Monday, 14 November 2016

paper no-2 Gulliver's Travel as a Satrical and Allegorical Novel






 “Gulliver’s Travels as a satirical  and Allegorical novel”



INTRODUCTION:
 
                     Gulliver’s travels a misanthropic satire of Humanity was written in 1726 by an Anglo Irish satirist Jonathan swift who was the foremost prose satirist in the English language and also known for being a master of two style of satire; The horatian satire and The Juvenilia satire. Satire is the powerful weapon of swift and he attacks the social institution of his times directly in his works, such as A modest proposal (Juvenilia satirical Essay), The battle of the book (short satire) and his most famous work Gulliver’s travels which is satire and a political allegory. Swift uses the journey as the backdrop for is satire by using second person narrative technique. Gulliver’s travel is basically an allegorical satire on contemporary leaders swift’s foes like Walpole, Anne, Charls2etc... The original title of swift’s novel is
            “Travels into several remote of the world in four parts by lemual   Gulliver, first a surgeon, and then a captain of several ships” 

‘`                     Gulliver’s travel is all about lemual Gulliver’s various adventures in several unknown lands from where he comes out as complete common human being. Swift using Gulliver’s voyage’s to satirizing various aspects of English society. Gulliver’s various conflicts in the lands he visits. These prime four lands like Lilliput, Brobdingnang, Laputa and Houyhnhnms in which swift has enunciated various human weakness and pride of the people, praised rational animals like horses and made a  mordant irony upon yahoos. Norman A. Jeffers has written about Gulliver’s travel that: “it is at once a delightful, fantastic story of adventures foe children, a political allegory, and a serious satire on human nature on contemporary politics, social institutions and on the manners and the morals of the age” so let’s have a concisely look on that novel that how and where swift uses bitter satire on England and its culture through this novel.

Satire and Allegory in the Gulliver’s travels 


 


                 Jonathan swift’s novel satirizes numerous aspects of human life – government, the state, knowledge, human relations, morals and technology, the entire book can be seen as an allegory of the slow collapse of human values. Several aspects of human ‘culture’ come in for mockery here. The novel here is an allegory of the human race itself. Gulliver refers to the ‘degenerate nature of man’. He is not making an observation about Lilliput or Laputa alone, but about the whole of humankind. In each and every case, Laputa, Lilliput or Glubbdrib, swift satirizes a particular set of human qualities or systems. Gulliver’s travel is basically written in four books the first and second book specifically satirizes English culture and customs, whereas the third and fourth book satirizes the general human condition. In writing this novel swift had aimed at amending and correcting his public, he wanted to shock the people into a realization of their faults and fallings. Second thing is that Gulliver’s travel is an allegorical satire this means that swift does not attack personalities and institutions directly but in a veiled manner. 
 
Satirizing Morals

                         Some critics have argued that swift’s novel is a moral satire. (Herbert deivis, 1947
 Swifts moral satire is an attack on rituals that are solemn, even when the participants are corruptor morally depraved. The entire novel is satire on humankind’s obsession with empty rituals. Gulliver eventually realizes that the customs and traditions of the court in Lilliput are actually frivolous.

Hold the right foot in the left hand, place the middle finger of the right hand on the crown of the head, and the thumb on the tip of the right ear

                 These lines are portraying that rituals is meaningless, and yet is considered important in Lilliputians customs. Swift satire is directed at such practice in society. In the land of the Houyhnhnms Gulliver makes a strong criticism of lawyers, by saying they are ‘biased…against truth and equity’ and favor‘ fraud, perjury and oppression…’.What swift criticizes is not the profession itself but the morals of the people in these professions. Gulliver himself becomes a symbol of human’s follies. When the queen of Brobdingnang adopts Gulliver he suddenly ignores the farmer who had found him and taken care of him. His behavior towards this farmer in the queen’s court shows ingratitude. Here in this scene swift’s comment on the human tendency to always flatter and praise those in power. Here, Gulliver’s own moral codes and virtues are open to question, since he revels both sycophancy and ingratitude.

