Saturday, November 12, 2016

paper no.9 A history of the age background reading A.c.ward’s twentieth century literature.

To evaluate my assignment


Name: - chintavan bhungani
Course: - M.A. English
Semester: - 3
Batch: - 2015-2017
Enrolment no: - PG15101006
Submitted to: - Smt. S.B.Gardi Dept. of English MKBU
Email id: - cnbhungani7484@gmail.com
Paper no: -   9 the modernist  literature
Topic: - A history of the age background reading A.c.ward’s twentieth century literature.
ANS:-
 

From this image of chart we can see that how the twentieth century begins .this age is one of most important and very interesting age because all the new and different things and changing in writing of literature is done in this age. The modern age is very different from the other ages in English Literature. The modern age is known as “Modernist Movement” in English Literature. The period of modern age is 1915 to 1945 and this age is totally different from the Victorian age.
                    The people of modern age reject old forms and trying to do a new technique and new style. Even in literature also many of the poet and writer wants to do different and bring something new in their writing.
                   The terms modern and modernism pertain to the beliefs and philosophy of the society during the late 19th to the early 20th century. Because the concept has two different accepted meaning.           
Literary Movements and Periods:-
                                                              Literature constantly evolves as new movements emerge to speak to the concerns of different groups of people and historical periods. In this age there are two movements start; Artistic and Literary Movements.
Absurd, literature of the (c. 1930–1970): A movement, primarily in the theater, that responded to the seeming illogicality and purposelessness of human life in works marked by a lack of clear narrative, understandable psychological motives, or emotional catharsis. Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot is one of the most celebrated works in the theater of the absurd.
Beat Generation (1950s–1960s): A group of American writers in the 1950s and 1960s who sought release and illumination though a bohemian counterculture of sex, drugs, and Zen Buddhism. Beat writers such as Jack Kerouac (On the Road) and Allen Ginsberg (Howl) gained fame by giving readings in coffeehouses, often accompanied by jazz music.
Dadaism (1916–1922): An avant-garde movement that began in response to the devastation of World War I. Based in Paris and led by the poet Tristan Tzara, the Dadaists produced nihilistic and antilogical prose, poetry, and art, and rejected the traditions, rules, and ideals of prewar Europe.
Lost Generation (c. 1918–1930s): A term used to describe the generation of writers, many of them soldiers that came to maturity during World War I. Notable members of this group include F. Scott Fitzgerald, John Dos Passes, and Ernest Hemingway, whose novel The Sun Also Rises embodies the Lost Generation’s sense of disillusionment.
Magic realism (c. 1935–present): A style of writing, popularized by Jorge Luis Borges, Gabriel García Márquez, Günter Grass, and others, that combines realism with moments of dream-like fantasy within a single prose narrative.
Modernism (1890s–1940s): A literary and artistic movement that provided a radical breaks with traditional modes of Western art, thought, religion, social conventions, and morality. Major themes of this period include the attack on notions of hierarchy; experimentation in new forms of narrative, such as stream of consciousness; doubt about the existence of knowable, objective reality; attention to alternative viewpoints and modes of thinking; and self-preferentiality as a means of drawing attention to the relationships between artist and audience, and form and content.
High modernism (1920s): Generally considered the golden age of modernist literature, this period saw the publication of James Joyce’s Ulysses, T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land, Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway, and Marcel Proust’s In Search of Lost Time.
Nouveau Roman (“New Novel”) (c. 1955–1970): A French movement, led by Alain Robbe-Grillet, that dispensed with traditional elements of the novel, such as plot and character, in favor of neutrally recording the experience of sensations and things.
Postcolonial literature (c. 1950s–present): Literature by and about people from former European colonies, primarily in Africa, Asia, South America, and the Caribbean. This literature aims both to expand the traditional canon of Western literature and to challenge Eurocentric assumptions about literature, especially through examination of questions of otherness, identity, and race. Prominent postcolonial works include Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, V. S. Naipaul’s A House for Mr. Biswas, and Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children. Edward Said’s Orientalism (1978) provided an important theoretical basis for understanding postcolonial literature.
Postmodernism (c. 1945–present): A notoriously ambiguous term, especially as it refers to literature, postmodernism can be seen as a response to the elitism of high modernism as well as to the horrors of World War II. Postmodern literature is characterized by a disjointed, fragmented pastiche of high and low culture that reflects the absence of tradition and structure in a world driven by technology and consumerism. Julian Barnes, Don DeLillo, Toni Morrison, Vladimir Nabokov, Thomas Pynchon, Salman Rushdie, and Kurt Vonnegut are among many who are considered postmodern authors.
