SHAKESPEARE
TEST PAPER I
Read the following extract and answer the questions that follow:-
Others abide our question. Thou art free.
We ask and ask – Thou smilest and art free,
Out-topping knowledge.
Question 1:-Line 1 constructs an opposition between abide and free. Explain the opposition.
Question 2:-Comment on the notion of freedom implicit in line 1 of the extract.
Question 3:-Explain and comment on line 1 and extract.
Question 4;-Who smiles and why, when questions are put on him? Who puts these questions to
him?
Question 5:-What do you think does the word still means in Line 2 of the extract.
ANSWERS
Answer 1;-In line 1 Arnold constructs an opposition between other dramatists and Shakespeare.
He says that while other poets and dramatists give in to others’ questions before they
write, Shakespeare does not seem to be concerned about their questions. He is free
and writes verses which concern him and through him everybody.
Answer 2:- Shakespeare’s triumph is in having achieved a stance towards life. It’s a stance of
complete calmness, quietness, assurance and silence.
Answer 3:- There are many questions asked by others but Shakespeare remains unperturbed.
Answer 4:-When questions are put to him, Shakespeare smiles because he remains unperturbed
by the questions put up to him.
Answer 5:- In line 2 of the extract, the word ‘still’ means calm and tranquil.
GURUKUL STEPS COACHING INSTITUTE
BIRHANA ROAD KANPUR
SHAKESPEARE
TEST PAPER II
Read the following extract and answer the questions that follow:-
For the loftiest hill,
Who to the stars uncrowns his majesty,
Planting his steadfast footsteps in the sea,
Making the heavens of the heavens his dwelling place,
Spares but the cloudy border of his base
To the foil’d searching of mortality;
Question 1;-Shakespeare is represented her as lofty hill. Explain the image clearly.
Question 2;-Comment on the use of word uncrowns in line 1 of the extract.
Question 3:- Explain the meaning of heaven of heaven. Whose dwelling place is so high in the
sky?
Question 4:-What does the phrase ‘foil’d searching of mortality’ mean? Who are the people who
would conduct such foil’d searches?
ANSWERS
Answer 1:- Shakespeare is compared to the grandest and the highest mountain peak. As the peak
of a lofty mountain appear to penetrate the sky and is inaccessible by human beings
similarly Shakespeare has moved beyond the knowledge to the ultimate knowledge.
Answer 2;- As the peak of a lofty mountain appears to uncover its head to the stars, similarly the
knowledge of Shakespeare out-tops knowledge. To underline this thought
‘uncrowns’ is the best word which Arnold could use.
Answer 3;-Heaven of heaven is the highest reaches of heaven. It is the dwelling place of God
who is the ultimate of all knowledge. Arnold says that the knowledge of Shakespeare
was so great the he had the right to dwell with god.
Answer 4:- ‘foiled searching of mortality’ means baffled search of human race.
It is the ordinary human beings who would conduct ‘foiled searches.
GURUKUL STEPS COACHING INSTITUTE
BIRHANA ROAD KANPUR
SHAKESPEARE
TEST PAPER III
Read the following extract and answer the questions that follow:-
And thou, who dids’t the stars and sunbeams know,
Self-schooled, self scanned, self, honored, self secure,
Dids’t tred on earth unguess’d at. Better so!
Question 1:-Explain the implications of knowing the sunbeams and the stars.
Question 2:- Comment on the use of phrases self schooled and self scanned for Shakespeare.
Question 3:-How do you think is Shakespeare self-honored and selof-secure?
Question 4:-Outline two important characteristic of Shakespeare suggested in the stanza that
precedes this extract.
Question 5:-Why does the poet think mit is better that Shakespeare wrote unguesse’d at?
ANSWERS
Answer 1:-Being like a high mountain, Shakespeare was linked to the heavens which is
represented in the terms of knowing the stars and the sunbeams.
Answer 2; As a dramatist, poet and individual, Shakespeare taught himself, analyzed his own
weaknesses and strengths and honored himself i.e. he did not desire public
recognition, felt confident and secure, being what he was.
Answer 3:-I think that Shakespeare is self honored and self secure because he did not desire
public recognition, felt confident and secure, being what he was.
Answer 4:-Two important characteristics of Shakespeare that precedes this extract are that
Shakespeare was free and wrote verses which concerned him and through him
concerned everybody. He remained calm and smiled as he worked without
concerning himself with the thought of others.
Answer 5:-The poet thinks that it is better that Shakespeare wrote unguess’d at because public
fame and recogni9tion would have conflicted withy the greatness of Shakespeare.
GURUKUL STEPS COACHING INSTITUTE
BIRHANA ROAD KANPUR
SHAKESPEARE
TEST PAPER IV
Read the following extract and answer the questions that follow:-
All pains the immortal spirits must endure,
All weakness which impairs, all griefs which bow
Find their sole speech in that victorious brow.
Question 1:-How does the argument in the poem changes in this stanza? Which aspects of
Shakespeare has he described before?
Question 2:-Why is it important for immortal spirit to endure all pains?
Question 3:-What forces other than the pain should an immortal spirit endure?
