Shakespeare Love Poems - Analysis of Sonnet 18 (Shall I Compare Thee?)

Analysis of Sonnet 18: 1st quatrain

Sonnet 18 is the most famous of Shakespeare's love poems... In the story of the Shakespeare sonnets, the main character directs this message to the fair youth, with whom he shares a special love. Whether the love is platonic or sexual, has been debated over the years, however the romantic and loving nature of this sonnet cannot be debated. The writer begins by asking, Shall I compare you to a summer's day?, and is comparing the fair youth's beauty, youthfulness and vitality to that of a summer's day... The writer also says that the fair youth is more lovely and more temperate than a summer's day-possibly saying the fair youth is more calm, kind and gentle.

But the last two lines of this quatrain say that summer is far too short, and begin to question the fair youths good looks will they last forever

2nd quatrain

In this quatrain, negative thoughts and worries start to fill the writer's head. He begins by carrying on with his thoughts that the summer lasts very short... You can sense a a rather pensive and doubting mood as he talks about the summer being too hot, and at other times being too cold-the nasty extremes of summer. So even though the fair youth is lovely, at times the fair youth can also be angry, and he can also be harsh. He then starts to question nature, "...every fair from fair sometime declines"-even fair and beautiful things such.as the fair youth will lose its beauty to "nature's changing course".

quatrain 3 rd

But a new sense of vigour seems to have overtaken the writer at the start of this quatrain, "thy eternal summer shall not fade as he says firmly,"... He says that the fair youths beauty and vitality shall not fade... He says you will not lose your youth, or the beauty you possess, and death will not claim you for his own. The writer could be saying that the fair youths in inner beauty shall not fade, and there is certainly an element to that with these poetic words, but the moreover the writer is also saying with the words "with eternal lines" that the fair youth's beauty is immortalised in the words of this sonnet.

Final rhyming couplet

The final rhyming couplet of any Shakespearean sonnet, this reinforces the writers previous assertion. That as long as there are people on this earth to read these words, the fair youths spirit and beauty lives on in this poem.

Here is the Shakespeare love poem, Sonnet 18. I have even separated this poem out into quatrains for you...

1st quatrain

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?

Thou art more lovely and more temperate;

Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,

And summer's lease hath all too short a date;

2nd quatrain

Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,

And often is his gold complexion dimm'd;

And every fair from fair sometime declines,

By chance or nature's changing course untrimm'd;

quatrain 3 rd

But thy eternal summer shall not fade,

Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow ' st;

Nor shall Death brag thou wander ' st in his shade,

When in eternal lines to time thou grow ' st:

Final rhyming couplet

So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,

So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

If you want to learn more about Shakespeare love poems, or indeed, anything to do with romance and Shakespeare, have a look at some of my other posts at Shakespeare love poems

Hi! I'm Cluivee, and I'm interested in all things Shakespeare! I especially enjoy reading and writing about Shakespeare love poems and the famous Shakespeare love sonnets.
If you want to know more about Shakespeare love poems, check out my site at http://www.shakespearelovepoems.com/

Lanval: Ladies Man or Girly Man?

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Abstract: In Marie de France's Lanval was Lanval truly a homosexual and alluded to in the following verses, and what were the punishments for homosexuality in the Middle Ages?

"That women are not what you prefer".
But you have many little boys,
With whom you take your joys" (lines 278-280).

In Lanval, by Marie de France, Lanval is accused of being a homosexual by Queen Guinevere after Lanval refuses to accept Guinevere's advances. Although Lanval explains to Guinevere that he had saved himself for his fair lady and is loyal to his king, it seems as if Guinevere thinks that Lanval is lying and accuses him of being a homosexual. She then puts him on trial for turning down her advances even though he had done so out of love and his loyalty to the king. This paper will seek to research the medieval outlook on homosexuality and common punishments that were handed out from being found to be a homosexual in medieval times and the social ramifications of being accused or found guilty.

First, in medieval times there was an ecumenical council that condemned homosexual couplings. This council was established in 1179 and was called Lateren III (Blogged.the-protagonist.net). This council was attended by 302 bishops and presided over by Pope Alexander III. This council also dealt with other social stigmas such as heresy and sodomy. The church took allegations of homosexuality very serious and the condemned could have faced beheading or being burnt at the stake. There were specific torture devices used on a condemned homosexual. One such device was called the Pear of Anguish. It had the shape of a pear and, as the handle was turned, the spoon shaped lobes flowered open causing major damage to the intestines of the victim when inserted into the anus. This apparatus was rarely washed so that the victim would surely succumb to infection if he managed to live through the intestine damage. This device was used widespread as punishment for a plethora of crimes, one of them being homosexuality.

