Patterns of Creativity Summary and Explanation
CBSE Class 11 English (Elective) Essay Chapter 3- Patterns of Creativity Summary, Explanation along with Difficult Word Meanings from Woven Words Book
Patterns of Creativity Summary – Are you looking for the summary, theme and lesson explanation for CBSE 11 English (Elective) Essay Chapter 3 – Patterns of Creativity from English Woven Words Book . Get My Watch Essay summary, theme, explanation along with difficult word meanings
CBSE Class 11 English (Elective) Essay Chapter 3 – Patterns of Creativity
By S. Chandrasekhar
The essay “Patterns of Creativity” by S. Chandrasekhar focuses on the differences and similarities between scientists and poets. The essay shows that both groups, while different in their work, follow common patterns in creativity. It discusses how creative people connect ideas, find inspiration from various sources, and enrich culture, regardless of their field.
- Patterns of Creativity Summary
- Patterns of Creativity Summary in Hindi
- Patterns of Creativity Theme
- Patterns of Creativity Explanation
Related:
Patterns of Creativity Summary
In his essay on the Patterns of Creativity, S. Chandrasekhar begins by posing a central question: why do artists and scientists show different patterns of creativity? He doesn’t directly answer this, but offers various observations related to the attitudes of poets towards science and vice-versa.
Chandrasekhar first notes that poets like Wordsworth and Keats often viewed science negatively. He quotes Keats’s lines lamenting how cold philosophy (science) destroys the beauty and charm of nature, seeing it as “murdering to dissect” and “clipping an Angel’s wings” by reducing wonder to mere facts. This sentiment, he points out, is echoed by Lowes Dickinson, who claimed “When Science arrives, it expels Literature.”
However, Chandrasekhar then introduces the counter-argument from scientists. He cites Peter Medawar, who argued the opposite: “when literature arrives, it expels science.” Medawar believed that instead of cooperating, science and literature actually compete. Chandrasekhar suggests that this finger-pointing is unhelpful and instead directs the reader to consider the poet Shelley.
According to Chandrasekhar, Shelley is a “scientist’s poet” because his attitude towards science was positive, unlike Wordsworth and Keats. He mentions that scientific literary criticism of Shelley exists, and that Shelley’s approach to nature was remarkably modern, describing natural mechanisms with great precision. A.N. Whitehead also testified that Shelley “loved” science, seeing it as a source of “joy, and peace, and illumination.” Chandrasekhar provides examples from Shelley’s poems, “The Cloud” and “Prometheus Unbound,” to illustrate Shelley’s scientific appreciation for nature’s processes and his celebration of humanity’s intellectual power over the elements.
The author then shifts to a different aspect, presenting the confession of Charles Darwin, who sadly admitted that after a certain age, he lost all taste for poetry, pictures, and music. Darwin felt his mind had become a “machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts,” and couldn’t understand why this had caused the “atrophy” of his higher tastes.
Chandrasekhar also considers Michael Faraday, a scientist whose revolutionary ideas of lines of force were initially met with skepticism. Yet, James Clerk Maxwell recognized Faraday’s profound mathematical insight. Despite this, when asked about the use of his electricity work by Gladstone (Chancellor of the Exchequer), Faraday famously responded, “Why, Sir, there is every probability that you will soon be able to tax it,” a response often quoted with approval.
Chandrasekhar then suggests that Shelley’s “A Defence of Poetry” offers a relevant perspective on Darwin’s confession and Faraday’s practical response. Shelley wrote that while science has expanded humanity’s control over the external world, it has, without the “poetical faculty,” circumscribed those of the internal world; and man, having enslaved the elements, remains himself a slave. However, Chandrasekhar clarifies that Shelley also acknowledged the role of “promoters of utility” (technologists), seeing them as following poets and implementing their creations into common life.
Finally, Chandrasekhar emphasizes the profoundness of Shelley’s “A Defence of Poetry,” quoting lines that describe poetry as divine, immortalizing beauty, encompassing all knowledge, and portraying poets as unacknowledged legislators of the world. The essay concludes by questioning why there isn’t a similar “A Defence of Science” written by a scientist of equal stature, implying that this might offer part of the answer to his initial question about differing patterns of creativity.
