Function of criticism at the present time by Matthew Arnold

 Function of criticism at the present time

                                                                                                           - Matthew Arnold

Introduction:   

Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) was a poet, critic and one of the most significant writers of the late Victorian period in England. He occupies a prominent place in the history of literary criticism. His essay “The function of criticism at the present time” was published in his first collection of critical writings, “Essays in criticism” in 1865. The essay deals with Arnold’s interpretation of criticism and his critic of writers who write politically or religiously biased literature.

 Definitions of critic and criticism:                                                                           Defining criticism Arnold says that “it is not the greatest of the activity to be carried out. It is not as great as creativity.” And criticism is not creativity. Arnold starts an essay saying- “ of all the literature of France and German, as of the intellect of Europe in general, the main effort, for now, many years, has been a critical effort; the Endeavour in all branches of knowledge, theology, philosophy, history, art, science to see the object as in itself it is really is.” And adds “falls and malicious criticism had better never been made.”                                                                            

 Here Arnold explains the task of any critic. According to him, ‘a critic must perceive any work as it is, For him the text should be the whole and he should be the whole and he should never take help of any other text for its explanation.” He condemns the false criticism (which is not original and is biased).

 He believes that creator of a text is greater than critic because- “creative activity is the true function of man.” However, it is critic who draws the true meaning of the particular work of literature.

 Arnold defines the role of critic as the one view an object as it is, to bring best ideas to the masses, and to create an atmosphere that fuels the literary genius of the future.

 Arnold assigns three functions to critics: 1. A critic must learn all the existing knowledge. 2. He must spread that knowledge. 3.To create conclusive environment of writing.

He states the role of criticism is to make it inherently valuable and to rouse men for com-pliancy to a state of achieving perfection. He believes that criticism is a way to understand life and the world and can be linked to the satisfaction derived from creative writing.

 Disinterestedness of critic:                                                                   Disinterestedness means critic should not show in certain topics and that topics are- 

1.Prejudice against barbarism. 2. The Aristocrats 3.Blind impulse of populace (public)  4. Shun the falsification ideas 5.He must pursue on the ends of cultural perfection and remain influenced by the coarser appeal of philistine.

Critic works for the betterment of culture, he has to work for the great and good culture which will be conclusive for everyone.

Function of criticism:                                                                                   1.To create a current of fresh ideas. 2.Criticism should make good judgement. 3.To bring out the true meaning of a text.                                                                                    

     Arnold believes that Victorian culture/ period was missing new ideas, fresh and innovative ideas. Criticism should be made on reality; judgement should not be made of personal likes and dislikes. Criticism is aimed to bring out the good judgement of the text. Critic should be learned man so that they can bring out correct meaning of the text.

False standards of judgement:                                                                     1. Personal   2. Historical

A critic should not judge a text on personal grounds. It should be unbiased. It is wrong to judge work based on one’s liking it must happen that the worthy text might get wrong judgement due to it. Similarly, if we judge on historical ground there might be text which was fit during renaissance, in society of that time but the same work is not fit in 21^st century because it might not meet the requirements.

 Power of man and power of moment:                                                                    According to Arnold, for a production of a great literary work, “the power of man” and “the power of moment” i.e. climate of great ideas must concur. If anyone of them is absent then a great work of literature will never be produced. To explain this Arnold took two poets as example Goethe and Byron. Both Goethe and Byron had great productive power yet the work of Goethe is more productive than that of Byron because the former had a rich cultural background which the latter lacked. Shakespeare was not a deep reader. His fame and glory were only because his age had a climate of great ideas.

 He also says that French revolution, with its writers like Rousseau and Voltaire, was more powerful that the English revolution of Charles, English revolution is practically less successful than the French revolution yet it is better than the letter as it “appeals to an order of ideas which are universal, certain permanent.”

 Epoch of concentration and expansion:                                                                      French revolution quieted the intellectual sphere and rushed into political sphere, losing its universal application. French revolution was followed by ‘epoch of concentration’ (period of single mindedness) and ‘epoch of expansion’ (period of creative ideas). The works written on the French revolution are though great and well appreciated yet they are biased as they combine politics with thought.

Arnold criticises the literature produced during the Victorian age. According to him, there is a failure of criticism due to the division of society and into small political and religious groups that makes them incapable of seeing things in their true states.

He cites the example of various works which were written to promote the writer’s own political agenda.

e.g. - Edinburgh review represents views of Whigs Quarterly Review- Tories, The times- rich Englishman.

He also criticises the ‘constructive’ suggestions for living presented by Bishop Colenso and Miss Cobbe. For him, they have religious influence in their writings which are again against the spirit of true criticism. He tells that common man lacks creativity.

 Duty of criticism:                                                                                                        Arnold says that ‘criticism must maintain its independence from the practical spirit and its aims.’ It must express dissatisfaction even with well meant efforts of the practical spirit if in the sphere of the ideal they seem lacking. It must be patient and not hurry on to the goal because of its practical importance, know how to wait, and know how to attach itself as well as withdraw from things.

 Conclusion:                                                                                                                  Arnold talks about a person who regrets the loss of zeal which one existed but is no longer present in contemporary society due to the influence of politics and religion on ideas.

Thus he gives voice to commoner’s views to enhance the glory of the past. He advises the critics to adopt disinterested behaviour towards criticism. They should take into consideration foreign thought as well. Their judgement should be from their own mind without any biases and should communicate fresh knowledge to their readers. The criticism is capable of making progress in Europe taking it towards perfection.

In the end, he depends his views on criticism and says the he views on criticism and says the he won’t change his opinion for any person who deviates from the theory of criticism.          

