Notes for Class (Magic of Words)

Notes (Magic of Words)
My Heart Leaps up When I Behold -William Wordsworth
1. Write in one sentence what the poem is about.
The poem is about the poet’s pleasant childhood experience of seeing colourful rainbow in the sky and his wish to enjoy its beauty his whole life.
2. Explain the paradox in “The Child is father of the Man”.
We generally think that the man is father of the child. Without a man’s contribution a child can’t come in the world. Therefore, the given line from the poem sounds paradoxical, that is, self-contradictory. But it’s not absurd if we analyze its symbolical meaning. Here, father is the symbol of the source from which something new emerges. Everyone has to be first a child to become a man; no one can directly become a man. It’s a child who grows and becomes a man. There cannot be any existence of the man if there is not the child. Hence, a man comes from a child. In other words, the child is the father of the man.
There is, however, not only biological relationship between the child and the man. The way a child is raised, the values and beliefs that he has been taught, and his nature – all these factors have tremendous impact on the man that he grows into. Thus, the paradox in this poetic line reveals a fact about human life and also focuses the significance of childhood.
3. Summarize the poem in one paragraph.
The poem “My Heart Leaps up When I Behold”, composed by one of the greatest English romantic poets, William Wordsworth, deals with the theme of his pleasant childhood experience with nature. He would get extremely delighted whenever he saw a rainbow in the sky in his childhood. At present he has become a man but his fascination with the rainbow remains the same. It’s still a source of great delight for him, and will continue to remain the same in the remaining days of his life. Therefore, he wishes to see rainbows and enjoy their beauties in his old age too. If this pleasure is denied to him, then he would rather like to die. In other words, the poet is not ready to live without an intimate relationship with nature which is source of great pleasure and wisdom as well for him. At the same time he believes that the present is the outcome of the past, and so naturally the future will be the outcome of the present. He means to say so in his paradoxical remark – “The Child is father of the Man”. This helps assure him that he will certainly see colourful rainbows in old age and enjoy their beauties. After that he feels relaxed and says that he will maintain deep respect for the nature forever. Thus, this poem, which is in fact his tribute to nature, truly depicts him as “a worshipper of nature”.
Discussion Questions
1. Interpret the poem in any way you like.
See the answer of the above question no.3.
2. What does the poet mean by “natural piety”?
By “natural piety” the poet means deep respect for nature, which is a great source of pleasure for him. For his boundless love and adoration for the nature he was rightly called ‘worshipper of nature’. This image of the Wordsworth gets reflected in this short poem also where he describes his bondage with nature and expresses his wish to live in her lap forever maintaining the same intensity of love and respect for her.
Look at a Teacup -Patricia Hampl
1. Describe the teacup. The teacup was thin and shiny. It was of pale water-green color with three bands of gold outside it – one on the edge, on in the middle and one at its base. There was no other decoration on its outside. Inside it, there wereflowers, each of them of different size and color. They were however not just pasted; they seemed to be in motion instead. It seemed as if someone had scattered a bouquet of flowers over it, and they were falling in the cup. Some of them had reached the bottom whereas some were still floating in the air. One thin but firm band of gold wasalso seen inside the cup amidst the falling flowers at its bottom. The teacup was made in Czechoslovakia from where the author’s father originally belonged to. It had the name of its manufacturing country in tiny letters on its bottom. It was moreover accompanied by a saucer with matching design. It was bought by the author’s mother in 1939 when she got married with her father,an American Czech. It is an evidence of Czech art of making the finest china that was badly destroyed by the Second World War.
1. Explain “The cup is a detail, a small uncharred finger from the mid-century bonfire.” The cup is a detail for the author because it symbolically suggests her so many valuable information about her mother who had bought it in 1939 at time of her marriage, and also about the nation where it was made - Czechoslovakia. Patricia Hampl reads her mother’s history in that small delicate teacup. Here, mid-century bonfire stands for the Second World War that took place in the mid twentieth century from 1939 to 1945. It has been the most devastating war the human civilization has ever seen. It took lives of 55 million people, leaving many more millions injured and displaced. The metaphor of a finger for the cup suggests that its body is Czechoslovakia where it was made. That body was badly burnt in that bonfire but its glorious traditions and arts are at present symbolically shown by its part, i.e. the cup. The cup escaped that war, and therefore is described as an uncharred finger.
2. What do you mean by “Many things fell that year”? In the given remark, that year refers to 1939 when the Second World War started and the author’s mother got married with an American Czech. Bombs fell that year on human societies causing death and destruction on a very large scale. Bodies of newly married girls fell paired with other bodies on beds together for the first time in their life. Patricia Hampl condemns both these two. Both war in which bombs fell and marriage in which brides’ bodies fall with those of husbands are unacceptable for her, as both are destructive in some ways for her. * Read the answer for this question from your ex.book.
3. How does Hampl see herself and her mother connected by the teacup? The teacup works as a link between Patricia Hampl and her mother. Whenever she looks at it, she remembers her mother who bought it after her marriage with an American Czech in 1939, and later gave it to her who was living separately. She finds herself emotionally attached with her mother but ideologically much different from her. The falling flowers inside the teacup remind the author that her mother, like other girls at her time, fell with her husband on the bed for the first time in her life. Unlike her, Patricia Hampl refuses to marry, and goes against the tradition. Her mother believes that family is the most important thing for a woman but family doesn’t hold as much importance as work and self-identity for her. She loves and respects her mother, but not her ideologies. Thus, the author has accepted this possession but not the traditions handed down by her mother to her.
• Read the answer for this question from your ex.book.

