The Phoenix of Egypt: The Legend of Rebirth

The Phoenix of Egypt: The Legend of Rebirth

During history, myths and legends have served as bridges between the tangible and the mystical, offering insight into the beliefs and values of ancient civilizations. Among these tales, the story of the phoenix, which is a mythical bird symbolizing rebirth and renewal, stands out as one of the most enduring and captivating. In ancient Egyptian culture, we come across plenty of animals such as cats, parrots, snakes and lions. However, there is a bird, which is divine. It is Phoenix. I shared the Mummification Process before, but I want to focus on Egypt's history more. While the phoenix is often associated with Greek mythology, its origins and variations can be traced to several ancient cultures, including Egypt. In this blog post, we explore the Egyptian version of this legendary creature and its profound symbolism.

The Egyptian Bennu Bird

In ancient Egyptian mythology, the Bennu bird is often considered the precursor to the Greek phoenix. Depicted as a heron with long legs and a striking plumage, the Bennu was deeply intertwined with the concepts of creation, life, and renewal. According to Egyptian beliefs, the Bennu emerged from the waters of chaos at the beginning of time, representing the spark of life and the cyclical nature of existence. The Bennu was closely linked to Ra, the sun god, and Osiris, the god of the afterlife. It was believed to embody the soul of Ra and served as a symbol of resurrection, much like Osiris himself. The bird’s association with the sun reinforced its connection to cycles- sunrise and sunset, death and rebirth.

The story of the Bennu bird shares similarities with later phoenix myths. According to legend, the Bennu bird would live for hundreds of years before building a nest of aromatic branches and spices. Once its time had come, it would set itself ablaze, only to rise anew from its ashes. This act of self-immolation and rebirth symbolized immortality and the eternal cycle of life, death, and regeneration.

Some versions of the tale suggest that the Bennu bird would fly to Heliopolis, known as the City of the Sun, to renew itself. Heliopolis was a significant religious centre in ancient Egypt, dedicated to worshipping Ra. The Bennu’s journey to this sacred city further emphasized its role as a divine messenger and a symbol of spiritual transformation.

The Bennu bird held deep symbolic meaning for ancient Egyptians. It represented not only physical rebirth but also spiritual renewal and hope. Its connection to Osiris made it a comforting figure in funerary traditions, offering assurance that life continued after death. The Bennu also symbolized resilience, the ability to rise again even after destruction or hardship. In Egyptian art and literature, the Bennu was often portrayed perched on a benben stone, a sacred pyramid-shaped stone associated with creation. This imagery reinforced its role as a harbinger of new beginnings.

The Bennu bird held deep symbolic meaning for ancient Egyptians. It represented not only physical rebirth but also spiritual renewal and hope. Its connection to Osiris made it a comforting figure in funerary traditions, offering assurance that life continued after death. The Bennu also symbolized resilience, the ability to rise again even after destruction or hardship. In Egyptian art and literature, the Bennu was often portrayed perched on a benben stone, a sacred pyramid-shaped stone associated with creation. This imagery reinforced its role as a harbinger of new beginnings.

Archetypal/Mythological Criticism: Recurrence in Literature

Archetypal/Mythological Criticism: Recurrence in Literature

The word archetype refers to any recurring image, character type, plot formula, or pattern of action. An archetype, then, is a kind of supertype, or model, different versions of which recur throughout the history of human production… (Tyson, L. (2015). Critical Theory Today (3rd ed., p. 211).

We are at the third blog, we have studied two blogs: Formalism (Russian) and New Criticism. When you read this blog, mo

st of you will consider that “I have already known that!” I have this topic in the Theory and Criticism of Literature. I have enjoyed it, so writing this topic will make me excited. Let’s start.

Before starting, I want to ask you that

All literary works should be unique?

Your answer now will show how you approach Archetypal Criticism.

Archetypal/Mythological Criticism suggests that when we look at literature, we find certain stories and characters that show up repeatedly, even across different cultures. It is as if we all know the same fundamental stories, and these stories connect us to each other. For instance, a hero setting out on a journey, facing evil, and returning with new wisdom is a pattern we see in many tales and myths. These common themes and characters are what we call “archetypes.” The hero, the guide, the villain, or even elements like nature are universal figures that hold meaning for all of us.

