Friday, July 26, 2013

Summary on Charles Lamb’S “Dream Children-a Reverie”

Summary on Charles Lamb’S “Dream Children-a Reverie”

The children of James Elia, John and Alice, asked him to tell them about his grandmother-their great grandmother- Mrs. Field who used to live in a great mansion in Norfolk. The house belonged to a rich nobleman who lived in another new house. Grandmother Field was the keeper of the house and she looked after the house with great care as though it was her own. The tragic incident of the two children and their cruel uncle had taken place in the house. The children had come to know the story from the ballad of ‘The Children in the wood’. The story was carved in wood upon the chimney piece. But a foolish rich person later pulled down the wooden chimney and put a chimney of marble. The new chimney piece had no story on it. Alice was very unhappy that the rich man had pulled down the chimney piece with the story. She looked upbraiding and her anger was like her mother’s.
When the house came to decay later, after the death of Mrs. Field the nobleman carried away the ornaments of the house and used them in his new house. The ornaments of the old house looked very awkward in the new house, just like the beautiful tombs of Westminster Abbey would look awkward if placed in someone’s drawing room. Things looked beautiful only if they are in harmony with the surroundings. John enjoyed the comparison and smiled as if he also felt it would be very awkward indeed. Grandmother Field was a very good lady. She was also very religious for she was well acquainted with ‘The Book of Psalms’ in ‘The Old Testament’ and a great portion of ‘The New Testament’ of ‘The Bible’. Alice here spread her hands as if she was not interested in the praise of a quality of the grandmother that she herself did not have. Children find it difficult to learn lessons by heart.
Grandmother Field did not fear the spirits of the two infants which haunted the house at night. So she slept alone. But Elia used to sleep with his maid as he was not so religious. John tried to look courageous but his eyes expanded in fear. When the grandmother died many people in the neighbourhood including the gentry or the aristocrats attended her funeral. She was also a good dancer when she was young. Here, Alice moved her feet unconsciously as she too was interested in dancing. Grandmother Field was tall and upright but later she was bowed down by a disease called cancer. She was good to her grand children. Elia in childhood used to spend his holiday there. He used to gaze upon the bust of the twelve Caesars or roam about in the mansion or in the garden. In the garden, there were fruits like nectarines, peaches, oranges and others. Elia never plucked them but rather enjoyed looking at them. Here John deposited a bunch of grapes upon the plate again. He was showing that he too was not tempted by fruits.
From all the grandchildren, Grandmother Field loved John the most. John was lively and spirited, fond of riding, hunting and outdoor activities. He was brave and handsome. He used to take James Elia upon his back out for outings as James Elia was lame footed. But James was not very considerate to him. He was sorry for it. John died later and James missed him much.
The children began to cry at the sad turn of events. They asked him to continue the story of Uncle John but to tell them about their dead mother. The father began to tell them how he had courted their mother, Alice for seven years. He was at times hopeful of winning her and at times in despair. He explained to them what coyness, difficulty and denial mean in an unmarried lady. When the father looked at Alice she looked at that time very much like her mother. Thereafter, the children began to grow fainter. They began to go away further and further till the father could hardly see them. From a great distance they seemed to say that they were not children of Alice nor of him, they were not children at all, they were only what might have been. When he woke up he found himself in an armed chair. He had fallen asleep and he had been dreaming. James Elia had vanished. On the chair was only Charles Lamb.

Battle of Agincourt (decisive victory of the English over the French)

Battle of Agincourt, (Oct. 25, 1415), decisive victory of the English over the French in the Hundred Years’ War.

In pursuit of his claim to the French throne, Henry V of England and an army of about 11,000 men invaded Normandy in August 1415. They took Harfleur in September, but by then half their troops had been lost to disease and battle casualties. Henry decided to move northeast to Calais, an English enclave in France, whence his diminished forces could return to England. Large French forces under the constable Charles I d’Albret blocked his line of advance to the north, however.

The French force, which totaled 20,000 to 30,000 men, many of them mounted knights in heavy armour, caught the exhausted English army at Agincourt (now Azincourt in Pas-de-Calais département). The French unwisely chose a battlefield with a narrow frontage of only about 1,000 yards of open ground between two woods. In this cramped space, which made large-scale maneuvers almost impossible, the French virtually forfeited the advantage of their overwhelming numbers. At dawn on October 25, the two armies prepared for battle. Three French divisions, the first two dismounted, were drawn up one behind another. Henry had only about 5,000 archers and 900 men-at-arms, whom he arrayed in a dismounted line. The dismounted men-at-arms were arrayed in three central blocks linked by projecting wedges of archers, and additional masses of archers formed forward wings at the left and right ends of the English line.

Henry led his troops forward into bowshot range, where their long-range archery provoked the French into an assault. Several small French cavalry charges broke upon a line of pointed stakes in front of the English archers. Then the main French assault, consisting of heavily armoured, dismounted knights, advanced over the sodden ground. At the first clash the English line yielded, only to recover quickly. As more French knights entered the battle, they became so tightly bunched that some of them could barely raise their arms to strike a blow. At this decisive point, Henry ordered his lightly equipped and more mobile English archers to attack with swords and axes. The unencumbered English hacked down thousands of the French, and thousands more were taken prisoner, many of whom were killed on Henry’s orders when another French attack seemed imminent.

The battle was a disaster for the French. The constable himself, 12 other members of the highest nobility, some 1,500 knights, and about 4,500 men-at-arms were killed on the French side, while the English lost less than 450 men. The English had been led brilliantly by Henry, but the incoherent tactics of the French had also contributed greatly to their defeat.

Battle of Agincourt

Force and Order Battle of Agincourt

The Hundred Years’ War is a misnomer not only because the hostilities between England and France lasted from 1337 to 1453, but also because, as with much medieval warfare, engaged fighting was comparatively infrequent during this period. Major battles usually lasted less than two weeks, commonly with less than 3,000 people on each side, siege being a far more common form of achieving victory. Cause for war began mounting when the French king Charles IV died in 1328 with no heir. Edward III, his nephew, had a good claim to the throne, but the French peers chose Charles’s cousin, Philip VI of Valois. In May 1337 Philip VI confiscated Edward’s duchy of Gascony in southwestern France, and in October Edward laid claim to the French throne. The war would not close until England’s alliance with Burgundy ended in 1435 and the English lost their last foothold in France, Castillon, in 1453. Henry V’s expedition through northwestern France began in August 1415 with a protracted siege on the town of Harfleur at the mouth of the Seine. In October Henry decided to lead the remains of his army to Calais instead of immediately departing by sea for England. The French, sensing an easy victory, finally encountered the English at Agincourt in the afternoon of October 24.

English and French chronicles state different numbers of forces on the two sides that prepared for battle that evening, but the ratio seems to have been eight French to one Englishman. The Gesta Henrici Quinti estimates a slightly greater disparity, with 60,000 French to 6,000 English. After a night in the open air and rain, the English amassed in three groups of men-at-arms, each group flanked by archers. When the two forces finally encountered each other, the archers created havoc on the thick of the French horses and armed men, who were already weighed down by armor in the mud of a freshly ploughed field. The English forces were then able to move in and counter-attack on horseback and foot. The anonymous royal chaplain and writer of the Gesta claims – and is generally agreed – to have been an eyewitness to several events he relates in the prose chronicle: the king’s suppression of the 1414 Lollard uprising, the English army’s expedition in France, Henry’s triumphant return to London in November of the same year (see “Processions,” p. 209), and the 1416 meeting between the king and Emperor Sigismund. The writer’s descriptions of Henry V, of the intervention of divine grace, and of Emperor Sigismund signal that the Gesta is not only a reliable and important account, but that it was also intended to be politically persuasive. Henry is characterized as a devout king, who succeeds in the face of immediate adversity and who desires peace but has been forced into war by the intransigent French. God intercedes at crucial points in the king’s attempts to reclaim his rights to France, and all successes are due to God’s perception of the just nature of Henry’s cause. While the audience is not definitively known, the Gesta circulated quickly after its composition. Its most important effect may have been on parliament and religious leaders, garnering financial and spiritual support for the king’s next expedition to France, for which Henry was preparing during the time of the chronicle’s writing.

It was also probably intended for Sigismund in order to combat French hostility at the Council of Constance (see “The English and England,” p. 50).And then, when the enemy were nearly ready to attack, the French cavalry posted on the flanks made charges against those of our archers who were on both sides of our army. But soon, by God’s will, they were forced to fall back under showers of arrows and to flee to their rearguard, save for a very few who, although not without losses in dead and wounded, rode through between the archers and the woodlands, and save, too, of course, for the many who were stopped by the stakes driven into the ground and prevented from fleeing very far by the stinging hail of missiles shot at both horses and riders in their flight. And the enemy catapults, which were at the back of the men-at-arms and on the flanks, after a first but over-hasty volley by which they did injury to very few, withdrew for fear of our bows.

And when the men-at-arms had from each side advanced towards one another over roughly the same distance, the flanks of both battle-lines, ours, that is, and the enemy’s, extended into the woodlands, which were on both sides of the armies. But the French nobility, who had previously advanced in line abreast and had all but come to grips with us, either from fear of the missiles, which by their very force pierced the sides and visors of their helmets, or in order the sooner to break through our strongest points and reach the standards, divided into three columns, attacking our line of battle at the three places where the standards were. And in the mêlée of spears which then followed, they hurled themselves against our men in such a fierce charge as to force them to fall back almost a spear’s length. And then we who have been assigned to the clerical militia and were watching, fell upon our faces in prayer before the great mercy-seat of God, crying out aloud in bitterness of spirit that God might even yet remember us and the crown of England and, by the grace of his supreme bounty, deliver us from this iron furnace and the terrible death which menaced us. Nor was God unmindful of the multitude of prayers and supplications being made in England, by which, as it is devoutly believed, our men soon regained their strength and, valiantly resisting, pushed back the enemy until they had recovered the ground that had been lost. And then the battle raged at its fiercest, and our archers notched their sharp-pointed arrows and loosed them into the enemy’s flanks, keeping up the fight without pause. And when their arrows were all used up, seizing axes, stakes and swords, and spear-heads that were lying about, they struck down, hacked, and stabbed the enemy.

For the Almighty and Merciful God, who is ever marvellous in his works and whose will it was to deal mercifully with us, and whom also it pleased that, under our gracious king, his own soldier, and with that little band, the crown of England should remain invincible as of old, did, as soon as the lines of battle had so come to grips and the fighting had begun, increase the strength of our men, which dire want of food had previously weakened and wasted, took away from them their fear, and gave them dauntless hearts. Nor, it seemed to our older men, had Englishmen ever fallen upon their enemies more boldly and fearlessly or with a better will. And the same just judge, whose intention it was to strike with the thunderbolt of his vengeance the proud host of the enemy, turned his face away from them and broke their strength – the bow, the shield, the sword, and the battle.1 Nor, in any former times, which chronicle or history records, does it ever appear that so many of the very pick and most sturdy of warriors had offered opposition so lacking in vigour, and so confused and faint-hearted, or so unmanly. Indeed, fear and trembling seized them, for, so it was said among the army, there were some of them, even of their more nobly born, who that day surrendered themselves more than ten times.

No one, however, had time to take them prisoner, but almost all, without distinction of person, were, as soon as they were struck down, put to death without respite, either by those who had laid them low or by others following after, by what secret judgement of God is not known. God, indeed, had also smitten them with another great blow from which there could be no recovery. For when some of them, killed when battle was first joined, fell at the front, so great was the undisciplined violence and pressure of the mass of men behind that the living fell on top of the dead, and others falling on top of the living were killed as well, with the result that, in each of the three places where the strong contingents guarding our standards were, such a great heap grew of the slain and of those lying crushed in between that our men climbed up those heaps, which had risen above a man’s height, and butchered their enemies down below with swords, axes, and other weapons. And when at long last, after two or three hours, their vanguard had been riddled through and through, and broken up, and the rest were being put to flight, our men began to pull those heaps apart and to separate the living from the dead, intending to hold them as prisoners for ransom.

But then, all at once, because of what wrathfulness on God’s part no one knows, a shout went up that the enemy’s mounted rearguard (in incomparable number and still fresh) were re-establishing their position and line of battle in order to launch an attack on us, few and weary as we were. And immediately, regardless of distinction of person, the prisoners, save for the dukes of Orleans and Bourbon, certain other illustrious men who were in the king’s “battle,” and a very few others, were killed by the swords either of their captors or of others following after, lest they should involve us in utter disaster in the fighting that would ensue. After but a short time, however, the enemy ranks, having experienced the bitter taste of our missiles and with our king advancing towards them, by God’s will abandoned to us that field of blood together with their wagons and other baggage-carts, many of these loaded with provisions and missiles, spears, and bows. And when, at God’s behest, the strength of that people had been thus utterly wasted and the rigours of battled had ended, we, who had gained the victory, came back through the masses, the mounds, and the heaps of the slain and, seeing them, reflected (though not without grief and tears on the part of many) upon the fact that so great a number of warriors, famous and most valiant had only God been with them, should have sought their own deaths in such a manner at our hands, quite contrary to any wish of ours, and should thus have effaced and destroyed, all to no avail, the glory and honour of their own country. And if that sight gave rise to compunction and pity in us, strangers passing by, how much more was it a cause of grief and mourning to their own people, awaiting expectantly the warriors of their country and then seeing them so crushed and made defenseless.