5. What does this essay/story tell us about marriage? About mother-daughter relationship?about the importance of family? About women? This essay tells us that marriage is an essential and inevitable part of life for the people of old generation like the author’s mother in the essay. In the post-modern world, that is after Second World War, this traditional social belief has, however, lost its significance and relevance. Nowadays marriage is no longer a must. The younger generation, especially females like Patricia Hampl, thinks that it’s rather a tragedy and an end in itself. This essay also shows that the mother-daughter relationship is not as warm and affectionate as before because of generation gap. The mother who represents older generation tries or expects her daughter to follow the traditional norms, values and beliefs but the daughter just refuses to do so. She prefers to work and establish her own identity instead of marrying and setting up a family. Family is not that much of importance to her. The people of older generation used to consider it as most important thing in their life. Women have to suffer because of the traditional values and beliefs of a patriarchal or male dominated society especially when they are not aware of their rights and don’t fight for them. Those values and beliefs are made to suit males, and therefore they victimize women and put them at disadvantages. As the essay tells us, the Second World War brought about a big change in women’s perspective to look at their life and society. They grew more confident about themselves and more aware of their life styles. They refused to sacrifice their individual careers and likings for the sake of traditions and customs.

A Worn Path ByEudora Wetly
2. What does Phoenix do when she is knocked down by the dog? When old Phoenix is knocked down by the dog, she falls into a ditch and her senses drift away for a while. After a while she tries to come outside but she can’t. She stretches her hand up for help but there is nobody to pull her out of the ditch. So, she keeps lying there on her back helpless like an overturned June-bug.
3. In Egyptian mythology the Phoenix was a bird of great splendour that every five hundred years consumed itself by fire and rose renewed from its ashes. In what way is Phoenix Jackson like the bird? In the Egyptian mythology Phoenix is believed to be a bird that lived for a very long time - 500 years! Like it, the protagonist in this story, the old Black lady named Phoenix Jackson has also lived a long life. All her family members along with her little sick grandson have passed away but she is still alive.
For the Egyptian mythological bird, death is just an obstacle on the way of its immortality that it easily overcomes and emerges rather more beautiful and energetic after that. Like it, the old woman also faces the obstacles on her way to the town very boldly and confidently and deals with them successfully. After that she also emerges more confident and energetic. For example, when she crosses a creek by walking on a single log, she says, “I was not as old as I thought.” This expression clearly suggests the growing confidence and boldness her. Phoenix is only bird of its kind in the Egyptian mythology. Likewise, Phoenix Jackson is also a unique lady who lives an active life in her old age facing a lot of challenges, not for herself but for her sick grandson. Such a woman is really rare in any human society. In this way, the heroic lady Phoenix Jackson is full of splendour like that bird.
The bird is also colourful and the protagonist also wears colourful clothes.(See the slides also)

4. Why does Phoenix keep talking to herself? What do her monologues add to the total portrait of her? Phoenix keeps talking to herself on her long way to the town primarily because she is very old. It’s the nature of aged people to keep talking to themselves. The other reason might also be monotony and boredom of the long difficult journey. She talks to herself probably to get rid of them. Whatever might be the reason of her monologues, they reveal her innermost emotions and thoughts.
5. What is the meaning of the episode in which Phoenix steals the nickel? Does the act offend our sense of honesty? Explain your answer. The episode in which Phoenix steals the nickel bears a lot of meaning. It shows poverty doesn’t make a person honest; that poor persons are honest is just a myth. This episode clearly shows that poverty rather degrades them morally and spiritually. It’s because of her poverty that Phoenix, a loving, sacrificing, and courageous lady, happens to steal the nickel, though not for her personal interests. She does so for her little sick grandson. It is Christmas time and she wants to buy some gifts for him so that he would be happy. Even though it is an immoral act, I don’t feel that she is a dishonest person. It doesn’t offend my sense of honesty; instead, it arouses pity and sympathy in my heart for the old woman because she is well aware of her act. She feels the omnipresent god is watching her act in the form the bird flying over her head and she confesses that she is stealing it.
6. What significance can you attach to the fact that the journey (of Phoenix Jackson) takes place at Christmas time? The significance of Phoenix’s journey that takes place at Christmas time lies in the fact that it is more beneficial and safer than those done at any other time. It is safer because at Christmas time it is very cold and therefore there is no chance of confronting bulls and snakes on her way. They are not seen usually in the winter season. Moreover, her journey is more beneficial also because she is likely to get some gifts/ moneybecause people become more generous during the Christmas. * Go through the Presentation Slides also.
The Three Day Blow -Ernest Hemingway
1. Describe the setting in which the writer locates his characters.
The writer locates his two characters Nick and Bill in the countryside. Both of them drink and talk together in Bill’s cottage that is built on a small hill. Almost the whole plot gets unfolded through their conversation that takes place in front of the fireplace in the sitting room of the cottage. At that time the autumn wind is blowing outside after rain.
2. What has the weather condition to do with the sequence of events?
When the protagonist Nick visits his friend Bill’s house, the autumn wind is blowing after the rain. It is because of such weather condition that they stay indoors near fireplace in the sitting room. They drink and talk together about so many things including Nick’s failed love affair with Marjorie. The story’s title which is also related with the weather condition – The Three Day Blow symbolically represents the sequence of events that have taken place in its protagonist’s life. The first day blow refers to the conflict between Nick and his girlfriend, Marjorie. The second day blow refers to the separation between them. But just as the trees that happen to lose their leaves and branches due to the wind again get new leaves, in the same way Nick develops the hope of reconciliation with his beloved. This hope of reconciliation is symbolically shown by the third day blow. In this way, the detailed analogy between the three day blow and Nick’s mental ordeal gets completed too.
3. Discuss “The Three Day Blow” as a dramatic story. It is more interaction than narration, scenic division of the story, and setting that bring it closer to drama than fiction. As in a drama, the plot unfolds in this story not through narration but through interaction between the protagonist Nick and Bill. It seems as if the two characters are performing on a stage. Drama is a unique form of literature that is known for its distinguished feature – interaction. On the other hand narration is the essence of fiction. The story “The Three Day Blow” contains more interaction then narration, and hence it looks more like a drama. As in a drama, scenes keep changing in this story, too. If we leave the expository part of its beginning, we find seven scenes in it. The first scene is the sitting room of Bill’s cottage where he and his friend Nick sit in front of the fireplace. The second scene is the kitchen where Nick happens to hit a pan on the table with a log that he is bringing from the backyard. The third scene is again the sitting room where they both put the log together in the fire. The fourth scene is the passage where Nick finds his face reflected in a mirror and gets amused. The fifth scene is once again the sitting room where they talk now about Nick’s affair with Marjorie. And the seventh scene is outside the cottage where they are standing with two shotguns and planning to go for shooting in the nearby jungle where Bill’s father was already shooting. The setting in this story also makes it look like a dramatic piece. As wind is blowing outside after rain in the autumn, Nick and Bill stay in the sitting room near fireplace and drink and talk together. The cottage appears to a kind of stage where they talk and it is through their dialogue the plot unfolds. Their drinking, talking, and other activities inside and outside the cottage are onstage actions whereas conflict and separation between Nick and Marjorie are offstage actions that are reported mostly by Bill in the story. In this way, this is a dramatic story.

