Coleridge's Distinction between Primary Imagination, Secondary Imagination & Fancy

Coleridge gave much thought to the Imagination. He considers poetry the product of the secondary imagination. The secondary imagination dissolves, diffuses and dissipates in order to recreate; it struggles to idealize and unify.

The two Cardinal Points of poetry according to Coleridge are:

1) The power of exciting the sympathy of the reader by a faithful adherence to the truth of nature.

2) The power of giving the interest of novelty by the modifying colors of Imagination.

Primary Imagination: (Living power and prime agent of all human perception). Coleridge asserts that the mind is active in perception. This activity which is subconscious and is the common birthright of all men is the work of the Primary Imagination, which may be defined as the inborn power of perceiving that makes it possible for us to know things. The Primary Imagination is a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM. The power of perception, Coleridge called as Primary Imagination whereas the poetic imagination as the Secondary Imagination. It differs from the Primary Imagination in degree, but not in kind. While all men possess the Primary, only some men possess the heightened degree of the universally human power to which the poet lays claim.

Secondary Imagination: (Echo of the Primary Imagination) differs in two important respects from Primary Imagination. First, Primary Imagination is subconscious, while Secondary Imagination coexists "with the conscious will" and involves, therefore, elements of conscious and subconscious activity. Poetic "making" blends conscious selection with subconscious infusion, some elements are intentionally chosen while others are mysteriously given or supplied from the deepness of the poet's subconscious mind. Second, the secondary Imagination is described as a power that "dissolves, diffuses, dissipates, in order to recreate." It dissolves and then reintegrates the components in a new way that draws attention to their coalescence. Secondary Imagination bridges the gap between the world of spirit and matter; it fuses perception, intellect, feeling, passions and memory. It struggles to idealize and unify.

Fancy: On the other hand, is distinguished from Imagination (both primary and secondary) because it is not poetic. It differs from Imagination in kind. Fancy is merely aggregative and associative; it is a mode of memory receiving all its materials ready made from the law of association. In other words, fancy joins without blending; it works together with the pre-existing sensations without creating anything originally new, fabricates without refashioning the elements which it combines.

To Coleridge poetry was fundamentally and formally distinct from other modes of writing, and it possesses a logic of its own, as severe as that of science, and more difficult, because more subtle, more complex, and dependent on more and more fugitive causes. Poetry could and should bring together thought and feeling; it should reconcile the workings of both the head and the heart. Coleridge says that Wordsworth had unified thought and feeling in poetic utterance; he has both realized and idealized the commonplace and had made the reader see man and nature as if he was seeing them for the first time. Therefore; at times he seems to be still aware of the sensationalist philosophy of his youth which from it he inherits a conception of a world of facts, an inanimate cold world in which objects as objects are essentially "fixed and dead." But as a poet, his task is to transform it by the imagination. He has a deep trust in the imagination and considers it as something which gives shape to life. His dead world may be brought to life by Imagination. He believes that meaning is found for the existence through the exercise of the creative activity which is akin to that of god.

As a poet, Coleridge was fascinated by the notion of unearthly power at work in the world. Thus, because of his belief that life is ruled by powers which cannot be fully understood, the result is a poetry more mysterious than that of any Romantic. However, because it is based on primary human emotions, he thought that the task of poetry is to convey the mystery of life. Coleridge believes in Imagination as a vehicle for truth. He felt about the creation of his imagination something similar to what he felt about dreams. He assumes that while we have them, we do not question their reality. Coleridge believes that creation needs joy, so without joy, the poet is helpless and miserable.      

A poem Coleridge defines as an organic construct which, unlike works of science, proposes for its immediate object "Pleasure not Truth." In other words, while the truth is the ultimate end of poetry, pleasure is its immediate end. Coleridge's definition of the ideal poet is characterized by its emphasis on imagination. The poet described in ideal perfection, brings the whole soul of man into activity, with the subordination of its faculties to each other, according to their relative worth and dignity. He diffuses a tone and spirit of unity, that blends and fuses each into each by that magical power, imagination, and synthesis. In Coleridge's view, Wordsworth's particular genius was Miltonic; his strength lay, as the Prelude had demonstrated, in impressing the stamp of his own mind and character on all that he chose to write about.

