The Intrusion by Shashi Deshpande | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Intrusion and Other Stories was a short story collection by Shashi Deshpande, published in 1993. Her stories portray the Indian way of life; in a language of “our emotional make-up” and successfully infused “the tempo of Indian life in her English expression.”

The Intrusion is the title story of the book. The story revolves around the consent of a woman. Her parents do not give importance to her consent before her marriage. Later, her husband also ignores her consent. Consequently, her husband intrudes into her ‘privacy’, and she cannot protect herself from 'the intrusion' into her body. The Intrusion, as the title suggests, is the unwanted entry of someone or something. In this case, this title refers to the intrusion of the man in the “private” space of the woman without her consent. At another level, the intrusion is also of societal expectations into the way of living of a newly married woman. George Bernard Shaw once said, “Marriage is legalized prostitution.” The story suggests that it can be forced prostitution too as it discusses the issue of marital sexual violence.

Characters of The Intrusion:

The story revolves around a newly married woman who is the narrator. She is an Indian girl who just got married to a man chosen by her family. She knows nothing about her husband and he is a total stranger. The girl hopes to develop a friendly relationship with that stranger who is already her husband but the husband has other plans. The narrator is unnamed and it appears that the author left her unnamed deliberately. It lets the story offer a sense of deja vu, as the reader to their own life and the story appears relevant. Her husband is the other character whom she calls the man, the stranger to whom she has already been married. He is a young Indian man who acknowledges his privileges for being a member of the patriarchial society and practices his authority with utmost ruthlessness. Thus, intruding on the privacy of his wife without acknowledging or caring for her consent. The story is about the marital rape he attempts on his wife.

Summary of The Intrusion:

The narrator is a newly married girl who belongs to a middle-class Indian family. She is a modern educated woman who expects that husband and wife should know each other pretty well and be good friends before they start a normal married life. She is not “a frigid woman incapable of love”. She is only “shy and frightened about exposing the mysteries of her body to him.” She has her own dreams of how husband and wife should be. She got married to a man of her family’s choice whom she never knew nor ever met before their marriage. She had no choice nor any say in that marriage because she also had younger sisters and her revolt could have ruined their prospects. After her marriage, she reaches her husband’s home which is crowded. She hardly gets any time alone with her husband and he remains a stranger to her. However, the man is eager to consummate their marriage. So he decided to take the narrator on a trip which is supposed to be their honeymoon.

The narrator, along with her husband, crosses a fishing village. She is aware of her physical surroundings as much as she is aware of her inner chaos and the unreasonable twinge of irritation against her husband. They walked out of the seaboard and were back in the village, hiking up a steep rocky path and finally reaching the top with the square stalk building.

The newly married couple hardly know each other. Therefore, the narrator feels uneasy about her partner. The unease that the narrator experiences continues to grow when they are finally boarded indoors. In the room, the man attending to them opened the window to let the wind in. The narrator was aware of the man smirking and revealing an awareness of what they had come here for and the gaze that the man was giving made her feel uneasy and embarrassed. The man left the room, having left alone to themselves, she felt a painful silence as if they were strangers left to themselves.

Soon, silence predominates in the room between them. Therefore, to break the silence, her husband suddenly starts talking. He tells her he feels fortunate to come to the place as their honeymoon destination. He is happy because they have “complete privacy”. On the other hand, she feels nervous at the thought of being alone with a strange man in a strange land. She is skeptical about the room too. She describes the room as ‘non-homely’ and says, “…the sheets looked grubby and the pillow covers disgustingly greasy…it didn’t look like seem like a place where children have ever shouted.” She doubts that the room was frequently visited by prostitutes.

Because of the tedious journey, the narrator feels tired. Therefore, she relaxes in the chair, and she is lost in her thoughts. Suddenly, he breaks the silence and asks why she is so silent. She says that she is a little tired. He comes closer and puts his arm around her firmly, which causes her uncomfortable. However, she pretends to act normal and gets up. She suggests to him they should go out to the veranda since she wants to see the sea.

On the veranda, she also suggests to him they should go down to the sea. But her husband tells her they should go in the morning as it is already dark. The man approaches her again. He puts his arm around her waist and pulls her inside. Upon seeing the bed, she remembers her narrow bed at home. She feels homesick. She remembers how she was not ready for the marriage. She was hurt when the alliance was fixed up without her willingness. “No one had asked me if I had agreed; it had been taken for granted.” When her father asks her the reason for her rejection of her marriage and what she is going to do after that she has no answer. And so she agrees finding no fault with the groom. Suddenly a few days before the wedding, I had gone to my father stricken by doubts. “Why?” he had asked me, again and again. And, “What will you do then?” In a panic, I asked myself, “What will I do?” And I thought of a thousand answers, but not to the question, “What’s wrong with him?” She realizes that if she revolts against her family’s will, she will become the black sheep of the family. No one would marry her sisters. For her, her parents would feel disgraced.

The man is unaware of her feelings, and her hesitation. He excitingly changes his dress. On the other hand, the narrator feels low and lonely. She sits quietly for a while, then dashes to the veranda. She wishes to be anywhere in the world except in a strange place. When he does not find her in the room. He calls her to change her clothes. She follows his words unwillingly. She changes feeling glad that her night-dress was simple. However, escaping his sexual overtures seemed difficult now.

She again opens the door to the veranda. But he forbids her to go out. She reluctantly goes to him. He puts his arms around her tightly. The sudden and tight grip of his embrace makes her too uncomfortable. She struggles to get rid of his approaching rough chin. He tries to kiss her, but she averts her face and, in the struggle, his glasses fall. His touch reminds her of the instances of molestation that the character experienced from “faceless, nameless men in crowds”

Her defiance makes him furious, and he demands to know why she is avoiding him. Finally, she breaks the unbearable silence and says that they don’t know each other. He is astonished to hear that. She wants to express her feelings that she wants to know all about him. She wishes to develop a friendship, a cordial relationship, and a level of comfortability. However, his view of marriage is limited to only satisfying the physical needs of the husband. The other’s state of mind and emotion are marginal things to be avoided. He thinks marriage gives the man the license to invade his wife’s privacy. The man thinks that he can come to know his wife through physical intimacy. Her consent has no value in the relationship. She can’t say a word anymore because his fierce look frightens her and she knows it is futile to express her feelings to him.

