One app for all your study abroad needs
This section provides NCERT Solutions for Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3: Patterns of Creativity, designed to deepen students’ understanding of the essay’s exploration of creativity in arts and sciences, mutual perceptions between poets and scientists, and the interplay of their contributions. The solutions analyse the essay’s themes, tone, and literary devices, helping in effective exam preparation. You can also download the free PDF for quick revision.
Contents
Explore Notes of Class 11 English Woven Words
NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3: Patterns of Creativity
Here are the NCERT Solutions for Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3: Patterns of Creativity, crafted to enhance comprehension of the essay’s themes, arguments, and narrative style for effective revision.
UNDERSTANDING THE TEXT
- How does Shelley’s attitude to science differ from that of Wordsworth and Keats?
Shelley’s attitude to science is markedly positive and integrative, unlike that of Wordsworth and Keats, who view science as reductive and detrimental to beauty. Wordsworth criticises scientists as “fingering slaves” who “peep and botanise” on nature, implying they desecrate its sanctity, while Keats laments that “cold philosophy” strips the rainbow of its charm, reducing it to a “dull catalogue of common things.” In contrast, Shelley, as described by Chandrasekhar, embraces science, depicting nature’s mechanisms with precision and enthusiasm in poems like The Cloud and Prometheus Unbound. A.N. Whitehead notes that Shelley “loved” science, finding in it “joy, peace, and illumination,” thus integrating scientific insight with poetic beauty, unlike the dismissive attitudes of 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?
This statement highlights the convergence of poetry and science through Shelley’s work, which bridges both disciplines. Desmond King-Hele, a scientist, provides insightful literary criticism of Shelley’s poetry, recognising its scientific accuracy and imaginative depth. Chandrasekhar notes that Shelley describes “the mechanisms of nature with a precision and a wealth of detail unparalleled in English poetry,” as seen in The Cloud, which blends scientific observation with creative myth. This suggests a meeting point where poetry captures scientific phenomena poetically, and science appreciates poetic insight, exemplified by King-Hele’s ability to analyse Shelley’s work through a scientific lens, revealing a shared pursuit of truth and beauty.
- What do you infer from Darwin’s comment on his indifference to literature as he advanced in years?
Darwin’s comment that he lost his taste for poetry, art, and music as his mind became “a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts” suggests that intense scientific specialisation can diminish appreciation for the arts. He confesses that works by Milton, Shelley, and Shakespeare, once sources of “great pleasure,” became “intolerably dull” in later years, indicating a shift in cognitive focus. This infers that the analytical rigour of scientific creativity, which prioritises empirical generalisation, may suppress the emotional and imaginative engagement required for literature, highlighting a potential cost of scientific dedication and a divergence in creative patterns between science and poetry.
- How do the patterns of creativity displayed by scientists differ from those displayed by poets?
The essay suggests that scientists’ creativity, as seen in Faraday’s formulation of “lines of force” and “fields of force,” involves empirical observation, abstraction, and practical application, often leading to tangible outcomes like taxable electricity, as Faraday humorously noted. This contrasts with poets’ creativity, which, as Shelley describes in A Defence of Poetry, captures “the best and happiest moments” and makes “immortal all that is best and most beautiful,” focusing on emotional and imaginative expression. While scientists like Darwin systematise facts into laws, poets like Shelley weave myths and emotions, as in The Cloud, blending scientific detail with artistic vision, thus differing in their methods but converging in expanding human understanding.
- What is the central argument of the speaker?
The central argument of Chandrasekhar is that creativity in science and poetry differs in approach but shares a potential for synergy, as seen in Shelley’s work, yet mutual misunderstandings persist. He explores how poets like Wordsworth and Keats view science as reductive, while scientists like Medawar see literature as competitive. However, Shelley’s poetry, blending scientific precision with artistic beauty, and Faraday’s innovative concepts suggest that both fields advance human knowledge. Chandrasekhar questions why no scientist has written a defence of science akin to Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry, implying that recognising their complementary roles could bridge the divide between the two.
Also Read: NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Hornbill Poem 1 A Photograph (Free PDF)
TALKING ABOUT THE TEXT
Discuss in small groups
- ‘Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world’.
This statement from Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry, quoted by Chandrasekhar, can spark debate. In favour, students may argue that poets shape societal values and inspire change through their imaginative and emotional expressions, as Shelley’s Prometheus Unbound evokes a desire for “intellectual light and spiritual liberty.” His poetry, blending science and myth, influences thought subtly, acting as an “unacknowledged” force in shaping worldviews. Conversely, poets lack formal authority, and their influence may be less direct than scientists’ tangible contributions, like Faraday’s discoveries, which led to practical applications like electricity. Students can discuss whether poetry’s emotional impact outweighs science’s practical impact in shaping society, using Shelley’s integrative approach as a focal point.