The Poplar Field - William Cowper
Summary
The poem ‘The Poplar Field’, which is in fact a strong defence of nature conservation, is composed by the English poet William Cowper. It deals with the theme of destruction of natural resources especially trees and its adverse impact on the human beings. The author’s approach to this serious theme is, however, quite personal. He seems at first to be describing his personal experience of suffering the loss of his favourite poplar field, and cherishing the sweet memories of enjoying there in the past. But the poplar field is just a case in point. It represents, in fact, forests and other natural resources that are badly threatened in the rural areas.
The poet visits his poplar field on the bank of the Ouse River after twelve years, and feels upset to find it totally destroyed. The trees, that used to provide him shade in the past, are now lying in the grass. He can neither get any protection from the scorching heat of the sun, nor can he hear the mellifluous whispering sound of cool colonnade. Similarly, he can no longer enjoy the beautiful reflection of those trees in the river. Moreover, he can’t hear the fascinating “sweet flowing ditties” of birds as they have fled to another retreat.
The poet is sad, and quite disheartened by the pathetic sight of his poplar field that used to be his place for pleasure and peace. It makes him think about the prospect of his pleasant life in future. He realizes well that he’s growing old rather fast and he’ll pass away soon without seeing such another garden at the same place. He thinks that his departure from the earth will be miserable and painful like the field itself. At last he ceases thinking about himself, and is rather enforced by the same pathetic sight of the poplar field to think seriously about “the perishing pleasures of man”. He reaches the conclusion after deep thinking that human life is short but enjoyments die even sooner than us.
The poem begins in a straightforward way with a short but effective line – ‘the poplars are fell’d, farewell to…’ and concludes with a bitter truth of life – ‘…our enjoyments…die sooner than we’. We find the beginning and the end of the poem strongly correlated, and they make together a very strong point about natural degradation and its ultimate consequence. The natural resources in urban areas are mostly destroyed but even those left in countryside are now being destroyed rapidly. And this is a matter of big concern for the poet who wants to live peacefully there enjoying natural beauties and their bliss. He points out the result of destruction of natural resources that human beings are making their own life more complicated and painful by such act. The more we destroy them, the more we lose our pleasures and face troubles in life. We can’t live a peaceful and happy life in a degraded natural surrounding. In a sense, the quality of life much depends on that of natural surrounding and environment. So we should learn to conserve the natural resources for our own sake and that of other species and coming generation, too.

The Nightmare Life without Fuel -Isaac Asimov
Summary
‘The Nightmare Life without Fuel’ is an essay written by an American author of Russian origin named Isaac Asimov. It originally appeared in the Time magazine in America in 1977. The author at that time assumed that after two decades there would be fuel crisis and described in this article for the magazine how America would struggle without fuel and what kind of situation would be outside it. Here, America is just a case in point. The author in fact tries to show what is going to happen if we don’t conserve the world’s natural resources. Fuel is a major resource but there are so many others too that need conservation for the sake of mankind and other creatures on the earth as well. The first and foremost impact of fuel crisis will be seen on transportation. The vehicles, which are run by gasoline, will disappear, making life very much complicated. People will have to walk to their work or other places. Those who can afford will use bicycle that will be a major means of transport. Anyone older than ten in 1997 will just remember automobiles in America. Development works will stop and demolition work will start. Buses, cars, jeeps, trains and others will be no longer in use, and they will be destroyed to extract metals and reuse them. “The fading structures of a decaying city will be the great mineral mines and hardware shops of the nation”. Cities will decay due to lack of sufficient energy.
There will not be immediate and equally effective option for fuel. Coal is too difficult to dig up, and moreover it can’t give energy in required amounts. Similarly, energy from nuclear power will remain just a dream only as nuclear fission is very dangerous. Solar batteries are also too expensive to maintain, and therefore they can’t effectively replace gasoline. There will be, however, some energy left in America but that will not be for personal use. The nation will use them to survive until new energy sources are found. The remaining sources of energy will be spent on railroads, subways, and agriculture.
Fuel crisis will certainly exert its adverse effects on food distribution as well. Americans will have to eat less because of high prices of foods and difficulty of their distribution all over the nation. America will export food so that it can pay the oil rich countries for some amount of fuel and other resources. People will have to live without present day luxuries like air-conditioning, fan, cooler, heater etc. In summer, they will stay out and the open air will be the only air conditioning for them. In summer, they will have to huddle together to keep each other warm. Sweaters will be most popular indoor wear, and lukewarm sponge baths will be in practice due to lack of water and electricity as well.
People will have to work more but they will get less to eat due to fuel crisis even in America, according to the author. Machines will be replaced by ‘human muscles and beasts of burden’. They will work and sleep as much as they like in their leisure but they will not get enough to eat. Outside cities the situation will be even worse. People there will console themselves to know that those in suburban are suffering more than them. With automobiles the suburbs will also disappear because their existence totally depends on the former (i.e. automobiles).
Isaac Asimov ironically says that there will be some advantages of fuel crisis as well. For example, there will be less pollution as there will not be any vehicle to emit exhaust, and therefore there will be less chance of catching cold. Crime rate will drop. Here the writer becomes ironical because he actually means to say that police would not be able to keep records of the crime and it would seem as if the crime rate has dropped. Streets will be crowded, and parks will be full. People will have sense of mutual protection in the crowd. Moreover, armies that consume fuel in large amounts and thereby cause its crisis sooner than later will also disappear, as nations won’t be economically strong to maintain them.
In this way, America will struggle a lot without fuel, according to Isaac Asimov. But outside America except Europe, as he predicts, the situation will be worse. People will starve out there. Just 20% of people there that is one in five will have something to eat at any given time. Millions of people will have their brain damaged by under nutrition. Because of lack of balanced diet mothers will go dry, and as they‘ll be unable to feed their babies, infant mortality rate will increase high. Poverty and diseases will spread everywhere outside America and Europe. Such bad news about the rest of the world will rather save Americans from being despaired!
The author quite pessimistically predicts that fuel crisis will ultimately take the modern developed human world back to the pre-industrial age, and once again there will be subsistence farming as before 1800.By that time the world population will have been reduced to less than a billion by starvation, poverty, disease, and violence. He believed at the time of writing this essay that is in 1977 that if any genuine attempt to find out the option for fuel had started 50 years ago, and then it would be very easy to avert any such situation. But now almost nothing can be done to prevent such a horrible situation to come. That is, according to him, fuel crisis is bound to take place leading to such miserable condition.
Though such situation did not occur in 1990s as predicted by him, it doesn’t mean that now it won’t arise. He has appealed us to use rationally the natural resources like the fossil fuel and others. If we don’t check our destructive attitude towards them, may be that situation will arise, badly crippling life on earth.