@unknown source

Theory of Impersonality by T S Eliot

T.S. Eliot’s impersonal conception of art and the fullest expression of his classicist attitude towards art and poetry are essentially given by him in his essay Tradition and the Individual Talent.

Eliot explains his theory of impersonality by examining first, the relation of the poet to the past and secondly, the relation of the poem to its author. According to his view, the past is never dead, it lives in the present. “No poet or no artist has his complete meaning alone.

His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists.” Above all, the artist or the poet has to work in the long-established tradition of the literature to which he belongs. We cannot value the poet alone; we must set him for comparison and contrast among the dead poets of his language.

In the next part of the theory, he examines the relation of the poet to the poem. According to him, the poem has no relation to the poet. The difference between the mind of a mature poet and an immature one is that a mature poet has more finely perfected medium. Eliot thinks that the poet and the poem are two separate things. The feeling or emotion or vision resulting from the poem is something different from feeling, emotion, and vision in the mind of the poet. The art emotion is different from personal emotion. In other words, the poet should be passive and impersonal.

To explain the theory, Eliot has brought the analogy of chemical reaction. When oxygen and sulfur-di-oxide are mixed in the presence of a filament of platinum, they form sulfurous acid. This combination takes place only when platinum is a presence. Platinum is the catalyst that helps to process of chemical reaction, but it itself is apparently unaffected. The mind of the poet is the shred of platinum. Its presence may be necessary for partly or exclusively to operate for the combination of the experience in order to give birth to a piece of poetry.

Eliot says that the business of the poet is not to find new emotions, but to use the ordinary ones and in working them up in poetry, to express feelings which are not actual emotions at all.

The emotion of art is impersonal. It has its life in the poem and not in the history of poets. So, honest criticism and sensitive appreciation is directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry. The biography of the poet is not to be studied; the structure of the poem and its evocation powers are important.

Edited by: Mahbub Murad. Dhaka,

Touchstone Method by Matthew Arnold

Poetry is something which sustains, console and interprets life for us. Arnold had given a very high position to poetry that it is a substitute for religion. Arnold says "The strongest part of our religion today is its unconscious poetry". At this point, Arnold offers his theory of Touchstone Method.

Arnold’s touchstone method is a comparative method of criticism. According to this method, in order to judge a poet's work properly, a critic should compare it to passages taken from works of great masters of poetry, and that these passages should be applied as touchstones to other poetry. Even a single line or selected quotation will serve the purpose. If the other work moves us in the same way as these lines and expressions do, then it is really a great work, otherwise not. We are to make a comparison with any master in order to justify its validity

Arnold wants us to avoid the false evaluation of the historic estimate and the personal estimate, and to attain to a real estimate by learning to feel and enjoy the best work of the real classic, and thus to appreciate the wide difference between it and all lesser work. If you want to know whether any poetic work is of a high quality, we should compare it with specimens of the poetry of the highest quality. According to him the most useful method of discovering the worth of poetry is "to have always in one’s mind lines and expressions of the great masters, and to apply them as a touchstone to other poetry". The real classics can serve as the touchstone by which the merit of contemporary poetic work can be tested. This is the central idea of Arnold’s Touchstone Method.

Arnold was basically a classicist. He admired the ancient Greek, Roman and French authors as the models to be followed by modern English authors. The old English like Shakespeare, Spenser or Milton were also to be taken as models. Arnold took selected passages from the modern authors and compared them with selected passages from the ancient authors and thus decided their merits. This method was called Arnold's Touchstone Method. He quoted the two lines from Milton;

"And courage never to submit or yield

And what is else not to be overcome"

It has been said that the sentiment or the moral here is noble, but that the diction and movement are faulty. Perhaps, in offering these two lines as a specimen of the highest poetry, Arnold just tripped.

However, this system of judgment has its own limitations. Arnold would probably have agreed that his method of comparing passage with a passage is not a sufficient test for determining the value of a work as a whole. Arnold himself insisted that we must judge a poem by the 'total impression' and not by its fragments. But we can further extend this method of comparison from passages to the poems as whole units. The comparative method is an invaluable aid to the appreciation of any kind of art. It is helpful not merely thus to compare the masterpiece and the lesser work, but the good with the not so good, the sincere with the not quite sincere, and so on.

