What is literature? And How the literature shaped at me?

The   Literature  is   Mystery  to  culture,   society &  History  of  Reality.  It  is  a  Technique  that  proves   to  be   a   Logical  Representation  of  the  old  manners.  The   society is  Formed  through  this  Artificiality. And  the  Literature  itself  shows  the   truth of   society.   The  Literature  is a  best   knowledge.  So  it's  Need  more.

Yes I have been very much sincerely. By virtue of this I know the harsh reality of society. Women, feminism, racism, politics and many social phenomena have made me even rigid.
                    

Sardar movie review

'Sardar' ,' the iron man' in this film is talk about famous ' iron man ' for ' Sardar patel' . This film ' s title is ' Sardar ' . Then title is introduce To this character. In this film in the country 's independence past and future ' s situation in description. And how this situations in sardar' s roll for the India? This film in all characters are in our the India for loyalists with duty created. ' gandhi' , ' sardar' , ' nehru' in this three man's are each other with connect And creat To India ' s management. This addition To independence after then countries partition talk about say to in film. But at that time in sardar not wants to country 's partition. Because he was tray to all over country of unity . Suddenly decided of India s partition but partition in after then to community row and violence to spread . So at that time in sardar was protected To this situations and handals it. This film s direct to ketan Mehta . And sardar s roll is act to paresh raval. Then paresh raval was acting to most films in comic roll.So he is very well play to sardar character. So such true in this film threw the past of India and past time in people's there create to independence for struggling in remembering it.

Huxley vs Orwell: Dystopian Truth in Post-truth era , OD

THE   LITERATURE   IS   REFLECTION   OF   THE   SOCIETY  AND  CULTURE  .  EVERY  DAYS  LIFE 'S   ACTION  IS  EFFECTED   BY  THE  LITERATURE , THEN  PEOPLE  INTERESTED  SOCIAL AND  POLITICAL  ACTIVITES  IN  PERFORMED , SO  THEY  HAD  LIVE  TO  LITERATURE  , WHEN   LITERATURE   IS   ESTABLISHED  TO   SOCIAL, POLITICAL RULES  AND  REGULATION , THEN  LITERATURE   DEPENDED  TO   SOCIAL  COMMUNICATION.

OD: POST-TRUTH

 

               then   ' post  truth '  is  a   very  logical   concept , because   human's   daily   life  in  truth  and   reality  is  a  very   important   for  in  human  life .

                                     first   of  all   what  is ' post  truth ' ?  then  post  truth  means  'not   real  truth '  but   truth  is  disinformation  of   unreality .then   human's  mind  in   cerculing  to  bad   things  but  that  this  person's  out look  is  a  good  , so   that   is   post  truth .

           
                                       for   the   example  of   ''asharam'  , when   people  belived  in  him  to , then   people's   superticious  of   asharam , but   asharam  is  big  chitter  for  the  peoples , so  peoples  blind  faith  is  post  truth  of  asharam .

                                  so   the   truth  is   made   to   unreal   truth and   unreality  .

Education systeam school in forest- online disscusion

 

this    image   is   reflecting   to  education   systeam  . then  every   person  in  our  ability   and   hidden   talent  but  person   will  be  not  expressed   every  time , that  then  classroom  in  teacher   and   perents  wants  to  their   students (child)  was  giving  to  good  performance but  all  chid (student)  not  multitasking ,then their   performed  to  in  our  interested   filed . so  its  view  of  poor  educational  systeam.

O-D , ISI NO HATH

this story is Gujarati short story. this story title is " isi no hath" . this story is written by Mahendrshih  Parmar. the story in introduce to three person's characters. they are not connected to terrorism. but they are religion peoples and they are care to temple .again they are name in announce to terrorist so they are pass to in this situation and  solve to that problems. they are each other connected to personal professions.in this story's title dedicate to three characters name's first letters.so it is sing in to this story' s title and they are three character's is living common life. they are not terrorist.

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conred

               Heart  of  Darkness  (1899) is  a  Novella  by  Polish British  novelist  Joseph  corned . In  this  novel  is  about   the  voyage  up   the  Congo  River  in  to  the  congo  free  state,  in  the  heart  of  Africa  by  the   story 's  narrator  Charles Marlow.  Marlow  tells  his   story   to  friends  aboard  a   boat  anchored on  the  River  themes  London ,  England. 

                    Heart   of   Darkness  raises   question  about  imperialism  and  racism.   Marlow  as  a   child.  His  Dream  is   ship  captain Marlow.  Him  with  one  uncharted  map   of  Africa .  MARLOW  tries  to  Repair  his   ship  needs  rivets  . MARLOW'MARLOW's  fears : crashing going  in  to  the  Dark  to  Kurtz . Kurtz  said  to Marlow : "  he 'd kill me  if  I  didn't  give  it to  him  " ,  it's  kurtz  frustration.  Mr Kurtz  is  died.  Manager  uses  personal  papers  .  One   lady  was   asking  about  the   Mr Kurtz to  MARLOW. And  MARLOW  don't  know  about  her  . It's  horro   feeling   feels to  MARLOW.