Surrealism (1920s–1930s): An avant-garde movement, based primarily in France, that sought to break down the boundaries between rational and irrational, conscious and unconscious, through a variety of literary and artistic experiments. The surrealist poets, such as André Breton and Paul Eluard, were not as successful as their artist counterparts, who included Salvador Dalí, Joan Miró, and René Magritte.
The Twentieth Century, Modernisms and Modernity
·       Society and Culture:-
                                                The twentieth century introduces a cultural period in which individuals not only reject the past but also question the very basis of knowledge and consider the possibility that knowledge and concepts once thought to be fixed and objective are instead constantly shifting and subjective.
Philosophers and thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzche, Henri Bergson, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud challenged nineteenth-century science and the positivist confidence in its ability to explain both the physical and social worlds in completely rational terms.
World War I had a powerful impact in its aftermath, causing Europeans to reconsider their very belief systems and leading to widespread dissatisfaction with the authorities who, many believed, were motivated by greed, class exploitation, and hunger for power.
A growing interest in psychology influenced by the theories of Sigmund Freud contributed to a new emphasis on the internal reality of individuals, the importance of the self, and the alienation of the self in modern society.
New studies in the relationship between reality and appearance led to the philosophies of phenomenology and existentialism as represented in the philosophical writings of Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre.
After the Second World War, the rise of Communism, the gradual disintegration of colonialism, and the exponential development of technology, existentialism flourished in the 1940s and 1950s as individuals struggled to find meaning in an increasingly fragmented and confusing world.
A growing awareness of a variety of other cultures that have differing worldviews than traditional European or American ones undercut the assumptions of “cultural parochialism” and led to pluralistic and postcolonial perspectives.
·       The Bloomsbury Group:-
                                                          He Bloomsbury Group was a small, informal association of artists and intellectuals who lived and worked in the Bloomsbury area of central London. Most prominent of these was novelist and essayist Virginia Woolf. In all, only about a dozen people at any one time could have called themselves members of the group. Beginning shortly before 1910, the Bloomsbury Group gathered at irregular intervals for conversation, companionship, and the refueling of creative energy. The members of Bloomsbury, or “Bloomsberries,” would more or less maintain allegiance to their mutual philosophy of an ideal society, even through a World War and three decades of tectonic shifts in the political climate. They had no codified agenda or mission. They were not political in the ordinary sense of the word. Most importantly, there was no application or initiation required to become a member. Bloomsbury was an informal hodgepodge of intellectual friends, and one either merited inclusion to that circle or one did not. No rules of order, as in a committee, governed the way in which Bloomsbury managed their interactions. Instead, they held impromptu dinners and gatherings where any number of topics was the subject of serious discussion and contemplation. These intellectual exchanges served as the main influence on later work by individual members. By no means were all members in full agreement on all subjects. Some of Bloomsbury’s most stimulating ideas and writings were borne out of internal disagreement and strife. One can safely say that each member of Bloomsbury was leftist in his or her politics, although as individuals they expressed their politics in very different ways.
A significant fact about the Bloomsbury Group is that the members, for the most part, did not achieve their greatest fame until later in life. The Group held its discussions and parties while all the participants were still virtually unknown. The men of Bloomsbury were students at King’s College and Trinity College, constituents of Cambridge University. They were almost all high achievers and active in student life, yet one must imagine that they didn’t quite fit in as well as other students. Many of the Bloomsberries held particular ideas on human society which at the time seemed beyond radical. For example, the noncritical assessment of homosexuality, however appropriate today, was considered a serious moral error in the early twentieth century. Indeed, many of the Bloomsberries called into question the idea of traditional monogamous marriage. Several advocated for and practiced polyamory – multiple, consensual romantic partners. The idea of this level of sexual liberation in Edwardian England was unspeakable. In a sense, they made it very easy for their generation to dismiss them as quacks and deviants. However, none could deny that the Bloomsbury Group brought a great deal of intellectual clout to bear on any issue of the day.
·       Members of the Bloomsbury Group
v Strachey, Giles Lytton (1880-1932)
v Bell, Clive (1881-1964)
v Keynes, John Maynard (1883-1946)
v Fry, Roger (1866-1934)
v Grant, Duncan (1885-1978)
v MacCarthy, Desmond (1877-1952)
v Bell, Vanessa Stephen (1879-1961)
v Woolf, Leonard (1880-1969)
v MacCarthy, Mary (1882-1953)
v Stephen, Thoby (1880-1906)
v Stephen, Adrian (1883-1948)
v Carrington, Dora (1893-1932)
v Sydney-Turney, Saxon (1880-1962)

