Prose and Fiction - 2

EG-04 (2nd Year)

VARDHAMAN MAHAVEER OPEN UNIVERSIY, KOTA
Unit I
JOHN RUSKIN : ROOTS OF HONOUR
Unit II
E.V. LUCAS : THIRD THOUGHTS
Unit III
BERTRAND RUSSELL: MACHINES AND EMOTIONS
Unit IV
WILLIAM DOUGLAS : DEEP WATER
Unit V
ALDOUS HUXLEY:SELECTED SNOBBERIES
Unit VI
NIRAD C. CHAUDHURI : CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION
Unit VII
NIRAD C. CHAUDHURI : MONEY AND THE ENGLISHMAN
Unit VIII
JANE AUSTEN : EMMA (I)
Unit IX
JANE AUSTEN : EMMA (II)
Unit X
CHARLES DICKENS: A CHRISTMAS CAROL (I)
Unit XI
CHARLES DICKENS: A CHRISTMAS CAROL (II)
Unit XII
LEWIS CARROLL : HUMPTY DUMPTY
Unit XIII
ANTON P. CHEKHOV:THE LAMENT
Unit XIV
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE : THE SPECKLED BAND
Unit XV
SELMA LAGERLOF : THE RATTRAP
Unit XVI
MAXIM GORKY : THE MOTHER OF A TRAITOR
Unit XVII
D.H.LAWRENCE:THE ROCKING-HORSE WINNER
Unit XVIII
W.S. MAUGHAM: THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER
UNIT XIX
E.M. FORSTER: MOSQUE
UNIT XX
E.M.FORSTER : TEMPLE PRICE : 180

.
 UNIT-1

JOHN RUSKIN : ROOTS OF HONOUR

Q.1. Which concept Ruskin discuss in the essay.
Ans. Ruskin discusses the concept of an advantageous code of social action can be calculated irrespective of the
social affection.

Q.2. Who were the leading exponents of poltical economics of nineteenth century?
Ans. The nineteenth-century leading exponents of political economics were John Stuart Mill, Thomas Robert
Malthus, and David Ricardo.

Q.3. Who was a champion of liberty?

Ans. Mill was a champion of liberty.

Q.4. Who accepts the theory put forward by Malthus?

Ans. Ricardo accepts the theory put forward by Malthus.

Q.5. What is the economists believe?

Ans. Economists believe that social affections are accidental and unsettling elements of human nature.

Q.6. What did john suggest?

Ans. He further suggests that elements of social affections do not operate in a mathematical but chemical way.

Q.7. In the first essay “Roots of Honour”, what did Ruskin attempts?
Ans. In the first essay “Roots of Honour”, Ruskin attempts to put forth his views in an ethical framework.

Q.8. What is John Ruskin’s opinion about the nineteenth-century political economists?
Ans. John Ruskin has a very negative opinion of the theories advanced by the nineteenth-century political
economists. These economists believe that an advantageous code of social action can be created without taking into
consideration the influence of social affection. They are of the opinion that avarice and the desire of progress are constant
elements in the processes of social action while social affections are accidental.
John Ruskin rejects this idea. He says that these forces do not operate mathematically, but chemically. He also
stresses that importance of human soul or spirit which motivates men. Ruskin also criticizes these political economists
because they believe that the interest of masters and workmen are antagonistic. It does not always follow that persons
must be antagonistic because their interests are.
He also condemns these theorists for suggesting that human actions depend on the rule of expediency. He believes
that the balance of justice is more important and it includes human affection, something which one man owes to another.
All right relationships between masters and workmen depend on these. Ruskin rejects the contemporary view that worker
is a mere engine the motive power of which is steam, magnetism and gravitation. He believes that motive power is a soul
which enters into all the political economist’s equations without his knowledge.
Thus Ruskin creates an emotional, even an ethical angle as opposed to the mechanical angle put forward by
political economists like John Stuart Mill, Ricardo and Malthus.

.
 Q.9. What are John Ruskin’s views about the master-workmen relationship?
Ans. John Ruskin looks at the questions related to the master-workmen relationship in great detail. First of all, he
affirms that human beings are not automation or engines. They are not motivated with steam, magnetism and gravitation.
They are motivated with a spirit. So they must be treated with consideration and sympathy and balance of justice.
Ruskin also knows that kindness and sympathy will be frequently abused. He asserts that workmen should be
treated with kindness without any economic purpose and, in return, our economic purposes will be answered. Masters
need not be blatantly selfish but cautiously considerate. Further, Ruskin proves his point with the examples from army,
robbers and industrialists. He suggests that unlike a soldier or a servant, a workman operates at a rate of wages which
varies according to the demand of labour. He can be thrown out at any time.
He raises two questions here: one, how the rates are to be regulated in a way that they do not vary with the
demand of labour. Second, how bodies of workmen may be engaged or maintained without enlarging or diminishing their
numbers. The answer to the first question is that it should be paid at a fixed rate on a regular basis. Secondly, the number
of workers may not be enlarged or diminished at will. They should be given some permanent interests in the establishment
in which they work.
To conclude, John Ruskin does not look at the master-worker relationship only from the mercantile angle. He wants
it to have a character with a human, emotional, and ethical angle.

Q.10. Which according to Ruskin are five “great intellectual professions” in every civilised nation? What are their
duties?
Ans. The five great intellectual professions are those of soldiers, pastors, physicians, lawyers, merchants. The
soldier’s profession is to defend the nation and not run away on the due occasion of war. The physician should keep a
nation in good health. He should not leave his post in times of medical emergency. The pastor should teach faith rather
than falsehood. The lawyer should not defend injustice but enforce justice.
John Ruskin then takes up the case of the merchant by putting the question “What are the duties of a merchant?”
According to him, the duty of a merchant or a manufacturer is to provide for the nation. He says that it is perfectly
legitimate for a merchant to earn a profit. But it is his duty to maintain the quality of the things he deals in. The purity of the
products must be maintained at every cost.
It is also the duty of the merchant to distribute or sell his things at the cheapest rate where it is most needed. Since
the production or obtaining of any commodity involves necessarily the involvement of many people, it is the responsibility
of the merchant to produce and sell in purest and cheapest forms. It is also his duty to maintain the balance of justice in his
dealings with his employees.
Thus John Ruskin, by pointing to social, ethical and emotional issues, emerges as a different kind of political
economist.

Q.11. Write the detail summary of ‘The Roots of Honour’.

Ans. In this introductory essay, Ruskin discusses the concept of an advantageous code of social action can be
calculated irrespective of the social affection. He also looks at concerns about the perfect relationship between the workers
and their masters. He disagrees with nineteenth-century political theorists who believed social affections were
unintentional and upsetting features of human nature. The nineteenth-century leading exponents of political economics
were John Stuart Mill, Thomas Robert Malthus, and David Ricardo.
Although Mill was a champion of liberty, he was of the opinion that the public option and the law should work
against an increase in population. As it would be difficult to maintain a decent standard of living, he agrees with Malthus,
who discussed the relationship between the population and the means of subsistence. He further argues that, by nature,
the former must outrun the latter. Ricardo also accepts the theory put forward by Malthus.
Ruskin criticized those economic thinkers who, according to him, were self-styled political economists. These
economists believe that social affections are accidental and unsettling elements of human nature. Greed and the desire for

.
progress are, on the other hand, constant elements. According to these economists, the inconstant is to be eliminated and
human beings are to be treated as covetous machines. After that, we should examine what labor, purchase and sale laws,
etc., operate in a society in order to obtain wealth. They also feel that these laws, once determined, will allow each
individual to introduce as many of the disturbing affections as he chooses, so that he would be able to determine for
himself the result of the new conditions.
Ruskin thus creates the basis for his discussion. He finds faults with the above-mentioned economists for two
primary reasons. First, he believes that man ‘s behavior should be traced under constant conditions , and later on the
causes of variations should be known.
He further suggests that elements of social affections do not operate in a mathematical but chemical way. Second,
he disagrees with contemporary political economists in that they see human beings as nothing but a mere skeleton, an
automation without a soul. Like many other idealists, Ruskin protested against the concept of human beings as machines.
To make his argument possible, he borrows images from chemistry and human anatomy. Despite the influence of science
on his writings, Ruskin did not hesitate to reject the popular view that the human body is a machine. He uses the example
of using pure nitrogen as a highly manageable gas.
However, when we deal with its fluorides, it can cause damage to us and our apparatus. In the same way, he is
attacking the theory of progress at the expense of the negation of the soul. By giving these examples, Ruskin argues that
human problems can not be resolved through mathematical precision. It also points to the inapplicability of such a theory in
the context of the strike of workers.
Here, he discusses a vital issue concerning the relationship between the employer and the employee. He believes
that all the leading economists of the 19th century have preferred to remain silent on this issue. They are incapable of
reconciling the interests of the opposing parties. Ruskin, on the other hand , believes that the interests of the masters and
workers are the same and that there is no antagonism between them.
He suggests that all cordial relations between the masters and the servants depend on the “balance of justice” – a
term that encompasses the emotional relationship between one man and another. He steadfastly rejects the political-
economic view that a worker is merely a motor whose motivating power is steam, magnetism and gravitation. For him, the
motivating power of a worker is a soul of an unknown quantity. He believes that this motivating force, involving the will and
spirit of man, is brought to its greater strength by its own proper feeling, that is, by the affection that these political
economists have described as accidental and disturbing elements of human nature. He ends the statement by implying that
the master ‘s relationship with the workers must be based on love because there is no animosity between them and there is
no conflict of interests between them.
After this, Ruskin discusses the wage problem. He believes in the equality of wages and maintains that the constant
number of workers should remain in employment. Bad worker should not be discriminated against with a good worker in
terms of wages. If the master has to choose a worker, he always chooses a good worker. A bad worker should not be
allowed to offer his work even at half wages, nor should he be allowed to take the place of a good worker. For the sake of
insufficient money, he completely rules out competition. Likewise, a good worker should be satisfied with the fact that he is
chosen for his work. He should not feel proud of the higher wages he earns.
Ruskin believes that there are five intellectual professions in every civilized society, namely a soldier, a pastor, a
physician, a lawyer and a merchant. Persons belonging to these professions are expected to perform their duties honestly.
The merchant, for example, must supply the people with perfect and pure things. But the question that disturbs Ruskin ‘s
mind is what kind of social pressure can be exerted on an dishonest person.
In this first essay, Unto This Last Ruskin ‘s mind is concerned with the question of the individual conscience. He
believes that society can only be transformed if the individual is reformed. Personal honesty will therefore lead to social
honesty as opposed to the mechanical theories of other contemporary political economists. Ruskin ‘s theory of political
economy is based on the code of ethics of life. An amoral person is likely to act against the general interest of society. Thus,
despite the fact that Ruskin does not oppose the right of an individual to run industries and to employ workers, he wants an

.
ethical basis to form the core of all social and financial efforts. So, in the first essay “Roots of Honour”, Ruskin attempts to
put forth his views in an ethical framework. However, he leaves certain vital questions unanswered.

.
 UNIT-2

E.V. LUCAS : THIRD THOUGHTS

Q.1. Who is the narrator in the story?
Ans. Author’s friend is the narrator in the story.

Q.2. What was the opinion of the dealer about the drawing?
Ans. The opinion of the dealer about drawing was “If it were a genuine Turner, it would be worth anything”.

Q.3. What price did the narrator pay for the drawing to the dealer? How much profit did he gain by selling it?
Ans. Ten shillings. He achieved a profit of forty-nine pounds ten and was very happy.

Q.4. Why did the narrator think of sending some amount of the profit to the dealer?
Ans. The dealer behaved very well to him and he ought to behave well to him. Therefore, he thought that it would
be fair to give him half.

Q.5. How many times did he think about the dealer? Did he change his thoughts each time?
Ans. First, he thought that he would give the dealer fifty per cent of his profit; the second time he reduced it to ten
pounds; the third time he decided to give five pounds; then the thought that he would send the dealer one pound
accompanied by a brief note of thanks. Finally, he dropped the idea of sending any share from his profit to the dealer.

Q.6. Why did he not post the letter after having written the first note?
Ans. As he played bridge disastrously, he could not post the letter.

Q.7. Comment on the title ‘Third Thoughts’?

Ans. The title is apt and suggestive of the fact that there is no end to consideration and reconsideration when one’s
mind is taken over by selfish thoughts.

Q.8. Who tells the story to the author?

Ans. The author's friend tells this story to the author.

Q.9. When does the narrator give away his artistic articles?
Ans. The narrator gives away his artistic articles when he is tired of a picture or a decorative article He does so only
to make its acceptance by another a personal favour.

Q.10. Did the narrator go to the market with the intention of buying the painting? How did he happen to buy it?
Ans. No, the narrator did not go to the market with the intention of buying the painting. On seeing the painting, the
narrator thought it to be a possible Turner and the dealer sold it on the cheapest rate. Thus he happened to buy it.

Q.11. What price did the narrator get from the buyer for the drawing?
Ans. The narrator got fifty pounds from the buyer for the drawing. He bought it for ten shillings. He got a good
profit from it.

Q.12. Why did the dealer sell the drawings so cheaply to the narrator?

.
 Ans. The dealer sold the drawing so cheaply to the narrator because according to him it was not a genuine Turner.
He would enquire of it the next week when he would go to London.

Q.13. Why did the narrator feel so delighted and proud after selling the painting?
Ans. After selling the painting, the narrator felt so delighted and proud because he got a very good profit which he
never had earlier.

Q.14. Why does the narrator think that the dealer should get a part of the profit he had earned?
Ans. The narrator thinks that the dealer should get a part of the profit he had earned because he behaved very well
to him. Therefore, the narrator should also behave very well to him. It would be only fair to give him half.

Q.15. In his mood of elation what did the narrator write in the first note to the dealer?
Ans. In his mood of elation the narrator wrote in the first note to the dealer that the potential Turner drawing
turned out to be authentic and  he had great pleasure in  enclosing half of the proceeds as it was the only just and decent
course.

Q.16. Which habit of the story teller leads him to examine and re-examine his idea of sending a part of the profit
to the dealer?
Ans. His greed and the habit of reconsideration leads the story teller to examine and reexamine his idea of sending
a part of the profit to his dealer.

Q.17. What did the narrator do when sleep did not come to him?
Ans. When sleep did not come to the narrator, he took a book of short stories and read one. Then he closed his
eyes and began to think about the dealer. 

Q.18. Why does the narrator term the bargaining as a straight forward matter between dealer and customer?
Ans. The narrator terms the bargaining as a straight forward matter between dealer and customer because this
thinking may save him from the pangs of conscience He bargains with his own soul.

Q.19. The point of narrative resides not in bargaining with the collectors, but in bargaining with my own soul.
How far does the statement embody the true spirit of Third Thoughts'?
Ans. The author's friend wants to show how selfishness and narrow-mindedness spoil our mind and soul First, the
narrator thinks that the dealer is an honest, fair man and he should get half the profit Then he comes to ten pounds. Then
he thinks of giving away even five pounds will make the goddess of wealth angry One pound will be enough. At the end, he
sends no money and thus, bargains with his own soul. The statement embodies the true spirit.

Q.20. Why are city magnates successful according to the narrator?

Ans. According to the narrator the city magnates are successful because they have deep insight into the business
psychology and philosophy of the World of Trade and Commerce where impulse is negation of Magnetism and buying and
selling are a perfectly straight forward matter between dealer and customer The dealer extorts as much as possible After
payment the customer is under no obligation.

Q.21. How did the intended note to the dealer read and did it ever reach him?
Ans. The intended note to the dealer read that the potential Turner drawing was authentic so he was sending half
of the proceeds Then he thought of sending ten pounds and then five pounds and then one pound because of various

.
reasons The note never reached the dealer because the narrator forgot to post it. He bargained with his own soul
repeatedly.

Q.22. Here is no fury like a woman scorned. Who is the 'woman referred to here and why does the narrator fear
her fury?
Ans. The woman referred to here is the Goddess of Business. The narrator fears her fury because earlier he did not
earn any profit. Now first time he earns profit. If he shares this profit with the dealer, the Goddess of Business will be in
fury. His business will come to an end if the Goddess of Business is angry with him.

Q.23. How much profit did the narrator achieve by selling the drawing? (Sr. Sec. Exam., 2019)
Ans. By selling the drawing the narrator achieved the profit of forty nine and a half pounds The dealer sold it just
for ten shillings The purchaser bought it from the narrator at fifty pounds The drawing was an authentic Tumer while the
dealer was unsure about it.

Q.24. Why does the narrator feel that he has to give away finally his artistic possessions?
Ans. Whenever the narrator feels that he is tired of the artistic or decorative piece he has to give it away to
somebody to get rid of it It becomes a personal favour.

Q.25. What was the opinion of the dealer about the drawing?
Ans. The dealer did not believe that it was the drawing of the great artist Tumer. He was unsure about it That is
why he sold it just for ten shillings.

Q.26. Why did the dealer sell the drawings so cheaply to the narrator? (Board Model Paper, 2017-18)
Ans. The dealer sold the drawing so cheaply to the narrator because to him it was not a genuine Tumer He would
enquire the next week.

Q.27. What price did the narrator pay for the drawing to the dealer? How much profit did he gain by selling it?
Ans. The narrator paid ten shillings to the dealer for the drawing He came a profit of forty nine and a half pounds by
selling it It was an authentic Tumer.

Q.28. Why did the narrator think of sending some amount of the profit to the dealer?
Ans. The narrator thought that the dealer was a plain, simple and honest man He behaved well with the narrator It
will be fair to share good fortune with some others.

Q.29. What did he write in his first note to the dealer?

Ans. The narrator wrote in the first letter that the possible Turner drawing had really turned out to be genuine or
authentic As a just step he was sending him half the amount he received.

Q.30. When does he become the 'enviable thing' a successful dealer?

Ans. Once while wandering among curiosity shop he succeeds in buying a drawing of Turner just for ten shillings i.e.
in half a pound. He sells it for fifty pounds and thus earns profit.

Q.31. What was the reply of the dealer when the narrator wanted to know the price of the drawing?
Ans. The dealer said that if the drawing had been really made by Turner there could have been any price but he
could sell it for ten shillings only He would carry it to London to have an opinion.

.
 Q.32. Pick out and write the sentence which tells that the number of the errors the author's friend committed in
life was not one.
Ans. The sentence is, "At about 3.30 am I woke widely up and, according to custom, began to review my life's errors
which are in no danger of ever suffering from loneliness.

Q.33. Why did he not post the letter after having written the first note?
Ans. It was late evening when he wrote the first letter He did not have postage stamps and time was late He went
to bed and could not post the letter.

Q.34. What did the narrator write in the brief note which he was to send with a gift of one pound to the dealer?
Ans. The narrator wrote in the letter that he had earned some profit from the drawing and according to his belief
he wanted to give him a present. Good luck should be shared

Q.35. Justify the title Third Thoughts.

Ans. Third Thoughts' is a new idiom coined by the author It is based on the common and well-known idiom-second
thoughts which means one more consideration given to an issue. The writer goes on considering and changing his ideas
directed by the selfish motives. These thoughts replace the lofty and generous ideas by selfish thoughts and worldly
wisdom. It shows that man is basically selfish and materialistic and for the sake of money he can consider, reconsider and
even change his noble and ideal thoughts in his everyday social behaviour. Thus it can be said that the title is quite
appropriate.

Q.36. Mention the reasons given by the narrator for changing his resolution with each reconsideration.
Ans. At first the narrator thought to give half of the profit. He reviewed this decision at 3.30 a m He argued that it
was he who detected the Tumer. The dealer failed though it was his routine task so ten  pounds would be sufficient. He
further argued that if he did so it would give him a wrong idea of his customers and none of them would be as fair and
sporting as he himself so  five would be plenty. Next morning he further argued that the goddess of business brought the
profit to him so he should not spoil it by giving a large part of the profit away. It would like flying in the face of the goddess
of business. She might never come to him again. A business man should never be impulsive. One pound would be  
sufficient. But that afternoon he played Bridge so badly that was glad that he did not send even the one pound to the
dealer.

Q.37. Give the character-sketch of the narrator in the essay Third Thoughts'.
Ans. The narrator in Third Thoughts' is the friend of the author, E V Lucas. Initially he was an unsuccessful dealer.
He bought in the dearest markets and sold in the cheapest.
The Goddess of Business was angry with him. Once he bought a possible Tuner drawing. It gave him a profit of forty
nine and a half pounds The Goddess of Business smiled first time on him He became a successful dealer He wanted to share
his good luck. He thought to give half of the profit to the dealer but later on examined and re-examined it and decided to
send first ten, then five and then one pound. In the end, he sends nothing. He bargains with his own soul. Thus, he is selfish,
greedy and over-ambitious

Q.38. List the messages, E.V. Lucas, wishes to convey in Third Thoughts.
Ans. E.V Lucas in Third Thoughts wishes to convey a number of thoughts. The first and foremost is this that we
should not bargain with our own soul. The narrator first wants to give half of the profit but in the end he doesn't send a
single pound The second is this that we should share our good luck with others. The narrator wants to do so. The third is
this that unsuccessful person can become a successful person one day The narrator becomes so by a Turner drawing. The

.
fourth is, that a person should not be impulsive in business. The narrator says that impulse is the negation of magnetism
The fifth is, that a person should implement the first thought which is generally of pious nature

Q.39. Throw light on the reasons given by the narrator of ‘Third Thought’ for changing his resolutions with each
consideration.
Ans. This story was told to the author by one of his friends. The friend said that it is only one ‘s destiny that can be
bought and sold at the cheapest price in the most expensive markets. A friend was dealing with decorative items. Usually,
he had to sell them at such a lower price than it seemed to him that by accepting the item at such a lower rate, the buyer
was giving him a special favour. But the other day was a very lucky day for him to bring him an unexpected earning.
Drifting around the old curiosity shops of the Cathedral City, he came across a portfolio of watercolour drawings.
Among these, Turner’s drawing attracted him a lot. He asked the dealer for his price, and the dealer said it only cost ten
shillings. He paid ten shillings to the dealer and bought it from him, and then sold it at a price of fifty pounds the next time,
and thus made a huge profit, exactly forty-nine pounds ten, and was duly enriched.
Thereupon, his thoughts ran thus; that the dealer must also participate in the profit. He had behaved him very well
and he ought to behave well to him. Hence, it would be fair to send him half of the earning. After having decided thus, he
sat down and wrote a little note saying that the potential Turner drawing turned out to be authentic and he had great
pleasure in enclosing half of the proceeds. As he had no stamps and was late by an hour, he could not post the  letter and
went to bed. He woke up at about 3.30 a.m. and began to review his life’s errors. This process of evaluation and review led
him to examine and cross-examine the contents of the letter. His thoughts ran why he should give half of the proceeds to
the dealer as it was useless to be quixotic in this modern world. It was only his eyes that detected the probability of this
business in which he had remained a complete failure and thus why he should put a premium for ineptitude. And a present
of ten pounds would be more than enough. Then he took a storybook and read one as sleep was refusing to oblige him. His
thoughts ran thus why he should send ten pounds even. It will only give the dealer a wrong idea of his customers; none
other would be so fair and sporting to him. He will expect every day such a letter and this
will make him disappointed. Thus, he will get embittered and become miserable. It was a crime to injure his existing nature.
Five pounds would be plenty.
He thought about the dealer again when he was dressing the next morning. His thoughts ran like this, why he was
supposed to bring a financial coup in his life by giving away such a large part of his money, and he was supposed to control
his feelings. At last, he decided to send a pound with a brief note. The note contained that he had sold the drawing to a
profit – which made it possible for him to make a present because his old belief is that good luck must be shared. He had an
envelope containing a check and a brief note in his pocket when he reached the club for lunch.
He played bridge so disastrously that he was glad he didn’t post it. Because in the last one, he decided not to send
anything to the dealer, thinking that buying and selling was a perfectly straight-forward affair between the dealer and the
customer. The dealer asks as much as he thinks he can urge, and the customer who paid the price is not under the
obligation of the dealer. The incident was closed.

.
 UNIT-3

BERTRAND RUSSELL: MACHINES AND EMOTIONS

Q.1. Who wrote the novel Erewhon? What kind of novel is it?
Ans. Samuel Butler wrote the novel Erewhon. It is a satirical novel.

Q.2. Why are machines valued?

Ans. They are valued because they confer power upon others.

Q.3. Why is a machine like a Djinn?

Ans. Because it makes its owner’s life happy but it is cruel to those who work with machines.

Q.4. Do people want more money for having more material goods?
Ans. No, they want more and more money so that others praise them for their money.

Q.5. What does writer say in the essay ?

Ans. The writer says that the machines have made the life of their owners comfortable but those of the workers
miserable. Machines demand the qualities of regularity, punctuality, and exactness while there is no scope for the workers
to do anything different or new. Their desire to do something is never satisfied and they become rebellious. They find their
satisfaction in world wars. The writer makes some suggestions so as to avoid the possibility of a third world war by making
the workers happy.

Q.6. What is the machine according to Bertrand Russell?

Ans. Machines are slaves to their masters. The masters of the machines do not know the harmful effects of the
machine because only those who stay and work with the machines are directly and terribly affected and damaged by the
noise and smell of the machine. But the masters claim that it is only because of the operation of the machines, they have a
much better life than their forefather.

Q.7. How the possession of material goods increases the happiness of human beings?
Ans. The possession of material goods increases the happiness of human beings. The person who owns more goods
becomes happier than the person who has fewer goods. Some moralists and religious personalities reject the emphasis on
material goods, but this is only superficial and prejudiced, because, with a lot of money and a better income, they are also
happier than they are left with a lower income. So happiness felt by human beings, along with goods, is linked to
psychological factors. Human emotions are also linked to physical needs. Physical fulfilment increases satisfaction. In
poverty and lack of goods, human beings can not be satisfied and happy.

Q.8. How are the people trying to increase their income?

Ans. The people are trying to increase their income because their satisfaction with a better life relies on material
wealth. Material wealth is gaining social influence as well as mental and spiritual contentment. While people don’t know
everything about the things they have and they hold that so other people in society know the value and significance of the
things. Social status and recognition are different from one culture to another.

Q.9. In what possession of material prosperity should work as a competitive matter?

Ans. The possession of material prosperity should work as a competitive matter. People who have much material
prosperity are superior and the people who don’t have material prosperity get pain if they are poorer than their

.
neighbours. On the other hand, human happiness depends on the control of the population. If any country has a smaller
population, people can be more prosperous than that of the people of those countries which have a greater population. So
if we think the only machine brings happiness and prosperity that is the wrong concept. So, to replace the importance of
machine and material prosperity, we should control starvation too. The machine regularizes men, and lack of it renders
them erratic. Irregular life is called a bad life because there is no punctuality, severity and consistency.

Q.10. On what grounds can the use of machines be justified according to Bertrand Russell?
Ans. Machines have made people and nations rich and prosperous but they have not succeeded in making them
happy. This is clear from the fact that during the last century the world has seen two world wars and a great and huge
amount of loss of money and goods. Such wastage is inexcusable. What the world needs most is not the physical comforts
but happiness. Happiness is a psychological necessity whereas the comforts are needed for the physical well being only.
During the nineteenth century machines were invented by the West but they did not attract the attention of Asia
and the East. The East had a cultural heritage which was against the physical comforts and emphasized the necessity of
psychological satisfaction. But such is the attraction of machines that the people of the East also feel jealous of the West
because of its machine culture.
The machines have made the life of the people psychologically miserable. No doubt, because of machines, people
today earn more than their fathers and grandfathers ever did. But the machines have made only those people prosperous
who own them. On the other hand, there are many workers who work on machines regularly and they have to live with dirt
and dust that machines create.
Moreover, machines expect their workers to have a machine like qualities which are regularity, changelessness and
exactness and there is no relief for the workers from these machines like qualities.
Working continuously and for long hours on the machines, they have nothing fresh or new for them in their life to
do. The desire to do something new or unusual is never satisfied and they become more and more irritated and dissatisfied
with their work.
They have no opportunity to do anything which will satisfy their desire to do something different.
The use of machines, according to the writer, can be justified only if it is used for the reduction of poverty and
destitution. But beyond, that the desire to have more and more money turns human beings into machines. But human
being are not machines and they want to change, novelty and something fresh to do. The writer is of the opinion that if the
world is to be saved from the fear of world wars the workers must be provided with opportunities to do something
different so that they may find some emotional satisfaction. As a solution, the writer suggests that each worker should be
given at least one month’s leave on full pay to do whatever he likes to do in order to satisfy his starved instincts so that
after a month’s leave he may return fresh to his work and psychologically satisfied. The writer says that some people may
object to the idea on the ground that will involve a lot of money. To this, the writer says that though the money involved is
immense but it cannot be as much that is spent on world wars.
So, the use of machines can be justified only for reducing poverty and destitution and not for making only some
people very rich and others unhappy and emotionally starved.

Q.11. Write the detail summary of ‘Machines and Emotions’.

Ans. This essay “Machines and Emotions” written by English thinkers and mathematicians, Bertrand Russell, deals
with the advantages and demerits of machines, human reactions, and some solutions to the problems created by the use of
machines. The relationship between machine and human emotion has been clearly identified. In the beginning, the writer
takes the side of the machine and technology inventions and later comes to feel some problems created by machines that
are and offer some positive solutions to problems that are not solved by science or machines.
In the essay, Bertrand Russell says machines and human emotions are in contradiction to one another. This paradox
is growing further together with the growth of the use of machines in the modern-days. He provides some examples of
Japanese people and Asian society who hate their own traditional cultures but they like Western automobiles. Western

.
people like machines too but this mentality is criticized by some poets and aesthetes. Machines are magnificent, disgusting
and gross. They give power, and they impose slavery.
This liking disliking mentality can’t be totally incorrect. Machines are slaves to their masters. The masters of the
machines do not know the harmful effects of the machine because only those who stay and work with the machines are
directly and terribly affected and damaged by the noise and smell of the machine. But the masters claim that it is only
because of the operation of the machines, they have a much better life than their forefather.
The possession of material goods increases the happiness of human beings. The person who owns more goods
becomes happier than the person who has fewer goods. Some moralists and religious personalities reject the emphasis on
material goods, but this is only superficial and prejudiced, because, with a lot of money and a better income, they are also
happier than they are left with a lower income. So happiness felt by human beings, along with goods, is linked to
psychological factors. Human emotions are also linked to physical needs. Physical fulfilment increases satisfaction. In
poverty and lack of goods, human beings can not be satisfied and happy.
All the people are trying to increase their income because their satisfaction with a better life relies on material
wealth. Material wealth is gaining social influence as well as mental and spiritual contentment. While people don’t know
everything about the things they have and they hold that so other people in society know the value and significance of the
things. Social status and recognition are different from one culture to another.
The possession of material prosperity should work as a competitive matter. People who have much material
prosperity are superior and the people who don’t have material prosperity get pain if they are poorer than their
neighbours. On the other hand, human happiness depends on the control of the population. If any country has a smaller
population, people can be more prosperous than that of the people of those countries which have a greater population. So
if we think the only machine brings happiness and prosperity that is the wrong concept. So, to replace the importance of
machine and material prosperity, we should control starvation too. The machine regularizes men, and lack of it renders
them erratic. Irregular life is called a bad life because there is no punctuality, severity and consistency.

Q.12. How can use of machines be justify according to Russell?

