Thursday, March 17, 2011

Paper: EC (204) Middlemarch as a Subtle and Rich study of Females


                 Assignment Paper: - EC (204) , IX
                                  Topic    : - Middlemarch as a Subtle and
                                          Rich study of Females
       Student’s name    : - Vala Neeta T.
                         Roll no          :- 22
                         URL              :-valaneeta391011.blogspot.com
                         Semester       :-  M.A. Sem.ii
                         Batch            :-  2010-11










                                          Submitted to
                                                   Miss Ruchira Dudhrejiya,
                                                            Department of English,
                                                          Bhavnagar University



o   Introduction:
Mary Ann Ivans, later to be famous as George Eliot, is one of the greatest novelists of the Victorian age.
  “She stands at the gateway between the old and the new novel, no unworthy heir of Thackeray and Dickens and no unworthy forerunner of Hardy and Henry James.”
    She was essentially a novelist of intellectual life and her psychological insight into human motives and spring of action is deep and profound.
*    Her greatest novels are:-
Ø Adam Bede (1857)
Ø Silas Marner (1861)
Ø Middlemarch (1871 & 4 vols.1872)
Ø Romola (1863)
Ø Mill on the Floss (1860)

*    Middlemarch as a Subtle and Rich study of Females
George Eliot exhibited a rare insight in the presentation of female characters and her female figures have a feminine attitude towards life. They are all vividly and convincingly drawn. Nearly always, the subject is studied from the woman’s point of view; the women are so vastly superior to their lovers that it is difficult for the reader to appreciate all that it means for them. Main aim of Eliot is to study the psychological of people and individual that how they dominated by nature.  Outwardly, women did not have power in nineteenth-century  society, or even much respect or recognition. However, they still had “soul hunger,” even if they had no outlet for their spiritual yearning as St. Theresa did (see Prelude).
          Following the French positivist philosopher, Auguste Comte (the father of sociology), Eliot believed that it was women who held society together and guided its progress altruistically, from behind the scenes. She did not advocate working for political “rights” because a woman’s power and goodness were profoundly subtle. Sympathy was the antidote to competition, and women have this quality in abundance. They are the ones who encourage it in others and who use love and sympathy to ameliorate the harshness of the world.

Dorothea Casaubon is the chief saint in Middlemarch who has the power to correct the flow of the river of life around her. She can save Lydgate’s reputation; she can give Will Ladislaw the chance he needs. Fred Vincy fights hard to get Mary Garth as a wife, not because she is beautiful or stylish and makes a good hostess at parties, like his sister, Rosamond, but because she can save his life: “I don’t see how a man is to be good for much unless he has some one woman to love him dearly” (Chapter 14, p. 103) Despite his flaws, we learn to respect Fred for his wisdom in this area. His winning Mary Garth, a plain and penniless girl, is the making of his success. Instead of becoming a clergyman, which his family urges but Mary realizes would be a disaster, he works the land at Stone Court, the estate he once hoped to inherit, with Mary and his children at his side. He writes a pamphlet on agriculture instead of gaining rank in the church, but at least he does something useful and is happy. Having been trained by the example of the elder Garths, Mary and Fred represent husband and wife as true partners (see Finale).

The admirable women in the story are Dorothea Brooke, Mrs. Garth, and Mary Garth. They are educated, intelligent, thinking  and self-sacrificing women whose main contribution, nevertheless, is their ability to be the magnetic though invisible center of their families and society. Other lesser women characters who have a positive part to play, are Harriet Bulstrode, Mrs. Cadwallader, Miss Noble, and Celia Brooke.

The contrasting female figure is Rosamond Vincy, who destroys everyone around her to further her own schemes. She is her husband’s “basil plant” as he calls her, referring to the plant on top of a murdered man’s head in Boccaccio’s story (Finale). Not only does she ruin her husband financially, but emotionally as well, by having no understanding or sympathy for him. He dies prematurely as a failure in his own eyes, for he had to work for money to support his family instead of doing pure research: “Lydgate had accepted his narrowed lot with sad resignation. He had chosen this frail creature, and had taken the burthen of her life upon his arms. He must walk as he could, carryissng that burthen pitifully” (Chapter 82, p. 586).

