Feminism in Bapsi Sidhwa’s Ice Candy Man

Feminism in Bapsi Sidhwa’s Ice Candy Man

Regarding feminism; accurately this indictment that the ‘will of men’ had brought on the Women that places this novel apart from the other Women stories. Ice Candy Man is exclusive in illustrating not only the assault that was revealed on the women of the subcontinent but also in its valorization of the indictment and bravery that women are able in periods of disaster. Colors of contemporary feminism as well as would be found in Sidhwa’s work.

Feminism & Women’s Power

Sidhwa’s interpretation of Lenny’s own ideas, of Ayah’s overall rejection to take her destiny, of Godmother’s ingenuity, and of Lenny’s mother and aunt’s initiatives at recovery – all join to offer organization to women in this novel in the perspective of feminism. Sidhwa’s Women-centered story thus vindicates the power of women to create options and to take the reins of their life in their own arms, which actually volumes to an act of fantastic defiance, especially if we keep in thoughts the particular conditions of Ayah’s situation. Thus, though being a novel which seemingly prioritizes a man at least in its name, Ice-Candy-Man slightly but successfully subvert discussion of patriarchy and rights women will, option and durability along with the feministic features of sympathy and becoming a mother.

Feminism & Diasphoric Femininity (ies) in Sidhwa’s Writings

On the other hand through An American Brat, Sidhwa can appropriately be known as a diasporic femininity’s author, as the protect of the novel explains that she “divides her time between the U.S where she instructed, and Lahore where she lived a part of life.” Problematizing the idea of a set identity (ies), Sidhwa symbolizes her woman character as having several stages of identity (ies). Searching the groups of marginalization in Pakistan as well as in U.S, she lives upon the techniques of the sexed subaltern for training organization. When checked out in this way, Sidhwa’s work is different as it explains the various kinds and stages of marginalization. Furthermore, the limitations between the oppressed and the oppressor are brought up into a talk. Situated in various public and regional roles, the females of color develop methods of preparing organization. While doing so, the factors of “normalcy” and “traditionally feminine” are re-conceptualized. It is this state policies of gendering, its significance and effects that are shown in the perspective of contemporary as well as classical feminism.

Bapsi Sidhwa at the 2008 Texas Book Festival, ...
Bapsi Sidhwa at the 2008 Texas Book Festival, Austin, Texas, United States. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA)

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA)

The goal of feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) research, therefore, is to appear the complicated, simple, and sometimes not so simple, methods in which regularly obtained-for-allocated gendered presumptions and hegemonic energy interaction are discursive created, continual, mentioned, and pushed in different situations and cultural contexts.
Such a new is not merely an educational de-construction of text messages and discuss for its own benefit, but comes from a recognition that the concerns addressed (in perspective of affecting public change) have content and phenomenological repercussions for categories of men and women in particular cultural contexts. A feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) viewpoint is obviously interdisciplinary in characteristics. On the one side, it plays a role in (critical) terminology and discussion research a viewpoint advised by feminist research, and however, it indicates the effectiveness of terminology and discussion research for the research of feminist concerns in sex, gender and women research.

Why Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA)?

For over a several decades, in several divisions of linguistic and discussion research, there has been a serious shift towards clearly such as the phrase ‘feminist’ in various sub-fields by feminist experts managing in these places, such as ‘feminist stylistics’ (Mills 1995), ‘feminist pragmatics’ (Christie 2000), and ‘feminist discussion analysis’ (e.g., Kitzinger 2000). In all these places, the popular research has been recognized by an apparently impartial and purpose questions, which feminist experts managing within have pushed. Composing more usually about feminism and language concept in 1992, Cameron described that one of her primary aims was to ‘question the whole scholarly purpose tendency of linguistics and to prove how presumptions and techniques of linguistics are suggested as a reason in patriarchal philosophy and oppression’ (1992: 16). The need to declare and find a feminist viewpoint in linguistic and discussion research is of course part of what feminists in academie have for many decades belittled and desired to change beyond male-torrent restraints in the humanities, public sciences, and sciences (Gordon 1986; Harding 1986; Spender 1981).

But remain, one might quite reasonably ask, ‘But why a feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA)?’ – for Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), as a research system, is known for its brazenly governmental place and is worried with research of various kinds of public inequality and disfavor. Furthermore, the tab Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) bounds to feminist techniques in female’s research, which offered an inspiration to the new area in the Nineteen-eighties, has also sometimes been freely recognized (Van Dijk 1991). Needlessly to say, therefore, feminist speakers have managed quite gladly under the prescript of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) without requiring to banner a feminist viewpoint clearly.

