Welcome to the class notes for English Class XI (Elective), focusing on Woven Words: Essay 03. In this resource, you'll explore thought-provoking questions and answers that analyze the interplay between poetry and science, referencing writers such as Shelley, Wordsworth, and Keats, as well as scientific thinkers like Darwin. Use the Table of Contents below for quick navigation and enhanced accessibility.
UNDERSTANDING THE TEXT (Q&A)
-
How does Shelley’s attitude to science differ from that of Wordsworth
and Keats?
Wordsworth in his poem 'A Poet's Epitaph' looks at science with a critical mind. Even in the poem 'Tables Turned' he praises nature and appreciates the beauty it gives to humanity:
"Up! up! my Friend, and quit your books;"
"Enough of Science and of Art;
Close up those barren leaves;
Come forth, and bring with you a heart
That watches and receives."
Wordsworth requests us to be more inclined towards Nature because there is more wisdom in it. Keats, in his poem 'Lamia', talks of two facets of human nature: one is sensual and other emotional. Keats calls philosophy destructive and pleasure unreal but inseparable. Shelley, however, presents a different view—he loves science and finds in it joy, peace, and illumination, as described by A. N. Whitehead. Shelley expressed in poetry the positive thoughts inspired by science, marking a contrast to Wordsworth and Keats. -
‘It is not an accident that the most discriminating literary criticism
of Shelley’s thought and work is by a distinguished scientist, Desmond
King-Hele.’ How does this statement bring out the meeting point of
poetry and science?
Desmond King-Hele, a British physicist, in his book Shelley: His Thought and Work, highlighted Shelley's modern and scientific approach. Shelley's poetry often demonstrates a fusion of creative imagination and scientific precision. King-Hele, as a scientist reviewing a poet's outlook on science, illustrates how poetry and science can intersect. S. Chandrasekhar referenced two examples: in "The Cloud", Shelley merges myth, science, and storytelling, and in "Prometheus Unbound", he voices humanity's wish for intellectual and spiritual freedom.
-
What do you infer from Darwin’s comment on his indifference to
literature as he advanced in years?
Darwin, known for On the Origin of Species, enjoyed literature—including Byron, Coleridge, Shelley, and Shakespeare's historical plays—until about age 30. As he aged, this interest waned. He admitted that his increased focus on science led to a decline in his aesthetic enjoyment; his mind turned into a "grinding machine to process laws out of facts". This atrophy of higher tastes is attributed to the dominance of scientific thinking over literary appreciation.
-
How do the patterns of creativity displayed by scientists differ from
those displayed by poets?
Poets celebrate nature and the present, while scientists analyze and harness nature to drive progress. Wordsworth and Keats often criticize humans for exploiting nature, whereas scientists invent and uncover natural mechanisms. There isn’t true rivalry—Shelley acknowledged the value of productive utility, and Darwin enjoyed literature in his youth. While poets immortalize the present, scientists invent for tomorrow, marking a fundamental difference in creative patterns.
-
What is the central argument of the speaker?
In "Patterns of Creativity," S. Chandrasekhar explores why creativity differs in the arts and sciences. Instead of direct answers, he compiles observations illustrating how poets and scientists perceive each other and their crafts. Poets like Wordsworth and Keats revere nature and resist technological intrusion, while Shelley wrote poetry inspired by science. Darwin once found joy in literature but eventually focused solely on scientific pursuits. Chandrasekhar wonders why there is no "A Defence of Science" akin to Shelley's essay on poetry, hinting that perhaps scientists express their defense through their work rather than written advocacy.
TALKING ABOUT THE TEXT (Q&A)
-
‘Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world’.
Shelley, in A Defence of Poetry, declared this, emphasizing the transformative and inspiring power of poetry. Poetry can immortalize beauty, ignite change, and inspire humanity, reflecting past, present, and future. Poets and great writers act as subtle revolutionaries—participating actively in society not merely as observers, but as critics and visionaries driving moral and cultural progress.
-
Poetry and science are incompatible.
There are always two perspectives: poets like Wordsworth and Keats see science as a threat to nature, while Shelley is a scientific poet blending joy of science into verse. Even among scientists, opinions differ—Darwin appreciated literature in youth, Faraday was absorbed entirely by experimentation. Compatibility depends on the individual, as some bridge the worlds of poetry and science, while others remain committed to their field.
-
‘On reading Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry, the question insistently
occurs why there is no similar A Defence of Science written by a
scientist of equal endowment.’
Passion for a subject shapes its expression: poets praise through words; scientists may praise through discovery. Shelley wrote eloquently for poetry, while Faraday defended his findings via field concepts and practical arguments (as with Gladstone and electricity). Scientists do defend their subject, but their medium is often practical work rather than literary expression.
APPRECIATION (Q&A)
-
How does the ‘assortment of remarks’ compiled by the author give us an
understanding of the ways of science and poetry?
