Guide Book of Treasure Trove of Poems Archives

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Poems Workbook Answers Chapter 8 The Patriot

November 10, 2023May 21, 2022 by Raju

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Poems Workbook Answers Chapter 8 The Patriot – ICSE Class 10, 9 English

English Maths Physics Chemistry Biology

Comprehension Passages

Stanza 1

Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned, the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modern politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor, when he was no more in power. They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

In these lines the poet says through the mouth of a political leader, when for the first time, only one year ago, on that very day, he came to power, the people gave him a very warm welcome. There were roses mixed with myrtle flowers which people spread on his way through and through. The house-tops were crowded with people and they were moving and swinging like mad people. Also they were so happy as if they were mad. The minarets and domes of churches were shining with light. These churches were decorated with colourful flags. All this was on that very day when the politician came into power and it took place only one year ago.

Question 2.
By which flower was the patriot welcomed?
Answer:
He was welcomed with roses and myrtles.

Question 3.
When was the patriot welcomed?
Answer:
The patriot was welcomed a year ago.

Question 4.
“The house-tops seemed to heave and sway”. Explain
Answer:
The heaving and swaying motion creates an image of overcrowding, emblematic of our speaker’s importance. It suggests that he is a celebrated figure – one that everyone wants to see.

Stanza 2

Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned,-the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modern politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor, when he was no more in power. They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

When the people were given him a warm welcome they rang bells and raised slogans. These different voices mingled with one another and produced a sort of music.The air became misty and heavy because of the noisy slogans and the ringing bells. The slogans of the crowd were so heavy and loud that the adjacent walls of the road-side houses trembled with various cries and noise of the crowd. These people were welcoming him so happily that if he had told them that mere noise and slogans did not please him. And that they should give him the sun, that is there in the sky far away from them , they would have replied, that was executed (done and what else they could do for him ‘the leader’.

Question 2.
What did the patriot want form the “Good folks”?
Answer:
The patriot said “give me your sun from yonder skies”.

Question 3.
Explain“And afterward, what else?”
Answer:
“And afterward, what else?” adds to the image of endless love that the speaker received from the public. Browning includes the voice of the crowd here to indicate that the speaker is not exaggerating, and it makes his fall from glory even more tragic.

Stanza 3

Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned, the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modem politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor, when he was no more in power. They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

In these lines the leader regretfully says that the people did not help him, instead, it was he who leaped at the sun and made impossible, possible for them. He brought the sun down and handed it over to his dear friends (country men). He made, .them realize that every impossible could be made possible for sincere friends. As such he made every effort and did not leave any thing undone for them. Had he left anything undone, nobody else would have done that for them. But he further says with great sorrow that today when only one year has lapsed and that he is no more in chair, his reward can be seen. It can also be seen what he is reaping as a reward of his deeds. He has been branded as a traitor by the people of his nation.

Question 2.
Comment on the tone of the Patriot in this stanza.
Answer:
Throughout the whole of stanza, the patriot is reflecting and thinking . He states, ‘Nought man could do, have I left undone’. He feels he did everything he could have possibly done. We gather he also has power, ‘what I reap’ illustrating how he has collected his rewards from the work he has done.

Question 3.
What does the word ‘harvest ‘ connote here?
Answer:
Harvest, here means reward.

Stanza 4

Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned, the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modem politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor, when he was no more in power. They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

In these lines the poet mourns that nobody can be seen on the housetops to welcome him now. It is quite opposite to the scene when he was received by them. Now there are only a few people, who are rather paralyzed and are standing at the windows. Now they are watching a different sight. This sight is a sort of ridicule and everybody agrees to it.

Obviously, the sight is horrible because the leader is now being taken to the slaughter house, or it can be better said, the leader thinks, that he is being taken to the gallows to be hanged there. It is all the reward of his good deeds. His deeds have been converted into wicked deeds and people are now punishing him for his supposed misdeeds.

Question 2.
What is ‘shamble’?
Answer:
Shamble is a slaughter house.

Question 3.
What is ‘scaffold’?
Answer:
‘Scaffold’ is the place where the criminals are hanged.

Question 4.
Why does Browning say that the palsied watched the execution?
Answer:
Browning described the people watching the execution as ‘palsied’. Only the old and riddled with disease could be bothered enough to watch the hanging. This contrasts with the importance of the man: a man of power would have many watch his death. It’s all gone wrong as nobody is on the roof tops.

Stanza 5
Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned, the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modern politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor, when he was no more in power. They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

In these lines the poet also mopes over his sad condition. He says that the people are carrying him to the gallows in the rain. They unnecessarily, have tied his hands behind his back with a tight rope. When they are taking him to the slaughter-house, the rope cuts his both hands at wrists. The culprit (the leader) feels that his fore-head is bleeding. This is because everybody in his right sense is throwing stones at him. Everybody feels that he has done nothing for his countrymen. Every person has turned against him and the achievements of his past one year have been changed to misdeeds. This means they have forgotten his service to them and they are now punishing him for his good work for them.

Question 2.
Which line is a contrast to the welcome he had received.
Answer:
The lines are:

For they fling, whoever has a mind,
Stones at me for my year’s misdeeds.
In spite of this self-sacrifice, the good deeds are seem to be oft been forgotten.

Question 3.
What does the rain imagery signify?
Answer:
It is a pathetic fallacy and helps to add to the depressed mood, and could be argued to be emblematic of the speaker’s inner-cries and sadness. As well as making the patriot wet it also reduces his dignity. The rain can also be seen to symbolise how the patriot is innocent as he is washed clean. As well as this, rain in general represents corruption creating a negative tense mood. This describes the public who are clearly corrupt for hanging somebody who has doing nothing wrong.

Stanza 6

Read the above lines and answer the questions that follow.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to the context.
Answer:
This is stanza has been taken from the poem Patriot into Traitor” written by Robert Browning.This poem is a criticism of politics and people’s opinion. When a leader comes into power, people call him a patriot. When he is dethroned, the same leader is considered a traitor. This is the tragedy of modem politics. The leader in this poem fell a victim to the same state of affairs. When he came into power, people showered flowers at him as a patriot. But after a year, they declared him a traitor,, when he was no more in power.
They took him to the gallows. But Browning has ended his poem not on a tragic, rather on a next world optimistic note.

In the given lines the poet, through the mouth of the deposed leader says that he was brought honorably to the chair and with great pomp and show but now he is being taken very insultingly to the gallows. He says sometimes great heroes fall from their climax and die. Such has not happened to him. Had he died in the peak of his power, he would have been happy. Further the leader ridiculously says that heroes can not expect reward from God in the next world because they get their reward in this world. In his case people have not done him justice. They have killed him. He says after death he will go to his Lord Creator where God Might question him about his deeds he had done for the people. He would reply that he had done his best for them but they rewarded him with shame. Now he will ask God for a reward because God is just and He would give him the best reward – in the other world for his service to his people. He would be safe with God in the work here after.

Question 2.
Give an example of Antithesis from the poem ‘The Patriot: An Old Story.’
Answer:
“Thus I entered, and thus 1 go!” is an example of antithesis.

Question 3.
How did the leader come and go?
Answer:
The leader came like a patriot and went like a traitor.

Question 4.
What type of poetic piece ‘The Patriot: An Old Story’ is?
Answer:
‘The Patriot: An Old Story’ is a dramatic monologue.

Question 5.
Can one see the faith of humans in God in the poem?
Answer:
The poem is about human predicament.Good deeds are not often rewarded or appreciated in this world. People with religious belief find solace in the hope that they will be rewarded with paradise. The poet has effectively used the metaphor of calcification Jesus Christ and the poem reminds the life of Gandhiji, Lincon etc.

Project

Question 1.
Can the poem The Patriot be considered a dramatic monologue? Justify.
Answer:
Dramatic monologue refers to a type of poetry and Robert Browning is master in it. It is a “mono-drama in verse”. Like many other dramatic monologues of Browning “Patriot into Traitor” is also a fine example of this genre because it has a single speaker, a silent audience and dramatic situation.

Firstly, the poem has a solitary speaker who is patently not the poet. He is an erstwhile worshipful leader who is receiving unearned punishment. In this critical situation, he is freely giving vent to his feelings to reveal the inner working of his mind. He is, in fact, “a soul in action”.

Secondly, the poem has a silent audience. There is no dialogue between the speaker and the audience. This audience consists of people who adore or abhor someone unexpectedly. This implied presence of an auditor distinguishes this dramatic monologue from a soliloquy in which the speaker is alone.

Thirdly, the poem presents a tragic dramatic situation. It invokes in us feelings of pity, fear and relief called catharsis. The leader’s downfall excites feelings of pity in us. We fear because we recognize similar possibilities in us. However, the leader’s belief, “Tis God shall repay: I am safer so” gives us relief.

Question 2.
Is there any relevance of this poem to the present scenario?
Answer:
Yes, the poem is relevant even today. Patriot into Traitor’ is a realistic depiction of the dilemma of our contemporary political scenario of the Third World countries where mass- illiteracy, political instability, economic deprivation, institutional frailty, and democratic immaturity create the vacuum and in come the military coups, many times with the spilling of the blood cheaper than water. It is how these countries turn into blasted heath of Shakespeare’s Macbeth and the witches enjoy the scene there for fair is foul and foul is fair there. The heroes of yester year turn into villains of today.

The first scene presented through this dramatic monologue is that of joy and jollity. The leader is being welcomed by all and his whole way is decked with rose-petals and myrtles. People have gathered there to greet him and roofs and walls rock and seem to sag underneath their load. Their noise fills the air with jingling heaviness. The minarets of churches seem to be ablaze as the flags of all the incendiary colours flutter there. But it is the scene of one year back. If he had asked them to turn the impossible into possible, they would have done so but he himself jumped at the sun for them and whatever he is reaping today is of this tragic flaw

He is handcuffed and people are stoning him almost to death. He bleeds and is being taken to the gallows through the deserted streets. People gather there to enjoy the scene of his being hanged. So it is God who is to reward him in the life-hereafter. We witness these scenes everyday in the Third World countries.

Question 3.
What is the rhyme of ‘The Patriot: An Old Story’?
Answer:
The rhyme of the poem ‘The Patriot: An Old Story’ is ababa.

Question 4.
Explain the difference between welcome scene and departure scene from the poem “The Patriot” by Robert Browning.
Answer:
The welcome scene and the departure scene, as you call them, are sort of mirror images of one another. They show how the fortunes of the speaker have been turned completely around in the year that elapsed between the two scenes.

In the welcome scene, the speaker is a hero. The people are all praising him. They would give him anything he wants as he is paraded along. In the departure scene, he is being paraded again. But this time his hands are tied and he is clearly about to be executed. This time, people are throwing rocks at him.Over the course of the year, he went from a hero to a villain, presumably because he did not achieve the goal he set out to achieve.

Question 5.
Can the poem be taken as interpretation of human fickleness?
Answer:
This poem is very interesting. Its ambiguity allows a large range of interpretations to the meaning. It may be that Browning is portraying the fickleness of human nature as the patriots deeds are forgotten as no bodys on the rooftops now,versus the faith to God not leaving in bad times as humans do. However, it may also be about the consolation humans find in feeling accepted and glorified, as is suggested by the use of dramatic monologue and the symbolism of the patriot and Jesus, which hints at a sense of selfabsorbance and the bitterness of being rejected from society.

