Author Archives: Rohit

Question 1.
“I have done something; oh, God! I’ve done something real at last”. Why does Andrew say this? What does it mean?
Answer:
Andrew Manson, just returned from a medical college was quite new in medical practice. He was rather new in every experience of worldly life. He had opened his own surgery in the neighbourhood of drillers and miners. It was not doing very fine as his condition predicts. His lady love also ditched him. That day after spending a very frustrating and disappointing evening with his beloved Christine, he was returning home at mid night. He was very tired in his spirits. He was feeling very dejected.

As he reached home he found Joe Morgan pacing between his surgery and the entrance of his house. Joe wanted to take him home, whose wife was about to deliver a baby. It was their first baby after their married life of 20 years and a long wait of course. Joe picked up his bag and both went along. Andrew promised that all would be right.

After a long struggle the baby took birth at about dawn period. But the most ghastly havoc the luck had played was that the baby was stillborn! In the wake of his promise to Joe and his mother-in-law and in the wake of the hopes of the mother of the child, Andrew felt cheated. After giving the necessary medical aid to the patient, Andrew turned to the child. Seeing the condition, he at once realised that it was a case of asphyxia pallida, the same case he had treated in Samaritan.

Then there was no resting for Andrew for next 2 hours. He instantly gave the child hot and cold bath alternatively. He tried to give artificial respiration and after his long struggle the child responded. Only then he took himself a breath of relief. Finally when the baby returned to natural self, he handed to the nurse and left for his own home. Outside Joe was standing expectant and Andrew told him that all was right.While returning home, when Andrew footfalls joined the footfalls of the night-shift drillers, he felt quite relieved forgetting all about his disappointment at the hands of Christine and uttered these words, “I have done something…” He clearly regarded it a job a doctor is weighed for.

Question 2.
‘There lies a great difference between textbook medicine and the world of a practising physician.’ Discuss.
Answer:
The statement is aptly said, “There lies a great difference between textbook medicine and the world of a practising physician.” All would admit the fact that there is a sea difference between practical and theory. Theoretically the things could sound different but while taking practical form their form could turn out totally different.Same occurs in the life of Andrew. He was a medical-practitioner.

Though he seems to be novice, but he had undergone various experiences in his short-term medical practice to trust mere theoretical facts in his medical line. The nurse though appears quite oblivious of the difference between theory and practical. So when a case of asphyxia-pallida appears, she fails to understand that the infant could be resuscitated to normal self once again.

While Andrew was trying to follow the required treatment, she just whimpered in consternation, “for mercy’s sake, Doctor…. It’s stillborn.”Later on when the child returned to consciousness, she had no medical explanation for it but just thanked God for having mercy on it. Whereas Andrew knew where to tick the bowl for better sound. He proved that knowledge of mere textbook is not sufficient in their profession. It would be rather quack/shallow, which could prove fatal to some. Had he taken it the case of ‘stillborn’ it would have an end to Joe’s hopefulness in his life and he himself won’t have been able to bring himself to say ,“I have done something…”

Question 3.
Do you know of any incident when someone has been brought back to life from the brink of death through medical help. Discuss medical procedures such as organ transplant and organ regeneration that are used to save human life.
Answer:
Yes, it’s a case of my friend’s mother. My friend Kavinder and his family mem¬bers i.e. his father, mother and one sister Kavita were going for a picnic to a neighbouring village which boasts of its natural beauty for being surrounded by Yamuna river almost on three sides. They were on a deserted road. There was none other than their own vehicle i.e. jeep. His parents were resident doctors at the time in the civil hospital of the town, Ganaur. But by conspiracy of misfortune, one screw in the right side of jeep (front) got loosened and the front tyre went off. As a result their jeep keep careening off. Kavita and Kavinder got crushed under the jeep itself after falling off. Their father Mr. Mahender fell on the pavement.

Their mother Mrs. Meenakshi’s hair and saree got entangled with one of the wheel and was dragged for God knows how long. Her face got totally slashed. Bones ap¬peared. Just then a cart, appeared on the same road and saw the people lying on road on the difference of about 4 kms. He instantly collected all and put them on his cart and took to the hospital. Nobody knew what would happen to Dr. Meenakshi. She had lost her facial features so to say. Kavita and Kavinder could not be restored back to life. Dr. Mahender also survived a fracture in backbone.

A steel rod was planted there. But it was Dr. Meenakshi who was a challenge to the medical science. Then surgeons all over India joined hands and after conducting 21 skin grafting operations her facial features were restored. It took her 3 and half years to recover. Medically and physically she came out much better off than was expected but her emotions suffered a severe scar. Later both husband and wife made it a mission of their life to serve the needy and the poor in the same village where the tragic incident occurred to them. Dr. Meenakshi’s coming to her routine life was a glowing success of medical science.

Birth Extra Questions and Answers

Birth Extra Questions Short Answer Type

Question 1.
Why was Andrew Manson feeling “over-wrought” that particular evening?
Answer:
After spending his renting day in his surgery, Andrew had gone to see his lady¬love Christine that evening. There he got frustration and disappointed as she broke off. Hence he was feeling over-wrought.

Question 2.
How did the night prove unusual for Dr. Andrew?
Answer:
The night proved unusual for Dr. Andrew. That night his patient Mrs. Morgan delivered a baby but it was a case of‘asphyxia pallida’. He had to strive hard for about two hours to resuscitate the infant. Finally, the child started recovering. That way it was an unusual night for him. As the incident made him oblivious of his own loss in love life and he returned to his normal self in routine life.

Question 3.
How did Andrew wish to consider marriage? Did it materialise in his real life?
Answer:
Andrew wished to consider marriage an idyllic state. No his wish didn’t materialise in his real life. In his friendly circle, he had so many examples of failed married life. In his personal life also his affair had failed and couldn’t reach even to the border of marriage.

Question 4.
Why was Joe so much nervous? How did it become explicit?
Answer:
Joe was so much nervous as his wife Susan was going to deliver their first baby after their married life of twenty years. His nervousness was quite explicit as he was pacing to and from before Andrew’s house, as he came to fetch him. He could also not sit still at his own home also, till he didn’t get the news ‘all is right’.

Question 5.
How did Mrs Morgan’s mother react as she saw Dr. Andrew giving frantic treatment to the pallid baby?
Answer:
She appeared a very optimistic lady. She just had placed her entire trust in first God and next in the doctor. So she just kept standing against the wall holding her breath, keeping the hands on her throat and mouth, lest she should produce any sound, and disturb the doctor. She didn’t interfere or object doctor’s treatment. Finally her optimism is duly paid.

Question 6.
Who remained most active throughout the treatment? How?
Answer:
Of course, it was Dr. Andrew. No doubt the nurse obeyed his orders to fetch the things. Mrs. Morgan also couldn’t sit for a while. But they were just the passive on-lookers. Dr. Andrew kept doing his duty of first delivering one baby and then to bring him back to consciousness. Of course before that the nurse looked after the patient.

Question 7.
How would you term the success of Dr. Andrew?
Answer:
Dr. Andrew’s success can be termed as the success of medical science conjoined with trust in sole-self. The nurse declared it a stillborn baby. But Dr. Andrew knew it was a case of Asyphxia-pallida and he proved himself right.

Question 8.
“…his footfalls echoing with others under the morning sky…” Explain.
Answer:
The statement is with reference to Andrew, returning from Mr. Morgan’s house where he had been successful in restoring consciousness to the new bom baby. He felt djuite happy and relieved after this success. So he felt that his own footfalls had joined the others who also were returning after striving hard in mines. The feelings of Mr. Andrew prove that he had returned to his normal self forgetting his last evening’s sordid experience with Christine.

Question 9.
Where did Andrew live?
Answer:
Andrew lived in the close proximity of drillers and miners in Blaenelly. He had opened his ‘surgery’ in a part of his residence only.

Question 10.
Had Andrew not got success, how would it have affected him apart from Morgans? Explain.
Answer:
Morgans were being blessed with a child after a long wait of 20 years in their life. But had Andrew not got success in restoring consciousness to the pallid baby, they would perhaps remain deprived of being parents forever. But apart from them, for Andrew it was a case of total close as far as success in any sphere is concerned. He would have transformed a totally pessimistic, morom and lost soul. But God willing, nothing unfortunate happened and all returned to their joyful chapter of life, after the child’s recovery.

