Please click here for the book by Raymond Williams Keywords.
Enjoy!
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Lecture on Henrik Iben's 'A Doll's House'
Henrik Ibsen was a major 19th century Norwegian playwright, director and poet. His works shaped the modern theatre. Ibsen’s plays were considered scandalous to many of his era. One could characterize rebellious sprit and unforgiving scrutiny through his writings. A Doll’s house is a scathing criticism of the acceptance of the traditional roles of men and women in Victorian marriage. This play is also an important work of the naturalist movement, in which real events (day to day conversations) and situations are depicted on stage in a departure from previous forms as romanticism.
Mr. Pinto’s advise\observation to us was that, “We always try to place or accommodate new objects\ideas to the existing framework (which we already know). Hence, we should try to move away from what we already know and explore new possibility to fit new objects\ideas.” Similarly with Ibsen’s ‘A Doll’s House’, people could not place his works in the existing framework thus giving rise to modern theatre. This play rocked the stages of Europe when it premiered. Nora’s rejection of marriage and motherhood scandalized the contemporary audiences. Self-liberation was reflected through this play. Many could not accept ‘A Doll’s House’ till as late as 1940’s. In fact, the first German productions of the play in the 1880s used an altered ending, written by Ibsen at the request of the producers. In this ending, Nora is led to her children after having argued with Torvald. Seeing them, she collapses, and the curtain is brought down. 1970 onwards there was a shift in the theatre itself to performance studies. Accordingly, ‘A Doll’s House’ was also studied upon and perceived differently. It went back to anthropology and ethnographic studies were conducted on actors who have portrayed the role of Nora, which is one of the most challenging role in the world of theatre.
Mr. Pinto’s advise\observation to us was that, “We always try to place or accommodate new objects\ideas to the existing framework (which we already know). Hence, we should try to move away from what we already know and explore new possibility to fit new objects\ideas.” Similarly with Ibsen’s ‘A Doll’s House’, people could not place his works in the existing framework thus giving rise to modern theatre. This play rocked the stages of Europe when it premiered. Nora’s rejection of marriage and motherhood scandalized the contemporary audiences. Self-liberation was reflected through this play. Many could not accept ‘A Doll’s House’ till as late as 1940’s. In fact, the first German productions of the play in the 1880s used an altered ending, written by Ibsen at the request of the producers. In this ending, Nora is led to her children after having argued with Torvald. Seeing them, she collapses, and the curtain is brought down. 1970 onwards there was a shift in the theatre itself to performance studies. Accordingly, ‘A Doll’s House’ was also studied upon and perceived differently. It went back to anthropology and ethnographic studies were conducted on actors who have portrayed the role of Nora, which is one of the most challenging role in the world of theatre.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Review of the Presentations and Discussions on History and Cultural Studies
The study of history and culture are the two sides of one coin. They complement each other. The culture of a society or a nation is very much influenced by its history. So the manner of interpreting history is very important. So the presentations and discussions on history and culture raised different questions and problematized the understanding of history. What are the parameters used to analysis the history? How does the imperialism influence the history? Whether the past is fixed or not?
The first presentation was based on the article, “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for "Indian" Pasts?” by Dipesh Chakrabarty. It problematized the idea of “Indians” representing themselves in history. In the academic discourse of history “Europe” remains the sovereign, theoretical subject of all histories. All other histories, Indian, Chinese, Kenyan etc., tend to become variations on a master narrative that could be call the history of Europe. In this sense, Indian history itself is in a position of subalternity. Europe works as a silent referent in historical knowledge itself becomes obvious in a highly ordinary way. There are at least two everyday symptoms of the subalternity of non-Western, third-world histories.
Third-world historians feel a need to refer to works in European history; historians of Europe do not feel any need to reciprocate.
The dominance of Europe as the subject of all histories is a part of a much more profound theoretical condition under which historical knowledge is produced in the third world. Our footnotes bear rich testimony to the insights we have derived from their knowledge and creativity.
For generations now, philosophers and thinkers shaping the nature of social science have produced theories embracing the entirety of humanity. These theories have been produced in relative and sometimes absolute ignorance of the majority of humankind i.e., those in non-Western cultures. The everyday paradox of third-world social science is that the third world intellectuals use these theories eminently useful in understanding their societies.
For example, following the western methodology of writing history on the basis of historical transition, the Indian history is also written. To prove this the writer takes Sumit Sarkar’s Modern India (regarded as one of the best textbooks on Indian history written primarily for Indian universities). The text opens with “The sixty years or so that lie between the foundation of the Indian National Congress in 1885 and the achievement of independence in August 1947 witnessed perhaps the greatest transition in our country’s long history. A transition, however, which in many ways remains grievously incomplete, and it is with this central ambiguity that it seems most convenient to begin our survey.”
Now the question arises, what kind of a transition was it remained? Answer is grievously incomplete. The study of such a failed history creates a lackness, absence or incompleteness. This history lead us to the British conquer and to the medieval period. This led to modernity. The terms have changed with time. The medieval was once called despotic and the modern is the rule of law. For example, Alexander Dow’s History of Hindostan, (1770) says: “this fundamental jurisprudence was the rule of law that contrasted with a past rule that was arbitrary and despotic ...Despotism was the opposite of English constitutional government.”
In the nineteenth and twentieth century’s, generations of elite Indian nationalists found Indian history between the two poles: despotic-constitutional, medieval-modern, feudal-capitalist. Within this narrative shared between imperialist and nationalist imaginations, the Indian was always a figure of lack. There was always the theme of inadequacy or failure.
This discussion led to Provincializing Europe. Here Chakrabarty is not dealing with "the region of the world we call 'Europe,'" but rather the "imaginary figure [of Europe] that remains deeply embedded in clichéd and shorthand forms in some everyday habits of thought." European thought is no longer the sole property of Europeans and can be used by postcolonialists to good effect, when revised for local conditions.
The Second presentation was based on the article “The Many worlds of Indian History” by Sumit Sarkar. It explores the idea of Indian History, its limitations and the development of history in the late colonial and contemporary times .Finally, the article concludes with a discussion on the how the gap between the writings of elite people on history and the teaching done by primary school teachers can be bridged in the academic arena. . In this article Sumit Sarkar first describes how Indian history failed to project reality. Our historigraphical essays tend to become bibliographies, surveys of trends or movements within the academic guild. Through the Ramjanmabhumi issue in Ayodhya, he gives a clear idea about how history is created because of faith and academic knowledge is sidelined. This, however, was very far from being a simple triumph of age-old popular faith over the alienated rationalism of secular intellectuals. Scholars and researchers have limited role here.
Sumit Sarkar says in his essay that the main aim of teaching history is limited to stimulating patriotism among students and to build in a quiz culture where the students should have by-hearted knowledge of various dates and events. Thereby we fail to imbibe in ourselves questioning attitudes and the ability of critical evaluation.
Impact and impositions of Western English education has affected Indian history. Two major changes occurred because of the influence of Western English education. British rule brought a notion of time as linear abstract and measurable. The other major change was they divided period into three phases. This led to the four yougas being replaced by three phases (i.e., Ancient, Medieval, and Modern Schema).