Question 6.
How has Browning used allusion in the poem? Explain.
Answer:
Browning uses the story of Icarus to describe the ambition of the man in stanza three. This creates a moral of the story not to be too ambitious, like Icarus with flying. Icarus attempted to fly by sticking feathers to his arm with wax. However, the closer he flew to the sun, the more the wax melted until he fell from the sky. Browning uses this story to introduce an ideology to not be too ambitious which unfortunately the patriot was. The whole of stanza three reflects on what he has done. The man feels he carried out everything he possibly could have which makes his life even more of a travesty, ‘Nought man could do, have I left undone’. The man feels he deserves a reward, ‘I reap’, sharing with the reader that he has power. From this, Browning described the man as someone powerful and for the good of mankind, juxtaposing it to what the public thought, creating a sense of unfairness

Extra Questions

Question 1.
Comment on the imagery used in the poem.
Answer:
The poet has used visual imagery, auditory , tactile and kinaesthetic imagery. Visual imagery is there in the following lines :‘lt was roses, roses, all the way,’ ‘the church-spires flames, such flags they had,’ ‘Just a palsied few at the windows set;
Auditory images abound in the lines: ‘The air broke into a mist with bells, /The old walls rocked with the crowd and cries.’
Tactile images are found in: ‘A rope cuts both my writs behind;/And think, by the feel, my forehead bleeds,’
Kinesthetic imagery in “The house-tops seemed to heave and sway”/ Alack, it was I who leaped at the sun
To give it my loving friends to keep!

Question 2.
Who is reminded of his past? Why?
Answer:
The patriot is reminded of his past because then he was welcomed with roses and myrtle and now the same people are humiliating him and throwing stones at him and are going to hang him.

Question 3.
What bells are being referred to here? Why are they rung?
Answer:
The church bells are being referred to here. They are being rung to welcome the patriot and honour him.

Question 4.
What tells you that the speaker was swayed by the enthusiasm of his admirers? What proves him wrong?
Answer:
The lines where he says

‘Had I said, “Good fold, mere noise repels—
But give me your sun from yonder skies!”

They had answered, “And afterward, what else?’ show that he had believed in their enthusiasm in the past but he feels sad at what they had done to him in the present, at the way they had humiliated him.

Question 5.
In what mood is the speaker now? Where is he?
Answer:
The speaker is in a sad and despondent mood. He is depressed at the way he has been humiliated at the stones people have thrown at him. He is at the scaffold in the street where he is to be hanged.

Question 6.
What tells you that the patriot was overambitious?
Answer:
The line which tell us that he was overambitious is: Alack, it was I who leaped at the sun To give it my loving friends to keep! But the people had rewarded him with humiliating him for his past deeds.

Question 7.
Explain, ‘Just a palsied few at the windows set;’
Answer:
Instead of the cheering crowds who had welcomed him a year ago now there are only a few diseased and old people gathered to see him being hanged. This is the humiliation which he is faced with as no longer is he a celebrity who people will throng to see.

Question 8.
What do you think of the mentality of the crowd?
Answer:
The crowd is fickle. Only a year ago had they given him a welcome fit for a hero and now they were humiliating and degrading him by throwing stones.

Question 9.
Explain:
Thus I entered, and thus I go!
In triumphs, people have dropped down dead.
Answer:
In these lines the speaker says that says that he was brought honourably to the chair and with great pomp and show but now he is being taken very insultingly to the gallows. He says sometimes great heroes fall from their climax and die. Such has not happened to him. Had he died in the peak of his power, he would have been happy.

Question 10.
What thought makes him feel safer?
Answer:
The speaker says:

“Paid by the world, what dost thou owe
Me? “—God might question; now instead,
‘Tis God shall repay: I am safer so.

He says sometimes great heroes fall from their climax and die. Such has not happened to him. Had he died in the peak of his power, he would have been happy. Further the speaker says that heroes can not expect reward from God in the next world because they get their reward in this world. In his case people hgve not done him justice. They have killed him. He says after death he will go to his Lord Creator where God Might question him about his deeds he had done for the people. He would reply that he had done his best for them but they rewarded him with shame. Now he will ask God for a reward because God is just and He would give him the best reward in the other world for his service to his people. He would be safe with God in the world here after.

For More Resources

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Poems Workbook Answers Chapter 9 Abou Ben Adhem

November 10, 2023May 20, 2022 by Raju

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Poems Workbook Answers Chapter 9 Abou Ben Adhem – ICSE Class 10, 9 English

English Maths Physics Chemistry Biology

Comprehension Passages

Stanza 1

Read the lines given above and answer the following questions.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to context.
Answer:
These lines have been taken from Abou Ben Adhem written by Leigh Hunt. In this poem the poet has describe the spiritual experience of Abou who was a pious man. One night Abou awoke from a deep dream of peace. He saw an angel writing something in a golden book. He asked the angel what he wrote. The angel replied that he was writing the names of those who loved God, but Abou’s name was not there. Abou requested the angel to write his name in the list of those who loved their fellowmen. The next night the angel come again and showed Abou the names of those whom God had blessed. Abou was surprised to see that his name was written on top.

In these lines the poet tells us that one night Abou Ben Adhem awoke from a peaceful dream and saw an angel in his room. The room was bright with moonlight and the angel look like a Lily in full bloom. The room was more brightened by the presence of the angel. The angel was writing something in a book of gold. Abou was much delighted and asked the angel what he wrote.

Question 2.
Name the poet of the given lines.
Answer:
These lines are from the poem Abou Ben Adhem written by Leigh Hunt.

Question 3.
What was the angel doing when Abou bin Adhem saw him within the moonlight in his room?
Answer:
He was writing in a book of gold..

Question 4.
What did Ben Adhem sec one night in his room, when he was awakened?
Answer:
One night, when Ben Adhem was awakened from a deep dream of peace he saw that his room was filled with moonlight, making it appear rich (bright) like a lily in bloom. He also saw an angel writing something in a book of gold.

Question 5.
What does the poet mean when he says “may his tribe increase”?
Answer:
The poet means that the number of good people like Abou Ben Adhem should increase in this selfish and wicked world.

Question 6.
What was Abou dreaming about?
Answer:
Abou was dreaming about peace in the world.

Stanza 2

Read the lines given above and answer the following questions.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to context.
Answer:
These lines have been taken from Abou Ben Adhem written by Leigh Hunt. In this poem the poet has describe the spiritual experience of Abou who was a pious man. One night Abou awoke from a deep dream of peace. He saw an angel writing something in a golden book. He asked the angel what he wrote. The angel replied that he was writing the names of those who loved God, but Abou’s name was not there. Abou requested the angel to write his name in the list of those who loved their fellowmen. The next night the angel come -again and showed Abou the names of those whom God had blessed. Abou was surprised to see that his name was written on top.

In these lines the poet tells us how Abou spoke to the angel. As there was too much peace Abou was not afraid. He became bold and asked the angel what he wrote. The angel raised his head and looked at Abou in a friendly way. He replied that he was writing the names of those who loved God.

Question 2.
What did Abou Adhem ask the angel?
Answer:
He asked the angel, “What are your writing?”

Question 3.
What did the angel tell Abou bin Adhem?
Answer:
The Angel told Abou Ben Adhem, “I am writing the names of those who love God.”

Question 4.
Why was Abou not afraid?
Answer:
He was not afraid because he was a pious and holy man who believed in God. The peace he felt in the presence of the vision made him bold enough to ask the question.

Stanza 3

Read the lines given above and answer the following questions.

Question 1.
Explain with reference to context.
Answer:
These lines have been taken from Abou Ben Adhem written by Leigh Hunt. In this poem the poet has describe the spiritual experience of Abou who was a pious man. One night Abou awoke from a deep dream of peace. He saw an angel writing something in a golden book. He asked the angel what he wrote. The angel replied that he was writing the names of those who loved God, but Abou’s name was not there. Abou requested the angel to write his name in the list of those who loved their fellowmen. The next night the angel come again and showed Abou the names of those whom God had blessed, Abou was surprised to see that his name was written on top.
In these lines the poet tells us that Abou asked the angel if his name was written in the list. The angel replied that his name was not in the list. Abou did not loose heart and asked the angel in a low but cheerful voice to write his name among those who loved His fellowmen.

Question 2.
What did Adhem ask the angel again when the angel told Adhem that he was “writing the names of those who love the Lord?”
Answer:
He requested the angel to write his name among those who love His fellow men.

Question 3.
What did the angel tell Adhem?
Answer:
The angel told Adhem that his name was not among the names of those who loved the Lord.

Stanza 4

Read the lines given above and answer the following questions.

In these lines the poet tells us that Abou asked the angel if his name was written in the list. The angel replied that his name was not in the list. Abou did not loose heart and asked the angel in a low but cheerful voice to write his name among those who loved His fellowmen.
In these lines the poet tells us that when Abou requested the angel to write his name among those who loved His fellowmen, the angel wrote something in the book and disappeared. The angel came again to Abou’s room next night. The angel showed Abou the names of those whom God had blessed. Abou was surprised to see that his name was on the top of the list. It means that Abou was nearer to God because he loved His fellowmen.

Question 2.
What did Adhem beg the angel to write about him?
Answer:
He begged the angel to write his name as lover of the human beings.

Question 3.
Did the angel appear again?
Answer:
Yes, the angel appeared again the next night.

Question 4.
Where was Abou’s name written amongst those who loved God?
Answer:
Abou Ben Adhem’s name was at the top of the list.

Question 5.
Mention two other words used by the poet to refer to the angel.
Answer:
The two other words used by the poet to refer to the angel are ‘the vision’ and ‘the presence’.

Project

Question 1.
What lesson do you learn from this poem?
Answer:
From this poem I learn that devotion to God is directly related to one’s love for his fellow beings. One cannot hate his fellowmen whom he has seen and love God whom he has not seen. God resides in the core of every human being.

Question 2.
What does the poem “Abou Ben Adhem” convey?
Answer:
The poem, written by Leigh Hunt, tells of a conversation between an angel and Abou.The angel, seen writing in a golden book, lists the names of all the people who love God. When Abou hears he is not on the list, he prays that the angel add his name to the list of people who love their fellow man. The following night the angel returns and tells Abou that not only has he made the list, he “led all the rest.” Hunt uses the language of the poem to convey the idea that loving your fellow man is the way one loves the Lord and is what allows an individual to become truly alive. He uses the simile “a lily in bloom” to convey flowering of the human spirit that occurs when men look beyond themselves. The poem’s message explains the best way man loves God is to love others, which brings God’s blessing. The “book of gold” symbolizes the richness a man encounters when he loves the Lord, a richness of spirit that transcends this life

Question 3.
Identify the figures of speech in the following lines from the poem.
(a) Awoke one night from a deep dream of peace.
(b) Making it rich, and like a lily in bloom.
Answer:
In the first line alliteration is used where the ‘d’ sound is used to convey sound and peaceful sleep. In the second line the poet has used simile to make comparison.

Question 4.
Write a short note on Abou bin Adhem.
Answer:
In this poem the poet describes an even in the life of Abu Ben Adhem. He was a pious man and the leader of a tribe. He had a meeting with an angel who was writing the names of those people who loved God. Abou’s name was not in it. Abou requested the angel to write his name as one who loved his fellowmen. The angel did so and vanished. The next night the angel came again into his room and showed him the names of those who had been blessed by God’s love. Abou bin Adhem’s name was at the top of the list. It means if you want to get God’s love, you should love your fellow beings.

