Introduction: An Artist of the Floating World

Hello everyone, this is the blog of our group task given by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir, in which we have to give a basic and brief introduction of the novel "An Artist of the Floating World" by Kazuo Ishiguro. This blog is prepared by Me and Khushbu both. 

About Novelist

Kazuo Ishiguro, in full Sir Kazuo Ishiguro, (born November 8, 1954, Nagasaki, Japan), Japanese-born British novelist known for his lyrical tales of regret fused with subtle optimism. In 2017 he won the Nobel Prize for Literature for his works that “uncovered the abyss beneath our illusory sense of connection with the world.” 

The novel was published in 1986. Ishiguro is a prolific and well-known novelist, famous for his books "The Remains of the Day" and "Never Let Me Go". He has won the Man Booker Prize and won the Nobel Prize in 2017, and was knighted in 2019. An Artist of the Floating World, his second novel, is an example of his earlier writing, and was well-received, earning a Whitbread Award. This novel is particularly well-known for its use of an unreliable narrator, Masuji Ono. It tells the story of Ono, a retired Japanese artist trying to come to terms with changes in his country after the Second World War. Ishiguro himself was born in Japan, but emigrated to the United Kingdom as a child and did not return to Japan until after publishing An Artist of the Floating World. He has said that, by writing about places with which he is unfamiliar, such as post-war Japan in this novel, he is able to write more imaginatively. 

∆NOTABLE WORKS :-

• “An Artist of the Floating World”

• “The White Countess”

• “When We Were Orphans”

• “A Pale View of Hills”

Title of the novel

The novel's title is based on the literal translation of Ukiyo-e, a word referring to the Japanese art of prints. Therefore, it can be read as "a printmaker" or "an artist living in a changing world," given both Ono's limited understanding and the dramatic changes his world, Japan in the first half of the twentieth century, has undergone in his lifetime.

The title also refers to an artistic genre. Ono's master is especially interested in depicting scenes from the pleasure district adjacent to the villa in which he and his students live. Ono mentions the ephemeral nature of the floating world that could be experienced during each night. His master experiments with innovative softer Western-style painting techniques, rejecting the hard black outlining that was considered more traditional. Under the influence of right-wing political ideas about tradition, Ono becomes estranged from his master and forges his own career. He feels gleeful when his master's paintings fell into disfavour during a return to the use of more traditional bold lines in the paintings used for nationalistic posters. 

Brief summary of the novel

 

Though the book dwells on events from Ono's childhood and early adulthood, it is held together by a linear thread taking place in the novel's present, the late 1940s and early 1950s. This thread describes Ono's attempt to arrange a marriage for his younger daughter, Noriko. He believes that his reputation is in shambles because of his early nationalistic paintings, and he grieves for the family members lost in the war. Over the course of the novel, Ono's narration flashes between past and present, and he often calls his own reliability into question by interrogating the accuracy of his own memories. The novel deals with themes including war, solitude, aging and death, and grief. Stylistically, it is rather spare and direct, though its structure calls that directness into question with poignant omissions. The book is split into four sections, which are titled using time markers: 

• October 1948, 

• April 1949, 

• November 1949, 

• June 1950.

Characters

Masuji Ono :-

Ono is the novel’s protagonist and narrator. He is, at the time of the narration, an aging retired artist in post-war Japan.

Setsuko :-

Setsuko is Ono’s older daughter. By the time the novel begins, she is already married and living in another city with her husband and son. 

Noriko :-

Noriko is Ono’s younger daughter. The first half of the novel revolves largely around the process of her engagement. Noriko is more spontaneous and bold than her sister, and she often pokes fun at their morose father. 

Ichiro :-

Ichiro is Setsuko’s young son and Matsuji’s grandson. He is more or less a typical energetic child, and he provides comic relief over the course of the novel, though he appears increasingly worried about his grandfather’s mental state. 

Chishu Matsuda :-

We first encounter Matsuda as an elderly man, when Ono goes to visit him over the course of Noriko’s marriage negotiations.

