paper no-8

paper no-8 (The cultural Study)
Topic- Two Characters in 'Hamlet' marginalization with a Vengeance.

To Evaluation my assignment click here.

                        

Assignment

Name: - Vala Asha T.

Class: -     M.A.  SEM 2

Topic: -    Two Characters in 'Hamlet' marginalization with a Vengeance.

Paper: -   8.

ROLL NO: - 38

Year: -   2015 - 2016

ENROLLMENT NO: - PG15101041

E-MAIL:-valaasha10@gmail.com 

    

Submitted:-    Smt S.B.Gardy   Department of English      Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Bhavnagar

 

 Two characters in ‘Hamlet’ marginalization with a vengeance.

·                Preface

                                                                                 In several instances earlier in this play ‘Hamlet’ in we can see that culture and new historical emphases on power relationships.  Let us now cultural in practice to hamlet in two minor characters to who does to Shakespeare’s hamlet in marginalization with a vengeance. And also context to power, political indeed on all matters that deeply affect people’s ideas and it may that to people power to society marginalized people. The most influential writer in all of English literature, William Shakespeare was born in 1564 to a successful middle-class glove-maker in Stratford-upon-Avon, England. So now shortly after the play ‘Hamlet’ within the play and Claudius is taking privately with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, hamlet’s fellow students from Wittenberg. In response to Claudius’s plan to hamlet to England so now see to this context in two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in cultural context and practice to hamlet.

·             Cultural approach and practice to culture in ‘Hamlet’

               Shakespeare’s most of the work in human studies and also he observes  were motivated by an educational and political ideal called (in Latin) humanity the idea that all of the capabilities and virtues peculiar to human beings should be studied and developed to their furthest extent. In several instances earlier in this chapter we noted the cultural and new historical emphases on power relationships. Now, let us approach Shakespeare’s Hamlet with a view to seeing power in its cultural context.

·         Two marginalized characters in Hamlet: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

In this play in hamlet we see that to two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in also the king Claudius use to power in this persons and it may be that to political and culture ideas in  this text. We know that true reality to hamlet in his life his friend also his favor but in power position king Claudius in between to sent England and his ambitions to kill hamlet into his friend . In response to Claudius ‘s plan to send hamlet to England , Rosencrantz delivers a speech that if read out of context is both an excellent set of metaphors and a summations of the Elizabethan concepts of role and  power of kingship: 

The singular and peculiar life is bound

With all the strength and armor of the mind

To keep itself from joyance but much more

That spirit upon whose weal depends and rests 

The lives of many .the cease of majesty 

Dies not alone, but like a gulf doth draw

What’s near it with it? It is a massy wheel

 Fixed on the summit of the highest mount,

To whose huge spoken ten thousand lesser things

Are mortised and adjoined; which, when it falls,

Each small annulment, petty consequences,

Attends the boisterous ruin: never alone

Did the king sign but with a general groan.

In this passage we can see that thoughtful and imagistic ally successful passage worthy of a wise and accomplished statesman. It wants us to have a lance at once marginalized characters we are not given enough important and those who should have been given recognitions in their lives. In that culture I ‘Hamlet’ political. In other word, Power and indeed on all matter to hand of the king. But how many readers and viewers  are of the play would rank this passage among the best-known lines of the play and also with Hamlet’s soliloquies  for instance or with the kings effort to prays, or even with the aphorisms addressed by Polonius to his son elates? We know that venture to say that the passage intrinsically good if one looks at it alone, is simply not well known.

                           

       In spite of having access of excellent they have been marginalized and hamlet being a hero. From a wealthy and royal family has been put into category of a moral hero. Who has a few lacks also? The questions arises about the people will be notice it? The agreement is only a reaffirmation of what they had told the king when he first received them court. The two are distinctly plot-driven: empty of personality, sycophantic in a sniveling way eager to curry favors with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. They admit without mush skill at denial that they ‘’were sent for’’. So that meaning of there are less successful and also they try to play on hamlet’s metaphorical ‘’pipe’’ to know his ‘’stops’’ when they are forced to admit that they could not even handle the literal musical instrument that Hamlet shows them. still later these nonentities  meet their destine ‘non-boringness’ as it were when   hamlet  who, can play the pipe so much more efficiently  substituted  their names in the death warrant intended for him.

