Showing posts with label English Literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label English Literature. Show all posts

Friday, September 18, 2020

Class 12 - Kaleidoscope - Non Fiction - 03 Film Making

 STOP AND THINK QUESTIONS

Q1. What childhood memories does the author recollect that had a bearing on his later involvement with filmmaking?

ANSWER: The author had a childhood which made him aware of the two main types of characters in life. The good and the villainous. He came to know about these from his father who prepared sermons. From this knowledge, he easily connected to the stories like. Red Riding Hood and the Wolf, and all the others. And the wolf was the Devil, without horns but with a tail and a gaping red mouth. From imagining these bits to imagining church bells and hearing a piano from a picture at his grandmother's house at Uppsala everything was a part of his creative association with his childhood memories.

Q2. What connection does the author draw between filmmaking and conjuring?

ANSWER: The author says that film making and Conjuring are of the same dice because both require deception of the human eye. Most of the times the viewer is caught between the frames of a movie. Cause whatever emotion or situation is shown in it is false or enacted. But with the help of certain filming instruments, the film seems to be a real-life event and people express real emotions while watching it.

Q3. What is the nature of the first impressions that form the basis for a film?

ANSWER: A film is a finished product. The basis of a film is laid on split-second impressions that disappear as soon as they come. This means that the birth of a film can be a from anything as small as a note of music to an actor who seems to have been born for a role yet to be played. It isn't the story that takes the shape of a film. It is an idea, a feeling, a reflex of a second that draws into a film if it is followed beautifully.

Q4. Which art form is film-making closest to? What is the reason for the similarity?

ANSWER: Filmmaking is the closest to music according to the author. This is because both film and music are based on a certain rhythm. It is the inhalation and exhalation in a continuous sequence of recreation by directly affecting the emotions rather than affecting the intellect.

Q5. Quite often a film made out of a book is not very successful. Discuss.

ANSWER: There is a wide range of difference between films and literary work. Every literary work has an irrational aspect which forms the basis of its existence. This irrational dimension is the inherent seed of every literary work and makes a reader connect to it. The bitter part is that most of the times this aspect of literary creation is not physical. It is an emotion that can be struck through innumerable written lines but can never be put into enactment and converted into films.

Even after knowing this, when a literary work is forcefully converted into a movie, the nucleus or the purpose of the movie is in mist. Or the adjustments done to put the novel in terms of a film breaks the backbone of the movie and takes the magic element away from it.

Q6. What, according to Bergman, is the relationship between a film-maker and his audience?

ANSWER: A filmmaker essentially makes the story come live and the audience gives reactions. This means that the audience is meant to evaluate what the director has put into action. It's like the relationship between a teacher and a student. The audience is meant to rate or react to the movies. The reaction is the main element of the movie.

Q7. What is the story of the Cathedral of Chartres and how does the author relate it to his profession?

ANSWER: The story of the Cathedral of Chartres begins when the cathedral was hit by lightning and burnt down to ashes. Soon thousands of people came from all points of the compass, like a giant procession of ants, and together they began to rebuild the cathedral on its old site. They worked until the building was completed—master builders, artists, labourers, clowns, noblemen, priests, burghers. But they all remained anonymous and no one knows to this day who built the cathedral of Chartres.

The author says that in the old times the craftsmanship brought in glory. There was nothing like self-identity back in those days. It was all done for god. And the author wants to enjoy his own work. He wants to be satisfied with the quality of his work and enjoy his wok. That’s all he desires.

Q8. What are some of the flaws of the world of filmmaking today?

ANSWER: The world of filmmaking is dependent on learning from each other’s work and collaborating together. But today people have become so self-conscious that they do not want to share their ideas and the concept is that sharing will make the film vulnerable. Also, people are no longer polite and gentle. The expression has become very brutal. What was as easy as a play to the author once has now become a struggle. Failure, criticism, public indifference all hurt more today than yesterday. The brutality of the industry is undisguised.

UNDERSTANDING THE TEXT

Q1. Pick out examples from the text that show Bergman’s sensitivity to sensory impressions which have made him a great filmmaker.

