Eco Critical Analysis of "Lord of the Flies" by William Golding

Eco-critical Analysis of Lord of the Flies

By William Golding

Ecocriticism is the study of representations of nature in literary works and of the relationship between literature and the environment. As an academic discipline, it began in earnest in the 1990s, although its roots go back to the late 1970s. Because it is a new area of study, scholars are still engaged in defining the scope and aims of the subject. The term has been defined from several perspectives by different critics. However, the most appropriate ones relating to our discussion are that of Laurence Buell, who says that this study must be “conducted in a spirit of commitment to environmentalist praxis.” The other is that of David Mazel, who declares it is the analysis of literature “as though nature mattered.” With reference to William Golding’s “Lord of the Flies”, the essay shall discuss the following in relation with the eco-critical study as discussed in Imam A. Hanafy’s article:  environment presented as something pure untainted and untouched, the limited nature of environmental resources and exploitation of these resources, environment as something which is eerily silent all the time but is, at the same time, immensely powerful, the ability of environment to draw out the hidden ‘beast’ inside of us, and the dichotomy of culture and environment.

The term “ecocriticism” was coined in 1978 by William Rueckert in his essay “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism.” Interest in the study of nature writing and with reading literature with a focus on “green” issues grew through the 1980s, and by the early 1990s ecocriticism had emerged as a recognizable discipline within literature departments of American universities.

The novel “Lord of the Flies” presents an island as a small version of the real modern world, in which man has exploited the nature and environment for the sake of his comfort, progress and also due to his beastly nature. The title of the novel is significant and carries multiple interpretations. ‘Lord’ may represent ‘power’, as we see Ralphs’s and Jack’s group fighting for power. ‘Flies’ may refer to death and decay; which may mean the death and decay having an alliance with power and corruption. However, from an eco-critical perspective, it may be referred to Beelzebub (another name for evil), who is also known as Lord of Filth and Dung. Throughout the novel, the children keep becoming more savage, beastly, dirty and devilish. Also the ‘Flies’ signify death and decay, which may mean the death and decay of nature, environment and their purity.

Nature, according to Hanafy, has been presented as something that is pure, untainted and untouched. It is due to man’s urge for civilization and development that the nature and environment got ravished, tainted and impure. As the island in Lord of the Flies is a miniature of the real modern world, the initial environmental and physical conditions of the island were such that “the shore was pledged with palm trees” and the salty water of the sea was clear. As for the ground, it was “a bank covered with coarse grass, scattered with decaying coconuts and palm saplings”. Before the human activities on earth began, the environment of the earth was quite like that of the island in the novel and its natural beauty and purity was preserved. However, later with the developments and establishment of human colonies, the earth started to get tainted with the marks of so called human civilization which actually is the sole cause of its impurity. This can be paralleled with the part of the novel when the boys “had built castles in the sand at the bar of the little river”, and also when they try to build huts for themselves. “Two shelters were in position” but were shaky. These activities on the island began to taint and contaminate the island as the boys tried to practice their civilization. Some critics are of the view that the arrival of the navy at the resolution of the story is symbolic, as it represents the return of the civilization which actually made the environment and nature impure. Therefore, the arrival of navy according to some critics is ironical, since they come as rescuers; however, they depict civilization, hence representing the cause of destruction of environment and nature.

Imam A. Hanafy, in his article, writes that environment is something that remains still and eerily silent; yet it is immensely powerful and can have a long lasting effects. Since the advent of man, he has been experimenting with nature and his surroundings. As soon as his means of food, shelter and covering were met, man started exploiting nature for the sake of surplus, leisure and in order to satisfy his beastly and curious nature. However, the nature and environment silently observed the man exploiting them, and proved powerful in the climax as man today is at a constant threat of global warming, climatic changes, thinning of ozone and other natural disasters. A representation of this power of environment is evident within Lord of the Flies, when the boys initially make all the rules like civilized English people, and try to set up the facilities they enjoyed back home in their country. For this, they exploit the island in return of which the environment silently practices its strength on them and overpowers them, making them forget all their civil nature and submit to the environment and nature. The environment also possess power of punishing by remaining silent and attacking the minds of the inhabitants. Simon, in Lord of the Flies, gets scared of the cave mystery and pig’s head due to eerier, silent eloquence of the island and runs madly to the other boys. There, he gets killed by the boys as they mistake him for a beast in the dark, killing him brutally with their wooden spears.