Summary of the Lesson Patterns of Creativity in Hindi
रचनात्मकता के पैटर्न पर अपने निबंध में, एस. चंद्रशेखर एक केंद्रीय प्रश्न के साथ शुरू करते हैंः कलाकार और वैज्ञानिक रचनात्मकता के विभिन्न पैटर्न क्यों दिखाते हैं? वह इसका सीधा जवाब नहीं देते हैं, लेकिन विज्ञान के प्रति कवियों के दृष्टिकोण से संबंधित विभिन्न टिप्पणियों को प्रस्तुत करते हैं।
चंद्रशेखर ने सबसे पहले नोट किया कि वर्ड्सवर्थ और कीट्स जैसे कवियों ने अक्सर विज्ञान को नकारात्मक रूप से देखा। वह कीट्स की पंक्तियों को उद्धृत करते हुए विलाप करते हैं कि कैसे ठंडा दर्शन (विज्ञान) प्रकृति की सुंदरता और आकर्षण को नष्ट कर देता है, इसे आश्चर्य को केवल तथ्यों तक कम करके “विच्छेदन करने के लिए हत्या” और “एक परी के पंखों को काटने” के रूप में देखता है। इस भावना को, वे बताते हैं, लोव्स डिकिंसन द्वारा प्रतिध्वनित किया गया है, जिन्होंने दावा किया कि “जब विज्ञान आता है, तो यह साहित्य को निष्कासित कर देता है।”
हालाँकि, चंद्रशेखर तब वैज्ञानिकों से जवाबी तर्क पेश करते हैं। उन्होंने पीटर मेदावर का हवाला दिया, जिन्होंने इसके विपरीत तर्क दियाः “जब साहित्य आता है, तो यह विज्ञान को निष्कासित कर देता है।” मेदावर का मानना था कि सहयोग करने के बजाय, विज्ञान और साहित्य वास्तव में प्रतिस्पर्धा करते हैं। चंद्रशेखर सुझाव देते हैं कि यह उंगली-इशारा असहयोगी है और इसके बजाय पाठक को कवि शेली पर विचार करने का निर्देश देता है।
चंद्रशेखर के अनुसार, शेली एक “वैज्ञानिक के कवि” हैं क्योंकि विज्ञान के प्रति उनका दृष्टिकोण वर्ड्सवर्थ और कीट्स के विपरीत सकारात्मक था। उन्होंने उल्लेख किया कि शेली की वैज्ञानिक साहित्यिक आलोचना मौजूद है, और प्रकृति के प्रति शेली का दृष्टिकोण उल्लेखनीय रूप से आधुनिक था, जिसमें प्राकृतिक तंत्र का बहुत सटीकता के साथ वर्णन किया गया था। A.N. व्हाइटहेड ने यह भी गवाही दी कि शेली विज्ञान से “प्यार” करते थे, इसे “आनंद, शांति और रोशनी” के स्रोत के रूप में देखते थे। चंद्रशेखर प्रकृति की प्रक्रियाओं के लिए शेली की वैज्ञानिक प्रशंसा और तत्वों पर मानवता की बौद्धिक शक्ति के उनके उत्सव को चित्रित करने के लिए शेली की कविताओं, “द क्लाउड” और “प्रोमेथियस अनबाउंड” से उदाहरण प्रदान करते हैं।
इसके बाद लेखक चार्ल्स डार्विन की स्वीकारोक्ति को प्रस्तुत करते हुए एक अलग पहलू की ओर मुड़ जाता है, जिन्होंने दुख के साथ स्वीकार किया कि एक निश्चित उम्र के बाद, उन्होंने कविता, चित्रों और संगीत के लिए सभी रुचि खो दी। डार्विन ने महसूस किया कि उनका मन “तथ्यों के बड़े संग्रह से सामान्य नियमों को पीसने की मशीन” बन गया था, और यह समझ नहीं पा रहा था कि इससे उनकी उच्च अभिरुचियों का क्षय क्यों हुआ था।
चंद्रशेखर माइकल फैराडे को एक वैज्ञानिक भी मानते हैं, जिनके बल की रेखाओं के क्रांतिकारी विचारों को शुरू में संदेह का सामना करना पड़ा था। फिर भी, जेम्स क्लर्क मैक्सवेल ने फैराडे की गहन गणितीय अंतर्दृष्टि को पहचाना। इसके बावजूद, ग्लैडस्टोन (राजकोष के कुलाधिपति) द्वारा अपने बिजली के काम के उपयोग के बारे में पूछे जाने पर फैराडे ने प्रसिद्ध रूप से जवाब दिया, “क्यों, महोदय, इस बात की पूरी संभावना है कि आप जल्द ही इस पर कर लगा पाएंगे”, एक प्रतिक्रिया जिसे अक्सर अनुमोदन के साथ उद्धृत किया जाता है।
चंद्रशेखर तब सुझाव देते हैं कि शेली की “ए डिफेंस ऑफ पोएट्री” डार्विन के कबूलनामे और फैराडे की व्यावहारिक प्रतिक्रिया पर एक प्रासंगिक परिप्रेक्ष्य प्रदान करती है। शेली ने लिखा है कि जबकि विज्ञान ने बाहरी दुनिया पर मानवता के नियंत्रण का विस्तार किया है, इसने “काव्यात्मक क्षमता” के बिना, “आंतरिक दुनिया के लोगों को सीमित कर दिया है; और मनुष्य, तत्वों को गुलाम बनाकर, खुद को गुलाम बना हुआ है”। हालांकि, चंद्रशेखर स्पष्ट करते हैं कि शेली ने उपयोगिता के प्रवर्तकों (प्रौद्योगिकीविदों) की भूमिका को भी स्वीकार किया, जो उन्हें कवियों का अनुसरण करने वाले के रूप में देखते हैं और उनकी रचनाओं को सामान्य जीवन में लागू करते हैं।
अंत में, चंद्रशेखर शेली की “ए डिफेंस ऑफ पोएट्री” की गहराई पर जोर देते हैं, जो कविता को दिव्य, अमर सौंदर्य, सभी ज्ञान को शामिल करने और कवियों को दुनिया के अस्वीकृत विधायकों के रूप में चित्रित करने वाली पंक्तियों का हवाला देते हैं। निबंध का समापन यह सवाल करते हुए होता है कि समान कद के वैज्ञानिक द्वारा इसी तरह का “ए डिफेंस ऑफ साइंस” क्यों नहीं लिखा गया है, जिसका अर्थ है कि यह रचनात्मकता के विभिन्न पैटर्न के बारे में उनके प्रारंभिक प्रश्न का उत्तर दे सकता है।