So that in this Rosencrantz and Guildenstern report back to King Claudius after their conversation with Hamlet They have very little to tell the King, who opens the scene by asking. The only good news they have for the King is that Hamlet was greatly cheered to hear about the arrival of the traveling players and that he ordered them to put on a performance. Claudius is very pleased to hear about this show of interest on the part of his melancholy stepson. And also we see to Claudius power to this two people and hamlet also remembered to these ideas in his mind. And also see that conversion to Claudius and Rosencrantz like that:

"And can you, by no drift of conference,

Get from him why he puts on this confusion,

Grating so harshly all his days of quiet

With turbulent and dangerous lunacy?"

Rosencrantz says,

"He does confess he feels himself distracted,

But from what cause he will by no means speak."

And Guildenstern adds,

"Nor do we find him forward to be sounded,

But with a crafty madness keeps aloof

When we would bring him on to some confession

Of his true state."

The King's interview with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Nothing much is accomplished except to establish that the King and Queen will be attending the play Hamlet has ordered the players to perform. In play these nonentities meet their destined “non-boringness” as it were, when hamlet who can play the pipe so much more efficiently substitutes their names in the death warrant intended for him. In say something Rosencrantz and Guildenstern also to struggle and to say that the mighty struggle between powerful antagonists is the stuff of this play is hardly original. But our emphasis in the present reading is that one can gain a further insight into the play. In last of the play into inform to hamlet his friend are death. Both are distinctly plot-driven: empty of personality, sycophantic in a sniveling way, eager to curry favor with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. In a moment of trickery on his own part, Hamlet blithely substitutes a forged document bearing their names rather than his as the ones to be “put to sudden death, not shriving time allowed” when horatio responds laconically with so Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to hamlet is unmoved, and last as well as Shakespeare mind to ‘hamlet’ is done with these two characters “they are not rear, conscience”. And last this two are death between to power and it may be that marginalized are not social support and both are death in end the play.

·                        Death of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

In this play in cultural studies to practice into cultural approach and such some example and also wrote to Tom Stoppard play in protagonist to this two characters Guildenstern and Rosencrantz. It is instructive to note that the reality of power refractive a Shakespeare time might in another and culture reflect a radically different worldview. Let us enrich our response to hamlet by looking at related culture and philosophical manifestation from the 20th century. In 20th century the dead or never living Guildenstern and Rosencrantz were resuscrited by Tom Stoppard in a fascinating re-seeing of their existence it lack. In Stopper’s version they are even more obviously two ineffectual pawns, seeking constantly to know who they are here and where are going. Whether they “are” at all may be the ultimate question of this modern play.

 

In “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead”, he has given the contemporary audience a play that examines existential questions in the context of a whole world that may have no meaning at all. Although it is not our intentions to examine that play in great detail. And also marginalized two person view and it may be that Guildenstern and Rosencrantz are archetypal human beings caught up on a ship and also should been spaceship earth for the 20th or 21th century that leads nowhere, and Hamlet is except to death and persons who are already dead and if these two characters were marginalized in Hamlet, they are even more so in Stopper’s handing. 
                                                    If Shakespeare marginalized the powerless in his version of Guildenstern and Rosencrantz and also you can see that to cultural and historical view that was shake spear is radically reworked to reflection a cultural and philosophical view of another time and our own. And if philosophical way to tom Stoppard goes too far some consider a much more mundane phenomenon of the later 20th century and we except. Both are caught up in the corporate downsizing and mergers in recent decades the effect on these workers when multinational companies move factories and office around the world like pawns on a chessboard. And Shakespeare and Stoppard’s Guildenstern and Rosencrantz characters are no more than what Rosencrantz called a “small annulment” and also says that “petty consequence mere nothing for the massy wheel of the king”.

·       Conclusions

So that in cultural studies Hamlet in marginalization to two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at power into King Claudius. At that time in realty to the king and rich upper class many times fight and used power to marginalized people. It became realty and also culture has create to everything  and minority to marginalized to society, we see to this two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern  are dead in play any one not remembered  to then. Thus that in the play Hamlet I apply to culture and real example give as to ruling and power positions countries.

To Evaluation my assignment click here.

Paper no-7

Paper no- Literary Theory & Criticism

Topic-I.A.Richard’s view on the language of poetry  

To Evaluate my assignment click here.

Course No. 7: Literary Theory & Criticism: The 20th Western & Indian Poetics – 2

M.A. English Semester – 2

Assignment

Name: - Vala Asha T.