Seiji Moriyama :-

Often referred to simply as Mori-San, Moriyama was Ono’s teacher, mentor, and sponsor during the early years of his artistic career.

The Tortoise :-

The “tortoise” is less of a three-dimensional character and more of a symbol, meant to serve as a foil to Ono. His real name is Yasunari Nakahara, but Ono refers to him almost solely by his nickname. 

Shintaro :-

Shintaro is a former student of Ono's, and the two of them remain friends.

Suichi :-

Suichi is Setsuko's husband, making him Ono's first son-in-law. Ono frequently invokes him even though he appears rarely in the novel.

Kuroda :-

Ono's former favorite student, Kuroda remains a mysterious offscreen figure for most of the novel.

Several themes of the novel

• Role of Art and the Artist

• Intergenerational Conflict

• Imperialism and Sovereignty

• Aging

• Grief

• Pedagogy

• Marriage

Symbols

These are the symbols used in the novel.

• Bridge of Hesitation

• Fire

• Samurai

• Reception Room

• Sake

• Cowboys

So we can say that An Artist of the Floating World discusses several themes through the memories of the narrator, Masuji Ono. The analysis of these themes is facilitated through their transcendence of time, allowing the audience's rumination on Ono's experiences, permitting them to judge the narrative objectively. 

Thank you. 

Thinking activity on The Great Gatsby

Hello friends,

Today's I'm going to discuss the novel "The Great Gatsby" by f. Scott Fitzgerald. 

The Great Gatsby, third novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald, published in 1925 by Charles Scribner's Sons. Set in Jazz Age New York, the novel tells the tragic story of Jay Gatsby, a self-made millionaire, and his pursuit of Daisy Buchanan, a wealthy young woman whom he loved in his youth. 

We had a film screening on the 14th Jun 2021. With reference to the screening of the film, we were supposed to write the answers to the following questions.

1)How did the film capture the Jazz Age - the Roaring Twenties of America in the 1920s ?

In the movie we can see the term "Jazz Age" to describe the decade of decadence and prosperity that America enjoyed in the 1920s, which was also known as the Roaring Twenties. After World War I ended in 1918, the United States and much of the rest of the world experienced an enormous economic expansion. The surging economy turned the 1920s into a time of easy money, hard drinking, and lavish parties. We can understand better it with this image -

Though the 1920s were a time of great optimism, filmmaker portrays the much bleeker side of the revelry by focusing on its indulgence, hypocrisy, shallow recklessness, and its perilous, even fatal consequences. 

2)How did the film help in understanding the characters of the novel ?

The film helps us to understand characters in an easy way. Filmmakers are using different angles to capture any situation. It makes the scene very interesting. In this movie we can see that the characters of Gatsby, Tom, Nick and Daisy are presented in a very interesting way. 

This is how the character of Daisy was presented ! Daisy's first look in the movie is also fascinating. Jay Gatsby is described as a mysterious character. His entry is also very interesting. In short film helps us to understand the characters of the novel. 

3)How did the film help in understanding the symbolic significance of 'The Valley of Ashes', 'The Eyes of Dr. T J Eckleberg' and 'The Green Light' ?

The Valley of Ashes

The scene of The Valley of Ashes is described in a very interesting way. The valley of ashes is located between West Egg and New York City consists of a long stretch of desolate land created by the dumping of industrial ashes. In the film we can see the image and setting of ' The valley of Ashes '. It helps us to understand the situation of that time. With the film screening we can understand that a fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat into ridges and hills and grotesque gardens; where ashes take the forms of houses and chimneys and rising smoke and, finally, with a transcendent effort, of men who move dimly and already crumbling through the powdery air. 

The Eyes of Dr. T J Eckleberg

The eye of Eckleburg The eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg are a pair of fading, bespectacled eyes painted on an old advertising billboard over the valley of ashes. They may represent God staring down upon and judging American society as a moral wasteland, though the novel never makes this point explicitly. And this eyes gave punishment to those who are bad person or those who are not doing their job sincerely. 

