Topic: THE SOURCE OF PLEASURE PROVIDED BY TRAGEDY

Name: Chauhan Sejal  Arunbhai

Subject: Literary Theory and Criticism

 Paper: 3

Roll no:31

M.A. Part I Sem I

Year: 2013-15

Submitted to:M.K.Bhavanagar University

THE SOURCES OF PLEASURE PROVIDED BY TRAGEDY

v ARISTOTLE’S EMPHASIS UPTON THE FEELING OF PITY AND FEAR

           Aristotle concludes his defination of tragedy with stipulation that tragedy, by arousing pity and fear,the Catharsis of such emotion. Now , the meaning of the word “Catharsis” has been the subject of a controversy through the ages Catharsis has been translated as purgation or purification ; and yet in the history of literary criticism few terms have been so extensively and hotly debated as Catharsis , beacuse even the words purgation and purification in this contexts are not self-explanatory . Aristotle lays a great stress upon the feeling of pity and fear as being the emotions which tragedy must arouse. Not only does he specify these emotions in his defination of tragedy, but he reverts to them several times in the course of his treatise. For instance, in Chapter X he says: Tragedy is an imitation not only of a complete action, but of events inspiring fear of pity. In Chapter XI he says that recognition, combined with reversal, will produce either pity or fear; and actions, producing these effects, are those which, by our definition, tragedy represents. In Chapter XIII, he write that tragedy should imitate actions which excite pity and fear, this being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation. In Chapter XIV, he writes that fear and pity may be aroused by spectacular means but that the better way is that these emotions should result from the inner structure of the play. He also says here that the plot of a tragedy should be so constucted that the listener will thrill with horror and melt to pity at what takes place. In Chapter XIX, he refers to the excitation of the feeling such as pity, fear , anger , and the like . Aristotle in this connection also speaks several times of fearful and pitiful events.

v CATHARSIS, THE SUBJECT OF MUCH DISCUSSION

But what does Aristotle mean by the Catharsis of the emotion of pity and fear? There has been so much discussion of the meaning of Catharsis that one scholar described this dicussion as “a grotesque monument of sterility”. Another scholar writes: “Every varity of moral, aesthetic, and therappeutic effect that is, or could be, experienced from tragedy gas been subsumed under the venerable word at one time or another”. It would be worth while taking a look at some of the interpretation of Catharsis which have been put forward by scholars and critics. Stephen Halliwell, in a profound book, has indicated the various interpretation.

v THE MORALITY OR DIDACTIC VIEW OF CATHARSIS

First of all, there is the moralistic or didactic view of Catharsis. According to this view, tragedy teaches the audience by example to curb their own emotions and the faults which those emotions may cause. The audience can learn through Catharsis to avoid those passions which lead to suffering and tragedy. Thus, according to this view, Catharsis becomes synonymous with direct ethical teaching. This interpretation of Catharsis is rooted deeply in neo-classicism. It may also be pointed out here that the moralistic interpretation of Catharsis sometimes incorporates the medical analogy which Aristotle dwell upon in his other treatise known as the Politics. However, the medical analogy is not central to this interpretation.

v CATHARSIS,A SOURCE OF EMOTIONAL FORTITUDE

Then there is an interpretation of Catharsis which overiaps the  one already given but which may be stated separated. According to this view, Catharsis implies the acquisition by the audience of emotional fortitude. The idea here is that, through an exposure to the greater suffrrings of the characters in a tragedy, the susceptibility to pity and fear of the audience in their own lives is greatly diminished. When we witness a tragic performance, we become familiar with the spectacle of misfortune and suffering; and through the familiarity we become better able to tolerate our own misfortunes. Thus every tragic performance that we behold will be like a dose of addition courage to us. Our tragic experience of the stage would therefore prepare us to lead our own lives bravely. We grow emotionally stronger through of an experince which involves the feelings of pity and fear; and we are consequently toughened.It may here be pointed out that, if this view of Catharsis is taken to the extreme, the fortitude theory would lead to Stoicism which means a total immunity to emotion in our own lives. Aristotle would certainly not have advocated the elimination of all emotions from our lives.

v CATHARSIS AS A MEANS OF PHYSIOLOGICAL BALANCE

Another interpretation of Catharsis links this term in some way with Aristotle’s theory of the golden mean. This approach implies a process of psychological attunement or balance. It may even mean that Catharsis leads to a heightened capacity for emotion on the part of those who are deficient in the appropriate feelings. In other words, the arousal of pity and fear, by the spectacle of misfortune and suffering, accustoms us to experiencing these emotions in the right way and to the right extent. Thus this interpretation of Catharsis emphasizes the principle of balance and the golden mean. Milton in his preface to Samson Agonistes seems to have interpreted Catharsis in this same way. His paraphrase of Catharsis in that preface is “to temper and reduce the passion to just measure”. Milton’s use of a medical analogy in that preface is not the essential point and does not make him a precursor of that school of critics who have concentrated on the medical aspect of Catharsis.

v CATHARSIS AS A PROCESS OF EMOTIONAL OUTLET

In recent times, Catharsis has been taken to mean a process of emotional release or outlet. In other words, Catharsis is a harmless and pleasurable means of expending pent-up or excessive emotions. The chief originator of this view was Jacob Bernays who interprets the process as a pathological phenomenon. Bernays and others of his way of thinking have emphasized the medical analogy. The point to note here is that Bernays has emphasized this analogy in order to give to Catharsis the exclusive sense of therapeutic or quasi-therapeutic relief, and to rule out any question of an ethical dimension to the experience; whereas certain earlier writers had employed the medical analogy in combination with various types of moral reading of the doctrine.

v THE DOCTRINE OF INTELLECTUAL CATHARSIS

Apart from Number 1, all the above interpretations agree in regarding Catharsis as essentially a matter of emotional experience. But there have also been some writers who deduce from the Poetics a doctrine of intellectual Catharsis. According to these writers, the tragic emotions depend on cognitive judgements about the dramatic action. One writer, for instance, says that Catharsis means intellectual clarification and that it is a synonym for the process of inference. Another writer suggests that Catharsis means the removal of the spectator’s false opinion about the tragic agent, and consequently the removal of his pity and fear for the tragic agent, at the point at which the latter’s culpability is perceived. However, these interpretations do not carry much conviction.

v DESCRIPTIVE OR STUCTURAL CATHARSIS

Then there are various theories which have been given the loose description of dramatic or structure Catharsis. These theories locate Catharsis as an internal and objective feature of the poetic work itself. The chief exponent of such an interpretation describes Catharsis as the purification of the tragic act by the demonstration that its motive was not morally odious. According to this exponent, we come to realize that the agent is innocent and therefore not polluted; and so our emotions towards him are released. However, in this connection it may be pointed out that innocence does not generally guarantee freedom from pollution.