Frye's archetypal criticism focuses on identifying and analysing recurring narrative patterns, symbols, and character types in literature. By examining these archetypes, Frye believed we could uncover the universal themes and structures that support Western literature. This method highlights how certain stories and patterns resonate across different cultures and periods, revealing the shared human experiences and emotions that these archetypes represent.

Archetypes function as structural models that generate various versions of themselves, maintaining the same underlying structure despite different surface phenomena. This means that while the specific content of romances, tragedies, ironic/satiric narratives, and comedies may differ, their fundamental structures remain consistent. Archetypes provide a framework that shapes the narrative elements, allowing for diverse expressions while preserving a core pattern. This structural consistency is what makes archetypes so powerful and universal in literature.

Carl Jung's studies of mythology, religion, ancient symbols, and the customs of primitive people led him to several key conclusions.

• Causality and Teleology: Human behaviour is influenced not only by individual and racial history (causality) but also by future goals and aspirations (teleology). Both past experiences and future potentials shape present behaviour.

• Creative Development: Jung believed in the constant and often creative development of individuals, driven by the search for wholeness, completion, and rebirth.

• Ancestral Influence: He saw individual personality as a product of ancestral history. Modern humans are shaped by the cumulative experiences of past generations, extending back to the origins of humanity. These foundations are archaic, primitive, innate, unconscious, and likely universal.

• Inherited Predispositions: Humans are born with many predispositions inherited from their ancestors.

• Inner and Outer Forces: An individual's personality results from the interaction of inner forces (such as instincts and unconscious drives) and outer forces (such as social and environmental influences).

• The Persona: This is the mask we wear to meet the expectations of society and our own inner needs. It is the public face we show to the world, often concealing our true nature.

• The Anima and Animus: These represent the feminine and masculine aspects of each person. The anima is the feminine side in men, and the animus is the masculine side in women. These archetypes reflect the influence of the opposite sex on our psyche, shaped by our interactions with the opposite gender throughout history.

• The Shadow: This consists of our primal, animal instincts inherited from our evolutionary past. It embodies the darker aspects of our personality, such as unpleasant thoughts and actions. When projected outward, the shadow can appear as an enemy or a devil.

• The Self: This represents the total personality, the central point around which all other systems are organized. It provides unity, equilibrium, and stability to the personality, motivating our behaviour and driving the search for wholeness, often through spiritual or religious means.

Jung's theories on self-realization and individuation are central to his understanding of human development. He believed that individuals are constantly striving to progress from a less complete stage to a more complete one, with the ultimate goal being self-realization. This means achieving the fullest and most harmonious integration of all aspects of one's personality, where the self takes precedence over the ego.

• Individuation is the process by which this development occurs. It involves the differentiation and full development of various systems of personality. Neglected or underdeveloped systems can create resistance, so for a healthy, integrated personality, every system must be allowed to reach its fullest potential.

• Symbolization plays a crucial role in this process. Symbols are embodiments of archetypal material and represent the psyche. They carry the accumulated wisdom of humanity, both racial and individual. To understand the knowledge contained in a symbol, one must decipher it, as it often holds important messages that are not directly known to the conscious mind. The creation of symbols is driven by both a motivating force and an attracting force, reflecting the dynamic nature of the psyche.

The monomyth, or the hero's journey, is a universal narrative pattern found in literature. It often follows a circular structure and can take various forms, such as:

• The Quest: A hero embarks on a journey to achieve a goal, facing obstacles and temporary defeats before ultimately succeeding. An example is Abraham's quest for a son.

• The Death-Rebirth Motif: A hero experiences death or danger and then returns to life or safety. The story of Jesus is a classic example.

• The Initiation: A character is thrust out of an ideal situation and undergoes a series of ordeals, encountering various forms of evil or hardship for the first time. The story of Joseph illustrates this pattern.

