Movie Screening: Chanya Button's Vita & Virginia

 1. How do the letters function not only as a medium of communication between the two central characters but also as a narrative tool within the film?

The letters between Vita and Virginia are not just about staying in touch-they are a window into their emotions, thoughts, and how their relationship evolves over time. We can see their love, admiration, and sometimes doubts and insecurities through their written words. The letters give us a way to understand their personalities and how their connection grows deeper. As a narrative tool, the letters help tell the story in an intimate way, showing things that spoken dialogue might not capture. They also bridge the physical distance between them and reveal their inner struggles, making the audience feel more connected to their journey. The letters are like a diary shared between two people, letting us see their world through their eyes.

2. Discuss some of the views regarding marriage, relationships, and the role of society presented by the various characters in the film.

The movie presents different ideas of marriage and relationships. For Vita Sackville-West, marriage is a companionship but not necessarily a constraint. She is married to Harold Nicholson, but Vita still maintains an understanding with her husband; however, she lives out her desires without inhibition, including her affair with Virginia. This presents her as defying societal standards. For Virginia Woolf, however, relationships are more emotional and intellectual, making it harder for her to find the middle ground between what she feels and what is socially acceptable.

It further criticizes society's fixed roles of women. Vita broke these norms by her adventurous spirit and boldness, while Virginia is more of a prisoner by her mental illness and pressures put upon her as a woman and writer. In their love story, all the questions were raised over the social conception of love, fidelity, and the set boundaries between love and lust. How the norms would affect them in different ways, freeing some moments of their lives and then constricting others in those moments.

3. In your opinion, is the film able to capture Woolf's depressive state with sincerity and genuineness?

Yes, the film depicts Virginia Woolf's depression with a lot of honesty and depth. It doesn't romanticize or exaggerate her struggles but shows how her mental health deeply affects her life, relationships, and creativity. The moments where Virginia appears distant, overwhelmed, or consumed by her thoughts feel very genuine. The film also depicts how her depression creates challenges for those around her, especially Vita, who struggles to fully understand Virginia's inner world.

The scenes of Virginia walking in the garden or losing herself in her thoughts are haunting and powerful, giving a glimpse into her fragile mental state. Simultaneously, the film portrays her brilliance as a writer, showing that her struggles are part of who she is but do not define her entirely. It's a sensitive and authentic portrayal that makes her struggles relatable without oversimplifying them.

4. Express your views on the depiction of the relationship between Virginia Woolf and Vita Sackville-West.

The film captures the intense and transformational nature of the relationship between Virginia Woolf and Vita Sackville-West. It is Vita who instigates the relationship. She is bold, charming, and is fascinated by Virginia's intellect and creativity. Their first meeting was laced with admiration and intrigue. The boldness of Vita contrasts with the reticent and cautious nature of Virginia, which is really interesting to watch.

The film shows how, with the development of their relationship, their deep emotional and intellectual connection, though both have very different personalities and lives, comes into existence. Vita's adventurous spirit brings new energy into Virginia's life, and Virginia's brilliance inspires Vita. Their bond also leads to the creation of Virginia's novel Orlando, which is a love letter to Vita.

Their last meeting will be bittersweet evidence of the end of the romantic relationship, though the effects of each other on their life will still be felt. A film of such complexities has been portrayed in their love—passionate, inspiring, yet bound by realities. It is a glorious depiction of a relationship against convention and leaves an after-life legacy.

Thinking Activity : I.A. Richards Figurative Language (Practical Criticism)

 I ’M nobody! Who are you By Emily Dickinson

I ’M nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there ’s a pair of us—don’t tell!
They ’d banish us, you know.

How dreary to be somebody!
How public, like a frog
To tell your name the livelong day
To an admiring bog! Summary :

In this poem, the speaker says they are "nobody" and wonders if the person they are speaking to is also "nobody." They enjoy the idea of being private and not drawing attention. This is contrasted with the idea of being "somebody," which the speaker finds unpleasant, like a frog who constantly croaks in front of an audience.

Glossary :

dreary : not at all interesting or attractive; boring
bog : an area of ground that is very soft and wet

Analysis:

1. Sense (What the Poem Means):

The poem speaks about happiness as a "nobody" that is, a person who doesn't seek to be famous or known. The speaker likes being unnoticed because it feels peaceful and free. She thinks being a "somebody" that is, a famous person is exhausting and fake.



