English 10: Writing Portfolio

 

Catholic Memorial High School

 

2007-2008

   
   
   
   
   
Research  
   
Creative Writing  
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  For many years, etymologists have battled over the definition of champion. Through these
years more and more definitions of the word began to come into play, and so the variation of its
usage remains as it did centuries ago. Over time, the common perception of this word began to focus
on one primary definition: “One who fights on behalf of another and emerges victoriously.”
Many people today can look at the word, sound it out and come to the conclusion that it is a French
based word and in fact it was originally an Old French word: cham-pi-oun. According to the Oxford
English Dictionary
(OED), the first written recording of this word dates back seven hundred and
eighty-two years, to 1225. Flourishing from its beginning, the word champion has had tremendous
success in plays, movies; even the theme of a champion has been retold throughout stories and tales.
From this we can look at other words such as champion and see whether or not they are from the
French over England era, the Latin era, and so forth. Through time, we came to use a word with
passion and meaning, and have it shape the arts of our culture.

Research shows many people today, of both male and female, understand the general definition of
champion. Four of the five interviewed, champion meant one who was on top, a high position, and had
won it by themselves, a victorious leader. “A champion is one who has experience in the area, one
who emerges victoriously,” said Ashley. Along with Ashley were Paul, Ryan, and Joe who gave similar
definitions such as Ashley’s. So today, eighty percent of the people still refer to the older
definition, the one used many centuries ago for plays and shows, “One who battles on behalf of
himself or another and emerges victoriously.” However, the remaining twenty percent dish out a new
definition, one referring to the modern clothing line Champion. David stated in his sentence, “My
favorite brand of clothing is the Champion line because they are durable clothes for a cheap price.
In general Americans know the definition of a champion, however some know but tend to think of
something else when asked the question, “Define champion.” As we can see, although sixty percent of
the people surveyed were in there teens and forty percent were either younger or older than myself,
we can see that the generation of mine and those younger and older still learn and keep the
definition used for centuries before our time, and will continued to be used.

Through most of the OED, the discovered definitions and uses of the word champion remain the same
for the first six or seven definitions, for champion had many definitions it would kill many trees
by printing all the pages. Every use and definition with section of OED in my possession has some
variation of an animal, plant, human winning first-prize in a competition, fighting for another, and
so on. However, there is one definition that is still around today, probably only in England for the
definition is “champion of the king, or queen, of the realm of England.” From the OED, people from
around the world can have a better look and where, when, and how certain words came into play within
the creating of our new language hundreds of years ago. The times, the dates, the uses, the quotes,
from a certain word are all from texts both modern and ones found in successful archeological digs.
From its birth in 1225, the word champion has never faltered from its meaning in order to affect it.
Right through Shakespeare’s time in the middle 1500s, the definition remained and Shakespeare
incorporated it into many of his plays. Although many words have several definitions such as
champion, not all will mean the same or all still be in use. Thanks to the scientific works of digs
and of the genius of some humans, the origins of the words within our languages are written, typed
and printed in numerous amounts.

From the OED, one could learn about authors, books, plays, etc. that have used the word. The word
champion, first used in 1225 has never really changed. When the arts began to take over, and plays
began to get popular words, languages came into play. Therefore words that were around were used and
had a new part of their history created. Champion was used numerous times by the great William
Shakespeare in his novels and plays. Some of these works include Henry III and VI (1591) as well as
Richard I and II (1593). Two quoted lines from these plays are included in the next sentences. “A
stouter Champion neuer handled Sword” from Henry by William Shakespeare is one quote. “The Champions
are prepared, and stay for nothing but his Maiesties approach,” written by Shakespeare in his
Richard pieces. Two other major authors or users of this word are Walter Scott in 1819 and Caxton in
1483. The times it was and was recorded all seem to have the same concept of this one word. Walter
Scott had written the book Ivanhoe in 1819 and included the word champion. Before Scott was William
Caxton who wrote the book The Golden Legende. Even the mightiest authors who have used this word
never thought of changing it.

