Decolonising The Mind by NGugi wa Thiong'o

This essay is a critique on rulers essentailly. He described how African authors wrote in English to reach a wide audience. Over the last five years the Equity Studies Student Union's annual Decolonizing Our Minds conferences have attempted to address the different ways groups practice resistance. Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature book download Download Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature . The Kenyan author, Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o, wrote this book in 1986. Dudley Perkins Georgia Muldrow - Beautiful Mind, RBG Tube is the premier black consciousness video site on the Internet - self sufficient, independent, innovative, All Afrikan, all RBG, and focused. Ngugi Wa Thiongo's “Decolonising the Mind” holds true in the present day as well where we have failed to carve out our own subjectivity that would be perfectly divested of the Western thought of conduct and behaviour. €�We have unfinished business of decolonising the minds of our people by changing the name of Lake Victoria, which was given by the colonialists,” he said. Question: issues of concern in decolonising the mind - Question #371972. Introduction The complete title of this book reads: Decolonizing the Hindu Mind: Ideological Development of Hindu Revivalism. I read Ngui wa Thiong'o's essay for my problem idea. Zuma's 'decolonising minds' reference to violent Frantz Fanon, or non-violent Radical Honesty 'decolonizing minds' definition of Reconciliation, in Review 'Kill Boere' Judgement in Concourt? More specifically the way in which Kenyan's rule and British.

Orientalism. Edward.w.said

On a visit to Beirut during the terrible civil war of 1975 regretfully of the gutted downtown area that “it had once1976 a French journalist wrote seemed to belong to . . . the Orient of Chateaubriand and Nerval.” 1 He was right about the place, of course, especially so far as a European was concerned. The Orient was almost a European invention, and had been since antiquity ‘a place of romance, exoti c beings, haunting memories and landscapes, remarkable experiences. Now it was disappearing; in a sense it had happened, its time was over. Perhaps it seemed irrelevant that Orientals themselves had something at stake in the process, that even in the time of Chateaubriand and Nerval Orientals had lived there, and that now it was they who were suffering; the main thing for the European visitor was a European representation of the Orient and its contemporary fate, both of which had a privileged communal signi ficance for the journalist and his French readers. Americans will not feel quite the same about the Orient, which for them is much more likely to be associated very differently with the Far East (China and Japan, mainly). Unlike the Americans, the French and the British Italians, and Swiss-- less so the Germans, Russians, Spanish, Portuguese, have had a long tradition of what I shall be calling Orientation a way of coming to terms with the Orient that is based on the Orient’s special place in European Wester n experience. The Orient is not only adjacent to Europe; it is also the place of Europe’s greatest and richest and oldest colonies, the source of its civilizations and languages, its cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most recurring images of the other. In addition, the Orient has helped to define Europe (or the West) 9 as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience. Yet none of this Orient is merely imaginative. The Orient is an integral of European material civilization and culture. O rientalism expresses and represents that part culturally and even ideologically as a mode of discourse with supporting institutions, vocabulary, scholarship, imagery, doctrines, even colonial bureaucracies and colonial styles. In contrast, the American und erstanding of the Orient will seem considerably less dense, although our recent Japanese, Korean, and Indochinese adventures ought now to be creating a more sober, more realistic “Oriental” awareness. Moreover, the vastly expanded American political and ec onomic role in the Near East (the Middle East) makes great claims on our understanding of that Orient. It will be clear to the reader (and will become clearer still throughout the many pages that follow) that by Orientalism I mean several things, all of th em, in my opinion, interdependent. The most ‘read adily accepted designation for Orientalism is an academic one, and indeed the label still serves in a number of academic institutions. Anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient and this app philologistlies whether the person is an anthropologist, sociologist, historian, or either in its specific or its general aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism. Compared with Oriental studies or area studies, it is true that t he term Orientalism is less preferred by specialists today, both because it is too vague and general and because it connotes the high handed executive attitude of nineteenthEuropean colonialism. Nevertheless books are w century and early twentiethcentury ritten and congresses held with “the Orient” as their main focus, with the Orientalist in his new or old guise as their main authority. The point is that even if it does not survive as it once did, Orientalism lives on academically through its doctrines an d theses about the Orient and the Oriental. Related to this academic tradition, whose fortunes, transmigrations, specializations, and transmissions are in part the subject of this study, is a more general meaning for Orientalism. Orientalism is a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between “the Orient” and (most of the time) “the Occident.” Thus a very large mass of writers, among whom are poets, novelists, philosophers, political theorists, economists, and imperi al administrators, have accepted the basic distinction between East and West as the starting point for elaborate theories, epics, novels, epics, social descriptions and political accounts concerning the 10 Orient, its people, customs, “mind,” destiny, and s o on. This Orientalism can accommodate Aeschylus, say, and Victor Hugo, Dante and Karl Marx. A little later in this introduction I shall deal with the methodological problems one encounters in so broadly construed a “field” as this. The inter change betwee n the academic and the more or less imaginative meaning of Orientalism is a constant one, and since the late eighteenth century there has been a considerable, quite disciplined perhaps even regulatedmeanin traffic between the two. Here I come to the third g of Orientalism, which is something more historically and materially defined than either of the other two. Taking the late eighteenth century as a very roughly defined starting point Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution f or dealing with the Orientdealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating restructuring, and having authority over t he Orient. I have found it useful here to employ is a Foucault’s notion of a discourse, as described by him in The Archaeology of Knowledge and in Discipline and Punish, to identify Orientalism. My contention is that without examining Orientalism as a disc ourse one cannot possibly understand the enormously systematic discipline by which European culture was able to manage and even producethe Orient politically , sociologically, militarily, ideologically, scientifically, and imaginatively during the postEn lightenment period. Moreover, so authoritative a position did Orientalism have that I believe no one writing, thinking, or acting on the Orient could do so without taking account of the limitations on thought and action imposed by Orientalism. In brief, be cause of Orientalism the Orient was not (and is not) a free subject of thought or action. This is not to say that Orientalism unilaterally determines what can be said about the Orient, but that it is thewhole network of interests inevitably brought to bea r on (and therefore always involved) any occasion when that peculiar entity “the Orient” is in question. How this happens is what this book tries to demonstrate. It also tries to show that European culture gained in strength and identity by setting itself off against the Orient as a sort of surrogate an even underground self. , Historically and culturally there is a quantitative as well as a qualitative difference between the Franco British involvement in the Orient anduntil the period of American ascenda ncy after 11 For read to full in PDF above