Satirizing the culture of Appearance

             The voyages to Lilliput and Brobdingnang revel to Gulliver the excessive human obsession with size and appearance. When Gulliver is bigger than Lilliput’s inhabitant he is in a position of power over them. His size symbolized allegorical representation of the class. The big size of Gulliver symbolize the England as an upper class and other tiny people are seems like lower class. In Brobdingnang he is, in terms of size, a ‘cockroach’. Here, Swift wants to show that size has little to do with power, and even the tiny king is powerful enough to order the execution of his subjects for any minor misdeed. It is Gulliver’s size that determines his relations with other people, not his real qualities. This also functions as a satire on humankind’s inability to go beyond appearances.


Satirizing power

 


                 The entire novel is a criticism of power and institutions, of knowledge and authority. Swift suggest that all human relations are based not on virtues but on power. When Gulliver destroys the navy of Blefuscu, he misuses his power against a people who have done him no harm. To satirize the power swift makes use of politics and the government, through describing England’s political and legal institutions to Brobdingnag’s king, Gulliver’s tries to paint a bright picture. But after he describes how the parliament works and the way in which the ruling classes in England behave, the king of Brobdingnang believes and declares that every aspects of England’s society and political power is corrupts and immoral. In the third voyage of Laputa we can see that Laputa establishes control over its neighbor’s by threatening to shut off sunlight. It’s suggested that power does not lead  to compassion or understanding – it leads to an abuse of power. After visiting his past in Glubbdudrib he realizes the flaws of his own country’s ruling system and now he describes the English parliament as ‘a knot of peddlers, pickpockets, highwaymen and bullies’. This is swift’s satire on the institution that the Englishmen were so proud of. If he had the power of immortality, as in the case of the race of Struldbruggs in the land of luggnagg, Gulliver believes that he could have endless wisdom, riches and learning. In the end of the novel

 Gulliver discovers that colonial power is actually not about civilizing the natives or improving them- it is about oppression and exploitation.
 
Satirizing Knowledge

         When Gulliver teaches the Brobdingnagian king the use of gunpowder, the king is shocked at the destructive potential of this human invention. He then declares that the humans were

the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth’.

               Here, swift is satirizing humankinds pride in its abilities, inventions and power. Swift wants to show here that how humankind seems to take pride even in its ability to destroy. In the third voyage of Laputa we find the better examples for satirizing the knowledge and the abuses of science are the aim of satires.

                In the third voyage of Laputa we find better examples for satirizing the knowledge and the abuses of science. The laputans are philosopher, and brilliant at theoretical mathematics, but they seem to have no common sense, For example: their houses do not have straight walls or square corners. Its seems that they have knowledge but where and how to use it they totally unaware.
             Swift suggests that even though their imagination may be powerful, the laputans have lost have controls over reality. Here is no practical reason at all. Only highly evolved abstract mathematics and thought. 

            Swift is writing in the period of the Elizabethan age when Reason was believed to be supreme, thus he satirizesHumankinds obsessions with rational thinking here. In the land of Laputa a women were runs away from Laputa to lagando and lives with a man who beats her regularly she did not think even though she is beat by that man.

         In the land of Houyhnhnms the Horses are allegorically portrayed as the have more humanity than Humans. Houyhnhnms (horses) who are endowed with reason even they are animals. On the other hand Yahoos, who is human they are caricatures of humans lacking the power of reasons.

          At the end this discussion swift tries to say that there is no humanity left in either Laputa or Lagado- in both cases the emphasis is on Knowledge of a particular kind, without seeing how that knowledge can work for or against humans.

Conclusion:

              To sum up this discussion about Gulliver’s travels we may find that Gulliver’stravel is an outstanding adventurous story by Jonathan swift. This is novel interwoven many aspects of human life. It is political allegory its deals with many political allegories. The story is surrounded by one central character lemual Gulliver who goes on four separate voyages, each voyages brings new perspectives to Gulliver’s life and new opportunities for satirizing the ways of England. At the end we can say that 

 Gulliver’s travels is a literary work in which human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit.  