Throughout the years, many Americans probably knew the definition of champion wasn’t going to
change and they were correct. In recent research into the www.nytimes.com and oed.com, there is
proof that the word has been around for seven hundred and eighty-two years, and since then the
definition has remained the same up until present day, such as articles today in papers. On October
29, 2007 the New York Times published many articles containing the word champion in them.
"Patriots 52, Redskins 7; Patriots Drive over Redskins on way to meeting with Colts” was the
headline for an article written by Judy Battista in the sports section. Another usage in an article
comes from the world section written by the Associated Press and includes the world champion and the
title is “American Favored as UN Prosecutor” speaking of a Yugoslavian who believes he is the
champion of international affairs for his country. As many can see, the path the definition of
champion is taking is one straight across the horizon, no change from its birth and probably none
until its death many years, and possibly centuries from now.

Speaking with foreigners gives a close idea of their troubles (if any) of learning this word when
learning the English language and the possible future use of this word within their original
language. Spanish speaking countries such as Peru have roots within the English language because of
the old Latin language. Ms. Paz, one with Peruvian heritage, recounts her childhood and learning to
speak English along with Spanish. “I went to school in Mexico for three years growing up. We spoke
Spanish and English growing up, but I didn’t have many words that I struggled with. All of my family
has trouble with accents. Champion in Spanish is pretty close and the "ch" sound is found
in plenty of words, so there's not much difficulty.” According to Ms. Paz, Peruvians and many
other Hispanic countries do not have difficulty with this word because of their “ch” sound in many
words; however the accent could be off. I later went on to think of the future use of the word
champion in the Spanish language and in other languages around the world and found some interesting
information. The word is actually part of many of the world languages today!

The word champion has a very bright future in plays and in the movies, sports and activities.
Champion is one who emerges victoriously and that is what this word has certainly done over the
years. Nailing ideas for plays and movies, becoming a title for the winner, creating rivalries and
jealousy, this word has already had its future yet the language it’s in and those it has not made
time to introduce itself to yet have to revolve around it. The English language has ran with the
word from the time it was written for the first time. The future for the language relies on that of
the word, and whether or not it will defeat it in the end.
   
   
   
  .
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  .
   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Scribe,

Hope all is well with you and your life. Unfortunately I have been made editor for Prentice
Hall and now I must edit the newest edition debuting before the start of next year, with budget cuts
in place. This creates problems where there never used to be any, like between us. I am writing this
letter to you to inform you that your masterpiece, Beowulf will not be included in the next edition
of Prentice Hall: Timeless Voices/Timeless Themes-The British Tradition. I really do not know how to
put this nicely, but the decision to exclude it was rather undisputed. You and your talent to just
sit yourself down and begin an entirely different language based on what you hear is amazing!
However, since the language has changed so much since you wrote the piece, I do not believe students
in some middle schools and high schools want to go in depth in a text written in old English, when
some of the students can barely comprehend that of modern English. As I reread Beowulf, I took the
time to find instances where the piece would not fit today. First I noticed the extreme liking of
blood and violence, followed by the disputed reason of whether or not you were a monk and why you
threw in pagan traditions and customs, ending with the excessively long speeches given to the
characters. Also, the work shows an extreme liking of kingship or monarchy. I am truly sorry about
the decision, but your work will continue to be studied at the collegiate level.

The emphasis of blood and violence within this piece does not fit well with higher schools
students and possibly some middle schools. In today’s day in age, the violence of teens and guns is
increasing, and the communities would like to work together fixing this major problem. Beowulf is an
epic of only blood and violence, projected well from the scenes of “Grendel” being beheaded and
“Grendel” having his arm torn off by the protagonist. On one particular account, Jonathan A. Glenn
agrees that there are “cycles of violence” throughout Beowulf including “fratricide/kin slaying.”
The society today wants to rid the communities of teenage crime and, no offense to you, the piece
just provokes the increase among the people. Jonathan A. Glenn also includes in his compilation of
notes and outlines that the character had the “use and abuse of swords” and the “use and abuse of
boasts.”

