Archetypes of Literature by Northop Frye

 Archetypes of Literature: Northrop Frye

Introduction:

Northrop Frye was a Canadian literary critic who became famous for his unique way of understanding literature. One of his most important essays is “Archetypes of Literature”, first published in 1951. In this essay, Frye explains a method of literary criticism called archetypal criticism. This type of criticism looks at the common patterns, images, and stories that appear again and again in literature of all cultures and times.

To understand Frye’s ideas, it is also important to know where the concept of “archetype” comes from.

Origin of Archetypal Criticism:

The word archetype comes from Greek and means original pattern. The idea of archetypes was first developed by the Swiss psychologist Carl Gustav Jung. Jung said that the human mind contains certain universal symbols and images, which he called the collective unconscious. These are ideas and stories that all humans understand because they come from shared human experience.

For example, figures like the hero, the mother, the wise old man and stories like death and rebirth or the journey are found in myths, fairy tales, and literature everywhere in the world. Jung called these figures and stories archetypes.

Literary critics like Maud Bodkin and Northrop Frye used Jung’s idea of archetypes to study literature. They said that literature is full of these universal patterns and that understanding them helps us see the deeper meaning of stories.

Frye’s Main Ideas in "Archetypes of Literature":

In “Archetypes of Literature”, Frye explains how archetypes shape the way stories are told. He says that all stories and poems can be understood as part of a larger pattern, and that these patterns come from myths and rituals of ancient societies.

1. Literature and Myth

Frye argues that literature is connected to myths and rituals because both are ways of expressing the deepest feelings and beliefs of human beings. Myths are the earliest stories humans told to explain the world. Literature continues this tradition.

2. Why Look for Archetypes?

Frye says that if we only study literature as individual works, we miss the big picture. Archetypal criticism helps us see the connections between different works and cultures. It shows how all literature is part of a larger “order” of human imagination.

3. Types of Archetypes

Frye identifies some common archetypes in literature:

·        The hero’s journey (a young person goes on an adventure, faces challenges, and grows up).

·        The death and rebirth (something dies or ends, but something new begins).

·        The seasons (spring = birth/rebirth, summer = happiness, autumn = decline, winter = death).

Frye and the Seasons:

One of Frye’s most famous ideas in Archetypes of Literature is his connection between literature and the four seasons of the year.

He noticed that many stories, myths, and poems follow patterns that are similar to the cycle of the seasons — spring, summer, autumn, and winter. These seasons are natural cycles of life, death, and rebirth — and human beings have always expressed these cycles in their stories.

Frye connects each season to a certain type of story (or literary mode), like this:

·     Spring — Comedy

·        Spring represents birth and rebirth, new beginnings, hope, and joy.

·        In stories, spring is like a comedy — the characters overcome problems, and everything ends happily.

·        Example: A play where misunderstandings are resolved, lovers are united, and life goes on.

·     Summer — Romance

·        Summer is the time of fullness, growth, and happiness. Everything is alive and at its best.

·        In literature, summer matches romance (or idealized heroic stories) — the hero achieves great things, love flourishes, and the world seems perfect.

·        Example: A story about a brave hero who saves the world or a perfect love story.

·     Autumn — Tragedy

·        Autumn is the time of decline and decay. Things start to die or come to an end.

·        In stories, autumn is like tragedy — the hero falls, things go wrong, and life becomes sad or bitter.

·        Example: A play where the hero makes mistakes and suffers a downfall.

·     Winter — Irony and Satire

·        Winter represents death, darkness, and barrenness. Nothing grows; it is cold and harsh.

·        In literature, winter matches irony and satire — stories that show the world as hopeless, meaningless, or absurd.

·        Example: A story where characters struggle in a cold, uncaring world, and there is no happy ending.

Why is this important?

Frye says these seasonal patterns are not just in nature — they are in our minds too. People see their lives as a cycle of beginnings, growth, decline, and endings. That’s why writers across cultures use these seasonal patterns in their stories.

These patterns appear in almost all stories, whether they are ancient myths, Shakespeare’s plays, or modern novels.

Why is Frye’s Essay Important?

Frye’s essay is important because it changed how people study literature. Instead of looking at each work separately, he showed that literature has universal patterns. This approach makes it easier to see how stories from different times and cultures are connected.