Citations:
 
  •     Critical Edition of Gulliver’s Travels(Jonathan
Swift), Edited by Pramod K. Narayan 
·      From Mahesh B. dholiya’s Blog assignment






Sunday, 13 November 2016

Paper no- 3 Literary theory and criticism





To evaluate My assignment
“William wordsworth as a literary critic”
                                                                                                                                     Name: RINKAL JANI

Roll No: 30

Paper: 03
                                                                                                                              Paper Name: Literary theory and criticism
                                                                                                                         Topic: “William wordsworth as a literary critic”

M.A. English Semester – 1s

Batch: 2016 - 2018

Department of English

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

Submitted to: -

Dr. Dilip Barad,

Department of English

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University




William wordsworth as a literary critic
“Wordsworth is a poet who never seems far from critic’s”
Introduction:




                  William wordsworth is a major English Romantic poet. He was primarily a poet not a critic, he started writing in The Neo Classical Age. He went beyond the Neo Classical view. He wrote lyrical Ballads combine authorship of Wordsworth and Coleridge. Wordsworth through his literary criticism demolished the old and the faulty and opens out new vistas and avenues. Let’s have an overlook on William wordsworth as literary critic, his contribution to the English literature and his major work’s. He was p William Wordsworth (1770-1850)

William wordsworth as a literary critic:                                                                                                                                                     Wordsworth’s criticism is of far-reaching historical significance. When Wordsworth started, it was the Neo-classical criticism, which held the day. Critics were pre-occupied with poetic genres, poetry was judged on the basis of rules devised by Aristotle and other ancients, and interpreted by the Italian and French critics. They cared for rules, for methods, for outward form, and had nothing to say about the substance, the soul of poetry. Wordsworth is the first critic to turn from the poetry to its substance; builds a theory of poetry, and gives an account of the nature of the creative process. His emphasis is on novelty, experiment, liberty, spontaneity, inspiration and imagination, as contrasted with the classical emphasis on authority, tradition, and restraint. His ‘Preface’ is an unofficial manifesto of the English Romantic Movement giving it a new direction, consciousness and program. After Wordsworth had written, literary criticism could never be the same as before.

            Wordsworth through his literary criticism demolishes the old and the faulty and opens out new vistas and avenues. He discards the artificial and restricted forms of approved 18th century poetry. Disgusted by the, “gaudiness and inane phraseology”, of many modern writers, he criticizes poets who:

       … separate themselves from the sympathies of men, and indulge in arbitrary and capricious habits of expression, in order to furnish food for fickle tastes, and fickle appetites, of their own creation.

      Discarding formal finish and perfection, he stresses vivid sensation and spontaneous feeling.He says:

All good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings.
Scott James says:

He discards Aristotelian doctrine. For him, the plot, or situation, is not the first thing. It is the feeling that matters.
         Reacting against the artificiality of 18th century poetry, he advocates simplicity both in theme and treatment. He advocates a deliberate choice of subject from “humble and rustic life”. Instead of being pre-occupied with nymphs and goddesses, he portrays the emotions of collage girls and peasants. There is a healthy realism in his demand that the poet should use, “the language of common men”, and that he should aim at keeping, “the reader in the company of flesh and blood.”

           There is, no doubt, his views in this respect are open to criticism. Scott James points out, the flesh and blood and emotions of a townsman are not more profound. Besides, by confining himself wholly to rustic life, he excluded many essential elements in human experience. Thus, he narrowed down his range.

          His insistence on the use of a selection of language really used by men is always in danger of becoming trivial and mean.

            There is also, no doubt, that he is guilty of over-emphasis every now and then, and that it is easy to pick holes in his theories. Coleridge could easily demolish his theory of poetic diction and demonstrate that a selection of language as advocated by Wordsworth would differ in no way from the language of any other man of commonsense.

             All the same, the historical significance of his criticism is very great. It served as a corrective to the artificial and inane phraseology and emphasized the value of a simpler and more natural language. By advocating simplicity in theme, he succeeded in enlarging the range of English poetry. He attacked the old, outdated and trivial and created a taste of the new and the significant. He emphasized the true nature of poetry as an expression of emotion and passion, and so dealt a death blow to the dry intellectuality of contemporary poetry. In this way, he brought about a revolution in the theory of poetry, and made popular acceptance of the new poetry, the romantic poetry, possible.