ANSWER: There are many instances. But the most prominent ones are when he could imagine a whole live representation of the wall hanging and could imagine even the church bells ringing. He also could visualize the pigeons fly and was transported into a completely different world. It was a complete melodramatic scene created by Bergman in his fantasy of imagination.

The second instance is when he sees the cranes at Dalarna and left all work to watch the cranes fly.

Q2. What do you understand of the complexity of the little invisible steps that go into the making of a good film?

ANSWER: The first step is to get an idea of the theme. Once the theme is clear from split-second impressions and the topic is absolutely strong enough to take shape of reality, The next step is the storyline. Montage, rhythm and the relation of one picture to another—the vital third dimension without which the film is merely a dead product from a factory. The next important thing is shooting the movie helping each other work in the same direction to make the film a success. So the steps of filmmaking are idea formulation, storyline, scripting and shooting.

Q3. What are some of the risks that film-making involves?

ANSWER: Film-making involves storytelling through a sequence of pictures. It is absolutely important that the public identifies with the theme of the movie. If the theme is completely alien, then the message that the film wants to deliver will not be understood. Another thing is choosing the idea. If the theme of the movie is different from the current demand of the public, it will be difficult for the producer to impress the viewers.

Q4. What misgivings does Bergman have about the contemporary film industry?

ANSWER: The contemporary film industry doesn’t want to understand the fact that everyone learns from the other and that this is a continuous process. The current generation of filmmakers has the mentality of secluding oneself and ideas from everyone else. They take it to be cheating or creating plagiarised content. But in reality, it is a fact that we are all a community of people and we have to learn from each other. Learning from one another is the ultimate source of knowledge for us.

Q5. Compare Bergman’s views about making films out of books with that of Umberto Eco’s.

ANSWER: According to Bergman a novel cannot be put into a film completely. If done so, it becomes a complete injustice to the novel because the novel triggers the intellectual faculty of a person whereas the film triggers the emotion directly.

But according to Umberto Eco, the film takes over the popularity of a novel and it's only when the movie is made out of a novel that the novel reaches the epitome of its popularity. So the film indirectly helps the novel.

TALKING ABOUT THE TEXT

Q1. According to the author, split-second impressions form a ‘mental state, not an actual story, but one abounding in fertile associations and images’.
Compare this with Virginia Woolf’s experiment with the stream of consciousness technique in ‘The Mark on the Wall’.

ANSWER: Split Second Impressions is what Bergman associates with the beginning of the film that is a very vague but agreeable event which disappears as they come and leave behind a mood. He says that this is a mental state, not an actual story being a brightly coloured thread sticking out of the dark sack of unconsciousness. With the accumulation of all these threads, one can carefully weave a complete film but it requires patience and a pattern in accordance with these rhythms, obeying laws born out of and conditioned by his original stimulus can gain enough strength it could be made into a film. It requires proper analysis of the Impressions; Its rhythms, moods, atmosphere, tensions, sequences that give a perfect screenplay.

Whereas the Mark on the Wall Summary by Virginia Woolf is a first-person narrative recalling the past and specifics of an event. The narrator beautifully crafts his stream of consciousness into words that try to reflect and associate a series of event with a singularity of a mark on the wall. The process of thinking exhibits a spectrum of event related to the one being discussed and shows how vivid a mind could be.

Q2. Bergman talks about the various influences in his life including his parents and his religious upbringing. To what extent are an individual’s achievements dependent on the kind of influences he or she has had in life? Discuss.

ANSWER: An individual’s achievement is a mixed bag consisting of all his thoughts, his life experiences and his background. It shapes the way one perceives things around him and lays a path towards positivity and success. Bergman associates his motivation towards film and manipulating viewers emotions to the world of his childhood and his religious upbringing similarly one can definitely find pieces of their memory associate with every up and down of their lives. There is a substantial amount of evidence indicating that the way individuals are brought up has important implications on how they cope with their future, by serving as a framework for how they interpret success and the possibility of future achievements. Human behaviour is more closely related to environment and upbringing than education. Interpersonal skills and personality traits grow stronger with disciplined environments and many more examples could be easily related. Growing up and all other influential factors keep working in sync to help a person decide his both taken and untaken road that paves a path to his achievement depending on the role the person is playing. A person achievement depends closely on his personality and one could easily figure that personality is a pattern of thoughts, feelings and behaviours collected gradually over time and situation. So, one could easily map a person’s learnt behaviour to his life’s achievement. The environment that one entertains in his/her life collects the various modes of their problem solving, decision making and creative skills and help them in evolution in this brief period of time being on both positive and negative edges. Thus, with all these references and the statements of Bergman associating his childhood with his achievements one can safely assume the necessary association of an individual’s achievement with their incidents and influences bagged through their lives.