Ans. According to Bertrand Russell, there should be no opposition between machines and emotions. The machines
were invented by the West for increasing their wealth and prosperity and the people of the East are jealous of the West
because the West had machinery but the East did not have it. The people of the East also love machines now.
The important question for Russell is why people love machines. The answer is that machines give power and
money to the man and with money a man can satisfy his physical needs like food, clothes, house etc. No doubt, machines
can reduce poverty but the problem is that those who love machines have already enough to provide them against poverty.
If people love machines and money for reducing poverty and destitution, there is a justification for them. But what
justification is there for those people who have enough to meet their physical needs, and yet want to increase their money?
They want more money because they want to have the power to do good not to themselves but to cause pain to others.
They feel happy with the idea that those who have to work with machines have to live in dust and dirt caused by machines
while they themselves sit away from them and from the dirt and dust in which the workers have to work.
The writer says that there is no harm if the wealth that machines create is needed for meeting the physical
necessities of life and to that limit the use of machines is perfectly acceptable. There is nothing objectionable about
machines if these are used for reducing poverty and destitution among people and nations. But how to account for the love
of money for money’s sake only? Those whose physical needs are totally satisfied yet they want more and more money.
The answer to it is that people want power through money and machines. They want to live a life better than others. In
other words, they want to be admired and appreciated because they have more than they need so that others who do not
have as much money should feel jealous of them. The writer says that for such people happiness is in proportion to their
wealth. They have so much that they do not know what to do with their excess money and so they spend it on things in
which they are in the least interested. But they do so, so that others may feel jealous of them. Thus the happiness that
money gives to them is in proportion to the pain that others feel in being jealous of them and it is for this reason that

.
people want more money. If by law it is decided that everyone will have the same amount of money, neither more nor less,
the competitive advantage that money gives will not be there and people will not want more money and more machinery.
The reason is that the desire for admiration and appreciation that everyone has is natural in man and this desire is
the source of competitive spirit in man. The disadvantage with working on machines is that man is unable to satisfy his
competitive instinct. Machines demand machine-like qualities in a man—regularity, punctuality and exactness. Being
dissatisfied with regularity their instincts become rebellious. They want spontaneity and variety and these are the qualities
discouraged by machines. The workers want to do something new, different and unusual. But they have no opportunity for
doing so. Consequently, their instincts seek their expression and relief in war. This is the reason for the modern costly world
wars in our days. The writer says that something needs to be done to curb these rebellious and anarchic tendencies in man.
One method is to provide workers with opportunities for doing something unusual and new. For this, the workers may be
given one month’s leave on full pay to do what they like to satisfy their natural instincts. They may climb the Alps
mountains or work on an aeroplane and the like. All this will give them relief and the desire for war will disappear.
Psychology has not made the study of human nature from this point of view. In this way, the desire for collecting too much
wealth will naturally disappear and man will be happier. Then there will be no opposition between machines and human
emotions.

.
 UNIT-4

WILLIAM DOUGLAS : DEEP WATER

Q.1. Douglas had a fear of water even before his experience of drowning in the Y.M.C.A pool? Why?
Ans. At the age of three or four, Douglas had gone with his father to the beach. A powerful wave had struck him
and knocked him down while he was with his father in the surf. This experience had terrorized him and this fear stayed
even as he grew older.

Q.2. What is the ‘misadventure’ that William Douglas speaks about?

Ans. The misadventure tool place when Douglas went swimming in the Y.M.C.A pool. A big bruiser of a boy, about
eighteen years old, picked him up and tossed him into the deep end. He swallowed a lot of water and went at once to the
bottom. He planned to hit the bottom and make a big jump and come to the surface. But his plan failed and he almost had a
brush with death.

Q.3. What was the bruising experience that Douglas had at the Y.M.C.A?
Ans. To overcome his fear of water Douglas started learning swimming at the Y.M.C.A pool. However, he was
tossed into the deep end of the pool by a big boy of eighteen. Douglas almost drowned in the incident and his fear of water
became more intense and hard to overcome.

Q.4. What were the series of emotions and fears that Douglas experienced when he was thrown into the pool?
What plans did he make to come to the surface?
Ans. Douglas was frightened when he was thrown into the water but he did not lose his wits. He made a plan to
make a big jump, to come to the surface, lie flat on it and paddle to the edge of the pool. He summoned all his strength and
made a great spring upwards but instead, he came up slowly. He opened his eyes and saw nothing. He tried again but was
seized by terror. He was shrieking underwater and was paralyzed-stiff and rigid with fear. He only knew one thing – that he
was alive.

Q.5. How did this experience affect him?

Ans. This experience revived the fear of water. He felt weak and trembled as he walked home. He shook and cried
when he lay on his bed and could not eat anything that night. He was haunted by the frightening experience. The slightest
exertion upset him, making him wobbly in the knees and sick in the stomach.

Q.6. What strategy did the author remember when he was drowning in the Y.M.C.A pool?
Ans. Douglas thought that as he would hit the bottom of the tiled pool, he would spring up like a cork to the
surface, then lie flat on the water, strike out with his arms and thrash with his legs and reach the edge of the pool.
However, this plan failed.

Q.7. ‘I crossed to oblivion and the curtain of life fell’. Why did the author make this remark?
Ans. The author had made three futile attempts to spring up to the surface but as his strength failed and energy got
exhausted, he gave up and stopped all his efforts. He relaxed and passed into a state of unconsciousness and then there
was no fear after that.

Q.8. Why was Douglas determined to get over his fear of water?

.
 Ans. Douglas after his misadventure and a near brush with death became so scared of water that he could not go
fishing, canoeing, boating and swimming. He tried hard to overcome his fear but it held him firmly in its grip. Finally, one
October he decided to get an instructor and learn to swim. He started going to the pool 5 days a week, an hour each day.

Q.9. What joys did his fear of water deprive him off?
Ans. The author’s fear of water-deprived him of the joy of having fun with his friends during their fishing trips and
also the thrill of canoeing, boating or swimming. The moment he would go near water, his fear of water would start
haunting him.

Q.10. How did the instructor make a swimmer out of Douglas?

 Ans. The instructor put a belt around Douglas and attached a rope to the belt which went through a pulley that ran
on an overhead cable. He held on to the rope and went back and forth across the pool for three months, after which his
terror of water slackened a bit. He could put his face underwater and exhale and inhale with the nose out of the water.
Then he learnt to kick with his legs for many weeks till he could relax. After seven months he could swim the entire length
of the pool.

Q.11. How did Douglas make sure that he conquered the old terror?
Ans. Douglas would still feel the old terror even after the instructor taught him to swim. To overcome this fear, he
started talking to terror and challenged it. He would go for another length of the pool after talking to terror. Still, to ensure
that he conquered it completely he went to Lake Wentworth, dived at Triggers Island and swam two miles to Stamp Act is
land. He tried all strokes, put his face underwater, and mocked at his terror which fled as he swam on.

Q.12. What did the author mean by ‘But I was not finished’ after his swimming lessons with the instructor were
over?
Ans. The author’s remark meant that he was not sure whether his old terror had left him. He still felt scared and
frightened while swimming the length of the pool up and down.

Q.13. What impression do you get of Douglas from the essay?

Ans. Douglas was a brave and strong-willed person. Despite his horrifying experiences in water when he almost
drowned, he didn’t give up. He resolved to overcome his fear by learning to swim. He hired an instructor and with complete
focus and determination, he succeeded in learning to swim.

Q.14. What did Douglas experience as he went down to the bottom of the pool for the first time?
Ans. The movement towards the bottom of the pool after being tossed in it by a big boy was gradual as he was in
the deep side. He felt nine feet to be ninety. His lungs were ready to burst before he touched the bottom. He did not lose
his presence of mind and tried to make a great jump upwards.

Q.15. What two things did Douglas dislike to do? Which one did he have to do and why?
Ans. Douglas was very thin and hated to show his skinny legs. He was also scared of going into the pool alone. So he
sat by the poolside and waited for others to come.

Q.16. ‘On the way down I planned’, remarks Douglas. What plan had he devised and how far did it succeed?
Ans. After being tossed into the deep side of the pool, Douglas planned to save himself from being drowned. He
decided to spring back to the surface like a cork after touching the bottom. Then he would lie flat on it, paddle to the edge
and save himself. His plan did not succeed. He tried to come up three times by putting his plan to action, but he could not
do so and swallowed a lot of water instead.

.
 Q.17. In what connection does Douglas mention ‘a big bruiser of a boy’?
Ans. Douglas talks about the boy who tossed him into the deep end of the Y.M.C.A pool. This boy was about
eighteen, he had a good physique and ‘was a big bruiser’ according to Douglas. This boy, after Douglas almost drowned,
exclaimed that he was only fooling.

Q.18. How did Douglas initially feel when he went to the Y.M.C.A pool? What made him feel comfortable?
Ans. As Douglas started going to the Y.M.C.A pool to learn how to swim. His childhood fears and memories of the
unpleasant experience were revived. He gradually regained some confidence and started paddling with the help of water
wings. He watched other boys and copied their style. Slowly he started feeling more comfortable.

Q.19. Give two character traits of Douglas that enabled him to overcome his fear of water.
Ans. Douglas had a strong-will and steadfastness of purpose. It is with the help of these two traits, i.e. his
determination and fixity of purpose that he was able to conquer terror and learn swimming.

Q.20. What were the thoughts that came to Douglas’s mind when he was going towards the bottom of the pool
for the third time?
Ans. When Douglas went down the third time, his effort ceased. He relaxed and his legs felt limp. He felt there was
nothing to be afraid of. It was nice and he felt drowsy, ready to sleep, too tired to jump. He felt he was floating and the
tender arms of his mother were carrying him gently and putting him to sleep.

Q.21. When did Douglas decide to learn swimming? What were the options available to him?
Ans. Douglas decided to learn swimming when he was ten or eleven years old. The options available to him were
the Yakima River and the YMCA pool. The Yakima River was dangerous and many had drowned in it. So he closes the YMCA
pool.

Q.22. Why does Douglas recount a childhood experience of terror and his overcoming it?
Ans. Douglas suffered a handicap. He could not go for boating, swimming, canoeing and fishing. His willpower and
determination made him overcome it. He realised that there is the terror that fear produces. In death there is peace. He
had experienced both the sensation of dying and the terror that fear of it can produce. So the will to live somehow grew in
intensity. He felt a release when he overcame his fear.

Q.23. What two things did Douglas dislike to do?

Ans. Douglas hated to walk naked into the pool and show his very thin legs. Secondly, he was afraid of going into
the pool alone. He would sit on the side of the pool and wait for others.

Q.24. What shocking experience did Douglas have at YMCA pool?                                      
Ans. At the age of ten or eleven, William O. Douglas decided to learn and swim at the YMCA pool because it was
only two or three feet deep at the shallow end. He had an aversion to the water but he felt comfortable when he paddled
with his new water wings in the water. One day he went to the pool when no one else was there. He was waiting for others
to come. Then there came a big bruiser of a boy who picked Douglas and ducked him into the deep end. He landed in a
sitting position, swallowed water and went at once to the bottom. Though he was saved, his fear of water intensified after
this misadventure.

Q.25. Why did Douglas fail to come to the surface of the pool as he hoped to?          

.
 Ans. When Douglas was thrown into the pool by a muscular boy, he landed in a sitting position, swallowed water
and touched the bottom. He was frightened but he had not lost his wit. He thought of a strategy to come up to the surface
by making a big jump when his feet touched the bottom. But his lungs were about to burst. He thought to spring back to the
surface like a cock but he moved slowly. He grew panicky and saw water everywhere. He reached up as if to catch a rope
with his hands but he could not clutch water and was paralysed.

Q.26. How did Douglas’ introduction to YMCA pool revive his childhood fear of water?
Ans. At the age of ten or eleven, William O. Douglas decided to learn and swim at the Y.M.C.A pool because it was
only two or three feet deep at the shallow end. He had an aversion to the water but he felt comfortable when he paddled
with his new water wings in the water. One day he went to the pool when no one else was there. He was waiting for others
to come. Then there came a big bruiser who picked Douglas and ducked him into the deep land. He landed in a sitting
position, swallowed water and went at once to the bottom. This misadventure revived his childhood fear of water.

Q.27. When Douglas realised that he was sinking, how did he plan to save himself?
Ans. When Douglas was thrown into the deep water of the pool, he was terrified. He knew that going to drown as
he didn’t know to swim. So he thought of a strategy to save himself. He decided that as his feet hit the bottom of the pool,
he would make a big jump and come to the surface. Then he would swim to the edge of the pool.

Q.28. How did Douglas’ misadventure at the YMCA pool affect his later life?
Ans. Douglas’ misadventure at the YMCA pool developed an aversion of water in him. He suffered from,
hydrophobia and could not swim. As a result, he was devoid of pleasures of swimming, rafting, fishing, canoeing and other
water sports. This made him feel incomplete.

Q.29. What factors led Douglas to decide in favour of Y.M.C.A. pool?  

Ans. When Douglas was three years old, he was swept over by sea waves at the California beach. Since then he
developed an aversion to water. But he wanted to learn to swim. So he decided to learn to swim in a safer place. The
Y.M.C.A. pool was the safest pool with two or three feet deep at the shallow end and nine feet at the deep side. It was very
safe even for the beginners. Thus Douglas decided to learn to swim at the Y.M.C.A. pool.

Q.30. Why did Douglas go to Lake Wentworth in New Hampshire? How did he make his terror flee?
OR 
How did Douglas make sure that he conquered the old terror?
Ans. After getting training from the instructor, Douglas, in pursuit of complete elimination of the fear of water,
decided to go to various water bodies. Finally, he decided to go to go to Lake Wentworth to test himself for fear. He swam
there without fear, which made his confidant believe that he had chased away all residual fears and terrors.

Q.31. How did William Douglas’ aversion to water begin?                                                       

OR
Which two incidents in Douglas’ early life made him scared of water?                             
Ans. Douglas had a very bad experience at the age of three or four years. His father took him to the beach in
California and there he was knocked down by huge waves and was almost buried under water. This left a scary impact on
his mind. Second, when he was ten or eleven years old, a bruiser threw him into the Y.M.C.A. pool. This time he narrowly
escaped death. He was saved from getting drowned but an aversion to water overpowered him. As a result, he became
scared of water and couldn’t enjoy swimming, canoeing, fishing or any other water sport.

Q.32. How did Douglas’s experience at the YMCA pool affect him?

.
 OR
How did the incident at the YMCA pool affect Douglas later in life?                                                
Ans. This incident spoiled the confidence of Douglas. He became hydrophobic and always avoided water. The
moment he entered the water, his limbs would become paralysed and a terror would grab him. This fear ruined his fishing
trips. He could not enjoy any water sports like canoeing, fishing, swimming, etc. due to this fear of water.

Q.33. How did Douglas remove his residual doubts about his fear of water?
OR
“The instructor was finished. But I was not finished.” What does this refer to? Explain briefly.
Ans. The instructor worked with Douglas for seven months through rigorous training, the instructor made him get
rid of his fear of water. But still some vestiges of fear used to haunt Douglas whenever he was alone in the water. So he
decided to go the various water bodies to overcome his fear of water and become confident.

Q.34. What was Douglas’ initial reaction on being thrown into the pool?
Ans. When Douglas was thrown into the pool, he was frightened. He knew that he was going to drown as he didn’t
know to swim. But even then he was not out of his wits. On his way down the pool, he planned that when he hit the
bottom, he would make a big jump, come to the surface, lie flat on it and paddle to the edge of the pool.

Q.35. What sort of terror seized Douglas as he went down the water for a second time? How could he feel that
he was still alive?
Ans. When Douglas went down for a second time, panic seized him. His lungs ached, his head throbbed and he was
terrified. He was shrieking and was paralysed under water. But he could realise that he was alive as he shook and trembled
with fright. He didn’t give up and tried for a third time to save himself.

Q.36. What was the immediate effect of Douglas’ experience of nearly drowning in the pool? And what was the
long-term effect?
Ans. The immediate effect was both physical and mental. He was sick and could not eat that night and was weak at
the knees. It took him many days to recover. The long-term effect was that he developed hydrophobia, i.e. fear of water,
and, as a result, he dreaded going near water to enjoy any water sport and fishing.

Q.37. What happened to Douglas when he failed in his attempt to come onto the surface of the water a third
time?
Ans. When Douglas was thrown into the pool, he tried his level best to save himself. He planned a strategy to come
onto the surface of the water. He tried twice but failed. As Douglas went down for the third time, he sucked water as he
tried to breathe air. Then all his efforts stopped. He had a blackout. Everything became quiet and calm.

Q.38. Why did Douglas want to overcome his fear of water?

Ans. Douglas wanted to overcome his fear of water because this fear had become his handicap. The moment he
entered the water, his limbs would become paralysed and terror would grab him. This fear ruined all his fishing trips. He
could not do canoeing, boating and swimming. So in order to enjoy his life completely, he decided to overcome his fear of
water.

Q.39. Why couldn’t Douglas come up in his first attempt?

Ans. Douglas couldn’t come up in his first attempt, though he tried his best. His strategy didn’t work. His strategy
was that when his feet hit the bottom, he would make a big jump, come onto the surface, lie flat on it and paddle to the
edge. But by the time he reached the bottom, he felt as if his lungs were about to burst and he became helpless.

.
 Q.40. How did Douglas get rid of all the residual fear of water that he had?
Ans. The instructor had built as swimmer out of Douglas. But still same vestiges of fear used to haunt S whenever
he was alone in the water. In order to get rid of all the residual fear, Douglas swam across various water bodies. He went up
to the Tieton to Conrad Meadows, up the Conrad Creek ‘Bail to Meade Glacier and, finally, camped at Warm Lake.

Q.41. Explain how Douglas felt when he was thrown into the pool. What plan did he make to come to the
surface?
Ans. When Douglas was thrown into the pool, he got frightened and a sense of panic gripped him. But still was not
out of his wits. He thought of a strategy to save himself. He decided that as his feet hit the bottom of the pool, he would
make a big jump and come to the surface. He would lie flat on it and paddle to the edge of the pool.

Q.42. How did Douglas try to save himself from drowning in the YMCA pool?
Ans. When Douglas was flung into the swimming pool by a big boy, he became fearful. But he thought rationally
and planned a strategy to save himself self f from drowning. He decided that as he hit the bottom of the pool, he would
take a big jump to come to the surface of the water. Then he would lie flat and paddle to the edge of the pool. But
unfortunately, it took so long for him to reach the bottom and felt as if his lungs would burst. Even then he tried to take a
big jump using all his might but in vain. Once again, he tried the same technique but his action did not produce the desired
result. Finally, panic seized him. His limbs got numb and he fainted.

Q.43. How did Douglas develop an aversion to water?

OR
‘I crossed to oblivion, and the curtain of life fell.’ What was the incident which nearly killed Douglas and
developed in him a strong aversion to water?                                                           
Ans. When Douglas was three or four years old, his father took him to the beach in California. The waves of the sea
knocked him down and almost buried him in water. He was terrified and unable to breathe. Since then he developed an
aversion to water. Later on, when he was ten or eleven years old, one day while sitting on the side of the swimming pool, he
was flung into the pool by a bruiser.
It was really an encounter with death. He underwent a terrible experience in his attempt to save himself. He almost
drowned in water, which suffocated him, an abject fear immobilised his limbs. Though he was rescued, he became
hydrophobic. He could not swim and do any other water activities like canoeing, fishing, boating, rafting, etc. Every time he
came in contact with water, pangs of panic would paralyse him. He spent many years of his life under this fear and then
finally decided to conquer it.

Q.44. Douglas fully realised the truth of Roosevelt’s statement, “All we have to fear is fear itself.” How did this
realization help him brush aside his fear and become an expert swimmer?
Ans. Fear is a paralysing emotion. It restricts all kinds of efforts, creativity and all kinds of ventures that one thinks
of achieving. But with the help of grit, determination and hard work, fear can be conquered. William Douglas proved this.
He chased away his fear of water by first psychoanalysing it and then treating it in a systematic manner. After his
misadventure at YMCA pool, Douglas has developed hydrophobia. In spite of that, he hired a professional trainer and learnt
swimming step by step. Due to his strong willpower and rigorous practice, Douglas was made a swimmer by the trainer. But
even now Douglas was not satisfied and set a higher benchmark for his perfection and devised various tests and situations
to defeat the fear in all forms. Thus, ultimately, Douglas was able to overpower his fear of water completely and became an
expert swimmer.

.
 Q.45. Desire, determination and diligence lead to success. Explain the value of these qualities in the light of
Douglas’ experience in Deep Water.
OR
Courage and optimism are attributes that can make the impossible possible. Elucidate with reference to Deep
Water.
Ans. It is only through courage, desire and determination that man has succeeded in making the impossible
possible. The most appropriate example is William Douglas’ pursuit to overcome his fear of water. After the terrible
experience of almost drowning at the Y.M.C.A. swimming pool, Douglas developed a fear of water. The moment he entered
the water, pangs of panic paralysed his lumps. He spent many years of his life, under this fear. But finally, he decided to
overcome this fear and succeeded in his attempts due to his relentless efforts and positive approach. He hired the services
of an instructor, who after rigorous training and special technique, built a swimmer out of him. It took Douglas almost seven
months to overcome this fear. But, finally, Douglas proved that it was courage, determination, desire, diligence and
optimism that made him get rid of fear.

Q.46. ‘This handicap stayed with me as the years rolled by.’ Which handicap is being referred to and what are the
events that made Douglas handicapped?
Ans. The handicap being referred to is the fear of water Douglas had developed due to some unfortunate incidents
in his childhood. As a result, he could not enjoy water sports and swimming. When he was three or four years old, his father
took him to the beach in California. Douglas was knocked down by the sea waves and was almost buried in water. He
developed an aversion to water. Moreover, when he was ten or eleven years old, a bruiser flung him into a swimming pool.
At that time he had a terrible experience. He was almost in the water, which suffocated him and the fear immobilised his
limbs. However, he somehow escaped drowning. Since then he was scared of water and could not enjoy canoeing,
swimming, rafting, fishing, etc. This became a handicap for him, as he was deprived of the joy of water sports and
swimming.

Q.47. But I was not finished.’ Describe how Douglas gained confidence as a swimmer after the instructor had left
him.
Ans. Douglas was slowly made a swimmer by the instructor. He trained him to overcome his fear of water, swim,
move his legs and inhale and exhale while swimming. In seven months, the instructor made a swimmer out of Douglas. But
Douglas was not confident as yet. The vestiges of fear of water still haunted him. So he decided to swim in various pools
and lakes to completely overcome his fear. He went to the Tieton to Conrad Meadows, up the Conrad Creek Trail, to Meade
Glacier and finally swam in Warm Lake. After this, Douglas was confident that he had completely overcome his fear of
water.

Q.48. Do you think that ‘Deep Water’ is an appropriate title? Give reasons in support of your answer.
Ans. ‘Deep Water’ is the most appropriate title for the chapter. Literally ‘deep water’ means ‘in trouble’. The author
suffered from hydrophobia and was really afraid of going deep in water. The misadventure at the YMCA pool made his
efforts more difficult when a big bruiser threw him into deep water. The author underwent a series of emotions under
water. He made a plan to come up to the surface of the water but failed. He was somehow rescued and saved. In order to
overcome his fear, he hired an instructor and mastered each step of swimming. His grit, determination and rigorous
practice enabled him to be an expert swimmer. The title signifies that the phobia of water was very deep rooted and had to
be pulled out with great difficulty.

Q.49. How did the instructor make Douglas a good swimmer?

.
 Ans. The hunting fear of the water followed Douglas in his fishing trips, swimming, boating and canoeing. He used
every way he knew to get rid of this fear but it held him firmly in its grip. So, he finally engaged an instructor to learn
swimming.
The instructor made him practice five days a week, an hour each day. He held one end of the rope in his hand and
the other end through a pulley overhead of Douglas was tied to the belt. Thus the instructor relaxing his hold on the rope
made Douglas swim back and forth in the pool.
After three months of this much training, the instructor taught Douglas to put his face underwater and breathe out
and to raise his nose and breathe in. He repeated this breathing out and breathing in exercise hundreds of times. Bit by bit,
he got rid of part of the terror which gripped him. Next, the instructor held Douglas at the side of the pool and made him.
After weeks of practice, he could command his own legs for swimming in water.
Thus piece by piece, the instructor built him a good swimmer. When he had perfected each piece, he put them into
an integrated whole in the seventh month of the training.

Q.50. Narrate in your words how William Douglas was nearly drowned in the Y.M.C.A pool.
Ans. Douglas wanted to learn swimming. Being afraid of water, he chose the Y.M.C.A. pool as it was safe. He bought
water wings and went to the pool to practice swimming.
One day as he sat alone near its edge, a strong boy came there. He looked at skinny Douglas in scorn. He picked up
Douglas and threw him right into the pool, out of fun.
Douglas hit the water in a sitting position. The water over there was nine feet deep. Douglas sank gradually. He
planned to jump to the bottom of the pool and came to the top. He hoped he would float like a cork, and then he would
swim to the edge. However, he actually jumped off the bottom, the movement upward was slow. He reached the surface
but laid his hand on nothing. His legs became stiff and lifeless. He was again pulled to the bottom. Once again he jumped
and had the same experience. He froze with terror. His heart throbbed. He tried calling for help but only swallowed water.
The experience was repeated once again. Finally, he felt exhausted. No energy was left in him. He passed into oblivion with
no fear.

Q.51. What is the “misadventure” that William Douglas speaks about? How did this experience affect him?
OR
How and why did Douglas develop an aversion to the water when he was in it?
Ans. illiam Douglas speaks about the “misadventure” that he experiences at the Y.M.C.A. swimming pool. He was
yet to master the art of swimming. In the swimming pool, he was trying to practice swimming. He feared to go alone in
deep water. Suddenly a big boy appeared before him and he picked him up and tossed him into the deep end of the pool.
He went at once at the bottom and was almost drowned. He was getting up and down in the water. When Douglas went
down a third time, all of his efforts ceased. He almost lost his senses. His legs felt limp. ‘Blackness’ swept over his face. Now
he was beyond panic. It was quiet and peaceful. When he came to his senses, he found himself laying on his stomach beside
the pool, vomiting.
This ‘misadventure’ had a lasting effect on Douglas. He never went back to the pool. He developed a ‘phobia’
towards the water. Whenever he tried swimming, the terror that had seized him in the pool would come back. This
handicap stayed with Douglas for years. It ruined his fishing trips. He lost the joy of canoeing, boating and swimming.

Q.52. What was the fear of Douglas? How did it come in the life of Douglas?
Ans. The fear of Douglas was water. In the life of Douglas, there happened two incidents. First, when he was a child
of three or four years old. At California beach, he was hanging to his father when the waves knocked him down and swept
over him. He buried into the water but nothing serious happened as water returned to the sea immediately. But Douglas
was extremely scared from the overpowering force of the water. Secondly, at the pool, when Douglas was waiting for
others, a big bruiser of a boy came there and threw Douglas into the pool just for fun. At that time, Douglas didn‘t know

.
how to swim and nearby drowned. Hardly somebody saved his life and he could escaped. So, In Douglas’s life, the greatest
fear was from water, though, later, by his will continuous efforts, Douglas won over his fear of water and became an expert
swimmer.

Q.53. What incident did Douglas face at the pool? What was its effect on his life?
Ans. Douglas wanted to learn swimming at Y.M.C.A. pool and for this purpose, he went to the pool and waited for
others. After some minutes, a big bruiser of a boy came there, probably eighteen years old, and threw Douglas into the pool
just for fun. But Douglas did not know how to swim by that time. He went to the bottom of the pool and during the way,
made a strategy to hit and jump and swim to the edge. But everytime, his efforts failed. No one was there to save his life,
he screamed but it was for no use. Finally, he surrendered, and became drowsy and unconscious. Then hardly, someone
saved his life from drowning. That incident affected his life for a long time, He never went back to pool, never went for
fishing and cannoeing and then later by inner inspiration, he learned swimming and for clearing residual doubts, struggled a
lot of various risky locations and then he became an expert swimmer.

Q.54. Describe Douglas’s struggle at the pool? What strategy did he make to save his life?
Ans. At the pool, the incident took place when Douglas was waiting for others, a big bruiser of a boy came there
and throws Douglas into the pool just for fun. At the same time, Douglas’s struggle started. He went to the bottom directly
and on the way down, he planned : When his feet hit the bottom, he would make a big jump, come to the surface, lie flat on
it, and paddle to the edge of the pool. But it seemed a long way down, those nine feet were more like ninety and before he
touched bottom his lungs were ready to burst. He summoned all his strength, hit the bottom but he came up slowly. He
opened his eyes and saw nothing but water only. He was scared. He wanted to catch a rope but there was only water. He
was suffocating. He tried to yell but no sound came out. His legs hung as dead weights, paralysed and rigid. His lungs ached,
head throbbed. He was getting dizzy. Again he tried the way, he thought and planned but failed. The terror had seized him
completely. He was shrieking under water but his screams in his throat frozen. Nothing positive happened. Again he tried
his strategy but his arms couldn’t move, his legs couldn’t move. He cried for help but no one came there. And finally, he
started to be drowsy and became unconscious. He crossed to oblivion, and the curtain of life fell. But fortunately,
somebody came and saved his 

Q.55. What handicap stayed with Douglas for a long time? What did he do to resolve it from his life?
Ans. A handicap of water stayed with Douglas for a long time. Due to childhood incident at California beach and
fatal incident at Y. M. C. A. pool, he was in great fear of water. To resolve this fear from his life, he learnt swimming by an
instructor for seven months. But being unsatisfied, he went to Lake Wentworth in New Hampshire, dived off a dock at
Triggs Island and swam two miles across the lake to Stamp Act Island. At his first opportunity he hurried west, went up the
Tieton to Conrad Meadows, up the Conrad Creek Trail to Meade Glacier, and camped in the high meadow by the side of
Warm Lake. The next morning, he stripped, dived into the lake, and swam across to the other shore and back. And finally,
he shouted with joy, and Gilbert peak returned the echo. Thus, he conquered his fear of water.

Q.56. How did the swimming instructor ‘build a swimmer’ out of Douglas?
Ans. William Douglas had a most frightening and nightmarish experience at the Y.M.C.A pool when a boy of
eighteen had tossed him into the pool and he had had a near brush with death. The terror that he experienced and the
resulting fear of water prevented him from enjoying fishing, canoeing, swimming etc. with his friends. The fear became so
deep-rooted that Douglas then decided to overcome it.
The first step he took was to get an instructor. The instructor made him swim five days a week and very patiently
taught him how to exhale underwater and inhale above water. He made him practise very hard five days a week, an hour
each day. His safety was ensured when the instructor put a belt around him, with a hook and a rope attached to it. An
overhead cable had a pulley in it and the rope going over it. The instructor would hold the rope while Douglas swam from

.
one end of the pool to the other. In about six months, and with a lot of hard work and determination, Douglas was able to
perfect the art of swimming. His instructor had built a swimmer out of him, bit by bit.

Q.57. A big boy threw Douglas into the swimming pool. How did this experience affect Douglas?
Ans. William Douglas had decided to overcome his childhood fear of water and joined the Y.M.C.A swimming pool.
He had gradually gathered confidence and was trying to learn swimming by using water wings and aping other boys. Just
when he was beginning to feel at ease, the misadventure happened.
A big boy, about eighteen years of age, saw Douglas sitting by the poolside and tossed him into the deep side of the
pool. Douglas was frightened but did not lose his wits. He planned the strategy of giving himself a thrust just as he would
touch the bottom and then move up to the surface of the water and float towards the edge. His plans failed and thrice he
went up and down in the water, being unable to reach the surface and breathe. He had almost given up when he was
rescued. The boy admitted that he was only ‘fooling’.
 Douglas had to pay a heavy price for this ‘joke’. He was shocked and trembled when he recovered from this
incident. But worse was the fact that his fear turned into terror and a sort of phobia. He could not get into the Cascades or
bathe in the Warm Lake. He could not even go for fishing, canoeing, boating or swimming. His fear of water deprived him of
all the joys that he wanted to experience in the water. He tried hard to overcome his fear but psychologically, the fear had a
strong hold on him.

Q.58. What did Douglas decide to overcome his fear of water? How long it took to Douglas to become a
swimmer?
Ans. Douglas was a person who unfortunately faced an unwanted and unexpected situation in his childhood days.
Two incidents of his childhood with the water made him scared of water. And for a long time, he stayed far from the water.
Later, by the inner inspiration and attraction towards water, compelled him to go close to the water again. And to
overcome his fear of water, he learnt swimming by an instructor. But still he had some residual doubts. And for clearing
those residual doubts, he went to many lakes, docks and Islands. At different locations, he swam miles of distance, crossed
whole lakes up and down, went to meadows and glaciers and gained a lot of confidence and experience. Sometimes when
he was in the mid of water, the old terror returned, but he put his face under and laughed and said, “Well, Mr. Terror, what
do you think you can do to me?” The terror fled and he swam on. Thus, with long and dedicated efforts, Douglas become an
expert swimmer. It took about eleven to twelve months to became a confident swimmer.

Q.59. How did he emerge as a perfect swimmer by hiring an instructor?

Ans. The author still feared from his childhood misadventure. But he was determined to overcome it. Therefore, he
hired an instructor to learn swimming and was able to shed off his terror step by step. In First phase, a belt was tightened
around him attached to the rope of an over cable which passed through a pulley. The instructor held the other end of the
rope and he swam back and forth for until 3 months, when he felt a terror loosening its grip. Next he was taught the
repeated practising to exhale under the water and inhale outside the water. This further eased off the panic inside him.
After this the instructor held him at the side of the pool and had kicking with legs for weeks. His legs were now under
control. Thus, emerged a swimmer by integrating all these lessons in one. To completely root out the terror and test him
certainly of fearlessness, he tried the waters of endless places and as Roosevelt has said ‘All we have to fear is fear itself,’ he
conquered his fear.