Arnold seems to go too far insisting all the time on work of the highest excellence in literature. It is not fair to demand that "all hills should be the Alps". There may be an excellence in some minor poetry worthwhile on its own account. Arnold expresses the view that good literature will never lose its currency. There might be some vulgarization and cheapening of literary values, as a result of the increase in numbers of the common sort of readers, but the currency of good literature is ensured by, "the instinct of self-preservation in humanity." So strong is Arnold’s faith in the value of poetry of the highest kind. Arnold declared that it would be much better to disregard the mass of current literature. By this method, we can set apart the alive, the vital, and the sincere from the shoddy, the showy and the insincere.

He declared, "In poetry, it is the glory, the eternal honor

that charlatanism shall find no entrance".

@Freeguide.blogspot.com

What Shortcomings does Arnold find in Chaucer as Poetical Classics?

Arnold’s “The study of Poetry” can be taken as a kind of legislative criticism where he puts up his belief as a literary critic. He proclaims that Chaucer and Burn are not the great classics. Now, the question comes why does Arnold put Chaucer outside the domain of classic writers? To solve this riddle, we should first know his idea of a classic and touchstone method.

According to Arnold, poetry is a criticism of life under the conditions fixed by the laws of poetic truth and poetic beauty. Great poetry alone possess the power to sustain, console, delight and to interpret life to us. He thus sets a high standard for great poetry. In order to be a classic, the poet must be able to fill us with such strength and joy that will guide us in our life. He suggests a practical method for finding a true classic. It is his famous “Touchstone Method.” One has to take a specimen of the poetry of the high quality and apply them to the poetry under judgment. When we judge a contemporary piece of poetry by such touchstone we can determine whether it can be justifiably turned as the product of a genuine classic. So it can be said that when poetry can fulfill all the criteria said in touchstone method can only be able to regard as a classic poetry.

Accordingly, the best poetry is characterized by truth and seriousness. As regards the manner and style, the best poetry is characterized by the superiority of diction and of movement. Thus according to Arnold, a poet is to be regarded as a classic if he fulfills the conditions stated above.

Arnold is of the opinion that many writers are considered to be classics but actually, they are false classics because their poetry does not live up to the high standard of poetic art attained by such great masters as Homer, Milton, and Shakespeare.

Comparison with Chaucer and Dante Arnold at first applies his Touchstone Method on Chaucer. He quotes a few lines from Chaucer and then compares them with a line from Dante and comes to the conclusion that the poetry of Chaucer does not have the account of the classics. At first, Arnold praises on Chaucer’s poetical performance and poetical achievement. But he denies to Chaucer the status of a poetical classic. In his opinion, Chaucer does not possess high poetic seriousness.

Chaucer appreciation and lacking: Arnold has high praise for Chaucer’s poetical performance. The poetry of Chaucer is far superior to the French romance poetry of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Chaucer’s power of fascination is enduring. The substance of Chaucer’s poetry, his view of things and his criticism of life has largeness, freedom, shrewdness, and kindliness. His poetry is the criticism of life and it has the truth of substance or matter. Chaucer is a perpetual source of good sense. Yet he does not have that high seriousness which Homer had, which his successor like Shakespeare, Milton etc had.

Lack of moral lessons in Chaucer’s writing: Chaucer does not pose himself as a stern moralist, as a social reformer. Chaucer has a genial humor devoid of spite and cynicism. Chaucer endeavored to picture life truthfully without either exalting unduly or demeaning unnecessarily any of his characters.

By such means,

we can derive the benefit of being able clearly to feel and deeply to enjoy the best, the truly classic in poetry.

©literary-articles.com

Imagination and Fancy in Coleridge's Biographia Literaria

Coleridge defines imagination by saying that "The imagination then I consider either as primary, or secondary. The primary imagination I hold to be the living power and prime agent of all human perception, and as a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite, I am. The secondary I consider as an echo of the former, co-existing with the conscious will, yet still as identical with the primary in the kind of its agency, and differing only in degrees, and in the mode of operation. It dissolves, diffuses, dissipates, in order to recreate, or where this process is rendered impossible, yet still, at all events, it struggles to idealize and to unify. It is essentially vital, even as all objects are essentially fixed and dead."

"Fancy, on the contrary, has no other counters to play with but fixity and definitions. Fancy is indeed no other than a mode of memory emancipated from the order of time and space. But equally with the ordinary memory, it must receive but its materials ready made from the law of association."