The focus of this essay, however, is not the history of India. Rather, the purpose of this piece is to explore very schematically some of the issues and examples for the abandonment of history and show what is the present stage of our history and how it can be effectively produced in future in the academic arena. Sumit Sarkar argues that the shift from late colonial history has produced one-sided accounts that artificially separate from pure history. As a result, the main essence/aim of Indian history and its basic purposes has been neglected altogether.
In the third part Sumit Sarkar compares two periods in Indian History i.e. late colonial Indian history and contemporary history. He says that, hierarchical division is more visible in late colonial period opportunities, for any kind of education was more restricted and therefore education and research was not sharp in the late colonial period. But in contemporary times, research and education has grown considerably. In late colonial period, absence of internal hierarchization is more visible. Sumit Sakar gives the example of Sir Jadunath Sarkar whose formal degrees were in English, and till retirement he combined research with the teaching of history.
In contemporary India very significant shifts in basic approaches and choice of research question has taken place. In 1950 the themes like social formation, debates about the existence and nature of Indian Feudalism, the possibilities of capital development in pre-colonial time were focused on, but in late colonial period the primary focus was on information about kings, dynasties or conquests. In 1960-1970 there were major changes happening in history. Firstly, there was the emergence of the Left. Secondly, the lower cast became more powerful due to peasant revolution. Thirdly, women participated in revolutionary activities. Sumit Sarkar says that, due to these changes Subaltern Studies and Women history came into existence. Meanwhile, there was a spate of research publications on tribal peasant and labour movements, as well as a few pioneering, sympathetic studies of lower-caste initiatives in large part independent of, or even hostile to, mainstream nationalism. The hierarchical divisions between scholars at research institute, university teachers, and those working in undergraduate colleges are visibly deepening in contemporary times. Sumit Sarkar gives the example of Ekalavya volunteer group who tried to bridge the gap between the primary school teachers and the elite researchers through teaching-cum-research seminar. They encouraged classroom discussion and creative assimilation.
Other questions that came up for discussion were, on Gramsci’s notion on common sense? How do the social and the political get connected to the education about which Sumit Sarkar has discussed in the later part of his essay? What does Partha Chatterjee say about the adoption of modern principle of European history in India?
For the further discussions the class invited Dr.Vageshwari SP, Christ University. She initiated the discussion on systematic breaking down of history. The problem in the study discourse is that we consider history as fixed not dynamic. We are not questioning the history. In India, the study of history is based on the methodology of imperialism and Geometry which provides a defined way of studying history.
The theory of relativity challenged the undisputable absolute truth of the past. Study of history is a truth making process.
One of the problems is how to convert the cultural practices to academic. Here many times form takes over content and we fail to bring up tools for the analysis.
Rewriting history is always a part of society. Here, why the history is rewritten is important, not what is rewritten. What is the agenda behind it?
The syllabus of the history in higher education should be re-worked. It should be based on facts as well as issue based.
The first presentation was based on the article, “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for "Indian" Pasts?” by Dipesh Chakrabarty. It problematized the idea of “Indians” representing themselves in history. In the academic discourse of history “Europe” remains the sovereign, theoretical subject of all histories. All other histories, Indian, Chinese, Kenyan etc., tend to become variations on a master narrative that could be call the history of Europe. In this sense, Indian history itself is in a position of subalternity. Europe works as a silent referent in historical knowledge itself becomes obvious in a highly ordinary way. There are at least two everyday symptoms of the subalternity of non-Western, third-world histories.
Third-world historians feel a need to refer to works in European history; historians of Europe do not feel any need to reciprocate.
The dominance of Europe as the subject of all histories is a part of a much more profound theoretical condition under which historical knowledge is produced in the third world. Our footnotes bear rich testimony to the insights we have derived from their knowledge and creativity.
For generations now, philosophers and thinkers shaping the nature of social science have produced theories embracing the entirety of humanity. These theories have been produced in relative and sometimes absolute ignorance of the majority of humankind i.e., those in non-Western cultures. The everyday paradox of third-world social science is that the third world intellectuals use these theories eminently useful in understanding their societies.
For example, following the western methodology of writing history on the basis of historical transition, the Indian history is also written. To prove this the writer takes Sumit Sarkar’s Modern India (regarded as one of the best textbooks on Indian history written primarily for Indian universities). The text opens with “The sixty years or so that lie between the foundation of the Indian National Congress in 1885 and the achievement of independence in August 1947 witnessed perhaps the greatest transition in our country’s long history. A transition, however, which in many ways remains grievously incomplete, and it is with this central ambiguity that it seems most convenient to begin our survey.”
Now the question arises, what kind of a transition was it remained? Answer is grievously incomplete. The study of such a failed history creates a lackness, absence or incompleteness. This history lead us to the British conquer and to the medieval period. This led to modernity. The terms have changed with time. The medieval was once called despotic and the modern is the rule of law. For example, Alexander Dow’s History of Hindostan, (1770) says: “this fundamental jurisprudence was the rule of law that contrasted with a past rule that was arbitrary and despotic ...Despotism was the opposite of English constitutional government.”
In the nineteenth and twentieth century’s, generations of elite Indian nationalists found Indian history between the two poles: despotic-constitutional, medieval-modern, feudal-capitalist. Within this narrative shared between imperialist and nationalist imaginations, the Indian was always a figure of lack. There was always the theme of inadequacy or failure.
This discussion led to Provincializing Europe. Here Chakrabarty is not dealing with "the region of the world we call 'Europe,'" but rather the "imaginary figure [of Europe] that remains deeply embedded in clichéd and shorthand forms in some everyday habits of thought." European thought is no longer the sole property of Europeans and can be used by postcolonialists to good effect, when revised for local conditions.
The Second presentation was based on the article “The Many worlds of Indian History” by Sumit Sarkar. It explores the idea of Indian History, its limitations and the development of history in the late colonial and contemporary times .Finally, the article concludes with a discussion on the how the gap between the writings of elite people on history and the teaching done by primary school teachers can be bridged in the academic arena. . In this article Sumit Sarkar first describes how Indian history failed to project reality. Our historigraphical essays tend to become bibliographies, surveys of trends or movements within the academic guild. Through the Ramjanmabhumi issue in Ayodhya, he gives a clear idea about how history is created because of faith and academic knowledge is sidelined. This, however, was very far from being a simple triumph of age-old popular faith over the alienated rationalism of secular intellectuals. Scholars and researchers have limited role here.
Sumit Sarkar says in his essay that the main aim of teaching history is limited to stimulating patriotism among students and to build in a quiz culture where the students should have by-hearted knowledge of various dates and events. Thereby we fail to imbibe in ourselves questioning attitudes and the ability of critical evaluation.
Impact and impositions of Western English education has affected Indian history. Two major changes occurred because of the influence of Western English education. British rule brought a notion of time as linear abstract and measurable. The other major change was they divided period into three phases. This led to the four yougas being replaced by three phases (i.e., Ancient, Medieval, and Modern Schema).