From Preface to the plays of Shakespeare by Samuel Johnson

Preface to the plays of Shakespeare 

-Samuel Johnson

About the Writer:

                                                                    The life span of Samuel Johnson is from 18 September 1709 to December 1784. Samuel Johnson is also known as Dr. Johnson. He has given the great contribution to English literature. He was Neo- classical critic which means who brings the balance between Excellencies and fall of Shakespeare. He was born in Hichfield, Staffordshire, England. His father was a bookseller. Due to an accident in childhood he became partial deaf and partially lost his vision. He took admission in Oxford University but he left it due to financial issues. He started a private academy but it failed. Later, he decided to move to London. There he started writing for ‘The gentlemen’s magazine’. After 9 years of work he wrote ‘The dictionary of the English language.’ It gave his a great success and popularity. He advertised to write ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ within one year. But he was unable to complete. He published it after 9 years of proposal. Other significant works of Johnson are ‘The dictionary of English language’, ‘The lives of the past’, ‘Preface to Shakespeare’, ‘Rambler’.

In  Introduction to preface to Shakespeare:                                                                                  

                                                                   The preface to the plays of Shakespeare was published in 1765. It was of about 72 pages and 162 paragraphs. It was publishes in two parts-                                     1.Criticised as a dramatist. 2.Criticised as an editor.

Samuel Johnson’s preface to the plays of Shakespeare has been long considered as a classic document of English literary criticism. In it Johnson sets forth his editorial principles and gives an appreciative analysis of the ‘excellencies’ and ‘defects’ of the work of the great Elizabeth dramatist- Shakespeare.

 

Shakespeare as a timeless & universal figure/ merits of Shakespeare:                                                                                                                                         Other dramatist could only gain attention by hyperbolic or aggravated characters. But Shakespeare has not used any hyperbolic language to gain the attention of readers.

“Shakespeare has no hero; his scenes are occupied only by men who act and speak as the reader thinks that he should himself have spoken or acted on the same occasion: even when the agencies are supernatural the dialogue is level with life.”

                                                                      Shakespeare has no heroes in his plays; his scenes are only occupied by men, who act and speak as the reader, reader thinks he should himself have spoken or acted on the same occasion. We find flood of characters on Shakespearean works. This shows us real people from society. They are the real deeply rooted characters of society. This character shows us the basic instinct, basic emotions, feelings also makes us laugh and moron in some situation. For a specific reason Shakespeare’s drama are considered as the mirror of life. It represents human sentiments in a very believable language. Shakespeare did not need any special character as hero from nature, he choose them from real society. We feel these characters to be real characters and them to be among us. Character in Shakespeare’s drama are men and women and not king and queen. History requires Roman queens and kings but he think only on men. Denims and Rymer (critic) think his Romans are not sufficiently Roman. Voltaire (critic) criticises that his king are not completely royal. Shakespeare has combined laughter and sorrow at one place. Many critic objects to this, this to be wrong as the Greek tradition or classical tradition of composition but here Johnson supports this point that no life is divided of only sorrow or only happiness. Life is combination of both happiness and sorrow. And by combining this two gave a new form of literature that is tragicomedy. Shakespeare has united the powers of exiting laughter and sorrow.  According to classic critic they say that it is not possible to instruct or please with these two forms, so there should not be amalgamation of these two forms in one play. Because teaching, giving instruction is the prime object of literature as per classical critic. But here Johnson says that it is not needed because Shakespeare has combined these elements so finely that we cannot very consciously get, we are just involved in that particular play.

“… by showing how great machinations and slender designs may promote or obviate one another, and the high and the low co-operate in the general system by unavoidable concatenation.”

                                                                So it is easy to combine this high and cow elements as there are ups and down in everyday life and some has been reflected.

                                                                Shakespearean plays are categorised as tragedies, comedies and histories but according to Dr. Johnson there is no fix rule or light to divide his plays. His plays are generally the inter-mixture of all elements we cannot say that this plays belong to a particular or special kind of category like history, comedy or tragedy. There may be elements combined in one play. This becomes an amalgamated form which Shakespeare has created. Following words of Johnson clearly states that we cannot categories Shakespeare’s work…

“Through all these denominations of the drama Shakespeare’s mode of composition is the same: an interchange of seriousness and merriment by which the mind is softened at one time, and exhilarated at another… he never fails to attain his purposes; as he commands us, we laugh or mourn, or sit silent with quiet expectation, in tranquillity without indifference.”

                                                                    What Shakespeare wanted from the audience he did exactly the same; we laugh when we see his comedies, we witness his tragedies we feel anxious when we see histories. So this is the power of William Shakespeare, The great power of string audience or reader. 

 

Shakespeare’s faults/ demerits/ drawbacks/ negatives:                                                                                                                                               Dr. Johnson talks about his demerits but still Dr. Johnson supports Shakespeare. He says that this faults are not faults of Elizabethan age or the Shakespearean faults but this faults are universal they can be found in any author, in any passage of time.

1.Shakespeare sacrifices virtues for his convenience:                                                         His first defect is that he assigns most of evil in books or in men. He did not care about virtues or morality, he didn’t care about instructions while for many classical critic teaching in prime objective of literature and Shakespeare fails in this objective. He sacrificed virtue to simplicity.

“His first defect is that to which may be imputed most of the evil in books or in men. He sacrifices virtue to convenience and is so much more careful to please than to instruct, that he seems to write without any moral purpose.”

He carries his person indifferently through right and wrong, and at the close failure without further care.

2. Plots are loosely connected:

The plots are often loosely formed that sometimes he cannot comprehend his own design and always seem to go for an easier option. It may be observed that in many of his plays the later part is evidently neglected when of his plays the later part is evidently neglected when he found himself near to the end of his work and in view of his reward, he shortened the labour to snatch the profit.

“The plots are often so loosely formed that very slight consideration may improve them, and so carelessly pursued, that he seems not always fully to comprehend his own design.”