Q.60. Discuss ‘Deep Water’ as a saga of perseverance and courage.

Ans. `Deep Water’ is an excerpt from Of Men and Mountains wrote by William 0. Douglas. It is an autobiographical
description of how the author develops the fear of water and, thereafter, how he finally overcame it. He narrates that his
aversion to water started when he was three or four years old and his father took him to the beach in California. There he
was knocked down by the waves and was almost buried down in water. When he was ten or eleven years old, he joined the

.
Y.M.C.A. pool to learn to swim. One day, when he was sitting on the side of the pool all alone, a big bruiser of a boy picked
him up and threw him into the deep end of the pool. He went at once at the bottom. He was frightened but thought of a
strategy to save his life. He decided to hit the bottom and take a big jump to come to the surface and lie flat on it and then
paddle to the edge of the pool. But it seemed his way down was very long.
Before he touched the bottom, his lungs were about to burst. Though he tried to take a big jump, he came up very
slowly. As a result, he went down for a second time. His lungs ached and he started feeling dig’. He jumped, his feet
touched the bottom but it made no difference. When he went down for the third time, he sucked a lot of water while trying
to breathe air. Then all his efforts stopped and he had a blackout. He was completely overpowered by fear and eventually
fainted.
After this incident, his fear of water worsened and he did not go swimming or fishing or to any other water sport for
many years. Finally one October, he decided to overcome his fear of water. He hired an instructor to learn to swim. He
started practising swimming. Bit by bit he shed part of the panic that seized him. The instructor tied a belt around his waist
and connected it to a pulley with a rope. The author practised day after day till he began to get back his confidence. He was
able to swim the length of the pool on his ova Tough the instructor was satisfied, the author felt that on many occasions his
old fear of water would return’
So he continued relentlessly to swim in different water bodies till he was confident that he had overcome
Finally, to test if he had lost the last vestiges of fear, Douglas went up to the Tieton to Conrad Meadows, up the
Conrad Creek Trail to Meade Glacier, and camped in the high meadow by the side of Warm Lake. As he had experienced the
terror of death, his will to live grew most intensely. This made him fearless and Confident.

.
 UNIT-5

ALDOUS HUXLEY : SELECTED SNOBBERIES

Q.1. What kind of a man was George Ramsay?
Ans. George Ramsay was an honest, industrious and worthy man. He had a good wife and four daughters to whom
he was the best of fathers. He made a point of saving a third of his income and his plan was to retire at fifty-five to a little
house in the country. He was a hardworking, decent and respectful man.

Q.2. Describe George’s appearance when the narrator met him at a restaurant.
Ans. The narrator found George lunching all by himself in the restaurant. George looked gloomy and stared into
space as if the world’s burden lied on his shoulders.

Q.3. What lesson does the La Fontaine’s fable The Ant and the Grasshopper teach? Does the narrator sympathise
with the ant or the grasshopper?
Ans. The fable ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’ teaches us to make hay while the sun shines. If you want to succeed
tomorrow, you should work hard from today. Also, if you are lazy, you would not succeed. The narrator is sympathetic to
the ant simply because the ant is someone who we can relate to and not the grasshopper.

Q.4. Why was George enraged when he heard that Tom and Cronshaw had gone off together to Monte Carlo?
Ans. Tom cheated a man who nearly took him to prison. The man was determined to take the matter to court. It
cost George five hundred pounds to settle the affair. George was enraged when he heard that Tom and Cronshaw had gone
off together to Monte Carlo the moment they cashed the cheque.

Q.5. Who is the ant and who is the grasshopper in the story? Give reasons.
Ans. In the story, George Ramsay is the ant who works hard for himself and his family. He saves money so that he
and his family can have a good future. George was a decent, straightforward and respectable man. Tom Ramsay is the
grasshopper who never saved a penny but somehow lived a luxurious life by borrowing money. For his own selfish needs,
he exploited his own brother. Tom was idle, worthless, dissolute and a dishonourable rouge.

Q.6. Who is the narrator to as a black sheep and why?

Ans. Undoubtedly, the narrator refers to Tom as a black sheep. He began his lifedecently, went on to get married
and had two children. However, one day he decided to leave his family and work only to enjoy his life. He spent two years in
Europe where he spent all his money and began to borrow money. He believed in spending money on luxuries and not
necessities. He always depended on his brother George. All Tom did was raced, gambled and danced in expensive hotels.

Q.7. What are the commoner disease snobberies of rich people?

Ans. There are some commoner disease snobberies of the rich people who think that they suffer from incurable
diseases. Such people possess a lot of leisure, sufficient wealth and health also yet they seem to suffer from undiagnosable
diseases and for their cure they run from one famous doctor to another and spend a lot of money also and yet they find no
satisfaction. The truth about them is that they do not suffer from any disease and are quite hale and healthy: but such
people are only disease snobs. If they suffer from any disease at all it is only that they overeat and then they think that they
suffer from several diseases. Overeating is their habit because they are rich people and they can afford to be disease snobs.

Q.8. What are Huxley views on unplatonic art snobbery?

.
 Ans. According to Huxley art snobs are of two kinds – the platonic and the unplatonic. The platonic art snobs
admire and appreciate art for its own sake. They do not buy art objects. But the unplatonic art snobs, instead of admiring
art want to possess it and so they buy art objects as though an art object is a commodity like a fleet of motor cars. Thus
they want to show that they have enough money and want to impress others by their power to buy art also. For them, an
art object is a money symbol which is costlier than a fleet of motor cars and is nothing more.
They think that people will admire and respect them as real art lovers.
The unplatonic art snobs are worse when they happen to be modernity snobs also. In that case, instead of buying
old art objects, they buy art objects made by living artists. In this way instead of buying the art objects of the Old Masters,
they patronize the living artists. Thus they are a source of livelihood for the poor living artists. In this way, they think that
they are great patrons of living art. The advantage is that the poor living artists benefit from it and so these modern
unplatonic art snobs impress others by their money power.

Q.9. Write a short detail about the writer ‘Aldous Leonerd Huxley’.
Ans. Aldous Leonerd Huxley (1894–1963), an English writer who spent the latter part of his life in the United States
is famous for his novels and essays on a number of topics. He also published poetry, stories and film stories. He was not
only a humanist and pacifist but a writer on spiritual subjects including those on parapsychology and philosophical
mysticism. He was an intellectual and a leader of modern thought and philosophy.
Huxley started writing at an early age. He wrote his famous novel Brave New world in which he discusses the
demeaning effect of scientific progress and in Ends and Means he points out that though everyone is in favour of a just and
ideal society yet there are differences among people and leaders on how to achieve it. In 1938 Huxley became a friend of J.
Krishnamurti whose teachings had a great influence on him. He was much attracted to Vedantism also and was introduced
into the Vendantic Circle of Swami Prabhavananda and soon after he wrote The Perennial Philosophy in which he discusses
some of the widely believed spiritual ideas and the mystical teachings of the famous mystics.

Q.10. What are Huxley’s general views and observations about snobberies?
Ans. According to Huxley all of us are snobs about something or the other and there is nothing about which man
cannot be snobbish. However, there is the leprosy disease about which hardly any person can be found to be snobbish. The
writer says that he cannot imagine any person who can be snobbish about leprosy.
About the value of snobberies, Huxley says that snobberies make every person active and working for it. A society
that has many snobberies will never be dull because all people are snobbish about something and so all people ought to be
working for their particular snobberies. In this way, all people ought to be busy and active. “Every snobbery demands of its
devotees unceasing efforts, a succession of sacrifices”.
No snobbery is good or bad in itself. It all depends on one’s view about life in general. If we think that all activity is
good, all snobberies ought to be good. If, on the other hand, we think that all activity is bad and useless, all snobbery is bad
and useless. The value of snobbery accordingly depends on what we think about the purpose of life. But generally, people
avoid both the extremes. Generally, people prefer to take the middle position with regard to these extremes about activity
related to snobberies.
Everyone is interested in promoting his kind of snobbery. He will promote only that snobbery which he considers to
be good. He will naturally try to promote and work for that very activity. Thus for each snobbery, there is its promoter and
its advertiser.

Q.11. According to Huxley snobberies like fashions keep on changing. How does the writer substantiate it?
Ans. According to Huxley snobberies also have their fashions and live according to their allotted time. Just as
fashions change so do snobberies. There were many snobberies which were quite fashionable and popular a fifty or a
hundred years ago but they are not valued now. With the advancement in medical sciences, the disease snobbery is
increasing, while the family snobbery which used to be quite fashionable earlier is now on the decline. The culture snobbery

.
is also there but it is being challenged by low taste people. For example, France was once quite famous for its fine wines
and fine tastes. But the fine taste for drinking is being substituted by booze snobbery and people now want strong drinks
and cocktails. The latest fashion is seen in the drinking habits of women also. Now every woman from fifteen to seventy is
seen drunk not in public places so much as in the privacy of domestic parties.
There is also the modernity snobbery nowadays. In the past, people used to respect old families and old things and
traditions. But now all this is a thing of the past. Today people are modernity snobs and they want to buy the latest things
that are produced by the machines. They want to throw away the old things. Such people are the modern producers’ best
friends. The producer is fast producing items that are quickly perishable.
There are the art snobs and they are of two kinds — the platonic and the unplatonic. The platonic ones merely
appreciate works of art. They do not buy these things but only admire them for their artistic excellence. But the unplatonic
ones actually buy these art objects without having any knowledge or taste for these things. Such people only show that
they are interested in art but actually they are interested in showing their money power and value.

Q.12. Elucidate the benefits or advantages of snobberies.

OR
Explain in detail all the selected snobberies mentioned by Huxley in his essay.
Ans. There are all kinds of people and all kinds of snobberies so that there is nothing in the world about which
people cannot be snobbish. There is however one exception to it. It is not possible to find a leprosy snob as none wants to
suffer from it. But there are a good number of people who are disease snobs. There are examples of young men and
women who are T.B. snobs. They think that it would be quite romantic to die of tuberculosis while they are in the prime of
their youth. The regrettable part of it is that the end of these T.B. snobs is not as romantic as they seem to imagine. But
there are many rich people who seem to think that they suffer from many diseases and they run from one fashionable
doctor to another to seek a cure for their imaginary diseases. The only disease that these snobs suffer from is none else but
that of over-eating. They eat more than they can digest and so they think that they are suffering from several diseases.
There are fashions in snobberies also. Old snobberies become outdated and the new ones take their place. Earlier
people used to be snobbish about their families but now family snobbery is on the decline. New culture snobbery is on the
increase though it is resisted by low-class people. The latest in our times is the booze snobbery and most young men and
women also from fifteen to seventy are seen drunk in at least private parties. France has been famous for its fine wines and
its fine tastes but such is the influence of these low-class people that the taste for fine wines is being substituted for strong
wines and cocktails.
Modernity snobbery is not wholly new for it existed in the past also. Modernity snobs throw away old things and
buy the latest that have been created or invented by machines. These snobs are the best friends of the modern industry
producers. The producer produces the latest things that do not last long. This modernity snobbery is fast increasing in our
times.
Art snobbery is another. These art snobs are of two kinds: The platonic and the unplatonic. The Platonic ones only
appreciate and admire art without buying art objects; but the unplatonic art snobs actually purchase art objects and for
them, an art object is not a piece of art but actually a commodity, a money symbol which they must possess just as they buy
and possess motor cars. Some of these art snobs happen to be modernity snobs also and they claim to be the patrons of
modern art. Without understanding anything about the art they just buy paintings of modern painters. In this way, these
modern art snobs are a great source of the livelihood of the new art painters.
As for the value of snobberies, it all depends on the attitude of its practitioners. If they think that all activities are
good then all snobberies are also good. But if they think that all activities are bad then all snobberies are not good. If they
think that all the world is an illusion then all snobberies are meaningless. All depends on our attitude and approval of what
is a good activity and what is bad. But most people take the middle position between these two extremes. Those who
regard some snobberies as good activities they will promote only those snobberies and they will advise all people to acquire

.
those very snobberies which they think promote good activity. Every snob in this way is the promoter of one snobbery or
the other at a time.

Q.13. “All men are snobs”. Elaborate with supportive references to ‘Selected Snobbories’.
Ans. All men are snobs about something. One is almost tempted to add. There is nothing about which men cannot
feel snobbish. But this would doubtless be an exaggeration. There are certain disfiguring and mortal diseases about which
there has probably never been any snobbery. I cannot imagine, for example, that there are any leprosy-snobs. More
picturesque disease, even when they are dangerous, and less dangerous diseases, particularly when they are the disease of
the rich, can be and very frequently are a source of Snow be self-importance. I have met several adolescent consumption-
snobs, who thought that it would be romantic to fade away in the flower of youth, like Keats or Marie Bashkirtseff. Alas, the
final stage of the consumptive fadings is generally a good deal less romantic than these ingenuous young tubercle-snobs
seem to imagine. To anyone who has actually witnessed this final stage, the complacent Poeticizing of these adolescents
must seem as exasperating as they are profoundly pathetic. In the case of those commoner disease-snobs, whose claim to
distinction is that they suffer from one of the maladies of the rich, exasperation is not tempered by very much sympathy.
People who possess sufficient leisure, sufficient wealth, mot to mention sufficient health, to go traveling from spa to spa,
from doctor to fashionable doctor, in search of cures from problematical diseases (which, in so far as they exist at all,
probably have their sources in overheating) cannot expect us to be very lavish in our solicitude and pity.
Disease-snobbery is only one out of a great multitude of snobberies, now some now others take pride of place in
general esteem. For snobberies ebb and flow; their empire rises, declines, and falls in the most approved historical manner.
What were good snobberies a hundred years ago are now out of fashion. Thus, the snobbery of the family is everywhere on
the decline. The snobbery of ignorance and stupidity unique, so far as I know, in the whole history.
Modernity-snobbery, though not exclusive to our age, has come to assume unprecedented importance. The
reasons for this are simple and of a strictly economic character. Thanks to modern machinery, production is out of running
consumption. Organized waste among consumers is the first condition of our industrial prosperity. The sooner a consumer
throws away the object he has bought and buys another, the better for the producer must do his bit by producing nothing
but the most perishable articles. The man who builds a skyscraper to last for more than forty years is a traitor to the
building trade. The words are those of great American contractors. Substitute motor car, boot, suit of clothes, etc., for a
skyscraper, and one year, three months, six months, and so on for forty years, and you have the gospel of any leader of any
modern industry. The moderinity-snob, it is obvious, is the industrialist’s best friend. Modernity-snobs naturally tend to
throw away their old possession and buy new ones at a greater rate than those who are not modernity snobs. Therefore it
is in the producer’s interest to encourage modernity-snobbery which is in fact he does do — on an enormous scale and to
the tune of millions and millions a year-by means of advertising. The newspaper does their best to help them, and to the
food of advertisement is added a flood of less directly paid-for propaganda in favour of modernity-snobbery. The public is
taught that up-to-dateness is one of the first duties of man. Docile, it accepts the reiterated suggestion. We are all
modernity-snobs now.
Most of us are also art-snobs. There are two varieties of art-snobbery — the platonic and the unplatonic. Platonic
art-snobbery merely ‘take an interest’ in art. Unplatonic art-snobs go further and actually buy art. Platonic art-snobbery is a
branch of culture-snobbery. Unplatonic art-snobbery is hybrid or mule; for it is simultaneously a sub-species of culture-
snobbery and of possession-snobbery. A collection of work of art is a collection of cultural symbol and culture still carry
social prestige it is also a collection of wealth-symbol for an art-collection represent money more effectively than a whole
fleet of motor cars.
The value of snobbery in general, its humanistic point, consist of its power to stimulate activity. A society with
plenty of snobberies is like a dog with plenty of fleas: it is not likely to become comatose. Every snobbery demands of its
devotee's unceasing efforts, a succession of sacrifices. The society snob must be perpetually lion-hunting; the modernity-
snob can never rest from trying to be up-to-date. Swiss doctors and the best that has been thought or said must be the
daily and nightly preoccupation of all the snobs respectively of disease and culture.

.
 If we regard activity as being in itself a good; for all provoke activity. If with the Buddhists, we regard all activity in
this world of illusion as bad, then we shall condemn all snobberies out of hand. Most of us, I suppose, take up our position
somewhere between the two extremes. We regard some activities as good, others as indifferent or downright bad. Our
approval will be given only to such snobberies as excite what we regard as the better activities; the others we shall tolerate
or detest. For example, most professional intellectuals will approve of culture-snobbery (even while intensely disliking most
individual culture-snobs), because it compels things of the mind and so helps to make the world less dangerously unsafe for
ideas than it otherwise might have been. A manufacturer of motor cars, on the other hand, will rank the robbery of
possessions above culture-snobbery; he will do his best to persuade people that those who have fewer possessions,
particularly possessions on four wheels, are inferior to those who have more possessions. And so on. Each hierarchy
culminates in its own particular Pope.

.
 UNIT-6,7

NIRAD C. CHAUDHURI : CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION, MONEY AND THE ENGLISHMAN

Q.1. Why did Lewis Carroll get upset over his friend’s remarks ?
Ans. Lewis Carroll got upset over his friend’s remark because he felt his friend was not serious in the matter of
religion.

Q.2. What is the discrimination shown by some people in their appraisal of Lewis Carroll ?
Ans. Some people do not consider the humour of Alice to be Victorian but they regard his seriousness in the matter
of religion to be a feature of Victorianism.

Q.3. How did the English people react when Canterbury was hit by Nazi bombing?
Ans. People felt that the bombing had hit their sensibilities which were deep rooted in their culture and they were
convinced that there could be no compromise between Nazism and their way of life.

Q.4. Why was Chaudhuri surprised at the presence of a large number of people in King;s College Chapel ?
Ans. Chauduri had read so much about the decline of religious belief, falling church attendance, and ignorance of
the Bible that he was surprised by the number of people in devotional mood at King’s College Chapel.

Q.5. What was his feeling when he visited the Chapel a second time?
Ans. Chaudhuri was deeply moved by the seriousness of religious attitude and the number of people who attended
the religious festival. He felt if anywhere he, a Hindu, could think of becoming a Christian it was in such a place.

Q.6. What is Chaudhuri’s opinion about the origin of Hindu temple cults ?
Ans. Chaudhuri believes that temple cults are no necessary part of true Hinduism. None of the Hindu scriptures lays
on a Hindu the duty of going to a temple or worshipping an image. These cults, India borrowed from Western Asia.

Q.7. What does Chaudhuri write about true Hinduism ?

Ans. True Hinduism makes us accept the universe and requires us to make it a welfare universe with the help of
gods that any man-made welfare state can only be a pinch beck imitation of it.

Q.8. What is the third feature of the Hindus’ collective worship?

Ans. The third feature of Hindu collective worship is propitiation and coercion of the gods through offerings,
sacrifices, and incantations. A Hindu is not a mere suppliant at the feet of his gods and goddesses. He can also assert his
claims on the deities. He has a kind of contract with his gods.

Q.9. Write the difference between Christian and Hindu worship.

Ans. The Christian worship was different from the Hindu worship in one more aspect. It lacks propitiation and
coercion of the gods through offerings, sacrifices and incantations. In Hinduism the relationship between the gods and men
is of the type of a contract. A Hindu can assert his claims on the gods by performing the religious duties.

Q.10. Why did the author fail to read and hear about the economic conditions and problems of the English ?

.
 Ans. The author failed to read and hear about the economic conditions and problems of the English because he
knew he would not be able to understand them. He was not only ignorant of the subject but even contemptuous of it.

Q.11. What according to the author is the most difficult thing in the west?
Ans. The most difficult thing in the west, or to be more precise in Great Britain and Western Europe is to know a
man’s exact degree of attachment to money. The reason is that the man of this region can confess to even the most
depraved of passions, but not to his love to money.

Q.12. What did the author do when he visited the house of an English family?
Ans. The author wanted to know about the religious symptoms for the love of money of Englishmen. So when he
visited the house of an English family he tried quietly to find out if in any part of it there was a private shrine for a god or
goddess of money, or for an economic form of their own God.

Q.13. Do the Indians leave medical treatment solely to the doctor or the surgeon?
Ans. No, Indians do not leave medical treatment solely to the doctor or the surgeon. They call upon the gods to
help them.

Q.14. What attitude is shown by the Englishmen in monetary transactions?

Ans. The Englishmen believe in the smoothness of monetary transactions. In England, everybody pays his dues
regularly and promptly, but in India the willingness to pay decreases as the capacity to pay increases.

Q.15. Describe the experience of the author when he presented his first cheque.
Ans. When the author presented his first cheque in England, the clerk looked at it, pulled out a drawer, and handed
him the money across the counter. He was astonished at this important discovery.

Q.16. Describe the author’s experience when he went to buy a pair of shoes.
Ans. The author noticed that the shop was full of different varieties of shoes. He was unable to select the right one.
So he requested the shop assistant to help him.

Q.17. The author says that Englishmen had a two-party system in their spending. Name them.
Ans. The author observed that the Englishmen had a two-party system in their spending, as they had in their
politics. They are- the Misers and the Spendthrifts.

Q.18. How do the Englishmen spend their money ?

Ans. The Englishmen spend money in a planned and deliberate manner.

Q.19. Why do middle-class people in England feel shy of going to Bond Street shops ?
Ans. Some middle-class people in England feel shy of going into Bond street shops on account of their-clothes. They
feel that they will be looked down upon by the shop assistants.

Q.20. What lesson does the author learn from his experience of the attitude of the Englishmen regarding
money ?
Ans. The author learns from his experience of the attitude towards money of the Englishmen that the best use for
money is to spend it on the good things of life.

Q.21. Explain the literary devices use by author.

.
 Ans. Chaudhari’s meticulous use of various figures of speech, especially of simile, enchances the vehemence of his
style. The appropriate use of simile imparts picturesqueness to his style. His style is conspicuous for the aptness of diction.
He chooses apt words and phrases from a rich stock and spares no pain in polishing them. The aptness of diction enables
him to pack his arguments effectively and precisely. In spite of the controversial character writing, he enjoys a privileged
place in Indian English prose by virtue of his vigorous logic, eloquent, flexible and lucid style, intellectual sharpness and wide
scholarship, his boundless capacity for original thinking and immaculate command over English.

Q.22. Write the introduction of the eassy “Money and the Englishman”.
Ans. The extract entitled Money and the Englishman has been selected from Nirad C. Chaudhuri’s famous work A
Passage to England. It was published in 1959. The book is a series of impressions about the author’s visit to Britian in 1955.
His five week’s visit to England, occasioned the writing of this book. He discusses in detail the public behaviour of the
English people and as usual compares and contrasts it with that of the Indians. Nirad C. Chaudhuri’s love for Europe is
clearly evident in the book. He always regards Englishmen superior to Indians. In fact his anglicized spirit could only make
him very close to his English hosts. In this extract he observes that Englishmen happily spend money on good things of life in
a planned and deliberate manner. Indians on the contrary, feel pleasure in hoarding money and pain in spending it. Even
when they spend it, they have no planned and deliberate manner.

Q.23. Write about the behaviour of the Englishman?

Ans. The only thing in the behaviour of the Englishmen which seemed to throw an indirect light on the subject is
that they believe in smoothness in monetary transactions. In England,everybody pays his dues regularly and promptly, but
in India the willingness to pay decreases as the capacity to pay increases. The author illustrates this aspect of their life with
his personal experience. Once he presented a cheque, he was handed the money without verifying the signature and
balance. When he arrived in London, the B.B.C. official gave him money without any formality. Once he did not have
enough ready money, he wrote a cheque and his cheque was accepted though he was an unknown customer.

Q.24. Discuss in detail the attitude of an Englishman towards money.

Ans. Englishmen are undemonstrative to the attraction of money. They do not evince any easily recognizable
symptoms of money. Indians inordinately demonstrate their love for money and the religious symptoms of the love of
money are found in every Hindu house. In the homes and shops of Hindus, Lakshmi, the Indian goddess of wealth, and
Ganesh, the elephant headed god of success and financial enterprises, are worshipped. Their religiosity covers every aspect
of money-making, including the dishonest and violent. But the author did not find such things in Christianity. The people of
the two countries have different attitude in this matter. Ever since the Rigvedic age the Hindus have had economic gods,
and they will continue to have them. For instance, when the great dam at Bhakra was formally opened there were observed
Vedic rites to ensure its success. The author did not get any clue of Englishman’s devotion to money from their religious
observances. So the author tried another approach and watched their secular behaviour. But their reticence confused the
author. For Hindus, money-making is an occupation which can be avowed with pride by every honest and honourable man.
But in English society there is a good deal of prudery over this.

Q.25. Write about the ‘Nirad C. Chaudhuri’.

Ans. Nirad C. Chaudhuri (1897-1999) occupies an honourable place among the Indian writers writing in English.
Critics have placed him in the top class of Indo-Anglian writers. He emerged as a new star with the publication of his book
The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian in 1951. This work made him suddenly- and deservedly- famous. His aim was to
become a professor and historian. Unfortunately, he could not fulfil his ambition. He became a journalist. By temperament,
aspiration and aruduous training, he was meant to be a historian, but the fates had decided otherwise, This set back was
like a deep wound to his sensibility, and it soured his temperament not a little. “To day I nurse no grievance,” he says
“because I have at last unravelled the genesis and growth of my maladjustment.” This explains his unconventional progress

.
to history through autobiography. Chaudhuri emerged as an essentially Indian in Education. He never wished to get
educated abroad. As he became a popular figure after the publication of his book, he was invited by BBC to see England and
write a few talks for its Overseas Service. So he visited England in his sixties. His visit provided him the theme for his second
book A Passage to England which was published in 1959. His other works are: The Continent of Circe and To Live or Not to
Live. From the analysis of his works, he appears as an admirer of the English character, though he freely criticizes it too on
occasions.
Nirad C. Chaudhuri remains the Grand solitary, the master of a prose style that has often a fascinating spidery
quality. His great merit as an intellectual is that he isn’t ever too lazy to avoid doing his own thinking or too timid to hesitate
to give expression to his own views.

Q.26. From which famous book of Nirad C. Chaudhari's the present essay is extract ?
Ans. The present essay is an extract from Nirad C Chaudhuri’s famous book A Passage to England. This piece brings
to focus the essentials of the Christian civilization and contrasts it with Hinduism, in terms of worship offered by the
respective devotees in their shrines and collectively, in the main. The author has given many examples of his observations
on different occasions to show the seriousness of the English people in the matter of religion. He has also acquainted us
with the attitude of Hindus shown to their religion.

Q.27. Where the author attended the first religious service?

Ans. The author attended the first religious service at Cambridge in the King’s College Chapel. He saw there a large
number of visitors. He heard a boy who was singing a hymn. The author was spellbound. He had never before heard
anything so divine and lovely. In the evening again the author saw a large number of devotees at the chapel in a deeply
devotional mood. He had read in India, much about the decline of religious belief, falling church attendance and ignorance
of the Bible. He was surprised to see just opposite to what he had read. He found that the people did not take the service as
a mere song recital, nor the singers took it that way.After the church service people went out in grave devotional manner.
He attended other service sat Stratford and Winchester also and had the same impression.

Q.28. What is the author view about religion and civilization?

Ans. The author is of the view that religion and civilization are interwoven with each other in the west. It seems to
him that as soon as the life of the English people loses touch with religion, it will pass beyond the state of civilization to that
of a decivilized state. Such a state is being created for a large number of people in the west by industrialization and
democracy. The author became aware of this when he saw a party of English visitors to Canterbury. In the church of
Thomas a Backet, the pilgrims had to be told who Thomas was and who the Black Prince was. This not only showed lack of
knowledge of history, it also showed that they had lost touch with religion.
The author found that there was no pretence of secularity in any aspect of the civilization of English people. Even
their deepest and highest scientific thoughts are coloured by religion.
The English religious rituals are accompanied by reverence which is inspired in its turn by the feelings of mystery.
The choir boys looked like angles and they sang like angles.

Q.29. What the main features of Christian Civilization according to Nirad C. Chaudhuri ? How far do you agree
with his views ?
Ans. The essay ‘Christain Civilization’ by Nirad C. Chudhuri throws light on the essentials of the Christian civilization
and contrasts it with Hinduism in terms of the worship offered by the respective devotees in their shrines and collectively,
in the main. The author observes that Christianity has been a great force behind the rise of Western Civilization. Religion
and culture have always mingled in Europe. The bombings of 1942 hit the sensibilities of the English people who realized
that there could be no compromise between Nazism and their way of life. The author thinks that as soon as the ties of
religion and civilization are snapped, England will recede into a decivilized state.

.
 Full seriousness is a marked feature of English Culture as far as religion is concerned. Even the great and learned
persons are very serious in the matter of their religious observances. The author had read about the decline of religious
belief of the English people. But, when visited England, he found the situation just the opposite of what he had read.
Christians visit church with different spirit from that of Hindus going to temple. A Hindu goes to temple to look on
the image of a Divine Ruler and the ceremonials of his daily life. He does everything to please god. The Christian does not go
to church to look on a Divine Ruler and his life. The author says that temple cults are not a part of true Hinduism. They were
borrowed from Western Asia. Christianity had fought and triumphed over those very cults.
Christian worship differs from Hindu worship in its objectives. A Hindu seeks worldly as well as spiritual welfare in
his worship. In other words, materialism and spiritualism exist side by side in Hinduism. All the basic aspiration of Hinduism
are absent from the collective worship of the English. They seem to be inspired by a movement of the spirit away from the
world.
The author found that there was no pretence of secularity in any aspect of the civilization of the Christians. Even
their deepest and highest scientific thoughts are coloured by religion.
The author also found a sociological fact about the religion. He observed that the upper classes were more religious
in England than the common people. The situation is exactly the opposite in India. In India, religion belongs to the common
people, while the upper classes boast of their irreligiosity. The upper classes in India are losing, and have largely lost, their
capacity for faith and they no longer feel its need.

Q.30. Write the summary of the essay ‘Christian Civilization’.

Ans. Full seriousness is a marked feature of English cultural life. The English are quite serious in the matter of
religion. Lewis Carroll, the author of one of the supreme achievements of English culture, Alice’s Adventures in
Wonderland, was not only a devoted mathematician but also religious man. Thus, according to Chaudhuri, English culture is
deeply religious in character.
According to the author, Christianity has been a great force behind the rise of Western civilization. Religion and
culture have always intermingled in Europe, more so in England than anywhere else. The author had a first-hand experience
of it.
The author was first introduced to the religious life of the English people at Canterbury. In the cathedral a very
learned clergyman explained to him what it stood for and symbolized. The very atmosphere of the cathedral had something
in it that accounted for its significance for the present age.
The author attended the first religious service at Cambridge in the King’s College Chapel. He saw there a large
number of visitors. He heard a boy who was singing a hymn. The author was spellbound. He had never before heard
anything so divine and lovely. In the evening again the author saw a large number of devotees at the chapel in a deeply
devotional mood. He had read in India, much about the decline of religious belief, falling church attendance and ignorance
of the Bible. He was surprised to see just opposite to what he had read. He found that the people did not take the service as
a mere song recital, nor the singers took it that way. After the church service people went out in grave devotional manner.
He attended other services at Stratford and Winchester also and had the same impression.
The author never asked any Englishman what he was seeking in his religious observance or what he was getting out
of them. He tried to find an answer to this question by applying Hindu analogies, but he found no answer. He says that
Hindus go to temples to look on the image of a divine power. They prostrate themselves before it. They watch the
ceremonials of its daily life. The English people do not go to their churches to look on a divine power and its daily life. But it
must be remembered that temple cults are no necessary part of true Hinduism.
Our scriptures do not refer to them, nor do they lay down on a Hindu the duty of going to a temple or worshipping
an image. These cults were borrowed from Western Asia. Christianity had fought and triumphed over those cults. This is a
greater reason why there could be no resemblance between temple worship and Christian worship.
Then the author refers to Hindu and Brahmanic forms of religious experience. True Hinduism makes us accept the
universe and requires us to make it a welfare universe with the help of gods. Some of this welfare is thought of in purely

.
worldly terms. In olden days kings turned to religion for the sake of conquest, the merchant for wealth, the peasants for
crops. Children, health and prosperity inspired all to take shelter of the religion. But, the Hindu view of materialism is not
wholly devoid of religion. Materialism and religion have got intermixed in the Hindu concept of the world. In the West
economics is driving out religion out of the life of mankind. The collective worship of the English people is different from
that of the Hindus in this respect. The English worship seems to be inspired by a movement of the spirit leading away from
the world.
The Christian worship was different from the Hindu worship in one more aspect. It lacks propitiation and coercion
of the gods through offerings, sacrifices and incantations. In Hinduism the relationship between the gods and men is of the
type of a contract. A Hindu can assert his claims on the gods by performing the religious duties.
The author is of the view that religion and civilization are interwoven with each other in the west. It seems to him
that as soon as the life of the English people loses touch with religion, it will pass beyond the state of civilization to that of a
decivilized state. Such a state is being created for a large number of people in the west by industrialization and democracy.
The author became aware of this when he saw a party of English visitors to Canterbury. In the church of Thomas a Backet,
the pilgrims had to be told who Thomas was and who the Black Prince was. This not only showed lack of knowledge of
history, it also showed that they had lost touch with religion.
The author found that there was no pretence of secularity in any aspect of the civilization of English people. Even
their deepest and highest scientific thoughts are coloured by religion.
The English religious rituals are accompanied by reverence which is inspired in its turn by the feelings of mystery.
The choir boys looked like angles and they sang like angles. This showed the influence of religion on them.
The author also noticed a sociological fact in connection with religion. The upper classes in England were more
religious than the common people, while in India the situation is exactly opposite. In India religion belongs to the common
people and the upper classes boast of their irreligiosity. The upper classes in India are losing, and have largely lost, their
capacity for religion and they no loner feel its need.

