Followers

king lear tragic hero by: William Shakespeare


 

             Plot Overview

https://www.scribd.com/document/387960960/King-Lear-Enotes



Lear, the aging king of Britain, decides to step down from the throne and divide his kingdom evenly among his three daughters. First, however, he puts his daughters through a test, asking each to tell him how much she loves him. Goneril and Regan, Lear’s older daughters, give their father flattering answers. But Cordelia, Lear’s youngest and favorite daughter, remains silent, saying that she has no words to describe how much she loves her father. Lear flies into a rage and disowns Cordelia. The king of France, who has courted Cordelia, says that he still wants to marry her even without her land, and she accompanies him to France without her father’s blessing. Lear quickly learns that he made a bad decision. Goneril and Regan swiftly begin to undermine the little authority that Lear still holds. Unable to believe that his beloved daughters are betraying him, Lear slowly goes insane. He flees his daughters’ houses to wander on a heath during a great thunderstorm, accompanied by his Fool and by Kent, a loyal nobleman in disguise. Meanwhile, an elderly nobleman named Gloucester also experiences family problems. His illegitimate son, Edmund, tricks him into believing that his legitimate son, Edgar, is trying to kill him. Fleeing the manhunt that his father has set for him, Edgar disguises himself as a crazy beggar and calls himself “Poor Tom.” Like Lear, he heads out onto the heath. When the loyal Gloucester realizes that Lear’s daughters have turned against their father, he decides to help Lear in spite of the danger. Regan and her husband, Cornwall, discover him helping Lear, accuse him of treason, blind him, and turn him out to wander the countryside. He ends up being led by his disguised son, Edgar, toward the city of Dover, where Lear has also been brought. In Dover, a French army lands as part of an invasion led by Cordelia in an effort to save her father. Edmund apparently becomes romantically entangled with both Regan and Goneril, whose husband, Albany, is increasingly sympathetic to Lear’s cause. Goneril and Edmund conspire to kill Albany. The despairing Gloucester tries to commit suicide, but Edgar saves him by pulling the strange trick of leading him off an imaginary cliff. Meanwhile, the English troops reach Dover, and the English, led by Edmund, defeat the Cordelia-led French. Lear and Cordelia are captured. In the climactic scene, Edgar duels with and kills Edmund; we learn of the death of Gloucester; Goneril poisons Regan out of jealousy over Edmund and then kills herself when her treachery is revealed to Albany; Edmund’s betrayal of Cordelia leads to her needless execution in prison; and Lear finally dies out of grief at Cordelia’s passing. Albany, Edgar, and the elderly Kent are left to take care of the country under a cloud of sorrow and regret.

Ugc NET/JRF PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTION PAPER 1 DOWNLOAD

UGC NET Solved Question Papers I Paper 1- June 2011 by Suresh M Hosamani on Scribd

Kingmaker Surya post

UGC NET Solved Question Papers I Paper 1- December 2011 by Suresh M Hosamani on Scribd

Marquee code generator The marquee code generator allows you to insert a scrolling piece of text to highlight an announcement or draw attention to a certain part of your website. Another unique feature of the marquee tag is that you can apply it to images. So why should you use a marquee on your website? The marquee tag has many benefits including: Fitting larger sentences into a smaller area Attract attention to the text or image of your choice (use with caution it may be annoying) Wide-browser support & compatibility Marquee properties Scroll direction: Marquee behaviour: Speed: Css styles Height: 100 Width: 400 Border width: Border style: Border color: #c1c1c1 Bg color: #ffffff Text color: #0b5b55 Font family: Text size: Marquee content Kingmaker Surya post Alternatively you can include an image for your marquee tag enter image URL This is a preview of your generated code Kingmaker Surya post Copy and paste the generated code into your page: Kingmaker Surya post

UGC NET Solved Question Papers I Paper 1- June 2012 by Suresh M Hosamani on Scribd

© 2018 sureshhosamani.blogspot.in. All rights reserved. Site by SharmaSaurabh.com

Ugc NET/JRF SYLLABUS

     
        

UGC NET Syllabus

If you have dreamt to crack UGC NET with good score, then you must follow an effective study plan with a precise approach. Knowing syllabus is the first step to begin your exam preparations. The candidates, who aspire to crack the exam, before starting their preparations, must check the NET Syllabus to get a descriptive idea about the topics to be covered in exam.