Class: -     M.A.  SEM 2

Topic: - I.A.Richard’s view on the language of poetry  

Paper: -   7.

ROLL NO: -  37

Year: -   2015 - 2016

ENROLLMENT NO: - PG15101041

E-MAIL:-valaasha10@gmail.com 

     

Submitted:-    Smt S.B.Gardy   Department of English      Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Bhavnagar

INTRODUCTION:- 

                               

                                I.A.Richards, along with T.S.Eliot, may be called the founding father of the new criticism. He has been a constant source of inspiration to the new critics-more particularly to John Crowe Ransom and William Epson – many of whom have used his tools and techniques on an extensive scale. But he differs from the New Critics in one important respect. While the New Critics limit themselves rigorously to the poem under consideration, I.A.Richards also takes into account its effects on the readers. For him the real value of a poem lies in the reactions and attitudes it creates, and whether or not it is conducive to greater emotional balance, equilibrium, peace and rest in the mid of the readers. For him, the value of a work if art lies in its power to harmonize and organize complex and warring human impulses into patterns that are lasting and pleasurable. In the view of new critics, all such considerations are extrinsic and they come in the way of the appreciation and evaluation of a work of art as it is in itself.

Four kinds of Meaning:-

A poet writes to communicate, and language is the means of that communication. Language is made of words and hence a study of words is all important if we are to understand the meaning of a work of art. According to I.A. Richard, words carry Four kinds of meaning or to be more precise, the total meaning of a word depends upon Four factors,

I.G.

                Sense,

                        Feeling,

                                Tone,

       

                                        Intention.

1)   Sense is what is said, or the ‘items’ referred to by a writer.

2)   Feeling refers to emotions, emotional attitudes, will, desire, pleasure, displeasure and the rest. When we say something we have a feeling about it, “an attitude towards it, some special direction, bias or accentuation of interest towards it, some personal flavor or coloring of feeling.” Words express “these feelings, these nuances of interest.”

3)   Tone is the writer’s attitude to his readers or audience, the use of language is determined by the writers ‘recognition’ of his relation to his readers.

4)   Intention is the writer’s aim, which may be conscious or unconscious. It refers to the effect that he tries to produce. This purpose modifies the expression. It controls the emphasis, shapes the, or draws attention to something of importance.

Two uses of Language:-

In his “principles of literary criticism” chapter 34, he discusses the most neglected subject, i.g.the theory of language and the two uses of language. To understand much the theory of poetry and what is said about poetry, a clear comprehension of the differences between the uses of language is indispensable. David Deices says,

“Richard conducts this investigation in order to come to some clear conclusions about what imaginative literature is how it employs language, how its use of language differs from the scientific use of language and what is its special faction and value.”

According to I.A.Richards language can be used in two ways,

 I.e. the scientific use and the emotive one.

 It’s only in recent years that serious attention is given to the language as a science. In the scientific use of language, we are usually matters of fact. All the activities covered by this use require undistorted references and absence of fiction.

We may use a statement, true or false, in a scientific use of language, but it may also be used to create emotions and attitudes. This is the emotive use of language. We use words scientifically or for emotional attitudes when words are used to evoke attitudes without recourse to references like musical phrases. References are conditions for developing attitudes and hence the attitudes are more important, without carrying for true or false references. Their sole purpose is to support the attitudes. Aristotle wisely said, “Better a plausible impossibility than an improbable possibility.” In the scientific use of the language, the difference in reference is fatal but in the emotive language it is not so. In the scientific use of language, the references should be correct and the relation of references should be logical.

Four types of misunderstanding:-

v Misunderstanding of the sense of poetry: Careless, intuitive reading.

v Over-literal reading-prosaic reading.

v Defective scholarship; inappropriate metaphor

Difference in meaning of words in poetry and prose(personification, metaphor etc.)

Poem -1: solemn and Gray.

“solemn and gray, the immense clouds of even

pass on their towering unperturbed way

Through the vast whiteness of the rain-swept heaven

The moving pageants of the waning day;

Heavy with dreams, desires, prognostication,

Brooding with sullen and Titanic crests,

They surge, whose mantles’ wise imaginations

Trail where Earths mute and languorous body rests;

While below the Hawthorns smile like milk splashed down

                  From Noon’s blue pitcher over mead and hill;                 

The arrases distance is so dim with flowers

It seems itself some colored cloud made atilt,

O how the clouds this dying daylight crown

With the tremendous triumph of tall towers!”