R.k. Narayan: ''The Guide''

The movie starts with Raju  being released from jail. Raju was a freelance guide, who earned his living by taking tourists to historic sites. One day, a wealthy and aging archaeologist, Marco

comes to the city with his young wife Rosie , the daughter of a courtesan. Marco wants to do some research on the caves outside the city and hires Raju as his guide.
While Marco devotes himself to the discovery of the cave, Raju takes Rosie on a tour and appreciates her dancing ability and innocence. He learns about Rosie's background as a daughter of a virgin courtesan and how Rosie has achieved respectability as the wife of Marco but at a terrible cost. She had to give up her passion of dancing since it was unacceptable to Marco. Meanwhile, Rosie tries to commit suicide by consuming poison. Marco, upon learning of the incident, returns from the caves to see Rosie and is furious with Rosie after seeing her alive. He tells her that her act of committing suicide was a drama, otherwise she would have consumed more sleeping pills so that she could really have died. Upon returning to the caves which were discovered, Rosie learns that Marco is spending time and enjoying the company of a native tribal girl. She is enraged at Marco and both indulge in a serious heated discussion, which concludes with Rosie leaving the caves, and she once again wants to end her life.
Raju calms her down by saying that committing suicide is a sin, and that she should live to pursue her dream. She finally says good-bye to the relation of being the wife of Marco. Now she needs support and a home. Raju gives her shelter. Rosie is considered a prostitute by Raju's community (as classical dancing traditionally was prostitutes' work at royal courts), which leads to many problems, including his mother and her brother insisting that Rosie be kicked out. Raju refuses and his mother leaves him. His friend and driver also falls out with him over Rosie. Raju loses his business and the entire town turns against him. Undeterred by these setbacks, Raju helps Rosie embark on a singing and dancing career and Rosie becomes a star. As she rises as a star, Raju becomes dissolute — gambling and drinking. Marco comes back on the scene. Trying to win Rosie back, he brings flowers and has his agent ask Rosie to release some jewelry which is in a safe deposit box. Raju, a bit jealous, does not want Marco to have any contact with Rosie and forges Rosie's name on the release of the jewels. Meanwhile, Rosie and Raju drift apart due to Rosie's incomprehensible behaviour when she tortures Raju by not obliging him a caring hug even and asks him to leave her room else she says she will have to go out. Before this, they also had a discussion about how a man should live when Rosie remembers Marco and tells Raju that Marco was probably correct when he used to say that a man should not live on a woman's earnings.
Raju retorts by saying that she is under a misunderstanding that she has become a star on her own and it was only because of Raju's efforts that she became famous. Later, Rosie learns of the forgery release. Raju is convicted of forgery, resulting in a two-year sentence. Rosie does not understand why Raju indulged in forgery, when he could have easily asked her for money. It was not money, it was the loving fascination for Rosie which urged Raju not to reveal Marco's visit to Rosie so that she doesn't remember him again and to eliminate the probability of Rosie and Marco's togetherness, if at all, there was any little chance. On the day of his release, his mother and Rosie come to pick him up but they are told that he was released six months ago because of his good behaviour.
Meanwhile, upon his release Raju wanders alone. Despair, poverty, rags, hunger, and loneliness engulf him until he finds a wandering group of sadhus (holy men) with whom he spends a night at a derelict temple in a small town.Raju impresses the woman with the logic in taking a husband and she submits, which convinces Bhola that Raju is a swami (holy man). Impressed by this, Bhola spreads the news through the village. Raju is taken as a holy man by the village. Raju assumes the role of village holy man (Swami Ji) and engages in skirmishes with the local pandits.And drama started here. Due to drought Raju was forced to fast for 12 days so that it rains. Meanwhile, his mother, friend and Rosie unite with him and patch things up. In the end it rains but Raju dies.

"The Bluest Eyes"

Toni Morrison has long been one of my favorite authors.  

The Bluest Eye is, most simply, a story of beauty and what makes beauty. More specifically, it tells the story of Claudia, her sister Frieda, and their neighbor and sometimes friend Pecola Breedlove. Pecola and Claudia, while often not getting along – Pecola is a bit of the town oddball, and everyone knows how cruel kids can be – share similar feelings about beauty in relation to race. 

Claudia hate Shirley Temple and some of her fellow white classmates because they’re white and, thus, are given attention and praise. Pecola also realizes the power behind being white, but instead of becoming angry, she desires to be like them. More specifically, she desires to have blue eyes, because she believes that blue eyes are what make white people so beautiful. However, more than a story of just beauty, The Bluest Eye also makes comments on race, gender, and getting caught in a life you didn’t intend. Themes that, if you’ve ever read Morrison, you know she’s touched on in practically all her other books.

Running along side the story of Pecola and Claudia is the story of Polly and Cholly, Pecola’s mother and father. The two are trapped in a marriage of hate, violence, and frustration. 