The focus of this essay, however, is not the history of India. Rather, the purpose of this piece is to explore very schematically some of the issues and examples for the abandonment of history and show what is the present stage of our history and how it can be effectively produced in future in the academic arena. Sumit Sarkar argues that the shift from late colonial history has produced one-sided accounts that artificially separate from pure history. As a result, the main essence/aim of Indian history and its basic purposes has been neglected altogether.
In the third part Sumit Sarkar compares two periods in Indian History i.e. late colonial Indian history and contemporary history. He says that, hierarchical division is more visible in late colonial period opportunities, for any kind of education was more restricted and therefore education and research was not sharp in the late colonial period. But in contemporary times, research and education has grown considerably. In late colonial period, absence of internal hierarchization is more visible. Sumit Sakar gives the example of Sir Jadunath Sarkar whose formal degrees were in English, and till retirement he combined research with the teaching of history.
In contemporary India very significant shifts in basic approaches and choice of research question has taken place. In 1950 the themes like social formation, debates about the existence and nature of Indian Feudalism, the possibilities of capital development in pre-colonial time were focused on, but in late colonial period the primary focus was on information about kings, dynasties or conquests. In 1960-1970 there were major changes happening in history. Firstly, there was the emergence of the Left. Secondly, the lower cast became more powerful due to peasant revolution. Thirdly, women participated in revolutionary activities. Sumit Sarkar says that, due to these changes Subaltern Studies and Women history came into existence. Meanwhile, there was a spate of research publications on tribal peasant and labour movements, as well as a few pioneering, sympathetic studies of lower-caste initiatives in large part independent of, or even hostile to, mainstream nationalism. The hierarchical divisions between scholars at research institute, university teachers, and those working in undergraduate colleges are visibly deepening in contemporary times. Sumit Sarkar gives the example of Ekalavya volunteer group who tried to bridge the gap between the primary school teachers and the elite researchers through teaching-cum-research seminar. They encouraged classroom discussion and creative assimilation.
Other questions that came up for discussion were, on Gramsci’s notion on common sense? How do the social and the political get connected to the education about which Sumit Sarkar has discussed in the later part of his essay? What does Partha Chatterjee say about the adoption of modern principle of European history in India?
For the further discussions the class invited Dr.Vageshwari SP, Christ University. She initiated the discussion on systematic breaking down of history. The problem in the study discourse is that we consider history as fixed not dynamic. We are not questioning the history. In India, the study of history is based on the methodology of imperialism and Geometry which provides a defined way of studying history.
The theory of relativity challenged the undisputable absolute truth of the past. Study of history is a truth making process.
One of the problems is how to convert the cultural practices to academic. Here many times form takes over content and we fail to bring up tools for the analysis.
Rewriting history is always a part of society. Here, why the history is rewritten is important, not what is rewritten. What is the agenda behind it?
The syllabus of the history in higher education should be re-worked. It should be based on facts as well as issue based.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
English Education and Cultural Hegemony in India
Report of Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
The topic which my group took for cultural studies paper presentation was literary theory and cultural studies. In this major topic we focused on two essays, one is Gouary Viswanathan’s Introduction to Masks Conquests and Susie Tharu’s and K Lalita’s Empire, Nation, and the Literary Text. Through these essays we are tried to focus how literary studies and cultural studies are related.
Gouari Viswanathan in her essay talks about the introduction, and development of English education in India. In the essay the author says that the colonial rulers introduced English education as a weapon for the domination over colonized, India.
Using the story of Bangalore Nagaratnamma’s reprinting of the eighteenth century Telugu text Radhika Santwanam by Muddupalani, Sisie Taru and Lalita introduce the rationale behind the effort to collect the materials which have been seised by the people who have power. The main intention of the writers is to show how power controlled the literary work and how the literary production was always subject to gender, class, empire, and nation prejudices.
Presentations and classroom discussions on Literary and Cultural Studies were on the second week of November. For the general discussion of the module our group called Ms. Sreelatha from English and Media Studies Department. The main questions and arguments which came during discussions were, how is the notion of discipline linked with cultu re andhow language works within the discipline of cultural studies. The main argument which Ms Sreelatha proposed was, when we discuss literary studies with cultural studies, first we need to discuss with literature. Another question which came was, how culture is portrayed in literature. Other questions that came up for discussion were, is epistemological basis necessary to begin a study? Is cultural Studies having a philosophical basis? How discussion in literature and literary studies slips into question of language, identity, nation etc… andwhy Indianness? In attempting an answer one needs to acknowledge that, Cultural studies inculcates a questioning attitude which is absent in many other disciplines. Does learning a literature from a culture means one is influenced by that particular culture? The main argument for this question was based on the presumption that one culture being influenced by another and that it is not just an individual influence. Cultural influences are not very obvious. It’s in the psyche. Why should there be a division on national cultures? What is the problem in learning national cultures?
The final argument about the discipline and literature came was, we are still following the traditions of colonial rulers and what we are trying to do is just imitate them because the rules are not changing. To change this we need to raise questions and theoretical discussions which will help to create our own cultural basis in literature and in the discipline of English Studies.
Discussion on Philosophy and cultural Studies II MA English
Report of the Presentation on Philosophy and Cultural Studies
For the module on Philosophy and Cultural Studies, two seminal works were discussed in the class; 1) Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of Human Sciences by Derrida and 2) Can the Subaltern Speak by Gayathri Spivak. This report is based on the presentation on the second text and the subsequent discussion on it in the II MA English Literature with Communication Studies as well as the lecture of Mr. Sunder Sarukkai on Experience and Cognition based on his article, Dalit Experience and Theory.
Gayathri Spivak’s essay problematises three central theories of experience; 1) the postcolonial theories, 2) the subaltern concern and 3) the subalternised woman. She argues that the intellectuals are complicit in silencing the experiences of the colonised, the subaltern and the woman by appropriating their experiences inaccurately in the narratives. She questions the authority of the intellectuals to speak of the experience of these oppressed. Theorisation on the subaltern experience is palimpsestic in nature because even as the intellectual tries to construct a history/experience of the subaltern, the authentic history/experience undergoes erasure. The intellectual’s attempts to essentialise the subaltern experience actually cancels out the multifarious entity of the subaltern experience. She argues that the intellectual should constantly question one’s own ground of argument. All the subalterns, be it the postcolonial countries or the women who belong to innumerable backgrounds and conditions, cannot be put under one monolithic categorisation. Citing a couple examples of women suicide in India during the colonial period she argues how the British understanding legal explanations under the pretext of supporting women’s cause, overlooked the actual reasons for their suicide. What then is the intellectual capable of theorising? The possibility is to form a strategic solidarity with the subalterns for the sake of an argumentative support and buying their own space in the debate all the while being aware of the intellectual’s shaky ground on which one stands to argue. This she calls strategic essentialism.
The crux of the argument is, that the personal lived experience cannot be in any way generalised. The humans are in need of an unmediated channel to share one another’s experience in totem. However the unmediated experience does not take place and what is transferred to others is only partial and makes the other incapable of making the experience for theorising.
Establishing the relationship between culture and philosophy is fundamental in proceeding any further on this module. Sarukkai considered experience as the basic stratum of culture while an argument was brought to establish culture as the substratum of philosophy or the latter as the product of culture. Further arguments are required to establish both the syllogisms. For example, is it possible for anyone to have an experience outside one’s culture? Or, is culture the common fund of experiences of a group of people? As the understanding goes now the linear progression of experience-culture-philosophy is the paradigm to work with.