       Paper 1 Syllabus 
Section
Questions
Marks
Total
50
100
Teaching Aptitude
5
10
Research Aptitude
5
10
Reading Comprehension
5
10
Communication
5
10
Reasoning (including Maths)
5
10
Logical Reasoning
5
10
Data Interpretation
5
10
Information & Communication Technology (ICT)
5
10
People & Environment
5
10
Higher Education System: Governance, Polity & Administration


                     Paper 2 Syllabus:
As per latest media reports, University Grants Commission (UGC) has decided to revise the syllabus for National Eligibility Test (NET) for the first time in last decade. For the same, UGC has set up 25 committees to revise the syllabus for all subjects. Currently, all committees are in the process of developing the draft syllabus for different subjects. Once prepared, draft syllabus will be sent for approval to the main council. Once approved, decision will be taken on when to put the revised syllabus into practice.
The decision of revising the NET syllabus has been taken by UGC in order to reflect changes in what is being taught in different universities and colleges. The decision has also been taken to ensure that the revised syllabus meets the current requirement of higher education. Candidates can view UGC NET 2017 syllabus for reference. As soon as the syllabus for UGC NET 2018 is released, the same would be updated in the table below.
     British Literature:
Chaucer to Shakespeare
Jacobean to Restoration Periods
Augustan Age : 18th Century Literature
Romantic Period
Victorian Period
Modern Period
Contemporary Period
Other Topics incorporated:
Rhetoric and Prosody
Literary Comprehension
History of English Language, English Language Teaching.
European Literature from Classical Age to the 20th Century.
Indian writing in English and Indian Literature in English translation.
American and other non – British English Literatures.
Literary Theory and Criticism.


     
© 2018 sureshhosamani.blogspot.in. All rights reserved. Site by SharmaSaurabh.com
         

OMG ! It hurts. What to do with hurt – express or suppress?

HTML marquee Tag kingmaker Surya post
prove Hurt is a universal language. At the physical level it tells the dentist to ease up, and at the emotional level it tells a lover to change his approach. When hurt is expressed, it lets others you know that they have gone too far. Telling someone that they have hurt you puts them on check. Letting others understand what is important to you Hurt is your private message. If it hurts you, it matters to you. Denying hurt is not being brave, but being merely reckless. The purpose of hurt is to limit the extent of the damage done to you. The role of hurt is to tell you that you have been damaged – physically or emotionally. It defines the limits of trespassing. Hurt teaches you to establish limits with others. Your hurt is a feedback to you and communicating it to others becomes a feedback to them. It shows you and others how much you can tolerate. These limits are especially important with people you really care about. People you truly love are the ones with whom you relate with your guards down and hence you are the most vulnerable to be hurt by them. In fact, people you love the most have the power to hurt you the most. If you do not express yourself when others hurt you, then they have no way of knowing that you did not like what they did to you and with you. They would believe whatever they did was acceptable to you. So they keep repeating the same behavior and continue the same approach. In due course hurt compounds and becomes complex. If you don’t maintain boundaries, you will find others hurting you all the time, not because they are bad, but because they never knew that they were hurting you. You avoid expressing your hurt because you do not want to admit that you can be hurt. You believe if the world knows that you can be hurt then it will take you to be vulnerable. So you keep denying your hurt, because you do not want to take any action that might leave you all alone, which is your worst fear. So you prefer to suffer with the person than without the person. Remember, expressing hurt as and when it happens will never take a person away from the relationship. But, if you keep continuously sweeping everything under the carpet for too long and then one day you will find dust accumulation of unmanageable proportion. Expressing hurt when it happens is vital for keeping a relationship safe and honest. If you do not say ‘NO’ TO the relationship. It becomes a major challenge to get people to stay away from your space, when you have been continuously pampering them by letting them to barge into your psychological space. It is difficult to assert yourself with someone who has accustomed himself to violating your boundaries. Now, they will even claim that it is their right to do so. The practice of prolonged usage defines ownership and rights. If you allow people to use a shortcut across your property, without posting a ‘NO TREESPASSING’ sign, after few years that shortcut becomes a public way and you lose all claim to it. If you want to know how some of your most valued relationships went off track, you need to look no further than the way you kept avoiding speaking out when you were hurt. You were betrayed by your own assumption that others will care enough for your feelings and will not hurt you. The truth is that people consider their feelings first. If you don’t object, others will simply act in their best interest. If you allow others to exploit you, you will be exploited. If you allow others to take you for granted, you will be taken for granted. If you allow others to hurt you, you will be hurt. People treat you in life the way you to teach them to treat you. Your rights are not guaranteed, unless you are willing to defend them. If you don’t learn to object, then you become inhibited about objecting. Most problems that you suffer would be solved if you could stand up for yourself at the time of your being hurt. Hurt can be a powerful relationship builder only if you do not deny it. So, the next time someone hurts you, directly tell the person who caused it and do not make it a matter of gossip. Do not conceal it, deny it or pretend as if it did not matter. Do not punish others or plan a revenge to show you are tough. You were hurt – say so and leave it at that. What the other person will do when you tell him that you were hurt cannot be your concern. Expressing your hurt is your business. Do not get into the negative history between you and the other person – citing prior damages. Do not keep nagging. Remember that the person to whom you are expressing your feelings is someone you love and you want that person to have an opportunity to recover. Avoid overkill. Don’t overdo and overact. Just say it and just let go. Having expressed your hurt, forgive people who have hurt you. Forgiving is letting go of your hurt. Without forgiving you cannot grow. You cannot alter what has already been done to you. Forgiving does not mean that you have to be in a friendship with people who have hurt you. It only means that you no longer allow your old hurt to be a cause for you to suffer. If you expect others to apologize for hurting you and wait until they do so, you will only prolong your suffering. If you search your past looking for villains, be assured that you will find them, but you will not find peace. It is time to forgive and move on. Move on. You have nothing to prove tattoo-fonts