Q.31. Write a short note on ‘Money and the Englishman’.

Ans. The author was interested in everything English. He was unable to understand the economics. However, he
realized that economics had become an integral part of modern life.
In this extract, the author has expressed his views about the Englishman’s relations with money from the moral
standpoint. Englishmen are undemonstrative to the attraction of money. They do not evince any easily recognizable
symptoms of money. Indians inordinately demonstrate their love for money and the religious symptoms of the love of
money are found in every Hindu house. In the homes and shops of Hindus, Lakshmi, the Indian goddess of wealth, and
Ganesh, the elephant headed god of success and financial enterprises, are worshipped. Their religiosity covers every aspect
of money-making, including the dishonest and violent. But the author did not find such things in Christianity. The people of
the two countries have different attitude in this matter. Ever since the Rigvedic age the Hindus have had economic gods,
and they will continue to have them. For instance, when the great dam at Bhakra was formally opened there were observed
Vedic rites to ensure its success. The author did not get any clue of Englishman’s devotion to money from their religious
observances. So the author tried another approach and watched their secular behaviour. But their reticence confused the
author. For Hindus, money-making is an occupation which can be avowed with pride by every honest and honourable man.
But in English society there is a good deal of prudery over this.
The only thing in the behaviour of the Englishmen which seemed to throw an indirect light on the subject is that
they believe in smoothness in monetary transactions. In England, everybody pays his dues regularly and promptly, but in
India the willingness to pay decreases as the capacity to pay increases. The author illustrates this aspect of their life with his
personal experience. Once he presented a cheque, he was handed the money without verifying the signature and balance.
When he arrived in London, the B.B.C. official gave him money without any formality. Once he did not have enough ready
money, he wrote a cheque and his cheque was accepted though he was an unknown customer.

.
 The author observed that there were two types of people in England. There was the party of the savers, and the
party of the spenders. The author called them the Misers and the Spendthrifts. He felt that in England the Spendthrifts were
in power. They beliveve in spending money. On the contrary in India, hoarding is a pleasure as well as a virtue and spending
at best a stern duty, but normally a pain. The noticeable difference between the Indians, and the English people is that
Indians cannot spend money in a planned and deliberate manner, but stand in need of some external pressure or stimulus.
People of moderate means are compelled to spend and for wealthy people, it is temptation, passion or panic.
In England, there was an incredible variety and abundance of goods, at all prices in shops. One can select from
many options. In India, however, limited options are given to the customers to decide about. The author noticed this
feature in every field. He goes to the extent of saying that he got good cows’ milk for the first time in about twenty years, in
London of all places, after coming from a cow-worshipping country. Similarly, he got quality camembert and other good
items in England.
There were not only a large number of shops, there also seemed to be a hierarchy and even caste system among
them. There were very expensive as well as very cheap shops.
Some people feel shy of going into Bond Street shops on account of their clothes. However, the author did not
notice such thing. He advises the shopkeepers to do something to remove such doubts from the mind of the customers. In a
nutshell, the author liked the English people for their devotion to expenditure – “that’s the way the money goes.”
The Government and economists of England are trying to wean the people from the habit of spending. The author
does not agree with them. He says that England is a Welfare State and people should be allowed to do what they like. Time
has changed. Now people are careful regarding their expenditure and income. In brief, the author comes to realize that the
best use of money is to spend it on the good things of life.

.
 UNIT - 8,9

JANE AUSTEN : EMMA (I), EMMA (II)

Q.1. Who is valetuditarian ? Give example from the novel
Ans. One who is excessively conscious about the health and safety of himself and his loved ones. For example
Emma’s Father.

Q.2. Who is the only critic of Emma ?

Ans. Mr. Knightley, her neighbour for the adjacent Estate.

Q.3. Who is Miss Taylor ?

Ans. Emma’s old governess, married to Mr. Weston.

Q.4. Why does Emma want Harriet to reject Mr. Martin ?

Ans. Because Emma thinks that he is too socially inferior.

Q.5. Whom does Emma marry in the End ?

Ans. Mr Knightley.

Q.6. Who is Mrs Weston’s stepson ?

Ans. Frank Churchill.

Q.7. Who uses child’s blocks to create words for the ladies to decode ?
Ans. Frank Churchill.

Q.8. Cite two words made by Frank in word game in chapter 41.
Ans. Blunder and Dixon.

Q.9. In which chapter does the word game take place ?

Ans. Chapter 41

Q.10. What does Harriet keep as souvenirs of Mr Elton ?

Ans. Court plaster and a pencil stub.

Q.11. What is described in these words- “It was a delightful visit, - perfect, in being much too short” ?
Ans. Isabella’s Christmas visit with her father and sister.

Q.12. Who is “a young man living alone without liking it”?

Ans. Mr Elton.

Q.13. Why does Mr Woodhouse want Mr George Knightley after the marriage of his daughter?
Ans. He still wants Mr Knightley for the protection of Poultry houses.

Q.14. Name the six parties that take place in the novel.

.
 Ans. There are six important parties in the novel: the Christmas Eve party at Randalls, the dinner party at the Coles’,
the dinner party given for Mrs Elton, the dance at the Crown Inn, the morning party at Donwell Abbey, and the picnic at Box
Hill.

Q.15. Who says about whom. “Mr Knightley loves to find fault with me – in a joke. We always say what we like to
one another”?
Ans. Emma says about Mr Knightley.

Q.16. Describe some of the illusions and misconceptions of Emma.

Ans. She considers that she has a hand in bringing about the marriage of Miss Taylor and Mr Weston. She can find a
suitable wife for the Vicar, Mr Elton. She takes a liking to Harriet Smith whom she takes under her wings.

Q.17. Give three examples of Emma’s snobbery.

Ans. 1. Emma does not think Robert Martin to be a suitable husband for Harriet.
2. She thinks it is beneath her dignity to mix with the Coles.
3. Emma’s indifferent attitude towards Miss Bates.

Q.18. “There is nobody in Highbury who deserves him; and he has been here a whole year, and has fitted up his
house so comfortably that it would be a shame to have him single any longer.” Who is the speaker and about whom are
these words spoken ?
Ans. Emma says these words about Mr Elton.

Q.19. “She will never submit to anything requiring industry and patience; and a subjection of the fancy to the
understanding”. Who is the speaker and about whom are these words spoken ?
Ans. Mr Knightley says these words about Emma.

Q.20. “My idea of him is, that he can adapt his conversation to the taste of everybody, and has the power as well
as the wish of being universally agreeable. To you, he will talk of farming; to me, of drawing or music; and so on.... that is
my idea of him.” Who is the speaker and about whom are these words spoken ?
Ans. Emma speaks these worlds about Frank Churchill

Q.21. Who, in fact, was one of the few people who could see faults in Emma Woodhouse, and the only one who
ever told her of them?
Ans. Mr Knightley

Q.22. “You will puff her (Harriet) up with such ideas of her own beauty and of what she has a claim to that, in a
little while, nobody within her reach will be good enough for her. Vanity working on a weak head, produces every sort of
mischief. Nothing so easy as for a young lady to raise her expectations too high.” Who is the speaker and to whom are
these words spoken ?
Ans. Mr Knightley says these words to Emma.

Q.23. “I am convinced of her being an artless, amiable girl, with very good notions, very seriously good principles,
and placing her happiness in the affections and utility of domestic life.”. Who speak these lines ? Who is being
described ?
Ans. Mr Knightley speaks these lines about Harriet Smith.

.
 Who is described as “a chattering coxcomb, the most insufferable fellow breathing” by Mr Knightley ?
Ans. Mr Frank Churchill.

Q.24. “I do not accuse her of want of feeling. Her sensibilities, I suspect are, strong and her temper excellent in its
power of forbearance, patience, I self control, but it wants openness. She is reserved, more reserved, I think, than she
used to be. And I love an open temper.” Who speak these lines ? Who is being described in these lines.?
Ans. Mr Knightley speaks these lines about Jane Fairfax.

Q.25. ”She is poor, She has sunk from the comforts she was born to ; and, if she live to old age, must probably
sink more. Her situation should secure your compassion. It was badly done, indeed. You, whom she had known from an
infant;.”Who is the speaker of these lines ? To whom are these lines spoken ? Who is being described in these lines ?
Ans. Mr Knightley speaks these lines to Emma. Miss Bates is being described in these lines.

Q.26. “Why do you talk of success ? Where is your merit ? What are you proud of ? You made a lucky guess ; and
that is all that can be said.” Who rebukes in these lines? Who is being rebuked ?
Ans. Mr Knightley rebukes Emma about her role as a match maker.

Q.27. “I will do you the justice to say that you would have chosen for him better than he has chosen for himself.
Harriet Smith has some first rate qualities which Mrs Elton is totally without. An unpretending, single minded, artless girl
– infinitely to be preferred by any man of sense and taste to such a woman as Mrs Elton.”. Who speak these words ?
Who is being addressed to ?
Ans. These words are spoken to Emma by Mr Knightley.

Q.28. “Mrs Bates, let me propose your venturing on one of these eggs. An egg boiled very soft is not
unwholesome. Serle understands boiling an egg better than anybody. I would not recommend an egg boiled by anybody
else – but you need not be afraid- they are very small, you see-one of our small eggs will not hurt you. Miss Bates, let
Emma help you to a little bit of tart – a very little bit. Ours are all apple tarts. You need not be afraid of unwholesome
preserves here. I do not advise the custard Mrs Goddard, what say you to half a glass of wine ? A small half glass – put
into a tumbler of water ? I do not think it could disagree with you.” From the vocabulary used in the passage, can you
guess who the speaker of these lines is ? What does it reflect upon his character?
Ans. Mr Woodhouse speaks these lines. It is about eating habits. He is an invalid himself. He is extra conscious of his
own health as well as of others.

Q.29. “He only wanted to aggrandize and enrich himself; and if Miss Woodhouse of Hartfield, the heiress of thirty
thousand pounds, were not quite so easily obtained as he had fancied, he would soon try for Miss Somebody else with
twenty, or with ten”. Who is being described ? What does it reflect upon his character?
Ans. Mr Elton is being referred to in these lines. It means he demands dowry in marriage.

Q.30. Who goes to London especially for a hair cut ? Who calls him “The trifling, silly fellow”?
Ans. Frank Churchill goes to London for a haircut. Mr Knightley calls him “The trifling, silly-fellow.

Q.31. Write a short note on ‘Emma’.

Ans. Emma Woodhouse is a young woman in Regency England. She lives in Surrey in the village of Highbury with
her father, a valetudinarian (one who is afraid he will become ill) who is principally characterized by excessive concern for
the health and safety of his loved ones. Emma’s friend and only critic is the gentlemanly Mr. Knightley, her neighbour from
the adjacent estate of Donwell, and brother of her elder sister Isabella’s husband. As the novel opens, Emma has just

.
attended the wedding of Miss Taylor, her old governess and best friend. Having introduced Miss Taylor to her future
husband, Mr Weston, Emma takes credit for their marriage, and decides that she rather likes matchmaking.

Q.32. Who is the Jane Fairfax in the novel.

Ans. Jane Fairfax is an orphan whose only family consists of an aunt, Miss Bates, and a grandmother, Mrs Bates. She
is regarded as a very beautiful, clever, and elegant woman, with the best of manners, and is also very well-educated and
exceptionally talented at singing and playing the piano; in fact, she is the sole person that Emma envies. She has little
fortune, however, and seems destined to become a governess – a prospect she dislikes. Jane Fairfax is a skillfully employed
foil for Emma, but we do not get to know her in dramatic detail because she is involved in a mystery and much about her
must remain unknown until it is revealed in summary. On the other hand, Frank Churchill, though he too is involved in the
mystery, comes through with better delineation. He has admirable abilities but is too frivolous to be truly admirable; his
mainstay is social charm and wit. He is important partly because in many respects he is the male counterpart of Emma:
Both get a certain enjoyment out of seeing others labor under misapprehensions, and it is significant that Emma recognizes
this lively similarity near the end of the story.
Q.33. How Emma proves surprisingly immune to romantic attraction and sexual desire
Ans. Emma proves surprisingly immune to romantic attraction and sexual desire. In contrast to Austen heroines like
Elizabeth Bennet and Marianne Dashwood, who are attracted to the wrong man before they settle on the right one, Emma
shows no romantic interest in the men she meets. She is genuinely surprised and somewhat disgusted when Mr. Elton
declares his love for her. Her fancy for Frank Churchill represents more of a longing for a little drama in her life than a
longing for romantic love. Notably, too, Emma utterly fails to understand Harriet Smith and Robert Martin’s budding
affection for each other; she interprets the prospective match solely in terms of financial settlements and social ambition.
Only after Harriet Smith reveals her interest in Mr. Knightley does Emma realize her own feelings for him. Although never
outright stated as such, it may be postulated that the reason for Emma’s inability to fall in love with another man is that she
has been unconsciously in love with Mr. Knightley for years.

Q.34. Discuss ‘Emma’ as a comic novel about the perils of misconstrued romance.
Ans. Emma, by Jane Austen, first published in December 1815, is a comic novel about the perils of misconstrued
romance. The author explores the concerns and difficulties of genteel women living in Georgian-Regency England; she also
creates a lively 'comedy of manners' among her characters. Before she began the novel, Austen wrote, "I am going to take a
heroine whom no-one but myself will much like." In the very first sentence she introduces the title character as "Emma
Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich." Emma, however, is also rather spoiled; she greatly overestimates her own
matchmaking abilities; and she is blind to the dangers of meddling in other people's lives.Emma Woodhouse is a young,
beautiful, witty, and privileged woman in Regency England. She lives on an estate in Surrey in the village of Highbury with
her father, a hypochondriac who is excessively concerned for the health and safety of his loved ones. Emma's friend and
only critic is the gentlemanly George Knightley, her neighbour from the adjacent estate of Donwell, and brother of her elder
sister Isabella's husband. As the novel opens, Emma has just attended the wedding of Miss Taylor, her best friend and
former governess. Having introduced Miss Taylor to her future husband, Mr Weston, Emma takes credit for their marriage,
and decides that she rather likes matchmaking. Against Mr. Knightley's advice, Emma forges ahead with her new interest,
and tries to match her new friend Harriet Smith, a sweet but none-too-bright girl of seventeen–described as "the natural
daughter of somebody"–to Mr. Elton, the local vicar. However, first she must persuade Miss Smith to refuse an
advantageous marriage proposal from a respectable young farmer, Mr. Martin, whom Emma decides is not good enough
for Harriet. Against her own wishes, the easily-influenced Harriet turns Mr. Martin down. However, soon Emma's schemes
go awry when Mr. Elton, a social climber, proposes to Emma and scoffs at the idea of marrying the socially inferior Harriet.
After Emma rejects Mr. Elton, he leaves for a while for a sojourn in Bath, and Harriet fancies herself heartbroken. Emma
now tries to convince Harriet that Mr. Elton is beneath her after all. An interesting development is the arrival in the
neighbourhood of Frank Churchill, Mrs Weston's stepson, whom Emma has never met, but in whom she has a long-standing

.
interest. Also, Mr. Elton, who will reveal himself to be more and more arrogant and pompous as the story continues—much
like Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice—returns with another newcomer, a common, vulgar but rich wife who becomes part
of Emma's social circle, though the two women soon loathe each other.
A third new character is the orphaned Jane Fairfax, the reserved but beautiful niece of Emma's impoverished
neighbour, the talkative Miss Bates. Miss Bates is an aging spinster, who is well-meaning but increasingly poor; Emma
strives to be polite and kind to her, but is irritated by her dull and incessant chattering. Jane, who is very accomplished
musically, is Miss Bates' pride and joy; Emma envies her talent and initially dislikes her for her apparent coldness and
reserve. Jane had lived with Miss Bates until she was nine, but Colonel Campbell, a friend indebted to her father for seeing
him through a life-threatening illness, welcomed her into his own home where she became fast friends with his
unfortunately plain daughter and received a first-rate education. On the marriage of Miss Campbell, Jane returned to her
relations, ostensibly to regain her health and prepare to earn her living as a governess. In her eagerness to find some sort of
fault with Jane—and also to find something to amuse her in her pleasant but dull village—Emma indulges in the fantasy,
apparently shared by Frank, that Jane was an object of admiration for Miss Campbell's husband, Mr. Dixon, and that it is for
this reason she has returned home, rather than going to Ireland to visit them. This suspicion is further fueled by the arrival
of a piano for Jane from a mysterious anonymous benefactor. Emma tries to make herself fall in love with Frank largely
because everyone says they make a handsome couple. Frank seems to everyone to have Emma as his object, and the two
flirt together in public, including on a day-trip to Box Hill, a local beauty spot. Emma ultimately decides, however, that he
would suit Harriet better after an episode where Frank 'saves' Harriet from a band of Gypsies. At this time, Mrs. Weston
wonders if Emma's old friend Mr. Knightley might have taken a fancy to Jane. Emma promptly decides that she does not
want Mr. Knightley to marry anyone, but rather than further explore these feelings, she claims that this is because she
wants her nephew Henry to inherit the family property. When Mr. Knightley scolds her for a thoughtless insult to Miss
Bates, Emma is privately ashamed, and tries to atone by going to visit Miss Bates. Mr. Knightley is surprised but deeply
impressed by Emma's recognition of her wrongdoing and attempt to atone, revealing a foreshadowing of more meaningful
affection for Emma. Meanwhile, Jane reportedly becomes ill, but refuses to see Emma or accept her gifts. Emma believes
that Jane's behaviour stems from Emma's previous neglect of Jane and/or coldness towards Jane. Jane also suddenly
accepts an offer for a governess position from a friend of Mrs. Elton's. Emma soon thereafter learns the reasons for Jane's
odd behaviour: Jane and Frank have been secretly engaged for almost a year. Frank had pretended to admire Emma in
order to disguise his clandestine relationship with Jane. Jane's distress was due to the fact that she and Frank had
quarrelled over his behaviour towards Emma and his unguarded behaviour towards Jane, which Jane believed could put
them at risk for discovery. The death of Frank's overbearing aunt/adoptive mother frees Frank to marry Jane, and the
engagement becomes public. When Harriet confides that she thinks Mr. Knightley is in love with her, jealousy forces Emma
to realize that she loves him herself. Mr. Knightley has been in love with Emma all along, and after the engagement of Jane
and Frank is revealed, he proposes to her. Shortly thereafter Harriet reconciles with her young farmer, Mr. Martin; Jane and
Emma reconcile; and everyone lives happily ever after.

Q.35. Write a critical appreciation of ‘EMMA’ as a typical Victorian novel.

Ans. Marriage and social status are the two foci of Emma. Most of the drama in Austen’s novel revolves around
who loves whom and what that means, given their social station. Social status in 19th-century England was determined by
a confluence of factors, including, but not limited to, family name, sex, birthright, reputation, and wealth, and it dictated
much about the course of a person’s life. Members of the higher social classes were not expected to intermarry, let alone
interact, with members of a lower class. In fact, in some cases, such marriages were considered inappropriate.
Through Emma, Austen subtly satirizes her society’s obsession with social distinctions. At the beginning of the
novel, Austen’s heroine is confident she knows who “the chosen and the best” are in Highbury and who  constitutes the
“second set.” Keeping with her social code, Emma discourages Harriet from pursuing a relationship with Robert. As Emma
explains, Robert is not a “gentleman.” He is therefore destined to become “a completely gross, vulgar farmer, totally

.
inattentive to appearances, and thinking of nothing but profit and loss.” Emma is similarly appalled when Mrs. Elton
presumes to call Mr. Elton and Mr. Knightley “Mr. E” and “Knightley.”
Mr. Knightley challenges Emma’s notions of class distinction, pushing her to contemplate whether such distinctions
truly matter. When Emma criticizes Robert for his ungentlemanly demeanour, Mr. Knightley impassionedly defends Robert,
claiming that he “has more true gentility than Harriet Smith could ever understand.” After all her attempts to make suitable
matches fail, Emma finally begins to realize that social distinction does not equate to a constitutional difference in
character. By the end of the novel, Emma has learned her lesson, and she decides that “[i]t would be a great pleasure to
know Robert Martin.”
In terms of its subject matter, Emma was by no means revolutionary: Austen herself described the novel’s subject
(“Three or four families in a country village”) as an ideal subject for any novel. However, Emma was revolutionary in terms
of its form and style. Before Austen, novelists generally used either first- or third-person narration to tell their stories.
Austen combined the two styles, first in Sense and Sensibility (1811) and then again in Emma. From the outset,
Austen characterizes Emma as a self-deluded young woman. Austen’s style of narration allows the reader to share in
Emma’s delusions:
The longer she considered it, the greater was her sense of expediency. Mr. Elton’s situation was most
suitable, quite the gentleman himself, and without low connections; at the same time not of any
family that could fairly object to the doubtful birth of Harriet. He had a comfortable home for her,
and Emma imagined a very sufficient income; for though the vicarage of Highbury was not large, he
was known to have some independent property; and she thought very highly of him as a good-
humoured, well-meaning, respectable young man, without any deficiency of useful understanding or
knowledge of the world.
Here Austen distinguishes the voice of the third-person narrator from that of the heroine. Using phrases like “quite
the gentleman himself” and “a comfortable home for her,” Austen evokes Emma’s consciousness through a type of
subjective narration called free indirect discourse. Its intended effect is to close the distance between the reader and the
character, thereby helping the reader to see through the character’s eyes. In this passage (and throughout Emma), Austen
passes between Emma’s own thought processes and a more straightforward, traditionally third-person narrative voice (“she
considered it,” “Emma imagined”).
Emma was one of the first novels—if not the first novel—to employ sustained free indirect discourse. As such, some
critics locate it among novels such as James Joyce’s Ulysses (1922) and Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway (1925) as one of the
great experimental novels of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Q.36. Write an essay on the plot structure of ‘Emma’.

Ans. Some generalization should be kept in mind when one considers the plot of Emma. Perhaps first should be a
reminder of the seeming leisureliness with which Miss Austen puts her story together. Practically none of the material is, in
the usual sense, exciting — that is, there is little external climactic action, and there is no adventurous action. Primarily the
reasons are that it is a satirical novel about social manners and mores and that the satire comes more from the effects of
emotion than from emotion itself. However, the novel will appear leisurely written only on one's first reading. Once the
reader knows the outcome of events and repeats the novel, he will find that it is one of the most tightly knit works ever
done. For, since much of the book is plotted for purposes of irony (which shows the difference between intention and
performance or the difference between what a character knows and what others, including the reader at times, know), the
repeating reader can relish the minuteness with which Miss Austen has prepared for and then exploits to the full the
misunderstandings and the foibles of the people in her provincial community, especially those of Emma. For instance, all
that Frank Churchill does and says on the party to Box Hill takes on the meaning of double entendre for the re-reader, who
now discovers that it is leisurely only in appearance. Similarly, one can sense the irony in how Emma misconstrues Mr.
Elton's gallantry or Harriet's attachment for Mr. Knightley simply because the characters are too mannered to speak
directly.

.
 The plot structure of the novel is regulated in part by division into three volumes: In Volume One Emma deceives
herself about Mr. Elton and that deception reaches its climax in his declaration in the carriage; Volume Two shows her
deceiving herself about Frank Churchill and getting over it in a much less climactic fashion; Volume Three continues her self-
deception about people but reaches its major climax in the ultimate revelation about herself and George Knightley.
Obviously many other developing facets are involved, but in brief outline these are the three rising and falling stages of
action in the novel. Only the last one, however, is final, for Emma throughout is more and more self-deceived, though at the
same time she is also moving toward self-knowledge which will let her come to terms with herself and her situation.
This is only the skeletal plot structure, and it is fleshed out in many ways. To comprehend this fleshing out, the
reader should remember that the motive force for plot in fiction is generally one or more of three kinds of conflict: man
against man, man against environment, or man against himself. The force of man-against-man is incidental but important to
the overall satire of the novel and can be seen in the social maneuverings of various characters. The force of man-against-
environment is seen primarily in terms of Emma versus her social milieu: She goes against the accepted manners and social
ranks in trying to manipulate Harriet either from or into the social and personal lives of others. But the most consistent plot
force in the novel is man-against-himself: Emma is constantly deceiving herself and is thus in conflict with herself. All three
motive forces for plot, then, are found in Emma, but the last two predominate and are in essence the same, for Emma is
ironically against herself because she is against her environment. She has accepted the code of her society but at the same
time, due to her imbalance of imagination and reason, she wants to go against it; both the code and her opposing
willfulness are important to her — hence conflict.
The overall pattern of plot movement is rather classic. Emma's conflict begins when her willful imagination is
released by the loss of Miss Taylor; her situation is like a vacuum to be filled — and fulfilled — in accordance with her
nature. The result is a continuous rising interest for the reader as Emma's self-deception realizes and manifests itself. The
major climax, the highest point of reader interest, comes in Chapters XI, XII, and XIII in the final volume, followed by an
unraveling denouement. This movement designed to increase reader interest can be charted like the rising, peaking, and
falling on a graph.
Finally, another major plot pattern used in the novel is that of contrast. Plot manipulation not only arranges to
juxtapose significantly different characters (Frank and George, for instance) but also often develops a special rhythm by
placing introspective scene or chapter next to one of social interaction.
Thus the plot is quite complex, with more than one element often working at once. Composed of classic pattern,
contrast, and planned general social satire, all facets are based upon conflict. Though not as obvious as the others, even the
last-mentioned element (which is man-against-man) stems from the conflict between social intention and performance.
Underlying all of these conflicts is the motive of comic irony.

Q.37. Write about the age of “Romantic Period”.

Ans. The Romantic period in English literature is usually considered from 1789 (The beginning of the French
Revolution) or 1798 ( The Publication of the Lyrical Ballads by Wordsworth & Coleridge) up to the beginning of the Victorian
era. This is considered a great literary period with a strong contrast with the Neoclassical period (From Restoration 1660 to
the beginning of the Romanticism) in theme and style. Wordsworth, Coleridge, Blake, Byron, Shelley, Keats as poets ; Lamb,
Hazlitt, De Quincey and Leigh Hunt as essayists; Jane Austen and Sir Walter Scott as novelists are well-known writers of this
age.
Dryden, Pope, Addison, Swift, Johnson, Goldsmith and Edmund Burke are important writers of neoclassicism who
imitated the classical writers in form & style; and specially they had high respect for the Roman writers who acted as their
models.
The Romantic writers of the first three decades of the 19th Century differ from the neo writers in their approach of
ideals and writings. Their materials, form and style of literature are different from their predecessors. The Romantic
manifesto or statement of revolutionary aims begin with the Preface to the Lyrical Ballads (1798) by Wordsworth.

.
 Wordsworth rejected the use of artificiality in theme and style. Common man from the country side in common
man’s language became the subject matter. This was in contrast with the urban ideas and artificial diction of the
neoclassical writers. Thus the Romantics violated the norms of decorum according to which poetry should be with serious
subjects in appropriately elevated style. Use of supernatural element became one of the other innovations in the poetry of
Coleridge and Keats. Blake, Wordsworth, Shelley acted as the poet-prophets of the era.
In his Preface to the Lyrical Ballads Wordsworth defines poetry as the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings
recollected in tranquility. Thus it is free from artificial rules and traditions of the neoclassic predecessors. Keats said “If
poetry comes not as naturally as the leaves to a tree, it had better not come at all”. Thus the Romantics were against
artificiality in theme and style. Imagination played an important role in the poetic process of the Romantics.
Nature, the landscape along with its flora and fauna became the subject matter of the Romantic poetry.
Wordsworth is considered the high priest of nature. Accurate description and sensuousness became the integral part of the
poetry of Keats. Nature became an important medium for human thinking and human problems. Nature became an
important themeagainst the fever and the fret of this world, against the evils of industrialization which deserted the
solitude of the countryside, the evils of urban life & the satanic mills.
Much of the Romantic works are full of autobiographical details representing the poet himself. While the works of
the neoclassicists were mainly about other men. Most of the Romantic poems reflect the life and mood of the poet for
example Wordsworth’s Prelude or odes of Shelley or Keats or Byron’s Childe Harold. In a similar manner we find
autobiographical details in the personal essays of Lamb and Hazlitt. In all these works the writer appears as a solitary figure,
socially non-conformist or outcaste. He is usually away from society. Many a time the chief character of a Romantic work is
a rebel, whether for good or evil.
While the neo-classical writers rejoiced in perfect accomplishment in form and style in the manner of their Greco-
Roman models, the Romantics preferred the glory of the imperfect.
The Romantics rejoiced the at notion of unachievable ideals. The poet’s faculty of imagination leads into limitless
aspirations. The French Revolution and its ideas of fraternity, liberty, equality and humanity affected the Romantics to
various limits and thus the Romantic era became an age of new beginnings and great possibilities in subject matter as well
as in style.

.
 UNIT – 10,11

CHARLES DICKENS: A CHRISTMAS CAROL (I), A CHRISTMAS CAROL (II)

Q.1. Which of the spirits don't speak to Scrooge?
Ans. The Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come.

Q.2. What does Jacob Marley drag as a result of his sinful life?
Ans. Heavy chains forged from lockboxes

Q.3. Why does Scrooge like the darkness?

Ans. It costs less money.

Q.4. Who appears in Scrooge's door knocker?

Ans. Jacob Marley's ghost.

Q.5. Who is in the Grave in Stave Four in 'A Christmas Carol'?

Ans. Ebenezer Scrooge.

Q.6. In which year was 'A Christmas Carol' written?

Ans. 1843

Q.7. What was the special quality of the torch possessed by the Spirit of Christmas Present?
Ans. The torch had a peculiar flavour which could make the Christmas meal more delicious.

Q.8. Who is Martha and what is her profession ?

Ans. Martha is the eldest daughter of Bob Cratchit and she was serving as an apprentice to a milliner.

Q.9. What was the Spirit’s reply about Tiny Tim’s life ?
Ans. The spirit said that if the shadows of a vacant seat in the poor chimney corner, and a crutch without an owner
remain unchanged by the Future, Tiny Tim will die.

Q.10. Why is Scrooge’s nephew sorry for his uncle ?

Ans. Scrooge’s nephew is sorry for his uncle because a person who has ill whims himself suffers from them, and
such was the case with his uncle.

Q.11. Who are the two children brought from the folding of the second Spirit’s robe ?
Ans. The two children are Ignorance the boy and Want the girl.

How did the third Spirit reply to the questions of Scrooge ?

Ans. It did not speak for replying to Scrooge’s questions but waved its hands in different directions and suggested
the answers.

Q.12. What was the reaction of the couple on hearing their creditor’s death? Whose debtors were they ?
Ans. The couple felt relieved on hearing the news of death of their creditor. They were debtors to Scrooge.

.
 Q.13. Whose name was carved on the grave in the Churchyard?
Ans. The name of Ebenezer Scrooge was carved on the grave in the churchyard.

Q.14. What gift did Scrooge provide to the Cratchit family on Christmas ?
Ans. Scrooge sent the prize Turkey as a gift to the Cratchit family on Christmas.

Q.15. To whom did Scrooge go for the Christmas Dinner?215

Ans. Scrooge went to his nephew Fred for the Christmas dinner.