Then a need for a particular feminist brand now, Why? First, the most straightforward reason is that many research in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) with a sex or gender concentrate embrace a crucial feminist view of sex or gender interaction – they are inspired by the need to change substantively the existing circumstances of these interaction. This said, it is value emphasizing that not all studies that cope with sex or gender in discussion are actually feminist in this critical feel.

More other, concerns indicated by some feminist experts about Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) invite pause for believed. Cameron wrote: ‘[CDA] is one of those broadly modern tasks whose creators and major results are nevertheless all immediately white-colored men (1998: 969–70), and Wilkinson and Kitzinger (1995) particularly review on these male’s failing to prefer feminists by stating their work.’ Free from doubt, most feminist research in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is not performed by ‘straight white-colored men’, but by a variety of feminist females in a variety of regional places, not all of whom are white-colored and heterosexual. With respect to Wilkinson and Kitzinger’s statement, one might see that more latest theorizing in some places of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) does recognize and consist of, among other crucial public systematic research, feminist performs (e.g., Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999). With regards to a feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA), however, we might imagine more than details of feminist experts, essential as that is. It is necessary within Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to find a clearly ‘feminist policies of articulation’ (to lend a expression from Wetherell, 1995, p. 141), by which I mean the need to be advised by feminist concepts and ideas in theorizing and examining the apparently innocent yet oppressive characteristics of sex or gender as an omni-relevant classification in many public techniques. Eckert, such as, has mentioned how sex or gender functions in a more persistent and complicated way than other techniques of oppression:

Whereas the energy interaction between men and women are just like those between taken over and subordinated sessions and cultural categories, the day-to-day context in which these energy interaction are performed out is quite different. It is not a social standard for each managing classification person to be joined up for life with participant of the middle-class or for every dark-colored person to be so paired up for lifestyle with a white-colored person. However, our conventional sex or gender ideology dictates just this type of connection between men and women (1989: 253-54).

Lastly, an end result of the insufficient self-naming has intended that increasing amounts of feminist crucial discussion experts spread across the planet have not completely structured them/ourselves to come together in a typical community. The concerns of collectivity and of getting team exposure are now essential for another purpose. Although Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in its beginning decades had a minor place within the more founded popular places in linguistics, its reputation over the decades has led to a switch towards the center and, as some have suggested, has itself become an orthodoxy (Billig 2000). Composing in the beginning 90’s, van Dijk, one of the primary experts in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), remarked:

For Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to become a popular strategy in the humanities and public sciences, we should expect a multitude of guides, thousands of content and meeting documents, and unique symposia or meeting sections on yearly bases’ (1991: 1).

After a several decades later, all these have been obtained and more: this publication is testimony to that, along with the increasing number of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) guides, content, and worldwide conventions, as well as CDA’s (Critical Discourse Analysis
) addition as a trained topic on many linguistics applications globally. Feminist exposure and speech in ‘mainstream’ Critical Discourse Analysis CDA scholarships then, remarkably, also has a appropriate political work.

Why a feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA)?

The ‘discursive turn’ in much public medical and humanities research, as we know, has given reputation to concerns of terminology and discussion. poststructuralism provides a seriously useful perspective of discussion as a site of battle, where causes of public (re)production and contestation are performed out. Within feminist scholarships, the discursive convert is shown in guides outside linguistics (e.g., Weedon, 1997; Wilkinson & Kitzinger, 1995) as well as within linguistics under the rubric of ‘gender and language’ research (e.g., Baxter, 2003; Area & Bucholtz, 1995; Wodak, 1997). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA), with its concentrate on public rights and change of sex, is a appropriate participation to the increasing body of feminist discussion literary performs, particularly in sex and terminology where feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) has filled a amazingly minor place.

Wilkinson and Kitzinger (1995, p. 5) have mentioned that there is really ‘no necessary coincidence between the passions of feminists and discussion analysts’, even though the likelihood for successful involvement prevails. With regards to feminism and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in particular, however, there is actually much overlap in circumstances of public emancipatory goals. Indeed, as opposed to feminist techniques that use illustrative discussion analytic techniques, feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) has the benefits of managing, at the beginning, within a politically spent, informative system of discussion research. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA provides a regarded theorization of the connection between public techniques and discussion components (see, e.g., Wodak & She 2001, for various kinds of theorization), and a variety of resources and techniques for particular studies of contextualized uses of terminology in text messages and discuss. Further, under the offset umbrella of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) research, particular studies of various kinds of wide spread inequality have been designed (refer, e.g., to content in Discourse and Society). Feminist discussion college students can understand much about the interconnections between and the particularities of discursive techniques used in various kinds of public inequality and oppression that can nourish back into crucial feminist research and techniques for telecommuting saves gas. The wedding of feminism with Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), in sum, can generate a wealthy and highly effective governmental check for activity.