Birth Extra Questions Long Answer Type

Question 1.
Justify the title ‘The Birth’.
Answer:
‘The Birth’ is quite an apt and appropriate title for the story by A.J. Cronin. Seeing on surface level the story talks about the birth of a child. But brooding deeply, we find actually with the physical birth of the child, there are so many whose lives also get regeneration.

Dr. Andrew came to Morgan’s house where Susan was about to deliver a baby. A midwife was already there to tend the patient in labour pains. Andrew had spent a frustrating evening with his beloved Christine who broke off perhaps, the relation. So Andrew’s mind and concentration got astrayed there and then before one ‘birth’ during the period of the ‘wait’.

Joe was pacing to and fro outside the house. Then the child took birth, it was a stillborn baby. The nurse placed it under the bed. The doctor mechanically got busy in giving necessary medical aid first to the mother-patient. Then he turned all his attention to the infant-patient. It was a case of asphyxia-pallida. He had treated such case, earlier as well in

Samaritan. So with all frantic and feverish efforts he got fully absorbed in resuscitating the baby. Meanwhile the nurse looked in consternation. Susan’s mother couldn’t believe the whole thing could be true. Andrew also felt desperate as the child didn’t respond even after an hour and half.

Then just as he was trying to crush and release the tiny chest of the infant, it heaved and finally a few gasps it cried. It was a success for one and all related with the birth. For the nurse, it was quite a new experience. For Morgans it was a fulfilment of his life long dream. For Andrew it was a new start in his life. So we see that the birth of a child gave birth to so many new things to so many people. Hence no other title could have suited so well to the story.

Question 2.
Suppose that you are the nurse in the story. Describe your views about the particular case you attended at Morgans.
Answer:
I live in the neighbourhood of Morgans. I knew that Joe Morgan’s wife Susan Morgan was expecting a baby. They were oveijoyed as they were going to have the baby after a long and tiresome wait of 20 years of their married life. They had already booked me. Joe came to fetch me the evening his wife was in labour pains. I went there and kept noting the progress of the case.

After an hour or so, Joe also brought along Dr. Andrew who had just started his private medical practice. So honestly, I didn’t trust him much. But anyhow, I just had to help him now. At about 3.30 a.m, the baby took birth (but it was stillborn) Susan was still anesthetic so not in a position to react. Joe was out in the street. But Susan’s mother knew all this. I myself was shocked and stunned. How brutally luck had dealt with poor Morgans. But had to abide by God’s wish. I placed the baby under the bed, as is done in such case.

Dr. Andrew after giving required treatment to Susan asked for the baby. He just fishing through the papers, took out the baby and asked me to bring cold and hot water both and basins and towels and all that. He had already slashed the cord which fell like a broken stem. I tried to object but he never listened to me. I just saw him with consternation.

He gave the child hot and cold bath alternatively. He gave the child artificial respiration. He rubbed the child with rough towel. He pressed and released the child’s tiny chest in his hands to bring in there some breaths. Really, it was all just incredible. I again implored him.

But he won’t listen to him and as if God in heaven had guided his hands and minds. As he was trying to bring breath while clasping and releasing, the child’s tiny chest heaved! It was a miracle I never had seen. Next day only he told me the case history. I saluted Dr. Andrew, his knowledge and commitment to work. Thank God; he didn’t give way to my disbelief.

Question 3.
Do you agree with the end of the story? Could it end some other way as well?
Answer:
Yes, I agree with the end of the story. The writer A.J. Cronin has presented a happy ending story, with the victory of medical science and practical experience. The story couldn’t have ended other than the way it has now. Had Dr. Andrew shown unsuccessful in his effort, he would have appeased quite a crazy doctor, with all the (Retails which are already there in the story, ‘the hanging one sleeve, littered room, and sweating brows, panting doctor at etc. etc. Just a single stroke of pen could have changed the most optimistic stoxy into a most depressing pessimistic story.

Now the story is really rejoicing, after all, the sincere and committed efforts of Dr. Andrew are duly paid. The nurse also added new experience to her own medical experience. Morgans would become firm believers in God and medical-science. Andrew gave a new start to his normal life. After breaking away from Christine, he was really feeling broken hearted and all the negative thoughts regarding love and marriage came to his mind.

He just could recall the examples of failed marriage after his “break’. He couldn’t have possible returned to his normal routine life, had he not got success in the case of child birth at Morgans. So, I fully agree with the happy end. The stoiy becomes all the more encouraging. The layman also learns a lesson that hard work, experience and firm faith in God always pay,’ after reading the story. Otherwise and could have led us to consider God a mysterious power with mysterious designs who can shatter so many homes with just one blow.

Question 1.
What impressions of Shahid do you gather from the piece?
Answer:
Introduction. Shahid came to befriend with the writer Amitav during his last days of life. Shahid was basically an Indian like the author. As the very name suggests, he was a Muslim He belonged to Kashmir. He sought his education in Delhi. While in India they shared common friends and nothing more. But as Shahid shifted to Brooklyn in 2000, he came to entrust a very important task to the writer.

An Endless Revealer. Shahid had great love for fun and festivity. The smell of food would make him cry ‘Kya Badia Khana Hat.’ He was fond of exactitude in the cooking of food. He himself would host parties almost daily. He would do long preparations and cooking to host such parties. He always liked to hold ‘addas’ and surrounded with friends and relatives. ‘Food, fun, friends and poetry all were his weaknesses.

Aware of Impending Death. Shahid suffered from brain tumour. The fact came to be established a year or so before his death. Before that also he had been under treatment for cancer. He had sensed his death. But he didn’t want to cry to death. He wanted to sip up the last drop of joy of life with great relish and enjoyment. He described about his approaching death in many of his works. But he was quite cool and at ease and peace with death, as he had consoled himself that he was going to reunite his departed mother in the “other life” after the earthly life.

His friendship with Amitav : After shifting to Brooklyn, Shahid started meeting and eating with Amitav almost everyday. He entrusted him to write about him after he was gone. He didn’t want that he should he remembered just through the words of memory but he wanted to be remembered through some writing about him. This Amitav did successfully later on keeping his friendly pledge.

A Peaceful End. Shahid, it seems was tom due to the stormy and voilent political atmosphere in Kashmir. During his last days, he would talk about Kashmir a lot. He actually wanted to die there, to lie peacefully beside his mother’s grave. But due to logistic reasons he had to change his idea. Still there is Northampton, in the vicinity of Amherst, the sacred place of his beloved Emily Dickinson, he felt he would rest peacefully. So on Dec. 8 at 2 a.m. he died a quite, serene and peaceful death while in deep sleep.Conclusion. To conclude with we can say, that apart from being a great poet, Shahid was an incarnation of joy, optimism, love and wisdom.

Question 2.
How do Shahid and the writer react to the knowledge that Shahid is going to die?
Answer:
Shahid had gone for scan-test. It was scheduled for 2.30 in the afternoon. The writer got restless and he started calling at his home. He phoned many a times in the afternoon in the evening to have the latest information about the position of the ailment of his dear friend.

Nobody responded. But he couldn’t be hindered and he phoned in the early next morning. This time Shahid responded. Without any preambles he straightway started giving the bad news of his ailment which had already taken a devasting form. He told that the doctors had stopped his all the medicines and treatment like chemotherapy. They just would give him radiation a little later. But they didn’t hope much from that also.

At this writer is dazed and lost the sense of uttering some words of consolation. He could merely ask, “What would you do now, Shahid?” At this Shahid in a quite untroubled a matter of fact manner told that first he would arrange his passport, set his will and then leave for Kashmir to die there. He didn’t want to trouble his children there. Moreover, he wanted to have some moral support from his father, who was still in Srinagar. He wanted to lie in peace in his grave beside his mother’s grave there.

So we see that Shahid wore quite a bold upfront as if he was all prepared to welcome his impending death. He just wanted to complete his all the due responsibilities so that his children have no problems after he is gone. Whereas the writer is too shocked and stunned to react properly according to the occasion.

