Dheeraj Waran's blog

John Donne was one of the leading writers of metaphysical poetry and was severely criticised by Samuel Jonson for this. The Flea is definitely one of the more famous John Donne poems. It is humorous, ironic and vivid and deals with the formerly highly controversial subject of premarital sex. Although “The Flea” is one of my favourite John Donne poems, its depiction of the power struggle is very significant at this time, as it can be extrapolated beyond its subject of the gender struggle to several others. India for example is now facing a struggle of its own, since Homosexuality was re-criminalized this week. Yes, Re-criminalized.
“The flea” begins with the narrator telling his beloved to look at a flea to highlight how insignificant her denial of premarital sex to him is. The poem is extremely humorous with lines like: “And pampered swells with one blood made of two, And this, alas, is more than we would do”; as seen here, Donne uses vivid, visual imagery to highlight the themes of the poem through the ‘plight’ of his narrator. The narrator’s fiancé tries hard to refute his arguments, culminating in the killing of the flea; hoping to thereby end the argument. The narrator then goes on to say:

“Just so much honour, when thou yield’st to me, Will waste, as this flea’s death took life from thee”.

The power struggle between a man pestering his fiancé for premarital sex and her failed attempts at ending the argument is portrayed effectively and humorously in this poem.
Most of India rejoiced when Homosexuality was decriminalized in 2008, i.e. the Delhi High Court declared Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code(instituted in 1861) unconstitutional. Its reversal has huge implications today. The section talks about ‘unnatural sex’, which brings one to question the definition of unnatural since homosexuality has been observed in nature. The court’s judgement stated that: “In its anxiety to protect the so-called rights of LGBT persons and to declare that Section 377 IPC violates the right to privacy, autonomy and dignity….”

I’d like to emphasize the use of the words: ‘so –called rights’ in the Supreme Court’s judgment as it effectively highlights the discrimination and the view that certain individuals take against LGBT communities in India.
Extrapolating this to John Donne, one can imagine the LGBT community representing the narrator and the Supreme Court representing the narrator’s beloved. Although this is humorous, it is in essence, pathetic and ironic that the power struggle between a man and a woman has been extrapolated to the power struggle between sections of people, independent of their sex, based only on their lifestyle.
The power struggle depicted in John Donne’s “The Flea”, although humorous, has cultural and social implications that can be extrapolated and identified with all over. Is it possible that its popularity may in part stem from this?

What constitutes the perfect monster? The defining attributes vary through literature vary. People can be monstrous, but can they be categorized as monsters? Does Medea’s murder of her children to get back at Jason for his dismissal of their marriage (Euripides’ Medea) count as monstrous? Does this make her a monster? For the purpose of this discussion I will talk about non-human beings that are phantasmagorical in nature and represent the forces of evil, and talk about why I think Grendel, from Beowulf is one of the greatest monsters, if not the perfect one.
There are several characteristics that led me to believe that Grendel is almost a perfect monster. The first is the strength of his phantasmagorical nature, represented through the lines:

“In off the moors, down through the mist bands
God-cursed Grendel came greedily loping.
The bane of the race of men roamed forth,
hunting for a prey in the high hall.”

– Seamus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf

The eerie depiction of Grendel as a creepily stalking entity would give even the bravest of kids a nightmare. I don’t remember whether the movie version of Beowulf captured Grendel’s essence, but I highly doubt it. I believe that the several representations of Grendel in different forms of Art decrease his phantasmagorical identity, i.e. he is most terrifying when imagined as opposed to actually seen.
Grendel’s apparent history (Grendel is supposed to be the son of Cain, although there are no actual biblical references to this) combined with him being identified as ‘God-cursed’ and the ‘bane of the race of men’, helps create transcend his identity from that of a monster to that of a monster that stems from evil, especially since Beowulf was written at a time when Religion could not be as openly critiqued as it is today.
Through the highly phantasmagorical depiction of Grendel, and his depiction as an anti-christian entity, Grendel transcends the usual definitions of a monster but in his fate, he abides by the principal definition of a monster, viz. he is defeated by a hero, thereby heightening Beowulf’s heroic nature.
Although I cannot explicitly state that Grendel is ‘The Perfect Monster’, I can conclude that Grendel, by transcending the usual definitions of a monster and through his heightened pathos and terrifying nature, is definitely one of the greatest monsters ever created.

Before I actually talk about the depiction of religion in these two novels, I’d like to point out that they are both fairly similar in their setting, i.e. they both depict a society that would be termed ‘exotic’ by the western world, however, it must be noted that these novels are written from two different points of view, i.e. the colonialists and the exotics.
When Samskara was published in 1974, it caused quite a controversy due to its depiction of Brahmans or ‘holy men’ in a fairly unholy light. The Brahmans depicted in Samskara are promiscuous, hypocritical and greedy. The question that the novel raises is can a man be a sinner and yet a good man?
Unlike Samskara, Oroonoko does not focus on religion. However, the protagonist’s perspective of religion and the perspective depicted in Samskara are very similar. Oroonoko takes a very bemused view of religion throughout the novel, i.e. the possibility of a godly entity baffles and amuses him. However, through his trials and suffering, he begins to understand that even though these men have a set of apparently enforced ideals and rules that they must follow (religion), the atrocities that they commit against Oroonoko, bring him to identify religion with evil. Therefore, Oroonoko’s perspective of religion turns to hatred of the very idea of it.
Oroonoko and Praneshacharya(the protagonist of Samskara) hence experience a transformation of their views on religion through the progress of Oroonoko and Samskara respectively. Oroonoko’s views on religion become fixed in his hatred of it, whereas Praneshacharya, the holiest Brahman in the village, takes an existentialist view on religion as he has now committed a ‘sin’ and starts to question his status as a good man.

The character of Yahoos in Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels has long since been extrapolated to human beings. This extrapolation, done by both, Swift and his critics has resulted in several critics, notably George Orwell, characterizing Swift as a Misanthrope.

Rowling has therefore, through the inspiration for ‘nifflers’ created a positive and complete inversion of the themes and motifs that the Yahoos in “Gulliver’s Travels” represent. Although I enjoyed reading Gulliver’s Travels and thought it was extremely well written, I was put off by his at times, unfounded and unnecessary criticism of the human race through the various devices he utilizes to this end.