Furthermore, Hanafy discusses the ability of environment to draw out the hidden beast inside of the man, that how being one with the environment causes one to lose his humanity and causes him to give in to his animalistic instincts. The phenomenon of man-eating leopards and tigers has a long history in different parts of world (Atkinson 1881; Corbett 1947). But this kind of beastly behaviour cannot be justified for man, as he is born with wits and characteristics higher in degree than that of the beasts. However, as Dipesh Chakrabarty says: “There is the widely accepted point that humans have been putting pressure on other species for quite some time now; I do not need to belabor it. Indeed, the war among animals such as rhinoceroses, elephants, monkeys, and big cats may be seen everyday in many Indian cities and villages”. It may also be seen in the novel, Lord of the Flies, that initially Jack and his hunters are hesitant in killing a pig. But later, when he kills one finally, he makes it a practice to kill the pigs and eat them as a treat. Initially, when the boys find Simon sitting near the bank, they throw stones at him, however took care that it didn’t hit him. But when Ralph cames to Jack’s group later for Piggy’s specs, they throw stones at Ralph brutally in order to show him their might. In chapter nine-the boys think they heard the beast (really simon) they sing a chant “kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!”. Also, when Simon is killed by misunderstanding, Jack’s group becomes a little upset at the killing of a human being. But afterwards, when Piggy and Ralph come to them for retrieving Piggy’s spectacles, one of the boy from Jack’s group throws a huge stone on Piggy, killing him at the spot. At this, no expressions of guilt could be seen on their faces; rather an air of pride, arrogance, shamelessness, brutality and barbarity was evident on their faces. And when Ralph is left alone after Simon and Piggy’s death, Jacks and his boys had become so barbarous that the beast inside them completely overtook them and they run after Ralph to kill him. All these incidents reflect how the nature and the environment brought out the beast inside the boys, which makes them not only kill the pigs but also the human beings without any guilt.

According to Imam A. Hanafy, Golding has presented the island; the microcosmic representation of nature, as something pure; untainted. By doing so, he has set it up as a foil to the impure civilization that society thrusts upon humans. However, at the same time, Golding seems to endorse the fact that letting go of civilization completely causes one to become inhuman. Golding does not seem to place much faith in human nature to begin with, as he comments in the early chapters of Lord of the Flies, that civilization or culture helps humans curb their savage or beastly impulses by providing a suitable outlet for these emotions. In the wilderness, without any authority to check them, the boys easily fall prey to the natural urges inside them, eventually causing them to lose their humanity completely. For instance, Jack’s initial desire to hunt is channeled into the need for food, highlighting how civilization provides an acceptable outlet for such urges. As long as Jack is within the rules of a civilization, he is no threat to the people around him. It is when he out rightly rejects the authority of Ralph and rejects the validity of society that he becomes a true danger for the others. Golding seems to suggest that while savagery is an inherent characteristic of human beings, civilization helps to mitigate its effects to some extent, creating a sort of balance between the natural beastly side of humans and the socially acceptable ‘civilized’ version of themselves. By leaving that culture behind, the boys let go of their humanity, and “reenter nature on its own terms”. Naked and cultureless, their perceptions become irrational, intermixing with the perceptions of the creatures around them, so that, as a part of the natural world they are stranded in, they become inseparable from it. This is evident from Ralph’s first encounter with this new world, he immediately takes off his clothes and leaps into the water. The act of undressing signifies Ralph’s shedding of his former identity – the shedding of his culture; his civilized self – and adopt a new identity; one that is more at ‘home’ in this natural world.

Imam A. Hanafy goes on to suggest that when there is no law and order; when there is no authoritative figure to keep one in check, those curbed urges find an outlet. This can clearly be seen in the attitude of the boys, as their hunts become kills; their need for food turns into pure bloodlust and they begin to thirst for blood. This deterioration begins with the hunts of pigs turning into frenzied ritualistic massacres, and ends with the murder of Piggy. The boys feel no remorse for killing their friend; instead there is only the feeling of extreme satisfaction and contentedness at having made another kill. Golding does not seem to hold much faith in the preservation of one’s humanity while being one with nature. In this way, Golding reinforces the dichotomy between nature and culture.