Theme of the Lesson Patterns of Creativity
The Perceived Divide and Tension Between Arts and Sciences
A central theme is the historical and ongoing tension between how artists and scientists view each other. Chandrasekhar highlights this by quoting poets like Wordsworth and Keats, who believed that science, with its analytical approach, “murders to dissect” and destroys the beauty and wonder of nature. This suggests a view that scientific inquiry diminishes spiritual or aesthetic appreciation. He also acknowledges the counter-argument from scientists like Peter Medawar, who feel that literature can likewise “expel” science, implying a competitive rather than complementary relationship between the two fields.
Different Modes of Understanding and Perceiving Reality
The essay delves into how artists and scientists approach understanding the world in fundamentally different ways. Scientists, as exemplified by Darwin’s later confession, can develop a mind focused solely on “grinding general laws out of large collections of facts,” potentially leading to an “atrophy” of aesthetic tastes. This contrasts with poets who capture the emotional and qualitative aspects of existence. Chandrasekhar, however, uses Shelley as an example of a poet who appreciated the “mechanisms of nature with a precision and a wealth of detail,” suggesting that scientific understanding can also inspire profound beauty.
Importance of Imagination and the “Poetical Faculty”
Chandrasekhar emphasizes, through Shelley’s “A Defence of Poetry,” the crucial role of imagination, or the “poetical faculty.” Shelley argued that while science expands humanity’s control over the external world, without this poetic sensibility, the “internal world” (human spirit, emotions, deeper understanding) becomes “circumscribed” or limited. This theme suggests that true human progress and creativity require a balance between objective scientific knowledge and the imaginative, intuitive, and philosophical insights provided by the arts.
The Interplay of Pure Knowledge, Beauty, and Utility
The essay also explores the tension between pursuing knowledge for its own sake or for its beauty, versus its practical utility. Faraday’s famous retort, “what use is it?” answered with “you will soon be able to tax it,” highlights how scientific endeavor is often judged by its immediate practical applications and economic benefits. This stands in contrast to the inherent value of poetry, which Shelley describes as immortalizing beauty and being the “centre and circumference of knowledge,” suggesting a non-utilitarian, holistic understanding of existence. This theme questions whether society values the useful more than the profound.
The Search for a Unified Understanding of Creativity
Underlying the entire discussion is Chandrasekhar’s implicit search for a more unified understanding of creativity across disciplines. By showcasing Shelley as a poet who embraced science, and by lamenting the “atrophy” in Darwin, he points towards a potential synthesis. The essay concludes with the provocative question of why there isn’t a “Defence of Science” written by a scientist of equal stature to Shelley, hinting that such an articulation might reveal a deeper, more profound, and perhaps even poetic aspect of scientific endeavor that could bridge the perceived gap between the “two cultures.”
Patterns of Creativity Explanation
Passage: …But I must return to the question: why is there a difference in the patterns of creativity among the practitioners in the arts and the practitioners in the sciences? I shall not attempt to answer this question directly; but I shall make an assortment of remarks which may bear on the answer.
