Oppression of women is an ongoing conflict, especially in third world countries. Women there are given no value and no respect. They are suppressed by the empowerment given by men and do not have the ability to break society’s norms. If, by chance, they are able to break these barriers, then they are ridiculed, threatened, beaten, and abused for doing so, ultimately leading them back into suppression. They’re only escape from oppression is death. By experiencing death, these women achieve their freedom and independence. This claim is exemplified in the narration of, “Punishment”, where the brilliant author, Rabindranath Tagore, portrays the mass oppression and belittlement given to women and the manners in which they are perceived, stereotyped, and treated in a third world environment.

From the very beginning of the text, Tagore portrays one aspect of stereotypical behavior amongst women in local villages. He compares the “shrill screams” between two women to the “sun rising at dawn”. No one questions the rising of the sun and therefore no one would care to question the emotions of women. In other words, this behavior is apparent amongst women and so it was not a “violation of Nature’s rules” (893) because naturally, it is bound to happen. As mentioned earlier, women are suppressed by the empowerment of men in society. Men hold certain expectations against women. They seek for the women to have certain tasks accomplished and made ready. In one account of the story, Dukhiram was famished after a long days work and so was “expecting” his wife, Radha, to have made lunch ready. However, Radha was unable to provide for Dukhiram in that instant. The reason is not that Radha could careless for her husband. But, that her husband in fact did not provide the means for her to have made lunch ready. Additionally, in that same scenario, Radha tried to talk back. But, in this society, women do not have freedom of speech, they are unable to make their voice heard. They’re inability to project their voice is evident, and the moment they even try to speak back, it feels “like a spark on a sack of gunpowder” (894). That spark is their voice, which is denied in this society. That spark also signifies all of their emotions and overwhelming feelings that are bottled up inside. When they finally try to let their emotions out, the outcome becomes that “spark on a sack of gunpowder”. When they do talk back, it is viewed as disrespect, as a sign of rebellion. The moment they try to “rebel”, they become killed by men who are “raging with hunger” (894).

Tagore portrays another unjust attribution given to women. In the next claim, he shows women being used as scapegoats in society. “In their quarrel, Chotobau struck at Barobau’s head with a farm-knife” (894). The younger brother made a false claim in defending the real murderer, his older brother by putting the blame on his wife. He did not think for one second about this false accusation, and that this will get his innocent wife killed. He gave her up in a moment of a second. “A reply to Ramlochan’s question had come instantly to mind, and he had blurted it out” (894). An “instant” thought resulted into an “instant” blame and turned an innocent individual into an “instant” victim. This shows how undervalued these women are in society. They are deceived by even their “lover” in matters of misery and have no outlet from their own misery.

An ideal female figure emerged in Tagore’s, “Punishment”. She was the wife who was put on blame for the murder. Chandara was an ideal figure because although she was innocent, she took matters into her own hands and was able to stand her ground. “I shall give my youth to the gallows instead of to you. My final ties in this life will be with them” (897). Although many acts of reassurance were given by her husband, she knew that she had the ability to abolish herself from suppression. She knew that her husband’s words held no value. In accepting the blame, she performed an act of justice for herself. She was free from injustice, abuse, and suppression. She no longer had to cope with society norms and injustices. By accepting death, she became a “handful of mercury” (896) that was able to slip away from prejudice and blame given by society. The real punishment professed by Tagore was not the punishment given because of murder, but the punishment given to the women in society. Their abuse, mistreatment, and belittlement in society were what Tagore wanted to project in his work. The descriptions of Chandara were ideal to Tagore because that was how he wanted women to be perceived in society. Tagore also indicated in the passage, “The Deputy Magistrate…new rice-crop” (898), that these events and misdemeanors against women were an ongoing problem. Life must go on, but according to Tagore, life should go on in way that it should be equally blissful for people of the opposite sex.

As influential and unique of a writer as he was, Ghalib “argued for a secular merger in shared ways of everyday life” and believed that “being human was more essential than, and prior to, being either Muslim or Hindu, believer or infidel”. What he is trying to convey, in my opinion, is that devoting life to religion and continuing to show affection to a divine deity is not the way one should live. Strong devotion to religion will only suppress an individual and refrain themselves from living a more prosperous life. Ghalib’s perception of a prosperous life is reflected by the numerous ghazals that he himself established. These ghazals adhere to the connection between romanticism and divinity. Conclusively, Ghalib provides the notion that romanticism can only be experienced with the hindrance of divinity and the art of devotion.