However, out of what seems to be a sense of proving the ability to stay, a misguided sense of duty, the two remain together. Both stories are told, Polly’s about a young woman with a lame foot who takes her strength not from her husband and children but from the movies she escapes in to and the luxuries she can pretend to have from the white family she works for. Cholly, abandoned by mother and father and raised to his teens by an aunt who passes away, is a man who enters in to marriage without knowing why, knowing the whole time that the thing most abhorent to him is sameness and obligation. 

Obviously, putting the two together results in the kind of marriage that **spoilers** leads to the rape and impregnation, and eventual miscarriage and insanity, of Pecola, raped by her father and beaten and berated by her mother. It is also the relationship that teaches Pecola her ugliness, an ugliness that forces her to the local witch-doctor to ask for blue eyes. The price she has to pay? ‘Sacrificing’ a local dog via poison. **End spoilers** 

Morrison’s writing style is always addicting. At once complicated and simple, the book hits on a level that somewhat goes beyond conscious understanding. While her individual sentences can sometimes be convoluted, and there are many times when you just have to trust her, trust that it will all be explained in due course, the power of her story comes through and comes through swimmingly.

''Tuglaq''

Girish Karnad is one of the greatest Indo Anglican dramatists. He has basically written in Kannad. Some of his plays have been translated into English by himself. Karnad has a long and eventful career. He has only three notable plays to his credit. They gave him a prestigious place. 'Tughlaq' is considered as his most famous work.

        'Tughlaq is the second play of Karnad. It is indeed a historical play written in the backdrop of modern times, the period of J. L. Nehru. Here the dramatist describes certain events of the reign a medieval sultan named Tughlaq. It deals with his decision to move his capital from Delhi to Daulatabad and from Daulatabad to Delhi. In this highly entertaining play Karnad explores the paradox of idealistic Sultan whose reign is considered the most spectacular failures in Indian history.

      Tughlaq dramatises the opposites- the ideal and the real, he divine aspiration and the political intrigue. Tughlaq is the protagonist of this New Drama. He has been presented as an idealist aiming at Hindu Muslim unity, at secularism and also at building a new future for India. He is known for his knowledge of philosophy and poetry. But unfortunately he is divided within himself.

       Tughlaq was indeed an idealist and visionary king. In this play Tughlaq is respected by his people. But it was rumoured that he came to the throne by killing his father and brother. Due to his secularism Muslims criticised him. But he did not mind people's criticism. Due to his declaration of the shifting of the capital from Delhi to Daulatabad, both the Hindus and Muslims became against the king. It is unfortunate because Tughlaq wished for their unity by this act.

       Tughlaq was a learned fellow and a lover of judgement. But at the same time he was a cunning fellow who committed many murders. Tughlaq's stepmother, Saikh, Azim etc. all are killed by him. Barani warned him but due to his suspicious nature he did things which all went against him.  In the end of the play Sultan is found all disappointed and dejected. In fact, his whimsical nature brought shameful situation to him.

       Thus Tughlaq is a fine play. Here the dramatist deals with the problem of search of identity and the problem of isolation and frustration. Though it is a historical play but when artistic necessity requires Karnad does not hesitate to deviate from history. 

'' The Namesake"

"The Namesake"

       Jhumpa Lahiri

                                                   

      Jhumpa Lahiri was a Bengali Indian woman writer. In 1999, Lahiri published her first short story collection entitled Interpreter of Maladies. It dealt with the issues of Indians or Indian immigrants, including their generation gaps in understanding and values.

About the novel:

        The novel is about the three people Ashoke, Ashima and Nikhil/ Gogol Ganguli.  The novel covers the time past and present. Marriage life of Ashoke and Ashima covers the time past. While the life of Ashoke and Ashima with their children Nikhil and Sonali it covers the time present. After marriage job of Ashoke shifted in foreign. Ashima always remembered her past with her family and her relatives. Ashima have one kid but they have problem about their son that what name should be given to their child. Ashoke insisted the name “Gogol”. Ashima agreed with that name temporary because she waiting for the name which was given by her Bengali family. Afterward she got the name is Nikhil. But Ashima ask to her child that which name should you like Gogol or Nikhil.

      At the child age he attracted towards the name of Gogol but after the incident of school he wants to change his name from Gogol to Nikhil. It is because he mock by his classmate but his class teacher told one story about the writer Nikolai Gogol. The story is that he highly suffered in his life. So, this matter highly affected in his life. His father denied changing the name because this name very much connected to his past. Due to this name and this writer’s book “The Overcoat” by Nikolai Gogol his life was save once upon a time. Ashoke also insist to read that book. Nikhil have many affairs with various girls and married with Moushumi Mazoomdar who was also immigrant from Bengal to foreign. But their marriage life not becomes successful. He doesn’t like India. But because of their parents he visit India. After visiting India he highly affected towards the heritage of India and from that he got the idea to become architecture.

