Venetian Society in Volpone

In the play “Volpone,” Ben Jonson attempts to depict the social system of his time. The events of this play unfold in Venice, a prosperous city in Italy. We also observe that Shakespeare’s play “The Merchant of Venice” is set in Venice, and several works of English literature draw inspiration from the city. However, despite the setting in Venice and the portrayal of its social system, “Volpone” actually aims to portray the society of England, particularly London, during that era.

The main plot of this play goes somewhat like this: Volpone is a nobleman in Venice. He is wealthy and possesses many assets, but he has no children. As a result, many people are greedy about who will inherit his wealth after his death, and several individuals desire to become the heir to his wealth. Volpone takes advantage of this opportunity by employing his loyal servant, Mosca. Mosca goes to everyone and tells them that they will be the sole heirs of Volpone, thus tempting these individuals. So, we can see that to appease Volpone, some people send their wives to him, while others disinherit their sons and nominate Volpone as the heir to their wealth. This way, an anarchy is created.

Although Ben Jonson talks about Venice, it actually represents Renaissance England society. The Renaissance brought many good things to England, but at the same time, it also created a lack of morality among people. In that era, individual freedom developed, and some bad people took this opportunity to achieve their goals and became morally corrupt in society.

The main reason for this is that, on the one hand, the Renaissance and, on the other hand, economic conditions improved during the Elizabethan age. As a result, prosperity increased, and London became a wealthier city. The middle class emerged, and the wealth of the upper-class elite continued to grow. As a result of all this, people’s desire and greed for wealth increased significantly. Consequently, those who are morally corrupt in society try to take advantage of this, while good people begin to suffer, and many of them also turn corrupt. Ben Jonson might have been somewhat worried about all these issues, which is why he aimed to show in his play that greed never brings positive results. Upon examining the play, we observe that every character is morally corrupt and greedy. Volpone constantly thinks about how to cunningly acquire other people’s wealth illegally. Mosca shares the same desires. Corvino and Corbaccio believe they will be the sole heirs to Volpone’s wealth and eagerly await his demise, hoping he will designate them as heirs in his will before he dies. As a result, each character does not hesitate to commit any evil deed. Volpone hears that Corvino’s wife, Celia, is very beautiful and desires to have her, even though she is someone else’s wife. Volpone cunningly attempts to rape her.

The main lesson we learn from this play is that good people like Celia and Bonario are primarily tortured because of the lack of unity among them. On the other hand, bad people unite for their interests and, in doing so, can easily oppress good people. When Celia falls into danger, there is no one to help her. Conversely, Bonario’s father betrays him and gives testimony against him. Similarly, even after Celia survives the rape, her husband does not come forward to help her in court. Celia’s husband and Bonario’s father unite with bad people like Volpone and Mosca. As a result, they forget the simple fact that it is not outsiders but their family members who are being harmed, all because they fall into greed.

When bad people unite in society, it leads to the destruction of good people, and as a result, it does not mean that the bad people win. Instead, bad people often end up causing harm to themselves. Ben Jonson has beautifully portrayed this idea and suggested that exactly this kind of destruction is impending in English society, especially in London. If people do not become aware from now on, it will bring a lot of danger for the future. So, Ben Jonson tried to convey to people that if we do not choose the path of goodness, we will lead to the destruction of society. If society is affected, its impact will affect everyone, whether good or bad. 

Shib Narayan Das: The designer of Bangladesh’s first flag

It is sad but true that very few people in Bangladesh know about Shib Narayan Das. This legendary figure earned his place in the history of Bangladesh as the first designer of the national flag. In this article, readers will learn about this remarkable individual and the history behind the design of Bangladesh’s first flag.

Shib Narayan Das was a freedom fighter who risked his life to free the country from the oppression of the Pakistani military. He passed away at the age of 77 on April 19, 2024, while undergoing treatment in the ICU of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University. 

He was so courageous that he trampled on a photo of then-President Ayub Khan, which had been hung at Comilla Victoria Government College. For this reason, the authoritarian government issued a warrant against him. Not only that, he was the 17th out of 35 accused in the Agartala conspiracy case.

The beginning of the design of Bangladesh’s first flag was not easy. The process began on June 7, 1970, when Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was scheduled to participate in a student military parade at Paltan Maidan in Dhaka, the capital of East Pakistan at the time. For this event, a group called the “Joy Bangla Force,” also known as the “February 15 Force,” was formed with students. The student leaders decided to make a flag for this force.