The question on the emergence of different philosophies at different historical junctures deserves an attention. How will one account for the emergence of Platonian idealism and Aristotelian empiricism as the product of the Greek culture while the existentialists and phenomenologists appeared only hundreds of years later in another culture. A vague attempt at answering this question was that a certain political climate is responsible for the emergence of certain types of philosophies. It was monarchy that gave conducive atmosphere for philosophies that were centred around the analysis of matter and the world. With the emergence of democracy and other people-participative forms of government the discussion on the subject of experience shifted to the human person, the meaning of his existence and experience and thereby giving rise to the existentialist philosophies. The emergence of the nihilist philosphies can be attributed to the disillusionment caused by the world wars. Going into the depth of this argument one finds that the mode of exercising power influences heavily if not being the deciding factor on the emergence of different philosophies.
This further shifted the questions on the difference between what is generalisation and essentialisation. They are to be differentiated as two different logical procedures of argument. In the process of essentialisation a general principle is arrived at by observing the experiences of A, B , C and so on. The generalisation is the reverse process of applying a principle or a personal experience as a general principle to a larger category without actually observing all of them. The former is called induction and the latter deduction.
Sarukkai explores the quintessential difference between the subjective lived experience and the mediated experience. The mediated experience has primarily a certain freedom to choose to undergo or not a certain experience, secondly one has the freedom to leave from the experience if it is not satisfactory and thirdly he has the freedom to modify that experience.
While exploring the lines of argument of Sarukkai and Spivak the philosophies could be accused of complicity in essentialising the diverse human experiences. The question itself is heavily loaded with the nuances of the individualistic turn the capitalistic philosophy of the west has taken. This question arises only when individual is possible despite the social. But the society has not been always so. In the earlier cultures which privileged the social over the individual, the subjective experiences do not take significant discussions at all. When the society is essential to make the individual possible the focus of the discussion can centre only on the society. Society being a common institution, the individual variances are shed to create minimum common identities or the essential. To treat such essentialisation as a malady could arise from subaltern, post colonial or postsructuralist perspectives in social sciences. But natural or physical sciences cannot be held accountable for such essentialsiation. If these sciences fail to draw similarities and essentialise the nature of human bodies, every body has to become a ground of experiment at the cost of its life. The question then extends to what can be essentialised and what cannot be on the basis of empirical proofs.. Such normative approaches are still unacceptable to a postcolonial reading. The arguments go in infinite regression ad infinitum.
Monday, November 30, 2009
World Literature
The idea of word literature was represented in a very glorified manner until the emergence of comparative literature. World literature itself had a very English connotation. Roman, French and the English literature dominated the world scenario. Anthologies of world literature had often been used to market the European cannons. Comparative literature to a certain extent created a binary. Literature from South America, Asia, and Africa which were something “outside the imaginations” started being accommodated in world literature.
Edward Saied’s book “Orientilism” made major inroads towards transforming the outlook of world literature. Said’s book “began to travel” and was used for various political reasons. Mr. Pinto said that, it’s how well one put forward their ideas to communicate that makes a work successful. Said was able to do that. On his lecture, he said that “world literature” does not change the syllabus instead, follows a politics of accommodation. The radical questioning the system as a whole is absent. Edward Said’s orientilism started creating ripples in India from 1981 and it affected women the most. Names like Gauri Vishwanathan and Rajeshwari Vishwanathen were put forward, whose ideas were not accepted in Indian institution, and they had to take refuge westward. One of the first institutions to radically question the system in India was Bangalore University in 1996.
On the development ideas in technology, Mr. Pinto commented on Mr. Shah’s essay on ‘internet and women’. Mr. Shah had argued on the relationship between technology and women. He illustrated this idea by focusing on the role played by women when computers were being introduced in the 1970’s and when the gramophones were invented in 1902 (till about a decade only women recorded). Mr. Pinto then emphasized on the use of the word “world” on how it was used to make a statement. He also said that the world “world does not have any materiality”. Taking off from the book called the “World is flat” by Thomas L. Friedman and the optical illusion that prevailed, he traced back to the fall of Constantinople when the two thousand year old silk route was blocked resulting in an attempt to find a new sea route to south Asia. History saw explorers like Vasco Da Gama and Christopher Columbus who stretched the horizon a bit further with their successful attempts in discovering new routes to different parts of the world. With the discoveries of various new places various dimensions of cultures and expression could be witnessed, sparking off the “process of accommodation” in world literature.
Edward Saied’s book “Orientilism” made major inroads towards transforming the outlook of world literature. Said’s book “began to travel” and was used for various political reasons. Mr. Pinto said that, it’s how well one put forward their ideas to communicate that makes a work successful. Said was able to do that. On his lecture, he said that “world literature” does not change the syllabus instead, follows a politics of accommodation. The radical questioning the system as a whole is absent. Edward Said’s orientilism started creating ripples in India from 1981 and it affected women the most. Names like Gauri Vishwanathan and Rajeshwari Vishwanathen were put forward, whose ideas were not accepted in Indian institution, and they had to take refuge westward. One of the first institutions to radically question the system in India was Bangalore University in 1996.
On the development ideas in technology, Mr. Pinto commented on Mr. Shah’s essay on ‘internet and women’. Mr. Shah had argued on the relationship between technology and women. He illustrated this idea by focusing on the role played by women when computers were being introduced in the 1970’s and when the gramophones were invented in 1902 (till about a decade only women recorded). Mr. Pinto then emphasized on the use of the word “world” on how it was used to make a statement. He also said that the world “world does not have any materiality”. Taking off from the book called the “World is flat” by Thomas L. Friedman and the optical illusion that prevailed, he traced back to the fall of Constantinople when the two thousand year old silk route was blocked resulting in an attempt to find a new sea route to south Asia. History saw explorers like Vasco Da Gama and Christopher Columbus who stretched the horizon a bit further with their successful attempts in discovering new routes to different parts of the world. With the discoveries of various new places various dimensions of cultures and expression could be witnessed, sparking off the “process of accommodation” in world literature.
introductory class on translation studies
What is translation?
Translation of text from one language to another.
Translation of literary texts.
Translation can hardly match up to the original. rewriting the text which is written in some other language Word to word / sense to sense. It is not losing the mood and meaning of the original work.
Putting content from one language to another language atleast semantically.
Converting work from its primary language to its target language.
Trans- change. Translating a written text keeping content intact.
“Translatum” similar to anuvadam or rupantaram – going closer to the word.
Original meaning of translatum to exhume a body from its grave and bury it in another place.
Concerns with grammar, cultural contexts , expressions, meaning.
Rewriting a work from one language to another.
From regional language to a global language.
What is translation studies?
Study of the different theories and issues related to trans
Trends and shifts in translation, translated texts.
Problems one encounters while translation
Trans studies is a discipline, methods, problems theories and concepts
Applicability of the theory of translation. Looking at different aspects of translation.
Studying the process of translation.
Studying something self reflectively and critically.
What are the issues a translator should be aware of while translating?
