Pooja

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers Television

Television Questions and Answers

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

1. The most important thing we’ve learned,
So far as children are concerned,
Is never, NEVER, NEVER let
Them near your television set –
Or better still, just don’t install
The idiotic thing at all.
In almost every house we’ve been.
We’ve watched them gaping at the screen.
They loll and slop and lounge about,
And stare until their eyes pop out.
(Last week in someone’s place we saw
A dozen eyeballs on the floor.)

Question 1.
The poet’s treatment of his subject is critical, but he still does not sound too opinionated. Why?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet criticises the increasing craze for television among children. However, as the stalling line puts it, he has learned about it primarily from other people or some other source. Thus, he does not directly start criticizing television for its bad impact on children, but traces the root of his opinion in how others perceive it. That is why he. does not sound opinionated.

Question 2.
Why do you think the poet has used the adverb ‘never’ three times in the third line?
Answer:
The adverb ‘never’ is generally used to mean ‘not ever’. The purpose of using it is to stress the avoidance of something not agreeable or acceptable. In this stanza, the poet wants to say that children should not be allowed by their parents to spend a lot of time sitting before the television set, because this is a harmful practice in many ways. In order to assert this point forcefully, the poet repeats the adverb ‘never’ three times. The use of capital letters twice further reinforces his point.

Question 3.
What has been referred to as ‘the idiotic thing’ in this stanza? Why?
Answer:
In this stanza, the phrase ‘the idiotic thing’ has been used for the television set. In some way, the phrase reinforces the poet’s view that television is an extremely useless thing as far as children are concerned. This explains why he feels that children should be kept away from it.

Question 4.
Do you think that the idea of not installing a television set sounds practical in today’s context?
Answer:
The presence of a television set in almost every urban household is almost unavoidable today. Keeping that in mind, this idea may appear to be rather unrealistic. However, the negative impact that its presence casts on children is a stark reality. Perhaps the poet is just too impulsive while expressing his view against television. But if we look at the problem with a sensitive and empathetic approach, we may find that his view is not illogical or unacceptable. As readers, we cannot simply overlook his deep concern for children that is quite genuine.

Question 5.
Describe the significance of the bracketed lines at the end of the stanza.
Answer:
The pair of lines bracketed here is an example of a literary device called parenthesis. Usually, a parenthesis is added to a sentence or word, either to provide an explanation or to emphasise the point expressed by its precedent. Here, the poet employs this device to exemplify the negative impact of children’s obsession with television. Indulging in a bit of exaggeration, he says that sometimes the children stare so hard that their eyeballs fall off, and he has seen a dozen such eyeballs rolling about on the floor in one house. This ‘diversion’ from the normal track of expression lends an amusing twist to it, and makes the reading more interesting and enjoyable.

2. They sit and stare and stare and sit
Until they’re hypnotised by it,
Until they’re absolutely drunk
With all that shocking ghastly junk.
Oh yes, we know it keeps them still,
They don’t climb out the window sill.
They never fight or kick or punch,
They leave you free to cook the lunch
And wash the dishes in the sink –
But did you ever stop to think,
To wonder just exactly what
This does to your beloved tot?

Question 1.
How does this stanza describe children’s fascination with television?
Answer:
The poet says that it is not uncommon to see the children sitting and staring continuously at the television sets. In almost every house, the same scenario is seen. The children are so obsessive of watching the television, that they remain engrossed in it without caring for how long they have been sitting.

Question 2.
How does children’s habit of watching TV gives some relief to their elders in the house?
Answer:
As the poet says, due to their obsessive indulgence in watching television, children remain glued to one place. This means that they do not perform their naughty acts like climbing out of the window sill. Moreover, they do not quarrel or fight as children are normally supposed to do. Due to this, their elders can feel relieved and feel free to cook the lunch or wash the dishes, without worrying too much about them.

Question 3.
What does the phrase ‘all that shocking ghastly junk’ imply in this stanza?
Answer:
This phrase is obviously for the contents of the TV programmes watched by children so obsessively. By using this phrase, the poet wants to tell that almost all that is dished out to children in the name of information and entertainment has no use for them.

Question 4.
Who are the people directly addressed by the poet in the last three lines? Do they have a particular identity?
Answer:
People referred to as ‘you’ are the parents of those children about whom the poet seems to be deeply concerned. They are not particular people with specific identities, but all the parents addressed together. The poet wants all of them to think over the problem, because children are affected everywhere. In other words, the problem that the poet talks about is generic and universal in nature.

Question 5.
What message does the poet want to give his readers?
Answer:
The poet wants to tell them that, they should not feel complacent just because children do not disturb them with their activities and stay away from their engagements. Instead, they must try to closely observe them and try to find out why their children do not behave as they should. What gives them a temporary relief and opportunity to do things without the intervention of their kids is actually a dangerous trap that will spoil their natural talent.

3. IT ROTS THE SENSE IN THE HEAD!
IT KILLS IMAGINATION DEAD!
IT CLOGS AND CLUTTERS UP THE MIND!
IT MAKES A CHILD SO DULL AND BLIND
HE CAN NO LONGER UNDERSTAND
A FANTASY, A FAIRYLAND!
HIS BRAIN BECOMES AS SOFT AS CHEESE!
HIS POWERS OF THINKING RUST AND FREEZE!
HE CANNOT THINK – HE ONLY SEES!

Question 1.
What do the personal pronouns ‘IT’ and ‘HE’ signify in this stanza?
Answer:
These two pronouns respectively signify ‘television’ and ‘any child who watches television continuously for hours’. In the first four lines of the stanza, ‘IT’ has been used as the subject thus implying that the poet’s focus is on what television does in terms of its detrimental impact on a child. Subsequently, the focus shifts to the child.

Question 2.
Why are the lines of this stanza written in capitals?
Answer:
These lines are written in capitals with a view to stress the main message of the poem. As they are written differently, these lines show a distinc¬tive appeal capable of easily drawing the attention of the readers. They also suggest the poet’s penchant for experiment in terms of style and presentation.

Question 3.
What is the message that the poet wants to give here?
Answer:
The message is that watching too much television fills up the mind of children with useless facts while at the same time destroying their ability to be creative or imaginative. It takes away their ability to think and they can only keep staring at the television screen.

Question 4.
Why does the poet think that a child cannot understand a fantasy or fairyland?
Answer:
The ability to understand a fantasy or fairyland calls for the application of creativity and imagination. As the poet says, the unproductive and useless practice of watching television for hours and hours continuously has severely affected a child’s creativity and imagination. That is why he/she cannot understand a fantasy or fairyland.

Question 5.
‘HE CANNOT THINK—HE ONLY SEES!’ What does this line suggest?
Answer:
This is the concluding line of this stanza that presents the crux of what the poet wants to say here. In the preceding lines of the stanza, the poet categorically opines that television spoils the creativity of children so much that they cannot use their brain to understand things that are abstract and invisible for which imaginative power is required. As they are absolutely accustomed to seeing things that appear on the TV screen before them, they lose the ability to think of things and situations that are not readily presented before them in concrete form. This indicates the loss of their creativity and imaginative faculty.

4. ‘All right!’ you’ll cry. ‘All right!’ you’ll say,
‘But if we take the set away,
What shall we do to entertain
Our darling children? Please explain!’ .
We’ll answer this by asking you,
What used the darling ones to do?
‘How used they keep themselves contented
Before this monster was invented?’

Question 1.
Comment on the style of expression employed by the poet in this stanza.
Answer:
The poet adopts a style that is simple, lucid and conversational in nature. It seems that the poet is interacting with the parents directly, and responding to their query.

Question 2.
Who are referred to as ‘you’ and ‘we’ in this stanza?
Answer:
In this stanza, the personal pronoun ‘you’ has been used for the parents of children. ‘We’ is used for the speaker, i.e. the poet himself and all those who like him feel that television has badly affected children.

Question 3.
How does the poet express the dilemma suffered by the parents?
Answer:
In the first four lines of this stanza, the poet focuses on the dilemma of the parents by bringing out their possible response. As it shows, the parents understand that the televisions are of course not good for the development and growth of their child. However, they do not know what they should do to entertain the children.

Question 4.
Why does the poet use the word ‘monster’ in the last line? What does it signify?
Answer:
The word ‘monster’ has been used here for the television set. The poet feels that it is responsible for all the bad things that have happened to children.

Question 5.
Which point does the poet try to stress here?
Answer:
The poet wants to stress the view that substitutes for televisions should be thought about, which are as entertaining as the TV sets and even overcome the flaws which the latter has. He further says that the task of finding such substitutes is quite simple. For this, the parents should take their thinking far before when this TV set was invented. He therefore asks their parents to recall the past when children were able to find better and far more productive ways to entertain themselves.

5. Have youforgotten? Don’t you know?
We’ll say it very loud and slow:
THEY… USED …TO… READ! They’d READ and READ,
AND READ and READ, and then proceed
To READ some more. Great Scott! Gadzooks!
One half their lives was reading books!
The nursery shelves held books galore!
Books cluttered up the nursery floor!

Question 1.
Who are the people addressed in this stanza? What does the poet speak of?
Answer:
People addressed in the first line of this stanza are parents of children who, the poet thinks, have been affected by the ill-effects of watching TV habitually. By posing a couple of questions in the beginning, the poet tries to stir their conscience reminding them of the good old times when children used to get entertained without the TV sets.

Question 2.
What does the poet suggest as an alternative to the harmful practice of watching TV continuously?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet suggests with emphasises that for children, reading books is the best alternative to the harmful practice of watching TV, In the past, reading books was an extremely useful, engaging and productive pastime. He further says that the parents must motivate their children to read real good books in order to entertain themselves. There are so many great books that were readily available in the past and are still there for the children to read and learn from.

Question 3.
Explain the line: ‘We’ll say it very loud and slow’.
Answer:
This line reflects what the poet feels about the visibly lackadaisical approach of parents to their children. Though they understand that their children’s habit of continuously watching TV is not good, they are not quite prompt and self-motivated to explore sound and effective alternative that can save their future. By being ’very loud and slow’, the poet actually means that he has a solution, which he wants everyone to hear clearly and attentively.

Question 4.
What is the significance of capitalising some words in this stanza?
Answer:
The poet has deliberately capitalised some words with a view for highlighting their importance in the context of. the poem. ‘READ’ is obviously the most important of all words capitalised. By capitalising this word, he wants to reinforce his point that in the olden days, when there were no television sets, children used to read books and that was no doubt far more productive and beneficial.

Question 5.
Which famous writer has been referred to as ‘the great Scott’?
Answer:
Sir Walter Scott, the famous 19th century novelist and poet, has been referred to as ‘the great Scott’ in this stanza. He wrote a number of novels that are immensely enjoyed by young and adolescent readers even today. Scott is often regarded as ‘the father of historical novel’.

6. And in the bedroom, by the bed,
More books were waiting to be read!
Such wondrous, fine, fantastic tales
Of dragons, gypsies, queens, and whales
And treasure isles, and distant shores
Where smugglers rowed with muffled oars.
And pirates wearing purple pants,
And sailing ships and elephants,
And cannibals crouching ’round the pot,
Stirring away at something hot
(It smells so good, what can it be?
Good gracious, it’s Penelope.)

Question 1.
Explain the first two lines of this stanza.
Answer:
In these lines, the poet talks about the great popularity of books due to which their presence was visible literally everywhere. This was because children were very fond of reading them. The number of books was so large that the process seemed to be almost everlasting, because there were always some books that ‘were waiting to be read.’

Question 2.
What types of tales were read by children in the past? How were they useful for their young readers?
Answer:
As the poet says, the tales read by children in the past were fantasies with a galaxy of interesting characters. These tales were full of adventures and strange but interesting situations that honed the imagination and creativity of their young readers.

Question 3.
How was the world depicted in the fantasies different from the one that is shown in the TV programmes?
Answer:
As the poet says, the world depicted in the fantasies was based on pure imagination. It had a range of unusual characters and situation to entertain and amuse the young readers. That is why the tales of dragons, gypsies, queens and whales were the most engaging pastime for children before the invention of television. Today, the television programmes miss all that, as they do not involve creativity and imagination. Through these programmes, children can only see what is presented before them in concrete form, but they cannot imagine things, characters or situations that are seen so abundantly in fantasies and tales of yesteryears.

Question 4.
Fantasies serve as a productive and interesting pastime that stirs the imagination of children. In which other way are they beneficial for the children?
Answer:
One great advantage of reading books that contain these fantasies is that you can go through them anywhere. This precisely implies that it is not necessary for the readers to sit at a particular place only to read books.

Question 5.
Why has the poet used a parenthesis to end the stanza?
Answer:
Parenthesis, as we know, is a word, phrase or line in brackets either inserted in a passage or stanza, or placed at the end of it. The parenthesis used here seems to be an afterthought that serves as a sort of happy diversion or ‘comic relief from the rest of the stanza that presents his view rather categorically and in a focused manner.

7. The younger ones had Beatrix Potter
With Mr. Tod, the dirty rotter,
And Squirrel Nutkin, Pigling Bland,
And Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle and-
Just How The Camel Got His Hump,
And How the Monkey Lost His Rump,
And Mr. Toad, and bless my soul,
There’s Mr. Rat and Mr. Mole-
Oh, books, what books they used to know, .
Those children living long ago!

Question 1.
Which period does this stanza talk about?
Answer:
This stanza talks about the period of time when television had not been invented, and reading books was the favourite pastime of children.

Question 2.
Which important features of reading before the invention of television does the poet highlight here?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet says that a plenty of books were available for the children before the invention of television. More importantly, they had the freedom to choose books for reading, according to their preference and interest matching their age-group.

Question 3.
How does the poet respond to the practice of reading in the past?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet lists some of the most popular fictional characters that children in the pre-television era used to read and know about through different books available to them. In the concluding lines of the stanza, he seems to be simply awed by the extraordinary range of their reading and familiarity with comical or fictional characters.

Question 4.
Which age group of children can most easily relate to the fictional characters mentioned in the stanza?
Answer:
Mr. Tod, Squirrel Nutkin, Pigling Bland, Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle, Mr. Rat and Mr. Mole are the characters that fascinate small, young kids most. Thus, the children, the poet talks about here must be small kids passing through the primary stage of learning. As children grow up, they gradually start looking for more mature reading stuff.

Question 5.
The name of which famous writer of children’s books has been mentioned in this stanza?
Answer:
The famous writer of children’s books referred to in this stanza is Beatrice Potter. Her name being mentioned particularly, suggests that she must have influenced the poet Roald Dahl, an outstanding writer of children’s books himself.

8. So please, oh please, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away,
And in its place you can install
A lovely bookshelf on the wall.
Then Jill the shelves with lots of books,
Ignoring all the dirty looks,
The screams and yells, the bites and kicks,
And children hitting you with sticks-

Question 1.
Explain these opening lines of the stanza:
So please, oh please, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away.
Answer:
In these lines, parents are exhorted by the poet to throw away their TV sets. His request to parents is propelled by his perception that their children’s habit of watching TV for long and continuous hours is dangerous and unproductive.

Question 2.
What does the poet want the parents to replace the TV set with? Why?
Answer:
The poet requests parents to replace their TV sets with a book¬shelf. The reason lies in his time-tested assumption that books alone will save the natural, imaginative, sensitive and curiously passionate inner self of a child from the blunting and barren practice of watching TV. Thus, the fundamental motive is to save the childhood and ensure that children will have a better future.

Question 3.
What does the poet mean by the phrase ‘ignoring all the dirty looks’?
Answer:
The poet says that bringing in a bookshelf as a replacement for TV set may not be tolerated in the beginning. Nevertheless, the parents must remain firm in their decision and overlook any resistance, because a change like this is beneficial for the future of their children.

Question 4.
What does the concluding couplet of this stanza suggest about the response of children to the initiative taken by their parents?
Answer:
This couplet clearly suggests that children will not put up with the change introduced by their parents. In the beginning, they will fail to understand the significance of a bookshelf filled with books. As a result, they will protest against it. Occasionally, they may be violent also. Despite all this, the parents must go ahead with their decision as they know that this will change the liVes of their dear kids for the better.

Question 5.
Parents play a major role in shaping the future of their children. How does this assumption get reflected here?
Answer:
As tire poet says, children who are used to watching television cannot understand its disadvantages themselves. Their parents must therefore take the initiative to change this habit and replace it with a much better and far more beneficial practice of reading books. They should therefore understand that their decision will eventually secure a great future for their children.

9. Fear not, because we promise you
That, in about a week or two
Of having nothing else to do,
They’ll now begin to feel the need
Of having something to read.

Question 1.
What does the phrase ‘Fear not’ suggest about the mental state of people to whom this stanza is addressed?
Answer:
The stanza is addressed to parents whom the poet exhorts to replace TV sets with books. The poet feels that the parents are apprehensive of this change, which their children may not accept easily.

Question 2.
Explain the concluding couplet:
Theyll now begin to feel the need
Of having something to read.
Answer:
In these lines, the poet talks about the situation in which children will start realising the urgency to read something. As he says, this will happen only when TV sets are removed from their homes and they find it impossible to watch the programmes they have been used to watching so far.

Question 3.
What does the poet’s promise relate to?
Answer:
The poet’s promise is about a positive change in children, which he thinks, will be noticeable in a period of about a week or two.

Question 4.
Comment on the tone of conversation adopted by the poet.
Answer:
The poet’s approach is thoroughly conversational and his tone seems to be that of a public speaker addressing a gathering of parents. It reflects a high level of understanding, insight and confidence. It seems that he is fully self¬assured and knows the results with a remarkable precision.

Question 5.
Why does the poet feel that children should be compelled to have ‘nothing else to do’, in order to understand the importance and joy of reading books?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet wants to say that the habit of watching TV is too deep-seated in case of children. It is therefore difficult for them to easily realise how adversely this habit is affecting their creativity, mental strength and health. That is why he feels that when there will be no TV sets inside their homes, and children will have nothing else to do, they will be forced to accept what their parents want.

10. And once they start – oh boy, oh boy!
You watch the slowly growing joy
ThatJills their hearts. They’ll grow so keen
They’ll wonder what they’d ever seen
In that ridiculous machine,
That nauseating, foul, unclean,
Repulsive television screen!
And later, each and every kid
Will love you more for what you did.

Question 1.
What kind of emotional response does the first line of the stanza convey? When will this response be noticeable?
Answer:
The emotional response of children that this line conveys is that of sheer joy. This type of response, as the poet says, will come into notice when they start reading books.

Question 2.
What has been referred to in this stanza as ‘that ridiculous machine’?
Answer:
The phrase ‘that ridiculous machine’ here refers to the TV set. It is followed by another that refers to the TV screen as ‘That nauseating, foul, unclean, repulsive television screen’. The poem has many such phrases that have been used to denounce the role of television in the lives of children excessively used to watching it.

Question 3.
How does this stanza speak of the maturing of children’s realisation regarding their newly acquired habit?
Answer:
As the poet says, children will gradually understand the joy of reading and soon will gain interest. These books will make its own place in their hearts and they will become fond of reading. Subsequently, showing a mature understanding, they will realize that they had been wasting a lot of their precious time in watching the television.

Question 4.
Why, according to the poet, the children will start loving their parents?
Answer:
The poet thinks that the children will soon realize that their parents did a wonderful thing for them by throwing away the television and instead, installing the lovely books to entertain and teach them so much. Due to this, they will love their parents all the more.

Question 5.
Describe a few qualities that the parents should have, if they want positive change in their children as suggested here.
Answer:
Two qualities that they should have are determination and patience. Determination is required when they decide to replace their children’s bad old habits with a far more productive and positive ones. Patience is needed when their decision is resisted by their own children. Furthermore, they should also be absolutely caring and sensitive to the needs of their children.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers The Little Match Girl

The Little Match Girl Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. She had been wearing slippers, it is true, when she left home, but what good were they ? They had been her mother’s, so you can imagine how big they were. The little girl had lost them as she ran across the street to escape from two carriages that were being driven terribly fast. One slipper could not be found, and a boy had run off with the other, saying that it would come in very handy as a cradle some day when he had children of his own.

Question 1.
What type of weather has been described in this extract?
Answer:
The weather was extremely cold and it was completely dark. As it was the last evening of the year, the snow was falling heavily and everything seemed to be freezing. The sky was covered with dark clouds. There was chill in the atmosphere and shivering cold had restricted people to move out of their homes. Only few people were seen on the roads. It was gloomy and fearful atmosphere.

Question 2.
In what condition was the little child moving in the streets?
Answer:
The little child was moving in the streets through the biting wind and driving snow. The snowfall of the last day of the year was excessively heavy and as the evening approached, it became almost dark as compared to the other evenings. From her appearance, it seemed as if she belonged to a very poor family otherwise no one would have dared to come out of their house in such a harsh weather.

Question 3.
How could you make out that the girl belonged to a poor family?
Answer:
The little girl was out of her house without enough warm clothes to protect her from chilly winter evening. She had nothing to cover her head or her feet. She had lost her slippers also and so she had to walk on her naked feet which ultimately became red and blue with cold.

Question 4.
Why was the poor child walking barefoot and bareheaded in the streets in such harsh weather?
Answer:
The little girl was among the few people who were seen on the roads in the biting cold weather. There must be some genuine reason for which she was out in the streets and it was clear from seeing her tattered clothes. She was wearing an old apron in which she carried several packages of matches. She held a box of them in her hand for selling but no one had bought any box from her since morning. As she did not get a single cent, she did not dare to go back home.

Question 5.
What has happened to her slippers? Why were they of no use for her?
Answer:
The poor little girl was walking in the streets barefoot. It was obvious that when she had left her house in the morning, she might be wearing them but they were not too much of use for her as they were her mother’s and too big for her. Also she had lost one while crossing the road where two carriages had rattled by speedily. She had not been able to find the slipper and other was taken away by one boy who told that he would use it as a cradle in future for his children. And so she walked on her naked feet.

