The Sense of an Ending - Julian Barnes

The Sense of an Ending - Julian Barnes

This blog based on the task of the Sense of an Ending.

• What is the meaning of phrase ‘Blood Money’ in Veronica’s reply email?

     The reference of blood money can be seen as that the money which getting by Tony is out of the suicide of Adrian. How was he responsible for the suicide? This can be read as that because of the letter of Tony, Adrian goes more nearer to Sarah Ford. Likewise the relationship of both takes place as a burden on Adrian and he committed suicide. So in that context it can be read.

•      How do you decipher the equation: b = s – v x/+ a1 or a2 + v + a1 X s = b?

B= S- V x/+ a1

B=Baby, S= Sarah, V=Veronica, a1= Adrian

Meaning= Sarah relation with Veronica diminish and her relationship with Adrian came as a result of baby.

A2+ V+ a1 X S =B

A2= Antony Webster, V=Veronica, A1= Adrian, S= Sarah Ford, B=Baby, a1X s= a1’s relationship with S

Meaning= Antony Webster, Veronica and Adrian are friends and the relationship of Adrian with Sarah came as a result of baby

• Adrian’s diary is willed to Tony by Sarah Ford. How come Sarah Ford owned it? Why was it in the possession of Veronica?

As the psychological thriller opened, Tony come to know that Sarah owned the diary because she is the wife of Adrian and veronica possessed it because she is the daughter of them (according to the relationship of both).

• Was the mentally retarded middle aged ‘Adrian’, Tony’s friend who did not commit suicide and was suffering from trauma and thus gone mad, and was living with hidden identity?

Possibilities not lie there because there is the clarification of suicide note. Adrian did very intellectual philosophical suicide. He believes that there is nothing wrong in suicide. There are different reasons of suicide but there are not possibilities of Adrian living with hidden identity.

• How was Veronica related to Adrian, the one suffering in care-in-the-community?

At first view point of Tony it is seems like that because of the curse of Tony, Veronica’s child- Adrian suffering from mental disease and she means Veronica as a mother suffering in care-in-the-community. But latter on as time passes he come to know that Veronica and Adrian are brother and sister. And as a sister she carries her brother Adrian.

• Do you see any missing block – some dot which is not getting connected with the whole or dot missing to get full sense of the novel - in the plot of this psychological thriller?

If we talked about the whole novel then there was nothing like that. But I have one doubt in one scene. The scene is where Veronica and Tony are in car and Veronica tries to convey one message to Tony but Tony cannot able to understand. The description of Tony that there are some people who coming in front of him. No doubt that through that place he came to know about the reality of the relationship of Adrian with Sarah. But the clarification of that scene is what Tony describe, I am not able to getting that.

• Do you see any possible reason in the suicide of Adrian Finn?

There are multiple reasons behind the suicide of Adrian.  First, he is suicide because of the suffering from trauma. Second- His suicide because of the burden that he has. The burden of baby and second the fear from society.

• In the light of new revelations, how do you read character of Veronica? Instinctive, manipulative, calculating, stubborn, haughty, sacrificial, trustworthy, good Samaritan?

This definition of Veronica is coming from Tony. And as time passes, the definition of Veronica also goes on changing. It is the point of view of Tony on Veronica. But the problem is that he has very limited and specific eyesight. He cannot think beyond the boundaries that he has.

• What do you mean by Unreliable Narrator? Is Tony Webster classifiable as Unreliable Narrator?

Yes, Tony Webster classifiable as unreliable narrator because there are many point which suggest that Tony himself clarified that he aren’t reliable. 

For Example-

“I remember, in no particular order”

So, how one can rely on that narration which is not particular in sequence? Another example is that-

“I can’t be sure of the actual events any more, I can at least be true to the impressions those facts left.”

The whole novel based on the memory of Tony but he himself said that he wasn’t sure about his memory. Moreover, he said that the story of his is out of impression. And as time passes or as story growing we come to know that Tony himself becomes the deconstructionist of his memory.  At the end we come to know that he got the memory totally wrong in a way. 

"Da Vinci Code"

You have studied ‘Genesis’ (The Bible), ‘The Paradise Lost’ (John Milton) and ‘The Da Vinci Code’ (Dan Brown). Which of the narrative/s seem/s to be truthful? Whose narrative is convincing to the contemporary young mind?

The differences in narratives between three texts such as:

Genesis (The Bible)

The Paradise Lost (John Milton)

The Da Vinci Code (Dan Brown)

First let us discuss about the narrative. So first thing came in front of our eyes is that the narration is based on individual perception. When it is goes through religion then there obviously different points of view of people. Religion always kept by people as a blind faith by people. It is never considered in true way.