He also argued that literature should not only be studied for its historical or moral messages, but also as a creative expression of human imagination. Archetypal criticism focuses on how stories work as part of this imagination.

Conclusion:

Northrop Frye’s “Archetypes of Literature” explains that all literature is built on a foundation of universal patterns called archetypes. These archetypes come from myths, rituals, and shared human experiences. Frye’s work is based on the ideas of Carl Jung, who believed in a collective unconscious full of these universal images.

Frye’s essay helps us understand that literature from any culture or time is connected by these common patterns. It also reminds us that literature is not just a collection of separate works, but a part of the larger story of humanity’s imagination.

 

Criticism Inc. by J. C. Ransom

 Criticism Inc. by J. C. Ransom

Introduction:

John Crowe Ransom (1888–1974) was a major figure in American literary criticism and a founder of the New Criticism movement. His 1937 essay, “Criticism, Inc.”, is considered a key text in the history of literary studies. In this essay, Ransom outlines what he believes literary criticism should be like.

He argues that criticism must be objective and systematic, meaning it should be based on facts and clear methods—not just personal opinions or emotions. He also believed criticism should focus on the text itself, not on things like history, language, morals, or the writer’s background. His followers—such as Allen Tate, Cleanth Brooks, and Robert Penn Warren—helped develop these ideas further. One of the most important tools they used was close reading, which means carefully studying the structure, language, and details of a literary work.

1. The Business of Criticism:

Ransom begins the essay by talking about the current state of literary criticism. He feels that most criticism has been done by people who aren’t trained properly. These critics often don’t use a clear method or system. According to Ransom, there are three kinds of people who might appear to be good critics, but who aren’t necessarily suited for the job:

A. The Artist

An artist, like a poet or novelist, may understand art in a deep, emotional way. But that doesn’t mean they can explain or analyze it well. Their understanding is often intuitive, not logical. Ransom quotes D. H. Lawrence, who once said, “Never trust the artist. Trust the tale.” In other words, just because someone can create art doesn’t mean they can explain it objectively.

B. The Philosopher

Philosophers often talk about what art is and what its purpose should be. They understand theories about beauty and art. But they usually don’t study individual works of literature closely. This can lead to vague and overly general statements, rather than useful insights about a particular poem or story.

C.  The University Teacher

According to Ransom, university teachers should be the best people to do criticism. They are in a position to study literature seriously. However, many of them focus too much on collecting information—like historical facts or details about language—and not enough on making judgments about the quality and style of literature. Ransom criticizes English departments in universities for relying too much on history and linguistics, and not enough on aesthetic (artistic) analysis.

He argues that criticism should be more like a science—precise, organized, and based on evidence. He believes that universities are the right place to develop this kind of criticism because they can work on it in a serious, cooperative, and long-term way.

2. Professor Crane and Reforming English Studies:

Ransom praises Professor Ronald S. Crane of the University of Chicago, who wanted English departments to focus more on criticism and less on historical studies. Crane wrote an article called “History Versus Criticism in the University Study of Literature,” where he argued that students should focus on literary works themselves rather than on the history around them.

Ransom supports this idea. He believes that English departments should pay more attention to the structure, language, and beauty of literary texts, and not just their background or meaning.

He also talks about two other groups who tried to change English studies but didn’t succeed, in his opinion:

A. The New Humanists

Led by thinkers like Paul Elmer More and Irving Babbitt, the New Humanists said that literature should teach moral values. They focused on how literature could help make people more ethical or thoughtful. While Ransom admits that this was a welcome break from historical studies, he criticizes them for ignoring literary form—the artistic side of literature.

B. Leftists/Proletarian Critics

These critics focused on social and political themes in literature. They looked at how literature represents class struggles, poverty, and justice. Like the New Humanists, they focused on the moral or political meaning of a work, but Ransom says this again draws attention away from literature’s artistic features.

In short, Ransom says that English departments have failed to find their own proper identity. They either focus on history, language, or moral issues. He wants criticism to be its own serious field, focused on the text itself.

3. Appreciation and Historical Studies:

Ransom now explains the difference between appreciation and criticism:

• Appreciation is personal and emotional. It’s about enjoying a piece of literature, often in a private and intuitive way.
• Criticism, on the other hand, is public and systematic. It involves analyzing how a piece of literature works and why it is good (or not good).

He believes appreciation is not enough. Critics must go deeper than just liking or disliking something.