The Green Light

The Green Light indicates the dream and hope of Gatsby. The film helps us to understand the importance of green light for Gatsby. He is always watching that light. That indicates him as a hopeful man. Situated at the end of Daisy’s East Egg dock and barely visible from Gatsby’s West Egg lawn, the green light represents Gatsby’s hopes and dreams for the future. Jay Gatsby is believe in hope and he also believe that he can change the past also. So in the movie we can see that Green Light' is also located at East Egg, where Daisy is lives. So there is hope of Gatsby to getting Daisy in his life.

 

4)How did the film capture the theme of racism and sexism ?

The theme of racism and sexism is very important in "The Great Gatsby".  In the movie we come to know  sexism and racism in the movies described by the gorgeousness of life. In clothing and expression both racism and sexism are described very well. In the above image we can get an idea about sexism. 

In this image we get an idea about the racism in that time. That is how black people are treated. People like Tom believe that the black people and low class people are born to be slaves only ! That idea we can understand in a better way through the movie. 

5)Watch the video on Nick Carraway and discuss him as a narrator.

Here is the link of The video,

As the narrator of the novel Nick Carraway is a very significant character. The novel is written from the first person point of view. He tells a story through a series of flashbacks but not always told in chronological order. As we see in the novel the character of Nick Carraway is very kind. He always remembers his father and his moral advice. The way he represents the story is awesome and in chronological order. In the novel we can observe that he has sympathy for Gatsby. 

Nick also arranges the meeting of Gatsby and Daisy when he comes to know that once upon a Time they were in love. So he can invite Daisy for tea. For their comfort he went out of the house. This behavior makes him very gentle. 

At the end of the novel we can see that nobody came for Gatsby's funeral except him and Gatsby's father. This we can see he has an attachment with Gatsby. He is the only one character who knows the truth about Gatsby. And in the end he leaves Long Island. 

Thank you… 

Thinking activity on Archetypal Theory

Hello friends, in this blog I'm going to talk about Northrop Frye and his archetypal theory. 

Northrop Frye, in full Herman Northrop Frye, (born July 14, 1912, died Jan. 23, 1991), Canadian educator and literary critic who wrote much on Canadian literature and culture and became best known as one of the most important literary theorists of the 20th century. 

1.What is Archetypal Criticism ? What does the Archetypal critic do ?

Archetypal literary criticism is a theory that interprets a text by focusing on recurring myths and archetypes in the narrative and symbols, rituals, images and character types in a literary work. Archetype denotes recurrent narrative designs, patterns of action, character types, themes and images which are identifiable in a wide variety of works of literature, as well as in myths, dreams and even social rituals. Such recurrent items result from elemental and universal patterns in the human psyche. 

2.What is Frye trying to prove by giving an analogy of 'Physics to Nature' and 'Criticism to Literature' ?

Northrop Frye has given a very unique idea of Archetypal Criticism by comparing the human emotions or human characteristics with the cycle of seasons. Here Frye compares both Physics to Nature and Criticism to Literature. Physics is a deep study of Nature but it is called physics, not Nature though it is based on Nature only it is called physics. In the same manner, In the literature, we are not learning literature but we learn to understand literature,  how to read and how to criticise literature so we are not learning literature but criticising literature. So it is the criticism of literature. So Literature is equal to Nature and Physics is equal to Criticism. One can learn criticism of literature but can't learn literature. 

3.Share your views of Criticism as an organised body of knowledge. Mention relation of literature with history and philosophy.

Literature is the central division of Humanities. Historical sense and Philosophy are about morality, ethics and all these things are required when we study literature. Philosophy is about existence and it progressively moves on, its ideas never stopped. Northrop Frye says that without reasoning and thinking to jump to any type of conclusion is not valid to process.   We have Archetype criticism is based on philosophy and History of people. As it has been said that literature includes history as well as philosophy to convey its meaning so it displays events and ideas. History and philosophy are two important pillars of literature. History gives events and philosophy gives ideas and writers combine both and create work of literature.

