The Great Derangement by Amitav Ghosh | Structure, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable is a non-fiction book by Indian author Amitav Ghosh, published in 2016. In this work, Ghosh explores the cultural, political, and philosophical challenges posed by climate change, arguing that contemporary literature, art, and politics have largely failed to address the scale and urgency of the crisis. He critiques modern literature and art for their inability to grapple with the enormity of climate change. He argues that the tools of storytelling and representation are inadequate to convey the interconnectedness and complexity of the crisis. The book examines how colonialism, industrialization, and capitalism have contributed to the current environmental crisis. Ghosh highlights the unequal distribution of climate impacts, particularly on marginalized communities. Ghosh discusses how political systems and institutions have failed to respond effectively to climate change, often prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term sustainability.

The sub title of the book is Climate Change and the Unthinkable; it refers to humanity's collective inability to fully comprehend and act on the existential threat of climate change. Ghosh suggests that this "derangement" stems from a disconnect between human societies and the natural world. Despite the grim analysis, Ghosh calls for a reimagining of human relationships with nature and a renewed sense of collective responsibility. He emphasizes the importance of storytelling and art in fostering this transformation.

Structure of The Great Derangement:

The book is structured into three main sections, each exploring a different dimension of the climate crisis: Stories, History, and Politics. These sections are interconnected, building a comprehensive argument about why humanity has failed to adequately address climate change and how we might begin to confront it.

Summary of The Great Derangement: Stories

Ghosh begins with an assertion that contemporary fiction does not deal with climate change in any real way. It might include aspects of the supernatural, or take on a dystopian theme, but it does not deal with the crisis in the here and now. He connects this to the development of the modern novel, which happened coterminously with science’s embrace of “gradualism” as opposed to “catastrophism.” He questions why climate change is rarely a central theme in serious literary fiction. He observes that while genres like science fiction and fantasy occasionally tackle environmental themes, mainstream literature tends to avoid them. Modern literature focuses on individual, human-centered stories, which makes it difficult to address the collective and global nature of climate change. In a way, he criticizes Romantic individualism. He complains that Climate change is often treated as something "unreal" or distant, even though it is a pressing reality. Ghosh suggests that the tools of modern storytelling are inadequate to convey the interconnectedness and complexity of the climate crisis.

He attacks realism and critiques the conventions of modern realism, which prioritize probability and relatability over extraordinary or improbable events. Modern literature is rooted in the idea of probability—events that are likely and relatable. Climate change, however, often manifests in extreme, improbable events (e.g., hurricanes, floods, and wildfires) that seem to defy the norms of everyday life. The recently occurred COVID-19 crisis can be considered one example. These "freak" events are increasingly becoming the new normal, yet literature struggles to incorporate them because they disrupt the expected patterns of storytelling. Ghosh contrasts this with older storytelling traditions, where the extraordinary and the supernatural were often integral to the narrative. He suggests that modern literature must reintegrate nature into its narratives to better reflect the realities of climate change. Amitav Ghosh references Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, a prominent 19th-century Bengali writer, as an example of how literature in non-Western traditions has historically engaged with the extraordinary and the supernatural. Ghosh uses this reference to contrast the limitations of modern Western literary realism with the more expansive narrative traditions found in other cultures. He mentions Rajmohan’s Wife, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's first novel and one of the earliest Indian novels written in English. While the novel is not explicitly about nature or climate change, Ghosh references it as an example of how early Indian literature often wove together human drama with the natural world, reflecting a deeper connection between people and their environment. Ghosh's mention of Rajmohan's Wife underscores his broader argument: that literature must draw inspiration from older, more diverse traditions to reinvent itself and better address the climate crisis. He stresses the role of art and culture in shaping societal responses to climate change.

History:

The second part of the book is titled History. This section delves into the historical roots of the climate crisis, particularly the role of imperialism, industrialization, and capitalism in shaping the modern world. Amitav Ghosh argues that understanding the historical context of climate change is essential for addressing its present and future challenges. Ghosh traces the origins of the climate crisis to the rise of European imperialism and the Industrial Revolution, which transformed the global economy and environment. The exploitation of natural resources by colonial powers laid the groundwork for the modern fossil fuel economy. The Industrial Revolution, driven by coal and later oil, marked the beginning of large-scale carbon emissions and environmental degradation. Ghosh emphasizes that the climate crisis is not an accidental byproduct of progress but a direct result of historical processes rooted in exploitation and inequality.

Colonial powers exploited the natural resources of colonized regions, including forests, minerals, and agricultural land, to fuel their industrial economies. Ghosh highlights the impact of British colonialism on India, where forests were cleared for timber and agriculture, disrupting local ecosystems and livelihoods. The colonial legacy of resource extraction and environmental degradation continues to shape global inequalities and climate vulnerabilities.

Ghosh critiques the historical and ongoing exploitation of the Global South by the Global North, which has contributed to the climate crisis while leaving poorer nations more vulnerable to its impacts. He discusses how colonial histories of resource extraction and environmental destruction have created lasting inequalities, making it harder for former colonies to adapt to climate change. The concept of "climate justice" is central to this discussion, emphasizing the need to address historical and structural inequalities in climate responses. Ghosh traces the history of coal and oil, from their role in powering the Industrial Revolution to their central place in the modern global economy. He argues that the fossil fuel economy is deeply entrenched in political and economic systems, making it difficult to transition to more sustainable alternatives. The reliance on fossil fuels has created a "carbon economy" that prioritizes short-term profits over long-term sustainability.