And, as I truly believe, there is not a man with heart of flesh or even of stone who, had he seen and pondered on the horrible deaths and bitter wounds of so many Christian men, would not have dissolved into tears, time and again, for grief. Indeed, having previously been despoiled by English pillagers, none of them, however illustrious or distinguished, possessed at our departure any more covering, save only to conceal his nature, than that with which nature had endowed him when first he saw the light.

The Battle of Hastings 1066: The Uncomfortable Truth

The Battle of Hastings 1066: The Uncomfortable Truth

The Battle of Hastings is the most famous military encounter in English history. This is partly because of the seismic social change that followed William the Conqueror’s decisive victory over his English rival, Harold Godwineson, on October 14th, 1066. It is also because of the quality of the original source material, notably the Bayeux Tapestry. What other medieval battle can we teach to schoolchildren using contemporary pictures?

Despite the quality of the primary sources, almost everything about Hastings is up for debate: the course of the action, the numbers on each side and, famously, whether or not Harold was killed by an arrow in the eye. As one of the foremost experts of the previous century, R. Allen Brown, once ruefully observed, sometimes the only certainty about Hastings seems to be that the Normans won.

The one other fact that has remained certain down the ages is the battle’s location. Until recent times it has been universally accepted that the action took place in the town of Battle, some seven miles north-west of Hastings itself. According to tradition William the Conqueror marked his victory by building a great abbey on the spot where Harold fell. Happily the abbey survives and so enables us to identify the battlefield with some precision.

The authors of the present volume are unhappy with this tradition. The site at Battle, they insist, does not fit with the primary source material. They contend that the fighting in 1066 took place at a different location, not far away, called Caldbec Hill.

It is impossible to catalogue here all the contortions, omissions, misconceptions, mistakes and absurdities required to sustain this view. The argument for Caldbec Hill ultimately rests on the statement of the ‘D version’ of the contemporary Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, that Harold came to oppose William at ‘the grey apple tree’. In the 1960s it was suggested that this long-lost landmark stood on top of Caldbec Hill. This is an unprovable assumption, so the authors settle for repeatedly stating it as fact (‘It is universally accepted’, we are told).

What of the traditional site? The authors assert that the story of the abbey’s altar being erected on the spot where Harold raised his standard occurs only in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey, written a hundred years after the event. On the basis that the same chronicle contains other known distortions, they then rule its testimony out of court. But the Battle Chronicle is far from being the only source of the altar story. Half a century earlier the Anglo-Norman historian William of Malmesbury said exactly the same thing. Even more compelling is the testimony of the ‘E version’ of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, recording William the Conqueror’s death in 1087: ‘On the very spot [On ðam ilcan steode] where God granted him the conquest of England he caused a great abbey to be built.’ Thus an English source, demonstrably written before 1100, confirms what is alleged here to have been a Norman conspiracy.

The authors find no room to mention either of these two sources; in their first chapter, they cheerfully admit to cherry-picking ‘the information which best suits our hypothesis’. That’s the bit that ought to leave readers feeling truly uncomfortable.

How did the Battle of Hastings affect England? 1066 & the Battle of Hastings
Significance of the Battle of Hastings:

Language

One of the most obvious changes was the introduction of Anglo-Norman, a northern dialect of Old French, as the language of the ruling classes in England, displacing Old English. Even after the decline of Norman, French retained the status of a prestige language for nearly 300 years and has had (with Norman) a significant influence on the language, which is easily visible in Modern English.

Governmental systems

Before the Normans arrived, Anglo-Saxon England had one of the most sophisticated governmental systems in Western Europe. All of England was divided into administrative units called shires (shares) of roughly uniform size and shape, which were run by officials known as "shire reeve" or "sheriff". The shires tended to be somewhat autonomous and lacked coordinated control. English government made heavy use of written documentation which was unusual for kingdoms in Western Europe and made for more efficient governance than word of mouth.

The English developed permanent physical locations of government. Most medieval governments were always on the move, holding court wherever the weather and food or other matters were best at the moment. This practice limited the potential size and sophistication of a government body to whatever could be packed on a horse and cart, including the treasury and library. England had a permanent treasury at Winchester, from which a permanent government bureaucracy and document archive begun to grow.

This sophisticated medieval form of government was handed over to the Normans and grew stronger. The Normans centralised the autonomous shire system. The Domesday Book exemplifies the practical codification which enabled Norman assimilation of conquered territories through central control of a census. It was the first kingdom-wide census taken in Europe since the time of the Romans, and enabled more efficient taxation of the Norman's new realm.

Systems of accounting grew in sophistication. A government accounting office called the exchequer was established by Henry I; from 1150 onward this was located in Westminster.

Anglo-Norman and French relations


After the conquest, Anglo-Norman and French political relations became very complicated and somewhat hostile. The Normans retained control of the holdings in Normandy and were thus still vassals to the King of France. At the same time, they were their equals as King of England. On the one hand they owed fealty to the King of France, and on the other hand they did not, because they were peers. In the 1150s, with the creation of the Angevin Empire, the Plantagenets controlled half of France and all of England, dwarfing the power of the Capetians. Yet the Normans were still technically vassals to France. A crisis came in 1204 when French King Philip II seized all Norman and Angevin holdings in mainland France except Gascony. This led to the Hundred Years War when Anglo-Norman English kings tried to regain their dynastic holdings in France.

During William's lifetime, his vast land gains were a source of great alarm to the King of France and the counts of Anjou and Flanders. Each did his best to diminish Normandy's holdings and power, leading to years of conflict in the region.

English cultural development

A direct consequence of the invasion was the near total elimination of the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy and the loss of English control over the Catholic Church in England. As William subdued rebels, he confiscated their lands and gave them to his Norman supporters. By the time of the Domesday Book, only two English landowners of any note had survived the displacement.[9] By 1096 no church See or Bishopric was held by any native Englishman; all were held by Normans. No other medieval European conquest of Christians by Christians had such devastating consequences for the defeated ruling class. Meanwhile, William's prestige among his followers increased tremendously because he was able to award them vast tracts of land at little cost to himself. His awards also had a basis in consolidating his own control; with each gift of land and titles, the newly-created feudal lord would have to build a castle and subdue the natives. Thus was the conquest self-perpetuating.

Legacy

As early as the 12th century the Dialogue concerning the Exchequer attests to considerable intermarriage between native English and Norman immigrants. Over the centuries, particularly after 1348 when the Black Death pandemic carried off a significant number of the English nobility, the two groups largely intermarried and became barely distinguishable.

The Norman conquest was the last successful conquest of England, although some historians identify the Glorious Revolution of 1688 as the most recent successful invasion from the continent. Major invasion attempts were launched by the Spanish in 1588 and the French in 1744 and 1759, but in each case the combined impact of the weather and the attacks of the Royal Navy on their escort fleets thwarted the enterprise without the invading army even putting to sea. Invasions were also prepared by the French in 1805 and Nazi Germany in 1940, but these were abandoned after preliminary operations failed to overcome Britain's naval and, in the latter case, air defences. Various brief raids on British coasts were successful within their limited scope, such as those launched by the French during the Hundred Years War, the Spanish landing in Cornwall (Huernwall) in 1595, the Dutch raid on the Medway shipyards in 1667 and raids by Barbary pirates in the 17th and 18th centuries.

What happened in the battle of hastings?

Well first of all, there was the battle of Stamford Bridge (which happened up north of England) , so Harold Godwinson (the current king of England at the time) and his men had to march all the way up to Stamford from London, to fight Harold Hadraada, then Harold Godwinson won. After that, someone informed him that William Duke of Normandy had come over from France to invade and was down North ready to fight. So, all Harold Godwinson's men and him, had to march back down north to fight William Duke Of Normandy. Harold and his men were at the top of the hill and William and his men were at the bottom. William decided to get straight in with the fight and attack first. William's men charged up to the top of the hill and tried to get through the strong Shield Wall that Harold's men were forming at the top of the hill. After a while Williams men found that they weren't having much luck trying to get through the shield wall , but there was also another problem, William was missing so everyone started to think that he was dead. Williams men were just about to give up hope when William came out from the back of his crowd of men and shouted out 'Im Not Dead, I'm Alive!' then all his men got motivated. They were still having no luck getting through the shield wall so they decided to come up with a plan. They would run away pretending to be scared and then they would turn round and kill them! They did this and William won the battle and got crowned king of England!
In the battle of Hastings King Harold got shot in the eye and the Normans ran away to trick the Saxon's then the fyrn (not fully trained soldiers) ran down the hill to slaughter
them but the Normans turned round and killed them. the first time they ran away was because they thought that William was dead so William had to lift his helmet off to show them he was not but they ran away three times each time some of the fyrn ran down to kill the Normans but they all got killed. William had an advantage because he had archers and soldiers on horses all of which king Harold did not have but Harold did have an advantage because he was on a hill and William was not so it was harder to climb and they could just kill the Normans when they reached the hill it was also a lot easier for them to fight because the Normans would find it hard to balance and attack at the same time so the Saxons had time to kill them before they could. At the end of the battle the Saxons fled and they gave William time to celebrate for he was now king of England because Edgar Harold's nephew gave William the crown and the throne because he couldn't really do anything about it.

The Age of Transition Viva

 The Age of Transition Viva
Q. 1. What is the significance of the Age of Transition?
Ans. There were two movements in the Age of Transition. Firstly, there was the allegiance to the old order of classicism. In this movement chief and almost the only figure is that of Samuel Johnson. Secondly, there was the search after the new order of Romanticism. It began as early as 1730, with the publication of Thomson’s Seasons.