These all texts are written by different writers so there must be different points of view. There is different ways of looking towards the religion or history. The individual narration is always connected with his or her own feelings, emotions, heritage, tradition, and atmosphere. So, there were more chances that narration surrounded with individual atmosphere.

Genesis (The Bible)

Genesis (The Bible) is more rigid in its nature. After the entry of ‘The Bible’ people were blindly following the religion. God is at the center. People were not aware about the text because The Bible is only allowed to priest. It is not reachable to human being. So, people were not suspension about The Bible. So, there was no space for questioning or doubting.

John Milton (The Paradise Lost)

In Milton’s Paradise Lost still God is at the center. Human beings are nearer to the God. Milton is giving more space to human being in his narration. He is giving more conservative and argumentative nature to human being. The slight change here in Milton’s narration is that he tries to questioning God. So, questions are the beginning of knowledge and diminishing the ignorance and blind faith in God. It is challenging. But women position still double marginalized in nature. They were portraying as the weakness of men.

Dan Brown (The Da Vinci Code)

The more changes come in the narration of Dan Brown. First people blindly follow the religion while now people are in search of proving. God and human being are now in face to face or sometimes they overcome on God also. But Da Vinci Code is more nearer to human interest. It has the quality to grab the attention of people. It shows that woman has more space but not parallel to male. It is more according to the people that what people like to see and watch. There is suspense, thriller and what not.

What harm has been done to humanity by the biblical narration or that of Milton’s in The Paradise Lose? What sort of damage does narrative like ‘The Vinci Code’ do to humanity?

But what harm has been done to humanity by these all texts. Bible harms on the ground that people not questioning in front of Church and God. They not allow asking question. So, their knowledge about religion is very limited. People are doing whatever on the ground of religion. While The Paradise Lost by Milton harm people on the ground that people trying to think. People raise the argumentative nature but the position of women is in down position. People believe that the down fall of male is because of woman.

The Da Vinci Code is harm on the ground that it is the religion that killed more number of people. Religion removes from the life of people everything goes well in the life. This is the idea of Sir Leigh Teabing. He tries to reveal the secret of bloodline. He knows that if it is happen than the blind faith of people towards the church and priest is also remove. People are become free from the fake burden of religion. But as Robert tries to keep secret it will take the liberty of human being. It may harm the freedom of individual.

What difference do you see in the portrayal of 'Ophelia' (Kate Winslet) in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, 'Elizabeth' (Helena Bonham Carter) in Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein or 'Hester Prynne' (Demi Moore) in Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter' or David Yates's 'Harmione Granger' (Emma Watson) in last four Harry Potter films - and 'Sophie Neuve' (Audrey Tautau) in Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code? How would justify your answer?

Women are always portraying as a double marginalized one. They have very distance and different space in every place. Whether it is about the reality or it is about the film, the position of women is same. First if we talked about Ophelia in Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet, she is slight different than the Hamlet of Shakespeare. Kenneth Branagh takes more freedom in portraying woman. At the end Ophelia goes in madness. Elizabeth also killed in the movie. Hester Prynne is out casting from the society. And all these three women are portraying from the point of view of male or through the eyes of male. But obvious, that the body of women more objectified. Hermione and Sophie’s physical appearance is more controlled in film. No doubt that the movie’s theme “Feminine Sacredness” is played a vital role in portraying the female character like Sophie. But what camera played is also important thing.

  

Edger Allen Poe’s “The Black Cat”

Edger Allen Poe’s “The Black Cat”

                          

Biography of the writer-

Born January 19, 1809, Boston, Massachusetts, U. S. American short story writer, poet, critic, and editor Edger Allan Poe’s tales of mystery and horror initiated the modern detective story, and the atmosphere is his tales of horror is unrivaled in American fiction. His “The Raven” (1845) numbers among the best-known poems in national literature.

Synopses:

The narrator from his childhood love animals, especially pet animals. So, he kept animals and passing his time, and at a young age he marries a woman who also loves pets. In their household they have a number of animals, including a large and beautiful black cat named PLUTO. Pluto is his favorite animal. But his wife doesn’t like Pluto because she often refers to the superstition that black cats are actually disguised witches.