Set your goals & make them happen

tattoo-fonts
There are the only 2 options in life. Either ignores the small things to achieve higher goals or subordinate somebody in life, if you want to stand above the crowd, if you want to be someone who will be looked up to, then there is just one choice for you. You have to subordinate your likes and dislikes, ignore the small things, and keep focusing on larger goals. I like sleeping. I dislike exercise. I like fried food. I dislike sprouts and salads. Beyond my likes and dislikes, I, also know I can do a lot more with my life if I am fit and healthy. So, I subordinate my liking for excessive sleep and fried foods, as well as my dislike for exercise, sprouts and salads to the purpose of being healthy in life. So I do what the body needs to be fit and healthy. Obviously, Vishvnathan Anand would not have been in the typical bandwagon during his adolescent years. If he had been, he would not be the world champion. Parties, chill-outs, discotheques, movies, hanging-out, gang biking are typical expressions of growing years. And if they had those typical growing years then they would not be the Leander Peas and Sachin Tendulkar that we know of. We enjoy the free India that we enjoy because so many nameless, faceless Indians subordinate their likes, dislikes, family, and even their lives for the purpose of driving the British out. Most successful people became what they became because, much after all of us went to sleep, they were still working. If I need everything from life then I need to first give everything I have got to life. We don’t have to give all that. We just need to forgo some of our likes and some of our dislikes, so that we can have all of the purpose that we desire so dearly. If I have to reach where I have never reached, then I will have to take the path that I have never taken. If I have to achieve what I have never achieved before, then I will have to do the things that I have never done before. If I have to accomplish what no one has ever done, I have to do what no one has ever done. Either Subordinate your likes and dislikes to the purpose of your life or subordinate the purpose of your life to your likes and dislikes. This simply explains why it is so crowded in the bottom of the pyramid. For the few, who have chosen to be one above the crowd, their likes, their dislikes, even their life is insignificant compared to the purpose of their life.

