All for Love Character List

Antony

A previously-successful Roman general, Antony has essentially gone into retirement following his humiliating defeat at Actium. As the play begins, his relationship with the beautiful Egyptian queen Cleopatra is unraveling. He is passionately attached to Cleopatra, unable to extricate himself from their intense relationship. Throughout the play he is described as possessing large and unsubtle feelings, which both make him a brave and great man, but can also undermine him.

Towards the end of the play, he attributes any political and military success he has had to his love for Cleopatra.

Cleopatra

Cleopatra is the infamous queen of Egypt who has already enjoyed a romantic relationship with Caesar before taking up with Antony. She is described as sexually irresistible, and expresses her love for Antony as passionately as he expresses his for her. While she wants to act in ethical and pure ways that reflect her commitment to Antony, she is easily swayed by the strategizing of her eunuch, and is not above manipulation.

Cleopatra is ultimately just as committed to Antony as she is to her, and when given the opportunity to live in Caesar's court, opts to kill herself instead.

Octavia

Octavia is Caesar's sister and wife to Antony. She travels to Egypt in order to convince Antony to return to his country and his family. She is presented as pure and noble-hearted, committed to doing what is right for her family and country. In this respect, she is the opposite of Cleopatra and Antony, who respond only to their passions.

Dolabella

Dolabella is one of Antony's dearest old friends. They had a very intimate friendship until Antony suspected Dolabella of being attracted to Cleopatra, his beloved. Dolabella comes to Rome in order to convince Antony to leave Egypt and returns to Rome.

Ventidius

Antony's old general, Ventidius is an older man who has Antony's best interest in mind. He consistently tries to convince Antony to leave Cleopatra behind and return to his life in Rome in order to uphold his political power. In spite of his desire to help, he misinterprets certain events and does not do a good enough job of preventing Antony from falling back into his codependent relationship with Cleopatra. At the end of the play, he chooses to kill himself instead of killing Antony.

Serapion

A priest of Isis who portends bad fortune for Rome.

Alexas

Alexas is Cleopatra's eunuch, and the closest thing the play has to an antagonist. Throughout the play, he conspires to keep Cleopatra and Antony together while also protecting himself, which leads to chaos and tragedy. He is also a tragic figure, who is depicted as lying only to maintain his precarious position in society. He is ultimately captured by the Roman troops.

T.S.Eliot as a critic

 

T.S.Eliot as a critic

Thomas Stearns Eliot is considered to be one of the most influential critics of the modern era. He is widely influential for his famous essay Tradition and the Individual Talent. The essay influenced the emerging theory in the literary theory known as New Criticism and hence Eliot is also sometimes referred to be as the anticipator of New Criticism theory. He has contributed critical terms such as the Impersonality theory, objective correlative, unification of sensibility and autotelic text.

Firstly as a critic Eliot is a classicist. His essay Tradition and the Individual Talent shrouds him to be a classicist where he believed that a piece of art should be sublime, complex and objective. He gave a full understanding of the idea of tradition where tradition is simply a current of literary writings but Eliot highlights that the poet cannot attain tradition unless and until he obtains a historical sense. Historical sense is simply a consciousness of the past in terms of writing consciousness of the dead poets from Homer till the present and grasping on their literary works. A poet according to Eliot has to obtain this sense of historical sense first so to obtain tradition. A poet can only refine his sense of tradition/historical sense only when he subtracts his personal feelings and emotions. Hence, he highlights the theory of Impersonality which also makes him a classicist.

According to Eliot the work of art has to be impersonal and the poet can achieved the level of impersonality only when he has refined his tradition/historical sense. The materials or historical sense/tradition that he gathered inside his mind is going to be mixed as in a chemical reaction along with the personal experiences of the poet. The mind has to act as a catalyst as in chemistry where it will increase its reaction but will not participate or undergo any process of change. He highlights that the past (materials he obtained through historical sense/tradition) will direct or guide the present poet( any modern poet) for his writing or creativity at present and the present(the modern mind’s poet) will alter or modify the past(materials from the past tradition/historical sense) and a new of work of art will be created which is the individual talent. In simple words, the Individual talent is the product of the chemical reaction between tradition/historical sense fusing with personal experiences of the poet.