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) as a governmental viewpoint on sex, worried with demystifying the interrelationships of sex, energy, and philosophy in discussion, is to the research of text messages and discuss similarly, which provides a remedial to techniques that give preference to one language use over another (see Lazar, 2005a). Frameworks for research of discussion in Critical Discourse Analysis CDA also, much, recognize a multimodal aspect (e.g., Kress & van Leeuwen, 1996; Scollon, 2001) that is usually losing in other techniques in linguistics. Significantly in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) research, terminology is seriously evaluated together with other semiotic techniques like creation, templates, actions, and appears to be, which creates for an enhancing and informative research. Clearly, a multimodal perspective of discussion has great value for a natural feminist check of discursive designs of sex (Lazar, 1999, 2000).

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis
English: One of the symbols of German Women’s movement (from the 1970s) Deutsch: Ein Logo der deutschen Frauenbewegung (aus den 70er Jahren) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Critical Discourse Analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis

Van Dijk (1998a) states that Critical Discourse Analysis, (CDA), is a area that is involved with learning and assessing published and verbal text messages to expose the discursive resources of capability, popularity, inequality and prejudice.  It investigates how these discursive resources are managed and duplicated within particular public, governmental and traditional situations.  In a similar line of thinking, Fairclough (1993) describes CDA as

discourse analysis which is designed to consistently discover often solid connections of causality and dedication between (a) discursive methods, events and text messages, and (b) broader public and social components, interaction and processes; to look at how such methods, activities and text messages occur out of and are ideologically formed by interaction of capability and battles over power; and to explore how the opacity of these connections between discourse and community is itself a aspect obtaining capability and hegemony. (p. 135)

To put it simply, CDA is designed at making clear the connections between discourse methods, public methods, and public components, connections that might be solid to the layperson.

Fairclough & Chuliaraki (1999) assume that CDA has a appropriate participation to create and declare that, “the previous 20 years or so have been an interval of powerful financial public modification on an international scale” (p. 30). Although these changes are due to particular activities by individuals the changes have been recognized as “part of nature” (p. 4), that is, the developments have been recognized as organic and not due to individuals causal activities. The latest financial and public changes, according to Fairclough & Chuliaraki (1999), “are to a important level . . . changes in the terminology, and discourses” (p. 4), thus, CDA can help by theorizing changes and developing an attention “of what is, how it has come to be, and what it might become, on the reasons for which individuals may be able to create and rebuilding their lives” (p. 4). With such a purpose in thoughts, Chuliaraki and Fairclough (1999) declare that

Critical Discourse Analysis, of relationships places out to demonstrate that the semiotic and terminology functions of the relationships are constantly linked with what is going on culturally, and what is going on culturally is indeed going on partially or definitely semiotically or linguistically. Put in a different way, CDA constantly maps relationships of modification between the representational and non-symbolic, between discussion and the non-discursive. (p. 113)

The first systematic concentrate of Fairclough’s three-part design is written text. Research of text involves language analysis with regards to language, sentence structure, semantics, the sound system, and cohesion-organization above the phrase stage (Fairclough, 1995b: 57).
With in language investigation sementically there are most impotand things lexical investigation of text and sementic investigation as well (Fairclough, 1995b: 57-58). Fairclough also argues that some text having multidimensional meaning. Some texts having also needs investigation at the level of phonetics, that changed by him again.

Language analysis is involved with presences as well as absences in text messages that could consist of “representations, groups of personal, constructions of personal identification or personal relations” (Fairclough, 1995: 58).

Nederlands: CDA-logo
Nederlands: CDA-logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Themes in Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus

Themes in Doctor Faustus

Themes are the universal and fundamental ideas presented in a literary work. There are lots of significant themes in Doctor Faustus.

Flesh and Spirit

The conflict between flash and spirit is strongly depicted in Doctor Faustus. Flash is related with human body lust and desires while spirit deals with religion and God. Flash consider worldly pleasures more important while spirit resistance against those desires. Faustus values flesh move them spirit.

 Good and Evil

Good and evil are the most important issue presented in Doctor Faustus. Conflict between Good and evil makes a man hesitant, he remains confused like Faustus that either he have to adopt good or evil what way is good for him and what way sis dangerous for him.