1. Decay of Character and Hero:-
Psychological theories of Sigmund Freud created an impact on modernist writers, Writers found that the traditional method of portraying characters was erroneous, Death of both hero and villain
2. Decay of Plot:-
Modern story does not follow a chronological order, Modern stories do not have a beginning or end, Modernist literature requires an active reader
3. Stress on Individual:-
Individual is more important for modernist writers than society, in a modern story, there are no universally accepted values of social conduct 
4. Realism:-
Modern stories are realistic, for writers, there is no such thing as absolute truth; everything is relative.  , Modernist literature is a portrayal of life as it is.
CONCLUTION:-
At the end of the twentieth century, as geopolitical boundaries blurred and shifted, an increased recognition of the diversity of cultural identities in ethnic, gender, and sexual issues led to a correspondent pluralism in writing that depicts the full range of human diversity. Included in these new perspectives is attention to the efforts of postcolonial cultures to develop a consciousness apart from that of their colonizers.


WORK CITED:-
Ø http://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/nawest/content/overview/modern.htm


To evaluate my assignment





Saturday, April 2, 2016

Paper no.8:-cultural studies - Four Goals of Cultural Studies



DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH MAHARAJAH KRISHNAKUMARSINHJI BHAVNAGAR UNIVERSITY

CONCEPT OF CULTURE AND ANARCHY BY MATTHEW ARNOLD

                      Semester:-M.A SEM 2                               Paper no.8:-cultural studies

ROLL NO:-6

ENROLLMENT NO:- PG15101006
EMAIL ID:-cnbhungani7484@gmail.com
Blog id:- chintavanbhungani201517.blog.spot.com

Four Goals of Cultural Studies

Introduction:-
The word “culture” itself it so difficult to pin down, “cultural studies” is hard to define. As far as cultural study is concerned, it has broader meaning because we see from various perspective then an individual can know what actually it lays in the meaning. Therefore firstly it becomes my job to deconstruct the meaning of culture as the meaning is elaborated according to different critics so at first we will have glance on the meaning of culture.

What is culture?
 ‘Culture’, derives from ‘Cultura’ and ‘colere’ meaning ‘to cultivate’. It also meant ‘to honor’ and ‘project’ by the 19th century in Europe it tastes of the upper class (elite).

          ‘Culture’ is the mode of producing meaning and ideas. This ‘mode’ is a negotiation over which meanings are valid. Elite culture controls meanings because it controls the terms of the debate.

What is Cultural Study?
Cultural studies is the science of understanding modern society, with an emphasis on politics and power cultural studies is an umbrella term used to look at a number of different subject. Categories studied include media studies including film and Journalism, sociology, industrial culture, globalization and social theory.

“Cultural Studies is not a tightly coherent unified movement with a fixed agenda, but a loosely coherent group of tendencies, issues, and questions.”

Cultural studies is composed of elements of Marxism, Post structuralism and Postmodernism, Feminism, Gender studies, anthropology, sociology, race and ethnic studies, film theory, urban studies, public policy, popular culture studies and Postcolonial studies: those field that concentrate on social and cultural forces that either create community or cause division and alienation.
