Question 3.
Look up the dictionary for the meaning of the word ‘diaspora’. What do you understand of the indian diaspora from this piece?
Answer:
‘Diaspora’ simply means ‘dispersion’ or a ‘scattering’ as per dictionary. The present extract ‘The Ghat of the Only World’, dabs a very morbid line of Indian diaspora. First of all the writer talks about indian citizens living in different parts of the world like America, England and so on. Their life-style go with them to foreign lands. Like Shahid went to settle in Brooklyn.

But his love for rogan josh, Heeng never ceased. He won’t throw parties where Indian dishes, well cooked and delicately served were the main attractions. He was fond of Kishore Kumar. His love for poetry and in that too Kashmir had almost become a universal topic during his declining days.

Secondly, I feel perhaps that the writer felt somewhat scattered and greatly affected due to the violent political atmosphere in his beloved State Kashmir. He wanted that politics and religion must be kept secret. He expressed his desire to die in Kashmir.

It proves clearly, that in spite of all the worldly luxuries his soul craved to touch his home land. So it was an ‘emotional diaspora’ on the part of Shahid, which I feel every Indian settled in foreign land must be suffering from. Finally, his own residence in New York, presented various tastes of various continents.

The Ghat of the Only World Extra Questions and Answers

The Ghat of the Only World Extra Questions Short Answer Type 

Question 1.
Which characteristic of Shahid strikes you the most?
Answer:
Shahid is a quite lucid fellow. He is an endless scholar. He has the socerer’s ability to transform a commonplace thing into magical. His liveliness strikes me the most.

Question 2.
When and where did the writer befriend Shahid?
Answer:
The writer befriended Shahid, when the latter came to stay and settle in Brooklyn.

Question 3.
What were the basis of their friendship progressing so fast?
Answer:
Shahid and Amitav were familiar with each other since their college days. When Shahid came to stay in a building a few blocks away from the writer’s in Brooklyn both came closer. Soon they started meeting on lunch. Their friendship progressed fast, as they both had similar taste in food, music and films.

Question 4.
What responsibility did Shahid hand over to the writer and why?
Answer:
Shahid handed over the responsibility to the writer to write something about the former after his death. He did so as he wanted to be remembered not through the spoken recitatives of memory and friendship but through the written words.

Question 5.
How did the writer keep his promise made to Shahid ? How did he feel before taking this responsibility?
Answer:
The writer kept his words quite honestly. Just after promising Shahid, he picked up his pen and started jotting down the details of the conversation with the former quite sincerely and regularly. Later he wrote about Shahid as per promise, earlier he felt that some other writer friend of Shahid could do the job better who knew him better close and longer.

Question 6.
Why did Shahid want to return to Kashmir?
Answer:
Shahid wanted to return to Kashmir to die. He wanted to lie for eternal rest beside his mother’s grave. Besides he didn’t want his siblings to make journey afterwards for his final ceremonies. Finally, he wanted to spend some time and have some moral support while living with his father during his final time.

Question 7.
What was the sole consolation to Shahid during his final days of life?
Answer:
Though Shahid knew it quite well that his death was approaching fast to grab him by neck, yet he was not afraid. The sole consolation during those days was that he would reunite with his mother after his death in the another world, if there is any.

Question 8.
How did the writer feel after Shahid’s death?
Answer:
The friendship of the writer and Shahid was quite new. Though they talked a lot and shared many common tastes. So their friendship in spite of a short life had become quite firm. After Shahid’s death, the writer felt as if a void had occurred. The writer still felt Shahid’s presence even after his death in his own living room.

Question 9.
How did Shahid behave in the hospital on May 21?
Answer:
On May 21, Shahid had gone to the hospital to undergo a surgical procedure. It aimed at relieving the pressure on his brain. When he was leaving ward, a wheelchair was brought. But he refused to sit on it telling that he could still walk. But his knees bent soon after and he had to accept the wheelchair this time.

Question 10.
Shahid’s gregariousness had no limits. Explain.
Answer:
Shahid really loved to be surrounded by friends, relatives, poets and writers all the time. It proves his gregariousness that there was never an evening when there was never wasn’t a party in his living room. He had once told the writer, ‘I love it that people come and there is always food….’

The Ghat of the Only World Extra Questions Long Answer Type 

Question 1.
Comment on the friendship between the writer and Shahid.
Answer:
Shahid and the writer both were basically Indians settled in England. The both had studied in Delhi University. Their common period at university was very short. Hence they didn’t grow any friendship. But they both had common friends. They remained as acquaintance while in India. Shahid’s work ‘The Country Without A Post Office’, impressed the writer very much. They had become phone friends as well.

But as Shahid shifted to Brooklyn where the writer was already settled, the warmth of their friendship increased. They shared same neighbourhood. So they started meeting on meals. They found their tastes in rogan josh, Kishore Kumar and Bombay films same. So they became now bosom friends.

The writer found him always jolly and lucid. Though he was under treatment for the last fourteen months, he never talked about his death. But as the doctors told that even radiation won’t help much, he lost hope for the life hut not for joy and happiness. He behaved quite sensibly even during the last moments of life. He asked the writer to write something about the former after his death.

Except this, he never troubled anybody in his life. He enjoyed the last drop of the drink of life. He never complained. Finally, he died a peaceful death, just in sleep. It left a void in the life of writer. He felt Shahid’s presence in his living room even after his death. Their friendship had become so fast.

Question 2.
Justify the title of the story ‘The Ghat Of The Only World.’
Answer:
The ‘ghat’ is a Hindi word which simply means shore. Shahid, the protagonist of the excerpt, was standing on the Ghat of the only world i.e. on the verge of death. He was being consumed by brain tumour already. He was undergoing surgical procedures, operations and medication. But nothing was helping much. Finally, the doctors stopped all treatments and recommended radiation though the chances of his survival were quite bleak. They had given him a year’s time. At this Shahid felt as if he was standing on the last end of life after which his journey to another life would start.

Moreover, the terrace at the top of Shahid’s residence gave significant view of Manhatten skyline across the East River. He loved this scene of Brooklyn water from slipping like a ghat into the East River. He made his last days lovely by seeing and enjoying beautiful things. He once had said, that he had no time to be sad and depressed. So he found joy, love, friendship and poetry everywhere and in everyone.

Question 1.
This play written in the 1950s, is a humorous and satirical depiction of the status of the mother in a family.
(i) What are the issues it raises ?
Answer:
As this play depicts the old status of mother that’s why it conveys that in those times
(1) mothers were treated like a slave or we can saw a home appliance just a care latest nothing else.
(2) mother were always take for granted as if they did not have any like or dislike or what would made them happy or sad. In short she was thought to be the worst-part for due best use in household jobs.

(ii) Do you think it caricatures these issues or do you think that the problems it raises are genuine ? How does the play resolve the issues? Do you agree with the resolution?
Answer:
It caricatures the character of Mrs Fitzgerland put not the issues but her char¬acter suits because whatever she enacts that all is for betterment of Mrs. Pearson. The problem raised are genuine because it gives the genuine picture and condition of the family in 50’s.

The play resolves the issues very dramatically as whenever some one in problem he wishes to be some one mightier to face and solve his problem skilfully. The same happened in the play and issues are resolved. I do agree because true realization can only eradicate the civil issues for over.

Question 2.
If you were to write about these issues today what are some of the incidents, examples and problems that you would think of as relevant ?
Answer:
Doris Pearson, the daughter of the family was willing to go out with Charlie Spence a mature person not that good and could even ruin her life. But she whs mad about him. The same is happening today’s era. The girls want to be out even late at night for their fun and frolic. Their companion should be mad about them and rich. If a fellow qualifies these two condition the girls would also go crazy.

Today’s woman is independent and think of her identity not like the women of 1950, totally devoted to the family. As too much of everything is bad same is the case with women. Too much of negligency or suppression leads to depressing and demoralization. On the other hand too much of liberty would also ruin the house. There are no parameters for conduct and behaviour because where our liberty ends other’s liberty start.

