Mary Wollstonecraft's "Vindication of The Rights of Woman"

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
by Mostafa Mahmoud

During the early years of the French Revolution, England became a place of new beginnings, where the idea of the individual emerged, the world of literature was reborn and authority was thoroughly questioned and often uprooted. Great poets and philosophers were awakened, and the 'war of pamphlets' began, proclaiming revolutionary theories, arguing social and political change, and urging self-examination. Mary Wollstonecraft, "pioneer of feminist thought" (Jane Moore, 1999) in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman was the first to bring the subordinate attitude that society had towards women into the open, arguing that women were men's intellectual equals and therefore affirming a woman's right to a full education.

"A profound conviction that the neglected education of my fellow-creatures is the grand source of the misery I deplore." (Page166) Continuing on from this radical observation, Wollstonecraft states, that through the education of women, relationships between husbands and wives will be better and the children, future of society will receive a better education. By including the children into these benefits, Wollstonecraft appeals to the men, who at that time considered "females rather as women than human creature; have been more anxious to make them alluring mistresses than affectionate wives and rational mothers." Wollstonecraft continues to say that women are elevated, acknowledging the "homage" that men pay to women, yet this "homage" is purely directed towards purile qualities rather than noble.

She argues that this elevation does nothing but weaken the women. Wollstonecraft's preferable woman figure is a rational and useful citizen.
It is not only the attitude of men towards women that Wollstonecraft directed her arguments against. Much of her criticism was aimed at the women's perception of themselves and their own abilities. Wollstonecraft claims in chapter two, page 170, that the only education women receive is that which is taught by their mothers, "softness of temper, outward obedience and a scrupulous attention to a purile kind of propriety, will obtain for them the protection of man..." Who, "...try to secure the good conduct of women by attempting to keep them always in a state of childhood." (Page 170-171) Wollstonecraft continues throughout her book to refer to the "wife" as being an "overgrown child." In connecting the way women are treated to how children are treated, emphasis is placed on the fact that as children are dependant on adults, (men), for intellectual guidance, so to do women rely on men, rather than becoming responsible for their own intellectual growth.

Keeping these views of women in mind, Wollstonecraft's ideas were revolutionary. They were the beginnings of emancipation for women.
Wollstonecraft argues that men may well be more virtuous in their bodies, yet when it comes to the virtue of one's nature, she defies any idea of virtue being different for men or women; "in fact how can they, if virtue has only one eternal standard?" (Page 176) This is one of her main objectives that woman's physical inferiority has led to false assumptions about her intellectual ability. By including God in the argument, Wollstonecraft dares to confront the church, a leader power of the time, and its opinion that it is only men who have certain Godly qualities.

She alludes once again to the Christian teachings, yet this time backing up her point by using the Old Testament. In this case she is against Dr Gregory in his "Legacy to his daughters," that girls should "give lie to her feelings, and not dance with her spirit..."continuing to advise the restraint of speech lest it make her seem immodest. Wollstonecraft fights back by quoting "the wiser Solomon" saying that the heart should be pure, abundant and natural, out of this state the mouth would speak true knowledge. Thus the heart is more important than trivial ceremonies placed on women and children, because even people with vice in their heart can perform such actions. This is a very confrontational approach, as both men and women partook of church ceremonies for no other reason than to heighten people's opinion of themselves.

Throughout the Vindication, Wollstonecraft makes clear her position that to be a good mother and responsible citizen the woman must be equal with her husband, "and not the humble dependant" (page 178) the only way to achieve this is through friendship, and a natural understanding that both are "creatures of reason." Wollstonecraft does not however deny the passion that is felt in a marriage, she says that when this passion should subside, there should be a friendship in which to educate children and form strong morals on which society can move forward. To have a strong friendship with one's wife would be an absurd idea to many men at that time, but because of the revolutionary awakening occurring, Wollstonecraft was able to try and change this constraining idea which men had.

Rousseau is another poet that she fights against to prove her point. While he is concerned about power plays and feeling lacking in some way, Wollstonecraft states "I do not wish them to have power over men; but over themselves." (Chap 4, page 187) This is her main point, equality, and understanding of ones self. She is encouraging women to educate themselves, push past the false limitations which society has placed on women and begin to cultivate rationality, understanding and peace of mind. (Page 181) None of her arguments seek to make women higher than men, they are rather encouraging woman to embrace this time of new beginnings.

Shakespeare's "Hamlet"

Short Summary of Hamlet

Hamlet starts with soldiers changing the guard outside of Elsinore Castle in Denmark. The new guards have brought along a scholar named Horatio because they claim to have seen a ghost. Horatio is skeptical of their story until the ghost actually appears. He then tries to speak to it, but the ghost remains silent until it stalks away.

Horatio tells the guards that the ghost was dressed the same way Old Hamlet (the former King of Denmark and Hamlet's father) was dressed when he defeated King Fortinbras of Norway. He further tells them that young Fortinbras, the son, has gathered together an army to attack Denmark. At this point the ghost reappears and Horatio again begs it to speak to him. The ghost seems about to say something but at that moment a cock crows and the ghost vanishes. The guards and Horatio decide to tell Hamlet what they have seen.

King Claudius, who is Hamlet's uncle and who assumed the throne after Hamlet's father died, is in the castle. He has recently married Queen Gertrude, who is Hamlet's mother and the widow to Old Hamlet. Claudius is worried about the fact that young Fortinbras has raised an army against Denmark, and so he sends out messengers to the uncle of young Fortinbras asking him to stop his nephew. Claudius then turns to Laertes, the son of Polonius, and asks him why he requested an audience. Laertes asks the king for permission to return to France, which he is granted.

Claudius finally turns his attention to Hamlet, who is standing in black robes of mourning for his father. He tells Hamlet that it is unnatural for a man to mourn for such a long period of time. Queen Gertrude agrees, and asks Hamlet to wear normal clothes again. Both the king and queen then beg Hamlet to stay with them at the castle rather than return to his studies in Wittenberg. Hamlet agrees to stay, and both his mother and uncle rush out of the palace to celebrate their new wedding.

Horatio arrives with the guards and tells Hamlet that they have seen his father's ghost. Hamlet is extremely interested in this, and informs them that he will join them for the watch that night.

Laertes is finishing his packing and is also giving his sister Ophelia some brotherly advice before he leaves. He warns her to watch out for Hamlet whom he has seen wooing her. Laertes tells Ophelia to ignore Hamlet's overtures towards her until he is made king, at which point if he still wants to marry her then she should consent. Polonius arrives and orders his son to hurry up and get to the ship. Polonius then gives Laertes some fatherly advice, telling him to behave himself in France. Laertes departs, leaving Ophelia with Polonius. Polonius then turns to her and asks what has been going on between her and Hamlet. She tells him that Hamlet has professed his love to her, but Polonius only laughs and calls her ignorant. He then orders her to avoid Hamlet and to not believe his protestations of love. Ophelia promises to obey her father.