First Goals: cultural studies transcends the confines of a PARTICULAR DISCIPLINE such as literary criticism or history:-

“Cultural studies transcend the confine of a particular discipline such as literary criticism or history. “practiced in such journal as critical inquiry , representations, and boundary 2 , cultural studies involves scrutinizing the cultural phenomenon of a text – for example Italian opera, a Latino telenovela, the architectural styles of prisons, body piercing and drawing conclusion about the change in textual phenomena over time.

 Cultural studies are not necessarily about literature in the traditional sense or even about “art”. In their introduction to cultural studies , editors Lawrence grossberg,cary nelson , and Paula trencher emphasize that the intellectual promise of cultural studies lies in the attempts to “ cut across diverse social and political interests and address many of the struggles within the current scene.”

 Intellectual works are not limited by their own “borders” as single texts, historical problems or disciplines , and the critic’s own personal connections to what is being analyzed Amy also be described.
      Henry Giroux and others write in their Dalhousie review  manifesto that cultural studies practitioners are “resisting intellectuals” who see what they do as “an emancipator project.” Because it erodes the traditional disciplinary divisions in most institutions of higher education.

 Second goals:- Cultural Studies is politically engaged:

          The cultural critics see themselves as “Oppositional” not only within their own discipliner but to many of the power structures of society at large. The cultural critics question inequalities within power structures and try to find out the models for restructuring relationships among the dominant and “minority” of “Subaltern” discourses. The meaning and individual subjectivity are culturally constructed, they can thus be reconstructed. This type of idea, taken to a Philosophical extreme, demise the autonomy of the individual whether an actual person or a character in literature, a rebuttal of the traditional humanistic “Great man” or “Great Book” theory and a relocation of esthetics and culture from the ideal realms of taste and sensibility into the arena of a whole society’s everyday life as it is constructed.

3.   Cultural studies deny the separation of “high” and “law” or elite and popular culture:

You might hear someone remarks at the symphony or at art museum “I came here to get a little culture”. Being a “cultured” person used to mean being acquainted with “highbrow” art and intellectual pursuits. But is not culture also being found with a pair of tickets to a rock concert? Cultural critic’s today work to transfer the term popular, folk or urban. Following theorists Team Baudrillard and Andreas Hussein, cultural critics argue that after world war-II the distinction among high, low and mass culture collapsed and they cite other theory such as Pierre Boudoirs and Dick Hedge on how “Good taste” often only reflects prevailing social, economic and political power bases.

For example,
The images of India that were circulated during the colonial rule of the British Raj by writers like Rudyard Kipling seem innocent but reveal an entrenched imperialist argument for white superiority and worldwide domination of other races, especially Asians. But race alone was not the issue for the British Raj, money was also a deciding factor. Thus, drawing also upon the ideas of French historian Michel de Cereal, cultural critics examined “The practice of everyday life”. Studying literature as an anthropologist would, as a phenomenon of culture, including a culture’s economy. Rather than determining which are the “best” works produced, cultural critics describe what is produced and how various productions relate to one another. They aim to reveal the political economic reasons why certain cultural product is more valued at certain times.

Transgressing of boundaries among discipline high and law can make cultural studies just plain fun.

For example,
A possible cultural studies research paper with the following title: The Birth of Caption Jack Sparrow: An Analysis”. For sources of Johnny Deep’s funky performance in Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean, the curse of the Black Pearl (2003). You could research cultural topics ranging from the trade economies of the sea two hundred years ago, to real pirates of the Caribbean such as Blackbeard and Henry Morgan, then on the Robert Louis Stevenson’s Long John Silver in Treasure Island (1881).
4.  Cultural Studies analyses not only the cultural work, but also the means of production:

Marxist critics have long recognized the importance of such par literary questions as these: Who published his or her books and how are these books distributed? Who buys books? For that matter, who is literate and who is not? A well known analysis of literary production is Janice Radway’s study of the American romance novel and its readers, reading the romance women, patriarchy and popular literature, which demonstrates the textual effects of the publishing industry’s decisions about books that will minimize its financial risks. Another contribution is the collection reading in America, edited by Cathy N. Davidson, which includes essays on literature and gender in colonial New England, urban magazine audiences in 18th century New York City. The impact upon reading of such technical innovations as cheaper eye glasses, electric lights and trains, the book-of-the-month club and how writers and texts go through fluctuation of popularity and canonicity. These studies help us recognize that literature does not occur in a space separated from other concerns of over lives.