Many critics also debate whether or not you were a monk. In order to write such a long piece,
especially when there was no written part of the English language then, you must have taken a lot of
time in order to complete it. This partial evidence gives us critics a good idea that you “were” a
monk. If this is true, why would you mix Christian and pagan customs and traditions together in one
epic? In lines such as twenty-seven, “…fela-hror, feran on Frean waere…” and as you may see, I
underlined what probably meant Frea in pagan worship but “Lord” or “God” today, yet you use “God” is
some cases. In line thirteen, “…geong in geardum, pone God sende…” you return to the Christian faith
with “God.” Many here are confused why you would combine the two religions together, such as
syncretism, although nothing comes forth from it. Another interesting part in the story is the fact
that even you are questioning “Is there a God?” It just seems extraordinary that a monk of the
Christian faith would question that.

Another aspect I noticed in the story is the fact that characters such as Hrothgar and Beowulf
have extremely long speeches and sermons. Many speeches start and finish around approximately one
hundred lines. Jonathan A. Glenn can avouch the fact that Hrothgar’s sermon began at line 1699 and
ended at line 1784, Beowulf’s first major speech lasting from line 2425 and finished at 2537, and
the critics conclude many speeches are much too long for a modern person to follow along with and
comprehend completely what matter is taking place. As the piece tells it, most important speeches
are lengthy, which the speeches should, yet even I do not think one would boast that much, even
could boast that much if they tried in one single speech. If the speeches were narrowed down, the
characters might be able to accomplish more tasks and keep the audience entertained rather than
listening to the single character boast for minutes, possibly even hours.

Finally, I noticed the extreme liking of kingship or monarchy. In today’s world, there are
many cases of monarchy and principalities, but the power is not the same as it was thousands of
years ago. Characters such as Hrothgar, who lives as a king and Beowulf, who will live and die as a
king show your amazement with one person rulings and powers thrust upon one people. The battle with
the dragon shows the personality of Beowulf and why he wanted to die a wealthy king, rather than a
normal king. Beowulf treasured loot and he wanted to use it for himself and the other high ranking
officials around him. Hrothgar wanted to build the biggest mead hall in all the land and he did by
building Heorot. The kings and leaders in your story do not show good examples of why countries
today fight for freedom and liberty.

Again I would like to apologize and offer my gratitude, but the piece just could not be
accepted. If you had any other works out there I would like to see them and exchange thoughts of
possibly adding others works to the newest editions of the textbook. I hope you understand.


Yours Truly,
Shane Smith, Editor-in-Chief-Prentice Hall

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Gentlemen Only Ladies Forbidden,” the acronym for the sport of “golf”, has been around for many
centuries, according to the O.E.D. The exact origins of golf are unknown, and three different
countries are claiming the ownership. Scotland, China, and the Netherlands are the contenders, but
the world has settled the dispute by agreeing the sport originated in Scotland in the 1100s,
according to the Oxford English Dictionary. Also, the word golf derives from the Dutch word kolf
meaning stick, club, or bat. The actual word “golf” is said to have been written down for the first
time in 1497, according to the Oxford English Dictionary as well. King James II banned ‘ye golf’, in
an attempt to encourage archery practice, which was being neglected. The sentence from King James II
is, “And at be fut bal ande be golf vtterly cryt down nocht vsyt.” The “ideal” thought of how golf
was invented is that bored shepherds tending flocks of sheep near St. Andrews became adept to
hitting rounded stones into rabbit’s holes with their wooden crooks, according to The Royal and
Ancient Golf Club’s website. The British people seem to favor the sport of golf over those such as
croquet, polo, etc. There is even a museum for golf in Britain, most cleverly called, The British
Golf Museum. With the British people favoring this type of sport over others, it reveals to us that
these people like challenging sports, harder sports. Hitting a tiny ball into a hole, hundreds of
yards away, is no simple task to do.