3. Not followed historical chronology accurately:

He has no regard to distinct of time and place. Comic scene sometimes fall flat and all the character appear same. The same problem continued in tragedy, it gets worst as his labour is more. 

4. Disproportionate narration:

Narration of dramatic poetry is naturally tedious. There is a sense of unequal pomp of diction. It is sometimes inactive in the progress of the action.

“In narration he affects a disproportionate pomp of diction and a weariness train of circulation, and tells the incident imperfectly in many words, which might have been more plainly delivered in few.”

5. Weak at conceits and quibbles:

Conceits & quibbles are significant elements in any language and it should be included in great with use of quibbles and conceits. Shakespeare is fatal in using them. It is nothing but the ornamental element of the language which Aristotle had.

6. Not followed any unities (no unities):

Shakespeare didn’t follow any unities. He always neglected unities and violated those laws which have been instituted and established by the joint authority of poet and of critics. Shakespeare didn’t followed time and place. We find inaccuracy in chronology events happened in his plays. We find some events happen in Alexandria & other in Rome this is also crossing line of classical rules of composition. He didn’t follow any unity and just wrote as he wanted.

Conclusion/ end:

This preface is significant in the whole literary criticism as this preface has given new insights in the study of Shakespeare’s work. It is to the public how they look at it, it is Dr. Johnson’s own opinion and own judgement. 

literary form- comedy

COMEDY

What is comedy?

In ordinary English the words comedy and comic are used for anything that is funny or laughable. But the truth is that we use the word comedy in different and confusing way. Generally Comedy means a play which has a pleasant atmosphere and a happy ending. It may not actually make us laugh, but it must at least be amusing and entertaining. Even satirical, satire and comedy are closely related. Comedy is found in other forms of literature too.

Certain people and certain situation always seem to be funny,  mother-in-law,  an old man with young wife,  blind man,  odd behavior of lunatics. These people deserve sympathy rather than laughter, but they always seem funny to other world. They can be like all time comedians.

There is of course  no clear border line between comedy and satire. Even the lightest comedy must contain some kind of social comment as in 'comedy of manners',  but when a dramatist tries to to use the stage is the base of lectures,  sermons and propaganda. We must expect the death of true comedy. Less attractive features of drama between 1922 -1970 has been a continuing attempt by some writers and critics to persuade us that plays try to be profound or significant. Most of us do not go to theatre for advice about difficult problems of politics or morality. We are not interested in opinion,  there maybe place for the kind of drama that preaches in societies to who are illiterate like audience of miracle places in medieval time, but generally teaching and preaching are not part of true comedy.

Theories:

Laughter,  it must be admitted to be Cruel and harmful more than reliving comedy seems to be working on the Aristotle's theory of catharsis,  it provides us imaginary objects on which we laugh and perform cruelty without harming others and without shocking. More,  one can not laugh on own friend whose wife is having an affair with the other person, but can freely laugh on the stupid old husband in Chaucer's 'Miller tale'. The theory of laughter is also an expression of pleasure and thankfulness at one's own comparative good luck. To laugh at a fat woman is to express one's own satisfaction at not being a very fat women. We laugh at others misfortune it is because we observe ourselves happy and free of them. Laughter is not always cruel or selfish but there is a difference between laughing at somebody and laughing with somebody. Also,  there is no possibility of being witty without a little in nature. 

History:

History of comedy would have to begin with the ancient Greek COMOS (a revel) and the satyr play which were performed as the kind of comic relief.

Greek >  Comedy of Aristophanes (448-380 BC) [Satirical in tone and are still alive when performed in transition.] > Menander (340-292 BC). [He developed so called new comedy.] > Latin dramatist Plautus (254-184 BC) [It imitated Menander comedies.] > Terence (190-159 BC) [It resembled to what is called comedy of manners.]

The true origin of English comedy is to be found in the mystery place and miracle plays of middle ages. Mystery and miracle plays were based on the biblical stories for the lives of the saints.They were performed in large towns,  it showed the whole cycle from beginning with the story of Adam and Eve and ending the Christ crucifixion and resurrection. The plays were performed on heavy Wagons called 'pageant'. It had three stages presenting heaven,  Earth and hell. There were stations where it would stop and present its own particular play. Four mystery play still exist Chester, Coventry,  York and Wakefield.

In York play of Noah's flood for instance much comic relief is provided by Noah's wife,  who refuses to leave her gossip and go into the Ark of water rises. In the end She was forced by her three sons and Noah pulled her in boat and They had an argumental conversation.

In Wakefield play,  the ship stealer steals the ship when the shepherds were listening the news of Christ's birth. Mak's (the stealer) wife was admiring their new born child in cradle,  while the Shepherds were on the Way to Bethlehem. And they noticed that the child is strange and they realise it to be stolen ship. Then Mak was thrown about in the blanket as punishment. 

There are many such comedy play,  one cannot be failed to impress by the happy way in which two elements are mixed to create drama.

Three of the most popular characters in the mystery plays were king Herod,  the devil and the Vice. Herod was always shown as the comically angry Tyrant,  his rage. The devil wore an ugly mask and was given long fingernails. He was accompanied by a vice- a sort of lesser devil than having who danced around him and pretended to be threaten him with a wooden sword. Vice was to play a long and important part in the history of European comedy. He reappears in England as the Shakespearean down,  Often a clever amusing commentator on the other actors and events in the play. 

