section, Pope criticizes Lord Hervey by the name of Sporus. Dr. Arbuthnot interrupts him and questions if Hervey deserves any criticism as he is too foolish who drinks donkey’s milk and who is so torturous that he crushes butterflies in breaking wheels.

“. . . What? That Thing of silk, Sporus, / that mere white Curd of Ass’s milk?
Satire or Sense alas! Can Sporus feel? / Who breaks a Butterfl y upon a Wheel?” (305–309)

Pope says that such poetasters deserve his criticism because while trained eyes could see their faults, common people often mistake them to be great artists. He then caricatures Hervey as Sporus, whose “virtues” are twisted. He admires “Beauty that shocks you, Parts that none will trust, / Wit that can creep, and Pride that licks the dust” (332–33). he says that Hervey is a liar and flatterer who says anything to please the people in court and in government. He values glamour, sensual pleasure, and social climbing. Being a homosexual, Hervey is not only a man-woman but an animal demon, a shape-changer, like Satan. Hervey had attacked Pope most viciously and he even abused his family and parents.

Section Seven (Lines 334-419)

In the last section, Pope tries to convince Dr. Arbuthnot not to worry about him. He says that his close friend must believe Pope’s virtues and abilities. Pope describes himself as bold, and courageous who is not in fear of his detractors. He says that he never worried about wealth and fortune and thus he has never flattered anyone to gain their favor. He rather likes satirizing his enemies and critics. He claims that he was brought up well by his peace-loving parents, good citizens of England. They led a happy domestic life. Pope also wants to live a similar life. He concludes the poem by praying that Arbuthnot should lead a happy, peaceful, and prosperous life.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards.

The Man with The Blue Guitar by Wallace Stevens | Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Man with The Blue Guitar is a long abstract poem by Wallace Stevens that was published in the year 1937. The poem is divided into 33 sections and while each section can be read as a separate poem, Wallace maintains a consistent theme in all these sections and thus, these sections appear to be parts of a larger plot or greater picture of thoughts. Wallace used Parataxis throughout the poem to juxtapose a guitarist, or a musician, and the poet. The main theme of the poem is the difference between reality and imagination and how reality is dependent on perception. The poem suggests that each perception or experience of reality is unique and insightful. The guitar is used as a metaphor for an instrument of perception used by the musician who does not present the reality as it is but creates a new reality as a perception. The poet stresses that reality is an abstraction with many perspective possibilities.

Structure of The Man With The Blue Guitar:

The poem is divided into 33 short parts of cantos written in couplets. Each canto contains a varied number of couplets, some have five, and some have six or eight. There is no consistent rhyming pattern in the couplets though most of the lines are written in iambic tetrameter with specific use of enjambment. The poem follows Free verse with a few rhyming couplets. Wallace has used Onomatopoeia and Topopoeia to offer a sense of the four beats of a guitar. The poem appears as an improvisation of a musical composition and in each of the 33 cantos, Wallace has used a series of improvisation that offers a sense of jointness to the overall poem as one in which the poet offers different metaphors to explain the metamorphosis of the whole poem in parts. Wallace also used Anaphora, Assonance, Alliteration, Apostrophe, Irony, and Repetition. The poem is written as a dialogue between the man with the blue guitar and his audience, and thus, it continually shifts from third person to first person narrative. The poet is not only compared with a guitarist, but also with a painter or an actor, or any fine artist. He offers a similarity between poetry and painting and suggests that both present many perceptions of reality in place of reality itself.

Summary of The Man With The Blue Guitar:

“The man bent over his guitar, / A shearsman of sorts. The day was green.”

The poem begins with a man starts playing his guitar. It is a green day, which is a metaphor for reality while the guitar is his instrument to express reality with different perceptions, it creates a new reality out of the imagination of the audience. The man is described as a shearsman, that is a person whose occupation is to alter things, change them, or not present them as they are. His audience questions him “You have a blue guitar, You do not play things as they are."

The blue guitar is a metaphor for the instrument that can alter things or present real facts in a multitude of perceptions. The man accepts that his ‘Blue Guitar’ does alter things as they are “changed upon the blue guitar.”

The poet is suggesting that when a musician performs, he doesn’t express reality as it is, rather the reality changes a bit or more and is presented in the perception of the musician. Furthermore, when the audience listens to the music, they perceive the performance according to their own perception or imagination. Despite this difference between the reality and the imagination of the performer and audience, The ‘imagination’ does contain a vital portion of reality and thus, there is a strong similarity between reality and the perception or performance of an artist ( poet, musician, painter, etc.).

Nevertheless, the audience is adamant and insists that the man must play a tune “of things exactly as they are.” Yet, the audience acknowledges that such a tune, which is exactly like reality, is beyond their comprehension because whatever they will listen to, they will perceive it with their own perception, which again will be an amalgamation of reality and imagination. Thus, while the audience demands the guitarist to present reality as it is, they demand “A tune beyond us, yet ourselves”, and “things exactly as they are”. Here is the irony, the audience or the critics realize that they cannot perceive reality sans any bias or perception yet, demand the performer to present his art exactly similar to reality. Thus, the poet exposes the demands of realism on the musician or poet.