Culture and author’s idea. Language, audience, syntax and semantics. market , proverbs. Dialectical issues. Aesthetics, meaning of original text. Writer’s viewpoint. Text always comes to you with its cultural context(Gadamer).
Translation and change of form, self translation.
Writer’s viewpoint and translator’s reading of it.
Translators make shift knowingly and unknowingly.
In selftranslation you participate in two language systems and question the previous theories of translation.
Bible translation – ppl will be trained to write similarly and they come back and write similarly. Finding terms of Bible in the respective colloquial languages.
Essence should not be lost.
Literary aspects
Translator should be aware of his attitude towards translation
Fairly good vocabulary of the source and target languages.
Should know about the author
Know the text in all its aspects and should try and collect what has already been said about the text
Should be aware of the translated words before him
Two issues :
Ideal translator is a literary translator
Hierarchization of terms: appropriation, adaptation, translation, transcreation, transliteration
Gender translation, power translation.
Why do people translate?
Ideas and sharing of ideas. All texts go through the socio political dimensions before getting translated. Market forces also play a significant role in translation.
To know about different cultures. Why translated into dominant languages? Why specific texts get translated into other languages and not others?
Tragedies and comedies. Tragedies are in conformity with the authority and comedies challenge the authority.
Translating one of the ways to prove the lack within a culture. Creating a lack.
To get more audience for the text.
Global recognition and fame.
To make the text accessible to others. Individual pleasure, popularity, understand the culture and governance and administration(imperial necessity). The problem with the mediator facilitates translation. Dictionary comes in this context. To make the original text accessible to others who do not know the language.
To understand the nature of the language and also its culture. To create interest in the culture. Making readers more inquisitive about the language in which the work is written.
What kind of words gets translated? It is always nouns. Issues of secularism and words with heavy cultural and communal issues.
Issue of originality. Who makes a work more original translator or the writer. It problematises some of the notions we have of translation.
Trans- movement – creating a replica. any movement is transcreation.
Much of the assumptions we have of translation today are continued from the translation of bible. (word to word, faithful – word of God). INFIDEL
Bring to light certain specific problems faced by a community.
Creativity. Ethics. Communication specially for administrative reasons.
Translation of text from one language to another.
Translation of literary texts.
Translation can hardly match up to the original. rewriting the text which is written in some other language Word to word / sense to sense. It is not losing the mood and meaning of the original work.
Putting content from one language to another language atleast semantically.
Converting work from its primary language to its target language.
Trans- change. Translating a written text keeping content intact.
“Translatum” similar to anuvadam or rupantaram – going closer to the word.
Original meaning of translatum to exhume a body from its grave and bury it in another place.
Concerns with grammar, cultural contexts , expressions, meaning.
Rewriting a work from one language to another.
From regional language to a global language.
What is translation studies?
Study of the different theories and issues related to trans
Trends and shifts in translation, translated texts.
Problems one encounters while translation
Trans studies is a discipline, methods, problems theories and concepts
Applicability of the theory of translation. Looking at different aspects of translation.
Studying the process of translation.
Studying something self reflectively and critically.
What are the issues a translator should be aware of while translating?
Culture and author’s idea. Language, audience, syntax and semantics. market , proverbs. Dialectical issues. Aesthetics, meaning of original text. Writer’s viewpoint. Text always comes to you with its cultural context(Gadamer).
Translation and change of form, self translation.
Writer’s viewpoint and translator’s reading of it.
Translators make shift knowingly and unknowingly.
In selftranslation you participate in two language systems and question the previous theories of translation.
Bible translation – ppl will be trained to write similarly and they come back and write similarly. Finding terms of Bible in the respective colloquial languages.
Essence should not be lost.
Literary aspects
Translator should be aware of his attitude towards translation
Fairly good vocabulary of the source and target languages.
Should know about the author
Know the text in all its aspects and should try and collect what has already been said about the text
Should be aware of the translated words before him
Two issues :
Ideal translator is a literary translator
Hierarchization of terms: appropriation, adaptation, translation, transcreation, transliteration
Gender translation, power translation.
Why do people translate?
Ideas and sharing of ideas. All texts go through the socio political dimensions before getting translated. Market forces also play a significant role in translation.
To know about different cultures. Why translated into dominant languages? Why specific texts get translated into other languages and not others?
Tragedies and comedies. Tragedies are in conformity with the authority and comedies challenge the authority.
Translating one of the ways to prove the lack within a culture. Creating a lack.
To get more audience for the text.
Global recognition and fame.
To make the text accessible to others. Individual pleasure, popularity, understand the culture and governance and administration(imperial necessity). The problem with the mediator facilitates translation. Dictionary comes in this context. To make the original text accessible to others who do not know the language.
To understand the nature of the language and also its culture. To create interest in the culture. Making readers more inquisitive about the language in which the work is written.
What kind of words gets translated? It is always nouns. Issues of secularism and words with heavy cultural and communal issues.
Issue of originality. Who makes a work more original translator or the writer. It problematises some of the notions we have of translation.
Trans- movement – creating a replica. any movement is transcreation.
Much of the assumptions we have of translation today are continued from the translation of bible. (word to word, faithful – word of God). INFIDEL
Bring to light certain specific problems faced by a community.
Creativity. Ethics. Communication specially for administrative reasons.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
WHAT MAKES US THINK: CONVERSATIONS ON CONSCIOUSNESS
WHAT MAKES US THINK: CONVERSATIONS ON CONSCIOUSNESS
CERTIFICATE COURSE FOR EVEN SEMESTER 2009-10
CERTIFICATE COURSE FOR EVEN SEMESTER 2009-10
Conducted by
DEPT. OF PSYCHOLOGY, CHRIST UNIVERSITY
IN COLLABORATION WITH
CUSP@CSCS, BANGALORE
Saturdays: 2 pm – 6 pm (Dec 2009 – Mar 2010)
Venue: Room No. 303 (Dept. of Psychology- PG Unit)
Concept:
What makes us think: Conversations on Consciousness will look once again at the veracity of the mind-body divide. Will minds get collapsed to bodies/brains? Will understanding our brains help us know our minds? Or is there an unbridgeable distance between the work of neuroscience and the workings of human consciousness? What is the relation between the facts (or "what is") of natural science, the ‘interpretations’ of social science and the prescriptions (or "what ought to be") of ethics? Can neuroscience throw light on ethics? What are the relations between brain states and psychological experience? What is a mental representation? How does a sign relate to what it signifies? How might subjective experience be constructed rather than discovered? Can biological or cultural evolution be considered progressive? Can we be optimistic about the prospects of connecting matters of the mind to matters of the brain? Would we have one perspective – the perspective of materiality? Or would there be a splitting and a duality of perspectives on human affairs? How does one negotiate between transcendental idealism and mechanical materialism? How does one connect the in vitro and the in vivo? How does one work through objective/subjective, 1st person/3rd person accounts?
Continuum of Disciplines:
Physics
Biology
Perceptual and Cognitive Psychology
Cultural Studies (including anthropology and semiotics)
Ethics, Religion, and Morality approached from humanistic perspectives
At another level, this course will look at the continuum of disciplines and would try to place psychology as an uncanny in-between in this continuum. This in-between-ness will be seen by the course as the promise of the discipline of psychology (and not its problem). The promise lies in offering us a possible methodology for negotiating between apparently incommensurable disciplinary regimes like philosophy and neurobiology, and historically separated knowledge registers like the human and the natural sciences.