As time passes he loses his interest in Pluto. The narrator becomes moody and irritable due to alcoholism and abusing his wife as well as his cat. One day, he comes home drunk and imagining that Pluto is avoiding him. In response, the narrator loses control and cuts one of Pluto’s eyes out with a pen-knife. Moreover he hate Pluto because of Pluto's one eye and he kill Pluto by hanging the cat from a tree.

Afterward, the next day his house completely burned out accept one wall. It makes narrator doubt. As time passes one day he seemed one cat who is look like Pluto and because he wants to replaced the regration, the narrator take that cat at his home.

Everyday this cat follows the narrator, this thing completely disliked by the narrator. Out of this dislike he tries to killed that cat but instead of that his wife killed by him.

Realizing that he cannot remove the body from the house, he plasters the body into cellar. Few days after police came for investigation. At the first time they couldn’t found anything but something latter narrator realizes some voice came from the cellar. Out of the frustration he speaks everything in front of police and check out everything. With his wife he found that cat also into the cellar. The narrator realizes, to his horror, that he must have trapped the cat behind the wall along with his wife.

Critical Analysis:

The characters of Edger Allan Poe also can be read psychologically, because all the characters especially the heroes who are unnamed narrator are mentally disordered. The hero of the Black Cat also can be read in same context.

The narrator brought up with pet animals so but obvious that he hasn’t any company of human being. Second thing is that because of the pet animals he couldn’t shares his emotions and feelings or expressions. So, the jar is fulfilled with frustration. Killing the cat brutally is maybe the result of frustration.

Next is that, he got human companion in a form of his wife at the very early stage. So, he got responsibilities at the very early stage in his life. The frustration or mental disorder came in a result of the tragic end of hero or in a way the tragic end of the story “The Black Cat”. The short story “The Tell-tale heart” highly resemble with the short story “The Black Cat”.

A Marriage Proposal - Anton Palovich Chekhov

A Marriage Proposal

    - Anton Palovich Chekhov

Anton Palovich Chekhov (1860-1904) is a major world classic, being an incomparable artist who touches the right chord of not only the Russians but of human beings everywhere. Chekhov fashions his plots to focus attention on his “message’’ or underline particular aspects of a character, with the result that the conventional plot is always kept to the minimum.

Character List:

Stepan Stepanovitch Tschubukov, a country farmer.

Natalia Stepanovitch, his daughter (age 25).

Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov, Tschubukov’s neighbour.

This short play is surrounded with these three characters. “A Marriage Proposal” is a comedy bordering on a farce. There is much noisy fun here, if not actual horse play.

A Marriage Proposal is built on the theme of human vanity which blinds a person even to his best interests and lands him in all sorts of inconvenient or compromising situation.

Lomov:

               He was thirty-five years old. He lives a well regulated life. A person, who has weak heart, continual palpitation, and very sensitive and always getting excited and has the disease of insomnia.

Natalia:

                 Natalia was a young beautiful lady. Natalia was twenty-five years old. Natalia wants to marry with Lomov but having very egoistic mind set.

Tschub:

               Tschub is father of Natalia and neighbour of Lomov. Tschub impressed with the characteristic of Lomov and he also like Lomov because of his well settlement and his personality.

Lomov wants to be husband of Natalia so he comes with the marriage proposal to Tschub house. First of all, Tschub very happy with this proposal and also agree with this. Natalia is totally unaware about this matter and start quarrelling with Lomov. Both are quarrelling for very silly matter is that the meadow belongs to whom? Chekhov make fun on society that how on silly thing people quarrelling?

Meanwhile Natalia comes to know that Lomov came here with proposal. So, she tries to removing the quarrels but somehow he quarrel start again with other subject that which dog is better: Otkatai or Ugadi? The quarrel end after long argument or maybe it is end because of the illness of Lomov. And about the end of this play is happy end.

In this short play Chekhov covers the very invisible matters happens in an around us. Chekhov tries to bring that satirical matter with funny way. Moreover it is also brings out some patriarchal comedy and also the patriarchal view point on women.

For example- When Lomov choose his life partner what are the matters he wants from his life partner. What he think for Naltalia as a life partner?

Lomov: “Natalia is an excellent housekeeper, not at all bad-working, well-educated what more could I ask?”

So, these are the parameter to judge any girl as a life partner. So, here Chekhov tries to throw light on the reality of patriarchal power.

Chekhov raises laughter by stressing the incongruity of the central situation. The father of Natalia anxious to marry off his daughter to anyone. But Natalia believe in suitability. The eligible bachelor is interested in marriage simply because he has arrived at ‘a critical age’. Everything is good without ego. Each one of them is obsessed with the idea of his own importance, besides being a bundle of nerves. No wonder a serious thing like the marriage proposal is thrown about as of no concern of anybody!

