A Room of One's Own by Virginia Woolf | Summary and Analysis | Christy Clement

                                         A Room Of One's Own by Virginia Woolf

Virginia Woolf's essay A Room of One's Own is a milestone of twentieth-century feminist study. It explores the history of women in literature through an unconventional and largely instigating inquiry of the social and material conditions needed for the writing of literature. These conditions — rest time, seclusion, and financial independence — capitalize all learned output, but they're particularly applicable to understanding the situation of women in the literary tradition because women, historically, have been slightly deprived of those fundamental prerequisites.

  In her investigation of this idea, Woolf launches several stimulating sociological and aesthetic reviews. She reviews not only the state of women's literature but also the state of education, both theoretical and literal, concerning women. She also elaborates an aesthetics grounded on the principle of" incandescence, “the ideal state in which everything that's simply particular is consumed in the intensity and truth of one's art.

Woolf, giving a lecture on women and fiction, tells her audience she isn't sure if the content should be what women are like; the fiction women write; the fiction written about women or a combination of the three. Rather, she has come up with “one minor point-- a woman must have money and a room of her own if she's to write fiction. “She says she'll use a fictional narrator whom she calls Mary Beton as her alter ego to relate how her studies on the lecture mingled with her day-to-day life.

  A week ago, the narrator crosses a field at the fictional Oxbridge university, tries to enter the library, and passes by the church. She's intercepted at each station and reminded that women aren't allowed to do similar things without accompanying men. She goes to lunch, where the excellent food and comforting atmosphere make for good discussion. Back at Fernham, the women's college where she's staying as a guest, she has a medium banquet. She latterly talks with a friend of hers, Mary Seton, about how men's colleges were funded by kings and independently affluent men, and how finances were raised with difficulty for the women's college. She and Seton denounce their mothers, and their sex, for being so impoverished and leaving their daughters so little. Had they been independently affluent, maybe they could have established fellowships and secured similar luxuries for women. Still, the narrator realizes the obstacles they faced.  Entrepreneurship is at odds with child-rearing, and only for the last 48 years have women indeed been allowed to keep the money they earned. The narrator thinks about the effects of wealth and poverty on the mind, about the abundance of males and the poverty of ladies, and the effects of tradition or lack of tradition on the author.

Searching for answers, the narrator explores the British Museum in London. She finds there are innumerous books written about women by men, while there are hardly any books by women on men. She selects a dozen books to try and come up with an answer for why women are poor. Rather, she locates a multitude of other contents and a contradictory collection of men's opinions on women. One male professor who writes about the inferiority of women angers her, and it occurs to her that she has become angry because the professor has written angrily. Had he written"dispassionately," she'd have paid further attention to his argument, and not to him. After her outrage dissipates, she wonders why men are so angry if England is a patriarchal society in which they've all the power and money. Maybe holding power produces wrathfulness out of fear that others will take one's power. She posits that when men express the inferiority of women, they're claiming their superiority. The narrator believes self-confidence, a demand to get through life, is frequently attained by considering other people inferior about oneself. Throughout history, women have served as models of inferiority who enlarge the superiority of men.

  The narrator is thankful for the heritage left her by her aunt. Before that, she had gotten by on loathsome, slavish odd jobs available to women before 1918. Now, she reasons that since nothing can take down her money and security, she need not detest or enslave herself to any man. She now feels free to" think of things in themselves", she can judge art, for example, with greater detachment.

The narrator investigates women in Elizabethan England, puzzled why there were no women authors in that rich literary period. She believes there's a deep connection between living conditions and creative works. She reads a history book, learns that women had many rights in the period, and finds no material about middle-class women. She imagines what would have occurred had Shakespeare had an equally blessed sister named Judith. She outlines the possible course of Shakespeare's life grammar school, marriage, and work at a theatre in London. His sister, still, wasn't equal to attending school and her family discouraged her from independent study. She was married against her will as a teenager and ran off to London. The men at a theatre denied her the chance to work and learn the craft. Impregnated by a theatrical man, she committed suicide.

  The narrator believes that no woman of the time would have had a similar genius, "For genius like Shakespeare's isn't born among labouring, uninstructed, base people." Nonetheless, some kind of genius must have existed among women also, as it exists among the working class, although it never translated to paper. The narrator argues that the difficulties of writing-- especially the disregard of the world to one's art-- are compounded for women, who are laboriously disrespected by the male establishment. She says the mind of the artist must be" incandescent" like Shakespeare's, without any obstacles. She argues that the reason we know so little about Shakespeare's mind is that his work filters out his personal" grievances and spites and aversions. “His absence of particular complaint makes his work" free and unhampered."

The narrator reviews the poetry of several Elizabethan aristocratic ladies and finds that outrage toward men and insecurity mar their writing and prevent intellect from shining through. The writer Aphra Behn marks a turning point for a middle-class woman whose hubby's death forced her to earn her living.  Behn's triumph over circumstances surpasses indeed her excellent writing. Behn is the first female writer to have" freedom of the mind." Innumerous 18th-century middle-class female writers and beyond owe a great debt to Behn's breakthrough. The narrator wonders why the four celebrated and divergent 19th-century female novelists George Eliot, Emily and Charlotte Brontë, and Jane Austen-- all wrote novels; as middle-class women, they would have had less privacy and a lesser leaning toward writing poetry or plays, which demand smaller attention. Still, the 19th-century middle-class woman was trained in the art of social observation, and the novel was a natural fit for her aptitudes.

  The narrator argues that traditionally male values and contents in novels similar to war are valued more than feminine ones, similar to drawing-room character studies. Female authors, again, are frequently forced to condition their writing to meet the necessary criticism that their work was insubstantial. Indeed, if they did so without outrage, they turned off from their original fancies and their books suffered. The early 19th-century female novelist also had no real tradition from which to work; they lacked indeed a prose style fit for a woman. The narrator argues that the novel was the chosen form for these women since it was a fairly new and pliable medium.

The narrator takes down a recent debut novel called Life's Adventure by Mary Carmichael. Viewing Carmichael as a successor of the female writers she has reflected on, the narrator dissects her book. She finds the prose style uneven, maybe as a rebellion against the" flowery" character of women's writing. She reads on and finds the simple judgment” ‘Chloe liked Olivia.’ “She believes the idea of fellowship between two women is groundbreaking in literature, as women have historically been viewed in literature only about men. By the 19th century, women grew more complex in novels, but the narrator still believes that each gender is limited in its knowledge of the opposite sex. The narrator recognizes that for whatever internal greatness women have, they've not yet made an important mark in the world compared to men. Still, she believes that the great men in history frequently depended on women for supplying them with “some encouragement, some renewal of creative power" that other men could not. She argues that the creativity of men and women is different and that their writing should reflect their differences. The narrator believes Carmichael has important work to do in recording the lives of women, and Carmichael will have to write without anger against men. Also, since everyone has a blind spot about themselves, only women can fill out the portrayal of men in literature. Still, the narrator feels Carmichael is"no further than a clever girl," indeed though she bears no traces of wrathfulness or fear. In a hundred years, the narrator believes, and with money and a room of her own, Carmichael will be a better writer.

  The pleasing sight of a man and woman getting into a taxi provokes an idea for the narrator that the mind contains both a manly and female part and for" complete satisfaction and happiness," the two must live in harmony. This combination, she believes, is what poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge described when he said a great mind is" androgynous”. The androgynous mind transmits emotion without impediments. It is naturally creative, incandescent and concentrated." Shakespeare is a fine model of this androgynous mind, though it's harder to find current instances in this “stridently sex-conscious" age. The narrator blames both sexes for bringing about this self-consciousness of gender.

