origin, method and circuit of cultural study

Assignments paper no -8 (Cultural study)

Topic – Origin, method and circuit of cultural study

Prepared by – Shital D Italiya

Roll no- 31

M.A.Sem – 2

Submitted to – Smt.S.B.Gardy Department of English                           M.K.University Bhavnagar

Origin, method and circuit of cultural study

Birth of cultural study-

                   Birmingham (the Birmingham centre for contemporary cultural study) by Raymond Williams and Richard Hogarth in 1964 the appellation adopted for this institution indicated at least four point of departure from the erstwhile and learning, first, it was going to be a center for a cultural and not cultural study with which the centere probably hoped to cross the hurdles of the amorphous density attached with the noun ‘Culture’ by trying to study culture  through its various signifying elements. Second , it was going to be a centre where various disciplines studies were going o be focused upon instead of one , there by necessarily making the study inter cross disciplinary. Thirdly, the temporal marker indicated that what constitud the amorphous present knowledge trends finding in these various disciplines were equally if not more important than the well formed past, in a kind challenging the canon.

 This is in turn suggested the the centre was established for the purpose of enquiring into the multidisciplinary domains of knowledge called under the umbrella term cultural studies, rather than establishing it self because of an already existing domain of knowledge like literature. In other words, the Birmingham center for contemporary cultural study indicates that it was in search of a discourse instead of a discourse being in search of a centre or a department to house itself in.

According to Andrew Milner

“ contemporary cultural studies had emerged from out of literary studies essentially by way of a very simple move: by shifting attention from an exclusive focus on the canon of high literary text to an in principle, inclusive focus on all cultural texts, William and Hogarth attempted no more than to expand the subject matter of English literature it self to include popular culture. Literary criticism had constructed the popular, not as part of English however but as the discipline’s excluded antithetical other. Almost by default then the popular culture became the subject matter of something else, the new proto- discipline of cultural study.”

                  But that was the mind 1960 prior to certain new phenomena and second waves that were to impact the definition of culture and forcing academicians in these disciplines to redraft their epistemological blueprints. The remaining two sections would attempt an understanding of this change.

Circuit of cultural studies

         The five major cultural process which the identifies

1) Representation

2) Identity

3) Production

4) Consumption

5) Regulation

                  Taken together they complete a sort of circuit what we term the circuit of culture through which any analysis of cultural text or artifact must pass if it is to be adequately studied.

                         Web have separated these parts of the circuit into distinct section but in the real worlds the continually overlap and intertwine in complex and contigent ways. However they are the elements which taken together are what we mean by doing a cultural study of a particular object.

                        As our notion of the cultural circuit suggests meaning making is an on going process. It does not just end at a pre – ordained point. While producers attempt to encode product with particular meanibg and association this is not the end of the story or biography of a product because this tells us nothing about what those product may came to mean for those using them. In other words, meanings are not just sent by producers and received passively by consumers rather meanings are actively made in consumption, through the use to which people put these product in their everyday lives.

Methods of cultural studies

Cultural studies adopts methods of analysis from various disciplines: media studies, cultural anthropology, discourse analysis, popular culture, audience theory. Most of these methods when appropriated by cultural study are heavily influenced and informed by the theories outlined in the later chapter. They are also gearned to political reading of various aspects of culture generatind gender, race sexuality related interpretation that reveal the oppressive of hegemony structure of society.

All cuktural fprms are linked to institutions the market consumers and regularity bodies. Cultural studies believes that we cannot read cultural artifact only within the aesthetics realm. A novel must be read not only within its generic conventions and the history of the novel but also in term of the publishing industry and its profits the community of reviewers the academic field of literary criticism the politics of awards and the hype and publicity machienary that sells the book.

Media culture

                  Media culture clearly reflects the multiple sides of contemporary debats and progrrame. It is for this reason that any reading of the media must always be a political reading. It helps rein force the hegemony and power of specific political, cultural and economic groups. The representation in the media are-

Suggestive

Provocative

      This means they suggests ideologies if not alert imbibes. Media culture does not need to declare its position or ideology openly; it only needs to suggest. Showing a film star guzzling coke in a film, or using particular brands of clothing is not necessary a markrting strategy for the product. But what it does is to suggest that atars wear certain kinds of clothes and that their glamour is in part the effect of clothes.