Types:

Romantic comedy:

It is the most popular form of Entertainment. Plays of romantic are very different play. It is a pleasant mixture of love and laughter, this plays are popular all over and it's not difficult to explain. The earliest English romantic comedy is probably 'Ralph Roister Doister' written by headmaster of Westminster school 12 years later. 'Gammer Gurton's Needle' produced at Christ College,  Cambridge. Both plays are farcial and has a love interest. 'The honorable history of Friar Bacon and Frian Bungay' by Robert Greene pattern of farcical  qualities with dialogue in prose,  mixed with the theme of love and romance expressed in verse 

Shakespeare carried romantic comedy almost to perfection during the period 1594-1602. The welknown romantic comedies are 'A midsummer Night's Dream', 'As you like it' and 'Twelfth night'. Comedy of this kind depend on good deal.

Midsummer Night's Dream: For example Theseus hippolyta story and the moonlight Mistakes of the lovers would probably seemed tedious sentimental if it was not the foolery of bottom and his friends. The latter might seem crudely farcial If not lightened by the poetry and romance of the lovers. The story of Titania and the changed  bottom makes a link between the two world and might be taken as and symbol of all comedy. 

Shakespeare was a practical playwright. He had to please to quite separate group of audience: educated and uneducated. Educated part of the audience liked fine poetry romance and touches of satire,  while others preferred partial humour and good natured clowning. After seeing aristocratic hippolyta seeing bottoms play Shakespeare himself apologised to the educated half of the audience. With changing time educated failed to enjoy the journey. The last three plays of Shakespeare's comedy 'The Tempest',  'Cymbeline',  'The winter's Tale' were designed for private performances rather than public playhouse,  have less farce and more poetry and romance than his earlier comedy. The Other writers of comedy in Shakespeare's time were Beaumont (1584-1616) and Fletcher (1579-1625) who worked together and Thomas Dekker ( 1570-1632). Dekker stressed the humorous and realistic element more than poetic 'The shoemaker's holiday' is one of the liveliest.

Shakespeare	Twelfth Night A midsummer night’s dream As you like it Cymbeline The winter’s tale The tempest
Goldsmith	She stoops to conquer
Wilde	The importance of being earnest
Shaw	Pygmalion
Noel Coward	Blithe spirit
Dekker	The shoemaker’s holiday
Robert Greene	The honourable history of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay
Nicolas Udall	Gammer Gurton’s Needle Ralph Roister Doister

• Romantic comedies are famous because of Shakespeare's 'Twelfth night',  Goldsmith's 'She stoops to conquer' (1773), Noel Cowards 'Blithe spirit'(1941).

Comedy of humours:

Comedy of humours is used in connection to Ben Jonson. He had an eventful life. He had been in his long days a bricklayer and a soldier. He also have been a productive writer. Not only play but also masques,  poetry and criticism. Johnson's idea was that comedy should not be true to life but larger-than-life. Each character should be so much real men or women as a personification of some human passion or weakness. His comedies are, every man in his humour', 'every man out of his humour,',  'the silent woman',  'Volpone',  'The Alchemist' and 'Bartholomew fair'. Hear the humour has a special use. It is not used in modern sense but in sense of a dominant passion for obsession.
In 'Every man in his humour' the richest merchant, Kietly has a young and Pretty wife of whom he is jealous,  jealousy in his humour; Young heroes father is always worried about his son's behaviour and safety,  anxiety is humour; Captain is the talkative but coward old soldier, boastfulness is humour. The passion that rule characters whole life is humour. In Bartholomew fair Johnson shows us how to humans of various types of Londoners are taken advantage of by the hard headed and quick witted market people. 

Johnson invented his characters and constructed his plays,  characters like boastful soldier,  jealous husband,  etc but the new was the scientific support which Johnson was found of he borrowed it from the believes of medieval doctors and scientist,  who thought human body is made up of four humours which is corresponding to four elements in physical World- Earth,  air,  fire and water. Men's Health and his whole character depends on the balance between the four humours in his body too much of choleric humour (anger,  fire) made a man energetic and hot tempered,  too much of lymphatic (water) human make him cold and spiritless. Johnson found it useful as a support for his theory. 

Johnson's importance depend on the success as a comic dramatist and not because of his theories. His comedies are seen on the stage. In comparison to Shakespeare's romantic comedies Johnson's comedy of humours are seemed to be more acceptable perhaps because romantic comedy is out of fashion.

Ben Johnson

Every man in his humour Every man out of his humour The silent women Volpone The alchemist Bartholomew

Comedy of manners:

This phrase is often used in literary history and criticism. It is particularly applied to Restoration dramatist in England. It makes fun not so much of individual human beings and their humours as a social groups and their  fashionable manners. It is generally more or less satirical to in a good-natured way. They were likely found in aristocratic group like the court of Charles II in England or Louis XIV in France. Congreve (1672 -1729) and Wycherley (1642-1716),  later Sheridan (1751-1816) and Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) are famous for comedy of manners. Critics who object to the low moral tone of much Restoration comedy forget that Wycherley, in 'the country wife' should the moral weakness of a particular social group.
Sheridan was doing same in 'The school for scandal' where no one complaint  for the Immoral behaviour of lady Sneerwell  and sir Benjamin Baebite- persumable because it is not sexually Immoral. It was hardness and cynicism of the typical restoration comedy as well as indecency and permissiveness which led Jeremy to persuade public that the theatre needed to be cleaned up and wrote 'short view of the immorality and profaneness of the English stage'. Generally criticised Congreve and Wycherley for their plays.