Woolf takes over the speaking voice and responds to two anticipated criticisms against the narrator. First, she says she deliberately didn't express an opinion on the relative merits of the two genders-- especially as writers-- since she doesn't believe such a judgment is possible or desirable. Second, her audience may believe the narrator laid too much emphasis on material things, and that the mind should be suitable to overcome poverty and lack of isolation. She cites a professor's argument that of the top poets of the last century, nearly all were well-educated and rich. Without material things, she repeats, one cannot have intellectual freedom, and without intellectual freedom, one cannot write great poetry. Women, who have been poor since the beginning of time, have understandably not yet written great poetry. She also responds to the question of why she insists women's writing is important. As an avid reader, the exorbitantly mannish writing in all classes has dissatisfied her recently. She encourages her audience to be themselves and" think of effects in themselves. “She says that Judith Shakespeare still lives within all women and that if women are given money and privacy in the coming century, she'll be revived.

Money and the Englishman by Nirad C. Chaudhari- An Analysis

 

Nirad C Chaudhuri at the opening of the chapter says that he did now not give a good deal of interest to the economic stipulations and issues of England due to the fact he was no longer in a position to recognize them. He is now not only ignorant of the challenge but even contemptuous of it. But at the same time, he stresses the truth that economics as a problem can't be prevented because it has its position in day-to-day human life and plays an important position in deciding the improvement of a country. He points out that he will talk about the Englishman’s relations with money from a moral standpoint.

 Nirad C Chaudhari explains that it is very difficult to get information from the English about their habits with money. Here hypocrisy rules the roost. He had to resort to indirect means to get the suitable information out of an Englishman.

 In the chapter Nirad C Chaudhuri sings the praise of the Englishman for his general ‘non-attachment’ to money; and, at the same time, compares and contrasts it with what Chaudhuri terms ‘religious symptoms of the love of cash in the Hindu Society’. There have been no non-secular signs and symptoms of cash in an English home, in contrast to in India where, at home and in shops, Lakshmi or Ganesh is worshipped. He failed to find in the residence of an English family a non-public shrine for a god or goddess of money and such a shrine is exactly the component one can't escape noticing in each normal Hindu home. In the shops, too, he missed the photo of any god who was probable to be a counterpart of 'Ganesa’.

 

About the religious practices at home, he has this to say: ‘‘Our religiosity covers every factor of money-making, including the dishonest and violent. There were no more dedicated worshippers of the Goddess Kali than the Thugs.” And in contrast “Christianity does not seem to have been directly involved in financial transactions, and so far, as I have read the Anglican liturgy I do not find in it any reference to money-making although there are prayers for protection against natural calamities.”

 About the Indian pundits he says, there is no different country in the world today in which the tribe of pundits known as economists is held in greater honor. He asserts that India has become an El Dorado for every type of economist from each part of the world. We have formed here an economic cult which is a combination of American, English, German, French, Soviet, and Japanese economies. In fact, as Chaudhuri asserts, the economic cult is so closely related to the religious cult in the Hindu society that it prompts him to comment: “Ever since the Rigvedic age we have had economic gods and we shall continue to have them. Just as we do not even now leave medical treatment solely to the doctor or the surgeon, but requisition the priest and the astrologer. So also, we call upon the gods to help us in our economic and technological ventures even in what is described in current economic jargon as the public sector. For instance, when the great dam at Bhakra was formally opened there were Vedic rites to ensure its success.” In the personal sphere, Indians still rely upon the occult powers for their success.

 

He also asserts that in his society money-making is an open conspiracy, if it is a conspiracy at all. We do not, however, regard it as such. In his eyes, it is an occupation that can be avowed with pride by every honest and honorable man. Indeed, as long as we remain in the world we are expected to put money above everything else.

 

Chaudhuri failed to see in the Englishman’s mindset to money the sordidness he finds amongst Indians. According to him, it is unthinkable to find in India the smoothness with which English humans put through their economic transactions. They pay their dues immediately and regularly, very readily part with money and without a second’s thought, trust individuals in money matters. All this offers a strong contrast to our society in which Chaudhuri says, the willingness to pay decreases as the ability to pay increases. Chaudhuri used to be exceedingly impressed by the industrial honesty of the English people. They comply with the principle that the love of money, in order to be enjoyed, needs to be restricted. Moreover, the Englishman believes in dwelling in style. He is no longer involved in hoarding money like the Indian. 

 

The author tells us that spending is the positive urge of the English people. For them spending is ideal and frugality is the practical correlative of that ideal. But for Indians, hoarding is a pleasure as well a virtue and spending, a strict duty but normally a pain. The English always expected to live in style and they were careless about money.

 

What excites him is the fact that the banks and shops are so lenient and honest in cash matters. Commercial honesty in England amazes him. He calls it a virtue of the highest order. But English people refrain from all types of ‘shop-talk. But in India ``money-making is an open conspiracy.” In a lighter vein, Nirad Chaudhuri remarks that money-making is as significant as love-making in the West.

 

English society deems it very undignified to openly discuss monetary problems and strategies of acquisition, a very unusual habit in humans who are described universally as shopkeepers and capitalistic. But this displays certain negative elements of the English character. The financial world is truly divided into two: the party of spenders and the party of savers. The difference is between the misers and the spendthrifts. But this is the case from the point of the income of view- “...love for cash in order to be enjoyed need to be restricted”.  The scene is one-of-a-kind when it comes to spending- “On this side, there was as a whole lot assertiveness as there was once secrecy on the other ''. Nirad Chaudhuri perceives spending to be the fantastic urge of the English people and saving as a corrective measure. He offers an insight into the psyche of Indians and the English in relation to money. For the Indians, hoarding is a pleasure. Unlike the English, we can't spend money in a planned and deliberate manner. Money is synonymous with temptation, passion, and panic.

 

The range and abundance of commodities in a shop amaze a man who has in no way been exposed to the thinking of ‘choosing’ from amongst items- “I suppose I need to have gone mad if I had to figure out about clothes, or furniture, or glass, or china”. There is a hierarchy in spending too. London has its very own share of low-cost and pricey stores. But Cambridge is for the middle-range. The English middle-class is not comfortable in a Bond-street shop. They feel shy because of their sartorial style, which is now not up to its mark when in contrast to those of the immaculately attired shop assistants. But the traveller in Nirad Chaudhuri enjoys to its heart’s content- “I can hardly ever say how it gladdened the heart of a spendthrift in both principal and...my means...to find myself in a country in which spending was once respectable. I appreciated the English people for their devotion to spending that's the way the cash goes”. Nirad Chaudhuri’s experience with the English financial affair is an eye-opener. He feels that people in England are fond of ‘style-in-living’. There is continually a desire for a high standard of living. So, “the fine use of money is to spend it on the desirable things of life”. A notion that is an anathema to the Indian mindset.

 

The Tell-Tale Heart By Edgar Allan Poe- Summary and Analysis

 The Tell-Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe- Summary and Analysis

Edgar Allen Poe is one of the greatest names in American literature. Renowned as a poet, short writer, playwright and novelist, his name has become synonymous with writings on the macabre and the grotesque. Poe was born on 19 January 1809 in Boston, Massachusetts to actors Elizabeth and David Poe. He gained considerable reputation as a critic and an editor. His first collection of short stories, Tales of the Grotesque and Arabesque was published in 1839. It contained one of his most famous stories, ‘The Fall of the House of Usher’. Poe’s well-known poem, ‘The Raven’ was published in 1845 and it brought him fame in America and abroad.