Important matter is that Chekhov never used farce for his own sake. The farce is always wedded to social purposes. The shaft of satire goes straight to its mark.

Telephonic Conversation - Wole Soyinka

Telephonic Conversation

       Wole Soyinka

The title itself suggests that it’s about the conversation between a white lady and an African American man. It is the spots light that Wole Soyinka throws. Wole Soyinka throws harsh light on the racism and prejudice which grips society.

 An African American man searching for house and he agree with one land lady. But something happened with his past or maybe humiliated by white because of his identity so in advanced he clarifies his identity that he is an African man.

“But self confession. ‘Madam’, I warned, ‘I hate a wasted journey – I am African”.

After hearing this land lady more curious about the identity of that man and she ask various questions like:

“HOW DARK?... I had not misheard… ARE YOU LIGHT OR VERY DARK?”

Before this there was long silence and black man can pressurize good-breeding, voice, when it came. All the lines like:

“Lip-stick coated, long gold rolled cigarette-holder pipped.”

Symbolized the richness of that lady. She is from upper class family. Afterward asking such questions maybe she wants to felt to black man a shame on his color or identity that he has. In a way it is the habit of white to mock on black color or identity through asking questions like this or through laughing. They got snick pleasure from doing such things. It can be read in psychological context also of that lady.

Wole Soyinka also puts very good imaginary such as:

“Red booth. Red pillar-box. Red double-tiered”

It shows the reaction of blackman that he shows everywhere red or in a way it’s his reaction of anger against that lady who asked such dangerous questions.

The lady is very positively present herself. It shows that she wants to overcome to that Blackman because she judges an African American man through his skin color. How ridiculous it that one should go through the book cover instead of what is inside in the book? Same thing happen here that lady judge that man with color not through his personality or humanity.

There is one word in the poem is “Self-Confession”. It shows that one cannot control over the color of skin. It is not in the hand of person to change color. Moreover it is more ridiculous to shame over the skin color. Soyinka here mock on them who are shame on their own personality or identity just because it is not like by other. Likewise Wole Soyinka criticizes the society where the people like the lady live who are full of prejudices and tries to convince themselves as a good or superior one than the “other”.

So, at the end speaker of this poem criticized that lady that first you look at yourself that “how ugly you are”.

“Madam, I pleaded, wouldn’t you rather see for yourself?”

No, doubt that African is black from their skin but conscience of them is white while white people are white by the skin but consciences of them are black. So, Fanon wrote-

“Black Skin, White Mask”.

Shamitabh- movie review

Shamitabh

Genre- Comic Drama’
Caste- Amitabh Bachchan, Dhanush and Akshara Haasan
Director- R Balki




This movie is about the two opposite qualities mixed together and from that the born of the title and the theme of the movie is “SHAMITABH”.

SHAMITABH- the born of the title is very interesting scene in the movie. “SH” from Danish (Dhanush) and the remaining part is fulfilled with Amitabh Sinha (Amitabh Bachchan) and the rise of Shamitabh- a hero.

Danish is from his childhood highly impressed by films. He is filmopher and also wants to be actor at the initial stage of his life. He is full of passion and ambition and wants to see his name up on the movie billboards. But the problem is that no one is perfect. Danish has also the problem of voice. He is voiceless. His vocal chod is paralyses. But his dreams are unstoppable.

                               “Try and try will be man success.”

This phrase highly applicable here. Danish wants to be actor and he tries a lot to fulfill his dream. Ultimately he got voice from Amitabh through technology. Now he covered the whole Bollywood in his hand with the help of Akshara. Danish has brilliant quality of performance and the remains one is voice fulfilled with the arrival of Amitabh.

The plot moves around the three characters Danish, Amitabh and Akshara. Likewise the problems are arises from two extraordinary qualities or in a way conflict between two ego. Both of them tries to overcome to each other but Akshara tries to evaluate the things that both are interdependence. Both are everything for each other and both are nothing without each other.

The importance of each other compared various time like "Whiskey" and "Paani" that without "Paani", "whiskey" is impossible. Moreover the dialogue-

“Without my voice you finished, if I finished your voice will be finished”.

The ego is more powerful to destroy everything. The clash of two ego leads towards the destruction of two extraordinary qualities but in between Akshara played a vital role and save the destruction of the name and fame of Shamitabh.