APPRECIATION

Q1. Autobiographical accounts make interesting reading when the author selects episodes that are connected to the pursuit of excellence. How does this apply to Ingmar Bergman’s narration of the details of film-making?

ANSWER: Autobiographical accounts do make interesting reading when the author selects episodes that are connected to the pursuit of excellence. In context with Ingmar Bergman’s narration of the details of film-making, one could easily find references to a various past event that draws readers attention on his hunger to perfection in filmmaking. He starts accounting the importance of childhood experiences and environment and how it moulds a person and paves his path to success. He describes the split-second Impressions that weave into an actual movie with hard work and giving importance to details that help him envisage a proper screenplay with appropriate dialogues. He shows the importance of working at the root level and also writing and says about the difference between film and literature. He finally lays the importance of people in one’s success in life. He describes the role of his parents and the values they inculcated in him. He urges taking advantages of setbacks to become stronger and thus shows how excellence in one’s career could be achieved.

Q2. Comment on the conversational tone of the narration. Compare this with the very informal style adopted by Umberto Eco in the interview.

ANSWER: People tend to prefer persons or textual materials where a conversational tone is used because when someone reads something written in a conversational tone, it tricks people’s brain to think that they are directly involved. As a result, a conversational tone is more effective for getting a message across–and getting that message to stick and this is what the narrator has utilised in this narration which leaves readers in a state of awe and motivation. They can relate well to the narrator’s story and can find pieces in them that can help them to reach their own goals. Whereas The informal style adopted by Umberto Eco in the interview is a series of questions with the person's answers and it's like reading them as a documentary of events and answers. It is casual and is appropriate when communicating with a large mass.

Thursday, September 17, 2020

Class 12 - Elective English - A Wedding in Brownsville by Isaac Bashevis Singer

DETAILED SUMMARY

Issac Bashevis Singer was a Polish – American writer who used to write in Yiddish language. He received a Nobel Prize in Literature in 1978.  This story basically points out the void or the emptiness that overpowers the protagonist of the story, that is, Dr.  Solomon Margolin, even after he manages to accomplish his goals and objectives. The story commences with the portrayal of marriage as a burden in the eyes of Dr.  Solomon. Dr. Solomon was basically a Jew who initially used to reside in Poland where his family was killed in the holocaust that was enforced by Hitler.  