Question 5.
Explain briefly how Abou Ben Adhem demonstrated his love for God.
Answer:
Abou Ben Adhem, a pious man, demonstrated his love for God by expressing his love for mankind. He believed that to love god you need to love your fellow-beings first.

Question 6.
What is the message of the poem?
Answer:
The poem tries to convey the idea to us that a man cannot have the love of God unless he loves his fellowmen. It means that to love god we must first learn to love our and serve our fellow beings. Only a life lived in the service of others is worth living. The poem’s message explains the best way man loves God is to love others, which brings God’s blessing.

Extra Questions

Question 1.
Explain ‘may his tribe increase.’
Answer:
The phrase, ‘may his tribe increase,’ means that may the number of good people like Abou Ben Adhem increase in this selfish and wicked world.

Question 2.
What kind of person was Abou Ben Adhem?
Answer:
Abou Ben Adhem was a pious man who believed in loving God by serving his fellow men.

Question 3.
Which poetic device is used in the line: ‘Making it rich, and like a lily in bloom,’
Answer:
The poet has used a simile to compare the pure white light emanating from the angel to a white lily. The poet uses the simile “a lily in bloom” to convey flowering of the human spirit that occurs when men look beyond themselves.

Question 4.
Describe the angel. How did he look at Abou?
Answer:
The angel was emanating peace and looked pure in the white light around him. He looked at Abou in acceptance and willingly told him that he was writing a list of those who loved God.

Question 5.
What does the book of gold symbolize?
Answer:
The “book of gold” symbolizes the richness a man encounters when he loves the Lord, a richness of spirit that transcends this life.

Question 6.
What surprises Abou the next night? What message has the poet conveyed to all of us?
Answer:
The next night the angel came again into his room and showed him the names of those who had been blessed by God’s love. Abou bin Adhem’s name was at the top of the list. The message the poet conveys to us is that if you want to get God’s love, you should love your fellow beings.

For More Resources

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 1 Chief Seattle’s Speech

November 10, 2023May 20, 2022 by Raju

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 1 Chief Seattle’s Speech – ICSE Class 10, 9 English

English Maths Physics Chemistry Biology

ICSE Solutions Selina ICSE Solutions ML Aggarwal Solutions

Comprehension Passages

Passage 1

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

There was a time when our people covered the land as the waves of a wind-ruffled sea cover its shell-paved floor, but that time long since passed away with the greatness of tribes that are now but a mournful memory. 1 will not dwell on, nor mourn over, our untimely decay, nor reproach my paleface brothers with hastening it, as we too may have been somewhat to blame.

Youth is impulsive. When our young men grow angry at some real or imaginary wrong, and disfigure their faces with black paint, it denotes that their hearts are black, and that they are often cruel and relentless, and our old men and old women are unable to restrain them. Thus it has ever been. Thus it was when the white man began to push our forefathers ever westward. But let us hope that the hostilities between us may never return. We would have everything to lose and nothing to gain. Revenge by young men is considered gain, even at the cost of their own lives, but old men who stay at home in times of war, and mothers who have sons to lose, know better.

Question 1.
What does Chief Seattle tell about the condition of his people earlier?
Answer:
Chief Seattle says that earlier his people occupied the land in large numbers just like water of the sea covers the sea bed.

Question 2.
What hint does he give regarding the cause for the depletion of his race?
Answer:
Chief Seattle said that he did not blame the aggression of the white man for the depletion of his race but he does hint at it being the most plausible reason.

Question 3.
What happened when the tribal young man became angry?
Answer:
Seattle said that youth is impulsive and the young men of his race were no exception. When the young men grew angry at some real or imaginary wrong and they painted their faces with black paint, it denoted that their hearts were up to no good , and then they were often cruel and relentless.

Question 4.
When did the hostilities between the Trials and the White men begin?
Answer:
The hostilities began when the White men started pushing the Trials out of their land and occupying it and the tribal were forced to move westward.

Question 5.
Why did Seattle wanted to end up the hostilities?
Answer:
Seattle wanted the hostilities to end because no one would have any gain rather everything would be lost as the young men considered revenge as gain, even at the cost of their own lives

Passage 2

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

To us the ashes of our ancestors are sacred and their resting place is hallowed ground. You wander far from the graves of your ancestors and seemingly without regret. Your religion was written upon tablets of stone by the iron finger of your God so that you could not forget. The Red Man could never comprehend or remember it. Our religion is the traditions of our ancestors — the dreams of our old men, given them in solemn hours of the night by the Great Spirit; and the visions of our sachems, and is written in the hearts of our people.

Your dead cease to love you and the land of their nativity as soon as they pass the portals of the tomb and wander away beyond the stars. They are soon forgotten and never return. Our dead never forget this beautiful world that gave them being. They still love its verdant valleys, its murmuring rivers, its magnificent mountains, sequestered vales and verdant lined lakes and bays, and ever yearn in tender fond affection over the lonely hearted living, and often return from the happy hunting ground to visit, guide, console, and comfort them.

Day and night cannot dwell together. The Red Man has ever fled the approach of the White Man, as the morning mist flees before the morning sun. However, your proposition seems fair and I think that my people will accept it and will retire to the reservation you offer them. Then we will dwell apart in peace, for the words of the Great White Chief seem to be the words of nature speaking to my people out of dense darkness.

Question 1.
How do the tribal men regard the ashes of their ancestors?
Answer:
The tribal men regard the ashes of their ancestors as sacred and respect them. The ground where their dead are buried is considered holy by them.

Question 2.
How do the White feel about their dead people?
Answer:
The white people have no respect for their dead and leave their graves unattended.

Question 3.
Where was the religion of the White people written?
Answer:
The religion of the white people was written on stone slabs so that they would never forget but they could never understand its significance.

Question 4.
What is the religion of the Tribal men? How is it different?
Answer:
The religion of the tribal people is the traditions of their ancestors — the dreams of their old men, given to them in solemn hours of the night by the Great Spirit, their God, and is written in the hearts of our people.

Question 5.
Why do the dead of the Tribals never forget them or this beautiful world?
Answer:
The dead of the Tribals never forget this beautiful world that gave them being. They still love its verdant valleys, its murmuring rivers, its magnificent mountains, sequestered vales and verdant lined lakes and bays, and always yearn in tender fond affection over the lonely hearted living, and often return from the other world to visit, guide, console, and comfort their people.

Passage 3

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

It matters little where we pass the remnant of our days. They will not be many. The Indian’s night promises to be dark. Not a single star of hope hovers above his horizon. Sad-voiced winds moan in the distance. Grim fate seems to be on the Red Man’s trail, and wherever he will hear the approaching footsteps of his fell destroyer and prepare stolidly to meet his doom, as does the wounded doe that hears the approaching footsteps of the hunter.

A few more moons, a few more winters, and not one of the descendants of the mighty hosts that once moved over this broad land or lived in happy homes, protected by the Great Spirit, will remain to mourn over the graves of a people once more powerful and hopeful than yours. But why should I mourn at the untimely fate of my people? Tribe follows tribe, and nation follows nation, like the waves of the sea. It is the order of nature, and regret is useless. Your time of decay may be distant, but it will surely come, for even the White Man whose God walked and talked with him as friend to friend, cannot be exempt from the common destiny. We may be brothers after all. We will see.

Question 1.
How does Seattle predict the future of his tribe to be?
Answer:
Seattle predicts that his tribe might not survive for long. He says that he can see ableak future for his people without a single star of hope. Sad-voiced winds moan in the distance and a grim fate seems to be in store for them. But he is sure his people will prepare stolidly to meet their doom whenever they hear the approaching footsteps of their fell destroyer.

Question 2.
How does the speaker differentiate his tribal people from the white people?
Answer:
Seattle feels that although the decay of his people might come earlier , the white people will also not be spared. They too would perish, the only difference being that hty might survive a little longer.

Question 3.
How does the speaker realize that he should not mourn the untimely fate of his people?
Answer:
The speaker realizes that he should not mourn the untimely fate of his people because tribe follows tribe, and nation follows nation, like the waves of the sea. The cycle of life continues and change is the law of nature. It is the order of nature, and regret is useless.

Question 4.
Why does Seattle say that they maybe brothers after all?
Answer:
Seattle say that they maybe brothers after all because a common fate in the form of ultimate decay awaits both. The decay and death for the white race may be distant, but it would surely come, for even the White Man whose God walked and talked with him as friend to friend, could not be exempted from the common destiny that is death and decay. So being bound by a common destiny made them brothers after all.

Passage 4

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

We will ponder your proposition and when we decide we will let you know. But should we accept it, I here and now make this condition that we will not be denied the privilege without molestation of visiting at any time the tombs of our ancestors, friends, and children. Every part of this soil is sacred in the estimation of my people. Every hillside, every valley, every plain and grove, has been hallowed by some sad or happy event in days long vanished. Even the rocks, which seem to be dumb and dead as the swelter in the sun along the silent shore, thrill with memories of stirring events connected with the lives of my people, and the very dust upon which you now stand responds more lovingly to their footsteps than yours, because it is rich with the blood of our ancestors, and our bare feet are conscious of the sympathetic touch. Our departed braves, fond mothers, glad, happy hearted maidens, and even the little children who lived here and rejoiced here for a brief season, will love these somber solitudes and at eventide they greet shadowy returning spirits. And when the last Red Man shall have perished, and the memory of my tribe shall have become a myth among the White Men, these shores will swarm with the invisible dead of my tribe^ and when your children’s children think themselves alone in the field, the store, the shop, upon the highway, or in the silence of the pathless woods, they will not be alone. In all the earth there is no place dedicated to solitude. At night when the streets of your cities and villages are silent and you think them deserted, they will throng with the returning hosts’that once filled them and still lover this beautiful land. The White Man will never be alone.
Let him be just and deal kindly with my people, for the dead are not powerless. Dead, did I say? There is no death, only a change of worlds.

Question 1.
What is the condition laid by the speaker before he accepts the white man’s proposition?
Answer:
The condition laid by the speaker before he accepts the white man’s proposition is that they will not be denied the privilege of visiting at any time the tombs of their ancestors, friends, and children as it was sacred ground for them.

Question 2.
How is every part of the soil sacred to his people?
Answer:
Every part of the soil is sacred to his people because every hillside, every valley, every plain and grove, has been hallowed by some sad or happy event in days long gone by. Even the rocks, which are now dumb and dead are connected with memories of events from the lives of his people, and the very dust upon which they stand responds lovingly to their footsteps because it is rich with the blood of their ancestors, and their bare feet are conscious of the sympathetic touch

Question 3.
When will the shores swarm with the invisible dead of the speaker’s tribe? Why?
Answer:
The shores will swarm with the invisible dead of the speaker’s tribe tribe when the white man’s children’s children think themselves alone in the field, the store, the shop, upon the highway, or in the silence of the pathless woods, but they will not be alone. And they will not be alone because in all the earth there is no place dedicated to solitude. At night when the streets of the white man’s cities and villages are silent and they think that they are deserted, the fact would be that the streets throng with the returning spirits of his people that had once filled them and still love this beautiful land.

Question 4.
What does the speaker say about death? Explain.
Answer:
The speaker says that death is inevitable and is the destiny of both the races, whether the Indians or the white people. They all have to die one day one may decay earlier than the other but the ultimate fate is death. So he feels that death unites them and they are like brothers. He says that infect there is no death, only a change of worlds.