These are times when people did not get a divorce; the spouse is truly a partner for life. Farebrother warns Lydgate to make a good choice. We see from his earlier entanglement with Madame Laure that he doesn’t know women or think them important (see Chapter 15). Rosamond nearly destroys Ladislaw as well by compromising him in front of Dorothea, whom he loves (Chapters 77-78). The Ladislaw-Dorothea relationship was another tragedy in the making until Dorothea’s soul burst through the limitations in her final triumph (Chapters 80, 81, 83 and Finale).

Ø Dorothea Brooke
Ø Rosamond Vincy
Ø Mary
Ø Celia Brooke
*    Dorothea Brooke and the Theresa Complex
          Dorothea Brooke is the first major character to be introduced to us, and the prelude to the novel creates the impression that she is its heroine. But it is not so. She is, doubt, one of the most important characters in the novel, and it deals with the frustration of her aspiration. Still, she is not the heroine, for Middlemarch is the story of Middlemarch society, and if anyone is its hero it is Middlemarch itself.
ü A.O.J. Cockshut in this connection says,
   “Emma is on every page of the story of Emma, even when she is most misguided. Middlemarch is the story of Middlemarch even when for the moment; Dorothea’s concerns are the centre of attention.
Ø Her Idealistic, Theoretic Nature:-
Dorothea Brooke is a lady with noble aspirations. She wants to lead a higher life, to achieve something really noble. She is the extraordinary individual thrown upon a commonplace world. She seeks an outlet for her higher aspirations in doing humanitarian work. Thus she makes plans and projects to improve the living conditions of the estate of the Baronet, Sir Chettam. She is different from other young ladies of her age, and this difference is stressed by contrasting her with her sister Celia. Celia is an ordinary normal girl, with a girlish fondness for jewellery and fine clothes. Dorothea looks down upon such feminine frivolities. Celia notices Casaubon’s age and his
“two white moles with hairs on them”;
Dorothea remains completely oblivious to such physical details. She sees in him a reflection of Locke or Milton, and accepts him as her husband in preference to young and handsome Sir Chettam, for she thinks (mistakenly) that through marriage with a scholar like him, she would be able to achieve her aspirations.
Ø The Theresa- Complex
  Dorothea has what has been called, the Theresa-Complex, i.e.
    “a yearning to do good in the world which is so intense that it must answer to some emotional need in the Theresa herself”.
Theresa was a Christian saint who had such a yearning; Dorothea has been referred to in the Prelude as a later born Theresa. We are told,      “Here and there is born a Saint Theresa, founders of nothing whose loving heart- beats and sobs after an unattained goodness tremble off and are dispersed among hindrances, instead of  centering in some long – recognizable deed.”
  She is Theresa in her lofty aspirations,
“struggling under dim lights and entangled circumstances”,  
to achieve her aspirations. But she lives in a society in which there is no particular demand for Theresa. It is a repressive environment which allows no scope for lofty ideals, where such idealistic natures are frustrated, crushed to atoms, or compelled to compromise with their environment.
Ø Her Self-Decision and Suffering
  She is lofty, idealistic, straightforward and honest and also self- deluded and self-deceived. Carried away by her lofty ideals, she fails to see the reality; she remains blind even to most obvious truths. She fails to understand the real character of Casaubon- that he is a prig, a pedant, a wooden character incapable of love or any enjoyment of life – until it is too late. This self- delusion is her “spot of commonness”, and the real cause of the tragedy of her life. When her cherished dreams of being of help to a great man in his scholarly work are shattered, misery, and wretchedness are the result. This disillusionment comes as early as their honeymoon in Rome, and many are the bitter tears she sheds, and wretched and lonely days and nights she passes. Still as a loyal wife, she does her duty to her husband, and after his death remains loyal to his memory, till she discovers that he has insulted her in her will. Her marriage to Ladislaw is a compromise with reality. It is a climb down from her lofty idealism, but such is, after all, the ways of the world.
Ø Comparison with Celia
 Celia, the simpler nature, with her perfectly normal and unconcealed wish to war splendid jewellery, is here the more objective of the two.
Cockshut says,