In the 2nd canto, the poet says that he cannot present his poem exactly as real as he can't draw a perfect circle. “I cannot bring a world quite round,/Although I patch him as I can./I sing a hero’s head, large eye/And bearded bronze, but not a man”. The poet says that reproducing reality is impossible though he tries his best but falters every time. Every time he performs, the reality is amalgamated with his own perception of it. He says that he can only describe the man with the blue guitar just like he performs a serenade of his music which is almost like the reality but still, is just a serenade, a creation of the guitarist, just like the poem is the creation of the poet. It can be very similar to reality, still, it is imagination but not reality. In the first canto, the audience were examining the guitarist, while in the 2nd canto, the poet himself explains the guitarist in the first person.

From canto 1 to canto 6, Stevens continues to offer similarities between the musician and poets and how the imagination of a poet or musician ‘slightly’ differs from reality, the green world, “things exactly as they are.” The poet or musician offers their own imagination, their own created world, and no matter how diligently they try to paint reality as it is, they are never able to remake the reality perfectly. In the 6th Canto, Stevens introduces Topopoeia and tries to construct an image large enough to enclose its own image. The audience is mingled up with the tune and finds themselves as if they are a part of the tune themselves. “Ourselves in the tune as if in space,

Yet nothing changed, except the place.” However, they find no difference except that they are not in the real world now but in the imaginative world of the guitarist. While contemplating on the guitarist’s imagination, the audience comes to see all the possible perceptions of the performance, yet, they fail to realize the reality which is still “A tune beyond us as we are” because though the critic may dive in the imagination of the performer to see his perceptions, he can merely observe the perceptions, but not the reality.

In the 7th canto, the poet expresses the concerns of the performers (musicians, poets, painters, actors, and others). He says that the performers are like the sun who shares their works.

“It is the sun that shares our works. / The moon shares nothing. It is a sea.”

The sun offers light and heat while the moon produces nothing and hence, offers nothing, just like the sea which offers no warmth. It is a cold winter day during which, even the warmth of the sun is absent and thus, the poet says “The sun no longer shares our works.” Thus, the imagination of the performer is the warmth that keeps mankind moving. However, the moon is good, detached from creation or imagination, it offers no imagination and presents things as they are. The poet says that despite all the demands of realism, the imagination of the poet, musician, painter, or actor is the warmth that keeps the world alive. In absence of the warmth of the sun and the creative, imaginative performers, the earth would be a place of “creeping men.”

The title of the poem suggests that it was inspired by a famous painting by Pablo Picasso titled “The Old Guitarist” which he made in 1903-04. Stevens mentions Picasso in canto 15 which begins as

“Is this picture of Picasso's, this "hoard / Of destructions", a picture of ourselves.” In this canto, Stevens offers similarities between the imaginations of a poet, musician, and painter. Stevens again suggests that though the performer creates an imaginative equivalent of reality, yet, the reader or audience further amalgamates it with his own perception. He asks, “Is my thought a memory, not alive?” Obviously, his poem is perceived by the reader according to their own perceptions. The reader brings life to the poem as they read it.

The poet again says that though the performer tries his best to express reality, it is just a patchwork and can never be “exactly the things they are”. He mentions the case of “Humpty” who sat on the wall and had a great fall, and once fallen, no matter how much patchwork is done, the broken naked egg cannot be the real egg. “Now, an image of our society? /Do I sit, deformed, a naked egg.”

In canto 18, Stevens describes poetry as a dream in which the poet can describe reality according to his own perception and wishes. In this dream, the poet allows “sun’s green”, “cloud’s red”, “earth feeling”, and a “sky that thinks.” However, while the poem is the subject of poetry which is used to describe reality, the process makes the poem alienated from reality. Poems take reality and form it into a sensual reproduction, and then give the representation to readers of the poem.

In canto 26, the poet says that a performer imagines and offers the best of his imagination and that is Utopia. “Sand heaped in the clouds, giant that fought/Against the murderous alphabet:/The swarm of thoughts, the swarm of dreams/Of inaccessible Utopia.” The poet says that to create such a world, the poet must fight against the “murderous alphabet” to create words and this fight is no less gruesome that the fight of Ullysses against the One-eyed giant. The poet says that similar is the task of a musician “A mountainous music always seemed/To be falling and to be passing away”. Despite the strength required to produce such a creative poem or music, it always seems to falter as it fails to express reality in its entirety.

In canto 33, Stevens further explains the faltering nature of creative arts and says that an art form of the past is nothing but the best, finest dream of a generation that has gone by. Each such piece of art, be it a painting, music, or poem, fades away with time because the generation that produces it and that appreciates it also fades away and the new generation demands newer tastes in arts. The fine piece of art is nothing but the perception of the past.

