Comparison and contrast of surrey and wyatt:

Both Surrey and Wyatt wrote and translated many sonnets. Yet, in their poems, they have
different attitudes, themes and tones. While Surrey accepts the courtly love tradition, Wyatt does
not. They have contradictory attitudes towards their beloveds. Wyatt is more passionate. Yet,
Surrey can control his emotion. The poetry of Surrey presents some ideas and attitudes
which contradict with the views of Wyatt.
The difference between Surrey and Wyatt's poetic attitudes and themes are listed in
the following points. First, Surrey is affected by the tradition of the Petrarchan school, so he
believes in the idea of courtly love, but Wyatt rejects the concept in "The Lover Comforteth
Himself with the Worthiness of his Love". Surrey expresses his pain and suffering which
are caused by his beloved's rejection. He is burdened with the pangs of unrequited love, but he
shows his willingness to endure more pains because his beloved is a worthy lady. At the end of
the poem, he determines to bear the pangs of her rejection patiently and happily. On the other
hand, Wyatt has different attitudes towards his beloved which shows that he does not believe in
the idea of Courtly Love. He shows that he will make no further efforts to win her favour. He is fed
up with her cruelty and rejection, so he warns her to stop looking down on her admirers. He shows
her that one day, she will regret rejecting him. He assumes that he will no longer pay court to her.
His poem is considered a warning for his beloved.
Second, Surrey is objective but Wyatt is subjective. Surrey expresses his personal experience of
love, but he goes beyond his experience by comparing himself to other people who similarly
endured a lot of suffering because of love. This shows the typical human attitude. He refers to the
Troy War. The Greek waged the war to get Helen back. Many brave men lost their life for the sake
of a woman. He uses this allusion to shows the value of love. Thus, he generalizes his idea. On
the other hand, Wyatt is subjective and egotistic. He does not take in consideration the emotion
or experience of other people. He cares only about his personal experience. He complains at his
beloved cruelly and shows that he has decided to give up courting her if she keeps rejecting him.