Being found guilty of homosexuality in the Middle Ages for a person of noble status could bring forth excommunication from the church and exile from the kingdom. Although it was not a death sentence, being exiled could be far worse than death. Being cut off from one's land and court could be a fate worse than death for nobility. The exiled would be subjected to loss of status, land holdings, and any wealth that was accumulated through wills. This punishment of exile leaves the accused alone and far from familiar surrounds and people.

Next, one could argue that the queen's ego was bruised so badly that she had no recourse but to accuse Lanval of homosexuality. Lanval was bound by secrecy not to reveal his lover's name for fear that he would lose the hand of his beloved. Guinevere was so offended by her pass being discarded by Lanval that she took him to trial. Offending nobility was often a death sentence in itself. Taking Lanval to trial was a way to expose what she had perhaps heard others say about his sexual behavior. The line "But you have many little boys" (line 279) (de France) could not only insinuate homosexuality, but pedophilia as well. It is often overlooked that the reason that Lanval is put on trial to begin with is from the Queen's improper advancements. It was her improprieties and Lanval's refusal to betray his love and King that ends him up on trial. The Queen was the one that threw herself at Lanval and it was Lanval that refused. This is never brought up in open count; perhaps Lanval is so noble that he still wants to protect the honor of the Queen. However, this protection could very well cost Lanval dearly --either his life, exile, or his love. Perhaps it is Lanval's devotion to the King and his refusal to smear the name of the royal family and mark it with infidelity that makes Lanval endure the court proceedings.

Lastly, Lanval was put in an awkward situation by being bound by secrecy by his lover. The one thing that could exonerate Lanval from the charges of homosexuality is disclosing his relations with his beloved. Instead, he has to endure the stress of trial at the hand of the Queen. It is only at the last moment that he is saved from judgment being passed on to him by his beloved. His beloved could have, at any time, made her way to the Queen's court and exonerated Lanval. Her testimony of their sordid times in her tent would have quickly dissolved any thoughts of homosexuality from anyone that had an audience with the King and Queen at the court proceedings. Instead she waits until the last moment to save Lanval; letting him deal with the accusations and stress from the court proceedings with no way to exonerate himself without breaking his oath to his lover. This oath of secrecy does not help his case and Lanval's refusal to give up his lover's name for his innocence shows his passion towards her. The King's court, and the Queen, could view him as a homosexual that is making up lies of heterosexual intimate escapades to try and cover up the fact that he is truly a homosexual. In the end Lanval's lover came to his aid and it seemed as if there was no stigma put on him at the end of the poem. It is slightly ironic that throughout this whole story, even at the end where he is exonerated, the Queen is not brought forth before her King, and husband, to answer for her role in this whole ordeal.

In conclusion, homosexuality has been prevalent since ancient Roman and Greek times. These acts weren't punished as harshly back in ancient times as they had been since the conversion to Christianity in the Middle Ages. The act of homosexuality was brought against Lanval by Queen Guinevere although no first hand evidence is brought against him except the refusal of Guinevere's advances by Lanval. It is hearsay and a bruised ego that leads Lanval to stand trial. Whether the trial was truly based on the Queen thinking that Lanval was a homosexual, and thus going against God's will, is never really openly discussed other than the aforementioned quote and the beginning of this text. It is more reasonable to assume that the Queen was furious out of her own vanity and lack of rejection coping skills that made Lanval a target for homosexual accusations to cover up her own improprieties. This argument stirs questions within the author of this paper as to how many people were put to death, or exiled out of vanity or the inability to cope with rejection throughout the ages.

Sources Cited
De France, Marie, "Lanval." The Norton Anthology. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. Eighth Edition. Vol. One. New York, NY: W.W Norton and Company, 2006. 142-157. Print.
Homosexuality: The Queer Fight for Equality. 1 Dec. 2005. Blogged. 2 Nov. 2010 < http://blogged.the-protagonist.net/2005/01/25/homosexuality-the-queer-fight-for-equality/ >.