Discontent fills his face and he lies still in the bed uttering nothing. After him, she also tries to sleep. She remembers the days when she was not married. She is very practical and before her marriage, she wanted to know more before getting involved with her married life. Hence before her wedding, she reads a book on sex. Unlike the other girls who have their own dreams of their husbands, she thinks of the realities of her would-be husband. And there were all those fears crouching in him – would his breath smell, and were his feet huge and dirty with uncut toenails, and did he chew his food noisily and belch after meals?

However, the man to whom she is married is uninterested in her as a person. He considers her a property that he has a right to exploit. Somehow, she falls asleep. At midnight, she finds herself in a dreamy state. She is lying on the beach; she feels the waves hitting her hard. When she comes into consciousness, she realizes that the sound of the sea is real, but it is not the wave, rather her husband is hitting her body. She attempts to push his chest away from her body, but she fails. He has intruded into her private space. She wished her husband to become her friend and understand her before they undergo any of the experiences a husband and a wife undergo. But finding him keyed for a different experience, she was unable to communicate none of these things to him and as a result feels humiliated when her husband forces himself on her. On the whole, she finally becomes submissive and compromises with life as any other Indian wife does.

The story raises the issue of troubles in an arranged marriage and suggests that proper coordination, and a reasonable mutual understanding between husband and wife is essential for a happy married life. 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!

The Pearl by John Steinbeck | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Pearl is a short novel by John Steinbeck, published in 1947. It is divided into 6 chapters. The story is based upon a folktale from La Paz, Baza California Sur, Mexico which Steinbeck visited in 1940. The novella is more like a parable, a succinct, didactic story that illustrates some instructive lessons and principles of life.

The major theme of the novel is the contrast between Good and Evil, greed, compassion, family values, racial and societal discrimination, and an individual’s will to improve their life.

Characters of The Pearl:

Kino is the protagonist of the novella. He is a Mexican-Indian who works as a pearl diver, searching for pearls while diving into the Gulf of the area. He is a devoted family man, father, and husband to Coyotito and Juana, respectively. Kino represents an 'everyman' who finds himself in a circle of vicious situations that turn him increasingly violent, frustrated, defiant, and paranoid. Juana is the mother of Coyotito and the wife of Kino. She is a nice woman, a devoted wife, and a caring mother. She dutifully supports her husband despite his rash behavior but continues to warn him about the impending dangers that his greed may bring upon him. She is a strong individual who even disobeys Kino when he suggests that they take separate paths to avoid the trackers. Coyotito is the infant son of Juana and Kino. He gets stung by a scorpion and suffers a lethal fever. Kino and Juana try every possible way to save their child. The Doctor is a fat, complacent, greedy, corrupt man who is a Racist and refuses to treat Kino’s child just because he doesn’t wish to help a poor man of another race. However, when he comes to know that Kino found a rare precious huge pearl, he insists on treating Coyotito just in the hope of stealing the pearl. Juan Tomas is a brother of Kino. He is a helpful benevolent man who helps Kino and hides Kino and Juana in his house after Kino murders a man in self-defense. Juan warns Kino against the disastrous consequences that he faces from finding the pearl. Apolonia is the wife of Juan who allows Kino and Juana to hide in her house after Kino murders a man in self-defense.

Summary of The Pearl:

Kino is a young Mexican-Indian man who works as a pearl diver. He is married to Juana and the couple have an infant child named Coyotito. The family lives in a brush house in the suburb of the city of La Paz. One day, when Kino wakes up, he sees a scorpion nearby that stings his child Coyotito. Coyotito instantly develops a fever and Juana gets worried. Juana tells Kino to go to town and get the doctor, but Kino and their neighbors tell Juana that the doctor will never come to where they live. Juana couldn’t let fate take control so she sets off with Coyotito to the doctor. Kino accompanies her and many other villagers follow them out of curiosity. The doctor is a known racist who never helps poor native Indians. When Juana and Kino reach there and knock at the door of the Doctor, a servant of the doctor comes out and says that the doctor is not at home. In fact, the doctor doesn’t wish to treat the child because he is a racist and knows that Kino is too poor to pay him well.

Disheartened, the couple returns and takes their son to the sea. Juana continues to find a cure for her child while Kino decides to go to work and find some oysters in the Gulf. Juana tends to Coyotito and applies a brown seaweed poultice on the shoulder of Coyotito which is swollen now because of the scorpion sting. As Kino decides to dive into the Gulf to find some osters, Juana prays he would get a large pearl that may help them pay for the doctor’s fee.

Kino searches the sea bottom and it appears as if Juana’s prayers for a large pearl are answered when Kino surfaces with the largest oyster that he has ever seen. He comes back to the canoe. Kino does not want to open the oyster immediately, but Juana insists he opens the oyster; when he does, he finds a huge pearl none of them had ever seen. Juana gets mesmerized by the pearl but soon remembers her son and goes to check him out. Juana finds that Coyotito is better now, his shoulder is no longer swollen. Kino is already excited by seeing the huge pearl and when Juana tells him that Coyotito is fine now, he becomes ecstatic. He puts back his head and howls, causing the other pearl divers to look up and race toward Kino's canoe.

The news that Kino has found an immense pearl travels fast through La Paz. The doctor who refused to treat Coyotito decides to visit Kino. Kino's neighbors begin to feel bitter toward him for his good fortune, but neither Kino nor Juana realize this feeling they have engendered. For safety, Kino hides the huge pearl and buries it in the corner of his hut. Kino’s brother Juan asks him what he will do with his money, and he envisions getting married to Juana in a church and dressing Coyotito in a yachting cap and sailor suit. He claims that he will send Coyotito to school and buy a rifle for himself. The local priest visits and tells Kino to remember to give thanks and to pray for guidance. The doctor also visits, and although Coyotito seems to be healing, the doctor insists that Coyotito still faces danger and treats him. Kino tells the doctor that he will pay him once he sells his pearl, and the doctor attempts to discern where the pearl is located. He offers to keep the pearl for Kino, and Kino refuses the request, but the doctor tricks Kino into revealing where Kino has hidden the pearl. That night, a thief attempts to break into Kino's hut, but Kino drives him away. Juana tells Kino that the pearl will destroy them, but Kino insists that the pearl is their one chance and that tomorrow they will sell it.