Third, Surrey is skilled in controlling his emotion while Wyatt is more passionate. Surrey shows
that he will give up complaining because his beloved is worthy woman. Therefore, she deserves
his endurance and patience. In the end, he feels content and satisfied. He is more optimistic.
Thus, his poem has a peaceful end as he finds himself lucky to love this woman. On the other
hand, Wyatt is passionate. He always keeps complaining about the insincerity of his beloved. He
ends his poem with repeating the warning that he will give up courting her. Fourth, Wyatt uses
conversational language, but Surrey uses rhetorical one. Wyatt addresses his lute to express his
weary of his beloved's rejection. Thus, the poem is presented in a form of conversation between
the poet and his lute. On the other hand, Surrey employs rhetorical language in his poem. He
uses rhetorical question to draw the reader's attention and to involve him in the subject and the
debate. He wonders why he has not taken in considering the idea that his beloved is a worthy
woman. Last, Surrey uses hyperbolic images while Wyatt uses conceptual images.
 The Role of Fate In “Oedipus Rex"
Q. What does Sophocles intend to prove and illustrate in Oedipus Rex? Rationalise with
arguments. (PU-1996)
OR
‘Tis not in mortals to avert their doom! Discuss with reference to Sophocles’ Oedipus
Rex. (PU-2000)
OR
How far can the play Oedipus Rex be described as ‘tragedy of destiny? (PU-2001)
Ans: Greek theatre was very different from what we call theatre today. It was, first of all, part of
a religious festival. To attend a performance of one of these plays was an act of worship, not
entertainment or intellectual pastime. But it is difficult for us to understand this aspect of the Greek
theatre because the religion in question was very different from modern religions. The god
celebrated by the performances of these plays was Dionysus. The worship of Dionysus was
associated with an ecstasy that bordered on madness. Dionysus, whose cult was that of
drunkenness and sexuality, little resembles modern image of God. A second way in which Greek
theatre was different from modern theatre is its cultural centrality: every citizen attended these
plays.
According to moral point of view man should remain in his limits fixed by the gods. Over
ambition, pride and rashness are responsible for one’s downfall. He must show respect to gods,
prophets and social institutions and religious dogmas. Whereas, Aeschylus believes more in the
fatalistic and deterministic tendencies of fate, Sophocles gives new dimension to the suffering of
man by shifting the responsibility to man’s own character along with the role of fate.
Thus in Sophocles this tragic concept becomes more snared and complicated. In his play,
Oedipus Rex, fate is closely related to hamartia. The hamartia of the tragic hero helps the
adversity of fate.
In case of Oedipus, his father Laius had the prophecy from the gods that he would be
killed by his own son who would marry his mother. Laius was blessed with a son but in order to
defy the oracle he planed the death of his child by giving it to a slave to leave him on a mountain,
exposed to dangers of all kinds. He also drove a rivet into child’s feet. The slave, however, did
not kill the child and handed it over to another shephered who took the child to Corinth and
presented it to the childless king of Corinth named Polybus. So Oedipus grew up into a pretty,
handsome and well-built young man looking upon Polybus as his father and Merope his mother.
 Oedipus grew up without any idea that he was the son of a Theban king. One day he
heard the prediction by the Apollo about himself that he will kill his father and marry his mother.
He became worried and ran away thinking Polybus his father and Merope his mother. On the road
he met Laius’ royal chariot and soon a quarrel arouse about the right of the passage. Oedipus
killed the king. Then he proceeded to Thebes and answered the riddle of Sphinx thus became the
king of Thebes. According to the custom the new king was to marry the widowed queen. So
Oedipus married his own mother Jocasta without knowing that he was marrying his own mother
and he had killed his father.
This is very powerful example of relationship between hamartia and circumstances
created through the use of free choice. After some years of peace, the city is caught up in the
hands of pestilence and famine. There is a prediction by the gods that the city should be cleaned
from a pollution caused by the sin of a man. Oedipus most gracefully announces a proclamation
wherein asking for the killing or banishment of the said person. It is from here that Sophocle
constructs the plot of the play most dramatically and ironically. The hamartia of Oedipus grows
very powerful when he accuses Teiresias, the blind prophet for hatching a canspiracy against him
in collaboration with Creon. It is quite ironical that Oedipus who is famous for solving the riddles
does not understand the clear allusions made by Teiresias. Nor he understands that human
knowledge is extremely limited and misleading. It is his hamartia that he bears himself equal in
knowledge with gods and prophets. He says proudly:
“But I came by,
Oedipus, the simple man, who knows nothing.
I though it out for myself, no birds helped me!”
Up till then gods were not willing to reveal the truth but then only to make Oedipus
recognise his limitation as a human being, the truth is revealed and thus Oedipus becomes
responsible for hastening his tragic end.
It is through the skillful use of reversal and recognition that Sophocles portrays the tragic
end of Oedipus. Man can solve the riddle of Sphinx but cannot solve the riddle of his own life.
Oedipus forces Tereisias in his anger to utter the truth against his will, though Teriesias forbades
him from knowing the reality. The irony becomes more dramatic when Jocasta and Corinthian
messanger in order to console Oedipus add to his mental disturbance. He refuses to pay any
head to Jocasta’s request of not continuing his search and attributes it to her snobbery and jears
at seeking the truth even though it becomes clear that the result will be extremely unfavourable
to him. When he came to know the secret of his birth, Jocasta commits suicide and Oedipus takes
 out his eyes and blinded himself. The following speech by Oedipus not only throws light on his
tragedy but it also shows the close relationship between fate and hamartia, the use of free will
which becomes hamartia.
In conclusion, we can say that in spite of the evidence to prove Oedipus a free agent in
most of his actions as depicted in the play, we cannot forget that the most tragic events of his life
— his murder of his father and his marriage with his mother — had inevitably to happen. Here the
responsibility of the fate cannot by denied. But the discovery by Oedipus of his crimes or sins is
the result of the compulsion of his own nature. The real tragedy lies in this discovery, which is due
to the traits of his own character. If he had not discovered the truth, he would have continued to
live in a state of blissful ignorance and there would have been no tragedy. But the patricide and
the incest — these were pre-ordained and for these fate is responsible.