Elements of his largely tragic life have made their way into his writing which is typically melancholic and morbid. His works boldly explore aspects of human life that are often hidden. He used his compressed, tightly woven prose style to the utmost effect in stories like “The Cask of Amontillado’ (1846), “The Purloined Letter” (1845) and “The Murders in the Rue Morgue” (1841).

Poe died on 13 October 1849. Poe’s contribution to literature has been acknowledged by critics and he remains popular to this day. He is widely regarded as the father of the American horror story. He is also credited with inventing the modern detective story with a number of stories featuring his fictional detective Dupin.

‘The Tell-Tale Heart’ was published in January 1843 in a magazine called Pioneer. The story, narrated in the first person, recounts an act of murder. The unnamed narrator tells us how he carefully planned and carried out the murder of the old man he lived with.

The unknown narrator in the first person tells us in the beginning that madness had sharpened his senses and his hearing is acute. He could even hear voices from heaven and hell. But he was dreadfully nervous and haunted by an image of an eye of an old man. It was the eye of a vulture, a pale blue eye. The narrator states that he did not have anything against the old man and he loved him. He was also not interested in the money of the old man. But he couldn’t stand the sight of his eye. He considered it to be evil in nature. 

The narrator tells us how meticulously he planned the murder of the old man. In the process he explains that this planning and strategy could not be done by someone who is mad. He informs that every night at 12 o’ clock, he would peep into the room of the old man with an intention to murder him. For seven days he did this routine. He couldn’t do anything because the old man’s eye was closed. He would return annoyingly as it is his “Evil Eye” which motivates him to murder him. Ironically, in the morning he would ask the old man about his health.

The narrator continues his story and on the eighth day of his routine which was the day he murdered the old man he entered his room with much caution. He thought about his wise strategy and laughs at the old man’s lack of awareness. However, the old man sensed something and moved in his bed. The narrator tells us that he did not feel afraid as he knew that the old man cannot see him in the darkness. As he quietly entered the room, the old man heard some noise and asked who was there in the room. The narrator informs us that he did not move an inch for an hour knowing that the old man is awake. Then he hears a frightening cry from the old man sitting alert in his bed. He tells us that the old man knows not of his presence but he can assume his death impending upon him. Afterwards, he gradually shows the lantern light on the old man and realizes that his hateful eye is open. It makes him angry. He does not notice his face but the blue hateful eye that troubles him. The sight of his eye fills him with rage. 

Moreover, as he brags of his expanded hearing sense, he hears the beating of the heart of the old man. He attempts to remain quiet however the beating of the old man’s heart builds his displeasure. The storyteller becomes restless and can't bear the sound any longer. The storyteller takes the help of the bed and holds it immovably "over his head". The elderly person, gradually and steadily, suffocates and his pulse stops. The storyteller takes a murmur of relief realizing that his eye will never trouble him again. He again challenges the individuals who question his mental soundness and tells them to know that they ought to consider how he concealed the dead body so as nobody can track down it. He dissects each part of the dead body cautiously. Then, at that point, he removes the planks from the floor and conceals the pieces there ensuring nothing remains behind. A while later, he puts the boards down once more, with incredible consideration, with the goal that nobody can obtain some proof of his murder. He washed off the stains from the floor.

At the point when he gets done, it was 4 o’ clock in the morning. Somebody thumps at the door. He tranquilly opens the door and understands that three police officers have shown up. They have been called upon by one of the neighbors who heard the yell of the elderly person. They are here to explore the incident. He lets them inside and informs that he was the one who yelled as a result of a bad dream. He accompanies them all around the house and advises them to do their search. He even leads them to the elderly person's room and offers them seats to stay there and rest. He admits that his quiet conduct caused the cops to accept his clarification and they sat there without any suspicion. They talk persistently and sooner or later; the storyteller wishes they should leave. Gradually and slowly, he becomes restless and his serenity disappears. Meanwhile, he hears some sound. From the outset, he believes it to be inside his head however at that point he understands that the sound isn't inward rather it is in the room. He talks louder and tries to cover it up yet it gets stronger with the progression of time. It seems like the sound of a heart beating from under the planks. 

He strolls forward and backward in the room to make some commotion however the sound increases. Notwithstanding, the police officers appear not to hear it and they are occupied with talking and grinning obviously. The storyteller thinks the police officers know and they are snickering at his ineptitude. He says he continually endured their grins and the sound of the heartbeat. In the end, he can't stand it any longer and admits his wrongdoing. He advises the police officers to take away the planks and to track down the ruined body of the elderly person and his beating heart.

In this story, Poe shows us the significance of emotional wellness. The story shows that psychological sickness can drive an individual to the cruelest of actions. Mental issues can lead people to act perilously with practically no intention. The storyteller, in the story, experiences some psychological issues which lead to his annihilation. He continually denies the way that he experiences dysfunctional behavior yet his abnormal activities demonstrate that he experiences some mental issue. He is fixated on killing the elderly person for reasons unknown and notices him for seven progressive evenings. The storyteller, being paranoiac, kills the elderly person out of dread yet that is certifiably not an adequate explanation.

Besides, he additionally rejoices in the second when he chokes out the elderly person, holding the bed firmly over his face. This occasion makes him a sadist; who appreciates causing torment for other people. This occasion likewise shows that he has some mental issues. Through these occasions, Poe exhibits that a person's mental wellbeing is just about as significant as his actual wellbeing. The thumping of the heart happens inside the storyteller himself. It is informed in the start of the story that he is over-delicate. He can hear and feel things that others can't. Toward the end of the story, there is no thumping heart under the boards. Unmistakably, the storyteller, who has quite recently completed the terrible demonstration of eviscerating a dead body, can't adapt to the profoundly inner strength required when the police are looking through the house. These two variables cause his pulse to speed up to the point that his pulse is beating in his ears so noisily that he can't stand the mental tension any more. Consequently, he admits to his terrible deed. The storyteller's heart makes him a convict himself.

Is There an Indian Way of Thinking? by A.K. Ramanujan- Summary and Analysis

 Is There an Indian Way of Thinking? A.K. Ramanujan- Summary and Analysis

Stanislavskian Approach

In the first section of the essay, A.K. Ramanujan uses the Stanislavskian approach and asks a few questions emphasising on different words in each question. The first question is ‘Is’ there an Indian way of thinking? Here ‘is’ is given emphasis. The answer he gives is there was an Indian way of thinking, now there isn’t any. The thinking was there with pundits, the vaidyas and in the old texts. But he also states that on the contrary, India never changes according to the modern contexts. Indians are traditional by nature and they still think in terms of the Vedas.

In the second question, Is there ‘an’ Indian way of thinking? Emphasis is given to ‘an’. The answer is there is no single way of thinking in India. In fact, there are different ways. There are great and little traditions, ancient and modern thinking, rural and urban thinking, classical and folk thinking etc. So, under the apparent diversity, there is unity. Nehru calls this ‘unity in diversity’.

In the third question, Is there an ‘Indian’ way of thinking? The emphasis is given to the word Indian. Ramanujan answers that what we see in India is nothing special to India. India is a confluence of different cultures and traditions. Many new cultures came here and we received them and made it our own. There were a lot of borrowings in Indian culture. So, there is no Indian way of thinking.

In the fourth question, Is there an Indian way of ‘thinking’? the emphasis is given to the word thinking. The answer Ramanujan gives is Indians don’t think at all. The real thinking is in the west which is materialistic and rational. He explains that Indians have no philosophy, positive science or psychology but only religion. In India matter is subordinated to spirit and rational thought to feeling and intuition.

