Monday, 15 November 2021

Absalom and Achitophel

CHARACTERS IN ABSALOM AND ACHITOPHEL

This blog is in response to the blog task given us as a classwork on Absalom and Achitophel by Dr. Dilip Barad sir. In this blog I am going to talk about the characters in the poem who are favoring King David (Charles II) and those who are against him.

Absalom and Achitophel:

Absalom and Achitophel is a Political Satire, satirical verse poem written in heroic couplet by the Poet Laureate of the time John Dryden in the reign of Charles II.  It was published in 1681, Its second part was also published in 1682 by Nahum Tate, a friend of Dryden, in which Dryden anonymously contributed a few lines but it failed to impress the critics.  In this poem Dryden has done the allegorical representation of real public figures of his time with the help of biblical characters. The poem is rooted in the contemporary time.


Literary elements in the poem

  • It is written in heroic couplet - iambic pentameter

  • It features third person narration.

  • It has AABB rhyming scheme.

  • GENRE: Poem → Satire → Political satire


Satire: uses humors, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

The poem starts with a prologue ‘To a Reader’ it states that ‘the true end (objective) of satire is the amendment of vices by correction’, which can be read as a definition of the true satire. Satire is divided into three natures

  1. Horatian Satire 

  2. Juvenalian Satire 

  3. Menippean Satire

It is said in Epilogue:  “Si proprius stes; Te capiet magis” - ‘Stand closer, it will charm you more’

So if one wants to understand or enjoy this poem he/ she needs to come close to this poem because some pieces will strike better if we have a deep insight and some will strike by easy reading. ORIGINAL POEM


As we are talking about political satire, here is a video from ‘So sorry’ which is making a satire of the contemporary government on the rising price of fuels. मोदी सरकार की नई योजना है 'पुश अप करो, पुश करो'। पुश अप तो आप करते होंगे लेकिन उससे भी ज्यादा अच्छी एक्सरसाइज है गाड़ी पुश करें यानि धक्का लगाएं। इसीलिए तो सरकार ने तेल के दाम बढ़ा दिए हैं ताकि आप गाड़ी पर बैठे ना बल्कि धक्का लगाएं और फिट रहें.




CHARACTERS AND THEIR ALLEGORICAL REPRESENTATION IN THE POEM:

Characters

Allegorical representation

David

King Charles II

Absalom

James Scott, Duke of Monmouth

Achitophel

Anthony Ashley Cooper

Saul 

Oliver Cromwell

David’s brother

James II

Corah

Titus Oates

Shimei

Slingsby Bethel

Zimri

George Villiers

The Pharaoh

Louis XIV of France

Ishbosheth

Richard Cromwell

Jonas

William Jones

Zadoc

William Sancroft

Barzillai

James Butler

Barzillai’s eldest Son

Thomas Butler

Jotham

George Savile

Amiel

Edward Seymour


MINOR CHARACTERS:

Characters

Allegorical representation

Balaam

Theophilus Hastings

Caleb

Arthur Capel

Nadab

William, Lord Howard Esrick

Zadoc

William Sancroft

Sagan of Jerusalem

Henry Compton

Adriel

John Sheffield

Hushai

Lawrence Hyde

Amnon

(Absalom’s half brother)

Michal

Catherine

Annabel

Anne


Now further we are going to read which characters among this supported David and which were against him.



Against King David

Supports of King David

Absalom

Absalom

Achitophel

Barzillai

Corah

Jotham

Shimei

Ameil

Zimri

Zadoc

The pharaoh

The Pharaoh

Jonas

Hushai

Nadab

Adriel

Caleb

Sagan of Jerusalem

Balaam



CHARACTERS IN DETAIL:


Absalom-



Here we consider Absalom as an opponent as well as a supporter of King David. Absalom is an illegitimate son of King David who is allegorical representation of James Scott (Duke of Monmouth) illegitimate son of King Charles II. 


'Of all this numerous progeny was none

So beautiful, so brave, as Absalom:'


David didn't have a legitimate son and among his all illegitimate Children Absalom was his most favorite child. He was brave, handsome and ambitious. Achitophel believed that The Jews (the English) were not happy in the reign of David and would accept Absalom as their kind. So Achitophel started encouraging Absalom for gaining the throne and to convince him to rebel against King David. But Absalom was not a malicious man, he didn't believe to have any of his right on the crown.