Wycherley	The country wife
Sheridan	The school of scandal
Collier	Short view of the immorality and profaneness of the English stage

Sentimental comedy:

Jeremy Collier,  a church man and a Puritan was critical to plays of Wycherley and Congreve  and the hardness,  indecency,  cynicism and permissiveness led him to write his short view of the immorality and profoundness of the English stage. He persuaded public the theatre need to be cleaned up and as a result sentimental comedy appeared. Here the word sentimental is used in an unusual sense or sentimental comedy was returned with the intention of expressing moral sentiments. In other words In contained preaching even though the preaching was disguised as entertainment. Sir Richard Steele (1672-1729) was the chief writer. He best remembered as the essayist and journalist. Agreed to Collier that English stage needed cleaning up. He thought that the cleaning up would best be done by writing new plays rather than attacking old one,  He wrote 'The funeral'. In 1722 produced 'the conscious lovers' and after these sentimental comedies seized for some two centuries to be taken seriously. L.J Potts, in his book 'Comedy' (1949) described these plays as a display of naked and immoderate virtue such as the modern audience would not endure. It was amusingly satirised by several comic writers of the by time.

Dark/black comedy:

There are many plays which do not belong to any of the classes,  which may not even be funny or amusing all cheerful, but go under the name of comedy. Shakespeare's 'measure for measure' and Eliot's 'the cocktail party' for example might not be called comedy but they have very little in common with each other or even less with place like Sheridan's 'the Rivals' or Rattigan's 'French'. No ready made name to attach this kind of play. Critics and historians used phrases like tragicomedy, comic tragedy or simply drama. In the present century there has been a rebirth of sentimental comedy but under new name and new form. The drama of social consciousness and the drama of commitment are phrases used by critics and writer who felt like Steele that 'comedy should be morally in instructive as well as inter entertaining' Wilde, Sir James Barrie,  Sir Noel and sir Terence Rattigan was criticised for being frivolous and for having no social purpose, where is Shaw has been praised for using comedy as propaganda for his own opinion. While German dramatist Brecht (1898-1956) was encouraged in England and America to think that drama ought to be concerned with political and social problems not actually protect propagandist. these perhaps have led to the death of true comedy and sentimental comedy lead to the death of Genuine comedy of Wycherley and Congreve.

Shakespeare: 

 the best introduction to the dark comedy can be heard by reading Shakespeare's 'measure for measure' and 'Troilus and Cressida'. And comparing them with better known romantic comedy like 'the taming of the Shrew', or 'A midsummer Night's Dream'. The first two are  cynical and unpleasant for the readers of romantic comedy. 

Troilus and Cressida: it is a bitter attack on the weakness of human nature. Almost every character same to be wicked. This is not a sort of play from which one gets many good laugh though  modern produces have tried hard to made it so 

Iliad: Achilles,  hector,  Ajax,  Diameles are heroes in the eyes of Shakespeare's thersites. He sees whole story of the war over the beautiful Helen in such patchery,  juggling and knavery.

Measures for measure: Besides being an interesting study of a Angela man who would now be called sexual psycho path contains much discussion of serious moral and intellectual problems. This both plays are article of darker side of comedy. 

John Osborne:

 He was born a 1929. He was actor before he became dramatist. He wrote to historical Plays 'Luther' and 'a patriot for me', as well as dark comedies, like 'Epithet of George Dillon' and 'the Entertainer' and 'inadmissible evidence'. His work 'Look Back in Anger' first seen on the London became clear that a new age in the story of English drama of beginning. The importance of it was not that it is a better play, but that it introduced new king of drama to the English stage. If it is comedy then it must not be mistaken as comedies of Sheridan or Wild.
Look Back in Anger: The subject is the hidden class war between those who have grown up in comfortable Borgeis homes and those who had fought their way up in Social stairs by their own intelligence. Osborne shows us something of the married life of a young man of the latter type and his wife -a girl of equal intelligence but higher social class who is unable to understand his anger and frustration.

The phrase angry young men become popular as a description of writers who were unhappy about the Injustice and inequality which it still seemed to exist in Britain. Despite of the recent victory of democracy.

Arnold Wesker:

Born a 1932 wrote 'the kitchen' which was actually that in the kitchen of a London restaurant and show the relations both tragic and comic between the people working there. He seems to be the most important dramatist of the dark comedy. He is probably the most readable. His 3 plays 'kitchen soup with barley',  'roots' and 'I am talking about Jerusalem'started in 1950 and are concerned with Jewish family from east end of London the trilogy shows a group of people who are being physically loving and ideal stick trying in a small way to improve the world and build a better life for themselves, but generally defeated and frustrated by hard facts of life and human nature. Wesker's trilogy seems to have unusual mixture of comedy and tragedy social consciousness and human warmth.

Theatre of absurd:

Some of the most successful of the younger dramatist have been much influenced by so called  theatre of absurd (illogical). It's uncertain who invented this phrase but these kind of play began in France with the works of Eugene Ionesco and Samuel Beckett. 

Samuel Beckett:

Samuel Beckett is an Irish man who lived in Paris and wrote play in French. Audience has found it puzzling but was extremely successful, he became as one of the chief influence in English experimental theatre.
'Waiting for Godot' Was performed in England 1950.
'End game' (1957) the character lived in Dustbin and the audience sees only their heads and shoulders.
'Happy Days',  women who was almost the only speaking character is slowly buried in sand until at the end of the play only her head is visible.
'Come and go' there is no action only 121 words.

Harold Pinter:

Harold Pinter's play 'The birthday party 'was part of absurdity theatre. The writers of the theatre of the Absurd are in the happy position beyond all question and criticism as people were willing to see their play. A woman wrote a letter to Harold Pinter after watching play the birthday party. She asked the meaning of play and the two points, which she could not understand.
1.Who are the two men?
2. Where did Stanley come from?
3.Were they all supposed to be normal?
And Pinter replied- Asked Ma'am To explain the meaning of the letter and who are you?
2.Where did you come from?
3.Are you supposed to be normal?
After Pinter the chief writer to use ideas of the theatre of the Absurd in 1960s were:

Jean Baptiste Poquelin:

Jean-Baptiste Poquelin (1622-73) Was  French playwright known to the world under the name of Moliere. Most of his play were returned for performance at the court of the French King Louis XIV. Moliere works in little comedy called L'Amour Medicin (Loves the best doctor) emphasises as strongly as possible that stage comedies are intended to be active. Moliere himself was an actor and a writer. It can be proved by reading his other works like 'The Miser' (L'A vare) Or 'world be gentlemen '(Le bourgeois gentlihomme).