The way of world by William congreve's

Mirabell, a young man-about-town, apparently not a man of great wealth, has had an affair with Mrs. Fainall, the widowed daughter of Lady Wishfort. To protect her from scandal in the event of pregnancy, he has helped engineer her marriage to Mr. Fainall, a man whom he feels to be of sufficiently good reputation to constitute a respectable match, but not a man of such virtue that tricking him would be unfair. Fainall, for his part, married the young widow because he coveted her fortune to support his amour with Mrs. Marwood. In time, the liaison between Mirabell and Mrs. Fainall ended (although this is not explicitly stated), and Mirabell found himself in love with Millamant, the niece and ward of Lady Wish-fort, and the cousin of his former mistress. There are, however, financial complications. Half of Millamant's fortune was under her own control, but the other half, 6,000 pounds, was controlled by Lady Wishfort, to be turned over to Millamant if she married a suitor approved by her aunt. Unfortunately, Mirabell had earlier offended Lady Wishfort; she had misinterpreted his flattery as love. Mirabell, therefore, has contrived an elaborate scheme. He has arranged for a pretended uncle (his valet, Waitwell) to woo and win Lady Wishfort. Then Mirabell intends to reveal the actual status of the successful wooer and obtain her consent to his marriage to Millamant by rescuing her from this misalliance. Waitwell was to marry Foible, Lady Wishfort's maid, before the masquerade so that he might not decide to hold Lady Wishfort to her contract; Mirabell is too much a man of his time to trust anyone in matters of money or love. Millamant is aware of the plot, probably through Foible. When the play opens, Mirabell is impatiently waiting to hear that Waitwell is married to Foible. During Mirabell's card game with Fainall, it becomes clear that the relations between the two men are strained. There are hints at the fact that Fainall has been twice duped by Mirabell: Mrs. Fainall is Mirabell's former mistress, and Mrs. Marwood, Fainall's mistress, is in love with Mirabell. In the meantime, although Millamant quite clearly intends to have Mirabell, she enjoys teasing him in his state of uncertainty. Mirabell bids fair to succeed until, unfortunately, Mrs. Marwood overhears Mrs. Fainall and Foible discussing the scheme, as well as Mirabell and Mrs. Fainall's earlier love affair. Since Mrs. Marwood also overhears insulting comments about herself, she is vengeful and informs Fainall of the plot and the fact, which he suspected before, that his wife was once Mirabell's mistress. The two conspirators now have both motive and means for revenge. In the same afternoon, Millamant accepts Mirabell's proposal and rejects Sir Wilfull Witwoud, Lady Wishfort's candidate for her hand. Fainall now dominates the action. He unmasks Sir Rowland, the false uncle, and blackmails Lady Wishfort with the threat of her daughter's disgrace. He demands that the balance of Millamant's fortune, now forfeit, be turned over to his sole control, as well as the unspent balance of Mrs. Fainall's fortune. In addition, he wants assurance that Lady Wishfort will not marry so that Mrs. Fainall is certain to be the heir. This move of Fainall's is now countered; Millamant says that she will marry Sir Wilfull to save her own fortune. Fainall insists that he wants control of the rest of his wife's money and immediate management of Lady Wishfort's fortune. When Mirabell brings two servants to prove that Fainall and Mrs. Marwood were themselves guilty of adultery, Fainall ignores the accusation and points out that he will still create a scandal which would blacken the name of Mrs. Fainall unless he gets the money. At this point, Mirabell triumphantly reveals his most successful ploy. Before Mrs. Fainall married Fainall, she and Mirabell had suspected the man's character, and she had appointed her lover trustee of her fortune. Fainall is left with no claim to make because Mrs. Fainall does not control her own money. He and Mrs. Marwood leave in great anger. Sir Wilfull steps aside as Millamant's suitor; Lady Wishfort forgives the servants and consents to the match of Mirabell and Millamant.