First, I should like to consider how scientists and poets view one another. When one thinks of the attitude of poets to science, one almost always thinks of Wordsworth and Keats and their off-quoted lines
Word meanings
Practitioners: People who regularly do a particular job or activity, especially one that requires skill or training (here, referring to artists and scientists).
Assortment: A collection or mixture of various kinds of things.
Remarks: Comments or statements.
Bear on: To be relevant to something.
View one another: How they see or perceive each other.
Off-quoted lines: Lines from their writings that are frequently mentioned or referred to.
Explanation of the above passage—Chandrasekhar then returned to his main question: why are the ways artists (in the arts) and scientists (in the sciences) created differently. He stated that he would not try to answer this question directly. Instead, he would offer various comments that might help to explain the answer. First, he wanted to look at how scientists and poets see each other. When thinking about how poets feel about science, one usually thinks of poets like Wordsworth and Keats and their often-quoted lines.
Passage
A fingering slave,
One that would peep and botanises
Upon his mother’s grave?
A reasoning self-suffering thing.
An intellectual AlI-in-AIl!
Sweet is the lore which Nature brings:
Our meddling intellect
Misshapes the beauteous forms of things:
We murder to dissect.
(Wordsworth)
Word meanings
Fingering slave: someone who is overly focused on small, minute details, almost enslaved by the need to meticulously touch and examine everything.
Peep: To look quickly and secretly, often at something small or hidden.
Botanises: To study plants, especially in a scientific way by collecting, identifying, and classifying them. Here, it implies a cold, analytical approach to something that should be felt or appreciated emotionally.
Reasoning self-suffering thing: Someone who relies purely on logic and analysis, which paradoxically leads to their own emotional or spiritual distress because they miss the broader beauty or meaning.
Intellectual All-in-All: Someone who believes they are entirely knowledgeable and supreme in their intellect, knowing everything there is to know.
Lore: A body of traditions and knowledge on a subject or held by a particular group, typically passed from person to person by word of mouth; here, wisdom or knowledge.
Meddling intellect: The human mind that interferes or intrudes in a way that is unwelcome or harmful, especially by over-analyzing.
Misshapes: Distorts or spoils the shape
Murder to dissect: A very strong metaphor meaning that by breaking things down to analyze them scientifically, we destroy their living essence, beauty, or wonder. The act of “dissecting” (cutting apart for study) is equated with “murdering” (destroying life).
Explanation of the above passage—These lines by Wordsworth, express a critical view of how a purely scientific or overly intellectual approach can harm the appreciation of nature. The poet describes a person who is like a “slave” to small details, someone who would examine and categorize even a sacred place like their mother’s grave scientifically (“peep and botanises”), is seen as someone who relies only on reason, causing themselves suffering (“self-suffering thing”), and believes they know everything (“intellectual All-in-All”). The poet argues that the wisdom and beauty that nature naturally provides are wonderful. However, he believes that our thinking, analytical minds (“meddling intellect”) ruin the beautiful shapes and forms of things. He uses a strong image, saying, “We murder to dissect,” meaning that by analyzing things too closely, we destroy their natural charm and life.
Passage:
Do not all charms fly
At the mere touch of cold philosophy?
There was an awful rainbow once in heaven:
We know her woof, her texture; she is given
In the dull catalogue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angel’s wings.
(Keats)
These lines, perhaps, find an echo in a statement of Lowes Dickinson, “When Science arrives, it expels Literature”.
Word meanings
Charms: qualities that delight or attract; magic or fascination.
Cold philosophy: scientific or purely rational, analytical thought that lacks emotion or appreciation for beauty. “Philosophy” here stands for scientific inquiry and explanation.
Awful: deeply impressive and wondrous.
Woof: The threads woven crosswise in a fabric. Here, it refers to the basic structure or composition of the rainbow, its physical make-up.
Texture: The feel or appearance of a surface; here, also referring to the physical composition and arrangement.
Dull catalogue of common things: A boring list of ordinary, unexciting items.
Clip an Angel’s wings: An idiom meaning to restrict, limit, or take away the power, beauty, or ability to soar (spiritually or imaginatively). It suggests that scientific explanation removes the magic or divine aspect of something.
Echo: A similarity or parallel; something that reminds one of something else.
Expels: drives away or pushes out.