The next day, when Kino goes to sell the pearl, all the men of the village accompany him. They discuss what they would do if they had found the pearl, and suggest giving it as a present to the Pope, buying Masses for the souls of his family, and distributing it among the poor of La Paz. Kino discusses the prize for the pearl with a pearl dealer and he offers a thousand pesos when Kino believes that he deserves fifty thousand. Although other dealers inspect the pearl and give similar prices, Kino refuses their offer and decides to go to the capital to sell it there.

That night, after another attack on Kino, Juana begs him to get rid of the pearl; he refuses. When Kino falls asleep, Juana takes the pearl, intending to throw it back into the ocean, but Kino catches up to her at the beach and violently seizes the pearl, injuring Juana. As Kino returns home, unknown assailants again attack him; he kills one of them and the pearl rolls away. Juana recovers the pearl, which she now decides to keep, realizing that their old life is gone forever. She also manages to save Coyotito when other attackers burn their house down. Kino, Juana, and Coyotito take cover in the house belonging to Kino’s older brother Juan and his wife Apolonia. Juan and Apolonia try to convince Kino to get rid of the pearl as it is proving to be a bad omen for him but he refuses.

That night, Kino, Juana, and Coyotito leave their village and head toward Loreto. Kino is suspicious that they will be followed and thieves will try to snatch the pearl, so he tries to leave no tracks behind. They decide to travel at night and rest during the day. Juana and Coyotito fall asleep, and soon Kino does too. He is suddenly awakened by noises, creeps out from where they are hiding, and sees trackers who are following them. Once the trackers pass by the hiding place, Kino and his family head toward the high mountains. When they reach the first rise of the mountains, Kino tries to convince Juana to hide with Coyotito while he leads the trackers away, but she refuses so they head higher up the mountains to where Kino finds a stream. There, Kino hides Juana and Coyotito in a small cave and makes false tracks up the side of the mountain, hoping to mislead the trackers; he then hides in the cave with his family. Kino takes his white clothes off so that no one will notice his white clothing. Kino, realizing that the trackers will discover them in the morning, vows to attack the trackers before the trackers attack him and his family. He goes towards the campfire. One of the trackers was taking guard while two others were sleeping.

Coyotito feels a mosquito sting and he begins to cry. The tracker hears the sound and thinks that it must be a coyote pup. But the cries continue so the guarding tracker shoots in the direction of the cries. Kino attacks the tracker at the same time and kills all three of them. Kino can hear nothing but silence. He comes back and sees Coyotito dead from that shot of the tracker who was taking a guard. Juana and Kino, united and beleaguered, walk back to the village side-by-side with Coyotito’s dead body in Juana’s shawl. Kino carries a rifle stolen from one of the trackers he killed. The two approach the gulf, and Kino, who now sees the image of Coyotito with his head blown off in the pearl, throws it into the ocean.

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!

Thomas Gray Biography and Works | Summary of Ode On the Spring

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Thomas Gray was an English poet who was born on 26 December 1716 and died on 30h July 1770. He was educated at Eton College. In 1734, He joined Peterhouse, Cambridge for higher education but chose to shift to Pembroke College in the same year. He spent most of his life as a scholar in Cambridge. In 1742, he began writing poems and publishing them. His first published work was An Ode on the Spring which was published in 1742. His other poem "Sonnet on the Death of Richard West" was also published in 1742 which he wrote after the death of his close friend Richard West.

Thomas Gray is majorly known for his famous poem ‘Elegy Written in Country Churchyard’ which was published in 1751. The contemplates such themes as death and the afterlife. These themes foreshadowed the upcoming Gothic movement. Because of this poem, he became known as one of the Graveyard Poets. The "Graveyard Poets", also termed "Churchyard Poets", was a number of pre-Romantic poets of the 18th century characterized by their gloomy meditations on mortality, "skulls and coffins, epitaphs, and worms" elicited by the presence of the graveyard. Moving beyond the elegy lamenting a single death, their purpose was rarely sensationalist. The "graveyard poets" are often recognized as precursors of the Gothic literary genre, as well as the Romantic movement. The term "Graveyard School" refers to four poems: Thomas Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard", Thomas Parnell's "Night-Piece on Death", Robert Blair's The Grave, and Edward Young's “Night-Thoughts”.

Gray also wrote a mock-elegy titled ‘Ode on the Death of a Favourite Cat, Drowned in a Tub of Goldfishes’ that he wrote for his friend Horace Walpole’s cat. The mock elegy was published in 1747. In the same year (1747) he wrote “Ode to a Distant Prospect of Eton College” which was published anonymously. In this poem, he recalled his schooldays as a time of great happiness. It was a Horatian Ode with a calm and reflective form. In contrast to the lofty, heroic Pindaric odes, most of Hortian odes are intimate, calm, and reflective; they are often addressed to a friend and deal with friendship, love, and the practice of poetry.

In 1754, Gray published ‘The Progress of Poesy: A Pindaric Ode’. It was his first Pindaric Ode. A Pindaric Ode is a ceremonious poem written in a triadic structure consisting of a strophe (two or more lines repeated as a unit) followed by a metrically harmonious antistrophe, concluding with a summary line (called an epode) in a different meter. Pindaric odes are often ceremonious, celebrating the victory of a winner with a performance of choral chant and dance in an elaboratively complex, metaphorically rich, and intensively emotive language. His other famous Pindaric ode was The Bard: A Pindaric Ode which was published in 1757. Gray was self-critical and this is why he didn’t write much. His published content include only thirteen poems but all his poems were hugely popular. He gained so much popularity that in 1757, he was offered the post of Poet Laureate of England, which he refused. Gray considered his Pindaric odes as his best work. However, these were the poems in which the poet writes while considering the sentiments of the audience. Samuel Johnson commented on Gray’s Elegy written in Country Churchyard and said, "I rejoice to concur with the common reader ... The Church-yard abounds with images which find a mirror in every mind, and with sentiments to which every bosom returns an echo".

Ode on the Spring:

Ode on The Spring was the first published poem by Thomas Gray. It was published in 1747. This poem is made up of five stanzas with ten lines in each. The rhyming scheme of each of the stanzas is ABABCCDEED.

Stanza 1 Lines 1-10

“Lo! where the rosy-bosomed Hours,
Fair Venus' train, appear,
Disclose the long-expecting flowers,
And wake the purple year!
The Attic warbler pours her throat,
Responsive to the cuckoo's note,
The untaught harmony of spring:
While, whisp'ring pleasure as they fly,
Cool Zephyrs thro' the clear blue sky
Their gathered fragrance fling.”