Thus, in the 1st part of his essay, Ramanujan states how India is perceived differently at different stages by different people and from different perspectives.

Instance from Personal Life

In the second part of the essay, Ramanujan uses a frame from his personal life which is about his father to show the inconsistency in Indian thinking. He states that his father’s clothes and life style represented his inner life style as well. He was a south Indian Brahmin and he wore dhotis and white turbans. But over his dhoti he used to wear western jackets and even used western shoes instead of Indian sandals. He wore his shoes to the university but took it off while entering the inner quarters of his house.

His father was a mathematician and astronomer but at the same time a Sanskrit scholar and an expert astrologer. He was visited by English mathematicians and American scholars but also by local astrologers and orthodox pundits. He talked religiously about Bhagavad Gita but with the same tongue used to talk about Bertrand Russell and Ingersoll, the modern philosophers. Ramanujan describes that such contradictions are at the heart of Indian way of thinking. It is both exclusive and inclusive.

Inconsistency in Indian Thinking

In the next part of his essay, Ramanujan points out that both English and modern Indians have been dismayed and angered by this kind of inconsistency. They agree on the Indian trait of hypocrisy. Indians do not mean what they say and say different things at different times. He uses the concept of ‘Karma’ to explain this hypocrisy. Sheryl Daniel found that Indians used Karma and Thalavidhi (Head Writing) as explanations for the events happening around them. Karma implies the self’s past determining the present. It is an iron chain of cause and effect. But Thalavidhi is one’s fate inscribed arbitrarily at one’s birth on one’s forehead. It has no relation to one’s prior actions. Some thinkers believe that it happens because Indians have not developed a notion of ‘data’ of objective facts. In India it is all about subjective facts. Henry Kissinger and Sudhir Kakar also alludes to this view.

Zimmer praises Indians for not spending much time on objectivity that distinguishes self from non-self, interior from exterior etc. Naipaul calls this as a ‘defect of vision’. Another proof of inconsistency is the ability to distinguish self and non-self. Ramanujan gives an instance from Manusmriti and Kantian philosophy. Manusmriti lacks universality. ‘Man shall not kill’ is a universal law. But Manusmriti suggests different punishments based on caste and jati. A kshtriya and vaisya can escape punishment by paying a fine while a sudhra shall suffer corporal punishment.

Context-Free and Context-Sensitive Cultures

In the next part of the essay, Ramanujan talks about context- free and context-sensitive cultures. In Indian culture context-sensitivity is the preferred structure. Baudhayana enumerates the context-sensitive nature of Indians. He explains that the Brahmins of the north and those of the south are different and have aberrant practices. In the north, the southern ways would be wrong and vice versa. For Indians, each addition is really a subtraction from any universal law.

The author states that he doesn’t know any Indian texts which discuss values like the works of Plato. For eg., in Plato’s ‘Symposium’, he talks about finding beauty in every object and not concentrating on only one. He tells that no Indian texts comes without a context, till the 19^th century. The work will tell the reader of all the benefits he or she will get after reading the text. In other ways, they contextualise it. He gives the example of ‘Nadisastra’, which offers anyone his or her personal history.

In India, texts may be date less and anonymous but may have explicit contexts. The Ramayana and Mahabharata open with episodes that tell us why and under what circumstances they were composed. Every story is encased inside a meta story. Within the text, one tale is a context for another. 

Even space and time, the universal contexts are in India not uniform or neutral, but have properties, that affect those who dwell in them. In India it is believed that the soil in a village which produces crops for the people, affects their character. The houses here have mood and character. It could change the fortune and moods of the dwellers. Time too has been separated in India. Certain hours of the day, certain days of the week etc are auspicious or inauspicious (rahu kala). Certain units of time (yugas) breed certain kinds of maladies. Eg; Kali yuga.

Arts in India even depend on time and obey time’s changing moods and properties. For instance, the ragas of both north and south Indian classical music have their prescribed appropriate times for recitation. Thus, all things, even so-called non-material ones like space and time or caste, affect other things because all things are ‘substantial’ (dhatu).

Ramanujan exhorts that contrary to the notion that Indians are spiritual, they are really material minded. They are materialists, believers in substance. There is a constant flow of substance from context to object, from non-self to self.

Contradictions

In the last part of the essay, Ramanujan states that all societies have context-sensitive behaviour and rules. But the dominant ideal in every society is to be context-free. Protestant Christianity believes both the universal and the unique and insists that any member is equal to and like any other in the group. Yet in predominantly context-free societies, the counter movements tend to be towards the context-sensitive situations. In traditional cultures like India, where context-sensitivity rules, the dream is to be free of context. So ‘rasa’ in aesthetics, ‘moksha’ in the aims of life, ‘sanyasa’ in the life stages, ‘sphota’ in semantics and ‘bhakti’ in religion define themselves against a background of contextuality.

The author points out that kama, artha and dharma are all relational in their values and they are tied to place, time, personal character and social role. Moksha is the release from all relations. If brahmacharya is preparation for a fully relational life, grahasthasrama is a full realisation of it. Vanaprastha loosens the bonds, and sanyasa cremates all one’s past and present relations. The last of the great Hindu anti- contextual notions, bhakti, is different from the above and it denies the very need for the context.

In conclusion, Ramanujan makes a couple of observations about modernisation. One might see modernisation in India as a movement from the context-sensitive to the context-free in all realms. It is an erosion of contexts in principle. Print replaced palm-leaf manuscripts, making possible an open and equal access to knowledge irrespective of caste. The Indian constitution made the contexts of birth, region, sex and creed irrelevant, overthrowing Manusmriti. But every context-free situation in India becomes a context in itself.

 

 

 

Michael Branch- Ecocriticism: The Nature of Nature in Literary Theory and Practice- Analysis and Notes

 Michael Branch: Ecocriticism: The Nature of Nature in Literary Theory and Practice

In his study of primitivism in antiquity, Arthur Lovejoy observes that "one of the strangest, most mighty and most power elements in Western thought is the use of the term 'nature' to express the standard of human values, the identification of the appropriate with that which is 'natural' or 'according to nature’. There has traditionally been as little consensus about what constitutes the "natural" as there has been about what constitutes the "good." Considering the sixty-six meanings of nature which Lovejoy gives as proof for the polysemous nature of "nature", it is handy to admire the medieval notion of libri naturae, or the e book of nature. Indeed, no different textual content has been so broadly read, so little understood, so frequently invoked, and so successful of sustaining the range of interpretations projected upon it by way of human want and imagination. Each of the sixty-six meanings Lovejoy cites is each a department in the genealogy of an idea and a second in the records of our development of surroundings and our relationship to it. This essay is involved generally with the sixty-seventh meaning of nature with how cutting-edge ecophilosophy represents so vital an improvement in the evolution of our thoughts about nature, and with how ecological recognition is coming to be mirrored in current literary concept and practice.

Ecosophy is itself a constellation of complex and sometimes contradictory ideas not a sixty-seventh meaning so much as an exciting discursive climate in which a new conception of our relationship to nature is clearly emergent. Although ecological science has flourished in the late twentieth century, it is the metaphysical implications of ecology which are primarily responsible for the recent, unprecedented interest in ecological thinking. Only in the last twenty years has an awareness of such thinking entered the popular consciousness in America. Only in the last ten years have we begun in earnest to develop and debate philosophical and ethical implications of ecology, and only in the last few years has literary scholarship under the aegis of "ecocriticism “begun to explore constructions of environment in literary texts and theoretical discourse.