Hamlet, Horatio and a guard meet outside to see whether the ghost will appear. It soon arrives and silently beckons Hamlet to follow it. Hamlet pushes away Horatio, who is trying to hold him back, and runs after the ghost. The guard tells Horatio that they had better follow Hamlet and make sure he is alright.

The ghost finally stops and turns to Hamlet. He tells Hamlet that he is the ghost of Old Hamlet, who has come to tell his son the truth about how he died. He tells Hamlet that he was sitting in the garden one day, asleep in his chair, when Claudius came up to him and poured poison into his ear. He was killed immediately, and because he was not allowed to confess his sins, he is now suffering in Purgatory. The ghost of Old Hamlet then orders his son to seek revenge for this foul crime before departing.

Hamlet is confused about whether to believe the ghost or not, but he makes Horatio and the guard swear to never reveal what they have seen. He decides that he will pretend to be mad in order to fool Claudius and Gertrude until he is able to know whether Claudius really killed his father or not.

Polonius sends his servant Reynaldo to France in order to spy on Laertes. He order Reynaldo to ask the other Danes what sort of reputation Laertes has in order to make sure his son is behaving. Reynaldo promises to do this and leaves for France. Ophelia enters looking extremely frightened and informs her father that Hamlet has gone mad. She tells him that Hamlet entered the room where she was sewing and took her wrist. After staring into her eyes for a long while he walked out of the room without ever taking his eyes off of her. Polonius concludes that Hamlet must have gone mad because he ordered Ophelia to reject Hamlet's affections.

Claudius and Gertrude have invited two friends of Hamlet to come and spy on Hamlet. They are aware that Hamlet is acting strangely and want the friends to figure out what the problem is. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, eager to please King Claudius, agree to try and find out what is wrong with Hamlet. They leave, and Polonius enters with news that the messengers are back from Norway. Claudius tells him to bring the messengers in.

The messengers inform Claudius that after they arrived, the uncle of Fortinbras sent his nephew a summons. Young Fortinbras obeyed, and the uncle chastised him for attempting to attack Denmark. Fortinbras apologized for his behavior and received an annual allowance from his uncle as a token of goodwill. Further, the uncle gave Fortinbras permission to attack Poland. Since Fortinbras would have to march through Denmark in order to reach Poland, the uncle sent Claudius a letter asking for safe passage. Claudius, overjoyed by this news, assents to give permission.

Polonius then tells him that he knows the reason for Hamlet's madness. He reads Claudius and Gertrude one of the letters Hamlet sent to Ophelia in which Hamlet professes his love for her. Claudius is not entirely convinced, and so he and Polonius agree to set up a meeting between Hamlet and Ophelia that they will be able to spy on.

Hamlet enters the room and cuts their plotting short. Polonius asks the king and queen to leave him alone with their son, to which they assent. Polonius then tries to talk to Hamlet, who, feigning madness, calls him a fishmonger and asks him if he has a daughter. Hamlet continues to insult Polonius until Polonius finally gives up in frustration.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arrive and Hamlet recognizes them. He greets them warmly and asks what brings them to Denmark. They only give an ambiguous answer, from which Hamlet infers that Claudius asked them to come. Hamlet then reveals to them that he has been very melancholic lately, and gives that as the reason he has been acting mad. They try to cheer him up by telling him some actors arrived with them on their ship. Hamlet is overjoyed to hear this news, and he immediately goes to find the actors.

He succeeds in finding the players and asks them to perform a speech from Dido and Aeneas for him. One of them agrees and performs the part where Priam, the father of Aeneas, is killed. He then continues with the part where Hecuba, Priam's wife, sees her husband being murdered and lets out a cry that rouses even the gods. Hamlet tells him it is enough when Polonius begs the actor to stop. He then asks the actors if they can perform the murder of Gonzago as well some extra lines that he will write for them. They agree and leave to rehearse their parts. Hamlet meanwhile has compared the murder of Priam to his own father's murder and has become outraged with Claudius, whom he hopes to reveal as the murderer through the play that he asked the actors to perform that night.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tell Claudius and Gertrude that they really do not know what the matter with Hamlet is. They can only say that he seems distracted, but that the arrival of the actors made him happier. Polonius then tells Claudius that Hamlet is putting on a play that night and requested that they attend. Claudius agrees to go.

Polonius hears Hamlet coming and he and Claudius quickly made Ophelia stand in clear view while they hide themselves. Hamlet enters and gives his "To be or not to be; that is the question" (3.1.58) speech. He stops when he sees Ophelia and goes over to speak with her. Hamlet rudely tells her that he never loved her and orders her to go to a nunnery. After he leaves, Claudius tells Polonius that Hamlet does not seem to be mad because of Ophelia, but Polonius still believes that she is the real reason for his melancholic madness.

Hamlet puts on a play called The Mousetrap for Claudius and Gertrude, as well as other attendants in the castle. The play involves a king who is murdered by his nephew while sleeping in the garden. As the nephew pours poison into the king's ears, King Claudius becomes so outraged that he stands up, thereby forcing the play to end. He orders light to be shone on him and stalks angrily out of the room.

Hamlet is delighted by this and is convinced that the ghost was telling the truth. Horatio agrees with him. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern then arrive and tell Hamlet that his mother wants to see him in her private chambers immediately. Polonius soon arrives with the same news. Hamlet sends them all away and plans to reveal what he knows to his mother in order to see if she was part of the plot to kill his father.

Claudius, overcome with emotion, prays to heaven to forgive him his sin. He admits to committing the murder of his brother. Hamlet enters silently with his sword and is about to kill Claudius when he realizes that Claudius is praying. Since that would mean that Claudius would be absolved of his sins if he died right then, Hamlet stops and decides to wait until he can kill Claudius when his "soul may be as damned and black as hell" (3.3.94-95).

Hamlet then goes to see his mother. He immediately insults her for having married Claudius so soon after his father's death. She gets scared and calls for help, causing Polonius (who is hidden behind a curtain spying on them) to make a sound. Hamlet pulls out his dagger and kills Polonius through the curtain, but he is disappointed when her realizes it is not the king. Hamlet then shows his mother two pictures of both Claudius and Old Hamlet, comparing them for her. She is almost at the point where she believes him when the ghost appears and Hamlet starts to speak to it. Gertrude, unable to see the ghost, concludes that Hamlet must be truly mad and starts to agree with everything he says in order to get him out of her room.

Claudius, once Gertrude tells him what has happened, orders Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to prepare to take Hamlet with them to England. He then orders the body of Polonius to be found since Hamlet has hidden it. Hamlet eventually reveals the location of the body and then leaves the castle that night.

While traveling away from Elsinore, Hamlet encounters Fortinbras' army. Fortinbras has just send Claudius a message telling him that the Norwegian army is there and requesting safe passage. Hamlet asks one of the captains what part of Poland they are attacking. The captain refuses to reveal the exact location, and there remains the possibility that Denmark is the true target, although this is not revealed in the play.