       Gogol becomes the sandwich between to name, two identities and two nations. He suffers a lot because of two different matters.

The Namesake: A Critique:

Immigrants:

      The Namesake, it is not only about the clash between two names but indirectly Jhumpa tries to show the clash between two identities- first is Indian and second is as a foreigner or as a NRI.   

Gogol

And

Nikhil

      The two names of own character show the conflict between two identities and two different nations. They become the sandwich between two different mattes. They haven’t their personal identity. Moreover tries to sustain their life in between two matters. Another thing is that it is difficult to Ashima to adjust in foreign. She always remembered her India or in a way her family and relative. She always suffers to adjust in that culture.

Generation Gap:

“Old”                          “New”

Ashoke                       Gogol

Ashima                      Gogol

Ashoke                      Sonali

Ashima                      Sonali

        The relationship between father and son is very hard. Gogol doesn’t like the name which was given by his father. He doesn’t that his father interferes in his personal life. He wants to live life how he would like to live. Even in the choice of partner he doesn’t like his father suggestion. His relationship with mother is very soft. They both have their personal life and they don’t like to interfere their personal life by their parents. In their house they make one rule to speak in Bengali but Gogol and Sonali don’t like to speak in Bengali instead of English. Here the clash between “old generation” and “new generation”. Here the clash between “old morality” and “new morality”. 

Conclusion:

       

         In short whatever happens because of the SAKE of NAME. The life of Gogol becomes pathetic because of the two cultures, two identities, two nations and moreover two NAMES.

All MY sons

All My Sons

   -Arthur Miller

                          

All My Sons is a 1947 play by Arthur Miller. It is his second play came after his first play The Man Who Had All the Luck. All My Sons based upon a true story which was capture by Miller here very beautifully.

The reflection of the great Grecian tragedies:

All My Sons- the play based on the Grecian tragedies of the likes of Aeschulus, Sophocles and Euripides. In these play main character or the protagonist committed crime and due to that offence they must learn his fault and suffer as a result, and perhaps even die. In All My Sons the elements of Grecian tragedies are presented. Joe Keller first committed a crime and later on he suffering from a previous offence, and punishment for that offence. Likewise it explores the father-son relationship, also a common theme in Grecian tragedies. Ann Deever could also be seen to parallel a messenger as her letter is proof of Larry’s death.

Moreover this play is also considered as the influenced from the play of Ibsen’s The Wild Duck, where Miler took the idea of two partners in a business where one is forced to take moral and legal responsibility for other. This is mirrored in All My Sons. He also borrowed the idea of a character’s idealism being the source of a problem. In a way we cannot blame the protagonist because whatever he done it is out of circumstances. He did whatever due to the responsibilities of his family. He wants to make him family well-settle. But in between his wrong work effect on other family and because of that they suffer a lot.

This play also takes into consideration as a failed idealism of American Dream. Arthur Miller later uses the everyman in a criticism of the American Dream in Death of a Salesman, which is in many ways similar to All My Sons.

Far From the Madding Crowed by Thomas Hardy

Far From the Madding Crowd by Thomas Hardy

Far From the Madding Crowd (1874) was Thomas Hardy’s first major literary success. Centring on Bathsheba Everdene, a young woman who inherits a small farm, it follows the fortunes of three of her suitors – small-scale farmer Gabriel Oak, the more firmly-established farmer William Boldwood, and soldier Sergeant Troy. A typical pastoral tale, the plot twists and turns as coincidence, disaster, and the hearts of the characters create an ever-moving story. As the seasons pass, loves blossom and wane, and the drama builds to a crescendo that leaves all the characters’ lives changed permanently.

As Bathsheba and her suitors stumble through a plot that ambles along, pushed forward by coincidence and the small wants of its characters, it quickly becomes clear that love – from solipsistic to generous – is frequently to be unrequited. Clearly, all three suitors cannot secure Bathsheba’s hand in marriage, and the soap opera-like playing out of the various conjugations keeps the reader intrigued. Not only this, but the use of catastrophic, unexpected events within the plot – another soap opera-like technique – helps to shock and engross the reader. Indeed, as a serialised novel, Far From the Madding Crowd lent itself to this style, and Hardy found that he had hit upon a form that engaged his Victorian readership – a style that he would go on to develop from simple romantic plots as here to include deeper, more profound issues.

Hardy does work in smaller themes, here, however. His representation of rural society is the thing that characterises his pastoral novels and here the idea of social hierarchy is perhaps the most evident matter of interest. There is certainly social mobility for men in rural societies, and Gabriel’s changing fortunes within the novel, and how this changes other characters’ position to him, is a very clear indication of how a class-conscious society works, even in a contained rural setting. In Bathsheba, too, we have a common theme of Victorian literature, that of a woman who seeks independence from men but finds herself at the mercy of the marriage laws. With some land and money to her name, she is forced to pick her mate carefully given that they will assume financial control of all her assets. While Gabriel may have the opportunity to move about the social hierarchy based on his own merit, Bathsheba, despite proving herself extremely capable, cannot maintain control of her own destiny and marry.

