NET SET English
This group has been created for lover of literature and those candidate who are preparing UGC Net and Set Examination.
https://t.me/UGCNETSET

Download admit card👍👍

OMR_Sample_2019.pdf

Covid-19_Preventive_measures.pdf

For Maharastra set examination only👆👆👆👆👍

Follow this link to join my WhatsApp group: https://chat.whatsapp.com/KFS2YEXsouZHTntlfDw983

*Misanthropy*
It is the general hatred, dislike, distrust or contempt of the human species,  human behavior and/or human nature. *A misanthrope* or 
*misanthropist* is someone who holds such views or feelings. In literature we also find the example such as  William Shakespeare ( *Timon of Athens* ). Jonathan Swift is widely believed to have been misanthropic
( A Tale of a Tub and, most especially, *Book IV of Gulliver's Travels* ). Poet Philip Larkin has been described as a misanthropy

*_List of Nobel Prize Winner ( English
Literature)*_

Nobel prize is one among the prestiginious award in the world , every year Swedish Academy choose a best work in the literature not particularly for English alone.

1. Rudyard Kipling - 1907
2. William Butler Yeats - 1923
3. George Bernard Shaw- 1925
4. Sinclair Lewis- 1930
5. John Galsworthy- 1932
6. Eugene O'Neill - 1936
7. Pearl S. Buck - 1938
8. T. S. Eliot. - 1948
9. William Faulkner - 1949
10. Bertrand Russell- 1953
11. Sir Winston Churchill - 1953
12. Ernest Hemingway- 1954
13. John Steinbeck - 1962
14. Samuel Beckett- 1969
15. Patrick White - 1973
16. Saul Bellow- 1976
17. William Golding - 1983
18. Akinwande Oluwole Soyinka - 1986
19. Joseph Brodsky - 1987
20. Nadine Gordimer - 1991
21. Derek Walcott - 1992
22. Toni Morrison- 1993
23. Seamus Heaney- 1995
24. Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul - 2001
25. John Maxwell Coetzee - 2003
26. Harold Painter - 2005
27. Doris Lessing - 2007
28. Alice Munro - 2013

AbsurdTheatre

Theatre of the Absurd, dramatic works of certain European and American dramatists of the 1950s and early ’60s who agreed with the Existentialist philosopher Albert Camus’s assessment, in his essay “The Myth of Sisyphus” (1942), that the human situation is essentially absurd, devoid of purpose. The term is also loosely applied to those dramatists and the production of those works. Though no formal Absurdist movement existed as such, dramatists as diverse as Samuel Beckett, Eugène Ionesco, Jean Genet, Arthur Adamov, Harold Pinter, and a few others shared a pessimistic vision of humanity struggling vainly to find a purpose and to control its fate. Humankind in this view is left feeling hopeless, bewildered, and anxious.
The ideas that inform the plays also dictate their structure. Absurdist playwrights, therefore, did away with most of the logical structures of traditional theatre. There is little dramatic action as conventionally understood; however frantically the characters perform, their busyness serves to underscore the fact that nothing happens to change their existence. In Beckett’s Waiting for Godot (1952), plot is eliminated, and a timeless, circular quality emerges as two lost creatures, usually played as tramps, spend their days waiting—but without any certainty of whom they are waiting for or of whether he, or it, will ever come.
Language in an Absurdist play is often dislocated, full of cliches, puns, repetitions, and non sequiturs. The characters in Ionesco’s The Bald Soprano (1950) sit and talk, repeating the obvious until it sounds like nonsense, thus revealing the inadequacies of verbal communication. The ridiculous, purposeless behaviour and talk give the plays a sometimes dazzling comic surface, but there is an underlying serious message of metaphysical distress. This reflects the influence of comic tradition drawn from such sources as commedia dell’arte, vaudeville, and music hall combined with such theatre arts as mime and acrobatics. At the same time, the impact of ideas as expressed by the Surrealist, Existentialist, and Expressionist schools and the writings of Franz Kafka is evident.
Originally shocking in its flouting of theatrical convention while popular for its apt expression of the preoccupations of the mid-20th century, the Theatre of the Absurd declined somewhat by the mid-1960s; some of its innovations had been absorbed into the mainstream of theatre even while serving to inspire further experiments. Some of the chief authors of the Absurd have sought new directions in their art, while others continue to work in the same vein.