What makes us think: Conversations on Consciousness will look once again at the veracity of the mind-body divide. Will minds get collapsed to bodies/brains? Will understanding our brains help us know our minds? Or is there an unbridgeable distance between the work of neuroscience and the workings of human consciousness? What is the relation between the facts (or "what is") of natural science, the ‘interpretations’ of social science and the prescriptions (or "what ought to be") of ethics? Can neuroscience throw light on ethics? What are the relations between brain states and psychological experience? What is a mental representation? How does a sign relate to what it signifies? How might subjective experience be constructed rather than discovered? Can biological or cultural evolution be considered progressive? Can we be optimistic about the prospects of connecting matters of the mind to matters of the brain? Would we have one perspective – the perspective of materiality? Or would there be a splitting and a duality of perspectives on human affairs? How does one negotiate between transcendental idealism and mechanical materialism? How does one connect the in vitro and the in vivo? How does one work through objective/subjective, 1st person/3rd person accounts?
Continuum of Disciplines:
Physics
Biology
Perceptual and Cognitive Psychology
Cultural Studies (including anthropology and semiotics)
Ethics, Religion, and Morality approached from humanistic perspectives
At another level, this course will look at the continuum of disciplines and would try to place psychology as an uncanny in-between in this continuum. This in-between-ness will be seen by the course as the promise of the discipline of psychology (and not its problem). The promise lies in offering us a possible methodology for negotiating between apparently incommensurable disciplinary regimes like philosophy and neurobiology, and historically separated knowledge registers like the human and the natural sciences.
PRIMARY READINGS:
Blackmore, Susan (2006). Conversations on Consciousness: What the best minds think about the brain, free will, and what it means to be human. NY: OUP.
Changeux, Jean-Pierre & Ricoeur, Paul (2000). What makes us think? A neuroscientist and a philosopher argue about ethics, human nature, and the brain. (Translated by M.B. Debevoise). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS:
Chalmers, D. (1996). The conscious mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
Changeux, J. P. (1985/1983). Neuronal man: The biology of mind. New York: Pantheon. (original publication 1983).
Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness explained. Boston: Little Brown.
Dreyfus, H. (1972). What computers can't do: A critique of artificial reason. New York: Harper and Row.
Nagel, T. (1979). What is it like to be a bat? Moral questions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Popper, K. and Eccles, J. (1078). The self and its brain. London: Springer Verlag.
Searle, J. (1992). The rediscovery of the mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
For more information contact: Sonia Soans ( sonjasoans@gmail.com ) or Diptarup Chowdhury ( diptarup.chowdhury@christuniversity.in )
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Monday, November 02, 2009
SEMINARS
I know its been really long and that I was supposed to write all this long ago.. But I've decided to write about it today. So, here's a little abstract of how classes work here.
I'm a postgraduate student doing MA Critical Theory and Cultural Studies. I have six hours of classes per week. Well, actually four hours per week, with one two hour seminar per week per module.
I'm doing two modules this semester, one titled Material Cultures and Subject and Sign after Freud and Saussure. The second one is the most exciting part of the course, and is also the toughest. It's so interesting to see how the curve moves from Saussure, to Barthes, to Freud, to Lacan. I can actually see how each theorist and philosopher laid the foundation for the next one to come, and so on... Its a beautiful progression of thought. And it's so interesting to see how each person belongs to their time, and that they could not, obviously think beyond their time.
I was talking about the structure of the seminars when I got carried away... We have, as I said, two modules per semester, and the last two hours is this series of lectures called Tradition of Critique, which is pretty awesome, because we get an overview of the key theorists of the 19th and 20th Century. For the man module classes, we have quite a bit of reading to do... These reading last somewhere between 50-100 pages, but this s just the essential reading... There's also the secondary reading, which I've never managed to actually get around.
This week is reading week, which means we don't have classes at all. I know that sounds like a blast, but its really hard because you have to get off your back and sit and focus and read, and figure out what you want to with your essay, which I'm finding quite difficult at the moment.
Till I have more,
In typical Brit Style,
Cheers
Kanasu
I'm a postgraduate student doing MA Critical Theory and Cultural Studies. I have six hours of classes per week. Well, actually four hours per week, with one two hour seminar per week per module.
I'm doing two modules this semester, one titled Material Cultures and Subject and Sign after Freud and Saussure. The second one is the most exciting part of the course, and is also the toughest. It's so interesting to see how the curve moves from Saussure, to Barthes, to Freud, to Lacan. I can actually see how each theorist and philosopher laid the foundation for the next one to come, and so on... Its a beautiful progression of thought. And it's so interesting to see how each person belongs to their time, and that they could not, obviously think beyond their time.
I was talking about the structure of the seminars when I got carried away... We have, as I said, two modules per semester, and the last two hours is this series of lectures called Tradition of Critique, which is pretty awesome, because we get an overview of the key theorists of the 19th and 20th Century. For the man module classes, we have quite a bit of reading to do... These reading last somewhere between 50-100 pages, but this s just the essential reading... There's also the secondary reading, which I've never managed to actually get around.
This week is reading week, which means we don't have classes at all. I know that sounds like a blast, but its really hard because you have to get off your back and sit and focus and read, and figure out what you want to with your essay, which I'm finding quite difficult at the moment.
Till I have more,
In typical Brit Style,
Cheers
Kanasu
Thursday, October 29, 2009
University of the People
A new and unique university - University of the People. Click to visit the website
Paintings and Art
M. N Srinivasan is the father of Indian Sociology whose greatest study was on coorg and his autobiography was remembered village. He introduced the concept of Sanskritization. Everybody irrespective of religion and community started using Sanskrit names. Hence there was a sweep of Sanskrit in communities.
After analyzing a painting by John Constable named “Haywain” painted in the year 1821, Mr Pinto gave guidelines on how to analyze Painting.
He said there are 3 categories of painting.
• Landscape (such as cityscape or urbanscape)
• Potrait (people) Equesterian refers to animal painting
• Still life.
How to analyze Painting
What is subject matter
What is location or setting of a particular scene.
Historical period, or work it depicts.
Season of time of the year.
Time of the day, activities by people..
What is the instant, what is the capture.
Erin Panofsky (Russian)– Branch of Art History that is concerned with meaning of Art or subject matter of Art.
Erwin Panofsky said art has 3 levels of meanings: -
1) Primary- Recognize objects. Eg:- A man walking.
2) Secondary-Conventions Eg:-Greetings, Taking off hat.
3) Tertiary-Intrusion Eg:- About the nation, class, attitude, psychology, period.
Iconology deals with the third level of meaning.
Roger Fry said people have 2 kinds of life
-Actual life
-Imaginative life.
Art is related to Imaginary life and should not be represented of reality. Art was never realistic. Till Renaissance art was completely abstract. In the 12c art became completely realistic.
Rembrandt is considered as the greatest painter as he was excellent in the use of light.