Pride and prejudice. By Jane austen

kingmaker surya post

The news that a wealthy young gentleman named Charles Bingley has rented the manor of Netherfield Park causes a great stir in the nearby village of Longbourn, especially in the Bennet household. The Bennets have five unmarried daughters—from oldest to youngest, Jane, Elizabeth, Mary, Kitty, and Lydia—and Mrs. Bennet is desperate to see them all married. After Mr. Bennet pays a social visit to Mr. Bingley, the Bennets attend a ball at which Mr. Bingley is present. He is taken with Jane and spends much of the evening dancing with her. His close friend, Mr. Darcy, is less pleased with the evening and haughtily refuses to dance with Elizabeth, which makes everyone view him as arrogant and obnoxious. The news that a wealthy young gentleman named Charles Bingley has rented the manor of Netherfield Park causes a great stir in the nearby village of Longbourn, especially in the Bennet household. The Bennets have five unmarried daughters—from oldest to youngest, Jane, Elizabeth, Mary, Kitty, and Lydia—and Mrs. Bennet is desperate to see them all married. After Mr. Bennet pays a social visit to Mr. Bingley, the Bennets attend a ball at which Mr. Bingley is present. He is taken with Jane and spends much of the evening dancing with her. His close friend, Mr. Darcy, is less pleased with the evening and haughtily refuses to dance with Elizabeth, which makes everyone view him as arrogant and obnoxious. At social functions over subsequent weeks, however, Mr. Darcy finds himself increasingly attracted to Elizabeth’s charm and intelligence. Jane’s friendship with Mr. Bingley also continues to burgeon, and Jane pays a visit to the Bingley mansion. On her journey to the house she is caught in a downpour and catches ill, forcing her to stay at Netherfield for several days. In order to tend to Jane, Elizabeth hikes through muddy fields and arrives with a spattered dress, much to the disdain of the snobbish Miss Bingley, Charles Bingley’s sister. Miss Bingley’s spite only increases when she notices that Darcy, whom she is pursuing, pays quite a bit of attention to Elizabeth. When Elizabeth and Jane return home, they find Mr. Collins visiting their household. Mr. Collins is a young clergyman who stands to inherit Mr. Bennet’s property, which has been “entailed,” meaning that it can only be passed down to male heirs. Mr. Collins is a pompous fool, though he is quite enthralled by the Bennet girls. Shortly after his arrival, he makes a proposal of marriage to Elizabeth. She turns him down, wounding his pride. Meanwhile, the Bennet girls have become friendly with militia officers stationed in a nearby town. Among them is Wickham, a handsome young soldier who is friendly toward Elizabeth and tells her how Darcy cruelly cheated him out of an inheritance. At the beginning of winter, the Bingleys and Darcy leave Netherfield and return to London, much to Jane’s dismay. A further shock arrives with the news that Mr. Collins has become engaged to Charlotte Lucas, Elizabeth’s best friend and the poor daughter of a local knight. Charlotte explains to Elizabeth that she is getting older and needs the match for financial reasons. Charlotte and Mr. Collins get married and Elizabeth promises to visit them at their new home. As winter progresses, Jane visits the city to see friends (hoping also that she might see Mr. Bingley). However, Miss Bingley visits her and behaves rudely, while Mr. Bingley fails to visit her at all. The marriage prospects for the Bennet girls appear bleak. That spring, Elizabeth visits Charlotte, who now lives near the home of Mr. Collins’s patron, Lady Catherine de Bourgh, who