Ghosh calls for a deeper understanding of how historical processes have shaped the modern world and contributed to the climate crisis. He emphasizes the importance of learning from history to avoid repeating past mistakes and to develop more equitable and sustainable solutions. This historical perspective is essential for building a more just and effective response to climate change.

Politics:

In the "Politics" section of The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable, Amitav Ghosh examines the political dimensions of the climate crisis, critiquing the failures of nation-states, international agreements, and corporate power to address the urgency of the issue. He argues that the climate crisis requires a radical rethinking of political systems and collective action.

Nation-states are often driven by economic growth and political power, which can conflict with the need for climate action. The competitive nature of international relations undermines cooperation on global issues like climate change. Ghosh highlights the limitations of national sovereignty in addressing a crisis that transcends borders and requires collective action.

He critiques the reliance on voluntary commitments and market-based solutions, which often prioritize economic interests over environmental sustainability. He argues that international negotiations are dominated by powerful nations and corporations, leaving marginalized communities and vulnerable nations with little voice. The slow pace of international action contrasts sharply with the urgency of the climate crisis.

Ghosh highlights the role of lobbying, campaign financing, and corporate influence in shaping climate policies that prioritize profit over sustainability. The fossil fuel industry has actively promoted climate denial and delayed action, despite knowing the risks of climate change for decades. He calls for greater accountability and regulation of corporate power to address the climate crisis. Ghosh emphasizes the unequal distribution of climate impacts, with marginalized communities and developing nations bearing the brunt of the crisis. He critiques the historical responsibility of industrialized nations for the majority of carbon emissions, calling for reparations and support for vulnerable communities. Climate justice requires addressing both the causes and consequences of climate change fairly and equitably.

Ghosh highlights the power of activism, protests, and community organizing in pushing for systemic change. He points to examples of successful grassroots movements, such as the fight against fossil fuel extraction and the promotion of renewable energy. Collective action at the local, national, and global levels is essential for building a more sustainable and just future. He calls for a shift away from the growth-driven, fossil fuel-dependent economy toward a more sustainable and equitable model. He emphasizes the need for bold, visionary leadership and a reimagining of political priorities to prioritize the planet and future generations. Systemic change must address the root causes of the climate crisis, including inequality, exploitation, and unsustainable consumption.

In the "Politics" section, Ghosh provides a critical analysis of the political failures and challenges in addressing climate change, while also highlighting the potential for collective action and systemic transformation. This section builds on the earlier discussions of culture and history, emphasizing the interconnectedness of these dimensions in confronting the climate crisis.

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!

Aristotle’s Poetics | Summary, Analysis, Explanation

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Poetics by Aristotle is a foundational work of literary criticism that examines the principles of poetry, particularly tragedy and epic poetry.

While the original text is not explicitly divided into chapters, modern editions often break it down into sections for easier analysis. Researchers believe that the work was composed around 330 BCE and was preserved primarily through Aristotle's students' notes.

While the original text is not explicitly divided into chapters, modern editions often break it down into 26 sections or chapters for easier analysis. 

Summary of Poetics:

In Chapter 1, Aristotle introduces and defines poetry as a form of imitation (mimesis). It can imitate noble actions, people, or events. A poet has three means of imitation at his disposal——rhythm, language, and harmony. He may employ metres too, but the distinguishing merit of a poet is not that he writes in metre, but that it is an imitative nature of his work. He distinguishes between different types of poetry: epic, tragedy, comedy, dithyrambic poetry, and music. He says poetry differs based on the medium, objects, and manner of imitation.

In Chapter 2, Aristotle discusses the Objects of Imitation. He says that Poetry imitates human actions, which can be noble or base. Characters in poetry are either better than, worse than, or similar to real-life people. Tragedy imitates noble actions, while comedy imitates base or ridiculous actions. In Chapter 3, Aristotle discusses the Manner of Imitation. Poetry can imitate through narration, direct action, or a combination of both. Epic poetry uses narration, while drama (tragedy and comedy) uses direct action. The poet may imitate by narration -in which case he can either speak through another personality (which is purely narrative), or he may present all his characters as living and moving before us. This latter type is called drama.

In Chapter 4, he discusses Origins and Development of Poetry. He offers instinctive and psychological origins of poetry and says that Poetry arises from human instincts for imitation and rhythm. He also discusses historical origins of various forms of poetry. Tragedy evolved from improvisations by leaders of dithyrambs (choral hymns), while comedy originated from phallic songs. Tragedy developed over time, with Aeschylus and Sophocles contributing to its structure.

In Chapter 5, Aristotle explores and defines Comedy and Epic Poetry. He says that comedy is an imitation of men “worse than the average” which is not the same thing as bad characters. Comedy imitates inferior characters and focuses on the ridiculous rather than the harmful. He defines Epic Poetry and says that Epic poetry shares similarities with tragedy but differs in length, structure, and meter (epic uses hexameter). Tragedy is more concentrated and unified than epic poetry.