Exercises
1. What specific problem does Asimov focus on in this essay? Why does he consider this issue worth of attention?
Asimov focuses on the specific problem of fuel crisis, that is, the scarcity of fossil fuel. It a major and most efficient source of energy on which the world’s economy and even the quality of life depends. At present people are using fuel in such large quantity that it will not, as the author thinks, last for long. He considers this issue worth of attention because if its options are not found in time it will dwindle soon and that will badly affect the world’s economy and the quality of life on the earth ultimately.

2. According to the author, what will be the advantages of the fuel crisis of 1997? The disadvantages?
The author mentions some advantages of the fuel crisis in an ironic sense. According to him, this crisis will help reduce pollution, and thereby the chance of catching cold, too. This crime rate will drop. These two are not, however, genuine advantages. They are rather byproduct of the disadvantages like lack of vehicle and Police’s inability to record crime. Public places like subways and park will be crowded and people will feel mutually protected in the crowd. Armies will disappear as governments will no longer be able to maintain those “energy gobbling monstrosities”.
Though the author mentions these advantages of the fuel crisis, his main focus is, in fact, on its disadvantages. Means of transport like buses, cars, and other automobiles will disappear due to scarcity of fuel, making life slow and too hard. Development work of the society will stop; instead demolition will start, especially of automobiles which will not be useful any longer. They will become source of metals to be reused in farm machinery and other tools. The modern sophisticated cities which have plenty of facilities will transform into dark desolate places due to lack of proper energy. People will have to work longer but will get less to eat. As a result, their health will get badly affected. Especially outside America and Europe, only one among five will have something to eat at any given time. Millions of them will be alive but with already damaged mind from under nutrition. Poverty, starvation and disease will be seen here and there. Mothers will go dry due to lack of balanced diet. As a result, infant mortality rate will increase.
3. In Asimov’s essay, what is happening in the rest of the world as America struggles without fuel?
As America struggles without fuel, the rest of the world except Europe is facing a number of challenges. Life is so much miserable there. Transportation, movies, books, TV and such other facilities are long gone. People don’t have sufficient foods to eat. They are starving; just one in five has enough to eat at any given time. Mothers are not being able to feed their infants in their laps because they have gone dry due to lack of balanced diet. As a result, infant mortality rate is increasing. Those, who are alive, have their mind damaged due to under nutrition. Poverty, disease and violence can be seen everywhere, causing decrease in population.

4. What does the author mean when he says, “the suburbs were born the auto, lived with the auto, and are dying with the auto.” (Lines 49-50)
When the author says this sentence, he means the existence of suburbs depends on that of automobiles and immediate impact of their disappearance due to fuel crisis will be on those areas. As cities got overcrowded, people started living outside a few miles away from them. But that was possible only because of automobiles. They would come to cities in automobiles to work and then go back to suburbs. Without those means of transport they could not manage to live miles away from cities and work there. Thus, thanks to automobiles suburbs came into existence. As long as they are available, those areas also survive, rather flourish. But as they disappear because of fuel crisis, life becomes much too hard there. The suburbanites will not be in condition to go to their work places in the city area and then again to come back to their residence the same day. They face so many insurmountable problems in their life. In this way, just as automobiles disappear, in the same way at almost the same pace suburbs also die with them.
5. What does the author think of the armed forces in general? What should be their place in society? How did you come to this conclusion? Isaac Asimov thinks of the armed forces as the major precipitators of the fuel crisis which will badly transform the modern developed face of the human society. They use fuel in very large amount but not for any constructive work. They are involved in violent works like killing others at the risk of their own lives. As society does not get benefited from them in any way, they should not have any place in the society. There should not be any existence of armed forces. This is what the author seems to think about them. We come to this conclusion on the basis of Asimov’s reference to soldiers as “expensive, energy-gobbling monstrosities”.

Unchopping a Tree- M. S. Merwin
1. Is unchopping a tree possible? What does the essay suggest about conservation and against deforestation? Unchopping a tree is literally not possible at all. It is an irreversible process. Once a tree is cut, it’s dead, and it cannot be brought back to life again in the same previous condition. It symbolically may refer to afforestation. The essay appeals us to conserve the natural resources especially trees which are extremely important for us and other creatures as well. While we cut a tree, we just think about our interests, and ignore its effects on those creatures that rely on it for their residence and other purposes. This selfish attitude towards natural resources is causing troubles to human beings themselves and no doubt to other creatures, too. The author seems to urge us to conserve natural resources for our own wellbeing and for others as well. He opposes deforestation which is going on a fast pace at the moment everywhere. It’s the root cause of so many other natural calamities which together make our survival on the earth more painful and challenging. * Please go through the Powerpoint Presentation slides also.