      “And throughout these early chapters Celia is used to show by contrast the more obscure character of Dorothea. It would be wrong to think of Dorothea as entirely remote from mundane concerns. She is very anxious, once she was agreed to marry Casaubon, to get the people well-housed in Lowick. But even here she has little concerns for the feelings of others. Seeing that Sir James has the money and concern for the feelings of others. Seeing that Sir James has the money and goodwill to carry her ideas about cottages into effect, she ignores his feeling for her. Nor does she realize that when she gives Sir James peremptory orders about the dog, she must seem to him to be claiming the privileges of a prospective bride, and that, if she does not intend to accept him, she should let him please himself about his own pets. These early chapters show very clearly how a person can be rude and unfeeling while filled with the most sincere impulses of unselfish devotion.”      
*    Rosamond Vincy
   She is stupid, self-centered, but she is young and fascinating and it is her physical charms that have been stressed from the very beginning. She is the rose of Middlemarch and the flower imagery has been used throughout to bring out her physical charms and bird-imagery to bring out her gentility and seeming delicacy and innocence. When Lydgate meets her for the first time she appears to him to be,
 “so immaculately blond, as if the petals of some gigantic flower had just opened and disclosed her”.
Rosamond has been,
  “the flower of Mrs. Lemon’s school”;
She is now
 “the flower of Middlemarch”.
No pleasant fate seems to be in store for Lydgate, who “hovered” about her, for the petals of this gigantic flower may close upon him and terminate his ‘holiday freedom’. Rosamond appears to Lydgate to be as
      “sweet to look at as a half-opened blush rose”.
 It is the sight of Rosamond’s tears-  
       “like water on a blue flower”-
 which shakes Lydgate’s flirtation into love. The reader is asked to remember that
 “the ambitious man who has looking at those Forget- me-nots under the water was very warm-herted and rash”.
Lydgate’s first impression of Rosamond is of, “a paradise with….blue eyes for a heaven” and later she is alluded to as a creature which looks at its prey “through watchful blue eyes,” like “Forget- me-nots under the water”. She has, ä flower- like blond head”. When Lydgate has merely seen Rosamond from a distance he imagines her company to be, “a paradise with sweet laughs for bird-notes”. The images of birds, flowers and paradise are frequently used to indicate the manifold physical charms of Rosamond.
Ø Her One Generous Act
 The only generous act with she performs in life, and when she rises above her own selfishness, is when she tells Dorothea the truth about her relationship with Ladislaw, and thus brings about their ultimate union. This is a generous and noble act. But G.G. Urwin is of the view that even here her motives are mixed.
“the impulse to tell the truth and clear away misunderstanding did not last long, the note she wrote to Ladislaw informing him that she had told Dorothea what really happened during his visit to not a generous gesture by someone who likes him; it is the cold dismissal from her life of a man who can no longer be useful or entertaining.”
Ø Intriguing and Scheming
            Rosamond does not hesitate to use questionable means to gain her ends. She disobeys her husband, schemes and intrigues and acts secretly in utter disregard to her wishes. Unimaginative and stupid, she has no idea of the greatness of her husband, of her nobility and generosity and the deep anguish she causes to her.
A.O.J. Cockshut writes,
 “She believes that she understands the ways of the world better than he does. She interferes with his plans and countermands his orders, thus losing them the chance of the disposing of the lease of their expensive house. She causes him deep humiliation by writing without his knowledge to ask his uncle for money. Here Rosamond, having acted deceitfully, as well as unwisely, would seem to be most obviously in the wrong, but the actual upshot is very surprising. This appears in chapter 65, which is worth especially careful attention. Rosamond, in the face of his justified accusations, is silent, resentful, and self-righteous. Lydgate pausing and looking at her begins to feel that half-maddening sense of helplessness which comes over passionate people when their passion is met by innocent- looking silence, whose meek victimized air seems to put them in the wrong, and at last infects even the justest indignation with a doubt of its justice. Her calm assurance in the end drives him to apologize, and when she says that she wishes she had died with the baby, he tells himself that it was ten times harder for her than for him.”