The poem is all about Spring and its beauties and wonders that it brings to the world. The first stanza speaks of the beautiful sunrises, the flowers blossoming, the birds singing and flying, and a great smell in the air. This stanza is marked by both neo-classical characteristics and the romantic temper of the poet. The time of spring is personified as the “rosy-bosom’d Hours” which are regarded as the attendants of Venus. The winds and the breezes have been personified as Zephyrs (that is, the followers of Zephyrus, the god of winds). The Nightingale is described as “the Attic warbler”, and this is an example of poetic diction.

Stanza 2 Lines 11-20

“Where'er the oak's thick branches stretch
A broader browner shade,
Where'er the rude and moss-grown beech
O'er-canopies the glade,
Beside some water's rushy brink
With me the Muse shall sit, and think
(At ease reclined in rustic state)
How vain the ardour of the Crowd,
How low, how little are the Proud,
How indigent the Great!”

The second stanza is about sitting next to a bank during the season. In this stanza, the poet addresses his Muse and suggests how he and his Muse will cherish the natural pleasantries of the season while they (poet and the Muse) also meditate upon the smallness and insignificance of the people in the city who feel proud of themselves, and upon the extreme poverty of those persons who think themselves to be very rich and exalted.

Stanza 3 Lines 21-30

“Still is the toiling hand of Care;
The panting herds repose:
Yet hark, how through the peopled air
The busy murmur glows!
The insect-youth are on the wing,
Eager to taste the honied spring
And float amid the liquid noon:
Some lightly o'er the current skim,
Some show their gayly-gilded trim
Quick-glancing to the sun.”

In the third stanza, the poet speaks of all the insects wanting to pollinate. It appears as nature poetry as the poet describes the beauty of the scene. He observes and describes the sounds coming from the insects which are passing through the prime of their existence, and which are fluttering their wings as they fly about through the air. These insects are eager to taste the sweetness of the flowers that bloom during this season (namely spring). These insects fly in a leisurely manner on the surface of some brook at noon-time.

Stanza 4 Lines 31-40

“To Contemplation's sober eye
Such is the race of Man:
And they that creep, and they that fly,
Shall end where they began.
Alike the Busy and the Gay
But flutter thro' life's little day,
In Fortune's varying colours drest:
Brushed by the hand of rough Mischance,
Or chilled by Age, their airy dance
They leave, in dust to rest.”

The fourth stanza goes back to him thinking about the season. He wonders about these wonderful insects and how they will end. All these insects are dressed in the different colors with which Fate has endowed them. Some of these insects shall get killed by an accidental blow from someone, and some of them shall die a natural death in due course. These flying insects would ultimately cease their movements through the air and would end their existence to rest on the ground below where they would mingle with the dust.

Stanza 5 Lines 41-50

“Methinks I hear, in accents low,
The sportive kind reply:
Poor moralist! and what art thou?
A solitary fly!
Thy joys no glittering female meets,
No hive hast thou of hoarded sweets,
No painted plumage to display:
On hasty wings thy youth is flown;
Thy sun is set, thy spring is gone -
We frolic while 'tis May.”

The fifth stanza covers all the stanzas comparing himself and others like him to flies. He wondered about the fate of insects and now the poet contemplates what might be the answer of those insects. This is what the insects have to the poet, “You are a miserable preacher delivering sermons to others. What are you yourself? You are no better than a lonely fly. You have no woman, dressed in bright and shining garments or wearing jewelry, to keep you company and to serve as a source of pleasure to you. You possess no storehouse full of accumulated pleasures from which you can draw any happiness at your will. You have no gaudy garments or showy equipment to display. Your youthful years have already passed, and they have passed in a hurried manner. The years of your prime are over, and thus the spring of your life has already ended while we are still enjoying our spring and are flying about merrily.

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!

I Died for Beauty but Was Scarce by Emily Dickinson | Structure, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. “I Died for Beauty but Was Scarce” is an allegorical macabre poem written by Emily Dickinson that was published posthumously in 1890. The poem offers a discussion between two idealist persons, one died for beauty, and the other died for death. The speaker who died for beauty develops friendship and a rapport with the martyr who died for truth. However, soon their discussion ends as their voices and identities dissolve into oblivion. The poem offers a contrast of idealism against the stark reality of death, emphasizing that death is far more permanent than the ideals people die for.

The poem can also be interpreted as a discourse between truth and beauty that are laid beside one another in the graveyard of mind.

Structure of I Died for Beauty but was scarce:

The poem consists of 12 lines composed in three quatrains or stanzas. The poem follows a formal rhyming scheme of ABCB. Each of the four lines in all the quatrains follows a uniformly structured metrical scheme. Iambic tetrameter and iambic trimeter dominate the poem. The tetrameter lines (the first and third in each stanza) have eight syllables and four feet, and the trimeter lines (the second and fourth) have six syllables and three feet. This structure offers a stress pattern of 4-3-4-3.

Dickinson used strong imagery in this poem. “Moss had reached our lips” and “covered up – our names” offer an imagery of the decaying effect of death. The two dead people buried in the same tomb are metaphors or personifications for the ideals of truth and beauty. Dickinson also used symbolism. While the ideals of truth and beauty symbolize perfection, death symbolizes failure. Dickinson used enjambment in lines 1,2, and 3 but used dashes and question marks in the other lines of the poem.

Summary of I Dies for Beauty but was scarce:

Stanza 1 Lines 1-4

“I died for Beauty – but was scarce
Adjusted in the Tomb
When One who died for Truth was lain
In an adjoining Room –“

The poem begins with a paradoxical tone as a dead person is speaking. It appears as if the poem is about the afterlife. However, the dead person is beauty personified. Beauty is being adjusted in the tomb carefully and lovingly. However, once she is inside, she feels lonely and scarce. She noticed that she wasn’t alone, there was someone else. A man who died for Truth. He may be a martyr or a soldier who died in the war. And the speaker could be a lover or a beautiful woman. Now, after their death, they both are put in the same tomb.

Stanza 2 Lines 5-8

“He questioned softly "Why I failed"?
"For Beauty", I replied -
"And I - for Truth - Themself are One -
We Brethren, are", He said -”

In the second stanza, the poetess opens up her metaphors. is a discourse between the one who died for beauty and the one who died for truth. Sensing the presence of beauty beside his tomb, truth enquires about her cause of death. He addresses her slowly and genuinely, understanding that he is touching on a sore topic. He speaks softly to Her. Then “beauty” gives her reply, listening to which “truth” connects himself to the cause. He calls them “brethren” as both of them had given up their lives for the fundamentals they believed in.