Keeping Things Whole-Mark Strand
Summary
The poet is physically present in the field but finds himself absent. This seems to be contradictory. It actually suggests symbolically that he doesn’t give any importance to his presence in the field which has given him space to stand and move. He attaches more importance to the field of which he considers himself to be just a part. He considers it so highly that his presence in it becomes insignificant. He says this is always the case; wherever he goes’ he finds himself absent. Such attitude of the poet toward himself suggests that he doesn’t give much importance to his self. He rather often considers himself as a part of the system in which he lives. Here, his mention of the field instead of any other manmade structures like malls, theatre, and others shows that he is talking about system that is found in the nature, that is, ecology. And this point further supports his feelings when he further talks about air which is also a part of nature. When he walks, he divides the air as every other person. However, the moment he moves forward, the air moves in to fill the spaces occupied by his body before. Unlike others, he is aware of the division that his body causes even momentarily in the air. At this point he appears to be causing fragmentation in the natural environment prevailing in the field. But he doesn’t intend to do so at all.
He clarifies his position, purpose and perspective in the last stanza. He clarifies that he is present in the field not to cause any kind of fragmentation; he rather tries to keep things whole, and it is the conservation of nature - not fragmentation or destruction - that is the purpose of his life. In this way, Mark Strand in this poem appeals us to protect nature against fragmentation that going apace at present in the world.

1. Interpret the poem in any way you like. See the summary.
2. How does the poet view himself in the field, in the air, and in the backdrop? The poet views himself in the field as an entity that is missing from there. In the air he isa force that causes partition in it. But in the backdrop he views himself as a person who likes to keep things whole.
3. What does the last stanza suggest? The last stanza suggests that we should learn to keep thing whole. We should oppose fragmentation that is going on in life and nature.

Concrete Cat-Dorothi Charles
Summary
“Concrete Cat” is a concrete (pictorial) poem. As the title suggests, this poem tries to depict a cat in rather concrete form, going against the poetic norms of drawing a verbal picture of the subject matter. The words are arranged in such a way that they create an image of a cat in action on the page. We just have to look at the text to know what it is all about; we don’t have to read it. Such poems are written for the eye, not for the ear. We can’t enjoy reading it because it doesn’t have any musical qualities and features of poetic language. It is written in the “reduced language” of the word. In other words, only words are used, not any full sentence, to create the picture of the cat on the page. Many grammatical norms are violated for this purpose. Moreover, in this experimental form of poetry, the author’s main concern is with its physical appearance on the page, not primarily with ideas and emotions. The letter A is capital in the middle of the word ear to show that it is erected. Y is also capital in the word eye toshow that it wide open. Similarly, U is capitalized in the mouth to show that the cat’s tongue is falling. The word ‘tail’ is written leaving spaces between the letters to show that there are black spots on this part of the cat. The word ‘mouse’ is interestingly written upside down. This shows that it has already been killed by the cat. The mention of dish and litter box suggests that it is domestic cat, may be somebody’s pet. The poem is prosaic except in the word – stripe. It is the only place in the poem where language tends to be poetic. We find a pun in the cat’s middle stripe. This word can be read as tripe and stripe as well, and both meanings seem to be relevant in the poem. When read as stripe, this word describes the long band of colour all over the cat. Similarly, when it is read as tripe, it refers to the mouse’s stomach tissue that it has eaten. Thus, the same word describes what is outside and even inside the stomach of the cat.

