The Buddhist Caves in Ajanta are approximately 30 rock-cut Buddhist cave monuments dating from the 2nd century BCE to about 480 CE in the Aurangabad district of Maharashtra state in India.The caves include paintings and rock-cut sculptures described as among the finest surviving examples of ancient Indian art, particularly expressive paintings that present emotions through gesture, pose and form.
They are universally regarded as masterpieces ofBuddhst religious art. The caves were built in two phases, the first starting around the 2nd century BCE and the second occurring from 400 to 650 CE, according to older accounts, or in a brief period of 460–480 CE according to later scholarship.The site is a protected monument in the care of theArchaeological Survey of India,and since 1983, the Ajanta Caves have been aUNESCOWorld Heritage Site.
The Ajanta Caves constitute ancient monasteries and worship-halls of different Buddhist traditions carved into a 75-metre (246 ft) wall of rock.The caves also present paintings depicting the past livesand rebirths of the Buddha, pictorial tales from Aryasura's Jatakamala, and rock-cut sculptures of Buddhist deities.Textual records suggest that these caves served as a monsoon retreat for monks, as well as a resting site for merchants and pilgrims in ancient India.While vivid colours and mural wall-painting were abundant in Indian history as evidenced by historical records.They are universally regarded as masterpieces of Buddhist religious art. The caves were built in two phases, the first starting around the 2nd century BCE and the second occurring from 400 to 650 CE, according to older accounts, or in a brief period of 460–480 CE according to later scholarship.The site is a protected monument in the care of the Archaeological Survey of India, and since 1983, the Ajanta Caves have been a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
So, let's talk about the exhibition. The exhibition was held at KHODIDAS PARMAR ART GALLERY, SARDARNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR.
Marxismwas introduced byKarl Marx. Most Marxist critics, who were writing in what could chronologically be specified as the early period of Marxist literary criticism, subscribed to what has come to be called "vulgar Marxism." In this thinking of the structure of societies, literary texts are one register of thesuperstructure, which is determined by the economicbaseof any given society. Therefore, literary texts are a reflection of the economic base rather than "the social institutions from which they originate" for all social institutions, or more precisely human–social relationships, are in the final analysis determined by the economic base.
According to Marxists, even literature itself is a social institution and has a specific ideological function, based on the background and ideology of the author. The English literary critic and cultural theorist Terry Eagleton defines Marxist criticism this way: "Marxist criticism is not merely a 'sociology of literature', concerned with how novels get published and whether they mention the working class. Its aim is to explain the literary work more fully; and this means a sensitive attention to its forms, styles and, meanings. But it also means grasping those forms, styles and meanings as the product of a particular history."
1.Marxist criticism on the movie Modern Times (Charlie Chaplin, 1936)
A classic movie by Charlie Chaplin is a Marxist film? Chaplin was always sensitive to social problems. England has always been the land of socialist battles. Highgate cemetery is a sufficient proof of how deeply related England is to Marx’s life.
This film could be seen as a social accusation toward industrialization . If one wants to better understand what proletariat alienation is, this is the film to see. This movie is based on a simple concept which it explains well through stereotypical and ironic characters.
A society that works in a crazy context cannot be fit for man, who continuously searches to be free. If it is only a critical film more than constructive one, it reflects a particular aspect of industrial proletariat problems, a very old problem that is a socialist vindication but at the same time, is the basis of Marx’s philosophy.
2.Ecocritical criticism
Ecocriticism isthe study of literature and environment from an interdisciplinary point of view where all sciences come together to analyze the environment and brainstorm possible solutions for the correction of the contemporary environmental situation.
Ecocriticism asks us to examine ourselves and the world around us,critiquing the way that we represent, interact with, and construct the environment, both “natural” and manmade. At the heart of ecocriticism, many maintain, is “a commitment to environmentality from whatever critical vantage point.”
2.Ecocritical criticism on the movie Avatar.