          Unlike other romantics, Wordsworth also lays stress on the element of thought in poetry. He has a high conception of his own calling and so knows that great poetry cannot be produced by a careless or thoughtless person. He says:

             Poems to which any value can be attached were never produced on any variety of subjects but by a man who, being possessed of more than usual organic sensibility, had also thought long and deeply.

              Poetic process is a complex one. Great poetry is not produced on the spur of the moment. It is produced only when the original emotion is contemplated in tranquility, and the poet passions anew.

          Wordsworth goes against the neo-classic view that poetry should both instruct and delight, when he stresses that the function of poetry is to give pleasure, a noble and exalted kind of pleasure which results from increased understanding and sympathy. If at all it teaches, it does so only indirectly, by purifying the emotions, uplifting the soul, and bringing it nearer to nature.

          The credit for democratizing the conception of the poet must go to Wordsworth. According to him, the poet is essentially a man who differs from other men not in kind, but only in degree. He has a more lively sensibility, a more comprehensive soul, greater powers of observation, imagination and communication. He is also a man who has thought long and deep. Wordsworth emphasizes his organic oneness as also the need for his emotional identification with other men.
His works are…                                                                                                              Works of wordsworth

His works are…                                                                                                                
‘Lyrical Ballads’ ‘The Excursion’ ‘ We are Seven’


‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’

‘Tintern Abbey’


‘The Prelude’


‘The ldiot Boy’


                        He basically writes poetry, Wordsworth's personality and poetry were deeply influenced by his love of nature, especially by the sights and scenes of the Lake Country, in which he spent most of his mature life. A profoundly earnest and sincere thinker, he displayed a high seriousness comparable, at times, to Milton's but tempered with tenderness and a love of simplicity.

                      Wordsworth's earlier work shows the poetic beauty of commonplace things and people as in "Margaret,""Peter Bell,""Michael," and "The Idiot Boy." His use of the language of ordinary speech was heavily criticized, but it helped to rid English poetry of the more artificial conventions of 18th-century diction. Among his other well-known poems are "Lucy" ("She dwelt among the untrodden ways"), "The Solitary Reaper,""Resolution and Independence,""Daffodils,""The Rainbow," and the sonnet "The World Is Too Much with Us."

                       Although Wordsworth was venerated in the 19th cent., by the early 20th cent. his reputation had declined. He was criticized for the unevenness of his poetry, for his rather marked capacity for bathos, and for his transformation from an open-minded liberal to a cramped conservative. In recent years, however, Wordsworth has again been recognized as a great English poet—a profound, original thinker who created a new poetic tradition. The Poetry of Wordsworth:
            Wordsworth has in favour of simple poetic diction but he himself has not followed his own rule, his poetries are easy to read but not to understand, reader could get the pleasure but not the hidden meaning. As in his poem “Lucy”:

A violet by a mossy stone,

Half hidden from the eye;

Fair as a star, when only one

Is shining in the sky.

          Wordsworth was strongly believed that man and nature shouldbe portrayed as they are. He is not always melodious, but he is seldom graceful. He is absolutely without humour.

          After his longer works his first good book as per critics was Selections with short poems, after reading these poems we come to know that Wordsworth is the greatest nature poet that ever has been produced by our literature. No other poet has found such beauty in nature as Wordsworth has described. He had a strong belief that all nature is the reflection of the living God, all his contemporary writers like Cowper, Burns, Keats, and Tennyson were providing the out ward aspects of nature in varying degrees but Wordsworth gives you her very life, and the experience of man with the nature. While reading his poetry the reader could feel the touch of nature, the experience of wonderland and memory of our own childhood

           Wordsworth’s philosophy toward human life is very simple that man is not apart from nature, but is the very “life of her life.” Wordsworth has connected birth with nature and he expressed this gladness with poetry that the child comes straight from the Creator of nature:


Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:

The soul that rises with us, our life’s star,

But trailing cloud of glory do we come

From God, who is our home”


                     In “Intimations of Immorality from recollections of Early Childhood” and in “The Retreat” he has summed up his childhood and philosophy; In “Tintern Abbey”, “The Rainbow”, “Ode to Duty” and “Intimation of Immorality” it is plain teaching; In “Michael,” “The Solitary Reaper,” “to a Highland Girl,”“Stepping Westward,” he tries to suggests the joy and sorrow not of princes or kings but of a common life. He has described his whole life in “The Prelude” and “The Recluse” is the treat to nature.