Explanation of the above passage—The poet Keats questioned if all the magic and beauty disappear when one looks at things purely through “cold philosophy,” which here means scientific or logical analysis. He remembered a time when a rainbow in the sky seemed wonderful. But now, he says, people understand how a rainbow is formed, knowing its basic structure and parts, which makes it just another ordinary item in a boring list of common things. Keats believed that this kind of scientific understanding would limit or destroy the inspiring and magical qualities of things, as if it would “clip an Angel’s wings.” Chandrasekhar suggests that this idea from Keats is similar to a statement by Lowes Dickinson, who said that when science appears, it forces literature out.
Passage: It is to be expected that one should find scientists countering these views. Thus, Peter Medawar counters Lowes Dickinson by
The case I shall find evidence for is that when literature arrives, it expels science… The way things are at present, it is simply no good pretending that science and literature represent complementary and mutually sustaining endeavours to reach a common goal. On the contrary, where they might be expected to cooperate they compete.
It would not seem to me that one can go very far in these matters by pointing accusing fingers at one another. So, let me only say that the attitudes of Wordsworth and Keats are by no means typical. A scientist should rather consider the attitude of Shelley. Shelley is a scientist’s poet. 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. As King-Hele has pointed out, “Shelley’s attitude to science emphasises the surprising modern climate of thoughts in which he chose to live and Shelley describes the mechanisms of nature with a precision and a wealth of detail unparalleled in English poetry”. And here is A.N. Whitehead’s testimony
Shelley’s attitude to Science was at the opposite pole to that of Wordsworth. He loved it, and is never tired of expressing in poetry the thoughts which it suggests. It symbolises to him joy, and peace, and illumination…
Word meanings
Countering: Arguing against; opposing.
Complementary: Combining in such a way as to enhance or improve each other
Mutually sustaining: Supporting each other.
Pointing accusing fingers: Blaming someone.
Typical: Showing the usual characteristics of a particular type of person or thing.
Discriminating literary criticism: Very perceptive and insightful judgment or analysis of literature.
Distinguished: respected and successful.
Emphasises: Gives special importance or attention to something.
Surprising modern climate of thoughts: Ideas that were ahead of their time or unusually progressive.
Mechanisms of nature: The ways in which natural things and processes work.
Precision: The quality of being exact and accurate.
Wealth of detail: A large amount of specific information.
Unparalleled: Having no equal or match; exceptional.
Testimony: A formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in court; evidence or proof.
Opposite pole: Completely opposite.
Symbolises: Represents or stands for something else.
Illumination: Enlightenment; a greater understanding of something.
Explanation of the above passage—It is natural to expect that scientists would argue against the negative opinions of poets like Wordsworth and Keats about science. For example, Peter Medawar argues against Lowes Dickinson by saying that when literature becomes important, it actually pushes science out. Medawar believes that currently, it’s not useful to pretend that science and literature work together and support each other to achieve the same goal. Instead, he thinks that where they should cooperate, they actually compete. Chandrasekhar believes that it’s not helpful to blame each other. So, he simply states that the negative views of Wordsworth and Keats are not common for all poets. He suggests that scientists should instead look at the attitude of Shelley, calling Shelley “a scientist’s poet.” It’s no coincidence, he notes, that the best and most insightful literary analysis of Shelley’s work comes from a well-known scientist, Desmond King-Hele. King-Hele has pointed out that Shelley’s view of science highlights how modern his thinking was for his time. Shelley also described how nature works with a level of detail and accuracy not seen before in English poetry. A.N. Whitehead also supports this, saying that Shelley’s feelings about science were completely opposite to Wordsworth’s. Shelley loved science and frequently wrote poems about the ideas it gave him. For Shelley, science represented happiness, calmness, and enlightenment.
Passage: I should like to read two examples from Shelley’s poetry which support what has been said about him. The first example is from his Cloud which ‘fuses together a creative myth, a scientific monograph, and a gay picaresque tale of cloud adventure’
I am the daughter of Earth and Water,
And the nursling of the Sky:
I pass through the pores of the ocean and the shores:
I change, but I cannot die.
For after the rain when never a stain
The pavilion of Heaven is bare,
And the winds and sunbeams with their convex gleams
Build up the blue dome of air,
I silently laugh at my own cenotaph,
And out of the caverns of rain,
Like a child from the womb, like a ghost from the tomb,
I arise and unbuild it again.
The second example is from Prometheus Unbound, which has been described by Herbert Read as “the greatest expression ever given to humanity’s desire for intellectual light and spiritual liberty”
The lightning is his slave, heaven’s utmost deep
Gives up her stars, and like a flock of sheep
They pass before his eye, are numbered, and roll on!
The tempest is his steed, he strides the air;
And the abyss shouts from her depth laid bare,
Heaven, hast thou secrets? Man unveils me: I have none.