Eliot as a critic believed that the work of art can project a personal emotions of the poet but he believed that it needs a mediator to be expressed. In his essay Hamlet and His Problems , Eliot coined the term objective correlative. This critical concept is actually a mediator through which a poet can correlate his personality and emotions with a set of objects or events. Eliot criticized that Shakespeare’s Hamlet has a lot of emotions in his head but are unable to be expressed because it lacked objective correlative. In critical understanding the concept emphasizes on evoking a sense of emotions in any work of poetry where a particular emotion can be expressed by correlating it with an image or object or events to portray it objectively.

Eliot criticism has always emphasized on objectivity rather than subjectivity. This essence also makes him a classicist. His impersonality theory focuses on objective art and he criticizes the Romantic poetry for its subjectivity especially Wordsworth’s theory of poetry of “recollection in tranquility”. He believes that poetry is an escape of emotions and personality rather than expressing one’s emotions and feelings. This is the idea of objectivity he emphasized and he further adds that it has to be “impersonal” since it has its own life and does not focus on the existence of the writer/poet/artist. He is actually propagating the idea of art for art’s sake where they believed that art has its own life and can exist without the presence of an artist.

However, there is also a question which arises the need for tradition and objectivity. It was the demand of the time and the society for it became complex and difficult for the poets and people to live during that age. The individual trust was broken due to the First world war and if Eliot expressed his emotions like Wordsworth then nobody will dared to believe Eliot and his writings. Hence, there was a demand for the sense of tradition and Eliot in the impersonality revolutionized the modern poetry by attacking Renaissance Humanism. He attacks the Renaissance Humanism with his impersonality theory that though human beings maybe significant in the world yet they are also equally destructible in the world because the of the impact of the First World War and Impersonality theory addresses such compaction of forces of First World War.

It was Eliot who actually appreciated and glorified the 17th century poets knows as Metaphysical poets. In his essay The Metaphysical Poets, Eliot appreciates their poetry for their ability to unify both wits and emotions in a balanced form. When Neo-classicism emerged, poetry became witty and imbalanced and Romanticism became emotional and less witty. Hence, it was the metaphysical poets who balanced the wits and emotions in their poetry and he came up with the idea of unification of sensibility where the use of wits and emotions are well balanced and formed in a work of art.

 

 

William Wordsworth as a critic

  William Wordsworth as a critic

William Wordsworth is a leading figure in the history of English Romanticism. He is the pioneer of the Romantic poets. Other Romantic poets have accepted his leadership in writing poems. But he goes beyond the limit of a poet. He successfully establishes himself in the field of literary criticism too. His performance as a literary critic has been seen in his famous critical piece, "Preface to the Lyrical Ballads". He explains his preference to Romantic poetry very well. Like a lawyer, he refuse the Neo-classical poetic theories in " Preface ". Moreover, he has clarified his theory of poetry. He explains very clearly the nature and function of poetry. He also interprets his clear-cut views about poetic diction, poetic creation and poet. Thus he becomes a literary critic.

 Wordsworth has expressed his views on poetic creation in his " Preface to the Lyrical Ballads ". A good poem does not appear in the mind of a poet automatically. A poet has to go through a number of stages for creating it.

 There are four stages in a poetic process. They are watching or studying, remembrance, meditation and imaginative thrill or enthusiasm. A poet goes through these stages and at last creates poetry. At first, he watches anything in nature. He studies any natural incident. His mind collects the images of natural objects. Afterwards, he meditates over the remembered feelings and emotions. The remembered feelings and emotions get a new dimension in the meditation of the poet. The poet becomes thrilled with the help of his powerful imagination.

Spontaneous feelings and emotions come out from the heart of the poet. They form a perfect poem. So poetry is actually the natural enfolding of strong feelings and emotions. But the natural enfolding of strong feelings and emotions should be taken place in tranquility. Actually, the poet transforms his powerful feelings and emotions into poetry. However, this poetic process occurs in a calm and quite state of the mind. The mind of the poet needs tranquility to create beautiful poetry. Wordsworth believes that imagination is the guiding force of writing poetry. It is the essence of poetic creation too.

Wordsworth revolts against the poetic diction of the Neo-classical poets of the 18th century. He opposes to their flashiness and absurd laseology. However, he expresses his own theory of language for his new kind of poetry or Romantic poetry in the "Preface to the Lyrical Ballads". He selects the language of the common people for his new kind of poems. He also selects the incidents of the common people's life for his poems. The language of his poetry is actually the language of general people. He believes that simple and easy language can express feelings and emotions properly. Simple language is more idealistic than the artificial language.