2. Feeling (How It Makes You Feel):

The poem feels friendly and playful. It makes you feel like the speaker is talking directly to you, inviting you to join her in being "nobody." It might also make you think about how tiring it can be to try to fit into what society wants.



3. Tone (The Poet's Attitude):

The tone here is humorous, a tad sarcastic, and anti-authority. The poet pretends that it is so lame to try to be recognized and significant all the time-it is just like a frog croaking all day in the jungle for no logical reason.



4. Purpose (Why the poet wrote it):

Emily Dickinson wanted to get across that it's sometimes good to be forgotten or overlooked. She says to be yourself, it's better than being some type of celebrity or fame-struck.


5. Meaning of Words in the Poem:

Nobody : A person who doesn't like fame or attention

Someone : A person who likes being famous or admired

Frog : A loud person that likes attention

Bog : A group of admirers who don't know their own minds


6. Misinterpretation of the Poem:

The poem may be misinterpreted by some as saying being "nobody" is bad or unimportant. That's wrong. Dickinson says that being "nobody" can make one free and happy.

Doubts:

1. What does the speaker mean by saying, "They’d banish us, you know"?

2. How does the comparison of a "frog" in the poem relate to the speaker's view of being "somebody"?

Thinking Activity: War Poetry

 Que 1 . Choose one poem from the English literary cannon which deals with the theme of war and compare it with any one of the five war poems you have studied in this unit. [Discuss aspects like the style of the poems, language employed, treatment of the theme of war, etc.] How are they different? Are there any similarities?

Comparison of Rupert Brooke's The Soldier with Thomas Hardy's The Man He Killed

War is the theme in Rupert Brooke's The Soldier and Thomas Hardy's The Man He Killed, but each one handles the theme very differently, and the tones vary. 

1. Tone and Perspective

The Soldier: Brooke wrote his poem in a highly patriotic and idealistic tone. He made war a noble thing, and for that reason, the man sacrificed himself for his country.

The Man He Killed: Hardy's tone is reflective and ironic. The speaker questions the logic of war, where men who could have been friends in other circumstances kill each other due to political orders.

2. Style and Structure

The Soldier: Written in sonnet form, it has a formal and elevated structure that matches Brooke's romanticized view of war.

The Man He Killed: Hardy writes in a rather conversational and informal mode with short, simple stanzas, which characterizes the everyman persona of the speaker.

3. Diction and Imagery

The Soldier: Brooke speaks in a romantic and idealized language, as evident in "a richer dust" and "a corner of a foreign field that is forever England," making it full of beauty and honor.

The Man He Killed: Hardy uses plain and direct language, as seen in the line “I shot him dead because — / Because he was my foe,” highlighting the absurdity of war.

4. Theme of War

The Soldier: Brooke glorifies war and sees death as meaningful if it serves one’s country.

The Man He Killed: Hardy critiques war by exposing its irrationality and the unnecessary loss of life it causes.

Similarities

Both poems relate to the life experiences of people in war.

Both have the theme of death, but with varying perspectives.

 

Contrasts

Brooke exalts war as something noble and patriotic, whereas Hardy questions its senselessness.

Brooke's poem has an idealistic, emotional tone, while Hardy's has a critical and ironic tone.

The Soldier centers on love for one's country, while The Man He Killed focuses on the futility of killing someone who could have been a friend.

 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, Brooke romanticizes war as an honorable sacrifice, while Hardy reveals its irrationality and human cost. These contrasting views provide a fuller understanding of war's complexity.

Que 2 .  "War poetry is not necessarily ‘anti-war’. It is, however, about the very large questions of life: identity, innocence, guilt, loyalty, courage, compassion, humanity, duty, desire, death." Discuss this statement in the context of any two of the war poems you have studied.

Introduction

War poetry often transcends just being "anti-war" to deal with profound questions of life, emotions, and moral dilemmas. In The Fear by Wilfrid Wilson Gibson and The Hero by Siegfried Sassoon, both poets deal with themes like identity, guilt, duty, and death. 

1. Identity and Courage

The Fear: This poem shows how war can strip a soldier of their identity, reducing them to fear and survival instincts. The soldier's courage is tested, but their overwhelming fear highlights the human vulnerability in war.

The Hero: Sassoon examines identity by the difference between the soldier who dies in battle and the fake image of him that was made for his family. The poem asks if the heroism in war is truly heroic or rather a tragic sacrifice.