Sheridan:

He was not an actor, but he had a good sense of theatre for he became part- owner of Deury theatre in London, and as a member of parliament knew how to obtain dramatic effects. He wrote his first play as age of 24 years 'The rivals'. It is a good example of comedy of manners,  to be heard and seen not merely read. The rivals invites us to laugh at the social conventions of the duel. When the play appeared in 1770s duelling was in common, even Sheridan fought to duel in France. However in England people began to realise it to be a bad habit and that the idea of gentleman being obliged to fight about Matters of imaginary honour was Not only uncivilised but also ridiculous.

Comedy in novel:

Comedy is almost always taken to mean a stage comedy but comedy itself is something to be found in other forms of literature, especially the novel. George Meredith as a novelist give one of the best descriptions of the comedy spirit in his 'essay on Comedy', but we scarcely disagree with his very thoughtful description of comic view of life.

Non dramatic comedy: 

World's greatest Masterpiece of non-dramatic comedy is 'Don Quixote De la Mancha' 1605 by Miguel DE Cervantes. According to L.J. Potts significance of story lies between Quixote's nobility of mind and his absurdity of Behaving and between Sanchi's cynical peasant selfishness and his irrational behaviour loyalty to his master. Conceiving the most famous characters in the literature,  Cervantes divided the whole human nature in two  with the neatness of a surgeon's knife. 

It is to remember that To great comic novel is merely funny. Indeed a book which sets out to be purely comic is likely to be failure; The comedy must be mixed with Pathos and humour and human so that we love what we love at and laugh at what we love. 

The tradition of English comic novel is largely by Cervantes,  taking it from Dickens followed by Smollett,  Sterne,  Goldsmith,  Elliot and Trollop.

Chaucer:

He is unique among major English poets in being also comic writer. In The Canterbury Tales include the whole range of comedy and lively farce of the miller's tale to the delicate mixture of romance and comedy in the Franklin's tale and artificial humour in the prologue.

The nun's priest's tale: Chaucer's comic Masterpiece is 'the nun's priest's tale' is of Chanticleer. Chanticleer and his wife Pertelote. Chanticleer wakes up one morning distressed by a terrifying dream in which He has seen a dog like animal with burning eyes about to attack him Pertelote his favourite by among 7 wife comforts him by saying that he had an upset stomach and that some medicine will soon put him right. Chanticleer feels better and soon walks towards the yard,  to his great surprise finds himself face to face with sir Russel,  The fox,  terrified, he is about to fly away. when sir Russel addresses him with a politest tone,  praising his voice and appearance and referring with respect and admiration of his father to whom Russell had made an enjoyable dinner. Chanticleer is easily persuaded to show that he is a good singer as his father was he shut his eyes and open the mouth he was seized by the throat and carried towards the Woods. Chanticleer helpless in Fox mouth has to admit that he is fairly Caught but he says Russell l,  "if I were in your position I should want to turn back and laugh at my pursuers." This is what exactly fox does and Chanticleer escaping from the teeth flies to the safety of a high tree.

The moral of fable- don't shut your eyes when they are both to keep them open and don't open your mouth when you go to keep it shut.

The comedy in the nun's priest's tale lies partly in the story itself, but mainly in Chaucer's way of treating it. The character talk and behave like recognisable types of human being. Chanticleer is a pompous s middle age gentleman,  Pertelote is a hard headed but kind wife who knows exactly how to manage him and Russel is a persuasive,  confidence man- all typical characters. The mock philosophical discussion display of the learning,  the entertaining digressions and the comical irony of which Chaucer is a master.

Dickens:

Dickens is certainly the great English master of comedy in the novel, though with the exception of the Pickwick papers more of his major works is wholly comic in intention. Generally,  the book wholly is likely to be failure and it may be that Pickwick is the exception. One can admire to wide range of emotions expressed from the most deep tragedy the most absurd and farcial. He gives us comedy as set in life not in isolation, but shining out of the Dullness  of everyday work for breaking through the gloom of even the most serious tragedy. He invented in his comics the very kind of human creature ranging from the grotesque evil to the lovable lovable absurdity. It has been objected that Dickens characters are near caricatures, but he proves that there is no human oddity in any case. The writer of comedy is under no obligation to give us character which are rounded and whole. Dickens owed a great deal to his illustrators  in no way to distract from his creative genius, but it is a fact that the drawing of character have helps to fix the his characters in our imagination in such a way that they seem almost more real than the people we meet everyday. All the characters by Dickens are colourful and alive,  all mixed with the normal characters whose adventures provide the plots of the novels. The comic genius of Dickens was often used in satire. He is indeed with Chaucer,  an outstanding example of the fact that humour is probably the most powerful weapon in the satirist armoury.

The Pickwick paper: A famous case of Bardall versus Pickwick,  Pickwick's landlady Mrs. Bardall encouraged by the villainous of lawyers Dodson and Fog,  claims on him because he has broken his promise to marry her. Mrs. Bardall lawyer produces a notice which Mrs Bardall has displaced in the window of a house in Goswell street.

Play in book and play on stage:
The proper relationship between play in book and play on the stage or screen is often forgotten especially by reader and writer of this kind of book. Play is a like Symphony on score paper: the real symphony is what we hear in the concert halls interpreted by conductor and orchestra. The real play is what we see and hear on the stage,  interpreted by actors and produces,  with the help of scene designers,  costume designers,  makeup artist and other technical and artistic exports. So when we are reading a play especially comedy one should try to think of it in terms of sound and movement.