is also Darcy’s aunt. Darcy calls on Lady Catherine and encounters Elizabeth, whose presence leads him to make a number of visits to the Collins’s home, where she is staying. One day, he makes a shocking proposal of marriage, which Elizabeth quickly refuses. She tells Darcy that she considers him arrogant and unpleasant, then scolds him for steering Bingley away from Jane and disinheriting Wickham. Darcy leaves her but shortly thereafter delivers a letter to her. In this letter, he admits that he urged Bingley to distance himself from Jane, but claims he did so only because he thought their romance was not serious. As for Wickham, he informs Elizabeth that the young officer is a liar and that the real cause of their disagreement was Wickham’s attempt to elope with his young sister, Georgiana Darcy. This letter causes Elizabeth to reevaluate her feelings about Darcy. She returns home and acts coldly toward Wickham. The militia is leaving town, which makes the younger, rather man-crazy Bennet girls distraught. Lydia manages to obtain permission from her father to spend the summer with an old colonel in Brighton, where Wickham’s regiment will be stationed. With the arrival of June, Elizabeth goes on another journey, this time with the Gardiners, who are relatives of the Bennets. The trip takes her to the North and eventually to the neighborhood of Pemberley, Darcy’s estate. She visits Pemberley, after making sure that Darcy is away, and delights in the building and grounds, while hearing from Darcy’s servants that he is a wonderful, generous master. Suddenly, Darcy arrives and behaves cordially toward her. Making no mention of his proposal, he entertains the Gardiners and invites Elizabeth to meet his sister. Shortly thereafter, however, a letter arrives from home, telling Elizabeth that Lydia has eloped with Wickham and that the couple is nowhere to be found, which suggests that they may be living together out of wedlock. Fearful of the disgrace such a situation would bring on her entire family, Elizabeth hastens home. Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Bennet go off to search for Lydia, but Mr. Bennet eventually returns home empty-handed. Just when all hope seems lost, a letter comes from Mr. Gardiner saying that the couple has been found and that Wickham has agreed to marry Lydia in exchange for an annual income. The Bennets are convinced that Mr. Gardiner has paid off Wickham, but Elizabeth learns that the source of the money, and of her family’s salvation, was none other than Darcy. Now married, Wickham and Lydia return to Longbourn briefly, where Mr. Bennet treats them coldly. They then depart for Wickham’s new assignment in the North of England. Shortly thereafter, Bingley returns to Netherfield and resumes his courtship of Jane. Darcy goes to stay with him and pays visits to the Bennets but makes no mention of his desire to marry Elizabeth. Bingley, on the other hand, presses his suit and proposes to Jane, to the delight of everyone but Bingley’s haughty sister. While the family celebrates, Lady Catherine de Bourgh pays a visit to Longbourn. She corners Elizabeth and says that she has heard that Darcy, her nephew, is planning to marry her. Since she considers a Bennet an unsuitable match for a Darcy, Lady Catherine demands that Elizabeth promise to refuse him. Elizabeth spiritedly refuses, saying she is not engaged to Darcy, but she will not promise anything against her own happiness. A little later, Elizabeth and Darcy go out walking together and he tells her that his feelings have not altered since the spring. She tenderly accepts his proposal, and both Jane and Elizabeth are married.