For this purpose, on June 6, 1970, a meeting was held in room 108 of Sergeant Zahurul Haque Hall (then known as Iqbal Hall) at Dhaka University. The meeting was attended by Chhatra League leaders ASM Abdur Rab, Shahjahan Siraj, Kazi Aref Ahmed and Marshal Monirul Islam to plan the flag design. Also present at the meeting were Chhatra League leader Swapan Kumar Chowdhury, Jagannath College BCL leader Nazrul Islam, Cumilla district BCL general secretary and central student leader Shib Narayan Das, BUET BCL general secretary Hasanul Haq Inu, and student leader Yusuf Salauddin.

In the meeting, based on Kazi Aref Ahmed's initial proposal and after everyone's discussion, it was decided to create a flag with a yellow map of Bangladesh in the middle of a red sun on a green background. Kamrul Alam Khan (Khasru) then brought a large piece of green fabric with a red circle sewn into it from a Bihari tailor’s shop in Dhaka New Market.

On the night of June 6, 1970, in room 401 (North) of Sher-e-Bangla Hall at Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), the entire design of the flag was completed after 11 p.m. That same night, Khalek Mohammadi, the tailor master of New Pak Fashion Tailors, located next to the Chhatra League office on the third floor of the Balaka building in the New Market area, began working on the flag design. It should be noted that, at that time, the design featured a map of Bangladesh in the middle of a red sun.

On the night of March 25, 1971, the Pakistani military forces launched their first attack on Shib Narayan Das’s residence in Bagichagaon, Cumilla. Failing to find him, they took his father to the cantonment, where he was brutally killed that night. A reward of Tk 10,000 was announced for capturing Shib Narayan Das. During that incident, he was barricading the road with party workers and burning car tires in Shasongacha.

In March 2001, when a first-class daily newspaper approached him for an interview, he directly refused, saying, “If I tell the whole story, there will be things you won't be able to publish. This government will not take these words positively. Moreover, radical fundamentalists may be encouraged by these words, which I don’t want. So, I have decided not to say anything for now. Let the time come, then I will see. It does not matter what I did in 1971. My name is not even on the list of freedom fighters, and I have no objection to that either.” 

Avarice is the main theme of Volpone

The main theme of “Volpone,” one of the best plays by Ben Jonson, is avarice. The central character of this play is Volpone, who was a nobleman in seventeenth-century Venice. Though he is quite rich, his greed knows no bounds. Volpone’s story revolves around his amassing more wealth and the kind of complexity that arises from this greed. The main lesson that we get from this play is that greed leads to destruction.

If we examine the characters of this play, we will see that each of the main five characters is extremely greedy. First is the central character, Volpone, who is difficult to label as a hero. His greed knows no bounds, and his religion is not Christianity but rather greed. From beginning to end, he obsesses over wealth and gold incessantly. Gold is significant because, during that time, it held more importance than other forms of wealth. That is why Volpone repeatedly fixates on gold.

In those days, currency was primarily minted using gold, and gold coins were also widely circulated. Gold coins were the most valuable currency, so when referring to gold, it often included gold coins as well. Therefore, when Volpone thinks of acquiring more gold, it implies his desire to accumulate wealth in the form of gold coins.

The next important character after Volpone is Mosca, and Mosca shares the same thoughts as Volpone throughout the day. Mosca does not engage in much labor; rather, his primary task is to survive by depending on Volpone. In a way, Mosca acts as Volpone’s servant, working for him all day long, albeit in a flattering manner. Mosca is not only a companion but also an active accomplice in Volpone’s nefarious deeds. Consequently, Mosca becomes extremely greedy at one point and betrays Volpone.

There are not many female characters in this play. Among the few, Corvino’s wife, Celia, is one. Driven by greed for Volpone’s wealth and ensnared by Mosca’s cunning, Corvino sends his wife to Volpone so that Volpone can enjoy her. Nothing could be more unethical than this, indicating how greedy Corvino was. If we consider Corvino’s greed as bad, then we can think about Corbaccio as well. Corbaccio agreed to disinherit his son Bonario and designate Volpone as the sole heir to his wealth. Certainly, Corbaccio and Corvino should be blamed more than Volpone or Mosca because they abandoned their son and wife, respectively, out of greed. Family is certainly important and should be the most important, but we learn from Volpone that people, out of greed, do not hesitate to sacrifice their own family or even the dignity of their wives.

As a result, each character in this play suffers. Volpone becomes almost mad by the end when he discovers that his favorite servant, Mosca, has been cheating on him. Mosca nearly succeeds in deceiving Volpone, but he ultimately loses in court. Corbaccio and Corvino do not inherit Volpone’s wealth; instead, their relationships with their families deteriorate. The two virtuous characters, Celia and Bonario, are proven innocent in court.