 Pride and Sin

Pride and sin is the most important factor in the downfall of Faustus. Pride belongs to the seven deadly sins, considering himself better from all, Faustus falls in pride and quickly adopt sin to fulfill his lusty desires which leads him towards hell.

 Salvation and Damnation

According to Christian religion salvation is necessary for a Christian to save from hell. It one’s fail to get salvation, he will be eternally damned. Salvation actually deals with the repentance, but the Faustus refuses to repent which causes his damnation and he is punished forever in the hell.

Knowledge and Wisdom

Faustus has a great lust for knowledge. He has studies all the branches of knowledge including divinity but he feels the himself still hungry about the knowledge that’s why he adopts the forbidden knowledge which is called black art. It was his failure of wisdom while adopting the forbidden knowledge. Faustus was not true towards life because he was valuing his knowledge on his wisdom.

 Man’s Lust and Limitations of Power

Man like Doctor Faustus has so many desires like lust for wealth, lust for beauty, lust for power etc. But when he adopts the wrong way to fulfill his desires he cannot be succeeded. Like Faustus sells him soul for fulfilling his desires but he comes to know about his limitations as a man when he used to just amuse and entertain dukes for showing his skill of black art. He cannot do something like God which shows the limitations of power.

Greed

Another theme in Doctor Faustus is that of greed like other heroes of Marlow’s heroes forget their responsibilities to God and other creatures instead they try to hid their weak character. Faustus was in a tragic cycle of   greed and despair.

Tragic Hero

A tragic is a character that the audience thinks with despite his / her action that would indicate the contrary. Faustus in the play not the mere shell of a man existing only represents the evil in the world. He is a human beings with full of emotions and thoughts. Although the Doctor Faustus himself does not care of humanity.

Doctor Faustus (film)
Doctor Faustus (film) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What is Plagiarism?

What is Plagiarism?

Etymology of the word “plagiarism”

In the 1st century, the use of the Latin word plagiarius (literally kidnapper), to denote someone stealing someone else’s work, was pioneered by Roman poet Martial, who complained that another poet had “kidnapped his verses.” This use of the word was introduced into English in 1601 by dramatist Ben Jonson, to describe as a plagiary someone guilty of literary theft.

The derived form plagiarism was introduced into English around 1620.

DEFINITION

According to the Merriam-Webster On-Line Dictionary, to “plagiarize” means

1. To steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own

2. To use (another’s production) without crediting the source

3. To commit literary theft: to present as new and original, an idea or product, derived from an existing source.

 

Stanford sees plagiarism as “use, without giving reasonable and appropriate credit to or acknowledging the author or source, of another person’s original work, whether such work is made up of code, formulas, ideas, language, research, strategies, writing or other form”

The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own is plagiarism.

(http://www.mdc.edu)

So what is plagiarism?

 

1. Plagiarism can occur on any academic assignment, not just papers.

2. Plagiarism is not limited to copying other peoples’ work, but includes failing to cite your sources properly or revising others’ work to make it sound like your own.

3. If you don’t use quotation marks correctly, you are plagiarizing! If you don’t use footnotes correctly, you are plagiarizing! If you copy someone else’s work and try to mask it by changing words or sentences around, you are plagiarizing!

But can words and ideas really be stolen?

According to U.S. law, the answer is yes.  In the United States and  many other countries, the expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions.  Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some media (such as a book or a computer file).

All of the following are considered plagiarism

1. Turning in someone else’s work as your own
2. Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
3. Failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
4. Giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
5. Changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
6. Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not.

TYPES OF PLAGIARISM

1. CLONE

Submitting another’s work, word-for-word, as one’s own

2. CTRL-C

Contains significant portions of text from a single source without alterations

3. FIND – REPLACE

Changing key words and phrases but retaining the essential content of the source

4. REMIX

Paraphrases from multiple sources, made to fit together

5. RECYCLE

Borrows generously from the writer’s previous work without citation

6. HYBRID

Combines perfectly cited sources with copied passages without citation

7. MASHUP

Mixes copied material from multiple sources

8. 404 ERROR

Includes citations to non-existent or inaccurate information about sources

9. AGGREGATOR

Includes proper citation to sources but the paper contains almost no original work

10. RE-TWEET

Includes proper citation, but relies too closely on the text’s original wording and/or structure

 

Self-plagiarism

Reading the following line, can you guess the meaning of the term self-plagiarism.