He thus repli'd.—And what pretence have I

To take up arms for public liberty?

'My Father governs with unquestion'd right;

The Faith's defender, and mankind's delight:

Good, gracious, just, observant of the laws;

And Heav'n by wonders has espous'd his cause.

Whom has he wrong'd in all his peaceful reign?

Who sues for justice to his throne in vain?

What millions has he pardon'd of his foes,

Whom just revenge did to his wrath expose?

Mild, easy, humble, studious of our good;

Inclin'd to mercy, and averse from blood.

If mildness ill with stubborn Israel suit,

His crime is God's beloved attribute.'


This stanza of the poem shows his favor towards the rule of King David and his support to the King. In this stanza, Absalom doesn’t think he has any claim to the throne. After all, David  rules with “unquestioned right,” and he is a good king. David is merciful and just, and instead of making his enemies suffer and drawing blood, he pardons them. David’s only crime, Absalom says, “is God’s beloved attribute.”


Achitophel saw that Absalom was not conceived so he stepped up his flattery. 


'Th'eternal God, supremely good and wise,

Imparts not these prodigious gifts in vain;

What wonders are reserv'd to bless your reign?

Against your will your arguments have shown,

Such virtue's only giv'n to guide a throne.'


Here Achitophel tries to be a king maker. He boosts the ambition and desire in Absalom to be a king. With the temptation of gaining the throne he joined Achitophel in the rebellion against King David. Absalom and Achitophel show David’s merciful and good nature as a weakness. But in the end King David lost his patience and stopped this rebellion. The temptation of Absalom by Achitophel makes Absalom an opponent of King David. 


Achitophel-

Achitophel is an allegorical representation of Anthony Ashley Cooper. He was dishonest counselor of King David and an antagonist of Absalom and Achitophel. This line of the poem shows his cynicism.  


'In friendship false, implacable in hate,

Resolved to ruin or to rule the state,

To compass this the Triple Bond he broke,

The pillars of the public safety shook,

And fitted Israel for a foreign yoke.

Then, seized with fear, yet still affecting fame,

Usurped a patriot’s all-atoning name.' 


Achitophel was a counselor of David, he pretended to be a friend of David with evil thoughts of ruling Israel or destroying it. Achitophel to ruin king David incites anti Jebusite in the Jews and encourages Absalom to join him to rebel against King David. Achitophel hated David’s brother and didn't want him to sit on the throne. He knew that it was not an argument enough to defame King David. So Achitophel provoked Jews as he knew about Jews fear about Jebusite, and planned to bring David down inside the government. Along with, included Absalom in his rebellion against David by flattering.


Corah-

Corah in an allegorical representation of Titus Oates, the Englishman who engineered the Popish Plot. He was the most important person of Achitophel. He was a priest.


'Yet, Corah, thou shalt from oblivion pass;

Erect thyself thou monumental brass:

High as the serpent of thy metal made,

While nations stand secure beneath thy shade.'


Corah was a priest but he was lying about his degree of priest (rabbinical degree). Even in contemporary times, people blindly believe in saints, people connected to  religion (dharma gurus). In the same way the Jews, people of that time blindly believed what the corah said. He played an important role for Achitophel. His plotting and planning helped Achitophel to dishonor David’s brother and to please Absalom. And the Jews easily believed in a fake plot, The popish plot. (Popish Plot, (1678), in English history, a totally fictitious but widely believed plot in which it was alleged that Jebusites were planning the assassination of King Charles II in order to bring his Roman Catholic brother, the Duke of York (afterward King James II), to the throne.)


Shimei-

Shimei is an allegorical representation of Slingsby Bethel the sheriff of London and a member of Parliament, who also supported the Exclusion Bill.


'Shimei, whose youth did early promise bring

Of zeal to God, and hatred to his king;

Did wisely from expensive sins refrain,

And never broke the Sabbath, but for gain:

Nor ever was he known an oath to vent,

Or curse, unless against the government.'