Oops! How’s That Again?-Roger Rosenblatt
Summary
The essay,“Oops! How’s That Again?”, written by Roger Rosenblatt, is about several types of verbal error. The author explains them with plenty of examples but his main concern is to explore why we make them and what possible meaning might be there behind them.
Slip of tongue is a part of linguistic behavior of the human being. It is made unintentionally and unwillingly. It’s quite natural. Everyone happens to make such mistakes. Only after we happen to make a slip of tongue, we realize that. Most of the time, it is a source of fun. The first reaction shown by listeners toward it is generally an outbreak of laughter. It gives pleasure because it breaks the monotony of speaking in a meaningful and rational way. It brings about freshness in communication. But sometimes slip of tongue has rather adverse effect on the speaker and listeners as well because it happens to convey undesirable meaning which hurt the latter’s sentiments. It can put sometime the speaker in trouble. For example, the French prime minister once happened to describe bombing of Paris synagogue as “this odious attack that was aimed at Jews and that struck at innocent Frenchmen”. Though he has not intended at all, he happened to mean that Jews were neither innocent nor French. His blooper also meant that the attack would have been less odious had it been more limited.
Rosenblatt describes four types of verbal error in this essay. They are slip of tongue, blooper, mistranslation, and spoonerism. A slip of tongue can be embarrassing. For example, Peter Balfour wished Prince Charles long life and conjugal happiness with Lady Jane instead of Lady Diana. Blooper is that expression in which we happen to arrange the words in totally unintended way resulting in unexpectedly different meaning. In this kind of verbal error, not any particular word gets replaced by an inappropriate one; it is rather the whole sentence arrangement erroneous. Mistranslation is more cause of error than an error in itself. It occurs when one translates something in other language without understanding true meaning of the original expression. Spoonerism is the unusual verbal error named after Mr. Spooner who was a lecturer at New College, Oxford. It refers to that kind of mistake in which some sounds of two or more than two words are interchanged in the same sentence.
The author advances two theories to explain the human tendency of making slip of tongue. They are linguistic and psychological theories. According to linguists like Victoria Frompkin, all words related with same thing are stored together in our mind. Before we say something, all the words are arranged in sensible order so that they make sense. Sometimes one word gets replaced by an unintended one and thus slip of tongue occurs. The author isn’t much interested in this theory. So, he doesn’t care to elaborate it much in the essay, and moves to explain the psychological theory in which he more interested. According to psychologists like Freud, slip of tongue isn’t simply an error and stock of fun: it’s also a tool to know about the psyche of the speaker. It shows what lies at the subconscious level of mind. * Read the slides.
Malini -Rabindranath Tagore
Understanding
1. In the beginning of the play the King talks about “storm clouds gathering over the King’s house.” What does he refer to?
When the King talks about ‘storm clouds’, he refers to the problems that he would have to face in the near future due to Malini’s faith in Buddhism. The Brahmins of Kashi were going to start their protest with the demand of his daughter’s banishment from his own palace. It would certainly put him in a problematic condition. It was such probable condition that the King alludes to when he talks metaphorically about ‘storm clouds’.
2. What are the Brahmins demanding for?
The Brahmins are demanding for PrincessMalini’s banishment from the palace. They think that she is an enemy of their ancient Hindu religion. They accuse her of attempting to overthrow their religion from Kashi by introducing Buddhism. They think that by having her punished in that way, their religion would be safe. Their demand is, in fact, totally unjustified.
3. If the demand persisted, would the king banish his daughter? Give reasons.
If the Brahmins’ demand persisted, I think the King would have to banish his daughter Malini from the palace. It would create unrest in his state if he didn’t. He has to listen to his subjects and fulfill their demand. He was also being pressurized by the princess also to do so. Malini herself also wanted to go outside the palace for her own purpose. Moreover, the soldiers were also willing to take the Brahmins’ side openly. The soldiers’ participation in that struggle would leave no option to the King but to banish her as demanded by them.
4. Draw the character sketch of Malini.
Ans: Malini is the protagonistof theplay “Malini” by Rabindranath Tagore.She is the princess of Kasi, a land where Hinduism originated and prospered and where her new thoughts stirred the conservative Hindus. Although she is a princess, she doesn’t wear dresses and ornaments like a princess. This annoys her mother but Malini thinks her destiny is “to find riches in the property”.
Malini is inspired by a doctrine of Buddhism. She thinks she should leave the palace and go and live among the people. It is important because she thinks only by bridging the gap between palace and people; she can preach and rescue them from the troubled life of earth. She thinks she can help people to achieve nirvana. However once she goes out, she finds the reality quite different from what she has supposed. She asks help from Supriya in her mission as she lacks words when she is amidst human crowd. This might make the readers think that all her visions are in fact illusions. Nevertheless, it doesn’t mean she doesn’t possess any power at all. In fact she looks so bright that the agitating Brahmins takes her as an incarnation of a goddess who has descended on the pious land of Kasi to rescue it from the possible bloodshed.
Malini is taught by Buddhist monks. Accordingly she is very much influenced by its philosophy of non- violence and peace. When Supriya tells about how he has informed the king about Kemanker’s plan who makes him a captive, she doesn’t like it. She thinks her heart is big enough to greet even the opponent. Not only that when Kemankar kills Supriya, she pleads the king to forgive him inspite of Supriyabeing very dear to her.
4. Draw a character sketch of Supriya and show how he is different from Kemankar.
Supriya and Kemankar are two very close childhood friends but they are poles apart by nature. Supriya is a liberal and open-minded Brahmin boy who has got good knowledge of religious books. Unlike him, his friend Kemankaris a radical and conservative Brahmin who believes that his religious books contain complete truth and just by following them one can reach heaven. But Supriya doesn’t think so; he’s read so many Hindu holy books but has never felt inner joy and peace in his heart by reading them. They don’t provide him the answers to the questions that arise in his mind. So, he has come to realize that those religious books can’t be perfect in them and he doesn’t follow them blindly as Kemankar does. But for Kemankarhis religious values and beliefs are most important and considers that it is his duty to protect his religion. For Supriya, humanity, love for all, and sacrifice are much more important than them.
Supriya has a weakness that he doesn’t follow what he thinks is right. He can’t maintain a firm standpoint in his life as his friend Kemankar does. The former (Supriya) always lacks confidence but it abounds in the latter (Kemankar). Unfortunately when Supriya listens to his conscience and acts accordingly, he gets brutally killed by Kemankar whom he calls in the play “my friend, my brother, my master.” When he comes to know from Kemankar’s letter sent from foreign land about his plan to kill Malini, he informs the King about this, and thereby gets the latter and his hired soldiers captured. As revenge, Kemankar kills him by striking on his head with the chain that bound his hands in front of the King and Malini in the garden of the palace itself.
Conclusively, we can say that Kemankar is an evil person who is an emblem of hatred and fanaticism whereas Supriya is an amiable and loving Brahmin.
5. What was the revolt against? Against Malini?Against the King?Against Buddhism?
The revolt was mainly against Buddhism,the new religion that was being spread by Malini. But even if it had been some other religion instead of Buddhism, the Brahmins would have revolted in the traditionally Hindu kingdom Kashi. Malini was also a prime target in that revolt. They sensed a big threat from both Malini and the Buddhist creeds that would put the Brahmins at disadvantage in the Hindu society where they enjoyed great privileges. Therefore, they demanded for her banishment from the palace. They thought that by having her punished that way, their religion would be safe.
6. Why does Malini ask for her own banishment from the palace?
As Malini has picked up Buddhist creed and believes in Buddhism, she doesn’t enjoy royal life in the palace. Materialistic pleasures don’t fascinate her any more. Therefore, she even started wearing simple dress and rejected ornaments and beautification. She says about herself to her mother in the beginning of the play, “Mother there are some who are born poor, even in a king’s house”. She says “her destiny is to find riches in poverty”. She wants to go outside the palace so that she can help the poor and needy personsin some ways. The palace is no longer a place where she can really achieve the goals of her life. She wants to devote herself to the service of mankind.
Malini seems to believe that the Brahmins of Kashi and others are spiritually misguided and they will ascend to heaven by getting spiritual guidance from her. She thinks that the world needs her for help. She doesn’t want to cling to materialistic pleasures in the palace; instead she wants to live for others. All these things are impossible for her unless she goes out of the palace. Therefore, she tells her father to fulfill the Brahmins’ demand by banishing her from the palace.