Question 3.
Is drama a good medium for conveying a social message ? Discuss.
Answer:
Drama is an effective medium for conveying a social message because it gives the sugarcoated bitterpill easy to swallow and removes the disease as well. Drama stages the actions and situations. When a person watches, imagines himself in those shoes and realizes because a wearer, only best knows where the shoe pinches. Such dramas are very effective because it conveys the message to the literate or illiterate, elder or younger and urban or rural society undubiously.

Question 4.
Read the play out in parts. Enact the play on a suitable occasion.
Answer:
Enact in Classroom.

Question 5.
Discuss in group, plays or films with a strong message of social reform that you have watched.
Answer:
Teachers can help the students by dividing the students into four groups e.g. A, B, C, D. Each group should be given separate topic to enact within a week time.

Questions On Appreciation

Question 1.
Write about the relationship between Mrs. F and Mrs. P which forced Mrs. F to help Mrs. P.
Answer:
Mrs. F and Mrs. P were neighbours and good friends too. Like other ladies they share their joys and sorrows. This sharing made Mrs F about Mrs. P sorrows and weaknesses which pinched Mrs. F a lot Mrs. F makes up her mind to help Mrs. P in family affairs. It was not possible to set the things right, therefore both of them exchanged their bodies and it was a child’s play for Mrs. F. Later Mrs. F as Mrs. P sets Mrs. P’s family affairs in her own way.

Question 2.
Comment on the contrast characters of Mrs. F and Mrs. P.
Answer:
Mrs F is older, heavier and strong and sinister personality. On the other hand Mrs. P is a pleasant but worried looking woman in forties. Both are working opposite personality and they are different in their behaviour too. That’s why when Mrs. F settles Mrs P family affairs in an unpleasant way, it’ seems to be ironical and unbearable to Mrs. P. Though they are opposite in every respect but good friends indeed may be because opposites attract each others.

Question 3.
Detail any situation from the drama when Mrs F call a spade a spade and comment as well.
Answer:
Mrs. F as Mrs P straight way tells Mr. George Pearson that why he is going to club always and not spending time with his wife though his wife always concerns for him. She also discloses that people at club are naming you Pompy-ompy Pearson because they think you’re slow and pompous. George gets upset and calls Cyril to clarify but Cyril hesitatingly tells that it is true. George gets staggered and Cyril indignantly turns to Mrs. F as Mrs. P for unpolished behaviour. She call a spade a spade very ironically hurting the feelings of the George.

Question 4.
Express Doris and Cyril thinking and assumption about Mrs. F as Mrs. P.
Answer:
Both of them faced a real set back when there was not even a tea for them. Moreover Mom was planning to go out for squal meal. They thought their Mom might have got hurt and became insane. That’s why she was doing such activities. They got annoyed when she carried on the same behaviour with their father too. They were in tears when actual Mrs P the real Mom entered their house. She was welcomed as never before as a saviour.

Discussion

Question 1.
The way in which Mrs. F solved Mrs. P problem is humorous, realistic, ironical, imaginative or practical. Elaborate.
Answer:
The dramatic procedure followed for solving the problem is humorous to the reader only. It is non realistic as in real life we can’t exchange our bodies or spirit. It is purely imaginative as every one wishes to change himself and the situations with a magic chant but we know it is not possible but imaginations can go to any extent.

It is practically impossible to misbehave with the family members and to treat harshly to convince or make them realize. Through love and emotion everything can be made right. It is ironically because an outsider can only call a spade without carrying about the feeling of others. Therefore the way Mrs. F followed was completely unrealistic and ironical approach of solving the problem.

Question 1.
What do you understand of Einstein’s nature from his conversations with his history teacher, his mathematics teacher and the head teacher?
Answer:
Coining events cast their shadow before is aptly proved in the case of Albert Einstein. His conversation with the history teacher Mr. Braun proved that neither Albert hesitated to admit his own shortcomings nor he felt reluctance in pointing out the shortcomings in the then education-system.

He preferred ideas rather than craming of dates or datas like a parrot. Moreover his conversation with Mr. Braun proved that he was not firm on his stand and quite honestly straight forward. He never cowed down unnecessarily before others even if they were his teachers.

His conversation with mathematics teacher Mr Koch proved that he was very sincere. He got well versed in school level maths even before graduation. His maths teacher was all praise for him. He was quite indifferent in school against Einstein.

He gave him a very glowing recommendation letter in praise of Albert’s ability and skill in maths. Albert finally, met his head teacher while leaving school. The meeting was short.The teacher offered him to leave school rather than be expelled which Albert did willingly.

Here also he wanted to prove his rebellion and outspoken nature, but perhaps the awe for the authorities kept him tight-lipped. But as he was dismissed, he just came out of the room proudly, banging the door, avoiding the head teacher’s order to shut the door behind.To conclude with, we can say that his history teacher and his head teacher failed to understand him. Neither he could be guided to respect or hate anybody. He paid due regards to the people whom he found worthy of it, like Mr Koch.

Question 2.
The school system often curbs individual talents. Discuss.
Answer:
The statement that the school system often curbs individual talents collects mixed reactions. I myself don’t fully agree. Had there been so, there won’t have been any school, institutes or colleges. But as we see even in modem day society, when the computers are available in almost every third home, schools mushroom. Still in case of Sachin Tendulkar, Thomas Elva Edison and Albert Einstein the said statement proves quite apt.

Our education system is such that schools have to care for the quantity. There are certain subjects which are imposed on students irrespective of their individual capability, craving or liking. No matter what or which the individual likes to do, that is regarded secondary here. In schools, every student is expected to qualify the basic subjects otherwise he will be awarded ‘failed’.

So to the students like Albert Einstein schools become the most hateful place, who turn rebel against one and all. It is their personal/individual talent which drives them to get success, name and fame. Schools leave no stone unturned to curb their talents. Every individual has his own talent.

Some may excel in Maths, others in geology and while others are fit to cram just history. But school system imposes them to learn by heart all the subjects. That’s why, some students like Albert turn rebel and simply walk out of school to harness their own talent in their own way.

Question 3.
How do you distinguish between information gathering and insight information?
Answer:
Both the terms or phrases i.e. ‘information gathering’ and ‘insight formation’ have quite different meanings. We shall deal with them elaborately and separately. First let’s talk about ‘information gathering’. It simply means ‘collecting information’ as the news reporters do to create a news, article or news story. Without going behind the screen, they just present what they see on the screen.

At Albert’s German school he was also supposed just to gather information, according to the school system. His cousin Elsa also asserted that she knew many students who were more stupid than Albert, but they also got through after learning some facts. This is called really information gathering i.e. to learn the facts and dates by heart without caring to understand them.

On the other hand, ‘insight information’ means creating or forming insight or understanding. This is what was realised much later on by our educationists. But Albert felt the need in his early studenthood. He felt that learning facts is not important but search the reason is really important. Learning the dates of battles is not important but to probe into the reason so that the basis could be rooted out later on is really important.

Albert felt for the first time the importance of ‘insight building’, which his school system failed to understand and he had to leave school before completing his diploma. Actually, education really means the development of personality and it can’t be done by imposing or inducing facts. Students are not sacks in which anything can be filled. They are the most creative beings and must be created likewise individual talent must get recognition at school level.

Albert Einstein at School Extra Questions and Answers

Albert Einstein at School Extra Questions Short Answer Type 

Question 1.
What does Albert’s history teacher think about him?
Answer:
Albert was not good at learning facts and dates. Moreover, he saw no point in doing that like a parrot. The teacher regarded him an insult to the class. He felt that he was a lazy and insolent boy who made teaching and learning process in class a difficult thing.

Question 2.
How did Mr. Braun treat Albert?
Answer:
Albert was not in good books of Mr Braun, the history teacher. Whenever Mr. Braun asked him dates of any important historicaLevent, he would plainly reply that he didn’t see any point in learning them. That irritatSFMr Braun. Mr. Braun would hold him back for one more period. That also didn’t prove of any help. He complained about it to head teacher with the result that he was asked to leave school on his own.