The author, S. Chandrasekhar, presents an "assortment of remarks" rather than direct conclusions, creating a nuanced understanding of how creativity differs in science and poetry. Through varied observations and examples—such as Wordsworth’s and Keats’s reverence for nature versus Shelley’s poetic embrace of science—the essay highlights the contrasting yet sometimes overlapping approaches of poets and scientists. Poets are shown to celebrate emotion, intuition, and beauty, often cautioning against the mechanical or reductive tendencies of science, while scientists are depicted as seeking patterns, laws, and empirical truths, sometimes at the cost of aesthetic appreciation. This collection of remarks suggests that, although the creativity of each field is distinct, both contribute to human understanding and are shaped by their practitioners' perspectives and values. -
Considering that this is an excerpt from a lecture, how does the
commentary provided by the speaker string the arguments together?
Chandrasekhar’s commentary is conversational and reflective, guiding the reader through a thoughtful exploration rather than a rigid argument. He weaves literary references, real-life scientific anecdotes, and philosophical questions together, allowing each to build upon the last. By juxtaposing the experiences of poets and scientists and transitioning smoothly between perspectives, the speaker creates a coherent narrative that invites reflection and connection among ideas. This lecture-style approach not only informs but encourages learners to recognize the mutual influences and tensions between scientific and artistic creativity. -
The Cloud ‘fuses together a creative myth, a scientific monograph, and
a gay picaresque tale of cloud adventure’— explain.
Shelley’s poem "The Cloud" exemplifies a remarkable fusion of creative myth, scientific observation, and playful storytelling. As a creative myth, the cloud is personified and given agency, described as “the daughter of Earth and Water,” which evokes ancient mythological traditions. The poem also serves as a scientific monograph by detailing natural processes like condensation, evaporation, and the water cycle with accuracy, referencing scientific knowledge of the time. Finally, it is a picaresque tale through its lively narrative, chronicling the cloud’s journeys across the sky and various adventures. Thus, Shelley blends imagination, science, and storytelling to portray nature dynamically and vividly, demonstrating that poetry can both enchant and enlighten.
Key Points for Quick Exam Revision
Patterns of Creativity by S. Chandrasekhar
1. Differences in Creativity: Arts vs. Sciences
- The essay explores why patterns of creativity differ between artists (especially poets) and scientists.
- Chandrasekhar does not provide a direct answer but presents “an assortment of remarks” for reflection.
2. Poets Versus Scientists
- Wordsworth and Keats are often critical of science, viewing it as cold and reductive (e.g., “We murder to dissect”).
- Both poets suggest science destroys the beauty and mystery of nature.
3. Counterview from Scientists
- Some scientists, like Peter Medawar, argue that literature can expel science, not just the other way around.
- Science and literature are sometimes seen as competing rather than complementary endeavors.
4. Shelley: The Scientist’s Poet
- Shelley’s poetry is noted for its positive and modern attitude toward science.
- Desmond King-Hele admires Shelley’s blend of myth, detail, and scientific observation in poetry.
- Shelley contrasts with Wordsworth and Keats, who are more skeptical about science.
5. Example from Poetry
- In "The Cloud," Shelley poetically fuses myth (“daughter of Earth and Water”), scientific observation (cloud formation), and an adventurous narrative.
- In "Prometheus Unbound," he expresses humanity’s yearning for knowledge and liberation.
6. Charles Darwin’s Confession
- Darwin loved poetry, music, and literature in youth but lost his taste as he aged, possibly due to his mind’s focus on scientific analysis (“a machine for grinding general laws”).
- This change hints at the effects of intense scientific thinking on aesthetic appreciation.
7. Faraday’s Example
- Faraday’s scientific insights on electric fields were initially misunderstood or underestimated by contemporaries.
- His exchange with Gladstone (“You will soon be able to tax it”) is a classic example of practical scientific defense.
8. Insights from Shelley’s "A Defence of Poetry"
- Poetry makes everything beautiful and immortal.
- Poets are called “the unacknowledged legislators of the world” for their subtle yet profound societal influence.
- Poetry is described as both the center and root of knowledge, embracing science too.
9. Central Argument of the Essay
- Chandrasekhar wonders why there isn’t an equally passionate "A Defence of Science" as Shelley’s "Defence of Poetry".
- He suggests the difference in creative patterns may be inherent to each field and person.
10. Key Terms to Know
- cold philosophy, mutually sustaining endeavours, picaresque tale, cenotaph, atrophy, prophetic discernment, hierophants of unapprehended inspiration, interlunations of life
11. Additional Notes
- Chandrasekhar stresses not accusing either field but recognizing unique contributions and perspectives.
- He references Maxwell’s respect for Faraday and discusses the complementary roles of teaching and research in science.
- The essay closes with snippets from an interview with Chandrasekhar, emphasizing his personal and professional journey, views on science in India and the US, and his integrated approach to teaching and research.