Q. 2. What were the characteristics of the New Romanticism in the Age of Transition?
Ans. Firstly, there was a return to nature—to the real nature of earth and air, and not to the bookish nature, of the artificial pastoral. Secondly, there was a fresh interest in man’s position in the world of nature. This led to great activity in religious and political speculation. Thirdly, there was an enlightened sympathy for the poor and oppressed. Fourthly, there was a revolt against the conventional literary technique such as that of the heroic couplet. On the other hand, there was a desire for strength, simplicity and sincerity in the expression of Romantic themes. The writers turned to supernatural stories, legends, and the more colourful periods of .history, especially the Middle Ages.
Q. 3. Discuss the poetry of Samuel Johnson.
Ans. Dr. Johnson wrote little poetry. Though it has much merit, it cannot be called first class. His first poem, London written in the heroic couplet, is of great and sombre power. It depicts the vanities and the sins of city life. His only other longish poem is The Vanity of Human Wishes. The metre is the same as in London and there is the same bleak pessimism.
Q. 4. Attempt a critical appraisal of ‘The Traveller’ by Oliver Goldsmith?
Ans. Oliver Goldsmith’s first poem The Traveller deals with his wanderings through Europe. The poem, about four hundred lines in length, is written in the heroic couplet, and is a series of descriptions and criticisms of the places and peoples of which he had experience. It contains descriptive passages -of considerable beauty phrased in simple language, and the couplet is melodious and polished. The poem has his characteristic charm and grace and reveals a clear perception of the sufferings of the poor, where “laws grind the poor, and rich men make the laws.”
Q. 5. Comment upon the Pindaric Odes of Thomas Gray.
Ans. At the first glance Gray’s odes are seen to have all the odic splendour of diction; in fact, the adornment is so thickly applied that it can almost stand alone, like a robe stiff with gems and gold lace. Yet the poems have energy and dignity. Johnson, who had a distaste for both the character and the work of Gray, cavils at the work, saying that it has a strutting dignity.
Q. 6. What do you know about ‘The Progress of Poesy’ by Gray?
Ans. The Progress of Poesy is an important landmark in Gray’s poetic development. This poem has romantic elements. It consists of 3 stanzas of 41 lines each. It is written in an eloborately consistent verse form. In each stanza there are 3 regular divisions, ‘Strophe’, ‘Anti-Strophe’, and ‘Epode’. The poem is characterized by a perfect artistic structure rarely to be found among other poets.
Q. 7. What are your views about Gray’s ‘Bard’?
Ans. Gray’s Bard has enjoyed an instant and sustained popularity while Collin’s Ode to Liberty has had few admirers and Blake’s Book of Thel, tell lately has had none. The Bard consists of 3 stanzas, each having 3 divisions, Strophe, Anti-Strophe and Epode. When the poem opens we hear the actual voice of the last survivor of ancient of Celtic Bards. His utterance is marked with a note of dignity. The bard tells that man shall never by wanting to celebrate true virtue and valour in immortal strains, he exposes the vices of the king and badly censures tyranny and oppression.
Q. 8. What are your view about Thomas Gray’s ‘Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard’?
Ans. This poem was smooth and graceful; it contained familiar sentiments turned into admirable, quotable phrases; and so, while it was agreeably familiar it was fresh enough to be attractive. It was the most perfect poem of the age. In fact, it is the beginning and the perfection of that literature of melancholy.
Q. 9. Discuss Collins’s ‘Ode to Evening’.
Ans. The Ode to Evening is one of Collins’s most perfect poems, which he lived to give us all too few. It is here in this young man’s genius that we behold the first delicate unfolding of the romantic dawn, displaying itself in his case mostly in a fine meditative sentiment and melancholy, a fondness for old ruins and pleasing landscape.
Q. 10. What is the significance of the New    School of poetry of the Age of Transition?   
                Ans. These poets wrote in the middle and later years of the eighteenth century, and who abandoned the classical tradition. In their generation they came too early to be definitely included in the school of Wordsworth and Coleridge, but in their works they are often as romantically inclined as any of their great successors. With the appearance of Burns we can say that the day of Romanticism has come.
Q. 11. State the poetical features of Robert Burns.
                Ans. Firstly, the best work of Burns was almost entirely lyrical in motive. He is one of the rare examples, like Shelley, of the born singer who can give to human emotion a precious and imperishable utterance. Secondly, the feelings he describes are those of the Scottish peasant, but the genius of, the poet makes them germane to every member of the human race. Thirdly, his humour and pathos are as copious and varied as his subject-matter. Fourthly, his style is noteworthy for the curious double tendency that is typical of the transition. When he writes in the ‘correct’ manner he has all the petty vices of the early school. Finally, as the national poet of Scotland his position is unique.
Q. 12. What was Robert Burns’ contribution to the Romantic Revival?
Ans. Burns’ contributions to the romantic revival were: firstly, the restoration of passion element, which was as in a way a return to nature, the presentation of man in a natural state. Secondly, the restoration of humour, which is closely allied to the highest kind of pathos. There is a pathetic note in his poetry, a great contribution to the romantic art. Finally, it was poetry of revolt which was a great contribution to the romantic movement.
Q. 13. What was William Blake s contribution to the Romantic Revival?
Ans. Blake’s contributions to the Romantic Revival are (i) spirit of lyricism; (ii) absolute sincerity of feeling; (iii) a touch of tenderness overshadowed by a deepening note of mysticism, (iv) symbolism, and (v) love of lower animals, as evinced in his Songs of Innocence. Blake also recreated, after Burns, the poetry, regarding childhood. Poetry of man and Nature poetry are also his contributions to English literature.
Q. 14. Examine the poetical style of the Age of Transition.
Ans. In poetical style the transitional features are well marked. The earlier authors reveal many artificial mannerisms—for example extreme regularity of metre and the frequent employment of the more formal figures of speech, such as personification and apostrophy. As the century draws to a close we have many of the newer styles appearing; the more regular blank verse of Cowper; the lighter heroic couplet of Goldsmith; the archaic medley of Chatterton; and the intense simplicity of the lyrics of Burns and Blake.
Q. 15. Evaluate the dramatic art of Samuel Johnson.
Ans. Samuel Johnson attempted the first play Irene which is a solemn, ponderous, undramatic and blank verse tragedy. Even Johnson’s best friends had to admit that it was no success.
Q. 16. Examine the prose comedies of Oliver Goldsmith.
Ans. Goldsmith wrote two prose comedies, both of which rank high among their class. The first, called Good Natur’d Man is not so good as the second, She Stoops to Conquer. Each, but especially the latter, is endowed with an ingenious and lively plot, a cast of excellent characters, and a vivacious delightful style. Based on the Restoration comedy, they lack the Restoration grossness. The second play had an immense popularity, and even yet it is sometimes staged.
Q. 17. How will you appreciate the dramatic art of Goldsmith?
Ans. Goldsmith in The Good Natured Man and in She Stoops to Conquer has a real sense of character, especially of the pleasantly grotesque, comic invention, natural sentiment and amusing dialogue. He despised the sentimental comedy, ridiculed it, and introduced in his plays comic situation, humour, and character all of which sentimental comedy lacked.
Q. 18. What are the salient features of the prose comedies of Sheridan?
Ans. Sheridan’s prose comedies all resemble the best restoration comedies without the immorality of the Restoration play. Again we see the polite world of fashion, but Sheridan makes its views appear foolish by exaggerating them in humorous portraiture. The plots are ingenious and effective, though they depend largely on a stagy complexity of intrigue. The characters, among whom are the immortal figures of Mrs. Malaprop, Bob Acres, and Sir Fretful Plagiary, are stage types, but they are struck off with daring skill, and we find them quite irresistible. The dialogue is brilliant in its picturesque, epigrammatic repartee—indeed, the wit sometimes obscures the characters, nearly of all whom speak with the same brilliance. The plays are remarkable for their vivacity and charm.
Q. 19. Examine Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s ‘The Rivals’.
Ans. The Rivals presents not an admixture of Shakespearean humour with features of the school of manners, but the very atmosphere of Congreve modified by exaggerated humours of the Jonsonian type. The names of the characters are mostly of the humorous sort—Sir Lucius O’Trigger, Sir Anthony Absolute, and Lydia Languish may be taken as examples—and the exaggeration of special traits is well shown in the notorious Mrs. malaprop. In the main this comedy presents a direct challenge to the sentimentalists. The Rivals, as a whole, is a somewhat disappointing play. Some scenes in it are so excellent that we notice all the more clearly the weaknesses in the whole plan. About the whole play, too, breathes an atmosphere of farce, and although there is something of farce in every great comedy, this lower strain tends to weaken the general effect of Sheridan’s work.
Q. 20. Evaluate Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s ‘The School for Scandal’.
Ans. The School for Scandal is a more homogeneous work of art. Nothing truly disturbs the constant glitter of its wit, and the situations are never exaggerated or bizarre; rather do they stand forward as among the most perfect in the English theatre. With The School for Scandal we reach the culmination of the anti-sentimental movement.
Q. 21. Who are the chief novelists of Transition?
Ans. The chief novelists of the Age of Transition are Samuel Richardson, Henry Fielding, Tobias Smollett and Laurence Sterne.
Q. 22. Discuss Richardson’s art of characterization.
Ans. Richardson’s greatest ability lies in characterization. His psychological insight into human motives and feelings, and particularly his understanding of the feminine heart, has seldom been surpassed since his day. Clarissa is his finest portrait, but each successive novel shows a greater range and variety of character. Part of Richardson’s importance in the history of the novel lies in his introduction of characters of the lower-middle class, whom he portrays with great accuracy.
Q. 23. Comment upon Richardson’s ‘Pamela’.
Ans. The first of Richardson’s three novels Pamela or Virtue Rewarded was published in 1740. It is considered to be the first modern English novel of character. The story is told in a series of letters from the heroine, Pamela Andrews, a young maid-servant whose mistress has just died when the story opens. The lady’s son, Mr. B., becomes enamoured of Pamela, and taking a dishonourable advantage of her position, pursues her with his advances. She indognantly repels them, leaves the house, is pursued by B. and she was considerable astuteness in defending herself. Finally B, being much in love with her, comes to terms and decides to marry her. The second part of the book, which is less interesting, presents Pamela married, suffering with dignity and sweetness the burden of a profligate husband.
Q. 24. Discuss Henry Fielding’s ‘Joseph Andrews’ as a ‘parody.
Ans. In 1742 appeared Joseph Andrews, which begins in laughter at the namby-pamby Pamela of Richardson. In the story of Joseph Andrews,’ the hero is a footman, and the brother of Pamela. Along with a poor and simple curate called Abraham Adams he survives numerous ridiculous adventures. In a short time Fielding forgets about the burlesque, becomes interested in his own story, and we then see a novel of a new and powerful kind. From the very beginning we get the Fielding touch; the complete rejection of the letter method; the bustle and sweep of the tale; the broad and vivacious humour; the genial and half-contemptuous insight into human nature; and the forcible and pithy prose style.
Q. 25. What is Henry Fielding’s art of characterization?
Ans. Like Richardson, Fielding had a genius for sounding the emotions of the human heart, but his methods are different Richardson pours over human weaknesses with puckered brow and with many a sight Fielding looks, laughs, and passes on. He does not seek to analyse or over-refine, and so his characters possess a breadth, humanity, and attraction denied to Richardson’s Even a sneaking rogue like Blifil in Tom Jones has a Shakespearean roundness of contour that keeps him from being quite revolting.
Q. 26. Comment upon Henry Fielding’s ‘Tom Jones’.
Ans. In Tome Jones, we have all the virtues of his previous novels “with the addition of greater symmetry of plot, clearer and steadier vision into human life and human frailty, and a broader and more thickly peopled stage.” Moreover, although the hero travels from place to place and meets with a variety of adventures, relates each character, each thread of plot, to the main theme, although he does not follow the more formal dramatic structure of Richardson. The new element in Tom Jones is Fielding’s architectonic quality. No plot has ever been carried through with more consummate skill, and the skill can be truly appreciated only after the book has closed. In reading, one is delighted with sweiftness of the narration, the economy, the nimble and inexhaustible invention.
Q. 27. Differentiate between Richardson’s and Fielding’s attitude to morality,
Ans. Fielding had no sympathy with the kind of sentimentality that Richardson was making so popular. But really he too was a moralist and an emotionalist in his own way He trusts the natural emotions and values highly the sentiments as guides to conduct; it is against affectation, pretence, and hypocrisy that he appeals for sincerity and naturalness. On the other hand, Samuel Richardson suffused his scenes with a sentimental pathos which promptly took the town. His sentimentality was mawkish. Fielding was against the cloying sentimentality of Richardson. He revolted against contemporary morality.
Q. 28. Discuss the chief characteristics of Laurence Sterne’s novels.
Ans. His two novels are The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gent, which won him immediate recognition and A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy. Unique in English literature, they are the accurate reflection of the singular personality of their author. They are made up of Sterne’s peculiar blend of pathos and humour, and, though the pathos is sometimes overdone to the point of becoming offensively sentimental, the humour is subtle and intellectual, and constantly surprises by the unusual forms in which it is found. Indeed, for many, Sterne is merely the eccentric who appealed to his own age by such unusual devices as a completely black page in the middle of his story. But his characters are his chief claim to greatness.
Q. 29. How will you justify that there was no .real novel before publication of Richardson’s ‘Pamela’?
Ans. Notwithstanding this long history of fiction, to which we have called attention, it is safe to say that, until the publication of Richardson’s Pamela, in 1740, no true novel had appeared in any literature. By a true novel we mean simply a work of fiction which relates the story of a plain human life, under stress of emotion, which depends for its interest not on incident or adventure, but on its truth to nature. A number of English novelists—Goldsmith, Richardson, Fielding, Smollett, Sterne—all seem to have seized upon the idea of reflecting life as it is in the form of a story, and to have developed it simultaneously. The result was an extraordinary awakening of interest, especially among people who had never before been greatly concerned with literature.
Q. 30. Give a critical appraisal of Goldsmith’s ‘Vicar of Wakefield.’
Ans. The Vicar of Wakefield is the only novel of the period which can be freely recommended to all readers, as giving an excellent idea of the new literary type, which was perhaps more remarkable for its promise than for its achievement. In the short space of twenty-five years there suddenly appeared and flourished a new form of literature, which influenced all Europe for nearly a century, and which still furnishes the largest part of our literary enjoyment of English literature. Each successive novelist brought some new element to the work, as when Fielding supplied animal vigour and humour to Richardson’s analysis of a human heart, and Sterne added brilliancy, and Goldsmith emphasized purity and the honest domestic sentiments which are still the greatest ruling force among men.
Q. 31. Comment upon the critical works of Dr. Johnson?
Ans. In Johnson’s Lives of the English Poets we find that he was less sympathetic to many poets. To Cowley and specially to Milton he was unfair, though he himself preferred his Life of Cowley to all the rest “on account of the dissertation it contains on the ‘Metaphysical Poets.” The dissertation is indeed a brilliant and justly famous passage, still the classic verdict on all the metaphysicals. Johnson was not altogether kind in his estimates of certain contemporaries, notable’ Gray, Lyttleton, Shenstone, and even Collins. His worst case of critical blindness is Milton, for whom he had a dislike grounded on religious and political issues which carried over to the poet’s language and versification. Nevertheless, Johnson’s views of the poetry surveyed in Lives are normally judicious and beautifully articulated.
Q. 32. Estimate Dr. Johnson as a critic.
Ans. Dr. Johnson has been called “a hanging judge”. In other words, he had preconceived notions and grievances. He was very unjust to Spenser, Milton and Gray. But he was enthusiastic about Dryden and Pope. His attitude was firm and decided. His views were only formal. His criticism on poets was generally based on principles alien to modern taste. His approach to literature was moralistic.

The Return to Nature Viva

 The Return to Nature Viva
Q. 1. What is the significance of the French Revolution in the history of English literature?
Ans. Long before it burst, the storm of the Revolution was, in the words of Burke, blackening the horizon. During the century new ideas were germinating; new forces were gathering strength; and the Revolution, when it did come in 1789, was only the climax to a long and deeply diffused unrest. Revolutionary ideas stirred literature to the very depths.
Q. 2. What was the treatment of nature in the Romantic literature?