2. Lights were shining in every window, and there was a glorious smell of roast goose in the street, for this was New Year’s Eve, and she could not think of anything else.She huddled down in a heap in a corner formed by two houses, one of which projected further out into the street than the other, but though she tucked her little legs up under her she felt colder and colder. She did not dare to go home, for she had sold no matches and earned not a single penny.

Question 1.
How has the atmosphere been set up in the given passage?
Answer:
The passage presents the picture of the miserable child. She is walking very slowly on the road due to extreme cold and hunger. She had beautiful long hair which hung in pretty curls over her neck and were covered with snowflakes. It was getting dark so the houses were lit up. In all the windows of the houses the light was shining and wonderful smell of roast goose was coming put as it was New Year’s Eve. The poor little creature was perishing with cold and in the picture of misery.

Question 2.
Why did writer say that ‘she did not think of her appearance now’?
Answer:
The little girl crept along the streets, shivering and hungry with a hope of selling at least few packs of matchsticks But nobody had bought any from her. She was presented as the picture of misery. She kept on trying despite the extremely cold weather. The snowflakes fell on her long golden hair which curled so prettily about her neck but she did not think of her appearance now. The only thing that captured her mind was to sell the matchboxes anyhow.

Question 3.
What did the little girl do to keep herself warm? Did it help her?
Answer:
On the New Year’s Eve, a few days after Christmas when everyone was in festive mood and cuddled in their houses, the miserable child was on the streets. When she could not stand the cold any more, she found a place in a corner formed by two houses, one of which projected further out into the street than the other. She tucked her little legs up under her to feel warm but it did no good and still she felt colder and colder.

Question 4.
Why could the little girl not go home in spite of extremely bad weather?
Answer:
The little poor child was out in the streets barefoot and bareheaded to sell the match boxes which she carried in her old apron. She had been trying to sell those boxes since morning but didn’t succeed till evening. In spite of the harsh weather she could not go home because of the fear of her father’s beating. She knew that as she had not sold a single match box as a result of which she had not earned a single cent, her father would surely scold and beat her. So she found a corner formed by two houses and sat down there drawing up her little feet under her.

Question 5.
Apart from her father’s wrath, she did not want to go home. Why?
OR
What was the other reason for which she did not want to go home?
Ans.
The poor child was out from her house since very morning to sell out the matchboxes. Although evening had approached and it became dark early due to chilling weather and snowfall, she did not dare to go home because she was not able to sell even a single matchbox. She feared her father’s wrath so found it better to spend time there in the street. So she sought shelter in a corner formed by two houses, one of which was projected farther out into the street than the other. But there was other reason too for which she didn’t want to go home as it was not comfortable there. In the name of house, they had a roof through which the wind passes and the cracks had been stuffed with straw and rags.

3. She pulled one out-scr-r-ratch!—how it spluttered and burnt! It had a warm, bright Jlame like a tiny candle when she held her hand over it—but what a strange light! It seemed to the little girl as if she were sitting in front of a great iron stove with polished brass knobs and brass ornaments. The fire burnt so beautifully and gave out such a lovely warmth. Oh, how wonderful that was!

Question 1.
What did the poor child do to warm herself up?
Answer:
Extraordinary chill had created numbness in the hands of the little girl. Although she had the whole bundle of matchboxes in her hand, still she thought that how much warmth she could get from them. She then thought of lighting a single match by rubbing it against the wall she was sitting near, to warm up her hands. She drew one matchstick from the box and burnt it. It gave a strange and wonderful light. For her it was like as if a drowning man has caught hold of a straw. It seemed to her that she was sitting in front of an iron stove and felt comfortable.

Question 2.
Was the method used by the child to keep her warm successful?
Ans.
The girl was literally shivering with cold. Her feet had turned blue and red due to chill and above all she had nothing to wear in her feet. Her head was also not covered. Her clothes were old and not warm. In such situation she even found a corner formed by two houses more comfortable. She sat there and an idea struck her mind that if she lights a match she would get warmth.

As soon as she rubbed it against the wall, a bright flame shone with a spluttered sound, it had a warm and bright flame like a tiny candle when she held her hand over it. It was so comfortable that she stretched out her feet to warm them too. Thought it did not give her as warmth as was required in that weather still she had peace in her mind or one can say a kind of illusion that she was getting warmth.

Question 3.
What do you think she was lighting only one matchstick from the box?
Answer:The girl belonged to a poor family. She had nothing to wear and she was dying from cold and hunger. She had been sent out of the house in the morning only to sell the matchboxes so that she could earn some money for her father. She dared not to disobey her father due to his rude and cruel nature. She knew that if she would return home without earning a cent he would beat her. So she decided to spend time in the street only but because it was too cold and unbearable for the little girl, she thought of getting warmth by lighting matchsticks. On the other hand she knew her father’s nature so she took out only one matchstick out of the box and lit it knowing that how much one little match might warm her.

Question 4.
What was the first vision which she saw after lighting the matchstick?
Answer:
When the girl struck one small match from the packet, it spluttered and burnt. And it was so amazing that she felt like sitting in front of a great iron stove with shining brass knobs and a brass cover. The fire burnt so beautifully and gave out lovely warmth. It appeared Wonderful to the child. But soon the flame went out, the stove vanished and she was left with only the remains of burnt match in her hand.

Question 5.
What is the symbolism in the passage?
Answer:
There are lots of instances where symbolism has been used in the story. They are used to impart more than the literal meaning of the word. Here in this passage too, the iron stove is the symbolic of the little girl’s longing for warmth as she was dying with cold, she was expecting warmth from somewhere. She found a place in the corner between the two houses, and hid her feet under it but it was of no use. So she lit up a match and in the light of the flame and then she visualizes a stove. It is also the symbolic of warm feelings of love and care which her grandmother used to give her.

4. She struck another match on the wall. Once more there was light, and in the glow stood her old grandmother, oh, so bright and shining, and looking so gentle, kind and loving. “Granny!” cried the little girl. “Oh, take me with you! I know you will disappear when the match is burnt out; you will vanish like the warm stove, the lovely roast goose and the great glorious Christmas tree!”

Question 1.
What different images did the poor child see on the wall?
Answer:
The little girl was almost dying with cold and hunger. Therefore she burnt a matchstick to get rid of that chill but it soon went out. Thus she struck another match against the wall and when the light fell upon it, it became thin like a veil. Through it she could see into a room. She saw a table covered with a snow white cloth and on it there was a shining dinner service. The roast goose stuffed with prunes and apples was steaming. Then only the matchstick went out. She lighted another matchstick and found herself sitting under the most beautiful Christmas tree with thousands of candles burning on its branches. By this time again the match went out. But the Christmas lights were still there which mounted higher and higher.

Question 2.
Were the images real or merely her imagination?
Answer:
The girl was so innocent that she was unaware of the clever worldly ways. It was her age of playing with the toys but she was being forced to engage in household chores. The only thing that she knew was her father’s rude nature and so she thought of sitting on the road only. Besides, her house was not so cozy so she thought of remaining out. As her hands were almost dead with cold in the biting chill, the poor child burnt a matchstick to keep herself warm, which soon went out. Again she lighted a matchstick and when the light fell upon the wall, she saw various beautiful images. As we know that there was nothing actually, it’s clear that all those images were her mind’s creativity. Whatever she used to imagine, came alive in those images. In fact they were illusions.

Question 3.
Which was the last picture that she saw on the wall and which she did not want to vanish?
Answer:
When the little girl lit a matchstick against the wall, she saw beautiful images formed on the wall which were her mind’s productivity only. The final image which she saw was someone dying. And that was her grandmother, the only person who had loved her and was now dead. She got immense affection from her that she did not want to lose her again. She wanted her company forever as she found solace in her grandmother’s lap. That is why she did not want her grandmother’s picture to vanish from her eyesight.

Question 4.
Can you guess the reason why she wanted to keep the picture alive?
Answer:
Grandmother was the only person in poor child’s life who loved her a lot. Her father was an ill-natured person who scolded and beated her for petty things. And from the story we can guess that there was no other member in her family except these two. The grandmother who used to love her more than anyone was now dead. And when she saw her image, she became so relaxed and felt joy that she did not want to part with her again. Because she knew that as soon as the match went out, the picture would also vanish. So she kept on lighting the matchsticks.

Question 5.
What kind of relationship did the little girl share with her grand¬mother?
Answer:
From the above passage it is clear that the little girl was all alone in the vast world. She only had one person in her life who gave her immense love and that too was not alive. It was none other than her grandmother. She was dead but the child remembered her fondly. She recalled all her views and stories told by her. The memory of her grandmother and her affection gave her warmth for some time and enabled her to bear all the suffering.

5. But in the cold dawn, in the corner formed by the two houses, sat the little girl with rosy cheeks and smiling lips, dead-frozen to death on the last evening of the old year. The dawn of the new year rose on the huddled figure of the girl. She was still holding the matches, and half a packet had been burnt.
“She was evidently trying to warm herself’, people said.

Question 1.
What is the theme of this passage?
Answer:
The theme of this passage projects the happiness of the child which she experienced throughout the series of troubles. The world in which she lived had lost touch with humanity. No one had shown sympathy towards the child who had been out in the bitter weather for selling matches. But when she saw the image dr rather illusion of her grandmother, she became enormously happy and in order to keep her alive, burnt the whole bundle of matches, forgetting the fear of her father.

Question 2.
Where did the grandmother take the child along with her?
Answer:
When the child saw her grandmother, she pleaded to take her away. She struck the whole bundle of matches to keep her grandmother with her forever; the bright glow of the matches reflected the image of grandmother clearly and more effectively. The light was brighter than the daylight. She had never seen such beauty and grandeur of her grandmother. The grandmother took the little girl in her arms and both of them flew in brightness and joy above the earth.

Question 3.
What has happened finally?
Answer:
The child was so fed up of her life that when she saw her grandmother in her illusions, she asked her to take along so that she could also led a peaceful life. The child of her age didn’t know that death was the ultimate truth. As she was told by her grandmother that when a star fell down, a soul went up to the God, she also wanted to join her in heaven. Finally the grandmother took the little girl into her arms and both of them flew in brightness and joy above the earth, very, very high and up there was neither cold, nor hunger, nor fear. They were now safe in the hands of God.

Question 4.
What were the people’s reactions on seeing the poor child’s stiff body?
Answer:
On the last evening of the year, leaning against the wall, the little girl was sitting in the corner with red cheeks and smiling mouth, frozen to death. The New Year’s sun witnessed a pathetic figure. Her body was stiff and cold, she held the matches out of which one bundle was almost burned.

The people, who were unconcerned till now, started making different guesses for the burnt out matches beside her. They said that she might want to warm herself up. They could never been able to imagine what beautiful things she had seen and how cheerfully she had gone with her grandmother in the New Year.

Question 5.
What is the significance of matches in the story?
Answer:
Matches are minor things but sometimes even minor things can get biggest happiness of life. To sell the matches and to get money for her father, the child was out in the streets during the festive time in chilly winter evening. By lighting the matches, she tried to keep herself warm. Then in the light of matches only she was able to visualize different images which were the yield of her mind. Matches are the symbolic of faith and hope, warmth and love.

The Little Match Girl Questions and Answers

Question 1.
How does the writer create sympathy for the little girl in the story ?
Answer:
The title invites our attention to the young age of the girl and the fact that she has to suffer so much from her misfortune, evokes unlimited sympathy for her. Secondly, the writer draws our attention to the bitter cold and darkness of the night and the sight of a delicate and helpless child exposed to its bitterness on the last evening of the year chokes our throat with pain.

Thirdly, how unequipped the girl is, to face the terrible cold is emphasised by describing her pathetic condition. She is walking in the street barehead and barefoot. The oversized slippers which she is wearing belonged to her mother, and one of which she loses while escaping from a speeding carriage. The other is taken away by a boy. Such is the callousness with which the world treats a poor, hapless child.

Further, we are told that her feet are fed and blue due to walking long distance, trying to sell matchsticks which nobody buys. “She crept along, shivering and hungry, the picture of misery, poor little thing.” This very description definitely creates an empathy for the lovely little child with golden hair.

Question 2.
What are the four visions seen by the girl and what do they signify?
Answer:
Huddled in the corner of two houses, the little girl lights a match for warmth. She sees the vision of a great iron stove with polished brass knobs and brass ornaments. She stretches her feet to feel its lovely warmth, but alas ! The warmth vanishes leaving her cold.

Next, the girl strikes another match, and she sees the mouthwatering vision of a dinner table spread with a white cloth, with a steaming roast goose in the centre, stuffed with prunes and apples. Her hunder makes her imagine the goose hopping towards her but this also vanishes.
Thirdly, she sees the vision of a Christmas tree, with a thousand candles lighting up its green branches and gaily coloured balls. When she stretches her hands to touch them,they rise higher and higher to become bright stars.

Finally, she sees the beautiful vision of her grandmother smiling lovingly at her. She implores her granny to take her along with her. Little does she know that she is imploring for her death.The four visions symbolise the wishes of every child in this world, for warmth, for food, for the cheer of sitting under a Christmas tree decorated with candles and other baubles, and most importantly, for love and kindness. The child does not get these in this world; so she longs to go to the other world.

Question 3.
What are your feelings after reading the story ?
Answer:
In one sentence, if I can summarise my feelings, I will simply say, the story makes me cry. It touches the depth of my heart. In fact, it still haunts me in my lonely hours; before falling asleep or when I see small, sweet children. It makes me angry with myself and the callous world around me that is so insensitive about our fellow creatures.

One New Year eve, when the well-to-do are getting ready for their cosy dinner, a little match girl walks in the cold, dark night trying to sell matches. Nobody buys them, no one notices the hungry, shivering girl, her feet red and blue after walking barefoot. She cannot go back to her house as there also, no love, warmth or food awaits her. She is scared of her father who may beat her for not bringing any money home. So, she sits in the corner made by two houses from which the glow of fire and smell of roast goose tempts her taste buds.

Everywhere around her, there is festivity; but not for her. Her simple wishes are manifested each time she lights a matchstick. Her wish for warmth, for food, for beautiful things of life, for love and for protection-she achieves all these, but in dreams. She begs the vision of her grandmother to take her with her and her ultimate wish is fulfilled. She rises in all her glory to the world of God, where no misery will touch her, where no hunger or chill winds will trouble her.

The vision of the frozen child with rosy cheeks and a happy smile, sitting huddled inthe corner, never leaves our memory. However, we also feel happy that she leaves this world with blissful smile after fulfilling her long cherished wishes, in those last moments just before she is lifted by her grandmother to be near God.

 

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers An Angel in Disguise

An Angel in Disguise Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. Neighbors went hastily to the old tumble-down hut, in which she had secured little more than a place of shelter from summer heats and winter cold: some with grave-clothes for a decent interment of the body; and some with food for the half-starving children, three in number. Of these, John, the oldest, a boy of twelve, was a stout lad, able to earn his living with any farmer. Kate, between ten and eleven, was bright, active girl, out of whom something clever might be made, if in good hands; but poor little Maggie, the youngest, was hopelessly diseased.

Question 1.
What could be the possible reason for woman’s death?
Answer:
The woman was discovered dead at the threshold of her own door in the presence of her three children. She was in a drunken state, her body lay cold and still among her miserable children. Looking at her house and children’s condition, we can guess that she was a big alcoholic.

Question 2.
People hated the woman; still they turned up on her death. Give reason.
Answer:
It is truly said that why we do not rejoice at our birth and lament on death because we are the person concerned. Howsoever one maybe hostile towards someone but death changes and touches the inner self of the person. Same thing happened here; the dead woman was despised, mocked and condemned by almost every member of the village. But when she died, everybody gathered around her house. They were more worried about her wretched children more than herself and so in spite of pitying her, they were angry with her.

Question 3.
How did everyone try to help the children in their own way?
Answer:
Compassion is the desire to ease other’s sufferings and help the less fortunate. Neighbors went quickly to the old tumble-down hut as soon as they heard the news of poor woman’s death. It was only sufficient enough to secure the family from summer heat or winter cold. They came with grave clothes for the decent burial of the body and some came with food for the half starving children.

Question 4.
How many children did the dead woman leave behind?
Answer:
There were three children in all who were orphaned after the mother’s death. They were nearly half starving. Of these, John, was the oldest boy of twelve years. He was a stout lad who was able to earn his living with any farmer. The second child named Kate was between ten and eleven. She was bright and active girl. She could turn out to be very useful if in good hands. The youngest among them was the poor little Maggie who was hopelessly diseased.

Question 5.
How was the youngest child Maggie got disabled? What was her prospective future?
Answer:
Maggie was the dead woman’s third child. Two years ago, she had fallen from a window and injured her spine for which she was bed-ridden. Since then she had not been able to leave her bed except when lifted in the arms of her mother. She was crippled for life and nobody wanted to take her home as she would turn out to be burden for anyone. Her innocent looks attracted everyone but no one was ready to take her. It was decide that she should be sent to the poorhouse.

2. “Take her to the poorhouse”, said a rough man, of whom the question “What’s to be done with Maggie?” was asked. “Nobody’s going to be bothered with her. ”
“The podrhouse is a sad place for a sick and helpless child”, answered one.
“For your child or mine”, said the other, lightly speaking; “but for tis brat is will prove a blessed change, she will be kept clean, have healthy food, and be doctored, which is more than can be said of her past condition. ”

Question 1.
What was finally decided for the children?
Answer:
After the mother’s death, the chief question which arose was “What is to be done with the children?” The dead mother would be buried soon and she would be free from all the care or concern of the villagers, but humanity was something that could not leave the children to starve. After considering the matter and having discussed with his wife, farmer Jones decided to take John with him. Mrs. Ellis who was looking out for a bound girl did charity on her part by making choice of Katy, although she was too young to be useful for her. Only Maggie was left.

Question 2.
Why no one was ready to take Maggie home when her elder brother and sister’s fate had already been decided?
Answer:
Maggie was suffering from a hopeless disease in which she could not , get up on her own feet. She was completely dependent on other’s mercy. Her spine was damaged and therefore she was confined to bed for the rest of her life. After her mother’s death, she was left all alone in the house. Nobody wanted to deal with her disability as she could be of no use for anybody except a burden though all had pitied her condition.

Question 3.
What did the neighborhood women bring for Maggie? But the humanity did not arise for a poor sick child. Comment.
Answer:
The fate of the elder two children was decided in the hands of farmer Jones and Mrs. Ellis but no one said that I’ll take Maggie. People were giving pity glances on her pale and thin structure and ideas were exchanged on her account. The women helped to remove her soiled and ragged clothes, dressed her in clean attire. Somber the gloomy eyes and patient face of Maggie touched every heart but nobody was ready to open it for her. Nobody wanted a bedridden child.

Question 4.
What suggestions were given by the people for little Maggie?
Answer:
There were as many suggestions as there were people. The first suggestion came from a rough man Who suggested her to be taking to the poor house. Nobody was concerned for her as she seemed to be burden. Another one remarked that the poor house was a sad place for a sick and helpless child. To this another one responded that it might be a sad place for “Your child or mine”. But for poor Maggie, it would be a blessing as she would be kept clean, have healthy food, would be doctored and taken care very well.

Question 5.
What was the scene of the burial day?
Answer:
The day following the day of death was decided as the day of burial. A few neighbors were present at the miserable place but nobody followed the dead cart to the grave. Farmer Jones took John in his wagon after the coffin was taken out and drove away feelings contented that he had fulfilled his duty. Mrs. Ellis also hurriedly asked Kate to bid her sister goodbye and drew the tearful children apart. Both the sisters gave a sobbing farewell to each other. Others went out hurriedly glancing at Maggie and some refrained from a look. The only bedridden child was left unconcerned.

3. “What have you there?” sharply questioned Mrs. Thompson. Joe felt the child start and shrink against him. He did not reply, except by a look that was pleading and cautionary, that said, “Wait a moment for Explanations, and be gentle”, and passing in, carried Maggie to the small chamber on the first floor, and laid her on a bed. Then, stepping back, he shut the door, and stood face to face with his vinegar-tempered wife in the passage-way outside.

Question 1.
Who said, “Then take her to the poorhouse: she’ll have to go there?” Why did Joe Thompson go to Maggie’s hovel again?
Answer:
The above words are said by the blacksmith’s wife who was hastening off with the rest of the villagers after the burial of the children’s mother. John was immediately taken away by farmer Jones and Mrs. Ellis took away Kate. Maggie was almost alone in the hovel. Blacksmith’s wife replied this to Mr. Joe Thompson’s when he called it a cruel thing to leave Maggie like that. She also left the place hurriedly leaving Joe behind. He was puzzled for a while and then went inside again to have a look on her and perhaps with a decision in his mind.

Question 2.
How did poor Maggie’s catchy words “don’t leave me here all alone!” moved Mr. Thompson?
Answer:
When everybody left the place after the burial, Mr. Thompson seemed to be worried about the little girl. He asked blacksmith’s wife who suggested him to take her to the poorhouse. Joe stood there for some time confused. He went into the hovel again and saw Maggie had raised her into an upright position with painful effort and was sitting on her bed. Her eyes were on the door out of which all had departed. A terror had covered her pale face. It aroused a feeling of sympathy in Mr. Thompson and when she cried “don’t leave me here alone!” Mr. Thompson felt guilty leaving the child as she was.

Question 3.
Which brave action full of pity was undertaken by Mr. Thompson?
Answer:
Mr. Thompson was rough from outside but he had a heart which was tender in some places. He liked to have children come to his shop. When he heard the poor Maggie pleading not to leave her alone, he stopped down over her and told her that she would not be left alone. A little show of compassion and courtesy defines the humanity. He wrapped her with the gentleness of a woman in clean bedclothes brought by the neighbors, held her in his strong arms and took her home.

Question 4.
What type of woman Mrs. Jones was? What doubts did Mr. Jones have about her?
Answer:
Mrs. Jones, wife of Joe Thompson was childless and not a woman of saintly temper, or much given to self-denial for others’ good whereas Mr. Joe Thompson had well-grounded doubts about the manner he would be greeted by his wife on reaching home with the crippled child. He had a fear that she would not get along with her and knew that she would not welcome Maggie and it proved to be true when he was confronted by her.