Ophelia has meanwhile gone mad at the death of her father. Horatio tries to take care of her, but finally asks Gertrude to help him. Claudius and Gertrude order Horatio to keep an eye on her. Soon thereafter Laertes arrives with a mob. He has returned from France once he learned of Polonius' death and is intent on killing the murderer of his father. Claudius calms him down and tells him that Hamlet is the murderer, and since Hamlet has been sent to England there is no one there to kill. Laertes then sees Ophelia, who fails to recognize him and instead gives him a flower.

Hamlet sends letters back to Denmark. He tells Horatio that the ship was attacked by pirates and that he managed to escape in the process by joining the pirates for a short while as their prisoner. He also tells Horatio that he sent Rosencrantz and Guildenstern on to England, but that he will be returning shortly. Claudius also receives a letter from Hamlet informing him that Hamlet will soon return home. Claudius immediately plots a way to kill Hamlet by having Laertes fight him in a fencing match. Laertes decides to put poison on the tip of his rapier so that any small scratch will kill Hamlet, and Claudius tells him he will also poison a cup of wine and give it to Hamlet as a backup measure. At that moment Gertrude enters and tells the men that Ophelia has drowned herself in a brook. She and Claudius follow Laertes, who is once more grief-stricken.

Hamlet and Horatio come across two gravediggers who are digging a fresh grave. They are engaged in wordplay until one of the men sends the other away to fetch him some liquor. Hamlet watches as the remaining man tosses up skulls and sings while he works. He finally approaches the man and asks who the one skull belonged to. The gravedigger tells him it was Yorick's, a court fool whom Hamlet knew from his youth. Hamlet is shaken by the skull and ponders the fact that all of them return to the earth. He and Horatio are forced to run and hide when Laertes, Claudius and Gertrude arrive with the coffin.

They place the coffin into the ground, but the priest refuses to say any prayers for the dead because Ophelia committed suicide rather then die a natural death. Laertes argues with him, but finally gives up and jumps into the grave in grief. Hamlet, when he realizes who is dead, comes out of hiding and also jumps into the grave. Laertes grabs him by the throat and Claudius is forced to order the other men to intervene and separate them.

Back in the castle Hamlet tells Horatio that before he got off the ship he stole the letters Claudius had given to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The letters asked the English king to kill Hamlet. Hamlet, furious at this betrayal, wrote new letters in which he asked the king to kill the messengers, namely Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

A lord named Osric enters the room and informs Hamlet that Laertes has challenged him to a fencing match. Claudius has bet Laertes that he cannot defeat Hamlet by more than three hits during twelve engagements. Hamlet agrees to the dual even though Horatio tells him he cannot win. They enter the match room, and Claudius announces that if Hamlet scores a hit during the first, second, or third bout, then he will drop a valuable pearl into a cup of wine and give it to Hamlet.

Laertes and Hamlet choose their foils and proceed to fight. Hamlet scores a hit which Osric upholds, and Claudius drops his pearl into some wine which he offers to Hamlet. Hamlet, excited by the match, refuses to drink it and asks for the next round. They fight again, and Hamlet wins the next hit as well. Gertrude, thrilled at how well her son is fighting, takes the cup of wine from Claudius and drinks it to celebrate Hamlet's hit. Claudius turns pale when he realizes that she has drunk the poisoned wine, but he says nothing.

They fight again, and Laertes slashes Hamlet out of turn with his poisoned foil, causing Hamlet to bleed. Hamlet is infuriated and attacks him viciously, causing him to drop the foil. Hamlet gets both rapiers and accidentally tosses his rapier over to Laertes. He then slashes Laertes with the poisoned foil, drawing blood as well. They stop fighting when they realize that Queen Gertrude is lying on the ground.

Gertrude realizes that she has been poisoned and tells Hamlet that it was the drink. She dies, and Laertes tells Hamlet that he too is going to die from the poisoned tip. Hamlet, even more furious than before, slashes Claudius with the poisoned tip. He then takes the wine chalice and forces the poison into Claudius' mouth until Claudius falls dead onto the ground. Laertes is also on the ground at this point and he forgives Hamlet for killing Polonius before he too dies.

Hamlet sees Horatio about to drink the remaining poisoned wine and orders him to stop. He tells Horatio that only he can tell the people what really happened and thus reveal the truth. Osric comes in at that moment and informs them that Fortinbras and some ambassadors from England have arrived. Hamlet's final words are to give Fortinbras his vote to become the next King of Denmark.

Fortinbras arrives and looks over the scene of dead bodies. The ambassadors also enter the room and inform Horatio that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have been put to death. Horatio asks Fortinbras to order the bodies placed in the public view so that he can tell the people what happened. Fortinbras' final act is to order his soldiers to give Hamlet a military salute by firing their guns.

"Paradise Lost" by John Milton

Summary and Analysis of John Milton's "Paradise Lost Book I"
By: Mostafa Mahmoud

Summary
Book I of Paradise Lost begins with Milton describing what he intends to undertake with his epic: the story of Man's first disobedience and the "loss of Eden," subjects which have been "unattempted yet in prose or rhyme." His main objective, however, is to "justify the ways of God to men."

The poem then shifts to focus on the character of Satan who has just fallen from heaven. The scene opens in a fiery, yet dark, lake of hell. Satan, dazed, seems to be coming to consciousness after his fall and finds himself chained to the lake.
He lifts his head to see his second in command, Beelzebub,
the Lord of the Flies, who has been transformed from a beautiful archangel into a horrid fallen angel. Satan gets his bearings and, in a speech to Beelzebub, realizes what has just happened: Satan, presuming that he was equal to God, had declared war on the creator. Many angels had joined Satan, and the cosmic battle had shaken God's throne.

Satan and his cohorts had lost and been cast "nine times the space that measures day and night" to hell. Still, Satan tells Beelzebub that all is not lost. He will never bow down to God and now, knowing more of the extent of God's might, the rebel angels might better know how to continue to fight him in an eternal war.

Beelzebub questions why they themselves still exist. What plan did God have for them since he did not kill them completely, but left them their souls and spirits intact to feel pain in hell?

Satan replies that God indeed wanted to punish them by forcing them to languish in hell for eternity. But, he says, that means that they don't ever have to obey God again. In fact, Satan says, they must work to instill evil in all good things so as to always anger God.

Satan and Beelzebub gather their strength and fly off the fiery lake to firmer, though still fiery, ground. They look around at the dark wasteland that is hell, but Satan remains proud. "Better to reign in hell, then serve in heaven."

They see their army lying confused and vanquished in the fiery lake. Satan calls to them and they respond immediately. Satan gathers his closest twelve around him .
Music plays and banners fly as the army of rebel angels comes to attention, tormented and defeated but faithful to their general

They could not have known the extent of God's might, Satan tells them, but now they do know and can now examine how best to beat him. Satan has heard of a new kind of creation that God intends on making, called man. They will continue the war against heaven, but the battlefield will be within the world of mankind.