• The Journey: Characters face danger and grow as they move from one place to another.

• Tragedy: Often involves a fall from innocence, as seen in the stories of Adam and Eve.

• Comedy: A U-shaped story that starts in prosperity, descends into tragedy, but ends happily as obstacles are overcome.

• Crime & Punishment: Focuses on the consequences of wrongdoing.

• The Temptation: Someone falls victim to an evil tempter or temptress.

• The Rescue: A character is saved from danger or distress.

• The Suffering Servant or Scapegoat Pattern: A character undergoes unmerited suffering to secure the welfare of others, like in the stories of Joseph and Jesus.

1)    The Young Hero

• Unusual or Prophesied Birth: Often born under extraordinary circumstances.

• Remarkable Courage: Displays bravery beyond the ordinary.

• Princely Status: Often of noble birth or destined for greatness.

• Struggles with Pride or Impatience: Faces internal conflicts.

• Boredom with Current Situation: Feels a sense of restlessness.

2)    During their journey, the Young Hero

• Performs Impossible Tasks

• Battles Monsters

• Solves Unanswerable Riddles

• Overcomes Insurmountable Obstacles

• Saves a Kingdom

• Marries a Princess

3)    The Sacrificial Scapegoat

• Hero Figure: Represents the welfare of the tribe or nation.

• Must Die to Atone: Sacrifices themselves to restore balance or fertility.

• Savior or Deliverer: Becomes a figure of salvation.

4)    The Wise Old Man (Helper or Guide Figure)

• Savior or Redeemer: Embodies wisdom and spirituality.

• Possesses Knowledge and Insight: Offers guidance and tests the hero's moral qualities.

• Surrogate Father: Acts as a mentor and assists the hero on their journey.

5)    The Devil Figure

• Opposes the Hero and Wise Old Man: Represents chaos and evil.

• Fights the Hero: Engages in spiritual, psychological, or physical battles.

• Personifies Negative Traits: Embodies corruption, deceit, and selfishness.

 

Female Figures

1)    The Good Mother

• Represents Life and Nourishment: Symbolizes fertility, growth, and protection.

• Maternal Support: Provides care and support to the hero.

2)    The Terrible Mother

• Represents Danger and Darkness: Embodies fear, death, and the terrifying aspects of the unconscious.

• The counterpart to the Devil Figure: Often depicted as a witch or sorceress.

3)    The Soul Mate

• Inspiration and Fulfilment: Represents spiritual fulfilment and often appears as a princess or beautiful lady.

These archetypes help us understand the universal patterns and themes that resonate across different cultures and periods. They provide a framework for analysing the deeper meanings and connections within literary works.

Archetypal Images

• Water: Symbolizes the mystery of creation, birth/death/resurrection, purification/redemption, fertility/growth, and the unconscious.

• Sun: Represents creative energy, law in nature, consciousness, enlightenment, and wisdom.

• Tree: Stands for life, consistency, growth, proliferation, generative and regenerative processes, inexhaustible life, and immortality.

• Circle/Sphere: Signifies wholeness and unity.

• Serpent/Snake/Worm: Embodies evil, corruption, sensuality, destruction, mystery, wisdom, and the unconscious.

Strengths of Archetypal Criticism

• Focus on Symbols: It emphasizes the meanings of symbols in literature, which are often used to convey significant events and themes.

• Universal Feelings and Ideas: It helps in teaching and expressing universal feelings, beliefs, and ideas, closely linked with psychological theories and criticism. This explains why literature resonates deeply with readers.

Weaknesses of Archetypal Criticism

• Reductionistic and Formulaic: Some critics argue that it is too reductionistic and formulaic, often excluding other sources or criticisms.

• Neglect of Literary Individuality: It may ignore the individuality of literary works by focusing too much on cycles and patterns. Not all literature contains symbolism; some are written purely for enjoyment.

• Overlap with Other Fields: Critics argue that archetypal approaches can also be covered in psychology, anthropology, comparative religion, and other fields. Symbols can have multiple meanings, leading to interpretations that may differ from the author's intentions.

