- Lines 121-123 (Genesis 1:26-27)
- Line 134 (Genesis 1:28)
- Lines 148-152 (Mark 6:33-44) Although the wife references Mark, it is John who specifies that the five loaves are made of barley (John 6:1-14).
- Lines 154-165 (1 Corinthians 7:2-5)
- Lines 166-168 (Ephesians 5:21-33)
What did Emily actually see when she looked behind the black veil? Emily, it may be recollected, had, after the first glance, let the veil drop, and her terror had prevented her from ever after provoking a renewal of such suffering, as she had then experienced. Had she dared to look again, her delusion and her fears would have vanished together, and she would have perceived, that the figure before her was not human, but formed of wax. The history of it is somewhat extraordinary, though not without example in the records of that fierce severity, which monkish superstition has sometimes inflicted on mankind. A member of the house of Udolpho, having committed some offence against the prerogative of the church, had been condemned to the penance of contemplating, during certain hours of the day, a waxen image, made to resemble a human body in the state, to which it is reduced after death. This penance, serving as a memento of the condition at which he must himself arrive, had been designed to reprove the pride of the Marquis of Udolpho, which had formerly so much exasperated that of the Romish church; and he had not only superstitiously observed this penance himself, which, he had believed, was to obtain a pardon for all his sins, but had made it a condition in his will, that his descendants should preserve the image, on pain of forfeiting to the church a certain part of his domain, that they also might profit by the humiliating moral it conveyed. The figure, therefore, had been suffered to retain its station in the wall of the chamber, but his descendants excused themselves from observing the penance, to which he had been enjoined. from The Mysteries of Udolpho, Volume 4, Chapter XVII This technique has been referred to as the "supernatural explained. In The Supernatural and English Fiction (1995), Glen Cavaliero describes it as "a sequence of evasions and withdrawals, concluding with long-subsequent explanations." While this was an apparently effective technique as far as Anne Radcliffe's reading public were concerned, it has not been well-received by literary critics. E.J. Clery, in "The Supernatural Explained," writes that It was Walter Scott who properly launched a critique of the "explained supernatural": "We disapprove of the mode introduced by Mrs. Radcliffe . . . of winding up their story with a solution by which all incidents appearing to partake of the mystic and the marvellous are resolved by very simple and natural causes . . . We can . . . allow of supernatural agency to a certain extent and for an appropriate purpose, but we never can consent that the effect of such agency shall be finally attributed to natural causes totally inadequate to its production." "Shrovetide is the English equivalent of what is known in the greater part of Southern Europe as the "Carnival", a word which, in spite of wild suggestions to the contrary, is undoubtedly to be derived from the "taking away of flesh" (carne levare) which marked the beginning of Lent. TheEnglish term "shrovetide" (from "to shrive", or hear confessions) is sufficiently explained by a sentence in the Anglo-Saxon "Ecclesiastical Institutes" translated from Theodulphus by Abbot Aelfric about A.D. 1000: "In the week immediately before Lent everyone shall go to his confessor and confess his deeds and the confessor shall so shrive him as he then may hear by his deeds what he is to do [in the way ofpenance]". In this name shrovetide the religious idea is uppermost, and the same is true of the German Fastnacht (the eve of the fast). It is intelligible enough that before a long period of deprivations human nature should allow itself some exceptional licence in the way of frolic and goodcheer. No appeal to vague and often inconsistent traces of earlier pagan customs seems needed to explain the general observance of a carnival celebration. The only clear fact which does not seem to be adequately accounted for is the widespread tendency to include the precedingThursday (called in French Jeudi gras and in German fetter Donnerstag — just as Shrove Tuesday is respectively called Mardi gras and fetter Dienstag) with the Monday and Tuesday which follow Quinquagesima. The English custom of eating pancakes was undoubtedly suggested by the need of using up the eggs and fat which were, originally at least, prohibited articles of diet during the forty days of Lent. The same prohibition is, of course, mainly responsible for the association of eggs with the Easter festival at the other end of Lent. Although the observance of Shrovetide in England never ran to the wild excesses which often marked this period of licence in southern climes, still various sports and especially games of football were common in almost all parts of the country, and in the households of the great it was customary to celebrate the evening of Shrove Tuesday by the performance of plays and masques. One form of cruel sport peculiarly prevalent at this season was the throwing at cocks, neither does it seem to have been confined to England. The festive observance of Shrovetide had become far too much a part of the life of the people to be summarily discarded at the Reformation. In Dekker's "Seven Deadly Sins of London", 1606, we read: "they presently, like prentices uponShrove-Tuesday, take the game into their own hands and do what they list"; and we learn from contemporary writers that the day was almost everywhere kept as a holiday, while many kinds of horseplay seem to have been tolerated or winked at in the universities and public schools.