Question 5.
Describe Mrs. Thompson’s reactions on seeing Maggie in her husband’s arms? Where did Mr. Thompson lay her?
Answer:
Joe’s wife was childless, so she had no feelings. She was ill tempered and it had become her usual nature. She had lost the purpose of living. When she saw Mr. Thompson carrying a piece of precious burden in his arms from the window, she sharply questioned him about the child. Her tone was full of anger and astonishment and her face was in flame when she asked. “You haven’t brought home that sick brat”.
Her tone scared little Maggie and she started shrinking in Thompson’s arms. He did not reply but carried Maggie to the small chamber on the first floor and laid her on a bed.

4. Mrs. Thompson did not reply, but presently turned towards the little chamber where her husband had deposited Maggie; and, pushing open the door, went quietly in. Joe did not follow; he saw that, her state had changed, and felt that it would be best to leave her alone with the child. So he went to his shop, which stood near the house, and worked until dusky evening released him from labor. A light shining through the little chamber windows was the first object that attracted Joe’s attention on turning towards the house : it was a good omen.

Question 1.
How did Mr. Thompson manage to touch the soft nerve of his wife?
Answer:
Mrs. Thompson was full of anger and astonishment when she saw Maggie in her husband’s arms. Mr. Thompson noticed this and said, ‘I think women’s hearts are sometimes very hard’. Usually he got out of her sight in such situations or kept silent to avoid further arguments but this time he faced an entirely different person and encountered countenance and well determined eyes. To his counter, she replied that men’s hearts are harder than women’s. By this only, he came to know that he had been successful in touching the strings of her heart.

Question 2.
Why did Mrs. Thompson enquire about the two other children of the dead woman?
Answer:
Mrs. Thompson who was a bitter lady got angry when she saw Maggie in her husband’s arms. She knew that Maggie had one brother and sister too. She was keen to know that where they would have been when Maggie was brought there and why didn’t she was sent along with them. She wanted her to go to the poorhouse.

Question 3.
On the pretext of Bible, how did Mr. Thompson presented his views before his wife?
Answer:
Mrs. Thompson asked her husband to go at once to the poorhouse for getting permit to send Maggie to the poorhouse when she brought the child home. Then he gave the reference of Bible in which much is written about children. And the Savior rebuked and punished the disciples who would not receive them, but took them in his arms and blessed them and even the smallest of help to the children would be considered. Kindness goes in a circle and comes back in one way or the other. Hearing this, a soft feeling crept into her heart.

Question 4.
Why did Mr. Thompson avoid the chamber where Maggie was kept when he returned back home?
OR
Why did Mr. Thompson felt it better to leave Mrs. Thompson alone with the child in the chamber?
Answer:
Mr. Thompson was not sure whether his wife’s temperament would be normal by evening or not. The first thing that caught his attention after reaching home was the light shining through the little chamber. He paused to look in and was satisfied to see the view. His wife was sitting by the bed in the chamber where Maggie lay and was talking to her. But entering the house, he did not go immediately to the little chamber. His heavy footsteps were heard by his wife who hurriedly came out of the chamber where she was with Maggie. Joe thought it best, not to discuss about the child or show any concern for the child.

Question 5.
What did Mr. Thompson notice when he returned back in the evening from his work? Why was he relieved?
OR
What expressions did Mr. Thompson find on the little girl’s face after he returned home?
Answer:
When Mr. Thompson retxirned back home he observed the light shining in the chamber in which Maggie was kept. He considered it a good omen. It was dark enough outside to screen him from the observation. Maggie was lying on the bed with her head little raised on the pillow. His wife was sitting beside her and talking to her. The light fell upon Maggie’s face and Thompson could see that her eyes were fixed upon his wife. Every now and then few words came as if in answers from her lips. There was sadness and tenderness in her expression but no pain or bitterness. This sight lifted the heavy weight from his heart.

5. “Is it good?” asked Mrs. Thompson, seeing with what a keen relish the food was taken. The child paused with the cup in her hand, and answered with a look of gratitude that awoke to new life old human feelings which had been slumbering in her heart for half a score of years.
“We’ll keep her a day or two longer; she is so weak and helpless”, said Mrs. Joe Thompson, in answer to her husband’s remark, at breakfast-time on the next morning, that he must step down and see the Guardians of the Poor about Maggie.

Question 1.
What were Mr. Thompson’s feelings when he saw the child carefully for the first time?
Answer:
After having his dinner, Mr. Thompson washed from his hands and face the dust and soil of work, left the kitchen and went to the little chamber. He found a pair of large bright eyes looking at him from the snowy bed. The looks were tender, grateful and pleading. This gave him extreme joy, his heartbeats became faster. Joe Thompson sat down and for the first time examined the child carefully under the lamp light. The tender face was attractive and full of childish sweetness on which suffering had not been able to leave its marks. It strengthened his sympathy towards Maggie.

Question 2.
What was the subject of discussion between Maggie and Mr. Thompson?
Answer:
On the first day, after returning from his work, Joe Thompson encountered the girl’s childish face for the first time. He sat down beside her and taking her soft little hand, confirmed her name Maggie. She affirmed in a trembled voice. He asked about her sickness and her treatment then about the pain. The girls replied that till now she had some problems and pain also but now as she was in the soft bed it felt good and comfortable. She was satisfied and grateful to Mr. Thompson.

Question 3.
Mrs. Thompson pretended to be indifferent to the child. Was she actually?
Answer:
At first Mrs. Thompson was against taking care of Maggie and insisted her husband to send her to the poorhouse immediately. Thompson reminded her of the Bible and explained her that it was a small thing for them to keep that poor motherless child for a single night. The voice was very strong but simultaneously there was moisture in his eyes. Mrs. Thompson did not answer but a soft feeling crept into her heart.

She spent the whole day with her and at night she made an effort to be indifferent to Maggie in front of her husband. She kept silent on that theme and gave the child a toasted slice of bread which was softened with milk and butter added with a cup of tea. This showed that the chords of her heart were struck with sympathy for the child.

Question 4.
How was the behavior of Mrs. Joe Thompson transformed completely?
OR
What change has been noticed in Mrs. Thompson’s behaviour with regard to Maggie?
Answer:
Earlier Mrs. Thompson was adamant for sending the poor child to the poorhouse. But with the passage of time the harshness of her behaviour
converted into softness and her heart began to melt towards little Maggie. The tenderness, innocence, patience, gratitude, nature and purity of the child moved her a lot and she asked her husband to keep her for one or two day more before sending to the poorhouse on the pretext of her weakness and helplessness. Finally she gave up the idea of sending her to poorhouse and accepted her whole heartedly.

Question 5.
What change did the little child bring in Thompson house? What kind of life were they leading?
Answer:
The sick and helpless child brought light and happiness to Thompson’s house. She was a blessing for them, for a long period of time it had been dark, cold and miserable because Mrs. Thompson had no one to take care or love. That was why she became sore, irritable and ill-tempered and self- afflicting woman. Now the sweetness of that sick child who was also thirsty for getting someone’s love was honey to her soul as she carried her in her heart as well as arms. As for Joe, there was not a single man in the whole neighborhood who drank as precious wine as he. Maggie came as an angel in disguise and Med its dreary chambers with love.

An Angel in Disguise Questions and Answers

Question 1.
What is the tragedy of the life of the children ?
Answer:
The tragedy in the life of the children in ‘An Angel in Disguise’ is beyond imagination. Their poor mother died in front of her three frightened children, John, Kate and Maggie. They were nearly half starving. Of these, John, was the oldest boy of twelve years. He was a stout lad who was able to earn his living with any farmer. The second child named Kate was between ten and eleven. She was a bright and active girl.

She could turn out to be very useful, if in good hands. The youngest among them was poor little Maggie who was hopelessly diseased. Two years ago, she had fallen from a window and injured her spine for which she was bedridden. Since then she had not been able to leave her bed except when lifted in the arms of her mother. She was crippled for life and nobody wanted to take her home as she would turn out to be a burden for anyone. Her innocent looks attracted everyone but no one was ready to take her. It was decide that she should be sent to the poorhouse.

Question 2.
What was the reaction of Mrs. Thompson when the handicapped child was brought to her home ?
Answer:
Joe’s wife Mrs. Thompson was childless, so she had no feelings. She was ill-tempered and that had become her usual nature. She had lost the purpose of living. When she saw Mr. Thompson carrying a piece of precious burden in his arms from the window, she sharply questioned him about the child. Her tone was full of anger and astonishment and her face was in flame when she asked. “You haven’t brought home that sick brat”. Her tone scared little Maggie and she started shrinking in Thompson’s arms. He did not reply but carried Maggie to the small chamber on the first floor and laid her on a bed.

Question 3.
Comment on the title ‘An Angel in Disguise’.
Answer:
‘An Angel in Disguise’ is the most appropriate title for the story. Maggie, the youngest of three children brings joy and happiness in the lives of a childless couple, Mr. and Mrs. Thompson. She proves to be an angel for them. Mrs. Thompson’s attitude and behaviour show a drastic change. From a rude, ill-tempered and self-afflicting woman, Mrs. Thompson is now a loving and caring figure. The sick and helpless child brings light and happiness to Thompson’s house. She is a blessing for them.

For a long period of time it has been dark, cold and miserable because Mrs. Thompson had no one to take care off or to love. That is why she became sore, irritable and an ill-tempered and self-afflicting woman. Now the sweetness of that sick child who was thirsty for love is honey to her soul as she carries her in her heart as well as arms. Maggie comes as an angel in disguise and fills their dreary chambers with love.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers A Face in the Dark

A Face in the Dark Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. When there was a strong wind, the pine trees made sad, eerie sounds that kept most people to the main road. But Mr. Oliver was not a nervous or imaginative man. He carried a torch, and its gleam—the batteries were running down—moved fitfully down the narrow forest path. When its flickering light fell in the figure of a boy, who was sitting alone on a rock, Mr. Oliver stopped. Boys were not supposed to be out after dark.

Question 1.
What picture of the school is projected here?
Answer:
The school was situated on the outskirts of the hill station of Shimla. The school had its established reputation from before Kipling’s time. It had been run on English public school lines. The boys of the school belonged to wealthy Indian families. They wore blazers, caps and ties. The Life Magazine had once called the school ‘Eton of the East’.

Question 2.
Why the school in which Mr. Oliver was a teacher, called the ‘Eton of the East’?
Answer:
Eton school is said to run on the British pattern. It begins with the standard of teaching. There is no nonsense there. There are weekly assessments of the boys and the results are public. If there is any drop in the result, the teacher is summoned. The school activities are having unrelenting competition.

The school in Shimla in which Mr. Oliver was a teacher ran on the same principles. The boys were disciplined and followed the rules and regulations of the school. It was a prestigious school and thus called the ‘Eton of the East’.

Question 3.
Who was Mr. Oliver and what was his daily routine?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver was an Anglo-Indian teacher who had been teaching in a school situated on the outskirts of the hill station of Shimla for several years. The Shimla Bazaar was about three miles from the school. It had restaurants, cinemas, etc. Mr. Oliver, a bachelor, used to stroll into the town in the evening and returned after dark taking a short cut through the pine forest.

Question 4.
How can you say that Mr. Oliver was a brave man?
OR
Was Mr. Oliver was a strong or a fearful man?
Answer:
Shimla, a very high hill station has many pine forests. People in those days avoided the route through these forests as when there were strong wind; sad eerie sounds which were frightening enough to raise anyone’s goose bumps. But Mr. Oliver was not that sort of person. He was not a nervous or imaginative man. He usually carried a torch and its beam moved fitfully down the forest path. Even when he saw a boy’s figure in that lonely place, he didn’t got scared. Rather he asked him the reason for being alone and weeping.

Question 5.
What did Mr. Oliver see when he was returning back while passing through the pine forest?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver was on his usual walk in the evening. While returning back from Shimla Bazaar through the narrow path of the pine forest, he came across an unusual sight. He saw a figure on the rock. He usually carried a torch with him always and as soon as the flickering light of his torch fell upon the figure, he found it to be a boy and stopped. It was a strange sight as the boys were not supposed to be out after dark.

2. “I saw something—somethin horrible—a boy weeping in the forest—and he
had no face!”
“Noface, Sahib?”
“No eyes, nose, mouth—nothing!”
“Do you mean it was like this, Sahib?” asked the watchman, and raised the
lamp to his own face. The watchman had no eyes, no ears, no features at
all—not even an eyebrow! And that’s when the wind blew the lamp out.

Question 1.
Why was Mr. Oliver surprised to see the boy?
Answer:
On his usual walk, when Mr. Oliver saw a boy sitting alone on a rock, he was surprised to see him as the boys of the school were not supposed to be out after dark. And as the place was near to school, he could imagine no one else outsider there. He questioned him strongly that what he was doing there and when he got no reply, he moved closer so that he could recognize the boy.

Question 2.
Why was the boy called a miscreant?
Answer:
The place where Mr. Oliver saw the boy in the woods was not far away from the school in which he was teaching. Therefore he thought that the boy must be from that school and the students of the school were supposed to be much disciplined and to abide by the rules. Finding him at that time of hour made him think that the boy might have done some mischief and that was why he was hiding there.

Question 3.
Why did Mr. Oliver move closer to the boy who was sitting alone on the rock in the forest?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver encountered a figure while coming back to school one night. He was surprised and felt uneasy to see it. When the light of his torch fell on the figure, it came out to be a boy. He stopped there and asked him sharply what he was doing there. Getting no response, he moved closer to him and sensed something wrong. The boy appeared to be crying with his face in his hands and his body was moving violently.

Question 4.
How did he show his concern for the boy? Did the boy reply affirmatively?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver became angry on seeing the boy alone in the forest at night. He asked him strongly the reason for being there but the boy didn’t answer. He moved closer to him thinking that he must have done wrong and for that reason he had run away from the school. But then he realized that the boy was sobbing and soon his anger gave way to concern. He again asked him why he was crying but the boy neither replied nor looked up. His body was shivering due to silent sobbing. He told him not to be there alone at that hour and asked what the trouble was.

Question 5.
Which horrible sight frightened Mr. Oliver?
Answer:
As Mr. Oliver approached the boy, he discovered that the boy was sobbing holding his face in his hands. His body was shaking. It was a strange, soundless weeping. Initially, Mr. Oliver got angry but when he heard him crying his anger diverted into concern. He suggested the boy that he shouldn’t be there at that time and asked the problem. When the boy looked up, the light from Mr. Oliver’s torch fell upon the boy’s face which had no eyes, ears, nose or mouth. This sight frightened him so much that he ran away from the place without pausing for a second.

A Face in the Dark Questions and Answers

Question 1.
What do you know about Mr. Oliver and the school he worked in?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver, the protagonist of the story, ‘A Face in the Dark’, was an Anglo Indian teacher who worked in one of the prestigious schools in Simla. He had been teaching in the school for several years. He was a bachelor. It had been his habit to go to Simla Bazaar, which was three miles away from the school. There he might watch movies or dine in a restaurant, and return after dark, taking a short cut through the pine forest. He was not a nervous person, nor given to too much of imagination, so he was not scared of walking through the forest which would make an eerie sound when strong winds blew.

The school he worked was known as the ‘Eton of the East’. It had been run on English public school lines. Most of the boys studying there were from wealthy Indian families, and wore blazers, caps and ties. Run on typical English pattern, the school had featured in Life Magazine and was considered as a status symbol.

Question 2.
What bizarre incident took place one day when Mr. Oliver was coming back from Simla Bazaar ?
Answer:
Mr. Oliver was returning after spending some time in Simla Bazaar. He took the pine forest route. It was a lonely path, dark and eerie. In the flickering light of the torch, he saw the figure of a boy, sitting alone on a rock. The boy was crying. It was a strange soundless weeping which made the teacher, rather uneasy. He held his head in his hands and his body shook convulsively. The concerned teacher insisted that the boy should look up and tell him his trouble. To his utter shock, when the boy looked up, he realised, he had no eyes, tears, nose or mouth.

It was just a smooth head, with a school cap on top of it. Immediately, he turned and ran towards the school. He encountered the watchman and told him about the boy without features. The watchman held the lantern to his face and asked whether the face was like his. He also did not have any features. Even Mr. Oliver, with his rational outlook had a fit of terror at the confrontation of what might have been supernatural.

Question 3.
On what two planes can you evaluate the incidents in the story ?
Answer:
The story can be evaluated at two levels : either as a weird supernatural experience or on a rational ground. Dark, lonely path through a pine grove, the eerie sound made by the wind, the reservations the locals had in using the short cut, all create an illusion of the supernatural. A boy sitting on a rock with his head down, his face covered with his hands, his body shaking hi soundless sobs, the flickering torchlight revealing a face without eyes, ears, nose or mouth; enough to make any man shake with fear. That was exactly what the school master went through on that bizarre night. On the top of it, he encountered another being of the same strange face in the form of a watchman, carrying a lantern. It is a perfect setting for a ghost story.

On the other hand, Mr. Oliver is described as a man, who was not easily given to nervousness or imagination. Perhaps, the lonely walk in the stormy night, might have led him to imagine something supernatural like a ghostly figure. A boy’s school cap lying on a rock or a mask someone left behind, might have created an illusion in the flickering light of his torch. The same fear might have made him imagine the watchman too as being faceless.

The story ends with a sense of ambiguity, leaving the ending open. The reader has to decide whether they were ghosts, whether they were optical illusions or whether the whole thing was a prank played upon the teacher by some mischievous students.

 

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers Hearts and Hands

Hearts and Hands Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. At Denver there was an influx of passengers into the coaches on the eastbound B. & M. Express. In one coach there sat a very pretty young woman dressed in elegant taste and surrounded by all the luxurious comforts of an experienced traveller. Among the newcomers were two young men; one of handsome presence with a bold, frank countenance and manner; the other a ruffled, glum-faced person, heavily built and roughly dressed. The two were handcuffed together.

Question 1.
Describe the opening scene of the story.
Answer:
There was a crowd of passengers into the coaches on the eastbound B. & M. Express. In one coach there was a pretty looking young woman who was sitting, reflecting all kinds of elegance and delicacy. The two newcomers were two young men, one among them was handsome with bold looks and the other was ruffled, glum-faced who was heavily built and roughly dressed. The two were handcuffed together. The coach was fully crowded and the two men could find only one vacant seat in front of the young lady.

Question 2.
Who was the pretty young lady? Describe her.
Answer:
The pretty young lady was Miss Fairchild who was seated in one of the coaches on the train to Denver. She was elegantly dressed and surrounded by all the luxurious comforts which described her as an experienced traveler. She had a lovely smile and from her appearance she seemed to be rich who had a passion for travelling. She was acquainted with one of the two passengers who arrived in the same coach in which she was sitting. She threw a lovely smile to him which made her cheeks slightly pink.

Question 3.
‘Here the linked couple seated themselves’. How was the two couple linked? What do you understand by this?
Answer:
There was too much crowd on the Eastbound B. & M. Express in one coach, a pretty young stylish woman was sitting. The two young men, who were handcuffed together, entered the coach. One of them was fair and handsome and other was rough and strongly built. They were linked together as they couldn’t be separated from each other. The handcuff had tied them. It means that one of them must be a criminal and the other a policeman

Question 4.
Why did the young lady in the coach say, “Don’t you ever recog¬nize old friends when you meet them in the West?”
Answer:
The two new comers got the vacant seat opposite the attractive young woman in the whole coach. She threw a glance on them from a distance and with a lovely smile greeted them. She held out her little gray gloved hand perhaps in order to handshake with one of the two newcomers who seemed to be her acquaintance. When she didn’t receive any kind of positive response from the other side, she made this remark.

Question 5.
Why did the looks of the young lady suddenly changed?
Answer:
Initially when the two men entered her coach, she seemed to be totally uninterested but soon with a lovely smile she looked at them. She took the initiative to talk to him one of the two was her very well known by her. The younger man was roused at her voice and tried to come out of slight embarrassment of the handcuffs which suddenly clouded him.

2. “You’ll excuse me for speaking miss, but, I see you’re acquainted with the marshall here. If you’ll ask him to speak a word for me when we get to the pen he’ll do it, and it’ll make things easier for me there. He’s taking me to Leavenworth prison. It’s seven years for counterfeiting. ” “Oh!” said the girl, with a deep breath and returning colour. “So that is what you are doing out here ? A marshal!”

Question 1.
What explanation was given by the other man to the young woman about Mr. Easton?
Answer:
When the other man saw that young lady was acquainted with the handsome man with him and seeing him handcuffed, he sensed Easton’s embarrassment. On the other hand, the pretty woman was in a state of bewilderment, so he called Easton as marshal who was taking him to the Leavenworth prison for seven years of imprisonment in the case of counterfeiting.

Question 2.
What reason was given by Mr. Easton for not going to Washington?
Answer:
Mr. Easton told the woman that he wanted to do something. Money, according to him had wings and to live in Washington, lot of money is required. He saw the opportunities in the West as well. Miss Fairchild was surprised to know that Easton has preferred life in West to become marshal over life in Washington.

Question 3.
Why did Miss Fairchild call Mr. Easton ‘Dashing Western Hero’?
Answer:
In the course of conversation, the ruffled man told Miss Fairchild that he was being taken to Leavenworth prison for seven years of imprisonment in the case of counterfeiting. As the conversation continued, the woman was surprised to learn that Easton had given up the life in Washington to become a Marshal in West. She was impressed with this and called ‘Dashing Western Hero’ who ride and shoot and face all kinds of dangers.

Question 4.
“My butterfly days are over”, what kind of irony is there?
Answer:
There is a verbal irony here as Mr. Easton was not talking of his good days with Miss Fairchild. Rather he was talking about being locked up and not being free like a butterfly. His freedom had been snatched away because of his wrong act. But Miss Fairchild thought that he was talking about his social days and as he had taken up a job of responsibility, he won’t be able to move as freely as he was earlier.