(Holocaust here refers to the extermination of Jews by German Nazis in the rule of Hitler. This means that Jews were killed on a large scale by the Nazis under the supervision of Hitler). Dr.  Solomon ultimately escaped to America along with the other Jews who survived the holocaust. In America, Dr. Solomon had been appointed as the board member of a Jewish scholastic society and co-editor of an academic Jewish quarterly. However, the brutal treatment that was imposed on his family in Poland had an adverse impact on the mind of Dr.  Solomon, he seemed to have lost his faith in humanity and the fear of death often used to haunt him.  Also, Dr.  Solomon often used to keep thinking about his past memories, his first love, Raizel, who was a beautiful Jewish girl and the daughter of a Jewish watch – maker, Melekh. He also recalled that Raizel got married to someone else which disheartened him at that time but she and her entire family was later killed by Nazis. This thought further used to intensify his depressive tendencies.  Dr.  Solomon’s wife, Gretl, was also a German, but she was anti - Nazis. Dr.  Solomon used to treat rabbis, refugees and Jewish writers without charging any money from them and he also used to provide medicines and hospital beds to them in case of necessity. Dr.  Solomon and Gretl used to live a life of simplicity and modesty. Gretl used to manage all the household chores herself without ever thinking of appointing a maid or helper. Sometimes, Dr.  Solomon used to ponder about the transformation of his wife from a German blonde to a Jewish home – maker. Even after originally being a German, Gretl had begun to embrace Jewish culture and befriend Jewish women. This was primarily because one of Gretl’s brothers was killed by the Nazis, merely because he was a communist and he opposed the idea of exterminating (killing on a large scale ) the Jews. The story further begins to unfold. A Jewish wedding was about to happen in a town, that is, Brownsville and Dr.  Solomon had been invited to attend that wedding ceremony. The wedding ceremony was of Sylvia, daughter of Abraham Mekheles, an acquaintance of Dr.  Solomon. Abraham Mekheles was a Senciminer, that is, he too belonged to Sencimin (a small town in Poland) just like Dr.  Solomon. However, Dr.  Solomon was hesitant in attending that wedding ceremony because he was making attempts to distance himself from the Jewish community. This is because Dr.  Solomon had begun to feel that the Jews did not maintain the trueness of their culture after they had gone to America. Dr.  Solomon used to feel that the Jews were breaking their cultural legacy, for instance, Jewish men had started consuming alcohol in excess. This drove Dr.  Solomon away from his own community. Gretl noticed her husband’s aloofness from his own community. But since Dr.  Solomon occupied a prominent position in Jewish community, he finally decided to attend the wedding ceremony in Brownsville. He hired a taxi to reach Brownsville. Suddenly, the taxi in which Dr.  Solomon was going to Brownsville, stopped abruptly and Dr.  Solomon witnessed that an accident had taken place on that road. A man was being taken on a stretcher and Dr.  Solomon apparently seemed to recognize that person. Nevertheless, the driver again started driving the taxi and finally, Dr.  Solomon reached the wedding destination, that is, Brownsville. Upon reaching there, he discovered that the wedding venue was full of mirth and festivity, ladies were dancing around and people were getting drunk.  He came across Zissel, a person from his hometown, who narrated the old stories that described the brutal way in which the Jews were killed by the Nazis.  He described that the Jews were compelled (forced ) by the Nazis to dig their own graves and then those Jews were shot and buried in the graves that were dug by themselves. Many Jews were starved to death, burnt alive and many were transported to Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland which had over 40 extermination camps. Each camp was filled with poisonous gases in order to kill the Jews mercilessly. 

Dr.  Solomon felt suffocated when he recalled the animalistic ways in which the members of his community were killed and suddenly, he saw the face of a lady amidst the chaos of people. When he tried to get closer to that lady in order to recall who she was, that lady turned out to be his long – lost love, Raizel. He 

went ahead to confront Raizel and shockingly discovered that it was not a dream rather Raizel was really there at the wedding venue. The old romance between Dr.  Solomon and Raizel rekindled. Dr.  Solomon held the hand of Raizel and took her away from the crowd of people. Dr.  Solomon’s act of taking Raizel away from the crowd of people metaphorically depicts that Dr.  Solomon did not want to lose Raizel amidst the chaos of life all over again. A thought came to Dr.  Solomon that he was still single according to Jewish Law as he got married to Gretl in a civil ceremony.  Therefore, he took Raizel in a secluded place and expressed his desire to get married to her. He needed only a penny (currency ) in order to get married to her.  However, when he searched for his wallet in his breast pocket, he was surprised to discover that he had lost it. Moreover, suddenly it occurred to him that Raizel seemed much younger than the way she should have looked. Dr.  Solomon started feeling devoid of life, he was not able to feel the weight of his body and his body seemed to be deflated as if his body did not exist. This made Dr.  Solomon wonder whether the accident and the body laid on the stretcher that he witnessed on his way to Brownsville (on Eastern Parkway ) was his own accident and his own body. Dr.  Solomon was perplexed and wondered whether he was really alive or it was only his soul that was floating on Earth in order to seek his long – lost love. He also wondered whether Raizel was real or she was just a figment of imagination. The story ends on the note of this ambiguity and finally, Abraham Mekheles led his daughter, Sylvia, down the aisle for her wedding ceremony. 