Ø Comparison with Dorothea
       A further light is thrown on Rosamond’s character by a comparison with Dorothea. Both are alike in certain respects and yet so entirely different.
Speaight in this connection says,
 “Rosamond had each been the victim of a misalliance, but in both cases the mistakes arose not from an unconsidered impulse or an irrational perversity, but from the profound logic of their characters. Rosamond thought she was making a good match; Dorothea thought she was marrying Pascal. Both were disillusioned, and disillusionment was necessary and natural. Like Dorothea, though from motives of selfishness and not of altruism, she is likely to be the victim of her fantasies. It is significant that neither has the least sense of humour. Rosamond was clever with that sort of cleverness that catches every tone except the humours.  Happily she never attempted a joke, and this was perhaps the most decisive mark of her cleverness. She proceeded by calculation where Dorothea proceeded by instinct. Her calculation was all part of her industry. She was assiduous at her music and sketching and “found time also to read the best novels, and even the second best, and she knew much poetry by heart. Her favourite poem was Lallah Rookh.”
*    Mary Garth
        Mary Garth is the young daughter of Caleb Garth, plain-looking but attractive all the same. Mary’s attitude to life is sane and balanced. She makes no extravagant claims on life, and adjusts herself to her circumstances and makes the best of her opportunity.  About her the novelist herself tells us,
 “Mary was fond of her own thoughts, and could amuse herself well, sitting in twilight with her hands in her lap; for having had strong reason to believe that things were not likely to be arranged for her peculiar satisfaction, she wasted no time in astonishment and annoyance at that fact. And she had already come to take life very much as a comedy in which she had a proud, nay a generous resolution not to act the mean or treacherous part. Mary might have become cynical, if she had not had parents whom was all the fuller because she had learned to make no unreasonable claims.”
 This is a healthy, practical attitude to life, and Mary is thus revealed to be a sane and balanced young woman. As children she and Fred Vincy had been sweethearts, and no one else replaces him in her affections, although she scorns his imperfections and steadily opposes his plan to take holy orders. Uncle Mary’s influence, specifically, and under the general influence of her family, Fred Vincy Himself is gradually reformed:
 “at the outset the only attribute in Fred’s favour is his unwavering love for Mary; for the rest he seems a weak young man, selfish like his sister unable to complete his studies, pleasure-loving, getting himself into debt, and as result, depriving the Garths of a good portion of their hard-won savings. He leaves the impression that the world owes him a living, and lowers his image still further by joining the greedy potential legates awaiting Featherstone’s death.”          
*    Celia Brooke
       Dorothea’s sister, Celia, is an amiable, innocent-looking, down to earth young lady; her attitude towards Dorothea is “a mixture of  criticism and awe”, and on “safe opportunities she has the knack” of making her negative wisdom tell…by reminding her that people were staring, not listening. “again, in contrast to Dorothea, she is not impulsive: she waits the appropriate opportunity to voice her views, and always in a tone of ‘quite’ staccato evenness.”
 Her sense of propriety is often shocked by Dorothea’s unconventional opinions and deeds, and she is strongly critical of Dorothea’s marriage to Casaubon. After her own marriage she feels an affectionate superiority and fears that her brother in law’s learning is a kind of damp which might in due time saturate a neighbouring body. In many respects she is a far better judge of character than her sister. She is certainly more practical, and her choice of a husband is much more prudent and happy.
o   Conclusion:-
  According to the learned critic, the obvious moral of Dorothea’s story is “that the describe thing is to your work well in the position to which providence has assigned you and not to bother about ideals at all. Such a moral seems satiric at the end of a story which is to give us a Modern Theresa.” Thus Dorothea is becomes an ironical portraits of young ladies with lofty ideals and noble aspirations.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Paper: EC -203: INDIAN POETICS: RASA THEORY