Question 5.
Why were Miss Fairchild’s eyes rested upon the glittering handcuffs and what did the other man explain her?
Answer:
Miss Fairchild encountered Mr. Easton, one of her old acquaintances in the same coach on the train to Denver in which she was traveling. She spoke to him but was surprised to see him handcuffed with the other man. The other man guessed her embarrassment and gave her an explanation. She then continued to chat with him but her eyes were still on handcuffs. The other mem told her that she should not worry as all the marshals handcuffed themselves to their prisoners.

3. “I love the West,” said the girl irrelevantly. Her eyes were shining softly. She looked away out the car window. She begain to speak truly and simply without the gloss of style and manner : ‘‘Mamma and I spent the summer in Denver. She went home a week ago because father was slightly ill. I could live and be happy in the West. I think the air here agrees with me. Money isn’t everything. But people always misunderstand things and remain stupid”

Question 1.
How did Miss Fairchild support the life of West?
Answer:
Miss Fairchild loved the life at West, when she was telling this, her eyes were shining softly. She looked out of the car window. She began to speak honestly and plainly. She and her mumma had spent the summer in Denver. She had gone back to home as her father was ill. The young lady could live and be happy in the West. The atmosphere there suited her. She supported the view of Easton as the money was not everything.

Question 2.
How did glum faced man take excuse to go away from that coach?
Answer:
After some conversation, the glum-faced man wished to have a drink as he had not even smoked all through the day. He further added that they had talked too much; he now wanted to go to the smoker. He was dying for a pipe. To this Easton replied that he couldn’t deny a petition for tobacco.

Question 3.
What reason did the other man give for his going for a smoke and why did he do so?
Answer:
Miss Fairchild kept on talking to Mr. Easton but her constant attention was towards the handcuffs. In order to ease the tense situation, the glum-faced man asked Easton to take him to the smoker’s room as he was half dead for a pipe. In addition, he was also worried that Easton might reveal something about himself that should not be told to the young woman. So he intervened and requested him to be taken to the smoker room.

Question 4.
Which remark made by one of the two passengers sitting nearby creates suspicion in our mind?
OR
How do we come to know that Mr. Easton was the real convict?
Answer:
When Miss Fairchild was talking to the two men, two other passengers in the same coach were listening to them and keenly observing everything. One of them remarked that Mr. Easton appeared to be too young to hold the position of a Marshal. This arise doubt in reader’s mind and when the other one exclaimed saying that Easton couldn’t be the Marshal as no officer would handcuff his own right hand with the criminal’s left hand, the truth is revealed.

Question 5.
The final twist in the story may not be expected by the readers. What is it?
Answer:
There is a series of conflict in O Henry’s story “Heart and Hands”. Miss Fairchild when saw Mr. Easton on the train, she recognizes him immediately. Easton was handcuffed to the other rough looking man. He didn’t want Miss Fairchild to notice him. But when she was sure that Easton acknowledged her, she asked him if it was their custom not to recognize the old friends in the West.

The other man understood the situation and came to protect him from it. He told the young lady that Easton was the Marshal who was taking him to Leavenworth prison for seven years imprisonment for counterfeiting. But the actual twist comes in the end when the two other co passengers who had overheard the conversation noticed that a marshal would never handcuff a criminal to his right hand.

Hearts and Hands Questions and Answers

Question 1.
The main theme of the story is kindness. Elucidate.
Answer:
Kindness plays an important role in the story. The glum-faced, rough¬looking, real Marshall is a kind man who saves Mr. Easton as well as Miss Fairchild from some embarrassment with no ulterior motives. He does not stand to gain anything out of this and yet wants to help. He makes sure Miss Fairchild comes to believe that Mr. Easton is the Marshall so that she does not get a shock seeing the handcuffs on him.

Later, when Miss Fairchild seems to be hinting at being interested in Mr. Easton, he decides that the lie has gone too far, and cuts it short. He saves Miss Fair child from any further embarrassment and future heartbreak by taking the other man under the pretext of wanting to smoke. In doing so, he removes Mr. Easton from her presence, so that the truth would not come out and break her illusions. His another intention is to save the young woman and the man from embarrassment.

Question 2.
Attempt a character sketch of Miss Fairchild.
Answer:
Miss Fairchild is a rich woman who has class and style. In the train, she looks and speaks how a noble class person should be. She has a full, sweet, and deliberate voice that shows that she expects to be heard. Her sweet manners also reveal she has feelings for Mr. Easton. At first, she is disinterested but soon her countenance brightens and a tender pink tinges her round cheeks on recognizing Mr. Easton. Miss Fairchild is an interesting character with many different personality traits.

She seems to be smart, and rich. She comes from the east coast, and is adventurous enough to take a train out to Colorado during these violent western times. Like all young women of her times and status, she has marriage in mind and expresses it to the young man indirectly, “I love the West, the air agrees with me here.”

She wants to convey that she is romantically interested in Mr. Easton and does not mind staying with him in the West. Her girlish romantic heart is happy to see the young man as a hero in the garb of a Marshall. That she is gullible, is revealed in her instantly trusting the words of the Marshall. She becomes a victim of mistaken identity and is not shrewd enough to understand that a Marshall never ties himself to the criminal by his right hand.

Question 3.
Explain the significance of ‘hands’ and ‘hearts’ in the story.
Answer:
At the beginning of the story, we see two people, Mr. Easton and a glum-faced man hand-cuffed together. It is the handcuffing that points at the ‘Hands’ part of the title. In fact, the way that the hands are handcuffed reveals the true identities of the two men. Miss Fairchild is misled by the unnamed man about the identity of Mr. Easton as he wants to save Mr. Easton from an embarrassing situation by pretending that he is not her friend, is a convict and is being taken by him to the prison. It is an observation by a passenger in the coach that reveals a Marshal will not handcuff his own right hand with that of a convict.

It is the ‘hearts’ part of the title that unravels the theme of the story. It is because of having a compassionate heart that the Marshall tells a lie to Miss Fairchild. In spite of the rough looks, he has a golden heart. He lies to save the young man and the girl from embarrass-ment and humiliation. He does not want to expose Mr. Easton as a convict in front of an old friend. He tells Miss Fairchild that Mr. Easton is the Marshall and he is the convict who is being taken to the prison. He wants the young woman to retain her romantic illusion. At least she will think of the young man as a daring hero, instead of having to think of him as a fraudster and counterfeiter of notes.

Question 4.
Attempt a character sketch of Mr. Easton.
Answer:
Mr. Easton is described as a handsome young man with a bold and frank countenance and manner. He is preoccupied with some thoughts, and does not notice Miss Fairchild at first. When he recognises her, he is embarrassed but is quick to cover up. We are utterly shocked to know at the end, that he is a criminal and is being taken to prison by the Marshall. The lady is unaware of this fact and is led to believe otherwise. The real Marshall covers up the situation to save both the young people from embarrassment.

Mr. Easton is an opportunist. He doesn’t exactly lie but plays along with the Marshall. All his words have double meaning. He does not confess that he is accused of counterfeiting and has to serve seven years in prison. Instead, he says, “money has a way of taking wings unto itself’, and he requires money to keep step with the well-to-do in Washington. ‘The opening in West’, he mentions, is actually counterfeiting but the lady takes it as the job of the Marshall. Thus, he cleverly lays out an explanation as to why he has moved to the West and why he won’t be able to see her in the future. He even picks up on the hint from the Marshall when he asks to go to the smoke room quickly.

Question 5.
How are the two men a foil to each other ?
Answer:
Both the men are opposite to each other in appearance, behaviour and character. Mr. Easton is dressed like a gentleman having good breeding and manners. The other person handcuffed to him is glum-faced, roughly dressed and heavily-built. Easton is a criminal while the other one is a Marshall. Easton is suave in manners and is quick to cover up his crime and save his face in front of Fairchild. The other man, on the other hand, takes up the crime on himself to save the lady from embarrassment and shock.

One can say, that Easton is a wolf in sheep’s coat, whereas the real Marshall is gentle and caring, beneath the rough exterior. The ‘heart’ part of the title is dedicated to the Marshall because of the kindness he showed. The ‘hand’ part is about Mr. Easton, the hand that counterfeits money; the hand that is handcuffed and is on his way to prison.

Question 6.
‘Appearances are deceptive’, goes the saying. How is it applicable in the story ?
Answer:
The story, ‘Hearts and Hands’ has two main male characters. The men enter into the train handcuffed to each other. One is a young-looking man, well- dressed like a gentleman. He has a bold, frank countenance and manner. The other man is described as “ruffled, glum-faced, heavily built and roughly dressed”. At one glance, one would take the handsome man as the Marshall and the other one as a criminal.

When the real Marshall takes the blame on himself and says that he is on his way to Leavenworth prison for counterfeiting, Miss Fairchild believes it completely, as she cannot connect the man she is acquainted with as a criminal; but she can equate the other one as a criminal due to his rough exterior and abrupt behaviour and manner of talking.

That a criminal is lurking inside the elegant attire and suave manners of Mr. Easton, is unbelievable. That a heart of gold is hidden inside the rugged, unpolished exterior of the shrewd-eyed Mar shall is also unbelievable. The gentleman turns out to be a criminal and the uncultured, unpolished ruffian turns out to be a police officer. One cannot definitely go by appearance!

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers After Blenheim

After Blenheim Questions and Answers

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

1. It was a summer evening,
Old Kaspar’s work was done,
And he before his cottage door
Was sitting in the sun,
And by him sported on the green
His little grandchild Wilhelmine.

Question 1.
Who is the speaker? Where was the old man sitting? What mood was he in?
Answer:
The speaker is an old man named Kaspar. The old man was sitting before his cottage. It’s evening and his work was already done, and he was sitting in the sun. This suggests that he was in a relaxed mood.

Question 2.
Who were two grandchildren of Old Kaspar? What do you think of them?
Answer:
Peterkin and Wilhelmine were the two grandchildren of Old Kaspar. They were curious and intelligent kids with a lot of questions in their minds. They were quite sensitive to their surroundings and were always eager to know about things that they saw.

Question 3.
What is he telling about?
Answer:
He starts by telling his two grandchildren about the mystery of the skull, one of them has found. As he further explains, it is linked to a battle that was fought many years ago. Historically, this battle is known as the Battle of Blenheim.

Question 4.
What tells you about the serene atmosphere at Old Kaspar’s home?
Answer:
At Old Kaspar’s home, as the opening lines suggest, there are only three people. One of them is Old Kaspar himself, while the other two are his two grandchildren. The atmosphere prevailing there indicates a kind of aloofness from larger social surroundings. The greenness of vegetation spread before and around the old man’s cottage further adds to the serenity and calm there.

Question 5.
What kind of situation is presented here?
Answer:
The situation presented here does not directly remind us of the war that took place many years ago. It’s a cottage where an old farmer, feeling relaxed after completing his work for the day, is affectionately involved in a conversation with his two grandchildren. As their conversation proceeds, the readers get to know that the place where they are sitting may have been the battleground for a war years ago.

2. Old Kaspar took it from the boy,
Who stood expectant by;
And then the old man shook his head,
And, with a natural sigh –
“Tis some poor fellow’s skull,” said he,
“Whofell in the great victory.
“Ifind them in the garden,
For there’s many here about;
And often when I go to plough,
The ploughshare turns them out.
For many thousand men, ” said he,
“Were slain in that great victory. ”

Question 1.
Where was the skull found? Why does the speaker say that the skull was of some poor fellow?
Answer:
The skull was found by Old Kaspar’s grandson, Peterkin, while playing in front of the cottage. The word ‘poor’ used by the speaker here means ‘unfortunate’ or ‘miserable’. He feels that this must be the skull of someone who lost his life in the battle and his corpse was left there to decay. Thus, he was unfortunate because he could not get what he deserved, for giving away his life in the war.

Question 2.
How common were the skulls there? At which place many of them could be found?
Answer:
It has been suggested here that the place where Old Kaspar’s cottage is situated must have the ground where the Battle of Blenheim was fought many years ago. That is why such skulls of soldiers who had died in the battle could be found there frequently. As Old Kaspar says, he finds many of them in the garden, when he ploughs.

Question 3.
Who does the phrase ‘poor fellow’ refer to in this stanza? Why do you think the poet has used the word ‘expectant’ for ‘the boy’?
Answer:
The phrase poor fellow’ refers to a soldier killed in war.

The poet has used the word ‘expectant’ for the boy as it suggests that he is expecting an answer from the old man to his question regarding the identity of the object he has discovered.

Question 4.
What made the old man shake his head and sigh?
Answer:
The old man’s little grandson Peterkin brought a human skull. On seeing it, he did not look surprised. Instead, he felt pity and remorse while knowing already that there were many more skulls lying there. What Peterkin had come with was just one of the many human skulls that belonged to men who had died years ago in the Battle of Blenheim. The tragic thing was that the dead had been left rotting there for so many years

Question 5.
What was told by the old man?
Answer:
The old man was not astonished when he saw his grandson holding a human skull in his hand. He already knew that there could be many such skulls there, because the place where his cottage was located had been a battleground many years ago. He referred to it as the skull of some poor fellow by which he actually meant that it belonged to an unfortunate, wretched soldier.

Question 6.
What is the irony used in the last two lines here?
Answer:
While he said that the skull belonged to ‘some poor fellow’, he further adds that he ‘fell in the great victory’. These two phrases seem to be contradictory in their connotations. In any victory that is usually regarded as ‘great’, anyone who gives away his life is considered to be a martyr and is said to have sacrificed his life for his motherland. However, the soldier whose skull was discovered by Kaspar’s grandson was referred to by him as a ‘poor fellow’ because he felt pity for the soldier. Thus, the perception of war as ‘the great victory’ becomes questionable.

3. “Now tell us what ’twas all about,”
Young Peterkin, he cries;
And little Wilhelmine looks up
With wonder-waiting eyes;
“Now tell us all about the war,
And what they fought each otherfor. ”
“It was the English, ” Kaspar cried,
“Who put the French to rout;
But what they fought each other for,
I could not well make out;
But everybody said, ” quoth he,
“That ’twas a famous victory.

Question 1.
What had Kaspar told about the battle of Blenheim before in the extract?
Answer:
Earlier, Kaspar had told his grandchildren that many thousand men were killed in that great war. He stated this, in order to explain why Peterkin found a skull there. This implied that the skull belonged to one of those who had died in the battle.

Question 2.
Why is the word ‘cries’ used by the poet in the first line?
Answer:
The word ‘cries’ used here suggests the extent to which young Peterkin was eager to know about the battle. He did not know at that time, that the description of war to be given by his grandfather would be rather saddening and scary.

Question 3.
What is meant by ‘wonder-waiting eyes’? Where is the alliteration used here? Why did Wilhelmine look up with such eyes?
Answer:
This phrase signifies the unmistakable curiosity reflected by the eyes of Wilhelmine eager to get some amazing answer to her question. The figure of speech used here is alliteration as the consonant ‘w’ has been used here twice. If we read the preceding line, we can find reference to Wilhelmine. This is another word starting with ‘w’. Like other children of her age, little Wilhelmine is curious to know something wonderful about different things she hears from her elders. That is why she looks up with such eyes.

Question 4.
What was the curiosity in young Peterkin’s mind?
Answer:
Like his little sister Wilhelmine, young Peterkin is small kid fired with the curiosity to know about different things. He was eager to hear something amazing and exciting about the war. He thought his grandfather knew a lot of interesting things about it. In this extract, when his grandfather refers to ‘the great victory’, he feels he cannot remain quiet. He was just curious to know what the ‘famous victory’ was all about.

Question 5.
What did Kaspar tell about the ‘famous victory’? In what sense was it famous?
Answer:
The ‘famous victory’ talked about by Kaspar was the victory of British- Austrian forces over their French opponents. Kaspar told about its destructive features resulting in a large number of casualties and massive destruction of property. Nevertheless, he felt like any common mam or woman that the victory was famous. Historically, the consequence of the battle established the superiority of the British and dealt a blow to the ambitions of the French emperor Louis XIV.

Question 6.
What did the people say about the war?
Answer:
The war at the core of this poem was a real historical event forming a part of people’s memory. Despite its horrifying consequences, the war was usually remembered as a ‘famous victory’ for the winning side. In the poem, Old Kaspar expresses the perception of common folks of his time who were subdued in their opinion about the negative consequences of the war.

Question 7.
What could old Kaspar not make out?
Answer:
Kaspar was aware of the great quantum of destruction and damage done by the battle. He knew that it had left his own family and surroundings in shambles. Despite that, he could not be too articulate regarding the negative impact of the battle probably because he did not bear the brunt directly and it was not a first-hand experience for him. Thus, it was easier for him to uncritically accept the prevailing trends in public opinion that regarded it as a ‘famous victory’. But when he finds the two kids questioning him on the merits of the battle, he found himself in a state of dilemma, and was exposed in his inability to justify his opinion with discerning precision.

4. “My father lived at Blenheim then,
Yon little stream hard by;
They burnt his dwelling to the ground,
And he was forced to fly;
So with his wife and child he fled,
Nor had he where to rest his head.
“Withfire and sword the country round
Was wasted far and wide,
And many a childing mother then,
And new-born baby died;
But things like that, you know, must be
At every famous victory.

Question 1.
Whose father lived at Blenheim when the war broke out? What does the word ‘then’ mean here?
OR
Who burnt ‘his dwelling’ to the ground?
Answer:
Kaspar’s father lived at Blenheim when the war broke out. The word ‘then’ mean signifies the time when the war took place. The adjective ‘his’ has been used here for the father of Kaspar whose dwelling was burnt by the soldiers of the combined British-Austrian army.

Question 2.
How was the great victory a personal tragedy for the Kaspar family?
Answer:
The great victory left behind a trail of destruction and doom for all who were affected by it. For the Kaspar family, as the speaker says, it proved to be extremely disastrous. His house was burnt and his father was forced to flee with his wife and child.

Question 3.
What were the results of the great victory?
Answer:
The great victory was scripted by the combined forces of Britain and Austria. In the Battle of Blenheim, the combined forces defeated the forces of France and some of its German and Italian allies. But thousands of people died. It was a horrible scene with blood-covered bodies lying rotting in the sun everywhere. Many were forced to leave their dwellings, mothers separated from their children. A great destruction had been caused far and wide.

Question 4.
What is most tragic about the war hinted here?
Answer:
The most tragic aspect of war suggested here is its impact on the civilian population. From the description given by Old Kaspar, it’s evident that they suffered its consequences most severely. The battle, whose winners were hailed as heroes and were immortalized in popular legends, laid waste to the entire country where it was fought.

Question 5.
What does the use of ‘fire’ and ‘sword’ suggest here?
Answer:
‘Fire’ and ‘sword’ suggest the destruction, horror and ruin brought about by the war that there was a havoc all over the country. Houses were ruined, a lot people died, death, blood and misery, a sorrowful condition of once calm and happy place. The fire and sword or the arson and murder created terrible disturbance all over the land.

Question 6.
How was the country affected by the war?
Answer:
The country was ruined by the forces. People deserted their homes and were forced to wander about trying to find safe shelters. The impact of war was so disastrous that many civilians, including innocent women and children, lost their lives. After the war, thousands of corpses were lying everywhere.

Question 7.
What do the last two lines suggest about Kaspar’s perception of the so-called ‘famous victory’?
Answer:
These lines only suggest that like a common man, he feels that death and destruction are only natural if a war leads to a victory regarded as a famous one. In other words, he accepts them as natural things, instead of denouncing or criticising ‘war’ for causing them.

Question 8.
What is the rhyme scheme followed in the poem?
Answer:
In the last couplet of 10 out 11 stanzas, two lines rhyme. In the first four lines, the rhyme scheme is ‘abcb’. Thus, the overall rhyme scheme for each stanza is ‘abcbdd’. In the 10th stanza, however, last words in the second and fourth lines respectively (‘won’ and ‘Wilhelmine’) do not rhyme. Thus, we can say that the rhyme scheme is not regular except for the last two lines of each stanza.

5. “Great praise the Duke of Marlbro’ won,
And our good Prince Eugene. ”
“Why, ’twas a very wicked thing!”
Said little Wilhelmine.
“Nay… nay… my little girl,” quoth he, .
“It was a famous victory
“And everybody praised the Duke
Who this great fight did win. ”
“But wfiat good came of it at last?”
Quoth little Peterkin.
“Why that I cannot tell, ” said he,
“But ’twas a famous victory. ”

Question 1.
What does Kaspar’s answer to his grandson’s question suggest?
Answer:
It suggests that either he does not actually know why the war should be glorified. That probably brings him closer to the way any victory on the battlefield is seen by common people.

Question 2.
Bring out the irony inherent in the speaker’s utterance.
Answer:
The speaker occasionally refers to the enormous quantum of destruction caused by the war. He also categorically talks about the death of thousands of people on the battlefield. Nevertheless, he keeps uttering that the war was a ‘famous victory’.

Question 3.
How did Wilhelmine react to the old man’s description of the war?
Answer:
Wilhelmine was a sensitive and intelligent child. She knew what the war was all about and what it brought in its aftermath. Moreover, when her grandfather told her about the destruction and death that followed the war, she was convinced that it was something bad. She therefore reacted by saying that it was a wicked thing, when her grandfather praised the Duke and the prince for the ‘famous victory’

Question 4.
What do you think of the old man’s point of view?
Answer:
The old man’s point of view in this poem represents an uncritical mass perception of history. Occasionally, it touches upon the actual consequences of the war it describes, but it is not suggested anywhere that denounces the leaders of the winning side who must have been responsible for all the destruction.

Question 5.
Comment upon the contrasted viewpoints in the poem.
Answer:
Old Kaspar, who is the speaker in this poem, describes the horrible consequences of the war fought there. He even tells his grandchildren how his own family was affected and forced to migrate elsewhere in the aftermath of ‘that’ war. This is reinforced by the opinion of his little granddaughter who refers to war as something ‘wicked’. Despite all this, the speaker admires Duke Marlbro and Prince Eugene who led the winning side in the war. Moreover, he frequently refers to the war as ‘a famous victory’.