Ben Jonson tried to beautifully convey that avarice is a very bad thing. However, at the same time, we have to keep in mind that if people do not have morality in society, then it brings danger to society. Greed may lead to temporary gains, but it is not sustainable in the long run. 

Sydney Carton is a sacrificing hero

Who is Sydney Carton?

Sydney Carton is one of the most important characters in the novel, A Tale of Two Cities, written by Charles Dickens. He is portrayed as an alcoholic and indifferent attorney who leads a miserable life, feeling hopeless. However, he is compared to a jackal for his cleverness. He closely resembles Darnay.

What does he sacrifice?

Sydney Carton makes the most important sacrifice in this novel. His sacrifice greatly impacts the lives of Charles Darnay, Lucie Manette, and their family. He sacrifices his life to save the husband of the woman he adores. By sacrificing his life, he fulfills his promise to Lucie Manette that he will sacrifice his life for her or for someone dear to her. He was willing to die for Lucie due to his deep love for her, but his motivation goes beyond simple affection. Towards the end of the novel, Sydney realizes that he wants to do something noble with his life. That is why he does something incredibly selfless, something few people could even imagine accomplishing in their dreams.

When Darnay was imprisoned in France, Sydney went to France and rescued him from prison by switching places with him just before Darnay was scheduled for execution.

Why is it important?

The sacrifice of Sydney Carton is highly significant in this novel, arguably receiving more importance than the sacrifices of other characters. Firstly, he saves Darnay’s life by sacrificing his own, acting as a rescuer. He frees Darnay, Lucie, and Dr. Manette from prison. As he heads towards the guillotine, Darnay and his family are on their way to England, safe thanks to Carton’s sacrifice.

Another important reason is that he kept his promise that he gave to Lucie Manette. He promised her that one day he would sacrifice himself for the person whom Lucie loved. By doing so, he has chosen his destiny. It shows his selfless love for Lucie. It is also important because we know that very few people in the world are capable of doing the thing that Sydney has done.

Different Sydney from first and last:

At the beginning of the novel, Sydney Carton was portrayed as an indifferent person who lacked any prospects in life and did not seem to pursue anything or anyone. He was careless. However, he is deeply passionate about Lucie. His feelings for her transform him into a man of profound merit. He loves Lucie so much that he does not hesitate to sacrifice his life for her. Despite his many bad habits, including drugs and alcohol, he captures the readers’ attention with his selfless love for Lucie.

Sydney is hero?

Sydney Carton is not the main hero of this novel. Instead, he is considered a sacrificial hero for his selflessness. He sacrifices himself for the benefit of others, which is undoubtedly a heroic deed. We cannot label him a hero based solely on his characteristics. He closely resembles Darnay in physical appearance, but they are two distinct individuals. However, he is not a hero in the traditional sense.

Is Sydney success or failure?

Sydney fails as a traditional hero, but by the end of the novel, he achieves a form of immortality and garners more attention than the main hero. Readers sympathize with him, elevating him beyond mere heroism. Through this novel, Dickens illustrates that redemption is always possible. For much of the story, Sydney appears to be a failure: he lacks a wife, family, or friends and shows little dedication to his job or career.

Love and sacrifice in A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens

Charles Darnay-Lucie Manette relation:

Charles Darnay and Lucie Manette are two important characters in this novel. They are husband and wife. In this novel, we can see that they love each other very much. Darnay belongs to an aristocratic family in France, and he knows that Lucie is an ordinary girl. Despite this fact, he loves Lucie dearly. Both Lucie and Darnay are faithful to each other. When Darnay was imprisoned in France, Lucie went to France with her young daughter to save her husband’s life. She did not even think about her safety.

Selfless Love:

Sydney Carton represents selfless love. Though he knows that Lucie loves someone else, and in the religious context, it is not ethical, he is deeply in love with her. Throughout the novel, we find him not to be a good person like Darnay. Even he has all these bad habits. However, he is so deeply in love with Lucie that he is ready to sacrifice his life for her or anyone dear to her just to keep her happy. At the end of the novel, he fulfills his promise, which is why he is called the sacrificing hero.

Sacrifice:

Sacrifice is the most important theme of this novel. From the beginning to the end, we encounter many examples of sacrifice. Most of the characters in this novel make sacrifices. Dr. Manette is first seen sacrificing his life, imprisoned for eighteen years in the Bastille without any reason. Because of his long imprisonment, he becomes mentally ill. Throughout his life, he curses the family for whom he was imprisoned. On the morning of his daughter’s marriage, he learns of Charles Darnay’s true identity and is shocked. However, he agrees to the marriage, thinking of his daughter’s happiness.