Conclusion:

            We can do no better than conclude this account of the achievement of Wordsworth as a critic with the words of “Rene Wellek”:

              Wordsworth thus holds a position in the history of criticism which must be called ambiguous or transitional. He inherited from neo-classicism a theory of the imitation of nature to which he gives, however, a specific social twist: he inherited from the 18th century a view of poetry as passion and emotion which he again modified as … “recollection in tranquility”. He takes up rhetorical ideas about the effect of poetry but extends and amplifies them into a theory of the social effects of literature … he also adopts a theory of poetry in which imagination holds the central place as a power of unification and ultimate insight into the unity of the world. Though Wordsworth left only a small body of criticism, it is rich in survivals, suggestions, anticipations and personal insights.

Citation:



Deepti joshi's Assignment: Wordsworth as Critic and his views on subject matter of poetry
Wikipedia
http://littcritic.blogspot.in/2014/01/william-wordsworth.html
Another internet sources

paper no-4 Indian writting in English



To evaluate My Assignment



Analyze The characters of Ekalavya and Arjuna in the play “The Purpose’’


Name: RINKAL JANI

Roll No: 30

Paper: 4-A
                                                                                                                               Paper Name: Indian Writing in English Pre - Independence
                                                                                                                             Topic: Analyze the characters of Ekalavya and Arjuna in the play “The Purpose’’
                                                                                                                            M.A. English Semester - 1

Batch: 2016 - 2018

Submitted to: -

Parth sir,

Department of English

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University


The characters of Ekalavya and Arjuna
    Play: “The Purpose”

   Playwright: T.P. Kailasam

    Introduction: -




                       This play “The Purpose’’ is written by well-known playwright T. P. Kailasam. His full name is Thyagaraja Paramasiva Kailasam. He was born in 1884 and died in 1946. T. P. Kailasam who wrote both in English and Kannada. He was prominent playwright of Kannada literature and contribute a lot to Kannada Theater. comedy earned him the title Prahasana Prapitamaha, "the father of humorous plays" and later he was also called as "Kannadakke Obbane Kailasam" means "One and Only Kailasam for Kannada.                                                                                                                                           This play “The Purpose’’ is written by well-known playwright T. P. Kailasam. His full name is Thyagaraja Paramasiva Kailasam. He was born in 1884 and died in 1946. T. P. Kailasam who wrote both in English and Kannada. He was prominent playwright of Kannada literature and contribute a lot to Kannada Theater. comedy earned him the title Prahasana Prapitamaha, "the father of humorous plays" and later he was also called as "Kannadakke Obbane Kailasam" means "One and Only Kailasam for Kannada".
                                                                                                                                                                    T. P. Kailasam is considered as the father of modern Kannada drama. However, his dramatic art blossom fully in English drama. He has ardent love for dramatic genre as an actor as well as a writer. His famous works are...


The Brahmin’s curse
The fulfilment
The Burden
Keechaka
Karna
The purpos
e

       All his theme and character are mythological yet their treatment and delineation are strictly according to his vision, mission and imagination.

About The Play “The Purpose”:-

        “The Purpose” is originally written by Kailasam. But the concept of the play is adopted from the myth of great Indian Epic “The Mahabharata” written by Maharishi Veda Vyas.Here in this play has tried to break this myth of real Mahabharata. He gives twist of the original story of Mahabharata “The Purpose” and tries to                                                                                       De-construct the theory of myth in The Purpose.                                                                                                                                      Here, ‘The Purpose’ is a mythical play it deals with past and ancient Indians culture, and connected with socio-political situation in the time of ancient Mahabharata. ‘Mythical story is always a fable of people’ it’s like a tell that spreading our culture and its value.


By a myth ... I mean primarily a certain type of

story in which some of the chief characters are

gods or other beings larger in power than humanity.”