         Media culture is provocative because it sometimes asks us to rethink what we know or reinforce that we believe in. in cuitural studies media culture is studied  through an analysis of popular media culture link films, tv serials, advertisement rather than avowedly political programmes.

Myth and morality in Frankenstein

Assignments paper no 5 (Romantic literature)

Topic- Myth and morality in Frankenstein

Name- Shital D Italiya

Roll no – 31

Submitted to – Smt. S.B .Gardy department of English

                               M.K.University Bhavnagar

Myth and morality in Frankenstein

Introduction:

                            In a lot of ways this wasn’t quite what I expected. I suppose the main thing was that most of the pieces that have based themselves around the Frankenstein story have placed quite a lot of emphasis on the act of creating the monster. The original on the other hand deals with it in just a couple of pages. It is for those who don’t know the basic of the story, Frankenstein gets obsessed with the nature of life, makes a creature bring it to life and reject it. The monsters then spend the rest of the book utterly destroying his life by praying on those around him, while simultaneously blaming Frankenstein for facing it to be that way.

                     For the most part it’s well written, though there are times when you can see impatience in ties nineteen year old writer. The instant hate of Frankenstein for his creating doesn’t strike me as entirely convincing while the ability of the thing to miraculously track down those around him doesn’t quite work either. The center of the story is more the monster’s motivation than it is the actual mechanics of vengeance. It is evil because it was created that way? It is evil because of repeated rejection do human concept of morality even applies to something non human?

                       It raises some intriguing about the role of other people in making us who we are. The monster, cut off from other and abandoned, is left without a moral compass. As, it might be argued, is Frankenstein, who slips into solitude well away from his family while working on the thing. When the monster wants to destroy him, moreover, it is not Frankenstein he attacks but those around him. I suspect on the whole, that its book not about what it means to make a monster, but about what other do to keep us human.

Myth into the novel

                          Fact+ fiction = Myth

                        “Myth is symbolic projection of people’s hopes, values, fears and aspiration”.

              Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein is lauded as one of the earliest examples of science fiction literature. Telling the story of the talented but misguided Dr. Victor Frankenstein and the hideous monster he creates, Shelly’s novel is recognized as one of the most engaging horror stories even written. The creation myth within the book has served as inspiration for modern films graphics novels, songs and even horror themed episodes of numerous television shows.

According to Alan w. watts

“Myth is to be defined as a complex of stories, some no doubt fact and fantasy which is for various reasons. Human being regards as demon station of the inner meaning of the universe and of human life.”

                Myth critic concerned to seek out those mysterious elements that inform certain literary work and that elicit with almost uncanny force, dramatic and universal human reaction study of myth reveals about the mind and character of people.myth also reflects more profound reality.

William Black – myth is fundamental, the dramatic representation of our deepest instinctual life, or primary awareness of man in the universe capable of many configuration, upon which all particular opinions and attitude depends.”

           In the novel we can find the selfishness and immature ego of monster and it leads the result of this devilish mind. Here, monster himself becomes the myth of the novel how? Let’s see

1) His name is “Frankenstein”

                  Many critics believes that the monster’s name to be Frankenstein, he is actually never refer to by any name in the book. Dr .Frankenstein does call him other hateful names such as devil and fiend. According to Chris Baldric

“In Frankenstein’s shadow; myth, monstrosity and nineteenth century writing”

2) He is green with bolts in his neck.

             In the novel, especially chapter 5 of the book, victor describes the monster as having been designed to have limbs that were in propitiation and I had selected his features as beautiful.beautifil! Great god! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair of a lustrous black and flowing his teeth so a pearly whiteness the monster was definitely not as hideous s popular culture has updated his look to be!.

3) He died at the end of the book.

                  While many assume that the monster dies after off I to the frozen arctic wasteland after his creature dies, it is never specified whether the monster survives in the harsh wilderness, as noted by mental floss.

4) He lacked intelligence

                 Through the book the monster is portrayed as both sensitive and intelligent. He lacks only the companionship another being just like him, and his only acts of rage and cruelty come as a result of his loneliness. So there you have it, the monster was both compassionate and knowledgeable not some heartless creature.