One can easily identify the same core aspects of criticism in various articles. These can be summarized as the notion of a strong pro-environmentalism linked to a romanticized picture of nature and a relentless condemnation of the western world, if not the whole human kind. This goes along with a stance of anti-military and the praise of a religion which sees God in every animate and inanimate being and therefore encourages the strong bond with nature which is described in the reviews. All of these are notions often associated with the mindsets of Leftists and the Hippie counterculture of the 1960s, which are mentioned as well. Another remark to mention is that of a stereotyped good vs evil -scheme leaving no room for grey areas. In addition, some of the reviewers claim that the fancy filmmaking is meant to hide a bland storyline and at the same time, is the only thing that keeps the politically unconcerned audience entertained.
3.Feminist criticism
Feminist criticism is concerned with "the ways in which literature (and other cultural productions) reinforce or undermine the economic, political, social, and psychological oppression of women".For example, feminist critics may claim that certain male writers address their readers as if they were all men and exclude the female reader. Much feminist literary theory reminds us that the relationship between men and women in society is often unequal and reflects a particular patriarchal ideology.
3. Feminist criticism on The Hours (2002)
Director: Stephen Daldry
Who’s more of a feminist than Virginia Woolf? It’s no wonder that this film, which acts as a loving tribute to Woolf’s work, focuses not on one, but three women: Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman) herself, struggling to write her hit novel Mrs Dalloway in 1923, Laura Brown (Julianne Moore), an L.A. housewife who in 1951 is suffering from clinical depression, and book editor Clarissa Vaughn (Meryl Streep) in present day New York, who is planning a party for her friend and former lover Richard, who aptly nicknames her Mrs Dalloway.
4.Queer criticism
Queer literary criticism denotes a range of approaches to textual scholarship that analyze and contest heteronormative structures and relations of meaning.Queer Theory (QT) is both theory and political action. Definition is impossible, but QT can be summarised as exploring the oppressive power of dominant norms, particularly those relating to sexuality, and the immiseration they cause to those who cannot, or do not wish to, live according to those norms.Stories help shape cultures and if you hear no stories about something that is a part of you then, to my mind, that part of you can't possibly develop and mature at the same pace as the rest.
4.Queer criticism on Raging sun, Raging sky
Raging Sun, Raging Sky
A lot of the films on this list have been chosen for their social and political resonance alongside their entertainment value, but I have to be honest about the core virtue of Julian Hernandez’s 140-minute epic of desire and physicality: it’s really, really,reallyhot. The third in a trilogy of sensual gay experimental films by the Mexican auteur the other two, A Thousand Clouds of Peace and Broken Sky, are both well worth your while is the most ravishing of the lot, tangling the restless earthly bodies and urges of young gay men with eerie spiritual challenges and complications. It’s queer eroticism given quasi-mythic grandeur.
The Home and the World is a 1916 novel by Rabindranath Tagore. The book illustrates the battle Tagore had with himself, between the ideas of Western culture and revolution against the Western culture. These two ideas are portrayed in two of the main characters, Nikhilesh, who is rational and opposes violence, and Sandip, who will let nothing stand in his way from reaching his goals. These two opposing ideals are very important in understanding the history of the Bengal region and its contemporary problems.
There is much controversy over whether or not Tagore was attempting to represent Gandhi with Sandip. This is owing to Gyorgy Lukacs's 1922 review of the novel in the Berlin periodical, Die rote Fahne that is typically translated into English as "Tagore's Gandhi Novel"where he makes this mistaken suggestion. The novel could not have been based on Gandhi as it was published in 1916 and written before when Gandhi had just moved to India from South Africa and was not a known political figure. Gandhi gained political prominence in India in the context of the Khilafat movement of 1919, which was long after the novel's publication, and took over the leadership of the Indian National Congress in 1920.
The novel was translated into English by the author's nephew, Surendranath Tagore, with input from the author, in 1919. The Home and the World was among the contenders in a 2014 list by The Telegraph of the 10 all-time greatest Asian novels.