Question 3.
How did Mr. Koch think about Albert?
Answer:
Mr. Koch was Albert’s ittaths teacher. Albert had already completed his school level maths. He had even done a bit more. So naturally Mr. Koch had a very high opinion  about Albert. He felt that he had nothing to teach him and probably Albert would be in a position soon to teach him. He also gave Albert a glowing reference which could help Albert seek admission in some Italian College for higher studies of maths.

Question 4.
“The world’s worst liar”. Who used this phrase and for whom? Why?
Answer:
Yuri used this phrase for Albert. He called Albert ‘world’s worst liar’ telling Albert clearly that he was not good at cheating others. He actually gave him compliment for his straight forwardness and honesty.

Question 5.
How did Albert feel while at school?
Answer:
Albert felt miserable while at school. He had very bad time at his German school. He had neither the tendency nor the capability to learn historical facts and dates. Hence his teacher Mr. Braun punished him every now and then.

Question 6.
How did Albert feel at his lodging?
Answer:
Albert stayed in the poor quarter of Munich, as his father had not enough money to spare him for the lodgings. Here slum violence was routine. Albert hated such atmosphere. So he didn’t feel any solace even in his lodging.

Question 7.
What provided comfort to Albert?
Answer:
Albert felt miserable at school. His lodging in slum area also never cheered him up. Music only provided him comfort. To ease his strained nerves, he would play on his violin till his landlady yelled at him to stop. Solving maths problems and studying geology also comforted him.

Question 8.
How did the Dr. Ernst Weil treat Albert?
Answer:
Dr. Ernst Weil was Yuri’s friend. On Yuri’s recommendation, Albert had come to meet Dr. Ernst Weil. So naturally, the doctor treated him quite pleasantly. Besides it, the doctor himself had just ceased to be a student and understood Albert’s problem and position. Moreover, Albert was really very nervous about his school. So he gladly gave Albert a medical certificate proving that the latter had a nervous breakdown and needed six month’s rest.

Question 9.
Did the doctor believe that his certificate would help Albert a lot?
Answer:
Dr. Ernst Weil believed that his medical certificate would help Albert only to keep him away from school. When Albert told him that that way he could do without school diploma and could seek admission in college for higher studies of maths on the basis of Mr. Koch’s reference letter, the doctor didn’t believe these things. He appeared doubtful and told that he didn’t hope that things would come off.

Question 10.
Why was Albert made to leave school?
Answer:
Albert was not good at the subjects being taught at school. He even didn’t believe in learning the things his history teacher would ask him. It appeared an open rebellion. The teacher felt that his very presence in class made it difficult for the teacher to teach and for the students to learn. No serious class work could be done there in his presence. So the head teacher himself asked him to leave the school lest they should save of the blemished act of expelling him.

Albert Einstein at School Extra Questions Long Answer Type

Question 1.
“Yuri was a great help to Albert while in Munich’. Comment on it.
Answer:
Yes. I do agree with the statement that Yuri was a great help to Albert while he was in German school. He is his great friend and guide who stands by him through thick and thin. Actually, Yuri is the only person in Munich whom Albert liked and with whom he could share his innermost feelings even his hatred for school.

When, Yuri sees Albert quite sad, dejected and nervous, he realised that it was not good for the former to stay in school any longer. So on Albert’s suggestion, he prepares his doctor friend Dr. Ernst Weil to give Albert a fake medical certificate proving that Albert has a nervous breakdown and he needs to stay away from school at least for six months.

It is Yuri only who guides Albert to obtain a reference from his maths teacher Mr. Koch. On the basis of which he could seek admission in some Italian College or Institute for higher studies of maths. After leaving school when Albert was leaving Munich for good, he gave a thanking treat to Yuri. While parting from him Yuri bade Albert a very warm farewell saying: “Goodbye—and good luck…you are going to a wonderful country, I think, I hope you will be happier there.”

Question 2.
Were the teachers at Albert’s school interested in understanding him and bringing out his potential?
Answer:
We read about two teachers and one head teacher in this excerpt ‘Albert Einstein at School’ One of them is his history teacher Mr. Braun and the second is his maths teacher Mr. Koch. Albert is not at all good at History. Naturally he is not in good books of his teacher. All the worse the teacher also fails to understand Albert’s nature and badly fails in bringing out his potential. Neither does he get success in inculcating a zeal in Albert to do good in history.

He just follows the traditional ways of just imposing things on him to learn. If Albert fails he would just punish him. The punishment also shows his reactionary attitude instead of his desire to improve the lot of the word. His attitude in class room is quite sarcastic.

He later complained to head teacher and suggested perhaps to expell Albert from school at all. On the other hand, Mr. Koch we unaffected of Albert’s dealings with his history teacher. Moreover, Albert was good in maths, so his teacher also gave him a glowing reference letter. Actually, teachers during those days bothered about their syllabus rather than student’s abilities.

Question 3.
Describe how the head teacher made it easy for Albert to leave school.
Answer:
Albert was sick of going to school. He felt miserable as he hated the place very much. He wanted to stay away from it. So he decided to obtain a medical-certificate stating that he had a nervous breakdown and he must stay away from school for some time. His friend Yuri helped him obtain this.

Next day, he went to school with the final decision of leaving school. But first went to Mr. Koch, his maths teacher, to seek a reference letter from him, on the basis of which he could seek admission in some Italian College or Institute for higher studies of maths. Next he was to request a meeting to see the head teacher.

For that he could have to wait for an hour or two. Just then he was called by head teacher himself. He was too eager to see him that he didn’t bother why he had been called. He just guessed that it could have been a punishment class with the head teacher. Reaching there he found things quite favourable.

The head teacher told him that his presence in the class made it impossible for the teacher to teach and students to learn. So it was better that Albert should leave school on his own accord, lest they should expell him. Albert tempted to show the medical certificate and tell them how he hated that place. But finding the situation in his favour, he just withdrew and came out of school feeling greatly relieved. So the head teacher made his leaving of school all the more easy.

Question 1.
Comment on the influence of English—the language and the way of life—on Indian life as reflected in the story. What is the narrator’s attitude to English ?
Answer:
The story reflects the old lifesytle of India when only a few people knew English. Those knew it never used its words while speaking Kannad. In those olden days, people were simple and did the same like of flock of sheep. The narrator was the true admirer of his village Hosahalli.

He was very cultured and caring but believed in respecting his own mother tongue. He used English when required only. He was also feeling delighted while narrating that no one could notice village people conversing in English in every street of Hosahalli during holidays.

Question 2.
Astrologers’ perceptions are based more on hearsay and conjecture than what they learn from the study of the stars. Comment with reference to the story.
Answer:
Most of the astrologers depend either on the basis of the hearsay or on basis of the information collected from their clientrThe innocent client feels that his astrologer is reading his stars but in fact the crooked fellow robs innocent faces. The same happens in the story when Shyam, the narrator tutors Shastri to vomit the mugged up facts in front of Rangappa that Ratna would be the only suitable match for him according to star cast. The poor Ranga listened to his heart and married Ratna because of the dramatic mockery played by Shyam and Shastri. He got so influenced that he named his son ‘Shyam’ after the narrator.

Question 3.
Indian society has moved a long way from the way the marriage is arranged in the story. Discuss.
Answer:
In today’s world each and every Indian is well-qualified and cultured. As knowledge is increasing same as expectations or vision is getting wider. This deep thought was there in narrator’s mind which gave origin to the story. Narrator has plotted the whole drama to make Ranga realize the marriageable age and how to choose the right partner. He knocked at Ranga’s heart and he welcomed Ratna in. If narrator had asked simply and proposed for Ratna, Ranga might have run away telling so many ifs and buts.

Question 4.
What kind of a person do you think the narrator is?
Answer:
The today’s self-centered fast world no one pains for others. But the narrator is a different man. He not only devotes his time but also selflessly plans for Ranga’s marriage. In fact he extends a mature and experienced help to tender heart and immature mind of Ranga in choosing a right life partner. As a reward of his selfless deed Ranga named his son Shyam after the narrator’s name.

Ranga’s Marriage Extra Questions and Answers

Ranga’s Marriage Extra Questions Short Answer Type

Question 1.
Why is the village Hosahalli unknown to the world, according to the narrator ?
Answer:
Hosahalli is a small-very small village in Mysore state. The map-makers do not have any information about it. So, they can’t put it on the map.