 

 

New Criticism and the Art of Textual Interpretation

New Criticism and the Art of Textual Interpretation

In the previous blog, we discussed Formalism. In this blog, we are going to examine a new theory: New Criticism. New Criticism left a lasting mark on the literary world from the 1940s to the 1960s and New Criticism was a movement in literary theory that dominated American literary criticism.; however, it is rarely used by writers today, so we can no longer consider it a contemporary theory. It changed how literature was taught, helped define English Studies, and was a starting point for critical theory in the 20th century. However, it was unusual because it wasn't led by a single critic, had no manifesto, and no clear aims or membership. The term “New Criticism” was first used in 1941 by John Crowe Ransom in his book. Ransom's book was more about the need for a certain type of critic than defining New Criticism. The critics he examined rejected the label, and those now called New Critics were hardly mentioned by Ransom. Matterson, S. (2006). The New Criticism. In P. Waugh (Ed.), Literary theory and criticism: An Oxford guide. Oxford University Press. I am going to show you shortly, and then we will set out on a journey in this literature adventure.

I am going to show you shortly, then we will set out a journey in this literature adventure:

When you read a story, you are just trying to understand what is happening in the story itself without thinking about the outside world or the author’s life. In this kind of criticism, the beauty and meaning of the story are hidden in the words, sentences, and the way it’s told. So, you try to understand it by focusing only on the story. It is like a puzzle. You are paying attention to each piece to discover how it all fits together.

New Criticism is a type of critique that focuses solely on the work itself to understand it. In this approach, the work is examined based on its language, structure, and form, without connecting it to external factors such as the author’s life or its social and historical context. In other words, to find the meaning and value of a work, we pay attention to the elements within the text itself. Every word, sentence, and structural detail contributes to the overall meaning of the work, so we analyse it in its own completeness. In this context, when we evaluate a text, we should take into account some points. Extrinsic analysis, which involves examining elements outside the text to uncover its meaning, should be avoided. Instead, the critic's job is to understand how a poem functions as a self-contained, self-referential object. This means focusing solely on the text itself and its internal elements to interpret its meaning.

It used to be common to interpret a literary text by studying the author's life and times to understand the meaning the author planned. People would look through the author's letters, diaries, essays, autobiographies, biographies, and history books for clues. In its most extreme form, biographical-historical criticism focuses more on the author's context than on the text itself. Most of us expect to hear about the author's personal and intellectual life: his family, friends, enemies, lovers, habits, education, beliefs, and experiences. We may be curious about things that affected the author before reading. Moreover, we may wonder about the period when the work was written. However, For New Critics, the focus was entirely on the text itself. They believed that the poem, or any literary work, should be analysed as a self-contained object. This means that the meaning and value of the work are found within the text itself, without needing to consider the author's intentions, historical context, or external factors.

New Criticism emphasizes that a literary work is a self-contained, timeless entity. Its meaning is as fixed and objective as the words on the page. This meaning can't be fully captured by paraphrasing or translating it into another language. Literary language is distinct from scientific or everyday language, with its form and content being inseparable. The text's meaning and how it conveys that meaning are one and the same. The work is seen as an ideal, organic unity where all elements contribute to its overall complexity, often resulting from multiple and conflicting meanings.

The Great Gatsby as a reflection of the Jazz Age and its social commentary can indeed overshadow its formal elements. New Criticism would argue that we should examine the text, structure, language, and literary devices to uncover its deeper meanings. By doing so, we might find that the novel's complexity and richness go beyond its historical context, revealing layers of meaning embedded in Fitzgerald's precise use of words and narrative techniques. This approach can offer a new and different perspective on a well-known classic.

To analyze *The Great Gatsby* through New Criticism, we’ll focus solely on the text itself, looking at language, structure, imagery, and the interactions of characters, without considering the historical context or F. Scott Fitzgerald's life.

Imagery and Symbols

In The Great Gatsby, some of the key symbols include:

1.  The Green Light: Positioned at Daisy’s dock, the green light symbolizes Gatsby's dreams and hopes for the future. However, it’s always out of reach, which reflects the nature of his ambitions. The green light also serves as a symbol of Gatsby’s longing and the impossible nature of his dreams.