 

2. Guilt and Humanity

The Fear: The soldier's fear is connected to guilt—guilt for feeling scared rather than courageous, and guilt for possibly letting his fellow comrades down. This relates to the emotional weight that soldiers carry.

The Hero: Guilt is also central here but is placed on the officer and the system that romanticize a soldier's death to appease a grieving family. The officer's feigned sympathy speaks to the absence of humanity in the way war is managed.

3. Duty and Death

The Fear: Duty drives the soldier into the battlefield, but death's fear makes him think if such a sacrifice was worthwhile for duty.

The Hero: Sassoon indicts the idea of duty when it takes a man's life but leaves lies instead of truth to the man's family. It shows that death in battle is not noble but senseless.

 

4. Innocence and Compassion

The Fear: The soldier's fear reveals his innocence. He is not a fearless warrior but an ordinary human being who values his life.

The Hero: The poem also speaks to lost innocence, as the young soldier's death brings out the cruelty of war. Compassion is missing, replaced by hollow words of consolation.

 

Similarities Between the Poems

Both poems depict the emotional and psychological impact of war.

They emphasize the gap between how war is idealized and the harsh reality faced by soldiers.

Both criticize the romanticized idea of war by focusing on fear, death, and lies.

Conclusion

These poems show us that war poetry does not condemn war itself, but actually opens up questions about humanness: fear, courage, duty, and loss. The Fear and The Hero ask the reader to ponder what war does to human beings and how the social world condones it because of its costs. These remind us that warfare has a rippling impact: not just on the battleground, but in the very hearts of humanity.

Que 3 . Compare Ivor Gurney's The Target with Wilfred Owen's Dulce et Decorum Est. What are some notable similarities and differences between these two war poets and their poetry?

Comparison of Ivor Gurney's The Target with Wilfred Owen's Dulce et Decorum Est

Both Ivor Gurney's The Target and Wilfred Owen's Dulce et Decorum Est are great war poems that expose the barbarity of World War I. However, they portray the theme of war differently. 

1. Tone and Perspective

Gurney’s The Target: The tone is personal and reflective. The speaker feels guilt and sorrow about killing another man in battle. The poem explores the emotional and moral struggles of a soldier.

Owen’s Dulce et Decorum Est: The tone is bitter and angry. Owen condemns the glorification of war and exposes its horrors through vivid and shocking imagery.

2. Theme of War

Gurney: The Target is all about the psychological effects of war upon the individual. The soldier questions himself for having taken a life, and the purpose of going to war.

Owen: Dulce et Decorum Est is a bitter critique of the romanticised notion that it is worthwhile to die for one's country. It brings home the physical agony and death wrung by war.

3. Language and Imagery

Gurney: The language is more introspective, with lines like “I shot him, and it had to be.” The imagery is emotional, focusing on the internal conflict of the soldier.

Owen: Owen uses graphic and detailed imagery to depict the horrors of war, such as “gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs.” His language is more direct and shocking.

4. Style and Structure

Gurney: The poem is conversational and reflective, with a sense of intimacy. The structure is simple, just like the soldier's thoughts, yet profound.

Owen: Owen's poem is more dramatic, with a vivid narrative of a gas attack. The irregular rhythm reflects the chaos of war.

5. Similarities

Both poems reject the glorification of war and show its harsh reality.

Both focus on the experiences of individual soldiers.

Both deal with themes of death and the emotional toll of war.

6. Differences

Focus: Gurney’s poem is more introspective, focusing on the soldier’s guilt and personal conflict. Owen’s poem is outwardly critical, targeting society’s false ideals about war.

Imagery: Gurney uses emotional imagery, while Owen uses graphic, physical imagery.

Tone: Gurney’s tone is sorrowful and regretful; Owen’s is angry and accusatory.

Conclusion

The other, Dulce et Decorum Est, condemns a larger societal lie about war's nobility. Although both poems are moving to the reader, they paint vivid pictures of the horrors of war from different perspectives.

Bridge Course: T.S. Eliot - Criticism - Tradition and Individual Talent

1.How would you like to explain Eliot's concept of 'Tradition'? Do you agree with it? What do you understand by 'Historical Sense'? (Use these quotes to explain your understanding.)

"The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past but of its presence."

This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal, and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. 

T.S. Eliot's idea of "Tradition" is, however, most lucidly expressed in his essay Tradition and the Individual Talent. He thought that the writer does not create a work of art in isolation but based on the literary traditions. 