Question 5.
What plea does the speaker make to the white men?
Answer:
The speaker pleads with the White men to be just and kind to his people.

Assignment

Question 1.
Show how the author uses tone and style to reinforce his memories and make an impact upon his audience.
Answer:
Few speeches have captured the imagination of both Europeans and Americans . .i Chief Seattle’s legendary address has. It was originally made in the Suquamish language as Chief Seattle could not speak English. Reputedly delivered in the 1850s to Isaac Steven’ the governor of the Washington Territory, it took on a life of its own in the late 20th century when several different versions, many with an emphasis on the environment, surfaced.

Chief Seattle shares his precious land’s memories by forming two different tones. Chief Seattle creates a passionate and a sorrowful tone through diction and imagery. He made his speech passionate and sorrowful to move the audience’s heart and hoping that the people would take care of the land like the chief did.

The first part of Seattle’s speech of the land is packed with memories and what they mean to his people. He says that if he sells the land everybody must remember that they should treat “every” part of the land as if they were their “brothers”. The tone of his words is sorrowful because he focused on what he’s going to lose, the things and values that are precious to him – everything in his memory, his brothers.
Every detail of the land, part of the land came from his memories. Seattle uses detailed words or imagery such as every “shining” pine needle, every “humming” insect, and every “perfumed” flower. Seattle uses detailed words to describe a scene that had impacted him. His imagery centers and puts deeper meanings to his speech that he is going to miss the land.

The second part of Seattle’s speech presents is not his memory – it is what Seattle wants the inherent of the land to do and not to do and what the land means to him. He says to love and to care for the land because it is precious to everyone and all things are united and harming the land is the same thing as to have contempt for its creator. The tone of his words is passionate because the land is very precious to him and he wants everyone to take care of the land. Seattle uses repetition of “love” and “care” in the sentence: “love it as we have loved it, care for it as we have cared for it.” Repeating the two words emphasizes them and it makes it sound that he is really passionate about the land. Seattle says that “No man, be he Red Man or White Man can be apart.”

Question 2.
Mention and discuss the versions of Chief Seattle’s speech.
Answer:
The speech given by Chief Seattle in January of 1854 is the subject of a great deal of historical debate. The most important fact to note is that there is NO VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT IN EXISTENCE. All known texts are second-hand.
Version 1 appeared in the Seattle Sunday Star on Oct. 29, 1887, in a column by Dr. Henry A. Smith. He makes it very clear that his version is not an exact copy, but rather the best he could put together from notes taken at the time. There is an undecided historical argument on which native dialect the Chief would have used, Duwamish or Suquamish. Either way all agree the speech was translated into the Chinook Jargon on the spot, since Chief Seattle never learned to speak English.
Version 2 was written by poet William Arrow smith in the late 1960s. This was an attempt to put the text into more current speech patterns, rather than Dr. Smith’s more flowery Victorian style. Except for this modernization, it is very similar to Version 1.
Version 3 is perhaps the most widely known of all. This version was written by Texas professor Ted Perry as part of a film script. The makers of the film took a little literary license, further changing the speech and making it, into a letter to President Franklin Pierce, which has been frequently reprinted. No such letter was ever written by or for Chief Seattle.
Version 4 appeared in an exhibit at Expo ’74 in Spokane, Washington, and is a shortened edition of Dr. Perry’s script (Version 3).

Question 3.
How does Seattle justify his religion as opposed to what the white men had said about it?
Answer:
Chief Seattle also responds to the charge of “godlessness” circulated by the conquerors by comparing his religion with Christianity. He exclaims, ‘Your God is not our God! Your God loves your people and hates mine! … If we have a common Heavenly Father He must be partial, for He came to His paleface children. We never saw Him. He gave you laws but had no word for His red children.’

These statements highlight the absurdity of expecting the American Indians, having been isolated from the Europeans for thousands of years, to have adopted the same religion. In place of Christianity, Seattle introduces the religion of his people: “Our religion is the tradition of our ancestors… ” . He points out several areas in which his religion is superior to Christianity. He says, “Your religion was written upon tablets of stone… so that you could not forget… Our religion… is written in the hearts of our people”. Similarly, “Your dead cease to love you… Our dead never forget this beautiful world thai gave them being”. These comparisons pose a direct challenge to the earlier portrayals of the Indians as godless and devil-worshiping. Furthermore. Chief Seattle also responds to the Euro-American belief that the Indians had no claim to the land by expressing their profound attachment to it. He declares, “The very dust upon which you now stand responds more lovingly to [our] footsteps than yours, because it is rich with the blood of our ancestors.” In direct opposition with Euro-American representations, Seattle demonstrates that the Natives, like the Europeans, have a complex religion and culture.

Question 4.
Discuss trans-culturation as represented in Seattle’s speech.
Answer:
It has elements of trans-culturation. Although Seattle tended to emphasize the differences between Native Americans and Euro-Americans, the Euro-American idea that the Native Americans were going to become extinct surfaced throughout his speech.This idea of the inevitable extinction of the Native Americans as a race originated from the colonists. This idea served the colonists quite conveniently. It justified what Ring calls the “transfer of real estate,” the process in which European settlers gradually moved into established Indian communities as the Indians “disappeared”. Apparently, killing and stealing from an already-doomed race was easier to accept.

Throughout his speech, Chief Seattle indicates his acceptance of this belief that the Native Americans would become extinct. He refers to their “untimely decay” and laments, “It matters little where we pass the remnant of our days. They will not be many”, although he does not provide any concrete reasons for these sentiments. Instead, Seattle settles with the warning, “When the last Red Man shall have perished… these shores will throng with the invisible dead of my tribe… The White Man will never be alone”. In accepting the ultimate defeat of the Indians, Chief Seattle adopted an element of the dominant, Euro- American thought, demonstrating the trans-culturation predicted

For More Resources

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 2 Old Man at the Bridge

November 10, 2023May 20, 2022 by Raju

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 2 Old Man at the Bridge- ICSE Class 10, 9 English

English Maths Physics Chemistry Biology

ICSE Solutions Selina ICSE Solutions ML Aggarwal Solutions

Comprehension Passages

Passage 1

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

An old man with steel rimmed spectacles and very dusty clothes sat by the side of the road. There was a pontoon bridge across the river and carts, trucks, and men, women and children were crossing it. The mule-drawn carts staggered up the steep bank from the bridge with soldiers helping push against the spokes of the wheels. The trucks ground up and away heading out of it all and the peasants plodded along in the ankle deep dust. But the old man sat there without moving. He was too tired to go any farther.

Question 1.
Who was sitting by the side of the road?
Answer:
An old man wearing steel rimmed glasses and very dusty clothes was sitting by the side of the road.

Question 2.
What does the term “pontoon bridge” mean?
Answer:
A pontoon bridge also known as a floating bridge, uses floats or shallow-draft boats to support a continuous deck for pedestrian and vehicle travel. The buoyancy of the supports limits the maximum load they can carry. Most pontoon bridges are temporary, used in wartime and civil emergencies.

Question 3.
Why were the soldiers “helping to push against the spokes of the wheels”?
Answer:
The soldiers were “helping to push against the spokes of the wheels” because there was a steep elevation.

Question 4.
What does the reference to the old man in the beginning and the end of the passage indicate?
Answer:
The author through the reference to the old man in the beginning and the end of the passage intends to bring the figure of the old man under a sharp focus.

Question 5.
Why did the old man continue to sit without moving with the other villagers?
Answer:
The old man continued to sit because he was too tired to walk further.

Passage 2

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

It was my business to cross the bridge, explore the bridge head 3 beyond and find out to what point the enemy had advanced. I did this and returned over the bridge. There were not so many carts now and very few people on foot, but the old man was still there.’’Where do you come from?” I asked him.
“From San Carlos,” he said, and smiled.
That was his native town and so it gave him pleasure to mention it and he smiled.
“I was taking care of animals,” he explained.
“Oh,” I said, not quite understanding.
“Yes,” he said, “I stayed, you see, taking care of animals. I was the last one to leave the town of San Carlos.”
He did not look like a shepherd nor a herdsman and I looked at his black dusty clothes and his gray dusty face and his steel rimmed spectacles and said, “What animals were they?”
“Various animals,” he said, and shook his head. “I had to leave them.”

Question 1.
What was the name of the old man’s native town?
Answer:
The name of the name of the old man’s native town was San Carlos.

Question 2.
What is the narrator’s job?
Answer:
The narrator’s job was to cross the bridge, explore the bridgehead beyond and find out to what point the enemy had advanced.

Question 3.
Why did the old man leave his hometown? Why did he leave it reluctantly?
Answer:
The old man had to leave his hometown due to the war as the town was being evacuated .He left it reluctantly because he had to take care of his animals and he did not want to abandon them.

Question 4.
What did the narrator see on the bridge when he returned?
Answer:
When the narrator returned he saw that there were only a few carts and very few people on foot, but the old man was still there.

Question 5.
What gave the old man pleasure?
Answer:
When he said the name of his hometown aloud, it gave the old man pleasure.

Passage 3

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

“There were three animals altogether,” he explained. “There were two goats and a cat and then there were four pairs of pigeons.”
“And you had to leave them?” I asked.
“Yes. Because of the artillery. The captain told me to go because of the artillery.” “And you have no family?” I asked, watching the far end of the bridge where a few last carts were hurrying down the slope of the bank.
“No,” he said, “only the animals I stated. The cat, of course, will be all right. A cat can look out for itself, but I cannot think what will become of the others.”
“What politics have you?” I asked.
“I am without politics,” he said. “I am seventy-six years old. I have come twelve kilometers now and I think now I can go no further.”
“This is not a good place to stop,” I said. “If you can make it, there are trucks up the road where it forks for Tortosa.”
“I will wait a while,” he said, “ and then I will go. Where do the trucks go?” “Towards Barcelona,” I told him.
“I know no one in that direction,” he said, “but thank you very much.

Question 1.
Why cannot the old man walk further?
Answer:
He could not walk further as he was seventy-six years old and he had come twelve kilometers. He was very tired.

Question 2.
Why did the old man have to leave his animals?
Answer:
The old man left the animals because the enemy artillery was advancing.

Question 3.
Does the old man have a family? What were the animals he was worried about?
Answer:
The old man had no family, only the animals. He had a cat which would “be all right as it could survive on its own, but he was worried about the goat.

Question 4.
Why did the soldier tell the old man that it was not a good place to stop?
Answer:
The soldier told the old man that it was not a good place to stop because the enemy was advancing and soon their planes would launch bombs on the bridge.

Question 5.
Where did the narrator want the old man to go?
Answer:
The narrator wanted the old man to go up the road to where it divided for Tortosa as there were trucks there which would take the old man to Barcelona.

Passage 4

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

He looked at me very blankly and tiredly, and then said, having to share his worry with someone, “The cat will be all right, I am sure. There is no need to be unquiet about the cat. But the others. Now what do you think about the others?”
“Why they’ll probably come through it all right.”
“You think so?”
“Why not,” I said, watching the far bank where now there were no carts.
“But what will they do under the artillery when I was told to leave because of the artillery?”
“Did you leave the dove cage unlocked?” I asked.
“Yes.”
“Then they’ll fly.”
“Yes, certainly they’ll fly. But the others. It’s better not to think about the others,” he said.

Question 1.
What does the old man worry about? Why?
Answer:
The old man is worried not about the cat or the doves but about the goat because they would come under artillery fire and they could not escape like the cat or fly away like the doves.