Ans. In the work of Cowper, Crabbe, and Gray the treatment is principally the simple chronicle and sympathetic observation of natural features. In the new race of poets the observation becomes more matured and intimate. Notably in the case of Wordsworth, the feeling for nature rises to a passionate veneration that is love and religion too. To Wordsworth nature is not only a procession of seasons and seasonal fruition: it is the eye of all things, natural and supernatural, into which the observant soul can peer and behold the spirit that inhabits all things.
Q. 3. Comment upon Romantic enthusiasm.
Ans. In the early days when old institutions seemed crumbling with the Bastille, Coleridge and Southey formed their youthful scheme of an ideal commonwealth in which the principles of Moore’s Utopla should be put in practice. The essence of romanticism was that literature must reflect all that is spontaneous and unaffected in nature and in man, and be free to follow its own fancy in its own way. Even Wordsworth, fired with political enthusiasm, remarked:
Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, But to be young was very heaven.
In Coleridge we see this independence expressed in Kubla Khan and The Ancient Mariner, two dream pictures, one of the populous Orient, the other of the lonely sea. In Wordsworth this literary independence led him inward to the heart of common things.
Q. 4. How will you characterise that the Age of Romanticism is an age of Poetry?
Ans. The important characteristic of this age is that it is emphatically an age of Poetry. The preceding age, with its practical outlook on life, was largely one of prose. Like the Elizabethan Age, the young enthusiasts turned as naturally to poetry as a happy man to singing. The glory of the age is in the poetry of Scott, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Byron, Keats, Moore and Shelley.
Q.5. Do Romanticism literature?
Ans. In the age of Romanticism we find that even the lavishness of the Elizabethans cannot excel that of this age. The development of new ideas brings fresh inspiration for poetry, and the poetical sky is bright with luminaries of the first magnitude. In prose we: may note especially the fruitful yield of the novel, the rejuvenation of the essay, the unprecedented activity of critical and miscellaneous writers.
Q. 6. What is the fundamental of Romanticism?
Ans. One of the fundamentals of Romanticism is the belief in the natural goodness of man, the idea that man in a state of nature would behave well but the corrupted by civilization. From this belief springs not only the Romantic admiration for the primitive and for the child, but the Romantic faith in the emotions. If man is inherently sinful, reason must restrain his passions: but if he is naturally good, then this emotions can be trusted. They may, indeed, lead him correctly where reason fails. Romantic individualism is reinforced by his belief, for a man may properly express his unique emotional self if its essence is good. From this individualism stems the self-analysis the intricate examination and full exposure of the soul.
Q. 7. What are the salient characteristics of Romanticism?
Ans. The chief quality of romantic poetry is emotion and, imagination. Neo-classical poetry appealed chiefly to reason; romantic poetry has a predominantly emotional period.
Secondly, the eighteenth-century poets were little interested in nature. The romantic poets, on the contrary, had a deep and sincere love the nature. Thirdly, the romantic poets had an equally sincere love for man. Wordsworth, Coleridge and Shelley had a superabundant enthusiasm for humanity. Fourthly, the romantic poets were deeply interested in their own personality revealing their own nature, feeling and thought. Finally, the style of the romantic poets deserves special mention. In the eighteenth century conventional and artificial diction, was employed for writing poetry. The romantic poets introduced several new metres. Their poems are marked by delightful melody and cadence.
Q. 8. Give a critical appraisal of Wordsworth’s ‘Tintern Abbey’.
Ans. Wordsworth has himself admitted that no poem of his was composed under circumstances more pleasant for him to remember than Tintern Abbey. In the midst of attractive surroundings he has not only a sense of present pleasure but a pleasing thought that the present moment has life and food for future years. Although he has changed in some respects since his former visits when he was merely a boy and could appreciate the delights of the place some what sensuously, yet his intellectual interests or associations with nature have remained untouched and, and fact, nature has obviously become all in all for him. This is’ what we clearly gather in Wordsworth’s poem Tintern Abbey.
Q. 9. Bring out the basic poetical qualities of ‘The Prelude’.
Ans. The Prelude was completed in 1805, but it was not published till 1850. The poem is the record of his development as a poet. He describes his experiences with a fullness, closeness, and laborious anxiety that are unique in our literature. The poem, which runs to fourteen books, is often dull and prosy but a times, particularly when he is describing the formative influence of nature; and his emotions when confronted by seemingly unreal natural objects, the blank verse is impressioned, and inspired by his exaltation, wonder, and awe.
Q. 10. Discuss Wordsworth as a Sonneteer.
Ans. Wordsworth was extremely fond of the sonnet. It suited his genius. Wordsworth’s chief aim in life was to compose a long poem, especially a philosophical poem, but he had not the capacity for that order of poetic architecture. His power is in bursts: his inspiration is short. He cannot move gradually through a train of thoughts or a consecutive narrative. Wordsworth reinstalled the Italian sonnet in English poetry after a long period of disuse. Except in one case, all his sonnets are in the traditional Italian measures, or else in varieties of them of his own*invention. In general he feels free to extend the practice of Milton, which in one essential had departed from that of the Florentine matters.
Q. 11. Give the gist of Book 1 of ‘The Prelude’.
Ans. The Book I of The Prelude, Wordsworth is speaking of the unique experiences of his boyhood and it is the Presences of Nature that are addressed here. As a man he looks and reflects upon his relation to his physical surroundings and sees in it a moulding force. He turns to his infancy and childhood, and beholds what Nature has done for him in those early surroundings.
Q. 12. Bring out the chief points in Book II of ‘The Prelude’.
Ans. In Book II Wordsworth speaks of Nature and her overflowing soul and reviews the development of his mind during the Hawkshead days Wordsworth’s intercourse with nature becomes more active now. The poet walks with nature in the spirit of religious love. His creative faculty has been awakened; a plastic power is with him; a spiritual hand moulds and fashions; an auxiliar light coming from his mind bestows new splendour on the setting sun. He observed affinities in things which had no reality for more passive minds.
Q. 13. Discuss Wordsworth’s ‘The Prelude’ as an epic.
Ans. The Prelude has not merely a unity of design; it has something of epic structure. It has episodes and vicissitudes and a climax. Elton remarks. It is skilfully ordered for its purpose, it begins at the end; the poet, at the age of twenty-nine is now safe in heaven, and relates his long past voyage of the soul and imagination. And he ends with the dreams and consolations which had dawned upon his childhood, which had been deadened or clouded, but which have at last come back to him, ratified by experience, for good and all.
Q. 14. Discuss Wordsworth as a Teacher.
Ans. Wordsworth’s conception of a poet was a lofty one and he expressed his sense of the loftiness of the mission in The Recluse. Wordsworth took his vocation in earnest. He felt like Milton that he was a dedicated spirit. He considered himself as a prophet and a poet as well as a teacher. He thought his vocation is not only to please but also to teach. According to him, every great poet is a teacher. He found new joys in the commonplace things in Nature and in the’ Human Mind and this was the mission to find and to communicate.
Q. 15. Enumerate Wordsworth’s theory of poetry.
Ans. In the preface to the second edition of the Lyrical Ballads Wordsworth sets out his theory of poetry. It reveals a lofty conception of the dignity of that art which is the breath and finer spirit of all knowledge, and which is the product of the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings taking its origin from emotion recollected in tranquility. The qualifications of the poet are on a level with the dignity of his art. To Wordsworth, he is a man possessed of more than usual Organic sensibility, and one who has also brought long deeply.
Q. 16. What are the views of Wordsworth regarding the subject of poetry?
Ans. Regarding subject Wordsworth declares his preference for incidents and situations from common life and to obtain such situations, humble and rustic life was generally chosen, because in that condition the essential passions of the heart find a better soil in which they can attain their maturity. Over these incidents Wordsworth proposes to throw a certain colouring of the imagination whereby ordinary things should be presented to the mind in an unusual aspect.
Q. 17. How far was Wordsworth successful to write in simple poetical style?
Ans. Generally, though, when Wordsworth writes under a strong emotional stimulus, his style is free from banality and prosaicism. It is touchingly simple in some of his Lucy poems, gay and joyous in other lyrics, and vigorous, with something of a Miltonic sweep and resonance, in his greatest sonnets and blank verse. In truth, though in his best blank verse, it is fired by the passion of his imaginative insight to a grandeur above ordinary’ speech; it does not stray very far from the selection of the real language of men which he advocated. At other times, however, when the emotional stimulus is small or entirely lacking, he writes with his theories in the forefront of his mind, and the result is the prosaic banality of some sections of Simon Lee.
Q. 18. What was the conception of Rousseau’s ‘Return to Nature’?
Ans. Firstly, Rousseau found outward Nature to be most human in its meaning, just where it had been hitherto regarded as most inhuman. Rousseau taught men to find rest and refreshment for the weary spirit in the wild freedom of Nature and in the presence of the most awful manifestation. Secondly, by the cry for a Return to Nature. Rousseau asserted the importance of the primary bonds of human affections and the dignity of human labour. Thirdly, by a Return to Nature Rousseau meant that there should be an awakening in each man of a consciousness of his own capacities, rights and duties.
Q. 19. What are the chief defects in Wordsworth’s poetry?
Ans. Firstly, Wordsworth’s poetry lacks humour. Secondly, there is excess of egotism in his poetry. Thirdly, he has presented one sided ideal of humanity. Fourthly, there is absence of love poetry. Fifthly, he has avoided Nature’s gorgeous aspects. Finally, Wordsworth celebrates the beauty, harmony and sublimity of Nature, but Nature is not all a May day. He loses sight of Nature “red in tooth and claw with rapine.”
Q. 20. Comment upon S.T. Coleridge’s poem ‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’.
Ans. The composition of this poem was commenced during a tour which the poet, Wordsworth and his sister made along the Quantock Hills. The original intention was to write a poem conjointly to defray the expenses of the tour. Some parts, of it thus owe their suggestion to Wordsworth. But as the poem grew in length and beauty Wordsworth withdrew his hand, leaving its composition to Coleridge, to whose tastes the supernatural element in it was more suited. The main idea of the voyage, founded on a dream of his own, was Coleridge’s Wordsworth suggested details. The poem presents us marvellous series of dissolving pictures, so curiously distinct and yet so strangely fused into one; the voyage through the polar ice; the death of the albatross; the amazing scenes during the calm and the storm; and the return home. In style, in swift stealthiness of narrative speed, and in its weird and compelling strength of imagination the poem is without a parallel. The moral of the poem—”He prayeth well who loveth well, Both man and bird and beast”-grew out of Coleridge’s great love of lower animals.
Q. 21. Elaborate Coleridge’s skill in making the unreal real, in ‘The Ancient Mariner’.
Ans. The great charm and power of the poem lies in the skill with which the unreal is made to look like the real. Description of natural phenomena are given with such minuteness and detail, and dovetailed onto the imaginative and supernatural parts with such nicety, as to make the whole story look quite probable. The dreadful silence of the far seas; the hot stagnant waters with the intolerable blasting sun overhead, and the vast unknown furnish a background of reality on which the emotions of a sensitive human soul may be portrayed with absolute freedom and yet carry conviction with them. “I never met”, writes Stopford Brooke, “a sailor whose ship had been among the lonely places of the sea, who did not know of their hauntings, who would be surprised to see the phantom ship, who did not hear in the air that sighed in the rigging the voices of the creatures that are half of the water and half of the air above them”?
Q. 22. Give a critical appraisal of Coleridge’s ‘Kubla Khan’.
Ans. Kubla Khan, written in 1798, was like Christabel, unfirinshed, and it also remained unpublished until 1816. It is the echo of a dream—the shadow of a shadow. Coleridge avers that he dreams the lines, awoke in a fever of inspiration, threw words on paper, but before the fit was over was distracted from the composition, so that the glory of the dream never returned and Kubla Khan, remained unfinished. The poem beginning with a description of the stately pleasure-dome built by Kubla Khan in Xanadu, soon becomes a dreamlike series of dissolving views, each expressed in the most perfect imagery and most magical of verbal music, but it collapses in mid-career.
Q. 23. State the main points in Byron’s poem ‘Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage’.
Ans. The first two cantos of Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage were written in 1812. The hero of the poem is a romantic youth, and is very clearly Byron himself. He is very grand and terrible, and sinister with the stain of a dark and awful past. He visits some of the popular beauty spots of the Continent, which he describes in Spenserian stanzas of moderate skill and attractiveness. The poem is diffuse, but sometimes it can be terse and energetic. In 1816 Byron was hounded out of England, and his wanderings are chronicled in the third and fourth cantos of Childe’s Harold’s Pilgrimage. In metre and general scheme the poem is unaltered, but in spirit and style the new parts are very different from the first two cantos. The descriptions are firmer and terser, and are often graced; and the tone all through is deeper and more sincere.
Q. 24. Discuss Lord Byron as a satirist.
Ans. Byron’s satirical spirit is gigantic. In the expression of his scorn, a kind of sublime and reckless arrogance, he has the touch of the master. Yet in spite of his genius he has several defects. In the first place, his motive is to a very large extent personal, and so his scorn becomes one-sided. Secondly, he lacks the deep vision of the supreme satirist. In the third place, he is often deliberately outrageous. When he found how easily and deeply he could shock a certain class of people we went out of his way to shock them, and succeeded only too well.
Q. 25. Comment upon Lord Byron’s style.
Ans. Byron’s style is quite distinct from any other romantic poet. Always an admirer of Pope, though he lacked his finish and artistry, he never completely freed himself from the poetic diction and personification of the previous age. His faults as an artist are glaring: he had no ear for melody and his workmanship was careless. When writing to himself, he was often guilty of repetition and over-emphasis. There is also much vehemence and passion in his work in his best satires the tone approaches the conversational in its naturalness and he displays an epigrammatic wit and great vivacity.
Q. 26. Comment upon Shelley’s ‘Adonais’.
Ans. Adonais is a pastoral elegy after the original Greek model. It has important resemblances to the pastorals of Theocritus, to the pastoral elegies of Bion and Moschus and their English imitation, Milton’s Lycidas. The most poetical and impressive portion of the poem is solemn and majestic conclusion, where the poet rises from the region of earthly sorrow into the realm of ideal aspiration and contemplation.
Q. 27. Discuss Shelley’s lyrical quality.
Ans. A poet of such keen feelings, fiery emotion, and consuming impatience is eminently fitted for lyrical expression of the desires and inspirations, joys and sorrows that move his heart; and Shelley remains the greatest lyric poet in English literature, as the subjectivism of the Romantic Revival found its best exponent in him. The whole Adonais may be taken as a long lyric of passionate grief and poetic visions in which he celebrates not only the life of Keats but also the essence of poetic ecstasy in both sorrow and joy.
Q. 28. What was the interpretation of Negative Capability in John Keats?
Ans. It is an expression used by Keats in his letter of December 21, 1817, to his brothers George and Thomas. With term Negative Capability, Keats described a quality which a roan possesses when he is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after tact and reason “Coleridge.” Keats said, “often lacked Negative Capability, for he was incapable of negating the logical, rationalizing part of his mind and would often lose an intuition by attempting to make it part of a system”, that is ,by being incapable of remaining content with half knowledge.” When a poet possesses Negative Capability, he has no need to rationalize; “the sense of beauty,” Keats said, “overcomes every other consideration.”
Q. 29. Compare and contrast Wordsworth and Coleridge as poets of Nature.
Ans. Wordsworth is the high-priest of Nature. His attitude towards Nature is very peculiar and nose! The poetry of Nature reaches its high water-mark in him. No other poet has surrendered himself so completely to the spell that Nature casts upon the human mind. Coleridge is also romantic before his deep love of Nature. He, too, thinks Nature to be a living being, sees’ a divine spirit pervading the objects of Nature and believes in the moral and educative influence of Nature upon Man. Later on he modified his attitude towards Nature and believed that we interpret the moods of Nature according to our own moods. In other words if we are happy, Nature looks happy too and if we are dejected, Nature also looks dejected. Nature, therefore, has no moods and feelings of her own. We receive from Nature only that which we give to her.
Q. 30. How will you compare and contrast Shelley and Keats?
Ans. Shelley was a social rebel, while Keats was a social recluse. The former, was intensely interested in social and political reforms of his time, the latter was quite aloof from the burning problems of the day. Again, Shelley was a Utopian and an idealist. He was hoping of Millennium, while Keats was a pure artist who held that his chief business was to create beauty for the delight of men, and not in favour of change in human society.
Q. 31. Compare Wordsworth and Shelley as poets of Nature.
Ans. Shelley had the same idea as Wordsworth that Nature was alive; but while Wordsworth made the active principle which filled and made Nature to be Thought, Shelley made it Love. The natural world was dear then to his soul as well as to his eye, but he loved best indefinite aspects. He lacked the closeness of grasp of Nature which Wordsworth and Keats had, but he had the power in a far greater degree than they of describing the cloud scenery of the sky, the doings of the great sea, and the vast realms of landscape. He is, in this as well as in his eye for subtle colour, the Turner of poetry.
Q. 32. Examine the condition of drama in the early 19th century.
Ans. After the appearance of Sheridan and Goldsmith the drama rapidly decayed. There are several reasons for this. There was a gulf between the men of letters and the theatre which had grown vulgar. The age did not lend itself to dramatic expression. It was fundamentally critical, romantic reflective and philosophic
Q. 33. What type of drama was popular in the early 19th century?
Ans. In this period the Closet drama was popular. The romantic poets were set dramatists of the high order. The poetical plays make the first appearance of ‘closet drama’—that is, of drama which is intended to be read; and is not written for representation on the stage. The prevailing note of the period was lyrical and not dramatistic. Scott, Wordsworth, Coleridge write plays but they are not effective either as play or its literature. Keats, Southey and Byron’s Manfred and Cain and Shelley’s Prometheus Unbound are fine poems though not successful The Cenci by Shelley was written for the stage and it is the only stage-play of real merit though not without its defects.
Q. 34. What are your views regarding the Eighteenth-century criticism?
Ans. Eighteenth-century criticism is mainly the criticism of external rules. The critics employed the foot-rule as if they were measuring surfaces. They were quite unacquainted with sympathetic criticism. They could not judge by perception, nor did they possess any aesthetic sense or taste. Johnson judged the work of other writers, from his majestical seat of judgment, criticising its possible and unthought of blemishes, never stooping to discover the merits. He considered poetry almost exclusively from the didactic and logical points of view. He always inquired ‘what is the moral?’ ‘what it proves?’ and paid excessive attention to the ‘logical solidity’ and coherence of its sentiments. He judged Lycidas by exhibiting its “inherent improbability” in the eyes of crude common sense. The method of the 18th century critics was to judge by reference to an external standard of ‘taste’ and to reject everything that did not conform to the standard.
Q. 35. What is your opinion about Wordsworth’s ‘Preface to Lyrical Ballad’?
Ans. Prefaces are, in a way, highly illuminating. His own aims and intentions are fully set out there. He, however, made the mistake of thinking that his theory of poetry and his theory of poetic diction held good for all poets. If we remember that these Prefaces throw light on Wordsworth’s own practice their study can be very rewarding. His critical doctrines did not command immediate acceptance. But many of his ideas’ have become common form.
Q. 36. Comment upon Coleridge’s ‘Biographia Literaria’.
Ans. Biographia Literaria is the most valuable prose work of Coleridge. It pretends to record his literary upbringing, but as a consecutive narrative it is quite worthless. After sixteen chapters of philosophizing, almost entirely irrelevant, he discusses the poetical theory of his friend Wordsworth, and then in the last seven chapters of the book he gives a remarkable demonstration of his ;critical powers. He analyses the Wordsworthian theory in masterly fashion, and, separating the good form the bad, upon the sounder elements bases a critical dogma of great and permanent value. These last chapters of the book, which are the most enduring exposition of the Romantic theory as it exists in English, place Coleridge in the first flight of critics.
Q. 37. What was the contribution of Coleridge to English criticism?
Ans. Coleridge was responsible for bringing about a change in the attitude of literature toward criticism. His service lay in reasserting such fundamental principles as that a critical standard is something quite distinct from a set of external rules, that “all great genius necessarily worked in accordance with certain laws which it was the function of the critic to determine by a study of each particular work of art.
Q. 38. Discuss William Hazlitt as a critic.
Ans. Modern opinion has endorsed the contemporary recognition of Hazlitt’s eminence as a critic. His writing is remarkable for its fearless expression of an honest and individual opinion, and, while he lacks the learned critical apparatus of more modern critics, his is unsurpassed in his ability to communicate his own enjoyment, and his gift for evoking unnoticed beauties. His judgments are based on his emotional reactions rather than on objectively applied principles. Consequently, they are sometimes marred by personal bias, as in some of the portraits in The Spirit of the Age.
Q. 39. Discuss Charles Lamb as a critic.
Ans. Charles Lamb had that rare love of the book, a sound taste which singles him out as a genius in Criticism for posterity to claim and cherish. Although he is a delightful critic, yet he is a little capricious in his judgment. He calls Heywood a ‘prose Shakespeare’. Saintsbury calls Lamb ‘as ariel of criticism’. He is fresh ?in thought and feeling; his style is distinguished by a rare sympathy and pathos and a sudden turn of the phrase and fancy which we miss so badly in Hazlitt.
Q. 40. Discuss Lamb’s ‘Essays of Elia’.
Ans. Lamb contributed his essays, signed ‘Ella’ to The London Magazine between 1820 and 1825. A first collection of these was made in 1820; and The Last Essay of Elia (gathered from various magazines) appeared in 1833.
Q. 41. Examine Charles Lamb as an essayist.
Ans. Lamb’s essays are unequalled in English. In subject they are of the usual miscellaneous kind, ranging from Chimney-sweeps to Old China. They are, however, touched with personal opinions and recollections so oddly obtruded that interest in the subject is nearly swamped by the reader’s delight in the author. No essayist is more egotistical than Lamb; but no egotist can be so artless and yet so artful, so tearful and yet so mirthful, so pedantic and yet so humane. It is this delicate clashing of humours, like the chiming of sweet bells, that affords the chief delight to Lamb’s readers.
Q. 42. Comment upon the style of Charle’s Lamb.
Ans. It is almost impossible to do justice to his style. It is old-fashioned, bearing echoes and odours from older writers like Sir Thomas Browne and Fuller; it is full of long and curious words; and it is dashed with frequent exclamations and parentheses. The humour that runs through it all is not strong, but airy, almost elfish in note, it vibrates faintly, but in application never lacks precision. His pathos is of much the same character; and sometimes, as in Dream Children, it deepens into a quivering sing of regret. He is so sensitive and so strong, so cheerful and yet so unalterably doomed to sorrow.
Q. 43. Discuss William Hazlitt’s style.
Ans. In style Hazlitt contrasts strongly with the elaborate orchestration of the complex sentence and the magic of the delicate word tracery which we have seen in De Quincey. His brief, abrupt sentences have the vigour and directness which his views demand. His lectures have mainly simplicity, and something of the looseness of organization which is typical of good conservation. Essays and lectures alike show a fondness for the apt and skillfully blended quotation, and for the balanced sentence, often embodying contrast. Always his diction is pure and his expression concise.
Q. 44. Discuss Sir Walter Scott as the historical novelist.
Ans. Scott created the historical novel. He combined stories of love and adventure with real scenes, and events of the past. He summoned the great figures of history and legend to live with men and women of his own invention. There had been to such union of history and fiction before, except in Shakespeare’s historical plays, and there has not been since Scott any imaginative recreation of the past comparable with his.
Q. 45. What was Walter Scott’s contribution to the novel?
Ans. His contribution to the novel is very great indeed. To the historical novels he brought a knowledge that was not pedantically exact, but manageable, wide and bountiful. To the sum of this knowledge he added a life-giving force, a vitalizing energy, an insight, and a genial dexterity that made the historical novel an entirely new species.
Q. 46. Discuss Walter Scott as the king of Romancers?
Ans. Scott has been called the king of romancers and on the contrary it has been denied that he was a romanticist at all. In some respects he was quite different from his romantic contemporaries. He did not believe in political or social reform, and he did not make literature chiefly the. expression of personality. One of the most conspicuous of the tendencies .if the time however reaches its culminations in him. The interest in Middle Ages which was reawakened in the eighteenth century had antimated Scott’s, early literary ventures and it grew into a profound attachment to the past. That is the theme of his novels and that is their unique achievement, imaginative reconstruction of the days that are gone.
Q. 47. Comment upon Jane Austen’s novel ‘Pride and Prejudice’.
Ans. In this novel, as in all her works, we have middle-class people pursuing the common round. The heroine is a girl of spirit, but she has no extraordinary qualities; the pride and prejudice of rank and wealthy are gently but pleasingly titillated, as if they are being subjected to an electric current of carefully selected intensity. The style is smooth and unobtrusive but covers a delicate pricking of irony that is agreeable and masterly in its quiet way. Nothing quite like it had appeared before in the novel. In unobtrusive and dexterous art the book is considered to be her masterpiece.
Q. 48. Justify that Jane Austen is a Master of Realism.
Ans. Within the limited range, there has been never more searching and convincing delineating of character. The quiet but ever attentive humour, the fide discrimination of individual peculiarities, the development of personality under the stress of ordinary experience have made her novels the joy of countless readers. Though her range is limited, it is the range of everyday experience with which every one is familiar, and her interpretation of its persons and happenings is as fresh today as ever.
Q. 49. Discuss the characterisation of Jane Austen.
Ans. Her characters are developed with minuteness and accuracy. They are ordinary people but are convincingly alive. She is fond of introducing clergymen, all of whom strike the reader as being exactly like clergymen though each has his own individual characteristics. She has many characters of the first class, like the servile Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice, the garrulous Miss Bates in Emma, and the selfish and vulgar John Thorpe in Northanger Abbey. Her characters are not types, but individuals. Her method of portrayal is based upon acute observation and a quiet but incisive irony. Her male characters have a certain softness of thews and temper, but her female characters are almost unexceptionable in perfection of finish.
Q. 50. Justify that the Romantic Age is the golden age of the lyric.
Ans. The Romantic Age was indeed the golden age of the lyric, which reflected the Romantic spirit of the time in a liberal and. varied measure. It comprised the exalted passion of Shelley, the meditative simplicity of Wordsworth, the sumptuous descriptions of Keats, and the golden notes of Coleridge. It is to be noted that in form the lyric employed the ancient externals of the stereotyped metres and rhymes. There was some attempt at rhymeless poems in the work of Southey and the early poems of Shelley, but this practice was never general.
Q. 51. What was the development in the art of fiction in the Romantic Age?
Ans. Of the different kings of prose composition, the novel showed in this period the most marked development. This was largely due to the work of Scott and domestic types of novel. With regard to the work of Scott, we can here only briefly summarize what has already been said. He raised the historical novel to the rank of one of the major kinds of literature; he brought to it knowledge, and through the divine gift of knowledge made it true to life; he fired historical characters with living energy; he set on foot the device of the unhistorical hero—that is, he made the chief character purely fictitious, and caused the historical persons to rotate about it; he established a style that suited many periods of history; and pervading all these advances was a great and genial personality that transformed what might have been mere lumber into an - artistic product of truth and beauty. Jane Austen’s achievement was of a different kind. She revealed the beauty and interest that underlie ordinary affairs; she displayed the infinite variety of common life, and so she opened an inexhaustible vein that her successors were assiduously to develop.
Q. 52. Appraise the development of Essay in the Romantic Age.
Ans. Finding a fresh outlet in the new type of periodical, the essay acquired additional importance. The purely literary essay, exemplified in the works of Southey, Hazlitt, and Lockhart, increased in length and solidity. The miscellaneous essay, represented in the works of Lamb, acquired in increased dignity. It was growing beyond the limits set by Addison and Johnson. It was more intimate and aspiring and contained many more mannerisms of the author.
Q. 53. Bring out the chief points in the Literary Criticism of the Romantic Age?
Ans. No previous period had seen literary criticism of such bulk or such generally high standard as that produced in this age. In addition to the work of the professional critics, such as Hazlitt and the reviewers, many of the poets and imaginative prose-writers have left us critical works of great and enduring value. Mention may be made of Wordsworth’s preface to the Lyrical Ballads: Coleridge’s Biographia Literaria and lectures on Shakespeare and other poets; Shelley’s The Defence of Poetry, in reply to the provocative The Four Ages of Poetry of Peacock; and Lamb’s Specimens of English Dramatic Poets, who lived about the Time of Shakespeare.