In Chapter 6, he offers Definition and Elements of Tragedy. Tragedy is defined as the imitation of a serious, complete action that evokes pity and fear (catharsis). The six elements of tragedy, in order of importance, are Plot (mythos) – the arrangement of events, Character (ethos) – the moral qualities of the agents, Thought (dianoia) – the reasoning behind characters' actions, Diction (lexis) – the choice of words, Melody (melos) – the musical elements, and Spectacle (opsis) – the visual elements. Aristotle stresses that the Plot is the main element of a tragedy and says, “A tragedy is impossible without action, but there may be one without character.”

In Chapter 7, he discusses the Structure of the Plot. According to his definition, a tragedy is an imitation of a whole action. A good plot must have a beginning, middle, and end. It should be complete, with a logical sequence of events. The plot should be of a reasonable length to allow for a change of fortune.

In Chapter 8, Aristotle stresses the Unity of Action. The plot must have unity of action, meaning all events should be connected and necessary to the story. Episodic plots, where events are not causally linked, are inferior.

In Chapter 9, he discusses Universality and Probability in poetry. Poetry deals with universal truths, while history deals with specific events. He suggests that poetry is better than History. The plot should follow probability or necessity, meaning events should happen logically.

In Chapter 10, Aristotle discusses Simple and Complex Plots. Plots are either simple or complex. A plot is simple when there is neither any unexpected change or reversal of situation nor a sudden discovery. A complex plot includes both Discovery and Reversal. A simple plot has a single, continuous action without a reversal or recognition. A complex plot includes a reversal (peripeteia) and/or recognition (anagnorisis), which are more effective in evoking pity and fear.

In Chapter 11, he further elaborates on Complex Plots and discusses Reversal, Recognition, and Suffering.

Reversal (Peripeteia) refers to a sudden change in the protagonist's fortune, often from good to bad, that is crucial to the plot.

In Oedipus Rex by Sophocles, Oedipus begins the play as a respected king of Thebes, determined to save his city from a plague. However, his investigation into the murder of the former king, Laius, leads to the shocking revelation that he himself is the murderer and that he has unknowingly married his mother, Jocasta. This reversal transforms him from a noble ruler into a tragic figure doomed to exile and suffering.

Recognition (Anagnorisis) is the moment when a character moves from ignorance to knowledge, often revealing a critical truth about their identity or situation.

In Oedipus Rex, the moment of recognition occurs when Oedipus realizes that he is the son of Laius and Jocasta, the king and queen he unknowingly killed and married. This revelation shatters his sense of identity and leads to his tragic downfall.

Suffering (Pathos) refers to a destructive or painful action, such as death, agony, or loss, that evokes pity and fear in the audience. After discovering the truth about his identity, Oedipus blinds himself in a fit of despair and is exiled from Thebes. His physical and emotional suffering is a direct result of his actions and ignorance.

In Chapter 12, Aristotle discusses the Parts of Tragedy. He divides tragedy into quantitative parts: prologue, episode, exode, and choral sections.

In Chapter 13, he describes The Ideal Tragic Hero. The tragic hero should be a person of high standing who is neither wholly good nor wholly evil. The hero's downfall results from a tragic flaw (hamartia) or error in judgment. Aristotle says that the best tragedies evoke pity and fear through the suffering of a relatable hero. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus's tragic flaw is his hubris (excessive pride) and ignorance. He believes he can outwit fate and avoid the prophecy that he will kill his father and marry his mother. His determination to uncover the truth, while admirable, blinds him to the possibility that he himself might be the cause of Thebes's suffering. Shakespeare’s Hamlet suffers the tragic flaw of Indecisiveness and overthinking. Macbeth’s tragic flaw is Ambition and susceptibility to manipulation.

In Chapter 14, Aristotle elaborates on Pity and Fear. Pity is evoked for someone who does not deserve their suffering. Fear is evoked when the suffering could happen to anyone. The best plots involve suffering within families, such as murder or betrayal among kin.

In Chapter 15, he discusses Character in Tragedies and says that Characters should be good, appropriate, consistent, and true to life. They should also be consistent in their actions and speech.

In Chapter 16, he describes Types of Recognition (Anagnorisis). Aristotle describes various forms of recognition, such as recognition by signs, through memory, or through reasoning. The best recognition arises naturally from the plot.

In Chapter 17, Aristotle offers some Practical Advice for Poets. Poets should visualize the action as they write. They should outline the plot before adding details and characters. Poetry implies either a happy gift of nature or a strain of madness. Aristotle reminds the poets that the Chorus should be regarded as one of the actors and should not be used for providing mere interludes.

In Chapter 18, he discusses the Complications and Resolutions of a Tragic Plot. The complication (desis) is the part of the plot where the conflict develops. The resolution (lysis) is the part where the conflict is resolved. The resolution should arise naturally from the plot, not through external means like divine intervention (deus ex machina).

In Chapter 19, Aristotle discusses Thought and Diction of a Tragedy. Thought refers to the themes and ideas expressed by the characters. Diction refers to the choice of words and style of language.