war poetry in 20 th centuary

KINGMAKER SURYA

Comments by the Poets' E. E. CU MMINGS: \ IS SOMETHING WRONG?~"ls something wrong with America's so called creative artists? Why don'{our poets andpaihters and composers and so forth glorify the war effort? Are they Good Americans or are they not?" . ' . ; . First: are they Good Americans. . . . .,' when I was a boy, Good Americans were...:..believe it. or don't "':"adoring the Japanese and loathing the Russians; now, Good Americans ar~ adoring the Russians and loathing the Japanese. Furth~rmore (in case you were. born yesterday) yesterd~y Good Amencans wereadonng the Fmns; today Good Amencans are either loathing the Finns or completely forgetting that FinIand exists. Not even the fact that twice during my lifetime Good Americans have succeeded in disliking the Germans Can convince me that any human being (such as an artist) is a Good American: Second: why don't they glorify .... when you confuse art with propaganda, you confuse an act !of God with something which can be turned on and off like the hot water faucet. If "God" means nothing to you (or less than nothing) I'll cheerfully substitute one of your own favorite words, "freedom." You confuse freedom-the only freedom-with absolute tyranny. Let me, incidentally, opine that absolute tyranny is what most of you are really after; that yout socalled ideal isn't America at all and never was America at all: that you'll never' be satisfied until what Father Abraham called "a new nation, conceived i in liberty" becomes just another subhuman superstate (like the "great freedom-loving democracy" of Comrade Stalin) where:an artist-or any other human being-either does as he's told or turns into fertilizer. ' Third: is something wrong ... '. J all over a socalled world, hundreds of millions of servile and insolent inhuman unbeings are busily rolling and unrolling in the enlightenment of propaganda. So what? There are still a few erect 12 ' i.<'~.;: I"~ \; ,}: .h~~apbeings ~ the so called world. Proudly and humbly, I say to· ;:v .,;:.tliese' human bemgs: ~;:,':',! "0 my fellow citizens, many an honest man believes a lie. ~:(;,rhoughyou are as honest as the day, fear and hate the liar. Fear :,,;it~ndhate him when he should be feared and hated: now. Fear and ;::·i.nh~~~ him where he should be fe.are.d and hated: in yourselves. '~p::' Do no~ hate and fear .the artist ~ yourselves, my fellow citizens. ~~;:) ~onour him. and love hun. Love hIm truly-do not try to possess :!;,hIm. Trust him as nobly as you trust tomorrow. ttit>;,,"Only the artist in yourselves is more truthful than the night." i;r{~ji. .' :·'::;'·,GEOFFREY GRIGSON: f:> { ~i. j , .j·:'\·WAR-You ask about war: one must be self-deluded if one sim~' Jrp¥es so~ething so muddled as a 20th century compl~te war into \~,:!t ca,uses, _eIth~r good or bad .. The only clear thing that I can see is ,,<,itter .conten;tpt.· time, due to their confrontation of the holocaustic and distaste for the bureaucracy and class-dlstmctlOn WIth WhICh, of the present conflict. The imponderables of this. the British Army is permeated. In the Army I had the useful ex-, are unresolvable. I am inclined to believe that the man who perience of seeing this bureaucracy and class-distinction from the . : ' ,write poetry will write it. The war may present or force a bottom of the social scale; in civilian life I'm halfway up it. These, .itrriay bring out a poet, or shock him into insensibility of . two feelings, of comradeship and bitterness, I've tried to put into, ',.. It may kill him; Or gern1inate the best war poems for exsome poems. . '. .years after the event. i:War is another kind of show than the peace show, intractable, . :ingrained in man's nature. It is the evil standing up. A Lieut.-Commander RICHARD EBERHART: ,may. cope with these examples, as he can with the natural of normal peacetime phenomena. The best war poetry will A NOTE ON WAR POETRY -Generalizations about war' I 1*>.L,l .... ~'''_''u·u· war, just as it transcends nationalistic or sectarian boundpoetry are easy and ~ang~rous to ~ake. War len~s the poet obJet~s .which is to say that the best war poetry will have to be of the upon which to exerCIse hIS perceptlOns. These objects .are.multifan- Like God, it will have to be on both sides, or on none. It ous; they mayor may not be seized upon: They may Impmge up~n ' . applicable to different peoples and centuries. the sensibility in curious. and ~iffering ",:"ays. It cannot be .sald· universality of utterance I claim for the best war poetry whether the poetry res~ltmg. will ,be s~penort? poetry conceIVed to make it less about war than about man. Therefore, it is against other sets of objects, m ot,het tImes. Objects the,msel~es ~re ' ..... the spirit; judgment upon it cannot be limited to its context, loose determinants; the poem wIll result from endless subjectIve 'must run the whole gamut of poetical possibilities. It is the lack 18 , '19

