Judgment scene in Oenone

“Oenone” is a wonderful poem written by Alfred, Lord Tennyson. It tells the story of the Greek mythological character Oenone and her tragic life. Perhaps the most important part of the poem is the judgment scene, where the golden apple is introduced, and Paris must choose between the three goddesses who desire it.

Paris decided to give the apple to Aphrodite, who promised him that in return, she would ensure he would have the most beautiful and loving wife in Greece. The judgment scene is significant for several reasons. Firstly, it occurs at a crucial moment in the poem. Up until that point, the poem focuses on Oenone’s sadness, as she has already been abandoned by Paris. Understanding the background of the story, which the judgment scene provides, is essential for the reader. 

The poem reaches its climax in the judgment scene, where Paris’ decision sets the course for what follows. It is at this moment that Paris resolves to leave Oenone and pursue Helen as his wife. The judgment scene also reflects Tennyson’s idea about 19th-century England, particularly the Victorian era. Hera symbolizes power, much like Queen Victoria. During the Victorian age, the English people made significant advancements in science and knowledge, which Pallas Athena represents. Simultaneously, there was an increasing emphasis on beauty and superficial appearances, as embodied by Aphrodite. Thus, the judgment scene highlights the dilemma faced by the Victorian people, who were torn between these competing values during Tennyson’s time.

The judgment scene also provides Tennyson with an opportunity to impart moral lessons within the poem. Although “Oenone” is based on a mythological character, it carries important moral messages. The poem suggests that we should not be overly driven by passion, especially when it comes to love and marriage. Oenone suffered because she was too passionate about Paris, ignoring his background and character. Similarly, Paris, consumed by his passion for Helen, fails to recognize that Oenone is a good wife. His decision to leave Oenone for Helen was an act of folly, underscoring the dangers of letting passion override reason.

“Oenone” is a beautiful dramatic monologue in which Oenone serves as the speaker. She reflects on a critical moment in her life, as is typical in dramatic monologues, where characters often share their experiences during pivotal situations. In this poem, the judgment scene plays a key role in helping us understand Oenone’s background and the circumstances that have led to her current state.

Oenone is enduring a critical situation and is contemplating suicide. The judgment scene reveals the shock she experienced as she witnessed Paris leaving her to accept Aphrodite’s gift of another woman. This betrayal is heartbreaking for any woman or wife in any era. The judgment scene allows us to deeply empathize with Oenone’s pain and understand the extent of her suffering.

The judgment scene also introduces several key characters, particularly the three goddesses. These goddesses were incredibly powerful and often manipulated the lives of humans, reflecting a common belief in ancient Greece. However, in this scene, we also see negative traits, especially in Aphrodite. She tempts Paris with the promise of a beautiful woman, ultimately leading to the destruction of both Paris and Oenone’s lives.

The judgment scene in “Oenone” is particularly interesting, as such scenes are more commonly found in dramas, like in The Merchant of Venice. The judgment scene in The Merchant of Venice is renowned and has become iconic. Although “Oenone” is not a lengthy poem, it still features a compelling and significant judgment scene, adding depth and intrigue to the narrative. 

Treatment of Arthurian legend

“Morte d’Arthur” is the final part of Alfred Lord Tennyson’s epic poem Idylls of the King. In this section, the poet narrates the death of King Arthur and the fate of his sword, Excalibur. The Victorian era is marked by significant scientific advancements, but it is also characterized by a sense of restlessness. With the rise of science, many people began to lose faith in religion. King Arthur remains a central figure in England’s history.

The true understanding of materialism versus myth in “Morte d’Arthur” is revealed in the scene between Arthur and Sir Bedivere. Mortally wounded, Arthur commands Bedivere to throw Excalibur back into the lake from which it came. Bedivere runs to the lake, ready to fulfill his duty, when the sight of Excalibur’s hilt catches his eye. The hilt “twinkled with diamond sparks, / Myriads of topaz-lights, and jacinth-work / Of subtlest jewellery” (56-58). Initially prepared to throw the sword into the lake, Bedivere is instead captivated by its beauty. Unable to part with it, he chooses to conceal Excalibur “there in the many-knotted waterflags” (62-63) and returns to the king, lying about the sword’s fate.