VARIOUS THEMES


  1. Impact Of Holocaust On The Psyche of The Survivors: One of the important themes of this short story is that the holocaust survivors often go through a psychological breakdown and are likely to live in a state of despair throughout their lives because the brutal memories of their past continue to haunt them forever.  For instance, in this story, the central character, that is, Dr.  Solomon was never able to recover from his sorrowful memories in which his family and his beloved, Raizel got slaughtered at the hands of the Nazis under the dictatorship of Hitler.

  2. Surrealism: Surrealism in literature basically refers to the presentation of a story in such a way that it starts resembling a dream. In this story, Issac has used ambiguity in order to present a fantastical possibility of the reunion of Dr. Solomon and his long – lost love, Raizel. He presented this possibility by creating two conditions in the minds of his readers : either Dr. Solomon died in the car accident at Eastern Park and his wandering soul reunited with the wandering soul of his beloved, Raizel OR Dr. Solomon was in a state of hallucination which made him imagine his reunion with Raizel amidst the chaos of life. Both these conditions are unrealistic, dream – like and fantastical and therefore, these conditions give a touch of surrealism to the story.

  3. The Unbreakable Chains of A Void That Can Never Be Filled: Issac has depicted the fact that there are some voids in the lives of human beings that can never be filled by anything or anyone. In this story, Dr. Solomon led a life hollowness and emptiness because of the loss of his family and his beloved during a holocaust. This made him miserable with the passage of time and he was never able to restore himself to a life of genuine bliss even after becoming a successful doctor and occupying a prominent position in the Jewish society. All his professional accomplishments and all the ranks that he achieved in the Jewish community ultimately proved worthless because they did not help him in getting rid of his deep – seated depression and his insurmountable (something that cannot be overcome) void.

  4. The Submergence or The Loss Of True Identity in a Foreign Place: Finally, Issac has pointed out to the fact that people often tend to lose their true identities when they migrate to a foreign place. For instance, in this story, Dr. Solomon drove himself away from his own Jewish community because Jews adapted themselves to the culture of America and developed habits like drinking and dancing in order to celebrate their happiness. These habits were condemned in Judaism and the inability of the Jewish community to retain the principles of their religion represent the loss of their true identity.

 

UNDERSTANDING THE TEXT

QUESTION 1. What do you understand of Dr. Margolin’s past? How does it affect his present life?

ANSWER: Dr. Margolin’s past was a mixture of recognition and grief. As a child, he was declared a prodigy. Everyone thought he would grow up to be a genius. But he also faced hardships. His entire family had been tortured, burned and gassed. He had lost his one true love, Raizel. All this shaped Dr. Margolin’s present state of mind. He had grown aloof from the Senciminers after the loss of his family. He suffered from hypochondria ad fear of death. The death of his family and his love in the reign of Hitler made him lose faith in humanity. However, on the other hand, he had a good career. He was a success in his profession. He had an office in West End Avenue and wealthy patients. He was highly respected by his colleagues and everyone else.

QUESTION 2. What was Dr. Margolin’s attitude towards his profession?

ANSWER: Dr. Margolin has always been loyal towards his profession. He had never broken the Hippocratic Oath and had always been honourable with his patients. He was an enormous success in his field and is highly respected. Although he has wealthy patients, he treated rabbis, refugees and Jewish writers without any charge, and even supplied them with medicines and a hospital bed, if necessary. However, Hitler’s reign and the brutal death of his family and his community made him despise the matrons who came to him for petty ills while millions faced horrible deaths.

QUESTION 3. What is Dr. Margolin’s view of the kind of life the American Jewish community leads?

ANSWER: The kind of life the American Jewish community led was not appreciated by Dr. Margolin. According to him, Jewish laws and customs were completely distorted. Those who had no regard for Jewishness wore skullcaps. He even found their celebrations irritating, the Anglicised Yiddish, the Yiddishised English, the ear-splitting music and unruly dances. He was ashamed whenever he took his wife to a wedding or a Bar Mitzvah.

QUESTION 4. What were the personality traits that endeared Dr. Margolin to others in his community?