ELAINE SHOWALTER :- TOWARDS A FEMINIST POETICS PDF

Elaine Showalter: Towards A Feminist Poetics: The Summary Elaine Showalter: Towards A Feminist Poetics
kingmaker surya About the author: Elaine Showalter (born January 21, 1941) is an American literary critic, feminist, and writer on cultural and social issues. She is one of the founders of feminist literary criticism in United States academia, developing the concept and practice of gynocritics. She is well known and respected in both academic and popular cultural fields. She has written and edited numerous books and articles focused on a variety of subjects, from feminist literary criticism to fashion, sometimes sparking widespread controversy, especially with her work on illnesses. Showalter has been a television critic for People magazine and a commentator on BBC radio and television. Showalter is a specialist in Victorian literature and the Fin-de-Siecle (turn of the 19th century). Her most innovative work in this field is in madness and hysteria in literature, specifically in women’s writing and in the portrayal of female characters. Showalter's best known works are Toward a Feminist Poetics (1979), The Female Malady: Women, Madness, and English Culture (1830–1980) (1985), Sexual Anarchy: Gender at Culture at the Fin de Siecle (1990), Hystories: Hysterical Epidemics and Modern Media (1997), and Inventing Herself: Claiming a Feminist Intellectual Heritage (2001). In 2007 Showalter was chair of the judges for the prestigious British literary award, the Man Booker International Prize. Showalter's book Inventing Herself (2001), a survey of feminist icons, seems to be the culmination of a long-time interest in communicating the importance of understanding feminist tradition. Showalter’s early essays and editorial work in the late 1970s and the 1980s survey the history of the feminist tradition within the “wilderness” of literary theory and criticism. Working in the field of feminist literary theory and criticism, which was just emerging as a serious scholarly pursuit in universities in the 1970s, Showalter's writing reflects a conscious effort to convey the importance of mapping her discipline’s past in order to both ground it in substantive theory, and amass a knowledge base that will be able to inform a path for future feminist academic pursuit Showalter is concerned by stereotypes of feminism that see feminist critics as being ‘obsessed with the phallus’ and ‘obsessed with destroying male artists’. Showalter wonders if such stereotypes emerge from the fact that feminism lacks a fully articulated theory. Another problem for Showalter is the way in which feminists turn away from theory as a result of the attitudes of some male academics: theory is their property. Showalter writes: ‘From this perspective, the academic demand for theory can only be heard as a threat to the feminist need for authenticity, and the visitor looking for a formula that he or she can take away without personal encounter is not welcome’. In response, Showalter wants to outline a poetics of feminist criticism. In Toward a Feminist Poetics Showalter divides feminist criticism into two sections: •The Woman as Reader or Feminist Critique : ‘the way in which a female reader changes our apprehension of a given text, awakening it to the significance of its sexual codes’; historically grounded inquiry which probes the ideological assumptions of literary phenomena’; ‘subjects include the images and stereotypes of women in literature, the omissions of and misconceptions about women in criticism, and the fissures in male–constructed literary history’; ‘concerned with the exploitation and manipulation of the female audience, especially in popular culture and film, and with the analysis of woman–as–sign in semiotic systems’; ‘political and polemical’; like the Old Testament looking for the errors of the past. One of the problems of the feminist critique is that it is male–orientated. If we study stereotypes of women, the sexism of male critics, and the limited roles women play in literary history, we are not learning what women have felt and experienced, but only what men thought women should be. […] The critique also has a tendency to naturalize women’s victimization by making it the inevitable and obsessive topic of discussion. •The Woman as Writer or Gynocritics (la gynocritique) : Showalter coined the term 'gynocritics' to describe literary criticism based in a feminine perspective. Probably the best description Showalter gives of gynocritics is in Towards a Feminist Poetics: In contrast to [an] angry or loving fixation on male literature, the program of gynocritics is to construct a female framework for the analysis of women’s literature, to develop new models based on the study of female experience, rather than to adapt male models and theories. Gynocritics begins at the point when we free ourselves from the linear absolutes of male literary history, stop trying to fit women between the lines of the male tradition, and focus instead on the newly visible world of female culture. This does not mean that the goal of gynocritics is to erase the differences between male and female writing; gynocritics is not “on a pilgrimage to the promised land in which gender would lose its power, in which all texts would be sexless and equal, like angels”. Rather gynocritics aims to understand the specificity of women’s writing not as a product of sexism but as a fundamental aspect of female reality. Its prime concern is to see ‘woman as producer of textual meaning, with the history themes, genres, and structures of literature by women’. Its ‘subjects include the psychodynamics of female