Question 6.
Why and how did the speaker try to justify the war?
Answer:
The speaker’s interpretation of the battle was wholly based on how it was perceived by common folks during his time. There are no doubt traces of genuineness and authenticity in his description of its consequences. But at the end, it was regarded by everyone as a ‘famous victory’. Kaspar himself had doubts about it, but he lacked the spirit to reject it. He therefore was almost forced by his own ignorance to completely depart from how the result of the battle was seen by common people. He justified his stand by praising the Duke and the Prince, and repeatedly calling the battle a ‘famous victory’.

Question 7.
Do you agree with the justification of war? Why/Why not?
Answer:
The way the war is justified is not agreeable on any count. As we learn from the speaker’s description, a war is always disastrous as it results in the killing of thousands of people and enormous damage to property or assets owned by common people. It does not matter which side wins and which one gets defeated in it. What is really significant is the extent to which it disturbs the life of common people. From that standpoint, glorification of war heroes cannot really justify its negative side. That is why the justification of war is not acceptable.

Question 8.
In the context of the poem, what special significance do the adjectives ‘young’ and ‘little’ have?
Answer:
These adjectives have been used here for the two grandchildren of Kaspar, the speaker or narrator. Though they are not mature enough to clearly understand the inherent contradiction underlying Kaspar’s reference to the battle, they are still able to question and counter it. This suggests the difference between how the generation of Kaspar thinks of it, and the way the future will look upon it. While Kaspar’s opinion is that of a generation dying out and becoming obsolete, the questions posed by his grandchildren show a new wave of curiosity that will not accept it uncritically as the former does.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers A Horse and Two Goats

A Horse and Two Goats Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. His fortunes had declined gradually; unnoticed. From a flock offorty which he drove into a pen at night, his stock had now come down to the two goats, which were tethered to the trunk of a drumstick tree which grew in front of his hut and from which occasionally Muni could shake down drumsticks. This morning he got six. he carried them in with a sense of triumph. Although no one could say precisely who owned the tree, it was his because he lived in its shadow.

Question 1.
Which village has been referred to here? What is the meaning of that village? Give the picture of that village.
OR
Describe the village that has been referred in this passage. Where is it located and what does it mean?
Answer:
There are seven hundred thousand villages in India. The village referred here is ‘Kritam’ that hardly finds a place on the map and is supposed to be the tiniest one which is indicated by a microscopic dot on the survey map of the district Tamil Nadu. But the size has nothing to do with its meaning. Kritam in Tamil means “coronet” or “crown” on the brow of this subcontinent. The village has less than thirty houses among which only one is built with brick and cement.

Question 2.
What is the difference between the ‘big house’ and the other houses in the village ‘Kritam’?
Answer:
The village Kritam is a small village that consisted of less than thirty houses out of which only one is built with brick and cement. It is painted in bright yellow and blue all over with marvelous carvings of Gods and gargoyles on its pillars. This is a big house. The other houses are distributed in four streets that are made up of bamboo thatch, straw, mud and other material.

Question 3.
What was Muni’s daily routine? How many cattle did he have in his prosperous days?
Answer:
Muni lived in an extremely small village of Tamil Nadu named Kritam. His house was last in the fourth street beyond which there were stretched fields. He had once a flock of forty sheep and goats in his prosperous days and he used to set out daily morning for grazing them to the highway a couple of miles away. There was a clay statue of a horse where he would sit on its pedestal while his cattle grazed around. He had a crook at the end of a bamboo pole and snapped foliage from the avenue trees to feed his flock. He collected the bundle of sticks and carried them home for the fuel.

Question 4.
How did Muni’s wife carry out her daily household chores? What did she give Muni for breakfast?
Answer:
Muni’s wife was a homely woman. Her work included preparing meals for her husband and herself and doing various kinds of works at the big house to run her home. In the morning, she lit the domestic fire, boiled water in a mud pot, put some millet flour in it, added salt and then gave it to Muni as the first nourishment for the day. She handed him the packed lunch when he started out and it was the same millet cooked into a little ball which he used to eat with raw onion at midday.

Question 5.
Which lines show that Muni and his wife were leading a life of extreme poverty?
OR
What was the economic condition of Muni’s family?
Answer:
Muni and his wife were living a miserable life where they had only a handful of millet to satisfy their appetite both the times of the day. His stock of cattle had also come down from forty to two goats. There was a drumstick tree in front of his house from which he could shake down drumsticks occasionally. He was tired of eating the boiled leaves of the tree with salt, so on a particular day when he got six drumsticks; he showed his desire to cook them in sauce. But his wife displayed her inability as they had nothing at home to prepare the sauce for the drumsticks.

2. “You have only Jour teeth in your jaw, but your craving is for big things. All right, get the stufffor the sauce, and I will prepare it for you. After all, next year you may not be alive to ask for anything. But first get me all the stuff, including a measure of rice or millet, and I will satisfy your unholy craving. Our store is empty today. Dhall, chilly, curry leaves, mustard, coriander, gingelley oil, and one large potato. Go out and get all this.”

Question 1.
Why was Muni’s wife angry with him? What did she ask him to bring?
OR
What was Muni craving for and why?
Answer:
Muni was tired of eating boiled drumstick leaves, so he had a craving to chew the drumstick out of sauce. At this his wife got angry and rebuked him by saying,” You have only four teeth in your jaw, but your craving is for big things”. Therefore she asked him to bring all the ingredients like dhall, chilly, curry leaves, mustard, coriander, gingelley oil and one large potato required for making the sauce as their store was empty. She agreed as she was doubtful whether he would be alive for the following year to ask for anything.

Question 2.
Comment on the appraisal of humor of shop man by Muni. What was Muni’s purpose behind doing this?
Answer:
On being asked by his wife to bring the stuff for preparing sauce, Muni went to the shop in the third street. He was impatient but the shopkeeper paid no attention on him. Muni kept clearing his throat, coughing and sneezing until the shop man had to ask him, “What ails you? You will fly off that seat into the gutter if you sneeze so hard, young man”. Muni laughed in order to please him at being called “young man”. This made the shopkeeper happy and he liked his sense of humor.

By doing so, Muni wanted him to give one or two items of food on the promise of later repayment. Whenever the shopkeeper was in good mood, he gave but when he lost his temper, he refused him and barked at him for daring to ask for credit.

Question 3.
How did Muni try to attract the shopkeeper’s attention?
Answer:
Muni walked off to the shop in the third street from his house. He sat patiently on an upturned packing case below the platform of the shop. When the shop man didn’t pay heed, Muni cleared his throat, coughed and sneezed until the shop man could not tolerate anymore and asked his problem. Muni laughed in order to please him when he called him ‘Young man’. This completely won the shop man over and he liked his sense of humor to be appreciated.

Question 4.
How did Muni try to befool the shopkeeper? Did he succeed?
Answer:
Muni owed rupees five and a quarter to the shopkeeper. The shopkeeper asked for it when Muni again approached him for getting some food items on debt. At this Muni replied that he would pay off the debt on the first of the next month when his daughter would send him the money on his birthday. As the shopkeeper was very well aware of his tact, he asked him his age and caught him red handed saying that he had already celebrated his birthday five weeks ago. Muni did not succeed as the shopkeeper denied giving him anything.

Question 5.
On what basis Muni used to calculate his age?
Answer:
Muni was not sure of his age so he told the shopkeeper his age ‘fifty’. He always calculated his age from the time of great famine when he was as tall as the parapet around the village well because he was not educated at all due to his low caste. Only the Brahmins were allowed to study. But the accuracy of such things could not be relied upon due to many famines occurring those days.

3. Only on the outskirts did he lift his head and look up. He urged and bullied the goats until they meandered along to the foot of the horse statue on the edge of the village. He sat on its pedestal for the rest of the day. The advantage of this was that he could 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.

Question 1.
How did Muni’s wife show her annoyance over Muni’s failure of getting the ingredients for preparing sauce?
Answer:
When Muni returned empty handed from the shop and asked his wife to sell the drumsticks, his wife became annoyed and refused to give him anything whole day. She told him to fast till evening. She further asked him to take, the goats and be off for grazing them immediately. She even cried, “Don’t come back before the sun is down”.

Question 2.
What trait of her character was Muni aware of?
OR
What impression of his wife’s character do you get from Muni’s words?
Answer:
Muni and his wife were leading a life of poverty. When Muni returned home without anything to cook, his wife became angry and she asked him to move out of the house. But Muni knew that if he obeyed her, she would anyhow arrange something for food in the evening. So it was better not to argue with her at that very moment. Her temper was undependable in the morning but subsided by the evening. She would surely go out and work, grind corn in the Big House, sweep or scrub somewhere and earn enough to buy foodstuff and keep dinner ready for him in the evening.

Question 3.
Which words show that he was worried about his wife?
Answer:
Muni was uncertain about his age. The shopkeeper had told him that he was seventy and then he realized that at seventy, one only waited to be summoned by God. And when he was dead, he thought that what his wife would do. They both had lived in each other’s company since they were children. He had been told that when they got married, he was only ten years old and she was eight. They didn’t have any children otherwise a large progeny would have taken care of them in the old age.

Question 4.
Which was his usual place for grazing his goats?
Answer:
Muni used to take his goats for grazing on the outskirts of the town. He bullied the goats until they meandered along to the foot of the horse’s statue on the edge of the village. Muni sat on its pedestal for the whole day whereas the goats would graze. The benefit of sitting there was that he could watch the highway and see the lorries and buses that passed through to the hills. Seeing

Question 4.
Muni was in a fix when the American talked to him in a language unknown to him. Elucidate.
Answer:
Muni was totally uneducated and he didn’t know the English language except the two words, “Yes, No”. He couldn’t understand what the foreigner was speaking. When he was exhausted with the only English words he was well versed in, he started speaking in Tamil and gave him his introduction. The foreigner also looked in the direction indicated by the Muni’s fingers as he also didn’t knew a single word in Tamil. He gazed at the two goats and the rocks for a while and gave a puzzled expression.

Question 5.
How did Muni react when the stranger offered cigarette to him?
Answer:
When the foreigner offered him a cigarette, Muni received it with a surprise as no one had offered him smoke for years now. He had always liked to smoke a cigarette. Only once the shopkeeper had given him one on credit and he remembered how good it had tasted. The foreigner flicked the lighter and offered it to Muni. Muni was so confused and didn’t knew what to do, so he blew on it and put it out. The foreigner was also puzzled at this but presented the lighter again and lit Muni’s cigarette himself. Muni drew a deep puff and started coughing. It was racking but extremely pleasant.

5. “I am sure you know when this horse was made’’, said the red man and smiled ingratiatingly. Muni reached to the relaxed atmosphere by smiling himself, and pleaded, “Please go away, sir, I know nothing. I promise we will hold him for you if we see any bad character around, and we will bury him up to his neck in a coconut pit if he tries to escape; but our village has always had a clean record. Must definitely be the other village. ”

Question 1.
What was the first thing that occupied Muni’s mind on seeing the American’s card?
OR
What did Muni interpret when he saw the card in American’s hand?
Answer:
After offering him the cigarette, the American said that he had come from New York and took out a wallet from his pocket and presented it to Muni. Already Muni had the impression that he was either a soldier or policeman and was scared of him and this card solidified his fear. Above all he was wearing khaki. He moved away from the card thinking it to be the warrant to arrest him as he might have never seen the card. His mind warned him of khaki. He believed in accepting whatever was offered but never got caught.

Question 2.
In what possible way Muni tried to ward off the trouble?
Answer:
Muni became afraid of seeing the card in the foreigner’s hand. He wanted to run away but then he remembered his age as told by the shopkeeper and thought that it would be better to surrender rather than to get caught. And then an idea struck his mind that he could ward off the trouble by talk. So he started talking in Tamil in a simple manner. He swore before him that he had seen nothing and knew nothing of the case.

If the murder had been committed, the convict wouldn’t be able to escape. According to him, the God was watching everything and pleaded the foreigner not to ask him anything. He also added that a body had been found mutilated and thrown under a tree between Kritam and Kuppam a few weeks ago.

Question 3.
How did Muni try to prove himself innocent? What promise did he make to the foreigner?
OR
What explanation did he give to the foreigner to prove himself innocent?
Answer:
Muni requested the American not to ask him anything as he was unaware of any murder or such incident. He then assured him of catching the convict if they found him and bury him up to his neck in a coconut pit if he tried to escape. He then remarked that their village had a clean record and that must be done by some other village.

Question 4.
The American seemed to be bit annoyed by Muni’s conversation. How can you guess?
Answer:
Among all the conversation in their own respective languages which was totally not understood by each other, Muni and the stranger continued to talk. But then the American realized that there was something wrong and he asked him earnestly, “Please, please I will speak slowly, please try to understand me.” He asked Muni if he couldn’t understand a simple English word where everyone seemed to know some English. He told that he had gotten with English everywhere in the country, but he didn’t speak. Further he made a taunt that if Muni had any religious or spiritual scruples against English speech.

Question 5.
How did the American make plan for India on the pretext of visiting other civilizations?
OR
How did American make plan for India visit and what did he tell Muni?
OR
Which difficulties were faced by the American while working in the Empire State Building?
Answer:
The red-faced man was somewhat irritated after a long series of conversation as he was not feeling satisfied with Muni’s answers. Therefore he tried his best to explain him everything very clearly. He uttered each syllable very carefully and with deliberation. He told him that last August they had the hottest summer in History and he worked in shirt-sleeves in his office on the fortieth floor of the Empire State Building. Once he was stuck also for four hours as there was a power failure and there was no elevator or air conditioning. Meanwhile in the train, he kept on thinking and on reaching home he told about his plan to visit India in the coming winter. He wanted to look at other civilizations.

6. Perhaps he guessed by the way he sat on its pedestal; like other souvenir sellers in this country presiding over their wares. Muni followed the man’s eyes and pointing fingers and dimly understood the subject matter and, feeling relieved that the theme of the mutilated body had been abandoned at least for the time being, said again, enthusiastically, “I was this high when my grandfather told me about this horse and the warrior, and my grandfather was this high when he himself…’

Question 1.
What did Muni explain the American on being distracted from his continued explanation?
Answer:
The American was telling Muni how he made the plans to visit India with his wife to see the new civilizations. At this Muni began to tell, “When I was this high”, and no one knew what he was going to explain when the American interrupted him. Muni forgot what he had started to say and began to talk about his cattle. He remarked that they too loose their cattle sometimes. They were carried by Jackals and Cheetahs and sometimes were being stolen and then they came to know who had done it. Their temple priest could see the face of the thief in the camphor flame and when caught was chopped. The last word he explained through gestures.

Question 2.
Which gestures made by Muni excited the American and how did they remind him of his hobby?
Answer:
The gestures made by Muni were that of chopping the thief who had stolen their cattle. The American watched his hands keenly and guessed he was talking about the chopping of wood. He enquired about his axe and asked to give it to him as he also like chopping wood. He revealed that it was his hobby and he enjoyed that work. He told Muni that on Sundays he did nothing except chopping wood he got along the backwater, near his house.

Question 3.
What made Muni understand that the American was referring to the horse statue?
Answer:
Muni was trying hard to get away from the place and as soon as he turned to go back, the foreigner seized his shoulder and desperately asked him if there was no one who could translate for him. He then looked at the deserted road in the hot afternoon. Pointing towards the statue, he asked Muni if it belonged to him and why didn’t he sell it to him. Then only Muni realized that he was referring to the statue.

Question 4.
How did the American conclude that the horse statue belong to Muni?
Answer:
The American interrupted Muni when the latter was telling about his childhood days and the story of that horse and the warrior. He showed his interest in buying the statue and offered him a good price. He had concluded without any doubt that the horse clay statue belonged to Muni. He might have guessed by the way Muni was sitting on its pedestal as the other souvenir sellers in the country preside over their wares.

Question 5.
At what point did Muni was relieved from the theme of crime he was expecting the American was talking about?
Answer:
The American was least interested in any of the Muni’s talks. He only had a keen interest in buying the horse. Interrupting Muni, he indicated towards the horse and following his eyes and pointing fingers Muni ultimately understood the subject matter and felt relieved that the theme of the mutilated body had been abandoned at least for that particular time and the American had diverted his course of conversation to the horse statue.

7. “I could give a sales talk for this better than anyone else…. This is a marvellous combination of yellow and indigo, though faded now…. How do you people of this country achieve these flaming colours ?”Muni, now assured that the subject was still the horse and not the dead body, said, “This is our guardian, it means death to our adversaries. At the end of Kali Yuga, this world and all other worlds will be destroyed, and the Redeemer will come in the shape of a horse called ‘Kalki’; this horse will come to life and gallop and trample down all bad men. ”

Question 1.
What reason did Muni put forth for not going to school?
Answer:
Muni told the American that he had never been to school because in the earlier days, they had to go out to work in the fields since morning till night, from sowing to harvest time. During Pongal time, they had to cut the harvest and his father allowed them to play out with others at the tank. That was the reason for not knowing the Parangi language. Besides, only Brahmins went to school being the upper caste.

Question 2.
Comment on the few words of appreciation spoken by American for the statue.
Answer:
Muni smoked another cigarette offered by the foreigner with much ease and decided to stay back if he kept on giving him more to smoke. The American now stood up on the pedestal of the statue in the manner as if a demonstrative lecturer did. He ran his fingers along the carved decorations around the horse’s neck and appreciated it at length. He explained Muni that he could give a sales talk for the statue better than anyone else. He praised the vibrant colours of the statue although they were faded now.

Question 3.
What assurance did the foreigner give Muni with regard to horse? What did he tell him about its accommodation?
Answer:
The foreigner assured Muni that the horse statue would find the best accommodation in U.S.A. He further told him that he would shift the book case that he had, to some other place although he loved books very much and was the member of five book clubs. The bonus volumes were mounted up in a pile in his living room which was as high as the horse. But he would remove them all to which his wife might object but he would convince her.

Question 4.
A pinch of humor has been introduced in between all the misunder-standings when the American talked about his coffee business. What were they?
Answer:
Muni asked a question from the foreigner in such a tone that was easily understood by him. The American replied that he was not a millionaire instead he had a modest business of coffee. Amidst all the confusions, Muni caught the word “coffee”. He suggested him to drive to another town where he could get “kapi”. There they had the Friday market where many ‘Kapi-otels’ were opened. The word ‘kapi’ uttered by Muni in his uneducated accent creates a humor in the story.

Question 5.
Finally realizing that too much time was wasted in conversation, how did the American introduce the topic of money?
Answer:
The visitor was now too much tired of all the conversation and finally asked Muni whether he would accept hundred rupees for the statue or not. Muni also wished to take the whiskered soldier but he had no space that year. For carrying the statue the American said that he would have to cancel his air ticket and take a boat home. His wife Ruth could go by air if she wanted but he would go with the horse and keep it in his own cabin all the way.

8. In answer to these questions the red man dashed his hand into his pocket and brought forth his wallet in order to take immediate advantage of the bearish trend in the market. He flourished a hundred-rupee currency note and said, “Well, this is what I meant. ” The old man now realized that some financial element was entering their talk. He peered closely at the currency note, the like of which he had never seen in his life; he knew the five and ten by their colours although always in other people’s hands, while his own earning at any time was in coppers and nickels.

Question 1.
How did the foreigner make plan to carry away the horse statue?
Answer:
The foreigner told Muni that he would have to cancel his air ticket and take a boat home to carry the horse statue and imagined himself voyaging across the seas hugging his horse. He planned to pad it with straw to prevent it from any breakage. He asked Muni for help to keep the horse in his station wagon after he pushed the seat back. He thought of lifting the horse from its pedestal after picking out the cement joints.

Question 2.
Why did Muni feel oblige when the American talked to him and how did he explain it to him?
Answer:
When the topic of money was introduced and the foreigner displayed his plans of carrying the statue to Muni, the guessing game of the words and language seemed to come to an end. Muni asked him if he had many children. He said this because the American appeared good to him as he stayed with an old man and talked to him when nobody showed interest in him. It was evident from Muni’s answer that whole day; he had none to talk except if somebody stopped by to ask for a piece of tobacco.

Question 3.
Again what misunderstanding took place when the American gave him a hundred rupee currency?
Answer:
When the American showed a hundred rupee currency note to Muni, he realized that some sort of financial element had been taking place in their conversation. The old man had never seen that currency in his life. He knew the five and ten by their colours in other people’s hands. He thought that the American was flourishing the note for a change and he gave the reference of village headman who was also a moneylender. This again added to humour in the story.

Question 4.
What did Muni tell about the village headman?
OR
How did Muni describe the village headman?
Answer:
When the misunderstanding with reference to hundred rupee note aroused in the mind of Muni, he directed the foreigner towards the village headman. He told the American that the headman was a moneylender and he could change a lakh of rupees in gold sovereigns. The headman had no idea that everybody in the village knew this. If one dug the floor of his puja room he could see the horad. He only disguised in rags just to mislead the public.

Question 5.
What was Muni’s lifetime dream and how was it going to be fulfilled?
Answer:
The American followed Muni’s look when he talked of his goats and thought that it was a policy to show interest towards the old man’s pets. He went and stroked their backs showing courtesy. The old man realized that the American was making an offer for the goats and his dream was about to be fulfilled. He had reared them up in the hope of selling them one day at a good price and with that money opening a small shop on that very spot. He dreamt of putting a thatched roof, spread a gunny sack on the ground and display on it fried nuts, coloured sweets and green coconuts for the thirsty and weary wayfarers on the highway.

9. Muni hurried homeward with the cash securely tucked away at his waist in his dhoti, he shut the street door and stole up softly to his wife as she squatted before the lit oven wondering if by a miracle food would drop from the sky. Muni displayed his fortune for the day. She snatched the notes from him, counted them by the glow of the fire, and cried, “One hundred rupees! How did you come by it ? Have you been stealing ?”