Wordsworth thinks that the language of poetry should be near to the language of men. The language of poetry should be the spoken language of the general people. Simple language can give immediate pleasure if it is used in poetry. Wordsworth does not like the personifications of abstract ideas in his poems. He believes that the personifications of the abstract ideas are not the part of the natural language. There is not any essential difference between the language of prose and the language of poetry. The language of poetry and the language of prose are same.

Wordsworth tries to seek for the answer of the question, " Who is a poet? " He says that a poet is a man speaking to men. A poet should have deep feelings, eagerness and softness. He should be well aware of the nature of human beings. A poet is a ready man. He is always ready to feel and think. He should not have any restriction. His only responsibility is to give immediate pleasure to the readers. He will give immediate pleasure as a man. It means that he will be fully aware of human pleasures. He tries to find out the characteristics of the relationship that exists between man and Nature. The relation between man and Nature is the first object of a poet. He should find out the confidence, perception, and reasoning of a man.

Wordsworth also makes a comparative study between the poet and the man of science. He says that the poet and the man of science try to give us comfort and pleasure. The knowledge of the poet is related to our existence. But the knowledge of the man of science is not related to our existence. The knowledge of the man of science does not come quickly to the general people. It comes slowly. But anybody can share the truth of the poet. Everybody can understand poetic truth. But scientific truth is not for everybody. The poet is different from other people because he has swift thinking capacity. He can think without any external influence. A poet should select the words of conversational language. A poet should not use complex phrases. But he does not have anything to do when he has to deal with metre. The poet and his reader do not have any scope for running away from the rigid rules of metre.

In conclusion, we may say that "Preface to the Lyrical Ballads" is a manifesto of the Romantic Movement. It is a landmark of literary criticism too. It removes the influence of Neo-classicism and it brings the elements of Romanticism. However, many modern critics do not like Wordsworth's theory. They have pointed out that poetry is an art and it is not a dumping ground of powerful feelings. But contradictions and conflicts do not matter. The plain truth is that Wordsworth delivers some clear-cut ideas about poet, poetic creation, poetic diction and the nature and function of poetry in this "Preface". These features make it one of the most discussed critical and epoch-making documents in English. Wordsworth is also able to represent him as a literary critic.

 

Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard - Thomas Gray

 

 

Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard  - Thomas Gray

Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard is a poem by Thomas Gray, published in 1751. The poem's origins are unknown, but it was partly inspired by Gray's thoughts following the death of the poet Richard West in 1742. The main idea of “Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard” is a simple one: Brooding on the inevitability of death. Gray says, power, beauty, wealth all fall a prey to death.

The speaker begins the poem by saying he is in a churchyard with a bell tolling for the end of the day, he uses this image as a metaphor for life and death. He describes the scenery around him, speaking of the sun setting, the church tower covered in ivy, and an owl hooting. He then focuses on the graveyard around him. He speaks of the men who are in the graves and how they were probably simple village folk. They’re dead and nothing will wake these villagers, not a rooster’s call in the morning, not twittering birds, and not the smell of the morning breeze. The speaker also laments that life’s pleasures will no longer be felt by those buried in the graveyard, especially emphasizing the joys of family life.

The dead villagers probably were farmers, and the speaker discusses how they probably enjoyed farming. He warns that although it sounds like a simple life, no one should mock a good honest working life as these men once had. No one should mock these men because in death, these arbitrary ideas of being wealthy or high-born do not matter. Fancy grave markers will not bring someone back to life, and neither will the honor of being well born.

The speaker then wonders about those in the graveyard who are buried in unmarked graves. He wonders if they were full of passion, or if they were potential world leaders who left the world too soon. He wonders if one was a beautiful lyre player, whose music could bring the lyre to life—literally. He laments for the poor villagers, as they were never able to learn much about the world. He uses metaphors to describe their lack of education, that knowledge as a book was never open to them, and that poverty froze their souls.

He speaks of those in the graveyard as unsung heroes, comparing them to gems that are never found, or flowers that bloom and are never seen. He wonders if some of the residents of the graveyard could have been historically relevant, but unable to shine. One could have been a mute Milton, the author of Paradise Lost; or one could have been like John Hampden, a politician who openly opposed the policies of King Charles. Alas, the speaker mourns again that these villagers were poor and unable to make their mark on the world.