v ETHICAL ALIGNMENT BETWEEN THE EMOTIONS AND THE REASON

There is also the view, expressed by Stephen Halliwall,that tragic Catharsis in some way conduces to an ethical alignment between the emotions and the reason. As tragedy arouses pity and fear by appropriate means, it does not water or feed the emotions as was alleged by Plato, but tends to harmonized the emotions with our perceptions and judgements of the world. And, because of this integration into the experience of tragedy, Catharsis must also be intimately associated with the pleasure derivable from the genre, for this pleasure arises from the comprehension of the same action which is the focus of the emotions. Tragic Catharsis and tragic pleasure are both grounded in the understanding of the plot structure which is regarded by Aristotle as the soul of tragedy.

v THE CLARIFICATION THEORY

The clarification theory hinted at above needs a little explanation. According to this theory, Catharsis means a clarification of the essential and universal significance of the events and situations depicted in a tragic play. The clarification leads to a better understanding by us of the universal law governing human life and human destiny. Such an understanding, even when the events depicted are horrible or repellent, leads to the pleasure which is proper to tragedy. Thus interpreted, Catharsis is neither a medical term nor a moral or didactic one, but an intellectual one. The word “Catharsis” would then refer not to the psychology of the audience but to the events and situations depicted in the tragedy, and to the way the poet, by his artistic skill, reveals their universal significance. Catharsis would then mean a process of learning and therefore pleasurable. But this view of Catharsis, divorced as it is from the emotion of the audience, goes altogether aginst the function of tragedy as conceived by Aristotle who insists, time and again, on the arousal by tragedy of the emotions of pity and fear. Aristotle specifically mentions the Catharsis of pity and fear and similar other emotions. Therefore, to delink Catharsis from these emotions, as the “Clarification Theory” does, would mean distorting Aristotle’s view.

v THE JOYFUL SAFETY THEORY

There are some other theories too, offered by various scholars, to explain the secret of the pleasure which is provided by tragedy. These theories have been classified by T.R.Henn. one of these is described by him as “the joyful safety theory”. According to this approach, the pain of suffering in tragedy brings tears to the eyes of the spectators, but this pain is accompanied with a vigorous sense of pleasure so that, at the fall of the curtain, the spectators feel an intensification of their vital powers, and their agitation is followed by a feeling of joyful safety. In other words, the spectators feel exultant to reflect that, while the characters in the tragedy have suffered agonies, the spectators themselves are perfectly safe.

v THE THEORY OF BALANCED FORCES

Then there is the theory of balanced forces. This has been neatly summarized by I.A.Richards. Pity, he says, is the impulse to advance, while fear is the impulse the existing emotional excess. This theory is attractive; but it breaks down as soon as we admit into the tragic range emotions other than pity and fear. Besides, pity and fear here are regarded as opposed to each other in their effect, while actually these are emotions which supplement each other.

v THE INOCULATION THEORY

Next comes the inoculation theory. According to it, tragedy provides small and harmless doses of passions which can be indulged in harmlessly in the theatre, whereas they might become dangerous obsessions in the world of reality.

v THE THEORY OF MALICIOUS SATISFACTION

According to one philosopher, the pleasure of tragedy results from the satisfaction of our malicious instincts. we secretly feel pleased to witness the sufferings and misfortunes of the characters in tragic plays, because these sufferings and misfortune give us a feeling of superiority over these characters. There is something sadistic about this pleasure.

v POETIC JUSTICE

It has also been affirmed that one source of pleasure in tragedy is the observance of poetic justice by the author. The audiences derive immense pleasure from the fact that evil is in the long run exposed and punished even though tremendous suffering has been caused to some people by the manipulations of evil-minded persons.

·      S.H.BUTCHER’S VIEW OF CATHARSIS

v CATHARSIS, NOT EXPLAINED BY ARISTOTLE HIMSELF

The most lucid exposition of Aristotle’s concept of Catharsis has been provided by S.H.Butcher who is undoubtedly a great authoritybon the great Greek philosopher. Butcher points out that difficulty with regard to the meaning of the word’’Catharsis’’ is fundamental one, and that it is a difficulty for the solution of which Aristoble’s treatise itself does not offer any help at all because, after having used the word’’Catharsis’’ in his defination of tragedy, Aristotle nowhere in the treatise attempts to explain the word. Butcher also points out that a great historic discussion has centred round this word. No passage, probably, in ancient literature has been so frequently debated by commentators, critics, and poets. Literature has been so frequently debated by commentators, critics, and poets.

v PURIFICATION OR PURGATION OF THE PASSIONS

Butcher then goes on to say that a tradition almost unbroken through the centuries found in the word ‘’Catharsis’’ a reference to the moral effect which tragedy produces through the purification of the passions. What the precise effect is, and what those passions are, has variously been interpreted. Corneille, Racine, Lassing, all agreed in assuming the purely ethical intention of drama, though each offered different solutions. In 1857, a pamphlet by Jacob Bernays reopened the whole question and gave a new direction to the argument.Bernays mainted that Catharsis was a medical metaphor. Catharsis may be paraphresed as “puegation” which is a medical term. Purgation here implies a pathological effect on the soul similar to the effect of medicine on the body. Tregedy excites the emotions of pity and fear, which are kindred emotions to be found in the breasts of all men. By this act of excitation, tragedy affords pleasurable relief. The feelings aroused by the tragic spectacle are not permanently removed, but are calmed for the time, so that the human system can revert to its normal course. The theatre thus provides a harmless and pleasurable outlet for instnicts which demand satisfaction and which can be indulged in the theatre more fearlessly than in real life. Plato in his attack upon the drama had said that the “natural hunger for sorrow and weeping,” which is kept under control by us in our own misfortune, is satisfied and fed by the poets. “poetry feeds and waters the passions instead of starving them,” said Plato. In other words, by evoking tears, drama weakens the manly temper and creates disorder in the soul by exalting the lower elements over the higher and by dethroning reason in favour of feeling. Aristotle, on the other hand, holds that it is not desirable to kill or to starve the emotional part of the soul, and that the regulated indulgence of the feelings serves to maintain the balance of our nature. Tragedy is thus a vent or outlet for the particular emotions of pity and fear. In the first place, it is true, the effect of tragedy is to excite, not to tranquillize. However, tragedy excites emotion only to allay it. Pity and fear, when artificially stirred by tragedy on the stage, expel the latent pity and fear which we bring with us from real life, or at least expel such elements in our feelings of pity and fear as are disquieting. In the pleasurable calm, which follows when the passions are spent, an emotional cure has been effected.

v TRAGEDY,A FORM OF HOMOEOPATHIC TREATMENT

Butcher then points out that Milton had already understood something of the true maening of Aristotle’s cocept. In his preface to Samson Agonistes, Milton writes:

“Tragedy has been ever held the gravest, moralest, and most profitable of all other poems; therefore said by Aristotle to be of power, by raising pity and fear, or terror, to purge the mind of those and such-like passions; that is, to temper or reduce them to just measure with a kind of delight stirred up by reading or seeing those passions well imitated. Nor is Nature herself wanting in her own effects to make good Aristotle’s assertion, for so, in physick, things of melancholic hue and quality are used against melancholy, sour against sour, salt to remove salt humours.”