There must have been rules known to golfers dating back to the origins of the game. Otherwise, how
could players have squared off in competition? What those rules were, nobody knows. At least not
until later centuries and up to modern times, when the first known written rules of golf were put
into writing by the Gentlemen Golfers of Leith, now the Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers
based at Muirfield. The rules were written for the Annual Challenge for the Edinburgh Silver Club in
1744. There were thirteen of them, and note how many survived today. The rules first written include
many used in today’s play. Out of the many rules found, three of them stuck out. The first rule that
stuck out to me was that of your tee having to be on the ground. Thinking back to their time, I do
not think one could find a good explanation for this rule. To me it makes no sense, but then again
this paper is not about me. You are to play your ball honestly at the hole, and not to play upon
your adversary's ball, not lying in your way to the hole. This was a funny one because many of
the players know there are “those” people who will try and cheat by hitting you ball away from the
hole, even when their ball is nowhere near the putting players. If you should lose your ball, by it
being taken up, or any other way, you are to go back to the spot where you struck last and drop
another ball and allow your adversary a stroke for the misfortune. Some people think that the rule
stated before is reasonable. But, did they think of the actual chances of losing a golf ball? Any
decent player would hit the ball down the fairway to the green and continue on. The Rules of Golf
continued to be developed over time, taking a huge step forward in 1897 when the Royal & Ancient
Golf Club of St. Andrews formed a Rules Committee. Since 1952, the R&A and the United States
Golf Association have met every two years to set down a uniform code of rules.

All over the British Empire there are professional organizations, who travel the world playing the
sport of golf, and then there are the “regular Joes” who play one another in amateur organizations.
Several professional clubs include the Royal Black Heath Golf Club of England, followed by the Old
Manchester Golf Club. Canada was next. Clubs such as the Royal Montreal Club surfaced and the Quebec
Golf Club came to be later on. Amateur golf clubs started to surface as well, for those who purely
love the game and want to compete with family and friends, such as the Wormburners Golf Club. Clubs
for women were being formed as well, such as the Executive Women’s Golf Association, according to
the Executive Women’s Golf Association’s website. Golf has spread from many places, and now has
become a sporting phenomenon.

“You don't win tournaments by playing well and thinking poorly,” says one of England’s most
renowned golf players, Lee Westwood. In recent articles by the London Times, as recent as March 6th,
Lee Westwood speaks of his “resurrection” in his golfing career. He has been said to be targeting
Nick Faldo’s Ryder Cup record. “I’ve looked at the statistics, and that is the goal,” says Westwood,
looking to surpass his captain. “I’m a naturally aggressive player, but I will have to rein it in
and remember where I am. It will be interesting to see what happens this year” (both quotes from the
London Times). Another professional player in England is Mark Brown, who recently won the Johnnie
Walker Classic in India. “I played terribly on the front side,” he said, “I don’t think I hit a
fairway or green and got to the 10th and said to myself ‘Let’s have a solid nine holes,’ and the
birdies started falling. The rest is a dream.” A scare occurred on the 18th hole when Brown teed off
and the ball headed toward the water. The ball cleared the obstacle however, and Brown putted the
ball in for the win. “It’s the worst shot since I was 14,” says Brown, after his minor scare.