Sydney Carton is the quintessential example of the theme of sacrifice. He sacrifices his life to ensure Lucie’s happiness. Through this ultimate sacrifice, he saves Lucie, Charles, and their family. By fulfilling his promise to sacrifice his life for the one Lucie loves, he demonstrates profound selflessness and devotion.

Charles Darnay also makes sacrifices, relinquishing his family, property, and various other privileges to lead a life free of guilt associated with the actions of his ancestors. He chooses to leave his homeland, France, in pursuit of a simpler existence. His decision reflects a commitment to distancing himself from the injustices perpetuated by his family’s past behavior.

The French Revolution plays a crucial role in this novel. It was a conflict between the aristocratic and peasant classes, with the lower class fighting for their rights and liberation from the oppression of the upper class. Throughout the revolution, ordinary French citizens sacrificed their lives in pursuit of freedom from tyranny and inequality. 

Gangaridai Kingdom: The only kingdom that Alexander feared

Gangaridai was an ethnic group of ancient Bengal during the first and second centuries BCE. We can come to know about this ethnic group from the writings of Greek and Latin authors. Various writers have referred to this ethic group using different spellings, such as Gangaridae, Gangariridum, and Gangarides.

In 327 BCE, Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush mountains and marched towards India. Then, in 326 BCE, he crossed the Indus River and entered Taxila. Greek historians who came to India during the time of Alexander mentioned a powerful king named Gangaridai. The descriptions of this ethnic group found in Greek and Latin writings are as follows:

·         “The Gangaridai kingdom boasted a formidable army of elephants. Due to this force, the kingdom was never defeated by a foreign power, leaving other kingdoms intimidated by the sheer number and strength of their elephant forces. The width of the last part of the Ganges is eight miles, and at its narrowest point, it reaches a depth of about 100 feet. The inhabitants of these distant regions are known as the Gangaridai. Their king maintains a prepared army of 1,000 cavalry, 700 elephants, and 60,000 foot soldiers. During the reign of Seleucus, Alexander’s commander and friend, Megasthenes (350–290 BCE) came to India as a Greek ambassador.”

·         “The Gangaridai are the most formidable of all Indian races. After coming to know about the Gangaridai king’s army of 4,000 elephants, well-equipped and prepared for battle, Alexander dared not engage in warfare against him.” - Diodorus (90–30 BCE)

·         “The Ganges River flows from north to south, and the sea meets at the eastern border of the Gangaridai kingdom.” – Megasthenes

·         “The Gangaridai kingdom encompasses the entire region at the mouth of the Ganges River.” - Ptolemy

·         “The last part of the Ganges River has flown through the Gangaridai kingdom.” - Pliny 

According to Ptolemy’s writing, we can come to know the location of Gangaridai. The Gangaridai occupied almost the entire area adjacent to the five mouths of the Ganges. “Gange” was its capital. The four longitudinal degrees he described included the region from the westernmost to the easternmost mouth of the Ganges River, along the coast of the Bay of Bengal. Practically, this means that ‘Gangaridai’ extended from the westernmost to the easternmost mouth of the Ganges River near the Bay of Bengal. It is observed that the longitudinal degree between the mouths of the Bhagirathi (near Tamluk) and Padma Rivers (near Chattogram) is slightly more than 35 degrees. Therefore, according to Ptolemy’s information, Gangaridai can be identified in the regions between the two main branches of the Ganges in present-day West Bengal and Bangladesh.

A Greek navigator in his book, Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, mentioned the Gange country located east of the coast of Odisha, adjacent to the Bay of Bengal. According to him, Gange was a commercial city named after the river.

The word ‘Gangaridai’ is derived from ‘Gangarid.’ It is believed that ‘Gangarid’ is the Greek form of the Indian word ‘Gangahrd,’ meaning the land through which the Ganges flows. According to the historian Atul Sur, the word ‘Gangarida’ may have originated from ‘Gangarid,’ then ‘Gangaradhi,’ and from there, the word ‘Radha’ may have emerged. Renowned historian Niharranjan Ray, in his book “Bangalir Itihas: Adiparba” (বাঙালির ইতিহাস: আদি পর্ব), wrote, “There is no doubt that the Gangaridai are the inhabitants of the Gangetic province because Greek and Latin writers agree on this matter.” Hemchandra Rai Chaudhary, by conducting a comparative and comprehensive discussion of the relevant opinions of authors such as Diodorus, Curtis, Plutarch, Solinus, Pliny, Ptolemy, Strabo, etc., has shown that Gangaridai was located on the eastern bank of the Ganges-Bhagirathi River and extended from there.”