creativity. It studies linguistics and the problem of a female language in literary text. It reviews the trajectory of the individual or collective female literary career. It proposes ‘to construct a female framework for the analysis of women’s literature, to develop new models based on women’s experience’. Its study ‘focuses on the newly visible world of female culture’; ‘hypotheses of a female sub–culture’; ‘the occupations, interactions, and consciousness of women’. It projects how ‘feminine values penetrate and undermine the masculine systems that contain them’. And at its extreme, it is ‘engaged in the myth of the Amazons, and the fantasies of a separate female society’. Showalter acknowledges the difficulty of “[d]efining the unique difference of women’s writing” which she says is “a slippery and demanding task” in “Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness”. She says that gynocritics may never succeed in understanding the special differences of women’s writing, or realize a distinct female literary tradition. But, with grounding in theory and historical research, Showalter sees gynocriticism as a way to “learn something solid, enduring, and real about the relation of women to literary culture”. Showalter then provides an exemplary feminist critique of Thomas Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge to demonstrate that “one of the problems of the feminist critique is that it is male-oriented,” meaning that, in some sense, every feminist critique, even when criticizing patriarchy, is focused toward the male. As an alternative, Showalter presents gynocritics as a way “to construct a female framework for the analysis of women’s literature, to develop new models based on the study of female experience, rather that to adapt to male models and theories.” To begin to trace out this radically female-centered theory, Showalter notes excerpts from feminist historians and sociologists. She then moves on to an engaging discussion of the experiences of Elizabeth Barrett Browning and other female authors to show the need for “completeness” in discussing women authors’ work way in which “it is necessary to leave oneself room to deal with other things besides [women writers'] work, so much has that work been influenced by conditions that have nothing whatever to do with art.” Three Phases: From these experiences, Showalter then begins a rough sketch of some of the elements that have characterized women’s writing: awakening, suffering, unhappiness, and matrophobia, among others. She concludes with her classification of women’s writing into three phases that “establish[es] the continuity of the female tradition from decade to decade, rather than from Great Woman to Great Woman.” Thus, Showalter traces the history of women's literature, suggesting that it can be divided into three phases: The Feminine phase (1840–1880): Showalter sees the first phases taking place from roughly 1840 to 1880; she calls this “the Feminine phase” and declares that it is characterized by “women [writing] in an effort to equal the intellectual achievements of the male culture… The distinguishing sign of this period is the male pseudonym… [which] exerts an irregular pressure on the narrative, affecting tone, diction, structure, and characterization.” The Feminist phase (1880–1920): The second, Feminist phase follows from 1880 to 1920, wherein “women are historically enabled to reject the accommodating postures of femininity and to use literature to dramatize the ordeals of wronged womanhood.” This phase is characterized by “Amazon Utopias,” visions of perfect, female-led societies of the future. This phase was characterized by women’s writing that protested against male standards and values, and advocated women’s rights and values, including a demand for autonomy. The Female phase (1920— ) is one of self-discovery. Showalter says, “women reject both imitation and protest—two forms of dependency—and turn instead to female experience as the source of an autonomous art, extending the feminist analysis of culture to the forms and techniques of literature”. Significantly, Showalter does not offer a characteristic sign or figure for the Female phase, suggesting a welcome diversity of experience that is too broad to be encompassed in a single image. Rejecting both imitation and protest, Showalter advocates approaching feminist criticism from a cultural perspective in the current Female phase, rather than from perspectives that traditionally come from an androcentric perspective like psychoanalytic and biological theories, for example. Feminists in the past have worked within these traditions by revising and criticizing female representations, or lack thereof, in the male traditions (that is, in the Feminine and Feminist phases). In her essay Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness (1981), Showalter says, "A cultural theory acknowledges that there are important differences between women as writers: class, race nationality, and history are literary determinants as significant as gender. Nonetheless, women’s culture forms a collective experience within the cultural whole, an experience that binds women writers to each other over time and space". Conclusion: On the whole, we may conclude that her views on feminist poetics are intelligent, largely devoid of rhetorical extremities, and confidently provocative. Showalter speaks with calmly convincing authority, as one who firmly believes in the verity of what she’s saying. She is both earnest, in that she sees change needing to occur immediately, and patient, in that she expects that, given time enough, the wisdom and truth of her cause will prevail.