◼ The growth of individual characters.
Rabindranath Tagore, a worshipper of universal humanism, depicts two different streams of Nationalism in his novel The Home and the World. The first stream may be termed as Moderation that articulates essentially pure patriotism without showing the aggressiveness of the Extremism that is the other stream. Both these streams surely are built on the basis of ideals and the followers are motivated according to their beliefs. In this novel Nikhil is a personification of moderate politics whereas Sandip represents the aggressive nationalism throughout the novel.
1.Nikhilesh
Nikhil is seen and described as an educated and gentle man. He is from kulin aristocratic family of landlords, and his family prides themselves in beautiful women. However, Nikhil is different in that he married not only a poor woman, but also one who was not particularly attractive. He is also unpopular in the town because he has not joined them stating, "I am not running amuck crying Bande Mataram." In light of this, the police also suspect him of harbouring some "hidden protest." In reality, Nikhil considers himself to be more aware of his country's role in a broader sense, and refuses to take part in Swadeshi.
2. Bimala
Bimala is the wife of Nikhil. She is described as not very pretty and from a much more humble background than Nikhil. She loves her husband dearly, and enjoys being completely devoted to him. At the beginning of the novel, she seems to be confined to the traditional female role, and has no thoughts of entering the real world, even with persuasion from her husband. Her feelings make a rapid change with the occurrence of the Swadeshi movement, due to Sandip's radical influence.
3. Sandip
Sandip is the third major character in the novel, completing the love triangle. He is a guest in the home of Nikhil and Bimala and his revolutionary ideas and speeches have a significant impact on Bimala. He is very vocal in his anti-imperialistic views and is a skilled orator. Sandip represents characteristics that are directly opposite to those Nikhil possesses, thus drawing Bimala to Sandip. Bimala gets caught up in the ideas that Sandip presents as well as the man himself. Her seemingly increasing patriotism causes her to spend more and more time with Sandip, thereby solidifying the love triangle conflict. Sandip's first name is translated to "with dipa light fire flame".
4. Bara Rani
Bara Rani is Bimala's sister in law. Her relationship with Bimala is strained at best. She causes a lot of tension in the household. She also uses Nikhil to get the material items that she desires. Bimala constantly complains about her to Nikhil. Bara Rani taunts Bimala for her mingling with Sandip Babu.
5. Amulya
Bimala considers Amulya to be her adoptive son, whom she met from the Swadeshi Movement. When first they meet, Bimala asks him to acquire money for their cause. He lists wild schemes and plans, to which Bimala replies "you must not be childish" . After pondering their situation, Amulya resolves to murder the cashier for the money. Tagore uses him to symbolise the raw emotion and passion, yet lack of sympathy for others often encompassed by group or riot mentality. Amulya struggles, as any youth, between completing the goals of the movement and developing strong relationships on an individual level, such as with Bimala; this is made extremely difficult by Sandip's powerful influence.
◼ Psychological growth of the characters.
we can clearly see the psychological development of the characters like in the case of Bimala his realisation shows how it offers a good deal of development.
Towards the end of the book Sandip convinces Bimala to steal from her husband, Nikhil. While in the act of stealing 6,000 rupees, she comes to a realisation of the terrible crime she is committing, "I could not think of my house as separate from my country: I had robbed my house, I had robbed my country. For this sin my house had ceased to be mine, my country also was estranged from me". This represents a character turning point for Bimala: While in the act of thieving, she realises that Sandip is not only corrupting and robbing the nation, but encouraging her and others to do the same. Ultimately, she ends up giving the money to Sandip and receives unceasing praise from both Sandip and Amulya for her newly recognised sin.
However, Bimala realises that she has made a mistake by stealing the money from Nikhil and attempts to have Amulya pawn off some of her jewellery to replace the money. Amulya attempts to give the box back, but Sandip steals it and gives it back himself. This event allows both Amulya and Bimala to see that Sandip is concerned only with himself, thus allowing them to break free from part of his web. It is during this time that Bimala realises her power over Sandip by being able to easily make him jealous.