The rediscovery of ‘self’; the taking back of ‘identity’, the incorporation of culture into the now savage world of the boys comes in the form of the naval officer. He is a symbol of authority; of power, and most of all, of civilization and culture. His appearance causes the boys to remember what they have done; to reflect on how they have turned into savage beasts whose bloodlust is so strong that they hold no remorse for the cold-blooded murder of their friend. Tahmina Mojadeddi writes: “Realization begins with Ralph, as he remembers the deaths of the other boys and the savage ways they turned to. Soon they all begin to cry as they realize that slowly and step by step they got carried away by instinct. Instinct was the only thing that taught them how to survive on the island but they see the faults and errors in it”.

The gist of the above discussion is that man is born in the natural world, yes, but from the moments he gains of consciousness of himself, he is othered from nature and nature is othered from him. He is taught to live according to society’s rules and regulations and to curb his natural desires and urges. In the introduction to The Environmental Imagination, Lawrence Buell remarks that, “Nature has been doubly otherized in modern thought”. Golding reinforces this fact through his novel by showing how, when the boys are separated from their culture and placed in the wilderness, they feel as if they are missing something. It is almost as if a part of them is missing; that part is culture. The tragedy of their life, according to Imam A. Hanafy, is the fact that humans cannot live outside of culture; they are not equipped to deal with a life without culture; without civilization; without authority.

However, on the other hand, Golding also shows the destructive effect culture has on nature. It engages the modern ecologists who see the present ecological crisis as stemming from “destructive habits of thought”. Ralph has explained this predicament when the fire becomes not fun but fatal. While the boys see the fire as a source of entertainment, Piggy and Simon see its dangerous repercussions and warn the boys against it. It is Piggy who suggests the need for smoke as a signal for help, not fire which can set the island on fire. This revolution in thought is what is needed in order for humans’ attitude towards nature to change. When humans choose to perceive something in a new way, they can do so, just as Piggy and Simon can. They begin to understand the relationship between culture and nature at a deeper level. They can see how the two are united at heart, for they are, in fact, variations on the same theme.

Under this new awareness, man is re-imagined as being not only physically dependent on nature – as shown by the boys’ need for food, which is provided by nature – but also as being culturally dependent on it. Furthermore, although it is depending on nature, culture is also a product of nature. Meaning that there is an inherent relationship between culture and nature, wherein neither can exist without the other. Golding, seemingly endorsing this notion, shows that a dual accountability to nature and culture is the best one can hope for: when one lets go of culture completely, the result is death; when one completely embraces culture, the result is also death, when viewed from an ecological viewpoint. Culture is the life-sustaining factor for human beings, according to Imam A. Hanafy, but it poses its own problems as well, because, in its alienation of nature, it poses as a serious threat to the natural environment.

Therefore, Golding delineates the double estate of man – his capacity for harmony with, and alienation from, nature. All human beings hold this faculty; this possibility of going either way, depending on their ‘power of awareness’. Golding, in this way, tries to deconstruct the dichotomy of man and nature on one hand, and culture and nature on the other hand in an effort to ‘re-imagine the self and understand it in relation to nature’.

In the light of above discussion it can be concluded that the environment and nature in itself is a strong force and has a deep effect over the mind and actions of man. In return of exploitation of nature and environment, man is made to bear devastating repercussions. Ironically, man weaves his own destruction by exploitation of his environment. The eco-critical analysis is carried out for the very purpose, and to highlight man’s treatment with his environment and nature. In the novel Lord of the Flies, Golding also endeavours to highlight some aspects of this treatment and its consequences; alarming us of destruction of our environment and tries to explain the might of the environment greater than the might of man.

_______________________________

References:

·         http://gv.pl/pdf/lord_of_the_flies.pdf

·         Ecocriticism and Early Modern English Literature: Green Pastures

Todd A. Borlik

Routledge, 11-May-2011 - Literary Criticism - 292 pages

·                     Creaturely Poetics: Animality and Vulnerability in Literature and Film Anat Pick Columbia University Press, 2011 - Nature - 249 pages ·         “It’s a conspiracy theory and climate change” Of beastly encounters and cervine disappearances in Himalayan India Nayanika MATHUR, University of Cambridge (article) ·         www.prezi.com

Grammar Translation Method

Grammar Translation Method

Historical Background of Grammar Translation Method:

The Grammar Translation Method of foreign language teaching is one of the most traditional methods, dating back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In terms of learning a foreign language in the West, the meaning was generally taken as learning of Latin and Greek. For the acquisition of L2, Classical Method was adopted that focused on the following: grammatical rules, memorization of vocabulary, translation of texts, and doing written exercises. In the nineteenth century, the Classical Method came to be known as the Grammar Translation Method. Grammar Translation Method began in Germany, or more accurately, Prussia, at the end of the eighteenth century and flourished as the most trusted and favoured methodology of learning L2.  The Grammar-Translation Method aimed at adapting to the circumstances and requirements of schools. Its focus was to make language learning easier. The fundamental attribute was the replacement of traditional texts by exemplary sentences. Grammar-Translation was the offspring of German scholarship, the object of which, according to one of its less charitable critics, was “to know everything about something rather than the thing itself”.