These words clearly show that Milton regarded tragedy as a form of homeoepathic treatment, curing emotion by means of an emotion like in kind, but not identical. In the homeoepathic mode of treatment, the patient suffering from any disease is given doses of a medicine which, if administered in similar dises to a healthy man, would produce in him the symptoms of the same disease. In homoeopathy, like cures like. And, in the same way, the emotions of pity and fear, aroused by tragedy, cure the audience of those emotions of pity and fear which lie dormant in them and which constitude a kind of disease.

v MUSIC AS A CURE FOR RELIGIOUS ECSTASY

Aristotle, it would seem, was led to this theory by observing the effect of certain musical tunes upon a form of religious enthusiasm or ecstasy. There are people who go into a sort of religious ecstasy, and who then begin to make all kinds of wild and uncontrollable bodily movements and gestures. In ancient times, persons subject to such fits of ecstasy were regarded as men possessed by a god, and were taken by the priests under their own care. The treatment prescribed for such men was homoeopathic in character because it consisted in applying movement to cure movement and in soothing the internal tumult of the mind by a wild and tumultuous kind of music. On hearing this kind of music for some time, the patient felt gradually comforted and soothed, and returned to the condition of normality. In this way music brought about a Catharsia, and the patient fell back into his normal state, as if he had undergone a medical or purgative treatment. The emotional result was a harmless joy.

v CATHARSIS, A KIND OF AESTHETIC SATISFACTION

Butcher then goes on to say that the word ‘’Catharsis’’ probably had a further meaning also for Aristotle. The word certainly expresses a fact of a certain school of medicine, this word strictly means the removal of a painful or disturbing element from the organism, and hence the purification of what remains, by the elimination of alien matter. Applying this to tragedy, we observe thst the feelings of pity and fear in real life contain a morbid and distributing element. In the process of tragic excitation, these feelings find relief, and the morbid element is thrown off. As the tragic action progresses, the tumult of the mind is first roused; and it afterwards subsides. In the process, the painful element in the pity and fear of our real life is purged away. Thus the emotions themselves are purged. Tragedy, then, does more than effect the homoeopathic cure of pity and fear. Its function in not merely to provide an outlet for pity and fear, but to provides for then a distinctively asthetic satisfaction, to purify and by passing them through the medium of art.

v CONCLUSION

We can assume, then, that the tragic Catharsis involves not only the idea of an emotional relief but the further idea of the purofication of the emotions so relieved. In accepting this interpretation we do not attribute to tragedy a direct moral purpose and influence. Tragedy, according to the definition, acts on the feelings, not on the will. It does not make men better, through it removes certain hindrances to virtue. The excitation of noble emotions will probably in course of time exert an effect upon the will also. But whatever may be the indirect effect of the repeated operation of the Catharsis, we may confidently say that Aristotle in his definition of tragedy was not thinking of any such distant result but of the immediate end of the art, namely the aesthetic function which it fulfils.

Topic: THE SIN OF FAUSTUS

Name: Chauhan Sejal  Arunbhai

Subject: The Renaissance Literature

 Paper: 1

Roll no:31

M.A. Part I Sem I

Year: 2013-15

Submitted to: M.K.Bhavanagar University

THE SIN OF FAUSTUS

           The Christian theology of sin, which was current in Marlowe’s time, had been stated by St.Augustine in his classic work with which, Marlowe had in all probability, a first-hand acquaintance. According to Augustine, man had been created with the power to move upward to God, or downward to degradation and misery. All sins, says Augustine, consist in turning away from godly things which are changeable and insecure. A man who becomes proud, curious, and self-indulgent, is caught up in a life which, compared to the higher life , is no better than death . All earthly evil results from a perversion of the human will. The root of that perversion lies in  the  impulses of pride and egoism . Pride is , indeed , the beginning of all sin ; and the beginning of the pride of man is to fall from God .

              

                   The ideas and concepts of St. Augustine find a direct expression in the language and action of Doctor Faustus. Faustus’s pride, the willfulness of his falling from God, his egoistic ambition to become his own god-these are clear in everything he says and does.

Moreover, Faustus commits this sin formally, that is , deliberately , without the shadow of an excuse or reason except his will to do so. Taking this as its theme, the play should be regarded not only as an allegory , but as a morality .                    

                    Possible excuse for Faustus’s sin could have been passion or ignorance .One or the other would have diminished or totally abolished Faustus’s moral responsibility by taking his action out of his power. But Faustus , in his first sixty-five lines , shows himself without a trace of either . He does not mention lusts of the flesh. He is free from a lust for gold which he dismisses as “external trash“.He is free from a desire for worldly honours which he has already enjoyed in ample measure .He longs for n something else. If there is in him any ambition of some kind or another, it is of an undetermined nature this impulse, though   urgent, is not clearly or even dimly conscious of a goal. As for ignorance, Faustus is an expert in all the arts, from logic to jurisprudence. He has achieved a remarkable success in all these and, reviewing them one, he finds that none of them has anything to give him any more. Therefore it is not among them that he will find a goal to which he may direct his impulse to activity. The only goal left, it seems, is that of affairs not of this earth: the super-natural rather than the natural .Opening Jerome’s Bible, he finds, as his first lesson in the supernatural in the words: “The wages of sin is death.”There is, he learns, such a possibility as that man should sin, and sin humiliates man in death .He shrinks from the lesson.  As all men have sinned , and he is already involved in death. This he rejects outright, preferring his own idea of what fact is or should be to what he can see that it is:

                         “If we see that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and there is no truth in us,

                          Why, then, belike we must sin, and so consequently die:

                          Ay, we must die an everlasting death.

                          What doctrine call you this, Che sera, sera , _

                          What will be, shall be? divinity,  adieu .         

                     Thus Faustus commits the sin of pride He no longer feels the need to review the sciences so that he may discover in what direction to employ himself. External authority denied, conscience puts to sleep, there is no direction which is forbidden. Not wishing to profess the useful arts, he will become a magician and will attain supernatural power. He seeks the world of profit and delight, of power, of honour , of omnipotence . Through the door of pride the passions have begun to invade Faustus, and he welcomes every one. As has already been said, Faustus’s sin has not the shadow of an excuse. It is not the result of suasion but a pure act of the will, and the will turns to evil.

                    After pointing out and emphasising Faustus’s pride, Marlowe proceeds to narrate the consequence of that pride. These consequence include Faustus’s consenting to accept mistresses instead of the wife he wanted, his enjoying the vision of the Seven Deadly Sins, and Marlowe in this play, is that it may be replete with acts like these.