Q.16. Why does the author say “ Old Marley was as dead as a door nail.”? Which figure of speech is employed
here?
Ans. The author says that “ Old Marley was as dead as a door nail” because there was no doubt about Marley’s
death as he had died seven years ago. The writer has used simile in this statement.

Q.17. What was the motive of the gentleman in seeking donation from Scrooge?
Ans. The portly gentlemen wanted to help the poor and destitutes who suffered greatly due to extreme cold.
Another cause was to make them cheerful since it was the festive season.

Q.18. Why does Scrooge doubt his senses when he first meets the ghost of Marley?
Ans. Scrooge doubts his senses on first meeting with the ghost of Marley because according to him it may be some
disorder of the stomach which affects the mind and it in turn visualizes such things as ghosts.

Q.19. What is the symbolic significance of the chain in which the ghost of Marley is bound?
Ans. The chain in which the ghost of Marley was bound symbolizes the large number of materialistic desires which
every person breeds during his life time.

Q.20. What is the purpose of Marley’s ghost’s visit to Scrooge?

Ans. Its purpose was to warn Scrooge so that he might escape the fate met by Marley,since it yet had a chance and
hope of escape.

Q.21. Describe the appearance of the First of the three Spirits.

Ans. The first Spirit was a strange figure having the features both of a child and an old man. The hair on his head
were white but the face was wrinkle free. There was a crown on its head from which emitted a strong and bright ray of
light.

Q.22. What was the reaction of Scrooge on seeing his old self as a poor and lonely young boy?
Ans. On looking at his own poor and lonely self Scrooge pitied the poor child who came to him the previous evening
singing Christmas Carol and was turned away cruelly by him.

Q.23. What according to Scrooge is significant about a few pounds spent by Fizziwig upon his workers at
Christmas?
Ans. The few pounds spent by Fezziwig on his workers at Christmas were very significant because his words and
looks at that time were so tender and humane that they made the workers feel rich of the richest.

.
 Q.24. “Another idol has displaced me,” what does Scrooge’s beloved mean by this statement?
Ans. Scrooge’s beloved means to say that before becoming rich he loved her as a goddess but now money had
replaced her and Scrooge is madly in love with money paying scant attention to her.

Q.25. Why does Scrooge not want to see any scene after his beloved departs from him?
Ans. Because he is totally crestfallen on looking at his misdeeds done in the past life.

Q.26. What kind of man was Ebenezer Scrooge? What were his views on Christmas?
Ans. Ebenezer Scrooge was a selfish person who lacked a generous spirit despite having great wealth. He was
insensitive to the feelings of others and believed that through wealth happiness and comforts could be attained. He felt
that Christmas was just a farce to ask for a donation in the name of helping the poor and the needy. According to him the
poor and the idle had no reason to be merry. He also felt that holidays were a waste of working hours and people should
work instead on those days and acquire wealth and money and thereby become rich and prosperous.

Q.27. Scrooge was mean to all who came to him on Christmas Eve. What did he say?
Ans. Scrooge didn’t respond kindly to his nephew’s cheerful greetings and to him Christmas was just humbug. He
told his nephew that he had no reason to be happy or cheerful since his salary was small and with that, he had to maintain
his family. He didn’t have surplus money to spend on festivity. Scrooge was also rude to the two men who had come for the
donation saying it was an excuse to rob the rich man. He sent them away without offering any money. He further cautioned
his clerk that while he was taking a day off, he must be early in the office on the following day.

Q.28. What was the change that came over in Scrooge’s nature after the visitations from the three ghosts? How
did he make up for his mean behaviour?
Ans. In the story A Christmas Carol, after the visitations of the three ghosts, Scrooge realized that he had been
mean and selfish in his conduct. He had valued money over people and relationships and so, he lost all those who were
close to him due to his avarice and selfishness.
When he realized that money wasn’t the most important thing in life but people are, he decided to be a different
person than he used to. He gave a generous amount of money as donations to the less-fortunates, took interest in others
and started to interact with the children. He took part in the celebration of Christmas at his nephew’s house and even
raised his clerk’s salary besides promising him to assist his struggling family.

Q.29. Discuss about the author of “Charles Dickens”.

Ans. Charles Dickens was born to John and Elizabeth Dickens in 1812 at Portsea. He was the first son, but second
child among the eight children born in the Dickens family. Due to the transfer of John Dickens the family moved to London
when Charles was nine year old and this was his home for the rest of his life. Charles was a delicate child and was thrown
back at an early age on the companionship of books such as Roderick Random, Tom Jones, The Vicar of Wakefield, Don
Quixote, and Robinson Crusoe to name a few. Charles suffered a serious setback in his life when his father was thrown into
the poor debtor’s prison for not being able to pay his debts.
At the age of eleven young Charles was taken out of school and sent to work in the cellar of Warren’s blacking
factory, sitting in the front window of the factory, pasting labels from sunrise to sunset. At twenty he became a
parliamentary reporter and a writer of fictitious sketches of London life by night. These writings were published as Sketches
by Boz (1836).
This debut work of Dickens attracted the attention of some publishers of his day and they commissioned him to
write for them. The result was that he wrote about 15 major novels and many short stories. Dickens earned enormous fame
as a writer and a speaker by giving public readings from his works. Dickens traveled to America and other countries on the
Continent and earned great admiration wherever he went. On June 8, 1870 he wrote the whole day and before dinner he

.
said suddenly that he had to go to London at once, he got up from the table and collapsed never to regain consciousness
and the next evening he died. He was buried in the Westminster Abbey.

Q.30. Give the Character Sketch of Ebenezer Scrooge.

Ans. Ebenezer Scrooge is the protagonist of the story. He is an old whimsical man of nearly seventy years of age. He
owns a counting-house and lends money on interest to people. He is an isolated figure after the death of his business
partner Jacob Marley. He is also the sole owner of all the property possessed by Marley.
Scrooge is a reticent fellow and does not mix socially. He is a great miser and hates people who waste money in the
name of Christmas. He holds the policy of doing only those things which earn him profit and has no faith in charity. He is
harsh towards his employee Bob Cratchit and quite reluctantly allows Christmas holiday to him. An air of melancholy
surrounds his meals and his bed.
Scrooge, in spite of many drawbacks has a good quality too. He is a courageous person and rebukes the ghost of
Marley calling it some disturbance of the stomach which is affecting his mind. Scrooge has only one relative his nephew
Fred. However,he never allows any proximity with Fred, fearing he might ask some money.
When the three Spirits of Christmas take him into his past, present and future he changes radically in his thoughts
and deeds. He realizes his mistakes of past and learns a lesson from the various scenes shown by the Christmas Spirits. He
donates handsome sums of money to the needy and develops cordial relations with his nephew Fred. He also raises the
salary of his employee Bob and helps his ill son Tiny Tim.
The character of Scrooge undergoes a sea change in the story. He turns into a fairy godfather from a hard-hearted
demon. This change brings happiness into the life of Scrooge and all those who are associated with him. Thus we seek a
lesson from this change in the character of Scrooge that love and brotherhood are keys to happiness in this worldly life.

Q.31. Summarize the story of ‘Christmas Carol’.

Ans. A Christmas Carol is an abridged version of the novel ‘A Christmas Carol’ written by Charles Dickens published
in 1843. The story is about one old man named Ebenezer Scrooge who would not celebrate Christmas as he thought
Christmas was stupid. He was also a miser and didn’t give any donation.
One Christmas Eve, he received an invitation from his nephew for a dinner, but he sent him away saying Christmas
was ‘humbug’ or nonsense. But that night, as he was sleeping, he was visited by three ghosts one after another. First, he
was visited by the ghost of Christmas past. The ghost took him to the Christmases in the past and showed him how he let
the girl, who used to love him, go on a Christmas Eve. The ghost also showed him how his sister used to love him, which
made him feel bad at how he treated her son and his nephew. Then, he was visited by the ghost of Christmas present and
took him to the house of his nephew where he heard his nephew saying that he loved him and felt pity for him. This melted
his heart. Finally, the ghost of Christmas future visited him and took him to a room where the corpse of his clerk’s son Tim
was lying. He was saddened by the death and asked the ghost why little Tim had to die. Soon after, the ghost took him to a
graveyard and showed him a grave with his name on it.
Seeing his own grave, Ebenezer Scrooge started to cry and pleaded to the ghost to not show him anything more
and that he wasn’t the man he had become and promised that from that day onward, he would honour Christmas in his
heart. The ghost took him back to his bedroom. In the morning, Scrooge became a completely different man. He gave
donations, visited his nephew and raised his clerk’s salary.

Q.32. What all events in Scrooge’s life brought a sea-change in his attitude towards life in ‘Christmas Caroll’?
Ans. Scrooge experiences a dramatic change of perspective, what one could even call an epiphany (which is an
appropriate word given the Christmas setting), by the end of this story. The visits from the three spirits each bring
significant realizations and changes, so it is difficult to choose one as the most important. But I think there are three

.
moments which stand out for the deep impact they have upon Scrooge. First, the moment during the visit from the Ghost
of Christmas Present when he sees Tiny Tim for the first time and feels a jolt of compassion.
The other two moments occur during the visit from the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. He sees a tombstone with
Tiny Tim's name and his family grieving; Scrooge feels indirectly responsible for Tiny Tim's death, knowing that the Cratchit
family's misfortune is linked to their poverty, which he is in a position to change.
He is then shown his own tombstone, and it is in this moment, catalyzed by fear of death, and regret for all his past
misdeeds and all he has left undone, that he vows to change.
"Spirit!" he cried, tight clutching at its robe, "hear me! I am not the man I was. I will not be the
man I must have been but for this intercourse. Why show me this, if I am past all hope!" 
For the first time the hand appeared to shake. 
"Good Spirit," he pursued, as down upon the ground he fell before it: "Your nature intercedes
for me, and pities me. Assure me that I yet may change these shadows you have shown me, by an altered
life!" 
The kind hand trembled. 
"I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year. I will live in the Past, the Present,
and the Future. The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me. I will not shut out the lessons that they
teach."
After this, Scrooge awakens from what may have been a dream (the novel does not clarify if these visitations were
real or a dream, but it hardly matters since the impact on Scrooge is suitably powerful) and is utterly changed. He decides to
seize the opportunity to do good. he runs into the street shouting "Merry Christmas!" to everyone who passes by, and his
greeting is returned warmly. He tells a passing boy to go and by the huge Christmas goose hanging in a shop and to have it
delivered to the Cratchit house. He offers Cratchit a raise in salary, and also offers to help financially with Tiny Tim's illness.
We learn that Scrooge did indeed turn his life around, that Tiny Tim did not die, and that Scrooge continues to
honor Christmas with joy and celebration. The opportunity to change his life is one that is inspired by the dream/vision of
the spirits, but that ultimately comes from Scrooge himself.

Q.33. Narrate the dramatic incidents with three ghosts as depicted in Charles Dickens’s Christmas Carol.
Ans. On a frigid, foggy Christmas Eve in London, a shrewd, mean-spirited cheapskate named Ebenezer Scrooge
works meticulously in his counting-house. Outside the office creaks a little sign reading "Scrooge and Marley"--Jacob
Marley, Scrooge's business partner, has died seven years previous. Inside the office, Scrooge watches over his clerk, a poor
diminutive man named Bob Cratchit. The smoldering ashes in the fireplace provide little heat even for Bob's tiny room.
Despite the harsh weather Scrooge refuses to pay for another lump of coal to warm the office.
Suddenly, a ruddy-faced young man bursts into the office offering holiday greetings and an exclamatory, "Merry
Christmas!" The young man is Scrooge's jovial nephew Fred who has stopped by to invite Scrooge to Christmas dinner. The
grumpy Scrooge responds with a "Bah! Humbug!" refusing to share in Fred's Christmas cheer. After Fred departs, a pair of
portly gentlemen enters the office to ask Scrooge for a charitable donation to help the poor. Scrooge angrily replies that
prisons and workhouses are the only charities he is willing to support, and the gentlemen leave empty-handed. Scrooge
confronts Bob Cratchit, complaining about Bob's wish to take a day off for the holiday. "What good is Christmas," Scrooge
snipes, "that it should shut down business?" He begrudgingly agrees to give Bob a day off but insists that he arrive at the
office all the earlier the next day.
Scrooge follows the same old routine, taking dinner in his usual tavern and returning home through the dismal, fog-
blanketed London streets. Just before entering his house, the doorknocker on his front door, the same door he has passed
through twice a d ay for his many years, catches his attention. A ghostly image in the curves of the knocker gives the old
man a momentary shock: It is the peering face of Jacob Marley. When Scrooge takes a second re-focused look, he sees
nothing but a doorknocker. With a disgusted "Pooh-pooh," Scrooge opens the door and trudges into his bleak quarters. He

.
makes little effort to brighten his home: "darkness is cheap, and Scrooge liked it." As he plods up the wide staircase,
Scrooge, in utter disbelief, sees a locomotive hearse climbing the stairs beside him.
After rushing to his room, Scrooge locks the door behind him and puts on his dressing gown. As he eats his gruel
before the fire, the carvings on his mantelpiece suddenly transform into images of Jacob Marley's face. Scrooge,
determined to dismiss the strange visions, blurts out "Humbug!" All the bells in the room fly up from the tables and begin to
ring sharply. Scrooge hears footsteps thumping up the stairs. A ghostly figure floats through the closed door--Jacob Marley,
transparent and bound in chains.
Scrooge shouts in disbelief, refusing to admit that he sees Marley's ghost--a strange case of food poisoning, he
claims. The ghost begins to murmur: He has spent seven years wandering the Earth in his heavy chains as punishment for
his sins. Scrooge looks closely at the chains and realizes that the links are forged of cashboxes, padlocks, ledgers, and steel
purses. The wraith tells Scrooge that he has come from beyond the grave to save him from this very fate. He says that
Scrooge will be visited by three spirits over the next three nights--the first two appearing at one o'clock in the morning and
the final spirit arriving at the last stoke of midnight. He rises and backs toward the window, which opens almost magically,
leaving a trembling Scrooge white with fear. The ghost gestures to Scrooge to look out the window, and Scrooge complies.
He sees a throng of spirits, each bound in chains. They wail about their failure to lead honorable, caring lives and their
inability to reach out to others in need as they and Marley disappear into the mist. Scrooge stumbles to his bed and falls
instantly asleep.

Q.34. The ghosts in A Christmas Carol are by turns comic, grotesque and allegorical.Discuss.
Ans. There had been ghosts in literature before the Victorians, but the ghost story as a distinct and popular genre
was the invention of the Victorians. Charles Dickens was hugely influential in establishing the genre’s popularity – not only
as a writer but also as an editor: his journals Household Words and All the Year Round specialised in ghost stories, and other
contemporary journals followed. Dickens’s close friend and biographer John Forster said that the novelist had ‘a hankering
after ghosts’. Not that Dickens exactly believed in ghosts – but he was intrigued by our belief in them. In  A Christmas
Carol (1843), the first of his ghost stories, he harnesses that belief by making the supernatural a natural extension of the
real world of Scrooge and his victims. This is a long way from the spectres of earlier Gothic fiction.
The terrible and the comic
The first strictly supernatural sight in the story is the door knocker on the outside door of Scrooge's chambers that
metamorphoses, as the miser looks at it, into the face of his former partner, Jacob Marley, dead for seven years. ‘The hair
curiously stirred, as if by breath or hot-air; and though the eyes were wide open, they were perfectly motionless’. Yet
Dickens’s sense of fantasy brings the horrible and comic together: in the surrounding gloom, the face has ‘a dismal light
about it, like a bad lobster in a dark cellar’. The weird mix of the terrible and the comic is kept up when Marley's ghost
finally appears carrying its chain of cash-boxes, keys, padlocks and the like. Like a parody ghost, its body is transparent, as
Scrooge observes. ‘Scrooge had often heard it said that Marley had no bowels, but he had never believed it until now’.
City of spectres and animated objects
On Christmas Eve the city is itself a place of spectres where ‘it had not been light all day’. Outside Scrooge's
counting house, the fog is so dense ‘that although the court was of the narrowest, the houses opposite were mere
phantoms’. The bell in a nearby church tower strikes the hours and quarters ‘as if its teeth were chattering in its frozen
head up there’. After Marley's Ghost has left him, Scrooge looks out of his window and sees ‘the air filled with phantoms’,
many of them chained souls who had once been known to Scrooge (Stave 1). It is like a fantastic vision of the city that
Scrooge already knows well. Like Macbeth, Scrooge, because of his sins, sees visions that are for him alone.
Allegory and morality
The apparitions are inescapable. ‘Show me no more!’ Scrooge cries to the Ghost of Christmas Past. What he sees is
a punishment to him. ‘But the relentless Ghost pinioned him in both his arms, and forced him to observe what happened
next’ (Stave 2). The phantom as literary device enables Dickens to explore the social and moral issues central to his fiction: –
poverty, miserliness, guilt, redemption.

.
 The ghosts borrow in their appearance from a tradition of allegory. There is the strange child/old man that is
Christmas Past, clutching a branch of holly yet trimmed with summer flowers. There is the large and avuncular Ghost of
Christmas Present, tinged more and more with age as his visions draw to their close. And there is ‘The Phantom’ that is the
Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, shrouded and ‘stately’ and mysterious. Their shapes tell you about author's moral design.
Structure and time-consciousness
The ghosts give the story its irresistibly logical structure, and make Scrooge think that he is prepared for each
succeeding visitation. Preparing to meet the second of the three spirits, ‘nothing between a baby and a rhinoceros would
have astonished him very much’ (Stave 3). But of course he is surprised. The Ghost of Christmas Present surprises him by
showing him flashes of humour and happiness in the most unlikely of circumstances. And when Scrooge sees the visions
revealed by the third of the spirits, he naturally fails to recognise what the reader knows from the first: that the dead man,
abandoned after the scavengers have done with him, is himself.
Marley's Ghost announces them. ‘You will be haunted … by Three Spirits’ (Stave 1). Scrooge is even told at what
times they will appear. The ghosts bring fatality to the narrative: Scrooge cannot resist the visions they set before him. He
must awake at the destined times to encounter the world that he has made for himself. Time-consciousness is built into the
narrative (those bells). The ghosts have only their allotted spans. ‘My time is nearly gone,’ says Marley's Ghost. ‘My time
grows short,’ observes the first of the three spirits, ‘quick!’ (Stave 1; Stave 2). Chronology is of the essence: Christmas is a
special day made all the more significant by the unfolding of these visions at their hours. On Christmas Eve Marley's Ghost
tells Scrooge of three visits in three consecutive nights, but he wakes to find that it is Christmas Day. ‘The Spirits have done
it all in one night’ – which means that he still has the day to redeem himself (Stave 5).
A Christmas Carol is a brilliant narrative success, and was a huge commercial coup. It forged the association
between Christmas and ghost stories, and led Dickens to write a series of such tales for Christmas. It also showed how the
genre worked best within limitations of time and length, so that the short story and the novella were best suited to ghostly
tales. Dickens had set a new literary fashion in motion.

Q.35. Draw a character sketch of Ebenezer Scrooge in ‘Christmas Carol’.

Ans. Christmas Carol Characters
1. Ebenezer Scrooge
The miserly owner of a London counting-house, a nineteenth century term for an accountant's office. The three
spirits of Christmas visit the stodgy bean-counter in hopes of reversing Scrooge's greedy, cold-hearted approach to life.
2. Bob Cratchit
Scrooge's clerk, a kind, mild, and very poor man with a large family. Though treated harshly by his boss, Cratchit
remains a humble and dedicated employee.
3. Tiny Tim
Bob Cratchit's young son, crippled from birth. Tiny Tim is a highly sentimentalized character who Dickens uses to
highlight the tribulations of England's poor and to elicit sympathy from his middle and upper class readership.
4. Jacob Marley
In the living world, Ebenezer Scrooge's equally greedy partner. Marley died seven years before the narrative opens.
He appears to Scrooge as a ghost condemned to wander the world bound in heavy chains. Marley hopes to save his old
partner from suff ering a similar fate.
5. The Ghost of Christmas Past
The first spirit to visit Scrooge, a curiously childlike apparition with a glowing head. He takes Scrooge on a tour of
Christmases in his past. The spirit uses a cap to dampen the light emanating from his head.
6. The Ghost of Christmas Present
The second spirit to visit Scrooge, a majestic giant clad in a green robe. His lifespan is restricted to Christmas Day.
He escorts Scrooge on a tour of his contemporaries' Holiday celebrations.

.
7. The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come
The third and final spirit to visit Scrooge, a silent phantom clad in a hooded black robe. He presents Scrooge with an
ominous view of his lonely death.
8. Fred
Scrooge's nephew, a genial man who loves Christmas. He invites Scrooge to his Christmas party each and every
year, only to be refused by his grumpy uncle.
9. Fezziwig
The jovial merchant with whom the young Scrooge apprenticed. Fezziwig was renowned for his wonderful
Christmas parties.
10. Belle
A beautiful woman who Scrooge loved deeply when he was a young man. Belle broke off their engagement after
Scrooge became consumed with greed and the lust for wealth. She later married another man.
11. Peter Cratchit
Bob's oldest son, who inherits his father's stiff-collared shirt for Christmas.
12. Martha Cratchit
Bob's oldest daughter, who works in a milliner's shop. (A milliner is a person who designs, produces, and sells hats.)
13. Fan
Scrooge's sister; Fred's mother. In Scrooge's vision of Christmases past, he remembers Fan picking him up from
school and walking him home.
14. The Portly Gentlemen
Two gentlemen who visit Scrooge at the beginning of the tale seeking charitable contributions. Scrooge promptly
throws them out of his office. Upon meeting one of them on the street after his visitations, he promises to make lavish
donations to help the poor.
15. Mrs. Cratchit
Bob's wife, a kind and loving woman.

.
 UNIT-12

LEWIS CARROLL : HUMPTY DUMPTY

Q.1. Who insults Alice.
Ans. Humpty Dumpty insults Alice.

Q.2. Who tell the name to Humpty Dumpty

Ans. Alice tells Humpty Dumpty her name and he tells her that her name is stupid.

Q.3. What is the Alice’s allusion to the poem?

Ans. Alice’s allusion to the poem angers Humpty Dumpty, who insists that he is well protected and changes the
subject.

Q.4. From where Alice get the cravet?

Ans. Alice compliments his cravat, which he explains he received from the White King and Queen for his un-
birthday.

Q.5. What impression do you form about Humpty Dumpty?

Ans. Lewis Carroll has created an immortal character in Humpty Dumpty. This character is now taken to be a
symbol of arrogance, snobbery, mean intellectuality and above all absurdity. When Alice looked at him for the first time she
thought that she was looking at a large egg. But when she went near him she found that he had a human form with a large
egg-like face. Humpty Dumpty was sitting with his legs like a Turk on top of a high wall. The wall was so narrow that this
man was precariously placed making Alice wonder how he could keep his balance.
Lewis Carroll conditions the response of the reader by using the word “Turk” from him. A Turk is taken to be a
barbaric, arrogant man with no trace of kindness or humaneness. This impression about Humpty Dumpty is confirmed
when we find him trying to brow-beat Alice. He scolds her for calling him an egg. He is harsh and legal minded and tries to
undermine her by asking absurd questions.
He is fond of creating riddles and quizzes and every word spoken turns into a sort of game for him. He distorts the
meaning of traditional words, coins new words and with their help tries to corner Alice. He tells Alice that the cravat, he
was wearing had been gifted to him by cap white King and Queen on his unbirthday. Then with a maze of logic he proves
that a birthday comes only on a day in a year while there are 364 unbirthdays.
When Alice asks him the meaning of a very difficult poem ‘Jabberwocky’ he gives his own meaning and boasts that
he masters verbs and adjectives. Then in a fit of self importance he also recites a non-sensical poem. Throughout this
encounter he seems to be proving himself better to Alice and thus emerges as an obnoxious, rotund man who cares only for
himself and no one else. Alice sums up her impression of Humpty Dumpty in the following words : “Of all the unsatisfactory
people I ever met” which clearly indicates a strong tinge of distaste that she has developed for Humpty Dumpty.

Q.6. How does Alice cope with Humpty Dumpty during the various arguments?
Ans. Alice is a little girl of seven and half years. In a series of adventures “Through the Looking Glass” she comes
across many strange people and stranger adventures. Her encounter with Humpty Dumpty is not only very interesting but it
also reveals some basic traits of human behaviour.
Her remark that Humpty Dumpty looks exactly like an egg is said in all honesty and without any ill will. But Humpty
Dumpty sitting like a Turk on the top of a narrow wall takes an offence and starts scolding her in a loud voice. Though Alice
is a little girl she realises the offence made and tactfully suggests that some eggs are very pretty. This does not mollify
Humpty Dumpty and he is still sullen. Then he asks her name and on being told the name he makes fun of her by suggesting

.
that it is a stupid name. On the other hand, he tells Alice that his name has a meaning : that is the shape he is and brags
about his beauty. Even a simple suggestion that he should climb down to avoid a fall meets with a jeer. For him every
spoken word is a riddle or a puzzle and he ridicules the poor innocent Alice for asking such a simple riddle. When she recites
the poem about Humpty Dumpty having a great fall and not all the King’s men being able to put him together again, he
feels angry.
Humpty Dumpty boasts that the King had promised him that he would send men to put him together. Humpty
Dumpty puts Alice in a fix by asking her about her age. When told he makes fun of her and says that it is an uncomfortable
sort of age. Alice tries to manage the situation by praising his belt but once again she is rebuffed. Humpty Dumpty tells her
that it was a cravat gifted to him by the King on his unbirthday.
Though Alice is just a little child, she is mature enough to understand the psychological and emotional pressures
Humpty Dumpty might be experiencing. So she uses the technique of diverting his attention and thus getting over the
difficult situation.

Q.7. Write a character sketch of Alice.

Ans. Alice is one of those immortal characters which every little child would like to read. Her adventures in the
wonderland and “Through the Looking Glass” are simply amazing and yet Alice seems to be the seven and half year old little
girl living next door.
Here in “Humpty Dumpty” Alice emerges as a charming girl who is so fond of talking. She talks to everyone who
comes in contact with and she is also fond of talking to herself. In a way this habit of talking to herself provides to her an
opportunity to comment upon character and situation. Sometimes when she is in a difficult situation, her habit of having a
dialogue with herself gives her a clue with the help of which she is able to make an escape.
One thing that is so charming about Alice is that she has a keen sense of observation. This quality helps her to make
a quick assessment of a situation or a person. In the same way she is quick witted and can save a situation with the help of a
gesture or a dialogue. When Humpty Dumpty is annoyed on being called an egg, she placates him by suggesting that some
eggs are very beautiful.
One thing that strikes us about Alice is her transparency and her positve attitude. She is courageous and also on
many occasions we find her fighting in a bold manner for a just cause or for her survival.
In the final assessment we can say that Alice is a sunny character with so many sterling qualities. Her sympathetic
attitude, positive thinking are burnished with her hyperactive imagination and she remains a favouriite not only of the
children but also the adults who are still children at heart.

Q.8. Write the summary of essay on ‘Humpty Dumpty’.

Ans. Alice approaches the egg, which has grown large and transformed into Humpty Dumpty. Humpty Dumpty idly
sits on a wall, taking no notice of Alice until she remarks how much he resembles an egg. Irritated by this remark, Humpty
Dumpty insults Alice. She starts to softly recite the nursery rhyme about Humpty Dumpty, and he asks for her name and
requests that she state her business. Alice tells Humpty Dumpty her name and he tells her that her name is stupid. In
Humpty Dumpty’s opinion, names should mean something, offering his own name as an example since it alludes to the
shape of his body. He goes on to remark that with a name like Alice, she could be any shape at all. Concerned for his safety,
Alice asks Humpty Dumpty why he sits atop the wall. He replies that the King made him a promise, which spurs Alice’s
memory of the rhyme stating that the King’s horses and the King’s men put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Alice’s
allusion to the poem angers Humpty Dumpty, who insists that he is well protected and changes the subject.
Humpty Dumpty seems to make a riddle out of every part of their conversation. Alice compliments his cravat, which
he explains he received from the White King and Queen for his un-birthday. He explains that an un-birthday is a day that is
not his birthday. Humpty Dumpty declares that un-birthdays are better than birthdays and starts to use words that make no
sense in the context of what he says. Alice questions what he means, to which he retorts that he can make words do
anything that he wants, though he pays words extra if he requires them to do a lot of work. Alice remembers the poem

.
“Jabberwocky,” and she asks Humpty Dumpty to explain the words to her. She recites the first stanza, which he picks apart
word by word. Humpty Dumpty then begins his own poem for her, which abruptly ends with a goodbye. Annoyed, Alice
walks off, complaining about his behavior when a great crash resounds through the wood.

Q.9. Discuss the analysis of the essay.

Ans. Humpty Dumpty reintroduces the idea of naming and the role it plays in shaping identity. Unlike the Fawn and
the Gnat, Humpty Dumpty has a nuanced understanding of naming. However, Humpty Dumpty maintains an understanding
of language that reverses Alice’s understanding of the way language works. Alice believes that proper names do not have
profound significance, while names for universal concepts such as a “glory” or “impenetrability” have fixed meanings that
all people understand. Humpty Dumpty believes the opposite, stating that he finds the name Alice to be stupid since it fails
to connote anything about who she is. Humpty Dumpty continues this manipulation of language, taking liberties with the
meanings of known words and establishing definitions for them that suit his purposes. Words become characters under
Humpty Dumpty’s employment, an idea he promotes with the claim that he literally pays the words more when he makes
them do a lot of work.
Humpty Dumpty’s philosophy of naming demonstrates both the arbitrariness of lanugage and the capacity of
literature to convey meaning. Humpty Dumpty redefines the meanings of words at will, but he must use other words that
have presumably stable meanings to explain the new definitions. If too many words have fluid meanings, their meanings
will change erratically, and language will cease to function as a system capable of communicating ideas. Humpty Dumpty’s
ideas about language will fall apart if multiple people adjust the meanings of words to suit their individual fancy. When
applied to literature, Humpty Dumpty’s ideas are more appropriate. Authors manipulate the multiple meanings of words
they use when writing, giving their language a richness that has the potential to fascinate and delight readers. Carroll’s
frequent use of puns and wordplay shows how attuned he was to this property of language. Even in this section, Carroll
plays with the pun on the “richness” of language, indicating that Humpty Dumpty pays words more when they work harder.

Q.10. Write the background of novel ‘Humpty Dumpty’.

Ans. Lewis Carroll called Through the Looking Glass a fairly tale. In the opening chapter we find Alice, the seven year
old (7 years and 6 months, to be exact) girl talking to her kitten Kitty. The little girl is prone to day-dreaming and as such it is
natural for her to slip effortlessly into a world of phantasy.
So while Alice is talking to her cat, she “passes” through the looking glass and enteres into a world through the
looking glass where the unreality seems to impinge upon reality to the extent that the reader indentifies with the little Alice
and voluntarily suspends his disbelief in order to be a witness to her adventures.
As Alice looks at the looking glass it turns into a sort of mist and she with the help of her hyper-active imagination
gets through it. Then begins a series of exciting adventure very much in the manner of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland,
whose sequel Through the Looking Glass is. Alice has a very interssting encounter with Red King, Red Queen and their little
daughter Lily. The world in which Alice seems to be moving is unreal, imaginary, even fantastic.
However, this unreal world is tinchired with the real life petty, but inflatable egoes, prejudices, insecurities, fears
and all such emotions which human beings suffer from.
Alice speaks with lilies, roses and daisies and looking glass insects. It is a world of non-sense, yet on deeper reading,
it seems to make sense as well. The world of Tweedledum and Tweedledee is full of high-sounding arguments which do not
seem to mean much.
In the same way she becomes a witness to a futile war between the lion and the onicorn. The make-believe world
of the “inventor” knight, the petty ego clashes of the two queens on the hand make us laugh on the non-sensical
endeavours of these “fairy tale characters.” On he other hand like Jonathan Swifts Gulliver’s Travels, these adventures
involving the little Alice, show up a looking glass to the paltry world of human beings. The adults seem to be engaged in
activities which, in essence, are insignificant and only reflect the pettiness of human mind. In this sense Through the
Looking Glass acquires a deeper significance. It is Lewis Carroll’s veiled comment on human behaviour and vanity.

.
 The book can be read at another level. There can be a cap Freudian interpretation of some of the adventures in
which Alice is involved. It is important to remember that Carroll’s greatest hobby, that give him the greatest joy, was
entertaining little girls. As a loose definition Freudian psychology explores the sexual origins and characters of thought,
motives, feelings, conduct and language used at the unconscious or sub-conscious level.