Arthur immediately recognizes the lie and gently scolds Bedivere, reminding him that it is a “shameful thing for men to lie” (78). He orders Bedivere once again to cast the sword into the lake. Bedivere returns to the lake but is once more captivated by the “wonder of the hilt” (85). He rationalizes his disobedience, speaking of the sword in purely materialistic terms, describing it as a “precious thing... which might have pleased the eye of many men” (89-91). He imagines it displayed in a treasure house or at a tournament, disregarding its sanctity and mystery. Most significantly, he disobeys his king. 

Arthur does not respond kindly to Bedivere’s second betrayal, and he seems to grasp the motive behind it fully. He condemns Bedivere as “miserable and unkind, untrue, / Unknightly, traitor-hearted...” (119-120) and laments that Bedivere would “betray me for the precious hilt; Either from lust of gold, or like a girl / Valuing the giddy pleasure of the eyes” (126-128). While Arthur forgave Bedivere’s first offense as a crime of impulse, the second was a deliberate act of rationalization that the king could not condone. Bedivere consciously chose to keep the sword, a symbol of material perfection, over obeying his king’s orders. In this, Tennyson offers a critique of the materialism that permeated his own culture, illustrating that while the allure of material perfection is tempting, it must ultimately be set aside in favor of something deeper. 

Political satire in Piers Plowman

The first thing that comes to mind about William Langland after reading the poem Piers Plowman is his courage. We have to keep in mind that in those days, monarchy was prevalent in England, and it was not like the monarchy of today. Then, people could be executed for trivial reasons, and the king had absolute power. There was no sign of democracy, and giving any speech against the king or rulers would be considered treason in many cases and severely punished. So, the way William Langland satirized in Piers Plowman is truly remarkable. We will not see many examples of satire in England from that time. Piers Plowman cannot be completely called a political satire because he did not only satirize politics but also common people, the church, and everything else.

The political situation in England at that time was somewhat troubled. The war with France had been going on for many years, and the effects of the hostility with France impacted life in England as a whole. However, simultaneously, as a result of this war with France, a sense of nationalism developed among the people of England, leading to the establishment of a new system. The foundation of the new England that we later see during Elizabeth’s reign probably began in the time of William Langland and Geoffrey Chaucer. Gradually, the power of the king was decreasing while the power of influential landlords was increasing. Parliament was the meeting place of influential landlords, and the power of Parliament started to increase somewhat during this period.

Since the king had all the power, he would often become a tyrant. William Langland was against this and called for more power to be given to the common people. In doing so, he highlighted the poor conditions at the royal court of that time and mentioned a fable where mice wanted to tie a bell around the cat’s neck. Here, the mice represent the common people who want to control the cat or the king, but tying a bell around the cat’s neck is indeed a difficult task.

The effects of bad government were felt by common people. When a ruler of a country cannot govern properly, various problems arise, and the economic condition of the people deteriorates, thus increasing corruption. He talked about beggars who begged as a hobby. Many of them could support their own families, but still, they used to beg because they made more profit from it. These beggars used to drink alcohol and had no purpose in their lives. Those who were unemployed, businessmen, or merchants would give poor-quality goods to people, and by doing this, the condition of common people worsened, but these unemployed individuals and merchants were becoming rich. It is depicted here that the ruling system at that time was not good, and the king, along with his ministers and officials, was not very successful in controlling the people of different classes and professions in society.

In this poem, William Langland talks about the common people who were illiterate and not very enthusiastic about the development of society. They would be tempted by greed very easily, and in this way, a kind of unrest prevailed in society. In fact, Langland, by highlighting the problems of the state or the bad political conditions, meant to imply that, as a result, issues were emerging in both the church and social life. 

In England, in those days, writing political satire was very difficult because the king had so much power. The judicial system was not as strong as it is today, and there was hardly any personal freedom or freedom of speech. In those days, there were no daily newspapers, radio, or television. As a result, the rulers could easily become tyrannical if they wanted, and there was no way to restrain them. Therefore, Langland wanted a system of governance where common people would have more rights and be less oppressed. Although Piers Plowman cannot be called a complete political satire, he satirized the political conditions of his time in various ways.