4.Briefly explain inductive method with illustration of Shakespeare's Hamlet's Grave Digger's scene. 

Inductive method is a journey which leads from specific to general. As we read some specific literary work and come to a general conclusion, in this way we extend from specific outcome to general outcome.

Northrop Frye gives the example of Gravedigger’s scene from “Hamlet” to explain this method.

• First, the question of existence can be seen. Every man dies at one point.

• Second, the image of corruption can be seen.

• Third, we see Hamlet’s love for Ophelia.

• Forth thing is Hamlet represents Archetypal hero who is ready to die for his love.

• Fifth is this method moves from “Particular to General”.

• Sixth is on that scene there were two grave diggers & they seemed quite in harmony with their work. 

• The last one is we can see that they have no grief for a deadly one. 

5.Briefly explain deductive method with reference to an analogy to music, painting, rhythm and pattern. Give examples of the outcome of deductive method. 

Deductive method is a journey from general to specific. An Archetypal Critic, under the Deductive method of analysis, proceeds to establish the meaning of a work from the general truth to the particular truth. If we can go deep we can understand that literature is Like music & painting. Music and painting both are the form of an art. In music rhythm is an essential characteristic of music & in painting’ pattern is the chief Virtue.  Rhythm is a narrative form, while pattern is simultaneous mental grasp of verbal structure and it has meaning and significance. It provides a mental visual. By listening to some of the music we can't get everything, but looking at the painting we can get an idea of it's pattern. In Literature both rhythm and pattern are recurrences of Images, forms and words. 

6.If you can please read a small Gujarati or Hindi or English poem from the Archetypal approach and apply Indian seasonal grid in the interpretation.

As we know that In India there are three main seasons which are known as,

• Winter

• Summer

• Spring

But, according to Hindu scripture we have six seasons. 

This are below :

• Vasant (Basant) Ritu : Spring

• Grishma Ritu : Summer

• Varsha Ritu : Monsoon 

• Sharad Ritu : Autumn 

• Hemant Ritu : pre winter 

• Shishir / shita Ritu : Winter 

This is the poem by Narendra Modi. In his poem he describes Basant Ritu. The sweet songs of the angels of nature, the freshness that the fields breathe, the blossoming of the flowers… all announce the Advent of youthful spring, and the calendar says it's Basant. 

7.Make an Archetypal study a poem or narrative or a scene from a movie. 

In the movie Genius we find the Archetypal scene in the end. Using the voice of conch in the compound of the template and surviving hero it shows the positivity in the movie at last.

Here is the link of the video,

https://youtu.be/r1qcE2l1tYk

Thinking activity : Waiting for Godot

 Hello everyone,

My today's activity is quite different from other activities, which I did earlier. This activity is assigned by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir. In this task we were supposed to give the answers to the questions that sir gave us to ponder upon. This is an activity about "Waiting for Godot". So let's discuss the answers of the play. And yes we have to give answers according to our understanding of the play. So let's start.

For better understanding of activity I'm sharing the link of professor's blog, 

https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2014/09/worksheet-screening-movie-waiting-for.html

∆What connection do you see in the setting (“A country road. A tree.Evening.”) of the play and these paintings?

The setting of the play "Waiting for Godot" is inspired by this painting, titled as "Longing" by Casper David Friedrich. The word "Longing" means - an earnest and deep desire for something. In this painting we see that there is a view of sunrise and sunset. Two people are watching towards sunrise and sunset. It means they are waiting for such hope, as the similar way like Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot. Just like the sun is rising and these two people are watching for something till the sunset, Vladimir and Estragon are also waiting for someone from morning to rise of the moon. 

∆The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of tree in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves - ?

The tree is an important symbol of the play. Tree stands symbolically in both acts. Trees are seen as hebetate matter. In the play we see Vladimir and Estragon also act like hebetation (tree). There are no leaves on barren tree in act |. As we know that the play was written after the war it symbolically indicates the World War ||. In the second act Buckett adds some leaves on the barren tree. These leaves indicate hope and positivity. Also we can say that this is the change of nature in a positive way. 