Question 1.
What joke did Muni crack about his only treasure, the two goats to the American?
Answer:
The old man was sure in his mind that the American was interested in buying his goats and when he put a hundred rupee note currency on Muni’s palm, he felt extreme joy and asked if he was carrying them at the station wagon. The old man then explained him that it was the goats’ first ride in a motor car and he should carry them off only after he (Muni) was out of sight otherwise they would never follow him but only Muni even if he was travelling on the path to Yama Loka. Saying this, Muni laughed at his own joke.

Question 2.
Who helped the American to detach the horse statue and how?
Answer:
After taking money, Muni left the place and the American thought he had gone to fetch some help. He waited for some time at the place and when he saw a truck coming downhill, he stopped it and asked for the help. A couple of men helped in detaching the statue from its pedestal and placed it in his station wagon. The American gave them five rupees each and for further payment they siphoned off gas from the truck to start his engine.

Question 3.
What explanation did Muni give to his wife about the money?
Answer:
Muni was extremely happy by selling his goats for hundred rupees to a foreigner. He had never expected such a deal. After getting money and leaving his goats grazing at the same place, he rushed towards his home excitedly. His wife was sitting before the lit oven expecting some miracle food to be dropped from the sky. He displayed his fortune to her and told that he had sold his goats to a red-faced man who was absolutely crazy about them. The American gave him all that money and carried them off his motor car.

Question 4.
What was Muni’s wife’s reaction when he showed her a hundred rupee note?
Answer:
Muni excitedly rushed home with cash tucked carefully at his waist in his dhoti. On reaching home, he displayed the money to his wife who snatched it and thought that he might have stolen them from somewhere. When he was telling the story of selling the goats, they heard the bleating outside. His wife saw them and declared that if the police came to arrest him she would go away to her parents.

Question 5.
What did Muni get irritated on seeing his goats back? How did he react?
Answer:
Muni was in the opinion that he had sold his goats to the American for he was crazy for his goats and offered him hundred rupees for them. But when they heard bleating outside and his wife opened the door, she found the goats.When Muni saw them at his doorstep, he muttered a great curse and seized one of the goats by its ears and shouted,” Where is that man? Don’t you know you are his? Why did you come back?” The goat wriggled in his grip. He did the same thing with the other goat.

A Horse and Two Goats Questions and Answers

Question 1.
Describe the conversation between Muni and the shopkeeper.
Answer:
On being asked by his wife to bring the ingredients to prepare the sauce, Muni went to the shop in the third street. He was impatient but the shopkeeper paid no attention to him. Muni kept clearing his throat, coughing and sneezing until the shop man had to ask him, “What ails you ? You will fly off that seat into the gutter if you sneeze so hard, young man”. Muni laughed in order to please him and also at being called “young man”. This made the shopkeeper happy and he liked his sense of humor.

The shopkeeper asked for five rupees and a quarter which Muni owed to him. At this Muni replied that he would pay off the debt on the first of the next month when his daughter would send him the money on his birthday. As the shopkeeper was very well aware of his tact, he asked him his age and caught him red-handed saying that he had already celebrated his birthday five weeks ago. Muni did not succeed in his attempt, as the shopkeeper denied to give him anything.

Question 2.
Why was Muni scared to see the red-faced foreigner ?
Answer:
While Muni was watching his goats grazing on the outskirts of the town Kritam, a red-faced man got down from his motor vehicle and approached towards Muni. He was wearing khaki clothes and from his appearance he seemed to be a policeman or a soldier. Muni thought that if he ran, the foreigner would either chase or shoot him as the dogs chase only those who run. He couldn’t understand why that man was after him. Meanwhile the foreigner cried “Marvelous” ! Looking at the horse statue with his eyes fixed on it, Muni was frozen with fear and tried to edge away. Suddenly, the other man joined his palms together and with a smiling face said, “Namaste ! How do you do ?”

Question 3.
Trace the circumstances in which Muni gets ready to part with his goats.
Answer:
During a series of great misunderstanding between their conversation, the American followed Muni’s gaze when he talked of his goats and thought that it was a policy to show interest towards the old man’s pets. He went and stroked their backs showing courtesy. Old man thought that the American was making an offer for the goats and his dream of lifetime was about to be fulfilled. He had reared them up in the hope of selling them one day at a good price and with that money opening a small shop on that very spot. He dreamt of putting a thatched roof, spreading a gunny sack on the ground and display on it, fried nuts, coloured sweets and green coconuts for the thirsty and weary wayfarers on the highway. Thus, he made a deal with the American without realizing the veracity.

Question 4.
Depict the life of Muni and his wife at the beginning of the story, ‘A Horse and Two Goats’ ?
Answer:
Muni and his wife lived in ‘Kritam’, a tiny village in India. The name means, “coronet or crown’” in Tamil. The village had less than thirty houses, only one of them built with cement and brick. Painted in yellow and blue with gorgeous carvings, it was known as Big House. Muni’s mud-house was thatched with bamboo, and straw. Muni had forty sheep in his good days, but it dwindled down to two. All day he would graze his animals, sitting on the pedestal of a horse statue.

Muni’s wife would cook the meagre supply of millet and salt, for breakfast and lunch. Occasionally, he would have, drumsticks, but mostly they did not have the ingredients to make a sauce for them. At times, he would humour the local shopkeeper and buy things on credit, which he may never repay. Although, the lady of the house would scold him, somehow she conjured up some food for the evening out of the money she made by working in the Big House or somewhere else. Muni looked seventy and his only worry was what his wife would do once he was gone.

Question 5.
Describe the horse statue. What is the significance of it in the story ?
Answer:
The village boast of a life size horse statue, ‘moulded out of clay, baked, burnt and brightly colored’. It was a dynamic one, as though in motion, with its head held proudly, prancing its forelegs in the air and flourishing its tail in a loop. Beside the horse, there was the figure of a warrior with curved moustache, bulging eyes and sharp nose. Initially, the horse had been pure white and had a colourful brocade cover on its back, but with time it became a shadow of its former self.

The statue was big enough for Muni to creep under its belly for shade. When the foreigner came to visit the village, he was enamoured by the statue and wanted to buy it. Muni, who hardly knew English could not understand the man. When the man gave him money, Muni thought it was for his goats. The man took away the horse to America, and Muni was happy to get the money. Thus, the horse stands testimony to the misunderstanding which language can cause. Also, it shows how foreigners appreciate local art and how the locals pay no attention to such works.

Question 6.
The way of life and language of Muni and the red-faced man differed and due to this their conversation creates a lot of humour. Elaborate.
Answer:
There is a huge cultural difference between Muni and the foreigner. Muni is a poor villager in an obscure place in India while the red-faced man is an American who has come to see the local culture of India. He speaks English but Muni knows only Tamil and his knowledge of English is limited to two words- ‘Yes’ and ‘No’.

Right from the initial greetings, this difference in culture and language makes the interactions of the two hilarious. The lack of connection through language results in verbal and situational humour. Just seeing the khakhi clad man, sent shivers of fear through the old man. He felt that the red-faced man was a police and when he offered his card, he thought that it was a warrant.

He immediately denied any knowledge about the village murder and tried to deviate the conversation to theft in the village. He talked about his childhood, the other man talked about his holiday plans. He talked about buying the horse, Muni talked about selling off his goats. The misunderstandings were from both the sides and the confusion rising out of them is simply hilarious.

Cross culture differences leading to humor can also be seen at the ending of the story. Muni thought that he had sold his goats and made a profit. The traveler thought that he had purchased the statue at market price. Humor is enhanced by the fact that Muni understood the significance of the statue, and yet could not understand that he had payed a crucial role in the transaction.

The red-faced traveler imagined the statue “in his living room,” but failed to understand how it was a landmark for the locals. In the resolution to this misunderstanding, cultural differences in the form of language prevented either one from understanding the other. Yet, both got what they wanted. Muni got the money he so coveted. The foreigner got the statue he desired. Thus, in a way, the lack of cultural understanding manages to provide an ending that brought contentment for both.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers The Bangle Sellers

The Bangle Sellers Questions and Answers

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

1. Bangle sellers are we who bear
Our shining loads to the temple fair….
Who will buy these delicate, bright
Rainbow-tinted circles of light?
Lustrous tokens of radiant lives.
For happy daughters and happy wives.

Question 1.
What is meant by “shining loads”? Where are the bangle sellers going to sell their bangles and why?
Answer:
In this stanza, “shining loads” means the various types of bright and colourful bangles that the bangle sellers carry. The bangle sellers are going to the temple fair. They are going there to sell their bangles to women of different age groups i.e., in different stages of life.

Question 2.
What rhyme scheme is followed in the poem? Who are the buyers of the bangles suggested here? Describe the bangles mentioned in the extract.
Answer:
Each stanza of the poem is arranged in three couplets that follow the rhyme scheme of aabbcc. The buyers suggested here are happy daughters and wives. The bangles described here are delicate, bright, colourful like a rainbow, and shining.

Question 3.
What do the metaphorical expressions ‘shining loads’, ‘delicate, bright rainbow-tinted circles of light’ and ‘lustrous tokens of radiant lives’ imply?
Answer:
These metaphors describe their features like brightness, softness and colourfulness that make them catchy and fascinating. Due to these features, the bangles are a symbol of positivity, happiness, beauty and hope rather than just objects of cosmetic value worn by women on their wrists.

Question 4.
Explain how the poet uses her descriptive skills to present facts. Give two examples from the extract?
Answer:
In this extract, the poet touches upon the popularity of bangles not merely as an ornament, but also as a deep-rooted cultural symbol that allows them a kind of freedom in terms of choosing and buying something according to their own preferences. The extract also suggests that temples, apart from being the centres of spiritual activities, may also account for economic activities in the form of purchase and sale of different items and goods used by people.

Question 5.
Give the relevance of the role of bangle sellers in a traditional Indian set-up, according to this extract?
Answer:
Bangle sellers are a community of people who can be easily spotted. The bangles they sell are a distinctive mark of womanhood and femininity in India’s socio-cultural context. They also symbolise an old and culturally established practice associated with women in the traditional Indian society. Thus, bangle sellers can be regarded as people who are responsible for maintaining an old tradition, which in turn lends uniqueness to womanhood.

2. Some are made for a maiden’s wrist,
Silver and blue as the mountain mist,
Some are flushed like the buds that dream
On the tranquil brow of a woodland stream.
Some are aglow with the bloom that cleaves
To the limpid glory of new born leaves

Question 1.
What type of bangle is suitable for a maiden’s wrist? Why are silver and blue colours compared to the mountain mist?
Answer:
According to the speaker, some of the bangles that are suitable for a maiden’s wrist are blue and silver like the mist in the mountains. Some others are reddish in colour like the flushed buds found along a stream. Then, there are others that glow like newborn leaves. Mountain mist is characterised by beauty, freshness and purity. That is why silver and blue colours are compared to it.

Question 2.
In what way are the buds set to dream? Explain the simile used here?
Answer:
Here, the speaker is alluding to the appearance of a particular type of bangle suitable for maidens. She says that it looks rosy with a glow like ‘the buds that dream on the tranquil brow of a woodland stream’. The figure of speech used here is simile because two dissimilar things (‘bangle’ and ‘buds’) are compared here for an attribute that is identical (their ‘rosiness’).

Question 3.
Explain the line : “On the tranquil brow of a woodland stream.”
Answer:
In this line, the speaker has used the phrase ‘tranquil brow’ to imply the calm height or crest of a stream flowing through a forest. It’s rather plausible to read it with the noun phrase ‘the buds that dream’, which precedes it. Keeping in mind the use of words like ‘dream’, tranquil’ and ‘brow’, it seems to be an example of personification.

Question 4.
How are the bangles compared to the new bom leaves?
Answer:
Describing one type of bangles, the speaker states that it has a pure, untrammelled glow of freshness. This glow of freshness is compared here to the brightness and charm of nascent leaves. The comparison here is metaphorical, because unlike what we see in case of a simile, ‘like’ or ‘as’ has not been used to compare two dissimilar objects.

Question 5.
What colours of the bangles are meant for maidens? What do the colours symbolize?
Answer:
Silver, blue, rosy red and leaf-green are the the colours of the bangles that are meant for maidens. While silver is the symbol of purity and brightness, blue symbolises emotional intensity and depth. Rosy red and leaf-green colours are symbols of beauty and freshness, respectively.

Question 6.
The word ‘some’ has been repeated in the poem for a purpose. What is it? Which phrases used in these lines reflect the poet’s keen under¬standing of the beauty of nature?
Answer:
The word ‘some’ represents the different types of bangles in the poem. ‘Mountain mist’, ‘woodland stream’ and ‘newborn leaves’ are the phrases reflect the poet’s keen understanding of the beauty of nature.

3. Some are like fields of sunlit corn,
Meet for a bride on her bridal morn,
Some, like the flame of her marriage fire,
Or, rich with the hue of her heart’s desire,
Tinkling, luminous, tender, and clear,
Like her bridal laughter and bridal tear.

Question 1.
What do the first two lines of the extract explain? What is being compared to the “fields of sunlit com”? Why?
Answer:
In the first line, some bangles are compared to ‘fields of sunlit corn’. In the context of a bride to whom it relates, it suggests the bright and joyful prospect of a new phase of life that is about to begin. Thus, the colour of the bangles described here corresponds to the appearance of a bride preparing to set out for a fresh and extremely meaningful journey in her life.

Question 2.
What does the simile ‘the flame of her marriage fire’ suggest about the colour of some bangles? Which phrases used in these lines tell you about the life of a married woman?
Answer:
It suggests that some bangles referred to by the narrator are crimson red or orange resembling the colour of the flames of marriage fire. The phrases that tell us about the life of a married woman are ‘a bride on her bridal morn’, ‘flame of her marriage fire’, ‘bridal laughter’ and ‘bridal tear’.

Question 3.
Explain with examples the simile and metaphor used in these two lines.
Some, like the flame of her marriage fire, Or, rich with the hue of her heart’s desire,
Answer:
In the first line, the colour of some bangles is likened to the flame of marriage fire. The figure of speech used here is simile, implying that the bangles referred to are yellow in colour. In the second line, another comparison has been made between the colour of bangles and the colour of desire of a bride’s heart. The figure of speech employed here is metaphor, because the comparison is more direct.

Question 4.
Bring out the applicability of the line: “Some, like the flame of her marriage fire”.
Answer:
In traditional Indian society, the flame of marriage fire holds immense significance. It is regarded as a symbol of promise, hope and assurance for an enduring bond of life that marriage essentially signifies. As the speaker states, some of the bangles worn by a newly married woman have the colour of marriage fire. This suggests that the yellow colour of these bangles seems to be reflecting the same promise, hope and assurance as does the marriage fire.

Question 5.
What do the contrasting images of ‘bridal laughter ‘ and ‘bridal tear ‘imply here?
Answer:
The phrase ‘bridal laughter’ captures the mood of natural joy and happiness exhibited by a young woman after her marriage. It reinforces the significance of marriage as a source of fulfilment and self-satisfaction for a young maiden. ‘Bridal tear’ probably suggests a bride’s grief caused by her separation and going away from her childhood home.

4. Some are purple and goldjlecked grey
For she who has journeyed through life midway,
Whose hands have cherished, whose love has blest,
And cradled fair sons on her faithful breast,
And serves her household in fruitful pride,
And worships the gods at her husband’s side.

Question 1.
How does the narrator describe an adult or middle-aged woman?
Answer:
As the narrator says, an adult or middle-aged woman is an embodiment of emotional stability, equanimity and self-assurance. She may look back and see herself performing a number of tasks for the betterment of her family. She exudes a sense of contentment as she knows that she has performed her duties and now, she is in a position to see the fruits of her commitment and dedication to family values, with pride. Thus, the phase of life she is passing through marks the peak in her life.

Question 2.
What special significance does the phrase “fruitful pride” hold in the above extract?
Answer:
The phrase ‘fruitful pride’ has been used in this extract to indicate the basic trait of a woman’s involvement in household tasks. In a traditional social system like ours, a woman is expected to play multiple roles and perform a lot of duties. Her commitment, though undervalued at times, is selfless and undemanding. This is propelled by the conviction that her dutifulness will bear fruits some day, and prove to be beneficial for the entire family. The phrase ‘fruitful pride’ suggests the realization of this hope in some way or the other that brings in for her a sense of contentment with her work as a homemaker.

Question 3.
For which type of women are the bangles described in these lines, suitable for?
Answer:
The bangles described in these lines have colours that are completely different from those described earlier. This is because the type of women they are suitable for are seasoned, experienced , balanced, judicious and emotionally poised. They have travelled a long way on the path of life and have seen the seeds of their dedication grow into plants. They have performed their household duties on all counts, with a sense of selfless commitment.

Question 4.
Discuss the use of colour imagery in the extract.
Answer:
Purple and grey are colours that signify depth and maturity. Women and men usually develop these traits in their understanding, after a transition from youth to adulthood. Due to this change, their preferences also change. Bangles of purple and grey colours, as the speaker says, are therefore suitable for middle-aged women. Thus, the use of colour imagery indicates the poet’s mastery as a very sensitive, empathetic and discerning observer of life.

Question 5.
Comment on the changes in the life of a woman vis-a-vis the colour of her bangles.
Answer:
As the speaker says, colours of bangles correspond to the different stages of life of those women who wear them. Accordingly, bangles of different hues are referred to for women who are unmarried and those who have just begun the journey of married life. Life of a middle-aged is marked with maturity, calm of mind and sense of contentment. She has already spent a greater part of her life as wife, mother and homemaker. Corresponding to this change, the speaker states that bangles of purple and golden grey colours are meant for her. Here, the speaker seems to be offering a view of life based on its segmentation into interrelated patterns of existence each of which comprises a set of emotions, ideas and practices explicable in terms of certain colours.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers The Cold Within

The Cold Within Questions and Answers

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

1. Six humans trapped by happenstance
In bleak and bitter cold.
Each one possessed a stick of wood
Or so the story’s told.

Question 1.
What does this stanza suggest about the source of the poem?
Answer:
As the last line indicates, the poem is based on a story that the poet has heard from someone. Tims, it is obvious that the poem is not a first-hand account of something he has seen or experienced himself. However, the exact source from which the poet might have received the first-hand information is not stated anywhere. The poet’s main objective, as it appears, has been to express the content of the story in a poetic form for the readers who may not have been familiar with the story or the moral it conveys. Thus, irrespective of the source from which its theme may have been imported, the poet can be credited with having re-created the story as a poetic piece while retaining its moral spirit and the message it conveys.

Question 2.
Give some examples of assonance from this stanza, explaining why this poetic device is used.
Answer:
As we know, assonance is a poetic device that involves the use of the identical vowel sounds in two non-rhyming words in a sentence or line. Assonance is one of the most important poetic devices employed in verses. It is used for internal rhyming in a poetic piece. In this stanza, the first line has words such as ‘trapped’ and ‘happenstance’ which share the same ‘a’ sound. Similarly, ‘so’, ‘story’ and ‘told’ in the last line have the same ‘o’ sound.

Question 3.
What does the use of words like “bleak and bitter cold,” “dying” and “forlorn” suggest?
Answer:
Their use suggests a depressing and desperate mood that the poet wants to set up for the entire poem. This essentially indicates that the poem deals with am uncomfortable situation in the life of people it talks about. Symbolically, it refers to a deep social crisis reflecting the decay of certain moral values due to which the peaceful co-existence of people with different mindsets and identities becomes endangered.

Question 4.
How does this stanza suggest that destiny occasionally plays a significant role in determining the conditions of a person’s existence?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet says that six men are together experiencing extremely unfavorable climatic conditions. These conditions, characterized by ‘bleak and bitter cold’, are not suitable for their survival. As we know, nobody would ever like to experience such conditions. This essentially implies that they are compelled to be there by some invisible force of nature that is beyond their own control. It’s this force that we usually call ‘destiny’. The phrase ‘trapped by happenstance’ in the first line only reinforces this point.

Question 5.
Each of the six men possesses ‘a stick of wood’. In your opinion, what does this suggest here?
Answer:
This phrase is relevant here both in its literal and symbolic meanings. Literally, it means something that is capable of producing fire in the extremely cold conditions, in which the six men find themselves. Thus, it is an object that can save their lives. Symbolically, it means some attribute or trait that is deeply rooted in their character or individuality. This is suggested by the use of the word ‘possessed’, implying ownership with a deep sense of attachment.

2. Their dying fire in need oj logs,
But the first one held hers back,
For, of the faces round the fire.
She noticed one was black.

Question 1.
What kind of prejudice does this stanza refer to?
Answer:
As the stanza reveals, ‘the first one’ holds back her log just because she doesn’t want to share the fire and its warmth with one of them who is black. Thus, the kind of prejudice that the behavior of ‘the first person’ speaks of is racial in nature.

Question 2.
What is the symbolic significance of the phrase ‘dying fire’?
Answer:
The word ‘fire’ basically symbolises the basic spirit of humanity and harmony underlying the social-cultural milieus of existence. The adjective ‘dying’ mayr be interpreted as the poor state of social relationships, due to the prevalence of negative values and feelings.

Question 3.
What does the word ‘logs’ imply here?
Answer:
The word ‘logs’ here implies the ‘prejudices’ that the six men referred to in the poem have against one another. Each of them knows that if he throws his log into the fire, he will give himself as well as others a chance to stay alive. However, their minds are so much preoccupied with a deep sense of hatred that they fail to understand this.

Question 4.
The attitude of people to one another speaks of the social system to which they belong. How does this stanza imply this?
Answer:
This stanza depicts an extremely pathetic state of existence where the survival of everyone exposed to it depends on his inner strength to offer what he possesses, i.e. the stick of wood that he holds. The person referred to as ‘the first one’ is too narrow and biased in his perception to share her ‘possession’ with others for the common good of all. Her attitude clearly reflects that negativity prevails in the behavior pattern of everyone and positive values are on a decline. In a social system also, predominance of counterproductive values and feelings such as mutual hatred, opportunism and bias suggests the declining state of existence for everyone.