Pope as the representative of the 18th Century

 Pope as the representative of the 18th Century
Introduction: A great work of art, though universal in its appeal, is the most typical product of its time. It is rooted in the contemporary social and cultural life and reflects, implicitly or explicitly, that life is in its essence and totality. It is an indispensable prerequisite for the greatness of a work of art. If it fails to be of its own age, almost as a rule, it will also fail to be universal in its appeal. It is a great poem by all cannons of art and it does all that admirably. Its focus mainly captures the typical features of the aristocratic class of its time.
The Rape of The Lock gives a complete and graphic picture of the 20th century.  The Rape of The Lock is concerned with the aristocratic society and presents a charming portrait of its features. This portrait is not presented in word-pictures of descriptive passages; but is richly suggested through the mock-epic adventures of Lord Petre and Belinda – the representative figures of the society.  The aristocratic of the 18th century English was a newly formed class, having emerged out of the commercial prosperity of England since the exploits of the Armada victory. The aristocratic people were primarily urban people with easy flow of money from trade and commerce and in some classes from the hoardings of land. They were luxury loving people, enjoying life in idle games and fun and frolic. Being wealthy with a new-found lust for money and craze for fashion, mostly imitated from the French whose influence had come through the Restoration. They got themselves preoccupied in trivialities. Gossips, sex-intrigues, and courting ladies. The ladies of the time loved being wooed and playing coquets to the gentlemen.