2. The Eyes of Doctor T.J. Eckleburg: The billboard with the large, staring eyes represents an unseeing, god-like presence watching over the moral decay of society.

3.    Colors: Fitzgerald’s use of colour imagery, such as the bright yellows of Gatsby’s car and the gold in Daisy’s dress, represents wealth, luxury, and the facade of happiness, which contrast with darker images of grey in the Valley of Ashes, suggesting despair and poverty.

Language and Style

New Criticism emphasizes the close reading of language. Fitzgerald's prose in The Great Gatsby is poetic and symbolic, often using lyrical language to emphasize the characters' emotions. For instance:

1.     Gatsby’s Speech Patterns: Gatsby’s formal, almost rehearsed way of speaking—especially his repeated phrase, “Old sport”—highlights his constructed identity and his attempt to fit into the wealthy, upper-class society.

Structure and Form

New Criticism also looks at the structure of the narrative and how it affects meaning:

1. Unreliable Narration: Nick Carraway’s perspective shapes the novel’s events. Nick’s narration invites the reader to question his own biases, revealing layers of ambiguity in the way Gatsby and other characters are perceived.

2. Non-linear Timeline: Fitzgerald’s non-linear timeline, where the story begins in the present and then recounts Gatsby’s past, underlines the theme of memory and desire. This structure reflects Gatsby’s inability to move forward, reinforcing the novel’s tragic tone.

Themes Explored Through Textual Analysis

New Criticism focuses on themes found in the text:

 1. The American Dream: Through the perspective of New Criticism, the text reveals the illusion of the American Dream. Gatsby's wealth and lifestyle appear glamorous, but his inability to truly achieve his dreams exposes the corruption of this pursuit. The text's language underlines this theme.

 2.  Illusion vs. Reality: Gatsby’s life is a carefully crafted illusion, from his backstory to his parties. The contrast between appearance and reality is portrayed through language, like Gatsby's description as an “Oxford man” and the rich details of his mansion, which ultimately reveal little about his true self.

Russian Formalism: The Art of Literary Structure

Russian Formalism: The Art of Literary Structure

We are going to start a new series after a long time…

I have been focusing on history for a long time, from Rome to the Ottoman Empire, and from Ancient Egypt... Now, we come back to literature. In my Theory and Criticism of Literature class, we will study a variety of theories, including Russian Formalism, New Criticism, Archetypal Criticism, Reader-Response Criticism, Structuralism, Post-structuralism and Deconstruction, Postmodernism, Psychoanalytic Criticism, Feminist Criticism, Marxist Criticism, New Historicism, and Cultural Materialism. These theories are not only related to literature, they are also related to psychology, philosophy, history, and more. In this series, we will explore each of these theories in detail.

Literary theory is a set of concepts and ideas used to explain or interpret literary texts. It is sometimes called "critical theory" or "theory" and is now evolving into "cultural theory." Literary theory includes principles from analyzing texts internally or using external knowledge. It is the body of ideas and methods we use to read and understand literature practically.

Literary criticism involves studying, evaluating, and interpreting literary works. While literary theory provides a broader framework for analyzing literature, literary criticism offers readers new ways to understand an author's work. It helps to examine the text, uncovering layers of meaning and providing insights into the author's intentions and the work's impact.

Why do we criticise literary works? What Is the Purpose of Literary Criticism?

Literary criticism aims to improve a reader's understanding of an author's work by summarizing, interpreting, and evaluating its significance. After closely reading the text, a critic creates a detailed analysis that can inform or challenge another reader's perspective. This practice allows readers to appreciate the beauty and complexity of the world through literature.

Russian Formalism emerged in the early 20th century in Russia as a literary theory movement. This theory was developed by a group of literary scholars and linguists seeking new ways to analyse literature. At that time, traditional approaches to literary analysis focused on content and meaning, primarily emphasizing what literary works conveyed. However, the Russian Formalists aimed to change this perspective.