Question 2.
Who sent his son to Bangalore ? And what for ?
Answer:
The village accountant had sent his son Ranga or Rangappa to the city Of Bangalore for further study. There was no ‘schooling in better spirit there’.

Question 3.
Narrate the disgraceful episode showing the result of using English by Rama Rao’s son.
Answer:
One day Rama Rao’s family bought a bundle of firewood. His son asked the woman how much he should give her. The woman said four pice. The boy told her he did not have any change and asked her to come the next morning. The poor woman did not , understand the English word ‘change’, and went away muttering to herself. The narrator could not know. Later on when he went to Ranga’s house and asked him. Then he understood what it had meant.

Question 4.
Why was Ranga’s homecoming a great event ?
Answer:
Ranga returned the village after having educated in Bangalore. The villagers had ‘a regard’ for him They rushed to his doorstep to have a closer look of the village boy who had come from the city. The innocent people rejoiced the return and celebrated his home¬coming.

Question 5.
What made Ranga come out from his house and spread a smile on his face?
Answer:
As soon as a large crowd of people gathered before the doorstep of Ranga’s house, he came out with a smile on his face. He was the same person in attitude. He respected the , elders and waved his hands in regard.

Question 6.
What made the narrator attract towards Ranga ?
Answer:
The crowd dispersed after having known that Ranga was still the same boy. The narrator stepped a foot and asked how Ranga was. Ranga noticed him, came near and did . a namaskara respectfully. He bent low to touch the narrator’s feet. It attracted him towards .

Question 7.
Why was Ranga against getting married early ?
Answer:
To Ranga one should marry a girl who is mature. Moreover a man should marry k a girl he admires. How one can admire a girl with milk stains on one side of her face and wetness on the other.

Question 8.
Why was the narrator determined to get Ranga marry soon ?
Answer:
The narrator was distressed that the boy who he thought would make a good husband, had decided to remain a bachelor. After chatting for a little longer, Ranga left. The narrator made up his mind that he would get him (Ranga) married.

Question 9.
Who was Ratna ? What were her hobbies ?
Answer:
Ratna was Rama Rao’s niece whose parents had died. Rama Rao took the girl to the village. She had a passion for music. She knew how to play the veena and the harmo¬nium. Moreover she have a sweet voice.

Question 10.
As soon as Ranga stepped in the narrator’s house* his legs stopped at the doorstep. Why ?
Answer:
Ratna was singing a song in the narrator’s room when Ranga stepped in the doorway. He had been invited by the narrator’s himself deliberately. He stopped. He did not want the singing to stop, but was curious to see the female singer.

Question 11.
Why did the narrator tell a lie about Ratna to Ranga when they met first time ? .
Answer:
In order to excite and make him curious the narrator told a lie that Ratna had been married. He wanted to know how much it would affect Ranga.

Question 12.
What affect did telling a lie by the narrator do on Ranga ?
Answer:
As soon as the narrator told Ranga that Ratna was married, Ranga’s face shrivelled like a roasted brinjal. He wanted to leave the room on some pretext that he had some work at him

Question 13.
For what did the narrator meet Shastriji ?
Answer:
The narrator had gone to Shastriji to tutor him about Ranga and Ratna’s relation forecast. He made Shastri speak whatever he himself wanted to tell.

Question 14.
How was the drama played on Ranga ? With what results ?
Answer:
Shastriji made Ranga believe that the stars would match both of them in their tie-up. Ranga married Ratna and started following the family way.

Ranga’s Marriage Extra Questions Long Answer Type

Question 1.
What type of a boy Ranga was before and after getting education in Bangalore ? Have you found any change in him ? Why or not ?
Answer:
Ranga was an accountant’s son in the village. He was a simple as the others there. Before going to Bangalore he was a boy with feelings overflowing from the heart. After getting education, when he returned the village everybody waited to see him and check him whether he had changed or not. The narrator found no change in him as far as regards and respects for elders were concerned.

He was a qualified bachelor with a notion that one should marry a mature girl. Ranga was a man down to earth. He was stuck still to his traditions and customs. He did not come wearing Janewara in the neck and touch the elders’ feet on seeing them. Moreover he used to say namaskara to everybody who came to his house. He was spiritually sound. He still believed in religious ceremonies, and even in stars etc. Ranga alias Rangappa is the mirror to other people in the village.

Question 2.
The villagers of Hosahalli are a flock of sheep following blindly one after the other. Elucidate.
Answer:
The village Hosahalli is a small village in Mysore. It has not been trapped by any „ geographer or Sahibs in England. They do not bother to place it on the map. The villagers are innocent, docile and stuck to their traditional values. They do not want to send their younglings to the cities. But they are not illiterate. Some of them can speak English words but they love their language Kannada very much.

When Ranga turned from Bangalore they rushed to his doorstep to know whether he had changed or not. An old lady who was near him ran her hand over his chest, looked into his eyes and said that the Janewara was still there. It showed their peace-loving, easy to go nature and even simplicity. As soon as they realized that Ranga was still the same as he was six months ago, they dispersed. Only human people can do so. .

Question 3.
How did the narrator plan to Ranga get married with Ratna ? Was he successful ? Explain.
Answer:
Ranga returned to the village after getting study in Bangalore. The narrator felt ; attracted towards him when he touched his feet with folded hands and said namaskara. He determined to get Ranga married soon. Rama Rao brought her niece to the village. Her parents had died earlier. The narrator found a good match in Ratna. He planned to make them united.

One day he invited Ranga deliberately to his house when Ratna was singing a song. Ranga felt attracted towards her. The narrator tutored Shastri to make Ranga believe that Ratna would be a pood match to him. He spread the net and caught Ranga in with his wits and feelings. Both Ranga and Ratna got married later on. The narrator was successful in making them tie in a knot.

Question 1.
‘Have you come back?’ said the woman. ‘I thought that no one had come back.’ Does this statement give some clue about the story? If yes, what is it?
Answer:
Yes, the above said statement in question gives us a clue about the story. It clearly proves that the lady, whom the young girl had paid a visit, knew her already and didn’t want to meet her.

Question 2.
The story is divided into pre-war and post-war times. What hardships do you think the girl underwent during these times?
Answer:
The girl suffered severely. She was severed from every precious household things, house, even her relations during the period. The story tells clearly, earlier she was a happy soul but during post-war period, she was a lost soul living in a rented room in very miserable condition.

Question 3.
Why did the narrator of the story want to forget the address?
Answer:
The narrator of the story is a young girl, a victim of war. The war had left her a desolate soul. But the narrator appears to be a very optimistic sort of girl. After paying a tributary visit to see her long served household articles, she decided to forget everything about her past even the address as she wanted to start a fresh. Everything linked with her past had lost its value to her.

Question 4.
‘The Address’ is a story of human predicament that follows war.’ Comment.
Answer:
Yes, it’s quite aptly said that ‘The Address’ is a poignant story of human predicament that follows war. The story seems to discuss about the loss of a little girl after war in Holland. The protagonist was Mrs S’s daughter leading a very happy and peaceful life with her family luring pre-war time.

She had almost all the luxuries and decorations at her home, large vases, silver cutlery, antique plates, crockery, Hanakkah candle-holder, pewter plates, white pot with a gold border on the lid. So to say, the girl had nothing to :
complain.

Then the fatal war broke out and mysterious old acquaintance appeared from nowhere named Mrs Dorling living at Marconi Street No. 46. She ‘helped’ the protagonist’s mother to keep safe their household possessions. She took away all their household goods to her own home and never looked back. The losses for the poor girl also never hesitated to befall on her.

War created havoc to her not only material life but also in her emotional life. She lost her all the relations, home everything else having relation with her happy past life. When she paid a visit to have a look at her old possessions, she felt like a lost soul. She felt so heavy-hearted, that she left the place, never to return. War made her so severed that she resolved to erase the address from her memory.

The Address Extra Questions and Answers

The Address Extra Questions Short Answer Type 

Question 1.
Why does the narrator think that she has rung the wrong bell?
Answer:
The narrator thinks so as the woman owner of the house shows no sign of recognition. She refuses to recognise the narrator.