Question 4:-The stanza builds an opposition between pain, weakness and grief on one hand and
the victorious brow on the other. What is the significance of the opposition?
ANSWER
Answer 1:-There is a change of argument in this stanza. Unlike the Octave part of this sonnet,
this stanza says that though Shakespeare depicted the sorrowful experiences in his
tragedies, he himself remained unaffected by them. He converted those sorrows into
poetic material which is evident in the victory that his forehead reflects.
Answer 2;-It is important for eternal spirits to endure all pains so that he has access to the kinds
of truth that others can only aspire to.
Answer 3:-An immortal should not only endure all kinds of pains but also the questions or
criticisms of others.
Answer 4:-This opposition signifies that in Shakespeare, the weakness and the sufferings do not
reflect as negatives but as victory.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Albert Einstein At School
This book is written by ‘Patrick Pringle’. In this book the following characters are there – Albert Einstein, his history teacher Mr. Braun, Yuri, Dr. Ernest Weil and Mr. Koch.
Albert’s class was on the history teacher Mr. Braun asked Albert if the Prussians defeated the French to Waterloo. Albert told him that he didn’t know and he must have forgotten. This irritated the teacher. He asked Albert, why? Albert replied that he didn’t see a point in learning dates. One could learn about them from books. Ideas are more important than facts and figures. The teacher attributed to Albert that he didn’t believe in education. He talked in a sarcastic manner. Albert told him that education should be about ideas and not facts. The teacher said that Albert was a disgrace to be there Albert felt miserable when he left the school that afternoon.
He didn’t like this school. H would have to come to it again. He lived in a small room. It was one of the poorest quarters of Munich. The landlady beat her children regularly. Her husband came every Saturday and drank in the evening. He then beat her. He didn’t like the children’s crying every time. He told these things to Yuri. He hated the atmosphere of slum violence. Next time his cousin came to Munich. She told Albert that if he tried he could pass the examination. There were more stupid boys than him. Moreover, passing the examination was not difficult. It was simply just to be able to repeat in the examination that Elsa that he was not good at learning things by heart. He liked music as it gave him comfort. H also liked Geology. Albert didn’t like to remain in school. He met Yuri after six months. He had an idea. He told Yuri that if he had a medical certificate that he suffered from a nervous breakdown, he could get rid of school. He asked Yuri if he had a doctor friend. Yuri told him that he had in Dr. Ernest Weil. However, Yuri told him not to deceive him. He must be frank with him. When Albert visited Dr. Ernest Weil he had really come near a nervous breakdown. Dr. Ernest issued him the certificate. His fees were that he should serve Yuri with a meal. Albert told Dr. Ernest about his future plans.
He would go to Milan. He hoped to get admission into an Italian college or institute. It was possible from the comments of the Mathematics teacher, Mr. Koch. Yuri told him to get a reference in writing from the Mathematics teacher before going to the head teacher. Mr. Koch, the mathematics teacher encouraged him.
Albert’s class was on the history teacher Mr. Braun asked Albert if the Prussians defeated the French to Waterloo. Albert told him that he didn’t know and he must have forgotten. This irritated the teacher. He asked Albert, why? Albert replied that he didn’t see a point in learning dates. One could learn about them from books. Ideas are more important than facts and figures. The teacher attributed to Albert that he didn’t believe in education. He talked in a sarcastic manner. Albert told him that education should be about ideas and not facts. The teacher said that Albert was a disgrace to be there Albert felt miserable when he left the school that afternoon.
He didn’t like this school. H would have to come to it again. He lived in a small room. It was one of the poorest quarters of Munich. The landlady beat her children regularly. Her husband came every Saturday and drank in the evening. He then beat her. He didn’t like the children’s crying every time. He told these things to Yuri. He hated the atmosphere of slum violence. Next time his cousin came to Munich. She told Albert that if he tried he could pass the examination. There were more stupid boys than him. Moreover, passing the examination was not difficult. It was simply just to be able to repeat in the examination that Elsa that he was not good at learning things by heart. He liked music as it gave him comfort. H also liked Geology. Albert didn’t like to remain in school. He met Yuri after six months. He had an idea. He told Yuri that if he had a medical certificate that he suffered from a nervous breakdown, he could get rid of school. He asked Yuri if he had a doctor friend. Yuri told him that he had in Dr. Ernest Weil. However, Yuri told him not to deceive him. He must be frank with him. When Albert visited Dr. Ernest Weil he had really come near a nervous breakdown. Dr. Ernest issued him the certificate. His fees were that he should serve Yuri with a meal. Albert told Dr. Ernest about his future plans.
He would go to Milan. He hoped to get admission into an Italian college or institute. It was possible from the comments of the Mathematics teacher, Mr. Koch. Yuri told him to get a reference in writing from the Mathematics teacher before going to the head teacher. Mr. Koch, the mathematics teacher encouraged him.
“Principles of Good Writing”.