Shimei was a treason and a dishonest crook, he used to steal all the benefits of the Jews. But still Jews selected him as the magistrate. Shimei unanimously (fully in agreement) all the juries to punish David’s supporters and to support all his enemies. As a magistrate, a part of parliament he played a role in bringing down the fame of King David


Zimri-

Zimri is an allegorical representation of George Villiers, the 2nd Duke of Buckingham, an English statesman and poet.


'In the first rank of these did Zimri stand:

A man so various, that he seem'd to be

Not one, but all Mankind's Epitome.'


According to Dryden, Zimri was a ‘Buffon’ - a man who is a ridiculous but amusing person. ‘A man so various’ this phrase meant that he followed many different professions. He was among the Achitophel men; he also played an active role in the Popish plot. 


Jonas-

Jonas is an allegorical representation of Sir William Jones, a member of Parliament.


'Not bull-faced Jonas, who could statutes draw

To mean rebellion, and make treason law.'


Jonas was a member of parliament, he was a great powerful man so he could easily operate all the laws. Jonas accused Catholics, supporters of King David in a popish plot and supported the exclusion bill.  In the accusation, Michal, wife of King David, was also accused.


Nadab-

Nadab is an allegorical representation of William, Lord Howard Esrick. 


'And canting Nadab let oblivion damn,

Who made new porridge for the Paschal Lamb.'


He is one of the minor characters in the poem and one of Achitophel’s men. He represents William, Lord Howard Esrick, a Puritan preacher who supported the Exclusion Bill. The word “porridge” was used to describe the Book of Common Prayer by those who refused to conform to the Act of Uniformity, which implies that Achitophel and his men are nonconformists and working against the government instead of for it.


Caleb and Balaam-

Caleb is an allegorical representation of Arthur Capel, Earl of Essex and Balaam is representation of Theophilus Hastings, a Member of Parliament.


'And, therefore in the name of dullness, be

The well-hung Balaam and cold Caleb free.'


Caleb and Balaam are the minor characters in the poem. Calem was the prominent advocate on the exclusion bill. Balaam was a proponent of the exclusion bill. 



Barzillai-

Barzillai is an allegorical representation of James Butler,1st Duke of Ormond.


'In this short file Barzillai first appears;

Barzillai crown'd with honour and with years:

Long since, the rising rebels he withstood'


As the plan of Achitophel everyone was becoming against King David. There were very few who were supporting and trusting King David, they were his  friends which were loyal and trusted. Barzillai was among them. He was in exile with King David after the death of Saul.


Jotham-

Jotham is an allegorical representation of Jotham as the king of Judah and the grandson of Zadoc.


'Jotham of piercing wit and pregnant thought,

Endow'd by Nature, and by learning taught

To move assemblies, who but only tri'd

The worse awhile, then chose the better side;

Nor chose alone, but turn'd the balance too;

So much the weight of one brave man can do.'

.

Jotham was one of David's trusted and loyal friends and supporters. George Savile, the nephew of the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, the man allegorized in the character Achitophel. Jotham is credited for his active contribution in defeating the exclusion bill in parliament.


Amiel- 

Amiel is an allegorical representation of Edward Seymour, the speaker of the House of Commons in Parliament.


'For Amiel, who can Amiel's praise refuse?

Of ancient race by birth, but nobler yet

In his own worth, and without title great:

The Sanhedrin long time as chief he rul'd,

Their reason guided, and their passion cool'd;

So dext'rous was he in the crown's defence,

So form'd to speak a loyal nation's sense,

That as their band was Israel's tribes in small,

So fit was he to represent them all.'


Amiel was among trusted and loyal men of David. He was a significant member of the Sanhedrin (English Parliament). He helped to end the uprising against David in the parliament and was a great opponent of the exclusion bill.  


The Pharaoh- 

Pharaoh is an allegorical representation of Louis XIV of France. 


'Naked of friends and round beset with foes?