                    Yet one of Mephistophilis’s first speeches is a rebuke to pride. Mephistophilis bluntly tells Faustus’s ‘’conjuring speeches ’’, but that he came because the devils always rush to capture the soul of a man who is inclined to renounce God and scriptures. Faustus might have learnt, if he had paid sufficient attention to this statement of Mephistophilis, that, far from becoming omnipotent, he would receive nothing except at a price. Though informed in all frankness that he is able to exercise supernatural  powers only that he many ultimately be dragged down to hell , he protests defiantly , saying that he thinks hell to be a fable and that the word ‘’damnation’’ does not terrify him . Such is his pride that he maintains his own opinion against Mephistophilis who has come direct from hell and to whom he is talking only because he believes him to have come from there. This willful blindness, this persistence in self-deception, is brought out most clearly in the passage in which he inquires about the fate of Lucifer. He is told by Mephistophilis that Lucifer fell because of ‘’aspiring pride and insolence ’’(the very sin of which Faustus himself is now guilty). When Mephistophilis refers to the eternal joys of heaven which he has lost and when he speaks of his feeling ‘’tormented with ten thousand hells’’, Faustus’s arrogance or self-conceit does not in any way diminish; on the contrary he mocks at Mephistophilis:

                              What , is great Mephistophilis so passionate? , …

                              Learn thou of Faustus’ manly fortitude,                       

                              And scorn those joys thou never shalt possess.

                       Doctor Faustus may be regarded as a tragedy of presumption. Faustus, a man of humble origin, has acquired great learning, but his pride and arrogance cause him to over-reach and himself. Marlowe had said in Tamburlaine that Nature ‘’doth teach us all to have aspiring minds’’. This aspiration finds dismisses the traditional subjects of study_philosophy, medicine, law and divinity. He turns instead to magic, anticipating the ‘’world of profit and delight, of power, of honour, of omnipotence’ ’which he hopes to attain. He reviews the various uses to which he proposes to put the magic skill that he expects to acquire. This review shows his ardent curiosity, his desire for wealth and luxury, his longing for power, and his nationalism. Faustus’s remark that ‘’a sound magician is a demi-god’’ compels us to recognize the presumptuous nature of his ambition. He obviously aims at becoming something more than man. We find him, too, feeling somewhat uneasy in his conscience. This uneasiness finds an external expression in the respective admonitions of the Good and the Evil Angels. The Good Angel asks Faustus to lay aside the damned book of magic lest it should tempt his soul. He asks Faustus to read the scriptures and warns him against incurring ‘’God’s heavy wrath.’’ This warring makes us fear for a scholar who has already won much of our sympathy. Our fear is heightened when, in the next scene, into two Scholars, speaking about Faustus, deplore the fact that ‘’he is fallen into that damned art for which they two are infamous through the world’’.                                                                                                                           

                           In scene III of Act I, Faustus succeeds in summoning Mephistophilis and agrees to the devil’s suggestion that he should become a follower of Lucifer. In Scene I of Act II, Faustus signs the bond with blood, and questions Mephistophilis about hell; in Scene II of this Act, he question Mephistophilis about astronomy and  of  witnesses an infernal parade of the Seven Deadly sins which is intended to divert his mind from thoughts of repentance. As Lucifer puts it, Faustus will be shown ‘’some pastime’’ and when Faustus makes a reference to paradise and the creation of Adam, Lucifer replies: ’’Talk not of Paradise nor creation: but mark this show : talk of the devil and nothing else.’’

                           In the first scene, Faustus runs through all the branches of human knowledge and finds them inadequate to his desires. Logic can only teach argument; medicine stops story where human desire is most thwarted, since it cannot defeat death; law is a mercenary pursuit; divinity is most disappointing as it is based on the recognition of man’s mortality and man’s fallibility. He turns instead to magic because it is ‘’a world of profit and delight, of power, of honour, of omnipotence’’. He decides human status, or a revolt against the law of his creation.

                            But when he is last seen alone in his study it is the opposite sin which contributes to his damnation; this is the sin of despair. However much, in his state of fear, he may call on God or Christ , it is the power of Lusifer which he really believe in. It is to Lusifer he prays, in this last monologue:

                        “O spare me , Lusifer ! “, and “ Ah , rend not my heart for naming of my Christ !”

  Presumption and despair have been regarded as two of the gravest sins  , “ for presumption takes away the fear of God , and desperation the love off  God .” They are the two faces of the sin of pride. Faustus  , tormented by devils , is obsessed by their power ; but the Old Man is safe from them because of his faith .                      

                              “The great reversal from the first scene of the play to the last can be defined in different ways : from presumption to despair ; from doubt of the existence of hell to a belief in the reality nothing else ; from a desire to be more than man to the recognition that he has exclude himself from the promise of delay when the moment comes to honour it ; from aspiration to deity and omnipotence to a longing for extinction . At the beginning Faustus wished to rise above his humanity; at the close he would sink below it, be transformed into a beast or into little water drops “.

                          Faustus’s original sin is a usurpation upon deity and a repudiation of humanity. Though surely a part of Faustus’s admitted “surfeit of deadly sin “, sensual delight is meeting with Mephistopilis , talked of living “ in all voluptuousness “. Faustus’s relation to the deity is though envy and cupidity , not through charity . His imitation of God is as a rival. He wishes to ascend above humanity and feels unhappy to reflect , “ yet art thou still but Faustus , and a man”. He repudiates the image of God in favour of what he calls Mephistophilis fratris imagine.

                           The new world of  . Faustus is a world of illusion University of Wittenberg ring with the words sic probo plays ridiculous tricks upon the Pope and his court. It is true that much of the central portion of the play is believed to have been so ,it does serve a purpose . In the very degradation of these comic and farcical scenes , we may see the tragedy of Faustus . Upon the first appearance of Mephistophilis , Faustus had indicated his rejection of reality in the refusal to accept the devil in his own true shape and had asked him to appear before him as a friar .From that point onward , Faustus’s hold upon reality steadily diminishes , and the degrading buffoonery _first with the Pope , later with the honest Knight , and then with the poor Horse –Courser_ serves to emphasise the disintegration of Faustus’s human dignity . Even the conjuring games of the low life character , Robin and Ralph, point by parallelism to the pettiness of Faustus’s accomplishments . Reality is for Faustus no longer substantial and important. He has rejected creation in favour of chaos, because only in this way could he continue to avail the services of Mephistophilis. Mephistophilis asks him to think only of hell, “for thou art damned “ ; and Lusifer devil only . So Faustus, having rejected God and having lost his own humanity , must now reject creation also . The quality of his own existence is therefore determined by the  “ norm “ of chaos . It is in this context that the seemingly irrelevant farcical scenes in the middle of the play become meaningful as showing Faustus’s acceptance of chaos.

                    The very fact of Faustus’s fame is accompanied with buffoonery, and this is quite proper. Indeed, his position is not very different from that of a wandering juggler, entertaining various courts with his tricks and entertaining himself with irresponsible pranks. His magic performances are far removed from his earlier hopes. It was his desire to do great things, to “chase the Prince of Parma from our land, and reign sole king of all our  province“. He had also thought that the Emperor would rule only by his permission and under his authority. Instead of all this, he finds himself employed as an entertainer to the Emperor, and finds himself rewarded with money at the end of his performance. The spirits who , he had hoped would drag huge argosies from Venice and “ from America the golden fleece “ do bring a bunch of grapes for the pregnant Duchess of Vanholt , but this  only shows the long distance they can travel , and beyond but this Faustus’s power hardly seems to extend. Faustus even accepts  the patronage of those whom once he had hoped to patronize. Such contrasts between what Faustus originally wanted to do and what he actually does subsequently, constitute one of the effective ironies of the tragedy. The demands for Knowledge and for power finally cease. The last request is for Helen. and this request is another symbol of his repudiation of humanity and his “ marriage “ with hell .