                 Assignment Paper: - EC203,VIII
                         Topic    : -INDIAN POETICS:
                                          RASA THEORY
        Student’s name    : - Vala Neeta T.
                         Roll no          :- 22
                         URL              :-valaneeta391011.blogspot.com
                         Semester       :-  M.A. Sem.ii
                         Batch            :-  2010-11




                                                         Submitted to Dr. Dilip Barad,
                                                            Department of English,
                                                          Bhavnagar University





Introduction:-
  What the ancients thought about the name and nature of poetry may be had from the Risks of the Vedas and the texts of the Upnishads.
 The Vedic texts declared that the poets were ‘Gods’- Kavi’ was the term they employed while invoking the foremost of the Gods- Ganapati- they addressed him as the poet’s poet. The poet was the seer of truth having a subtle, profound and penetrating consciousness. He saw the principle of beauty in all things and was filled with utter ecstasy and raised the earth to the level of Heaven and established this principle of joy everywhere.
                                                                                     (Rig Veda III, 38, 2&3) 
o   Thus, the Vedic conception of a poet took into account all aspects of poetry:-
Ø Its creation,
Ø its manifestation     and
Ø its impact upon the reader.
     Apart from the normal consciousness which we call jagrat, the Upnishads spoke of subtler states such as swapta, susupti and turiya not to mention in free conscious levels. The Upnishadic Seer – poet could withdraw, ingather or collect contain and concentrate his consciousness and come out to express his vision and experience. He had the world. He could thus give us the vision and he knew the way to get back to the source and testify to the authenticity of the transcript.
    The most significant example of what we have been describing is, Valmiki, whose Ramayana spontaneously sprang out of the pathos – filled fountain of the poet’s heart.
ü He says,
“padbaddhokshrasama: tanrilayasamnvita:
Shokatrasya  pravuto me sloko bhavtu nanyattha
v The observation makes it clear that
Ø Genuine great poetry is not made (constructed out of one’s cleverness (chamtkar) but is a spontaneous emanation from a heart filled with Rasa
Ø That the great artist is also a great art critic- the kavi and sahradaya are one and it is only the most sensitive critic that can respond to the charm of great poetry.
Ø Most significantly the form (of poetry) which includes diction, versification and music is determined by the inspiration and the laya is as important as any other element and it determines the meaning of the utterance. Every Vedic scholar who has learnt his texts in the traditional way will tell us about the importance of intonation/ Swara and how it determines the meaning.
*    The theory of Rasa:-
   The concept of rasa is reffered to in the phrase “shokatrasya  pravuto me” etc. Rasa is the source of inspiration. The term is rendered as taste/ essence. Tradition makes god Almighty himself as the first and foremost of creative artist; and Taittiriya Upnishads describes as Rasa Raso ve sa: Valmiki is also the greatest of critics who felt that what He created was good and made Him happy. Rasa is therefore supposed to constitute art experience and the critic is one capable of rasanubhav.
 The theory of Rasa is associated with Bharata though there are references to it in the Vedas and in Valmiki. The context in the Vedas and Upnishads where Rasa is mentioned, are not exactly aesthetic. The word means sap of essence and refers to the experience of the Supreme Reality which is one of the self- existent delights.
  The Vedic poetry does contain a number of rks on speech, Vak, especially in the tenth mandala (or Rg Veda) and the seers knew perhaps a lot about inspiration and the need for sahradayatva in understanding and enjoying poetry. 
Valmiki’s slokas, spontaneously emanating from his being overpowered by an intense feeling of pathos, and his own appreciation of it, indicate that he was, at one stroke, both a poet and a critic.
    The Karunarasa of the epic Ramayana has made all the later critics and poets look upon him (Valmiki) as the father of the theory of Rasa.
 It is, however, only in Natyashastra of Bharata that the theory of Rasa is stated in all its ramifications. We do not know when Bharata lived. Scholars like A. B. Keith place him in the first or the second part of the first century B.C. the references to various aspects of dramaturgy in the book show that dramatic technique must have been a teacher of theatre, arts, music and dancing. The extracts are intended to give us an idea of the theory of Rasa.
*    On Natya and Rasa: Aesthetics of Dramatic Experience.
    The natya is depiction and communication pertaining to the emotions of the entire triple world:-
Ø The pious behavior of those who practice , religion, the passion of those who indulge in sexual pleasure, the repression of those who go by a wicked path, the act of self- restraint of those who are disciplined.
Ø In fact, the nature and behavior (svabhava) of the world, intimately connected with happiness and misery, as rendered by physical and other forms of acting, is to be called natya.
Ø The eight rhetorical sentiments (Rasa) recognized in drama and dramatic representations are named as follows:-