.
 UNIT-13

ANTON P. CHEKHOV : THE LAMENT

Q.1. How much time had passed since his son died ?
Ans. A weak.

Q.2. With whom does he shares his grief ?

Ans. The little horse.

Q.3. Name story writers from Russia, Britain and India.

Ans. Anton Chekhov became popular in Russia. Conan Doyle, John Galsworthy, H.G. Wells and H.A. Munro (Saki) are
some of the most famous story-writers of Britain. Rabindranath Tagore, Quazi Nazrul Islam, Premechand and Mulkraj
Anand are some of the brilliant Indian writers

Q.4. Comment on the graphic detail with which the various passengers who took Iona's cab are described.
Ans. The author described the passengers that took Iona's cab defining their character sketch. The first one was the
officer. It gives an image of the impatience that the police personnel have. These characters portray the society we live in.
How a drunkard might react to someone's grief and how a police officer would be unconcerned about someone's loss. Even
the boy in the stable did not pay any heed to Iona's story. No body in the busy world had the time to stop and hear to what
the poor old cab driver had to say.

Q.5. What impression of the character of Iona do you get from this story?
Ans. When the story opens we find that the cab driver, Iona Potapov, is quite white and looks like a phantom. He is
bent doubled literally as well as metaphorically because he is grieving the death of his son. 
He is a poor man, who is struggling to earn his livelihood as a cab driver. He is married, with two children, Kuzma
the son and Anissia the daughter. 
He is a normal human being and throughout the story he is searching for an emotional outlet to unburden his grief.
He is having a very positive and simplistic approach towards life. He does not react violently to the disrespect and curses
that his passengers hurl at him.

Q.6. How does the horse serve as a true friend and companion to Iona?
Ans. The horse serves as a true friend and companion to Iona. When Iona gets no one to share his grief, the horse
comes to his rescue. It not only listens to him but appears to lament the death of Kuzma Ionitch along with Iona.
When Iona realized that no body was listening to him and that he had no body to go to to grieve at his loss, he
turned to his horse. He tried to talk to his passengers, the officers, the drunkards and the young cabdriver, about his son;
how he fell ill, what did he say before he died. It was about to be a week since the mishap and the Cabby had had no body
to talk to so far. Finally, he decided to go to look after his horse. It was unbearably painful to him to picture his son when he
was alone. So he tried to keep himself occupied. He offered hay to the little horse as that was all he could as he had no corn
as he did not earn much for he had lost his young son, he explained it to the horse. Iona's feelings were too much for him.
The driver goes on explaining the whole story of his son to the horse, while the horse listened patiently and breathed over
his master's hand like a true mate.

.
 Q.7. Empathy and understanding are going out of modern society. The individual experiences intense alienation
from the society around him or her.
Ans. We have entered an era that feeds on globalization. A world that is driven by fast technology. The age old
emotions and sentiments are all bygone. There is little time for empathy and understanding. An ordinary human's lifestyle
has evolved, changing the ethics of our society. People are busy and work is immense and the pressure that a human
undergoes leaves no time for her/him to ponder or wonder. A state that makes a human mechanical and lacking in
sensibility, which is overtaken by practicality. The concept of society has altered. The individual is alienated from the
society. Human does contribute to the society but not with cultural values but only by technological advancement. The
sharing and dependence have evaporated from our culture and we have restricted our zone by not giving way to feelings of
joy, sorrow, fear or love any way. Humans have resigned from such emotions and are resolute not to give in to them.

Q.8. Behind the public face of the people in various occupations is a whole saga of personal suffering and joy
which they wish to share with others.
Ans. Like Iona, every human has a portion of his/her heart unexplored. They guard it stealing it from everyone and
yet they long for it to be uncovered; sharing it all with a companion, a friend, a mate. A human, like a diamond has many
facets. The face people wear in public is just one of those facets. There is a child inside everyone, a male in every female
and a female in every male, unknown, hidden. They keep them locked inside and yet crave to share it with someone. This
world of today, where we all are much wiser and practical and much more busy, get little time to spend and share the inner
self of ours with someone. The true face behind us all is shielded carefully and it longs to be known, understood. We all
hold our souls back yet we wish to share our dark secrets with someone. Our sufferings, our joys, our desires, our hidden
self. And in this modern world, few find that true mate with whom they can share their personal joys and sufferings, which
they keep locked away in their hearts.

Q.9. The story begins with a description of the setting. How does this serve as a fitting prelude to the events
described in the story?
Ans. The story of Iona Potapov is one of suffering. The setting described in the beginning sets the mood of the
reader, the atmosphere is full of gloom and darkness as it is a day covered with snow. The author has tried to evoke
melancholy in the reader's heart through the environment he describes so that the reader is set in tune with the mood of
the protagonist. The author describes the positions and appearance of Iona. He appears like a phantom who is lost as if he
is not interested in the world any more, unaware of his surroundings and the snow that covered his eyelashes and even on
his horse's back. This all sets the mood perfectly for a story that is to uncover the protagonist's loss at which he laments.

Q.10. Explain the associations that the colour 'white' has in the story.
Ans. White is the colour of light. However, the irony in the story The Lament is that it reflects the gloom portrayed
in the story. In the beginning to show the melancholy of Iona Potapov, the narrator says that he is so white that he looks
like a phantom. His horse also appears quiet white. Actually white is the colour of snow. And snow reflects despondency
and lethargy of the season of winter and how the whole environment and atmosphere appears to be thrown into utter
despair. The evening is setting in and everything seems so white and withered. The street lamps' light is also white,
replacing the brighter rays. The whole setting, while laying stress on the white surroundings, project the solitude of the
poor cab driver.

Q.11. This short story revolves around a single important event. Discuss how the narrative is woven around this
central fact.
Ans. The story has a simple plot and revolves around it. Iona Potapov, an ageing man, a poor Russian cab driver lost
his dear son earlier week. A load that he carries, weighing his heart, Iona wishes to speak and share his grief desperately

.
with someone. Thus, on finding no companion or friend to mourn over his grief he tries to share it with every one he comes
across. He tries to share it with the passengers that board his sledge only to find how disinterested everyone is in his story.
His agony grows and he is thrown into despair. All the while there is one thing that remains constant in the story, the loss
Iona suffers and his attempt to overcome it. So, overwhelmed is the old father that he finally decides to go on and talk his
heart out to his horse. The horse proves to be a true companion and listens to Iona's story patiently while munching hay.

Q.12. Comment on the indifference that meets Iona's attempts to share his grief with his fellow human beings?
Ans. Iona the main character in the story is a poor cab driver, who has lost his son and is mourning his death. As a
human being he wants to share his grief to his fellow human beings but non of them pay any attention to it. 
In the story he first tried to talk to the officer who hired him to go to Viborg Way. The officer is in hurry to reach his
destination and doesn't pay any attention when Iona says "My son Barin, died this week". 
After the officer, the three young men hired his cab to go to Police Bridge. These young men not only cursed Iona
but also made fun of him. They also expressed the least concern when Iona told them about the death of his son and
jokingly said "We must all die". The three young men are busy arguing with each other and show no sympathy towards
Iona. 
Next, Iona tries to talk to a Hall Porter but the hall porter orders him to "move on". 
Finally he tries to tell his grief to a half a sleep cab driver at the tavern but this fellow is just interested in drinking
some water and falls a sleep soon after without paying any attention to Iona's request to listen to his grief.

Q.13. The story begins and ends with Iona and his horse. Comment on the significance of this to the plot of the
story.
Ans. The story is a satire on how disengaged humans are that one has to find a true companion in an animal. Iona
from the beginning of the story is portrayed with his horse. In the beginning, while Iona is struck with his loss and is
melancholic, he and his horse stood unmoved. It appeared that they both shared similar grief. Both seemed unaware of
their surroundings and of the heavy snow, the horse for being a slave animal and Iona due to his grief. The story narrates
how Iona lashes his frustration by brandishing the horse unnecessarily, yet the horse is faithful to his master. Even by the
end of the story, Iona is left unheard and his heavy heart knows no one to release his burden to. He finds solace in the
company of his horse again. He goes up to him and gives him hay to munch. While he goes on speaking to the silent animal
explaining how he lost his young son. He grieved, now that he is old and poor, to make things worse, he will be having
trouble earning. The animal, not sure if understood what his master said, remained silent and heard it all peacefully proving
its faithfulness to his master.

Q.14. Write about life and works of author.

Ans. Born on January 29, 1860, in Taganrog, Russia, on the Sea of Azov, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov eventually
became one of Russia’s most cherished storytellers. Especially fond of vaudevilles and French farces, he produced some
hilarious one-acts, but it is his full-length tragedies that have secured him a place among the greatest dramatists of all time.
Chekhov began writing short stories during his days as a medical student at the Uni-versity of Moscow. After
graduating in 1884 with a degree in medicine, he began to freelance as a journalist and writer of comic sketches. Early in his
career, he mastered the form of the one-act and produced several masterpieces of this genre including The Bear (1889)
Ivanov (1887), Chekhov’s first full-length play, a fairly immature work compared to his later plays, examines the suicide of a
young man very similar to Chekhov himself in many ways. His next play, the Wood Demon (1888) was also rather
unsuccessful. In fact, it was not until the Moscow Art Theater production of The Seagull (1897) that Chekhov enjoyed his
first overwhelming success. The same play had been performed two years earlier at the Alexandrinsky Theatre in St.
Petersburg and had been so badly received that Chekhov had actually left the auditorium during the second act and vowed
never to write for the theatre again. But in the hands of the Moscow Art Theatre, the play was transformed into a critical

.
success, and Chekhov soon realized that the earlier production had failed because the actors had not understood their
roles.
In 1899, Chekhov gave the Moscow Art Theatre a revised version of the Wood Demon, now titled Uncle Vanya
(1899). Along with The Three Sisters (1901) and The Cherry Orchard (1904), this play would go on to become one of the
masterpieces of the modern theatre. However, although the Moscow Art Theatre productions brought Cheknov great fame,
he was never quite happy with the style that director Constantin Stanislavsky imposed on the plays.While Chekhov insisted
that his plays were comedies, Stanislavsky’s productions tended to emphasize their tragic elements. Still, in spite of their
stylistic disagreements, it was not an unhappy marriage, and these productions brought widespread acclaim to both
Chekhov’s work and the Moscow Art Theatre itself.
Chekhov considered his mature plays to be a kind of comic satire, pointing out the unhappy nature of existence in
turn-of-the-century Russia.
During Chekhov’s final years, he was forced to live in exile. In March of 1897, he had suffered a lung hemorrhage,
and although he still made occasional trips to Moscow to participate in the productions of his plays, he was forced to spend
most of his time in Crimea. He died of tuberculosis on July 14, 1904, at the age of forty-four, in a German health resort and
was buried in Moscow. Since his death, Chekhov’s plays have become famous worldwide and he has come to be considered
the greatest Russian storyteller and dramastist of modern times.

Q.15. Discuss about the ‘Short Story’ as a literary genre of “The Lament”.
Ans. The short story is a product of the modern times. It is a deliberately fashioned work of art. It took its birth for
the first time in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Edgar Allen Poe (1809-1894), an American is said to be the
father of the short story. His book Tales of Mystery and Imagination arrested the attetion of all as soon as it appeared.
Some of his stories are matchless.
With the extension of education in different countries, the need of short stories came to be felt. All persons could
not find interest in higher literature. They wanted some light literature for casual reading. At the same time people came to
suffer from lack of time. They wanted best of entertainment in the least possible space of time. The short story with a
modern artistic appearance catered to the needs of masses. It was almost a universal need. Hence, the short story became
popular day by day.
The spread of journalism has given great encouragement to the spreading up of short stories. A number of
magazines and periodicals have been helpful in the development of the short story. With a view to entertaining the readers
within a limited space at their disposal, they have given preference to short stories and one act plays.
The short story has found a host of imitators in all countries and in all languages. Guyde Maupassant became a
prominent story-writer in France. Anton Chekhov became popular in Russia. Conan Doyle, John Galsworthy, H.G. Wells and
H.A. Munro (Saki) are some of the most famous story-writers of Britain. Rabindranath Tagore, Quazi Nazrul Islam,
Premechand and Mulkraj Anand are some of the brilliant Indian writers. The efforts of these persons have developed,
improved and refined the mode of story-writing. They have given permanence to this technique in modern Literature.

.
 UNIT-14

ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE : THE SPECKLED BAND

Q.1. Who is the narrator in the story?
Ans. Dr. Watson is the narrator of the story.

Q.2. Who woke up Watson up one morning?

Ans. Sherlock Holmes woke up Watson one morning.

Q.3. How was the lady dressed?

Ans. The lady was dressed in black and was heavily veiled.

Q.4. What is the name of the lady?

Ans. The name of the lady is Helen Stoner.

Q.5. To which family did her stepfather belong?260

Ans. Her Stepfather belonged to one of the oldest Saxon families of England, the Roylotts of Stoke Moran.

Q.6. Who made a marriage proposal to Helen?

Ans. Percy Armitage made on offer of marriage to Helen.

Q.7. Describe the incident of Julia’s death as narrated by Helen.

Ans. Helen says that on the night of Julia’s death the weather was very rough and she suddenly heard a terrified
scream of Helen. She immediately left her bed and went towards her sister’s room. She heard a low whistle and then a
clanging sound of a mass of metal. On reaching Julia’s room she saw her appear at the opening. Her face was white with
terror and she wanted help. She walked like a drunkard and finally fell261 down. She was in terrible pain and convulsed.
She then shrieked and said, “Oh, my God! Helen! It was the Band! The Speckled Band !” She showed her finger towards the
room of the doctor and then died.

Q.8. What minute details did Holmes make note of in Julia’s room?
Ans. Holmes took details of everything in Julia’s room. He saw a thick bell-rope which hung down to the bed. He
examined the connections of the bell and observed that it was a dummy and was not even attached to a wire. Moreover it
was fastened to a hook at the opening of the ventilator. He also observed that the ventilator opened in the next room
instead of outside.

Q.9. Who was Helen Stoner? Comment on her appearance at Sherlock Holmes’ chambers.
Ans. Helen Stoner was the step-daughter of Dr. Grimesby Roylott of Stoke Moran. She came to see Holmes
regarding the death of her sister. When she appeared at Holmes’ chambers, her face was drawn and grey, with restless,
frightened eyes. She was shivering.

Q.10. What were Holmes’ findings after his inspection of the rooms at Stoke Moran?
Ans. Holmes found that there was actually no need for repairs in Helen’s own room. Since, the reapirs had begun,
she had been using her sister’s room and there, Holmes found that the bed was bolted to the floor. A rope that was meant

.
to ring for the housekeeper was actually a dummy – it was attached to a ventilator that opened into the next room. Dr.
Roylott’s room was larger than the others. Holmes also found a saucer of milk in the doctor’s room.

Q.11. Who was Julia? How had her death affected Helen?
Ans. Julia was Helen Stoner’s twin sister. After her death, Helen had become lonely and depressed because she had
lost her only companion. She had also begun to suspect that some foul play may have been involved in her sister’s death.

Q.12. What happened the night that Holmes and Watson were in Helen’s sister’s room?
Ans. When Holmes and Watson were in Julia’s room, they waited in the dark, in absolute silence. After a few
minutes, they heard a gentle whistling sound and Holmes sprang from the bed, struck a match and began lashing furiously
at the dummy bell-pull with his cane. When he stopped, they heard a horrible cry from Dr. Roylott’s room. They rushed into
his room and saw Dr. Roylott dead in a chair, his eyes staring up. There was a deadly swamp adder around his neck. The
doctor had been killed by the weapon he had been trying to use on his step-daughter.

Q.13. Describe Dr. Grimesby Roylott’s character. Support your descriptions with examples from the text.
Ans. In the beginning, after his marriage to their mother, Dr. Roylott did not make much of an impression on the
girls. Soon, after their mothers’ death, he seemed to become a sort of a recluse. He seldom came out of his room and
argued with anyone he met. He had a fondness for dangerous animals from India. His greed was obvious in his decision to
kill both his step-daughters. The manner in which he planned to execute the killing – with a snake from India, that would be
unfamiliar in England, tells us that he was very clever and calculative.

Q.14. Narrate the story ‘The Speckled Band’ by Arthur Conan Doyle.
Ans. “The Adventure of the Speckled Band” begins with Watson recounting how, of the nearly seventy cases that
he and Sherlock Holmes have embarked upon together as a detective duo, the one that he is about to narrate is among the
most unusual of them. Watson’s telling of the narrative starts when a young woman,  Helen Stoner, pays them a visit one
morning, in desperate need of their help.
Helen’s stepfather, Dr. Grimesby Roylott, is the sole remaining descendent of an old family whose fortune has been
slowly reduced to nearly nothing after generations of waste and gambling. When he was younger, Roylott embarked on a
medical career in India, where he married the widowed Mrs. Stoner. Helen’s mother died and Roylott moved back into his
family’s decaying Stoke Moran Manor, along with Helen and her twin sister Julia, all of them living in adjacent bedrooms in
the building’s one inhabitable wing. Mrs. Stoner had left an inheritance to Roylott, with a stipulation that should her
daughters get married, they would receive an annual income from this fund.
Two years ago, Helen tells Holmes and Watson, her sister got engaged. Shortly thereafter, Julia told Helen that she
began to hear a low whistling sound in the middle of the night. This went on for some time, until, shortly before Julia’s
wedding date, Helen heard a scream coming from her sister’s bedroom. Helen ran over to see what happened and Julia, in a
state of shock, fell to the ground in convulsions. Julia said, “It was the band! The speckled band!” and died. The sisters were
in the habit of locking their doors and shuttering their windows—Roylott keeps a wild cheetah and baboon around the
property as pets—so Julia’s death fully baffles Helen.
By the time she comes to visit Holmes and Watson, Helen herself has become engaged. Soon after she makes the
announcement, renovations begin on the exterior wall next to her bedroom, so Helen is forced to move into her sister’s
former room, next door to Roylott. Not long after this, Helen begins to hear the same low whistling sound that Julia had
described to her. Holmes and Watson then make plans to meet her at the Stoke Moran Manor later that day so they can
begin investigating the mysterious incidents.
Not long after Helen leaves their apartment, a large man with a threatening demeanor enters the room. He
announces himself as Dr. Roylott, Helen’s stepfather. He tells Holmes and Watson that he’s been tracing Helen’s
movements, so he knows that she has just paid them a visit and he demands to know what she told them. When Holmes

.
refuses to say anything, Roylott tells them not to meddle in his affairs. He then grabs a fire poker, bends it as show of his
strength, and leaves them. Holmes remarks that he himself is stronger than he looks and he bends the poker back into
shape.
Holmes and Watson journey out to Surrey later that afternoon. Meeting up with Helen, the detectives first inspect
the rooms from the outside, determining that the shutters are essentially impenetrable, and then the inside, where there
are a number of telling clues. Holmes examines every surface of Julia’s former room and notices that the bed is bolted to
the floor, that a ventilator hole leads into Roylott’s bedroom next door, and that the bell-pull is fake (it’s merely a rope
hanging onto a hook in the ceiling). They then inspect Roylott’s room, where Holmes notices a safe with a saucer of milk
sitting on top of it and a leash tied and looped like a whipcord hanging from the bed.
The three hatch a plan for the evening. Holmes and Watson will take a room on the second floor of the inn across
the lane from the manor. Helen will tell her stepfather that she will be confining herself to her room due a headache. When
she hears that Roylott has gone to bed, she will undo the shutters in Julia’s former room, put a lamp in the window
indicating that all is quiet in the house, and then retreat into her former room for the night. Holmes and Watson then go
back to the inn and wait for Helen’s signal. At eleven, they see the light and head to the manor.
In Julia’s former room, Holmes instructs Watson to sit silently in the dark and to not fall asleep. They quietly wait
until, hours later, they see a light coming from the ventilator hole and smell burning oil, telling them that Roylott is stirring
about next door. A few moments later, they hear a long hissing sound come into their room. Suddenly, Holmes gets up and
begins to furiously beat at the hanging bell-pull rope with his cane. Right when they light a lantern in their room, the glare
makes it so that Watson can’t tell what Holmes had seen, only that the detective’s face had paled and a taken on a look of
terror. They then hear the expected low whistling and, shortly after, a horribly loud scream coming from Roylott’s room.
Once the shrieking fades, they investigate Roylott’s room and see the doctor sitting on a chair with a snake curled
tightly around his head. Holmes immediately remarks on the speckled bands around the snake’s skin and identifies it as
a swamp adder, “the deadliest snake in India.” Roylott has died quickly from the snake’s lethal bite.
The story closes with Holmes telling Watson what he took away from the investigation, namely how important it is
to have sufficient data, noting the confusing double meaning of the word “band,” which initially threw him off. Only by
examining the physical clues directly in front of him—the bell-pull, the bolted bed and the ventilator hole—could he
accurately deduce the method of the crime. Though he knows he is at least partly responsible for Roylott’s death, Holmes
tells Watson, the guilt of this evil man dying will not weigh on him very heavily.

.
 UNIT – 15

SELMA LAGERLOF : THE RATTRAP

Q.1. How did the peddler of rattraps manage in survive?
Ans. He made rattraps of wire and went around selling them. He got material for making them
by begging in the big stores or at big farms. Since his business was not quite profitable, he would beg or steal in order to
survive.

Q.2. How did the peddler look? Was he different from people of his type?
Ans. He was a man with a long beard, dirty, ragged, and with a bunch of rattraps dangling on his chest. His clothes
were in rags, his cheeks were sunken, and hunger gleamed in his eyes. No, he looked like the way people of his type usually
did.

Q.3. What idea. did he get about the world? What were its implications?
Ans. He got the idea that the whole world was only a big trap. It sets baits for people exactly as the rattrap offered
cheese and pork. It offered riches and joys, shelter and food, heat and clothing as baits. It closed on the person who let
himself be tempted to touch the bait. Then everything came to an end.

Q.4. Why did the peddler think of the world as a rattrap? What became his cherished pastime?
Ans. The world had never been kind to the peddler. So, he got unusual joy to think ill of the world. His pastime was
to think of people he knew who had let themselves be caught in the dangerous snare of the world, and of others who were
still circling around the bait.

Q.5. What hospitality did the peddler with rattraps receive from the old crofter?
Ans. The old crofter served the peddler hot porridge for supper and gave him tabacco for his pipe. He entertained
his guest by playing cards with him. He also informed him about his prosperous past life and how his cow supported him in
his old age now.

Q.6. ‘The old man was just as generous with his confidences as with his porridge and tobacco’. What personal
information did he impart to his guest ?
Ans. The old man told his guest that in his days of prosperity he had been a crofter at Ramsjo Ironworks. Then he
worked on the land. Now he was unable to do physical labour. His cow supported him now. He supplied her milk to the
creamery everyday. Last month he had received thirty kronor in payment.

Q.7. Where had the old man put his money? Why did he hold it up before the eyes of his guest and what did he
do later on?
Ans. The man had put his money in a leather pouch which hung on a nail in the window frame. He picked out three
wrinMed ten-kronor bills for his guest to see as he has seemed sceptical. Then he stuffed them back into the pouch.

Q.8. ‘The next day both men got up in good, season.’ Why? Who are the men and what did they do after getting
up?
Ans. The two men are the old crofter and his guest-the peddler with, the rattraps. The crofter was in a hurry to milk
his cow. His guest did not want to stay in bed when the host had risen. They left the cottage at the same time. The crofter
locked the door and put the key in his pocket. The peddler bade him goodbye and thanked him. Then each went his own
way.

.
 Q.9. Why did rattrap peddler return and how did he rob the old crofter?
Ans. The rattrap peddler was tempted by the thirty kronors he had seen in the leather pouch of the old crofter. He
returned half an hour later, smashed a window pane, stuck in his hand and got hold of the pouch. He took out the money
and thrust it into his own pocket. Thus, he robbed the old crofter.

Q.10. How did the peddler feel after robbing the crofter? Why did he discontinue walking on the public highway?
Ans. At first he felt quite pleased with his smartness. Then he realised the danger of being caught by the police with
the stolen money with him. He decided to discontinue walking on the public highway and turn off the road, into the woods.

Q.11. Why did Edla plead with her father not to send the vagabond away? [All India 2014]
Ans. Edla was kind and sympathetic. She was much pained by the plight of the peddler. Edla requested her father to
spend a day with them in peace as a respite from the struggle.

Q.12. How did the peddler feel while walking through the wood? What did he realise?
Ans. During the first hours the woods caused him no difficulty. Later in the day, it became worse as it was a big and
confusing forest. The paths twisted back and forth. He kept on walking but did not come to the end of the wood. He
realised that he had been walking around in the same part of the forest.

Q.13. What do you learn about the Ramsjo Ironworks from ‘The Rattrap’?
Ans. The Ramsjo Ironworks used to be a large plant, with smelter, rolling mill and forge. In the summer time long
fines of heavily loaded barges and scows slid down the canal. In the winter time, the roads near the mill were black from
charcoal dust.

Q.14. Why did the blacksmith fail to notice the entry of the peddler in the forge?
Ans. The forge was full of many sounds. The big bellows groaned and the burning coal cracked. The fire boy
shovelled charcoal into the maw of the fumance with a great deal of clatter. A water fall roared outside. Sharp north wind
made the rain strike the brick-tiled roof. Due to all this noise the blacksmith failed to notice the peddlar’s entry.

Q.15. ‘The blacksmiths glanced only casually and indifferently at the intruder’, What prompted them to do so?
Ans. Usually poor vegabonds, without any better shelter for the night, felt attracted to the forge by the glow of
fight which escaped through the sooty panes. They came in to warm themselves in front of the fire. The intruder looked like
other people of his type usually did.

Q.16. What did the tramp ask? Was his request granted? What did he do then?
Ans. The tramp asked permission to stay. The blacksmiths hardly deigned to look at him. The master blacksmith
nodded a haughty consent without uttering a word. The tramp too did not say anything. He had come there only to warm
himself and sleep. So, he eased his way close to the furnace. ‘

Q.17. Who was the owner of the Ramsjo Iron Mill? Why did he come to the forge that night?
Ans. The owner of that mill was a very prominent ironmaster. His greatest ambition was to ship out good iron to
the market. He insisted on quality and kept a watch on the work both night and day. He came to the forge on one of his
nightly rounds of inspection.

Q.18. What did the ironmaster notice in the forge? How did he react then?

.
 Ans. The ironmaster noticed a person in dirty rags lying quite close to the furnace. Steam rose from his wet rags.
The ironmaster went near him and looked at him very carefully. Then he removed his slouch hat to get a better view of his
face. He thought that he was an old acquaintance of his and said : “But of course it is you, Nils Olof!”

Q.19. Why did the man with the rattraps not want to undeceive the ironmaster all at once?
Ans. The peddler thought that if the fine gentleman thought he was an old acquaintance, he might perhaps throw
him a couple of kronor. So he did not want to undeceive him all at once.

Q.20. What observation did the ironmaster make about the stranger? What did he ask him to do?
Ans. The ironmaster saw the stranger in the uncertain fight of the fumance and mistook him for his old regimental
comrade. He said that it was a mistake on his part to have resigned from the regiment. If he had been in service at that
time, it would never have happened. He asked the stranger to go home with him.

Q.21. What did the peddler think about going up to the manor house? How did he react to the ironmaster’s
invitation?
Ans. The peddler looked quite alarmed. He still had the stolen thirty kronor on him. Going up to the manor house
would be like throwing himself voluntarily into the lion’s den. He did not feel pleased to go there and be received by the
owner like an old regimental comrade. So he declined the invitation.

Q.22. What did the ironmaster assume to be the reason behind his old comrade s refusal? Hoiw did he try to
reassure him?
Ans. The ironmaster assumed that his old regimental comrade felt embarrassed because of his miserable clothing.
He said that his house was not so fine that he couldn’t show himself there. He lived there only with his daughter as his wife
Elizabeth was dead and his sons were abroad.

Q.23. What reason did the ironmaster advance in support of his invitation to the stranger?
Ans. He said that they didn’t have any company for Christmas. He thought it was quite bad. He requested the
stranger to come along with him and help them make the Christmas food disappear a little faster.

Q.24. ‘The ironmaster saw that he must give in.’ What made him give in? What did he say? What did the
blacksmith think about the ironmaster?
Ans. The stranger declined the ironmaster’s invitation thrice. The ironmaster then told Stjemstrom, the blacksmith
that Captain von Stahle preferred to stay with him that night. He laughed to himself as he went away. The blacksmith, who
knew the ironmaster, understood very well that he had not said his last word.

Q.25. Who was the new guest at the forge ? Why had that person come there and how did he I she look’? Who
accompanied her and why? 
Ans. The new guest was the ironmaster’s daughter. She drove in there in a carriage along with a valet who carried
on his arm a big fur coat. She had been sent there by her father hoping that she had better powers of persuasion that he
himself. She was not at all pretty, but seemed modest and quite Shy.

Q.26. Describe the scene at the forge when Edla Willmansson came there.
Ans. The master blacksmith and his apprentice sat on a bench. Iron and charcoal glowed in the furnace. The
stranger had stretched himself out on the floor. He lay with a piece of pig iron under his head and his hat pulled down over
his eyes.

.
 Q.27. What did the young girl notice about the stranger? What did she conclude? How did she make him feel
confidence in her?
Ans. The stranger jumped up abruptly and seemed to be quite frightened. She looked at him sympathetically, but
the man still looked afraid. She concluded that either he had stolen something or else he had escaped from jail. She spoke
to him in a very friendly manner to make him feel confidence in her.

Q.28. What did the peddler of rat traps think while he was riding up to the manor house?
Ans. Whfie he was riding up to the manor house he had evil forebodings. He questioned himself why he had taken
that fellow’s money. He thought that he was sitting in the trap and would never get out of it.

Q.29. Why did the peddler derive pleasure from his idea of the world as a rattrap? [Delhi 2014]
Ans. The peddler was very happy with the idea of the world as a rattrap because he was never given kindly
treatment by the world. He had quite different feeling for it and loved to think ill of it by comparing it to a rattrap.

Q.30. How did the ironmaster try to convince his daughter about the stranger’
Ans. He asked his daughter to have some patience. She would see something different as soon as the stranger got
clean and dressed up. Last night he was naturally embarrassed. He asserted that tramp manners would fall away from him
with tramp clothes.

Q.31. What impression did the well-groomed guest make? How did the ironmaster react and why?
Ans. He looked truly clean and well dressed. The ironmaster did not seem pleased. He looked at him with
contracted brow. It was because he had made a mistake in identifying the person in uncertain light at night. He demanded
an explanation from the man.

Q.32. What did the ironmaster threaten to do after knowing the mistake? How did the stranger save himself?
Ans. The ironmaster threatened to call in the sheriff. The stranger told him that the Sheriff might lock him up for
dissembling. He reminded the ironmaster that a day might come when he might get tempted, and then he would be caught
in the big rattrap of the world. The metaphor amused the ironmaster. He dropped the idea of sending for the sheriff, but
asked the stranger to leave at once.

Q.33. ‘The daughter stood there quite embarrassed and hardly knew what to answer.’ What embarrassed her?
Why did she intercede for the vagabond?
Ans. The daughter had drawn plans to make things homelike and typical of Christmas, for the poor hungry wretch.
She could not get away from this idea at once. She felt embarrassed when her father asked the man to get out. She
interceded for the vagabond to persuade her father to let him stay for Christmas.

Q.34. What arguments did the young girl give in favour of the stranger’s stay there?
Ans. She said that the whole year long, the stranger walked around. He was probably not welcome or made to feel
at home even at a single place. He was chased away wherever he turned. He was always afraid of being arrested and cross-
examined. She wanted him to enjoy a day of peace with them-just one in the whole year.

Q.35. “He only stared at the young girl in boundless amazement.” What made the man with the rattraps react in
this manner?
Ans. The young girl told him after the Christmas dinner that the suit he wore was to be a Christmas present from
her father. He did not have to return it. If he wanted to spend next Christmas Eve peacefully, without any evil befalling him,
he would be welcomed back again. This amazed him.

.
 Q.36. “The young girl sat and hung her head even more dejectedly than usual.” What two reasons forced her to
behave in this manner?
Ans. First, she had learned at church that one of the old crofters of the ironworks had been robbed by a man who
went around selling rattraps. Second, her father taunted her and held her responsible for letting that “fine fellow” into the
house.

Q.37. Sum up the contents of the letter addressed to Miss Willmansson.

Ans. The stranger did not want her to be embarrassed at the Christmas season with a thief. As she had been nice to
him as if he were a captain, he would be nice to her as if he were a real captain. She asked her to return the money to the
old crofter. The rattrap was a present from a rat who would have been caught in the world’s rattrap if he had not been
raised to captain. It was as captain that he got power to clear himself.