How does D. H. Lawrence glorify novel in "Why the Novel Matters" essay?

In the history of English literature, D. H. Lawrence is considered one of the greatest novelists of the 20th century. His writings, on the one hand, have given rise to controversy and, on the other hand, have become extremely popular among many people. Therefore, there is no doubt that he will take up his pen in favor of the novel. His essay “Why the Novel Matters” is also an important addition to the history of literary criticism because here he portrays the novel as an important medium of literature. Before that, poetry and drama were considered the important mediums of literature, and everyone would give importance to poetry, especially. As a result, most of the literary criticism we find from the past is about poetry and discusses various aspects of poetry. In that context, D. H. Lawrence’s “Why the Novel Matters” is a different type of essay. Here, he mainly tries to highlight the importance and excellence of the novel.

According to D. H. Lawrence, other branches of knowledge are fragmented. In science, we see one kind of truth; in religion, we see another kind; and in philosophy, we see yet another kind. Therefore, in all these areas, we can only see fragmented pieces of truth, knowledge, and the universe. D. H. Lawrence has beautifully illustrated this point by discussing which aspects of a person science is interested in, which aspects a painter is interested in, and which aspects a philosopher is interested in. D. H. Lawrence tried to say that other branches of knowledge are not interested in the whole person.

On the other hand, a novel is something that seeks to portray the overall life of a person. By the term “human,” it does not just mean the hands, feet, eyes, and face, but also their thoughts, society, successes, failures, joys, and sorrows. Depicting all these aspects is the purpose of a novel. In fact, if we look at novels, we can see that each novel is as long in length as it is vast in terms of content. Therefore, a novel has many characters, can have many events, and can take a lot of time to develop. According to D. H. Lawrence, a novel is interested in all aspects of human life, and for this reason, its superiority over any branch of knowledge is undeniable.

Not only that, but in a novel, a man is alive and truly alive. In other branches of knowledge, people are more like dead and like an inanimate object. A philosopher ends up telling some moral stories, or perhaps, in the case of religion, we see this. Science provides some unemotional conclusions about humans. From this perspective, a person is alive in the novel, and when readers read, they often see a living person.

Another aspect of the novel that D. H. Lawrence considers extremely remarkable is that it portrays human society. We know that the main difference between animals and humans is that humans live in a society and are dependent on one another. These social relationships, dependencies, and exchanges are depicted in novels.

However, one thing that needs to be mentioned here is that by “novel,” D. H. Lawrence did not only mean a long story written in prose. According to him, the novel is the highest form of literature. Therefore, he considers the Bible to be an extraordinary novel, and he believes that the works of poets like Homer and Shakespeare fall into the category of novels. In this case, the main argument of D. H. Lawrence is that the Bible, as well as the works of Homer and Shakespeare, primarily discuss and portray all aspects of human life. He believes that a novelist should depict the full spectrum of human life in this way.

D. H. Lawrence began writing novels at a time when their popularity had skyrocketed, and he himself achieved considerable success. However, many people did not regard novels with much respect and were keen to give importance to drama and poetry. But D. H. Lawrence said that we must value novels because they complete human life in a way that no other branch of knowledge can. Therefore, according to D. H. Lawrence, novels will not only bring joy and entertainment to people’s minds but also teach them to think critically and help reveal the truths about human life and society. In novels, we can see both good and bad, not just moral lessons. Novels contain not only greatness but also baseness, good alongside evil, and success alongside failure. Thus, novels help to make human life meaningful. 

Emergence of Bangladesh

Some people may think that the emergence of Bangladesh began on March 26, 1971, when Bangladesh started its liberation war against Pakistan. However, the process of the emergence of Bangladesh started immediately after Pakistan was created on August 14, 1947. The Bengali people formed the majority of the population in the newly independent Pakistan, but it was the minority of people who lived either in West Pakistan or were non-Bengali speakers living in East Pakistan (today’s Bangladesh) who had absolute power and control of the country from the start. As a result, it was inevitable that the majority of Bengali people would become united and fight for their independence. The history of the emergence of Bangladesh can be divided into several stages. 