Dickinson used the term ‘failed’ for ‘died’. If a person fails the suggestion is that they somehow didn't quite make the grade in life, or died too young, or in suspicious circumstances. The poem appears thoroughly romantic and gothic but doesn’t appear macabre.

Stanza 3 Lines 9-12

“And so, as Kinsmen, met a Night -
We talked between the Rooms -
Until the Moss had reached our lips -
And covered up - Our names -”

In the third stanza, the poetess continues to describe the delicate relationship between the two ideals, Truth and Beauty. They have met like kinsmen at night and talked between their rooms. Their deaths for noble causes make them spiritually akin, which enables their communication. Like a found relationship where people do not run out of things to speak, the two keep communicating. Ironically, the conversation here happens between two corpses. Both have paid the ultimate price - how heroic, how perfect - and are now entering a new phase of their lives: death.

But, this doesn’t go long for they are covered by moss. The decay ends their ability to speak. They are once again silenced by the natural cycle of life and death. The image of the moss covering the bodies’ mouths erases not only their names but their memories from the time.

Dickinson was an avid reader and she read Shakespeare and John Keats. Some scholars suggest that this particular poem ‘I Died for Beauty but Was Scarce’ is a direct response to the penultimate stanza from Shakespeare's The Phoenix and the Turtle:

“Truth may seem but cannot be;
Beauty brag but 'tis not she;
Truth and beauty buried be.”

Some other scholars suggest that Emily’s poem could be inspired by the last two lines of Keats's Ode to a Grecian Urn:

“Beauty is truth, truth beauty,- that is all

Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”

In any case, Dickinson’s poem agrees with both Shakespeare and Keats and depicts the truth and beauty one in same, as a company in the afterlife.

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!

That Long Silence by Shashi Deshpande | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. That Long Silence is a novel by Shashi Deshpande that was first published in 1989. That Long Silence is a prime example of literary fiction. As opposed to genre fiction, literary fiction refers to the realistic fiction of human characters, or more broadly, "all serious prose fiction outside the market genres", the genres being, for example, science fiction, fantasy, thrillers, or Westerns. Literary fiction often involves a concern with social commentary, political criticism, or reflection on human conditions. This novel is focused on the character Jaya, her relationships, and her thoughts, and thus not much on the plot. Nothing much happens in the course of the novel but the author reflects upon the current situation of Indian women facing societal suppression and their will to change their situation.

Shashi Deshpande is known for her stories that resonate with the struggles of modern Indian women. While she questions and attacks the patriarchal norms of society, unlike a radical feminist, she doesn’t attack men for these social anomalies. That Long Silence is not a story of a single woman, but it’s a story of many women whose dreams, emotions, and feelings are getting crushed by the norms of our society. In addition, the other major theme of the novel is the importance of communication, and the expression of feelings and love between a couple sans which, their relationship and family go to tatters.

Characters of That Long Silence:

Jaya is the protagonist of the novel, a married woman, mother of two kids, a son, and a daughter Rita. She belongs to a middle-class Indian joint family. As a child, she was a clever, curious, and bright student with a desire to become a writer. However, her grandmother encourages her to act more conventionally so she can get a husband when she grows up, explaining that civilized and cultured girls are skilled at cooking, cleaning, and household labor. In addition, she tells Jaya to learn to be more accommodating and to keep quiet when she disagrees so that she may develop good relationships with her in-laws after her marriage. The teachings of her grandmother and mother deeply influence her and eventually, she becomes a subservient young woman. Her father is a government servant and her mother is a housewife. Ravi, her elder brother is a settled married man. Mohan is Jaya’s husband. He works at a private firm. He is aware of his duties as a patriarchial man and husband in society but he is not comfortable with that. He is ambitious and wishes to attain and offer the best facilities for his family. Ramukaka is Jaya’s uncle, the elder brother of her father. Kamat is a widower living in the neighborhood of Jaya. His only son is settled abroad and Kamat lives alone. Jaya develops a friendly rapport with him though she keeps it a secret.

The Title and the Theme:

“If I were a man and cared to know the world I lived in, I almost think it would make me a shade uneasy–the weight of that long silence of one-half of the world.”

Shashi Deshpande used this statement by Elizabeth Robins, the famous actress, writer, novelist, and activist as an epigraph for her novel and the title comes from that statement. ‘That Long Silence’ refers to the forced suppression of expression by women in general because of societal and cultural discrepancies. It is a scathing critique of our social institutions like marriage and family, and the way they stifle the growth and free expression of the individual.

The novel traces Jaya’s passage through a plethora of self-doubts, fears, guilt, smothered anger, and silence toward articulation and affirmation. Jaya is caught in an emotional eddy, and endeavors to come to terms with her protean roles, while trying, albeit in vain, to rediscover her true self, which is but an ephemera-an unfulfilled wife, a disappointed mother, and a failed writer, Jaya, in fact rejects the patriarchal notion of a unitary self or identity. She realizes that her silence and suppression are not only harming her, but it is detrimental to her family and her husband too. The main theme of the novel is the lack of communication

Summary of That Long Silence:

The novel begins as Jaya and Mohan prepare to shift from their well-settled, comfortable house to their old house in Dadar, Bombay, where they had stayed immediately after getting married when their financial condition was not good. They shift into their old apartment because Mohan has been caught in some business malpractice and an inquiry is in progress. Here in a small old flat, Jaya gets out of touch with her daily schedule and becomes an introvert. She sits deep in contemplation, thinking of her childhood, and tries to analyze herself. Jaya finds that she is an unsatisfied woman. She is neither a good wife nor a good mother and she remembers how she failed as a writer. Jaya recalls her past days, her upbringing the environment in which she was brought up, and the preachings that were thrust upon her when she was growing up e.g. she has been taught that “a husband is like a sheltering tree.” Though Jaya is a modern educated woman, she wishes to be an ideal wife and mother like Sita, Parvati, and other mythical figures. However, she often fails at that.

She remembers her daughter Revati’s last birthday and how she and Revati felt Mohan loved his niece more than his own daughter. But she does not say anything to Mohan as he only dismisses it as her “writer’s imagination” and nothing more. She always wishes to proceed as per her husband’s wish.