~ Northrop Frye


Kailasams plays have a Uniform technical excellence and for this, C.R. Reddy has said that,


“Greater than any writer I have known is Kailasam in dramatic technique.”
                  Here, in his play, Kailasam tried to illuminated something which is in original myth was neglected through the character of Eklavya and Kailasam is also give of another important twist to Arjuna’s character and tried to highlighted his another side apart from his good or greatness in original myth.

About two main Characters of this play : Ekalavya And Arjuna :-
           So Let’s see that how this both the characters play his role in this play And through them Kailasam has to do on the society or its custoums.




Arjuna:



                           When we talked about Arjuna’s character first image comes in our mind is that Arjuna is a very powerful man and as humble as God. But here in this play playwright Kailasam has broken the myth of real Mahabharata. And here in this play he portrayed Arjuna as very ambitious man and very low class person in emotions wise. Arjuna was third brother from the five pandavas in real Mahabharata epic. Arjuna’s mother was Kunti and his father was Pandu. He is son of Indra dev in epic. He is a prince of Hastinapura and he has four brothers Yudhishthir, Bheem, Nakul and Sahdev. In Mahabharata Arjuna was known for his steadfastness and single mindedness in pursuing his goals.

                            In T.P kailasam’s play Arjuna was a little boy who goes to Guru Drona’s Ashram for learning archery with pandavas and cousin brother’s by Bhishma. In the Mahabharata Arjuna was fast learner archery and he is favorite student of guru Dronacharya, and in T.P Kailasam’s play he was a slow learner but favorite student of Guru Dronacharya. Guru Dronacharya gives promise to him that he became best archer in the world.

                            The play ‘The Purpose’ is starts with Arjuna practicing with bow, his target swag by a tree-branch. Arjuna himself emphasize on his aim of life.







Arjuna:

Yes, Taataajee! Why, I shall HAVE to remember it, as it is my personal ambition to be the most famous archer of all time!
                                                                                                                                    These lines suggested that the aim of Arjuna he want to become greatest archer  in the world. Also these line signifies that the self-cantered nature of Arjuna and he might “own longing”. Arjuna was so confident about his archery that he didn’t know that Eklavya also wanted to become the best archer of the world. Drona make him understand that why he makes poor Progress. He wants to make aware Arjuna about his “KARMA’S” towards his family and his kingdom. Drona tells him in frustration by saying this…                                                                                                                             
“YOU POOR SELF-OBSESSED CHILD; YOU WILL THEN REALIZES THAT RIGHTEOUSNESS IS GOD!”                                                                                              
At that time, overwhelmed by Drona’s outburst, Arjuna shudders in fear.

Arjuna:  (Plaintively) Forgive me Gurujee, but I really cannot make out how all the lessons you so kindly teach me... slip out of my mind...                                        
 

Drona:  YOU CANNOT... Paratha! But I CAN! The true trouble with you is that your AIM is wrong, altogether wrong!                                                                            
Arjuna: "My aim wrong"? But I always aim at my target, Gurujee, straight at it!             
Drona: Oh! I am not talking of your aim at your target! I mean the AIM... the MAIN AIM... the MAIN PURPOSE with which you are learning... THAT is what is at fault!
Arjuna: "My main aim in learning Archery"?... Well...!
Drona: Your AIM, Paratha, is just this: TO ATTAIN FAME AS AN ARCHER! No more! Every moment you spend at work, your mind is FULLER of thoughts of the DAY WHEN YOU'LL BE ACCLAIM'D AS THE VERY GREATEST ARCHER OF ALL TIMES, than of thoughts of the work itself! Be honest now, and confess that I am right!
Arjuna: (Dropping his eyes) Yes, Gurujee, you are right.
                  From this conversation of Guru Dronacharya and Arjuna, we have clear idea about Arjuna’s real purpose for become a best archer in the world. He wants to become best archer of the world at any cost its shows his obsess nature toward his ambition. After this conversation story begins with the second prominent character of this play Ekalavya. He was belonging to Nishadha community and also want to learn archery from Guru Dronacharya.