If Pharaoh's doubtful succour he should use,

A foreign aid would more incense the Jews:

Proud Egypt would dissembled friendship bring;'


The pharaoh pretended to be a friend of King David but in reality he was planning to destroy King David and the Jews. The Pharaoh represented Louis XIV of France which meant he was a Catholics and it worked as a proof that Charles was also a Catholic like his brother James and was trying to force the protestant to follow Catholic religion. Here we are placing Pharaoh as a supporter and opponent both as in the eyes of people he was a supporter and with his reference David was considered Catholic but in reality he was with an idea of exploiting David’s rule. 


Hushai-

Hushai is an allegorical representation of Lawrence Hyde, Earl of Rochester


'Hushai, the friend of David in distress,

In public storms of manly steadfastness;

By foreign treaties he inform'd his youth;

And join'd experience to his native truth.'


Hushai is a minor character in the poem but he is among the loyal and trusted men of King David. He played an important role in parliament standing against the exclusion bill. And according to the Bible’s reference he agreed to spy on Absalom during his rebellion against King David under the influence of Achitophel..


Zadoc, Adriel & Sagan of Jerusalem-

Zadoc is an allegorical representation of William Sancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury. Adriel represented John Sheffield, 3rd Earl of Mulgrave and Sagan of Jerusalem represented Henry Compton, Bishop of London.


'Zadoc the priest whom, shunning, pow'r and place,

His lowly mind advanc'd to David's grace:

With him the Sagan of Jerusalem,

Of hospitable soul and noble stem;

Him of the western dome, whose weighty sense

Flows in fit words and heavenly eloquence.'


'Next them a train of loyal peers ascend:

Sharp judging Adriel, the Muse's friend,

Himself a Muse:—in Sanhedrin's debate

True to his prince; but not a slave of state.'


Zadoc, Adriel and Sagan of Jerusalem are the minor characters in the poem and the loyal and trusted men of King David. Ariel very keenly opposed the succession of Absalom and voted for James II. All three didn't play a great role but were unconditional supporters of King David.


I hope my this blog might be helpful to you to understand the supporters and opponents easily. If you find any changes or queries post in a comment box. Thanks for visiting.


Wednesday, 10 November 2021

Sunday reading: Post- Truth

Post- Truth

"MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALLY WANT THE TRUTH, THEY JUST WANT A CONSTANT REASSURANCE THAT WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS THE TRUTH."




Oxford university selects a word every as the word of the year. Here we are discussing a word chosen in 2016 ‘Post- Truth’. We will look over the words of the year of the last few years.

YEAR

WORD

2011

Squeezed middle

2012

GIF

2013

selfie

2014

vape

2015

pictograph: Face with tears

of joy

2016

Post- truth 

2017

Youth quake

2018

Toxic

2019

Climate emergency 

2020

No single word chosen

(unprecedented year) a number of new additions to the global English lexicon have found mention, including “coronavirus”, “mail in”, “unmute” and “lockdown”

2021

Vax - a vaccine or

vaccination


There are also some Hindi words added in Oxford dictionary like aadhaar(2017) , Nari shakti(2018), Samvidhan(2019) and Atma nirbharta (2020).


Post-truth: "Relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."

In 2016, Oxford dictionary chose the word ‘Post truth’ as a word of the year. The concept of post-truth has been in existence since a decade but Oxford dictionary saw a sudden rise in frequency of its use in 2016- 2017. There are many nouns that go with post-truth, the most classic example is post-truth politics. Other nouns are politicians, age, era, brigade, journalism etc.

It is easier to fool the masses than to convince them that they have been fooled. Today we have got a cultural trend to place emotional truth (ethos) over logical truth (logos). To understand in a simplest form, Post- Truth is where logical facts become less important than emotional feelings. Post- Truth is not a lie, it’s a public relation with false or things which are not true also we can say it is about people not valuing the truth. Post-Truth is not news/views, it is a contradiction between what you want to hear, knowing it's false and then deciding ‘This is true’.

We saw this situation when the corona vaccine was introduced. Many scientists and doctors were influencing people to take vaccines but they were not ready to get a vaccine, they were afraid. So doctors had to take help of ‘Dharma Gurus’, once the guru said it to be reliable all were ready to take the vaccines. This is an ethos over logos.