Ecosophical thinking has already begun to exert an influence upon the way literary texts are created, interpreted, and taught. Ecosophical critiques of the humanities' relative unresponsiveness to environmental issues are being amplified, and there is a greater acknowledgment of the need for environmental education throughout the humanities. As sensitivity to environmental problems continues to grow, literary theory and criticism entrenched as they are in related social and political contexts have increasingly come to reflect this sensitivity. As a measure of our culture's aesthetic sensibility and as a response to the changing circumstances of our lives, contemporary literature has also begun to demonstrate increasing environmental concern.

There are, however, better and older reasons for the influence of environmental awareness upon literary studies. Although ecosophical thinking sometimes appears unprecedented, there is a strong tradition of such thinking within the domain of literary art. First, questions about the proper role of humans in the cosmic scheme have always engaged the literary imagination, and concerns about maintaining or restoring a right relationship to nature are both thematically and symbolically present in the literature of every culture. For example, when Oedipus Rex opens with a plague upon the land, or The Bible begins with Adam and Eve's expulsion from the paradisiacal garden, or The Divine Comedy starts with Dante lost in the rank wildness of the dark wood, we understand that the ethical propriety of individual action is metaphorically conceived of in terms of the health and balance of nature. Second, literature has always struggled with questions of value comparable to those being asked by ecosophy. For example: should humans be valued as creations of God, as Milton might suggest, as creations of nature, as Rousseau might suggest, or as creations of culture, as Henry James might suggest? Should wilderness be feared, as it was by Puritan exegetes, studied scientifically, as it was by Enlightenment rationalists, or revered, as it was by Romantic poets? Third, literature has always been extremely concerned with the creation and recreation of a sense of place. For example, Frost's New England and Faulkner's Mississippi are the subjects rather than simply the settings of their work. Fourth, a great deal of literature has dealt explicitly with nature, whether to speculate upon our place within it, or to explore and express its beauty irrespective of human concerns. Both ecosophy and literature are born of a meeting between nature and culture: both deeply explore and often deeply question the relationships between humans and their natural surroundings.

Historically, literature has exerted a tremendous influence upon our changing conceptions of natural systems and our role within them. Homer provided his age with a vision of nature as a stage upon which gods and heroes enacted a cosmic drama. The classical ideas of nature's plenitude and the human place in nature's hierarchical system were formulated by Plato and Aristotle, respectively. The work of Hellenistic authors including Virgil and Horace first introduced the notion that nature exists as a serene retreat from the artificial environs of the city. During the middle ages, authors from Augustine to Aquinas promulgated the orthodox Christian view that nature was primarily significant as tangible evidence of God's design. Renaissance and early seventeenth-century writers such as Bacon and Descartes accelerated the emergence of the modern world view by applauding human control over natural forces. In the eighteenth century, Robert Bruns’s poetry and Gilbert White's natural history helped establish more congenial attitudes toward nature during the Age of Reason. In the nineteenth century, continental, English, and American romantic literature from Goethe to Wordsworth to Emerson led the criticism of industrial culture's hegemonic view of nature as mere commodity. And in the twentieth century, the most eloquent voices for an ecologically integrative vision of nature have come from literary artists as diverse as D.H. Lawrence, Aldous Huxley, John Muir, and Edward Abbey.

Literature has always conditioned our philosophical understanding of nature. Hence literary theory and practice also have a role in shaping our cultural constructions of environment. The phrases like the beautiful, the picturesque, the sublime, the scenic, the wild, etc. show the aesthetic categories by which our feelings for nature are understood. For the early Greeks, the work of art was itself the central metaphor for nature. Applying the ecosophical literary theory, a literary text might actually be likened to an ecosystem: it is a functional whole whose purposes are accomplished through integration of constituent elements. We continuously search it for knowledge of who we are and how to live in the world. Literature has so often provided the nexus between the interlocking contexts of nature and culture. Ecosophy’s new ideas about our relationship to the environment have begun to influence our critical approaches to literary texts.

Ecosophy and Poststructuralist Literary Theory.

Both theorists find similarity in the use of the word- ‘intertextuality’. Ecosophers locate value in natural wholes, and in the interrelationships, which comprise them. Similarly, poststructuralists such as Stanley Fish locate meaning within the context of a particular discourse community, and deny that it may exist independently of such a context. When Saussure maintains that the meaning of words exists only as a function of their differences from other words, he reinforces ecologist Paul Shepard’s contention that the relationships among things are as real as the things. When Derrida asserts that signification is achieved relationally through a play of signifiers, he anticipates ecosophist Neil Evernden’s claim that the self is created by a system of natural signifiers that “there is no such thing as an individual, only an individual-in-context. Whether in a linguistic or an ecosystemic context, no individual element may be understood in isolation from the generative and defining context of the systemic whole.

In post structuralist theory, emphasis upon contexted discourse insists that all readings are situated in a variety of interpenetrating contexts, that our interpretations of literary texts are relationally constructed rather than hermeneutically revealed. According to poststructuralists, the locus of literary meaning resides neither in the reader nor in the text, but resides indeterminately in the contextual interpenetration of the two.

Ecosophy challenges the assumption of objectivity by which human readers have interpreted the text of nature. It points to tree as an example. In addition to providing the paper which is the physical medium of this article, a tree is also a bird’s way of securing shelter, the soil’s way of preventing its being washed to the sea. If we interpret the tree to mean only dollars or furniture or firewood, we have misread the tree by ignoring the variety of other contexts which define its meaning and value. Thus, ecophilosophy mirrors literary theory in calling for an acknowledgment that meaning and value are determined through negotiated patterns of interrelationship rather than claims of objectivity.

Both post structuralist theory and ecosophy object to a certain kind of authority. Post structuralist theory argues that this unjust authority stems from a kind of “presence”, while ecosophy holds that it has its source in anthropocentrism. Post structuralist theory wishes to replace privileged discourse of all kinds with a concept of contextual discourse which better represents a plurality of voices. A comparable impulse is clearly visible in ecosophy’s wish to replace anthropocentricism with an affirmation of the value of ecosystemic wholes. It views the decentering of the human subject as an affirmation and as a liberation of life which results in a sense of interrelationship rather than a pattern of domination.

Ecologizing Literary Studies

Eco critic Cheryll Glotfelty offers that ecocriticism takes as its subject the interconnections between human culture and the material world, between the human and the nonhuman. Ecological literary criticism focuses specifically upon the cultural elements, language and literature and their relationship to the environment. 

Many Eco critics have catalyzed the “ecologizing” of literary studies by exploring the merits of the American nature writing tradition. The term “nature writing” now refers to the rich corpus of literature which takes nature, or the relationship between human and non-human nature, as its primary focus. As a discipline in the humanities, literary studies have traditionally been informed by a variety of anthropocentric assumptions about the centrality of humans in the enactment and authorization of literary texts. Under the influence of ecosophical thinking which is now entering the academy through numerous disciplines, literary scholars are presently using nature writing to question the very assumptions which have resulted in its critical neglect.

Peter Fritzell’s ‘Nature Writing and America, Essays on a Cultural Type’ (1990) argues that writing must be seen as an organic activity, as an artifact of the psychobiotic needs of the human organism.

Scott Slovic’s ‘Seeking Awareness in American Nature Writing’ (1992) employs environmental psychology to examine environmental consciousness and the ways in which nature writers attempt to inspire this consciousness among their readers.

Critics Karen Warren, Patrick Murphy and Jim Cheney have suggested provocative ways in which ecofeminist critical perspectives can enhance the ecosophical sensitivity of literary studies generally.

Scott Slovic and Terrell Dixon have recently edited a reader for the undergraduate composition courses, entitled ‘Being in the World: An Environmental Reader for Writers, and many teachers are documenting successful experiments using environmental writing in composition as well as literature courses.