∆In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot?

As we see in both acts evening falls into night and moon rises. Waiting for someone, time will not stop, It continually passes. The day and night come and go. But the rising of the moon at night seems like the bright side (moon) in the darkness (night). It indicates the positive hope in the play. 

∆The director feels the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?

The director feels the setting with some debris. It expressly indicates the World War ||. This debris seems like the buildings are destroyed by the bombs. And everything become debris.

∆The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?

The play begins with this dialogue "Nothing to be done". It indicates the theme of nothingness in the play. This dialogue refers to the theory of existentialism. This theory of existentialism says that there is no meaning to anything that we are doing. Everything is meaningless. So in the beginning we see nothingness in the play. Vladimir and Estragon both are waiting for someone named 'Godot', but they don't know who Godot is ! What he looks like ! Is he coming or not ! Does he exist or not ! They don't know anything despite waiting. So the whole concept is described in one sentence, "Nothing to be done". 

∆Do you agree: “The play (Waiting for Godot), we agreed, was a positive play, not negative, not pessimistic. As I saw it, with my blood and skin and eyes, the philosophy is: 'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." (E.G. Marshall who played Vladimir in the original Broadway production 1950s)?

My answer is yes. I agree with the point of E.G Marshal that the play waiting for Godot is a positive play not a negative play. We can not stop or kill our life and time. As well as giving birth and death is not in our hands. If we commit suicide or stop our breath it doesn't mean that we can stop our life. We kill ourselves not the life, it must go on. So, we can say that life is meaningless, there is also nothingness though we have to live life. So the play gives us positivity of thinking in different way. 

∆How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolic significance of these props?

There are many symbols used in this play. The hat and boots are also very important symbols in this play. The hat indicates intellectuality and the boots indicates the lowness of characters. 

∆Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity of slavishness is unbelievable?

Yes, the obedience of lucky is extremely irritating and nauseated. Some people are used to it. They can't think beyond their limitations, even if they get a chance to be free they don't do it. Lucky knows that his master is blind, but still he serves for Pozzo without asking any question. In today's time there are some people who blindly follow the instructions of some Dharma Guru's or political leaders. That type of Gurus and leaders are controller and people like lucky gives them rope of their life !

∆Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or  . . .

According to me Godot is changeable with time. It depends on different time zones. Because we haven't only one desire or one success in our life. Our desire changes with time. In childhood our Godot is toys. In our youth we have a desire for good marks. After that we want good jobs, a good salary, success, a perfect life partner, homes and so and so… But everything is about passing the time. Our last desire is waiting for death ! It is our last wait and then everything is finished. 

∆“The subject of the play is not Godot but ‘Waiting’” (Esslin, A Search for the Self). Do you agree? How can you justify your answer?

Yes, I agree with Esslin's point of view. "The subject of the play is not Godot but Waiting". We can see in the play that nothing happens except meaningless waiting. In our life we are also waiting for meaningless matters. In the different stages of life we are waiting for different types of Godot(waiting). According to our desires we are waiting to fully fill them. And at last we are waiting for death ! So we can say that the subject is waiting rather than Godot.

∆Do you think that plays like this can better be ‘read’ than ‘viewed’ as it requires a lot of thinking on the part of readers, while viewing, the torrent of dialogues does not give ample time and space to ‘think’? Or is it that the audio-visuals help in better understanding of the play?

I want to say that reading and audio-visual both are equally important for understanding any of the play. It's easy to remember the actions of characters if we watch them. But if we want to understand deeper things we have to read the original play. There are benefits of both mediums. But if there is only one choice in between them, I choose reading of the play, because audio-visuals can not display everything in the play. But reading the play can give us every information of the play. Because everything has been written, but everything has not been spoken in audio-visual. 