In the essay, “Principles of Good Writing”, L.A. Hill tells us the principles that we should follow if we want to write well-how to think clearly and logically, how to increase vocabulary and expression, how to find subjects for writing, how to make them interesting and what to avoid in writing. If we want to write well we must think clearly and logically. To develop it we should practice thinking about a subject and follow it step by step. We should practice it repeatedly. For example, if we think about the freedom of a man, we shall find that his freedom is limited first to what is possible, then to what is legal. His freedom is limited so because he cannot fly to Mars; that is impossible, and he must not kill his neighbour, as that is illegal. Repeated practice of this sort on various topics will improve our availability to think clearly and logically. To increase our vocabulary or stock of words and expressions, we should read widely and carefully. We should note down the interesting and useful expressions and know their meanings with the help of a dictionary.
One can learn writing by writing only. So one should write without waiting for any inspiration. Good writing depends more upon hard labour and less upon inspiration. How to find subject matters to write on? If we carefully observe things around us we shall find many interesting things to write about. We should read our newspapers, books and magazines carefully, and note down the striking things and ideas that we come across. If we develop a warm understanding of human joys and sorrows we shall find a lot of interesting things to write about in every ordinary incidents of life. To be a good writer, it is not enough to find out interesting subjects. One has to write about them in an interesting way. To write interestingly, one has to select what kind of readers he wants to write for. Then one can find out what kind of subjects interests them. If we read woman’s magazine we shall find what subject interests them, and we find subjects that interests young people from magazines meant for young people like sports magazines. Moreover we must remember that subjects that concern us at present interest us more. A writer should thus select subjects that are of present interest and that are interesting to the kind of readers that he aims at. The subjects that we choose must be ones that we know very well. Only then we can write on them with authority and conviction.
While writing on the chosen subject we should write in a systematic way. In the first paragraph, for example, we should state clearly what we are going to write about and why. In the middle, we should present the ideas and arguments in support of it. We should write only the relevant things and avoid the irrelevant. In the last paragraph we should summarize leading to a neat and clear end of what we have been talking about earlier. However the reader will not find interest in our writing unless we ourselves are intensely interested in it. In our writing we must try to convey the feeling that we ourselves are deeply interested in the subject, and our own interest will infect the reader as it were. However, while doing so, we must not force upon them our own personal problems, which have no importance to the readers in general.
The writer trying to write well must not try to tell the reader the obvious things. If a subject is of importance, it should be discussed seriously. The reader knows that. He does not need to be told so in many words. One should avoid abstract words and expressions as far as practicable. One should instead use the concrete words and expressions. So one should avoid euphemism, which is used to hide unpleasant things in pleasant language, for example, special treatment to mean savage torture.
A writer must follow the same style consistently. We must not mix up the formal and the slang expressions in the same piece of writing. It is absurd if we write,”I have had no alternative but to give it the thumbs-down.” The expression “I have had no alternative but to give” is a formal piece of expression, whereas the expression, “to give it the thumbs-down”, is a very colloquial or slang expression. The mixture is very ridiculous. If we do not at times find the right word or expression, we should use the expression that comes to us for the time being or leave the space blank to be filled up later. Later we may think and find out a better expression otherwise our flow of thoughts may be interrupted. After the writing is over, we must read it over again critically. We can replace words and expressions that we find weak or vague with better ones.
One can learn writing by writing only. So one should write without waiting for any inspiration. Good writing depends more upon hard labour and less upon inspiration. How to find subject matters to write on? If we carefully observe things around us we shall find many interesting things to write about. We should read our newspapers, books and magazines carefully, and note down the striking things and ideas that we come across. If we develop a warm understanding of human joys and sorrows we shall find a lot of interesting things to write about in every ordinary incidents of life. To be a good writer, it is not enough to find out interesting subjects. One has to write about them in an interesting way. To write interestingly, one has to select what kind of readers he wants to write for. Then one can find out what kind of subjects interests them. If we read woman’s magazine we shall find what subject interests them, and we find subjects that interests young people from magazines meant for young people like sports magazines. Moreover we must remember that subjects that concern us at present interest us more. A writer should thus select subjects that are of present interest and that are interesting to the kind of readers that he aims at. The subjects that we choose must be ones that we know very well. Only then we can write on them with authority and conviction.
While writing on the chosen subject we should write in a systematic way. In the first paragraph, for example, we should state clearly what we are going to write about and why. In the middle, we should present the ideas and arguments in support of it. We should write only the relevant things and avoid the irrelevant. In the last paragraph we should summarize leading to a neat and clear end of what we have been talking about earlier. However the reader will not find interest in our writing unless we ourselves are intensely interested in it. In our writing we must try to convey the feeling that we ourselves are deeply interested in the subject, and our own interest will infect the reader as it were. However, while doing so, we must not force upon them our own personal problems, which have no importance to the readers in general.
The writer trying to write well must not try to tell the reader the obvious things. If a subject is of importance, it should be discussed seriously. The reader knows that. He does not need to be told so in many words. One should avoid abstract words and expressions as far as practicable. One should instead use the concrete words and expressions. So one should avoid euphemism, which is used to hide unpleasant things in pleasant language, for example, special treatment to mean savage torture.