                When two main characters Arjuna and Ekalavya they confront each other, it was the situation or conflict with them that who will become the best archer in the world. There is no doubt that ultimately they both become best in archery and for that Ekalavya has to do sacrifice and give his thumb as a “Gurudakshina” to his guru dronacharya. And that is the reason who made him great and sympathetic character in this play. Let’s have look on this second major character of this play…
Ekalavya:


                                 Ekalavya is the protagonist of this play “The purpose”. He is a Nishadha boy, and also a marginalized character in the play or in original myth also. His ambition to be the best archer in the world. Ekalavya wants to learn archery for two purpose first for himself, for save Nature and second for his Mother’s dream.
                              In the original myth Ekalavyas character is ignorant and not considerable but here Kailasam give justice to this minor character and made him major or great by writing his dramatic technique. Ekalavya is not powerful character in the ved vyas the purpose but here he is enough capable and he had great esteem. He always speaks whatever he thinks to be true. He really likes the technique of archery of Guru Dronacharya, but he also apprehends Arjuna as his acquaintance. This shows his humble nature.
                                                                                                                                           “...this MUST BE THE GREAT DRONACHARYA! Who else could in a few moments and with a few words turn a voice into a good archery that boy, Paratha, looks a skillful archer already! Why, I am better myself for listening to him and following his words!”    
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          We can find the devotion and love for Guru Dronacharya in above lines which spoken by Ekalavya. He doesn’t even miss the one word of his favorite Guru Dronacharya. At that time, he was not even noticed by anyone during that movement, he speaks himself. He wanted to learn archery from Guru Dronacharya but he refuses to him and said that I am teaches only to the princes hear we find ‘Indian cast and creed system where a talented person is not equally seen’. Though he has impersonal purpose to learn archery and also has quality but he can’t because of his belonging. Tragedy arises when guru Drona refuses him to teach though he takes Daxina, seeing his guru’s dilemma Ekalavya willingly gives his ‘RIGHT HANDS THUMB’ as Guru Daxina to guru dronacharya. He has to pay fees is it so because of his ambition to learn archery. He becomes ‘SCAPEGOAT’ of dominated of caste hierarchy. Though he has a quality he becomes helpless character in throughout the ply.
                           After examine the character of Ekalavya we can conclude that being a common man and cause of marginalization in ancient society Ekalavya has to suffers a lot. Ekalavya faces all the problems and do lots of struggles he comes out with flying colors and emerge as the tragic hero of the ply “The Purpose”
                         Resemblance and Antithesis between Arjuna and Ekalavya
When we talk about these two major character, first of all we have to discussed that, that there are some similarities and some differentiate things between these two character, so let’s have a briefly look on that.
                     “A person of no Pride always remember that no one can be perfect”
There is one similar thing in between Arjuna and Ekalavya is that that “their ambition of to become great archer in the world”. Though their aim is similar but their Purpose of learn archery is different. Arjuna’s purpose is to get fame by become greatest archer. (and may be he defeat kauravas and wanted to back empire of Hastinapura) on the other side Ekalavyas purpose was very noble and selflessness, his purpose is that because of his mother want and also to protect nature and animals. Ekalavya is very fast learner in compare to Arjuna though he is a self-Lerner. Arjuna is greedy but Ekalavya is helpless. Contextual different between Arjuna and Ekalavya is that, Ekalavya is SUBALTERN hero of the T.P Kailasams “The Purpose”, in actual text he is Marginalize character. Arjuna character in “The purpose” is portrayed as a rude and self-proud person while in original text he is very humble and great. We can see his rude behave while he is calling Ekalavya a LAW BORN NISHAADHA by saying this…
“…An Arya is an Arya! And a Nishadha is only a low born Nishadha...!”                                                                                                                            
Conclusion:
                        To sum up, we can say that Kailasam tried to give justice to Ekalavyas character which is in original Mahabharata marginalized by ved Vyas, he also tried to give twist to his play and breaks the myth of Mahabharata in his all mythical play.it is an art of writing for that he has said that,
“The greatness of art is in Proportion to the greatness, of the characters of the characters that the artist creates.”



Citation:
http://pritibagohil1416.blogspot.in
http://tpkailasam.blogspot.in