The army bangs their shields with their swords in loud agreement. The rebel angels then construct a Temple, a throne room, for their general and for their government, greater in grandeur than the pyramids or the Tower of Babylon.

All the millions of rebel angels then gather in the Temple for a great council, shrinking themselves and become dwarves in order to fit.

Analysis

Milton tells us that he is tackling the story told in Genesis of the Fall of Adam and the loss of the Garden of Eden. With it, Milton will also be exploring a cosmic battle in heaven between good and evil. Supernatural creatures, including Satan and the Judeo Christian God himself, will be mixing with humans and acting and reacting with humanlike feelings and emotions. As in other poetic epics such as Homer's Iliad and Ulysses, the Popul Vuh, and Gilgamesh, Milton is actually attempting to describe the nature of man by reflecting on who his gods are and what his origins are. By demonstrating the nature of the beings who created mankind, Milton is presenting his, or his culture's , views on what good and evil mean, what mankind's relationship is with the Absolute, what man's destiny is as an individual and as a species. The story, therefore, can be read as a simple narrative, with characters interacting with each other along a plot and various subplots. It can also, however, be extrapolated out to hold theological and religious messages, as well as political and social themes.

Milton introduces Book I with a simple summary of what his epic poem is about: the Fall of Adam and the loss of the Garden of Eden. He tells us that his heavenly muse is the same as that of Moses, that is, the spirit that combines the absolute with the literary. The voice is of a self-conscious narrator explaining his position. There is some background in the past tense, then suddenly the reader finds himself in the present tense on a fiery lake in hell. The quiet introduction, the backing into the story, then the verb change and plunge into the middle of the action, in medias res, creates a cinematic and exciting beginning.

On this lake we meet Satan, general and king of the fallen rebel angels.
Milton's portrait of Satan has fascinated critics since Paradise Lost's publication, leading some in the Romantic period to claim that Satan is, in fact, the heroic protagonist of the whole work. Certainly Milton's depiction of Satan has greatly influenced the devil's image in Western art and literature since the book's publication.

The reader first meets a stunned Satan chained down to a fiery lake of hell, surrounded by his coconspirators. In this first chapter, the reason for his downfall is that he thought himself equal to God. Hell, however, has not taught him humility, and, in fact, strengthens his revolve to never bow to the Almighty (Interestingly, the word "God" is not used in the chapters dealing with Hell and Satan).

Satan is often called a sympathetic character in Paradise Lost, despite being the source of all evil, and in the first chapter the reader is presented with some of Satan's frustration. Satan tells his army that they were tricked, that it wasn't until they were at battle that God showed the true extent of his almightiness. If they had been shown this force previously, not only would the rebel angels not have declared war on heaven, but Satan, also, would never have presumed that he himself was better than God. Now they have been irreversibly punished for all eternity, but, rather than feel sorry for themselves or repent, Satan pushes his army to be strong, to make "a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven."

Hell reflecting heaven and, later, earth reflecting both, will be a common theme throughout the work. Satan chooses twelve close friends: all of them drawn from pagan mythology or from foreign kings in the Hebrew Bible: to echo and mimic Christ's twelve apostles. Satan's angels build a large a glorious temple and call a council, both of which will be echoed in heaven. In fact, Satan uses the same architect as heaven, now called Mammon in hell.

Many of the structures and symbols are similar. In heaven and hell there is a king and a military hierarchy of angels. In most cases, however, they the reverse of each other. In Book I, we are shown that the most prominent thing about hell is its darkness, whereas heaven is full of luminous light. As well, the fallen angels, previously glorious and beautiful, are now ugly and disfigured.

These mirror, and therefore reverse, images of heaven and hell also work on a theological level. The darkness of hell symbolizes the distance Satan and his army are from the luminous light and grace of God. Simultaneously, the rebel angels pulled away from God by their actions and are forced away by God himself, outside of all the blessings and glory that come with God's light and into the pain and suffering that comes with distance away from him. The physical corruption and disfigurement that occurs to all the fallen angels is symbolic of the corruption which has occurred in their souls.

Hell itself is described as a belching unhealthy body, whose "womb" will be torn open to expose the "ribs" of metal ore that are necessary to build Satan's temple. Natural occurrences in hell, such as the metaphor of the eclipsed sun, are symbols of natural, and therefore spiritual, decay.

Psychological motivations also work in reverse in hell. Hell is punishment for turning away from the Good, but instead of learning his lesson, Satan becomes more stubborn and more proud. While heaven is a place where all are turned toward the good and toward pleasing and obeying God, Satan makes hell a place turned away from God and turned deliberately toward displeasing him. Whereas before falling from heaven, Satan was only guilty of presuming to be greater than God (pride), now Satan has, in fact, become a creator himself. He has created evil: the direction away from God.

Other critics have examined the political implications of Milton's hell. Like Dante's hell, the characters and institutions in Milton's hell are often subtle references to political issues in Milton's day. The Temple of Satan, for example, has been thought to symbolize St. Peter's Cathedral in Rome, the "capitol" of Roman Catholicism and home of the Pope. The comparison of the glory of hell to the light of an eclipsed sun was thought to be a veiled critique of the Sun King, King Charles, who reigned during Milton's time.

A full understanding of the metaphors and images that Milton uses, however, would take more than a knowledge of his contemporary history or religious background. Describing Satan's kingdom, Milton takes from a myriad of sources, including Greek mythology and epic poetry, Egyptian and Canaanite religious traditions, the Hebrew Bible and Mishnaic texts, the New Testament and apocryphal texts, the Church Fathers, popular legends, and other theological texts.

It should be noted that, in the epic tradition, Milton is using poetry to tell his story, following most prominently the style of Homer. The work, therefore, can also be examined through the lens of poetry with an eye toward rhythm and sound. In the first sentence, Milton uses an alliteration to conduct what is referred to as a double discourse: "Of man's first disobedience, and the fruit of that forbidden tree..." Not only does the repeated "f" sound add to the aesthetic of the sentence, it connects the "f" words to present a different idea than the sentence itself is presenting. In this case, "first... fruits" are "forbidden." This double discourse, literally two sentences spoken at the same time, is repeated throughout Milton.

George Eliot and Middlemarch

George Eliot (1819-1880) - pseudonym for Mary Ann Cross, also Marian Evans, original surname Evans
From Kirjasto

Victorian writer, a humane freethinker, whose insightful psychological novels paved way to modern character portrayals - contemporary of Dostoevsky (1821-1881), who at the same time in Russia developed similar narrative techniques. Eliot's liaison with the married writer and editor George Henry Lewes arise among the rigid Victorians much indignation, which calmed down with the progress of her literary fame.