In Chapters 20-22, Aristotle discusses Language and Grammar to be used in poetry. He discusses the parts of speech, metaphors, and the importance of clarity in diction and emphasizes the use of appropriate and effective language. Diction should be clear but not mean.

In Chapters 23-24, he elaborates on Epic Poetry. Epic poetry shares many elements with tragedy but is longer and more expansive. It should also have unity of action and focus on a single theme. The plot in epic poetry should be constructed on dramatic principles. There should be a single subject, whole and complete. It should resemble a living animal in all its unity, differing in construction from history, which presents not a single action but a single period. The difference between Epic poetry and Tragedy lies in the scale and the meter, on which they are constructed. In Epic poetry, hexameter is used.

In Chapter 25, Aristotle addresses common Criticism of Poetry and explains how to evaluate a work. He emphasizes that poetry should be judged based on its own rules and goals, not external standards. He elucidates that the meaning of poetic truth as distinguished from the truth of fact. Aristotle emphasizes that the poet presents not facts but his own view of facts. A probable impossibility should be preferred to improbable possibility.

Chapter 26 offers a comparison between Tragedy and Epic Poetry. Tragedy is superior to epic poetry because it is more concentrated, uses more artistic elements (like spectacle and music), and achieves its effect more effectively. Possesses all the epic elements, it may even use the metre used in epic and has the additional advantage in its use of music and spectacle. Moreover, the canvas of tragedy being shorter, it has more concentrated effect; whereas, the bigger canvas and diffusion through a long extent of time, weaken the impression in Epic.

Critical Analysis:

In Poetics, Aristotle focuses almost exclusively on tragedy, giving limited attention to other forms of poetry, such as comedy or lyric poetry. His analysis of comedy, for example, is largely lost, leaving a gap in his theoretical framework. His definition of tragedy as requiring a noble protagonist, a unified plot, and a cathartic effect is seen as overly prescriptive. Many great works of literature, including modern tragedies, do not conform to these rules. Aristotle prioritizes plot (mythos) over character (ethos), arguing that character is secondary to action. This has been criticized for undervaluing the role of complex character development in storytelling. His insistence on the unity of action (a single, coherent plot) has been criticized as limiting. Many great works, such as Shakespeare’s dramas, episodic novels or postmodern narratives, thrive on multiple plotlines and fragmented structures. Aristotle emphasizes that events in a plot must follow probability or necessity. This has been criticized for excluding the role of chance, randomness, or the absurd in literature.

Aristotle wrote the work as a counterargument against Plato’s opposition to poetry and other art forms. According to Plato, poetry is "thrice removed from reality" because it imitates an imitation of the Forms (the ultimate reality), making it a distant and imperfect representation of true knowledge and reality. While Plato criticized mimesis (imitation or arts) as deceptive and inferior, twice removed from reality, Aristotle suggests that man can only imitate, and mimesis is natural, educational, and capable of revealing truth. However, Aristotle maintains that all poetry is imitation (mimesis). This view has been criticized for reducing literature to mere representation, ignoring its creative, expressive, and transformative potential.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss Classical Literary criticism. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Aristotle | Rhetoric and Poetics | Literary Criticism

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. Aristotle is considered one of the most important philosophers, thinkers, and polymaths of the Ancient world. He made significant contributions to various fields, including logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, natural science, and rhetoric. His work laid the foundation for much of Western philosophy and science. He was born in the year 384 BC in a wealthy family of Macedonia (North Greece). He traveled to Athens as a student to seek guidance from Plato at his famous school Academy and became his student. After his studies, he became a teacher in the same institute. He began teaching reasoning and debate at the Academy. After some time, he returned to Macedonia and tutored Alexander the Great there. After some years, he returned to Athens where he founded his own school called the Peripatetic school of philosophy in the Lyceum in Athens. He died in the year 322 BC.

Aristotle developed formal logic, particularly the syllogism, which became the cornerstone of logical reasoning for centuries. He explored the nature of being, existence, and reality, introducing concepts like substance, form, and matter. In Nicomachean Ethics, he argued that virtue lies in achieving a balance (the "Golden Mean") and that the purpose of human life is to achieve eudaimonia (flourishing or happiness). In Politics, he analyzed governance and human society, advocating for a mixed government and emphasizing the importance of the middle class. Aristotle studied biology, physics, and astronomy, though many of his scientific ideas were later disproven (e.g., geocentrism). His contribution in literature and literary concepts is immense. He analyzed persuasive communication in Rhetoric and explored literary theory in Poetics, defining tragedy and its components.

In Poetics, Aristotle explored the concept of Aesthetics, a branch of philosophy which deals with the idea of beauty. Aristotle's "Poetics" is one of the earliest and most influential works of literary criticism, written in the 4th century BCE. It focuses primarily on the nature of poetry, drama, and storytelling, with a particular emphasis on tragedy and epic poetry.

Rhetoric by Aristotle

Aristotle's "Rhetoric" is a foundational text in the study of persuasive communication, written in the 4th century BCE. It systematically explores the art of rhetoric, which Aristotle defines as the ability to discern the available means of persuasion in any given situation. The work is divided into three books, each focusing on different aspects of rhetoric.