So, Coleridge seems to be saying that one can use fancy as a kind of power to create memory mosaics or colleges, rearranging what we've experienced into a new contribution or share to suit our fancy.

Coleridge has distinguished between Fancy and Imagination in the following ways:

# Fancy in Coleridge's eyes was employed for Tasks those were 'passive', 'mechanical', the accumulation s of fact and documentation of what is seen. Fancy, Coleridge argued, was "too often adulterator and counterfeiter of memory." (59)

The imagination, on the other hand, was 'vital' and transformative, "a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation". For Coleridge, it was the imagination that was responsible for acts that were truly creative and inventive and, in turn, that identified true instances of find or noble art. (60)

# Fancy is "the faculty of mere images or impressions, as imagination is the faculty of intuitions."

# Fancy is light and playful, while Imagination is grave and solemn.

# Fancy was concerned with the mechanical operations of the mind, those which are responsible for the passive accumulation of data and shortage of such data in the memory.

Imagination, on the other hand, described the "mysterious power," which extracted from such data, "hidden ideas and meaning"

# Fancy sports with the definite and static images and doesn't modify them; while imagination dissolves and reshapes them into new wholes.

# For Coleridge, fancy is the attribute of poetic genius, but imagination is its soul, which transforms all photo one graceful and intelligent whole.

# Fancy is equated with a mechanical mixture and Imagination is equated with a chemical compound. In a mechanical mixture, a number of ingredients are brought together. They are mixed up, but they do not tear their individual properties, they will exist as separate identities.

In a chemical compound, on the other hand, the different ingredients combine to form something new. The different ingredients no longer exist as separate identities. They kore their respective properties and fuse together to save something new and entirely different. A compound is an act of creation; while a mixture is merely a bringing together of a number of separate elements.

Thus imagination creates new shapes and forms of beauty by during and unifying the different impressions it receives from the external world. Fancy is not creative, it is a kind of memory; it arbitrarily brings together images and even when brought together, they continue to retain their separate and individual properties. They receive no coloring or modification from the mind. It is merely mechanical juxtaposition and not a chemical fusion.

Coleridge explains the point by quoting two passages from Shakespeare's Venus and Adonis. The following lines from this poem serve to illustrate fancy :

"Full gently now she takes him by the hand
A lily prisoned in a hold of snow
Or ivory in an alabaster band
So white a friend engirds so white a foe.

In these lines images drawn from memory, but they do not interpenetrate into one another.

The following kind from the same poem, illustrate the power and function of imagination:

"Look! How a bright star shooteth from the sky
So glides he in the night from Nenus' eye.

"How many images and feelings", says Coleridge, "are here brought together without effort and without the discord-the beauty of Adonis - the rapidity of the flight - the yearning yet helplessness of the unarmoured gazes- and a shadowy, ideal character thrown over the whole."

Coleridge's brief discussion of imagination and fancy in Biographia Literaria has been called, "perhaps the most famous single prose passage in all of English literature, yet... .Also one of the most baffling ". He was also one first critic to distinguish between them and define their respective roles.

Main differences between Structuralism and Post-Structuralism

1) Theoretical differences:

structuralism: Structuralism was a literary movement primarily concerned with understanding how language works as a system of meaning production. Focusing on the form or structure of the literary work, and the particular use of language
in the work would allow structuralists to think of language as a kind of science.
Post-structuralism, on the other hand, is less singularly defined as a movement than structuralism. Post-structuralists accuse structuralists of not following through the implications of the views about the language on which their intellectual
system is based. Post-structuralism offers a way of studying how knowledge is produced and critiques structuralist premises
. A post-structuralist approach argues that to understand an object (e.g., a text), it is necessary to study both the object itself and the systems of knowledge that produced the object.

2) Origins: Structuralism derives ultimately from linguistics. It
believes that if we observe accurately, collect data systematically
and make logical deductions then we can reach reliable conclusions
about language and the world.

 By contrast, post-structuralism derives ultimately from philosophy
which has always tended to emphasize the difficulty of achieving
secure knowledge about things. They inherit the habit of skepticism
and intensify it. 

3) Attitude to language: Structuralists accept that the world is constructed
through language in the sense that we do not have access to
reality other than through the linguistic system.