A writer must follow the same style consistently. We must not mix up the formal and the slang expressions in the same piece of writing. It is absurd if we write,”I have had no alternative but to give it the thumbs-down.” The expression “I have had no alternative but to give” is a formal piece of expression, whereas the expression, “to give it the thumbs-down”, is a very colloquial or slang expression. The mixture is very ridiculous. If we do not at times find the right word or expression, we should use the expression that comes to us for the time being or leave the space blank to be filled up later. Later we may think and find out a better expression otherwise our flow of thoughts may be interrupted. After the writing is over, we must read it over again critically. We can replace words and expressions that we find weak or vague with better ones.
Of Studies
Studies serve for delight, for ornament, and for ability. Their chief use for delight is in privateness and retiring; for ornament, is in discourse; and for ability, is in the judgment and disposition of business. For expert men can execute, and perhaps judge of particulars, one by one; but the general counsels, and the plots and marshalling of affairs, come best from those that are learned. To spend too much time in studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament, is affectation; to make judgment wholly by their rules, is the humor of a scholar. They perfect nature, and are perfected by experience: for natural abilities are like natural plants, that need pruning, by study; and studies themselves do give forth directions too much at large, except they be bounded in by experience. Crafty men condemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them; for they teach not their own use; but that is a wisdom without them, and above them, won by observation. Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested; that is, some books are to be read only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention. Some books also may be read by deputy, and extracts made of them by others; but that would be only in the less important arguments, and the meaner sort of books, else distilled books are like common distilled waters, flashy things. Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man. And therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer little, he had need have a present wit: and if he read little, he had need have much cunning, to seem to know that he doth not. Histories make men wise; poets witty; the mathematics subtle; natural philosophy deep; moral grave; logic and rhetoric able to contend. Abeunt studia in mores [Studies pass into and influence manners]. Nay, there is no stond or impediment in the wit but may be wrought out by fit studies; like as diseases of the body may have appropriate exercises. Bowling is good for the stone and reins; shooting for the lungs and breast; gentle walking for the stomach; riding for the head; and the like. So if a man’s wit be wandering, let him study the mathematics; for in demonstrations, if his wit be called away never so little, he must begin again. If his wit be not apt to distinguish or find differences, let him study the School men; for they are cymini sectores [splitters of hairs]. If he be not apt to beat over matters, and to call up one thing to prove and illustrate another, let him study the lawyers’ cases. So every defect of the mind may have a special receipt.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People
Charles Lamb's essay "A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People" is just what the title suggests: it is indeed "a bachelor's complaint of the behavior of Married People." Lamb emphasizes his single status in the start of the essay"As a single man"and in doing so, separates himself from the "Married People." He talks about Married People as if they are despicable and offensive and gives both hypothetical and personal examples to back up his points. He believes that Married People "prefer one another to all the world" and openly flaunt it, thus offending singles such as Lamb by implying that they "are not the object of this preference." Furthermore, Lamb believes that overall, singles are looked down on Married People are undoubtedly more favored and knowledgeable. The main complaint that Lamb is making throughout the whole essay is the Married People's attitudes and how they demonstrate their status. He goes as far as to "the airs which these creatures give themselves when they come to have children"and, by using the negative aspects of children, he furthers his disapproval of Married People and their actions.
Lamb's purpose in writing "A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People" is to bring to attention the attitudes of Married People. He wishes for his audience to realize how Married People subconsciously flaunt themselves in their love, offending those who are single. Ultimately, he hopes that Married People will bring themselves to correct their mistakes and be more considerate towards others. He structures his argument by stating his main reason for decrying Married People is because he believes them to be overly involved with each other and their love that they disregard and "perk it up in the faces of [singles] so shamelessly." From this claim, Lamb offers personal anecdotes as well as hypothetical situations that illustrate and support his points. He concludes his essay stating that although he despises their attitudes, he is still willing to "forgive their jealousy and dispense with toying with their brats"but thinks it "unreasonable to be called upon to love them." Through Lamb's willingness to forgive these people whom he disapproves of, he is seen to be credible with good values and his readers are more inclined to believe his words and work to correct the attitudes of Married People.
The structure of Lamb's argument logically appeals to his readers, for it flows and clarifies his points through examples. However, Lamb fails to address any possible counterarguments. His argument addresses only the negative aspects of Married People, but surely there are positive sides as well. By failing to address and disprove these possibilities, Lamb leaves room for doubt. Despite this, his argument stands strongthe examples he gives are cogent and, through his personal anecdotes, he is able to establish a connection with the audience. He also appeals emotionally especially to the singles, for he is a bachelor himself. The injustice that he sometimes feels can appeal to others who have felt the same way. Overall, Lamb appeals effectively to his readers through his use of pathos, ethos, and logos. Although there are some flaws in his arguments, they are overlooked and undermined by his credibility and emotional appeal.