"Marriage, which has been the bourne of so many narratives, is still a great beginning, as it was to Adam and Eve, who kept their honeymoon in Eden, but had their first little one among the thorns and thistles of the wilderness. It is still the beginning of the home epic - the gradual conquest or irremediable loss of that complete union which makes the advancing years as a climax, and age the harvest of sweet memories in common." (from Middlemarch, 1871-72)
Mary Ann Evans (George Eliot) was born in Chilvers Coton, Warwickshire. Her father was a carpenter who rose to be a land agent. When she was a few months old, the family moved to Griff, a 'cheerful red-brick, ivory-covered house', and there Eliot spent 21 years of his life among people that he later depicted in her novels. She was educated at home and in several schools, and developed a strong evangelical piety at Mrs. Wallington's School at Neneaton. However, later Eliot rejected her dogmatic faith. When her mother died in 1836, she took charge of the family household. In 1841 she moved with her father to Coventry, where she lived with him until his death in 1849. During this time she met Charles Bray, a free-thinking Coventry manufacturer. His wife, Caroline (Cara) was the sister of Charles Hennel, the author of a work entitled An Inquiry Concerning the Origin of Christianity (1838). The reading of this and other rationalistic works influenced deeply Eliot's thoughts. After her father's death, Eliot travelled around Europe. She settled in London and took up work as subeditor of Westminster Review.

In Coventry she met Charles Bray and later Charles Hennell, who introduced her to many new religious and political ideas. Under Eliot's control the Westminster Review enjoyed success. She became the centre of a literary circle, one of whose members was George Henry Lewes, who would be her companion until his death in 1878. Lewes's wife was mentally unbalanced and she had already had two children by another man. In 1854 Eliot went to Germany with Lewes. Their unconventional union caused some difficulties because Lewes was still married and he was unable to obtain divorce. Eliot did not inform her close friends Caroline and Sarah Hennell about her decision to live with Lewes - the both friends were shocked and angry because she had not trusted them.

Eliot's first collection of tales, SCENES OF CLERICAL LIFE, appeared in 1858 under the pseudonym George Eliot - in those days writing was considered to be a male profession. It was followed by her first novel, ADAM BEDE, a tragic love story in which the model for the title character was Eliot's father. He was noted for his great physical strength, which enabled him to carry loads that three average men could barely handle. When impostors claimed authorship of Adam Bede, it was revealed that Marian Evans, the Westminster reviewer, was George Eliot. The book was a brilliant success. Her other major works include THE MILL ON THE FLOSS (1860), a story of destructive family relations, and SILAS MARNER (1861). Silas Marner, a linen-weaver, has accumulated a goodly sum of gold. He was falsely judged guilty of theft 15 years before and left his community. Squire Cass' son Dunstan steals Marner's gold and disappears. Marner takes care of an orphaned little girl, Eppie and she becomes for him more precious than the lost property. Sixteen years later the skeleton of Dunstan and Marner's gold is found. Godfrey Cass, Dunstal's brother, admits that he is the father of Eppie. He married the girl's mother, opium-ridden Molly Farren secretly before hear death. Eppie and Silas Marner don't wish to separate when Godfrey tries to adopt the girl. In the end Eppie marries Aaron Winthorp, who accepts Silas Marner as part of the household.

MIDDLEMARCH (1871-72), her greatest novel, was probably inspired by her life at Coventry. The story follows the sexual and intellectual frustrations of Dorothea Brooke. Eliot weaves into her story other narrative lines, which offer a sad comment upon human aspirations. Among Eliot's translation works are D.F. Strauss's Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet (published anonymously in 1846), Ludwig Feuerbach's Das Wesen des Christentum, and Spinoza's Ethics (unpublished).Eliot's thoughts of religion were considered at that time advanced. When she visited Cambridge University in 1873 and discussed with F.W.H. Mayers of "the words of God, Immortality, and Duty", she pronounced "with terrible earnestness how inconceivable was the first, how unbelievable was the second, and yet how peremptory and absolute the third."

Middlemarch is a novel of English provincial life in the early nineteenth century, just before the Reform Bill of 1832. The book was called by the famous American writer Henry James a 'treasure-house of detail.' It fuses several stories and characters, creating a a network of parallels and contrasts. One of Eliot's main concerns is the way which the past moulds the present and the attempts of various characters to control the future. Harold Bloom has noted in The Western Canon (1994) the implicit but clear relation of the work to Dante's Comedy. Dorothea, an idealistic young woman, marries the pedantic Casaubon. After his death she marries Will Ladislaw, Casaubon's young cousin, a vaguely artistic outsider. Doctor Tertius Lydgate is trapped with the egoistic Rosamond Vincy, the town's beauty. Lydgate becomes involved in a scandal, and he dies at 50, his ambitions frustrated. Other characters are Bulstrode, a banker and a religious hypocrite, Mary Garth, the practical daughter of a land agent, and Fred Vincy, the son of the mayor of Middlemarch. For modern feminist readers Middlemarch has been a disappointment: Dorothea was not prepared to give up marriage. "'I know that I must expect trials, uncle. Marriage is a state of higher duties, I never thought of it as mere personal ease,' said poor Dorothea." However, Eliot's lament for Dorothea left no doubts about her views: "Some have felt that these blundering lives are due to the inconvenient indefiniteness with which the Supreme Power has fashioned the nature of women: if there were one level of feminine incompetence as strict as the ability to count three and no more, the social lot of women might be treated with scientific certitude. Meanwhile the indefiniteness remains, the the limits of variation are really much wider than any one would imagine from the sameness of women's coiffure and the favorite lovestories in prose and verse." - The book is required reading in university English courses.

In 1860-61 Eliot spent some time in Italy collecting material for her historical romance ROMOLA. It was published serially first in the Cornhill Magazine and in book form in 1863. Henry James considered it the finest thing she wrote, "but its defects are almost on the scale of its beauties." In 1871 she mentioned to Alexander Main: "I have the conviction that excessive literary production is a social offence." When Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote admiringly of Silas Marner in 1869 Eliot began a correspondence with her. In a letter from 1876 she wrote about DANIEL DERONDA (1876): "As to the Jewish element in 'Deronda', I expected from first to last in writing it, that it would create much stronger resistance and even repulsion than it has actually met with. But precisely because I felt that the usual attitude of Christians towards Jews is - I hardly know whether to say more impious or more stupid when viewed in the light of their professed principles, I therefore felt urged to treat Jews with such sympathy and understanding as my nature and knowledge could attain to. Moreover, not only towards the Jews, but towards all oriental peoples with whom we English come in contact, a spirit of arrogance and contemptuous dictatorialness is observable which has become a national disgrace to us."