Mirror to the 18th century: The Rape of the Lock is a mirror to this kind of society. Of which Lord Petre and Belinda are the representative figures. Belinda is presented as dazzling charming like the sun, and lap-dogs were another indispensable ingredient of their lives.

Now lap-dogs give themselves the rousing shake,
And sleepless lovers, just at twelve, awake:

It is significant that how Pope brackets lap-dogs and lovers as though lovers were no better than lap-dogs.
Glittering fashion, celebrations in the form of parties, dances with amorous intentions beneath, were the typical features of the people belonging to the aristocratic class. Ariel’s speech that Belinda hears in a state of dreaming portraits the sex-intrigues of the dancing balls. The ladies spent more time applying to themselves beauty aids, a large variety of cosmetics from distant lands. They were always burning to win the heart of their lover. They spent hours at the toilets, played card games, danced and considered the dressing table a place of worship. Coquetry was the only art that these ladies practiced sedulously: rolling the eye ball for furtive glances or winking in a debonair, apparently indifferent manner, blushing at the right moment to attract the admiring eyes, were the manners that they worked hard to acquire. The ladies as well as the gallant young men were fickle-minded, inconsistent, unreliable frankly trivializing valuable human relationship. Pretension, dissimulation and hypocrisy constituted their way of life. Levity was their common characteristic. The following shows their picture.

On the rich guilt sinks with becoming woe,
Wrapt in a gown, for sickness, and for show.
The fair ones feel such maladies as these,
When each new night-dress gives a new disease

Pope gives minute details of the ladies’ constant concern for enhancing their beauty effect with artificial means. For these ladies, the conventionally serious things of life had lost their importance. Their moods and passion were ruled by trivialities. Trifles would make them anxious or angry. These ladies, in other words, were devoid of any real moral sense, or any serious, meaningful purpose in life. To them, the death of husbands affected them only as much as that of their lap-dog or breaking of China jars. Honor, to them, was almost equal to nothing. The loss of chastity was no more serious than staining of brocades. To them Church meant nothing. Missing a church congregation was not a serious affair, but missing a ball was considered an important thing. Losing heart or indulging in sex was less important than the loss of a necklace.
All this goes to show that utter moral confusion prevailed in the aristocracy of the eighteenth century. Serious purpose had evaporated from their lives. Men were chiefly concerned with getting richer and carrying on sexual adventures with fashion-frenzy coquettish ladies.  Their love letters were more sacred to them than the Bible. In the Rape of the Lock, the adventurous Baron builds an Alter of Love; it is built of twelve voluminous French romances and all the prizes gained from him former love; and significantly, the fire at the altar is raised with the heaps of love-letters that he had received. Lord Petre’s sense of victory at the cutting of Belinda’s lock is symbolic of the shallowness, triviality, in fact, the emptiness of the youths of the contemporary aristocratic class.
Shallowness of Judges, the fashion of coffee-taking.

The hungry judges soon the sentence sign
And wretches hang that the jury-men dine
“Coffee, (which makes the politician wise,)
and see through all things with half-shut eyes”

The Rape of the Lock is an epitome of the eighteenth century social life. In this poem, Pope has caught and fixed for ever the atmosphere of the age. No great English poet is at once so great and so empty, so artistic and yet so void of the ideal on which all high art rests. As Dixon asserts: Pope is the protagonist of a whole age, of an attitude of mind and manner of writing. Hence, the poem is highly arresting because of its presentation of social life of the age. It reflects and mirrors the contemporary society.
Conclusion: Pope fully bears the witticism of its age. In his conception of theme and selection of the tile, Pope displays his unsurpassable wit. This was the kind of life led by the fashionable people of the upper classes in the age of Pope, and Pope has described it in gorgeous colors on the one hand and with scathing satire on the other. While it shows the grace and fascination of Belinda’s toilet, he indicates the vanity and futility of it all. There is nothing deep or serious in the lives and activities of the fashionable people, all is vanity and emptiness and this Pope has revealed with art and brilliance. The Rape of the Lock reflects the artificial age with all its outward splendor and inward emptiness. It the mirror of a particular aspect of life in the age of Pope. It was, says, Lowell, a mirror in a drawing room, but it gave back a faithful image of society.

Modern Poets

 Modern Poets
1.  Robert Bridges (1840-1930)
Robert Bridges, though a twentieth century poet, may be considered as the last of the Great Victorians as he carried on the Victorian tradition. He is not a poet of the modern crisis except for his metrical innovations. Belonging to the aristocracy his work is also concerned with the leisured and highly cultivated aristocratic class of society.