5) The monster is longer than any human being.

              The monster was actually eight feet tall in the book. Thus here, have been living human beings who could look him in the eye. None the less he would still stand among the world’s tallest humans, so that definitely warrants recognition.

Frankenstein – The modern Prometheus.

                            In addition to the biblical account of the creation, Adam and Eve and the fall, the Greek myth of Prometheus also like behind the text. The myth says that

Myth behind Prometheus

                        Zeus, the supreme God of the Greeks asked Prometheus to create humanity from mud and water. Prometheus became a great benefactor to mankind, teaching them architecture, astronomy, navigation, medicine and a number of other useful skills. Prometheus later played a tick on Zeus, who retaliated by withholding the gift of fire from mankind. But Prometheus defied Zeus and stole fire from the heaven to bring to earth. As a punishment, Prometheus was bound to a rock and everybody a giant eagle ate his liver, which was miraculously renewed every night. He was eventually rescued from his suffering by Hercules, the Greek hero.

         As a further punishment, Zeus caused the beautiful but thoughtless Pandora to open a jar in which were imprisoned all the ills that afflict humanity illness, old age, the need to labour, insanity and vice.

Mary Shelley’s sources

ü Her reading of Greek literature as a child and young woman.

ü Byron publishes a poem called Prometheus in July 1816.

ü In the same summer, just before beginning work on Frankenstein, she helped Byron by making a fair copy of canto 3 of his poem child Harold, which contains reference to Prometheus during the year 1818 and 1819, and probably discussed the poem with her earlier than this, while she was writing Frankenstein.

Moralistic approach in novel.

         1) Victor Frankenstein committed an act of hubris. He created life. That is the job of God, not man.

2) Once he died create life, he walked away from it without offering nurturing and guidance. That is morally wrong as well.

EXAMPLE; we are responsible for our children. It is our job to raise them and care for them until such time as they are ready to live independently.

Victor simply walked away from his creature which was not only an injustice to the creature but an injustice to the world’s especially his own family on whom the creature sought revenge. Those are the moral issues. Being a gothic novel, one of the requirements is that in the end hr or she pay for their Trans aggressions, victor certainly does pay for his transgressions against God, the creature his family and the world. Society behaves immorally but this is unfixable. Shelly shows it is ethically wrong to treat people so severely and can only lead to further destruction. The justice system is also behaving morally incorrect for condemning Justine to a crime which they had little proof she committed.  

Morality without God

       Throughout Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, knowledge of the existence of a creature has a crippling effect on the on the creature as he struggle to reconcile his own perception of himself with his maddening desire for divine approval and acceptance. In the end, through Frankenstein Shelley conclude that moral and spiritual development the shedding be attained through the dogmatic belief structure, resulting in the eliminate of god towards the attainment of self realization.

Conclusion

Considering the fact that the creature lives outside the bounds of civilized society, and thus lacks the enculturation that contribute to a sense of community to help ease the “awesome” thought and perceived conception of god , it becomes clear that Shelley may be trying to relate the idea that only through society and interaction with others can a human being grapple with the enormity of god.

Culture and Anarchy

Assignment paper no – 6

Topic – Culture and Anarchy: An essay in political and

                Social criticism

Roll no – 31

Prepared by – Shital Italia

Submitted to – Smt.S.B.Gardi Department of English

                                     M.K.University Bhavnagar.

Culture and anarchy: An essay in political and social criticism – by Mathew Arnold.

Introduction:

                Culture and anarchy is a controversial philosophical work written by the celebrated Victorian poet and critic Mathew Arnold., composed during a time a time of unprecedented social and political change, the essay argues for a restructuring of England’s social ideology. It reflect Arnold’s passionate conviction that the uneducated English masses could be molded into conscientious individual who strive for human perfection through the  harmonious system of education must replace the programmed which emphasize rigid individual moral conduct at the expense of free thinking and devotion to community.

Major concept of this essay.