According to Pliny, “The last part of the Ganges River flows through the Gangaridai kingdom. The inhabitants of the southern part of the Ganges had a black and tanned complexion, but they were not as black as the Ethiopians.” From this description, it can be inferred that they were a mixed race of Negrito, Proto-Australoid, and Dravidian ethnic groups.

Relationship between Edward and Elinor in Sense and Sensibility

In “Sense and Sensibility,” we can see the life story of two sisters, who are Elinor and Marianne. This novel does not have a hero in the true sense. If we have to consider anyone as a hero, then the name that should come to readers’ minds first is Edward Ferrars. Elinor and Edward love each other, and eventually, they get married. They suffer a lot in this love and have to overcome many obstacles. At one point, it even seemed that they would not marry each other and that there would be no union between them. However, fate supported them in the end, and they loved each other very much. Finally, they get the result of their love, and they get married.

First of all, it is necessary to understand how they initially met. Fanny Dashwood was the wife of Elinor’s stepbrother, and Fanny’s brother was Edward. Fanny and her mother were quite dominating, and they used to exert pressure on Edward from an early age. Edward did something foolish and secretly became engaged to Lucy without informing anyone. Lucy was completely opposite to Edward in terms of personality, and she did not have strong feelings for Edward. When Edward visited Elinor’s house, which was actually inherited by his stepbrother, John, after the death of her father, he became acquainted with Elinor, and from the beginning, Edward and Elinor started to like each other. However, their mutual affection remained somewhat concealed, which led to many problems for them. Edward was honest in his personal life, so he wanted to confide in Elinor about his troubled situation, but he had to leave suddenly before he could do so. Edward’s sudden departure severed their contact and relationship, as he knew in his heart that it would not be possible for him to marry Elinor. Despite loving Elinor deeply, Edward, being an honest man, refrained from allowing their relationship to progress further. On the other hand, although Elinor loved Edward with all her heart, she, being somewhat reserved, did not openly reveal her suffering to anyone. While her mother and sister understood, Elinor still kept her feelings hidden.

Edward and Elinor endured suffering for an extended period of time. Elinor’s anguish stemmed from her lack of knowledge of the truth, and it intensified when she eventually discovered it. Conversely, Edward’s sorrow deepened as he realized Elinor was a far superior person compared to Lucie. Elinor possessed all the qualities that Lucie lacked. Therefore, Edward’s anguish heightened significantly, pondering over encountering such a wonderful girl yet being unable to marry her.

However, being a good person, Edward attempted to honor his promise. When his mother learned of his intention to marry Lucie, she became furious and disinherited him, leaving everything to his younger brother. At that moment, Lucie realized that Edward had little and that his future prospects were bleak. Consequently, Lucie decided to sever all ties with Edward and elope with his younger brother, marrying him instead.

When Edward was going through all this turmoil, Elinor was unaware of most of it. She only heard rumors that Edward had married Lucie, but in reality, it had not occurred. Elinor lost all hope, and her life became filled with suffering. However, luck was on her side, and later, she learned directly from Edward that he did not actually marry.

They got married, and Elinor’s entire family joyfully approved of their union. Initially, Edward’s mother objected to the marriage, but eventually, she came around and accepted it. They were overjoyed, emerging as the most ideal couple in the novel.

If we examine the relationship between Edward and Elinor, we can observe that both of them were good people, but luck did not favor them. Edward faced considerable misfortune from the start. His circumstances were challenging, and when he became secretly engaged at the age of 18–19, he foolishly became infatuated with a girl who was unsuitable for him in every way. He became fixated on her, only to later realize that she was not the right match for him. When he recognized this and encountered Elinor, he should have promptly ended the engagement with Lucie, especially since it was kept secret and he had minimal communication with her. However, by not doing so, the situation became even more complicated. On the other hand, Elinor was reserved by nature. She should have stepped forward and stood by Edward, encouraging him not to marry Lucie. Elinor should have taken this step because she understood that Lucie was not a suitable match for Edward and that he would not find happiness with her. Therefore, she should have made an effort to intervene.

No matter what happened, they found happiness in the end, which is the best outcome. Luck played a role in this, and simultaneously, Jane Austen wanted to illustrate that they were well-suited for each other.