                    The two blood pacts may also be seen as having much significance in this connection. It is symbolically essential that Faustus’s commitment to hell should be signed with his blood, that is, with his most intimate being. At the time of his singing  the first pact, his most intimate being. At the time if his singing the first pact, his blood protests, but not at the time of his singing it on the second occasion . There is meaning in this  difference, for much has happened in twenty-four year . The Good Angel has appeared to Faustus four times, to urge repentance and the need of divine mercy. The last time Faustus sees the Goo Angel is just before the appearance of Lusifer who is annoyed with Faustus and who forbids all thought of creation:’’ Talk not of paradise nor creation .’’ Beyond this point, Faustus cannot again either see or hear the direct messenger of heaven. His heart is hardening, he later admits, and his only hope is the vague belief in a last-minute reprieve:’’ Christ did call the thief upon the cross.’’ But there is no doubt that there is still hope till the time of the second blood bond and the demonic union with Helen. Indeed the Old Man’s function is to indicate that Faustus still can ‘’call for mercy, and avoid despair’’, and he informs Faustus that there is an Angel hovering over his head waiting to pour divine grace into his soul. But, being threatened with dire consequences, Faustus seeks Mephistophilis’s pardon instead of acting upon the Old Man’s advice to seek God’s pardon. This is his ultimate rejection of the deity , and of humanity too.

              The play closes, as it opens, with Faustus significantly alone. A little before his last soliloquy, he tells the Scholars in anguish that he “must remain in hell for ever-hell, ah, hell, forever!” And then the Scholars leave, and he is alone. His  life has come full circle. He desires escape, not because of his love for God but because of his fear of hell. Gripped by the tension and anguish of the last moments of his life, he once more explicitly and feverishly repudiates his humanity. He would like to be change into some beast, nay into little water-drops. Thus he rejects not only humanity and immortality, but even the most basic sentience or animation. As he utterly repudiates his existence, the demons come, and the plot of the play ends. The rejection of humanity which constituted the character of Faustus is complete, and the plot closes, as it had of opened, with this. It is in this terms that the play achieves unity, and it is by virtue of this unity that the play depicts the writer’s understanding of the human condition which has never been more central to the plight of man than it is in our own time. That human condition has thus been stated by an eminent man of our time:

             “The super-man in the measure that his power increases , becomes poorer and poorer. The more we become super-men, the more we become in human”

              Thus, the following points, then, emerge from this brief discussion: (1) The fact of the pervading, and increasing, sensuality of Faustus should not push into the background the fact that his fall is due to the spiritual sin of pride. (2) In some cases what has been taken to be straightforward sensuality has rather an intellectual quality that should be regarded as “curiosity’’, and this curiosity is of great importance in our consideration of the central acts. (3) In the representation of Faustus’s character, the presence of this vice of curiosity mediates the transition between his essentially spiritual pride and his sensuality. The double appearance of the succubae who impersonates Helen symbolizes this transition: She appears first to satisfy the curiosity of the Scholars, and appears again to satisfy Faustus’s sensual desire.  

Topic: THE STUCTURE OF TOM JONES

Name: Chauhan Sejal  Arunbhai

Subject: The Neo-Classical Literature

 Paper: 2

Roll no:31

M.A. Part I Sem I

Year: 2013-15

Submitted to: M.K.Bhavanagar University

THE STUCTURE OF ‘TOM JONES’

·        FIELDING A SUPERB CRAFTSMAN

                       Fielding is a superb craftman. He is perhaps the first n of novelist to concieve of an organic stucture for his novel . He niether muddle up an incoherent mass of episode nor strings them loosely on to the life of his chief protagonist . Instead , he is very careful of those aspect of his art that would ensure the structural unity of the novel. To begin with he gives his plot an organic unit. It means that the majoriy of incidents conclude by him are held in organic relation ship with one another; they grow out of the former incidents and howsoever trifling they might be , they help to advance the story. Next , he observes a strict harmony between the character, plot and style. It implies that the incidents are shaped by the characters and the characters are affected by the incidents and the style is adapted to the total design of the novel. Finally, Fielding’s moral vision that governs the entire movement of the novel gives it a kind of morality unity. Thus the novel is handed down to us as a unified whole. Fielding was the first novelist to give his works this kind of unity. Hence walter Scott is quite justified in considering him the ‘Father of the English novel’ and Walter Allen’s encomium is well merited: “Fielding was as superb a craftman in his own way as Henry James.”

·  NARRATIVE UNITY

                                       It has now been quite customary to pay homage to Fielding’s ‘ever-to-be-praised skill as an architect of plot’. with some minor qulifications, the plot of Tom Jones is stil one of the best. coleridge, indeed, considers it one of the three perfect plot ever planned, the other two being the plots of Oedipus Tyrannus and The Alchemist. If a digression of two is ignored, this plot is quite in accord with the Aristotlelian concept of a fable from which nothing can be taken and to which nothing can be added without damage.

·  THE UNIFYING IDEA

                       R.S.Crane, in his celebrated article ‘The plot of Tom Jones’, illustrates the unity of the plot most convincingly . What is the unifying idea of the novel? Oliver Elton locates the essence of the story in the sustained concealment and final disclosure of Tom’s parentage, Other plausible unifying factors are the love affair of Tom and Sophia, the conflict between Tom and Blifil and the quasipicaresque sequence of Tom’s adventures with women and on the road. All these lines of action are important but none of them subsumes the others to be considered the only principal theme. According to R.S.Crane the unifying idea consists in the dynamic systems of aciton, extending throughout the novel, by which the divergent intention and beliefs of a large number of persons of different characters and state of knowledge belonging to or somehow related to the neighbouring families of the Allworthys and the Westerns are made to co-poerate, with the assistance of Fortune, first to bring Tom into an incomplete and precarious union, founded on an affinity of nature in spite of disparity of status, with Allwothy and Sophia ; then to separate him as completely as possible from them through actions that impel both of them, one after the other , to reverse their opinions of his character ; and then, just as he seems about to fulfil the old prophecy that ‘he was certainly born to be hanged’, to restore them unexpectedly to him in a more entire and stable union of both affection and fortune than he has known before.

                     The starting point of everything is Briget’s scheme to provide security for herself and her illgitimate son by palming off Tom on Allworthy as a foundling, with the intention, however, of ultimately informing her brother of the truth. The first part works beautifully; but the second is jeopardised by Brodget’s marriage with Captain Blifil. Consequently no early disclosure of Tom’s parentage is now possible, and in addition, the boy acquires a potential rival in Blifil. Bridget’s scheme involves the departure from the neighbourhood both of Partridge and Jenny Jones and the resolution is postponed for the time being.