Q.38. What is the theme of the story ‘The Rattrap’ ? How has this theme been developed?
Ans. The theme of the story is that most human beings are prone to fall into the trap of material benefit. However,
every human being has an essential goodness that can be awakened through understanding and love. A human being has
the tendency to redeem himself from dishonest ways.
The theme is developed with the help of the metaphor of the rattrap. The peddler of rattraps calls the world a big
rattrap. The material benefits like riches and joys, shelter and food, heat and clothing are temptations that that allure a
person to fall into the rattrap of the world exactly as the bait of cheese and pork attract a rat to fall into the rattrap. Once
someone takes the bait, the world closes in on him and then everything is lost.
The peddler is tempted by the thirty kronors of the old crofter. He steals the money. Now he is afraid of being
caught and moves through the woods. It is the kind, sympathetic, loving and generous treatment given by Edla Willmansson
that helps him get himself free from the rattrap of the world.

Q.39. Give an account of the peddler’s meeting with the old crofter. How does the peddler conduct himself?
What light does this episode throw on human nature?
Ans. One dark evening the peddler reached a little gray cottage by the roadside. He knocked on the door to ask
shelter for the night. The owner, an old man without wife or child, welcomed him. He was happy to get someone to talk to
in his loneliness. He served him hot porridge for supper and gave him tobacco for his pipe. Then he played cards with him
till bed time.
The host told the peddler that in his days of prosperity, he worked on land at Ramsjo Ironworks. Now his cow
supported him. He sold her milk at the creamery everyday. He showed the peddler the thirty kronor notes he got as
payment that month. Then he hung the leather pouch on a nail in the window frame. Next morning the crofter went to milk
the cow, and the peddler went away. However, he returned after half an hour, broke the window pane, took the money out
of the leather pouch and hang it back on the nail.This episode shows that in loneliness, human beings crave for company,
for social bonding. Secondly, temptations can overpower the greatest philosopher. The peddler who calls the world a
rattrap is himself tempted by thirty kronor.

Q.40. How did the peddler feel after robbing the crofter? What course did he adopt and how did he react to the
new situation? What does his reaction highlight?
Ans. Having robbed his generous host, the peddler felt quite pleased with his smartness. He did not feel any qualms
of conscience that he had abused the confidence reposed in him by the crofter. The selfish wretch thought only of his own
safety. He realised the danger of being caught by the police with the stolen thirty kronor on his person. Hence, he decided
to discontinue walking on the public highway and turn off the road, into the woods.
During the first few hours the woods caused him no difficulty. Later on, it became worse as it was a big and
confusing forest. The paths twisted back and forth. He kept on walking but did not come to the end of the wood. He

.
realised that he had only been walking around in the same part of the forest. The forest closed in upon him like an
impenetrate prison from which he could never escape.
The reaction of the peddler highlights the predicament of human nature. Temptations lead to evil. The fruits of evil
seem pleasant at first, but they deprive man of his goodness and push him into the maze of the world which holds a vice-
like grip on him.

Q.41. Bring out the contrast in the ironmaster’s attitude and behaviour towards the stranger before and after he
realises his mistake.
Ans. The ironmaster is moved to see his old regimental comrade in a pitiable state. He considers it a mistake on his
part to have resigned from the regiment. He insists that his old comrade will go home with him. As the stranger declines the
invitation, he thinks that the man feels embarrassed because of his miserable clothing. He explains that he does not have
such a fine home that he cannot show himself there. He requests the stranger to provide company to him and his daughter
for Christmas. When the stranger refuses thrice, he sends his daughter, with a big fur coat to persuade him. Just before
breakfast on Christmas Eve, he thinks of feeding him well and providing him same honourable piece of work.
His behaviour undergoes a U-turn when he looks at the well-groomed stranger and realises his mistake. He
expresses his displeasure with a wrinkled brow and demands an explanation from the man. Though the peddler defends
himself well saying he never pretended to be someone else, the ironmaster calls him dishonest and threatens to hand him
over to the sheriff. When the metaphor of world being a rattrap softens him a bit, he asks the peddler to quit at once.

Q.42. What impression do you form of Edla on reading the story ‘The Raitrap’ ?
Ans. Miss Edla Willmansson is the eldest daughter of the owner of the Ramsjo Ironworks. She is not pretty, but
modest and quite shy. She is quite obedient and visits the forge at the behest of her father. She has a wonderful power of
observation and takes quick judgement. From the stranger’s frightened looks, she concludes that he is either a thief or a
runaway convict. She uses her skills of persuasion to make the stranger agree to accompany her home. Her compassionate
looks, friendly manner and polite way of address help her. She tells her father that nothing about the man shows that once
he was an educated man.
She believes in the spirit of Christmas and intercedes on behalf of the stranger to per suade her father to let him
stay and be happy. She first makes a passionate plea and then argues that they should not chase away a person they had
invited themselves and promised him Christmas cheer.
Her dejection on learning that the peddler with rattraps was a thief reflects her sensitiveness. The gift of the captain
makes her happy. It is her noble action that helps a thief redeem himself. In short, she is an intelligent, affectionate and
kind young girl.

Q.43. Do you think the title of the story ‘The Rattrap’ is appropriate? Give reasons to support your answer.
Ans. The story has an appropriate and suggestive title. It at once draws our attention to the central theme—the
whole world is a big rattrap. This metaphor helps us to understand the human predicament. All the good things of the world
are nothing but baits to tempt a person to fall into the rattrap. Through the character of the peddler, the writer drives
home the idea that most human beings are prone to fall into the trap of material benefits.
The story begins with rattraps and ends with a rattrap as a present for someone who has helped a rat to get free
from’the rattrap. Even the middle of the story revolves round the rattrap. The actions of the peddler after he steals thirty
kronor of the old crofter reveal the inner conflicts, tensions and lack of peace of a person who touches the bait of
temptation. Renunciation of the temptation helps in redemption.Thus, we conclude that the title is apt and significant.

Q.44. What are the instances in the story that show that the character of the ironmaster is different from that of
his daughter in many ways?

.
 Ans. There are several instances in the story to show that the character of the ironmaster is different from that of
his daughter. The first of these is when they invite the peddler home. The iron master thought it was his old acquaintance
Nils Olof. So he invites him home but his words show his arrogance. He points out the Captain’s mistake and says that it
happened only because he, the ironmaster, was not in service at that time. Thus he thinks that the man has been refusing
because he is too poor to ennter his manor house. He returns unsuccessful.
His daughter is, however, full of compassion. She can see that the man is terribly afraid and needs an assurance
that he will be allowed to leave as freely as he has come. When she gives her word about it, he readily goes with her. Thus
while the ironman is proud. The daughter is compassionate.
The second instance is when the identity of the man is revealed. The ironmaster is angry, thinks that he has been
cheated and even wants him jailed. The daughter is still compassionate and remembers her word. She persuades her father
to let him live to enjoy the Christmas eve.
The third and the last instance which reveals their character is when the man has left and the ironmaster and his
daughter know that he is a thief. The ironmaster cannot hide his feelings. He is worried about his silver spoons, the young
girl is only more dejected than usual.

Q.45. The story has many instances of unexpected reactions from the characters to others’ behaviour. Pick out
instances of these surprises.
Ans. The first surprising reaction is of the crofter. The peddler never expected the hospitality given to him. He
expected as usual a sour face. But the crofter gave him food and tobacco and played cards with him. The peddler was most
surprised at the crofters unexpected reaction to his expression of being incredulous. The crofter’s showing the money was
most unexpected. It was not only the peddler’s fate to come across unexpected reactions. But other characters have also
their share.
The iron master does not understand why his supposed friend is insistent on living in the forge. When his daughter
comes to persuade the peddler, the peddler’s reaction of fear was very unexpected to her. The peddler was not surprised
when he was asked to leave by the ironmaster but her daughter’s behaviour on that occasion surprised him a great deal. He
calls it a ‘crazy idea.’
Last but not least, the peddler’s reaction to the young girl’s kindness was also most unexpected. No one could think
that the thief would leave the house not only without taking anything away but on the contrary leaving a decent present for
the young lady. The girl was rightly and of course, pleasantly surprised.

Q.46. The story ‘The Rattrap’ is told somewhat in the manner of a fairy tale. Elaborate.
Ans. 1. ‘The Rattrap’ is a story that underlies a belief that essential goodness in human beings can be aroused
through sympathy, understanding and love.
2. Once a man went around selling small rattraps but he took to begging and thievery to keep his body and soul
together.
3. One day he was struck with the idea – the whole world is a big rattrap and it offers riches as bait.
4. People let themselves be tempted to touch the bait then it closes in on them bringing an end to everything.
5. One dark evening the rattrap peddler sought shelter in an old crofter’s roadside cottage.
6. The old man gave him food, tobacco they enjoyed the card game too.
7. Next morning the peddler stole away his thirty kroners.
8. The rattrap peddler escaped into a big confusing forest and got lost.
9. While resting on the ground he recollected his idea that the world is a rattrap and thought his end was near.
10. Hearing a thumping sound he reached Ramsjo ironworks for a night shelter.
11. The owner came on his nightly rounds and noticed the ragged wretch near the furnace.
12. He took him as an old acquaintance ‘Nils Olof.’

.
 13. He invited him to stay with them for Christmas but the stranger declined the offer.
14. His daughter Edla Willmansson persuaded to go home with him.
15. She requested him to stay for Christmas Eve only.
16. On his way to the Manor House the peddler thought that he had thrown himself into the lion’s den.
17. The next day in broad day light the iron master realized the stranger was not captain and threatened to call the
sheriff.
18. Edla pleaded for him and asked him to stay back.
19. Christmas Eve at Ramsjo was as usual and the stranger slept and slept.
20. She made him understand that if he wanted rest and peace he would be welcome next Christmas also. This had
a miraculous effect on him.
21. Next morning they went for early church service leaving behind the guest who was asleep.
22. They learnt at church that a rattrap peddler had robbed an old crofter.
23. Edla becomes very upset.
24. They reach home immediately and learn that the peddler had already left but had not taken anything at all with
him. Instead, he had left a small packet for the young girl as a Christmas present.
25. She opens the packet and finds a rattrap, three wrinkled ten-Kronor notes and also a letter with a request to
return the Kroners to the crofter.

Q.47. Write the detail summary of the essay ‘The Rattrap’.

Ans. A rattrap peddler went around selling small rattraps. His clothes were in rags. His cheeks were hollow. He had
the look of a starved man. He made wire traps. He begged the material from stores and big farms. Sometimes he resorted
to begging and a little stealing to survive. The world had never been kind to him. He had no home, no shelter.
The peddler led a lonely life. One day while he was thinking about his rattraps, an idea struck him. He thought that
the world itself was a rattrap. As soon as anybody touched it, the trap closed on them. He was amused to think of some
people who were already trapped, and some others who were trying to reach the bait in the trap.
It was a cold evening in December. He reached a cottage on the roadside. He knocked at the door and asked for a
night’s shelter. The owner of the cottage was a lonely old crofter. He wanted someone to talk to. He welcomed the peddler.
He gave the peddler hot porridge to eat, and tobacco to smoke. Then they played cards. The crofter was generous as well as
trustful. He told the peddler that he had a cow and sold her milk to a creamery. He also told him that he received thirty
kronors as payment the previous month. Then he took down a pouch and showed him the money. Then he put the money
back i
n the pouch and hung it on a nail in the window frame. Next morning the peddler left. The crofter locked his cottage, and
went away.
The peddler came back to the cottage. He had been tempted to steal the money that hung like a bait in the window
frame. He smashed the pane and stole the money. Now he thought it was not safe to walk along the public highway. So he
went into the woods. There he walked and walked but could not get out. He moved in circles. He was tired. He looked upon
the forest as a rattrap in which he was caught. He thought his end was near. He lay down to die.
After a while he heard regular thumping of a hammer’s strokes. He knew the sound was coming from Ramsjo
Ironworks. He stood up and walked in the direction of the sound. He opened the gate of the ironworks and went into the
forge. The owner came on his nightly rounds and noticed the ragged wretch near the furnace. The ironmaster looked
intently at the peddler’s face. He felt sure that the peddler was one of his old regimental comrades, Captain von Stable who
had fallen on evil days. He invited the peddler to go home with him for Christmas. But the peddler was alarmed. He thought
it was risky for him to accept the offer. He firmly declined it. The ironmaster went home.
The ironmaster sent his daughter Edla to persuade the peddler to come home. She spoke gently to him. The
peddler felt confidence in her and agreed to go with her. On the way he was sorry to have stolen the crofter’s money that
had put him in a trap.

.
 The ironmaster was happy to have his old regimental comrade under his roof. He planned to feed him well and give
him some respectable work. The servant cut the peddler’s hair, shaved him ad bathed him. The peddler appeared wearing
one of the ironmaster’s fine suits. But when the ironmaster looked at him in daylight, he felt that he had made a mistake.
The peddler was not captain von Stable. He thought that the man had deceived him. He even thought of handing him to the
sheriff.
The peddler said that he had not pretended to be what he was not. He had not been willing to go to the
ironmaster’s house. Even then he was willing to put on his rags and leave. He also told the ironmaster that the world was a
rattrap, and he himself might one day be tempted by a big bait and get caught in the trap. The ironmaster told him to leave
at once.
Edla did not like her father’s asking the poor peddler to leave. She thought it was unfair to turn away the man
whom they had invited. She wanted to have the joy of entertaining a homeless wanderer on Christmas Eve. She stopped
the peddler and her father agreed to it.
Edla served food to the peddler. He was given Christmas presents which he thankfully received. Edla told him that
her father’s suit that the peddler was wearing was also a Christmas present. She assured him that he would be welcomed
again if he liked to spend the next Christmas Eve with them.
Next morning the ironmaster and his daughter went to church. There they learned that the peddler was a thief. He
had robbed the crofter. The ironmaster was sure that the peddler must have made away with their silver. Edla was
dejected. But when they reached home they learned that the peddler had left. But he had taken away nothing. On the
other hand he had left a Christmas present for Edla.
Edla opened the present. It was a tiny rattrap. Edla was happy to see that the peddler had left the crofter’s money
behind. There was a letter also. It was addressed to Edla. He thanked her for her kindness. He wanted to repay her
kindness. So he had left the crofter’s money and had requested her to return it to the crofter. He said he had been raised to
captain. That was why he could come out of the rattrap in which he had been caught. He signed the letter Captain von
Stable.

.
 UNIT – 16

MAXIM GORKY : THE MOTHER OF A TRAITOR

Q.1. What was the reason for young Paul's restlessness at the beginning of the story? How did it find expression?
Ans. Young Paul is restless at the beginning of the story because he was told by his mother that they were not lucky
therefore don't have enough money to have a car and other luxuries of life. Besides young Paul had a feeling that deep
down his mother was not as happy as she appeared to be. She blamed young Paul's father for not being lucky and making
her unlucky as well because she was married to him.

Q.2. Why do you think Paul's mother was not satisfied with the yearly birthday gift of 1,000 pounds for five
years.
Ans. Paul's mother was not satisfied with the yearly birthday gift of 1000 pounds for five years because she was an
unsatisfied lot. She always had the feeling that she deserved a better treatment from life and this resulted in not showing
any enthusiasm for the handsome birthday gift from Paul. Instead Paul started to hear more whispers from the house for
more money.

Q.3. What was the reason for the anxiety of Paul's mother as he grew older?
Ans. As it can be implied from the story, The Rocking-horse Winner, Paul was an autistic child who also suffered
Oedipus-complex. The story pictures a very young Paul who is at the threshold of teenage and is very eager to fight the
sounds that keep whispering in his house that “there must be more money He was desperate to bring happiness to his
mother through money and desired to replace his father in her life. As Paul grew impatient and betted on racing horses to
earn money by means of gambling. Hester, realised that her son was indulging too much in horse racing and asked the
gardener and her brother to keep him away from it. She realised how tensed Paul had grown. Yet she knew not that the
worry that had been eating and consuming him up was of his mother. Eager to win, Paul lost, and lost again. It was before
Derby, he grew worried to earn for his mother and prove his luck to her. She was worried so much that she left the party in
the middle to return to her son to see him safe and healthy. However, it was the last time she saw her son in senses.

Q.4. Paul's final bet his family richer but cost him his life. Explain.
Ans. Paul was a child that was doomed. There had to be some signs, indications to his disintegrating health,
implying his mental situation. He was possibly an autistic child who needed more than general attention and care from his
family. He heard the house whispering to him all the time that there must be more money. The child was possibly
schizophrenic as well for he was hearing sounds that did not exist. And he was oedipal for sure. All these were already
leading him to the inevitable, however, the child had no knowledge to what was happening to him. He tried and tried to
earn for his mothers sake. He wanted to prove that he is lucky to earn and deserving of her love. And he did earn in Derby
80,000 pounds by predicting that Malabar would win through his clairvoyance. However, it deteriorated his health so much
that he died in few days afterwards.

Q.5. What were the voices that Paul heard? Did they lead him to success in the real sense?
Ans. Although the house Paul and his family lived in was a pleasant one, the money they had was not enough to
maintain the social position they had to keep up. The mother realised that father had no luck to make enough money so she
decided to do something on her own. It was then that the house started whispering from every corner that “there must be
more money The sounds started haunting the place and made Paul very uncomfortable and distressed and disturbed him.
Though there were expensive gifts coming on Christmas, Paul could hear behind the shining rocking horse that “there must
be more money It is plausible that Paul was schizophrenic and imagined the voices on being stressed due to their misery. As

.
it is written in the text that no body said it aloud and there is no mention of anyone else hearing such voices, it is clear that
Paul imagined his fears giving them voice. Paul's fear transferred into him through his mother constantly haunted him and
became his driving force. The boy was oedipal and unknowingly wished to replace his father from his mother's life. So, the
autistic boy drove his shinning horse ferociously until he “got thereand would be sure of the horse that would win the next
race. There were times when he was not sure, so he would be careful. The gardener Bassett was his partner throughout.
Later even uncle Oscar joined as such was the conviction with which Paul used to declare the winning horse's name, and the
horse used to win in actual. Call it clairvoyance or sheer luck, which he aspired to have to prove to be worthy of his
mother's luck, Paul made money by betting on horses and fi8nally left 80,000 pounds for his family by losing himself.

Q.6. Comment on Groky’s didactic aim in the story ‘the Mother of Traitor’.
Ans. Introduction
This is a short story which deals with Dual love: Love for the country and love for the son.
Marinna’s son: He was heartless man. He was brave and cleaver. He was a traitor. He was head of the men
destroying the town. He was hated by the town. He thinks that he can become famous by destroying others life. He says
people don’t remember the men who built the Rome but remembers the men who destroyed Rome. He was so blind for
the Glory.
Suffering caused by war: Enemy used to torture the citizen. Citizens were crying due to pain. They lost all hope.
Enemy had poisoned all the water sources by throwing dead bodies in water. Citizen used to talk about death all the time.
Monna Marinna: She is the central character of the story. She is not happy with her son. She is worried about her
country as a citizen. She thought previously that her son would become a great leader of the country and would do
something for the country. Contrary to her will, he harasses citizen of the country. Marinna has equal love for her son and
native country.
City’s defenders and mother: Marinna requests them to kill her. They refused and said she is not responsible for her
son’s actions.
Marinna fulfills her duty: As a citizen her heart was weeping as her son was giving suffering to the citizen. Finally she
goes to her son. She tries to convince her son that hero is one who creates life. But her son arrogantly answers that the
destroyer is more glorious than the builder. Finally Marinna makes her son rest in her lap and immediately covers him with
her black cloak. Then she kills him by pushing a knife into his heart.
Thus she fulfills her duty as a citizen. But she is also a mother and a mother cannot live her life by killing her own
son. She also kills herself with the same knife and fulfills her duty as a mother. She is the tragic hero of the story.

Q.7. Summarize the story ‘The Mother of a Traitor’ in your own words.
Ans. The story ‘The Mother of a Traitor’ as the name suggests deals with Monna Marianna,the mother of a traitor.
Her son was the leader of the enemy who had surrounded the city. The enemy had surrounded the city in the tight ring of
steel; they had also cut off all the supplies of water and food. The people in the city knew that there was little hope of help.
Their hope of salvation was waning day by day. Everything spoke to them of death.
Marianna moved about in the streets all alone hated by most people. She wandered from place to place by night.
One day she saw a woman kneeling beside a corpse. It was the dead body of her son. Her husband had died thirteen days
ago. Her son died that day. She said to Marianna.
“Now that he has died honourably fighting for his country I can say that I feared for him: he was light – hearted, too
fond of revelry and I feared that he might betray his city, as did the son of Marianna, the enemy of God and Man, the leader
of our foes, may he be so cursed and the womb that bore him!”
The old lady did not know that she was talking to Marianna herself. Marianna covered her face and went on her
way. The next morning she went to the city’s defenders and said “My son has come to be your enemy. Either kill me or
open the gates that I may go to him.” Thes oldiers took counsel with one another and decided that it was no use killing the

.
lady for the sins of her son. They were certain that she could not have led her son to commit this terrible sin. Therefore they
opened the gate and let her go. In the enemy’s camp, the soldiers enquired from her who she was and why she had come.
She replied:
“Your leader is my son, she said”, Just then came her son. He kissed her hands and said” Mother! you have come to
me. You are with me. Tomorrow I shall capture the city. I have spared this city for your sake, it has been like a thorn in my
flesh. It has retarded my swift rise to fame. But now tomorrow I shall capture the city”. They conversed for a long time.
Soon it was dark. The mother said to him “come my son, lay thy head on my breast and rest,remember how gay and kind
you were as a child, and how everyone loved you”. He obeyed her, laid his head in her lap and closed his eyes. He dozed
there on mother’s breast – like a child. Then, covering him with her black cloak, she plunged a knife into his heart and he
died.
Merianna threw his corpse at the feet of the bewildered sentries. Addressing the countrymen she said,” As a citizen
I have done for my country all I could; as a Mother I remain with my soul.” With a firm hand she plunged the knife into her
own breast. She was soon dead.

1.

.
 UNIT-17

D.H.LAWRENCE:THE ROCKING-HORSE WINNER

Q.1. How did the failure affect the woman?

Ans. The woman tried a variety of things but was unable to discover anything worthwhile. She racked her wits even
more, and her failure left deep lines on her cheeks.

Q.2. What was the haunted phrase and who heard it?
Ans. An unsaid word began to plague the house: “There must be more money!” I'm sure there's more money!”
Nobody stated it out loud, but the kids could hear it all the time.

Q.3. What did Paul do with the rocking horse?

Ans. Paul sat on his large rocking horse, became enraged, and careered the horse erratically. He climbed down and
stood in front of his rocking-horse as he reached the conclusion of his short insane adventure.

Q.4. Why did the uncle feel delighted?

Ans. The uncle felt delighted to find that his small nephew was posted with all the racing news and events that
were happening and was also accustomed to the names and details of the horses.

Q.5. What was Paul’s secret?

Ans. Paul’s secret of secrets was his unnamed wooden horse. He had his horse taken from his own bedroom and
placed at the top of the house when he was freed from his duties as a nurse and nursery governess.

Q.6. What were the gifts of Christmas?

Ans. On the occasion of Christmas, the house was full of expensive and splendid toys which filled the entire nursery.
The gifts were a gleaming contemporary rocking horse, a smart dollhouse, a large pink doll who sat in her new pram, and an
exceptionally stupid dog who replaced a teddy bear.

Q.7. How did uncle manage five thousand pounds without letting Paul’s mother know about it?
Ans. Uncle promised Paul that he would handle it without his mother's knowledge, and he did it without difficulty.
Uncle deposited the five thousand pounds with the family lawyer, who was then to notify Paul's mother that a relative had
placed five thousand pounds in his hands.

Q.8. What happened two nights before the Derby?

Ans. Paul's mother went to a huge party in town two nights before the Derby. One of her panic attacks was
concerning her son, her firstborn, which grabbed her heart and made her unable to speak. She battled the sensation since
she was a firm believer in logic. But that was too much for her, so she left the dance and walked downstairs to contact her
son on the phone.

Q.9. Why was Paul tense and what made his mother tense more?
Ans. The Derby was approaching, and the boy was becoming increasingly apprehensive. He didn't hear a word that
was spoken to him. He looked thin, and his eyes had an eerie quality to them. His mother was also experiencing weird
discomfort about him. She would feel a certain anxiety about him that was almost anguish and wanted to rush to him at
once to know about his safety.  

.
 Q.10. Give the details of the woman and her family.
Ans. The woman was lovely, but she lacked fortune in her life. She married for love, but the love lasted just a few
months. She had three lovely children, two girls and a boy, but she felt forced to have them and couldn't love them. She
knew there was a hard tiny spot in the centre of her heart that couldn't feel love for anyone. They lived in a nice house with
a garden and quiet maids, and they thought they were better than everyone. Both the father and the mother had a meagre
salary. The father was attractive and moved into town to work at some office, but his plans never materialised. Despite the
fact that the style was maintained at all times, there was always a nagging feeling of financial scarcity.

Q.11. What did Paul’s mother do for income?

Ans. Paul's mother travelled into town on a daily basis. She'd discovered a strange talent for drawing furs and
clothing fabrics. She also worked in secret at a friend's studio who was the head artist for the big drapers. For the
newspaper advertising, she created representations of ladies in furs and ladies in silk and sequins. Paul's mother barely
made a few hundred dollars a week and was unsatisfied despite working numerous jobs at once. She always wanted to be
first in things, even when it came to producing designs for curtain commercials.

Q.12. What was her reaction after reading the letter?

Ans. She received the letter while eating breakfast on her birthday morning. Her face stiffened and became more
expressionless as she read the letter. Her face took on a hard, determined expression afterwards. She hid the letter under
the piles of some other letters and did not say a word about it. She did not disclose the letter nor said anything related to it
to anybody, and she went to the town without saying more to her son.

Q.13. What did Paul’s mother observe in her house after her return from the party?
Ans. Paul's mother was in town for a huge celebration. She returned to her room and removed her white fur coat.
She walked upstairs to her son's room since she was experiencing odd anxiousness. She waited outside his door, muscles
tense, listening to weird, weighty, but not loud sounds. For a little moment, her heart remained still. It was a silent sound,
yet it was rushing and strong. She felt as though she recognised the cacophony, which seemed to be going insane. The
room was dark when she turned the door handle, but she heard and saw something move to and fro in the space near the
window. She stared, terrified and astonished.

Q.14. What happened to Paul and how did he die?

Ans. Paul was in his green pyjamas, madly surging on the rocking horse. The blaze of the light suddenly lit him up as
he urged the wooden horse. His eyes blazed at her mother for one strange and senseless second, as he ceased urging his
wooden horse. He fell off with a crash to the ground and became unconscious. He remained unconscious with some brain-
fever as well. He was very critical on the third day of the illness and everyone was waiting for a change. He neither slept nor
regained consciousness and his eyes were like blue stones. He died the same night after being conscious for some time
while talking to his mother.

Q.15. The ending of the story is an instance of irony. Suppose Paul had not died at the end, how would you have
reacted to the story?
Ans. It is true that a tragedy digs a deeper mark than a happy ending. It causes an emotional catharsis in the
audience. Had the story had a happy ending it would have been pleasant, however, the reader would not have felt the
emotions and passion that drove Paul to his inevitable climax. Yet some may find it not justified to have killed the boy at the
end of the story that went so well with Paul achieving what he wanted all the while, money and love both. He sacrificed his
life to bring to his mother what his father couldn't and thus proved to be worthy of her affection, which hungered for.
However, one can not have all the happiness in the world. They say that God is cruel when he gives us something, he gives

.
it to us only with one had while taking away with the other our most cherished possession. So, it can not be said that the
death of Paul was justified or other way round; however, it is ironical. Had he lived post the Derby win, who knows what
shape the story might have taken. Maybe what happens happens for some good yet it would have brought the story to a
happy ending had Paul lived.

Q.16. Examine the communication channels in the story between:-

1. Paul and his mother
2. Paul and Bassett
3. Paul and his uncle
4. Basset and Paul's uncle
5. Paul's mother and his uncle
Ans. 1. Paul and her mother shared the most intimate conversation through eyes. Though they were not actually
love bound to each other as in the first paragraph, the author says that it was the children and the mother alone who knew
that there was no love in their relation, they knew it because they read in each other's eyes.
2. The friendship of Paul and Bassett or to say more clearly their partnership was an affectionate relation between
them. Bassett knew and understood what the rest failed to even notice. He brought all the news of racing horses to Paul
and then the clairvoyant Paul will decide in his trance who was to be the winner.
3. Paul and uncle Oscar became partners soon after uncle discovers that Paul has an uncanny knowledge that
makes him predict the winning horse. However, there is more to it, he realises that the whole betting thing was making Paul
nervous and was hampering his health. However, Oscar Creswell asks Paul on how to win by betting, to which the child
innocently replies that he just knows who is going to win once he “gets there.
4. Bassett and uncle Creswell shared a bond since long back. However, as Bassett had promised to Paul he never
told about his betting to uncle Oscar as well. But later he found himself explaining things to Creswell and the three of them
became partners.
5. It would be totally unfair to call Hester that harsh a lady for she did care about her children after all,however, she
gave importance to materialistic gains. When she realised her sons obsession with the racing horses, she asked Bassett the
gardener to keep Paul away from Oscar so it did not affect her son's health. She realised that the obsession was proving to
be neurotic for her son and she wanted her son to be healthy and for that she risked her relation with her dear brother.

Q.17. How has the author linked the symbol of the rocking-horse to Paul's triumphs at the races?
Ans. The rocking-horse is one of the three symbols present in the story that Lawrence has dealt with throughout
the story. The horse is symbolic of the victory that Paul achieves at last. The materialistic gain and the importance of money
over love. The whispering that haunts Paul that “there must be more money and the rocking-horse are interrelated. The
want of money to achieve the love of mother that he never had, he goes on betting and earning more and more, thus,
proving his luck. The boy when asked his mother for what is luck, she explained him that luck is what brings one money. The
boy is disheartened to know that his father has no luck and so will not make money. He is sad at the implication that he will
never have his mother's love who is all consumed by indebtedness. The boy, autistic as he is, with some clairvoyance rides
his horse harder and ferociously till he “gets there It shows his desperation to physically win his mother's love by winning
the race and thus earning more money, as “there must be more money Post the ride, Paul will stand facing the horse with
his legs apart and he would look at the bent head of the horse and its shining eyes. These interpret just one thing, the
determination, the wanting, the longing for money. It is about success, money, love and most importantly, winning. And
Paul gets it all, he wins and gets her mother the money through his triumphs in races. And he even found her love as she
grew too concerned about her son's obsession with the races that eventually killed him.

Q.18. Write the summary of the story ‘The Rocking Horse Winner’.

.
 Ans. The story begins with a description of Hester, who has trouble loving her three children. Hester she feels
unlucky because her family is running out of money, but she cares a great deal about appearing to be wealthy. The house
seems to constantly whisper, “There must be more money!” and Paul (Hester’s young son) in particular becomes concerned
about the family’s financial situation. When he asks his mother why they don’t have enough money, she explains to him
they they are unlucky, and that luck is the reason people are rich. Paul claims that  he is lucky, but his mother doesn’t
believe him, so he becomes determined to prove his luck to her.
Paul obsessively and furiously starts riding his rocking-horse because he believes it can take him to luck—a habit he
keeps secret from everyone else. He also talks with Bassett, the family’s gardener, about horse racing and places bets on
the races whenever he “knows” who will win. Paul’s Uncle Oscar finds out about Paul’s betting and begins betting based on
Paul’s recommendations, which are always correct. Paul makes an extraordinarily large amount of money, but he also
becomes increasingly anxious and intense.
Uncle Oscar helps Paul give some money to his mother anonymously, but the money only makes the whispering in
the house worse. Instead of using it to pay off debts, Hester buys new furniture and invests in sending Paul to an elite
school. Paul is more determined than ever to make the whispering stop, and he refuses to stop riding his rocking-horse,
even when his mother suggests that he is too old for the toy. The Derby (a big horse race) is coming up, and Paul is
obsessed with picking the winner.
One night, while at a party, Hester is overwhelmed with anxiety about Paul. She calls the nurse to see how he’s
doing, but when the nurse offers to check on him in his room, Hester decides not to bother him until she gets home. When
she finally arrives at his room, she hears a familiar yet violent noise coming from behind the door. Paul is riding his rocking-
horse so hard that he and the horse are lit up in a strange light. He announces in a deep voice, “It’s Malabar” and then
collapses to the floor.
Days later, Paul is very ill. Bassett tells Paul that Malabar (a horse’s name) won the Derby, and Paul now has eighty
thousand pounds. Paul is very excited to be able to prove to his mother that he is, in fact, lucky. But that night, Paul dies.
Uncle Oscar suggests that Hester is better off having eighty thousand pounds instead of a strange son—but that Paul is also
better off dead than living in a state where “he rides his rocking-horse to find the winner.”