Furthermore, the story moves around the soliloquy on death and life of Amitabh. The movie also talks about the distance of real life and reel life. Due to reel life the destruction of the life of Amitabh happen. Once upon time Amitabh rejected in reel world because of his voice and now people like his voice. So, in a way Amitabh mock on the world of reel and time and again he criticized the world of reel also.

For example-

“It is not picture, it is mixture otherwise Bollywood become the furniture of wood.”

"Jao jake film industry se poocho ki woh hum mein dhoondne mein itne late kyun ho gaye ... jao jake duniya waalon se poocho ki woh hamari awaaz sunane mein itne late kyun ho gaye ... jao jake sapno se poocho ki woh sach hone mein itne late kyun ho gaye"

"Go and ask the film industry as to why was it so late in finding me ... go and ask the people of the world as to why were they so late in hearing my voice ... go and ask the dreams as to why were they so late in becoming a reality"

Moreover the politics run in the Bollywood, Amitabh talks also about that.

Likewise this movie falls under the category of self help movie because it's also teach and giving moral lesson and also gives the facts and figure of life.





 For example- Akshara teaches the lesson of "ABCD of LIFE" to Amitabh and Danish and in general to the world because if someone wants to be great the things are required which expressed well in the lesson of "ABCD of LIFE". Move on, it is also talks about the natural facts and figures such as- in the world there is the importance of opposite. Nothing can be survive without the "Binary Opposition". The concept of night and day is the best example of that. Second thing is the speech or soliloquy of Amitabh on the death and life in graveyard.

Furthermore the facts of life is REALITY. "TRUTH" is the best option to overcome enemy or defeat the cruel idea of enemy that what Danish do. He tries to overcome his enemy, a journalist tries to reveal the secret of Danish and Amitabh but Danish move ahead. He believe that-

"Truth is the world's most beautiful idea",

and he tried to reveal his own secret but he meet with accident and at the end the soliloquy of Amitabh becomes truth and the sentence of Danish that if he will be finished, the voice of Amitabh will be finish. In other way Danish meet the secret of life-Death. This movie also talks about the reality of life that nothing is permanent, everything will be destroyed when time came though how much you got. This movie also throw the light on the work of journalist.

It can be also read in a context that in the film industry there is no space for "Truth". The reel world is far ahead from the truth.

Movie review of Reluctant Fundamentalist

"The Reluctant Fundamentalist"

                  - Mohsin Hamid

Directed by Mira Nair

Produced by Lydia Dean Pilcher

Written by Mohsin Hamid

                 Ami Boghani

Screenplay by William Wheeler

                Rutvik Oza

Based on The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamid

Starring:

Riz Ahmed

Kate Hudson

Liev Schreiber

Kiefer Sutherland

The novel “Reluctant Fundamentalist” is written by a Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid. It is based on 9/11 incident. This is adopted as a movie by Mira Nair. The protagonist is Changez Khan. The image was created by American as a superior, he has in his mind. He has an American dream. He works in America very well. But as time passes he comes to know that he exploiting his ‘‘own people’’. He himself drives thousands of people into unemployment.

  Afterward he comes to know that they are considered as a Pakistani terrorist instead of a Pakistani man. It is also constructed image by English people. Here Changez tries to remove this image through the postcolonial tool. He is coming from third world country, so he knows very well about the aspects of post colonialism. And through this tool he tries to remove the identity which is imposed or constructed. He tries to remove the identity through the basic fundamental. He comes into introduction of two different persons, who are talked about fundamental at the surface level.

For example –

Jim Cross – ‘‘we do that by focusing on the fundamentals’’ and

Mustafa Fazil – ‘‘our only hopes as a people are the fundamental truths…’’

  Everybody talked about fundamental but the thing is that nobody knows the basic fundamental. Changez tries to gave basic fundamentals like, 

      ‘‘Acts of love’’ and ‘‘Humanity’’.

  Colonial people forget these two aspects. So through the mouthpiece of Changez, Mohsin Hamid tries to reached these two aspects to the people through postcolonial. American people created the image of Pakistani as a terrorist. Moreover the component represent as a dull, dark and deserted country. The identity of them is as a terrorist. Here in this movie it shows that how the companies of America run and how they exploited other countries. Moreover hero tries to remove that identity which was imposed or created by American elites for their own profit. This movie we saw on the base of Edward Said’s “Orientalism”. “Orientalism” is also talked the same thing. He criticized on the mentality of American People that they have the habit to see Orient people as an inferior and also imposed the mentality of them on the people of Orient so they also seemed themselves as an inferior.