                                Tom Jones has now two problems t0 face with regarded to his relation with Allworthy and Sophia. Tom’s feelings for Squire Allworthy are based not on any considerations of self-interest but on the instinctive love of one good naure for another. He has a strong affection foa Allworthy, and there can be no change on his part, but Allworthy’s is capable of giving a contrary verdict on Jones. Occasions for passing judgement on Tom present themselves increasingly from Tom’s fourteenth year. The occasions are giving by Tom’s well-intentioned but quixoticand imprudently managed action towards Black George and his family. Blifil misses no chance of using them to blacken his character in his guardian’s eyes. In the first series of these actions, no harm is done to Tom. In Book V, chapter 7, we are told that Allworthy still belie Tom to be one who has ‘much goodness, generosity, and honour’ in his temper and needs only ‘prudence and religion’ to make himself actually happy.

                     The basis of Tom’s attachment with Sophia is again the affinity between similar natures. A series of actions bring them together.Tom will ever love Sophia. Sophia also is a better judge of human nature than Squire Allworthy. She is not unacquainted with the Tom-Molly affair, still she loves Tom. Squire Western, however, does not approve of their marriage_Tom’s parentage is dubious and his marriage hold no material prospects. Neither Sophia nor Tom has any intentions of violating filial piety or betraying ingratitude. So unless some event happens to change Tom’s position as a foundling, there can be no resolution.

                    Such an event could happen, for Bridget has confided her secret in Downing, but fortune intervenes in favour of Blifil. A complex action now begins with Allworthy’s illness and ends with Tom’s expulsion and Sophia’s flight. The separating action of the novel comes to its first major climax with Tom resolved, for the sake of Sophia, to renounce her and leave the country, and with Sophia, unable to endure the prospect of a marriage with Blifil, determined to seek refuge in London with her cousin Lady Bellaston.

                      The secretn of Tom’s parentage is known partly or wholly to at least three persons-partridge, Jenny Jones and Dowling, Tom, now on the road, is more likely to meet them now than before. In fact, he does meet them one after the other. His meeting with Partridge reveals that he is not Partridge’s son. From his meeting with others, no immediates resolution follows. In the case of Jenny Jones, it so happens that she does not meet Partridge at the Upton Inn and although Dowling is prepared to sell the secret, Tom’s own disinterestedness postpones the probability of an early revelation.

                     The events at the Upton Inn, in the meanwhile, comlicate the situation.Tom has first an angry encounter with Fitzpatrick and then misses Sophia, who departs at once on learning of his infidelity and makes her way to London. Sophia is disturbed not so much by his misconduct with Jenny as by Partridge’s free use of her name in public.

                      Tom finds his way to Sophia in London, but he is seduced into the affair with Lady Bellaston. He also incurs the wrath of Lady Bellaston and thus begin a fresh series of efforts to separate Tom and Sophia. The first of these, the attempted rape of Sophia is thwarted by her timely rescure by Western. Imminent marriage of Sophia with Blifil is, however, threatened Lady Bellaston acts two ways. She sends to Sophia the letter she had received from Tom and she arrange for Tom’s kidnapping by a press - gang. She succeeds with Sophia but not with Tom.

            Things gradually improve for Tom. Mrs.Miller intercedes with Squire Allworthy and Sophia on behalf of Tom. The character in the know of the secret assemble , in the meanwhile, in close proximity of Allworthy. A reversal of Tom’s position needs first a reversal of Allworthy’s impression of Tom. This is prepared by Mrs. Miller’s insistence upon his present goodness, but the decisive event is the letter from the dying and repentant Square. Tom is absoleved from much though Blifil is not implicated. The intervention of fortune, aided by Blifil’s rashness, brings about the revelation so long delayed. Fitzpatrick’s wound does not prove as serious as it appeared; Jenny goes to Allworthy with her story; finally Dowling is questioned, the revelation is complete, and Bridget’s intended disclosure of her secret is at last made.

             The union with Sophia is likewise prepared by Mrs.Miller, who is able to convince her that Tom’s letter proposing marriage to Lady Bellaston was at worst an indiscretion. Allworthy intervenes on Tom’s behalf. Western advocates for him as he did earlier for Blifil, but the resolution comes only with Sophia’s meeting with the repentant youngman.

·       THE SYMMETRY OF THE PLOT

                        This, then, in essence, is the plot of Tom Jones and Fielding has condutced it with consummate symmetry. The whole novel consists of eighteen Books, further divided into extremely well-defined three parts. First six Books deal with Tom’s life in the countryside; in the next six Books when Tom is practically on the road, the novel follows the picaresque tradition, and the last six Books deal with the life in London. Exactly at the centre-Books IX and X-is placed the comic peritety, the hilarious comedy at the Upton Inn. These two Books cover only twelve hours. This is perhaps the shortest duration of time covered in any singel unit of novel. Hence it could be said that the dramatic character of the novel is best sustained at the centre. The centre reintroduces Jenny Jones into the novel. Now Jenny is the person who, by taking upon herself Bridget’ guilt, helps in the concealment of Tom’s true parentage, but it is she who, at the end of the novel, by exposing Blifil, brings about the revelation and the final resolution. Again, when Sophia arrives at Upton, she is pursuing Tom, but having learnt of Tom’s escapade with Mrs.Waters, she depart in indignation and now it is Tom who has to pursue her. Thus the centre brings a completeb reversal in their love. The two major digressions in the novel, the story of the Man of the Hill and Mrs.Fitzpatrick’s account, are symmentrically interpolated about the centre-Books VIII and XI. Then there are contrasts and similarities to add to the structural unity of the novel. Tom’s rural entanglement with Molly is balanced by his urban onvolvement with Lady Bellaston. Sophia’s first interview with Blifil is paralleled by her misadventure with Lord Fellamar. The curtain scene in Molly’s bed room has a parallel in the curtain scenes in Tom’s bed room at Mrs.Miller’s lodgings.

·       STRUCTURAL UNITY THROUGH REPEATED APPEARANCE OF THE SAME OBJECT OR THE SAME PERSON

                     The structural unity of the novel is preserved through repeated appearance of either the same object or the same person. Sophia’s hundred-pound bill as well as her muff makes repeated appearances in the novel. The hundred-pound bill puts Tom on Sophia’s track; later it provides Tom with an excuse to meet Sophia at Lady Bellaston’s. The muff when retrieved from fire by Sophia early in the novel assures Tom that Sophia loves him. At the Upton Inn, Sophia leaves it in Tom’s bed to make Tom regret his indiscretion and to make him puesue Sophia. Dowling and Jenny Jones cross Tom’s path quite frequently. Ensign Northerton is the person with whom Tom Jones quarrels when he picks an acquaintance with some military personnel but it is also from him that he rescues Jenny Jones. The highwayman makes an effort to deprive Tom of his money, but it is later discovered that he is related to Mrs.Miller.