                     Arnold does not create specific fictional character to express his ideas in culture and anarchy, he dose impulse his essay with narrative persona that can best be described as a Socratic figure. This sagacious mentor serve as a thematic link between each of the chapter, underscoring the importance of self knowledge in order to fully engage the concept of pursuing human perfection. This mentor also identifies and classifies three group is the barbarian, or the aristocratic segenement of society, who are so involved with their archaic tradition and gluttony that they have lost touch with the rest of society which they were once responsible. The second group for whom Arnold persona serves his most scorn criticism is the philistine or the selfish and materialistic middle class who have been guided into a torpid state of puritanical self centeredness by nonconforming religious sect. the third group is the populace or the disenfranchised, poverty stricken lower class who have been let down by the negligent barbarians and greedy philistine. For Arnold, the populace represents the most malleable and the most deserving, social class to be elevated out of anarchy through the pursuit of culture.

What is culture and anarchy?

                Arnold introduces the principle theme of culture and anarchy directly in the essay’s title. Culture involves an active personal quest so forsake egocentricity, prejudice and narrow mindedness and to embrace an equally balanced development of all human talent in the pursuit of flawlessness. It is a process of self discipline which initiates a metamorphosis from self interest to conscientiousness and an enlightened understanding of one’s singular obligation to an all inclusive utopian society.

According to Stefan Collin

                                  “Culture is an ideal of human life, a standard of excellence and fullness for the development of our capacity, aesthetic, intellectual and moral”

Anarchy represents the absence of guiding principle in one’s life which prevents one from striving to attain perfection. This lack of purpose manifests’ itself in such social and religious defects as laissez fair commercialism and puritanical hierocracy. Arnold emphasize on egocentric self – assertions has devastanding impact on providing for the need of the community; indeed it can only lead to a future of increased anarchy as the rapidly evolvinis the ideas modern democracy secures the enfranchisement of the middle and lower classes without instilling in them the lead for culture. Inherent in Arnold’s argument is the idea of Hebraism and Hellenism. Hebraism represents the action of people who are either ignorant or resistant to the idea of culture. Hebraists subscribe to a strict, narrow minded method off moral conduct and self control which does not allow them to visualize a utopian future of belonging to an enlightened community. Hellenism signifies the open minded, spontenious exploration of classical ideas and their application to contemporary society. Indeed Arnold believes that the idea promulgated by such philosopher as Plato and Socrates can help resolve the moral ethical problem resulting the bitter conflict between the society, politics and religion during the Victorian age. As serious as Arnold’s message is, he elect to employ the device of irony to reveal his philosophical point to his reader. Through irony, satire and urban humor, the authors deftly entertain his reader with example of educational travesties, he wittily exposes the enemies of reform and culture, and he beguiles his reader with self detracting humor in order to endear them to his ideas.

Culture as study in perfection

Culture as a great help of out of our present difficulties; culture being a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which most concern to us.

     “The best which has been thought and said in the world”.

Through this knowledge, turning a stream of fresh and free thought upon our stock nation and habits, which we now follow staunchly but mechanically. This and this alone all inward operation, is the scope of the following essay, and the culture we recommend is, above all an inward operation.

EXAMPLE-      Arnold has given an example of American culture. The news daily

                          TIMES had praised the advancement of America as “America without religious establishment, seem to get ahead f us all, even in light and the thing of the mind”. But by not laying the foundation of culture, America has created intellectual mediocrity, their vulgarity of manners, their superficial sprit, their lack of general intelligence.

              Culture which is the study of perfection, leads as Arnold in the essay shown, “to convince of true human perfection as a harmonious perfection developing all sides of our humanity; and as a general perfection developing all parts of society. For if one member suffer the other member must suffer with it; and the fever there is that the true way of salvation, the hander that way is to find.

                 Culture is considered not merely as the endeavor to see and learn this. But as the endeavor also to make it prevail, the moral, social and beneficent character of culture become manifest.

“The kingdom of god within you”- religion

     Culture: sweetness and light

                                       For Arnold, culture is connected with the idea of sweetness and light. He tries to explain this idea with the help of Greek words aphuia and euphoria. The euphoria is the man, who stands towards sweetness and light the aphesis, on the other hand is our philistine. The immense spiritual significance of the Greek is due to their having been inspired with this central and happy idea of the essential character of human perfection: and Mr. Bright’s misperception of culture as a smattering of Greek and Latin, comes itself, after all from this wonderful significance of the Greek having affected the very machinery of out education, and is in itself a kind of homage to it. In this making sweetness and light to be character of perfection culture is of like spirit with poetry, follows one law with other.