W

hen you write a story, how you tell that story is very important. Russian Formalists were interested not only in what a story says but also in how it is told. Just like when you draw a picture, it’s not just the colours that matter, but also how the lines and shapes are made. These people tried to understand the structure of stories. To them, the words, sounds, and rhythm of a story are just as important as the story itself.  That is: Russian Formalism is a literary theory that focuses not just on the content of literary works but on how language and structure are used. Formalists argue that the meaning of a work is determined not by what the author says, but by how they say it. According to this theory, the purpose of literature is to disrupt our usual ways of seeing and make us think in new ways. So, to understand the aesthetic value of a work, we should focus more on its narrative techniques, linguistic play, and formal structure rather than just the plot. In the rest of the article, I will analyse this theory with a literary work. 

• The name of the author is not important.
• The time in which the author lived is not important.
• Any cultural impact on the author’s life is not important.
• The political beliefs of the author are not important.
• The actual reader is not important.

Then, if we comprehend this theory, we may go into detail a bit.

There were two schools of Russian Formalism. The Moscow Linguistic Circle, led by Roman Jakobson, was formed in 1915; this group also included Osip Brik and Boris Tomashevsky. The second group, the Society for the Study of Poetic Language (Opoyaz), was founded in 1916, and its leading figures included Victor Shklovsky, Boris Eichenbaum, and Yuri Tynyanov. Other important critics associated with these movements included Leo Jakubinsky and the folklorist Vladimir Propp. Habib, M. A. R. (2005). A History of Literary Criticism: From Plato to the present (p. 603). Blackwell Publishing.

In the 1910s, figures like Viktor Shklovsky and Roman Jakobson proposed a new way of examining literature. According to them, literature could not be evaluated solely based on the subject matter, characters, or messages of a work. What was crucial was how the author used language and how the structure of the narrative was shaped. Shklovsky's concept of "defamiliarization" (ostranenie) was central to this movement. He defends that the power of literature lies in presenting ordinary things in unusual and new ways, providing people to see the world differently.

The emergence of this theory was influenced by the belief that literary art could be analysed on a scientific basis. The Russian Formalists believed that literature should be examined through objective methods like science. Therefore, they focused on formal elements such as narrative structures, rhythm, sound, and the structure of language, drawing attention to the formal characteristics of literary works. This perspective marked a significant departure from traditional literary criticism, emphasizing not only the "what" but also the "how" of storytelling.

Shklovsky was a founding member of one of the two schools of Russian Formalism, the Society for the Study of Poetic Language, formed in 1916. His essay “Art as Technique” (1917) was one of the central statements of formalist theory. Like others in his group, he was denounced by Leon Trotsky for his formalist views. Habib, M. A. R. (2005). A History of Literary Criticism: From Plato to the Present (p. 603). Blackwell Publishing.

Defamiliarization…

Shklovsky introduces a new concept of Russian Formalism.

Shklovsky indicates that over time, we get so used to the things around us that we stop really noticing them. For instance, you might see a tree every day and get so used to it that you do not pay attention to it anymore. Shklovsky explains this as remembering only a small part of something. That’s why, to truly understand something, we need to look at it in a new way as if we were seeing it for the first time. Then everything seems interesting again. To sum up, defamiliarization is one of the most important things in literature and art. Art and literature help us see the world in a new way. Literature shows us those familiar things again, in a different and interesting way. This way, we look at them carefully again and discover things we did not notice before.

Roman Jakobson played an important role in helping us understand literature and language. Along with Victor Shklovsky, he founded a group in 1916 that studied the language of poetry. This group aimed to teach how to analyse poems and writings. In 1926, Jakobson established another group in Czechoslovakia that focused on studying how language works. Later, he fled from Nazi danger and moved to America in 1941. There, he met another important scholar named Claude Lévi-Strauss, and in 1943, they co-founded a linguistic study group in New York. His ideas became significant first in France and then in America.