·       PARALLEL OR CONTRASTED CHARACTERS

                     The structural unity is also achieved through parallel or contrasted character , In the early part of the book , Squire Allworthy’s wisdom and his moral restraint are contrasted with Squire Western’s stupidity and his rash impetuosity . Then Tom’s good nature is contrasted with Blifil’s malice . Sophia’s innocence in her love is in contrast with Molly’s guilt . Sophia is also to be contrasted with Lady Bellaston and Mrs.Fitzpatrick and a comparison between Tom Jones and Nightingale is also not out of place .

·       BLEMISHES

                                Coming to the blemishes , there are major and three minor digressions in this narrative . The two major digressions are the story of the Man of the Hill and Mrs.Fitzpatrick’s account in Books VIII and XI . The three minor dugressions are Tom’s presence at the puppet show , and his encounter with the gypsies and later his presence at Garrick’s performance of Hamlet in London . While on purely artistic grounds , these digressions cannot be defended , at least an explanation can be ventured . The Man of the Hill offers a contrast to Tom and helps to underline the sanity of Tom’s attitude to life . Tom has not been less wronged than the Man of the Hill . But Tom does not withdraw from the society . Had Tom also grown as indifferent and apathetic to humanity , would not have imperiled his life to rescue the old man . Mrs.Fitzpatrick’s account is even less objectionable , for it serves to warm Sophia of the dangers of displaced attachment and clandestine marriage . Besides , for these two digressions , Fielding enjoys , at least , the sanction of the epic tradition . Of the minour digressions , Tom’s encounter with the gypsies is neither very interesting nor of much service to the plan of the novel , though the gypsy low has some moral implications in the context of the novel . Partridge’s comments on Garrick’s performance of Hamlet arouse much fun .

                     A few more lapses in the story could also be pointed out . Some of the coincidences are a bit too improbable . It would be difficult to accept as probable the sequence of arrivals and departures that Fielding contrives at the Upton Inn . Tom , on the track of Sophia , first comes across the beggar who has picked up her pocketbook , then meets the merry gentleman who has seen her passing by and finally , in the alehouse , encounters the very guide who has conducted her to Mariden . In London , Squire Western appears at the right moment to rescue Sophia from being raped by Lord Fellamar . Such a series of lucky occurrences , though not impossible , are in deed to opportune to strike as credible .

·                       Finally the ending of the story is a bit hurried and huddled . In the last Books , a number of momentous actions are massed together confusedly Fielding himself appears to have been conscious that the narrative is unduly compressed in Book XVIII , for he writes : when thou has pursued the many great events which this Book will produce , thou wilt think the number of pages contained in it scarce sufficient to tell the story .

·       HARMONY OF PLOT AND CHARACTER                   

In a good novel , a strict correspondence between plot and character is very essential . In fact , Henry James declares that chracter is action . In Tom Jones , action follows logically from the character . Tom’s dismissal by Allworthy is the climactic action of the first third of the novel . This is precipitated by Squire Allworthy’s misplaced confidence in his capability to judge coupled with Tom’s joyous drunkenness and his indiscretion with Molly . At the centre of the novel , Tom’s involvement with Mrs. Waters creates a whole series of new complications in his relationship with Sophia; so does Tom’s behaviour with Lady Bellaston at the end of the novel . Squire Western’s faith in established social values and his hot-headed affection for his daughter also play a very important role . Blifil’s execrable self-interestedness and jealousy first act to degrade Tom in the eyes of other but later they help in the final resolution .

·       FIELDING’S MORAL VISION GOVERNS THE ENTIRE MOVEMENT

The whole design of Tom Jones is governed by Fielding’s moral vision . In Tom Jones , his subject is human nature and his purpose is threefold: to exhibit the loveliness of virtue and the ugliness of vice ; to convince men that their interest lies in the pursuit of virtue and the avoidance of vice ; and finally , to inculcate the lesson that virtue needs to be guided by discretion . As the action in Tom Jones is unfolded , this purpose is aptly realised .

·       THE STYLE OF THE NOVEL IS SUITED TO ITS SUBJECT

                            

                            Fielding’s style-light , gay , mildly ironical- is quite suited to his purpose . It makes one conscious of one’s follies without causing undue bitterness . It points out but does not condemn , hence it provokes reflection .

                            To conclude , it would no be an exaggeration to say that the world had not seen a greater epic than Tom Jones since the days of Homer . The characters and action are wonderfully deversifird , yet all is so natural , and so pleasant . While reading Tom Jones , one is pleasantly struck with certain harmony of composition . Thackeray was quite justified to pronounce that as a work of construction , Tom Jones is ‘quite a wonder ‘.

Topic: Sri Aurobindos views on Education

Name: Chauhan Sejal  Arunbhai

Subject: Indian Writing in English

 Paper: 4

Roll no:31

M.A. Part I Sem I

Year: 2013-15

Submitted to: M.K.Bhavanagar University

SRI AUROBINDO’S VIEWS ON EDUCATION

·       Sri Aurobindo

                 “The supreme truths are neither the rigid conclusions of

                    logical reasoning nor the affirmations of creedal statement,

                   but fruits of the soul’s inner experience.”

                  Sri Aurobindo always laid great stress on education. He himself had the best education while in Cambridge, and between 1897 and 1906, was a professor in the Bengal National College. So he knew the question in depth. And he had hopes in the young. He trusted that youth can give their good contribution in rebuiling the nation. Sri Aurobindo never tired of calling for what he termed “a national education.” He gave his definition.

                   The education which starting with the post and making full use of the present builds up a great nation. Whoever wishes to cut off the nation from its past is no friend of our national growth. Whoever fails to take advantages of the present is losing us the battle of life. We must therefore save for India all that she has stored up of knowledge, character and noble thought in her immemorial past. We must acquire for her best knowledge that Europe can give her and assimilate it to her own peculiar type of national temperament. We must introduce the best methods of teaching humanity has developed, whether modern or ancient. And all these are we must harmonise into a system which will be impregnated with the spirit of self-reliance so as to build up men and not machines.

                   Aurobindo Ghosh was an Idealistic to the core. His Idealistic philosophy of life was based upon Vedantic philosophy of Upanishad. He maintains that the kind of education, we need in our country, is an education-

                 “Proper to the Indian soul and temperament and culture that

                   we are in quest of, not indeed something faithful merely to

                   the past, but to the developing soul of India, to her future

                   need, to the greatness of her coming-self creation, to her

                   eternal spirit.”

Sri Aurobindo’s concept of ‘education’ is not only acquiring information, but “the acquiring of various kinds of information,” he points out , “is only one and not the chief of the means and necessities of education; its central aim is the building of the powers of the human mind and spirit.”