Reunion- W. St. John Tayleur

Reunion

Introduction:

William Tayleur's period is from 10 September 1803 to 5 November 1873. He was an English liberal politician who said in the House of Commons from 1832 to 1835. He died at the age of 70.

Reunion is a one-act play which successfully brings out a man who changes himself according to the circumstances and becomes selfish. The reunion title suggests the reunion of the comrades who survived while serving British Army in Second World War.

Characters:

• George Carter 
• Philip Rowland
• Mark Tallis
• Peter Ransom 
• Vinceto 
• John Grayson 
• Colin Grayson 
• Sergeant Smith 

Theme:

A theme of this play is stated in the words of Grayson,  one of the character in the play, "Will men never learn"?  If man gets into serious trouble, and finds himself face-to-face with death or destruction. He prays to God to be saved making sincere promises to himself in that hour of Crisis. But when he is mercifully spared he is once more his old self- possessive,  destructive and brutal. 

All the blueprints of human wealth which are conveniently forgotten during peace time are rediscovered paraded and traded upon during critical times and armed conflicts between Nation.Four war comrade survivors from a group of seven have met in accordance with a pledge they had taken 10 years ago.The historical event is referred to in the play was the difficult position of the British army after the fall of France in the early stages of the second World War.We are told that a group of seven soldiers were in a ruined farmhouse 20 miles from Dunkirk. The chances to escape seemed very dim to these doomed person. When this abled body decided to leave the enemies place, they made a pact to meet at same place after 10 years and celebrate. Carter informs Vinceto when the play opens that they have assembled to commemorate the date with Destiny.

Based on play:

All four are George Carter,  Philip Rowland,  Marked Tallies and Peter Ransom. They meet up to discuss what they decided and planned after war and where did the reach. Did they get off on the values ethics and plants? Carter is a person with a dominating personality and may be considered to represent the tripe of go-getters. Successful type of men who have come to believe that money is the most important thing in the world. As all is Fair in Love and War,  All is fair in industry and commerce as well. He has no feeling of hesitation in Morality,  He considers it to disagree the law and money only helps him to do so. Then Padre,  Rowland good humorously protests against his philosophy of Life,  Carter replies- "It is the way of the world, you know, there's not much room for our sermon of the mount principles in life today. Blessed are the meek may sound very nice in sermons, but they will take the hinder most is my motto." That in fact is the rule of the large number of people. Successful man of the world like Carter have always dismissed these values of Life which constitute the basis of all civilised life, as impractical and unrealistic. 

And when Grayson  tells him how their comrade Sergeant Smith was squeezed out of business and driven to commit suicide all including Carter were horrified. He protests that,  "if he would know,  he would not have allowed it to happen. He might have saved Sargent Smith because of personal relation." 'But what about all other sergeant Smith and the Brown and the Robinson's and the rest? Only swine would do down an old friend, but if he's just a stranger, it's a smart bit of business. You never stopped to think that he also was somebody's  comrade.' These are the sentiments and ideas which are emerging from the dramatic situation to give it Universality  and make it a moving experience. 

The second character Mark Tallis, he is a writer who to has sold his soul for immediate fame and profit. Before the war he believe in the ideals about an author's duty to the public.But as he became the writer he started writing pornography and felt that- "Authors first duty is to cater for his audience not to preach to them." He was younger with intelligence, but slightly dissipated face. 

The third character is Philip Rowland ,  a pleasant easygoing person of about middle 40s. He was supposed to look after the spiritual welfare of the people. Before the war he considered it his mission to work among the poor in East End and he is now apologetic about the whole thing. He rationalises by saying that- "it's really a young man's job some people seem to think that labouring among the people is the Parsons only proper sphere, a most narrow-minded notion as if the rich did not need spiritual guidance!" But it is evident that he too has rejected Christ and uses the church for his own advancement. 

The fourth character is Peter Ransom,  who is younger in all four of about 28. Whose good looks are rather spoiled by a discontented expressions. He is disgrunted young man who holds debt to his country,  for which he gave some of the best years of his life has ignored him and thrown him on the dunghill. Therefore he has made up his mind to migrate to America for better opportunities. He has a distorted view of things and dissatisfaction is due to the fact that he unlike other comrades has not been provided with a comfortable job. Ideals have no place in his scheme. He represents the unbeatable youth of England and he says' "My generations got nothing except the bitterness of six wasted years.

Grayson delivered his great speech and opened eyes of these comrades. For some time all four were touched of the white dream of peace and Humanity. But Vision soon dispelled when they found out that these Grayson  is not their comrade, but his brother. They all got angry and abused him which showed the stuff they were made of. But Grayson still manages to have a upper head. And clears he is brother of Colin Grayson, John Grayson. He delivers his brothers message from letter. Colin requested john to go for reunion and explained that he is dying for his other comrades. He was happy like sacrificing  his life,  so that other comrades can enjoy and achieve their values in life. Before departing he delivers to them the message of Colin which has an apocalyptic significance. And the last word of Grayson, "But there's still time gentleman!" May be regarded as a prophetic warning to the human race. 

The theme of the play has both Universal as well as particular significance. The story of mankind is a record,  not so much wars and massacres as of man's inability to learn from history. If history repeats itself, It also plants signpost and danger signals in the Corridors of time. The first world war (1914-18) was for to make the world safe for democracy. It was a war to end war but hardly had the ink dried on the peace treaty when the seeds of another wall were sown. The Second World War II failed to awaken mankind as a whole to a realisation that man must change radically if the past disasters were not to be repeated. Consequently,  another War seems to loom large Over the Horizon. The play beautifully dramatised the theme of failure,  theme of treachery,  of betrayed hope and ideals. 