Written by Dominic Sobieralski, November 3rd 2010

Save Lost Childhood

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Joree Williams has written a book that is a must, in society today, to read. 'Lost Childhood' has just been released by Publishing with Passion.

It is in the hopes that some child or children somewhere will be helped that this book was written.

Many of us have had difficulties in life. We usually try to make the most of them. Sometimes we come across another human being who we deeply care for, and in bits and pieces we are permitted to learn the past complexities of their earlier growth. I have not yet met Joree Williams in person, but I consider her to be a close friend. That is possible in this day and age by the Internet.

Joree has had a horrendous childhood. Where other people do and have not made it, Williams has. It is sometimes thought, that occurrences such as Joree has experienced, only could have taken place in a movie. It does not seem possible that she could have survived what she has.

This story, told in poetic style and some story type of writing done in paragraphs, tells of abused children. One little girl is the main focus. It tells of sexual abuse and violent physical abuse. The story unfolds the beginning of a very young child, a baby's life, and re-lives her growth.

Williams lets you explore the mind of an abused child through many different aspects. You will explore the fantasy places an abused child creates in her own mind to help herself not face reality.

'Lost Childhood' tells of crimes that we should all be aware of. Joree Williams has given us a view into the most inner depths of her being. She tells this story so that we may learn from it. Child abuse happens far too often. Kidnapping and the murder of children happen and must be stopped. There are ways to help end it.

A story, such as this, will help many to recognize the signs of a victim of a vicious attack on her very existence. If you have strong emotions about those who would hurt an innocent child, read this book and learn how you could help one instead of turning away and being part of the problem. We must learn to step in and report when we suspect there is child molestation going on.

Daveda Gruber, owner of Publishing with Passion and Poetry with Passion as well as, author of fourteen books including: "Magical Moments," "Bruised but Not Beaten," "Death of a Daughter," "Steelers Cheers," "Red Barn and Other Short Stories," "Cling to the Magic Mere Mortals," "The Blonde Who Found Jesus," "A Blonde View of Life," "Tales of a Tiny Dog," "More Tales of a Tiny Dog," "Castle of Ice," "More Snapshots from my Family Album" and "Snapshots a Blonde View." I am a professional graphic art designer and I produce professional video productions.

Daveda@Roadrunner.com

publishingwithpassion@gmail.com

Semicolons and Other Signs of Savvy Writing

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

An editor friend of mine tells me that when he first begins working on a manuscript he often likes to do a search for semicolons, and more often than not, he isn't surprised when the results turn up that the entire book is completely devoid of their use. Why is that? I think it's because people don't know how to use semicolons so they avoid them.

I've heard, along with the many arguments to get rid of punctuation, and especially the comma, that the semicolon is no longer needed. I beg to differ. I think of punctuation as being like road signs in a text. The period is equivalent to a stop sign. The semicolon is more like the yellow light that tells us to proceed with caution; we can keep going, but the yellow light alerts us that the situation has changed a little. Similarly, a semicolon tells us one sentence is ending and another beginning, but we can proceed on to the new sentence knowing it has a connection to the previous one. Think what would happen if there were no yellow lights. The result might not be as many accidents as if there were no stop signs, but it would be the next worse thing. Similarly, the semicolon's power is almost as great as the period's. Perhaps it should be more aptly named the semiperiod, but in any case, it does serve a need.

Certain situations are appropriate for semicolon usage while others are a matter of taste and style. Let's look at three common rules for when semicolon usage is appropriate and preferred.

Semicolons in a series. This usage is probably the least common and only results when a series of items is referred to and commas are already used, so the semicolons have to separate items and another barrier is needed beyond the commas. It's somewhat similar to why when writing an outline we use a. b. c. because we've already used 1. 2. 3. We can't use 1. 2. 3. again because it would confuse people. For example:

I went to the store to buy milk, licorice, apples, and coffee.

Here is an example of a series that uses commas to separate multiple items. Now let's look at an example of a series with multiple items that also uses commas to the extent where semicolons are needed.

We broke the children into three teams: John, Mary, and Judy; Sam, Nate, and Beth; and Marsha, Wesley, and Tom.