Ransom also talks about the role of historical studies. He agrees that they are useful—especially for older texts. For example, understanding Chaucer’s time helps us read his works more accurately. But history should be a tool, not the main focus. The most important thing is to study how the literature is written and what makes it effective as art.

He says critics should engage with literature as art, not just as a historical object. There should be public discussion and clear analysis of literature’s form and language.

4. What Criticism Is Not:

Ransom says it is sometimes easier to define what criticism is not than to define what it is. He lists six things that should not be considered real criticism:

A.  Personal Registrations

These are personal feelings or reactions to a work. Ransom says this kind of response is not helpful in criticism. He even criticizes Aristotle’s idea of catharsis (the emotional release that comes from watching a tragedy), because it focuses on the audience’s reaction, not the work itself. Critics should focus on the text, not how it makes them feel.

B.  Synopsis and Paraphrase

Simply summarizing or restating a literary work in your own words does not count as criticism. This does not help us understand the artistic qualities of the work.

C.  Historical Studies

Historical context can help us understand a work, but it should not replace the study of the work’s style, form, and language.

D. Linguistic Studies

Learning about grammar, vocabulary, and language changes is useful. But this is not the same as criticism. These studies don’t tell us about the beauty or structure of a literary work.

E.   Moral Studies

Some critics judge literature based on whether it teaches good values. But Ransom says this is not enough. A story might be morally good but artistically weak—or the opposite. The aesthetic quality must be the main focus.

F.   Other Special Studies

This includes things like researching the author's knowledge of science, religion, or other subjects. These can be interesting but should not become the center of criticism.

5. Technical Studies and the Role of the Critic:

Ransom disagrees with Austin Warren, who wanted to combine historical and literary studies. Ransom believes criticism should be an independent field with its own focus and methods.

He says critics should do technical studies—they should look closely at the structure of a poem or story. This includes:

• Meter (the rhythm of poetry)
• Tropes (figures of speech like metaphors and similes)
• Sound and style (rhyme, alliteration, sentence patterns, etc.)

Poetry, Ransom says, uses special techniques that make it different from regular language or prose. These techniques create a world of their own. The poet tries to protect this world from the dullness of everyday life or the cold logic of science.

The critic’s job is to explain how a poem achieves this—to show how the structure, language, and techniques create a unique and powerful aesthetic experience.

Conclusion:

In Criticism, Inc., John Crowe Ransom argues that literary criticism should be careful, systematic, and based on the text itself. He says we should move away from criticism based on emotions, history, language, or morals. The true task of the critic is to study the form, style, and structure of literature—especially poetry—and to explain how these elements work together to create meaning and beauty.

Ransom believes that universities should take the lead in developing this kind of criticism. His essay helped lay the foundation for New Criticism, a movement that shaped literary studies for many decades and still influences how we read and analyze texts today.

Where the Mind is Without Fear by Rabindranath Tagore

‘Where the Mind is Without Fear’ by Rabindranath Tagore

Introduction:

Rabindranath Tagore’s “Where the Mind is Without Fear” is one of his most famous poems, originally written in Bengali and later translated into English by himself. It is part of his Nobel Prize-winning book Gitanjali (Song Offerings), published in 1910. Written during India’s struggle for independence from British rule, the poem is a heartfelt prayer to God. Tagore wishes for his country to wake up to true freedom — a freedom that is not just political, but also moral, intellectual, and spiritual.

Line-wise Summary:

·       Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high

—    People should be brave and live with dignity.

·       Where knowledge is free

—    Education and learning should be open to everyone.

·       Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls

—    Society should not be divided by caste, religion, or class.

·       Where words come out from the depth of truth

—    People should always speak the truth honestly.

·       Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection

—    People should keep working hard to improve themselves and society.

·       Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit

—    Reason and logic should not be lost in old, meaningless traditions.

·       Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action

—    God should guide people to think big and work for progress.

·       Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake

—    The poet prays for his nation to wake up to this ideal state of true freedom.

Theme:

The central theme of the poem is the idea of true freedom. Tagore emphasizes that real freedom is not just the end of British rule but also:

·       Freedom from fear and oppression, so people can live with confidence and dignity.

·       Freedom through education and knowledge, making everyone enlightened and aware.

·       Freedom from social divisions like caste, religion, and regionalism, which weaken unity.