“That’s it, the only dream they knew,/Time in its final block, not time/To come, a wrangling of two dreams”.

However, a poet can dream and express his dream in his poem according to what he sees, observes, and knows. He is not omniscient and cannot have all the possible perceptions. Yet, his piece of art is timeless because the reader analyses his dream according to his own perception and knowledge of his time in the future that the writer himself was unable to perceive. Thus, his performance is “a wrangling of two dreams” because the reader also perceives the piece of art as per his finite perception. The poet has his dream and the reader interprets the dream, but the interpretation will be the reader’s own dream, not the poet’s dream, or even a duplication of reality.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of American English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

The Vendor of Sweets by R. K. Narayan | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Vendor of Sweets is a novel by R. K. Narayan that was published in the year 1967. It is set in the fictional town of Malgudi and the novel sketches the biography of a fictional character named Mr. K. V. Jagan who is a sweet vendor in Malgudi. It is a story of the clash between the traditional Indian ethos and emerging modern Indian culture. Jagan’s wife dies at an early age due to his negligence and then Jagan raises his son Mali as a single parent. R. K. Narayan himself raised his daughter after his wife’s untimely death. The novel also shows the flaws of Gandhian ideals while satirizing the hypocrisy of Gandhian followers.

Characters:

Jagan is a 55 years old sweet vendor of Malgudi. He is a disciple of Mahatma Gandhi though he has his own flaws and hypocrisy. His wife Ambika, suffered a brain tumor while their son Mali was just a teen. Being influenced by the Gandhian idea of Naturopathy and ‘Swadeshi’, Jagan refused to take medical help for his wife while he continued to offer Ayurvedic treatment to her. As a result, she died at an early age. Mali was still a child when his mother died, however, he has some memories of how his father’s patriarchial mindset and too much belief in the supremacy of naturopathy over modern medicine aggravated his mother’s condition. These memories create tension between the father and son. Mali willingly goes against the wishes of his father and cheats on him to collect money for going to the U.S.A. where he gets completely modernized and westernized. When he returns home, Jagan finds him doing everything against his native culture. He dislikes Malgudi and wishes to modernize it. Chinna Doari is a hair dryer, spiritualist, and sculptor. He engages Jagan in helping him build a sculpture of Goddess Gayatri. The cousin is a popular man of Malgudi who helps everyone and is loved and respected by them. Jagan decides to hand over his shop and other assets to him before he retires. Grace is a half-American, half-Korean girlfriend of Mali who comes to India with him. Initially, Mali introduces her as his wife to Jagan. Jagan is very upset about his marriage with a foreign girl but gradually, he starts liking Grace and realizes that Mali isn’t treating her properly. He feels that Mali is doing the same mistakes that he did with his wife, Mali’s mother. He talks to Mali trying to help Grace. Later on, he comes to know that Mali and Grace aren’t even married. Grace continues to mix up American culture with her Korean origins and Indian culture that she came in touch with due to Mali.

Summary of The Vendor of Sweets:

The novel is set in Independent India. Jagan is a sweet vendor who owns a shop in Malgudi. He is an ardent fan of Gandhi and follows Gandhian asceticism. He eats only wheat, green vegetable, and honey and cuts sugar and salt from his diet. He firmly believes that indulging in sugar is both unhealthy and contrary to Gandhi’s teachings but he earns his living selling sugary confections to others. He believes in Bhagwat Geeta yet, he has no qualms in skimming a portion of each day’s profits, hoarding it away so that he will not have to pay taxes on his unreported income. His wife Ambika died in her youth because of a brain tumor that could have been treated with modern medical help. But being a follower of Gandhi, Jagan insisted on naturopathy for her treatment and rejected any form of allopathy to cure her. Jagan had written a book on naturopathy through the publication of the book was overdue by the printer. His adamant insistence on naturopathy resulted in her demise while his son Mali was still a teenager. This incident filled Mali’s heart with a strong resentment against his father. He blamed Jagan for his mother’s death. Jagan also felt that he was a bit negligent about his wife. Anyhow, he continued his sweet shop and devoted himself to the upbringing of Mali as a single parent. Meanwhile, he is helped by a man of Malgudi who claims his cousinhood with everyone in Malgudi. He becomes a bridge between Mali and Jagan as he can respect Jagan’s traditional outlook while acknowledging Mali’s rebellious views.

Mali is now a grown-up person who aspires to be a poet and writer. He still has a strong feeling of resentment against Jagan who wishes him to complete his education and secure a good future. Mali decides to drop out of college and steal some money from his father’s shop to go to the U.S. where he has to attend a writing program. Instead of taking his father in confidence, Mali steals money from the sweet shop. He manages to get his passport and a ticket to the U.S. Jagan is shocked when Mali declares that he is leaving his education halfway and going to the U.S. to fulfill his dreams.