Question 2.
How does the soldier console the old man? Does it affect the old man in a positive way?
Answer:
The soldier tells the old man that the animals would survive and the doves would fly away. But the old man is not consoled as he continues to worry about the others, the goats.

Question 3.
Which animal is the old man least concerned about?
Answer:
The old man is least concerned about the cat as it is said the cat has nine lives and is a survivor.

Question 4.
Why is the old man not worried about the birds?
Answer:
He is not worried about the birds as he had left the cage door open and they would fly off.

Question 5.
Why is the old man worried about the goats?
Answer:
The old man is about the goats because they would come under artillery fire as they would not be able to escape.

Passage 5

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

“If you are rested I would go,” I urged. “Get up and try to walk now.”
“Thank you,” he said and got to his feet, swayed from side to side and then sat down backwards in the dust.
“I was taking care of animals,” he said dully, but no longer to me. “I was only taking care of animals.”
There was nothing to do about him. It was Easter Sunday and the Fascists were advancing toward the Ebro. It was a grey overcast day with a low ceiling so their planes were not up. That and the fact that cats know how to look after themselves was all the good luck that the old man would ever have.

Question 1.
When the narrator spoke to the old man about the pigeon cage, what does this reveal about him?
Answer:
When the narrator speaks to the old man about the pigeon cage it reveals that he cares for the old man.

Question 2.
Why might the old man need good luck at the end of the story?
Answer:
The old man needs good luck at the end of the story because he is not moving away from the war zone and could die from artillery.

Question 3.
What is the theme of the story?
Answer:
The theme of the story is that we should make sacrifices for those things we love and that war is destructive and dangerous.

Question 4.
Explain the line, ‘There was nothing to do about him.’
Answer:
This line expresses the sadness and pity that the soldier feels for the old man as he realises that if the old man sits on the bridge he would surely die. He is loyal to the military system and has to obey orders and do his duty. He can do nothing for the old man and knows that inevitable death is in his fate.

Question 5.
Why could the Fascists planes not fly?
Answer:
The planes could not fly because the sky was overcast and weather was bad.

Assignment

Question 1.
How does the seemingly small incident described in the story reveal a significant truth about life?
Answer:
The short story,“The Old Man at the Bridge” is set during the Spanish Civil War—the old man is a civilian in loyalist territory; the narrator is a loyalist sympathizer, and it is only a matter of time before the fascists advance on the town from across the bridge. The old man is weak and weary; at the beginning of the story all the peasants in the area are migrating to safety, away from the war, but the old man cannot make it. He is sitting in the dust by the side of the road, despairing, clinging to the memory of his home and his animals. He was taking care of animals—specifically, two goats, a cat, and four pigeons, in his hometown of San Carlos, before the town was evacuated due to artillery fire. The old man had no family beyond these animals, and he could not bear to leave them, so much so that he was the very last person to leave San Carlos. When asked about his loyalties, the old man replies, “’I have no politics … I am seventy-six years old. I have come twelve kilometers now and I think now I can go no further.’

The old man refuses to get on a truck, because the trucks are headed towards Barcelona and he knows no one in that direction. He no longer has the will to move on. This reveals a fact of life: if a person has no will to live, too often he will not live. The animals were all the man had, and now that he had abandoned them, he has nothing. Life is defined by our relationships, by what we value, and once those things are gone, once we have nothing to live for, it takes rigid determination to push on. For the old man, his remaining years will prove to be lonely and harsh. And so he chooses rather to stay and face his fate. It is not cowardly, it is not weak—it is reason.

In short, the old man has come to terms with his death, and with the fact that he cannot now control what happens to his animals. He comes constantly back to this point, fretting over the fate of his animals—over his surrogate family, as it were. Even as he resigns himself to death, his mind is on the only things that gave his life meaning. “I was only taking care of animals,” the man repeats several times. He was living a simple life, and a contented one, and yet the war disrupted this contentment and will lead ultimately to the man’s demise. War is an interruption; war separates people from all they know and love, and often these individuals cannot bounce back from the trauma. War destroys in more sectors than the battlefield. After all that he has given up, after all that he has lost, the old man is lucky, according to the narrator, only in that the weather has prevented the fascists from sending out their planes that day—“That and the fact that cats know how to look after themselves,” a comforting thought for the old man in his last days.

Question 2.
Discuss the conflict in the story, “Old Man at the Bridge”?
Answer:
In Old Man on the Bridge,the conflict is not between the principal characters but between much larger forces whose struggle affects the lives of the little people unavoidably involved. On the one side of the great conflict is the army of the Loyalists. They are fighting to preserve the legally elected Spanish government. On the other side is the army of the Fascists. The little people, such as the weary old man at the bridge, are forced to scramble to keep from getting crushed between the opposing juggernauts. The old man symbolizes the Spanish people in general. He is not concerned about the greater issues involved in the conflict. He isn’t capable of understanding them. The Spanish Civil War was considered to be a prelude to World War II, which covered the entire globe and resulted in the deaths of some seventy million people, half of whom were civilians. The old man is only concerned about a few animals—a cat, two goats, and eight pigeons—which he had to leave behind when he fled the advancing Fascists. The narrator presents this slice-of-life as a picture of the face of war. The advancing Fascist army might be said to symbolize the great conflict which seems to be threatening much of the entire world. Hemingway’s story was published in 1938. Britain and France declared war on Germany in 1939. America was drawn into the international conflict when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in Hawaii in 1941.

Question 3.
Why is the old man at the bridge?
Answer:
The old man sat down beside the road because he is too tired to go any farther. He is one of the many civilians fleeing before the advancing forces of the Fascists. The Fascists, or Nationalists, were killing peasants and workers as a means of spreading terror and also under the assumption that these impoverished people must be supporters of the lawfully elected Loyalist government.

The narrator, a nameless soldier, is standing there because he is watching for the approach of the enemy. He is evidently an American and one of the many foreigners who volunteered to help the Loyalist cause against the fascist rebels. The dialogue in “Old Man at the Bridge” is in English, but it is simple and lucid. Hemingway was very good at writing dialogue and used dialogue to characterize the speakers as well as to provide exposition.

The narrator is primarily concerned about the advancing army, but he is also concerned about the old man.

“This is not a good place to stop,” I said. “If you can make it, there are trucks up the road where it forks for Tortosa.”

When the narrator again advises him more urgently to get up and go on,
“Thank you,” he said and got to his feet, swayed from side to side and then sat down backwards in the dust.

It is pretty obvious that this old man is going to get killed when the Fascists cross the bridge. He is too old and too worn out to flee any farther, and he doesn’t really have anything left to live for. He might be said to symbolize the Liberal government and its Loyalist supporters, gradually being overwhelmed by the Fascists who were backed by Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy.

This little story, or slice-of-life, is intended to represent the big picture of the war. Hemingway was a foreign correspondent and was accustomed to sending brief dispatches because of time and communication constraints. Foreign correspondents were fond of finding little scenes that symbolized great historical events. Hemingway wrote this story as a dispatch and then decided to publish it as a short story instead.

Question 4.
What does the old man’s moral dilemma reveal in Hemingway’s short story, “The Old Man at the Bridge?
Answer:
The old man has already walked twelve kilometers away from his home town San Carlos. He is sitting in dust on the road side close to a bridge on the River Ebro. He is worried about his animals that include a cat, two goats and four pairs of pigeons; they also constitute his family.
The troops have forced him along with others to vacate his home town as the enemy was approaching fast to carry out a massive attack.

The “trucks up the road” would take him towards Barcelona, if he boards one. Several of them have been deployed to take the civilians to safe places. But the old man doesn’t want to go further.
When the narrator urges him to leave the place, the old man says, “Thank you,” and gets to his feet but instead of going along with him, he “…swayed from side to side and then sat down backwards in the dust.”

The old man’s dilemma is about making a decision about whether to proceed towards Barcelona where he knows “no one in that direction ” or to await his fate sitting alone in the dust and thinking about his mute family members, his animals.
His dilemma shows how deep his attachment is to his animals. The fact that he is putting his life in danger by not moving further doesn’t seem to bother him much. Although he has come miles away from his animals, he is simply unable to move ahead without them.
Besides, his dilemma makes him a foil to the remorseless and cruel enemy who won’t hesitate to open indiscriminate firing on the civilians, soldiers and even animals and birds alike.

Question 5.
Who was talking to the old man?
Answer:
The narrator of this brief story does not identify himself, but there are indications that he is one of the many foreigners who volunteered to help the Loyalist cause during the Spanish Civil War, which broke out in 1937 and ended with the victory of the Fascist forces, aided and abetted by fascist Germany and fascist Italy in what is generally considered a prelude or rehearsal for World War II.

The narrator tells us: ‘It was my business to cross the bridge, explore the bridgehead beyond and find out to what point the enemy had advanced. I did this and returned over the bridge. There were not so many cars now and very few people on foot, but the old man was still there.’

It is evident that although the dialogue is in English, the two men are really speaking Spanish. The old peasant certainly would not know English. It is clear that the narrator’s Spanish/English is somewhat constrained because he does not know the language well because he speaks to the old man in short sentences using a limited vocabulary. However, his explication to the reader is in proper English, as in the long sentence: ‘It was my business to cross the bridge, explore the bridgehead beyond and find out to what point the enemy had advanced.’

He would not have tried to say this to the old man in Spanish/English because he wouldn’t have known how to say it in Spanish, and the old man would never have understood anyway. An example of the narrator’s stilted Spanish is the following: ‘What politics have you?’This is the way the question would be translated from Spanish into English if it were a literal translation. Hemingway used dialogues effectively to convey what the characters think and speak.

So it would not be incorrect to assume that the narrator is an American volunteer working for the Loyalist cause and trying to carry on a conversation with a aged native Spanish speaker while his attention is mainly focused on the area on the other side of the bridge, where he expects to see the Fascist army appear momentarily. The narrator has obviously been in Spain for some time and has seen fighting, air raids, artillery shelling, fleeing civilians, countless corpses, and other grim aspects of the Spanish Civil War.

He says, ‘I was watching the bridge and the African looking country of the Ebro Delta and wondering how long now it would be before we would see the enemy, and listening all the while for the first noises that would signal that ever mysterious event called contact, and the old man still sat there.’

Question 6.
What thoughts are uppermost in the soldier’s mind as he talks with the old man?
Answer:
The incident described in “Old Man at the Bridge” takes place during the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). The narrator appears to be one of the many foreigners who volunteered to aid the Loyalists against the fascist reactionaries. The narrator seems to be an American soldier or volunteer. The unnamed narrator of “Old Man at the Bridge” has been given the assignment of watching enemy movements on the other side of the bridge and reporting back.

He says, ‘It was my business to cross the bridge, explore the bridgehead beyond and find out to what point the enemy had advanced. I did this and returned over the bridge.’

The thought uppermost in the narrator’s mind as he talks with the old man is the approaching enemy troops. He is just making conversation with the old man because he has nothing to do but wait. He explains, ‘I was watching the bridge and the African looking country of the Ebro Delta and wondering how long now it would be before we would see the enemy, and listening all the while for the first noises that would signal that ever mysterious event called contact, and the old man still sat there.’