Word meanings
Fuses together: Combines or blends together.
Creative myth: A story that explains something in a imaginative way.
Scientific monograph: A detailed and scholarly written study on a single, specialized subject in science.
Gay picaresque tale: A cheerful and adventurous story, often about a wandering hero who gets into various situations.
Pores: Tiny holes or openings.
Nursling: Someone or something that is nursed or cared for.
Pavilion of Heaven: A poetic way of referring to the dome or expanse of the sky.
Convex gleams: Curved, outward-bulging reflections or beams of light.
Cenotaph: A monument built to honor a dead person whose body is buried elsewhere, or whose body is lost. Here, it’s used poetically by the cloud for itself when it disappears before reforming.
Unbuild it again: To take apart or dissolve something that was previously built or formed. In the context of the cloud, it means to reform itself after dissipating.
Prometheus Unbound: The title of Shelley’s famous play. Prometheus is a figure in Greek mythology known for bringing fire (knowledge/enlightenment) to humanity and being punished for it. “Unbound” means set free.
Intellectual light: knowledge or enlightenment.
Spiritual liberty: Freedom of spirit or soul; inner freedom.
Utmost deep: The deepest or furthest extent of something, here referring to heaven’s depths.
Flock of sheep: A group of sheep. Used here as a comparison for how stars move past Prometheus.
Tempest: A violent windy storm.
Steed: A horse, especially a warhorse or a horse for riding.
Strides the air: Walks or moves with long steps through the air.
Abyss shouts from her depth laid bare: The deep, seemingly bottomless space (like the universe) revealing its secrets, as if speaking from its exposed inner parts.
Explanation of the above passage – The author wanted to share two examples from Shelley’s poems that support what had been said about Shelley’s positive view of science. The first example is from Shelley’s poem “The Cloud,” which the author says combines a creative story (myth), a detailed scientific paper (monograph), and a lighthearted, adventurous story about a cloud (picaresque tale). In this poem, the cloud speaks, saying it is born from the Earth and Water, and cared for by the Sky. It moves through the small openings in the ocean and along the coastlines. The cloud explains that it changes its form, but it never truly disappears or dies. After it rains, and the sky (heaven’s pavilion) is clear without any clouds, and the winds and sunbeams (with their curved, shining light) build up the clear blue sky, the cloud quietly laughs at its own empty tomb (cenotaph). Then, from where the rain forms, like a baby coming from its mother or a ghost rising from a grave, the cloud rises again and re-forms itself. The second example is from Shelley’s poem “Prometheus Unbound,” which Herbert Read has called the best expression of humanity’s wish for intellectual understanding and freedom of spirit. In this example, it describes how lightning obeys a powerful figure (Prometheus). The deepest parts of heaven reveal their stars, and these stars move past Prometheus’s eyes like a group of sheep, being counted and continuing their journey. The storm is like Prometheus’s horse, and he walks through the air. And the deep, empty space (abyss) calls out from its exposed depths, asking Heaven if it has any secrets, to which it declares that man reveals its secrets, and it has none left hidden.
Passage: Let me turn to a slightly different aspect of the matter. What are we to make of the following confession of Charles Darwin?
Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many kinds, such as the works of Milton, Gray, Byron, Wordsworth, Coleridge and Shelley gave me great pleasure; and even as a school boy I took intense delight in Shakespeare, especially historical plays… I have also said that formerly pictures gave me considerable, and music very great, delight. But now, for many years, I cannot endure to read a line of poetry; I have tried lately to read Shakespeare and found it so intolerably dull that it nauseated me. I have almost lost my taste for pictures or music… My mind seems to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part of the brain alone on which the higher tastes depend, I cannot conceive.
Word meanings
Aspect: A particular part or feature of something.
Confession: A formal statement admitting something, often something difficult or regrettable.
Nauseated: Made to feel sick to the stomach
Atrophy: The wasting away or decline of a part of the brain or the loss of a skill or function, due to lack of use or disuse.
Higher tastes: Refers to appreciation for things like art, music, and poetry, which are often considered more intellectual or refined pleasures.
Conceive: To form a plan or idea in the mind; to imagine or understand
Explanation of the above passage – The author then wants to look at a slightly different part of the topic. He asks what we should think about something Charles Darwin admitted. Charles Darwin confessed that until he was about thirty years old, or even older, he really enjoyed many types of poetry, including works by famous poets like Milton, Gray, Byron, Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Shelley. Even as a schoolboy, he took great pleasure in Shakespeare, especially the historical plays. Darwin also said that in the past, he found pictures quite enjoyable, and music brought him a lot of joy. However, Darwin explained that for many years now, he cannot stand to read any poetry. He recently tried to read Shakespeare but found it so boring and unpleasant that it made him feel sick. He has almost completely lost his enjoyment of pictures and music. Darwin felt that his mind had turned into a machine that only processed large amounts of facts to find general rules. But he could not understand why this change caused the weakening or loss of the part of his brain responsible for enjoying art and music.