An amateur player, named Michael Lunt, has recently passed away. Michael Lunt was among the best
amateur golfers of his era. He won the 1963 Amateur Championship and became a widely respected golf
administrator. One of the game’s most popular personalities he was, at the time of his death, the
captain of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews. Michael Lunt was born into a well-known
Midlands golfing family. His father, Stanley, a former English Amateur Champion, fostered an early
interest in the game by giving his son putting lessons, with both standing on a billiard table.
Michael Stanley Randle Lunt was educated at Uppingham School, where he indulged his passion for
golf, while during the holidays he spent hours at the Moseley and Edgbaston golf clubs, grooming the
rhythmical swing and exceptional short game that became such features of his future successes. He
won a string of junior titles and, on his way to victory in the Midland Boys’ Championship at the
Blackwell Club in Worcestershire, he astounded spectators at the 17th hole, powering the ball nearly
300 yards uphill, and using old-style clubs. A devoted family man, Lunt was renowned for his
honesty, kindness and dry humor. Soon after winning the Amateur Championship, he was practicing his
swing in the garden of a holiday house when a man leaned over the balcony next door and remarked.
“You’re obviously a bit of a golfer with a swing like that.” “Yes,” said Lunt. “I’ve always enjoyed
the game.” “I’ve got a friend called John Blackwell who’s a brilliant golfer,” continued the man.
“He has just won the Amateur Championship.” “You were misinformed,” said Lunt, deadpan. “I beat him
in the final.” Despite his success, his career always took precedence over his golf, and he turned
down several invitations to play in the Masters because of work commitments. When the family
business was taken over by Courtaulds in the 1960s, Lunt became the European sales manager of
Slazenger’s golfing arm, then joined the Royal Mid-Surrey Golf Club as manager and secretary. Lunt,
who still possessed one of the most stylish games in golf, could also, when necessary, rise to the
occasion with tact and charm. On one occasion the Duke of York, then little better than an average
hacker, came to the club for a round with him. When asked how the game had gone, he said gently: “It
was delightful. His Royal Highness was kind enough to offer me some tips on how I might improve my
swing,” according to the London Times.

Literature includes many aspects of life, including sports such as golf. One author, George
Plimpton, writes many times of “golf,” all the while being crippled. His famous books include “The
Bogey Man,” “Paper Lion,” and “Out of My League.” Many authors try to write about thoughts and/or
actual experiences during their lifetime. George Plimpton writes of his views on golf and includes
his experiences, according to the “The Bogey Man.”

In Britain, its surrounding neighbors, and the rest of the world seem to be continuing the support
of golf. For many centuries, kings and queens have been trying to ban golf, in search for ways to
bring their people back to archery and hunting, according to the O.E.D, yet the people took a liking
to this new sport. The future looks bright for the sport of golf, only on one condition: if the fans
and supporters continue to pay and travel to express their liking for their favorite players.

   
   
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From stained glass Anglican Church windows to the paper of British writers, literature and its
interpretations have spread like wildfire. British literature however, has spread through many
parts, introducing many “devices” and tips on how to write effective literature. In the British
literature, many tend to observe patterns within the titles and works of certain authors. Charles
Dickens for example, uses a trick where he names characters after their characteristics, or he has
the characters name the same as his with the initials flipped, etc. British prose uses more of a
story form, as does the drama. The poetry of the literature uses more of a song-like form, with the
ability to sing it as intended. The five “devices” I believe British literature uses are within
settings, themes, resolutions, the topic of gender, and the form of the written piece. British
literature needs these five “devices”, because these in fact may be the true basis of every piece of
literature, in Great Britain but in the rest of the world as well.

Men within British Literature have a certain age range that does not include the average
middle-aged man (gender). The men are both young and youthful, or they are older with much
experience and the ability to lead. Jane Austen speaks of men as youthful and powerful, as well as
having many of them in one spot for a strength effect. “But I am particularly attached to these
young men,” (35) she writes. Virginia Woolf sees men as older, more experienced and it is a contrast
to that of Jane’s, although there are cases when she agrees. “He was a leader of men, a great
walker, and a climber of mountain peaks” (28) and also “she saw nothing but young men…” (51)
Virginia. Mia Carter, a critic addresses the fact that Virginia Woolf uses much juvenilia. She
writes, “Woolf's juvenilia, youthful diaries, and early fiction depict her lifelong struggle
with questions of national, cultural, and ethnic inheritance” (47). Mia writes of Woolf’s writing as
almost childish. The way Carter describes the style of writing attacks the “juvenilia” recorded in
the writing. George Orwell writes of men as possible offenders of women, not specifically young or
old, but many would suspect it is a younger, more delinquent man. “…It was feared that the men might
have harmed her in some way, or even carried her off with them…” (38). George is trying to set the
reader up, leading them on into an area that no one knows what is going to happen. Leo Tolstoy is in
agreement with Jane Austen’s idea that many men are to be placed in one spot. “It happened because
it was bound to happen; and so it came to pass that some millions of men, ignoring all common sense
and human feeling, started to march…” (197). Obviously the concept of men, women, and gender all
together is in high demand among the women, and the men. And the fact of the matter is, is that
gender has been the high demand criteria for centuries within the pieces of literature.