The simplest example. We students waste a lot of time on mobile phones. We are already aware about our pending works but still we convince ourselves that we also need to rest, get fresh etc. excuses. We know the truth of time is being wasted. We need to study but we somehow convince ourselves that ‘This is true’. Over here, factual truth is we need to study and emotional truth becomes our wish to use and spend time on mobile.

Emotional truth and Actual (Factual) truth:


Actual truth is what is existing in reality or matter of fact i.e. real or genuine. We don't find any specific definition of emotional truth but we can understand it through an example. It is, as Steve Yates writes, that "heartfelt connection that arises between reader and character or characters through the unfolding of an invented, narrated conflict”. This connection brings emotional truth. Fiction is a lie that tells the truth. The lie is that the characters were or are living people and that the events in the story happened. The truth is an emotional one.
We can understand ‘Fiction is a lie that tells the truth' with an example of a movie ‘Raazi' by Meghna Gulzar. In Harinder Sikka's book ‘Calling Sehmat' She came back to India in an Airforce plane to Delhi And she was given a grand warm welcome.(This is the actual truth). While in a movie Sehmat reached India through a side by side road where she fainted showing her to be weak and exhausting. Sehmat in the movie was shown depressed at the end of movie by killing her husband.(This is an emotional/ fictional truth). This scene makes a heartfelt connection with the character and we find it to be the truth while the fact is something different. The connection which we realize is through emotional truth. Your emotional truth is what you feel about a situation, and sometimes it has nothing to do with actual facts.


Post- truth and Politics:


Since the 2016 presidential election, it's been hard to ignore the fact that political rhetoric has become increasingly difficult to trust. Cognitive ease or fluency is the measure of how easy it is for our brains to process information. The problem arises because cognitive ease can be easily artificially created in many ways and one way is by repeating the stimulus. This process is used majorly in politics by politicians. Before elections the politicians rant a lot of things and promise many deeds which he will fulfill after being at a post. But since years we are seeing the promises done are rarely fulfilled yet the society people believe in them. After the completion of tenure when elections are on the way they come with ranting of what they have done , what changes they brought but if we compare them with the promises done before they barely completed. Here we already know the reality but still we blindly follow the sheple. No one stands out to question or share the reality. We can recall a historical even - The Brexit in which the campaigns, emotional appeals and feelings, and not facts (truth), were the factors for Britain leaving the European Union.
Social media and truth:


There have been a number of studies which have shown that an overwhelming majority of people polled believe there is a lot of misinformation on social media, and a majority feel themselves as not being able to differentiate between what is true and what isn't.

The problem is especially prevalent on Instagram, for example, where bot accounts create large amounts of fake likes and followers in order to make money off them. On Facebook, false news stories are being presented as fact more often than not, often encouraging unwarranted fear or outrage.

At this point in time, it seems that everyone has an opinion on anything and everything, but no one is taking responsibility for their opinions or information. If you had asked me 5 or 10 years ago if I thought that people would rely more on propaganda than real information, I would never have guessed that they would trust absolute strangers over real journalists with extremely verified credentials. But here we are.

In today’s time we see many people spreading lots of fake news in WhatsApp and in the corona pandemic period India has become the top in spreading the fake news. In the era we are seeing that people are depending more on the WhatsApp messages, WhatsApp university. They gain more information whether it is right or not.


As a journalist who prides herself on never publishing anything that I can't verify to be factual, it disheartens me to see that we're approaching a state where we just don't believe in our ability to recognize fact from fiction and assume that information given to us is truthful and accurate.


What can we do about this?

If we think about it we realize that the Post- truth is not the only source lying in front of us. Also cross- checking with other few sources also might not clear our about or give us the truth. We live in the age of decentralized information. There are millions of different sources which say millions of different things. Content creators and social media users alike should be taking real steps in the effort to verify their sources and ensure that what they say is true. If you can take the time out of your day to post 140 characters about what you had for breakfast, you can take the time out of your day to do some research on whatever political topic you want to rant about. It also becomes difficult to cross check everything we read or listen. Children from the time of their schooling should be taught by the teachers to criticize what they read or cross check the reading at their education level. Which can be helpful for students to question everything that comes in front of them, not to easily believe everyone and start moving to the wrong path. The step we can take is before writing or sharing our own ideas or writing, the creator or writer can take better references or cross check that what they are writing is correct or not. This might help to stop the spreading of false or say post- truth.