 The pursuit of perfection then, is the pursuit of sweetness and light. He who works for sweetness and light works to make reason and the will of god prevail. He, who works for hatred, works only for confusion. Culture hates hatred; culture has one great passion, the passion for sweetness and light.

Anarchy in society

                       According to Arnold ‘freedom of doing as one likes,’ it was one of those thing which English thus worshipped in itself, without enough regarding the ends for which freedom is to be desired. He agree with the prevalent notion that it is a most happy and important thing for a man merely to be able to do as he likes. But the problem is “on what he is to do when he is thus free to do as he likes, we do not lay as so much stress”. Even though the British constitution and liberal preciseness like Mr. Bright forcibly say that – “British constitution is a system which stops and paralyses ant power in interfering with the free action of individual that the central idea of English life and politics is the assertions of personal liberty”.

Arnold has divides the society in to three class the is

1) Aristocratic class

2) Middle class

3) Working class

            Three great of England are the aristocratic, the middle class and the working class. Arnold advises the virtuous mean and would like to point out the express and the defect of all these three classes of English people.

A)   The aristocratic class

                   The aristocratic class Arnold calls the barbarian. They are champion of personal liberty and often anarchical in their tendencies yet they have their own individualism field, sport and manly exercises are a fashion with them. The sense of chivalry of the barbarians makes the aristocrats practice politeness in the action and manner. All these outward qualities such as politeness in and grace in manner come directly included by the aristocrats from the barbarians. Even the culture of the aristocrats is skin deep, external lacking in inward virtue.

B)    The middle class

                      The philistines are the middle class, according to Arnold. By philistine, in its original German sense, is meant the uncalculated people like most of the shopkeepers. The philistines are worldly wise men, captains of industry busy in trade and commerce. As a notion of shopkeepers, philistines have brought all economic prosperity and progress in the country. They built cities, they have made railroads and lustily they have produced the greatest mercantile navy the world has ever seen.

C)    The working class

                      The working classes who help the empire builders are the populace in Arnold’s parlance poverty and squalor has dogged the footsteps of the populace wherever they are engaged in running the whets of industry. They are raw and half develop. They are being exploited by the philistine and the barbarians so long. Now there is a satire and an awakening among the populace. Democratic awakening has downed upon their poverty and Aqualon. The people of this class are becoming politically conscious and are coming out from the obscurities to assert “an Englishman’s heaven- born privilege of doing as he likes, meeting where he likes, bailing what he likes braking what he likes”.

                      Thus Arnold finds a sort of caste system in England consisting of the barbarians the philistines and the populace.

         Yet there is something of a common dominator in all the three classes. A common basis of human nature from that above the basis of culture must be founded sweetness and a light.

Aim of Hebraism and Hellenism

                        The final aim of both Hebraism and Hellenism is man’s perfection or salvation so the aim and end of both Hebraism and Hellenism is admirable. And Hellenism is too seeing thing as they are and Hebraism is conduct and obedience. Right thinking and right action both are motivated by the desire of the body; and at the bottom of this design lurks a desire in man for reason and he the will of god and. So in the ultimate analysis Arnold find that “the governing ideas of Hellenism is spontaneity of consciousness that of Hebraism, strictness or conscience.”

                     Again the emphasis of Hebraism is a doing more then knowing, and doing in Christianity is doing the will of god. On the other hand Hellenism means thinking ciearly, seeing thing in their think of the original sin of man so through Hebraism again you get a sense of sin and a consequent to free yourself from the body of the sin. Not either of them says Arnold is a law unto itself but each in its own way contribution to human development.

                                                                                           Thank you

                  

Rasa Theory

Assignment Paper no – 7

Topic – Rasa Theory

Submitted to- S.B.Gardy Department of English

                             M.K.Bhavnagar University

                                         Bhavnagar

Prepared by- Italiya Shital D

     Rasa Theory

Introduction:

              Bharatiya Natyashastra and encyclopedia, is the earliest work on dramaturgy available at present.Bharatmuni and Ancient Indian musicologist has authored the theoretical treatise, the Natyashastra during two hundred B.C. to two hundred A.D.It is even known as 5^th ‘Veda’ because of it’s immense varieties. There are 36 thousands ‘sutras’ (couplet) and 6 thousands ‘shlokas’ through which Bharatmuni talks about performing arts, theatre, dance and music. That is why modern Indian critic often use to say that

                      ‘’Natyashastra is the foundation of fine arts in India’’.