Lamb's style of writing in this essay is fairly colloquial. He is very assertive in his argument, and states his points with conviction and support. These assertions are highlighted by his occasional use of italics throughout the essay. At the beginning of the essay, Lamb firmly establishes a line between him and Married Peoplesimply by capitalizing "Married People." In doing so, he sets them apart in their own group of Married People, symbolizing that this is truly how it is in reality too: Married People set themselves apart in their own groups through their attitudes. They really do seem to be off in their own little world of love, and this is what Lamb dislikes. Towards the end of the essay, Lamb brings up the subject of children and how they also contribute to the Married People's attitudes. He brings out all the negative aspects of children and emphasizes them by listing them continuously with dashes as separation. He also bring in a simile from "the excellent office in the Prayer-book""Like as arrows in the hand of the giant, even so are the young children"and uses it in his favor. He takes this idea of arrows and extends it into a metaphor to support his argument. Like "double-headed" arrows with "two forks, to be sure to hit with one or the other", how one acts with children will always be wrong; "with one or other of these forks the arrow is sure to hit you." Whether you act stoic to a child's attention or shower them with affection, "some pretext or other is sure to be found for sending them out of the room." Through this comparison of double-headed arrows and children, Lamb effectively conveys his opinions of Married People and their attitudes that are shown in everything, including the way they handle their children.
Personally, I do not agree with Lamb for the most part. Although I can see why he views married people in this way, I don't think that they should be decried in this manner. Sure, it may seem like those who are married are flaunting their love to others, but I don't think that they do it to offend others. Lamb makes it sound like married people intentionally target singles and taunt them for not having a significant other like themselves. But think of it in the married people's perspectivehow can they possibly suppress the love that they are feeling? Love is a very strong feeling, and it is impossible to suppress. I'm sure that if Lamb got married and was finally allowed to show his love unconditionally, he would act like the "Married People" he discussed in his essay. He merely looks at the negative aspects of marriage from the perspective of an outsiderbut what about the positives aspects from the perspective of a married person? Furthermore, his discussion of the children, to me, was not very convincing. His views of children would most likely change after having some children of his own. To conclude, I don't agree with Lamb's views and arguments because he is a biased source. I think that he should get married and have children first, before making these kinds of assertions.
Overall, "A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People" is effectively portrayed through Lamb's arguments and claims. His complaints are easy to understand, thanks to the examples that he gives. He makes many good points about Married People, and most likely is able to persuade many readers of his views. Although I personally am more skeptical of his views, it is because I am also biased. I think of love as one of the most important and potent feelings, but not everybody thinks of love as strongly as I do. Despite my views, I still think that Lamb's points are overall strong and assertive. I feel that the connection he makes with his readers is also very effective, and I believe his argument will continue to affect people of today, as marriage is a large part of society.
Lamb's purpose in writing "A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People" is to bring to attention the attitudes of Married People. He wishes for his audience to realize how Married People subconsciously flaunt themselves in their love, offending those who are single. Ultimately, he hopes that Married People will bring themselves to correct their mistakes and be more considerate towards others. He structures his argument by stating his main reason for decrying Married People is because he believes them to be overly involved with each other and their love that they disregard and "perk it up in the faces of [singles] so shamelessly." From this claim, Lamb offers personal anecdotes as well as hypothetical situations that illustrate and support his points. He concludes his essay stating that although he despises their attitudes, he is still willing to "forgive their jealousy and dispense with toying with their brats"but thinks it "unreasonable to be called upon to love them." Through Lamb's willingness to forgive these people whom he disapproves of, he is seen to be credible with good values and his readers are more inclined to believe his words and work to correct the attitudes of Married People.
The structure of Lamb's argument logically appeals to his readers, for it flows and clarifies his points through examples. However, Lamb fails to address any possible counterarguments. His argument addresses only the negative aspects of Married People, but surely there are positive sides as well. By failing to address and disprove these possibilities, Lamb leaves room for doubt. Despite this, his argument stands strongthe examples he gives are cogent and, through his personal anecdotes, he is able to establish a connection with the audience. He also appeals emotionally especially to the singles, for he is a bachelor himself. The injustice that he sometimes feels can appeal to others who have felt the same way. Overall, Lamb appeals effectively to his readers through his use of pathos, ethos, and logos. Although there are some flaws in his arguments, they are overlooked and undermined by his credibility and emotional appeal.
Lamb's style of writing in this essay is fairly colloquial. He is very assertive in his argument, and states his points with conviction and support. These assertions are highlighted by his occasional use of italics throughout the essay. At the beginning of the essay, Lamb firmly establishes a line between him and Married Peoplesimply by capitalizing "Married People." In doing so, he sets them apart in their own group of Married People, symbolizing that this is truly how it is in reality too: Married People set themselves apart in their own groups through their attitudes. They really do seem to be off in their own little world of love, and this is what Lamb dislikes. Towards the end of the essay, Lamb brings up the subject of children and how they also contribute to the Married People's attitudes. He brings out all the negative aspects of children and emphasizes them by listing them continuously with dashes as separation. He also bring in a simile from "the excellent office in the Prayer-book""Like as arrows in the hand of the giant, even so are the young children"and uses it in his favor. He takes this idea of arrows and extends it into a metaphor to support his argument. Like "double-headed" arrows with "two forks, to be sure to hit with one or the other", how one acts with children will always be wrong; "with one or other of these forks the arrow is sure to hit you." Whether you act stoic to a child's attention or shower them with affection, "some pretext or other is sure to be found for sending them out of the room." Through this comparison of double-headed arrows and children, Lamb effectively conveys his opinions of Married People and their attitudes that are shown in everything, including the way they handle their children.