·       Freedom to use reason and logic, instead of blindly following old habits and customs.

·       Freedom to strive towards perfection and progress, working hard to improve society.

The poem highlights the importance of truth, hard work, unity, reason, and moral courage as the foundation of a free and strong nation.

The Concept of Utopia:

The poem presents Tagore’s vision of a utopia — an ideal society. In this utopia, people are fearless, educated, united, honest, progressive, and guided by reason and spirituality. It is not just a dream of political freedom but a dream of a perfect, harmonious world where humanity lives up to its highest potential. Tagore’s utopia is deeply humanistic and universal — it applies not just to India, but to all of humanity.

Structure and Style:

The poem is written in free verse, without rhyme or regular rhythm, which gives it a natural and prayer-like flow. The style is simple, yet powerful, making it accessible to everyone. The long, single sentence reflects the poet’s deep longing and urgency.

Figures of Speech:

Metaphor

The poet uses many metaphors — indirect comparisons — to express ideas:

“Narrow domestic walls” — compared to walls, symbolizing narrow-mindedness and social divisions.

“Clear stream of reason” — compared to a flowing stream, symbolizing fresh, logical thinking.

“Dreary desert sand of dead habit” — compared to a dry desert, symbolizing lifeless, meaningless traditions.

These metaphors make abstract ideas more vivid and easy to understand.

Personification

The poet personifies qualities like mind and reason:

“Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection” — striving is shown as if it were a person reaching out for something.

“Where the mind is led forward by thee” — the mind is described as being guided, like a person walking forward.

Alliteration

Repetition of consonant sounds at the beginning of nearby words for musical effect:

“head is held high” — repetition of h sound.

“dreary desert sand of dead habit” — repetition of d sound.

Symbolism

Tagore uses simple words to stand for big ideas:

Walls — stand for divisions in society.

Stream of reason — stands for logical thinking.

Desert of dead habit — stands for harmful customs and blind traditions.

Apostrophe

The entire poem is a direct address to God (the “Father”), which is called apostrophe — speaking to someone who is not physically present.

Imagery

The poem paints clear pictures in the reader’s mind, appealing to our senses:

A fearless, dignified person.

A flowing stream and a dry desert.

A world without barriers.

Tone and Mood:

The tone of the poem is prayerful, hopeful, and idealistic. The poet criticizes the present condition of society but also expresses his deep faith in the possibility of change.

Relevance:

The poem is timeless. Even today, people everywhere face fear, ignorance, and divisions. Tagore’s vision reminds us to work toward a better, freer, and more enlightened society.

Conclusion:

Where the Mind is Without Fear is a beautiful prayer and a vision of a utopian world. It shows Tagore’s deep love for his country, his belief in humanity, and his poetic genius. The poem inspires us to overcome our weaknesses and strive for truth, knowledge, and unity — the true meaning of freedom.

A Cup of Tea by Catherine Mansfield

 A Cup of Tea by Catherine Mansfield

Katherine Mansfield (1888–1923) was a famous short story writer from New Zealand. She wrote many of her best stories while living in England. Her stories are known for their new style, deep emotions, and clear pictures of everyday life. She helped change the way short stories were written in the early 1900s.

Famous stories by Katherine Mansfield:

• The Garden Party
• The Doll’s House
• Miss Brill
• Bliss
• A Cup of Tea

She was inspired by a Russian writer named Anton Chekhov. Later, she also influenced writers like Virginia Woolf. Katherine Mansfield died very young, at the age of 34, because of a disease called tuberculosis. Even though she died young, her stories are still read and loved today.

A Cup of Tea – Summary:

Main Characters:

• Rosemary Fell – a rich and stylish woman
• Miss Smith – a poor young woman
• Philip – Rosemary’s husband

A Cup of Tea is a short story about rich and poor people, and about how people sometimes pretend to be kind.

• Beginning:
  Rosemary, a rich woman in London, is shopping. She loves expensive things.
• Meeting:
  A poor girl named Miss Smith asks Rosemary for money to buy a cup of tea.
• Helping:
  Rosemary wants to do something kind. Instead of giving money, she takes Miss Smith to her house to feed her.
• Problem:
  Rosemary’s husband, Philip, comes home. He sees Miss Smith and says she is pretty. Rosemary feels jealous.
• Ending:
  Rosemary becomes worried. She quickly gives Miss Smith some money and sends her away. At the end, she asks her husband, “Am I pretty?”, showing she is insecure.