Jaya feels that a woman’s identity is defined by others, in terms of her relationship with men, i.e. as a daughter, as a wife, as a mother, etc. The question “What a woman does” is never asked but “who she belong to” is always considered important. She doesn’t have an identity of her own. Even her name is not her own and it keeps changing. She has two names, JAYA and SUHASINI. Jaya which means victory, is the name given by her father when she was born, and Suhasini, the name given after her marriage means a “soft, smiling, placid, motherly woman”. Both the names symbolize the traits of her personality. The former symbolizes revolt and the latter submission. Jaya remembers how painstakingly her uncle Ramukaka prepared a family tree, mentioning all the members of their family. However, Jaya’s name was not on that list, nor was her sister’s. When Jaya asked her uncle why her name was not included in the family tree, she came to learn that she now belongs to her husband's family and not her father's. All these thoughts continue to make her feel depressed and she becomes more distant from her husband.

Mohan faces further disgrace when he is found guilty of counterfeiting at his job and fired. Jaya’s sister Kusum visits Jaya and discusses her own husband from whom she has recently separated. Jaya thinks that Kusum’s abusive husband and her own distant one have very different flaws but that they stem from the same cultural expectations of the way men should treat women. Next, Jaya meets wither her brother Ravi, who speaks harshly about Mohan. When Mohan learns about this, he is angry with Jaya.

Jaya fails to realize that Mohan seeks her support in this difficult period. Mohan tried to discuss his issues with Jaya, but she didn’t know what to say and how to console him. Because of her silence during all these years, she has forgotten to express her thoughts. On the other hand, Mohan thought, she was behaving like this because he had lost his job. Misunderstandings started to occupy the gaps made by Jaya’s silence. Neither of them has ever been comfortable talking about their feelings and fears with each other. Mohan has no idea how to ask for what he needs, and Jaya has no idea how to offer it. The situation becomes even direr when the couple’s son, Rahul, runs away from home. Eventually, Mohan left the house and did not return for several days. Jaya’s physical and mental condition was devastated. She had no clue how to manage without Mohan. During all those years, she was only a follower and she did not learn how to make decisions of her own. She begins to contemplate her past.

As a child, she was a very curious and brilliant student who aspired to be a writer. Her grandmother was quite unhappy with her inquisitive nature. In her view, girls must remain silent and submissive all the time. They don’t have any right to ask so many questions. Jaya’s father was very fond of her daughter and he used to support her always. He encouraged Jaya to follow her dreams of being a successful writer. But, after his sudden death, Jaya became alone and no one ever tried to understand her feelings and emotions. She started suppressing her desires to satisfy the criteria of our society. In the subsequent time, she got married to Mohan. Mohan was a good man, but he was also a man, and just like every other man in our society, he also never made the effort to understand Jaya’s heart and her feelings. He thought that whatever he would do or say, Jaya would follow him blindly. So, he never bothered to ask about her views from small to big decisions. They shifted to Bombay and there Jaya gave birth to her son Rahul and daughter Rati. Her world revolves around her family. Initially, they stayed at a small house in Dadar, Bombay because their financial condition was not so good. Gradually, Mohan continued to make progress in his career and soon they bought a new bigger, much comfortable house in a better locality. Kamat was a widower, Jaya's neighbor upstairs in Dadar. He was a lonely man whose only son was living abroad. As Mohan remained busy in his office and Jaya’s kids spent most of their time in school and studies, Jaya developed a rapport with Kamat. However, she kept it a secret. During her first pregnancy, Jaya suggested that Mohan should cook. Mohan didn’t like the idea because it is not a man’s job but since there was no other woman to help, he did. However, she confessed to Kamat that the sight of Mohan cooking made her uneasy because she thought it was unmanly. Jaya always wished to become a writer so in her free time she begins writing stories. She made a good start as a writer by creating a story that won first prize and was published in a magazine. But Mohan's reaction to the story was very disheartening. He assumed the story was about their personal lives. He was worried and pained to think that people he knew would think he was the kind of person the man in the story was. Jaya was hurt by this discouragement. However, Kamat appreciated her story. She decided to continue writing under a false name but most of her other stories were rejected. Kamat reviewed her stories and told her that the stories showed Jaya's anger and her strong passions. Jaya tried to remind him what she had actually learned from her husband in her first memorable argument with him, that a woman cannot be angry, that anger makes a woman unwomanly. Kamat told her that she should not use a fake name and should work harder. Jaya told him that she didn’t have time for serious work because of her domestic responsibilities. Kamat rebuked her and said, “I warn you – beware of your 'women are the victims' theory. It drags you down into a soft squishy swamp of self-pity. Take it seriously, woman. Don't hide behind a fake name. And work-, work if you want others to take you seriously.” However, she continued to hide behind her excuses. Jaya always respected Kamat who

showed much understanding and sympathy for Jaya. In fact, Jaya was more free and uninhibited with him than she was with her husband. But she was not confident enough to tell her husband about her friendship with Kamat. She kept it a secret as friendship between a married woman and another man is always viewed with suspicion and disapproval. One day, when she visited Kamat’s apartment, she found him dead on the floor. She panicked and left the apartment silently. Jaya couldn't even stay and pay tribute to her best friend in his death for fear of ruining her marriage. Now when Mohan has left, she realizes that she failed as a wife, a mother, and a friend. She feels as if she is a failure as an individual. Thinking about what has led to their separation, Jaya understands that she is partly to blame for withdrawing from her husband during his trying time. She recognizes that the long silence has stifled communication and openness in her family, making it difficult to support her husband and vice versa. Jaya remembers how Kamat always encouraged her to express herself and be truthful to herself.

Jaya sees a ray of hope when she receives a telegram from Mohan informing her that he will be home soon and his company is willing to take him back as he has been acquitted of the charges of corruption. Jaya is ready to accept Mohan back into her life, and she vows that never again will she let the long silence separate them emotionally from each other.

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

An Essay of Dramatic Poesy by John Dryden | Characters, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. John Dryden was one of the most important authors, dramatists, poets, and literary critics of the Restoration Period. Dryden had a great influence such as Alexander Pope who greatly admired and often imitated him, and Samuel Johnson who considered him to have “refined the language, improved the sentiments, and tuned the numbers of English poetry.” Samuel Johnson termed John Dryden as the Father of English Criticism.