After a few months, Jagan receives a letter from Mali in which he comes to know that Mali eats beef by choice and he likes it and thus, shows complete rejection and disdain towards his father’s beliefs. After three years, Mali realizes that he has no future in America and decides to return back to India. Jagan receives another letter informing him about the return to Mali with another person. Despite knowing that Mali has rejected all the traditions, Jagan is happy about his return. Mali reappears with Grace, his girlfriend who is half-American and half-Korean. Jagan is bewildered by her presence. He assumes that Mali married Grace without taking his consent and he is sad about this. Since Grace isn’t an Indian, nor a Hindu, Jagan feels animosity towards her. However, she is warm and kind to Jagan in ways that Mali is not. She is not only trying to manage her ethnic Korean culture along with American culture, but she also tries to learn Indian culture and starts taking up the duties of a traditional Indian daughter-in-law: cooking, cleaning, and even decorating the house. Jagan is habitual of self-reliance as he is living alone for many years, taking care of his kitchen and home. Grace’s interference makes him feel awkward. Yet, she is warm enough and Jagan is willing to have a healthy relationship with Grace because she becomes the bridge between the estranged father-son duo. Jagan notices that Mali doesn’t treat Grace well and this reminds him of his own behavior toward his late wife. He talks to Mali about this and suggests he treat Grace well but Mali ignores him.

Jagan faces another problem when Mali announces that he is planning to establish a printing press of his own and asks for money to do so. He says that he will establish a publishing company that will allow India to compete with western countries in the literary arena. Jagan shows no interest in Mali’s lofty ideas and tries to ignore his demand for money. Jagan believes that great writing can only come through the inspiration of God but Mali’s idea of automated “novel-writing machines” challenges his belief. When Mali insists he invests in his company, Jagan adopts ‘non-violent non-cooperation and tries to avoid investing his money. However, Mali and Grace confront him strictly and asks him to clearly answer if he will help Mali in establishing his company or not. To his, Jagan answers that the best he can do is to leave the sweet shop to him. Mali mocks him and sneeringly responds, "better plans than to be a vendor of sweetmeats.”

Jagan is disturbed by Mali’s demand and he even starts doubting that Grace’s warmness, friendliness, and attention are intended efforts to win his money. He starts spending more time outside the home and one day, he meets a hair dryer named Chinna Dorai who tells him that he is a sculptor and trying to finish a magnanimous idol of goddess Gayatri for a long. Chinna takes Jagan to a groove to show him the unfinished sculptor. Jagan feels a strange sense of tranquility and peace at the groove. Chinna asks him to become his patron and buy the groove so that he may complete his work. Initially, Jagan is not interested in Chinna Dorai’s request but then he thinks that his own life with Mali and Grace is no better and he realizes that Mali will never work at the sweet shop. Thus, he decides to help Chinna Dorai in completing the idol of Goddess Gayatri and becomes his patron.

When Jagan returns home, Grace starts a conversation with him. She informs him that contrary to his belief, she is not married to Mali and he is not treating her well. Jagan is shocked to know all this. He is too disturbed by knowing that his son is keeping a woman without marrying her. He decides to leave the house immediately and start living in the groove. He retires from the sweet shop too and declares that he has chosen ‘Vanaprastha,’ or renunciation from the materialistic world.

While Jagan is preparing to leave his home and settle in the groove, the cousin visits him and informs him that Mali has been arrested by police for drinking liquor, violating prohibition laws. Jagan takes this news with calmness and says that a 'dose of prison life is not a bad thing' for Mali as the harsh punishment may make him realize his mistakes and he may turn towards the right path after that. He offers the keys and ownership of his sweet shop to the cousin and writes a cheque to him to manage the arrangement of bail of Mali. In addition, he sets aside some money for Grace to buy a ticket for her return and departs for the grove to help Chinna Dorai.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of Indian English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

An Essay on Man Epistle 4 by Alexander Pope | Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. An Essay on Man was published in the year 1743 in which Alexander Pope discussed the order of the universe on the lines of hierarchy or chain of beings that he termed the ‘chain of love’. In the first epistle, Pope discussed relations between humans and the universe; the second examines humans as individuals. The third addresses the relationship between the individual and society, and the fourth questions the potential of the individual for happiness. The subtitle of the fourth epistle is “On the Nature and State of Man, with Respect to Happiness.” The fourth Epistle is 398 lines long in which the narrator describes man’s various attempts to achieve true human happiness. The narrator then tries to establish that only a virtuous, good man can achieve such happiness.

Summary of An Essay on Man Epistle 4 :

Section 1 Lines (1-28)

Pope begins the fourth epistle by declaring that the purpose of human life is to achieve happiness.