                    The major questions being discussed by Bharatmuni in his treatise ‘The – Natyashastra’ is that how was drama born? How should one built a theatre dances like Tandava, the difference varieties of acting, the customs of character, language, prosody and music employed in drama, the nature of rasa and bhava etc. He has given an analytical theory as far as rasa is concerned.

What is Rasa?

               According to Bharatmuni

            ‘’ Vibhava anubhava vyabhacari samyoght rasa nishpattihi’’

              Vibhava means determines, anubhava means consequences and vyabhacari means transitory state or feeling.

               The Sanskrit meaning of rasa is that juice or essence. However Bharatmuni has used the word in different context. The word rasa here dose not like any type of liquid or syrup.

According to Makarand Paranjap

             ‘’ Rasa in Bharatmuni, is nothing

                But the exposition of the structure

                Of human experience’’.

                 The Vedic meaning of rasa is essence and it refers to the experience of the supreme reality, which is one of the self existence delights. Rasa is the emotion resulting from a contemplation of a various feelings.

According to V.S. Seturaman

                  ‘’ A blending of various bhava arise

                    Certain emotion, accomplished by

                    Thrill and a sense of joy is ‘Rasa’ ‘’.

                  Bharatmuni himself identified the four kinds of bhava responsible for the various rasas, they are known as ‘ a state of mind or state of being’ they are

1)    Sthayibhava

2)    Anubhava

3)    Sattvikabhava

4)    Vyabhicaribhava

·       1) Sthayibhava

           It is known as a dominant state of mind. There are eight more Sthayibhava like love, mirth, sorrow, anger, energy, terror, disgust and astonishment.

·       2) Anubhava

            Body language expression and non verbal elements are known as Anubhava.

·       3) Sattvikabhava

             It is also known as ‘’Vibhava’’ which includes both ‘Alabaman and udipana’. Vibhava is the adjective condition and producing emotions. There are eight kinds of Sattvikabhava like paralysis, perspiration, horriplation change of voice etc.

·       4) Vyabhacari bhava

            It is known as a transitory state of mind. One may ask here wherefore are they called vyabhicarians? It may be replied: VI and abha are two prepositions; car is a root employed in the sense of movement or motion. The vyabhicarians are so called because they move prominently towards abha creating the poetic sentiment in a variety of ways. Equipped with the acting based on speech, body and concentrated mind, the lead or carry the spectator in actual dramatic performance to the poetic sentiments, hence they are called Vyabhicarians.

              Bharata says that the drama renders the bhava of all the worlds. Hence, evidently, he means states and thinks existing emotions. The bhava are bringing into being rasa which is the kavyartha. The end of all meaning of poetry, it is the functional aspect of the word bhava. This is emphasized.

According to V.S.Seturaman

        ‘’ Bhavyanti means ‘to bring into being and to make pervade’ ‘’.

                   Bhava are through an element which makes the essence or poetry, rasa and pervade the heart of the reader. In this sense, bhava includes Sthayibhava, Anubhava, Vyabhicaribhava, Sattvikabhava or Vibhava. Though Bharatmuni emphasized on functional aspect of word, he seems to have realized that in the last analysis, it is the mental state rendered in a poem, which manifested its essence and that be characters and their actions are only the vehicle of the mental state. Bharatmuni himself contrasted the meaning by speaking of the bhava as though they included only the three varieties, eight sthayins, thirty three vyabhicarians and eight Sattvikabhava. However they are the 49 bhava capable, manifesting the rasa of the poem. On the one hand bhava mean all the elements having the energy or power to the manifest rasa.

   

                  Though the term Sthayibhava does not figure in Bharat’s definition for the current understanding of the theory of rasa, it is necessary for one to elucidate the concept. However the words figure in Bharat’s exploitation of the rasa. Rasa sutras according to Sthayibhava are of the nature of vasna or sansakara.Every human being is born with a set of instinctual propensities in herited from earlier generation and because sited on the bed of his consciousness.