By contrast,
post-structuralism is much more fundamental in insisting upon the consequences
of the view that, in effect, reality itself is textual.

4)Practical differences: The post-structuralist literary critic is engaged in the task of

'deconstructing' the text. This process can be roughly defined as
'applied post-structuralism'. It is often referred to as 'reading against
the grain' or 'reading the text against itself', with the purpose
of 'knowing the text as it cannot know itself'. (Terry
Eagleton's definitions)

 At the same time, structuralists look for features
like parallels, echoes, and reflections. The deconstructionist looks
for evidence of gaps, breaks, and discontinuities of all kinds.

Characteristics of Postcolonial Literature

Postcolonial literature is the literature by people from formerly colonized countries. It exists on all continents except Antarctica Postcolonial literature often addresses the problems and consequences of the decolonization of a country, especially questions relating to the political and cultural independence of formerly subjugated people, and themes such as racialism and colonialism. A range of literary theory has evolved around the subject. It addresses the role of literature in perpetuating and challenging what postcolonial critic Edward Said refers to as cultural imperialism.

Characteristic of Postcolonial Literature

-

1)Use of own language: Authors use native language within their writing

2)Rewriting history: The British wrote the histories of the empires they conquered. 

Postcolonial writers don't like this version of history. It's a version that casts colonizers as heroes, as rescuers who "saved" everyone from ignorance and darkness. So postcolonial writers set about writing history from their own perspective, showing how colonialism was actually a pretty violent, terrible thing. More importantly, these writers also show how history is a matter of perspective, and there are always many perspectives: there is no one"true" history

3)Valorization of Cultural Identity: You know how a big justification for colonialism was, basically, that the cultures of colonized peoples were inferior to those of Europeans? Well, postcolonial writers challenge this idea, and they do this by valorizing their own indigenous cultures. "You've got religion?" they say to the colonizer. "So do we. You've got the culture? So do we. We've got our own literature and our own art, from sculpture to painting to bodypainting, dudes."

4)Nationhood and Nationalism: Postcolonial writers are really interested in nationhood and nationalism. A lot of these writers are very patriotic. They write books on behalf of their nations. Their work is often nationalist because postcolonial writers like to highlight and valorize their nation's cultural, political and social identity.

Why postcolonial criticism is important?

Postcolonial criticism analyzes and critiques the literature, poetry, drama, and prose fiction of writers who are subjects of countries that were governed by or that were colonies of other nations, primarily England and France, and, to a lesser extent, the United States. Postcolonial criticism deals mainly with the literature of Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean by analyzing the interactions between the culture, customs, and history of indigenous peoples and of the colonial power that governs. Postcolonial criticism is part of a larger field called cultural studies, or race and ethnicity studies.

 To understand the importance of postcolonial literature, a reader should understand the scope of European involvement in the lives of people around the world. Between the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, European countries conquered, governed, and otherwise had interests in the majority of nations around the world. Colonialism had begun principally through mercantilism and the protection of mercantile companies, such as the British East India Company, by the British navy and the navies of other trading countries. By the mid-twentieth century, however, domination by Europe began to end, as colonized countries staged successful independence movements. By 1980, Britain had lost all but a few of its colonial holdings; Hong Kong remained British until 1997 and Australia remained British until 1999.

  Postcolonial literary criticism is a recent development. Formerly known as commonwealth studies, postcolonial literary studies include examinations of works by authors from colonized nations. After nationalism, indigenous novelists and poets finally were able to express freely their own thoughts and feelings about the effects of the long-term conquest of their peoples, their traditions, and their customs. Although some literature from the East originated in these early days of colonial rule, the great mass of postcolonial literature began as colonies gained their independence

Edward Said: A list of the most influential postcolonial critics would have to begin with Edward W. Said (1935-2003), whose Orientalism (1978) is considered a foundational work in postcolonial studies. Said has a special place in postcolonial studies in part because of the uniqueness of his birth and education. He was born in Jerusalem while it was still a British...

       The work of Postcolonial criticism in short:

a)      Reject universalism.

b)      Examine the representation of other cultures in literature. Whether a work of literature is silent or does mention the issues of colonialism.

c)      Foreground questions of cultural differences and diversity.

d)     Celebrate Hybridity and ‘cultural polyvalency’.

e)      Develop a perspective, not just applicable to postcolonial literature, of power relation and potential change.