Question 5.
Do you think it is natural for a person to hate some other person if they have differences in their physical features or appearance?
Answer:
No, Hating someone for being different in physical features or appearance cannot be accepted as a sign of natural or normal behaviour. It only indicates a mindset dominated by negative and regressive values that go against humanity and hamper the growth of positive values and feelings such as mutual harmony and brotherhood among people in a social system, irrespective of their difference. A social system progresses in the right direction only by overlooking such difference and motivating all its members to cooperate for their collective growth.

3. The next man looking ‘cross the way
Saw one not of his church.
And couldn’t bring himself to give
The fire his stick of birch.

Question 1.
Mention the kind of prejudice that this stanza talks about. How is it implied?
Answer:
The kind of prejudice that this stanza speaks of is religious. This is evident from the use of the word ‘church’. Usually, religion serves as a binding force that brings people together. However, as this stanza indicates, there may be inherent differences in a faith that comes in critical situations when a sense of selfless cooperation is required. Here, the difference is so pronounced that it prevents a man from offering his stick to fire, as he thinks this will benefit another man who is of a different church.

Question 2.
What does the attitude of the ‘next man’ suggest here?
Answer:
His attitude suggests that prejudices are sometimes so narrow that even the followers of the same religion become hostile to each other. They may be insensitive to each other’s needs just because their churches are different. What is even more shocking is the fact that people who have such prejudices are insensitive to their own needs as well.

Question 3.
What is it that makes prejudice so deep-rooted?
Answer:
In case of religious prejudice that this stanza talks about, it’s the wrong or half-baked understanding of the basic ideas propagated by a faith that makes it so effective in determining people’s behavior and developing negative attitudes that last for years.

Question 4.
Do you think prejudice comes naturally from following a particular religion?
Answer:
Each religion is based on the highest principles and ideals that govern our lives. It never teaches its followers to hate others. However, the way in which common people understand, interpret and practice these principles and practices usually involves a certain role for those who teach or preach those principles and ideals. A religious prejudice takes root in the mind, when the sources from which one receives the understanding of those principles and ideals have some problem.

Question 5.
Based on your reading, briefly describe the character of the man referred to as ‘the next man’ in this stanza.
Answer:
The next man’ in this stanza is bigoted and biased despite being religious. As his attitude suggests, he is not the one who follows his faith with a broad mind and big heart. Instead his attitude is that of a selfish and opportunistic character who hates his neighbour for following a different faith. Thus, he is least concerned about practically adopting one of the greatest of all ideals that every faith instructs its followers to cherish, i.e. love for one’s neighbour. Moreover, his obsession with his own ‘church’ also suggests that he is too dogmatic and orthodox in his belief.

4. The third one sat in tattered clothes.
He gave his coat a hitch.
Why should his log be put to use
To warm the idle rich?

Question 1.
What does the ‘tattered clothes’ of the man referred to suggest about his prejudice?
Answer:
It tells us that he is a poor man and as such, the target of his prejudice is the rich man. He feels that it is unjust to give what little he had to help him (the rich man) who had more than he. It is because of this prejudice that be is not willing to offer his log.

Question 2.
Based on this stanza, explain why economic prejudices form in people’s minds.
Answer:
The word ‘idle’ used in the last line indicates that the poor man here has formed a rather rigid opinion about the rich one, regarding the latter as an inactive man with a lot of money. Many people, who work hard but earn very little, may have this opinion even about their employers or masters, apparently sitting inside their huge chambers and delivering orders to them. However, when such opinions take the form of hatred, they become prejudices.

Question 3.
How do people suffering from economic prejudices usually react to those whom they hate? Can you find an analogue here?
Answer:
Economic prejudices are mostly articulated by people through their conduct in day-to-day life. Very often, they can be noticed in people’s gestures and speech, when they interact with one another. However, if they turn into a feeling of deep hatred, they can provoke people into directing it against one another with a clearly revengeful motive and intent. In this stanza, the poor man expresses this motive and intent, when he refuses to offer his log as he feels this would make the rich man feel comfortable.

Question 4.
Intolerance is like a blinding force that works against human values. How do you think this assumption stands true in the context of this stanza?
Answer:
The poor man referred to in this stanza does not like the rich man sitting beside him. But his hatred is so rigid that it becomes a form of intolerance. Dominated by it, the poor man stops seeing the simple fact that if he offers his log, it will not only save the rich man but himself as well. Thus, just because he hates the rich man, he avoids saving many lives including the life of his neighbour and also his own. His intolerance therefore works against human values.

Question 5.
How do you think the poor man should have behaved instead of showing negativity in his attitude and behaviour as suggested in this stanza?
Answer:
The poor man should have reasonably understood his own state and accepted it as a reality without blaming the rich man. He must have been able to appraise and appreci te his economic condition with fairness and without impartiality or bias. This would have enabled him to think of the crisis with a positive frame of mind and contribute towards it for making the situation better for all.

5. The rich man just sat back and thought
Of the wealth he had in store,
And how to keep what he had earned
From the lazy, shiftless poor.

Question 1.
What kind of prejudice is at the core of this stanza? Who is at the receiving end here?
Answer:
Economic prejudice forms the core of this stanza, but the person who is at the receiving end is the poor man. The rich man is greedy and has his own stereotyped perception of the poor man that prevents him from taking initiative to make the situation better.

Question 2.
Based on this stanza, how will you define the attitude of the rich man?
Answer:
The rich man has been described here as a mean-minded, self-seeking paranoid who is scared of the presence of the poor man. His perception of the poor man as ‘lazy’ and ‘shiftless’, captured in the last line, shows that he is conceited and deceitful as well.

Question 3.
What, according to this stanza, prompts the rich man to sit back without offering his log?
Answer:
While the rich man is over-possessive about his wealth, he is also biased in his opinion about the poor man. He feels that if the poor man survives, he may make off with all he owns. It’s his desire not to let the poor man survive that prompts him to sit back and make no effort to offer the log he holds.

Question 4.
What according to the poet are the limitations of the rich man?
Answer:
According to the poet, material richness comes from the accumulation of wealth. As the character of the rich man suggests here, the rich man’s practice of wealth accumulation has made him too possessive, self-centred, opportunistic and insensitive to his surroundings. He doubts others, fearing that they may steal or take away his wealth. This makes it extremely difficult for him to mix and cooperate with others. The way he perceives his less wealthy or materially poor neighbour thus isolates him and tends to make him unsociable.

Question 5.
Material wealth is useless unless it gives one the strength to survive in a crisis situation. Can you justify this in the context of this stanza?
Answer:
In this stanza, the man referred to as ‘the rich man’ is wealthy, but prejudiced and hateful to the poor man. Due to his narrow-mindedness, he fails to perceive the significance of making a little sacrifice for his own sake, just because he thought this might also benefit someone he regards as his foe. This failure exposes his lack of foresight besides his fatal insensitivity which would eventually cost him his own life.

6. The black man’s face bespoke revenge
As the fire passed from his sight.
For all he saw in his stick of wood
Was a chance to spite the white.

Question 1.
According to this stanza, what is the motive behind the black man’s refusal to offer his stick of wood? Who is the target of his prejudice?
Answer:
The stanza reveals that the motive behind the black man’s refusal to offer his stick of wood is retaliation or revenge. The black man thinks it as a chance to take revenge and harm the white man who is the target of his prejudice, by keeping the log to himself.

Question 2.
Can you justify the behavior of the black man?
Answer:
The black man here represents the victims of racial prejudice that have made them suffer for centuries. To a certain degree, the anger of the black man seems to be natural. However, when this anger becomes a deep-seated sense of revenge, it goes against the great values of humanity such as mutual harmony and love. Thus, it cannot be justified.

Question 3.
What does the ‘stick of wood’ held by the black man symbolise in his own context?
Answer:
‘The stick of wood’ that the black man holds is apparently a kind of life-line on which his survival depends. It’s going to produce fire that will save him from falling a prey to the lethal cold. However, the tire thus produced will be shared by all, including a white man whom the black man hates. As the black man is obsessed with the idea of not letting the white man have his share in the fire, he refuses to offer his stick of wood. Thus, to the black man, his stick of wood symbolises an opportunity to take revenge on the white man.

Question 4.
Lack of cooperation may be suicidal in a situation of crisis. How does this stanza suggest this?
Answer:
In this stanza, we find that the black man is not interested to offer his stick that will keep the fire burning and thus, keep alive the chance of survival for everyone present there. The lack of cooperation on his part comes from his deep-seated prejudice against one of them who is white. This prejudice desensitises the black man completely due to which he forgets that by giving his stick into fire, he will not only save others but also himself. Obviously, his passivity caused by prejudiced perception is suicidal.

Question 5.
What according to you is the best way to handle a crisis that con¬cerns two people who represent different and mutually hostile communities?
Answer:
In such a critical situation, their survival basically depends on how much they cooperate with each other and together chalk out an effective strategy to deal with it. So, the best way is to forget their past animosity and focus on the present. It is only by shedding their prejudices and joining hands that they can find a way to emerge unscathed.

7. The last man of this forlorn group
Did nought except for gain.
Giving only to those who gave
Was how he played the game.

Question 1.
What type of mindset aptly defines the behavior of the ‘last man’?
Answer:
It can be regarded as a grossly materialistic mindset devoid of generosity for fellow humans or philanthropy. A greedy fellow who would give help only if there is something beneficial in return i.e., he doesn’t want to lose his possession without being in a profitable state.

Question 2.
Do you think the behavior of the person referred to as the ‘last man’ can positively contribute to the welfare of any society? Why?
Answer:
As stated here, this man always expects others to do something for him before doing anything for them. Only those people who are selfish and obsessed with their own betterment can behave in this manner. Besides, it also shows a blatant lack of the tendency to take initiative and show a high degree of commitment to anything that concerns the entire society.

Question 3.
What does the word ‘game’ imply here?
Answer:
The word has been used here to suggest the opportunistic behavior of some prejudiced minds incapable of seeing anything beyond themselves. The man referred to here is a prime example of a person who is not ready to ‘give’ anything, because he does not sense the prospect of any immediate gain for himself. Thus, the connotation of this word is negative.

Question 4.
Why does the poet calls them a forlorn group?
Answer:
The group of six men that the poet talks about are completely cut-off from the outside world and are forced to put up with an extremely inclement weather conditions. The chances of their survival are minimum. They know this showing sadness in their gestures. However, they are not ready to give up their prejudiced views and cooperate for survival. Thus, they are not making any attempt to avoid death, which seems to be almost certain. That is why the poet refers to them as a forlorn group.

Question 5.
Even in a relation purely based on ‘giving and taking’, one has to take initiative. Do you think ‘the last man’ referred to in this stanza, has the ability to take initiative?
Answer:
It seems that this man can never take initiative in any relationship. He is the kind of person who will reciprocate only when he receives something. Even then, he will remain selective in his approach and will give anything only to the person, from whom he receives something. Thus, he embodies a hard-headed opportunism incapable of taking initiative.

8. Their logs held tight in death’s still hands
Was proof of human sin.
They didn’t die from the cold without
They died from the cold within.

Question 1.
What is the outcome of their prejudices?
Answer:
Due to their prejudices, as it is stated here, all the six men refuse to offer the logs. They agreed to froze in the cold and kept sitting with hatred and revenge but not overcome their prejudices. As a result, they all died in the end, not because of the cold weather but because of the coldness within them.

Question 2.
What is the phrase ‘human sin’ used here for?
Answer:
This phrase basically suggests their gross insensitivity and hostility towards one another. What is inhuman about their tragic death is their refusal to sacrifice their egos and prejudices, ignoring the fact they might have survived if they had agreed to cooperate. It speaks about their inner weakness, which is tantamount to impiety and wickedness.

Question 3.
What do the phrases ‘cold without’ and ‘cold within’ suggest here?
Answer:
The first phrase, ‘cold without’ has a plain meaning, signifying the inclement climatic condition in which the six men are trapped. The second phrase, ‘cold within’ has a deep, connotative meaning, implying their insensitive prejudices and inhuman behavior which cost their lives.

Question 4.
What does the first line imply here?
Answer:
This line suggests their end without any remorse or repentance. It clearly indicates that they died primarily because they were unable to make a little sacrifice that was so much required in situation of deep crisis facing them. Had they given their logs into fire, they would have survived. But none of them was able to do this, as they failed to free themselves from their narrowness and biased perceptions. Unfortunately for them, they died with ‘their logs held tight’, suggesting that they did not realize the basic flaw in their characters till the end.

Question 5.
What does the way they meet their end tell you about the flaws in their character and nature?
Answer:
In this stanza, it is stated that they died without throwing their logs. It indicates their obstinacy and insensitivity to the demand of the situation. If we go deeper into it, we can see that their unwillingness to throw their logs was caused by negative feelings such as hatred, prejudice and animosity defying the ethical-moral fabric of human existence. It clearly appears that they are not only rigidly bigoted, egotistical and opportunistic in their understanding of others, but also absolutely impractical and without any foresight. In some way, therefore, ‘death’ seems to be already inherent in their behaviour, attitude and thinking.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers Old Man at the Bridge

Old Man at the Bridge Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. 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.

Question 1.
What is a Pontoon Bridge? Why has it been made?
Answer:
A Pontoon Bridge is a temporary floating platform built across several boats or hollow structures or we can say it’s a floating bridge. It was the time when Spanish Civil war broke out and the scene was a typical war zone when the civilians were fleeing and the vehicles were moving across the bridge to protect themselves from the enemy’s attack. The scene was 12 kilometers away from the town of the San Carlos and the temporary bridge had been made to help the people move out of the war zone.

Question 2.
What did narrator observe while doing his duty?
Answer:
The narrator who was a soldier, was on his duty to find out how far the enemy had advanced. When the soldier crossed the Pontoon bridge near the Ebro River towards the enemy, he observed an old man sitting at the bridge while everybody else was fleeing from the place. When he returned back, he again saw the same old man sitting at the same place whereas there were not so many carts now and very few people on foot. This aroused his curiosity.

Question 3.
Who was sitting by the roadside? In which condition was the he sitting?
Answer:
An old man was sitting by the roadside. He was wearing steel rimmed spectacles and his clothes were very dusty. He was sitting by the roadside near a Pontoon bridge across the river. The situation was chaotic as the civilians were fleeing from the place due to unexpected anytime attack of the enemy somewhere from beyond the bridge. The old man seemed to be totally exhausted and was looking somewhat confused and worried.

Question 4.
Why was there chaos on the bridge?
Answer:
There was lot of chaos on the Pontoon bridge which stood across the river. The carts, trucks, men, women and children were crossing the bridge. The mule drawn carts were pushed by the soldiers against the spokes of the wheels as they staggered up the steep bank from the bridge. It was all due to anytime approach of the enemy from beyond the bridge as the Civil War had taken place in Spain and everyone was fleeing to save their lives.

Question 5.
Which business is the narrator talking about? Is it actually a business?
Answer:
The narrator is talking about his job in the above extract. Being a soldier, it’s his duty which he calls as business, to maintain peace and security in the country. As the story is set up during the Spanish Civil War, and the enemies are approaching fast, the narrator is exploring the bridgehead beyond to find out to what point the enemy has advanced. He is watching the bridge and the African looking country Ebro Delta, listening the voices for the signal.

2. 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.
“What animals were they ?” I asked.
“There were three animals altogether”, he explained. “There were two goats and a cat and then there were four pairs of pigeons. ”

Question 1.
What did narrator ask the old man and how did he react to the question?
OR
To which place did the old man belong to? What was his occupation?
Answer:
The narrator was following his duty of observing the approach of enemy beyond the bridge. The atmosphere was much tensed due to the heavy firing from the enemy side. When everybody was rushing to save their lives, an old man was noticed by the soldier who didn’t seem to try to flee from the place. Out of curiosity, the narrator asked him, “Where do you come from”? To this, the old man replied that he had come from San Carlos and it gave him pleasure to mention it and he smiled. His occupation was to take care of few animals which included goats, cats and pigeons.

Question 2.
On being questioned by the narrator, what did old man tell about himself?
Answer:
The old man did not move a bit from the roadside even after such a critical situation and chaos. While doing his duty, when the narrator saw him again and again at the same place, he became anxious about his safety and made enquiry about his whereabouts. The old man told that he came from San Carlos, his native town and was taking care of the animals he was in charge of. But he didn’t look like a shepherd or a herdsman to the narrator as they generally don’t wear steel rimmed spectacles. His clothes and face was dusty.

Question 3.
Which animals was he in charge of and what were his feelings for them?
OR
Which animals he was taking care of and how was he attached to them?
Answer:
The old man was sitting by the side of the road. He looked too tired to move further even after knowing that the enemy was advancing towards them. On being questioned by the narrator, he told that he was from San Carlos and was taking care of the animals. So the narrator asked him “Which animals were they?” And then he told that they were three animals altogether which included two goats, a cat and four pairs of pigeons. From his appearance, he did not seem to be a shepherd or a herdsman but he had a great sense of duty towards his animals. He was anxious for the safety of the animals than his own safety.

Question 4.
Why was he worried too much about the animals?
Answer:
The old man was in charge of various animals. Those animals were two goats, a cat and four pairs of pigeons. He had to leave them due to the untimely war and captain had asked him to leave because of the artillery. The old man had no family and was without politics. Only those animals were his family. He did not want to leave his animals unattended. Still he was less worried about the safety of the cat as it could look after itself and the pigeons which would fly away from the unlocked cage but he lamented the fate of the two goats.

Question 5.
What do you learn from the above extract about the consequ¬ences of the war?
Answer:
The story had taken place during the Spanish Civil War at a pontoon bridge across the Ebro Delta. It is Easter Sunday but there is lot of disturbance everywhere instead of celebrations. The enemy troops are firing heavily. People are fleeing leaving their homes and things. They all are frightened and worried. The old man who is the main character of the story, seems to be worried about the animals he has left behind in his town. This indicates that the poor, helpless birds and animals are not left behind from becoming the victims of war besides human beings.

3. “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.

Question 1.
Who asked, “What politics have you” and what did he mean by this?
Answer:
This question has been asked by the narrator to the old man when he was on his duty to look for the advancement of enemy from across the bridge. While going to and fro he observed an unusual scene. When everybody was fleeing to save their lives, an old man was sitting carelessly at the same place on the roadside. This made the narrator anxious. And he couldn’t refrain himself from asking the old man about his political views to which the old man replied, “I am without politics”.

Question 2.
What advice did the narrator give to the old man?
Answer:
The old man told the narrator that he had neither family nor he was into politics. He was 76 years old and had travelled 12 kilometers on foot because of which his energy had been drained and he could move no more. Therefore he sat there on the roadside. Seeing the situation, narrator tried to convince him by telling that it was not a good place to stop and advised him to go by trucks which were standing on the road where it was divided for Tortosa.

Question 3.
Why did he refuse to go to Barcelona?
Answer:
The narrator urged the old man to leave the place as there was fear of enemy’s approach. Seeing no anxiety, narrator asked him to go by trucks standing on the road where it forked for Tortosa because according to him it was not a good place to halt. But the old man was so exhausted that he preferred to stay back for some more time and when he came to know that trucks were going towards Barcelona, he refused, as he didn’t knew anyone there.

Question 4.
Why was the old man not willing to cross the bridge and escape to a safer place?
Answer:
The mention of his native town ‘San Carlos’ brought a smile on the old man’s face in such a tensed atmosphere. It showed that he became sentimental while telling its name to the narrator. He had to leave the town and his animals forcibly due to fire attack by enemy. The narrator advised him to cross the bridge but he seemed to be least concerned about his life and he didn’t want to part with his animals. Apart from this, he was attacked by sever fatigue.

Question 5.
What does it reveal about the mental situation of the old man when he said “Thank you” again and again to the narrator?
Answer:
The narrator after hearing about the whereabouts of the old man, asked him to get up and walk. He warned him against the upcoming danger and told him that it was not the right place to halt. But the old man was too much attached with his town and animals that he refused to go. He was a lonely person and when the narrator showed his concern for him, he felt happy and grateful that he talked to him. Perhaps somebody had conversed with him after a long time. He also felt that there was someone who cared for him too. That was why he again and again thanked the narrator to show his gratitude.

4. “Did you leave the dove cage unlocked ?” I asked.
“Yes. ”
“Then they’ll Jly.”
“Yes, certainly they’ll Jly. But the others. It’s better not to think about the others”, he said.
“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. ”

Question 1.
Who looked at whom very blankly and tiredly? What was the reason behind such looks?
Answer:
The old man looked at the narrator very blankly and tiredly when he suggested him to go by trucks. He didn’t want to go to Barcelona where the trucks were going as he didn’t know anyone there. It was obvious that he had lost his hope and surrendered to his fate. He was waiting for his imminent death. The only thing that troubled him was his anxiety towards his animals.

Question 2.
How did the old man relieved himself by sharing his worries with narrator?
Answer:
The old man seemed to be tired of his life. Despite the sensitive situation due to untimely Civil War, he was not at all worried. The only thing that troubled him was his animals that he was taking care of. On one hand he knew that cat would be alright but the worry of other animals made him restless. He told the narrator that he had left the cage of the pigeons unlocked and that they would fly but nothing could be done of the goats and they would become the victims of war for sure.

Question 3.
How did the narrator try to console the old man? Did he get success?
Answer:
The narrator tried his best to console him by reassuring the safety of his animals. And at times, he reminded him to move away from the place where he was sitting. The old man was worried about the safety of his animals and the narrator was worried about the safety of the old man. Even though he told the old man that the animals would be alright still it didn’t stop him from worrying about the animals. The narrator could not get success as the old man was not able to get rid of the thought of his animals.