- Poetry and science are incompatible.
The essay provides grounds to debate this. Supporting incompatibility, Wordsworth and Keats view science as “murdering to dissect,” reducing nature’s beauty, while Medawar argues literature competes with science, as seen in Lowes Dickinson’s claim that “Science expels Literature.” Darwin’s loss of literary appreciation further suggests a cognitive divide. However, Shelley’s poetry, which Chandrasekhar highlights for its scientific precision in The Cloud, demonstrates compatibility, blending empirical detail with poetic beauty. Students can discuss whether these fields are inherently opposed or if figures like Shelley show that they can complement each other, enhancing both knowledge and imagination.
- ‘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.’
This statement invites discussion on why science lacks a defence as eloquent as Shelley’s for poetry. In favour of the question, students may argue that scientists, like Faraday or Maxwell, focus on empirical outcomes rather than articulating their field’s philosophical value, as seen in Faraday’s practical response to Gladstone. Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry portrays poetry as divine, encompassing all knowledge, yet no scientist has similarly championed science’s role in human progress. Conversely, science’s tangible results, like electricity, may not require such a defence, unlike poetry’s abstract impact. Students can explore whether this absence reflects a difference in creative expression or societal perception of science’s value.
APPRECIATION
- How does the ‘assortment of remarks’ compiled by the author give us an understanding of the ways of science and poetry?
Chandrasekhar’s “assortment of remarks” provides a nuanced understanding of science and poetry by juxtaposing their perspectives and contributions. He cites Wordsworth and Keats to show poetry’s view of science as reductive, contrasting this with Shelley’s embrace of science in The Cloud and Prometheus Unbound, which blend empirical detail with myth. Darwin’s confession reveals science’s analytical focus, potentially at the cost of artistic appreciation, while Faraday’s innovative concepts highlight science’s creative leaps. Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry portrays poetry as the “centre and circumference of knowledge,” suggesting its encompassing nature, yet the absence of a scientific equivalent prompts reflection on their differing expressions. This assortment reveals science’s empirical, practical creativity versus poetry’s emotional, imaginative approach, hinting at potential synergy.
- Considering that this is an excerpt from a lecture, how does the commentary provided by the speaker string the arguments together?
As a lecture excerpt, Chandrasekhar’s commentary strings arguments together by weaving literary and scientific examples into a cohesive exploration of creativity. He begins with poets’ views, using quotes from Wordsworth and Keats to establish their critique of science, then counters with Shelley’s scientific poetry, supported by King-Hele and Whitehead’s insights. Darwin’s confession illustrates science’s cognitive demands, while Faraday’s discoveries showcase its imagination, linked to Maxwell’s praise. Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry serves as a climax, prompting the question of why science lacks a similar defence. This structured progression, from mutual perceptions to individual examples and philosophical reflection, maintains a conversational tone, engaging listeners while building a case for the interplay of science and poetry.
- The Cloud ‘fuses together a creative myth, a scientific monograph, and a gay picaresque tale of cloud adventure’—explain.
This description of Shelley’s The Cloud highlights its multifaceted nature. As a “creative myth,” the poem personifies the cloud as “the daughter of Earth and Water,” weaving a narrative of cosmic origin, evoking wonder. As a “scientific monograph,” it accurately describes meteorological processes, such as the cloud passing “through the pores of the ocean and shores” and rebuilding “the blue dome of air” after rain, reflecting Shelley’s precise observation of nature. As a “gay picaresque tale of cloud adventure,” it portrays the cloud’s journey with playful imagery, like “I silently laugh at my own cenotaph” and rising “like a child from the womb,” adding a lively, adventurous tone. This fusion showcases Shelley’s ability to blend scientific accuracy with poetic imagination and narrative charm.
Download NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3: Patterns of Creativity
You can download the free PDF of NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3: Patterns of Creativity for effective revision.
| Download the free PDF of NCERT Solutions Class 11 English Woven Words Essay 3 Patterns of Creativity |
Download more NCERT Solutions of Class 11 English ‘Woven Words’ here!
| Essay 1: My Watch |
| Essay 2: My Three Passions |
| Essay 4: Tribal Verse |
| Essay 5: What is a Good Book? |
| Essay 6: The Story |
For more topics, follow LeverageEdu NCERT Study Material today!