Types of rasa

Sentiments	Meaning	God	Colour
1)Shrungara	attractiveness	Vishnu	Light green
2)Hasya	Mirth/comedy	pramatha	white
3)Rudra	Furg	Rudra	Red
4)Karun yam	Compassion/tragedy	Yama	Gray
5)Bibhatsam	Disgust/aversion	Shiva	Blue
6)Bhayanakam	Horror/Terror	Kala	Black
7)Vira	Heroic mood	Indra	Yellowish
8)Adbhutam	Wonder/Amazement	Brahma	Yellow
9)Shantam	Peace	-	White

Though the essence of all the rasas is the same, the test of it acquires distinctiveness because of its association with the vibhavas and anubhavas during its experience. The syrup of wood apple, time and sogad rood is all syrups and all sweet but have a distingue sweetness. The rasa may be classified from the same view point like syrup.Bharatmuni classified eight rasas equivivalent to eight sthyibhavas.

A) The erotic sentiment.

                 The shringar rasa processed from the dominant state of love rati and is associated with the God Vishnu. This sentiment is associated with bright and elegant attire. The shringar or amour is not only first in the list but also in popularity. The mutual affection of love is found not only between men and women but also between birds, animals, and all the other creatures, since love convergent with every heart, it has the prominent place among the rasas. It has two varieties.

                        1) Love – in – union

                         2) Love – in – separation.

                However in separation there will be hope great or small of that meeting later. Even in love, love in union there will be a fear of separation, some times before the first union takes place desire may grow dominant and make the lover languish.

EXAMPLE: It is found in the first three acts of “Shakuntala” by Kalidasa, after the union separation may occurs on account of a quarrel due to occurs wended pride, journey and light of the separation in Shakuntala occurs due to curse. The whole idea can be summed up where in V.S.Seturaman says

             “Shrungara is reach in pleasure associated with desired objects favorable music and poetry and is related with either the union or the separation of men and women”

B) The comic sentiment

                         Hasyarasa processed the dominant state of laughter or mirth and is associated with pramatha – the god of comedy. According to T.N SHRINKANTAIYYA the analysis of humor is extremely difficult. The modern philosophers who have set out to examine the origin of this manifold humor and the nature of it’s ‘charm have not yet arrived at a define conclusion. While taking about the humor Bharatmuni says that

        “The humor arise from the grotesque dress and costume of other, shameless character, craze for sensual pleasure, mischief, foul words, physical handicaps, accusation of other and the like…”

        He has given two main kinds of Hasya exiting in one’s own self and existing in other.

I) self centered…when one is laughing himself, it exist in one self.

ii) Centered in other.

              When one makes other’s laugh it exist in other.

              On the basis of it recent theorists admit that humor is of six kinds. Which are as following?

   

                                                          Slight smile (smita)     

                                                         Smile (Hasita)     

                                                         Gentle laughter (vihasita)    

                                                         Laughter of ridicule (uphasita)      

                                                 Vulgar laughter

                                                        Excessive laughter (atihasita)

                             

Two by two they belong respectively to the superior, the middling and the inferior types of person.

a) The slight smile.

                 It deals with the superior type should be characterized by slightly, blown chicks and elegant glances and in the teeth should not be visible.

b) Smile.

                It should be distinguished by blowing eyes, face and cheeks and in it the teeth should be slightly visible.

c) Gentle laughter.

                The gentle laughter should have slight sound, sweetness and should be suitable to the accession and in it the eyes and the cheek should be contracted and the face joyful.

d) Laughter of Ridicule.

               During the laughter of ridicule the nose should be expanded, the eyes should be squinting and the shoulder and the head should bent.

e) Vulgar laughter.

              The laughter on occasion not suitable to it, the laughter with tears in one’s eyes, or with the shoulder and the head violently shaking, is called the vulgar laughter.

f) Excessive laughter.

              The excessive laughter is that in which the eyes are expanded and tearful. Sound is loud and excessive and the sight are covered by hands.

C) The pathetic sentiment.