Clearly, Bathsheba is a forebear of some of Hardy’s more complete female characters, Eustacia Vye and Tess Durbeyfield in particular. A victim of her own heart and of men and society, she is somehow a little flatter and less engaging than later Hardy women but she shares with these heroines a very clear humanity as she struggles against both internal and external forces. As with the plot itself, here Hardy hits upon a formula that works for the reading public and which he would later develop to better effect with other female characters. As for the male characters, they are largely archetypes but work well enough for the purposes of the plot here. Indeed, they are played off one another well, and the varying dynamics that Bathsheba shares with each of her suitors is well done and makes for interesting reading.

Hardy is often accused of purple prose, and he is as equally culpable of this charge here as anywhere else in his fiction. With the meandering plot, slew of coincidences and unexpected turns, and rural setting that brushes only briefly with town life, Far From the Madding Crowd is almost the archetypal Hardy novel in embryonic form, or at least what is commonly thought of as a Hardy novel. The timeless space which the characters inhabit, driven by the seasons and nature’s demands, is certainly far from the madding crowd, and perfectly rendered by Hardy. In such a setting it is the characters who are able to attune themselves most closely to nature’s demands that succeed.

When Far From the Madding Crowd first appeared in the Cornhill Magazine, early instalments were thought by some to be the work of George Eliot writing under a pseudonym. For an emerging novelist, this was a favourable comparison, even if it was a faulty assertion. Even if a misperception on the part of some critics, it is clear to see how Hardy’s pastoral themes were mistaken for the work of Eliot, and it is likely that Hardy had Eliot’s, or similar pastoral writers’, work in mind when composing Far From the Madding Crowd. He had until that point experimented with different forms for his novels (finding his poems hard to sell), and so by adopting a popular genre in Victorian fiction, he found for himself a niche that certainly married up many of his interests and strengths as a writer.

The novel is not as tightly structured as many of Hardy’s later novels, nor does it contain the same defeated pessimism about a rural way of life being eroded by modern cities, or the human existential struggle. Instead, there is a lightness here, despite the theme of unrequited love, and this makes Far From the Madding Crowd a smaller and less gloomy pastoral read than some other Hardy novels. Clearly, it lacks something as a consequence, and isn’t comparable to Hardy’s weightier efforts as a work of literature. It is, instead, a more plot-driven piece, which carries many Hardyian tropes – a comfortable read, and an important part of Hardy’s canon as, in many ways, a turning point in his career. 

Oliver Twist

attending the birth and death, takes from the dying woman a locket and ring. Bumble, the parochial beadle, names the boy Oliver Twist. Oliver is sent to an infant farm, run by Mrs Mann, until he is 9 years old, at which time he is returned to the workhouse.

The orphans at the workhouse are starving due to callous mistreatment and cast lots to decide who among them will ask for more gruel on behalf of the group and Oliver is chosen. At supper that evening, after the normal allotment, Oliver advances to the master and asks for more.

Oliver is branded a troublemaker and is offered as an apprentice to anyone willing to take him. After narrowly escaping being bound to a chimney sweep, a very dangerous business where small boys are routinely smothered being lowered into chimneys, Oliver is apprenticed to the undertaker, Sowerberry. Mr. Sowerberry is kind to Oliver, however, his wife, Mrs. Sowerberry is mean, cruel and unjust to him.

Oliver fights with Noah Claypole, another of the undertaker’s boys, after Noah mocks Oliver’s dead mother as a “regular right-down bad ‘un”. After being unjustly beaten for this offense, Oliver escapes the undertaker’s and runs away to London.

On the outskirts on the city Oliver, tired and hungry, meets Jack Dawkins who offers a place to stay in London. Thus Oliver is thrown together with the band of thieves run by the sinister Fagin. Oliver innocently goes “to work” with Dawkins, also known as the Artful Dodger, and Charlie Bates, another of Fagin’s boys, and witnesses the real business when Dawkins picks the pocket of a gentleman. When the gentleman, Mr. Brownlow, discovers the robbery in progress Oliver is mistaken for the culprit and, after a chase, is captured and taken to the police. Oliver, injured in the chase, is cleared by a witness to the crime and is taken by the kindly Brownlow to his home to recuperate.

Oliver is kindly treated at the Brownlow home and the housekeeper Mrs. Bedwin, and after a period of recuperation, is sent on an errand by Mr Brownlow to pay a local merchant 5 pounds and to return some books. On carrying out this charge Oliver is captured by Nancy and Bill Sikes and returned to Fagin’s den of thieves.

Mr Brownlow, thinking that Oliver has run away with his money concludes that Oliver was a thief all along. This assumption is further strengthened when Bumble the beadle, answering an advertisment in the paper, placed by Brownlow, for information concerning Oliver, gives a disparaging opinion of Oliver.