“O HAPPINESS! our being’s end and aim!” He then says that it is not easy to know what is happiness as there are many contradictory ideas about it. He says that happiness is something for which we continue to live even with all our problems and burdens and can dare to die too to find our happiness. The narrator says that most people, including fools and the wise, hold the wrong meaning of happiness. The narrator asks that if happiness is a “celestial seed” that was dropped (sowed) below, in what kind of mortal soil, in what kind of human heart, would happiness choose to grow? “Where grows?—where grows it not?” The narrator says that if happiness doesn’t grow, it is not the fault of the seed, nor of the soil (or individual heart), rather it is the fault of the culture in which the individual is bound. “We ought to blame the culture, not the soil,” Pope says.

Happiness is very elusive and everyone has their own way to define it. Happiness is “nowhere to be found, and everywhere.” The narrator says that one cannot buy happiness which is “always free.” Some say that they find happiness in bliss, and some others find it in rest, however, no one has found a general definition of happiness that works for all.

Section 2 Lines (29-92)

The narrator says that happiness is man’s end, his goal and it can be achieved by everyone because God intends happiness to be available to all; thus, it must be social, governed by general laws. Since God wants everyone to be happy, an individual should not strive for his happiness alone, rather one should strive for the happiness of everyone. Since happiness is a social thing, it is necessary for the maintenance of peace, order, and welfare of society. However, happiness cannot be located in outer things. Though some people can be wealthier, healthier, more powerful, or wiser than others, their ability to feel happiness is equal—“all are equal in their happiness”. The narrator warns the readers not to fall into the trap of those who define happiness in a wrong manner and suggests that all people can reach and conceive of it using “thinking right and meaning well.” Furthermore, even if there are inequities among us in terms of giftedness, possessions or whatever, nevertheless there is an equality of “common sense” among all people which provides equal access to the garden of happiness.

The narrator says that God brings a balance of happiness in mankind through Hope and Fear. Reasonable people often wish for three things, “health, peace, and competence” as these three things ensure happiness. By competence, Pope means that one should be content with the rewards, gifts, or earnings that he achieves through his competence.

Section 3 Lines (93-110)

In these lines, Pope asserts that happiness is distributed among people according to God’s plan for whom all men are equal. He then raises the general questions that a man may ask, like why does a virtuous person die while the sinful man lives. The narrator says that accidents and illnesses can occur by chance but the good man will always have an advantage. The person who understands God’s greater plan follows virtues and avoids sinful behavior because he knows that true happiness lies in virtues. Yet, those who are virtuous and just may fall ill or die too soon, but their deaths are not caused by their virtue.

Section 4 Lines (111-130)

In these lines, Pope continues to discuss the issue of virtue and vice about happiness and says that it is inappropriate to question God’s plan and doubt it. God will not alter his laws to favor individuals.

Section 5 Lines (131-148)

In these lines, the narrator chides those who complain that virtuous people often suffer while the sinful cherish tastier fruits. The narrator says that it is not a man’s right to judge the goodness and righteousness of other men. This is the purview of God alone. Whichever men are most good and righteous must be the happiest. “The very best will variously incline, And what rewards your virtue, punish mine. Whatever is, is right.”

Section 6 Lines (149-308)

Pope endeavors to remove the doubts about the relationship between virtues and happiness and asserts that only virtues will lead to true happiness.

“But sometimes virtue starves, while vice is fed.” / What then? Is the reward of virtue bread?”

A virtuous man may not be as rich and powerful as a sinful man. Only fools lament that virtuous people are not rewarded. What is the reward of virtue? External goods? By some law or character of human nature (greed), we tend to think that the reward of righteousness should be riches, a foundational principle of “prosperity.” The narrator debunks this myth and says that the reward of virtue is an immaterial, inner sort of tranquility and joy. Virtue’s reward is not earthly in nature, and hence cannot be taken away or destroyed.

“What nothing earthly gives, or can destroy, / The soul’s calm sunshine, and the heartfelt joy.”

Pope suggests that all the earthly riches and materialistic pleasures that are ephemeral are nothing but trash which is unfit as virtue’s reward, either now or in some afterlife. The narrator says that materialistic pleasure cannot be the reward for a virtuous person whose sights and sensitivities are not adapted to these pleasures which are nothing but trifles for him that may even cause harm to his virtuous self. Such a virtuous person would personally avoid such materialistic pleasures.

“Rewards, that either would to Virtue bring / No joy, or be destructive of the thing: / How oft by these at sixty are undone / The Virtues of the saint at twenty-one!”

The narrator says that the mere possession of external goods alone-- fortune, honor, nobility, greatness, fame, and talent apart from virtue makes no one happy.

“Bring then these blessings to a strict account; Make fair deductions; see to what they mount.”

That is, even if a person has all these materialistic pleasures and much more, if they lack virtues, they cannot be happy.