One of the serious causes of misunderstanding is the failure to realize that the poetic use of words is different from their use in prose. Literal sense of words can be easily understood with the help of a dictionary, “but an inability to seize the poetical sense of words neither is nor so easily remedied.”

Critics found following problem with this poem (Solemn and Gray):

1) A cloud cannot have ‘desires’.

2) A mantle cannot have ‘imaginations’.

3) ‘Imaginations’ cannot ‘trail’.

4)’Milk’ does not ‘smile’.

5) ‘Dim with flowers’ is rather weak, for flowers are bright things.

6) ‘Tell towers’ do not ‘triumph’ so far as human sense can comprehend. Might be an interesting sight!

These complaints rest upon as assumption about language that would be fatal to poetry. All these things may happen in a poem – if there is any good reason for their happening or advantage is gained from their happening.

Not many metaphors, or for the matter of that, much poetry will survive such deadly demands for scientific precision. Poetic use of words is different from their use in `prose and such literalism is the most serious obstacle in the way of a right understanding of such poetic use of words.

“How are we to explain”, asks Richards, “to those who see nothing in poetical language but a tissue of ridiculous exaggerations, childish ‘fancies’ ignorant conceits and absurd symbolizations”

In what way its sense is be read? Poetry is different form prose and needs a different attitude for right understand

Comparative Criticism:

Richards warns his readers against the dangers of over simple forms of ‘comparative criticism’. A critic has compared the poet and Shelley is clear in the conception. One thing should be noted that ‘end’ and ‘means’ both differ. As two poets are often closely paralleled in their intents, divergence in their methods does not prove one poem better than the other, ‘Comparative Criticism’ has value under conditions and circumstances.

“When after five years of ‘antics’ chiefly concerned with the cloud- shadows, he turns to the cloud itself in its afternoon dissolution, he cuts the personification down, mixing his metaphors to reflect its incoherence, and finally, ‘O frail steel issue of the sun,’ depersonifying it altogether in mockery of its total loss of character. This recognition that the personification was originally an extra vantage makes the poem definitely one of fancy rather than imagination to use the Wordsworthian division but it rather increases than diminishes the descriptive effects gained by the device. And its peculiar felicity in exactly expressing a certain shade of feeling towards the cloud deserves to be remarked.”

Conclusion:

Briefly, a proper understanding of figurative language needs closer study. Its literal meaning must be traced. Its literal meaning cannot be found in any imaginative appreciation of it. There should be a judicious balance between literalism and imaginative freedom. One should comprehend the meaning of poetry properly and then come to the judgment whether it has any fault or not. 

I.A.Richards says:-

“The chemist must not require that the poet writes like a chemist, not the moralist, not the man of affairs, nor the logician, nor the professor, that he writes as they would. The whole trouble of literalism is that the readers forget that the aim of the poems comes first and is the sole justification of its means. We may quarrel, frequently we must, with aim of the poem, but we have first to ascertain what it is. We cannot legitimately judge its means by external standards which may have no relevance to its success in doing what it set out to do.

To Evaluate my assignment click here.

paper no-6

Paper no-6 (The Victorian age.)
Topic-A Critical Study (Analysis) Of Middle March.

To Evaluation my assignment click here.

Assignment

Name: - Vala Asha T.

Class: -     M.A.  SEM 2

Topic: -    A Critical Study (Analysis) Of Middle March.

Paper: -   6.

ROLL NO: - 37

Year: -   2015 - 2016

ENROLLMENT NO: - PG15101041

E-MAIL:-valaasha10@gmail.com 

     

Submitted :-    Smt S.B.Gardy   Department of English      Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Bhavnagar

Middle March

George Eliot

        Author, Journalist (1819–1880)

   

Born

In South Farm, Asbury Hall, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, the United Kingdom 

November 22, 1819

Introduction :-

                    In 1819, novelist George Eliot (nee Mary Ann Evans), was born at a farmstead in Nuneaton, Warwickshire, England, where her father was estate manager. Mary Ann, the youngest child and a favorite of her father's, received a good education for a young woman of her day. Influenced by a favorite governess, she became a religious evangelical as an adolescent. Her first published work was a religious poem. Through a family friend, she was exposed to Charles Pennell’s An Inquiry into the Origins of Christianity. Unable to believe, she conscientiously gave up religion and stopped attending church. Her father shunned her, sending the broken-hearted young dependent to live with a sister until she promised to reexamine her feelings. Her intellectual views did not, however, change.