Techniques used in Grammar Translation Method:

In Grammar Translation Method, the techniques employed in making the learners acquire L2 were as following:

·         Translation of a literary passage (from target language to mother tongue)

·         Reading comprehension questions (finding information in a text)

·         Antonyms, synonyms (finding antonyms and synonyms for words or sets of words)

·         Fill in the gaps (new words or items of a particular grammar)

·         Memorization (vocabulary lists or grammatical rules)

·         Use words in sentences (to illustrate the understanding of mseaning and use of new words)

·         Cognates (Learning spelling/sound patterns that correspond between L1 and the target language)

·         Composition (Students write about a topic using the target language)

Principles and Characteristics of Grammar Translation Method:

Grammar Translation Method, through translation of the classic literature, not only aimed at the learning of L2, but also was seen as a practice for mental discipline and intellectual development. Moreover, the idea of teaching L2 through explicit grammar rules makes one think that learning a foreign language is a matter of mastering the grammatical rules of the target language.  From the four basic receptive and productive skills of a language, reading and writing were the main focus. Written and reading accuracy was emphasized. Words and vocabulary items were taught through bilingual word lists, i.e. the words were written both in L1 and L2. For teaching grammar, deductive method was used and the other tongue of the learner was employed in teaching L2. Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences from the target language into the mother tongue. Little or no attention was given to the pronunciation.

Role of Teacher:

In Grammar Translation Method, teachers are the guides. They are expected to explain rules and patterns of grammar. Teachers are guides since Grammar Translation Method focuses on memorization of rules, operating morphology and syntax of L2. On the part of teachers, fewer specialized skills are needed as the translation tests and marking grammar exercises objectively is easy. The teachers provide students with translation practice, corrects the practice exercises and controls language and structure. The teacher’s attitude towards errors is that the errors are not acceptable as grammar is taught rigorously. One of the teacher’s prime function is that of observation rather than corrective intervention in regards to the learners.

Role of the Learner:

Concerning the role of learners, they are expected to memorize explicit grammar rules and vocabulary items and were supposed to produce the translations of L2 into L1. This practice meant a laborious and painstaking work which often created frustration in the learners. Main activities and controls are stated by the students, he or she is the one who provides the course of the learning process and the status of knowledge as well. Cooperative work and integrated behaviour in learners was essential for the practice. Since Grammar Translation Method focused on the translation of literary texts, academic skills – such as metalinguistic knowledge, knowledge of L1, and intellectual activity – were also needed in the students.

Advantages of Grammar Translation Method:

The Grammar Translation Method has been practiced so widely and has survived so long for its main advantages. First, as many schools still have classes with large number of students, GTM with its focus on teacher centeredness is cost-effective and appropriate. Next, its main technique, translation into learner's L1, along with some sort of accuracy in understanding synonyms helps meaning to be clarified and the possibility of any misinterpretation or misunderstanding removed. Further, this method saves a lot of time because via translation from one language into another the meanings, words and phrases of the target language would quickly be explained. So, even teachers who are not fluent in L2 can teach through this method. Finally, teachers are less challenged because the students understand, and will not have any problems in responding the comprehension questions asked in the first language. This helps teachers to understand whether the students have learned what they were taught or not.

Disadvantages of Grammar Translation Method:

Where there are advantages of Grammar Translation Method, there are some disadvantages of this method which made this method fall from use. Speaking and understanding are more important for learners to communicate in real life situations, but Grammar Translation Method focused on reading and writing. It prefers written language to spoken language. This method uses a graded grammatical syllabus and learners must gradually accumulate and accurate command of each item in the syllabus. This may be a big disadvantage for learners who want to start using the language straight away. Learning through exposure, experience and use found no scope in this method; instead Grammar Translation Method used conscious memorization of grammar rules or vocabulary instead. Furthermore, in this method the teacher and the learners speak mainly in their mother tongue which meant no real interaction practice in L2. Also, it was not always practically possible to translate the literary texts into L1 as the classic texts contained many archaic words and were not ideal for use as the literary language is hardly used in day-to-day life.