The formation of a poem is the piece that really draws readers in (form). If the lines are too
uneven, or the spacing is not quite right, the reader may think that the author hasn’t spent much
time on it. Derek Walcott is a poet who writes in the form, many British writers do not.
Exaggeration starts off with a slow, understandable line, then goes on to complicate an event or an
object that could have easily been simple. His poem, Omeros, demonstrates this line formation. The
first line of a stanza starts with the exaggeration of one who would hate certain shoes and the
phase of that specific pair of shoes, then changes into an entirely different person who experiences
joy when seeing them, etc.

I sang our wide country, the Caribbean Sea
Who hated shoes, whose soles were as cracked as a stone,
Who was gentle with ropes, who had one suit alone,
Whom no man dared insult and who insulted no one,
Whose grin was a white breaker cresting, but whose frown
Was a growing thunderhead...

Walcott stresses the fact that a certain being can like one thing, and then dislike it over and over
again. Doris Lessing, another writer has the form of exaggerating a certain form. For example the
author writes, “Chapter Seven IT was a brilliant, cool, cloudless June. This was the time of the
year Mary liked best: warm during the day, but with a tang in the air...” (127). Lessing is
stressing the formation of a writer placing a story inside another story for a read-read effect.
Phyllis Sternberg Perrakis writes of Lessing’s novel as a “cautionary tale chronicling all the wrong
moves” (5). Here Perrakis shows her enthusiasm for the book, explaining how it describes all of the
upcoming events.

A common passage of open vales and high waterways is the bridge (setting). Within British
literature, the setting of bridges is used often. Siegfried Sassoon uses the bridge in Picture-Show.
“Here's the Canal: it's dusk; we cross the bridge” (8). Sassoon sees a bridge as a means
of accomplishment. Without a bridge, how could one cross a ravine or a ditch in some case? That
allows him to write of certain case where the bridge is needed. William Butler Yeats speaks of
bridges in his works as well. In Phases of the Moon, Yeats says:

An old man cocked his ear upon a bridge; He and his friend, their faces to the South, Had trod the
uneven road. Their boots were soiled, Their Connemara cloth worn out of shape; They had kept a
steady pace as though their beds, 5 Despite a dwindling and late risen moon, Were distant. An old
man cocked his ear (1-7).

Yeats describes the peacefulness one could get from being elderly and having all the time to
yourself, enjoying the earth and everything on it with a friend. Barrett Harper Clark is a critic of
William Butler Yeats. In the book The British and American Drama of To-day: Outlines for Their
Study, Harper states “A play may be written with no pretense to style, and yet be good literature”
(43). Clark goes on to speak of water and the effect it has, coming into play Yeats’ bridge
accommodation. “…here that leads to the water. This is a place that should be minded…” (206). Alan
Sillitoe, author of many books including A Start in Life, writes of a peaceful time where one can
relax near the canal bridge. “On my way back I’d lean the bike by the wall of a canal bridge and
take a half an hour at my book or comic…” (15). Crossing obstacles is a constant factor in life. A
bridge is just one of those inventions which helps us in the difficult process.