What is Tradition?

According to Eliot, tradition is not just following old ways or copying the past. It’s about having an awareness of all the great works that came before and understanding their influence on the present.

A good writer respects this tradition but also contributes something new to it.

What is the 'Historical Sense'?

Quote:

 "The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past but of its presence."

This means a writer needs to see the past not just as something old but as something alive and relevant today.

For Eliot, great writers have a sense of belonging with both the past and the present. They know that their writings are part of a whole literary tradition.

Quote:

 "This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal, and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional."

According to Eliot, writers need both the timeless (universal truth in literature) and temporal (the moment at their hands). This mixture allows their work to be of the time and not at the same time.

I agree:

Because i feel that Eliot is correct because every artist learns from what came before. Literature is a dialogue between generations, and the new writer has to hear the older voices before adding his own.

In this , Eliot says, "You can't write in a vacuum. You're part of a bigger story, and to write well, you need to understand and respect the chapters that came before you. But you also need to add your unique voice to this story."

2.What is the relationship between “tradition” and "individual talent,” according to the poet T. S. Eliot? 

Explain: "Some can absorb knowledge; the more tardy must sweat for it.  Shakespeare acquired more essential history from Plutarch than most men could from the whole British Museum".

Explain: "Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation are directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry." 

T.S. Eliot's essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent" analyzes the interplay between the personal creativity of a poet and the influence of literary tradition. 

Relationship Between "Tradition" and "Individual Talent":

Tradition: Eliot believes tradition is the treasure of learned and written words of ancient poets. According to him, a poet must be closely aware of this literary background in order to produce sensible work. It does not mean to imitate the past; rather, it is to study and interact with it.

Individual Talent: Though tradition is necessary, Eliot believes that, equally important is the particular creativity of a poet, called individual talent. A greater poet integrates personal expression and the results of tradition. He creates something new in the poetic world.

Interpretation of the Quotes:

1. "Some can absorb knowledge; the more tardy must sweat for it. Shakespeare acquired more essential history from Plutarch than most men could from the whole British Museum."

Meaning: Eliot means some people, such as Shakespeare, have a genius whereby they can intuitively receive the essential knowledge. What a man like Shakespeare had intuitively learned from his wide reading of Plutarch and others, others could acquire, but only after much reading; it was not only something he knew but was deep in him.

2. " Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation are directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry. "

That is, Eliot believed that literary work evaluations should center on the poem, and not on the personal life or intentions of the poet. This view encourages readers and critics to evaluate the excellence, meaning, and power of the poetry regardless of its creator, making their appreciation objective.

3.How would you like to explain Eliot's theory of depersonalization? You can explain this with the help of a chemical reaction in the presence of a catalyst agent, platinum. 

Explain: "Poetry is not a turning loose of emotion but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality but an escape from personality." Write two points on which one can write a critique of 'T.S. Eliot as a critic.'

T.S. Eliot's theory of depersonalization suggests that poets should separate their personal emotions and experiences from their poetry, allowing the work to stand independently of the author's individuality. He illustrates this concept using a chemical analogy involving a catalyst.

Chemical Analogy:

Eliot compares the poet's mind to a piece of platinum in a chemical reaction. In the process of creating sulfurous acid, sulfur dioxide and oxygen react in the presence of a platinum catalyst. The platinum facilitates the reaction but remains unchanged and unaffected by it. Similarly, a poet's mind should act as a catalyst, combining various emotions and experiences to create poetry, while remaining detached and unaltered by these elements.

Explanation of the Quote:

Eliot's statement, "Poetry is not a turning loose of emotion but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality but an escape from personality," emphasizes that poetry should transcend personal feelings and individual identity. Instead of merely expressing personal emotions, poets should strive to craft works that evoke universal emotions, enabling readers to connect with the poetry on a broader level.

Critique of T.S. Eliot as a Critic:

1. Influence on Literary Criticism: Eliot's emphasis on impersonality and tradition has significantly shaped modern literary criticism. His ideas encourage critics to focus on the text itself rather than the author's biography, promoting objective analysis. However, some argue that this approach may overlook the importance of personal context in understanding a work's depth and meaning.

2. Potential Limitations: While Eliot's theory advocates for detachment in poetic creation, critics have pointed out that complete depersonalization may be unrealistic. The poet's experiences and emotions inevitably influence their work to some extent. Additionally, the analogy of the poet's mind as a catalyst has been questioned, with some suggesting that the comparison may not fully capture the complexities of the creative process.