Conclusion:

Due to its rigorous grammar training and intellectual development scope through the translation of classic literary texts, Grammar Translation Method remained in practice for a very long time in the history of second language acquisition. However, the inability of the method to ensure comprehensible spoken fluency and its impracticality to deal with real life language problems dropped Grammar Translation Method from use.

References:

The Grammar Translation http://www.unizar.es/elafuen/files_metodologia/tema_2/The%20Grammar%20Translation%20(diapos).pdf.

The Grammar Translation Method.  Accessed 10 January 2010 https://esl-methods.wikispaces.com/file/view/The+Grammar+Translation+Method.pdf.

Grammer-Translation Methods. http://web3.apiu.edu/.

Mart, Cagri Tugrul. 2013. "The Grammar-Translation Method and the Use of Translation to Facilitate Learning in Esl Classes." Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching 1 (4): pp. 103-105.

Mondal, Nitish Kumar. 2012. "A Comparative Study of Grammar Translation Method and Communicative Approach in Teaching English Language." New York Science Journal. http://www.sciencepub.net/newyork/ny0505/013_9247ny0505_86_93.pdf.

Reni Fitriyanti, Apik Soraya. 2011. Grammar Translation Method.  https://novaekasari09.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/grammar-translation-method/.

rights are reserved by Esmaeil, All, and Heydari Asl. "Comparative Study of Grammar Translation Method (Gtm) and Communicative Language Teaching (Clt) in Language Teaching Methodology."

Transition from Literary Criticism to Literary Theory

Literature has always been talked about extensively through the ages in various contexts. However, one of the most widely discussed context is the idea if literature is a unifying force and unifies people all around the globe by transcending the notions such as gender, ethnicity, religion, race, nationalism, social class, etc. However, a critical analysis of this idea reveals that literature has been wrongly presented as a unifying, universal force. The idea that literature is apolitical, universal and connects humanity is false. This idea has been promoted in different ages of literature and was upheld by various types of criticisms. The essay shall unleash how literature was promoted as universal and apolitical during different ages and by various schools of criticism, where actually it was serving to uphold the power structures, resulting in the need of Literary Theory to deal with the flaws of literature.

The idea of treating literature as universal and apolitical was found in the tenants of Liberal Humanism. It suggested that gender, race and class apparently may make us look different, but we all have universal human nature defined on the grounds of morality (Barry 21). It says that if literature was political, it would be a source of propaganda. Therefore, literature is apolitical and is not an ideological tool. These ideas of Liberal Humanism regarding literature had been the latent concepts promoted by the literature during different ages.

The industrial revolution of Romantic Era brought mass production, surplus and consumer culture. “A crassly philistine Utilitarianism” (Eagleton 17) was seen as the ruling ideology of the industrial bourgeois class.  However, this revolution imprinted this age with some dark impressions including capitalism, alienation, individualism, fragmentation of society, loss of humanity, greed, etc.  During this age, the valuable writings, such as philosophy, history, poems, etc. were included in literature (Eagleton 15). The Romantics saw literature (poetry) as an individual genius; as a special talent that the writer possesses in order to remove the alienation of society and to restore the human aspects. However, the writings and imagination that reflected the values and taste of a certain social class were considered true literature. This aesthetical concept of literature was apolitical and universal since it emphasized on the individuality of the masses but did not bring to light the evils of capitalism and class distinction. It suggested escapism and empty nostalgia instead of focusing the influence of capitalism. Therefore, it again promoted literature as “ideological” (Eagleton 19).

The shift from Romantic to Victorian Age is marked by the scientific advancements, full blown industrial revolution and religious scepticism. The post-war society brought forth the bourgeoisie as the new class in possession of money. This gave rise to the need of civilizing this class for which literature was used.  Moreover, English studies were bought into prominence owing to “the failure of religion” (Eagleton 20). The unquestioned trust and belief on religion shattered primarily because of scientific discoveries, such as Darwin’s theory of evolution, as well as the social change. Therefore, English had three main purposes to serve: delight, instruct, saving souls and healing the State (Eagleton 20), and the idea of nationalism was promoted. Arnold suggested to find such literature in “Hellenism” (Bertens 3), which meant that the Greek literature was appropriate to teach the new rich bourgeois class adequate culture. However, it again resulted in upholding the power structures since the Hellenistic literature was not discernible by the common masses. Moreover, the idea of Nationalism again pushed people to show national unity which meant no retaliation against the power structures. It was suggested that “Literature helps to promote sympathy and fellow feeling among all classes” (Eagleton 20), which again was an apolitical concept. As for Arnold, he also included only English and American literature in the canon (Bertens 12) resulting in the exclusion of literature of the marginalized groups. For Bretens, Arnold is an elitist snob. Therefore, the Victorian age again presented literature as apolitical and universal, and ignored the exploitations of capitalism in the society.