In his poetry we find beautiful descriptions of English landscapes, clear streams, gardens, songs of birds. The world that he depicts is haunted by memories of the classics, of music and poetry and decorous love making. He carries on the tradition of Milton, Wordsworth and Tennyson, against which the young men of his times were in open revolt. We do not find in his poetry any bold attempt to face the critical problems facing his generation. Even his greatest poem, The Testament of Beauty, does not contain any consistent treatment of deep philosophy. That is why Yeats remarked that there is emptiness everywhere in the poetry of Bridges.
The importance of Bridges in modern poetry, however, is in his metrical innovations. He was lover of old English music and many of his early lyrics are obviously influenced by the Elizabethan lyricists, especially Thomas Campion. He was a remarkable prosodist, the first English poet who had a grasp of phonetic theory. He was tireless experimenter in verse form. He himself admitted: “What led me to poetry was the inexhaustible satisfaction of form, the magic of speech, lying as it seemed to be in the masterly control of the material.” Working under the influence of his friend, Hopkins, to whom he dedicated the second book of shorter poems, Bridges wrote his poems following the rules of new prosody. The best of Bridges’ metrical experiment is the sprung rhythm, a kind of versification which is not, as usual, based on speech rhythm, but on “the hidden emotional pattern that makes poetry.” And it was a definite contribution to the development of English verse.
The lyrics of Bridges like A Passer-By, London Snow, The Downs, are marked by an Elizabethan simplicity. In the sonnets of The Growth of Love, we find the calm, the mediative strain of Victorian love poetry. A believer in Platonic love, he exalts the ethical and intellectual principle of beauty. In his greatest poem, The Testament of Beauty, he has given beautiful expression to his love for ‘the mighty abstract idea of beauty in all things’ which he received from Keats. Here he has also sought to ‘reconcile Passion with peace and show desire at rest.’ In his poetry Bridges thus transcended rather than solved the modern problems by his faith in idealism and the evolutionary spirit. He has no sympathy for the down-trodden and less fortunate members of humanity, and so whenever he deals with a simple human theme, as in the poem The Villager, he reflects the mind of the upper class which has lost touch with common humanity. Bridges is, therefore, rightly called the last Great Victorian, and his greatest poem, The Testament of Beauty, the final flower of the Victorian Spirit.
2.  Gerard Manley Hopkins (1844-1889)
Hopkins who died in 1889, but whose poems were not issued during his lifetime, and who only became widely known after his friend Robert Bridges edited the collection in 1918, exerted a great influence on modern English poetry. The poems of Hopkins were so eccentric in style that Bridges dared not publish them till thirty years after his death. Hopkins had tried to revive the ‘sprung rhythm’, the accentual and alliterative measure of Langland and Skelton, which had dropped out of use since the sixteenth century. In this rhythm there are two currents, the undercurrent and the overcurrent, which are intertwined. This effect is produced by inducing the metre to run back on itself, sometimes making a second line reverse the movement of one before; sometimes in the same line confronting a metric foot by its opposite, for instance, an iambic followed by a trochee. As these variations produce the momentary effect of a break or split, Hopkins called this device sprung rhythm. This rhythm follows the system of beats and stresses unlike the quantitive metres where every syllable is counted. As in conversation we stress significant words and syllables with so much emphasis that accompanying syllables and words are left to take care of themselves, the ‘sprung’ rhythm is nearer to natural speech. That is why it has appealed to the modern poets who in their poetry attempt to convey the everyday experience of modern life and its multifarious problem in a most natural manner. The ‘sprung’ rhythm of Hopkins, therefore, is his greatest contribution to modern poetry. Of course he was not the first to invent it; there are examples of it in the poetry of all great poets, especially Milton. But Hopkins revived it and laid special emphasis on it, and exerted a great influence because the twentieth century needed it.
Hopkins, like Keats, was endowed with a highly sensuous temperament, but being a deeply religious man having an abiding faith in God, he refined his faculty and offered it to God. He avoided all outward and sensuous experiences, but enjoyed them in a deeply religious mood as intimations of the Divine Presence. He could perceive God in every object, and tried to find its distinctive virtue of design of pattern the inner kernel of its being, or its very soul which was expressed by its outer form. This peculiarity or the immanent quality in each thing which is the manifestation of Beauty was called by Hopkins as inscape’, a term which he borrowed from Don Scotus. For example, the inscape of the flower called ‘blue bell’, according to Hopkins, is mixed strength and grace. Thus to him not only trees, grass, flower, but each human spirit had its personal inscape, a mystic, creative force which shapes the mind. This ‘inscape Hopkisn expressed in a style also which was peculiar to himself, because he could not be satisfied with the conventional rhythms and metres which were incapable of conveying what came straight from his heart.
The poems of Hopkins are about God, Nature and Man, and all of them are pervaded with the immanence of God. His greatest poem is The Wreck of Deutschland, which is full of storm and agony revealing the mystery of God’s way to men. All his poetry is symbolic, and he means more than he says. Some of his lyrics are sublime, but the majority of his poems are obscure. It is mainly on account of his theory—sprung rhythm, and inscape, that he has exerted such a tremendous influence on modern poets.
3.  A. E. Houseman (1859-1936)
Alfred Edward Houseman was a great classical scholar. He wrote much of his poetry about Shorpshrie, which like Hardy’s Wessex, is a part of England, full of historic memories and still comparatively free from the taint of materialism. Out of his memories of this place, Houseman created a dream world, a type of arcadia. His most celebrated poem, Shorpshire Lad, which is a pseudo-pastoral fancy, deals with the life of the Shorpshire lad who lives a vigorous, care-fee life.
Housemen was disgusted with the dismal picture which the modern world presented to him, but he did not possess a sufficiently acute intellect to solve its problems. However, in some of his poems he gives an effective and powerful expression to the division in the modern consciousness caused by the contrast between the development of the moral sense and the dehumanised world picture provided by scientific discoveries. In one of his poems based on his memories of Shorpshrie, he has achieved tragic dignity:
Men loved unkindness then, but lightless in the quarry
I slept and saw not; tears fell down, I did not mourn;
Sweat ran and blood sprang and I was never sorry;
Then it was well with me, in days ere I was born
Housemen also wrote a few poems expressing the horrible destruction caused by modern wars, and their utter futility and inhumanity. But he was on the whole a minor poet who could not attain the stature of T. S. Eliot or W. B. Yeats.
4.  The “Georgian” Poets
Besides Bridges and Houseman, who did not belong to any group, there was in the first quarter of the twentieth century a group of poets called the “George Group:” These poets flourished in the reign of George V (1911-1936). They possessed various characteristics and were not conscious of belonging to a particular group. In reality they were imitators of the parts, who shut their eyes against the contemporary problems. But they were presumptuous enough to think of themselves as the heralds of a new age. Robert Graves who first claimed to belong to this group, and subsequently broke away with it, wrote about the Georgian poets. “The Georgians’ general recommendations were the discarding of archaistic diction such as ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ and ‘flower’d’ and ‘when’er’, and of poetical construction such as ‘winter clear’ and ‘host on armed host’ and of pomposities generally… In reaction to Victorianism their verse should avoid all formally religious, philosophic or improving themes; and all sad, wrecked cafe-table themes in reaction to the ninetees. Georgian poets were to be English but not aggressively imperialistic, pantheistic rather than atheistic; and as simple as a child’s reading book. Their subjects were to be Nature, love, leisure, old age, childhood, animals, sleep… unemotional subject.”
This is rather a severe account of the Georgian poets but it is not wholly unjustified. Though the quantity of work produced by the Georgian poets is great, the quality is not of a high order. The poets generally attributed to this group are roughly those whose work was published in the five volumes of Georgian Poetry, dated respectively 1911-12, 1913-15, 1916-17, 1918-19 and 1920-22. The important poets who contributed to these volumes were Lascelles Aberchrombie, Gordon Bottomley, Rupert Brooke, G. K. Chesterton, W. H. Davis; Walter De La Mare, John Masefield, J. E. Flecker, W. W. Gibson; D. H. Lawrence, John Drinkwater, Sturge Moore, Laurence Binyon, Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen.
Among these the poets whose work has some lasting value are Walter De la Mare, W. H. Davis, Laurence Binyon and John Masefield. The greatest of them is Walter De La Mare (1873-1957) who writes in a simple, pure, lyrical style about beautiful sights and sounds of the country, about children and old people but there is always in his poetry a strange enchantment produced by the apprehension of another world existing side by with the everyday world. His poetry has the atmosphere of dreamland, as he himself says in his introduction to Behold, This Dreamer: “Every imaginative poem resembles in its onset and its effect the experience of dreaming.” He has the faculty of bridging the gulf between waking and dreaming, between reality and fantasy. Besides this he has great skill in the management of metre, and successfully welding the grotesque with the profoundly pathetic.
William Henry Davies (1871-1940) is one of the natural singers in the English language. Being immensely interested in Nature, the experiences which he describes about natural objects and scenes are authentic. His lyrics remind us of the melodies of Herrick and Blake. Though living in the twentieth century, he remained wholly unsophisticated, and composing his poems without much conscious effort, he could not give them polish and finish. But inspite of this he has left quite a number of lyrics which on account of their lively music have an enduring appeal to sensitive ears.
Laurence Binyon (1869-1943), a scholar and poet who translated Dante into English had a sense of just word and its sound. Generally he wrote about classical themes. The most notable of such poems is his Attila, a dramatic poem which is a well-constructed play. Its vehement blank verse and speed of action remind the readers of Shakespeare. The First World War stirred him to profound feelings and he wrote some very moving poems, for example, the one beginning with the unforgettable line—
They shall not grow old, as we that are left grow old.
The Second World War had a great saddening effect on him, and in his last years he wrote poems in which he contrasted old pleasures and dreams with the horrible war oppressed present. They were posthumously published in 1944 under the title The Burning of the Leaves and other Poems. Though these poems were written under the shadow of war and they deal with the transient nature of things and their tendency to decay, yet they express the hope, like Browning’s poetry, that nothing that is past is ultimately gone.
John Masefield (born 1878) who has been Poet Laureate since 1930, has been composing poems for the last forty years, but he has not attained real greatness as a poet. As a young man he was a sailor, and so most of his early poetry deals with life at sea and the various adventures that one meets there. The poems which give expression to this experience are contained in the volumes Salt Water Ballads (1902) and Ballads (1906). In 1909 he produced his best poetic tragedy—The Tragedy of Nan. After that he gave up writing on imaginative themes, and produced poems dealing with the graver aspects of modern life in a realistic manner, e.g. The Everlasting Mercy (1911), The Widow in the Bye-Street Dauber (1913), The Daffodil Fields (1913). All these poems narrate a stirring story with an excellent moral. Now he is looked upon as one of the ‘prophets’ of modern England.
5.  The Imagists
The first revolt against the Victorian Romantic poetic tradition came from a group of poets called the Imagists. Their activities extended for about ten years—from 1912 to 1922. They realized that the poetry of the Georgians did not introduce any new vitality in English poetry. At its best it displayed both power and individuality, but it did not alter the fact that each of the Georgian poets was content to delimit or modify the poetic inheritance of the nineteenth century rather than abandon it in favour of a radically different approach. Neither Masefield, whose poetry is realistic in subject and vocabulary, no De la Mare, who is the last of the true romantic poets of England, pointed to the new paths in English poetry.
The poetic revolution engineered by the Imagists, which began in the years immediately preceding the First World War, and which was both produced and further encouraged by T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land, preferred the older tradition in English poetry to the Victorian Romantic tradition. The Romantic and the Victorian poets tried to express their personalities in their poems. For them poetry was a means of self-expression and they appealed to the cultivated sensibility of their reader. They treated of themes dealing with their personal hopes and fears and often indulged in the emotions of nostalgia and self-pity. That is why the Victorian poetry especially had a tendency of running to elegy. The Imagists believed that the function of poetry is not self-expression, but the proper fusion of meaning in language. According to them poems are works of art and not pieces of emotional autobiography or rhetorical prophecy. As the purpose of poetry is the exploration of experience, the poet must strive after a kind of poetic statement, which is both precise and passionate, profoundly felt and desperately accurate, even if it means the twisting of the language into a new shape. There must be the fusion of thought and emotion which is found among the Metaphysical poets of the seventeenth century. The Imagists did not look upon the poet as the sweet singer whose function was to render in sweet verse and conventional imagery some personal emotions, but he was the explorer of experience. Therefore, he must use the language in order to build up rich patterns of meaning which required very close attention before they were communicated. The rebels were conscious of the fact that the poetry of their own time represented the final ebb of the Victorian Romantic tradition, and that the time was ripe to give a new direction to English poetry.
The new movement began with a revolt against every kind of sweet verbal impression and romantic egotism which persisted throughout the nineteenth century. Its originator, T. E. Hulme, who was killed in war in 1917, in an article which he wrote in 1909, declared his preference for precise and disciplined classicism to sloppy romanticism. He advocated hardness and precision of imagery “in order to get the exact curve of the thing” together with subtler and more flexible rhythms. He with the help of Ezra Pound, who had come from America, founded the movement called Imagism. Defining the Imagists, Pound wrote in 1912: “They are in opposition to the numerous and unassembled writers who busy themselves with dull and interminable effusions, and who seem to think that a man can write a good long poem before he learns to write a good short one, or even before he learns to produce a good single line.” Giving a fuller statement of the aims of the Imagist movement, F. S. Flint pointed out in 1913 that three rules the Imagists observed were—(a) “direct treatment of the “thing”, (b) “to use absolutely no word that did not contribute to the presentation”, and (c) “to compose in sequence of the musical phrase, not in sequence of a metronome.” Pound emphasised that the Imagists should “use no superfluous word, no adjective, which does not reveal something”, and that they should avoid abstraction. The Imagist movement spread in England and America, and it was helped by the seventeenth century metaphysical poetry and the nineteenth century symbolists, who contributed their techniques and attitudes to the revolution.
The leader of the Imagists was Ezra Pound. Other poets who were included in this group were F. S. Flint, Richard Aldington, F. M. Hueffer, James Joyce, Allan Upward, H. D. (Hilda Doolittle), Amy Lowell, William Carlos Williams, Instead of imitating the English romantics like the Georgians, the Imagists attempted to reproduce the qualities of Ancient Greek and Chinese poetry. They aimed at hard, clear, brilliant effects instead of the soft, dreamy vagueness of the English nineteenth century. Their aims which were expressed in the introduction to Some Imagist Poets (1915), can be summarised as follows:
(1)                  To use the language of common speech, but to employ always the exact word, not the nearly exact, nor the merely decorative word.
(2)                  To produce poetry that is hard and clear, and not deal in vague generalities, however, magnificent and sonorous.
(3)                  To create new rhythms and not to copy old rhythms which merely echo old ones.
The Imagists were greatly influenced by the poetry of Gerard Manley Hopkins, which appeared in 1918, thirty years after the death of the poet. It was the complete absence of any sign of laxness in Hopkins’ poetry, the clear signs of words and rhythms which were perfectly controlled by the poet to produce the desired effect, with no dependence at all on the general poetic feeling, which made an immediate appeal to the new poets.
Regarding the subject matter of poetry, the Imagists, believing that there was no longer a general public of poetry lovers, concentrated on expressing the modern consciousness for their own satisfaction and that of their friends. They gave up the old pretence that humanity was steadily progressing towards a millennium. Instead they recognised that in the new dark age of barbarism and vulgarity, it is the duty of the enlightened few to protect culture and escape the spiritual degradation of a commercialised world. This attitude seems to be similar to that of the aesthetes of the last decade of the nineteenth century, but it is not so. Whereas the aesthetes hating the vulgarity of the contemporary world tried to lose themselves among beautiful fantasies by withdrawing into an ivory tower, the Imagists, on the contrary, faced the new problems and tried to create a very precise and concentrated expression, a new sort of consciousness because the traditional poetic techniques were inadequate for that purpose. Opposed to the romantic view of man as “an infinite reservoir of possibilities”, they looked upon him as a very imperfect creature “intrinsically limited but disciplined by order.” Unlike the romantics who regarded the world as a glorious place with which man was naturally in harmony, the Imagists regarded it “as landscape with occasional oasis…But mainly deserts of dirt, ash-pits of cosmos, grass on ashpits”. They did believe in the words of Hulme, in “no universal ego, but a few definite persons gradually built up”. In his essay on Romanticism and Classicism, he predicted that “a period of dry, hard, classical verse is coming” and expressed the opinion that “there is an increasing proportion of people who simply can’t stand Swinburne.”
The Imagists could not adequately tackle the contemporary problems, because they lived too much among books, were rather irresponsible in their conduct, did not possess sharp intellect, and were not in close contact with actualities. The result is that their poetry is as nerveless and artificial as the neo-romantic poetry of the Georgians. But they certainly deserve the credit of showing that English poetry needed a new technique, and that unnecessary rules and a burdensome mass of dead associations must be removed.
The poets belonging to the Imagist group did not produce great poetry on account of the reasons stated above. Ezra Pound is a poet of real originality, but his too much and rather undigested learning which he tries to introduce in his poems, makes them difficult to understand, and also gives them an air of pedantry. His greatest contribution to modern poetry is his development of an unrhymed ‘free verse’, and other metrical experiments which influenced T. S. Eliot.
