An Analysis of the Poem “Prison” by Krishna Sen ‘Ichchhuk’ Translated by Govinda Raj Bhattarai

Poetry is a form of art; to express emotions and feelings by the use of distinctive style, meaning, sound and rhythm. The poem presents the rebellious nature of the revolutionists to defeat the arbitrary through literature and is much privileged towards independence. The poet imagines such an awful condition that happens in the insurgency period and he is not able to equivalent the freedom of choice and action. Oligarchy creates fascism, besides it, the poet has used the literary term, ‘my friend’ in each stanza to denote all victimized citizens and inmates who are anguished from despotism. To uplift from authoritarianism regime and to live with full sovereignty the communist movement had played an appreciable role in the context of Nepal. The literary genre which is characterized by literature and cultural form of early modern England that is written while the author is confined in a location against his wills, such as a prison, jail, or house arrest is known as prison literature. Thus, the message or underlying meaning of the poem is such that the poet alerts the emperor and leaders to adopt a democratic model.

The Gray Pains of Imprisonment: Examining the Perceptions of Confinement among a Sample of Sexagenarians and Septuagenarians

While the overall United States prison population has decreased over the last 10 years, the number of sentenced individuals above the age of 50 nearly doubled during the same period. The focus of this study, the pains of imprisonment experienced by the aging, is an under-researched area in the prison literature. Results from a sample of 134 male participants of True Grit, a structured living program for older prisoners, indicate strong agreement among sexagenarians, among septuagenarians, and between them. Previous studies of the pains of imprisonment found similar evaluations of the most and least difficult aspects of incarceration. While different instruments were used, collectively these studies suggest some commonality in the greatest hardships and least problematic aspects of incarceration. Policy implications derived from the present research are considered.

Dostoievski și literatura Gulagului

This paper aims to describe and analyze the references and allusions made by the authors who write about the Soviet Gulag to Dostoevsky and to his text written after his imprisonment in the tsarist prison in Omsk, The House of the Dead (1860- 1862). Starting from the premise that The House of the Dead has a special status as it is a text that makes the transition from the classical and vaguely defined genre of prison literature (i.e. literature written in prison or related – however not always explicitly – to the prison experience) to that of testimonial literature (i.e. literature related to a traumatic experience of a collective nature that is able to testify on behalf of those who remain to suffer in prisons or concentration camps), I will emphasize the testimonial character of Dostoevsky’s writing. Subsequently, I will analyze how the authors who write about their experiences in the Soviet camps (Gustaw Herling-Grudziński, A World Apart, Julius Margolin, Journey into the Land of Zeks and Back, Varlam Shalamov, Kolyma Tales, Yevgenia Ginzburg, Journey into the Whirlwind, Within the Whirlwind, and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago) relate to Dostoevsky’s text. At first, the references to Dostoevsky highlight the continuity between the two repressive systems: the tsarist katorga and the Soviet Gulag (Gustaw Herling-Grudziński). Later, however, the differences between them become apparent, as the Gulag writers all highlight in their writing the extent and intensity of the suffering experienced by those who lived through the hell of the repressions in the Gulag. In this way, they enter in an ironic and polemical dialogue with the nineteenth-century Russian writer. In the end, this polemical separation from Dostoevsky shows how the Gulag writers abandon the messianic and humanistic innocence of the nineteenth-century prison literature in the context of the totalitarian and repressive system of the twentieth century.

The Victim–Offender Overlap in Prison: Examining the Factors Associated With Group Membership

Historically, criminologists have examined offending and victimization in the community as separate outcomes. Recently, however, researchers have begun to explore the shared commonalities of being an offender and a victim. The victim–offender overlap literature shows that victimization and offending are not different and distinct outcomes, but rather these outcomes share numerous risk factors. A close examination of the victim–offender overlap has not been done within the prison literature. Thus, it remains unclear whether there are commonalities among prisoners who offend while incarcerated and those who experience victimization. The focus of the current study is to (a) identify the proportion of the prisoners who were victims-only, offenders-only, victim–offenders, or neither victim nor offender and (b) identify the factors that predict membership into the four categories of the overlap. The current study used the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities with multinomial logistic regression analyses to examine which factors are associated with group membership into the victim–only, offender–only, or victim–offender groups in prison. Findings show that although the victim–offender overlap exists among prisoners, the majority of prisoners were neither a victim nor an offender. Victim–offenders and victims-only comprise only a small proportion of the sample. Findings also indicate that there are few unique factors across the groups. Results of the study have implications policy and future research.