The Role Of Chorus In "Oedipus Rex"

Q. Write a note on the function of the chorus in Oedipus Rex. (PU-1995)
Ans. Lexically the word Chorus means ‘a company of dancers or singers’. In the tragedies of
the ancient Greek, the Chorus is an essential characters. Before its special use in the theatre, the
chorus had been participants in Greek religious festivals, dancing and chanting.
The chorus in classical tragedies plays a very significant role. Aristotle in his“Poetics” traces the
origin of tragedy in choric songs and hymns sung in prays of various gods particularly Dionysus.
It is chorus that in the due course of time developed into tragedy and the choric songs gradually
incorporated in them developed into dialogues. Tragedy later on consisted of dialogues and action
but the role of chorus was still prominent though this role diminished as time passed.
In Sophocles and Euripides the chorus seems to have been exploited differently, but it is still,
there all the time for the spectators to see and hear. InRoman tragedies the Chorus only
delivered speeches in between the acts. InShakespeare, in some cases, the Chorus appears as
an actor delivering the prologue and the epilogue. Aristotle praises Sophocles more for the proper
exploitation of the chorus than he does Euripides. As he says:
“The chorus should be regarded as one of the actors; it should be an integral part of the
whole, and take a share in the action — that which it has in Sophocles rather than in
Euripides”.
As a matter of fact, in most Greek tragedies Chorus does not seem to be an undesirable
interpolation rather it contributes positively to the over-all structure of the play.
In “Oedipus Rex” as in other Greek plays, the Chorus seems well knit in the very structure. The
tragedy begins with the pronouncements of the chorus after the prologue. The chorus like the
opening scene of “Hamlet” creates an atmosphere of the play and certain expectations mingled
with an element of suspense. The structural significance of the chorus can well be imagined from
the fact that various episodes are marked off by choric odes. Each ode commenting on what has
happened, also seems to speculate what is likely to follow. Even the conclusion of a Greek
tragedy is clearly marked off by exodeor the exit song. The chorus thus comments on the various
events and stirs the imagination of the spectators.
In Greek tragedies, the chorus playing the role of an actor, on certain occasions, is found talking
with the main characters. The chorus even advisesthe characters and gives them clues regarding
the appropriateness of their actions and utterances. Sometimes we feel as if the pronouncements
of the chorus comprise nothing but our own view point viz-a-viz event in the tragedy. At others, it
would seems as if the Chorus voices the view points of the dramatist, particularly when we take
into account its thought provoking comments on events and characters and also its contribution
to create an atmosphere.
The role played by Chorus in “Oedipus Rex” is no less prominent. TheParodos or the
entrance song delivered by the chorus certainly creates an atmosphere of horror resulting from
the plague that has striken the people of Thebes. The misery of the people of Thebes has been
very graphically and poignantly depicted. The Chorus seems to lend a helping voice to the
entreaties of the suffering Thebans. In fact all the odes say things that ought to have been said at
various stages of the play. The role of the chorus in pacifying Oedipus and Creon is particularly
remarkable; it is the role of a moderator. But prior to playing this role, the chorus sides with
Oedipus when he has an argument with Teiresias.
Aristotle acknowledged the importance of the chorus and maintains that it should be given the
status of an actor. But this statement should not be taken too literally. The chorus does at times
talk to the characters in tragedy and is found to be advising some of them but it never takes a
hand in the action of the play directly rather it influences the action indirectly.
In Oedipus Rex, the chorus seems to have a lot to do with the main action. It is chorus whom
Oedipus questions as to who the killer of Laius was. It also advises the king to sent for Teiresias
though the king replies that he has done so already. Creon needs the testimony of the
chorus having hear that he has been accused of treason. The reaction of the chorus on this
occasion is balanced and moderating. The role of the chorus, though an indirect one, when it
persuades Jocasta to reconcile, Oedipus and Creon is particularly remarkable. It is the chorus
again that expresses its veiled apprehension, when Jocasta rushes into the palace having known
 the truth. The chorus comments on the prevailing mood and prepares the spectators for the
imminent disaster. Oedipus questions the chorus if it knows the identity of the Theaben
shepherd who handed over a child to Corinthian messenger. The chorus wise enough, once again
says:
“Jocaste perhaps could tell you something”.
It expresses sympathy with Oedipus when the blinded king enters the stage. Earlier, it has
lamented the terrible fall that has occurred in the position of Oedipus. In the final song, it seems
to under-line the moral of the play by emphasizing that human happiness is extremely transitory
and precarious.
All these instances throw ample light on the influence of the chorus on the action. This influence
takes place in many ways. The contribution of the chorus to the impact of tragedy on the audience
is also great. The chouse, therefore, is certainly not an undesirable encumbrance. Its presence
on the stage keeps the attention of the spectators rivetted to the action even when there are no
actors saying or doing anything on the stage.
Chorus lends continuity to the main plot. Just as in modern plays, we have melody, the chorus
(with its songs and dances) satisfied this psychological need of the viewers. In Shakespeare, in
the Elizabethan age, the role of the chorus seems to have almost diminished though its remanants
can easily be traced in Shakespeare, Marlowe and Johnson. The comic relief that relieves
hightend tention in Shakespeare can also be equated with choral odes in Greek tragedies.
To sum up we can say that the chorus has its significance not only viz-a-viz structural necessity
but also the psychological state of mind of the spectators. The odes create an emotional
background to the action. They point to the significance of certain facts and also reflect the outlook
of the society. Its function, therefore, is not only to mark off scenes and events, but also to control
the emotional reaction of the spectators to events taking place on the stage. With the passage of
time as the interest of the people in psychology, anthropology and other social sciences
increased, more personal and complex stories began to be adopted for the stage and it diminished
the significance and role of the chorus.