After Lewes's death Eliot married twenty years younger friend, John Cross, an American banker, on May 6, 1880. They made a trip to Italy and according to a story, he jumped in Venice from their hotel balcony into the Grand Canal. After honeymoon they returned to London, where she died of a kidney ailment on the same year on December 22. Cross never married again. In her will she expressed her wish to be buried in Westminster Abbey, but Dean Stanley of Westminster Abbey rejected the idea and Eliot was buried in Highgate Cemetery. Eliot's interest in the interior life of human beings, moral problems and strains, anticipated the narrative methods of modern literature. D.H. Lawrence once wrote: "It was really George Eliot who started it all. It was she started putting action inside." The young Henry James described her "magnificently, awe-inspiringly ugly," but also studied her work carefully, critically, and acknowledged her greatness as a writer: "What is remarkable, extraordinary - and the process remains inscrutable and mysterious - is that this quiet, anxious, sedentary, serious, invalidical English lady, without animal spirits, without adventures, without extravagance, assumption, or bravado, should have made us believe that nothing in the world was alien to her; should have produced such rich, deep, masterly pictures of the multifold life of man." (Henry James in The Atlantic monthly, May 1885)

P. B. Shelley "A Defence of Poetry"

Selections from
A Defence of Poetry
By Percy Bysshe Shelley
Selected by Jack Lynch

An observation of the regular mode of the occurrence of this harmony, in the language of poetical minds, together with its relation to music, produced metre, or a certain system of traditional forms of harmony and language. Yet it is by no means essential that a poet should accomodate his language to this traditional form, so that the harmony which is its spirit, be observed. The practise is indeed convenient and popular and to be preferred, especially in such composition as includes much action: but every great poet must inevitably innovate upon the example of his predecessors in the exact structure of his peculiar versification. The distinction between poets and prose-writers is a vulgar error. The distinction between philosophers and poets has been anticipated.

Plato was essentially a poet — the truth and splendour of his imagery and the melody of his language is the most intense that it is possible to conceive. He rejected the measure of the epic, dramatic and lyrical forms, because he sought to kindle a harmony in thoughts divested of shape and action, and he forebore to invent any regular plan of rhythm which would include under determinate forms, the varied pauses of his style. Cicero sought to imitate the cadence of his periods but with little success. Lord Bacon was a poet. His language has a sweet and majestic rhythm which satisfies the sense no less than the almost superhuman wisdom of his philosophy satisfies the intellect; it is a strain which distends, and then bursts the circumference of the readers' mind and pours itself forth together with it into the universal element with which it has perpetual sympathy. — All the Authors of revolutions in opinion are not only necessarily poets as they are inventors, nor even as their words unveil the permanent analogy of things by images which participate in the life of truth; but as their periods are harmonious and rhythmical and contain in themselves the elements of verse; being the echo of the eternal music. Nor are those supreme poets, who have employed traditional forms of rhythm on account of the form and action of their subjects, less incapable of perceiving and teaching the truth of things, than those who have omitted that form. Shakespear, Dante and Milton (to confine ourselves to modern writers.) are philosophers of the very loftiest powers.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But in periods of the decay of social life, the drama sympathizes with that decay. Tragedy becomes a cold imitation of the form of the great master-pieces of antiquity, divested of all harmonious accompaniment of the kindred arts; and often the very form misunderstood: or a weak attempt to teach certain doctrines, which the writer considers as moral truths; and which are usually no more than specious flatteries of some gross vice or weakness with which the author in common with his auditors are infected. Hence what has been called the classical and the domestic drama. Addison's Cato is a specimen of the one, and would it were not superfluous to cite examples of the other! To such purposes Poetry cannot be made subservient. Poetry is a sword of lightning ever unsheathed, which consumes the scabbard that would contain it. And thus we observe that all dramatic writings of this nature are unimaginative in a singular degree; they affect sentiment and passion: which divested of imagination are other names for caprice and appetite. The period in our own history of the greatest degradation of the drama is the reign of Charles II when all forms in which poetry had been accustomed to be expressed become hymns to the triumph of kingly power over liberty and virtue. Milton stood alone illuminating an age unworthy of him. At such periods the calculating principle pervades all the forms of dramatic exhibition, and poetry ceases to be expressed upon them. Comedy loses its ideal universality: wit succeeds to humour; we laugh from self complacency and triumph instead of pleasure; malignity, sarcasm & contempt succeeds to sympathetic merriment; we hardly laugh, but we smile. Obscenity, which is ever blasphemy against the divine beauty in life, becomes, from the very veil which it assumes, more active if less disgusting: it is a monster for which the corruption of society for ever brings forth new food; which it devours in secret.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The poetry of Dante may be considered as the bridge thrown over the stream of time which unites the modern and the antient world. The distorted notions of invisible things which Dante and his rival Milton have idealised, are merely the mask and the mantle in which these great poets walk through eternity enveloped and disguised. It is a difficult question to determine how far they were conscious of the distinction which must have subsisted in their minds between their own creeds and that of the people. Dante at least appears to wish to mark the full extent of it by placing Riphæus whom Virgil calls justissimus unus in Paradise, and observing a most heretical caprice in his distribution of rewards and punishments. And Milton's poem contains within itself a philosophical refutation of that system of which, by a strange and natural antithesis, it has been a chief popular support. Nothing can exceed the energy and magnificence of the character as expressed in Paradise Lost. It is a mistake to suppose that he could ever have been intended for the popular personification of evil. Implacable hate, patient cunning, and a sleepless refinement of device to inflict the extremest anguish on an enemy, these things are evil; and although venial in a slave are not to be forgiven in a tyrant; although redeemed by much that ennobles his defeat in one subdued, are marked by all that dishonours his conquest in the victor. Milton's Devil as a moral being is as far superior to his God as one who perseveres in some purpose which he has conceived to be excellent in spite of adversity and torture, is to one who in the cold security of undoubted triumph inflicts the most horrible revenge upon his enemy — not from any mistaken notion of inducing him to repent of a perseverance in enmity, but with the alledged design of exasperating him to deserve new torments. Milton has so far violated the popular creed (if this shall be judged to be a violation) as to have alledged no superiority of moral virtue to his God over his Devil. And this bold neglect of a direct moral purpose is the most decisive proof of the supremacy of Milton's genius. He mingled as it were the elements of human nature, as colours upon a single pallet, and arranged them into the composition of his great picture according to the laws of epic truth; that is, according to the laws of that principle by which a series of actions of the external universe, and of intelligent and ethical beings is calculated to excite the sympathy of succeeding generations of mankind. The Divina Comedia, and Paradise Lost have conferred upon modern mythology a systematic form; and when change and time shall have added one more superstition to the mass of those which have arisen and decayed upon the earth, commentators will be learnedly employed in elucidating the religion of ancestral Europe, only not utterly forgotten because it will have been stamped with the eternity of genius.

Symbolism and Meaning in Donne's "The Canonization"

Symbolism and Meaning in John Donne's “The Canonization”

Starting in the late 16th Century and lasting throughout the 17th Century, was a form of poetry that has come to be known as Metaphysical. Though not a poetic movement in the sense of having a manifesto (as did the Romantics), these poets explored similar themes such as love and religion, approaching them in a practical yet transcendent manner. One of the greatest of these Metaphysical Poets was John Donne (1572-1631). Writing in a time of political, social and religious upheaval, his poetry is largely concerned with the enigmatic relationship between a person’s sexuality and spirituality. This question is raised in his poem “The Canonization”, in which the social stigma surrounding an overt love affair is compared to the martyrdom of saints. Many poetic techniques, characteristic of Metaphysical poetry, are used to develop this theme, as love is established as an alternative religion to Orthodox Christianity and the societal conventions it propagates.