Passage: Or consider this: Faraday discovered the laws of electromagnetic induction and his discoveries led him to formulate concepts such as ‘lines of force’ and ‘fields of force’ which were foreign to the then prevailing modes of thought. They were, in fact, looked askance by many of his contemporaries. But of Faraday’s ideas, Maxwell wrote with prophetic discernment
The way in which Faraday made use of his idea of the lines of force in coordinating the phenomenon of electromagnetic induction shows him to have been, in reality, a mathematician of a very high order—one from whom the mathematicians of the future may derive valuable and fertile methods. We are probably ignorant even of the name of the science which will be developed out of the materials we are now collecting, when the great philosopher next after Faraday makes his appearance.
Word meanings
Electromagnetic induction: The process by which a changing magnetic field produces an electric current.
Formulate concepts: To create or develop new ideas or principles.
Foreign to the then prevailing modes of thought: Very different from the common or accepted ways of thinking at that time.
Looked askance by many of his contemporaries: Many people living at the same time as him viewed his ideas with suspicion, disapproval, or distrust.
Prophetic discernment: The ability to understand or judge something with great insight into the future; having a wise and clear foresight.
Coordinating the phenomenon: To organize or bring together different events or observations in a logical way.
Mathematician of a very high order: A mathematician of exceptional skill and ability.
Derive valuable and fertile methods: To get or obtain useful and productive ways of doing things.
Materials we are now collecting: The scientific information and observations being gathered at that time.
Explanation of the above passage – The author also asks to think about this: Michael Faraday found out the rules of how electricity and magnetism affect each other (electromagnetic induction). His discoveries led him to create ideas like ‘lines of force’ and ‘fields of force.’ These ideas were new and strange to the way people thought at that time. In fact, many people living at the same time as him looked at these ideas with suspicion. However, about Faraday’s new ideas, James Clerk Maxwell wrote with great foresight and understanding: The way Faraday used his idea of ‘lines of force’ to organize and explain the effects of electromagnetic induction shows that he was actually a very skilled mathematician. He was someone from whom future mathematicians could get useful and productive ways of thinking. Maxwell thought that people in his time probably didn’t even know the name of the new science that would grow from the information they were gathering then, which would appear when the next great thinker, after Faraday, arrived.
Passage: And yet when Gladstone, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer, interrupted Faraday in his description of his work on electricity by the impatient inquiry, “But after all, what use is it?” Faraday’s response was, “Why, Sir, there is every probability that you will soon be able to tax it”. And Faraday’s response has always been quoted most approvingly.
It seems to me that to Darwin’s confession and to Faraday’s response, what Shelley has said about the cultivation of the sciences in his Defence of Poetry is apposite
The cultivation of those sciences which have enlarged the limits of the empire of man over the external world, has, for want of the poetical faculty, proportionally circumscribed those of the internal world; and man, having enslaved the elements, remains himself a slave.
Lest you think that Shelley is not sensitive to the role of technology in modern society, let me quote what he has said in that connection
Undoubtedly the promoters of utility, in this limited sense, have their appointed office in society. They follow the footstep of poets, and copy the sketches of their creations into the book of common life. They make space and give time.
Word meanings
Chancellor of the Exchequer: The finance minister in the British government.
Impatient inquiry: A question asked without waiting calmly, showing eagerness for an answer.
Apposite: Very appropriate or suitable to the situation.
Cultivation: The development or improvement of something.
Enlarged the limits of the empire of man over the external world: Increased humanity’s control and understanding of the outside physical world (nature, environment).
Poetical faculty: The ability to create poetry or to think in a creative, imaginative, and intuitive way; the power of imagination and aesthetic understanding.
Proportionally: In a corresponding way; in relation to how much something else has changed.
Circumscribed: Restricted or limited.
Internal world: A person’s thoughts, feelings, imagination, and spiritual life.
Enslaved the elements: Gained control over natural forces (like electricity, gravity, etc.).
Lest: For fear of that; to avoid the risk of.|
Sensitive to: Aware of and understanding of something.
Promoters of utility: People who advocate for or develop things that are practical and useful (often referring to engineers, inventors, technologists).