                                                Image Source 

In the first stage, awareness spread among the Bengali people. Bengali Muslims fought for Pakistan with the dream that in the new country they would become the majority and enjoy economic benefits. This did not materialize for two reasons. First, the minority people living in West Pakistan (mostly Punjabis) had control over the government, military, administration, and economy. Secondly, non-Bengalis coming from the Indian states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar benefited from all the facilities in East Pakistan. Thus, the Bengali people were deprived of economic benefits by Punjabis not only in West Pakistan but also in their own land in East Pakistan. This awareness came shortly after Pakistan was created. In East Pakistan, educated people from the Indian states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (most of them Urdu speakers) took government jobs, often neglecting Bengalis. As a result, these outsiders became economically rich and gained power and prestige in Dhaka and other major cities and towns in East Pakistan. This created a sense of deprivation and frustration among the educated people of East Pakistan or East Bengal. When the first draft of the Basic Principles Committee, which was supposed to prepare a constitution for Pakistan, came out, Bengali people felt frustrated and angry because they saw that their majority was not considered in the draft. In 1949, the Awami League issued a 42-point manifesto addressing the political demands of the Bengali people. In 1951, the Youth League was formed to raise awareness among Bengalis about their real condition. Meanwhile, the ruling Muslim League was advocating for the unity of Pakistan based on the religion of Islam.

In the second stage, the people of East Pakistan or East Bengal (today’s Bangladesh) evaluated the ideas put forward by Bengali nationalists as well as Muslim League supporters. During this time, the Muslim League started to lose its popularity. Political parties and student organizations advocating Bengali nationalism demanded that Bangla must be included as a state language of Pakistan alongside Urdu. Since Bengali people formed the majority in Pakistan, they believed their language must be included in the constitution as a national language of Pakistan. On the other hand, Muslim League leaders like Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Khawaja Nazimuddin supported Urdu and advocated that only Urdu should be the national language. The Bengali people, or most of them, realized that if Bengali was not made a national language, they would suffer in government jobs and education. Consequently, educated people took to the streets in large numbers to protest, leading to the language movement. The tragic incident of February 21, 1952, opened the eyes of many Bengali people to the true nature of the non-Bengali people of West Pakistan and East Pakistan.

This realization also brought a sense among the Bengali people that they must be united in demanding equality, fairness, and justice. This demand was echoed in the provincial assembly in East Bengal in 1954. A United Front consisting of political parties like the Awami League, Krishak-Sramik Party, and some other political, social, and cultural forces emerged. In this election, the Muslim League was almost wiped out in East Bengal or East Pakistan, winning only nine out of the 309 seats. Before the election, the United Front promised to advocate for Bengali culture and the interests of the Bengali people. This gained significant support among ordinary people, including the illiterate population living in villages. However, the United Front government could not continue, as the central government in West Pakistan dismissed the government within a few months and took power. It was a sad and frustrating time for the people living in today’s Bangladesh.

This frustration led the Bengali people to realize that they must demand more autonomy. Unfortunately, the leading party of the Bengali people, the Awami League, suffered a division in 1957 when Maulana Bhashani and his followers left to form the National Awami Party (NAP). Meanwhile, in the central government, military general Ayub Khan captured power and ruled from 1958 to 1969 with an iron hand. Ayub Khan was an autocratic ruler, and during his rule, the 1965 Indo-Pak war took place. During this war, the people in Bengal realized they were totally insecure because most of the Army, Navy, and Air Force soldiers and officers were in West Pakistan. Against this background, in 1966, Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman announced his revolutionary six-point demand. This demand called for maximum autonomy for East Pakistan and did not sit well with the rulers in West Pakistan. They feared that if the six points were implemented, they would no longer be able to exploit and treat East Pakistan as a colony. Consequently, they charged Sheikh Mujib and some of his followers with the Agartala Conspiracy Case. The main goal was to destroy Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the Awami League, thus silencing the Bengali demand for autonomy.