In this example, we have three groups, but then in each group are three children so we use the semicolons to separate the groups, and the commas to separate the children. A more complicated example would be:

When doing the dishes, remember to wipe all the grease, sauce, and meat off the plates before you put them in the water; use the dishcloth to wash the plates, but use the scrubber for troublesome residue; and remember to rinse the dishes off before placing them in the rack.

In this example, there are three steps to the process, so the semicolons are used to separate those three steps.

Semicolons and Subordinate Conjunctions. This rule may be the easiest to remember. Use a semicolon before the subordinate conjunction and a comma after the subordinate conjunction when that conjunction combines two sentences.

I know; you may not know what a subordinate conjunction is. First, let's look at coordinating conjunctions. You know those. They are words like: and, but, or, so. We use coordinating conjunctions to connect two sentences as one. For example:

I like apples. I don't like applesauce. We can change to: I like apples, but I don't like applesauce.

A subordinate conjunction does the same thing, except it usually has a bit more emphasis. There are many subordinate conjunctions, but they tend to be big words like:

therefore, however, furthermore, nevertheless, hence, moreover

They might also include phrases such as:

for example, for instance, as a matter of fact, in that case

If we inserted a subordinate conjunction into the example above, we could say:

I like apples; however, I don't like applesauce.

The difference here is we put a semicolon before the subordinate conjunction, and then, we put a comma after it. That doesn't mean, however, that we put a semicolon before every subordinate conjunction. Look at that last sentence and you'll see I used "however" with only a comma before it. That's because it doesn't separate two complete sentences. We couldn't say, "That doesn't mean. That we put a semicolon before every subordinate conjunction." If we wrote that, we wouldn't have two complete sentences if we removed "however;" however, we would have two complete sentences if we removed "however" from my earlier example and were left with "I like apples. I don't like applesauce."

Here are a few more examples of subordinate conjunctions used both with semicolons and with just commas, the difference depending on their placement in the sentence. Note that each of these sentences has the correct punctuation. Also note that you can use a period instead of a semicolon with the subordinate conjunction. It just depends on the sentence and how much emphasis you want to give it.

I decided I wanted to be an English major; therefore, I brushed up on the rules about semicolons.
Your brother, John, is going away to college; therefore, you can have his room.

I like to read; however, I don't like to write.
Most writers, however, prefer to use pen and paper over a typewriter.

Stealing is a crime. Furthermore, everyone who steals deserves to go to prison.
Stealing is a crime; furthermore, it is not fair to the storeowner.
(Note that a period is appropriate in the first example here because the second sentence has a stronger emphasis than the first.)

Mark is a good boy; hence, he did not steal the candy.
While you may like chocolate, nevertheless, it will give you acne.

I think painting the room green would be a better choice; for example, it would clash nicely with the purple curtains.
So you would rather go to the movie than clean your room; in that case, I would rather watch TV than make dinner.

Semicolons in place of periods. The final way to use semicolons is when you wish to connect two closely related thoughts that may really feel like one thought, but they are, technically, two complete sentences. Let's look at a few examples of where a semicolon would not be appropriate and where it would.

John and Mary will get married in the spring. The wedding will be in North Carolina.

The wedding, in North Carolina, will be convenient; both John and Mary are from that state.

In the first sentence, no reason is given for North Carolina being the setting of the wedding so a clear relation between the sentences isn't apparent; however, in the second example, the first sentence tells us the wedding's location is convenient and the second sentence tells us why-in this case we could have used "because" in place of the semicolon because there is a relationship between the two. Here's another example:

I hate going into the bathroom after Edna has been in there; she really stinks it up.

This sentence wouldn't be as effective if we used "because" or a period where the semicolon is placed. It just would cause the sentence to lose a bit of its humorous punch.

Frank is the best football player on the team; even when he was a little boy, he would practice five hours a day.

Again here, the second sentence completes the first by giving an explanation of why Frank is the best player; the semicolon really completes the thought or answers the question the first sentence raises.

Those three simple rules for semicolon usage will help you remember when to use them, and perhaps also encourage you to use them when appropriate or effective to make your sentences flow more smoothly. Polished writers know how to use semicolons; now, so do you.

Irene Watson is the Managing Editor of Reader Views, where avid readers can find reviews of recently published books as well as read interviews with authors. Her team also provides author publicity and a variety of other services specific to writing and publishing books.

The Journey Through Grief As Told In Widowed Dreams

Widowed Dreams
By: Helen McManus

Helen McManus shares her story of grief in this dynamic book entitled Widowed Dreams...