Here I have presented my understanding of Post- truth. I hope this blog might have given  you an easy understanding. If you find any queries or recommendations please post in the comment box. Thanks for visiting.


[Words: 1532]

Sunday, 31 October 2021

The Rape of the Lock

 This blog is written in response to the thinking activity given to us based on the poem The Rape of the Lock by Vaidehi Ma'am 

THE RAPE OF THE LOCK



The Rape of the Lock is a mock-heroic narrative poem written by Alexander Pope. The poem of The Rape of the Lock satirizes a minor incident of life, by comparing it to the epic world of the gods, and is based on an event recounted to Alexander Pope by his friend John Caryll. Arabella Fermor and her suitor, Lord Peter, each was member of an aristocratic recusant Catholic family, at a time in England when, under such laws as the Test Act, all denominations except Anglicanism suffered legal restrictions and penalties. Peter had cut off a lock of Arabella's hair without permission, and the consequent argument had created a breach between the two families. The poem's title does not refer to the extreme of sexual rape, but to an earlier definition of the word derived from the Latin rapere (supine stem raptum), "to snatch, to grab, to carry off"—in this case, the theft and carrying away of a lock of hair

Here is a video of summary and characters so that you can easily understand the answers written further.

1. According to you, who is the protagonist of the poem Clarissa or Belinda? Why? Give your answer with logical reasons.

Character sketch of Belinda


In this poem we can see that Belinda is representative of 18th century England's female society. The protagonist of the poem, Belinda, is a wealthy and beautiful young woman who travels to Hampton Court for a day of socializing and leisure. Her beauty was like-

“If to her share some female errors fall,
Look on her face, and you’ll forget all”

We see Belinda in many different lights; It will be wrong to regard her purely as a goddess, or as a pretty spoiled child, or as a flirt. She is a combination of all three. We see her as a vamp, an injured innocent, a sweet charmer, a society belle, a rival of the sun, and a murderer of millions. Despite the fact that Belinda is Pope’s protagonist, she’s actually a bit of a slippery character to come to terms with, as the reader is provided with relatively little access to her inner thoughts, and her actions are often governed by supernatural forces.

“Favours to none, to all she smiles extends
Oft she rejects, but never once offends,”

This line suggests the character of Belinda. Belinda’s character is like a superior female who is more conscious about her beauty and hair. Belinda is a heroine or we can regard as a made heroine/ protagonist of the poem as the whole poem revolves around her. In many lines of the poem we can see the leisure routine she spends. In this poem we see that beauty is connected with hairs. Baron with the help of Clarissa cut the lock of hair which was curled up for a social event, this thing made Belinda mad as beauty was everything to Belinda. At last Belinda was consoled with the suggestion that it has been taken up into the heavens and immortalized as a constellation. Here we feel that Belinda was not mature enough to understand the matters, she needed to be pacified like a child.

“Here Files of Pins extend their shining Rows,
Puff s, Powders, Patches, Bibles, Billet-doux.”

This lines of the poem completely suggests how important cosmetics were to Belinda.

Character sketch of Clarissa


The character of Clarissa solidifies this serious social critique. She scorns the trivialities with which women (and men) occupy themselves.

“How vain are all these Glories, all our Pains,
Unless good Sense preserve what Beauty gains :
at Men may say, when we the Front-box grace,
Behold the first in Virtue as in Face !”

Clarissa points out that beauty quickly fades with age, and extols the virtues of "good humor," which, she says,

“And trust me, dear ! good Humor can prevail,
When Airs, and Flights, and Screams, and Scolding fail.
Beauties in vain their pretty Eyes may roll ;
Charms strike the Sight, but Merit wins the Soul.”

This exclamation, which is perhaps the most significant and revealing passage of the entire poem, is, of course, frowned upon and ignored by the foolish Belinda and the belligerent Thalestris, who is only concerned with the young woman’s honor. While the main female character misses the idea that may have redeemed her, Pope asks the reader to reconsider Clarissa’s statement, since both Belinda and Thalestris are frequently mocked within the poem. The message is clear: social airs, no matter how a lady might acquire them and hold fast to them, do her no credit. She should instead employ her mind and "good humor" to gain respect and favor (perhaps one of Pope’s motives--to appease the woman upon whom this poem was based--is particularly evident in this message.)