The Agartala Conspiracy Case, instead of silencing the voice of autonomy for the Bengali people, amplified it. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman became immensely popular as the students of East Pakistan launched a massive campaign against Ayub Khan’s government. People from all walks of life joined the movement, demanding not only the release of Sheikh Mujib and other political prisoners but also greater autonomy for East Pakistan. This culminated in the mass uprising of 1969, which ensured the release of Sheikh Mujib and his followers from prison and ultimately brought an end to the tough dictatorship of Ayub Khan.

After Ayub Khan resigned, the head of the army, Yahya Khan, took power in early 1969 and promised that Pakistan would return to democratic rule, pledging to hand over power to representatives elected by the people. His government arranged an election in 1970 in which the Awami League won 160 seats, becoming the majority party in the upcoming parliament. Sheikh Mujib announced his intention to implement the six points, but the military and West Pakistani leaders were unwilling to hand over power to him. This led to massive protests in East Pakistan in March 1971. Realizing it was impossible to stop the Bengali people, the Pakistani army and political leaders like Bhutto decided to use brutal force. On the night of March 25, 1971, the military launched a crackdown on unarmed and innocent Bengali people, resulting in almost three million deaths. Bangladesh declared its independence on March 26, 1971, and victory was achieved on December 16 of the same year. It was a very tragic and bloody war during which two million women were raped. Nearly ten million people fled to neighboring India for refuge, suffering greatly from malnourishment and a lack of medical treatment. Thousands of people died in India due to these harsh conditions. Despite the immense suffering, the Bengali people were determined to finish what had started with the language movement in 1952. They sacrificed their lives but remained resolute in their quest for independence. With support from the Indian army, Bangladesh finally emerged as an independent nation.

The emergence of Bangladesh came at the cost of a lot of blood and the supreme sacrifice of millions of people. It is the duty of every citizen of the country to remember those who gave their lives and suffered for its creation, not only in 1971 but also from 1947 onwards. Because of their continuous efforts, Bangladesh became a democratic and independent country.

Character of the Holy Church in Piers Plowman

The main subject of Piers Plowman is the Holy Church and its features. In those days, the condition of the English church was deplorable. Corruption was widespread. We can see that he not only criticized the church but also wrote about how the real church should be. So, we can see the character of the Holy Church, which is the true Jesus Christ or the features of the Christian religion.

The first word in Christianity is God. God is the creator of this earth. So, we have to love God and seek his blessings. We will achieve true freedom in life only after receiving our blessings, and the church is the ideal medium.

Jesus Christ is the creator of Christianity. Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the savior of men. They believe that human beings have been saved by his arrival on earth, and he tried to save mankind all his life. All his life, he served human beings and loved them. He always tried to show them the right path. Human beings will achieve true freedom by walking on that path. The main function of the Holy Church is to save people and show them the right path.

The features of the church mentioned by Langland are not new, but the main problem is that in those days, the condition of churches in England and Europe was worse. The priests, instead of loving people, exploited them and became rich. As a result, people only suffered at the hands of the church.

In Book 1, three aspects of the Holy Church have been given importance. First, we have to believe in God and Jesus Christ. Then we will be able to reach the next stage. Those who do not believe in their hearts will not be able to prosper. So, we must have faith in God and Jesus Christ. Faith in God and Jesus Christ is the main foundation of every religion. In other religions around the world, a lot of emphasis has been placed on believing in God. In every major religious book, faith in God has been given the most importance, and then other matters have been discussed.

After faith, the next most important quality is Truth. Every day, we face lots of problems in this world, and often we have to lie. But if we keep lying and follow the wrong path, one day we will suffer. So, we should always remain truthful and honest and love truth. Those who remain honest and truthful believe in God. When we believe in God, we will be on the path of honesty because God emphasizes truth.

Loving God and Jesus Christ is an important duty. Jesus Christ loved men with all his heart. He did not even take revenge on those who killed him. He also advised others to forgive them.

The rich should show love to the poor. Those who are powerful can oppress poor people whenever they want, and it is very common. The Holy Church teaches us to show love and sympathy towards poor and weak people. We should help them. We only show kindness to someone when we love them. In the poem, the poet talks about two types of love— love towards God and love towards men.