Oliver is forced by Fagin to accompany Sikes in an attempted robbery, needing a small boy to enter a window and open the door for the housebreakers. The robbery is foiled when the house is alarmed and, in the ensuing confusion, Oliver is shot.

Oliver is nursed back to health at the home of the Maylies, the house Sikes was attempting to burglarize. Oliver imparts his story to the Maylies and Doctor Losberne.

The mysterious Monks, revealed to be Oliver’s half brother, teams up with Fagin in an attempt to recapture Oliver and lead him into a life of crime thereby negating the unknowing Oliver’s claim to his rightful inheritance which would then go to Monks.

Sike’s woman, Nancy, having compassion for Oliver, overhears Fagin and Monk’s plan and tells Rose Maylie in the hope of thwarting the plan. Rose recruits Mr. Brownlow, Dr. Losberne, and others.

Bumble the beadle has married the matron of the workhouse, Mrs. Corney. The former Mrs. Corney, attending the death of Old Sally, has taken the locket and ring that Sally had taken from Oliver’s mother on her deathbed. Monks buys this locket and ring from the Bumbles hoping that in destroying it that Oliver’s true identity will remain hidden.

Mr. Brownlow and Rose Maylie meet Nancy on London Bridge and she tells them where to find Monks. Fagin has had Nancy followed by Noah Claypole and, enraged, tells Sikes that Nancy has betrayed them. Sikes brutally murders Nancy and flees to the country.

Monks is taken by Mr. Brownlow. Fagin is captured and sentenced to be hung. Sikes, with a mob on his tail, accidentally hangs himself trying to escape. The Bumbles are relieved of their position at the workhouse, become paupers, and are now inmates at the same workhouse they once managed.

Oliver is revealed to be the illegitimate son of Edwin Leeford and Agnes Fleming. Leeford has fathered the evil Edward (Monks) through a failed former marriage. After seducing Agnes, Edwin dies, leaving a will which states that the unborn child will inherit his estate if “in his minority he should never have stained his name with any public act of dishonor, meanness, cowardice, or wrong” in the event of which all would go to Edward (Monks), hence Monk’s attempt to corrupt Oliver via Fagin.

Monks is given half of Oliver’s inheritance by Mr. Brownlow, who had been a friend of Edwin Leeford, in the hope that he will start a new life. Monks flees to America (The New World) where he quickly squanders his portion and dies in prison. Rose Maylie is revealed to be the sister of Agnes Fleming who is adopted by the Maylies after her parents die, therefore Rose is Oliver’s aunt.

Oliver collects his inheritance and is adopted by Mr. Brownlow. Rose marries longtime beau, Harry Maylie.