Personally, I do not agree with Lamb for the most part. Although I can see why he views married people in this way, I don't think that they should be decried in this manner. Sure, it may seem like those who are married are flaunting their love to others, but I don't think that they do it to offend others. Lamb makes it sound like married people intentionally target singles and taunt them for not having a significant other like themselves. But think of it in the married people's perspectivehow can they possibly suppress the love that they are feeling? Love is a very strong feeling, and it is impossible to suppress. I'm sure that if Lamb got married and was finally allowed to show his love unconditionally, he would act like the "Married People" he discussed in his essay. He merely looks at the negative aspects of marriage from the perspective of an outsiderbut what about the positives aspects from the perspective of a married person? Furthermore, his discussion of the children, to me, was not very convincing. His views of children would most likely change after having some children of his own. To conclude, I don't agree with Lamb's views and arguments because he is a biased source. I think that he should get married and have children first, before making these kinds of assertions.
Overall, "A Bachelor's Complaint of the Behavior of Married People" is effectively portrayed through Lamb's arguments and claims. His complaints are easy to understand, thanks to the examples that he gives. He makes many good points about Married People, and most likely is able to persuade many readers of his views. Although I personally am more skeptical of his views, it is because I am also biased. I think of love as one of the most important and potent feelings, but not everybody thinks of love as strongly as I do. Despite my views, I still think that Lamb's points are overall strong and assertive. I feel that the connection he makes with his readers is also very effective, and I believe his argument will continue to affect people of today, as marriage is a large part of society.
On Saying Please
INTRODUCTION
This essay tells us about the value of good manners.Bad manners are anti social. But they are not a crime in the eyes of the law and therefore the law does not permit us to hit back if we have been the victims of bad manners.If we are threatened by physical violence ,the law protects us by some action.It is good that the law does not permit physical action in return for bad manners.actually violation or breach of good manners is very common. If there had been some punishment for bad manners,it would have lead to too much violence.People begin to avoid a man with bad manners.He is not liked by anyone.A person with good manners bring us sunshine.His company is indeed very pleasant.
Civility oils the machine of life,makes things easier and keeps human being in good relationship. It is not a social but a moral obligation.
The writer pays rich tribute to bus conductor. With his good behavior he spreads joy around him. A polite word to an impolite person is sweeter form of revenge than the revenge of throwing stones at him who throws a stone at you. Although the law does not compel us to be polite yet social practice requires us to be civil. Words like please and thank you do keep the machine of life in a good working order.
T
hey teach us co-operation and we can get better work by the use of these words.
The author once boarded on a bus. He found that he had no money in his pocket. He was in a fix what to do. He was expecting that a conductor would call his statement and old trick.But when he told the conductor he had forgotten to bring money with him,he accepted his explanation and gave him the ticket up to his destination when the author asked him where he should give him the fare ,his simple reply wasoh youll see me some day all right.Luckily the author found a shilling in one of the corners of his pocket and he settled the account . A few days later the author was hurt by the heavy boots of the conductor but he behaved in a very decent manner and the author did not mind it.
The conductor always tried to make his passengers comfortable. A journey with him was a lesson in natural courtesy and good manners.
If we are uncivil,others also become uncivil. If we show good manners others will also behave well. A cheerful person can make a gloomiest person cheerful.
The author feels that it is always better to be on the bus of that conductor when going from one place to another.It is sound investment to poses good manners. If wordsworth could get a lesson from the poor-leech gatherer,there is no harm in getting lessons from a person like bus conductor who has good manners.War has affected civilities of life. But they must be got back to make life sweet, kindly and tolerable for each other.
T
he law cannot help us to get them back, but it can only protect us against physical attack. We should be polite towards others so as to have a spiritual victory.
If the lift man had treated the passenger in the civil manner, he would have attained the spiritual victory over him.
This essay tells us about the value of good manners.Bad manners are anti social. But they are not a crime in the eyes of the law and therefore the law does not permit us to hit back if we have been the victims of bad manners.If we are threatened by physical violence ,the law protects us by some action.It is good that the law does not permit physical action in return for bad manners.actually violation or breach of good manners is very common. If there had been some punishment for bad manners,it would have lead to too much violence.People begin to avoid a man with bad manners.He is not liked by anyone.A person with good manners bring us sunshine.His company is indeed very pleasant.
Civility oils the machine of life,makes things easier and keeps human being in good relationship. It is not a social but a moral obligation.
The writer pays rich tribute to bus conductor. With his good behavior he spreads joy around him. A polite word to an impolite person is sweeter form of revenge than the revenge of throwing stones at him who throws a stone at you. Although the law does not compel us to be polite yet social practice requires us to be civil. Words like please and thank you do keep the machine of life in a good working order.
T
hey teach us co-operation and we can get better work by the use of these words.