“Self-plagiarism involves dishonesty but not intellectual theft.“ (David B. Resnik)

Self-plagiarism (also known as “recycling fraud”) is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one’s own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work. It is common for university researchers to rephrase and republish their own work, tailoring it for different academic journals and newspaper articles, to disseminate their work to the widest possible interested public. One of the functions of the process of peer review in academic writing is to prevent this type of “recycling”.

CRITICISM ON SELF-PLAGIARISM

The concept of “self-plagiarism” has been challenged as self-contradictory. Stephanie J. Bird argues that self-plagiarism is a misnomer, since by definition plagiarism concerns the use of others’ material. Bird identifies that in an educational context, “self-plagiarism” refers to the case of a student who resubmits “the same essay for credit in two different courses.”

 

HEC’s Plagiarism Eradication System

HEC’s goal is to combat plagiarism effectively in an academic environment in all institutions while ensuring that the students and academicians know that stealing someone’s intellectual property is unethical and can lead to serious consequences. For this, IT division has sought for technological solution and acquired an online software tool to assist in identifying the plagiarized material from documents. The software tool, iThenticate and Turnitin are amongst the leading software used globally for such purposes. The facility is provided to all higher education institutions across the country and is in use since 2007. This web based service is available at http://www.turnitin.com and 1000 licenses for each of the universities/ institutes have been acquired and handed over to teaching faculty, post graduate students and researchers in order to address the issue at the grass root level. A total of one hundred and twenty seven (127) HEIs have been provided with this facility. At present there are 7170 instructors registered with this acquired services, whereas the number of students are more than 15,000. During past five (05) years, nearly 150,000 articles and/ or documents have been submitted to generate the Originality Report.

How do these software help?

1. Educators can check students’ work for improper citation.
2. Helps instructors in saving time spent on assessing written work and marking it accordingly.

How TO benefit from hec plagiarism prevention service?

In order to get benefit from HEC Plagiarism Prevention Service, online service is available at:

http://www.turnitin.com

 

What IS CITATION?

A “citation” is the way you tell your readers that certain material in your work came from another source. It also gives your readers the information necessary to find that source again, including:

1. Information about the author

2. The title of the work
3. The name and location of the company that published your copy of the source
4. The date your copy was published
5. The page numbers of the material you are borrowing

 

WHEN DO I NEED TO CITE?

Whenever you borrow words or ideas, you need to acknowledge their source. The following situations almost always require citation:

1. Whenever you use quotes

2. Whenever you paraphrase
3. Whenever you use an idea that someone else has already expressed
4. Whenever you make specific reference to the work of another
5. Whenever someone else’s work has been critical in developing your own ideas.

 Sanctions for student plagiarism

In the academic world, plagiarism by students is usually considered a very serious offense that can result in punishments such as a failing grade on the particular assignment, the entire course, or even being expelled from the institution. Generally, the punishment increases as a person enters higher institutions of learning. For cases of repeated plagiarism, or for cases in which a student commits severe plagiarism (e.g., submitting a copied piece of writing as original work), suspension or expulsion is likely.

How to avoid plagiarism?

ATTRIBUTION

The acknowledgement that something came from another source. The following sentence properly attributes an idea to its original author:

Jack Bauer, in his article “Twenty-Four Reasons not to Plagiarize,” maintains that cases of plagiarists being expelled by academic institutions have risen dramatically in recent years due to an increasing awareness on the part of educators.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A list of sources used in preparing a work.

CITATION

A short, formal indication of the source of information or quoted material.

ENDNOTES

Notes at the end of a paper acknowledging sources and providing additional references or information.

FOOTNOTES

Notes at the bottom of a paper acknowledging sources or providing additional references or information.

QUOTATION

Quote Your Sources Correctly!

 

Some other ways to avoid plagiarism are:

1. Paraphrase Your Sources!

2. Proofread!

3. Ask a Librarian or Your Professor!

4. Use the Library’s Online Resources and Tutorials!

5. Commit Yourself to Not Plagiarizing!

 

CONCLUSION

1. The presentation of the work of another person as one’s own or without proper acknowledgement is said to be PLAGIARISM.
2. Plagiarism is unethical and can lead to serious consequences.
3. People who are found guilty of this offence are punished duly.
4. Pakistan combats plagiarism with the help of HEC.
5. The best way to stop Plagiarism is to “Commit yourself to NOT Plagiarizing!”