Explanation of the above passage – Even when Gladstone, who was the finance minister at the time, interrupted Faraday as he was explaining his work on electricity with an impatient question, asking what its use was, Faraday replied that there was a very good chance it would soon be something they could tax which indicates its usefulness. Faraday’s reply has been repeated and quoted with great approval. Chandrasekhar believes that what Shelley wrote in his “Defence of Poetry” is very relevant to Charles Darwin’s personal confession and Faraday’s answer. Shelley said that the development of sciences, which has expanded humanity’s control over the outside world, has, because people lack the poetic ability, also limited their control over their inner thoughts and feelings. So, even though humans have gained control over nature’s forces, they themselves remain trapped. To make sure readers do not think that Shelley was not aware of how important technology is in modern society, the author quotes what Shelley said about it. Shelley stated that people who promote usefulness (technology) in a limited way definitely have an important role in society. They follow the path set by poets and turn the poets’ creative ideas into practical things for everyday life. They create opportunities and save time.
Passage: Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry, from which I have just quoted, is one of the most moving documents in all of English literature. W.B. Yeats called it “the profoundest essay on the foundation of poetry in the English language”. The essay should be read in its entirety; but allow me to read a selection
Poetry is the record of the best and happiest moments of the happiest and the best minds. Poetry, thus, makes immortal all that is best and most beautiful in the world; it arrests the vanishing apparitions which haunt the interlunations of life,..
Poetry is indeed something divine. It is at once the centre and circumference of knowledge; it is that which comprehends all science, and that to which all science must be referred. It is, at the same time, the root and blossom of all other systems of thought.
Word meanings
Moving documents: Writings that stir strong emotions or feelings.
Profoundest: The deepest or most insightful.
Foundation: The underlying basis or principle.
Apparitions: Ghostly figures or sudden, unusual appearances.
Interlunations: The periods of darkness or gaps between phases of life, like the new moon.
Divine: Relating to a god; sacred or heavenly.
Explanation of the above passage – Chandrasekhar mentions that Shelley’s “A Defence of Poetry,” from which he had just taken quotes, is considered one of the most touching and impactful writings in all of English literature. He notes that W.B. Yeats described it as “the deepest essay on what poetry is based on in the English language.” The author suggests that the entire essay should be read, but asks permission to share a chosen part. Poetry is a record of the very best and happiest times experienced by the happiest and most talented thinkers. Because of this, poetry makes everything that is excellent and beautiful in the world last forever; it stops the disappearing visions that appear in the gaps or changing phases of life. Poetry is truly something sacred or god-like. It is simultaneously the most important core and the outer boundary of all knowledge. It is the thing that understands all areas of science, and it is also the point to which all scientific knowledge must eventually be connected. At the same time, poetry is seen as both the origin and the fullest development of all other ways of thinking.
Passage: Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors or the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world.
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. Perhaps in raising the question I have, in part, suggested an answer to the one I have repeatedly asked during the lecture.
Word meanings
Hierophants: Priests in ancient Greece who interpreted sacred mysteries and revealed divine things. Someone who reveals or interprets a hidden or sacred knowledge.
Unapprehended: Not yet understood, grasped, or perceived.
Futurity: The future time or state.
Trumpets which sing to battle: A poetic image for something that inspires action or courage, like a trumpet call before a battle.
Unacknowledged: Not recognized or formally admitted.
Legislators: Lawmakers; people who make laws.
Insistently occurs: Keeps coming to mind strongly.
Endowment: A natural ability, talent, or quality given to someone. A scientist having a similar level of intellectual and expressive talent as Shelley.
Explanation of the above passage— Chandrasekhar writes that poets are like priests who reveal an inspiration that is not yet fully understood. They are like reflections or huge shadows that the future casts onto the present time. They speak words that express things they themselves do not fully grasp. They are like trumpets that encourage people to fight, yet they don’t feel the emotions they cause in others. They are an influence that doesn’t move itself, but makes other things move. Poets are the unrecognized lawmakers of the world. He observes that after reading Shelley’s “A Defence of Poetry,” the question often arises why there is no similar “A Defence of Science” written by a scientist with the same level of talent. He suggests that perhaps by asking this question, he has partly hinted at an answer to the question he had repeatedly asked during the lecture.
Conclusion
Patterns of Creativity by S. Chandrasekhar focuses on the differences and similarities between scientists and poets. The essay shows that both groups, while different in their work, follow common patterns in creativity. It discusses how creative people connect ideas, find inspiration from various sources, and enrich culture, regardless of their field. Students can take help from this post to understand the lesson and also learn the difficult word meanings to get a better grasp of Patterns of Creativity. This lesson includes a summary of Patterns of Creativity, which will help students in class 11 to get a quick recap of the lesson.