The recent formation of ‘The Association for the Study of Literature and Environment (ASLE) further suggests that the ecosophical thinking which is already on the threshold of literary studies has begun to influence the way literature sees the environment and the way we as critics see the environment in and of literature.

Ecocriticism shifts critical focus from social relations toward natural relationships, and views the individual as a member of ecosystemic as well as human patterns of organization. Ecocriticism values highly the literary “sense of place”, not as a setting but as an essential expression of bonding with or alienation from a specific natural context. It looks to literature to provide speculation upon the relationship between human and nonhuman nature, and to suggest ways in which that relationship might be reinterpreted or reformed. It wishes to demonstrate how elements of literary texts work together, rather than how they may be taken apart. Ecocritics take seriously both the spiritual consequences of nature and the moral consequences of its violation.

Ecocriticism exists in constellation with and often in tremulous suspension between the post-modern intellectual movements of post structuralist literary theory and contemporary ecophilosophy. In order for ecocriticism to provide a meaningful framework for students of literature and the environment, ecocritics must wrestle with a simple paradox, which might be stated this simple way: “nature” is both a cultural construct and a grounding reality.

When Aristotle, Virgil, Augustine and Darwin wrote of “nature’, they meant very different things by the term; and as current political battles over land use constantly remind us, there is no consensus about the definition of nature even within our own historical moment. As a 67^th interpretation of nature in text and theoretical discourse, ecosophical criticism must attempt to chart a course away from our culture’s destructive and self- destructive relationship with the natural world.

 

 

Definition of Reading/ Types of Reading

 Reading as a Skill

Reading is a cognitive process that entails deciphering symbols in order to derive meaning. Reading is a process of actively generating meanings from words. Reading with a goal in mind allows the reader to focus their attention and guide information toward a specific objective. Although there are a variety of motivations for reading, the basic goal is to comprehend the text. Reading is a method of thinking. Word recognition, comprehension, fluency, and motivation are all part of the reading process. Making sense of print is what reading is all about. As a result, we must:

 1.     Recognise words which is the process of identifying words in print.

 2.     Comprehend words which is the process of constructing an understanding from them.

3.     Coordinate word recognition and meaning creation so that reading becomes automatic and accurate - a skill known as fluency.

 You can sometimes deduce meaning from print without knowing all of the words. You can sometimes recognise words without being able to deduce much meaning from them.

 Decoding the information in a text, or decoding written or printed symbols, is the process of reading. To put it another way, it is the process of converting a written word or printed sign into an appropriate sound. It refers to your capacity to read and comprehend words, phrases, sentences, as well as other symbols and pictures in a text.

 Reading can be defined as the process of extracting meaning from written material. It refers to the ability to portray language sounds graphically and symbolically. Reading is an active talent since it requires both active visual and mental processes. It is a receptive talent since the reader interprets the written material.

 Reading may additionally be described as the act of receiving that means from the written form. It is the capacity to interpret linguistic sounds in their photo and symbolic representation. Reading is a lively skill in the feel that it entails lively visual and intellectual processes. It is a receptive ability as the reader derives message from the written material. It is understanding, decoding or making experience of a given text. The message will not be passively absorbed, it requires effort. Reading is specially for knowledge, pleasure and culture.

 Comprehension takes area in three levels- literal meaning, interpretation of that means and contrast of meaning. Edgar Dale calls them studying on the lines, reading between the traces and studying past the traces respectively.

 Skimmimg

Skimming is a way of studying in which the reader glances through a text material swiftly to get a general idea or gist of the passage without attending to detail. This may additionally be to get a rough idea or to see what the book is about. The reader is very aware of the facts he wants. This skill involves the surface stage understanding of the ordinary context of a piece of writing. An example is reading the day by day newspaper for the headlines and subject sentences of its columns. Leafing via the pages of a book is any other example.

 Scanning

Scanning is a type of analyzing in which the reader quickly goes through a text to find a particular piece of information. The reader ignores something he is now not searching for. This ability, used for skipping along for particular information, additionally nurtures the capacity to forget about insignificant details. It is typically used in time tables, charts etc. For example, we can scan for the date of birth of a writer from his biography or for the smartphone number of a character from telephone directory.

 Extensive Reading

Extensive reading is one of the methods of reading that human beings use for rest and pleasure. Adopt this approach when the motive is to enjoy the studying experience. It places no burden upon the reader and due to its indulgent nature, it is seldom used if the textual content isn’t enjoyable. This is one of the strategies of analyzing that occurs naturally. It’s how you’ve read as a baby and whilst growing up. This technique of reading helps you apprehend phrases in context and enriches your vocabulary.

Intensive Reading

Among the distinctive sorts of reading skills, intensive reading is used when you prefer to study carefully by way of paying complete attention to apprehend every word of the text. It is the place you would look at and decipher every unfamiliar word or expression. As the term states, intensive means in-depth. This analyzing method is particularly used when reading academic texts, where the aim is to put together for an examination or to post a report. This method helps hold information for much longer periods.

 Critical Reading

Among the unique kinds of reading strategies, critical reading has a distinctive place. Here, the data and facts are examined for accuracy. You take a look at the thoughts referred to and analyze them until you attain a conclusion.

 You would have to apply your critical schools when using this method. Critical analyzing is often used when studying the news on social media, watching controversial advertisements, or reading periodicals.

 Benefits of Reading

Various kinds of reading lead to distinctive outcomes. Choosing the proper one can be instrumental in furthering your goals. Further, diversifying your studying habits to include special types of studying will enable you to grow to be a better creator and speaker. Improving your communication skills will allow you to bring your ideas with precision and clarity. It’s no longer always effortless to get your point across. But analyzing gives you the strength to apprehend multiple perspectives. Building a reading habit can be advantageous in the short and long run.

Translation in Malayalam

ഒരു നൈപുണ്യമായി വായന

അർത്ഥം കണ്ടെത്തുന്നതിനായി ചിഹ്നങ്ങൾ മനസ്സിലാക്കുന്ന ഒരു വൈജ്ഞാനിക പ്രക്രിയയാണ് വായന. വാക്കുകളിൽ നിന്ന് സജീവമായി അർത്ഥങ്ങൾ സൃഷ്ടിക്കുന്ന പ്രക്രിയയാണ് വായന. ഒരു ലക്ഷ്യത്തോടെയുള്ള വായന വായനക്കാരനെ അവരുടെ ശ്രദ്ധ കേന്ദ്രീകരിക്കാനും ഒരു പ്രത്യേക ലക്ഷ്യത്തിലേക്ക് വിവരങ്ങൾ നയിക്കാനും അനുവദിക്കുന്നു. വായനയ്ക്ക് പലതരത്തിലുള്ള പ്രേരണകൾ ഉണ്ടെങ്കിലും, അടിസ്ഥാന ലക്ഷ്യം വാചകം മനസ്സിലാക്കുക എന്നതാണ്. ചിന്തയുടെ ഒരു രീതിയാണ് വായന. വാക്ക് തിരിച്ചറിയൽ, മനസ്സിലാക്കൽ, ഒഴുക്ക്, പ്രചോദനം എന്നിവയെല്ലാം വായനാ പ്രക്രിയയുടെ ഭാഗമാണ്. പ്രിന്റ് അർത്ഥമാക്കുന്നത് വായനയാണ്. തൽഫലമായി, നമ്മൾ ചെയ്യേണ്ടത്:

അച്ചടിയിലെ വാക്കുകൾ തിരിച്ചറിയുന്ന പ്രക്രിയയാണ് വാക്കുകൾ തിരിച്ചറിയുക.