"The Church repeatedly made efforts to check the excesses of the carnival, especially in Italy. During the sixteenth century in particular a specialform of the Forty Hours Prayer was instituted in many places on the Monday and Tuesday of Shrovetide, partly to draw the people away from these dangerous occasions of sin, partly to make expiation for the excesses committed. By a special constitution addressed by Benedict XIV to the archbishops and bishops of the Papal States, and headed "Super Bacchanalibus," a plenary indulgence was granted in 1747 to those who took part in the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament which was to be carried out daily for three days during the carnival season." from The Catholic Encyclopedia. New Advent. Web. The inappropriate use of a word by substituting one word for another, often of similar sound, and often with humorous effect.
For example, . . . ARTHUR: Shut up! Will you shut up! DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system. ARTHUR: Shut up! DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed! ARTHUR: Bloody peasant! DENNIS: Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that, eh? That's what I'm on about -- did you see him repressing me, you saw it didn't you? ~ Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Scene 3 NOTE: Dennis should say that he is being OPPRESSED. It is uncommon to refer to someone else as repressing you. Repression is something you do -- often unconsciously -- to unpleasant or unacceptable memories, emotions or desires. RELATED LITERARY TERM: See spoonerism. The transcript to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Keep in mind that this film is crude, often irreverent and possibly offensive -- but no more so than many of the satires, parodies, etc. that we will be studying in the class throughout the year. And the offense is the whole point of the film.
Keep in mind while completing this assignment that -- except perhaps in the mind of College Board -- the notion of literature as only the written word, and only the written word of a "certain quality," is essentially antiquated. In response to the development of technology, we must expand our definition of literature. To that end, I want you to approach this film as a text. This is not just fluff. I don't introduce it to the course just to give you a break -- though it might be more comfortable for you to watch a film than to read Chaucer. I include this film because it is closely aligned with the British literary tradition which we are studying in this course. And I hope that, in your papers, I will treat it as such. Juxtaposition
Juxtaposition is an act or instance of placing two things close together or side by side. This is often done in order to compare andcontrast the two to show similarities or differences. In logic, juxtaposition is a logical fallacy (a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which makes the argument invalid) on the part of the observer, where two items placed next to each other imply a correlation (or corresponding element), when none is actually claimed. In music, a juxtaposition is an abrupt change of elements. In film, the position of shots next to one another (montage) is intended to create meaning within the audience's mind. In literature, a juxtaposition occurs when two images that are otherwise not commonly brought together appear side by side or structurally close together, thereby forcing the reader to stop and reconsider the meaning of the text through the contrasting images, ideas, motifs, etc. For example, "He was slouched alertly" is a juxtaposition. Modern poetry plays extensively with juxtaposing images, inserting unrelated fragments together in order to create wonder and interest in readers. Non Sequitur A non sequitur (or absurdism) is a literary device. When used in comedy (as opposed to its use in formal logic), it is a comment which, due to its lack of meaning relative to the comment it follows, is absurd to the point of being humorous. Its use can be deliberate or unintentional. Literally, non sequitur is Latin for "it does not follow." In other literature, a non sequitur can denote an abrupt, illogical, unexpected or absurd turn of plot or dialogue not normally associated with or appropriate to the part of the story preceding it. When non sequiturs are used frequently, this can be called "absurd humor". Non sequiturs often appear to be disconnected or random comments, or random changes in subject, especially socially inappropriate ones. A few examples of works which make heavy use of the non sequitur device to humorous effect are the radio show “The Goon Show”, the television series “Monty Python's Flying Circus”, the cartoons “Family Guy” and “The Simpsons”, the novels of Douglas Adams, and the comedy of Jack Handey and Mitch Hedberg, just to name a few. The non sequitur can be understood as the opposite of cliché. For example, in theatre, traditional comedy and drama depend on the ritualization; that is the predictability of human emotional experiences. In contrast, the theatre of the absurd depends upon the disjunction or the unpredictability of that experience. Predictability in its most extreme form is cliché; unpredictability, then, expresses itself most naturally as non sequitur. from the SPAMALOT STUDY GUIDE @ http://www.tuts.com/ "A story inside a framework, a story inside a story" (Harman and Holman). In English literature, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is the quintessential example of this form. Other examples include Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. The framework may contain less developed than the framework-story or inner narrative. Chaucer's pilgrimage to Canterbury, for example, is little more than setting almost completely devoid of plot. Your primary concern when reading a framework-story should be to discover the relationship between the framework and its inner narrative: Does the narrative serve to develop the framework? Or the framework the narrative?
Contrast is often at the root of this relationship: FOIL. Both PARODY and BURLESQUE imitate another text with the intention of producing a comic effect.
However, in A Handbook to Literature, Harmon and Holman make the following distinction:
|