Post Impressionist Painting – After the Impression.
1830’s there was a slight deviation from actual.
Form Looks at:-
Rhythym of line.
Mass
Shape
Light and shade
Colour
Then Mr. Pinto showed us Cezanne’s painting “Basket of Apple’s” which is a good example of still life painting.
With this painting we understood that lines create an impression and we can understand heaviness through the space used.
From 16th century onwards there is a tendency of self portrait.
Art History
Gombrich has witten a book called “History of Art”. He says Art initially began with cave painting then the Egyptians Painting which was taken over by Greeks (500 BCE to 500 C). Greeks started to make art realistic.
The next 500 years there was no art because of collapse of Roman empire.
During Renissance period the important painters are Da Vinci, Titian, Raffael but the greatest is Rembrandt.
Barooque painting is a style referred to lot of people. And Rococo refers to lot of ornaments.
19c :- Menet, student Monet.
Cezanne :- Person who began modern art.
Monet:- Impressions.
Cubism:- Refers to breaking the painting and painting different dimensions.
Gombrich dosen’t have place for community art and also women were never encouraged in painting.
Painting is always abstract. Indian painting upto Raviverma is abstract. After him is realist.
Picasso, Yan Gogh come in the tradition of impressionist.
1745 – Butcher
1866-Origin of the world- pubic area of the women.
Essay: - Laura Muloey- Visual pleasure and narrative cinema.
Women are centre of most visual creations. It is there for man’s pleasure.
Renissance paintings- fascinations for male. There was no fascination for male body before.
1937-Picasso, in Spain, painted Guernica. UN office entrance has the picture – Guernica. This painting is about anti war.
Principles of Painting
* *
* donor’s pic
After Renissance
Watching through a hole in the wall. A private view into the private life of people.
‘My body for beginners’- simple book of visuals written by scholars. Body for philosophy, for medicine.
Politics of Aesthetics
Tracy Amin – ‘My Bed”
‘This is not a pipe’ – Dushamp
‘Fountain’
Art is a construct-the artists themselves started to question.
‘Art is an imitation of reality’ – this concept is broken. This was said by Plato Baudrillard- gave a concept called hyper reality in modern times we have lost the distinction between reality and aesthetics of reality.
Nationalist Politics:-
CN Ramachandran- Most of India is Hindu and Hindu refres to uppercast male dominatnt society. It does not include women.
Visit To The Chapel
On 25th October afternoon MCMS students were taken to St. Aloysius Chapel where the century old edifice houses breathtaking paintings which were created by the famous Italian Painter Br. Antonio Moscheni S.J.
There are 2 types of paintings in the chapel Fresco and Canvas. Frescoes cover about 600 square meters of the walls of the chapel and canvas made of pure linen of strong close weave cover 400 square meters on the ceilings.
Most of the paintings portray life of St. Aloysius the patron saint, life of Jesus. The arches consists paintings of different saints of church and Jesuit saints.
Life size angles are holding garlands of different flowers found in Dakshina Kannada.
Mr. Pinto explained different symbols in the paintings which helps us to recognize the holy personality and also different meanings the paintings try to tell.
as written by Bojamma B.C & Sandhya D'Souza
After analyzing a painting by John Constable named “Haywain” painted in the year 1821, Mr Pinto gave guidelines on how to analyze Painting.
He said there are 3 categories of painting.
• Landscape (such as cityscape or urbanscape)
• Potrait (people) Equesterian refers to animal painting
• Still life.
How to analyze Painting
What is subject matter
What is location or setting of a particular scene.
Historical period, or work it depicts.
Season of time of the year.
Time of the day, activities by people..
What is the instant, what is the capture.
Erin Panofsky (Russian)– Branch of Art History that is concerned with meaning of Art or subject matter of Art.
Erwin Panofsky said art has 3 levels of meanings: -
1) Primary- Recognize objects. Eg:- A man walking.
2) Secondary-Conventions Eg:-Greetings, Taking off hat.
3) Tertiary-Intrusion Eg:- About the nation, class, attitude, psychology, period.
Iconology deals with the third level of meaning.
Roger Fry said people have 2 kinds of life
-Actual life
-Imaginative life.
Art is related to Imaginary life and should not be represented of reality. Art was never realistic. Till Renaissance art was completely abstract. In the 12c art became completely realistic.
Rembrandt is considered as the greatest painter as he was excellent in the use of light.
Post Impressionist Painting – After the Impression.
1830’s there was a slight deviation from actual.
Form Looks at:-
Rhythym of line.
Mass
Shape
Light and shade
Colour
Then Mr. Pinto showed us Cezanne’s painting “Basket of Apple’s” which is a good example of still life painting.
With this painting we understood that lines create an impression and we can understand heaviness through the space used.
From 16th century onwards there is a tendency of self portrait.
Art History
Gombrich has witten a book called “History of Art”. He says Art initially began with cave painting then the Egyptians Painting which was taken over by Greeks (500 BCE to 500 C). Greeks started to make art realistic.
The next 500 years there was no art because of collapse of Roman empire.
During Renissance period the important painters are Da Vinci, Titian, Raffael but the greatest is Rembrandt.
Barooque painting is a style referred to lot of people. And Rococo refers to lot of ornaments.
19c :- Menet, student Monet.
Cezanne :- Person who began modern art.
Monet:- Impressions.
Cubism:- Refers to breaking the painting and painting different dimensions.
Gombrich dosen’t have place for community art and also women were never encouraged in painting.
Painting is always abstract. Indian painting upto Raviverma is abstract. After him is realist.
Picasso, Yan Gogh come in the tradition of impressionist.
1745 – Butcher
1866-Origin of the world- pubic area of the women.
Essay: - Laura Muloey- Visual pleasure and narrative cinema.
Women are centre of most visual creations. It is there for man’s pleasure.
Renissance paintings- fascinations for male. There was no fascination for male body before.
1937-Picasso, in Spain, painted Guernica. UN office entrance has the picture – Guernica. This painting is about anti war.
Principles of Painting
* *
* donor’s pic
After Renissance
Watching through a hole in the wall. A private view into the private life of people.
‘My body for beginners’- simple book of visuals written by scholars. Body for philosophy, for medicine.
Politics of Aesthetics
Tracy Amin – ‘My Bed”
‘This is not a pipe’ – Dushamp
‘Fountain’
Art is a construct-the artists themselves started to question.
‘Art is an imitation of reality’ – this concept is broken. This was said by Plato Baudrillard- gave a concept called hyper reality in modern times we have lost the distinction between reality and aesthetics of reality.
Nationalist Politics:-
CN Ramachandran- Most of India is Hindu and Hindu refres to uppercast male dominatnt society. It does not include women.
Visit To The Chapel
On 25th October afternoon MCMS students were taken to St. Aloysius Chapel where the century old edifice houses breathtaking paintings which were created by the famous Italian Painter Br. Antonio Moscheni S.J.
There are 2 types of paintings in the chapel Fresco and Canvas. Frescoes cover about 600 square meters of the walls of the chapel and canvas made of pure linen of strong close weave cover 400 square meters on the ceilings.
Most of the paintings portray life of St. Aloysius the patron saint, life of Jesus. The arches consists paintings of different saints of church and Jesuit saints.