Justice within today’s society is a very large part of what makes us safe, therefore it become a
large theme in British literature; law and trial is brought up not only amongst humans, but of the
holy and divine as well. William Butler Yeats says, “God tries each man/According to a different
plan” (6-7). George Orwell uses the story Animal Farm to show the intolerable law the animals are
laying down. “These Seven Commandments would now be inscribed on the wall; they would form an
unalterable law by which all the animals on Animal Farm must live forever…” (22). James Berry speaks
of the law as a necessity in which people need in order to function as a society. “...the police
officials, the hospital commissaries, in fact almost everyone on whom the maintenance of law and
order depended, had gone...” (204). Necessity it is and it always will be because of the constant
violence in our world. Critics James Acheson and Romana Huk open up to readers by describing the use
of “law” in writings. In Contemporary British Poetry: Essays in Theory and Criticism, the two of
them state from a Lacanian psychoanalytic model of analysis:

…is intimately connected… with the way in which women become social beings in the first place, so
that the very condition of their accession to their own subjectivity, to the consciousness of a
self, which is both personal and public is their unwitting acceptance of the law which limits their
speech (87).

The critics write of the development of women’s rights and how their laws use to affect them.

Seizing good occupations or being chased by mysterious things are common resolutions in
British Literature (…resolutions). Upamanyu Chatterjee is an Indian-English writer who explores the
employed ways in his writings. Throughout his life, Upamanyu was and still is influenced by
important people. In English, August Chatterjee speaks as a young man named “August” and he is very
intellectual, finally landing the top government job he wanted. “…has just landed a prize government
job…” (73). The Sunday Express writes: “There's a popular conception that Indian fiction in
English hit the road to big time with Upamanyu Chatterjee's English, August in 1988. The
irreverent language, the wry humor and the immediately identifiable situations struck a chord with a
generation of Indians which was looking for its own voice and found it in Agastya Sen.” (1988
edition). Philip Larkin, author of Next Please writes of a ghostly ship following them, and it is
only one, yet the water doesn’t reflect the presence of the forthcoming ship:

Only one ship is seeking us, a black-
Sailed unfamiliar, towing at her back
A huge and birdless silence. In her wake
No waters breed or break (56-60).

Resolutions tend to vary, depending on the mood of the writer, the thought process of the reader,
etc. However, when a writer is writing, he or she sees what he or she thinks the reader will see.
That is not always the case, and for the writer the resolution may seem serious, while the new
reader, it might be hilarious.

“So what?” and “Who cares?” are the questions in which readers and scholars base their arguments on
whether or not a theme, setting, resolution, gender issue, or form belongs to world literature or
British literature. For years, authors have been trying to distinguish themselves from other
novelists, poets, etc. In many cases it has worked. Take for example the theme of justice. Sure many
authors use, law and justice, but it is how they use it. Some writers will use trials and
justification with just humans, or vice versa. That is what distinguishes British writers, past,
present, and future from world writers: they include both sides of the argument, not just the one.



Work Cited Page

Acheson, James and Romana Huk. "Contemporary British Poetry: Essays in Theory and
Criticism". SUNY Press, 1996.

Austen, Jane. "Pride and Prejudice". United Kingdom: Little, Brown Book Group, 1903.

Berry, James. "Around the World in Eighty Poems". Chronicle Books, 2002.

Carter, Mia. "History’s child: Virginia Woolf, heritage, and historical consciousness".
Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, 2007.

Chatterjee, Upamanyu. "English, August: An Indian Story". New York Review Books, 2006.

Clark, Barrett Harper. "The British and American Drama of To-day: Outlines for Their
Study". Stewart & Kidd Co., 1921.

Larkin, Philip. "A Writer’s Life". Noonday Press, 1994.

Lessing, Doris. "The Grass is Singing". Ballantine Books, 1964.

Orwell, George. "Animal Farm". 1st World Publishing, 2004.

Perrakis, Phyllis Sternberg. "Spiritual Exploration in the Works of Doris Lessing".
Greenwood Press, 1999.

Sassoon, Siegfried. "Picture-Show". E.P. Dutton & Company, 1920.

Sillitoe, Alan. "A Start in Life". W. H. Allen, 1970.

Tolstoy, Leo. "War and Peace". Russia, T.Y. Crowell & Co., 1889.

Walcott, Derek. "Omeros". Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1990.

Woolf, Virginia. "To the Lighthouse". Collector’s Library, 2004.

Yeats, William Butler. “The Phases of the Moon.” The Collected Poems of W.B. Yeats. Wordsworth
Editions, 2000.