 അവയിൽ നിന്ന് ഒരു ധാരണ ഉണ്ടാക്കുന്ന പ്രക്രിയയാണ് വാക്കുകൾ ഗ്രഹിക്കുക.

വാക്ക് തിരിച്ചറിയലും അർത്ഥ സൃഷ്ടിയും ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കുക, അതുവഴി വായന യാന്ത്രികവും കൃത്യവുമാകും - ഒഴുക്ക് എന്നറിയപ്പെടുന്ന ഒരു കഴിവ്.

എല്ലാ വാക്കുകളും അറിയാതെ നിങ്ങൾക്ക് ചിലപ്പോൾ അച്ചടിയിൽ നിന്ന് അർത്ഥം ഊഹിക്കാം. വാക്കുകളിൽ നിന്ന് കൂടുതൽ അർഥം കണ്ടെത്താനാവാതെ നിങ്ങൾക്ക് ചിലപ്പോൾ തിരിച്ചറിയാൻ കഴിയും.

ഒരു വാചകത്തിലെ വിവരങ്ങൾ ഡീകോഡ് ചെയ്യുക, അല്ലെങ്കിൽ എഴുതിയതോ അച്ചടിച്ചതോ ആയ ചിഹ്നങ്ങൾ ഡീകോഡ് ചെയ്യുന്നത് വായനയുടെ പ്രക്രിയയാണ്. മറ്റൊരു തരത്തിൽ പറഞ്ഞാൽ, എഴുതപ്പെട്ട പദമോ അച്ചടിച്ച ചിഹ്നമോ ഉചിതമായ ശബ്ദമാക്കി മാറ്റുന്ന പ്രക്രിയയാണ്. ഒരു വാചകത്തിലെ വാക്കുകൾ, ശൈലികൾ, വാക്യങ്ങൾ, മറ്റ് ചിഹ്നങ്ങൾ, ചിത്രങ്ങൾ എന്നിവ വായിക്കാനും മനസ്സിലാക്കാനുമുള്ള നിങ്ങളുടെ കഴിവിനെ ഇത് സൂചിപ്പിക്കുന്നു.

എഴുതപ്പെട്ട വസ്തുക്കളിൽ നിന്ന് അർത്ഥം വേർതിരിച്ചെടുക്കുന്ന പ്രക്രിയയായി വായനയെ നിർവചിക്കാം. ഭാഷാ ശബ്ദങ്ങളെ ഗ്രാഫിക്കലായും പ്രതീകാത്മകമായും ചിത്രീകരിക്കാനുള്ള കഴിവിനെ ഇത് സൂചിപ്പിക്കുന്നു. സജീവമായ ദൃശ്യപരവും മാനസികവുമായ പ്രക്രിയകൾ ആവശ്യമുള്ളതിനാൽ വായന സജീവമായ ഒരു കഴിവാണ്. എഴുതിയ മെറ്റീരിയലിനെ വായനക്കാരൻ വ്യാഖ്യാനിക്കുന്നതിനാൽ ഇത് സ്വീകാര്യമായ കഴിവാണ്.

രേഖാമൂലമുള്ള രൂപത്തിൽ നിന്ന് സ്വീകരിക്കുന്ന പ്രവർത്തനമായി വായനയെ അധികമായി വിശേഷിപ്പിക്കാം. ഭാഷാപരമായ ശബ്ദങ്ങളെ അവയുടെ ഫോട്ടോയിലും പ്രതീകാത്മക പ്രാതിനിധ്യത്തിലും വ്യാഖ്യാനിക്കാനുള്ള കഴിവാണിത്. സജീവമായ ദൃശ്യപരവും ബൗദ്ധികവുമായ പ്രക്രിയകൾ ഉൾക്കൊള്ളുന്നു എന്ന തോന്നലിലെ സജീവമായ കഴിവാണ് വായന. വായനക്കാരൻ എന്ന നിലയിൽ അത് സ്വീകാര്യമായ ഒരു കഴിവാണ്

എഴുതിയ മെറ്റീരിയലിൽ നിന്ന് സന്ദേശം ലഭിക്കുന്നു. തന്നിരിക്കുന്ന ഒരു വാചകം മനസ്സിലാക്കുക, ഡീകോഡ് ചെയ്യുക അല്ലെങ്കിൽ അനുഭവം ഉണ്ടാക്കുക. സന്ദേശം നിഷ്ക്രിയമായി ആഗിരണം ചെയ്യപ്പെടില്ല, അതിന് പരിശ്രമം ആവശ്യമാണ്. വായന പ്രത്യേകിച്ച് അറിവിനും ആനന്ദത്തിനും സംസ്കാരത്തിനും വേണ്ടിയാണ്.

ഗ്രാഹ്യത്തിന് മൂന്ന് തലങ്ങളാണുള്ളത്- അക്ഷരാർത്ഥത്തിലുള്ള അർത്ഥം, വ്യാഖ്യാനം

അതിന്റെ അർത്ഥവും അർത്ഥത്തിന്റെ വൈരുദ്ധ്യവും. എഡ്ഗർ ഡെയ്ൽ അവരെ യഥാക്രമം വരികളിൽ പഠിക്കുക, ട്രെയ്‌സുകൾക്കിടയിൽ വായിക്കുക, ട്രെയ്‌സുകൾ കഴിഞ്ഞുള്ള പഠനം എന്നിങ്ങനെ വിളിക്കുന്നു.

സ്കിമ്മിംഗ്

വിശദാംശങ്ങളൊന്നും ശ്രദ്ധിക്കാതെ ഒരു പൊതു ആശയമോ ഭാഗത്തിന്റെ സാരാംശമോ ലഭിക്കുന്നതിന് വായനക്കാരൻ ഒരു ടെക്സ്റ്റ് മെറ്റീരിയലിലൂടെ വേഗത്തിൽ നോക്കുന്ന ഒരു പഠനരീതിയാണ് സ്കിമ്മിംഗ്. ഇത് ഒരു ഏകദേശ ആശയം നേടുന്നതിനോ അല്ലെങ്കിൽ പുസ്തകം എന്തിനെക്കുറിച്ചാണെന്ന് കാണാൻ വേണ്ടിയോ ആകാം. താൻ ആഗ്രഹിക്കുന്ന വസ്തുതകളെക്കുറിച്ച് വായനക്കാരന് നന്നായി അറിയാം. ഈ നൈപുണ്യത്തിൽ ഒരു എഴുത്തിന്റെ സാധാരണ സന്ദർഭത്തെക്കുറിച്ചുള്ള ഉപരിതല ഘട്ടം മനസ്സിലാക്കൽ ഉൾപ്പെടുന്നു. 

ദിനപത്രം അതിന്റെ കോളങ്ങളിലെ തലക്കെട്ടുകൾക്കും വിഷയ വാക്യങ്ങൾക്കും വേണ്ടി വായിക്കുന്നതാണ് ഉദാഹരണം. ഒരു പുസ്തകത്തിന്റെ പേജുകളിലൂടെ കടന്നുപോകുന്നത് മറ്റേതെങ്കിലും ഉദാഹരണമാണ്.