Written through tears as she shares from her heart reliving the loss of her dear spouse... It was a sudden loss and one that many will be able to relate too. The readers will be able to connect with Helen through the beautiful pages of poetry she shares with her readers.

Through sharing this story the author knows that God will get the glory and her readers will also find healing in their own lives also. You will see that this journey through grief is not appealing and you will certainly wonder why is there so much pain just as Helen felt as she releases her hurts through poetry many, many sleepless nights.

Line after line we find Healing Rain as Helen cries out Oh Lord please heal! The reader will also find comfort in the memories the writer shares with her readers as they flow with her through the land of tears... The author shares with her readers poems describing the different stages of sorrow she experienced. The grieving, the coping and finally the healing.

"Widowed Dreams In" we see a young woman now left with so many fears as she faces her day by day activities. She reaches out to her audience as she picks up the pieces and begins to live her life again... This time not as a married woman but a widow... Step by step through the pages of the book the author carries her readers on this journey...

So many questions this young lady had to face and endure as she journeyed through this new season in her life... One that was not invited but suddenly showed up as an uninvited guest. Her world was now shattered but she knew she had an undying love and with the help of the Lord and her dear friends she would make it through. It was not easy for this author but I noticed she certainly had a strong support system of friends and family to help her each step of the way.

Her book shares beautiful graphics and encouraging responses from her cries by her dear friend J. Elwood Davis... This certainly is a must and great healing tool for anyone suffering a loss.
I truly, truly, enjoyed this book form beginning to end. But beware... keep a box of tissues close by...

Love is Not Love - In Shakespeare's Sonnet 18, Anyway

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Sonnets 18 and 116 are two of Shakespeare's most quotable love poems. If you're a fan of weddings, rose-petal-filled baths, or Kate Winslet in Sense and Sensibility, you'll probably recognize the lines "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" and "Love is not love / Which alters when it alteration finds." The problem with quotes, however, is that they lack context. Let's do a quick line-by-line overview of Sonnets 116 and 18. You might be surprised to find that one of these so-called "love" poems is very much not like the other.

Sonnet 116

Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments.

This is Shakespeare's equivalent of saying "Mum's the word" to the ol' "Speak now or forever hold your peace" bit of the marriage ceremony. In fact, Shakespeare won't even admit the word "impediments" to the line that talks about marriage. Love: 1; Impediments: 0.

...Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:

In other words, he's not one for pulling any of this "you've changed" crap.

O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;

Psh, tempests.

It is the star to every wand'ring bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.

The star to every wand'ring bark? That'd have to be the North Star, which never appears to move from its place in the Northern Hemisphere. The reason its "worth's unknown" is because Europeans didn't know a whole heck of a lot about stars back in Shakespeare's day, what with still being bitter about the Earth's roundness and all.

Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:

Love: 2; Rosy Lips and Cheeks: 0. On a side note, remember that this is Shakespeare, meaning that anything a 12-year old could possibly construe as dirty probably is. Feel free to laugh, therefore, at the image of Old Father Time's "bending" sickle.

Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.

Love: 3; Edge of Doom: big ol' goose egg. If love could speak, it'd be saying "booya" right about now.

If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.

Did Shakespeare just take an oath upon his own poetry? Them's fightin' words. If you're not sure why, it'll all make sense when we get to Sonnet 18.

Like Sonnet 116, Sonnet 18 is ranked high up there on Sappy Poetry lists... usually by people who go for explicit rather than implicit meaning. If you've ever considered including a reading of Sonnet 18 at your anniversary party, the last three or so lines will probably change your mind. (If you're a really careful reader, the first two will do the trick.) Let's start from the top.

Sonnet 18

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:

Aww, how sweet! We think... To be sure, let's read it again - aloud. Remember to stress every second syllable, like so:

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:

Ah hah! Notice how "I" is emphasized but "thee" and "thou" aren't? Sneaky. Let's continue.

Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer's lease hath all too short a date:

Can't argue with that.

Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimm'd;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance, or nature's changing course untrimm'd;

Yeah yeah, we get it - everything in nature fades. Go back to that "thou" person already.

But thy eternal summer shall not fade,

Woohoo! And the "thy" is emphasized! We knew Shakespeare would come around eventually!

Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st,

We like where this is going.