In Book I, he discusses the role of Rhetoric and defines rhetoric as the counterpart of dialectic, a method of argumentation. While dialectic seeks truth through logical discussion, rhetoric aims to persuade an audience. Some orators are impressively influential. They may not sound logical but they succeed in persuading the listeners. He further classifies Persuasion in three parts: Ethos, which defines the character and credibility of the speaker, Pathos, which suggests the emotional appeal to the audience, and Logos, which consists of the logical argument or reasoning behind the speech or persuasion.

Aristotle offered three Genres of Rhetoric which include Deliberative: Concerned with future actions, often used in political debates, Forensic: Concerned with past actions, typically used in legal settings, and Epideictic: Concerned with praise or blame, often used in ceremonial speeches.

In Book 2, Aristotle emphasizes the importance of understanding the audience's emotions, beliefs, and values to effectively persuade them (Pathos). He provides a detailed analysis of various emotions, such as anger, fear, and pity, and how they can be elicited in an audience. He emphasizes that the speaker's character is crucial for persuasion. Aristotle discusses how a speaker can project wisdom, virtue, and goodwill to gain the audience's trust.

In Book 3, Aristotle discusses Style (Lexis), and Arrangement or Structure (Taxis) or a persuasive speech. He stresses the importance of clarity, appropriateness, and vividness in language. He advises against overly complex or ornate language that might obscure the message.

Major Theories by Aristotle:

Syllogism: The syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning introduced by Aristotle in his work Organon, specifically in the Prior Analytics. It is a logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions (premises) that are asserted or assumed to be true. Aristotle's syllogism is foundational to classical logic and has influenced Western thought for centuries. A syllogism consists of three parts: Major Premise: A general statement, Minor Premise: A specific statement related to the major premise, and Conclusion: The logical outcome derived from the two premises.

An example can be, All humans are mortal. (General statement); Socrates is a human. (Specific statement); Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (Logical conclusion). It is an example of Categorical Syllogism. The other two types are Hypothetical Syllogism: Involves "if-then" statements, and Disjunctive Syllogism: Involves "either-or" statements. (Either it is day or it is night; it is not day, therefore, it is night.)

Idea of Causality: Aristotle's theory of causality is a central aspect of his philosophy, particularly in his works Physics and Metaphysics. He proposed that understanding why things happen requires identifying their causes. Aristotle introduced the concept of the "four causes" (Greek: aitiai) to explain the reasons or principles behind the existence and nature of things. These four causes provide a comprehensive framework for analyzing the factors that contribute to an object's being or an event's occurrence. The first cause is Material Cause; this refers to the physical substance or matter from which something is made (The material cause of a statue is the bronze used to create it). Formal Cause is the form, pattern, or essence of something—its defining characteristics or structure (the formal cause of a statue is the design or blueprint that shapes the bronze into a specific figure). Efficient Cause is the agent or process that brings something into being—the "maker" or "doer" (the efficient cause of a statue is the sculptor who carves it.) Final Cause is the purpose, goal, or end (telos) for which something exists or occurs (the final cause of a statue is to serve as a work of art or to honor a deity). During the Scientific Revolution, thinkers like Francis Bacon and René Descartes criticized Aristotle's focus on final causes, advocating instead for a mechanistic view of nature based on efficient causes.

The Golden Mean: Aristotle's concept of the Golden Mean is a central idea in his ethical philosophy, particularly outlined in his work Nicomachean Ethics. It represents the ideal middle ground between two extremes of behavior—excess and deficiency. According to Aristotle, virtue lies in finding this balance, which allows individuals to achieve eudaimonia (flourishing or happiness), the ultimate goal of human life.

Aristotle on Poetry:

Aristotle and Plato had fundamentally different views on poetry, reflecting their broader philosophical differences. While Plato was highly critical of poetry, Aristotle defended it as a valuable and meaningful art form. Their contrasting perspectives can be understood through their respective works: Plato's Republic (particularly Book X) and Aristotle's Poetics.

Mimesis (Imitation versus Creative Imitation)

Plato argued that poetry is a form of mimesis (imitation), which is twice removed from reality. According to his theory of Forms, the physical world is an imperfect copy of the eternal, unchanging Forms. Poetry, in turn, imitates the physical world, making it an imitation of an imitation. Unlike Plato, Aristotle saw mimesis (imitation) as a natural and innate human tendency. He argued that imitation is a way of learning and understanding the world. Poetry, as a form of mimesis, can reveal universal truths about human nature and experience, even if it is not literally true.

Catharsis:

Plato believed that poetry appeals to the emotions rather than reason, which can corrupt the soul. He argued that it stirs up irrational passions, such as grief, fear, or anger, and undermines self-control and rationality. In Republic, he famously banishes poets from his ideal city, fearing their influence on the guardians and citizens. Aristotle introduced the concept of catharsis (purgation or purification) to describe the emotional effect of tragedy. He believed that tragedy, through its depiction of suffering and conflict, allows audiences to experience and release emotions like pity and fear in a controlled and healthy way. This process, he argued, is psychologically beneficial and contributes to moral and emotional balance. Aristotle analyzed poetry (especially tragedy) in terms of its formal elements, such as plot (mythos), character (ethos), and thought (dianoia). He emphasized the importance of a well-constructed plot with a beginning, middle, and end. He saw poetry as a skilled craft that requires careful attention to structure and technique.