Cultural studies thus joins subjectively – that is, cultural in relation to individual lives – with engagement a direct approach to attacking social ills. Though cultural studies practitioners deny “humanism” or “the humanities” as universal categories, they strive reason”, which often resembles the goals and values of humanistic and democratic ideals. What difference does a cultural studies approach make for student? First of all, it is increasingly clear that by the year 2050 the United States will be demographers call a “Majority – Minority” population, that is the present numerical majority of “white”, “education” and  “Anglo-Americans” will be the minority, particularly with the dramatically increasing number of Latin / residents, mostly Mexican Americans. As Gerald Graff and James Phelan observe “It is a common prediction that the culture of the next century will put a premium on people’s ability to deal productively with conflict and cultural difference. To the question “Why teach the controversy?” they note that today a student can go from one class in which the values of western culture are prorated as hopelessly compromised by racism, sexism and homophobia. Professors can acknowledge these differences and encourage student to construct a conversation for themselves as “the most exciting part of their education”.

Conclusion:-

So here I write my own thoughts and understanding about four goals of cultural studies .in culture this main four goals are most important part for understanding the cultural studies. This theory came with many questions and here we can solve this issue with these goals.  



Paper no.7:-Literary theory and criticism - Eliot’s concept of tradition And individual talent.

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH MAHARAJAH KRISHNAKUMARSINHJI BHAVNAGAR UNIVERSITY

Eliot’s concept of tradition  And individual talent. 

Semester:-M.A SEM 2 

Paper no.6:-Literary  theory and criticism  ROLL NO:-6

ENROLLMENT NO:- PG15101006
EMAIL ID:-cnbhungani7484@gmail.com
Blog id:- chintavanbhungani201517.blog.spot.com
Introduction:-
Born
Thomas Stearns Eliot
26 September 1888
St. Louis, Missouri, United States
Died
4 January 1965 (aged 76)
Kensington, London, England
Occupation
Poet, dramatist, literary critic, and editor
Citizenship
American by birth; British from 1927
Education
AB in philosophy
Period
1905–1965
Literary movement
Notable works
Notable awards
Thomas Stearns Eliot OM  "one of the twentieth century's major poets”. Eliot attracted widespread attention for his poem The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock (1915), which is seen as a masterpiece of the Modernist movement.
Literary
Eliot also made significant contributions to the field of literary criticism, strongly influencing the school of New Criticism. While somewhat self-deprecating and minimizing of his work—he once said his criticism was merely a "by-product" of his "private poetry-workshop"—Eliot is considered by some to be one of the greatest literary critics of the twentieth century.
 The critic William Epson once said, "I do not know for certain how much of my own mind [Eliot] invented, let alone how much of it is a reaction against him or indeed a consequence of misreading him. He is a very penetrating influence, perhaps not unlike the east wind."

In his critical essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent", Eliot argues that art must be understood not in a vacuum, but in the context of previous pieces of art. "In a peculiar sense [an artist or poet] ... must inevitably be judged by the standards of the past." This essay was an important influence over the New Criticism by introducing the idea that the value of a work of art must be viewed in the context of the artist's previous works, a "simultaneous order" of works (i.e., "tradition"). Eliot himself employed this concept on many of his works, especially on his long-poem The Waste Land.
                             
Tradition and individual talent
T.s. Eliot’s “tradition and individual talent” was published in 1919 in the egoist – the times literary supplement. Later, the essay was published in the sacred wood: essays on poetry and criticism in 1920/2. This essay is described by David lodge as the most celebrated critical essay in the English of the 20thcentury. The essay is divided into three main sections:
1)the first part gives us concept of tradition.
2)the second part is exemplifies his theory of depersonalization and poetry
3)and third part he conclude the debate by saying that the poet’s sense of tradition and impersonality of poetry are complementry things.
At the outset of the essay, Eliot asserts that the word ‘tradition’ is not a very favourable term with the English who generally utilize the same as a term of censure. The English do not possess an orientation towards criticism as the French do, they praise a poet for those aspects of the work that are individualistic.