''The Purpose '' BY T.P.Kailasm

His full name is Thyagraja Paramasiva Kailasam (1884-1946). He was born 29 July 1884, Bangalore, India. He was a prominent writer of Kannada literature. He also contributed to Kannada Theatre so, Kannada Theatergave him the name “The Father of humorous plays” for his humorous plays and later he was also called as “Kannadakke Obbeane Kailasam” means “One and Only Kailasam for Kannada”. He contributed to local theatre, and his humors and revolutionary applications left an impression on Kannadigas. He was invited as chair person at Kannada Sahitya Sammelana in 1945. He was unhappy with modern use of Kannada language. His humorous and satiric play was legendary that the plays are still popular among the people. He not only writes play but also write poems. His English Plays: §  Fulfillment §  Purpose §  The Brahmin’s Curse     His Poems: §  The Dramatist §  Eternal Cain §  Truth Naked §  The Lake §  Mother-Love §  The Sixth Columnist 1943 §  A Monologue §  The Recipe §  The Smilin’s Seven §  The Artist §  Kaikeyee §  Commiseration (Karna) §  Drona §  Krishna §  Subhadra   His one of the most famous plays ‘THE PURPOSE’.  Full Title: The Purpose: A Playlet of Ekalavya published in 1944. In the very beginning of the play he writes that “The scenes and words you’ll see and hear, I’ve seen and hear before, as king or priest, poltroon or peer, somewhere… Some when of yore!” He also dedicates this play he writes that ‘DEDICATED IN ALL HUMILITY TO MY YOUTHFUL BROTHERS OF MY MOTHERLAND IN HAPPY MEMORY OF MY YOUTHFUL YEARS.’ “I f Youth but Knew! If Age but Could!” Personae: BHEESHMA- The Patriarch of the Royal Kuru House ARJUNA, NAKULA and SAHADEVA- Bheeshma’s Grandchildren DRONAACHAARYA- Preceptor to the princes EKALAVYA – A Nishaada (Non- Arya) Boy Period: The Aadi Parva of THE MAHAABHAARATA Here he presents the same scene from the myth in a different way. The play is made of two acts. The second act starts after six years. When the play opens we will find Guruji Dronaachaarya giving lessons of archery. In the very beginning we will find Sahadeva learing archery from guruji. He was just a little boy so he tried his best to lift up the bow. But he the bow was bigger than the boy so was failed to lift that bow, and then the play process. We will find totally different play from the myth. In the mythical ‘MAHAABHAARATA’ we find Ekalavya Nobel person, even the protagonist of the play Arjuna was also Nobel person, but here we will find Ekalavya more Nobel than Arjuna and mythical Ekalavya. It shows the skills of the writer that how skillfully and under his control his break the myth. We can find so many symbols in the play which the satire on the society. Like when Guru deny to teach archery to Ekalavya, which shows that how class conscious we are. If someone really has that potation and skill, still they cannot come out because of the class discrimination. Though kailasam choose the mythical characters to convey his views but in a way he is trying to show the modern problems of the society. At the end, Ekalavya sacrifices, by cutting his thumb, which shows that weaker and class wise lower has to suffer and has to sacrifices. We always think that the character of Arjuna was the best and he was humble and was so Nobel person, but here writer breaks out thinking and myth both, which shows that the writer gives a new imagination, which we never imagined. In the myth the character of Ekalavya is marginalized character, where as in this play he is the protagonist of the play. Here writer uses the technique of decentering. Here we will find the shisyas (students) learning archery. Means if we want to do archery then we have to focus a lot, here the students are focusing but every one’s focus are different. We can also find out another symbol that they all are very near to the nature. It is said that when people go near to the nature then they become very true to their self but we are shocked that how every person is true to their self, how harsh the reality is. At the end Ekalavya cries a lot because he give up his thumb and he cries in front of that idol whom he was thinking that is his guruji. And also complained that why don’t you stop me when I was giving my thumb. He said lines to the idol of Guru which he make that: “IN MY MAD LOVE FOR MY GURU, GAVE TO HIM WHAT WAS Never Mine to Give! WHAT WAS always Yours! ONE MOMENT OF MAD LOVE FOR MY GURU, I FORGOT YOU ALL AND Forgot too the whole whole purpose of my archery.” “I NEVER KNEW WHAT I WAS DOING! I NEVER KNEW! I NEVER KNEW! BUT HE KNEW! GURUJEE KNEW! HE MUST HAVE KNOW! HE MUST HAVE STOPPED ME!” It is true that the writer give more space to the marginalized character but still it is worthless because here no one is hearing him. In the myth it is said that after giving his thumb Ekalavya never regret and even spoke a single word, but here he cries a lot and speaks long speeches. In the myth he even speak a word and here he speaks means at the end he is speaking but at the front of the idol means he is speaking but no one was there to hear his pain, his agony, what he has done indirectly for Partha (Arjuna), sacrifices his right hand’s thumb, sacrifices his Nobel intentions, his Nobel aims. Alas! What he has done? Here the most important symbol is the title of the play itself “THE PURPOSE”, may be here writer present different type of purposes from the different view point. The purpose of Ekalavya to learn archery was Nobel one. He wants to save the lives of deer and all those animals, which are weak so that they can spend their life fearless and without hurting themselves. The purpose of Arjuna to learn archery was not Nobel one. Because he was just learning archery to show off himself and he can take pride among the mankind. He just wants to learn archery because he can win the wars. Even when he tells his intentions to his Guruji and Thaathaajee they said that it is wrong that you are learning aechery just because you can satisfy but your intention must be the royal one because you are a prince and in future you will be a king.                CONCLUSION: I conclude that the writer puts his views in a different way. And even the title of the play suggests everything. As we know that Kailasam write satirist writing. We can say that this is also satire on society. We can consider this play as tragic play of Ekalavya, because at the end he has to cut his thumb. He does this sacrifice willingly and yet no one cared about him. Not even the Guruji for whom he does this all, to save his pride, to save his promise which he give to Bheeshma. In a way writer puts different perspective of the characters of the play and also the harsh mentality of human mind.

Guliver Travels

Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift

Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift is a very famous boook. This work was completed in its final form in 1735. This story is a satire and a social commentary on the state of humanity. It examines various human foibles such as war, prejudice, religious conflicts and politics, to name just a few. Surprisingly, I found much of this commentary to be very relevant to our current times.

Four Voyages in Brief:

          The book is divided into four parts which describes Gulliver’s Voyage to different countries.

PART-I     :         Describes Gulliver’s voyage to a country 

          known as Lilliput and his experiences in 

          that country.

PART-II    :         Describes his voyage to Brobdingnay and 

          his experience.

PART-III  :         Deals with his voyage to some countries 

          like Laputa, Balnibarbi, Glubdubrib,

          Luggnagg, and Japan.

PART-IV  :         Tells about his voyage to the country of

          Houyhnhnms and the yahoos.

Over the course of various sea voyages, Gulliver travels to many strange lands. These include his famous visit to Lilliput, a land whose citizens are tiny. Conversely, Brobdingnag is a land of giants. Laputa is a floating island. Balnibarbi is a horribly dystopian society being wrecked by ideologues. Glubbdubdrib is a magical place where the dead are resurrected. Luggnagg is a land where a few folks are immortal but in a terrible condition. The Country of the Houyhnhnms is a place of sentient horses and with characteristics of a utopia.