Question 2.
How does the narrator realise that she has rung the right bell?
Answer:
The woman occupant of the house was wearing the green knitted cardigan of narrator’s mother though the wooden buttons had become pale from washing. When she realised that the narrator was looking at her cardigan, she became conscious and half hid herself behind the door. Then the narrator knew that she had rung the right bell.

Question 3.
Who was the woman with the broad back? Why did she take away all the nice things from narrator’s house ?
Answer:
The woman seemed an old acquaintance of the narrator’s mother whom she hadn’t seen for years. The war for liberation had broken out. It was supposed that they would have to leave the house. In that case, their all the household articles would be left behind. Perhaps the woman Marconi Street, the woman with broad back was unaffected with the war. So to keep safe the nice things at the narrator’s home, she carried them away.

Question 4.
To what extent did the life assume its normal self after the war for the narrator?
Answer:
Life returned to its normal self after the war gradually for the narrator also but only upto the extent that the bread became lighter in colour. Now she could sleep unthreatened. But the loss of relations and possessions made her feel about them.

Question 5.
Why did the narrator go to Number 46, in Marconi Street?
Answer:
Number 46, in Marconi Street was the address, where the valuable possessions of her household were supposed lying safe. So the narrator went there as to see them, touch them and remember them once again.

Question 6.
Why did the old possessions of the narrator lose their value?
Answer:
After war, when the life returned to normalcy, the narrator decided to see her old possessions at Number 46, in Marconi Street. But as he reached there the things lost their , value firstly because they were arranged in a tasteless way. Secondly and more importantly, the things had an association with the relations which no more existed. So the narrator better felt it right to leave them behind.

Question 7.
What was the narrator’s reaction as she found herself infront of her old household things?
Answer:
The narrator was horrified and oppressed as she found herself infront of her old household things. She also felt a sense of estrangement with those things finding them arranged in a tasteless and strange atmosphere.

Question 8.
What impression do you form of the girl of the woman with broad back?
Answer:
The girl is about 15 years old. She seems to be a simpleton fellow. She let the narrator inside the house, though a stranger to her. She showed her the collection of her mother’s valuable articles. She offered the narrator a cup of tea also.

Question 9.
What is the present state of life for the narrator?
Answer:
The narrator now is severed from her every important relation and possession. Now she lives in a small rented room only. War really has heavy toll on her personal life.

Question 10.
What is the narrator’s final resolution?
Answer:
The narrator after paying a visit at Number 46, in Marconi Street, resolved to forget the address. She didn’t want to keep the memory of the things also which reminded
her of her loss. It marks a note of optimism in narrator’s attitude. She has decided to start afresh.

The Address Extra Questions Long Answer Type

Question 1.
Give the pen portrait of the narrator.
Answer:
The narrator lives in Holland. Life has changed drastically for her after the liberation war. Her early life. She enjoyed a happy life, with her family. She had all the belongings in her house to make life comfortable and cosy. Transformation in Her Life. The liberation war in Holland brought a sea-change in her life. Earlier, she had all the things to cling to; relations and possessions; now she has none. She even had to leave her house. Now she lives in a rented small room trying hard to collect the loose ends of life.

Her Final Resolve. After war, the life had once again started treading upon the normal ,track. She became curious to have a look, touch of her old stuff lying ‘safe’ in house No. 46 in Marconi Street. She took a train and went there. But Mrs. Dorling refused to recognise her. The girl had no option except to return. But again she tried. This time Mrs Dorling’s daughter, a fifteen year old girl opened the door.

She let her in. The narrator found her old familiar things lying in ugly way in a strange atmosphere. She felt horrified and oppressed.She decided to forget everything about her past and to start her iife in a new way with her rented room and less cutlery. The narrator’s final resolve talks about her optimistic view about life. Life has to go on. Better forget the sour past to make your future a bit easier.

Question 2.
Justify the title of the story ‘The Address’.
Answer:
The Address is quite apt and appropriate title for the story. The story starts with the search of ‘the address’ by the protagonist. It ends with the narrator’s departure from ‘the address’ only Moreover her visit to the address brings a change in her life and motivates her to forget the sad past.

The liberation war had broken out in Holland. An old acquaintance Mrs Dorling took away all the possessions from the narrator’s house to keep them safe. The war laid the poor narrator homeless and relationless. She started living in a rented small room. One day she got curious to see her old belongings. She reached the address told by her mother a few years ago.

At first attempt, she had to return emptyhanded. She went there second time. She was let in. But the sight of her old stuff arranged in an ugly manner in a strange atmosphere made her feel horrified. She felt as if she didn’t know the things in spite of the fact those were her familiar things.

So much so to even notice them. She felt, it’s never too late to repair the bum marks in life and realising this, she left in a fresher mood to start her life afresh in her own way without the crutches of the sour past which would pierce sharp into her emotions. She leaves the house feeling dejected from the old things for whom she had seen hunting just to touch.

Question 3.
Give a brief note on Mrs. Dorling.
Answer:
Mrs. Dorling appears a veiy mysterious lady with greedy heart and shrewd mind. She contacted Mrs. S, only at the time when the war in Holland was about to break. She convinced Mrs. S to hand her all the possessions to her sole self to keep them safe. Mrs. S is taken in. She is too simple to question the appropriateness of the demand. Mrs Dorling insisted to take away Mrs S’s all the belongings.

She would come early in the morning so that she could complete her ‘errands’, unnoticed by the neighbours. One by one she took away all the stuff from Mrs S’s house. But she didn’t keep those things ‘safe’. She used them; the narrator came to know about it on her visit.

Her meanness didn’t stop here only. When the narrator (Mrs. S’s daughter) visited her, she refused to recognise her. When the narrator recognised the cardigan as her mother’s she was shrewd enough to hide herself behind the door. It was clear that she didn’t want to return those valuables.

Later when the narrator visited her house the second time, her fifteen year old daughter told that her mother was out on her important ‘errand’.It all clearly proves that Mrs. Dorling was such a fellow who would go to any extent to profit herself. Her character is typical of such rogues who crop, soar at the time of wars. Such people are after gold only.

The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse Reading with insight

Question 1.
You will probably agree that this story does not have breathless adventure and exciting action. Then what in your opinion makes it interesting?
Answer:
The thing of crazy streak in Garoghlanian family makes the story interesting. Uncle Khosrove repeated phrase to every petty or major loss, ‘Pay no attention to it. It’s no harm’, adds more interest in the story. Mourad’s innocence and his mysterious ways to tackle the ‘horse’, ‘dog1 and even ‘farmer’ make the story really very interesting.

Question 2.
Did the boys return the horse because they were conscience-stricken or because they were afraid?
Answer:
The boys returned the horse as they were afraid. The narrator had come to know that the horse belonged to farmer John Byro whose surrey had become useless because of his lost horse for a month. He informed it to Mourad and asked him not to return the horse as he wanted to learn how to ride a horse properly first. But unluckily when they met John Byro on the way, they got afraid. They put it stealthily in Byro’s bam next morning.

Question 3.
‘One day back there in the good old days when I was nine and the world was full of every imaginable kind of magnificence, and life was still a delightful and mysterious dream. The story begins in a mood of nostalgia. Can you narrate some interesting incident from your childhood that might make an interesting story?
Answer:
Once when I was still a student of Class IV, I had gone to pick fruits including berries, guava, and pomegranates in the garden of villager Mr. Ramdhan Tyagi. We were a pack of eight children. We all had eaten fruits to our fill. After that we all packed our pockets. As we were returning happily, uncle Ramdhan returned from his home after a nap in the noon. He naturally gave us a chase.

I being the youngest in the group, lagged behind and was caught. He asked ‘whose daughter are you?’ ‘Sh. Lekh Ram’, I replied. In the evening we all heard the sounds of great row at the home of Sh. Lekh Ram. Actually, romance at ‘hort notice was my speciality then. To save my skin from my parents I had told the name of a neighbour as my father.