An Essay of Dramatic Poesy is a leisurely discussion between four contemporary writers. Dryden wrote it in a semi-dramatic manner and structured it as a dialogue between four friends on the river Thames. The group has taken refuge on a barge during a naval battle between the English and the Dutch fleets. The four gentlemen, Eugenius, Crites, Lisideius, and Neander (all aliases for actual Restoration critics and the last for Dryden himself), begin an ironic and witty conversation on the subject of poetry, which soon turns into a debate on the virtues of modern and ancient writers. Neander is the one who holds the views of Dryden. Unlike other characters, Neander does not diminish the arguments that are contrary to his views. Though he favors modern drama, he does not blame others.

Characters of An Essay of Dramatic Poesy:

The four characters of An Essay of Dramatic Poesy are Eugenius modeled on Sir Charles Sackville, an English poet, and courtier, Crites modeled on Sir Robert Howard, an English playwright, and politician, Lisideius modeled on Sir Charles Sedley, an English noble, dramatist, and politician, and Neander, modeled on Dryden himself. The four people discuss three topics:

(1) the relative merit of classical drama (upheld by Crites) vs. modern drama (championed by Eugenius);

(2) whether French drama, as Lisideius maintains, is better than English drama, and

(3) whether plays in rhyme are an improvement upon blank verse drama. Crites oppose this despite favoring the Ancients earlier while Neander suggests that rhyme in Dramas is certainly an improvement though he initially defended Elizabethans who introduced blank verse in dramas. 

In addition, the four also discuss the importance of maintaining the three unities of Time, Place, and Action from Aristotle’s Poetics. In the late 17th century, Shakespeare was severely criticized for his careless attitude towards the mixing of genres and neglect of the three Unities. It was Dryden who elevated Shakespeare to the height of his natural genius. Crites support Ben Johnson and Beaumont and Fletcher for their correctness and maintaining the three Unities. Dryden supports Shakespeare and defends him for mixing the genres and creating Tragicomedies. Dryden further says, “I am apt to believe the English language in them arrived at its highest perfection”. If Ben Jonson is a genius for correctness, Shakespeare excels in wit.

Summary of An Essay of Dramatic Poesy:

The narrative begins during a battle going on between England and the Netherlands. Four gentlemen, probably authors are traveling on a barge down the river Thames, seeking a vantage point from which they can hear the battle safely.

Through these four characters, Dryden defines drama as a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind. The word ‘just’ suggests that literature imitates (and not merely reproduces) human actions. However, for Dryden, ‘poetic imitation’ is different from an exact, servile copy of reality, for, the imitation is not only ‘just’, but it is also ‘lively’.

Lisideus is the one who claims Drama is a just and lively imitation of human nature and the debate continues to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of French and English Drama, Ancient, and Modern Drama, and the importance of “Unity in French Drama”.

The sound of cannon fire initiates the discussion about the quality of English composition. Crites bemoans the fact that, even in the event of victory, they will be punished “in being subject to the reading and hearing of so many ill verses as he is sure will be made on that subject”. Lisideius seconds this objection, adding that some of these glory-hungry poets will be prepared “either way,” so “they can produce not only a panegyric upon the victory but, if need be, a funeral elegy for the duke”. Thus, Crites and Lisideius criticize the modern writers. However, Eugenius tries to defend the modern writers. Crites attacks Modern English dramatists and says that the Moderns are still imitating the Ancients and using their forms and subjects, relying on Aristotle and Horace, adding nothing new, and yet not following their good advice closely either, especially concerning the Unities of time, place and action. Crites praises Ben Jonson as the best in English drama, saying that he followed the Ancients "in all things" and offered nothing really new in terms of "serious thoughts".

Eugenius says that "the moderns have profited by the rules of the ancients" but moderns have "excelled them." He points first to some discrepancies in the applications of the Unities, mentioning that there seem to be four parts in Aristotle's method: the entrance, the intensifying of the plot, the counter-turn, and the catastrophe. But he points out that somewhere along the line, and by way of Horace, plays developed five acts (the Spanish only 3). As regards the action, Eugenius contends that they are transparent, everybody already knows what will happen; that the Romans borrowed from the Greeks; and that the deus ex machina convention is a weak escape. As far as the unity of place is concerned, he suggests that the Ancients were not the ones to insist on it so much as the French and that insistence has caused some artificial entrances and exits of characters. The unity of time is often ignored in both. As to the liveliness of language, Eugenius countersuits Crites by suggesting that even if we do not know all the contexts, good writing is always good, it is always discernible if done well. He goes on to say also that while the Ancients portrayed many emotions and actions, they neglected love, "which is the most frequent of all passions" and known to everyone. He mentions Shakespeare and Fletcher as offering "excellent scenes of passion."

Lisideius supports Crites and argues in favor of Ancient writers. He agrees with Eugenius that the Elizabethan drama was superior. Then they had their Jonson, Beaumont, and Fletcher. But English drama has decayed and declined since then. They live in an awful age full of bloodshed and violence, and poetry is an art of peace. Since France is relatively at peace, poetry flourishes in France and not in England. He mentions Corneille (1606-84) as the best French dramatist and the English have no dramatist equal to him.

Crites and Lisideius support French dramatists in the following ways:

a) They follow the Ancients and carefully observe the Unity of Time in their plays. In most French plays, the entire action is limited to one place and thus they follow the Unity of Place. French plays are never overloaded with sub-plots and hence the French follow the Unity of Action. English playwrights, on the other hand, continue to divert from one action to the other, and its due effects. Licideius says that no drama in the world is as absurd as the English tragic-comedy.

b) The French comedies are based on well-known Ancient stories. The French playwrights transform these stories for dramatic purposes and thus, in some way, they are superior even to the Ancients. The plots of French plays are a mixture of truth with fiction based on historical invention. Crites criticize English dramatists like Shakespeare, who do not modify and transform their stories for dramatic purposes. He says that English dramatists lack verisimilitude (likeness to reality) while the French plays have it.

c) The French dramatists keep their plots simple and do not burden it with subplots but the English burden their plays with actions and incidents which have no logical and natural connection with the main action so much so that an English play is a mere compilation. Hence the French plays are better written than the English ones.

d) The English plays concentrate on one major character while ignoring the others and thus, the greater part of the action is concerned with him. But in French plays, the other characters are not neglected. In French plays, such narrations are made by those who are in some way or the other connected with the main action.

e) They also criticize Engish drama for having too much bloodshed and gory.