Universal Truth: Plato criticized poets for lacking true knowledge. He believed they create works based on appearances rather than truth, misleading their audiences. Aristotle argued that poetry is more philosophical than history because it deals with universal truths rather than specific events. While history recounts what has happened, poetry explores what could happen, making it a more profound and insightful art form. Plato criticized poetry for its potential to corrupt moral character. Aristotle defended poetry as a means of exploring universal truths and human nature. He valued poetry as an art form with intellectual and emotional benefits.
So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss Literary criticism and literary critics. Please stay connected with the discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Carpe Diem: Embracing Life in Literature | Literary Terms and Devices

 

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. "Carpe Diem" is a Latin phrase that translates to "seize the day" in English. As a literary term, it refers to a theme or motif that encourages individuals to make the most of the present moment, often emphasizing the fleeting nature of time and the inevitability of death. This concept has been widely explored in literature, particularly poetry, where it serves as a call to action to live life to its fullest and not to postpone happiness or fulfillment.

Origins and Historical Context:

The phrase originates from the Roman poet Horace's Odes (Book 1, Poem 11), where he writes:

"Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."
("Seize the day, trusting as little as possible in the future.")

Horace's advice reflects the philosophy of Epicureanism, which advocates for enjoying life's pleasures while one can, as the future is uncertain. The major theme of Carpe Diem literature is to highlight the ‘fleeting nature of life.’ Many works highlight how quickly time passes and the importance of living fully in the moment. In addition, the idea of Carpe Diem is also found in love poetry, where the urgency of seizing the day is linked to love, desires, and romantic encounters.

Carpe Diem in Literature

The theme has been a recurring motif in various literary movements and works:

1. Renaissance Poetry:

   In English literature, the concept became prominent during the Renaissance. Poets like Robert Herrick and Andrew Marvell used it to urge readers to embrace life and love before time runs out.

   In Marvell's "To His Coy Mistress," the speaker argues that they should act on their love now because "Time's winged chariot hurrying near" suggests that life is short. This poem urges the beloved to embrace love and passion without delay.

   Robert Herrick's "To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time" is a classic example that encourages young women to marry while they are still young and beautiful.

"Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old Time is still a-flying;
And this same flower that smiles today
Tomorrow will be dying."

2. Romanticism

Romantic poets like William Wordsworth and John Keats often explored the beauty of the present moment and the urgency of experiencing life deeply. Keats' "Ode on a Grecian Urn" reflects on the tension between eternal beauty and the fleeting nature of human life.

The "Carpe Diem" theme resonates in contemporary literature and popular culture, often serving as a reminder to prioritize experiences and relationships over material concerns. The phrase has transcended literature, influencing various aspects of life, including philosophy, self-help, and even motivational speaking. In Walt Whitman’s "Leaves of Grass", Whitman celebrates the present moment and the beauty of existence, urging readers to embrace life fully. As a literary term, "Carpe Diem" encapsulates a timeless and universal message about the importance of living in the moment. It resonates across cultures and eras, reminding readers of the transient nature of life and the value of making the most of the time we have.

So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss literary terms and devices. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!

Ariel by Sylvia Plath | Structure, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. "Ariel" is a collection of poems by Sylvia Plath, published posthumously in 1965. The title poem, "Ariel," is one of Plath's most famous works and is often interpreted as a powerful expression of transformation and liberation. The poem captures a moment of intense, almost ecstatic experience, as the speaker rides a horse named Ariel at dawn. The imagery is vivid and intense, with a sense of speed, freedom, and a merging with nature. The poem is known for its intense imagery and emotional depth, reflecting Plath's own struggles and her quest for identity and self-expression. The title "Ariel" has multiple connotations, including the name of the horse, the spirit Ariel from Shakespeare's "The Tempest," and the Hebrew word for "lion of God."

Plath's work often explores themes of death, rebirth, and the complexities of the self, and "Ariel" is no exception. The collection as a whole is considered one of her most significant contributions to literature, showcasing her unique voice and her mastery of poetic form. It should be noted that Sylvia Plath had a pet horse named Ariel. In this free verse poem, a speaker sheds her inner burdens on a morning horseback ride, becoming one with the natural force she feels in her horse and the landscape. The speaker's liberating but dangerous ride has often been read as a metaphor for writing, female empowerment, and/or psychological instability.

Structure of Ariel:

The poem is written in free verse, meaning it does not follow a strict rhyme scheme or meter. Instead, its structure is defined by its staccato lines, fragmented imagery, and rapid, breathless pace, which mirror the speaker's experience of riding a horse and the emotional and psychological transformation that accompanies it. The poem follows no strict order, but one can divide it into eleven stanzas. The first ten stanzas contain ten tercets (containing 3 lines each) while the last stanza contains a single line. This sudden change from the established form calls attention to the poem's conclusion—a conclusion that suggests both a gloriously violent ending and a new beginning. While the poem is not explicitly divided into sections, it can be seen as having a three-part structure. The poem begins in stillness ("Stasis in darkness") and quickly moves into motion, symbolizing a shift from inertia to action. In the second part, the speaker describes a merging with the horse and the natural world, suggesting a loss of self and a transcendence of boundaries.  The poem culminates in a moment of ecstatic, almost suicidal intensity, as the speaker becomes "the arrow" flying into the "cauldron of morning." The poet has used metaphor, simile, symbolism, imagery, alliteration, enjambment, juxtaposition, and repetition in the poem.

