VCE Stuff > VCE Literature
Anyone want to talk about Donne or A Passage to India with me?
iamdan08:
Yeah language use is a big one and apparently assessors love it lol. It is all about how the writer uses language to create an image in the readers mind. Things such as word choice, how they sound, do they force the reader to so slow down through use of vowels (they take longer to pronounce) or speed up, sentence length, connotations of words, literary techniques (metaphors etc.), contrasting words, tone. All these things talk about HOW the writer has created meaning in their work.
simpak:
HOW it creates meaning, would be Forster's constant satirical and ironic tone highlighting the futility of the human attempt to stage a "feeble invasion" upon the face of the universe.
I don't talk about Oriental/British stuff. Or Racism.
I talk about unity of groups in the novel sometimes, maybe, if it fits.
I focus my main contentions around the irony in humanity's sense of false power in a universe that will never be comprehensive to man's simple logic and structure; how there is a greater truth that Forster implies that we cannot understand.
So, yeah.
I tend not to work well with discussions because my ideas are too different, but I thought I would add that in. I spent most of my time talking about the conflicting logic of man with the overruling truth of the universe.
And it's not rejected by the examiners. An external examiner marked my practice at an 18/20.
StringFever:
--- Quote from: mavisgibbons on October 10, 2009, 01:18:33 am ---HOW it creates meaning, would be Forster's constant satirical and ironic tone highlighting the futility of the human attempt to stage a "feeble invasion" upon the face of the universe.
I don't talk about Oriental/British stuff. Or Racism.
I talk about unity of groups in the novel sometimes, maybe, if it fits.
I focus my main contentions around the irony in humanity's sense of false power in a universe that will never be comprehensive to man's simple logic and structure; how there is a greater truth that Forster implies that we cannot understand.
So, yeah.
I tend not to work well with discussions because my ideas are too different, but I thought I would add that in. I spent most of my time talking about the conflicting logic of man with the overruling truth of the universe.
And it's not rejected by the examiners. An external examiner marked my practice at an 18/20.
--- End quote ---
Haha, I don't doubt it. I'm sure you have evidence from the text to back it up.
But I was wondering - doesn't Forster offer Hinduism as a means of "understanding" a world that does not necessarily conform to the Christian or Muslim sensibility (e.g. logic, order and reason).
simpak:
--- Quote from: StringFever on October 10, 2009, 03:45:00 pm ---
--- Quote from: mavisgibbons on October 10, 2009, 01:18:33 am ---HOW it creates meaning, would be Forster's constant satirical and ironic tone highlighting the futility of the human attempt to stage a "feeble invasion" upon the face of the universe.
I don't talk about Oriental/British stuff. Or Racism.
I talk about unity of groups in the novel sometimes, maybe, if it fits.
I focus my main contentions around the irony in humanity's sense of false power in a universe that will never be comprehensive to man's simple logic and structure; how there is a greater truth that Forster implies that we cannot understand.
So, yeah.
I tend not to work well with discussions because my ideas are too different, but I thought I would add that in. I spent most of my time talking about the conflicting logic of man with the overruling truth of the universe.
And it's not rejected by the examiners. An external examiner marked my practice at an 18/20.
--- End quote ---
Haha, I don't doubt it. I'm sure you have evidence from the text to back it up.
But I was wondering - doesn't Forster offer Hinduism as a means of "understanding" a world that does not necessarily conform to the Christian or Muslim sensibility (e.g. logic, order and reason).
--- End quote ---
Yes and no?
I feel that Hinduism is offered more as an acceptance of the fact that the universe cannot be understood.
Read Godbole's little rattle on about his acceptance of how minuscule his own existence is.
The fact that he can accept that he can call to God but God will not come, as he explains the song in the tea party, and Mrs Moore isn't so happy with that idea explains their different views quite well.
In a way he offers the religion as an 'understanding' I suppose.
But at the same time, I think he is trying to convey that there is no need for the structure of Christianity or British regime in Hinduism, and that those who follow the Hindu faith are happy within the clutter and "muddle" without a logical explanation for their worth.
StringFever:
I reckon that Hinduism is endorsed by this novel - both in the narrative-sense and language use. I definitely agree with you that Hindus, like Godbole, believe that their existences are miniscule; but I firmly believe that Forster contends that (and I paraphrase) "Hinduiusm offers an explanation to things Christianity cannot" - its all-encompassing nature allows followers to be live happily in a spiritual-muddledom.
In the narrative, we see that Mrs. Moore, the Oriental, being the sole survivor of the Marabars/India. Unlike Aziz, Fielding or Adela; Mrs. Moore leaves the India in the same state she arrived - in absolute awe of the country. As the trees and land farewelled her, we are told that her final thoughts are of the places she had not seen - sentiments closer to the Mrs. Moore we saw at the mosque rather than the nihilistic, snippy woman affected by the "boum". Therefore, the Hindu religion seems adept at preparing its followers for the mystery of India, something Christianity and Islam are unable to do.
Also, stylistically, we see Forster's "richest" writing in the Hindu scenes. For example, in the Krishna scenes in 'Temple', we are confronted with a wall of vivid descriptions - its almost as if Forster is trying to smother us with something large and shapeless, something that defies logic. This is in stark contrast to passages about Anglo-India or Aziz, where Forster seems to write with irony or a sense of tongue-in-cheek. Compared to those scenes, Forster seems to be writing most "sincerely" (without irony) in the Hindu scenes - perhaps suggesting that he tolerated it more than Islamic or Christian scenes...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version