Question 4.
Which animal was the old man most worried about and why?
Answer:
The animal which worried him the most was the pair of goats. The old man knew that cat could look after itself because it did not need anybody to survive. They could independently protect themselves and as he had left the cage of the pigeons unlocked, they would also fly away. But it were the goats that were meek and helpless animals which totally depend on human beings. That was why the old man was the last person to leave the town. His own fate was like that of the goats – no one to take care and waiting for the impending death.

Question 5.
Why did narrator think that ‘There was nothing to do about him’? Who he is referring to?
Answer:
The narrator in the above lines refers to the old man. He urged the old man to get up and walk. The old man tried to get up but he was too tired and weak that he swayed from side to side and then sat down backwards in the dust. Narrator thought that ‘There was nothing to do about him’. It was Easter Sunday and the Fascists were moving towards Ebro. The day was overcast and their planes were not up, so he could perhaps get one more chance to escape but it was next to impossible and therefore the narrator felt pity for him.

Old Man at the Bridge Questions and Answers

Question 1.
Explain why the narrator spends so much time to converse with the old man. Use details from the story to support your answer.
Answer:
The narrator who is a soldier, sees an old man at a pontoon bridge near the Ebro river. People are crossing the bridge to escape from the war zone. The still image of the old man intrigues the narrator to talk to him. He learns that the old man is worrying about his animals and not himself. The narrator is kind and starts pitying the old man’s condition and reassures him that the animals will be fine. The narrator becomes interested to hear more from the old man, and thus spends so much time to converse with him.

Question 2.
What statements from the story suggest that the old man is about to give up on life ? Quote specific statements to support your answer.
Answer:
When the old man says, “I am seventy-six years old. I have come twelve kilometers now, I can go no further,” it seems that he does not wish to save his life from the enemies. Also when the narrator says, that it is not a good place to stay and he should start moving, the old man plainly replies, “I will wait a while”. In the end when the narrator persuades him to try to walk, the old man says, “thank you” and gets to his feet only to sway from side to side and then sit down backwards in the dust.

Question 3.
How does Hemingway show that war disrupts the lives of ordinary people ? Is this portrayal realistic ? Explain why you think so.
Answer:
The story clearly portrays how war disrupts the life of ordinary people. ‘ They are forced to leave their homes, their comfort, belongings, pets and freedom. Some become homeless, some are separated from their families. There is destruction and sorrow that pervades the atmosphere. The old man had to leave his home, and his beloved animals, because of the enemy attack. He is fatigued to walk twelve kilometers and his age does not allow him to continue further. He sits down thinking about his animals, neglecting the terrible situation in which he is. This is indeed, the reality of war and a bitter one at that.

Question 4.
“Hemingway takes a small, ordinary detail in a situation and transforms it into a powerful story about the tragedy of war.” Comment.
Answer:
The story ‘Old Man at the Bridge’ is set during the Spanish Civil war and begins with a scene where people are crossing the bridge to protect themselves from the impending attack by the enemy troops. An old man with steel rimmed spectacles and dusty clothes sits by the road. He is the symbol of the countless civilian victims, who get relocated due to war. He is not into politics.

He is not bothered about power or establishing supremacy over other lands. He is a simple character who loves his land and the creatures in it. His only worry is about the animals he has left behind. He is alone and disoriented. He fatalistically accepts his death. The writer has been able to portray the tragedy of war; how it affects the common people, and drags them to their inevitable fate for no fault of theirs.

Question 5.
‘I was taking care of the animals’. What animals are being referred to and what is the underlying message in the line.
Answer:
The old man had two goats, a cat and four pairs of pigeons. The animals were his family; he loved them and cared for them so much that separating from them made him feel that he had lost his reason for existence. He left the animals behind in his native town of San Carlos. The heavy firing from the enemy forced him to do so.

The underlying message is that civilians of a country live for their family and the animals they take care of. They are least bothered about political games, wars or empowerment. All they want is to be left alone, to lead their day to day life in peace and contentment. Looking after the animals gives a meaning to the life of the old man, and it is a tragedy that he is denied of this satisfaction by the heavy firing during the Spanish Civil War.

Question 6.
‘There was nothing to do about him’, is the comment made by the narrator. Explain the significance of this line in the light of the story.
Answer:
In spite of the narrator’s repeated suggestions to move on, the old man does not make any effort to leave the bridge. It seems he is tied to the place where he has left his beloved animals. It is Easter Sunday, the day when Christ resurrected from the grave. The day is symbolic of peace and joy of a new beginning. But, paradoxically, this is not the case with men like the helpless protagonist of the story. After leaving his town, he has nothing to live for; not even his animals.

Consequently, the old man surrenders to his fate and till the end, he only thinks of his animals. “I was taking care of the animals”, “I was only taking care of the animals”- he goes on repeating. The narrator, thus realizes that nothing can be done about him and moves on, leaving the decrepit man to his fate.. The old man’s only hope of survival hinges on the fact that the sky is overcast; so no bombing for the time being; and also, ‘cats know how to look after themselves’.

His age, his tiredness and lack of anything to look forward to, makes the old man a tragic victim of war. Destruction and fatal end is the inevitable result of any war and it is a universal truth that man has to realize. He should realise the need to amend his ways and thus, pave way for universal peace.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers Chief Seattle’s Speech

Chief Seattle’s Speech Questions and Answers Extract Based

Read the extract and answer the following questions:

1. 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. I 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.

Question 1.
What does the opening paragraph of ‘Chief Seattle’s Speech’ imply?
OR
What do you understand by,” Yonder sky that has wept tears of compassion upon my people for centuries untold”.
Answer:
The opening paragraph is the letter written by Chief Seattle as a reply to the President of Washington. Here he is referring to the offer made by Big Chief at Washington for buying their land. According to him, the time was fair then but in future problems might arise and whatever appeared changeless and eternal might change but his words were like stars which would never change. The great Chief at Washington could rely upon him as he could upon the return of the sun or the seasons. The Big Chief at Washington sent them greetings and goodwill. Chief appreciated this as he had no requirement for their friendship in return.

Question 2.
Explain with the metaphor that how did Chief Seattle compare his people with that of Whites?
Answer:
Chief Seattle said that the Americans were large in number. He compared them to the grass that covered the vast Prairies; the grasslands of America, whereas the Red Indians were few. They resembled the scattering of trees of a storm-swept plain. Using these metaphors, Chief Seattle was successfully able to describe the less number of his people as compared to that of Whites.

Question 3.
Which offer was Chief Seattle talking about here? Was it generous to him? Why?
Answer:
Chief Seattle was talking about the offer made by George Washington to buy their Native land. He said that American Chief wished to buy their land but was willing to allow them to live comfortably. It appeared generous to him as the Red Indians no longer had the rights to be respected. And the offer might be wise as they were no longer in need of an extensive country.

Question 4.
How did Chief Seattle describe that once upon a time his people were numerous?
OR
According to Seattle, why were the Natives no longer in need of the vast land?
Answer:
Chief Seattle recollected the time when his people were large in number. They covered the land in the same way as the wind-ruffled sea covers its shell-paved floor. But that was long ago and the greatness of tribes had become a mournful memory and the Chief did not want to mourn over the untimely decay of his tribes as they were also responsible for it. As the number of Red Indians had reduced, they no longer need the extensive country.

Question 5.
While talking about the buying of land, why did Chief Seattle become sentimental?
Answer:
First of all the idea of buying or selling the land was an unusual thing for Chief Seattle. It is a natural resource and the whole life depends upon it. It did not belong to a particular tribe or race; it was a sacred thing for his men. Moreover Earth does not belong to man; but man belongs to Earth. Chief Seattle said that once the Red Indians covered the land and it carried the memories and culture of his tribe. With the passage of time, the greatness of tribes had become a mournful memory which Chief Seattle did not want to mourn over. He did not even express his disapproval of the Americans.

2. Your God is not our God! Your God loves your people and hates mine! He folds his strong protecting arms lovingly about the paleface and leads him by the hand as a father leads an infant son. But, he has forsaken His red children, if they really are His. Our God, the Great Spirit, seems also to have forsaken us. Your God makes your people wax stronger every day. Soon they will fill all the land.

Question 1.
Why did Chief Seattle blame his own man for losing their ancestral land?
Answer:
Chief Seattle had been very much fair in presenting his views for the whites or his own men. He did not exclude his tribe from being responsible for the loss of their ancestral land. The youth as he said was impulsive. They indulged in revengeful acts and war had resulted in loss of their lives. They were responsible for the untimely decay of their people.

Question 2.
What did the youth do when they became angry?
OR
How did the youth react when they grow angry?
Answer:
Chief Seattle described his men cruel and relentless when they became angry. They disfigured the faces of the wrong doers with black paints. They became uncontrollable by the feeble old men and women. And it happened When the white men pushed their forefathers westward. But now he expected that the hostilities between them should never be returned as he did not want to lose anything.

Question 3.
According to Chief Seattle, on what conditions the father in Washington would be his tribe’s father too?
Answer:
As the discussion of buying land was going on, Chief Seattle presumed that there would be a common father for both the Americans as well as Red Indians. King George had advanced towards North and moved his boundaries and sent them the word that the Red Indians would be protected only if they went according to him and if he protected the Red Indians then only he would be their father in real sense.

Question 4.
How would Washington’s men protect his race?
Answer:
The valiant warriors of George Washington would act as a bristling wall of strength and their harbours would be filled with their wonderful ships of wars so that their ancient enemies like the Haidas and Tsimshians far to the Northward would stop frightening their women, children and old men. Then only he would be Red Indian’s father and they, his children.

Question 5.
How did Chief Seattle prove that White’s God was different from theirs?
Answer:
Seattle felt that the God of different races was also different. White’s God loved His people only and hated Seattle’s tribe. He folded His strong protecting arms lovingly about the paleface and led them by the hand as a father led an infant son. Their God made his people wax stronger every day. But he had forsaken His Red children.

3. 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 man, 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.

Question 1.
On what basis Chief Seattle denies that the Whites and Red Indians were brothers?
OR
Why the Natives are called orphans?
Answer:
Seattle remarks that his people were reducing in number rapidly like the receding tide that will never return. The White Man’s God was indifferent towards the Red Indians. He had no sympathy for His Red children. He did not protect them from enemies. They were like orphans in the vast world. So how could they be brothers when one race got so much of support and benefits and the. other was forsaken.

Question 2.
If both the races had a common God, what type of God it would be?
Answer:
If both the races had a common God, He would have been impartial. He would love and shower blessings over the people of both the tribe. He would not favour only a particular race or tribe and would give strength and punish¬ments to the deserved one regardless of his race, on being judged by his deeds.

Question 3.
Why did Seattle say that they were two different races?
OR
Why there was little in common between the two races?
Answer:
The two races were different in their skin colour, culture, traditions, religion and beliefs. The White settlers were called as ‘White Man’, ‘paleface’ whereas the Natives were known as ‘Red Man’ or ‘Red children’. That was why Seattle said that they were two distinct races with separate origins and separate destinies. There was little in common between them.

Question 4.
How did the Red Man regard the ashes of their ancestors?
OR
What was the religion of the Red Man?
OR
What was the value of the ancestors in the Red Man’s hearts?
Answer:
Even the ashes of the Red Man’s ancestors were precious and valuable to them. It was sacred for them and the resting place was hallowed ground. Their religion was the tradition of their ancestors. It carried the dreams of their old men, given them in solemn hours of the night by the Great Spirit and was written in the hearts of his people.

Question 5.
How as the religion of the White men different from the Red men?
Answer:
The religion of the White men was different from that of the Red men in the sense that they did not have much attachment to their ancestors. Where the ashes of the Red Men’s ancestors were sacred to them, the Whites wandered away from the graves of their ancestors. They did not have any regret too. Their religion was written upon tablets of stone by the iron fingers of their God but the religion of Red Men was the tradition of their ancestors.

4. 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.
Why did the dead of the White Men cease to love them?
Answer:
The culture and traditions of the Whites were entirely different from those of the Red Men. They were materialistic and wanted to buy the native land of the Red Man. The religion to them was mere set of rules. They did not have sentiments for their motherland. Once they were dead, they stop loving their fellow men. They wander away beyond the stars. They were soon forgotten and would never return.

Question 2.
How the ancestors of Red Indians were attached to their land?
OR
How do the dead of ‘Red Man’ keep loving the beautiful world?
Answer:
As per their beliefs, although the ancestors of the Red Indians had left their bodies still their souls dwelled on the land. They permanently reside in the land and could never forget that land because it was not just a piece of land but everything for them. For them the simple pleasures of earth were more precious and important than anything else. They still loved its valleys, murmuring rivers, its magnificent mountains, sequestered vales and verdant lined lakes and bays. They still guided, consoled and comforted their people on Earth.

Question 3.
Why would Red Indians likely to accept the propositions made by the White Chief?
Answer:
The propositions made by the whites seemed to be fair to Chief Seattle and therefore he thought of accepting them. He said that day and night could not dwell together. By this he referred to the Red Indians and whites. The Red Men could not stand before the Americans and flee as the morning mist flees before the rising sun. So the propositions would be agreeable to them and would follow whatever had been told to them. The White Chiefs words were the words of nature spoken to his people from darkness.

Question 4.
Why did Seattle say, “Grim fate seems to be on the Red Man’s trail”?
OR
Why was the Chief sad about the fate of his tribe?
Answer:
Chief Seattle was a spiritual man who believed in the sacredness of the land in which the spirits of his ancestors dwelled. It was a resting place of the dead of his tribe. But now that was to be bought by the Americans. The nights were going to be dark for them i.e., they won’t find solitude now. The Whites’ attitude was such empowering that they did not let a single star of hope to hover above Red Man’s horizon. He could hear the voice of sad winds moaning in the distance. He exclaims that, “Grim fate seems to be on the Red Man’s trail”. Moreover they are compared to the wounded doe that hears the approaching footsteps of the hunter.

Question 5.
Chief Seattle believed in the vicious circle of change. Explain it.
OR
Why did Seattle say that he should not mourn over the ‘untimely fate of his people’?
Answer:
Chief Seattle tried to figure out the future of his men at the very thought of selling his land to the White Chief. He could hear the sad voices of the moaning winds from far. The Red Indian would soon meet their doom. Only few days were left before their land would be overtaken by others. The once mighty dwellers of the land would be lost in oblivion and would mourn over the graves of the deceased. But then he said to himself that it was not right to lament over the untimely fate of his people. Tribes and nature follow each other like the waves of the sea. It was the order of the nature and regret was useless. He believed that as their time was over, one day the Whites would also perish as the nature takes turn.

5. 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 they 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.

Question 1.
On what conditions did the speaker agree to accept the proposition put forth by the White Chief?
Answer:
There was no other option left for the Natives except to accept the proposal made by the White Chief. Seattle remarked that he would ponder over the proposition and let them know. But he was little apprehensive so further added that he would accept only if his tribe was not denied the privilege without molestation of visiting any time the tombs of their ancestors, friends and children.

Question 2.
How was the every part of the soil sacred Seattle’s men?
Answer:
Every part of the soil of the Natives’ land was sacred in the estimation of Seattle’s tribe. Every hillside, every valley, every plain and grove has been hallowed by some sad or happy event in days long vanished. Even the dumb and dead rocks which swelter in the sun along the silent shore, thrill with memories of stirring events related to the lives of the tribal people.

Question 3.
Why did the dust upon which the White Settlers stood, respond lovingly to the footsteps of the tribal people?
Answer:
The ancestors of the Red Man were deeply connected with their land. After their death, they still wandered around and loved the mountains, valleys, lakes, bays and all and often visited from the happy hunting ground to guide, console and comfort their people. Every hill, valley, rocks and plains that seemed to be lifeless, contained the happy and sad stories of the dead. The sand responds more lovingly to their footsteps as it was rich with the blood of their ancestors and their bare feet were conscious of the sympathetic touch.

Question 4.
Why would the children’s children of White Man never be alone?
Answer:
The Children’s children of White Man would never be left alone because the souls of the departed braves, fond mothers, glad, happy hearted maidens and even the little children of the tribal people would love those somber solitudes and greet shadowy returning spirits. When all the Red Men would have perished and became a myth, the shores would swarm with the invisible dead and the White people’s children would never feel alone.

Question 5.
What did Seattle mean by, “There is no death, only a change of worlds”?
Answer:
Chief Seattle was a philosophical man who believed that death was an inevitable truth and one should not regret. In fact it is only the change of world. Tribes follow tribes and nations follow nations. He talked about his dead and the land that they still visited the land and would forever so the Whites should treat them kindly as the dead were not powerless according to him. He stated that there was no death, only man changed his world.

Chief Seattle’s Speech Questions and Answers

Question 1.
Write a note on the signification of Chief Seattle’s speech.
Answer:
Seattle’s speech is acclaimed as a powerful appeal for the recognition of the rights of native Americans and also environmental values. Seattle criticized the white people’s imperialistic attitude in demanding the land of the tribe, as though their sentiments did not matter. Apart from that, it also is a statement against reckless developments that are clearly affecting the natural environment. In fact, this speech is one of the earliest pleas that expressed great concern over the degradation of nature and ecological balance. The speech is a clear warning against the rapid progress of western civilization and the need to protect nature. And, this is why Chief Seattle’s speech is regarded with such high esteem.

Question 2.
Comment on the tone and language of the speech.
Answer:
The tone of Seattle’s speech is polite yet sarcastic, passionate yet sorrowful, complying yet dignified. It is a speech that reveals the inner core of the man, his anguish, his helplessness and the final acceptance of the truth that for the survival of the remaining tribe, he has to give in to the demands of the Whites, and persuade them to give up the land of their ancestors.

Chief Seattle uses two different tones – a passionate and a sorrowful tone along with powerful words and imagery. He wants to win the audience’s heart and hopes that the people will take care of the land like he did. The speech comes alive with figurative language, imagery, especially color imagery and death imagery. The speech becomes poignant with metaphors and similes , sarcasm, comparisons and contrasts, personification, alliteration, rhetorical questions and tone shifts.

Question 3.
What are the purposes of this speech.
Answer:
Chief Seattle’s chief purpose is to persuade Gov. Stevens to not to cheat them off their land. He wants to convince Gov. Stevens that he and his people are educated, wise, and aware of the exploitation. Another objective is to elicit sympathy and to connect with Stevens through shared experiences of having the same government as well as both being leaders. He further wants to educate the governor about Seattle’s culture, traditions and belief system .

He does this by contrasting the two in terms of their numbers, beliefs, attitudes towards God and Nature, life after death, and concept of land ownership. His intention is also to establish himself as the leader and a force to be reckoned with. He mocks the White man subtly, using sarcasm to warn the governor and the Whites about excessive pride and arrogance.

Question 4.
In what circumstances was the famous speech of Chief Seattle given? What proposal was put forward to the Red Man by the Great Chief? What would be the impact of the proposal on the Red man and in what light would the world see the White man ?
Answer:
In 1854, the United States Government offered to buy two million acres of land occupied by the native people. Chief Seattle gave a powerful and eloquent speech as a reply to President Franklin Pierce. His speech is described as one of the most inspiring ones ever argued in favour of environment and human rights.

The proposal was that the natives should surrender their land to the Whites. In return of this, the Whites would protect them from foreign attack of the Haidas and Tsimshians. The Whites were willing to allow them enough land to live comfortably. The impact of the proposal meant the Native Americans should leave their revered land where their ancestors were resting in eternal peace. They would lose their land which was full of memories, rife with stirring events connected with their lives. The land that they had been asked to sell was sacred for them.

The Whites were unjustly exercising authority over the Native Americans. Having a powerful army and navy, they were expecting the Red Indians to bow down to their super strength. In their arrogance, the Whites offered to allow them enough land to live comfortably. The world would see it as symbolic of master-slave relationship; sheer exploitation by imperial powers.

Question 5.
How does Seattle compare Christianity and the religion of Great Spirit?
Answer:
The White men follow Christianity written by the iron finger of their God, symbolising strict adherence to rules and principles. The God of this religion is partial and has forsaken his Red children. Seattle says that this God loves only his ‘paleface’ children and makes them stronger every day. So soon

they will fill all the land. He does not love Red children thus they seem to be ebbing away.
Seattle says that for a Red Man, the ashes of his ancestors are sacred and their resting place is hallowed ground. They love to stay in the land where their ancestors’ memories are alive, whereas the Whites wander far from their ancestors’ graves. The Whites once they are dead, forget their native land and never return.

The religion of the Red Man 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; and the visions of their sachems, are written in the hearts of their people.

Question 6.
What is the gist and overall message of the speech? How is the order of nature referred to by the Chief? How does he hint that justice will be done at the end?
Answer:
One cannot fail to notice the overall irony reflected throughout the speech of Chief of Seattle. The speaker thanks the friendship and good will shown by the White Chief and appreciates it saying, ‘It’s kind of him.’ However, in every single word, the Chief makes it clear that it is the power of money and military strength that makes rich nations subdue the less powerful, and in the garb of friendship, they cheat the real holders of their land.

Chief Seattle is upset but at the same time, is aware that he and his men are cornered and will have to consider the proposal. But before that, he gives a few warnings and suggestions which are to be heeded by all. God, land, water and plants are close-knit family and require more respect and reverence than White men are giving. There is an order in Nature and if that balance is upset, everything will be lost.

Tribe follows tribe; nation follows nation. No one is above the other. By sheer strength of the army, some may be able to conquer the others; but not for long. In the zeal to build and possess, they may lose sill they have. There will come a time when they will realise that the ultimate destiny of man is the same. Some may prolong their existence; some may perish early, like the Red Indian minority. When the powerful nations accept this truth, they will realise that all are brothers and have equal rights.

The Chief also makes it clear, that the tribe should be able to visit the tombs of their near and dear ones whenever they want and no restrictions should be imposed. Also he promises that their dead would throng the shops and streets, highways and country sides along with the living Whites; the memories of the vanished tribe will haunt their present, giving them company, and solace in solitude. Whether the speech lost its authenticity in translation or not, what matters is that Seattle’s words inspired and will continue to do so, drilling in a most compelling truth about man’s relation with man and his environment.