Summary of Ariel:

Lines 1-3

“Stasis in darkness.
Then the substanceless blue
Pour of tor and distances.”

The speaker describes her surroundings in the beginning lines. It is early morning and the darkness of night still lingers. As she looks into distance, she sees a “substanceless blue / Pour of tor and distances.” The craggy "tor[s]" (or rocky hills) seem to have become misty and immaterial, able to “pour” out in front of her. The imagery here suggests a blurry, dreamlike scene, and gives the impression that the speaker and the horse have moved from "stasis" to a rapid gallop. They were static a moment before, but now the horse is moving at a lightning speed. It should be noted that the speaker hasn’t mentioned a horse yet, but the imagery suggests rapid movement and the poem is about Ariel, the horse which may also allude to the spirit Ariel from Shakespeare’s The Tempest, or the biblical lion of God. The poem depicts a woman riding her horse in the countryside, at the very break of dawn. It details the ecstasy and personal transformation that occurs through the experience. The poet has used juxtaposition in the first stanza, expressing stasis and rapid movement in quick succession.

Lines 4-6

“God’s lioness,   

How one we grow,

Pivot of heels and knees!—The furrow”

The speaker describes the horse as ‘God’s lioness’, suggesting the strength and power of the horse; she is a fearful being. The horse is moving swiftly and the speaker is only able to see flashes of the horse’s movements. She sees the fast “Pivot of heels and knees!” And how Ariel propels her forward, deftly navigating the terrain. 

Lines 7-9

“Splits and passes, sister to   

The brown arc

Of the neck I cannot catch,”

The speaker compares the ‘furrow’ or the foot marks made by the horse on the ground as she runs swiftly to the brown arc (or the horse’s swiftly moving neck). They are like sisters moving together. The speaker also expresses her bewilderment as she finds it difficult to keep a hold on the ‘brown’ neck of the horse. The speaker feels as if she is losing the little control she had over the situation.

Lines 10-12

“Nigger-eye   

Berries cast dark   

Hooks—“

In these lines, the speaker suggests that darkness is diminishing. The horse is taking the speaker away from the darkness. Her mind is still affected by the darkness and its fear as she describes the dark ‘berries’ casting ‘hooks’ into her.

Lines 13-15

“Black sweet blood mouthfuls,   

Shadows.

Something else”

The speaker describes the black berries as ‘black sweet blood mouthfuls,’ offering a sense of dread and danger, as if something sinister is about to happen. This feeling matches with the fact that the speaker is riding a horse that is galloping swiftly, and she has little control over the horse. She sees ‘shadows’ and more flashes as she rides, and there is “Something else.” 

Lines 16-18

“Hauls me through air—

Thighs, hair;

Flakes from my heels.”

That something else is hauling her over the horse as if it is not her choice, she is forced to embark on this chaotic and somewhat terrifying ride on top of Ariel. She describes the power of Ariel as the horse is carrying her wherever it wants. She feels as if her own legs, thighs, hair, are falling like flakes from her heels, as if she is self-transforming into something else.

Lines 19-21

“White

Godiva, I unpeel—

Dead hands, dead stringencies.”

In these lines, the speaker brings contrast by describing herself as ‘white.’ She represents the opposite of darkness, that she has tasted in the dark blue berries. She alludes to herself to Godiva, a historical Anglo-Saxon noblewoman who rode naked on her horse, covered only by her long hair – through the streets of Coventry to gain a remission of the oppressive taxation that her husband, Leofric, imposed on his tenants. By doing so, she proved her loyalty to her husband and her generosity for the tenants. The speaker, amid the ride, can slough off things of no consequence –"dead hands, dead stringencies."  She is shedding the person that she has been and is becoming someone else. 

Lines 22-24

“And now I

Foam to wheat, a glitter of seas.   

The child’s cry”

The speaker views herself as the foam on wheat, as a sparkling of light on the ocean. She discerns a child's cry through a wall, but ignores it. The speaker begins to realize that this ride on Ariel is more than just an accidental brush with disaster; it is a wake-up call, an opportunity to change her way of life. She is changing from “Foam to wheat” and shedding her old self. She is becoming one with the landscape she is flying through. 

Lines 25-27

“Melts in the wall.   

And I

Am the arrow,”

The speaker ignores the child’s cry, her own existence is paramount to her, she is getting rid of her dark past. The child’s cry disappears out of her consciousness; she is part of nature with no need to dwell on the past. Like an arrow, she is speeding away from the darkness that is her past. Now, she is one with Ariel, the horse.

Lines 28-30

“The dew that flies

Suicidal, at one with the drive   

Into the red”

She compares herself to the dew that is quickly vanishing. She describes herself as ‘suicidal’ suggesting that she is ready and willing to forget or kill her past. The speaker, and her horse Ariel are one now, and they know where they are driving. She is no more afraid of the horse, or the ride, or the changes she has to go through, she is one with the horse now and she is confident of her destination. The speaker's suicidal impulse is paired with a sense of unity and purpose, creating a tension between destruction and transcendence.