Here in this poem we saw that Belinda the protagonist is more on her beauty, a self obsessed character while Clarissa is giving us a way of life. She makes us understand that beauty is temporary, permanent is the good humor way of living and virtues. Beauty fades with time and virtues would last forever. Comparing the mental ability or understanding of both the female character I feel Clarissa is the real protagonist in the poem who is lightening the flames is the women of society for coming out from self obsession of beauty and to make her own space in society with virtues instead of beauty.


2. What is beauty? Write your views about it.
Starting with a literal definition of beauty- a combination of qualities, such as shape, color, or form, that pleases the aesthetic senses, especially the sight. Today we define beauty majorly in relation to looks. Beautiful looks is the only thing which is preferred by everyone. I agree to the point that beauty provides confidence but who decides the rubrics of beauty? How do people differentiate between ugly, beautiful or very beautiful? And the basic answer is on the skin tone, length of hairs, eyes etc. that is all the physical appearance only. And we generally see that the females of society need to look beautiful physically, or else they are judged quickly based on their looks. 
This is a video from Super 30 movie explaining what is beauty with the base of science. 
According to my views, beauty is not in appearance, beauty is internal and mental beauty of the person. ‘The quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit.’ If we look at these definitions we can realize that beauty is something which gives pleasure to mind or spirit, so here I argue that why do people think that only physical beauty gives pleasure? Once in a life everyone would have met a person who is not pretty in appearance but we love their company the reason is we love the way of their thinking, their abilities, we get attracted to their mentality.

We do find the same thing in this poem ‘The Rape of The Lock’ Belinda is beautiful and is made protagonist in the poem, but in end when we read the Clarissa’s speech we feel more connected to her. We feel that her point is more reliable and truth that everyone should follow. That is we are attracted to Clarissa for her thoughts and ideas. We also find the same thing in the Mary Shelley Novel ‘Frankenstein’ where the creature was not accepted by society due to his giant appearance. On the other hand, he was more natural and pure of heart than people of society.

The attraction to physical appearance will not last long but the attraction and love to mental appearance will remain forever.


In my view, Inner beauty refers to the personality of a person including his/her mind and character. Whereas outer beauty simply refers to the looks of a person. It can easily be faked and changed through makeup, dressing, surgery etc. But it takes a whole lot of effort and a true heart to maintain your inner beauty in this modern age. So inner beauty is more important and is only beauty.


3. Find out a research paper on "The Rape of the Lock". Give the details of the paper and write down in brief what it says about the Poem by Alexander Pope.
I have read a research paper of Global English Oriented Research Journal ( GEORJ) by Dr. George Kolanchery. This paper is detailing about The Rape of The Lock as a mirror to Pope’s age and society of that time. The frivolities of women folk of that is discussed, Belinda is the representative of the fashionable ladies of that time. There is not the slightest glimpse of seriousness or sincerity, goodness or grandeur of human life in any of their words or actions. Along with, he debates the hollowness of the men of that time, as Belinda Baron represents the class of men of that time and we see that they are idle, empty- minded folk and have nothing to do except love making or flirting with ladies.


After reading this paper I learned that the poem shows the ‘Battle’ between the ladies and the gentlemen showing the emptiness and fertility of their lives. The poem shows the fashionable society of the upper class of that time, Pope’s age. And the Pope very beautifully weaved the incident between Lord Peter and Arabella along with the society of that age describing the colors of that age and on other hand satirizing the society. We see that the people have no other work and are getting ready, looking after their beauty and spending their time playing cards and having gatherings. No English poem is at once so brilliant and so empty as ‘The Rape of the Lock’. It reflects the artificial age with splendour and inward emptiness.

[words count: 1651]

My Learnings from the National Workshop on Academic Writing (2026)

The National Workshop on Academic Writing  I recently had the opportunity to participate in the National Workshop on Academic Writing (2026)...