Oedipus Rex As A Tragic Hero

Q. Do you think that hubris plays a significant part in the fall of Oedipus? (PU-2006)

OR

Discuss Oedipus’ final choice and evaluate his character. (PU-1994)

Ans.: Sophocles touches the Olympian heights of excellence in presenting vivid varieties of
characters, occasions, scenes, moods, joys, sorrows frustrations, agonies and physical as well
as psychological crisis.

Oedipus is a master creation of Sophocles' genius who comes upto the canons fixed by
Aristotle for a tragic hero. According to Aristotle, a tragic hero is a distinguished person, who
occupies a high position or has a high status in life and falls from prosperous circumstances into
misfortune on account of a "hamartia" or some error of judgement. In Aristotle's view tragic hero
should be a good man though not prefect. The fall of a bad character will not arouse any feeling
of pity or fear whereas, the fall of a person who represents near perfection will be repugnant and
horrible. In this way ideal tragic hero should neither be a paragon of excellence nor a deprayed
villain. Aristotle also believed that the tragic hero should be true to type and consistent or true to
himself and his catastrophe must be caused by an error rather than a deliberate crime.

Now, when one examines Oedipus on the criterion set by Aristotle one find that that he
fulfills the requirements mentioned above. Oedipus is the son of a king and a queen, he is brought
up by a king and a queen and he himself becomes a king. In this way he is a man of social
eminence as well as he possesses excellent qualities of character, though he is by no means
perfect. Yet we cannot say that his misfortune is due to any defect in his character rather it is an
error of judgment (hamartia) which brings about his fall.

When the reader carefully and critically examine the character of Oedipus, it becomes
quite vivid and clear that he is an ideal king as he treats his subjects as his own children. Once
he saved the lives of the citizens from the clutches of a sphinx and now in the wave of pestilence
they look towards him for guidance and help. He is a man who is highly esteemed by all because
of his qualities. He is an able ruler, a father of his people, an honest and great administrator and
a man of outstanding intellect. There is no doubt about the essential goodness of his character.
He has full faith in the bond of family and hates impurity. Thus a man who is essentially a noble
man should meet such ghastly fate is unthinkable and very painful.