*   The Erotic Rasa
*   The Comic Rasa
*   The Furious Rasa
*   The Heroic Rasa
*   The Terrible Rasa
*   The Odious Rasa
*   The Marvellous Rasa
Ø The high souled Druhina (Brahma) preclaimed these eight rhetorical sentiments. I shall now mention the emotional states (Bhava) as arising from the abiding, (sthayin) the transient (Sancari or Vyabhichari) and the psycho- physical conditions (Sattvika) of the mind.
Ø The four styles in which dramatic representation is established are:-
*    Bharati or Verbal,
*    Sattvati or Grand,
*    Kaisiki or Graceful,
*    Arabhati or Energetic
Ø The success of dramatic representation is twofold heavenly or human
Ø The musical instruments (atodya) are of four finds:-their characters are
o   Stringed (tata),
o   Covered (avanaddha),
o   Solid (Ghana) and
o   Holes (Susira)
ü Tata is known to be connected with the stringed lyre,
ü Avanaddha is connected with drum;
ü Ghana is cymbol or gong,
ü Susira is flute.
*    Rasa:
The term rasa has a twofold significance;
  It means the ‘aesthetic content’ of literary art and also ‘aesthetic relish’ which the reader – spectator enjoys.
 We shall first of all explain the rhetorical sentiments (Rasas). No literary import can ever proceed without rhetorical sentiment and aesthetic relish. Now, Rasas aries from a proper combination of the stimulants (vibhava) the physical consequents (anubhava), and the transient emotional states (Vyabhichari Bhava).
*    What is illustrative case?
 There  we say:
   Just as by a proper combination of different spicy foodstuffs (vyajana) leafy vegetables (ausadhi) and other articles of food (dravya) there is a flavor and taste (rasa) is produced, in the same way when different emotional states come together, aesthetic flavour  and relish are produced. Just as again, an account of such articles of food as molasses, and spicy and vegetables stuff, the six (food) flavours and tastes are produced, in the same way when various emotional states reach the abiding mental conditions, the latter attain the quality of rhetorical sentiments. Or become aesthetically relishable. 
*    What is this that you call ‘rasa’?
We say:  it is so called because it is capable of being tasted or relished.
*    How is rasa tasted?
Just as people in a contended state of mind (sumanasah), eating the food prepared well (samkrta) with various spicy things taste the (various) flavours (enjoys the various state) and obtain delight and satisfaction (harsadin)  in the same manner spectators, in the right (receptive) frame of mind (sumanash) taste the permanent mental conditions, suggested (vyanjita) by the representation (abhinaya) of various emotional states, the abhinaya carried out by speech – delivery (vac), physical gestures and movements (anga), and by the physical acting of physical impacts (sattva), and obtain pleasure and satisfaction. It is for this reason that they have been explained as natya-rasa: aesthetic contents and their relish arising from dramatic representation.
In this context there are two traditional couplets:-
Just as connoisseurs of cooked rice of food (bhakta), when they eat it as prepared with many articles of food and with many different spicy things enjoy the flavour and taste.
In like manner, the wise (spectator) taste and enjoy in their mind the permanent mental conditions rendered through (lit. well- connected with) the acting of emotional states (bhavabhinaya).
*    Bharata defines Rasa in his well known aporism:-
Vibhava anubhava Vyabhichari samyogat Rasa nishpattihi
        He said that rasa is achieved as a result of the functioning of the vibhavs, the anubhavas and Vyabhichari bhavas.
*    Vibhava:-
   Vibhava has the meaning of distinct, specific knowledge. Vibhava, karana (cause), nimitta (instrument), hetu (reasons) are synonyms. As words, physical gestures and the psycho physical acting connected with the representation of stable and transitory mental states are specifically determined by this (vibhavyante), it is therefore called Vibhava: Determinate or Stimulant
Here there is a verse:
 As many matters based on verbal and physical acting are determined by this for the actor, and as many matters arising through the verbal and physical acting are distinctly comprehended by the spectator, this causative, stimulating or determining factor is given the name Vibhava.
*    Anubhava:-
Anubhava, physical gestures and sattva is made to be felt (anu-bhavyate) as an after- effect- (anu) of the impact of the emotional stimulant.
There is verse about this:-
 Since the emotional content of art (artha) is made to be felt by the particular acting through words and physical gestures, the term anubhava (consequents or physical reactions) is therefore used: it is connected with the flourish of hand – gestures (sakha) as well as the gestures of the major and minor limbs of the body.
*    Emotional Status and Rasa:-
The emotional states (bhavas) are explained in this manner as connected with determinates or stimulants (vibhava) and consequents (anubhava).
In this connection the vibhava and anubhava are quite familiar among the common people. Besides, as  they closely follow human nature their characteristics are not defined; and this is for avoiding verbal prolixity.
Ø This is however a verse in this connection:-
 The wise should know that the Vibhava and the Anubhava are such matters in the art actually created (sam-siddha) by human nature and as closely follow theways of human nature and worldly conduct.            