The words used by the author that the narrator is ‘wondering’ and ‘listening’ show clearly that the advancing enemy is uppermost in his mind, which is certainly understandable. The old man does not seem in the least concerned about the advancing enemy or about his own possible danger. He is only concerned about the animals he had to leave behind. There were two goats, a cat, and four pairs of pigeons. It was the old man’s responsibility to take care of them, and he feels sad about having to leave them behind. Without his animals, the old man has nothing to live for. They are his family. He is seventy-six years old and worn out from the ordeal of retreating before the advancing enemy. Hemingway is using the old man to symbolize the plight of the Spanish peasantry, who suffered the most from the war.

Question 7.
What does the reader learn about the characters of the narrator and the old man, in Ernest Hemingway “Old Man and the Bridge?
Answer:
The narrator seems to be with the army that is anticipating the attack of the enemy from somewhere beyond the bridge. The narrator may be a scout of some kind. He tells us * that his job is to cross over the bridge, assess how close the enemy is and return. He notices the old man as he crosses the bridge to do his job, and when he returns, although most of the peasant traffic has gone, he finds the old man still there. He strikes up a conversation with the elderly gentleman and tries to encourage him to move on to a safer location.

The old man has left San Carlos, his home town and he reports that he was the last to leave, departing only because of the danger of artillery fire. The elderly man reports that he has no politics, taking neither side in the war raging around him. He also says that he has no family. The old man says that he was in San Carlos caring for animals:two goats, a cat, and four pairs of pigeons. The soldier tells the old man that he really had to leave because of the danger he faced due to the advancing enemy.The old man is exhausted and having a hard time finding the energy to move on. He tells the soldier (narrator) about the animals. He is worried about what would happen to them; if it was dangerous for him, would it not also be dangerous for the animals?

The soldier tries to comfort the man, and once again encourages him to leave, but the old man becomes more mentally unfocused; and when he rises, he sways and sits back down.

Finally, when the soldier leaves, the old man is still seated next to the bridge.

Question 8.
What is the significance of Easter Sunday in “Old Man at the Bridge”?
Answer:
“The Old Man at the Bridge” is one of Hemingway’s shortest tales. It is based upon an Easter Sunday stopover at the Ebro River during his coverage of the Spanish Civil War in April 193 8. Although employed by the North American Newspaper Association (NANA), Hemingway apparently decided to submit it to Ken Magazine as a short story instead of using it as a news article.

Hemingway reports an incident that took place on an Easter Sunday. It might have just been a coincidence that this incident took place on Easter Sunday.

On the other hand, Hemingway might have wanted to emphasize the irony of the situation that the ‘old man’s’ life is in danger on the very same day that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

A soldier (who is also the narrator) sees an old man resting on the side of a road near a pontoon bridge. Other civilians are crossing this bridge, but the old man is too tired to proceed any further. The old man tells the soldier that he is a native of San Carlos where he worked as a caretaker of animals.

The old man seems more concerned for the safety of his animals than for his own safety. He has some relief in knowing that the cat will be able to fend for itself, and that since he has unlocked the cage, the birds can fly away, but the fate of the other animals is uncertain and the man is distraught by this.

The soldier tries to encourage the old man to move a little farther along, for he knows the bridge is likely to be bombed. The old man, however, is simply too exhausted to proceed.

Question 9.
What does Hemingway want to convey about the affects of war through the story?
Answer:
The Old Man on the Bridge is a short story which clearly depicts the true destruction caused by war. Hemingway uses an old man and some animals to make us realize where the true destruction of war lies.

In most literary compositions regarding war, in order to heighten the pathos, stories revolve around young people. Very often it’s a young soldier corresponding with his lover or family, or a young wife mourning the loss of her lover who was a soldier, or it’s a retired soldier returning home only to find that his parents and loved ones have already died. But in this short story Ernest Hemingway has uniquely used an old man and his pets to convey the destruction caused by war in a deeper context. This short story brings us the experience of an individual and how war has affected him. It also makes us realize that old people too have similar needs and requirements as any other.

This story revolves around an old man who was forced to leave his hometown due to war. He didn’t have anyone to consider as family except a few pets. He was very attached to them. His whole world centred on them and his whole existence purely depended on them. Infact, he lived because of those animals.

But then came the war and he was asked to leave his hometown because of heavy artillery. The most difficult thing for him was leaving his animals. He was not that worried about his cat because he believed that cats could look after themselves. But he was constantly worried about the other animals. Since he was forced to leave and the other people were evacuating the city, he too had to leave the city. He walked twelve kilometres and stopped just before the bridge which carried them to the other side of the river which was considered as the safe area. But the old man refused to cross the bridge claiming to be tired. Crossing the bridge promised a physically safe life. But it failed to give him psychological happiness. Those who were with their families crossed because they had hope to keep their families safe and to live with them. But the old man was deprived of any hope.

He lost his hope the very moment he left his animals. Therefore we can say that he, psychologically and symbolically, died at the moment he left his animals. That is because he lost his hope and his whole reason for existence. In this respect Hemingway defines life as living with your loved ones and implies that a man can be considered as living only if he carries hope. The old man constantly mentions the symbolic death when he says that he’s tired.

Thus Hemingway subtly criticizes war and makes us realize that the least destruction that war can cause is destruction of physical property. But the maximum destruction is where people lose their hope as in the case of the old man. It also shows that even an old man can lose hope due to war.

For More Resources

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 3 A Horse and Two Goats

November 10, 2023May 20, 2022 by Raju

Treasure Trove A Collection of ICSE Short Stories Workbook Answers Chapter 3 A Horse and Two Goats – ICSE Class 10, 9 English

English Maths Physics Chemistry Biology

ICSE Solutions Selina ICSE Solutions ML Aggarwal Solutions

Comprehension Passages

Passage

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

Of the seven hundred villages dotting the map of India, in which the majority of India’s five hundred million live, flourish and die, Kritam was probably the tiniest, indicated on the district survey map by a microscopic dot, the map being meant more for the revenue official out to collect tax than for the guidance of the motorist, who in any case could not hope to reach it since it sprawled far from the highway at the end of a rough track furrowed up by the iron-hooped wheels of bullock carts. But its size did not prevent its giving itself the grandiose name Kritam, which meant in Tamil coronet or crown on the brow of the subcontinent. The village consisted of fewer than thirty houses, only one of them built from brick and cement and painted a brilliant yellow and blue all over with

gorgeous carvings of gods and gargoyles on its balustrade, it was known as the Big House. The other houses, distributed in four streets, were generally of bamboo thatch, straw, mud and other unspecified material. Muni’s was the last house in the fourth street, beyond which stretched the fields. In his prosperous days Muni had owned a flock of sheep and goats and sallied forth every morning driving the flock to the highway a couple of miles away.

Question 1.
Name the village in which Muni lived.
Answer:
The name of the village in which Muni lived was Kritam. It was “probably the tiniest” of India’s 700,000 villages. Of the thirty houses in the village, only one, the Big House, is made of brick.

Question 2.
What did the Big House look like?
Answer:
The Big House, as it was known, was built from brick and cement and painted a brilliant yellow and blue all over with gorgeous carvings of gods and gargoyles on its balustrade.

Question 3.
How many houses were there in the village?
Answer:
There were thirty houses in the village.

Question 4.
Describe the other houses.
Answer:
The other houses were poor in appearance and were built of bamboo thatch, straw, mud and other unspecified material.

Question 5.
Where was Muni’s house located?
Answer:
Muni’s was the last house in the fourth street, beyond which stretched the fields.

Question 6.
Describe Muni’s prosperous days.
Answer:
In his prosperous days Muni owned a flock of sheep and goats but was now left with only two scraggly goats which could neither be sold nor eaten.

Passage 2

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

He flungs himself down in a corner to recoup from the fatigue of his visit to the shop. His wife said, “You are getting no sauce today, nor anything else. I can’t find anything to give you to eat. Fast till the evening, it’ll do you good. Take the goats and be gone now,” she cried and added, “Don’t come back before the sun is down.”

Question 1.
Where had Muni gone and why?
Answer:
Muni had gone to the shop to get the other things like dal, chilli, curry leaves, mustard, coriander, oil and a potato.

Question 2.
Did The shopkeeper give Muni what he needed? Why/ Why not?
Answer:
The shopkeeper refused to give Muni any more items on credit until he paid off his previous debt. He also humiliated Muni.

Question 3.
How much money did Muni owe to the shopkeeper?
Answer:
Muni owed the shopkeeper five rupees and a quarter.

Question 4.
What lie did Muni tell the shopkeeper?
Answer:
Muni told the shopkeeper that he had a daughter in another town who had promised to send him some money.

Passage 3

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

Unleashing the goats from the drumstick tree, Muni started out, driving them ahead and uttering weird cries from time to time in order to urge them on. Me passed through the village with his head bowed in thought. He did not want to look at anyone or be accosted. A couple of cronies lounging in the temple corridor hailed him, but he ignored their call. They had known him in the days of affluence when he lorded over a flock of fleecy sheep, not the miserable grawky goats that he had today.

Question 1.
What did Muni do to urge the goats to move on?
Answer:
Muni uttered weird cries from time to time to urge the goats to move on.

Question 2.
Describe Muni’s prosperous times.
Answer:
In his prosperous days Muni had a flock of 40 sheep and some goats which were healthy.

Question 3.
Why did people prefer sheep?
Answer:
People preferred sheep because they bred fast and people came and bought the fleece in the shearing season.

Question 4.
How had Muni lost the animals?
Answer:
Some pestilence had struck and then Muni could not sell his animals at even half the price to his friendly butcher.

Question 5.
Did Muni know his age?
Answer:
No, Muni did not know his age. It was the shopkeeper who told him that he was seventy.

Passage 4

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

The horse was nearly life-size, moulded out of clay, baked, burnt, and brightly coloured, and reared its head proudly, prancing its forelegs in the air and flourishing its tail in a loop; beside the horse stood a warrior with scythelike mustachios, bulging eyes, and aquiline nose. The old image-makers believed in indicating a man of strength by bulging out his eyes and sharpening his moustache tips, and also decorated the man’s chest with beads which looked today like blobs of mud through the ravages of sun and wind and rain (when it came), but Muni would insist that he had known the beads to sparkle like the nine gems at one time in his life.

Question 1.
Describe the horse.
Answer:
It was a big life-size horse made from clay which had been baked, burnt and then coloured brightly. The horse was posed standing proudly with his head reared high, its legs prancing in the air, flourishing its tail in a loop in the air. Next to the horse stood a warrior with sharp, scythe- like moustache, eyes that protruded and a aquiline shaped nose. The image makers had made him have such eyes and nose to depict his strength.

Question 2.
Why had the image makers given the warrior bulging eyes and aquiline nose?
Answer:
The image makers believed that by giving a man bulging eyes and an aquiline nose in a statue they depicted his strength.

Question 3.
What destruction did the village boys do to the things near the statue?
Answer:
The village boys carved and gashed tree trunks with their knives, they tried to topple milestones and made lewd designs on all the walls.

Question 4.
What was the effect of the construction of the highway?
Answer:
Before the highway was made the statue had been closer to the village as the spot had bordered the village but once the highway was laide the village had shifted more inland.

Question 5.
Had anyone seen the splendour of the horse?
Answer:
No one could remember seeing the horse in its pure- white condition with a cover of pure brocade and red and black lace.

Passage 5

Read the extract given below and answer the questions that follow.