Line 31

“Eye, the cauldron of morning.”

The speaker can see a new, intense, burning light at the end of her tunnel, and she, Ariel, is heading straight for it. This is where she will find her new life.

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! 

Sonnet: To the River Otter by Samuel Taylor Coleridge | Structure, Summary, Analysis

Hello and welcome to the Discourse. "To the River Otter" is a sonnet written by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a prominent English poet, literary critic, and philosopher of the Romantic era. The poem reflects Coleridge's deep connection to nature and his nostalgic longing for the landscapes of his youth. The River Otter, located in Devon, England, was personally significant to Coleridge, as it was near his childhood home. The speaker of the poem remains unnamed, but it is assumed that the poet is the speaker himself. In this poem, Coleridge reminisces about his childhood experiences by the River Otter, expressing a yearning to return to the innocence and simplicity of his youth. The imagery of the river, the stones, the willows, and the sand evoke a vivid picture of the natural world that left a lasting impression on him. The poem captures the Romantic ideal of finding solace and inspiration in nature, as well as the bittersweet nature of memory and the passage of time. The poem was possibly written in 1793 and was published in Sonnets from Various Artists in 1796.

Structure of To The River Otter:

Sonnet: To the River Otter is a fourteen line poem in a single stanza containing an Octave and a sestet joined by a volta. It follows traditional Petrarchan and Shakespearean sonnet. Coleridge adopted a rhyming scheme of ABBA ABBA for the octave and CDE CDE for the sestet. This division creates a clear separation between the octave, which introduces the theme (nostalgia for childhood and nature), and the sestet, which reflects on and resolves the emotional response to that theme. The volta, or thematic turn, occurs between the octave and the sestet. In this poem, the volta shifts from the vivid description of the river and childhood memories (octave) to the poet's emotional response and longing to relive those moments (sestet). The poem is written in iambic pentameter, a common meter for sonnets. Each line consists of five iambs (an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable), giving the poem a rhythmic and musical quality. Coleridge uses vivid natural imagery (e.g., "wild Streamlet," "willows grey," "bedded sand") to evoke the beauty of the River Otter and its connection to his childhood. The tone is nostalgic and reflective, with a sense of longing for the innocence and joy of youth. Coleridge has used Apostrophe, Personification, Alliteration, Enjambment, Metaphor, and Hyperbole, in the poem.

Summary of Sonnet: To the River Otter:

Lines 1-4

“Dear native Brook! wild Streamlet of the West!
How many various-fated years have past,
What happy and what mournful hours, since last
I skimmed the smooth thin stone along thy breast,”

The speaker begins with an Apostrophe, directly addressing the River Otter, personifying it as a dear friend or companion, which emphasizes his emotional connection to the river. He says that numerous years have passed since he spent his time along the stream and made the lovely childhood memories. Now, he looks back and remembers the sweet memories. He used to walk there, and skim the “smooth thin stone along thy breast.” Here again, the poet uses personification,  comparing the river’s surface to someone’s chest. The river's surface is metaphorically described as a "breast," suggesting tenderness and intimacy. He’s been happy since then, he’s also been sorrowful since then, a statement that represents the broader nature of the long time that has passed. Alliteration has been used in the first line (wild Streamlet of the West) with repetition of ‘w’ sound. In the second line, Enjambment has been used to create a flowing, conversational tone, mirroring the movement of the river and the stream of memories. In the third line, Anaphora has been used with repetition of ‘what.’ He reminisces about the years that have passed since he last skipped stones across its surface, recalling both happy and sorrowful moments from his past.

Lines 5-8

“Numbering its light leaps! yet so deep imprest
Sink the sweet scenes of childhood, that mine eyes
I never shut amid the sunny ray,
But straight with all their tints thy waters rise,”

In these lines, the speaker happily remembers the old times when he used to stroll and watch the stones skip along the river’s surface. It was a good time in his life, marked by the sweetness of childhood. He was filled with youth then, and with all the aspirations a child holds in their mind and heart. The River Otter symbolizes childhood innocence, joy, and the passage of time. It serves as a conduit for the poet's memories and emotions.

Lines 9-4

“Thy crossing plank, thy marge with willows grey,
And bedded sand that veined with various dyes
Gleamed through thy bright transparence! On my way,
Visions of Childhood! oft have ye beguiled
Lone manhood's cares, yet waking fondest sighs:
Ah! that once more I were a careless Child!”

Coleridge describes the vivid and enduring memories of his childhood by the river. He recalls specific details, such as the "crossing plank," the "willows grey," and the "bedded sand" that gleamed through the water. These images are deeply imprinted in his mind, and they rise before his eyes whenever he thinks of the river.

The speaker reflects on how these childhood memories have comforted him in his adult life, often easing his cares and bringing fond sighs. However, the memories also evoke a deep yearning to return to the carefree days of his youth. The poem ends with an emotional exclamation: "Ah! that once more I were a careless Child!"—expressing his longing to relive the innocence and joy of childhood.
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!