Themes in "A Cup of Tea"

1.  Rich and Poor People:

There is a big difference between the life of Rosemary and the life of Miss Smith. Rosemary has money, nice clothes, and a big house, while Miss Smith is hungry and has nothing. The story shows how rich people may not really understand the pain of poor people. Rosemary tries to help, but she does not truly care about Miss Smith's life or problems.

2.  Pride and Jealousy:

Rosemary wants to feel proud of herself for helping someone. She thinks that by bringing Miss Smith home, she will look like a good and kind person. But when her husband says Miss Smith is pretty, Rosemary feels jealous. Her pride is hurt, and she no longer wants to help the girl.

3.  Fake Kindness:

Rosemary's kindness is not deep or real. She only helps Miss Smith to feel important and good about herself. When she becomes jealous, she forgets about kindness and quickly sends Miss Smith away. This shows that her help was just for show, not from the heart.

4.  Women and Insecurity:

Rosemary is rich and beautiful, but still, she does not feel confident. She needs her husband to tell her that she is pretty. After he calls another woman pretty, she feels unsure about herself. This shows that women, even if they have everything, can still feel weak and insecure inside.

 

The Thief by Ruskin Bond

 THE THIEF by Ruskin Bond

Introduction:

Ruskin Bond is one of India’s most beloved and prolific short story writers in English. Born on May 19, 1934, in Kasauli, India, to British parents, Bond has spent most of his life in the hills of North India, especially Mussoorie, which serves as a frequent backdrop in his stories. His deep connection with the Indian landscape and people gives his writing a rare authenticity and charm.

Bond’s short stories are known for their simplicity, warmth, and emotional depth. He often focuses on everyday life, childhood experiences, nature, and human relationships. His characters are ordinary people—lonely children, kind-hearted villagers, eccentric strangers—yet they leave a lasting impression on the reader. Stories like The Eyes Have It, The Woman on Platform 8, and The Blue Umbrella showcase his keen observation of human nature and his gentle, humorous narrative style.

Through his short stories, Ruskin Bond has carved a unique place in Indian English literature. He writes not to impress, but to connect—with readers of all ages. His works continue to be celebrated for their timeless appeal, touching the hearts of readers with their simplicity and sincerity.

Here is the point-wise summary of Ruskin Bond’s short story The Thief:

1.  Narrator is a young thief:

o   A 15-year-old boy who makes a living by stealing from people and then moving on to avoid getting caught.

2.  He meets Anil:

o   Anil is a kind, simple man in his twenties who writes articles for a living.

o   The thief lies to Anil, saying his name is ‘Deepak’, and asks for work.

3.  Anil offers him shelter:

o   Though Anil cannot pay him, he gives him food and a place to stay.

o   He also begins teaching him how to read and write.

4.  The thief plans a robbery:

o   One day, he sees Anil receiving a large sum of money.

o   Tempted by greed, he steals the money and runs away at night.

5.  He has a change of heart:

o   Anil’s trust and kindness haunt him.

o   He feels guilty and decides to return.

6.  He puts the money back:

o   Quietly returns to the house and places the money under the mattress.

o   Anil does not mention the theft the next morning.

7.  Anil forgives him silently:

o   He behaves normally and continues to treat the boy kindly.

o   This silent forgiveness deeply affects the thief.

8.  Moral transformation:

o   The thief decides to change his life and stop stealing.

o   The story ends on a hopeful note, showing that love and trust can reform even a criminal.

Moral lessons:

1.  Kindness Can Change People

o   Anil’s gentle and trusting nature helps the thief realize his mistakes and change for the better.

o   Kindness is more powerful than punishment in reforming someone.

2.  Trust Builds Responsibility

o   Anil’s trust makes the thief feel guilty and responsible.

o   When we are trusted, we feel the need to live up to that trust.

3.  Education Has the Power to Transform

o   Anil teaches the boy how to read and write, giving him hope for a better future.

o   Education is shown as a tool for personal growth and moral improvement.

4.  True Change Comes From Within

o   The thief chooses to return the money on his own.

o   Real transformation happens only when a person decides to change from the heart.

5.  Forgiveness is Noble

o   Anil forgives the thief silently, without anger or blame.

o   Forgiveness can lead to healing and redemption.