1) The poem is written before 120 years (approx.). Can you find any resemblance between the poem and the pandemic time?
This poem is exactly the chain situation of covid pandemic today.It related to it when the sage also talked about how God communicated his disbelief at the situation, wondering how the same king provide shelter to his own homeless subjects.Does he really fancy of giving me a home?"
2) Why do you think the King is angry on the Sage?
The king gets angry on the sage because he reminds the king it was the wrong time to have spent his riches in building a temple in the same year that the people of his land were struck by a calamity, and came begging at his door, only to be turned away by the king.
3) Why do you think the Sage denies to enter in the temple?
The sage, who denies to enter the temple because he tells the king that the temple he has built with "two million gold coins, does not have god inside. The king is enraged, calls the sage an atheist, and asks if such a grand temple could be empty. The sage replies that it isn't empty - it's filled with the king's pride.
4) Can there be any connection between the text of the poem and the verdict of Ayoydhya Ram Mandir?
Our Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid down the first bricks of the much contested Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. The ceremony was marked with much fanfare and celebrations. The celebrations were in the middle of a pandemic that has gripped the world. Meanwhile, many on social media found parallels between Tagore's poem and the Ram Mandir ceremony.
Following this, the poem went viral on social media, with many finding similarities between our times of coronavirus. Many lauded Tagore and pointed out that reading the poem at this time will 'send shivers down your spine'.
1.) How faithful is the movie to the original short story?
The movie and the story both are having almost relative perspective with in the concern of the main idea.It is that there are many poor and ignorant underprivileged people who have hidden talents which can blossom if their circumstances change. The astrologer in this story was forced to flee to a city from his little village.
2.) After watching the movie, have your perception about the short story, characters or situations changed?
Yes. The drastic changes where the story gets turn is in the character and the situation where is the protagonist was forced to flee from the village where both he and Guru Nayak lived, because the protagonist had stabbed Guru Nayak and left him for dead.
3.) Do you feel ‘aesthetic delight’ while watching the movie? If yes, exactly when did it happen? If no, can you explain with reasons?
I think within the concept of asthetic delight something is more relavent as per my view is "Guilt and Relief" playing a vital role in the story.The astrologer is not truly an astrologer, but merely a man masquerading as one. He has taken on a new, fabricated identity to escape the just consequences of his attempt at murder. The astrologer no longer has any opportunity to practice authenticity; his livelihood, marriage, and very survival are all predicated on lies. Narayan uses the astrologer to contemplate the ways in which fear and guilt can push an individual to live an unauthentic, self-deceiving.
4.) Does screening of movie help you in better understanding of the short story?
Yes .By watching the film screening it stucks into our mind that how all the thing happening in the story works and it also denotes that how each ane every small thing can make huge change.Ee get to know that it arouses curiosity as something might have taken place on a particular day. The title is very interesting and creates curiosity in the mind of the readers. The writer extended the word with a particular purpose as it was used by Churchill.'Everyone has his day'.
5.) Was there any particular scene or moment in the story that you think was perfect?
The scene where The astrologer manages to convince Guru Nayak that his attacker is dead. He was killed by a lorry. The astrologer convinces Guru Nayak that his attacker is indeed dead. With this information, Guru Nayak is satisfied and pays the astrologer for this information.This scene creates a moment where it seems the perfection of relativity.
6.) If you are director, what changes would you like to make in the remaking of the movie based on the short story “An Astrologer’s Day” by R.K.Narayan?
If I redirect the movie based on the story then I will make changes in plot and the climax where , it can be seen that the climax comes not at the end of the story, but approximately halfway through, at the moment when the stranger's face is illuminated by the match that lights his cheroot and in astrology too I feel they create a sense of disgrace which could harm your own thinking.
.jpg)