Section 7 Lines (309-98)

In this last section, the narrator asserts that virtue alone constitutes the universal and permanent happiness of man. Only virtue can provide happiness which seeks to rise above the individual and embrace the universal. Such happiness will exist eternally. This perfection of virtue and happiness conforms to God’s order and represents the ultimate purpose of mankind. Pope says that while happiness is equally available for all, equality of wealth is opposed to God’s ways because it would breed discontent among those who deserve greater wealth and status. However, happiness is not dependent on wealth or other materialistic pleasures. The "first, last purpose of the human soul" is to love God and humankind. Thus one should even let one's enemies have a part of happiness. Pope asserts that being virtuous is happiness in itself. “Know then this truth (enough for Man to know) ìVirtue alone is Happiness below.”

Virtue translates into happiness when in a purely non-sectarian fashion a man through God recognizes his place in the chain of being, learns from his place in the chain his purpose, understands the origin of the cosmic values of the universe (faith, law, morality), and seeks to love both God and man. Virtue is perfected, and along with it happiness, when man settles himself in the chain of beings with containment. God has placed man “on the isthmus of a middle state,“ between the angels and the animals. He should avoid trying to mix with the angels, and he should avoid sinking to the level of the beasts.

The narrator says that while “God loves from Whole to Parts, the human soul must rise from the individual to the whole.” Thus man begins from “Self-love thus pushed to social, to divine,” that is, a love of the whole to which there is grateful resignation.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards.

An Essay on Man Epistle 3 by Alexander Pope | Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Alexander Pope discussed Man’s relationship to God in Epistle 1 of his Essay on Man. In the second epistle, he discussed Man as an individual, his powers, abilities, and his limits. In Epistle 3 of An Essay on Man, Pope discusses the relationship of Man as an individual with the society as a whole and that is the subtitle of the third part; “Of the Nature and State of Man, with respect to Society.”

Third Epistle discusses the relationship of man with family, society, government, and religion. The narrator suggests that the interdependence of all species necessitates love among all creatures exchanging services in a symbiotic relationship. He mentions that individuals with excessive ego turn tyrannical at instances and that offends nature as it brings imbalance and disharmony. He further stresses on the importance of reason while distinguishing it from individual instincts and suggests that both instincts and reason are important for survival and progress.

Epistle III is composed of 318 lines written in heroic couplets. The first six lines innumerate the points that Pope already discussed in Epistle 1 and Epistle 2 The remaining lines are divided into 6 sections or stanzas of varying length.

Summary of Epistle III :

Section 1 (Lines 7-78)

In these lines, Pope recognizes the chain of the hierarchy of creatures in the living world and suggests that not only these living creatures but inanimate bodies too are interconnected with a “chain of love”. This chain of love isn’t erotic or familial in nature, rather it is a contractual sort of love where love, harmony, and balance between different individuals, individuals, and society, Man and other creatures, creatures, and non-living world ascertains well-being and progress of the whole Universe. This contractual chain of love is the building block of God’s design and the chain of beings. The narrator explains it with examples of atoms, attracting other particles and ensuring the shapes of things. Similarly, plants grow in dirt and take essential elements from it for their growth. When a plant dies, it returns to the dirt, enriching it with nourishment that is taken by newer plants. Man grows grass, fruits, and flowers and the Antelope eats it and then nourishes man. Pope discusses a range of animals from larks to bears and questions if all these creatures were produced only to serve man? He is confident that is not the case and says that it would be ridiculous if a goose says that man was created for its use and similarly, it is silly to believe that all creatures were created to serve man.

“Grant that the pow'rful still the weak control; / Be Man the wit and tyrant of the whole:
Nature that tyrant checks; he only knows, / And helps. another creature's wants and woes.”

The narrator says that man certainly has the power of intellect that nature doesn’t possess, yet nature can conquer all. Even if Man uses his mental abilities tyrannically to exploit nature, nature can check his tyranny. The narrator asserts that nothing, not even mankind, is made wholly for the benefit of itself, nor anything is made wholly for serving others. Instead, everything is related to each other in a symbiotic embrace, completing each other as “parts relate to whole.”

The narrator then says that Man’s ability to reason and his intellect offer him great powers but it also fills him with the fear of death. Animals do not have such fear as they do not have the useless knowledge that they will die.

Section 2 (Lines 79-108)

In this section, the narrator clarifies instincts in contrast with reason. The narrator says that all creatures use instincts or reason whichever helps them most. In some cases, instincts outperform reason while in some other cases, reason and thinking prove to be better. For man, the best way is to ascertain a harmony between instincts and reason to achieve their goals. It is impossible to say how man learned "shun their poison, and to choose their food," just like we cannot say what taught spiders to weave a web. Thus, instincts offer creatures enough powers to sustain their life and they are necessary. However, it would be wrong to say that instincts can be the ‘unerring guide’.

Instinct causes men to feel compassion for others and results in service, an aspect that Reason, “cool at best”, ignores. The best way is to use a proportionate mix of reason and instinct and that is God’s plan. The narrator suggests that God's hand is apparent in what people have come to view as instinct.