The structure of “The Canonization” is an example of a love Lyric, and operating within considerable structural constraints. The poem consists of 5 stanzas, each of 9 lines, with a Rhyme scheme of ABBACCCAA. This could be described as an alternative Quatrain followed by a tercet and a rhyming couplet, thereby highlighting the epigrammatical origins of Metaphysical poetry, however none of these sections are separated by voltars to make this analysis explicit. This strict format can be understood as showing social constraints within which the persona must operate, and to whom the persona’s love is held accountable. The metre of the lines varies within individual stanzas, alternating between iambic Pentameter, tetrameter, and trimeter, often changing Foot as well. These various meters are, however, to some extent consistent between stanzas. This is a reflection of the Metaphysical attempts at a more conversational Rhythm, so as to be more accessible in meaning. This strict structure also allows for distinct stages in the development in the persona’s argument, however jumbled these stages may be in comparison to convention. The first Stanza describes the viewpoint of society (however briefly) and passes judgement on that viewpoint. The second stanza presents the case of the persona’s argument. A decision is therefore already made before the reader has heard all cases, forcing them to accept the message of the text, and allowing the following stanzas to operate on that assumption of agreement. The structure has thereby played a major role in the persuasion of readers, and manipulation of their reader position.

The first impressions of the meaning of any poem are given by the poem’s title. The title “The Canonization” has direct religious connotations; however, Donne manipulates reader preconceptions in order to generate meaning. Readers may think of canonization in terms of idyllic saints, given devotion by the Roman Catholic Church in particular. Donne, though originally a Roman Catholic himself, wrote much polemic poetry against Catholicism (following his switch to Protestantism), and is therefore critical of this romanticised view of saints. Instead, he contrasts these reader preconceptions with the actual struggle and torture of martyrdom that created these saints. The poem deals with this later view of canonization. In this title, Donne gives readers a potentially false sense of prior understanding of the poem’s message, a sense which is used to create a Paradox between readers’ understanding and the text’s message, a paradox used throughout the poem to persuade readers into Donne’s point of view.
The first stanza deals with the reaction of society to the persona’s love. No explanation is given of the details of the love affair, nor if there are any particular moral questions of which society could be critical. Instead, the persona lists society’s General complaints against the obsession of love. The poem begins in true Metaphysical form with:
For Godsake hold your tongue, and let me love,

This has a sense of immediacy and converstionalism, with the reference to a listener’s “…tongue…” creating an awareness of prior words in the conversation. Metaphysical poets strove for this more realistic representation of language (realistic in comparison to their contemporary poet’s, though perhaps not compared to modern standards) in order to affect the poem’s accessibility and high level of reader engagement. Immediately the reader is addressed and given the proposition to “…let me (the speaker) love…”. The opening line also establishes the dialectic of God (the conventions of religion and social decorousness) in contrast to love (more specifically a love affair, with some sexual aspect). The tension between these two powers is discussed throughout the poem. This line is followed by a listing of reasons against the overt love of the persona. These are almost given in the manner of an inverted blazon, with the listing of physical defects of the persona (“…palsie…gout…gray haires…”). Though no link is explicitly made, such catalogues of the problems of age were common in carpe diem poems, extolling the need to ‘make love while we may’. Reader’s at the time of the poem’s composition would have recognised this and possibly anticipated that genre of poetry to follow. However, again Donne challenges the preconceptions of readers by refusing to conform. Reference is next made to the Elizabethan belief in fate/fortune, emphasised by the alliteration “…ruined fortune flout…”. The reasons for not loving are that the persona is too old and that it will ruin his fortunes for the future. It should be noted that no mention is made of the persona’s love interest. The love remains a singular activity until the end of the second stanza. In the second half of the first stanza, the persona dismisses the criticisms of society, addressing the critics and prescribing for them a course of action. The treasures of wealth, education, destiny and rank are given to society, if the persona is allowed to love in return. The search for these commodities was expanding dramatically at the time of Donne, especially with the exploration of the New World and the precarious position of the British monarchy; however, here they are regarded as worthless in comparison to love. The tone in discussing them verges on mockery, it certainly demeans the value given to them by the era. In return for love, society is also given leave to honour an ambiguous ‘him’, either the monarchy, the King, or perhaps Christ. This section may possibly have biblical connotations to the questioning of Christ over taxes paid to Caesar (Christ pointing to the face of Caesar on the coins as warranting that they are given as tax). However, again the story is inverted, as God and the social conventions supported by religion take the role of Caesar, in contrast to love playing the role of God. In this extended judgement of a society critical of love, Donne confronts any readership in sympathy with that opinion, either antagonising such readers or persuading them into a less resistant reading of the poem.

In contrast to conventions of Rhetoric, judgement is passed on those in disagreement with the persona in stanza one, before the persona defends his case in stanza two. This is carried out through successive rhetorical questions:
Alas, alas, who’s injur’d by my love?

What merchants ships have my sighs drown’d?
Implicit descriptions of the tortures intrinsic to love (as opposed to being imposed by society) are made with reference to “…sighs…teares…colds…heats…”. These are linked with successive natural disasters, which may also be seen as acts of God, such as floods and diseases. With this interpretation, Donne can be viewed as verging on apostasy, as he discretely criticises God by pointing out that love has no hand in causing the disasters for which God can be viewed as responsible. Whereas God causes ten plagues of Egypt in the Bible, and strikes many people dead:

When did the heats which my veines fill
Adde one man to the plaguie Bill?

Love is thereby established as an alternative religion to Orthodox understandings of Christianity. The reference to soldiers and lawyers, towards the stanza’s conclusion, is again symptomatic of Metaphysical poetry. The Metaphysical poets often compared metaphysical themes such as love to more practical aspects of life, such as law and war. Though here the legal and military aspects do not play an active role in the poem’s imagery, their inclusion challenges readers. Readers are encouraged to acknowledge the practical applications of the poem’s message, as well as provided with an illustration of the harmless nature of love (whereas conventional religion often attacks the offices of war and law as sinful). The stanza is really concerned with proving that love in no way hurts the operations of society, and that there is therefore no need for society to hurt the operations of love. In the final lines of the stanza, a second lover enters the poem, a voiceless female figure. Gender studies of “The Canonization” and Metaphysical poetry in general, would argue that this is representative of a depersonalised and objectified view of women, that they are merely objects of love, rather than being active participants in the love affair. This is supported by the fact that in leading up to the introduction of the female, the love is owned by the male. This is not only in the fact that he provides the discourse about love, but that it is often referred to as “…my love…” and he as the only lover that needs release from the taunts of society. When the lady does enter, it is not as an equal to the male persona, but either separated from him (“…she and I do love…”) or spoken for by him. Love is a male dominated issue, which is revealed through the gaps and silences of the poem.
The third stanza focuses on the essence of the love itself. Though the male voice retains command of the discourse, the female is joined to him as an “…us…”. Little regard is given in this stanza, to the criticisms of society. The real issue is now the saintly nature of love, with criticisms of love becoming a side-point. The persona declares:
Call us what you will, wee’are made such by love;