Life size angles are holding garlands of different flowers found in Dakshina Kannada.
Mr. Pinto explained different symbols in the paintings which helps us to recognize the holy personality and also different meanings the paintings try to tell.
as written by Bojamma B.C & Sandhya D'Souza
Nationalist Politics and Aesthetics of Art
Creative communication class of Anil pinto for MCMS students of St Aloysius College on Monday, 26 October dealt with the topic nationalist, politics and aesthetics of art.
Plato says ‘Art is imitation of reality’ and reality is aesthetics. According to Jean Baudrillard "The simulation of something which never really existed."
Mr.. Anil Pinto said according to CM Radhachandran,
Hinduism = upper caste = male
Pierre Bondreau argument about nationalist is that-
· One’s taste is determined by social class we belong to.
· Most of the social classes decide what is good or what is bad.
Mr Pinto, told us to read the book “Distinction, a social critique of judgment of taste” by Pierre Bondreau.
as written by Amritha B Rao & Reena S
Plato says ‘Art is imitation of reality’ and reality is aesthetics. According to Jean Baudrillard "The simulation of something which never really existed."
Mr.. Anil Pinto said according to CM Radhachandran,
Hinduism = upper caste = male
Pierre Bondreau argument about nationalist is that-
· One’s taste is determined by social class we belong to.
· Most of the social classes decide what is good or what is bad.
Mr Pinto, told us to read the book “Distinction, a social critique of judgment of taste” by Pierre Bondreau.
as written by Amritha B Rao & Reena S
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Review writing- drama, music, painting , book
Drama review
One of the most important aspects to be observed in drama review is the structure. The structure contains the exposition, rising action, climax, falling action and the denovment.
The drama review can start with a comment. The review gives the details of the drama, where was it stages, who is the director, name of the drama, whether it’s an adaption from a book, the language of communication and the actors of the drama. The review also tells about what the play tries to achieve through the characters and the subject matter. The evaluation is given after giving the intro about the drama. If the drama has a bad review and the critique has a bad opinion of the drama, the critique has to give the reasons what went wrong in the drama. A drama can be criticized by taking instances from the drama. While criticising a drama the criticism should be on the acting and not the person. When a newspaper carries the review it should create an interest in the minds of the reader and let the reader decide whether it is good or bad. So it is not necessary to give the storyline.
All plays tell the story of a hero’s journey. In the exposition stage the director gives an introduction to the characters, the location and the content. In the rising action stage small instances happen that will lead the drama into the climax which is the important level where the emotions play a highest role. Falling action stage is where the story unveils and the denovement is the conclusion.
Theatre direction includes
Prop
Lighting
Sound design
Costume
Acting
The director has to ensure the quality of the production, healthy artiste realise their artistic vision. He has to give bodies to the character, oversees props and he has to decide on everything.
Desired effect can be achieved through voice modulation while acting. The actor has to act according to the directions of the director. Thepsis is the first known actor in drama.
But things changed after the Second World War. Stanislovsky changed the method of acting. According to him the actor should prepare himself by imaging himself as the character. He has to put his feet in the shoes of the character and empathise with the character.
MUSIC REVIEW
An introduction t the music programme is given at the introduction of the music review. It includes where and when the programme was held and who was the singer. The evaluation of the talent is given after the introduction. After the small evaluation the details about the music is given which includes the raga, tala and the other details about its composition. In the later part another evaluation along with suggestion from the reviewer is also included. To review music piece the reviewer should know the details related to classical music. It is always seen that only classical music is reviewed and a lot of technical terms related to music is given. This divides the readers into people who know music and others who do not have a music background.
PAINTING REVIEW
As the music review here also the details is given about when and where the painting exhibition was conducted, who is the painter and what is the price. Here the impact of the audience is also given in the review. The review also includes the quotes from the painter and also a brief on the painter’s life. In painting review also we find a lot of technical terms like the tone of colour, which again divide the audience.
BOOK REVIEW
In the book review the name of the book with the language, the author, the publication and the year of publication is given. Here the reviewer raises questions regarding the book and the language used in writing. Quotes from the book are also given as examples to support the argument. The reviewer also compares the earlier works of the same author. The reviewer also sees how the book is valued in its tradition.
While writing reviews the writer should show that the review is not a subjective one but and he is considering the existing standards of the field.
as written by Saranya Valsarajan & Janice Fernandes
One of the most important aspects to be observed in drama review is the structure. The structure contains the exposition, rising action, climax, falling action and the denovment.
The drama review can start with a comment. The review gives the details of the drama, where was it stages, who is the director, name of the drama, whether it’s an adaption from a book, the language of communication and the actors of the drama. The review also tells about what the play tries to achieve through the characters and the subject matter. The evaluation is given after giving the intro about the drama. If the drama has a bad review and the critique has a bad opinion of the drama, the critique has to give the reasons what went wrong in the drama. A drama can be criticized by taking instances from the drama. While criticising a drama the criticism should be on the acting and not the person. When a newspaper carries the review it should create an interest in the minds of the reader and let the reader decide whether it is good or bad. So it is not necessary to give the storyline.
All plays tell the story of a hero’s journey. In the exposition stage the director gives an introduction to the characters, the location and the content. In the rising action stage small instances happen that will lead the drama into the climax which is the important level where the emotions play a highest role. Falling action stage is where the story unveils and the denovement is the conclusion.
Theatre direction includes
Prop
Lighting
Sound design
Costume
Acting
The director has to ensure the quality of the production, healthy artiste realise their artistic vision. He has to give bodies to the character, oversees props and he has to decide on everything.
Desired effect can be achieved through voice modulation while acting. The actor has to act according to the directions of the director. Thepsis is the first known actor in drama.
But things changed after the Second World War. Stanislovsky changed the method of acting. According to him the actor should prepare himself by imaging himself as the character. He has to put his feet in the shoes of the character and empathise with the character.
MUSIC REVIEW
An introduction t the music programme is given at the introduction of the music review. It includes where and when the programme was held and who was the singer. The evaluation of the talent is given after the introduction. After the small evaluation the details about the music is given which includes the raga, tala and the other details about its composition. In the later part another evaluation along with suggestion from the reviewer is also included. To review music piece the reviewer should know the details related to classical music. It is always seen that only classical music is reviewed and a lot of technical terms related to music is given. This divides the readers into people who know music and others who do not have a music background.
PAINTING REVIEW
As the music review here also the details is given about when and where the painting exhibition was conducted, who is the painter and what is the price. Here the impact of the audience is also given in the review. The review also includes the quotes from the painter and also a brief on the painter’s life. In painting review also we find a lot of technical terms like the tone of colour, which again divide the audience.
BOOK REVIEW
In the book review the name of the book with the language, the author, the publication and the year of publication is given. Here the reviewer raises questions regarding the book and the language used in writing. Quotes from the book are also given as examples to support the argument. The reviewer also compares the earlier works of the same author. The reviewer also sees how the book is valued in its tradition.
While writing reviews the writer should show that the review is not a subjective one but and he is considering the existing standards of the field.
as written by Saranya Valsarajan & Janice Fernandes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)