Section 3 (Lines 109-46)

Pope continues the discourse on instincts and reason and explores how far society can be carried by instinct, then shows how much farther society can be carried by reason. The narrator says that all creatures have their wants and needs which depend on each other. Their instincts make them serve each other. Instincts push creatures and people together. Instincts are necessary for perpetuating their species.

“Each loves itself, but not itself alone, / Each sex desires alike, till two are one.
Nor ends the pleasure with the fierce embrace: / They love themselves a third time in their race.”

The narrator says that the opposite sex comes close as they are pushed by their instincts toward each other. Both sex desire love of embrace till they become one and this offers them a pleasure as a reward. However, the pleasure of fierce embrace is just a reward, the purpose of their instinct was to perpetuate their species and thus, they love again for the proper breeding of their offspring as responsible parents.

“Thus beast and bird their common charge attend, The mothers nurse it, and the sires defend.”

However, once the young bird starts wandering in the sky, the parental instinct ends and so does the sense of duty to feed and defend.

The narrator then says that Man is guided not only by instincts but reason too and reason helps him build deeper emotional relations, which is why man remains in their parents' care longer than animals. It furthers reason and strengthens the rational faculty of the offspring. These connections and relationships develop in human society by reason. Reason fills man with dread of death but it also empowers man with hope. And thus, instincts and reason further the interest of human beings and perpetuate their species.

Section 4 (147-198)

In this section, Pope talks about how Man learned from nature. The narrator says that if left to instincts only, the man might allow his greed to lead to destruction and savagery. But reason helps him to learn how to control his instincts while observing nature. In the beginning, the man walked along with beasts. He was savage and unsocial but then he learned from animals. He learned where to hunt from birds, about societies from ants, and how to build from bees. Gradually, with the help of his rational faculty, he surpassed all these animals and became better than all.

Section 5 (199-214)

In this section, the narrator discusses how man developed societies and how the first governments were formed. He discusses how monarchies were established that turned into the patriarchial government.

Reason further helped man in raising cities and societies. Though he failed too and then got engaged in conflicts and wars. However, people learned to negotiate and develop commerce. This was necessary for the benefit of all. Eventually, the strongest were chosen as kings to reign above all.

Section 6 (215-318)

In section six, the narrator explores the origins of religion. Pope suggests that the basis of both religion and government is love or the need for harmony and balance. He says that faith is the love of God and the government is the love of man. On the other hand, fear gives birth to superstitions and tyranny. Thus, self-love, through just and unjust means, can either drive man’s ambition or restrain him.

Reason inspired man to form governments and churches. Initially, churches were built on pride and bloody sacrifices but then God inspired man to learn better ways and man developed faith with love. Pope says that men may disagree on faith with each other but it is beyond any doubt that "all mankind's concern" should be charity. People must support one another. In the end, Pope uses a metaphor comparing individuals to planets revolving around the sun. Each planet is unique and rotates on its own axis but they all revolve around the sun. In the same manner, man must respect his own self, and understand the importance of self-love but he must also not ignore the greater good of the family, society, all the creatures, the world, and the universe.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

An Essay on Man Epistle 2 by Alexander Pope | Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The subtitle of the second epistle of An Essay on Man was “Of the Nature and State of Man, with respect to Himself, as an Individual.” As the title suggests, Pope discusses humans as individuals and Pope proposes a better and more harmonious way for a man to live within his surroundings. It is a discourse about the relationship between the individual and God’s greater design.

The second epistle also contains 294 lines composed of Heroic couples, divided into 6 sections or parts. Pope continues using Juxtaposition, Antithesis, Hyperbaton, Assonance, and other literary forms to make his essay appear more interesting.

Section 1 Lines (1-52):

In epistle 1, Pope invested enough time to explain the relationship between Man, God, and the remaining world. He begins the second epistle with a common for the man to “know then thyself.” What Pope means is that a man should understand and know his own self and limits. There’s no reason to study God as it is beyond the limits of man’s rational faculty. He shouldn’t venture to question the design of God. The correct way for the improvement of humans as individuals and the whole of humankind is to study and discover man, his potential, and his limits.

“Know then thyself, presume not God to scan; / The proper study of mankind is man.”

The second epistle begins with an Antithesis, a juxtaposition as in the first line, and Hyperbation has also been used (instead of ‘don’t presume God to scan,’ Pope used “presume not God to scan”.

Pope isn’t saying that all attainable knowledge can be attained from within the Man. Pope says that it seems that the only way to understand the surroundings and other creatures of the world is to study and probe outward. But one should not overanalyze this outward study and presume that one can understand God’s design in its entirety. The man should not pry into God’s affairs but rather study himself, especially his nature, powers, limits, and frailties. Instead of questioning why God created the universe, it is better to probe the reason and validity of our own existence. Pope says that science is the study of nature and God’s creation. Science is the power of man that he may harness for the betterment of himself and society. But often, man becomes too proud of his scientific achievements and starts “imitating God,” and this is foolishness.