                                                                                                     (lokatraga)
Now in the matter of emotional states, the stable or permanent mental states (sthyinah)n are eight and the Transitory states (Vyabhichari)  are thirty-two. There is a further separate group of eight psycho- physical states (sattvikah). These forty-nine emotional states should thus be recognized as the causal factors for the artistic revelation (abhivyakti) of the poetic content (kriya- rasa: its charm and relish). From   these arise the rasas by (i.e. when the presentation acquires) the quality of universality.
Ø The verse in this connection is:
The emotional state pertaining to the art- content (artha) which evokes a hearty communication is the source of rasa: by it the body is pervaded as dry wood is enveloped by fire.
*    Vyabhichari –bhavas:-
   Vyabhichari- bhavas – secondary emotion and sensations which feed the dominant emotion. The word ‘vyabhichari’ it may be replied: vi and abha are two prepositions; car is a root employed in the sense of movement or motion. The Vyabhicarians are so called because they move prominently towards creating the poetic sentiments in a variety of ways. Equipped with the acting based on speech, body and concentrated mind, these lead or carry the spectator, in actual dramatic performance, to the poetic sentiments ; hence they are called vyabhicarins.
Ø Bharata speaks of eight different types of  Rasas and their development is aided by poetry, music and other histrionic devices called natyadharmi, all brought under abhinaya.
*    Inter relation of Bhava and Rasa:-
   The rhetorical sentiments are turned out of the emotional states, and not that emotional states are turned out of the sentiments.
There are traditional couplets about this:-
v The emotional states are so known by the designers of dramatic art because they (the bhavas) bring to the spectators (iman) an emotional awareness (bhavayanti) of the sentiments as connected with various modes of acting or dramatic representation
v Just as, by many articles of food (dravya) of various kinds, the spicy foodstuff (vyanjana) like vegetables, meat, fish is brought to a distinct flavour (bhavayate), in the same way, the emotional states bring the level of actual experience (bhavayati) when helped by different kinds of acting or historinic representation (abhinaya).
v There can hardly be the experience of sentiment without the previous presentation of an emotional state; nor can there be an emotional state which does not lead to the experience of a sentiment. During the process of historinic representation the two (Bhava and rasa) accomplish their status and functions by dual interaction.
v As the combination of spicy foodstuffs and vegetables lends the cooked food a distinct relishable taste (svaduta) in the same way the emotional states and sentiments lead each to the distinct level of an experience.
As from a seed a tree grows, and from the tree flower and fruit, so all the sentiments stand as the root; the emotional states have their settled position for the sake of (tebbyah: i.e. for the purpose of manifesting ) the sentiments.
v Now, we will expound the origin, colours (presiding deities) and illustrations of these Rhetorical Sentiments. The sources of origin of these (sentiments) are the four basic elements, these are as follow: The Erotic, The Furious, The Heroic and The Odious.
ü The comic sentiment becomes possible from the Erotic;
ü The Pathetic from the Furious,
ü The origin of the Marvellous is from the Heroic and of
ü The Terrible from the Odious.
Ø A mimicry or imitation of the Erotic is fittingly described as the sentiment of laughter.
Ø And the consequence of the Heroic is properly described as the Marvellous.
Ø And the consequence of the Furious is to be known as the Pathetic sentiment.
Ø And the presentation of the Odious is to be known likewise as the Terrible.
*    Now the colours:-
o   The Erotic Sentiment is light green (syama)
o   The Comic is Described as white (sita)
o   Pathetic is grey (kapota)
o   The fearful described as red (rakta)  
o   The Heroic is to be known as yellow red (gaura)
o   The terrible as black
o   The Odious on the contray is blue (rala)
o   The Marvellous is yellow.
*    Now the Deities:-
o   The Erotic (sentiment) has Vishnu as its presiding deity;
o   The deity of the Comic is Pramatha,
o   The deity of the Furious  is Rudra,
o   The Pathetic was Yama  as its deity,
o   The deity of the Odious is Mahakala,
o   The Terrible has Kala as the God,
o   The Heroic, the god Mahendra,
o   The Marvellous has Brahma as its deity.
*    Conclusion:-
  Bharata, the first enouncer of the theory, gives the most comprehensive analysis of its sources, nature, and its categories. Subsequently, the theory found major commentators in Dhanika- Dhananjaya whore-examined Bharata’s typology of drama and added to it a typology of uparupakas, sub-plays, play within plays, and one act plays. It is Abhinavagupta, however who enriched the theory by elucidating its philosophic foundations and by analyzing in depththe aesthetic dimension of the nature, cognition and effect of literary experience.
   The rasa theory has been accepted as the core liberary theory by all major poeticians both before and after   Abhinavagupta. In particular, the discussion and analysis by Vishwanath and Pt. Jagannath have contributed towards a more subtle understanding of this theory.