What are the characteristics of Postmodernism?

When listing the characteristics of postmodernism, it is important to remember that postmodernists do not place their philosophy in a defined box or category. Their beliefs and practices are personal rather than being identifiable with a particular establishment or special interest group. The following principles appear elemental to postmodernists:

There is no absolute truth - Postmodernists believe that the notion of truth is a contrived illusion, misused by people and special interest groups to gain power over others.

Truth and error are synonymous - Facts, postmodernists claim, are too limiting to determine anything. Changing erratically, what is fact today can be false tomorrow.

Self-conceptualization and rationalization - Traditional logic and objectivity are spurned by postmodernists. Preferring to rely on opinions rather than embrace facts, postmodernist spurn the scientific method.

Traditional authority is false and corrupt - Postmodernists speak out against the constraints of religious morals and secular authority. They wage an intellectual revolution to voice their concerns about the traditional establishment.

Ownership - They claim that collective ownership would most fairly administrate goods and services.

Disillusionment with modernism - Postmodernists rue the unfulfilled promises of science, technology, government, and religion.

Morality is personal - Believing ethics to be relative, postmodernists subject morality to personal opinion. They define morality as each person’s private code of ethics without the need to follow traditional values and rules.

Globalization – Many postmodernists claim that national boundaries are a hindrance to human communication. Nationalism, they believe, causes wars. Therefore, postmodernists often propose internationalism and uniting separate countries.

All religions are valid - Valuing inclusive faiths, postmodernists gravitate towards New Age religion. They denounce the exclusive claims of Jesus Christ as being the only way to God.

Liberal ethics - Postmodernists defend the cause of feminists and homosexuals.

Pro-environmentalism - Defending “Mother Earth,” postmodernists blame Western society for its destruction.

Difference Between Modernism and Postmodernism

Each person has his own belief and philosophy in life, and each has a mindset of his own. When he meets other individuals with the same views as his own, they can create a school of thought and share a common philosophy, belief, opinion, and discipline. Throughout mankind’s history, several schools of thought existed with modernism and postmodernism being more relevant and influential to the people of today.

Modernism is a school of thought or a movement that took place in the late 19th century and early 20th centuries. It involved a reform movement in art, music, literature, and the applied arts. It was based on rational thinking, logic, and the scientific process. It aimed at creating a clear and rational view of the world; believing that through scientific and reason mankind can advance and grow. It advocated the belief that there is much to learn from the past that could be beneficial to the present.

Modernism supported the belief that there is a purpose for life and that it should be viewed objectively. Modernist had an optimistic view of the world and believed that there are values and ethics that need to be followed. They were not very concerned about politics and gave more thought to significant things. The era of modernism was a time of artistic and literary advancement. Great works of art and literature were abundant as well as of music, architecture, poetry, and science. Modernist works were admired for their simplicity and elegance.

Postmodernism, on the other hand, is a school of thought or a movement that took place after the Second World War, but it gained popularity in the 1960s. It was a chaotic era hard to comprehend and appraise. It advocated the belief that there is no universal truth. It used an unscientific approach to life and believed that all things are irrational. Postmodernists believed in chance and transience. They questioned the rationality of modernism, its principles, and thinking. They believed that there is no connection between the past and the present and that past event are irrelevant in the present.

The postmodernist era was characterized by the advancement of technology and its use in music, art, and literature. Very few original works of artists can be found during this time, and previous works were copied. Postmodernist artists get their inspiration and basis from the original works of modernist artists.

To know more about Critical theory

Summary:

1)       Modernism is a school of thought that took place in the late 1800s and early 1900s while postmodernism is a school of thought that took place after World War II.

2)   Modernism advocated rational thinking and the use of science and reason for the advancement of man while postmodernism believed in the irrationality of things.

3)     The modernist era was characterized by the simple and elegant original works of gifted artists while the postmodernist era was characterized by the advancement in technology and its use in different media.

4)     Modernists believed in universal truth while postmodernists did not.

5)     Postmodernists were very political while modernists were not.