The term ‘literariness’ was first introduced by the Russian Formalist Roman Jacobson in 1921. He declared in his work Modern Russian Poetry that ‘the object of literary science is not literature but literariness, i.e. what makes a given work a literary work’ (Das 2005, p. 78).

Literariness is a feature that shows that a book or story is special. This feature separates that book from ordinary texts. For instance, in a song, artists use some special things like rhythm, rhyme, and repetition. That's why these features make a story or book more interesting.

Jakobson states: “Poetry and stories are about the beautiful use of words. Linguistics, on the other hand, is a science that studies how words are structured. Therefore, the art of writing poetry and stories is a part of language.” He also mentions that literary criticism (which involves personal opinions about books) is based on subjective views, whereas literary studies (which focus on carefully examining books) use more accurate information. In other words, to understand books, it’s important to analyse them carefully and focus on the words.

Mikhail Bakhtin is recognized as one of the most important literary thinkers of the 20th century. One of his best-known ideas is about the different and interesting ways language is used. He has some important concepts that explain how novels are written. These concepts include “dialogue,” which is how people talk to each other; “polyphony,” which means hearing different voices from different people in a story; and “carnival,” which refers to times when everyone is having fun and there are different rules. All of these ideas help us understand how people communicate with different languages and voices.

Bakhtin borrows the term "polyphony" from music to describe the different narrative voices in novels. In his book Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, he illustrates how multiple voices can work together, including the author's voice and the voices of the characters.

Another important term is "heteroglossia," which also refers to "polyphony." Bakhtin discusses this concept in his essay "Discourse in the Novel." This term expresses the idea that there are many different ways of speaking in society.

Additionally, "dialogism" is significant. It explains how meaning is created through the interactions between the writer, the characters in a novel, and the readers. According to Bakhtin, nothing exists meaningfully on its own; everything is understood through its relationships and interactions with other things. In other words, what everyone says to each other is very important.

A Checklist of Formalist Critical Questions

Structure and Organization

• How is the work structured or organized?
• How does it begin, progress, and end?
• What is the work’s plot, and how does the plot relate to its structure?

Characters

• Who are the major and minor characters, and what do they represent?
• What is the relationship of each part of the work to the whole?
• How are the parts related to one another?

Narration:

• Who is narrating or telling the story?
• How is the narrator, speaker, or character revealed to the readers?
• How do we come to know and understand this figure?

Setting

• What are the time and place of the work—its setting?
• How does the setting relate to the characters and their actions?
• To what extent is the setting symbolic?

Language and Imagery

• What kind of language does the author use to describe, narrate, explain, or create the literary world?
• Specifically, what images, similes, metaphors, and symbols appear in the work?
•  What is their function, and what meanings do they convey?

These questions can help readers analyse a literary work through a formalist lens, focusing on its structure, characters, narration, setting, and use of language.

Language and Structure

• The language of the sonnet is rich with imagery. It uses elements of summer and nature to discuss the nature of love. The comparison to a summer's day serves as a tool to emphasize the beauty.
• The poem is structured as a Shakespearean sonnet, consisting of 14 lines divided into three quatrains and a final couplet. The rhyme scheme is ABABCDCDEFEFGG, which is typical for Shakespearean sonnets.

Sound and Rhythm

• The sonnet is written in iambic pentameter. This rhythm creates a sense of fluidity for the reader and enhances its emotional impact.
• Alliteration and assonance within the poem strengthen the emotional tone. For instance, the sound similarity between "more" and "fair" enhances the musicality of the expression.

Defamiliarization

• The comparisons and images in the poem offer the reader a chance to think about the beloved's beauty in an unconventional way. For example, the phrase "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" reminds us that the warmth of summer is temporary, prompting a reflection on the permanence of love.

 

Meaning and Themes

Immortality and Beauty

• Shakespeare highlights the beloved's beauty while also stressing that this beauty can fade over time. However, through his works, this beauty becomes eternal.
• The expression "eternal summer" symbolizes the power of art and literature to make the ephemeral permanent.

Transience of Time

• The poem questions the transience of time and the permanence of love, offering the reader a profound opportunity for reflection. In this context, it reminds us of the value of time.