 

This work goes in so many directions in terms of social satire that it is difficult to write a comprehensive summary. In general, Swift takes aim at hypocrisy as well as absurdities that are ingrained in the society of his time. Many of the issues that the author tackles are still with us in the Twenty First Century.

At times, the criticism of humanity is lighthearted, at other times searing. Though the entire work is not negative, the narrative reaches an extremely cynical point during the visit to Glubbdubdrib. At one point, Gulliver convinces the island’s governor to summon various historical personages back from the dead. At the protagonist’s request, mostly leaders from the past are resurrected. After encounters with these ghouls, Gulliver draws some dark conclusions about government,

“Here I discovered the true causes of many great events that have surprised the world; how a whore can govern the back-stairs, the back-stairs a council, and the council a senate.   A general confessed, in my presence, “that he got a victory purely by the force of cowardice and ill conduct;” and an admiral, “that, for want of proper intelligence, he beat the enemy, to whom he intended to betray the fleet.”   Three kings protested to me, “that in their whole reigns they never did once prefer any person of merit, unless by mistake, or treachery of some minister in whom they confided; neither would they do it if they were to live again:” and they showed, with great strength of reason, “that the royal throne could not be supported without corruption, because that positive, confident, restiff temper, which virtue infused into a man, was a perpetual clog to public business.” 

This is a grim depiction of human governance indeed! Here and elsewhere narrative, it is apparent that Swift is not enamored with many human institutions. Government is but one of these institutions that bear the brunt of his ire.

Virginia woolf : " To the Lighthouse "

              "  To  The Lighthouse " is  a  1927  Novel  by  Virginia woolf.  The  Novel  centre's  on  the  Ramsay  family and  their  visits  to  the  Isle  of  Skye  in   Scotland  between  1910  and  1920 .

                        This  Novel is  a  Modernist   literature's  part.  Virginia woolf  is  a  Modernist  writer.

                        In  this   Novel  more   focusing  to  the   Mrs Ramsay's  Character.  Even  This  Novel also  based  to  telling  about Mrs Ramsay.  Well  Mrs  Ramsay  is  a  best  house  wife. She  is  caring  for  her child, daughters  and  husband.  When  her' s  house  in  coming to  Guest ,  she  is  preparing  to  Dinners  for  her  Guest.
                           Apart   from  this,   she   was  engaged  in   Organizing  all  her  couples doing  so  things of  all.

                         Mr. RAMSAY , his  wife  could  not  give  him  time  even  more  than  love  Lily Briscoe,  who  was  the  best   friend  of  Mrs  Ramsay   and  When  she  did  not  get  married,   Lily  always  liked Mr Ramsay  for  the  time  being  . Mrs  Ramsay  asked  her younger  son  to go  to  the  lighthouse  and  Mr  Ramsay  avoided  this,  so  little  James Ramsay  got  angry  for   his  father  and  this  irritability  rattled .  So  much  that  these   guys  had  some  idea  in   mind  that  '  i  killed  my   father  ' .  Suddenly  one  day  Mrs Ramsay  dies . And  it's  space  receives  Lily  Ramsay.  But  she could not  even  become  like  Mrs  Ramsay. 

                          At  the   end  Mr  .  RAMSAY   ends  up  wishing  to  go to  his  son  James ' s   Lighthouse.   James  is  very  happy.   And  Lily Briscoe  who  is  good  painter . She  paint  about  Mrs  Ramsay. She  pauses on  the  paint  of  Mrs  Ramsay  and  she  begins  to  express  herself. 

Victor Frekenstine

Hello friends ,


                           here .. I am  sharing  my  view  about  the  Novel  " Victor  Frankenstein". so please  evaluate  my  views. 


                                                       "Victor  Frankenstein"  is a Written  by English  Author Mary Shelly  ( 1797-1851) . this story is a tells  about Victor Frankenstein  and  Frankenstein's  Monster .


                                 well , Mary Shelly  is  a  young  Female writer. Shelly  started  writing  the  story  when, she  was 18, and  the  first edition of the Novel Was Published  Anonymously in  London on 1 January  1818, she was 20.

     
                          'Victor  Frankenstein ' novel  is  a  Gothic Novel .this Novel is a Moment  of  Romantic  Age . At  the  Same time , it is an early Example of  Science fiction . this First science  fiction story in the Romantic age. Mary  Shelly was  more Introducing  to  the  Horrible  element  in this  Novel .so this  Novel is a horror  story.

                                            This  Novel's  Central  Characters  is a  Victor Frankenstein &  Frankenstein's Monster. this both  of  Characters , between  Relationship is a very Different . but they both are Corresponding Each others.

                
                                    In this novel of  Mary  Shelly's  Main  Hero Victor is  Actually  a  real Monster . Because it Only Goes  against  Nature and  revives the  Demon  and  that  Monster will Destroy  every thing.