Nor shall death brag thou wander'st in his shade,

Good, good. Keep it coming!

When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st;

Uh oh, we've got ourselves a conditional. So let's get this straight: all that not fading, getting ugly, or dying business depends on growing in some eternal lines to time? What does that even mean? And please don't tell us it has anything to do with the fact that Sonnets 1-17 are also known as the "procreation sonnets." If Shakespeare's saying that the best way to bottle up all them good looks is by creating genetic blood lines, we're going to go ahead and turn down that second date.

So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see,

Another conditional?!? Okay, okay: "so long as men can breathe, or eyes can see" is actually a decent amount of time, so we'll let it slide.

So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

At last! - an emphasized "thee"! But hold the phone: what's giving thee life? Some unnamed "this"?? Is Shakespeare referring back to those eternal lines? To give him a little credit, he probably knows enough about grammar to use the pronoun "these" when talking about something plural. Dare we ask... if "this" is the sonnet itself? Might Shakespeare be suggesting that being featured in his work immortalizes you? Are those eternal lines the lines of the sonnet itself? Is the final thee only emphasized because it's the end result of Shakespeare's awesome, immortalizing poetry skills?

Probably. After all, being Shakespeare is like being an Elizabethan rockstar: you can bully the roadies, sleep with the groupies, trash the hotel rooms, and still be the world's darling. And let's face it: if you went down in history as The Bard, you'd probably swear by your own poetry too.

Shmoop is an online study guide for Shakespeare, Sonnet 116 and many more. Its content is written by Ph.D. and Masters students from top universities, like Stanford, Berkeley, Harvard, and Yale who have also taught at the high school and college levels. Teachers and students should feel confident to cite Shmoop.

Golden Spotted Deer - Based On An Episode In The Epic Ramayana

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

The great philosopher Socrates taught his disciples, never to accept anything without questioning. The question why has to be answered truthfully without flinching and requires great moral courage and indomitable spirit of adventure to pursue matters to a logical conclusion, which may be unpalatable and invite violent reaction from uninformed public, especially if religion is involved. May He grant me the toughness! I seek sincere apology, in advance. The theme involves Sita, whom I respect most, Ram, the maryada purushottam, venerated all over India and Lakshman, the faithful brother, who sacrificed his family life, to protect his brother and sister-in-law, in their long and tortuous journey through the subcontinent, disregarding the threat from wild animals and asuras who dominated the wilderness. Let us be extremely cautious!

All went well, until the fourteenth year of their picnic-like excursion, enjoying the splendor of virgin forests and emerald green hills. Then tragedy struck as in a Hollywood film.

A lovely golden deer appeared near the cottage, where the princely trio were camping. Its beauty and innocent eyes captivated the Princess. She just wanted to have it! They told her that it was no ordinary animal; it was some evil being, with ulterior motives, sent to harm them.They had already incurred the wrath of Shoorpanaka (in the South it is Surpanakha) and killed her brothers who attacked them. They were expecting trouble.

But Sita won't hear. She wanted the golden deer. Ultimately, her husband yielded. Entrusting the safety of his spouse to his faithful brother, Ram went after the animal.

Oh help me Lakshman: I am in immediate danger-When Sita heard these cries, she urged Lakshman to go and help Ram. On being told that Ram is capable of defending himself and that this is a trick of the evil spirit that came in the guise of the animal, Sita was infuriated, became wild, accusing Lakshman of entertaining dirty motives to posses her after Ram fell dead. That was the last straw! Lakshman left instantly, leaving Sita undefended. In comes a sanyasi (a hermit) asking for alms. Every Hindu respects and welcomes such people. Unsuspecting Sita comes out of the cottage and is kidnapped by Ravana, in order to avenge the ill-treatment of his sister Shoorpanaka. The seed is sown for the epic Ram vs. Ravana war.

In this single episode, the poet Valmiki exhibits his superlative qualities with regard to plot, characterization and human psychology! We are concerned with certain fundamental questions arising out of the whole sequence of events.

1) The first question is: why Sita behaved like a nine year old girl crying for a Barbie doll?