The most important writer, who in spite of his being not a regular member of their group, was directly connected with the Imagists, was David Herbert Lawrence (1885-1930). He contributed both to Georgian poetry and the Imagist anthologies. Most of his mature poetry deals with the theme of duel of sex, a conflict of love and hate between man and wife, and expresses an annihilation of the ego and a sort of mystical rebirth or regeneration. His most remarkable poem Manifesto ends with a beautiful description of universe where all human beings have completely realised their individualities, where
All men detach themselves and become unique;
Every human being will then be like a flower, untrammelled,
Every movement will be direct
Only to be will be such delight, we cover our faces when we think of it,
Lest our faces betray us to some untimely end.
The poems which he wrote in the last year of his life when he was dying of consumption, deal with the themes of death and eternity. Lawrence did a lot in rebuilding English poetry, and as a critic he set before the English poets the following ideal, which has greatly influenced the modern English poets.
“The essence of poetry with us in this age of stark unlovely actualities is a stark directness, without a shadow of a lie, or a shadow of deflection anywhere. Everything can go, but this stark, bare, rocky directness of statement, this alone makes poetry to-day.”
6.  Trench Poets
The First World War (1914-18) gave rise to war poetry, and the poets who wrote about the war and its horrors especially in the trenches are called the War Poets, or the “Trench Poets.” The war poetry was in continuation of Georgian poetry, and displayed its major characteristics, namely, an escape from actuality. For example, E. W. Tennant describes the soldiers in Home Thoughts in Laventie, as
Dancing with a measured step from wrecked and shattered town.
Away upon the Downs.
Instead of facing squarely the horrors of war, these poets looked upon the terrible present as a mere dream and the world of imagination the only reality. Following the Georgian tradition with its fanciful revolution from the drabness of urban life and its impressionistic description of the commonplace in a low emotional tone, a number of poets who wrote about the war, described incidents of war and the ardours and pathos of simple men caught in the catastrophe. Their method was descriptive and impressionistic, and on account of lack of any intense, sincere and realistic approach, they failed to arouse the desired emotions in the readers.
Out of a number of these war poets, only two—Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen – attained some poetic standard. Though Sassoon in his early period belonged to the Georgian group, his predominant mood was not lyrical but satiric, not ‘escapist’ but rebellious, because he felt that the soldier was being sacrificed for a false idealism. He looked upon him as
a decent chap
Who did his work and hadn’t much to say
(A Working Party)
In his Suicide in Trenches he described the horrors of trench warfare. In Song Books of the War he dwelt on the short memory of the public who forget those who suffered and died for them during the war. Sassoon, who is still living, wrote some poems between the two great wars, in which he attacked the shallow complacency of his contemporaries, and gave voice to the disillusionment.
Wilfred Owen wrote war poems under the influence of Sassoon. He admired Sassoon because the latter expressed in  a harsh manner the truth about war. Speaking about his own poetry he remarked, “Above all, I am not concerned with poetry. My subject is War and the poetry of War. The poetry is in the pity … all a poet can do today is to warn. That is why the true poets must be truthful.” Though in his poems we find the mood of disillusioned irony, yet, unlike Sassoon, he does not completely lose his hope for man. His poems are free from bitterness and he rejoices in the exultation of battle as well as in the fellowship of comrades. Whereas in Sassoon’s poetry we find a mood of indignation and satire, in Owen’s poetry the mood is of reconciliation and elegy. The following remarkable lines in his poem Strange Meeting reveal Owen’s typical approach to War.
I am the enemy you killed, my fried…
Let us sleep now.
As an experimenter in metre Owen’s contribution to modern English poetry is great. Against the Georgian laxity, he introduced accumulative use of balance and parallelism. And above all, he brought a new dignity to war poetry.
7.  W. B. Yeats (1865 – 1939)
William Butler Yeats was one of the most important of modern poets, who exerted a great influence on his contemporaries as well as successors. He was an Irish, and could never reconcile himself to the English habits and way of thinking. By temperament he was a dreamer, a visionary, who fell under the spell of the folk-lore and the superstitions of the Irish peasantry. Like them he believed in fairies, gnomes, and demons, in the truth of dreams, and in personal immortality. Naturally with such a type of temperament, Yeats felt himself a stranger in the world dominated by science, technology and rationalism.
Being convinced that modern civilisation effaces our fundamental consciousness of ourselves, Yeats trusted in the faculty of imagination, and admired those ages when imagination reigned supreme. Thus he went deeper and farther in the range of folk-lore and mythology. He discovered the primitive and perennial throb of life in passions and beliefs of ancient times, and he wanted to revive it, because he felt that modern civilisation has tamed it by its insistence on dry logic and cold reason.
Yeats was anti-rationalist. He believed in magic, occult influences and hypnotism. He thus led the ‘revolt of the soul against the intellect’, in the hope to acquire ‘a more conscious exercise of the human faculties’. He also believed in the magic of words, the phrases and terms which appeal to common humanity. Therefore, he tried to rediscover those symbols which had a popular appeal in ancient days, and which can even now touch man’s hidden selves and awaken in him his deepest and oldest consciousness of love and death, or his impulse towards adventure and self-fulfillment. Being disillusioned by lack of harmony and strength in modern culture, he tried to revive the ancient spells and incantations to bring about unity and a spirit of integration in modern civilisation which was torn by conflicts and dissensions.
All these factors inclined Yeats towards symbolism. Believing in the existence of a universal ‘great mind’, and a ‘great memory’ which could be ‘evoked by symbols’, he came to regard that both imagery and rhythm can work as incantations to rouse universal emotions. He liked Shelley’s poetry because of the symbolism inherent in the recurrent images of leaves, boats, stars, caves, the moon. He found that Blake invented his own symbols, but his own task was easier because he could draw freely on Irish mythology for the symbols he required. Coming under the influence of French Symbolists like Verlaine, Macterlinck, he tried to substitute the wavering, meditative and organic rhythms, which are the embodiment of imagination, for those energetic rhythms as of a running man which are not suited to serious poetry.
As a symbolist poet Yeats’ aim was to evoke a complex of emotions not by a direct statement but by a multitude of indirect strokes. The result is that sometimes the symbols used by him are not clear as they have been derived from certain obscure sources. For example, the symbols used in the following lines from The Poet Pleads with the Elemental powers demand a commentary:
Do you not hear me calling white deer with no horns?
I have been changed to a hound with one red ear!
I would that the Boar without bristles had come from the west
And had rooted the sun and moon and stars out of the sky
And lay in the darkness, grunting, and turning to his rest.
In most of his poems, however, the symbols used by Yeats are obvious. One very common symbol in his poetry is ‘the moon’, which stands for life’s mystery.
Yeats, therefore, tried to reform poetry not by breaking with the Past, but with the Present. According  to him, the true poet is he who tells the most ancient story in a manner which applies to the people today. His early poems, like The Wanderings of Oisin (1889), express Yeats’ deepest idealism in the simple outlines of primitive tales. The same attempt, though more effective and mature, was made in The Wind Among the Reeds (1899) and The Shadowy Waters (1900). But up to this time Yeats had not found himself; he was groping in the dreamland for wisdom and illumination.
The First World War (1914-18) and the Irish disturbances during those eventful years gave to Yeats a more realistic direction. These conflicts, of course, did not completely efface his dreams, but they turned his eyes from mythology to his own soul which was divided between earthly passions and unearthly visions. Yeats realised that the highest type of poetry is produced by the fusion of both—“the synthesis of the Self and Anti-self” as he called It. The Anti-self is our soaring spirit which tries to rise above the bondage of our mental habits and associations. Yeats’ lyrics which give the most effective expression to these views are The Wild Swan at Coole (1917), The Tower (1928) and The Winding Stair (1929). Here he gave a very satisfying presentation of the wholeness of man—his Self and Anti-self.
In his later poetry Yeats reached a maturity of vision and style which may be described as hard, athletic and having a metallic glint. Instead of serving as symbols and having certain indefinite associations, his last poems expressed ‘Cold passion’ in images which are chastened and well-defined. That is why, it is no exaggeration to say that Yeats was influenced by the Imagists, and influenced them in return. A Thought from Propertius is in every respect an Imagist poem.
In his last years Yeats retired to the solitude of his own mind, and he wrote poems dealing with his early interests—love of dreams (Presences), admiration of simple joy of youth and old civilisations, but the disintegration of modern civilisation under the impact of war pained Yeats, and he believed that a revolutionary change is in the offing. In Second Coming he describes what lies at the root of the malady;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold…
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity
For about half a century Yeats exerted a tremendous influence on modern poetry on account of his utter sincerity and extraordinary personality and genius. He recognised no external law, but like a true and great artist, he was a law unto himself.
8.         T. S. Eliot (1888)
Thomas Stearns Eliot is the greatest among the modern English poets, and he has influenced modern poetry more than any other poet of the twentieth century. He combines in himself strange and opposing characteristics. He is a great poet as well a great critic; he is a traditionalist rooted in classicism as well as an innovator of a new style of poetry; he is a stern realist acutely conscious of modern civilisation with its manifold problems as well as a visionary who looks at life beyond the limits of time and space.
T. S. Eliot was born in 1888 in the U.S.A. He was educated at Harvard University. After that he received education at Paris and Oxford, and settled in England which he has made his literary home. He came into prominence as a poet in the decade following the First World War i.e., between 1920 and 1930, during which period he wrote the poems for which he is best known. There was at that time in England a tendency in favour of classicism which directly influenced Eliot. Being himself a great classical scholar, and finding around him petty poets of the Georgian group, he set himself to establish principles of a sound classicism. To him classicism stands for order. It is a tradition not established by the authority of Aristotle or any other ancient critic, but by the whole body of great writers who have contributed to it in the course of centuries. He conceives of literature as a continuous process in which the present contains the past. The modern poet, according to Eliot, should carry on that process, follow the permanent spirit of that tradition, and thus create fresh literature by expressing the present on a new and modified manner. Thus Eliot is different from the neo-classicists of the eighteenth century who insisted on implicitly following the narrowly defined rules of writing. To him classicism means a sort of training for order, poise and right reason. In order to achieve that the modern writer should not defy the permanent spirit of tradition, and must have “a framework of accepted and traditional ideas.”
But the surprising thing about Eliot is that in spite of his being a professed classicist and an uncompromising upholder of tradition, he was the man who led the attack on the writing of “traditional’ poetry, and come out as the foremost innovator of modern times. He thought that the literary language which had served its purpose in the past was not suited for modern use. So he rejected it outright. According to him, the modern writer while carrying on the literary tradition of ‘poise, order and right reason’ need not follow the old and obsolete idiom of his predecessors, but should invent entirely a new medium which is capable of digesting and expressing new objects and new feelings, new ideas, and new aspects of modern life. The language used by the modern poet must be different from the language of the past because modern life dominated by science and technology is radically different from the life of the past ages characterised by slow and steady development.
In his attempt to find a new medium for poetry Eliot became interested in the experiments of Ezra Pound, the leader of the Imagists. Like Pound, Eliot also sought to extend the range of poetic language by introducing words used in common speech but commonly regarded as inappropriate in literature. But Eliot is different from Pound in this respect that having a profound knowledge of classical literature he can, whenever he likes, borrow phrases from well-known poets and thus create an astonishing effect. Thus in his poem one find colloquial words expressing precisely and exactly the meaning which he wants to convey, along with archaic and foreign words used by ancient poets, philosophers and prophets, which sound like voice far away beyond a mountain.
Eliot is acutely aware of the present and the baffling problems which face mankind in the modern times. The poems of his early period as The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock (1917) express the disillusion, irony and disgust at the contemplation of the modern world which is trivial, sordid and empty. In his greatest poem, The Waste Land, the poet surveys the desolate scene of the world with a searching gaze. He relentlessly uncovers its baffling contrasts and looks in vain for a meaning where there is only
A heap of broken images, where the sun heats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water.
The same attitude is expressed in the Hollow Men (1925):
We are the hollow men,
We are stuffed men,
Leaning together,
He Headpiece filled with straw.
But it is not merely the present with which Eliot is preoccupied. He is a mystic who has a profound sense of the past and he looks into the future. His aim is to look beyond the instant, pressing moment, and think of himself as belonging to what was best in the past and may be prolonged into the future. For him the spirit exists in one eternal Now, in which Past, Present and Future are blended. In order to experience it one should surrender one’s ego and relax in a mood of humble receptivity. Only then one can absorb the fleeting moment in such a way that the scheme of existence purged of all one’s personal prejudices, narrowness and resentment is felt all around one’s self. It is in this mood that his later poems published together in Four Quartets, consisting of Burnt Norton (1936), East Coker (1940), The Dry Salvages (1941), and Little Gidding (1942) are written. In the last mentioned poem the poet lets his thoughts go free amid the ruined chapel at Little Gidding from which all recollection of conflict and effort has vanished, but where the intensity of spiritual prayer can still be left.
Burnt Norton begins with the significant lines
Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future
And time future contained in time past.
Thus T. S. Eliot who is a force in modern English literature, is a many-sided personality. He is a classicist, innovator, critic, poet, social philosopher and mystic—all combined into one. He makes the reader aware not merely of the problems of modern life but also of mankind as a whole. The soul of man finds itself in horror and loneliness in the Waste Land unless it is redeemed by courage and faith. Though a great and acute thinker, he has a spiritual approach to life, which is rare in the twentieth century dominated by science and materialism. And he has expressed his ideas and feelings in a language which is devoid of all superfluous ornamentation and is capable of conveying the bewildering and terrifying aspects of modern life. Of all the living English poets he has done most to make his age conscious of itself, and aware of the dangers inherent in modern civilisation.
9.  Poets after T. S. Eliot
T. S. Eliot dominated the English poetic scene till 1930; after that a new school of English poets came to the forefront. It is headed by W. H. Auden, and the other leading poets of this group are Stephen Spender and Cecil Day Lewis. They follow the example of Hopkins and make use of the technical achievements of T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound. These poets are conscious of the bareness of modern civilisation and strive to find a way out of the Waste Land. Their ideal is the creation of a society in which the real and living contact between man and man may again become possible.
The most original and the most poetically exciting among the modern poets is W. H. Auden who settled in America shortly before the Second World War. He also considers the Waste Land as symbolic of modern civilisation, but whereas to T. S. Eliot it is a symbol of a state of spiritual dryness, to Auden it is a symbol of the depressing physical and psychological condition in the English social life. He is greatly distressed by the upper and lower classes. It is the sense of imminent crisis which pervades his early poetry.
In his later poetry Auden has given up the psychological-economic diagnosis of the troubles of the times, and developed a more sober, contemplative and religious approach to life. But he is also capable of writing light verse full of puns and ironic overtone. But whatever he writes is full of symbols and images derived not from mythology as in the case of Yeats and Eliot, but from the multifarious of everyday life.
Stephen Spender who began writing under the influence of Auden composed lyrics in which he expressed sympathy for the working classes:
Oh young men, oh young comrades,
It is too late now to stay in those houses
Your fathers built where they built you to breed money on money.
But in his later poetry he has developed his own quiet, autobiographical style, which is unlike the style of any modern poet.
What I expected was
Thunder, fighting.
Long struggle with men
And climbing,
After continual straining
I should grow strong;
Then the rocks would shake
And I should rest long.
What I had not foreseen
Was the gradual day
Weakening the will
Leaking the brightness away,
The lack of good to touch
The fading of body and soul
Like smoke before wind
Corrupt, unsubstantial.
Cecil Day Lewis also wrote his early poetry under the influence of Auden. But his later poetry has become more and more reflective and reminiscent. Moreover, he has adopted the Victorian diction. On account of his profound knowledge of technique he may be called the academic poet of the present age. In his poems the imagery is primarily rural and his tone is elegiac. These characteristics associate him with the Georgians.
Other important English poets of the present age are Louis Mac Niece, Edith Sitwell, Robert Graves, Roy Campbell, Geoffrey Grigson, George Barker and Dylan Thomas. Though they do not form any definite group, yet there is a tendency among them to Romanticism in English poetry which had become metaphysical and classical under the influence of Hopkins, Ezra Pound, T. S. Eliot and the Auden group of poets. They do not give so much importance to ‘dry, hard’ images, and being visionary rather than speculative, their presiding genius is Blake rather than Donne. Dylan Thomas who is the most popular of the young poets finds unity of man with nature, of the generations with each other, of the divine with the human, of life with death. Death does not mean destruction, but a guarantee of immortality, of perpetual life in cosmic eternity:
And death shall have no dominion
Dead men naked they shall be one
With the man in the wind and the west moon;
When their bones are picked clean and the clean bones gone,
They shall have stars at elbow and foot;
Though they go mad they shall be sane,
Though they sink through the sea they shall rise again;
Though lovers be lost love shall not,
And death shall have no dominion.
But in spite of this tendency towards Romanticism in the poetry of the present age in England, Eliot, and his school of poetry which is akin to classicism, still hold the field. All modern poetry possesses intellectual toughness and there is no attempt to return to the melodious diction of Tennyson and Swinburne or to the imaginative flights of Shelley. Of course, the tension that we find in Eliot’s poetry has ceased and the trend is towards Wordsworthian quietness.