Further, in the Modern era, the society faced identity crises owing to the war between Britain and Germany. Having its roots in Germany, the Great Britain was now having bitter terms with the country of its roots. This provoked the British people to rewrite their history, carefully eliminating any Germanic associations, and thus shaking the sense of identity of the masses (Eagleton 26). To read literature was to get connected with one’s own individual being. During this time, a popular magazine Scrutiny appeared on the scene with the noise of battling against capitalism by making its adherents go to schools and universities. However, the only change it really brought into the society was “education” (Eagleton 29). However, it was only a little population of society that could actually afford to attend universities. Moreover, the literature it prescribed was also Hellenistic which was hardly discernible by the masses. Therefore, “the Scrutiny case was inseparably elitist” (Eagleton 30). In this way, the literature of Modern age also remained apolitical.

The school of thoughts that upheld literature as universal and apolitical were the result of the attitude towards literature in different ages. As discussed in the beginning, Liberal Humanism served as an umbrella, under which other schools of thought rooted, such as Historical Criticism, Practical Criticism and New Criticism. All these forms of criticisms remained apolitical and universal in the end. Liberal Humanism promoted that literature is “timeless and connects humanity” (Barry 20). It presents literature as a mirror of universal human nature which form universal human values, making it apolitical. Focusing the moral aspects of literature, Liberal Humanism ignored its political aspects. Historical criticism did more or less the same. It focused on the biographical aspects of the writer and spirit of age (Tyson 136) in order to derive meaning from the text, ignoring the political and individual aspects that may influence the literature.

Practical Criticism and New Criticism were rooted in Liberal Humanism. Practical Criticism meant “a method which spurned belle-lettristic waffle” (Eagleton 37) and said that the greatness of a literary text can be evaluated if it is divorced from its cultural and historical contexts. New Criticism also focused on the “text itself” (Tyson 136), and emphasized on the formal elements of the text which contribute in creating complexity as well as conflicts in the text.  However, its end product of resolution of these conflicts by giving a universal moral theme which resolves the conflicts created by the literary devices. This approach again treated literature as apolitical and universal, instead of highlighting the social unrest and deterioration caused by capitalism.

All these factors contributed to the need of an approach which deals with these flaws of literature. As a result, Literary Theory was born, which focuses on problematizing the idea and unleashing the latent intentions of a literary text. Theory involves reflexivity, which involves thinking on how identities are created and philosophies are generated (Barry 31). It suggests that reality is only a construct that is constructed using language. According to Jonathan Culler, theory involves complex relations and is not easily confirmed or disproved (Culler 3). It is an unbounded group of texts that includes everything in the globe and encompasses every field in it. It disputes the common sense, universal meanings and ideas and dismantle the structures that rule these ideas. It calls to question the notions or aspects that might be ignored or taken for granted otherwise (Culler 5). The concepts of Foucault and Derrida about the identity as a social construct and about language as a tool of creating binaries, respectively, are among the examples that reveal the political nature of theory.

The backhand purpose of pacifying the masses through literature has promoted literature as an apolitical and universal element. In every age, literature, in one way or the other, has been used to uphold the power structures in the society in order to ensure the rule of the elites and the capitalists. Criticism during this time; be it Historical Criticism, Practical Criticism or New Criticism, promoted the idea of universal morality. To deal with these flaws of literature, Literary Theory stepped in an acknowledged the political concerns of the society. The shift from Literary Criticism to literary Theory thus brought forth the political and autonomous aspects of literature.

_______________________________

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.       Tyson, Louis, 1950- Critical theory today : a user‑friendly guide, Taylor & Francis Group 270 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016

2.      Bertens, Hans, Literary Theory: The Basics, Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE

3.       Barry,Peter, V.(Ed) 1995, 2002 Beginning theory An introduction to literary and cultural theory

4.      Culler, Jonathan, Literary Theory: A very short Introduction, Oxford University Press, New York.

5.      Eagleton, Terry, Literary Theory: An Introduction (criticism) 1983