Read more: Difference Between Modernism and Postmodernism | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/politics/ideology-politics/difference-between-modernism-and-postmodernism/#ixzz5Q9teT67w

Marxism- A Short Discussion

Marxism is a method of socio-economic analysis that views class relations and social conflict using a materialist interpretation of historical development and takes a dialectical view of social transformation. It originates from the works of 19th-century German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

To know about Sigmund Freud

Marxism uses a methodology, now known as historical materialism, to analyze and critique the development of capitalism and the role of class struggles in systemic economic change.

According to Marxian theory, class conflict arises in capitalist societies due to contradictions between the material interests of the oppressed proletariat—a class of wage laborers employed by the bourgeoisie to produce goods and services—and the bourgeoisie—the ruling class that owns the means of production and extract their wealth through appropriation of the surplus product (profit) produced by the proletariat.

Read more articles on Critical theory

Marxism has developed into many different branches and schools of thought, though now there is no single definitive Marxist theory. Different Marxian schools place a greater emphasis on certain aspects of classical Marxism while rejecting or modifying other aspects. Many schools of thought have sought to combine Marxian concepts and non-Marxian concepts, which has then led to contradictory conclusions. However, lately, there is a movement toward the recognition that historical materialism and dialectical materialism remains the fundamental aspect of all Marxist schools of thought, which should result in more agreement between different schools.

To know more by the writer

Cultural materialism- A Short Discussion

Cultural materialism is an anthropological research orientation first introduced by Marvin Harris in his 1968 book The Rise of Anthropological Theory, as a theoretical paradigm and research strategy. It is said to be the most enduring achievement of that work. Harris subsequently developed a full elaboration and defense of the paradigm in his 1979 book Cultural Materialism. To Harris social change is dependent on three factors: a society's infrastructure, structure, and superstructure.

To know about Sigmund Freud

Harris's concept of cultural materialism was influenced by the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, as well as their theories as modified by Karl August Wittfogel and his 1957 book, Oriental Despotism Yet this materialism is distinct from Marxist dialectical materialism, as well as from philosophical materialism Thomas Malthus's work encouraged Harris to consider reproduction of equal importance to production. The research strategy was also influenced by the work of earlier anthropologists including Herbert Spencer, Edward Taylor and Lewis Henry Morgan who, in the 19th century, first proposed that cultures evolved from the less complex to the more complex over time. Leslie White and Julian Steward and their theories of cultural evolution and cultural ecology were instrumental in the reemergence of evolutionist theories of culture in the 20th century and Harris took inspiration from them in formulating cultural materialism.

To know more by the writer

Feminist criticism- A brief discussion

Feminist literary criticism is literary criticism informed by feminist theory, or more broadly, by the politics of feminism. It uses the principles and ideology of feminism to critique the language of literature. This school of thought seeks to analyze and describe the ways in which literature portrays the narrative of male domination by exploring the economic, social, political, and psychological forces embedded within literature. This way of thinking and criticizing works can be said to have changed the way literary texts are viewed and studied, as well as changing and expanding the canon of what is commonly taught.

                                                                                                          

Want to read more about Critical theory

Traditionally, feminist literary criticism has sought to examine old texts within literary canon through a new lens. Specific goals of feminist criticism include both the development and discovery female tradition of writing, and rediscovering of old texts, while also interpreting the symbolism of women's writing so that it will not be lost or ignored by the male point of view and resisting sexism inherent in the majority of mainstream literature. These goals along with the intent to analyze women writers and their writings from a female perspective, and increase awareness of the sexual politics of language and style were developed by Lisa Tuttle in the 1980s, and have since been adopted by a majority of feminist critics.

To know about Sigmund Freud

The history of feminist literary criticism is extensive, from classic works of nineteenth-century women authors such as George Eliot and Margaret Fuller to cutting-edge theoretical work in women's studies and gender studies by "third-wave" authors. Before the 1970s—in the first and second waves of feminism— feminist literary criticism was concerned with women's authorship and the representation of women's condition within literature; in particular the depiction of fictional female characters. In addition, feminist literary criticism is concerned with the exclusion of women from the literary canon, with theorists such as Lois Tyson suggesting that this is because the views of women authors are often not considered to be universal ones.

Additionally, feminist criticism has been closely associated with the birth and growth of queer studies. The modern feminist literary theory seeks to understand both the literary portrayals and representation of both women and people in the queer community, expanding the role of a variety of identities and analysis within feminist literary criticism.