For Eliot, Tradition has a three-fold significance.
Firstly, tradition cannot be inherited and involves a great deal of labour and erudition.
Secondly, it involves the historical sense which involves apperception not only of the pastness of the past, but also of its presence.
Thirdly the historical sense enables a writer to write not only with his own generation in mind, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature from Homer down to the literature of his own country forms a continuous literary tradition.

Part 1:- concept of tradition


Eliot begins the essay by pointing out that the word ‘tradition’ is generally regarded as a word of censure. It is a word disagreeable to the English ears. When the English praise a poet, they praise him for those-aspects of his work which are ‘individual’ and original. This brings Eliot to a consideration of the value and significance of tradition. Tradition does not mean a blind adherence to the ways of the previous generation or generations. This would be mere slavish imitation, a mere repetition of what has already been achieved, and

“novelty is better than repetition.”

To him knowledge of tradition plays vital role in the development of personal talent. He writes,

“Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited and if you want it you must obtain it by great labour. It involves the historical sense.” This means:
“the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most acutely conscious of his place in time, of his contemporaneity.”

The close relationship and interdependence of the past and the present:
Eliot express his views as follow
“No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you must set him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of  asthetic, not merely historical criticism”

The relationship of a poet’s work to the great works of the past:
                      Eliot says that there is a distinction between knowledge and pedantry.

“Some can absorb knowledge; the more tardy must sweat for it. Shakespeare acquired more essential histories from Plutarch than most men could from the whole British Museum”.

He also then finds is that shakespeare seem to be unexceptinal because if  he says that everyone has to be very well read every creative artist and then coming down to the modern reader they also have to be very active readers very well than what about some luminaries like shakespeare. If we look at shakespeare biography, we find that there is no mention that shakespeare went to any unuversity for example ,marlow his contemporary was university wits.shakespeare there is no mention by literary historian.arnold mention that critic play very important role in criticism .critic provides fresh ideas to the authors. 

Part - 2

His theory of Depersonalization:

    He starts the second part of his essay with: ‘‘Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation is directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry’’.

   The artist or the poet adopts the process of depersonalization, which is ‘‘a continual surrender of him as he is at the moment to something which is more valuable. The progress of an artist is a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality.’’ There still remain to define this process of depersonalization and its relation to sense of tradition.
·      
  THE PROCESS OF DEPERSONALISATION:-

Eliot explains this process of depersonalization and its relation to the sense of tradition by comparing it to a chemical process – the action which takes place when a bit of finely filiated platinum is introduced into a chamber containing oxygen and sulphur dioxide. The analogy is that of the catalyst. He says: “when the two gases previously mentioned (oxygen and sulphur dioxide) are mixed in the presence of a filament of platinum they form sulphurous if the platinum is present: nevertheless the newly formed acid contains no trace of platinum. And the platinum itself is apparently unaffected: has remained inert, neutral, and unchanged. The mind of the poet is the shred of platinum. It may partly or exclusively operate upon the experience of the man himself; but, the more perfect the artist, the more completely separate in him will be the man who suffers and the mind which creates; the more perfectly will the mind digest and transmute the passions which are its material.
                       

Part – 3

       In the last section of this essay, Eliot says that the poet’s sense of tradition and the impersonality of poetry are complementary things. Eliot writes: ‘‘to divert interest from the poet to the poetry is a laudable aim: for it would conduce to a jester estimation of actual poetry, good and bad.’’ Finally he ends his essay with: ‘‘very few know when there is expression of significant emotion, emotion which has its life in the poem and not in the history of the poet. The emotion of art is impersonal. And the poet cannot reach this impersonality without surrendering himself wholly to the work to be done. And he is not likely to know what is to be done unless he lives in what is not merely the present, but the present moment of the past, unless he is conscious, not of what is dead, but of what is already living.’’