സ്കാൻ ചെയ്യുന്നു

സ്കാനിംഗ് എന്നത് ഒരു തരം വിശകലനമാണ്, അതിൽ വായനക്കാരൻ ഒരു പ്രത്യേക വിവരങ്ങൾ കണ്ടെത്തുന്നതിന് ഒരു വാചകത്തിലൂടെ വേഗത്തിൽ കടന്നുപോകുന്നു. വായനക്കാരൻ താൻ ഇപ്പോൾ അന്വേഷിക്കാത്ത എന്തെങ്കിലും അവഗണിക്കുന്നു. ഈ കഴിവ്, പ്രത്യേക വിവരങ്ങൾക്കായി സ്കിപ്പിങ്ങിനായി ഉപയോഗിക്കുന്നു, കൂടാതെ നിസ്സാരകാര്യങ്ങൾ മറക്കാനുള്ള കഴിവിനെ പരിപോഷിപ്പിക്കുന്നു.

വിശദാംശങ്ങൾ. ടൈം ടേബിളുകളിലും ചാർട്ടുകളിലും മറ്റും ഇത് സാധാരണയായി ഉപയോഗിക്കാറുണ്ട്. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്, ഒരു എഴുത്തുകാരന്റെ ജീവചരിത്രത്തിൽ നിന്ന് അല്ലെങ്കിൽ ടെലിഫോൺ ഡയറക്‌ടറിയിൽ നിന്ന് ഒരു കഥാപാത്രത്തിന്റെ സ്‌മാർട്ട്‌ഫോൺ നമ്പറിനായി നമുക്ക് സ്കാൻ ചെയ്യാം.

വിപുലമായ വായന

മനുഷ്യൻ വിശ്രമത്തിനും ആനന്ദത്തിനും ഉപയോഗിക്കുന്ന വായനാ രീതികളിൽ ഒന്നാണ് വിപുലമായ വായന. പഠനാനുഭവം ആസ്വദിക്കുക എന്ന ലക്ഷ്യമാകുമ്പോൾ ഈ സമീപനം സ്വീകരിക്കുക. ഇത് വായനക്കാരന്റെ മേൽ ഒരു ഭാരവും ചുമത്തുന്നില്ല, അതിന്റെ ആഹ്ലാദകരമായ സ്വഭാവം കാരണം, വാചക ഉള്ളടക്കം ആസ്വാദ്യകരമല്ലെങ്കിൽ ഇത് വളരെ അപൂർവമായി മാത്രമേ ഉപയോഗിക്കൂ. സ്വാഭാവികമായി സംഭവിക്കുന്ന വിശകലനത്തിന്റെ തന്ത്രങ്ങളിലൊന്നാണിത്. കുഞ്ഞായിരിക്കുമ്പോഴും വളർന്നപ്പോഴും നിങ്ങൾ വായിച്ചത് ഇങ്ങനെയാണ്. ഈ വായനാ രീതി സന്ദർഭത്തിൽ ശൈലികൾ മനസ്സിലാക്കാനും നിങ്ങളുടെ പദാവലി സമ്പന്നമാക്കാനും നിങ്ങളെ സഹായിക്കുന്നു.

തീവ്രമായ വായന

വ്യതിരിക്തമായ വായനാ വൈദഗ്ധ്യങ്ങളിൽ, വാചകത്തിലെ ഓരോ വാക്കും പിടിച്ചെടുക്കാൻ പൂർണ്ണ ശ്രദ്ധ നൽകിക്കൊണ്ട് ശ്രദ്ധാപൂർവ്വം പഠിക്കാൻ നിങ്ങൾ താൽപ്പര്യപ്പെടുമ്പോൾ തീവ്രമായ വായന ഉപയോഗിക്കുന്നു. അപരിചിതമായ എല്ലാ വാക്കുകളും പദപ്രയോഗങ്ങളും നിങ്ങൾ നോക്കുകയും മനസ്സിലാക്കുകയും ചെയ്യുന്ന സ്ഥലമാണിത്. പദം പ്രസ്താവിക്കുന്നതുപോലെ, തീവ്രത എന്നാൽ ആഴത്തിലുള്ളത് എന്നാണ്. അക്കാദമിക് ഗ്രന്ഥങ്ങൾ വായിക്കുമ്പോൾ ഈ വിശകലന രീതി പ്രത്യേകിച്ചും ഉപയോഗിക്കുന്നു, അവിടെ ഒരു പരീക്ഷയ്‌ക്കോ ഒരു റിപ്പോർട്ട് പോസ്റ്റ് ചെയ്യാനോ ഒരുമിച്ചെടുക്കുക എന്നതാണ് ലക്ഷ്യം. ഈ രീതി കൂടുതൽ കാലം വിവരങ്ങൾ സൂക്ഷിക്കാൻ സഹായിക്കുന്നു.

വിമർശനാത്മക വായന

സവിശേഷമായ വായനാ തന്ത്രങ്ങളിൽ, വിമർശനാത്മക വായനയ്ക്ക് ഒരു പ്രത്യേക സ്ഥാനമുണ്ട്. ഇവിടെ, ഡാറ്റയും വസ്തുതകളും കൃത്യതയ്ക്കായി പരിശോധിക്കുന്നു. നിങ്ങൾ ഒരു നിഗമനത്തിലെത്തുന്നതുവരെ പരാമർശിച്ചിരിക്കുന്ന ചിന്തകൾ പരിശോധിക്കുകയും വിശകലനം ചെയ്യുകയും ചെയ്യുക.

ഈ രീതി ഉപയോഗിക്കുമ്പോൾ നിങ്ങളുടെ നിർണായക വിദ്യാലയങ്ങൾ പ്രയോഗിക്കേണ്ടതുണ്ട്. സോഷ്യൽ മീഡിയയിലെ വാർത്തകൾ പഠിക്കുമ്പോഴോ വിവാദ പരസ്യങ്ങൾ കാണുമ്പോഴോ ആനുകാലികങ്ങൾ വായിക്കുമ്പോഴോ വിമർശനാത്മക വിശകലനം ഉപയോഗിക്കാറുണ്ട്.

വായനയുടെ പ്രയോജനങ്ങൾ

വിവിധ തരത്തിലുള്ള വായനകൾ വ്യതിരിക്തമായ ഫലങ്ങളിലേക്ക് നയിക്കുന്നു. ശരിയായ ഒന്ന് തിരഞ്ഞെടുക്കുന്നത് നിങ്ങളുടെ ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങൾ കൈവരിക്കുന്നതിന് സഹായകമാകും. കൂടാതെ, പ്രത്യേക തരത്തിലുള്ള പഠനങ്ങൾ ഉൾപ്പെടുത്തുന്നതിനായി നിങ്ങളുടെ പഠന ശീലങ്ങൾ വൈവിധ്യവത്കരിക്കുന്നത് ഒരു മികച്ച സ്രഷ്ടാവും പ്രഭാഷകനുമായി വളരാൻ നിങ്ങളെ പ്രാപ്തരാക്കും. നിങ്ങളുടെ ആശയവിനിമയ കഴിവുകൾ മെച്ചപ്പെടുത്തുന്നത് നിങ്ങളുടെ ആശയങ്ങൾ കൃത്യതയോടെയും വ്യക്തതയോടെയും കൊണ്ടുവരാൻ നിങ്ങളെ അനുവദിക്കും. നിങ്ങളുടെ പോയിന്റ് മനസ്സിലാക്കാൻ ഇനി എപ്പോഴും അനായാസമായിരിക്കില്ല. എന്നാൽ വിശകലനം ചെയ്യുന്നത് നിങ്ങൾക്ക് ഒന്നിലധികം വീക്ഷണങ്ങൾ മനസ്സിലാക്കാനുള്ള ശക്തി നൽകുന്നു. ഒരു വായനാ ശീലം വളർത്തിയെടുക്കുന്നത് ഹ്രസ്വവും ദീർഘകാലവുമായ ഒരു നേട്ടമാണ്.