Although William Langland was a 14th-century poet, he was a modern man in thought. He tried to show that Christianity is inherently good, but the priests ruined this religion. Hence, we all should return to the roots of Christianity and restore the original Holy Church.

The character of Volpone

Volpone is the central character of the play “Volpone.” It is hard to call him a protagonist because he lacks hero-like qualities; rather, it is better to think of him as a villain. In fact, there is no hero in the play “Volpone,” and we can consider two people as central characters: one is Volpone and the other is Mosca. It is absolutely impossible to think of these two as heroes because they have all the bad qualities in them. As for Volpone, it is very hard to find any good qualities in him. There is no doubt that he is intelligent and has a lot of wit, but he always uses his intelligence for evil purposes, and for this reason, it is reasonable for us to regard him as a villain rather than a hero. 

If we want to know the identity of Volpone, he is a noble and wealthy man with a lot of property. He used to live in Venice during the Renaissance and was undoubtedly an influential person. There is no doubt that he has more wealth than those he wishes to cheat out of their money. Moreover, he has no children, and there is much speculation about who will get his property after his death. Many people are greedy for his riches, and he always tries to amass his wealth by exploiting this greed, pretending that he will die soon. As a result, it is uncertain in whose hands his wealth will end up. So, whoever can satisfy him will be named in his will. 

Volpone is extremely greedy, and his greed knows no bounds. However, it is also true that he is not the only greedy person in this play; rather, he is trying to deceive those whose wealth he is attempting to seize. They are equally guilty of the same charge. Therefore, it is not fair to blame Volpone alone. He is greedy and a bad person, but those he is deceiving are not good people either. They are serving him with the thought that they will inherit his wealth upon his death. Thinking that he is an old man and will die after a few days, no one is giving him anything. So, although Volpone is greedy, it would be unfair for readers to blame him alone in this regard. 

One of his characteristics is that he does not trust anyone and tries to deceive everyone. Not trusting anyone may not be a bad thing, but trying to deceive everyone is definitely unfair and blameworthy. He understands who is greedy and always tries to exploit their greed. He always acts and performs extremely skillfully as an actor, so much so that others cannot catch him. Only Mosca knows his real secret. Besides Mosca, no one else knows his true story. Despite not being an actor in the play, we can easily say that in his personal life, he is much more skilled and professional than the actors in the drama. 

His real fault was that he trusted Mosca. He thought that Mosca was loyal to him, but he forgot that he was a bad guy and that Mosca was as bad as him. So, when he tried to fool everyone, Mosca also tried to cheat him, and not understanding this was his main fault, which led him into danger. He pretended that he was dead and that Mosca was the heir to his fortune. As a result, Mosca took full advantage and pretended not to recognize Volpone. Mosca showed that he had become the heir to all the wealth. This was Volpone’s only mistake: trusting Mosca. As a result, he was ruined. 

There is no doubt that Volpone is an abnormal person. He is rich and old. It is not right to expect that he will live for many more years. At this age, he might have thought about death or should have done some good deeds before dying or in his old age. However, he was greedy and abnormal, and he had no interest in doing any good deeds. He always thought more about dishonest acts and how to deceive and cheat people. 

Volpone was a cruel person and sometimes showed extreme cruelty. He tried to deprive a father of making his son the heir to his property. At the same time, he became infatuated with Celia’s beauty and tried to rape her. There is nothing worse than this because Celia was a virtuous woman, and his downfall mainly began with his failed attempt to rape her. Therefore, his cruelty ultimately brings about his danger, and this is how he is eventually destroyed. 

What we can see in Volpone’s character is that there is no good side to him. He loves beauty and goes mad upon seeing Celia’s beauty. At the same time, he has a poetic side. He sometimes recites poetry and, in this way, tries to woo Celia. However, he does not have any good qualities, and he is not interested in using his skills for good deeds. Volpone is a character with only negative traits, and throughout the play, we hardly see any good side to him. Although we can consider him a flat character, Ben Jonson was very skilled and presented this character very beautifully. So, even though there is no variation in Volpone’s character, there is no doubt that this character gives great pleasure to readers and stage audiences.