RASA THEORY BY BHARATA CODE OF NATYASHASTRA

kingmaker surya post

Bharata Muni very emphatically states in the Rasadhyaya of Natyashastra that "no meaningful idea is conveyed if the "Rasa" is not evoked." The very core of the Sanskrit Natya theory is the creation of "Rasa". Every dramatic presentation was aimed at evoking in the minds of the audience a particular kind of aesthetic experience, which is described as "Rasa". The concept of "Rasa" is the most important and significant contribution of the Indian mind to aesthetics. The study of aesthetics deals with the realization of beauty in art, its relish or enjoyment, and the awareness of joy that accompanies an experience of beauty. Rasa has no equivalent in word or concept in any other language or art of the world hitherto known to us. The closest explanation can be 'aesthetic relish'. We do come across the mention of Natasutras of Silalin and Krishasva by Panini, prior to Bharata's Natyashastra, yet, it is only Bharatamuni who seems to have given a scientific analysis and codification of the concept of Rasa. Bharata says that Natya is the imitation of life (lokanukruti) wherein the various human emotions have to be dramatically glorified (bhavanukirtanam) so that the spectator is able to flavour the portrayed pleasure and pain (lokasya sukhaduhkha) as Natyarasa. This Rasa experience will entertain and enlighten the spectator who hence becomes the 'Rasika'. The word Rasa is derived from the root 'rasah' meaning sap or juice, taste, flavour, relish. The extract of a fruit is referred to as 'rasa,' which itself is the essence of it, the ultimate flavour of it. Bharata succinctly encapsulates the theory of Rasa in his most famous formula-like Rasa sutra thus: "vibhavanubhavavyabhicharisanyogatRASAnishpattih."1 The aesthetic relish is produced (rasanishpattih) by a combination of the determinants (vibhava), consequents (anubhava), and transitory states or fleeting emotions (vyabhicharibhava). He explains Rasa as the essence derived from the various ingredients. He gives the parallel of the extract, rasa, got from various condiments, having different tastes, when combined becomes delectable to taste. Hence, that which can be tasted or flavored (asvadya) can be termed as Rasa. Just as the gourmet with a refined taste relishes good food, so also cultured and learned persons taste and relish the well established dominant mood (sthayibhava) created by various bhavas and abhinaya.2 This aesthetic relish, which is possible only through mental perception, is termed as 'natyarasa'. Even the terms vibhava, anubhava, and vyabhicharibhava refer only to stage representations, not to realities of life. It naturally follows that what they produce should only be 'natya rasa' (sentiments pertaining to the dramatic spectacle). One enjoys experiencing the emotions with the artistes, and sometimes even visibly expresses it by shedding tears or laughing spontaneously. But both the artiste and the spectator are well aware that neither of them is going through it in reality. This enjoyment is 'natya rasa'. The 6th and 7th chapters of the Natyashastra, known as the Rasadhyaya and Bhavaadhyaya respectively, together bring out the concept of the Bhava-Rasa theory of Bharata, and have hence become the bedrock for all deliberations on aesthetics, including the most brilliant contribution of Abhinavaguptacharya, whose Abhinavabharati remains till date the best commentary on the Natyashastra. "Bhava" is derived from the root 'bhu'-bhavati, that is, 'to become', 'to come into existence'. Bharata gives a causal quality to Bhava, saying 'bhavayanti iti bhava',3 that is, a thing or mental state that brings its awareness or makes one conscious of it, which pervades one like a particular smell. Bharata classifies the Rasa under eight categories (ashtarasa) and gives the corresponding Bhava which gives rise to the rasa. These are known as Sthayi Bhava or pervading stable emotion. They are rati(love), hasa(mirth), shoka(grief), krodha(anger), utsaha(heroism), bhaya(fear), jugupsa(disgust), and vismaya(wonder).4 The corresponding eight Rasa are sringara(amorous), hasya(humorous), karuna(pathetic), raudra(furious), vira(valorous), bhayanaka(horrific), bibhatsa(repugnant), and adbhuta(wondrous).5 There are three types of Bhava, namely, Sthayi (eight types), Vyabhichari (thirty three), and Satvika (eight), totaling to forty-nine. The Satvika bhava are the physical manifestation of intense emotion. They are sthamba(petrification), sveda(perspiration), romancha(horripilation), svarabheda(voice change), vepathu(trembling), vaivarnya(facial colour change), asru(weeping), and pralaya(fainting). It is an amazing analysis of human emotions put in a nutshell ! Vibhava is the cause (karana), the main stimulating cause being termed as alambana vibhava (the determinant), and, the environmental factors that are additional causes termed as uddipana vibhava (excitant). Anubhava is the consequent physical reaction through action, word and facial expression that follows (anu), as the impact of the vibhava. The thirty-three vyabhichari bhava (also referred to as sanchari bhava in some editions), are transitory, fleeting emotions based on psychological states of the mind. Several such emotions follow one after the other, one replacing the other, strengthening the sthayi bhava at each stage, till finally the sthayibhava is established and there is 'Rasanubhava'. "Just as in music a procession of notes in certain combinations reveals a characteristic melodic whole or raga, similarly it seems that the representation of bhavas reveals rasa as an aesthetic whole."6 For instance, in the play Abhijnanashakuntalam, Kalidasa uses King Dushyanta's coming to the hermitage to pay respects to the sage, as the alambana vibhava. The girls' talk, the bee, their attire, the flower garden and such others become the uddipana vibhava. On Dushyanta's entry, fleeting emotions like confusion, wonder, fear, curiosity, bashfulness and such others seem to fill the minds of all the characters present. The blossoming of love between Shakuntala and Dushyanta is gradually established through the reactions of both of them to the conversation of the sakhis with the King. If the 'patra' enacting as Shakuntala is able to show the Satvika bhava of horripilation (romancha) or vepathu (trembling) out of the new experience of love which is strange to an ashramite and Dushyanta is able to portray sthambha (petrification) on seeing her beauty and romancha on knowing her lineage, then the rati sthayi bhava gets established in the mind of the people who can experience the sringara rasa. Bharata says that Bhava and Rasa are mutually dependent. The performer or producer, be it an actor, dancer, singer, instrumentalist, or stage craftsmen, should be conscious of the sthayi bhava and the rasa that they are striving to establish. This will help them realize their 'siddhi' through 'Rasotpatti'.