“Go, teach Eternal Wisdom how to rule— / Then drop into thyself, and be a fool!”

Those who believe that one day, Man can acquire enough knowledge to solve all the puzzles of the Universe, then it is foolishness because the Universe is limitless but man and mankind have got their limits.

Section 2 (Lines 53-92)

Pope begins this section with Concordia Discors and juxtaposes passion and reason against each other, validating both. He says,

“Two principles in human nature reign; / Self-love, to urge, and reason, to restrain;”

Pope says that two principles are of utmost importance in a man’s life, ‘self-love’ and ‘reason.’

Pope says that while self-love is stronger, it leads to man as an individual. However, the reason is required to lead him about the surroundings, other human beings, and other creatures too.

Pope suggests that ‘self-love’ or passion or desires of an individual drive them to behave in certain ways. However, too much indulgence in passion or desires may bring harm to the individual and society as a whole and thus, Reason is needed to control ‘self-love’ and bring harmony and peace in a man’s life. Thus, Pope says that an Individual’s behavior originated from his inner self, his self-love, passion, and desires but reason regulates their behavior and makes it harmonious. Thus, ‘self-love’ and ‘reason’ despite being opposite, augment each other.

“Pleasure, or wrong or rightly understood, / Our greatest evil, or our greatest good.”

Pope says that unrestricted passion and self-love unchecked by reason can be the greatest evil, but if augmented by reason, it becomes the greatest good. As humanity becomes wiser with experience, reason triumphs over self-love. However, both work together to make people want pleasure and not pain.

Section 3 (Lines 93-202)

In this section, Pope discusses different modes and kinds of ‘self-love’ or passions and how they function in a man’s life. Pope describes the strength of self-love or passion as the driving force of the behavior of an individual and how good it can be. Pope ridicules those who suggest that one should renounce their passions. Rather, Pope says that The ruling passion works to provide man with direction and defines man’s nature and virtue. He criticizes Stoics who renounce passions and says that Stoics may have their virtues but those virtue doesn’t help them, or society, they produce nothing. Passions can be selfish, but if one is passionate about something good, one should cultivate the passion as it helps and drives an individual to achieve.

“Love, hope, and joy, fair pleasure's smiling train, / Hate, fear, and grief, the family of pain,

These mix'd with art, and to due bounds confin'd, / Make and maintain the balance of the mind:

The lights and shades, whose well accorded strife / Gives all the strength and colour of our life.”

Pope uses Concordia Discors again and says that passions bring all sorts of contrasting and opposing emotions, they bring pleasure and pain and appear like lights and shades, but in harmony, they offer colors to our life. The narrator compares passions to a wind that pushes a ship forward. He says that passions are the Individual’s own and not raised by God. God lets man pursue their passions, be they good or bad, and lets him restrict them with the help of reason. All different experiences and emotions, even bad ones like fear or grief, push man forward.

Section 4 (Lines 203-216)

in this section, Pope suggests that man is a mixture of virtues and vices. The narrator says that the individual is a blend of black and white. Everyone is driven by their passions and though reason can help them restrict their passions to appropriate limits, individuals may fail to use reason. Everyone has flaws, but these flaws are part of God's plan. For someone, what appears to be a flaw, may appear a strength to someone else.

“Fools! who from hence into the notion fall, / That vice or virtue there is none at all.”

The narrator ridicules those who say that vice and virtues do not exist.

Section 5 (Lines 217-230)

In this section, Pope describes vices and how evil and destructive they can be.

“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, / As, to be hated, needs but to be seen;

Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, / We first endure, then pity, then embrace. “

The narrator says vices often appear juicy and men are easily drawn towards vices.

Section 6 (Lines 231-294)

In this section, the narrator again asserts that a man is a mixture of virtues and vices and suggests that he should remain so because it is within God’s plan. He says that some virtues and some vices must be restricted and few in degree, while some others should be acquired as much as one can. The passions and imperfections are distributed to all individuals of each order of men in all societies. They guide man in every state and at every age of life. The narrator says that Happiness is the purpose of life. An individual’s wants, desires, and flaws draw him to achieve joy, satisfaction, and peace and this is the ‘glory of mankind.’ The narrator says that these wants of individuals make them dependent on each other and thus create the ground for a healthy society. The narrator says that one should not fear his wants, desires, and flaws because, with the help of reason, he will attain a harmonious balance. God has made man such that he can achieve a balance in life's losses with gains. "Though man's a fool, yet God is wise," the narrator says.

In Epistle 2, Pope says that self-love and passions give birth to an individual's behavior and reason shapes it and brings closure to the harmonious existence of man following his passions in limits. He says that the conflict between passions and reason raises virtues and vice and every individual is a mix of these virtues and vices but with the help of reason, every individual can achieve a harmonious balance and that is within God’s plan.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!