Sita is no ordinary woman. She forsook the pleasures of life in the palace and went along with her husband with bare clothes into the forest. This shows her high moral standard and extreme devotion to her beloved husband. During their sojourn through the forest, they must have come across hundreds of deer and fondled them. Therefore, the sight of the golden deer should not have excited her. When told that it is no ordinary deer but some evil spirit masquerading as deer with definite motives for revenge, Sita should have been convinced. In fact, any dutiful wife with some sense of responsibility would readily agree with her husband and forget the deer. Why did Sita of such high standard and integrity of character, fully devoted to her husband, insist on her demand for the pet?

2) As a responsible husband, Ram should have convinced his wife about the futility of seeking to capture the illusive deer. Why did he fail to do this? When he was fully convinced that the deer is a mirage, he should have refused to budge. Why did he fail? He could have thrashed his wife for being so silly and adamant, why did he not do it?

3) When Lakshman left his wife and accompanied the princely couple, he had only one thing in his mind: protection of his beloved brother and sister- in- law. He should have clearly told Sita that Ram is quite safe and there is nothing to worry about. If he could not countenance the vulgar insinuations of Sita, he could have pretended to go but actually hidden himself in the nearby bush. Why did he not do this?

4) Ravan was a very powerful and valiant fighter. When his sister Soorpanaka was insulted and her breasts and nose cut off (did they have to do this to a woman?), he should have challenged the princes for a fight and not sneak into the hutment like a thief

and stolen Sita. His wife Mandodari had actually advised Ravan against this heinous crime. Did he entertain finer sentiments for the lovely princess and was only waiting for an excuse?

The Unpredictability Principle

Every human being is subject to unreasonable and mysterious reaction some time or other. It is difficult to quote instances from my own life.Most of the time I have been carried away as by a current, as if I have no will of my own. It is recently that I have started writing and feel a bit nervous. We were not badly off when my father broke off from our ancestral home and wandered from one place to another. When he, at last, built a house and settled down, He called him. Mother, a young widow and we four children, all under sixteen, were left in the lurch with practically no earnings. Why did he break away in the first instance? Napoleon Buonaparte was a great statesman. He has written a lot during his last days in prison in St.Helena Island. It is worth reading even today. Why did he want to conquer the world? Hitler could have remained unbeaten, had he not attacked the USSR. Why did Kamsa not put Vasudeva and Devaki in separate cells in jail?

Every human being carries an invisible burden, which I call the spiritual baggage, consisting of the things he has seen and experienced, which is stored in his computer called his brain. It works even when he sleeps. Poets and writers try to dissect it. Scientists are far from even guessing what goes on there. We always blame something or other without understanding anything. This baggage vitiates our judgment at critical moments.

I am a strong believer in Him. My reason tells me that He is everywhere.It is not necessary to go to a temple. But I enjoy the trip to any temple It is very soothing. My Christian friend may like, if it is a church A Malayalam Muslim poet has written a beautiful hymn in praise of Sree Guruvayoorappan (there is one temple of the deity -Krishna in Delhi) ending with the plea that, at least in the next janam, he may have the chance to have a darshan of the temple deity. (If I am empowered, I shall allow all devotees free access to the temple as in gurudwaras)

To return to Sita.

She will have to answer a number of inconvenient questions. Why did she not resist as soon as she realized that he was not a sanyasi? Ravan had a curse. If he touched a woman against her wishes, he would perish. Without touching her, how could he drag her into the helicopter? (Pushpaka viman).Why did she not jump out and commits suicide as any chaste school girl could do now? Why did she not go on fast unto death even as Medhaji would do now? Ultimately, she ended her life when a repentant Ram requested her to come back to Ayodhya from the forest where she was unceremoniously and sneakingly cast away, merely because some worthless washerwoman made some derogatory comments about her stay in Ravan's custody. Why did she not show the same spirit at that time?

Ram:

He never behaved like a gentleman. He hid himself and killed Bali when the latter was fighting Sugriv, his own brother. (What a curse on humanity! Brothers rarely remain friends- Ambani vs Ambani).When the dying Bali confronted him with the question: why did you kill me like a coward, Ram, instead of expressing sympathy for the dying hero (Bali was a remarkable fighter. He once humiliated Ravan by holding him with his tail and dipping Ravan again and again in the sea!) abused him right and left: "Who are you to question me? Do you know that I belong to the Ikshuki race? You are only a monkey. You illegally took away your brother's wife. You deserve to die". A gentleman ought to be more polite to a dying hero. Will George Bush use such words to a dying Bin Laden?