                                  Karun rasa arises from the dominant state of sorrow. It is usually presented through affliction under a curse, separation, from death, loss of wealth, dangerous and grievous accident or any other similar misfortune. Theatrically it is presented on the stage by means like shedding of tears, lamentation, dryness of mouth, change of color fainting etc. some of the best example in Sanskrit of work generates pathos are

                               “Shakuntala”

                                “Raghuvansham” by kalidasa

                                “Kadambari’’ – by Banabhatt

 

In Shakuntala separation of lover due to curse generates pathos. While in Raghuvansham the death of indumati, stimulates the pathetic sentiment. According to sreekantaiyya

                                “Pathetic is a very dedicate rasa, during its experience the heart melt a great deal”

                       Even among Sanskrit poets, Bhavbhuti went to the extent of suggesting that pathos alone is rasa.

D) The furious sentiment.

                            The sthayins for raudra or for fury is worth krodh.It fundamentally owes its origin to raksha, danavas and haughty men and is usually caused by fights, war. The raudra rasa is created by anger, rape, abuse, insult, untrue, allegation, exercising threatening and the similar determinants.

Accordingly.

                       “The raudra rasa is created by striking, cutting, mutilation and piecing in fight and tumult of the battles and other similar thing.”

                        Theatrically the raudra rasa is represented on the stage through red eyes, knitting of eye brows, billing of lips and other similar expression, transitory states connected with it. It represents the mind determination, energy, and fury checking voice and like these.

E) The heroic sentiment.

                       The sthayins for vira is vigor (utsaha) and is associated with Indra. Accordingly

                        “The special condition such as energy, perseverance, optimism, absence of surprise and presence of mind facilitates the nishpattihi of vira rasa”

               The heroic sentiment is related with the superior type of person. Theatrically the vira rasa is represented on the stage through firmness, patience, heroism, charity, diplomacy and other similar thing.

              Bharat divides the rasa of velour into three kinds.

Ø Velour of munificence.

Ø Velour of virtue.

Ø Velour of war.

Some of the recent critics added velour of mercy (daya vira). All these velour are inter-related with each other.

F) The terrible sentiment.

                    The terrible rasa has its dominant state of fear which is black in color and it associated with deity ‘yama’.It is related with bright and scariness. It is usually reacted by gothic atmosphere like hideous, noise, sight of ghost, panic anxiety due to the ultimate cry of dangerous and wild animals, state of solitude ,battle etc. Theatrically speaking it is easy to perform the Bhayanakam rasa. It is presented on the stage through trembling of the hands and the feet, horriplation, change of color, heavy breathing etc.

G) The odious sentiment.

                       Sometimes a doubt may arise how odium whose source is disgust can become a rasa. If enjoyment is found in pathos, it is in the distress is two great. Even when a description of the repulsive is learned feeling it many a time as it is actually seem and experienced in real life.

                     The odious rasa has as it’s the dominant state of disgust .it is usually created by determinants such as hearing of unpleasant, offensive impose and harmful thing or seeing them or discussing them ,viewing a nauseated sight and other similar things. Theatrically the Bibhatsam rasa is represented on the stage through narrowing down of mouth, vomiting, spitting, shaking the limbs in ulterdisgust.

H) The marvelous sentiment.

                      Like shringar rasa which is perhaps more wide spread is Adbhutam. All experience, wonder, fantastic, astonishment which is its basic wander begins from the time. In poetry and drama there is a special impotence for figure of speech like hyperbole and fancied comparison, which generates marvelous sentiment.

                  It is usually related by determinants such as sight of heavenly begins or events, attainment of desired object, entrance into superior mention, temple or witnessing magical and illusory acts. Theatrically it is represented on the stage through wide opening eyes, looking with fixed gaze, horriplation, tears of joy altering words of approbation and other similar thing.

According to T.N. Sreekantaiyya.

                 “The principle of rasa is the very kernel of Indian poetics. It is the nectar that our thinker have obtained after churching the ocean of poetry”

                            Till now we have considered the matter of pleasant experience called rasa by Bharata. But probably from the earliest period and most importantly the debate whether Shantam should be considered a rasa or not took place. Finally in 11^th century, the debate reached to a conclusion by the time of Abhinavgupta he admitted the Shantam rasa and awarded it the 1^st place.

According to Mohan Thampi

                        “Majority of the traditionalist; consider that nine rasas are enough to cope with infinite variety of literary production.”