modern australian poetry

There are and have been many tries to work out a complete definition of Austrian literature. Something most people can agree on is that there are certain differences and distinctive motives common in this literature which make it stand apart from other literary traditions. From the 19th century onward, Austria contributed some of the greatest names in modern literature. It was the home of novelists / short-story writers Adalbert Stifter, Arthur Schnitzler, Franz Werfel, Stefan Zweig, Franz Kafka, Thomas Bernhard, Joseph Roth, or Robert Musil, of poets Georg Trakl, Rose Ausländer, Franz Grillparzer, Rainer Maria Rilke or Paul Celan. Famous contemporary playwrights and novelists are Elfriede Jelinek and Peter Handke, well-known essayists are Robert Menasse and Karl-Markus Gauß. Yet, it is hard to speak of an Austrian literature prior to that period. In the early 18th century, Lady Mary Wortly Montague, whilst visiting Vienna, was stunned to meet no writers at all. For all of Austria's contributions to architecture, and having one of the most hallowed musical traditions in Europe, no Austrian literature made it to the classical canon until the 19th century. A number of reasons can be given. Firstly, the arts were the preserve of the imperial court, who saw culture as a political tool, as propaganda. Fine baroque palaces, imperial portraits and commissions of music could all work very well to this aim, but literature was deemed less suitable, and thus not encouraged. Secondly was the late emergence of a German literature; whilst much was published in the German language, little had the calibre to become 'classic' until the late 18th century, when Goethe and Schiller began writing. In Austria, the imperial state also censored all books mercilessly; The Sorrows of Young Werther, Goethe's novel depicting a young man's ecstatic love and suicide, spawned a string of copycat suicides across Germany, and many states banned the work, but Austrian authorities also banned Goethe's entire opus. It came mostly from Empress Maria Theresa's 'Chastity Commission', intended to uphold public morals, but it had the effect not only of creating a facade of decency, but a stunted intellectual front. But perhaps the greatest reason for Austria's late literary fruition was its cultural mindset. According to the cultural historian Carl Emil Schorske, 'profoundly Catholic, it was a deeply sensuous, plastic culture'. The outlook of a leisured aristocracy, it was copied by the lower classes. This mentality was not necessarily bad; the emphasis on beauty and fantasy was integral to establishing the imperial capital of Vienna, and it made Vienna the greatest centre of music in Europe. But it was not the best ground for literary experiment. Nevertheless, the liberalisation of Austria in the late 19th century created a more dynamic climate for writing, which soon produced a flowering. This article tries to provide some definitions which together may give a better understanding of authors and literature in Austria and its territorial predecessors, referring to all published works as well as those with classic status

the high cast hindu women by pandita ramabai ~ ⓐⓢ ⓨⓞⓤ ⓛⓘⓚⓔ ⓘⓣ

the high cast hindu women by pandita ramabai ~ ⓐⓢ ⓨⓞⓤ ⓛⓘⓚⓔ ⓘⓣ