But the dramatist does not present merely negative or pessimist picture of life. There seems to be some hope. The human conscience can still be moved and to do so, he makes use of fantasy in the play. When Grayson is delivering his great speech which is addressed not only to these four person, but to the English nation and the human race in general, the stage is darkened and these four persons under the spell of his voice are transformed.  

Conclusion: 

These four characters are not individuals but symbols the ruling class or capitalist,  the church, the writer who is conscience keeper of society, the youth the vanguard of progressive forces have all forgotten their duty to the nation and towards mankind in general. Therefore Grayson's Cry of Anguish,  "Will men never learn!" is not only Grayson's cry alone, but the Cry of dramatist and On man of good will. 

Short story- The Monkey's Paw by W.W. Jacobs

The Monkey’s Paw- W. W. Jacobs

Introduction:

William Wymark Jacobs (1863-1943) is an English author of famous humorous short stories. The monkey’s paw is a supernatural short story by him. It was first published in England in the collection ‘The Lady of the Barge’ in 1902. The monkey’s paw is a powerful horror story; it was adapted for the stage by L. N. Parker with whom he wrote the plays. The one-act-play of the monkey’s paw is presented in three scenes. Every scene comes with a new climax piled with others.  The play appeals to a human fascination for mystery and horror.

 

Theme:

The theme of the play is very clearly stated in the play in words of Major Sergeant Morris- “Fate ruled the people’s lives and those who interfere with fate do so their sorrow.”

Characters:

John White/ Mr. White

Jenny White/ Mrs. White

Herbert White

Mr. Sampson

Sergeant Morris

Scene-1   

It was a dark story night as the three members of the white family were relaxing in the cozy house. Mr. White and Herbert were playing chess and Mrs. White knits near the fire. A family friend sergeant Major Morris arrives for a visit. Over whiskey, he tells of his exploits abroad. Major Morris returned home after serving the British army in India. They were discussing the magic fascinating the people of India and Major Morris was favoring the fakirs of India. He explained that the fakir cast a spell after 15 years of continuous meditation on a monkey’s paw, the monkey’s paw can fulfill the three wishes of three people. Sergeant explains about the paw; Sergeant was the second to get this paw; he himself has already had his three wishes, and the person before Sergeant had a last wish of his own death. The sergeant tries to sell it as if it was causing more trouble but no one buys the paw without seeing proof of its effect. He throws the paw into the fire in order to destroy it but Mr. White rescued it. Even after the Sergeant warning he desires it. He learned to make a wish from Sergeant. Mrs. White referred to ‘Arabian nights’ there. The family jokingly suggests their wish; Mrs. White asks for extra pair of hands while Herbert says Mr. White should make an emperor so that they don’t have to listen to Mrs. White’s nagging. The sergeant takes a leave from the family with a warning. Mr. White said he had everything he wanted and didn’t know what to wish for. Herbert asked to wish for 200 pounds which are to be paid for the house’s EMI. Mr. White wishes for 200 pounds; he suddenly cried out and said that the paw moved but no one believed. There was no change, they didn’t get 200 pounds, and they felt it is fake. Herbert was working in the industry, and had night swift it was half-past-eleven (11:15), Herbert left for the job and Mr. and Mrs. White slept.

·        The climax of the scene- 1 is the introduction of the monkey’s paw by sergeant Major Morris.

Scene- 2

The next morning Mr. and Mrs. White talks about the night Mr. White felt very restless that night. It was a sunny day; Mrs. White settled a breakfast near a window. It was 8:45 but Herbert didn’t return yet they started their breakfast. They were chatting about wishes, paw, and sergeant. There came a post in a post box. Mrs. White with hope said to Mr. White that its banknotes it can be the 200 pounds we wished for but it was a receipt for the interest of 200 pounds which was duly received. Later Mrs. White notices a stranger outside dressed in nice clothes. Stranger hesitantly approaches the door, he nervously states that he is representative of ‘maw and meggins’. Herbert’s employer, Mrs. White asks whether Herbert is all right, and the representative (Mr. Sampson) says he is hurt but not in pain. It strikes Mrs. White that it means he is dead. Representative nervously and with stress explains that last night Herbert was caught in the machinery/ caught in the flywheel. And the company doesn’t take any responsibility for it but will give 200 pounds as compensation.

·        The climax in this scene is Herbert being late and Mr. and Mrs. White’s anxious feelings. Along with, Mr. Sampson’s entry with horrifying news and completion of their wish at cost of Herbert.

Scene- 3

Even after ten days of Herbert's burial. The couple felt exhausted and hopeless. A week after being buried Mr. White hears his wife crying by the window, he gently urges her to come back to bed, and she refuses. Mrs. White suddenly cries that she needs a monkey’s paw. She realizes that paw can still fulfill their two wishes. She insists Mr. White wish Herbert back to life, she orders him to make a wish and he finally does so. They hear the voice knock Mr. White thinks it is a rat but Mrs. White runs downstairs with the expectation of Herbert at door but the bolt of the door was stiff; she called Mr. White to help her. Mr. White begs not to open the door. He was horrified. Mr. White frantically searches for the paw, which was dropped on the floor, Mrs. White pulls back the bolt and Mr. White finds the paw and makes a final wish- “I wish him dead. I wish him to die a peace.” The knocking stops abruptly. Mrs. White opens the door and the street is empty.

·        The climax in this scene comes when Mrs. White realizes that more two wishes are yet to be fulfilled by the monkey’s paw.

Moral:

The person can never own anything more than what is in his fate. And if he tries to do so he will definitely lead to some sorrow in his life or have to abandon.

Symbols in the play:

Monkey’s paw- The monkey’s paw is a symbol of desire and greed.

Chess- it symbolizes the life of those who play daring and risky games of chess will lose, just as those who take unnecessary risks in life will die.