By: Emanuel Anthony

Source:

WRITING, EDITING, CITATION

 

Plagiarism (EP)
Plagiarism (EP) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Fairy Queen as an Allegory

The Fairy Queen as an Allegory

Edmund Spenser the writer of Fairy Queen stands among the greatest writers of the Elizabethan period whose valuable contributions fashioned a new tradition in English literature. Nowadays he is hailed to be one of the chief initiators of the Renaissance movement in English literature. Spenser’s rich and vigorous imagery, and careful treatment of metrical structure left a profound influence on the succeeding poets and ensured his place as one of the seminal literary artists in the flamboyant field of English literature.

Spenser reached the highest pinnacle of his art and invention with his romantic tour de force The Faerie Queene. It has been hailed as Spenser’s masterpiece, the supreme triumph of the poetic art in English literature. The poem is an allegorical romance symbolising the moral and spiritual journey of an individual through innumerable temptations of sins towards the ultimate attainment of glory and truth. The poem thus has a serious purpose behind its fanciful characters, settings and events. All the characters in The Faerie Queene have allegorical significance since they represent abstract ideas. The title character, the Fairy Queen (Gloriana) herself, is meant to represent Queen Elizabeth. The Red Cross Knight who is appointed by the Fairy Queen to assist Lady Una in releasing her parents from the prison of Dragon is the embodiment of Holiness, piety, and true religion (Protestantism). Lady Una stands for truth, goodness and wisdom. Her parents symbolise humanity held by Evil represented by the foul Dragon. The mission of Holiness is to champion the cause of Truth and regain the right of human race, held by subjection by the mighty force of Evil.

For a Christian to be holy, he must have true faith. So Holiness must be grounded in Truth in order to remain pure and immaculate in the world. As long as Truth and Holiness are united no evildoer can stand against holiness. The power of truth invigourates Holiness. The plot of Book I mostly concerns the attempts of evildoers to separate Red Cross from Una to decrease his strength. Most of these villains are meant by Spenser to represent one thing in common: the Roman Catholic Church. The poet felt that, in the English Reformation, the people had defeated “false religion” (Catholicism) and embraced “true religion” (Protestantism/Anglicanism).So Red Cross must defeat villains who mimic the falsehood of the Roman Church. In the course of his mission he and Una come upon various manifestations of evil. The first encounter is with monster Error. The monster Error allegorically stands for all sorts of mistakes which every individual makes in the course of his life. The fight of the Red Cross Knight with the monster Error symbolises the conflict between Protestantism and Catholicism. The books and papers vomited by Error allude to the offensive pamphlets directed against Queen Elizabeth by the Roman Catholics.

The Red Cross Knight may able to defeat these obvious and disgusting errors, but until he is united to the truth he is totally lost and can be easily deceived. This deceit is arranged by Archimago, who symbolises the hypocrisy of Papacy. When Truth and Holiness are separated, Hypocrisy gets the chance to mislead Holiness. The separation of Truth from Holiness symbolises the danger of the English Church against the hypocrisy and plots of the Roman Catholicism.

Once separated, Holiness is susceptible to the opposite of truth or falsehood. Red Cross may able to defeat the strength of Sansfoy or faithlessness through his own native virtue, but he falls prey to the tricks of Falsehood herself –Duessa. Duessa also represents the Roman Church, both because she is “false faith”, and of her rich, purple and gold clothing, which, for Spenser, displays the greedy wealth and arrogant pomp of Rome. Historically Duessa stands for Queen Mary who was a Roman Catholic by faith. Having been separated from Truth, the Holiness becomes weak and feeble. He cannot withstand the fierce attack of Falsehood and becomes a prey to Duessa. Red Cross becomes a veritable puppet in the hands of Duessa. In the similar manner Truth also becomes weak and in order to protect her virtue she gets aid and succour from Lion which stands for Courage. But subsequently the hypocrisy of Archimago makes her an easy victim Sans Loy who stands for lawlessness. She is later saved by Sir Satyrane who is a symbol of the Natural force. The implication here is very clear and concrete. Truth cannot be subjected to Lawlessness for long. It has a natural force which would assuredly impel it to reassert itself against all hindrance. The humility, symbolised by the Dwarf, informs Truth the story of the sufferings of Holiness. Then Truth goes in search of Gloriana, the Fairy Queen and Holiness is led to the palace of Divine Grace by Truth. There he recovers his former strength. He is now ready to fight against the malignant forces of nature.

Thus at the end Spenser represents the triumph of Holiness and Truth. They may be separated by various evildoers but ultimately they are united again to bring about the redemption and moral salvation of human race.