Question 4.
The story revolves around the characters that belong to a tribe in Armenia. Mourad and Aram are members of the Garoghlanian family. Now locate Armenia and Assyria on the atlas and prepare a write up on the Garoghlanian tribes. You may write about people, their names, traits, geographical and economic features as suggested in the story.
Answer:
The Garoghlanian tribes were scattered in the expanse of Assyria and Armenia in Asia continent sometime between the period of 500 B.C. to 800 B.C. Their main occupation was farming. They were famous for their honesty and trust. They were great nature-lovers. They never thought of stealing. They never bothered to attain more heights financially as well as physically. They were contented in their peaceful easy life. They never dreamt of taking advantage of others in the world.

The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse Extra Questions and Answers

The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse Extra Questions Short Answer Type 

Question 1.
To which tribe did Aram and Mourad belong? What was particular about their tribe?
Answer:
Aram and Mourad belonged to Garoghlanian tribe. The tribe was well known for its honesty and trust. The people belonging to the tribe to neither be liars nor thieves.

Question 2.
Why and when did Mourad take John Byro’s horse?
Answer:
Mourad was known for a crazy streak in his character. He was fond of horse riding. But he belonged to a poor family, He could never afford to realise his long cherished s dream of riding a horse. So one day he ‘stole’ John Byro’s horse. He kept it to his custody at * least a month, before he disclosed it to Aram.

Question 3.
Why did Mourad bring the wonderful white horse to Aram?
Answer:
Mourad brought this horse to Aram, his cousin brother. He knew quite well that Aram was equally fond of riding a horse. Mourad himself had been enjoying joy-rides on the wonderful white horse since a month’s time. Now he wanted his cousin brother to enjoy the same.

Question 4.
How did Mourad manage to keep his ‘deed’ a ‘secret’?
Answer:
Mourad would enjoy the joy-rides on the wonderful white horse only during the early morning hours. As soon as the day breaks, he would hide the horse in a deserted bam. There were some oats and dry alfalfa to satisfy the hunger of the horse.

Question 5.
How did the narrator come to know about the real owner of the horse? What was his reaction?
Answer:
The narrator returned his home, after enjoying a ride on the wonderful white horse. An Assyrian visitor named John Byro came to his home and sighing sadly told that v his white horse was stolen for a month. Now the narrator realised the horse Mourad was . having those days, was actually Byro’s. He felt panicky and went to Mourad to disclose the news. But he requested him not to return the horse so early.

Question 6.
Why did the boys not want to return the horse immediately? Did their wish fulfill?
Answer:
The boys didn’t want to return the horse immediately as both wanted to learn properly how to ride a horse. Mourad told Aram that he would keep it at least six months. But alas! Their wish couldn’t be fulfilled.

Question 7.
Why did the boys return the horse so early?
Answer:
One morning the boys were taking the horse to its hiding place, after having a joy ride over it. They met John Byro; the real owner of the horse. John swore that the horse was the twin of his own one and some suspicious mind could take it to be his own as its teeth and everything were like those of his own one. At this the boys got panicky. Due to fear of disclosure of their dare deed, they put hack the horse the next day at its real owner’s bam.

Question 8.
Who was John Byro? Why had he come to the narrator’s house?
Answer:
John Byro was an Assyrian by birth. He was a farmer. But he had learnt to speak Armenian also due to loneliness. Perhaps he had settled down somewhere in Armenia ten miles away from narrator’s home. He had come to the narrator’s house to vent out his woes over the loss of his only horse. His horse was missing for a month. .

Question 9.
What impression do you form about Khosrove?
Answer:
Khosrove was an uncle to Mourad and Aram. He had acquired the special char-acteristic of the family i.e. the crazy streak. He was an enormous man with a powerful head of black hair. He had the largest moustache in entire San Joaquin Valley. He was quite an irritable fellow who lost his temper quite easily if somebody cried over his loss. His most repeated words (at such situation) were. It is no harm; pay no attention to it.”

Question 10.
‘I couldn’t believe what I saw.’ What was there so incredible to the speaker? Who is the speaker here?
Answer:
The protagonist of the story ‘Aram’ is the speaker here. One fine summer pre day-break, his cousin brother Mourad had come to invite him on a wonderful white horse. The horse didn’t belong to him. So it was incredible to the speaker where from Mourad had got that horse, as he could not be a thief.

Question 11.
How was the ‘deed’ of taking away somebody else’s horse and hiding it without the owner’s knowledge not a theft according to the boys?
Answer:
According to the boys, the horse which actually belonged to John Byro had been taken away by them just to enjoy joy rides. It can’t be called a ‘theft’ until they offered to sell the horse.

The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse Extra Questions Long Answer Type

Question 1.
Describe the boys joyride early one morning in your own words.
Answer:
The boys i.e. Mourad and Aram belonged to Garoghlanian tribe whose hallmarks were trust and honesty. Mourad was regarded a ‘crazy boy having acquired the ‘crazy streak’ of the family. One morning at about 4 a.m., Mourad tapped on Aram’s window waking him up. Aram peeped out of the window. He was surprised to see, wonderful white horse. He had come to invite him for a joy ride.

There was no time for Aram to think or care for the right or wrong. He just jumped out of window, on to the horse, behind Mourad. They both had a round of the vineyards, orchards, irrigation ditches and country roads, all behind Aram’s house. Then they reached on Olive Avenue. The air was new and lovely to breathe in early morning. Mourad began to sing, being too much crazy. They made the horse run, as long as it felt like running

Then Movrr.d alone had a ride. He shouted ‘Vazire’ run; and the horse once stood on its hind legs, snorted and burst into a fury of speed across a field of dry grass. Mourad returned after five minutes. He was dripping wet. Now the narrator wanted to ride alone. But the horse didn’t budge. At this Mourad asked Aram to kick it into its muscles and the trick worked.

But Aram didn’t know how to reign the horse and it dropped him after leaping over vines. It ran away. It was only after half an hour, Mourad got it and brought it back. Then they both took it to Fetvajian’s deserted bam to hide. Mourad had a strange way of taming the horse. The horse seemed to obey him. Both returned to their homes. The narrator had a hearty breakfast that morning, as his long cherished dream of riding a horse had been fulfilled.

Question 2.
Compare and Contrast the characters of Mourad and Aram.
Answer:
The story ‘The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse’ has a few characters. Two of them are Mourad and Aram. Aram is the speaker/ narrator of the story. But the most interesting character here is Mourad. He has his own way of understanding with birds and animals. He is thirteen year old i.e. 4 years older to Aram. Mourad had acquired the crazy streak of the family naturally. Except the narrator everybody who knew him regarded him crazy.

But one day, he surprised the narrator also. He had brought along a Wonderful white horse. No doubt it was not ‘his’, as neither he could purchase and stealing was out of question. Both belonged to poor family and stealing was not a natural trait with their tribe whose hallmarks were honesty and trust.

Anyhow, he had come to invite the narrator to enjoy a ride. He was so simpleton at heart, that he wanted to make Aram feel the same joy of enjoy¬ing a joyride, as he himself had enjoyed. Though he didn’t disclose how and when he did steal it. Both regarded that it was not a ‘theft’ until they wished to sell it. Both decided that they would keep it at least for six months unless they learnt to ride properly. The period is also decided by Mourad.

But unluckily, the narrator came to know about the real owner. He felt nervous as the owner of the horse, John Byrd had come to his house, inquiring/ feeling sorry over his lost horse. Jle went to Mourad to reveal the news. At that time Mouracl was sitting under a peach tree, healing the hurt wing of a young robin. It showed that he loved animals and birds a lot.

Mourad is a mysterious person with amusing characteristics. He had been enjoying rides on a horse of John Byro for a month and kept it for another two weeks. But he didn’t consider it a theft. As the narrator requested him to keep it for a year, he roared “what?” “Are you inviting a member of the Garoghlanian family to steal?” As they met the real owner, without getting worried, Mourad peacefully put back the horse at its real owner’s barn, early next morning. Again he behaved strangely, while bidding ‘goodbye’ to the horse.

He put his arms around the horse, pressed his nose into the horse’s nose, patted it, and then started back. It was all too mysterious to Aram to understand Mourad’s strange ways of making the wounded bird fly, keeping the dogs shut their mouths, and making the horse run. Really he was a strange boy.