Her major works :-

1) Adam Bede (1859), 

2) The Mill on the Floss (1860), 

3) Silas Marner (1861), 

4) Middlemarch (1871–72), and 

5) Daniel Deronda (1876).

“A Critical study (Analysis) Of Middle March ’’

                          Middlemarch: A Study of Provincial Life is a novel by George Eliot; the novel is set in the fictitious Midlands town of Middlemarch, thought to be based on Coventry, during the period 1830–32. It has multiple plots with a large cast of characters, and in addition to its distinct though interlocking narratives it pursues a number of underlying themes, including the status of women, the nature of marriage, idealism, self-interest, religion, hypocrisy, political reform, and education. The pace is leisurely, the tone is mildly didactic, and the canvas is very broad.

                       Although it has some comical elements and comically named characters. Middlemarch is a work of realism. Through the voices and opinions of different characters we become aware of various issues of the day: the Great Reform Bill, the beginnings of the railways, the death of King George IV, and the succession of his brother, the Duke of Clarence. We learn something of the state of contemporary medical science. We also encounter the deeply reactionary mindset within a settled community facing the prospect of what too many is unwelcome Chan.

                                              Middlemarch is a novel of epic proportions, but it transforms the notion of an epic. Epics usually narrate the tale of one important hero who experiences grand adventure, and they usually interpret events according to a grand design of fate. Every event has immediate, grand consequences. Kings and dynasties are made and unmade in epic tales.

                       Middlemarch's subtitle is "A Study of Provincial Life." This means that Middlemarch represents the lives of ordinary people, not the grand adventures of princes and kings. Middlemarch represents the spirit of nineteenth-century England through the unknown, historically unremarkable common people. The small community of Middlemarch is thrown into relief against the background of larger social transformations, rather than the other way around.  England is the process of rapid industrialization. Social mobility is growing rapidly. With the rise of the merchant middle class, one's birth no longer necessarily determines one's social class for life.

                      Middlemarch readers will be astonished by the novel's amazingly complex social world. Eliot continually uses the metaphor of a web to describe the town's social relations. She intricately weaves together the disparate life experiences of a large cast of characters. Many characters subscribe to a world-view; others want to find a world-view to organize their lives. The absence of a single, triumphant world-view to organize all life is the basic design of Middlemarch. No one occupies the center of the novel as the most important or influential person. Middlemarch social relations are indeed like a web, but the web has no center. Each individual occupies a point in the web, affecting and affected by the other points. Eliot's admirable effort to represent this web in great detail makes her novel epic in length and scope. Unlike in an epic, however, no single point in the web and no single world-view reign triumphant.

The moral standard and centre of the novel - the Garth family.

                            As a matter of fact, even “Middlemarch”, an imaginary provincial town, has a symbolical not a topical significance. It is provincial, because it is bereft of the glamour of heroic adventure and passionate dedication to high ideals; and this not because the characters are no longer capable of dedication, but because the time for uncommon fits is forever gone.

                             If the Dorothea and the Lydgate plots unfold as twin studies in defeated aspirations There was no more opportunity for either religious or speculative quests in the post-industrial and post-metaphysical age. There is one family that would seem to be the moral standard and centre of the novel - the Garth family. Mrs. Garth is introduced to us teaching Latin to the children while cooking dinner. 

                                  This is portrayed as being a very worthwhile activity, and is contrasted with the somewhat silly parenting attitude of both Celia and the Vinci’s. Mary Garth's insistence that Fred find a worthy profession before she will marry him is also held in high esteem - she is putting the good of others above her own desires. The only trouble that the Garth family goes through is a result of their virtue rather than their vice; Caleb, out of kindness and of love, backs Fred, and so when the redactors want their money, the future of one of the Garth children is put in jeopardy.

                                    She finds such accompaniment to her cooking in the kitchen as proper as having taught before marriage. So many critics, following the misleading Prelude, take Dorothea to be the moral centre of the novel. The Garth family is the only major characters in Middlemarch who are not educated by experience, they do not change. This is because they are already in possession of the moral education that matters by the time the novel opens. 