But this is not a complete picture of Oedipus' character. Like an ideal tragic hero Oedipus
is also not perfect because in spite of all these good qualities there are some irritants and the
traits which cannot be approved. For example, he is hot-tempered and can be easily provoked.
He quickly loses his temper with Teiresias when the prophet is reluctant to reveal the things he
knows. He flares up and accuses Teiresias of hatching a conspiracy againsthim. Though, first he
addresses him reverently but later on, he behaves like a ruthless tyrant who is out to pick up a
quarrel without any consideration of its consequences. He is guilty of rash judgment in the case
of Creon. It is really not proper to treat one’s trusted and tried kinsman like that. It all shows his
arbitrariness, and rash vindictiveness.

An other flaw of Oedipus' character is that he is excessively proud of his intelligence. This
feeling of pride may be the result of his success in solving the riddles of Sphinx. Self-confidence
is a good quality but when it takes the form of over confidence and pride, it becomes disgusting
and obnoxious.

But despite these faults and shortcomings it would be wrong to suppose that Oedipus
suffers only because of this pride. He has committed heinous crimes but his pride is not the only
direct cause of these crimes. He tried his level best to avoid the fulfillment of prophecies. It was
in complete ignorance that he killed his father and married mother. His tragedy is a tragedy of
errors, not of any willful action yet it is possible to argue that if he had been a little more careful,
things would have taken a different shape. He might have avoided the quarrel on the road, if he
had not been so short sighted he might have refused to marry a woman old enough to be his
mother, if he had not been blinded by the pride of his intelligence in solving the riddle of the sphinx.

Actually Oedipus failed to realize that a man can solve the riddle of the Sphinx but he
cannot solve the riddle of his own life. He wanted to know the whole truth but could not see that
man cannot bear much truth. Thus if he had not pursued the investigations, he might have avoided
the shock of discovery. Teiresias tried to conceal the truth and Jocasta also discouraged Oedipus
to continue his investigations but Oedipus paid no heed to them. It was his insistence on the truth
that led him to his tragedy. The oracle said that: Oedipus would be guilty of those sins but no
oracle said that he must discover the truth. If there had not been any discovery surely there would
have been no tragedy. No doubt, Oedipus has already committed the sins which make him guilty
in the eyes of gods but the tragedy lies not so much in committing of these crimes as in his
discovery of these crimes.

In conclusion, we can say that Oedipus is an authentic tragic hero in Aristotelian sense
because his tragedy is caused by his own initiatives in discovering the truth. However, the manner
in which Oedipus blinded himself after realizing his guilt and the manner in which he endured his
punishment, raises him in our estimation. The final impression which we get of him is of massive
integrity, powerful will, and magnanimous acceptance of a horrible fate. The spirit of Oedipus
remains unconquered even in his defeat and that is the essential requisite for an ideal tragic hero
as propounded by Aristotle in his poetics.
J O H N D O N N E : USE OF CONCEITS IN DONNE’S POETRY

