ICSE

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.

Treasure Trove Poems and Short Stories Workbook Answers

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers The Heart Of A Tree

The Heart Of A Tree Questions and Answers

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

1. What does he plant who plants a tree?
He plants a friend of sun and sky;
He plants the flag of breezes free;
The shaft of beauty, towering high;
He plants a home to heaven anigh;
For song and mother-croon of bird
In hushed and happy twilight heard-
The treble of heaven’s harmony-
These things he plants who plants a tree.

Question 1.
What does the poet mean by the personal pronoun ‘he’?
Answer:
In poet’s own words, the personal pronoun ‘he’ has been used here for the person who plants a tree. This pronoun does not actually mean any particular person, but anyone who plants a tree. This word therefore suggests anyone who adopts this as a practice.

Question 2.
What does the poet suggest when he says that a person who plants a tree, plants ‘a friend of sun and sky’ and ‘the flag of breezes free’?
Answer:
The poet uses these phrases for a tree planted by someone. Here, the poet wants to say that a tree is usually high enough to appear to be talking to the sky in all its brightness. The tree also directly receives the warmth and heat of the sunrays falling on it. Similarly, when the breezes or winds blow, we can notice their impact on the tree in the movement of its leaves and branches. This indirectly suggests the feelings of excitement and joy which we experience ourselves when we meet our friends after long time. Thus, the poet tries to establish an indirect connection between a tree planted by someone and some of the most significant components of Nature.

Question 3.
What is the phrase ‘The shaft of beauty, towering high’ used for?
Answer:
In the stanza given here, this phrase denotes the stem of a tree that is beautiful and goes up vertically showing its height. The stem becomes longer and denser as a tree grows up and matures. Moreover, it’s on the stem that twigs and branches grow with a lot of leaves, fruits and flowers. Thus, as the poet aptly observes, the stem not only accounts for the beauty of a tree, but also its height that makes it a veritable representative of vast and bounteous nature.

Question 4.
Based on the poet’s description here, what type Of tree is the poet referring to? Do you see such trees in your surroundings?
Answer:
The description of the tree given by the poet indicates that it must be a very tall and dense tree with many branches. Such trees are usually very old. In our surroundings, we see quite a few such trees, but they are becoming rarer now. A number of trees have been cut down or felled to accommodate concrete structures due to which we are deprived of their benefits.

Question 5.
What does the phrase ‘The treble of heaven’s harmony’ signify here?
Answer:
In this stanza, the poet speaks of three major advantages of planting a tree, which connect it to nature in a unique way. Firstly, it acts as a friend of sun and sky, due to its height and exposure to sunrays falling on it. Secondly, it acts as though it were a flag of the winds touching and stirring it occasionally. Thirdly, it offers shelter to birds that sing and croon in its lap with their families reflecting a sense of security and joy. Due to this, the tree appears to be a perfect messenger of ‘heaven’ as it is instrumental in bringing harmony on earth. The phrase The treble of heaven’s harmony’ precisely suggests the great significance of all that the tree does for the humankind.

2. What does he plant who plants a tree?
He plants cool shade and tender rain.
And seed and bud of days to be,
And years that fade and flush again;
He plants the glory of the plain;
He plants the forest’s heritage;
The harvest of a coming age;
The joy that unborn eyes shall see-
These things he plants who plants a tree.

Question 1.
Why does the poet equate the planting of a tree with the planting of ‘cool shade and tender rain’?
Answer:
As this stanza suggests, the tree that the poet refers to must be a huge tree with several branches laden full of twigs and leaves. A tree like this offers a shade to the comfort of wayfarers and passers-by. Moreover, when the raindrops fall on it, they lose their intensity and swiftness before touching the ground. Though these advantages may not be evident when someone plants a tree, they Eire revealed when the latter grows in size, volume and spread with the passage of time. That is why the poet feels that the planting of a tree is the same as planting ‘cool shade and tender rain’.

Question 2.
What does the phrase ‘seed and bud of days to be’ suggest here?
Answer:
The poet here speaks with the foresight of a visionary, capable of seeing the bright side of future due to the benefits that the planting of a tree may offer to the generations to follow. As the tree grows in size, and starts bearing flowers and fruits, its seeds and buds ‘will become visible in future.

Question 3.
Which phrases used in this stanza reflect that the poet has a futuristic perception of the tree that he is talking about?
Answer:
These phrases are ‘seed and bud of days to be’, ‘forest’s heritage’, the harvest of a coming age’ and ‘the joy that unborn eyes shall see’. Use of words like ‘seed’ and ‘bud’ in the first phrase clearly indicate that the poet sees in a tree the possibility of having many such trees in future, which will grow from them. As the number of trees will grow, they will give birth to a forest and will be thus seen as a heritage by the forthcoming generations. The third phrase suggests that future men and women will reap the benefits of the natural resources growing out of the tree.