∆Which of the following sequence you liked the most:

o Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting

o Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts

o Conversation of Vladimir with the boy

I like Vladimir's conversation with the boy. Because this conversation is quite different from all other conversations. We listen to their conversation curiously. It is noticeable that Vladimir becomes serious while talking with the little boy. Conversation of Vladimir and Estragon makes us very bored, so that's why I don't like their conversation. In the first conversation Vladimir is little bit happy because he think that Godot send his messenger for them. He ask some interesting questions to messenger boy, like

• When will Godot come? 

• What Godot is doing ?

• Godot give you food ?

• Has he beat you ?

• Are you frightened ? 

 

So this dialogue makes it curious to listen to the conversation. In the second conversation we can see Vladimir's selfishness. This is also very interesting dialogues to be listen. 

∆Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?

Yes, I feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference universe in the scene of Pozzo, lucky and Vladimir. When Pozzo, the master of lucky was blind, but lucky still served his master. He doesn't grab the opportunity to be free, but continue his slavery for Pozzo. Here we can see that Lucky's life is meaningless. He have chance to become free, but he doesn't choose that way and he gives the rope of his life in the hand of Pozzo. This is how meaninglessness is described in the play.

∆Vladimir and Estragon talks about ‘hanging’ themselves and commit suicide, but they do not do so. How do you read this idea of suicide in Existentialism?

As we know that the play indirectly indicates about Christian religion. And commit suicide is the crime according to Christian religion. But existentialism take suicide as art. It talks about philosophical death. But Vladimir and Estragon avoid doing that, because Vladimir is a strong believer of Christianity. He believes that Godot will surely come to them. So they abandon that idea. 

∆Can we do any political reading of the play if we see European nations represented by the 'names' of the characters (Vladimir - Russia; Estragon - France; Pozzo - Italy and Lucky - England)? What interpretation can be inferred from the play written just after World War II? Which country stands for 'Godot'?

So far as Pozzo and Lucky [master and slave] are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland." (Bert Lahr who played Estragon in the Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?

Yes, we can do a political reading of the play in which Vladimir stands for Russia, Pozzo stands for Italy, Lucky stands for England and Estragon stands for France. So, we can connect this to the world war in which all countries destroyed by Godot means Germany. All these countries were lost in their gimmicks and passing time in wait for something good to come out. What actually turned out to be the end of Waiting, in the form of Godot, was the Second World War – the rise of Hitler - a psychopathic good.

So we connect Godot with Germany, which means Hitler, who destroyed many countries and killed thousands of people. And another interpretation of Pozzo and Lucky (master and slave) in which we connect Pozzo with England and Lucky with Ireland, so in this matter Ireland is struggling a lot with England. As lucky is doing slavery of Pozzo, Ireland is also slave of England at that time. 

∆The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have no change in Act I and Act II of the play. Even the conversation between Vladimir and the Boy sounds almost similar. But there is one major change. In Act I, in reply to Boy;s question, Vladimir says: 

"BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?

VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?"

How does this conversation go in Act II? Is there any change in seeming similar situation and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify? 

Yes, there is change in this conversation in act ||. In the second act, conversation become like that,

BOY : What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?

VLADIMIR : Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw me and that . . . (he hesitates) . . . that you saw me. (Pause. Vladimir advances, the Boy recoils. Vladimir halts, the Boy halts. With sudden violence.) You're sure you saw me,you won't come and tell me tomorrow that you never saw me! 

Saw us is changed in saw me ! This is a big change of the act. Here we can see the selfishness of Vladimir. He thinks that he will survive so he tells the boy to tell mr. Godot that he is waiting for him. 

So these are all questions regarding the play and I gave answers according to my understanding of the play. At the end I want to say that our life is full of desire, but because of laziness we are not doing anything and we started waiting for something to happen to others. There is one dialogue,

APNA TIME AAYEGA

Time will not wait for people, it comes and goes. People are talking about this dialogue, but few are working on it. Remaining all are waiting… the time will come… their time will come… nothing comes… death comes !!!