7. Would you call Supriya a betrayer? Give reasons for your answer. If Supriya’s character is analyzed on neutral ground, he doesn’t seem to be a betrayer. At first he appears to be so, for he broke his promise to his friend Kemankarwhich led to his arrest. But the cause for which he broke his promise was much more important than his friendship. Before Kemankar left for foreign land to hire soldiers, he had never mentioned his intention of attacking the palace and killing Princess Malini. When he came to know about it from his letter that he had sent from some foreign land, he must have felt badly shaken. His conscience would never allow him to side with that person who wanted to take an innocent girl’s life, especially that girl who was a living image of love, sacrifice and forgiveness. He realized well that if he didn’t inform the King about his friend’s monstrous plan, Malini and the whole kingdom would be at big risk. He felt his friendship was not as important as Malini’s life and Kashi. Therefore, he informed the King in time about Kemankar’s plan and thereby stopped him to cause trouble there. Hence, I would not like to call Supriya a betrayer.

8. The King repeatedly asks Supriya to ask for anything he wished. Why do you think he is so insistent?
Supriya has saved the King’s daughter by informing him in time about his friend Kemankar’s plan of killing her. He has also helped the King avert big problem posed by Kemankar. Therefore, the King is very happy and highly impressed with him. He wants to reward him for that. Therefore, he insistently asks him to ask for anything he wished.
When the king tells him to ask even for that thing that seems impossible, he seems at that point that he is intending to give his daughter’s hands in marriage to him, to whom she owes her life. This intention of the King is clear when he says to him,”Will you repeat that prayer to me, to lead my daughter to exile from her father’s house?”
9. The play ends with Malini’s words: “Father, forgive Kemankar.” Do you think the King will forgive Kemankar? Discuss.
I don’t think the King will forgive Kemankar simply because his daughter was requesting him. Kemankar was a big criminal. He had made a conspiracy against the princess and also brutally killed Supriya in front of the King himself. For these two grave crimes he must be punished so that it will set an example in the state that everyone will be punished for wrongdoing. The King will certainly punish him to give justice to Supriya and to maintain law and order. If he forgives Kemankar, that will set a very bad example of injustice and will encourage others to commit crimes. Moreover, Kemankar would again go to foreign land to bring soldiers and attack Malinias he himself told the king that he would do so if he was forgiven.
The Six Million Dollar Man -Harold J. Morowitz
Questions:
1. Explain the title of this essay and the author’s joy in discovering that he is a six Million Dollar Man. The title of this essay is derived from the author’s first delightful evaluation as a six million dollar figure. When he discovers that he is worth six million dollars and not just 97cents as estimated by the biochemists, he feels extremely delighted. It boosts up his sense of ego; he feels proud of himself.
2. What definition of the human body is implied in the statement on the greeting card? Why does Morowitz question it? The human body seems to be defined in the statement on the greeting card as a mere commodity that is worth not more than 97 cents. The author questions it because he can’t believe that a man like him or anyone else can be so cheap.
3. At what strikingly different definition does the author finally arrive? The author begins with the definition of the human body but finally arrives at a strikingly different definition of the human being that each individual is infinitely precious. S/he is priceless. It is a grand philosophical definition of the human beings.
4. In his conclusion Morowitz declares that how we think about the humans must colour our view of the world. Define the world view of someone who answers the question “What is human?” with the greeting card assumption: “A human is 97 cents worth of chemicals.”

A person who answers that question with the above mentioned greeting card assumption must have materialistic world view. Such persons think that the world is a market where everything has their certain value. They highly consider only matters, and lacks capacity to appreciate spiritual things. They donot value emotions and intelligence. Moreover, they don’t look at a thing in its totality.
( Read the slides also) On the Vanity of Earthly Greatness-Arthur Guiterman

Summary
The poem, “On the Vanity of Earthly Greatness” composed by the American poet Arthur Guiterman deals with the theme of the remorselessness of time and the vanity of earthly greatness. It elaborates this theme with four examples - two from animal world and two from the human world.
Mastodons, extinct mammals that resembled the elephant, used to show their power by hitting other animals with their powerful tusks which have now been transformed into billiard balls. Similarly, grizzly bears would show their power by hugging others but now after their death they exist in the form of mere rugs.
Charlemagne was a great Emperor of Rome. He conquered wars and maintained law and order and justice by using his sword. But now the same sword, that slain or injured others, is now on the verge of extinction due to rust. Rust in the emperor’s word symbolically shows that he doesn’t same influence at present. Similarly, Julius Caesar, a great Roman statesman and general, was one of the most influential and powerful person of his time, but now he remains just as a showpiece on the shelf of the poet. And the poet himself who used to feel strong and energetic at one stage of his life doesn’t feel so well at the moment. It’s all because of time.
All these examples clearly show that time doesn’t spare anyone on the earth. Every creature, no matter how much powerful they are, lose their power and magnificence in course of time. It’s like an acid that drips on their earthly greatness and glory, finally reducing them to good for nothing.
Discussion Questions
2. Bring out the ‘vanity’ involved in the last couplet. The last couplet deals with the present condition of the great Roman statesman and General Julius Caesar and the poet himself. The vanity involved in this couplet is shown by the difference between their past and present conditions. Julius Caesar was a great warrior and administrator of his time with a lot of power and influence in his hand. But all his glory, magnificence and influence vanished in the course of time and at present he stands as a decorative piece on the poet’s shelf in the form of bust – a half statue without legs and arms! His presence in this form suggests the effects of time on his power, position, and other achievements. Like him, the poet is also no longer in a desirable condition. In his past he would feel strong and energetic but at present does not feel so well.
3. What is ironical about the poem? Irony means incongruity between what actually happens and what might be expected to happen, especially when this disparity seems absurd and laughable. Such incongruity abounds in this short poem. It is exemplified by vast differences between the past situations of mastodons, grizzly bears, Charlemagne the Just, Julius Caesar, and the poet himself.
While mastodons were alive, they exercised their power by striking other creatures in fierce fights with their powerful tusks. They had never thought that one day they themselves would disappear from the earth, let alone their “tusks”. Now their tusks have been transformed into billiard balls. They are now being hit in billiard game instead of hitting others. Grizzly bear “whose potent hug was feared by all” has turned into rugs, and Charlemagne the Just’s sword has rusted. Similarly, a most influential person of his time Julius Caesar is present now but as a bust on the poet’s shelf. Who would have thought that such a great warrior would become a showpiece having no arms and legs? It’s such differences between what happens actually and what is expected that creates irony in the poem.
In Bed -Joan Didion