                                   This is a significant clue. The Dorothea-Casaubon story and its aftermath, and the Lydgate-Rosamond story, are of course more important in the pattern of the novel’s action than the Mary-Fred story or than anything which involves the Garth family, but the Garth family establishes the criteria to which most other actions are referred.H.J.Harvey:

“The Garths are the one solidly happy family in the book and as such provide a standard whereby the failings of the other marriages can be measured. Apart from the devious contrasts with the Casaubon’s and him Lydgates, the Garths relate especially – because of Fred – to the Vincy household. The different relationships of parents to children are especially well illustrated. The different reactions of Mrs. Garth and Mrs. Vincy to the news of Fred’s decision to work for Caleb illustrate George Eliot’s mature control over that difficult and complex area of human experience where likeness and unlikeness merge into each other.

Main character:-

v Dorothia Brooke.

v Mr.casaubon.

v Celia Brooke

v Sir James chettam

v Tertius Lydgate(Doctor)

v Lucy vincy

v Walter vincy

v Fred vincy

v Rosamond vincy

v Will ladislaw.

Middlemarch as a Subtle and Rich study of Females

                              George Eliot exhibited a rare insight in the presentation of female characters and her female figures have a feminine attitude towards life. They are all vividly and convincingly drawn However, they still had “soul hunger,” even if they had no outlet for their spiritual yearning as St. Theresa did (see Prelude).

                              Following the French positivist philosopher, Augusta Comte (the father of sociology), Eliot believed that it was women who held society together and guided its progress altruistically, from behind the scenes. She did not advocate working for political “rights” because a woman’s power and goodness were profoundly subtle. Sympathy was the antidote to competition, and women have this quality in abundance. They are the ones who encourage it in others and who use love and sympathy to ameliorate the harshness of the world.

MIDDLEMARCH EXPLORED THE WAYS IN WHICH SOCIAL AND SPIRITUAL ENERGY CAN BE FRUSTRATED

                         I do not believe that it is sufficient to say that Middlemarch explores the ways in which social and spiritual energy can be frustrated; it would be more appropriate to say that Middlemarch explores the ways in which social and spiritual energies (ideals if you will) are completely destroyed and perverted. One need only look to Lydgate to see an example of idealism being destroyed by the environment in which it is found. At the start of the novel, we are introduced to the "young, poor and ambitious" and most of all idealistic Doctor Lydgate, who has great plans for the fever hospital in Middlemarch. Throughout the novel, however, we see his plans frustrated by the designs of others, though primarily the hypocritical desires of Nicholas Bestrode. The second example of the idealism of the young being destroyed by the old is that of Dorothea. This can be seen by her continuing desire to "bear a larger part of the world's misery" or to learn Latin and Greek, both of which are continually thwarted by Casaubon, though this ends after his death, with her discovery of his selfish and suspicious nature, by way of the codicil.

                         The character who has their ambitions and ideals brought most obviously low is Lydgate. The earliest example is when he has to make the choice between Fairbrother and Tyke. Both of these characters are rather poor examples of the clergy (Fairbrother because of his gambling, and Tyke because of his rather lazy attitude). Our sympathies are clearly with Fairbrother for a number of reasons; he doesn't gamble because he wants to, but because the wage he receives from running his parish alone is too small to support him and the various members of his family that rely on him. Lydgate has to make the choice between someone he likes as a person (Fairbrother) and someone who he needs help from (Bestrode). It is clear that Lydgate is very similar to Fairbrother in a number of ways; both are scientists, and both have great hopes for the future. It would therefore seem to be the case that Lydgate would automatically support Fairbrother. 

                                    However, Bestrode uses his money and his influence to ensure Tyke's success. Bestrode is another example of a character that has had his idealism and destroyed, though not by Middlemarch. He was once a great and trusted minister, but the lure of money from the pawn shop, and the possibility of inheriting all of Ladislaw's mother's money proved too great for him. He is no longer the honorable and trusted man, but something all together darker and more sinister: There are many coarse hypocrites who consciously affect beliefs … for the sake of gulling the world, but Bestrode was not one of them. He was simply a man whose desires had been stronger than his theoretic beliefs, and who gradually explained the gratification of his desires into satisfactory agreement with those beliefs. He does not lie to others, but to himself; he continues to try and justify his desires, though puts them in such ways that they appear to be morally sound and justifiable.

Conclusion:-

According to the learned critic, the obvious moral of Dorothea’s story is

“that the describe thing is to your work well in the position to which providence has assigned you and not to bother about ideals at all. Such a moral seems satiric at the end of a story which is to give us a Modern Theresa.”

 Thus Dorothea is becomes an ironical portraits of young ladies with lofty ideals and noble aspirations.

To Evaluation my assignment click here.