Question 4.
Do you think that the poet’s perception of the benefits of planting a tree is realistic? Why?
Answer:
The poet’s perception is realistic to a large extent. No doubt, if a tree is planted in favourable climatic conditions and is looked after with a positive intent, it can be advantageous on all counts, for generations of people. However, in an age when a large quantum of natural resources is spoilt for material comfort and pleasure, and people are not keen to devote time to rearing trees, the poet’s perception sounds very idealistic.

Question 5.
How do trees account for the forest wealth of a nation?
Answer:
Trees account for the forest wealth of a nation by ensuring plenty harvest in the days to come. This is reinforced by the poet’s use of the phrase ‘the forest’s heritage’ for a tree. The poet wants to say that trees, besides keeping our environment healthy and clean, also yield a number of products such as fruits, flowers and other things that are good for health and are also beneficial from economic point of view.

3. What does he plant who plants a tree?
He plants, in sap and leaf and wood,
In love of home and loyalty
And far-cast thought of civic good-
His blessings on the neighborhood
Who in the hollow of His hand
Holds all the growth of all our land-
A nation’s growth from sea to sea
Stirs in his heart who plants a tree.

Question 1.
How does a person, who plants a tree, serve his nation?
Answer:
By planting a tree, a person contributes to the growth of his society. His contribution may not be as direct as that of a physician who treats his ailing compatriots, or a teacher who directs his pupils towards the task of nation building, but it’s still no less important. The practice of planting a tree keeps the social ambiance in good and healthy shape, and affects its future positively. That is how the person, who plants a tree, contributes his mite to the task of nation building.

Question 2.
Which fundamental values have been highlighted in this stanza? How is the practice of planting a tree responsible for promoting them?
Answer:
As the poet says, the person who plants a tree loves the humankind. This is because he is aware of the fact that the tree, he is planting is beneficial for everyone. Thus, it also suggests that he is a person who really cares for the growth of his kinsfolk and social surroundings. Due to his love for this practice, he also spreads the message of social peace, harmony and brotherhood.

Furthermore, the practice also suggests his concern for his nation’s growth, highlighting his patriotic character and spirit.

Question 3.
Briefly explain the concluding lines of this stanza. What does the poet want to say here?
Answer:
The concluding lines of the stanza highlights the significance of planting a tree as a great service to the nation. The poet feels that the man who plants a tree is, like a true patriot, who is genuinely concerned about the growth of his nation. As he is quite familiar with the advantages offered by a tree, he is able to link them with his nation’s growth which is his prime concern. This implies that it’s his love for his nation that actually propels and motivates him to adopt this practice.

Question 4.
How can this poem help in making a person as a good citizen?
Answer:
A person who plants trees becomes good citizen of his country because, by planting a tree, he brings joy and blessings to the neighbourhood. It suggests that the practice of planting trees reflects the humanistic idea of common good that would be a boon for man in general and the nation in particular.

Question 5.
Describe the alliteration been used by the poet in the last five lines of this stanza with example.
Answer:
In the last five lines of this stanza, the poet has used the literary device or figure of speech- alliteration. Alliteration signifies the occurrence of several words in a row having the same first consonant sound or similar sounding letter. Such words either come successively or one after the other, or they may be close together in a line or sentence. In the 6th and 7thlines, we have words like ‘hollow’, ‘His’, ‘hand’ and ‘hold’ all of which start with ‘h’.

Similarly, in the last two lines, we see the phrase ‘sea to sea’ followed by ‘stir’ with the same consonant sound ‘s’ in the beginning.

Treasure Trove Poems Workbook Answers ICSE Class 10 & 9 English

1. The Heart of a Tree
2. The Cold Within
3. The Bangle Sellers
4. After Blenheim
5. Television
6. Daffodils
7. I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings
8. The Patriot
9. Abou Ben Adhem
10. Nine Gold Medals

Treasure Trove Poems Summary

1. The Heart of a Tree Summary
2. The Cold Within Summary
3. The Bangle Sellers Summary
4. After Blenheim Summary
5. Television Summary
6. Daffodils Summary
7. I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings Summary
8. The Patriot Summary
9. Abou Ben Adhem Summary
10. Nine Gold Medals Summary

Treasure Trove Short Stories Workbook Answers ICSE Class 10 & 9 English

1. Chief Seattle’s Speech
2. Old Man at the Bridge
3. A Horse and Two Goats
4. Hearts and Hands
5. A Face in the Dark
6. An Angel in Disguise
7. The Little Match Girl
8. The Blue Bead
9. My Greatest Olympic Prize
10. All Summer in a Day

Treasure Trove Short Stories Summary

1. Chief Seattle’s Speech Summary
2. Old Man at the Bridge Summary
3. A Horse and Two Goats Summary
4. Hearts and Hands Summary
5. A Face in the Dark Summary
6. An Angel in Disguise Summary
7. The Little Match Girl Summary
8. The Blue Bead Summary
9. My Greatest Olympic Prize Summary
10. All Summer in a Day Summary