To know more by the writer

Marxist criticism- A short discussion

Marxist literary criticism is a loose term describing literary criticism based on socialist and dialectic theories. Marxist criticism views literary works as reflections of the social institutions from which they originate. (Clarification: In fact, most Marxist critics who were writing in what could chronologically be specified as the early period of Marxist literary criticism subscribed to what has come to be called "Vulgar Marxism." In this thinking of the structure of societies, literary texts are one register of the Superstructure, which is determined by the economic Base of any given society. Therefore, literary texts are a reflection of the economic Base rather than "the social institutions from which they originate" for all social institutions, or, more precisely human social relationships, are in the final analysis determined by the economic Base). According to Marxists, even literature itself is a social institution and has a specific ideological function, based on the background and ideology of the author.

To know about Sigmund Freud

Want to read more about Critical theory

To know more by the writer

What is 'The wretched of the earth'

The Wretched of the Earth (French: Les Damnés de la Terre) is a 1961 book by Frantz Fanon, in which the author provides a psychiatric and psychological analysis of the dehumanizing effects of colonization upon the individual and the nation, and discusses the broader social, cultural, and political implications inherent to establishing a social movement for the decolonization of a person and of a people. The French-language title derives from the opening lyrics of "The International".

To know about Sigmund Freud

Want to read more about Critical theory

To know more by the writer

Gist of The play Look Back In Anger

A Realistic Subject Matter: Look Back In Anger received an overwhelming response from the audience when it was first produced. It appealed to the audience because of the realistic subject-matter. Through the character of the protagonist, Osborne revealed his feeling for the contemporary scene and the frustration and the temperament of post-war Britain found expression through the speeches of Jimmy. The use of contemporary idiom the sharp comments on matters ranging from “posh” Sunday newspaper and “whiletile” universities to the bishop and the hydrogen bomb.

Symbols in look Back on Anger

An “unpleasant” Social Play: Unlike another realistic playwright, Osborne presents the social problems apprehended by the characters. The stinking rhetorical speeches go beyond realistic prose drama. Many of his impressive tirades are concerned with the debased values of modern life but the action of the play is very little influenced by such social questions as a class system. Alison describes Jimmy’s invasion of her upper-class world as a part of the class war he was waging with Alison as a hostage.

Learn about Helena Charles

Jimmy’s Anger: Jimmy’s anger seems to be deep-rooted. For him “the misery of the world is misery and will not then rest”. He suffers for others and likes other people’s lives. As a young boy, he watched his dying father and learned more about love-death and betrayal that people like Helena would know all their lives. He recalls the experience with bitterness and says that every time he had sat near his father’s bed and listen to his father’s talk he had to fight back his tears. He says he had become a ”veteran after his experience of remaining by his father’s bedside for twelve months. He also suffers for Mrs. Tanner, Augh’s mother who ac­cording to him went “through the sordid process of dying.”

Read more about Look back on anger

Incompatibility between Jimmy and His Wife: the Social disparity between his working-class origin and the upper middle class to which his wife belongs is also a reason for Jimmy’s anger. He wages an unending battle against the upper middle class whom he holds in contempt and treats Alison as a “hostage”. He constantly bullies his wife and provokes her to retaliate Alison’s silence, her withdrawal into detached indifference makes communication between him and herself impossible. “That girl there can twist your arm off with’ her silence,” he comments on her infuriated by her silent disposition.

Jimmy’s Deep-Seated Need of Allegiance: Jimmy is over demanding in his relationship. He seeks from women much more than he could ever hope to get. When disappointed he turns his wrath on them with savage resentment. He expects everyone to be loyal not only to him but to all the things he believes in, not only to his present and future but to his past as well. Alison’s failure to live up to his expectation irritates him.

Sexual Passion No Remedy for Jimmy’s Trouble: Sexual passion occasionally helps Jimmy to overcome his frustration, and assists him to escape his troubling mind now and then. But it does not provide a permanent solution to his problems. In the first act the ever critically Jimmy takes a brief break and is shown to share a tender moment of togetherness with his wife. But immediately after some time on learning about Helena’s impending visit he returns to his farmer self-cursing and condemning people. He alternates between sexual teaming and sexual passion. In the Act III & Sc. II he asks contemptuously why women bled men to death. He says that men have no alternative but to it themselves be butchered as there is no brave cause to die for.