Prince Arthur and the Fairy Queen.
Prince Arthur and the Fairy Queen. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Gender and Language Theory

Masculinity and Femininity, Biological Distinction, Linguistics Resources, Colonial Literature, Gender Ideologies, Gender and Language, Lexical Approach
Newyork, London, US
UK

GENDER AND LANGUAGE THEORY

Gender is a social construct and cultural construct while sex is sex is biological distinction. On the other hand gender is quite different from sex. It is the quality referred to a sex. Since last two decades we that the term gender has got popular by the post structuralist feminists. It is complex in origin and nature.

Swann, 1998 views that biological distinction is not enough to explore the differences in sex. The variation of Masculinity and femininity develops from generations and cultures these are not fixed and reversible (Wodak 1997, Tulbot 1998).

Language in itself is cultural and social reality. It is perception of oneself and others. Speaker and listener are key agents that understand not only linguistically but also lexical constructed upon ideological grounds. Language creates the gender identities. Social status, power, authorities, identities within a particular society are constructed through language. Language is the road map for understanding the feminist discourses and texts.

 Antik views that language is not even but it is variable and complex. Linguistics resources provide us choice to construct meaningful communication (Antik, 1994). Suppose if there is atopic of “abortion” different classes of society like doctors, media, legislators will use different linguistic choices to construct language on the gender ideologies base in a society.

As regard to femininity (ies) in a society gender and language plays pivotal role in establishing and constructing these ideologies and identities (Graddol & Swan, 1989). The same reflection is found in works of western writers, colonial literature and feminist writers views all identities and femininity (ies) in their literacy works. There are two different approaches feminist and non feminists regarding gender construction. Lexical approach and generic discourse vocabulary usage is also socially construction (Lia Litosselitti, Gendrer and Language Theory and Practice, 2006).

Gender "femininity" day 124/365 365 days of me
“femininity” day 124/365 365 days of me (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Patriarchy and its Discourse

Mills Discourse, Colonial Discourses, Sara Mills, Male Dominance, Suffrage Movement, Feminist Writers, Spivak, Structuralist, Escapism, Patriarchy
London
UK

Patriarchy and its Discourse

Early feminists of Victorian age revolted against patriarchal language but post structuralist feminists did not just focused upon suffrage movement but the developed the issue and rebel against the male dominance. Iragery (1998) views that patriarchal discourses are based upon power and political determinism. The same politics and power developing discursive femininities through language is differently cited and viewed by Julia Kristina, (Strangers to ourselves, 1989), Gayatri Spivak (On other worlds, 1995), Catharine Clemet’s (Opera,1998 undoing of women).

SUBJECTIVITY AND BEASLEY’S VIEW

Beasely also views that women are considered as pet creature to men. They have to work the household and to develop the children instead of the professionals like doctor and architecture. The fiction must play role to construct subjectivity about women. The term subject and subjectivity refers that meaning in text are never fixed. It is the reader that construct it .the research aims to investigate the patriarchal effects created in the text developed by Ibsen in “A Doll’s House”.

MILLS DISCOURSE

Sara Mills views that the women. about its importance  feminism over the writings of founded through travel writings that was not earlier developed femininities within society. Female writers of Victorian age and post modern age have visible subject matter differences in literary works (Morris, 1979: 23). She analyses the women travel writers theme of discourses. Though all their works are Hetrogenitic and complex phenomenon. Constraints in writings have been used by female writers (Hulme 1986, O Porter 1982).

Victorian age is considered that few feminist writers emerged at the surface due to the patriarchal oppression. Colonial discourses and Victorian literature finds less similarities due to cross cultural impact and text (Worley, 1986: 40). Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Hulman and Mary Louise used objectivity, escapism and  especially individuality is key subject that is contradictory to literature of female writers of 19th century. Imperialism represented the real picture of the British women.

Foucault’s work on power and language ‘he believes that power is economy (Focault, 1992a: 109). He further says that speech acts of text and discourses represent reality by organizing them and finding the fluidity and unspoken elements of discourses. He concludes the ambiguity in women writings using the language as authority and power.

 The surface and deeper level analysis predicts the facts as “Hermeneutic” analysis says that there is no text, the thing is interpretation.

“Power is convinced as sort of grand,absolute subject… who attributes what is forbidden on the side on which power is suffered. There is an equal tendency to ‘subjective’ it, by determining the point at which the acceptance of the indirect occurs, the point at which one says ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to power” (Foucault in Morris and Patton, 1979: 54).