But because they were poor, they were also innocent. They were not capable of regicide or being merciless. They were also incapable of hiding the truth, meaning they were honest with the world. The speaker notes that these people, because they were poor, will not even be remembered negatively. They lived far from cities and lived in the quiet. At least their graves are protected by simple grave markers, so people do not desecrate their burial places by accident. And the graves have enough meaning to the speaker that he will stop and reflect on their lives. The speaker wonders who leaves earth in death without wondering what they are leaving behind. Even the poor leave behind loved ones, and they need someone in their life who is pious to close their eyes upon death.

The speaker begins to wonder about himself in relation to these graveyard inhabitants. Even if these deceased villagers were poor, at least the speaker is elegizing them now. The speaker wonders who will elegize him. Maybe it will be someone like him, a kindred spirit, who wandered into the same graveyard. In the speaker’s own epitaph, he remarks that he has died, unknown to both fame and fortune, as in he never became famous and was not well-born. But at least he was full of knowledge—he was a scholar and a poet. Yet oftentimes, the speaker could become depressed. But he was bighearted and sincere, so heaven paid him back for his good qualities by giving him a friend. His other good and bad qualities do not matter anymore, so he instructs people not to go looking for them since he hopes for a good life in heaven with God.

 

I.A.Richards

 

 

I.A.Richards

Introduction

Ivor Armstrong Richards is the pioneer of the new criticism. He is one of the major critics of the twentieth century. He is admired for the originality of ideas. He has made substantial and lasting contribution to the growth and development of the new criticism. His important works are ‘Principles of Literary Criticism’, Practical Criticism, and Coleridge On Imagination’. He also wrote ‘The Foundation of Aesthetics’ in collaboration with C.K.Ogden and James Wood, and the ‘Meaning of Meaning’ with Ogden. He turned criticism into science. He deftly applied the methods of scientific investigation to literary   judgment. He was the first critic who realized the importance of psychology and the impact it made on the reader and society. He also gives paramount importance to the art of communication and brings out a distinction between the scientific and the emotive uses of the language.

His Critical Principles

In his ‘Principles of Literary Criticism’ Richards insists about the questions which a critic must be asked.They are, “what gives the experience of reading a certain poem its value?  How is this experience better than another? Why prefer this picture to that ? In which ways should we listen to opinion about works of art not as good as another? These are the fundamental questions which criticism is required to answer, together with such preliminary questions – What is a picture, a poem, a piece of music? How can  experiences be compared? What is value? – as may required in order to approach these questions, “Richards examines the history of criticism and tries to find out how far the critics from the past to the present age have been able to answer these questions successfully. He is not satisfied with the previous criticism .

Methods of Science

He has formulated a theory which says that the methods of experimental science must be applied to literary criticism. Richards says that an aesthetic experience is neither unique nor does it provide any deep insight into reality, it is similar to the other experiences. But aesthetic experience is organized and developed. To him poetry is an activity which has to perform a psychological duty like all other physical activities.

His theory of criticism

In order to determine the nature of poetry Richards first examines the working of the human minds, which, according to him is “a system of impulses”. Impulses may be defined as the reactions produced in the mind by some stimulus and culminating in an act. Until the stage of action arrives they pull it different directions, each pressing the others to act in the way suited to it. The mind experiences a state of poise only when they organize to follow a common sense. He explains his theory through an image. He considered mind as a system of magnetic needles that are free to move in any direction. An outside impulse makes the needles vibrate. After the interaction is complete the needles are set in a particular direction. So every outside impulse moves the mind. The needles represent man’s interests and objectives in life. Man is not merely intelligence but is governed by a system of interests. This system of interests is activated by poetic words.

The Value of Poetry

Richards divides impulses into two kinds: ‘appetencies and aversions’, in plain words ‘desires’ and ‘dislikes’. The mind instinctively prefers the satisfaction of appetencies to the satisfaction of aversions, and as some appetencies are more important than others it seeks their satisfaction first. It prefers elevating those appetencies, which have importance in life, to those that are depraving. The normal satisfaction of impulses is involved in almost all the greatest good of life. This is what morality wants and the poetic experience too has ultimately a moral value. The mind functions normally and is not prompted by any ethical motive.

The function of Language

Richard is interested in textual and verbal analysis. According to him, words communicate four kinds of meaning.  They are Sense, Feeling, Tone and intention He examines the nature of statements and divides them into two as scientific statements and  pseudo statements. The scientific statements are related to nature. To Richards, poetic expressions are pseudo statements and they are not absolutely true as they do not correspond to the world of facts.