confirming that it is their censure within society that makes them martyrs, effecting their canonisation. The two figures become meaningless as themselves (“…mee another flye…”) as the poem’s focus shifts to an intense view of their love as an entity. The condensed conceit:
We’are Tapers too, and at our own cost die,
again reflects the lovers’ martyrdom to the religion of love. Conventional symbols of the “…Eagle and the Dove…” are used to describe the relationship within the love affair. The eagle, as a conventional image of male strength, and the dove, representing female gentleness, juxta posed together, reveal the inequality between the partners (evidence of the Patriarchal system contemporary to the poet). These two binary opposites brought together can also be viewed as part of the Neoplatonic understanding, that the entire world is present within the two lovers, all the opposing forces (represented by the eagle and dove) brought together within them. The mythological Phoenix is next alluded to, bringing with it the religious connotations of resurrection awaiting the lovers. However, these spiritual understandings are called into question by sexual images that follow:
By us, we two being one, are it,
So, to one neutrall thing both sexes fit.
Wee dye and rise the same,…

It is again almost blasphemous the combination of such copulative images with the religious connotations of resurrection (“…dye and rise…). The final line of the stanza refers to the love as “…Mysterious…”. This has further religious overtones, with the understanding that the term ‘sacrament’ is derived from the Latin for ‘mystery’. The sexual act is transformed into a Sacrament, celebrated by two saints, in worship of the religion of love. By now the poem is not concerned with whether society should censure the persona’s love, but is instead occupied with evangelising in the name of the religion of love. Readers are moved through this change in issue of the poem, and are thereby prevented from forming any resistance to the original premise of the poem.
The fourth stanza begins with the proposition that love is intrinsic to life:
Wee can dye by it, if not live by love,
followed by a reflection on the fate of the lovers once their martyrdom is effected, that is, after their deaths. It is not debated whether the lovers will be remembered (the fact that both persona and reader agree over the lovers’ status as “…legend(s)…” is assumed by the text), instead the issue is in what form that memory will be recorded. The Historical form of “…Chronicle…” is juxta posed with the beautiful “…sonnets…”, transformed by Metaphor into religious “…hymnes…”. In this way, the lovers’ sexual understanding is enshrined in both secular and religious memory, a union of the spiritual and sexual which has been the aim of the poem. This remembrance is alluded to as a creation of Heaven, as “…pretty roomes…” may refer to Christ’s ‘many rooms in my father’s house’. The second half of the stanza employs conceits to further expound on the fate of the lovers’ “…legend…”. The lovers are compared to “…The greatest ashes…” and the poem which immortalises them “…a well wrought urn…”. The form of “…Chronicle…” is compared to “…half-acre tombes…” which wouldn’t suit the encasement of ashes. The specific compact conceit of “…ashes…” for the lovers is particularly appropriate, considering that burning at the stake was a common form of martyrdom. The image thereby provides a link with the stanza’s concluding line and the title of the poem, “…Canoniz’d for Love…”. At this stage, the argument is proven that the lovers are saints, and readings of the text have been limited so that no other empathy can be felt for any other viewpoint besides that of the persona. This has been achieved by the systematic expulsion of other voices from the text, first the female and by now the opinion of society. Readers are not provided any opportunity to see the issues from another light; therefore, their position on the issues of the text has been manipulated in compliance with the views of the persona and subsequently Donne.

With an argument already resolved and a readership in total sympathy for the persona, the final stanza opens instructing readers to “…thus invoke us…” (an instruction emphasised by assonance or in-rhyme). It is confirmed that the lovers are canonized martyrs, worthy of devotion. Ironically, this devotion would come from conventional religious, the very society that martyred the lovers in the poem’s beginning. The fifth stanza relies heavily on the Neoplatonic understanding that quintessence of the world can be found wholly within the two lovers. They are “…one anothers hermitage…” a message ironic within the poem’s historical context of world exploration and deeper understanding of the heavens (with Galileo giving credibility to Copernican theories of the solar system). This philosophical understanding is then applied to the intermingling of sexual and spiritual love:
You, to whom love was peace (religious, conventional), that now is rage (passionate, sexual);
This quintessential love is further explored with the scientific conceit, comparing lovemaking to the experiment in alchemy, extracting essences in “…glasses…”. Again, the practical scientific analogy combined with the metaphysical theme of love, acts as a persuasive tool in the ensuring of reader sympathy. The final statement in the poem:
…Beg from above
A patterne of your love!
though an unsatisfying rhyming couplet (as in its use in Shakespeare’s Sonnets, it fails to summarise the thematic journey of the poem), does reveal the ultimate transformation of love. Love is not to be ridiculed, as in the poem’s opening; it is now a religion, martyrdom, a canonisation, and a grace to be evoked from above.

“The Canonization” by John Donne is a complex piece of rhetoric, which uses persuasive and poetic techniques to manipulate readers through different understandings of the place of love within society. Beginning with the condemnation of over love by society, the persona establishes an argument by which means love challenges conventional religion, before taking its place as religion, martyrdom, canonisation and grace. Different techniques are used to effect this transformation, including the metaphysical conceit, Irony, paradox, structure and sound devices. These are all performed within the metaphysical style, recognisable in its attempts at conversationalism, accessibility, refusal of convention, and witticisms. By creating this intricate forum of expression, John Donne has, to considerable extent, been able to link the enigmatic opposites of human sexuality and spirituality within the religion of love.

Notes on literature

Literature
It is a work of art that reflects every nation's culture. It also expresses human thoughts, feelings, ideas and interests...
Literature not only describes reality but also adds to it. It is not merely a depiction of reality; it is rather a value-addition. Literary works are portrayals of the thinking patterns and social norms prevalent in society. Literary works based on philosophy, art, history, religion, and culture and also scientific and legal writings are grouped under the category of literature. Literature helps a person take a closer look at the different facets of life. It can change one's perspective towards life and help him to understand it.
Every literary work has a message to say or convey.

Major Forms of Literature
There are many kinds of literature. We will focus here in the main forms of literature which are:
· Poetry: A poem is a composition written in verse.
· Novel: A novel is a long narrative fictional prose.
· Novella: A novella is a written, fictional, prose narrative longer than a novelette but shorter than a novel.
· Short story: A short story is a fictional narrative work of art that tends to be short in length and has a very wide meaning.
· Drama: A drama is a play acted out on a stage.