.
 Unit-18

W.S. MAUGHAM: THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER

Q.1. What lesson does one learn from the fable ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’?
Ans. From the fable ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’ one learns that hardwork is rewarded and laziness is punished.

Q.2. How did Tom blackmail his brother George?

Ans. Tom started shaking cocktails behind the bar of the restaurant and waiting on the box-seat of a taxi outside
the club of his elder brother George. He adopted these ways to blackmail his brother George.

Q.3. What news did George Ramsay give to the author about his brother Tom Ramsay?
Ans. George told the author that his brother became engaged to a woman old enough to be his mother a few
weeks before and after her death he had got half a million pounds, a yacht, a house in London and a house in the country.

Q.4. People knew that Tom was a worthless fellow. Why did they like him then?
Ans. Despite the fact that people knew how worthless Tom was yet people liked him because he was charming and
handsome.

Q.5. Why did the people around like Tom?

Ans. People around like Tom because he has something special in his personality that attracted them. He was
charming as well as handsome.

Q.6. Why did George Ramsay dislike his brother?

Ans. George Ramsay disliked his brother Tom because he was a worthless fellow, hated to work, and spent money
on luxuries. Tom never cared for future and believed in enjoying life on borrowed money.

Q.7. What did Tom Ramsay do for twenty years?

Ans. Tom Ramsay was a source of trouble to his elder brother George for twenty years. He borrowed money from
everyone whom he knew. When Tom was short of money, he started blackmailing his elder brother George.

Q.8. What did Tom start doing when his money was spent?
Ans. Tom hated work. He was an idle man. So he started borrowing money form his friends when his money was
spent. He regularly borrowed money from his friends and spend it on luxuries.

Q.9. What kind of a man was George Ramsay?

Ans. George Ramsay was an honest, industrious and worthy man. He had a good wife and four daughters to whom
he was the best of fathers. He made a point of saving a third of his income and his plan was to retire at fifty-five to a little
house in the country. He was a hardworking, decent and respectful man.

Q.10. Describe George’s appearance when the narrator met him at a restaurant.
Ans. The narrator found George lunching all by himself in the restaurant. George looked gloomy and stared into
space as if the world’s burden lied on his shoulders.

Q.11. What lesson does the La Fontaine’s fable The Ant and the Grasshopper teach? Does the narrator
sympathise with the ant or the grasshopper?

.
 Ans. The fable ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’ teaches us to make hay while the sun shines. If you want to succeed
tomorrow, you should work hard from today. Also, if you are lazy, you would not succeed. The narrator is sympathetic to
the ant simply because the ant is someone who we can relate to and not the grasshopper.

Q.12. Why was George enraged when he heard that Tom and Cronshaw had gone off together to Monte Carlo?
Ans. Tom cheated a man who nearly took him to prison. The man was determined to take the matter to court. It
cost George five hundred pounds to settle the affair. George was enraged when he heard that Tom and Cronshaw had gone
off together to Monte Carlo the moment they cashed the cheque.

Q.13. Who is the ant and who is the grasshopper in the story? Give reasons.
Ans. In the story, George Ramsay is the ant who works hard for himself and his family. He saves money so that he
and his family can have a good future. George was a decent, straightforward and respectable man. Tom Ramsay is the
grasshopper who never saved a penny but somehow lived a luxurious life by borrowing money. For his own selfish needs,
he exploited his own brother. Tom was idle, worthless, dissolute and a dishonourable rouge.

Q.14. Who is the narrator to as a black sheep and why?

Ans. Undoubtedly, the narrator refers to Tom as a black sheep. He began his lifedecently, went on to get married
and had two children. However, one day he decided to leave his family and work only to enjoy his life. He spent two years in
Europe where he spent all his money and began to borrow money. He believed in spending money on luxuries and not
necessities. He always depended on his brother George. All Tom did was raced, gambled and danced in expensive hotels.

Q.15. Give a character-sketch of Tom Ramsay.

Ans. Introduction: Tom Ramsay was the only brother of George Ramsay. He was only one year younger to him. He
began his life decently. He started his business. He got married and had two children. His personality: He was a man of
incredible charm. Therefore he made friends easily. He was the most amusing companion. He had high spirits and unfailing
gaiety. He always looked as if he had just stepped out of a bandbox. An unscrupulous man: There was a sudden change in
his mind. He left his business and his family. When his money was spent, he began to borrow it. He blackmailed his elder
brother many a time. He cheated him for 500 pounds with the help of Cronshaw and left together for Monte Carlo, a
gambling resort. A pleasure-seeking man: For twenty years Tom raced and gambled. He amused himself by making love to
the prettiest girls and danced with them. He ate in the most expensive restaurants. Practical man: He was a practical man.
He became engaged to a very old woman. She died after some days. She left half a million pounds, a yacht, a house in
London and a house in the country for him. He knew that virtue and justice are not always rewarded. In the end, his
idleness won. Conclusion: Tom, in the fable, is a symbol of the grasshopper who sings, dances and enjoys himself all the
time and gets success in the end without doing any hard work.

Q.16. Give a character-sketch of George.

Ans. Geroge Ramsay was a respectable lawyer. All his life he had been hard-working, decent and straightforward.
As a responsible person: George had a respectable family life. Even in thought he had never been false to his wife. To his
four daughters he was the good father. He was also affectionate and helpful to his only brother Tom. Despite all the faults
and failings of his younger brother Tom. He repeatedly helped him with money so that he might make a fresh start in life.
An honest, hard-working man: George worked hard in his office from morning to evening. He never took more than fifteen
days leave in a year. His life was blameless. A thrifty man with a foresight: George saved a third of his income regularly. He
had wisely planned to retire at fifty-five to a little house in the country. He hoped to have thirty thousand pounds at the age
of fifty. He symbolizes the ant in the fable ‘The ant and the Grasshopper’. A simple man: George was a simple man. He could
be easily cheated. He often believed his brother’s promised of improvement and gave him sums of money which Tom used
to spent on luxuries. He could not see through the invented story of his brother’s going to jail and was practically robbed of

.
five hundred pounds. Conclusion: When Tom became richer than his brother, he called it absolutely ‘unfair’. In the end he
stands as a man having no faith in natural justice.

Q.17. Describe the story “The Ant and the Grasshopper” in your own words.
Ans. Introduction: When the narrator was a very small boy, he was made to learn by heart the fable ‘The Ant and
the Grasshopper’. Lesson one learns from the fable: One learns from the fable that hardwork is rewarded and laryness is
punished. The fable shows that the ant worked in summer so she was comfortable in winter. The grasshopper did not work
in summer. He sat on a grass blade in the sun and sang with pleasure so he suffered in winter. It has been generally seen
that one who works is rewarded and one who is lazy, is punished.
The narrator view: The story teller does not agree to the lesson of the fable. He has tried to prove otherwise. He
has given the example of two brothers George Ramsay and Tom Ramsay. George Ramsay represents the ant. He worked
hard. Tom Ramsay represents the grasshopper. He did not work, he was lazy and good for nothing. But he passed his life
comfortably and luxuriously while George Ramsay suffered a lot in his life. Conclusion: The narrator does not agree to the
lesson of the fable. Tom became richer than his brother and the author called it absolutely ‘unfair’.

Q.18. Illustrate how the lesson ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’ is a disapproval of prudence and common sense.
Ans. The story: The narrator had read the fable about an ant and a grasshopper. It was shown in it that the person
who wastes his time in making merry thoughtlessly suffers like the grasshopper. The author says that sometimes the
opposite is true. The result: The present story shows it by the example of the Ramsay brothers. Tom Ramsay was the most
careless person. He spent his time and money in enjoying himself. But he did not suffer in the end. On the other hand he
became very rich and comfortable. If Tom had been prudent like his brother George his life would have been all hard work.
His last days would have been comfortable but not luxurious. George used prudence and common sense while Tom ignored
them, but Tom was much better off. So these two qualities sometimes do not carry much weight.

Q.19. Compare and contrast the characters of Tom and George.

Ans. Introduction: George Ramsay and Tom Ramsay belong to a respectable family. Tom is only one year younger
than George. Comparison: Both the brothers begin their career honourably. Both are married and have children. Contrast:
There is a remarkable contrast between the two. George is a lawyer. He works hard in his office till evening. He is decent,
respectable and straightforward. He saves one-third part of his income for his retirement. He is sensible for the fame of the
family. He gives money to Tom in order that he make a fresh start. George is a good husband and a good father. Tom starts
a business. He married and has two children. But suddenly he deserts his wife and business to enjoy himself. He is an idle,
worthless, disolute and dishonourable rogue. He blackmails his elder brother George for his luxury. Tom is good looking. At
the age of 45, he becomes engaged to a woman old enough to be his mother. She died after a few weeks leaving for Tom
everything she had. Half a million pounds, a yacht, a house in London and a house in the country.
Conclusion: George condemns his brother Tom’s actions they are not fair.

Q.20. What method or methods did Tom Ramsay use to get money from George Ramsay?
Ans. Tom Ramsay used the following methods to get money from George Ramsay:-
1. False promise: Tom promised George to make amendment in his life. George therefore gave Tom considerable
sums once or twice in order that he might make a fresh start. But Tom bought a motor car and some very nice jewellery
with the money.
2. Blackmailing: Tom began shaking cocktails behind the bar of George’s favourite restaurant. He began waiting on
the box-seat of taxi outside George’s club. Tom said that he could give up these things for the honour of the family if
George gave him two hundred pounds.
3. Cheating: He designed and intrigue in connivance of Cronshaw who was a vindictive man. He said that Tom had
cheated him. He would take the matter into court. Tom’s action was illegal. George feared that Tom would be prosecuted

.
and convicted. George paid five hundred pounds to settle the affair. These were Tom’s craftiness of getting money from his
elder brother George.

Q.21. Discuss about the author “W. Somerset Maugham”.

Ans. Born in the British Embassy in Paris, France (legally considered British soil), Maugham endured a traumatic
childhood, orphaned at ten when his mother died from tuberculosis and his father died from cancer. He was raised by his
aunt and uncle, and bullied by children at school.
Maugham studied medicine at St. Thomas' Hospital, and apprenticed as a midwife in London's Lambeth slum area.
He published his first novel, Liza of Lambeth, in 1897; the book depicted the life and death of Liza Kent, a working-class
woman. The popular and controversial novel launched Maugham's impressive writing career.
One of the highest-paid writers of the early to mid-twentieth century, Maugham wrote fiction, memoir,
travelogues, and plays. His best-known works are Of Human Bondage (1915) and Moon and Sixpence (1919).
During World War I, Maugham assisted in the ambulance corps and in intelligence work. He was stationed in Russia
shortly before the Bolshevik revolution; later, he said that if he had only been sent there six months before, he might have
succeeded in his aim of keeping the provisional government in power.
Though he was unhappily married to Syrie Wellcome (a liaison which began when she was still married to her first
husband, Henry Wellcome), Maugham's sexual orientation appears to have been primarily homosexual, and he had several
male lovers throughout his life. Frederick Gerald Haxton was Maugham's constant companion for nearly thirty years, and
proofread many of Maugham's manuscripts, including Of Human Bondage.
Maugham died on December 16, 1965, in Nice, France.

Q.22. Summarize the essay of “The Ant and the Grasshopper by W. Somerset Maugham”.
Ans. In The Ant and the Grasshopper by W. Somerset Maugham we have the theme of justice, trust, fear, morality,
embarrassment, happiness and struggle. Taken from his Collected Short Stories collection the story is narrated in the first
person by an unnamed narrator and after reading the story the reader realises that Maugham may be exploring the theme
of justice or rather the lack of it. George Ramsey has worked all his life and has set aside some money to provide for his
retirement. He has been diligent and astute unlike his brother Tom. However rather than being satisfied that he will have a
peaceful retirement George can’t believe that Tom has inherited a half a million pounds. There is a sense that George feels
as though there has been an injustice done.  It is very much the ant (George) versus the grasshopper (Tom). Just as the
grasshopper made no provisions for the winter. Tom too made no provisions for his future though he still appears to have
landed on his feet. The narrator’s reaction to Tom’s success in life is also interesting as it mirrors his feelings towards the
ant. Whether it is insensitive of the narrator to laugh there is no disputing that he likes and supports Tom Ramsey.
Something that is noticeable by the fact that the narrator attends dinners with Tom. If anything the narrator has been true
throughout the story favouring the grasshopper over the ant.
It is also clear to the reader that George has struggled through life. Looking after his wife and family and at the
same time making sure that he has a substantial pension to help him in retirement. Tom on the other hand has not
struggled at all. He has gone from one calamity to another and has often been bailed out of trouble by George due to
George’s fear of embarrassment. If anything George lives his life to a moral code while Tom on the other hand appears to
live his life recklessly. It is also noticeable that Tom shows George no allegiance. His number one concern is living a good
life, one that is subsidised by others. Regardless of the individual Tom’s number one concern is himself and his own
happiness. He has borrowed money off not only George but others too and never paid any of the money back. To an
outsider Tom might be considered to be untrustworthy. However he is charming enough that people find it easy to lend
him money even though they may never get the money back. In modern terms Tom might be considered, rightly or
wrongly, to be a lovable rogue or scoundrel. A man who charms people by deception yet the same people can’t help but
like Tom’s character.

.
 Tom also appears to have remarried due to the fact that his new wife is wealthy. There is no sense that he has
changed his ways and has married for love. At all stages in the story the most important person in Tom’s life is Tom himself.
He acts selfishly without consideration for others. However some critics may suggest that though Tom may be lax in morals
he is only living his life as he wishes to live it. Something that most people would long to do. Tom is not confined or
restricted to society’s views or morals. He is his own man even if he may be morally corrupt.  In reality there are also times
in the story in whereby Tom is simply playing on George’s fears. Which might suggest to some that the problem lies with
George and not Tom. George at any stage of the story, should he have overcome any sense of embarrassment, could have
refused Tom assistance. Tom does not mind embarrassing himself in order to profit while George looks upon some of Tom’s
actions as being an embarrassment to him.
There is also no doubting that the happiest character in the story is Tom. Not only because he has inherited half a
million pounds but because he has lived his life as he wants to. Even if that life has been at the expense of others. It is also
ironic that though Tom has made no significant contribution to society he at the end of the story is the most successful of
all the characters. That is if success is gauged by monetary worth. Which appears to be how George evaluates success.
Something that becomes clear to the reader when George discusses with the narrator how much money he will have when
he retires. This may be important as it suggests that both George and Tom have one thing in common. A love for money.
Though money is a necessity in life both men are also aware of its power and its ability to influence others. George may feel
as though he will be placed on a pedestal by others when he retires due to the fact that he has set aside so much money
while Tom is obviously aware of the power of money. He has used money, other people’s money, to get what he wants in
life.

.
 UNIT-19,20

E.M. FORSTER: MOSQUE, TEMPLE

Q.1. What do Dr. Aziz and others feel about the English?
Ans. They all believed that friendship between the English and the Indians was not possible.

Q.2. Who sent a message to Aziz?

Ans. Major Callendar, the Civil surgeon of Chandrapore sent a message for Aziz.

Q.3. What message did old Callendar send to Aziz?

Ans. “Old Callendar wanted to see Dr. Aziz at his bungalow in Civil Lines” was the message sent to him.

Q.4. Why was Aziz forced to take a tonga?

Ans. Aziz started off to meet Callendar on his bicycle but its tyre went flat on the way so he hired a tonga.

Q.5. Name the two English women who took away Aziz’s tonga.336
Ans. The two Englishwomen who took away the tonga of Aziz were Mesdames Callendar and Lesley.

Q.6. Where did Aziz go after leaving Callendar’s bungalow?

Ans. After leaving Callendar’s bungalow Aziz went to a mosque.

Q.7. Who met him at the mosque?

Ans. Mrs Moore, an Englishwoman met him at the mosque.

Q.8. Why did Aziz get angry on seeing Mrs Moore?

Ans. Aziz presumed that Mrs Moore must not have taken off her shoes in the mosque which was a holy place for
moslems so he got angry with her.

Q.9. Who is the son of Mrs Moore?

Ans. The City Magistrate of Chandrapore Mr Heaslp is the son of Mrs Moore.

Q.10. Who are the family members of Mrs Moore?

Ans. Other than Mr. Heaslop, Ralph and stella are the two members of Mrs. Moore’s family.

Q.11. Where did Aziz and Fielding go after becoming friends again?
Ans. Aziz and Fielding went for a horse ride in the jungles of man.

Q.12. What had Godbole promised to Fielding?

Ans. Godbole had promised Fielding to show him over to the king-emperor George Fifth High School.

Q.13. Why had Fielding come to India?

Ans. Fielding had come back to India as a Government Education Officer to inspect the functioning of the schools.

Q.14. Whom did Fielding marry?

Ans. Fielding married Stella, the daughter of Mrs. Moore.

.
 Q.15. What did the two Englishwomen do when Aziz reached Callendar’s bungalow?
Ans. The two Englishwomen at Callendar’s bungalow snubbed and insulted Dr Aziz. Firstly they ignored his bow and
secondly without taking his permission took away the tonga hired by him. Moreover, they did not thank him and ignored
his offer as well.

Q.16. What different feelings did Aziz have when he met Mrs Moore?
Ans. Initially Aziz got furious on seeing Mrs Moore in the mosque as he presumed that she must not have taken off
her shoes. After having known that Mrs Moore was considerate enough to have taken off her shoes his mood changed.
Then while they conversed, Aziz realized that Mrs Moore was unlike other British as she sympathized with Indians.

Q.17. What impression of the character of Aziz do you get after having read the extract from Passage to India
prescribed for your study?
Ans. Dr. Aziz is a young Muslim Doctor working in an English Hospital at Chandrapore. He is eager to please others.
He is critical of the ‘purdah’. He is the hero of the novel. He is a nationalist. He comes of a propsperous Muslim family and
has studied in London. He is handsome and is a competent doctor. He is impulsive and sensitive. Although married twice, he
is a widower. He is revengeful to the English. He is the most human, and believable of all Forster’s characters.

Q.18. Describe the religious celebration going on in Chandrapore.

Ans. After a lapse of two years, a few hundred miles from Chandrapore, the Janmashtami festival (festival of Lord
Krishan’s birth) was being celebrated at the palace of Mau. Prof. Godbole, minister of education, had arranged the
mysterious ceremony. He led the choir, danced along with the other Hindus of all castes and was totally absorbed in the
performance. All present imagined themselves in the place of Lord Krishan and tried to love others. The worshippers were
so elated with the feelings of universal love that they forgot all religious decorum. At midnight when the Lord was born the
‘conch’ was sounded. The noise of people talking excitedly became greater and greater leading towards the water where
the God is finally immersed. The chanting of ‘radhakrishan’ ‘radhakrishan’ echoes everywhere. This is how the religious
celebration goes on.

Q.19. Trace the circumstances of the reunion of Aziz and Fielding.

Ans. When Aziz and Fielding meet each other again in the last section of the novel, there is no joyous reunion
between friends. In the meanwhile, Fielding has become older, sterner, more official, more like a pucca sahib. Aziz, who has
turned into an unforgiving enemy of the British, is now bitterly hostile towards his former friend due to the
misunderstanding about Fielding’s marriage. The spirit of Mrs Moore, the spirit of Hinduism and the propitious season
together serve to bring about reconciliation between the two. Aziz, bitter and angry, is paradoxically the instrument of
reconciliation between himself and the British. Aziz wants to take revenge on Ralph for what the British had done to him.
But when he realizes that Ralph is like his mother in every respect, the memory of Mrs Moore floods in his mind, expelling
all bitterness and hatred. Instead of avoiding reinvolvement with the English (as he had planned to), Aziz now arms towards
the boy and, in friendship takes the boy out on the river where the festivities are taking place. Meanwhile, Fielding and his
wife are also in another boat, having come to witness the Hindu ceremony. When Aziz and Ralph approach the place where
the Hindus are celebrating the birth of Krishna, they find themselves in the midst of a divine muddle. A clay model of Gokul,
Krishna’s birth place, is pushed out into the waters. Aziz and Fielding, in different boats are so absorbed by the ceremony
that their boats collide with each other and there is total confusion. Yet this confusion is liberating. In the forcible meeting
between Aziz and Fielding, there is a combination of the mysterious influences, of Mrs Moore, Shri Krishna and the healing
waters. The letters of Ronny and Adela which had increased Aziz’s distrust of Fielding, now float away in the water. The
misunderstanding of Aziz, the restricted responses of the British, the suspicion, hatred and pettiness between them - all
these seem to dissolve in water. Aziz, Fielding, Ralph and Stella together are plunged in water and undergo a sort of

.
purification, a sort of spiritual baptism. The estrangement that existed between Fielding and Aziz is ended and they are
friends once more.

Q.20. Is the reconciliation between Aziz and Fielding successful? Discuss the factors and causes of Disunion.
Ans. In the last chapter of the novel, Aziz and Fielding are taking a last ride together in the jungles of Mau and they
know they cannot see each other again. The force and fineness of their former relationship is revived again; the re-
establishement of friendship is brief, but still it is a triumph. However, it is a limited triumph : The forces of disunion are still
powerful. This becomes clearer as the two friends continue their last ride together. They start talking frankly and intimately
about what means most to them and they find that they are now different from what they were in Chandrapore. Their talk
reveals to them how precarious their former personal understanding was and how powerless they were to maintain it. As
they start talking about politics, friendly but with no holds barred, they realize that their characters and ways of life have
changed radically for them to be able to continue as close friends. They have never been closer than now; and yet they
speak more as an Englishman and an Indian than as Fielding and Aziz; both are angry and excited, Aziz begins to shout,
Fielding mocks at him and Aziz is enraged. But, as they ride on, their abstract hatred brings a vital, if temporary, bond
between them - something that their sincerity and self-revelation could not do. They bring their horses nearer to embrace
each other, but the horses swerve apart. This suggests that sub-human India is hostile to interfacial friendships and,
therefore, their union, by necessity, is transitory. But the novel ends on a note of hope. The forces of disorder are powerful
and persistent, but they can be fought against and subdued, if not conquered. Everything depends upon himself; if man
does not give up, there may be moments, outside time, in which man can have union with his fellowmen. An Englishman
may after all be friends with an Indian, at least in some future time.

Q.21. Critical analysis on ‘Forster's Writing Technique’.

Ans. Forster's narrative style is straightforward; events follow one another in logical order. Structurally, his
sentence style also is relatively uncomplicated, and he reproduces accurately the tones of human conversation; his handling
of the idiom of the English-speaking Indian is especially remarkable.
However, Forster's rhetorical style is far from unsubtle. His descriptions of the landscape, however unattractive it
may be, frequently have a poetic rhythm. He makes lavish use of both satire and irony, and the satire is especially biting in
his treatment of the English colonials, particularly in the events before the trial in the "Caves" section. But he is also capable
of gentle humor, notably in his depiction of the high-spirited and volatile Aziz.
As has been noted earlier, there are numerous themes and symbols — such as the wasp, the echo, the "Come
come" of Godbole's song — which recur throughout the novel; these are not introduced in an obvious fashion, and it is not
until the end of the book that their full significance is apparent.
Some of the statements in the book are in the form of questions to which answers are obvious; but for many of
them no answers are suggested or even implied — an indication of the philosophical nature of the novel. Forster is not the
man with all the answers, and perhaps he is implying that he himself is not certain whether life is (in the terms he
frequently uses) "mystery or muddle" — or both.

Q.22. Write the biography of ‘E. M. Forster’.

Ans. Edward Morgan Forster was born in London in 1879, the son of an architect. He attended Tonbridge School,
which he hated; he caricatured what he termed "public school behavior" in several of his novels. A different atmosphere
awaited him at King's College, Cambridge, which he enjoyed thoroughly.
After graduation, he began to write short stories. He lived for a time in Italy, the scene of two of his early
novels: Where Angels Fear to Tread (1905), and A Room with a View (1908). Cambridge is the setting for The Longest
Journey (1907). It was in this year that he returned to England and delivered a series of lectures at Working Men's College.
His most mature work to date was to appear in 1910 with the publication of Howards End.

.
 Forster then turned to literary journalism and wrote a play which was never staged. In 1911 he went to India with
G. Lowes Dickinson, his mentor at King's College. During World War 1, Forster was engaged in civilian war work in
Alexandria. He returned to London after the war as a journalist.
In 1921 he again went to India, to work as secretary to the Maharajah of Dewas State Senior. He had begun work
on A Passage to India before this time, but on reading his notes in India, he was discouraged and put them aside. The book
was published in 1924, having been written upon his return to England. This was his last novel. It is considered to be
his magnum opus, and it won for the author the Femina Vie Heureuse and the James Tait Black Memorial prizes in 1925.
In 1927 Forster delivered the William George Clark lectures at Trinity College, Cambridge. Titled Aspects of the
Novel, the lectures were published in book form the same year. Also in 1927 he became a Fellow of Cambridge.
Forster's writing after that time has been varied. A collection of short stories (The Eternal Moment) was published
in 1928. Abinger Harvest (1936) is a collection of reprints of reviews and articles. During World War II he broadcast many
essays over the BBC. He has written a pageant play (England's Pleasant Land), a film (Diary For Timothy), two biographies
(Goldsworthy Lowes Dickinson in 1934 and Marianne Thornton in 1956), a libretto for Benjamin Britten's opera, Billy
Budd (with Eric Crozier), and numerous essays. In 1953 he published The Hill of Devi, an uneven collection of letters and
reminiscences of his experiences in India.
In 1960 A Passage to India was adapted for the stage by Santha Rama Rau. After playing in London for a year, the
play opened on Broadway on January 31, 1962, and ran for 110 performances. Although Forster was "delighted" with the
adaptation, most of the American critics felt the play did not measure up to the novel.
In 1946, Forster moved to King's College in Cambridge to live there as an honorary fellow. Mr. Forster's numerous
awards included membership in the Order of Companions of Honour, a recognition bestowed in 1953 by Queen Elizabeth II.
Forster died on June 7, 1970.

Q.23. Write the short summary of ‘Mosque’.

Ans. Mosque," the novel opens with a panoramic view of the fictional city of Chandrapore, India. The narrative
shifts to Dr. Aziz, who is called away from dinner with his friends by his superior at the hospital, Major Callendar. He then
visits to the local mosque, where he meets Mrs. Moore, an Englishwoman who has recently arrived to visit her son, Ronny
Heaslop, with his love interest, Adela Quested.
After the mosque, Mrs. Moore arrives at the club just as Adela announces to the members of the club that she
would like to see the real India. To humor her, Mr. Turton, the Collector of the district, offers to set up a Bridge Party. At the
Bridge Party, Adela is disappointed to find that the British and Indian guests are grouped in separate areas of the lawn.
There, Adela meets Mr. Fielding, the principal of the local Government College, who invites her to a tea party where she
might meet more Indians, including Mrs. Moore's friend Aziz.
At Fielding's tea party, Adela finally meets Aziz. The other guests include Mrs. Moore and Professor Godbole. While
Fielding gives Mrs. Moore a tour of the grounds, Aziz and Adela continue their conversation. Aziz spontaneously offers to
take Adela and the rest of the party for an excursion to the Marabar Caves. During this conversation, Aziz and Adela are
interrupted by Ronny, who is angered to see Adela alone with an Indian. After Fielding's tea party, Adela tells Ronny that
she is unwilling to marry him. Just then, the Nawab Bahadur offers to take them on a ride in his new car. They accept, but
on the ride, get into a car accident. No one is hurt, and the accident is a bonding experience for Adela and Ronny, who
agree to marry each other by the time they return home.
Aziz skips work for a few days feigning illness. Aziz's friends, including Hamidullah, stop by to see how he's doing,
followed by Fielding. After the rest of the guests leave, Aziz detains Fielding in order to show him a photograph of his dead
wife as a gesture of friendship.

Q.24. Why is the first part of Forster’s novel titled Mosque?

Ans. Forster’s novel is divided into three different parts. The first part is ‘Mosque’. The other two are ‘Caves’ and
‘Temple’. In the first part, after having introduced the locale Chandrapore, Forster begins the tale with Dr. Aziz. Dr. Aziz can

.
also be understood as the protagonist of the first part of the novel. If Forster’s novel forms a discussion of the socio-
cultural, religious and political issues plaguing the British ruled India, the first part presents the Islamic part of the story. Dr.
Aziz has his own perspective of the English. The first encounter between Dr. Aziz and Mrs. Moore is set in the Mosque. It
can also be seen as a meeting between the East and the West. Aziz frequently meditates over Islam and Islamic art. He is
mostly concerned with Islam rather than India. The Muslims used to be an important part of the Indian population before
the partition. Aziz is at the center of most of the story taking place in the first part of the novel. Forster also provides a
glimpse of the Islamic culture as seen in India in this part of the novel.
Overall, the first part brings readers to an important part of the Indian culture – the Muslim part. Mosque, in
general, implies Islam and sets the stage for the entire drama that follows. Aziz feels one with the Islamic culture but is
disgusted over the presence of the British in India. The first part presents how an educated Muslim sees the British
presence in India. A Passage to India also represents a cultural tour of India undertaken by Forster in his times. ‘Mosque’ is
the Islamic part of the tour and a reminder of how the Indian culture is influenced by the Mughal rulers who came before
the British. It holds a very deep meaning in the context of the novel. Particularly, it is important since after the British
occupation of India ended Muslims remained only a minority in India because of its partition and creation of Pakistan.
Forster presents India as a powerful cultural force and Mosque as the distinct Islamic part of it. Through Aziz, one gets an
appreciable view of Islamic poetry and art. Except for his criticism of the Hindus, he is an open-minded and humble Muslim.
Forster’s novel uses the three sections also to highlight the internal differences that exist between the Indians, particularly
that between the Hindus and the Muslims. However, religion and culture both are important in the context of Forster’s
novel. Mosque deals with the religious and cultural aspects of Islam as seen in India.

Q.25. Write about the character Aziz in the essay Mosque.

Ans. Aziz seems to be a mess of extremes and contradictions, an embodiment of Forster’s notion of the “muddle”
of India. Aziz is impetuous and flighty, changing opinions and preoccupations quickly and without warning, from one
moment to the next. His moods swing back and forth between extremes, from childlike elation one minute to utter despair
the next. Aziz even seems capable of shifting careers and talents, serving as both physician and poet during the course of  A
Passage to India. Aziz’s somewhat youthful qualities, as evidenced by a sense of humor that leans toward practical joking,
are offset by his attitude of irony toward his English superiors.
Forster, though not blatantly stereotyping, encourages us to see many of Aziz’s characteristics as characteristics of
Indians in general. Aziz, like many of his friends, dislikes blunt honesty and directness, preferring to communicate through
confidences, feelings underlying words, and indirect speech. Aziz has a sense that much of morality is really social code. He
therefore feels no moral compunction about visiting prostitutes or reading Fielding’s private mail—both because his
intentions are good and because he knows he will not be caught. Instead of living by merely social codes, Aziz guides his
action through a code that is nearly religious, such as we see in his extreme hospitality. Moreover, Aziz, like many of the
other Indians, struggles with the problem of the English in India. On the one hand, he appreciates some of the modernizing
influences that the West has brought to India; on the other, he feels that the presence of the English degrades and
oppresses his people.
Despite his contradictions, Aziz is a genuinely affectionate character, and his affection is often based on intuited
connections, as with Mrs. Moore and Fielding. Though Forster holds up Aziz’s capacity for imaginative sympathy as a good
trait, we see that this imaginativeness can also betray Aziz. The deep offense Aziz feels toward Fielding in the aftermath of
his trial stems from fiction and misinterpreted intuition. Aziz does not stop to evaluate facts, but rather follows his heart to
the exclusion of all other methods—an approach that is sometimes wrong.
Many critics have contended that Forster portrays Aziz and many of the other Indian characters unflatteringly.
Indeed, though the author is certainly sympathetic to the Indians, he does sometimes present them as incompetent,
subservient, or childish. These somewhat valid critiques call into question the realism of Forster’s novel, but they do not, on
the whole, corrupt his exploration of the possibility of friendly relations between Indians and Englishmen—arguably the
central concern of the novel.