The author once boarded on a bus. He found that he had no money in his pocket. He was in a fix what to do. He was expecting that a conductor would call his statement and old trick.But when he told the conductor he had forgotten to bring money with him,he accepted his explanation and gave him the ticket up to his destination when the author asked him where he should give him the fare ,his simple reply wasoh youll see me some day all right.Luckily the author found a shilling in one of the corners of his pocket and he settled the account . A few days later the author was hurt by the heavy boots of the conductor but he behaved in a very decent manner and the author did not mind it.
The conductor always tried to make his passengers comfortable. A journey with him was a lesson in natural courtesy and good manners.
If we are uncivil,others also become uncivil. If we show good manners others will also behave well. A cheerful person can make a gloomiest person cheerful.
The author feels that it is always better to be on the bus of that conductor when going from one place to another.It is sound investment to poses good manners. If wordsworth could get a lesson from the poor-leech gatherer,there is no harm in getting lessons from a person like bus conductor who has good manners.War has affected civilities of life. But they must be got back to make life sweet, kindly and tolerable for each other.
T
he law cannot help us to get them back, but it can only protect us against physical attack. We should be polite towards others so as to have a spiritual victory.
If the lift man had treated the passenger in the civil manner, he would have attained the spiritual victory over him.
Book Review
Book Review- Two States: Story of My Marriage
Published by:- Rupa & co.
Price:-Rs. 350/-
There are quite a few reasons you could justify reading Chetan Bhagat to your friends, colleagues or the English teacher: it’s a good pastime, easy on language - so you don’t need to carry a dictionary, low on price, interesting in parts, funny at times etc. You may add one more reason: his are stories of today, where you and I live.
Bhagat’s USP is slowly, but surely, turning out to be this: an exploration of modern India- of IITs & IIMs (himself an alumni, he is obsessed with these citadels of higher learning), Call Centres, ambitious kids wanting to make a quick buck, religious divisions, caste lines and an underneath throbbing with a new found wakefulness, a sort of characteristic of the new generation.
‘Two States: the story of my marriage’ is a formula book; it works wonders with the average Indian reader. Much like a formula film, its got emotions, sex, friendship, music, betrayal, exploitation, Indian families on the verge of break-up and then re-uniting, elaborate weddings, tearful mothers, nosy relatives, spirituality, office politics, just-for-laugh lines and a predictable ending.
As the back cover of this paper back (there is a reason that Bhagat sells fast) describes in a cute summary:
‘Boy loves Girl. Girl loves Boy.
Girl's family has to love boy. Boy's family has to love girl.
Girl's Family has to love Boy's Family. Boy's family has to love girl's family.
Girl and Boy still love each other. They get married.’
…the plot is a basic one- girl meets boy, they fall in love etc. But by the end of the above description, this couple- Ananya & Krish- almost fell out of love trying to get their respective families to like each other, but for an expected twist which converts the clash of civilizations into a marriage of cultures.
So you have a life loving Punjabi boy from Delhi fall in love with a South Indian girl, who is not only fair but a Tamil Brahmin from Chennai. Chhole Bhaturey and Rawa Dosa, anyone? You may say no problem, but then this story is not their love story- that is complete within 40 pages of dating, living-in, sex, college life, commitment phobia et al, it is the story of their families and whether they fall in love with each other or not.
The journey takes you to Punjabi & posh neighbourhoods in Delhi (including my own, yes tears of joy on spotting my address in a bestseller apart from the Voter ID. Can’t get more realistic for me) where marble kothis have more marble ‘than Taj Mahal’ and girls are ‘whiter than milk’. Krish finds himself on temptation island, but love gets the better of him. There is one problem though- his mother thinks ‘madrasis’ (every South Indian is called that, up here) are just out to ‘trap her boy’.
Now before your blood boils over this regional castigation, go relish a Butter Chicken (‘Food calms down Punjabis like nothing else’). The dhoti-clad, Carnatic music loving Tamilians haven’t been spared the loving jabs either and Bhagat apologetically puts out a disclaimer in the beginning, ‘I have taken the liberty to have some fun with you because I see you as my own.’
To that end, he has even dedicated the book to his in-laws; something he admits is a first in publishing.
What with the high-brow culture of South, its love for knowledge, its hatred for showing it off, its earthy ways of eating food etc- Krish struggles to be accepted by his would be in-laws. Ditto for Ananya- her would be mother-in-law can’t imagine she doesn’t know how to make masala bhindi.
The humor is situational as well as slapdash and does manage to make the reader play a smile all along. The pace of the story, which picks up from Bhagat’s earlier bestseller now being made into a film called ‘Three Idiots’ by Aamir Khan, ‘Five Point Someone…’, makes ‘Two States…’ a no-put-downer. Surprisingly, it touches an emotional chord near the end as an alienated father and son overcome their reservations.
In fact, all facets of a relationship have been shortly dealt with: father-son, mother-daughter-, father-in-law-son-in-law, boss-protégé- you get the picture. The characters are dramatic (them Punjabis) though not well etched. But then the book costs Rs 95 and as the MTV Bai succinctly puts it, “Itne paise mein itna vich mile ga.”