Summary
The essay “In Bed”, written by Joan Didion, deals with the theme of migraine. It’s a very severe recurrent headache that occurs only on one side of the head. The author describes the nature of this disease and elaborates it side by side with her own experience of suffering from it.
Migraine is an incurable disease related with a nerve hormone called serotonin. When the amount of serotonin falls sharply in the blood, the migraine headache starts. At this time the patient feels flush of blood in his/her cerebral arteries, and irritation. This makes him/her aware that it’s now about to start now, and before that medicine has to be taken. This stage is called migraine “aura”. There are some medicines that do not allow serotonin decrease, and thereby stop migraine temporarily. Once it starts, no medicine can have any effect on it. Then it will continue for hours, in some cases even for a few days. Migraine gives some people mild hallucinations, temporarily blinds others, and even causes other troubles like gastrointestinal disturbance, a painful sensitivity to all sensory stimuli, fatigue, and stroke-like aphasia. It also brings with it chills, sweating, nausea, and excessive weakness. Almost anyone can trigger the attack of migraine, for example stress, allergy, exhaustion, unexpected arrival of guests at home etc. It doesn’t kill anyone it makes life quite complicated and miserable.
Migraine patients suffer not only from severe headache but also accusations and criticisms of others who don’t suffer from this disease. Thinking that it can cured by taking some pills like aspirin, some of them accuse the sufferers that they are just pretending to suffer in order to rest in bed. Some even think that it is rather imaginary.They don’t understand the problem of the migraine sufferers and becomes difficult to sympathize with them. The author thinks that she is fortunate to get a husband who also suffers from migraine because as he himself suffers from it he understand her problem and pain. Even doctors seem to have misconception about such patients. They call them as “migraine personality” and think that such personality tends to be ambitious, inward, intolerant of error, rigidly organized, and perfectionist. But not all perfectionists have, the author says, migraine, and not all migrainous people have migraine personalities.
Joan Didion suffers from migraine because of her hereditary problem: her two grandmothers and parents had it. She started suffering from it when she was in school.She tried to fight it a number of times. She thought that just by ignoring it she would get rid of it. She even used to feel ashamed to admit that she had a migraine because of what others would think. Now she has realized that she will have to live and die with it as it is an incurable disease. She has understood her disease and shows an intellectual response toward it. She no longer fights it: instead she treats it as a friend not as a mere lodger. She says that she has even a good understanding with it. That is, when she has really big trouble, it doesn’t come to her. When she has rather small problems, only then it visits her. She has learned now to live with it. Once it comes, she no longer fights it: instead she simply lies down in bed and lets it happen. She concentrates hard on the pain which makes her forget the other problems of life. When the pain recedes, all the apprehension, resentments and anxieties go with it. And then she enjoys even the minor things. It works as a circuit breaker for her.
Exercises
1. According to the author, how do migraines differ from ordinary headaches? What are their distinctive traits?
Migraine is an extremely painful disease that cannot be permanently cured whereas ordinary headache is not real disease in itself; it is merely a symptom that indicates something is wrong with the body. Migraine occurs only in half of the head whereas ordinary one in the whole. The former is far more painful and troubling than the latter.
Migraine is mostly caused by heredity. It is related with a nerve hormone called serotonin that is found in blood. When its amount decreases a lot, then migraine pain starts in half of the head. Before it starts, it shows some symptoms like irritation and flush of blood in cerebral arteries. Common headaches have no aura period whereas it is an inevitable part of migraine. Medicines have to be taken before the pain starts in order to avert its arrival. Once it starts, it can’t be stopped by any drugs. Ordinary headaches can be cured by painkillers.
2. What popular misconceptions about migraine headaches does Didion want to correct?
Those people who don’t have migraine have misconceptions about it. They think that it can be cured by taking some aspirins. According to them, it is like ordinary headaches that can be cured. Some of them even think that it rather imaginary and it is caused by unpleasant temper, bad attitudes, etc. These are two popular misconceptions that Didion wants to correct in this essay. She makes it clear giving her own example that migraine is an incurable disease.
3. What once made Didion ashamed to admit that she suffered from migraines?
PreviouslyDidion felt ashamed to admit that she had migraine because of two reasons. First, migraine is the evidence of some chemical inferiority in the body. Second, people might think that she picked this disease because she had an unpleasant temper, bad attitude, and so on.
5. What intellectual response does she have toward her own migraines?
Didion’s intellectual response toward her own migraine is that she treats it as friend instead of lodger. She no longer fights it. She has accepted the truth that she has to live with it and die with it. She says she has even developed an understanding with it: it never comes to her when she has big troubles; instead, it comes when she has rather small problems.

The Gardener-Rudyard Kipling
1. What is the real relation between Helen and Michael?
The real relation between Helen and Michael is that he is her own biological son whom she gave birth in France away from her hometown. He was not her nephew;the son her brother George – as she had introduced him to people in her hometown. She had told that lie in order to save her image and prestige in society. At that time pregnancy before marriage was a matter of disgrace and unmarried mothers were not socially accepted especially in the countryside in England.
2. What is the truth behind each of the lies Helen tells the village at the beginning of the story? Why does she tell these lies?
Helen tells the people of her hometown at the beginning that she has a lung trouble and she is going to France for treatment but the truth behind this is that she is pregnant and going there to give birth to her child. Michael is not her nephew as she tells; he is her own biological son. He is not born of George’s fiancée in Bombay, India.
3. How do you know who the gardener really is? The gardener is a mysterious character that emerges abruptly at the end of the story.In the story she has told no one about her true relation with Michael, and tells the gardener also that she is looking for the grave of her nephew Michael. But this character knows that he is her son, not nephew. This fact can be known only to two persons other than her; one – The God himself and the other - that person who was Michael’s father. I think it could be God who could have come there to be with the unfortunate people who had lost their dear ones because he looked at her with infinite compassion in his eyes.
It couldpossibly be Michael’s father also because he knew about her true relation with Michael.

Best of Luck!