The village consisted of less than thirty houses, only one of them built with brick and cement. Painted a brilliant yellow and blue all over with gorgeous carvings of gods and gargoyles on its balustrade, it was known as the Big House. The other houses, distributed in four streets, were generally of bamboo thatch, straw, mud, and other unspecified material. Muni’s was the last house in the fourth street, beyond which stretched the fields. In his prosperous days Muni had owned a flock of forty sheep and goats and sallied forth every morning driving the flock to the highway a couple of miles away.

Question 1.
What is the name of the village referred to here? Where is it situated?
Answer:
The name of the village referred to here is Kritam. It is a tiny village, situated far away from the highway at the end of a rough track. ‘Kritam’ in Tamil mean ‘crown’.

Question 2.
Describe the Big House.
Answer:
The Big House was built with brick and cement. It was painted in a brilliant yellow and blue colour. There were carvings of gods and gargoyles on several posts.

Question 3.
What had Muni owned in his days of prosperity? What did he do every morning?
Answer:
Muni had owned a flock of forty sheep and goats in his days of prosperity. Every morning he went out with his cattle to graze them.

Question 4.
What did Muni feed his flock with? When did he come back home? What did he carry home?
Answer:
Muni fed his flock with foliage. He cam back home at sunset. He gathered faggots and dry sticks and carried them home for fuel.

Question 5.
What did Muni’s wife cook for him in the morning? How did she cook it?
Answer:
Muni’s wife cooked balls of millet flour for him in the morning. She boiled water in a mud pot. then she threw a handful of millet flour into it, and added salt in it. then she made balls of millet flour.

Assignments

Question 1.
Show liow Narayan depicts women in the story and their role in a man’s life.
Answer:
When Muni the Indian peasant and the red-faced American meet and converse in “A Horse and Two Goats,” the differences between them are immediately apparent, and these differences inform the main idea of the story, the clash of cultures. One of the few things the two men have in common is kept in the background of the story, but resurfaces frequently—each has a devoted wife on the sidelines, making it possible for them to keep going.

To begin to understand Narayan’s sense of women, it would be useful to look briefly at how Indian and Hindu culture has perceived and shaped women’s lives. It is believed that the ancient Tamil societies may have been matriarchal, that is, ruled and guided by woman. The great Indian epics, composed approximately two thousand years ago, contain stories of several important female characters.

In practical terms, however, the life of a woman in India as recently as one hundred or two hundred years ago was almost unimaginable today, even in comparison to the restrictions placed upon American women in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Hindu law and tradition dictated that women were under the protection of their fathers, and then of their husbands. In fact, although Muni has never kept track of his age, “He was told on their day of wedding that he was ten years old and she was eight. During the wedding ceremony they had had to recite their respective ages and names.” This is the tradition under which Muni had grown up. Women were honored on the one hand, and subordinate on the other—no more simple or straightforward than gender roles in any society.

Muni and his wife were married in a traditional ceremony at a young age and have lived together nearly all their lives. His expectations for their roles in relation to each other, based on tradition, have not been met. He remembers that “he had thrashed her only a few times in their career.” The tone here is casual, without regret; thrashing is what husbands do when wives get out of line. But the balance of power did not hold, at least not in Muni’s eyes: “later she had the upper hand.” In the opening, the narrator shows the town and a typical day. “His wife lit the domestic fire at dawn, boiled water in a mud pot, threw into it a handful of millet flour, added salt, and gave him his first nourishment of the day. When he started out, she would put in his hand a packed lunch, once again the same millet cooked into a little ball, which he could swallow with a raw onion at midday.” It is a spartan meal, the most nutrition for the least money, but there is no mention of her preparing anything for herself. Is the narrator simply not interested in her diet, or does she skip the morning meal to leave more for Muni? “She was old, but he was older and needed all the attention she could give him in order to be kept alive.”

The American’s wife is even more on the periphery of the main action than Muni’s wife; in fact the action could go along just as smoothy without her even being mentioned. But Narayan has a reason for introducing her. The American’s wife’s name is Ruth, the name of an Old Testament figure who stands in Judeo-Christian tradition as a model for wifely loyalty. The Biblical Ruth is loyal to her dead husband’s family; the Ruth in “A

Horse and Two Goats” is loyal to her husband and stands by to prop him up when he is about to do something off-balance. She seems to be a good sport, to support her husband’s whims: “Next day she called the travel agent first thing and told him to fix it, and so here 1 am.”

Having a loyal, grounded wife gives each of the husbands the freedom to move out into the world. Muni goes to the highway each day so he can “watch the highway and see the lorries and buses pass through to the hills, and it gave him a sense of belonging to a larger world.” Ruth has come to India with her husband, but he tells Muni that she is “staying back at Srinagar, and I am the one doing the rounds and joining her later.”

Muni remembers that in his youth he was often chosen for the women’s roles in the plays the community performed. Sometimes he was the Goddess Lakshmi, a nurturer and a model for devoted wives. It is her obedience to Vishnu that gives her power. Muni also played the part of Sita, another incarnation of Lakshmi and the wife of Rama, the hero of the Ramayana, an exemplary wife, who remains loyal to Rama in spite of many trials.

A possible reason for Muni’s memories of these plays may lie in town gossip. To the delight of the men in town, the postman’s wife has run off to the city with another man. The postman “does not speak to anyone at all nowadays. Who would if a wife did what she did? In this speech, Muni comes as close as he ever will to stating the truth about wives: it may be annoying when they stay, but it is devastating when they leave. As Muni drives his goats out to the statue in the beginning of the story, he reflects on his age. “At seventy, one only waited to be summoned by God. When he was dead what would his wife do?” In fact, his wife would be lonely, but she is the one in the family with survival skills. The real question is what would Muni do without his wife if she were summoned by God? Where would a man be without a loyal wife?

Question 2.
Show how the story though Indian in context is quintessentially human also. Discuss.
Answer:
Narayan has, on occasions, been criticized for focusing on middle-class urban India in his stories, thereby excluding the poor of rural India who continue to make up the vast majority of the Indian population. But Narayan’s purpose as a storyteller has never been to educate the non-Indian reader about India. So although we can learn specific things about village life in India from this story, it isn’t about Indian problems or about Indian sensibilities as such. While what happens in “A Horse and Two Goats” is accurate to the particular of the Indian experience, it deliberately deals with themes that are quintessentially human, also. William Walsh has suggested it is a story about misunderstanding, a story about the gap between supposed and real understanding, a story about the element of incomprehension in human relationships.

“A Horse and Two Goats” is typical of Narayan’s pre-Modernist, village storyteller style of writing. In a deceptively simple, linear narrative Narayan unfolds the story of Muni, an old goatherd. In keeping with his usual narrative formula, Narayan carefully follows Muni as he goes about his daily, frequently humiliating existence—eating his meagre breakfast, visiting the local shopkeeper in a typically unsuccessful attempt to get a few items of food on credit, and then taking his two scraggy goats to graze near the foot of the horse statue at the edge of the village. He spends the rest of his day crouching in the shade offered by the clay horse, or watching the traffic pass on the highway.

This is where the comedy of misunderstanding takes over. After initially thinking he is being questioned about a crime by the khaki-clad foreigner, whom he assumes must be either a policeman or a soldier, Muni concludes that the man wants to buy his goats. Meanwhile the red-faced American, assuming the Tamil peasant owns the clay horse statute, which to the villagers, as Muni explains, “is our guardian, it means death to our adversaries,” sets about trying to buy it, so he can take it back to the United States to decorate his living room: “I’m going to keep him right in the middle of the room . .. we’ll stand around him and have our drinks.”

Narayan does a very good job depicting the relationships of long married couples. In just a few lines he can make us understand their lives. Maybe there was a time when the man was the boss but those times are long gone. Muni’s main occupation now is taking his goats for long walks where they can hopefully find something to eat. His wife tells him not to come back until the goats are fed and he knows if he is gone long enough she would find some way to put together a meal for him. If he stays out longer maybe she would be in a good mood when he gets home.

Question 3.
How does the story “A Horse and Two Goats” develop the idea of the need to interact with people who have vastly different identities from your own?
Answer:
“A Horse and Two Goats” is a story by Indian author R. K. Narayan. Its main focus is cultural insularity and miscommunication. Although some of the effect of this is comic, it also raises some serious points about the harm that such insularity does to both India and the colonial powers attempting to govern India and help India’s development.

Both Muni and the American do not know each others’ languages and thus have difficulty understanding one another. Muni therefore thinks that the American is trying to buy his goats, while the American thinks that Muni is selling him the statue. If we look at the story more analytically, though, we find that it addresses more complex issues.

Muni is a poor villager, who we feel is justified in having little knowledge of American culture, but we also think that the American, who traveled to India, and is intent on taking back souvenirs to show off his sophistication, should be more sensitive to Indian culture.

We are made aware of different traditions and value systems. Although Muni is a poor villager, he is very knowledgeable about the great Sanskrit epics that are at the center of the Hindu religion. He is himself pious, and understands and explains the spiritual significance of the horse. The American, by contrast, appears crudely materialistic.

In the exchange, both seem unaware of each others’ needs and values. Muni’s misunderstanding of the American leads him to sell off, for a desultory sum, a crucial part of his cultural heritage. In respect to the American, the author is trying to explain that donations of aid in the form of cash will not transform the lives of poor villagers for the better, and that colonialism is actually culturally impoverishing as well as exploitative.

This suggests that in a globalized culture and economy it benefits people in both developed and developing nations to understand each, others’ cultures better.

Question 4.
Besides being an amusing tale about a failure to communicate the story “A Horse and Two Goats” makes some crucial points also. Justify.
Answer:
“A Horse and Two Goats” by R. K. Narayan may simply seem like an amusing tale, but it has a far more profound meaning when read in terms of its cultural context. Narayan was born when India was still ruled by the British. His father was the headmaster of a school, and Narayan was educated in English literature and wrote in English. Many of his stories take place in southern India and reflect upon colonialism and its legacy.

In this story, the misunderstandings between Muni and the American are symbolic of their two cultures. Muni is poor but understands the value of the horse as an important religious symbol, seeing it as the spiritual guardian of the village. The American, who is quite wealthy by Indian standards, sees the horse statue only as a potential material possession, one to be displayed as a way of showing off his wealth and as a form of entertainment at parties.

Although the failure of Muni, who only speaks Tamil, to communicate with the American, who speaks only English, is the source of some humor in the story, it also reflects cultural differences. Even if the two spoke the same language, they might still have been unable to communicate given the differences in their values and world views.

Another issue raised by the story is that of western aid to India and the developing world. Muni is desperately poor. The American gives Muni one hundred rupees, which seems like a trivial amount of money to the American but a small fortune to Muni. Still, at the end of the story, we do not get a sense that Muni’s life has been improved. This suggests that largesse without understanding is unproductive.

Finally, the story suggests what it means to be cosmopolitan or sophisticated. The story opens with a description of the setting:Of the seven hundred thousand villages dotting the map of India. Kritam was probably the tiniest, indicated on the district survey map by a microscopic dot.This suggests that Muni is a poor villager with little contact with the outside world. Yet, as the story progresses, we come to see the ironic point that the wealthy, well-traveled American is just as monolingual and ethnocentric as the poor villager.

Question 5.
Discuss how the author uses comic irony to describe the incident surrounding the statue?
Answer:
Comic irony takes place in the story ‘A horse and two goats’ during the interaction between a very poor Indian man, Muni, and a very rich American tourist because they lack the ability to communicate. While this might cause anger or frustration in a similar situation, Narayan deftly makes the story amusing.