Defense of The English Dramatists:

At this point, Neander (Dryden) intervenes in favor of English dramatists. He stresses on the definition of Drama suggested by Lisideius and says that English playwrights are best at "the lively imitation of nature" (i.e., human nature). French poesy is beautiful; it is beautiful like a "statue" but is not lively. He defends the English invention of tragi-comedy by suggesting that the use of mirth with tragedy provides "contraries" that "set each other off" and gives the audience relief from the heaviness of straight tragedy. He suggests that the use of well-ordered sub-plots makes the plays interesting and helps the main action. Neander says that English plays are more entertaining and instructive because they offer an element of surprise that the Ancients and the French do not. Neander says that the audience knows that nothing of the drama is real yet they feel like it is all real because drama imitates reality. So why should they think scenes of deaths or battles any less "real" than the rest? Neander suggests that it may be there are simply too many rules and often following them creates more absurdities than they prevent.

Crites continues to support Ancient Playwrights and presents the following arguments:

a) Ancients are obviously the best and that is why the Modern playwrights continue to imitate them. They use the foundation built by the Ancients.

b) The Ancients had a special genius for drama, and in their particular branch of poetry, they could reach perfection. Just as they excel in drama.

c) During the Greek and Roman periods, poetry was more honored than any other branch of knowledge. Poets were encouraged to excel in this field through frequent competitions, judges were appointed and the dramatists were rewarded according to their merits. But in modern times there is no such spirit of healthy rivalry and competition. Poets are neither suitably honored nor are they rewarded.

d) Ancients were a better observer of nature and faithfully represented nature in their work. Modern however are lousy. They do not observe and study Nature carefully and so they distort and disfigure nature in their plays.

e) Crites say that the Modern playwrights continue to follow the same rules of Dramatic composition set by the Ancients yet, they often disregard the Unities, of Time, Place, and Action.

Eugene counters these arguments in support of Modern playwrights. He agrees that the Moderns have learned much from the Ancients. But he adds that by their own labor, the Moderns have added to what they have gained from them.

a) The Moderns have perfected the division of plays and divided their plays not only into Acts but also into scenes.

b) Eugene counters the charge of the three Unities and says that even the Ancients’ observance of the three unities is not perfect. The Ancient critics, like Horace and Aristotle, did not make mention of the Unity of Place. Even the Ancients did not always observe the Unity of Time. Euripides, a great dramatist, no doubt, confines his action to one day, but, then, he commits many absurdities.

c) Eugene attacks Ancient writers and says Ancient dramas have too much narration at the cost of Action. Instead of providing the necessary information to the audience through dialogues the Ancients often do so through monologues. The result is, that their play becomes monotonous and tiresome.

d) He further attacks Ancient writers and says that there is no poetic justice in their plays. Instead of punishing vice and rewarding virtue, they have often shown a prosperous wickedness and an unhappy piety.

e) He attacks the themes of Ancient plays. The proper end of Tragedy is to arouse “admiration and concernment (pity)”. But their themes are lust, cruelty, murder, and bloodshed, which instead of arousing admiration and pity arouses “horror and terror”.

Thus, Dryden took no extreme position and was sensible enough to give the Ancients their respect. He mentions the achievement of the Ancients and the gratitude of the Moderns to them and then he presents the comparative merits and demerits of each more clearly.

Defense of Tragi-Comedy or Mixing the Genres:

Cites and Lisideius criticize Shakespeare for mixing the genres and creating Tragicomedies. Neander supports Shakespeare though. He vindicates tragi-comedy on the following grounds:

a) Tragedy and comedy are contrasting feelings when placed together appropriately, they offer a balance.

b) He says that the continued gravity of a tragedy may depress the spirit of the audience while a scene of mirth placed in between refreshes and energizes the audience. Comic scenes offer relief to the audience.

c) Comedy or mirth does not reduce the value of compassion and thus the serious effect that tragedy aims at is not disturbed by mingling of tragic and comic.

d) One can easily turn their eyes from an unpleasant thing to a pleasant one. Similarly, the audience faces no difficulty in moving from the tragic to the comic, rather it reinvigorates them.

e) The English dramatists have perfected a new way of writing which was not known to the Ancients. If Aristotle could see the works of Modern English writers, he might have appreciated them. He says that tastes change with time. The Ancients cannot be a model for all times and countries, “What pleased the Greeks would not satisfy an English audience”. Had Aristotle seen the English plays “He might have changed his mind”.

Thus, as an intelligent and shrewd critic, Dryden defends the Modern English authors especially Shakespeare, and supports liberal classicism.

Support for Rhymed Verses in Dramas:

Elizabethan dramas were known for the excellent use of Blank Verse which came into vogue right after Thomas Sackville used Blank Verse in Gorboduc. Dryden too followed the trend in his play ‘Aurangzebe’. However, the dramatists and authors of the Restoration period preferred rhymed Heroic couplets over Blank verse and Dryden also defends the use of Heroic couplets in playwrights.

Crites begin attacking modern playwrights on the issue of Rhyme violently on the following grounds:

a) Rhyme is unnatural in plays because a play is in dialogues and nobody speaks in rhyme.

b) Though nobody speaks in Blank Verse either, it is nearer to prose and according to Aristotle, tragedy should be written in a verse form which is nearer to prose.

c) Rhyme can be allowed in comedies but never in tragedies.

Neander then counters the attack and defends the use of Heroic couplets in dramas by saying-

a) The use of verse or rhyme doesn’t make a language natural. It appears natural only when the choice and the placing of the word are natural in a natural order which makes the language natural.

b) One can make use of hemistich, manipulation of pauses and stresses, and the change of meter to make Rhyme appear to imitate nature.

c) The Elizabethans achieved perfection in the use of blank verse but the Moderns cannot excel them, or achieve anything significant or better in the use of blank verse. Hence they must use rhyme, which suits the genius of their age, and should excel in that.

d) Rhyme is the noblest kind of verse while tragedy is a serious play representing nature exalted to its highest pitch. Thus, Rhyme suits tragedy better because both are the best in their sphere.

At the end of his essay, Dryden again says that Rhyme is more suited for dramas because rhyme adds to the pleasure of poetry. Rhyme helps the judgment and thus makes it easier to control the free flights of the fancy. The primary function of poetry is to give ‘delight’, and rhyme enables the poet to perform this function well.

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!