ANSWER: Dr. Margolin was a self-taught man, a son of a poor teacher of Talmud. As a child, he was declared as a prodigy, reciting long passages of the bible and studying Talmud and commentaries on his own. He even taught himself geometry and algebra. At the age of seventeen, he attempted a translation. He was referred to as great and illustrious. As a doctor he was always available to other community members, was very social and involved himself in other community activities to promote Yiddish language and Jewish culture. This endeared Dr. Margolin to others in his community.

QUESTION 5. Why do you think Dr. Margolin had the curious experience at the wedding hall?

ANSWER: Dr. Margolin experience at the wedding hall was a result of his death. The write has tried to showcase the Jewish sentiments through the metaphysical experience of Dr. Margolin. He met with an accident on the way to the wedding. His curious and mysterious encounter with Raizel could probably be explained through his past. Raizel was his one true love who he never had a chance to marry. She was given away to someone else and was later shot by the Nazis.

QUESTION 6. Was the encounter with Raizel an illusion or was the carousing at the wedding-hall illusory? Was Dr. Margolin the victim of the accident and was his astral body hovering in the world of twilight?

ANSWER: The carousing at the wedding-hall was illusionary. Raizel herself has been dead for long and her encounter with Dr. Margolin was because of his own death. He was the victim of the accident and his astral body was hovering in the world of twilight. Both were missing a physical dimension, and in fact, were spirits.

APPRECIATION

QUESTION 1. Surrealism was an artistic and literary movement in France between the two World Wars. Its basic idea is that the automatic, illogical and uncontrolled associations of the mind represent a higher reality than the world of practical life and ordinary literature. Do you think this story could be loosely classified as surrealistic? What elements in this story would support the idea?

ANSWER: Yes, this story could be loosely classified as surrealistic. The ending is an element of such surrealism. Dr. Margolin is in absence of a physical dimension and yet the story shows him to be participating in the wedding, dancing, drinking, chatting with guests, etc. His encounter with Raizel, his one true love who was shot by Nazis also stands out to explain surrealism.

QUESTION 2: Comment on the technique used by the author to convey the gruesome realities of the war and its devastating effect on the psyche of human beings through an intense personal experience.

ANSWER: The author uses banter at the wedding and the conversation between the guests to portray the realities of the war. At the wedding party, people are shown to be conversing with each other and with Dr. Margolin about the deaths of their family and the destruction of their community. Through this, the author used an unusual and an uncommon way of showcasing the realities of the war in the story.

STOP AND THINK QUESTIONS

Q1. Who were the Senciminers?

ANSWER: Senciminers were the native Jewish inhabitants of the town Sencimin. They were however forced to leave the town because it was destroyed by the Germans. Many Senciminers were tortured, burned and gassed, however, few survived and escaped to America from the camps.

Q2. Why did Dr. Margolin not particularly want his wife to accompany him to the wedding?

ANSWER: Dr. Margolin didn’t want his wife to accompany him to the wedding because he was ashamed of the mess that the American Judaism was. Every time he took his wife to a wedding or a Bar Mitzvah, he had to make apologies to her. However, this time he was relieved of it.

Q3. What is the Hippocratic oath?

ANSWER: The Hippocratic Oath is an oath usually taken by doctors to swear their loyalty to their profession. The protagonist, being a doctor himself, says that he has never broken the oath and that he has always been honourable towards his patients.

Q4. What topic does the merry banter the wedding invariably lead to?

ANSWER: The merry banter at the wedding invariably lead to the mentioning of the deaths of the Senciminers. Every conversation eventually led to that and occasionally, the protagonist found himself being asked about his own family and their death.

Q5. Who was the woman that Dr Margolin suddenly encountered at the wedding?

ANSWER: The woman that Dr Margolin encountered was his one great love, Raizel, the daughter of Melekh the watchman. He, however, had no luck with her and couldn’t marry her. The last time Dr Margolin heard of her was that she married someone else and was later shot by the Nazis.

Q6. What were the events that led to his confused state of mind?

ANSWER: Dr Margolin started to realize that something is wrong when he noticed that his wallet was missing but wasn’t sure how he could have lost it. He also couldn’t understand the fact that Raizel looked too young and he thought that maybe she was her daughter, trying to mock him.