                    Here describe Aurobindo’s aims of education. He emphasized that education should be in accordance with the needs of our real modern life. In other words, education should create dynamic citizen so that they are able to meet the needs of modern complex life. According to him, physical development and holiness are the chief aims of education. As such, he not only emphasized mere physical development, that but physical purity also without which no spiritual development is possible. In this sense physical development and purification are the two bases on which the spiritual development is built. The second important aim of education is to train all the sences hearing, seaking, listening, touching, smelling and tasting. According to these senses can be fully trained when nerve, Chitta and manas are pure. Hence, through education purity of senses is to be achieved before any development is possible. The third aim of education is to achievemental development of the child. This mental development means the enhancement of all mental faculties namely , memory, thinking, reasoning, imagination and discrimination etc education should develop them fully and harmoniously. Another important aim of education is the development of morality. Shri Aurobindo has emphasized that without moral and emotional development only, mental development becomes harmful to human process. Heart of a child should be so developed as to show extreme love, sympathy and consideration for all living beings. This is real moral development. Thus, the teacher should be a role model to his children that mere imitation can enable them to reach higher and higher stages of development. Development of conscience is another important aim of education that needs to develop by the help of teacher. Conscience has four level chitta, manas, intelligence, and knowledge. Aurobindo emphasized that the main aim of education is to promote spiritual development. According to him every human being has some fragment of divine existence within himself and education can scan it from each individual with its full extent.

·       AUROBINDO DISCRIBES CURRICULUM FOR DIFFERENT STAGES OF EDUCATION

Mother tongue, English, French, literature, national history, art,  painting, general science, social studies and arithmetic should be taught at primary stage.

Mother tongue , English, French, literature, arithmetic, art, chemistery, physics, botany, physiology, health education, social studies at secondary stage.

           Indian and Western philosophy, history of civilization, English literature, French, sociology, psychology, history, chemistry, physics, botany at university level .

          Art, painting, photography, sculptural, drawing, types, cottage- industries, mechanical and electrical engineering, nursing etc at vocationan level.

·       TEACHER-TAUGHT RELATIONSHIP

Aurobindo enunciates certain sound principles of good teaching, which have to be kept in mind when actually engaged in the process of learning. According to Sri Aurobindo, the first principle of true teaching is ‘’that nothing can be taught.” He explains that the knowledge is already dormant within the child and for this reason. The teacher is not an instructor or task- master; “he is a helper and a guide.” The roll of the teacher is to suggest and not to impose. He does not actually train the pupil’s mind, he only shows him how to perfect the instrumensn of knowledge and helps him and encourages him in the process. He does not impart knowledge to him; he shows him how to acquire knowledge for himself. He does not call forth the knowledge that is within; he only shows him where it lies and how it can be habituated to rise to the surface.

·       SRI AUROBINDO’S ROAD TO INTEGRAL EDUCATION

         “Every child is a spark of the divine meant to progress, evolve and devlope through experience. This development on the line of the child’s own choice needs to be nourished and not forced to be molded in accordance with the parent’s ambitions or preorbained expectations of society; This is quite different from the present educational industrial mindset, which churns the raw material into uniform mass production. Sri Aurobindo writes about the legend and his philosophy of education. Education as enunciated by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother is very different from what is normally understood and practised. It requires us to unlearn our habitual ways of viewing education and other associated responses. The key is a change in the mindset with which we view education; such a paradigm shift of the right perception of what truly constitutes a child, is expected of educators, teachers and parents.

              In Mother’s and Aurobindo’s view the aim of true education should be to give the students a chance to distinguish between the ordinary life and the life of truth to see things in a different unconventional way. Unlike what is commonly expected, to crave for money and worldly recognition or to be engrossed in the pursuit of career building cannot be the sole aim of education.

“To learn for the sake of knowledge, to educate oneself in order to grow in conscience, to discipline oneself in order to become master of oneself, to overcome one’s weaknesses, incapacities and ignorance, to prepare oneself to advance in life towards a goal that is nobler, more generous and more true.”

This is what is expected of students of Integral Education; an all round progress and a constant striving for self exceeding; one of the most significant contributions by Sri Aurobindo to education and understanding the student historically.

“Do not aim at success, our aim is perfection..........”

What did Aurobindo connote by all round develpoment?

The student is made of five distinct parts all of which must be developmed through education.

           The aim of the body is to express the beauty and harmony and needs to be trained to be strong healthy and supple. Next, the need to consciously help our students deal effectively with their emotions. We also want our children to develop a sense of esthetic refinement. The mind being the main focus of modern education needs to develop both its parts the left and the right brain through the training of its various respective faculties of observation and analysis and the other of comprehension and creativity. The most important and central part consists of the fourth dimension which is that of the truth of our being namely our psychic being within which grows across lives through every kind of experience. Its essential nature is to aspire for truth, goodness and beauty. The last dimension is that of the spiritual self which we will not concern ourselves with for now.

               Such is the broad framework of what needs to be addressed in the development of the child, the teacher and even in ourselves through a lifelong education.

               In several ways Aurobindo’s educational vision is meant to open the ways of the future to children who belong to the future.

·       SRI AUROBINDO’S THREE PRINCIPLES OF TEACHING

                        The first principle states “.....nothing can be taught.” The teacher is not an instructor or taskmaster; he/she is a helper and a guide. His or her role is to suggest and not to impose. The teacher does not actually train the pupil’s mind; she or he only shows the students how to perfect his or her instruments of knowledge for himself. He or she does not call forth the knowledge that is within: the teacher only shows where it lies and how it can be habituated to rise to the surface. The truth that this principle conveys has been advocated in India by all the great educational thinkers as it in aligment to the ancient Indian belief that all knowledge lies within and needs only to be unfolded.

                    The need is to create interest in the child to learn, Which leads us to the second principle “.....the mind has to be consulted in its own growth.” The idea of hammering the child into the shape dasired by the parent or teacher is a barbarous and ignorant superstition. There can be no greater error that for the parent to arrange beforehand that his son/daughter shall develop particular qualities, capacities, ideas, virtues or be prepared for a prearranged career.” This is a principle of great value and relevance to all teachers, parents and educators to liberate the child from their personal and selfish expectations.

              The third principle takes into consideration the nativity involve in the child’s learning therefore the need “to work from the near to the far from that which is to what shall be.”

               These three principles serve as the foundation of Integral Education and show as how to work towards its right implementation. They can be practiced in any school. 

                          Curriculum must be designed keeping in view the interest of the students as per their age, learning styles and varied interests. The child needs to be encouraged to pursue his own line of interest in the future course of his life.

                  Although still at the infant stage, we at Sri Aurobindo International school entered the domain of practicability and made it possible to bring about some change in the educational curriculum and re-orient it towards integral education. We have started in earnest to implement the same in phases from 1993.

                  The inspiration for SAIS and to draw from a system of Integral Education linked with Sri Aurobiindo’s concept of Integral Yoga. Its fundamental educational concept is that every child is an evolving soul; and that the responsibility of the teacher and the parent is to enable to grow to its true and fullest potential.

                   As heads of schools our goal is high and the scope is endless. The only possible thing to do is to take the first step in this challenging and  meaningful journey of realizing true education, that of Integral Education.

                  Thus, Aurobindo conceived of education as an instrument for the real working of the spirit in the mind and body of the individual and the nation. He thought of educatio that for the individual will make its one central object the growth of the soul and its powers and possibilities, for the nation will keep first in view the preservation, strengthening and enrichment of the nation soul and its Dharma (virtue) and raise both into powers of the life and ascending mind and soul of humanity.