Muni, an old man who was once ‘prosperous’, spends his days with his two goats— he cannot sell them for money nor eat them for they are worthless. They are, however, his constant companions. One day while Muni is lounging at his regular spot next to the large statue of a horse, a car pulls up and an American steps out, trying to communicate with Muni in English. Muni, who speaks only Tamil does not understand what the foreigner wants. In fact, the only English he knows is “Yes, no.” The narrator shows the reader that the American wants to buy the statue, believing that Muni is the owner. Without knowing it, Muni appears to consent to the sale. However, comically, Muni believes that the American wants to buy his goats. He understood that the red man was actually making an offer for the goats… When he was reflecting thus, the red man shook his hand and left on his palm one hundred rupees…’

Muni is more than happy to sell the goats. Conversely, the American is more than happy to buy the statue.The details of the exchange are lost in translation. Muni takes his money. The American take the horse:

Meanwhile, Muni returns home with his money. Humorously, while he is pleased to bring the money to his wife, she does not believe that he came by it honestly. His wife glared at him and declared, “If you have thieved, the police will come tonight and break your bones. Don’t involve me. I will go away to my parents…’’She has good reason to doubt Muni’s story because the goats he thought he sold had followed him home.

Specifically, the comic irony is that Muni thought he was selling his goats. Without knowing it, he has sold the statue of the horse. However, both men get what they wanted. Muni unexpectedly gets to keep his goats.

Question 6.
Narayan has created a memorable character in Muni. Discuss.
Answer:
Muni is memorable because he is realistic and also comical. The reader can sympathize with Muni because he is faced with the real life struggles of poverty. He sometimes is ridiculed by others in the village, and has insecurities about being able to provide for himself and his wife.

Muni is old and very poor. Although Muni is initially described as poor, the author then goes on to say that he wasn’t always as poor as he is. “In his prosperous days Muni had owned a flock of forty sheep and goats and sallied forth every morning driving the flock to the highway a couple of miles away. There he would sit on the pedestal of a clay statue of a horse while his cattle grazed around. He carried a crook at the end of a bamboo pole and snapped foliage from the avenue trees to feed his flock

More is revealed about Muni during his conversation with the American tourist. His dialogue with the tourist is sincere but amusing at the same time since neither understands much of what the other is saying. They both ramble on as if they understand each other. The only real connection that is made (which also ends in a misunderstanding) is that the American wants to buy something. He wants the statue but Muni thinks he wants the goats.

Since the American is financially sound enough to be able to make trips to India, he is the rich character and Muni is clearly poor by comparison and poor relative to the other villagers. This story becomes like a fairy tale where the poor man stumbles onto some fortune. So, Narayan makes us root for Muni. We sympathize with him and want him to find some success in life.

Question 7.
Examine how cross cultural differences bring out humor in “A Horse and Two Goats.”
Answer:
Cross cultural differences bring out humour in the story as is seen when Muni meets the khaki- clad outsider for the first time. From the initial,greeting of “Namaste! How do you do?” Muni launches into a fairly detailed diatribe regarding his life: “My name is Muni. These two goats are mine, and no one can gainsay it though our village is full of slanderers these days who will not hesitate to say that what belongs to a man doesn’t belong to him.” This difference in cultural and language helps to bring out humor in the initial interactions between both men, that is Muni and the American. Muni’s launch into how the politics of the village maligned his name is about the last thing that the traveller wants to know or cares about. The initial exchange between both men is obscured by cultural differences. The lack of connect through language helps to bring out humour.

Cross cultural differences also reveal themselves in the sense of purpose in both men’s lives. Purpose has been established for Muni. His purpose is so clearly established that it never dawns on him to question it. He has lived his life as a goat herder with his wife in the village for so long that it is embedded within him. By contrast, the foreigner talks about how he is in India because of being trapped in an elevator “on the fortieth floor of the Empire State Building.” The need to “look at other civilizations” is what motivates him to be at the same place that Muni has called home for so long. This cross cultural difference illuminates humour because both men are thrown into the same place at the same moment with such a sense of surreal randomness. There is little in way of logic or rationality to determine why their paths cross. As a result of the cultural condition of both men, reflective humour emerges.

Finally, cross cultural differences reveal humour in the ending of the story. Muni thinks that he has sold his goats and made a profit. The traveller thinks that he has purchased the statue at market price, something at which he can marvel back home. Humour is enhanced by the fact that Muni understands the spiritual significance to the statue, and yet cannot understand the nature of the transaction of which he is a part. This is further enhanced in the fact that the traveller wants the statue for decorating “in his living room,” but fails to understand how it is an avatar of Vishnu that punishes those who have done evil at the end of the world. In the resolution to this misunderstanding, cultural differences in the form of language prevent either one from understanding the other. Yet, both get what they want. Muni gets the money he so coveted. The foreigner gets the statue he coveted. Neither one understands the other, believing opposite to what is true, and yet both find a sense of contentment. The lack of cultural understanding helps to provide an ending that is thought- provoking in its humour.

Question 8.
What is the main message of the short story “A Horse and Two Goats” by R.K. Narayan?
Answer:
The story “A Horse and Two Goats” is about an Indian man Muni, a Tamil peasant who meets a wealthy American tourist. Through a complete lack of communication (as neither can speak the language of the other), the poor man receives a large sum of money from the American who wrongly believes that the Indian man has sold him an enormous statue of a horse that actually belongs to the town, not to Muni.

Muni, who was once a prosperous man, is now destitute, the butt of jokes by the townspeople. He is living with his wife and two goats—goats that are so puny that no one will buy them. The “red-faced” American is extremely wealthy, driving up in a beautiful car with money to spare. Neither man understands the other:Muni and the Red-faced Man are hopelessly trapped discussing entirely different subjects simultaneously.

As the American tries to communicate with Muni, the poor man believes the American wants to buy his goats. Muni’s interest is in how the American intends to move the goats:

‘This will be their first ride in a motor car. Carry them off after I get out of sight, otherwise they will never follow you, but only me even if I am traveling on the path to Yama Loka.

However, while the American believes he and Muni understand each other regarding transportation, in truth, they are not both discussing the statue or the goats.

Whereas he has been unable to sell the goats to anyone else, Muni is more than pleased to take the large sum of money the American offers, and turns to go home, leaving (he thinks) the goats with the American. Meanwhile, the American, believing he has bought the very old statue of the horse, waits for Muni to go get men to help remove the statue so that he can ship it home and put it on display in his house.

When Muni gets home and tells his wife what has happened, she does not believe him…especially when the goats return shortly thereafter, making it seem as if Muni has made up the entire story. This is another entertaining moment: Muni has brought home an unexpectedly large sum of money—but his wife does not appreciate his achievement, finding his story incredible—impossible to believe.

The message at the heart of this tale is unique. Whereas poor communication can divide families or communities, or bring about war between nations, Narayan sees a more positive light in this particular lack of communication—for both parties are quite satisfied with the end result: Neither character can understand the other; the cultures and languages vary greatly, yet both succeed in their interaction.

Perhaps it is the positive way in which the men speak, and their demeanours, which fill in the gaps where language is not present. They are willing to work together (though unaware that they are working at cross-purposes) to overcome their lack of ability to talk to one another, and both leave satisfied with the outcome. Perhaps the author is pointing out that we often communicate without using words at all. Our attitude, gestures and facial features may lack something “in the translation.” However, the spirit of the exchange can be pleasant and positive for people who don’t understand our language—or simply don’t understand our perspectives.

Question 9.
In “A Horse and Two Goats”, how did Muni feel about his married life?
Answer:
In the story, ” A Horse and Two Goats” by R.K. Narayan, the main character Muni struggles to survive. The setting for the story is harsh, rural India. Using third person omniscient narration, the story moves through Muni and the characters that he encounters. He and his wife have been married for some sixty years.

In India, marriage is thought to be for life; consequently, the divorce rate is extremely low. Muni and his wife were ten and eight when they were married. Now after sixty years of life together, the couple have settled into a daily, yet troubled routine.

Muni and his wife live in poverty in a remote Indian village. In his prosperous days, Muni had forty sheep and goats. Now in his old age, Muni has just two goats. Each day he takes his goats out to graze to avoid a wife whose temper was “undependable” in the morning. When he returns, his wife will have prepared a simple meal for him. Life is harsh for Muni and his wife, yet they are surviving. He thinks that he controls the home but actually his wife does—she will go out to work and “conjure” up a meal. He does not know how she does it, but she always does.

This elderly couple have no children to help them in their old age. Because of this, the village looks down on Muni. He has so often been humiliated that he can barely raise his eyes to face the towns people. To hide his humiliation, he even lies to a shop man and tells him that he has a daughter in another town.

Through prosperity and poverty, Muni’s wife has stayed beside him. Although she is gruff with him now, she is willing to indulge his request for a special meal. She works as hard as he does, or harder, getting up at dawn to fix his breakfast. Unfortunately, poverty has worn her down. Each day she prepares a packed lunch and hands it to Muni. Whether it is love or practicality, she wants him to stay alive. Frustrated by his ineptness, she sends him out the door, threatening him with no supper. Muni fears his wife, but he also know that she will in the end take care of him.

After Muni’s encounter with the white man and his fortune tucked safely at his waist, Muni hurries home to share it with his wife, thinking his troubles are over. Sadly, her first reaction when she sees the hundred rupees is to accuse Muni of stealing, threatening him again. This time she will leave him and return to her parents. Obviously, things are not going as well as Muni had hoped.

Muni’s marriage is important to him. He depends on his wife. They have been together for so long that it would be hard for Muni to imagine living with her. It is doubtful whether Muni will survive without his wife because he has lost his ability to manage on his own. Muni wants to share his good fortune with her, probably hoping that she will once again be proud of him.

Question 10.
Make a critical appreciation of the short story, “A Horse and Two Goats,” by R.K. Narayan.
Answer:
The story of R.K. Narayan called, “A Horse and Two Goats,” is about a poor Indian man who meets a wealthy American. The men are not only separated by language, but by their status in society. Muni and his wife have known prosperity in the past, but a string of bad luck and’weather have reduced the old couple to living in one of the many shacks in their village, having great debt, and owning only two goats. Muni belongs to a low caste and cannot improve his lot in life.

The food that Muni and his wife share is meagre fare: they cannot afford anything else. However, one day Muni is able to shake “drumsticks” from a tree and asks his wife to prepare them for him. She sends him to the store for ingredients, but he has no money and the shopkeeper sends a deeply mortified Muni away. When Muni gets home, his wife tells him to forget eating until the end of theday—fasting will be good for him. So Muni walks away to sit next to a statue of a horse, that hps been there for the past seventy years.Soon a large station wagon arrives, carrying an American. Neither man can understand the other, but they carry on a conversation. Each man speaks about what is important to him: the American wants to buy the statue, believing Muni owns it. Muni understands none of this, but neither does the American understand Muni’s story of his life (including a childhood of poverty) and the history of the statue.

The story shows a clash of two very different cultures. By the end of the tale, the American believes he has bought the statue from Muni, and he presses a hundred rupees into Muni’s hand. It is humorous to note that Muni has no thought of the statue, but believes that he has sold the American his old scraggly goats—that are too worthless to be sold or eaten. Muni takes the money and runs to tell his wife. She refuses to believe the story.lt becomes even more difficult when the goats finally find their way home, making the story seem even less credible. The story ends with Muni being verbally beaten down by his wife. They have money, but now Muni has no peace.

For More Resources