A conceit is basically a simile, or comparison between two dissimilar things. In conceit, the
dissimilarity between the things compared is so great that the reader is always fully aware of it
while having to concede the likeness implied by the poet. Thus Dr Johnson pointed out that the most
heterogeneous ideas are yoked together in the metaphysical poetry.
Far-fetched images, departing from the conventional Elizabeth’s type:
Far-fetched images mark Donne’s poems. Conceits may be brief like a spark made by striking
two stones together. Comparison is not confined to any single point. Fresh points of likeness are
drawn up and brought to the attention of the reader. The poet sets out to prove the legs of
compasses in “A valediction:Forbidding Mourning.” Another clever conceit is in “The Flea”
where the flea becomes the marriage bed. The comparison is not clear but the poet unfolds the
likeness logically.
Metaphysical conceits are drawn from a wide range of subjects:
Indeed, Nature and art are used for illustrations, comparisons and illusions. The images are not
conventional: they do not repeat the well-worn poetic devices of the lady’s cheeks looking like
roses or her teeth like pearls. The conceits employed by Donne are learned. They display the
poet’s thorough knowledge of a wide range of subjects, such as science, exploration,
philosophy, mathematics, astronomy and many more. The conceits thus give the poetry an
intellectual tone. In single poem, we may have images drawn from cartography, geography,
myth and natural science. “A Valediction: Of Weeping” employs images from a variety of
sources. The lover’s tears are like precious coins because they bear the stamp of the
beloved(image from mintage), the tears are pregnant of thee--- a complex image showing the
impression of the beloved’s reflection in the drop of tear along with the meaning and life given to
the tears by the beloved’s reflection in them. Next, the beloved’s tears are compared to the
moon which draws up seas to drown the lover in her sphere (image from geography).Reference
to sea discoveries, new worlds and the hemispheres of the earth occurs in most of
Donne’spoems, reflecting contemporary explorations. War and military affairs also provide a
source for Donne’sconceits, not only in his love poems, but in his religious poems as well. In
“Batter My Heart”, he compareshimself to an occupied town.
Images can not be condemned for being far-fetched:
One can not condemn images only if they are out of place in the context in which they are used.
In Donne’s poems, very seldom is an image used without relevance. Donne’s images stimulate one to think.
They bring one to awareness of the new angles from which an experience can be viewed. The
images, though, are unconventional, but are undeniable. In “Go and Catch the Falling Star” a
string of unconventional imagery is used to describe the view that there is no woman in the world both
beautiful and true. Donne’s conceits are used to illustrate and persuade. They are instrument of
definition an argument.
Conclusion:
Donne’s use of conceits is skillful. It is also, in most cases, appropriate. It makes us concede
justness while we are admiring its skill, as Helen Gardener says. The poet has something to say
which the conceit urge and help to forward. The purpose of an image in Donne’s poetry is to
define the emotional experience by an intellectual parallel. Donne’s imagery brings together the
opposites of life, all in one breathe.

JOHN DONNE AS A METAPHYSICAL POET

John Donne was an English poet of the early seventeenth century. He is considered the pre-
eminent representative of the metaphysical poets.. Donne's style is characterised by abrupt
openings and various paradoxes, ironies and dislocations.He is particularly famous for his
mastery of metaphysical conceits.[2]

The term ‘metaphysical ’means pertaining to abstract thoughts and subjects .as ‘meta’ means
beyond,thus, the literal translation of metaphysical is beyond physical.

.S LEWIS asserts:

“Metaphysics in poetry is the fruit of Renaissance tree,becoming

over-ripe and approaching putrescence”

The metaphysical poetry is replete with such far fetched images

(conceits) and allusions and paradoxes as in BATTER MY HEART,THREE -PERSONED
GOD :

That I may rise,and stand,o’erthrow me,and bend

Your force,to break,blow,burn and make me new

It is a paradoxical statement where the poet asks the God to use violent and harsh methods for
his re-shaping like over throwing and pulling him down so that he may stand up,reformed and
purified.

The metaphysical poetry finds it origin in two broad divisions of amorous and religious verse.The
metaphysical element,perhaps,first made its appearance in love poems,following the example of
Italian writers,whom Donne seem to have adopted as his models.The Cannonization where he
speaks so vehemently in defence of his love to people who discourage him that his love does not
cause harm or damage to anyone.

Alas, alas,who’s injured by my love?

What merchant ships have my sighs drowned?

Who says my tears have overflowed his ground?

The use of hyperbole in the above lines which is another significant feature of metaphysical
poetry is praise worthy.Donne’s divine poems are marked by an intense feeling of piety.

Platonic poetry’ is a false poetry dealing with ideals and ideas alone.He prefers metaphysical
poetry not because it represents the middle way between the two but because it produces a
beautiful blend of the two.