Mills finds out the failure of critics in finding out the Gender identity and lack of perceptions. She concentrate on short texts and represent the discourse analysis of feminist perspective. She argues that women writers should frame different types of discourses. The key types are Confessional discourse and Feminine discourse. Confess is there to adhere the reality and admit the daily facts that are not confessed by writers. The second one she stats that represents the femininity and heterosexuality. She pictures the representation in famous book “Feminist Stylistics”1995. She clearly concludes that writing style of women is different than male writer. She believes that foregrounding in texts makes it different. In representation of text gender is necessary element .the speech acts; language of discourse is actually reflection of the writer’s gender identity.

CLASSICAL VS MODERN PATRIARCHY  

It is an agreed fact by research and scholars that women is always taken as the subordinate and inhabitant creature. Women has been represented by weak and negative characters since the origin of the English literature.

“BEOWOLF”  and other ancient vernaculars shows the dominance and authoritative value of male being the patriarchal society. On the other hand the famous writers like Shakespeare represents female in comedies and tragedies “King Lear, Twelfth Night” in same boat, G.B Shaw in Major Barbra and ‘The Arms and the Men’, Ibsen in ‘A Doll’s House while in poetry John Donne in “A Faerie Queen” and Chaucer’s character “A Wife of Bath” represented the women in their patriarchal ideological sense. As far the modern dramatists concern we see after the third wave of feminism women is quite different in gender role. O Neil’s drama “Juno & Paycock” is one of the senile representation of women as domesticated animal in male dominated society.

The stereotypical role of men and women is beautifully depicted by Virginia Woolf in (Women and fiction, 1998). She argues that our fathers are distinctive that made law but what about our mothers that just a tradition.

             “One was beautiful, one was red haired, one was kissed by a queen, we know nothing of them except  their names and dates of their marriages and number of children they bore” (Woolf in Women and Fiction, 1998).

 It is described by different feminists that sex is biological category while gender is social construct (Weedon 1987 & Millet 1997). Modern male writers presents the role of the female in society in real sense as Henrik Ibsen points out the gender role of ‘NORA’ in ‘A Doll’s House’. The terms got popular in 1960 by Lakoff’s article “Language and Women place”, he argues that both sex are different in talk and all is result of male supremacy. Judith believes that modern feminists committed a mistake by talking female common in character and objectives (Gender Trouble 1990).

Patriarchy & Discourse

Feminism and Virginia Woolf

Feminism and Virginia Woolf

In the race of feminism, one of the great feminist writer was Virginia Woolf. She is the pioneer of the literature reflecting the women troubleanities, inequalities, gender and identities differences, femininity (ies) and masculinity (ies) with true pen. Earlier the women was represented by the male writer in literature, that is why we find “Pamela” and Shakespearean women in ‘king Lear’ and ‘Hamlet’ as subordinate class. Even Donne’s women are not optimist in poetry. The patriarchal discourses was firstly was challenged by Virginia Woolf in  “A ROOM OF ONE’S OWN”.

Feminism piece of literature that forces the female by its tremendous discourse to revolt against patriarchy and seeks equality and rebel to male dominance.

She was a “touch stone” for contemporaries and predecessors. Woolf believes that women are socially and economically disable. Men have prejudice and economic selfishness(1992: 14). She also uses the stream of consciousness by representing the feelings and emotions suppressed by men by physical torture and linguistic choices in  discourses. She expresses her feeling as

                       “A room which a women may call her own and which she can be inhabit with same freedom as her brother”(Woolf, 1992: 191).

The male dominance and female subjugation is strictly criticized by realistic pen. She argues that fluidity comes if women have same freedom of expression like men. She argues further that women will not contribute in literature due to less access and material resources available to men. She strictly follows the capitalism and Marxism by saying that poverty has bitterly affected the literature.

Woolf, Language and Power

Spender (1980) states in hi most famous book “Men Made Language” that language in origin and implication men made. Male has strict control over language as power and claim to be master and women are subordinate to men in all patriarchal societies. She tells that men construct femininity (ies) through language. Spender is mile stone in feminism. Amebella Moorey & Sutori Soden (2010) argues in “Language, Society and Power (an introduction), that society, culture, ethnicity, class and gender has strong grip at thought. It is determiner of class and status. Language construct identities and femininity (ies). It is complex phenomenon of social construct.

         Jenifer Coates, 2004 (women, men and language) justify that how male form dominance by language and talk differently and using  language as power and prejudice. They are actually all the followers of Woolf.

 

Feminism: Portrait of Virginia Woolf
Portrait of Virginia Woolf (Photo credit: Wikipedia)