The point of the story is to show how the stark differences in India get painfully highlighted on a joyous (mostly) occasion like marriage. It also points out how love can conquer all the trivialities, as also how intelligent IIM guys are but how their well-paying jobs terribly suck.
In that, Bhagat is talking to the countless lovelorn Indians who have been left heartbroken because of their family’s ‘izzat’. He even says it is inspired by his own experiences and, well, he is happily married to a Tamil Brahmin Indian who is actually fair (!).
It’s a pop effort to address a contemporary issue and Bhagat pulls it off successfully. The lesson is delivered in the epilogue along with his twins as Krish says, “They (new born twins) will be from a state called India.’
Published by:- Rupa & co.
Price:-Rs. 350/-
There are quite a few reasons you could justify reading Chetan Bhagat to your friends, colleagues or the English teacher: it’s a good pastime, easy on language - so you don’t need to carry a dictionary, low on price, interesting in parts, funny at times etc. You may add one more reason: his are stories of today, where you and I live.
Bhagat’s USP is slowly, but surely, turning out to be this: an exploration of modern India- of IITs & IIMs (himself an alumni, he is obsessed with these citadels of higher learning), Call Centres, ambitious kids wanting to make a quick buck, religious divisions, caste lines and an underneath throbbing with a new found wakefulness, a sort of characteristic of the new generation.
‘Two States: the story of my marriage’ is a formula book; it works wonders with the average Indian reader. Much like a formula film, its got emotions, sex, friendship, music, betrayal, exploitation, Indian families on the verge of break-up and then re-uniting, elaborate weddings, tearful mothers, nosy relatives, spirituality, office politics, just-for-laugh lines and a predictable ending.
As the back cover of this paper back (there is a reason that Bhagat sells fast) describes in a cute summary:
‘Boy loves Girl. Girl loves Boy.
Girl's family has to love boy. Boy's family has to love girl.
Girl's Family has to love Boy's Family. Boy's family has to love girl's family.
Girl and Boy still love each other. They get married.’
…the plot is a basic one- girl meets boy, they fall in love etc. But by the end of the above description, this couple- Ananya & Krish- almost fell out of love trying to get their respective families to like each other, but for an expected twist which converts the clash of civilizations into a marriage of cultures.
So you have a life loving Punjabi boy from Delhi fall in love with a South Indian girl, who is not only fair but a Tamil Brahmin from Chennai. Chhole Bhaturey and Rawa Dosa, anyone? You may say no problem, but then this story is not their love story- that is complete within 40 pages of dating, living-in, sex, college life, commitment phobia et al, it is the story of their families and whether they fall in love with each other or not.
The journey takes you to Punjabi & posh neighbourhoods in Delhi (including my own, yes tears of joy on spotting my address in a bestseller apart from the Voter ID. Can’t get more realistic for me) where marble kothis have more marble ‘than Taj Mahal’ and girls are ‘whiter than milk’. Krish finds himself on temptation island, but love gets the better of him. There is one problem though- his mother thinks ‘madrasis’ (every South Indian is called that, up here) are just out to ‘trap her boy’.
Now before your blood boils over this regional castigation, go relish a Butter Chicken (‘Food calms down Punjabis like nothing else’). The dhoti-clad, Carnatic music loving Tamilians haven’t been spared the loving jabs either and Bhagat apologetically puts out a disclaimer in the beginning, ‘I have taken the liberty to have some fun with you because I see you as my own.’
To that end, he has even dedicated the book to his in-laws; something he admits is a first in publishing.
What with the high-brow culture of South, its love for knowledge, its hatred for showing it off, its earthy ways of eating food etc- Krish struggles to be accepted by his would be in-laws. Ditto for Ananya- her would be mother-in-law can’t imagine she doesn’t know how to make masala bhindi.
The humor is situational as well as slapdash and does manage to make the reader play a smile all along. The pace of the story, which picks up from Bhagat’s earlier bestseller now being made into a film called ‘Three Idiots’ by Aamir Khan, ‘Five Point Someone…’, makes ‘Two States…’ a no-put-downer. Surprisingly, it touches an emotional chord near the end as an alienated father and son overcome their reservations.
In fact, all facets of a relationship have been shortly dealt with: father-son, mother-daughter-, father-in-law-son-in-law, boss-protégé- you get the picture. The characters are dramatic (them Punjabis) though not well etched. But then the book costs Rs 95 and as the MTV Bai succinctly puts it, “Itne paise mein itna vich mile ga.”
The point of the story is to show how the stark differences in India get painfully highlighted on a joyous (mostly) occasion like marriage. It also points out how love can conquer all the trivialities, as also how intelligent IIM guys are but how their well-paying jobs terribly suck.
In that, Bhagat is talking to the countless lovelorn Indians who have been left heartbroken because of their family’s ‘izzat’. He even says it is inspired by his own experiences and, well, he is happily married to a Tamil Brahmin Indian who is actually fair (!).
It’s a pop effort to address a contemporary issue and Bhagat pulls it off successfully. The lesson is delivered in the epilogue along with his twins as Krish says, “They (new born twins) will be from a state called India.’
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)