Conclusion

Richards depends on psychology too much. As psychology is developing and the knowledge of human consciousness is so vast that Richards’ theory is too weak. His theory is narrow to account for the wide range of poetry. In order to satisfy his theory he had ignored certain legitimate functions of poetry.

Ode on Solitude - Alexander Pope

 

Ode on Solitude - Alexander Pope

Alexander Pope is one of the best known writers of the seventeenth century. He wrote Ode on Solitude in 1700, at the age of twelve. It is a beautiful and peaceful poem. The poet emphasizes how solitude is another important part of the equation. It asserts the poet’s desire to live a good, simple life and go unnoticed by the world.

In the first stanza of the poem, the poet speaks of a man with simple dreams, only living off his own land, which is also the land of his fathers. In the second stanza, his desires are further explained, as he wants to farm and live off his land, being completely self-sufficient. The third stanza states how this way of life is good because time has no meaning, one is healthy, has few worries, and lives quiet days. In the fourth stanza, recreation and innocence are revealed to be the results of this lifestyle. In the fifth and final stanza, it is revealed that the poet is the man in the poem, and he wishes to be left alone, unknown from the world.

According to the poet, a man can be truly happy if he leads a life of contentment and simplicity. He should not be greedy. He should be satisfied with the few acres of land inherited from his ancestors. His field will give him food and his cow will give him milk. His trees will give him shade and firewood and his sheep will give him the wool for clothing. He will have a healthy body and peace of mind, spending his time in study, rest and recreation. He will lead an innocent life and a life of meditation and prayer.

The poet considered this man blessed! Time almost doesn’t have meaning for this man; his world provides for all of his needs. Hours go by, days go by, years go by, and everything remains the same. The health the man is in at the beginning of this cycle is the health he remains in when it is finished. Peace of mind is normal for him — what is there to trouble him? It seems as though, in a world of peace and quiet, there is absolutely nothing that could disrupt the life of this farmer, and the poet sees that as a high blessing.

He concludes the poem by asking that he live “unseen, unknown” and die away from the world where no one can find him. It’s this kind of life, without exterior pressures or an image to maintain that appeals to him.

 

A Song for St.Cecilia’s Day- John Dryden

 A Song for St.Cecilia’s Day - John Dryden

John Dryden wrote ‘A Song for St.Cecilia’s Day’ for performance with orchestra, to celebrate the festival of St. Cecilia’s Day (Nov. 22) in 1687. St. Cecila was a pious Christian lady who sacrificed her life in Rome in the year 230 AD. She is the patron saint of music. Her music had divine qualities. The central idea of the poem is that the whole universe is a stage. It was created by the power of music and will be dissolved by the music of the last trumpet. The music thus connects the two ends of creation and destruction.

Dryden begins the poem with the observation that the universe was originally in a chaotic state and order was gradually evolved thanks to the impact of divine music. The four elements hot, cold, music and dry which had been lying pell-mell, were arranged in proper order. This evolutionary process culminated in the birth of man. All the excellences in nature are contained in man just as all the musical notes in the scale are contained in the diapason.

There is a reference to Biblical Jubal. According to the Bible, Jubal was the first musician who represented the elemental force of primitive music. When Jubal struck the chords, the listeners were enchanted. They thought that a god dwelt in the hollow of the shell and produced the ravishing music. They were sure a  human being could not produce such strains.

Of the many musical instruments mentioned in the poem, the drum with its double beat is one. Its loud clangor puts soldiers on their mettle and makes them think not in terms of running away from the battlefield. The flute, the lute and the violin express the feelings of lovers. But the organ expresses divine love. Dryden says that the organ music ascends to heaven and inspires the angels there to sing all the more 

The last section, Dryden is made a comparison  between St.Cecilia and Orpheus. Orpheus was the great classical singer who could control both man and nature through his music. ‘The savage race’ and ‘trees’ represent undisciplined nature. Yet they were tamed by the music of Orpheus. But Cecilia does more than Orpheus. The music that emanated from Cecilia’s organ was so marvellous that an angel mistook the earth for heaven. Thus Dryden establishes the superiority of musical power of St.Cecilia over the pagan musical power of Orpheus.

Dryden concludes the poem with a grand chorus. The power of music made the spheres resound: similarly the end of the universe will be announced by the powerful beat of the trumpet.

The poem ends with a prophecy that as the universe was created from the power generated out of the musical harmony, so the universe will cease to exist with the end of that harmony.