Life shouldn’t be driven by the dependence on God. Merely devoting one’s self to religion is immoral because God himself is “that Idol of an Infidel” (Line 18). In stating that “God himself is not faithful to the faith that focuses on him” (Footnote 5), why should the average man hold dependence and devotion towards Him? This question is explained thoroughly in, “My tongue begs for the power of speech”, where Ghalib transitions from praising the gifts that God provides man to the same gifts that torment and bring misery to their lives. The speaker accepts the gift of voice or the “power of speech” given by God. But, the power of speech is hindered by the simultaneous gift of silence. What Ghalib is trying to hint at is that this gift is contradictory along with the many gifts that God provides man. The reason being that through the power of speech, “silence gets its style of representation” (Lines 4-5). The gifts that God gives include the “melancholic weeping of disappointment” (Line7-8), “the blood of slaughter’s victims” (Line 17), “the flood of tears” (Line 22), and “the colors of grief” (Line 23). These “gifts” allude to the disappointment and sorrow-filled lives of humans. The contradiction stated above is envisioned through the fact that “devotion is the veil” (Line 31). In other words, if man continues to devote their lives to God, they can only expect more grief and agony. And what can God do in regards to these terms? He can only remain hidden under the veil, “hidden from human eyes”. Man’s devotion is compared to a “farce-like search for mercy” (Line 37). Because God is hidden under that veil, devotion is of no value, and it is only left to mockery. God does not hold the answers to life, He only, according to Ghalib, “keeps our hubris hidden” (Line 32).

Ghalib’s use of this highly structured form, ghazal, influences the meaning of his poems. The refrain concept of the ghazal, where a line is stated repeatedly, is evident in three significant poems, “My tongue begs for the power of speech”, “It was essential”, and “I’ve made my home next door to you”. These redundant phrases emphasize the general message that Ghalib seeks to convey. They are the foundation of his poems. The message that he wants to convey refers to his views on religion and his perspective on God. In staying alive “for a few more days”, Ghalib has the opportunity to critique his religion. In continuing to “wish for death for few more days” (Line 60), Ghalib is able to make his voice be heard and use “the power of his speech” to criticize the gifts that God provided for man, to unravel God from beneath the “veil.” The statement “Your gift to us” is the means by which Ghalib ridicules the devotion of man to God and God’s inability to provide for man. Ghalib establishes himself “without a word being said”. In adding to his critique, Ghalib does not seek permission from God in letting his voice be heard. He hints at the fact that man is superior to God when he states, “You still can’t find my whereabouts without my help, without a word being said” (Line 3-4). The ghazals are the transitions of Ghalib’s thoughts from one context to another. They stem from his desire in wanting to stay alive, so that he can criticize God and his devotees, and do so by the power of his own authority. This sheer brilliance of a man is what makes Ghalib unique. He has the ability to express his ideas across the borders of his poems. Normally, a poet’s thoughts and ideas are secluded in one poem. But, Ghalib breaks the barriers in shifting his ideas, in this case, across three different poems.

Ghalib’s love for poetry and his belief that this form of literature is exceptional to all others is also recognized in the works of Emily Dickinson. In poem 657, Dickinson “dwells in possibility”, which is a “fairer house than prose” because it is “more numerous of windows- superior- for doors” (Line 1-4). The poet views poetry as a means of opportunity, to bring oneself to light, and attain betterment. The metaphorical comparison made between doors and poetry, and not windows, alludes to the idea that poetry establishes a broad path in attaining that opportunity, whereas windows merely show a glimpse of that same opportunity and prevents one from properly obtaining it. In, “Petition: My Salary”, Ghalib definitively states that, “it’s a violation of etiquette not to praise poetry” (Line 31-32). Therefore, poetry holds a substantial value to Ghalib because it has the ability to “rain down pearls” (Line 30).

“Beauty is truth, truth beauty.” John Keats defines the truth behind beauty in association with the concept of life. In a general perspective, life is immortal. However, on a more personal level, life is abruptly hindered in the progression of time. Time is inevitable and human beings are confined in the authority of time. Keats depicts a visual narration of time in “Ode on a Grecian Urn.” The Grecian Urn establishes a world free of change. In this world, time cannot hinder the beauty of a single moment. The urn is an escape from the real world and pertains to the beauty of a single moment captured in time. Being the “foster-child of slow time” (line 2), the urn provides the notion that human beings are not bounded by the suppression of time.

“Bold lover, never, never canst thou kiss, though winning near the goal-yet, do not grieve; she cannot fade, though hast not thy bliss, for ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!” (line 17-20). In the second stanza, Keats describes a paradox. The speaker is bounded by love, but he cannot fully grasp his emotions in relation to his lover. Although the speaker is unable to approach his lover, he knows that her beauty will never fade away. She will always be the object of his desire and the love between the two individuals will remain in eternal bliss.

Furthermore, death is prolonged. “Who are these coming to the sacrifice?…Is emptied of this folk, this pious morn?” (line 31-37). The people are in route to the sacrifice of a heifer dressed in silken flanks and garlands. However, the people are merely in an ascent towards the sacrifice. They do not have the ability to experience death personally because the sacrifice is not depicted on the Grecian Urn in its entirety.

John Keats establishes the Grecian Urn as an escape from real life. The urn simultaneously depicts the innocence of love and the liberation from death. However, time in relation with life, is inevitable. The real world is bounded by time. “When old age shall this generation waste, thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe” (line 46-47). We as humans are suppressed by the changes in life. We face adversities on a consistent basis and do not have control of our own lives. As we fade with time, the Grecian Urn will remain present as a “Sylvian historian, who canst thus express a flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme” (line 3-4). The images depicted on the urn will forever remain in eternal bliss. The individual will remain with his lover and the sacrifice of the heifer will forever be at halt. Time defines human life and that is the true beauty.