While Philip Sidney’s “Loving in Truth” and George Herbert’s “Jordan (II)” are two different forms of poetry, they both convey a very similar idea. Interestingly, in both situations, the speakers tell a story of their inability to express their true feelings and declare their love while they try to overcome their own expectations that their writing must be held up to a particular standard. However, these poems deal with the expression of love in two different ways, “Loving in Truth” deals with the struggles of a man trying to earn the love of a woman, while “Jordan (II)” focuses on the struggles of a man trying to express his devotion to God. In the end, both speakers reach the conclusion that their writing must come from the heart in order
He had an eternal covenant and treaty with his people by the suffered animals of his stories , if he saw that an injustice was doing toward a horse of a carriage he rose against the oppression and he didn 't recognize the stereotyped slogans as a duty and mission. When he wrote the Hajaqa I said to him: ‘‘abandon the printing of this work Hedayat! ’’ But Hedayat said: ‘‘don 't think this manuscript gives me satisfaction, No! I know it 's a deceiving of yourself but let me throw this the last spit as well. ’’ He was one of the most advanced and aware humans of our century, he told : ‘‘Always the author is not the only one expressing his mentally eroding inner pain, that undoubtedly their pain too has a common aspect with other afflicted people.
The disclosure of post provinciality and colonialism tracks a bungle of societies, conventions, relocations, crashing foundations, distances and important chain of illusions and disappoints. A parallel is drawn in the middle of fiction and history in connection to the dialects. A residential area man, Deven, gets the chance to question his legend, Nur Shahjehanabadi, the best living Urdu writer. Having constantly cherished Urdu verse and missed the opportunity to be a Urdu dialect educator, the previous is enchanted into going to Delhi, by his youth companion, Murad. Despite the fact that he shrivels at the thought of potentially being misused by sharp yet egotistical Murad, the
Free will is an illusion: anyone who deviates from the norm is considered a mistake, and either forcibly brought back to conformity or destroyed. It is either utopia or hell, depending on the perspective. IT says its various offshoots are happy, but does happiness have any meaning in such a tightly controlled environment? In the story, IT possessed Charles Wallace asks the reason why we have wars and unhappiness on earth. He replies by saying that people live their own, separate lives unlike the residents of Camazotz.
George Herbert and John Donne each convey very different views on love in their poems "Love(III)" and "Lover 's Infiniteness". Donne uses a myriad of paradoxes and puns to explore the endless loop lover 's enter to complete the "transaction of love", while Herbert dramatizes a climatic meeting between a worshipper and God. Despite their vast difference in ideas, both poems exude a sense of insecurity and inadequacy that is later replaced with acceptance. In "Love(III)", Herbert depicts God not as a figure of vengeance and stern judgement, but as a 'quick-eyed ', 'sweet ' lover, eager to please his children. The poem begins with the idea that man is unworthy of God 's favour and merit because he has no goodness.
Valentine and I Will Always Love You by Whitney Houston are similar, due to both texts showing the hardships of love. Stating, “Bittersweet memories” the speaker in I Will Always Love You shows that love gives individuals varied responses when they reflect on their love. Accordingly, the speaker in Valentine talks about love realistically, unlike the speaker in Sonnet 116, declaring, “Not a cute card or a kissogram.” Explaining to the audience in an assertive tone, the speaker warns the audience not to associate love with pretty or perfect objects, as it contains problems. The speaker then tries to justify the previous harsh tone; declaring, “I am trying to be truthful.” This shows us that Carol Ann Duffy wants people to realise that love includes challenges so they will not treat it as if is faultless. Furthermore, the poet wants us to understand the hardships involved with being in love, so we don’t expect love to be effortless and give up on it when it is
Hate, the word that my mother would say she strongly dislikes. I feel a die-hard, devout dislike for this detestable, diabolical word, the word that makes no sense because there is good in virtually everything. I am infatuated by words afraid to be spoken, sometimes they can be turned into pretty poems of perfection. My closet comrades carry captured words carefully on their tongues, prolonging the release date of these words to an opportune moment instead of every moment. I find value in the fear that has prevented me from speaking my mind, it has helped me find my voice in a plain piece of paper and a pretty pen.
True love isn’t supposed to be a struggle if both lovers are together. The struggle is when they are apart. Comparing Deon’s song to Poison’s song we can find completely opposite. In Deon’s song, even though two lovers are permanently away from each other, their love is unending. In the last line, Deon says, “You are safe in my heart and my heart will go on and on” with regards to this line, Deon’s song shows the realistic views on love.
He regarded Persian as a superior literary language, suitable for his ambition: ‘‘to polish the mirror and show in it the face of meaning—this … is a mighty work.’’ Then, in 1826, his personal life suffered several blows: his only brother Yusuf went mad, and his father-in-law died. Ghalib’s share of the substantial inheritance came into question because of a long and bitter dispute between two sons of his father-in-law, born of different mothers. Most of Ghalib’s life was a struggle for an income; he employed his poetic skills at various courts, and he indulged in other aristocratic pursuits. In middle age, Ghalib was arrested on a gambling charge, and in 1847, he was imprisoned for running a gaming house. After his release, he was welcomed at court—as he had long wished to be.
However, most commentators and scholars who have studied Ghalib’s work regard this legend as a made-up figment of someone’s imagination, since Ghalib appears to have used both his pen names quite frequently and interchangeably throughout his poetic career, and one cannot really determine if he preferred one over the other or not. Ghalib’s ghazals and poetic work can be regarded as the perfect chronicle to understand the one of the most turbulent periods in the history of the subcontinent, the demise and decline of the Mughal Empire. Ghalib was there to see all the grand mohallas, katras and Bazaars of his time vanish into nothingness, while the grand havelis and mahals were people would get together to listen to his recent works had all been razed into the very ground. Ghalib had not only documented the life in the glorious days of Delhi, but he was also there to witness Delhi turn into a dessert with scarce water and a decline of the feudal elite under who’s patronage Ghalib had flourished for years. Ghalib describes that Delhi as a “military camp”, saying, “An ocean of blood churns around