Thinking Activity : Zeitgeist of the Time: Modern Times and The Great Dictator

 Charlie Chaplin Modern times 1936

Modern Times (1936) is a silent comedy from Charlie Chaplin, using his iconic "Little Tramp" character. The movie satirizes the dehumanizing effects of modern industrialization at the time of the Great Depression. A factory worker cannot cope with the modern machines, breaks down, and then falls in love with a girl who is a fugitive. Together they face hardships and strive for a better life.

It is despite the rise of talkies that Chaplin refused to dialogue, using only music and sound effects. The film combines social criticism with humor, as highlighted by the famous scene of Chaplin on the assembly line. It's considered a timeless masterpiece reflecting modern struggles with alienation and mechanization.


The great Dictator 1940

The Great Dictator (1940) is a satirical comedy-drama film written, directed, and starring Charlie Chaplin. It marks his first true sound film and condemns Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, fascism, and antisemitism. Chaplin plays dual roles: a Jewish barber mistaken for a tyrannical dictator, and the dictator himself, modeled after Hitler. The film mocks Nazi leaders with characters like Adenoid Hynkel (Hitler), Garbitsch (Goebbels), and Benzino Napaloni (Mussolini). Famed for its scathing satire and Chaplin's now-famous speech calling for peace, the movie was a commercial success and remains one of the most important works in comedy and political cinema.



Modern Times and The Great Dictator - A Visual Study of Power, Conformity, and Manipulation
Frames from Modern Times:

Frame 1: A tightly packed herd of sheep being herded.
Frame 2: A mass of workers rushing into a factory.
Frames from The Great Dictator:
Frame 1: Chaplin as a dictator (Hynkel) with a child in a photoshoot.
Analysis:

1. Conformity and Power in Modern Times (Sheep and Workers):
Composition and Movement: In the first two frames of Modern Times, Chaplin shows how sheep and workers move in the same way. The sheep are bunched together and herded in a manner that is very similar to the workers in the factory. Both seem to have no individuality but rather form part of a greater machine. This is a reflection of Chaplin's critique of industrial society, where people become mere parts of the machine.

Metaphor: It is the sheep who represent workers, sharing qualities like obedience, and lack of personal decision-making. This idea links to the theme of Modern Times with the loss of individualism in the face of industrialization. Chaplin mocks the dehumanizing result of mass production by portraying the worker as sheep.

Semiotics: These frames work as a visual "code." On the surface, it just shows sheep and workers; however, symbolically speaking, it critiques how society forces people into conforming roles, stripping away one's unique identity.

2. Authority and Manipulation in The Great Dictator (Chaplin with Child):
Frame Analysis: One of the most important frames in The Great Dictator is when Chaplin, as dictator Hynkel, poses for a photo with a child. Such an image is a conscious manipulation by authoritarian leaders; they use children to pose as benevolent and caring. Associating with children gives leaders an image of hope and protection, which draws sympathy and diverts attention from their oppressive actions.

Images of Children: Most dictators and tyrants tend to use images with children in them to appear humanitarian. This is for a variety of reasons:

Image of Compassion: They need people to perceive them as figures that care for the future, which children represent as well.
Redirecting Attention: The people's attention from the repressive, oppressive policies that they implement to their "humane" side.

Hope and Continuity: The leaders want to present continuity; they are claiming that under their rule, safety and stability will be available for future generations.
Relationship Between the Two Films:
Both movies represent how power systems, industrial and political, utilize images for the control and manipulation of society. In Modern Times, workers are treated like machines; they have no personal freedom or individuality. The dictator in The Great Dictator uses the image of children for himself to seem gentle and caring, but the message is that he's authoritarian by nature. Both movies utilize some powerful visuals to critique the way those in power manage the public for their own maintenance of control.

Conclusion:
Chaplin, through Modern Times and The Great Dictator, visually emphasizes the dangers of conformity and manipulation in society. In Modern Times, he depicts workers as mere cogged machines in the industrial machine, while in The Great Dictator, authoritarian leaders use child imagery to veil their oppressive policies. Both works critique how those in power manipulate people—whether through industrial labor or political imagery—to maintain control. Chaplin smartly plays upon visual metaphors and semiotics to attract attention towards this struggle between individuality and forces bent on ripping it apart.